• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Is being gay a sin according to your religion?

shmogie

shmogie

Well-Known Member
Shadow Wolf said:
There is no evidence of a global flood. There is evidence of severe flooding in that area, but it doesn't prove the Bible because there were recorded flood stories before Noah (such as Gilgamesh, which contains the oldest known flood story).

That something has been criticized is irrelevant. It's why something is criticized that is important. In the case of Sodom and Gomorrah, even Christian archaeologists have criticized the "finding" of those two cities over some methodological issues, including labeling what they found and assuming to know what it was they found before doing any actual work.
Or, there are others who think they found them somewhere else, but what they found was abandoned, not destroyed.

No, it hasn't. We have traced our lineage back a long ways, but as far back as we can does not lead us to the Tigris and Euphrates, it was well over 100,000 years ago (far outside the frame of Creationism), and we find that we came from Africa, not the Middle East.

If there is no evidence, nothing factual to support a claim, I deny it.
Click to expand...
You say, "it has not, it has not, it has not" You are simply in error, you are wrong
 
shmogie

shmogie

Well-Known Member
Shadow Wolf said:
There is no evidence of a global flood. There is evidence of severe flooding in that area, but it doesn't prove the Bible because there were recorded flood stories before Noah (such as Gilgamesh, which contains the oldest known flood story).

That something has been criticized is irrelevant. It's why something is criticized that is important. In the case of Sodom and Gomorrah, even Christian archaeologists have criticized the "finding" of those two cities over some methodological issues, including labeling what they found and assuming to know what it was they found before doing any actual work.
Or, there are others who think they found them somewhere else, but what they found was abandoned, not destroyed.

No, it hasn't. We have traced our lineage back a long ways, but as far back as we can does not lead us to the Tigris and Euphrates, it was well over 100,000 years ago (far outside the frame of Creationism), and we find that we came from Africa, not the Middle East.

If there is no evidence, nothing factual to support a claim, I deny it.
Click to expand...
Very strong evidence, and some fact, on a whole range of issues, which you deny. I understand though, you must. Chronic denial is a defense mechanism you must employ to defend yourself from a belief system you won't accept. You will deny this too
 
shmogie

shmogie

Well-Known Member
leibowde84 said:
The two modern humans were merely two in thousands. They seem to be the only ones who we still see in our genetic code, but they were in NO WAY the first human beings. Nice try though.
Click to expand...
I didn't say they were the first humans, nice try though, I said the genetic evidence goes back to those two. You are a master at seeing what isn't in what you read
 
shmogie

shmogie

Well-Known Member
leibowde84 said:
You are confused about the facts. This should help:

Adam and Eve?
These primeval people aren't parallel to the biblical Adam and Eve. They weren't the first modern humans on the planet, but instead just the two out of thousands of people alive at the time with unbroken male or female lineages that continue on today.
The rest of the human genome contains tiny snippets of DNA from many other ancestors — they just don't show up in mitochondrial or Y-chromosome DNA, Hammer said. (For instance, if an ancient woman had only sons, then her mitochondrial DNA would disappear, even though the son would pass on a quarter of her DNA via the rest of his genome.)
As a follow-up, Bustamante's lab is sequencing Y chromosomes from nearly 2,000 other men. Those data could help pinpoint precisely where in Africa these ancient humans lived.
"It's very exciting," Wilson Sayres told LiveScience. "As we get more populations across the world, we can start to understand exactly where we came from physically."
Click to expand...
So ? The geneticists have dubbed them Adam and Eve, not I
 
johnhanks

johnhanks

Well-Known Member
shmogie said:
I didn't say they were the first humans, nice try though, I said the genetic evidence goes back to those two. You are a master at seeing what isn't in what you read
Click to expand...
And you seem to be a master of not reading what you don't like to see. See posts 4556 and 4557: "those two" have no fixed or stable identity, but are the purely temporary holders of the MRCA title at this point in time.
 
Shadow Wolf

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
shmogie said:
You say, "it has not, it has not, it has not" You are simply in error, you are wrong
Click to expand...
You haven't even been able to provide evidence. As I said, there is plenty of proof that major flooding happened in the Middle East during ancient times, but not a global flood, and Noah is not the first or only flood story.
As for a global flood and Noah's Ark, it runs into a major problem that the size of the ark would have only been about the size as an ocean liner, which is far too small for seven of a handful of animals and two of every other kind, plus food, and plus any supplies brought with them.
shmogie said:
Chronic denial is a defense mechanism you must employ to defend yourself from a belief system you won't accept.
Click to expand...
That makes no sense. I deny your claims, but I've been providing evidence and studies that I do not deny. This "chronic denial" you accuse me of is illogical simply by the fact I have been posting things I do not deny.
shmogie said:
So ? The geneticists have dubbed them Adam and Eve, not I
Click to expand...
In an abstract way, and the names "Adam and Eve" used because they are easily understood by most people, and time frame as these two are not congruent with accepted Biblical timelines, and these two didn't even live during the same time.
 
leibowde84

leibowde84

Veteran Member
shmogie said:
So ? The geneticists have dubbed them Adam and Eve, not I
Click to expand...
No, the geneticists are clearly saying that they are in no way connected with the Biblical Adam and eve. They went out of their way to make it clear that they were NOT making that connection and it is absurd to link these two with the Bible in any way.
 
Shadow Wolf

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
PreacherToTheChoir said:
Homosexuals can't multiply when God commanded man to multiply, replenish the earth, and subdue it.
Click to expand...
We've been more than successful at filling the Earth. Too successful, actually, and we now over-populate the Earth.
And why subdue the Earth? There is no subduing it. We can destroy it, we can dominate other animals, but in the end we are still very much a part of nature, equal to other life forms in the grand scheme of things, and we are ultimately helplessly dependent upon the Earth.
 
P

PreacherToTheChoir

Member
Shadow Wolf said:
We've been more than successful at filling the Earth. Too successful, actually, and we now over-populate the Earth.
And why subdue the Earth? There is no subduing it. We can destroy it, we can dominate other animals, but in the end we are still very much a part of nature, equal to other life forms in the grand scheme of things, and we are ultimately helplessly dependent upon the Earth.
Click to expand...

I see.
 
The Emperor of Mankind

The Emperor of Mankind

Currently the galaxy's spookiest paraplegic
PreacherToTheChoir said:
Homosexuals can't multiply when God commanded man to multiply, replenish the earth, and subdue it.

Therefore it is immoral.
Click to expand...

Don't you think that as a species we've pretty much fulfilled that since we are pretty much a sentient extinction-level event? The Earth can't really get more subdued or multiplied by humans on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top