Page 2 of 4 [ 55 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

06 Sep 2011, 6:31 am

Inuyasha wrote:

Meaning you want atheists to push their views on kids in the public schools and get the kids to hate people that are of a religious faith.


Most atheists don't have a "view" to push. They simply do not believe in your god. And why should they? There is no evidence for the existence of your god.

ruveyn



CaptainTrips222
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2009
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,100

06 Sep 2011, 11:17 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
My only suggestion is, just bring your child along to church and Sunday school without any pressure to convert, and faith might just grow on him.
And in regard to the name of your post - the majority of us who call ourselves Christians would hardly classify ourselves as born again.


That's good a thing if you ask me. Born again is a byword for preachy hypocrite in my book. The smarter christians usually have their grey areas, or interpret the scripture such that they're actually more Agnostic, even though they don't consider themselves Agnostic.

But going by scripture, ALL christians have to be "born again" to be saved, however you interpret that.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,739
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

06 Sep 2011, 11:31 pm

CaptainTrips222 wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
My only suggestion is, just bring your child along to church and Sunday school without any pressure to convert, and faith might just grow on him.
And in regard to the name of your post - the majority of us who call ourselves Christians would hardly classify ourselves as born again.


That's good a thing if you ask me. Born again is a byword for preachy hypocrite in my book. The smarter christians usually have their grey areas, or interpret the scripture such that they're actually more Agnostic, even though they don't consider themselves Agnostic.

But going by scripture, ALL christians have to be "born again" to be saved, however you interpret that.


When you say born again, I think of adult baptism after having a born gain experience. Like most people, I was baptized as a baby, and can't pinpoint any particular time when I was "saved."

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



ValentineWiggin
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 May 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,907
Location: Beneath my cat's paw

07 Sep 2011, 1:59 am

Oh, noez! Can't wait til the kid is an adult and can pursue religious teachings, or not, of his own accord!
Gotsta get him when he's young and impressionable! :roll:
Seriously. What ignoramus truly-feels children, indoctrinated from a young age by their parents and other adults into believing this or that are retroactively made "free to choose" by the arrival of their 18th birthday?
"It's not indoctrination. It's just telling him that his parent(s) believe in wizards, and taking him to houses of wizard worship and having him sing the wizard worship songs and taught stories about teh wizard."
You'd think at least the basics of developmental psychology would be known on a forum dedicated to a DEVELOPMENTAL DISORDER.


_________________
"Such is the Frailty
of the human Heart, that very few Men, who have no Property, have any Judgment of their own.
They talk and vote as they are directed by Some Man of Property, who has attached their Minds
to his Interest."


iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

07 Sep 2011, 2:08 am

dandelion4 wrote:
My boys says "There is no God because I can't see Him" . He is very concrete/literal.


There is no air because you can't see air.



iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

07 Sep 2011, 2:11 am

Furthermore, why would there not also be a lack of anything beyond that which you can see? If you were blind, then nothing would exist. Visibility/invisibility according to our senses is a meaningless measure of the existence or non-existence of anything or anyone.



CaptainTrips222
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2009
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,100

07 Sep 2011, 3:27 am

Kraichgauer wrote:
CaptainTrips222 wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
My only suggestion is, just bring your child along to church and Sunday school without any pressure to convert, and faith might just grow on him.
And in regard to the name of your post - the majority of us who call ourselves Christians would hardly classify ourselves as born again.


That's good a thing if you ask me. Born again is a byword for preachy hypocrite in my book. The smarter christians usually have their grey areas, or interpret the scripture such that they're actually more Agnostic, even though they don't consider themselves Agnostic.

But going by scripture, ALL christians have to be "born again" to be saved, however you interpret that.


When you say born again, I think of adult baptism after having a born gain experience. Like most people, I was baptized as a baby, and can't pinpoint any particular time when I was "saved."

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


You sound like one of the smart ones. "Saved" instead of Saved! makes it sound like you question the meaning behind it.

Why do I need to have Jesus in my heart to be saved? Is God that unfair?
Why does dying on the cross so horribly in the Middle East save us from our sins, most of which are biologically based?
How can God expect us all to accept Jesus, when some of us are born into cultures that have different belief systems?
Why has Christianity, supposedly a force of good, led to so much suffering? AND...
Even if that's the doing of bad people and Christianity isn't to blame, why would God allow His name to get besmirched like that?

These are questions that the thinking Christian should come to on his/her own.



John_Browning
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,456
Location: The shooting range

07 Sep 2011, 4:44 am

ruveyn wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:

Meaning you want atheists to push their views on kids in the public schools and get the kids to hate people that are of a religious faith.


Most atheists don't have a "view" to push. They simply do not believe in your god. And why should they? There is no evidence for the existence of your god.

ruveyn

It seems like a whole lot of atheists (I didn't say majority because I don't have exact numbers) seem to have a vendetta against God more than a lack of belief in His existence.


_________________
"Gun control is like trying to reduce drunk driving by making it tougher for sober people to own cars."
- Unknown

"A fear of weapons is a sign of ret*d sexual and emotional maturity."
-Sigmund Freud


ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

07 Sep 2011, 5:39 am

John_Browning wrote:
It seems like a whole lot of atheists (I didn't say majority because I don't have exact numbers) seem to have a vendetta against God more than a lack of belief in His existence.


the "vendetta" is really against the churches and institutions run by barking mad enthusiasts who really think they are acting in the name of and according to the will of their hypothetical god. God did not make religions. Man did. You can tell by the low quality of the product.

ruveyn



ValentineWiggin
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 May 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,907
Location: Beneath my cat's paw

07 Sep 2011, 9:54 am

John_Browning wrote:
It seems like a whole lot of atheists (I didn't say majority because I don't have exact numbers) seem to have a vendetta against God more than a lack of belief in His existence.



Why do you hate unicorns so, John?
You know they love you.


_________________
"Such is the Frailty
of the human Heart, that very few Men, who have no Property, have any Judgment of their own.
They talk and vote as they are directed by Some Man of Property, who has attached their Minds
to his Interest."


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,739
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

07 Sep 2011, 10:22 am

CaptainTrips222 wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
CaptainTrips222 wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
My only suggestion is, just bring your child along to church and Sunday school without any pressure to convert, and faith might just grow on him.
And in regard to the name of your post - the majority of us who call ourselves Christians would hardly classify ourselves as born again.


That's good a thing if you ask me. Born again is a byword for preachy hypocrite in my book. The smarter christians usually have their grey areas, or interpret the scripture such that they're actually more Agnostic, even though they don't consider themselves Agnostic.

But going by scripture, ALL christians have to be "born again" to be saved, however you interpret that.


When you say born again, I think of adult baptism after having a born gain experience. Like most people, I was baptized as a baby, and can't pinpoint any particular time when I was "saved."

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


You sound like one of the smart ones. "Saved" instead of Saved! makes it sound like you question the meaning behind it.

Why do I need to have Jesus in my heart to be saved? Is God that unfair?
Why does dying on the cross so horribly in the Middle East save us from our sins, most of which are biologically based?
How can God expect us all to accept Jesus, when some of us are born into cultures that have different belief systems?
Why has Christianity, supposedly a force of good, led to so much suffering? AND...
Even if that's the doing of bad people and Christianity isn't to blame, why would God allow His name to get besmirched like that?

These are questions that the thinking Christian should come to on his/her own.


I think perhaps you've read more into my post than I had intended to be there. For the record, my religious beliefs can best be described as mainline, as opposed to evangelical. While I do believe that our salvation does depend on Christ, I also believe that our fate is in the hands of a loving, generous God, rather than in our own hands (so we can't screw it up). It's not for me to say who is going to hell, and who isn't. So I'm not about to damn you, or anyone else to eternal damnation - the best sign, though, to judge any such thing is by the works an individual's faith produces. Nor do I feel that I have any business cramming my faith down someone else' throat.
Hope that was explanatory enough. And I apologize if I sounded the least bit sappy there.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



AngelRho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,366
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile

07 Sep 2011, 10:52 am

CaptainTrips222 wrote:
These are questions that the thinking Christian should come to on his/her own.

This is nothing new at all, though, and certainly not anything thinking Christians HAVEN'T thought about.

CaptainTrips222 wrote:
Why do I need to have Jesus in my heart to be saved? Is God that unfair?

Your second question here looks to me to further qualify the first. Rather than answer the first question, I think the second is more important. Why is that so unfair? Also, what is the standard for "fairness" here? Do you weigh fairness subjectively or objectively?

I only ask because I suspect that the idea of fairness involved is subjective. If that is true, then your quasi-accusation of God being unfair is really just a matter of opinion and ultimately irrelevant. It doesn't matter what we believe. So who are you to judge us for believing that way?

CaptainTrips222 wrote:
Why does dying on the cross so horribly in the Middle East save us from our sins, most of which are biologically based?

Your rationale is that sins are based entirely on biology. In that case, you are wrong to accuse and convict child molesters, rapists, murders, and the like. It could be that people who commit violent crimes are born that way, in which case punishment is not the answer. Sociopaths are to be pitied.

Now, I do believe this is true to a degree--but you do have people with violent tendencies taking "anger management classes," and criminal justice philosophy has changed significantly in the last 100-200 years to the effect that rehabilitation of the criminal is a priority in returning him safely to society. State hospitals house the criminally insane and work towards treating the illness as well as keeping them safely isolated. So, while we accept violent behavior to a point, we do NOT tolerate it in open society.

Even people who recognize that something isn't "right" about themselves have various means of seeking help. One example would be men who feel unwanted sexual attraction to other men but, for whatever reason, do not want to engage in a homosexual lifestyle, neither publicly nor privately. They are free to get counseling to deal with the problem, even if they cannot change those things about themselves that leads to the initial feelings.

So, yes, existing in a fallen world inevitably leads towards what we call "sinful behavior." But being born in a fallen world and existing in a fallen state does not excuse a person from responding in an appropriate way.

CaptainTrips222 wrote:
How can God expect us all to accept Jesus, when some of us are born into cultures that have different belief systems?

Tough question. There's no easy answer here.

My take on it is this: The Bible informs us that at one point in time everyone spoke a common language and lived in close proximity to each other. This means that knowledge could be spread quickly, that even religious teachings could be disseminated and taught quickly and easily. So while it makes it easy to teach and spread the message of a "true" religion, it also facilitates the viral spread of false religions. People make the choice to worship in truth or not.

After Babylon, people were forced to spread throughout the world. So where ever they went, they would have brought their religions with them, whether it was the original "true" religion, a false variant, or a false religion wholly unconnected with the true faith. It makes sense, then, that all religions, since they are mostly connected, share common elements or are a "shared memory" of the original. So all people throughout the world OUGHT to have some awareness of God and what it means to worship God.

What happens is that an ancient culture decides to worship other gods, thereby condemning their children and future generations because they do not help them know the true God. But I still don't think that God remains hidden from these people. I think that pagans, even if they aren't exposed to Christianity, do have an underlying sense that something is wrong with their faith. If such a person is seeking the truth, then that person can confess that he is a sinner unworthy of God's love, that he believes in the God of all creation, and he accepts whatever plan for salvation that God has set in place for that salvation. We may not be openly naming names here, but I think rather it is the intent of the heart that leads to salvation, not merely getting all the names right and saying the right words.

And lastly, given the rapidity of communication and the dispersion of Christian missionaries and other believers throughout the world, it is becoming less likely or anyone to have NOT heard the gospel. Being born in a culture with different beliefs is not really an excuse, since ultimately you've heard the gospel and, having understood it, rejected it.

CaptainTrips222 wrote:
Why has Christianity, supposedly a force of good, led to so much suffering?

Where in the Bible did Jesus ever command His followers to be agents of suffering? We are called to be agents of peace and healing. I question the faith of one who has the name of Jesus on his lips and not on his actions.

Now, you might also bring up the idea of war and the fact that many Christians are in the military or otherwise are favorable of war. Governments, even those of largely-Christian nations, have a duty to protect their citizenry as well as support foreign friends. So you have to distinguish a just war from an unjust war. Biblical teachings encourage us to be willing to die for our friends, to make ultimate sacrifices. But if involvement in war is a futile effort and results in more harm than good, then Christians ought to oppose it. Christians are also called to be peaceful and supportive of national leaders. In countries like the USA, we are free to voice dissenting sentiments and we have non-destructive ways to oppose our governing authority. Ultimately we are called to submit to ruling authority since a religious group opposing authority inspires a chaotic existence. If peace is our greatest end, then enduring unpleasantness for the sake of the greater good is what we're called to do.

In the end, we want to end suffering. I don't believe that following Christ's teachings lead to suffering except for perhaps the Christian facing opposition. And besides, there'd still be suffering in the world, with our without Christians. That Christians often seek to help those who are suffering shows that without us, there might actually be much, much more suffering in the world.

CaptainTrips222 wrote:
AND...
Even if that's the doing of bad people and Christianity isn't to blame, why would God allow His name to get besmirched like that?

God is merciful. He holds out for people who may change their minds at any moment. You might argue that God wasn't always so patient, but He withheld punishment from Judah for hundreds of years before He finally decided that they had gone far enough. And even when He did punish them, He sent them into exile rather than completely eliminating them. And after a period of time, He allowed a relatively small number of those still faithful to return. God can allow His name to get besmirched because He is merciful and patient. It is not a patience without limits, and even in God's wrath there is hope for those who turn back from sinful life.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,739
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

07 Sep 2011, 2:39 pm

AngelRho wrote:
CaptainTrips222 wrote:
These are questions that the thinking Christian should come to on his/her own.

This is nothing new at all, though, and certainly not anything thinking Christians HAVEN'T thought about.

CaptainTrips222 wrote:
Why do I need to have Jesus in my heart to be saved? Is God that unfair?

Your second question here looks to me to further qualify the first. Rather than answer the first question, I think the second is more important. Why is that so unfair? Also, what is the standard for "fairness" here? Do you weigh fairness subjectively or objectively?

I only ask because I suspect that the idea of fairness involved is subjective. If that is true, then your quasi-accusation of God being unfair is really just a matter of opinion and ultimately irrelevant. It doesn't matter what we believe. So who are you to judge us for believing that way?

CaptainTrips222 wrote:
Why does dying on the cross so horribly in the Middle East save us from our sins, most of which are biologically based?

Your rationale is that sins are based entirely on biology. In that case, you are wrong to accuse and convict child molesters, rapists, murders, and the like. It could be that people who commit violent crimes are born that way, in which case punishment is not the answer. Sociopaths are to be pitied.

Now, I do believe this is true to a degree--but you do have people with violent tendencies taking "anger management classes," and criminal justice philosophy has changed significantly in the last 100-200 years to the effect that rehabilitation of the criminal is a priority in returning him safely to society. State hospitals house the criminally insane and work towards treating the illness as well as keeping them safely isolated. So, while we accept violent behavior to a point, we do NOT tolerate it in open society.

Even people who recognize that something isn't "right" about themselves have various means of seeking help. One example would be men who feel unwanted sexual attraction to other men but, for whatever reason, do not want to engage in a homosexual lifestyle, neither publicly nor privately. They are free to get counseling to deal with the problem, even if they cannot change those things about themselves that leads to the initial feelings.

So, yes, existing in a fallen world inevitably leads towards what we call "sinful behavior." But being born in a fallen world and existing in a fallen state does not excuse a person from responding in an appropriate way.

CaptainTrips222 wrote:
How can God expect us all to accept Jesus, when some of us are born into cultures that have different belief systems?

Tough question. There's no easy answer here.

My take on it is this: The Bible informs us that at one point in time everyone spoke a common language and lived in close proximity to each other. This means that knowledge could be spread quickly, that even religious teachings could be disseminated and taught quickly and easily. So while it makes it easy to teach and spread the message of a "true" religion, it also facilitates the viral spread of false religions. People make the choice to worship in truth or not.

After Babylon, people were forced to spread throughout the world. So where ever they went, they would have brought their religions with them, whether it was the original "true" religion, a false variant, or a false religion wholly unconnected with the true faith. It makes sense, then, that all religions, since they are mostly connected, share common elements or are a "shared memory" of the original. So all people throughout the world OUGHT to have some awareness of God and what it means to worship God.

What happens is that an ancient culture decides to worship other gods, thereby condemning their children and future generations because they do not help them know the true God. But I still don't think that God remains hidden from these people. I think that pagans, even if they aren't exposed to Christianity, do have an underlying sense that something is wrong with their faith. If such a person is seeking the truth, then that person can confess that he is a sinner unworthy of God's love, that he believes in the God of all creation, and he accepts whatever plan for salvation that God has set in place for that salvation. We may not be openly naming names here, but I think rather it is the intent of the heart that leads to salvation, not merely getting all the names right and saying the right words.

And lastly, given the rapidity of communication and the dispersion of Christian missionaries and other believers throughout the world, it is becoming less likely or anyone to have NOT heard the gospel. Being born in a culture with different beliefs is not really an excuse, since ultimately you've heard the gospel and, having understood it, rejected it.

CaptainTrips222 wrote:
Why has Christianity, supposedly a force of good, led to so much suffering?

Where in the Bible did Jesus ever command His followers to be agents of suffering? We are called to be agents of peace and healing. I question the faith of one who has the name of Jesus on his lips and not on his actions.

Now, you might also bring up the idea of war and the fact that many Christians are in the military or otherwise are favorable of war. Governments, even those of largely-Christian nations, have a duty to protect their citizenry as well as support foreign friends. So you have to distinguish a just war from an unjust war. Biblical teachings encourage us to be willing to die for our friends, to make ultimate sacrifices. But if involvement in war is a futile effort and results in more harm than good, then Christians ought to oppose it. Christians are also called to be peaceful and supportive of national leaders. In countries like the USA, we are free to voice dissenting sentiments and we have non-destructive ways to oppose our governing authority. Ultimately we are called to submit to ruling authority since a religious group opposing authority inspires a chaotic existence. If peace is our greatest end, then enduring unpleasantness for the sake of the greater good is what we're called to do.

In the end, we want to end suffering. I don't believe that following Christ's teachings lead to suffering except for perhaps the Christian facing opposition. And besides, there'd still be suffering in the world, with our without Christians. That Christians often seek to help those who are suffering shows that without us, there might actually be much, much more suffering in the world.

CaptainTrips222 wrote:
AND...
Even if that's the doing of bad people and Christianity isn't to blame, why would God allow His name to get besmirched like that?

God is merciful. He holds out for people who may change their minds at any moment. You might argue that God wasn't always so patient, but He withheld punishment from Judah for hundreds of years before He finally decided that they had gone far enough. And even when He did punish them, He sent them into exile rather than completely eliminating them. And after a period of time, He allowed a relatively small number of those still faithful to return. God can allow His name to get besmirched because He is merciful and patient. It is not a patience without limits, and even in God's wrath there is hope for those who turn back from sinful life.


So, you don't believe in original sin? That is, the notion that human nature is naturally in rebellion against God without Christ?
As a believer in a theistic evolution, I don't exactly believe literally the whole Adam and Eve Biblical account, but it's obvious that there is something highly dysfunctional in human behavior that may in fact go to the very genetic level.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



AngelRho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,366
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile

07 Sep 2011, 3:14 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
So, you don't believe in original sin? That is, the notion that human nature is naturally in rebellion against God without Christ?
As a believer in a theistic evolution, I don't exactly believe literally the whole Adam and Eve Biblical account, but it's obvious that there is something highly dysfunctional in human behavior that may in fact go to the very genetic level.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Oh, I DO believe in original sin. I just didn't see it as relevant to that particular line. Although it is a "classic" answer, and legit. CT222 asked "Is God that unfair?" so I didn't think "original sin" as the default answer really fit. What's happening is someone is being critical of a deity purely based on personal opinion and emotion. Since it was addressed to "thinking" Christians, I figured it only fair to question whether the person asking is himself actually thinking. That's how it appears to me, anyway, and if I perceive incorrectly I am certainly open to correction.

Also, I think the idea of "original sin" and "biologically based" work hand-in-hand. It is not our fault that we are born with imperfect bodies, in an imperfect world, with imperfect tendencies. If someone, for example, is either schizophrenic or feels they are "born" homosexual, I tend not to question it or judge. If original sin led to the world we live in, then sure, there's no reason to think we aren't biologically affected as well. But I do reject the idea that we have no choice in how we respond to that world. No feeling of attraction or temptation is in itself a sin. Sin (or guilt) is only incurred if someone indulges in actual commission of that sin whether they privately fantasize about it or physically actualize it. Neither do I believe that there is a "cure" for certain conditions. I mean, there COULD be... What I hear from the gay community is they don't want to be "cured." But I also hear about people who are tormented by the feelings and neither want to have those feelings nor want to engage in that lifestyle. In that respect, one DOES exercise choice over the matter.

I happen to believe in the literal account of Adam and Eve, and at one time I wholly rejected the idea that you could be "born that way." I have since, however, come to understand that human depravity IS part of our DNA, though with one notable exception. The test is not really whether we keep from sinning in spite of our human nature--we'll always fail that one. The real test is ultimately whether we trust God with that aspect of our lives--the private, embarrassing aspects--as well as all other needs.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,739
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

07 Sep 2011, 5:43 pm

AngelRho wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
So, you don't believe in original sin? That is, the notion that human nature is naturally in rebellion against God without Christ?
As a believer in a theistic evolution, I don't exactly believe literally the whole Adam and Eve Biblical account, but it's obvious that there is something highly dysfunctional in human behavior that may in fact go to the very genetic level.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Oh, I DO believe in original sin. I just didn't see it as relevant to that particular line. Although it is a "classic" answer, and legit. CT222 asked "Is God that unfair?" so I didn't think "original sin" as the default answer really fit. What's happening is someone is being critical of a deity purely based on personal opinion and emotion. Since it was addressed to "thinking" Christians, I figured it only fair to question whether the person asking is himself actually thinking. That's how it appears to me, anyway, and if I perceive incorrectly I am certainly open to correction.

Also, I think the idea of "original sin" and "biologically based" work hand-in-hand. It is not our fault that we are born with imperfect bodies, in an imperfect world, with imperfect tendencies. If someone, for example, is either schizophrenic or feels they are "born" homosexual, I tend not to question it or judge. If original sin led to the world we live in, then sure, there's no reason to think we aren't biologically affected as well. But I do reject the idea that we have no choice in how we respond to that world. No feeling of attraction or temptation is in itself a sin. Sin (or guilt) is only incurred if someone indulges in actual commission of that sin whether they privately fantasize about it or physically actualize it. Neither do I believe that there is a "cure" for certain conditions. I mean, there COULD be... What I hear from the gay community is they don't want to be "cured." But I also hear about people who are tormented by the feelings and neither want to have those feelings nor want to engage in that lifestyle. In that respect, one DOES exercise choice over the matter.

I happen to believe in the literal account of Adam and Eve, and at one time I wholly rejected the idea that you could be "born that way." I have since, however, come to understand that human depravity IS part of our DNA, though with one notable exception. The test is not really whether we keep from sinning in spite of our human nature--we'll always fail that one. The real test is ultimately whether we trust God with that aspect of our lives--the private, embarrassing aspects--as well as all other needs.


As far as the gay question is concerned, I see it as a civil rights issue. As our country is a country of freedom shielding laws, rather than of religious dogma, I support full civil rights for homosexuals, including marriage.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



AlbusSeverus
Emu Egg
Emu Egg

User avatar

Joined: 13 Aug 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 8

08 Sep 2011, 1:13 am

I do not know of where the whole asking Jesus into your heart thing came about. I have never found it in the Bible.