RE: Christian Dominants (Full Version)

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



Message


MasterSlaveLA -> RE: Christian Dominants (10/2/2009 11:27:58 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Darcyandthedark

quote:

ORIGINAL: Eigenaar
One can also call Christ as Dominant as one can get. Christ is God.


Incorrect.
God is the dominant.
Jesus is the submissive.




Wrong.  The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are ONE AND THE SAME.  The "Trinity".  Read the bible.





MasterSlaveLA -> RE: Christian Dominants (10/2/2009 11:39:16 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Viridana

Dying for everybody else's sins. Isn't that the ultimate act of service.... and submission? just askin.....


No. For those who TRULY LOVE their sub/slave, as ANY man loves a woman, or as ANY woman loves a man -- if given the choice to SAVE the one you love (which is why Christ is called THE SAVIOR) -- any Top/Dom/Domme or whatever who TRULY LOVED their sub/slave would do the same.  Those who disagree with this do not TRULY LOVE the person they're with.  Period.  No different from a parent giving their life for their child.  That's not submissive in the least.





porcelaine -> RE: Christian Dominants (10/3/2009 8:10:46 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tinkerer

For those of you who are christian dominants, what do you do to follow christ in your role? What kinds of play do you abstain from because of your belief, and what aspects of the D/s relation do you pay especially close attention to? Is there anything you have your submissive do that you wouldn't if you didn't have faith?


i'm not christian but i have been involved with someone who was and i found that he had serious issues that led to conflicts between his faith and my sexual preferences. i believe some of the tenets of the religion in respect to their teachings on sex and what is or isn't appropriate was a point of internal contention for him. in my own experiences in the past i have found the same to be true.

while i once worshipped in a non-denominational sense, i was very involved and aware that this sort of behavior was frowned upon. the justification for what is acceptable and the feelings of guilt and uneasiness that accompany deviation from this were things i could no longer adhere to. he chose a different path, which i respect, but find i'm on the opposite side of.

i view religion and all facets of faith, dogma, and spirituality as tools that can be utilized for self betterment and actualization. the rigidity one applies or limitations you permit and enforce are individual, but i have sincere qualms about the overall effect and purpose for doing such. developing self-control doesn't require one to be repressed or overly laden with fear or supposed consequences of ostracization or pseudo damnation. perhaps for some these things must be in place to coax the mind into alliance. i do believe healthier methods exist, but i respect each persons right to choose what works for them.

porcelaine




Eigenaar -> RE: Christian Dominants (10/3/2009 8:36:00 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Acer49

quote:

ORIGINAL: Eigenaar

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tinkerer

For those of you who are christian dominants, what do you do to follow christ in your role? What kinds of play do you abstain from because of your belief, and what aspects of the D/s relation do you pay especially close attention to? Is there anything you have your submissive do that you wouldn't if you didn't have faith?

Myself being a follower I wondered how others thought. I'm not trying to start a flame war, so please keep things civil.


Edited for speling ;)
I once called myself a Christian but I no longer do and to be honest I don't see why a Christian should look at bdsm in a different way than a heathen or what we have more. I discussed this with several practitioners. When asked why they ask they claim it is obvious Christians disapprove of poly and bdsm in general. Yet when consulting the Scripture all one will find are contradictions including some condoning real slavery and bdsm beyond ones wildest imaginations. Years ago a large erotic mail-order business in the Netherlands made public most of their customers are Christian. There are poly Christians in the past and in the present and corporal punishment was never far away. In Germany a group of people growing up in Christian children's homes recently broke the silence about abuse and during the ungoing investigations there were even found human remains. I am sure Christians do not follow Christ more or less in their role as a dominant.
quote:

ORIGINAL: Darcyandthedark

Christ was about as submissive as one can get.

the.dark.
One can also call Christ as Dominant as one can get. Christ is God.

quote:

I once called myself a Christian but I no longer do and to be honest I don't see why a Christian should look at bdsm in a different way than a heathen or what we have more. I discussed this with several practitioners. When asked why they ask they claim it is obvious Christians disapprove of poly and bdsm in general. Yet when consulting the Scripture all one will find are contradictions including some condoning real slavery and bdsm beyond ones wildest imaginations. Years ago a large erotic mail-order business in the Netherlands made public most of their customers are Christian. There are poly Christians in the past and in the present and corporal punishment was never far away. In Germany a group of people growing up in Christian children's homes recently broke the silence about abuse and during the ungoing investigations there were even found human remains. I am sure Christians do not follow Christ more or less in their role as a dominant.


I do not think Christians do, there are some aspects that they may have issues with but I do not think that for the most part, they are exclusive to the lifestyle. If for instance you felt that lust is a sin, then you can find that in must all situations, any activity that involves outside of marriage may come up, that that is as well, not exclusive to the lifestyle. I believe your practitioners are incorrect, nothing is obvious. I do not object to poly on religious grounds, I reject it because it rarely works over a long period of time. I will remind you that the lifestyle does not sanction play without consent and as such, "real slavery" is not part of bdsm. As to the use of corporal punishment, that activity has been practiced in a large family structure and can no way be considered exclusive to the lifestyle

A Netherlands mail order sad" put your credit card number here and please check the correct box as to your religious affiliation. I seriously doubt that. Children’s home was found to have abused children? I would have never have guessed that was possible, only because stories like this have popped up time and time again for the past 70-80 years. I am not naive, since you seem to feel that Christians are judging you, you feel the need to suggest that we are less than righteous. After all, we see ourselves as perfect and we can walk on water too... NOT!!! Christians are not more righteous than any other segment of the religious society. We do not believe ourselves to be above others and we are just as prone to make as many mistakes. Since unlike you, I am not privy to data that would either confirm or deny the conclusion of if or how lifestyle members might follow Christ

The bdsm practitioners I refer to wondered how Christians would see the lifestyle and were convinced Christians would be appaled by it. I mentioned Christians are no strangers to bdsm practises themselves. I did not say ''real slavery'' is part of bdsm.

The mail order made public most orders come from Christian communities. I did not say a thing about being judged by Christians, furthermore, I in fact said the same as you when you say Christian bdsm practitioners are not more righteous than general bdsm practitioners and don't have a reason to think or find they should do things differently in the lifestyle.




happylittlepet -> RE: Christian Dominants (10/3/2009 8:49:44 AM)

[Awaiting Approval]*








*Sorry, I can't resist [8D]. There are three posts above me that show these two words, so this came to mind:

I am waiting for my own approval about whether to respond to this thread.

Edit: I don't think that 'about' is the right word in the above sentence, but I have no idea what would be better, the word 'on'?





DemonKia -> RE: Christian Dominants (10/3/2009 8:55:44 AM)

Lovely postings in this thread, Amaros . . . . . But I gotta quibble with this particular detail, quoted below.

Buddha died from food poisoning, in his 80's. He spent the rest of his life, after attaining enlightenment in his 30's, wandering, teaching, & begging for food . . . . . .

quote:

ORIGINAL: Amaros

Graham eventually proved to be unable to control his appetites, and like another famous spiritual leader, Buddha, ate himself to death.


As for the OP, I'm not much help as I've never chosen to be Christian despite the ministrations of my maternal grama throughout my childhood . . . ..

I do note that this thread has repeatedly fallen into the pit of confusing submission & passivity, which distinction is apparently a tough one to get . . . .

& there's this thing that goes on where humans have tendencies to dichotomize things, & then take that & make it a 100% consistent correlation for any related characteristic. A lot of this kind of thinking goes on, such as: dominant = leader = strong = active = assertive = . . . . . & then anyone or thing that is judged 'dominant' is implicitly packed up with all these other associated characteristics . . . .

The problem of course is that darn few things in the universe have 100% consistent correlation, & much of the universe exists in much slighter relationship with everything else . . . .

Fascinating thread, tho' . . . . Thanks much to all who contributed . . . ..




mnottertail -> RE: Christian Dominants (10/3/2009 9:08:19 AM)

Onward Christian Dominant;
Fucking with the Whores;
sucking cocks for Jesus;
dropping down their drawers......


Sabine Baring-Gould




GreedyTop -> RE: Christian Dominants (10/3/2009 9:12:19 AM)

lol Ron.. you're so gonna burn....LOL




Amaros -> RE: Christian Dominants (10/3/2009 10:13:04 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DemonKia

Lovely postings in this thread, Amaros . . . . . But I gotta quibble with this particular detail, quoted below.

Buddha died from food poisoning, in his 80's. He spent the rest of his life, after attaining enlightenment in his 30's, wandering, teaching, & begging for food . . . . . .

quote:

ORIGINAL: Amaros

Graham eventually proved to be unable to control his appetites, and like another famous spiritual leader, Buddha, ate himself to death.


As for the OP, I'm not much help as I've never chosen to be Christian despite the ministrations of my maternal grama throughout my childhood . . . ..

I do note that this thread has repeatedly fallen into the pit of confusing submission & passivity, which distinction is apparently a tough one to get . . . .

& there's this thing that goes on where humans have tendencies to dichotomize things, & then take that & make it a 100% consistent correlation for any related characteristic. A lot of this kind of thinking goes on, such as: dominant = leader = strong = active = assertive = . . . . . & then anyone or thing that is judged 'dominant' is implicitly packed up with all these other associated characteristics . . . .

The problem of course is that darn few things in the universe have 100% consistent correlation, & much of the universe exists in much slighter relationship with everything else . . . .

Fascinating thread, tho' . . . . Thanks much to all who contributed . . . ..


Thanks Kia I've read that  Buddha liked his curry, and died of an ulcerated stomach, I've never seen a skinny Buddha - at any rate, he is recorded as wrestling with sexual demons, so there is some antecedent for a link between religious experience and ertophobia, given that the majority of the surrounding Vedic culture was religiously and spiritually erotophillic.

Nealry all major culture appear to become formally erotophobic, due largely to reproductive politics - i.e. women carry the full evolutionary cost of childbirth for inescapable reasons of biology, monogamy is a system whereby she can distribute thise costs and share them with a partner, formally a man, and the fatehr of the child, thus it is in the mans interest to assure himself the child he is devoting his resources to is his, thus the high value of virginity, and formal rejection of public eroticism for fear that the whole system will break down, erotomania, which expresses itself as erotophobia.

A number of religions, rituals, and sects however, have revolved around erotolepsy, something like the evangelical equivilent of writhing on the floor and speaking in tongues.

These rites and sects typically reflect the primal value of fertility, and fertility rites are deeply and universally associated with sexual expression.

The word "Whore" derives from Horae, who were women of status, valued not only for their skills of seduction, but their learning and wisdom, the equivilent of the Wiseman. Objectifed by competitive androcentric religion that reduced women to chattel in an exaggerated expression of reproductive politics, jealous of their status, they become villified as "whores", although even throughout the Victorian era, Prostitutes often had higher informal social status than formal socialites, were courted, admired, and celebrated, although the spiritual elements of the role have been largley excised.

Probably not useful in terms of Christian D/S, but it never hurts to expand ones understanding of the patterns of the spiritual/religious impulse.




DemonKia -> RE: Christian Dominants (10/3/2009 11:09:06 AM)

Hmmmmm.

Most of the round, fat images that Westerners are likely to think of as 'buddhas' are rather some Chinese mythic figure, a good luck one . . . . .

I'm of the understanding that the majority of depictions of Siddhattha Gotama (aka, the Buddha) show him in various stages of leanness. Fasting played a significant role in the life of the Buddha, & there are quite a few images of him starved skinny .. . .

Siddhattha Gotama was born a prince who had experienced a full range of earthly pleasures (available circa 500 BCE) before renouncing all that & becoming a wandering ascetic experimenting with spiritual stuff, leading to his enlightenment as to the true nature of reality. Basically.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Amaros

Thanks Kia I've read that  Buddha liked his curry, and died of an ulcerated stomach, I've never seen a skinny Buddha - at any rate, he is recorded as wrestling with sexual demons, so there is some antecedent for a link between religious experience and ertophobia, given that the majority of the surrounding Vedic culture was religiously and spiritually erotophillic.





Amaros -> RE: Christian Dominants (10/3/2009 11:35:59 AM)

Not being an expert on Buddha, I'm inclined to take your word for it - although it's a Tantric philosophy Buddhism takes a more ascetic approach to synthesis; in short, they aren't into sex, erotoleptic ego submersion is the more interesting approach to me.




DemonKia -> RE: Christian Dominants (10/3/2009 11:49:13 AM)

There's this notion of right-handed Buddhism, versus left-handed. Right-handed Buddhism uses abstention in conjunction with conceptions of ahimsa in pursuit of nirvana; left-handed Buddhism uses meat-eating, sex, intoxicant use, & other 'taboos' in pursuit of same . . . . . It's found more in the mystically-inclined Tibetan branches of Buddhism . . .. . (There's as many branchings & sects & such in Buddhism as in any of the other major religions, lol . . . . . )

quote:

ORIGINAL: Amaros

Not being an expert on Buddha, I'm inclined to take your word for it - although it's a Tantric philosophy Buddhism takes a more ascetic approach to synthesis; in short, they aren't into sex, erotoleptic ego submersion is the more interesting approach to me.





mnottertail -> RE: Christian Dominants (10/3/2009 11:59:26 AM)

And I am left handed

Buddha




Amaros -> RE: Christian Dominants (10/3/2009 12:08:52 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DemonKia

There's this notion of right-handed Buddhism, versus left-handed. Right-handed Buddhism uses abstention in conjunction with conceptions of ahimsa in pursuit of nirvana; left-handed Buddhism uses meat-eating, sex, intoxicant use, & other 'taboos' in pursuit of same . . . . . It's found more in the mystically-inclined Tibetan branches of Buddhism . . .. . (There's as many branchings & sects & such in Buddhism as in any of the other major religions, lol . . . . . )

quote:

ORIGINAL: Amaros

Not being an expert on Buddha, I'm inclined to take your word for it - although it's a Tantric philosophy Buddhism takes a more ascetic approach to synthesis; in short, they aren't into sex, erotoleptic ego submersion is the more interesting approach to me.




That's consistent with Gnostic philosophy, which conceives of both asceticism and debauchery as equally valid approaches to ego submersion, two sides of the same coin so to speak.

Asceticism and erotophobia do not necessarily correlate, but erotophobes are often ascetics, and so the Two tend to be associated in formal religion, asceticism being "safer", less disruptive to the status quo.

Of course, that's what makes the left handed approach more challenging: interaction with "The World" as opposed withdrawal from it.




Amaros -> RE: Christian Dominants (10/3/2009 12:13:31 PM)

Ahimsa is echoed in the more modern gnostic formulae: and you harm none, do what you will, which I believe originates with Crowley, but is claimed by Wiccans among others, though clearly of ancient origin in principle.




TurboJugend -> RE: Christian Dominants (10/3/2009 12:23:06 PM)

"Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law." " Love is the law, love under will" Aleister Crowley / Thelema
indeed

but also
"....and kill those who would thwart these rights"




Amaros -> RE: Christian Dominants (10/3/2009 12:30:46 PM)

Yeah, I guess Crowley had his own spin on it, no doubt - the line paraphrased above is more Wiccan, and reflects a more classical gnostic line of thought.




TurboJugend -> RE: Christian Dominants (10/3/2009 12:39:43 PM)

Not sure who spinned it, I only know he said it.
Wiccan and gnostic? I don't know about that. I thought gnostics were from before christ and wiccans somewhat later.
Not sure though...never saw them mentioned together..




DemonKia -> RE: Christian Dominants (10/3/2009 12:52:51 PM)

FR, after continuing read thru

It's my understanding that all the world's major religions has some form of the 'golden rule', ahimsa, et al. . . . . Despite their much vaunted differences . . . . .


As to this polarization thing. I think of it as an innate human tendency to dichotomize, & I theorize that it is an artifact of our bilateral observational instrument (ie, our bicameral brains & etc) more than it is some fundament of the 'true nature of reality' (whatever that might be) . . . . . . .

& as such, this desire to centrifuge things one way or the other manifests all over the place. Given a coupla other of our propensities, to abstract (with virtually no limit) & to assign meaning, we have had a lot of edification construction about the 'deeper meaning' of this or that polarity, but, respectfully, I mostly scoff [ETA] at those reifications.

We do not see the world as it is. We see the world as we are.
- Talmud -




symphonyofroses -> RE: Christian Dominants (10/3/2009 1:29:21 PM)

The Bible never uses the word "trinity", however, the Father, Son & Holy Spirit as often referred to in letters from the early church.
Although God the father is spirit and so is the Holy Spirit a spirit, Jesus was the only person of the trinity that became flesh.
Jesus was in heaven with God the Father from the beginning.
As far as dominance, Jesus did the will of the Father while here on earth, however God also religated the creation of all things to Jesus. Jesus will also come back to judge. There is a common goal here in the bible as well as tremendous love. That can't be said of all Dom/sub relationships, although that would certainly be the ideal.




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

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875