A Christian Store Denied Him This T-Shirt…

They had a t-shirt printer that was used to put verses. I asked if a printing of a Timothy 2:12 shirt was reasonable. Being Christians, they had never looked that far into the Bible, so they looked it up with their handy dandy on site Bible. When they recited the verse (A woman happened to be the reader of the Bible) they informed me of how disrespectful of their religion I was being. I was unsure of how I was being disrespectful by asking for a verse from their Holy Book.

So I really want to know: Why is that disrespectful? It’s not really out of context — not anymore than any other quotation would be. It’s in the Bible. So what if most Christians don’t happen to agree with it?

Source

This is my favorite thing, when Christians get upset about things being taken out of context from the Bible. Could someone explain to me the true context of this verse? How about the true context of the verses banning hair cuts? Shell fish? Wearing clothes with mixed materials?

reply to post by cetaphobic

Could someone explain to me the true context of this verse?

There was man, Paul who was made a disciple and apostle by the resurrected Christ independent of any current Christian authority, so became an authority himself and had a habit of publicizing his opinions in the churches he created through his preaching. Paul died eventually and some other people in the churches decided they would create a church government with themselves in charge. They were never personally commissioned to such a thing by Christ so had no real weight behind their personal opinions, so they fixed that problem by writing their opinions in the form of letters, then claimed they were written by Paul.

reply to post by jmdewey60


But how does that solve the problem of those who claim the WHOLE Bible is the word of God and is not to be cherry picked from?

reply to post by cetaphobic


bible.cc...

Good thing you didn't go in there on a Sunday and ask them to print Exodus 31-15.
They might have called the cops on you.

Its difficult because religion is a main stay for some people. Just like atheism is too others. So when people see negative aspects of their religion the first thing they jump on is, "you don't respect my religion/ideologies".

Thats how atheism can get away with slandering religious people and religious people can slander the others. Its opinion based and if both peoples opinions don't see eye to eye, then they normally argue. And when one person has a power another doesn't (IE, denying a t shirt being made with a biblical scripture on it) they normally use that to their advantage.

Either way, live and let live.

reply to post by cetaphobic


It doesn't. And when you call them upon it they ignore you completely and keep on talking.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

In that thread Revelationgeneration patently ignores me when I bring up the subject that the bible says alot of things. Some of them not necessarily relevant to our time.

Originally posted by cetaphobic

They had a t-shirt printer that was used to put verses. I asked if a printing of a Timothy 2:12 shirt was reasonable. Being Christians, they had never looked that far into the Bible, so they looked it up with their handy dandy on site Bible. When they recited the verse (A woman happened to be the reader of the Bible) they informed me of how disrespectful of their religion I was being. I was unsure of how I was being disrespectful by asking for a verse from their Holy Book.

So I really want to know: Why is that disrespectful? It’s not really out of context — not anymore than any other quotation would be. It’s in the Bible. So what if most Christians don’t happen to agree with it?

Source

This is my favorite thing, when Christians get upset about things being taken out of context from the Bible. Could someone explain to me the true context of this verse? How about the true context of the verses banning hair cuts? Shell fish? Wearing clothes with mixed materials?

I can see the humour in it. Sometimes i wish my wife would stop talking for a little while because anytime she says my name it's because she wants me to go do something and not for the sake of just having a chat.

That verse is archaic and i do not agree with it. Mary the mother of Christ and Mary Magdalena were chosen to be Apostles and were in the upper room with the 120 at Pentecost. If it was Christ's will for women to stay silent Jesus would never have permitted them to be present at Pentecost. You can usually tell if Paul wrote someting because of his style and choice of wording and if the epistle seems like its off key of his personality.

Man they would freak if he decided to put this one on the shirt

"If men struggle with each other and strike a woman with child so that she gives birth prematurely, yet there is no injury, he shall surely be fined as the woman's husband may demand of him, and he shall pay as the judges decide."
Exodus 21:22
bible.cc...

It means exactly what it says.
Women shouldn't teach religion to men, but they can teach to other women and children.
Even looking at a woman with lust was seen as adultery, so religious life outside the home should be as gender segregated and homosocial as possible.
That's still the main trend of the Abrahamic faiths.

Western culture wasn't much different until a few decades back, and only secular feminism has brought women religious rights to preach in some churches.

Originally posted by cetaphobic
reply to post by jmdewey60

 

But how does that solve the problem of those who claim the WHOLE Bible is the word of God and is not to be cherry picked from?

It solves nothing for them, but open minded people should recognize that Christianity was hijacked by people wanting to wear fancy robes and tall hats.
Paul did write some letters and had them published to the churches, and they are Romans, 1 & 2 Corinthians, and Galatians. 1 & 2 Timothy would be among the more egregious graspings for power by the forgers involved in the inside job of setting up their ecclesiastical system which did not include women.

reply to post by grey580


Oh I was quite involved with that thread for a few pages, I know exactly how he is. I asked him questions and he said he refused to answer them. When I told him I've read the Bible thrice, he admitted he had not read it in full at all. Funny guy!

reply to post by grey580


Saturday.

The Sabbath is Saturday. The same day as it is for the Jews and for the same reason. The whole Sunday idea came about due to, surprise surprise, the Pagans or more specifically Mithraism (Sun Worshippers).
This is pretty typical when you review the history of Christianity. They're like that friend we all have who acts differently depending on who's around, adopting new styles and ways of being, trying to please as many people as he/she can, while losing all sense of self in the process.
For instance, the Christians dropped the Jewish high holy days and decided to adopt pagan rituals and holidays in the attempt to boost their ratings and numbers, they altered the story of Christ, adding in mythological elements from other older stories, I guess for the reason of making themselves seem more legit, and less like a spinoff of Judaism, pleasing as many of the European tribes as they could.

While I do agree that this case is partially context sensitive, being part of church planned regulations. It is, however, a very sexist scripture, and goes along with the sexism(amongst other horrid mindsets) in the bible, particularly of the old testimate. I mean, that's a clean scripture compared to what many others that could have been chosen contain.

Honestly, if those of the book store thought that scripture was disrespectful to their religion, they should view most of the bible as disrespectful of it. It's horribly flawed reasoning.

Originally posted by FugitiveSoul
reply to post by grey580

 

Saturday.

The Sabbath is Saturday. The same day as it is for the Jews and for the same reason. The whole Sunday idea came about due to, surprise surprise, the Pagans or more specifically Mithraism (Sun Worshippers).
This is pretty typical when you review the history of Christianity. They're like that friend we all have who acts differently depending on who's around, adopting new styles and ways of being, trying to please as many people as he/she can, while losing all sense of self in the process.
For instance, the Christians dropped the Jewish high holy days and decided to adopt pagan rituals and holidays in the attempt to boost their ratings and numbers, they altered the story of Christ, adding in mythological elements from other older stories, I guess for the reason of making themselves seem more legit, and less like a spinoff of Judaism, pleasing as many of the European tribes as they could.

Uh, you do realize that God rested from his work on the 7th day. He finished creation at the end of the 6th day and that is why it is the shabbat. Its the day his final and ultimate creation Man came into being.

Lol. Do you even know what the word pagan means? It means "local" for local gods, as in that region in ancient times there were only local gods who were the patrons of certain people. Do you think the hebrew always served YHWH? No they were gentiles once too and served different gods as zoarastrianism was the dominant religion in Abraham's time.

Specifically it was the Holy Roman Catholic Church that couldn't put down its pagan ways. When christianity became the state religion of the Roman Empire the pagan clerics just took off their medallions and "christianized" their pagan rituals. Some of which include burning the yule log (representation of the death and rebirth of the sun on the winter solstice) and christmas, which christmas has nothing to do with christ at all. Jesus wasn't born on the 25th of december and if you lie to your children and teach them about santa claus and that they get their gifts from him instead of God (since God says all things come from him and there isn't anything on the earth that wasn't made by him) then that is another part of the pagan ritual. Santa Claus was designed to be a mockery of God "he knows when you are sleeping, he knows when youre awake, he knows when you've been good or bad so be good for goodness sake!"

reply to post by lonewolf19792000


I'm failing to see a difference between what you said and what I said... except that the word Pagan is derived from the latin "rustic" or "countryside", implying they were uneducated or simple people living beyond the modern era (of that time). The sixth day is Friday, the seventh, Saturday. What else am I missing? Sunday was adopted to appease the Pagans. The Romans were still mostly Pagan at that time, but Christian influence was running rampant and they still had the problem of infiltrating the western tribes somehow to assimilate them into their "group" to stop all of the fighting, and religion was the answer to this problem (for a time), though that plan had more to do with economics than peace.

Oh, and the Easter (Eostre) Bunny predates Christianity as well as colored eggs, and the earliest idea of stockings, decorated trees, reindeer, and jolly elves and chimneys also predate Christ and have more to do with mushrooms than religion.

reply to post by FugitiveSoul

The Sabbath is Saturday. The same day as it is for the Jews and for the same reason. The whole Sunday idea came about due to, surprise surprise, the Pagans or more specifically Mithraism (Sun Worshippers).

Sabbath, as it was used in, for example, the New Testament, was synonymous with, Week.
Back when the "Israelites" were in Egypt (as in between the time of Joseph and his brothers, and the Exodus) the Egyptians kept a ten day week. Abraham would have known a seven day week, coming from Ur, which believed in the seven cardinal gods. The Romans kept a eight day week until the Chaldean system was officially adopted by Emperor Constantine, who made the first day (unlucky) of the week as an official day off for government employees.
The concept of working six days and taking one day off fits best with human physiology so it is natural in a society which is somewhat democratic to eventually adopt. I would suggest that if God wanted a suitable week system for the benefit of His charges, it would be the seven day system, so anyone taking that day off (and probably more importantly, the the employer giving his workers one day off out of seven) would be in conformity with God's wishes.
I doubt seriously that there is a true God in heaven worried about exactly which particular day this day off would be. Christians have adopted Sunday as the beginning of their weekly cycle and honor the day in memory of the resurrection of Christ as being the symbol of our hope in salvation. Saturday is generally associated with death and hell so was appropriate for Jesus to remain in the tomb on that day. Sunday is the day that Jesus demonstrated his victory over death and hell, so is an appropriate time to celebrate on and having that day off for that purpose is in turn an appropriate thing, in my opinion. I believe moves towards establishing a seventh day ritual of no work is inherently anti-christ in nature and should be avoided for the sake of Jesus. Sunday is the traditional day of rest from worldly labor for Christians and should never be infringed upon. Advocates for a Jewish observance is fine (again, in my opinion) for people who are Jewish and have that as a tradition but I feel a serious annoyance with anyone who tries to push that onto Christians and would label it as a sort of ethnic cleansing, and genocidal at its core. I would recommend to anyone caught in this deception to examine yourself, and to pray for the spirit of Christ to come into your heart and to have that evil spirit driven out.

This verse actually illustrates why I cannot call myself a Christian anymore, not as it is typically understood. This verse was written by Paul. The more you know about Paul, the more you will realize that Christianity is NOT Jesus' religion - it was invented by PAUL. They're two different things. This is also why Christianity has been the cause of so much evil - because it is a Hellenistic pagan religion invented by a man, and not of God.

reply to post by jmdewey60


I doubt seriously that if a God exists, that he would care about any of the $h!t that's in that book, but for those who hold those writings as literal gospel, the bible breaks down the week, actually listing Saturday as the day, and if they (Christians) believe that they should maintain the word the of God as law, then breaking the Sabbath is breaking one of the commandments (weekly), which apparently is a no no. Christ wasn't trying to create a "new" religion when he was here. He was trying to get the old one to behave itself and get back on track. Christianity is unnecessary, and the worship of him (according to the commandments) is also no no.
As you said though, I don't think God really cares, I just find it interesting that Christianity has become a religion of convenience, picking and choosing which parts are holy, which parts are "law" or fluff, and all of it constantly changing to suit their needs; it's become like a theological salad bar.

Originally posted by Schkeptick
This verse actually illustrates why I cannot call myself a Christian anymore, not as it is typically understood. This verse was written by Paul. The more you know about Paul, the more you will realize that Christianity is NOT Jesus' religion - it was invented by PAUL. They're two different things. This is also why Christianity has been the cause of so much evil - because it is a Hellenistic pagan religion invented by a man, and not of God.

I would disagree with your post, especially the part saying this verse is by Paul. 1 & 2 Timothy are the books most agreed upon by biblical scholars as not written by Paul. You don't even need to be much of a scholar but just someone who reads the New Testament to see that, just by looking at that one verse. Paul would never make a statement like that. If it was something controversial, he would always appeal to a higher authority such as the OT or Jesus himself or at least the Spirit in a vision or something. He would never just flatly announce that he does not allow it. I should be obvious that this is a very poorly constructed blatant forgery.

reply to post by FugitiveSoul


In response to your comments I would say that Jesus in fact did come to create a new religion and not to fix up the old one. It starts right out by having John the Baptist saying to take an ax to the root of the tree. Jesus promptly goes to the temple and says it is written that thou shall call it a house of prayer. This would be in opposition to what it was, which was a slaughter house for countless sacrificial animals. Jesus in opposition to what the people believed was somehow the laws of God, openly and pointedly disregarded the commandment concerning the Sabbath. It was not just some added on pharisaical rules but the most basic tenant of the commandment, which was to do no work.