Genius314 wrote:better to be safe than to be sorry
Not pinpointing you specifically, but i've seen this reasoning made by many religious persons before. I always felt it's sort of like rewriting a holy script to suit your own needs. "Don't want to condemn homosexuals even if the good book says so, i guess it won't hurt?"
To say 'better safe than sorry' is like, well what the heck, i might as well join... Is that true faith and would that lead to an afterlife in heaven if you believe you would? Or would it mean you are living a lie by going along by what others say you should do?
Sorry you don't have to answer i'm just pointing out in general
Ceilick wrote:Think about why every religion is about what you MUST do or SHOULD NOT to. It's this ancient behaviour that have grown to monstrous proportions. This is why celibacy and virginity is such strong themes in every religion, it's about sacrificing our most primitive instinct, the one that made our existence possible. And a person living in celibacy must really mean serious business, right?
You said so above and I'm glad you recognized it, part of religion is about why we exist and how to understand the world. While there are plenty of instances where religion has told people what they 'must' do, I think many religious people would agree that its about what you 'should' do because its what leads to a rewarding life.
My theory that the modern society was dependant on religions to evolve is rooted in that type of thinking. If we had not evolved this type of sacrifice behaviour and evole safeguards for our selves i think we would still be fighting with bones and rocks, raping and killing eachother.
We needed a set of laws to be ruled under to keep us down.
Today we often have a law system mostly free of religious thoughts, so the good books have done their part really.
And as long as people keep thinking that a religion is needed on a personal plane to make people good, there won't be the same will to be and teach good without gods and fairytales. It's just that religions are a very good framework for teaching good and it's always been, but under false ideas, wich is the problem.
Ceilick wrote:Also, as far as I know, there isn't really anything significant about celibacy or maintaining ones virginity in the Bible. One can make arguments for them from things the Bible does say, but I'm not sure it states anything explicitly.
Well, virgin Mary, one of the most spoked of characters in the bible besides Jesus, have a heavy focus on virginity. Jesus himself is never mentioned to have had a relation with a woman like normal deadly ones, but i guess it's simply doesn't say he lived in celibacy so we simply doesn't know anything about it i think.
Most monks and nuns from all kinds of religions have been practicing celibacy as a strong theme in everything they do.
Marriage is basically this too, you are not supposed to have sex before god approves it. All pre-marriage sex as well as masturbation is considered a sin you know. The emphasis on female virginity is most likely due to strong patriarchy through out our history, it still is in many cases.
I think the patterns are quite obvious if you study them and know things like psychology and the dynamics of human social interaction.