Is There Anything God Can't Do?

[YngiweRhoads]

Most charitable and giving...

The Luke

Wouldn't it be ironic if a homosexual individual discovered a cure for cancer and refused to treat Christians?

[Deicide]

Pretty extraordinary claim to make with zero evidence. You're funny.

Hitler, apparently, was a Theist. Not a Christian. Not an Atheist. Not that it matters. He was probably one of the worst humans to ever have lived and both Theists and Atheists, almost universally, agree with this and both groups denounce his actions vehemently.

Just wondering MCWAY. How much of a fundamentalist are you? Do you take everything the Bible says in literal terms? Such as creating the the universe in a few days, Adam and Eve, Noah and Moses, for example.

What do you think of scientific hypotheses and theories such as evolution, the age of the universe, dinosaurs, the possibility of life on other planets, or the possibility that life may not have originated on Earth? How do you reconcile these subjects with the writings contained in the bible? These are just a few well known topics I'm using as examples of course.

Yes, you are new here.

MCWAY is s literalist and a young earth creationist.

[YngiweRhoads]

Yes, you are new here.

MCWAY is s literalist and a young earth creationist.

Doh!

[The Luke]

Wouldn't it be ironic if a homosexual individual discovered a cure for cancer and refused to treat Christians?

What if a scientist discovers a cure for stupid and won't treat Creationists?


The Luke

[Necrosis]

I answered it, Einstein. But, just to recap:

One, God does exist. So, your scenario holds no water and I can answer that such is not "OK" (hence the reason that both rape and murder were capital offenses in Scripture).

Two, as stated far too many times, if there is no God, man IS LEFT TO HIS OWN DEVICES. That means that you and Necrosis can't say JACK about folks like Stalin and Hitler, or those lovely folks from NAMBLA. All they are doing is exercising that fluid morality, that is so high on the atheistic totem pole.

closed minded as hell, no evidence god does exists none what so ever, thats why its called faith.

Answer the question, yes or no?

if god did not exist, would you rape and torture babies, kill people and you see this as ok?

[loco]

Wouldn't it be ironic if a homosexual individual discovered a cure for cancer and refused to treat Christians?

I'm a Christian.  If I discovered a cure for cancer, I would not refuse to treat homosexuals, or anybody else for that matter.

[The Luke]

I'm a Christian.  If I discovered a cure for cancer, I would not refuse to treat homosexuals, or anybody else for that matter.

...but your god would.

Loco: more moral than his own imaginary friend.


The Luke

[YngiweRhoads]

I'm a Christian.  If I discovered a cure for cancer, I would not refuse to treat homosexuals, or anybody else for that matter.

I would hope not, but some Theists apparently do not share your compassionate views.

[haider]

Most charitable and giving...

The Luke

The Onion is a fake news org.

I hope you guys realise that 

[The Luke]

The Onion is a fake news org.

I hope you guys realise that 

Don't you know the Bible declares homosexuality to be wrong...?

The Old Testament decries (male) homosexuality as "an abomination"... the New Testament goes even further and insists both sodomites and lesbians be put to death.

That's Christian charity. The Onion's satire isn't too far off the mark.


That's why the only religious group fit to run a charity are the Disciples of Atheismo.


The Luke

[loco]

the New Testament goes even further and insists both sodomites and lesbians be put to death.

Where?  Please quote book, chapter and verse.  

http://www.BibleGateway.com

[The Luke]

Where?  Please quote book, chapter and verse.  

http://www.BibleGateway.com

Corinthians 6:9
9Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,


Timothy 1:10
10For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;

Romans 1:18-32
18For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
19Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
20For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
21Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
22Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
23And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.
24Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:
25Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
26For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
27And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
28And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;
29Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,
30Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
31Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:
32Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

Cliff notes: "Gays and lesbians (among others) who have read the Bible and know God forbids their behaviour, deserve death. So not only kill them, but admire and cheer those who kill gays and lesbians (among others)".


Don't you guys even read the Bible?


The Luke

[Butterbean]

... the New Testament goes even further and insists both sodomites and lesbians be put to death.

Luke, where does the New Testament insist both sodomites and lesbians be put to death?


Where, in your last post does it say they must be put to death? 

Thanks.

[The Luke]

Luke, where does the New Testament insist both sodomites and lesbians be put to death?

Where, in your last post does it say they must be put to death? 

Can't read the Bible... can't read plain English.

"...that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them."


I know you guys don't take Shakespeare, but this is pretty easy to translate:

"...that they which commit such things..."
The people who do these things (referring to homosexuals; lesbians; adulterers; fornicators etc mentioned earlier in the passage)...

"...are worthy of death,"
...deserve to die,

"...not only do the same,"
...so not only kill them,

"but have pleasure in them that do them."
...but encourage/cheer-on/admire/respect those who kill such people.


All together now:
"...that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them."
The people who do these things deserve to die, so not only kill them, but admire those who kill such people.


That's the King James Version I'm quoting from... so don't pretend Christians never believed this.
Right through the Middle Ages homosexuals were executed based solely on the verdict of this passage. Even the great artist Michaelangelo was put on death row for homosexual behaviour. Up till modern times the main basis for the illegality of homosexual practice was the biblical interdictions (both Old and new Testament) against such behaviour.



Is this the big difference between atheists and believers... both read the Bible, but only the atheists understood it?

Frankly, the astonishing ignorance of what is actually in the Bible, among the supposedly Christian members of this board, frightens me. Every time an unpalatable truth regarding their (supposed) faith is placed in front of them it is either dismissed without consideration or some ridiculous pedantic re-translation is trotted out: "slavery" becomes indentured servitude; "battery" becomes chastisement; "rape" becomes consensual premarital sex;  

I wonder what will happen here?
-dismissal without consideration...?
-touchy-feely re-interpretation...?


The Luke

[Butterbean]

Can't read the Bible... can't read plain English.

"...that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them."


I know you guys don't take Shakespeare, but this is pretty easy to translate:

"...that they which commit such things..."
The people who do these things (referring to homosexuals; lesbians; adulterers; fornicators etc mentioned earlier in the passage)...

"...are worthy of death,"
...deserve to die,

"...not only do the same,"
...so not only kill them,

"but have pleasure in them that do them."
...but encourage/cheer-on/admire/respect those who kill such people.


All together now:
"...that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them."
The people who do these things deserve to die, so not only kill them, but admire those who kill such people.

Romans 1:26-32

26For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:

 27And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

 28And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;

 29Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,

 30Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,

 31Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:

 32Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.



Luke, maybe it would help you to read all of the above to see that your sentence there that you dissected is not commanding people to kill others.

The sentence is talking about the same people the whole time.

It doesn't start talking about a completely different group of people in the middle of the sentence.  See what I mean?

It is talking about people that engage in the same activity.


Continue to Romans 2 (right after the 32nd verse of Romans 1):

Romans 2

 1Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things.

 2But we are sure that the judgment of God is according to truth against them which commit such things.

 3And thinkest thou this, O man, that judgest them which do such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God?








Maybe the New International version can help you understand a little more:


6Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. 27In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.

 28Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done. 29They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, 30slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; 31they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless. 32Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.




Romans 2
God's Righteous Judgment
 1You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge the other, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgment do the same things. 2Now we know that God's judgment against those who do such things is based on truth. 3So when you, a mere man, pass judgment on them and yet do the same things, do you think you will escape God's judgment?

[Deicide]

Meh, you can find one passage that says one thing, another that says another thing. Bottom line is the Bible is a giant muck of contradictions from cover to cover.

[The Luke]

I wonder what will happen here?
-dismissal without consideration...?
-touchy-feely re-interpretation...?

We have a winner.


The Luke

[Butterbean]

We have a winner.


The Luke

So Luke you are saying that in the midst of all those verses, which are talking about the same people, all of a sudden in the middle of one sentence, it is in regard to different people and then back to the first group again w/the next sentence?

Come on now Luke!




I would be interested if Deicide reads it the same way as you do?

How do you read it D 

[The Luke]

So Luke you are saying that in the midst of all those verses, which are talking about the same people, all of a sudden in the middle of one sentence, it is in regard to different people and then back to the first group again w/the next sentence?

Come on now Luke!

...it's open to interpretation.

I know which interpretation was used to persecute homosexuals though.


Why is it so hard to believe the New Testament might be homophobic in light of what is in the Old Testament?


The Luke

[Butterbean]

...it's open to interpretation.

I know which interpretation was used to persecute homosexuals though.


Why is it so hard to believe the New Testament might be homophobic in light of what is in the Old Testament?


The Luke

Luke, it's clear that both the OT and NT state that engaging in homosexual behavior is a sin.

That's not what the debate was here.

You claimed that the New Testament insists that both sodomites and lesbians be put to death. 

It doesn't.

[The Luke]

You claimed that the New Testament insists that both sodomites and lesbians be put to death. 

It doesn't.

That's YOUR interpretation... I assume those final clauses are imperatives case; after all they come just after the assertion that gays and lesbians deserve death.

Isn't there a similar passage in the Old Testament that insists upon death as a punishment for homosexuality? Isn't the Bible self-consistent? Isn't it the infallible word of god?


The Luke

[Butterbean]

That's YOUR interpretation... I assume those final clauses are imperatives case; after all they come just after the assertion that gays and lesbians deserve death.

Isn't there a similar passage in the Old Testament that insists upon death as a punishment for homosexuality? Isn't the Bible self-consistent? Isn't it the infallible word of god?


The Luke

Your interpretation of that sentence seems pretty complicated.


Yes, can you please tell me your understanding of Old Testament Law in relation to Jesus Christ?

[The Luke]

Yes, can you please tell me your understanding of Old Testament Law in relation to Jesus (who came to fulfill the law)?

Well, lots of Christians think that Jesus overturns Mosaic Law (which essentially is Shariah Law), but it's as patently ridiculous to say "Jesus changed everything" as it is to use the justification "911 changed everything".

In fact Jesus asserted that his followers must follow Mosaic Law... and that's the problem, the entire Bible is self-contradictory. Jesus never denounced any of the evil shit his Dad spouted... never... not once.


Besides, how could Jesus even be the same god as Yahweh...? Jesus is a pretty decent guy except for his acceptance of female subjugation and slavery (he never spoke out against either despite their ubiquity in his times)... whereas Yahweh is a psychopath.


In fact, many Christian traditions (such as the Cathars) believed Yahweh the Creator was actually the devil.

It makes sense. Evil exists... the creation of evil is itself evil... therefore the creator is evil... therefore the devil is the creator.

This was known as the "Rex Mundi" heresy... Christianity never developed an apologist doctrine that counters the force of it's logic. In fact, the Papacy eventually had to exterminate the Cathars (and other groups) by the millions in order to stop the spread of such thinking.


...and that's the problem. What can't God do? He can't act morally.

God's morals ALWAYS reflect the morals of the time... for he is a construct of the human mind. Slave owners cannot conceive of a god who forbids slavery. Misogynists cannot conceive of a god who endorses equality. Racists cannot conceive of a universal god.


You guys look upon Jesus the way undereducated liberals look at Ghandi... you assume Jesus was perfect; he wasn't. He was pro-slavery. But Christian believers are blind to this fact because they work backwards from unquestionable certainty... that stifles thought, but, sadly that is the purpose of faith.

Soft-minded liberals look upon Ghandi in the same way... they see him as some form of perfect saintly activist/humanist: he wasn't. He was a racist; bigot; anti-Semite; misogynist who supported the caste system. Few liberals remember this aspect of his personality.

God is no different. Yahweh was moral when people dreamt him up... Jesus was moral when people dreamt him up... both fail today, Yahweh more markedly so.


The Luke

[Butterbean]

Well, lots of Christians think that Jesus overturns Mosaic Law (which essentially is Shariah Law),

Luke, I've never heard this...this is really interesting....I'm going to make another thread on it so as not to get off on even more tangents in this one OK?

[Butterbean]

I could be wrong but I don't think I've read here that anyone said "Jesus changed everything" in the way you seem to mean.

He is the New Covenant...that doesn't mean that the plan changed.  Mosaic Law (Old Cov) was between Israel and God.

Jesus is a pretty decent guy except for his acceptance of female subjugation and slavery (he never spoke out against either despite their ubiquity in his times)...

The slavery thing has been done to death here but in a different way think of these things:

Do you think that the only words He ever spoke are written in the bible?

Luke, I've never seen you speak out against girls with long nostril hair.  Does this mean you accept/approve of it