Religion and the DJ

[Rollo Tomassi]

I get a kick out of all the cakeeaters here with respect to christainity and sexual immorality. Here's a few versus you guys might want to read:
Exodus 20:14, 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, Galatains 5:19, Mark 7:20-21, Revelations 21:7-8. How many times have you bragged about your former conquests, or promoted sex outside of marriage, without remourse?

If you want them to quit kidding themselves about soulmates, maybe you should quit kidding yourself about this issue. I'm an agnostic, btw, and fully realize as a former christain its one or the other on this.

Come-on, LMS, come out of the closet on this, and tell them i speak the truth!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

As an alternative, RT, i would LOVE to here how you reconcile the two. How do you trick your mind to think its ok? Seriously, I would love to know how you do that.

Alright. Honestly I don't think I need to defend my spiritual beliefs, nor do I have any problem reconciling them with what I advocate here, but let me begin by stating I am not a christian in the sense that I ascribe to the constriction of an evangeical doctrine (which is really what your scriptural quotes reflect, agnostic or not) but I am a Christ-Follower. I also understand that to be human is to be imperfect. Since we're citing biblical verses let me pull out one that's important to me:

"I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart." - Matthew 5:28

Let me tell you how I interpret this scripture; what Jesus is showing (men in particular) is that no matter what you do you can not help but be sinful - it's literally how we're made to be. If the mere thought of tapping that beautiful ass is enough to earn you an enternity in hell, we're pretty much fukked as a whole. Now we can argue the semantics of what is defined as "lust" to the same degree that we can debate what constitutes "sexual immorality", but that's not the point. The point is that we endure a constant struggle with our biology, and the parts of that raw animalism that we have difficulty embracing is generally what we call sin. Biology trumps conviction in everyone, no matter how pious they appear; in fact the pious usually are the worst offenders of their own conviction. Personally, I believe Jesus said this to illustrate to us how screwed we all really are without faith in salvation.

So does that make Rollo Tomassi a hypocrite? You bet it does. It makes me a hypocrite, you a hypocrite and everyone else on planet earth a hypocrite who's ever said one thing and done another. Our behaviors make liars of us all. My difference is I'm able to accept that, and embrace it. I've always stated, since day one on SS, I advocate what I do not because I got it all right, but because I got it all wrong.

Damn right AZANON, I tapped a LOT of ass in my 20's and I enjoyed all of it. Am I a hypocrite for this? I've been the worst of AFCs in my time as well, does that make what I say incorrect or irrational here on SS? You see, I don't believe that one sin is worse than another; sex out of wedlock, homosexuality, and lying on your resume are equally as damning as murder, pride, avarice, and taking the Lord's name in vain (which I've done a lot more times than chicks I've banged). I also understand that while the wages of sin is death, experiencing sin is the only way to learn certain things. Sin has an educational value that can only be learned by sinning. In the Bible King David had a man killed so he could tap his wife, and yet this is the bloodline from which God chose to have Jesus descend.

I would challenge you to sift through my posts and look for any instance in which I advocate a guy going out and fukking as many women as humanly possible. I have stated on many occasions that it's a man's biological imperative to do so, but I've never implicitly said get as much ass as you can. To be sure, I've gone into detail about how it is in a man's best interest to maintain as many option available to him as possible and to remain non-exclusive for as long as he can, but even in Plate Theory I explicitly adovcate this in order to stay in a position of chosing - as the PRIZE - to reserve the freedom to become a better man in many ways, not exclusively sexual. If you want to see this in a biblical perspective, then call it encouraging a man to be what God intended him to be - a Man.

In fact here's a few other good verses I hold dear:

he prostitute reduces you to a loaf of bread, and the adulteress preys upon your very life. - Proverbs 6:26

A foolish son is his father's ruin, and a quarrelsome wife is like a constant dripping. Proverbs 9:13

Better to live on a corner of the roof than share a house with a quarrelsome wife. Proverbs 21:9

A quarrelsome wife is like a constant dripping on a rainy day Proverbs 27:15

My intent on this site isn't one of advocating to go out and get whatever you can because there is no tomorrow, but rather to prepare Men to be able to have the wisdom, confidence and prowess to make intelligent, informed decisions based on facts and sound judgement, all in an effort to avoid a lifetime of regretting life changing ones. Most times this involves experience in order to understand it. I think it's naive and foolish to think that our convictions are stronger than our biology and circumstance. Being a chirst-follower (or christian if you prefer) doesn't excuse you from thinking critically. In fact, if anything, I would say that having spiritual beliefs would necessitate more caution and critical thinking.

I don't see a disconnect in being a DJ (and disabusing oneself of childish idealization like the soulmate myth of the ONE) and having a firm belief in God. To be human is to be imperfect - remember, perfect is boring.

 

[azanon]

I read this but i dont have time to respond now. I'm not interested in putting you on the defensive so much as i am just discussing this topic. I believe its been brought up before, but I was particularily interested in your take on it since you mentioned first that you believe in God, but actively promote gaming women to its full extent outside of marriage.

I'll give a more full response some other time.

 

[grinder]

I’m calling “911” now to get the fire trucks over here to put out the inevitable flames……

Unless we can be mature about it.

Anybody can quote scripture to mean most anything, and, very unfortunately, with conflicting interpretations, the true meaning of the verses gets watered down.

BTW, didn’t King Solomon have 700 wives and 300 concubines…..?? Sign me up for that.

 

[azanon]

Alright. Honestly I don't think I need to defend my spiritual beliefs, nor do I have any problem reconciling them with what I advocate here, but let me begin by stating I am not a christian in the sense that I ascribe to the constriction of an evangeical doctrine (which is really what your scriptural quotes reflect, agnostic or not) but I am a Christ-Follower. I also understand that to be human is to be imperfect. Since we're citing biblical verses let me pull out one that's important to me:

Are you meaning by "Christ-follower", you just think the guy's pretty cool so you try to emulate him personally, but throw all the rest of the bible out, including versus written by Paul (one of the versus I quoted was Paul's)? If so, i guess there's nothing wrong with that as one can choose to emulate anyone, but surely you could find some historical figure more profound than Christ to emulate?

I once saw a top 100 most influential historial figures of all time list; Paul came in 5th, and Jesus was, like, 71st .

But back on christainity, I believe pretty much every major Prodestant denomination AND the catholics would say you cannot just pick and choose the versus you want to follow. Its an all-or-none deal. Since you take just part of it, you're really in my camp, IMO RT.

"I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart." - Matthew 5:28

(according to christains), its one thing to "sin". Its yet another to do it willfully, plan to do it beforehand, follow through with the sin, and then have no remourse afterwards. Again, most all prodestant denominations and the catholics would agree that, at a minimum, a Christain will strive to at least not sin. You promote it blatently before, during, and after. That's the kind of sin you die with.

Let me tell you how I interpret this scripture; what Jesus is showing (men in particular) is that no matter what you do you can not help but be sinful - it's literally how we're made to be. If the mere thought of tapping that beautiful ass is enough to earn you an enternity in hell, we're pretty much fukked as a whole. Now we can argue the semantics of what is defined as "lust" to the same degree that we can debate what constitutes "sexual immorality", but that's not the point. The point is that we endure a constant struggle with our biology, and the parts of that raw animalism that we have difficulty embracing is generally what we call sin. Biology trumps conviction in everyone, no matter how pious they appear; in fact the pious usually are the worst offenders of their own conviction. Personally, I believe Jesus said this to illustrate to us how screwed we all really are without faith in salvation.

Still, it doesnt mean you're not supposed to at least try not to sin and be remourseful when you do. You do neither of these. IMO, that paragraph just sounds like rationalization and if there's anyone that could rationalize something here, its you. If there really is a God, I'd reconsider that approach because presumably, you can't outsmart him.

So does that make Rollo Tomassi a hypocrite? You bet it does. It makes me a hypocrite, you a hypocrite and everyone else on planet earth a hypocrite who's ever said one thing and done another. Our behaviors make liars of us all. My difference is I'm able to accept that, and embrace it. I've always stated, since day one on SS, I advocate what I do not because I got it all right, but because I got it all wrong.

Same comment as before. Just because you're a sinner isn't a license to willfully continue to sin and have no remorse for it because you presume Jesus' blood has you covered. I think that mentality is false, from either a Christain or Christ-like perspective.

Damn right AZANON, I tapped a LOT of ass in my 20's and I enjoyed all of it. Am I a hypocrite for this? I've been the worst of AFCs in my time as well, does that make what I say incorrect or irrational here on SS? You see, I don't believe that one sin is worse than another; sex out of wedlock, homosexuality, and lying on your resume are equally as damning as murder, pride, avarice, and taking the Lord's name in vain (which I've done a lot more times than chicks I've banged). I also understand that while the wages of sin is death, experiencing sin is the only way to learn certain things. Sin has an educational value that can only be learned by sinning. In the Bible King David had a man killed so he could tap his wife, and yet this is the bloodline from which God chose to have Jesus descend.

Yet again, same comment. I agree all sins can dam* you but that is no license to plan them, carry them out, and have no remorse afterwards. That's what non-Christains like me do. Jesus RT (no pun intended), if you're christ-like, then so am I!

You can learn how to not sin by reading the bible instead of repeating them yourself. According to Christains, you're supposed to feel some sort of conviction before you sin so that you can avoid doing so in the first place.

I would challenge you to sift through my posts and look for any instance in which I advocate a guy going out and fukking as many women as humanly possible. I have stated on many occasions that it's a man's biological imperative to do so, but I've never implicitly said get as much ass as you can. To be sure, I've gone into detail about how it is in a man's best interest to maintain as many option available to him as possible and to remain non-exclusive for as long as he can, but even in Plate Theory I explicitly adovcate this in order to stay in a position of chosing - as the PRIZE - to reserve the freedom to become a better man in many ways, not exclusively sexual. If you want to see this in a biblical perspective, then call it encouraging a man to be what God intended him to be - a Man.

You started off with an extreme defense I never accused you of in the first place, but then try to suggest you're really not sending a message to men here that its ok to have premarital sex. My accusation is that you advocate premarital sex without remorse, and your very post here supports that. I don't need to dig at all.

In fact here's a few other good verses I hold dear:

One of the many reasons why i'm personally not a Christain is because the bible is so frequently contradictory. I will concede right now you can find versus that support your position or an opposite position. It makes trying to follow the whole thing almost impossible. Most of the prodestants where I live tend to just follow the stricter of opposing positions. For this specific topic, the bible says in multiple places sexual immorality including premarital sex is a sin.

My intent on this site isn't one of advocating to go out and get whatever you can because there is no tomorrow, but rather to prepare Men to be able to have the wisdom, confidence and prowess to make intelligent, informed decisions based on facts and sound judgement, all in an effort to avoid a lifetime of regretting life changing ones. Most times this involves experience in order to understand it. I think it's naive and foolish to think that our convictions are stronger than our biology and circumstance. Being a chirst-follower (or christian if you prefer) doesn't excuse you from thinking critically. In fact, if anything, I would say that having spiritual beliefs would necessitate more caution and critical thinking.

So more of a do as you say now, than as you did, approach? Going by your testimony, priority #1 in your 20s was .... how did you put it? "tapping that as$"

I don't see a disconnect in being a DJ (and disabusing oneself of childish idealization like the soulmate myth of the ONE) and having a firm belief in God. To be human is to be imperfect - remember, perfect is boring.

In my personal definition of DJ, neither do I ...... necessarily. I was only addressing the promotion and lack of remorse of sexual immorality as defined by the bible. If you no longer advocate this under any circumstances now, then I guess we don't really have any disagreements here.

...................

To be clear, i'm not personally judging you or anyone RT, since I don't think there's proof of any God. Also, I'm certainly not a Christain! All i'm doing is drawing on my understanding of the Bible, and I spent a LOT of time studying that blasted thing. I even have 6 semester college hrs in Old and New Testament.

 

[STR8UP]

I have a really good employee who comes from a very religious family. EXTREMELY religious. And he clains to be religious himself.

But here's where it gets good.

Two months ago this kid SWORE he would never set foot in a strip club. About a month ago we did a video shoot with some strippers at my store. He had a good time, and has since visited the club I do business with several times.

But that's not the good part....

He stopped by the club with some other guys I work with a couple of weeks ago. Turns out they ended up back at one of the guy's houses, and somehow this kid got in the middle of what was basically an ORGY. The one guy's wife was licking her friend's pu$$y, then went to fukk her husband (on the other side of the bed) so this kid jumped in and started fukking the friend. Oh yea, and another one of the strippers was playing with herself watching the whole thing.

Funny how he went from "I will NEVER go to a strip club" to getting involved with a stripper orgy.

I kinda feel bad for corrupting the boy.

Nahhhh.......

 

[grinder]

I have a really good employee who comes from a very religious family. EXTREMELY religious. And he clains to be religious himself.

But here's where it gets good.

Two months ago this kid SWORE he would never set foot in a strip club. About a month ago we did a video shoot with some strippers at my store. He had a good time, and has since visited the club I do business with several times.

But that's not the good part....

He stopped by the club with some other guys I work with a couple of weeks ago. Turns out they ended up back at one of the guy's houses, and somehow this kid got in the middle of what was basically an ORGY. The one guy's wife was licking her friend's pu$$y, then went to fukk her husband (on the other side of the bed) so this kid jumped in and started fukking the friend. Oh yea, and another one of the strippers was playing with herself watching the whole thing.

Funny how he went from "I will NEVER go to a strip club" to getting involved with a stripper orgy.

I kinda feel bad for corrupting the boy.

Nahhhh.......

This is a great example of the problem of Absolutes.

Your employee now has a conflict he must resolve; he must either realize no harm came to him and modify his blind acceptance of the absolute, or he will continue to try to adhere to the absolute and then wrestle with his inevitable guilty conscience.

If he is a good “Christian” then he will wrestle with the second one, because the first one, modifying his acceptance, comes into direct conflict with the absolute.

Absolutes are inflexible in a world that is eminently pliable.

If only one could see the religious literature as guides pointing the way rather than rigid absolute doctrines; perhaps individuals could better find their own righteous path?

Let me bring this back to the very real DJ topic of sexuality.

Although today is my one year anniversary on this board I still have much to learn. Things I have already learned are how to get and fvck women.

For the longest while I had no problem playing the role of the little Dutch boy, I enjoyed plugging every hole I could find. A hole is a hole is a hole. Right?

Only in the last few months have I had to deal with the issues of the fallout of my fun. All in the guise of “just having fun” I have managed to destabilize the marriages of two women, and get a whole bunch of people mad at me.

I respected no rule or boundary with regard to boyfriends and husbands.

At this late age, I am now relearning that my actions, especially regarding sexuality with women in relationships, have consequences.

Thanks to this place and some other sources I learned how to seduce women. I focused only on that, not those untidy issues of who to seduce and in which circumstances. Just because you CAN fvck some woman does not mean you SHOULD fvck her.

I guess this is a strange version of DJ morality, but this is not an easy topic.

Because of my personal beliefs, I feel no guilt at my actions, just the need to try to learn from my mistakes, to move on and do no more harm. That’s the best I can do.

 

[azanon]

Absolutes are inflexible in a world that is eminently pliable.

If only one could see the religious literature as guides pointing the way rather than rigid absolute doctrines; perhaps individuals could better find their own righteous path?

If "God" was that lax about what he required/didn't require, then why bother reading it or following it at all? I'll tell you the same thing i told RT, ... if this level of laxness still constitutes being a christain or "christ-follower" then i'm one too!

 

[theunflushables]

I have a really good employee who comes from a very religious family. EXTREMELY religious. And he clains to be religious himself.

But here's where it gets good.

Two months ago this kid SWORE he would never set foot in a strip club. About a month ago we did a video shoot with some strippers at my store. He had a good time, and has since visited the club I do business with several times.

But that's not the good part....

He stopped by the club with some other guys I work with a couple of weeks ago. Turns out they ended up back at one of the guy's houses, and somehow this kid got in the middle of what was basically an ORGY. The one guy's wife was licking her friend's pu$$y, then went to fukk her husband (on the other side of the bed) so this kid jumped in and started fukking the friend. Oh yea, and another one of the strippers was playing with herself watching the whole thing.

Funny how he went from "I will NEVER go to a strip club" to getting involved with a stripper orgy.

I kinda feel bad for corrupting the boy.

Nahhhh.......

See, thats exactly why I turned to the "dark side" so I don't have to deal with moral dillemas and crisis of faith and bleah bleah bleah. lol

I guess the main thing is this should be just like the government (well how it should really be) and keep the two seperate. I mean if it is causing conflict with a persons beliefs, maybe this isnt the place for them.

 

[Francisco d'Anconia]

Threads about religion aren't forboden anymore?

"Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body.”

Whew, I've wanted to get that off my chest for a long time. That lightens the load...

 

[PureFlow]

The ancient Egyptians, the greatest of all peoples on earth, had very different conceptions and opinons of sexuality.

http://www.thekeep.org/~kunoichi/kunoichi/themestream/sexuality.html

And this only touches the surface, as far as I know. It is true many sexual practices go hand in hand with the decay of morality in societies, but in the case of the Egyptians this was not true.

 

[azanon]

"Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body.”

Whew, I've wanted to get that off my chest for a long time. That lightens the load...

Hmm, maybe that's why this so-called sin is OH so good!

 

[Vulpine]

See, thats exactly why I turned to the "dark side" so I don't have to deal with moral dillemas and crisis of faith and bleah bleah bleah. lol

Yeah. And I use a rubber while having sex and enjoying it because it's hurting noone. How do I have to feel guilty for giving someone else pleasure? I can't wrap my head around that. I like it, she (and her friend) likes it... where's the problem?

How could you call ("not for procreation") sex a sin, or lust for that matter, and call murder and stealing the same thing (a sin)?

Talk about negativity and joy-robbing - lumping those things into the same boat? RIDICULOUS!



It makes you seriously wonder if, during the translations, the people compiling the bible had some personal experiences that affected the end content of the bible. For example, they weren't getting laid, and were jealous of those who were, so they started throwing some terms and conditions that would hinder everyone. Or, perhaps their wives kept leaving them because they were such big book-nerd, AFC, chachis.

Myself, I was baptized Catholic. But after I became old enough to think and old enough to fux, I started to claim agnostic, then it was athiest, now it's "spiritual, but not religious". After exposure to many, many religions, I've found elements of several that appeal to me. There are a few out there that dwell on energy and spirit more than "GOD worship". Those seem to have a bit more of a "interact positively with the world" theme, and less of the "do what this book says or suffer unspeakable torments in hell for eternity" overall scare thing.

I won't have a body after I die, so, I won't have any nerve cells: I won't feel one bit of that sh!t in hell if I'm wrong.

 

[azanon]

If i get sent to hel* with an actual body, the first words out of my mouth will go something like this

"Are you shi*ting me? Those cookoos were actually right? Well, fuc* me!"

 

[theunflushables]

lol, my first words "Where's the party?"

I think where the fornication thing came from is a lot of pagan traditions include sex worship. So they took sex out of the religion, for some sort of...something...crap I forgot what I was going to say. Little help?

 

[Desdinova]

My biggest conflict with religion of ANY denomination is that it contradicts itself. Religion causes a great deal of seperation. Each religion wants members to come from other religions because they have the true faith (and a collection box / plate). Some guy wrote in the bible that Jesus commanded to "love thy neighbour" but it sure as hell isn't happening between religions of any denomination.

You'd think that people who base their morals and beliefs on one book would unite, but the complete opposite has happened. Some religions believe in the Trinity, some believe in the rapture, some set dates for Armageddon to come, and the list goes on.

This is one of the biggest reasons why I chose to be an atheist. There is far too much conflict and disagreement spurring from one book to consider it as "The Good Book" inspired by a "loving God".

 

[Rollo Tomassi]

Well, let me first respond by saying that I'm in no way under the delusion that I'm in any way christ-like. I believe in God and in Jesus' teachings, but from there on you'll have to excuse me if it appears I have a 'pick & pull' approach to scripture. I'll say right now that I do not believe in an absolute literal interpretation of the Bible, and in fact I find it comical when I encounter people who do. That's not to discount the Bible as a whole, nor do I feel it invalidates the divinity of it, but it is to say that an omniscient would necessarily know the power of allegory and syllogisms and would use them to illustrate his intent to be understandable over the course of time. I always find it hillarious when the same creationist evangelicals who take Genesis literally will artfully interpret Revelations as this devine interplay of symbolism and analogy. Even Jesus spoke in platitudes, for the same effect.

One of the reasons you'll find that the Apostle Paul is more popular than even Jesus is due to the fact that the vast majority of his writings (letters to churches actually) reintroduce a religious legalism that even Jesus railed against in his own time. Now why would that be an appealing to anyone? Because most human beings have a need for that regimentation. We long for secuirty in a very chaotic world and when choices are made for us we may not like them, but they excuse ourselves from acting. And it's just this religious simple-mindedness that I meant when I said being a christian doesn't excuse one from thinking critically - at least it shouldn't - but simple minds crave uniformity and regulation. Paul is popular because he provides this regulation, but Jesus teachings are far more difficult to comprehend and adhere to. Love your enemy? Pray for those who persecute you? Do unto others? That's tough. Hell, Jesus flipped the tables of the money changers in the temple, made a whip from cords and drove them out he was so pissed. If Jesus came back today and preached the same words he'd be called a liberal hippy socialist by most people; is it any wonder Paul is bigger than Jesus today?

You can call what I advocate here a lax approach to christianity, and from a traditional evangelical/catholic guilt perspective I'm sure it seems that way from this regimened outlook.

You can learn how to not sin by reading the bible instead of repeating them yourself. According to Christains, you're supposed to feel some sort of conviction before you sin so that you can avoid doing so in the first place.

Isn't it odd that we don't? I've known guys who could quote scripture like an encyclopedia and yet they continued to fail to practice any of it. In fact you can find scripture to justify sinning, the pre-thought for it and the absolution of it (and remorse) through forgiveness of sin. All of us plan to sin, this is precisely what Jesus meant when he said just looking at a woman with lust makes you guitly of doing it. I know very "convicted" christians who've done things (and thought things) that are completely against what they say is they're dedicated against and feel little remorse, if any for doing the very thing they say they'll never do. Look at the disgraced leader of the evangelicals Ted Haggard, the guy preached against the evils of homosexuality every Sunday and promoted a bill to change the U.S. Constitution to ban gay marriage only to be outed as a homosexual himself having regular sex with a male prostitute who also happened to be his meth dealer. So we can talk about conviction and remorse and forethought of sin, the fact remains that reading the Bible is not a sin insurance policy.

Now the response you'll have is "so we shouldn't even bother trying?" To which I'll say of course not. Should we try to live better lives, be faithful and seek out a better understanding of God? Absolutely. But lets do so with the knowledge of what we really are and what's really involved in doing so instead of kidding ourselves that consistently striving for what were told to believe is healthy for us. It's disingenuous to try to discard and deny the elements of what we are. I'm not saying embrace sin, I'm not saying "it's all good, go ahead and sin, you're already covered", What I'm suggesting is we honestly see ourselves and our own conditions for what they are.

Essentially I'm a pragmatist in what I advocate here. If it seems I condone pre-marital sex and you think there's a disconnect there with regards to my ideology, I'll only add that 99% of people are going to have pre-marital sex anyway (and especially the ones who argue most strongly against it) and/or they will 'think' about doing so which in itself is also a sin. In fact desire (call it lust if you want) is an essential element for 2 people to come together. Sin is a necessity for 2 people to come together, get married and have children. There has to be passion, desire, lust, etc. between two people before there is an intimate connection and this entails having thoughts about that lust, about how hot it would be to tap that ass. And how much more convincing would the christian AFC be to tell his ONEitis girl he'd drop his strong conviction of faith to be with her in sin - that's the degree of his passion - what a sales pitch!

So what seems a more healthy approach to dating and relationships? The fearful AFC, scarcity mentality approach which tells a guy to be glad he's getting anything at all until his desperation forces him to get involved with the first or second girl to give him any attention and he marries far too young and far too immature to know what he's getting into, but his conviction tells him it's the only way? Or would it be better to accept the fact that we're imperfect human beings with desire and a physical aspect (that God created), that we're consciously and unconsciously beholden to, we want to live it, it's a necessary element to develop maturity and experiencing more partners (which we're more likely to do than not even with convictions) leaves us better prepared to choose what's best for us - which ultimately is what God wants, what's best for us.

 

[Vulpine]

"This next reading is from the gospel according to Tomassi, chapter 2, verse 4."

Now there's a good sermon!

*stuffs dollar in the basket*

 

[Nighthawk]

I think if God was serious about telling us what to do he'd write in in huge letters of fire in the sky, not via some dubious messengers two thousand years ago, who contradict each other at every turn.

And even then I'd still do what I please. Freewill is my bitch.

 

[azanon]

......Look at the disgraced leader of the evangelicals Ted Haggard, the guy preached against the evils of homosexuality every Sunday and promoted a bill to change the U.S. Constitution to ban gay marriage only to be outed as a homosexual himself having regular sex with a male prostitute who also happened to be his meth dealer. So we can talk about conviction and remorse and forethought of sin, the fact remains that reading the Bible is not a sin insurance policy.

My explanation for Haggart was just that he was/is a charlitan. In short, you're suggesting he's a christain that goofed up. I'm more prone to believe he knows he's a con-artist. My theory (Taken from Machivelli, "The Prince") is that most of the people at "the top" known that its really a scam and that they are using it for power, or to "control the people".

Essentially I'm a pragmatist in what I advocate here. If it seems I condone pre-marital sex and you think there's a disconnect there with regards to my ideology, I'll only add that 99% of people are going to have pre-marital sex anyway (and especially the ones who argue most strongly against it) and/or they will 'think' about doing so which in itself is also a sin......

I'm just saying, from a bibilical perspective, I believe there is more than a subtle difference between claiming to be pragmatic about it, and just saying its such an overpowering, tempting sin that you can effectively plan, execute, and have no remourse afterwards for having done it. Again, i'm not judging you personally since i'm not a christain myself, but from Paul's perspective, I think its possible you are not doing enough of what's required for forgiveness as forgiveness is an essential element to "salvation".

So what seems a more healthy approach to dating and relationships? The fearful AFC, scarcity mentality approach which tells a guy to be glad he's getting anything at all until his desperation forces him to get involved with the first or second girl to give him any attention and he marries far too young and far too immature to know what he's getting into, but his conviction tells him it's the only way? Or would it be better to accept the fact that we're imperfect human beings with desire and a physical aspect (that God created), that we're consciously and unconsciously beholden to, we want to live it, it's a necessary element to develop maturity and experiencing more partners (which we're more likely to do than not even with convictions) leaves us better prepared to choose what's best for us - which ultimately is what God wants, what's best for us.

Careful, you're using my personal trinity; reason, logic, and freethought. I'm all for that. But don't be so illusioned as to think this way of thinking and rationalizing is consistent with what Paul (who supposedly writes "god-breathed" guidance) says to do. They are in direct confict and contradiction. The bible does not want you to think; rather it wants to think for you.

 

[BlackWidow]

I'm lovin' this thread. Great discussion and very interesting responses from RT and az.