Christianity.

But Dude! You've got to get to the results at the end. They are FOTF funny!

:rose:

How right you are. It's good to know how far I am from being batshit crazy, though I have to cop to giving myself a total of 10 points in the quiz. ;)
 
How right you are. It's good to know how far I am from being batshit crazy, though I have to cop to giving myself a total of 10 points in the quiz. ;)

I gave myself five. It had to do (for me), with the power of positive thinking.

:rose:
 
So I keep wondering, actually from having heard these lyrics:

We will abandon it all, for the sake of the call, no other reason at all, but the sake of the call, wholly devoted to live and to die for the sake of the call.

Nobody stood and applauded them so they knew from the start this road would not lead to fame. All they really knew for sure was Jesus had called to them. He said come follow me and they came, with reckless abandon they came.

Drawn like the rivers are drawn to the sea, there's no turning back, for the water cannot help but flow. Once we hear the Savior's call, we'll follow wherever He leads Because of the love He has shown And because He has called us to go, we will answer...

We will abandon it all for the sake of the call, no other reason at all but the sake of the call, wholly devoted to live and to die

Not for the sake of a creed or a cause, not for a dream or a promise, simply because it is Jesus who called, and if we believe we'll obey


So, if you look at Jesus that way he basically kicks ass as the biggest, most influential, uberpolygamous Dom in history. I mean seriously, this guys is still weilding the whip from up in the clouds :devil:

*I find this possibility ironic. For those who find it offensive my apologies. I am an irreverent Catholic who enjoys a little religious openmindedness and concur with EG's statement that God is big enough for all religions*
 
So I keep wondering, actually from having heard these lyrics:

We will abandon it all, for the sake of the call, no other reason at all, but the sake of the call, wholly devoted to live and to die for the sake of the call.

Nobody stood and applauded them so they knew from the start this road would not lead to fame. All they really knew for sure was Jesus had called to them. He said come follow me and they came, with reckless abandon they came.

Drawn like the rivers are drawn to the sea, there's no turning back, for the water cannot help but flow. Once we hear the Savior's call, we'll follow wherever He leads Because of the love He has shown And because He has called us to go, we will answer...

We will abandon it all for the sake of the call, no other reason at all but the sake of the call, wholly devoted to live and to die

Not for the sake of a creed or a cause, not for a dream or a promise, simply because it is Jesus who called, and if we believe we'll obey


So, if you look at Jesus that way he basically kicks ass as the biggest, most influential, uberpolygamous Dom in history. I mean seriously, this guys is still weilding the whip from up in the clouds :devil:

*I find this possibility ironic. For those who find it offensive my apologies. I am an irreverent Catholic who enjoys a little religious openmindedness and concur with EG's statement that God is big enough for all religions*

I see that, and don't see what's ironic about it. Poetry and other writings with a D/s flavor are in the bible, in Christian and other religious poetry, and also in writings about chivalry, knights, royalty, etc. We didn't invent bdsm!

Furthermore, I've come across pyls who discuss their PYLs in God-like reverential language. There are people in vanilla relationships who do the same thing. And as I've said before, it always amuses me to encounter people who blast religion, and then recreate it in some other form.
 
I think it's ironic in the sense that most devout Christians would not appreciate being told Jesus was their Dominant. Or the image of themselves as submissive. It tickles my funny bone in the sense that in 9 years of Catcholic school I was taught that Jesus was born of a virgin, was a virgin himself and was held up as a prototype of male piety. The thought of him as a Dom which I associate with sexuality makes me grin. :)
 
I think it's ironic in the sense that most devout Christians would not appreciate being told Jesus was their Dominant. Or the image of themselves as submissive. It tickles my funny bone in the sense that in 9 years of Catcholic school I was taught that Jesus was born of a virgin, was a virgin himself and was held up as a prototype of male piety. The thought of him as a Dom which I associate with sexuality makes me grin. :)

I disagree. Although the word "dominant" might not sound funny to people, what about the word "Lord"? My Lord? As for Catholics, there are some writings that talk about nuns being married to Jesus. It's not sexual, but not all D/s is sexual anyway. The concepts of service and devotion goes way back.

ETA: Check out SweetGigi's recent post in the Dear X thread.
 
Last edited:
Okay, it's not techically a Christian thing, but to all my Jewish friends, I hope you have an easy feast.
 
I'm not buying into this whole virgin birth thing, or of Jesus being a virgin.

Does not compute.
 
Millions and millions of women have remained celibate in service to Jesus. That's probably more than worship Betticus. Makes him pretty Dom to me.

History will be the judge as to who is more popular in another 2000 years. Betticus or Jesus. :rolleyes:
 
If so he is more like an online Dom who doesn't type, cam or actually communicate in any way.

:eek:
 
Millions and millions of women have remained celibate in service to Jesus. That's probably more than worship Betticus. Makes him pretty Dom to me.

History will be the judge as to who is more popular in another 2000 years. Betticus or Jesus. :rolleyes:

Seriously. We roll our eyes at Jesus. Well, I'm sure some Christians would look at the devotion some submissives show to their Doms and say, geesh, whatever, that's just a man!

Different strokes, folks. Different strokes.

Look, are there some people who are mindless drones for religion? Sure. And there are plenty of people who are mindless drones for all sorts of other things. It's not fair or accurate to assume all religious people or even all Christians are the same.
 
I know there's that whole "bearing a sword thing" but literally dying and turning yourself into bread and wine to feed and save a bunch of other assholes seems like a very serious submission and service thing. What's the hang up people have about that?

This "terminator Jesus" thing is what's wrong with contemporary Christianity - the caretaking, responsibility and nurturing thing seems so tossed out.

G Sr. - Definitely a Dom. G jr. as some people like to think of Him - not so sure.
 
Last edited:
I know there's that whole "bearing a sword thing" but literally dying and turning yourself into bread and wine to feed and save a bunch of other assholes seems like a very serious submission and service thing. What's the hang up people have about that?

This "terminator Jesus" thing is what's wrong with contemporary Christianity - the caretaking, responsibility and nurturing thing seems so tossed out.

G Sr. - Definitely a Dom. G jr. as some people like to think of Him - not so sure.

Old Testament G. Sr. = hard-core, old-school, bad-ass Dominant


The bread of constipation is never easy. Thank you, though.

viv bought some chocolate covered matzah a week or two ago. I'm still not sure why.
 
Why buy chocolate covered matzo when you can buy chocolate covered macaroons?

I make chocolate matzoh crunch every year. It's fabulous. Recipe's on epicurious.com.

I know there's that whole "bearing a sword thing" but literally dying and turning yourself into bread and wine to feed and save a bunch of other assholes seems like a very serious submission and service thing. What's the hang up people have about that?

This "terminator Jesus" thing is what's wrong with contemporary Christianity - the caretaking, responsibility and nurturing thing seems so tossed out.

G Sr. - Definitely a Dom. G jr. as some people like to think of Him - not so sure.

Yes, the notion of Jesus dying for our sins certainly could be looked at as submissive.

I guess I'm just surprised that anyone is surprised there are D/s overtones in the Bible! Now Jesus as a gay leather daddy? That would be surprising.
 
I make chocolate matzoh crunch every year. It's fabulous. Recipe's on epicurious.com.

Yes, the notion of Jesus dying for our sins certainly could be looked at as submissive.

I guess I'm just surprised that anyone is surprised there are D/s overtones in the Bible! Now Jesus as a gay leather daddy? That would be surprising.

Well, I was surprised :eek: though looking back now there are references all over the place. I'm just starting to recognize more D/s in the world around me and it's sometimes an ahah moment when I notice something I was unaware of before. The thought of Jesus' death as a submission is incredibly powerful for me and actually I think is an amazing example of how beautiful submission can be. Tho I really, really don't want anyone to put thorns in my hair or stab me with a stick. A cross might be ok tho...and leather is always good...*meanders off to explore more biblical inspiration*
 
If the self sacrifice was a point of submission for Jesus then to whom was he being submissive? It's way easy to say to "the people", "humanity", "God", etc but given the events that led up to his crucification I'd have to say it was something different.

Let's assume that he knew that they were going to kill him. He could have fled but didn't. The whole thing points to an ethic that he was stamping his iron clad belief upon. In my opinion he died in order to stay true to his teachings.

Which brings me to the people that contributed to his death. Pilate tried to let Jesus go but the mob had been whipped into such a frenzy that they may have overthrown the Roman occupiers. It's a mob, they are mindless and someone directs their behaviour.

The church. It's known that Jesus lived a life quite unlike those that he was king over. The temple priests had massive power, wealth and influence and the teachings of Jesus were opposite of those things. God was not to be found in a building or behind the support of an organized religion. He was king of the jews, not king of the jewish religion. He led by example, he had only himself, his skills and the truth. It was not enough. When he tried to teach his people that God was in everyone and not in an organization that demanded tribute the church became his enemy and his fate was sealed.

I don't think he died for our "sins". I think he died while teaching his last lesson, giving his last sermon and he did it not with words but by example. For me, that lesson is not in any book nor can it be taught by any church. I think it's already inside each of us already but we just let ourselves get distracted from what it is. I think the lesson learned is different for everyone. Just depends on where you are in life at the time you learn it.

So that's why I don't like organized religions. They don't live their lives in the way that Jesus did.
 
That's obnoxious, and offensive.

Sadly, the truth often is just that.... well offensive anyway, not sure about obnoxious.... certainly its uncomfortable.

Says the drunk, bitter, ex-mormon philosophy major.

Some of us didn't ask to be saved and would rather have just been left alone to find our own way to hell thank you very much. Submission and obedience can be a curse as well as a gift.
 
Back
Top