Reply to topic  [ 23 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
 Want to buy Gawker? 
Author Message
Level 39
Level 39
User avatar

Cash on hand:
2,187.55

Bank:
5,250.50
Posts: 21063
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2009 11:44 pm
Group: Sysop
Post Re: Want to buy Gawker?
fluffy wrote:
All I know about Catholics is schoolgirls. All you need to know about Catholics is schoolgirls. In short, tentacle rape is the cornerstone of Catholicism.

Image


A secret experiment conducted in a catholic school in Japan created yuri.

_________________
Image
Yeap.

_________________
Click the icon to see the image in fullscreen mode  
1 pcs.
Click the icon to see the image in fullscreen mode  
4 pcs.


Fri Jun 24, 2016 8:58 pm
Profile E-mail WWW
Level 22
Level 22
User avatar

Cash on hand:
174,929.20
Posts: 2255
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2012 11:10 am
Location: SR388
Group: Special Access
Post Re: Want to buy Gawker?
n0th1n wrote:
YomToxic wrote:
n0th1n wrote:
I'd buy it for a quarter... MILLION... in Zimbabwe money.


What will you do with it?


Improve the quality of articles, integrity of it's journalism, and critical approach to existing social power structures (governments, corporations, that guy that runs the local mob, etc).

joshex wrote:
only roman pope worshipers hate fapping. they added verses to the bible to make it say that any sort of sexual act even with yourself is bad.

the only thing God has against any pronz is covetousness, but hentai is easy to make into something that can't be coveted, all you need to do is remove 'in-universe-ownership' of the hentai gals. aka they aren't in a relationship with anyone but the viewer. thus stopping thoughts like "I sure wish that was me instead of that guy", or "I want his girl", or "that guy has a hot wife but I'm gonna bang her" etc. thus no covetousness.

God says covetousness is Idolatry in that in those circumstances you accidentally place the person on a pedestal above yourself in your mind merely by the act of referencing them as some unattainable thing. but if they are fully mental property of the viewer then you don't have that problem.

Equality or subordination, it's also important that people don't see the hentai girl as some sort of unattainable goddess of beauty, meaning she should basically just give herself to the viewer as if the viewer and her are equals or as if she is a subordinate to the viewer, so instead of thinking of her as a goddess the viewer perceives her as their own personal companion OR tool.


Yea, no. For one, the Christians that follow the leadership of the Pope (Catholics, not all of which are of the Roman/Latin rite, mind you) actually hold sex in very high regard and believe it to be something good and holy, no less than a participation in the creative act of God. However, good things can be abused or imitated in bad ways (in fact, that's the nature of most evil, as evil is the corruption, or incompleteness, of good, however remote). Nonetheless, sex and sexuality are considered very good, even if some sexual acts are bad (and they are bad precisely because sex, and human beings, are good, and some aspect of the nature of the human being is being abused or diminished in some particular act, such as rape).
I'm not actually familiar though with any passage of the Bible that talks about masturbation directly though. So, I suppose the lack of the passages being there at all is evidence enough that Catholics didn't put them there.

That said, the Catholic/Christian community has developed a fairly coherent moral theology and body of moral teachings, outside of the Bible, though they relate and can be reasonably deduced from scriptures(Catholics, Orthodox, and various others aren't Sola Scriptura-ists), that make it clear that masturbation goes against the nature of sex (nature understood in the classical sense not as meaning 'from the physical/natural/biological world', but rather as what is proper to the whole of a being, what has been granted to it or what it was designed for on not just a physical level but a spiritual or formal level). St. John Paul II's Theology of the Body would probably be the most recent and authoritative body of work to cover the particulars and the reasoning behind it, but you'll find explanations from St. Thomas Aquinas and any number of other figures big and small going pretty far back. Largely, this relates to the sexual act being removed entirely from the both reproductive purposes and unitive purposes, and instead turning into a self-centered act of unproductive satisfaction (though, for many, such satisfaction is of diminishing returns).

When porn is involved, you have the problem not as much about covetousness as the degradation of persons (even if the persons are fictitious they are generally based on some reality, and even aside from that there is the tendency to degrade the idea of human persons into objects to fulfil ones pleasures rather than ends in themselves). Much more is involved there, of course, but that's the summary.


fuck j00 man, I'm lazy and you're gonna make me pull the song off youtube aren't you?

what do you think martin luther (not the black ones, didn't have the family name king) was all about? catholics added versus to the catholic bible that are not there in the original texts, martin luther called them out on that BS and with the later help of King James of scotland created the english translation of the original texts without the catholic additives, now famously used as the standard of all protestants the 'King James Version' also denoted KJV.

fuck, now I gotta log in tor after a long day to pull that video.


Link

_________________
mepsipax

Image

got any?

His name is not Robert Paulsen, His name is Gregory Matthew Bruni, he won so hard.

_________________
Click the icon to see the image in fullscreen mode  
1 pcs.
Click the icon to see the image in fullscreen mode  
1 pcs.
Click the icon to see the image in fullscreen mode  
1 pcs.
Click the icon to see the image in fullscreen mode  
1 pcs.


Sat Jun 25, 2016 8:26 am
Profile E-mail
Level 19
Level 19
User avatar

Cash on hand:
57,018.00
Posts: 1950
Joined: Thu May 21, 2009 1:28 pm
Group: Oldies
Post Re: Want to buy Gawker?
joshex wrote:
n0th1n wrote:
YomToxic wrote:
n0th1n wrote:
I'd buy it for a quarter... MILLION... in Zimbabwe money.


What will you do with it?


Improve the quality of articles, integrity of it's journalism, and critical approach to existing social power structures (governments, corporations, that guy that runs the local mob, etc).

joshex wrote:
only roman pope worshipers hate fapping. they added verses to the bible to make it say that any sort of sexual act even with yourself is bad.

the only thing God has against any pronz is covetousness, but hentai is easy to make into something that can't be coveted, all you need to do is remove 'in-universe-ownership' of the hentai gals. aka they aren't in a relationship with anyone but the viewer. thus stopping thoughts like "I sure wish that was me instead of that guy", or "I want his girl", or "that guy has a hot wife but I'm gonna bang her" etc. thus no covetousness.

God says covetousness is Idolatry in that in those circumstances you accidentally place the person on a pedestal above yourself in your mind merely by the act of referencing them as some unattainable thing. but if they are fully mental property of the viewer then you don't have that problem.

Equality or subordination, it's also important that people don't see the hentai girl as some sort of unattainable goddess of beauty, meaning she should basically just give herself to the viewer as if the viewer and her are equals or as if she is a subordinate to the viewer, so instead of thinking of her as a goddess the viewer perceives her as their own personal companion OR tool.


Yea, no. For one, the Christians that follow the leadership of the Pope (Catholics, not all of which are of the Roman/Latin rite, mind you) actually hold sex in very high regard and believe it to be something good and holy, no less than a participation in the creative act of God. However, good things can be abused or imitated in bad ways (in fact, that's the nature of most evil, as evil is the corruption, or incompleteness, of good, however remote). Nonetheless, sex and sexuality are considered very good, even if some sexual acts are bad (and they are bad precisely because sex, and human beings, are good, and some aspect of the nature of the human being is being abused or diminished in some particular act, such as rape).
I'm not actually familiar though with any passage of the Bible that talks about masturbation directly though. So, I suppose the lack of the passages being there at all is evidence enough that Catholics didn't put them there.

That said, the Catholic/Christian community has developed a fairly coherent moral theology and body of moral teachings, outside of the Bible, though they relate and can be reasonably deduced from scriptures(Catholics, Orthodox, and various others aren't Sola Scriptura-ists), that make it clear that masturbation goes against the nature of sex (nature understood in the classical sense not as meaning 'from the physical/natural/biological world', but rather as what is proper to the whole of a being, what has been granted to it or what it was designed for on not just a physical level but a spiritual or formal level). St. John Paul II's Theology of the Body would probably be the most recent and authoritative body of work to cover the particulars and the reasoning behind it, but you'll find explanations from St. Thomas Aquinas and any number of other figures big and small going pretty far back. Largely, this relates to the sexual act being removed entirely from the both reproductive purposes and unitive purposes, and instead turning into a self-centered act of unproductive satisfaction (though, for many, such satisfaction is of diminishing returns).

When porn is involved, you have the problem not as much about covetousness as the degradation of persons (even if the persons are fictitious they are generally based on some reality, and even aside from that there is the tendency to degrade the idea of human persons into objects to fulfil ones pleasures rather than ends in themselves). Much more is involved there, of course, but that's the summary.


fuck j00 man, I'm lazy and you're gonna make me pull the song off youtube aren't you?

what do you think martin luther (not the black ones, didn't have the family name king) was all about? catholics added versus to the catholic bible that are not there in the original texts, martin luther called them out on that BS and with the later help of King James of scotland created the english translation of the original texts without the catholic additives, now famously used as the standard of all protestants the 'King James Version' also denoted KJV.

fuck, now I gotta log in tor after a long day to pull that video.


Link


Nope, you don't even have Martin Luther's argument right. The point you are trying to get at doesn't even appear in the Luther's 95 Theses. His greater concern was really about indulgences, confession, salvation and authority. Only later, after his split, did he go into the matter of the deuterocanonical books: entire or large chunks of books of the Bible that he considered less authoritative and inspired. All of these were from the Old Testament: Tobit, Judith, parts of Esthar [10:4–16:24 in the Vulgate], Wisdom, Sirach, Baruch, three "books of Daniel" [Daniel is usually one book, but these are often talked about as books within Daniel for reasons], Macabees 1 and 2.
What was Martin Luther's objection? One objection was simply that there wasn't a known Hebrew manuscript for these, but only a Greek, as opposed to the rest of the Old Testament, so it seemed out of place I guess. There was also a commentary about this from St. Jerome in the Latin Vulgate, where in early versions he nots them as "not of the canon" by his own strict criteria (largely due to the Jewish community no longer using them and lack of Hebrew versions at the time), though later in life he changed his mind and considered these to be Scripture after all. These, however, did appear in the Septuagint (the famous and respected Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures that was in widespread, even primary, use during the first century and some time earlier, a version of which most of the Old Testament references in the New Testament seem to be using), and they were used in widespread use in the Christian communities since the first century (one of the criteria used for deciding what books to include in the Canon/Holy Bible, as there were a plethora of books to choose from) and agreed upon at various early synods and councils. However, as I mentioned, Martin Luther considered these as of lesser inspiration, or minor scripture, but he did not think they should be removed entirely either. He simply put them in a exasperate section together and marked them off as less inspired. As I recall though, Hebrew versions of some of the books were later found, but there's not any strong reason why a Hebrew origin was necessary (even the Greek versions were written pre-Christ).

It wasn't until much later that the books were removed from protestant Bibles, and not for theological reasons or by theologians, but by force of some protestant guilds that pressured the publishers to stop publishing that part since many, upon reading them, found them to fit the same criteria that Martin Luther had given for the authority of the Scriptures (they testify to themselves, in some vague way), and they found many things protestants rejected in them, and so there was a problem of people converting back to Catholicism. Some note this was a political problem at the time, as much power struggle was divided along Catholic/Protestant lines in the ruling classes, but that's an explanation you can look to yourself.

It should also be noted that more than just Catholics use these books. The Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox and Church of the East all use them as well. However, most modern Jews do not use these books, as I recall for similar reasons of a movement to go back to Hebrew only sources sometime after the destruction of the Temple (the same event that lead to the extinction of some Jewish sects like the Sadducees and the breaking rift between the Jews/mostly Pharisees and Christians/The Way, who until that time were still considered Jews for the most part). Funny part: Hanukkah comes from two of the books they don't use (Macabees). But, I'm lead to understand that's the Jewish community outside of the U.S. doesn't really care about that holiday anyway.

It should also be noted that Martin Luther had nothing to do with the King James Version translation of the Bible. He died over half a century before that translation began. Likewise, it should be noted that the King James Version DID include the books (Apocrypha, as they called it) in all publications until 1666 (over a half century after it's first completion in 1611). Not only that, but the King James Version actually had MORE Apocrypha books and parts than what the Catholic Bibles contained, and parts from the Apocrypha are still used in Anglican liturgies and prayer today. In fact, the first Bibles not to include the Apocrypha were published in 1633 (again, long after Martin Luther was dead).

_________________
Back again. I do stuff. Do you?


Tue Jun 28, 2016 9:30 pm
Profile E-mail YIM
Level 22
Level 22
User avatar

Cash on hand:
174,929.20
Posts: 2255
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2012 11:10 am
Location: SR388
Group: Special Access
Post Re: Want to buy Gawker?
you'll find that the catholic bible includes second Corinthians verses that aren't in the original manuscripts. where as the king james does not.

the verse in question says something like "every sperm that falleth upon the ground shall be counted against that man's head in judgement" (normally I'd get a direct quote but I don't keep a copy of the catholic bible for it's masturbation inhibition believing ways.

see Catholicism added stuff to the bible, and they are preoccupied with their own sexuality, they have personal inhibitions against masturbation which they decided should be in the bible so that people have to confess and repent for it.

heres something on it:

http://www.catholicbridge.com/catholic/masturbation.php

"Why are catholics the only denomination against masturbation?" (vague bible verses at the end which were really talking about somethign else entirely AFTER a whole bunch of book authors said their piece.

I'd have to get into a catholic version fo the bible to get that second corinthians verse. but yeah, christian hentai; it's possible man, just not if you're catholic lol.

_________________
mepsipax

Image

got any?

His name is not Robert Paulsen, His name is Gregory Matthew Bruni, he won so hard.

_________________
Click the icon to see the image in fullscreen mode  
1 pcs.
Click the icon to see the image in fullscreen mode  
1 pcs.
Click the icon to see the image in fullscreen mode  
1 pcs.
Click the icon to see the image in fullscreen mode  
1 pcs.


Wed Jun 29, 2016 1:59 am
Profile E-mail
Level 39
Level 39
User avatar

Cash on hand:
2,187.55

Bank:
5,250.50
Posts: 21063
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2009 11:44 pm
Group: Sysop
Post Re: Want to buy Gawker?
joshex wrote:
but yeah, christian hentai; it's possible man, just not if you're catholic lol.


We conducted some tests, following the recovery of these experiment logs. Not even catholics are immune.

_________________
Image
Yeap.

_________________
Click the icon to see the image in fullscreen mode  
1 pcs.
Click the icon to see the image in fullscreen mode  
4 pcs.


Wed Jun 29, 2016 7:08 am
Profile E-mail WWW
Level 22
Level 22
User avatar

Cash on hand:
174,929.20
Posts: 2255
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2012 11:10 am
Location: SR388
Group: Special Access
Post Re: Want to buy Gawker?
touche

you can put the catholic in the hentai, but can you put the hentai in the catholic? well, I suppose you can in some ways!

_________________
mepsipax

Image

got any?

His name is not Robert Paulsen, His name is Gregory Matthew Bruni, he won so hard.

_________________
Click the icon to see the image in fullscreen mode  
1 pcs.
Click the icon to see the image in fullscreen mode  
1 pcs.
Click the icon to see the image in fullscreen mode  
1 pcs.
Click the icon to see the image in fullscreen mode  
1 pcs.


Wed Jun 29, 2016 9:35 am
Profile E-mail
Level 19
Level 19
User avatar

Cash on hand:
57,018.00
Posts: 1950
Joined: Thu May 21, 2009 1:28 pm
Group: Oldies
Post Re: Want to buy Gawker?
joshex wrote:
you'll find that the catholic bible includes second Corinthians verses that aren't in the original manuscripts. where as the king james does not.

the verse in question says something like "every sperm that falleth upon the ground shall be counted against that man's head in judgement" (normally I'd get a direct quote but I don't keep a copy of the catholic bible for it's masturbation inhibition believing ways.

see Catholicism added stuff to the bible, and they are preoccupied with their own sexuality, they have personal inhibitions against masturbation which they decided should be in the bible so that people have to confess and repent for it.

heres something on it:

http://www.catholicbridge.com/catholic/masturbation.php

"Why are catholics the only denomination against masturbation?" (vague bible verses at the end which were really talking about somethign else entirely AFTER a whole bunch of book authors said their piece.

I'd have to get into a catholic version fo the bible to get that second corinthians verse. but yeah, christian hentai; it's possible man, just not if you're catholic lol.


No, dude. What you refer to is nowhere in Second Corinthians, not even in the Catholic Bible. Here, you can check an official Catholic translation of the Bible online here: http://www.usccb.org/bible/books-of-the-bible/

The thing is, unlike Sola Scripuraist denominations, there would be no need for Catholics to add anything extra to the Bible. We don't believe in "it must be explicitly in the Bible", we typically actually believe in the Tradition of the Church of which the Bible is an honored, indeed Sacred, part, but is far from the entirety. After all, the Bible does not contain everything, as the Conclusion to John's Gospel states (yes, in all Bibles, other than maybe that of Jehovah's Witnesses who arbitrarily removed various verses all over the place and mistranslated other parts): "There are also many other things that Jesus did, but if these were to be described individually, I do not think the whole world would contain the books that would be written." (John 21:25). And as St. Paul says in First Timothy:
"I am writing you about these matters, although I hope to visit you soon. But if I should be delayed, you should know how to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of truth." (1 Tim 3:14-15) Indicating that, while he is writing various instructions for the Church he is about to visit, there is more to be known but even without his further instruction they can rely on the Church herself, as the pillar and foundation (bulwark in many protestant bible's) of Truth. That's not actually the official reasoning for use of Tradition, typically anyway, but matters that happen to come to mind.

As for the site you linked, that's not really a source of official Catholic Teaching, and not a source I've ever heard of. Seems mostly like just some guy trying to do what he can to help others, and explain matters largely from his own views with some supports that he can find, but not giving the official reasons or anything (Catholicism has more structures of authority and validity than certain other groups, so it makes a difference. There's nothing wrong with him doing what he is doing, and he seems to be doing well enough, but don't confuse his explanation with the Catholic stance and reasoning).

In any case, Catholics are not the only Christian denomination against masturbation. He even indicates that essentially no protestant denomination accepted masturbation until the last century (when they started accepting a lot, and dividing further over such acceptances or rejections), and he went on to first cite C.S. Lewis on the matter, who was not Catholic. He was of the Church of England (and, as he has said, not particularly part of the High Church or Low Church of England). Regardless, there are protestants still against masturbation, and I'm fairly sure the Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, and other groups are against masturbation as well. It wouldn't really matter if Catholics were the only group, as that is not in itself a logical argument against it of any kind, but the fact is the statement is not true regardless of whether it could be part of a logical argument or not.

As for his Biblical citations, he might be personally stretching a bit with some of those, but like I said his explanation is not necessarily the Catholic Churches understanding, but he's also explaining it by a certain definition that might be lost on many readers. For instance, the verse he cites from Genesis seems more likely to be referring to withdrawal during sex, rather than masturbation. He, personally, likens and equates this (and other things) to masturbation, because it is an infertile sexual act resulting in ejaculation. I don't think I've heard anyone else that is so loose in defining masturbation though, seems to just be that guy. However, it's not wrong to take from those ideas and see a trend that would rule out unnatural sexual acts or sexual acts that are cut off artificially in some way from their reproductive nature. One doesn't really need to argue that the statements are in themselves explicitly against a particular sin, just that they create a body of morality, or some general principals, from which we can understand that something is sinful.

To take apply that elsewhere for illustration purposes: no where in the Bible does it say you can't blow up the planet (the capability wasn't even there for humans). However, you can take instruction from other matters dealing with killing humans, and even the as regards stewardship of the environment, and see that, since blowing up the world would necessarily involve things that violate the principals established elsewhere, it would be wrong to do it. Similarly, there's nothing in the Bible explicitly about identity theft, but from general principals about theft, and about love of neighbour, we know it's wrong.

_________________
Back again. I do stuff. Do you?


Thu Jun 30, 2016 9:34 pm
Profile E-mail YIM
ANTI-POPE
ANTI-POPE
User avatar

Cash on hand:
1,165,940.80
Posts: 29891
Joined: Thu May 14, 2009 3:43 pm
Location: BEL AIR
Group: hanzo ord3r
Post Re: Want to buy Gawker?
I woulda cut off the PS2 at 12:49

_________________
Ringed with the azure world he stands
Emperor of the sky
Lord of the ocean
The very image of a king
Image


Wed Aug 23, 2017 10:25 am
Profile E-mail
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 23 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 52 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
Mods Database :: Imprint :: Crawler Feeds :: Reset blocks
Designed by STSoftware for PTF.

Portal XL 5.0 ~ Premod 0.3 phpBB SEO