/mascgen/ - Christianity Edition

File: be_perfect_as_god.jpg?itok=By3ql3Qi.jpg (29KB, 480x373px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 480x373px

>>7885358
All thanks to god for the dubs. The lord is ever perfect in all directions and from all angles.

File: 48E10EA2-AC32-40B7-89CC-20F81535F1AD-13361-00000C1E288CD355_tmp.jpg (199KB, 1366x1221px) Image search: [Google]

199KB, 1366x1221px

>>7885358
Jesus was black

File: Teh Emprah....webm (1MB, 640x358px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 640x358px

>tfw no bf to cleanse the galaxy of filthy xenos with

File: JesusShepherd.jpg (194KB, 1600x1000px) Image search: [Google]

194KB, 1600x1000px

>>7885387
No, you're black. Know how I know? Because you're petty, and messy, and extra.

File: steven anderson.jpg (18KB, 400x300px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 400x300px

>>7885358
claiming my christfu

>>7885394
You lost, anon. Be graceful like our lord.

File: ready.jpg (214KB, 1600x924px) Image search: [Google]

214KB, 1600x924px

Who here prepared for the rapture of the church September 23rd, 2017? aka feast of trumpets?

>tfw you get on your knees and worship the lord*

*your bf's fat uncut dick

File: rapture.jpg (49KB, 600x330px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 600x330px

Reminder that pre-tribulation rapture is the only biblically supported rapture. Rapture comes from the latin rapere which is translated from the original gree harpazo which means to be snatch forcefully, much like a drag queen will snatch the wig off your head if you talk mess behind her back.

File: vines.jpg (163KB, 593x422px) Image search: [Google]

163KB, 593x422px

>>7885438
Just because you're gay doesn't mean you have to be a D E G E N E R A T E. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ezQjNJUSraY

>>7885472

There's nothing degenerate about sniffing the heavenly musk of his balls

File: IMG_9065.jpg (154KB, 600x668px) Image search: [Google]

154KB, 600x668px

>>7885472
Being degenerate always sounds like a good idea because the values of the people who use the word "degenerate" are stupid

>>7885472
Yes it does

>>7885536
Hey, my threshold for what I call degenerate is pretty damn high. Pretty much reserved only for futa furry vore

File: IMG_9066.jpg (79KB, 563x750px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 563x750px

>>7885438
Do people have a preference for uncut or cut? I've met a couple dudes who REALLY love that I have an uncut dick and it's weird to me

>>7885559
From the little I know there is a major preference among gays for intact.

It's much more pleasurable, allows more comfortable sex and can be played with in lots of ways.

>>7885546
It's just a stupid word and assumes a bullshit moral authority imo

File: 1459184063240.jpg (61KB, 499x750px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 499x750px

>>7885559
The majority of guys around here are uncut. In fact, I think only jewish men are cut around these parts (well, and those cases in which someone gets cut because of phimosis or something like that). So cut dicks always look weird to me. It wouldn't be a deal breaker though.

>>7885559

I prefer uncut

Easier to jack off + you can pull his foreskin up and slip your tongue under, feels good man

>>7885597
>well, and those cases in which someone gets cut because of phimosis or something like that
For the record, there is no medical reason to cut a boy and alternative treatments for all the justifications used to cut adolescents.

Misinformation and willful ignorance still lead to many boys getting cut for unnecessary "medical reasons" especially in America but also in the rest of the world.

>>7885559
got cut as a baby but Im actually restoring my foreskin right now and eventually you can grow skin back to replicate it. theres tuggers and manual tugging in order to do so.

>>7885597
pretty sure theres phimosis treatment that doesnt involve cutting off the forrskin

>>7885664
>>7885693
I don't really know about dick treatments, phimosis was just the first thing that came to my mind because I had it as a kid but luckilly I was able to correct it and now my dick is pretty af c:

>>7885693
There are, but worse than other options being ignored, doctors especially in America misdiagnose it, to the point where only a small percentage of "phimosis" cases are actual phimosis that need treatment (which shouldn't be cutting it off anyway). Phimosis is even diagnosed when it is impossible for it to be genuine, in children below around 10.

>>7885710
You're lucky, a different doctor and you could have been cut.

>>7885760
>You're lucky, a different doctor and you could have been cut.
yeah, I remember him saying that if the treatment didn't work then I would need surgery, which I guess meant getting cut. I had to pull back my foreskin as much as I could and apply some cream/ointment on it. It was painful and when it finally became unstuck my dick was dirty as fuck. I was like 10 and I that scared the shit out of me. I didn't tell my mom, lol.

>>7885844
That may have been genuine phimosis, not the more common misdiagnosis. There is surgery short of cutting it off (basically cutting a line through it so doesn't go all the way around), which is the real last resort and the reason getting cut is never medically necessary, so he may have been talking about that.

>>7885915
>There is surgery short of cutting it off (basically cutting a line through it so doesn't go all the way around)

that sounds awful

would rather be cut than get that desu

>>7886011
Why? You still get most of the sensitivity, your glans still gets some protection, it still has some sexual function. It's a pure upgrade on being cut.

>>7886043

- looks gross
- doesn't have the same gliding function

instead you get this gross mutilated vneck foreskin

>>7886052
That's worse than losing the most erotic part of your body and letting your glans become mutilated by damage?

Do trans girls lurk these?
I hate feeling like a chaser. I just want to hook up with one naturally.

>>7886274
>Do trans girls lurk these?
Do I count if I'm not transitioning?

>>7886246

The most erotic part is the rest of the dick lmao

desu people like you who are obsessed with foreskin are creepy

>>7886274

fuck off chaser

>>7886280
So like drag?

File: eb1fcd1f507cca1f8951a1963860b859ed3ebb2fc18a9adc5ae7302de729d8e4.jpg (17KB, 188x343px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 188x343px

>>7886282
You're right. I'll just kms.

>>7886288
Yes or just being the effeminate partner.

>>7886308
I dunno how I feel about that desu.

>>7886312
Are you even gay?

a more important question is, do any trans guys lurk on this gen?

>>7886361

>tfw no qt with a literal boypussy

>>7886282
The foreskin is the most sensitive sexually, regardless of what you enjoy playing with.

What exactly is creepy or obsessed about saying you shouldn't needlessly lose parts of your body?

>>7886369
I hate to sound like a creepy chaser but yeah. Truly the best of both worlds.

File: The First Mourning (1888).jpg (1MB, 3300x2634px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3300x2634px

>>7885358
Praise the lord, an edition that can redeem us from the feet edition.

>>7885536
>>7885583
Dunno about you anon but when I think of degenerates, what comes to mind for me is animal fuckers, bug chasers, cheaters and shit like polygamy, though those are obviously not all on the same level.

>>7885559
>tfw have long foreskin that overhangs while limp and still covers my cockhead while hard and slides around really easily
life is gud

>>7886274
lol no

>>7886473

prove it or you're cut high and tight

File: 147328745756758.jpg (1MB, 1936x1272px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1936x1272px

>>7886473
jesus was into feet

>>7886490
>desu people like you who are obsessed with foreskin are creepy

File: my fucking face when.png (77KB, 646x720px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 646x720px

>>7886523

>mfw

File: jesus-washing-the-feet-calvin-carter.jpg?w=212&h=170.jpg (5KB, 212x170px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 212x170px

>>7886515
Feet may have been a jewish euphemism for genitals. Finally I get to share these links and I think it will never be more relevant than right now.

https://jaminism.wordpress.com/2012/05/08/the-hidden-meaning-of-jesus-washing-the-disciples-feet/

>>7886558
post feet

>>7886543
thatsthepoint.jpg

File: 03-Ruth-and-Boaz_Gloria-Pizzilli.jpg (201KB, 960x640px) Image search: [Google]

201KB, 960x640px

>>7886593
Me on the left. My girl ruth on the right. Can't show my feet because this is a family board so use your imagination.

>>7885358
I just hope those of you here who truly consider yourselves Christian are practicing lifelong celibacy or marrying women to procreate and start a family. Those are literally the only acceptable paths for a gay Christian. Anything else is pure cognitive dissonance.

File: 20170118_035746.jpg (3MB, 3088x4160px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3088x4160px

>>7886490

>>7886660
eh, I'm not a Christian but I used to be Catholic. Most of the original rules have been changed, bent, or straight out forgotten to fit the modern times. Being a non celibate Christian gay doesn't sound that ridiculous when you take that into consideration.

>>7886691
imgur, you cock tease.

>>7886660
see
>>7885472

Basically, being gay and christian in the modern church dispensation totally checks out if you actually follow the bible and aren't a r-tard.

File: What Everyday feels like.webm (3MB, 960x540px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 960x540px

>tfw bad facial hair genetics
Post beards so I can live vicariously

File: v7NnDNF.gif (706KB, 500x212px) Image search: [Google]

706KB, 500x212px

>>7886708

But I'm a good, modest Christian man...
http://i.imgur.com/xKIgZ3x.jpg

File: PDc7MXv.jpg (105KB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 960x720px

>>7886871
Anon on he left

File: 20161222_092457.jpg (2MB, 1941x1486px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1941x1486px

>>7886871
>Post beards so I can live vicariously

I trapped some tasty bombercollar lint in mine here. Hawt.

>>7886950
Thank you senpai

>>7886798
>>7886695

Cognitive. Dissonance.

The bible is very, very clear on it's stance on homosexuality and premarital sex in general.

Jesus was a Jew - A Jew from Galilee heavily rooted in Zealot theory and adherent to the Torah. Do you honestly think he would have approved of homosexual sex? Get fucking real.

Any frotters?

>>7887098
I luv frotting, such an underrated sexual practice.

>>7885559
I never had a massive preference until I eventually had sex with a circumcised dude. It was fucking impossible to jerk him off and I thought I was going to hurt him. And then there's the unsightly scarring that you don't see on cut pornstar dicks. I don't think it's a deal breaker, but I definitely prefer a foreskin.

It's probably a symptom of where you grow up. You always hear Americans go on about how they prefer cut dicks, unless they're looking for something a little more exotic.

>>7887511
It's so hard to fin frotters in the gay community and there's no porn sites dedicated to it afaik. Frot+oral sex are the only things im into desu because I find assholes yucky.

>>7886473
that painting is dead good. the renaissance was well good, weren't it?

>>7887557
>Live in America
>Prefer uncut
>In a sea of cut dicks
Why live?

>>7886950
Please be my boyfriend!

File: _72767775_saintpeterssw.jpg (54KB, 660x371px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 660x371px

>>7887047
>The bible is very, very clear
This is only relevant if you follow an evangelical branch where the pastor/bishop clearly states any gay sex will doom you to hell.

As a catholic, it is not up to me to interpret the Bible. There is no mention of the holy book in any Catholic prayer whatsoever, and my loyalty and devotion lies in the Church and the directives of the Holy See. Openly gay priests are common and Pope never excommunicated gay people.

This is a common misconception amongst Catholics. We are not supposed to follow the Bible, we are supposed to follow the Church. A good comparison would be citizens of the UK. They aren't supposed to go around citing the Magna Carta and assuming that would be sufficient for them to operate within the law. What they really follow are the most recent Acts of Parliament and court decisions that are based on the original document.

Your answer to this may be
>so you aren't really following the word of God
And that too would be incorrect. Jesus himself determined that the church of Peter would be the continuation of his Word after he departed from mortal existence. That means he entrusted a specific institution with the task of guiding us and implementing divine law. A person who frivolously quotes the Bible while being detached from the Catholic institution is a heretic committing nothing short of rebellion and mutiny against Christ himself.

I know this triggers non-Catholics but it is the truth. Your pastor dressed as a businessman in some chapel in Alabama does not overturn the institution that converted Rome and evangelized half the world.

>>7887559
I also like butt stuff but it's not essential to me

Is there a mangen camchat

File: 14832958986.png (604KB, 510x566px) Image search: [Google]

604KB, 510x566px

>>7887047
>Do you honestly think he would have approved of homosexual sex?
Jesus had a harem of 12 guys while fucking Mary Magdalene on the side and he spent his life doing crazy shit like turning water into wine and go for psychedelic trips to the desert. He'd be cool.

File: 1454534657.jpg (303KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

303KB, 1280x720px

*rriiiip*

>>7887968
*licks*

>>7887968
hmmm gave me a bone.

Where do you download your porn mascgen? I use gaytorrents.ru

is there a better site to download mear/muscle porn?

>>7888167
I just use myvidster to stream/tumblr

>>7888167
eMule

>>7887968
hairy ass is best ass

>>7887047
>Jesus was a Jew - A Jew from Galilee heavily rooted in Zealot theory and adherent to the Torah.

Really? So jesus didn't called Pharisees and saducees, the leaders of the jewish community "Snakes! Brood of Vipers! Hypocrites!" He didn't say that he (jesus) had a father but that their jews (not just the saducees and pharisees) had their father in satan and since the son can only do as he sees the father doing that they are liars and murderers and reject Jesus.

He didn't say that about the Pharisees and Scribes "‘These people honor Me with their lips,
but their hearts are far from Me.

They worship Me in vain;
they teach as doctrine the precepts of men.’b

You have disregarded the commandment of God to keep the tradition of men.”

That was a huge part of Jesus's ministry. That the jews were so focused on following the traditions of men, what their elders told them to do and what their elder's elder's told them on and on that they've completely divorced themselves from God's ways. Just like you.

Like I said, you can only be against homosexuality in the modern age if you literally don't know what's in the bible.

File: IMG_9067.jpg (152KB, 540x808px) Image search: [Google]

152KB, 540x808px

>>7888593
What's the religion where you get to pound hot gay ass

File: o-ANDERSON-facebook.jpg (147KB, 2000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

147KB, 2000x1000px

>>7887047
The cliffnotes is this.

Sodom and Gomorrah? They were rapist more than homosexuals. Gang rape was a huge means of humiliating and embarassing the enemy in ancient times. It has nothing to do with orientation because whole armies were unlikely to be gay. So they, the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah, wanted to gang rape a guest of an esteemed person in their city. Angels no less! so for their wickedness and inhospitality god destroyed.

Leviticus? The Book of Leviticus deals primarily with ceremonial issues related to appropriate worship practices at the tabernacle: the various offerings and how to make them, clean versus unclean foods, diseases and bodily discharges, sexual taboos, and rules for the priests. Chapter 18 of Leviticus contains a list of sexual prohibitions, and chapter 20 follows this up with a list of punishments. In these chapters, male same-sex intercourse is prohibited, and the punishment for violators is death.

First, we are under the new testement covenant not the old. But for argument, two things should be noted.

1. In the Gospels, Jesus describes himself as the fulfillment of the Law, and in Romans 10:4, Paul writes “Christ is the end of the law.” Hebrews 8:13 states that the old covenant is now “obsolete,” because Christ is the basis of the new covenant, freeing Christians from the system of the Old Law, most of which was specific to the ancient Israelites, to their community and their unique worship practices.

File: steve-anderson-orlando-youtube.jpg (36KB, 745x408px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 745x408px

>>7887047
2. Yes it's called and abomination. The term “abomination” is primarily used in the Old Testament to distinguish practices that are common to foreign nations from those that are distinctly Israelite. This is why Genesis 43:32 says that for the Egyptians to eat with the Hebrews would be an abomination to the Egyptians, and why Exodus 8:26 says that for the Israelites to make sacrifices near the Pharaoh’s palace would be an abomination to the Egyptians. There is nothing wrong with the Israelites’ sacrifices, of course. The problem with both of these things is that they would blur the lines between practices that are specifically Israelite and those that are foreign. The nature of the term “abomination” in the Old Testament is intentionally culturally specific; it defines religious and cultural boundaries between Israel and other nations. But it’s not a statement about what is intrinsically good or bad, right or wrong, and that’s why numerous things that it’s applied to in the Old Testament (eating shellfish, pork, rabbit, sex during menstruation) have long been accepted parts of Christian life and practice.

File: Pastor-Steve-Anderson.jpg (63KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 1280x720px

>>7887047
2.1 >Okay, but the penalty is death – certainly, that indicates that the behavior in question is particularly bad, and that we should still regard it as sinful.

But this overlooks the severity of all of the other punishments in the Old Law. Given the threats posed to the Israelites by starvation, disease, internal discord, and attacks from other tribes, maintaining order and cohesiveness was of paramount importance for them, and so almost all of the punishments in the Old Testament will strike us as being quite harsh. A couple that has sex during the woman’s menstrual period is to be permanently exiled from the community. If a priest’s daughter falls into prostitution, she is to be burned at the stake. Anyone who uses the Lord’s name in vain is not only to be reprimanded, but to be stoned. And anyone who disobeys their parents is to be stoned as well. Even some things that we don’t see as moral issues at all received the death penalty in the Old Testament – according to Exodus 35:2, working on the Sabbath was a capital offense. And in Ezekiel 18, the death penalty is applied to anyone who charges interest on a loan, and this, too, is called an “abomination” at the chapter’s close. Simply because something received the death penalty in the Old Testament doesn’t mean that Christians should view it as sinful; there’s too much variance for that to be a consistent and effective approach. The default Christian approach for nearly two millennia now has been to view the particular hundreds of rules and prohibitions in the Old Law as having been fulfilled by Christ’s death, and there is no good reason why Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 should be exceptions to that rule.

>>7887047
Let me back up a bit. There are two fundamental things wrong with being against homosexuality and saying they must by without relationships and celibate for their entire life.

In Matthew 7, in the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus warns against false teachers, and he offers a principle that can be used to test good teaching from bad teaching. By their fruit, you will recognize them, he says. Every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. Good teachings, according to Jesus, have good consequences. That doesn’t mean that following Christian teaching will or should be easy, and in fact, many of Jesus’s commands are not easy at all – turning the other cheek, loving your enemies, laying down your life for your friends. But those are all profound acts of love that both reflect God’s love for us and that powerfully affirm the dignity and worth of human life and of human beings. Good teachings, even when they are very difficult, are not destructive to human dignity. They don’t lead to emotional and spiritual devastation, and to the loss of self-esteem and self-worth. But those have been the consequences for gay people of the traditional teaching on homosexuality. It has not borne good fruit in their lives, and it’s caused them incalculable pain and suffering. If we’re taking Jesus seriously that bad fruit cannot come from a good tree, then that should cause us to question whether the traditional teaching is correct.

File: steven_anderson_family.jpg (118KB, 600x386px) Image search: [Google]

118KB, 600x386px

>>7887047

The second problem that has already presented itself with the traditional interpretation comes from the opening chapters of Genesis, from the account of the creation of Adam and Eve. This story is often cited to argue against the blessing of same-sex unions: in the beginning, God created a man and a woman, and two men or two women would be a deviation from that design. But this biblical story deserves closer attention. In the first two chapters of Genesis, God creates the heavens and the earth, plants, animals, man, and everything in the earth. And He declares everything in creation to be either good or very good – except for one thing. In Genesis 2:18, God says, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.” And yes, the suitable helper or partner that God makes for Adam is Eve, a woman. And a woman is a suitable partner for the vast majority of men – for straight men. But for gay men, that isn’t the case. For them, a woman is not a suitable partner. And in all of the ways that a woman is a suitable partner for straight men—for gay men, it’s another gay man who is a suitable partner. And the same is true for lesbian women. For them, it is another lesbian woman who is a suitable partner. But the necessary consequence of the traditional teaching on homosexuality is that, even though gay people have suitable partners, they must reject them, and they must live alone for their whole lives, without a spouse or a family of their own. We are now declaring good the very first thing in Scripture that God declared not good: for the man to be forced to be alone. And the fruit that this teaching has borne has been deeply wounding and destructive.

File: 2Q==.jpg (4KB, 259x194px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 259x194px

>>7887047
This is a major problem. By holding to the traditional interpretation, we are now contradicting the Bible’s own teachings: the Bible teaches that it is not good for the man to be forced to be alone, and yet now, we are teaching that it is. Scripture says that good teachings will bear good fruit, but now, the reverse is occurring, and we say it’s not a problem. Something here is off; something is out of place. And it’s because of these problems and these contradictions that more and more Christians have been going back to Scripture and re-examining the 6 verses that have formed the basis for an absolute condemnation of same-sex relationships. Can we go back, can we take a closer look at these verses, and see what we can learn from further study of them?

What are these 6 verses? There are three in the Old Testament and three in the New Testament, so I’ll go in order of their appearance in Scripture. In the Old Testament, we have the story of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah in Genesis 19 as well as two prohibitions in Leviticus 18 and 20. And in the New Testament, we have a passage by Paul in Romans 1, as well as two Greek terms in 1 Corinthians 6 and 1 Timothy 1.

Moving onto the three new testement verses.

File: _91178727_stephenanderson.jpg (23KB, 660x371px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 660x371px

>>7887047
Paul begins his letter in Romans 1-3 by describing the unrighteousness of all humanity, Jew and Gentile alike, and the universal need for a savior. Romans 3 nears its close with the famous verse, “All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.” In Romans 3:10, Paul says, “There is no one righteous, not even one.” To build his case to that effect, Paul argues in chapter 2 that, even though the Jews have the Law, they still don’t follow it well enough to earn their salvation on their own. But he starts in chapter 1 by describing the unrighteousness of humanity more broadly. And in Romans 1:18-32, Paul writes of the descent of Gentiles into idolatry and the consequences for them of their rejection of God. He says that they knew the truth of God, but they rejected it; they exchanged the truth for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator – birds, animals, reptiles. And so because they had given up God, God, in turn, let them go – He let them live without Him, and He gave them over, it says, to a wide array of vices and passions. Included among these passions were some forms of lustful same-sex behavior. In verses 26 and 27, we read the following:

“Because of this [referring to their idol worship], God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. In the same way, the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.”

Well, now, it seems, the case is finally closed. Even though the verses in Leviticus don’t apply to Christians, here we have Paul in the New Testament explicitly teaching the unacceptability, the sinfulness of same-sex relationships. And even though he only speaks of lustful behavior, and not of loving relationships, he labels same-sex unions unnatural.

File: pastor-Steven-Anderson-x400.jpg (16KB, 400x300px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 400x300px

>>7887047
They are outside of God’s natural design, which was set forth in Genesis 1 and 2 and is exclusively heterosexual. So even if a same-sex relationship is loving and committed, it is still sinful. That is the traditional interpretation of Romans 1:26-27.

How solid of an interpretation is that? Does this passage require us to reject the possibility of loving relationships for gay people, and if so, how does that make sense, given the problems that I outlined earlier with that position? Was that Paul’s intent here, to teach that God desires gay people to be alone for their entire lives, because their sexual orientation is broken, and is outside of His created, natural design?

How we understand this passage hinges in large part on how we understand the meaning of the terms “natural” and “unnatural.” It’s commonly assumed by those who hold to the traditional interpretation that these terms refer back to Genesis 1 and 2, and are intended to define heterosexuality as God’s natural design and homosexuality as an unnatural distortion of that design. But once again, closer examination does not support that interpretation. In order to understand what Paul meant by the use of these terms, we have to consider two things. First, we have to look at the broader context of the passage in order to see how the concept of nature functions within it. And secondly, we need to see how Paul himself uses these terms in his other letters and how they were commonly and widely applied to sexual behavior in particular in the ancient world.

File: maxresdefault.jpg (39KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 1280x720px

>>7887047
First, the passage’s context. In 1:18-32, Paul is making a larger argument about idolatry, and that argument has a very precise logic to it. The reason, he says in verses 18-20, that the idolaters’ actions are blameworthy is because they knew God. They started with the knowledge of God, but they chose to reject Him. Paul writes, “What may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world, God’s invisible qualities – his eternal power and divine nature – have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.” The idolaters are without excuse because they knew the truth, they started with the truth, but they rejected it. Paul’s subsequent statements about sexual behavior follow this same pattern. The women, he says, “exchanged” natural relations for unnatural ones. And the men “abandoned” relations with women and committed shameful acts with other men. Both the men and the women started with heterosexuality—they were naturally disposed to it just as they were naturally disposed to the knowledge of God—but they rejected their original, natural inclinations for those that were unnatural: for them, same-sex behavior. Paul’s argument about idolatry requires that there be an exchange; the reason, he says, that the idolaters are at fault is because they first knew God but then turned away from him, exchanged Him for idols. Paul’s reference to same-sex behavior is intended to illustrate this larger sin of idolatry. But in order for this analogy to have any force, in order for it to make sense within this argument, the people he is describing must naturally begin with heterosexual relations and then abandon them. And that is exactly how he describes it.

>>7888756
That's cool and all but can i have gay sex in heaven?

File: Z.jpg (5KB, 295x171px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 295x171px

>>7887047
>>7888762
But that is not what we are talking about. Gay people have a natural, permanent orientation toward those of the same sex; it’s not something that they choose, and it’s not something that they can change. They aren’t abandoning or rejecting heterosexuality—that’s never an option for them to begin with. And if applied to gay people, Paul’s argument here should actually work in the other direction: If the point of this passage is to rebuke those who have spurned their true nature, be it religious when it comes to idolatry or sexual, then just as those who are naturally heterosexual should not be with those of the same sex, so, too, those who have a natural orientation toward the same sex should not be with those of the opposite sex. For them, that would be exchanging “the natural for the unnatural” in just the same way. We have different natures when it comes to sexual orientation.

But is this just a clever argument that has no grounding in the historical context of Paul’s world and therefore yields an interpretation that could not be what he originally intended? After all, the concept of sexual orientation is very recent; it was only developed within the past century, and has only come to be widely understood within the past few decades. So how we can we take our modern categories and understandings and use them to interpret a text that is so far removed from them? But that level of removal is precisely the point. In the ancient world, homosexuality was widely considered, not to be a different sexual orientation or something inherent in a small minority of people, but to be an excess of lust or passion that anyone could be prone to if they let themselves go too much. Just a couple of quotes to illustrate this. A well-known first-century Greek philosopher named Dio Chrysostom wrote the following:

File: anderson_birthcontrol_140430c-800x430.jpg (52KB, 800x430px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 800x430px

>>7888765
It's about the quality of the relationship and your devotion to god not the sex of the partners.

>>7887047
>>7888774

"“The man whose appetite is insatiate in such things [referring to heterosexual relations] …will have contempt for the easy conquest and scorn for a woman’s love, as a thing too readily given…and will turn his assault against the male quarters…believing that in them he will find a kind of pleasure difficult and hard to procure.”

A fourth-century Christian writer said of same-sex behavior: “You will see that all such desire stems from a greed which will not remain within its usual bounds.” The abandonment of heterosexual relations for same-sex lust was frequently compared to gluttony in eating or drinking. Sexuality was seen as a spectrum, with opposite-sex relations being the product of a “moderate” level of desire and same-sex relations the product of an excessive amount of desire. Personal orientation had nothing to do with it. But within this framework, as I said, same-sex relations were associated with the height of excess and lust, and that is why Paul invokes them in Romans 1. His purpose is to show that the idolaters were given over to unbridled passion, and to depict a scene of sexual chaos and excess that illustrates that. And that is completely consistent with how same-sex relations were most commonly described at the time. But the only reason that a reference to same-sex behavior helps Paul illustrate general sexual chaos is because the people he is describing first began with opposite-sex relations and then, in a burst of lust, abandoned them, exchanged them for something else.

File: TOorCNR.png (232KB, 634x348px) Image search: [Google]

232KB, 634x348px

>>7887047
>>7888780
And surely it is significant that Paul here speaks only of lustful, casual behavior. He says nothing about the people in question falling in love, making a lifelong commitment to one another, starting a family together. We would never dream of reading a passage in Scripture about heterosexual lust and promiscuity and then, from that, condemning all of the marriage relationships of straight Christians. There is an enormous difference between lust and love when it comes to our sexuality, between casual and committed relationships, between promiscuity and monogamy. That difference has always been held to be central to Christian teaching on sexual ethics for straight Christians. Why should that difference not be held to be as central for gay Christians? How can we take a passage about same-sex lust and promiscuity and then condemn any loving relationships that gay people might come to form? That is a very different standard than the one that we apply to straight people.

And again, the primary argument that is advanced in support of this kind of a different standard is that Paul doesn’t merely condemn same-sex lust, he also calls same-sex desires “shameful” and labels same-sex unions “unnatural.” I’ve already explained why Paul’s use of the term “unnatural” requires the idolaters’ willful spurning of their natural heterosexual desires. And that’s how this term functions within the passage as a whole, mirroring the idolaters’ exchange of God for idols. But before we leave this passage, we also need to consider how Paul himself uses these terms in his other letters and how the terms “natural” and “unnatural” were commonly applied to sexual behavior in his day.

File: maxresdefault.jpg (43KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 1280x720px

>>7887047
>>7888785
ne of Paul’s most significant references to “nature” outside of Romans 1 comes in 1 Corinthians 11. There, in verses 13-15, he writes:

“Judge for yourselves: Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? Does not the very nature of things teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a disgrace to him, but that if a woman has long hair, it is her glory?”

This is actually the most similar passage in the New Testament to Romans 1:26-27, because not only does Paul refer to “nature” here, he also speaks of the concept of “disgrace,” which is the same term that is translated as “shameful” in Romans 1. But the way that we interpret these terms in 1 Corinthians 11 is very different than how the traditional interpretation wants to read them in Romans 1. One of the most common meanings of the Greek word for “nature” is custom, and that is how Christians widely interpret this passage in 1 Corinthians today. And the reference to what is a “disgrace” or “shame” is taken as specifically being shameful given particular customs. So how we read Paul here in 1 Corinthians is basically this: “Do not the customs of our society dictate that it is considered shameful for a man to have long hair, but honorable for a woman?” This reading aligns with ancient Mediterranean attitudes about gender and hair length, and it makes much more sense than the idea that natural biological processes would lead men to have short hair. By “nature,” it would grow long.

So unnatural doesn't mean what you think it does.

The other two verses are 1 Corinthians 6:9 and 1 Timothy 1:10, and the debate here centers around the translation of two Greek terms. Arsenokoites and malakos meaning, literally, man-bed and "soft." No one actually knows what they mean just like honeymoon doesn't mean a combination of "honey" and "the moon." It wasn't until 1945 that it was translated to homosexual. Basically the whole argument is balls and gay is okay. The end.

>>7888658
>>7888675
>>7888683
>>7888727
>>7888736
>>7888747
>>7888753
>>7888756
>>7888762
>>7888774
>>7888780
>>7888785
>>7888805
Nice to someone who actually knows what they're talking about beyond "Muh daddy/church fathers said"

this is an interesting thread

File: 889E0F1E-95D6-4A39-84FB-A4350FEF52BB-14345-00000CBC7947EFE3_tmp.jpg (24KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 480x360px

>>7888820
They can run through their mental loops to justify homosexuality against Christianity but it doesn't do much good for us memers who are 2cool4god

Religion is flexible and constantly changing to reflect the society in which it is practiced. Judaism, Christianity, and Islam all worship the same god even, they just disagree on the holiness of key figures

File: f5753870a40ccef114a6cb88e7f48531.jpg (82KB, 680x680px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 680x680px

>>7888890
>Judaism, Christianity, and Islam all worship the same god even,

>>7888947
they do actually.
in islam jesus was a prophet of allah

its all the same they just refuse to see it.

File: 20170218_102218.jpg (834KB, 2560x1600px) Image search: [Google]

834KB, 2560x1600px

>>7889016

File: thumbs up.jpg (86KB, 500x542px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 500x542px

>mfw managed to get a guy who sells porn videos of him to add me on skype and watch him for free

File: christfu.png (411KB, 800x430px) Image search: [Google]

411KB, 800x430px

>>7888658
>>7888675
>>7888683
>>7888727
>>7888736
>>7888747
>>7888753
>>7888756
>>7888762
>>7888774
>>7888780
>>7888785
>>7888805
LEAVE MY CHRISTFU ALONE ILL FUCKING REKT YOU

File: Prometheus Bound (1745).jpg (2MB, 1950x2590px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1950x2590px

>>7887562

The return to renaissance themes as seen in the Pre-Raphaelite brotherhood is really my favorite style. I really love sculptures too, only partially because of the homo-eroticism in a lot of them. Turns out that white supremacists also are really into marble statues, but I guess I'm pretty /pol/ anyway so lol whatever.

File: 142543647489.jpg (70KB, 500x333px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 500x333px

>tfw you take your clothes off at the end of the day and your slighty sweaty armpits smell awesome

File: anderson17-copy.jpg (8KB, 260x258px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 260x258px

>>7889538
Search your heart. you know it to be true.

File: 87654678.png (130KB, 309x207px) Image search: [Google]

130KB, 309x207px

>>7886871

File: BAdh8vvlU6M.jpg (21KB, 320x400px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 320x400px

>>7889801
My armpits don't smell, I mostly think it's a blessing but you're making me want aromatic pits

I want an African American bf but dont live in america. Fml

File: 1443454366.jpg (84KB, 500x501px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 500x501px

>>7890226
>My armpits don't smell, I mostly think it's a blessing but you're making me want aromatic pits
I can see it being a blessing in some cases, but I don't think I would like mine not smelling at all. I wouldn't mind if my ass was less sweaty, though.

>>7890265
Shave them.

>>7890072
danke anon

>>7890284
I shaved my armpits once but I didn't love it. The lack of hair made the sweat worse somehow. The same happened that time I shaved my ass

>>7890421
god i wish i had a smooth ass, but fuuuck all the swear and sticking

>>7889801

c-can i test them out bro

>>7890820

hairy asses are hot

>>7888805
>>7888820
>>7888890

Wow. Just read all your posts. The mental gymnastics you jump through to cling to your belief that a cosmic Jewish zombie is the answer to life beyond death is astounding.

But whatever makes you think you're happy, I guess. All I see in all your posts is a life wasted, honestly. Come to term with the facts that it's all superstition and free yourself.

>>7890907
Why was I >>7888890 quoted

Can we please drop the religion talk. It actively makes the gen worse

>>7890916
>Can we please drop the religion talk.
>mascgen Christianity edition

Are you legitimately retarded?

File: 142343223.jpg (57KB, 500x498px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 500x498px

>>7890820
I thought having a smooth ass would feel good, but after half an hour I felt there was a river between my cheeks. Big mistake.
>>7890879
>c-can i test them out bro
sorry I've already showered :c I haven't washed my gym clothes yet tho c:

>>7890935
almost no one talked about feet in my edition!

>>7890907
When people disappear and there is an earthquake in september know that you were wrong and repent.

>>7891071
Because we aren't demented fetishist and realize that feet are one of the most mundane parts of literally anyone's body. You should feel bad for even suggesting it.

>>7891063

i-its not like i want to sniff a sweaty jock or a-anything

>>7891099
>Because we aren't demented fetishist
>sticks peepee in poopoo hole

>>7890072
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA LOOK AT THE TOP OF HIS HEAD HAHAHAHAHAHAHA OH MY GOD HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

File: IMmmP8A.gif (121KB, 910x1354px) Image search: [Google]

121KB, 910x1354px

>>7891273
I think this comic applies

>>7891273

would rub while nutting in him desu

File: tumblr_o7w9218gDS1uokq1to1_1280.jpg (99KB, 1080x1080px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 1080x1080px

>>7891273
Bald guys are hot, so.

File: 1437425245842.png (313KB, 406x412px) Image search: [Google]

313KB, 406x412px

>>7891273

>>7891384

slap my prostate with that dick daddy

>>7891273
lol. Yes.
Protip, some guys can pull off the bald look. But none wouldn't look better with a full head of hair.

I am a hairy manlet dicklet very muscular top that realized hes bottom.


Are there any twink tops here?

>>7891663
hi I'm 6'1" 130lbs with a 6.5 inch cock
how much of a manlet are you?

>>7891672
5ft9 smol dink but im really muscular.
6ft1 130 pounds sounds perfect...

>>7891680
Thanks. I wouldn't call a 5'9" a manlet though. At least you wouldn't be the shortest guy I've been with. But still pretty nice.

>>7891691
I mean i really want to try out a twink top. Im pretty hot especially if you just want to top. Ill be your loyal bf also

This isnt ann right?

>>7891703
>This isnt ann right?
annskellington? No.

I'd love a shorter, muscular, bottom bf who is loyal. I'm really exclusively a top. My bp is pretty much virgin (only had half a dick in it once)

>>7891725
based wed get along than

>>7891663

post bussy and cute lil weiner

>>7890248
A black person would do

>>7891063
>that sweat line in the middle
Fuck, I'm so horny

File: FB_IMG_1478612369865.jpg (7KB, 261x205px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 261x205px

>>7891663

>ywn be muscular enough to lose your virginity a muscular, hairy, sporty bottom

Don't tell me you train some sport/MAs, that would be too perfecy.

File: 1484794372388.jpg (38KB, 600x662px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 600x662px

>>7889801

>tfw I will never have this feel because my sweat smells like onion juice and sour cream

>>7893583
>tfw my ex always got an hard on smelling me
>I think I smell bad
don't worry fampai

>>7893348
Not him but I play rugby and train BJJ, even though I'm not really a bear.

>>7893882

>rugby+bjj

You're too good for me.

>>7893600
I find this so hot. I'll not really into man stink, but when a guy enjoys mine it makes me diamonds.

>>7894837
You a musky guy?

File: aaaa.jpg (206KB, 856x856px) Image search: [Google]

206KB, 856x856px

>>7894837
>but when a guy enjoys mine it makes me diamonds
Same. Once a guy told me he loved my smell and my dick almost exploded. Being desired is hot

Just checked out my university LGBT society on Facebook.
All of them look like they'd fit in on /mlp/

What the fuck is this

>>7895116
LGBT societies are always filled with special snowflakes. "normal" people don't usually get into them

>>7895129
FACTS

>>7895129
>>7895191
Like, surely you'd want people to join your society.
So you'd choose the most attractive people you could to be the face.

That's how advertising works. Make it appealing.
I'm legit cringing at these people.
I would probably have the will power to turn them down after being rohypnoled, that's how foul they are

>>7895342
It's usually the special snowflakes who start/run those societies, though. To them, those are the most attractive people.

>>7895342
They're sending their best, folks. It's sad.

>>7895116
tfw like no uni's here have things such as societies or clubs or whatever you want to call it

tfw my uni is filled with an insane amount of people from a non european ethnicity (literally like 3/4th it feels like) in which countries they hate the fuck out of fags

i fucking hate living in europe

>>7894952
Not usually. I get a bit of man stink street the gym, but I shower there. I kinda like my smell, but common courtesy means you gotta stink as little at possible.

>>7895014
>Tfw in bed and he likes leans in and takes a box whiff

>>7895116
IMO it's pretty funny that you're turned off by a club that's about inclusion and acceptance of different lifestyles because you don't like how they look

>>7895658
You got it right. They bothered to start the club in the first place

>>7894837
ahah me too, my smell is really popular with the guys.

>>7895796

I'm gonna sound like an arrogant prick. But I don't care.
let's not kid ourselves here.
LGBT socs at unis are for people to meet people (and fuck) with the same sexual orientations as them.
There's no shared hobbies/interests like in sports socs or gaming socs. It's a genetic thing.
It's like joining a japan-soc if you're a japanese student studing at an overseas uni. You're meeting similar people.

Saying that, I see these people who do not turn me on at all and I can see from that that I probably wouldn't have much in common with them bar liking dick. They definitely are not gonna enjoy lifting/sports like me.

Plus my friend group is all attractive. I'm not gonna lower the bar now.

I was gonna go extra dickhead and post a picture of them, but that's almost bullying and I like to think I'm a dick, but not that much of a dick.

>>7896728
It sounds like you just need to download Grindr instead of join a club

>>7893348
No i dont.

I study occult and read about computers study japanese shitpost and listen to entry level black metal all day

File: giphy.gif (1MB, 643x491px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 643x491px

>>7896754
nah I'm happy with the societies I'm in.
I'm just massively surprised by the difference in lgbt societies I had when I did my undergrad to now when I'm doing my masters.
My undergrad was like all normal people who just so happened to be gay and they just got wrecked all the time.
This one is like SJW crew disguised as LGBT society.

in other news, I just took some tramadol so I need to go lie down...

>>7896771
Different strokes for different folks I guess. I never understood the aversion to SJW types because adjusting behavior to not offend people was just called common courtesy where I grew up

>>7896782
I totally get that and I agree. Obviously I'm not gonna put myself in a situation like that where I'll offend people with my views. Thus why I know I wouldn't fit in with this society.

However, on the other hand, I also feel like these people need to learn how to not be offended at everything. We don't live in a 'safe space' society and I feel like by sheltering these people we are ultimately damaging them.
90% of SJW's (I've met) are very difficult to have a discussion with regarding controversial topics as they take offense to any view that isn't their own.

I love a good heated debate though, it's the best way to learn. However if you're not gonna accept other people's point of views, it becomes very frustrating and childish.

File: 1488842063790-co.jpg (37KB, 1024x672px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 1024x672px

>>7891680
>6ft1 130 pounds sounds perfect...

File: shit.jpg (467KB, 800x1110px) Image search: [Google]

467KB, 800x1110px

>>7896807
>I also feel like these people need to learn how to not be offended at everything
See I used to think this way but now I've come to see it that people just don't want other people to rock the boat. I'm fairly certain that these special snowflake SJWs are well aware that they won't always get what they want in this world, but that doesn't mean you have to give up entirely and never speak up. Offense is always taken, yes, but I don't see standing up and speaking out about it is an act of weakness.

Whenever I see people say something to the effect of "the world isn't your safe space, you need to grow up," it always comes with the implication of "the world is terrible, why even try to fix it." But the problem is that a shitty belief that is expressed and goes unchallenged is a shitty belief that will only perpetuate itself. If you hear something you don't like, it really takes a lot of courage to confront that person and attempt to explain why you don't like it.

But hey, I'm realistic. Racism, sexism, and homophobia will always exist and 99% of the time, you probably won't make a difference with whoever you speak to. Obviously there are right and wrong ways to confront someone about shitty attitudes and sure there are SJWs that are bad actors. But at the end of the day, they want a freer, fairer, and more equal world, so I can't really begrudge them for it.

>>7897012
Fair, I guess I agree.
It's like the end goal is good, but the means to get it seems like a spoilt child having a tantrum to me.

File: shit.jpg (156KB, 1000x839px) Image search: [Google]

156KB, 1000x839px

>>7897041
I mean politics is something everyone, and I mean everyone gets passionate about, since it ostensibly affects all of our lives. I've seen brats and bad actors on both sides of the political aisle, but I know where I stand and what I value and I feel comfortable knowing when to bring up politics and when to just let shit slide. I couldn't post on 4chan if I didn't.

Still, for all the outrage and fighting, I feel if you can convince at least one mind, then it's worth it. I finally convinced my parents this past year that global warming exists, for example, and it only took the last 18 consecutive months to be the warmest months in recorded history to achieve that. We fight about politics all the time but it's all in good faith, so I guess I'm lucky that I grew up in a family that encouraged it rather than avoided it.

File: BQ7dBNJD0RJ.jpg (105KB, 1080x1080px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 1080x1080px

>>7897152
>Finally convinced my parents global warming exists

Do you mean GW/climate change in general as a thing? Or AGW or CAGW? (I'm assuming the latter two of course)

Whether or not the last 18 months were the warmest recorded months does not really mean anything for AGW or CAGW. I'm sorry you and your parents seem to think so.

File: cute boy with cute pit.gif (2MB, 540x303px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 540x303px

i wanna sniff a boy

File: BPgFC8egH1x.jpg (58KB, 1080x817px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 1080x817px

>>7897792
I'll sniff you if you sniff me anon

>>7897830

o-oh gosh

>>7897673
I had to look up what CAGW even was and lo and behold it's a favorite term of climate change denialists :/

>>7885559
Prefer cut.

>>7897012
>I'm fairly certain that these special snowflake SJWs are well aware that they won't always get what they want in this world
This is the part you're wrong about. They don't understand that. SJWs in university generally come from this middle class stock that was never told "No" by their parents or teachers when growing up.

>>7898604
That's such a grossly broad generalization that you know that can't possibly be true

>>7898775
So it's just a coincidence that the average sjw acts like acts like a spoiled child? Look how hard of a tantrum that was thrown at Berkeley. Being sympathetic towards them doesn't negate how they've conducted themselves historically.

>>7886660
gay sex for chistians is just as bad as masturbation and premarital sex (because it's a waste of semen and a carnal pleasure), so not THAT bad

>>7899762
This. Church records show that even the Puritans were bumping uglies before marriage, IE having thier first kid less than 9 months after marriage.

All sinners fall short of the glory of God. Just gotta do the best you can.

File: 14432384958654.jpg (308KB, 900x1354px) Image search: [Google]

308KB, 900x1354px

Reminder that pec milk is the best source of protein

>>7900081
tiddies

>>7900081
>cock milk is the best source of protein

FTFY

File: October 23, 2016 at 0325PM.jpg (45KB, 600x591px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 600x591px

>>7900750
>Implying you shouldn't have both
it's like you don't want gainz

File: 1453351740196.jpg (35KB, 500x572px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 500x572px

Pic related is my goal. I'm pretty hairless so cub is all I can be unfortunately. How do mascgen feel about tattoos?

File: BMjSN6UFYRQ.jpg (94KB, 1080x1186px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 1080x1186px

>>7898201
Yeah, because being specific about what you are talking about rather than namecalling others "denialists" is the irrational uneducated thing to do

>>7900870
If you can't accept a 98% consensus among the scientific community then I don't know what will convince you until it's too late

>>7900853
Unless the tattoos are shitty I love them

>>7900957
what is the difference between shitty and non-shitty tattoos

>>7900979
Subject matter, concept, attention to detail, execution

Any tattoo of say Sheldon from "Big Bang Theory" is going to be terrible regardless of how close it is to likeness.

>>7900979
Well, ridiculous tattoos are almost never good. Also those that you can tell were cheap or made by an unexperienced tattooer. Or when you can tell the guy didn't took properly care of them after getting them, so they healed wrong and look bad.

File: BNu8Ze5jxHH.jpg (20KB, 480x480px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 480x480px

>>7900945
What do you think the consensus is about? Something obvious like GW? AGW?

Because it isn't about CAGW.

Also, though that study is incredibly flawed it doesn't matter. Science doesn't work by consensus. I really doubt that you understand the scientific method.

>join the Toronto /r/gaybros group on Facebook out of curiosity to see what these "gaybros" look like
>every single one of them ends up being a total nu-male

Was I retarded for expecting anything different?

>>7901375
Yes

>>7901584
i use all of them because i'm a femboy4mascs

>>7901584
the point of that meme is worst = more intelligent though. Unless you are saying that mascgen is the worst. If that is the case you did ok

>>7901593
Yeah I'm gonna need you to post bum

>>7901584
>mascgen still pathetically trying to make themselves relevant

>>7901887
i'm too ashamed of myself. i just like chatting.

>>7899762
>>7900009

But the idea behind sin is that you strive to repent for it and correct your behavior. According to some christian scholars, a sin which is engaged in without guilt and repentance is one of the worst offenses to god one can commit.

So you can have gay sex - just make sure you feel bad for it, repent, and try not to continue doing it.

>>7901926
Anything you want to chat about?

>>7887569
>selling indulgences is the word of God
top kek

>>7901988
what do you like?

>>7901375
>reddit
>expecting anything BUT nu-males
lmao

>>7902805
pokemon

>>7902805
I like guys who like to discuss things. Do you like films? I've been watching Chaplin all day.

File: c63d3a8d5c59562f0c80bf3fd3affe07.jpg (25KB, 338x450px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 338x450px

>>7903075
>I've been watching Chaplin all day.

Sooo, you're a masochist?
Just kidding, but Buster Keaton is better.
And not a child molester like Charlie.

>>7903185
Why choose one of over the other? Also, I try not to judge things out of context. Charlie the artist laid the foundation for entertainment as we know it. I don't care what he fucked.

File: 1488038791267-lgbt.jpg (109KB, 500x424px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 500x424px

men are hot

>>7903206
>Why choose one of over the other?

Because there are only so many hours in the day.
And Charlie, while clever, was hardly the foundation of entertainment.
Don't be daft.

>>7903240
There's always time for clever men

File: sugar daddy.jpg (134KB, 540x720px) Image search: [Google]

134KB, 540x720px

If you absolutely had to choose one or else your pet rock dies, would you rather have a sugar daddy or be a sugar daddy?

>>7903300
I think everyone would choose more power if it was legitimately an option.

>>7903300
dubbie dubs
I am the daddy. I have all the control.

>>7903254
The point being that if you spend all 24 hours in your day watching Charlie then that leaves 0 hours to watch Buster.
It is like the old thing about what to do when you're on a runaway trolley rolling down a hill.
Not jumping off is still a choice that has consequences, even if it takes no action on your part.

>>7903336
I don't agree. A lot of people prefer 'giving' the power to someone else. Especially the kind of people who have a hard time taking decisions

>>7903347
You only live 24 hours? Are you a fruit fly in disguise?
Buster gets his day, Charlie another. All boys get their share of attention.
What would you do then, if you only had 24 hours? Would you really watch films? Not share the time with loved ones or go basejumping or something?

File: 1439060300961.jpg (120KB, 500x374px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 500x374px

>>7903365
>tfw no bf to spend your last 24 hours with

>>7903372
That looks comfy

>>7903365
>being this obtuse

Are you always this disagreeable?
Or am I just lucky?

File: 5436346373.png (2MB, 903x851px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 903x851px

>>7903389
It can be.

Rate my orc husbando, mascgen.

>>7903352
I so agree! I can't comprehend something more freeing and blissful than giving up control.

Is it really common for the kind of people who have a hard time taking decisions?

>>7903391
You're the one with simplistic explanation models, hence have no right to call other people dim. Shoo.

>>7903413
>Is it really common for the kind of people who have a hard time taking decisions?
I mean at least from what I've seen, yes.

>>7903419
nobody called you dim.
i just thought you might like buster keaton.
but you somehow took that as an insult.
and don't tell me to shoo.
you're not my grandmother.

>>7903453
You called me obtuse, and now you're comparing me to a woman. You are a naughty monkey.

File: 1486855997778.jpg (43KB, 500x333px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 500x333px

if you are going to have a boring argument at least post hot dudes pls

>>7903482
do men say "shoo"?
do men call people "naughty monkey"s?

really made me think

File: 6aa.png (178KB, 452x310px) Image search: [Google]

178KB, 452x310px

>>7903482
>obtuse

ob·tuse
əbˈt(y)o͞os,äbˈt(y)o͞os/Submit
adjective
1.
annoyingly insensitive or slow to understand.


pretty apt, if you ask me.
which, of course, no one did.
i'll let myself out.

File: tumblr_oj0aamrqV41s9yreyo1_500.jpg (114KB, 500x643px) Image search: [Google]

114KB, 500x643px

>>7903482
>>7903501
Just fuck already.

>>7903501
Men speak their mind, little monkey. I'll accept a bum pic as apology.

File: BPs7vXahod6.jpg (111KB, 1080x1349px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 1080x1349px

How do I find guys that don't want anal every time

>>7903991
If you're the top, than that should be relatively easy.
If you're the bottom, then it'll probably be a little harder to find a guy who doesn't either always want anal, or almost never want it.

File: 1439267753158.jpg (119KB, 498x750px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 498x750px

>>7903991
Funnily enough, most guys I've met weren't that much into anal. I guess they are out there. No idea how to particulary find them, though. I think that all you can do is tell them you don't like having anal every time and hope for the best.

File: 1440867512140.gif (796KB, 500x281px) Image search: [Google]

796KB, 500x281px

>message hot guy
>immediatly proceeds to tell me that it is his birthday and that he's alone and sad
>sends me a photo of him having cake alone
>then tells me about that time he got into a car accident in which he almost died and hasn't fully recovered yet
fuuuck I wanted to pork not feel
why are the hot ones always crazy?

File: I.came.gif (2MB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 200x200px

>>7903991
just put it in your profile.
there are a lot of men who don't enjoy anal but are too shy to talk about it because they think that people will think they are a prude or asexual or something when the fact is it is uncomfortable and dangerous and mostly unnecessary.
you can have great sex without having anal and millions of men do just that every day.
don't be afraid to bring it up with potential partners, the sooner the better.
being vocal about your likes and dislikes is the best way to have a fulfilling sex life.

>>7904496
he's probably just smoking a lot of pot and oversharing.
or he is manipulative and trying to catch you off guard.
i used to use the "it's my birthday" line to get dates.
it is a pretty effective way to get people to do what you want if they think it's your birthday.
you can get perfect strangers to have a drink with you and once they are drunk you can pretty much do whatever you want with them.

>>7904546
I'd say he was oversharing because he started to rant about guys only looking for fwbs and not relationships. A severe case of loneliness, I think.

File: 1467326857687.jpg (193KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

193KB, 800x800px

>>7903400
Orcs are low tier husbandos anon. Chaotic evil Gruumsh worshipping scum can never be good husbandos.

Half-Orcs on the other hand can make excellent husbandos

>>7903991
Most people who've had a Long term monogamous relationship know you can't have anal every time. There are many ways to pleasure your partner

>>7901325
>Science doesn't work by consensus
What is peer review?

The evidence from multiple international studies (9,200peer reviewed studies) made by the IPCC have always suggested that human activity has been influential on climate change. In fact, the latest report published in 2014, said that "It is extremely likely that human influence has been the dominant cause of observed warming since 1950". You are burying your head in the sand if you continue to ignore the findings of the IPCC. There's no debate. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPCC_Fifth_Assessment_Report

File: 3463733.png (852KB, 556x636px) Image search: [Google]

852KB, 556x636px

>>7904746
I have to disagree, but respect your opinion.

>>7905344
>likely
so they are just guessing

>>7905756
Gravity is "likely"

That's how science works. Very rarely are things considered laws or facts, and they're normally so fundamental it's conceptually obvious. 2+2=4, Newton's laws of motion, etc. Almost everything else is considered theory. Don't be pedantic on word choice just to arrive at the conclusion you want

File: Screen Shot 2017-03-12 at 15.57.08.png (121KB, 742x734px) Image search: [Google]

121KB, 742x734px

>>7905756
>so they are just guessing

I know you're only trying to trigger me, but at least read the article and you might be able to do it a bit better.

File: 13 snootyfox james.jpg (839KB, 1500x1125px) Image search: [Google]

839KB, 1500x1125px

>>7905344
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D_9LZ62G_pg

Are you saying we should not be skeptical whatsoever about the IPCC's "findings", when the IPCC was set up initially with the goal not to find whatever the truth about our climate was (and study all natural factors) but to focus specifically and almost exclusively on human involvement. Their job security rests on promoting a narrative, so I think skepticism is important here.

>>7903991
Get really good at blow jobs.

>>7906122
I'm saying that experts in the field have spent almost 30 years studying climate change, its consequences, and its causes, and have, using thousands of peer reviewed studies, determined that there is at least a 95% chance that climate change is dominantly driven by human influence.
Fine, you can be skeptical of peer reviewed studies. It's an inherent aspect of research to question that which has come before you. However, just because your skeptical of peer reviews doesn't mean that 100% of scientific studies (that you don't agree with) are wrong.

>when the IPCC was set up initially with the goal not to find whatever the truth about our climate was (and study all natural factors) but to focus specifically and almost exclusively on human involvement
I know we live in a post-truth world, but this is just taking the biscuit. The 5th IPCC Assessment Report takes into account 9,200 studies "to assess scientific, technical and socio-economic information concerning climate change, its potential effects and options for adaptation and mitigation". Nowhere does it say that they are specialising in the human impact. The IPCC brings in experts and authors from all over the world who already have jobs elsewhere, so your point about job security is rubbish. The IPCC is not even conducting the studies itself. You conspiracy is founded on minimal evidence and relies on the entirety of modern science being discredited along with climate research.

>>7887569

Hi, there.

I was raised Catholic and I am almost certain I am bi, if not totally gay. I am what most friends consider a very religious person. I am not willing to leave the Church that easily and I do believe in its authority, as well as in the Sacraments and all. I enjoy reading philosophy and theology. Origen is quite interesting, as well as S. Jerome , Tertulianus and S. Iraeneus. S. Augustine and S. Thomas Aquinas obviously hold a special place.

And also I understand that the Church is not based on the Bible, but the other way around. Still, Romans and Paul in general condemn homosexual practices (aka sodomy and friends), as the Catechism also does. I am grateful for having studied doctrine, for it helped me understand I should not blame nor hate myself for who I am, but it seems very clear that any carnal relationship with another man is forbidden.

How do you reconcile this? I am desperately seeking for an answer at this point, for I very much fear I am in love. Desperately in love with a male friend.

Any advice will do, honestly.

>>7888615
It's totally fine, if you're an an atheist. So, lack of religion?

>>7889538
Steve Anderson looks like a guy who spends a lot of time on the floor. In a praying situation. With his mouth open.

Hey, a boy can dream, right?

>>7906424
Your life is pretty much fucked like mine. Teachings have taught us to repress, hide, and be ashamed of what we want. I don't know why this should be because I'd help anyone. After death I'll be free i guess.

>>7906423
Your so-called experts can suck my dick.

>>7906470
You'd rather die unhappy with your life, than live the one that you know 'god' set out to you? Maybe you're just born to not go to heaven, maybe hell isn't that bad

I think gays are kinda born to be devils

/mascgen/ help me, so night out drinking after sports game... I know that my juices are running when I get to a certain point how do I know if a straight buddy is feeling it too? Things like sexual telepathy is a thing right?

Is it just me being drunk hopeful? Tends to happen when I'm with new people that I don't know... I wanna be a straight boys dirty little secret..

>>7903400
>>7905655
From what game is this?

File: 56856585.png (2MB, 1070x788px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1070x788px

>>7906500
Elder Scrolls Online.

Much better than I thought it would be. More fun than FF14 to me anyways.

File: tumblr_ocu1f467Pw1urvepco1_1280.jpg (422KB, 1158x1920px) Image search: [Google]

422KB, 1158x1920px

>>7900853
The next edition should be Swimming trunks in honor of the coming summer

File: 24 ps i love you cast.jpg (94KB, 492x750px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 492x750px

>>7906535
This

>>7906496
>I wanna be a bi boys dirty little secret

Fixed

File: dead-memes-ac1.png (84KB, 500x208px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 500x208px

>>7901948
>So you can have gay sex - just make sure you feel bad for it, repent, and try not to continue doing it.
Being this wrong? In MY christianity edition?

>>7901375
In [current year]? Yes. Gaybros has been taken over by queens and beta men looking for actual gaybros. You missed the boat by bout 4-6 years.

File: 1432444569663.jpg (77KB, 540x720px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 540x720px

>>7906535
mmm yes pls

File: That+old+bitch+got+reported+to+the+fbi+lets+see+_c5fd4e7a434d0f8628ef9ab0b6925f12.png (272KB, 959x538px) Image search: [Google]

272KB, 959x538px

>>7904546

>>7906122
>MAsculine feature
>Faggot hair
What a waste.

>>7906645
Quite nice hair imo. I bet it looks really cute when he's not pimped up for a photoshoot.
Post your hair anon?

>>7906645
>homophobia
>on a gay board

What a travesty.

>>7906717
>muh homophobia
His hair is a waste of his otherwise manly features. Fact.

File: R5JC12R.jpg (631KB, 2376x2592px) Image search: [Google]

631KB, 2376x2592px

>>7906723
post your masculine hair

>>7906673
>>7906743
>post hair
0/10 low quality bait. Someone doesn't have to be an ideal to judge what is and isn't the ideal.

>>7885387
Jesus was most probably middle-eastern, probs looked just like any other jew. but its natural that every culture has the tendency to portray him as they look like themselves. Even chinese people had their own chinese jesus.

>>7906424
God hates the sin but loves the sinner.
Sin and punishment walk hand in hand. Your willingness to sin and not grow strong enough to fight your urges is already your punishment.

I'm meeting up with this guy for the second time and he's married. He says his husband will be home...

:V

>>7903991
Look for top/versatile guys.

>>7907622
why?

>>7906424
>Any advice will do, honestly
Do what every catholic does. Sin as much as you want, and then go get confessed. As long as you 'regret' it you will be ok.

File: 14345345436545.jpg (477KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

477KB, 1000x1000px

who wins

>>7908467
why does that pic look like clipart

File: 14347283742.jpg (168KB, 1080x1080px) Image search: [Google]

168KB, 1080x1080px

someone should tell Steve Raider that his drawings are, like, bad.

>>7908862
he's such a loser. I have no time for self confessed nerds

>>7908467
obviously the bigger guy on the right

File: hottest girls.png (662KB, 1056x542px) Image search: [Google]

662KB, 1056x542px

Damn ftms are getting hot

File: fire emblem fates.gif (1MB, 500x281px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 500x281px

None of you are secretly trans and affecting a masculine personality to hide it are you?

A really cute friend of a friend bearcub announced a while back announced he's trans and today shaved and is getting all this positive feedback. He's gonna look like a dumpter fire if he continues transitioning but everyone's enabling him.

File: 1438493845935.jpg (70KB, 540x567px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 540x567px

>>7909993
I have gone from crossdressing/trapping in my teens to being a masc dudebro who wants to get swole and huge, so who knows? Seeing hot bears transitioning is always a little sad, but him looking like a fire dumpster is probably better than getting depressed and eventually killing himself tbqh

>>7908862
>hot musclebear
>lisps like a lil twink and acts all flamey
Why do these exist?

>>7910167
Nothing turns me off more than meeting a big burly man who has the softest voice in the world.
And I'm a "twink".

>>7910182
Same, but do ultra masc dudes like that who like smooth twinks get turned off if we act masc? Just wondering if they like twinks for the generally more feminine features and then could get turned off for the reverse reason a girly bear is gross.

>>7910167
>>7910182
Overly feminine guys are a turn off for me. But, to be honest, I find a slight feminine behavior on a musclebear, like a wrist limping from time to time or a high pitched moan during sex to be cute as fuck.
>>7910404
Acting masc is a turn off on anybody if it's clearly forced (just like forced feminity). If someone naturally behaves that way then it's either a turn on or something most guys don't even notice/care about. From what I've seen, of course.

>>7910565
Makes sense, the forced thing applies both ways. I'm painfully awkward so I don't know if I come off masc or fem, I was just curious.

>tfw just had my first hook up
>tfw sucked off a hot guy and made him cum pretty quick
>tfw terrified about stds
getting tested soon

File: 6575734.jpg (40KB, 526x526px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 526x526px

> I find a slight feminine behavior on a musclebear, like a wrist limping from time to time or a high pitched moan during sex to be cute as fuck.
Agree wholeheartedly.

>>7910977
That's why I don't do hookups anymore.

File: 60cc5_1276967380_vogueing.gif (4MB, 300x225px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 300x225px

I honestly don't care if a guy acts or presents stereotypical or fem as long as they're more masculine looking. I'd much prefer a mincing queer of a muscle bear that does genderfuck drag and can lipsynch Gaga than some twinky little shit into sports and guns and stuff.

File: 14324392.jpg (61KB, 1080x1080px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 1080x1080px

>>7912570
This. Feminity isn't necessarily a bad thing. Both it and masculinity can turn bad, especially if they are forced or just a means to seek attention. The only thing I would say should be tired to be fixed would be a lisp, but just because it is a speech disorder that can actually be fixed in many cases, and because self improvement is always good.

>>7912697
Why is getting rid of gay affectation considered self-improvement tho

>mathcs talking down to fems
>the most disgusting aids riddled pig faggots tend to be mathcs
>fems are comfortable enough with their sexuality to live their lives as obviously submissive males
>mathcs think they're better for hiding it behind a rugged exterior, despite going home and moaning like a bitch while sitting on their traffic cone

Die. In. Fire.

>>7912730
Lmfao @ the traffic cone thing

Is it a generation thing? I don't get this masc fem thing.
Just be who you wanna be. Plenty of straight guys paint their nails and do other girly things.
Stop being weird old people.

>>7912742
Crises of masculinity are something baby gays will always have. All we can do is encourage and support their road to self-acceptance

>>7912762
q-tips can't speak

>>7912762
>tfw not masc
>want to be masc because I don't want to be a stand out faggot (not flamer, but obviously emasculate)
>know that my true nature is emasculate

Basically I'm stuck with becoming a less outgoing Leslie Jordan if I'm true to myself.
This is an unbearable fate.

>>7912807
i support u bby
u is smart, u is kind, u is important

>>7912711
Lisping is not inherently related to being gay. Plenty of straight people have a lisp. Think about it as having a bad form when lifting. You may get hurt. If you have a lisp, people may have a hard time understanding you. That's why is self-improvement in the cases it can be fixed.

>>7912851
I think there's a difference between gay voice and an actual lisp. If you're talking about actual lisps then you can ignore my post >>7912711

>>7912885
>I think there's a difference between gay voice and an actual lisp
Yeah. I think so too. A gay voice usually has a certain intonation and/or pitch and may or may not include a lisp as well.

>>7885387
That's bullshit, but I sure would love to worship that model.

rollin for feet boogaloo edition

File: tumblr_nxsm3jmVdi1unj453o1_500.jpg (75KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 500x500px

Rolling for cuddles edition

>>7912570
>than some twinky little shit into sports and guns and stuff.
Dreams dashed

>>7910182
>tfw opposite
>tfw aroused by twinks with manly as fuck voices

File: tumblr_ocu1f467Pw1urvepco2_1280.jpg (471KB, 1268x1920px) Image search: [Google]

471KB, 1268x1920px

Rolling for swimwear edition

>>7913481
Rolling

>>7913481
Rollan

>>7913481
Winning roll

>>7913499
Ayyy.

>>7913499
fuck you I wanted the piss edition

>>7913769
Satan take you.

>>7913098
No pls no. Cuddles trigger me

Does anyone else find it problematic that this thread is about to 404 and we don't have a new one?

Literally shaking right now.

>>7914905
I know right
It's triggering my PSTD

New thread:
>>7915269
>>7915269
>>7915269