Talk:Matthew 5:27, CWC Confessions - Revision history

Anonymax: Reverted edits by Anonybot (talk) to last revision by Clydec

2012-04-24T19:35:08Z

Reverted edits by Anonybot (talk) to last revision by Clydec

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:35, 24 April 2012
Line 1:		Line 1:
	Figured I should explain why I removed this from the article:		Figured I should explain why I removed this from the article:

	<blockquote>One notable fail is that Chris, as [[Captain's Log, Stardate March 10th, 2009\|before]], fails at understanding the Bible. Chris interprets Matthew 5:27-30 as Jesus indicting literal adultery (a man being unfaithful to his wife) when Chris was clearly saying that ''any'' sort of impure thought (like, oh let's say, [[mass debating\|masturbation]], consuming pornography, owning [[sex toys]], and a number of other things Chris does) is just as bad as committing actual adultery, to the point where it's better than gouge out eyes you use to look lustfully at a woman than to be cast into hell for those lustful thoughts. As Chris subscribes to the "The Bible says whatever I want it to say" school of thought, Chris does not consider this.</blockquote>		<blockquote>One notable fail is that Chris, as [[Captain's Log, Stardate March 10th, 2009\|before]], [[fail\|fails]] at understanding the Bible. Chris interprets Matthew 5:27-30 as Jesus indicting literal adultery (a man being unfaithful to his wife) when Chris was clearly saying that ''any'' sort of impure thought (like, oh let's say, [[mass debating\|masturbation]], consuming pornography, owning [[sex toys]], and a number of other things Chris does) is just as bad as committing actual adultery, to the point where it's better than gouge out eyes you use to look lustfully at a woman than to be cast into hell for those lustful thoughts. As Chris subscribes to the "The Bible says whatever I want it to say" school of thought, Chris does not consider this.</blockquote>

	In the video Chris, astonishingly, understands that just because he didn't physically cheat on his (fake) girlfriend with another (fake) girl doesn't make it okay, and he still has to atone for it. That seems like an accurate interpretation to me. Yes, Chris has other sins he has to deal with, but the point of the video was to deal with his transgressions against Ivy. --[[User:MachPunch\|MachPunch]] 06:26, 30 August 2009 (CEST)		In the video Chris, astonishingly, understands that just because he didn't physically cheat on his (fake) girlfriend with another (fake) girl doesn't make it okay, and he still has to atone for it. That seems like an accurate interpretation to me. Yes, Chris has other sins he has to deal with, but the point of the video was to deal with his transgressions against Ivy. --[[User:MachPunch\|MachPunch]] 06:26, 30 August 2009 (CEST)

Anonybot: Robot: Unlinking "Fail"

2012-04-23T22:36:45Z

Robot: Unlinking "Fail"

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:36, 23 April 2012
Line 1:		Line 1:
	Figured I should explain why I removed this from the article:		Figured I should explain why I removed this from the article:

	<blockquote>One notable fail is that Chris, as [[Captain's Log, Stardate March 10th, 2009\|before]], ~~[[fail\|~~fails]] at understanding the Bible. Chris interprets Matthew 5:27-30 as Jesus indicting literal adultery (a man being unfaithful to his wife) when Chris was clearly saying that ''any'' sort of impure thought (like, oh let's say, [[mass debating\|masturbation]], consuming pornography, owning [[sex toys]], and a number of other things Chris does) is just as bad as committing actual adultery, to the point where it's better than gouge out eyes you use to look lustfully at a woman than to be cast into hell for those lustful thoughts. As Chris subscribes to the "The Bible says whatever I want it to say" school of thought, Chris does not consider this.</blockquote>		<blockquote>One notable fail is that Chris, as [[Captain's Log, Stardate March 10th, 2009\|before]], fails at understanding the Bible. Chris interprets Matthew 5:27-30 as Jesus indicting literal adultery (a man being unfaithful to his wife) when Chris was clearly saying that ''any'' sort of impure thought (like, oh let's say, [[mass debating\|masturbation]], consuming pornography, owning [[sex toys]], and a number of other things Chris does) is just as bad as committing actual adultery, to the point where it's better than gouge out eyes you use to look lustfully at a woman than to be cast into hell for those lustful thoughts. As Chris subscribes to the "The Bible says whatever I want it to say" school of thought, Chris does not consider this.</blockquote>

	In the video Chris, astonishingly, understands that just because he didn't physically cheat on his (fake) girlfriend with another (fake) girl doesn't make it okay, and he still has to atone for it. That seems like an accurate interpretation to me. Yes, Chris has other sins he has to deal with, but the point of the video was to deal with his transgressions against Ivy. --[[User:MachPunch\|MachPunch]] 06:26, 30 August 2009 (CEST)		In the video Chris, astonishingly, understands that just because he didn't physically cheat on his (fake) girlfriend with another (fake) girl doesn't make it okay, and he still has to atone for it. That seems like an accurate interpretation to me. Yes, Chris has other sins he has to deal with, but the point of the video was to deal with his transgressions against Ivy. --[[User:MachPunch\|MachPunch]] 06:26, 30 August 2009 (CEST)

Clydec: 2 revisions

2010-01-03T08:59:42Z

2 revisions

← Older revision	Revision as of 04:59, 3 January 2010
(No difference)

VanKrause: Talk:Captain's Log, Stardate April 17th, 2009 moved to Talk:Matthew 5:27, CWC Confessions: This was/is [a slight modification of] the official and originial title.

2009-11-07T18:30:34Z

Talk:Captain's Log, Stardate April 17th, 2009 moved to Talk:Matthew 5:27, CWC Confessions: This was/is [a slight modification of] the official and originial title.

← Older revision	Revision as of 14:30, 7 November 2009
(No difference)

VanKrause: New page: Figured I should explain why I removed this from the article:
One notable fail is that Chris, as before, fails at underst...

2009-08-30T04:26:03Z

New page: Figured I should explain why I removed this from the article: <blockquote>One notable fail is that Chris, as before, fails at underst...

New page

Figured I should explain why I removed this from the article:

<blockquote>One notable fail is that Chris, as [[Captain's Log, Stardate March 10th, 2009|before]], [[fail|fails]] at understanding the Bible. Chris interprets Matthew 5:27-30 as Jesus indicting literal adultery (a man being unfaithful to his wife) when Chris was clearly saying that ''any'' sort of impure thought (like, oh let's say, [[mass debating|masturbation]], consuming pornography, owning [[sex toys]], and a number of other things Chris does) is just as bad as committing actual adultery, to the point where it's better than gouge out eyes you use to look lustfully at a woman than to be cast into hell for those lustful thoughts. As Chris subscribes to the "The Bible says whatever I want it to say" school of thought, Chris does not consider this.</blockquote>

In the video Chris, astonishingly, understands that just because he didn't physically cheat on his (fake) girlfriend with another (fake) girl doesn't make it okay, and he still has to atone for it. That seems like an accurate interpretation to me. Yes, Chris has other sins he has to deal with, but the point of the video was to deal with his transgressions against Ivy. --[[User:MachPunch|MachPunch]] 06:26, 30 August 2009 (CEST)

Talk:Matthew 5:27, CWC Confessions - Revision history

Anonymax: Reverted edits by Anonybot (talk) to last revision by Clydec

Anonybot: Robot: Unlinking "Fail"

Clydec: 2 revisions

VanKrause: Talk:Captain's Log, Stardate April 17th, 2009 moved to Talk:Matthew 5:27, CWC Confessions: This was/is [a slight modification of] the official and originial title.

VanKrause: New page: Figured I should explain why I removed this from the article: One notable fail is that Chris, as before, fails at underst...

VanKrause: New page: Figured I should explain why I removed this from the article:
One notable fail is that Chris, as before, fails at underst...