Questions: Religion & Spirituality

So my first semester, i got caught up in this church called "ICC" (it's a cult, i left it months ago, don't go to it) and on my way to becoming a member, they wanted me to give money for offering, mission trips and expanding the ministry. However, I told them i had no job, my parents are pretty tight with their money and the only money i did get was only for lunch. They then told me that "Americans THINK they know what it means to be poor, but if you went across the world to poorer countries. You would realize you couldn't be any further from the truth. So all we're asking that you ask your parents for AT LEAST $5 a week. And when God blesses you with a job, you could give $10, $15 or even $20 a week". So eventually i found a way of getting money by taken a dollar a day out of my lunch to have $5. And i told them how i got the money and they told me that I was being prideful because I didn't ask for more money. It's not that i didn't want to give because i did. But i didn't think i could. Do you think i was being prideful?

https://www.history.com/news/mary-magdalene-jesus-wife-prostitute-saint

https://aleteia.org/2018/04/02/was-mary-magdalene-a-prostitute/

As many historians were the 1st century, many have concluded that Mary Magdalene was likely a prostitute and she set her eyes mainly on our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. Many people thought she was a whore. Do you agree or disagree with their view? No, Christ nor Magdalene are surnames. Magdalene meant from where she was from and Christ meant His title in the God-head.

Since she had 7 powerful demons inside of her (I personally believe all 7 of the demons cast out were all strong, and hopefully no more were in her), I can't help to imagine that some of these demons were very well inflicting her with sexual lust. We see this demon in today's people. SO it would be no surprise that demons do their best and hardest work ideally in the areas of unbelief, sexual immorality and violence inflicted.

Please share your views about what Mary Magdalene's relationship was to Jesus!

Yes, I know there are technically the possibility that you can think one is more plausible but believe in the less plausible view but it makes no sense. If you think one is more plausible than the other, it makes more sense to go with the one you find more plausible. That's why I nailed down these choices.

Even if you don't believe in one of them and you believe in Evolutionism, you still would feel one is more plausible than the other assuming you didn't think they were the same thing as they have different views.

Here are the views to help you decide and listed in alphabetical order to show no bias about it:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creationism

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionism

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligent_design

Please read each of these if you aren't sure exactly of what they teach about. All of them hold a certain belief about how the universe began.

Well we mostly agree that Lucifer was real and was God's most beautiful angel and very talented in the music field. There is a great following after Lucifer, who has since been mainly known as Satan since he was thrown out of Heaven for his vanity.

I believe about 65% of the world believe that Lucifer or Satan is a real spiritual being. I know, before you start, popularity doesn't mean it is true. It also doesn't mean it is false either. So assuming you are in the agreement part, just how beautiful was Lucifer's singing? Do you think it was so glorious that God was very amazed and that God giving Lucifer such high praise got to Lucifer's ego and started warring against God?

It is no wonder that so many seculars listens to the music that is often filled with the things of the world, be it sexual, drunkenness, violence or divorce. Is this unknowingly adherence to Satan?

Please share your views on how glorious you think Satan's singing in Heaven was!

A Naturalism view holds that only the natural world exists or that we can only know that the natural world exist. Of course there are 2 varieties of Naturalism:

Philosophical Naturalism: This is the stronger view that only the natural world has explanations and there are no answers except by the natural world. It's basically the position that the supernatural world does not exist.

Methodological Naturalism: This is the weaker of the views. It is basically being unconvinced that there is a supernatural world and it is not withdrawing the possibility that the supernatural does exist, but will be unconvinced until proven to exist or to a stronger degree, shown extreme evidence it exists. It is not ruling out that the supernatural could provide answers.

So if you hold to naturalism, which form? Most people who claim to be atheists holds to the methodological view of naturalism, which is being unconvinced of the supernatural but not ruling out that it can't exist.

Please share your views on Naturalism! Also, if you think there is a spiritual world, explain why!

Does catholic or other churches still circumsize? if not where does it occur?

Do you think it's as dumb if not evil as I do?

The RULE:
Let's cut a little boys private part because of our belief passed down generations ago.