Homosexuality and Evolution: God's Will and Human Belief

[SkepticThinker]

Kindly go back and read what I wrote, I said "Darwinists," not "Charles Darwin". It is a fact that Darwinian evolutionists cursed mankind with abominable, spiteful, charged notion of race. A black or Asian man is a MAN, not another race or subspecies!

What?

 

[SkepticThinker]

I'd like to reply but I see a number of shifting arguments here. Can you limit yourself to one? Perhaps the notion that "you understand the Bible better than I"?

I've a year of ancient Greek in university, some training in Hebrew as a Jew, have read the Bible completely through in multiple versions multiple times, have a Bachelor's in Religion with an emphasis on biblical studies from a secular university, and share Bible truths with people on a regular, interactive basis--having witnessed to thousands of persons.

Of course, all of the above is nothing since I know the author of the Bible, and you seem to despise the same author. So I'd say I have multiple advantages in discerning what the Bible teaches.

Can you show this author to anyone? As far as I know, the authors of the Bible are all long dead.

 

[Sapiens]

I'd like to reply but I see a number of shifting arguments here. Can you limit yourself to one? Perhaps the notion that "you understand the Bible better than I"?

I've a year of ancient Greek in university, some training in Hebrew as a Jew, have read the Bible completely through in multiple versions multiple times, have a Bachelor's in Religion with an emphasis on biblical studies from a secular university, and share Bible truths with people on a regular, interactive basis--having witnessed to thousands of persons.

Of course, all of the above is nothing since I know the author of the Bible, and you seem to despise the same author. So I'd say I have multiple advantages in discerning what the Bible teaches.

If that is the basis for your appeal to yourself as an authority then there is little doubt in my mind as to the fact that it just ain't so. You are no authority, yet you mistakenly believe that you are one, that clearly explains your rather bizarre beliefs.

 

[Sapiens]

Kindly go back and read what I wrote, I said "Darwinists," not "Charles Darwin". It is a fact that Darwinian evolutionists cursed mankind with abominable, spiteful, charged notion of race. A black or Asian man is a MAN, not another race or subspecies!

What is a subspecies? Have you any idea? Would you disagree that it is a grouping within a species that can be sorted at better than 95 percent? Why do you feel that recognizing diversity (and celebrating it) is abominable, spiteful or charged? Bad case of liberal guilt?

 

[Ingledsva]

It is irrational for either of us to assert as true something requiring near-omniscient knowledge of this universe, which is why the Bible says, "The fool says in his heart there is no God," a wholly unproven, unknown, untestable assertion.

I hope you realize that also means -

"The fool says in his heart there IS A God," a wholly unproven, unknown, untestable assertion.

*

 

[Ingledsva]

Penicillin has temporary effect. Jesus offers you and I eternal benefit.

You don't actually KNOW that. You ASSUME that because of your BELIEFS.

*

 

[Ingledsva]

...
Personally, I've encountered hundreds of atheists who are quick to disagree (in error) with what they feel is Bible genocide and rape, yet never seem to notice that God condemns skeptics for adultery, lust, greed, jealousy, lying, theft, unbelief . . . why do you think you also make this omission? ...

Obviously you haven't read enough of our posts. Many of us (atheists and agnostics,) do condemn the ridiculous punishment laws. The God of the Bible comes off as a vindictive-angry-murderer, whom also supposedly gives laws thet are evil, - such as murdering people that are different, or gay, slavery, rape of war captives, etc.

These negatives show the God of the Bible to be just a human construct, doing what those humans want to do; = murder - rape - own women - own slaves, take other people's land and possessions, etc.

*

 

[BilliardsBall]

Please, you don't "know the author of the Bible". For one thing there is not one author. It was written by men. You may believe in a god, but you have repeated demonstrated that you do not "know".

But very good, you have some training in languages. That does not make you an authority on the subject. I will trust those that have been able to support their claims in the real world when it comes to authorities.

And you demonstrate that you are not a scholar of any sort since you do not understand the concept of atheism. You continually post a strawman version of it. I can easily refute a strawman version of Christianity too. I try to avoid that. I know that there are many different varieties of Christianity. As an example that is why I ask Christians which version of the Noah's Ark myth that they believe in if they make the claim of stating that the Bible is inerrant.

"Atheism is, in the broadest sense, the absence of belief in the existence of deities. Less broadly, atheism is the rejection of belief that any deities exist."

Which camp are you in? You are lacking evidence of the existence of a God or you assert that there is no god?

One side includes honest skeptics, the other side requires omniscient knowledge.

 

[BilliardsBall]

What is a subspecies? Have you any idea? Would you disagree that it is a grouping within a species that can be sorted at better than 95 percent? Why do you feel that recognizing diversity (and celebrating it) is abominable, spiteful or charged? Bad case of liberal guilt?

I celebrate diversity. I also say, "He is a good man," not "He is a good black man," or "He is an aborigine and is a subspecies," since I leave that talk to racists and evolutionists.

 

[BilliardsBall]

If that is the basis for your appeal to yourself as an authority then there is little doubt in my mind as to the fact that it just ain't so. You are no authority, yet you mistakenly believe that you are one, that clearly explains your rather bizarre beliefs.

If WHAT is the basis? My relationship with God or my sizable amount of knowledge and learning about God?

Either one can be helpful when claiming to represent God. Whom do you represent?

 

[BilliardsBall]

You don't actually KNOW that. You ASSUME that because of your BELIEFS.

*

You may be correct. How about Jesus offers you benefits NOW, so take them!

 

[BilliardsBall]

I hope you realize that also means -

"The fool says in his heart there IS A God," a wholly unproven, unknown, untestable assertion.

*

Of course one can test this assertion. I know God and have a relationship with God.

Malachi 3:10: Bring the whole tithe into the storehouse, that there may be food in my house. Test me in this," says the LORD Almighty, "and see if I will not throw open the floodgates of heaven and pour out so much blessing that there will not be room enough to store it.

Go on--tithe to your local church and see what God does!

 

[BilliardsBall]

Obviously you haven't read enough of our posts. Many of us (atheists and agnostics,) do condemn the ridiculous punishment laws. The God of the Bible comes off as a vindictive-angry-murderer, whom also supposedly gives laws thet are evil, - such as murdering people that are different, or gay, slavery, rape of war captives, etc.

These negatives show the God of the Bible to be just a human construct, doing what those humans want to do; = murder - rape - own women - own slaves, take other people's land and possessions, etc.

*

**Personally, I've encountered hundreds of atheists who are quick to disagree (in error) with what they feel is Bible genocide and rape, yet never seem to notice that God condemns skeptics for adultery, lust, greed, jealousy, lying, theft, unbelief . . . why do you think you also make this omission? ...**

And now I've encountered another one.

 

[SkepticThinker]

I celebrate diversity. I also say, "He is a good man," not "He is a good black man," or "He is an aborigine and is a subspecies," since I leave that talk to racists and evolutionists.

"Evolutionists" don't say that either. All living humans are homo sapiens. In other words, we're all the same. The opposite of what you are trying to say.

Where do you come up with this stuff?

 

[SkepticThinker]

Of course one can test this assertion. I know God and have a relationship with God.

Malachi 3:10: Bring the whole tithe into the storehouse, that there may be food in my house. Test me in this," says the LORD Almighty, "and see if I will not throw open the floodgates of heaven and pour out so much blessing that there will not be room enough to store it.

Go on--tithe to your local church and see what God does!

Can you show this God to anyone else?

 

[SkepticThinker]

**Personally, I've encountered hundreds of atheists who are quick to disagree (in error) with what they feel is Bible genocide and rape, yet never seem to notice that God condemns skeptics for adultery, lust, greed, jealousy, lying, theft, unbelief . . . why do you think you also make this omission? ...**

And now I've encountered another one.

Wait a minute, are you trying to say that the Bible does not contain genocide and rape? Or that disagreeing with the genocide and rape in the Bible is wrong?

 

[Subduction Zone]

"Atheism is, in the broadest sense, the absence of belief in the existence of deities. Less broadly, atheism is the rejection of belief that any deities exist."

Which camp are you in? You are lacking evidence of the existence of a God or you assert that there is no god?

One side includes honest skeptics, the other side requires omniscient knowledge.

I merely lack belief. If I was shown evidence of a god I would change my mind. And you made very well be wrong about the need of omniscient knowledge for your second claim. I doubt if you can support stating that there is a need of omniscient knowledge to rule out a god. I don't think that I cannot do so, that does not mean that no one can do so.

What evidence do you have that tells us one needs omniscient knowledge to rule out all gods. By the way, you do realize that some gods can be refuted, don't you?

 

[Polymath257]

"Atheism is, in the broadest sense, the absence of belief in the existence of deities. Less broadly, atheism is the rejection of belief that any deities exist."

Which camp are you in? You are lacking evidence of the existence of a God or you assert that there is no god?

One side includes honest skeptics, the other side requires omniscient knowledge.

My personal position is that there is a lack of evidence for a God, so all Gods where there *should* be evidence for existence are disproven.

 

[Subduction Zone]

My personal position is that there is a lack of evidence for a God, so all Gods where there *should* be evidence for existence are disproven.

I have found that many theists cannot understand the concept of multiple possible Gods. They tend to think that their own personal God is the only one that exists, even if it is a God that there should be evidence for and there isn't. In other words by their reasoning you are attempting to "disprove God". The conflate an inability to refute all gods as their own personal self contradicting God to be immune from being logically proven not to exist.

 

[Ingledsva]

You may be correct. How about Jesus offers you benefits NOW, so take them!

That is no different then saying Aphrodite offers you benefits NOW, so why not take them!

There is no proof for their existence.

I'm not going to bow before Bobba-wagga-zoobi God just in case he might actually exists.

*