Using religion for sex
-
Hmm... All of us going out of point for the topic? ~WAHahaha...
> " -
-
Following the last thread.Originally posted by Devil1976:Hmm... All of us going out of point for the topic? ~WAHahaha...> " -
go with the flow brudder...
i'd like to refer to my past post, that the reason we share, at least for me, is simply because we know this message we hold is important. like i said, we christians are sinners too, we do wrong things, blah blah. but we are given grace and forgiveness, tats all, this is a big cave of gold that we have found, there are so much of it, we want to share with all those we love, relatives, parents, friends..
of course its again, up to you to receive this gold or not. but at least listen, and consider with sincere hearts, listen to the facts revolving the message, the truth, then consider for yourself. -
Erm, i'm afriad i'll have to disagree your point on the diff. between Christians and regular ppl, that Christians are given grace and forgiveness.Originally posted by dumbdumb!:...at least for me, is simply because we know this message we hold is important. like i said, we christians are sinners too, we do wrong things, blah blah. but we are given grace and forgiveness, tats all, this is a big cave of gold that we have found, there are so much of it, we want to share with all those we love, relatives, parents, friends...
While what you said is not totally wrong (so i'm not disputing what you said), i would like to point out other people also have the grace and forgiveness from God! A simple example would be the conversion of Saul to Paul, remember? Before Saul was christianed, he was persecuting the Christ followers as per Bible. This passage proves that Saul was not a Christian before (he was a Pharisee), but Christ forgave and graced Saul in the conversion and oversaw him to the journey to Peter (Kephas) etc.
If you're still not convinced, there are many people who are converts to the faith, and only by the grace and forgiveness from God were these lay people able to convert and praise God. For if you're not filled with the Spirit (Holy Spirit, God), you will not know God, and you will not believe in Him.
My point: God's forgiveness, grace and His divine mercy extends to all (really, everyone, even Christians), His plan of salvation extends to all, so that we all may one day come to Him.
To add, while i can't prove if non-believers, or believers but doesn't do good can still go up to heaven, there is always a need to evangelize. And it is important that Christians truly have a solid ground on theology (which emcompass Bible wisdom, logic, love of God etc), so as to minimize the misunderstandings other people have on the faith.
Cheers -
Originally posted by wa|th3r:
exactly, before saul received Jesus Christ, and became paul! He was a murderer, the turning point was when he realise that Jesus is indeed what He claimed to be, the way, the truth and the life, and that no one comes to the Father, except through Him john 14:6. because pharasees are the teachers of the Law, and they didn't believe that the messiah, was Jesus. too blinded by self righteousness i guess.
Erm, i'm afriad i'll have to disagree your point on the diff. between Christians and regular ppl, that Christians are given grace and forgiveness.
While what you said is [b]not totally wrong (so i'm not disputing what you said), i would like to point out other people also have the grace and forgiveness from God! A simple example would be the conversion of Saul to Paul, remember? Before Saul was christianed, he was persecuting the Christ followers as per Bible. This passage proves that Saul was not a Christian before (he was a Pharisee), but Christ forgave and graced Saul in the conversion and oversaw him to the journey to Peter (Kephas) etc.
If you're still not convinced, there are many people who are converts to the faith, and only by the grace and forgiveness from God were these lay people able to convert and praise God. For if you're not filled with the Spirit (Holy Spirit, God), you will not know God, and you will not believe in Him.
My point: God's forgiveness, grace and His divine mercy extends to all (really, everyone, even Christians), His plan of salvation extends to all, so that we all may one day come to Him.
To add, while i can't prove if non-believers, or believers but doesn't do good can still go up to heaven, there is always a need to evangelize. And it is important that Christians truly have a solid ground on theology (which emcompass Bible wisdom, logic, love of God etc), so as to minimize the misunderstandings other people have on the faith.
Cheers [/b]
and i agree, grace is given to all, but not everyone chose to receive the grace.
it is also written, in romans 10:14How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them?
i'm not exactly sure what you meant in the whole post, i presume u meant that there is no difference between believers and non believers, and God loves all, saves all, there is no need to share and stuff like that. correct me if i misunderstood you.
but that verse above shows that yes, there is a need, if what you say is true, everyone is saved by default, that verse would contradict itself, which is impossible.
but i do agree that God loves all, and is WILLING to save all. but not all wants to be saved. but how can they hv a chance to make a choice, unless they are given one first? therefore, how can they call on the One they hv not believed in, and how can they even start believing without hving heard of Him, and how can they hear.. if no one speaks to them.
-
This girl looks like a downright b|tch!!Originally posted by Evil Clown: -
Originally posted by summerain22:this girl looks like a downright b|tch!!
-
issit? haha did she trash the person taking her photo??
-
well i guess, the point we stand is clear, that there is no solid fact, and proof that pastors, abuse their religion for the purpose of sex. not real churches anyway. its a malicious rumour with no basis of fact. but i agree that some ppl do join churches for the opposite sex.Originally posted by Devil1976:Hmm... All of us going out of point for the topic? ~WAHahaha...> "
well, in the end, God judges our actions, He is just, and everyone will hv to account to Him what they did with their lives, and whether they did right or not.
but some ppl initially join for the wrong reason, then they found and came to know God, and their focus changed. so in the end. we cannot be the judge of the ppl whu join churches, what is their motives, cuz we cannot read their hearts, and we cannot know the future. only God knows. only Jesus knows. -
Then again, if you say is not a church, why people still goes to "these" churches for worshipping or for their morning services?Originally posted by dumbdumb!:well i guess, the point we stand is clear, that there is no solid fact, and proof that pastors, abuse their religion for the purpose of sex. not real churches anyway. its a malicious rumour with no basis of fact. but i agree that some ppl do join churches for the opposite sex.
well, in the end, God judges our actions, He is just, and everyone will hv to account to Him what they did with their lives, and whether they did right or not.
but some ppl initially join for the wrong reason, then they found and came to know God, and their focus changed. so in the end. we cannot be the judge of the ppl whu join churches, what is their motives, cuz we cannot read their hearts, and we cannot know the future. only God knows. only Jesus knows. -
dumbdumb.
On your point saying that Saul converted to Paul before he became Christian, my memory serves to tell me that it is after he had converted. But i wish not to argue on this.
"but not everyone chose to receive the grace." I think reject or the inability to recognize or acknowledge the grace would be better replacements. God gives the grace, freely as we all know it, and He gives it at His own will and we received it, whether or not we know it. Far too often we fail to see this, and even more often we take it for granted. What God gives is something we cannot reject. If you still would like to dispute my statement, i won't comment.
"i'm not exactly sure what you meant in the whole post, i presume u meant that there is no difference between believers and non believers..." That is correct, from my point of view, everyone receives their own share of grace, just as Christ said, when everyone was paid the same amount regardless of the hour they had started working.
"but that verse above shows that yes, there is a need, if what you say is true, everyone is saved by default, that verse would contradict itself, which is impossible." Here you have clearly misunderstood. What i had said was "His plan of salvation extends to all..." I didn't say by word or intended that everyone is saved by default, but "his plan of salvation". I used to the word plan, so that statement means that God plans to save, which is in future tense, meaning that God plans to save but the salvation has yet to past but is ongoing and will continue until the second coming of Christ. But your statement "everyone is saved by default", your sentence is in past tense, showing that you thought that i meant God had already saved, which is untrue, not what i had said.
And in my post in response to mCbaobao, i had even stressed the need to evangelize, at least with some groundwork done by missionaries so as minimize misunderstandings of the faith. So to your last paragraph "but i do agree that God loves all, and is WILLING to save all. but not all wants to be saved. but how can they hv a chance to make a choice, unless they are given one first? therefore, how can they call on the One they hv not believed in, and how can they even start believing without hving heard of Him, and how can they hear.. if no one speaks to them." This I agree to all; the missionaries are to spread the faith, so as faith accompanied by good works may lead to salvation. -
it is however a very depressing fact that in some churches, there are very weak pastors who were not effective enough to preach to the lay the real meaning of church attendance. But, even with the best preachers around, people still attend church for variety of reasons. And here in our topic, there are indeed people who attend church for sex and for their own sick and selfish desires, which directly contradicts the meaning of church attendance and defiles the reputation of the church.
It is obvious that in the first pages of the forum, there are already ppl admitting that they had relations with churchgoers. In additions, ppl also attend church to pray for 4D, exams etc, and according to first post, pastors were said to have sex with the congregations (this, i don't know is happening). Despite all these happenings, what these ppl are doing is definitely not what the Bible or any righteous religion (i didn't just say church) preaches. It is just that while the great religions preaches righteousness, the so-called believers still commit heinous/mortal sins, and defiles the name of the religion they belong to.
My point: While the great religions preaches on the importance of peace, chasitity, purity, morality, righteousness, there will always be ppl remain as believers, yet continue their un-religiosity, their sinful behavior that stain the name of the religions. -
-
this goes deeper. what we know, the world is not just physical, it is also spiritual, after all God is a spiritual being. i believe you, wierd70 have heard about satan, the arch angel who fell in sin and became satan, who came to kill, steal and destroy all God holds dear.Originally posted by weird70s:Then again, if you say is not a church, why people still goes to "these" churches for worshipping or for their morning services?
why do these ppl still go to these churches? because they are either fooled into thinking these churches are orthadox, or they go with ill intentions already. either way, it doesn;'t matter to satan, he can pose as an angel of light or any religion, as long as he gets what he wants, ppl to accompany him in hell. -
I seriously think you guys should stop,
It's really useless to speak so much. Really cos everyone is speaking at different level and of different experiences.
Different emphasis onto the word.
It's unfair to argue on this issue, it's just putting Christianity in a difficult spot.
-
Originally posted by wa|th3r:
nono, i meant that saul, received Christ, and became paul, i meant that b4 he knew Christ, he was saul, who was a murderer.. but it got all jumbled up.
dumbdumb.
On your point saying that Saul converted to Paul [b]before he became Christian, my memory serves to tell me that it is after he had converted. But i wish not to argue on this.
"but not everyone chose to receive the grace." I think reject or the inability to recognize or acknowledge the grace would be better replacements. God gives the grace, freely as we all know it, and He gives it at His own will and we received it, whether or not we know it. Far too often we fail to see this, and even more often we take it for granted. What God gives is something we cannot reject. If you still would like to dispute my statement, i won't comment.
"i'm not exactly sure what you meant in the whole post, i presume u meant that there is no difference between believers and non believers..." That is correct, from my point of view, everyone receives their own share of grace, just as Christ said, when everyone was paid the same amount regardless of the hour they had started working.
"but that verse above shows that yes, there is a need, if what you say is true, everyone is saved by default, that verse would contradict itself, which is impossible." Here you have clearly misunderstood. What i had said was "His plan of salvation extends to all..." I didn't say by word or intended that everyone is saved by default, but "his plan of salvation". I used to the word plan, so that statement means that God plans to save, which is in future tense, meaning that God plans to save but the salvation has yet to past but is ongoing and will continue until the second coming of Christ. But your statement "everyone is saved by default", your sentence is in past tense, showing that you thought that i meant God had already saved, which is untrue, not what i had said.
And in my post in response to mCbaobao, i had even stressed the need to evangelize, at least with some groundwork done by missionaries so as minimize misunderstandings of the faith. So to your last paragraph "but i do agree that God loves all, and is WILLING to save all. but not all wants to be saved. but how can they hv a chance to make a choice, unless they are given one first? therefore, how can they call on the One they hv not believed in, and how can they even start believing without hving heard of Him, and how can they hear.. if no one speaks to them." This I agree to all; the missionaries are to spread the faith, so as faith accompanied by good works may lead to salvation.
[/b]God gives the grace, freely as we all know it, and He gives it at His own will and we received it, whether or not we know it.
i hv to disagree. it depends what kind of grace we are talking here, grace, on the whole, just simply means, something we do not deserve, for example, a rich spoilt brat being rich, he doesn't deserves being rich, all he does is make others lives miserable. but God still blesses him with wealth, for whatever reasons i dunno, thats grace, being alive, thats grace too, having food, thats grace.
but what i am talking about, is grace of salvation. that is given to all, freely, but not everyone accepts it, there is no biblical backing to say that we can unknowingly receive salvation through Christ. and Yes, we can reject the salvation,
i know of neighbours, who know everything we had told them. but they don't want to, for some reason or another.
in the bible, there was an incident, where a rich man approached Jesus and asked what must he do to attain eternal life, Jesus said, obey all the commandments (Jesus knew no one can do this, its impossible but its also true, by obeying these commandments would be reaching God's standard of perfect holiness)
and the young fellow said he did all those (claiming that he is perfect, and sinless, which the bible says that anyone who claims to hv no sin, has lied, which is a sin itself)
so Jesus simply pointed to him, to leave behind his money and follow Him. the young man was dejected cuz he could not bear to leave his cash behind, which means he could not put God first, which is the first commandment.
you see? the rich fellow knows about salvation, following Jesus, but he just couldn't follow through. and he rejected the salvation.That is correct, from my point of view, everyone receives their own share of grace, just as Christ said, when everyone was paid the same amount regardless of the hour they had started working.
that parable simply means that as long as that person knows and receives personally the Lord and saviour, he can be at his deathbed and receive, salvation is still his. at that time, Jesus was talking to the people and the pharasees, that salvation isn't just by works, the previous 2 workers were unhappy cause they felt that they deserved more for working longer hours than the third worker.
someone may be a believer for 40 years, and someone may just be a believer for 2 mins. both die same time. they both have salvation. afterall God is the one giving the salvation, who are we to say we deserve more?
there isn't any biblical backing to say that non-believers hv that grace of salvation, but it is written that Jesus Christ is the way, the truth and the LIFE!
and no one has any excuse at all to say they do not know.
if what you say is true, that nonbelievers hv the grace of salvation, why did the man in luke who died, went to hell? he didn't believe, that was why, even though he knew, because they hv the law and the prophet, whereas now, the people now, have the gospel of salvation and the missionaries. no one has any excuse. -
Whatever you believe...? I can't stop you from thinking... Just like you can't stop me from fantasizing..?Originally posted by dumbdumb!:well i guess, the point we stand is clear, that there is no solid fact, and proof that pastors, abuse their religion for the purpose of sex. not real churches anyway. its a malicious rumour with no basis of fact. but i agree that some ppl do join churches for the opposite sex.
well, in the end, God judges our actions, He is just, and everyone will hv to account to Him what they did with their lives, and whether they did right or not.
but some ppl initially join for the wrong reason, then they found and came to know God, and their focus changed. so in the end. we cannot be the judge of the ppl whu join churches, what is their motives, cuz we cannot read their hearts, and we cannot know the future. only God knows. only Jesus knows. " -
BINGOOriginally posted by M©+square:I seriously think you guys should stop,
It's really useless to speak so much. Really cos everyone is speaking at different level and of different experiences.
Different emphasis onto the word.
It's unfair to argue on this issue, it's just putting Christianity in a difficult spot. 
" -
dumbdumb
Strong vibes.
I believe you didnt read at all what i wrote about salvation, my last second paragraph. I mentioned that the plan of salvation extends to, do u still not understand what the word "plan" means?
I can see that you strongly defend for your faith, and i am speaking for you, not against you. I ask you to please re-read what we had written on, and my words parallels to what you said. Never did i say salvation is by good works only, never did i say non-believers have that grace of salvation, and never did i say that we cannot reject salvation. You are putting words in my mouth, let me remind you.
Salvation is a form of grace. This sentence means that, literally salvation is a form of grace, thus salvation is only one of the graces ppl receive. In my earlier paragraphs, when i said grace, it means general graces, blessings that God gives, like riches even to the undeserving. In my later paragraphs, my "grace" meant salvation. I regret and apologize for not being specific enough. So the grace i had mentioned in addition to the parable meant salvation, if i was clear enough.
Again, i stress that i didn't say non-believers have the "grace of salvation" (which i would like to quote using your own context), i said "plan", not "already have". In my line "God's plan of salvation extends to all", i mean to say that God plans to save every men and women. This line also means that we are going to saved, only if we allow ourselves to be, therefore meaning that we can reject, salvation that is.
Please, please read the what i said before making any disagreement or dispute. Because you did not actually disagree what i had said but what you thought i had said, just as i had mentioned that what i had written parallels to yours. Recognize who is for you, who is against you.
Cheers. -
Hi! You sound very Singaporean! ("It's really useless to speak so much.")Originally posted by M©+square:I seriously think you guys should stop,
It's really useless to speak so much. Really cos everyone is speaking at different level and of different experiences.
Different emphasis onto the word.
It's unfair to argue on this issue, it's just putting Christianity in a difficult spot.
While what you said holds certain truths, the true spirit of argument is to unveal the truth (argument is not to dispute or disagree, or it'll be called a dog-fight), especially here in this topic where we talk about people using religion for sex, which is a very sensitive topic here.
Denominational reason puts relativity on facts and "truths" into the picture, therefore making it difficult and unfair to "argue". You are right here in your context.
But here we are dealing with morality, specifically using religion for sex. I believe denominations and the great religions unanimously agree that morality is definite. (Social norms hold that morality is relative. For example, sex before marriage was once seen as taboo, but is now accepted, or more accepted than past. But remember we are dealing with religion, not social norms)
Here, dumbdumb and I both see that immoral sexual behavior is not of Christian teachings, and therefore the churches do not condone such, despite people still attending church for the wrong reasons (in our topic here, sex). Here i also would like to add that I strongly believe that the great religions like Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Islam preaches on righteousness and seek to purify [the followers from sin], and would therefore not preach encouraging immoral sexual behavior, much less use religion as a lure for sex. [although people still do it]
My point: Religions preaches on righteousness, thus do not doctrinally allow itself (religion) to be used by its members for their sexual gains. -
Yes, everyone is born with sin because of Adam. But, let's put it this way, even if it were not so, we would still have sin anyway because every human being sins. Even by the act of lying, whoever claims never to have told a lie before is already lying!
Suppose i agree that everybody is born with a sin,and by believing in God we will get salvation but like u said, "Even by the act of lying, whoever claims never to have told a lie before is already lying!" then i can assume that christians do lie too. Then who can really say that they can get salvation if they repeatly sin though they say they believe in God.I understand from dumbdumb! that true repentance is what neccessary from salvation but who can say that they will not ever sin after they believe in Christianity. -
Frankly speaking, even as i speak, i have to admit do not really and truly understand what salvation is. Basically in my understanding and what that has been taught, is into heaven.Originally posted by Simpl3guy:...who can say that they will not ever sin after they believe in Christianity.
This is a very neutral yet very true topic. Christians, are no different from other people, except religion, are sinners. Dumbdumb was basically saying that everyone are sinners. As the saying goes "The very body the makes great saints, makes great sinners" This line means that great saints and sinners have the same body as we all do, the human body. Yet here, given the same body, we have sinners as well as saints.
I'll skip explaining true repentence, but speak on what i think you're saying here. It is the sincerity to repent that i think is what God looks into, the heart, something that we cannot see spiritually speaking. And ultimately it is God himself who judge who is to be saved, who is not to be.
As a reminder: Don't be mistaken that Christians are entitled to salvation; this is nonsense and lead to complacency. I say this because there are missionaries who said that to join their faith, we'll be saved, and if not, we'll go to Hell. God is the one who's the true judge of salvation, not us, not anyone, not missionaries, not pastors, not bishops, not even the Pope. -
Originally posted by wa|th3r:
1. Let me end this short. In case i get carried away and indulge into the discussion.
Hi! You sound very Singaporean! ("It's really useless to speak so much.")
While what you said holds certain truths, the true spirit of argument is to unveal the truth (argument is not to dispute or disagree, or it'll be called a dog-fight), especially here in this topic where we talk about people using religion for sex, which is a very sensitive topic here.
Denominational reason puts relativity on facts and "truths" into the picture, therefore making it difficult and unfair to "argue". You are right here in your context.
But here we are dealing with morality, specifically using religion for sex. I believe denominations and the great religions unanimously agree that [b]morality is definite. (Social norms hold that morality is relative. For example, sex before marriage was once seen as taboo, but is now accepted, or more accepted than past. But remember we are dealing with religion, not social norms)
Here, dumbdumb and I both see that immoral sexual behavior is not of Christian teachings, and therefore the churches do not condone such, despite people still attending church for the wrong reasons (in our topic here, sex). Here i also would like to add that I strongly believe that the great religions like Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Islam preaches on righteousness and seek to purify [the followers from sin], and would therefore not preach encouraging immoral sexual behavior, much less use religion as a lure for sex. [although people still do it]
My point: Religions preaches on righteousness, thus do not doctrinally allow itself (religion) to be used by its members for their sexual gains.[/b]
2. On your fourth para onwards notice how the 'sexual morality' discussion became topic about salvation and believing in God. Out of point. Way way off tangent....
3.You know why?
It's because non believers and believers speak different language.
You speak your language which they don't comprehend...hence your experiences and teaching could not be told and be made understood to them.
4. You may have covered every single area about this topic and have convinced people that this generation should not condone to these immoralities. Esp to clear the name of Christian churches.
My question is, when will the church of God be totally clean of accusations? It's only when God comes and all man will be silent before Him.
5. The language of Christianity is The WALK.
If the walk is so important, should we discount on explaining and talk about the word? God forbid! Josh Mcdowell and other speakers did great job in defending the word and even proving the word to be true. Can you?
6. Lastly i'll end with a statement.
One word of grace, one act of love could speak a thousand words.
Let's walk the talk. -
wa|th3r: you may wish to meet up and we can discuss more on it.
