aspen
“"The harvest is plentiful but the workers are few
BMS,
My logic is sound, if two several things are wrong then it is sound to have a consistent approach to them all.
In what universe? Your desperate need for consistency is your main problem! Striving for consistency at the expenses of reason and practicality. It relies on idealism, magical thinking and even invokes a threat of the 'slippery slope'.
I already answered your questions about abortion and pedophilia. Neither have anything in common with homosexuality except that they are all condemned by God. I understand that condemnation by God is the only answer you need - 'God said it, I believe it!', but for people who do not believe in God it takes more convincing. Condemnation against pork is all a Muslim needs to outlaw pork - I think our country would have a serious problem outlawing pork based on Allah's feelings about it - even though pork is not a healthy food.
Now the question to you concerned why you would vote for these examples, it wasn’t about how society sees it. Once again you haven’t addressed the question. And I don’t even agree with your tangential answer. I am saying ‘God’s purposes’ and you are saying ‘God’s laws’; for a believer any law that is in line with God’s purposes/laws is God’s, not society’s. Society didn’t create the universe from a void.
My use of the word 'society' describes people who live in a shared secular culture. All societies have to have certain rules to exist - murder, theft, rape, and violence can not be tolerated within a society without punishment. Safety is the most basic need of people - regardless of what god they worship. India has all kinds of wicked and evil gods that they worship - some of them encourage people to eat waste and human beings, but the country still has to provide basic human safety for it's citizens.
I am not talking about believers - I am talking about nonbelievers. I could careless if believers want to attribute basic rules of safety to God - secular people do not recognize the source as God. Yet, they still have to have the safety laws in place to exist and thrive as a society.
The benchmark for believers is whether God approves or disproves. Your view is society’s and not God’s. Our view is God’s.
That’s what the world and society says, but they are both against God’s purposes. As dragonfly has affirmed.
Yep. Nonbelievers are not required to follow God's laws - and even if you want to dig around in the OT and pull out some verses about Israel wiping out foreign cultures because of their sin - it still does not apply to our pluralistic society in America today.
Well that is part of the gospel message of course, which surely you aren’t disputing, but under the umbrella of democracy we are asking for society to accept the best choices which are God’s purposes.
This response is a good one. If you really believe that God's purposes are the best choices for society then I can understand why you would want them to become law. What I reject is the idea that creating laws based on Christian doctrine will eventually convert secular society. I also reject the idea that God's purposes are best for future citizens of Hell, but that is another issue.
My last point brings us back to the issue of homosexuality. I do not believe enforcing penalties for homosexuality is best for homosexuals.
Again that’s not what dragonfly said, that’s you twisting what dragonfly said. Dragonfly said. Repentance is part of the gospel so it is part of believing. Lies seduce, the gospel convicts.
I am not twisting anything - I am carrying what he said to a logical conclusion. Legislating God's purposes is not going to help people believe in God or become Christian - it is more likely to make them mad about having their behavior restricted by a law they see as being an attempt to control them by people they do not share common values with.
We are not saying the gospel is legislative at all, but rather a personal revelation of the truth and love of God.
Ok. So why are you trying to reduce it to legislation? Prop 8 in California is legislation.
It is you who is implying its legislative as though you are happy with the gospel as long as repentance doesn’t put people off it.
Repentance is conversion. Turning from selfishness to selflessness. You cannot have the gospel without turning to God. The Pharisees tried to impose a legal form of worshiping God - all it did was force people to practice the mechanics of worship without faith. Forced morality without belief in God is empty and meaningless.
The answer to that is if people find repentance too big an obstacle then they won’t get the gospel. For most who Christ is and what He has done is the thing that makes people resigned to worship God as a new creation in Him and repent, even if after a struggle.
You are assuming that secular people want to worship God - they just do not know it until they repent of their sinful behavior. This is a false assumption. Why do you believe that Christians know what is best for nonbelievers?
And this one of the main problems with the homosexual issue. When the inclusivechurch issued a statement that the gospel couldnt be good news for homosexuals if it prohibits homosexual relations, it meant they dont believe the gospel. The deception of course was that people still assumed they had the gospel and treated their view as another Christian interpretaion.
Not at all. The inclusive church, as you call them, simply recognizes that homosexuality is forbidden by God for Christians - not nonbelievers.
aspen2,
The LGBT community and supporters might not agree with you there. For example I believe leading LGBT campaigner Peter Tatchell said in 2007 in the Guardian Newspaper
“The positive nature of some child-adult relations is not confined to non-Western cultures. Several of my friends – gay and straight, male and female – had sex with adults from the ages of 9 to 13. None feel they were abused. All say it was their conscious choice and gave them great joy. While it may be impossible to condone paedophilia, it is time society acknowledged the truth that not all sex involving children is unwanted, abusive and harmful.”
So you see as soon as one starts thinking in terms of lgbt one is already confused, No, it is not healthy for society because God disapproves of it
Why would homosexuals agree with me about my beliefs regarding homosexuality? You guys are the one's labeling me a LGBT activist - homosexuals would view my beliefs as just as draconian as yours. I believe that homosexuality is a sin. All I am saying is that sinners have a right to sin.
My logic is sound, if two several things are wrong then it is sound to have a consistent approach to them all.
In what universe? Your desperate need for consistency is your main problem! Striving for consistency at the expenses of reason and practicality. It relies on idealism, magical thinking and even invokes a threat of the 'slippery slope'.
I already answered your questions about abortion and pedophilia. Neither have anything in common with homosexuality except that they are all condemned by God. I understand that condemnation by God is the only answer you need - 'God said it, I believe it!', but for people who do not believe in God it takes more convincing. Condemnation against pork is all a Muslim needs to outlaw pork - I think our country would have a serious problem outlawing pork based on Allah's feelings about it - even though pork is not a healthy food.
Now the question to you concerned why you would vote for these examples, it wasn’t about how society sees it. Once again you haven’t addressed the question. And I don’t even agree with your tangential answer. I am saying ‘God’s purposes’ and you are saying ‘God’s laws’; for a believer any law that is in line with God’s purposes/laws is God’s, not society’s. Society didn’t create the universe from a void.
My use of the word 'society' describes people who live in a shared secular culture. All societies have to have certain rules to exist - murder, theft, rape, and violence can not be tolerated within a society without punishment. Safety is the most basic need of people - regardless of what god they worship. India has all kinds of wicked and evil gods that they worship - some of them encourage people to eat waste and human beings, but the country still has to provide basic human safety for it's citizens.
I am not talking about believers - I am talking about nonbelievers. I could careless if believers want to attribute basic rules of safety to God - secular people do not recognize the source as God. Yet, they still have to have the safety laws in place to exist and thrive as a society.
The benchmark for believers is whether God approves or disproves. Your view is society’s and not God’s. Our view is God’s.
That’s what the world and society says, but they are both against God’s purposes. As dragonfly has affirmed.
Yep. Nonbelievers are not required to follow God's laws - and even if you want to dig around in the OT and pull out some verses about Israel wiping out foreign cultures because of their sin - it still does not apply to our pluralistic society in America today.
Well that is part of the gospel message of course, which surely you aren’t disputing, but under the umbrella of democracy we are asking for society to accept the best choices which are God’s purposes.
This response is a good one. If you really believe that God's purposes are the best choices for society then I can understand why you would want them to become law. What I reject is the idea that creating laws based on Christian doctrine will eventually convert secular society. I also reject the idea that God's purposes are best for future citizens of Hell, but that is another issue.
My last point brings us back to the issue of homosexuality. I do not believe enforcing penalties for homosexuality is best for homosexuals.
Again that’s not what dragonfly said, that’s you twisting what dragonfly said. Dragonfly said. Repentance is part of the gospel so it is part of believing. Lies seduce, the gospel convicts.
I am not twisting anything - I am carrying what he said to a logical conclusion. Legislating God's purposes is not going to help people believe in God or become Christian - it is more likely to make them mad about having their behavior restricted by a law they see as being an attempt to control them by people they do not share common values with.
We are not saying the gospel is legislative at all, but rather a personal revelation of the truth and love of God.
Ok. So why are you trying to reduce it to legislation? Prop 8 in California is legislation.
It is you who is implying its legislative as though you are happy with the gospel as long as repentance doesn’t put people off it.
Repentance is conversion. Turning from selfishness to selflessness. You cannot have the gospel without turning to God. The Pharisees tried to impose a legal form of worshiping God - all it did was force people to practice the mechanics of worship without faith. Forced morality without belief in God is empty and meaningless.
The answer to that is if people find repentance too big an obstacle then they won’t get the gospel. For most who Christ is and what He has done is the thing that makes people resigned to worship God as a new creation in Him and repent, even if after a struggle.
You are assuming that secular people want to worship God - they just do not know it until they repent of their sinful behavior. This is a false assumption. Why do you believe that Christians know what is best for nonbelievers?
And this one of the main problems with the homosexual issue. When the inclusivechurch issued a statement that the gospel couldnt be good news for homosexuals if it prohibits homosexual relations, it meant they dont believe the gospel. The deception of course was that people still assumed they had the gospel and treated their view as another Christian interpretaion.
Not at all. The inclusive church, as you call them, simply recognizes that homosexuality is forbidden by God for Christians - not nonbelievers.
aspen2,
The LGBT community and supporters might not agree with you there. For example I believe leading LGBT campaigner Peter Tatchell said in 2007 in the Guardian Newspaper
“The positive nature of some child-adult relations is not confined to non-Western cultures. Several of my friends – gay and straight, male and female – had sex with adults from the ages of 9 to 13. None feel they were abused. All say it was their conscious choice and gave them great joy. While it may be impossible to condone paedophilia, it is time society acknowledged the truth that not all sex involving children is unwanted, abusive and harmful.”
So you see as soon as one starts thinking in terms of lgbt one is already confused, No, it is not healthy for society because God disapproves of it
Why would homosexuals agree with me about my beliefs regarding homosexuality? You guys are the one's labeling me a LGBT activist - homosexuals would view my beliefs as just as draconian as yours. I believe that homosexuality is a sin. All I am saying is that sinners have a right to sin.