For Those Who Do Believe In God...

[Kalam]

I did not misunderstand it at all--but I note that you fail to point out the precise nature of this "misunderstanding" when you have every opportunity to do so

I'd rather not discuss it in detail here - it's off-topic. There's already a thread about it.

I think you were just avoiding discussion.

You're welcome to think that...

OH REALLY? Then what does this really mean?

"Moreover, actual infinites do not exist in nature; that's the point that the KCA makes. The universe absolutely had a beginning."​

Actual infinites do not exist except in theory. The universe is corporeal.

That the universe had a beginning is indisputable.

It ceratinly is disputable, in fact, IT'S IN DISPUTE!!!

The universe must have had a beginning according to the Second Law of Thermodynamics.

As I mentioned on the other thread, a universe with an existence stretching into negative infinity would have attained maximum entropy an infinite amount of time ago. Moreover, actual infinites do not exist in nature; that's the point that the KCA makes. The universe absolutely had a beginning.

Fine. Then so did your "personal creator", otherwise PETITIO PRINCIPII.

Not necessarily. Unlike the physical universe, a prime mover's existence could conceivably extend into negative infinity. Moreover, because the universe had a beginning, because everything with a beginning is a response, because every response has a stimulus, and because a causal chain can not be infinitely long, the universe's existence must have a beginingless cause that exists independently of its creation.

 

[Againsheila]

There is a big difference between mourning in your own way and disrupting a funeral. Yes, DISRUPTING, as in having conversations with one another, loudly, while the funeral is in process. Most of these kids come from homes like yours and have never been to a funeral or in a church in their lives and were never taught the proper manners for such a thing. How would you like it if I came to your grandmother's funeral and chatted with my friend so loud YOU couldn't hear the eulogy? That's not grieving, that's just being RUDE!!!!

There isn't a big difference. I think you just feel you have to defend anyone of the Christian faith or be an appeaser of their bad behavior, even if its disrespectful and rude.
I would say that someone praying outloud at an agnostic funeral isn't grieving and that its just being rude.

By the way, I went to church most of my childhood. I didn't learn to be polite or respectful at church. Especially when those other church-goers told me that homosexuals were going to burn forever in Hell, same with the unbelievers. I didn't think that was very polite. I just learned that people fear God and, you know, that whole fire and brimstone thing for being different.

And you feel you have to attack anyone of the Christian faith because you had a bad experience as a child. Boo Hoo, get over it. Not all Christians are like that.

I spent a lot of my childhood in church and we never even discussed homosexuals. Not ONCE!!!! We discussed the Bible. We discussed Christ's teaching, but not once did we discuss homosexuals. In fact, I've never even seen it discussed EVER at Church, so either you went to the wrong Church or I've found several of the most unique Churches in the world, or you're just making stuff up.

 

[Coloradomtnman]

And you feel you have to attack anyone of the Christian faith because you had a bad experience as a child. Boo Hoo, get over it. Not all Christians are like that.

I spent a lot of my childhood in church and we never even discussed homosexuals. Not ONCE!!!! We discussed the Bible. We discussed Christ's teaching, but not once did we discuss homosexuals. In fact, I've never even seen it discussed EVER at Church, so either you went to the wrong Church or I've found several of the most unique Churches in the world, or you're just making stuff up.

I didn't have a bad experience as a child. I had bad experienceS and still do. And I know not all Christians are like that, but the most people that I knew were Christian (because of their out-spokeness about it) are also the people who were the sources of my bad experiences.

It was at a Methodist church's Bible school before the service that this woman preached about the sinfulness of homosexuals. And it was at almost every church that I ever went to that I heard about the punishment of Hell for all non-believers. So you either go to a very nice church where the clergy aren't evangelistic, or you're just making stuff up.

Either way, it doesn't excuse your Christian bias. Not that there is anything wrong with being biased one way or another, except when its hypocritical.

 

[Againsheila]

And you feel you have to attack anyone of the Christian faith because you had a bad experience as a child. Boo Hoo, get over it. Not all Christians are like that.

I spent a lot of my childhood in church and we never even discussed homosexuals. Not ONCE!!!! We discussed the Bible. We discussed Christ's teaching, but not once did we discuss homosexuals. In fact, I've never even seen it discussed EVER at Church, so either you went to the wrong Church or I've found several of the most unique Churches in the world, or you're just making stuff up.

I didn't have a bad experience as a child. I had bad experienceS and still do. And I know not all Christians are like that, but the most people that I knew were Christian (because of their out-spokeness about it) are also the people who were the sources of my bad experiences.

It was at a Methodist church's Bible school before the service that this woman preached about the sinfulness of homosexuals. And it was at almost every church that I ever went to that I heard about the punishment of Hell for all non-believers. So you either go to a very nice church where the clergy aren't evangelistic, or you're just making stuff up.

Either way, it doesn't excuse your Christian bias. Not that there is anything wrong with being biased one way or another, except when its hypocritical.

A Methodist Church is hardly Evangelical....you need to attend more Churches. One bad lady before Church and you blame the whole congregation, gee, how a atheist of you.

 

[AllieBaba]

There is a big difference between mourning in your own way and disrupting a funeral. Yes, DISRUPTING, as in having conversations with one another, loudly, while the funeral is in process. Most of these kids come from homes like yours and have never been to a funeral or in a church in their lives and were never taught the proper manners for such a thing. How would you like it if I came to your grandmother's funeral and chatted with my friend so loud YOU couldn't hear the eulogy? That's not grieving, that's just being RUDE!!!!

There isn't a big difference. I think you just feel you have to defend anyone of the Christian faith or be an appeaser of their bad behavior, even if its disrespectful and rude.
I would say that someone praying outloud at an agnostic funeral isn't grieving and that its just being rude.

By the way, I went to church most of my childhood. I didn't learn to be polite or respectful at church. Especially when those other church-goers told me that homosexuals were going to burn forever in Hell, same with the unbelievers. I didn't think that was very polite. I just learned that people fear God and, you know, that whole fire and brimstone thing for being different.

And you feel you have to attack anyone of the Christian faith because you had a bad experience as a child. Boo Hoo, get over it. Not all Christians are like that.

I spent a lot of my childhood in church and we never even discussed homosexuals. Not ONCE!!!! We discussed the Bible. We discussed Christ's teaching, but not once did we discuss homosexuals. In fact, I've never even seen it discussed EVER at Church, so either you went to the wrong Church or I've found several of the most unique Churches in the world, or you're just making stuff up.

My pastor made the mistake of discussuing homosexuality in a mixed Sunday school class, and was asked to step down shortly thereafter.

 

[Avatar4321]

I didn't have a bad experience as a child. I had bad experienceS and still do. And I know not all Christians are like that, but the most people that I knew were Christian (because of their out-spokeness about it) are also the people who were the sources of my bad experiences.

It was at a Methodist church's Bible school before the service that this woman preached about the sinfulness of homosexuals. And it was at almost every church that I ever went to that I heard about the punishment of Hell for all non-believers. So you either go to a very nice church where the clergy aren't evangelistic, or you're just making stuff up.

Either way, it doesn't excuse your Christian bias. Not that there is anything wrong with being biased one way or another, except when its hypocritical.

Please don't take this the wrong way, but I think you have an unrealistic expectation of Christians. You act like everyone should live what they believe perfectly. And if they dont that somehow invalidates the message.

But it can't invalidate the message. That is the message. We fall short. We do stupid things we shouldn't do. Sometimes intentionally. Sometimes not. But we do stupid things. And that's why Christ came. So that we can be alittle better today then we were yesterday and be alittle better tomorrow than today.

If we were perfect, we wouldnt need healing. But we arent perfect, and that is why the Lord can teach us how to become so if we exercise faith in Him and walk His path.

Id rather be with a community of imperfect people trying to be better, than a community of people who believe there are no standards to strive for.

 

[AllieBaba]

Well said.

 

[Father Time]

One bad lady before Church and you blame the whole congregation, gee, how a atheist of you.

Wait are you implying that most atheists make blanket statements?

Because if yes that would be really ironic.

 

[Againsheila]

One bad lady before Church and you blame the whole congregation, gee, how a atheist of you.

Wait are you implying that most atheists make blanket statements?

Because if yes that would be really ironic.

Actually, I know you couldn't see it, but that last part was said with tongue in cheek. I almost said "How Christian of you," but realized that wouldn't quite work.

 

[Dr Grump]

Just came from volunteering at a church to give out lunches to the homeless. They were talking about a well attended funeral last weekend at the church for a young girl who died in a head on collision, she was going the wrong way on the freeway having taken the off ramp to get on instead of the on ramp.

Most of these people attending this funeral were young. Most of them had never been to a church or a funeral before. They were loud, they were rude, a funeral that should have taken and hour to an hour and a 1/2 (not including the reception afterward) took 2 and 1/2 hours.

I'm so sorry that you think a prayer to Jesus in some way "harms" you child, but I think not teaching him how to act appropriately in church or at a funeral harms him AND society.

Oh, and BTW, you will notice that everyone in favor of abortion has ALREADY BEEN BORN!!!! Kind of selfish, don't ya think?

Who said a prayer to Jesus harms my child? My original quote said forcing kids to pray would harm them (especially if they are non believers).

No I don't think it is selfish with regard to them already being born. Their parents made a choice. I don't have a problem with foetus's being aborted in the first trimester.

As for the funeral, if what you say is correct, yes those kids were rude. I went to several funerals in my late teens and early 20s of contemporaries who died young - most in car crashes or suicides. Most of the kids at the funerals were not religious and very respectful. Not too sure what your point is? Religious folk are more respectful at funerals than athiests? Poppycock. That aside, your anecdote is once removed from the original source and people like to exaggerate. Probably a couple of kids were rude and by the time it got to you the whole lot more...

 

[KittenKoder]

Just came from volunteering at a church to give out lunches to the homeless. They were talking about a well attended funeral last weekend at the church for a young girl who died in a head on collision, she was going the wrong way on the freeway having taken the off ramp to get on instead of the on ramp.

Most of these people attending this funeral were young. Most of them had never been to a church or a funeral before. They were loud, they were rude, a funeral that should have taken and hour to an hour and a 1/2 (not including the reception afterward) took 2 and 1/2 hours.

I'm so sorry that you think a prayer to Jesus in some way "harms" you child, but I think not teaching him how to act appropriately in church or at a funeral harms him AND society.

Oh, and BTW, you will notice that everyone in favor of abortion has ALREADY BEEN BORN!!!! Kind of selfish, don't ya think?

I'm sorry, but this story just points to a lot of problems society has, and many due to only one specific religion being so forceful.

Problem 1: Death should never be a time of sadness, no more than someone moving to another country pre-internet times. This goes into so many topics, so to simplify this, no matter what your belief they are better off now.

Problem 2: Manners regarding "other religions" was never something that the forceful religious zealots emulate ... EVER. I wear a pentacle and an ankh ... I get some harassment just for those from these zealots (always christian, go figure) and gods forbid I go in to volunteer wearing them and telling people the teachings on Imhotep and Cleopatra (a heraldess of unity) no matter where the poor are getting help from. To demand others extend those common courtesies we have rarely received is hypocritical at best. But that's not even the biggest problem with it, it will take decades without any religious influences from the forceful zealots of any ideology for our society to once again care about each other.

Problem 3: A church to most non-organized religions is NOT a building, it's a glen or field, or some other place actually created by the gods, not some human made construct lacking a soul and life (using dead materials or stone negates the life of the building automatically). Yet many people have no respect for the churches we view as sacred (to me it's anyplace where death is prevalent), how can a human made building EVER expect to be thought of as "holy"?

 

[LOki]

Actual infinites do not exist except in theory.

Potential infinities are possible--but that is beside the point--as is the point I made that the assertion in the KCA that states that because actual infinites do not exist in nature, nature cannot be an actual infinity, is like asserting that because the atoms in a cube of gold are colorless, the cube of gold is colorless--it's subject to the error of composition.

So, asserting that whole of the universe had a beginning because it's pieces had beginnings really is subject to compositional error, which is STILL secondary to the contentious presumption that there is some existence [where a personal creator exists] outside of the universe within which the universe should begin. Contentious in the presumtion that there is existence outside of the universe, and then question begging in that the existence outside of the universe is the personal creator who created the universe.

The universe must have had a beginning according to the Second Law of Thermodynamics.

Thus, so does your personal creator. The way you're getting around this is by using a definition of universe that presumes a personal creator (outside of the universe, an assertion which is necessarily in dispute)--putting "personal creator" in the definition of "universe" that is used in your first premise, that you then use to support your conclusion for the existence of a "personal creator", is question begging.

Just like I said.

As I mentioned on the other thread, a universe with an existence stretching into negative infinity would have attained maximum entropy an infinite amount of time ago. Moreover, actual infinites do not exist in nature; that's the point that the KCA makes. The universe absolutely had a beginning.

Fine. Then so did your "personal creator", otherwise PETITIO PRINCIPII.

Not necessarily.

Well, it seems that it is necessarily so. Just watch what you do:

Unlike the physical universe, a prime mover's existence could conceivably extend into negative infinity.

What prime mover? The one you presume exists in the definition of "the universe" that you use in your first premise? When you say "the universe" i9n your premise, do you really mean to say "all things in existence" or are you actually saying "everything except the personal creator whose existence I'm trying to prove"?

Moreover, because the universe had a beginning, . . .

Except for the personal creator that you presume exists in your first premise?

. . . because everything with a beginning is a response, . . .

Except for the personal creator that you presume exists in your first premise?

. . . because every response has a stimulus, . . .

Except for the personal creator that you presume exists in your first premise?

. . . and because a causal chain can not be infinitely long, . . .

An end on the causal chain that you assert is the personal creator that you presume exists in your first premise?

. . . the universe's existence must have a beginingless cause that exists independently of its creation.

Except for the personal creator that you presume exists in your first premise?

See? Question begging all the way down the line.

 

[LiveUninhibited]

I doubt the abrasive tone in the following post will win fiends (sic, as I am a demon working for the devil), but oh well. /sarcasm

Anymore, I'm concise and not very nice about it. This is a bait thread, that's all it is.

So what you're saying is you're a fish who is irresistably attracted to bait and must bite...

All it will do is draw those who would love the opportunity to re-crucify Christ, and whose greatest joy in life is ridiculing Christians and trying to make them lose faith.

The world would be a better place without religion. People would actually value extending and improving life instead of assuming everybody gets what they deserve in some mythical afterlife, which has rendered the material (real) world less relevant than it is. People will stop wasting time groping the air to cheesy songs every Sunday and instead will do something meaningful to the real world. Power-hungry assholes will have one less tool to manipulate poor fools to go fight frivilous wars/jihads for them.

I think it's a tool of Satan to spread unbelief. For a long time I felt the other way. But I've yet to see an internet Christian basher convert, or see anyone online in a forum such as this be converted by anything said within the forum. You see conversions at Christian forums, sometimes, because in addition to attracting anti-Christian demons, you also attract those who are seeking God.

Classic. You pretend the opposition are sub-human demons in order to explain their behavior. I guess that's how religious nuts justify killing infidels huh?

But you don't get that here. And my ability to turn the other cheek is limited when it comes to people who are trying their hardest to destroy the faith of people, and increase the numbers of those headed to hell.

Well good thing you're a "Christian" then huh? Because all you have to do is feel bad and ask Jesus to forgive you and you can be the biggest bitch in the universe and it wouldn't matter.

When really there's no excuse for it. They claim not to believe...if they don't, then why do they try so hard to un-convince people? What does it hurt, if it's not true, for people to believe in God and morality?

It hurts gays. It hinders science. It slows social progress. Social conservatism isn't always rooted in religion, but it very often is. It pits people against each other based upon imaginary friends. It is a social disease.

So anyway, pearls before swine. There's no point..at least in this forum, in response to such a blatant attack.

Yet you did, and while doing so speculated that he's a demon instead of addressing his points.

you know the faith you have that god does not exist......it is the other side of that coin.....

Wrong. Faith means believing something without, or in spite of, evidence. Would you agree with me if I told you that you disbelieve in the flying spaghetti monster based upon faith? No. You disbelieve it because it is totally ridiculous and lacking evidence. Ditto for your God.

How can you believe in something, but not believe in it? Im not sure thats possible.

How can you believe in something that is unseen and know its true.


Can you see air?
It is really not up to others to convince you. That's the job of the holy spirit...either you are moved to believe by the holy spirit or you are not. The conversion can only come from within.

The air response is common, but lame. Sight isn't the only sense we have you know. Air can be detected physically, the supernatural hasn't been demonstrated to exist AT ALL.

Allah's existence can be demonstrated logically. You may not agree with this, but it should at least make you think:
The Kalam Cosmological Argument: A Summary (not my namesake BTW )

Our failure, so far, to be able to wrap our minds around how the universe could have begun or always existed is NOT a legit argument that the supernatural must exist. It’s on the same level as ancients making up gods to explain lightning because they didn’t get it. When will we learn to stop stuffing gaps in knowledge with bullshit?

God hates you. Burn in hell, you miserable fuck.

not possible.....god doesn't hate.....

Um... Have you read the Bible?

Psalm 5:5 The arrogant cannot stand in your presence;
you hate all who do wrong.6 You destroy those who tell lies;
bloodthirsty and deceitful men the LORD abhors.

Romans 9:13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.
9:14 What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.
9:15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.

Malachi 1:3 And I hated Esau, and laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness.

BibleGateway.com - Passage*Lookup: Malachi 1 ;

(God really doesn’t like that Esau guy. That’ll teach him not to sell his birthright for food )

Leviticus 20:23 And ye shall not walk in the manners of the nation, which I cast out before you: for they committed all these things, and therefore I abhorred them.
20:24 But I have said unto you, Ye shall inherit their land, and I will give it unto you to possess it, a land that floweth with milk and honey: I am the LORD your God, which have separated you from other people.

But then in the New Testament I guess "God" grew up a little and learned that hating is stupid.

try getting up at sunrise, or looking at a spider web, or watch birds hatch. God is everywhere in everything you just have to look if you want to find him.

Of course, if you want to look for excuses not to believe that's easy too... your choice.

The sunrise is Apollo, the spider web is ... just a spider and birds hatching is the flying spaghetti monster.

It really is easy to see Gods when that's what you want to see.
Try taking a neutral look at things. Or try looking for God in a morgue or an intensive care unit at a hospital.

I heard God dresses in black and carries a scythe.

All jobs come with their unpleasant duties.

I think (the bolded stuff) was probably meant to shine a harsh light on my beliefs but no... actually I do see God in those places too. Suffering and tragedy happen, we endure no more than we can take or need.

It all makes sense now. Babies who spend their short lives suffering, born with congenital defects, exist to teach me a lesson. How nice.

The gift of His Son is the mercy. if God did nothing, we would have no hope and no chance because our choices are what damns us, not Him.

Well if he's omnipotent he sets the rules. Instead of judging humans as humans he allegedly sets impossibly high standards and then replaces it with something totally arbitrary (loving Jesus). It seems reflective of psychotic insecurity on one hand, and multiple personality disorder on the other.

There has been a law established. A Law pertaining the ways of happiness. If we transgress the law, we cannot be happy. In order for God to be perfectly just, and thus be God, He has to enforce His law. Mercy cannot rob justice.

Sorry but sending some people to eternal torture and others to eternal bliss based upon whether they get on their knees for Jesus is not perfect justice. Not even close.

I'm content in letting non-believers BURN IN HELL FOR ALL OF ETERNITY!

Then you're a sadist.

Only if he derives sexual pleasure from it.

 

[Newby]

There is a big difference between mourning in your own way and disrupting a funeral. Yes, DISRUPTING, as in having conversations with one another, loudly, while the funeral is in process. Most of these kids come from homes like yours and have never been to a funeral or in a church in their lives and were never taught the proper manners for such a thing. How would you like it if I came to your grandmother's funeral and chatted with my friend so loud YOU couldn't hear the eulogy? That's not grieving, that's just being RUDE!!!!

There isn't a big difference. I think you just feel you have to defend anyone of the Christian faith or be an appeaser of their bad behavior, even if its disrespectful and rude.
I would say that someone praying outloud at an agnostic funeral isn't grieving and that its just being rude.

By the way, I went to church most of my childhood. I didn't learn to be polite or respectful at church. Especially when those other church-goers told me that homosexuals were going to burn forever in Hell, same with the unbelievers. I didn't think that was very polite. I just learned that people fear God and, you know, that whole fire and brimstone thing for being different.

And you feel you have to attack anyone of the Christian faith because you had a bad experience as a child. Boo Hoo, get over it. Not all Christians are like that.

I spent a lot of my childhood in church and we never even discussed homosexuals. Not ONCE!!!! We discussed the Bible. We discussed Christ's teaching, but not once did we discuss homosexuals. In fact, I've never even seen it discussed EVER at Church, so either you went to the wrong Church or I've found several of the most unique Churches in the world, or you're just making stuff up.

I can't believe that this thread is still going. Sheila, I have had the exact same experience and I've attended Catholic churches, Lutheran churches, and non denominational christian churches, and I've never once heard a sermon about gays or homosexuals, ever. I keep telling people such as CMM that they are regurgitating a lie and a false stereo type because of what they have been told on liberal blogs or thru liberal propaganda in the media. There may be a small percentage of radical christian churches that do so, but the mainstream christian churches in this country do not even discuss the topic. As I pointed out earlier, my sister's church, which happens to be a Lutheran church (in a small town) has as members two lesbian couples who have adopted children. But, they'll just keep trying to perpetuate the stereo type whether they believe it to be true or not because it fits in with their neat little world view and gives them a reason to belittle what they apparently aren't able to understand.

 

[AVG-JOE]

Psalm 5:5 The arrogant cannot stand in your presence;
you hate all who do wrong. 6 You destroy those who tell lies;
bloodthirsty and deceitful men the LORD abhors.

I still say that this concept, combined with our history, while it may not be proof that the God of The Bible is a fantasy of man, it is evidence that there are inconsistencies in His Word versus His actions.

-Joe

 

[Coloradomtnman]

I can't believe that this thread is still going. Sheila, I have had the exact same experience and I've attended Catholic churches, Lutheran churches, and non denominational christian churches, and I've never once heard a sermon about gays or homosexuals, ever. I keep telling people such as CMM that they are regurgitating a lie and a false stereo type because of what they have been told on liberal blogs or thru liberal propaganda in the media. There may be a small percentage of radical christian churches that do so, but the mainstream christian churches in this country do not even discuss the topic. As I pointed out earlier, my sister's church, which happens to be a Lutheran church (in a small town) has as members two lesbian couples who have adopted children. But, they'll just keep trying to perpetuate the stereo type whether they believe it to be true or not because it fits in with their neat little world view and gives them a reason to belittle what they apparently aren't able to understand.

You know what? I'm not lying! I really experienced this woman preaching against homosexuality! And guess what? It wasn't liberal media who made me think Christians hate gays, it was Christians! Ever been to a gay rights protest? The Christians who arrive to protest the protesters invariably quote Leviticus. Ever been to a protest to quell any campaign for gay rights? The Christian protesters carry signs telling us the homosexuality is a sin. How is that liberal media? And what about Focus on the Family and its campaigns against homosexuality? And the Mormon church funding the Prop. 8 campaign? How about Dr. Dobbs messages that God is punishing the US for allowing homosexuals to be homosexuals here? The liberal media doesn't tell me that Christians hate gays, Christians tell me that.

So tell me... Are you a Christians? Should the government recognize same-sex marriages or should same-sex marriage be different than state sanctioned marriage between opposite genders? Why should only a man and a woman be married? Because your Bible says so, that's why.

Sheesh.

 

[Newby]

Yes. The faithful present their opinions as certain fact--they demand that thier opinions are certain fact--without the support of evidence or valid logic; in fact it is often the case that they judge the strength of thier convictions by their stoic determintion in denying the validity of evidence and valid logic--it could be considered definitive of faith. It is arrogance.

That comment is not true. No one has presented anything here as absolute fact, it's been presented that there are possibilities that man cannot refute. Nothing that you have posted here in any way disproves that there are multiple possibilities on how the universe was created, how 'space' came into existence, how many universes there actually are, and what comes beyond that. You take as absolute 'fact' only what the human brain can understand or comprehend. If you want to place all of your 'faith' in what the human mind is capable of understanding and place all of your bets on that, more power to you. To think that in doing so, it somehow makes you intellectually superior to those who will not define the universe by only what man can understand or explain shows your arrogance. Do you even admit to your own arrogant stance? I'm guessing not.

 

[Newby]

I can't believe that this thread is still going. Sheila, I have had the exact same experience and I've attended Catholic churches, Lutheran churches, and non denominational christian churches, and I've never once heard a sermon about gays or homosexuals, ever. I keep telling people such as CMM that they are regurgitating a lie and a false stereo type because of what they have been told on liberal blogs or thru liberal propaganda in the media. There may be a small percentage of radical christian churches that do so, but the mainstream christian churches in this country do not even discuss the topic. As I pointed out earlier, my sister's church, which happens to be a Lutheran church (in a small town) has as members two lesbian couples who have adopted children. But, they'll just keep trying to perpetuate the stereo type whether they believe it to be true or not because it fits in with their neat little world view and gives them a reason to belittle what they apparently aren't able to understand.

You know what? I'm not lying! I really experienced this woman preaching against homosexuality! And guess what? It wasn't liberal media who made me think Christians hate gays, it was Christians! Ever been to a gay rights protest? The Christians who arrive to protest the protesters invariably quote Leviticus. Ever been to a protest to quell any campaign for gay rights? The Christian protesters carry signs telling us the homosexuality is a sin. How is that liberal media? And what about Focus on the Family and its campaigns against homosexuality? And the Mormon church funding the Prop. 8 campaign? How about Dr. Dobbs messages that God is punishing the US for allowing homosexuals to be homosexuals here? The liberal media doesn't tell me that Christians hate gays, Christians tell me that.

So tell me... Are you a Christians? Should the government recognize same-sex marriages or should same-sex marriage be different than state sanctioned marriage between opposite genders? Why should only a man and a woman be married? Because your Bible says so, that's why.

Sheesh.

How many normal church services have you attended in your life? Everything you've talked about as far as experiencing interactions with Christians is in relation to gay protests and gay activities. One would think that you could deduce from that fact that you have only been exposed to those christians radical enough to even show up to any kind of a gay activity. Most would not even bother or care or even think that would be in any way the right thing to do based on their religious beliefs. I have never known in my entire life anyone that has attended any kind of a gay activity to protest it, and I would guess that would be the experience that 90 to 95 percent of all the other chritians in this country have had as well. So, to keep perpetuating your stereo type based on only these experiences is a lie. You have not experienced mainstream christian life, yet you expound on it like you're some kind of an expert. Those who scream the loudest, get the most attention, and the liberal media just loves to show those such as Dobbs as being the representative of the average american christian. The liberal media wants that to be the face of american christianity evne though it is not, which is why that is all they ever show. Keep buying into it tho, it's apparent that's all you want to believe.

I've already stated several times in this thread that I have no problem with legal civil unions between gay couples as long as churches are not forced by government to perform any religious ceremony should they choose not too.

 

[Newby]

So long as I'm not trying to force my beliefs on someone else I'm not sure how this can be viewed as arrogant.

Your certainty, in your belief, that your God is irrefutably real, is entiely in your own head--it's all about you. Rather arrogant to demand that that which you imagine to be real is real, because you believe it real. There is really no better example of arrogance than the ". . . because I say it is so" that is ultimately the only validation faith requires.

And I certainly don't make demands . . .

Except, of course, for the existence of your God.

You keep coming back to this "demand" word and your definition of what is a demand. Let's look at that.

–verb (used with object)
1. to ask for with proper authority; claim as a right: He demanded payment of the debt.
2. to ask for peremptorily or urgently: He demanded sanctuary. She demanded that we let her in.
3. to call for or require as just, proper, or necessary: This task demands patience. Justice demands objectivity.
4. Law.
a. to lay formal legal claim to.
b. to summon, as to court.

To be clear, I'm not asking for or calling for anything. You seem to be saying that if one person believes something it also means that they are asking or calling for others to believe it as well, as in your comment 'Rather arrogant to demand that that which you imagine to be real is real, because you believe it real", something I have never said, or even thought.

I simply set out what I believe, and others can either agree or disagree as they see fit. If you view this as a demand, then clearly your determination to validate your own argument is getting in the way of a reasonable discussion.

Well stated. His arrogance is getting in the way is how I would have stated it.

 

[Coloradomtnman]

How many normal church services have you attended in your life? Everything you've talked about as far as experiencing interactions with Christians is in relation to gay protests and gay activities. One would think that you could deduce from that fact that you have only been exposed to those christians radical enough to even show up to any kind of a gay activity. Most would not even bother or care or even think that would be in any way the right thing to do based on their religious beliefs. I have never known in my entire life anyone that has attended any kind of a gay activity to protest it, and I would guess that would be the experience that 90 to 95 percent of all the other chritians in this country have had as well. So, to keep perpetuating your stereo type based on only these experiences is a lie. You have not experienced mainstream christian life, yet you expound on it like you're some kind of an expert. Those who scream the loudest, get the most attention, and the liberal media just loves to show those such as Dobbs as being the representative of the average american christian. The liberal media wants that to be the face of american christianity evne though it is not, which is why that is all they ever show. Keep buying into it tho, it's apparent that's all you want to believe.

I've already stated several times in this thread that I have no problem with legal civil unions between gay couples as long as churches are not forced by government to perform any religious ceremony should they choose not too.

I've been to many church services. Until I was 13 I went to church every Sunday. After the age of 13 I went to church sporadically. I've been to Nazarene services, Catholic church for a year, Methodist services, non-denominational services, Kiwanis, Lutheran, Baptist, and Unitarian. Not all of the services were full of fear, fire, and brimstone, and only the Methodist church ever preached anything about homosexuality. But, from my experience, most Christians believe what I learned in these Churches: The Bible is true and if you don't believe that Christ is your savior, you go to Hell. Sorry if you think that is a stereotype because I can only express my experiences. I haven't lived the American Christian mainstream lifestyle because I'm not a Christian. So, if I've only been exposed to the fundamentalists, the extremists, and the most evangelical. Well, sorry, but that is how your religion is being represented and not just in the media. But tell me, do most Christians accept homosexuality or do most think its a sin? I never wrote anything as though I was an expert, though you seem to be an expert on liberals and love to spout about your liberal stereotypes.

If churches aren't forced to perform ceremonies that go against their church doctrine then why can't we just call it marriage? Why do Christians get to trademark that word? If Christians don't have a problem with gay marriage, then why do they vote against it?