Why Does the Biblical God Not Want People To Make an Informed Decision?

[waitasec]

ADD: Evolution doesn't favor the smartest or the most advanced among us. Evolution favors those who breed more. Think on that for a moment.

evolution favors adaptation.

 

[HiddenDjinn]

evolution favors adaptation.

Evolution favors the Chassidim who have more than 10 kids per mating pair.

 

[waitasec]

Evolution favors the Chassidim who have more than 10 kids per mating pair.

but you see if we over populate the planet that will eventually be a cause for our demise. don't forget we need balance.

think of a bacteria that continually eats off it's host. when the host dies so will the bacteria.

 

[HiddenDjinn]

but you see if we over populate the planet that will eventually be a cause for our demise. don't forget we need balance.

think of a bacteria that continually eats off it's host. when the host dies so will the bacteria.

The planet isn't truly at risk of "dying". What has and will happen: an area is overpopulated...starvation, disease, war takes care of such overpopulation...the population recovers.

 

[waitasec]

The planet isn't truly at risk of "dying". What has and will happen: an area is overpopulated...starvation, disease, war takes care of such overpopulation...the population recovers.

i never said the planet is at risk of dying, but we are certainly not in any danger of under population...

 

[Enoughie]

Here's the thing: in my limited experience of the world, which includes experiencing this world on three continents, I've seen one common theme underlying the societies I've experienced. Each society, culture, civilization(all of those) was built on top of one basic unit, the family. Like it or not, homosexual practice disrupts the continuity of the basic family. You no longer have generation followed by generation of a family once a significant portion of said family practices "alternative lifestyles" of any kind. Eventually, this leads to the disassembly of society. Examples include: Athens, Rome, Byzantium, Memphis(not the one in Tennessee). Are we to be so bold as to suggest that we're immune to the influence the breakdown of the basic family will have due to the permissive attitudes towards homosexuality?

All right. This is the beginning of a sensible discussion. While I disagree with your conclusions, I command you for putting forward a sensible argument (unlike some others on this forums).

So here we go..

First, the family unit is a fluid term. Sometimes it is two parents and their children, and sometimes it is a few generations living together in the same house. Sometimes the relationships are monogamous, and sometimes they are polygamous. There is no one universal basis of what a family is. Not only that, the fact that one family is polygamous does not "disrupt the continuity" of another family that might be monogamous. They can - and should - all be able to live and respect each other's lifestyle. Without having any negative effect on this generation, or future generations. The same can be said about people who are celibate, women who cannot bear children, men who are sterile, or homosexual. Their existence does not disrupt or threaten the continuity of civilization. Do you think Newton, Michelangelo, or Leonardo Da Vinci did more to disrupt or promote the continuation of society? None of them lived a "traditional" lifestyle in a family unit.

This is because there are many ways a person can contribute to the perpetuation of civilization that does not involve reproductive activity. For example, it is important to support a vibrant society (through the arts for example) and a strong economy (through entrepreneurship and technology). It is also important to promote a stable society, raise children in a safe environment, and prevent war. Homosexuals contribute in all of these fields. But not every individual must contribute in every single field. Not all people are Renaissance Men, Entrepreneurs, and so on. Those who promote these qualities (peace, vibrant society, and so no) help the perpetuation of civilization.

But for some reason, you think that a homosexual lifestyle (among a few members of society) does more harm to a civilization then starvation or war. That is a ridiculous point of view.

What has and will happen: an area is overpopulated...starvation, disease, war takes care of such overpopulation...the population recovers.

Also, the idea that the majority will become homosexual, and that will destroy society is simply absurd. The reason it is absurd is not just that such a scenario is highly unlikely, but also because if you apply the same logic to anything else, you would come up with the same results..

For example: if most people become [musicians/lawyers/drivers/teachers/pilots/homosexuals/priests/soldiers/doctors/etc. - choose one of these] our economy and civilization would collapse.

This makes such an argument meaningless.

Diversity is good for a healthy and vibrant society and the perpetuation of civilization. It is not a threat to it.

_____________________
Natural Philosophy of Life offers a simple, elegant, and powerful alternative to religious dogma. This philosophy has a firm foundation in nature, science, and reason, and it is centered on the core values of honesty, generosity, equality, and freedom

 

[Blackheart]

Evolution favors the Chassidim who have more than 10 kids per mating pair.

Evolution favours the blind as they are the only ones that can be led by it.

 

[waitasec]

Evolution favours the blind as they are the only ones that can be led by it.

 

[HiddenDjinn]

On the other hand, when homosexuality became acceptable in ancient cultures, and some not quite ancient, those cultures died out. I'm not saying that homosexuals did this, or, if they did this, they did it willingly, but accepting it as a norm in your society sounds a death knell for your civilization. Further, we are competing for resources with another civilization that does not accept it.

 

[HiddenDjinn]

And personally, I think this should be forked into another thread, since the initial basis of this thread has been abandoned in favor of a discussion about homosexuality, instead of whether G-D wants you to make an informed decision.

 

[waitasec]

On the other hand, when homosexuality became acceptable in ancient cultures, and some not quite ancient, those cultures died out.

but that was then this is now. and we have progressed.
and i'm curious as to how they died out, do you have any sources?

I'm not saying that homosexuals did this, or, if they did this, they did it willingly, but accepting it as a norm in your society sounds a death knell for your civilization. Further, we are competing for resources with another civilization that does not accept it.

but you can't deny it's there. denial is not progress.
do you think once homosexuality is a part of the norm there will only be only homosexuals? not sure that will ever happen, i don't think there will be more homosexuals then than now, the only difference is they are free at last.

 

[waitasec]

And personally, I think this should be forked into another thread, since the initial basis of this thread has been abandoned in favor of a discussion about homosexuality, instead of whether G-D wants you to make an informed decision.

yup!!!

edit:
in a way i think the issue of homosexuality and the way it has been handled is not making an informed decision based on what the bible says.

 

[Enoughie]

Then let's bring the discussion back to it's original basis with the following question:

How can we make an informed decision about the existence of heaven?

_____________________
Natural Philosophy of Life offers a simple, elegant, and powerful alternative to religious dogma. This philosophy has a firm foundation in nature, science, and reason, and it is centered on the core values of honesty, generosity, equality, and freedom

 

[Enoughie]

On the other hand, when homosexuality became acceptable in ancient cultures, and some not quite ancient, those cultures died out. I'm not saying that homosexuals did this, or, if they did this, they did it willingly, but accepting it as a norm in your society sounds a death knell for your civilization. Further, we are competing for resources with another civilization that does not accept it.

Unless you can demonstrate something stronger than merely a tentative correlation, this is nothing but a baseless speculation about the reason these civilizations declined. We can similarly say that once nations accepted rulers with mustaches ten of millions of people died. So do you think it is the mustache that is responsible for the death of millions?

_____________________
Natural Philosophy of Life offers a simple, elegant, and powerful alternative to religious dogma. This philosophy has a firm foundation in nature, science, and reason, and it is centered on the core values of honesty, generosity, equality, and freedom

 

[HiddenDjinn]

Then let's bring the discussion back to it's original basis with the following question:

How can we make an informed decision about the existence of heaven?

_____________________
Natural Philosophy of Life offers a simple, elegant, and powerful alternative to religious dogma. This philosophy has a firm foundation in nature, science, and reason, and it is centered on the core values of honesty, generosity, equality, and freedom

Is an informed decision concerning anything possible?

 

[Enoughie]

Is an informed decision concerning anything possible?

Yes. It is possible to make an informed decision about things that exist in reality, about the laws that govern nature, and the principles that govern the behavior of living beings (which is an applied form of the laws that govern nature). For everything else, you have religion (ie. credulity and self-delusion).

_____________________
Natural Philosophy of Life offers a simple, elegant, and powerful alternative to religious dogma. This philosophy has a firm foundation in nature, science, and reason, and it is centered on the core values of honesty, generosity, equality, and freedom

 

[HiddenDjinn]

Yes. It is possible to make an informed decision about things that exist in reality, about the laws that govern nature, and the principles that govern the behavior of living beings (which is an applied form of the laws that govern nature). For everything else, you have religion (ie. credulity and self-delusion).

_____________________
Natural Philosophy of Life offers a simple, elegant, and powerful alternative to religious dogma. This philosophy has a firm foundation in nature, science, and reason, and it is centered on the core values of honesty, generosity, equality, and freedom

It could be argued that it is impossible to make an informed decision about anything, considering that reality, as you perceive it, could easily be a delusion. Self-delusion takes many forms. You truly can't be absolutely sure you're not participating in it at this moment.

 

[Enoughie]

It could be argued that it is impossible to make an informed decision about anything, considering that reality, as you perceive it, could easily be a delusion. Self-delusion takes many forms. You truly can't be absolutely sure you're not participating in it at this moment.

Anything can be argued, just not very successfully. When you take refuge in the argument from ignorance/delusion, then you've already lost the debate thanks to your own reasoning. Because what you're basically saying is that you cannot argue or defend any position.

Reality is that which when you stop believing in it doesn't go away.

_____________________
Natural Philosophy of Life offers a simple, elegant, and powerful alternative to religious dogma. This philosophy has a firm foundation in nature, science, and reason, and it is centered on the core values of honesty, generosity, equality, and freedom

 

[HiddenDjinn]

Anything can be argued, just not very successfully. When you take refuge in the argument from ignorance/delusion, then you've already lost the debate thanks to your own reasoning. Because what you're basically saying is that you cannot argue or defend any position.

Reality is that which when you stop believing in it doesn't go away.

_____________________
Natural Philosophy of Life offers a simple, elegant, and powerful alternative to religious dogma. This philosophy has a firm foundation in nature, science, and reason, and it is centered on the core values of honesty, generosity, equality, and freedom

Actually, the argument carries that not only can I not argue or defend any position, but neither can you.

 

[Enoughie]

Actually, the argument carries that not only can I not argue or defend any position, but neither can you.

Actually, the argument voids itself, since when you say "considering that reality, as you perceive it, could easily be a delusion" you cannot know if that is a real perception of the perception of reality, or a delusion of the perception of the perception of reality. The question is how far do you want this argument to go. Because the perception of the perception of the perception of the perception of reality could be a delusion as well, which would still make reality real. So let's just say that it's a highly flawed argument.

_____________________
Natural Philosophy of Life offers a simple, elegant, and powerful alternative to religious dogma. This philosophy has a firm foundation in nature, science, and reason, and it is centered on the core values of honesty, generosity, equality, and freedom