|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sun Apr 09, 2006 7:05 am
Vermatitis According to what I know of Judeochristian doctrine, sex is only supposed to be used for the purposes of procreation(entirely contradicting what Paul Coelho said). This is why the church has such a strong position against condoms, birth control, homosexual sex, abortion, masturbation, bestiality, and to a lesser extent, incest (Because children born as the result of incest are likely to be unhealthy and corrupt the gene pool if they grow to reproductive maturity). what makes judeochristian any more accurate. It's really all opinion. I can't prove Paulo (NOT PAUL!) Coelho is right and you can't prove he's wrong. You can't really say the "Church" apply it's strict rules agaisnt that stuff because that's really just the catholic church. Many other christians are okay with birth control. Not to make this debate personnal, but do you really believe sex is only for procreation? It's main objective is procreation but there's definetly more to it then that.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Apr 11, 2006 11:00 am
Lauranthalis Vermatitis According to what I know of Judeochristian doctrine, sex is only supposed to be used for the purposes of procreation(entirely contradicting what Paul Coelho said). This is why the church has such a strong position against condoms, birth control, homosexual sex, abortion, masturbation, bestiality, and to a lesser extent, incest (Because children born as the result of incest are likely to be unhealthy and corrupt the gene pool if they grow to reproductive maturity). what makes judeochristian any more accurate. It's really all opinion. I can't prove Paulo (NOT PAUL!) Coelho is right and you can't prove he's wrong. You can't really say the "Church" apply it's strict rules agaisnt that stuff because that's really just the catholic church. Many other christians are okay with birth control. Not to make this debate personnal, but do you really believe sex is only for procreation? It's main objective is procreation but there's definetly more to it then that. I do believe sex can be used for more than procreation. I'm not Christian either, I just know a lot of TRADITIONAL doctrine. And I didn't say Judeochristian beliefs are any more accurate than Hinduist, Buddhist, Animist, Shintoist etc. beliefs. I bring this belief system up because when most people talk about spirituality in the Western world, they're talking about Judeochristian beliefs. As such, a lot of people assume that all religions are more or less the same as Christianity. Paulo Coelho strikes me as one of these people, because if he knew enough about preChristian beliefs he would know about the Roman orgies in the temple of Venus or many of the sexual religious traditions of India. If you take a good look at the conception of religion in relation to its environment, you'll find that the truly sexually-repressive religions have sprung up mostly in powerful, urbanized societies, while religions that emphasize sex solely for the purposes of reproduction emerge from societies where there is a state of warfare and oppression and a greater population is essential to survival and prosperity. Consider, for example, the position of the Hebrews about 4000-5000 years ago, when Israel was owned by several tribes and surrounded by powerful empires. Warfare was essential to survival, and since there existed a fairly balanced state of military technology and kingdom resources in relation to size, the determining factor for military success was manpower. As such, the Hebrews developed a code of conduct which insured a larger, stronger, and more disciplined population in order to guard their lands and defeat their enemies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Apr 11, 2006 4:50 pm
Vermatitis Lauranthalis Vermatitis According to what I know of Judeochristian doctrine, sex is only supposed to be used for the purposes of procreation(entirely contradicting what Paul Coelho said). This is why the church has such a strong position against condoms, birth control, homosexual sex, abortion, masturbation, bestiality, and to a lesser extent, incest (Because children born as the result of incest are likely to be unhealthy and corrupt the gene pool if they grow to reproductive maturity). what makes judeochristian any more accurate. It's really all opinion. I can't prove Paulo (NOT PAUL!) Coelho is right and you can't prove he's wrong. You can't really say the "Church" apply it's strict rules agaisnt that stuff because that's really just the catholic church. Many other christians are okay with birth control. Not to make this debate personnal, but do you really believe sex is only for procreation? It's main objective is procreation but there's definetly more to it then that. I do believe sex can be used for more than procreation. I'm not Christian either, I just know a lot of TRADITIONAL doctrine. And I didn't say Judeochristian beliefs are any more accurate than Hinduist, Buddhist, Animist, Shintoist etc. beliefs. I bring this belief system up because when most people talk about spirituality in the Western world, they're talking about Judeochristian beliefs. As such, a lot of people assume that all religions are more or less the same as Christianity. Paulo Coelho strikes me as one of these people, because if he knew enough about preChristian beliefs he would know about the Roman orgies in the temple of Venus or many of the sexual religious traditions of India. If you take a good look at the conception of religion in relation to its environment, you'll find that the truly sexually-repressive religions have sprung up mostly in powerful, urbanized societies, while religions that emphasize sex solely for the purposes of reproduction emerge from societies where there is a state of warfare and oppression and a greater population is essential to survival and prosperity. Consider, for example, the position of the Hebrews about 4000-5000 years ago, when Israel was owned by several tribes and surrounded by powerful empires. Warfare was essential to survival, and since there existed a fairly balanced state of military technology and kingdom resources in relation to size, the determining factor for military success was manpower. As such, the Hebrews developed a code of conduct which insured a larger, stronger, and more disciplined population in order to guard their lands and defeat their enemies. oh, it's on now blaugh actually, just a couple comments, how do you know that Paulo Coelho doesn't know ENOUGH about prechristian beliefs? For all we know, he's a freakin' genious in that topic. Of course, every religion is unique but the majority have the same goal of living a righteous life to continue to the afterlife. Christianity doesn't solely believe that sex is just for reproduction, ever read the bible? I've read a lot of the Old Testament and sex is described more then once a gift from God (i.e: why it's so pleasurable) then just about procreation, though there are the oddball stories, like fathers fathering children with his daughters... But anyways I do agree with the whole 4000-5000 years ago Hebrew situation; I'm just wondering what you've read by Paulo Coelho. I suggest "11 Minutes" which is about sex, and hardly ever brings up the use of sex for procreation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 15, 2006 9:27 pm
Lauranthalis Vermatitis Lauranthalis Vermatitis According to what I know of Judeochristian doctrine, sex is only supposed to be used for the purposes of procreation(entirely contradicting what Paul Coelho said). This is why the church has such a strong position against condoms, birth control, homosexual sex, abortion, masturbation, bestiality, and to a lesser extent, incest (Because children born as the result of incest are likely to be unhealthy and corrupt the gene pool if they grow to reproductive maturity). what makes judeochristian any more accurate. It's really all opinion. I can't prove Paulo (NOT PAUL!) Coelho is right and you can't prove he's wrong. You can't really say the "Church" apply it's strict rules agaisnt that stuff because that's really just the catholic church. Many other christians are okay with birth control. Not to make this debate personnal, but do you really believe sex is only for procreation? It's main objective is procreation but there's definetly more to it then that. I do believe sex can be used for more than procreation. I'm not Christian either, I just know a lot of TRADITIONAL doctrine. And I didn't say Judeochristian beliefs are any more accurate than Hinduist, Buddhist, Animist, Shintoist etc. beliefs. I bring this belief system up because when most people talk about spirituality in the Western world, they're talking about Judeochristian beliefs. As such, a lot of people assume that all religions are more or less the same as Christianity. Paulo Coelho strikes me as one of these people, because if he knew enough about preChristian beliefs he would know about the Roman orgies in the temple of Venus or many of the sexual religious traditions of India. If you take a good look at the conception of religion in relation to its environment, you'll find that the truly sexually-repressive religions have sprung up mostly in powerful, urbanized societies, while religions that emphasize sex solely for the purposes of reproduction emerge from societies where there is a state of warfare and oppression and a greater population is essential to survival and prosperity. Consider, for example, the position of the Hebrews about 4000-5000 years ago, when Israel was owned by several tribes and surrounded by powerful empires. Warfare was essential to survival, and since there existed a fairly balanced state of military technology and kingdom resources in relation to size, the determining factor for military success was manpower. As such, the Hebrews developed a code of conduct which insured a larger, stronger, and more disciplined population in order to guard their lands and defeat their enemies. oh, it's on now blaugh actually, just a couple comments, how do you know that Paulo Coelho doesn't know ENOUGH about prechristian beliefs? For all we know, he's a freakin' genious in that topic. Of course, every religion is unique but the majority have the same goal of living a righteous life to continue to the afterlife. Christianity doesn't solely believe that sex is just for reproduction, ever read the bible? I've read a lot of the Old Testament and sex is described more then once a gift from God (i.e: why it's so pleasurable) then just about procreation, though there are the oddball stories, like fathers fathering children with his daughters... But anyways I do agree with the whole 4000-5000 years ago Hebrew situation; I'm just wondering what you've read by Paulo Coelho. I suggest "11 Minutes" which is about sex, and hardly ever brings up the use of sex for procreation. Paulo Coelho Can you tell me why all religions, all over the world, even the most primitive of religions and cultures, consider that sex is something that should be forbidden? We have already established that not all religions see sex as a forbidden object. He could have made the generalization that most or many religions consider sex a forbidden practice, but he goes so far as to make his generalization absolute, that ALL religions consider sex taboo. One might think he is writing from the standpoint of himself at a younger age, as is the precursor to this passage, but given the overall context it is clear that he is referring to his current frame of reference. Unless, of course, he is referring to all religions his reader has heard of. still, this theory too has some holes in it. I don't know of anyone who hasn't at least heard of the various pagan religions which saw sex as a divine outlet (Whether romantacized or demonized). But then again, I could be wrong. But I would ask you this: Why is it that in modern agricultural societies, with a way of life similar to that of people 6000 years ago, there is a great tendency towards large, extended families? Why is it that in the suburbs, where food is plentiful and resources are abundant, the average family has 2.3 children?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 16, 2006 12:31 pm
Vermatitis Lauranthalis Vermatitis Lauranthalis Vermatitis According to what I know of Judeochristian doctrine, sex is only supposed to be used for the purposes of procreation(entirely contradicting what Paul Coelho said). This is why the church has such a strong position against condoms, birth control, homosexual sex, abortion, masturbation, bestiality, and to a lesser extent, incest (Because children born as the result of incest are likely to be unhealthy and corrupt the gene pool if they grow to reproductive maturity). what makes judeochristian any more accurate. It's really all opinion. I can't prove Paulo (NOT PAUL!) Coelho is right and you can't prove he's wrong. You can't really say the "Church" apply it's strict rules agaisnt that stuff because that's really just the catholic church. Many other christians are okay with birth control. Not to make this debate personnal, but do you really believe sex is only for procreation? It's main objective is procreation but there's definetly more to it then that. I do believe sex can be used for more than procreation. I'm not Christian either, I just know a lot of TRADITIONAL doctrine. And I didn't say Judeochristian beliefs are any more accurate than Hinduist, Buddhist, Animist, Shintoist etc. beliefs. I bring this belief system up because when most people talk about spirituality in the Western world, they're talking about Judeochristian beliefs. As such, a lot of people assume that all religions are more or less the same as Christianity. Paulo Coelho strikes me as one of these people, because if he knew enough about preChristian beliefs he would know about the Roman orgies in the temple of Venus or many of the sexual religious traditions of India. If you take a good look at the conception of religion in relation to its environment, you'll find that the truly sexually-repressive religions have sprung up mostly in powerful, urbanized societies, while religions that emphasize sex solely for the purposes of reproduction emerge from societies where there is a state of warfare and oppression and a greater population is essential to survival and prosperity. Consider, for example, the position of the Hebrews about 4000-5000 years ago, when Israel was owned by several tribes and surrounded by powerful empires. Warfare was essential to survival, and since there existed a fairly balanced state of military technology and kingdom resources in relation to size, the determining factor for military success was manpower. As such, the Hebrews developed a code of conduct which insured a larger, stronger, and more disciplined population in order to guard their lands and defeat their enemies. oh, it's on now blaugh actually, just a couple comments, how do you know that Paulo Coelho doesn't know ENOUGH about prechristian beliefs? For all we know, he's a freakin' genious in that topic. Of course, every religion is unique but the majority have the same goal of living a righteous life to continue to the afterlife. Christianity doesn't solely believe that sex is just for reproduction, ever read the bible? I've read a lot of the Old Testament and sex is described more then once a gift from God (i.e: why it's so pleasurable) then just about procreation, though there are the oddball stories, like fathers fathering children with his daughters... But anyways I do agree with the whole 4000-5000 years ago Hebrew situation; I'm just wondering what you've read by Paulo Coelho. I suggest "11 Minutes" which is about sex, and hardly ever brings up the use of sex for procreation. Paulo Coelho Can you tell me why all religions, all over the world, even the most primitive of religions and cultures, consider that sex is something that should be forbidden? We have already established that not all religions see sex as a forbidden object. He could have made the generalization that most or many religions consider sex a forbidden practice, but he goes so far as to make his generalization absolute, that ALL religions consider sex taboo. One might think he is writing from the standpoint of himself at a younger age, as is the precursor to this passage, but given the overall context it is clear that he is referring to his current frame of reference. Unless, of course, he is referring to all religions his reader has heard of. still, this theory too has some holes in it. I don't know of anyone who hasn't at least heard of the various pagan religions which saw sex as a divine outlet (Whether romantacized or demonized). But then again, I could be wrong. But I would ask you this: Why is it that in modern agricultural societies, with a way of life similar to that of people 6000 years ago, there is a great tendency towards large, extended families? Why is it that in the suburbs, where food is plentiful and resources are abundant, the average family has 2.3 children? I actually might know this answer from my grammy (yay!) You see, while it requires more food for more children, the work can be divided up among more children which requires less work from everyone. Or, more products are produced in general to feed everyone and trade in markets and such. In the suberbs, where getting food is as easy as driving to a store and swiping a card through a machine, they have less kids because a) kids are a lot of work b) kids are expensive. While farmers make their own food and can therefore plant more or keep more for themselves, people in the suberbs can not magically give themselves a raise. I'm assuming that it's the same way when my granny was a kid as the time period you're referring to.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Apr 18, 2006 4:25 pm
Lauranthalis Vermatitis Lauranthalis Vermatitis Lauranthalis what makes judeochristian any more accurate. It's really all opinion. I can't prove Paulo (NOT PAUL!) Coelho is right and you can't prove he's wrong. You can't really say the "Church" apply it's strict rules agaisnt that stuff because that's really just the catholic church. Many other christians are okay with birth control. Not to make this debate personnal, but do you really believe sex is only for procreation? It's main objective is procreation but there's definetly more to it then that. I do believe sex can be used for more than procreation. I'm not Christian either, I just know a lot of TRADITIONAL doctrine. And I didn't say Judeochristian beliefs are any more accurate than Hinduist, Buddhist, Animist, Shintoist etc. beliefs. I bring this belief system up because when most people talk about spirituality in the Western world, they're talking about Judeochristian beliefs. As such, a lot of people assume that all religions are more or less the same as Christianity. Paulo Coelho strikes me as one of these people, because if he knew enough about preChristian beliefs he would know about the Roman orgies in the temple of Venus or many of the sexual religious traditions of India. If you take a good look at the conception of religion in relation to its environment, you'll find that the truly sexually-repressive religions have sprung up mostly in powerful, urbanized societies, while religions that emphasize sex solely for the purposes of reproduction emerge from societies where there is a state of warfare and oppression and a greater population is essential to survival and prosperity. Consider, for example, the position of the Hebrews about 4000-5000 years ago, when Israel was owned by several tribes and surrounded by powerful empires. Warfare was essential to survival, and since there existed a fairly balanced state of military technology and kingdom resources in relation to size, the determining factor for military success was manpower. As such, the Hebrews developed a code of conduct which insured a larger, stronger, and more disciplined population in order to guard their lands and defeat their enemies. oh, it's on now blaugh actually, just a couple comments, how do you know that Paulo Coelho doesn't know ENOUGH about prechristian beliefs? For all we know, he's a freakin' genious in that topic. Of course, every religion is unique but the majority have the same goal of living a righteous life to continue to the afterlife. Christianity doesn't solely believe that sex is just for reproduction, ever read the bible? I've read a lot of the Old Testament and sex is described more then once a gift from God (i.e: why it's so pleasurable) then just about procreation, though there are the oddball stories, like fathers fathering children with his daughters... But anyways I do agree with the whole 4000-5000 years ago Hebrew situation; I'm just wondering what you've read by Paulo Coelho. I suggest "11 Minutes" which is about sex, and hardly ever brings up the use of sex for procreation. Paulo Coelho Can you tell me why all religions, all over the world, even the most primitive of religions and cultures, consider that sex is something that should be forbidden? We have already established that not all religions see sex as a forbidden object. He could have made the generalization that most or many religions consider sex a forbidden practice, but he goes so far as to make his generalization absolute, that ALL religions consider sex taboo. One might think he is writing from the standpoint of himself at a younger age, as is the precursor to this passage, but given the overall context it is clear that he is referring to his current frame of reference. Unless, of course, he is referring to all religions his reader has heard of. still, this theory too has some holes in it. I don't know of anyone who hasn't at least heard of the various pagan religions which saw sex as a divine outlet (Whether romantacized or demonized). But then again, I could be wrong. But I would ask you this: Why is it that in modern agricultural societies, with a way of life similar to that of people 6000 years ago, there is a great tendency towards large, extended families? Why is it that in the suburbs, where food is plentiful and resources are abundant, the average family has 2.3 children? I actually might know this answer from my grammy (yay!) You see, while it requires more food for more children, the work can be divided up among more children which requires less work from everyone. Or, more products are produced in general to feed everyone and trade in markets and such. In the suberbs, where getting food is as easy as driving to a store and swiping a card through a machine, they have less kids because a) kids are a lot of work b) kids are expensive. While farmers make their own food and can therefore plant more or keep more for themselves, people in the suberbs can not magically give themselves a raise. I'm assuming that it's the same way when my granny was a kid as the time period you're referring to. Exactly. Labor is essential in both agricultural and hunter-gatherer societies, which is why reproductive control makes very little sense for someone with this lifestyle. I am actually writing an extra credit paper for humanities on how this paradigm affects views of birth control and homosexuality in different economic areas. Notice that I used reproductive control, not sexual control or celibacy. Celibacy would imply that people should, under no circumstances, have sex ever. THis, of course, is highly impractical, which is why the only people expected to uphold this law are catholic and buddhist nuns and priests, as well as some Hindu/Jainist priests. Early Catholic and Hebrew dogma dictated that even having sex for reproductive means was sinful, and that belief is still held by some sects to this day. On the other hand, sexual control would imply that people can only have sex for the purposes of reproduction, which is a much more commonly held belief within the Christian community in the U.S.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 20, 2006 6:01 pm
Vermatitis Lauranthalis Vermatitis Lauranthalis Vermatitis I do believe sex can be used for more than procreation. I'm not Christian either, I just know a lot of TRADITIONAL doctrine. And I didn't say Judeochristian beliefs are any more accurate than Hinduist, Buddhist, Animist, Shintoist etc. beliefs. I bring this belief system up because when most people talk about spirituality in the Western world, they're talking about Judeochristian beliefs. As such, a lot of people assume that all religions are more or less the same as Christianity. Paulo Coelho strikes me as one of these people, because if he knew enough about preChristian beliefs he would know about the Roman orgies in the temple of Venus or many of the sexual religious traditions of India. If you take a good look at the conception of religion in relation to its environment, you'll find that the truly sexually-repressive religions have sprung up mostly in powerful, urbanized societies, while religions that emphasize sex solely for the purposes of reproduction emerge from societies where there is a state of warfare and oppression and a greater population is essential to survival and prosperity. Consider, for example, the position of the Hebrews about 4000-5000 years ago, when Israel was owned by several tribes and surrounded by powerful empires. Warfare was essential to survival, and since there existed a fairly balanced state of military technology and kingdom resources in relation to size, the determining factor for military success was manpower. As such, the Hebrews developed a code of conduct which insured a larger, stronger, and more disciplined population in order to guard their lands and defeat their enemies. oh, it's on now blaugh actually, just a couple comments, how do you know that Paulo Coelho doesn't know ENOUGH about prechristian beliefs? For all we know, he's a freakin' genious in that topic. Of course, every religion is unique but the majority have the same goal of living a righteous life to continue to the afterlife. Christianity doesn't solely believe that sex is just for reproduction, ever read the bible? I've read a lot of the Old Testament and sex is described more then once a gift from God (i.e: why it's so pleasurable) then just about procreation, though there are the oddball stories, like fathers fathering children with his daughters... But anyways I do agree with the whole 4000-5000 years ago Hebrew situation; I'm just wondering what you've read by Paulo Coelho. I suggest "11 Minutes" which is about sex, and hardly ever brings up the use of sex for procreation. Paulo Coelho Can you tell me why all religions, all over the world, even the most primitive of religions and cultures, consider that sex is something that should be forbidden? We have already established that not all religions see sex as a forbidden object. He could have made the generalization that most or many religions consider sex a forbidden practice, but he goes so far as to make his generalization absolute, that ALL religions consider sex taboo. One might think he is writing from the standpoint of himself at a younger age, as is the precursor to this passage, but given the overall context it is clear that he is referring to his current frame of reference. Unless, of course, he is referring to all religions his reader has heard of. still, this theory too has some holes in it. I don't know of anyone who hasn't at least heard of the various pagan religions which saw sex as a divine outlet (Whether romantacized or demonized). But then again, I could be wrong. But I would ask you this: Why is it that in modern agricultural societies, with a way of life similar to that of people 6000 years ago, there is a great tendency towards large, extended families? Why is it that in the suburbs, where food is plentiful and resources are abundant, the average family has 2.3 children? I actually might know this answer from my grammy (yay!) You see, while it requires more food for more children, the work can be divided up among more children which requires less work from everyone. Or, more products are produced in general to feed everyone and trade in markets and such. In the suberbs, where getting food is as easy as driving to a store and swiping a card through a machine, they have less kids because a) kids are a lot of work b) kids are expensive. While farmers make their own food and can therefore plant more or keep more for themselves, people in the suberbs can not magically give themselves a raise. I'm assuming that it's the same way when my granny was a kid as the time period you're referring to. Exactly. Labor is essential in both agricultural and hunter-gatherer societies, which is why reproductive control makes very little sense for someone with this lifestyle. I am actually writing an extra credit paper for humanities on how this paradigm affects views of birth control and homosexuality in different economic areas. Notice that I used reproductive control, not sexual control or celibacy. Celibacy would imply that people should, under no circumstances, have sex ever. THis, of course, is highly impractical, which is why the only people expected to uphold this law are catholic and buddhist nuns and priests, as well as some Hindu/Jainist priests. Early Catholic and Hebrew dogma dictated that even having sex for reproductive means was sinful, and that belief is still held by some sects to this day. On the other hand, sexual control would imply that people can only have sex for the purposes of reproduction, which is a much more commonly held belief within the Christian community in the U.S. Completely agree 3nodding
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 01, 2006 11:11 pm
That makes a lot of sense, that point of view. What I'd like to know though is how it spread from one tribe to a point where it's in almost every religion. I could see most of the points in there, but I'm not really sure about the women 's favorite part of marriage being the food...it's a possibility...
heart pink
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 31, 2006 2:54 pm
sexy_pink_rocker That makes a lot of sense, that point of view. What I'd like to know though is how it spread from one tribe to a point where it's in almost every religion. I could see most of the points in there, but I'm not really sure about the women 's favorite part of marriage being the food...it's a possibility... heart pink yeah, the food thing sort of throws me off too. As to your question of how that idea was spread throughout the world, it may be a time period where the human race was just starting or more then one guy thought of the great idea of enforcing this new idea by the will of the Gods.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
