Family Matters: Angelic Sexuality

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

In the Jesus legend the hero speaks of a virtual family as a greater state of being than a physical family. There are institutions in society today that promote virtual sibling-hood. Marriage is promoted as a form of virtual sibling relationship. People who profess to a faith in this hero claim to worship an eternal parent, albeit one without a partner. Some of them claim that they have experienced a second, virtual birth into an eternal abode.

As a test for these claims, we propose a simple interaction. Do they accept the proposition that there is no human life without birth? (Consider a c-section to be birth by an alternate route.) This one is usually easy for them to agree with. Is there no human birth without a human mother? This, too, is not difficult to accept. What about the proposition that there is no spiritual life without spiritual birth? This has nothing dangerous in it with which to disagree. Finally, can there be spiritual birth without a spiritual mother? This is where things get sticky. Can the spiritual charlatans identify the spiritual mother of their beloved icon? I have yet to hear a rational reply to this challenge.

Marriage is an essential aspect of slavery. Parents often control their children to usher them into the legal bondage of the chattel relationship. In California the partner who receives the greater income become the property of the partner with the lesser income. In societies where other forms of slavery are legal, the slave owner controls the sexuality of the slave.

People who live outside of the strict control of judicial sex are said to be fornicators and adulterers. They are outcast from the circle of the pious. In more rigid cultures they are stoned to death. In America illicit sex results only in a virtual stoning. (This will probably change once the Tea Party is in firm control.)

In the Jesus legend the hero is quoted as saying that people in the resurrection do not marry nor are given away by their parents to be married. The assumption on the part of the charlatans is that these people will abstain from sex altogether. After all, sexual practice would violate the Law. It would be considered fornication or adultery.

Can you think of any form of sexual activity, besides abstinence, that could be considered angelic?

Comments

[malasadas.livejournal.com]

buh?

[rasilio.livejournal.com]

Er yeah that is what I was thinking.

I was gonna say something to her but aside from a few ridiculous assertions that are completely unfounded I can't figure out what they hell she is actually trying to say.

[soliloquy76.livejournal.com]

Isn't this the default reaction to all of these posts? I don't both anymore because I figured it was implied.

[pastorlenny.livejournal.com]

Ass to mouth.

[rasilio.livejournal.com]

Sometimes you just gotta

I love...

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

... your photo of the Republican icon.

[rasilio.livejournal.com]

Lol yeah, I was gonna say, perhaps she has never heard of swingers or BDSM clubs.

[luvdovz.livejournal.com]

The posts from today have been a hit! :)))

[telemann.livejournal.com]

[luvdovz.livejournal.com]

You have the best gifs!

Is that sap...

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

... supposed to be evocative of pollen?

[the-rukh.livejournal.com]

simply put, just because something is labeled "life" doesn't mean it has all the same qualities.

For a thing to be "alive" in the biological sense a human does *generally* require being born and having a mother (thought with technology advancing we may clone humans at some date without using a parent)

the other uses of "life" do not necessarily require these things as they are more euphemisms than literal vivacity.

As to your second part... I think you are misusing the term "slavery".

I think also, you should define more strictly *by whom* people who "live outside of the strict control of judicial sex" are said to be fornicators and adulterers, because I don't think you can apply that to everybody. Certain conservative groups possibly, definitely not overall american culture though.

"The assumption on the part of the charlatans is that these people will abstain from sex altogether. After all, sexual practice would violate the Law. It would be considered fornication or adultery."

24Jesus replied, “Are you not in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God? 25When the dead rise, they will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven. 26Now about the dead rising—have you not read in the book of Moses, in the account of the bush, how God said to him, ‘I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’d? 27He is not the God of the dead, but of the living. You are badly mistaken!”

Its an interesting verse. What do you think it means that god is not the god of the dead?

I suppose...

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

... he was implying that the traditional deity of temple worship was more like Pluto than Jupiter. The deity of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob was more like Jupiter than Pluto. It is difficult to be certain because the followers of Jesus were persecuted by the Church.

[ddstory.livejournal.com]

Can you think of any form of sexual activity, besides abstinence, that could be considered angelic?

Oh, definitely! 0:)

[the-rukh.livejournal.com]

It is eternally weird to me how much humans mythologize sex-- both in the positive and the negative.

That smiley...

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

... reminds me of Polyphemus.

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

Now that was funny!!!!!

In California...

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

... the wolves are white supremacists. They probably are so in Oregon as well.

[mintogrubb.livejournal.com]

Can the spiritual charlatans identify the spiritual mother of their beloved icon? I have yet to hear a rational reply to this challenge.

Probably not, but I can.

See, an inscription has surfaced recently in Israel.
A letter sent to someone ending
" I bless you in the name of Yahweh and His Ashterah."

The Hebrews, according to wot I have read in Funk and Wagnell, borrowed their religious ideas from the folks down the road and across the valley. They took the labels off and passed it of as all their own work, but whatever...

Gods back then, they all had consorts.
But the Jews broke off with their neigbours and went all monotheistic - well, the ruling clas did, and the poor folk kept up the old ways.

The symbols of the Ashterah, the feminine aspect of God, were a golden calf and a serpent in a tree. Now maybe that rings a few bells with people. The priests at the Temple were forever trying to put this new monotheism forward as what Judaism was all about, and the Ot shows us how they tried to paper over the cracks but sometimes , things slipped through.

Like when David fled from Saul and his wife popped one of the Teraphim into the bed and covered it up so it looked like David was still there. Saul's soldiers came to kill hiim and found that david had slipped clean away.

but what was a Teraphim? Well, Teraphim is the plural of Teraph - a household god, similar to the Lares that the Romans had.It was an idol in other words. So, what was an Idol doing in the house of a monotheist like David? You tell me!

We also get a glimpse in Jeremiah of the prophet bewailing the fact that people are bowing down to ' the Queen of heaven in the Temple' - well, this is your Ashterah again.

My memory is a bit sketchy here, but I am sure that Paul somewhere says that Abraham had two wives, Sarah and Hagar, and compares each of them to the Covenants that God made with His people, concluding that "We are the children of Heavenly Jerusalem, the free woman, and she is our mother"

So, this idea of the Lord God Almighty having a consort, a wife, was not something that completely disappeared.

So, I fail to meet the criteria of a spiritual charlatan I guess.

I like it.

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

Josephus credits Abraham with coming up with the idea of a higher deity above the celestial bodies. This seems like an ex post facto modification of the original story, also known as an interpolation. The OT is full of polytheism. It takes a heavy case of cultural blindness to fail to see it.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

[malasadas.livejournal.com]

[rick-day.livejournal.com]

No. There is none. Also there are no angels as you well know. This marriage thing is a 'ring' in the nose of men to 'keep women in line'. Otherwise, they will start to run things again.

Then we won't be doing any fun stuff like making weapons and making war. We will be making babbies for the women, instead.

Where is nebris when you need him?

No angels!

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

Christians will storm you house if they find out that you do not believe in their fallen angel.

[harry-beast.livejournal.com]

One time, I was riding on a bus, and someone had left a weird religious pamphlet on the seat. Foolishly, I read it. It said something about angels having sex with people, and that this was somehow wrong. So, just say no.
On the other hand, what about feminism, and its rules, restrictions and rituals relating to sex? Far more interesting, in my view.

There are as many...

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

... rules from the camp of feminists as there are feminists. In our camp there are no rules, only guidelines.

Which feminist is it who sees all penetration as rape? Or is that just an urban legend.

[paedraggaidin.livejournal.com]

Every time I "ring the bell" an angel gets his wings.