Where have all the Christians gone?

But you are a false prophet. If you had risen from the read, may be we would believe you. But as you are ignorant of every aspect of religion, and make no attempt to learn, and yet has no scholarly credentials that we know of, we can discard everything you say as just as the ranting of a profound ignoramus.
You seem to display an ignorance of how logic and epistemology work.
 
Right. But homosexual behaviour happens in the animal kingdom, which is in nature, which makes it natural.
The point being what happens doesnt necessarily make it right. Also humans have cognitive thought capability that animals dont have so humans are capable of making rational decisions better than animals. Some animals eat their young but we would say because they do so should humans, right? In which case I dont see your point.

Besides, something being unnatural doesn't make it morally wrong.
Ah, well that is a debate that could happen if it were agreed something was unnatural.

You don't seem to have finished your sentence.
Because its you who has set a precedent that things can be 'interpreted' as opposite to what they are.
 
Please give your definitions of moral and immoral.
I gave you that, what didnt you understand by it?
concerned with the principles of right and wrong behaviour.

If one cant say a two sex act is moral because there are two sexes for it, and a one sex is immoral because there are two sexes for it, not one, then morals are meaningless.

We talked about this before and it came down to mu moral being based on an objective fact concerning the sex of people and your was a subjective idea that if anyone felt pleasure then it was moral, which means no one can tell what is or isnt moral and of course Hitler could have been moral if it gave him pleasure
 
Ah, so the Bible says we have been given proof, and - if we assume Christianity is true - then Christianity must be true.

Thank you for enlightening us as to the foundations of your beliefs.
It's your duty to check out the proof. If you can't be bothered, you will suffer the consequences.
 
Only when you disabuse yourself of the notion that "Jesus rose from the dead" can serve as evidence of anything, until there is good reason to believe that it happened.
As I said, you need to disabuse yourself that you are the ultimate judge of whether he rose from the dead. People far more knowledgeable than you are convinced that he did. You have shown no credentials that suggest you are to be taken as an authority. Produce the goods, or stop ranting.
 
The point being what happens doesnt necessarily make it right.
Nor wrong.

However, the point was that you thought it unnatural. You: "Biology shows us its unnatural" post #666.
Also humans have cognitive thought capability that animals dont have so humans are capable of making rational decisions better than animals. Some animals eat their young but we would say because they do so should humans, right? In which case I dont see your point.
This is beside the point, being, that you think same sex intimacy is unnatural even though it happens in nature, let's deal with that first before moving on.
Ah, well that is a debate that could happen if it were agreed something was unnatural.
It could happen without agreeing that homosexuality was unnatural. Playing tennis is unnatural, we could debate whether that makes it wrong.
Because its you who has set a precedent that things can be 'interpreted' as opposite to what they are.
I don't know what you mean exactly.
 
Nor wrong.
correct, so your point was meaningless concerning what happens in the animal kingdom. So why did you make that claim again?

However, the point was that you thought it unnatural. You: "Biology shows us its unnatural" post #666.
Because biology is an objective criteria for what is natural and what is therefore moral.

This is beside the point, being, that you think same sex intimacy is unnatural even though it happens in nature,
No, same sex acts are unnatural because there are two sexes for it.

let's deal with that first before moving on.
First you need to acknowledge what I have said instead of misrepresenting it.
The fact that there are two sexes for it means one sex isnt for it. So two sexes is natural and one sex is unnatural. Explain to us how one sex can be natural when there are two for it?

Explain why you think because some animals perform same sex acts and some animals eat their young you think that humans should do so as well because it happens in nature?

It could happen without agreeing that homosexuality was unnatural.
No it couldn't. If we are using natural/unnatural as a basis for morals we need to agree on what that is
 
I gave you that, what didnt you understand by it?
concerned with the principles of right and wrong behaviour.
Please define right and wrong.
If one cant say a two sex act is moral because there are two sexes for it, and a one sex is immoral because there are two sexes for it, not one, then morals are meaningless.
Without knowing what you mean by right and wrong, I can parse nothing from this.
As I define them, homosexuality qualifes as neither right nor wrong.
 
Last edited:
correct, so your point was meaningless concerning what happens in the animal kingdom. So why did you make that claim again?
No it wasn't. The point wasn't about what happens in nature being right or wrong, but was to do with whether it's natural or not. You seem to want to avoid that issue.
Because biology is an objective criteria for what is natural and what is therefore moral.
What happens naturally in nature is the criteria for what is natural. Being aware of the consequences of actions make something open to moral question. These are very different things.

Playing tennis is unnatural, is it therefore immoral? Eating is natural, does that make it a moral action?
No, same sex acts are unnatural because there are two sexes for it.
But as it happens naturally in nature, it can't be unnatural.
First you need to acknowledge what I have said instead of misrepresenting it.
The fact that there are two sexes for it means one sex isnt for it. So two sexes is natural and one sex is unnatural. Explain to us how one sex can be natural when there are two for it?
Because it happens naturally in nature, of course.
Explain why you think because some animals perform same sex acts and some animals eat their young you think that humans should do so as well because it happens in nature?
Umm, but I don't think humans should eat their young just because it happens elsewhere in nature, because it's not something that is natural to humans. Homosexuality is a part of nature as exhibited by it occurring naturally in nature, including in humans.
No it couldn't. If we are using natural/unnatural as a basis for morals we need to agree on what that is
But natural/unnatural shouldn't be used as a basis for morals, as exampled by my question that you have avoided.

So again, playing tennis is unnatural, does that makes it morally wrong? Eating is natural, does that make it a moral action?
 
Last edited:
As I said, you need to disabuse yourself that you are the ultimate judge of whether he rose from the dead.
I am the ultimate judge of whether or not I have sufficient reason to believe it.
People far more knowledgeable than you are convinced that he did.
Doesn't guarantee that they are convinced by good reasons.

If I said to an evolution/climate change denier "people far more knowledgable than you are convinced that it is true", they would - rightly - reject that logic.
You have shown no credentials that suggest you are to be taken as an authority.
I am the only possible authority on what I find reasonable.
The credential being, that I am me.
Produce the goods, or stop ranting.
I am under no obligation to produce anything - I made no claim.
 
No there won't.
1 Corinthians 1:20; Where is the wise man? Where is the scholar? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?21 For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe.22 Jews demand miraculous signs and Greeks look for wisdom,23 but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles,24 but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than man's wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than man's strength.
 
1 Corinthians 1:20; Where is the wise man? Where is the scholar? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?21 For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe.22 Jews demand miraculous signs and Greeks look for wisdom,23 but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles,24 but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than man's wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than man's strength.
Don't care what the Bible says - no such thing as hell.
 
Please define right and wrong.

Without knowing what you mean by right and wrong, I can parse nothing from this.
As I define them, homosexuality qualifes as neither right nor wrong.
Please describe what you mean by 'define'
As I said since there are two sexes for it homosexual acts are wrong
 
Back
Top