Simple question?

Additional on jewish hell:
When they did get around to inventing one, the duration of your stay there was 12 months for most people, not eternity.

I suppose if I had to choose a definition of hell, one that appeals more to me and is just and fair, I'd have to pick the jewish version as the true one.

Quote: FrGamble

Why do you think because someone cannot marry someone they are considered unequal.

If a straight, cisgender and infertile couple marries, adopts children, raises them, etc. they're considered virtuous. If a same sex couple does the same thing, you brand them as sinful.

If that's your definition of equality, you really ought to throw away your bible and pick up a dictionary.

Quote:

I can't marry anyone.

That is a lie. You choose not to marry anyone.

Quote:

Marriage in the Church is defined as a covenant of unconditional, permanent, faithful love that is between a man and a woman that symbolizes the love of God. Two women or two men don't meet this definition. It has nothing to do with who is more equal than others. An married woman in the Church is not greater than an unmarried woman.

Yes, saying "defined" makes it all better. Let's see:

"A citizen is defined as a white, male property owner. Blacks, women and the poor don't meet this definition. It has nothing to do with who is more equal than others. A black slave is no less equal than the planter who owns him."

Quote: FrGamble

Someone who knew that we need to keep custody of our thoughts and not allow those thoughts of adultery to burrow in our minds where they become the seedbed for action.

Ok.

Let's say the man in my example habitually feels desire, in varying degrees, for people who are not his wife. He never does anything about it, and it's no struggle for him not to act on his desires.

According to this moral jerk in the Bible, he's worse than a man who cheats on his wife once and then regrets it and seeks absolution. The latter, after all, "sinned" but once and went through the spiritual red tape required for a soul cleansing. The former is a habitual adulterer, who 1) is not even sorry about it, and 2) has the audacity to think that merely because he doesn't act on his desires he's not "sinning."

Quote: Nareed

Ok.

Let's say the man in my example habitually feels desire, in varying degrees, for people who are not his wife. He never does anything about it, and it's no struggle for him not to act on his desires.
According to this moral jerk in the Bible, he's worse than a man who cheats on his wife

This is what's so sick and twisted about Christians.
When I was a hanging out with them when I was
young, the boys were in agony all the time because
they had raging hormones and thought about sex
all the time. This made them feel horribly guilty
and they were always miserable. I know it's even
worse for Catholics. Why people fall for this sin crap
is a mystery, it's just a way for the Church to control
people. If you think there's a god who gives one
whit about what your thoughts are, you need help with
your narcissist complex.

Quote: Dalex64

Additional on jewish hell:

FWIW, in some 12 years, give or take, I (mis)spent on Judaism, there was little talk of an afterlife at all, and virtually none of any kind of hell. My most vivid memory of an afterlife description was the Torah teacher in 3rd grade claiming the souls of the dead wind up in the Garden of Eden.

Quote: Nareed

If a straight, cisgender and infertile couple marries, adopts children, raises them, etc. they're considered virtuous. If a same sex couple does the same thing, you brand them as sinful.

Stop saying things as fact that are totally wrong. Your again are fighting a paper Dragon. A same-sex couple can raise children and do a virtuous and loving job. The Church is only saying that all things being equal a child should have a mother and father if at all possible.

Quote:

That is a lie. You choose not to marry anyone.

That is true. However an unmarried person is not somehow less in the eyes of God or the Church.

Quote:

Yes, saying "defined" makes it all better. Let's see:

"A citizen is defined as a white, male property owner. Blacks, women and the poor don't meet this definition. It has nothing to do with who is more equal than others. A black slave is no less equal than the planter who owns him."

Oh come on your just grasping for straws now. There is nothing inherent in citizenship that requires one to be a male or female, black or white, or a landowner. There is something inherent in men and women that they are made to come together in a special way.

Quote: Nareed

Ok.

Let's say the man in my example habitually feels desire, in varying degrees, for people who are not his wife. He never does anything about it, and it's no struggle for him not to act on his desires.

According to this moral jerk in the Bible, he's worse than a man who cheats on his wife once and then regrets it and seeks absolution. The latter, after all, "sinned" but once and went through the spiritual red tape required for a soul cleansing. The former is a habitual adulterer, who 1) is not even sorry about it, and 2) has the audacity to think that merely because he doesn't act on his desires he's not "sinning."

I don't have time right now to adequately respond right now but again I am impressed at how little you think of Christ that you would do the mental and moral gymnastics it takes to so twist and distort His words. I am utterly convinced that you and Evenbob with a proper understanding of Christianity would be so much kinder.

Quote: FrGamble

Stop saying things as fact that are totally wrong. Your again are fighting a paper Dragon. A same-sex couple can raise children and do a virtuous and loving job. The Church is only saying that all things being equal a child should have a mother and father if at all possible.

I will believe your claims the day same sex couples can marry at a Catholic church.

Quote:

There is nothing inherent in citizenship that requires one to be a male or female, black or white, or a landowner.

I'm sure a great many men from, oh, the dawn of civilization until around the mid 19th Century would take issue with your assessment.

For that matter, what is inherently male about holding all the power in the Catholic church? Otherwise some pope would push for ordaining women.

Quote:

There is something inherent in men and women that they are made to come together in a special way.

So you reduce love to a mere physical act?

Quote: FrGamble

I don't have time right now to adequately respond right now but again I am impressed at how little you think of Christ that you would do the mental and moral gymnastics it takes to so twist and distort His words.

You don't seem to like my adaptation of the Socratic method much.

Did I mention we're at war?

Quote:

I am utterly convinced that you and Evenbob with a proper understanding of Christianity would be so much kinder.

I will admit to an improper understanding of Christianity. It's the only one worth having. otherwise I might, Jove forbid, take it seriously.

Quote: FrGamble

I am utterly convinced that you and Evenbob with a proper understanding of Christianity would be so much kinder.

I have an entirely proper understanding
of Christianity. It's a total fraud and a
cult. Jesus didn't die for sins, he died
because he pissed off the wrong people.
Sin doesn't exist, so he basically died
for nothing.

By 'proper understanding' you mean a
cult brainwashing. You don't think you
mean that, but cult members are always
the last to know what's really going on.