First new gay thread

[NPH]

.

 

[Minty]

Good for you, Captain Yesterday ( I genuinely mean that, I'm not being sarcastic).

**Minty sits back and prepares for the fight to ensue from some of CF's less tolerant members **

 

[Caylin]

This wouldn't be E&M without a first page full of gay threads, so I'm making the first:

Hi, I'm gay and very happy about that. Assuming that god is not a mythical character, I don't think he would have a problem with that at all. After all, it does absolutely no harm to anyone and brings great happiness to myself and many others.

Me too!

 

[exxxys]

Let me just say I'm quite proud that you have the courage to be open about your sexuality on here! It's greatly admirable.

Good day.

 

[jamielindas]

Also gay... also not causing harm to anyone as far as I know...

can others still practice their religion? yes!

can others still have their opinion about anything they like? yes!

does this harm anyone's freedom or rights? no!

can others get married in the religious venue of their choice? yes!

am i forcing anyone to have gay sex or get gay married? no!

yay for gay!

 

[MachZer0]

<staff edit>
The Scriptures are God's words speaking to me personally.

 

[Fin12]

<staff edit>

That's more an argument against the validality of gospel as oppossed to does the CHRISTIAN god dislike gays.

I'm not anti-gay or even that christian, but until someone can find a scripture saying "and god did say to the world, forget ye about the OT I didst not know what I wast saying"

I feel abah's opinion on this is quite clear.

Once again if your gay, good for you!

 

[PassionFruit]

The Scriptures are God's words speaking to me personally.

How do you know they're God's words? In fact, why would God speak to people?

 

[MachZer0]

How do you know they're God's words?

Much study and prayer. And better question would be "How do you know they're not?"

In fact, why would God speak to people?

Why wouldn't He. He created us for His pleasure and what good would we be if we could not communicate with Him and how could we serve Him if we didn't know what expectations He had of us?. Example, if you have kids, would you choose not to speak to them?

 

[PassionFruit]

Much study and prayer. And better question would be "How do you know they're not?"[/font]

Why wouldn't He. He created us for His pleasure and what good would we be if we could not communicate with Him and how could we serve Him if we didn't know what expectations He had of us?. Example, if you have kids, would you choose not to speak to them?

Why is God a "He?"

 

[WatersMoon110]

Much study and prayer. And better question would be "How do you know they're not?"

Well, first off, there is the simple matter that Jesus rather replaced the old laws, as shown through His actions (like walking farther than allowed on the Sabbath to help someone), and through Paul's words. To paraphrase Paul: if the old laws could have saved us, there would have been no need for Jesus to come and save us (Paul was talking about circumcision, but I feel it applies to all the old laws). Jesus left us with two Commandments: Love the Lord thy God, and Love thy Neighbor as thyself. <staff edit>

Why wouldn't He. He created us for His pleasure and what good would we be if we could not communicate with Him and how could we serve Him if we didn't know what expectations He had of us?. Example, if you have kids, would you choose not to speak to them?

If I had a basically infinate amount of kids, I wouldn't have time to speak to all of them personally.

God is perfect, but humans are not. Humans had to write down the Bible, because God couldn't. Not to mention that the Bible has been translated, copied, and changed throughout the centuries. So there is a huge chance that the Bible could contain human error. I think that one does a great disservice to the message of the Bible (particularly the New Testament) if one chooses instead to take some rather minor details literally. But that is just my opinion...

 

[WatersMoon110]

Why is God a "He?"

Because calling God an "It" sounds offensive. There just isn't a nice term for a non-gendered being in English.

 

[PassionFruit]

Because calling God an "It" sounds offensive. There just isn't a nice term for a non-gendered being in English.

But it seems that calling God a 'he' just reinforces the belief that Christianity is a patriarchal religion. Even if God is supposedly a non-gendered being. That's the English language for you.

If I had a basically infinate amount of kids, I wouldn't have time to speak to all of them personally.

God is perfect, but humans are not. Humans had to write down the Bible, because God couldn't.

That's why I often ask Christians why would speak to humanity through the Bible, knowing that humans are flawed and are subject to making errors. Why rely on flawed beings?

 

[jamielindas]

Much study and prayer. And better question would be "How do you know they're not?"[/font]

Burden of proof lies on the affirmative position

 

[Fin12]

Passion fruit: The theory is that god is very vast and complex and isn't quite what we would comprehend in the meaning of a sentient being, i.e. capabe of only thinking about 1 thing at a time/communicating with one person at a time. That the way god would percieve the world may be entirely different to the limited way of how we as human beings (who know no other form of consious state) think.

And the bible "being word of god" thing, is based on the idea; that the scribes through divine blessing copied it down and edited it etc, exactly the way god planned.

 

[PassionFruit]

Passion fruit: The theory is that god is very vast and complex and isn't quite what we would comprehend in the meaning of a sentient being, i.e. capabe of only thinking about 1 thing at a time/communicating with one person at a time. That the way god would percieve the world may be entirely different to the limited way of how we as human beings (who know no other form of consious state) think.

And the bible "being word of god" thing, is based on the idea; that the scribes through divine blessing copied it down and edited it etc, exactly the way god planned.

I'm well aware that God is a complex theory (me being a deist) I don't like the idea of anthropomorphic God. Why are you telling me this?

 

[MachZer0]

Why is God a "He?"

You would have to ask Him that. After all, when He incarnated, He didn't come incarnate as a woman

 

[MachZer0]

Well, first off, there is the simple matter that Jesus rather replaced the old laws, as shown through His actions (like walking farther than allowed on the Sabbath to help someone), and through Paul's words. To paraphrase Paul: if the old laws could have saved us, there would have been no need for Jesus to come and save us (Paul was talking about circumcision, but I feel it applies to all the old laws). Jesus left us with two Commandments: Love the Lord thy God, and Love thy Neighbor as thyself.

You're welcome to that interpretation. I happen to disagree

<staff edit>

If I had a basically infinate amount of kids, I wouldn't have time to speak to all of them personally.

That's why yopu aren't God

God is perfect, but humans are not. Humans had to write down the Bible, because God couldn't. Not to mention that the Bible has been translated, copied, and changed throughout the centuries. So there is a huge chance that the Bible could contain human error. I think that one does a great disservice to the message of the Bible (particularly the New Testament) if one chooses instead to take some rather minor details literally. But that is just my opinion...

You're free no to believe that the Bible is accurate <staff edit>

 

[WatersMoon110]

I'm well aware that God is a complex theory (me being a deist) I don't like the idea of anthropomorphic God. Why are you telling me this?

See, I think that it is easier to interface with an anthropomorphic God, and I use the masculine He because I pair God with a female Goddess counterpart. But that is just for me, nothing wrong with doing it any other way.

 

[Fin12]

I'm well aware that God is a complex theory (me being a deist) I don't like the idea of anthropomorphic God. Why are you telling me this?

It shows that if god was as described by the christian faith he would be able to speak to everyone/people at the same time, if he wanted too.