Atheist evolutionists: How far will you allow yourselves of sexual perversities?

It's a good question but a bit of a flame-thrower. It might be better to ask; "Does the sinful nature, which applies to us all, abound in us if we allow for sexual freedom."From my point of view, it is hard because I am sinful, and everyone is, and I probably, like most people, don't see this like God does.I think this present world and it's freedoms, provide a very, very strong proof that sin is prevailent, through the means of lust.How far should a person lust? That would be a more cordial topic. I think we are a bit hypocritical if we apply this to atheists, as our position is that all have sin.This is why people think we have "homophobia", if we pick out certain folk, but I should also mention that staright-sex fornication is not permissable under the New Testament and many christians will partake in this.My conclusion is that sin can only be dealt with internally. No human solution will work, or none-Theist solution. until a rapist DESIRES righteousness, he will continue to obey his sinful nature.Edited by mike the wiz, : No reason given.

Thanks, that was honest of you to mark that out. You could have just jumped on the bandwagon, but instead chose the correct course.

I'm not sure how you got to all of those conclusions. I was suggesting that we all ask ourselves about lust, and what the New Testament says about it. If anything I was attacking Christians and therefore myself, as we believe that sin is prevailent in all mankind, not just atheists therefore it is not fair to single out atheists over other groups.My only real point in this thread is that I believe no human formula, which might be considered a "Godless" formula, can change the crims or perversities in the world. It has to stem from the desire for the person to change from within.

Thanks for your post.I think that person you talked about, or a person like that can't have the Holy Spirit. Personally, I just don't see how when all that is revealed is hatred of a certain group, or the use of the bible to only justify his position rather than try and find out what it means.It's hard enough trying to explain the scriptures about homosexuality, etc, without such people making it much harder. Because ironically, people like this just make it impossible for a genuine believer to explain the Word, and show that we aren't promoting hate. I know. And sometimes people who are clearly genuine believers can act grotesquely, or sin, or do something immoral.I understand that the OP seems to promote a bias towards one group.Infact I know many decent moral atheist people who are generally, even "more" moral as they don't act in the digusting manner you described, my sole interest is to get people to point within. Whoever the rapist is, or the bigot, he needs to point within, and desire change and righteousness from within. I don't think our moral-formulas are enough, even if they are genuinely commendable.Thanks.

My understanding is that all sin is not seen on a scale, generally, although there might be exceptions, as there are verses that mention sins that don't lead to death, and sinning against ourselves, etc..I don't think I could make an argument saying that homosexuality is worse than adultery.I think in the new covenant, God takes us where we are, and "deals" with our sin in a personal manner. So if a fornicator came to Christ, he would be "convicted" by the Holy Spirit, eventually, that he/she was not proceeding according to righteousness.Hope that helps. I am "open", in the sense that I am very much explaining my beliefs rather than making a sound syllogism.

Thanks for being honest. If it helps, I can get very thinned out and get on auto pilot and make mistakes, and my grammar starts to go, etc...Maybe my original response could have been a bit clearer.

Yes.I will address Percy's post because it hits on the problem. Sorry for the delay, I am still "finding" posts to me. Lol

I think there's a lot of truth to what you say. This is the hardest area for a person whom believes they are genuinely born again, such as I.I FEEL completely unable to convince you of anything because basically it's too hard to explain.Your bible verse is a good example of why people do those very things you say. But I believe there is an "overall" theme to the "bible", and if you are going to go with the "bible", then you go with that whole theme.Our way (born agains), is to take what is said throughout the whole bible, searching the context, not the syntax, and finding, with the help of Hebrew, in some cases, what the answers are.With the homosexual issue, you're going to get "religious" people that are more concerned about homosexuals because of personal bigotry or hatred, rather than what the whole bible is telling us.But this is why I feel completely unable to explain this, because you will think, when I say "religious", that I mean all faiths. But infact, I believe it is a religious spirit, or what we call legalism.The problem is that there are all manner of sects. I saw a programme recently where a Coptic Christian stated, "we are biblical", and this very problem you mentioned, arose, because they were giving babies full-immersion baptisms, even though the bible clearly indicates that baptism should happen when a person comes to a position of decision about their lives. A baby can't do this.They also, although don't quote me on this as only the presenter said this, they also were burning incense to "help" their prayers.I think lots of religious denominations exist, but that it doesn't follow that these people are truly born again. Now before you state, "no true scotsman", remember, my point isn't that they do not call themselves Christian, but that they have to meet the criteria of the Gospels. It also doesn't follow that they are not born again, but eventually they will come to repent of these issues, if they really are.If they hold views which are generally contrary to those Gospels, then we have to ask - are these people really born again? Because if you are really born again, from experience, you know that there is no place left for either falsehood or hatred.Even now I am frustrated, because it simply is too hard for me to explain how I wanted to. My apologies.P.s. I believe the bible explaining the bible is the best proven philosophy. If one verse says all are saved, then why does it say in other places that people are condemned already if they don't believe in Christ?Logically, the only answer is that a syntax-level interpretation doesn't work, as the writers of the Gospels obviously aren't telling us that people who disbelieve are saved.So with these handpicked verses, the verses sometimes don't represent the "theme". Afterall, it was well understood by the apostles, as to why Christ came, Who he was, etc...and there are verses that deal with hell. therefore there MUST have logically been a misunderstanding on the part of those who take these verses and build dogmas by them.Edited by mike the wiz, : No reason given.

There is a "generic" , "religion".It is likely that I am put under this category. The only logical problem with that is that if you take thousands of slightly different beliefs, where is the "truth", in them? It can be easy to make them generic, and handwave away them all as false.This is such a big problem because even born again Christians disagree about what scripture says.But there has to be a difference in motive, if someone wants to understand what they say, and admitt he doesn't fully know, and someone who wants to "use" scriptures to justify in-built prejudices.But - yes, it is very understandable why say, an atheist, might want to handwave it away as A L L completely false. My advice would be to understand the bible, after having a real-life encounter with the God of that bible, and then try and understand it.That's all I can say. even if I am technically wrong, the truth is all that matters to me. I knew that saying "no" would make me look bad because people see me as a generic entity.

It surprises me that you say that. I don't know what I'm supposed to have done wrong. I admitted the church was biased, based on your reasoning, that they justify false marriage of straight folk, but no gay folk. Am I therefore a liar? Would a liar admitt to this truth?You have to remember, that through all of my struggles I never actually ever stopped believing in Christ. But it's not as though I'm a person whom insists I am right. All I know is that as far as I know I have searched for the truth, and as a believer I believe Christ has not led me down the garden path.Edited by mike the wiz, : No reason given.

I don't see how. That people come to wrong conclusions, in their various groups, won't get you to that conclusion.I would say that God has the ultimate meaning. That even boen-agains have their differences, doesn't mean that they undermine the general meaning of the bible as a Revelation.Yes, we can be theistic evolutionist or YEC, or OEC, or many things, such as pre-trib, mid-trib, post-trib.But really, we do believe that Christ has gave us a general revelation. Afterall, the "whole" bible, taking it all as true, only really means something to those who are Christian, and take it as it is, because that it what the "whole" of it represents.There is a theme you can't deny if you learn about it. Such as Christ being made sin because of atonement, which can be understood from the law books...death, overcoming it, because of the sin of Adam, at the beginning, and Revelation, a restoration of creation or a new creation, because of Christ's victory.All these things aren't up for interpretation. That a lot of the bible needs interpretation, doesn't have a baring on most of it. It would be a compositional error to give one issue such a huge "say", when the majority of scripture can be understood.I'll give you an example;When I was ten years old, I got to reading Genesis, and guess what - before any kind of worldly influences of any meaning, I understood Genesis.So what is it that really is the problem? Interpretation, or a pollution of our minds with other issues? Notice that eveolution wouldn't have been a problem at this stage of my life, therefore I didn't think six days could be six billion years, nor any need to water-down any verses.So it's not nearly as simple as throwing the baby out with the bathwater. But we are born again. We say, Christ is the truth. We say, that you can argue about anything, and defend "self" all you want. We don't believe other people's differences means that Christ didn't go to the cross, or that his miracles were parables, or that he died for an allegorical "death". We believe what is actually said, and the majority of the Gospels are understandable. The message is clear, but it's that people don't want to believe it in that form. It is more comfortable to believe it was all a parable, and that we all go to heaven no matter what we do in life.It's a matter of studying the bible, as a "whole" thing, and asking; "If God is behind this WHOLE thing, then what is his message?"The message is sin.Have you ever lied?
Have you ever stolen?
Have you ever cursed God or took His name in vain?
Have you ever commited adultery, even in your heart? Have you lusted ever before?
Have you ever been angry at your brother?Nobody has ever gotten around the fact that they have all done wrong in life, and even though the bible tells us about a Holy God that cannot withstand sin, people still believe they can enter his presence and live.What about the new creation? What if you lied by accident, and offended me, in that creation? What if you done a petty sin that led to something grand?Sin can only be addressed on a personal level. The sanctification process requires the Holy Spirit. We know through experience that this Spirit is real, whereas our worldly church-upbringing made us think it was "fake", something you had to believe in.if even the church doesn't believe in the message, then how are they real believers? How can they believe in the truth?It is being born again that matters. The body of Christ is human-form, not stone-form.All of these things can be understood from reading the real-life accounts of Paul, alone.What I'm saying is that the Holy Spirit is actually real. I have felt the presence of God and you can to. And my challenge is easy - if it is fake, go through the experience, and then say it is fake. But it is real - and Jesus Christ IS REAL. You have to therefore REALLY believe what he says.Edited by mike the wiz, : No reason given.