Welp, I answered before even reading ab the new stuff. I wish I could change my vote 🙃

Assuming the listed examples of incest, cheating in a mono relationship, abandoning his family, and revenge porn are accurate, then I would definitely consider him an asshole, dickhead, piece of shit, scumbag etc. but "degenerate" implies the belief that it's part of some kind of evolutionary decline into subhumans, right?

@TheAllMemeingEye No, no evolutionary meaning is meant, and it would not make sense for I, an evolutionism (note: different from the concept of evolution) doubter to thus use such terminology.

You can consider it as more or less the same with "gross and morally wrong", and that gets it around 95% of the time.

For instance, Indian food is gross, but if you like it, power to you. I don't know how you like it if you're not Indian, but if you like it... that's really good for you man.

If you fail to pay back a loan to a friend out of no ill will, it is certainly morally wrong. You have erred, and there is repentance to be had, but it is different from an act of malice.

A rapist would be a commonality between us that we would likely both call "degenerate".

@stardust right, thanks for clarifying 👍

I, an evolutionism (note: different from the concept of evolution) doubter

Could you summarise the difference?

@TheAllMemeingEye

Could you summarise the difference?

I think it's fully possible and probable that natural selection is true. However, I would deny the claim that humans came from bacteria (as the LORD created them in the beginning), and I would deny the claim that humans could come from great apes (as humans have a separate nature imbued with a rational soul).

@stardust do you believe that paleontological evidence is tricks by satan?

@TheAllMemeingEye No, not really. I've never understood why this "evidence for Old Earth" is in discord with the Christian model, as it seems very plain to me that it is not -- perhaps if you presuppose a secularist foundation, but then you're already presupposing Christianity out.

Very simply: how old do you think Adam and Eve appeared when God created them?

@stardust do you mean that you believe that the universe and earth were indeed created when the scientific evidence suggests, and that life did progress mostly according to mainstream natural history, but that God directly created the universe, the earth, the very first life, and the first humans himself, at the times when the evidence suggests they appeared?

I think he's genuinely quite smart (perhaps "sharp" is a better characterization, I don't know) as far as online content creators go (though admittedly, the bar is very low), but it's clear that his personal life is a shitshow, and this particular transgression is especially bad given that he's on record admonishing other sex-pest content creators for not being able to keep their closets skeleton-free when there's absolutely no reason for them to be doing sex crimes.

It's really a shame.

@NBAP It is a shame, and although everyone involved is engaged in sin, I am continually paying for those led astray by him. Although, a grand total of 0 Orthodox Christians are surprised.

this particular transgression is especially bad given that he's on record admonishing other sex-pest content creators for not being able to keep their closets skeleton-free when there's absolutely no reason for them to be doing sex crimes.

This, in particular. The philanderer often knows what he is doing is wrong, but unrepentantly does it anyways. Do we think also, that the thief thinks what he is doing is right and just more often than not?

The conclusion most people will and should take away is that we should detest and shun Mr. Bonnell, and it is a correct one. But I hope that this teaches people that the common criminal is not so different from their beloved streamer, that he is also a complex, multi-faceted, perhaps of high-worldly intelligence or the like, perhaps rich individual -- so that we may understand that God loves all his creation, but that love often means not to spare the rod.

@stardust

>The conclusion most people will and should take away is that we should detest and shun Mr. Bonnell

Well yes, though not, I would argue, because he is a philanderer, but rather because he distributed privately-shared pornographic material of someone without their consent ("revenge porn").

Even if you regard philandering as detestable, I think you would be doing your position a disservice by focusing on the evil that is lesser in most people's eyes. For my part (as a secularist), I don't think that the philandering itself is particularly objectionable, but I do think it is telling that so many of Destiny's previous romantic/sexual partners now regard him disfavourably. No matter what the reason (i.e. whether he is the reason those relationships soured or because he cannot effectively discriminate when choosing new partners), it reflects very poorly on him.

But again, I think that's trivial in the face of the revenge porn revelation.

Well, I think it's an extreme example of philandering -- in the same way that a thief can steal a TV or rob a bank or steal millions per year via usury, but it falls under that category. Bonnell went above and beyond, but many of us Christians (e.g. people in Jay's server) were not very surprised, that a philanderer would do more philandering. I certainly think these newest developments should be put front and center!

Wow. I already had a very low opinion of this internet 'personality' even before I learned of any of this, simply based on the vile things he said about President Trump and the unhinged, hateful tone he used while doing so.

@skibidist Celebrating an innocent man who had a wife and a family getting shot dead is low, truly degenerate behavior. As Christians, we are taught that life is sacred, and that the family is sacred. He seemingly does not agree.

@stardust how do you reconcile the sanctity of life, presumably based on the commandment against murder, with the other parts of the bible prescribing execution as punishment?

@TheAllMemeingEye Simply, it is not against but for the sanctity of life that we must enforce the death penalty. For one who has wronged others, has also deeply wronged himself, and put his soul into mortal danger. It is for the sanctity of life that we mustn't devalue it, by letting those who hold no sanctity for life throw it away. We have learned time and time again, suicide is not the only way to do that.

This is not mine, but rather from Autocratic Dogmatist (a mod in Jay Dyer's server). He writes better than I could, so I hope this will be enlightening.

"It must be remembered that power was granted by God, and to avenge crime the sword was permitted; he who carries out this vengeance is God's minister (Romans 13:1-4). What motive have we for condemning a practice that all hold to be permitted by God? We uphold, therefore, what has been observed until now, in order not to alter the discipline and so that we may not appear to act contrary to God's authority."

-POPE ST. INNOCENT I, (AD EXPUSERIUM, EPISCOPUM TOLONSANUM, CIRCA 405 AD)

Ergo, opposing the death penalty is contrary to God's authority.

If we say, "the state does not have the right to do it", we are calling God a liar, and St. Paul a liar, and all the Apostles and the Fathers liars. So it may seem not to be a big deal to have a pet opinion about what murder means, but it is very important to submit your mind and worldview to Divine revelation and the Church, so you don't go off making up your own rules and standard, which is a recipe for even worse errors.

"The Levite is, then, the minister who remits, whereas the man who in the example just cited unwittingly and unwillingly struck another in a homicidal act became in fact an administrator of divine punishment. See to it that Christ is infused into the act of slaying an impious man and that sanctification accompany and be part of your attempt to abolish what is abominable.” -ST. AMBROSE OF MILAN, (CHAPTER 4 OF BOOK 2 OF HEXAMERON, PARADISE, AND CAIN AND ABEL CIRCA 340 AD)

The Biblical model of proper Christian statecraft and civil law, is seen in the ancient Israelite kingdom, the Eastern Roman Empire, the Kievan Russian principalities, the Russian Empire, and basically all of historical Christendom. (edited)

And they all upheld the death penalty, until very recently, and conveniently abolished it after secularism and materialism and other post-revolutionary reductionisms started to intensify. This happened all after the idea of Divine kingship was abolished, and the world became "democratic" and neutered and emasculated by a pseudo-morality that more resembles Marcionism and Manicheanism than Christianity. (edited)

It's the rejection of every God-decreed restraint, originally put in place to protect the world from descending into unfettered evil and degeneracy. It has nothing to do with compassion. It is a restraint-killing act of the spirit of Antichrist, to give greater boldness to evil, allowing it to flourish beyond every limit without fear of consequence. So in view of this, pacifism is an emasculating poisoned-gas released from Hell to kill every impulse to respond when a proper response to evil is called for. It's a twisted and poor imitation of proper meekness.

And ironically, "let him who hath no sin, cast the first stone" still upholds the legitimacy of the death penalty, because it's telling you who ultimately has the right to judge and to punish those who sin, and it's putting that authority in God's hands, which gave that same authority to the state (Romans 13:3-4). And "he who lives by the sword shall die by the sword" also upholds the legitimacy of the death penalty, because it repeats Genesis 9:6, which sentences murderers and manslayers to death by the hands of men. Revelations 13:10 even says, anyone who kills with the sword (or commits murder) must be killed with the sword. Lex Talionis and the death penalty are upheld here and elsewhere. (edited)

And Ezekiel 13:19 shows that God is angered and displeased when a nation "kills those who should not die and keeps alive those who should not live." Again, Christ is God, and does not change. He is angered with societies that murder innocents but unjustly spare the lives of the guilty. The absolute state of Western secular societies today, is that we do those very things ourselves, by murdering the unborn (the innocent), and effeminately throwing a fit whenever a murderer is justly executed by the state and shrieking squeamishly at the idea of justly punishing the wicked.

It's the hallmark of a spiritually and morally stunted generation, to coldly watch innocents die, but throw bleeding-heart hissy fits and pretend to value human life whenever a criminal is deservedly executed by a just judgment. That is the spirit of Antichrist, and opposition to the death penalty, as it is popularly expressed today, follows that exact same spirit. This is also another reason why Christians should not oppose it in principle. It's a "small matter" by appearance, but in reality it is the tip of a very large and demonic and nigh-heretical iceberg. It is informed by a mindset that is anti-Christian and divorced from Divine revelation and the Church

I hope this helps, and if you may have any questions I will do my best to answer them to the best of my ability.

@stardust thanks for clarifying 👍

Would you not consider the UHC CEO to have done any crimes via his leadership of UHC frequently denying (or at least trying to deny) vital healthcare claims in the name of corporate profit?

@TheAllMemeingEye

Would you not consider the UHC CEO to have done any crimes via his leadership of UHC frequently denying (or at least trying to deny) vital healthcare claims in the name of corporate profit?

Perhaps. It is not my place to judge, but I would suppose that in a Christian system he would likely get the death penalty. Nevertheless, the Bible and the Church teach us not to bear false witness against our neighbor -- and such, outside of extreme cases vigilantism is generally not justified.

@stardust do I understand correctly that the problem was that it was a vigilante rather than a state that did it?