Was the first Temple Prostitute a man or a woman?

page: 2
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 16 2013 @ 10:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Greatest I am
 


I forgot to ask you in my first post :/ do you think Serguis and Bacchus where married and the Christians that knew them thought that Jesus was blessing there wedding by putting him in between them in the painting?

Which means sometime before that someone might have wrote that Jesus preached about same sex marriage and it was alright in his eyes as long as they loved each other? (maybe a lost gospel, or a hidden one)

Severus did say that "they where joined for life" and that was 200 years after they died, might Serguis and Bacchus been prostitutes that worked in the temple at a younger age before they found Christianity and then fell in love with each other or maybe they always loved each other?

I can't believe that the people 1400 years ago blessed same union marriages, i wonder whose in the dark ages because i really think its us in 2013, i wonder in 2000 years what people are going to think of us i'm just glad i won't be there to get stoned lol. I think i'm going to enjoy this.

I think that's enough for now as i'm away to make dinner, please keep this going i'm learning a lot, one bit at a time. thank you




posted on Apr, 16 2013 @ 11:19 AM
link   
reply to post by Greatest I am
 


Well, going back to cave man mentality, where clubbing a woman over the head and dragging by her hair back to his cave was in vogue, and men just took what they wanted, I would say that it was a woman who figured out how to make sex a business transaction.

The concept of the female fertility goddesses is a lot more of an obvious attraction to get men to donate food and furs and such in a temple setting than a male driven sexual urge that really had no need to be regulated, as male on male sex doesn't produce pregnant women and children that need protection and care.

The first temple prostitute was a female entrepreneur!
edit on 16-4-2013 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 16 2013 @ 03:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by ballymoney50
reply to post by Greatest I am
 


lol i will have a jeff duke at the video's in a moment had to reply back as you had me in stitches, though in a nice way.

I have watched a few youtube doc's in the past month or so and some where a bit hard to take seeing i believe in Jesus, it did have me questioning a few things though :/ maybe when i look at your vid's we can have a wee chat about it.

I must say this has been a very uplifting day for me lol, bless your wee cotton socks


You'll have me meditating next, i think i'll go watch the video's now that you have me in your web, i'm starting to feel i'm missing something here.


Which Jesus do you believe in?

The one the church teaches or the one shown in the bible with his own teachings?
Assuming that he was real in the first place and not a Roman puppet as seems to be the case.

www.youtube.com...

Regards
DL



posted on Apr, 16 2013 @ 03:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by ballymoney50
reply to post by Greatest I am
 


I watched the video's but your going to have to ask me the questions as i'm a bit lost for words (that's a first he says lol)

I'm not to sure if i fancy telling people i'm christ like i would feel a bit odd. Bill does tell a good story and i might even go watch a few more of his vid's with my horlicks to-night just to see if he trips himself up.

Though i'm away first to look into trying to find out more about your thread as it has me intrigued hopefully we can throw in a bit of each subject so we don't go of topic all the time or i'll get hung out to dry from my minder who likes to keep me right, (DTOM lol if you read this)


Let me just throw something at you.

Have you noticed that the largest statue in the Vatican collection is of an acorn which represents the pineal gland?

Ever wonder why the church never speaks of it?

www.youtube.com...

Regards
DL
edit on 16-4-2013 by Greatest I am because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 16 2013 @ 03:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by ballymoney50
reply to post by Greatest I am
 


I forgot to ask you in my first post :/ do you think Serguis and Bacchus where married and the Christians that knew them thought that Jesus was blessing there wedding by putting him in between them in the painting?

Which means sometime before that someone might have wrote that Jesus preached about same sex marriage and it was alright in his eyes as long as they loved each other? (maybe a lost gospel, or a hidden one)

Severus did say that "they where joined for life" and that was 200 years after they died, might Serguis and Bacchus been prostitutes that worked in the temple at a younger age before they found Christianity and then fell in love with each other or maybe they always loved each other?

I can't believe that the people 1400 years ago blessed same union marriages, i wonder whose in the dark ages because i really think its us in 2013, i wonder in 2000 years what people are going to think of us i'm just glad i won't be there to get stoned lol. I think i'm going to enjoy this.

I think that's enough for now as i'm away to make dinner, please keep this going i'm learning a lot, one bit at a time. thank you


"Between them is a traditional Roman ‘pronubus’ (a best man), "

The main focus of Jesus was love yet his divorce law, let no man put asunder is definitely anti-female and anti-love. To think that he would also deny gays love would just increase the notion that the scriptures were written by men for popular consumption and not some God. You will know that most of the old Gods were shown as androgynous so physical attributes or being male or female in a relationship or a gay one should not matter if love is the most important part of Jesus' thinking.

This woman gets kudos for the look she gives to her dick wad bishop.

www.cnn.com... Feed%3A+rss%2Fcnn_latest+%28RSS%3A+Most+Recent%29

To your other questions on the saints, I don't know but do suspect that the church would not keep paintings that would be seen as controversial and against it's policies.

Regards
DL



posted on Apr, 16 2013 @ 03:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by Greatest I am
 


Well, going back to cave man mentality, where clubbing a woman over the head and dragging by her hair back to his cave was in vogue, and men just took what they wanted, I would say that it was a woman who figured out how to make sex a business transaction.

The concept of the female fertility goddesses is a lot more of an obvious attraction to get men to donate food and furs and such in a temple setting than a male driven sexual urge that really had no need to be regulated, as male on male sex doesn't produce pregnant women and children that need protection and care.

The first temple prostitute was a female entrepreneur!
edit on 16-4-2013 by windword because: (no reason given)


Women I agree would be more desirable to us today but in that day when men relied more on other men for survival and women were chattel, it is hard to say what the mind set would have been especially when the free for all you allude to never was in vogue. Men have always to my knowledge treated wives as somewhat special as they wanted to make sure the child they provided for was their own.

Regards
DL



posted on Apr, 16 2013 @ 06:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Greatest I am
 





Women I agree would be more desirable to us today but in that day when men relied more on other men for survival and women were chattel, it is hard to say what the mind set would have been especially when the free for all you allude to never was in vogue. Men have always to my knowledge treated wives as somewhat special as they wanted to make sure the child they provided for was their own.


Women, indeed, were chattle by the time the Bible was written, and it documents the "free for all" that WAS in vogue during that time, at least for the Hebrew men.

But, I'm talking about the Paleolithic/Neolithic nomadic revolution time period from hunter gatherers to more stable agricultural societies and eventual pre-historic cities that anthropologists now study.


The major Neolithic development was an entirely new agricultural lifestyle, which permitted permanent settlement and a significant increase in population. The Paleolithic period, starting approximately 2.5 million years ago, was focused on the hunter-gathering lifestyle and during the glacial period was heavily dependent on the vast herds populating the predominantly savannah landscape.

Read more: The Difference Between Neolithic & Paleolithic | eHow.com www.ehow.com...


I don't believe that marriage was invented by men, nor was it invented by "God" in the Garden of Eden. I'm sure that women were often raped by traveling bands of men and left to their own wiles to survive. Women probably counted on each other, stayed in one place, cultivating gardens and such. They learned to sell or withhold their services to convince men to trade protection and food for sex and other female amenities. Men have always had egos that were easily stroked and were territorial. Women learned to use these traits to their advantage in those days, as they still do today, I'm sure.

The ability of the female to "create life" and nurture life was probably the first supernatural seed that created religion and thus, temples to the goddesses of fertility. The first temple prostitute was probably a woman.

In my opinion, of course.
edit on 16-4-2013 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 10:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by Greatest I am
 





Women I agree would be more desirable to us today but in that day when men relied more on other men for survival and women were chattel, it is hard to say what the mind set would have been especially when the free for all you allude to never was in vogue. Men have always to my knowledge treated wives as somewhat special as they wanted to make sure the child they provided for was their own.


Women, indeed, were chattle by the time the Bible was written, and it documents the "free for all" that WAS in vogue during that time, at least for the Hebrew men.

But, I'm talking about the Paleolithic/Neolithic nomadic revolution time period from hunter gatherers to more stable agricultural societies and eventual pre-historic cities that anthropologists now study.


The major Neolithic development was an entirely new agricultural lifestyle, which permitted permanent settlement and a significant increase in population. The Paleolithic period, starting approximately 2.5 million years ago, was focused on the hunter-gathering lifestyle and during the glacial period was heavily dependent on the vast herds populating the predominantly savannah landscape.

Read more: The Difference Between Neolithic & Paleolithic | eHow.com www.ehow.com...


I don't believe that marriage was invented by men, nor was it invented by "God" in the Garden of Eden. I'm sure that women were often raped by traveling bands of men and left to their own wiles to survive. Women probably counted on each other, stayed in one place, cultivating gardens and such. They learned to sell or withhold their services to convince men to trade protection and food for sex and other female amenities. Men have always had egos that were easily stroked and were territorial. Women learned to use these traits to their advantage in those days, as they still do today, I'm sure.

The ability of the female to "create life" and nurture life was probably the first supernatural seed that created religion and thus, temples to the goddesses of fertility. The first temple prostitute was probably a woman.

In my opinion, of course.
edit on 16-4-2013 by windword because: (no reason given)


We may never know unfortunately but I do not agree with your evaluation of earlier rape gangs going about. That is not what happens in the oldest tribes still around today and man has always been a tribal entity and has always lived in communities where men stayed to protect their women from the poaching of other tribes.

What do you have to promote your way of thinking other than opinion?
Any facts to go with it?

Regards
DL



posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 11:19 AM
link   
reply to post by Greatest I am
 





We may never know unfortunately but I do not agree with your evaluation of earlier rape gangs going about.


The Bible itself present many instances of the rape of women, and the kidnapping of women for sexual purposes. The Bible may, today, refer to some of these captured woman from opposing tribes as wives, but we know that they were more likely considered concubines and slaves rather than legitimately loved and accepted family members.


That is not what happens in the oldest tribes still around today and man has always been a tribal entity and has always lived in communities where men stayed to protect their women from the poaching of other tribes.


Not always, many times, in smaller tribal communities, all the young strong men left the women and went to war, leaving behind the weak and the old.


What do you have to promote your way of thinking other than opinion? Any facts to go with it?


From Matriarchy to Patriarchy: Year 3000 BCE

You hear a lot of talk about the Neolithic Revolution--the gradual adoption and spread of agriculture, animal husbandry and town life by our prehistoric European ancestors--but the most important epoch in the course of civilization goes largely unnoticed in the history books. That was the abrupt shift from matriarchy and worship of the Great Goddess to the warrior-based governments and language stocks of the steppe-dwelling Indo-Aryan barbarians who invaded Old Europe beginning in the late fourth millennium BCE.

.............

The invaders brought their male pantheon of war gods, Indo-European languages, aristocratic forms of government and Central Asian/Caucasian genes. The goddess cult underwent radical male adaptations, surviving in out-of-the-way places like Crete and Brittany.

...............

So, rather than one transformation, European civilization first went through a Neolithic Revolution, then conversion to warrior-dominated patriarchal societies. It can be postulated that the matriarchal societies eagerly adopted agriculture but exhausted soils, destroyed vital forests and became weaker and smaller-bodied due to a changed diet, falling prey around 3000 BCE to the barbarian warriors of the steppe, who found the accumulation of wealth and unprotected agrarian settlements of Old Europe easy pickings. Climate change could have been a contributing factor.

James Joyce called history "the nightmare from which one cannot wake." If we take a long view of human events, this nightmare began about five thousand years ago. Other-worldly religions like Christianity introduced a further element of alienation and turning away from the sources of life. Before that, people were happily alive, awake, in tune with nature and celebrated life under the auspices of matriarchy.



Ancient Matriarchy: The existence of the matriarchal society and the goddess cult The worship of the divine feminine dates back to the ancient cultures and the prehistoric times. The myths or oral traditions and Neolithic female cult-figures as “divine feminine” suggest that many ancient societies were matriarchal. In all the areas of the near and middle east during the Neolithic period there appeared to have been a widespread Goddess cult, based on the recovery of the so-called Venus figurines from widely scattered archaeological sites. The close resemblance of style in these figurines suggests that a similarity of worship and rituals could also have existed.

This Goddess cult could very well have been the origin of all matriarchal societies, especially those of an agricultural bias, such as Egypt and its neighbours to the northeast in the Mesopotamia. There is also a theory of the existence of a widespread matriarchal culture in pre-Indo-European Old Europe of the Neolithic.
www.rise-of-womanhood.org...


Archaeological and anthropological evidence tells us that first there were Matriarchal settlements, then the Patriarchy.

edit on 17-4-2013 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 12:50 PM
link   
I agree but that is hardly a world of rape gangs.

We were talking pre-neolithic and your examples above are after that period and speaks of wars, not plain old rape gangs.

Regards
DL



posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 01:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Greatest I am
 


Although I'm sure it sometimes happened, I'm not talking about "rape gangs" assembled purely for the purpose of raping women. I'm sure that more times than not, prehistoric women were raped as a matter of opportunity.

If men were seeking women and hiding in the bushes to ambush and kidnap neighboring tribes' women in biblical times, and rape was such problem that "illegal" rape had to be defined and legislated in the Bible, what makes you think that it didn't happen in prehistoric times as well?



posted on Apr, 18 2013 @ 09:01 AM
link   
I am sure that it did but not in the systematic rape gang way that you indicated when we started this chat. I see that you have backed away somewhat from that wording.

You should remember that up to about 7,000 years ago, Goddess worship was i8n vogue, not the Gods of war.

www.youtube.com...

Regards
DL



posted on Apr, 18 2013 @ 10:04 AM
link   
reply to post by Greatest I am
 


I never talked about systematic rape, before Biblical times, that is. I used a common, trite illustration of a cave made clubbing a woman over the head and dragging her back to his cave, as the first kind of sexual contract. I posited that it was women who first negotiated some kind of transaction to off set the "wham, bam, thank you ma'am" mentality.

Since the symptoms of pregnancy don't appear immediately after copulation, I'm pretty sure that the early cave man was long gone by the time a woman needed his help to protect her against the elements and provide for her and her child.

It is my belief that women were the first to domesticate man, and the first temples were goddess oriented, rather than dedicated to some male god, accepting sexual sacrifices, man on man. I'm not saying that it didn't happen, I'm just suggesting that it didn't happen first!



posted on Apr, 30 2013 @ 08:08 AM
link   
Man has always been a tribal creature and here you are believing that men and women did not co-habitate in the early days and men would just rape and run. Sigh.

Regards
DL





new topics
top topics
 
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join