I don’t think that had been brought up.

But the trinity is more complex – from a theological standpoint – than the simplification that it’s a case of multiple Gods.

The angels, the devil and demons do not fall into the category of “gods” either. Not in Christian belief anyway – I can see how they’d meet the definition for other believers in the supernatural.

This is in response to Nathan’s first comment:

“If we’re talking questions of degree then monotheistic religions are by nature less delusional than pantheistic religions.

I’m a Christian and I only believe in one more God than you do.”

Just sayin’.

Thanks for your thoughtful response. I too will probably make this my last comment on this post. I’ll try to address HoverFrog as well.

“Ultimately, the problem that I and other atheists have is that we can speak with one guy who insists that his exact set of beliefs just happens to be the exact right recipe to make god happy, while not seeming to realize that every religious person in the world is saying the exact same thing about THEIR beliefs, and not realizing how ridiculous and unbelievable that makes him look.”

Ultimately there is only one right way to please God – the freedom that Christians have, in terms of our relationship with God, is to be wrong. We understand that being wrong is forgivable.

This creates problems for outsiders because you never know what you’re going to get…

“Would you say that your marriage to your wife is an insignificant part of your life and who you are in society, not to mention how you interact with society?”

Not at all. It is very significant. But it’s a matter of what you primarily identify as. I primarily identify as a Christian, not a husband. Every other part of my identity flows from that. That’s kind of the point of Christianity. So if I were a man who was same sex attracted and I became a Christian it would change my thinking about my sexuality. It does. Like I said, I’m not arguing from abstract here, I have a few friends for whom this is a real struggle. But if you’re convinced of one truth your experience doesn’t necessarily alter the truthfulness of that moral absolute.

I no doubt would really enjoy many things that I don’t do because I’m a Christian. They could well be really fulfilling and give me an identity… but I’m a Christian first.

““I DON’T KNOW.”
Where have we heard this before, and recently?”

I find that most issues people have with Christianity come from people making absolute statements about things they’re unsure about. I would rather tell you honestly that I don’t understand something than pretend that I do… again, not understanding God completely is not a reason not to believe in God.

“You haven’t done any soul-searching to try to figure out why this is a sin, you simply accept it as it’s written. If you HAD done any soul-searching on this, I would think that you would come to the inescapable conclusion that this book and its doctrines are misguided, obsolete, and irrelevant.”

You’re making a lot of assumptions here that start off with two philosophical premises that I disagree with – one is that if something doesn’t seem to have negative results it must be a positive, and two is that you assume I haven’t done any soul searching.

Like I say, and like my next point that you didn’t understand was trying to make – the one where I said God is the arbiter of good… I believe good is defined by an external being, not by my internal conscience or a harm based ethical equation. Since I first believe that Jesus is who he says he is, and that therefore God is who he says he is, it follows that I take God’s word more seriously than human feelings. Humans do not have a consistent ethical framework – what you consider to be right and natural is considered by many – even non-Christians (the Dalai Lama for instance) to be unnatural and wrong.

“The whole world is broken? Do you say this BECAUSE science has observed homosexuality in animals? Is this what makes the world broken?”

I say this because the Bible makes that observation in Romans 8. It says the whole of creation (the earth) has been frustrated and broken by sin.

“As long as you’re waving your hand saying “Me! Me! I’M the one who has the right answers!” all the while ignoring the BILLIONS of others saying the SAME THING, then no, we can’t take you seriously.”

I think you’ll find that my beliefs on most things are pretty consistent with Biblical Christianity from the get go. I try to stay faithful to what the Bible says (using historical context and an understanding that Jesus is central to the interpretation of every bit of the Bible). You make assertions about “billions” of others that are based on the actions of the well documented fringe who have been denounced by just about every normal Christian denomination in public statements or reactions.

“I can put no stock in a god that supposedly made me who I am, and the religion that says I need to change.”

Why not? That’s the fundamental teaching of Christianity to everybody – not just to homosexuals. We all need to change, and none of us want to. That’s kind of the point. I completely understand your frustration though – the church has been pretty good at singling homosexuals out for special treatment, as though they’re somehow different to adulterers, people having casual sex, or people who tell lies to their spouse… and the Bible says we’re to love sinners (it doesn’t actually say anywhere that we’re to hate the sin – just that we’re to hate our own, and occasionally discipline other Christians within the church for their own good).

As you are not part of the church, and you seem quite certain you don’t want to be, I’d suggest you keep campaigning for the right to marry your partner and live happily ever after.

I don’t think marriage is a sacred institution that is the church’s to dispense to whomever they please. It’s a legal relationship and you’re being denied the right to form a legally recognised institution. It seems unfair to me – and I don’t think the Bible says anything about state instituted marriage.

It does say that if you’re a Christian you shouldn’t be a practicing homosexual, and it does say that God’s ideal picture of marriage is between a man and a woman.

“I have no respect for a belief system that answers serious, life-affecting questions with “I don’t know.””

I’ve covered this already – but you’re conflating my response with God’s. God knows, I don’t. The Bible probably knows, I don’t. I know all that I need to know though – that is I know that I personally am convinced that Jesus is who he claimed to be as recorded in the Bible.

Now, to HoverFrog…

You can believe in all the gods you want and interpret your holy book in whatever way you want to but when you label and judge other people you cross a line. When you (not necessarily the individual you) insist on laws being imposed that limit the freedoms and rights of those you judge because of your interpretation you cross another line.

I agree entirely.

I think Christians have a right to speak up on a Christian position on policy, but not a right to implement it on the whole country (whichever country) on the basis that they believe God thinks they should.

The only social issue I really think Christians should be arguing about are issues that have direct impact on people’s lives, like poverty, abortion, war and immigration. Abortion is probably a controversial one – but I think that if it’s even remotely possible that a fetus could be classified as a human it should be, and its life should be protected. We can talk about that elsewhere…

“By some interpretations of the concept of gods you cannot know the mind of your god, it is too vast and too unknowable.”

Clearly we have different points of view on what the Bible actually is – but again this is born out of philosophical presuppositions more than out of any desire for accuracy.

I would suggest that 1 Corinthians 2 probably addresses your issue here – Christians claim to have the mind of God both through the Bible and the Holy Spirit.

To judge others because of an assumption and an interpretation of a book clearly written by men within a cultural context seem to me to be the height of arrogance.

Once you believe that the Bible isn’t out to lead you down the garden path, it’s consistent to believe all of the Bible. If you believe in a God who intervenes through a physical and observable visit from his son then it’s reasonable to assume the same God can guide the writing of his Holy book. Well, that’s my logic anyway.

It is arrogant. Christianity is simultaneously the most arrogant and the most humble religion I’ve looked at.

On the one hand we claim to have a personal relationship with the only possible God, we make God much bigger and more powerful than any other religion – and yet at the same time we say that humanity without God is doomed, broken and of no eternal value. We claim that as individuals our works have no bearing on our futures. Most other religions have a meritocracy at play where if you’re really good and impressive you can claim to be really good and impressive… Christianity doesn’t do that.

Christians who do that are in danger of finding out that they’re not Christians when it’s too late to do anything about it.

Ask yourself what harm homosexuality really does. Be as objective as you are able. Do you think that a loving god would really condemn gay people for something that does no harm to one another and no harm to society? Is that really “God’s standard”?

Why does God need to make decisions on the basis of harm and not his own intention?

Why, if I believe that humans will inherently reject the Christian God, should I be surprised that this rejection manifests itself in ways humans enjoy and find harmful?

I don’t think God condemns people on the basis of homosexuality – I think that’s an expression of the problem not the problem. I think God condemns the people who reject him.

All of your assumptions are loaded with your understanding of the way God should work. I’d rather try to understand the way God says he works than the way I think he should work. If it’s pie in the sky at least it’s a well defined pie made by an expert…

I can back up any of the claims I have made about Christians and what God thinks using Bible passages – I don’t because I know you see no real value in the Bible and it would waste all of our time for me to post them.

I don’t agree with that interpretation of Romans.

That’s fine as long as you acknowledge that we are both interpreting it. Most atheists are fine with anyone holding whatever beliefs they like but draw a line when it impacts on the lives of others. You can believe in all the gods you want and interpret your holy book in whatever way you want to but when you label and judge other people you cross a line. When you (not necessarily the individual you) insist on laws being imposed that limit the freedoms and rights of those you judge because of your interpretation you cross another line.

To be frank you and I do not know if there are gods or not. If you make the assumption that there are then you still do not know what thoughts the gods have. By some interpretations of the concept of gods you cannot know the mind of your god, it is too vast and too unknowable. To judge others because of an assumption and an interpretation of a book clearly written by men within a cultural context seem to me to be the height of arrogance.

Moreover the book that you glean this interpretation is the same one that commands you to not judge, to be compassionate and to treat others as you yourself would wish to be treated. Like many Christians it seems that you are cherry picking the scriptures that you use to guide your decisions to support a decision that you have already made.

Perhaps I prejudge you and perhaps you are simply parroting opinions provided to you by family members and authority figures. We are all products of our upbringing after all but there is no good reason to retain such views in the face of contradictory evidence. Ask yourself what harm homosexuality really does. Be as objective as you are able. Do you think that a loving god would really condemn gay people for something that does no harm to one another and no harm to society? Is that really “God’s standard”?

Ultimately, the problem that I and other atheists have is that we can speak with one guy who insists that his exact set of beliefs just happens to be the exact right recipe to make god happy, while not seeming to realize that every religious person in the world is saying the exact same thing about THEIR beliefs, and not realizing how ridiculous and unbelievable that makes him look.
I explained to Nathan that asking me to change my homosexuality just to appease some god is an insult to who I am, and to my place in society. His response:

It only addresses your place in society if you choose to be defined by your sexuality.

No, I’m defined by many things, but my homosexuality is only one of them. But it’s an important part, because it goes beyond sexuality. It addresses who I love, and who loves me. It would address who I would marry, if I could. Would you say that your marriage to your wife is an insignificant part of your life and who you are in society, not to mention how you interact with society? Would you say that your marriage only has significance if you define yourself by your sexuality? I would think not, I would think that you feel very strongly about your marriage and how it places you in society. You and your wife operate as a team. I would think you’d be very proud of that (in as much as xtians are allowed to feel pride). I would think you would vehemently defend your position in society as a husband.

Most heterosexual guys I know have natural desires to want to sleep with as many women as possible. Christianity requires that those desires be repressed. As do my wedding vows. I’m not suggesting I have a problem there – but before I was married I had to commit to the idea of not having sex before I met and married my wife.

Well, if my partner and I COULD get married, we wouldn’t have that problem, would we? But no, xtians think they own the copyright on that. And I’m not talking about having multiple sexual partners. I’m talking about having ONE. Your book does not require that your desire for your wife be repressed, does it? So why should I? Who SHOULD I have desires for? Should I deny who I am, and fake attraction for some poor woman? Should I dupe this woman into a loveless and sexless marriage, because some ancient text says that who I am is a sin? You (all xtains) need to stop trying to separate the quality of BEING homosexual from the sex act itself. A person CAN remain abstinent and try to repress any of their true feelings from manifesting, but that doesn’t mean it’s a good idea, or that it’s healthy for them. Or that it changes them from being homosexual. It just makes them into a repressed person. I would argue that that is bad for everyone in society, since we have to share the world with such a twisted, self-hating person.
When I asked why homosexuality is a sin, in other words, what good, obvious, easily explained reasons did god have for decreeing that it is wrong, Nathan’s response was:

I don’t know. But it’s God’s prerogative to decree whatever he wants. Really.

“I DON’T KNOW.”
Where have we heard this before, and recently?

U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker asked what harms may befall California if gays are allowed to marry there. Charles Cooper, the lawyer for backers of Proposition 8 banning same-sex marriages, had an unusual answer, the New York Times reports. “Your honor, my answer is: I don’t know,” Cooper said. “I don’t know.”

Obviously, as Island Jack spelled it out, this is just rote memorization of indoctrination. You don’t have any real good REASON for believing this, other than you were TOLD to. You haven’t done any soul-searching to try to figure out why this is a sin, you simply accept it as it’s written. If you HAD done any soul-searching on this, I would think that you would come to the inescapable conclusion that this book and its doctrines are misguided, obsolete, and irrelevant. If you believe something strongly, you need good reasons for it. If you are asked WHY you believe it, and your answer is “I don’t know”, we call that a FAIL.
When I suggested that homosexuality is not unnatural, as many xtians would have us believe, because science has observed it in nature, the response was:

For the Christian God is the arbiter of “natural” not science. We might observe natural things happening – but we understand that it’s not just humanity that is broken, but the whole world.

I don’t even GET this. The whole world is broken? Do you say this BECAUSE science has observed homosexuality in animals? Is this what makes the world broken? How did it get this way? How did god let it get so out of hand? Did humans break it?
In a much earlier post, Nathan said:

Also, I think the vast majority of Christians (outside of America) don’t hold to the position you suggest they hold to regarding Genesis. Those that do are the inflexible fringe who believe that God is incapable of metaphor or nuance. Sadly atheists apply that understanding to both Christians, and our God.

How do we know YOU’RE not the “inflexible fringe”? This is yet ANOTHER case of “they’re not REAL xtians”.
And this finally, is the problem. As long as you’re waving your hand saying “Me! Me! I’M the one who has the right answers!” all the while ignoring the BILLIONS of others saying the SAME THING, then no, we can’t take you seriously.
The bible may have some pearls of wisdom here and there, but nothing that didn’t predate it, and nothing that a decent human being couldn’t figure out on their own. I can put no stock in a god that supposedly made me who I am, and the religion that says I need to change. I have no respect for a belief system that answers serious, life-affecting questions with “I don’t know.”

You make some very good arguments and in reading your posts I see where it appears that you have actually done some studying of the bible. What i mean is that you appear to have researched and looked at the translations (whether through Lexicons or study of the languages). This is very uncommon in most religions especially Christianity.

The biggest problem that i have always had with Christianity is that when i question things in the bible looking for meaning, the majority of Christians would simply read the passage and take the passage literally. They often times don’t like looking at the concept or idea behind the entire situation and are almost always lost when i start talking about the way the passage was translated from the original text. And believe it or not this was when i was just a tween. LOL.
I was raised to search for the answers myself and to consider the sources from which i seek knowledge. I am naturally an inquisitive person and rarely take anything at face value. I was that crazy kid that was not really kicked out of sunday school but more or less considered a nusiance because i asked to many questions and questioned the answers. You know the one who said “If God created Adam and Eve and they had Cain and Abel and Cain kills Abel and was sent to the land of Nod to live with the Others. Who are the Others and where did they come from?” I believe that the simple questions that children ask are often times the most important because they are seeking answers that are almost always the basic foundation of any belief. As they grow older they are shaped and molded and usually move through life with out questioning things because somewhere along the way they made someone angry by asking to many questions. They then end up getting the Proverbial “Because I said So” answer and then they don’t question as much anymore until eventually they quit questioning and just accept whatever explanation and teaching is given to them.
Look at any religion. What do you have? The majority of the followers don’t actually do any real research into thier religion they just accept the teachings of the leaders and repeat like little parrots what they heard (or think they heard) with no real understanding. My stepchildren are discovering this concept and constantly question me about hundreds of things after they go to Church on Sundays.
Ok i will get off my soapbox now and let this discussion get back on track. thank you to everyone for letting me give my opinions.
Nathan my only advice is to keep on keeping on and follow your heart and keep your faith. Unfortunately we won’t always have the answers to everything and that is fine. The biggest step forward is realizing that we don’t know or understand it all and to accept that. You appear to already know that which gives you a big headstart on most Christians.

Romans is talking specifically about activities in the temple.

I don’t agree with that interpretation of Romans.

“Nowhere in the bible does it describe normal relationships between same sex couples”

And yet the Bible speaks volumes about relationships between opposite sex couples.

“You could extend the limited scope of the bible to include all gay relationships or you could interpret it more compassionately and accept that the bible was a book of it’s time.”

Or, like I’ve argued, I could accept that one of the largest theme of the Bibles is the struggle against our sinful desires in order to follow Christ. Homosexual attraction is no doubt one of the hardest crosses to bear. But any action that doesn’t meet God’s standard – including homosexual sex – is sinful and needs to be repented of. It’s forgivable – and I think lots of Christians need to realise that, and it’s no worse than having sex outside of marriage – I think a lot of Christians need to realise that too… but it’s a sin. The key to forgiveness is repentance. The God of the Bible forgives anyone, for anything, on the basis of repentance – the idea of making things ok with God because they’re now culturally ok is relatively new. And it doesn’t do anybody any favours. Because it makes people assume they’ve got nothing to repent of…

I obviously could go into more detail but I don’t think I need to because the key point on homosexuality is that it is a matter of interpretation. Nowhere in the bible does it describe normal relationships between same sex couples. Only the cultural prohibitions and an orgy are condemned. How could you interpret that? You could extend the limited scope of the bible to include all gay relationships or you could interpret it more compassionately and accept that the bible was a book of it’s time. As a follower of Jesus what choice seems more appropriate to you?

– Love and pursuit of wisdom by intellectual means and moral self-discipline.
-A system of thought based on or involving such inquiry
– and on…

Philosophy always getting in the way /facepalm.

Using inquiry to better understand and decide our morals, what is “good”, and what is “bad” shouldn’t be the antagonist. Participating in self-driven thought and inquisitive behavior should never be discouraged. When it is discouraged I begin to question that as well.