Fellow Christians, what does this passage mean to you?

What about the atheists and agnostics?

Without God, All Things are Permitted
Godless Atheists Promote a Valueless, Immoral World without Order or Structure
God-Doesnt-Love-You-e.jpg


Religious believers tend to associate their religion closely with morality. Some go so far as to think that the two are inseparable -- that without their religion, or religion generally, or at least some sort of theism, morality and moral behavior are impossible. Depending on their attitude, this can lead people to insist that unless a person is a member of their religion, or is a member of some religion, or is at least a theist, then they cannot be moral and if they are given any power then they will end up promoting immorality.

These attitudes are exhibited to one degree or another by many on the Christian Right. Christian Nationalists in particular act like their religion is necessary as a moral foundation for America and, furthermore, that all of America's ills can be traced to people's failure to uphold traditional Christianity. Atheists especially are targeted for criticism -- not only do they reject Christianity and likely any religion at all, but they don't even believe in any gods.

In fact, atheists are sometimes approached by apologists with the argument that atheism is incompatible with morality and, therefore, that the need for morality is a good reason to become a Christian. They don't realize that even if there were no reason to be moral in the absence of any gods, that would at most provide a prudential reason to believe in God. This cannot support the claim that some god actually does exist. If morality requires a god, and there are no gods, then we simply have to live in a universe where there are no absolute, independent moral standards and where we have to make our own way.

Some on the Christian Right even take advantage of tragedies to make both of the above points. School shootings, for example, lead some to argue that the absence of morality is due to the absence of Christianity, that atheists and secularists are the cause of all this, and finally that atheists should convert to Christianity to stave off future tragedies.

This image is based on a World War II poster depicting a soldier telling workers at home not to get hurt because they are needed on the job full time. It is similar to a real ad used by Answers in Genesis which depicts a child pointing out gun at the viewer. Accompanying the image are the words "If you don't matter to God, you don't matter to anyone." The implied message is that without God in our lives, nothing matters at all and this causes us all to descend into barbaric violence.

By Austin Cline

By the way signal is an agnostic too!
 
Yes, sorry I ignored your post because of all the garble in it.

To me it still says women are to submit to husbands and that men are to love wives. Two different things. You could argue that men are to submit to wives, but that is limited only to being "in the fear of God." If men and women were to be equal the passage would not have given different verbage for each.

except there isn't different verbage for each......it says "submit" to one another.....the same verb is used for what is required of men and what is required of women.....to claim they are two different things is not only inaccurate, but in light of the fact it's been pointed out to you, incredibly dishonest......
 
...Anyway, the sign of true equality would be or the major denominations to give the priesthood to women, until that happens, you aren't going to convince me men And women are equals when it comes to religion.

Many Christian-based denominations do this already, but what you won't find, are female Mullahs and Clerics. You see, in Islam, a woman is a stupid animal, like a goat. It would be silly to expect them to follow religious teachings from a goat, don't you agree?
 
Wow! Look at how furiously you jumped in to defend DY's idiocy. Nice goin'.

As for insults, you sure had a lot when I asked you to show me where I made Obama out to be a hero. LOL

so now agreeing with someone is defending them? wow....you are truly retarded.

it wasn't an insult to say you made obama out to be a hero, it was the truth, then again, you think the truth is insulting.
 
so now agreeing with someone is defending them? wow....you are truly retarded.

it wasn't an insult to say you made obama out to be a hero, it was the truth, then again, you think the truth is insulting.

I didn't say it was an insult. I said you had a lot of insults after I asked you to show me where I did it.

And, delusional guy, I didn't. I said Obama made the announcement. Which, you interpreted to be me making him out to be a "hero."

Just to sum up. Because, it seems like you forgot & all....
 
" Submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God. Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and He is the saviour of the body. "

as a former christian, reasons that i am a former christian or just plain bullshit
 
I really cannot believe what I am witnessing here. Grown men not only discussing but discussing as if their lives depended upon it, the meaning of a passage of text that may or may not have been written about two thousand years ago by a man who may or may not have existed and about a man who may or may not have existed and the stories that have grown up at various times during what we call the first millenia which have been attributed to one or other of them.
These are grown men we are witnessing here. Men who, by all other judgements, are probably not insane as medically defined, but who, nevertheless, choose to believe in fairies.
No evidence, save that supplied by man, no proof supplied by any man or beast. No logic. No sense.
So convinced that they and they alone are right that they will kill to defend their stupidity. So warped and twisted that they and the others of this species that share their silliness, the muslims, the christians, the jews, the pagans the everything else will actually cause wars and kill their fellow man in the name of today's particular fairy.
It is absolutely incredible!
 
I really cannot believe what I am witnessing here. Grown men not only discussing but discussing as if their lives depended upon it, the meaning of a passage of text that may or may not have been written about two thousand years ago by a man who may or may not have existed and about a man who may or may not have existed and the stories that have grown up at various times during what we call the first millenia which have been attributed to one or other of them.
These are grown men we are witnessing here. Men who, by all other judgements, are probably not insane as medically defined, but who, nevertheless, choose to believe in fairies.
No evidence, save that supplied by man, no proof supplied by any man or beast. No logic. No sense.
So convinced that they and they alone are right that they will kill to defend their stupidity. So warped and twisted that they and the others of this species that share their silliness, the muslims, the christians, the jews, the pagans the everything else will actually cause wars and kill their fellow man in the name of today's particular fairy.
It is absolutely incredible!

i like the passage about the talking snake
 
i like the passage about the talking snake

Yes, but it was some dumb snake! Would you give an instruction to a woman and expect her to obey???

'Don't eat the apple.'NO. Don't eat the apple. DON'T eat the apple.

'Fur chrissakes, woman, leave the friggin apple alone.

Jeez! What can you do?

I KNOW you thought it looked pretty but I told you NOT to eat the bloody thing!
 
I've read what you posted, it doesn't make sense and is giving me a headache. Here's a specific example: A Muslim man is divorcing his wife on the grounds of incompatibility, she will not adhere to the 5th century laws of Islam and is disobedient. The Koran and Sharia mandate she should be stoned to death, and obviously, the US courts are not going to condemn her to a public stoning, but... The man has an attorney who says his client shouldn't be obligated to pay her alimony, since his religious beliefs call for her to be stoned to death. The court, using your liberal PC idiocy, could rule that she is not entitled to alimony because her husband is a Muslim who believes in Sharia, and Sharia objects to him paying her alimony. Now.... I am certain you are going to jump right in here and tell me.... well, that is obviously unconstitutional, and couldn't stand... but here's the rub, munchkin brain... YOU aren't always going to be there to determine whether something is PC enough to apply from Sharia or not... it will be decided by a judge, and you won't ever be consulted. I think it's best we leave jurisprudence separate from religious traditions and laws, and rely upon the Constitution.

Im sorry the truth gives you a headach, or is it thinking instead of emoting that does it. So, do you belive people should not be free to contract with each other for what rules will be used in the case of a dispute?
 
except there isn't different verbage for each......it says "submit" to one another.....the same verb is used for what is required of men and what is required of women.....to claim they are two different things is not only inaccurate, but in light of the fact it's been pointed out to you, incredibly dishonest......

I disagree, one phrase says they are to submit to each-other, then limits it to "in fear of God." Then it goes on to once again say that women are to submit to husbands without any limiting language and without mentioning any obligation of a man to submit to a women, this time without any limiting language. Why say it twice for women and only once for men? Why limiting language when men's obligation is involved and not when women's obligations are involved?

THen add other places in the Bible where it calls women the "weaker vessel" and such.
 
There is a definition for that on the web. It's called "trolling."

And Yurt loves you...go figure...

Actually:
In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts inflammatory,[2] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[3] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet)

What I described is torment, aimed at a specific individual or group of individuals. :)
 
DamnYankee,

Do you belive you are required by the Bible to submit to your wife? Who is the head of your household and why? Does Christanity ordain it or is it just by chance that its that way in your household. If you are not married, how would it be if you were?
 
DamnYankee,

Do you belive you are required by the Bible to submit to your wife? Who is the head of your household and why? Does Christanity ordain it or is it just by chance that its that way in your household. If you are not married, how would it be if you were?

Your basic understanding of this is so out-of-whack that there's really no point in going forward with this.
 
Back
Top