The beginning of wisdom is the fear of God. What does it mean to attempt to call God names, like some child on the playground?
Atheism is easy to understand -- "*I* am god. *I* define morality, truth, meaning, etc -- *I* "pull myself up by my bootstraps". It works as well as a spiritual solution as it does as a way to physically fly.
But how does one even begin to get their head around the idea that they ostensively want to claim there IS a "god", but they are worried that he is "homophobic"? I'm pretty sure they are "just kidding" -- they would like the intellectually VERY shallow idea that you can somehow believe in an actual creator of the universe, and then psychoanalyze him. We'll play along, but REALLY?
First of all, the God of Judaism and Christianity is NOT the same as the god of Islam. The Hebrew God is a God of order -- the Islamic god is a god "beyond order", which might easily be cast as "chaos" making the rather unsurprising conclusion that the Islamic god is Satan. See detail here.
If there is no god, then homosexuality and not having children is the very definition of "non-adaptive" as we see clearly as Muslims, Hispanics and Mormons take over the west. A not very detailed study of evolution will inform you that those who fail to breed fare rather badly in the "survival of the fittest". The "selfish gene" that is so "selfish" that it decides that masturbation or being gay is appropriate is the definition of "too selfish to survive". The future belongs to those who show up. Sorry Western civilization.
If there is a God, it appears that he might understand genetics and offspring -- shocking though that may be to those bent on psychoanalyzing the infinite. Removing non-adaptive characteristics from the gene pool may appear draconian, but when you are omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent, you get to decide. When GOD makes the same claims as your average atheist -- **I** AM GOD, **I** define truth, meaning, etc, it bears a lot more gravitas than a sniveling shitting, puking, soon to be worm eaten mortal making pronouncements from their "high horse" (children's rocking horse?).
I just finished Nietzsche's "Zarathustra", and will try to blog on it "soon", but the hubris is so thick it makes you really wonder about divine justice ... from Wikipedia.
In 1889, at age 44, he suffered a collapse and a complete loss of his mental faculties. He lived his remaining years in the care of his mother (until her death in 1897) and then with his sisterElisabeth Förster-Nietzsche, and died in 1900.So Mr "superman", who railed against compassion, was forced to spend the end of his sorry life in the care of his mother and sister. Certainly an intelligent man, but not a wise one. Just a little sampling of the kind of "thought" in the linked article.
Because I am a Christian, I suppose I more easily mock the views of another Christian, like Dan Patrick, toward my homosexuality, than I would mock a Muslim. But the wider problem with the Abrahamic religions remains: How will the new sexual freedoms of the West meet the religious conservatism of the East, especially as immigration has made distinctions between West and East moot in West Detroit or East London?"I am a Christian" ... but I mock God and other Christians. I am proud to declare myself homosexual in direct opposition to God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit, but I seek no forgiveness. No, "the problem" is with the "Abrahamic religions"! What will happen to these "sexual freedoms"? They will surely die -- with the Western civilization that spurned both the law of God and the law of survival of the fittest. Oh, and as for the author of the article? Well, God will be the judge of that.
Let us pray that God shows compassion on a remnant of believers who will be saved from this pit of cultural insanity and hubris.
'via Blog this'