What do you believe in?

[Duo Maxwell]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by REVENGE2 [/i]
[B]Also...I don't mind Christians today, as I said. Many of my freinds ARE Christians. However, I cannot and will never forgive the Christians which caused the fall of Rome. I mean...ROME! Let's put it this way: How much can of what we have today can be traced back to the Shang, or Yamato, or Choson, or Native Americans. With all due respect to those cultures - next to ntohing, if anything. How much can be traced back to the Greeks, Hebrews, Persians, and Phoenecians? Almost everything. And who controled the Greeks, Hebrews, Persians, and Phoenecians? You've got it - Rome. Go Rome![/B][/QUOTE]

And how did Rome get contol over them? War, just like everyone else, so really you condemn the christianss who caused the fall of Rome yet you don't condemn Rome for all the blood they've spilled .. a little hypocritic don't ya think?
And wouldn't it be better if you said most of the things we have today came from the Renaissance(sp?)

[enigma]

[COLOR=blue][I]Well, as for me, I have a strong belief in Religion. I'm a Christian, but I'm not a Cathlic but a Uniting Christian. Similar to Catholic, but it has it's differences.

I usually play drums from the morning or night time services, and we don't play those old church hyms where you fall asleep, but modern Christian songs from Hillsong and some people write themselves. I like playing the fast, loud, rock style ones.

Well, that's another part of me revealed, although the Downlands crew already knew this, I think.[/COLOR][/I]

[REVENGE2]

DUO MAXWELL:

Yes, Rome got control of them through war, bloodshed, looting and pillaging, yadda yadda yadda. Of course it was like that, they weren't going to get them any other way, now were they? I suppose they could have tried to subvert, but that would have taken at least a thousand years of bribary to get the four most powerful cultures - Greeks, Carthagians (who were descended from the Phoenecians), Persians, and Hebrews - under their sway.

It's another case of 'do the ends justify the means'. The means were wrong. However, the ends got them to unite the most influential cultures in the world and bring them forth to future generations. How was knoledge of the Greeks and Company preserved durring the second Dark age? through the preists. And what language did the preists speak? Latin.

There you go.

Also, we may have to thank the Renaissance, but the people durring the Renaissance who made the advances in art and science were trying to emulate the art and science of the Romans.

Believe me - everything can be traced back to Rome. You name it, I'll trace it.

[Sara]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Shyguy [/i]
[B][size=1]Ack, I have a headache now...

-Shy[/size] [/B][/QUOTE] [SIZE=1]You were making a lot of sense till you gave up, Shy.[/SIZE]

[Mnemolth]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Defcon5 [/i]
[B]What about all the single lay people in the church? There are many of those, they too are called to remain celibate. Wouldn't you also think that if God called them to remain celibate, knowing how hard it is to do that, that he thinks highly of them? That he thinks that they are capable of it?


JAMES

That's exactly what i've been triyng to say. God does NOT hate homosexuals. He actually holds them in high regard. [/B][/QUOTE]

Okay, just stop and think for a moment. :D

The Church does not support homosexuals or their 'lifestyle'. What the Church (and by Church I'm speaking primarily of the Catholic or various strict Protestant faiths and their derivatives) is trying to do is 'save' the homosexuals. There's a little bit of hair splitting going on. The Church respects gays as people but the Church neither respects nor supports homosexual 'acts', under ANY circumstances. This is the key. Until they do so, any 'acceptance' by the Church of homosexuals rings hollow.

Now I think somewhere you mentioned that the Church also requires single people to remain celibate. This is true. Premarital sex is frowned upon. But sex between a husband and wife is accepted, and really, if you think about it, it could be no other way. Else the believers will eventually all die out.

But sex between people of the same sex is never accepted. It doesn't matter if they love one another, and are prepared to commit to each other for life (as in the institution of marriage).

There's a big, humungous, grand canyon size difference here. I hope everyone can see it. Any acts of a sexual nature by gays are considered 'sin'. Period. And are not accepted in any shape or form. Sexual acts of heterosexual couples, on the other hand, are accepted, as long as they fall within the holy bond of matrimony, ie the couple are married.

I hope that clears things up a litte. :D

Now for a few more controversial matters... ;)

The Crusades...atrocities were commited by both sides and there was more than one Crusade. In one instance, the crusaders butchered an entire town, men, women and children, and one of the reasons they did so was because they considered the people heathens and so sub-human. The Muslims were also not above barbarity. But what everyone has to remember is that it was a different time, with different rules and codes of conduct. So I would be hesitant to judge any side.

And since I'm dealing with controversial issues anyway, let me deal with one of the biggest, the never ending evolution/creationism debate.

For those in the US, there was a documentary made by PBS called 'The Monkey Trial'. Have a look at that if you can, its pretty fascinating stuff. For those in Australia there is, I think, currently a whole series on evolution on what you call the SBS. Its pretty dull though, but there's a lot of info there.

The first thing to say about evolution is that its not a fact. People will say that endlessly but it doesn't make it any more true. Evolution is a THEORY. It may be a very compelling theory, but it remains a theory nonetheless. Its not a fact and its not a Law. Its isn't like gravity. That's why, surprise surprise, its referred to as the THEORY of evolution and not the LAW of evolution.

The second thing to say about evolution is that, contrary to popular belief, evolution is not about the 'survival of the fittest' in the sense that 'fittest' means 'strongest' or 'best'. Evolution or the theory of natural selection is based upon the idea of randomness. RANDOM genetic anomalies give rise to advantages to certain groups of a species because their anomalous traits better 'fit' the environment in which they live. Its not a linear progression with human beings at its apex. If that's what you're thinking you have the concept of evolution completely wrong.

The third thing to say about evolution is that it is generally accepted, by both evolutionists and creationists, that MICRO-evolution happens. So its not disputed that if mutations occur, and those genetic anomalies are advantages to a creature in the environment that it lives then those genetic anomalies will be passed onto to more of that kind, eg longer legs, stronger arms, better eye sight, etc. Where there's disagreement is about MACRO-evolution, that is that ENTIRELY NEW species can be 'created' this way. Creationists contend that evolution may tinker WITHIN a species but it does not breed a wholly NEW species.

You also have to be careful when talking about the evolution debate. This is because it often requires some understanding of the finer points of biology. And I'm certainly not a biologist, and I doubt many of you are either. :D

With regard to Ian Plimer. He is a notable geologist but he is no biologist. And he is not exactly a 'neutral' or 'objective' source of information on the topic. The very title of his book, Telling Lies for God, should be enough to warn people where he stands on the issues. I suggest if you should read his book you should also read the works of his critics, such as the Creation Science Foundation (CSF) amongst others.

When speaking of evolution or the Big Bang its always good to remain calm and have a clear and precise understanding of what you speak. I, for one, do not know much, so when I debate this issue it is with what I know. I don't exaggerate what I know because I'm getting frustrated. That is a mistake.

Evolution is a THEORY. The Big Bang is a THEORY. None of us were there. None of us can categorically say that that is what happened. Just like none of us can say with absolute certainty the Sun will rise tomorrow.

I find it curious how people can ridicule Creationists by suggesting evolution is an incontrovertible 'fact'. It isn't. Nor is it an incontrovertible 'fact' that the earth is 4 billion years old. The latter statement probably has stronger evidence to back it up, but its still not 'fact'. Why? Because if you go through the looking glass and see it from the other point of view, you would understand God is all-powerful. If He can set the laws of nature into motion, what's to say He can't break them? That is the believers' trump card. You can't beat it. If you start sprouting about all the evidence that points to an Earth billions rather than thousands of years old, believers can always come back at you with, well God is God, he can do anything. What come back have you got to that? Nothing. Religion is about faith, its about believing. And if we are a truly tolerant society we should respect other peoples' beliefs, regardless of what we think of those beliefs.

So I think its wrong to go around bashing people who believe in the literal interpretation of the Book of Genesis. Does that mean I support Creationism? Not really.

If you are Christian, you don't need to believe in Creationism. Most mainstream Christians do not. But even if you do, I don't really have a problem with that. What I do have a problem with is when people claim that Creationism is 'science'. It is not. Science is based on certain precepts, and these do not include faith. The believers' trump card of faith has no value in science. I don't know when the Earth was created. I wasn't there. It could have been thousands of years ago or billions. Now 'science' points to billions of years, but that doesn't make it 'the truth'. Its just the conclusion that is arrived at if one follows the precepts of the scientific method.

I don't have a problem with Creationism per se. Its fine when its taught in Sunday school, or discussed in Bible Studies. Its a matter of faith and religion, and frankly, who am I to question what you believe in?

But if you want to take Creationism into a science classroom, then that's not something I, or many others, can tolerate. For the simple fact its not science and it does not belong there. Just like science teachers or students shouldn't go around condemning religions and ridiculing them, and telling kids how science has 'proven' that their religion is 'false'.

I believe its wrong for science to meddle in the affairs of religion (something many scientists have been quilty of). Equally I believe its wrong for religion to intrude into the affairs of science. The two are separate and should not be competing against each other.

To the scientists I would say this, science is NOT a religion, so don't act like its one. To the Creationists I would say this, Creationism is NOT science, so don't pretend it is.

[Imp]

But you know what? As far as I believe, your own religion is the best kind because it fits you the most. But if you're not really creative, you might have to take whatever religions there are... Well, I have a religion of my own, and I call it Neonism. I can't tell you very much about it, though...

[color=deeppink][spoiler]I believe in everybody! Everybody from God to Allah, and others too! But mainly, my religion consists of the goddess Zulia (heh I named a Digimon after her), her daughter (Seana) and her son (Patea), and their three daughters: Lutria, Biora, and Nautica.[/spoiler]OK, well, maybe I did...[/color]

[Defcon5]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Mnemolth [/i]
[B] Sexual acts of heterosexual couples, on the other hand, are accepted, as long as they fall within the holy bond of matrimony, ie the couple are married. [/B][/QUOTE]

And the reason for them having sex is to concieve a child. Other wise they are not supposed to have sex. Since homosexual acts could never create a child they are considered a sin.

[Mnemolth]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Defcon5 [/i]
[B]And the reason for them having sex is to concieve a child. Other wise they are not supposed to have sex. Since homosexual acts could never create a child they are considered a sin. [/B][/QUOTE]

Somehow I thought you might say something like that. :D

Don't you see that when you set up a system that is prejudicial against a group of human beings, YOU are prejudiced against that group of human beings?

*glances at ShyGuy*

Now I've got a headache...

[Red]

[b][color=003399]My view on Homosexuality and religion is this. If God gave us a choice, why can't people choose their own sexuality without it being a sin in God's book? If it's 'bad', then it's God's fault for letting us choose in the first place.

Of course, people may argue and say that there are saints and sinners in this world, and that homosexuals fall into the latter category (although I highly disagree with this viewpoint, I'm just weighing up the argument), but there have been homosexual priests.. does this mean they are sinners too?[/b][/color]

[Defcon5]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Mnemolth [/i]
[B]Somehow I thought you might say something like that. :D

Don't you see that when you set up a system that is prejudicial against a group of human beings, YOU are prejudiced against that group of human beings?

*glances at ShyGuy*

Now I've got a headache... [/B][/QUOTE]

I'm not exactly sure what you mean by that. But I have nothing against homosexuals (If that's what you meant).

ELITE

It's not a sin to be gay. And you don't choose, your born that way, and if you happen to be homosexual then I believe that God has a special plan for you. I really just want to get that out that it is not a sin to be gay.

[REVENGE2]

[quote]Origonaly posted by elite:
My view on Homosexuality and religion is this. If God gave us a choice, why can't people choose their own sexuality without it being a sin in God's book? If it's 'bad', then it's God's fault for letting us choose in the first place.[/quote]

Exactly.

It's like with the Apple Tree thing. God puts the tree containing all evil smack dab in the middle of Eden, points at it, and says "Don't touch". Did he REALLY think that simply saying 'don't touch' was going to keep them away? I think he put it in Eden and let humans possibly get to all evil instead of putting it in Heaven because he was worried about a Seraph taking a bite from the apple. I mean, look at all the hell caused simply by Lucifer, who was an Arch Angel. That's five ranks bellow a Seraphim! If God had NOT wanted all of humanity to be exposed to evil, then he would never have put the tree in Eden in the first place.

[quote]Of course, people may argue and say that there are saints and sinners in this world, and that homosexuals fall into the latter category (although I highly disagree with this viewpoint, I'm just weighing up the argument), but there have been homosexual priests.. does this mean they are sinners too?[/quote]

Of course it does. They have "Sinned" *coughhowcouldfindingyourtruelovebeasin?cough*.

Yeah, right. Look at the Apple Tree thing above.

Plus, religions (and science, too) contridicts itself in too many places for it to be credible.

"Thou Shalt Not Kill"

"Suffer Not a Witch to Live"

and

"The Q'ran preaces peace"

"A Jyhad may be called to defend Islam"

Are two of my most favorites.

[Shy]

[size=1]ok, I'm going to try this again.[/size]
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Defcon5, headache And the reason for them having sex is to concieve a child. Other wise they are not supposed to have sex. Since homosexual acts could never create a child they are considered a sin.[/QUOTE]
[size=1]I know what you are trying to say; but I doubt that more than a fraction of the general population [istraight or gay, or whatnot) has sex only in order to have children. That is why forms of birth control exist, that is why there are abortions.[/size]
[QUOTE]It's not a sin to be gay. And you don't choose, your born that way, and if you happen to be homosexual then I believe that God has a special plan for you....[/QUOTE]
[size=1]Ok, so I'm going to use your logic to question the existance of God. God made everything, so why would create homosexuals; which are supposed to be "sinners" in his view?

...and what kind of "plan" does god have for his "sinners"?

On a side note: There was an article in Time magazine about gay priests a few months ago. There are quite a few of them, according to the statistics.

-Shy[/size]

[conpiracymonki]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by REVENGE2 [/i]
[B]
"The Qu'ran preaces peace"

"A Jihad may be called to defend Islam"
[/B][/QUOTE]

[b][size=1]
And the Qur-aan does preach peace. Look at it. But it also warns. And since when is [u]defending[/u] your religion contradicting being peaceful?
I'm sorry if I don't see your [i]obvious[/i] contradiction there..

'Fighting is enjoined on you, though it is disliked by you'

Rules of Engagement in Jihad:
-When fighting an unjust enemy, no matter how unjust they are, it is forbidden by Islam that their retreating forces are mutilated, tortured or slaughtered. The treacherous violation of treaties and carrying out assassinations after a cease fire, are also prohibited.
-Killing women, children, the elderly, the sick, monks, worshipper, hired labourers, animals is forbidden. As is burning/ruining crop and vegetation; polluting/poisoning their waters; and destroying home, churches, monasteries, and synagogues.

I'm sorry, Revenge2, but I can't see how those two points actually contradict each other. Try again. :whoops: [/b]

Methinks you should study Islam a bit more indepth[/size]

[Sui Generis]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Valen [/i]
[B]Lmao! Too true...

But I'm Wiccan, yes, that [i]is[/i] a religion for some of you who don't know... [/B][/QUOTE]

Wow more people like me! Yay!

Yeah anyways I'm Wiccan....like he said it IS a religion...

Anyways....yeah I think I'm on the same bus Piro maybe we'll get a suite down in hell!




By the way what AJeh said is true. Defending a religion is not contradiction their teachings. Besides religion is how you interpret what you have. Everyone has their own slightly different beliefs. When they say peace I think they are against un-just killing or hurting. But if someone attacks you I'm pretty sure its ok to fight back.

[Saiya-jinro]

I am a Christian. And also, Lucifer is of the highest order of angels. Perhaps a step above. Lucifer was made too be perfect.

[conpiracymonki]

[b][size=1]
We believe he was never an angel ^_^

We believe that he was highly ranked among the Jinn, and above all the other angels. But he had a problem with pride, and yeah, you all know the rest.[/b][/size]

[Deedlit]

[color=009966]I'm a Christian, but more specifically, I'm Mormon. Yes, Mormons ARE Christian. ^_- That's why our church is called The Church of [b]Jesus Christ[/b] of Latter Day Saints. Some of what needs to be said has already been said by my sisters Anna and Amibasuki and my sister-for-the-weekend-and-other-random-times-of-the-week, Queen Asuka, but one thing they didn't talk about was the Thirteen Articles of Faith. This almost sums it up, so I thought I should post it.

~*~
1 WE believe in God, the Eternal Father, and in His Son, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost.

2 We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam?s transgression.

3 We believe that through the Atonement of Christ, all mankind may be saved, by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel.

4 We believe that the first principles and ordinances of the Gospel are: first, Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ; second, Repentance; third, Baptism by immersion for the remission of sins; fourth, Laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost.

5 We believe that a man must be called of God, by prophecy, and by the laying on of hands by those who are in authority, to preach the Gospel and administer in the ordinances thereof.

6 We believe in the same organization that existed in the Primitive Church, namely, apostles, prophets, pastors, teachers, evangelists, and so forth.

7 We believe in the gift of tongues, prophecy, revelation, visions, healing, interpretation of tongues, and so forth.

8 We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God.

9 We believe all that God has revealed, all that He does now reveal, and we believe that He will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God.

10 We believe in the literal gathering of Israel and in the restoration of the Ten Tribes; that Zion (the New Jerusalem) will be built upon the American continent; that Christ will reign personally upon the earth; and, that the earth will be renewed and receive its paradisiacal glory.

11 We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.

12 We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.

13 We believe in being honest, true, chaste, benevolent, virtuous, and in doing good to all men; indeed, we may say that we follow the admonition of Paul?We believe all things, we hope all things, we have endured many things, and hope to be able to endure all things. If there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy, we seek after these things.
~*~[/color]

[SuruBlu]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Shyguy [/i]
[B]
[size=1]Eh, if I had a nickel for every time me and Adolf Hitler were put in the same paragraph...[/size][/B][/QUOTE]

I don't suppose I'll ever live that down will I? :(


[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by REVENGE2[/i][B]It's like with the Apple Tree thing. God puts the tree containing all evil smack dab in the middle of Eden, points at it, and says "Don't touch". Did he REALLY think that simply saying 'don't touch' was going to keep them away? I think he put it in Eden and let humans possibly get to all evil instead of putting it in Heaven because he was worried about a Seraph taking a bite from the apple. I mean, look at all the hell caused simply by Lucifer, who was an Arch Angel. That's five ranks bellow a Seraphim! If God had NOT wanted all of humanity to be exposed to evil, then he would never have put the tree in Eden in the first place.[/B][/QUOTE]

First of all it wasn't an apple tree, and it didn't contain all evil, it was the tree of knowledge. Lucifer had already become "evil" at this point, and when he lied to Eve telling her that the fruit would make her like God it challeged God's word. The tree was a test, plain and simple. Adam and Eve failed that test, but also by doing what he did Satan raised the question "can humans (and angels) live without God's guidance?" Also Seraphs don't need food so they wouldn't have eaten in the first place. I also take it that you're Catholic, since you refered to Lucifer as an Arch Angel, of which there is only one who is above all the others, Michael (unless your Catholic, then there are fifty). Arch means chief by the way, and Lucifer means daystar, and is also not an evil name especially since it no longer belongs to Satan.
I also offer this example, as a child your parents tell you not to touch the stove, but you go ahead an touch the stove. Well guess what, its hot, and you burn your hand leaving a scar. You didn't listen to what your parents said and so you paid for it, but it turns out you would have been right to do what your parents said and "not touch".



P.S. I'm a Jehovah's Witness <- also Christians like Mormons

[Defcon5]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Shyguy [/i]
[B][size=1]ok, I'm going to try this again.[/size]

[size=1]I know what you are trying to say; but I doubt that more than a fraction of the general population [istraight or gay, or whatnot) has sex only in order to have children. That is why forms of birth control exist, that is why there are abortions.[/size]


[size=1]Ok, so I'm going to use your logic to question the existance of God. God made everything, so why would create homosexuals; which are supposed to be "sinners" in his view?

...and what kind of "plan" does god have for his "sinners"?

On a side note: There was an article in Time magazine about gay priests a few months ago. There are quite a few of them, according to the statistics.

-Shy[/size] [/B][/QUOTE]

Yes so really homosexulas are not sinning anymore than a hetrosexual couple. People just tend to make a much bigger deal when homosexuals do it. They shouldn't because it's the exact same sin

This is kind of getting frustrating because i've said it so many times before. Being homosexual is not a sin, so God does not consider homosexuals to be any worse sinners then heterosexual people. It's just the act of having sex without the intent of having a baby. Which heterosexual people are also (very) guilty of. His plan would be for them to serve in the single ministry, or be a priest,brother,sister(see below).

Well last time I checked I don't think there was anything wrong with being a homosexual priest, or being homosexual in any other ministry. Could be wrong but i'm pretty sure of that.

I know alot of people tend to say that homosexuals are sinners just because of who they are and that God thinks of them as sinners. But they are dead wrong. So please stop saying that it is a sin to be a homosexual and that God see's them a sinners because it's totaly not true. (just wanted to say it again for clarification)

[Sara]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by SuruBlu [/i]
[B]I don't suppose I'll ever live that down will I? :([/b][/quote]
[SIZE=1]Oh, he gets that all the time.

[b]...and what kind of "plan" does god have for his "sinners"?
[/b]

Right now, you're making a difference in someone's life.

Glory. You go by the Bible, and every single freakin' person that's ever lived is a sinner. And it sure would have changed the course of history about twenty million times over if huge numbers of those people didn't believe God had a plan for them. [/SIZE]