It was about the holiness and morality of discovering sublime truth value through argumentation; you preferred to resort to fallacies.
Look you posted to troll and that is all. You brought nothing and countered nothing. You bring old threads up that others and myself beat your strange ASD ass down in and now you are simply trolling.
Why claim you are in any argument for the holiness and morality of discovering sublime truth value, if you usually resort to fallacies?
I don't you are the one who lacks understanding. Oh back on ignore because you are trolling; reported.
I've always wondered about the "lust in your heart" being the same as committing an act...well, I just don't get that. Seems like the two are very different. I just don't get it. Is that in the Bible or maybe a Catholic thing? <shrug>
Jesus was referring to all those people who are no longer really getting sexual gratification from the promiscuous culture but who support the sexually promiscuous behaviors in their attitudes. This supports the whoredom that the scriptures unrelentingly opposes as Gentile cultures and the evil that destroys families. These men are not even personally benefiting sexually from their own support of loose standards of sexual conduct that tear down the Institution of Marriage, while they see that that place set aside for sexual activity is now 50% divorce, second and third marriages after 14 years of promiscuity before marrying anyone until age @26, now.
As a Christian, especially in my studies of Early Christianity it seems to me that the church was not actually concerned very much with the survival of the human race all that much. But there are many different religions that have many different attitudes on this subject, religions I am not an expert on, religions that have different goals and different attitudes about what must be done to reach them. I don't really agree with the Early Christian interpretation I think people wanted to become saints and martyrs wayyyyyyy too much and did ridiculous things because of this. Although I'm really conflicted on this issue for other reasons as well.
When people living under the rule of a Theocracy want to change things, they need stand up and speak their minds, criticizng the authoritarian Pharaoh-like power that insists they shut up. Wha changes a theocracy is a different slant on the teachings that the power to be have been using to maintain control. So when you think of these people as martrys, put them in the same class as rebels against dictators, Freedom Fighters against Communist, traitors againstthe King, like william Tell, etc.
It's for each person to decide what it means to them. Nobody has a monopoly on deciding what the abstract meaning of a thing is. And since life and the Earth did not come with an instruction manual, there is not one single person in the entire history of human civilization who can objectively tell us what sex is "for". They can tell us what it does, which is procreation and the passing of diseases, but what it's "for" implies an intent, and intent implies design, which implies a designer, which absolutely no one has any evidence for. So when someone tries to tell you what sex is "for", tell them to shut the heck up because they are making it up in their own mind and then passing it off as fact, which is why it's mostly religious folks who attempt to do this because they are used to things being imagined and passed off as fact.
