Female Sexual characteristics in Christ symbology

…at least according to this site: Female Sexual Characteristics in Christ and Christianity.

I don’t know anything about this Poppy Dixon person. I do, however, know that I’ll never look at one of those Jesus bumper fish in the same light ever again.

So what do you think: another example of pagan symbolism co-opted by Christianity, or an exercise in skewing Christian symbolism to make it look that way?

(The size of the grain of salt with which this site should be taken is further confused by the link to the obviously less serious page on Evange-lingerie, panties with religious messages on them, from “Chic Tracts”. It just gets weirder and weirder.)

Huh? Shouldn’t this be in MPSIMS?

I thought it had more chance of becoming a serious religion-based discussion than simply a “hey, look at this link” thing, so I erred on the side of caution and put it here. The mods are welcome to relocate it as they see fit, as always.

Kind of an inflammatory thread title, don’t ya think?

Kind of an inflammatory subject.

It’s evidently some kind of anti-Christian website. Who they are.

http://www.postfun.com/pfp/NC-17Bible.html

And then it pulls all the “icky” parts out of the Bible and quotes them out of context under headings like “Gang Rape”, like that proves something about Christianity and the Bible.

[shrug] I don’t see a talking point here, jr8. Just some Christian-bashing, feh. :rolleyes: It isn’t even funny like Landover Baptist, just stoopid.

If you look hard enough (yes, pun intended) you can find a sexual reference in ANYTHING.

Anything oval becomes a female reference.

Anything taller than wide becomes a male reference.

Good god, the turgid, pendulant state of Florida on a map is terribly obscene and should be covered with a jock strap at least!

I think this is the correct link for Evange-lingerie.

I have it on good authority that both mathematics and Christianity are rooted in the same ancient symbolism, whatever that may be; this is obvious to me because they both make extensive use of the + symbol (or something very much like it).

Yes, but there’s a difference between arguing about whether the simplistic fish sigul is yonic in derivation, and discussing the much more (literally) visceral symbolism in a gaping wound you can put your hand into. I understand the power of the image from a literal narrative interpretation, but from a Freudian standpoint all sorts of alarm bells go off.

Heh. During the last election, a UK newspaper ran a political cartoon showing an Uncle Sam figure wearing the US like a pair of shorts, with Florida in the obvious place. The caption? “Electile dysfunction”. :stuck_out_tongue:

For future refernce, don’t be a fuckwad (again) and use such an ignorant thread title.

Also, you may not want to use such a bizarre site as the starting point for a meaningful discussion. (As of though that is what you wanted.)

I second that, jr8, I think you should e-mail a mod and ask them to change that title. It’s inflammatory to say the least.

I was going to respond and say that Jesus will kick your ass but… oh man this is all wrong. :smack:

Well, I sure don’t like to see my Saviour and Lord called names but that’s nothing new. Those who call him vile names will one day bow down and call Him Lord. Philippians 2:10-11. As to the symbol of the fish, it was used in the early christian days as a sign to tell if another person was a follower of Christ or not. They were being persecuted, thrown to the lions, etc. so when they met people on the road they drew the sign of the fish. They didn’t know who they could trust so they used this symbol. If the other people didn’t know what it was for, they most likely weren’t christians. Another interesting tidbit I learned is the Greek word for fish is IXOYE and it stands for Jesus Christ, God’s Son, Saviour. Kind of like how we use the word MADD today for Mothers Against Drunk Driving.

[Moderator Hat ON]

DON’T call people fuckwads in GD. You have a problem with the thread title you should have emailed me to discuss it, rather than breaking the rules of this forum. I am changing the thread title because it is, IMHO, a little too disingenously inflammatory.

[Moderator Hat OFF]

Thanks Gaudere :slight_smile:

I missed the original thread title—I was at a picnic and just got back. What was it??? (If you don’t want to repeat it here, e-mail me.)

The page forgot to mention the Sacred Heart of Jesus, which is the first thing that came to mind when I saw the (new & improved) thread title.

In one of the appendices to the Illuminatus! Trilogy by Robert Anton Wilson, telling some of the backstory to the novel, this Italian girl named Miss Portinelli starts a daily practice of meditating on the Sacred Heart of Jesus. Imagine her dismay when in her visualization it morphs into a sexual image that she finds extremely obscene. I mean, look at the flaming cross plunging into it and everything.

(Later, she’s initiated into Tantric Sex or something like that…)

As an advocate of Sacred Sex, I don’t find it obscene or ridiculous that religion and eros are so closely melded. I consider it entirely normal and proper, and only people who have been brainwashed by the artificial separation between the two will make a big fuss over it or mock it. Worship of the Goddess’s Yoni is the most ancient religion in the world, and it has survived in one form or another even in the major patriarchal religions. Driven underground, banished out of sight, but always there waiting to be rediscovered. You may think this all a big joke, but for me, finding a survival of Goddess Yoni worship in Christianity fills me with reverence and gives me greater respect for Christianity.

Never mind e-mailing me about the thread title – after posting I remembered seeing it in the forum page. And it still remains as the post title for the OP.

The OP’s post subject (the bold letters at the top of the OP).

Gah, I’m an idiot