Religion and LGBT Issues

[Neutraligon]

You never responded, @United Marxist Nations.


That brings the question, why should anyone follow the purpose in which Christianity espouses? When it is clear that we do not know of our purpose, nor if we have a purpose.

Because, if there is no intrinsic purpose, then it doesn't matter that we spent our lives on meaningless rituals and repentance, does it?

I have no problem if that was all you are doing. However it is not, since you also wish others to do what you want, condemn others for actions you consider sinful, to the point of causing them mental, and possibly physical harm, attempt to get laws that enforce said beliefs into law so that I must act Christian despite my not being Christian, etc.

[FelrikTheDeleted]

You never responded, @United Marxist Nations.


That brings the question, why should anyone follow the purpose in which Christianity espouses? When it is clear that we do not know of our purpose, nor if we have a purpose.

Because, if there is no intrinsic purpose, then it doesn't matter that we spent our lives on meaningless rituals and repentance, does it?

Nothing we do actually matters, there is no purpose for humanity, at most the advancement of Humanity is our only purpose. Of course if the people will it, then anything could be their purpose.

[United Marxist Nations]

I use humanity as a collective for all individuals, because all humans have the same purpose.

Even if we all have the same purpose, how do we not subjectivize it? Our perspectives cloud our understanding of purpose (whether they are products of our environment or whatever). You and I could both look at our shared purpose and draw radically different conclusions.

Turning to Scripture won't help too much on an individual, case-by-case basis...considering those writers themselves were equally blinded by their perspectives (which no Christian would deny; after all, most Christians don't hold these texts to be literally true, and they don't follow all the Jewish laws).

In that case, why do you believe God is evil?

They are still holding onto some conception of moral standards, likely derived from a secular philosophy stunningly similar to Christian ethics (at least, in its big ideas and spooks, not its particular prescriptions).

How could we subjectivize the reason for our existence, which is divinely ordained? It is something innate, it cannot be overturned.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Now you've shifted the argument...we were comparing the purpose of objects (sex toys) and of individuals (humans). You've brought a spook into the mix, whose purpose is equally as ethereal as itself. "Humanity" refers to nothing in particular. It is too vague to have meaning, to have purpose.

Individuals can purpose, objects can have purpose, but the purpose of an abstraction is basically just an abstraction of an abstraction.

So, now we have three different conceptions of purpose, which you've said two are the same and haven't really defined the last one: the purpose of ideas, or concepts.

I use humanity as a collective for all individuals, because all humans have the same purpose.

And what is the purpose of humanity?

[United Marxist Nations]

Because, if there is no intrinsic purpose, then it doesn't matter that we spent our lives on meaningless rituals and repentance, does it?

I have no problem if that was all you are doing. However it is not, since you also wish others to do what you want, condemn others for actions you consider sinful, to the point of causing them mental, and possibly physical harm, attempt to get laws that enforce said beliefs into law so that I must act Christian despite my not being Christian, etc.

I wouldn't call it condemnation. I'm equally condemned for my sins.

[United Marxist Nations]

I use humanity as a collective for all individuals, because all humans have the same purpose.

And what is the purpose of humanity?

The acquisition of the Holy Spirit.

[Neutraligon]

No it does not. I consider suffering wrong because I do not wish to suffer. I, a being capable of empathy have talked with others who have also said that they do not wish to suffer. This does not assume it is intrinsic, it is simply empathy and self interest. No intrinsic necessary


And god, being all powerful in unable to change this? Once again, your god is unwilling to act, despsite his acting having no negative effect on himself, making him culpable.

Your god has set up the perfect system to allow people to continue to "sin" and thus continue to harm themselves. It is almost like he wants people to sin.

Your self-interest does not make something bad.

I never said it did. I explained the source of the idea that suffering is wrong.

It simply means that you and others don't desire it.

Correct

There are, however, people who likely do desire it. Then causing suffering is just a matter of opinion, easily overturned or instated.

Sure, for instance there are people who wish to kill others, or to mentally harm them by telling them they are sinners and thus deserving of condemnation. We then have a conflict of ideas and have society figure out which ones they would prefer, thus it is not intrinsic.

For Him to change this, He would have to strip us of our freewill and of our souls. Instead, He seeks to cleanse us of our sin through Christ Jesus.

I fail to see the value of freewill given the description given. For that matter, if in heaven everyone obeys god perfectly it seems to me god does not see the value of free will. And clearly as that has not worked (big surprise, is your go also incompetent) he sits back and does nothing.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

How could we subjectivize the reason for our existence, which is divinely ordained? It is something innate, it cannot be overturned.

How can you tell a piece of art is beautiful?

Once you subjectivize ideas, it can be reasonably concluded that, if you think about it long enough, you can subjectivize your reason for existing.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

And what is the purpose of humanity?

The acquisition of the Holy Spirit.

Why is the acquisition of the Holy Spirit the purpose of humanity?

Suppose I don't want to acquire this "holy spirit" you speak of. The reasons are irrelevant. Why, then, is the acquisition of such supposed to make me suffer in life if I deny this purpose?

[Neutraligon]

I have no problem if that was all you are doing. However it is not, since you also wish others to do what you want, condemn others for actions you consider sinful, to the point of causing them mental, and possibly physical harm, attempt to get laws that enforce said beliefs into law so that I must act Christian despite my not being Christian, etc.

I wouldn't call it condemnation. I'm equally condemned for my sins.

You however not not condemned by society for your actions the way a homosexual is condemned for theirs. You are not ostracized because you decided not to give to the poor, or blasphemed the name of god, or any other number of sins that modern society pays little to no attention to. So no, you are not equally condemned.

[United Marxist Nations]

Your self-interest does not make something bad.

I never said it did. I explained the source of the idea that suffering is wrong.

It simply means that you and others don't desire it.

Correct

There are, however, people who likely do desire it. Then causing suffering is just a matter of opinion, easily overturned or instated.

Sure, for instance there are people who wish to kill others, or to mentally harm them by telling them they are sinners and thus deserving of condemnation. We then have a conflict of ideas and have society figure out which ones they would prefer, thus it is not intrinsic.

For Him to change this, He would have to strip us of our freewill and of our souls. Instead, He seeks to cleanse us of our sin through Christ Jesus.

I fail to see the value of freewill given the description given. For that matter, if in heaven everyone obeys god perfectly it seems to me god does not see the value of free will. And clearly as that has not worked (big surprise, is your go also incompetent) he sits back and does nothing.

Society's consensus doesn't matter. It's still just a matter of opinion and taste. Calling that "right" or "wrong" is just pointless yammering and absurdity.

He doesn't do "nothing", there are many instances throughout history of Him interfering in human affair to correct us, through prophets, miracles, etc.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Society's consensus doesn't matter. It's still just a matter of opinion and taste. Calling that "right" or "wrong" is just pointless yammering and absurdity.

He doesn't do "nothing", there are many instances throughout history of Him interfering in human affair to correct us, through prophets, miracles, etc.

You just boxed yourself into a corner, because if you say "society's consensus doesn't matter", then that means you are above the law anyways. If you are above the law, then that means you don't respect it, and thus you don't see changing the law as it stands as important on many issues Christians grapple with.

[United Marxist Nations]

The acquisition of the Holy Spirit.

Why is the acquisition of the Holy Spirit the purpose of humanity?

Suppose I don't want to acquire this "holy spirit" you speak of. The reasons are irrelevant. Why, then, is the acquisition of such supposed to make me suffer in life if I deny this purpose?

It will not make you suffer in life, but in death. If you do not acquire the Holy Spirit, then the soul is troubled and dismayed when it comes into contact with God's divine energies.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Your self-interest does not make something bad. It simply means that you and others don't desire it. There are, however, people who likely do desire it. Then causing suffering is just a matter of opinion, easily overturned or instated.

For Him to change this, He would have to strip us of our freewill and of our souls. Instead, He seeks to cleanse us of our sin through Christ Jesus.

Causing suffering may be a matter of opinion.

However, this is where might comes along. The one with the force to backup their defense or their right to make others suffer can call the shots.

[Neutraligon]

I never said it did. I explained the source of the idea that suffering is wrong.
Correct
Sure, for instance there are people who wish to kill others, or to mentally harm them by telling them they are sinners and thus deserving of condemnation. We then have a conflict of ideas and have society figure out which ones they would prefer, thus it is not intrinsic.

I fail to see the value of freewill given the description given. For that matter, if in heaven everyone obeys god perfectly it seems to me god does not see the value of free will. And clearly as that has not worked (big surprise, is your go also incompetent) he sits back and does nothing.

Society's consensus doesn't matter. It's still just a matter of opinion and taste. Calling that "right" or "wrong" is just pointless yammering and absurdity.

He doesn't do "nothing", there are many instances throughout history of Him interfering in human affair to correct us, through prophets, miracles, etc.

Societies consensus does matter, as they are supposedly acting on gods commandments. Thus there actions are directly a result of the things god says. Or if you wish, your churches consensus equally does not matter as calling it right or wrong is pointless yammering and absurdity. See here is the thing. There is no reason to believe your churches "yammering" then there is to believe in any church or hell any societies yammering, and your god set it up to be like that.

Also, if societies laws do not matter, then why do so many Christians attempt to enforce their religion with the law? Why do you say in other threads that you would enforce a theocracy? Either societies opinions and laws do not matter or they do, pick one.

Many a group have made the same claim. Clearly those interference have done little to nothing in the long term. You are not making your all powerful god seem and more competent.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Why is the acquisition of the Holy Spirit the purpose of humanity?

Suppose I don't want to acquire this "holy spirit" you speak of. The reasons are irrelevant. Why, then, is the acquisition of such supposed to make me suffer in life if I deny this purpose?

It will not make you suffer in life, but in death. If you do not acquire the Holy Spirit, then the soul is troubled and dismayed when it comes into contact with God's divine energies.

And I should care about what happens once my body dies because...?

[United Marxist Nations]

I wouldn't call it condemnation. I'm equally condemned for my sins.

You however not not condemned by society for your actions the way a homosexual is condemned for theirs. You are not ostracized because you decided not to give to the poor, or blasphemed the name of god, or any other number of sins that modern society pays little to no attention to. So no, you are not equally condemned.

I should be ostracized for those. In fact, I would say blasphemy and not giving to the poor is worse than having the occasional homosexual bout.

But, I meant condemned by the order of the universe.

[United Marxist Nations]

Your self-interest does not make something bad. It simply means that you and others don't desire it. There are, however, people who likely do desire it. Then causing suffering is just a matter of opinion, easily overturned or instated.

For Him to change this, He would have to strip us of our freewill and of our souls. Instead, He seeks to cleanse us of our sin through Christ Jesus.

Causing suffering may be a matter of opinion.

However, this is where might comes along. The one with the force to backup their defense or their right to make others suffer can call the shots.

I think you can understand why "might makes right" might be an undesirable status quo.

[Neutraligon]

You however not not condemned by society for your actions the way a homosexual is condemned for theirs. You are not ostracized because you decided not to give to the poor, or blasphemed the name of god, or any other number of sins that modern society pays little to no attention to. So no, you are not equally condemned.

I should be ostracized for those. In fact, I would say blasphemy and not giving to the poor is worse than having the occasional homosexual bout.

But, I meant condemned by the order of the universe.

And yet you are not. Since my entire focus was on society the order of the universe in unimportant in this context.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

You however not not condemned by society for your actions the way a homosexual is condemned for theirs. You are not ostracized because you decided not to give to the poor, or blasphemed the name of god, or any other number of sins that modern society pays little to no attention to. So no, you are not equally condemned.

I should be ostracized for those. In fact, I would say blasphemy and not giving to the poor is worse than having the occasional homosexual bout.

But, I meant condemned by the order of the universe.

Sure, but nobody punishes those who blaspheme and are selfish.

And the Universe doesn't really matter to the person whose life is made shit by those around them. Honestly, I couldn't care less if the universe is pissed off at me. I am more concerned on my friends not being pissed off at me. The Universe can go take a hike.

[United Marxist Nations]

Society's consensus doesn't matter. It's still just a matter of opinion and taste. Calling that "right" or "wrong" is just pointless yammering and absurdity.

He doesn't do "nothing", there are many instances throughout history of Him interfering in human affair to correct us, through prophets, miracles, etc.

Societies consensus does matter, as they are supposedly acting on gods commandments. Thus there actions are directly a result of the things god says. Or if you wish, your churches consensus equally does not matter as calling it right or wrong is pointless yammering and absurdity. See here is the thing. There is no reason to believe your churches "yammering" then there is to believe in any church or hell any societies yammering, and your god set it up to be like that.

Also, if societies laws do not matter, then why do so many Christians attempt to enforce their religion with the law? Why do you say in other threads that you would enforce a theocracy? Either societies opinions and laws do not matter or they do, pick one.

Many a group have made the same claim. Clearly those interference have done little to nothing in the long term. You are not making your all powerful god seem and more competent.

The Church consensus comes about through Holy Tradition, passed on by the Apostles, who directly experienced God. They are not arbitrary.

I support using the law to create a new culture that is centered around religious faith, nothing more.

[Neutraligon]

Causing suffering may be a matter of opinion.

However, this is where might comes along. The one with the force to backup their defense or their right to make others suffer can call the shots.

I think you can understand why "might makes right" might be an undesirable status quo.

And yet that is all god does.

[Anywhere Else But Here]

Causing suffering may be a matter of opinion.

However, this is where might comes along. The one with the force to backup their defense or their right to make others suffer can call the shots.

I think you can understand why "might makes right" might be an undesirable status quo.

That's literally the basis for your own morality.

[United Marxist Nations]

It will not make you suffer in life, but in death. If you do not acquire the Holy Spirit, then the soul is troubled and dismayed when it comes into contact with God's divine energies.

And I should care about what happens once my body dies because...?

Because you will continue to experience things.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

I think you can understand why "might makes right" might be an undesirable status quo.

That's the status quo that has existed since man started to roam the Earth.

I don't see anything that's particularly shocking about that.