7 days or 7 billion years?

kumate_champ07

Sam Vimes wrote: »

Lack of belief is not a belief. I will believe in god when the evidence is presented. Until that time, the default position is that it's just one more unsubstantiated claim

having the belief/opinion that there 'might or might not be' is a belief.

kumate_champ07

Jakkass wrote: »

God made people. I don't classify them into groupings. We could do this for various groups. Why did God create liars? I don't think God created people biologically to lie. I believe that lying is an action.

you are avoiding 2 simple questions.

your logic is failing right now

Twin-go

Jakkass wrote: »

God made people. I don't classify them into groupings. We could do this for various groups. Why did God create liars? I don't think God created people biologically to lie. I believe that lying is an action.

He created People:

You say people choose to be Homosexual or liars etc.

Did people also choose to be Handicapped?

kumate_champ07

Twin-go wrote: »

Did people also choose to be Handicapped?

im not sure if handicapped people are evil in the bible tho

philologos

kumate_champ07 wrote: »

you are avoiding 2 simple questions.

your logic is failing right now

You ask me why did God create homosexuals.

My answer is simply this. God created people. People became what they desired to be. So my answer is God created people, and people became homosexuals. You automatically assume that people are biologically predetermined or "made that way", I don't do this.

Sam Vimes

kumate_champ07 wrote: »

having the belief/opinion that there 'might or might not be' is a belief.

No, it's not. When a claim is made, that claim must be substantiated. In this case, a claim has been made that a bloke 2000 years ago performed miracles and raised from the dead. The evidence for that claim has not been presented, therefore I do not accept it. That is not a belief, it is a refusal to believe without evidence

Sam Vimes

Jakkass wrote: »

You ask me why did God create homosexuals.

My answer is simply this. God created people. People became what they desired to be. So my answer is God created people, and people became homosexuals. You automatically assume that people are biologically predetermined or "made that way", I don't do this.

I don't automatically assume that, I recognise that all of the evidence is pointing towards that being the case, except the claims of a 2000 year old book. And that's not evidence

People often wrestle with themselves for years over their sexuality and live miserable lives pretending not to be gay. Many are terrified of telling anyone, especially their parents. Many even commit suicide. Seems an odd choice to make

kumate_champ07

Jakkass wrote: »

You ask me why did God create homosexuals.

My answer is simply this. God created people. People became what they desired to be. So my answer is God created people, and people became homosexuals. You automatically assume that people are biologically predetermined or "made that way", I don't do this.

so from what you just stated, people desire to become homosexual?

so is 'yes' your answer to question 1?
1) so being gay is a choice?
2) or is it the kind of environment that your grew you in?
3) you dont think its genetically determined?

ill add another question, are we all born with the same genetics?

Jagera

I was having a very deep thought the other day after watching a documentary on space and life on Earth. Back when Earth was just a mass of gas & fire & other such goodies, there was no life at all, then after it cooled down and became more livable approx 400 million year ago, on a Wednesday, life kicked into action and started evolving.

So where did this life spring from? Space some say.

I really got into thinking about it, but then my mate returned with the pints and I didn't give a sh.t about it anymore.

The pints were more important to me. Beer certainly has evolved.

Twin-go

kumate_champ07 wrote: »

im not sure if handicapped people are evil in the bible tho

Lev.21 17-23 Whosoever ... hath any blemish, let him not approach to offer the bread of his God.

kumate_champ07

Sam Vimes wrote: »

No, it's not. When a claim is made, that claim must be substantiated. In this case, a claim has been made that a bloke 2000 years ago performed miracles and raised from the dead. The evidence for that claim has not been presented, therefore I do not accept it. That is not a belief, it is a refusal to believe without evidence

semantics+lose of what is being debated. its not just jesus, its also god.
i believe that there might have been a jesus. but why does he have white skin if he was born in the middle east? why havent modern picture souvenirs of jesus been corrected?
what did he do during his 20's?

philologos

kumate_champ07 wrote: »

so from what you just stated, people desire to become homosexual?

Homosexuality is based on desires. Just as heterosexuality is.

kumate_champ07 wrote: »

1) so being gay is a choice?

I don't know whether it is a choice or predetermined, but I am not going to assume.

kumate_champ07 wrote: »

2) or is it the kind of environment that your grew you in?

Possibly, again we don't have enough to work on at the minute.

kumate_champ07 wrote: »

3) you dont think its genetically determined?

I don't think so because I have no reason to think so.

kumate_champ07 wrote: »

ill add another question, are we all born with the same genetics?

Of course not. Why on earth would we be all different in appearance amongst other things if there weren't genetic differences?


As for Jesus and white skin. Of course Jesus would not have had white skin if He was Jewish and from the Middle East. Depictions always let us down since we don't actually know what Jesus looked like. In Africa Jesus is black on depictions, in China Jesus is Chinese.

Sam Vimes

kumate_champ07 wrote: »

semantics+lose of what is being debated. its not just jesus, its also god.
i believe that there might have been a jesus. but why does he have white skin if he was born in the middle east? why havent modern picture souvenirs of jesus been corrected?
what did he do during his 20's?

I know it's not just jesus, that was just an example. The evidence for god has not been presented either.

Sam Vimes

Jakkass wrote: »

Homosexuality is based on desires. Just as heterosexuality is.

Could you wake up tomorrow and decide to find men attractive?

Goduznt Xzst

Jakkass wrote: »

people became homosexuals.

Can you detail when you "became" heterosexual? I don't know about you but I've always been this way, so I assume homosexuals are also. I have no reason to think otherwise.

philologos

Sam Vimes wrote: »

Could you wake up tomorrow and decide to find men attractive?

Do you not think it is a bit of a leap to go from this position, to the position that it must be biologically predetermined?

Surely it is just as likely that other factors could be involved?

kumate_champ07

doh, i meant *loss not lose

kumate_champ07

Jakkass wrote: »

Do you not think it is a bit of a leap to go from this position, to the position that it must be biologically predetermined?

Surely it is just as likely that other factors could be involved?

i have the desire to lie, desire to steal, desire for sex outside marriage,desire to physically harm another person, but i try not to give in to desires.
i never have the desire to stick my dick in another mans arse, because i was born hetrosexual.

Twin-go

Jakkass wrote: »

Do you not think it is a bit of a leap to go from this position, to the position that it must be biologically predetermined?

Surely it is just as likely that other factors could be involved?

It has been shown that some animals in the wild can have preference for same sex sexual contact. Did they choose to be that way or is it instinct?

philologos

Twin-go wrote: »

Lev.21 17-23 Whosoever ... hath any blemish, let him not approach to offer the bread of his God.

Interestingly, this only refers to the high priests in the Tent of the Lord's Presence and the Temple in Jerusalem. It does not refer to the general population only as to what requirements there were for being a High Priest in the Holy of Holies. Again looking up a bit about Judaism might be useful.

Nowhere in the Old Testament does it say that God hates anyone of disability. It merely says that people who are disabled probably shouldn't serve as High Priests in the Temple. Infact God commands people in the very same book that you quote from (Leviticus) to show deference to the poor, the weak and the stranger in the land of Egypt.

The way these posts are going I'm wondering when the Judaism forum is going to open

Sam Vimes

Jakkass wrote: »

Do you not think it is a bit of a leap to go from this position, to the position that it must be biologically predetermined?

Surely it is just as likely that other factors could be involved?

Well that's not the only indication. There's also the fact that a significant number of gay people hate being gay, hide it from their family and friends, refuse to admit it to themselves, commit suicide etc. There is absolutely nothing to indicate that it's a choice and whole lot to indicate that it's a biologically determined attribute that people often wish they didn't have

People can't help who they find attractive. It's not a choice

kumate_champ07

Jakkass wrote: »

Surely it is just as likely that other factors could be involved?

like what?

philologos

Twin-go wrote: »

It has been shown that some animals in the wild can have preference for same sex sexual contact. Did they choose to be that way or is it instinct?

Others have offered alternative explanations for this:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/11/081104-homosexual-beetles.html

Some say it is a reproductive practice to give animals a reproductive edge when they come to mate with females. It's far far to early to just leap to the conclusion that it is biologically predetermined.

This is a quote from the article that was particularly notable:

"So many papers look at these sorts of behaviors and immediately consider them from a human perspective. This paper has done a remarkable job of not sexing up the homosexuality and [instead] just asking why beetles do this."

When we are observing the animal world we shouldn't be putting human standards on them so easily.

Twin-go

Jakkass wrote: »

Interestingly, this only refers to the high priests in the Tent of the Lord's Presence and the Temple in Jerusalem. It does not refer to the general population only as to what requirements there were for being a High Priest in the Holy of Holies. Again looking up a bit about Judaism might be useful.

Nowhere in the Old Testament does it say that God hates anyone of disability. It merely says that people who are disabled probably shouldn't serve as High Priests in the Temple. Infact God commands people in the very same book that you quote from (Leviticus) to show deference to the poor, the weak and the stranger in the land of Egypt.

The way these posts are going I'm wondering when the Judaism forum is going to open

In Leviticus 21:18 does it not say, some twelve impairments - from restricted growth to ruptured testicles, are listed as being unacceptable to God and in Samuel 5:8 He orders that those who are blind and lame "shall not come into the home."

Again, the bible can be quoted in both sides of any agrument.

BTW still wait for you to come back on some earlier posts.:D;)

philologos

Twin-go wrote: »

In Leviticus 21:18 does it not say, some twelve impairments - from restricted growth to ruptured testicles, are listed as being unacceptable to God and in Samuel 5:8 He orders that those who are blind and lame "shall not come into the home."

Again, the bible can be quoted in both sides of any agrument.

BTW still wait for you to come back on some earlier posts.:D;)

Which book of Samuel, first or second Samuel?

Secondly, I must ask you are you merely googling this instead of reading this yourself? If so, I don't think it's the best example of freethought.

As for coming back to your earlier posts, I'm not going to be able to get around to all of them considering there is only one of me.

Twin-go

Jakkass wrote: »

Others have offered alternative explanations for this:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/11/081104-homosexual-beetles.html

Some say it is a reproductive practice to give animals a reproductive edge when they come to mate with females. It's far far to early to just leap to the conclusion that it is biologically predetermined.

This is a quote from the article that was particularly notable:


When we are observing the animal world we shouldn't be putting human standards on them so easily.

Is this not an example biologically predetermination

Did they sit and think, "I wonder what would give me a repoductuve edge?"
Animal instinct is biologically predetermination.

TheInquisitor

Jakkass wrote: »

Which book of Samuel, first or second Samuel?

Secondly, I must ask you are you merely googling this instead of reading this yourself? If so, I don't think it's the best example of freethought.

As for coming back to your earlier posts, I'm not going to be able to get around to all of them considering there is only one of me.

Lets give it up for jackkass, fair enough i strongly disagree with everything he thinks but without him there'd be no discussion on the atheism forum or on this thread!

philologos

2 Samuel 5:6-8 wrote:

The king and his men marched to Jerusalem against the Jebusites, the inhabitants of the land, who said to David, ‘You will not come in here, even the blind and the lame will turn you back’—thinking, ‘David cannot come in here.’ Nevertheless, David took the stronghold of Zion, which is now the city of David. David had said on that day, ‘Whoever wishes to strike down the Jebusites, let him get up the water shaft to attack the lame and the blind, those whom David hates.’ Therefore it is said, ‘The blind and the lame shall not come into the house.’

It's quite funny that you quote this passage. This passage is not a commandment.

"Therefore it is said" refers to a common expression in Israel that was uttered by the people due to remembering this historical event. It does not refer to a commandment.

David and his army are invading Jerusalem the city of the Jebusites. They say concerning David's army that even the blind and the lame will cast you out of the city of Jerusalem. I.E You have no chance even the blind and the lame will defeat you. David however, did conquer the city of Jerusalem, hence the expression was used in ancient Israel.

The deaf and the blind are also used in Hebrew scriptures to refer to those who are incapable due to their disbelief to see God's work, and the deaf to refer to those who are unwilling to listen to God or to heed his commandments. It's used in Leviticus in this context and in other Jewish prophets of the Bible.

Edit: In this case it seems to be more that the expression was a reverse on the arrogance the Jebusites had uttered about the Jews.

Twin-go

Jakkass wrote: »

Which book of Samuel, first or second Samuel?.

Second.

Jakkass wrote: »

Secondly, I must ask you are you merely googling this instead of reading this yourself? If so, I don't think it's the best example of freethought.

Question was where in the Bible does God say Disabilities are evil?

That seems a strieght forward question. No free thought required. I quoted a passage were disabled people a thought as lesser people not capable of being preists.

Jakkass wrote: »

As for coming back to your earlier posts, I'm not going to be able to get around to all of them considering there is only one of me.

What, the God believer is in the minority:eek::eek::eek:

How is that possible??

Twin-go

TheInquisitor wrote: »

Lets give it up for jackkass, fair enough i strongly disagree with everything he thinks but without him there'd be no discussion on the atheism forum or on this thread!

Amen to that!!