Manchester United FC Official Thread

The_Quilo wrote:

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

It is too disgusting for me to associate with people who believe I deserve to suffer eternal punishment.

You deserve eternal punishment because you sin, as we all do. It's more than clear that the punishment for sin is death. The punishment for it is death, thus if you sin, someone must die. I'm pretty sure that is why Christians say God's son died came to earth and died for humanity. For all of our sins, forever, so that we would not have to die.

And Christians, or so they say, do not want us to go to hell. Eternal life apparently is a free gift, and all I have to do is believe...

I am more than certain that the last thing my christian friends would want is for me to spend an 'eternity' in hell. Maybe that is why they constantly talk about him to me.

(BTW, not sure if Christian, but I am seriously contemplating.)

So I don't see your problem? I have tons of christian friends, and they are some of the nicest people to me.

Nobody deserves eternal punishment for any sin. It is grossly disproportionate response, it's difficult to explain how disproportionate it is in human terms - it's akin to torturing someone to death because they steal a loaf of bread to feed their family, only infinitely worse. There is nothing one can do that warrants such a reaction, it is wholly unjust.

You're right, Christians do not want us to go to hell, nor do Muslims, but they are happy to worship a being that they believe will send large swathes of the world off to be tortured for all eternity. They want you to join their faith so you avoid it, but it's still incredibly unethical to worship such an evil being and claim he is the sources of one's morals. Belief isn't something you can choose to do, and even if you could, what happens if you choose to believe in the wrong God?

As for the punishment for sin being eternal punishment, rather than sending his son to be brutally tortured to death, why didn't God just change the rules? Make it so nobody goes to eternal punishment, shut down hell? I'm lead to believe he is omnipotent, why on earth would he want his son to endure that?

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

The_Quilo wrote:

You deserve eternal punishment because you sin, as we all do. It's more than clear that the punishment for sin is death. The punishment for it is death, thus if you sin, someone must die. I'm pretty sure that is why Christians say God's son died came to earth and died for humanity. For all of our sins, forever, so that we would not have to die.

And Christians, or so they say, do not want us to go to hell. Eternal life apparently is a free gift, and all I have to do is believe...

I am more than certain that the last thing my christian friends would want is for me to spend an 'eternity' in hell. Maybe that is why they constantly talk about him to me.

(BTW, not sure if Christian, but I am seriously contemplating.)

So I don't see your problem? I have tons of christian friends, and they are some of the nicest people to me.

Nobody deserves eternal punishment for any sin. It is grossly disproportionate response, it's difficult to explain how disproportionate it is in human terms - it's akin to torturing someone to death because they steal a loaf of bread to feed their family, only infinitely worse. There is nothing one can do that warrants such a reaction, it is wholly unjust.

You're right, Christians do not want us to go to hell, nor do Muslims, but they are happy to worship a being that they believe will send large swathes of the world off to be tortured for all eternity. They want you to join their faith so you avoid it, but it's still incredibly unethical to worship such an evil being and claim he is the sources of one's morals. Belief isn't something you can choose to do, and even if you could, what happens if you choose to believe in the wrong God?

As for the punishment for sin being eternal punishment, rather than sending his son to be brutally tortured to death, why didn't God just change the rules? Make it so nobody goes to eternal punishment, shut down hell? I'm lead to believe he is omnipotent, why on earth would he want his son to endure that?

Nobody deserves eternal punishment for sin? You get to choose that because, you make the universe along with billions of stars, right?

Sin might not seem so bad to the sin-twisted minds of humans, but to God it is worse than the murdering of a person, and in many countries the sentence for pre-meditated murder is death.

You cannot judge the evil of sin based on human-kind's distorted morals and beliefs. If our 'morals' are telling us gay marriage is right, then I don't trust humans to be the ultimate say-so on how bad sin is. I would rather trust the maker of the 'moral' concept. When you want to accurately know how good, or bad, a product is, you do not go to a 2 year-old who uses the product occasionally. No, you go to the maker, the inventor of the product.

And all my christian friends say that they love god because they have a relationship with him, and he loved them enough to send his own son (the one who hand-crafted everything from every molecule in your body to every star in the universe) to die for them.

God allowed Jesus to die because Jesus' death is the only thing that could ever make humans acceptable to God. Without Jesus' blood, we would be considered unclean no matter how much good, or how righteous we are.

And why does God not shut down hell? Because then there would be no choice. No decision before good and evil. How can a good and holy god force us to believe in him? No, there must be an alternative. He would be a dictator, not a God. If your parents, from the day you were born to today, dictated every decision you ever made, would you think they are perfect? Would you love them? Exactly.

I have been researching alot recently on the Christianity concept recently, and these are the answers I find for most of my similar questions...

The Quilo, I have immense respect for you for defending Christianity and religion as a whole.

2 pages in the Manchester United thread all about the religion, talk about it in some other thread or just shut the fuck up, please.

The_Quilo wrote:Nobody deserves eternal punishment for sin? You get to choose that because, you make the universe along with billions of stars, right?

Sin might not seem so bad to the sin-twisted minds of humans, but to God it is worse than the murdering of a person, and in many countries the sentence for pre-meditated murder is death.

You cannot judge the evil of sin based on human-kind's distorted morals and beliefs. If our 'morals' are telling us gay marriage is right, then I don't trust humans to be the ultimate say-so on how bad sin is. I would rather trust the maker of the 'moral' concept. When you want to accurately know how good, or bad, a product is, you do not go to a 2 year-old who uses the product occasionally. No, you go to the maker, the inventor of the product.

And all my christian friends say that they love god because they have a relationship with him, and he loved them enough to send his own son (the one who hand-crafted everything from every molecule in your body to every star in the universe) to die for them.

God allowed Jesus to die because Jesus' death is the only thing that could ever make humans acceptable to God. Without Jesus' blood, we would be considered unclean no matter how much good, or how righteous we are.

And why does God not shut down hell? Because then there would be no choice. No decision before good and evil. How can a good and holy god force us to believe in him? No, there must be an alternative. He would be a dictator, not a God. If your parents, from the day you were born to today, dictated every decision you ever made, would you think they are perfect? Would you love them? Exactly.

I have been researching alot recently on the Christianity concept recently, and these are the answers I find for most of my similar questions...

Why does creating the universe gives you moral authority?

If God thinks that, for example, blasphemy, is worse than murdering someone, and an honest lack of belief in him is more worthy of punishment than raping a child so long as the latter repents, then it is God whose moral system is twisted and corrupted, and I entirely reject it.

Why didn't he love them enough to just forgive them? Why could only Jesus' death make humans acceptable to God? This doesn't make any sense, why didn't he just say "You are clean" And have that be the end of it? I don't want to be forgiven on the basis of another man being tortured to death, I would prefer to be held accountable for my own wrongdoing by a fair system.

There is a decision between good and evil in life, there doesn't need to be a hell. I choose to be a good man because I want to be a good man, I don't kill anyone, I don't fuck people over, and I don't do it because I want approval from God, I do it because I have my own moral code. My parents love me so they would never send me to eternal torture.

Can't you see how perverse it is that God creates a system where we have free will, but if we do not obey his edicts he will send us to be tortured for eternity? That's not freedom, that's not a choice, any more than holding a knife to someone's throat and demanding their money is giving them a free choice.

Let's talk about United, article by Ferguson's friend Robert Cass in the Daily Mail this morning, said he's refusing to pay £32m for Luka Modric and is very angry at being quoted that price. I'd like to know what year he thinks it is.

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

The_Quilo wrote:Nobody deserves eternal punishment for sin? You get to choose that because, you make the universe along with billions of stars, right?

Sin might not seem so bad to the sin-twisted minds of humans, but to God it is worse than the murdering of a person, and in many countries the sentence for pre-meditated murder is death.

You cannot judge the evil of sin based on human-kind's distorted morals and beliefs. If our 'morals' are telling us gay marriage is right, then I don't trust humans to be the ultimate say-so on how bad sin is. I would rather trust the maker of the 'moral' concept. When you want to accurately know how good, or bad, a product is, you do not go to a 2 year-old who uses the product occasionally. No, you go to the maker, the inventor of the product.

And all my christian friends say that they love god because they have a relationship with him, and he loved them enough to send his own son (the one who hand-crafted everything from every molecule in your body to every star in the universe) to die for them.

God allowed Jesus to die because Jesus' death is the only thing that could ever make humans acceptable to God. Without Jesus' blood, we would be considered unclean no matter how much good, or how righteous we are.

And why does God not shut down hell? Because then there would be no choice. No decision before good and evil. How can a good and holy god force us to believe in him? No, there must be an alternative. He would be a dictator, not a God. If your parents, from the day you were born to today, dictated every decision you ever made, would you think they are perfect? Would you love them? Exactly.

I have been researching alot recently on the Christianity concept recently, and these are the answers I find for most of my similar questions...

Why does creating the universe gives you moral authority?

If God thinks that, for example, blasphemy, is worse than murdering someone, and an honest lack of belief in him is more worthy of punishment than raping a child so long as the latter repents, then it is God whose moral system is twisted and corrupted, and I entirely reject it.

Why didn't he love them enough to just forgive them? Why could only Jesus' death make humans acceptable to God? This doesn't make any sense, why didn't he just say "You are clean" And have that be the end of it? I don't want to be forgiven on the basis of another man being tortured to death, I would prefer to be held accountable for my own wrongdoing by a fair system.

There is a decision between good and evil in life, there doesn't need to be a hell. I choose to be a good man because I want to be a good man, I don't kill anyone, I don't fuck people over, and I don't do it because I want approval from God, I do it because I have my own moral code. My parents love me so they would never send me to eternal torture.

Can't you see how perverse it is that God creates a system where we have free will, but if we do not obey his edicts he will send us to be tortured for eternity? That's not freedom, that's not a choice, any more than holding a knife to someone's throat and demanding their money is giving them a free choice.

I repeat, he created the concept of moral authority. I think that pretty damn well gives you the authority on that subject.

And I don't know for a fact that God thinks sin is worse than murdering someone, I just expressing how serious God thinks sin is. If God, the maker of good and evil, says it is evil then it is evil. Who should I listen to: a random misled guy on the internet, or a God who made every cell in that man's body along with every other being or object in the universe?

Why didn't he 'just' love them enough to forgive them? You actually serious? So parent's should 'just' love their heroin smuggling, druggie of a son enough to forgive him, without disciplining him? I repeat, there is punishment, and consequences for sin. I wonder how far a guy would get if he murdered someone, and then brought that as his defense in court. "You should just love me enough to forgive me. You don't have to discipline me."

The Son of God's death was a gift. Jesus willingly gave his life (he also knew he would be resurrected 3 days later, and told his disciples) for us. And the reason he so willingly died for us, was because he loved us and wanted us to be with him in heaven.

No, I do not think you want to believe. You probably have some sinful part of your life that you do not want to let go of, and you fear that if you believed in a God, then you would have some sort of 'conscience' and feel bad while sinning.

And, yes, that is free choice. Or else you could argue, "You say we have free choice, but you discipline us for our actions! That is not free choice!" That, in essence, is what you are saying. It's life. You can be as perverse or as righteous as you want, and nobody is stopping you, but one day you will have to deal with the consequences. We deal with consequences like this everyday. We choose the 2% milk, but the consequence is we will become fatter. We continue to sin, and do not repent, and we are sent to hell. Of course, this is a much bigger consequence, but it is also a much bigger crime.

The_Quilo wrote:
I repeat, he created the concept of moral authority. I think that pretty damn well gives you the authority on that subject.

And I don't know for a fact that God thinks sin is worse than murdering someone, I just expressing how serious God thinks sin is. If God, the maker of good and evil, says it is evil then it is evil. Who should I listen to: a random misled guy on the internet, or a God who made every cell in that man's body along with every other being or object in the universe?

Would you torture a child to death if God asked you to and said it was right?

Why didn't he 'just' love them enough to forgive them? You actually serious? So parent's should 'just' love their heroin smuggling, druggie of a son enough to forgive him, without disciplining him? I repeat, there is punishment, and consequences for sin. I wonder how far a guy would get if he murdered someone, and then brought that as his defense in court. "You should just love me enough to forgive me. You don't have to discipline me."

And, yes, that is free choice. Or else you could argue, "You say we have free choice, but you discipline us for our actions! That is not free choice!" That, in essence, is what you are saying. It's life. You can be as perverse or as righteous as you want, and nobody is stopping you, but one day you will have to deal with the consequences. We deal with consequences like this everyday. We choose the 2% milk, but the consequence is we will become fatter. We continue to sin, and do not repent, and we are sent to hell. Of course, this is a much bigger consequence, but it is also a much bigger crime.

Effectively he did just forgive them. The only person to suffer a punishment was himself.

The reason we punish people on Earth is to improve society for everyone. We punish murderers to deter others from murdering people, and to stop them from murdering other people because they are locked in a jail. Parents punish their crack head son so he stops being a crack head and has a better life. We are constrained by the realities of the universe, God is not constrained by anything.

Sending someone to hell for not believing God exists doesn't do any good, you can't deter someone by threatening them with something they don't believe in, it's just an incredibly disproportionate, malevolent, vengeful and egotistical thing to do.

The Son of God's death was a gift. Jesus willingly gave his life (he also knew he would be resurrected 3 days later, and told his disciples) for us. And the reason he so willingly died for us, was because he loved us and wanted us to be with him in heaven.

Why is the death necessary? Why can't the forgiveness on it's own be a gift without human sacrifice?

No, I do not think you want to believe. You probably have some sinful part of your life that you do not want to let go of, and you fear that if you believed in a God, then you would have some sort of 'conscience' and feel bad while sinning.

I already do have a conscience and feel bad about wrongdoing I commit.

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

The_Quilo wrote:
I repeat, he created the concept of moral authority. I think that pretty damn well gives you the authority on that subject.

And I don't know for a fact that God thinks sin is worse than murdering someone, I just expressing how serious God thinks sin is. If God, the maker of good and evil, says it is evil then it is evil. Who should I listen to: a random misled guy on the internet, or a God who made every cell in that man's body along with every other being or object in the universe?

Would you torture a child to death if God asked you to and said it was right?

Why didn't he 'just' love them enough to forgive them? You actually serious? So parent's should 'just' love their heroin smuggling, druggie of a son enough to forgive him, without disciplining him? I repeat, there is punishment, and consequences for sin. I wonder how far a guy would get if he murdered someone, and then brought that as his defense in court. "You should just love me enough to forgive me. You don't have to discipline me."

And, yes, that is free choice. Or else you could argue, "You say we have free choice, but you discipline us for our actions! That is not free choice!" That, in essence, is what you are saying. It's life. You can be as perverse or as righteous as you want, and nobody is stopping you, but one day you will have to deal with the consequences. We deal with consequences like this everyday. We choose the 2% milk, but the consequence is we will become fatter. We continue to sin, and do not repent, and we are sent to hell. Of course, this is a much bigger consequence, but it is also a much bigger crime.

Effectively he did just forgive them. The only person to suffer a punishment was himself.

The reason we punish people on Earth is to improve society for everyone. We punish murderers to deter others from murdering people, and to stop them from murdering other people because they are locked in a jail. Parents punish their crack head son so he stops being a crack head and has a better life. We are constrained by the realities of the universe, God is not constrained by anything.

Sending someone to hell for not believing God exists doesn't do any good, you can't deter someone by threatening them with something they don't believe in, it's just an incredibly disproportionate, malevolent, vengeful and egotistical thing to do.

The Son of God's death was a gift. Jesus willingly gave his life (he also knew he would be resurrected 3 days later, and told his disciples) for us. And the reason he so willingly died for us, was because he loved us and wanted us to be with him in heaven.

Why is the death necessary? Why can't the forgiveness on it's own be a gift without human sacrifice?

No, I do not think you want to believe. You probably have some sinful part of your life that you do not want to let go of, and you fear that if you believed in a God, then you would have some sort of 'conscience' and feel bad while sinning.

I already do have a conscience and feel bad about wrongdoing I commit.

I would continue to argue against your points, as I see holes in them, but quite simply I do not have the time. And I do not intent to waste any more of it o;n this discussion. It's for another day.

You may all continue with your Manchester United club talk...

My friend, eschatological judgement is the price that accompanies the gift of free will.

RR, I'd say that story is more to do with he doesn't want to pay that amount for the 3 players we're linked with/made enquires about.

Would you willingly pay £40m for Tiote and Baines?

The_Quilo wrote:

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

Would you torture a child to death if God asked you to and said it was right?



Effectively he did just forgive them. The only person to suffer a punishment was himself.

The reason we punish people on Earth is to improve society for everyone. We punish murderers to deter others from murdering people, and to stop them from murdering other people because they are locked in a jail. Parents punish their crack head son so he stops being a crack head and has a better life. We are constrained by the realities of the universe, God is not constrained by anything.

Sending someone to hell for not believing God exists doesn't do any good, you can't deter someone by threatening them with something they don't believe in, it's just an incredibly disproportionate, malevolent, vengeful and egotistical thing to do.


Why is the death necessary? Why can't the forgiveness on it's own be a gift without human sacrifice?



I already do have a conscience and feel bad about wrongdoing I commit.

I would continue to argue against your points, as I see holes in them, but quite simply I do not have the time. And I do not intent to waste any more of it o;n this discussion. It's for another day.

You may all continue with your Manchester United club talk...

Please answer my question - would you torture a child to death if God asked you to and said it was right?

God only directly interferes in this world on matters of eternal consequence, so that possibility is irrelevant.

Danny wrote:RR, I'd say that story is more to do with he doesn't want to pay that amount for the 3 players we're linked with/made enquires about.

Would you willingly pay £40m for Tiote and Baines?

Stay on topic.

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

The_Quilo wrote:

I would continue to argue against your points, as I see holes in them, but quite simply I do not have the time. And I do not intent to waste any more of it o;n this discussion. It's for another day.

You may all continue with your Manchester United club talk...

Please answer my question - would you torture a child to death if God asked you to and said it was right?

That is completely unimportant. God would never do such a thing, as He is perfect.

The_Quilo wrote:

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

Please answer my question - would you torture a child to death if God asked you to and said it was right?

That is completely unimportant. God would never do such a thing, as He is perfect.

It is a test of faith - would you do it?

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

The_Quilo wrote:

That is completely unimportant. God would never do such a thing, as He is perfect.

It is a test of faith - would you do it?

This actually happened in the Old Testimant. God told Abraham to kill his son as a sacrifice. Just before Abraham plunged the sword into his only son, God told him to stop. It was a test, and knew God knew that Abraham would not withhold anything from Him, that he valued God above everything God gave him.

I am not trying to convert you to 'Christianity' or anything of the kind.

All I am asking, is you don't discount the God theory too quickly. There may yet be merit in some of the beliefs.

The_Quilo wrote:

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

Nobody deserves eternal punishment for any sin. It is grossly disproportionate response, it's difficult to explain how disproportionate it is in human terms - it's akin to torturing someone to death because they steal a loaf of bread to feed their family, only infinitely worse. There is nothing one can do that warrants such a reaction, it is wholly unjust.

You're right, Christians do not want us to go to hell, nor do Muslims, but they are happy to worship a being that they believe will send large swathes of the world off to be tortured for all eternity. They want you to join their faith so you avoid it, but it's still incredibly unethical to worship such an evil being and claim he is the sources of one's morals. Belief isn't something you can choose to do, and even if you could, what happens if you choose to believe in the wrong God?

As for the punishment for sin being eternal punishment, rather than sending his son to be brutally tortured to death, why didn't God just change the rules? Make it so nobody goes to eternal punishment, shut down hell? I'm lead to believe he is omnipotent, why on earth would he want his son to endure that?

Nobody deserves eternal punishment for sin? You get to choose that because, you make the universe along with billions of stars, right?

Sin might not seem so bad to the sin-twisted minds of humans, but to God it is worse than the murdering of a person, and in many countries the sentence for pre-meditated murder is death.

You cannot judge the evil of sin based on human-kind's distorted morals and beliefs. If our 'morals' are telling us gay marriage is right, then I don't trust humans to be the ultimate say-so on how bad sin is. I would rather trust the maker of the 'moral' concept. When you want to accurately know how good, or bad, a product is, you do not go to a 2 year-old who uses the product occasionally. No, you go to the maker, the inventor of the product.

And all my christian friends say that they love god because they have a relationship with him, and he loved them enough to send his own son (the one who hand-crafted everything from every molecule in your body to every star in the universe) to die for them.

God allowed Jesus to die because Jesus' death is the only thing that could ever make humans acceptable to God. Without Jesus' blood, we would be considered unclean no matter how much good, or how righteous we are.

And why does God not shut down hell? Because then there would be no choice. No decision before good and evil. How can a good and holy god force us to believe in him? No, there must be an alternative. He would be a dictator, not a God. If your parents, from the day you were born to today, dictated every decision you ever made, would you think they are perfect? Would you love them? Exactly.

I have been researching alot recently on the Christianity concept recently, and these are the answers I find for most of my similar questions...

And you have the audacity to put yourself in God's position and speak for God? Seriously, how do you know that "sins" are as bad as you are telling us? How do you know that the 7 deadly sins lead to hell, and not just death, as they do in Judaism.

Newsflash for you, there is no concrete mention of gay marriage in the bible. The basis of the whole argument is Genesis and the creation of Adam and Eve. That's it. That's the whole basis for the homosexuality is evil argument. It's almost as laughable an excuse as the priests can not marry argument, which has no basis in the bible other than "jesus wasn't married". Laugable, truly laughable. It's incredible how many people disregard the "Only god can judge others", and "Love thy neighbor" references. Suddenly we can decide what's evil? Pretentious if you ask me, and contrary to every teaching Jesus spoke of. Who did he protect more than anyone? The prostitutes, the thieves, the murderers, the lepars, the peasants. Basically the unwanted and "unworthy". How do his followers respond? By judging everyone in their path, calling people unworthy of salvation and condemning people to hell. Classical humanity.

By all means, please explain how dying for all of humanity's sins suddenly translates to "died for those who believe the right dogma, which incidentally have changed hundreds, if not thousands, of times in the past 2000 years."

There are hundreds of branches of Christianity, most of which would seem entirely foreign to anyone practicing the "big two", Catholicism and Protestantism. What about those? They believe in a Jesus, however their beliefs and practices are wildly different to that of the big two, are they sinners as well? Non believers? Who is to say that the religion that originated in Italy is any better than that which originated in Jerusalem, or in Ethiopia?

As for shutting down hell. God by definition is all powerful. If God felt that hell was unnecessary and messy, by definition, God could shut down hell and still give us free will. That's the definition of all powerful. You can't use the argument "then free will would be gone", because by virtue of being all powerful God would transcend any limitations.

Fucking Religion.

One of the big guns has entered the fray.

The_Quilo wrote:

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

It is a test of faith - would you do it?

This actually happened in the Old Testimant. God told Abraham to kill his son as a sacrifice. Just before Abraham plunged the sword into his only son, God told him to stop. It was a test, and knew God knew that Abraham would not withhold anything from Him, that he valued God above everything God gave him.

I am not trying to convert you to 'Christianity' or anything of the kind.

All I am asking, is you don't discount the God theory too quickly. There may yet be merit in some of the beliefs.

I know it happened in the Bible, it's another disgusting story of sadism and terror that you people hold up as a sign of moral virtue. What I always wondered was why do you need to perform tests if you are omniscient?

You still haven't answered my question. Here is the scenario

God tells you that in his wisdom he has decided you should torture a child to death, and that this is morally right. You won't be punished if you don't do it, but God feels that it is morally right and he would like you to do it. If you say it's not really him then he'll consider that the height of blasphemy and send you to hell - you either have to do it, or refuse because you feel it is morally wrong. Do you torture the child or don't you?

Laurencio wrote:Newsflash for you, there is no concrete mention of gay marriage in the bible. The basis of the whole argument is Genesis and the creation of Adam and Eve. That's it. That's the whole basis for the homosexuality is evil argument.

So the Bible teaches that homosexual acts are morally wrong, yet somehow same-sex marriage is completely fine? That's a new one.

Also, the latter portion of your comment if way off the mark. Genesis has nothing to do with Christian teachings on same-sex relations. It's Leviticus, Romans, and Corinthians that you might be thinking of.

Juventino. wrote:

Laurencio wrote:Newsflash for you, there is no concrete mention of gay marriage in the bible. The basis of the whole argument is Genesis and the creation of Adam and Eve. That's it. That's the whole basis for the homosexuality is evil argument.

So the Bible teaches that homosexual acts are morally wrong, yet somehow same-sex marriage is completely fine? That's a new one.

Also, the latter portion of your comment if way off the mark. Genesis has nothing to do with Christian teachings on same-sex relations. It's Leviticus, Romans, and Corinthians that you might be thinking of.

Crap, I forgot about Leviticus... Eh.. well aside from that

Romans speak specifically about going against one's nature. Homosexuals argue that it is in their nature to be attracted to men/women, and that they don't find that attraction to women. That would imply that it is in their nature, and in line with Romans.

Corinthians I can't make heads or tails off. Apparently everything is unrighteous in that one, however I don't really see a direct link between homosexuality and unrighteousness there. You're welcome to enlighten me of course.

Edit: Also, Leviticus only seems to mention man on man, not woman on woman

Laurencio wrote:

Juventino. wrote:

So the Bible teaches that homosexual acts
are morally wrong, yet somehow same-sex marriage is completely fine?
That's a new one.

Also,
the latter portion of your comment if way off the mark. Genesis has
nothing to do with Christian teachings on same-sex relations. It's
Leviticus, Romans, and Corinthians that you might be thinking
of.

Crap, I forgot about Leviticus... Eh.. well aside from that

Romans
speak specifically about going against one's nature. Homosexuals argue
that it is in their nature to be attracted to men, and that they don't
find that attraction to women. That would imply that it is in their
nature, and in line with Romans.

Corinthians I can't make heads
or tails off. Apparently everything is unrighteous in that one, however I
don't really see a direct link between homosexuality and
unrighteousness there. You're welcome to enlighten me of course.

We're discussing what the Bible teaches though, not what homosexuals deem to be natural/unnatural. The latter can be a topic for another day. However, you made a scriptural reference and I'm more than willing to "enlighten" you on Christian teachings and scripture. Also, I didn't intend to come off as rude as I did in my initial response.

Now, in Leviticus (Old Testament for those of you that don't care about religion) there are specific passages that deal with immoral sexual acts, homosexuality being among them, as does the passage in Romans (New Testament) albeit to a different extent. It's also true that Jesus - the son of God according to Christians - did make specific statements about certain Old Testament guidelines as being no longer binding. For example, Jewish dietary law i.e. not eating pork, no longer applied with the coming of Jesus. However, MORAL commandments such as the Ten Commandments and the ones regarding sexual relations in Leviticus, for instance, are still binding. Lastly, Christians believe in the triune God, thus Jesus is not only the son of God, but he is God, as well. If God wanted to allow same-sex relations then he would have made it clear somewhere along the line. Anyways, that's the Christian/scriptural take on the issue. Of course, there's much more that can be said, but I barely slept last night and I'm tired.

@ Your edit - It depends on the translation. Man can mean mankind as a whole, and some translations also include "womankind".

Laurencio wrote:

The_Quilo wrote:

Nobody deserves eternal punishment for sin? You get to choose that because, you make the universe along with billions of stars, right?

Sin might not seem so bad to the sin-twisted minds of humans, but to God it is worse than the murdering of a person, and in many countries the sentence for pre-meditated murder is death.

You cannot judge the evil of sin based on human-kind's distorted morals and beliefs. If our 'morals' are telling us gay marriage is right, then I don't trust humans to be the ultimate say-so on how bad sin is. I would rather trust the maker of the 'moral' concept. When you want to accurately know how good, or bad, a product is, you do not go to a 2 year-old who uses the product occasionally. No, you go to the maker, the inventor of the product.

And all my christian friends say that they love god because they have a relationship with him, and he loved them enough to send his own son (the one who hand-crafted everything from every molecule in your body to every star in the universe) to die for them.

God allowed Jesus to die because Jesus' death is the only thing that could ever make humans acceptable to God. Without Jesus' blood, we would be considered unclean no matter how much good, or how righteous we are.

And why does God not shut down hell? Because then there would be no choice. No decision before good and evil. How can a good and holy god force us to believe in him? No, there must be an alternative. He would be a dictator, not a God. If your parents, from the day you were born to today, dictated every decision you ever made, would you think they are perfect? Would you love them? Exactly.

I have been researching alot recently on the Christianity concept recently, and these are the answers I find for most of my similar questions...

And you have the audacity to put yourself in God's position and speak for God? Seriously, how do you know that "sins" are as bad as you are telling us? How do you know that the 7 deadly sins lead to hell, and not just death, as they do in Judaism.

Newsflash for you, there is no concrete mention of gay marriage in the bible. The basis of the whole argument is Genesis and the creation of Adam and Eve. That's it. That's the whole basis for the homosexuality is evil argument. It's almost as laughable an excuse as the priests can not marry argument, which has no basis in the bible other than "jesus wasn't married". Laugable, truly laughable. It's incredible how many people disregard the "Only god can judge others", and "Love thy neighbor" references. Suddenly we can decide what's evil? Pretentious if you ask me, and contrary to every teaching Jesus spoke of. Who did he protect more than anyone? The prostitutes, the thieves, the murderers, the lepars, the peasants. Basically the unwanted and "unworthy". How do his followers respond? By judging everyone in their path, calling people unworthy of salvation and condemning people to hell. Classical humanity.

By all means, please explain how dying for all of humanity's sins suddenly translates to "died for those who believe the right dogma, which incidentally have changed hundreds, if not thousands, of times in the past 2000 years."

There are hundreds of branches of Christianity, most of which would seem entirely foreign to anyone practicing the "big two", Catholicism and Protestantism. What about those? They believe in a Jesus, however their beliefs and practices are wildly different to that of the big two, are they sinners as well? Non believers? Who is to say that the religion that originated in Italy is any better than that which originated in Jerusalem, or in Ethiopia?

As for shutting down hell. God by definition is all powerful. If God felt that hell was unnecessary and messy, by definition, God could shut down hell and still give us free will. That's the definition of all powerful. You can't use the argument "then free will would be gone", because by virtue of being all powerful God would transcend any limitations.

but without hell. there would be no need for anything. what's the point in free will (in this life at least), if there is no punishment for sins later on.

NZG wrote:

Laurencio wrote:

And you have the audacity to put yourself in God's position and speak for God? Seriously, how do you know that "sins" are as bad as you are telling us? How do you know that the 7 deadly sins lead to hell, and not just death, as they do in Judaism.

Newsflash for you, there is no concrete mention of gay marriage in the bible. The basis of the whole argument is Genesis and the creation of Adam and Eve. That's it. That's the whole basis for the homosexuality is evil argument. It's almost as laughable an excuse as the priests can not marry argument, which has no basis in the bible other than "jesus wasn't married". Laugable, truly laughable. It's incredible how many people disregard the "Only god can judge others", and "Love thy neighbor" references. Suddenly we can decide what's evil? Pretentious if you ask me, and contrary to every teaching Jesus spoke of. Who did he protect more than anyone? The prostitutes, the thieves, the murderers, the lepars, the peasants. Basically the unwanted and "unworthy". How do his followers respond? By judging everyone in their path, calling people unworthy of salvation and condemning people to hell. Classical humanity.

By all means, please explain how dying for all of humanity's sins suddenly translates to "died for those who believe the right dogma, which incidentally have changed hundreds, if not thousands, of times in the past 2000 years."

There are hundreds of branches of Christianity, most of which would seem entirely foreign to anyone practicing the "big two", Catholicism and Protestantism. What about those? They believe in a Jesus, however their beliefs and practices are wildly different to that of the big two, are they sinners as well? Non believers? Who is to say that the religion that originated in Italy is any better than that which originated in Jerusalem, or in Ethiopia?

As for shutting down hell. God by definition is all powerful. If God felt that hell was unnecessary and messy, by definition, God could shut down hell and still give us free will. That's the definition of all powerful. You can't use the argument "then free will would be gone", because by virtue of being all powerful God would transcend any limitations.

but without hell. there would be no need for anything. what's the point in free will (in this life at least), if there is no punishment for sins later on.

How can you have free will if you get tortured for eternity if you don't as you're told? Honestly, I would rather not have free will than risk that.

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

NZG wrote:

but without hell. there would be no need for anything. what's the point in free will (in this life at least), if there is no punishment for sins later on.

How can you have free will if you get tortured for eternity if you don't as you're told? Honestly, I would rather not have free will than risk that.

There are choices, there are consequences. You aren't told to do anything other than have faith and morality. Just a few simple guidelines, which enhance one's perspective anyway.

Eternal Witcher wrote:

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

How can you have free will if you get tortured for eternity if you don't as you're told? Honestly, I would rather not have free will than risk that.

There are choices, there are consequences. You aren't told to do anything other than have faith and morality. Just a few simple guidelines, which enhance one's perspective anyway.

It's not a free choice if there is a horrific consequence. If I have you tied up with thumbscrews on you and tell you to say "RR is exceptional" or I'll squash your thumbs, are you doing it out of free will?

Juventino. wrote:

Laurencio wrote:

Crap, I forgot about Leviticus... Eh.. well aside from that

Romans
speak specifically about going against one's nature. Homosexuals argue
that it is in their nature to be attracted to men, and that they don't
find that attraction to women. That would imply that it is in their
nature, and in line with Romans.

Corinthians I can't make heads
or tails off. Apparently everything is unrighteous in that one, however I
don't really see a direct link between homosexuality and
unrighteousness there. You're welcome to enlighten me of course.

We're discussing what the Bible teaches though, not what homosexuals deem to be natural/unnatural. The latter can be a topic for another day. However, you made a scriptural reference and I'm more than willing to "enlighten" you on Christian teachings and scripture. Also, I didn't intend to come off as rude as I did in my initial response.

Now, in Leviticus (Old Testament for those of you that don't care about religion) there are specific passages that deal with immoral sexual acts, homosexuality being among them, as does the passage in Romans (New Testament) albeit to a different extent. It's also true that Jesus - the son of God according to Christians - did make specific statements about certain Old Testament guidelines as being no longer binding. For example, Jewish dietary law i.e. not eating pork, no longer applied with the coming of Jesus. However, MORAL commandments such as the Ten Commandments and the ones regarding sexual relations in Leviticus, for instance, are still binding. Lastly, Christians believe in the triune God, thus Jesus is not only the son of God, but he is God, as well. If God wanted to allow same-sex relations then he would have made it clear somewhere along the line. Anyways, that's the Christian/scriptural take on the issue. Of course, there's much more that can be said, but I barely slept last night and I'm tired.

@ Your edit - It depends on the translation. Man can mean mankind as a whole, and some translations also include "womankind".

Consider me schooled

NZG wrote:

Laurencio wrote:

And you have the audacity to put yourself in God's position and speak for God? Seriously, how do you know that "sins" are as bad as you are telling us? How do you know that the 7 deadly sins lead to hell, and not just death, as they do in Judaism.

Newsflash for you, there is no concrete mention of gay marriage in the bible. The basis of the whole argument is Genesis and the creation of Adam and Eve. That's it. That's the whole basis for the homosexuality is evil argument. It's almost as laughable an excuse as the priests can not marry argument, which has no basis in the bible other than "jesus wasn't married". Laugable, truly laughable. It's incredible how many people disregard the "Only god can judge others", and "Love thy neighbor" references. Suddenly we can decide what's evil? Pretentious if you ask me, and contrary to every teaching Jesus spoke of. Who did he protect more than anyone? The prostitutes, the thieves, the murderers, the lepars, the peasants. Basically the unwanted and "unworthy". How do his followers respond? By judging everyone in their path, calling people unworthy of salvation and condemning people to hell. Classical humanity.

By all means, please explain how dying for all of humanity's sins suddenly translates to "died for those who believe the right dogma, which incidentally have changed hundreds, if not thousands, of times in the past 2000 years."

There are hundreds of branches of Christianity, most of which would seem entirely foreign to anyone practicing the "big two", Catholicism and Protestantism. What about those? They believe in a Jesus, however their beliefs and practices are wildly different to that of the big two, are they sinners as well? Non believers? Who is to say that the religion that originated in Italy is any better than that which originated in Jerusalem, or in Ethiopia?

As for shutting down hell. God by definition is all powerful. If God felt that hell was unnecessary and messy, by definition, God could shut down hell and still give us free will. That's the definition of all powerful. You can't use the argument "then free will would be gone", because by virtue of being all powerful God would transcend any limitations.

but without hell. there would be no need for anything. what's the point in free will (in this life at least), if there is no punishment for sins later on.

As consequence of being all powerful those rules do not apply to God. God could ensure free will without consequences by virtue of being God. All powerful means just that, all powerful. There's nothing God can't do, if there is then God isn't God, it would contradict the definition, which seems rather impossible.