Alara317 said:
how am I being limited or narrow? the point I was trying to make is that you shouldn't use religious arguments in soemthing that isn't a religious debate, and explained in 8 steps why they have no place outside of church. It's all very scientific. Based on your asserion that "Science needs faith", I'd posit that you don't really 'get' science or the scientific method. |
I do appreciate your effort as well but i kinda agreee with Immortal that you take a very narrow view towards the religion. Also you make use of the word "they" to prove your point and that's impossibble to do when a faith like Christianity has so many doctrines it's almost impossible to come up with a valid argument that everyone agrees with. SO referencing you 8 steps:
1. & 2. http://bible.cc/leviticus/18-22.htm , O.k. look at this website on the Leviticus 18:22 which is the main argument against gay marriage if you look at all the versions except the newly created 2007 NLT version you will notice that none of these verses says homosexuality exactly. How you interpret the verse determines what you get out of it. "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination." Personally when i read this I get that one should not sleep with a man as one does with a woman. In other words when reading it as is, in other words it's ok to be gay, lesbian or straight. I think the issue my view are those who chose to sleep with both men and women.
3. Personally I don't get what you were getting at here so i have no comment.
4.5.6.7. Considering how many translations there are from the bible and they fact that most of us don't speak hebrew, specifically ancient hebrew it's impossible to recieve the exact same text that original writers have written so it's no surprise that there is so many doctines of the same faith. The main difference between each doctrine is how that group people choose to interpret the bible. Every Christian will tell you that the bible was written by God and I still believe that. Everyone will tell you that God used certain individuals to write his message for us all. I believe that this text is the specific text we were suppose to read and comprehend but overtime I believe the text has been changed here and there mainly due to translation issues, missing pages, and most importantly man's fault in trying to impose on sacred text.
8. So my issue here is why isn't there a place for both God and science. You can have both it's not all or none.
Honestly i appreciate your argument and you brought up some interesting points. I still feel that you're out for blood instead of looking for enlilghtenment, forgive me if i'm wrong. But you are like most athiest i know and is just looking for proof, and i just can't provide you that proof. It's just something I know, in my heart is true. I know that might not be enough for you or other people but unfortunately there is no scientific proof neither I or someone else can provide to prove at this point, to prove God's exsistence. It's called faith for a reason, there are some things of this world we will never understand but it doesn't mean that it's not real or true. So in my closing argument i just want to say that you have the right to believe in what you want to believe and have your associated arguments, but you should also be open to hear other arguments as well and if someone wants to make ridiculous claims by stating their faith then ignore it, it's not worth getting worked up over something so minimal. So i wish you the best luck in your journey in finding a faith or lack thereof.
