Assuming Christianity is True . . .

Haven · Post by **Haven** » Fri Jul 18, 2014 10:19 pm

No need for an introduction.

Debate questions: Assuming Christianity is true and everything Christians believe about God (i.e., he's just, moral, loving, kind, etc.) is correct, why would God:

1) Create gay* people as gay*?
2) Give them the same desires for love, companionship, and intimacy as non-gay people?
2) Tell them that simply being gay* or pursuing a relationship with a member of the same sex is immoral?
4) Tell them that there is no non-sinful outlet for their sexualities or desire for relationships, and that their only non-sinful options are to live a lie with someone to whom they are not attracted or remain celibate and lonely for life?

If God is so opposed to gayness, then why would he create gay* people in the first place? Does the existence of gay* people count as evidence against the existence of an anti-gay* deity?

By "gay*," I mean people with an innate, exclusive sexual and romantic attraction to members of the same sex, regardless of whether or not they act on those attractions.

bluethread · Post by **bluethread** » Mon Jul 21, 2014 2:22 pm

Haven wrote: No need for an introduction.

Debate questions: Assuming Christianity is true and everything Christians believe about God (i.e., he's just, moral, loving, kind, etc.) is correct, why would God:

1) Create gay* people as gay*?
2) Give them the same desires for love, companionship, and intimacy as non-gay people?
2) Tell them that simply being gay* or pursuing a relationship with a member of the same sex is immoral?
4) Tell them that there is no non-sinful outlet for their sexualities or desire for relationships, and that their only non-sinful options are to live a lie with someone to whom they are not attracted or remain celibate and lonely for life?

If God is so opposed to gayness, then why would he create gay* people in the first place? Does the existence of gay* people count as evidence against the existence of an anti-gay* deity?

This is presuming deterministic humanistic Christianity. Determinists say that all kinds of things are innate, from one's appetite to one's ability to kill. I find nothing in the Scriptures that requires someone to act on their passions. Also, humanists like to think that man is the center of the universe and therefore, all morality should be based on what is best for all of mankind. I also find nothing in the Scriptures that says Adonai is loving and kind to all humans.

Sorry about the size of the text. I don't know why it is so large.

connermt · Post by **connermt** » Mon Jul 21, 2014 2:41 pm

[Replying to post 10 by bluethread]

I find nothing in the Scriptures that requires someone to act on their passions.

Are people more than what's defined by their actions?

I also find nothing in the Scriptures that says Adonai is loving and kind to all humans.

Do you find anything that says god is not loving and not kind to all humans? I only ask because if one assumption is an option, without a counter, the other option(s) is(are) optional as well, no?

Goat · Post by **Goat** » Mon Jul 21, 2014 3:25 pm

connermt wrote: [Replying to post 8 by dianaiad]

ARE there [likely just as many sexually active straight people as gay people as a % that falls within the bell curve.]?

Why wouldn't there be? Just because a person is gay doesn't mean they are 'sex machines' anymore than a straight person, does it? I find it disturbing that someone would think so little of homosexuals to think that.
Of course there would be a variance, but it seems the media is quit loud about the apparent sterotyping the gay community as horn-dogs or the like anymore than the straight community.
Fact is, there are many straight people (men mostly) that will (and do) partake in any gay activity if given the chance during 'a dry spell'. There is an argument there as to rather or not those individuals are gay, straight, bi....whatever. But the fact remains, men in straight relationships do stray a lot of the time - sometimes for no good reason other than boredom.
I don't see gay people as being any more sexually active (on a % basis) than straight people from my experience. Of course I'm talking about the act, not the want (though I wouldn't think there would be much difference there either ).
In other words, you'll have people with high sexual activity in both camps, and those with low activity. Likewise, both camps have people who are...less than selective.... about who they sleep with, when, where or how.

Point of fact, I'm so over spell check so it there are mis-spellings there are mis-spellings

One result of gay marriage is that gay men who are in states where gay marriage is available are becoming less promiscuous. There seems to be a correlation with that and the reduction of new HIV infections. Gay people in states that have legalized gay marriage also are having less health problems in general.

bluethread · Post by **bluethread** » Mon Jul 21, 2014 4:03 pm

connermt wrote: [Replying to post 10 by bluethread]

I find nothing in the Scriptures that requires someone to act on their passions.
Are people more than what's defined by their actions?

The OP is asking about a presumed innate desire and the actions related to it. Therefore, desire and action are the focus of this discussion. It is a much broader question to ask what people are.

I also find nothing in the Scriptures that says Adonai is loving and kind to all humans.
Do you find anything that says god is not loving and not kind to all humans? I only ask because if one assumption is an option, without a counter, the other option(s) is(are) optional as well, no?

The Scriptures are filled with examples of Adonai saying that He is loving and kind to His people. There are also examples of Adonai saying that this is not an obligation on His part. If He is not obligated to those to whom He said He was loving and kind, why would He be obligated to those He did not say that about. Also, you yourself have often pointed out that if Adonai were loving and kind to everyone, what is written in the Scriptures would not be consistent with that.

connermt · Post by **connermt** » Mon Jul 21, 2014 4:41 pm

[Replying to post 12 by Goat]

Yeah I've heard those things too - and it makes sense.
I wonder if this is one reason why so many are against gay marriage?

connermt · Post by **connermt** » Mon Jul 21, 2014 4:47 pm

[Replying to post 13 by bluethread]

...desire and action are the focus of this discussion. It is a much broader question to ask what people are.

It was a legitimate question asked to you based off of your response in which I would appreciate an answer.

The Scriptures are filled with examples of Adonai saying that He is loving and kind to His people. There are also examples of Adonai saying that this is not an obligation on His part.

Obligation is one thing, which isn't what was asked, as I'm sure you understand.

If He is not obligated to those to whom He said He was loving and kind, why would He be obligated to those He did not say that about.

True, then why would god be obligated to anyone for anything, including salvation?

...you yourself have often pointed out that if Adonai were loving and kind to everyone, what is written in the Scriptures would not be consistent with that.

Where is that disputed? Fact is, scriptures say a lot of things. Most, if not every, sect of christianity has its basis on scriptural fact/phases.

bluethread · Post by **bluethread** » Mon Jul 21, 2014 7:00 pm

connermt wrote: [Replying to post 13 by bluethread]

...desire and action are the focus of this discussion. It is a much broader question to ask what people are.
It was a legitimate question asked to you based off of your response in which I would appreciate an answer.

Excuse me for trying to avoid a rabbit trail that takes up many volumns in my Great Books collection. People are more than is what is defined by their actions. What of the myriad of ways a person can be defined would you like to examine?

The Scriptures are filled with examples of Adonai saying that He is loving and kind to His people. There are also examples of Adonai saying that this is not an obligation on His part.
Obligation is one thing, which isn't what was asked, as I'm sure you understand.
If He is not obligated to those to whom He said He was loving and kind, why would He be obligated to those He did not say that about.
True, then why would god be obligated to anyone for anything, including salvation?

That is why the two sentences were in the same paragraph. The two go together. Adonai is not obligated to anyone for anything. However, humanism presumes an obligation as is exemplified in the OP premises.

...you yourself have often pointed out that if Adonai were loving and kind to everyone, what is written in the Scriptures would not be consistent with that.
Where is that disputed? Fact is, scriptures say a lot of things. Most, if not every, sect of christianity has its basis on scriptural fact/phases.

It wasn't, but I was bringing it up as to support my point. Yes, most Christian sects do claim to be based in the Scriptures. However, most Christian sects see the Scriptures as primarily the Apostolic Writings and reject the Tanakh as the primary context in favor of Greek philosophy. That is why I pointed out that the premise is based on deterministic and humanistic Christianity. Some may consider this a bit redundant, since most Christianity is more Catholic than truly Sola Scriptura or even Prima Scriptura. It is my contention that if one looks at the Apostolic Writings in the light of the Tanakh, one does not see a determinism and humanism as overriding principles.

connermt · Post by **connermt** » Mon Jul 21, 2014 8:53 pm

[Replying to post 16 by bluethread]

People are more than is what is defined by their actions. What of the myriad of ways a person can be defined would you like to examine?

No need. I simply wanted you to clarify what it looked like you were saying.

Adonai is not obligated to anyone for anything.

Including salvation?

Yes, most Christian sects do claim to be based in the Scriptures. However, most Christian sects see the Scriptures as primarily the Apostolic Writings and reject the Tanakh as the primary context in favor of Greek philosophy.

Perhaps. I would say most reject what doesn't impact them directly and accept what does AS WELL AS accepting what they can use to shun others when they're willing, of course.

bluethread · Post by **bluethread** » Mon Jul 21, 2014 11:09 pm

connermt wrote: [Replying to post 16 by bluethread]

Adonai is not obligated to anyone for anything.
Including salvation?

Correct, As Paul says, Eph 2:8 "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that (faith) not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:" It is Adonai's gift of faith that allows us to take advantage of His grace.

Yes, most Christian sects do claim to be based in the Scriptures. However, most Christian sects see the Scriptures as primarily the Apostolic Writings and reject the Tanakh as the primary context in favor of Greek philosophy.
Perhaps. I would say most reject what doesn't impact them directly and accept what does AS WELL AS accepting what they can use to shun others when they're willing, of course.

Yes, moral pragmatism also. That is at the root of many of the fences that Yeshua opposed. Let me throw you a bone here. One of Adonai's people is not justified in withholding service to someone who is not Torah submissive, as long as that one can remain Torah submissive in the process.

connermt · Post by **connermt** » Tue Jul 22, 2014 5:59 am

[Replying to post 18 by bluethread]

It is Adonai's gift of faith that allows us to take advantage of His grace.

Rather one believes in god or not - any god - it seems silly to think a god is obligated to anyone for anything, no?
Sorry if I hi-jacked - back to topic

Debating Christianity and Religion

Assuming Christianity is True . . .

Assuming Christianity is True . . .

Re: Assuming Christianity is True . . .

Re: Assuming Christianity is True . . .