Radicalism and the Church

[DBCooper]

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

Your long history of posting on all topics homosexual makes your position on equality beyond obvious.

[/quote]

That’s a fair point to make about the tone of my statements on homosexuality but it’s not a fair point regarding the substance. I have never argued or meant to imply that homosexuals are less worthy as individuals; only that homosexual acts are immoral - a value judgement of the behaviour itself, not a value judgement of homosexuals as people. In fact, I’ve made the point many times that I don’t believe that homosexuals are inherently evil - or at least, no more so than anyone else.

Also, I think I’m more of a realist in many ways regarding homosexuality than many religious people. For example, I’m far from convinced that someone can “pray the gay away”. So that of course begs the question of what should a gay person do? Celibacy? I don’t know. I’m inclined to think it’s something they need to decide for themselves. And I don’t presume to answer that question for them. However, my fundamental belief is that homosexual activity is immoral.
[/quote]

Pittbull could tell you all you need to know about the futility of praying away the gay.

[SexMachine]

[quote]DBCooper wrote:
Hold on, SM. How can God be comprehended? Can you explain to me how it is possible for a contradiction to actually exist? If God is omnipotent then he is, by definition, a contradiction. He cannot create a force so powerful that He cannot overcome, thereby discovering a limitation to His powers. Either there is a limit to His powers and He is not omnipotent (which would shatter any and all concepts of God), or He is omnipotent but in such a way that we are not equipped to comprehend.

[/quote]

I’m not saying the nature of God can be comprehended. I’m saying the ethical system of God can be comprehended. An objective, transcendent moral order can be comprehended. It is universally understood that murder is wrong. It is universally understood that stealing is wrong. In fact, as I’ve argued previously in the On Ethics thread, the fact that these things are universally understood is compelling evidence that a universal moral order exists. And it logically follows that the existence of a universal, objective, transcendent moral order implies a law giver. It implies a “thou”.

Can you actually comprehend how a contradiction can exist in reality? How can something be both blue and not blue at the same time? How can something with truth values that negate each other exist? I’m not discounting any possibilities as far as His existence goes, except for the possibility that we can even comprehend Him or His nature.

See above. I’m not claiming the nature of God can be comprehended.

If there can only be one sovereign, then that sovereign is a Higher Power that we cannot or have not comprehended yet.

Agreed.

Perhaps in the future we will develop the ability to understand how a contradiction can exist, how something can be both blue and not blue at the same time. But that sovereign is certainly not a god whom/that we cannot understand in our present condition.

Since the Church derives its authority from a god who is all-powerful, and since the Church is not capable of comprehending such a thing, they have no legitimate authority.

Not so. The church only need understand and transmit the ethics that God has commanded us to live by. The authority of the church is legitimate only in so far as it is predicated upon His ethical commands. In fact, all authority must be predicated upon His ethical commands. I accept the law of homicide because it is based on divine law. The only man made law(lex humana) that I accept as legitimate is law founded upon divine law(lex divina).

As I said before, all man made law is secularised theology. At least all legitimate law is.