Even without it, I reject faggotry. Male and female he created them.
The “no difference” theory is dead: Same sex parenting
- Thread starter GFR7
- Start date
Even without it, I reject faggotry. Male and female he created them.
GFR7
New member
I understand this, yes.
IMJerusha
New member
Do you have a link to that?
IMJerusha
New member
Interesting, Quip. Are you stating that God's Word disproves God or reveals Him?
Without man to hear/disseminate it....there would be no "word".
God needs man more than the opposite.
Last edited:
IMJerusha
New member
Oh, that's not so. If man kept quiet, the stones would cry out.
Acts 17:24-25 "The God who made the world and all things in it, since He is Lord of heaven and earth, does not dwell in temples made with hands; nor is He served by human hands, as though He needed anything, since He Himself gives to all people life and breath and all things;"
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4218827&postcount=84
Mind answering my question?
I did, the answer is both. If there was no man, there would be no godly rumination....the "stones" ruminate not nor hold any capacity to do so.
TracerBullet
New member
Quincy
New member
My cousin and her girlfriend are raising a child together, my cousin's own biological child. The kid is doing good, from conduct to school grades, so even if this study had legs, I wouldn't believe it speaks for all same sex families. It would only speak to the families studied and you'd have to know whether or not studied families have parents that are good at parenting (not all opposite sex couples make good parents either) and like many others here said, whether or not the child had emotional baggage.
That's always a problem with all studies, legit or not. In this case, this study would only truly be valid if all families with same sex parents were part of the study and there existed a clear pattern. Well, maybe not all but a very large percentage of that group.
That's always a problem with all studies, legit or not. In this case, this study would only truly be valid if all families with same sex parents were part of the study and there existed a clear pattern. Well, maybe not all but a very large percentage of that group.
Well, man needs God for existence itself, so I don't think that has legs, but it does lead to an interesting question. If God is perfect it goes for some that He cannot need anything, being complete. But if love in perfection is a thing that gives and does, how could He be complete in the manifestation of His nature, which love would appear to compel, without an object upon which to move?
Last edited:
realistically, even if you "studied" a billion "normal" families, can we count on accurate conclusions ?
Prayers for the child.
Quincy
New member
Probably not, I imagine there wouldn't be any clear patterns if the entire population was studied. People who do studies, find patterns because they hand choose subjects who are likely to display behavior conducive to the pattern they want.
Coming from you? Wow but is that creepy.:jump:
Ask Mr. Religion
☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) 	
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Hence the Trinity.
Thus also why non-Trinitarian views, including Unitarianism, suffer from making creation a necessary act somehow needed by God.AMR
I've tended to agree with that being at the root of the trinity...the only thing that can't be done by love in that circumstance is sacrifice. And it is in that reflection that I suspect our existence becomes less than mandate and more than whim, or that we are, instead, a desire of God.Hence the Trinity.
Ask Mr. Religion
☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) 	
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
I understand the matter of sacrifice as a component of imperfect human love, but why is there a necessity of sacrifice as an aspect of the expressed perfect love within the confines of the Trinity?
AMR
PureX
Well-known member
Actually, the accuracy of a statistical study depends on how the study is done; not so much on the number of participants.
These days, all sorts of entities routinely use biased polls and studies to promote their positions. So much so that it's easy to think that the methodology itself must be biased. But that isn't so. The problem is that it takes some real expertise to recognize when a body of data has been analyzed in such a way as to minimize bias, or when it has not. And it takes a lot of explaining in either case, once determined, to get someone else to understand it. And few of us have the intellect and attention span necessary to do that. Especially if the results are something we wanted to hear, or something we did not want to hear. As in both cases our own bias determines our position on the study prior to an accurate assessment of it, anyway.
PureX
Well-known member
I think if we understand love as an expression that comes from within, rather then a need for something that exists externally, we can resolve this dilemma.
I view existence, including the existence of love, as a manifestation of "God". It becomes, then, a bit of a 'chicken or the egg' question if we separate our existence, from God, in our own minds, and then view them as 'the lover and the beloved'. Because in truth, the egg IS the chicken, just as the chicken IS the egg. They are simply different relative aspects of the same phenomena.
I believe that God and existence (us) are not different entities. They are only different aspects of the Divine Absolute. And so it is also true of the phenomena of love; that the lover and the beloved are ultimately one and the same.
As Jesus says that to love God, ourselves, and each other; it's all the same love.
