quote:

ORIGINAL: Lockit

This is the trouble of taking one scripture and condensing the whole of the bible to fit that scripture. There were female leaders in the bible.

quote:

ORIGINAL: porcelaine

quote:

ORIGINAL: GoDolphins

There are a  few explanations I could think of.  My guess is that she's probably a "non-practicing" Christian.  In other words, she believes in God, believes in Jesus, but it's not really a real part of her life.  In other words, she's a Christian by name only (trying not to sound judgmental here as we all struggle with this at one time or another, and I myself have and unfortunately still do to some extent, so I definitely can't condemn her for it, but it's the truth).  I would say a lot of Christians fit this level.  Another explanation I can think of is that she's a new Christian.  There are a number of things I could think of. 

so she's a lapsed christian because she promotes financial dominance and openly states she will take their money, which they must be willing to give but that's another argument. but you see no contradiction with your presence on this site, something i'm willing to bet you couldn't go back to your local church group and discuss. single or not. so if she's lapsed, where does that leave you and others like you? cause i'm just trying to understand how one can be a spade and the other isn't.

porcelaine

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

So, in that regard, porcelaine: You lose, take off your pants.

and like David, you may go to the temple and gnash your teeth and wail and beg G-d to change his mind, G-d does not find fault in that, but once the situation is finalized, you clean yourself, compose yourself, and do obiesance.

LOL,

Rabbi David Nebbish

quote:

ORIGINAL: GoDolphins

You might should read what is actually written before trying to go after someone.  My issue with her is her general attitude towards people, not her interests.  I never once mentioned financial domination. 

Actually, while I wouldn't bring this up at church, some of the people I go to church with are probably more open-minded than a lot of people on this site. 

quote:

ORIGINAL: porcelaine

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

So, in that regard, porcelaine: You lose, take off your pants.

and like David, you may go to the temple and gnash your teeth and wail and beg G-d to change his mind, G-d does not find fault in that, but once the situation is finalized, you clean yourself, compose yourself, and do obiesance.

LOL,

Rabbi David Nebbish

since when did you start giving me orders? *grins* and unless you're paying for my trip to the mikvah i think i'll pass. of course you could sweeten the deal and build me one since you've got lots of room. *snickers*

the transforming shiksa...

porcelaine

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

And for comporting herself like Jezebel.....perhaps the third or fourth ring of hell in some humiliating auto-de-fay is appropriate.

Rabbi Mortie Gonnif, Sanhedron in conjunction with Cardinal Xerxes, Spanish Inquisition.

quote:

ORIGINAL: porcelaine

quote:

ORIGINAL: GoDolphins

You might should read what is actually written before trying to go after someone.  My issue with her is her general attitude towards people, not her interests.  I never once mentioned financial domination. 

Actually, while I wouldn't bring this up at church, some of the people I go to church with are probably more open-minded than a lot of people on this site. 

no, i read what you wrote. i just wondered if you did the same. your issue with her is moot. which is why i raised the issue about your congregation. because they'd take issue with you being here. see the problem? same issue called judgment. i couldn't care less what you do with your time. but i don't think you can assess her spirituality and relationship with G-d based on a few lines of text. much like i can't gauge yours nor do i wish to.

porcelaine

quote:

ORIGINAL: GoDolphins

No I can't assess her relationship with God, which is why I said there was more than one possibility.  I even explicitly wrote out more than one and stopped there because I could go on for a while with others.  Yes I did say that I did believe that one was probably true, which might have been a bit hasty for me to just blurt out here but it is what I would guess if I had to, but I didn't say it was for a fact then and I'm not now. 

quote:

Actually... the condemnation of many churches/creeds/socalledbeliever's has been a source of shame, guilt and many painful things to many people. Much of it I think would be an atrosity and a great big...shame on you from Christ. What mankind does in the name of Christ... whoa! There's a lot of logs in people's eyes

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lockit

Actually... the condemnation of many churches/creeds/socalledbeliever's has been a source of shame, guilt and many painful things to many people. Much of it I think would be an atrosity and a great big...shame on you from Christ. What mankind does in the name of Christ... whoa! There's a lot of logs in people's eyes!

If I understand the bolded sentence correctly, then yes: let's please separate what Christ says from what people make out of it/do with it/put on others.
 
But where do we draw the line? Shall we draw it at what Christ says, or at what the disciples/apostles/Paul say about Christ? Where is the Bible literal, where figuratively, where is it poetic, and where is it an example? Where do we draw that line with what we believe is historically correct? Do we believe any of the claims Christ makes about himself? If not, why not? It's not as easy as this seems. If we cut one thing out, why not another, and so on?

The bible says not to take on the sin of another and also that if in your heart you believe it is a sin, then it is a sin. You have condemned yourself in a sense. Teaching grace would be a very good thing and allowing for grace without taking advantage of forgiveness would have amazing results in people's lives.

E.g. slavery by white European traders who sailed from Africa west and east wards and by white slave owners was justified, based on Scripture. In the eyes of the traders/owners, it was not a sin. I beg to differ.

If you want to go by the bible and all that... you might really study it before you go into condeming yourself and what you do. Look at it not as a negative there to tell you how bad you are... but a place to find love and healing. But don't just study the bible... go by what your spirit tells you and know the grace, love and freedom of that spirit that guides you.

I like to keep it simple nowadays. I used to study it, but walked away from that, too many shoulds and musts. The paradox of condemnation and love was one I couldn't live with. So I concluded that love wins. If no sin is too big for God to forgive, then I will believe that. In that case, fear and condemnation have to leave. But there are many Christians who will condemn me to hell for saying that. And that's ok, no point in arguing. Like I wrote earlier, the 2 commandments: love God and your neighbor as yourself (that includes loving yourself). I am working on the love part, towards all three parties, in my own way. And yes, Lockit, it's spirit, and  breathing too.
 

quote:

ORIGINAL: looking4princess

I found this ad on CM from a Femdomme, actually a Findomme:

I specialize in WALLET-RAPING, ACCOUNT-DRAINING, and MONEY-SIPHONING you LOSERs! I will use, abuse, humiliate, and bring you SORRY FUCKS to your knees BEGGING FOR MORE!!

From curiosity i reviewed her profile and found that one of her Interests included christianity. I wrote to her to inquire if she did not see a disconnect between her religion and her contemptuous attitude toward others. I wondered what would jesus think? One more message exchange and the lady blocked me. LOL!

I realize i have cited an extreme contradiction with this lady’s(?) Profile. I also realize that love not contempt is a staple ingredient of most D/s relationships. But it got me to wondering if Christians and/or Jews and/or Muslims wrestled with any conflicts between their religious precepts and their BDSM desires and fantasies. I will tell you up front that i am an extreme agnostic on the issue of god and religion, so i do not harbor any conflicts regarding my “perv” persona.

I would welcome your observations.