In Immigrant Areas, a Culture Clash Over Gay Marriage

[ZeeWolf]

Originally Posted by razark

My view is that I do not choose what to believe and disbelieve. I can no more choose to believe the bible than I can choose to believe that water is not wet, or choose to believe the sky is green. Belief is the result of your brain processing the information it has available. I will not say that I have read every word of the bible, but I have read large portions of it, and find it to resemble more an ancient society's world view and less an authoritative book of history, science, morality, or any other subject. In addition, I have read other accounts of history and the history of the bible, and that further removed the bible from the category of authoritative literature.


And the more I learned about the bible, the less I was able to consider it accurate.


However, none of that addresses the question. Even if we take every bit of the bible as true, why is hell necessary? The only thing I can see it being needed for is to coerce people to comply. If god is omnipotent/omniscient, he should be able to achieve his ends without the need of eternal torture. If he is omnibenevolent, eternal torture (or even non-eternal torture) should go against his very nature.

I think you are confusing the issue with things
that we learn to believe as children through
the five senses. Which depends on each other
to confirm our conclusion. what I mean can be
demonstrated for example by a simple game you
can play by closing your eyes and have someone
feed you a spoonful of something familiar with
out the use of you sight. You will be amazed how
easily you choose to believe you are eating
something that in reality is totally wrong.
And another example is the man who hears from
his best friend tell him his wife is cheating
on him. The facts my be very well prepared and
presented with great sensitivity and more times
then his best friend just became his worst enemy
because he refuses to believe his wife would do
such a thing. This example could also work in
reverse, by having a suspicion about his wife
that no matter what she dose he refuses to
believe her. I could go on but I think you will
understand.
So, I hope you see that "choosing to believe" is
in fact a daily occurrence in our lives.

As for hell it is as much a deterrent as going
to prison for a crime. If you ever interviewed
men who committed crimes that resulted in a prison
sentence many will say they never thought they
would get caught.
There is very little concern for the need for
punishing criminals who work to enforce and uphold
the law. But there is great concern over the need
for prison and punishment from those innocent little
darlings setting in prison.
I guess it matters what side you are on over these
issues. The same logic can apply with the need for
hell.

[Krauter]

Originally Posted by Growler

In complete seriousness, I'd like to officially nominate the quoted post for Post of the Year. I mean, look at it. How can it NOT be? This is perfection, gentlemen. It just doesn't get any more succinct, eloquent, poignant, and totally, completely accurate as this.

Agreed

Originally Posted by TLAM Strike

... never knew the Alien was gay though...

I think we have a contender

@ Zeewolf, I'll just post this video, which is what I think of when people start trying to hate on gays..



@ Mods/Neal.. Why is this racist... #&&($... a Mod? What the hell is wrong with subsim now.

Edit: Also, Zeewolf, next time you have a thought... just let it go.

[ZeeWolf]

Originally Posted by Dowly

The whole concept of Heaven and Hell is contradicting to what God is supposed to
be: the good guy.

"Don't do as I say? Fine, you'll burn in hell for eternity!"

Sounds like a great guy!

Look at it this way Dowly it's a pretty good deal,
Suppose you are near the end of your life and suddenly you are
arrested for all the crimes you committed over your entire life.
And they make you a deal that all you have to do is admit to
being guilty of all charges. And in return the will drop all charges
and completely wipe your so record clean that it will be as if you
never violated the law.
That would be a pretty good deal wouldn't you say Dowly?

[Krauter]

So basically you're justifying your racist, hating and disrespectful ways by saying in the end, god will simply wipe the slate clean if you say "sorry".

One big example I can think of people doing this is the crusades, which caused war and hatred for what a couple hundred years...

[ZeeWolf]

Originally Posted by Krauter

Agreed



I think we have a contender

@ Zeewolf, I'll just post this video, which is what I think of when people start trying to hate on gays..



@ Mods/Neal.. Why is this racist... #&&($... a Mod? What the hell is wrong with subsim now.

Edit: Also, Zeewolf, next time you have a thought... just let it go.

Homophobia is like the term Homosexual they are terms created to deceive.
They are both modern terms that are founded to promote a list of behavior
that any decent man would find repulsive and depraved. Used to overturn
the sodomy Laws of Germany in the mid 1800's. "Homosexual" was a kind of
clinical term to give a false impression of careful medical research attached
to the proponents assertions that it should be made accepted on a firm
scientific bases and not on a moral one.

It all was started with lies and has continued in lies. There is no amount
propaganda no matter how many compromise and bend over to the pier
pressure it is the lowest debasement of man.

[ZeeWolf]

Originally Posted by Krauter

So basically you're justifying your racist, hating and disrespectful ways by saying in the end, god will simply wipe the slate clean if you say "sorry".

One big example I can think of people doing this is the crusades, which caused war and hatred for what a couple hundred years...

Wait a minute Krauter - when did you ever hear me say I was sorry for my
beliefs ?
This is America! Americans do not cry and hop away like you Canadians do
when denounced as "Racist, Bigot, Homophobias"

Crusades - no. Spanish inquisition - yes

[Krauter]

Wow, how they keep you here is beyond me.

What does my being Canadian have to do with anything? As far as I'm concerned you'd still be a racist, hating disrespectful twit if you were Canadian, German, Russian, Chinese, British, French or came from any other country.

[Oberon]

[Dowly]

NEVAAAH!


Ok, maybe I will, need to go watch David Lynch's Dune.

[razark]

Originally Posted by ZeeWolf

I think you are confusing the issue with things
that we learn to believe as children through
the five senses. ...
So, I hope you see that "choosing to believe" is
in fact a daily occurrence in our lives.

I'm just going to have to disagree. I think we're really talking about different things here, and I don't really feel like debating that point right now.

Originally Posted by ZeeWolf

As for hell it is as much a deterrent as going
to prison for a crime.

That's one of my problems with hell. It's a threat, simply to coerce people to behave a certain way. Let's say you have two people.

Person A does not believe in hell. He does what he believes to be right, based on his desire to do good and for people to treat him the way he treats them.

Person B believes in hell. He does what is right because he is afraid he will be punished at a later time for what he does.

Who is more moral? The person who doesn't rob a bank because he knows robbery is wrong, or the person who doesn't rob banks because he will go to prison?

Person A will do what is right because he believes it is correct to do so. He does not need a system of reward and punishment to be moral. Person B does what is right because he fears punishment. If the threat of punishment were removed, person A would continue to do what he believes is right. Person B may continue to do what is right, but there is also the chance that without the threat of punishment, he will do whatever he wants, to whoever he wants, simply because he knows he will get away with it.


Beyond that, the qualifications for going to hell are not moral. Person A has led a saintly life, done what is right, avoided every possible wrong he could have done, but he does not believe in Jesus. Person B is a horrible mass murder. He has committed every crime he could think of, tortured people for his own entertainment, caused suffering to innocent people at every chance he got. But person B believes in Jesus.

According to the bible, person A will go to hell despite leading an exemplary life. Person B will go to heaven, even though he has committed the worst possible crimes. Going to your prison analogy: A bank has been robbed. The police catch two suspects, A and B. They investigate, and find no evidence pointing to A, but every time they turn around, they find another bit pointing right to B. The police go to B and say "You're guilty! Apologize!" B says "I'm really very sorry.", and the police let him go. They go to A, and say "Apologize for robbing the bank!" A says "I have nothing to apologize for." The police then throw him in prison for the rest of his life.


Another point against hell is the punishment far outweighing the crime. The bible says that those who do not accept Jesus will go to hell to be punished for eternity. A person is capable of only finite acts. Hell is an infinite punishment. If a person was capable of infinite crimes, infinite punishment would be fitting. But infinite punishment for finite crimes is far beyond being moral.

Originally Posted by ZeeWolf

I guess it matters what side you are on over these
issues. The same logic can apply with the need for
hell.

I still do not see the "need" for hell. If hell exists so we will behave, then it is morally wrong. An omnibenevelent, loving god would not be able to commit such an unjustifiable act. Also, if god is omniscient/omnipotent, he knows what will happen, and in fact causes it to happen. If god wants us to be good, he can cause us to be good, and skip the threatening.

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by Oberon

Rgr that

[ZeeWolf]

Originally Posted by razark

I'm just going to have to disagree. I think we're really talking about different things here, and I don't really feel like debating that point right now.


That's one of my problems with hell. It's a threat, simply to coerce people to behave a certain way. Let's say you have two people.

Person A does not believe in hell. He does what he believes to be right, based on his desire to do good and for people to treat him the way he treats them.

Person B believes in hell. He does what is right because he is afraid he will be punished at a later time for what he does.

Who is more moral? The person who doesn't rob a bank because he knows robbery is wrong, or the person who doesn't rob banks because he will go to prison?

Person A will do what is right because he believes it is correct to do so. He does not need a system of reward and punishment to be moral. Person B does what is right because he fears punishment. If the threat of punishment were removed, person A would continue to do what he believes is right. Person B may continue to do what is right, but there is also the chance that without the threat of punishment, he will do whatever he wants, to whoever he wants, simply because he knows he will get away with it.


Beyond that, the qualifications for going to hell are not moral. Person A has led a saintly life, done what is right, avoided every possible wrong he could have done, but he does not believe in Jesus. Person B is a horrible mass murder. He has committed every crime he could think of, tortured people for his own entertainment, caused suffering to innocent people at every chance he got. But person B believes in Jesus.

According to the bible, person A will go to hell despite leading an exemplary life. Person B will go to heaven, even though he has committed the worst possible crimes. Going to your prison analogy: A bank has been robbed. The police catch two suspects, A and B. They investigate, and find no evidence pointing to A, but every time they turn around, they find another bit pointing right to B. The police go to B and say "You're guilty! Apologize!" B says "I'm really very sorry.", and the police let him go. They go to A, and say "Apologize for robbing the bank!" A says "I have nothing to apologize for." The police then throw him in prison for the rest of his life.


Another point against hell is the punishment far outweighing the crime. The bible says that those who do not accept Jesus will go to hell to be punished for eternity. A person is capable of only finite acts. Hell is an infinite punishment. If a person was capable of infinite crimes, infinite punishment would be fitting. But infinite punishment for finite crimes is far beyond being moral.


I still do not see the "need" for hell. If hell exists so we will behave, then it is morally wrong. An omnibenevelent, loving god would not be able to commit such an unjustifiable act. Also, if god is omniscient/omnipotent, he knows what will happen, and in fact causes it to happen. If god wants us to be good, he can cause us to be good, and skip the threatening.

Person A is the more noble without question.
However this morality issue has noting to do with your position in the eyes
of God.
Please allow me to explain the sin issue from Gods stand point.
All mans sins require blood atonement. In other words to be forgiven
requires a sin offering of blood sacrifice. And Christ is the absolute final
sin offering. Now, to escape the demand God has on all mankind to pay
a sin debt that no man can pay, God sacrificed his only begotten son
so that who ever believes on him will be saved from the penalty of sin.
Christ Jesus did not come into the world to condemn the world because
it is condemned already, but to save the world. So, who ever believes
in Christs full payment for sins will be excepted those who do not will
receive what they deserve.
Mans situation is dire and hopeless. Religion tries to say man can be
accepted if he works his way in by being a do-gooder. That's like trying
to out run a bullet, no matter how hard you run or how good you feel the
bullet hasn't caught up to you yet - it will. Or like the intellectuals who are
quick to see how stupid it is to try an out run a bullet they waste their
time dodging the bullet through clever, high minded reasoning and skepticism,
always wining the debate with their vast knowledge etc. this
too is futile.
We are all born into a bad situation, no matter how you slice it or dice it
it a totally no win - apart from Christ.

[ZeeWolf]

Originally Posted by Krauter

Wow, how they keep you here is beyond me.

What does my being Canadian have to do with anything? As far as I'm concerned you'd still be a racist, hating disrespectful twit if you were Canadian, German, Russian, Chinese, British, French or came from any other country.

Gee Krauter, I didn't realize you where such a pouter. Maybe it's time for your nappy poo!

[MH]

Originally Posted by ZeeWolf

Person A is the more noble without question.
However the morality issue has noting to do with your position in the eyes
of God. Please allow me to explain the sin issue from Gods stand point.
...........

Someone nail him please.

[Krauter]

Originally Posted by ZeeWolf

Person A is the more noble without question.
However this morality issue has noting to do with your position in the eyes
of God. Please allow me to explain the sin issue from Gods stand point.
All mans sins require blood atonement. In other words to be forgiven
requires a sin offering of blood sacrifice. And Christ is the absolute final
sin offering. Now, to escape the demand God has on all mankind to pay
a sin debt that no man can pay, God sacrificed his only begotten son
so that who ever believes on him will be saved from the penalty of sin.
Christ Jesus did not come into the world to condemn the world because
it is condemned already, but to save the world. So, who ever believes
in Christs full payment for sins will be excepted those who do not will
receive what they deserve.
Mans situation is dire and hopeless. Religion tries to say man can be
accepted if he works his way in by being a do-gooder. That's like trying
to out run a bullet, no matter how hard you run or how good you feel the
bullet hasn't caught up to you yet - it will. Or like the intellectuals who are
quick to see how stupid it is to try an out run a bullet they waste their
time dodging the bullet through clever, high minded reasoning and skepticism,
always wining the debate with their vast knowledge etc. this
too is futile.
We are all born into a bad situation, no matter how you slice it or dice it
it a totally no win - apart from Christ.

Wow. Sorry I actually kind of fell out of chair laughing there for a sec. After reading this, I'm sorry but I just can't take you seriously anymore.

As for me being a "pouter" where did you ever get that inclination?