Anyone know any good religious forums? - Page 4
Blogs > BackHo |
Mada_Jiang
Australia236 Posts
| ||
SaveYourSavior
United States1071 Posts
On April 25 2009 11:25 BackHo wrote: Kurosaki-kun! Welcome to TL : D Thanks for your suggestions - another good atheist author I have found a lot of respect for is Lloyd Geering, he wrote a book called Christianity Without God - well worth reading if your local public library has a copy. Unfortunately I'm a bit too old to go back to university and to be honest I've found most of the best arguments are ones I find on forums. Take for example the following, which if the person was not a student he would not be able to discuss in a lecture by putting his hand up in class due to time constraints: + Show Spoiler + I’ve been thinking about homosexuality, and have come to the conclusion that Christians in general have missed the boat. We should be the ones pushing for gay rights, not fighting against them. By demonizing homosexuality I think we’re missing a great opportunity to do a great good in our world, and instead are letting ourselves become tools for evil. I want to outline some of my thoughts on the matter. Biblical passages apparently condemning homosexuality In reality, it is hard to make a watertight biblical argument against homosexuality. To my knowledge, there are three main biblical passages that appear to be against homosexuality. The first is in old testament law (e.g. Leviticus 18:22), but is alongside a lot of other bizarre commandments, which no christian I know observes (e.g. don’t wear cloths with two fibres?), so there is no reason to see the law’s condemnation of homosexuality as anything more than an obscure old law. The next is the example Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen 19), cities that were destroyed by God for their unrighteousness. The question is, what were they doing that caused them to be considered unrighteousness? The bible gives us an example; angels visit the town, and the men of the town want to homosexually rape them. Some take this (as does christian tradition) to be an indication that homosexuality is wrong, but this misses the far more obvious sin; rape. Any town that’s default response to visitors is attempted rape is unrighteous, heterosexual or homosexual. So this account doesn’t provide evidence that homosexuality is wrong. Lastly, there are a few new testament passage that mention homosexuality amongst a list of other negative attributes. The most notable one is Romans 1, where Paul talks about people turning away from God, and engaging in homosexuality, among other things. This may appear as a scathing condemnation of homosexuality, but we should look closely at what Paul is actually saying. For a start, Romans is a horribly difficult book to understand, so we should be careful in coming to firm conclusions from a single passage. Among various interpretations, it is possible that Paul is quoting another passage, and doesn’t actually agree with what the passage is saying, which would explain why Paul suddenly flips the blame onto the readers in Romans 2: “Therefore, you are without excuse, every one of you who passes judgment.”. Additionally, it is entirely feasible that Paul (or the passage Paul is quoting) is not commenting homosexuality per sei, but pagan cults that involves sexual rituals. The bigger picture So there is some apparent biblical condemnation of homosexuality. But it’s in isolated passages, which can be explained as culturally irrelevant today. What we should look to is the broader picture of the bible, and ignore the pieces that seem to be artifacts of the culture of biblical authors (e.g. slavery, a decidedly non-christian practice, is all but endorsed in Colossians 3). What is the broader picture, and what does it have to say about homosexuality? Jesus did not come to the ‘in’ crowd. He came to the outcasts of society. He helped the lepers, he associated with ’sinners’, with tax collectors, with prostitutes, with the common people, all the people who the religious leaders looked down upon. He came bringing reversal to exploitation, he hated the idea that religion was being used to make money of people, that people were being oppressed by the economic and religious systems, and he fought against it. It took a while, but eventually his disciples caught on to the idea that the kingdom of God was not just for Jews, it was for Gentiles too. It wasn’t just for free men, but for slaves, for women, for everyone. Before God, all men and women are equal. All men and women. The end of James 1, James makes it pretty clear that if we resort to following the old ways of respecting one group over another group, we are really going against the message of Jesus. I put it to you that Homosexuals are the outcasts of modern society. Admittedly their lot in society has been getting better, but unfortunately this has been because of efforts outside of the church, and in fact their lot has been impeded by the church. It should be the other way round - the church should be advocating for homosexual rights. An appeal for Christians to accept, and advocate for homosexuals It’s hard to be different. Our society is heavily heterosexual, to be homosexual is a deviation from the norm. Someone who comes to terms with being a homosexual can go through a very difficult journey. They have to come to terms with being different from what seems like everyone else, they have to deal with an inner conflict as they try and work out who they are, and what they believe is right and wrong, they have to come to put up with all the derogatory comments towards homosexuals, the reactions of others when they come out, which can range from surprise to moral condemnation to disgust. Some people can be accepting, but others are not - and the most screwed up thing is that Christians are often the most unaccepting people. Christians condemnation of homosexuality is an evil, as it goes against what Jesus taught, and also, it causes much pain. Consider the familiar example of someone growing up inside Christianity, but coming to the realisation that they have homosexual feelings. There is an inevitable dilemma; either reject the church dogma that homosexuality is wrong, or reject a part of themselves. Both of these choices can be incredibly painful, one often leading to a disconnection from church, family, sometimes all they know, the other often leading to a rejection of self, a horrible, horrible fate. I have seen people destroyed by this dilemma. People shouldn’t have to make this choice. In the past I believed homosexuality was a sin. Naively I contributed to the christian culture that preached that homosexuality was wrong, that people who ‘had it’ could repent and change. I now recognize that I contributed to oppression; I contributed to the culture that causes a lot of pain for many people, a lot of which I probably wasn’t aware of it. No more. It's never too late to go back to a university I've seen 40 year olds to elderly people taking some classes | ||
BackHo
New Zealand400 Posts
| ||
Chromyne
Canada561 Posts
On April 26 2009 18:44 Cpt Obvious wrote: If half the world can be stupid, I sure as hell have a right to be as obnoxious about my beliefs as anyone else. It's not like me being reasonable would change anything about the 3 billion idiots actually believing in the fairy-tales. Besides, after everything I have learned in my physics studies, I'd say I've collected more evidence against the existence of a God than anyone can give me to prove the opposite. But like someone else already quoted, if you could reason with religious people, there'd be no religious people. So I'm just gonna be as retarded as them and say: I KNOW there is no God. But go ahead, drown your incompetence and fear in faith if that works for you. This is the sort of ad hominem that prevents healthy debate and discussion on topics like these. Something I want to clarify, though, is that the discussion should be between the beliefs of atheism and religion (which is still not really fair, because religion shouldn't be the main issue... at least w.r.t. Christianity). Science and Religion, or Christianity specifically, have no qualms, and is a non-issue. Cpt Obvious, I would sincerely like to hear about the evidence you've found (PM me or something). | ||
Hot_Bid
Braavos36362 Posts
On April 26 2009 20:05 BackHo wrote: I guess what I meant was that I graduated in 2007 with a law degree and am now working full time as a solicitor, so it would seem silly to quit my job just so I can pay to do some courses to satisfy my desire for intellectual debate. where did you go to school? | ||
PH
United States6173 Posts
On April 25 2009 09:38 IdrA wrote: i dont think anyone thinks atheism requires open mindedness, actually its religion thats asking you to accept things. atheism/agnosticism requires only rationality, which does indeed make it objectively superior when it comes to a logical discussion on the topic. Logic hasn't even been proven to have a logical/rational basis, which I think is the biggest flaw in that argument. However, beyond that, even arguing for an atheist standpoint from a logical basis requires circular reasoning of some kind that no one but an atheist would accept. The same goes for him accepting a Christian's point of view on the existence of God. You can construct both from a basic logical point of view, but they'll both fail in light of one another. You can't use logic and rationality, though maybe empiricism, to disprove a god. On April 25 2009 11:06 Kurosaki wrote: If you're really interested in arguments about religion, take a modern philosophy class. You'll get plausible argument about religion. Talking about it on forums isn't very informative because many people are really simple-minded when it comes to religion. Read up on those who spent their life learning and discussing what exist and what doesn't through reasoning and sense perceptions. You'll find how complex people will go through to prove their point. If you want arguments from atheists, look up David Hume and John Locke. first post =D I agree with this completely. You NEED to take university level courses to get a discussion going that isn't half baked at all. That is necessary. It is also sufficient to take an upper division course...as then the students you'll be discussing it with won't be idiots either. I'm taking an upper division/graduate Philosophy of religion course right now with a great professor...I think he's an atheist, but he used to teach at Notre Dame. The bible is one of his favorite books as well, and he loves studying religions. He's one of the most open-minded people I've met. In addition, the people in my class are all so fucking like...not dumb...it's amazing. The kind of perspective this grants is invaluable, to me, as we have a mix of all sorts of people, both religious and not. Shit, there's even a protestant pastor in the class. | ||
BackHo
New Zealand400 Posts
| ||
PH
United States6173 Posts
On April 26 2009 20:05 BackHo wrote: I guess what I meant was that I graduated in 2007 with a law degree and am now working full time as a solicitor, so it would seem silly to quit my job just so I can pay to do some courses to satisfy my desire for intellectual debate. Try contacting a university's philosophy dept and ask when they'll have religion-centered classes...then see if you can fit it into your schedule I guess? lol...yeah, it doesn't really work if you're a full-time worker, I guess. Taking one of those classes is definitely eye-opening, though. | ||
| ||