An Honest Debate/Whoeveristhirsty.com

The reason Religious needs outside questioning and Science does not is because Science is CONSTANTLY questioning itself, that is the nature of science, where as Religious Organizations forbid ANY questioning, so the only people left to question are those who don’t believe. Science has been constantly evolving since the time of Jesus. Imagine if science was the same now as it was then, this very conversation would be impossible. Yet religious hasn’t changed, it has stayed in the dark ages.

Good point! I never thought of it like that.

I disagree, Max. I grew up in a religious home where contant questioning was encouraged.

But was your home the norm or the exception?

So don’t reject the faith because some have abused it. It doesn’t have to be that way. My view has always been that truth has nothing to fear from questions…if it really is the truth. So I give myself freedom to question, to read, to learn. But to my amazement, I keep coming back and discovering that the Bible was there first.

Take for example the recent flap on this site about Big Bang. The amazing thing to me is that writers, some of the living as long as 4000 years ago, described it and they used the right terminology in discussing a transcendent cause. They did this when no one else in the world believed in ex nihilo, never had, and wouldn’t until the 20th century, and when the idea of a transcendent God was not even contemplated. How could they possibly have known these things? They said, God told them. Kind of makes you wonder, doesn’t it?

Finally, Max, you raise a good point when you say science is constantly evolving. That’s why I am never upset with the fact that the Bible sometimes contradicts what scientists are saying. If the Bible agreed completely with them I would have to conclude that it could not be true. Because like a new science text book, it would be obsolete in 10 years. But it has stood the test of time, proving accurate time and time again in everything it affirms, for 4000 years. That’s better than any science book ever written.

P.S. Religion is not in the dark ages, it produced western civilization, science and just about everything else you value (listen or read the openning chapters of What’s so Great About Christianity).

Dawkins, in his reply said that Boteach did not think like Hitler. Apparently the good professor did not know that when it comes to the subject of homosexuality, Boteach and Hitler are indeed like-minded.

Pink, you are not quite correct here. The third Reich came to power with the help of homosexual thugs, the brown shirts of Ernst Roehm. They were Hitler’s personal body guards until Roehm became a threat to him. Homosexual men were also well represented in their replacement, the SS, and by all accounts, Hitler was personally very comfortable around homosexuals. In fact, his inner circle, was full o f them.

Most the the gays killed by the Reich were brown shirts sent to the camps after the night of the long knifes (Roehm was actually caught in bed with his gay lover that night). Hitler surrounded himself with open homosexuals such as Rudolf Hess. Also, contrary to the modern narrative, there was never a systematic round-up of homosexuals by the Nazis. In fact, macho homosexuals were very much tolerated in the upper echelons of the party, the SS, etc., and homo eroticism on the Spartan model was a theme in Nazi art. Hitler loved the stuff.

But even before Hitler rose to power, in his days as a starving “artist,” Hitler was comfortable with homosexuals. He lived in a flop house with male prostitutes and there is evidence that he himself turned a trick or two. There is also evidence that he was involved in gay relationship during WWI. There is an excellent recent book on this subject, The Hidden Hitler, by Lothar Machton. It posits the theory that he was a self-loathing homosexual and that his pathology was in part responsible of his actions.

Here’ another interesting fact: every woman Hitler was romantically linked to ended up committing suicide. So all in all, it’s hard to draw the comparison between Hitler and Boteach.

As for you last post, since it contained a personal insult, a violation of my rules, I will not be posting it. Thanks for your contribution.

Boteach *is* a gay-sympathizer.

Whether Hitler was gay or not is an open question. But either way, why would any gay person would loath their own sexuality. Oh, that’s right - because for millenia the poison of the abrahamic religions have told them to do so. One is reminded of people like Haggard.

As for the last post, it was not a personal insult. You seem to have forgotten leviticus 20:13. Bad, bad christian.

Pink Unicorn,
When one looks at the Law s/he soon discovers, if he or she is honest with him/herself, that s/he has committed sin worthy of death. Paul was right; all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.

Let’s take one of my sins as an example; one occassion I have taken the Lord’s name in vain. This is a sin worthy of death according to the Law. You, I assume, have commmitted certain sexual acts that the Law says are worthy of death. I guess this means we are both guilty of capital crimes against God. So in answer your previous post (which I didn’t post) let us make a deal; I won’t kill any gays if you won’t kill those of us who have taken the Lord’s name in vain. Seriously, I don’t consider myself any better than you. So since I am not without sin I will not be throwing any stones. Biblically speaking, it would seem we are both in need of grace.

Also please, stop the little put downs like, “bad, bad, Christian.” I will allow it this time but please note, it violates the rules of this blog.

We may disagree with one another, but let’s be respectful.