Christianity is finished in the UK "Well thank god for that!"

reply to post by moocowman

No deliberate intention to twist your words, it's kind of difficult to imagine that which is (alleged to be) perfect love, creating something it considers filthy.

See, you're doing it again. I never said that God says that a woman having her period is a bad thing. Filthy just means dirty. Like, "Oh why, look at that! I stepped in mud and now my feet are filthy! HAHAHAHAHA!" When a woman would use a menstrual rag to clean up the blood, it's going to be filthy, as in dirty.

When God says that our righteousness is but filthy rags, he's saying that our human righteousness is still dirty.

Seems like Yawhe jesus god has a habit of hating the things it created, that is one dumbassed schizophrenic god you got there.

Or maybe we have some people that don't want to take the time to think about what they're saying and just spout whatever comes off the top of their head because they don't want to hear a defense of the Bible because they are so set in their ways against God.

reply to post by moocowman

Genesis 3:16:
To the woman he said, "I will greatly increase your pains in childbearing; with pain you will give birth to children. Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you."

There are effects for sin. Before the fall, Adam and Eve lived in perfection. Not afterward. Adam didn't get off Scott-free either. Man would have to toil with the ground for food. Also, man was now subject to physical death.

1 Timothy 2:11:
A woman should learn in quietness and full submission.

Yeah, so? God has a hierarchy for his church. That's hard for some of the liberals in the world to stand, but, that's the way that it is. Women aren't to teach in the church and go to male leadership is there is a problem/question.

1 Timothy 2:9 :
I also want women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or expensive clothes.

Don't forget verse 10:

but with what is proper for women who profess godliness—with good works.

This passage parallels with 1 Peter 3.3-4:

Do not let your adorning be external—the braiding of hair and the putting on of gold jewelry, or the clothing you wear—but let your adorning be the hidden person of the heart with the imperishable beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which in God's sight is very precious.

The principle is that a Christian woman should be more concerned with making her heart beautiful to God. Wearing jewelry isn't prohibited, as long as that is not what they are trying to do to beautify themselves. As for modest dress, why is that a bad thing? I know I don't want my wife to dress like a tramp [that's not to say that she dresses like she's from the 1800s though] and I don't like it when I see a woman dressed provocatively on the street, as that often leads to me stumble and sin. Funny thing is, women today will dress with their stuff hanging out nearly and then complain when a guy looks at them.

In the end, the principle is that Christian women should be concerned with what's inside, not what's outside, like the world worries about.

reply to post by moocowman

1 Corinthians 14:34:
Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says.

If you would care to read the context of the verse, you would see that women weren't prohibited from speaking in church. They are allowed to give a Word from the Lord. Just before this though, Paul was speaking about how when a prophet speaks, two or three should judge what they say. Paul is saying that a woman isn't to be one of these people. The reference to the Law goes back to the familial hierarchy that God gave in Genesis, which is also the model for the church. So, in regards to the issue of a evaluating prophets, a woman is supposed to submit to the masculine authority.

Deuteronomy 22:20-21:
If, however, the charge is true and no proof of the girl's virginity can be found, she shall be brought to the door of her father's house and there the men of her town shall stone her to death. She has done a disgraceful thing in Israel by being promiscuous while still in her father's house. You must purge the evil from among you.

Virginity in ancient Israel, just other other ancient Near East cultures, and still in some cultures today, was very important. God is showing that we should treat sexual things very seriously. Obviously a girl who lost her virginity before marriage and didn't claim her rights given in Exodus didn't care that much about what God wanted. Much of the Old Testament is geared toward protecting Israel so that the promised Messiah would come.

Interestingly, Jewish tradition says that this was never carried out.

ETA: Even if it were carried out, God gave the woman fair warning of what would happen. Also, the man didn't get off Scot-free. He had to pay a ton of money for libel and couldn't ever divorce his wife, if his allegation wasn't true. In today's world, some may say that that is worse than death...

Was this punishment over the top? In our human minds, yes. But, God isn't human. He had a reason. One that we'll understand better in eternity. But, to say that God has disdain for women becaues of this issue is foolish. Especially when you consider that they had warning and this is something that was to be done only after they'd been promiscuous and tried to hide it from their husband, which is deceit.

[edit on 7/7/2009 by octotom]

reply to post by octotom

Filthy just means dirty. Like, "Oh why, look at that! I stepped in mud and now my feet are filthy! HAHAHAHAHA!" When a woman would use a menstrual rag to clean up the blood, it's going to be filthy, as in dirty.

I'm amazed how you can imagine how a bodily function can be considered to be dirty by that which created it.

What this is saying is, that the creator of the universes is somehow offended by that which it created.

This is ridiculous, to use a one dimensional analogy, that is like me making a lego car but hating the wheels.

Even more ridiculous is that I would expect the car to keep the wheels away from me.

reply to post by octotom

Virginity in ancient Israel, just other other ancient Near East cultures, and still in some cultures today, was very important. God is showing that we should treat sexual things very seriously. Obviously a girl who lost her virginity before marriage and didn't claim her rights given in Exodus didn't care that much about what God wanted.

And like all good fathers do, the answer is to kill the offending child.

reply to post by moocowman

I'm amazed how you can imagine how a bodily function can be considered to be dirty by that which created it.

I am convinced now that you don't understand the English language. Dirt is dirty. God would say that dirt causes one to be dirty. Just as blood makes a rag dirty. So, our best human attempts at righteousness are dirty to God.

It's called a simile.

What this is saying is, that the creator of the universes is somehow offended by that which it created.

No, God is not offended by what he created. God is saying that, just as a dirty rag is dirty, and useless, so are our humanly motivated righteous deeds and acts, in his eyes.

[edit on 7/7/2009 by octotom]

reply to post by moocowman

And like all good fathers do, the answer is to kill the offending child.

Like I said, it's not easy to grasp.

But, as I also said, this was known, so if a girl didn't want to die, she shouldn't be promiscuous.

There is a better way to explain this whole issue, but, frankly, you wouldn't understand it very well becasue all you want to do is ridicule "yahwehjesusgod".

You're not looking for answers, xcowman, you just want to start fights.

Originally posted by moocowman
reply to post by Flighty

 

All this shows to me is not a decline in Christianity (as backed up by the Census figures) but a decline in PRACTICING Christians.

Christianity is not expanding (I'm sure the churches would be the first to blow that trumpet) IE no new bums on seats.

If there are no significant increase in the numbers of converts to christianity yet practicing xtians are declining, then by definition christianity is on the decline or is declining.

Actually I think the thread title is a little misleading.
The article is about the Church of England.
Christianity encompasses quite a few varying faiths.

I recently went back to church and it was chock a block full.
I spoke to the Priest and he said the Church is having a resurgence.
But then, that was a Catholic Church.
But still Christian after all.

reply to post by octotom

You're not looking for answers, xcowman, you just want to start fights.

It is looking for answers that one finds more questions then stumbles upon dilemmas.

You figuratively shake your fist at my being unable to conceive how ,that which is the creator of all that there is could possible create something which is "dirty".

Dirt or unclean is a human term to describe -- well what exactly ?

Something that would contaminate something else and pose a threat to health ?


When you get your hands dirty do you wash them because you fear the bacteria which could harm you or others ?


It would appear that I find the subject far more intriguing than yourself . Don't you even wonder why a womans' menstruation is somehow dirty yet washing of hands after toilet functions was not even considered ?

Considering the christian attitude to the birth canal, ie it was made redundant when it came to the birth of jesus, and the overwhelming religious repression of pleasurable sex for it's own sake.

One cannot help but wonder what is behind this business of the female menstrual cycle being deemed "dirty" or "unclean".
After all the process is but a cycle of life created (allegedly) by a god of life. A process no different our shedding our skin or renewing teeth.

reply to post by moocowman

It is looking for answers that one finds more questions then stumbles upon dilemmas.

I don't see it that way. But, you do, it would seem, because you're not truly looking for answers. Someone will give you an answer and you misconstrue what they say so that you don't have to accept it.

You figuratively shake your fist at my being unable to conceive how ,that which is the creator of all that there is could possible create something which is "dirty".

See there you go again. When I say "dirty" I'm not meaning it in a spiritual sense. Just literally dirty, what happens when you roll around in the mud or what happens to your baseball pants when you slide on the clay. Being dirty in and of itself isn't a bad thing. Adam probably got dirty when he would tend in the garden. That is the nature of dirt. It dirties someone.

I've said this before, but here I go again. Just as a women's menstrual rag [or in today's world tampon and so forth] is dirty and useless due to her period, so our good deeds are in God's eyes--they are polluted and worthless.

Note though xcow: I, nor God, didn't say that a woman having her period was a bad or evil thing. I didn't say that being dirty was a bad thing. Dirt isn't bad.

Don't you even wonder why a womans' menstruation is somehow dirty yet washing of hands after toilet functions was not even considered ?

Have you ever read the Levitical law? The Jews were really clean people. They had to clean themselves a lot. Again though, I didn't say that a women's cycle was spiritual dirty. It just is plain ol' dirty. The allusion to a women's dirty rags is in relation to how God views our humanly motivated righteousness. What is so hard for you to understand about this?

Considering the christian attitude to the birth canal, ie it was made redundant when it came to the birth of jesus, and the overwhelming religious repression of pleasurable sex for it's own sake.

You apparently only hang around ultra-fundamentalist Christians who believe that the Song of Solomon should be taken out of the Bible. The Christians in my circle, and myself, cherish sex. Sex is a good thing. It's not bad. God gave it to us for our enjoyment. This is obvious from even the slightest skimming of the Bible.

One cannot help but wonder what is behind this business of the female menstrual cycle being deemed "dirty" or "unclean".

The Isaiah passage doesn't say that it's unclean. Only dirty. But, again, not spiritually dirty. In Leviticus, though, it is said that a woman needs to cleanse herself afterward [just as a man does when he ejaculates]. There is a suggestion why [it has nothing to do with the cycle being "evil" or "unclean"]. That is, since it involves a fluid leaving the body, in the Jewish eye, that person is less than complete.

After all the process is but a cycle of life created (allegedly) by a god of life. A process no different our shedding our skin or renewing teeth.

Yes, and that is why it is not unclean or spiritually dirty.

Anyway, moocowman, perhaps, due to the original content of the thread, we should stop right now. I don't want either of us getting in trouble or anything. There will be a time and a place, and a better thread in the future, in which we can discuss things of this nature further. You can of course, U2U me, or I could give you my email and we can chat it up through there. [Just so you don't think I'm trying to dodge you or anything.]

Sorry to have hijacked your thread these last few pages!

Originally posted by moocowman

Originally posted by walsbg22
You guys who hate Christianity make me sick. I'm a christian and 99% of generalizations you guys make do not apply to me and a lot of people I know. Maybe you guys are exposed to a more radical version. Just stop generalizing, please.

[edit on 6-7-2009 by walsbg22]

You bloody xtians are all the same you're always accusing us of generalizing, nothing could be further from the truth

Ha ha ha You realize you just proved his point don't you!

when you said "you bloody xtians are ALL the same" HA HA HA and in the same voice, that same arrogant self righteous rant, you get convicted by your own words! saying "you're always accusing us of generalizing, nothing could be further from the truth"

SAY WHAT!

Here see this again in all its self incriminating truth
"you bloody xtians are ALL the same"

Seems you have no clue about the truth and YOU just proved it.

Your hypocrisy is guargantuan, your attitude is disturbing and your mission to share it on these boards offering the most intentionally twisted , convoluted, one sided and unequivocally erroneus excuses for it, can only be appreciated by those with similar arrogance and terminally self righteous piety. Playing the victim the self educated anti theologian you have bought your own BS about what you know of theology and pass yourself off as an expert without scholarly formal training or guidance, you have effectively shown your true colors of someone who has no tolerance of those you would demand understanding from, a religion and a people you have not even begun to understand much less know anything about. Like the comment you made putting an entire shoe store in your mouth, you epitomize the logical fallacy of guilt by association discriminating against belief and believers holding yourself holier than thou you are as guilty of the same thing and are totally un-aware of it.

This would normally illustrate that with or without religion

you are no less a hypocrite, no less a bigot with the only difference being Christians have always known this and will be the first to forgive yours as you hold ours against us, and see yourself blameless while you display to all of us, you are so much of what you hate most in us.

Perhaps you should start a new religion.

I mean besides the religion of atheism

[edit on 7-7-2009 by DASFEX]

Originally posted by walsbg22
reply to post by moocowman

 

You might be surprised that I think for myself and never bring a bible quote to debate with non-Christians.

Yeah and many here will gladly "school" him on the REAL thing and his quotemined cherry pickred discontextualized talking points about the bible but when you or anyone does, is when he complains it means nothing to him. The only meaning he has is to spread lies and hate and biblio bigotry. While he talks as rude and as wrong as he can the moment someone he has pissed off, actually gets pissed off, he says "is that anyway for a Christian to talk" then he wonders why things like the crusades happen. What did he forget Christians are people too?

ha ha ah he even has a point by point profile of the "Typical Christian" and oh of course we are all stupid and depressed or needing a crutch etc.

Hasn't man always done things like that to people they were about to genocide?

Originally posted by octotom

Have you ever read the Levitical law? The Jews were really clean people. They had to clean themselves a lot. Again though, I didn't say that a women's cycle was spiritual dirty. It just is plain ol' dirty. The allusion to a women's dirty rags is in relation to how God views our humanly motivated righteousness. What is so hard for you to understand about this?

Considering the christian attitude to the birth canal, ie it was made redundant when it came to the birth of jesus, and the overwhelming religious repression of pleasurable sex for it's own sake.

You apparently only hang around ultra-fundamentalist Christians who believe that the Song of Solomon should be taken out of the Bible. The Christians in my circle, and myself, cherish sex. Sex is a good thing. It's not bad. God gave it to us for our enjoyment. This is obvious from even the slightest skimming of the Bible.

One cannot help but wonder what is behind this business of the female menstrual cycle being deemed "dirty" or "unclean".

The Isaiah passage doesn't say that it's unclean. Only dirty. But, again, not spiritually dirty. In Leviticus, though, it is said that a woman needs to cleanse herself afterward [just as a man does when he ejaculates]. There is a suggestion why [it has nothing to do with the cycle being "evil" or "unclean"]. That is, since it involves a fluid leaving the body, in the Jewish eye, that person is less than complete.

After all the process is but a cycle of life created (allegedly) by a god of life. A process no different our shedding our skin or renewing teeth.

Yes, and that is why it is not unclean or spiritually dirty.

You understand you are talking to children of the grave? Many people on these boards who claim they are atheists have NO intention of learning what you are trying in earnest to show them.

These are people who don't search scholarly written white papers on the Scriptures, they don't refer to strongs exhaustive concordance or lexicon.

These are professional forum warriors that actually search for any alleged or pre-supposed disparity in the Bible they can find and re-post without its contextual, historical or linguistic reference. They don't google an apologist website they would rather read that blithering biblebabbling author spewing hate at evil bible dot com.

They are so actively involved in hating God, they sell their souls quite literally on the blaspheme challenge and even work creating a video to make it public and why??

Just to get the free video, "The God that wasn't there"

How appropriate the very creators of that junk documentary would be the very same people who sponsor the blaspheme challenge to offer the very video they are going to need to hear so they won't feel like they just made the biggest mistake, not in ther entire life but for an eternity!

He will say he was created that way and that is just what he was programmmed to do. What it is to spit in the face of the holy spirit and blame the very God that sacrificed his son to save you from that very tragic end then Blame god for that too!

ha ha ha my my my there are no words.

reply to moocowman


You're not looking for answers, xcowman, you just want to start fights. - octotom

It is looking for answers that one finds more questions then stumbles upon dilemmas.

You figuratively shake your fist at my being unable to conceive how ,that which is the creator of all that there is could possible create something which is "dirty".- moocowman

No he shakes his head (not his fist) not about you being unable to conceive of all those things you say create more questions and dilemmas,

he said you just want to start a fight because of your REFUSAL to learn answers to your questions and dilemmas. Or do you think you're the first person to have such issues they can not be given very logical answers to?

If so, than it would be that you refuse.

if not, then I ask when are you going to quit ranting long enough for someone to explain it to you.

or do you just enjoy hating and hating for the wrong reasons?

It's true, many people actually love to hate God while they claim they don't believe in fairytales yet I have never went on a mission to hate ufo believers who claim they have seen Grays and flying saucers mocking them and calling them stupid asking for proof.

I am honest enough to know, some people have seen and experienced things that can not be explained in ordinary labs using the scientific method. I realize they are many who have claimed this about UFO's but when it comes to truth, the truth is, I just may be wrong and they may be right. The only logical reason in your mind, that we believe in some invisible man in the sky is because you simply do not have the same experience the same truth that billions of others have and you assume it is because we are afraind of death or are stupid etc,.


You are the one saying we are so backward and so ignorant, Well,, so far you've been busted contradicting yourself. You have been busted not knowing the truth when it was right under your nose and typed out in your own words painting yourself in a corner so hows all that superior intellect and logic workin or ya.

It may be, we are simply right, and have experienced something divine that can not be explained in an ordinary finite context.

That does NOT mean however that you can not know it too.

You simply get angry at some of the things it claims you are guilty of and you ain't giving them up for no one.

well have at it, then but don't get mad at us, we are no more guilty of thinking we are right than you are



[edit on 7-7-2009 by DASFEX]

Has the Lion lost it's Teeth under the Worldwide Council of Churches?
Bishops of the Church of England in the past had won the fight for the rights of the people who were enslaved under the Popish rule of the Church of Rome.
please see & read Foxes Book of the Martyrs.

Where is the right to convert unsaved people to Christianity (Lord Jesus Christ) without Hypocrisy & Apostasy?

Christian people there should be ashamed.

True Christianity has nothing to do with the Vatican and the Pope actually but Roman Catholicism does.

Without Christianity in UK, what gives? Islam? Good luck!

reply to post by octotom

It really seems though that you don't understand why Christians evangelize and tell people that they're going to hell unless they believe in Jesus. It's not because we're "judging" you or anything like that. Christians evangelize because Christ told us to.

My granny used to say, "Would you jump off a cliff if you were told to?"
Before anyone says its not the same thing, she used this salutory metaphor to point out the stupidity of
A) doing anything just because someone tells you to &
B) attempting to avoid responsibility for actions by (i) claiming spurious authority &/or (ii) blaming somebody else.
You know what is unforgiveable tho? As moocowman says: "evangelizing" to children, especially when they're a captive audience in school. Its bad enough that just about every aspect of society is going to feed judeo-christian morality into their thinking, without filling their heads with a scare story designed to prevent them from attempting to deprogram themselves.
Here's a scary example: the word "evangelize" (with a Z!!) Was already in my phones T9 dictionary, whereas "deprogram" was not.

reply to post by octotom

Was this punishment [stoning to death] over the top? In our human minds, yes. But, God isn't human. He had a reason. One that we'll understand better in eternity. But, to say that God has disdain for women becaues of this issue is foolish. Especially when you consider that they had warning and this is something that was to be done only after they'd been promiscuous and tried to hide it from their husband, which is deceit.

See now here we have someone making excuses for the most hateful method of execution yet invented. As if that in itself is not bad enough, the 'crime' is having sex & lying about it. Er... WTF?
You need to do some reading about the differences between human fertility, reproductive organs & sexuality compared to other mammals. We are completely evolved, or designed if you must, to be promiscuous & furthermore for women to be able to 'get away with it', ie she will show little if any sign of being fertile & no sign of pregnancy until long after conception.
But whatever. Excuses for stoning to death. Sh!t... If that right there isn't enough evidence of the damage that religion does to people, I don't know what is.

reply to post by octotom

Dirt is dirty. God would say that dirt causes one to be dirty. Just as blood makes a rag dirty

No, just as dirt makes a thing dirty, blood makes a rag bloody. Leave it lying around & it will become a health hazard, @which point, yes dirty, filthy etc. The same as the flesh of dead animals. Leave it lying around it becomes a health hazard, filth etc. Do you eat flesh? Call it filth as a general term?
To stigmatise menstrual blood with the generalisations "dirty" or "filthy" is to denegrate a natural bodily function & cannot but induce shame in one undergoing that function, which she can't help, thus it is misogynistic.