RE: D/s and Religion

RE: D/s and Religion (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

CallaFirestormBW -> RE: D/s and Religion (9/28/2008 12:39:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CelticPrince quote: ORIGINAL: KnightofMists their Religion wasn't.... their Morality was. Knight Was?? many times they are one in the same. CP Except when they aren't... as in my case. CFB

CelticPrince -> RE: D/s and Religion (9/28/2008 4:23:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tweedydaddy Since Witchcraft involves scourging , it's a favourite with us. tweedydaddy ooops, I forgot to mention that! CP

CelticPrince -> RE: D/s and Religion (9/29/2008 11:32:24 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: persephonee Thats the funny thing...im agnostic...and im the major source of his information...everything he knows he learned from me until he started school. i never told him that there was no god...i simply never spoke of it...so imagine my surprise when one day he informed me that he believed in god and jesus etc...not only does he hold a belief that i didnt teach him, but hes apparently gone the christian way...every day i spend with this young man i am amazed by something. Since i firmly believe that i cant know if there is or is not a god...i dont feel as though i can impose my beliefs on him. He holds no such compunction but hes 6....or a Dom....time will tell. perse There is no accounting for the young furtile mind! CP

CelticPrince -> RE: D/s and Religion (9/29/2008 11:35:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RealSub58 After I posted here, I went to a website and asked a question... part of the response I received went like this. This is an excellent article by Betty Miller that talks about submission. What is the definition of submission? It is yielding to another's desires without resistance. Submission to another's wishes is an attitude of the heart done willingly, while surrender is yielding by being forced to do so. Our first submission should be unto the Lord. "Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind'' (Matthew 22:37). God never forces someone to follow Him nor does He want us to be forced to follow or yield to another human being. He wants us to lovingly submit to Him and to each other. However, because of the evil in some men's hearts a person under their authority can be abusive and a submissive person can be asked to do things that they do not believe is right. That is why the Bible also gives perimeters to submission. There are Scriptures that give us a guideline as to how far any human being is to submit to another. We need to understand the proper role of submission in marriage so that our homes will be harmonious and free of contention. The Bible teaches that, in the Spirit, women are equal with men, and each must submit unto Jesus as their spiritual head. *In the flesh,* in the marriage relationship, women are to be subject to their husband's headship. The Lord ordained that the man be the one that would make final decisions in the home because in any relationship involving two people one must be the final authority. In the marriage, or fleshly relationship, the man is the head and should guide his home and family. In the spirit, Jesus Christ is the head of His family and He guides each member according to His headship. Men are to love their wives like Jesus loves the church. He laid His life down for her. Men that are demanding that their wives submit to them have not learned the right way to win them and that is to love them with the love of the Lord. "Submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God. Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and He is the saviour of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything. Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish. So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself. For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church: For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh. This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church. Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband" (Ephesians 5:21-33). Submission to a husband does not mean a woman is to be a slave in bondage to that man, but rather it is to be a mutual submission in love. The above scripture says we are to submit unto each other. Submission means to yield or "to set yourself under." From this definition we see we are to yield to one another instead of demanding our own way. Love should be the rule in our homes, and we should "prefer one another." Not only should this be especially true in our homes, but in our church family as well. "Be kindly affectioned one to another with brotherly love; in honour preferring one another" (Romans 12:10). Both husband and wife should be submissive and loving. The love of Christ should be the rule in the home. When wifely submission is over-stressed we find it can lead to many problems that cause the husband-wife relationship to be thrown out of balance. Some even stress it to the degree that a wife must obey every command her husband dictates to her. They arrive at this conclusion because of the Scripture, "Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything" (Ephesians 5:24). The word "everything" here is not inclusive of evil things. Women are to submit to their husbands as the church is to submit unto Christ. Christ would never ask anything of the church that was not according to God's Word. Women are never to submit unto things that do not line up with God's Word. I still feel and know that God gives me a choice, and altho each persons interpretation of scripture is different, this is one women's interpretation on D/s and "religion." realsub, now that is indeed a mindfull. CP

NihilusZero -> RE: D/s and Religion (9/29/2008 11:45:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Darcyandthedark You are welcome Catize. It's as LadyT said - the bible that is in general circulation is a bastardized version as are many of the words which was partly laziness and partly ignorance on the part of the scholars that interpreted them. the.dark. The entire premise is a bastardization. One that apparently presupposes the acceptable conduit quality of the handful of original book authors, but does not grant the same 'understanding' to the subsequent language translators.

CelticPrince -> RE: D/s and Religion (9/29/2008 5:30:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: StayOfExecution I have no problem with someone having a different set of beliefs than I do, though i'd feel more bonded with someone who was aligned with my own thoughts on the matter. As long as we share the same basic code of ethics, I don't concern myself with his choice of religion. Stay, While I agree with your position, I ponder why you do not show a profile. CP

DavanKael -> RE: D/s and Religion (9/29/2008 5:48:57 PM)
In any partner, their spiritual path is important to me. These things tend to be fundamental to a person's views, outlooks, approach to the Universe, etc. Also, unfortunately, a lot of folks take on a guilt/shame approach related to their religion and understanding where they are coming from helps me to understand if/how that is going to manifest. I don't have guilt/shame about sexuality and if a person has too much of that, it's a definite problem. 'Course, I must interject that I watched "The Thorn birds" at a very impressionable age, so the whole 'corrupting' a sexy priest thing is massively hot to me but I didn't then, nor do I now view it as 'corruption': I saw the rightness and the sacredness in a man and a woman being together. It didn't make sense to me in the context of that story why he would choose God: Ralph being with Meggie seemed, to me, exactly what God would have ordained. I'm 'none of the above' in terms of affiliation but tend to have a greater affinity toward those belief systems that acknowledge the 'divine' in the 'ordinary', have a strong Earth-based foundation, etc. The idea of god/divinity/sacredness in all things, in me being god, you being god, etc. makes a lot of sense to me. Robert Heinlein's "Stranger in a Strange Land" is the closest I've come to reading something that seems to espouse my own personal belief structure, though it is more the underlying feel of Heinlein 'getting it' about the best things about humanity than about the particular behaviors characters in the book are doing. There is an old rumor about Heinlein and Hubbard having a bet about who could create a religion: Heinlein wrote "Stranger...", Hubbard "Dianetics". "Dianetics" struck me as a rather ill-organized, psychotic mix of pop-psychology and downright weird mythos. The irony is that Heinlein's book isn't really about religion at all but a way of being, which very much resonates with me: living up to the best of our potentials. It is also ironic that The Zells have created the "Church of All Worlds" (What Heinlein's character Michael called his initial 'church', though it wasn't a church) and that, as I understand it, the Church of All Worlds is a bastardization of what Heinlein wrote; it ocuses on those 'uicy details' that someone could easily pre-occupy with rather than on the fundamental ideas of the work. I fundamentally view sexuality (Including D/s) as sacred. On another fundamental level, the idea of my male partner as the guide or lead in a mutual spiritual path holds much appeal and an inherent feeling of 'rightness' for/to me. Davan

CelticPrince -> RE: D/s and Religion (9/30/2008 1:50:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DavanKael In any partner, their spiritual path is important to me. These things tend to be fundamental to a person's views, outlooks, approach to the Universe, etc. Also, unfortunately, a lot of folks take on a guilt/shame approach related to their religion and understanding where they are coming from helps me to understand if/how that is going to manifest. I don't have guilt/shame about sexuality and if a person has too much of that, it's a definite problem. 'Course, I must interject that I watched "The Thorn birds" at a very impressionable age, so the whole 'corrupting' a sexy priest thing is massively hot to me but I didn't then, nor do I now view it as 'corruption': I saw the rightness and the sacredness in a man and a woman being together. It didn't make sense to me in the context of that story why he would choose God: Ralph being with Meggie seemed, to me, exactly what God would have ordained. I'm 'none of the above' in terms of affiliation but tend to have a greater affinity toward those belief systems that acknowledge the 'divine' in the 'ordinary', have a strong Earth-based foundation, etc. The idea of god/divinity/sacredness in all things, in me being god, you being god, etc. makes a lot of sense to me. Robert Heinlein's "Stranger in a Strange Land" is the closest I've come to reading something that seems to espouse my own personal belief structure, though it is more the underlying feel of Heinlein 'getting it' about the best things about humanity than about the particular behaviors characters in the book are doing. There is an old rumor about Heinlein and Hubbard having a bet about who could create a religion: Heinlein wrote "Stranger...", Hubbard "Dianetics". "Dianetics" struck me as a rather ill-organized, psychotic mix of pop-psychology and downright weird mythos. The irony is that Heinlein's book isn't really about religion at all but a way of being, which very much resonates with me: living up to the best of our potentials. It is also ironic that The Zells have created the "Church of All Worlds" (What Heinlein's character Michael called his initial 'church', though it wasn't a church) and that, as I understand it, the Church of All Worlds is a bastardization of what Heinlein wrote; it ocuses on those 'uicy details' that someone could easily pre-occupy with rather than on the fundamental ideas of the work. I fundamentally view sexuality (Including D/s) as sacred. On another fundamental level, the idea of my male partner as the guide or lead in a mutual spiritual path holds much appeal and an inherent feeling of 'rightness' for/to me. Davan Davan, Well considered words/ thanks for your input. CP

DavanKael -> RE: D/s and Religion (9/30/2008 9:54:57 PM)
Thanks, CP---- You've made a lot of good points/observations throughout the course of this thread. :> Davan Did some more reading of the thread and have some more thoughts: Jumping to a different aspect of this thread: atheism (Much from NihilusZero) I was married to a rabid (foaming, frothing at the mouth) atheist. It is part of who he is and it's actually a part of him that links with a piece where we are fundmentally different: I am a hope-ful person where he is a hope-less person; he gets this fromhis Dad who is also a rather rabid Atheist (Largely, thanks to his experiences in Vietnam). No, I am not saying that all Atheists lack hope. Did his spirituality affect mine. Of course. I attenuated some of my openness and seeking but I remained who I am and grew/developed none-the-less. I feel more spiritually freed up now that he and I are not together. That was not a deal-breaking factor; the hope-ful vs hope-less was more of a factor, though there were many. I was strongly anti-Christian (Seriously pissed at Christianity in late high school) when he and I met but we were togther for 17 years, so I had awhile to work through those issues and calm down that stance. 'Course, at various times I've conceptualized myself as an atheistically-leaning agnostic. I think had I "gotten religion", I'd have gotten divorced sooner, lol! While he sometimes found my spiritual concepts wonky, we could agree to disagree and he actually had moments of spiritual openness himself. The lack of understanding the sacredness in sex part was highly distressing to me. My announcing I am god seemed to bother him a whole lot less; he'd look askance at the I am god, thou art god stuff but didn't spaz too much. He'd get downright tickled when I'd announce "worship me and give me oral sex" (one of my favorite statements of triumph or victory), lol! Although, come to think of it, he wasn't nearly as compliant or dedicated in said worship as I would have liked. < smirk > Thing about rabid atheists (or rabid anything, for that matter) is that they usually don't stop at having their own beliefs. They tend to need to beat others over the head. Now, if someone's being stupid and disrespectful, I'll have great fun using their supposed beliefs to crack 'em upside their fool heads < grin > but otherwise, I'm pretty live and let live. There's also some conversation about indoctrinating kids in this thread. I do not have children. I have 3 godkids, I have helped co-parent kids, I have lots of friends with kids that I interact with regularly, and I have worked with kids. Here are my thoughts on indoctrinating kids: We've already covered that I, ideally, wish a partner/husband as a guiding spiritual as well as overall force. This makes having someone in that place having a religion I can respect (Rather than merely tolerate) particularly important. Super important were progeny to result fromour union. With the ex-, he once, at the thought of our breeding, had this crazy "we'll have to take it to church" fit. My fit in response was something like, "The Hell you say, Mr. Atheist who talked his Parents out of making him go to Sunday school so he could stay home and watch "Godzilla" movies <That's true!>." And, you can't help but appreciate a little one who can exert that sort of persuasion, even if it was over poorly made monster movies. His saying that was related to the idea of instilling a moral code. Now, when we sat down and he stopped being a goon (We were in our early 20's at that time), we came to the agreement that morals don't have the tiniest shred of anything to do with religion inherently and religion isn't inherent to instilling good values. As an Atheist and an Agnostic, we agreed (Him grumblingly so) that we'd expose a kid to as many world religions as we could and keep our fingers crossed that we didn't wind upwith a Fundamentalist Christian Sports Star (That was what we conceptualized as so freakin' foreign as to make our heads explode). Kids are like sponges. Teaching isn't indoctrinating; it's teaching. You can't leave a child a tabula rasa (My apologies to John Locke if I misspelled that, it's late): they aren't going to be a blank slate forever. They start learning from the second they join the rest of the world. So, I think you teach them; you teach them a decent moral code and to be free thinkers that can function in society even if what the majority of society is upto isn't for them. A lot of people try to use their kids as 'mini-me's' and ego devices; I think that sucks. Kids rock. They have so much of their own inherent wisdom and things to teach us. It's not a 1 way street, the teaching thing. I think kids deserve respect. Lots of it. We owe them our good intent and guidance too. And consistency because without it they learn not to trust and do not feel safe. And honesty. And, above all, love. I don't care what kid says it, if a kid tells me they love me, I tell them right on back, and I mean it. Unconditionally. And, of course, I tell the kids closest to me that I love them bunches. Love is what it's all about. :> Davan

NihilusZero -> RE: D/s and Religion (9/30/2008 10:09:37 PM)
In my experience, the "rabid" atheists tend to be ones who develop their atheism as an byproduct of emotional distress/anger/resentment towards either their former deity or former religion/spirituality. In terms of forcing "beliefs", as an atheist, there are none to force. Personally, i think "belief" is a pointless thing to teach anyway (encouraged in subjective topic, sure...but not taught). We use the word in lieu of having knowledge and/or understanding of something. So, concerning my position seeming staunch at first glance, it actually isn't because I agree entirely with what you wrote here: quote: ORIGINAL: DavanKael So, I think you teach them; you teach them a decent moral code and to be free thinkers that can function in society even if what the majority of society is upto isn't for them.

Ialdabaoth -> RE: D/s and Religion (9/30/2008 10:22:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NihilusZeroIn terms of forcing "beliefs", as an atheist, there are none to force. Personally, i think "belief" is a pointless thing to teach anyway (encouraged in subjective topic, sure...but not taught). We use the word in lieu of having knowledge and/or understanding of something. You ever read good ol' Mr. Wilson?

DavanKael -> RE: D/s and Religion (9/30/2008 10:23:21 PM)
Hi, NihilusZero---- Worry not, I didn't think that you and I disagreed in a profound way. I agree with much of what you've said through the thread and the Atheism piece reminded me of my ex- and the views you espouse aren't as extreme as his were by a long-shot. His beliefs really were more about a lack of hope (And the idea that most people are not inherently good) as opposed to anything religious. He just thought that religion was stupid and peole who believed in it were stupid/self-deluded, etc., ultimtely going back to people being not inherently good. One point upon which I think we disagree, though the verbeage we'll get into is tricky but I'm game if you are: you asserted that atheism is a lack of belief but I'll contend that's still something to believe in: not believing. It's either a Rush or Yes song (When it gets late, I seem to come up with more song references: last night on a different post, it was Powerman 5000, lol!) that has the lyrics: "If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice". This is the spirit of what I am saying. Thoughts? Davan

Ialdabaoth -> RE: D/s and Religion (9/30/2008 11:05:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DavanKael "If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice". Wasn't that Devo?

DavanKael -> RE: D/s and Religion (9/30/2008 11:13:58 PM)
ROFL, Ialdabaoth---- I don't think so. 'Course, I think I only remember one of their songs. "Whip It",wasn't it? With the conical red hats in the video. Clearly it's too late; we're devolving a conversation about D/s and religion into baaaaaaaaad MTV moments, lol! :> Davan

bliss1 -> RE: D/s and Religion (10/1/2008 12:38:44 PM)
I was going to respond to the orginal post - until I see that the topic has gone from what was asked to a debate on what a parent may or may not do and what is an atheist. My words seem worthless now.

NihilusZero -> RE: D/s and Religion (10/1/2008 2:45:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: bliss1 I was going to respond to the orginal post - until I see that the topic has gone from what was asked to a debate on what a parent may or may not do and what is an atheist. My words seem worthless now. If you say so. However, CelticPrince has been doing a wonderful job of responding to each person's views individually and, though some tangents have occurred, the thread has continued to work its way back.

AnaisTwoCrows -> RE: D/s and Religion (10/1/2008 2:57:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: littlewonder While religion isn't important to me, spirituality is. We have to share a spiritual connection. Our belief system has to be very similar so that our morals, values and ethics are in line with one another. If we don't share in that then we wouldn't be compatible along any lines whatsoever. I couldn't have said it better Myself.

iamherproperty -> RE: D/s and Religion (10/1/2008 5:15:36 PM)
Don't we think that masochism can be helpful for the spiritual practice in some cases ? If the female is masochist , she can be the ideal wife , only if she will not go further than some limit of the ''proper submission ''. Its a paradox but her masochistic nature can give her the power to behave as an ideal wife and be very examplary Christian , in case ( I ripit again ) she will not overjump the measure of the '' proper submission''. The people with masochistic nature , some times are able to do the acts which are the acts of the highest spiritual greateness. And you will not even guess that in the forest of their brain is that masochistic core , which is extremely helpful in their enthusiasm to do noble and good acts. These are just my spontanous thinking about the masochistic nature and spirituality. I do not believe that there are the personal religions or personal spiritualities , or personal definitions of '' the true way of life ''. I know that there is one true spirituality , one true religion and one morality . Its not a matter of personal liking of disliking . I do not believe that , lets say - to have a sessions with a Mistresses makes my spirituality stronger or it has some positive effect on my spirituality. No way. What I practice is bad.And I know that is bad , I know I am a bad boy , but I just like it . Just like to be a bad boy. I do not take the true religion seriously. But my masochism can be helpful in some ways to realization of my self in other social activities very nobly . Let's say : -If I am some public service worker , I can offer the service to the lady that she will be much suprised how professionally I did my job , I mean in the professional way of serving her . But she would not even guess that I felt the masochistic pleasure by doing that , and actually my masochism helped me to serve her so good. -I can help some orphan girl , who is graduated from the school by supporting her materially and helping her very nobly in her many needs , and she will not even guess that in that platonic fatherly love is the secretely hidden masochistic pleasure - to serve. I think yes , from the spiritual point of view- my masochism can be very helpful to atchieve some good deeds in the noble , social , charity and generally many other noble activities. Only in this paradoxal way - masochism helps religion.

CelticPrince -> RE: D/s and Religion (10/4/2008 2:23:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: bliss1 I was going to respond to the orginal post - until I see that the topic has gone from what was asked to a debate on what a parent may or may not do and what is an atheist. My words seem worthless now. bliss1 Whoa girl, your words are never worthless so just respond to the original question. Thread often meander / congrats on linking up with the clan. CP

KatyLied -> RE: D/s and Religion (10/4/2008 2:26:05 PM)
quote: quote: "If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice". Wasn't that Devo? Rush

Page: << < prev 4 5 6 7 [8]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625