 |
|
|
|
 Don Lemon with his grandmother on his third birthday.
May 22nd, 2011
01:00 AM ET
My Faith: How I learned to stop 'praying away the gay'Editor's Note: Don Lemon is a CNN anchor and author of Transparent, a memoir . By Don Lemon, CNN "School day, time to get up, sleepy head. School day." Although she's been gone since 1998, my grandmother's words ring in my head just about every morning of my life. That's how MaMe, as I called her, got me out of bed and off to my Catholic school when I was growing up and in her care. But before I shuffled my way to the bathroom to begin my morning routine, I had to hit the floor on my knees to pray, just as I had the night before. It was usually The Lord's Prayer ("Our Father who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name...") followed by asking God to watch and guide me through my day until I returned to the safety of my home that evening. But MaMe (pronounced MAH-me) didn't know that at a very early age her favorite grandson had begun to pray, silently, that God would change him from being different, from having crushes on boys, from being more curious about boys than girls. By age four or five, I was too young to sexualize my infatuations but I knew that everyone else, including my family and friends, would think it was wrong. Perhaps it was the conversations I overheard from adults around my hometown of Port Allen, Louisiana, who'd mimic gay people, calling them "funny" or "sissy" or "fagots." Perhaps it was Sunday mornings at our Baptist church, where preachers taught that liking someone of the same sex was a direct and swift path to hell. And that if that person would just turn to the Lord and confess his sin, then God would change him back into the person He wanted him to be - a person who only had crushes on the opposite sex. All of which meant that, from a very early age, I began to think I was dirty and that I was going to hell. Can you imagine what that feels like for a kid who was just learning to read and perform basic arithmetic? It was awful. And talk about guilt - I was a Baptist attending Catholic school! I prayed the silent prayer for God to change me every chance I got until I started attending college in New York. That's when common sense began to take hold and I realized that no amount of prayer would change me into something that wasn't natural to me. With my religious upbringing, I'd had the opportunity to study religious doctrine. But I learned from different perspectives, from Catholic Mass on Fridays to Baptist services on Sundays to vacation Bible school in the summer to Bible study with a Jehovah's Witness as a teenager. As I got older I began to realize that all these people and institutions interpreted the Bible somewhat differently. I had a sort of epiphany: the Bible was about the lessons you learned, not about the events or words. When I became old enough, intelligent enough and logical enough to discern the difference between metaphor and reality, everything changed. I realized that Jonah living in the belly of a whale was a parable written in the same vein as Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. saying that he had "been to the mountaintop." Neither Jonah nor King had actually been to those places. They were metaphors for lessons for those of us who cared to absorb them. So many of us, especially in the black community and in churches, tend to think that religious teachings happened word for word as they were written in Scripture. I think that's naïve, even dangerous. That type of thinking - or non-thinking - keeps many religious people enslaved to beliefs that they haven't truly stepped back from and examined. That type of thinking causes people who are otherwise good to shun and ostracize young gay people. It causes people to want to control and change people who aren't like them. And who wants to be like someone else? Imagine if we had allowed Christian doctrines and teachings that supported slavery, segregation and the subjugation of women to pervade our society all the way up until the current moment. What kind of world would that be? Instead, we got on our knees, just as I did as a little boy, and prayed that slavery, segregation and the subjugation of women would end. In the United States, at least, those prayers have largely been realized. I'm no longer the member of any church but I do believe in a higher power. It's time for us, especially black people, to stop trying to pray the gay away and to get on our knees and start praying that the discrimination of gay people ends. What we're doing to our young gay people now is child abuse. It's plain old bigotry and hatred. And if African-Americans don't know what that feels like in America, I don't know who does. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Don Lemon. soundoff (4,733 Responses)« Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 Next »
« Previous entryIt's NOT the end of the world as we know it
|
  About this blog
The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.  |
|
|
|
Info
FOR THE RECORD. I DON'T HAVE TO COPY AND PASTE SCRIPTURES – LIKE DAVID SAID IN THE BOOK OF PSALMS. "THY WORD HAVE I HID IN MY HEART THAT I MIGHT NOT SIN AGAINST THEE". I WAS BORN AND RAISED STUDYING THE WORD OF GOD. THIS IS NOT FAKE, I DON'T HAVE A RELIGION, AND I AM ROOTED AND GROUNDED IN THE WORD OF GOD.
That's great and all but you failed prove anything you've said or that we are mistaken (though I must admit that "then you are a penguin" comment is still making me laugh, I had to show that to my Christian friends) and I like how you pick out how you do not copy and past to complain about instead of the issues and questions you were asked.
"AND I AM ROOTED AND GROUNDED IN THE WORD OF GOD"
Please don't say that, the Bible and the word of God is against you, Woman have an inferior status in the bible, many scriptures tell you to be silent and submissive (also not allowing you to come on here and speak your mind, no point and looking up scriptures in my bible since you already know them all and your deeply rooted in the word of god) nor are allowed to take up leadership roles (as in teaching as you say you do)
yet if you're allowed to ignore those scriptures that take away your personal rights and freedoms yet willfully enforce other scriptures that take away rights and freedoms (such as how your against gay) of others and accusing them of sin (as you have been doing all this time) what does that make you? Why are you allowed to pick and choose what to follow and what not too? Then say your "deeply rooted in the word of God"?
Love the sinner hate the sin isn't in the bible, people like you use that to justify taking away rights and freedoms to people you believe sin yet in Matthew 18:23-35 Christ tells of a slave who was forgiven of his debts (just like Christians are forgiven of their sins) However this slave refuses to forgive the debt of a fellow slave (Just as Christ ask us to forgive our fellow sinner) Christ calls that slave "evil".
If you are Christian you must absolutely forgive the sins of any other sinner, even being gay. Otherwise your condemning yourself and going against God's word, you are deeply rooted in Gods word correct?
According to your faith it's a sin for a man to lay with another man yet you are to forgive the sin as Jesus forgave the sins in you, after all Jesus is an all forgiving and loving deity, wouldn't he simply forgive anyone (even those who are gay) who simply believe in him (john 3:16) as you do? That's what a all loving and forgiving deity does. If he condemns just for being gay and denies heaven to that person, then how does that make him all loving and forgiving?
I will ask you again.
Why do you have the remnants of a tail bone (when our ancentors had tails), goosebumps (when our ancestors had more hair), a A third eyelid (Or the remains of one, anyway. Look at the little pink bit in the corner of your eye, next to your nose.), wisdom teeth (when we ate more greens), internal organs we no longer use (the Appendix, to digest those greens) if we didn't evolve from a common ancestor? Where in the bible does it tell you why we still have these items leftover in our bodies?
@Info
I cannot speak for Geraldine, but the NT, while still acknowledging cultural norms of it's day, does not promote women to have an inferior status in comparison to men. Some of the Disciples make strong statements in the regards that women should not be "leaders", but that is not intended to be a slam against women. Rather, our modern culture perceives that being a leader is of more significance than being a nurturer and a person actively involved in the rearing of children. This was not always the perception. If given the choice of being a world leader, or being the spiritual leader of my family, I happily choose the latter.
"If you are Christian you must absolutely forgive the sins of any other sinner, even being gay."
-----
I don't buy that being gay is a sin. The Bible says clearly that it is the *act* of ho-mose-xuality...not having an attraction to the same gender.
"Why do you have the remnants of a tail bone (when our ancentors had tails), goosebumps (when our ancestors had more hair), a A third eyelid (Or the remains of one, anyway. Look at the little pink bit in the corner of your eye, next to your nose.), wisdom teeth (when we ate more greens), internal organs we no longer use (the Appendix, to digest those greens) if we didn't evolve from a common ancestor? Where in the bible does it tell you why we still have these items leftover in our bodies?"
-----------–
1) It is an as-sumption that it is the remnants of a tail bone because it cannot be proven that we ever had a tailbone.
2) Goosebumps. Simple, it is a response to cold: in (mammals) covered with fur or hair, the erect hairs trap air to create a layer of insulation. God was pretty smart when he created us and animals in this fashion.
3) Third eyelid. I as-sume you are refering to the plica semilunaris..?? This is hypothesized to be the nicti-tating membrane for ho-mo sapiens. However, this cannot be confirmed due to the lack of available evidence.
**** As clarification, the world "evolved" used below is used ignorantly. This is actually mutation, as no increase in genetic information was displayed spontaneously.****
4) Wisdom teeth: "Wisdom teeth are vestigial third molars that human ancestors used to help in grinding down plant tissue. The common postulation is that the skulls of human ancestors had larger jaws with more teeth, which were possibly used to help chew down foliage to compensate for a lack of ability to efficiently digest the cellulose that makes up a plant cell wall. As human diets changed, smaller jaws gradually evolved, yet the third molars, or "wisdom teeth", still commonly develop in human mouths." (Johnson, Dr. George B. "Evidence for Evolution". (Page 12) Txtwriter Inc. 8 Jun 2006.).
I'll just sum up the remainder of your post: you claim that evolution is the reason for the vestigal organs/portions of the human body. The term "Evolution" actually refers to an increase in genetic information. Instead, the word "mutation" should be used, as this is either a) a lateral shift in genetic information, or b) a loss of genetic information. It is relevant here to take note that the overwhelming majority of *observed* mutations are not changes that result in improving the hereditary information of a species.
If we take the stance that all life began imperfect and is increasing towards perfection (albeit slowly) – this is the stance of Evolutionists – then why do we still have mutations occurring naturally in every living things on Earth? If we take the stance that all life is proceeding from perfection towards imperfection (introduced to man through sin) – this is the stance of Creationists – then we would likely see that all living things would being experiencing breakdowns at many levels...which would result in the genetic issues we see on almost a daily basis. There are some changes/mutations that are beneficial to the individual, but not the majority.
@Jeff M
Hello there and thanks for replying! I reread my comment and it wasn't exactly detailed but rather written hastily, I apologize for that. Okay on to the comment!
Whether it be NT, OT, KJV, ect. it's all the infallible word of God or written by men guided by the infallible holy spirit (God) and it is what it is and woman have an inferior status.
"Sin began with a woman and thanks to her we all must die" Ecclesiasticus, 25:19
"Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says."
-1 Corinthians 14:34
"A woman should learn in quietness and full submission."
-1 Timothy 2:11
Calvin described women as
"... more guilty than the man, because she was seduced by Satan, and so diverted her husband from obedience to God that she was an instrument of death leading all to perdition. It is necessary that woman recognize this, and that she learn to what she is subjected; and not only against her husband. This is reason enough why today she is placed below and that she bears within her ignominy and shame."
Your God doesn't think much of women and to say "God does not promote women to have an inferior status in comparison to men" those scriptures should have never been in the bible or in any other version of the bible.
"I don't buy that being gay is a sin. The Bible says clearly that it is the *act* of ho-mose-xuality...not having an attraction to the same gender."
Lev.20:13 If a man lie with mandkind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death: their blood shall be upon them.
I agree with you, I don't buy that being gay is a sin either and the act is consider sin, I also know that being gay isn't a choice and that it is proven to be genetic. Something we are born to be, it is natural and the act happens commonly in animals in the wild.
Yet why would any loving God make his children suffer so, to be born this way, born with this attraction yet never allowed to be able to act on it? In fear of condemnation or being called an abomination by family or other people, an all knowing God who creates his children this way knowing full well what awaits them in our society is discrimination, hate, loneliness, isolation, and injustice and the only way to 'salvation' is to deny their very selves as they were created and instead, live a lie? Is that something an all loving and forgiving God would do?
I asked Geraldine this and she ignored it.
Why is it okay to pick and choose what to follow and what to ignore as the word in God? The Old Testament Book of Leviticus, we're told it is wrong for a man to be with another man, In the very next chapter we are told to stone to death are disobedient children. Why is okay to condemn people for who they are but ignore other words of God that affect you? We can ignore stoning to death our kids who misbehave yet enforce that the act of ho-mose-xuality as wrong and sin taking way rights and freedoms and to condemn others so willfully. Picking and choosing what to follow as the word of God.
sorry for the long reply I'll post the 2nd part after this one
@Jeff M
1) It is an as-sumption that it is the remnants of a tail bone because it cannot be proven that we ever had a tailbone.
You are correct, it is a as-sumption, what we know is that the tail bone, or co-ccyx is a very small tail-like bone. When we're children it is made up of about five bones and extension to the vertebrae. As we grow the bones fuse. There is on rare occasions a condition known as evolutionary throwback. Since the genes for a tail are still with us. Just not common so they are very recessive. Some babies are born with the co-ccyx sticking outward forming a very small, very irregular tail. It is normally cut off at birth. Other known cases of evolutionary throwback include the disease that covers the body in hair Hypertrichosis.
2) Goosebumps. Simple, it is a response to cold: in (mammals) covered with fur or hair, the erect hairs trap air to create a layer of insulation. God was pretty smart when he created us and animals in this fashion.
Correct again! Goosebumps are caused by the tiny muscles at the base of are hair follicles contracting, causing our hair to stand on end and covering our skin with tiny bumps, animals covered with fur or hair as you said the erect hairs trap air to create a layer of insulation. Also if the animal is scared, its hair stands on end to appear bigger to scare away the predator.
Which is great for the animals but for us There is really no reason to have this reaction anymore as it's of no use to us. But it was useful to our ancestors who were a lot hairier (evolutionary throwback Hypertrichosis?). Now that we are lacking in the hair department, we can't use either of these features to our advantage. These days, it's just an easy way to tell if someone's cold, scared or se-x-ually aroused. In biblical creation time we are never talked about having hair all over our bodies so why would we need goosebumps to keep warm or used for defense
3) Third eyelid. I as-sume you are refering to the plica semilunaris..?? This is hypothesized to be the nicti-tating membrane for ho-mo sapiens. However, this cannot be confirmed due to the lack of available evidence.
Correct, it is as-sumption. The nicti-tating membrane, and it's a semi-transparent eyelid that is used by birds, reptiles, amphibians, fish and a handful of mammals. It is at least partially see-through and can be pulled across the eyeball to protect it or moisten it with a sideways wink and like you said The muscles that control them have degraded to the point where they're practically non-existent, as you said it cannot be confirmed due to the lack of available evidence.
4) Wisdom teeth/"I'll just sum up the remainder of your post: you claim that evolution is the reason for the vestigal organs/portions of the human body"
correct and and good source! Not only can you live without these features, but we live better without them. All they do is get in the way and/or get infected. (7% chance of developing an appendicitis and 85% chance of at least one impacted wisdom tooth both require surgery)
both seem to appears to be leftover equipment from an era when we used to eat a lot more leaves, Your wisdom teeth get impacted and infected because you don't have room for them, and you don't have room for them because they came about when earlier versions of humans had larger jaws as said from your source, which were more suited to chewing up plant matter. The appendix once helped in digesting all these greens. It's an extension of the cec-um, an organ that is much larger in herbivores than carnivores because it's used to break down the tremendous amount cellulose that we took in at the time. Since we no longer have a need for this extension of the cec-um, it has shrunk into a vestigial organ that looks like a worm. That's just one theory.
Evolution is happening everyday. Elephants are evolving to lose their tusks (this is happening in Asia and in Africa) and the most likely reason is cause poachers are constantly ki-ll-ing for their tusk. Their tusk are weapons and tools, and they're needed to dig for water and roots and to battle for a mate yet evolution deems poachers a bigger threat and studies have shown female elephants are choosing tusk less males over those with tusk and the percentage of tusk less males are on the rise. If being tusk less will ensure their survival then they will breed to be tusk less. fish in the Hudson river are becoming immune and evolving so all that sludge and waste no longer poisons them. There is even a fungus that lives inside the Chernobyl reactor that eats radiation, it has adapted and evolved to turn gamma radiation into food. These three evolutionary adaptions were caused by our interference with nature.
Sorry this got so off topic, After a post showing that being gay was natural and genetic. Geraldine starting asking questions that started this debate sorry about that.
@1word
"answer this if your religion is the right one. Why are Muslims looked at as Terrorists? Why is there so much Killings and suicide bombing happening to Muslims? God isn't going to let ya'll rest because you're worshipping the wrong God."
Jeeze your ignorant though am not muslim i'll answer, your fully aware that there is over 1.1. billion muslims in the world right? The 2nd largest religion in the world. Are you actually saying we have 1.1. billion terriorist? you are generalizing the acts of a 1/2% of the faith for all, that is why they are seem as terriorist. Radical extremist are found in all religion even in christian.
"I don't see Christians strapping bombs to themselves and blowing up other Christians. You might want to think long and hard about the state of the Muslim religion"
I have you heard of the Hutaree Militia? It translate to Christian Warriors. They are Christian Extremist, During an eighteen-month investigation authorities allege militia members discussed killing law enforcement personnel by first killing a single officer and then attacking the funeral with improvised explosive devices. Sound familiar?
Extremist are found in all religions but they don't equal to everyone of the faith.
these Hutaree Militia are christians like you, should we say all christians are militia terriost? No, because they make 1 or 2% of the 2.1 billion christians in the world, not all Christians are bad. Same goes for Muslims, just because 1% or 2% of the entire 1.1. billion are extremist doesn't mean they all are, there are good muslims in the world too.
you yourself have extremist tendencies, the way you put down and judge others outside your faith, disregarding that persons feelings, faith, and ideas as "nonsense" "unnatual" "wrong" your no better the extremist that you bash, they do the same thing using faith as a shield and for justifcation as do you, you said you gave your live to jesus christ but you act so very non christ like. Don't you remember his teachings?
What are you talking about? are you from earth?
@Geraldine
1word said this
"Lonezero, ALLAH? No matter what you call him if you don't believe in Jesus Christ you're worshipping the wrong GOD. This is for all the Muslims, answer this if your religion is the right one. Why are Muslims looked at as Terrorists? Why is there so much Killings and suicide bombing happening to Muslims? God isn't going to let ya'll rest because you're worshipping the wrong God. I don't see Christians strapping bombs to themselves and blowing up other Christians. You might want to think long and hard about the state of the Muslim religion."
so I said this
Jeez your ignorant though I am not Muslim, I'll answer.
Your fully aware that there is over 1.1. billion Muslims in the world right? The 2nd largest religion in the world. Are you actually saying we have 1.1. billion terrorist? You are generalizing the acts of a 1% or 2% of the faith and saying all are terrorist, that is why they are seem as terrorist to you. Radical extremist are found in all religions even in Christian.
I have you heard of the Hutaree Militia? It translate to Christian Warriors. They are Christian Extremist, During an eighteen-month investigation just last June in Michigan, authorities allege militia members discussed killing law enforcement personnel by first killing a single officer and then attacking the funeral with improvised explosive devices. Sound familiar? It should that is the work of radical extremist.
the Hutaree Militia are Christians like you and 1word. Should we say all Christians are militia terrorist? Just like the way 1word said how Muslims are terrorist? No, because they make 1% or 2% of the 2.1 billion Christians in the world, not all Christians are bad like the Hutaree. Same goes for Muslims, just because 1% or 2% of the entire 1.1. billion are extremist doesn't mean they all are, there are good Muslims in the world too.
the way you both put down and judge others outside of your faith, disregarding that persons feelings, faith, and ideas as "nonsense" "unnatural" "wrong", your no better then extremist that you bash, they do the same thing, using faith as a shield and for justification for their actions as do you, 1word said he gave his life to Jesus Christ but his actions are so very non-Christ like. Don't you remember his teachings? I would recommend to you Jefferson's bible, he removed all the supernatural and magic man mumbo jumbo elements of Jesus and kept it simple, just the teachings of Jesus, you should give it a try!
sorry for all the misspellings, I was in a hurry earlier.
TO ERIC, Q, AND INFO AND THE REST
WELL WELL YOU ALL SOUND LIKE YOU KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT WITH YOUR LITTLE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY. ALL OF YOU ARE GOOGLING INFORMATION AND TRYING TO SOUND SMART. IT SEEMS YOU LACK THE INTELLIGENCE TO UNDERSTAND YOURSELVES. YOU GUYS REALLY SOUND A LITLLE "SPECIAL" BY TRYING TO DOWN PLAY OTHERS INTELLIGENCE JUST BECAUSE YOU DONT HAVE AN ANSWER TO THOSE SIMPLE LITTLE QUESTIONS AND YOUR THEORY OF EVOLUTION CANNOT GIVE YOU ONE AND HAS LET YOU DOWN AS IT WILL CONTINUE TO DO.
why don't you prove them wrong by explaining and answering the questions they gave you instead of waving it off as just "wrong". You ignored everything they gave you without any proof other then "their wrong" prove it then, keep using blind faith as evidents it will get you no where. Copying and pasting scriptures to make it sound like you understand the bible isn't any better. It's just easier to judge and to shurg off facts with blind faith.
being gay is natural and not a choice you are born gay it is genetic. You take the Bible as the word of God correct? Well let me ask you this.
Love the sinner hate the sin isn't in the bible, people like you use that to justify taking away rights and freedoms to people you believe sin yet in Matthew 18:23-35 Christ tells of a slave who was forgiven of his debts (just like christians are forgiven of their sins)However this slave refuses to forgive the debt of a fellow slave (Just as Christ ask us to forgive our fellow sinner) Christ calls that slave "evil".
If you are Christian you must absolutely must forgive the sins of any other sinner, even being gay. Otherwise your condemning yourself claiming to love the sinner hate the sin. Multiple times I heard you do this in your comments.
Another reason not to take the bible as the word of god, inconsistent. One min it's a sin for a man to lay with another man the next you are to forgive the sin as jesus forgave the sins in you, after all jesus is an all forgiving and loving being, wouldn't he simply forgive anyone (even those who gay) who simply believe in him as you do? That's what a loving and forgiving deity does.
@Geraldine
Why do you have a tail bone (when we had tails), goosebumps (when we had more hair to raise it), a extra eyelid (that pink skin in the inner corner of your eyes), wisdom teeth (when we soley eat greens), internal organs we no longer use (to digest those greens) if we didn't evolve from a common ancestor? Where in the bible does it tell you why we still have these items in our bodies?
or was it that man was created from clay/dirt with everything already in it's place and women came from a rib of man or was it both were created from clay/dirt with everything already in it's place at the same time? That explains everything right? Just like all language came from a tower.
@Geraldine
"YOU ALL SOUND LIKE YOU KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT WITH YOUR LITTLE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY. ALL OF YOU ARE GOOGLING INFORMATION AND TRYING TO SOUND SMART."
------
No reason to be condescending. As Christians, we are responsible for giving evidence of the *hope* within us. We are also called to be Christ-like in *everything*. Resorting to condescension does not glorify God.
I've never heard about gay ape, only gay dino and it's me.
May 23, 2011 at 10:28 pm | Report abuse |
Q
@Geraldine – Your questions about why organisms are different is the question that started all of the biological studies culminating in the modern scientific Theory of Evolution. The short answer to your question regarding why plants and animals are different is a combination of the following: chance, variation, compet-tion, adaptation and divergence. Genetic replication is imperfect and introduces changes in genes (e.g. you contain at least 100+ mutations not found in either of your parents). These changes in genes produce variation in organismal behavior and/or morphology. Organisms are constantly competing for survival, access to resources and an opportunity to reproduce. Organisms whose inherent variation allows increased compet-tiveness may survive better, access more resources and reproduce more effectively to the exclusion of less compet-tive organisms. Over time, continued introduction of variation can refine these compet-tive advantages such that an organism's mode of survival, access to resources and reproduction isolate it from the original population of organisms.
The thing to remember here is that first, this isn't a conscious decision, i.e. an organism is not "willing" a particular change in its genes. The changes are essentially random. Second, organisms live in environments which are not uniform, i.e. the environments exhibit variation (e.g. temperature, humidity, sunlight, etc) and these variations can change over time. The same genetic change which benefits a particular organism in one environment may be neutral or detrimental in another environment. It also follows that a genetic change proving beneficial in a given environment at a particular time may become neutral or detrimental at a later time. Also very important here is to note that this temporal relationship can work in the opposite manner, i.e. a change which is detrimental in a given environment at a given time may somewhere down the road become neutral or even beneficial.
That's the very, very basic background. Now consider that an environment represents a series of "filters" where if an organism can pass through the filter, they gain access to survival, resources or reproduction. You might think of a filter for speed to out run a predator or a filter for teeth to chew a particular food or a filter for a behavior which increases the chances of an offspring's survival. All of these filters are operating simultaneously. But given the variation in environments, the individual filters in different regions will have different "pore sizes", e.g. a filter for "water access" is very different in a rainforest compared to a desert. The natural variation in organisms is forced through these various filters and over time, the result is organisms which appear and behave very differently.
What I've described here is natural selection and its ability to produce and refine variation is demonstrable throughout nature and in the laboratory. Suffice it to say that this is only one of the natural mechanisms known to produce biodiversity. Folks do contend that perhaps a "first cause" creator set everything up so that this system would eventually arise, however, this is pure philosophy with no empirical supporting evidence. What we can and do know is that biological evolution works, it's observable, predictable and applicable. We also know that it's been proceeding along without any apparent divine intervention since the emergence of single-celled life some 3.5 billion years ago. Where or how exactly single-celled life emerged is still an open question but there is a significant and growing body of evidence demonstrating plausible and purely natural mechanisms for pre-cell biochemical autoreplicators.
DOUBLE HOG WASH. YOU KNOW THIS IS CRAZY DON'T YOU. THIS DOES NOT ANSWER MY QUESTIONS OF HOW EVOLUTION SEPARATED MALE AND FEMALE AND THEIR DIFFERENT BODY MAKE UP FOR NEARLY EVERYLIVING THING ON THE EARTH FROM HUMAN, ANIMALS, INSECTS ETC. GET SERIOUS. DO YOU WANT TO DENY GOD THAT MUCH THAT YOU ARE WILLING TO TURN A BLIND EYE TO THE TRUTH.( CAPS ARE NOT FOR VOICE TONE-BUT HELPS ME TO FOCUS BETTER)
it's only hogwash because you lack the intellect to understand, it's much easier to read a 2000 year old book that says you were created from rib then educate yourself on how we came along. myselfand Q alredy explained it too you, you just can't accept it. you haven't answered how we still have goosebumps and remnants of a tail bone, how i've shown you being gay is genetic and natrual as we are animals and it happens in the wild in a daily basis. Us having souls and animals do not is is not a fact, since you have to prove the existence of a soul first.
Eric G
@Geraldine:
Your position is logically flawed. You state that you understand the Big Bang theory and the verified evidence that supports it, yet you deny the theory because it does not include a variable that you cannot prove exists. The theory works without this variable, yet you will only accept a theory that includes it.
You are dishonest.
Just out of curiosity, what kind of grades did you get in your science classes? Did you tell your professors that they were wrong?
HELLO ERIC, HOW IS MY POSITION LOGICALLY FLAWED. THE ONLY THING THAT YOU GAVE ME WAS SOME GIBBERISH ABOUT YOUR IDEA OF HOW THE SUN WAS "BIRTHED" YOU HAVE GIVEN NOTHING BUT EMPTY WORDS TRYING TO SOUND INTELLIGENT. NO OF IT MAKES SENSE BUT IF IT HELPS YOUR EGO. I WILL LET YOU GO WITH THAT SINCE THATS ALL YOU CAN COME UP WITH. AND YES, I DID DISAGREE WITH MY PROFESSORS AND THEY WERE JUST AS DUMBFOUNDED AS YOU BECAUSE THE BIG BANG AND EVOLUTION HAS TOO MANY FLAWS. YOU NEVER ANSWERED THE QUESTIONS ABOUT HOW EVOLUTION DISTINGUISHED BETWEEN MALE AND FEMALE, AND THE DIFFERENT RACES AND LANGUAGES. WRITE BACK
"YOU HAVE GIVEN NOTHING BUT EMPTY WORDS TRYING TO SOUND INTELLIGENT. "
So have you which is why your posts are hysterical. You can't use only the bible and say God exists, you have to have more proof than that.
I am sorry Geraldine. In my last post, I pointed out that your statements were logically flawed and gave an explaination as to why. The first words in your response were asking how your post was logically flawed.
I have explained to you again and again that you need a better understanding of Evolutionary theory. This is a blog for debate, not a place to ask childlike questions that can be answered with a trip to your local public library.
Thank you for proving your dishonesty. You are unwilling to have a civil and rational discussion about this topic.
"DUH
"You cannot be gay and a Christian."
Yes, you can and there are plenty of churches that support them. Being gay is NOT a sin."
May 24, 2011 at 3:01 pm
-REPLY–You're right being gay (having a desire to sleep with men) is not a sin, but being a practicing one is!
The churches who let you in and says it is acceptable are just ripping their favorite pages out of their bibles to create their own, human beliefs and a personal Jesus....
No, it's the fact they are smart enough to put the bible into historical context. What we now know about gays was not known in the past Plus if you actually picked up a history book you would realize that what the bible talks about is pagan rituals and prosti-tution. It's amazing in this day and age there are still ignorant people
The evil of the human societies knows no end.
The white people were better when they were racists; at least they didn't ra-pe Thai boys. The white perverts can't be taken in. The world is getting worse.
@hmmmm
One final note on this...I made an error. The primary purpose of marriage (per Christianity) is *not* procreation...but rather to prevent an individual from being overwhelmed by se-xual desire. God knows that se-x is enjoyable...He created it! He wanted us to have an "outlet" for this desire, so He gave us marraige. However, He also defined the bounds for marriage. We must abide by these boundaries if we want to abide in Him.
50% divorce rate...need i say more?
@claybigsby
50% divorce rate is amongst the general population in the US, which includes those that claim "Christianity" as their faith. However, deeper review of these studies proves that those that claim the Christian faith, the rate drops to 32%. Further review reveals those that claim Christianity as their faith *and* are actively involved in church ministries outside of the Sabbath, the rate drops to 27~28%, depending on *how* active they are.
So just being a Christian almost halves your likelihood of getting divorced...pretty significant in my book!
Jeff M
"So just being a Christian almost halves your likelihood of getting divorced...pretty significant in my book!"
But how many of those are actually happy marriages, or ones endured out of a sense of Christian duty?
@Free
"But how many of those are actually happy marriages, or ones endured out of a sense of Christian duty?"
--------
No clue...but if the study is of any indication, probably twice the amount than the marriages of those not in the Christian faith? That would be pure speculation, as I have no clue of any study performed recently that would provide us with accurate details on this.
Jeff M
Would such a study be accurate? Would people of faith answer truthfully that they are unhappy staying in a relationship only because they feel it's their duty as Christians? They may see this as complaining about some aspect of their relationship with God, and the same as a lapse in faith, right?
1. Those than toss around 1 Corinthians 6:9 as justification for bigotry need to look at different translations of the Bible (of which there are MANY).
In the original Greek, the terms used in Corinthian's list of vices that are sometimes translated as "hom-ose.xual" are 'malakoi' and 'ar.senkoitai'.
AR.SENKOTAI – Has been translated as "abusers of themselves with mankind" (KJV), "se.xual per.verts" (RSV), "sodo.mites" (NKJV, NAB, JB, NRSV), those "who are guilty of hom.ose.xual per.version" (NEB), "men who lie with males" (Lamsa), "behaves like a hom.ose.xual" (CEV), "men who have se.xual relations with other men" (NCV), and "ho.mose.xual offenders" (NIV). The New American Bible (Roman Catholic) translated ar.senokoitai as "practicing hom.ose.xuals". After much protest, the editors agreed to delete this term and replace it with "sodo.mites" in subsequent editions.
'Ar.senokoitai' referred to male prosti.tutes for Paul and Christians until the 4th century.
MALAKOI – Literally means "soft" or "males who are soft". This word has been translated as "ef.feminate" (KJV), "hom.ose.xuals" (NKJV), "corrupt" (Lamsa), "per.verts" (CEV), "catamites" which means call boys (JB), "those who are male prosti.tutes" (NCV), and "male prost.itutes." (NIV, NRSV). Until the Reformation in the 16th century and in Roman Catholicism until the 20th century, malakoi was thought to mean "mas.turb.ators." Only in the 20th century has it been understood as a reference to hom.ose.xuality.
So does God condemn gays in the New Testament?
It all depends on what translation you're reading.
@Doc
This is a great post! I love it! Yes, we must fully outline that the proclivity towards the same gender is *not* sin. I need to copy this info...good research!!!
At the same time, we need to be aware that the *act* (i.e.: se-xual intercourse) of both fornication and of ho-mose-xual intercourse *are sin*. They are both fornication, as the Christian marriage covenant is explicitly outlined in 1 Corinthians 7 as being between one man and one woman, with God.
Jeff it has to do with married life and not having s-ex outside of the marriage. At the time this scripture was written the men who wrote it did not understand about gays. As long as the gay couple is married then that scripture regarding married life would apply to them as well.
Eric,
The theory of evolution is nonesense. Life can only comes from life. Something can not comes out of nothing. Do you you people realize how orderly things are in the universe not to mention our planet?
The living planet.
Life on earth could never exist were it not for a series of very fortunate " coincidences".
Earth's location in the milky way galaxy and the solar system.
The planet's orbit, tilt, rotational speed and our unusual moon.
A magnetic field and atmosphere that serve as a dual protection.
Natural cycles that replenish and cleanse the air and our water supply.
The list goes on and on. You want to tell me that you absolutely sure all these are coincidental. Only a fool will believe such a thing.
"Life can only comes from life."
That is an unproven assumption. It is demonstrably true that the chemical reactions that fuel and structure life can occur through natural processes, so your contention lies on shaky ground.
"Something cannot comes out of nothing."
That same argument negates the possibility of god as well. There is no need for the ability to exist without beginning or end to be a property solely belonging to a conscious being rather than being a property of the universe itself.
Life on earth benefits from a number of coincidences, yes. Are you aware that there are literally billions of planetary in our galaxy alone – each on representing a chance for those coincidence to line up in favor of life – and that there are billions of galaxies that each contain their own billions of planets? No matter how bad the odds may be, if you get enough opportunities to play them then you're going to win eventually.
To a person playing a lottery where the chances of winning are one in a hundred million, winning seems like a miracle. To a lottery employee who knows that three hundred million tickets were bought, the fact that somebody won seems inevitable.
and you are fool to believe that life on earth is the only life in this universe.
"The theory of evolution is nonesense. Life can only comes from life. Something can not comes out of nothing. Do you you people realize how orderly things are in the universe not to mention our planet?"
Interesting post. However, I think your understanding of Evolutionary theory is lacking. Evolution theory does not make claims of the origin of life. That is called Abiogenesis theory.
Perhaps due to our position in the galaxy, the magnetic field that maintains our atmosphere and the chemical composition available, life was inevitable. We have found other planets in other solar systems. Now, we have found rocky planets in the "goldielocks zone" where liquid water could exist. Eventually, we will find evidence of life on other planets.
If we find intelligent life on other planets, does this discovery damage your faith?
154000 experts are alot of people to rely on for something like an answer wheather or not one is born gay, and so since they concluded that its not a choice maybe the whole world should just not have common sense. seriously not trying to offend but if you know the differance between right and wrong. why should your moral desicion depend on experts. also to reject jesus but yet belive in god, not good, not good at all. if we were and still are created in the image of god and believe one is born gay then does that mean god is gay? really doubt that.to all whom are havin the time of their life expressing how good of a happy go lucky life they live being atheist and all. you are right you dont have to believe in god to have family values,compassion,and respect for others. but seriously doubt your immensively happy. heres something for everyone who thinks that to be a follower of christ is to be blind. what if you are wrong? wrong about everything you belive or thought. one thing you cant be wrong about is that one day you will die. and then and only then you will realize you were wrong.how ever it might then be to late what do you loose?and if you are right and christians are wrong what do we loose? dont know about you all but etenity sounds like a long long time. and being that we arent sure if we will be alive this time today. i think everyone should think about what jesus offers. to those who are offend by poor grammar & spelling my appoligys must be awsome making people feel dumb by their inabilities or spelling mistakes and since this is an egoistic group i too am a teacher and im right and you are wrong. smile weather or not you like it jesus loves you
Isn't anyone content with living in the moment? It doesn't do anybody any good to consider themselves less worthy of life than any other man, no matter how wise or aware he was. Live your own life, explore and create, imagine yourself as anything you want to be. Just remember that everyone else is equally as worthy.
either that you are male or female. There are only two choices and the choice was made for each one of us in the womb.
The "what if you're wrong" argument falls very, very flat, in my opinion.
I've given it a lot of thought, to be honest, and if I'm wrong, if when I die the Christian god greets me, I will happily stand by the life I've lived and be judged by it. If I am found to be guilty of some unforgivable sin and my penalty is eternal torment? That is not a god I would be comfortable spending eternity with.
@Free: "Well, I think you have a stronger case in favor of Jesus being an actual person than any case against, but you have no historical evidence linking him as actually 'the Christ' in either the Jewish, or Christian sense. He may be called it, but that's a far cry from it actually being so, right?"
---
Clarification: there is no secular historical evidence linking Jesus of Nazareth to being "the Christ". The Jewish faith cannot accept Him as Christ, otherwise they would be Christians.
@myweightinwords: "There has been argument as to the legitimacy of the Josephus references."
---
There is actually less speculation concerning the historical accuracy of Josephus' accounting of Jesus of Nazareth than there is most other individuals commonly accepted as having actually lived. There are more secular historical references to "Jesus of Nazareth" and his subsequent crucifixion by Pontius Pilate there are many recordings of the numerous victories in battle of the Roman empire under Caesar Augustus' reign.
As for feeling "tacked on"...I guess that is something that any of us can debate... However, that would be about as substantial as me claiming that Atlantis exists in the Lorentian Abyss, buried in such a manner that makes it completely undetectable. While it may be fanciful to entertain, there is stronger likelihood that Josephus' accounting of Jesus of Nazareth is accurate – especially in light of numerous other secular accounts of various events that Jesus of Nazareth was apparently in attendance of.
Though...I'll re-read Josephus' account another time just for grins and giggles 😉
By, "the Christ" you, as a Christian, have a vastly different idea of what that meant, and still means, than the Jews from whose religion the term originated. Messiah just meant being God's 'anointed' and plenty of people, and even things were called such in the OT. Also, the term "Son of God" did not have the literal meaning Christians now have. Israel and David are both called Son of God in the OT, but nobody argues that they share the godhead with Jesus, right? No Jews expected God to generate a demi-god. Demi-gods were a fixture of pagan religions, and I think you have to look to the Greek-cultured gentiles that Paul was catering to in order to find the origins of the whole "Jesus is God's actual son" idea.
@Free
1) "By, "the Christ" you, as a Christian, have a vastly different idea of what that meant, and still means, than the Jews from whose religion the term originated."
-–
Actually, I do not. I just recognize that Jesus of Nazareth fulfilled the prophecies that would recognize "the Christ" or "the Messiah"...the one said to lead the Jewish nation out of bondage. This is the same definition that the Jewish faith uses, but they reject the belief that Jesus of Nazareth fulfilled the prophecies of the OT, in part because Jesus of Nazareth came more as a "lamb" than a "lion."
As the remainder of your post as-sumes that I recognize "the Christ" as a person, rather than the actual t-itle of the one that would bring about freedom for the Jewish nation, I see no reason to expound on it. If there is something specific you would like me to respond to out of the remainder of your post, please let me know and I will be happy to do so.
Jeff M-
Let's see, nowhere in the Bible does it actually predict that the messiah would be born of a virgin. That's a Greek mythic fantasy. Modern translations of Isaiah render the word 'almah' correctly as 'young woman.' Jesus was from Nazareth. The gospel stories that put him in Bethlehem are just transparent devices that don't match historical fact. If God really were Jesus' father then Jesus can't be of the "House of David." The "Suffering Servant" of Isaiah applies to the people of Israel, not the messiah. Jesus was hung from a tree, which makes him cursed, and thus not a candidate for messiah. Finally, any idea of him being God would have been just too sacrilegious for the purely monotheistic Jewish mind while pagans had no problem with it.
According to the Jewish (OT) tradition he true Messiah is going to rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem (Jeremiah 33:18). At the time Jesus lived a Temple was still standing. The true Messiah will reestablish Jewish religious law as the law of the land (Jeremiah 33:15). He will establish a government in Israel that will rule everyone, Jews and gentiles alike (Isaiah 2:2-4; 11:10; 42:1). He'll also return all exiles to their homeland. (Isaiah 11:11-12) Of course, Christians would argue that all of these things will occur when Christ returns, but the OT never says anything about two 'comings' of the messiah. In proper perspective the second coming idea is just a desperate attempt to explain away Jesus' failings in this regard.
Most importantly, the true Messiah will save Israel, yes? It would be difficult to imagine a series of worse disasters that could have befallen the Jewish people since the coming of Jesus. The destruction of the Temple, the exile, anti-Semitism, Hitler... By in large these people would have done much better without Christianity and it's proposed candidate for their messiah.
@Free
1) Let's see, nowhere in the Bible does it actually predict that the messiah would be born of a virgin. That's a Greek mythic fantasy. Modern translations of Isaiah render the word 'almah' correctly as 'young woman.' Jesus was from Nazareth."
---–
See Isaiah 7 (specifically v.14). Almah has been repeatedly accepted as being synonymous with "virgin" or "maiden" throughout the Bible. At no point is it ever used to denote a "young married woman" in all the instances of it in the OT. Christianity: 1, Free: 0.
2) "The gospel stories that put him in Bethlehem are just transparent devices that don't match historical fact."
----
Support this claim. You bear the burden of proof in this one. Christianity: 0, Free: 0
3) "If God really were Jesus' father then Jesus can't be of the "House of David." The "Suffering Servant" of Isaiah applies to the people of Israel, not the messiah."
------
This often confuses many. The term "Israel" is most commonly used as a reference to the Jewish nation, or to Abraham. Jesus of Nazareth is both a) in direct lineage from Abraham, and b) was a Jew. Christianity: 1, Free: 0
4) "Jesus was hung from a tree, which makes him cursed, and thus not a candidate for messiah."
--------
This has been answered in numerous forums:
"Hung on a tree" is misleading, because the word "tree" is equivalent to the word "wood" in the original language; and the word "hung" is saying the same thing as "being fastened to", so you could rephrase this as saying cursed is anyone who is fastened to a piece of wood, in which case in clearly refers to the crucifixion.
When Jesus died on the cross, He took upon Himself all of the curse that comes upon one for transgressing the Law, so the penalty for our transgression of the Law could be removed.
This is why He is called "The Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world".
Christianity: 1, Free: 0
5) "Finally, any idea of him being God would have been just too sacrilegious for the purely monotheistic Jewish mind while pagans had no problem with it."
-------------
That's why the Jewish faith rejects Jesus of Nazareth as being "the Christ." Since I am a Christian, it can be deduced that I do recognize Jesus of Nazareth as the fulfillment of the over 400 prophecies in the Old Testament. As a note, Jeremiah 33:18 does not mention anything about a temple...
Christianity: 0, Free: 0
6) "According to the Jewish (OT) tradition he true Messiah is going to rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem (Jeremiah 33:18). At the time Jesus lived a Temple was still standing. The true Messiah will reestablish Jewish religious law as the law of the land (Jeremiah 33:15). He will establish a government in Israel that will rule everyone, Jews and gentiles alike (Isaiah 2:2-4; 11:10; 42:1). He'll also return all exiles to their homeland. (Isaiah 11:11-12) Of course, Christians would argue that all of these things will occur when Christ returns, but the OT never says anything about two 'comings' of the messiah. In proper perspective the second coming idea is just a desperate attempt to explain away Jesus' failings in this regard."
-------
Though the Jewish faith does not accept this as prophetic fulfillment, the Christian faith recognizes that Jesus of Nazareth as having fulfilled this prophecies because the prophecy by the Christian faith was interpreted to mean the Spiritual temple, and not the physical one.
Christian: 0, Free: 0 (this is up to the individual faith to make a determination on their own)
7) "Most importantly, the true Messiah will save Israel, yes? "
-------
Jesus offered Salvation, but they chose to reject it, and crucify Him for it. Luckily there will be an opportunity coming up where a *major* contingency of the Jewish nation will make the conversion in the last days.
Christianity: 1, Free: 0
8) "It would be difficult to imagine a series of worse disasters that could have befallen the Jewish people since the coming of Jesus. The destruction of the Temple, the exile, anti-Semitism, Hitler... By in large these people would have done much better without Christianity and it's proposed candidate for their messiah."
-------
Pure conjecture implying that Jesus of Nazareth caused such events or even had anything to do with it.
Christianity: 0, Free: 0.
Out of 8 recorded points, Christianity scores 4 points, and Free scores 0. Out of the remaining 4 notes, 3 are not really points to win, merely differences between Judaism and Christianity...or are pure conjecture. The final point requires evidence of the claim before any point can be awarded.
Lonezero, ALLAH? No matter what you call him if you don't believe in Jesus Christ you're worshipping the wrong GOD. This is for all the Muslims, answer this if your religion is the right one. Why are Muslims looked at as Terrorists? Why is there so much Killings and suicide bombing happening to Muslims? God isn't going to let ya'll rest because you're worshipping the wrong God. I don't see Christians strapping bombs to themselves and blowing up other Christians. You might want to think long and hard about the state of the Muslim religion.
Jeff M
You kept score! LOL 🙂
Oh boy, I guess the simple explanation is that I can completely switch to the jewish perspective and see all of the problems with Jesus being the Christ, but you're mired in the Christian perspective that has 'interpreted' the OT completely to favor and support their belief system. There is a big difference between that and ingenuous scholarship. There are numerous actual scholarly works out there on the Historical Jesus, even a decent one that you can listen to on your iPod linked below. If you get curious you might want to give it a try.
http://itunes.apple.com/ca/itunes-u/historical-jesus/id384233911
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rainbow
You gotta love Science! Here's their explaination for the Rainbow. LOL
Yeah, I read the various religious and mythological explanations near the bottom, but I can't say that I found them funny. You have to take them in context with the stories they are linked to which, while myth, still taught a moral lesson those cultures valued. Really, you should be less judgmental of ancient societies.
Free
The Rainbow is the covenant between God and the Earth; that he will never again destroy the world by FLOOD! The next one will probably be by fire or cold, according to the bible the Sun won't shine on the earth so it's going to be cold. I guess we need to start working on some huge facilities where we can have farm animals inside and grow food. It's going to be a mess, I hope I'm not alive to see this day!
1word
From your link we have the earlier explanation:
"Another ancient portrayal of the rainbow is given in the Epic of Gilgamesh: the rainbow is the "jewelled necklace of the Great Mother Ishtar" that she lifts into the sky as a promise that she "will never forget these days of the great flood" that destroyed her children. (The Epic of Gilgamesh, Tablet Eleven)
Then Ishtar arrived. She lifted up the necklace of great jewels that her father, Anu, had created to please her and said, "Heavenly gods, as surely as this jewelled necklace hangs upon my neck, I will never forget these days of the great flood. Let all of the gods except Enlil come to the offering. Enlil may not come, for without reason he brought forth the flood that destroyed my people."-
So, I guess it depends on which myth you were led to believe. The one about leprechaun's gold is kinda cute. 😉
Free, I believe in the one I quoted. The one you quoted is nonsense. Having a discussion with nonbelievers is growing tiresome, when you're standing before God you'll be the one answering for your blasphemy against God. That's one thing he can't forgive. Good luck on that!
@1word
"Free, I believe in the one I quoted. The one you quoted is nonsense."
Just because you believe doesn't make it real. Infact the one free qouted is exacitly the same just borrowed to fit with yours faith, like the golden rule was borrowed and how the ten commandments were borrowed. Your faith was not the first it borrowed from previous religions. How does it make it the true if it just copies everyone else? Jesus was borrowed from Horus,apollonius of tyana, mirtha, dionysus, and krishna most proceeded jesus hundreds or more years.
"when you're standing before God you'll be the one answering for your blasphemy against God. That's one thing he can't forgive. Good luck on that!"
If you have to prove God is real and this will happen or else
when you're standing before Allah you'll be the one answering for your blasphemy against Allah. That's one thing he can't forgive. Good luck on that!
or
when you're standing before Zeus you'll be the one answering for your blasphemy against Zeus. That's one thing he can't forgive. Good luck on that!
or
when you're standing before Anubis the you'll be the one answering for your blasphemy against Anubis. That's one thing he can't forgive. Good luck on that!
your threat is moot if you cannot back it up and prove it, you can't prove your god exist just like you can't prove those gods exist either.
1word
LoneZero sums it up rather nicely. There is a magical/supernatural explanation for rainbows attached to every mythology, including the one you happen to believe in. They're all about as kooky, and none of them corresponds to the actual, scientific explanation, so the odds of the laws of nature bending to allow any one of them to be true are all equally astronomical, at best. Besides, the vast majority of Christians can appreciate the scientific explanation as the 'how' a rainbow works while retaining their religious view as the 'why'. People like who who deny the science altogether are rare in the extreme.
LOL!
Hey look more EGO! And you think those two are the issue. LOL!
LOL ! LOL!
Duh
All that education and you can't spell. What a waste of money.
YO
Wow do you have a HUGE ego or what! I feel sorry for the kids you teach obviously you need some serious
help
I DONT HAVE AN EGO WITH MY STUDENTS; I CARE ABOUT MY STUDENTS VERY MUCH.
ARE YOU TWO SERIOUS. I MAY HAVE MADE A TYPO BUT THAT IS ALL SWEETIE.
I CAN'T SPELL AND YOU CALL YOURSELF DUH?
Hey look more EGO! And you think those two are the issue. LOL!
Yup, screaming in all caps. Definitely big ego.
Almost as big as signing every post with an Amen (like you can imagine loads of people all agreeing with your words like they were scripture. Ah, HeavenSent you do need help, son!)
Amen means so it is, that is that.
Eric G
As for Evolution theory, your don't seem to have even a basic understanding of how it works or why. I would suggest starting with a basic biology course. Try your local library on Evolution theory when you have a grasp of biology. I would jump right into natural selection and genetic mutation, but I think it would be too much, based on the lack of education displayed by your questions.
I applaud your desire for a greater understanding of our world and wish you all the best on your quest for knowledge. Please let me know if there is any way I can help you on your path from supersti-tion to scientific understanding.
THANK YOU FOR THE RECOMMENDATION ERIC HOWEVER, I HAVE 2 MASTERS DEGREES IN THE AREA OF EDUCATION. I HAVE TAKEN SEVERAL BIOLOGY COURSES, PHYSICAL SCIENCE, CHEMISTRY. HOWEVER, IT IS NOT THAT I DON'T KNOW THE BIG BANG THEORY AND THE PROCESSES THAT IT GIVES AS AN EXPLAINATION. MY POINT TO YOU IS THAT THIS THEORY IS FLAWED WITHOUT AN INTELLIGENT DESIGNER BEHIND THE WHOLE MATTER. IF YOIU WOILD HAVE READ MY POSTS YOU WOULD SEE THAT IT IS NOT MY MISUNDERSTANDING OF THE SUBJECT BUT MY REJECTION OF THE THEORY. NOW HERE IS A RECOMMENDATION TO YOU. AS A MATH AND READING TEACHER, I RECOMMEND YOU TO GET MORE LESSONS IN COMPREHENSION BUILDING AND STOP BELIEVING EVERYTHING THAT YOU GOOGLE ON THE INTERNET RELATING TO THE BIG BANG THEORY
Wow do you have a HUGE ego or what! I feel sorry for the kids you teach obviously you need some serious help.
All that education and you can't spell. What a waste of money.
The Big Bang Theory is a load of Crock.
1word-
"The Big Bang Theory is a load of Crock."
Can you demonstrate how? Seriously, can you match physics with somebody like Hawking and come up with a better explanation? If you can't (and I'm pretty sure this is the case, or we'd of heard of you) then I respectfully say that it is you, sir, who is a load of crock.
@Geraldine:
Your position is logically flawed. You state that you understand the Big Bang theory and the verified evidence that supports it, yet you deny the theory because it does not include a variable that you cannot prove exists. The theory works without this variable, yet you will only accept a theory that includes it.
You are dishonest.
Just out of curiosity, what kind of grades did you get in your science classes? Did you tell your professors that they were wrong?
Eric, funny. Sounds like you think the name is "Big Bang Fact". Problem is it is "Bing Bang Theory". Are you claiming it is proven? If that is the case I am guessing you flunked science class and a few others as well. Theories can and should be questioned.
I think the key question is whether or not people are born with g_ay tendencies, liking people of the same gender as themselves. The other question is why is this being treated any differently than other immorality? The Bible says in numerous places, old and new testaments, that these tendencies are a part of who people are, but what they choose to do with them is what determines if the act is sinful or not. It is exactly the same as someone who looks at po_rnographic images or has relations with animals. The desire for those relations is not the sinful part. Each person is born flawed, this is all over the Bible. But what is clear repeatedly is how people handle their flaws. I think any "religious" person would agree that looking at p_orn is wrong and that they would not define it as an acceptable lifestyle. So why then is this issue talked about as an acceptable lifestyle? Here's a NEW testament reference for people who say the old testament is all basically hearsay. Romans 1 talks about people being handed over to unnatural relations and the men being enflamed with lust for other man. Now, this passage does not say that anyone who struggles with g_ay tendencies will burn in hell. If there's one thing the bible shows us is that NO ONE could perfectly live up to the standards set aside in old testament law, which is why He sent His son, Jesus, to pay the price for our sins. So it's about the choice, not the way you're born. In all truth, all of us born as creatures of evil and sin, so don't just single one group out. God is not out to see everyone burn, otherwise He would not have made the sacrifice so that you may have true life and not eternal suffering. See Romans 1:24-27, Psalm 51:5, John 3:16-18.
"So it's about the choice, not the way you're born."
154000 experts disagree with you since being gay is NOT a choice!
I think you have to remember that also back in Bible times grown men would marry, and even ra.pe in times of war, women who would be considered children these days. Let's not forget also that slavery was completely condoned too, as was polygamy, treating women and children as property, and sentencing children for the crimes of their parents. The Bible also has a heavy bias against being left-handed too, and how about it's treatment of every mental condition as a case of possession?
Clearly, the folks living in that long ago time had a different cultural understanding of what was right and wrong, and what was 'true', correct? So, why is it any different with this? Why can't we chalk up the injunctions against being gay as outmoded as these other things we've chosen to grow out of?
@Free
"Why can't we chalk up the injunctions against being gay as outmoded as these other things we've chosen to grow out of?"
----
I believe we should...but we have to define what those "injunctions" are. If you are talking about the medical inst-itutions' decision to not allow non-relatives from visiting dying patients, that should be lifted immediately. It is unfathomable that you should deny a dying person's request of seeing a loved one (regardless of gender and type of love). I understand that this is an issue of liability for the hospital..but can't we exercise some common sense?
There are no experts. Some people are focused on their professions for which they are good at what they do. Most people today will say anything for a paycheck.
Jeff M-
By "injunctions" I meant all negative distinctions placed against hom.ose.xual behavior per se. Instances where people are forcibly sod.imised ought to be cla.ssified as se.xual as.sault just as forced heterose.xual contact is. You see, there is a definite bigotry against the activities apart from who one choses to share them with. The mentality that places a premium on reproduction is no longer needed in this world of excessive population. It's really just all about that, I suspect.
@Free
"Free
Jeff M-
By "injunctions" I meant all negative distinctions placed against hom.ose.xual behavior per se. Instances where people are forcibly sod.imised ought to be cla.ssified as se.xual as.sault just as forced heterose.xual contact is. You see, there is a definite bigotry against the activities apart from who one choses to share them with. The mentality that places a premium on reproduction is no longer needed in this world of excessive population. It's really just all about that, I suspect."
---------
I can agree with that...and I believe such bigotry does come from both sides of the aisle. I think the ways you and I would choose to end such bigotry would probably differ, ... but the rest I can fully agree with. Stop the hate, show the love...right?
@Free
"You see, there is a definite bigotry against the activities apart from who one choses to share them with."
------
I just want to clarify my stance on this one: in the Christian faith, any se-xual intercourse between two individuals of the same gender is recognized as sin. I, for one, do not expect the secular world to abide by my understanding of this.
Jeff M
I would argue that the Christian faith is rather plastic, and can reconcile full acceptance of gays with a faithful following of Jesus' teaching just as it has come to accept slavery as a social wrong in spite of the tradition supporting it. Many sects have, or are coming to these terms already. Like slavery, they see the scriptural att.itude against gays in context with that time and society, which have long since passed. Likely, a lot of it had to do with the usual Jewish fears of contamination from rival religious groups, and maybe even ritual cleanliness issues. Neither of these are concerns when one observes the modern scene.
You may say that they risk being judged on this, but who is to say how God would judge any sect? All Christians who don't regularly celebrate the eucharist could be just as damned for not following the rules if Christ is as strict as people suspect. A purely strict Christ, if strict by the letter of scripture, may still support slavery for all any Christian 'knows' for sure, right? So, lets not speak of absolutes here.
There is no way to live 'perfectly' according by one's acts according to the faith anyway, so all have to make hard decisions in how to act. Many Christians (and atheists by large) choose to act according to the Golden Rule, or rather not to act against gays because they see no actual harm being done to others, and Jesus himself remained silent on the issue. You could point to Paul, but do all Christians still follow Paul's rules against women? See, adaption is alive and well even in less moderate circles.
Jeff M
"Stop the hate, show the love...right?"
Yes! I have far less interest in 'doing away' with religion than I do with trying to reason religious people out of damaging beliefs that may have been culturally relevant back when their holy books were written, but no longer are. I would say that every believer is a thinking person who can, potentially, see reason.
Remember that many, if not most, of us non-believers were brought up in religious households and were believers for quite some time so we have 'faith', for lack of a better term, in the power of reason to cut through indoctrination and allow a person's humanity to shine through.
You can take Jesus himself as an example of this. How much courage must he have had to stand against the traditional rigidity of the faith of his time? Ask yourself, was he a fundamentalist, or a radical liberal, and who would be the equivalent of his Pharisees today? 🙂
Some would say that m-u-r-d-e-r was not a choice for Ted Bundy and Charles Manson. But why does it have to be either it is or choice or it is not. Personal behavior become habitual after which there is little choice. This can easily explain the lack of choice some people seem to have. Thought there may be a genetic component to h-m-s-x-l-t-y that makes them even less culpable for any choices they may make. But there is little question in my mind these days that some choose to enter in to gay relationships and it becomes a habit to engage in gay acts. It's not always either or. I in fact think the causes of h-o-m-o s-x to be complex.
All "Abrahamics" believe that their god created all of us and of course that includes the g-ay members of the human race. Also, those who have studied ho-mo-se-xuality have determined that there is no choice involved therefore ga-ys are ga-y because god made them that way.
To wit:
o The Royal College of Psy-chiatrists stated in 2007:
“ Despite almost a century of psy-choanalytic and psy-chological speculation, there is no substantive evidence to support the suggestion that the nature of parenting or early childhood experiences play any role in the formation of a person’s fundamental heteros-exual or hom-ose-xual orientation. It would appear that s-exual orientation is biological in nature, determined by a complex interplay of ge-netic factors and the early ut-erine environment. Se-xual orientation is therefore not a choice.[60] "
"Garcia-Falgueras and Swaab state in the abstract of their 2010 study, "The fe-tal brain develops during the intraut-erine period in the male direction through a direct action of tes-tosterone on the developing nerve cells, or in the female direction through the absence of this hor-mone surge. In this way, our gender identi-ty (the conviction of belonging to the male or female gender) and s-exual orientation are programmed or organized into our brain structures when we are still in the womb. There is no indication that social environment after birth has an effect on gender ident–ity or s-exual orientation."[8
Of course, those g-ays who belong to Abrahamic religions abide by the rules of no adu-ltery or for-nication allowed.
And because of basic biology differences and Abrahamic and other religious traditions said mon-ogamous ventures should always be called same-s-ex unions not same-s-ex marriages++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
====================================================================