Christians vs. nonChristians on issues
-
I just realize that I said that wrong. sorry... have to get... more... sleep...
Apology (not that it was necessary) accepted - I understand the higher importance of sleep :-D
Ian Darling "The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt." - Bertrand Russell
-
I've been reading the message boards for a good while now without getting too involved. Certain subject seem to come up over and over and we have conservative "Bible-thumpers" arguing with liberal "go-what-feels-gooders" over morality issues. It seems that everyone is missing the point. :sigh: Noone will ever win the argument if we focus on just the issues. It's worldviews that have to be discussed and fought. I'm a conservative Christian. I hear a lot about how "close-minded" Christians are. Well, yeah, in a sense they are. But in the same way non-Christians are. You're convinced you're right and Christians are convinced they are right. What we have here is a failure to communicate.... Here's how the Christian's worldview affects his view on, say, homosexuality:
if ( DoesGodExist() )
{
if ( GodWroteTheBible() )
{
if ( TheBibleStatesHomosexualityIsWrong() )
{
bHomosexualityIsWrong = true;
}
}
}Once the Christian gets inside he can't get a different answer. You can make all types of statements about "love knows no bounds", blah, blah, blah, but to the Christian this function still returns true To change a Christian's mind you have to get the the first three conditionals to fail, before you can ever convince him that homosexuality is OK. So the Christin's "close-mindedness" is only inside the inner if loop. I'm not afraid of studying the if statements to see if they return true or not. So far, I've put a lot of study into it and I'm conviced that they do. You will have to do a lot of convincing to get my answers to change, but as an honest truth seeker, I'm willing to study and even admit weaknesses in my own arguments, and ultimately change my mind if the truth demands it. And Christians are hard-pressed to convince anybody that anything is wrong without first proving that the 1st three conditional return true. Once they accept those, they'll be no more argument. This is why I avoid arguments about these types of issues. All you do is get frustrated and go nowhere. We're missing the point. Sorry for such a long post. :-O Had to get this of my chest. :) There.. I feel better now...
I think it's interesting that you are applying predicate logic (I think that's the name for it :~) to a non-logic based system. I hate to break it to you, but you won't get far doing that. -- Ich bin der böse Mann von Schweden.
-
I've been reading the message boards for a good while now without getting too involved. Certain subject seem to come up over and over and we have conservative "Bible-thumpers" arguing with liberal "go-what-feels-gooders" over morality issues. It seems that everyone is missing the point. :sigh: Noone will ever win the argument if we focus on just the issues. It's worldviews that have to be discussed and fought. I'm a conservative Christian. I hear a lot about how "close-minded" Christians are. Well, yeah, in a sense they are. But in the same way non-Christians are. You're convinced you're right and Christians are convinced they are right. What we have here is a failure to communicate.... Here's how the Christian's worldview affects his view on, say, homosexuality:
if ( DoesGodExist() )
{
if ( GodWroteTheBible() )
{
if ( TheBibleStatesHomosexualityIsWrong() )
{
bHomosexualityIsWrong = true;
}
}
}Once the Christian gets inside he can't get a different answer. You can make all types of statements about "love knows no bounds", blah, blah, blah, but to the Christian this function still returns true To change a Christian's mind you have to get the the first three conditionals to fail, before you can ever convince him that homosexuality is OK. So the Christin's "close-mindedness" is only inside the inner if loop. I'm not afraid of studying the if statements to see if they return true or not. So far, I've put a lot of study into it and I'm conviced that they do. You will have to do a lot of convincing to get my answers to change, but as an honest truth seeker, I'm willing to study and even admit weaknesses in my own arguments, and ultimately change my mind if the truth demands it. And Christians are hard-pressed to convince anybody that anything is wrong without first proving that the 1st three conditional return true. Once they accept those, they'll be no more argument. This is why I avoid arguments about these types of issues. All you do is get frustrated and go nowhere. We're missing the point. Sorry for such a long post. :-O Had to get this of my chest. :) There.. I feel better now...
J. Eric Vaughan wrote: Certain subject seem to come up over and over and we have conservative "Bible-thumpers" arguing No arguments. If you claim to be a Christian, then - according to leviticus - you should stone to death anyone who is gay or commits adultery. If you don't agree with this then don't call yourself a christian. Call yourself a hypocrite or else do the manly thing and get a new religion. I am not a christian. Even if I believed god existed I would never bow my knee to any entity that would torture people forever just because they didn't kiss his ass.
Glano perictu com sahni delorin!
-
I started to make a response, but then deleted it because you obviously completely missed the whole point of my post, which is that everyone is missing the point... BTW, I don't remember anyone saying love was wrong. If you would like to quote someone, go ahead. Otherwise, please quit representing others' views.
Heh... this has been a very interesting thread. I am not a developer, but I take it that the first 3 lines in your code are conditional statements. How does one arrive at the second one? The one that says that God wrote the Bible. I think it is relatively easy from logic to prove that a superior being being (that some call God) exists, but how do you manage the second conditional that God wrote or inspired the Bible?
-
Terry O`Nolley wrote: brainwash their poor children into believing love is wrong Where does the Bible say love is wrong? Gary Kirkham A working Program is one that has only unobserved bugs I thought I wanted a career, turns out I just wanted paychecks
Gary Kirkham wrote: Where does the Bible say love is wrong? Leviticus says that a man who lays with another man should be put to death. Ditto for adultery. Now, you can either believe that is a good thing (making you a non-hypocritical Christian) or you can lie to yourself and say "Oh, the bible really tells us to love your neighbor and just live a good life". That would make you typical of the majority of hypocritical christians.
Glano perictu com sahni delorin!
-
Richard Stringer wrote: Take that little function DoesGodExist() for example and flesh it out - a Nobel awaits. Can you do this without resorting to the nonproveable therefore ambiguious state called "faith" ? Hell, yes. Richard Stringer wrote: The function GodWroteTheBible() can be disproven historically but you do your own homework. God plainly inspired the writing of the Bible, no-one is claiming that He dropped the manuscript on someones head already written. Richard Stringer wrote: What will happen to the "current" state of religious beliefs when (A) Man creates life in the lab and/or (B) Discovers life on another planet and/or (C) Can become practically immortal and/or (D) Can raise the dead. None of those things will change my experience or how I respond to it one iota. I guarentee that D will never happen in any case, not in any meaningful way beyond jump starting someone whose body has ceased to 'live' but still contains all it needs for life minus the actual heartbeat. I doubt B will ever happen, but if it did, I could care less. Our body is just a machine, it would not surprise me at all if we found a way to make it persist almost indefinately. Certainly in the old testament people lived for hundreds of years, so why not ? We're just playing catch up with God, as we always seem to do. Christian I have drunk the cool-aid and found it wan and bitter. - Chris Maunder
Christian Graus wrote: Hell, yes. Then please do so and save a soul from eternal damnation :) Christian Graus wrote: God plainly inspired the writing of the Bible, no-one is claiming that He dropped the manuscript on someones head already written. "Plainly". Surely you are joking. Its a history book and a collection of myths and tales ( the Old Testament). And as ambigious as heck to boot. If taken literally the age of the universe is what - some 6000 years old. There were no proto humans - we jumped into the evolutionary tree at the top. The earth is the same age as the Sun. And the Dinos never existed since they are not mentioned. Oh well I guess this is where the "faith" part starts. Christian Graus wrote: Our body is just a machine, it would not surprise me at all if we found a way to make it persist almost indefinately. Created in Gods imiage ( but its funny how the anatomy worked out ) according to the Bible. And yes we will. Richard "The man that hath not music in himself and is not moved with concord of sweet sounds is fit for treasons, stratagems and spoils; Let no man trust him." Shakespeare
-
J. Eric Vaughan wrote: Certain subject seem to come up over and over and we have conservative "Bible-thumpers" arguing No arguments. If you claim to be a Christian, then - according to leviticus - you should stone to death anyone who is gay or commits adultery. If you don't agree with this then don't call yourself a christian. Call yourself a hypocrite or else do the manly thing and get a new religion. I am not a christian. Even if I believed god existed I would never bow my knee to any entity that would torture people forever just because they didn't kiss his ass.
Glano perictu com sahni delorin!
Terry, I don't see the necessity of assuming under the new covenant that the harsh punishments under the Law of Moses should still be in effect. JM
-
I started to make a response, but then deleted it because you obviously completely missed the whole point of my post, which is that everyone is missing the point... BTW, I don't remember anyone saying love was wrong. If you would like to quote someone, go ahead. Otherwise, please quit representing others' views.
J. Eric Vaughan wrote: I don't remember anyone saying love was wrong Your bible says it. Read Leviticus. Gay men should be put to deatha long with adulterers. Or are you one of the 99% of Xstians who conveniently decide whichever parts of the bible that don't mesh their own lifestyles and worldviews can be safely ignored? Hey - don't get angry at me! Thats a mortal sin! Pray for me. Pray my honesty in refusing to worship a god so cruel as to torture you forever if you fail to cross all of your T's before walking in front of that train won't cause me to lose my immortal soul. (scary music playing)
Glano perictu com sahni delorin!
-
Terry, I don't see the necessity of assuming under the new covenant that the harsh punishments under the Law of Moses should still be in effect. JM
John McIlroy wrote: I don't see the necessity of assuming under the new covenant that the harsh punishments under the Law of Moses should still be in effect. D'OH! Well then try loving Jesus more than you love your own children. Or else go to hell when you die. You may fool yourself, but you won't fool god!
Glano perictu com sahni delorin!
-
Anna-Jayne Metcalfe wrote: Who do you think inspired them? So-crates? :-D
Ian Darling "The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt." - Bertrand Russell
LMAO! :laugh: Anna :rose: Homepage | Tears and Laughter "Be yourself - not what others think you should be" - Marcia Graesch "Anna's just a sexy-looking lesbian tart" - A friend, trying to wind me up. It didn't work. Trouble with resource IDs? Try the Resource ID Organiser Visual C++ Add-In
-
Christian Graus wrote: Hell, yes. Then please do so and save a soul from eternal damnation :) Christian Graus wrote: God plainly inspired the writing of the Bible, no-one is claiming that He dropped the manuscript on someones head already written. "Plainly". Surely you are joking. Its a history book and a collection of myths and tales ( the Old Testament). And as ambigious as heck to boot. If taken literally the age of the universe is what - some 6000 years old. There were no proto humans - we jumped into the evolutionary tree at the top. The earth is the same age as the Sun. And the Dinos never existed since they are not mentioned. Oh well I guess this is where the "faith" part starts. Christian Graus wrote: Our body is just a machine, it would not surprise me at all if we found a way to make it persist almost indefinately. Created in Gods imiage ( but its funny how the anatomy worked out ) according to the Bible. And yes we will. Richard "The man that hath not music in himself and is not moved with concord of sweet sounds is fit for treasons, stratagems and spoils; Let no man trust him." Shakespeare
Richard Stringer wrote: Then please do so and save a soul from eternal damnation What the Bible *actually* says is that when someone becomes a Christian, they have an experience which proves God exists to them personally, and includes, but is not limited to, recieving the ability to pray in a language that God gives. Like anything, this is something that folks can choose to make fun of without looking into it properly, but my church contains members who became Christians because they submitted to baptism and prayer in order to prove that there was no God. I certainly recieved this experience despite the fact that I was convinced I would not, and was largely going through the motions. My own experience and that of people I know is enough to convince me that my 'conversion' was not based on convincing myself that something I was expecting to happen, did. Additionally, prior to this, I 'gave my heart to Jesus' sincerely in many churches, and the changes I hoped to see in my life never occured. I had plenty of blind faith then, but it did not benefit me at all. In contrast, when I became a Christian, I became a totally different person overnight. Richard Stringer wrote: Surely you are joking. Its a history book and a collection of myths and tales ( the Old Testament). And as ambigious as heck to boot. If taken literally the age of the universe is what - some 6000 years old. There were no proto humans - we jumped into the evolutionary tree at the top. The earth is the same age as the Sun. And the Dinos never existed since they are not mentioned. Oh well I guess this is where the "faith" part starts. Where to start..... 1. Plainly in the sense that the promises it makes, it keeps, it prophecied things many years before they happened and in some cases even establishes a time line which is met to the year. 2. The Bible does not say that the earth is 6,000 years old, or that Adam was the first man. Genesis 1 records the creation of the world, and men. Genesis 2 records the forming of the first man and woman that God dealt with. The word translated 'day' in Gen 1 simply means a period of time. In fact, scientists agree that the world came into being in the order that Genesis gives. The rest is just how we chose to interpret things because we didn't know any better. 3. You believe in evolution ? I'm afraid that is a religious choice just as much as creation is. 4. Just because the Bible does not mention it, does not mean it did not
-
Gary Kirkham wrote: Where does the Bible say love is wrong? Leviticus says that a man who lays with another man should be put to death. Ditto for adultery. Now, you can either believe that is a good thing (making you a non-hypocritical Christian) or you can lie to yourself and say "Oh, the bible really tells us to love your neighbor and just live a good life". That would make you typical of the majority of hypocritical christians.
Glano perictu com sahni delorin!
I don't deny what the Bible says, in fact the Bible says that ALL sin is punishable by death...Eternal Death. However, you need to read the rest of the Bible not just the bits and peices that support your point. If you read the new testament, then you find out that Jesus came to set us free from the Laws you quoted and all the rest you didn't quote. Gary Kirkham A working Program is one that has only unobserved bugs I thought I wanted a career, turns out I just wanted paychecks
-
Just curious, where do you think the extra entropy went to? Is there another universe "catching" our universe's entropy? Stating that the universe is closed implies there is a system larger than it. But I thought the universe was a term used to describe everything that exists. I'm sure I'm probably confused on this, and will welcome elightenment.
-
Wjousts wrote: vastness of the universe, the vastness of time and the laws of statistics Sorry, but last I heard, neither of the above can overcome a little thing they call Second Law of Thermodynamics, otherwise know as, "ever increasing entropy". The vastness of time would do the exact opposite of what is being claimed. Things would spead out and become more disorderly, not orderly. When they disprove that Law, I'll re-think at least this one argument.
I've been going over that very derivation over the past week. Classical thermodynamics treats everything at a level where it is uniform and considers any state that isn't uniform to be outside it's realm. They then make statements like, if you wait long enough the system will settle down into equilibrium and the entropy of the entire system will have increased which is true. During the transition phase entropy is undefined.
However in more modern theories, thermodynamic entities are modeled as local properties and so you can have flows of entropy and temperature through time and space.
BTW. entropy will eventually win and everyting will turn into a uniform mess of particles or a black hole or something, we just have a pretty sweet thing going on right now. Or at least it has been for the 5 seconds that the universe has existed. -Andy Brummer -
Richard Stringer wrote: Then please do so and save a soul from eternal damnation What the Bible *actually* says is that when someone becomes a Christian, they have an experience which proves God exists to them personally, and includes, but is not limited to, recieving the ability to pray in a language that God gives. Like anything, this is something that folks can choose to make fun of without looking into it properly, but my church contains members who became Christians because they submitted to baptism and prayer in order to prove that there was no God. I certainly recieved this experience despite the fact that I was convinced I would not, and was largely going through the motions. My own experience and that of people I know is enough to convince me that my 'conversion' was not based on convincing myself that something I was expecting to happen, did. Additionally, prior to this, I 'gave my heart to Jesus' sincerely in many churches, and the changes I hoped to see in my life never occured. I had plenty of blind faith then, but it did not benefit me at all. In contrast, when I became a Christian, I became a totally different person overnight. Richard Stringer wrote: Surely you are joking. Its a history book and a collection of myths and tales ( the Old Testament). And as ambigious as heck to boot. If taken literally the age of the universe is what - some 6000 years old. There were no proto humans - we jumped into the evolutionary tree at the top. The earth is the same age as the Sun. And the Dinos never existed since they are not mentioned. Oh well I guess this is where the "faith" part starts. Where to start..... 1. Plainly in the sense that the promises it makes, it keeps, it prophecied things many years before they happened and in some cases even establishes a time line which is met to the year. 2. The Bible does not say that the earth is 6,000 years old, or that Adam was the first man. Genesis 1 records the creation of the world, and men. Genesis 2 records the forming of the first man and woman that God dealt with. The word translated 'day' in Gen 1 simply means a period of time. In fact, scientists agree that the world came into being in the order that Genesis gives. The rest is just how we chose to interpret things because we didn't know any better. 3. You believe in evolution ? I'm afraid that is a religious choice just as much as creation is. 4. Just because the Bible does not mention it, does not mean it did not
Christian Graus wrote: What the Bible *actually* says is that when someone becomes a Christian, they have an experience which proves God exists to them personally, and includes, but is not limited to, recieving the ability to pray in a language that God gives Mark 16:17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; Do we do a lot of Devil casting also. Taken literally ( as do so many belivers ) this can also mean that you are gonna learn a new language or possibly invent one. Christian Graus wrote: 1. Plainly in the sense that the promises it makes, it keeps, it prophecied things many years before they happened and in some cases even establishes a time line which is met to the year. So did Nostradamus. Do we accept his works as Devine ? Christian Graus wrote: 2. The Bible does not say that the earth is 6,000 years old, or that Adam was the first man. Genesis 1 records the creation of the world, and men. Genesis 2 records the forming of the first man and woman that God dealt with. The word translated 'day' in Gen 1 simply means a period of time. In fact, scientists agree that the world came into being in the order that Genesis gives. The rest is just how we chose to interpret things because we didn't know any better. I knew that one was coming. Its laughable but hey when dealing with "faith".... Christian Graus wrote: 3. You believe in evolution ? I'm afraid that is a religious choice just as much as creation is. Not so. I belive that 1+1=2. That is not a religion it is simply a demonstratable fact. I believe in evolution for the same reason. If you can show me one instance where 1+1 does not equal 2 or that evolution ( as defined by Darwin et al ) is incorrect then I will not suffer thru a belief crisis but simply look for another theory that works. No attachments. Christian Graus wrote: 4. Just because the Bible does not mention it, does not mean it did not exist. The Bible is not a natural history book, or a scientific manual, it's a history of what God did. "And God created the heavens and the Earth". Kinda includes everything does it not. Christian Graus wrote: That does not mean God looks like us, it means we are able to judge good and bad and make our own choices, as He does If God is omnipotent as the Bible declare
-
Heh... this has been a very interesting thread. I am not a developer, but I take it that the first 3 lines in your code are conditional statements. How does one arrive at the second one? The one that says that God wrote the Bible. I think it is relatively easy from logic to prove that a superior being being (that some call God) exists, but how do you manage the second conditional that God wrote or inspired the Bible?
John McIlroy wrote: think it is relatively easy from logic to prove that a superior being being (that some call God) exists, I contend that it is impossible to prove the existance of a superior being using logic without redefining "logic". Richard "The man that hath not music in himself and is not moved with concord of sweet sounds is fit for treasons, stratagems and spoils; Let no man trust him." Shakespeare
-
Christian Graus wrote: What the Bible *actually* says is that when someone becomes a Christian, they have an experience which proves God exists to them personally, and includes, but is not limited to, recieving the ability to pray in a language that God gives Mark 16:17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; Do we do a lot of Devil casting also. Taken literally ( as do so many belivers ) this can also mean that you are gonna learn a new language or possibly invent one. Christian Graus wrote: 1. Plainly in the sense that the promises it makes, it keeps, it prophecied things many years before they happened and in some cases even establishes a time line which is met to the year. So did Nostradamus. Do we accept his works as Devine ? Christian Graus wrote: 2. The Bible does not say that the earth is 6,000 years old, or that Adam was the first man. Genesis 1 records the creation of the world, and men. Genesis 2 records the forming of the first man and woman that God dealt with. The word translated 'day' in Gen 1 simply means a period of time. In fact, scientists agree that the world came into being in the order that Genesis gives. The rest is just how we chose to interpret things because we didn't know any better. I knew that one was coming. Its laughable but hey when dealing with "faith".... Christian Graus wrote: 3. You believe in evolution ? I'm afraid that is a religious choice just as much as creation is. Not so. I belive that 1+1=2. That is not a religion it is simply a demonstratable fact. I believe in evolution for the same reason. If you can show me one instance where 1+1 does not equal 2 or that evolution ( as defined by Darwin et al ) is incorrect then I will not suffer thru a belief crisis but simply look for another theory that works. No attachments. Christian Graus wrote: 4. Just because the Bible does not mention it, does not mean it did not exist. The Bible is not a natural history book, or a scientific manual, it's a history of what God did. "And God created the heavens and the Earth". Kinda includes everything does it not. Christian Graus wrote: That does not mean God looks like us, it means we are able to judge good and bad and make our own choices, as He does If God is omnipotent as the Bible declare
Richard Stringer wrote: Do we do a lot of Devil casting also. It's not possible for a 'devil' to attack a Christian, nor is there any way to cast anything out permanently except by a person becoming a Christian. Ask me if we pray for the sick and see them recover :-) Richard Stringer wrote: Taken literally ( as do so many belivers ) this can also mean that you are gonna learn a new language or possibly invent one. You need to use the Bible to interpret the Bible. The Bible says that a person who 'speaks in tongues' speaks only to God, because no man can understand it. I can still invent words if I want to or speak gibberish. This is totally different. Richard Stringer wrote: So did Nostradamus. Do we accept his works as Devine ? No, he didn't. A lot of what he had to say actually came from the Bible, and the rest is rubbish. It plainly does not set any specific time lines, or even name nations the way the Bible does. Richard Stringer wrote: that evolution ( as defined by Darwin et al ) is incorrect then I will not suffer thru a belief crisis but simply look for another theory that works. No attachments. There is no evidence from the fossil record that big E evolution is true. Little e evolution ( change in what features present in a species dominate due to circumstances changing ) is a different issue. Richard Stringer wrote: And God created the heavens and the Earth". Kinda includes everything does it not. Yes, broadly and in the sense that it comes under the brief of the book. Different to an itemised list, is my only point. Richard Stringer wrote: If God is omnipotent as the Bible declares then there is no such thing as choice - only the illusion of such. No, it just means that God knows what choices we will make. Christian I have drunk the cool-aid and found it wan and bitter. - Chris Maunder
-
jhwurmbach wrote: To be precise, historical research is not concerned with questions of truth at all. All history is about is interpretation of sources and sorting out what the sources tell us. If the goal isn't to find out what really happened (the truth), then why research it in the first place? Is it just fun to come up with fanciful explanations of stuff we find lying around? jhwurmbach wrote: Archeology, OTOH is making testable claims (like "Troy was a city in a backwater province of the hethite empire.") and then tests them against the evidence found. And as I meant to indicate, living researchers did not observe it being placed there. Neither does anyone have a repeatable way of showing that said evidence arrived in said location in whatever way is assumed. Instead, they are speculating based upon logical reasoning about the way things work. This is the distinction between observational science and historical science. One allows us to observe things happenening, while the other forces us to make guesses based on logic and assumptions. However, both are used when trying to determine the correct or truthful answer to a given question. John
"You said a whole sentence with no words in it, and I understood you!" -- my wife as she cries about slowly becoming a geek.John Fisher wrote: If the goal isn't to find out what really happened (the truth), then why research it in the first place? Is it just fun to come up with fanciful explanations of stuff we find lying around? The way social science works is not trying to come up with the one true reason for the result you got. This is futile in a discipline like Laws, as the dscipline is not distinct from its subject: The very same peaople who make (or clarify) the laws are those who do the reasearch. It is impossible in a discipline like history, where we only ever get a subjective, incomplete picture of the events. From Julius Cesars "De bello gallico" we would never be able to read the 'truth' about that war. That is lost forever. Bur we can get quite a lot about the political context it was written in, and how it is power politics, fantasy story and travel account in one.
"We trained hard, but it seemed that every time we were beginning to form up into teams we would be reorganised. I was to learn later in life that we tend to meet any new situation by reorganising: and a wonderful method it can be for creating the illusion of progress, while producing confusion, inefficiency and demoralisation." -- Caius Petronius, Roman Consul, 66 A.D.
-
I've been reading the message boards for a good while now without getting too involved. Certain subject seem to come up over and over and we have conservative "Bible-thumpers" arguing with liberal "go-what-feels-gooders" over morality issues. It seems that everyone is missing the point. :sigh: Noone will ever win the argument if we focus on just the issues. It's worldviews that have to be discussed and fought. I'm a conservative Christian. I hear a lot about how "close-minded" Christians are. Well, yeah, in a sense they are. But in the same way non-Christians are. You're convinced you're right and Christians are convinced they are right. What we have here is a failure to communicate.... Here's how the Christian's worldview affects his view on, say, homosexuality:
if ( DoesGodExist() )
{
if ( GodWroteTheBible() )
{
if ( TheBibleStatesHomosexualityIsWrong() )
{
bHomosexualityIsWrong = true;
}
}
}Once the Christian gets inside he can't get a different answer. You can make all types of statements about "love knows no bounds", blah, blah, blah, but to the Christian this function still returns true To change a Christian's mind you have to get the the first three conditionals to fail, before you can ever convince him that homosexuality is OK. So the Christin's "close-mindedness" is only inside the inner if loop. I'm not afraid of studying the if statements to see if they return true or not. So far, I've put a lot of study into it and I'm conviced that they do. You will have to do a lot of convincing to get my answers to change, but as an honest truth seeker, I'm willing to study and even admit weaknesses in my own arguments, and ultimately change my mind if the truth demands it. And Christians are hard-pressed to convince anybody that anything is wrong without first proving that the 1st three conditional return true. Once they accept those, they'll be no more argument. This is why I avoid arguments about these types of issues. All you do is get frustrated and go nowhere. We're missing the point. Sorry for such a long post. :-O Had to get this of my chest. :) There.. I feel better now...
Why are you judging other people (Homosexuals) anyway -- that's God's job and not yours.
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. ~Stephen Roberts
« eikonoklastes »
-
Why are you judging other people (Homosexuals) anyway -- that's God's job and not yours.
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. ~Stephen Roberts
« eikonoklastes »
He didn't judge anyone. If God says, through the Bible, that homosexuality is wrong (sin), then a Christian, or anyone else for that matter, can say that "Based on the Bible, homosexuality is wrong". It is simply a statement of God's truth, not a judgement. Gary Kirkham A working Program is one that has only unobserved bugs I thought I wanted a career, turns out I just wanted paychecks