Critique needed on my book 'GOD LOVES SEX ' (conscious evolution)

adam247 · 11-01-2009, 07:31 AM

This is a few pages from my book ....what do you guys think?

For starter, I believe that sex is where we are the most receptive to God realization. So there are many, many ways to come to God realization. Many ways ? many paths ? like I said before. But I believe sex to be where a human is most receptive to seeing that path - understanding it and wanting to follow it. I believe that sex in its purest, evolved, conscious form encourages us to follow those paths. I believe that sex will exaggerate positive emotional, psychological states that can deliver us to God realization.

Biologically, this would make perfect sense: apart from eating and drinking (which we need to survive), in order to reproduce, the want to find a partner for reproduction is the biggest and most distinct desire of all living things. So to me ? right there- would it not make sense for the ultimate answer to be within that state of beginning life - that state of conception? Bringing life to the planet. It would make perfect sense. Ultimately we?re sure of two things: life and death. Once we?re dead (as we currently know) there is no real way to consciously come back. When we conceive ? when we create life, we come back.

It?s the closest thing we come to death ? because we bring life. So: would it not make sense ? at that point ? the psychological, spiritual consciousness would be the closest it can to the understanding of life and death? Would it not make sense at that time we?d be our most receptive to feeling the most instinctive desires of sexual conscious evolution?

Now if we look back at our own history or we look at different species (my examples and my referencing may get weaker and weaker because this is not about what it has been ? not about what exists within other species: what it?s about is the evolution of consciousness). If I was to merely focus on the biology, I?d fall short ? simply because within our instincts there would be justification for rape, there would be justification for paedophilia: these things would be perfectly justified. The point were they no longer become justified is where we evolve consciously. As we evolve consciously, we become more aware of our instinct and how to follow them to the correct path - which is the most positive one.

So the actual desire for sex itself is the most beautiful thing in the world. The only things that will make sex negative are negativity ? negativity itself. Within our communities, within our religions, within our institutions, within our societies we don?t focus on what?s negative: we?re focused on sex. And by focusing on sex, what we have ultimately done is caused the most beautiful thing that living things possessed to implode on itself. By suppressing the most ultimately positive desire we caused a rebound effect and for it to turn negative.

Now negativity is what we want to avoid. Positivity is the direction we want to go.

I believe that through time, the institutions, cultures and religions that have suppressed sex have merrily encouraged negativity towards them. This negativity: the very negativity that I would link to ?the devil? (i.e. to evil, to bad), is being encouraged by these institutions. This is a complete contradiction ? an oxymoron ? of religion, if you ask me. But this is what has been happening? Not directly but indirectly.

An example of this follows; this implies the average human that?s living amongst these institutions (note: this does not include people with mental or psychological or genetic illnesses). Imagine you have a natural desire for sex and institutions that tell you that this desire is wrong surround you. Institutions that encourage you to adopt negativity towards yourself. But you are God. So you have a symbol of God (the representing religion) that is bringing negativity to God (which is yourself). To me this is a complete contradiction. I think it manifests and exaggerates to the point where I can give examples of extreme negativity. Thus follows:

If somebody has been suppressed severely but has severe desires, those desires have caused a negative about one?s self. Suddenly, the person with the desires feels guilty, feels generally hurt about who they are and detaches themselves from themselves ? which is ultimately God. So they detach themselves from God. Once you become detached from God, once you no longer respect yourself, once you no longer believe that others around you respect you because of the way you?re made to feel by societies you live in, the only thing that now exists is this desire? this desire that has been there since the dawn of living species. The problem now is that our own societies and institutes have back-pedalled that individual back to the beginning of time (when humans first stepped foot on this planet) by manipulating and suppressing the desires that individual had. Until they let go of their own consciousness and became completely instinctive. That individual would become the barbaric creature that we now would see as a ?rapist? that is actually the product of suppressing something that symbolized the very thing that the societies and institutes accused it of going against: God.

So what we have now is a victim of society, institutes or religions; that has lost himself in his own desire. Now: the desire will cause a ripple effect, as this desire will lead to a physical act without consciousness ? because that?s been taken from him. So now the physical act will involve another individual. If that individual receives an act that is meant to be so God-like but is empty of God itself, then they will feel a form of guilt that none of us can explain or have empathy for, unless we have been through it. So now that negativity has been passed on from one to another and this ripple effect can continue ? because the problem is that the society doesn?t admit to its own flaws or even see that it?s created this problem in the first place. It won?t know how to fix a problem it doesn?t believe exists, so you?ll have thousands of victims that will stay victims because they?re unaware of what they?re victims of.

The thing is, just like anyone that?s been pushed off a path from God, once you?ve been pushed off that path, it may be clearer to see it. When the path is clearer to see, you can get back and climb up and head in the right direction. Even when an individual tried to do that and detaches themselves from the symbols and constructs around them, they will find it difficult, as they will be on a journey on their own because the majority of society won?t even see the path in the first place.

So not only do I believe my view to be the pathway to God, but my view to also be the gateway to shut off the devil. Because how can you shut off the devil if you don?t see him?

The societies claimed that sex was the devil: they shut off sex. The devil?s still around? Yet they are appear unaware ? or choose not to see this. So I am writing these words not just for those directly influenced by sex (whether it?s positive or negative) but for everyone in society that can take elements of sex and put it into their everyday life. Because I believe that sex in its purest form represents these things:

? Empathy
? Appreciation
? Mentally and physically appreciating
? Appreciating that appreciation
? Sharing
? Caring
? Loving
? Reading
? Understanding
? Believing
? Trusting
? Honesty
? Opening up

All of these traits are God-like. So, from looking at that, could someone please tell me at what point is sex negative? It isn?t. As outlined earlier, the only thing that makes something so positive, with all those positive traits, turn negative - is negativity. It?s negativity that we need to shut off.

Sex without negativity will enlighten everyone. No matter what level ? those consciously advanced and those not so consciously advanced. But for those that consciously advance, God-realization will advance a lot quicker. For those not so consciously advanced (we?re not all so consciously advanced ? we?re not all as able to understand and see ourselves spiritually), well, it will bring positivity anyway ? even on a smaller scale.

This is why I believe sex to be so powerful ?but only for good and for shutting off the bad.

I?m going to talk a little bit about the sexual state.

This is the state where our receptiveness increases. Not everyone has probably even experienced the sexual state; not everyone can even relate to the idea of a ?state of mind? any different from that of the formal state. The ultimate sexual state ? or a magnified sexual state is a state of trance where desire and emotions will override logic. This isn?t necessarily a bad thing yet it can leave you more vulnerable. Humans need to learn to trust their own selves and be vulnerable. Because being vulnerable in a loving world is not a problem. The need for protection ? for protecting vulnerability - only happens when surrounded by negativity. In that situation, protection merely magnifies or encourages that negativity to exist.

This sexual state, I believe we all subconsciously know, is linked to Godliness because in many cultures, in many tribes throughout time ? and even in the animal kingdom ? we look to find this state of trance. You get biblical references for ?fasting starvation? as being the way to finding God - enlightenment. By fasting starving yourself you lose consciousness and therefore become more of an outer-body looking-down-on-yourself conscious being: a consciousness that reveals God. You get certain tribes that take certain drugs to speak to the spirits. Now those drugs will put you in the same state that you get in sexually - this euphoric state, trance-like state. So throughout time we know that that?s the state we need to be in to become completely self-aware.

So with all these references from all these cultures and religions trying to reach that state, we can see how the state is regarded, historically, as a place of finding one?s self. But to me, not eating to find it contradicts humans? desire to eat. To me, taking drugs to find it is merely using a car to get somewhere you?re meant to walk. We?re given something, we were programmed to do something: we?ve been designed to have sex, which puts us in this state. Why have these cultures and religions jumped from something that was so obviously in front of them to drugs (i.e. the car) or jumped to starving to get into a state that was so easily achieved through sex?

I believe possibly (and this is an assumption) that at the time when we were trying to reach these states, we weren?t as consciously evolved as we currently are. So maybe we were unable to get into the state. We were unable to be as consciously aware as we currently are or maybe we were less able to understand it. This is where the evolution bit comes in: because I?m not necessarily suggesting that we?re there currently: I?m merely predicting we will be, as we consciously, sexually evolve.

So it?s more of a prediction. I?d say that it?s better to be on that path than not. That path is there: to me it seems wiser to follow that path rather than to be just bumbling ahead, trying your hand at many different things.

I see throughout these circumstances of trance that within a starvation you become? alone. You become detached. You become detached from yourself. You become detached from your desires. You become detached from others around you. And therefore the desire of food will overtake your desire to love. So to me, starvation is definitely not the way to find yourself in this trance: it contradicts too many things. Sex, on the other hand, is something you share. Surely if God is about unity and all living things and the missing link, what does sex do? It?s one person joining another to become one. How can starving yourself be a greater pathway to realizing who God is, when sex can turn two people into one?

adam247 · 11-01-2009, 07:31 AM

We see examples of my view within many different cultures. Now if we were to name the most suppressive sexual religions and cultures, you?ll see a correlation with aggressive acts. If we look at Christianity ? the crusades, World War Two, KKK (although they resemble Christianity, they are merely a sub-culture of that). If we look at Islam, if we look at Judaism, if we look at the imperial Chinese and how they suppressed sex by establishing feudal control of settlements ? from rural villages to the lavish cities ? it involved controlling sexual activity. If we look at Cambodia and the Khmer Rouge?s policies (e.g. the Killing Fields) they attempted to control the sexual behaviour of the masses. If we look at Roman Catholicism, and the Vatican?s control of contraception, they try to restrict sexual activity. Certain Islamic counties have very strict laws on promiscuity ? which is punished with decapitation. Agression.

However, if we now look at the less suppressive religions and cultures ? we?ve got the tribes from South America ? the Amazonian tribes, the Inca: very calm, collective, less aggressive. In North America, settling in the Mesa Verde there were the Anastazi tribe. Again they didn?t suppress sex in any way: very sexually liberated. - a very peaceful culture. We look to more modern times and we look to areas of suppression sexually and we find a higher crime rate - we find less people going to university, more child crime. We find more involvement in aggressive acts like war. When we consider more liberal sexual people we see cultures and countries that are less involved in aggressive acts ? that are less violent and less likely to have been involved in war.

And this can go even further on: I could add many references. For example: there?s a species of money ? called the babboonas - that will solve conflict through sexual acts. They are very sexually active: they have straight sex, bisexual sex, gay sex, group sex; they do foreplay involving all types of sexual acts. They happen to be the least violent species on the planet.