JimmyDiggs - That's fine if that is what you believe. I fully support that and you should act on it as you see fit. All my point was that it is a big decision in anyone's life and that it should be up to the people involved, not anyone else. So if you think it is morally wrong, then don't do it, but don't tell other people not to do it as well.
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Rape is not consensual and therefore is not part of the parameters of the example I was giving. Consensual sex (of any type, orientation, etc) is solely the business of the people involved. Equating sex with murder and rape is ridiculous, and I am sure you can see that.
I am not encouraging debauchery, I just think people should make their own choices. Why should you be the person to decide right and wrong?
I am not encouraging debauchery, I just think people should make their own choices. Why should you be the person to decide right and wrong?
J
Terrible argument. Poor logic indeed.
The existence of contrary proclamations of truth does not require that two claims of truth be equally valid, nor does an opposing claim thereby negate the truth of that which it opposes.
As per the "it is your idea", I only communicating to you what is true. I am not claiming myself as the origin of what is true. I am not the origin of the claim at all.
The existence of contrary proclamations of truth does not require that two claims of truth be equally valid, nor does an opposing claim thereby negate the truth of that which it opposes.
As per the "it is your idea", I only communicating to you what is true. I am not claiming myself as the origin of what is true. I am not the origin of the claim at all.
Again though, it is true to YOU, not everyone. I doubt Muslims in Iran, Buddhists in Thailand or Shinto Monks in Japan would agree with you on everything. What I am saying is that religion and spirituality is an individual choice and an individual matter. The OP asked a question about something that they felt was important and all my point was that they should decide for themselves. If their religion or spiritual beliefs should indicate a certain decision needs to be made, so be it, but listening to someone else or doing what they say is a bad idea when it comes to such a personal issue.
J
Is there absolute truth?
I'm not asking that anyone agree with me. It is not me that you are bound to, but rather an objective moral law.
Yes and no, depends on what you mean by "individual matter." Not all "views" are equally valid. I'm sure you would say that when I say "the earth is approximately 6,000 years old" that it is an egregious error. Would you not?
This is a Christian forum, the OP is a Christian according to their profile. They are asking for Christian answers. Try not to get your panties in a bunch about it.
Prove it.
I'm not asking that anyone agree with me. It is not me that you are bound to, but rather an objective moral law.
Yes and no, depends on what you mean by "individual matter." Not all "views" are equally valid. I'm sure you would say that when I say "the earth is approximately 6,000 years old" that it is an egregious error. Would you not?
This is a Christian forum, the OP is a Christian according to their profile. They are asking for Christian answers. Try not to get your panties in a bunch about it.
Prove it.
I would say that neither the 12 year old girl nor the beast are in any position to give what could be conceived as reliable and informed consent. The man and his 700 wives, if they are all consenting adults then is there something so terrible with that. I struggle to find the idea of 700 women happy within that situation but I find it harder to justify to see why anyone would tell 701 happy people that they can no longer be happy. (If indeed they are happy, and if they are not, then it is not consensual and void as an example).
I disagree. Sex outside marriage is not evil. Rape and murder are however.
I am not encouraging people to disobey god (incidentally, which god are you talking about?), I am encouraging people to think for themselves. I think you are standing on unstable ground with regard to 'truth'. You cannot go around telling people right and wrong (whether you are the origin of the moral code or not) with little evidence or proof to support it.
In short, live your life as you see fit but don't tell others how to live theirs. Not everyone has the same idea of right and wrong as you, and there is nothing wrong with that.
I disagree. Sex outside marriage is not evil. Rape and murder are however.
I am not encouraging people to disobey god (incidentally, which god are you talking about?), I am encouraging people to think for themselves. I think you are standing on unstable ground with regard to 'truth'. You cannot go around telling people right and wrong (whether you are the origin of the moral code or not) with little evidence or proof to support it.
In short, live your life as you see fit but don't tell others how to live theirs. Not everyone has the same idea of right and wrong as you, and there is nothing wrong with that.
J
Hey, quit imposing your views. 
You're imposing your views on the two involved. That's wrong dood.
Ah, so you're a secular humanist.
You don't agree with reality? Oh well. Reality doesn't feel obliged.
Yes you are.
While that is a fallacious description, it is one Satan used as well in the Garden.
Right back atcha. Prove to me that the principles of right and that you espouse are what everyone should live by.
As per my end, I am arguing an objective moral law. You seemingly have no conception of what an objective moral law is, or you would be attempting to refute that.
So that's the moral code everyone is bound by?
Aren't you imposing your idea of right and wrong on what you say is my idea?
You're imposing your views on the two involved. That's wrong dood.Ah, so you're a secular humanist.
You don't agree with reality? Oh well. Reality doesn't feel obliged.
Yes you are.
While that is a fallacious description, it is one Satan used as well in the Garden.
Right back atcha. Prove to me that the principles of right and that you espouse are what everyone should live by.
As per my end, I am arguing an objective moral law. You seemingly have no conception of what an objective moral law is, or you would be attempting to refute that.
So that's the moral code everyone is bound by?
Aren't you imposing your idea of right and wrong on what you say is my idea?
I am not imposing my views on the people involved. I am illustrating how ridiculous your examples are and how I am refuting them as points that support your argument.
I prefer not to categorise myself, much less have it done for me.
Sex outside of marriage is not evil, not is that 'reality'. (This is one of your more deluded points)
There is nothing wrong or evil about asking people to think for themselves. Every christian (and every religious person for that matter) disobeys god on a daily basis. It's hard not to when the book you follow is so full of contractions and misinformation.
I think the best moral code is 'Treat others as you would like to be treated'. Maybe that is too general, and I am sure there are examples that contradict it, but it is much better than the bibles tales of genocide, rape, and murder.
Yes I suppose I am imposing my ideas of right and wrong on your idea, but I am not saying (without a shred of evidence or proof) that you will burn for eternity if you ignore me. Because you won't.
I prefer not to categorise myself, much less have it done for me.
Sex outside of marriage is not evil, not is that 'reality'. (This is one of your more deluded points)
There is nothing wrong or evil about asking people to think for themselves. Every christian (and every religious person for that matter) disobeys god on a daily basis. It's hard not to when the book you follow is so full of contractions and misinformation.
I think the best moral code is 'Treat others as you would like to be treated'. Maybe that is too general, and I am sure there are examples that contradict it, but it is much better than the bibles tales of genocide, rape, and murder.
Yes I suppose I am imposing my ideas of right and wrong on your idea, but I am not saying (without a shred of evidence or proof) that you will burn for eternity if you ignore me. Because you won't.
J
You're affirming something is permissible. Which is your view of the matter.
Is it wrong to murder?
You don't have to say it explicitly.
Hey, that's just your view. Stop imposing your view on others.
[quote Every christian (and every religious person for that matter) disobeys god on a daily basis. [/quote]Indeed, everyone disobeys God. That does not negate the fact that you are encouraging it.
Now you are beginning to reveal yourself.
Hey, that's just your moral view. Stop imposing your views on others.
If it's wrong for me to impose, what makes it okay for you?
You're right about that, it's you I will answer to, but rather the fact that I have violated an Objective Moral Law. I will answer to the enforcer.
Is it wrong to murder?
You don't have to say it explicitly.
Hey, that's just your view. Stop imposing your view on others.
[quote Every christian (and every religious person for that matter) disobeys god on a daily basis. [/quote]Indeed, everyone disobeys God. That does not negate the fact that you are encouraging it.
Now you are beginning to reveal yourself.
Hey, that's just your moral view. Stop imposing your views on others.
If it's wrong for me to impose, what makes it okay for you?
You're right about that, it's you I will answer to, but rather the fact that I have violated an Objective Moral Law. I will answer to the enforcer.
J
You can't even see your own contradictory nature.
Ephesians 4
17 So I tell you this, and insist on it in the Lord, that you must no longer live as the Gentiles do, in the futility of their thinking. 18 They are darkened in their understanding and separated from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them due to the hardening of their hearts. 19 Having lost all sensitivity, they have given themselves over to sensuality so as to indulge in every kind of impurity, and they are full of greed.
Ephesians 4
17 So I tell you this, and insist on it in the Lord, that you must no longer live as the Gentiles do, in the futility of their thinking. 18 They are darkened in their understanding and separated from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them due to the hardening of their hearts. 19 Having lost all sensitivity, they have given themselves over to sensuality so as to indulge in every kind of impurity, and they are full of greed.