From: owner-goths-digest@smoe.org (goths-digest) To: goths-digest@smoe.org Subject: goths-digest V3 #107 Reply-To: goths@smoe.org Sender: owner-goths-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-goths-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk goths-digest Monday, May 24 1999 Volume 03 : Number 107 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: hate.... ["Rainbow Bright" ] RE: hate.... [MICAH WESTFALL ] Re: hate.... [OneirosV@aol.com] [nrc] sex and love and tori and sex again and [Nahaliel@aol.com] Re: hate.... [KrodKnid@aol.com] bible content...christian haters should not read ["Rainbow Bright" Subject: Re: hate.... >although i'm rather late in responding, i'd like to defend christianity. >against what micah said. maybe somebody already has, i don't know. i just >read his little jot and got incensed. >actually, it was such an inane comment i'm not sure how to respond. >hm. thank you, Michele...that is rather inane. if micah hates christians then maybe his comment would be justified. (but then his comment just wouldnt be true...i'm confusing me.) but people who truly are christians (and dont just call themselves christians) should and generally DO make it a point not to hate people. after all, according to their moral code, hatred is as bad as murder, which is (guess what?) spoken against in the commandments. ever heard the phrase "hate the sin, love the sinner"? its ok to hate evil, but the person who does evil does not have to be hated. that concludes my sermon for today. pater noster qui es in caelis, etc, etc, Lori _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 18:01:22 -0400 From: MICAH WESTFALL Subject: RE: hate.... I did not say I hate christians but that christians hate everyone. @/*#$%$#*\@/*#$%$#*\@/*#$%$#*\@/*#$%$#*\@/*#$%$#*\@/*#$%$#*\@ On Sunday, May 23, 1999 2:17 PM, Rainbow Bright [SMTP:sunshine836@hotmail.com] wrote: | | >although i'm rather late in responding, i'd like to defend christianity. | >against what micah said. maybe somebody already has, i don't know. i just | >read his little jot and got incensed. | >actually, it was such an inane comment i'm not sure how to respond. | >hm. | | | thank you, Michele...that is rather inane. if micah hates christians then | maybe his comment would be justified. (but then his comment just wouldnt be | true...i'm confusing me.) but people who truly are christians (and dont just | call themselves christians) should and generally DO make it a point not to | hate people. after all, according to their moral code, hatred is as bad as | murder, which is (guess what?) spoken against in the commandments. ever | heard the phrase "hate the sin, love the sinner"? its ok to hate evil, but | the person who does evil does not have to be hated. | | that concludes my sermon for today. pater noster qui es in caelis, etc, etc, | Lori | | | _______________________________________________________________ | Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com | ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 20:32:26 EDT From: OneirosV@aol.com Subject: Re: hate.... In a message dated 5/23/99 5:03:45 PM Central Daylight Time, mrwsmile@foryou.net writes: > I did not say I hate christians but that christians hate everyone. ...And someone else pointed out that they don't. I consider myself Christian (though by no means in the traditional sense), and i don't hate much of anybody. I'm pretty apathetic, in fact, except when it comes to gross overgeneralization, then i get a bit miffed... ;) Anyway, i thought this thread died a while back... can we let it again? _____ - -FifthDream ...all around me darkness gathers, fading is the sun that shone; we must speak of other matters: you can be me when i'm gone..... Fifth Dream Today http://pages.prodigy.com/FifthDream/ featuring Switchblade Symphony, the Cure, NIN, Prick, Poppy Z. Brite, Vampyres, and Sifl & Olly. You can be all Goth some of the time, or some Goth all of the time, but you can't be all Goth all of the time... i sometimes even tried to catch her, but never even caught her name... ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 20:34:12 EDT From: Nahaliel@aol.com Subject: [nrc] sex and love and tori and sex again and hallo hallo.......... firstly: i know there are some Ears With Feet (read: toriphiles) around here. this site is of interest. i nearly peed myself laughing. and i never do silly things like that. http://members.aol.com/brandnew2u/adent.html i especially enjoyed "I'm crazeh sparkle woman! Now gimme some candeh!" :D secondly: alicelidell@hotmail.com writes: > Oh, and to close, all sex is guh-ross, with a capital GUH. This is a > personal thing, but gay sex is just as yukky as straight sex. i guess it is when you get down to really thinking of it. all that exchange of bodily fluids and whatnot. kissing's pretty gross when you think about it: "One special form of contact, which consists of mutual approximation of the mucous membranes of the lips in a kiss, has received a sexual value among the civilized nations, though the parts of the body do not belong to the sexual apparatus and merely form the entrance to the digestive tract." yum! not that i'm a huge fan of Freud or anything, but he hit that nail on the head. however, both kick serious tokhes when done with someone you love and who loves you. can't help feeling affection for it. affection is a funny word choice, no? makes me think more of ..cuddling. or something. but lovesex, to feel that electric desperate bloodrush, and i think i just stole that from a book, that one moment where your body just *stops*, it's like nothing else. everything else is just. messy and complicated. yes. anyway. now that you all know that i should probably go be embarrassed or something. :) heart, jennifer http://members.aol.com/nahaliel/ There is always a period of curious fear between the first sweet-smelling breeze and the time when the rain comes cracking down... - --Don DeLillo ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 21:35:44 EDT From: KrodKnid@aol.com Subject: Re: hate.... In a message dated 5/23/99 6:03:39 PM Eastern Daylight Time, mrwsmile@foryou.net writes: << | heard the phrase "hate the sin, love the sinner"? its ok to hate evil, but | the person who does evil does not have to be hated. >> I happen to be a Christian of sorts,but I think a lot of so called "born agains" or JFs have their Christianity a little skewed."Hate the sin,love the sinner" presupposes such a thing as sin.IOW,take Christ and the woman caught in adultry for example.According to Old Testament Mosaic Law she was supposed to be stoned to death for her "sin".Jesus said"Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." They were all convicted by their own hearts that they had committed "sin" according to the law at one time or another and none could bring themselves to righteously stone the woman.So when Christ asked her"Does no one accuse you?"and she replied "No one,Lord."He said "And neither do I accuse you..........go your way and sin no more."I often wonder if he meant "Don't do it anymore" or if he was really saying "There is no more sin.........the curse of the wrath of God is off the children of man...........for I am the antidote to the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil." This is even beyond forgiveness,since there is not even an accusation of sin for which to be forgiven.No accusation = no sin.Try to think of this the next time you are compelled to accuse some gay person of a sin for which you are generously willing to forgive them. BTW,I am glad some of you have the fortitude to stick up for Christianity:-)Some of the the pagans in here are so full of dung you can see the stink lines radiating from their posts. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 02:33:14 GMT From: "Rainbow Bright" Subject: bible content...christian haters should not read "Hate the sin,love the >sinner" presupposes such a thing as sin.IOW,take Christ and the woman >caught >in adultry for example.According to Old Testament Mosaic Law she was >supposed >to be stoned to death for her "sin".Jesus said"Let he who is without sin >cast >the first stone." They were all convicted by their own hearts that they had >committed "sin" according to the law at one time or another and none could >bring themselves to righteously stone the woman.So when Christ asked >her"Does >no one accuse you?"and she replied "No one,Lord."He said "And neither do I >accuse you..........go your way and sin no more."I often wonder if he meant >"Don't do it anymore" or if he was really saying "There is no more >sin.........the curse of the wrath of God is off the children of >man...........for I am the antidote to the fruit of the tree of knowledge >of >good and evil." This is even beyond forgiveness,since there is not even an >accusation of sin for which to be forgiven.No accusation = no sin. hmm, that is a very interesting point and one that was never pointed out to me before. however, i dont think that i personally agree with that interpretation (unless you can show me an original hebrew text that says literally that, and then i may be convinced) just because of all the rest of the Bible. when interpreting doubtful passages, one has to look at them in context with the complete work, and i dont see that theme anywhere else. i do, however, see the idea of sin and redemption and forgiveness, and all the other times Christ said "your sins are forgiven, go your way" etc. besides, if he had abolished sin at that point, all the apostles, and epistles of Paul would be pointless...and there would be no more evil in the world. and thank you for affirming me here...believe it or not, this is not an easy thing to do for me but its something i need to work on. anyone else who wants to (calmly and intelligently) discuss some issues like this, i need the practice. =) ~~Lori ~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!~!!~!~!~!~!~! "Television is a medium because it is neither rare nor well done." ~~Ernie Kovacs IM: Rasputeena _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 22:57:15 EDT From: DaliAdore@aol.com Subject: Re: hate.... In a message dated 5/22/99 11:52:24 PM Pacific Daylight Time, mrwsmile@foryou.net writes: << I personally believe that the only people who truely hate are chistians.... >> god... this was the stupidest thing i've heard in a long time... worth a good laugh though, i must say, to see somebody so pathetically wrong about something... but i guess i can see the good intentions behind your statement... i mean, sure... we have the crusades from the past and several isolated incidents of christian violence.. and i'm sure you're a preacher of "open mindedness" and tolerance... everything you believe christianity to NOT uphold... and so they're the only ones that hate... quite logical i guess, but to truly believe such a thing is pretty hypocritical on your part, ain't it? with shades of narrowmindedness on your own part, eh?? please... just think about something before you say it... it might SEEM like a logical deducement but often times you'll reflect and go "man, i just sounded like a fucken idiot" and that's what sounded like with the above quoted statement best of wishes drew ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 23:34:30 EDT From: KrodKnid@aol.com Subject: Re: bible content...christian haters should not read In a message dated 5/23/99 10:33:16 PM Eastern Daylight Time, sunshine836@hotmail.com writes: << i dont think that i personally agree with that interpretation (unless you can show me an original hebrew text that says literally that, and then i may be convinced) just because of all the rest of the Bible. when interpreting doubtful passages, one has to look at them in context with the complete work, and i dont see that theme anywhere else. i do, however, see the idea of sin and redemption and forgiveness, and all the other times Christ said "your sins are forgiven, go your way" etc. besides, if he had abolished sin at that point, all the apostles, and epistles of Paul would be pointless...and there would be no more evil in the world. and thank you for affirming me here...believe it or not, this is not an easy thing to do for me but its something i need to work on. anyone else who wants to (calmly and intelligently) discuss some issues like this, i need the practice. =) >> The Apostles and Paul et al were needed because,even though evil is abolished through Christ,belief in Christ has to come first to those who are called.Paul himself,probably the most avid homophobic of the entire Bible BTW,said that the Law of Moses came about in order to magnify sin that grace would be more abundant...............IOW,"show biz"!:-) It feels so good when I stop! Hehehehehe.......................... ------------------------------ End of goths-digest V3 #107 ***************************