RE: BDSM Saint?

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

RE: BDSM Saint?

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> RE: BDSM Saint?

Page: << < prev 2 3 4 5 [6]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: BDSM Saint? - 10/1/2006 7:31:13 PM

Amaros

Posts: 1363
Joined: 7/25/2005
Status: offline

Not a prob, it is a fascinating theory, and those books are a good read if you've got time.

(in reply to swtsouthernsub)

Profile

Post #: 101

RE: BDSM Saint? - 10/1/2006 7:42:49 PM

Amaros

Posts: 1363
Joined: 7/25/2005
Status: offline

You might also want to look at Theresa of Avila, I think it was, who had these mystical public "raptures" with god that are really quite erotic, and described in very sexual terms - she is "pierced" with the holy spirit, etc.

The Spanish cult of Mary is somewhat reminiscent of a godess religion, and the cult of Isis/Astarte was very popular in the region prior to Christianity - also near the sites often suspected to be the remnents of a paleolithic fertility religion.

Christianity also syncretized the Isis/Astarte cult, giving us, among other things, Easter (Astarte), the pagan festival of Spring/rebirth. The eggs, chicks, bunnies, etc., are fertility symbols.

(in reply to Amaros)

Profile

Post #: 102

RE: BDSM Saint? - 10/1/2006 8:38:39 PM

LordODiscipline

Posts: 995
Joined: 6/28/2004
Status: offline

Wow... take another pull and settle down..

We are discussing (despite arguments to the contrary)

Theorys have to have an element of possiblity - a basis in facts real or potential to allow them to exist as "theory"

Theory is defined as an analysis of a set of facts as they relate to one another -or- a plausability set for analysis... an unproven assumption (meaning that there would be a possibility of proving the issue - and in this instance, since it is a tale, there is not)

Otherwise, wihtout some basis for proof (potential or realized) the subject are supposition and fairy tale.

Nowv if you can pull one of these books up with reference to something up prior to the 2nd century AD when the council of Nicaea changed a lot of the literature for means... then it might be something plausable and theoretical... (this is where the theory really breaks down)

However - you have not even brought forth any reference. Simply stated that "it is a theory"

My point:

This is not even a theory, but an oft told tale without any basis for analysis or potential due to it's incurrsion into the culture >a millenia after the fact and resting the implausability of the issues involved in any part of the tale....

And, I could have sworn you were in this conversation from the begining - But, maybe all the writing earlier was simply an allusion (not that clever a pun, but there it is none the less).

If you are going to speak about logic... let;s understand that it has a basis which you are skipping about trying to avoid.

Suppositions are fun, but they cannot be presented as (even) theorys without being challenged.. and, doing so only presents your veracity in an uncertain light.

~J

_____________________________

"Anyone who thinks they're important is usually just a pompous moron who can't deal with his or her own pathetic insignificance and the fact that what they do is meaningless and inconsequential."
William Thomas

(in reply to Amaros)

Profile

Post #: 103

RE: BDSM Saint? - 10/2/2006 7:57:44 AM

Amaros

Posts: 1363
Joined: 7/25/2005
Status: offline

quote:

Theory is defined as an analysis of a set of facts as they relate to one another -or- a plausability set for analysis... an unproven assumption (meaning that there would be a possibility of proving the issue - and in this instance, since it is a tale, there is not)

I believe there is enough evidence to call it a theory, a theory is simply a hypothesis with enough supporting evidence to make it plausible, and not enough contradictory evidence to repudiate it. Quite a few hypothesis make it to theory stage on circumstantial evidence.

You are welcome call it a hypothesis if it suits you.

The narrative appears to conform to what we know of the general socio-political climate, likely behavior of a scion or exilarch, etc., and explains a number of anomolies and akward aspects of the synoptic gospels - there were all manner of charismatic religious types running around, why single out this one? Why mock him as a "King"? Jews don't crucify false prophets, they stone them, etc.

It is also possible to confirm, theoretically, through DNA analysis, though unlikely, and not with the current available evidence.

It would be possible for example to compare the DNA of Maccabee descendents with a sampling of the most likely Europeans - since it's posited that the DNA originates with Mary, the MtDNA should remain identifiable.

Again, without detailed geneologies, it still would not be conclusive, but add to the body of circumstantial evidence.

I admit I'm curious what you think is the real story - it almost sounds as if you're saying we cannot make any guesses about it whatsoever, that it's a blank page - or is it that you believe the synoptic gospels to be factual accounts? If that is the case, they do happen to confirm most apsects of the political angle.

< Message edited by Amaros -- 10/2/2006 7:59:49 AM >

(in reply to LordODiscipline)

Profile

Post #: 104

RE: BDSM Saint? - 10/5/2006 5:34:21 PM

pinkee

Posts: 487
Status: offline

Hey, Mary Magdelene is my patron saint, and i have always loved the bible passage in which she washes Jesus' feet with her tears and dries them with her hair. Personally, i believe Jesus and Mary Magdelene were very close. At the least, she was one of the Apostles. At the most, she was His lover, and it would be wonderful to believe that she bore Him a child.

pinkee

(in reply to Amaros)

Profile

Post #: 105