Women and porn

Originally Posted by Minion

The display of pain (wailing, gnashing) is indicative of an emotional/spiritual pain rather than a physical one.

I'm pretty sure if it was supposed to be indicative of emotional/spiritual pain it wouldn't have been described as a burning lake of fire. You aren't cozeying up to this symbolic interpretation because the idea of God inflicting real pain makes you a little uncomfortable, are you? Interpretation based off of personal desires isn't a good thing.

Originally Posted by MetheGelfling

But if atheists are wrong, isn't it better to be safe than sorry? And too, is it really all that bad to try to abide by a code of morality based on the idea of "love your neighbor as yourself" and believe in the idea that a supreme being is going to hook you up forever in the afterlife?

Oh, I forgot that Christianity is the only popular western religion that involves God/s and love in a way which condemns all other faiths to hell.

Originally Posted by Minion

Leviticus is Old Testament. What you're reading is Mosaic Law, which was "fulfilled" (read: made obsolete) by Jesus. Not sure why you guys love the OT books so much, but it would be cool if you read the whole book sometime.

Made obsolete? That's your opinion. There were many early christians called Ebionites (Peter very likely being one of them, Gal 2:14) who thought you needed to convert to Judaism and follow their laws in order to be saved by Christ.

Originally Posted by Minion

Also, the "if you X, you go to hell" thing is actually not quite accurate. The OT Jews didn't have a hell or even an afterlife, actually. Sounds crazy, but go look for explicit mention of the afterlife in the OT the likes of which you can easily find in the NT.

This is also very debatable, especially considering how the Bible says Enoch was swooped up into Heaven while he was still alive. There was someone else in the OT who was taken up while alive too I believe, but I forget who. Please don't make such sweeping generalities as if they're airtight facts when you (hopefully) know they aren't.

Oh, and if the Christian heaven does exist, porn stars aren't getting in, or gay people, or anybody non-Christan (2/3rds of the world) regardless of how you live your life. But then, I don't believe in the Christian heaven.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Originally Posted by Minion

while making assertions yourself with the other, e.g. who gets into heaven, about the lake of fire (which I'm certain is a literary device)

As for who gets into heaven, I stressed the Christian heaven, as is believed by the majority of the Christian leadership and followers. If you disagree with my assessment of who gets in then you're not mainstream Christianity.

As for the lake of fire, John was being shown visions by God. This negates the notion that John was specifically using those words and/or ideas as a clever literary device. Unless, of course, you want to call bullshit on his claim that visions were shown to him by God (1:10-11).

Originally Posted by snowie0wl

Although I don't think a situation in which every participant is happy is an immoral thing, I'm suprised no one would find paid penetration worse than tastefully done nude photography.

This reminds me of a news story a while ago about a female teacher who had nude/semi-erotic pictures of herself posted on the internet by way of her artistic lover, and she ended up getting suspended from school because another teacher found the website they were on and reported it. Conservatives were saying how it was immoral while Liberals were saying she has every right to express herself in this way. It'll be interesting to see whether God's a conservative or liberal, if one exists.

There's nowhere I can't reach.