Frogger
God Complex
Agnostics welcome the idea of God, they just don't have enough evidence to put all their faith into it.
Which Religion are you?
- Thread starter En4Neo
- Start date
Secumfex
Ninja? I'm a Pirate! Yarr
- Jan 14, 2007
- 567
- 15
- Wii Online Code
- 6205-5687-4726-5914
Squall7 said:
yes maybe I put that sentence not too clearly. What I meant is, an agnostic wouldn't answer the question "Is there a god" with "Yes" or "No", but he would say "It's not certain" or "There is no correct answer on that question" or "It doesn't matter (This would be an ignostic)"
But Arcadium said that he beleaves there is a god so he would rather be a theist (even though confessionless) than an agnostic, I think. Well... hard to say...
Squall7
A li'l bit different
Sounds like you know the answer to the question. Care to share?Skippy said:
He was using tactics associated with politics, only he didn't do them as subtly.
Brawny
Anglophobiphile
This forum loves it's religious debates. While there have been a *few* trolls, I think that they actually follow a pretty good order of things. Squall's good for that.
Last edited:
Squall7
A li'l bit different
Not sure what you meant by that...Brawny said:
...If it's good thank you. If it's bad, then meh.
Did you mean that I discuss things amockably(sp?), and without relying heavily on stereotypes and false beliefs in, well, beliefs?...
mr_resi
AKA:Skarecrow
This is old, expect a lock sooo,
IN BEFORE THE LOCK
IN BEFORE THE LOCK
Brawny
Anglophobiphile
Taills said:I was aiming at the forgiveness part.But still, can you explain those in a way they're supposed to be understood?
Just to ask this because there might not be a better time. But, if being Heterosexual was a sin, and being Homosexual was correct, would you be able do it?
ohh, gladly. I can't believed I "meh'd" Gene. Back when I thought you were a guy. :lol:
Anyways..first, squall is correct. We, or I at least, believe that homosexuality is a temptation, only a sin when you give into it. :yesnod:
Homosexuality is not the unforgivable sin, as many radicals would have you believe.
And the historical context of Isrealites:
Jeremiah, came at a time of a lack of religious discipline. Idol worship was common. There was much social injustice, poor morals. Jeremiah came immediately prior to the Assyrian Captivity.....kind of proves his point...:/
Ok, Samuel. Was during a time of the judges. Just previous to David. At this time, the Isrealites were gaining power. They were following the Lord, and so he delivered them in battle with a mighty fist... reward for following, ya know.
Numbers one...the spies were scared, they didn't follow him. Simple as that. In this time of the wandering, he needed to prove a point. He was giving them the promised land, and yet they didn't believe.
Exodus, part of the commandments. First...a bit of a hyperbole. He just had delivered them from slavery.... he needed to start a new people, and needed rules to keep them in line..... I know I'll get comments on this one, will reply in a bit.
Numbers 31: LOL, he let them be owned in battle because they would not follow him. You have to understand, God is perfect. Yes, he is merciful, and loving above all. But he still needs payment for evil.
When I read the Bible, I thought that the OT taught about a judgemental God, smiting all in his path, while the God of the NT is only loving.
Now that I read it again, I see he is both, in both.
I dunno Gene, maybe here, maybe gtalk, I'll catch ya later.
Axtlar
Del fuego he resurgido...
I'm a Catholic
FuzzyPuppyDog
I wiil rule the world.
Catholic.
Squall7 said:
So the deal is, the reporter guy approached that archbishop and asked about the verse in Leviticus that condemns homosexuality. The reporter's main point was that if the verse in Leviticus is valid, why aren't the other verses in Leviticus valid. The archbishop seemed to stumble around and not know how to answer. Which makes me wonder how he was ever appointed an archbishop in the first place.
The has to do with the Mosaic Law - the law given to the nation of Israel from God through Moses. It contained a lot of procedural laws in additional to many moral regulations. It's main purpose was to prepare them for the arrival of the Messiah and why one was needed in the first place. When Christ arrived, he fulfilled the Law - and it was his sacrifice of his perfect life made possible the permanent end to sin, and not just the temporary measures from the animal sacrifices of the Mosaic Law. This essentially did away with the Law and it's many specific regulations and procedures - for example the stuff you find in Leviticus that the reporter asked the archbishop about.
So now you may be thinking that if the Law was done away with, including the regulations in Leviticus, then the verse about homosexuality must have been done away with too, right? Not exactly. Just because something was part of the Mosaic Law does not necessarily mean it's gone from the law of the Christ. Many things, particularly morality related, were restated later in the Bible, under the Christian arrangement. Homosexuality was one of them.
Romans 1:27 "In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion."
1 Corinthians 6:9-10 "Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God."
All that archbishop had to do was say, "yeah, the Law in Leviticus was done away with, but homosexuality is still considered a sin under Christ" and then pointed out those other verses.
wario2ooo
vote for me....Wario!
nintendo is my god:worship: :worship: :worship:
:worship: :worship: :worship:
:worship: :worship: :worship:
Brawny
Anglophobiphile
Gah....I was looking forward to someone ripping apart my post.
Gene's gone. Squall? Somebody? LMAO
Gene's gone. Squall? Somebody? LMAO
