I'll give the first, but question the second answers.
What evidence can you give of knowing Him better?
Blessings, AJ
-
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!
Why did god create homosexuality?
- Thread starter Sha'irullah
- Start date
I'll give the first, but question the second answers.
What evidence can you give of knowing Him better?
Blessings, AJ
Triumphant_Loser
Libertarian Egalitarian
I think he is giving you guys a taste of your own medicine. "We know God better than anyone else." What group of people does that sound like?
AmbiguousGuy
Well-Known Member
1) The truths which I tell you about God are more whole, more integrated, than the things which you say about God. (I mean, you even seem to claim that God disapproves of homosexuality, after all!)
2) My God doesn't claim to do supernatural stuff in order to prove Himself. Any God who does such stuff (prophecy, raising the dead, etc.) is clearly a false God.
3) The Holy Spirit is all the evidence I need. He rides on my shoulder. We are tight.
So, anyway, what evidence can you give of knowing God better than I do?
AmbiguousGuy
Well-Known Member
What's weird is that the assumption of Best-God-Knowledge is often so deep that the claimant can't even understand that it's simply his personal opinion.
He really believes that (his understanding of his) God is simply the earth beneath all our feet.
Think of me as a wobbler of worlds.
I am not challenging the " better than I do?", just the scriptural references for your claims.
What in your religious background gives you a foundation for your claims?
Mine are based on scriptural references,experiences in different denominations, studies in many of the worlds religious beliefs, word and numbers in scripture studies and a personal experience in the presence of God.
Without a shadow of a doubt, to me, my faith is solidified by the experience.
I believe God sacrificed one soul, for all souls as a means of redeeming His own creation.
A process that of creating gods (sons) as like Himself, in the flesh that by consequence required separation. (death)
Mankind, regardless of who or what it did in life had no fault of being born in the flesh under those circumstances.
So, the tree of life, as described in the book of Genesis, is the antidote against the separation and the salvation of all mankind.
What we do then strictly applies to our own pearl,(while in the flesh, ending in the death of the flesh) not to the outcome after death.
For that God be thanked.
All that I have spoken in this post is my extrapolation of words, numbers and the with the help of the Holy Spirits guidance.
I challenge, occasionally, in trying to understand attitudes, motives and reasons for beliefs.
I condemn no one, for I believe in the universal salvation of mankind via Jesus Christ.
Blessings, AJ
AmbiguousGuy
Well-Known Member
I don't know what you are talking about. What scriptural references?
I am a humble prophet of God. The Holy Spirit tells me things.
What scripture are you talking about? And why do you consider it to contain reliable information about God?
Why does mankind need salvation? From what?
We may be in different places. My best guess is that Jesus was a fictional character created by the writer of the Gospel of Mark.
Anyway, the Holy Spirit definitely tells me that God approves of homosexuality and wants everyone to have as much sex as possible.
Awkward Fingers
Omphaloskeptic
Well, if AJ is going off a book that's been transcribed, rewritten, translated and has hundreds of different versions out for his knowledge..
And Ambiguous is chilling directly with the holy spirit on his shoulder..
....
I'm going with Ambiguous Guy on this one!
And Ambiguous is chilling directly with the holy spirit on his shoulder..
....
I'm going with Ambiguous Guy on this one!
AmbiguousGuy
Well-Known Member
Depends on what you mean by 'scriptures.' I hear poets all the time describing God's creative works. I do it myself.
Do you have some specific definition of 'scriptures'?
Awkward Fingers
Omphaloskeptic
I mean, if the book says, everyone is a sinner, don't judge, and above all, love each other.. And that still leads to questions about how you should feel about a group (tip, you should love them)
Then that book is poorly written.
Ambiguous saying (if I may paraphrase) "don't be hating on gays" seems a lot more inline with the gist of the book.
He seems to have that down...while the people that say they study and know and live the book, seem to be much fuzzier on their knowledge.
Then that book is poorly written.
Ambiguous saying (if I may paraphrase) "don't be hating on gays" seems a lot more inline with the gist of the book.
He seems to have that down...while the people that say they study and know and live the book, seem to be much fuzzier on their knowledge.
AmbiguousGuy
Well-Known Member
Thanks. I really do think it is better to go with the prophet right in front of you than with prophets who supposedly wrote ancient books in foreign, dead languages.
I really do.
Triumphant_Loser
Libertarian Egalitarian
Jews: "Apart from the Torah, there are no known stories of God's creative works."
Muslims: "Apart from the Quran, there are no known stories of God's creative works."
Hindus: "Apart from the Bhagavad Gita, there are no known stories of God's creative works."
Zoroastrians: "Apart from the Zend-avesta, there are no known stories of God's creative works."
I'm noticing a pattern here...
Triumphant_Loser
Libertarian Egalitarian
"If a man lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put death; their blood shall be upon them."
~ Leviticus 20:13
Yeaaah... I don't think so.
Awkward Fingers
Omphaloskeptic
How many people will cherry pick that one line from leviticus, and not live by the rest of it, though?
No tattoos, shaving, mixed fabrics et cetera...
And does leviticus trump the while love Thu neighbor as thyself bit?
No tattoos, shaving, mixed fabrics et cetera...
And does leviticus trump the while love Thu neighbor as thyself bit?
Triumphant_Loser
Libertarian Egalitarian
The good parts don't make the bad parts magically disappear. Also... I don't need a holy book to tell me to be nice to people. That should be common sense. Likewise... I can ask you, why do you only cherry pick the warm and fuzzy parts of the Bible?
Last edited:
Awkward Fingers
Omphaloskeptic
Which leads me back to saying its poorly written.
Because not only are there parts in OT vs NT that disagree, but even nt vs nt disagrees.
So, I'm going with Ambiguous Guy on this one, he seems stable and believable!
I mean, if I apply minimum standards of evidence to his claims, shouldn't we apply them to all?
Just think of the riot THAT would cause in theology!!!
Because not only are there parts in OT vs NT that disagree, but even nt vs nt disagrees.
So, I'm going with Ambiguous Guy on this one, he seems stable and believable!
I mean, if I apply minimum standards of evidence to his claims, shouldn't we apply them to all?
Just think of the riot THAT would cause in theology!!!
Triumphant_Loser
Libertarian Egalitarian
Exactly. So regardless of whether you're picking the good parts or the bad parts, you're still cherry-picking.
Awkward Fingers
Omphaloskeptic
I agree. Read back on what side Ambiguous was stating.
He's not going off the Bible at all.
...
...he's a prophet.
AJ is the one going off the Bible.
I'm not much of a Bible man myself... I'm an Omphaloskeptic, after all.
He's not going off the Bible at all.
...
...he's a prophet.
AJ is the one going off the Bible.
I'm not much of a Bible man myself... I'm an Omphaloskeptic, after all.
Triumphant_Loser
Libertarian Egalitarian
Awkward Fingers
Omphaloskeptic
Indeed we seem to be, friend.
Indeed we seem to be.
Indeed we seem to be.