Sexual selfishness

[xodkrm]

Why is it that when it comes to sexual partners we are never willing to share them?

It's weird because I feel that way, I would never let anyone else touch my girl. Yet I let my injured friend sleep on my bed, and I sleep on the couch.

I thought this might be because the thought of my dick entering pussy that's been fucked by someone else before is disgusting, both mentally and medically.

But if that girl on the first date told me she's been with another guy before me, I wouldn't really care, even if I know that they've obviouslly fucked.

So the question is, how are those two scenerios different? The girls been fucked by the guy for both situations yet one is okay and one is not.

[LinkTheGameFreak]

You're gonna have to rephrase some of this because it's not really making sense to me what you're trying to ask in about half of your post. Which 2 scenarios are you talking about? What's important about your injured friend and how come you slept on the couch?

[xodkrm]

Scenerio 1 - Girl fucks guy, and then me
Scenerio 2 - Girl explains that she's been with another guy before me on a date

Result is same, different approach.
However the two scenerios feel different.
I would actually be okay with #2.

(Brought up friend to explain about how I am sometimes too kind to some people but not when it comes to a girl)

[Prozerran]

My fiance and I had a talk about this with some friends of ours. It seems to be exactly what you call it, sexual selfishness. The reasons are numerous. I could actually sit here and tell you I think I'd be o.k. with her having sex with another guy (I mean, she's been with guys before we started seeing each other), but it's different when you get past that point where it's already happened. No matter how you feel about it then, you can't do anything about it, because what's done is done.

It's definitely an emotional response. I would gauge it in the realm of a controlled response as well, as the media does play a significant role in defining the constraints of a typical relationship, almost feeding us, if you will, the notion of selfishness we feel for our partner. How many movies, dramas, and sitcoms on T.V. make us feel jealous? "God, if a guy ever tried to get with you like that jerk, I'd kick his ass!!" It happens ALL the time. Soap Opera's, drama's like Dawson's Creek, or movies like The Notebook all feed us that selfishness of oneness with our partner.

I could go on, but I think that pretty much covers your point.

[Forsaken_One]

Do not let it come between you.

I was in a relationship for about a year, and this very topic literally ended it.

Long story short, she thought I was a virgin, when I wasn't. I was treating that subject as a "Don't ask, don't tell." I felt that if she wanted to know, she could have asked.

She discovered this news from rumors around school, and how I had lost my virginty for the first time.

Within 4 days out relationship ended.

(I am glad too, that gal was insane! After dating me, she felt compelled to retalliate against my one time ordeal, that happened FIVE years before I had even known her... She became one of the sluttiest women I had ever known.)

*Shudders

[Duddits]

It is different for different people. Some people believe in the abstinence till marriage, an attempt to 'save' them self till they meet the one person they want to spend their life with. Why do they do this? I think it is an offering in a way. A gift to their partner, both physically and symbolically. Physically, their partner will have to opportunity to take the other person's virginity, an experience only one person can share with someone in their life. Symbolically, some people see this as sharing their very soul to the other person; a gift that no one else ever had before received.

Why do these people do that? Moral and religious reasons dominate the list. It all comes down to their own personal choice.

People who chose to experiment with their sexuality also do so for the sake of their own curiosity. They want to know how it feels. They want to know why the idea of sex is such a big issue. There also is the innate human sexual urge the drives one another to engage in sexual activities. Sex can occur when people get caught up in the emotions of a situation, letting one thing leading to another because some portion of their being begs for more to happen.

The sexual connection two people can feel for each other is a magnificently powerful force. It leads to powerful emotions like love, lust, every, and jealousy. Sexually selfishness is defined by jealousy and envy. One person is jealous of another. They envy one person for being able to share the sexual experience with someone else. When you throw in the concept of trust into this formula, relationships can be shattered with on act of infidelity.

I would be hurt if my girlfriend ever cheated on me. I would feel the she betrayed my trust in her. I would feel betrayed because she would have hurt my by doing such a thing, and I would feel hurt because I would be jealous of the person she was with. I would be jealous that a person claimed something that I had though of as my own to themselves.

I can not say that I wouldn't care if my girlfriend was a virgin or not. I would in fact envy the person would might have taken that away from her. I fail to discuss the kind of person that I am, as that does hold bearing to this discussion. I value the sanctity of a relationship. When I am with someone, I give them all of myself, and I expect nothing less in return. If I were less a man, and I do feel that anyone with a different view is a lesser being, I would not respect a woman as much as I do, and in return, I would not demand that same respect. But I am who I am. I would envy that person who may have taken away take one thing a person can give away only once.

I am sexually selfish. I am a narrow minded fool. I am a man who will fight for love, and will settle for nothing less than absolute commitment. I’ve only just started my life, but God help the people whom cross me.

[SilverCrusader]

I only have a few words to say: The girl I'm marrying is going to be a virgin, or the hell with them, I don't go against my morals, and one of them is no sex before marriage.

[Duddits]

I only have a few words to say: The girl I'm marrying is going to be a virgin, or the hell with them, I don't go against my morals, and one of them is no sex before marriage.

Another topic to think about in this discussion is this : What about people who have been divorced? People who've saved themself till marriage, only to find that their love wasn't right for their life? How is this any different than the love of a boyfriend/girlfriend relationship who might have had sex, only to find out that thier love wasn't enough?

[SilverCrusader]

Ahh, now that'd be an exception. I think I'm smart enough to know when my morals apply and when they don't. I'm my own government.

[Duddits]

Ahh, now that'd be an exception. I think I'm smart enough to know when my morals apply and when they don't. I'm my own government.

Very true, whatever your morals may be, you are still in control of your decisions, no matter what. Even if you weren't going to marry a girl, would you still date her even if she previously had sex? What if you two ended up falling in love? Is it such a big thing that is would completly negate the possibility of a deep, personal, loving relationship?

[SilverCrusader]

I'm pretty strict on myself, and I would say no, sorry. They should of thought about that before they had sex.

[Forsaken_One]

This is not a flame, but mere opinion. So PLEASE, take this with a grain of salt. :)

If it is taken the wrong way, then so be it. Have a mod delete this post.

Silver, I respect but your morals/opinion to not marry a "non"-virgin. But, I think that realistically, it just cannot happen like that. I think it is somewhat petty to dismiss a person based upon what they have done in the past.

Given the fact that you may make exceptions, but I find it hypocritical if they are:

a) Non-virgin; Never Married = Immoral
b) Non-virgin; Divorced = Moral

In my eyes, it is one in the same. But I am also someone who doesn't really believe in marriage. Partly because of my religious views.

/end rant

I'll come back to this, or post at later time. I haven't finished me rant, I gotta head out.

I'll be back! :)

[TitanWing]

Silver, I respect but your morals/opinion to not marry a "non"-virgin. But, I think that realistically, it just cannot happen like that. I think it is somewhat petty to dismiss a person based upon what they have done in the past.Given that both myself and Akar are Christians, I think I can explain it (of course, he and I may have different angles as well).

It's not necessarily the fact that they had sex before, as much as are they STILL actively having sex with people. Men married widows (with children, thuse not virgins) in the Bible and God didn't consider that immoral. A newer concept is the "renewed virginity" (I forget if it is the exact term, so I will define it). A renewed virgin is one who has had sex with someone(s) but has made a change in their life and has decided to abstain from sex until marriage from the day they "renew" themselves.

Both cases are fine in my opinion, though I will admit I'm not exactly looking forward to marrying a widow. The reasons behind certain religon's angles on the issue depend on several facts:

1. Virgin marriages have a lower divorce rate
2. Virgin marriages do not have to worry about the possibility of STDs from previous marriages/partners

Given the fact that you may make exceptions, but I find it hypocritical if they are:

a) Non-virgin; Never Married = Immoral
b) Non-virgin; Divorced = Moral

In my eyes, it is one in the same. But I am also someone who doesn't really believe in marriage. Partly because of my religious views.It all depends on the religon itself. Don't attack us for our beliefs when we're not attacking you for yours.

[Forsaken_One]

Trim-spa Baby!
It all depends on the religon itself. Don't attack us for our beliefs when we're not attacking you for yours.


If that came out as an attack, I apologize.

This is a long story short, as my browser hiccuped and I lost a big post.

I look at sex as something that is not to be frowned upon. Regardless of what said person does, how they do it, or any of that. What I look at it as; A means of recreation. No, that does not qualify me as some crazy sexual deviant. I just believe sex is something that should be enjoyed.

As for my religious views, I am an atheist. So, of course my ideas on it are not from a written doctrine or anything else.

And for those that are curious, no I am not a virgin. I am not married, nor do I plan to be for another 10+ years or so. I have happily been with my girlfriend now, for quite sometime(3 years). Regardless of what she has done in the past (not much since I am a first boyfriend), but I wouldn't judge her. If I did, it would be super hypocritical if I made it out as she is to be a virgin and I can do whatever I want.

Eh, kind of went off on a tangent. I'll be more coherent and less rantish in the morning.

Sorry if I am hijacking the thread. :cry:

[ecyor0]

OK, just to squeeze into the debate.....


Personally speaking, I would not place much score by whether someone had slept around or not before they married me (oh yes, for the record: I'm Christian and I'm an advocate of no sex before marriage). Although I do think abstaining until marriage reduces complications, and I intend to do so, I do not believe in dismissing someone just because they aren't a virgin. Yes, adultery is wrong (by my beliefs): so is telling a white lie. So is holding a grudge. So is pretending you haven't heard your mum when she tells you to do the dishes. And I am guilty of all save the first.

Point is, relationships are not commodities that you inspect for hairline cracks or faint tarnish. You take them as they come, and work to make them better. Dithering over past events which quite frankly, are not your business to begin with, (not you lot personally, just 'you' in general) is less than becoming of a meaningful relationship. Which I'm assuming is the case if you're having sex.

Incidentally, this thread only seems to be concentrating on whether it's OK for women to sleep around: a common trap that cultures throughout history have repeatedly fallen into. What do women think about men who sleep around, I'd be interested to know.....

[Forsaken_One]

OK, just to squeeze into the debate.....


Personally speaking, I would not place much score by whether someone had slept around or not before they married me (oh yes, for the record: I'm Christian and I'm an advocate of no sex before marriage). Although I do think abstaining until marriage reduces complications, and I intend to do so, I do not believe in dismissing someone just because they aren't a virgin. Yes, adultery is wrong (by my beliefs): so is telling a white lie. So is holding a grudge. So is pretending you haven't heard your mum when she tells you to do the dishes. And I am guilty of all save the first.

Point is, relationships are not commodities that you inspect for hairline cracks or faint tarnish. You take them as they come, and work to make them better. Dithering over past events which quite frankly, are not your business to begin with, (not you lot personally, just 'you' in general) is less than becoming of a meaningful relationship. Which I'm assuming is the case if you're having sex.

Incidentally, this thread only seems to be concentrating on whether it's OK for women to sleep around: a common trap that cultures throughout history have repeatedly fallen into. What do women think about men who sleep around, I'd be interested to know.....

Bingo!

Thanks for putting that into words I was trying to aim at. Aside from me not being Christian. :)

Anyway, I blame those last incoherent posts on lack of sleep and/or no coffee.

:P

[ClintonM]

The funny thing about all this "OMG If She had sex I won't give her a chance!" thing is that people fail to realize what their religion really is...

People make mistakes (who would've thought?), God forgives them. Are you saying that if someone's good enough to be forgiven by God, they aren't good enough for you to forgive them?

I find this in almost EVERY situation EVERYWHERE. People are just so hypocritical it's not even funny... ESPECIALLY when it comes to religion.

Even POSTING this VERY POST I'm being hypocritical for judging someone else due to my religion (Christianity). Religion is a complex thing, is it not? ;)

Back On Topic:

I'm a virgin, and I would like the first girl that I have sex with to also be a virgin (before or after marriage, things happen). However, if she had did lose her virginity before coming to me that wouldn't change anything, people make mistakes and I can definately forgive them.

Making a mistake does not make you a bad person, in fact it can make you a better person if you realize that you made it. Just as in all life experiences.

[SilverCrusader]

The funny thing about all this "OMG If She had sex I won't give her a chance!" thing is that people fail to realize what their religion really is...

People make mistakes (who would've thought?), God forgives them. Are you saying that if someone's good enough to be forgiven by God, they aren't good enough for you to forgive them?

I find this in almost EVERY situation EVERYWHERE. People are just so hypocritical it's not even funny... ESPECIALLY when it comes to religion.

Even POSTING this VERY POST I'm being hypocritical for judging someone else due to my religion (Christianity). Religion is a complex thing, is it not?
It is a complex thing. But nevertheless, I go by my bible, which is my morals
Yes, I do believe in forgiveness, people can forgive, only if they are bonafide about it. Thats the confusion nowadays. Nowadays people think they can go do something against the bible, than go get forgiven for it. And many of them aren't genuine about forgiveness. If the person was really truly sorry they did, than it would be all right in my eyes. But when it comes to women, I'm very very picky. Only a seldom few have a chance with me.

[ClintonM]

Only a seldom few have a chance with me.

Kinda full of Pride now aren't we? I guess by your outlook I couldn't forgive you for being such a prideful person, I'm too good for you (Hypocricy anyone? :)), which is basically what you're saying.

The Bible is a masterpiece, you could use it to support something or prove it is evil just as easily... I did this during a debate on abortion to actually SUPPORT it to prove my point and it was proven well.

You take the Bible as a whole or not at all, the latter is exactly what you're doing...

There are so many double-standards people aren't willing to admit ^^.

[TitanWing]

Incidentally, this thread only seems to be concentrating on whether it's OK for women to sleep around: a common trap that cultures throughout history have repeatedly fallen into. What do women think about men who sleep around, I'd be interested to know.....
A good question, but I'm not the one to ask. :P

Most cultures in the past (specifically around the start of Christianity), the males played the major roles and women just did as told. Things are quite obviously much different now.

[Oblongato]

It is a complex thing. But nevertheless, I go by my bible, which is my morals
Yes, I do believe in forgiveness, people can forgive, only if they are bonafide about it. Thats the confusion nowadays. Nowadays people think they can go do something against the bible, than go get forgiven for it. And many of them aren't genuine about forgiveness. If the person was really truly sorry they did, than it would be all right in my eyes. But when it comes to women, I'm very very picky. Only a seldom few have a chance with me.

Very, very picky? Like Jesus?

Perhaps as an atheist I am misunderstanding Christianity completely, but should Christians be judgmental? It was my perception that Christianity was all about forgiveness and being non-judgmental. (Which is why I am constantly astonished by the radical judgmental statements and beliefs of so many who call themselves Christians...)

When you say the bible is your morals, which morals are you referring to? As a Christian, is it really OK to be more judgmental than Jesus? (Who, unless I have totally misunderstood the whole business of Christianity, was supposedly the least judgmental person who ever lived.)


It is also fascinating to hear the "well off" justify their Christianity in the face of this passage:

"It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God." (Matthew 19:24)

And an open question to all posters, religious or not:

How many of the people you hear claim to be Christians (or Jews, Muslims, Scientologists etc.) do you believe are actually living in accordance with the principles of their chosen religion?

[SilverCrusader]

Jesus wasn't judgmental, he was very merciful according to the bible.
But as for me, I'm judgmental. I believe in eye for an eye, just like the bible says. You kill, you shall be killed. You steal, you shall be taken from.

[Oblongato]

Jesus wasn't judgmental, he was very merciful according to the bible.
But as for me, I'm judgmental. I believe in eye for an eye, just like the bible says. You kill, you shall be killed. You steal, you shall be taken from.

Is this the passage you are basing your being judgmental on?

"You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.' But I tell you, don't resist him who is evil; but whoever strikes you on your right cheek, turn to him the other also. If anyone sues you to take away your coat, let him have your cloak also. Whoever compels you to go one mile, go with him two. Give to him who asks you, and don't turn away him who desires to borrow from you. (Matthew 5:38 - 42)Somehow I do not see how it justifies your attitude. In fact, it seems to be saying the exact opposite.

Do you really feel comfortable saying you are a Christian while acknowledging that your own views differ so radically from those of Jesus?

What am I missing here?

[SilverCrusader]

That verse is saying be merciful.
This is a bit complex, but: Eye for an eye type thing was used in old testement law, which is the law administration, people didn't have knowledge of the devil, and lived by strict laws (this would be why it would say in the old testement God smote so and so. This is because God let it happen because he can't rightfully cover someone if they don't follow his word and the devil is free to do whatever to that person that he can). Now, that verse was written in the new testement, in the administration called the grace administration, this administration deals with mercy, and several other things. It became so because of Jesus (which the bible actually says would of been born not in december, but rather in the fall, during harvest time).

[BludSyko]

People make mistakes (who would've thought?), God forgives them. Are you saying that if someone's good enough to be forgiven by God, they aren't good enough for you to forgive them?
Another way to say it....
To err is to be human, but to forgive, divine.
Some people are just too self-righteous to forgive someone they don't think is worthy.

I'm a virgin, and I would like the first girl that I have sex with to also be a virgin (before or after marriage, things happen). However, if she had did lose her virginity before coming to me that wouldn't change anything, people make mistakes and I can definately forgive them.

This is basically the same way I feel. I'm a virgin (and proud of it) and I would like to be with someone who is also a virgin. If they aren't, that's okay, just as long as they haven't been sleeping around (in other words, not a whore -- which is basically 3/4 of the girls at my school :shiftyr:)

[ecyor0]

Most cultures in the past (specifically around the start of Christianity), the males played the major roles and women just did as told. Things are quite obviously much different now. Ay-ay-ay, again with the blaming Christianity for everything! (vents steam and calms down)

The marginalization of women by men in society started much earlier than the 1st Century AD - the best example would be Ancient Greece. In those days, women had no rights whatsoever - they were only slightly less important than their husband's dogs. Heck, the Greeks saw woman as a curse on mankind - a punishment of Zeus, which they couldn't escape from, since they needed women to procreate. Remember Pandora? In Greek legend, she was the first woman, made by Zeus and sent down to earth. And to the Greeks, she was responsible for all the suffering of the world. Not only that, but according to Greek science (which was tied in closely to their philosophy) the woman played no more than a passive role in the birth process. The male provided the 'seed' that would grow into a man, while the woman was merely the 'soil' that the seed grew in. And occasionally the soil would corrupt the seed, turning it into a woman.

Note that this wasn't just their religion - this was ingrained into their science, and though the "science" in question was based heavily on philosophy and theology, it was accepted as unshakable truth throughout the Greek world.

Then, when the Romans started conquering, they adopted most of the Greek culture, including their views on woman, and so the Greek misogyny was spread throughout the known world, so that by the time Christianity arrived, it was already firmly ingrained into the culture of the time. Perhaps as an atheist I am misunderstanding Christianity completely, but should Christians be judgmental? It was my perception that Christianity was all about forgiveness and being non-judgmental. (Which is why I am constantly astonished by the radical judgmental statements and beliefs of so many who call themselves Christians...)

Absolutely. One of the fundamental tenents of Christianity is forgiveness -

"Let he who is without guilt cast the first stone."
"Do not judge, so that you will not be judged."
The parable of the man who owed 10,000 talents.

and so on. One of the greatest problems Christianity has is the springing up of self-righteous, judgmental people who claim Christianity, yet dish out doom and judgment at the same time. And if you think they're a problem to atheists, you should see what they do to christians. These people destroy faith. They tear churches apart. Families, even.

As a Christian, is it really OK to be more judgmental than Jesus? (Who, unless I have totally misunderstood the whole business of Christianity, was supposedly the least judgmental person who ever lived.)

Absolutely not. The whole idea is that Jesus was the only sinless human who has ever, and will ever live, so we should model ourselves on him.

Incidentally, the only people Jesus decried were the pharisees. Who were the pharisees exactly? Well, they were dedicated followers of the scriptures...... they believed in the resurrection, and miracles.... they believed God was still working in the world..... they attended worship regularly, and did all the proper, correct things...... gosh, starting to sound a lot like christians now, aren't they?

[TitanWing]

Ok, can we steer away from the "oooh! let's bash the Christians like we do in every IR topic" epidemic? I get sick of people arguing about religons they don't understand (both sides).

[ecyor0]

Seconded :D Now back to the topic...... anyone able to answer my previous question?

[Oblongato]

Ok, can we steer away from the "oooh! let's bash the Christians like we do in every IR topic" epidemic? I get sick of people arguing about religons they don't understand (both sides).

To avoid confusion, please name those you are referring to as Christian bashers.

[Oblongato]

That verse is saying be merciful.
This is a bit complex, but: Eye for an eye type thing was used in old testement law, which is the law administration, people didn't have knowledge of the devil, and lived by strict laws (this would be why it would say in the old testement God smote so and so. This is because God let it happen because he can't rightfully cover someone if they don't follow his word and the devil is free to do whatever to that person that he can). Now, that verse was written in the new testement, in the administration called the grace administration, this administration deals with mercy, and several other things. It became so because of Jesus (which the bible actually says would of been born not in december, but rather in the fall, during harvest time).

It was exactly my point that the passage is saying be merciful. Unfortunately, I have no idea how the rest of what you wrote answers my questions.

Just why is it that you insist on not being merciful (i.e. insist on being judgmental) and call it Christianity?

[SilverCrusader]

Me? I'm a bit overzealous when it comes to my religion. I believe that people deserve what they get, because they made it that way. You slack off through highschool and drop out you won't be very successful later on. I believe what you put into something you get out of it. But the grace administration doesn't work that way... And I often find myself being merciful when I shouldn't.

[ecyor0]

..... for my views, see my post earlier.

[Oblongato]

Me? I'm a bit overzealous when it comes to my religion. I believe that people deserve what they get, because they made it that way. You slack off through highschool and drop out you won't be very successful later on. I believe what you put into something you get out of it. But the grace administration doesn't work that way... And I often find myself being merciful when I shouldn't.

From my perspective, your overzealousness places you outside of the tenets of your religion.

Obviously, you should live as you believe is right, but I don't think the new testament would support your being less than merciful to those who don't live that way, and it certainly doesn't support your judging them. (I think that part is supposed to be left to God, in Christianity?)

There is a great deal of textual support for the idea that Christians should not judge, but by living as Christians should set an example that others may choose to follow.

Where in the bible does it say you should be judgmental towards others? Where does it tell you which people don't deserve your mercy?

[SilverCrusader]

Yes yes, I understand. I'm forgiving with other people, but when it has anything to do with me I'm harsh. And so far, my lover would have to do with me. So I'm strict about it. I have very high standards when it comes to women.
And yes I'm very prideful of myself when I say give them a chance. But what they don't understand whoever is my lover is going to be treated very well. I would do anything they ask, and thats a privilege seldom have.

[TitanWing]

To avoid confusion, please name those you are referring to as Christian bashers.
You, shut up now. You're STILL attacking Christianity in vain.

[Ahzz]

silvecrusader, you say your future lover/the one you get married with will have to be a virgin, because your morals are from da bible. Well, doesn't the bible say, "till death you apart" or something? therefore, it's completely allowed to remarry and all after your lover has died... Even the churches support this.

right?

[T-Dawg]

You, shut up now. You're STILL attacking Christianity in vain.

Uhm -- actually he isn't attacking Christianity. He is inquiring about one particular christian's views and why they depart from the merciful teachings of the New Testament. In fact, he is merely trying to learn more about the Christian religion and has done nothing thus far to show it any disrespect.

Thank you. Have a nice day.

[Oblongato]

Thanks, T-Dawg, I think that describes it.

You, shut up now. You're STILL attacking Christianity in vain.

For the record, I think people who actually live by Christian principles are good people, and I get along well with them. Perhaps you've misunderstood me. Tell me what you saw as an attack and maybe I can clarify.

The gist of my comments has all along been my inability to understand how things such as being judgmental, unforgiving, ungenerous etc. can be reconciled with the principles described in the bible.

If you think I don't understand something about Christianity, I'd be obliged if you could clue me in.

My understanding of Christianity seems to be about the same as what ecyor0 describes. Where do you see problems with it?

(And on a scale of 1 to 10, how Christian is it to tell people to shut up?)

[ecyor0]

About 3, I'd say.


I'd also be interested to hear how judgmentality can be reconciled to Christianity.....

[Oblongato]

Yes yes, I understand. I'm forgiving with other people, but when it has anything to do with me I'm harsh. And so far, my lover would have to do with me. So I'm strict about it. I have very high standards when it comes to women.
And yes I'm very prideful of myself when I say give them a chance. But what they don't understand whoever is my lover is going to be treated very well. I would do anything they ask, and thats a privilege seldom have.

I'm not suggesting that you choose as your mate someone who doesn't share your principles. But perhaps you are being a bit too hard on those whom you wouldn't choose?

Obviously, one chooses a mate who has the characteristics we desire in a mate. But you almost give me the impression that you are looking down on those who don't subscribe to your principles.

Maybe it's the pride thing that doesn't seem quite Christian to me - pride also seems to be pretty problematic in the bible, being Lucifer's sin (the first sin, and one of the 7 deadly sins) and all.

Where do you actually stand on the issue of pride/humility?

[SilverCrusader]

Ha, yes I have a large ego. I'm pro-pride, but anti-bragging. As for the women that don't cut it, there is other guys out there for them.

[ecyor0]

pro-pride..... anti-bragging...... mutually exclusive I'd have thought...... 0.o

ah well, each to their own.

[CrazyTom]

Women that don't cut it? With an attitude like that you'll be the one not cutting it. Jesus explicitly did away with 'eye for an eye' - if someone forces you to go a mile, go two miles, etc. So to not base your Christianity and indeed your lifestyle and behaviour on the teachings on Jesus is extremely suspect. Yes, I'm verging on a 'no true scotsman' fallacy, but it doesn't apply when you don't match the very definition of the thing you are claiming to be.

For me, when a woman accepts me in a relationship, I'll do my best not to ask about what she'd done in the past, unless it's stuff she still struggles with. I want to help her be happy, after all. Obviously I'd prefer to have a relationship with someone who hasn't had one with anyone else, simply to avoid issues of comparison and jealousy. (Her and me).

Her past actions would only be of relevance to me if she hadn't repented of them and was actively engaged in pursuing something I considered sinful. I know that's not exactly fair, because what I consider sinful and what she considers sinful could be different, but at the same time I have to assume she'd take issue with the things I did that were wrong in my past, if I hadn't asked God for forgiveness from them.

Interesting general point here - I have a friend who considers herself to be a Baptist. However, she has had and continues to have sex outside of marriage - I wouldn't say she 'sleeps around' per se, but if she is in a relationship with someone, she will sleep with them. She doesn't see anything wrong with that. I do... I know I shouldn't judge her, what with the things I myself have done in the past, but the difference between us is that I always know when I'm doing something wrong and repent sooner or later, but in my friend's case she is steadfastly unrepentant. It's not like normally when I see another Christian doing something 'sinful' - because then I think it's probably just something they struggle with and are trying to break free of. But there's no indication that that's the case with my friend.

/rambly post.

[CrazyTom]

Women that don't cut it? With an attitude like that you'll be the one not cutting it. Jesus explicitly did away with 'eye for an eye' - if someone forces you to go a mile, go two miles, etc. So to not base your Christianity and indeed your lifestyle and behaviour on the teachings on Jesus is extremely suspect. Yes, I'm verging on a 'no true scotsman' fallacy, but it doesn't apply when you don't match the very definition of the thing you are claiming to be.

For me, when a woman accepts me in a relationship, I'll do my best not to ask about what she'd done in the past, unless it's stuff she still struggles with. I want to help her be happy, after all. Obviously I'd prefer to have a relationship with someone who hasn't had one with anyone else, simply to avoid issues of comparison and jealousy. (Her and me).

Her past actions would only be of relevance to me if she hadn't repented of them and was actively engaged in pursuing something I considered sinful. I know that's not exactly fair, because what I consider sinful and what she considers sinful could be different, but at the same time I have to assume she'd take issue with the things I did that were wrong in my past, if I hadn't asked God for forgiveness from them.

Interesting general point here - I have a friend who considers herself to be a Baptist. However, she has had and continues to have sex outside of marriage - I wouldn't say she 'sleeps around' per se, but if she is in a relationship with someone, she will sleep with them. She doesn't see anything wrong with that. I do... I know I shouldn't judge her, what with the things I myself have done in the past, but the difference between us is that I always know when I'm doing something wrong and repent sooner or later, but in my friend's case she is steadfastly unrepentant. It's not like normally when I see another Christian doing something 'sinful' - because then I think it's probably just something they struggle with and are trying to break free of. But there's no indication that that's the case with my friend.

/rambly post.

pro-pride..... anti-bragging...... mutually exclusive I'd have thought...... 0.o

Not neccesarily. I'm all for being proud of my achievements, but I try not to go bragging about them to other people. Internal pride, if you will. The Bible says if we're to boast about anything, it's Jesus and God.

EDIT: double post, I'm stupid.

[GenocideAlive]

First of all, I'd like to point out to all the Christians in this thread that the topic of Christianity was brought up by one of their own. The topic was "sexual selfishness", to which SilverCrusader saw fit to denote his viewpoint on premarital sex, then preach the Bible.

Second, SilverCrusader has offered up several extremely arrogant and ignorant statements regarding his personal viewpoint. He's supposedly "above" women who have had premarital sex, and his personal viewpoint apparently makes him a "superior" cut of man.

Third, after his extremely trollish remarks regarding his and others' value, he goes on to make ridiculously idiotic statements in regard to Christian holy text. He states "eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth", apparently attempting to justify his current policies with Old Testament. Every Christian that knows shit from shineola would be able to immediately tell you that modern Christians should concern themselves solely with New Testament. After the death of Christ, the price of Man's sins were paid and the rules and conditions of a good Christian's life changed.

Of course, SilverCrusader knows none of this, he is simply spouting elitist Christian propaganda that he is spoonfed at home, in pop culture, and at church. He has absolutely no good idea why he is quoting Old Testament scripture to justify his belief structure, but has never seen or sacrificed an animal to God. Animal sacrifice was a cornerstone of Old Testament practices that also became outdated when Christ died for Man's sins. Sacrifice was no longer necessary, because Jesus was the ultimate sacrifice. He didn't know that, either.

So before you start your raving about how "every thread in the IR becomes Christian bashing", please consider your contemporaries' effect on others in the IR. Just as you would become inflamed and annoyed if someone wrote a haughty line about how being aetheist made them a cut above the rest, it is extremely irritating for others when Christians do it. Additionally, when those with a basic education in your religion can spot holes in a Christian's proclamations of superiority, it is also extremely irritating.

While I rarely enjoy seeing Christianity brought up as a topic, it continues with frequency it does because of gross ignorance on all sides. Ignorance is never enjoyable, but it is much less tolerable coming from an elitist that is misinformed about his own belief system. If you don't feel that Christianity is receiving the respect it deserves, perhaps you should reflect your beliefs in a more respectable manner.

[mranderson]

After the death of Christ, the price of Man's sins were paid and the rules and conditions of a good Christian's life changed.

I don't have any scriptures with me, but I'll give this a shot. "No unclean thing can enter into the presence of god." "Judge not lest ye be judged." Various others about being clean. I think there's something about David (or somebody) too. God's chosen sleeping with a woman. Look what happened to him. When did God say christians could live like S.O.B.s? I'll go pray in my closet about this.

Don't you need to judge wether the food you partake of is bad or good? Don't you need to judge the people you are around? You need to judge to be clean, and healthy yourself. I thought Jesus died so Christians could repent though. But I do know my shoe polish.

If you want some more I'll get some scriptures later, but I'm hungry right now.

[ecyor0]

(wince)

(stage whisper) He hasn't read the rest of the discussion has he?

(goes to find some good counter-arguments)
EDIT: (Sorry, to the aetheists in the forum - this is a direct christian-to-christian reply, so just bear with me...)

OK, first off, there is nothing particularly christian about shunning people of questionable morals - Jesus frequently dined with harlots and tax collectors, yes? Secondly, to reiterate my earlier points, judgment is not a human prerogative - rather, we, as Christians, are supposed to relinquish any rights to judgment that we think we might have to God. "Judge not so that you will not be judged" - and so on. Take a read through the gospels. Not once will you see Jesus condemning an adulteress, or a prostitute. But the group he does condemn repeatedly are the pharisees.

Who were the pharisees? What would be the modern equivalent? Let's list their qualities, shall we? They believed in God; they were awaiting the coming of the Messiah (from our perspective they missed him, but they were waiting for him); they believed in miracles, resurrection, heaven and hell. They prayed regularly and devoutly. They studied the scriptures (not just read them, studied them in depth). They went regularly to worship. They did all the things they were supposed to, they donated money to charity in the synagogue.......... Is this sounding like anyone you know?

And remember, Christians are supposed to be the light of the world - how can you be that if you reject anyone who is less than perfect (hide the light under a bushel, so to speak)?


And another thing. You posted:

"Judge not lest ye be judged."

...... this supports your view how, exactly? :\



OK, end rant. As you were, gentlemen. :D

[mranderson]

Sorry to the athiests, but I'm a christian, and I feel like quoting scripture.

St. Matthew 7:1-2
Judge not that ye be not judged. For with that judgement ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

St. Matthew 5:8
Blesssed are the pure in heart for they shall see god.

St. Matthew 6:5
And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synogogues and in the corners of the streets that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.

St. Matthew 5:16
Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your father which is in heaven.

St. Matthew 15:18-19
But those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart; and they defile the man. For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies.

25-26
Then came she and worshipped him, saying, Lord, help me. But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children's bread, and cast it to the dogs.


If you want me to quote more I can, but I think that is enough scripture for now. Jesus does judge everyone though. Doesn't he judge people if they are righteous, or not? That last scripture shows him judging someone. As you said, the only group he condemns (as of right now) are the pharisees (Yes, I know about them, and it sounds like some modern christians), but he does judge everyone. He just has a high level of grace to give people. I shun people of questionable morales all the time though. I think you do too, and it's plenty christian, but I still have a level of acceptance for them if they are willing to change. Feel free to take a look at my scriptures I quoted. (I'm sure you can all find counters to these, and feel free to try.) You can look back at my food analogy, and try to read it this time. I believe it's saying you need to Judge to be pure. I included it because everyone knows that scripture, but everyone still uses judgement.

Christians cover a lot of people (about every christian that has ever gone to any christian church at one point) and I'm absolutely positive not every single one of them acts christian.

With my allusions in the earlier post I expected some background knowledge. Praying in a closet refers to the Pharisees, and yourself. (Judgement) People actually need to judge to be pure in heart. David's stuff is in 2 Samuel:13 I think if you are interested. I know it's an extreme case, but at a level its the same as what we are talking about.

From what I've seen from the discussion: A-it's about sleeping with a woman who's already had sex, and kind of turned into a moral thing.
B-Intelectually bashing silver crusader for having exceptionally high morals in the twenty first century, and being christian.


I will not sleep with someone before marriage. The woman I marry I would like to be a virigin. If not, stuff happens. Because if I was dating someone, and proposed to her, and a couple months (or however long) before the wedding she told me she was not a virgin...depending if she was truly repentant (i.e. truly sorry, turned away from her sin, expressed sincere sorrow) I would marry her. I know everyone isn't perfect, and everyone has flaws. That includes me. I'll use my judgement, scriptures, gospel, and prayer in my life to live my life.

Finally, how can the light be shown if the candle isn't lit?

[GroG]

To put it simply, the reason it doesn't matter who a girl has gotten with before you is because there is no malice there. All previous relationships are prior to you, and so her sex life at that point is independent of yours.

Once you two are together, if she proceeds to have sex, hell even just flirt with other guys, it pisses you off. Why? There's malice there - she doesn't think your relationship is worth it to just be with you. It's almost like you aren't valuable enough.

You can say all this stuff about it being disgusting, yadda yadda yadda, but honestly think about it: are you grossed out because of it being sick physically, or because she has somewhat betrayed you for another?

When I first started dating my wife, I'd get irritated when she'd mention her ex-boyfriend from time to time. She didn't do it to tick me off, she'd just do it on occasion if he was involved in some story she was telling. But after a while, I stopped caring, because I knew if she wasn't interested in me I'd know.

At this point in our relationship, I really don't even bother trying to find out if she even flirts with guys or anything like that (I highly doubt it though). The more you care about that stuff, the more insecure you are about your own value. If you guys are really interested in each other, you shouldn't have to control her, she'll control herself.

That's my 2 cents.

[ecyor0]

St. Matthew 7:1-2
Judge not that ye be not judged. For with that judgement ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

St. Matthew 5:8
Blesssed are the pure in heart for they shall see god.

St. Matthew 6:5
And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synogogues and in the corners of the streets that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.

St. Matthew 5:16
Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your father which is in heaven.

St. Matthew 15:18-19
But those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart; and they defile the man. For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies.

25-26
Then came she and worshipped him, saying, Lord, help me. But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children's bread, and cast it to the dogs.

Jesus does judge everyone though. Doesn't he judge people if they are righteous, or not? That last scripture shows him judging someone. As you said, the only group he condemns (as of right now) are the pharisees .... but he does judge everyone. He just has a high level of grace to give people.

........ how exactly do any of those quotes support your points? The first verse was one I quoted against your statements. You say Jesus judges everyone. Supporting quotes? And that last scripture is not judgement. It seems judgmental on its own, but remember: context. To quote the entire passage:

25But she came and knelt before him, saying, ‘Lord, help me.’ 26He answered, ‘It is not fair to take the children’s food and throw it to the dogs.’ 27She said, ‘Yes, Lord, yet even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their masters’ table.’ 28Then Jesus answered her, ‘Woman, great is your faith! Let it be done for you as you wish.’ And her daughter was healed instantly.Now, that to me does not sound like judgement - that sounds more like a test.

I shun people of questionable morales all the time though. I think you do too, and it's plenty christian, but I still have a level of acceptance for them if they are willing to change. 0.o...... so now you're telling me what I believe?

You can look back at my food analogy, and try to read it this time. I believe it's saying you need to Judge to be pure. I included it because everyone knows that scripture, but everyone still uses judgement.If we're going to be using food analogies...... It is not what goes into a man's mouth that defiles him; but it is what comes out of his mouth - that defiles a man."


Christians cover a lot of people (about every christian that has ever gone to any christian church at one point) and I'm absolutely positive not every single one of them acts christian. Of course not. Christianity has nothing to do with church attendance. And if someone doesn't act christian, it's a safe bet to say they aren't christian.

With my allusions in the earlier post I expected some background knowledge. Praying in a closet refers to the Pharisees, and yourself. (Judgement) People actually need to judge to be pure in heart. David's stuff is in 2 Samuel:13 I think if you are interested. I know it's an extreme case, but at a level its the same as what we are talking about. Again, this supports your argument how?

Again one of your quoted verses contradicts you. St. Matthew 6:5
And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synogogues and in the corners of the streets that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.That's the pharisees he's talking about. Closet praying? Hardly. In fact, in that same section he says: 6But whenever you pray, go into your room and shut the door and pray to your Father who is in secret; and your Father who sees in secret will reward you

The exact opposite of the pharisees.

Finally, how can the light be shown if the candle isn't lit?0.o...... o.0....... eh?

[IrishDutchman]

B-Intelectually bashing silver crusader for having exceptionally high morals in the twenty first century, and being christian.


Well, no one bashed him more than he bashed others. Arguments tend to get a bit heated sometimes, but you should get used to that. It's not bashing, it's disagreeing.
You're also being quite denigrating towards the non-christians. You talk about of 'exceptionally high morals' and speak of christian values as the set standard.
Non-christians have values too, though they might not be the same as yours.
Calling non-christian morals inferior, is quite the opposite of what you've been taught.
'Judge not that ye be not judged.' Right?


Only a seldom few have a chance with me.

I prefer it this way:

You only have a chance with a seldom few, :/

[GenocideAlive]

I shun people of questionable morales all the time though. I think you do too, and it's plenty christian, but I still have a level of acceptance for them if they are willing to change. Feel free to take a look at my scriptures I quoted. (I'm sure you can all find counters to these, and feel free to try.) You can look back at my food analogy, and try to read it this time. I believe it's saying you need to Judge to be pure. I included it because everyone knows that scripture, but everyone still uses judgement.
Absolutely no Christian should judge anyone else on this planet, according the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Yes, you need to make good decisions about your life--no, that doesn't mean that you in turn need to pass judgment on those that have erred in sin or those that are erring in sin.

Mary Magdalene was the quintessential bride of Christ, and she was a whore. Think about it--all this garbage about purity and virginity is for idealism, it doesn't make you "better" or more worthy than anybody else. If a prostitute could marry Christ, there's not a woman on this planet whose sexual experiences make her any less or more than any other man. Get a fucking grip.

Quoting a few passages in the Bible out of context doesn't give you a right to pass out your personal holier-than-thou doctrine. You are to be a sheep, simple and obedient. You are not the shepherd, that judges and picks directions for sheep. This elitist bullshit about you need to judge and shun people is horseshit. Ironically, the people for which Jesus seemed to hold the most contempt in his entire time on Earth were those that were judgmental of others.
Finally, how can the light be shown if the candle isn't lit?
What the hell are you talking about? What do candles and light have to do with sexual experiences making you a lesser Christian? Lead your life as best you can to the ideal, and love all others in all you do. That was Jesus' message.

[SilverCrusader]

Well, no one bashed him more than he bashed others. Arguments tend to get a bit heated sometimes, but you should get used to that. It's not bashing, it's disagreeing.
You're also being quite denigrating towards the non-christians. You talk about of 'exceptionally high morals' and speak of christian values as the set standard.
Non-christians have values too, though they might not be the same as yours.
Calling non-christian morals inferior, is quite the opposite of what you've been taught.
'Judge not that ye be not judged.' Right?
Right-O. I is human and I have the freedom to act as I choose, as do all the other humans, Christian or not.

You only have a chance with a seldom few, :/
SO TRUE! :P

Some people say I'm not being fair to those that aren't accepted by my morals, but I have a few words for them:
All is fair in love and war.

[Oblongato]

Right-O. I is human and I have the freedom to act as I choose, as do all the other humans, Christian or not.

Stalin had that freedom too. Your point?

Some people say I'm not being fair to those that aren't accepted by my morals, but I have a few words for them:
All is fair in love and war.

From my perspective, the only thing that makes you Christian is your claim that you are Christian. Nothing you have written in this thread seems to be in any way Christian.

Judgmental, large ego, proud, merciful when you shouldn't be (?!) - and this adds up to an overzealous practice of Christianity? It beggars belief.

If I didn't know better (and I don't), I'd say you are not a Christian but a troll.

[SilverCrusader]

If I didn't know better (and I don't), I'd say you are not a Christian but a troll.
Well, wheres your money for crossing my bridge?!

I have my own actions, and my own thoughts. There is no one "Christian" way to think or "Christian way" to act. People have personalities you know, and I do have boundaries for myself. I'm not super-liberal.

Or are we going to inject ourselves with prozium and take away all emotions so people are "Christian"? /movie reference

[Oblongato]

Well, wheres your money for crossing my bridge?!

I have my own actions, and my own thoughts. There is no one "Christian" way to think or "Christian way" to act. People have personalities you know, and I do have boundaries for myself. I'm not super-liberal.

Or are we going to inject ourselves with prozium and take away all emotions so people are "Christian"? /movie reference

Consider this example: A poster shows up in this thread and says he is a Christian. Then he proceeds to list his personal qualities and habits:

- eats poodle meat
- child molester
- thinks Jesus was a "wuss"
- watches nun porn

When his claim to being a Christian is challenged using passages from the new testament, he basically says it's a free country and he can define what Christian means.

I can say I'm Hindu because I collect bottle caps. But how much credibility does my statement have? Communication is only possible if we agree on a common definition. I'm sure many of us would be curious to know how you define "Christian". Care to give us a brief description?

P.S. My posts should more than cover your troll fees.

[mranderson]

Just wow. I am stunned. I'll answer ecyor0 first.

-"........ how exactly do any of those quotes support your points?"

Feel like reading the scriptures (maybe more), and what I stated, but making some conclusions on your own? Yes, I did read that part about her receiving a blessing from Jesus. But you feel like reading that part, but not the part before praying in the closet, like praying on the street corners and receiving praise from man. It seems to me that you take, or leave things in context as you choose.

No, I'm not telling you what you believe, but I'm trying to make you think about what you do. If you feel like taking everything I say literally, and not expounding on it, my posts will take me a lot more time, and get a lot longer.

Didn't I use that scripture in one of my quotes about what cometh out of the mouth? Christians judge though. You've got your catholics with your priests that hand out the hell mary's and whatnot. You've got your bishops to tell people wether they've sinned. And you've always got yourself to judge by you. Please don't tell me it's acceptable for them to judge others, and you can't judge others. We're all sheep right? We can all judge, but I could understand if others judgement carried more weight. Also, what is judgement? Isn't that handing out the sentence for their crime? Its not my fault I want to try to keep my enviroment around me cleaner.

Christians don't act like christians huh. Strange that everyone's not perfect. But when a church takes a census on its members who does it include? You're telling me not to judge, but then you're saying no one that doesn't act like a christian is not a christian (safe to bet).

In second samuel King David committed adultery, and had her husband killed. A prophet told him a parable, and David condemned himself at the end. God did not let David prosper, but let the Kingdom prosper. One man vs. an entire nation. Committing adultery???? Being christian???? Doesn't support my arguement how???? Feel like reading that chapter?

The exact opposite of the pharisees? Look a couple verses ahead of that, and that's the pharisees. You are the one praying in the closet my friend.

And the light not being lit? How can a christian show the world how a christian acts if he doesn't act christian? Strange, huh.

-Genocide Alive
"Absolutely no Christian should judge anyone else on this planet, according the Gospel of Jesus Christ. "

See the catholic hell mary's above.

"Mary Magdalene was the quintessential bride of Christ, and she was a whore. Think about it--all this garbage about purity and virginity is for idealism, it doesn't make you "better" or more worthy than anybody else. If a prostitute could marry Christ, there's not a woman on this planet whose sexual experiences make her any less or more than any other man. Get a fucking grip."

What bible are you reading? Can you give me some scripture with this in the King James version?

"Quoting a few passages in the Bible out of context doesn't give you a right to pass out your personal holier-than-thou doctrine. You are to be a sheep, simple and obedient. You are not the shepherd, that judges and picks directions for sheep. This elitist bullshit about you need to judge and shun people is horseshit. Ironically, the people for which Jesus seemed to hold the most contempt in his entire time on Earth were those that were judgmental of others."

So apparently I'm part of a church, or order that takes scriptures out of context, and preaches holier than thou doctorine. But Jesus came to earth to bring his sheep back to his fold right? So why wouldn't he try to help those who need helping?

"Lead your life as best you can to the ideal, and love all others in all you do. That was Jesus' message."

How can you live your life in an ideal when others break your reality? Do you have your own reality warping bubble surrounding you? I think some of the stuff in my response to ecyorO will answer some of your statements if you feel like finding them.

Feel free to look back at my earlier posts, and try to decide what was taken out of context? Did Jesus really judge her, even though he did help her (Yes, I took that into consideration before quoting it, but I thought it was clear that he did judge her, but had enough grace to heal her.)

[Icarus]

To be honest, at this age it really doesn't matter whether or not my partners are sexually conservative or not. To be "selfish" about sex I believe to be a way of expressing exclusive love, which is of course great, but something that seems impossible to attain. If my partners aren't in love with me, and I've expressed myself truthfully, there's nothing I can do about it. I'm not going to view her as inferior because i'm not her one and only. That's my fault.

So until I find a woman I'd like to have children with, I'm not going to care about infidelity. Hell with girls in my town being as they are, i'd be surprised to find a girl who i'd be willing to be exclusive for. It's just a question of how much he/she loves you, which at an early age in general is either false or non-existant.

BTW have people not realized that the King James version is over 4 centuries old, and manipulated to complement the Anglican church? I thought we'd be past this after the reformation.

I once knew a theology major, and he told me the most accurate version is probably the new international.

[GenocideAlive]

Feel free to look back at my earlier posts, and try to decide what was taken out of context? Did Jesus really judge her, even though he did help her (Yes, I took that into consideration before quoting it, but I thought it was clear that he did judge her, but had enough grace to heal her.)
Which posts? The ones where you start quoting Old Testament and using it to justify your current beliefs? Feel free to read my previous post, the one about Old Testament becoming archaic after Jesus' death and the debt of Sin being paid. Old Testament is not a justification for modern beliefs. You're a Christian, figure it out. God ordered Moses and sons to slaughter 5,000 people by sword for worshipping a golden calf. So, does that mean you're going to grab a Claymore and chop the next Wiccan you see in half because you're a good Christian?
Quoting a few passages in the Bible out of context doesn't give you a right to pass out your personal holier-than-thou doctrine. You are to be a sheep, simple and obedient. You are not the shepherd, that judges and picks directions for sheep. This elitist bullshit about you need to judge and shun people is horseshit. Ironically, the people for which Jesus seemed to hold the most contempt in his entire time on Earth were those that were judgmental of others.
So apparently I'm part of a church, or order that takes scriptures out of context, and preaches holier than thou doctorine. But Jesus came to earth to bring his sheep back to his fold right? So why wouldn't he try to help those who need helping?
Could you please explain to me how your reply makes any sense whatsoever? You apparently seem to be claiming that everybody in your Church has the exact same beliefs you do, which is a pretty ignorant statement to make. You are essentially claiming that you speak for everybody in your Church. You also have thrown in there a comment about Jesus and helping people, which both have absolutely no bearing on either the topic or my comments. Or are you somehow claiming that you're a follower of Jesus and that's why you should be shunning people that Jesus told you to help?

It all makes sense now.

I know one thing, though. SilverCrusader is going to be escorted out of the fucking IR in a hurry.

[Prozerran]

Which posts? The ones where you start quoting Old Testament and using it to justify your current beliefs? Feel free to read my previous post, the one about Old Testament becoming archaic after Jesus' death and the debt of Sin being paid. Old Testament is not a justification for modern beliefs. You're a Christian, figure it out. God ordered Moses and sons to slaughter 5,000 people by sword for worshipping a golden calf. So, does that mean you're going to grab a Claymore and chop the next Wiccan you see in half because you're a good Christian?

It is if you're Jewish :P

Against my better judgment, I'm jumping in here on this, because, well, this should be fun. While we've been sort of touching on this concept of 'judgment' as it relates to Christianity, I just want to point out one thing that is actually taken out of context entirely.

"Judge not lest ye be judged yourself."

I think it often a misconception that Christians are not supposed to pass judgment according to this verse. In essence, this holds all accountable for their actions. All this simply means is that as a Christian, your duty isn't to hold others to your standard, but to hold yourself to the Christian standard. If you break it down, here's how it looks:

1.) God's standard
2.) Your standard
3.) Others' standards

And it is in the priorities that I think most Christians and all of us in general become confused. The scripture gets misinterpreted here in how it views 'passing judgment'. All it really says, more or less, is that you should not prioritize your standard at or above that of God, lest you be judged, since we all sin. So, passing judgment based on your standard is different than passing judgment on the standards of others based on the standard of God. Does that give Christians the right to "pass judgment" on others? Of course not. But it doesn't prevent them from making an observation based on the teachings of Christianity.

Maybe it's a little off point, but I just wanted to make sure the distinction was clear here. I mean, look. You either agree with something or you don't. If you don't agree with it, you've somehow judged that thing to be unworthy of the belief you uphold. It just happens to be conveniently written in a book for followers of the Christian religion to catalog and easily reference. So, passing judgment is really a matter of context entirely, and if I have somehow missed the context of your post, feel free to explain if you care to. Otherwise, just move on, but always keep in mind one of my favorite quotes from the movie Grandma's Boy:

Alex sits on Dante's couch smoking a (massive) blunt, taking a toke he turns to the monkey sitting next to him.

"Don't judge me, monkey."

It's perfect. If you haven't seen Grandma's Boy, see it. The fucking most hilarious movie ever!

[GroG]

Maybe it's a little off point, but I just wanted to make sure the distinction was clear here. I mean, look. You either agree with something or you don't. If you don't agree with it, you've somehow judged that thing to be unworthy of the belief you uphold.

That's not true. I can think someone is doing something I don't agree with, but still respect it. I can also think someone is doing something I don't agree with, but I can understand why they are doing it. I can also think someone is doing something I don't agree with, but I can accept the fact that they are different and not let it bother me.

That's where I find a lot of Christian people have problems. They can't just let people do what's best for themselves, they have to meddle with things beyond their control or attempt to "enlighten" people by telling them what's right and what's wrong.

Case in point, gay marriage. It's not something I'd do, it's not something I'd have an easy time dealing with if it was my child - don't get me wrong, I'd try, but it'd be hard at first. Anyone who tells you they'd be 100% accepting right off the bat of a gay child is full of shit. That kind of stuff in reality takes character to accept and a lifetime to deal with. But anyways, more to the point, I can accept gay people getting married. I can even respect it. Does it matter if I think it's right or wrong? No, it doesn't affect me in any way.

That's the issue. Control, respect, who's right, who's wrong, and who's willing to let it be without being a jerk about it.

[Prozerran]

That's not true. I can think someone is doing something I don't agree with, but still respect it. I can also think someone is doing something I don't agree with, but I can understand why they are doing it. I can also think someone is doing something I don't agree with, but I can accept the fact that they are different and not let it bother me.

That's where I find a lot of Christian people have problems. They can't just let people do what's best for themselves, they have to meddle with things beyond their control or attempt to "enlighten" people by telling them what's right and what's wrong.

Good point. I think what I was just trying to show is exactly what you are saying, though. Internally, you judge whatever issue it is. It's the reaction that gets me, and I think you as well, because it's problematic for Christians following a doctrine of evangelism to separate their own judgment on values from expressing the values of Christianity to others. I'm saying that there's a fine line between meddling and judgment, that they are not one in the same. Don't meddle, but have convictions and be strong in your values. For example.

You don't value homosexuality in your life, that's a judgment you've made on homosexuality as it pertains to you, and no one is going to convince you otherwise. But you also don't meddle in the lives of those who value homosexuality, which is great. No qualms here. I think we're looking at it in a different way but getting to the same result. I just think it needs to be clearer to everyone that this issue of "judgment" and what Christians should and should not do shouldn't be misinterpreted, and I think it is.

[mranderson]

Yay, more off topic responses. Ecyor0 was right, we need to start a new thread.

Anyways, more off topic stuff, but I'll try to keep it short.

Feel free to look back at my earlier posts, and try to decide what was taken out of context? Did Jesus really judge her, even though he did help her (Yes, I took that into consideration before quoting it, but I thought it was clear that he did judge her, but had enough grace to heal her.)

Which posts? The ones where you start quoting Old Testament and using it to justify your current beliefs? Feel free to read my previous post, the one about Old Testament becoming archaic after Jesus' death and the debt of Sin being paid. Old Testament is not a justification for modern beliefs. You're a Christian, figure it out. God ordered Moses and sons to slaughter 5,000 people by sword for worshipping a golden calf. So, does that mean you're going to grab a Claymore and chop the next Wiccan you see in half because you're a good Christian?


Funny that my scripture of the woman being judged comes from the new testament as well as most of my quotes. They were in Matthew. Only Old testament scripture I used was the one in second samuel which was more of a reference to this actual thread

. Yes, Jesus was the ultimate sacrifice. So I can now start sinning whenever I want to? (Sarcasm/ rhetorical statement.)

But if Jesus, or God told me to kill people, I would sure as hell kill them. But I would choose conventional weapons over medieval unless he told me otherwise. If God told you to kill people wouldn't you????

Could you please explain to me how your reply makes any sense whatsoever? You apparently seem to be claiming that everybody in your Church has the exact same beliefs you do, which is a pretty ignorant statement to make. You are essentially claiming that you speak for everybody in your Church. You also have thrown in there a comment about Jesus and helping people, which both have absolutely no bearing on either the topic or my comments. Or are you somehow claiming that you're a follower of Jesus and that's why you should be shunning people that Jesus told you to help?

I said apparently (note sarcasm in that quote) I am elitist christian man. But I know every member of my church isn't elitist man. Most of the people my age are sinners, but I still hang out with them (in church too.) I speak only for myself!

A:This thread was about wether or not you're going to sleep with someone that is promiscous.

My answer was no. I shun people of questionable morales, sorry about the generalization, but I can see where this confusion came from, and I didn't make it clear. I would shun those that would affect me (as in sleeping with someone promiscous). Personally, I hang out with a lot of sinners. And the thing about judgement is that I don't pass the sentence which is implied in their judgement, but not mine personally. Besides that whose spouting elitist christian stuff at whom now? "Jews killed 5000 people"

Lol, I already said King James version. If you want to continue this, let them get back to their "sexual selfishness" thread, and we should start a new one.

[GenocideAlive]

But if Jesus, or God told me to kill people, I would sure as hell kill them. But I would choose conventional weapons over medieval unless he told me otherwise. If God told you to kill people wouldn't you????
You scare the shit out of me; congratulations, I think you've hit PC-levels of scary-crazy-fundamentalist. Just FYI, I wouldn't kill people for "God" or anyone else. Murder is something that I would take on my own head, for my own reasons. I don't need or want someone to hold accountable for what I do.

Be very careful about the path you choose for yourself as a Christian. Satan doesn't want to convince others that God does not exist, he wants to convince them that God wants them to sin. Murder, judgment, elitism--these are not godly traits, whether internalized or externalized. Jesus was humble in all he did, he didn't judge anyone that did not attempt to harm him or others ("judge not, lest ye be judged"). He forgave all.

One of the most disappointing aspects of Christianity is that so few understand what it's about. What's confounding about it is that it is so simple: love.

[mranderson]

Lol. You take everything I say way to literally. It's as if I would go out right that second and do it if something said, "I'm god, go kill people." I doubt I would, and I definitely wouldn't do it that day unless I was damn sure it was god, or jesus. What's a pc level though?

Ya there is some modern day accounts of people actually saying God told them to kill people which I believe is kind of sad, and wrong. I believe one of them is one of the breakoffs of a !fundamentalist! latter day saint church or something. You might be able to find it on google.

Sigh, we really need a new thread.

[Oblongato]

Actually, we have never strayed far from the original topic, since it quickly became clear that one of the primary reasons for not wanting to sleep with a promiscuous woman (or man, I suppose) was "Christian morals".

We wound up where we are now because the arguments didn't stop at simply not sleeping with such a woman (or man, I suppose) - it went considerably further in the direction of moral judgment, casting stones etc.

From your own comments, too, there is a trend in this direction. There is a big difference between not sleeping with and shunning. How many people did Jesus shun again?

By the way, based on your own comments (or are you saying we shouldn't take them seriously?) those people who kill because God supposedly told them to are doing exactly what you yourself have said you would do. Did you assume that they killed despite not being sure if it was God or Ghandi?

So which is it going to be? Shall we ignore your comments because they are not serious, or are you going to start using some logic?

[mranderson]

How many of you would hang out with a leper, and touch him? Jesus did that all the time. But still, if you believe in the last judgement how many will he put away from himself (Yes, I know. Everyone that denies him.).

Personally I'm not perfect, and am fallible. But I have chosen not to be around certain people because of the way they acted. I'm not talking about small slights, but people that do illegal drugs, sleep around a lot, or swear all of the time (an f-bomb in every sentence at least), etc. I'm not saying I don't shun everybody that I have seen a slight sin, but those that are acting like the above mentioned.

When would Ghandi tell people to kill though?

I'll try to use less sacrcasm, hyperboles, and rhetorical statements from now on though.

[Oblongato]

How many of you would hang out with a leper, and touch him? Jesus did that all the time. But still, if you believe in the last judgement how many will he put away from himself (Yes, I know. Everyone that denies him.).

Just on the side, I'm an atheist.

Not touching a leper, of course, is common sense. But you don't have to shun lepers. I would certainly try to be as polite and friendly as possible without infecting myself. And you seem to be suggesting that you can be Christian and still put away from yourself those Jesus would put away from himself. This assumes, of course, that your capability for judgment is the equal of Jesus'.

Personally I'm not perfect, and am fallible. But I have chosen not to be around certain people because of the way they acted. I'm not talking about small slights, but people that do illegal drugs, sleep around a lot, or swear all of the time (an f-bomb in every sentence at least), etc. I'm not saying I don't shun everybody that I have seen a slight sin, but those that are acting like the above mentioned.

Using imperfection and fallibility as excuses to continue to behave in a non-Christian way is not in my view Christian. While I am not a Christian, when I notice my imperfection and fallibility, I work on it.

The examples you mention seem to me to be to be cases of "love your enemy" or "turn the other cheek". I would suggest that it may even be your Christian duty to show these people by your example the advantages of Christian philosophy. (Avoiding, of course, the "holier-than-thou" methods of typical "Christian" hypocrites.)

When would Ghandi tell people to kill though?

My point was that people who go as far as to kill are sure in their own minds who it is commanding them to kill. Even if to outsiders their claims are patently ridiculous (i.e. neither God nor Ghandi is out there telling people to kill).

I'll try to use less sacrcasm, hyperboles, and rhetorical statements from now on though.

Don't worry about it - we can take it. (Just don't expect not to be taken to task for things that don't make sense.)

[mranderson]

Okay I see your points in most of the stuff, and agree with them. God wouldn't tell people to kill people, shouldn't touch leperes but not shun them either, etc. But showing the above mentioned group the christian philosophy without holier than though, and not shunning them...What happens if they do go to your church every sunday, and pay their lip service? They've gone to church every sunday for most of their natural lives, but still sleep around, swear excessively, etc.

[GenocideAlive]

All people need things: love, safety, respect, attention, and purpose.

If they are not getting one of those things, they fall into socially maladaptive behaviors (some are "sin") in an effort to get them. Your job is to recognize the times that you didn't get one of those things you needed. How did you feel? How did you behave (sin)? Help them how you can, if you can. If you can't, help them get in touch with someone that can.

The only people you should shun are those that are a destructive influence on your life. And frankly, those that have a destructive influence on your life point to your weaknesses. For example: If a person gossiping is harming your life, perhaps your credibility is not what it should be because of some poor behaviors (sin).

love is the way.

[Oblongato]

Okay I see your points in most of the stuff, and agree with them. God wouldn't tell people to kill people, shouldn't touch leperes but not shun them either, etc. But showing the above mentioned group the christian philosophy without holier than though, and not shunning them...What happens if they do go to your church every sunday, and pay their lip service? They've gone to church every sunday for most of their natural lives, but still sleep around, swear excessively, etc.

I agree completely with GA here. And beyond that, why do you feel compelled to judge? Just be the best you can be, help others when you can - for example by setting a good example - and be happy.

[ClintonM]

I think that this thread has completely proven my point about the bible being able to be used in ANY way to support or prove ANYTHING evil when not taken as a whole... It's alright, the false Christians were shown the light in the past, it is up to the arrogant ones whether they wish to change or not and that is not our decision.

Lets end this pointless discussion, we've tried to help him and he's declined it won't be our fault for his continuing fall. Everyone has to fall from time to time to realize that you need God, his will just be slightly longer.

Now, continuing on.

Lets just say I recently had the opportunity for sex on a cruise I was on last week and declined repeatedly (it's not that the girls weren't attractive, it's just didn't "love" them and therefore couldn't break my virginity on Lust). They obviously had sex all the time, but that's their decision. I didn't really hang around them because they used drugs and drank and such and that wasn't judging them, I just didn't want to be around the drugs! They were actually really cool to talk to, but I just didn't want to be around the drugs, as I said, and hung around with other girls :P.

My point is that everyone makes mistakes, but everyone also deserves to be forgiven.

That being said, a lot of people live their whole lives as a mistake without realizing it, but a lot of others do realize it and make a change. It's up to the individual, not the people around him/her.

[TheOutcast]

There's this chick in my school, she's the town bicycle as we call her. She's whored herself out to all the preppy guys and they keep bragging about it. She even tries to be a girly girl, for fuck sakes! All I can say is that everyone's got a ride on her.

All I want is for those guys who fucked her is to shut the hell up before they get their asses mashed for being a whore themselves. Wow, this thread' s got me started with this charade in my school.

[CrazyTom]

So ask them what's there to be proud about, sleeping with someone who's easy and risking all kinds of diseases? (If she's truly promiscuous the risk of infection is going to be high and keep getting higher - even safe sex isn't 100% safe.)

Maybe you should try and befriend the girl, give her some attention and respect without seeking to use her. Maybe you could get her to see that her way of acting is emotionally unhealthy?