Negative views of female sexuality: origins, I

[Custer Laststand]

Negative views of female sexuality are rooted in ancient patriarchal philosophy and religion. A large percentage of people are religious, so the question of the origins of negative views of women who are openly sexual is highly relevant to this forum as well as being relevant to society in a broad sense. The following is excerpted from Wikipedia. (Subtitles added.)

Origins of Patriarchy - I
(From: Patriarchy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia )

Definition:

“Patriarchy is the structuring of family units based on the man, as father figure, having primary authority over the rest of the family members. Patriarchy also refers to the role of men in society more generally where men take primary responsibility over the welfare of the community as a whole.”

Role of Aristotle:

“In the 3rd Century BCE,* Aristotle taught that the city-state developed out of the patriarchal family....”

*[BCE => Before Common Era; CE => Common Era. These “time reference points” replace BC => Before Christ and AD => After Death (of Christ), thereby avoiding, for example, the problem that the birth date of Jesus Christ, thought to range from 7 to 4 BCE, is not known to an accuracy better than about 3 years.]

 

[Custer Laststand]

Negative views of female sexuality: origins, II

Origins of Patriarchy – II
(From: Patriarchy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia )

The Egyptions Disagree:

“Other ancient societies contemporary with Aristotle, as well as many Athenians, did not share these views of women, family organization, or political and economic structure. Egypt left no philosophical record, but Herodotus left a record of his shock at the contrast between the roles of Egyptian women and the women of Athens. He observed that they [women] attended market and were employed in trade. In ancient Egypt a middle-class woman might sit on a local tribunal, engage in real estate transactions, and inherit or bequeath property. Women engaged in real estate transactions, secured loans, and witnessed legal documents.:

Role of Military Conquest:

Greek influence spread, however, with the conquests of Alexander the Great, who was educated by Aristotle. ….”

 

[Custer Laststand]

Negative views of female sexuality: origins, III

Origins of Patriarchy - III
(From: Patriarchy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia )

Judaism Adopts Aristotle’s Teachings:

“About 200 BCE the Jewish Philosopher Aristobulus of Paneas claimed that Jewish revelation and Aristotelian philosophy were identical. Before another 200 years had passed it was said that Aristotle derived his doctrine directly from Judaism. In the 12 Century, Aristotlianism was harmonized with Judaism by the Tallmudist, philosopher and astronomer, Maimonides.”

As Does Islam:

“While Maimonides dared to contradict Aristotle's ideas in matters of faith, it wasn't long before the Islamic philosopher Averroes, endorsed them without reserve.”

 

[Custer Laststand]

Negative views of female sexuality: origins, IV

Origins of Patriarchy - IV
(From: Patriarchy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia )

Christianity Falls in Line:

“For the last 1800 years Christian leaders have placed great emphasis on the creation of Eve [from “one of Adam’s ribs”] mistakenly believing that the story was historical fact, rather than androcentric myth. ….”

“In the 4th Century, the basic attitude was one of puzzlement over the seemingly incongruous fact of woman's existence[!]. Augustine of Hippo said he could not see how a woman could be any help for a man if the work of childbearing is excluded[!!]. However, it was only with Thomas Acquinas in the 13th Century that Aristotle's teachings emerged in the official teachings of Roman Catholicism. …. The influence of combining Aristotle's theory with biblical interpretations cannot be overestimated.”

 

[Custer Laststand]

Negative views of female sexuality: origins, V

Origins of Patriarchy - V
(From: Patriarchy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia )

Women Begin to Rebel:

“In the 19th Century, Sarah Grimke dared to question the divine origin of the scriptures. Elizabeth Cady Stanton used Grimke’s criticism of biblical sources to establish a basis for feminist thought. She published the Woman’s Bible, which proposed a feminist reading of the Old and New Testament. Later, this tendency was enlarged by Feminist theory, which denounced the patriarchal Judeo-Christian tradition.”

 

[Susan's Slave]

Sorry Custer, you are presenting theory as if it were fact, and using a encyclopedia of questional repute as your authority.

Christians do not "mistakenly" believe anything. They cite as their source a book that has been in existence far longer than Wikipedia, and that has stood up to rigorous examination for centuries. Wikipedia accepts entries from anyone, regardless of educational standing and has been called on the carpet more times than can be counted for it's inaccuracies.

The Bible teaches that man is the nominal head of the household but that he is to place great weight on the counsel of his wife and recognize and respect her wisdom. It is a partnership in which the whole is greater than it's parts. What you see in most patriarchal marriages is a perversion of Biblical teaching taking for more from contemporary social mores than from true Biblical teaching.

 

[Custer Laststand]

Susan's Slave,

The Bible teaches that man is the nominal head of the household but that he is to place great weight on the counsel of his wife and recognize and respect her wisdom. It is a partnership in which the whole is greater than it's parts. What you see in most patriarchal marriages is a perversion of Biblical teaching taking for more from contemporary social mores than from true Biblical teaching.

Here, you have put your finger on the essence of "Bible-based thinking." The Bible is highly ambiguous — so much so that it can be, has been, and is used as justification for whatever the "Bible-citer" wishes to do. Historically, this has included everything from mass-murder (i.e., genocide), to mass torture-killings of the most awful kinds imaginable (per the ca. four centuries of the Christian Inquisitions), to bloody holy wars, to oppressive suppression of those who do not seem to believe sufficiently (or at all) in the causes of the believers — the latter, of course, being those who were called "heretics" during the long centuries, may they never return, of the Inquisitions.... AND centuries-long suppression, including torture and murder, of women.

—Custer

 

[Susan's Slave]

Custer you are absolutely correct in stating that people have used the Bible as their authority to do all kinds of atrocities. People have also used everything else under the sun as justification for their actions. How about we blame skin color, language, parents, spouses, or even Twinkies! If I were not half asleep I could come up with many more.

People commit atrocities against people, male and female, and they don't need the advice of any book or religion to do it. The Old Testament of the Bible does show a God who supported and encouraged war to establish His people in the land that he had promised to them. However, I have not seen a New Testament verse that encourages anything except love, forgiveness, and acceptance.

As for it's "ambiguity", this is another area where people, some well-intentioned, have screwed up. The Bible is not ambiguous when taken in context and using the original source documents still available in Greek, Latin, Hebrew, etc. It can be chopped up and made to say anything as could your words if one wanted to waste enough time.

Let's get back to the fun ways we can enjoy the women in our lives and stop trying to blame a book, religion, or specific diety for all our (or woman's in your post) problems. Besides, if you think a matriarchal society would be any better you might want to go back and study some of their atrocities (or just spend five minutes with my mother-in-law).

 

[fionasissyslut]

Sorry Custer, you are presenting theory as if it were fact, and using a encyclopedia of questional repute as your authority.

Christians do not "mistakenly" believe anything. They cite as their source a book that has been in existence far longer than Wikipedia, and that has stood up to rigorous examination for centuries. Wikipedia accepts entries from anyone, regardless of educational standing and has been called on the carpet more times than can be counted for it's inaccuracies.

The Bible teaches that man is the nominal head of the household but that he is to place great weight on the counsel of his wife and recognize and respect her wisdom. It is a partnership in which the whole is greater than it's parts. What you see in most patriarchal marriages is a perversion of Biblical teaching taking for more from contemporary social mores than from true Biblical teaching.

Sorry the bible was written by the Jews and does not stand up to any sort of objective scrutiny in the year 2009..
religious people and followers of the bible have tried to claim the moral high ground,but as we all know you don't have to believe in god to be a good and moral person

 

[Susan's Slave]

Once more into the breach...

Fiona, you are correct that the Old Testament of the Bible was written by Jews, however, if you think it through the New Testament was written by followers of Christ and they were called Christians. You are also correct that you do not need to believe in God to be a good and moral person. In fact many Christians fall far short of that mark. If you believe in Jesus Christ, his death, and resurrection you go to Heaven, if you are a good and moral person and don't believe, you don't go to Heaven. As for objective scrutiny, if you were objective I think you would find the Bible an excellent manual for living a successful life. Check out Proverbs some time and see for yourself.

Padder, I agree with you some people are easier to like than others. I have no patience for bad manners or jerks either. I'm all for fucking as well!

Just call me a sinner saved by Grace and let's stop trashing and misinterpreting the Bible. I would prefer to be commenting on how pretty the wives and sissies are and enjoying the lifestyle discussions.

 

[fionasissyslut]

Once more into the breach...

Fiona, you are correct that the Old Testament of the Bible was written by Jews, however, if you think it through the New Testament was written by followers of Christ and they were called Christians. You are also correct that you do not need to believe in God to be a good and moral person. In fact many Christians fall far short of that mark. If you believe in Jesus Christ, his death, and resurrection you go to Heaven, if you are a good and moral person and don't believe, you don't go to Heaven. As for objective scrutiny, if you were objective I think you would find the Bible an excellent manual for living a successful life. Check out Proverbs some time and see for yourself.

Padder, I agree with you some people are easier to like than others. I have no patience for bad manners or jerks either. I'm all for fucking as well!

Just call me a sinner saved by Grace and let's stop trashing and misinterpreting the Bible. I would prefer to be commenting on how pretty the wives and sissies are and enjoying the lifestyle discussions.

Firstly as a humanist,i think that heaven is an invention of mankind and as such,i have no wish to go there,and as for the bible being an excelent manual for life,it's full of agression,and treats women as second class citizens.
Mankind is unbelievably arrogant,we just can't believe that when you die,thats it! so we invent heaven to make ourselves feel better about that.
A man coming back from the dead,a woman that's still a virgin after giving birth,turning water into wine,walking on water,they may have believed that 2000 years ago but in the year 2009...perlease.
Jesus may or may not have exsisted,there are slight references in the Dead sea scrolls,but he WAS a JEW and never gave up his religion,the christians call it the last supper,the jews call it passover.
The jewish religion dates back over 6000 years and yet Christians think time started 2000 years ago.
Religious people always view their religion subjectivly,and if they were objective for just one minuet,they might see the chaos and bloodshed that their religions have caused over thousands of years,some of which is actualy refered to as being right in the bible.
One man's interpretation of the bible is another man's blasphemy,you can make it mean anything you want,to make a point,and if that makes me a sinner,well strike me down with a lightening bolt right now!!! nah it ain't gonna happen..............................phweeeew that was a close one,hey why pick on me god,oh yes i have dared to question the bible!!!!

 

[fionasissyslut]

On a recent trip to Ghana in Africa i went to the church that was situated over the cellars where slaves were kept,awaiting the ships to transport them.
300 to 400 people were kept locked up there,without sanitation,medical care,and very little food,for up to 3 months....all this while the Christians prayed in the church above......NUFF SAID
oh and it was YOU who brought up religion!!

 

[Susan's Slave]

"Firstly as a humanist,i think that heaven is an invention of mankind and as such,i have no wish to go there,"

I think you have taken care of that possibility, but there is always forgiveness if you change your mind!

"and as for the bible being an excelent manual for life,it's full of agression,and treats women as second class citizens."

I already covered this in the Old vs New Testament discussion above - I suggest you read it!

"Mankind is unbelievably arrogant,we just can't believe that when you die,thats it! so we invent heaven to make ourselves feel better about that."

As a Humanist where do you believe you came from? Are you decended from some sort of amoeba that crawled out of prehistoric pond and your ancestors pulled themselves up by there bootstraps to become tadpoles, then reptiles, then apes, then Humanists? Yes, you probably don't have much to feel arrogant about! I prefer to believe that I am a child of God, created in His image (and I don't believe that refers to our physical body, but rather to our spirit). Man did not invent Heaven, it was prepared for our coming! I have no reason to feel arrogant about life everlasting, that was given to me by the grace of my Lord Jesus Christ and I am extremely humbled by the offer.

"A man coming back from the dead,a woman that's still a virgin after giving birth,turning water into wine,walking on water,they may have believed that 2000 years ago but in the year 2009...perlease."

Yes, if you believe that man is the "be all, end all," and there is no higher authority, these things would be hard to accept. Of course they are all easily within the power of God, and the accounts were all taken from events that were witnessed by people of the time and passed down both verbally and in writing! And yet, in the year 2009 over 1 1/2 billion people believe just that..."perlease."

"Jesus may or may not have exsisted,there are slight references in the Dead sea scrolls,but he WAS a JEW and never gave up his religion,the christians call it the last supper,the jews call it passover.
The jewish religion dates back over 6000 years and yet Christians think time started 2000 years ago."

I know you do not believe, but before you attack you might want to educate yourself! "Jesus may or may not have existed"..."but he was a Jew". I guess we are in agreement that he existed. Yes, the Last Supper was held on Passover as that was the religion and culture that Jesus and His disciples were raised in. Christianity did not come into being until after His death and resurrection. Actually Christians believe the world existed before Christ (that would be B.C. in your calendar) and that Christ was a lineal decendant of Adam, through the line of David.

"Religious people always view their religion subjectivly" and Humanists don't? "

,and if they were objective for just one minuet," I prefer to be objective for one waltz or tango, but the minuet is such a slow and graceful dance that I surrender to the feeling.

"they might see the chaos and bloodshed that their religions have caused over thousands of years,some of which is actualy refered to as being right in the bible." I believe I covered this above, men start wars, even those who do not accept religion (Hitler, Stalin, etc.), but Jesus Christ certainly did not advocate violence toward men or women, quite the opposite!

"One man's interpretation of the bible is another man's blasphemy,you can make it mean anything you want,to make a point,and if that makes me a sinner,well strike me down with a lightening bolt right now!!! nah it ain't gonna happen..............................phweeeew that was a close one,hey why pick on me god,oh yes i have dared to question the bible!!!!" Humanist humor, very funny! Again, I covered this above, those that reject the Son of God go to Hell, not Heaven. Lightening bolts not necessary!

I have tried to bow out of this argument gracefully several times now. Why is it that you are so afraid of my beliefs that you have to attack them over and over again. Custer was apparently graceful enough to move on, how about we do the same?

 

[fionasissyslut]

"Firstly as a humanist,i think that heaven is an invention of mankind and as such,i have no wish to go there,"

I think you have taken care of that possibility, but there is always forgiveness if you change your mind!

"and as for the bible being an excelent manual for life,it's full of agression,and treats women as second class citizens."

I already covered this in the Old vs New Testament discussion above - I suggest you read it!

"Mankind is unbelievably arrogant,we just can't believe that when you die,thats it! so we invent heaven to make ourselves feel better about that."

As a Humanist where do you believe you came from? Are you decended from some sort of amoeba that crawled out of prehistoric pond and your ancestors pulled themselves up by there bootstraps to become tadpoles, then reptiles, then apes, then Humanists? Yes, you probably don't have much to feel arrogant about! I prefer to believe that I am a child of God, created in His image (and I don't believe that refers to our physical body, but rather to our spirit). Man did not invent Heaven, it was prepared for our coming! I have no reason to feel arrogant about life everlasting, that was given to me by the grace of my Lord Jesus Christ and I am extremely humbled by the offer.

"A man coming back from the dead,a woman that's still a virgin after giving birth,turning water into wine,walking on water,they may have believed that 2000 years ago but in the year 2009...perlease."

Yes, if you believe that man is the "be all, end all," and there is no higher authority, these things would be hard to accept. Of course they are all easily within the power of God, and the accounts were all taken from events that were witnessed by people of the time and passed down both verbally and in writing! And yet, in the year 2009 over 1 1/2 billion people believe just that..."perlease."

"Jesus may or may not have exsisted,there are slight references in the Dead sea scrolls,but he WAS a JEW and never gave up his religion,the christians call it the last supper,the jews call it passover.
The jewish religion dates back over 6000 years and yet Christians think time started 2000 years ago."

I know you do not believe, but before you attack you might want to educate yourself! "Jesus may or may not have existed"..."but he was a Jew". I guess we are in agreement that he existed. Yes, the Last Supper was held on Passover as that was the religion and culture that Jesus and His disciples were raised in. Christianity did not come into being until after His death and resurrection. Actually Christians believe the world existed before Christ (that would be B.C. in your calendar) and that Christ was a lineal decendant of Adam, through the line of David.

"Religious people always view their religion subjectivly" and Humanists don't? "

,and if they were objective for just one minuet," I prefer to be objective for one waltz or tango, but the minuet is such a slow and graceful dance that I surrender to the feeling.

"they might see the chaos and bloodshed that their religions have caused over thousands of years,some of which is actualy refered to as being right in the bible." I believe I covered this above, men start wars, even those who do not accept religion (Hitler, Stalin, etc.), but Jesus Christ certainly did not advocate violence toward men or women, quite the opposite!

"One man's interpretation of the bible is another man's blasphemy,you can make it mean anything you want,to make a point,and if that makes me a sinner,well strike me down with a lightening bolt right now!!! nah it ain't gonna happen..............................phweeeew that was a close one,hey why pick on me god,oh yes i have dared to question the bible!!!!" Humanist humor, very funny! Again, I covered this above, those that reject the Son of God go to Hell, not Heaven. Lightening bolts not necessary!

I have tried to bow out of this argument gracefully several times now. Why is it that you are so afraid of my beliefs that you have to attack them over and over again. Custer was apparently graceful enough to move on, how about we do the same?

I am not attacking anyones belief system merely pointing out that this nonsense is all invented by man and in your mind.
Forgivness for what? not believing your nonsense?
Bow out of this argument gracefully?
You continue to patronise people who don't agree with you.
I do not want your god's forgivness,your stupid heaven nonsense,or your patronising attitudes.
The Christian religion is so widespread,because,the murderous,armies took over other peoples countries,enslaved the population,and ****** them to adopt Christianity,over their chosen religion,the UK being the worst offenders.
These were not so called evil men like Hitler,but respectable Christians,who went,killed,enslaved,and looted
In the words of that wonderfull man Bishop Desmond Tutu:
"The white man invaded our land,we owned the land and they brought religion.
They said close your eyes,Kneel and pray..and when we opened our eyes,THEY owned the land and we had religion"
Even a lovely man like him appreciates these facts.
The Catholic guilt trip,whereby if you don't do as you are told,you will go to hell(oooooh) has been used,to control the people for thousands of years,in the name of Christ.
Yes the fairy stories were passed down,through Chinese whispers,whereby a simple farmer,sees a magic trick and reports a miracle.
Y'see there you go again,the Jewish calander has NO B.C. in it they don't recognise that,in fact HAPPY NEW YEAR (this was celebrated recently.)
Actually Humanists do not have a belief system they were set up soley to counter the religious,claims that you can't be a good person without religion and to provide alternatives to religious,burials,marriages etc

 

[fionasissyslut]

In the UK we have started to drop Creationist teachings(about time too) in schools in favour of the fact based Evolution,which is a science based subject
In fact it is you that need to educate yourself,prise yourself away from your fairy stories,get a copy of Charles Darwins,Origin of the Species,and read the geniuses words very carefully.

 

[Susan's Slave]

In point of fact I have read Origin of the Species. Charles Darwin was a preeminent scientist of his time and his theory is the primary teaching in American schools as it is in the British Isles. However, his theory is just that, a theory.

I wonder why, if his theory is correct, that all these animals alleged to be our biological predecessors are still around? Why have the rest of the apes not graduated to some status equal to or better than humans? Why have they still not picked up deductive reasoning, learned to build, to invent?

What annoys me and keeps me writing on this thread is the absolute ignorance of what the Bible says about Christ, his teachings, his followers. Once again I am happy to admit that many people of called themselves Christians and perverted Christ's teaching. But is this not true of science and of Darwinists as well. Eugenics came out of Darwin's teaching but it was not something he agreed with, or condoned. Scientists learned how to split the atom and one of the outcomes was the atomic bombs that killed hundreds of thousands of innocent people. Does this mean that all scientists are to blame for the use of atomic weapons, or that all Darwinists believe that some people should be allowed to breed and others should not?

Now, you must explain to me what fairy stories you are talking about? To my knowledge there are no mentions of fairies in the Bible. I am not even aware of any Chinese stories about fairies although they may exist. I am further confused by your tying the designation of B.C. to the Chinese(?) new year. The Jewish religion does not recognise Jesus as the Savior promised in the prophesies of the Old Testement, so of course they do not split their calendar into before and after Christ. I imagine that many of the religions in China (nor the current communist leadership) recognise Christ, but of course many Chinese do believe in Christ and many are of the Jewish faith as well.

I have no agenda to convert anyone on this site to my beliefs, but I will not sit back and accept the ignorant statements made about the Bible, Christ, or the good Christ followers that understand that Christ taught love and forgiveness, not war. I know that it will irk you no end to know that you are in my prayers but you are.

 

[Saraha]

I am reading a book by an American who was hit by a lightning strike of 180,000 volts. He was legally dead for 28 mins, and has written several books on his trip to Heaven while dead.

He says that God does not sit in judgement on you, you sit as Judge and Jury of yourself and see your entire pass slowly by you again, and you swop from your body to the body of all the people you have met, and you feel their emotions as well as your own.

So if you have hurt people, you feel 100% of their pain that you caused. If you have done nice things, you feel their pleasure of the inter-action between you both. What happens is that you see the error of your ways and undergo a transformation to not hurt anyone again....when you go back to earth on another mission.

All humans are heros and heroines on Earth because of being brave enough to go to planet Earth instead of staying safe in Heaven.

The mission of all humans on Earth is to do random acts of kindness with absolutely no expectation of reward. This gives you huge brownie points in Heaven. Giving an apple to a poor man may be better than giving him money that he might spend on booze or drugs to worsen his predictable.

Adolf Hitler will feel the pain of all his crime against humanity, and he will become remorseful and determined to go back to Earth and "put things right". in other words he will be a goodie-two shoes second time round, not even wanting to accidentally stand on a bumble-bee or a butterfly.

Our body wears out and decays, but human souls can't be destroyed even if you try to vaporize them with a million nuclear bombs. The soul goes back to talk to the Angels - NEVER EVER FEAR DEATH as it is impossible to die, you live forever as one of God's children.

When you go to Heaven you see all your friends and family again - and everyone is loving and caring and perfect in their behaviour up their because Heaven vibrates at the speed of Light and it is impossible to think bad stuff.

Just as a tuning fork causes another tuning fork to vibrate on the other side of the room, all souls in Heaven vibrate in unisom of perfect love. On Earth, we have FREEWILL because we lose our powers from being too far from Heaven to feel the pulse of Heaven, and we have to each deal with the problems we face, and we make the best choice we can without the benefit of hindsight.

God won't drop a ton of bricks on our head if we make bad choices, but we will have our LIFE REVIEW when we go back to Heaven and face the people we hurt.

I believe from all I have read that the entire world is run by females, whether plant, animal, insect, fish or bird - and that God is therefore female. The only difference between a male and a female is testosterone.

Men have tits on their chest, women have 32 skene glands that would become the prostrate gland if testosterone was around. The clitoris is a penis 4 inches long inside her body, but never grew because testosterone is only 10% of a male.

Female Hormones in chicken and grain feed beef are developing breasts needing bras in Japanese men. As the world population grows, female hormones are being released into ground water and appearing in food.

The Ohio river is recycled and filtered several times, so men are drinking female hormones, and losing muscle muscle and growing fatter and fatter.

Sperm numbers have halved in 50 years, and female is claiming back the world that men took off her. It is only the last 100 years that women have been allowed officially to get a free education, and look at what has happened in that time.

 

[Saraha]

On Earth, humans are co-creators with God. God is trying to live life from all sorts of angles and experiences. All of us have the same powers of God, but we have to be "close to God in our hearts" to use these powers co-creating.

If a team has doubts about wheter than can win, doubt is a wish to "fall short or fail", so "holding doubt" switches off your energy to CAUSE YOU TO FAIL.

If you believe nothing can stop you, then God gets behind and helps you in a powerful way. Problem is, most people stay in their comfort zone, and therefore never realise that the sky is the limit. The reason people play in competitions, is to bring out their best and discover they can achieve amazing things if only they choose to believe and act energetically.

Religion has had a strangle hold on humans for 10,000 years, but this is changing rapidly.

The guy who was struck by lightning found he could read/hear people's thoughts just from touching their hands, and he helped hundreds of people to win money on games of chance because he knew which horses would win their races, and which numbers would come up in the Lotteries.

In Heaven he was told 117 things that would happen on Earth, including the Russians dumping nuclear waste in the sea, and 95% of these things have already happen since 1975. His scientist friends ring up and tell him each time another prediction has occurred.

 

[Saraha]

In 800 AD, the Roman Catholic Church wrote down all the sexual sins a human should avoid. Masturbation was the one sin given most discussion, but masturbation is not banned in the Bible.

The killing of a man who spilled his sperm on the ground, was not masturbation, but withdrawal coital interuptus to prevent him begating his sister-in-law with child. The Church murdered him for masturbation, thereby breaking the "thou shalt not kill" and "forgive those that tresspass against you" rules burnt into the Rock whilst Moses was talking to God.

Why should any man or women take notice of Priests or Nuns who claim to be celibate but are actually telling lies about their sexual behavour and breaking their vows with God. The paedophiles in the Church over thousands of years are only now in recent years being "bought into account".

Choir boys were always "anal fodder" for control freak Priests, and the Church admitted they castrated teenage boys to keep their beautiful voices from "becoming a deeper tone at puberty. It is easy to see how the Devil has done his work in the Roman Catholic Church using the Priests to do dispicable acts, totally immune from the Law. Every Roman Catholic family was expected to have a lot of children and to "give up a girl and a boy" to become a Nun and a Priest to be in service to the Church all their lives.

Celibacy is an unnatural act of voluntary obedience, and Nuns and Priests have found they can't keep their vows, because their bodies had primal desires that "could not be held down". It would be far better to insist that all Nuns and Priests HAVE TO BE MARRIED before they can take office, so that they can more easily understand what marriage is and the problems it can experience.

It is strange that Priests know so much about sex because they take an oath of celibacy, which means they love God and no one else, and can't even masturbate or have sex. Talking about sex to anyone other than God is a form of flirting/adultery against God. I saw a reference to a Poll having been taken amongst Priests and 69% admitted being sexually active; and 31% of Nuns admitting they were sexually active. It did not say how large the Poll was but it does raise the question of serious adultery to God who they made celibacy promises to.

The Bible was written about 400 AD, from folk lore passed down from generation to generation, and the RC Church decided to take out 9 of the Books from the Bible because they did not want anyone to see what was in them. So the Bible we read to day is an "incomplete Bible". The original Bible is hidden in the Vatican.

There is much speculation as to what is in those 9 books, and to why the information is hidden from the masses. The Pope might lose his power, if the truth was told, so the RC Church has long been under a cloud of suspicion, some calling it a strange religion and possibly having links with the Devil because of the "give me a child until he is seven and we will capture his mind" - he might go out as a teenager and run amuck for a few years like a free bird, but his early training will bring him back to the fold eventually....we have him for life, we have imprinted his mind with values he can't shake off.

THE CHILD DOES NOT HAVE A FREEWILL CHOICE AS TO WHAT THE VALUES INPRINTED IN HIS MIND ARE IN THESE SEVEN YEARS - so he has been brain washed to believe only what he has been taught......(surely, this is the Devil at his best).

Hundreds of millions of humans were murdered by religion through the Ages for not believeing what the Church told them. GOD'S GIFT TO ALL HUMANS IS FREEWILL TO CHOOSE - religion ****** on the masses is not Freewill, it is the work of the Devil.

 

[Custer Laststand]

Hm.... I started this thread to point out that negative views of female sexuality are deeply rooted in ancient religious values propagated forward to the present, not to debate whether there is any truth in what might be called "The Christian Postulate."

But, regarding the following:

Sorry Custer, you are presenting theory as if it were fact, and using a encyclopedia of questional repute as your authority. Christians do not "mistakenly" believe anything. They cite as their source a book that has been in existence far longer than Wikipedia, and that has stood up to rigorous examination for centuries. ....

Christians mistakenly believe lots of things. The Old-Testament story of Adam and Eve, for example, is a child-like myth formulated by ancient people to "explain" the existence of humans, which was otherwise incomprehensible to them. It is no more "true" (i.e., not a mistaken concept) than the myth used by parents to explain to their young children where they came from ("the stork brought you, sweetheart"), because they think they're too young to understand the truth.

The idea that the Christian Bible must be "true" because lots of people have believed it for many centuries (it's "older than Wikipedia"[!]) is quaint, at best. "Rigorous examination" has shown that the Bible is, in fact, filled with inconsistencies and instances of the same events being described differently in different books or gospels. That means, by the definition of truth, that the Bible cannot be "true."

Also, in ancient times the contents of the Bible were transcribed so many times by different scribes at different times and places that it is filled with transcription and translation errors. Thus, when someone says the Bible is "true," the main responses that come to mind are: (1) it isn't because it can't be; and (2) which Bible do you mean, because there are *many* different versions.

As for the assertion that Wikipedia is filled with errors: according to an item on radio news a number of years ago, a "team" evaluated a random selection of articles appearing in Wikipedia for error content, then evaluated the same number of articles on the same subjects appearing in the Encyclopedia Britannica for error content. The Wikipedia articles, they found, contained fewer errors than the corresponding Encyclopedia Britannica articles.

The publishers of the august Encyclopedia Britannica, of course, hotly denied this saying, in essence, "That is impossible!" — thereby giving Wikipedia 15 minutes of fame per Andy Warhols well-known prediction ("In the future, everyone will be famous, for 15 minutes.").