Christians consider pic related the apex of virtue, as shown in the verses where jesus commands his followers to mutilate their bodies so that they ca...

Christians consider pic related the apex of virtue, as shown in the verses where jesus commands his followers to mutilate their bodies so that they cannot sin. This in turn resulted in the creation of cults like skopeks. How did something so repugnant and life denying even gain traction in the first place?

It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14

Homeless People Are Sexy Shirt $21.68

It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14

  1. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    the Bible doesn't even let you get a tattoo you fricking moron. Do better

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      Surely if Jesus saw modern day tatoo parlors and sanitation he'd reconsider

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      OP should have mutilated his hands so he couldn't type this cringe. If your takeway from Jesus' teachings is that you should cut your dick off then you are intentionally missing the point so that you can feel excused in your sin.

      >Ignoring the fact that actual christian cults like the skotepts did exist.

      i keep seeing this phrase "life denying" on here... and how anything "life denying" is in itself bad... is it some sort of kernel of the nietzschean ubermensch idea? why exactly is denying life so bad? the ultimate of life affirmation is narcissism & hedonism i feel like... i dont know, can you explain why you use the term "life denying" op?

      Well, let's look at the stalker. It doesn't have free will, nor is it particularly strong, nor inteliigent, nor artistic. However, it does exemplify all of the christian virtues such as humility and chasity, as they're characterized by denial of one's human features.

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        >people are wrong sometimes so the Truth is wrong
        ??

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          So, when would you like your stalker surgery appointment to be?

  2. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    OP should have mutilated his hands so he couldn't type this cringe. If your takeway from Jesus' teachings is that you should cut your dick off then you are intentionally missing the point so that you can feel excused in your sin.

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      >If your takeway from Jesus' teachings is that you should cut your dick off then you are intentionally missing the point
      He says in multiple places directly in the Bible to do such a thing.

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      >If your takeway from Jesus' teachings is that you should cut your dick off then you are intentionally missing the point
      He did literally tell his followers to mutilate themselves if that was what was necessary to prevent sin. Have you read the bible, anon?
      >Matthew 18:8-9
      >Wherefore if thy hand or thy foot offend thee, cut them off, and cast them from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life halt or maimed, rather than having two hands or two feet to be cast into everlasting fire. And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life with one eye, rather than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire.

  3. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    i keep seeing this phrase "life denying" on here... and how anything "life denying" is in itself bad... is it some sort of kernel of the nietzschean ubermensch idea? why exactly is denying life so bad? the ultimate of life affirmation is narcissism & hedonism i feel like... i dont know, can you explain why you use the term "life denying" op?

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      How is hedonism life affirming?

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        it's one of the logical conclusions to affirming life, hedonism says worldly pleasure above all, life affirmation says life and its worldly pleasures are what i will affirm. life affirmation says yes to everything, hedonism is yes in the highest calibre of the world and its pleasures. desire to the utmost, will to the utmost, in every possible instance.

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          >life has to be a bad thing because there are people who consume excessively
          your mind on desert ideology

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            well what's your definition of life affirming? i said i didn't know in my first post, here's a chance for your nietzschean will to conquer and for you to exercise your will onto another, i'm listening

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            i keep seeing this phrase "life denying" on here... and how anything "life denying" is in itself bad... is it some sort of kernel of the nietzschean ubermensch idea? why exactly is denying life so bad? the ultimate of life affirmation is narcissism & hedonism i feel like... i dont know, can you explain why you use the term "life denying" op?

            your mind immediately went to conceiving of the most powerful or affirmed life being one of "sin," so there is no real hope for you until you first renounce your nihilism

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          Hedonism doesn't seem very life-affirming to me. Humbly walking in the forest admiring nature is more vitalist than being unable to feel anything if one isn't currently fricking to b***hes at the same time, high on crack.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            yes and what is the logical conclusion to humbly walking in the forest? what is its ultimate form? think far ahead. the ultimate logical conclusion to humbly walking in the forest is actually life denying. it might be very vitalist and feel very serene and calming, but it is not life affirming whatsoever. the logical conclusion to humbly walking in the forest is total humility in the presence of nature. and that leads to "slave morality" if you want to adopt nietzsches terminology. the final form of humbly walking in a forest is buddhism/hinduism & esceticism. not very life affirming if you ask me, but is therefore worse?

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            I don't see how walking in the forest is not life affirming. Taking crack is life denying. To a hedonist life is not enough. He needs external stimula otherwise he can't enjoy life. The forest walker affirms life, he is content with life, he needs nothing more than life. It's the most life-affirming thing that exists.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            real af

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            And where does humility factor into the stroll in the forest? To me it appears that it is precisely though pride, via mastering nature through for example botanism that the stroll in the forest reaches a higher state.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            I don't mean humble in a passive way, but humble as in not expecting orgasms from it.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            jerking off while on a botanical journey is unlikely to improve it, but I cannot imagine it doing much harm either. But at the end of the day, the journey itself is deeply hedonistic. Does one not derive pleasure from the knowledge, beauty and botanical plants one obtains?

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            No, the hedonist is you. Your hedonism is so pathologic that you can't even think beyond pleasure anymore. To be life-affirming doesn't mean to engage in pleasure. It is something much larger, it is the embracement of life itself as the greatest ideal.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            What's wrong with finding the affirmation of life as pleasant?

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          life is not merely material. the odd thing about humans is that we can find pleasure and pain in literally everything

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          Does the stalker in the OP, which is incapable of hedonism appear as life affirming to you?

  4. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    Start here

  5. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    >hedonism and castrationism fighting with one another yet again
    Another sad attempt to backdoor more of your corrupted moral coding into new minds? More innoculation then.
    Total Abstinence <-------------> Normal <-------------> Total Hedonism
    You exist somewhere on this spectrum. Notions of typical 'holiness' exist to the left, not to the right, because within the spectrum of perceiving honor it is seen as virtuous to deny oneself of 'superior' things. To be specific to this case: experiencing a state of ([fulfilling]*[romantic copulation]) is superior to the state of nothingness. Going it alone is usually much more difficult, so often much more exotic, so sometimes much more desirable. You can find many examples of veterans of their field making things significantly more difficult for themselves in their desperation for further entertainments. It is also important to note the real world implications of these mechanisms, that these wavelengths exists in tandem with the above:
    Total Disease Containment <-------------> Normal <-------------> Total Disease Spreaders
    Herpes and its others exists for reasons. Here, have another:
    Self isolation is a plaque that clogs the arteries of your mortality <-------------> Normal <-------------> Orgies obliterate social mechanisms corrupting society
    Monks seek a state of physical stasis yet mental hyperactivity so that their soul may commune with existence in their continual seeking of the critical mechanisms of god
    The ambivalent seek a state of mental stasis yet physical hyperactivity so that their flesh may commune with existence in their continual horniness for god
    Within this reality of war you are often beings composed of restrained chaos thus the warriors path requires battle with oneself. This internalized feud clashes with the externalized. Accord quiets discord

  6. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    >jesus commands his followers to mutilate their bodies so that they cannot sin
    Source?

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      Dude, I'm just casually dropping in, but have you even read the Bible?

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        I don't really have the time or the interest to sit down and read the entire Bible. If Jesus really said what OP claims, he can provide a source. Otherwise, I don't care.

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          Here comes the airplane fwoooooosssh Matthew 5:29!

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            I'm obviously asking for a specific Bible verse. Are you that moronic that you didn't understand that?

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Matthew 5:29
            Are you dyslexic?

            your hand does not cause you to sin, you cause your hand to sin. if you had made the thread about how christianity encourages you to submit to your enemies you'd have had a point.

            Except that jesus explicitly says to pluck your eyes out.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            yeah but the point of his saying that was to demonstrate to his followers that it is not our eyes that cause us to sin. when you tell someone "dang bro, guess you'll just have to gouge out your fricking eyes" chances are they'll suddenly realize they can manage themselves better. dont be so literal when you read. the bible also states that those with disfigured genitals may not enter curches (deuteronomy 23:1) so it's clear that the christian god doesn't actually want us to cut ourselves up.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            Deuteronomy is old testament, so clearly when jesus talks of the holyness of eunuchs and self mutilation he overrides it. Furthermore, where are you getting the idea that the command to self mutilate is not meant literaly? All of the surrounding passages give very clear concrete advice, so I see why not this one too.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >where are you getting the idea that the command to self mutilate is not meant literaly?
            as i am not autistic i can recognize non-literal methods of communication, such as hyperbole or metaphor, even if they appear in writing. it's not at all uncommon for people to mix in one bit of non-literal communication in the middle of a large about of literal communication. the new testament superceding the old would only be an issue if there were a conflict between them but given that the verse in matthew is non-literal both verses are valid.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >literary methods like hyperbole and metaphor are non-literal methods of communication
            So on what basis is this passage not meant literally, other than it being necessary for your cope?

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            i have no need to cope. i'm not a christian myself so i don't even have a horse in this race (that, by the way, was an idiom, i am not literally talking about horses. please don't get confused). i'm just someone who has read the bible. the passage is a bit like solomon saying to cut a baby in half. simply floating out the suggestion of extreme violence is enough to make people seriously reconsider their priorities and behaviour.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            Not that anon but "if your right eye offends thee" is an extremely well known quote from the Bible. The issue is that OP takes it out of context when it really means that you should eliminate parts of your life that tempt you to sin. Saying that you should chop off your dick is the most autistic way you can possibly interpret these teachings and OP is just being a homosexual as usual.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            How do you square your notion of the interpetation being wrong with the fact that skopets was an actual cult, and many others like it also existed? Also you're ignoring the passage where jesus states that "some become eunuchs for god".

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            Pretty much what I was expecting and why I asked for a source. Cheers.

            >Matthew 5:29
            Are you dyslexic?
            [...]
            Except that jesus explicitly says to pluck your eyes out.

            >Taking anything written in the Bible in its most 3rd grade, literal interpretation
            Ah, I think I've identified the problem

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            The whole "it's a metaphor when I don't like a passage" is just pathetic. Either own up to it or admit that christianity is repugnant.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            It clearly just mean you should remove things from your life that cause you to sin, as

            Not that anon but "if your right eye offends thee" is an extremely well known quote from the Bible. The issue is that OP takes it out of context when it really means that you should eliminate parts of your life that tempt you to sin. Saying that you should chop off your dick is the most autistic way you can possibly interpret these teachings and OP is just being a homosexual as usual.

            pointed out. Everything in the Bible is allegorical, not just this one passage. I'm not even Christian nor am I a biblical scholar, but it's self-evident.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Talking snakes, zombies, jesus resurrecting, walking on water, all that really happened
            >But this particular passage that makes me personally uncomfortable, nah that's a metaphor
            Bruh

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >everything in the Bible is allegorical
            >Jesus is not the Messiah, he did not die for our sins and come back to life, that was just an allegory.
            >you are your own Messiah, you just have to let go of your sins and be reborn like Jesus in the allegory
            Thanks man, I will go church tomorrow and enlighten those Christians who interpret the Bible literally with this precious insight

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >The issue is that OP takes it out of context when it really means that you should eliminate parts of your life that tempt you to sin
            I hate this israeli shit where people think they can deliberately misinterpret the EXTREMELY STRAIGHTFORWARD AND UNAMBIGUOUS WORD OF GOD and actually think that when they die, God is just gonna be like
            >oh yeah I did say that and I did mean it literally but I guess it could be interpreted metaphorically lol you sure outsmarted me there, come on in to heaven buddy

            Plucking out your eye if it causes you to sin was meant LITERALLY, just as "do not resist an evil person" was meant LITERALLY and "love your enemies" was meant LITERALLY. You are here for an incredibly tiny and insignificant amount of time and the way you conduct yourself during that time will determine how you will spend the rest of ETERNITY and if you think it's a good idea to frick around and try to play semantic games with the word of God then you are unimaginably stupid.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            homie God played "semantic games" as you call it himself when he was on Earth. Jesus openly spoke in metaphor and allegory, do you think that the parable of the sower doesn't matter to you because you aren't a farmer? By your logic child porn is okay in God's eyes because it isn't specifically addressed in the Bible. We need to derive themes and lessons from these teachings, only following the specific law of the Bible and nothing else is the most israeli shit you can possibly do.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >only following the specific law of the Bible and nothing else is the most israeli shit you can possibly do.
            No, the most israeli thing you can do is bend over backwards to misinterpret your religious text in a way that permits you to ignore its more stringent commands. This is called pilpul and it is literally what you are doing when you try to weasel out of obeying the Lord by claiming his direct commands as "metaphor and allegory". There are plenty of obvious metaphors but you know perfectly well which are which and you are only harming yourself when you interpret clear, simple commandments as metaphor.

            When Jesus says,
            >do not resist an evil person; but whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also. If anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, let him have your coat also. Whoever forces you to go one mile, go with him two.
            then you should absolutely follow both the letter and the spirit of what he says. If you happily give away your shirt and coat but fight to keep your pants, you're ignoring the spirit. But if you claim that this is just a metaphor and that Jesus didn't actually meant it when he literally said, "do not resist an evil person" then you are playing a very dangerous game with your immortal soul, and I guaranteed you God will not look kindly upon people who spent their time alive trying to wiggle out of obeying Him.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            I'm curious what your refutation to OP is then if you think that mutilating your body is a requirement to getting into Heaven, you seem to be agreeing with him. Unless you're just OP poisoning the well by saying that you're Christian, in which case you've successfully baited me.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            You're responding to the OP, silly.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >if you think that mutilating your body is a requirement to getting into Heaven
            Are you being disingenuous on purpose or are you just so accustomed to these semantic tricks that you can't help yourself? The requirement for entering Heaven is, among other things, not sinning. If you repeatedly sin - say, you can't stop stealing no matter what you do - and have truly made every effort, then it is preferable to cut off your own hand so that you're physically incapable of sinning rather than continuing to do so. Your body is temporary. Your soul is not. It's obviously an extreme cause but it is in no way a metaphor, which has been my main point, and people who argue that things like this are metaphor are making the mistake of valuing their body over their soul.

            As far as OP goes, I can't imagine that someone would be such a devoted Christian as to willingly mutilate themselves to cease sinning but also so determined to sin that their only recourse was to cut off both hands and feet and pluck out both of their eyes.

            [...]
            ESL

            israelite

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >The requirement for entering Heaven is, among other things, not sinning.
            Christians believe that humans can't be sinless.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >I can't imagine that someone would be such a devoted Christian as to willingly mutilate themselves to cease sinning but also so determined to sin that their only recourse was to cut off both hands and feet and pluck out both of their eyes.
            You just refuted your own argument that Jesus wants people to pluck out their eyes. Self mutilation is an insanely extreme method of abstinence that is exclusively used by schizos like Boston Corbett and brainwashed cultists that can't even grasp the true teachings of the Bible anyway because as you said, they are just insanely determined to sin.
            Do you think that a man addicted to fornicating with women should just mutilate his genitals and take HRT to become a troony so that he wouldn't get sexual attention from women? A much easier and realistic solution would be to stop looking for bawds at bars, delete tinder from your phone, stop having female friends etc. which is what Jesus was talking about. You've either never tried to remove sin from your life or you're just a schizo.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >You just refuted your own argument that Jesus wants people to pluck out their eyes.
            I did no such thing, you slimy little pervert. As you well know, that was never my argument in the first place, but people like you are genetically incapable of honest debate.

            Jesus' own words

            >If your takeway from Jesus' teachings is that you should cut your dick off then you are intentionally missing the point
            He did literally tell his followers to mutilate themselves if that was what was necessary to prevent sin. Have you read the bible, anon?
            >Matthew 18:8-9
            >Wherefore if thy hand or thy foot offend thee, cut them off, and cast them from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life halt or maimed, rather than having two hands or two feet to be cast into everlasting fire. And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life with one eye, rather than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire.

            are not that he "wants" his followers to mutilate themselves, but that doing so would be preferable to sinning, if that is the only way they can prevent themselves from sinning. While it is an illustration of the extreme lengths you should go to in order to avoid sin, it is also meant quite literally and you dismiss it as "insane" to your own detriment.

            >Do you think that a man addicted to fornicating with women should just mutilate his genitals and take HRT to become a troony so that he wouldn't get sexual attention from women?
            I'm a bit confused as to why you brought trannies into the conversation. That's something you think about a lot, is it? Can't resist any excuse to share your obsessions with normal people?

            What do you think someone should do if they've followed all your directions and they still sin? What if it's not someone having casual sex but someone who can't keep himself from raping his wife or his children? Christianity, when practiced according to the actual teachings of Jesus, is a very extreme religion. Evil people like you have spent centuries watering it down and coming up with clever little semantic tricks to avoid actually living as Jesus instructed but when you strip all that away, what you're left with is a religion with a very simple message:

            The one and only purpose of this life is to determine if you're worthy of spending eternity at God's side. If you think that cutting off a hand or a foot in service of this goal is "extreme" then you quite simply don't understand what's at stake. Your body is nothing, it's a vessel, it will exist for an infinitesimally small amount of time, weighed against ETERNITY.

            >You've either never tried to remove sin from your life or you're just a schizo.
            You have never in your entire life, not even one single time, met a man who truly followed the teachings of Christ. If you ever did, you would indeed think that he was insane.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >What if it's not someone having casual sex but someone who can't keep himself from raping his wife or his children?

            I'm getting the impression that you are legitimately insane and low IQ.
            If someone can't stop raping his kids he probably should cut his dick off, yes. I think most non-Christians would agree too.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >If someone can't stop raping his kids he probably should cut his dick off, yes
            And if someone can't stop shoplifting? If someone can't stop himself from lusting after the women he sees at his job?

            You understand when it's an extreme example like rape but what you don't understand is that there are no degrees when it comes to sin. An unrepentant shoplifter will be sent to Hell right alongside an unrepentant murderer.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            Has it occurred to you that there could be such a concept as severity of sin? That's why in Christian nations people generally didn't have their hands amputated for stealing a loaf of bread. If you had +15 IQ you wouldnt be asking such questions.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            And if someone can't stop shoplifting? If someone can't stop himself from lusting after the women he sees at his job?
            Escalating it straight to self mutilation is silly. The bible specifically advises to fly from temptation as a first response. If you can’t stop shoplifting, stop entering shops. If you can’t stop lusting after a woman at work, get a new job

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Escalating it straight to self mutilation is silly.
            >tfw you are genetically incapable of honest debate

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            You've unironically just said that Christianity is indistinguishable from insanity, check yourself before you say more blasphemous shit.
            I never said that sinning is acceptable either, but we have free will to not cut our dicks off, man, Jesus would condemn that type of deranged thinking because it only leads to even worse sin. Someone schizo enough to cut his own dick off in the name of God would probably cut his son's dick off too if he caught him jerking off, mental illness is not virtue bro. But honestly I was right earlier when I said that you are a false Christian arguing in bad faith, so I will be exiting this gay thread started by an underage OP.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >You've unironically just said that Christianity is indistinguishable from insanity
            What joy do you get from telling these blatant lies?

            >Jesus would condemn that type of deranged thinking because it only leads to even worse sin.
            You're not arguing against me when you say this, anon. You're arguing against the word of God

            >If your takeway from Jesus' teachings is that you should cut your dick off then you are intentionally missing the point
            He did literally tell his followers to mutilate themselves if that was what was necessary to prevent sin. Have you read the bible, anon?
            >Matthew 18:8-9
            >Wherefore if thy hand or thy foot offend thee, cut them off, and cast them from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life halt or maimed, rather than having two hands or two feet to be cast into everlasting fire. And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life with one eye, rather than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire.

            . You can call me a "false Christian" all you want but you're the one denying Jesus' teachings.

            Has it occurred to you that there could be such a concept as severity of sin? That's why in Christian nations people generally didn't have their hands amputated for stealing a loaf of bread. If you had +15 IQ you wouldnt be asking such questions.

            >Has it occurred to you that there could be such a concept as severity of sin?
            This is a human concept, not a divine one. Or would you like to provide us with a verse where Jesus says that it's fine to not worry about "lesser" sins?

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            Sins are sins, but the NT distinguishes between degrees of sin.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            I notice that you haven't provided us with any verses in support of your position

            It's fine to commit "lesser" sins, then? They're not important? You'll be welcomed into Heaven even if you spent your life constantly sinning, just so long as they weren't "serious" sins?

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >“You could have no power at all against Me unless it had been given you from above. Therefore the one who delivered Me to you has the greater sin”
            t. Jesus
            And sins are sins so they're never ok.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            I guess I shouldn't be surprised that a person who thinks that "love thy enemy" is metaphorical would take a verse like that one as Jesus implying that some sins are less important than others.

            It's always so strange to me that people will fight tooth and nail against accepting clear and straightforward verses like

            >If your takeway from Jesus' teachings is that you should cut your dick off then you are intentionally missing the point
            He did literally tell his followers to mutilate themselves if that was what was necessary to prevent sin. Have you read the bible, anon?
            >Matthew 18:8-9
            >Wherefore if thy hand or thy foot offend thee, cut them off, and cast them from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life halt or maimed, rather than having two hands or two feet to be cast into everlasting fire. And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life with one eye, rather than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire.

            , verses where Jesus is directly instructing his followers, but will then turn around and make these huge assumptions about things he said in completely different situations, as if something so vital as
            >some sins are less important than others
            isn't something he would have spoken about directly in his teachings rather than expecting you to infer it from something he said later.

            Regardless, let's remember that the basis of this debate is that your assertion

            Has it occurred to you that there could be such a concept as severity of sin? That's why in Christian nations people generally didn't have their hands amputated for stealing a loaf of bread. If you had +15 IQ you wouldnt be asking such questions.

            that cutting off your own hand to prevent sin is something that you shouldn't do for a less "severe" sin, as if the supposed severity of your sins is going to have any relevance to your salvation. The root issue here is that you enjoy sinning, you placate yourself by telling yourself that they're only small sins, you're not out raping or murdering, so it's not a big deal. It's crazy to think that you should cut out your tongue if you can't stop lying. Lying, so what? It's not hurting anyone, not really, so who cares? There's no need to get so extreme about it.

            God cares. Christianity is an extreme religion. If it doesn't seem that way to you then you're not following Jesus' teachings.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            I'm not a Christian I just think I have a relatively good understanding of the NT and Christian history & theology. Jesus clearly says that some sins are greater than others. I understand that you are not well-read, so you might want to familiarize yourself with the historical Christian debates about the different degrees of sin.

            "All wrongdoing is sin, but there is sin that does not lead to death."

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >I understand that you are not well-read
            What an arrogant child you are. Well, there's no end to nonbelievers who think they're qualified to instruct the faithful but I'll remind you that casually reading theology for entertainment purposes is a very poor method of understanding it.

            I think we both know that you're nowhere near as "well-read" as you're imply your are but if you were, you would know that "historical Christian debates" have included voices both for and against virtually any interpretation you might imagine. The fact that many people in the past have been wrong has absolutely nothing to do with this discussion.

            >"All wrongdoing is sin, but there is sin that does not lead to death."
            There are various interpretations of this verse - which is not the word of Jesus, by the way - and none of them are that some sins are less important than others. A common interpretation is that all sin leads to death except that which we repent, so there are no degrees here. All sin leads to death unless you repent, in which case any and all sins, if earnestly repented, do not lead to death.

            On the other hand, we have various examples from the bible of people who sin and quite literally die on the spot as a result, Ananias and Sapphira being the most famous example. I suppose that could be interpreted as degree of sin, in that being struck dead on the spot for lying to the Holy Spirit precludes any potential repentance, but outside of that there's no reason to assume degrees of sin. This won't seem important to you since this is just theoretical on your part, but you will be damned for a "lesser" sin just as easily as you will for "greater" sin. It does not matter the "degree" of sin; if the only way to prevent yourself from sinning is to pluck out your eye, then that is exactly what you should do.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            You're free to dismiss the teaching of early Christians and the church on the degrees of sin and everything else, but I would at least expect you to show us some example of early Christian groups who plucked their eyes out. I assume you've managed to convince yourself that you understand the NT better than the Christian thinkers.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            Here comes the chuu chuu train James 2:10!

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            to you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of god, and to the other in parables so that seeing they may not see and hearing they may not understand

  7. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    your hand does not cause you to sin, you cause your hand to sin. if you had made the thread about how christianity encourages you to submit to your enemies you'd have had a point.

  8. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    >How did something so repugnant and life denying even gain traction in the first place?
    Initially, israelites. Later, israelites using the Roman Empire to force conquered people to convert or die. Much later, Christians lying about what their holy books actually contain in order to trick people into converting.

  9. 6 months ago
    sage

    OP is a teenager who posted a screenshot from his favorite Nintendo vidya to make his point. Why are people responding to this. This board is garbage now.

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      >posting on the literature board with such poor grammar
      2/10 read more books

      • 6 months ago
        sage

        >capslocking 15-year-old who doesn't understand allegory & metaphor complains about punctuation
        Stop embarrassing yourself.

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          >who doesn't understand allegory & metaphor
          see

          >The issue is that OP takes it out of context when it really means that you should eliminate parts of your life that tempt you to sin
          I hate this israeli shit where people think they can deliberately misinterpret the EXTREMELY STRAIGHTFORWARD AND UNAMBIGUOUS WORD OF GOD and actually think that when they die, God is just gonna be like
          >oh yeah I did say that and I did mean it literally but I guess it could be interpreted metaphorically lol you sure outsmarted me there, come on in to heaven buddy

          Plucking out your eye if it causes you to sin was meant LITERALLY, just as "do not resist an evil person" was meant LITERALLY and "love your enemies" was meant LITERALLY. You are here for an incredibly tiny and insignificant amount of time and the way you conduct yourself during that time will determine how you will spend the rest of ETERNITY and if you think it's a good idea to frick around and try to play semantic games with the word of God then you are unimaginably stupid.

          >only following the specific law of the Bible and nothing else is the most israeli shit you can possibly do.
          No, the most israeli thing you can do is bend over backwards to misinterpret your religious text in a way that permits you to ignore its more stringent commands. This is called pilpul and it is literally what you are doing when you try to weasel out of obeying the Lord by claiming his direct commands as "metaphor and allegory". There are plenty of obvious metaphors but you know perfectly well which are which and you are only harming yourself when you interpret clear, simple commandments as metaphor.

          When Jesus says,
          >do not resist an evil person; but whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also. If anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, let him have your coat also. Whoever forces you to go one mile, go with him two.
          then you should absolutely follow both the letter and the spirit of what he says. If you happily give away your shirt and coat but fight to keep your pants, you're ignoring the spirit. But if you claim that this is just a metaphor and that Jesus didn't actually meant it when he literally said, "do not resist an evil person" then you are playing a very dangerous game with your immortal soul, and I guaranteed you God will not look kindly upon people who spent their time alive trying to wiggle out of obeying Him.

          i wasn't commenting on your punctuation; i was commenting on your grammar
          2/10 read more books

          • 6 months ago
            sage

            >only following the specific law of the Bible and nothing else is the most israeli shit you can possibly do.
            No, the most israeli thing you can do is bend over backwards to misinterpret your religious text in a way that permits you to ignore its more stringent commands. This is called pilpul and it is literally what you are doing when you try to weasel out of obeying the Lord by claiming his direct commands as "metaphor and allegory". There are plenty of obvious metaphors but you know perfectly well which are which and you are only harming yourself when you interpret clear, simple commandments as metaphor.

            When Jesus says,
            >do not resist an evil person; but whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also. If anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, let him have your coat also. Whoever forces you to go one mile, go with him two.
            then you should absolutely follow both the letter and the spirit of what he says. If you happily give away your shirt and coat but fight to keep your pants, you're ignoring the spirit. But if you claim that this is just a metaphor and that Jesus didn't actually meant it when he literally said, "do not resist an evil person" then you are playing a very dangerous game with your immortal soul, and I guaranteed you God will not look kindly upon people who spent their time alive trying to wiggle out of obeying Him.

            ESL

  10. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    This is what the average person will be when the elites finally develop brainwashing to make us into completely obediant slaves, this is what every civilization have always dreamed of; mindless humans that execute on command. It will soon become a reality and will be a cheap solution to robot slaves.

  11. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    You know, the point of this thread was not to talk about bodily mutilation, even though it is closely related to the topic, which is how the stalkers from HL2 embody christian virtues. They are chaste, humble, diligent and so forth, yet the average christian, even one who claims to be a fundamentalist, would find the idea of surrendering themselves to be turned into a stalker repugnant. This clearly demonstrates that christian values are as a matter of fact repugnant, but also that the vast majority of humans agree with said assesment. Now, there are several ways one can cope with the cognitive dissonance that rises when this repugnance is brought to the fore. Unfortunately the coping mechanism chosen by the abrahamists of this thread is pure intellectual dishonesty. Hopefully given enough time they will come to accept that even they don't want to be turned into stalkers.

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      I'm not a Christian I just think I have a relatively good understanding of the NT and Christian history & theology. Jesus clearly says that some sins are greater than others. I understand that you are not well-read, so you might want to familiarize yourself with the historical Christian debates about the different degrees of sin.

      "All wrongdoing is sin, but there is sin that does not lead to death."

      Or perhaps you should stick to video games.

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        I see, we have moved on on the list of coping with loss from denial to anger. This is progress.
        You know, you could atleast try to justify how Matthew 5:29 is a metaphor instead of just repeating it hoping that the cognitive dissonance goes away.

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          To people with a normal IQ this wouldn't need justification, but you could ask yourself whether any of his disciples mutilated themselves.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            Extremely little is written about the apostles besides paul. Why would normal IQ people need no justification?

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            Ok are there early Christians who mutilated themselves en mass?

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            It was common enough to be mentioned in multiple sources, eg. Justin Martyr's Apology.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            There are also claims Origenes became a voluntary eunuch, but this seems dubious and the practice was condemned by the church.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            Did his disciples struggle with sin to the point that self-mutilation was their only option? It's an example of the most extreme possible measure, not something to be done casually.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            We're back to your earlier example of a parent who cannot stop raping his children I assume? One can only hope that person like that would mutilate himself, but I don't see the point in discussing this.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >We're back to your earlier example of a parent who cannot stop raping his children I assume?
            Once again, you "assume" dishonestly and incorrectly. It's a very straightforward concept and I'm not sure why you keep pretending that you don't understand, especially since I've already explained it to you:

            >if you think that mutilating your body is a requirement to getting into Heaven
            Are you being disingenuous on purpose or are you just so accustomed to these semantic tricks that you can't help yourself? The requirement for entering Heaven is, among other things, not sinning. If you repeatedly sin - say, you can't stop stealing no matter what you do - and have truly made every effort, then it is preferable to cut off your own hand so that you're physically incapable of sinning rather than continuing to do so. Your body is temporary. Your soul is not. It's obviously an extreme cause but it is in no way a metaphor, which has been my main point, and people who argue that things like this are metaphor are making the mistake of valuing their body over their soul.

            As far as OP goes, I can't imagine that someone would be such a devoted Christian as to willingly mutilate themselves to cease sinning but also so determined to sin that their only recourse was to cut off both hands and feet and pluck out both of their eyes.

            [...]
            israelite

            >If you repeatedly sin - say, you can't stop stealing no matter what you do - and have truly made every effort, then it is preferable to cut off your own hand so that you're physically incapable of sinning rather than continuing to do so.

            You're free to dismiss the teaching of early Christians and the church on the degrees of sin and everything else, but I would at least expect you to show us some example of early Christian groups who plucked their eyes out. I assume you've managed to convince yourself that you understand the NT better than the Christian thinkers.

            I was talking with you with the assumption that you were a misled believer, but there's no point in discussing matters of faith with a nonbeliever. My last response was a courtesy since we were in the middle of a debate but past that, we have nothing to talk about.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            I think the point of Christian moral teaching is that humans have the ability to repent & refrain from sin. When you talk about a person who cannot stop raping his child you can hardly be talking about a human being.

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      The Stalkers are incapable of faith. That’s clearly antithetical to the christian worldview

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        I don't think that is true given the fact that christian faith is really just taking things at face value with no skepticism, something which the stalkers are capable of, as dim as their minds may be.

  12. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    Episode 3 fricking when

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *