Wet Dream Forum

I really like you taosty but you cant be so manipulative in your language you loaded your statement.

That is not from the questionable Catholic parts of the Bible.



and what exactly are the parts of the bible? the parts people don't like? it's odd. you look out and you see christians protesting against gay marriage and saying masturbation is a terrible sin, and yet you never see anyone promoting the stoning of disobbediant children or having sex with your dead brother's wife. i say that if you truly want to call yourself a christian, you can't just pick and choose passages in the bible.
What was meant is that Martin Luther on his own decided that he didnt like what parts of the bible had to say so he took out seven books that had always been used by Christians. Catechism of the Catholic Church
2352 By masturbation is to be understood the deliberate stimulation of the genital organs in order to derive sexual pleasure. "Both the Magisterium of the Church, in the course of a constant tradition, and the moral sense of the faithful have been in no doubt and have firmly maintained that masturbation is an intrinsically and gravely disordered action."138 "The deliberate use of the sexual faculty, for whatever reason, outside of marriage is essentially contrary to its purpose." For here sexual pleasure is sought outside of "the sexual relationship which is demanded by the moral order and in which the total meaning of mutual self-giving and human procreation in the context of true love is achieved."139
and To form an equitable judgment about the subjects' moral responsibility and to guide pastoral action, one must take into account the affective immaturity, force of acquired habit, conditions of anxiety or other psychological or social factors that lessen, if not even reduce to a minimum, moral culpability.

I absolutely agree you cant just pick and choose what parts of Revelation you want to believe if you do that then you are not Christian at all. however as for the whole stoning bit
I suggest that you check your NT a little closer.




the bible should not be used as a moral handbook. you may agree that masturbation is bad but do you also agree that it's ok to sell your daughter into slavery?

There are three sets of laws in the OT and you cannot treat them equal. Somethings pertain to the Old while they are fulfilled in the New for example we do not circumcise our Children we baptise them. Circumcision is a stipulant of the Old covenant it is how you enter into the covenant with God where as Baptism is the new Circumcision it is how you enter the new covenant. the three types of laws are Divine, Natural, and Moral. I will remind you that "Slavery" as defined in the OT is not what most people think of as slavery (this is what I mean by you loading your question) for example in the OT if you beat a slave you had to pay reperation and if you did damage then you had to free them and pay them. Also slavery could not last for more than 7 years that is unless the individual chose to remain a slave. it was much more like indentured servatude.

again, you can't pick and choose so either believe it all or stop calling yourself christian. religion in itself is no more than substitutes for questions people don't know the real answers to. the bible itslef is no more than an astrotheological literary hybrid. in other words it's a book of fairy tales based on astrology. interesting... I was an Atheist for several years and knew better than that. The books of the bible are not based on astrology and no serious historian would say so. There are different literary types within the bible for example some is poetry while others are history and others are meant as fiction. For example it is widely thought by many even some of the early Church Fathers that the book of Tobit was fiction, it is not that it is a lie (fiction in its original sense did not mean lie or untruth) it was simply a moral story. This is while other books like more historic. Even Genesis since the begining there has always been some understanding that Genesis is not so much about a literal 7 day creation but is rather meant to demonstrate a point. To make this fact clear Ch 1 and Ch 2 conflict, common sense would say even if you go with the 5 author theory the editor should be smart enough not to make Ch1 so directly conflict with Ch 2. that is unless its not meant to be taken in a strict sense. and again i agree you need to believe in the whole thing.

don't let religion bind you. be free of such senseless beliefs. the bible may state that it is a sin to look at a women with lust, but it is not possible to go through life without doing so. our human brains are wired to be attractedto women. it's a little thing called testosterone. when you turn your head to look at a girls butt as she walkes by, it doesn't mean you're perverted, it's just the animalistic tendencies of your brain kicking in and the girl just has a really nice ass!
There is a famous saying by Bishop Sheed "I do not know many one hand one eyed theologians." Another words Christ did not mean literally to cut off your hand our cut out your eyes. its called hyperbole. and you really dont understand with lust is, what you discribed is not lust. Lust is a deliberate act of the will for example undressing a woman with your eyes. If however your mind wanders and you are not aware of your thoughts at that moment then you are not as culpable.
and as for being blinded by religion, funny thing that reminded me of myself. 10 years as an atheist is a long time. I could tare down Christianity with the best of them, I had read everything from Russel to Nietzsche. Hell i have even read every book written by Anton LaVey. that man does not have one original thought he is a plagerist from crawly, Nietzche, Russel, and jung, with some freud in there. By they way i still like Nietzsche. You should learn what Christianity is before you start bashing it.