FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: What Do You Believe About the Third Secret Of Fatima?
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
(12-21-2015, 07:43 AM)Melkite Wrote: [ -> ]I posted in one of the homosexuality threads why, but my doubts over circumcision opened up the door to all my other doubts.  I can never be part of an abrahamic faith again.  Circumcision is revolting, and even though Christianity doesn't require it, it believes God truly commanded it.  We're probably five-ten years away from foreskin regeneration.  If that's something I'm able to do, I think I'll get tatooed by my waist !קיינמאָל ווידער and if it's not something that ever comes to pass, I'll have !שמתי זין על יהוה (it's a play on words!) tattoed on my circumcision scar.

How did your intellectual doubts that HaShem may not have really commanded circumcision cause you to make this giant intellectual leap of not believing in Jesus?
And try to be concise as possible. Because you have a tendency to be overly verbose in your explanations.
(12-21-2015, 08:29 AM)Might_4_Right Wrote: [ -> ]
(12-21-2015, 07:43 AM)Melkite Wrote: [ -> ]I posted in one of the homosexuality threads why, but my doubts over circumcision opened up the door to all my other doubts.  I can never be part of an abrahamic faith again.  Circumcision is revolting, and even though Christianity doesn't require it, it believes God truly commanded it.  We're probably five-ten years away from foreskin regeneration.  If that's something I'm able to do, I think I'll get tatooed by my waist !קיינמאָל ווידער and if it's not something that ever comes to pass, I'll have !שמתי זין על יהוה (it's a play on words!) tattoed on my circumcision scar.

How did your intellectual doubts that HaShem may not have really commanded circumcision cause you to make this giant intellectual leap of not believing in Jesus?
And try to be concise as possible. Because you have a tendency to be overly verbose in your explanations�.

I'm sorry my loquacity bothers you.  God made men uncircumcised.  The foreskin is not a useless flap of skin, but actually a very intricately designed component of the penis, without which the penis cannot function properly.  It makes no logical sense that God would have created it just to dispose of it.  This is reason to doubt Yahweh.  Jesus claims Yahweh is his father.  If Yahweh is doubtful, then Jesus is doubtful by claiming connection to him.

I hope that was succinct enough.
(12-21-2015, 08:53 AM)Melkite Wrote: [ -> ]
(12-21-2015, 08:29 AM)Might_4_Right Wrote: [ -> ]
(12-21-2015, 07:43 AM)Melkite Wrote: [ -> ]I posted in one of the homosexuality threads why, but my doubts over circumcision opened up the door to all my other doubts.  I can never be part of an abrahamic faith again.  Circumcision is revolting, and even though Christianity doesn't require it, it believes God truly commanded it.  We're probably five-ten years away from foreskin regeneration.  If that's something I'm able to do, I think I'll get tatooed by my waist !קיינמאָל ווידער and if it's not something that ever comes to pass, I'll have !שמתי זין על יהוה (it's a play on words!) tattoed on my circumcision scar.

How did your intellectual doubts that HaShem may not have really commanded circumcision cause you to make this giant intellectual leap of not believing in Jesus?
And try to be concise as possible. Because you have a tendency to be overly verbose in your explanations�.

I'm sorry my loquacity bothers you.  God made men uncircumcised.  The foreskin is not a useless flap of skin, but actually a very intricately designed component of the penis, without which the penis cannot function properly.  It makes no logical sense that God would have created it just to dispose of it.  This is reason to doubt Yahweh.  Jesus claims Yahweh is his father.  If Yahweh is doubtful, then Jesus is doubtful by claiming connection to him.

I hope that was succinct enough.

Yes very succinct, thanks! I think I see the error in your logic. But first let me ask you for some further clarification. I know that you're right about the foreskin not being a useless flap of skin, but actually a designed component of the penis. But I'm not sure what you mean when you say that without it the penis cannot function properly. I only ask this because I Am circumcised and have normal penis function? Can you explain further?
I'm going to take a quick shower as I wait for your reply I will be back at my computer in about twenty minutes or so.
(12-21-2015, 09:32 AM)Might_4_Right Wrote: [ -> ]Yes very succinct, thanks! I think I see the error in your logic. But first let me ask you for some further clarification. I know that you're right about the foreskin not being a useless flap of skin, but actually a designed component of the penis. But I'm not sure what you mean when you say that without it the penis cannot function properly. I only ask this because I Am circumcised and have normal penis function? Can you explain further?
I'm going to take a quick shower as I wait for your reply I will be back at my computer in about twenty minutes or so.

No, if you're circumcised, you are incapable of proper penis function.  Your penis can still function basically, but it cannot function properly.
(12-21-2015, 09:50 AM)Melkite Wrote: [ -> ]
(12-21-2015, 09:32 AM)Might_4_Right Wrote: [ -> ]Yes very succinct, thanks! I think I see the error in your logic. But first let me ask you for some further clarification. I know that you're right about the foreskin not being a useless flap of skin, but actually a designed component of the penis. But I'm not sure what you mean when you say that without it the penis cannot function properly. I only ask this because I Am circumcised and have normal penis function? Can you explain further?
I'm going to take a quick shower as I wait for your reply I will be back at my computer in about twenty minutes or so.

No, if you're circumcised, you are incapable of proper penis function.  Your penis can still function basically, but it cannot function properly.

I see. I just have a couple of more question for further clarification. Firstly and most importantly. Is this function question of yours the primary stumbling block keeping you from returning to the Church?
(12-21-2015, 10:07 AM)Might_4_Right Wrote: [ -> ]I see. I just have a couple of more question for further clarification. Firstly and most importantly. Is this function question of yours the primary stumbling block keeping you from returning to the Church?

No, it's only the fundamental one.  It's the one that I have the most subjective interest in.  Built on top of that is that Yahweh was a genocidal, racist war god.  The OT is verifiably inaccurate, and inaccurate in ways that accuracy would be necessary to begin to believe in divine inspiration.  I reject original sin, since we know that predatory animals existed before the human species.  Death existed before we were around to sin, so the only way original sin could exist is if it were retroactive, and universal, something no other sin has ever been able to do.  And Christianity provides no greater proof for its veracity than any other religion can.  Those are the main things, everything else I think are corroborating details.  Ultimately, deism is the only worldview that I think makes sense with what man can know about the world.
Oh I see. We have a bit more work ahead of us than I first imagined. But nothing to unmanageable. I Just will have to sacrifice a bit more of my time for you. I'm willing to do that. Are you up for it?
(12-21-2015, 10:27 AM)Might_4_Right Wrote: [ -> ]Oh I see. We have a bit more work ahead of us than I first imagined. But nothing to unmanageable. I Just will have to sacrifice a bit more of my time for you. I'm willing to do that. Are you up for it?

Of course.  I'm always willing to recognize I got it wrong somewhere along the way.  Although, at this point, it might be a good idea to start a new thread if we're really going to hash all this out.
(12-21-2015, 10:32 AM)Melkite Wrote: [ -> ]
(12-21-2015, 10:27 AM)Might_4_Right Wrote: [ -> ]Oh I see. We have a bit more work ahead of us than I first imagined. But nothing to unmanageable. I Just will have to sacrifice a bit more of my time for you. I'm willing to do that. Are you up for it?

Of course.  I'm always willing to recognize I got it wrong somewhere along the way.  Although, at this point, it might be a good idea to start a new thread if we're really going to hash all this out.

Agreed. Why don't you get it started, and I'll meet you over there.
(12-21-2015, 08:53 AM)Melkite Wrote: [ -> ]
(12-21-2015, 08:29 AM)Might_4_Right Wrote: [ -> ]
(12-21-2015, 07:43 AM)Melkite Wrote: [ -> ]I posted in one of the homosexuality threads why, but my doubts over circumcision opened up the door to all my other doubts.  I can never be part of an abrahamic faith again.  Circumcision is revolting, and even though Christianity doesn't require it, it believes God truly commanded it.  We're probably five-ten years away from foreskin regeneration.  If that's something I'm able to do, I think I'll get tatooed by my waist !קיינמאָל ווידער and if it's not something that ever comes to pass, I'll have !שמתי זין על יהוה (it's a play on words!) tattoed on my circumcision scar.

How did your intellectual doubts that HaShem may not have really commanded circumcision cause you to make this giant intellectual leap of not believing in Jesus?
And try to be concise as possible. Because you have a tendency to be overly verbose in your explanations�.

I'm sorry my loquacity bothers you.  God made men uncircumcised.  The foreskin is not a useless flap of skin, but actually a very intricately designed component of the penis, without which the penis cannot function properly.  It makes no logical sense that God would have created it just to dispose of it.  This is reason to doubt Yahweh.  Jesus claims Yahweh is his father.  If Yahweh is doubtful, then Jesus is doubtful by claiming connection to him.

I hope that was succinct enough.

Hello Melkite,

I am sorry that this issues is such big weight in your life. I'm circumcised, and while I have come around to the idea that we should not circumcise men, I can't empathize with the seriousness that you attach to matter. Sexual pleasure is not the ultimate end of human life, and a reduction in that pleasure that results from circumcision should not be granted the gravity that give it. I wish I could understand where you are coming from, but since I cannot, all I can offer is my prayers, and a cyber hug. I know you are suffering, and I wish I could help.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5