|
Aswad -> RE: Christianity and BDSM (12/24/2007 11:19:46 AM)
|
To the OP,
This is the time for you to learn about your own faith, make some decisions, and grow as a person.
I would consider myself something along the lines of a Christian. But, the way I see it, the mainstream churches are way off base, as elegantly demonstrated by the ideas people in this thread have put forth regarding what that religion is about. If God is able to create two or more humans, as most versions of the faith claim, then he could have created far better slaves than us, so I posit that he did not intend for us to be slaves.
Proceeding from that, I posit that we are individually accountable to ourselves.
Owning up to that requires examining the origins of the faith, and how it came to be the mess that it is today. We soon find, upon looking back, that the root of much of this is the Pauline legacy. A pharisee (the Jewish equivalent of the Puritans) beurocrat who, by his own admission, never met Jesus, and in fact was charged with stamping out Jesus' heretical teachings, but who nonetheless is viewed as authoritative on Christ's teachings.
I would say he did a very fine job of stamping out those teachings.
Starting with the New Testament, since that's what most Christian denominations can-to some extent- agree on the contents and importance of, you have your work cut out for you. Start off by reading your Bible from one end to the other, gathering up only those things that Jesus is related as saying, and organize them chronologically, comparing the different recountings of what was said to arrive at as accurate a picture as possible.
With what he said in front of you, can you really say it even resembles what the priests say?
Proceeding on to the Apocrypha, you will see sides of the tale that are not usually told or given much weight in the mainstream religions. Even discounting the most popular divergences, like the role of Mary as wife to Jesus and his most enlightened disciple, you will probably find that what was taught has more than a touch of Buddhism in it. In fact, even if taken entirely as a parable, with no reality to it, the lessons are many and useful.
What of the integrity of the text itself, then?
Disregarding even the serious difficulties with translation, and the multiple redactions we can conclusively show to have taken place in the Bible, we are faced with the fact that even the usually quite conservative Catholic church admits that the notion of a unified Bible is a fiction; it took 12 centuries for them to agree what to put in the Bible, and it's going to take at least that long for them to agree on the interpretation of what is in it. And the doctrine that the message remains intact due to the influence of the Holy Spirit is nothing more than bullshit intended to cement the power of the priests over the masses. They know full well what hand it is that feeds them, after all.
So, how about a critical examination?
The documentary hypothesis is somewhat disputed, in that its specifics are not fully agreed upon. But one thing that is clear, is that both parts of the Bible have come from different sources, and been compiled by an editor (in the case of the Old Testament, it appears likely that this editor was Ezra) at some point in time. One of the sources that contains the most prohibitions and laws is the Priestly source, which is to say the stuff that the Levite priests themselves wrote and stuck in there, passing it off as part of the religion. This is not particularly controversial at all, and if we want to grow up in our own eyes, and the eyes of God, we must think critically for ourselves about this, and not so readily give power over ourselves to priests with other agendas than our own.
But what about the laws regarding marriage, homosexuality, and so forth?
Well, here is where you need to think. The Jewish people were scattered, subjugated and without a clear identity of their own when Moses sought to bring them out of the land of Egypt. Rather than allowing them to simply become yet another group of people in the culture of Canaan, a solution is put forth: an identity is constructed by contrasting it to the people who would otherwise have subsumed the Jewish people as part of their own. This is what Nietzsche called a slave morality, i.e. one wherein one starts with an idea of Other, and defines Self as the complement of this. And how apt to use such an approach with a people who were effectively just that: slaves. But, as I have already said, I do not think God wanted us to be his slaves. Hence, it seems reasonable for us to assume that he intended to try to help the Jewish people to grow, with as little of his interference as possible.
He failed, as shown in the tale of Job, the beaten dog that kept coming back for more.
Thus, he needs a vessel that understands humanity, by virtue of being, at least in part, human.
Jesus was that vessel, and taught us various things, trying to steer us in a direction that would lead to growth. In fact, most of the Jewish denominations now follow much of what was said to a greater extent than do the Christians, in looking at what is said in the Bible as a pointer, rather than an immutable and rigid Law. The noble man does not need the rule of Law to lead a good life, and if we are- as the texts say- infused with a spark of the divine, then surely we are, or should be, noble creatures, who should seek to live our lives on our feet, with pride (but not hubris) and striving to be all that we can be. This requires thinking for oneself, and being accountable to ourselves.
God does not, I think, care one whit for whether you fuck someone you haven't married.
If you listen to your instincts, live true to yourself, stay honest with yourself and the men and women in your life, and relate rationally to the world around you as you see it, and not as you would wish it to be, then I cannot think but that this is a giant leap for your soul. Believe as you will of what may lie beyond the veil, but in the end, we live in this world, and we must live such that our physical, mental and spiritual health does not become compromised by dogma that has been outdated for centuries.
Yes, the Canaanites allowed LGBT, poly, zoo, sodomy and a bunch of other stuff.
Yes, the Jews needed to distance themselves from that in order to retain their identity.
No, you do not need to follow their example, as long as you are willing to be a free man.
Cliff notes: you need to find out who you are and what you believe in before you decide how to act.
I've got lots more to say on the topic, but I hope this will suffice for now.
Health,
al-Aswad.
|
|
|
|
