Blind Faith

This is a most interesting topic.
Blind faith - some also know it as "fideism."
Do I, or rather, do Christians have "blind faith" in God, where we throw all reason and logic to the wind and abandon all thoughts? Do we really take everything that is spoon fed to us in Bible Study, VBS, or even our own pastors/priests/leaders?

Unfortunately, yes. SOME do, but don't lose hope, not all.
I have witnessed from time to time, a point where a Christian's faith has morphed into fanaticism. All they could do is spout what was inserted into their brains from the day they started going to church, and nothing was ever discovered on their own.

Personally, I don't think I have blind faith. Some might say it's illogical to believe in a God you can't see, touch, or hear (which some may argue is not true), but basically that having faith is illogical. Oh, how wrong they are. Faith is not illogical, nor unreasonable, but this can be saved for another day. I want to get back into why I don't think I have blind faith.
1. I have a very personal experience with me and God, that nobody else can refute but myself.
2. There are many corroborative evidences that point towards the existence of a personal Creator, and Jesus as a real person that lived in human history. (note: I said corroborative)
Basically, these are all the reasons for me. I, personally can't deny that God hasn't been involved in my life and neither can the world.

Still, how harmful can blind faith be? Well, for one, you can't defend blind faith. "/ yeah, bummer.
Seriously though, you can't, because you're just taking what someone else told you and regurgitating it over and over again. If you haven't done your own thinking and started your journey towards coming to terms with your very personal God, get on it. God wants a very unique relationship with each and everyone of us. He is not a generic, one size fits all kind of God. Go search that personal relationship with Him, and then you'll be ever better equipped to stand firm in your faith. If you don't truly know who you believe in, how can you ever defend Him?
Think about it.

Change

Change - everything changes.
We grow up and age as the years go by. The tiny acorn changes into a giant oak tree. The clouds are shaped and moved by the winds. Everything changes.
However, what CAN change is not what it is itself that very moment and what it CAN be at the same time. I can't be me right now and me 5 years from now at the same time. It is either or. Also, things can not bring themselves into being, and until it becomes whatever it is supposed to be, it does not yet exist, and therefore can not cause anything. (Did I lose anyone?)
All things change, and all change is the result of an act or force that caused the change. Nothing can give itself what it does not have, nor have something that it's supposed to have in the future in the present. "The result of change can not exist before the change" (Kreeft). All have a potential to change, but something needs to act upon it or cause it to change.
[ex.]: bodies move (change) because of the will
Question to consider: Are the things causing change also changing themselves? (pretty much a rhetorical quetion). If so, then everything is this big chain of cause and effect, where everything needs to be acted upon by something above/outside itself in order to change. The entire universe is changing and is the sum of all these moving/changing things. Therefore, there has to be something outside of the universe, causing it to change, in order for it to do so. A transcendent being. The universe is dependent on and changing with respect to three things: matter, space, and time. This being must then be outside of matter, space, and time. The being is not a changing thing, for that implies something outside of it to cause it to change, but the being is an unchanging Source of change.

Point of View: Homosexuality

Another thing I jotted down a while back (April 2008)

This seems to be the new hot topic nowadays. California is debating gay marriage's constitutionality.

What is homosexuality?

Let's look it up...

homosexual: (of a person) sexually attracted to people of one's own sex

pretty simple, and right to the point. A person is homosexual if he/she is sexually attracted to another person of the same sex. So, by definition, I suppose feelings of compassion and love can be ruled out from being "homo".

Personally, I don't think what goes on in prisons all fall under homosexual acts. I mean, sure, a lot of it, but not all. I think a lot of the whole establishing dominance is not because they feel an attraction to the guy, but the reasons are more carnal/primal than that. No love there, just domination and humiliation, and also those men are pretty lustful considering their appetites are rarely sated. So, technically, by definition, those acts of male domination do not fall under homosexual acts. Sure, they are sexual acts directed at the same sex, but a homosexual act involves a sexual attraction. I think it becomes more of a bestial attraction than a sexual one. Makes sense?

Now, some say homosexuality is a biological/mental defect. Kind of makes sense, I don't remember ever waking up and deciding I wanted to be straight for the rest of my life. I mean, there are clinical studies and reports on people who have the wrong balance of testosterone, or estrogen, or any one of those other nifty hormones that trigger puberty in teens, which leads to some strange medical cases. Attraction towards another person can not be helped, so I don't know, most reasonably I conclude there are people that are biologically homosexual. This does not mean that the choice to act upon your attractions are nonexistent. Everyone can be attracted to someone/something, and also everyone can choose to or not to act upon said urges.

Now down to the nitty gritty. Is homosexuality immoral?

I as a Christian set my moral values to the best of my ability on the Bible and what God says to me. This, can inevitably lead to inconsistencies on the personal opinions of all Christians on the topic of moral/immoral homosexuality, because everyone interprets the Bible their own way. Some liberally, some conservatively. Besides all that, I, personally, want to hear/see/feel what God has to say about this.

(I'm doing this without a Bible right in front of me, so certain Biblical examples must be found later*)

I don't know where my stance is on this, so that's why I'm doing this x]

Sexual acts directed towards the same sex are definitely condemned as immoral. The ACT, but the Bible doesn't say anything about the attraction, which is what defines homosexuality. I've heard it said that homosexuals were persecuted and killed during Biblical times. They were stoned/beaten to death because they lusted after a person of the same sex. Equally, adulterers were stoned to death as well. Jesus did say a man who looks lustfully at another woman has already committed adultery, so technically by Old Testament standards, he should be stoned. The man who lusted after another man should be killed, and the same goes for the man who lusted after a woman. Interesting. So, basically, bottom line, lust is bad, not specifically homosexual lust or heterosexual lust.

Now, we all know it is nigh impossible to not lust after someone. Especially in any relationship with a significant other, there will be times when dirty thoughts cross your mind, or you look at another man/woman. Even when you're not in a relationship for that matter. I say nigh impossible because I feel like God might just bring a person into this world who lacks the hormones, or brain processing to lust after someone just to prove me wrong.

So, basically any relationship is a tainted relationship, that will never be free of lusting. THIS does not mean it's a bad relationship, it becomes bad once either person starts to act upon those wicked urges. God understands this, I'm pretty much sure of that. Hence, the whole dying on the cross. AH the cross. He died on the cross for everyone, yes shocking, everyone, even homosexual people. That is why all that accept Jesus Christ as their Lord and Saviour are granted salvation.

So far, from the whole sexual attraction thing, the person who is heterosexual is no cleaner than the person who is homosexual. However, it is wrong to commit sexual acts with another of the same sex, because one, that's just wrong, and two it tarnishes what the act of procreation is supposed to be. God blessed us with the ability to "be fruitful ad multiply" so yeah it would be definitely wrong to try and twist that blessing around. The only reason sex isn't all sinful, is because of the necessity of sex in order to procreate. Having sex with the same sex, does not make babies, everyone knows that, even the people that are having that kind of sex, so therefore, wrong.

Now, the whole gay marriage thing. Honestly, those two men/women must either really love each other or be willing to go through a lot of crap for money to face public persecution and still go through with their "holy" matrimonies. Now, we can't assume all of the homosexual couples get married so that they can have more "sex", nor can we assume that they're all in it just to show compassion without acting on their lusts. (not omniscient) So, that leaves room for, there could be those that get married because they truly love each other and are not acting upon their sexual desires, and God forbid, may even be Christians.

But of course, we live in reality where people, heterosexual and homosexual alike get married to satiate their sexual desires, all caught up in dream land, and then file divorce after a few days. So, why should homosexual people be denied their right to pursue happiness, when heterosexual people are similarly abusing what is pure and beautiful about marriage. The Bible condemns homosexual acts, but yeah, heterosexual acts of lusting fall under the same category as sin as well. I don't think that God holds any particular sin higher than another, well there's the whole exception with the unforgivable sin of denying the Holy Spirit and Jesus Christ. So, why should we (Christians)? *rhetorical question.... no need to answer.

Epiphany* i think the greatest challenge for homosexuals, would be to set aside their pride, to set down their defenses that they unfortunately have been antagonized to set up due to society's tendency to not be able to accept differences, and to ask for forgiveness for any homosexual activities they've participated in, and any lustful thoughts (hey, sounds kind of familiar, except for the whole homosexual part); not for who they are or how they feel.

I'd like to think God made everyone, wonderfully and fearfully, as well as perfectly the way He wanted. People can put homosexuality in the same category as cancer, AIDS, natural disasters, a defect of our world that arose due to our sins, or they can simply say the Devil made it. Whatever. We say all this and we forget that lust, vengeance, greed, pride, are not made by God, but us. We are just as unclean. We can not start to think that homosexuality is the greatest of all sins, because from the way things seem to be going, that's exactly the road we're headed. The uncontrollable attraction between two people isn't the sin, the actions taken upon those feelings are, the thoughts that form due to those attractions are. We can't forget that. Who are we to even say what God had made and hadn't made, or how he should have made it. His ways are too great, and beyond our understanding. So I don't say God for sure made homosexual people the way they are, but I'd like to think He did. Why not? Maybe, homosexuality is present in our lives as a tool to measure just exactly how much we love our brothers/sisters.

The greatest sin for homosexual people would be to hold onto pride and think that lustful actions and lustful thoughts are alright. They are wrong period. Regardless of homosexual preferences or heterosexual preferences. And us heterosexuals need to stop passing judgement on things we can never fully understand. We have never had those uncontrollable urges to be with a person of the same sex, nor felt their anguish as they were persecuted. Homosexuality, in my eyes is not the sin. The wrong actions taken are.

Jesus Christ healed the lepers, He sat and dined with the tax collectors, associated Himself with prostitutes. Not one did he turn away. The "lesser" people, the tainted people, the "unclean". These were the people he loved as well. So, you might say what's so significant about healing a leper, how is that in any way related to Jesus possibly accepting homosexuals? The healing itself isn't completely significant, sure it's a miracle that leprosy was cured by a few words and faith, but Jesus' decision to even talk to/help the lepers is what is significant. The compassion, the mercy. Lepers were "unclean" people, ostracized from society, yes because leprosy was contagious, but only through open wounds, or blood transfers, and I'm pretty sure the people at that time knew that. Jesus did not just stand there and take pity on the lepers, but He did something about it. People can pity the unfortunate, pity the homosexuals, but if pitying is all that a person is going to do, they shouldn't waste their time. Stand up, take a stand, and try accepting others that are different, less fortunate, and as some might say "unclean".

Some fear of the liberalizing of Christianity, and in some ways bad. Conservatives Christians aren't all that perfect as well. Conservative, liberal, whatever. Search for the truth, and God's heart and regardless of what you're interpretation of the Bible may be, God is pleased, and helping you along. Now, an interesting question, was Christ a conservative lover, or for the lack of a better term, a liberal lover?