The canon - this is the name given to the set of books the church refers to as the New Testament (and also includes the older Jewish texts). In theory, the canon preserves the sacred one true gospel, free of dangerous taints and corruptions, thus making the canon a sure source of safety, knowledge, truth, and salvation for nervous worried churches, who are looking for just such a thing as a canon.
Now the truth of the matter is that the canon proves to be a filtered, selected, picked over, ideologically slanted set of documents, thus shooting down all those hopes for an easy ride that those churches wanted so bad and stubbornly insist can be found in ‘sacred canon'.
Now let us keep in mind that the canon was sifted over and picked over by a bunch of Stoic celibates with a hatred of human genitalia, a theology of original sin encapsulated, naturally, in the sinfully wicked human orgasm, the cause of the fall and every other evil and wicked thing on earth, according to such ascetic celibates as those who actually voted on the canon.
Now this is stating the obvious, but sometimes I feel that it is my job, due to the fact that people are so often morbid minded and completely faithless, and thus easy to convince that something as black and foul as that model of salvation as castration is more than likely absolutely correct, thus explaining how it wound up encapsulated in the canon.
The truth of the matter is just the plain and obvious truth which is that a small clique of ascetic Stoic celibates with a lot of weird ideas about genitalia and orgasms sifted through the available documents and naturally enough, as one would expect, came up with an ideologically slanted ‘canon' which excluded all other voices, and so it is the case that you will consistently find that same anti-testicle more or less pervading the entire manuscript, and it would be difficult to find a reference to sexual organs that doesn't mention them in relation to a heaping pile of wickedness and evil, the typical description of genitalia and orgasms to be found consistently throughout these documents assembled for our edification by ascetic celibate priests. So no big surprise there right. Now this slanted canon has a powerful use, in that by only parading that one anti-testicle point of view of those celibates who had the power at the time to decide what ‘canon' was going to mean, by doing this and consistently introducing that anti-testicle morbid brooding in a range of various documents the illusion could be created that this strong anti-testicle theology was apostolic, pure, the only voice ever heard as is supposedly ‘proved' by attaching names like Peter and so on to documents that were strongly slanted to the anti-testicle position, crushing and silencing all other voices, and thus creating this delusion of ideological purity and the sanctity of castration that we can find when we look over the finished product, the fruit of the labors of ascetic celibates, the celibate canon, a canon suitable for them, no doubt, but given its highly biased self serving slant, of limited use to the rest of the human race, and at the end of it all, of almost no use to me personally whatsoever.