Any Christians out there?

I'm fairly new on these forums, so I don't know many people as yet.
Basically, I would just like to ask if there are any Christian Masters/Dom(me)s/subs/slaves out there - and whether your faith has made any impact on that part of your life. I'm a Christian, but it's not exactly a topic I can ask someone at my church about! I'd be glad to hear any feedback, of any kind.
Yours respectfully,
Amaranth

There are quite a few here. I'm not one, though I do act with charity, tolerance and respect to others which are things I personally think Christians should do. So sometimes I think my behavior is very Christian like.

Anyway, here's a bump for others to notice and chime in on.

I so agree with you!

Stag of Oberon said:

I was raised christian, and unlike most people I know who've left the religious teachings of their childhood behind them, I don't really have anything against christianity in general, I'm just sickened by the lack of tolerance I see from the followers, both on a personal level as well their politics abroad.

The "greatest commandment" was to love thy neighbor "as I have loved you." Most christians seem to shrug this off without seriously thinking about how tolerantly god loves them.

God loved you enought to give you free will.

Anyway; so I don't associate with christians anymore. I have found my own spiritual path; my own ways of getting closer to god, and for a time I felt far better connection with god than I ever did going to church. These past couple of years have been so hectic though, I have trouble finding time for it, and I'm begining to understand why people would want a more rigidly structured spiritual practice.

Click to expand...

Lmao!

:d

A very, very good friend of mine is a kinky,Dominant, polyamorus Christian Preacher. I've asked him before how he reconciles his faith with his sexuality and while I don't recall his exact words, I do remember that it was pretty much as easy for him to be kinky and Christian as it is for me to be submissive and feminist.

DarkAmaranth said:

I'm fairly new on these forums, so I don't know many people as yet.
Basically, I would just like to ask if there are any Christian Masters/Dom(me)s/subs/slaves out there - and whether your faith has made any impact on that part of your life. I'm a Christian, but it's not exactly a topic I can ask someone at my church about! I'd be glad to hear any feedback, of any kind.
Yours respectfully,
Amaranth

Click to expand...

Welcome.

"Christian" covers a lot of ground. Mind if I ask which denomination or sect?

F is Catholic, though not as rigidly to the letter as some.

Catalina

Christianity and Sexual Moral Delimmas

WARNING: The length of this article may exceed that of your natural life. Ria takes no responsibility for how you choose to spend your time, and therefore cannot be held accountable for either your disappointment or your premature demise caused by boredom.

I would define a Christian as one who believes the claims of Jesus of Nazareth as the promised Messiah, and furthermore one who attempts to model one's behaviour on the teachings of Jesus as recorded in the Bible, including His urgings to follow the Commandments. (One who believes but does not attempt to obey, I would call a "lapsed Christian" or an apostate.)

As for the cruelty and misdeeds of some who call themselves Christians... Judge a philosophy/religion/lifestyle by its teachings and goals, not by the people who fail to fulfil them.

So that's my definition of "Christian," and when I use the word, I mean it the way I described it above. (i.e., NOT "someone who goes to church.")

On to the real question:
For me, the big conflict is not how kinky the sex is, it's the people involved that can pose a moral delimma. I think that bestiality, incest, and child molestation are simply wrong, and would never even consider being involved in sexual activities with these components--and many non-Christians feel the same way.

But there are other forbidden activities as well-- some of which are very difficult to avoid. The most obvious instance is sex outside of marriage. In today's society, monogamy seems like the exception rather than the rule, and we are encouraged to follow wherever our sexual urges lead. This is one of the most difficult temptations to resist.

Another common example is sexual activity involving someone of the same sex. I have some bisexual fantasies, and I know many others do as well. Because the Bible does not clearly state that women should not sleep with women (unlike the clearly written rule against male/male unions), it's easier to split hairs, or use ''pilpul'' to justify it. And, of course, again the majority tells us that if God gave us urges, we're okay to go with them.

But temptations are simply perversions (and I mean "perversion" in the old sense, as something turned from its original purpose) of the joys that are rightfully ours when we fulfill them appropriately.

I would say that the non-Christian majority's rules regarding sex are simply "consensual and safe." The Christian has stricter standards, but it is possible to satisfy them and still be involved in some "kinky" activities.

For instance, nowhere in the Bible is it even implied that married couples must have sex in any certain position, or that they can't role-play or engage in light "punishment." The tabu on all of these is more cultural than religious.

So I guess my long-winded answer to your question (hey, I can't help it, I love philosophy) would be this:

However much fun it might be, and however difficult to resist, the Christian believes it wrong to engage in sex with anyone other than your spouse. Furthermore, as the body is meant to be "a temple," permanent maiming or scarring is probably out. The Christian is told to love and respect his/her partner, which means consensuality is a must.

But as long as you and your spouse agree, you're free to fuck however (though not whomever) you like...


Ria

postnote: It can be very difficult to follow these rules (some more difficult than others), but we were promised that it would be hard, that we'd be laughed at, and that people wouldn't understand. It's a decision that you have to make every day-- whether you're on the wagon or off. And every night...

mini-hijack...

Stag of Oberon said:

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

*wipes away a tear*

oh sorry... you said god promised that others would laugh at you; i'm not one to meddle in the affairs of gods.

much.

I absolutely judge a religion by it's followers, for they are the products of their teaching. Let every man be a representative of his own beliefs, and if many stand together in their beleifs, good for them, but then if one should slip up and ... oh... molest children; it is shameful that the others should immediately say "well he's not one of us."

bullshit. he was yesterday.

have some responsibility the failings of your own organization. Pick up your fallen and help them or deal with them as your teachings dictate.

this idealized, perfect picture of what a christian should be, in complete ignorance of the flawed creature that every man was created to be, is sooooo typical of organized religion in general.

if the only christians were this flawless hypothetical christian you espouse, then the church would be too small to influence politics so negatively.

Click to expand...

No one is perfect, and certainly no one does what they think they ought all of the time. What I described was the goal, not the requirement: my definition of a Christian is one who believes in Christ and attempts to obey him, not someone who follows the rules all the time.

I believe that each person is responsible for the choices that he or she makes. So while I think that a child molester should certainly be held accountable--as should anyone who knew about it and said nothing--I don't believe that this culpability extends to everyone involved in the organisation this person claimed to uphold--even if some of them respected that person as a leader before they discovered the crime.

Think about this: a corporate executive may make some shady deals, and he ought to be held accountable, as should his secretary or his golf buddies who knew very well what was going on. But that doesn't mean that everyone in the corporation should be punished for the executive's wrongs, and neither does it change the value of the product or service that the corporation provides. (Though the public may very well lose faith in the corporation, and the members of the firm may be greatly embarrassed at the actions of the bad executive.)

I agree that a society is responsible to some degree for the teaching and guidance of its members, but these members are ultimately responsible for their own behaviour. (It's not the State's fault that people rob convenience stores.) A key point also to be made is that these actions which you denounce are also denounced by the teachings of Christ.

I'm not so eloquent as I would like to be, but I hope I'm a little clearer in my meaning now: basically, the behaviour of people who believe something does not effect whether that belief is an accurate reflection of reality. (Whether I bring my umbrella or not, it will still rain.) And the truth, or the logical foundation of a belief, should be the foremost importance when one considers any philosophy.

Okay, didn't mean to hijack this thread but I do love discussing such ideas.

Ria

A_ria said:

No one is perfect, and certainly no one does what they think they ought all of the time. What I described was the goal, not the requirement: my definition of a Christian is one who believes in Christ and attempts to obey him, not someone who follows the rules all the time.

I believe that each person is responsible for the choices that he or she makes. So while I think that a child molester should certainly be held accountable--as should anyone who knew about it and said nothing--I don't believe that this culpability extends to everyone involved in the organisation this person claimed to uphold--even if some of them respected that person as a leader before they discovered the crime.

Think about this: a corporate executive may make some shady deals, and he ought to be held accountable, as should his secretary or his golf buddies who knew very well what was going on. But that doesn't mean that everyone in the corporation should be punished for the executive's wrongs, and neither does it change the value of the product or service that the corporation provides. (Though the public may very well lose faith in the corporation, and the members of the firm may be greatly embarrassed at the actions of the bad executive.)

I agree that a society is responsible to some degree for the teaching and guidance of its members, but these members are ultimately responsible for their own behaviour. (It's not the State's fault that people rob convenience stores.) A key point also to be made is that these actions which you denounce are also denounced by the teachings of Christ.

I'm not so eloquent as I would like to be, but I hope I'm a little clearer in my meaning now: basically, the behaviour of people who believe something does not effect whether that belief is an accurate reflection of reality. (Whether I bring my umbrella or not, it will still rain.) And the truth, or the logical foundation of a belief, should be the foremost importance when one considers any philosophy.

Okay, didn't mean to hijack this thread but I do love discussing such ideas.

Ria

Click to expand...

Everyone I've talked to says that they don't keep kosher because the Salvation changed the terms of the laws. However, the laws against homosexuality are in Leviticus, also. Jesus doesn't weigh in on same-sex activity nor much else in the way of what you must and must not do other than being baptized and believing in him. And some marvelously inspiring stories about how to be a better person. And something about divorce which most people tend not to worry about nearly as much as the gay sex he didn't say anything about.

The rest is pretty much in the mouths of the Gospels or St. Paul. Or Christians are much more into being Jewish than I am.


So which is it? Is everyone saved from the old covenants, or just some of 'em?

Additionally, if I got cleaned out by Bernie Madoff, (or expelled, pogrommed or toasted in some fashion by the Church) you can't possibly tell me not to jump if the caller ID says it's his people when it rings. I'll trust but verify as the man said.

DarkAmaranth said:

I'm fairly new on these forums, so I don't know many people as yet.
Basically, I would just like to ask if there are any Christian Masters/Dom(me)s/subs/slaves out there - and whether your faith has made any impact on that part of your life. I'm a Christian, but it's not exactly a topic I can ask someone at my church about! I'd be glad to hear any feedback, of any kind.
Yours respectfully,
Amaranth

Click to expand...

I tend to stay away from religious debate on these boards but I will say this:

If you are too ashamed to talk about something with your religious leaders then you probably shouldn't be doing it.

Yes I have talked about sex to my sunday school teacher and/or pastors, even kinky sex. And I have worn my collar to church before (both the leather dog collar and the metal one with the lock in the front).

It took a while, but I came to terms with who I am, and how that relates to my relationship with God. I'm not affraid to be me anywhere, I'm not ashamed of who I am, and to not do something one day just because I'm going to church is rediculous. God sees me 24/7, not just on sunday.

I'm happy to talk via PM, but I won't say any more on the subject here.

God? Oh yeah, Zeus, Jesus's dad. No, wait, wasn't that Abraham? Ra? Is he in there somewhere? No, no, it’s Buddha, he begat Lucifer who got banished by Mohammed right?

No, Now I'm really confused. Perhaps the Great Spirit could explain it, oh yeah he got killed off along with all of his followers as atheists, deists, and Christians forged a new land out of the wilderness....

No, that ain't right either. Where is Joseph Smith or David Koresh when you need a good modern god invented?

You want to know about god, read Heinlein, all of it, then re read, between the lines. (Any number of other writers accomplish this task as well, Heinlein happens to be amusing.)

Man invents reason to sin, then blames it on god while seeking salvation in any of its varied forms.

Enjoy life, and all activities you and whomever you look to include can enjoy together, sexual or otherwise. "Kinky" sex between two people who both enjoy it is far less a sin than one person dragging another to some activity, say a football game for instance, that the dragged person "hates" every minute of.

We do so much to "please" others, then suffer from the stress caused by these acts of altruism. Find the mutually enjoyable. Communicate as much as necessary to find these things. If they do not exist move on to someone else. Life truly is too short to be saddled with misery, in the name of god in any of his/her disguises.

Christian? Sure I'm a Christian, and a Muslim, Jew, Buddhist, and in fact a follower of all gods past present and future. The path is so clear I can see forever or at least to just the other side of eternity.

I was certainly raised to believe the body is a temple but then again certain things could be decorations rather than desecration surely?

That said - stag:

A) The greatest commandment was to love the Lord, your God, with all your heart and all your soul and all your might. The SECOND greatest was to love your neighbor as yourself. Check if it you don't believe me, it's in Matthew.

B) If you are so anti christiantiy, why come to this thread? Hm? I think you protest too much. The OP did not attack your beliefs or you at all. Why you feel the overwhelming urge to belittle her beliefs is beyond me. If this is a sore subject maybe you shouldn't have even opened the thread.

FACT: Everyone is hypocritical in some way or the other. You will not find a group of people who don't, in some way, say one thing and do another. Human nature.

Netzach said:

Everyone I've talked to says that they don't keep kosher because the Salvation changed the terms of the laws. However, the laws against homosexuality are in Leviticus, also. Jesus doesn't weigh in on same-sex activity nor much else in the way of what you must and must not do other than being baptized and believing in him. And some marvelously inspiring stories about how to be a better person. And something about divorce which most people tend not to worry about nearly as much as the gay sex he didn't say anything about.

The rest is pretty much in the mouths of the Gospels or St. Paul. Or Christians are much more into being Jewish than I am.


So which is it? Is everyone saved from the old covenants, or just some of 'em?

Click to expand...

I think we've talked about this. I know I have with others.

The bible mentions homosexuality three times, I believe. It mentions lying, stealing, gossiping, coveting and adultery so many times I can't count them. But which is the one the average Christian has a cow over? Homosexuality. Why? Because it's human nature to want to say 'well, at least i'm not as bad as that person'. 'I may have cheated on my SO', or 'I may be the biggest gossip since the beginning of time', but at least I'm not a pervert.

And before we do a 'well Christians are like that' thing - I've seen it even here. 'I may be kinky, but at least I'm not like that person'. (Fill in the blanks - off hand, I think 'that person' for a lot of the people here is OSG.) Like I said - human nature.

As for the covenant thing - there were specific covenants that we were saved from, and specific ones we weren't. Jesus said "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them."

I'm not going to go into a lot more detail, because I know better than to put a lot of effort into a religious debate on this site. lol I do! And tomorrow I will be kicking myself for allowing myself to be drawn into this. I'm a big believer in not wasting my energy where it's not wanted.

To the OP: PM me if you want to talk about this more in depth. And yes, I'm a Christian. Kajira Callista is catholic. Evil Geoff is a Christian. myinnerslut is jewish, but I don't know if she's practicing. There are more, but offhand I can't think of them.

I couldn't care less about the whole issue. Even if God/Allah/whatever exists, logic tells me that I'm never going to know that with certainty and that I couldn't understand him or her or them even if I did, so why bother with the whole goddamn shooting match to begin with? It doesn't hurt either that you've got suicide bombers killing innocents in the name of Allah and bigots protesting the funerals of soldiers because that's what God would want. I accept that not all religious folk are like that, but I don't want anything to do with it - I'll stick to the Lords of Kobol when the shit hits the fan.

I read the good book and cite scripture for my own purposes.

rosco rathbone said:

I read the good book and cite scripture for my own purposes.

Click to expand...

You (and that Bible/belt Av) were the first name that popped into my head when I saw the thread title.

Religion and kink aren't necessarily mutually exclusive, IMO. There's the whole Taken in Hand sub-sect of BDSM, Christianity is full of martyrs, Catholicism thrives on penance and redemption (mmmm... penance), etc.

I was raised in a Christian household but my childhood was not a happy one and for a long time, I held the church partly responsible. They gave my father a vastly inflated notion of his status as our 'family head' and instilled the basic precept that disobeying my father was against the will of God. That was more than enough power to corrupt the one man on Earth I should have been able to rely on for love and protection.

I recognise now that my father's failings were personal ones. Had the church known about his treatment of me, they would never have condoned it. Unfortunately, my father always swore that the opposite was true, and so I never confided in them. They were and are good people who believe they are living in the best way possible. I have no grudge against them now.

I'm ambivalent about the whole thing really. I would like to believe in God. I like the idea of God as a benevolent creator. When I was little, I was able to see love in the whole of creation and I miss that blissful naivety very much. Christianity is something of a nouveaux faith though, in the scheme of things. I also have serious issues with the notion that an intelligent creator would consider a dusty, highly contested book, written by men and translated millions of times over with varying agendas and degrees of accuracy, to be adequate proof that we weren't shat into existence by a giant, discworld toting space turtle with galloping diarrhoea. While the Big Bang also remains a theory, and arguably an act of God, I prefer science to philosophy. Perhaps that's my layman's logic reaching for the tangible and more easily comprehensible but that is the nature of human beings, whether God created them or not.

I like and respect people of faith (with the exception of fanatics/fundamentalists) and I have found that atheists are among the most militantly evangelical people I know. I respect people's right to believe what they choose to, so long as they respect my right to be unsure until convinced otherwise. I have more than enough to deal with coping with the tangible. If the great high ruler of the universe really is up there somewhere, I seriously doubt whether my faith or lack of it makes one iota of difference.

rosco rathbone said:

I read the good book and cite scripture for my own purposes.

Click to expand...

Isn't this kind of what everyone does? Sounds a lot like politics of 1000-1700.

I mean authorial intent sure is a bitch with a 4000/2000 year old anonymously written by committee document.
Divinely inspired maybe, but the secretarial pool had to be a bit unreliable.

Netzach said:

Isn't this kind of what everyone does? Sounds a lot like politics of 1000-1700.

I mean authorial intent sure is a bitch with a 4000/2000 year old anonymously written by committee document.
Divinely inspired maybe, but the secretarial pool had to be a bit unreliable.

Click to expand...

The secretarial pool was very unreliable. I'm not saying it was their fault, they just were.

Christianity covers a LOT of ground.

I'm not a person of faith, but I do love a good debate on comparitive ethics and religion.

I ease much toward practical concerns, and Christianity has some good ones, so I practice them not in faith, but in what I consider good sense.

Golden Rule is one of the tenets I appreciate.

Judge not lest ye be judged is a good one.

Jesus was a very smart man. But I do believe he was a man.

Netzach said:

Isn't this kind of what everyone does? Sounds a lot like politics of 1000-1700.

I mean authorial intent sure is a bitch with a 4000/2000 year old anonymously written by committee document.
Divinely inspired maybe, but the secretarial pool had to be a bit unreliable.

Click to expand...

On my second go-round with the Pentateuch, I've come to the conclusion that the Old Testament was written by an elite priestly class in order to define, codify and protect their privileges.

Who wouldn't want to earn their living burning incense and dripping blood on the altar rather than hoeing the barley patch and chasing herds of half-starved goats around in the sun?

rosco rathbone said:

On my second go-round with the Pentateuch, I've come to the conclusion that the Old Testament was written by an elite priestly class in order to define, codify and protect their privileges.

Who wouldn't want to earn their living burning incense and dripping blood on the altar rather than hoeing the barley patch and chasing herds of half-starved goats around in the sun?

Click to expand...

Totally. And if you're a Levite, you are in like flynn. Wonder who was writing this one.

CutieMouse said:

The secretarial pool was very unreliable. I'm not saying it was their fault, they just were.

Click to expand...

Maybe there's some kind of Babel-like wisdom to it all - I mean the big 10 are one of the ONLY concise and clear moments in the entire narrative. If the rest was not supposed to be murky, maybe it wouldn't be.