Chastity cages and Christianity

I’m so happy this thread has become so “on point” and now infinitely more interesting.

I’m so glad the “God’s not real” folks seemed to have left us. They are free to reject Him, of course, but this thread isn’t titled “Does God exist?” It’s about the appropriateness or lack thereof of male chastity activity for the Christian.

Thank you ALL for helping me to understand that fundamental question better.

 

Woman was created as a helper and companion to man and as a means to fulfill God's commandment to be fruitful and multiply. It's hard to justify gender equality thru the bible. It's hard to justify racism thru the bible. I've seen people try to use the bible to justify a lot of things. Slavery was famously justified thru the bible in the American South by many a preacher. People pervert the word constantly but to the saved Christian who reads the bible informed by the Holy Spirit the meanings are clear.

Edit: this is all getting really weird considering most of us are trying to get our wives to spank us with paddles and lock our dicks up. Hey, I can be a Christian and a pervert both. It can be both.

 

Lazio:

The first Amendment has been read to swing both ways. It is only recently that religionist view it as not applying to church folk using their Government authority to make their jurisdictions conform to their biblical understandings and practices.

When government officials/leaders/presidents/senators/surpreme court justices pass laws that write into state law the practice of anything from religious foundation or purpose...they are messing with someone else's church. Freedom of religion requires one to also be able to be free from religion.

Otherwise, one has a state church that oppresses all people whose consciences don't follow in line with the state church. The cycle repeats itself. People flee oppressive religious systems and nations to find a free land...and then in due time they use their new religious system to oppress those that don't agree with them.

 

Add,

I am a Constitutional Originalist. The text clearly states that “congress shall pass no law.....”. It says NOTHING about limitations on the church’s ability to practice its religion.

I think your points about a dangerous mix are good ones. But there is no constitutionally justified limitation on the church’s ability to practice.

The first amendment was written to protect the church from the state. It says NOTHING about protecting the state from the church.

If the constitution can be “read to swing both ways”, we HAVE NO constitution. By definition.

 

The supreme court justices have done a pretty good job interpreting the constitution. A lot of people don't like what they hold to be true based on their informed legal interpretation within the context of the founder's intent and ancillary writings, but they generally come to the right conclusions.

@Lazlo Toth It would be more about protecting the people from the church if you consider that most of the religious minorities who fled to America did so in the face of severe persecution in Europe. The church without the state is a toothless tiger and Americans kind of like it that way.

 

I think you just made my point.

The church without the state....for whatever reasons. The church is a place of worship. Not a government entity.

 

The church should be toothless in governmental affairs. But the government shpuld be toothless in church worship affairs.

 

Christian here, and also a student of history. It might be worth your time going back and reading about the origins of the first amendment. It very much was written to keep the church out of the state, and also to keep the state out of the church. Many of the founding fathers (like Jefferson) had some very (very!) strong opinions on this topic, and they weren't afraid to say them.

The bit about "the first amendment wasn't intended to keep the church out of the state" is a fairly recent invention of the American "dominionist" movement -- e.g. Jerry Falwell, that whacky "Left behind" series, Billy Graham Jr. and his nuttery, "Trump is King Cyrus", the whole Fox News phenomenon, "Jesus needs us to take over the government by force if necessary, because Jesus is powerless without militant zealots like us fighting for him", etc. Reminds me so much of silly Peter with the sword in the Garden, but it definitely comes across more like the betrayal by Judas (who was an actual Zealot with a capital Z).

It's not my job to say that these dominionist nut-cases aren't Christians; that's between them and God. But I can tell you that by their actions and by their fruits, they are certainly not following the teachings of Jesus. (I'm not judging; I struggle with all of this myself. I need to go get a log out of my eye now.)

Galatians 5:22-23

 

I'd actually be okay going back to Christian Monarchy but that's clearly not how America was set up. Bring back the Holy Roman Empire and I'm there.

 

Hi Gents. Great commentary and i am lucky to be among it.

I respectfully feel that y’all are putting words and meaning into the 1st amendment that simply isn't there. A written constitution, like a written chastity contract, is to ELIMINATE the debate, not ignite it.

I feel you guys make sensible points. And i agree mostly. But i stand firm that the 1st amendment says what it says. No more. No less. Here is the actual text:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.“

The language was CLEARLY written to protect an individual’s rights, and not the government’s. There isn’t the vaguest mention that religion is to play no role in Government.

The term “separation of church and state” exists NO WHERE in the constitution.

Perhaps i’ve drifted off topic of Chastity and Christianity. For that I apologize.

Laz

 

Yikes. A Christian Monarchy would also be a Christian monopoly. One right way to view doctrine, dogma and practice...and the king's dungeon, torture chambers and stake for burning heretics would be occupied by dissenters.

I think we have gotten off topic.
I shall return my comments to discussing Bible passages, Christianity as it relates to chastity, orgasm denial and such things.

 

this goes back to Jan 5 in the post by littleguy3.
I think the 1 Corinthians 7:4 is one of the greatest chastity verses in the Bible.
Married people don't have authority over their own bodies...but their spouse has a rightful claim to authority over it. It goes without saying that she can have authority over his body and his sexual pleasures. and he over hers.

In what I would consider to be "extreme chastity" activity (extreme for me, but perhaps not for you.) would be using sex as a weapon with the other, her denying him all access to the totality of her body, her breasts, her vulva. And also her denying him any type of orgasmic pleasure, but having him hand out in a state of permanent denial. Even in a FLR, she should allow him access to her, rather than indulging her own needs in perpetual masturbation with a strap-on. And she has a responsibility to stimulate him to the heights of sexual pleasure...the ohOhOHspasm.

Anyway...love 1 Corinthians 7:4. Thank you Apostle Paul for considering sexual authority a two way street.

 

I live in the E.U. anyway as is. Make the Germans Christian again and we're already there.

I'd try anything to get away from whatever this society we have now is called. Anything.

 

I agree with you here Add. Christianity is not a system of governing. Even a perfect Christian—an impossibility—might be a terrible governor.

I think this is where people get confused. Theocracies don’t seem to work. Yet having Judeo Christian values as a government seems to be the superior mindset of a government. Historically speaking.

 

And PLEASE everyone spare us all the commentary about Christian dungeons and “what about the Crusades?”

Find me any contextual NEW Testament scripture that advocates such behavior. You won’t. It doesn’t exist.

Just because man is bad, doesn’t mean Christianity is. Christ came BECAUSE we were bad.

 

It’s worse than i have ever seen it Marcus. Your frustration is well founded.

 

Modern theocracies: Israel, Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia. Utah is basically a theocracy in hiding.

Recent theocracies: England was a theocratic monarchy for a long time before ditching the theocracy.

Ancient theocracies: Ancient Egypt was a successful theocratic monarchy. Rome likewise. Ancient China and Japan.

Theocratic monarchies are extremely stable. The only thing that topples them is total defeat in war by an external power. England was never truly defeated which is why Queen Elizabeth was the 27th grand daughter of William the Conqueror. And now her son is King. They were never toppled. They ditched the church as it became convenient to do so and maintain their position to this very day.

 

Interesting perspective Marcus. I think there are some fundamental differences in a monarchy and a theocracy, but your point is well taken. Plus i’m not sure I’d equate stable with good.

While TOTALLY going off the reservation here, it’s seems that the modern practice of male chastity most closely ties to certain cultural histories.

 

Interesting observation! You've got me puzzling over that one to see if there is any correlation.

 

For example: England can be considered by many to have a very refined “proper” culture. And chastity seems more popular per capita than anywhere.

 

So much from your post to comment on.... thank you for your contributions to this thread! They bring a fresh perspective.

This a great warning! When in seminary, I took a class on Bible Study Methods. The 3 steps of the process are: Observation, Interpetation & Application where we ask & answer the questions, What does it say, What does it mean, and How does it work. There should only be one answer to the first question, there should be few answers to the 2nd question & preferably only one, but there can be many answers to the third question. While there are no bible verses / passages that speak to the practice of physical chastity, there are many that speak to the practice of chastity & purity. And there can be many means to practice those principles.

I agree! However, the church and male leaders have mis-interpreted passages of scripture to the detriment of women. We're finally getting out from under some very poor teaching. An example can be found in Ephesians 5:33 "Nevertheless, as for you individually, each husband is to love his own wife the same as himself, and the wife must see to it that she respects her husband." This quote is from the NASB. Notice the italics for the words "must see to it"? These words aren't in the original Greek text and were supplied by the translators. A Greek scholar recently explained that the Henna Clause that appears in the text here should be translated such that the last statement should be rendered "and as a result the wife will respect her husband". The incorrect translation and subsequent teaching led to the abuse of wives by many men. If interpreted correctly given the full context of the passage, it suggests that if a husband loves his wife sacrificially giving himself up for her, she will respect her husband. I shared this insight with my pastor who is completing his seminary doctorate and he reviewed the Greek text and agreed with this rendering.

Male chastity devices may be a sex toy for you and Tom Allen and most others on this site, but for some of us here and our wives, they are a necessary consequence of the sexual addiction we have developed from early childhood and continued to practice for years and maybe decades. Most in our society and in Christianity appear ignorant of the addictiveness of porn, masturbation, and sex. I highly recommend you read "Dopamine Nation".

Could I escape from my device? Yes! Would my wife find out and realize I had cheated on her? Absolutely! I cannot pullout of mine and get back in without the key which she has locked away. Even for those who could get out, the device is just enough of a deterrent that it prevents the man from going too far during their moments of weakness. It's a perfect example of Self Binding that Anna Lembke suggests in her book and other therapists recommend to those with problematic addictions.

For many men, they have a real struggle with pornography and they have to use tools like Covenant Eyes on their technology to make it difficult for them to view porn or other erotic materials. There are those who find ways around these tools to cheat, but for many, it's a tool to deter them.

Chastity devices are also a good means for re-building trust with a betrayed spouse. Betrayal trauma is very real and cripples many women (and some men) who have been cheated on by their spouse. So it's not just the man who is being helped by MC, it can include his partner. It is a token of my renewed commitment to my wife & marriage.

That would be lovely if it was just as simple as that for me. We now live in a day and age where we are surrounded by sexuality. It is taking real healing and transformation for me to approach that ideal in this world. Julie Slattery in her book "Rethinking Sexuality" suggests that every one of us are sexually broken, we just don't realize it. It is taking a life changing experience and the power of the Holy Spirit to recognize it, heal and find healthy intimacy in my marriage.

Just my two cents! I apologize if I come across as being arrogant

 

I am really curious to hear how you interpret and apply the commands in the verses immediately surrounding verse 4 where Paul tells married couples to have sexual relations, fulfill your marital duty, and not deprive one another.

 

“Let the Lower Lips Be Throbbing”

A Satiracle Chastity Hymn

(Everything is pervertable.)

With Apologies to P.P. Bliss who wrote the traditional song: “Let the Lower Lights Be Burning”

(Anyone whose initials are P.P. (peepee) and whose last name is Bliss can’t be all bad.)

(Chastity has denied my peepee many blissful moments.

and all I can say is ‘thank you, My Queen.’)


By addadaypleaase,

chastity spouse and sire to Queen Addaday and her lady bits in waiting.


February 2023


addadayplease Singing:

1

Brightly burns my Queen’s libido.
Once again, it’s Friday night;
So to me you give the orders
“Kneel down and dim the light.” [Refrain]

Refrain:
“Let your lower lips be throbbing!
I’m so glad you married me.
But I’ll not be spurting semen,*
For I’m locked in chastity.

2

Dark the night, your body quivers!
I have induced your moans and sighs!
Eager fingers rub and flick you,
As I lick between your thighs. [Refrain]

3

Trim your pubes hair, my mistress!
Bid me worship thy smooth slit.
You shall praise God our creator,
As I fondle breasts and clit. [Refrain]

Underlined words indicate the original words that start each verse and refrain. * The original lyrics has the word “seaman” in this location. I thought it appropriate to include its manly homonym here.


Queen Addaday Singing

1

Brightly burns my own libido.
Once again, it’s Friday night;
So to you I give an order.
“Kneel down and dim the light.” [Refrain]

Refrain:
“Let my lower lips be throbbing!
I’m so glad you married me.
But you’ll not be spurting semen,*
For you’re locked in chastity.

2

Dark the night, my body quivers!
I’ve become just moans and sighs!
Eager fingers rub and flick me,
With your face between my thighs. [Refrain]

3

I have trimmed my pubes, my darling!
Come and worship my smooth slit.
Do the wonderous things you do, love.
To my nipples, crotch and clit. [Refrain]

Underlined words indicate the original words that start each verse and refrain. * The original lyrics has the word “seaman” in this location. I thought it appropriate to include its manly homonym here.

 

well done!

For me, Chastity has denied me orgasmic moments, definitely less pleasurable than the ones I more infrequently receive. Chastity has granted me many, many more blissful moments lying in the arms of my lover while caged.