I think I need a complete sentence here.
Is your view of the Bible God that He is autoerotic?
Why is God so obsessed with sex?
- Thread starter synthesizer-patel
- Start date
Is your view of the Bible God that He is autoerotic?
To formally talk about the concept of "nature" or "essence" only makes sense as long as we agree that this nature or essence is unchangeable, permanent.
If we conceive of God as the Creator or Progenitor, and as such conceive of Him as the one who defines what the nature of the individual living beings is, and our nature is unchangeable,
it is then illogical to talk about God creating rules that would be against our nature.
This reasoning involves several steps, I have not written all of them above, we can work them out as necessary.
If you want a clean house, it's prudent to regularly clean it and to not deliberately bring dirt in.
(Where is Lightgigantic when you need him ...
)Yes, we could say there is nothing but God.
But if we truly believed that there is nothing but God, then we would stop having this conversation. But we are still having it.
It is godly design that particular actions have particular consequences.
That we engage in those actions is essentially our doing.
What designs of Brahma? Brahma is not base. After He did not create ex nihilo. Brahma gives intellect, mind and free will. So the ball is in your court. Do as you want.
Did biblegod give these to you? Seems not.
Sex is not evil, but you can make it evil if you want. Btw, is a knife an evil object?
Sexual conduct is regulated socially, where man has full say about how to go about it. Our God does interfere in our bedroom. He is no peeping tom. Is yours, as he lays down laws for sex and MUST be monitoring infractions too.
Voyeur derives his pleasure by tom peepery, ususually supplementing it with auto erocism. Is bible god a voyeur?
So there are portions of the universe that are not Brahma?
I'm not a Christian, don't know where you got this idea.
No.
As I said, I am not a Christian.
Well, I don't believe it in the Hindu sense. My sense of the Hindu sense, what I was told while a practicing Hindu in India.(Where is Lightgigantic when you need him ...
Yes, we could say there is nothing but God.
But if we truly believed that there is nothing but God, then we would stop having this conversation. But we are still having it.
You know, I think there actually are problems. I am not sure this is case in Hinduism.
Like a program driven automaton, you mean? Are you smart enough to know hitting a wall with your head will damage your skull?
Are you not responsible for your actions. Can you say god had wriiten this murder, I only diddit? Not at all. Law of Karma as enacted in the criminal laws would catch you by the neck, literally too.
Which Hindu says there are no problems. There are problems everywhere. But Brahma equips you correct them as best you can. But we solve a few, worsen a few. But xians lookup to their god in smallest matters.
Doreen, universe is made of eternal, uncreated, immortal matter. Matter has three qualities:
Satva ie pure existence. Means it is uncreated. Has noble tendencies.
Tejas. Energy. Matter is possessed of energy and hence is ever mobile. Causes changes and motion. Restless tendencies.
No satva, no universe. No tejas, there is stasis only. No tamas, objects cannot hold together. Electrons would fall into nucleous and neutrons would fly off. No sun, no planets would be possible.
Tamas. Inertia. Resists changes. Also has base tendencies.
Last edited:
What problems?
I think I expressed myself clearly enough to make your questions redundant.
Biblegod was obsesses with or against sex from day one, but only for humans. He created Adam in his image, and all xians are incestual offspring of Adam. Adam did have an a**, so biblegod must have it, only the a** hole might be as big as a galaxy. So biblegod did have sex and a di** too.
He saw Adam and Eve have sex [outside Eden], and was excited. He plottedc a feqw days, really a few thousand human years, and zeroed on Mary. Later it was blamed on a Spook!!
Most of the prophets were definitely sex obsessed. Take Abraham. He abudcted 32,000 virgins and biblegod condoned it!!
But biblegod was deadly against gays. Reason why Aquinas called for their death.
He saw Adam and Eve have sex [outside Eden], and was excited. He plottedc a feqw days, really a few thousand human years, and zeroed on Mary. Later it was blamed on a Spook!!
Most of the prophets were definitely sex obsessed. Take Abraham. He abudcted 32,000 virgins and biblegod condoned it!!
But biblegod was deadly against gays. Reason why Aquinas called for their death.
Neddy Bate
Valued Senior Member
To the OP:
Well, God seems to have forgotten to create an oppositely gendered "god-mate" for himself. So, I guess its a micromanagement issue?
Well, God seems to have forgotten to create an oppositely gendered "god-mate" for himself. So, I guess its a micromanagement issue?
The very nature of material existence is a compromise to the "oneness" of god ... meaning of course that its our sense of oneness that is compromised.
IOW its the nature of material existence that what naturally binds one to the "oneness of god" binds one to a "separateness of god".
So the material impression of adi-rasa (sex attraction) becomes the most powerful binding force of material existence (since it is the most powerful dynamic of spiritual existence).
Edit - Discussing this is a bit difficult on forums due to the terminology. Generally if someone says that they are having a spiritual relationship with someone in a sexual context it is understood to mean something like they have maybe cut down to casual employment so they have more sex and take indulge in a bit more recreational drug use.
:shrug:
Last edited:
He has?
This is precisely my problem with Christianity. God placed us in a bind for no reason I have heard of. I can do what feels like pretending and say I am only these portions of myself over here, but it feels like being my own jailer, which is how the Judao-C rules strike. On more subtle levels I have the same problems with Hinduism/Buddhism.
No, I think I agree with that if these are the premises these are the consequences.
If I am a garden, then it is not dirt, but soil, out of which flowers grow. The very soil that feeds us and supports us as we walk and out of which tremendous beauty flows has come to be called dirt.
God is facing some of the same problems we are and working on them.
Is not everything Brahma? Are you saying that there is something wrong with Brahma?
I think you need to address your sense that Brahma is better than the Christian God to Christians. Otherwise I will keep thinking I have to remind you I am not a Christian.
Ah, so there is a part of Brahma that is the problem and it is called Tamas.
Last edited: