Need help

[JOEVIKING]

I need help debating this Gay poster on another board.

How would you reply to:

I would like to hear from you a single reasonable argument --from an ethical perspective-- which supports your position that homosexuality is morally wrong. But don't waste your time--there IS simply no such rational argument. All there is, is a patchwork-quilt of glossed-over translations of 2000-year-old religious propaganda to which you apparently subscribe, and most other people in the world do not.

and

Moreover, let me pose a theological question to you: If God is in fact loving and all powerful, then why does he allow innocent people to suffer? The position of Fred Phelps (and I presume your position as well) is that if someone suffers, then they must have done something to deserve it, and therefor anyone who suffers should be attacked by the church for their transgressions.

I submit that, if God even exists, then God is NOT all-powerful--that is, powerless to prevent suffering; or that God is not loving, in that he could protect the innocent from suffering, but just doesn't care. Either way, God falls short of being worthy of worship.


Can anyone help?


Oh, and if this is in the wrong forum, just move it to right one.

[2thePoint]

One good resource is at This Link (http://www.leaderu.com/jhs/dallas.html). It's a rebuttal to pro-gay theology written by a former gay activist. I'd also direct your opponent to This Link (http://www.fether.net/2002/01/01/2002-01-01-critique-of-when-bad-things-happen-to-good-people/), which is Norman Geisler's rebuttal to the "bad God" argument.

Anyone who says "if someone suffers, then they must have done something to deserve it" has never read the book of Job, or has any concept of sin. And anyone who refers to the Bible as "a patchwork-quilt of glossed-over translations of 2000-year-old religious propaganda" is just plain ignorant.

Clearly your opponent is just a Christophobic hatemonger who has no intention of actually listening to you. His attitude proves only that he is a hypocrite, because he thinks it's okay to hate Christians but Christians can't say anything is immoral.

[Beowulf]

I'll answer the 2nd question first:
Moreover, let me pose a theological question to you: If God is in fact loving and all powerful, then why does he allow innocent people to suffer? The position of Fred Phelps (and I presume your position as well) is that if someone suffers, then they must have done something to deserve it, and therefor anyone who suffers should be attacked by the church for their transgressions.

I submit that, if God even exists, then God is NOT all-powerful--that is, powerless to prevent suffering; or that God is not loving, in that he could protect the innocent from suffering, but just doesn't care. Either way, God falls short of being worthy of worship.

God at one point had handed the Earth to Lucifer BEFORE he became evil. God vowed not to interfere with mankind after that and has stuck to his word. In scripture, the Great Flood was used to cleanse the Earth of evil. God vowed never to do such a thing again. People could learn from his example of keeping their word when given. Sadly, all too many do not.

[ThomasMore]

Joe, my church just printed something on this very subject, which tackles it in a way which will surprise both homosexuals and many posters to this board.

When I began to read it, I began to get my back up, but as I continued into the article, I realized that it was COMPLETELY scriptural. It was also unintimidating to homosexuals, but faithful to the scriptures that address homosexuality.

I will contact the church tomorrow (later today) and see if I can get permission to transcribe it in its entirety.

[ThomasMore]

--- Edited: original post is below the dotted line ---

Looking at the poster's comments more closely, it sounds like the man is ranting and throwing everything up against the wall at once. It is nearly impossible to discuss a subject with someone who throws off 20 unrelated, inaccurate things at once. I see that he is personally attacking you by lumping you in with Fred Phelps, and that he has no compunction about attacking your faith with falsehoods about what Christianity stands for -- he also said "don't bother (arguing your case)." There probably isn't much you can discuss with him -- he is too filled with blind, bigoted self-righteous hatred.

If you do want to discuss the subject with him, you have to slow him down and tackle the topics one at a time.

Otherwise, talking with him will be like trying to hold a greased pig -- he will keep changing subjects and coming out with new attacks as soon as you try to answer one.

My original post was probably not very helpful, but I leave it below, on the outside chance that it is.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In the meantime, here are some thoughts, all scripturally supported by the Bible:

1. God is -- He exists.

2. He created everything -- all existence. And He created us, for us to be with Him and to love and be loved by Him.

3. He did not create us as robots, without free will. A robot or a computer can be programmed to say "I love you." But it doesn't mean anything. Only when someone is given the choice to love or to withhold that love, does that love have meaning. God gave us the choice.

4. God loves us and wants us to talk with Him. When we do, He always hears our prayers. We have to listen closely to hear His voice. Sometimes we don't hear anything back, sometimes we have to wait a lot longer than we want for an answer, and sometimes the answer is not what we wanted to hear. But God does hear our prayers and sooner or later, He answers them.

5. God does not want us to remain infants -- growing up means growing pains. Different people face different growing pains, but our labors and our skinned knees shape us and give us character. The same is true with spiritual growth.

6. When we follow God's wishes for us (and everyone fits in differently), we are in accord with His creation. That doesn't mean that life will be easy, but it means that we are moving in tune with the universe. When we choose to go our own way, we presume that we can manage things better than the creator of Everything. As a result, we work against the universe -- the result simply can't be good in the long run.

and

7. All of us have temptations in our life. God does not tempt us. Sometimes our own past behaviors set us up for temptation, sometimes the brokenness of this world (and each of us breaks the world) sets up those temptations.

If your colleague is sincere about inquiring about God, and not simply railing against his preconceptions of God, he can go straight to the source and ask Him.

If he simply prays to God, sincerely, "Show me if You are real, and if you are, show me what You want me to do about You," he WILL get an answer. If he is willing to wait for a still, small voice answering him -- and if he can be patient for it, he will get his answer -- from the God who loves him and wants good things for him. That I can promise.

---

Finally, Jesus demonstrated his love for ALL us sinners. Christianity is about God's love for every one of us.

Christians often fall down and say and do things that drive people away from Christ -- the Christians both make mistakes and fall into evils, as do all people. Just because we represent Christ imperfectly, does not mean that God and Jesus do not love your friend and want to see Him in Heaven with them.

[Timberwolf]

My answers are how I'd answer the guy to whom you refer, not you Joe. I would like to hear from you a single reasonable argument --from an ethical perspective-- which supports your position that homosexuality is morally wrong. But don't waste your time--there IS simply no such rational argument. All there is, is a patchwork-quilt of glossed-over translations of 2000-year-old religious propaganda to which you apparently subscribe, and most other people in the world do not.
No ethics, just medical science. The rectum is a ONE WAY street. Queer sex is DISASTROUS to the human body and *I* don't want to have to pay for YOUR "choices"...just as YOU shouldn't have to pay for the consequences of anyone else's choice to smoke. But, just for fun, how ethical is it to destroy the institution of marriage by compromising said with promiscuous sex practices (straight and queer)? Sex is for married people...and for a reason which you wouldn't understand if I explained them to you.

Furthermore, queer sex violates nature. EVERY species that reproduce sexually have male and female...and for a reason.

Moreover, let me pose a theological question to you: If God is in fact loving and all powerful, then why does he allow innocent people to suffer? The position of Fred Phelps (and I presume your position as well) is that if someone suffers, then they must have done something to deserve it, and therefor anyone who suffers should be attacked by the church for their transgressions.
Going to FP's "church" makes one a Christian as much as going to Mickey D's makes one a cheeseburger. Now that we're done dispensing with that VERY lame argument, let's continue.

WHO is innocent? Not me...not you...not anyone able to make a rational decision on the face of the planet. Did you ever stop to think that we ALL deserve the consequences of our sinful nature, but God (in His infinite MERCY) allows good things to happen to us?

Besides, the evil in this world wasn't created by God. The original "fall" is what brought sin into the world. EVIL is the result of hundreds of generations of humanity rejecting God and becoming more and more depraved.

I submit that, if God even exists, then God is NOT all-powerful--that is, powerless to prevent suffering; or that God is not loving, in that he could protect the innocent from suffering, but just doesn't care. Either way, God falls short of being worthy of worship.
I submit that you are speaking of things you clearly do not understand. LOOK at what you posted you arrogant ass! Who died and made YOU God? The Almighty doesn't answer to you, but you most certainly will answer to Him...in this world or in the next. Take your pick, but choose wisely. Suffering was brought into this world through the choice(s) mankind has made with the FREE WILL God gave humanity. God does NOT want robotic automatons. He wants us to CHOOSE to worship Him and has spelled out clear rewards for doing so and clear consequences for defying His will. But, the CHOICE is always OURS to make.


Anyway, Joe...that's how I'd answer him. He comes across just every other clueless queer atheist I've ever run into. Feel free to edit the above to suit yourself, if you can use any of it.

[Wolfcounsel]

Homos cannot engage in coitus, so two homos getting married is like two guppies getting together to fight a shark. God gave us freedom. All bad things come from the devil and man (and woman), and sometimes man helps the devil inadverently or on purpose to bring evil about.

[DesertFox]

Somebody gonna have to define "moral" and "ethical" for this argument to go on and still make any sense.

Is it moral for 17-year-olds to engage in sex? Is it ethical for a boy who turned 18 today, to have sex today with the 17-year-old girlfriend with whom he also had sex last night when he was 17? Would it be ethical for him to have sex with her before midnight but not ethical at one minute past midnight? How about if he marries her? Is it then ethical and moral for them to copulate despite their ages?

This all demonstrates the need of a society, ANY society, to have a single set of moral precepts recognized by everyone, even if they don't agree with all those precepts.

[Wolfcounsel]

"Is it ethical for a boy who turned 18 today, to have sex today with the 17-year-old girlfriend with whom he also had sex last night when he was 17? Would it be ethical for him to have sex with her before midnight but not ethical at one minute past midnight?" --DesertFox

How about if they are in different time zones? How about if they eat a sandwich and some piece of it is stuck in the tee--no, wait. That's from GREMLINS.

[d'urville]

Moral relativism never works.

Clearly your opponent is just a Christophobic hatemonger who has no intention of actually listening to you. His attitude proves only that he is a hypocrite, because he thinks it's okay to hate Christians but Christians can't say anything is immoral.

Good resources, but I think Joe is wasting his time on this screaming queen:

http://www.topix.com/member/profile/scottymatic

Hmmm...even money that he's HIV + as well, but be careful here...his IQ is in the top one percent of the population!:rolleyes: