[quote]forlife wrote:
Empty promises by religious fundamentalists are not substantial. When you have something real to show for your promises, I’ll listen. Until then, I’ll do what produces the most positive results in my life.
[/quote]
So because you never had a taste of heaven like Saint Paul or the Apostles did, you’re giving up? You’re going to live life according to your fleshly passions until evidence is produced?
I’ve shared this mindset, so I can’t grill you on it. I was quite zealous before apostasizing many years ago. I kept challenging myself to find out why I left the Faith. Was it because I simply didn’t believe in the Savior and His Church anymore or was it because I couldn’t have what I wanted in life? Or was it a combination?
After some serious soul-searching, I concluded that I fell away because I wasn’t willing to suffer unconditionally to increase my love for God. I wanted things my way. I saidmay God’s will be done, but I couldn’t understand how it was possible that persecutions & tribulations arose upon me. I wanted the honor, the crown of victory, the assurance that I was going to heaven without having to struggle for it to any critical degree. I wanted to carry on in my passions without fully submitting to God’s will or His commandments.
But like a broken bone that heals with time, my faith has been re-fortified, all thanks to God. I still have my battles to fight. I’m so tuned up for weight-training, simple concepts like fasting the way the early Christians did just seems to be a mountain for me while a mole hill for others. I don’t mean to turn this into a session of public confession, but at times I can be very slothful, failing to pray, failing to study the scriptures, being gluttonous, participating in gossip, and occasionally falling into sexually immorality myself…
I’m the last person to be grilling you, so I’ll end my rant here. I wish you all the best on attaining the evidence you require to bring you back into the flock. Peace be with you.
[quote]stellar_horizon wrote:
So because you never had a taste of heaven like Saint Paul or the Apostles did, you’re giving up? You’re going to live life according to your fleshly passions until evidence is produced?[/quote]
You mean the fables of Saint Paul and the Apostles? I don’t put any more stock in them than I put in the fables of Zeus, Allah, or Buddha. Why should I? There is no more evidence for one faith than for another…they are all, by definition, contingent on blind belief.
This thread is priceless. I’m reminded of the parody review on the Landover site about how people shouldn’t see Lord of the Rings because it promotes a gay lifestyle, as represented by Froda and Sam and that the Lord of the Ring the giant red eye were veilled references to the anus.
Eloquence often indicates intellegence, it’s sad to see that wasted in pursuits such as this.
[quote]forlife wrote:
I do know better. I know that christianity is a man-made religion, just like all the other hundreds of religions that have existed over the millenia. The only reason you believe in this particular brand is that you were born into a part of the world where it is prominent. Billions of people believe differently from you, because they were born somewhere else.[/quote]
Honest question… When did you perceive that Christianity was a man-made religion? Was that before or after you stopped waging battle against the flesh? And as a former missionary, I find it troubling that you’d travel the world spreading a Faith while remaining clueless as to how it was derived.
You equate Christianity which preaches love towards enemies with the militant religion of Islam which preaches the hate and murder of non-Muslims? I don’t think that’s a fair comparison.
And if you think I’d harm a homosexual (other than by politely verbally admonitioning them), you don’t know me for a split-second.
Peace be with you.
By-the-way, I live in a part of the world where Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism, atheism, Santa Ria, voodoo, Satan-worshipping, agnosticism, Roman Catholicism, and Protestantism are all prominent as well…
[quote]stellar_horizon wrote:
Honest question… When did you perceive that Christianity was a man-made religion? Was that before or after you stopped waging battle against the flesh? And as a former missionary, I find it troubling that you’d travel the world spreading a Faith while remaining clueless as to how it was derived.[/quote]
After doing research on the origins of my church, I applied the same magnifying glass to all of my spiritual beliefs. I found them wanting. They were grounded in emotions and hopes, rather than in objective reality. I realized that billions of other people felt equally sure that their particular brand of religion was right, despite their beliefs directly contradicting my own. The light turned on: emotionality is not evidence.
I’m well aware of the origins of Christianity, as well as the hodgepodge of writings that people today call the bible.
You don’t understand Islam if you think it is a militant religion. There are militant fanatics within Islam, just as there have been militant fanatics within Christianity. But neither religion advocates violence. However, both religions are manmade, and both of them tend to breed fundamentalist fervor in their followers.
I don’t believe you would beat up a gay guy…but I think you would advocate policies that create significant pain in the lives of gay men and women. There have been quite a few gays that have bought into the religious tripe that fundamentalists peddle, and being unable to reconcile their beliefs with their sexuality, ended up committing suicide.
Were you raised in a religion other than Christianity?
[quote]Professor X wrote:
You have been asked several times, why do you think anyone is so stupid that they need you to WARN them of a damn movie? This does NOT make sense. You wouldn’t be WARNING anyone of a movie unless you felt that people should not see this movie. If you feel people should not see this movie, you are logically FOR censorship of it. Do you follow now? You can hold whatever opinion you choose, but when you take it upon yourself to act as if you need to warn, stop, prevent, or halt anyone from seeing it, you are FOR censorship of it. You can dance around like this isn’t the case all you want to, but that is simply the way it is. Why is it you don’t even understand this?[/quote]
Do you have a one-track mind or what? Everything isn’t white or black in the world despite how extreme you wish things to be. People can go see the film but they should take heed that the film involves propaganda. Quit acting like you got stock shares in this flick.
If an army commander tells his troops, “Men, prepare for battle. The enemy has biochemical agents of warfare so be prepared.” Does that mean the soldiers are being withdrawn from the mission? No! It means they get the gas masks ready before the warfare commences. Is that a simple enough analogy?
Likewise, if anyone goes to watch this film accompanied by a person that is not of a mature, adult mind, a simple phrase may be inserted like: [b]We’re going to watch this film and I heard there was some type of propaganda involved, the way the married life and children are portrayed, and how religion is demoted. I also understand that the two main characters are depicted as heroes despite living sinful lives aside from the homosexual premise. It’s also hailed as a true love story, but after watching it for myself, I’ll judge that for myself![/b]
Is that so evil? Do you get it now or are you still confused as usual?
[quote]forlife wrote:
Were you raised in a religion other than Christianity?[/quote]
I see where you’re going with this so I wish I could say I wasn’t even though I was. If you consider not going to church except maybe twenty times from ages 8 to 18, a few icons scattered around the home, wearing a cross, and fasting for a week here and there as a serious Christian upbringing, then I don’t know what to tell you.
I started researching religion on my own at the beginning of college. I never recall picking up the Bible until I took a prerequisite course in college facilitated by a zealous Jewish professor.
One day some months after completing the requirement, I glanced through my course books and picked up the Bible. I guess that’s when I took interest in Christianity and religion in general.
I’ve also researched Judaism & Islam by the way, perhaps not for years like Christianity, but enough to get their gist.
Funny how a passage in the Koran preaches how non-Muslims are to be slain like pigs around every corner but you feel it’s the fundamentalists which take Islam to the extremes. On the contrary, it’s the non-violent Muslims who do not live according to the Koran but a diluted, non-traditional form of Islam.
I advise that you read up on Mohammed’s life to get a better glimpse of this religion before denying that its founders intended for murders and other human autrocities throughout the world.
Compare that to the life and ministry of Jesus Christ. You may or may not have come across sites like this before, but check out how archaeology findings coincide with the New Testament. http://www.ucgstp.org/lit/gn/gn028/trialcru.html
The proof is there. You just have to know where to find and weigh it with an objective mind. Blind followers don’t hang on for long anyways…
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[…]
The primary gay sex act is inherently unhealthy. Don’t make me post more facts…Just read a few of my posts to vroom. The rectum is for…well not for sex, sorry.[/quote]
“Contrary to popular belief, anal sex is not an activity exclusive to the male homosexual, nor is it the activity most often practiced by him. Although statistics on this subject are suspect, some investigators report that 47 percent of predominantly heterosexual men and 61 percent of the women have tried anal intercourse. Thirteen percent of married couples reported having anal intercourse at least once a month. Approximately 37 percent of both men and women have practiced oral-anal contact. A study of homosexual men revealed that only 20 percent had experience as inserter and 18 percent as insertee.” http://www2.hu-berlin.de/sexology/GESUND/ARCHIV/SEN/INDEX.HTM
What you define as the “primary gay sex act” is a common sexual practice. Whether dangerous or not, people will indulge in activities that pleasure them.
Now I understand the dangers and some aversion against anal sex, but it is not a homosexual practice only and there is no indication of homosexual transmission of HIV in women in the CDC data.
OK, I’ll say it (and I am fully aware that I might be kicked of T-Nation for this): Could it be that the combined risk group we are describing here are not gay men, but men in general?
[quote]stellar_horizon wrote:
Professor X wrote:
You have been asked several times, why do you think anyone is so stupid that they need you to WARN them of a damn movie? This does NOT make sense. You wouldn’t be WARNING anyone of a movie unless you felt that people should not see this movie. If you feel people should not see this movie, you are logically FOR censorship of it. Do you follow now? You can hold whatever opinion you choose, but when you take it upon yourself to act as if you need to warn, stop, prevent, or halt anyone from seeing it, you are FOR censorship of it. You can dance around like this isn’t the case all you want to, but that is simply the way it is. Why is it you don’t even understand this?
Do you have a one-track mind or what? Everything isn’t white or black in the world despite how extreme you wish things to be. People can go see the film but they should take heed that the film involves propaganda. Quit acting like you got stock shares in this flick.
If an army commander tells his troops, “Men, prepare for battle. The enemy has biochemical agents of warfare so be prepared.” Does that mean the soldiers are being withdrawn from the mission? No! It means they get the gas masks ready before the warfare commences. Is that a simple enough analogy?
Likewise, if anyone goes to watch this film accompanied by a person that is not of a mature, adult mind, a simple phrase may be inserted like: [b]We’re going to watch this film and I heard there was some type of propaganda involved, the way the married life and children are portrayed, and how religion is demoted. I also understand that the two main characters are depicted as heroes despite living sinful lives aside from the homosexual premise. It’s also hailed as a true love story, but after watching it for myself, I’ll judge that for myself![/b]
Is that so evil? Do you get it now or are you still confused as usual?[/quote]
No one is confused but you. Again, WHY DO YOU THINK ANYONE IS SO STUPID THAT THEY NEED YOU TO WARN THEM OF THIS MOVIE? Yes, it is that simple. If someone is so gullible that they are that easily pursuaded by a movie, why should they listen to you? You have the ability to pursuade them as well meaning we should also be warning about reading anything you post.
Stellar, had you been born in the middle of Bangkok or Tehran instead, it is far less likely that you would be a Christian today. I don’t doubt you would be similarly devout in whatever faith that came naturally to you. People tend to believe in the religion in which they are raised, or in the religion which predominates during their particular era. We are largely a product of our environment in that regard. As with most environmental influences, it is hard to pinpoint them…but they do exist, and they they have a powerful impact on how we view the world.
I find it funny when people point to Islam as a violent religion, while ignoring the centuries of murder and oppression in the name of Christianity (Crusades, Inquisition, Protestants vs. Catholics in Ireland, etc.).
There is no objective proof for Christianity, for life after death, or for the existence of a supernatural being floating in the sky. Not to say that there is no god (I hope there is), but wanting something to be true doesn’t make it so.
[quote]forlife wrote:
Zeb, I think you missed the part where I showed you that the majority of STRAIGHT people have also tried anal intercourse.
I also think you missed the part about anal sex being safe as long as it is not forced ;)[/quote]
And you missed this:
“At the lower end of the bowel, there are two distinct circular bands of muscles, sphincters, one is located about an 1 ?” above the other. These clamp down tight to prevent the passage of feces or gas.
The mucous membrane lining of the rectum is not as heavy as the lining of the vagina, so it can tear quite easily and it does not heal as quickly as the vagina. Because feces, loaded with bacteria, are passing by, any tear is vulnerable to infection.
The vigorous thrusting that may occur during anal intercourse can tear the mucous membrane. This can develop into an anal abscess that can become infected - more about that in a moment.
Also, if your partner has any of the sexually transmitted infections (STI’s), then you could get infected through the tear. So we are talking about gonorrhea (treatable); venereal warts (treatable if external, difficult if up in the rectum); syphilis (treatable); herpes (treatment, no cure); yeast infection (treatable); and HIV and AIDS (treatment but no cure.) You do not want any of these STI’s."
[quote]ZEB wrote:
Professor X wrote:
ZEB wrote:
forlife wrote:
The fruits of denying my orientation were pain, depression, and deterioration.
But the wages of sin are still death.
…of which not one man alive is excluded.
Um…that’s not the kind of “death” I was referring to.
I meant spiritual death and separation from God for eternity.
Sorry I was not more clear about that.
This is the specific verse:
Romans 6:23:
“For the wages of sin is death. But the free gift of God is enternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.”
[/quote]
I know the scripture. I thought that it would also be a good thing to remind you that you are far from perfect. I do not agree with this guy’s understanding of religion. I don’t, however, believe that God is standing at the gates of heaven turning away gay people. I also don’t think it is right for us to judge every single one of them and tell them what they can or can’t do. It is none of your business and the true judgement is far above all of us.