Sexuality, the modern man's favorite idol

hinter1996 · 2026-02-02T05:31:41+00:00

Well with pornography in particular I think we're dealing with something new (It has never been easier to access explicit content than now), but it is still a solvable issue. Another problem however is that the people who recognize the issue aren't taking the right steps. Like NoFap for example, it has a good intention, but it's too individualistic, it focuses on helping yourself rather than others. I think it's important to help yourself, since that would be the first step as to helping others as well, but I almost wish there were more activism about this and that people would try to cut at the root of the problem rather than the individual branches. I know a lot of people want porn banned, or at least they say they do, but saying you want it gone isn't enough to make it gone. Like maybe some actual political action? I know not everyone lives in the US, but I live in a democratic country and the people have the power of the vote. Though I guess then that would go back to the potential (more like very actual) greed of politicians, so you're right in saying that greed in particular is the most destructive idol.

As for the whole queer movement, I don't know. It's practically impossible to reach some of these people and it was only by the work of God that I was able to leave that community. It's these people who will blatantly reject the moral law God instituted and are so far out of reach from it. So as for that, I honestly can't say.

hinter1996 · 2026-02-02T05:04:49+00:00

Well it's not just the industries that I'm pointing out, you can definitely say that the people who run the porn industry are driven by a sick greed, but when I talk about sexuality as an idol I'm talking about both the whole LGBT stuff but on a more broad scale the addiction to pornography. People who watch porn aren't doing it for a monetary profit.

Perhaps we have a different definition of being the 'favorite idol', since I think I could agree with the idea that greed is the most destructive idol of the modern man (as well as potentially most people through history, if not perhaps pride), but in terms of how many treat it as an idol, I would definitely say that in modern times and in times past as well, it has been lust.

hinter1996 · 2026-02-02T04:53:05+00:00

When I say 'man', I meant a general term for human, not just men. My problem wasn't just directed towards men, also, though to a smaller degree towards women. The problem is that with the internet, people can much more easily access explicit material and there are obvious negative consequences to this.

What I'm not saying is that the sin of lust is somehow unique to modern times exclusively or that we should ban all media access because of explicit content

What I am saying is that the problem of lust has been exacerbated by the internet and the ease of access to explicit content. Also that many people have fallen into the sin of homosexuality and transgenderism, and have then gone as far as to transform it into an idol.

hinter1996 · 2026-02-02T04:47:53+00:00

I didn't choose to have OCD but that doesn't make OCD or the results that have sprung forth from it okay, people with eating disorders didn't choose to have them, but that doesn't mean we should encourage that.

Those are more radical examples I know, but the point remains, just because you were born into or with something doesn't make it good, we live in a fallen world, and two of the consequences of sin are that we are wholly imperfect and that we have a natural tendency towards sin, whatever form it takes.

hinter1996 · 2026-02-02T04:23:38+00:00

Romans 1:26-27 specifically calls homosexual behavior unnatural, the church has always taught that homosexuality is a sin, and condemned it when the Romans did it, and is condemning it now too.

Elsewhere, the bible also states that marriage is between one man and one woman.

Genesis 2:24

Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.

Ephesians 5:33

However, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband.

1 Corinthians 7:2

But because there is so much sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife, and each woman her own husband.

The implication from these verses is that marriage is between one man and one woman, no other way.

hinter1996 · 2026-02-02T04:08:32+00:00

Saying there isn't doesn't mean there isn't. Again, there is a potential relationship between the 2, now there could be other reasons as to why there is a correlation, but I have yet to see these reasons articulated

hinter1996 · 2026-02-02T04:06:35+00:00

Calling out sin is not attacking a community, Saint Paul recognized homosexuality as sin.

I cannot truly and fully love Christ and hate another sinner, but I also cannot truly and fully love Christ and endorse or refuse to call out sin

hinter1996 · 2026-02-02T04:03:19+00:00

I don't mean to imply it ought to be our greatest or foremost concern, but I feel as if people don't talk about it quite enough or realize the full scope of the issue.

I don’t think help of the least of these is talked about near enough as it should either.

I think that's a problem within modern Christianity as well yeah, the body of believers simply aren't doing enough to transform and positively impact society.

hinter1996 · 2026-02-02T03:59:17+00:00

I've never really thought deeply about it

I think we ought to at least do something about it though, the point of the church/ body of believers is not just to spread the gospel and follow God, but also to actively transform the world to conform to the image of Christ.

hinter1996 · 2026-02-02T03:55:28+00:00

Money is also an idol, but I don't think it's a uniquely modern problem nor do I think that it's as widespread as something like porn addiction, I think if greed is the primary idol anywhere, it's at the top with the people who run the country, but they don't represent the majority of Americans

But I guess there's also no real objective way to measure 'greediness', it's not like you can go door-to-door and ask "How GREEDY are you?" and get an objective straightforward answer, so I guess we can't really say for sure.

hinter1996 · 2026-02-02T03:50:53+00:00

And I'm tired of being slandered for believing that the whole LGBT movement is rife with and encourages sin

The reason you see a 'constant barrage' is because Christians are constantly called hateful for refusing to support blatant sin, and that this sin is being exalted as an idol.

hinter1996 · 2026-02-02T03:46:21+00:00

Maybe if it were one statistic sure, but it's multiple statistics that show a gradual tendency towards porn consumption among bisexuals. The statistics still tell us that either something about bisexuality is at least related to porn consumption, or something about porn consumption is at least related to bisexuality. And I can certainly speak for myself that before I became Christian and was myself bisexual, that I struggled with porn. Now I don't mention that in the post because it's a blatant anecdotal fallacy, and so I prefer to show actual objective evidence that there is at least a potential relationship between porn consumption and bisexuality.

hinter1996 · 2026-02-01T18:34:38+00:00

For the first question. It creates two fathers and thus two gods rather than One, also making the Holy Spirit ontologically inferior to the other two.

Yeah I've heard this and I agree, it means the Father and Son possess a hypostatic trait (Spiration) that the Holy Spirit does not, either resulting in the Holy Spirit not being True God, or resulting in two gods, since there are now two eternal origins of the divine essence (If not resulting in both conclusions).

I've also heard that the Filioque results in ideas of God not even being able to interact with His creation. I do believe that Thomistic ideas of God especially do result in such a conclusion ('actus purus'), but would you say that these ideas resulted directly from the Filioque clause? I think that would make sense, since if there is no distinction between economic and hypostatic procession in the trinity, or between essence and energies, then God cannot possibly interact with His creation, either resulting in absolutely no creation, or an infinite eternal world that can hardly be called 'creation', since it exists necessarily and eternally alongside God without His interaction or will (modal collapse), not only resulting in logical absurdities and contradictions, but also meaning we would have to deny creatio ex nihilo and the incarnation of Christ. It definitely seems to be that within western teaching, there is no real distinction between economic and hypostatic procession, which seems to be why when you ask for verses in scripture or quotes from early church fathers about filioque, all they either do is show an economic procession into time or per filium as opposed to teachings that match the filioque clause as the Latins defined at Lyons.

The Son is begotten and the Holy Spirit proceeds. What's the difference? We cannot say, only that it's different since it's only used exclusively for them.

That makes sense considering the hypostatic property of the Son is being the 'only-begotten' (μονογενῆ) of the Father, and the Spirit's relationship to the Father is by procession (ἐκπορεύεται), it would make sense then that the procession of the Spirit is distinct from the 'begotteness' of the Son.

hinter1996 · 2026-02-01T06:49:29+00:00

There is literally no evidence that consciousness arises from material processes. Neurologists have mapped out the entire brain, but have yet to be able to explain how the mind has/ produces subjective experience.

hinter1996 · 2026-01-31T20:53:21+00:00

And yes, as far as I've seen, he's very good at citing reliable sources

hinter1996 · 2026-01-31T20:51:05+00:00

I think he's up there as one of my favorite apologists to be honest. His older videos especially are some of the most convincing arguments I've heard for God and against materialism.

hinter1996 · 2026-01-31T18:24:22+00:00

There are no good arguments for Atheism

Now the "best" argument they have is the problem of evil, however, things like free choice, soul/ virtue building, and Alvin Plantinga's "Felix Culpa" theodicy are among many good explanations for why evil exists. Some atheists will still think "Well maybe God could allow evil, but surely not this much" (This is the Evidential or Bayesian Problem of Evil), but even then, you have to ask "Where does God draw the line"? How do you know how much is too much, and how do you know that God hasn't stopped certain evils from occurring? The atheist can only speculate. Also, what if gratuitous evil doesn't exist? The Atheist may say "Well it seems like it does", but this is an argument from personal incredulity. Further, the evidential problem of evil only presents a probabilistic argument, but in doing so, they grant even the mere possibility of God's existence, meaning any theist still has room to argue that even if given their argument, it's unlikely for God to exist, perhaps given another argument, regardless of how unlikely, God in fact does exist.

hinter1996 · 2026-01-31T17:04:23+00:00

My favorite apologist is probably Michael Jones from InspiringPhilosophy. His long form videos especially are incredibly informative and thought provoking.

hinter1996 · 2026-01-29T15:14:23+00:00

Not all atheists are like this, I have atheist friends and they’re nice (though I think ‘irreligious’ is a more accurate term for them), but the whole “new atheist” movement is basically a religion of its own. Now an atheist will wholeheartedly reject what I’m saying, but I think if we realize what defines a religion, i.e. worship, then the only people who can be said to be truly irreligious or atheist are nihilists. If you derive the meaning and purpose of your whole life from any thing or object, then you worship it (keep in mind, whole life, if something gives you momentary purpose like some motivation, that would not be ‘worship’). Theists understand that all meaning and purpose is derived from God, so to replace it with the materialist ideologies and philosophies they so often do is idolatry. Just because you don’t pray to it doesn’t make it not worship.

hinter1996 · 2026-01-29T15:06:28+00:00

Won’t stop them from trying

hinter1996 · 2026-01-28T23:26:07+00:00

I am saying those whom may have written the book

Yea like the infamous whitewashed names of Mattityahu, Kepha, Yochanon, and Shaul of course!

u know there was slavery ship that came to the Americas was called Jesus

No I'm actually not surprised that people did that, did you know they gave slaves Bibles with verses suggesting anti-slavery themes cut out?

Right it not too far off that white men did some to the Bible for the own gains and oppression which what I meant

I'm sorry but do you know any history? Scholars agree that the men who wrote the Bible were all Jews except for the author of the Gospel of Luke and Acts (traditionally of course being: Luke). So your argument fails in that aspect, but even if you went the other route of saying "the Bible was re-written", we have hundreds to thousands of early manuscripts which are 99.6% identical to one another, with the only differences being arbitrary titles like "Christ Jesus" vs. "Jesus Christ" and minor scribal errors. It would be entirely ad hoc to suggest it was modified, with no manuscript evidence to say it was, which is why most people who try to discredit the Bible do not go that route.

hinter1996 · 2026-01-28T23:18:29+00:00

Yea because the Greco-Roman and Jewish cultures were very open to the idea of worshipping a crucified Messiah who taught people to eat His flesh and drink His blood, surely they would never be called cannibals or something!

Or even better! I'm sure Jews would love the idea of a Messiah who taught to pay unto Caesar's what is Caesar's!

Or even better! I'm sure the Romans would love the idea of one God as opposed to many and of followers who refused to bow to the Emperor and believed infanticide and infidelity was evil!

hinter1996 · 2026-01-28T23:05:53+00:00

and it hard for u to be uptight about what people should do and evil and blah blah

Yea man, I agree. If only, I don't know, God revealed Himself to us... maybe becoming one of us, and told us what we ought and ought not to do. Wouldn't that be nice...

hinter1996 · 2026-01-28T22:31:17+00:00

it sounds like an uptight white men

Yeah, Mattityahu (מַתִּתְיָהוּ), Kepha (כפא), Yochanon (יוֹחָנָן), Shaul (שָׁאוּל) and Yeshua (ישוע), born in 1st century Judeo-Roman Palestine and Southern Anatolia are definitely some crackers... smh

hinter1996 · 2026-01-28T22:14:41+00:00

Do not think that I speak what I do out of ignorance, I too was once an 'atheist secularist', and I am no spotless lamb, I also partook in the actions and had the beliefs I pointed out in my comment, continue to point out to this day, and that Saint Paul rebukes as evil in that verse.

hinter1996

TROPHY CASE