elaina Posted April 3, 2011 Posted April 3, 2011 I have a daughter, and now a granddaughter. Trust me - flying spaghetti exists. Lol...
blYyfczucia43898 Posted April 4, 2011 Posted April 4, 2011 kamagra thailande kamagra uk kamagra up kamagra vente kamagra wiki kamagrafast le kamagra man health kamagra oral jelly kamagra ou acheter du kamagra ou acheter kamagra vente kamagra achat levitra achat levitra en france
blYyfczucia43898 Posted April 4, 2011 Posted April 4, 2011 levitra 10 orodispersible levitra 10 mg orodispersible le levitra levitra 10mg levitra 10mg forum levitra 10mg orodispersible
OldSkool Posted April 5, 2011 Posted April 5, 2011 As someone who has probably forgotten more verses than many people will ever memorize, I remember loving to tease the congregation sisters with this passage. 1 Timothy 2: 8 Therefore I want the men everywhere to pray, lifting up holy hands without anger or disputing. 9 I also want the women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety, adorning themselves, not with elaborate hairstyles or gold or pearls or expensive clothes, 10 but with good deeds, appropriate for women who profess to worship God. 11 A woman[a] should learn in quietness and full submission. 12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man;[b] she must be quiet. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. 15 But women[c] will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.
Trojan John Posted April 6, 2011 Posted April 6, 2011 Elania, I will not reply to your post to me in detail, because to do so would create a very long post and probably receive an even longer reply from you. I realise the pointlessness of our back and forth, so in short I will state that your post is rife with spurious argumentation (apologies, I wrote) and easily refutable statements (cf. NG flood argument) for anyone with access to the Google search engine. To me, fantasy is unicorns, pixie fairies, trolls, elves... you know... Lord of the Rings stuff, or fairy godmothers, magic wands... Cinderella stuff. I do like fantasy, but fantasy to me is not what is written in the Bible. What is written in the Bible is defined by me as being supernatural, miraculous, and of a different dimension. The above statement illustrates my point. You don't believe in some supernatural things, but you choose to believe in others. Fantasy is of supposition, imagination and all things that have no solid evidential support, including miracles and the supernatural. You limit your definition of fantasy to reject all except that in which you choose to believe. I would surmise that just as you do not believe in unicorns and trolls, nor do you believe in Zeus, Apollo, Vishnu, Orishas, Bumba or any of the other thousands of deities that humankind worships or has worshiped over the centuries. So why is it that you don't, or rather, can't extend your disbelief to one more? What makes you so right about your particular god, and so many others wrong about theirs?
Trojan John Posted April 6, 2011 Posted April 6, 2011 Back on topic, if anyone is interested there is an e-book called Christian Ideology and Oppression of Woman, or Gender Bias in the Bible available for download in several places. Some DLs include The Status of Women in Islam for comparison purposes. For further reading, The Gender-Neutral Language Controversy by Michael D. Marlowe : In short, the Bible is by no means gender-neutral. It presents from beginning to end a thoroughly “androcentric” perspective, and it often leaves it to the reader to decide what application to women or what inclusion of women is implied. ... [/url] If we begin looking for places where women are directly addressed in the Bible, we quickly discover that in such cases the message is even more offensive to the modern egalitarian mindset than anything which has been noted above. The women are addressed only to remind them that they are not equal: Wives, be subject to your husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its savior. As the church is subject to Christ, so let wives also be subject in everything to their husbands. (Ephesians 5:22-24. See also , , , , , etc.) To be fair, he does illustrate several cases where the term "man" is being used universally in passages where both men and women are being addressed, also. However, the argument is not of pronoun usage, but rather how women are specifically to play out their gender roles. Even more telling is the constant resistance to a gender-neutral revision of the Bible that attempts to rectify several of these interpretation issues.
Taramere Posted April 6, 2011 Posted April 6, 2011 Parting the Red Sea, talking snakes, non-burning burning bushes, the Sun moving on command, transforming water into wine, feeding hundreds of people from a quantity of food that could barely fill the stomachs of three people, and as already stated -- raising the dead and walking on water. If this does not strike you as fantasy, then you may not be familiar with the working definition of the word. I am almost willing to give you the walking on water bit, but you would have to prove that it was a non-Newtonian fluid. I think a rational explanation for the feeding the 5,000 is possible. I bet many people in that crowd had food stashed on them that they were keeping for a secret feast later on. When they saw that one man was willing to share what little food he had with everybody, those who had a secret stash of food probably felt shamed into taking it out and sharing it around. In that sense, Jesus might have been a psychologist who was far ahead of his time rather than an actual miracle worker.
GorillaTheater Posted April 6, 2011 Posted April 6, 2011 [COLOR=#990000]Ephesians 5:22-24[/COLOR]. And the next verse essentially says that husbands should take a bullet for their wives. The gist I get out of these verses is that each partner should put the other first. Somewhat idealistic, perhaps, but there are certainly worse recipes for constructing a happy marriage. That said, Paul always struck me as something of an *********. For a guy who never met Jesus, the guys who put together the New Testament sure seemed to put a lot of stock in what he had to say.
blEqznoverh15610 Posted April 6, 2011 Posted April 6, 2011 tadalafil tablets from india tadalafil tablets in india tadalafil tablets india tadalafil tablets prices tadalafil tablets side effects tadalafil tablets uk tadalafil tabs tadalafil tachyphylaxis tadalafil time tadalafil tolerance tadalafil soft tabs 20mg tadalafil uk tadalafil pah tadalafil united therapeutics tadalafil usa tadalafil user reviews tadalafil uses tadalafil vs sildenafil tadalafil vs sildenafil citrate tadalafil vs vardenafil tadalafil walmart tadalafil what is it tadalafil wiki tadalafil without prescription tadalafil tablets 20 mg tadalafil women what does tadalafil look like what is tadalafil oral jelly where to buy tadalafil 5mg finasteride for hair loss buy cheap finasteride buy finasteride buy finasteride 1mg buy finasteride 5mg buy finasteride australia buy finasteride canada buy finasteride generic tadalafil tablets generic buy finasteride in india
blEqznoverh15610 Posted April 6, 2011 Posted April 6, 2011 propecia and rogaine results propecia and rogaine together propecia and saw palmetto propecia and saw palmetto together propecia and shampoo propecia and shedding propecia and side effects propecia and smoking propecia and sperm propecia and sperm count propecia and steroids propecia and testicular pain propecia and testosterone propecia and the liver propecia and thyroid propecia and tinnitus propecia and trying to conceive propecia and ttc propecia and vitamins propecia and weight gain propecia and weight lifting propecia and women propecia and working out propecia anger propecia antibiotics propecia anxiety propecia argentina propecia ask propecia ask a crack ho propecia at 19 propecia at 6 months propecia at boots propecia at costco propecia at walgreens propecia at walmart propecia athletes propecia australia propecia australia cost propecia average cost propecia avodart propecia babies propecia baby propecia back hair propecia back pain propecia bad propecia bad for you propecia bad side effects propecia baldness propecia banned propecia banned substance propecia beard propecia beard growth propecia before after pics propecia before and after propecia before and after photos propecia before and after pictures propecia before bed propecia belgravia propecia belly fat propecia benefits propecia best place to buy propecia best price propecia bestellen propecia biotin propecia birth defects propecia biverkningar propecia black men propecia bladder propecia blind date propecia blood pressure propecia blood test propecia body fat propecia body hair loss
Velociraptor Posted April 13, 2011 Posted April 13, 2011 Elania, I will not reply to your post to me in detail, because to do so would create a very long post and probably receive an even longer reply from you. I realise the pointlessness of our back and forth, so in short I will state that your post is rife with spurious argumentation (apologies, I wrote) and easily refutable statements (cf. NG flood argument) for anyone with access to the Google search engine. The above statement illustrates my point. You don't believe in some supernatural things, but you choose to believe in others. Fantasy is of supposition, imagination and all things that have no solid evidential support, including miracles and the supernatural. You limit your definition of fantasy to reject all except that in which you choose to believe. I would surmise that just as you do not believe in unicorns and trolls, nor do you believe in Zeus, Apollo, Vishnu, Orishas, Bumba or any of the other thousands of deities that humankind worships or has worshiped over the centuries. So why is it that you don't, or rather, can't extend your disbelief to one more? What makes you so right about your particular god, and so many others wrong about theirs? Great post. It's no wonder she never replied to it.
elaina Posted April 13, 2011 Posted April 13, 2011 Great post. It's no wonder she never replied to it. Hello Velociraptor, I have a life. I am not on loveshack 24/7, but rather have been enjoying the beauty of God's Creation and enjoying getting to know my awesome boyfriend, which to me is way more important than checking to see if a negative man replied to me However, I will take the time to do so now, just for you and him, since ya'll consider yourselves so special and in so much need of my time.
elaina Posted April 13, 2011 Posted April 13, 2011 (edited) Elania, I will not reply to your post to me in detail, because to do so would create a very long post and probably receive an even longer reply from you. Do as you wish. I realise the pointlessness of our back and forth,If you realize the "pointlessness", then why reply? Just curious. so in short I will state that your post is rife with spurious argumentation (apologies, I wrote) and easily refutable statements (cf. NG flood argument) for anyone with access to the Google search engine.Regardless, it is true that there are worldwide flood stories of many ancient civilizations, and whether you accept them to contain truth or not is your affair. The above statement illustrates my point. You don't believe in some supernatural things, but you choose to believe in others. Fantasy is of supposition, imagination and all things that have no solid evidential support, including miracles and the supernatural. You limit your definition of fantasy to reject all except that in which you choose to believe.If you look up the definitions of fantasy and supernatural, including miracles, you can see the differences in their meanings. I would surmise that just as you do not believe in unicorns and trolls, nor do you believe in Zeus, Apollo, Vishnu, Orishas, Bumba or any of the other thousands of deities that humankind worships or has worshiped over the centuries. So why is it that you don't, or rather, can't extend your disbelief to one more? What makes you so right about your particular god, and so many others wrong about theirs? I actually do believe that there is reason that humankind all over the world, as accounted in history, worshiped many different gods. I do not believe that modern day man knows everything about the early days of mankind on earth, and yes I do believe that there were "gods" (or beings superior to mankind) who the ancient peoples knew of that we today only know about through the writings they left us. While I do not call Zeus, Apollo, Vishnu... God(s), I do understand through the Jewish ancient Scriptures and the history of the descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, that gods did exist and other peoples did worship these gods. However, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob chose Abraham and his descendants to follow Him, and I believe that God of Abraham... is the One and Only God, whereas all the other gods are superior beings, but are not the Creator/Judge/Ruler of the universe like YHWH is. Do you have any Jewish Orthodox friends? Do you know any Jewish people who believe in G-d? Even though I am not Jewish, I have studied their Scriptures and it amazes me how God has protected them and blessed them, and because Jesus is Jewish, to me it is very important to learn from their history. Regardless of whether you reply to me or not, I encourage you to study the history of the Jewish people, the descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and why they believe God exists. Thank you. Edited April 13, 2011 by elaina
Velociraptor Posted April 13, 2011 Posted April 13, 2011 Hello Velociraptor, I have a life. I am not on loveshack 24/7, but rather have been enjoying the beauty of God's Creation and enjoying getting to know my awesome boyfriend, which to me is way more important than checking to see if a negative man replied to me However, I will take the time to do so now, just for you and him, since ya'll consider yourselves so special and in so much need of my time. Special? I don't know about that. More intelligent maybe? MOST defenitley. I use logic and common sense. Two things that Christians are incapable of using. What makes you so right about your particular god, and so many others wrong about theirs? Not one damn thing.
Velociraptor Posted April 13, 2011 Posted April 13, 2011 God is imaginary, a fairytale. There's no proof what so ever that he actually exists. And before any dumbass Christian counters with the "well theres no proof that he doesn't exist!" logic. If I said that a megagigantic pancake tractor mutant was the ruler and creator of the universe. How would you prove to me that he doesn't exist? And how would you prove to me that he isn't the ruler and creator of the universe? You can't. Therefore since all it takes is really just blind belief. The megagigantic pancake tractor mutant is for real... if enough people believe in it. Hell maybe I should start writing down my own little scriptures and maybe in a few hundred or thousand years... People will worship and pray to the megagigantic pancake tractor mutant. Makes about as much sense as believing in God
elaina Posted April 13, 2011 Posted April 13, 2011 (edited) Special? I don't know about that. More intelligent maybe? MOST defenitley. I use logic and common sense. Two things that Christians are incapable of using. Ever heard of sarcasm? By the way, if another person sincerely compliments you and calls you intelligent, than that is awesome. However, if you call yourself intelligent and say you are more intelligent than another person or a group of people, whether the group is based on beliefs (Christians, Jewish Orthodox, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, ...) or ethnicity (Irish, Scottish, Spanish, Indian, Arabic, Jewish, Native American, Kenyan, Somalian, English...) then you are actually showing extreme bias, prejudice, and bigotry. (And yes, Atheists can be bigots too.) Sad to say, just because a person says they are more intelligent than another person or a group of people (regardless of what type of group that is), that definitely does not mean that person is what they say... Edited April 13, 2011 by elaina
elaina Posted April 13, 2011 Posted April 13, 2011 And before any dumbass Christian counters with the "well theres no proof that he doesn't exist!" logic. The above quote of yours also shows bias, prejudice, and bigotry on your part. Your hatred is showing, as well as how you despise people who believe differently than you. As a Christian, I do not consider myself or other Christians "dumbass", nor do I consider Atheists or Muslims or Buddhists or people of any other belief to be this descriptive insulting word you have used to paint people around the world. Rather, I do indeed consider anybody intolerant of other beliefs to be bigots. from http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/bigot " big·ot /ˈbɪgət/ Show Spelled[big-uht] Show IPA –noun a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion." Since you are utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion, why do you feel the need to insult Christians or any other group of people who believe in God? Does it make you feel good? Does it make you feel like you are superior to people who do believe in God? If so, please examine yourself and figure out why you feel you need to insult others. If you don't believe in God, fine. You don't have to. Just leave those who believe in God alone and enjoy life how you think is the best.
Trojan John Posted April 15, 2011 Posted April 15, 2011 @Velociraptor - No need to make enemies here. @Elaina - The "pointlessness" is that I would have continued to point out that your evidence is not good enough, and you would (and have) continued to argue for your own special definitions of history, fantasy and miracles. If you believe in the historical accuracy that a man can live under the ocean in a whale, a snake can talk, et cetera, et cetera, and that there are/were thousands of gods, then more power to you. We need not address the matter further. Taramere I think a rational explanation for the feeding the 5,000 is possible. I bet many people in that crowd had food stashed on them that they were keeping for a secret feast later on. When they saw that one man was willing to share what little food he had with everybody, those who had a secret stash of food probably felt shamed into taking it out and sharing it around. In that sense, Jesus might have been a psychologist who was far ahead of his time rather than an actual miracle worker. Entirely possible and totally rational, but that's a complete inference that is different from the actual reading of the story. People make all sorts of inferences -- good and bad -- from the tales in the Bible. This is where the apologetics (finally found the word I was looking for) comes in, whether it's trying to rationalise an entirely unlikely event, or justifying the slaughter of tens of thousands. GorillaTheater Quote: Originally Posted by Trojan John [COLOR=#990000]Ephesians 5:22-24[/COLOR]. And the next verse essentially says that husbands should take a bullet for their wives. The gist I get out of these verses is that each partner should put the other first. Somewhat idealistic, perhaps, but there are certainly worse recipes for constructing a happy marriage. True, but Ephesians also goes on to say that a wife should fear her husband. I find that regular beatings (Wii Resort ping pong) help with my wife.
elaina Posted April 15, 2011 Posted April 15, 2011 (edited) @Elaina - The "pointlessness" is that I would have continued to point out that your evidence is not good enough, and you would (and have) continued to argue for your own special definitions of history, fantasy and miracles. If you believe in the historical accuracy that a man can live under the ocean in a whale, a snake can talk, et cetera, et cetera, and that there are/were thousands of gods, then more power to you. We need not address the matter further. It depends on one's attitude as to whether interfaith discussion ( discussion with someone of a different belief, including Atheism, believing in no God) is pointless or not. Personally, I consider calling discussion with people who believe different as "pointless" to be very negative and close-minded. It is interesting and enlightening to talk or write with people of different beliefs/ideas, with courtesy and respect. Just because a person respects another does not mean they have to believe the same. It is entirely possible and beneficial to agree to disagree. As a Christian who engages in interfaith discussions with Jewish Orthodox people and Muslim people, I find the discussions very educational and have learned to respect and care for people who believe differently than I do. There are Atheists who I talk with as well who I have utmost respect for and care for and have learned from in how they view the world. Are these discussions pointless to me? No. However, if you consider discussions with people who don't believe the same as you pointless, that is your decision. Sadly, this attitude often goes with intolerance and a feeling of superiority over other human beings, which then leads to despising/hating others. Peace Edited April 15, 2011 by elaina
elaina Posted April 15, 2011 Posted April 15, 2011 True, but Ephesians also goes on to say that a wife should fear her husband. I find that regular beatings (Wii Resort ping pong) help with my wife. Please quote where Ephesians says that wife should fear? her husband? Below is the passage concerning wives and husbands in Ephesians 5... let me know where Ephesians talks about wives fearing their husbands.. thank you. I personally love this passage, and have boldened what has impacted me in this passage. Anyways, before saying a book in the Bible says something, it's probably good to look it up and reference it... Ephesians 5 (NIV) " 21 Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ. 22 Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything. 25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her 26 to make her holy, cleansing[b] her by the washing with water through the word, 27 and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. 28 In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29 After all, no one ever hated their own body, but they feed and care for their body, just as Christ does the church— 30 for we are members of his body. 31 “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.”[Genesis 2:24] 32 This is a profound mystery—but I am talking about Christ and the church. 33 However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband."
Trojan John Posted April 18, 2011 Posted April 18, 2011 (edited) Please quote where Ephesians says that wife should fear? her husband? Ephesians 5:33 has been translated as you have written, and that the wife should come to fear the husband in the International Standard Version, American Standard Version, and English Revised Bible. Other suspect verses: Leviticus 12:2, 12:5, 21:9 Genesis 38:24 Deuteronomy 25:11-12, 23:1, 22:13-21 Psalms 51:3-5 1 Corinthians 11:3, 11:8-9, 14:34-36 1 Timothy 2:8-15 1 Peter 3:1-7 Ephesians 5:22-24 Judges 19:24-25 And on, and on, and on... but sixteen examples should be sufficient. ***EDIT*** And just to clarify something in the never-ending battle of terminology, atheism is not "a belief in no god" as you put it. It is "the absence of belief in a god" (specifically because of a lack of empirical evidence). The difference in wording is subtle, but vast in meaning. Edited April 18, 2011 by Trojan John
elaina Posted April 21, 2011 Posted April 21, 2011 (edited) Ephesians 5:33 has been translated as you have written, and that the wife should come to fear the husband in the International Standard Version, American Standard Version, and English Revised Bible. The accurate translation is respect/reverence. In the following passages in New Testament letters that give "orders" to wives, the underlying current is respect. Below are passages in the New Testament letters and their "orders" to wives. As you can see, fearing husbands is not the idea. Rather, respecting their husbands and being wives of character and integrity are the idea. Another idea is that the relationship between a husband and wife is a picture for the relationship between Christ and his "bride." This is a very special and beautiful picture to Christians. Ephesians 5 (NIV) " 21 Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ. 22 Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything." ... 33 However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband. " I have heard this before and I agree, that most women don't need to be encouraged to love their husbands. Even many women whose husbands are alcoholic or have other issues have no problem loving them. Women have an easier time loving, but a harder time respecting and submitting to decisions they disagree with. Many men on the other hand, have a harder time loving. In the time when Paul and Peter were alive, most marriages were arranged marriages, where the parents picked their son's bride. For many of these men, they didn't "fall in love", but rather had to decide to love, whereas many women tend to have an easier time loving, yet had to decide to respect and submit to a man many had probably not personally chosen. Colossians 3 (NIV) 18 Wives, submit yourselves to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord. " 1 Peter 3 (NIV) " 1 Wives, in the same way submit yourselves to your own husbands so that, if any of them do not believe the word, they may be won over without words by the behavior of their wives, 2 when they see the purity and reverence of your lives. 3 Your beauty should not come from outward adornment, such as elaborate hairstyles and the wearing of gold jewelry or fine clothes. 4 Rather, it should be that of your inner self, the unfading beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is of great worth in God’s sight. 5 For this is the way the holy women of the past who put their hope in God used to adorn themselves. They submitted themselves to their own husbands, 6 like Sarah, who obeyed Abraham and called him her lord. You are her daughters if you do what is right and do not give way to fear. " (In verse 6, Peter is specifically saying to not be afraid, fear. There is a difference between obeying/submitting out of respect and being afraid.) One thing I personally do not understand is why do you not talk about what Ephesians 5 says about what husbands should do? To me, that is just as important. Please notice what husbands are to do to their wives: LOVE THEM. Ephesians 5 (NIV) " 25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her 26 to make her holy, cleansing[b] her by the washing with water through the word, 27 and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. 28 In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29 After all, no one ever hated their own body, but they feed and care for their body, just as Christ does the church— 30 for we are members of his body. 31 “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.”[Gen. 2:24] 32 This is a profound mystery—but I am talking about Christ and the church. 33 However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband. " Colossians 3 (NIV) "19 Husbands, love your wives and do not be harsh with them. " 1 Peter 3 (NIV) " 7 Husbands, in the same way be considerate as you live with your wives, and treat them with respect as the weaker partner and as heirs with you of the gracious gift of life, so that nothing will hinder your prayers. " (I don't mind being called the weaker partner. Why? Because there is a huge difference between the strength of my 200 lb. rock hard body boyfriend and me (135 lbs and wanting to lose 20 lbs.) I know without a doubt I'm weaker than he is I am happy he is stronger than me and I like that. It turns me on. If we get married, hopefully he treats me with respect and as a heir WITH me, and is considerate and loves me. As a woman, it is MUCH more easier to respect a man if he truly loves me and treats me with love. Other suspect verses: Leviticus 12:2, 12:5, The ceremonially uncleanness of menstruation/giving birth was because in Moses' time, the Israelites (descendants of Abraham's son Isaac's son Jacob/Israel) did not have the luxury of hot water plumbing, pads/tampons, and washers/dryers like today. As a woman who has the "joy" of menstruation, menstruation and blood from that area can be messy to say the least. I have ruined clothes before by being careless. Imagine vaginal blood everywhere... no never mind. Anyways, the laws above helped the women rest and relax after pregnancy. Ceremonially unclean simply means they had a break in their routine. Leviticus 21:9, Genesis 38:24This law showed the seriousness of prostitution. Sad to say,some men in other countries (like India) force their daughters into prostitution in order to make money. For others, prostitution was a way of worshiping a deity. However, for the Israelites, God had given them the specific command NOT to engage in prostitution. Burning was a harsh penalty, yet interestingly, many times burning did not happen. Many times the laws were considered by specific cases. Jesus' great great great... grandmother was Rahab, a prostitute. Another great great great great... grandmother of Jesus, Tamar, also was "considered" a prostitute in that she pretended to be one to get pregnant. So, in many cases, harsh man-given penalties were considered in specific cases. With the passage above, the responsibility of priest was a family job, and the family of the priest also did the job and were fed by the job. I personally do not know any story in the Bible where a prostitute/person pretending to be a prostitute was actually burned, though the law gave opportunity to consider it. If you talk to Jewish Orthodox people, many will tell you that each case is weighed, along with laws of Moses, and decisions in a fair trial way are strongly encouraged. Deuteronomy 25:11-12,Again, each case is specifically considered. I don't know any story in the Bible where this actually happened. Deuteronomy 23:1,The Israelites were not to offer animals with any defect in their sacrifices either. However, just because a person with a deformity could not enter the assembly of the Lord, that doesn't mean that person couldn't worship God. Rather, it just means he/she couldn't go into a certain location. However, going into a certain location doesn't mean people are automatically close to God or not. Rather, it's in the heart where people are close to God or far away, not the specific location a person stands on a certain time on earth. Deuteronomy 22:13-21Again, this is considered on an individual bases. Joseph, Mary's fiance for example, chose to not "obey" the law by accusing Mary and subjecting her to public disgrace (which included death) even before he understood about Jesus. Matthew 1 (NIV) " 18 This is how the birth of Jesus the Messiah came about[Or The origin of Jesus the Messiah was like this]: His mother Mary was pledged to be married to Joseph, but before they came together, she was found to be pregnant through the Holy Spirit. 19 Because Joseph her husband was faithful to the law, and yet[Or was a righteous man and] did not want to expose her to public disgrace, he had in mind to divorce her quietly. 20 But after he had considered this, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, “Joseph son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary home as your wife, because what is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. 21 She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus,[f] because he will save his people from their sins.” Please note that Joseph was considered a righteous and good man. Because of the goodness and kindness in his heart, he did not want to hurt Mary in any way. He considered it and it was against the righteousness and goodness in his heart, and decided to take the kindest way out of the marriage, until he learned about how Mary got to be pregnant. Was this bad or against his beliefs in God? No. Psalms 51:3-5Most babies have to learn how to share and think about others. When they are crying, they do not think "Oh perhaps my Mother is tired. I should let her rest." No. They think "I WANT YOU HERE NOW!!!" lol. Basically, King David was acknowledging lack of maturity from a very young age. Just like physical maturity, spiritual maturity isn't something people are born with. 1 Corinthians 11:3, 11:8-9, 14:34-36 Paul was writing to the Christians in the city of Corinth, where possibly there were cultural norms which equated women without a head covering to be sexually promiscuous. Because this teaching is only found in Paul's writing to the Christians in Corinth, most Christians of today consider this to be a culturally specific issue in which the Christian women of Corinth were being confused with sexually promiscuous women. Many of the other letters to other places talk about being sexually pure, but this is the only one that talks about head coverings, interestingly enough. Culture has a lot of influence and should for this reason be studied, as well as the context. Paul's letters to the Corinthian people, by the way, are filled with sexual stuff, which is an interesting study. In chapter 14, it is possible the women who Paul was specifically referring to were also very loud and obnoxious? and were causing drama. So, culture, context, and specific individuals are important to know about concerning understanding Paul's letters. 1 Timothy 2:8-15Again, culture comes into play and is very important to understand. In those times, both Greek and Jewish cultures held to firm beliefs in what men and women are to do. Women were to work in the home, and men were to work outside of the home. It was a partnership where the man was boss, and the woman was in charge of household affairs. It worked (and still works) for many families around the world. However, Christians today do very much understand how culture and traditions and the context and time period plays an important part in the writings. It doesn't make the writings bad; it just shows how they did things. People can follow or just learn from it. Judges 19:24-25This story shows the level of lust and perversity and disregard for human dignity and life in which the people of that time had stooped down so low as to this happening. The Bible is objective in that it does not hide bad things in history that happened. It reveals bad happenings as well as good happenings, mundane events as well as miraculous events. The story in Judges 19 shows a bad historic event that happened due to gross perversity, lust, and lack of regard for human dignity and life. Sad to say, all over the world, there are stories even NOW IN OUR TIME where people are treated horrible, where people are victims of gross lust, perversity, and lack of regard for human dignity and life. And on, and on, and on... but sixteen examples should be sufficient. ***EDIT***I think it all depends on one's attitude and if they are looking at the verses in a positive way or negative way. With the example of Joseph, the fiance and then husband of Mary, he knew the Law of Moses, yet he looked at them out of a kind and caring and loving heart, and made decisions accordingly. It really depends on how people interpret and consider the passages. And just to clarify something in the never-ending battle of terminology, atheism is not "a belief in no god" as you put it. It is "the absence of belief in a god" (specifically because of a lack of empirical evidence). The difference in wording is subtle, but vast in meaning.The absence of belief in a god = belief in no god. Please explain the difference in meaning? Or, the absence of belief = no belief, so instead of belief in no god, it would be no belief in god verses belief in no god? Edited April 21, 2011 by elaina
Trojan John Posted April 26, 2011 Posted April 26, 2011 (edited) Apologetics Olympics gold medalist. I don't really care what it says in your particular bible, or what your belief in the translation should be. I've demonstrated where the word appears in at least 3 major bibles. The honest thing, in the face of demonstrable evidence, is to concede the point. Each sect of christianity has a different bible(s), each bible says something different, each believer interprets those passages differently, ad infinitum. Massive divergence at its finest. Again... pointless. ***EDIT*** I won't bother trying to explain why your definition of atheism is incorrect, but it's like saying that you have a hole filled with nothing. Edited April 26, 2011 by Trojan John
DreamerGirl27 Posted June 2, 2011 Posted June 2, 2011 From a secular point of view the bible is gender biased. From a biblical point of view, the bible illuminates the ultimate truth about the sexes. Seems to me nature itself is gender biased since only women are required to commit their bodies to childbirth and all the risk that comes with it. If this had a "like" option, I would like this!!
creighton0123 Posted June 14, 2011 Posted June 14, 2011 Every Christian knows that Proverb 31 woman, she sounds like a superwoman. Many Christian men are seeking a woman like that. My question is: is there anything mentioned in Bible about a Virtue Husband? We need Proverb 32 man! So, what do you think? What do you think a ideal husband and lover would be like? I wouldn't say that Jewish/Christian scripture is gender biased. Instead, I would say that the gender norms present in our culture follow a different paradigm than the original cultures. Men and women in Jewish/Christian culture played different gender roles that were much more rigid. In that light, there was no fundamental bias. It was the norm. When it comes to Jewish culture and OT literature, the ideal was simple: document behaviors and expectations for Hebrew men and women so they appear fundamentally distinct from the pagan cultures surrounding them. That very same societal need does not exist in our culture and the extrapolation to gender bias is a futile one.
Recommended Posts