EnthronedbyGod:



Your effort to discredit this thread wouldn't yield any result. The people whom God want to save through this thread will be saved regardless of how much you try.

I'm pretty sure I've hardly made any significant effort to discredit this thread.I'm not against you sharing your personal experience and what you've understood about the depths of cultism.This can help save people who are either in it or contemplating it.There's no harm in that,in fact it's commendable but the way you deviated and your tbc posts is suspicious.

10 billion souls doesn't mean Jesus ain't coming soon, Once Bible prophecies are fulfilled, Christ will come even if the church isn't ready. Jesus loves the world and wishes the entire world could be saved , however if the world rejects Him , that wouldn't stop Him from coming

Riggghht.Rephrasing the preciseness with which you stated God told you 10 billion souls or no rapture,then satan too is trying to beat God in the game for 10 billion souls.This just shows you are exaggerating things just for the effect.Don't try to frightening people into believing in Christ(which is your main aim).

In what sense are we looking at it being morally right or wrong?
If all the rules for non-related relationships and activities apply then I don't see anything wrong. Humans are predisposed to find relationships outside their immediate family due to preference and many other factors but there are the exceptions.There are second and third cousins getting into relationships and tying the knot so I don't see why the same shouldn't apply if there's a mutual affection and agreement between both individuals.The Targaryens from GOT are fictional examples.
I feel the some of the cons of incest have been mentioned already.

jesusjnr:
Well all I can say is that i'm humbled to be used as a vessel in the hands of God to direct you this thread.

I know you might not be able to comprehend it now, but I trust that in the near future you'd know why and thank God later for using me to bring you here.

God bless you bro.

p.s. I don't also agree with the 10 billion souls part for the road to heaven is a straight and narrow one, and only few are able to find it. So I hope you are one of those few.

Keep praying for me mahn...Just in case I'm the blind one who is yet to see the light about the mysteries surrounding the supernatural.
The 10 billion souls part is just falling hand and shows that the person behind the screen speaks for himself.As long as he said it,he can make up any other story just to come off as legit and I hope my instincts are wrong about the agenda behind this OP's thread.
God bless.

Gandollaar:
I disagree with you that OP is only self-seeking. This thread has a history.

Urmmm I don't get.What history are you refering to? Is there a thread that precedes this?

The idea that birthed this thread was unplanned and it's the readers that encouraged the OP to create this thread.

I'm sure you're being biased right here and can't see that there's no sense in what you said. The OP opened the account as a new user just for this thread.

However, I concede he started the thread on a wrong footing when he started by calling out some MOGs thereby foreclosing the possibility of an engaging discourse from an early stage. Then again, the Op I doubt is a professional writer and so reeled out his points the way he was led.

Most people aren't professional writers but that doesn't stop them from passing across the message in a concise and summarized write up.

We are following, hopefully someone would be blessed by the topic.

I doubt anyone can be truly blessed

(Standing ovation as the closing credits is displayed and the keyboardist starts playing corny tune "I surrender all".Never have I seen a well crafted and researched propaganda driven post on NL.There's lots of them online and in print forms but not on NL(That I'm aware of).You should have added a journey to hell and mentioned Michael to add a little sparkle(stale but still does the job) and then hit home run by stating you saw the judgement day like John did(A little too adventurous but an untapped gold mine).I'm sorry if I'm being rude or disrespectful of your " personal experience" but I'm pretty sure you shouldn't expect less given how you strategically(short tbc posts within minutes) wore out the poor thread deviating from the main point with every page.Your insincerity is glaring when one sees how you managed to make a one post writeup into a week's plus in order to push the topic to the top of the religion section so as to stay relevant and capture as many gullible folks as you can.It's sad actually cos a person with the right and sincere intentions would have summarized his/her story within the first three pages so that the folks it's intended for don't have to read through convos that aren't related to the subject.You should have thought about that before calling out pastors and celebrities,even the pope just to cunningly sway the innocent using conspiracy theories which I applaud you for.You must have watched a lot of YouTube videos and googled sh!tloads of information to come off as someone who knows his sh!t.You now shot yaself in the leg by stating that God told you something about 10 billion souls before rapture can happen,an event that even Jesus himself said he doesn't even know the day nor hour,so there's definitely no doomsday countdown in heaven measured in soul per human.Abi was Jesus lying ni? .
Anyways I don't wanna write too much story hence deviating from the main purpose of this post and be accused of hypocrisy cos the angle of deviation you drew deserves accolades.
You may or may not have experienced cultism firsthand but your intention wasn't a sincere one.You didn't necessarily want to raise awareness for cultism but on a personal(mostly not God inspired) crusade.You wanted the attention but thankfully the mods aren't gullible people too.If not for jnr's post that redirected me here I wouldn't even know this post exists.
If I'm wrong about all this and you truly are "God sent" to bring light unto the darkness that plagues NL then I apologise in advance and I hope your catch is as plentiful as Simon Peters.Sometimes I'm way too skeptical for my own good.

hakeem4:
Emperorharry

Well it’s actually possible to acknowledge the evidence that science provides and still believe in god or gods. Let’s start by defining these terms.

science : the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behaviour of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment.


religion the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.

One works based on evidence while the other works based on belief
If as a scientist you go into your laboratory and you begin to invoke god or you bring out a hypothesis on how a phenomenon works but you’ve no evidence to back it up, then it isn’t science.

Hypotheses are based on beliefs and assumptions.Some would say that science doesn't entertain beliefs only assumptions with that are observable and verifiable which are rather more objective in nature than beliefs but I have my reasons.The major difference between science and religion in the belief aspect is the search for irrefutable evidence for an objective truth.Science doesn't seek to limit the search for the truth no matter how seemingly valid or plausible a theory or proposition is unlike religion which doesn't entertain such knowledge seeking for fear of the loss of control over the masses,Maybe?.Don't question God I was told growing up and I feel it's the same story for most nonreligious folks today.Budaatum can you quote me your delightful reference about going up the mountain .

I read the part where the op (from Quora) was just bringing up the god of the gaps. If you fill every point where science doesn’t understand with god without any evidence for backing up that claim. Then that’s not science any longer.

There's no need to fill god into the unknown.God is a choice(to Me) and god independent of sentient subjective influence and selfish interest is unfettered from human activities or perceptions.God is as independent as the shape of a cloud in the sky.How you view the shape of the cloud is different from the next person.You may find people with similar viewpoints and conflicting viewpoints but this in no way affects the cloud .If you don't see the cloud for lack of evidence that it's there then no problemo,it still doesn't add nor remove anything from the cloud.If the cloud is not there and the folks seeing the cloud are prolly on psychedelics then it's all good.The cloud doesn't stop you from going about your day to day activities now does it? This cloud stuff just popped up as I was writing this reply,so please don't quote me to point out it's gaps.I just hope it conveys the idea I'm intending it to and then anybody with a open-mind can subjectively fill in the "gaps".

Let me drop a little story here. After newton had got his equations for gravity and motion. He used his equation to explain how the moon and most celestial bodies stay in orbit. When he got to the place his knowledge and equations couldn’t explain he had to invoke god into it.
Years later a French scientist Laplace took up Newton’s work and continued from the point newton stopped. Napoleon called Laplace and asked him why he revoked god. Laplace replies “ there is no need for god to explain this phenomenon”.

Chalking everything we can't comprehend or can't do up to the supernatural is intellectual or physical laziness,desperation etc which can also be influenced by the quantity and quality of knowledge,the advancement in technology etc of such period.Most of the technology we have today would be useless or nonexistent without electricity so you get the gist.Like someone said on quora,a 100 years from now,humanity would look back to the 20th and 21st century with the same condescension with which we look at the primitive or medieval ages.

And as usual god became irrelevant.

Lol..I trust you to rain on god or the gods parade any chance you get.It's a good thing tho,life would be too boring without diversity.

...

This is a reply to the question "How can one believe in science and religion at the same time" by a quora user Jae Won Joh.It's lengthy but captivating and enlightening.


This is a really long answer, but bear with me and I'll try to blow your mind in the next few minutes. Allow me to begin by asking a seemingly irrelevant question: have you ever heard of the Ultra Deep Field Experiment by the Hubble Telescope?

You see, what happened some years ago was that NASA completed a low-resolution map of the night sky, and they decided they wanted to go deeper. So they picked a little, tiny patch of space--about the size of a pencil tip at arm's length. It was utterly insignificant, really, just another blank patch of space with nothing there, but they decided to point the finely-honed lens of the Hubble telescope at that patch in the hope of detecting whatever lonely photons of light might trickle in from that region of space.

Each time the Hubble made its way around the earth, it pointed toward that patch for 20 minutes. After 400 orbits, they took all the data and compiled it to discover not a star, nor a cluster of stars, but ten. thousand. galaxies. Turns out that blank patch wasn't so blank after all. Now, assuming a galaxy is about a 100 billion stars, that's a thousand trillion stars--many of which, much like our own sun, presumably have their own planetary systems, all with the potential to house as-yet unknown forms of biology.

I think these results are a really good consciousness-raiser to think about as we contemplate the sheer size of the mysteries that surround us. Hold on to this thought as you read on. :-)

== First, a little on science... ==
I am a scientist by training. By the time I graduated college I'd already poured thousands of hours into procedures, scored publications in peer-reviewed journals, presented my work at national conferences, and in total spent nearly a third of my life working in various research labs. Why? Because I figure if I want to understand what's going on in this strange world around me, there's probably no better method than to directly study the blueprints.

You have to admit, science in the last several hundred years has been immensely successful--we've cured smallpox and polio, gotten men to the moon, invented the internet, and tripled life spans.

But I think one of the most important experiences you gain from a life in science is that once you walk the pier of what is currently known, at some point, you reach the end of the pier. And beyond that end is everything we don't know--it's all the uncharted waters, the deep mysteries that we don't have insight into yet, like why mass and energy are equivalent, or what dark matter/dark energy are, or why there are multiple spatial dimensions, or how you build consciousness from mechanical pieces and parts. That's the real lesson that science provides--the vastness of our ignorance.

Now, rest assured that with every generation, we will undoubtedly continue to add more slats to the pier...but it's a huge ocean, and we have no guarantee how far we'll get, and certainly in our brief twinkling of a 21st century lifetime, we're simply not going to live to see the end. So again: science hammers home the message that what we know is so vastly outstripped by what we don't know.

So given all this, I find that this question has at its core a popular misconception that's become increasingly widespread over the last decade, particularly in the political arena: that scientists don't have the capacity to gamble beyond the available data, and they act like they've got it all figured out with various equations that perfectly capture the picture of the whole cosmos.

That's actually a very poor description of how science operates.

Science is in some ways about disproving other people's hypotheses (including those posited by religion), but it's so much more than that. Science is really about creativity in making up new hypotheses--and part of the scientific temperament is a tolerance for holding multiple hypotheses in mind at the same time. What we actually do is we make up new stories in lab every day and then we go and we seek evidence to weigh in favor of some stories over others.

But it's often the case that some questions are too far out right now. They're beyond the toolbox of science, and as a result we're unable to gather evidence for them. That's ok--science is fine with holding multiple hypotheses on the table. That ambiguity is accepted as part of the relationship we have with mother nature. It's just part of the vast mysteries around us.

== A little on religion... ==
I was raised by a microbiologist mother who was a very devout Christian who insisted I read the Bible and learn all its stories and go to church. Despite my many years as a scientist I still find comfort in praying to God even though I know He might not exist/care, and I have seen various circumstances that I could attribute to "power of prayer", although my cynical side calls it "placebo" and "coincidence". So I categorize myself loosely as being "religious".

Consider this: there are 2000+ religions on the globe, and everyone already knows what it's like to be an atheist, because all you need to do is look at someone else's religion and say "Well it's patently ridiculous that you would believe in that", and of course they're looking back at you and thinking the same thing.

Try an experiment: the next time you meet someone new/random, whether it's on an airplane or in a bar, ask them if they've ever heard of the Hubble Ultra Deep Field Experiment. I guarantee you the number of people who have will be outweighed heavily by the number who haven't. But everyone will be able to tell you all the details of whatever cultural story they grew up on.

You don't need to be an anthropologist to recognize that our nervous systems absorb whatever our cultures pour into us. So if you grew up in Saudi Arabia, chances are you love Islam. And if you were born in Rome, you probably love Catholicism; in Tel Aviv, Judaism; in Springfield, Ohio, Protestantism (apologies for the broad brush strokes here, I'm clearly overgeneralizing, but I think you get the point).

So it's not a coincidence that there's not a blossoming of Islam in Springfield, Ohio, and there's not a blossoming of Protestantism in Mecca. It's because we're products of our culture, and we accept whatever's poured into us. If there were one truth, you would expect that it would spread everywhere evenly, but clearly the data doesn't support that. The crazy part is, our cultures pour this stuff into us, and then sometimes people are willing to fight and die over their particular stories.

Are you familiar with the creation story of the Bakuba kingdom of the Congo? It goes like this: there was a white giant named Mombo who had a sharp pain in his belly, and he vomited up the earth and the sun and the moon and the stars. Then he had a second pain, and he vomited up the animals and people and trees. Included in that second ejection was the leopard, the anvil, the eagle, woman, the monkey Fumu, firmament, medicine, man, and lightning.

If you find the creation story of the Bakuba to be an unlikely explanation as to how we got here, keep in mind that if you were Bakuba, you would find equally bizarre the Western story of the naked couple and the talking reptile and the prohibited produce. AND if you were Bakuba living in Kansas, you would be fighting to get your story into your children's textbooks.

The holy books written by the world's religions are often quite beautiful, and crystallize hard-won wisdom, but keep in mind the fact that these were written millennia ago by people who didn't know about the size of the cosmos, or the Big Bang, or bacterial infection, or DNA, or computation, or even very much about neighboring landscapes/cultures. Ralph Waldo Emerson pointed out that the religious stories of one generation become the literary entertainment of the next--and indeed, you can see that nobody's fighting over Isis and Osiris anymore, or the Greek/Roman gods.

== So how do you combine the two? ==
I'm not suggesting that the Bakuba story is wrong or that the Adam and Eve story is wrong because the two are competing stories...as a scientist, I'm suggesting that they're wrong because all the available evidence weighs against them.

For example, the biblical story suggests that the world is 6000 years old while our best science tells us that it's 4.5 billion years old, which means the biblical account has to somehow explain how the Japanese were making pottery 4000 years before the earth existed.

For my money, this sort of thing puts me somewhere in the middle. I've felt for a long time that we know too little to commit to strict atheism, yet we know far too much to commit to a particular religious story.

So what surprises me is the amount of certainty I find out there. When you walk into a bookstore, you'll find books by the neo-atheists and books by the fundamentally religious, and they argue with each other and they polarize each other and they spend all of their energies on that.

Maybe there should be another voice here? That seems far too limited for a modern discussion. Because if you think about the space of possibilities...

Take the Judeo-Christian-Islamic traditions--bam! That's one point in the possibility space.
Take the eastern religions--bam! That's another point.
The idea that we're just mechanical pieces and parts and we shut off when we die, that's yet another.
We were planted here by space aliens...sounds absurd, but heck, it's still a possibility.

When you start populating the possibility space with these 2000+ data points, what you realize is that there are vast landscapes in between these possibilities as well. All of these points are infinitesimally unlikely, but together they add up to this possibility space, and there hasn't been enough discussion about this space as a whole. Instead, the discussion has been limited to what I consider a false dichotomy--God vs. no God.

...and that's where the conversation has ended. :-(

True, there are some people in the middle, and they sometimes describe themselves using the term "agnostic". I don't use that term because it's typically used as a weak term--often when people say they're "agnostic", what they mean is "I'm not sure if the guy with the beard on the cloud exists or doesn't exist".

So I call myself a "Possibilian". And the belief behind Possibilianism is an active exploration of new ideas, and a comfort with the scientific temperament of creativity and holding multiple hypotheses in mind. As a Possibilian, anything goes...at first. And then I import the tools of science to rule out parts of the possibility space. For instance, while it would be really cool if ESP existed, to the extent that we can measure things now, we cannot find any evidence to support it.

Possibilianism basically picks up where the toolbox of science leaves off, when we no longer have the tools to address the questions we have, and must simply understand the space of possibilities, some of which we can rule out, but others which we are unable to at this time.

The reason it is so important to keep that open-mindedness about the parts that we don't know is because we know for certain about the magnitude of things we don't know. In every generation of scientists, people have always felt that they have all the pieces and parts that they need in order to answer what is going on around them in the cosmos. But just imagine trying to explain the Northern lights without an understanding of the magnetosphere, or trying to explain the heart before the concept of a pump was invented, or trying to understand how muscles work before electricity was discovered. You would make theories, but you would be doomed to be incorrect. And that's where, in many instances, people found comfort in religion, superstition, the supernatural, etc.

We're in that same position now.

Example 1: We've got Newtonian physics, and Einsteinian physics and quantum mechanics, and we think, ok, we've sort of got all the pieces and parts. But astrophysicists look at the movement of the planets and galaxies, and they look at the gravitational pull, and they realize...something's missing. There's something out there that we can't quite see or smell or touch, but it must be there to make the equations work. So they call this fudge factor "dark matter"--we don't exactly know what it is, but we require it to make the equations balance out. Some of you may already know: dark matter isn't a small fudge factor; it's 90% of all known matter--that's a lot to sweep under the rug!

Example 2: Consider the human brain. It's the most complicated device we have ever found; it's essentially an alien computational material. It is so dense in its connectivity that if you were to take a cubic millimeter of brain tissue, there are more connections in there than stars in the Milky Way galaxy. Yet somehow, this wet, mechanical networked system is YOU. It's all your hopes and dreams and aspirations and emotions. If you were to lose a little part of your pinky, you wouldn't really be any different, but if you lost an equivalently sized piece of neural tissue, that would completely change your conscious state.

The problem is, we don't know how to take mechanical pieces and parts and build private subjective experience out of that. Imagine if I gave you a trillion tinker toys and told you to start hooking them up. At what point do you add one more tinker toy and say, "Ah-ha! It's experiencing... the taste of feta cheese now"?

That's the problem. We don't have any way to apply our equations to determine how we perceive the redness of red or the smell of a fart. Not only do we not have a theory of how the brain works...we don't even know what such a theory would look like.

== Conclusion ==
All of this calls for a bit of intellectual humility.

While we can't prove the existence of God, being unable to prove He exists doesn't necessarily mean He's nonexistent either--our current tools may simply be insufficient for the task. So I keep both religion and science at my side--in some cases, science gives me the answers I seek; in others, it doesn't, and when the current toolbox of science doesn't allow me to gather data to understand how/why a seemingly miraculous phenomenon occurs, I'm happy to simply chalk it up to the wisdom/grace of an all-knowing force until science steps up its game. If science will never be able to answer, then, eh, I'm ok with that.

For the smart-alecks out there who would suggest that not committing to anything is more fitting of politicians, I concede that people like people who can firmly commit to a decision. If you're trying to decide whether you should marry someone, or sell some property, or move to a different city, those things require a firm choice.

But what I'm going to suggest is that there are some domains where it's appropriate to be decisive, and some domains where it's not so appropriate. Would you stop a guy on a random ranch in the middle of nowhere and ask him if he thinks there are extraterrestrial civilizations? Do you care what his opinion is? Would you value it more than, say, an astrobiologist's? If not, that suggests that there are some domains in which it is not appropriate to commit and act like you have an answer in the absence of having good evidence.

I feel that people these days are sick and tired of people acting as though they're certain about things that they can't possibly be certain about. As Voltaire said, uncertainty is an uncomfortable position, but certainty is an absurd position.

So whatever. As a Possibilian, I would rather geek out and be creative with new narratives and hold multiple possibilities in mind with comfort. And I always feel free to cite the gospel of science, the most important three words that science ever gave to humankind: I don't know.

For anyone struggling to reconcile their seemingly conflicting views on religion and science: try to seek comfort with having multiple narratives and having uncertainty. This is not just a plea for simple open-mindedness, but for an active exploration of new ideas. This is important for our education, for our legislation, perhaps even for the future of our warfare (or lack thereof). In short, be free from dogma and full of awe and wonder. See if you can live a life that celebrates possibility and praises uncertainty. :-)

~~~~~
I want to give credit where it's due: the overwhelming majority of this answer came from a talk given by my neuroscience professor David Eagleman a few months ago on the subject. I found myself in complete agreement with him and I thought this question was an appropriate opportunity to share his ideas with even more people, so if you're impressed, I want to say that I'm really just standing on the shoulders of a giant here. :-)

A citation with links if you're interested in reading more: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pos...

Muttleylaff,openmine,Shepherd00 and TV01.I am a liberal individual that understands what ignorance and prejudice can do to unenlightened people and the innocent victims.Sleep paralysis to the unenlightened is caused by demonic powers trying to kill one.Perhaps someone(B) is beside said unenlightened person(A) during such episodes,said unenlightened and "spiritually woke" individual(A) starts questioning the presence of the person at that moment.Let's say A has painted B in negative light prior to the incident,paranoia would make A feel this corroborates his/her suspicions and then said suspicions graduate to perceived fact and heaven forbid A is a honorary gossip, the matter spirals out of control without B the slightest bit aware of what's going on.Imagine a 6 year old being accused of possessing "demons"(for reason out of one's control) beaten,treated with cruelty and unfairly,secluded from an immediate society due to hearsay.Cats are not exempted from this darkness that engulfs the unenlighted.You can only imagine the fate of individuals adults and nonadults with SSA sexual orientation in pitch black countries like Nigeria.I only seek to know just what the bible states clearly about homosexuality so as redirect the ignorant to the only objective source of "infallible" knowledge they deem acceptable. Now if muttleylaff says he has seen the light from the sacred fire and he's lit his Olympic torch in a quest to run the marathon of enlightenment into the darkness that engulfs the ignorant and prejudiced territory of homosexuality in christianity then he should be allowed to given he has packed all he needs to complete this tedious task.
If in the end his torch is put out by the winds of irrefutable evidence,then I'd want to know just how open-minded the bible(when viewed in the context of the average christian) is towards homosexuality which TV01 and openmine have given answers to from their perspective (which represents pretty much the greater population currently) on the subject.If homosexuality is kicked against within christendom for now at least the individuals should not be seen as sinful creatures due to their sexual orientation(which mostly is out of their control by nature) and don't need to be tortured or delivered from the "spirit of homosexuality".

Please note I am straight.It's not everyone that supports homosexuality that is gay or bi.Also,due to the religious nature of the thread I refer to the bible as an objective truth and evidence for or against the subject.
I'd like state that the apparent lack of feminine opinions or lesbian references on this thread makes it kinda gay....

...Just kidding

Muttleylaff pardon me for backtracking the progress you've made on the thread.It's not possible for me to read through this thread and find what I'm looking for without mental stress.The main reason for my question has been address(the question itself has not) and I'll take whatever y'all have said into consideration in order to get other answers.The etymological aspect you've brought to my attention is interesting I must say and I'll appreciate it if you can tag me to replies addressing that aspect.
I'll be watching this thread from afar cos I don't have the mental energy to mount the dragons(really really long arguments and counter arguments) like y'all have nor am I convinced about the infallibility of the bible so I don't take it's words seriously(my personal opinion).If you are victorious on your quest to deconstruct the lies & myth of consensual adult homosexuality/same sex union you should open a thread that comprehensively clarifies the whole thing cos reading this thread from scratch to gain enlightenment is not advisable.

Shepherd00:

You already know about Sodom and Gomorrah nau.
If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them. (Leviticus 20:13)

Leviticus 18:22-28
It is disgusting for a man to have sex with another man

. Anyone who has sex with an animal is unclean. Don't make yourselves unclean by any of these disgusting practices of those nations that I am forcing out of the land for you.

They made themselves and the land so unclean, that I punished the land because of their sins, and I made it vomit them up.

Now don't do these sickening things that make the land filthy. Instead, obey my laws and teachings. Then the land won't become sick of you and vomit you up, just as it did them.

Judges 19:22-25
They were having a good time, when some worthless men of that town surrounded the house and started banging on the door and shouting, “A man came to your house tonight. Send him out, so we can have sex with him!”

The old man went outside and said, “My friends, please don't commit such a horrible crime against a man who is a guest in my house.

Let me send out my daughter instead. She's a virgin. And I'll even send out the man's wife.

You can rape them or do whatever else you want, but please don't do such a horrible thing to this man.”

The men refused to listen, so the Levite grabbed his wife and shoved her outside.

The men raped her and abused her all night long. Finally, they let her go just before sunrise,


Judges 20:12-13 The tribes of Israel sent messengers to every town and village in Benjamin.

And wherever the messengers went, they said, “How could those worthless men in Gibeah do such a disgusting thing?

We can't allow such a terrible crime to go unpunished in Israel! Hand the men over to us, and we will put them to death.”

But the people of Benjamin refused to listen to the other Israelites.

Just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which likewise indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural desire, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire. (Jude 7)

Not necessarily the verses I asked for but it only points to validity of my initial speculations which has somehow being answered by TV and openmine.Thanks anyways.

Homosexuality is romantic attraction, sexual attraction or sexual behavior between members of the same sex or gender. As a sexual orientation, homosexuality is "an enduring pattern of emotional, romantic, and/or sexual attractions" to people of the same sex. It "also refers to a person's sense of identity based on those attractions, related behaviors, and membership in a community of others who share those attractions."
Wiki

1 : of, relating to, or characterized by a tendency to direct sexual desire toward another of the same sex : GAY
2 : of, relating to, or involving sexual activity between persons of the same sex
: a person who is sexually attracted to people of the same sex.

TV01 and openmine thanks for the replies.I think I've gotten just what I needed to know as regards to my question.I'll wait for Shepherd and those verses.

Budaatum and jesusjnr I've been literally laughing out loud at the comedy you guys are providing to nl users.
I suggest a 7 day period of celebration and felicitation with the winner from 1st Jan 2020.

openmine:

Its like saying or believing that since you dont indulge in wrongful acts but only in your thoughts,God will definitely see you as righteous!

"Thought is action is rehearsal"

Everything about homosexuality first started with a thought before it metamorphosed into a reality!

The very thought of being attracted to a same sex is enough to imply that you will definitely find a partner and you will one day become affectionate with such partner!

These are the trail of just one thought!

This can be likened to a man looking at a woman in a seductive manner but just because you have conceived that thought implies that you will definitely have sexual actions with such lady!

You cannot be 'gay' on your own in the absence of a partner!
God sees the intent of man and he knows such thought will lead to an action one day hence,he will not permit such thought!

Remember that Jesus said that if a man looks at a lady in a seductive way,he has already committed sin because he already had such thought....

All am trying to say is that,you cannot have a place in heaven because such acts go against the plan of God for mankind!

Though like I have said,the abuse and killing of those who practice such acts is condemnable!

Is it humanity's fault that the plan was distorted after the "fall of man"? The bible kicks against fornication but not the same sex kinda fornication. I'm only asking these questions cause a person can identify as gay and be treated like the devil's twin.
The Catholic priests and nuns who are sworn to celibacy are testaments that one can do without involving in sexual acts(regardless of what they do behind the scenes) and as such identifying as gay doesn't mean one would eventually indulge in sex acts with the same sex.

Shepherd00:

Pls ask him further why the HOMOSEXUAL ACT is met with a sentence of death everytime is mentioned since God does not condemn it.

I can provide scriptures.

@bolded That would be helpful.

Fidelismaria:
Still waiting

Cosmicgoat

Dude's prolly a goner.. There are natural and supernatural powers that don't want humanity to see the light CosmicGoat has seen or he's achieved Nirvana in the cosmos and he's ascended.Either ways this thread is closed

He could just be delusional..Who knows?

openmine and TV01 can a "homosexual" make heaven in that such a person never had sexual activity with same sex?
We've reached an clarification that being attracted to the same sex or identifying as gay doesn't mean one is an abomination.So do gay people who don't have sexual intimacy with same sex have a place in the church? Should they be allowed to worship in peace without stigma and victimization due to ignorantly prejudiced "sanctimonious" believers?

openmine:

The bible totally condemns homosexual acts!
Consensual or not isn't the case because what is wrong is wrong and there is no point trying to sugarcoat any....

There are more than 25 verses in the bible that accepts,welcomes and institute a relationship or marriage of two different genders which was validated by God who said in explicit terms......

That is why a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh.
Genesis 2:24

and Jesus also endorsed marriage between man and woman when he said....

He answered, "Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them MALE and FEMALE, and said, 'Therefore a man shall leave his FATHER and his MOTHER and hold fast to HIS WIFE, and the two shall become one flesh'? So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate."
Matthew 19:4-6 (ESV)

However,there is no SCRIPTURE that bears any semblance or proximity of an acceptance of homosexual acts in the scriptures be it consensual or not!

If someone says a section of homosexuality in this case loving and consensual couples are now permissible by God,there should be at least on instance or example of such couples in the scripture!

I totally understand what you saying.I'm only looking for verses that don't restrict homosexuality to having sex with the same gender.
This would mean that the bible condemns both the gay person and gay sex but from what I'm aware of it's just the sexual part cos individuals are abused and victimized for being gay but is it warranted?
Does emotional and romantic attraction towards the same sex mean that one should be put to death or in modern day condemned? Or is it when you are having sexual relations with the same sex that you warrant condemnation.

MuttleyLaff:
The Bible doesn't strictly condemn homosexuality per se nor does it condemn sex between homos, what the Bible explicitly condemns, like for example, the Leviticus verses, are homo sex done under pagan influence, done with fertility gods/goddess temple prostitutes. Other verses in the New Testament like Romans, Timothy and Corinthians are against homos interested in prepubescent
children, against promiscuous homos and temple prostituting males.

There is no Bible verse that condemns homosexuality as a whole or generally.

If you need detailed info or other questions, please don't hesitate to ask

I know that from your viewpoint the Bible doesn't unambiguously and outrightly condemn homosexuality but there are folks with opposing view on here hence the 24 pages on this thread.
I'm neither here to support nor oppose anyone but homosexuality is not just about having sex with the same gender as one.It's just part of the whole and having a relationship without sexual intercourse doesn't mean your not in a relationship.
From the bible references I'm personally aware of Genesis(Sodom and Gomorrah), Leviticus and Romans,homosexuality is reduced to just sexual relations which means being in a homosexual relationship without having sexual relations would be permissible unless there are verses that regard it as a whole(sexual and nonsexual).I just wanna know if homos themselves are abominations and derserve such contempt and negativity due to their sexual orientation or if it's just the sexual part of it that seems to condemned in the Bible.

Muttleylaff I have a question.
Does the Bible strictly condemn homosexuality or just sex between homos? Can you refer verses that don't suggest just the sexually related part of homosexuality.Verses that condemn homosexuality as a whole.
This is open to all.I just need to clarify something.

jesusjnr:
Lol!

You are EmperorHero that saved the day.

Lmao...Anytime bruv

CosmicGoat:
Lies we have been told.
1. The shape of the earth
2. Everything about Gravity
3. Our origins
4. The out view of our society.
Many have failed to see the bigger picture. But only a select few does.

Interesting but no revelations yet.
What's with the suspense?

budaatum:

He was dreaming the dream for the op as shown to him by the Holy Ghost.

Lol..Maybe jnr's story is not complete

Cletus77:


So if GOD Wants to save, seal and protect the op's name...he choosed to do it in a graveyard?
Y'all are editing the graveyard part...

Op I'll advise you initiate a serious fasting and praying session and seek spiritual advise cos I don't think this is a matter you should brush off because you received opinions from NL

Lmao...it's "engraved" dude

CosmicGoat:
I hope you keep an open mind

You shouldn't worry about that.
I hope you blow my mind.

CosmicGoat:
If we know where we come from, we will know where we are going. For ages, mankind has being going through series and bouts of cycles of confusion due to ignorance about our origins. E.g The Salem Witch Hunt and The Dark Ages. Its high time we left our "high places" and condescend to our origins.

So much talk mahn..I hope your revelations are worth this hype.Anyways I'm all eyes.

johnydon22:


at one point in this process of stripping it down did it cease to be the old ship and become a new one?

Because, If you change your car tyres, it's still the same car, if you change the engine even.

So, tell me, which point that replacing parts make something not be what it was before.

This is same thought experiment for thesus paradox.

How far we've come through science, philosophy et al

TV01:
Does evidence for the change of one kind of creature into another exist? Is there - as you claimed - evidence for animals being able to undergo changes to the genome such that they become an entirely different kind of creature

Yes I did, it did not answer my question. Please point it out if it did. This point is not about the origin of life or ID. I merely asked for the "observable, verified and evident" of macro-evolution that you asserted.

I asked for enlightenment about something you specifically claimed. This was not an objection per se, nor about ID or the age of the earth. If you have no answer or would like to retract or otherwise modify your claim, please say so.

I can only refer you to comprehensive links and research articles that portray evolution in it's simple forms.Unlike some folks at quora and reddit who are more knowledgeable(by experience in the field and years of research) and are willing to provide a compendious answer to every question and misconceptions you have about the subject,I am only limited to my subjective research (which has changed my perspective and enlightened me remarkably on the subject) and I don't have the mental strength nor fervor to have a long ass discussion in a bid to shed more light on evolutuon.You can learn more by reading through the answers and convos that can be found on the sites including debate.com and medium etc to subjectively understand evolution so you know where the gaps and holes are and how sceptical you should be about them.
The evolution theory becomes complicated when it is adapted to try to explain philosophical questions in a bid to provide a natural and materialistic explanation for everything.This leaves us with more questions than answers with a underwhelming amount of evidence to back up hypotheses postulated.Evolution independent of this as regards to the observation initially documented by Jean Baptiste Lamarck and modified by Darwin is a very plausible theory that is supported by adaptation.It has been promoted from an hypothesis to a scientific theory after billions of dollars and years of research from different scientists in various fields and there is a consensus that it's as valid as the earth is spherical(This doesn't mean it isn't liable to change and can be demoted to a hypothesis in light of new indisputable evidences).
That's just the fun thing about science independent of personal interests and influence.It doesn't have all the answers and a true scientist wouldn't claim to know it all.As vaxx said,science is a work in progress with more questions than answers.
At this point you must prolly be thinking,all this words and yet no answer to your simple question.I admit I'm not even attempting to provide evidences as regards your question but if you find anybody that does,try to be open-minded.I'm only writing this so as to nudge you to find out more about evolution indepthly for yourself before you disapprove of it cos I've been there before.

This is just my opinion and I would entertain any objections and corrections.

helinues:


No I wasn't high.. Happy?

Dayummm..That's some weed induced equivalent kind of happiness right there.
Its all good tho

helinues:
We die no Ni.. Then turn to maggot.. Maggot are rich for fertile soil.. Then the farmers make use of the fertile soil to plant their whatever.

After harvest, human consumption of the agricultural products.. You remember that maggot, combination of many of it germinates and ..

You for know the rest

Lmfao..Were you high when you were typing this
You are confusing yourself by yourself