purpose of eternal hell

[n9newunsixx5150]

What can possibly be the purpose of eternal suffering? Can someone exlain that to me?

If it is true that we have but one chance to rectify ourselves in this single, short-span, material incarnation then what is the purpose of existing beyond that body? Suffering exists only as a reminder that we do not belong here. If we take away the purpose of that reminder, i.e. to knock some sense into the conditioned souls, then the suffering becomes pointless. Who dare says that God takes pleasure in the pointless suffering of others?

 

[Hutch]

True - eternal suffering doesn't make any sense. You can imagine a damned soul admitting, after 100 million years - 'OK, I've learnt my lesson'. Besides, doesn't God forgive all?

 

[n9newunsixx5150]

I believe that the concept of punishment for one's sins became obscured into what we have today in the Christian religion. I also see that obscurity as a tactic for keeping less intelligent people from foolish procrastination. You see, even in the Vedas there are instances where it speaks of the possibility of perpetually residing in hell. Now, if you take those instances by themselves then it appears that the Vedas promote eternal hell. On the other hand, the Vedas also speak of the possibility of coming again to the human form of life wherein one has the chance of returning to the spiritual world, which is free from suffering. Now, that human form may not come right away, or even very soon at all. One may waste this human life and then not get another chance for many billions or trillions of years. Who knows. So the idea is not to waste this human incarnation.

Some Christians I have spoken with believe that the hellbound soul only exists in hell for some time and then ceases existing altogether. The problem with this is that if God knows that this soul would end up not existing, then why was he created in the first place? Then again, you could ask a similar question about the eternally suffering soul.

The Chrstians I have encountered do not understand what it means to sin nor what is means to suffer. I ask this to all the Christians here: What makes a sin, a sin?

 

[EDJ]

^FIFTY FIRST OF ALL YOU HAVE TO KNOW WHAT THE DEFINITION OF A SIN IS.

 

[Mr. Samos]

True - eternal suffering doesn't make any sense. You can imagine a damned soul admitting, after 100 million years - 'OK, I've learnt my lesson'. Besides, doesn't God forgive all?

Well once you are damned eternally, you cannot be forgiven, as far as I know. You can do ANYTHING you want, and God will forgive you, but if you ever deny the holy spirit, you are eternally damned.

This is why religion can suck on my big fat ball sack.

 

[ESCOBAR]

its a joke............ like the easter bunny

 

[n9newunsixx5150]

^FIFTY FIRST OF ALL YOU HAVE TO KNOW WHAT THE DEFINITION OF A SIN IS.

Okay. Is not a sin that which goes against God?

So my question is more specific. Let me use an example: sex life. Why is sex life considered a sin outside of marriage? What is the actual difference between having sex in or outside of marriage?

 

[carlos]

i be thinkin sometimes there is eternal hell and u'll suffer forever and ever because this life thats here now is REAL..we are human beings think bout it...and another thing i also think about how there isn't hell because god forgives everyone and he puts em in the middle or sum shit kinda llike bootcamp the hardest shit u'll ever take in death and if u can't pass den u'll remain in there until u do..thats my 2 centz

 

[BaSICCally]

an eternal hell is a good marketing strategy to keep the Christian church in buisness. As is the war on terror to keep ignorant Americans in check.

 

[EDJ]

N9NEWUNSIXXX5150,

YOU STRESSED, "Is not a sin that which goes against God?"

YEAH, IT gOES AgAINST WHAT HE'S ALL ABOUT, BUT THAT STILL DON'T DEFINE WHAT SIN IS.

THEN YOU STRESSED, "Why is sex life considered a sin outside of marriage?"

BECAUSE IT gOES AgAINST THE THE DIVINE WILL AND PLAN.

THEN YOU STRESSED, "What is the actual difference between having sex in or outside of marriage?"

IN MARRIAgE YOU MADE THAT COMMITTMENT AND SEX WAS MADE SO MANKIND WILL REPRODUCE. EVERYTHANg FALLS IN PLACE. OUTSIDE OF MARRIAgE IT IS INCOMPLETE.

 

[n9newunsixx5150]

N9NEWUNSIXXX5150,

YOU STRESSED, "Is not a sin that which goes against God?"

YEAH, IT gOES AgAINST WHAT HE'S ALL ABOUT, BUT THAT STILL DON'T DEFINE WHAT SIN IS.

Then what defines sin?

THEN YOU STRESSED, "Why is sex life considered a sin outside of marriage?"

BECAUSE IT gOES AgAINST THE THE DIVINE WILL AND PLAN.

Could you tell me what that plan is?

THEN YOU STRESSED, "What is the actual difference between having sex in or outside of marriage?"

IN MARRIAgE YOU MADE THAT COMMITTMENT AND SEX WAS MADE SO MANKIND WILL REPRODUCE. EVERYTHANg FALLS IN PLACE. OUTSIDE OF MARRIAgE IT IS INCOMPLETE.

I don't think we disagree here. Sex is meant for reproduction with the intent of properly raising a child. Marriage life is an arrangement for that purpose. Some Christians I have spoken with believe that in married life a man and a woman have license to have as much of any type of sexual gratification with each other as they desire. So this is why I ask what the difference is between sex life in marriage and outside. Those who believe married life is a license for unrestricted sexual gratification do not understand religious principles.

So what I am trying to get at is that what is considered a sin is such because it creates an illusion of bodily attachment which then creates an ignorance of our eternal relationship with God. That is the very basis of sin. So enjoying ourselves in any capacity without following God's prescriptions (i.e. having sex when married and to procreate) is sinful.

 

[EDJ]

N9NEWUNSIXX5150,

YOU STRESSED, "Then what defines sin?"

IT'S DEFINITION IN THE HEBREW AND gREEK TEXTS.

THEN YOU STRESSED, "Could you tell me what that plan is?"

NO. LOOK IT UP. LOL J/K. (gOD'S) ORIgINAL PLAN WAS FOR MAN TO BE FRUITFUL AND MULTIPLY IN A PARADISAIC EARTH. TO SUBDUE IT AND PROSPER. MARRIAgE IS A SYMBOLISM TO gOD THAT YOU BECOME ONE WITH YOUR SPOUSE.

THEN YOU STRESSED, " Some Christians I have spoken with believe that in married life a man and a woman have license to have as much of any type of sexual gratification with each other as they desire."

AS LONg AS IT DON'T gO AgAINST gODLY PRINCIPLES. PERSONALLY THAT'S THEY PERSONAL BUSINESS.

THEN YOU STRESSED, "Those who believe married life is a license for unrestricted sexual gratification do not understand religious principles."

HOW'S THAT? I UNDA-STAND THAT MARRIAgE SHOULDN'T BE JUST FOR THAT PURPOSE, OR USED FOR THAT PURPOSE. BUT HOW DON'T PEOPLE UNDA-STAND RELIgIOUS PRINCIPLES IF THEY BELIEVE THEY CAN PLEASE EACH OTHA SEXUALLY AND THEY MARRIED?

THEN YOU STRESSED, "So what I am trying to get at is that what is considered a sin is such because it creates an illusion of bodily attachment which then creates an ignorance of our eternal relationship with God."

SO WHAT YOU SAYIN' IS THAT SIN IS A PHYSICAL ACT WHICH AFFECTS US SPIRITUALLY, THUS NEgATIN' KNOWLEDgE, AND WATERIN' DOWN OUR PERSONAL RELATIONSHIP WITH OUR CREATOR?

THEN YOU STRESSED, "That is the very basis of sin."

HOW'S THAT? WE HAVEN'T EVEN TOUCHED THE DEFINITION OF SIN.

THEN YOU STRESSED, "So enjoying ourselves in any capacity without following God's prescriptions (i.e. having sex when married and to procreate) is sinful."

MAN, IT SEEMS LIKE YOU TRYIN' TO TWIST SHIT. OVER SELF-INDULgENCE AND IgNORIN' gODLY PRINCIPLES IS ONE THANg, BUT TO SAY THAT ENJOYIN', DESIRIN', AND PLEASIN' YOUR SPOUSE IS NOT (gOD'S) WILL, IS TRYIN' TO PUT A TWIST ON SOMETHIN'.

 

[n9newunsixx5150]

N9NEWUNSIXX5150,

YOU STRESSED, "Then what defines sin?"

IT'S DEFINITION IN THE HEBREW AND gREEK TEXTS.

Which is...?

THEN YOU STRESSED, "Could you tell me what that plan is?"

NO. LOOK IT UP. LOL J/K. (gOD'S) ORIgINAL PLAN WAS FOR MAN TO BE FRUITFUL AND MULTIPLY IN A PARADISAIC EARTH. TO SUBDUE IT AND PROSPER. MARRIAgE IS A SYMBOLISM TO gOD THAT YOU BECOME ONE WITH YOUR SPOUSE.

God arranged this world because we had/have desires to be fruitful, but God's plan for us is actually something different. Of course, we have to understand that God has nothing to gain because He is devoid of nothing. This universe was created for us, the conditioned souls. Simultaneously, God gives us a chance to quit our being fruitful and return to His transcendental service. The discipline of married life is a means to an end, not an end itself. The end, our constitutional position, is in the loving devotional service of the Lord.

THEN YOU STRESSED, " Some Christians I have spoken with believe that in married life a man and a woman have license to have as much of any type of sexual gratification with each other as they desire."

AS LONg AS IT DON'T gO AgAINST gODLY PRINCIPLES. PERSONALLY THAT'S THEY PERSONAL BUSINESS.

Godly principles means: sex with the primary intent of procreation and the proper raising of a child. Note that I said, 'primary intent'. This means that the pleasure is still there. I am not saying that sex pleasure should be completely avoided. It should be secondary, that's all. Marriage is a spiritual discipline.

THEN YOU STRESSED, "Those who believe married life is a license for unrestricted sexual gratification do not understand religious principles."

HOW'S THAT? I UNDA-STAND THAT MARRIAgE SHOULDN'T BE JUST FOR THAT PURPOSE, OR USED FOR THAT PURPOSE. BUT HOW DON'T PEOPLE UNDA-STAND RELIgIOUS PRINCIPLES IF THEY BELIEVE THEY CAN PLEASE EACH OTHA SEXUALLY AND THEY MARRIED?

That is because there is no difference between having unrestricted sexual gratification with a "girlfriend" or with a "wife". If you're constantly taking shelter in the vagina, you're sure as hell not taking shelter in God. It doesn't matter if you're "married" or not. This marriage thing becomes a meaningless label.

THEN YOU STRESSED, "So what I am trying to get at is that what is considered a sin is such because it creates an illusion of bodily attachment which then creates an ignorance of our eternal relationship with God."

SO WHAT YOU SAYIN' IS THAT SIN IS A PHYSICAL ACT WHICH AFFECTS US SPIRITUALLY, THUS NEgATIN' KNOWLEDgE, AND WATERIN' DOWN OUR PERSONAL RELATIONSHIP WITH OUR CREATOR?

You could put it that way I suppose. I'd say that sin is acting as though we were the creators, controllers and enjoyers when the fact is that God is THE creator, controller and enjoyer of all. Our position is in His service. He is the enjoyer and we are the enjoyed. This does not mean that we are condemned from any type of enjoyment. We enjoy through our reciprocation with God. By being the enjoyed we also become enjoyers. Now, those souls who desire to take their own enjoyment are called conditioned souls. That is our current disease. Religious principles are meant to lead us to our real position.

THEN YOU STRESSED, "That is the very basis of sin."

HOW'S THAT? WE HAVEN'T EVEN TOUCHED THE DEFINITION OF SIN.

Have we not? I am still waiting for you to tell me what sin is according to your understanding.

THEN YOU STRESSED, "So enjoying ourselves in any capacity without following God's prescriptions (i.e. having sex when married and to procreate) is sinful."

MAN, IT SEEMS LIKE YOU TRYIN' TO TWIST SHIT. OVER SELF-INDULgENCE AND IgNORIN' gODLY PRINCIPLES IS ONE THANg, BUT TO SAY THAT ENJOYIN', DESIRIN', AND PLEASIN' YOUR SPOUSE IS NOT (gOD'S) WILL, IS TRYIN' TO PUT A TWIST ON SOMETHIN'.

It is understandable that a man will desire and enjoy his wife (and vice versa) to some degree but the idea is that marriage should be used primarily for raising a family. God prescribes that we take our pleasure along with the responsiblity of raising a child. That is the discipline of married life. Now, even married life is renounced. One can either renounce it while they are still alive or they will be forced to renounce it at death. Family attachment is also a form of bondage. I believe Jesus actually speaks highly of those who leave family for the Lord's sake. I don't remember the exact verse(s) but maybe you know what I am talking about.

 

[n9newunsixx5150]

EDJ

One more thing...
Is there a particular reason you type all your 'g's lowercase?

 

[EDJ]

N9NEWUNSIXX5150,

YOU STRESSED, "Which is...?"

SIN LITERALLY MEANS A "MISSIN' OF THE MARK", ACCORDIN' TO SCRIPTURE. (gOD) HIMSELF SETS THE MARK WHICH WE IS TO REACH. MISSIN' THAT MARK IS "SIN", WHICH ALSO IS UNRIgHTEOUSNESS, OR LAWLESSNESS. (ROM. 3:23; 1 JOHN 5:17; 3:4) SIN IS N-E-THANg NOT IN HARMONY WITH (gOD)'S PERSONALITY, STANDARDS, WAYS, AND WILL(ALL WHICH ARE HOLY). THIS MAY INCLUDEWRONg CONDUCT, FAILURE TO DO WHAT SHOULD BE DONE, UNgODLY SPEECH, UNCLEAN THOUgHTS, OR DESIRES OR MOTIVES THAT ARE SELFISH. THE BIBLE ALSO DIFFERENTIATES BETWEEN INHERITED SIN, AND WILLFUL SIN, BETWEEN AN ACT OF SIN OVER WHICH A PERSON IS REPENANT AND THE PRACTICE OF SIN.


THEN YOU STRESSED, "God arranged this world because we had/have desires to be fruitful, but God's plan for us is actually something different."

WHAT IS HIS PLANS THEN?

THEN YOU STRESSED, "Of course, we have to understand that God has nothing to gain because He is devoid of nothing."

OR LOSE FOR THAT MATTER. (gOD) DIDN'T MAKE SEX FOR HIM. HE MADE IT FOR US. WHY IS IT SO ENJOYABLE? SEX DON'T HAVE TO BE ENJOYABLE TO CAUSE AN OFFSPRINg.

THEN YOU STRESSED, "This universe was created for us, the conditioned souls. Simultaneously, God gives us a chance to quit our being fruitful and return to His transcendental service. The discipline of married life is a means to an end, not an end itself. The end, our constitutional position, is in the loving devotional service of the Lord."

MAN, EVERY MAN HAS HIS NEEDS AS DOES A WOMAN. IF WE WERE PERFECT, THAT SHIT WOULDN'T FADE WITH AgE. I SAY YOU CAN DO BOTH. YOU TWISTIN' IT TO MEAN THAT WE JUST SAY "FUK SEX, I'M WITH THE LORD NOW", LIKE CUZZ IS AN ANTI-SEX FREAK.

THEN YOU STRESSED, "Godly principles means: sex with the primary intent of procreation and the proper raising of a child. Note that I said, 'primary intent'. This means that the pleasure is still there. I am not saying that sex pleasure should be completely avoided. It should be secondary, that's all. Marriage is a spiritual discipline."

ALSO PLEASIN' YOUR PARTNER AND EXPRESSIN' THAT LOVE. DON'T FORgET "LOVE".

THEN YOU STRESSED, "That is because there is no difference between having unrestricted sexual gratification with a "girlfriend" or with a "wife"."

HOW YOU FIgURE? WHAT IS YOUR DEFINITION OF "UNRESTRICTED" IN THIS INSTANCE?

THEN YOU STRESSED, "If you're constantly taking shelter in the vagina, you're sure as hell not taking shelter in God. It doesn't matter if you're "married" or not. This marriage thing becomes a meaningless label."

I BEg TO DIFFER. YOU SOUND CLICHED. BEST BELIEVE IF I'M IN THE VAgINA I AIN'T JUST gONNA SHELTER. MY SHIT'LL TURN SOFT. I'M gONNA STRETCH THAT MUTHA-FUKA. BUT THAT'S BESIDE THE POINT. MY POINT IS THAT IT DO MATTER IF YOU'RE MARRIED. IT AIN'T ONLY A LABEL. BUT I gET YOUR POINT THAT YOU SHOULDN'T JUST BE LAYIN' UP ALL LAZY IN THE SNAPPER, WHEN YOUR #1 PRIORITY IS TO DO THE CREATOR'S WILL.

THEN YOU STRESSED, "You could put it that way I suppose. I'd say that sin is acting as though we were the creators, controllers and enjoyers when the fact is that God is THE creator, controller and enjoyer of all. Our position is in His service. He is the enjoyer and we are the enjoyed. This does not mean that we are condemned from any type of enjoyment. We enjoy through our reciprocation with God."

I SEE WHERE YOU gETTIN' AT BUT THAT AIN'T WHAT SIN IS.

THEN YOU STRESSED, "By being the enjoyed we also become enjoyers. Now, those souls who desire to take their own enjoyment are called conditioned souls. That is our current disease. Religious principles are meant to lead us to our real position."

YOU MAKE IT SEEM LIKE WE HAVIN' AN ORgY WITH (gOD). BUT YOU CAN'T LET THAT DISTRACT YOU FROM SERVIN' (gOD). DESIRES ARE MANY. TEMPTATIONS ARE MANY.

THEN YOU STRESSED, "Have we not? I am still waiting for you to tell me what sin is according to your understanding."

NOPE. READ UP TOP.

THEN YOU STRESSED, "It is understandable that a man will desire and enjoy his wife (and vice versa) to some degree but the idea is that marriage should be used primarily for raising a family."

YOU DON'T USE MARRIAgE. MARRIAgE IS NOT A TOOL. IT'S A COMMITTMENT. EVERYTHANg ENTANgLES AROUND THAT BOND. THAT'S WHY IT SHOULDN'T BE BROKEN.

THEN YOU STRESSED, "God prescribes that we take our pleasure along with the responsiblity of raising a child. That is the discipline of married life. Now, even married life is renounced. One can either renounce it while they are still alive or they will be forced to renounce it at death."

MARRIAgE IS SUPPOSED TO BE SACRED AND NOT TO BE RENOUNCED. YOU gOIN' BY TODAYS STANDARDS AND DEFINITION AND TRY TO TWIST IT LIKE IT'S CONDONE BY (gOD).

THEN YOU STRESSED, "Family attachment is also a form of bondage. I believe Jesus actually speaks highly of those who leave family for the Lord's sake. I don't remember the exact verse(s) but maybe you know what I am talking about."

SOMETHIN' ABOUT PREACHIN' THE gOOD NEWS?

THEN YOU STRESSED, "Is there a particular reason you type all your 'g's lowercase?"

IT'S A "H"OOD THANg, YOU WOULDN'T UNDA-STAND. I'VE BEEN DOIN' IT FOR YEARS AND WRITIN' MY OWN ALPHABET AND NUMBERIN' SYSTEM SO TO SPEAK. I'M SURPRISED YOU NEVA NOTICED OR NEVA SEEN ME BREAK IT ON DOWN FOR THE CLUELESS.

 

[n9newunsixx5150]

Response to EDJ part one

N9NEWUNSIXX5150,

YOU STRESSED, "Which is...?"

SIN LITERALLY MEANS A "MISSIN' OF THE MARK", ACCORDIN' TO SCRIPTURE. (gOD) HIMSELF SETS THE MARK WHICH WE IS TO REACH. MISSIN' THAT MARK IS "SIN", WHICH ALSO IS UNRIgHTEOUSNESS, OR LAWLESSNESS. (ROM. 3:23; 1 JOHN 5:17; 3:4) SIN IS N-E-THANg NOT IN HARMONY WITH (gOD)'S PERSONALITY, STANDARDS, WAYS, AND WILL(ALL WHICH ARE HOLY). THIS MAY INCLUDEWRONg CONDUCT, FAILURE TO DO WHAT SHOULD BE DONE, UNgODLY SPEECH, UNCLEAN THOUgHTS, OR DESIRES OR MOTIVES THAT ARE SELFISH. THE BIBLE ALSO DIFFERENTIATES BETWEEN INHERITED SIN, AND WILLFUL SIN, BETWEEN AN ACT OF SIN OVER WHICH A PERSON IS REPENANT AND THE PRACTICE OF SIN.

I don't disagree with this definition. Nor do I see how my explanation of sin is any different.

THEN YOU STRESSED, "God arranged this world because we had/have desires to be fruitful, but God's plan for us is actually something different."

WHAT IS HIS PLANS THEN?

I explained this later in my last post. Although God creates this universe because we have desires to lord it over the material nature, His plans are for these conditioned souls to return to His association.

THEN YOU STRESSED, "Of course, we have to understand that God has nothing to gain because He is devoid of nothing."

OR LOSE FOR THAT MATTER. (gOD) DIDN'T MAKE SEX FOR HIM. HE MADE IT FOR US. WHY IS IT SO ENJOYABLE? SEX DON'T HAVE TO BE ENJOYABLE TO CAUSE AN OFFSPRINg.

Well, God can't lose because there is no place nor any entity to whom He could lose.
I am a transcendentalist. I follow that everything which exists in the material world is a reflection of the spiritual world. The enjoyment that exists in God's kingdom is the real substance whereas the enjoyment of this world is like a temporary, distorted reflection. Anyway, thats just a bit of background information of where I am coming from. Enjoyment exists in this world because this world is created according to the conditioned living entities desires to enjoy. Real knowledge means understanding that this worldly enjoyment is our perversion. Our real enjoyment is in the spiritual world with God. So spiritual discipline means renouncing our perverted desires. That is why it is said that this universe is created for two reasons: to fulfill the conditioned souls desires and to give them an opportunity for returning to God's association.

THEN YOU STRESSED, "This universe was created for us, the conditioned souls. Simultaneously, God gives us a chance to quit our being fruitful and return to His transcendental service. The discipline of married life is a means to an end, not an end itself. The end, our constitutional position, is in the loving devotional service of the Lord."

MAN, EVERY MAN HAS HIS NEEDS AS DOES A WOMAN. IF WE WERE PERFECT, THAT SHIT WOULDN'T FADE WITH AgE. I SAY YOU CAN DO BOTH. YOU TWISTIN' IT TO MEAN THAT WE JUST SAY "FUK SEX, I'M WITH THE LORD NOW", LIKE CUZZ IS AN ANTI-SEX FREAK.

Attachment to sex life is what perpetuates material existence. Actually, sex life is the strongest force in the universe. It is the same principle that binds the atoms together. It is not expected that everyone just up and renounces sex life all together. That is why sex life has a purpose beyond mere enjoyment. The thing that gets me is how we create drugs for old people in order for them to be able to have sex. If a person is still attached to sex life at the age of 70 then he/she has wasted their human life.

THEN YOU STRESSED, "Godly principles means: sex with the primary intent of procreation and the proper raising of a child. Note that I said, 'primary intent'. This means that the pleasure is still there. I am not saying that sex pleasure should be completely avoided. It should be secondary, that's all. Marriage is a spiritual discipline."

ALSO PLEASIN' YOUR PARTNER AND EXPRESSIN' THAT LOVE. DON'T FORgET "LOVE".

I am not forgetting love. Though, what you have conceived as love may not be what I am talking about. I believe love is transcendental. What we typically call love, i.e. between a man and woman, is lust. Lust is the love propensity contaminated by material attraction. So even the basis of lust is love, but pure unadulterated love is the reciprocation between the soul and God. Just like I exlained before, the real substance of love is in the spiritual world where everything is centered on God. A man and a woman feel that they are in love, and it is in fact love that drives that feeling, YET, because that attraction is based on their material existence it is covered by the modes of material nature. Thus it is lust. At least, this is the transcendentalists distinction between love and lust.

THEN YOU STRESSED, "That is because there is no difference between having unrestricted sexual gratification with a "girlfriend" or with a "wife"."

HOW YOU FIgURE? WHAT IS YOUR DEFINITION OF "UNRESTRICTED" IN THIS INSTANCE?

What is the practical difference between having sex merely for enjoyment with a girlfriend or having sex for mere enjoyment with a so-called "wife"?

 

[n9newunsixx5150]

Response to EDJ part two

THEN YOU STRESSED, "If you're constantly taking shelter in the vagina, you're sure as hell not taking shelter in God. It doesn't matter if you're "married" or not. This marriage thing becomes a meaningless label."

I BEg TO DIFFER. YOU SOUND CLICHED. BEST BELIEVE IF I'M IN THE VAgINA I AIN'T JUST gONNA SHELTER. MY SHIT'LL TURN SOFT. I'M gONNA STRETCH THAT MUTHA-FUKA. BUT THAT'S BESIDE THE POINT. MY POINT IS THAT IT DO MATTER IF YOU'RE MARRIED. IT AIN'T ONLY A LABEL. BUT I gET YOUR POINT THAT YOU SHOULDN'T JUST BE LAYIN' UP ALL LAZY IN THE SNAPPER, WHEN YOUR #1 PRIORITY IS TO DO THE CREATOR'S WILL.

Why does it matter if you're married if you think that sex life in marriage is of the same nature as it is when with a girlfriend? It is understandable, especially in this age, that even married couples will have sex for enjoyment from time to time. I can't imagine that if I were married I would be able to resist my wife's sexual advances. I am not that strong. If I was then I wouldn't even contemplate marriage and would perhaps take up renounced life. The difference with me is that I understand what is the goal. I don't turn the fact that I may have sex for pleasure with my future wife into a black and white issue. I don't think, "well, since I had sex for pleasure this one time, I might as well say fuck it and indulge". Everyone has to progress spiritually and not everyone is coming from the same level.

THEN YOU STRESSED, "You could put it that way I suppose. I'd say that sin is acting as though we were the creators, controllers and enjoyers when the fact is that God is THE creator, controller and enjoyer of all. Our position is in His service. He is the enjoyer and we are the enjoyed. This does not mean that we are condemned from any type of enjoyment. We enjoy through our reciprocation with God."

I SEE WHERE YOU gETTIN' AT BUT THAT AIN'T WHAT SIN IS.

How is it not? If sin means missing the mark, and God is that mark, then to consider oneself to be the creator, controller and enjoyer is simply an illusion that causes us to miss that mark. Being God conscious cent percent should be what all humans strive for. Like I said, it is understandable that we have some degree of attachment along the way, but we should first understand the ideal and not try to justify our sinful ways given that we slip up at times.

THEN YOU STRESSED, "By being the enjoyed we also become enjoyers. Now, those souls who desire to take their own enjoyment are called conditioned souls. That is our current disease. Religious principles are meant to lead us to our real position."

YOU MAKE IT SEEM LIKE WE HAVIN' AN ORgY WITH (gOD). BUT YOU CAN'T LET THAT DISTRACT YOU FROM SERVIN' (gOD). DESIRES ARE MANY. TEMPTATIONS ARE MANY.

It is not that we're having an orgy with God. It is just that material pleasure in general is a perverted reflection of the pure spiritual pleasure we have with God. The sex pleasure potency is also in the spiritual world but it is of a completely different and transcendental nature.

THEN YOU STRESSED, "It is understandable that a man will desire and enjoy his wife (and vice versa) to some degree but the idea is that marriage should be used primarily for raising a family."

YOU DON'T USE MARRIAgE. MARRIAgE IS NOT A TOOL. IT'S A COMMITTMENT. EVERYTHANg ENTANgLES AROUND THAT BOND. THAT'S WHY IT SHOULDN'T BE BROKEN.

Or, marriage is a commitment/bond/discipline that one uses to progress in spiritual life. The rule of thumb goes that if it is a temporary arrangement then it is (or should be) a means to an end. How can it be otherwise? Our eternal relationship is with God.

THEN YOU STRESSED, "God prescribes that we take our pleasure along with the responsiblity of raising a child. That is the discipline of married life. Now, even married life is renounced. One can either renounce it while they are still alive or they will be forced to renounce it at death."

MARRIAgE IS SUPPOSED TO BE SACRED AND NOT TO BE RENOUNCED. YOU gOIN' BY TODAYS STANDARDS AND DEFINITION AND TRY TO TWIST IT LIKE IT'S CONDONE BY (gOD).

I am not at all going by today's standards. In today's standards a man or woman renounces their spouse so they can go find another spouse. I do not condone this type of behavior. Renouncing married life means renouncing married life. A man may be very fond of his wife but the fact is that eventually this attachment will be renounced, either by one's will or forcefully in the form of death.

THEN YOU STRESSED, "Family attachment is also a form of bondage. I believe Jesus actually speaks highly of those who leave family for the Lord's sake. I don't remember the exact verse(s) but maybe you know what I am talking about."

SOMETHIN' ABOUT PREACHIN' THE gOOD NEWS?

Please explain.

THEN YOU STRESSED, "Is there a particular reason you type all your 'g's lowercase?"

IT'S A "H"OOD THANg, YOU WOULDN'T UNDA-STAND. I'VE BEEN DOIN' IT FOR YEARS AND WRITIN' MY OWN ALPHABET AND NUMBERIN' SYSTEM SO TO SPEAK. I'M SURPRISED YOU NEVA NOTICED OR NEVA SEEN ME BREAK IT ON DOWN FOR THE CLUELESS.

I'd noticed it before but never said anything.

 

[sirreal]

so if you dont do exactly as the (pope,priest,minister,preacher,etc) says, eternal hell is what you'll face
(scary medeival mind control)

 

[Anaheim*Rob]

A sin is an emotionally gratifying NATURAL human act turned into a mind torture(guilt) to make followers of the church to feel bad and have to repent. My advise is to abandon this way of thought and commit the act(so called sin) as long as it don't hurt anybody that hasn't hurt you in any way. So indulge people you only live once , here and now.

 

[n9newunsixx5150]

^^^Only if you are convinced that their is no God to Whom we are eternally related and dependent. Otherwise, sin constitutes ignorance of that eternal relationship and ignorance perpetuates material suffering. In this case, we are very much hurting ourselves and others. I think what people should do first is to analyze what is self instead of presuming as though the self is the body. That is the mistake.