Who thinks religion has out lived it's purpose?

[MissileMan]

This just isn't the case, and your example is wrong. Mainstream Christians don't have anything against the person, it is the action they dislike, and I'd be willing to bet most homosexuals in this country are in fact Christians.

In Christian America we have mosques, synagogues, temples, you can even go and worship Satan out in the woods if you want to.

American Christians are the most tolerant and accepting people in the world evidenced by the fact that people from all over the world flock to the country that tolerant Christians created.

There are a couple other threads about homosexuality going. Read through them and tell me that words like "queer" and "fag", and phrases like "take it in the ass" are signs of tolerance. It's not all religious people who do this, but there's an awful lot of terrible things being said and done in god's name. Radical muslims slicing off peoples heads because they are westerners. Radical christians blowing up abortion clinics and killing doctors who perform abortion.

If you strongly believe in your religion, then it follows that you would have to strongly disbelieve and therefore be intolerant of anything that is in disagreement with your religion. To do otherwise would be denying your own faith.

And can a homosexual be Christian? I'd bet not in PR's or OCA's church.

 

[Zhukov]

If you strongly believe in your religion, then it follows that you would have to strongly disbelieve and therefore be intolerant of anything that is in disagreement with your religion. To do otherwise would be denying your own faith.

No, not necessarily. There are actually passages in the bible that instruct them to submit to the will of their pagan Roman overlords. That goes far beyond tolerance of a religion with which they disagree.

As for individuals on this board disliking homosexuals, that is their individual opinion.

Besides tolerance is just that, tolerance. I could sit in a doctor's lobby next to a homosexual waiting for my turn, in my heart completely hating them and in my mind wishing them misfortune, and yet doing nothing, enduring them. That is tolerance.

Too many mistake tolerance for acceptance and celebration. Too many do it deliberately.

Tolerance is only tolerance. The only real systematic intolerance I see in our society today is liberal intolerance for our nation's Christian traditions.

It's not all religious people who do this, but there's an awful lot of terrible things being said and done in god's name. Radical muslims slicing off peoples heads

Well, I was only addressing your Christian example. I have no problem saying the faith of radical moslems is intolerant.

 

[Avatar4321]

Too many mistake tolerance for acceptance and celebration. Too many do it deliberately.

Tolerance is only tolerance. The only real systematic intolerance I see in our society today is liberal intolerance for our nation's Christian traditions.

Well said as usual Zhukov.

I would add that there may be some individual Christians who hate homosexuals. quite frankly i dont believe they are living their religion. But i believe that a majority feel more love and concern for those who practice homosexuality. We believe it is a sin, and it must be repented of just like any other sin we may have. We believe that God has the power to change a man from his natural state to be born again as a new creature in Christ.

This is one of the reasons ive never bought the argument "its natural, why would it be wrong?" We'll even if we concede that its natural so what? Its natural to lie when caught in a tough situation. Its natural to feel hate and desire revenge when someone hurts you. Its natural to feel intolerant and bigotted. Its natural to be violent. Simply because its natural doesnt mean its right.

As Christians we are taught to repent and put off the natural man and yield to the enticings of the Holy Spirit becoming Saints. By doing so we are born again in Christ and the atonement works in us to change our natural desires so that we only have the desire to do good continually.

Sadly there are many Christians who are ignorant of the Gospel. They think that simply saying you accept Christ is all there is to being a disciple. You do that and you are born again. However, being a Christian isnt as much what you say or do, its what you become. Its the process of becoming something better than we were the day before. yeah we screw up sometimes. but we get back up and try again.

 

[5stringJeff]

And I certainly don't believe that the Gospel of Jesus Christ can be forced upon people in the name of freedom!

The Gospel is never "forced" on anyone. People are exposed to it and then allowed to make their own decision. In most Muslim countries, people cannot even hear what Christianity offers, and so cannot become Christians. It is as simple as that. We (Christians) want to give everyone the option of becoming a Christian, but that means freedom of religion, which is sorely lacking in many countries.

 

[MissileMan]

Well said as usual Zhukov.

I would add that there may be some individual Christians who hate homosexuals. quite frankly i dont believe they are living their religion. But i believe that a majority feel more love and concern for those who practice homosexuality. We believe it is a sin, and it must be repented of just like any other sin we may have. We believe that God has the power to change a man from his natural state to be born again as a new creature in Christ.

This is one of the reasons ive never bought the argument "its natural, why would it be wrong?" We'll even if we concede that its natural so what? Its natural to lie when caught in a tough situation. Its natural to feel hate and desire revenge when someone hurts you. Its natural to feel intolerant and bigotted. Its natural to be violent. Simply because its natural doesnt mean its right.

As Christians we are taught to repent and put off the natural man and yield to the enticings of the Holy Spirit becoming Saints. By doing so we are born again in Christ and the atonement works in us to change our natural desires so that we only have the desire to do good continually.

Sadly there are many Christians who are ignorant of the Gospel. They think that simply saying you accept Christ is all there is to being a disciple. You do that and you are born again. However, being a Christian isnt as much what you say or do, its what you become. Its the process of becoming something better than we were the day before. yeah we screw up sometimes. but we get back up and try again.

Tolerance is defined as "Recognition of and respect for the opinions, practices, or behavior of others." It does not of course mean all opinions, all practices, or all behavior. The question is, who decides which opinions, practices, or behaviors are worthy of tolerance and which are not? My tolerance zone is probably different than yours. That does not make mine right and yours wrong, or vice versa.

 

[Zhukov]

I accept 'tolerance' as "the capacity to endure hardship or pain."

at worst....

"Leeway for variation from a standard"

...at best.

Ultimately the point is the ability to ignore.

Over time the Christians have decided they are willing to ignore the behavior of homosexuals so long as their conduct is private.

Private.

It is quite another thing to say, for them, that guys can 'marry' guys, women women, that they will quietly nod their heads, and gay people can be sexual promiscous in public society because to deny them would be discriminatory.

They will not.

Marriage is definitional, and never in human history has that definition included people of the same gender marrying, because two people of the same gender marrying is ridiculous. Marriage is for the production and care of children. It is a societal construct, not a result of selfish whim.

Very few on the christian conservative right object to the allowance of insurance benefits, hospital visitations, and inheritance for homosexuals. In fact I think these things have precedence in law, quite absent an undemocratic and court imposed ruling for same-sex marriage.

It is only a matter of tradition and respect.

Once you understand that you see where the real intolerance and disrespect is.

 

[Avatar4321]

Tolerance is defined as "Recognition of and respect for the opinions, practices, or behavior of others." It does not of course mean all opinions, all practices, or all behavior.

Im not sure where you got your deffinition of tolerance because i just checked the dictionary and it says nothing about respecting others opinions or practices.

2 a : sympathy or indulgence for beliefs or practices differing from or conflicting with one's own b : the act of allowing something : TOLERATION (Meriam-Websters dictionary) Definition

As i said nothing about respect at all there. You could hate and disrespect someone yet still be tolerant of them.

The question is, who decides which opinions, practices, or behaviors are worthy of tolerance and which are not? My tolerance zone is probably different than yours. That does not make mine right and yours wrong, or vice versa.

God does. God tell us we are not to tolerate sin. If we do we have a way to overcome it. However, we can tolerate people without tolerating sin. Again God has set the example. Encouraging us to forgive and love sinners.

 

[Avatar4321]

Very few on the christian conservative right object to the allowance of insurance benefits, hospital visitations, and inheritance for homosexuals. In fact I think these things have precedence in law, quite absent an undemocratic and court imposed ruling for same-sex marriage.

It is only a matter of tradition and respect.

Once you understand that you see where the real intolerance and disrespect is.

Again well said. I simply wanted to make the point i think hospital visitations and inheritances are quite reasonable. However, i think the insurance benefits arent. This is not because of any sort of intolerance, but because the market forces are controling them. There is a history of greater health risks in homosexual behavior. Mainly for their promiscious lifestyles. As long as there are greater health risks, they are going to be paying higher insurance.

 

[Zhukov]

However, i think the insurance benefits arent. This is not because of any sort of intolerance, but because the market forces are controling them. There is a history of greater health risks in homosexual behavior. Mainly for their promiscious lifestyles. As long as there are greater health risks, they are going to be paying higher insurance.

Absolutely no problem with that here. The market dictates prices. If homosexuals are more likely to require medical care it's only natural they pay higher premiums.

 

[White knight]

Maybe its me, but i havent seen where you actually asked a question in the above statement. You gave alot of opinions and some facts but where is the question?

Doesn’t being supportive to these executions and his involvement with the deaths of others now, go against his and the moral majority’s religious doctrines.

I was thinking about some of the arguments above, when I thought of this question.

How can people that claim to be followers of religion support institutions that are directly involved with the deaths of others?

 

[Zhukov]

Because their God commands they kill evil people.

 

[White knight]

For some reason, religion seems to breed intolerance, especially for other religions. As an example, even though Christianity preaches tolerance and acceptance, it seems to be reserved only for other Christians who believe and act as they do. .

I was just talking about this topic, Has anyone else noticed any other groups that get angry or mean spirited when you confront them with a opposing view? I have noticed that some tend to more so than others.

If everyone believed, as I do, that you get your one shot on this world and then it's back to oblivion, the chaos and lawlessness would destroy mankind. I am neither chaotic nor lawless, I am restrained by my own morals (based on the Golden Rule) and the legal system.

On the other hand, if everyone believed in one shot, then life might be held more precious, and it might be harder to convince someone to turn themselves into a suicide bomb.

I would tend to agree with these statements, for me the jury is not out.
So I live my life as well oblivious to whats after death. My moral code is based on what is best for the continued survival of man, not just my race or ideological group.

 

[MJDuncan1982]

My moral code is based on what is best for the continued survival of man, not just my race or ideological group.

I have trouble finding the root of moral codes. It is the Golden Rule which may ensure the survival of our species? Is it obeying the command of a God?

The answer may lie in the purpose of a moral code. Ideas as to what that purpose is?

 

[Avatar4321]

I was just talking about this topic, Has anyone else noticed any other groups that get angry or mean spirited when you confront them with a opposing view? I have noticed that some tend to more so than others.

Yeah, Democrats.

I would tend to agree with these statements, for me the jury is not out.
So I live my life as well oblivious to whats after death. My moral code is based on what is best for the continued survival of man, not just my race or ideological group.

And how do you judge what is best for the continued survival of man?

 

[White knight]

And how do you judge what is best for the continued survival of man?

Judging what is best for all comes instinctively, things like the threat of inhalation by nuclear war. Cooperation concerning the any destructive impact we have on our shared environment. I would like to see efforts made on how well our diminishing resources are managed. You know save some for the following generations. The types of judgments any reasonable parent would make concerning the welfare of his children.
Take the International Space Station. That is something that is clearly good for the continued survival of man. Just as a precaution if there was ever a need to evacuate a dying or overcrowded planet and search for a new habitat.
It would be a shame for man to become a footnote in the history of the Universe

 

[MissileMan]

Im not sure where you got your deffinition of tolerance because i just checked the dictionary and it says nothing about respecting others opinions or practices.

That is a directly quoted definition from Webster's II, New Riverside University Dictionary, U.S. Govt Edition

God does. God tell us we are not to tolerate sin. If we do we have a way to overcome it. However, we can tolerate people without tolerating sin. Again God has set the example. Encouraging us to forgive and love sinners.

In reality, god hasn't told you anything. You have read a centuries old collection of myths and legends and have accepted it as gospel being delivered to man from god. That's your choice, but there are approximately 4 billion people in the world who do not share your belief.

I notice that noone has tackled the question about whether homosexuals can be Christians.

 

[MJDuncan1982]

That is a directly quoted definition from Webster's II, New Riverside University Dictionary, U.S. Govt Edition

I would like to add that what is in the dictionary is not absolute. Definitions change over time and the dictionary is usually the common meaning.

 

[MissileMan]

I accept 'tolerance' as "the capacity to endure hardship or pain."

at worst....

"Leeway for variation from a standard"

...at best.

Ultimately the point is the ability to ignore.

Over time the Christians have decided they are willing to ignore the behavior of homosexuals so long as their conduct is private.

Private.

It is quite another thing to say, for them, that guys can 'marry' guys, women women, that they will quietly nod their heads, and gay people can be sexual promiscous in public society because to deny them would be discriminatory.

They will not.

Marriage is definitional, and never in human history has that definition included people of the same gender marrying, because two people of the same gender marrying is ridiculous. Marriage is for the production and care of children. It is a societal construct, not a result of selfish whim.

Very few on the christian conservative right object to the allowance of insurance benefits, hospital visitations, and inheritance for homosexuals. In fact I think these things have precedence in law, quite absent an undemocratic and court imposed ruling for same-sex marriage.

It is only a matter of tradition and respect.

Once you understand that you see where the real intolerance and disrespect is.

You blew right past the first accepted definition of tolerance in your own link. Tolerance is not about ignoring, it's about accepting.

 

[Avatar4321]

That is a directly quoted definition from Webster's II, New Riverside University Dictionary, U.S. Govt Edition.

Well it looks like it disagrees with two dictionaries we just cited, but ill take your word fdor it

In reality, god hasn't told you anything. You have read a centuries old collection of myths and legends and have accepted it as gospel being delivered to man from god. That's your choice, but there are approximately 4 billion people in the world who do not share your belief.

I happen to be the top authority of what God has or has not told me. I dont appreciate your arrogant assumptions otherwise. There are probably more tha 6 billion people in the world that dont share my belief. So what? doesnt make it any less true. But then i dont tell people to take my word for it. I tell them to go to the source and find out if what im saying is accurate enough.

I notice that noone has tackled the question about whether homosexuals can be Christians

Probably because its a very silly question. All men and women can be Christians if the have faith in Christ and repent. The steps are the same whether your gay, straight, black. white, jew or gentile. If you dont understand this, then you dont understand the entire point of the Gospel.

 

[wade]

Zhukov,

The old testament says "an eye for an eye". The new testament says "turn the other cheek". Bush is a born again - a follower of Christ and the new testament. Or so he says.