"The Bible Verse No Guy Enjoys Reading"

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby (OP)
"The Bible Verse No Guy Enjoys Reading"

"Over the years I’ve identified several categories of crushed manhood:

1. Insecurity. Many guys become selfish, driven performers, out to prove their manhood through competition. Because they didn’t get healthy encouragement at home, they become self-absorbed and crave the spotlight. They can appear extremely successful, but inside they are afraid of failure. They find it hard to build healthy friendships, and their wives usually feel used and ignored. In the end, these guys end up in divorce, scandal, prison or worse.

2. Indecisiveness. Some men just don’t have the ability to make decisions. They may have never had a father to encourage them or a role model to learn from. As a result they flounder in their careers, struggle financially, fear the future and feel spineless. Many of these men find Christ, but they live in painful isolation and get trapped in addictions because they lack self-control.

3. Domination. Some men—especially if they were abused physically or even sexually as boys—believe the only way to prove their manhood is to wield power. Violent anger seethes below the surface. If they marry, their wives suffer the brunt of their dysfunction. These men are tormented by secrets, but they cannot take their armor off long enough to admit their problems to anyone.

4. Promiscuity. Sex is a selfish contest for many guys. They try to bed as many women as possible to prove they are “real men.” Ironically, it is their lack of manhood that drives them to hurt themselves and others. Some men who were abused sexually as boys seek to have sex with as many women as possible to prove they are not gay.

5. Homosexuality. It’s not popular today to suggest that homosexuality is sinful. So what if I rephrase the question and ask: “Is it healthy?” Many men today struggle with their core identity as men, and often it is not their fault. They may have never had a father to affirm them, or their father may have withheld affection. Others have gender confusion because of abuse. In many cases, guys experience same-sex attraction because they crave the healthy male attention they should have received from a dad. And they mistakenly think that sex with another man will restore the manhood they crave.

When my friend Luis read from Deuteronomy 23:1, he also shared his painful story: how he had been abused as a child, how he wrestled with his fears and lusts, and how his abuse pushed him to become violent in his marriage. Thankfully, Luis found more than a Band-Aid for his problems when he came to faith. Jesus delivered him from his anger, healed his emotional wounds and began restoring his manhood.

This healing is found in Jesus. Like the Good Samaritan, Jesus pours His oil and wine on our wounds. Like the father of the prodigal son, He throws His arms around us and tells us He’s glad we belong to Him. The unconditional love of Jesus, which is both gentle and powerfully strong, is the perfect remedy for the fragmented masculine soul.

This supernatural healing is available to men today, but we cannot offer what we have not experienced ourselves. We must be willing to trade in our superficial “God bless you, brother!” back-slapping and get real. Men have been painfully emasculated, and they need surgery. Let’s quit denying the problem. It is time for a wave of healing to touch the wounded men all around us." J. Lee Grady (2 of 2) http://www.charismanews.com/opinion/39485-the-bible-verse-no-guy-enjoys-reading
__________

Comments?

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
Originally posted by Grampy Bobby (OP)
[b]"The Bible Verse No Guy Enjoys Reading"

"Over the years I’ve identified several categories of crushed manhood:

1. Insecurity. Many guys become selfish, driven performers, out to prove their manhood through competition. Because they didn’t get healthy encouragement at home, they become s ...[text shortened]... ww.charismanews.com/opinion/39485-the-bible-verse-no-guy-enjoys-reading
__________

Comments?[/b]

Insecurity, indecisiveness, domination, promiscuity and homosexuality are symptoms and consequences of having been "wounded in the stones". It takes courage to face the possibility that one may have developed a disposition that is less than true manhood.

Fear and abuse makes a man a brute beast unable to control his prurient nature.

And what makes a man a man? My belief is a man is one who embodies all the characteristics associated with love. A man is one who has endeavored to develope virtue in his being by practicing the attributes of love.

Galatians 5:22&23
But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
[b]The Bible Verse No Guy Enjoys Reading (5/15/2013 J. Lee Grady)

"I’d never heard a sermon on Deuteronomy 23:1 until last month, when my Puerto Rican friend Luis Roig had the courage to read the text out loud to a group of men in Florida. When he did, one guy gasped and fell on the floor. Several others laughed nervously, and we all drew our ...[text shortened]... feel." (1 of 2) http://www.charismanews.com/opinion/39485-the-bible-verse-no-guy-enjoys-reading[/b]

I must point out GB that the verse most likely refers to a deliberate act of emasculation, possibly for some nefarious purpose.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I must point out GB that the verse most likely refers to a deliberate act of emasculation, possibly for some nefarious purpose.

Grampy Bobby's OP mentions men who were sexually abused when they were children and does so several times.

You once got really bent out of shape when we were in a discussion about Romans 13:1 and it was me, of all people, who pointed out that you had made an error over scripture.

By way of some kind of strange retaliation, you then asked me repeatedly if I had been sexually abused as a child [and whether I was mentally ill] and you no longer wanted to talk about the topic anymore.

More recently you insinuated that I was a pedophile when you got bent out of shape in a discussion that, once again, wasn't exactly going your way. You did it again a week later, when similarly backed into a corner in a discussion, even though you had made a supposedly sincere apology for doing so the first time.

Is there some sort of link between you raising the issue of child sexual abuse (and how it may have been something experienced by the person disagreeing with you) in those ways in the course of processing dissent in a debate, on one hand, and the line of thinking laid out in the OP of this thread, on the other?

Originally posted by FMF
Grampy Bobby's OP mentions men who were sexually abused when they were children and does so several times.

You once got really bent out of shape when we were in a discussion about Romans 13:1 and it was me, of all people, who pointed out that you had made an error over scripture.

By way of some kind of strange retaliation, you then asked me repeatedly if ...[text shortened]... a debate, on one hand, and the line of thinking laid out in the OP of this thread, on the other?

Your attempts to personalise debate through incessant fault finding hold no interest for me, sorry. Try someone else that finds incessant fault finding interesting. As for asking if you were abused as a child it had the rational that internet trolls like you share a common characteristic, that being a sadistic urge to inflict pain on other people (one only needs to remember your handle, the scourge and your various other guises not to mention your forum behaviour in which you delight in cornering and sadisticly interrogating other people, noted not only by myself but others (startreader for example even described it as a form of torture)) and this can be attributed to having been a victim of abuse as its often the case that those who are abused turn out to become abusers themselves. I am not saying that you were abused merely attempting to find a rational for your forum behaviour.

Now naturally this is just the kind of emotive topic that an internet troll like you thrives on, but i am not interested in you or your personal grievances nor your moral sensibilities to emotive topics , nor your incessant attempts to personalise debate, sorry, if you've seen one FMF post you've seen them all.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Your attempts to personalise debate through incessant fault finding hold no interest for me, sorry. Try someone else that finds incessant fault finding interesting.

The question remains though, robbie: is your tendency to resort - sometimes - to various kinds of sex-related and child abuse-related taunting and "banter" rooted in your religious beliefs in some way?

Originally posted by FMF
The question remains though, robbie: is your tendency to resort - sometimes - to various kinds of sex-related and child abuse-related taunting and "banter" rooted in your religious beliefs in some way?

Please see the edited text and you may find this interesting.

Internet Trolls Are Narcissists, Psychopaths, and Sadists

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/your-online-secrets/201409/internet-trolls-are-narcissists-psychopaths-and-sadists

I repeat it I am uninterested in you, your attempts to personalise debate and your incessant fault finding.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
you may find this interesting.

Internet Trolls Are Narcissists, Psychopaths, and Sadists

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/your-online-secrets/201409/internet-trolls-are-narcissists-psychopaths-and-sadists

I repeat it I am uninterested in you, your attempts to personalise debate and your incessant fault finding.

It's interesting that you can't explain your sex/abuse-related taunting on this forum, although you appear to be referring to them as 'faults'. But this does seem like a suitable thread to raise it with you. Is your behaviour in this regard ~ mocking people with references to them supposedly being sexually abused or insinuations about them being abusers of children ~ in some way based on - or caused by - your religious beliefs?

Originally posted by FMF
It's interesting that you can't explain your sex/abuse-related taunting on this forum, although you appear to be referring to them as 'faults'. But this does seem like a suitable thread to raise it with you. Is your behaviour in this regard ~ mocking people with references to them supposedly being sexually abused or insinuations about them being abusers of children ~ in some way based on - or caused by - your religious beliefs?

I have explained the rational, you are a sadistic internet troll that likes to corner and interrogate people and one needs to understand why you behave the way you do. Abuse takes many forms and its interesting that you seem to be fixated with it taking the form of sexual abuse, why I cannot say, either way, one needs to account for your incessant fault finding, your sadistic cornering and interrogating other people. Someone that is interested enough in you may be able to find the answers, personally I am not that interested in you, nor do i find your incessant attempts to find fault in others that interesting either. Sorry.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I have explained the rational, you are a sadistic internet troll that likes to corner and interrogate people and one needs to understand why you behave the way you do.

I am asking you about whether you trying to dodge questions in a debate by suddenly asking someone if they were sexually abused as a child or trying to insinuate that they abuse children sexually, is linked to your religious faith and the exercise of your beliefs. It either IS rooted in your religious beliefs or it ISN'T, and it's rooted in something else instead. Perhaps you could explain.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Abuse takes many forms and its interesting that you seem to be fixated with it taking the form of sexual abuse, why I cannot say, either way, one needs to account for your incessant fault finding, your sadistic cornering and interrogating other people.

But robbie, it is you ~ not me ~ who has suddenly brandished questions about sexual abuse in the past - by way of deflection - in debates in which you were not faring well. The "fixation" is clearly yours. It appears to be a kind of go-to banter for you. Why would that be?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Now naturally this is just the kind of emotive topic that an internet troll like you thrives on, but i am not interested in you or your personal grievances nor your moral sensibilities to emotive topics , nor your incessant attempts to personalise debate, sorry, if you've seen one FMF post you've seen them all.

But surely you asked me ~ in the heat of a debate about something else altogether ~ if I had been sexually abused as a child, and also questioned whether it was safe for me to be around the children on this web site, specifically BECAUSE it was an "emotive topic". It was something YOU introduced into the exchanges, not me.

FMF you were caught by Freaky attempting to turn a post by Dasa on his medical problems into an excuse for attacking other posters, he called you out and described what you did as blatant douchbaggery. Here again you have taken a topic that was introduced by Grandpa Bobby and once again attempted to use it as a pretext for attacking other people. Whether that makes you the King of douchbags I cannot say although I sincerely hope you change your behaviour because I find it difficult to believe that someone that spends his time incessantly finding fault with other users, using unrelated topics as a pretext to attack them, cornering and sadisticly interrogating others can be a very happy individual. Wish you well.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie

As for asking if you were abused as a child it had the rational that internet trolls like you share a common characteristic, that being a sadistic urge to inflict pain on other people (one only needs to remember your handle, the scourge and your various other guises not to mention your forum behaviour in which you delight in cornering and sadisticly interrogating other people, noted not only by myself but others (startreader for example even described it as a form of torture)) and this can be attributed to having been a victim of abuse as its often the case that those who are abused turn out to become abusers themselves. I am not saying that you were abused merely attempting to find a rational for your forum behaviour.

So you think it's appropriate to raise and then speculate about, out loud, in public, the possibility that I was sexually abused as a child and whether it explains why you sometimes get into difficulties with me in the debates we have and why you dislike my posting style? And something a poster called Startreader [and "others"] have said leads you to believe that your attempted banter is legitimate?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
FMF you were caught by Freaky attempting to turn a post by Dasa on his medical problems into an excuse for attacking other posters, he called you out and described what you did as blatant douchbaggery.

Here is the thread you are referring to Thread 168200. People can judge for themselves.

What does a poster called FreakyKBH describing what I said as "blatant douchbaggery" have to do with me asking you about whether you mocking people with references to them supposedly being sexually abused ~ or insinuations about them being abusers of children ~ is behaviour that you feel is rooted in your religious beliefs?