/christ/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

oops porn

Too soon. I'm not talking jack about this topic for six months. And when I do, you'll all hate me for it.

>>704

Of all the Christian folks on this chan, you'd probably be the most receptive to what I usually argue about this topic.

Thing is, I know it angers my brothers when I do so, hence all the hate on /christian/ for my little person, and I don't want to take a chance on this here yet.

But I do tend to think that it's virtually impossible to consider the topic a sin unless you start looking at every enjoyable thing as a sin too. That's about as far I as I want to go now.

I wholeheartedly agree about the "not-fapping" thing becoming more important than God for many Christians. Asexual people need not comment.

That said, even the Catholic Church as these soothing words about it:

"To form an equitable judgment about the subjects’ moral responsibility and to guide pastoral action, one must take into account the affective immaturity, force of acquired habit, conditions of anxiety, or other psychological or social factors that lessen or even extenuate moral culpability."

When you're at the point where your entire mental world is nothing but female bodies and your cock all over and in them, and the only way to get rid of these is to get rid of a load, you're most likely under what these words cover.

I don't know how others do, but I cannot pray my rosary if all I can think of is a woman, whether it is a sin or not. Hunger pains while fasting may not be such a problem, because it's just pain, but cravings for flesh do take one's mental focus.

Let it be stated that I did not argue for anything here, merely described a situation.

>Freedom from self-censorship and karmadrama is only one logout away.

I'm more concerned about not antagonising people too much. I could hardly believe the reactions of people on /christian/. It was as though they lived sheltered lives and couldn't deal with adversity. As if I was an actual threat to their faith. I say, if something is so insecure, perhaps it is built on sand. Pointing out the sand shouldn't make me hated by Christians.

I tend to think it's a process of hating me for what they hate in themselves. I can't explain such anger otherwise, and the spurious notion that they did it "to save" my soul is the most hypocrite bullshit I ever heard. My favourite people here also disagree with me about this, but they were able to do so in a friendly and brotherly way. If you really want to save someone, you don't try to make them go away. Comments on /christian/ confirm that many are very happy that I have left; so much for saving my soul. Hypocrites.

>>689

> I have been doing pretty well lately, I have managed to not to fap for 4 months now last time,

I don't want to argue, but I can discuss your case. After 4 months, did you not lose any libido? Was the desire still as strong?

From experience, if nothing is done, I'll just shoot loads in my sleep. The body does need to regenerate its seeds, as we evolved to shoot loads all the time, like women evolved to be pregnant all the time (which we can solve now with the bar, which makes a woman's body think it's pregnant, alleviating period pains and being generally more healthy; socially, it wouldn't be convenient to be pregnant all the time, but that's what our biology demands, that's how we are supposed to behave).

And yeah, contraception is no problem to me. I want to have children and I am preparing a home for them. Being a responsible parent means I ensure a good life for them rather than act irresponsibly and ensure a shit life of social welfare for them, leeching out on other people and teaching them all the wrong things. I don't live in a tribal society with polygamy, I do not have a team of women at my service, so I can't do it the old way. Just like long hair is no longer considered a sin, despite Paul's words about it, so with contraception, which was never considered a sin, despite ancient possibilities to do so (Onan taught us that pulling out was a known option, yet Onan wasn't slain for this, either, but for not respecting an engagement).

>>715

I fear to ask if this is even real, because it just might. Although it's probably for other medical conditions.

>>718

I think it is a very well elaborated trolling website.

I will try making this into a banner though. I like the no self-rape kek ccatch phrase

>>718

I think it is a very well elaborated trolling website.

I will try making this into a banner though. I like the no self-rape kek ccatch phrase

http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/anti-masturbation-cross

found this. seems I'm right

>>719

found this. seems I'm right

http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/anti-masturbation-cross

>716

>Maybe the structure that cannot stand needs a good shaking before they get to rely too much on it. I don't want to build such a homosex community like that here.

So I should be able to question everything without worrying someone might get butthurted. We agree on this, then.

>You are a faggot and a liar.

I am not and I don't lie. Show how I lied.

>You are concerned about your persona more than you realise

My persona is important in that it personifies ideas and arguments. That's why it matters, and I do realise that, but that's as far as it goes. Humanising a board via names isn't something I find useless, especially in small communities.

>Which is not possible when there's no identity.

Of course it is. I got that hate long before I got that name, mind you. Just try it yourself: go argue for the same thing without a name and see what happens. What happens is you'll get the same treatment, and you might even get called OoLF in disguise for it.

>What is more you yourself reject the solution for most of the problems you spoke about including the clever mental overrides for things like:

Because these are not the problems I want to solve. The problem isn't me having a name, it is how people behave. Painting over dirt doesn't remove the dirt.

/christian/ will probably remove tripfagging soon enough.

I ended up getting a name because I enjoyed talking with familiar tripfags and I got tired of telling them which anon I was every time; a name makes this simpler.

The very idea of a lack of identity is very unchristian when you think about it, since it absolves you of online responsibility. With a name, there are consequences, which I prove very obviously. I could do without, as you suggest, but I think it's a question of honesty. Since these topics are serious to me, I want to be serious, and a name ensures that I am held accountable for my words. It's a measure of discipline for me. I know too damn well that without this, I would behave badly and the rage would be let out. I'd start acting like the haters on /christian/. Think about it, a name makes it more likely for us to behave in a civil manner.

Blame the guilty party. Now tell me why I am a liar. Genuinely curious.

>>726

>Ok but I claimed that this has happened because there was identity involved, namely the trip. One of the fuctions of anonymity is to countaract this.

It is not. Before I had a name, people would simply say, "You must be that same anon who said so-and-so on this other thread."

Identity doesn't matter. Anonymity has its uses, but names also have their uses. It's good when you want to be a /b/tard and fuck around, but when you want long-term conversations about important stuff, personal stuff, a name will help. People get to know you and you get to know people. If you are here to have a sense of community amongst Christians, a name will help. I have no Christian brothers around me, that is why I have a name and why I wish more had one. This isn't /b/.

>I was banned because I did

Confirming what I suggested. The name wasn't the reason.

>You can't change the way people behave.

Say this to Our Lord. Of course you can, but even if you can't at a particular moment in time, it doesn't mean you have to put up with it forever.

>Tripcodes have a very specific and needed function, the problem is faggots who don't understand that function's purpose and misuse it (like you), removing the function is overkill.

Enlighten us on the proper function of tripfags. I use it exactly how I intended to use it; same with other tripfags.

>Have you thought about making your version of /aniki/?

I don't even know /aniki/, sorry.

>Where do you think we are?

Most definitely not on /b/. You should catch up on that fact. You're not even on 4chan anymore, my friend. You are now on a Christian board.

>If name is the only thing stopping you then you're a faggot.

Perhaps, but that changes nothing to the use of the name. With anonymity, I will give way to negative behaviour, because I'll be able to. Name keeps me in check because I have a reputation at stake. Without a name, it's like nothing one does here counts to any degree. I've been nameless for long enough. It's time we build something more serious if our aspirations are truly religious. Think of the good use of names instead of only the bad, which, to you, is not much really.

>You're so much more concerned about your identity. Reading your post makes it obvious that you don't handle the hate you get very well.

So my "lie" is what exactly? I was more concerned about not antagonising people than not getting my feelings hurt. I stand by that as it is the truth.

>Reading your post makes it obvious that you don't handle the hate you get very well.

Is it? Point out where I failed to handle the hate, because I do believe I've remain very courteous and logical to everyone who hated on my ass. I didn't respond to insults with insults of my own. You saying "it's obvious" doesn't cut it. I definitely handled the hate far better than they handled the arguments I put forth.

If you're going to deny this, I'll need less abstract arguments, I'll need quotes and facts, if you can provide those, even paraphrasing.

>>730

>Say this to Our Lord. Of course you can, but even if you can't at a particular moment in time, it doesn't mean you have to put up with it forever.

You are not our Lord. You can influence someone to change his decision or outlook but you can't force him in any morally acceptable fashion. To clarify: while jailing people that harm society is ok it does not mean anyone has the right to lets say mind control them into not wanting to do the crime.

>It's time we build something more serious if our aspirations are truly religious.

One board I used to love already fell captive to pursposefaggotry, even if it's not that apparent. There's also one other board I never really enjoyed that much that fell to it likewise but one that you'll be more familiar with. Tell me what catholicmod tried to do? If I understand his motivation correctly he tried to make the board clean place for believers he deemed true believers.

>I stand by that as it is the truth.

And I don't beileve you based on what I can understand from your words but I don't think I can proove it beyond all shadow of doubt. If you're being honest I'm sorry, if not then I'm not.

>Confirming what I suggested. The name wasn't the reason.

Community didn't ban me, janitor did.

>Is it? Point out where I failed to handle the hate, because I do believe I've remain very courteous and logical to everyone who hated on my ass. I didn't respond to insults with insults of my own. You saying "it's obvious" doesn't cut it. I definitely handled the hate far better than they handled the arguments I put forth.

This is not what I was insinuating. What I meant is that you're hurt when people hate you to a point you start talking about it in little to entirely unrelated topics. You don't want to be hated but when I offer you a solution like "drop the trip" you don't want to do it. You want to maintain your identity no matter what but this is not a place for identity.

>>783

>Because they were faggots and most likely normies too.

Doesn't matter. They might also be absolutely average anons.

>Just as most let's say /v/irgins play vidya most of the board is comprised of Christians (at least self-declared ones). If I'm by any way wrong on that I'd like to request BO's opinion on the matter so I'll know whether it's time to go or not

Indeed, everyone here is Christian. Some have more doubts than others but everyone here identifies as a Christian. That said, I welcome curious atheists and others; if there's one useful thing you can do online, it is to convert the Godless.

>Which is a missuse because as we already know we are on anonymous imageboard. Tripcode is meant to confirm your identity. Let me anticipate your response:

Anticipate this: I will continue using my trip and there's nothing you can do about it. I have more reasons to use it than not.

>Tripfags are not unanimously hated by Anonymous without a reason.

That reason being that anon finds comfort in being an indistinguishable drop of piss in an ocean piss and you know it. That allows one to say whatever, post whatever, and always begin each post with a clean slate. Tripfags take the highway and this reminds anons of that.

And yes, a trip makes it so that giving relevant personal information makes more sense. You'll remember my words more than you will those of an anon amongst anons.

>If that is what you wish for then make such a board. All like-minded people will follow.

Correct me if I am wrong but it was mostly tripfags who ensured the birth of this board. If only anons had been banned and no known names, nobody would have become as angered, because everyone is anon, nobody is anyone, and you don't know what each anon said, but you will remember what Northern Baptist said in his own name. Another very important reason for trips to exist. I think as soon as you spend a lot of time on a board and contribute a lot, having a name is a good thing. Again, this is not /b/, this isn't even 4chan. Things change, people change, and I have changed too.

>You are not our Lord.

Our Lord tried to change the way people behaved and it worked. That's all I'm saying. I never suggested I was your Lord.

> If I understand his motivation correctly he tried to make the board clean place for believers he deemed true believers.

Neither here nor there. My objectives tend to be about preaching to the Godless via a board that is more in tune with chan culture than /christian/, which does a bad job of preaching. It's not about cleansing the heretics, as you know, since all of us here have been called heretics before. Lame strawman you made there.

>And I don't beileve you based on what I can understand from your words but I don't think I can proove it beyond all shadow of doubt.

Well give me a chance then. My honesty goes without saying, it doesn't come to my mind to have to prove it, but if there's anything I can do to prove it, hit me. I am being honest. What kind of cunt would I be if I weren't and for what purpose? Do you too believe that I am some demon typing on a computer?

>Community didn't ban me, janitor did.

I stay out of there mostly because of the community, not so much because of janitors and moderation, even though it is not to my liking.

>What I meant is that you're hurt when people hate you to a point you start talking about it in little to entirely unrelated topics.

It's always related. It may be connected to other people's behaviour or /christian/'s general attitude, or whatever, but it's always relevant, otherwise why would I mention it?

>You don't want to be hated

Consider this: if I dropped the trip and went back to /christian/ and kept quiet about what Ancient Greek really means, I'd be welcome like a brother. You know what this tells me? That I am liked as long as they don't know who I am. That is no kind of appreciation any sane person can enjoy. Would you like it? It's like being black under your KKK robe, being "loved" by everyone else around you. I'd rather be hated for who I am than liked for who I am not (inb4 Cobain).

>You want to maintain your identity no matter what but this is not a place for identity.

Identity matters in terms of faith. I am also here for spiritual guidance and this requires a name to be properly done. I will learn much more from Discipulus and the other Catholic person who posts images instead of a trip if they can connect my posts and constitute a person out of it. If this can get me closer to God via better information and guidance, I don't care about anon hate of the tripfags. This reason alone is enough for me to keep the name. Other reasons have to do with others, but let me post…

(cont.)

>>783

> in which you made response about yourself more than about the thread topic.

Just a word about this. Yes, I did. This was intended as humor for those who are familiar with the drama. I have done the same on /christian/ as an effort to lighten up the mood and cause some keks. I can't force you to get giggles if you don't want to, but stop assuming that everyone I do is geared towards smelling my own farts and loving it.

Lastly, one of the reasons for the name is for preaching. As I roam the wilderness of the Interbutts, I will give my name as a reference for those who are thirsty for God and want to know more. I'll tell them my name and they can come here and read my posts or summon me for more questions. It has a very practical purpose in this case. Atheists seldom find Christians they like and with whom they want to discuss more. If getting a trip means I can better help the Godless, then by God I will tripfag as hard as I can. You will not convert anyone by staying cozy in anonymity. I do not blame you for not preaching (if you don't), but this is one of the few things I do well in Christianity. I suck at having faith, I suck at choosing a Church, I suck at getting together with Christians IRL, but I do not suck at speaking for the Lord and making people change their minds about Christ. This is why identity matters.

If you think I am lying and am merely trying to rationalise around just so I can keep my tripfaggotry, then I don't know what to tell you. I don't feel famous, friend. I'm a disliked trip by virtue of being one plus I am disliked by virtue of what I actually say. Who wants that kind of fame? If I enjoyed it, I'd have stayed on /christian/ for more binz drama in which I get banned and banned and come back for more, and argue against the masses and all that jazz. I did not do that. You said yourself I didn't like being hated, and I don't. But this trip is necessary for dozens of reasons, many of which I mentioned to you. Laugh if you want but I see this board as a truly religious community and brothers have names. There's always /b/ for anons, and interests don't require personalities much, but something like, in my opinion, does. If I want to get anyone and get anyone anyone, individuality counts.

I hope you understand, if not, I am sorry.

>>717

>psychology

>not a pseudo-science

lel

Watch Brainwashing

>>704

Not even. It's just bad for you.

I'm starting to consider it merely un-pleasing to God rather than a full-blown sin, it harms man more than God, and while it may be one man's stumbling block, it may also be a simple nuisance for another. Please try and convince me otherwise, because despite coming to this conclusion, I'm still wary of its impacts.

>>8507

It doesn't really sound like there's anything you can do to ham God, in any of the christian sects. Its always on the man, and sexual sin of all kinds is usually pretty serious.

Be that as it may, I think if you can find several good logical, testable reasons why the behavior is bad for you specifically (forget about others, its just about you), and on top of that your religion says its bad, you probably ought to try and not do it.

But, heck, if only for entertainment, yeah, I will try and argue that masturbation is at best not a sin and at worst a minor sin, let's see what happens. What texts do you consider valid, just the Bible?

>>8510

I suppose just the Bible, but given the amount of wiggle room Sola Scriptura gives when isolated from the other Solae and doctrines, the works of esteemed Theologians and the Church Fathers would help give some insight to the Scripture. To be honest though, I haven't read much else aside from the Bible.

>>8511

Hmm… I tried to come up with something but all I could think about were arguments from ignorance. Basically, since Jesus never said anything about it, and many OT things don't apply anymore, that masturbation is fine. That's not a very strong argument. I'm gonna go out on a limb, mostly from memory, and say that the church fathers would be mostly against it, if they mention it. Can't really see any of those guys advocating for masturbation, so many of them being turbo-monks and high-degree ascetics.

This thread though, you could try and find OoLF's arguments which were all about the NT. Basically, lust is the real sin, not masturbation, which is correct in a way but only if you can effectively divorce lust from masturbation.

OoLF claimed to be able to do this, and nobody can prove him wrong, really. I was never willing to accept this belief, even now I don't think you can avoid what religious people call lust when you fap. IF this sounds convincing to you, you could risk it.

My rule of thumb? If it feels wrong, it probably is. If you have to jump through all these hoops with it, is it really worth it just to fap?

>>7734

>mfw i did it again

why cant i stop

>>8526

You haven't gone far enough. Fap until you can fap no more and then you will be free my child.

I'm a porn addict on my first day of nofap

So what exactly was it that OoLF argued?

>>9225

Whatever happened to Oolf? He went from evangelizing to saying he was having doubts about Christianity and then he vanished.

>>9254

I think he just got fed up with us not accepting his beliefs, in terms of it being a constant debate, a constant struggle with no results. He used to go to other boards to preach, even /b/ or /furry/ and stuff. Its what he liked, he didn't care for casual chan bullshit.

We were pretty hard on him too, pretty much calling him a bullshit christian because he was pretty liberal compared to everyone else. Ah well, he's a nice guy, I hope he's doing well.

>>9256

>fed up with us not accepting his beliefs

what did he believe that was unorthodox?

I remember the name kicking around, but I don't recall whether I ever interacted with him

>>9266

Pretty open stance on homosexuality and sexuality in general. He'd be more inclined to think about things in the Bible as allegory than others. There's things in the Bible or about God he considered illogical or was otherwise troubled about. OT stuff especially. He didn't like the answers some people gave. Most people gave. He emphasized love as in what the modern secular world teaches rather than the "love" that gets talked about in christian image boards or fundamentalist protestant churches. I'm sure his posts are still available for perusing, down in the bottom of the catalogue.

He was here during the early days, the better days. Took a break, came back, then left again forever. Probably for the best, for him.

>>9271

He used to preach on /atheism/ too up until around a month before he left /christ/. He argued for almost 200 posts, and might have finally accepted our case.

https://8ch.net/atheism/res/9476.html

>>9273

>being this delusion

fedoras are truly the enlightenest.

>>9308

Sometimes i have to teeth my fingers to avoid masturbating, its not that easy m8

Fun fact: the most common word for masturbation in Japanese derives from Onan, the guy who God killed for removing his seed. Masturbation used to be called onanism in English.

>>9365

Interesting

japs didnt fapped before Jesus

>>9404

kek

>>9423

"Sorry kids, you have to go off to the workhouse".

This song always gets me. They have a lot of energy for people living in abject poverty.