Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   An object lesson
:æ: 
Suspended Member (Idle past 7185 days)
Posts: 423
Joined: 07-23-2003


Message 106 of 131 (77147)
01-08-2004 12:02 PM
Reply to: Message 103 by grace2u
01-07-2004 9:17 PM


grace2u writes:
At any rate, since you mention a provable fact, what do you mean by this, in context with your post-modernalist view of the world?
Heh heh heh... I suppose I owe you that much...
To be explicit, it is provable under the axioms of set theory and Euclidian geometry.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 103 by grace2u, posted 01-07-2004 9:17 PM grace2u has not replied

  
Silent H
Member (Idle past 5819 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 107 of 131 (77172)
01-08-2004 3:41 PM
Reply to: Message 105 by grace2u
01-08-2004 11:00 AM


quote:
While we may disagree on some theological issues or interpretations, I am united with you in love.
See this is what I don't get. Steve essentially calls most Xians liars and pawns of Satan, and has wholly rejected common interpretation of the Bible... but gets a big hug and kiss from grace just because they are both STATED as Xian and are for love?
The ideological gulf between you (grace) and a pious Xian who happens to believe in relativism and evolution is much smaller than between you and Steve.
I think there may even be a smaller gap between you and I, and I love love. Isn't the difference between you and I just some theological issues and interpretations?
And in the end isn't the actual theology behind Xianity everything there is? Doesn't agreement on that mean more to you than just saying you're a Xian?
As much as Stephen seems like a nice guy, I am astounded at the lack of response by Xians on this forum to the amazingly controversial interpretations he holds. They seem tame in comparison to accepting relativism and evolution.

holmes

This message is a reply to:
 Message 105 by grace2u, posted 01-08-2004 11:00 AM grace2u has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 108 by grace2u, posted 01-08-2004 6:11 PM Silent H has not replied
 Message 109 by Stephen ben Yeshua, posted 01-08-2004 6:36 PM Silent H has replied

  
grace2u
Inactive Member


Message 108 of 131 (77198)
01-08-2004 6:11 PM
Reply to: Message 107 by Silent H
01-08-2004 3:41 PM


I think that what you are witnessing is simply an example of how some of this extremely complex information given through divine inspiration(the old and new testament) is dealt with in a realistic world in which differences of opinion exist amongst fallen and finite vessels. Now I may disagree with Stephen on some things and he might with me, however we are united in love by the grace of God . We both have had experiences that make us members of a fellowship which is far greater than any church door or religious sect. My Reformed Calvinistic theology challenges me and speaks to me in a way that I’m sure Stephen would largely disagree with. Just the same, his communion with the almighty is in a way that perhaps is different than mine. We might even draw different conclusions concerning the nature of church fellowship, doctrines of inerrancy, evolution vs. creation, divine command theory, abortion, theology in general, escetology, gifts of the spirit or whatever. I trust however that I will meet Stephen in heaven given his proclamations of having received grace and his obvious love/appreciation for God certainly demonstrating he has.
We are united by something far greater than any disagreement we might have in the nature of church worship or any other man-made concept.
I am not here to argue theology with other believers. I am not here to try and show how smart I am. I am simply on this forum because I have a love for Jesus and for those on this forum such that I want them to know the grace and love of God that I and millions of other people understand to exist.
I understand that many on this forum have scientific minds and can not simply accept many of the concepts Christianity teaches, even though they would probably like to. I am simply trying to demonstrate that a rational, scientific minded person, can embrace the teachings of Christ, and receive His mercy without murdering/ignoring their minds. That everything does not require a scientific process or proof to be valid or true. That many things in fact exist even though they can not be proved. That the contrary position is ultimately irrational in that it denies the existence of some of the more fundamental truths we understand about the world in which we live, even though it at times assumes they exist and are absolute. Truths such as absolute truth, logic, reason, anger, jealousy, right wrong, love, the order of mathematics, order, justice, etc.
And in the end isn't the actual theology behind Xianity everything there is
Absolutely not. Jesus is that which ties it together, not some systematicly derived theology. While I appreciate theology and beleive it has a purpose in the body of Christ, it is not the end all.
I will reply to your previous response as soon as time allows me to.
Take care and regards,

This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by Silent H, posted 01-08-2004 3:41 PM Silent H has not replied

  
Stephen ben Yeshua
Inactive Member


Message 109 of 131 (77202)
01-08-2004 6:36 PM
Reply to: Message 107 by Silent H
01-08-2004 3:41 PM


Not a Xian
Holmes,
You stated,
just because they are both STATED as Xian and are for love?
I do not state that I am a Christian, I specically deny the title, and believe that to so accept that title and use it on oneself dooms one to some sort of fiery consequence. I am for love, especially as defined in Scripture, as keeping the commandments. Grace2u, and myself both know how wrong we could be, and agree that "if anyone thinks he knows something, he doesn't know anything yet as he ought to." Also, any error on either of our parts, we know by experience, is covered by Yeshua's sacrifice. We both know that they are forgiven and rendered harmless. So, we can boost one another without fear.
As much as Stephen seems like a nice guy, I am astounded at the lack of response by Xians on this forum to the amazingly controversial interpretations he holds. They seem tame in comparison to accepting relativism and evolution.
Actually, I'm not all that nice. I have to pray a lot to not be happy that many people I have had dealings with are almost certainly going to Hell, or are actually getting their just deserts. And, the main reason I pray for this, to not be happy about their real or potential suffering, is that Jehovah says that if I do rejoice over that, He may change His mind and cut their punishment short. I was happy to learn that one of the things you have to do to get to heaven was to despise vile men, hate those who hate God. I've got that one down OK. So, discreet is better than nice.
An to Xians not responding to me, that's exactly what I would predict given what I believe about them. That Grace2u responded surprized me, but I asked God and He told me that he/she was okay. Calvinists have a better chance than most.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by Silent H, posted 01-08-2004 3:41 PM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 110 by Silent H, posted 01-08-2004 10:14 PM Stephen ben Yeshua has replied

  
Silent H
Member (Idle past 5819 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 110 of 131 (77250)
01-08-2004 10:14 PM
Reply to: Message 109 by Stephen ben Yeshua
01-08-2004 6:36 PM


quote:
I do not state that I am a Christian, I specically deny the title, and believe that to so accept that title and use it on oneself dooms one to some sort of fiery consequence.
Well grace seems to feel you are a Xian, and regardless of title you want, that would seem to be a good term to cover you.
I think I am giving up trying to figure out what you guys think. It appears completely bizarre and arbitrary. Whatever floats your boats.
quote:
I have to pray a lot to not be happy that many people I have had dealings with are almost certainly going to Hell, or are actually getting their just deserts... I've got that one down OK. So, discreet is better than nice.
Mmmmm, okay not nice. Given your self assessment I guess I could come up with a better term than discrete though. I don't find your outlook on life very healthy, frankly bordering on pathological illness.
After this I would love to have an explanation of how you can consider yourself interested in love (and to Grace: how you can consider Steve a brother in love)? The above seems diametrically opposed to a description of your interests in another thread.
If this is absolutism, I'll stick with my own morality. I actually like people, and have hopes for those I disagree with, far beyond them getting toasty.

holmes

This message is a reply to:
 Message 109 by Stephen ben Yeshua, posted 01-08-2004 6:36 PM Stephen ben Yeshua has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 111 by grace2u, posted 01-09-2004 12:39 PM Silent H has replied
 Message 112 by Stephen ben Yeshua, posted 01-09-2004 1:45 PM Silent H has replied

  
grace2u
Inactive Member


Message 111 of 131 (77344)
01-09-2004 12:39 PM
Reply to: Message 110 by Silent H
01-08-2004 10:14 PM


Well grace seems to feel you are a Xian, and regardless of title you want, that would seem to be a good term to cover you. .... and to Grace: how you can consider Steve a brother in love
The conclusion I have drawn concerning this is that when Stephen references "Jehovah" he is referencing the same Jehovah I know and love. References to Yeshua (Hebrew for Jesus) lend further evidence to my beleif that he has received Grace through Jesus perfect sacrifice. This is also evidenced by his proclomations of grace and appreciation of it. Now, Stephen would potentialy disassociate himself from that which I am saying, this is fine, as far as I can tell now, I still wouldn't change my mind about him. I understand that I am a fallen vessel and am in need of grace. It seems as if Stephen has a similar understanding and his statements concerning atonement have lended further evidence towards my belief that him and I are speaking of the same God and that we are in the same fellowship.
Just because he won't call himself a Christian doesn't mean that I can not love him as a brother or that we are not both in the perfect entity know as the body of Christ or the body of believers. Given this, any disagreements within the fellowship are certainly not to be discussed in some open forum-like here. God has in fact laid out methods we are to use in order to deal with these matters.
I ultimately do not know the true spiritual position of Stephen nor anyone else on this forum. It is not for me to know, it is for God. I am united with Stephen in love because I think we both are ultimately speaking of the same things. While Stephen and I would potentially disagree on every subject possible to discuss within the context of scriptures teachings or the "church today", it does seem that we are united in our beliefs of absolutism, which is what this thread is speaking about.
I apologize if this sounds somewhat arbitrary or disfunctional. Please know that my debate is with those who deny that God exist or deny that Jesus atonement is the perfect and neccesary method of salvation. My debate is NOT with those who see the Christian church today as having deep problems and feeling that they must completely disassociate themselves with it.
If this is absolutism, I'll stick with my own morality
It seems to me that this is a strange way of concluding that your own morality is much better off. Couldn't this brotherly acceptance of Stephen(and his apparent acceptance of me) actually be looked at as a type of relativism within the body of believers so as not to cause division or confuse matters more than they already are, since we understand that no one is perfect, only Jesus? What am I missing here?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 110 by Silent H, posted 01-08-2004 10:14 PM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 114 by Silent H, posted 01-10-2004 9:27 PM grace2u has not replied

  
Stephen ben Yeshua
Inactive Member


Message 112 of 131 (77364)
01-09-2004 1:45 PM
Reply to: Message 110 by Silent H
01-08-2004 10:14 PM


Love is good
Holmes,
First, Grace2U's reply expresses my understanding of our love for one another. We will work out our differences, sooner or later, in the process both of us will have to repent, or change our minds about a lot of things. I like changing my mind. It feels good, and I almost define humanity by the normalness of changing one's mind. To be bored (not having experiences that require a mind change) is much worse than to humble yourself and say, "Whoops, oh well, there I go again."
But, I know Jehovah. He talks to me, laughs with me, jokes around with me, takes me fun places, shows me neat stuff. I don't hate people who disagree, with Him or me. It's people who carelessly hurt those He and I were both hoping to see good things from. People who ought to know better.
Example: I have raised a bunch of daughters, all of whom I deeply love. I have done this in a culture that is big time into pornography, where girls and women are, in order to get money, gotten to do things that, were I to see my own daughters doing these things, would really put me into a rage. But, those women are someone's daughter! And I find it easy to generate compassion for either the father who has to endure this pain, or for the daughter who lacks a father who cares. So, I consider those who put up the money that gets the whole business started, and keeps it going. Any Hell I can imagine is too good for them, actually. "How long, Oh, Lord?"
Of course, if a pornography patron were to see what they are doing, and show appropriate grief and make appropriate amends, I would change my hopes for their eternal prospects. But, as they stand....
We might continue here with a discussion of what love is. It's my highest priority, and I do H-D science because "love believes all things" and "love is keeping the commandments." H-D science requires both believing theories for the sake of testing, and being very diligent to play by the rules.
As to loving people, it is written that the tender mercies of the wicked are cruel. The ontological reality of Satan makes "the road to Hell" be "paved with good intentions." It's a part of Satan's effort to make you miserable to have you earnestly want to make someone happier, try to do so, then have your efforts cause them incomparable pain. "What have I done?" we anquish when that happens. I hate it when that happens to me, but I understand that there's a lot of that in Hell. Which is why I'm taking no chances of going there.
Stephen

This message is a reply to:
 Message 110 by Silent H, posted 01-08-2004 10:14 PM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 115 by Silent H, posted 01-10-2004 9:43 PM Stephen ben Yeshua has replied

  
Stephen ben Yeshua
Inactive Member


Message 113 of 131 (77402)
01-09-2004 4:51 PM
Reply to: Message 95 by :æ:
01-07-2004 12:38 PM


Re: Begging the question?
:ae:
You comment,
I think this is semantic obfuscation, honestly. The universe is as equally "out of nothing" as you postulate Jehovah to be, yet it is still meaningful to speak about the existence of the universe.
confirming that your god is not my God. Jehovah is real picky about this sort of thing.
I'd just like to note at this point that the above is your interpretation of the Bible, and not necessarily the only correct one.
I agree, and a very important point. Remember, I am convinced that, if the ontology presented in the Bible is accurate, there are a lot of liars out there with the specific agenda of dis-information about the Bible. This is the basis, according to Satinover, for the existence of Bible Codes, to frustrate these liars. I trust my interpretation because it has worked miraculously for me, and, so far, I get few accusations of hypocrisy--observations that I am neglecting something in Scripture important to any interpretation I have.
When it comes to supernatural entities, nothing is objectively testable.
What if an omnipotent creator God says otherwise, as in Malachi 3:10?
Did you know that they've actually performed a study very similar to what you've just described? It indicated that Buddhists tend to be the happiest people. Funny, that.
If you think that study was "very similar" to the one I suggested, we're not communicating. The study you mentioned was a good one, however, confirming my belief that Christians are generally evil people, up to no good. Buddhism, on the other hand, seems to be a very effective way to "prepare ye the way of the Lord." when no Bible is handy, or when Christians have done a good jod confusing what the Bible says. I expect more Buddhists in heaven than Christians, percentage-wise.
More or less. The point is that my morality is primarily derived from the golden rule (don't get too excited, Speakers were preaching the golden rule long before Christ came around). Many of Jehovah's actions as described in the OT are inconsistent with it.
Inconsistent? I don't agree. Jehovah throughout the Scriptures has been as hard on those He loves as those He hates. He is severe in His justice, and long term view. If He is an ontological reality, we have to deal with that is it is, to use the knowledge profitably.
They're rather irrelevant, actually. There's no way to exclude the possibilty that your test results were frauds perpetrated by the trickster god, Loki. That said, I prayed, I humbled myself, I "knocked" on the proverbial door... Jehovah didn't answer.
Of course, ad hoc gods are always possible. But H-D science says that unlikely confirmations of predictions press the plausibility of the hypothesis under test upward. So, when Jehovah "told" me that if I gave up my tenured security, the bird species that I was studying and believed was headed for extinction would be saved, and I "retired" to see what would happen. Then, that very year, the species stopped its population decline (previously consistent for 15 years, as long as records had been kept.) And hasn't declined since, over 20 years. Unlikly coincidence. I have had several others of a similar nature, confirming that the voice I was hearing was somebody with the powers attributed to Jehovah.
So you say. Why don't you ask him to convince me that your statements are accurate? If you have, he has so far answered that prayer in the negative.
Hmmmm. I agree, not promising. Is it okay if I ask Him to give you some prophetic dreams relevant to keeping the Golden Rule?
It's unfortunate you feel that way about yourself. So far, I think you're a very nice person. Do your beliefs require such low self-esteem?
One of my not-so-nice ways is to somehow see niceness as unmanly. So, not being nice is actually, to me, rather honorable. My beliefs however, actually require this curious mixture of hunger for glory, honor, and immortality, and awareness that, like Frodo at the end, I need help getting it done. Hence, my goal in studying the Bible Codes, after publishing my "Central Theory of Ecology" paper, was to imitate Newton. The idea is, perhaps he got such glory because of his faith, as manifested in his turning to Bible Code research after he had a good theory out there for science to chew on. I have little choice but to try to impact the history of science as he did, to go for the same glory. Recognizing, of course, that I have his example, his shoulders, to stand on.
Then why do so many oppose a woman's right to have an abortion?Wouldn't that guarantee her child's passage to Heaven? What greater gift could a mother give her child than a guaranteed entry into Heaven?
Christians, trying to mess with our understanding of the God of the Scriptures. But, the child's passage to heaven wouldn't be guarenteed, only their chances improved. The greater gift is to have the child, raise it and discipline it, pray for it, and let it have many opportunities to earn treasure in heaven. I know personally of one case of abortion, where the guilt of the abortion drove the parent to seek out God's grace and forgiveness, brought peace, and ultimately an assurance from Jehovah that the child awaited the parent in heaven, having "given" its life to help the parent find salvation. The parent went on to do a lot of good, motivated by a desire to make proper restitution, to earn treasure in heaven for the child that never got that chance.
More importantly, do you know how many people claim to have had the same direct contact from Jehovah that you have and yet report drastically different instructions with regard to his will on this matter? Are they all sons of Satan too? And how should I know that it is not YOU that is the son of Satan and rather THEY that have had the actual instruction from Jehovah?
I know some. The rules are, if you hear something from Jehovah, recognize that you are only hearing in part, through a glass darkly, and the prophecy needs to be judged. Those who do not play by those rules are biblically judged as hearing from Satan, not Jehovah. You also are supposed to do a fruit check: love, joy, peace, patience, gentleness, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, self-control. If that fruit is present, take the prophet seriously and judge their prophecy, by asking Jehovah to confirm. You, of course, would have to prepare for this by learning to recognize His voice.
Good for you, but it seems the most reasonable stance given your beliefs should be more along the lines of abortion advocation, not just the advocation of choice.
My belief is that all knowledge of good and evil, as principle guiding action, is fatal. Government is good insofar as it gives freedom of choice. And freedom to educate about the consequences of choices. When I start advocating, I would always begin with getting people to receive the love of (know the rules of) getting the truth. All their actions, if they are mistakes, are covered by the blood of Yeshua, and this will matter to them if they develope an effective applied epistemology and use it to answer practical theological questions. (Refusing to receive the love of the truth is basically a denial of what it means to be human, a choice of "death" to one's humanness.) Jehovah honors that choice by keeping the blood from doing them much good. But, those who receive the love of the truth can be taught how to release all the healing and other good that is tied up in what happened at the cross. So, advocacy from me has to follow that agenda.
Stephen

This message is a reply to:
 Message 95 by :æ:, posted 01-07-2004 12:38 PM :æ: has not replied

  
Silent H
Member (Idle past 5819 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 114 of 131 (77671)
01-10-2004 9:27 PM
Reply to: Message 111 by grace2u
01-09-2004 12:39 PM


He said he is not Xian. If you agree with me that he is a Xian that's good enough for me.
I would think you would be disturbed that he thinks people who call themselves Xians are headed for hell, but it's no sweat for me.
Let me ask you this (and Steve can answer as well)... If someone came around saying that Christ was the savior, but in reality God was a female goat and that hell was for everyone that said otherwise, you would have no issues?
To my mind that's about how separate you guys are. The only thing that appears to link you is one name (Jesus Christ).
quote:
It seems to me that this is a strange way of concluding that your own morality is much better off.
I was refering to his irrational hatred of others, not the fact that you guys act like chums (while he condemns you to a pit of flames). He acts like he is all for love and then has to choke back glee that others will soon suffer. Pretty sick as far as I am concerned.
quote:
Couldn't this brotherly acceptance of Stephen(and his apparent acceptance of me) actually be looked at as a type of relativism within the body of believers so as not to cause division or confuse matters more than they already are, since we understand that no one is perfect, only Jesus? What am I missing here?
Thanks for scoring more points for my team.

holmes

This message is a reply to:
 Message 111 by grace2u, posted 01-09-2004 12:39 PM grace2u has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 117 by Stephen ben Yeshua, posted 01-11-2004 1:12 PM Silent H has replied

  
Silent H
Member (Idle past 5819 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 115 of 131 (77680)
01-10-2004 9:43 PM
Reply to: Message 112 by Stephen ben Yeshua
01-09-2004 1:45 PM


quote:
We will work out our differences, sooner or later, in the process both of us will have to repent, or change our minds about a lot of things. I like changing my mind. It feels good, and I almost define humanity by the normalness of changing one's mind.
Just think of how much fun you'll have eventually changing over to Methodological Naturalism and Secular Humanism.
quote:
I have done this in a culture that is big time into pornography, where girls and women are, in order to get money, gotten to do things that, were I to see my own daughters doing these things, would really put me into a rage. But, those women are someone's daughter! And I find it easy to generate compassion for either the father who has to endure this pain, or for the daughter who lacks a father who cares.
Seems you aren't very familiar with me, or my past posts. My gf is a pornstar. Believe it or not she even has a very loving family.
See love IS good. And there is nothing wrong with physical love, even when it is not encompanied with tight emotional bonds.
I cannot speak about what porn was like in the past, but I know from experience that modern porn is filled with many girls that love love and sexual pleasure. They are not "made" to do anything, and they do it for free as much as for money. In fact, girls are making their own for themselves.
Couples are also getting into the act. Some of them are married and do not have sex with anyone else. They just like to show how wonderful sex and love can be.
quote:
So, I consider those who put up the money that gets the whole business started, and keeps it going. Any Hell I can imagine is too good for them, actually. "How long, Oh, Lord?"
Even for the loving married couples that make their own movies?
I really love that last sentence of yours. You find people that enjoy physical pleasure as so horrible that you enjoy the thoughts of their cruel torture. That sounds pretty sick and Satanic to me.
Love is good Steve. Torture, hatred, and intolerance is bad.
quote:
The ontological reality of Satan makes "the road to Hell" be "paved with good intentions." It's a part of Satan's effort to make you miserable to have you earnestly want to make someone happier, try to do so, then have your efforts cause them incomparable pain. "What have I done?" we anquish when that happens. I hate it when that happens to me, but I understand that there's a lot of that in Hell. Which is why I'm taking no chances of going there.
How about wishing and enjoying the wishing of other people into hell, all for the best intentions of course?
As you have stated you hope me and my gf are going to hell, I can only respond by hoping at least oneor more of your daughters end up in porn. Maybe then you will come to realize there is no reason to hate those involved. That maybe if love is good, giving physical pleasure is not worthy of eternal torture.
And of course changing your mind will make you feel better.

holmes

This message is a reply to:
 Message 112 by Stephen ben Yeshua, posted 01-09-2004 1:45 PM Stephen ben Yeshua has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 116 by Stephen ben Yeshua, posted 01-11-2004 1:00 PM Silent H has replied

  
Stephen ben Yeshua
Inactive Member


Message 116 of 131 (77751)
01-11-2004 1:00 PM
Reply to: Message 115 by Silent H
01-10-2004 9:43 PM


Paying people to do hurtful things
Holmes,
I never said that engaging in sex was bad, but I expect that most (perhaps not all) fathers are deeply pained by the thought of their daughters putting their sexuality on display for money. I suppose this may be a purely natural instinct, based on the stress adaptational biologists place on reproductive fitness. That is, the chances of having a lot of reproductively successful grandchildren are increased by the presence of a loving, committed father for those grandchildren. Men who want to play that role in the lives of children are usually (again, not necessarily always--we are always talking about statistical probabilities here) reluctant to invest their lives in an unchaste female. The natural explanation is that lack of virginity, experience with a lot of sexual partners, etc, reflect uncertainty of parenthood. So, the father can't be sure he's investing in his own children, and so invests less. There's also a fairly strong correlation between many self-destructive behaviors and sexual promiscuity. I'd don't have many statistics comparing, say, the reproductive success of porn stars and women more committed to chastity, but I'd be surprised if the chaste women did not have larger families, and more grandchildren. Weren't in even evolutionary terms, more successful.
But it's the creeps who buy the stuff that I despise, not the actors. The poor actors are mostly just trying to make a buck. If nobody paid them, hardly any of this would be happening.
But, you and your girlfriend and her family appeared to have learned to walk through this peacefully. First such case I've ever heard of. Your example does not really change my own reaction, nor my empathy with other fathers who feel as I do. Do you have any daughters? My reactions to this began the day my first daughter was born.
But, I suppose that a pornographer who could be trusted, who only sold pornography where the stars involved could show that their parents or families were happy with their profession, would have customers that I would be at peace with.
But my main point throughout is that I am not an especially nice guy, nor do I feel that it would good if I were. Consistent with this thread, I am making the point that I have certain reactions and judgments, which others will differ with. But, they are mine and they make sense to me and if you or anyone thinks, from their reactions and judgments, I am vile and despises me, good on you. I have the freedom to try to protect those I love from what I see as terrible mistakes, and so do you. We have to deal with one another. I believe we also have to deal with God and His reactions, and to be honest, when I have considered pornography in His presence, I sense an rage even greater than mine, not for the sad women or men, but for those who pay them to invest their lives so unfruitfully.
I asked Him to confirm that He felt this way, and He reminded me that He only mentions three women in the ancestry of Yeshua: two of the three were sexually compromised in some way. Rahab the harlot of Jericho is a good example. God saved her and her family, but killed everyone else in Jericho, presumably all those who paid her for her services.
Stephen

This message is a reply to:
 Message 115 by Silent H, posted 01-10-2004 9:43 PM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 118 by Silent H, posted 01-11-2004 3:27 PM Stephen ben Yeshua has replied

  
Stephen ben Yeshua
Inactive Member


Message 117 of 131 (77755)
01-11-2004 1:12 PM
Reply to: Message 114 by Silent H
01-10-2004 9:27 PM


Issues with weird beliefs
Holmes,
You ask,
Let me ask you this (and Steve can answer as well)... If someone came around saying that Christ was the savior, but in reality God was a female goat and that hell was for everyone that said otherwise, you would have no issues?
If God was, in reality, a female goat, I might wonder how the someone got the idea that hell was for everyone that said otherwise. Does this goat talk? What or earth can we do with female goats, except milk them? And, even if the someone brought goat's milk to the followers of this religion, I'd have to say that this is not a strong inference test of the two theories about which is the real god. The God Jehovah specifically promises goat's milk to His followers as well.
Hell, in this case, would have to be limited to a default state. This, in fact, is the astro-physics notion, where everything with weight by default ends up in a black hole eventually. This includes dark matter, and plausibly the human soul. But saying the truth about a female goat isn't going to change that, based on everything I know about female goats. Now, if God's a loving father who will help any of His children who will ask and deal with His fathering, will help them out of the default condition of going to Hell, then I can see where saying something might make a difference. Of course, this God might have to hurry along the going to Hell of those who are stumbling others, others who might otherwise be saved from the default fate.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 114 by Silent H, posted 01-10-2004 9:27 PM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 119 by Silent H, posted 01-11-2004 3:33 PM Stephen ben Yeshua has replied

  
Silent H
Member (Idle past 5819 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 118 of 131 (77800)
01-11-2004 3:27 PM
Reply to: Message 116 by Stephen ben Yeshua
01-11-2004 1:00 PM


quote:
I suppose this may be a purely natural instinct, based on the stress adaptational biologists place on reproductive fitness.
You are wrong. There are already two threads which touch on this subject, one dealing with this specifically in the free for all area. The one that is specific is "evolution of sex=love".
Inside you will find ample evidence that disputes your position. If you have something to add on this subject, please go to those threads.
quote:
But it's the creeps who buy the stuff that I despise, not the actors. The poor actors are mostly just trying to make a buck. If nobody paid them, hardly any of this would be happening.
Well we buy it too so I guess that makes us creeps. While I am not about to say that everyone in the porn BUSINESS has no monetary interest, the idea that the only reason people create visual depictions of sexual acts is money is patently ridiculous.
Sexuality and erotica are powerful drives in art, and have been throughout history, even when money had no part to play in their creation. Once the ability to photograph human sexuality became a possibility, the desire to do so ran just as high and natural as those capturing it visually in other forms.
quote:
First such case I've ever heard of.
Have you ever really kept your ear out for positive statements regarding porn? Let's see... Jenna Jameson's father supports her career. Seymour Butts' mom not only supports his career, she is part of his company (there is a reality tv show about his company). All of us positive examples may not be the only people in porn, but we are certainly not alone. And our "kind" is actually growing as people realize that there is no reason to be upset by depictions of human sexuality.
It beats the hell out of all the murder tv and movies have been shoveling into the public consciousness for years.
quote:
But, I suppose that a pornographer who could be trusted, who only sold pornography where the stars involved could show that their parents or families were happy with their profession, would have customers that I would be at peace with.
Well this is a bit stringent. How many parents enjoy what professions their kids end up going into. But I do agree that porn producers should practice a strong ethic of only employing models that are interested in sexual expression, and not exploiting those who are against porn but willing to do it out of desperation.
quote:
but for those who pay them to invest their lives so unfruitfully.
Unless a girl is getting ripped off, she can make good money (much better than working retail) and even move into other careers they wouldn't have been able to afford otherwise. Many put themselves through college this way. It beats scrubbing dishes, for those that are sex positive.
quote:
He reminded me that He only mentions three women
I stand by my assessment that the Bible contains more mysogynistic ideas and degrading messages about women than any sexual image (meant for pleasure) could ever have.

holmes

This message is a reply to:
 Message 116 by Stephen ben Yeshua, posted 01-11-2004 1:00 PM Stephen ben Yeshua has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 125 by Stephen ben Yeshua, posted 01-13-2004 10:43 AM Silent H has replied

  
Silent H
Member (Idle past 5819 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 119 of 131 (77807)
01-11-2004 3:33 PM
Reply to: Message 117 by Stephen ben Yeshua
01-11-2004 1:12 PM


You missed the point of my example (perhaps my goat thing was too esoteric it distracted from my point) so I will create another one which you can address more directly. Unfortunately it is a real one.
Last night I watched a documentary on Nazis in America. There is a real Xian reverend who believes that Hitler is another prophet of God and that Xians must unite to rid the world of all lower peoples.
He sees no disjunction between the messages of Christ and Hitler.
And since he is a Xian does believe in being saved through Christ.
So do you and Grace find this man a brother in love and Christ and in some way practice the same religion, with the exception you'd have to work out a few differences over time?

holmes

This message is a reply to:
 Message 117 by Stephen ben Yeshua, posted 01-11-2004 1:12 PM Stephen ben Yeshua has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 120 by Stephen ben Yeshua, posted 01-12-2004 2:26 PM Silent H has replied
 Message 123 by grace2u, posted 01-12-2004 4:43 PM Silent H has not replied

  
Stephen ben Yeshua
Inactive Member


Message 120 of 131 (78045)
01-12-2004 2:26 PM
Reply to: Message 119 by Silent H
01-11-2004 3:33 PM


What do liars believe?
Holmes,
And since he is a Xian does believe in being saved through Christ.
I doubt it. I asked God about Grace2u, and got affirmation. I ask about this guy, and get a different response.
Stephen

This message is a reply to:
 Message 119 by Silent H, posted 01-11-2004 3:33 PM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 121 by Silent H, posted 01-12-2004 3:28 PM Stephen ben Yeshua has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024