Porn Pastor

[DNB]

Yes, but the Christians here are acting as the mob. They have decided what she is doing is sinful. Others do not think that it is. There was a reason for strong rules on sexuality in the past. Most of those reasons are gone today. Such behavior may no longer be considered a sin.

No, we were talking about Jesus' view on the matter - he despised sexual perversions while he was on earth, and continues to do so today, until the ends of time.
Morality is absolute, it transcends culture, history and opinions. These two charlatans are perverse and destructive.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No, we were talking about Jesus' view on the matter - he despised sexual perversions while he was on earth, and continues to do so today, until the ends of time.
Morality is absolute, it transcends culture, history and opinions. These two charlatans are perverse and destructive.

Did he now. I don't know of any such verses. Perhaps you could quote and link a couple.

 

[DNB]

So calling people "heretical incompetents" and "depraved nutcases" doesn't go against loving one's enemy? Don't get me wrong: I don't believe in "love your enemy" or find it a realistic injunction, but since you're a Christian (apparently a conservative one as well), I'd assume you'd try to observe that teaching and not just ones against sex outside of marriage.

They are not claiming to be my enemy, where they are not disguising their contempt for God. These two charlatans are. They are claiming to be my brother and sister in Christ, and an adherent to the precepts of Jesus. Therefore, a strong and firm rebuke is entirely in order. Jesus did the exact same to the hypocritical Pharisees and high priests, as Peter did to Simon Magus.

 

[DNB]

That's an interesting take; it seems to imply that you'd view them in a more generous light if they claimed to be your enemies. If Jesus instructed Christians to love your enemy, isn't that all the more reason to be gentle toward fellow believers even if you believe they're sinning?

At least an enemy is not being deceitful, there's an integrity there. But with a charlatan discussions are not optional, candor does not exist.
These two met at Bible College, therefore, they know fully well the precepts that Christians are expected to adhere to, and are fully acquainted with the vice of sin. I believe that they are without excuse.

 

[DNB]

Did he now. I don't know of any such verses. Perhaps you could quote and link a couple.

Jesus was perfect, he therefore fulfilled, amongst others, the 613 precepts of the Levitical Law, which denounced adultery, fornication, rape, bestiality, transvestites, homosexuality - all at the pain of death.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Jesus was perfect, he therefore fulfilled, amongst others, the 613 precepts of the Levitical Law, which denounced adultery, fornication, rape, bestiality, transvestites, homosexuality - all at the pain of death.

So you have nothing. You appear to be putting your own spin on the beliefs of Jesus since I do not know of him anywhere endorsing those beliefs.

Jesus does not appear to have been a literalist when it came to the Old Testament and Old Testament laws. Any sort of work on the sabbath could bring the death penalty according to those same Levitical Laws, and yet when confronted on his doing what was considered work on the Sabbath he had a different opinion:

Mark 2:27 Then Jesus declared, "The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath.

Who is to say that he would not have a similar opinion about outdated sex laws today?

 

[Debater Slayer]

They are not claiming to be my enemy, where they are not disguising their contempt for God. These two charlatans are. They are claiming to be my brother and sister in Christ, and an adherent to the precepts of Jesus. Therefore, a strong and firm rebuke is entirely in order. Jesus did the exact same to the hypocritical Pharisees and high priests, as Peter did to Simon Magus.

We don't know that they harbor "contempt for God," though. What we know is that they clearly don't subscribe to a mainstream Christian doctrine. For all we know, they might love the god they believe in with every fiber of their being. It's just that their view of said god is different from the mainstream concept.

At least an enemy is not being deceitful, there's an integrity there. But with a charlatan discussions are not optional, candor does not exist.
These two met at Bible College, therefore, they know fully well the precepts that Christians are expected to adhere to, and are fully acquainted with the vice of sin. I believe that they are without excuse.

This strongly reminds me of fundamentalist Islamic arguments that dismiss more liberal Muslims as "non-believers," "hypocrites," etc. The thing is that no single sect or denomination has a monopoly on any given religion, though, so what you consider to be "true" Christianity may not be seen as such by other believers who are nonetheless Christians as well.

Exclusivist, rigidly dogmatic beliefs seem to me among the most problematic cultural phenomena in existence today--be they religious or secular. In my opinion, such worldviews heavily enable and encourage dehumanization, hatred, and sometimes even persecution of those who disagree.

 

[DNB]

So you have nothing. You appear to be putting your own spin on the beliefs of Jesus since I do not know of him anywhere endorsing those beliefs.

Jesus does not appear to have been a literalist when it came to the Old Testament and Old Testament laws. Any sort of work on the sabbath could bring the death penalty according to those same Levitical Laws, and yet when confronted on his doing what was considered work on the Sabbath he had a different opinion:

Mark 2:27 Then Jesus declared, "The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath.

Who is to say that he would not have a similar opinion about outdated sex laws today?

Jesus was a literalist, like I said, in order to be the perfected sacrifice '....not one jot or tittle shall fail from the Law....'. You have a rather shallow understanding of why Jesus seemingly transgressed certain laws - it was only when human well-being was at stake, obviously.
Did he not state that anyone who even looks at a women lustfully has sinned? Therefore, there was no one more stringent and perfect in his comprehension of the Law, than Jesus.

 

[Twilight Hue]

No we don't.

Sexual taboos only create guilt and shame. Which is absolutely detrimental to all involved.

I left Christianity to get away from the BS backwards repressed nonsense.

What people do in the privacy of their own homes is their own business.

Exactly, and a stark reminder to the busy bodies to butt out of other people's private affairs.

It's none of their business.

 

[DNB]

We don't know that they harbor "contempt for God," though. What we know is that they clearly don't subscribe to a mainstream Christian doctrine. For all we know, they might love the god they believe in with every fiber of their being. It's just that their view of said god is different from the mainstream concept.



This strongly reminds me of fundamentalist Islamic arguments that dismiss more liberal Muslims as "non-believers," "hypocrites," etc. The thing is that no single sect or denomination has a monopoly on any given religion, though, so what you consider to be "true" Christianity may not be seen as such by other believers who are nonetheless Christians as well.

Exclusivist, rigidly dogmatic beliefs seem to me among the most problematic cultural phenomena in existence today--be they religious or secular. In my opinion, such worldviews heavily enable and encourage dehumanization, hatred, and sometimes even persecution of those who disagree.

Would you quite digressing or creating a straw-man argument? These two fools somehow believe, after sleeping around with every callous and depraved pervert in town, who they don't even know their names, that God approves and endorses such behaviour. This is the offense. It is one thing to forgive, which I strongly encourage, but only when repentance and contrition are present. These people are not even attempting to change their ways, it's a ploy admitting that you're a sinner but still indulging in the sin.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Jesus was a literalist, like I said, in order to be the perfected sacrifice '....not one jot or tittle shall fail from the Law....'. You have a rather shallow understanding of why Jesus seemingly transgressed certain laws - it was only when human well-being was at stake, obviously.
Did he not state that anyone who even looks at a women lustfully has sinned? Therefore, there was no one more stringent and perfect in his comprehension of the Law, than Jesus.

Only in your head. You have not supported that claim at all, nor do I think that you can. That verse is problematic since it appears that Jesus was being insanely unrealistic there. That appears to be out of character for him since he did not seem to think that prostitutes were bad. He hung out with quite a few of them One has to remember that that was written at least 50 years and more likely 60 years after Jesus died. A lot of the tales about him are simply going to be wrong.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I have to ask, are you @Rival 's wife, the same person that I mentioned in the previous part of this sentence?
I ask because, as far as I can tell, your views are worlds apart - diametrically so (your satan and devil statements in your signature are a little unnerving, to say the least)?

All couples have some varing views and some very different views. Rival and I also have a lot of views that are similar.
But she's my husband thingy. It's weird. And not a normal marriage at all. Not even real. We are good friends though.

 

[firedragon]

No, that’s not an oxymoron.

Check this out and let me know what you think:

In San Diego, Porn Star Preaches Message ‘For Sinners By Sinners’

I like it.

imo, it’s a positive. The old, antiquated christian religion is dying, as it should.
It was built upon false premises from very early on, imo.

Interesting. Good business idea I suppose. In a world where people sexualise children to promote TV shows and brands, these people using their religion for a business venture and promotion is perfectly fine I suppose. Wonder if they are even true Christians. This is a good PR stunt for this lady's website. Its all business.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Then why use this when you are claiming that she is not following the teachings of Jesus? That really makes no sense at all.

Because you aren't supposed to keep on sinning. Being a Christian is supposed to be more than just speaking words. Jesus makes it very clear it is a way of life and there are many things his followers are expected to do. Continuing in sin is not permitted. Jesus says go an sin no more, and he also says to look upon a woman with lust is to commit adultery in the heart.
It's another great example of Christians wanting the name but becoming further removed from a religion that just isn't working or very congruent with modern times and knowledge.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Because you aren't supposed to keep on sinning. Being a Christian is supposed to be more than just speaking words. Jesus makes it very clear it is a way of life and there are many things his followers are expected to do. Continuing in sin is not permitted. Jesus says go an sin no more, and he also says to look upon a woman with lust is to commit adultery in the heart.
It's another great example of Christians wanting the name but becoming further removed from a religion that just isn't working or very congruent with modern times and knowledge.

The problem is that what she does does not appear to be a sin.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Interesting. Good business idea I suppose. In a world where people sexualise children to promote TV shows and brands, these people using their religion for a business venture and promotion is perfectly fine I suppose. Wonder if they are even true Christians. This is a good PR stunt for this lady's website. Its all business.

Christianity is a very broad tent so I do not see why they cannot be True Christians (sorry, I don't have my tablet so I cannot insert the trademark symbol). Some Christians will always claim that others are not "True ChristiansTM, just as some Muslims say that other Muslims are not real Muslims.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

The problem is that what she does does not appear to be a sin.

She's a porn star. That means, inherently, she is doing what the Bible considers sexual immorality, and doing it for a living. OT, NT, Gospels and Paul, all throughout the Bible the policies regarding sex and sexuality are very strict.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

people have no idea how embarrassing it is for a grown man to buy underwear. Other shoppers be thinking "Don't you have a wife or mother to buy those for you?" It doesn't help that I boycott Amazon.

No need for it to be embarrassing. But, I'm here to help anyway.

These are Aussie, but they ship free to the US, and are awesome. I no longer wear anything else.

Men's Bamboo & Smart Boxer Underwear, Best Trunks & Briefs | Step One

 

[lewisnotmiller]

My response to this breaks the rules so I won't post it.

Suffice it to say, no, this is not good.

We need to bring back sexual taboos, not let it all out.

It's gonna depend on what taboos you're talking about, but overall I fundamentally disagree.
This as someone who doesn't break any taboos anyway, unless you're strictly against sex before marriage.

 

[firedragon]

Christianity is a very broad tent so I do not see why they cannot be True Christians (sorry, I don't have my tablet so I cannot insert the trademark symbol). Some Christians will always claim that others are not "True ChristiansTM, just as some Muslims say that other Muslims are not real Muslims.

Yeah. So Muslims are not relevant to this thread.

Also, I said "I wonder".

A porn star has promoted her website and the couples business. This is good PR. So this is just my opinion that they are no Christian, but its a good guise for brand promotion since it will attract a lot of free press. Very clever marketing. So this is not a sectarian matter mate. This is just my opinion. Maybe you know them better.