Okay, enough of that, let's just end this thread while we all still don't think of killing each other. Let us believe what we believe and see in the end who is right. Okay...okay then. Now, I have to go, my boyfriend is comming over with a bottle of sparkling cider and a box of Trojan's...be nice all of you and I'll see you all later.

------------------
"All you people, can't you see, can't you see
How your love's affecting our reality
Everytime we're down
You can make it right
And that makes you larger than life"

HEE-HEE-HEE.. inherent contradiction in less than twenty words! A new record!

Observe. Two (assumed) true premises, one conclusion which MUST follow.

1.) Everything God created is inherently perfect.
2.) God created Lucifer

Lucifer is inherently perfect.

"Inherent" means "immutable in the character of the object." In other words, something which is inherently perfect MUST remain perfect, else it ceases to be what it is. Something which possesses an inherent characteristic cannot have that characteristic changed from within. It simply IS such a way, unless it is changed from without.

Which begs the question, "what outside force could have corrupted Lucifer, most perfect of God's angels?" The only answer, of course, is "God."

Oh, and if the other guy's examples weren't good enough for you, how about this: "If God had wanted us to run long distances, he would have given us gazelle's legs."

------------------
"We shall not yield to you, nor to any man." -- Freak, The Mighty.

to Omega: *shakes his head* (I have done this a lot in this thread). You know for someone who takes me to task (and my religion) for not using there teaching strictly from the bible, you yourself should be more careful my friend. Here's what you said.

[Note the orginal quote is attributed to Sol]

""So everything God created is inherintly perfect?""

"Something like that. Thanks to old Luci and free will, though..."

Perhaps, however that's not what the bible said, if you check the King James edition what does God think of creation. Here it is, in Genesis (btw I put full quotes so no one can say I put it out of context).

1:4 "And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness."

1:10 "And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good."

1:12 "And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding
fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good."

1:18 "And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good."

1:21 "And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good."

1:25 "And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing
that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good."

1:31 "And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day."

Did anyone sense a pattern, perhaps the term "it was good" (btw if you believe the bible that was the words of God himself), not it was perfect, or it was "inherintly perfect", just good. Perhaps when he said that he meant (here's a thought perhaps take God's word at face value) [the previous statement assumes the blab, blab Christian belief]. The Catholic belief is that everything God created is good, not perfect just good. What happened was free will allowed the creations like humans and angels to decide whether they wished to be good or not. Btw the Catholic defination of evil is the pervertion of Good.

The second statement that annoys me even more, no you can't blame evil on Lucifier, at all. Why simple because to the ability to be evil existed before Lucifier, Lucifier was just the first and most powerful being in history to choose evil. All the Devil can do is tempt people to evil, that's it, period, there is nothing more he can do, he can't make people do evil.

Finally I really don't care about this thread any longer, people have gotten are being hypersensitive about this sensitive topic when I haven't yet seen an attack. It just seems to be a difference in options and the basic facts, not a hate toward homosexuals. Does anyone remember what this thread is about, anyone? Well to refresh everyone's memory it was the Catholic Church's view on homosexuality. This whole bl**dy thread has turned into a bl**dy mess. I am out of here.

[Note upon request I will edit the scripture quotes, there not there to say, you are bad, but to simply so the quotes can not be taken out of context.]

------------------
HMS White Star (your local friendly agent of Chaos and a d*mn lucky b*st*rd:-) )

------------------
Outside of a dog, a book is a mans best friend. Inside of a dog, it's to dark to read. Groucho Marx

------------------
It's all about the Pentiums, Baby!
"I'm down with Bill Gates, I call him Money for short
I phone him up at home and I make him do my tech support"

If you remember your Genesis (chapter three, IIRC), God cursed the world because of Adam and Eve's sin. So perhaps "was" would be more appropriate.

"Why are you dismissing them? What does the nature of our tools have to do with anything? Define "artificial", for starters. Either God created man with everything he could possibly ever need, or God didn't. If the former, everything in the modern world, including music, poetry, and chairs; are products of rebellion towards God. If the latter, than the Fall wasn't really a bad thing, was it?"

I may be misinterpreting this paragraph, so if so, I'm sorry. Homosexual sex doesn't constitute a tool. I'm using artificial to mean "that part of creation that has been reformed by man to a different purpose". God did create us with everything we could ever need. Everything artificial is just for comfort.

"...or this we should take everyone who believes they've been abducted out of society and place them in special re-education camps?"

I hope you don't think that's what I'm advocating for any group. I've never said ANYTHING about forcing something on people that they don't want. All I've said is that homosexual activity and Christian beliefs are contradictory, that homosexual activity is most certainly under consious control, and if the desire to do so is strong enough, even the homosexual attraction can be changed.

"I really, really hope that I'm simply misunderstanding you."

You are. I never said anything about the blame for a person being abused resting on that person. If, however, that person does something wrong which is infulenced by that abuse, it is still their responsibility. My point was that nobody could force a homosexual into a hetrosexual relationship. It would be THEIR decision. No one else's.

Charles:

Even though chances are you won't be reading this, yeah, I do. Why shouldn't I? It seems to make more sense than believing that God purposefully created something that was flawed.

1of2:

My apologies. I was misinformed as to the definition of the word "inherant". I believed it to mean "originally; at the moment of its creation; by design". So thus, I believe that everything God created was ORIGINALLY perfect. Again, sorry. My bad.

"Oh, and if the other guy's examples weren't good enough for you, how about this: 'If God had wanted us to run long distances, he would have given us gazelle's legs.'"

That would interfere with other activities, wouldn't you say? I don't think gazelle legs wouldn't work too well on a biped, anyway. And we weren't designed NOT to run long distances.

H.M.S.:

"here's a thought perhaps: take God's word at face value"

You might want to remember that the OT was written in Hebrew (and Aramaic, in spots), and, as we all know, one word in a foreign language can have many different translations. And "good" doesn't preclude perfection. Anyway, we seem to be using two slightly different definitions of perfect. Perfect as applied to a sentient being would be "sinless". Perfect as applied to an inanimate object would be "containing or being nothing that could be disadvantagous".

Anyway, in more appropriate response to the exchange that got this particular line of thought going (which was: Me: "God designed humanity in two sexes." Sol: "So everything God created is inherintly perfect?") No, everything God created is not inherintly perfect. Everything God created was originally perfect, but God cursed the universe because of us. God doesn't make mistakes.

"...you can't blame evil on Lucifier..."

No, but if it weren't for him, we'd all be in a worldwide paradise, munching on fruit and running around naked. Of course, that's unproovable, but without him, no initial temptation, thus...

Sunspot:

Why? If nobody's interested in this thread anymore, nobody will post, and the thread will die. Like the Original C/E thread. People said "Let it die", but that doesn't mean lock the thread. That would be more like killing it. Just let it sit. If it dies, it dies, and even I'm not dumb enough to argue with no one here.

Not sure exactly what translation you read and I may have just not been following this thread close enough, but God DID NOT curse the world!

------------------
It's all about the Pentiums, Baby!
"I'm down with Bill Gates, I call him Money for short
I phone him up at home and I make him do my tech support"

(And yes, that is the proper spelling. I looked it up.)

I third the motion to close the thread.

Without objection, thread closed.

The topic of sexual preference in relation to any religion is a closed topic for the next 30 days. Threads that deal with that subject matter will be closed upon discovery.