fetish vs. faith

[john getty]

Chip on my shoulder? I'd better avoid this thread from now on, my views on religion get MUCH more insulting.

 

[luv2tikl]

I dealt with this when I was Christian. It's actually shit like this that led me to losing my faith - I got tired of having to try to explain things away, and bending the rules to work around me. It's bullshit, really. If Jesus says that it's immoral to lust after a woman, then that's what Jesus says, no ifs, ands, or buts about it. So for those of us who like to see hot girls, tied naked or almost naked to the bed and tickle tortured, we are not following doctrine. But of coarse, we have to go digging for what Jesus "actually" meant. We have to start conversations about how Jesus' words "actually" meant something else in their original context. And all because we want to do things our own way and not Jesus' in this instance.

That's the thing about religious people - god always seems to love and hate the exact same things they do!

 

[Tickaler]

Don't forget Jews and Muslims as well, they worship the same God as Christians. It is the nature of man to disagree on pretty much everything, especially matters of faith. Christianity is not some kind of political movement that seeks to change how you think and make you one of us. Not true Christianity anyway. So your statement here is both ignorant and seems to be borne of a chip on your shoulder. You might reflect on your reasons for thinking this way before you make such statements.

So what are all those missionaries doing abroad preaching to the poor and destitute, where they hand out Bibles with bread?

Sounds an awful lot like the food-for-oil program that tarnished the former U.N. leader to me....

 

[Tickaler]

That's the thing about religious people - god always seems to love and hate the exact same things they do!

Amen, bro.

 

[Tidas]

So what are all those missionaries doing abroad preaching to the poor and destitute, where they hand out Bibles with bread?

Sounds an awful lot like the food-for-oil program that tarnished the former U.N. leader to me....

Obviously you missed the part where I said "true" Christians. But this is digressing into some that belongs in P&R.

 

[Tickaler]

Obviously you missed the part where I said "true" Christians. But this is digressing into some that belongs in P&R.

I guess Baptists and the Latter-Days aren't true Christians then? Because they are at the front of the missionary pack. If they aren't the "true" ones you speak of, well I agree with you there.

 

[Fugatum]

Interesting comments. My solution has been to seek tickling from other guys. Not being gay or even slightly bi, but purely hetero, I can just enjoy the tickling.

 

[BrightEyes1082]

Satan is barely mentioned in the Old Testament

What? What about the serpent in Genesis?? Chronicles?
Job? Psalms? Isaiah? Daniel? Jeremiah? Just to name a few?

Obviously you missed the part where I said "true" Christians. But this is digressing into some that belongs in P&R.

I sponsor two little girls through World Vision, a Christian relief
organization. Nelly, who lives in Mexico, and Sara, in Albania.
World Vision asks that we not discuss religion or faith in our
correspondance, lest the letters get into the wrong hands and
the children suffer for it. They seek only to show love to these
kids, and meet their basic needs for food, clothing, shelter, and
medical care. Are you saying World Vision missionaries are not
"true" Christians? What is a "true" Christian, exactly? Someone
who follows Christ, but keeps his mouth shut about it?

If anyone is ashamed of me and my words, the Son of Man
will be ashamed of him when he comes in his glory and in the
glory of the Father and of the holy angels. Luke 9:26

Just sayin'.

 

[Tidas]

That's not what i'm saying at all BrightEyes. It seems to me that the people who seek to convert everyone they meet are the people that are being untrue. It doesn't seem Christlike to me to ram religion down the throat of people every chance you get. What I mean is sometimes it's better to help people just to help them, and only explain why when they ask, as opposed to holding religion over people's heads. Please don't take offense, I know that what I said can seem polarizing. I am in no way trying to say that Christian charity is wrong, or untrue, but that the notion of coercion by charity is wrong.

 

[Markoni]

No person on earth can honestly say that they get their morality from the bible. It is impossible to live your life by the bible word for word (if you don't believe me, read it). Therefore, what most religious people do is pick and choose which parts they want to follow, and interpret the bible for themselves. It is the method by which we pick and choose which parts to follow that defines our morality. That method is a product of our up bringing, our society, and our genetics. Most importantly, it is available to all of us, religious or not.

So in summary, since you're already not following the bible word for word, throw your fetish in there with the rest because it makes you happy.

 

[Tidas]

For a touch of humor...

 

[Angel77]

For a touch of humor...

Lol! See, back in the day I would have felt like I was going to Hell just from laughing at that.

I love God and consider myself a good Christian but I have learned to accept who I was a long time ago. The guilt that I used to feel about my fetish didn't do me any damn good. I could pray about it but it was still there. Was I really forgiven because I prayed to God to forgive me after I indulged in it? Or was I looking for some sort of "permission" for Him, some sort of sign that it was ok to be me? These are questions that I have all thought about before and like I said in my earlier post..............I just learned to accept and love me for who I am and I'm pretty darn sure God still loves me too.

I still love that pic though!

 

[Tickaler]

Isn't "fetish vs. faith" the same as "sex vs. faith"?

Hey lee' n' lers,
Well, lately I have been making a return to all the things I should be doing, going to church, reading my Bible, etc. I know that the Bible says that is is sinful to lust after the flesh, and in the back of my mind I've always know that, but I guess I'm just now making an upfront connection between that and the foot tickling fetish I have nurtured for so many years. So, there seems to be a major confliction there. I just cannot imagine turning my back on this part of me, to deny it as something shameful. Are there any other christians out here that have gone through or are going through this same thing? Just looking for some input, from anybody really.

Aside from all the good comments made in this thread, here's one simple observation (may have already been mentioned): how is your lust for tickling different from lust for sex? You separate out and say that your tickling fetish is sinful and a contradiction to your God's will.

Why aren't you asking this question as well: "Is it wrong for me to want to lust after flesh for sex?" So could you imagine turning your back on the sexual part of you, and deny it as something shameful? Why is it people should be able to have premarital sex and still go to heaven, but not premarital tickling???

The way you're talking about sinful lust of tickling flesh is the same thing as sinful lust of flesh for sex purposes, so why treat the fetish differently?

 

[jackbw]

What? What about the serpent in Genesis?? Chronicles?
Job? Psalms? Isaiah? Daniel? Jeremiah? Just to name a few?

Well, in Genesis it just says the serpent, it never says "the devil" or "Satan" and then it goes on to a fable sort of conclusion about why snakes crawl on the ground... actual snakes. Why would an animal get punished for something Satan did? Remember, early Genesis is a poem, not a history book.

For the others, since you didn't bother giving any reference numbers, I'm not going to look each and every one up, but remember that the word satan in Hebrew just means "adversary." Sometimes it's not even used as a proper noun, it's just the word "ha-satan," the adversary, the accuser, the one who opposes. In Job, the Satan asks God's permission to test Job, and God gives that permission. There's no explanation as to what this person is, it's just a figure questioning Job's piety. It behaves nothing like the New Testament concept, and most of the OT passages referencing a Satan are post-exilic. There's nothing demonic about him.

 

[jackbw]

The thing about Christianity is, even though it's the same religion there are so many different interpretations of the bible by Catholics, Protestants, Mormons etc, and as Christians they disagree with each other, can't they even get their story straight before they start lying to us?

Well, good question, I guess... I actually can't think of a group of people with completely homogeneous beliefs and rhetoric. There are loose definitions of dogma within the followers of Jesus, with groups like Latter Day Saints and Jehovah's Witnesses usually considered slightly outside that hazy ring in the realm of "sects" or "cults" depending on your perspective. Catholics and Protestants historically disagreed on quite a lot, but Pope John Paul II closed that gap significantly (though the guy in the Vatican now has reversed some of that I believe...). Most of Luther's famous Theses have been addressed at this point.

But yes, there is disagreement. But where isn't there? We only have two major political parties in this country, as opposed to the Netherlands which I think have around 11 with influence. Even in our two political parties, there are sometimes massive divisions. You'd think people would get along temporarily to accomplish what's needed, but time and time again we see people self-serving. And just as many lies come out of our government than any church leader... we all have our first allegiances. Just because religion has been exploited by those in power doesn't render it meaningless. The same has been done for just about any other ideal you can think of.

 

[trace1984]

as far as what u guys said about the bible wow just wow and mostly wrong lol,,,,,,,,i know God.......as far as lust yes if u lust after anything its bad/wrong wanting something isnt wrong,sex isnt wrong neither is playing its just how and with whom,,,married do whatever u want,,i see tickling as playful ,fun, teasing, if its sexual or u mix play then u should be married but no ones perfect,,,,,,as for taking what u like out of the bible ,IT says listen to all of it or its pointless, u can take things and say your a buddist? the bible is history for the one guy. people need to read the bible and understand it ,to many ignorant people talking about something they know little about lol last comment get off of religion and get on God, religion will do NOTHING for u but give u a head ache,,,its all about God! people seem to forget that........

 

[proud2tickle]

well i suppose i have held my tongue long enough........ the bible is whatever you want it to be, to me it is the direct word of God. i believe God loves us all and has a plan for us and that plan can be revealed to you by reading the bible and seeing what events in your life are from God and what maybe from outside sources. my faith tells me that even though men wrote the bible for the lord and put it together that his influence was there... i mean he is the God of all, its pointless to think he couldnt protect his word throughout history. i saw someone mention songs of solomon earlier and talked of it as thinking it was lust, infact it isnt solomon is writing about his wife (one of them) in that book. he isnt lusting after her he is thankful for her. God said that a man and woman who are married can enjoy anything sexaul they do... someone compared the tickling vs faith to sex vs. faith there again i disagree. being lustful over anything is a sin but i dont think tickling indicates sex.... i get arroused when i tickle a beautiful girl, but i get arroused when i talk to one too in a binki on the lake.... the question is do i act on my arrousement.... and the answer is no i dont. if you arent actually having sex your not going against God. because then you could say to kiss someone is a sin and that isnt. i think its pretty simple its not your faith that is butting heads with ur beliefs and tickling but what u may think to be right and wrong...... sometimes what he believe to be wrong or not smart can sometimes be what God wants us to do.. like jonah and the whale... he didnt want to go to a place he viewed as dangerous and bad for him but that was what God asked him to do... so he ran and God delt with him... Remember jesus loves you and he suffered for nine hours on a cross to die for you and then he rose on the third day to defeat spiritaul death. he knows your not prefect he accepts it. it never says anywhere in the bible that you have to be prefect, it jsut simply asks you to give your life to jesus and follow him the best you can, so moral of the story enjoy tickling just dont act on the sex it makes you want to have or lust (which means a desire that is wanted more than obeying the lord) i hope you find your answer.....

 

[john getty]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YjZ-lSn0A3M

 

[Coda]

madpipertn,

I empathize with you. It may help to remember that nobody was ever born obligated to a religion; <I>everyone</I> has had to take their religion on faith without confirmation, including people like church officials. You're your own person, you arrived in the universe in the same way as anyone else, and I'm sure you're just as able to make up your own mind. Be honest with yourself, and have fun.

 

[jj82277]

It seems these threads are focused generally on two extremes: atheists and agnostics (most of which were raised in a religious home) and religious people who think they have found the "balance" of fetish and faith to keep from feeling too guilty. I apologize for the length and rambling nature of the following:

The thing is, it's not a black and white issue. Reading and intelligently interpreting the Bible eventually leads to a life decision, but it's not a rulebook. It's not even all about ethics and morality. The "book" is a vast collection of writings over thousands of years made up of every literary genre you can think of (narrative prose, poetry, song lyrics, parable, legal documents, apocalyptic writing, etc). It's a mistake to generalize it by saying things like "It was written by men, God had nothing to do with it," or "God wrote this book for us, he just used the writers as tools." We actually have pretty good copies of the original texts to check newer translations on (and yes, different translations of the Bible can be significantly different), so it makes no sense to say things like "It's based on a culture where science was thought to be from the devil!!" because science wasn't developed until hundreds of years after the Bible was written. If you're reading the bible from a scientific standpoint you've missed the boat already.

Now, more than ever before, people of faith can interpret scripture for themselves both individually and in their communities. Even Catholics have the ability to form their own opinions, whether the top-heavy papacy likes it or not. There's no need to make ad hoc arguments for things like homosexuality and fetishism, because when you study the culture these documents were written in and ignore the "Moral Majority" in the USA, there's really very little in the Bible about such things. Jesus never mentioned homosexuality in the records we have of his teachings (most of his teachings were about the Kingdom of God and taking care of the poor and widows), and other references were made in a society which had no concept of a "sexual orientation." Anal sex in the Old Testament was mostly something one man did to another to shame him after conquering him in battle. In the New Testament time period pederasty was an acceptable relationship in Roman culture, but it wasn't because the men were "gay." It was just what people did.

There is no verse in the Bible that says "Sex before marriage is wrong." In Hebrew culture it was expected that the bride was a virgin, but this was also a time of arranged marriages, so the bride was more of a possession than a person anyway. I suggest finding the "spirit of the law" in instances where a cultural equivalent does not exist today. Who wrote the story/law? What did the story/law mean to the people it was written for? What is the context this passage was written in? When you have an idea to these answers, then you might see how they can speak to you today, rather than blindly cutting and pasting directly from the bible into your 21st century life.

Satan is barely mentioned in the Old Testament; the idea of Hell and the Devil seem to be later developments, probably partially influenced by Greek dualist ideas (if there is an all-good God, there must be an evil counterpart). Satan may also just be a way to personify evil forces. The idea that God is the ultimate love, with infinite grace, yet is somehow unable to forgive people who don't believe in him and pray a certain prayer, and is contractually obligated to send them to Hell is complete nonsense. If you believe in a loving, all-powerful God, remember that He is in control, not some self-contained justice system of sin and punishment that God must submit to.

Yes, in our sexuality, as in all human qualities, there is always the potential for corruption. The world is broken, we see that every day. But drawing lines in the sand over "how far is too far" to balance a spiritual, churchy self with a physical, everyday self creates a false dichotomy. We don't have two distinct natures. There's no "inner battle" going on between Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. We're just people, flesh and spirit fused, and God is present in every aspect of our lives. I happen to believe that responding to that love entails a change of heart and a change of lifestyle, but it has nothing to do with hating gays and bombing abortion clinics. If it requires a change in how you understand your tickling fetish, I would think the main question might be "How much power am I giving this fetish over my life?" not "How can I satisfy my desires and still feel holy?"

I'm not perfect either, I've shared in these same struggles of faith, but these are my working conclusions.

all due respect, the most dangerous and reckless form of scriptural misinerpretation and misrepresentation is "well jesus never said..."

that attempts to completely invalidate every piece of scripture not highlighted in red and implies some kind of adversarial relationship between a collection of documents that have been vetted by men inspired by the holy spirit for centuries.

while i appreciate in a way the attention that you pay to certain details, lest i remind you that sin originated in the idea that there was beneficial knowledge outside the framework of devine order through human understanding gen 3:6.

and to say something like the idea of pre-marital sex isn't biblical completely obliterates the concept of the greatest commandment. the highest commandment that we have in relation to other people is to love our neighbor as ourselves. as that applies as a man to a woman who would take a woman into his house to know her without marrying her who is not a coward? that is not a moral axim subject to the concept of cultural transposition that may apply to things like dress, dance, observation of holidays, diet etc. etc. etc. but the foundational purpose of the covenant surrounding righteous sexual relations is fully explained several times (example 1 corinthians 7:1-10). It's about respect for the woman that you share that kind of intimacy with, not social conservative dogma.

 

[waitin2btkled]

The thing about Christianity is, even though it's the same religion there are so many different interpretations of the bible by Catholics, Protestants, Mormons etc, and as Christians they disagree with each other, can't they even get their story straight before they start lying to us?

I agree that there are too many different denominations which clarify what you said about different interpretations. However, there is ONE GOD, who has ONE SON who died for our sins. It took 50-60 lamb skins to put together 1 scroll to document this. How else would they have recorded the evens that have taken place.

Now when you have the original scrolls held in the Vatican, throughout the years, many different nations and kings had their form of control and used religion falsely. I agree on many levels as you that this but there is still one thing that holds true....

There is still only 1 book and while you eat God's food and drive his cars and enjoy breathing his air, remember what i said to you.

 

[john getty]

I agree that there are too many different denominations which clarify what you said about different interpretations. However, there is ONE GOD, who has ONE SON who died for our sins. It took 50-60 lamb skins to put together 1 scroll to document this. How else would they have recorded the evens that have taken place.

Now when you have the original scrolls held in the Vatican, throughout the years, many different nations and kings had their form of control and used religion falsely. I agree on many levels as you that this but there is still one thing that holds true....

There is still only 1 book and while you eat God's food and drive his cars and enjoy breathing his air, remember what i said to you.

In THEORY it's God's food, cars and air, and until it's been confirmed that this imaginary friend of yours -who seems to be a split-personality homophobic prone to violent mood swings- really does exist, no, I won't remember what you said to me, because you're just one of many Christians who've demanded my respect for their own delusions throughout my life. The notion of a God was invented by men who wanted their own rule book to be followed by everyone so they came up with a magical place of eternal bliss for people who comply, and an equally magical place of eternal suffering for those who don't.

 

[PurpleStyle]

that attempts to completely invalidate every piece of scripture not highlighted in red and implies some kind of adversarial relationship between a collection of documents that have been vetted by men inspired by the holy spirit for centuries.

Since when is self-proclaimed holy inspiration a qualification for anything of intrinsic value?

 

[Gadilici]

Ok, I haven't been online while this thread was developing. Now it's so long, I'll probably never get caught up. I did catch Markoni's post tho (as it was the first to pop up when I clicked page 5).

Untrue, Markoni. You either believe it, or you don't. You can't pick and choose. There are some things you have to know the context of (example; women not speaking in church. At the time women and men did not sit together, so for a woman to talk to her husband, it interrupted the service. Yet the Bible mentions prophetesses and deaconesses who almost certainly spoke in church, just not in the context Paul was warning against), but you cannot just say "I don't like this one". Well you can, there's stuff I don't like, but it doesn't mean I should just ignore it. You pick and choose at your own peril. You are perfectly free to do so, but as with all other choices there are consequences. And some of them are huge (ex; in Revelation, the warning against adding to or taking away from the book bringing judgment)

But yes, some of us do in fact get our "morality" from the Book. Whether or not we are good at keeping it, that is a different story. Some are better than others. But that's really the whole point of the Gospels. No one is perfect, no one can earn their way to God, so there is the gift of grace. That's why He was crucified, as an atonement sacrifice for the human race (but you have to accept that gift, and believe on Him). So, just because no one perfectly does all the commands, and follows the rules and advice all the time, does not mean that they've picked and chosen. Just that once again, they screwed it up. Get up, dust off, hit it again, and do better this time.

Sorry if that's been covered already.

As far as faith and fetish go...

To be precise I have no fetishes as the shrinks define them. I can get off without feet or tickling, etc. But what I am is a tickling enthusiast. I loved tickling as far back as I can remember. Literally. I have a very small handful of memories of things before my family moved to Ohio when I was 2. And among those are tickling memories. Shadows more than full-fledged memories, really. I had fantasies about tying up my classmates when I was 6 (and they never really stopped), but it was only tickling. The idea of nudity or even kissing was all sorts of ridiculous to my mind. I didn't have any connection in thought between the sexual and tickling until I was 20. I blame Howard Stern and his Christmas Tickle episode. Seriously, that's when it happened. So I spent upwards of 18 years dreaming and thinking about it with no sexual thoughts to it.

Meaning? I get to see it as a sport as well as a turn on. In other words, my love for tickling is not innately sinful, just as most things are not innately sinful. The question is, what do I do with it? I can tickle my wife for sexual gratification all I want. In the confines of marriage, and totally kosher. I can tickle women I am not married to, so long as it is NOT for the sexual gratification. I can use it the way other people use basketball, or golf. It's a sport, it's fun, and it doesn't have to lead to anything more than that. Or it can be used for the purposes of bonding in friendship. Like bowling, or having an MST3K party.

So is loving tickling a sin? I don't believe so. Is being turned on by it a sin? I don't think so, that's just an initial automatic reaction for some. I mean, anyone ever get a hard on from the vibrations of a motorcycle? Not really anything you can do about that. It's what I decide to do with the tickling that determines whether or not it is conflicting with my faith. Just like holding a baseball bat. I can use it for fun and recreation, or I can use it for sin (beating someone, or destroying someone's property). But the bat is not sinful. Nor is the motorcycle sinful for giving the erection. But If I should decide I need an available lady to fix the erection, yup, that's bad.

And of course, I believe it can be very good medicine for when you're down or depressed. No more sinful there than an aspirin.

But those are just my views, I seriously doubt they're shared by a great many people (or that a great many people have really pondered it). Those that are not Christian (and possibly Jews or Muslims), it wouldn't really apply, I suppose. But I've never seen anything in the Bible on it one way or the other, so it's purely a question of conscience. And Paul said if your conscience bothers you, don't do it.

My two scheckels...

Christopher

 

[Tickler15]

Hey lee' n' lers,
Well, lately I have been making a return to all the things I should be doing, going to church, reading my Bible, etc. I know that the Bible says that is is sinful to lust after the flesh, and in the back of my mind I've always know that, but I guess I'm just now making an upfront connection between that and the foot tickling fetish I have nurtured for so many years. So, there seems to be a major confliction there. I just cannot imagine turning my back on this part of me, to deny it as something shameful. Are there any other christians out here that have gone through or are going through this same thing? Just looking for some input, from anybody really.

Your not perfect bro, you can't help the way you are.....besides God will forgive you.....