Community > General Religion Chat

Previous 1 2 … 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 … 23 24 Next

Topic: IS GOD RESPONSABLE FOR EVERYTHING OR NOT
Krimsa Joined Fri 04/25/08 Posts: 9960	Sat 10/18/08 12:52 PM Edited by Krimsa on Sat 10/18/08 12:53 PM
Well, then we are still faced with the issue of Isaiah and what this boy god's intentions were exactly as it related directly to these ladies of Zion who were presumably out of control what with their wanton eyes and outstretched necks and such. Lets bring it back to the scripture if you prefer.

beachbum069 Joined Mon 04/07/08 Posts: 14325	Sat 10/18/08 12:56 PM
I like wanton woman

Krimsa Joined Fri 04/25/08 Posts: 9960	Sat 10/18/08 12:58 PM
I like wanton woman Me to. I did my "college day experimenting" and though I tend to like the menfolk now, it certainly was nothing I found disagreeable by any means.

tribo Joined Mon 05/12/08 Posts: 5577	Sat 10/18/08 12:58 PM
KRIM, have you ever read song of solomon?

TheLonelyWalker Joined Sat 04/07/07 Posts: 11870	Sat 10/18/08 12:59 PM
were talking on another thread about mans fall and some say its Satan who caused sin and others Adam and eve for eating and i who say it's god's fault!! So here's my case in a nut shell - god started creation, god knew how everything would go, god decided to allow sin to enter into existence - therefore god is responsible for sin. in a matter of fact: whose final decision was it God, satan, or man? whose act was it God, satan, or man? All of the above... Trinity-ish

Krimsa Joined Fri 04/25/08 Posts: 9960	Sat 10/18/08 01:00 PM
Yeah yea, its a love song and its very hot. That is not addressing this passage of the bible at all Sam.

Krimsa Joined Fri 04/25/08 Posts: 9960	Sat 10/18/08 01:00 PM Edited by Krimsa on Sat 10/18/08 01:00 PM
double post

tribo Joined Mon 05/12/08 Posts: 5577	Sat 10/18/08 01:02 PM
double post well i can't help but agree with everything you state here - its a miracle - now your getting to the core problems -

beachbum069 Joined Mon 04/07/08 Posts: 14325	Sat 10/18/08 01:06 PM
I just wonder how you make a tinkling with your feet??

tribo Joined Mon 05/12/08 Posts: 5577	Sat 10/18/08 01:10 PM
I just wonder how you make a tinkling with your feet?? maybe thats where the "hidden parts" are located - let me check your feet K !!!

Krimsa Joined Fri 04/25/08 Posts: 9960	Sat 10/18/08 01:19 PM
double post well i can't help but agree with everything you state here - its a miracle - now your getting to the core problems - Well these issues certainly require further scrutiny. Its not as if we are dealing with a separate tribe of people Sam. The Hebrew or the Canaanite or the Roman. Whoever. Females represent HALF of humanity and from a purely biological and reproductive standpoint, the more significant aspect. So why so much hatred, hostility and emphasis put into controlling and suppressing their sexuality and importance as the creators? Hmm? Is it because a male deity has decided it will be him that takes this job on henceforth?

SkyHook5652 Joined Sat 08/23/08 Posts: 4063	Sat 10/18/08 01:20 PM Edited by SkyHook5652 on Sat 10/18/08 01:23 PM
Isaiah 3 3:16 Moreover the LORD saith, Because the daughters of Zion are haughty, and walk with stretched forth necks and wanton eyes, walking and mincing as they go, and making a tinkling with their feet; 3:17 Therefore the LORD will smite with a scab the crown of the head of the daughters of Zion, and the LORD will discover their secret parts. What the hell is going on here exactly? God will "smite with a scab the crown of the head of the daughters of Zion" and "will discover their secret parts" since he doesn't like the way they dress and walk. Presumably they were shaving their legs also. Bad girls! so now we know he's responsible for porno to especially S&M - hahaha No I would disagree there. I think its some of the Christian indoctrination into the whole "sexuality is evil" and "women's bodies are to be covered and shunned" that really became the catalysts and eventually led to a lot of the dysfunctional sexual behaviors and criminal acts that we see evidenced today. I could certainly make that connection though it would require a LOT more research on my part of course. I would begin on this premise: When something is determined to be "evil" or "wrong" as was the case with female sexuality in general, then the more that rule of law is enforced, the greater the desire to have it or witness it in some respect. Thus pornography and the blatant exaggerated portrayal there of. I tend to agree that any prohibition against something will naturally produce a desire for it. (I think there’s a whole subject there. I think it has its roots in the natural human desire to “rise to challenge” or “play a game” or “win” or something like that. But I don’t want to go off on a tangent.) I just think that if one wants to “correct the problem” (or the prerequisite – to understand the problem) one has to go back farther than “what it is” to “how it came about”. Why is it that those things are considered “evil”? I am a firm believer in there being some logical or reasonable origin behind anything that is considered right or wrong. At some point it was determined to be contributing to (="good") or contrary to (="bad") the general welfare of some group. Whether or not that reason still applies is the real question. For example, the consideration that it was “good” for a woman to obey her man actually does have some logical survival-related benefits in a very primitive society. But in a technologically advanced, socialistic society, pretty much all of those reasons are completely irrrelevant. Yes, there is no doubt that Christian indoctrination has generally influenced the current views on pornography. And yes, those majorly-Christian-based-prohibitions against it definitely contribute to the “equal and opposite reaction” of the desire for it. But I also think that there was some valid reason behind the prohibition in the first place. And in order to truly understand the entire picture, that original reason has to be fully understood and evaluated against the current needs of society in general.

tribo Joined Mon 05/12/08 Posts: 5577	Sat 10/18/08 01:33 PM
Isaiah 3 3:16 Moreover the LORD saith, Because the daughters of Zion are haughty, and walk with stretched forth necks and wanton eyes, walking and mincing as they go, and making a tinkling with their feet; 3:17 Therefore the LORD will smite with a scab the crown of the head of the daughters of Zion, and the LORD will discover their secret parts. What the hell is going on here exactly? God will "smite with a scab the crown of the head of the daughters of Zion" and "will discover their secret parts" since he doesn't like the way they dress and walk. Presumably they were shaving their legs also. Bad girls! so now we know he's responsible for porno to especially S&M - hahaha No I would disagree there. I think its some of the Christian indoctrination into the whole "sexuality is evil" and "women's bodies are to be covered and shunned" that really became the catalysts and eventually led to a lot of the dysfunctional sexual behaviors and criminal acts that we see evidenced today. I could certainly make that connection though it would require a LOT more research on my part of course. I would begin on this premise: When something is determined to be "evil" or "wrong" as was the case with female sexuality in general, then the more that rule of law is enforced, the greater the desire to have it or witness it in some respect. Thus pornography and the blatant exaggerated portrayal there of. I tend to agree that any prohibition against something will naturally produce a desire for it. (I think there’s a whole subject there. I think it has its roots in the natural human desire to “rise to challenge” or “play a game” or “win” or something like that. But I don’t want to go off on a tangent.) I just think that if one wants to “correct the problem” (or the prerequisite – to understand the problem) one has to go back farther than “what it is” to “how it came about”. Why is it that those things are considered “evil”? I am a firm believer in there being some logical or reasonable origin behind anything that is considered right or wrong. At some point it was determined to be contributing to (="good") or contrary to (="bad") the general welfare of some group. Whether or not that reason still applies is the real question. For example, the consideration that it was “good” for a woman to obey her man actually does have some logical survival-related benefits in a very primitive society. But in a technologically advanced, socialistic society, pretty much all of those reasons are completely irrrelevant. Yes, there is no doubt that Christian indoctrination has generally influenced the current views on pornography. And yes, those majorly-Christian-based-prohibitions against it definitely contribute to the “equal and opposite reaction” of the desire for it. But I also think that there was some valid reason behind the prohibition in the first place. And in order to truly understand the entire picture, that original reason has to be fully understood and evaluated against the current needs of society in general. well what gets me is there didn't seem to be a problem at the beginning with A&E - god was all for the human body unclothed, and for reproduction - hmmm? maybe that's the problem with him sex for pleasures sake and not just for reproduction? but then again why bother with the song of soloman? unless that is to be taken as love among married peolple. or why give us such a strong desire for sex if were to curtail it? its the old holyness issue again. Plus the fact that married or unmarried the same sexual feelings are present. he must be a mysoginist.

Krimsa Joined Fri 04/25/08 Posts: 9960	Sat 10/18/08 01:45 PM Edited by Krimsa on Sat 10/18/08 01:46 PM
I just wonder how you make a tinkling with your feet?? maybe thats where the "hidden parts" are located - let me check your feet K !!! "Secret parts" is referring to their vaginas Sam. Dont start down that road of "exegesis" to the tune of simply reinterpreting what is blatantly being imparted. We saw what happened with that in Leviticus.

tribo Joined Mon 05/12/08 Posts: 5577	Sat 10/18/08 02:48 PM
I just wonder how you make a tinkling with your feet?? maybe thats where the "hidden parts" are located - let me check your feet K !!! "Secret parts" is referring to their vaginas Sam. Dont start down that road of "exegesis" to the tune of simply reinterpreting what is blatantly being imparted. We saw what happened with that in Leviticus. boy no more humor for you - you take me to seriously -

Krimsa Joined Fri 04/25/08 Posts: 9960	Sat 10/18/08 02:56 PM
I looked and saw it was a joke. I thought you were trying to "run away" with interpretation as some other folks have done in past debates. I wanted to nip that in the bud.

Krimsa Joined Fri 04/25/08 Posts: 9960	Sat 10/18/08 03:06 PM Edited by Krimsa on Sat 10/18/08 03:08 PM
And Skyhook, Im not really certain when, at any point in history it would have been advisable to simply insist that one gender obey all commands and essentially subjugate themselves and listen to the other without imparting any information or input of their own. That to me sounds defeatist. I would think an egalitarian or a partnership society would be far more successful over the long haul. In fact, archeological evidence indicates this. I suppose you could make the argument that women menstruate and as a consequence of this become overly aggressive and emotional during this span of time thus effecting their capacity for judgment in social matters. Well dont men behave that way 24/7?

tribo Joined Mon 05/12/08 Posts: 5577	Sat 10/18/08 03:15 PM Edited by tribo on Sat 10/18/08 03:45 PM
And Skyhook, Im not really certain when, at any point in history it would have been advisable to simply insist that one gender obey all commands and essentially subjugate themselves and listen to the other without imparting any information or input of their own. That to me sounds defeatist. I would think an egalitarian or a partnership society would be far more successful over the long haul. In fact, archeological evidence indicates this. I suppose you could make the argument that women menstruate and as a consequence of this become overly aggressive and emotional during this span of time thus effecting their capacity for judgment in social matters. Well dont men behave that way 24/7? sure worked for the first people, the women had as much freedoms and say so in this society,, for a looooong time! wouldn't have stopped if it hadn't been for the white man and his "civilized" [yeah right] society.

tribo Joined Mon 05/12/08 Posts: 5577	Sat 10/18/08 03:44 PM
women of the first people: SAVAGERY TO "CIVILIZATION" THE INDIAN WOMEN: We whom you pity as drudges reached centuries ago the goal that you are now nearing The use of Indian women to provide an exemplar of feminist liberty continued into the nineteenth century. On May 16, 1914, only six years before the first national election in which women had the vote, Puck printed a line drawing of a group of Indian women observing Susan B. Anthony, Anne Howard Shaw and Elizabeth Cady Stanton leading a parade of women. A verse under the print read: "Savagery to Civilization" We, the women of the Iroquois Own the Land, the Lodge, the Children Ours is the right to adoption, life or death; Ours is the right to raise up and depose chiefs; Ours is the right to representation in all councils; Ours is the right to make and abrogate treaties; Ours is the supervision over domestic and foreign policies; Ours is the trusteeship of tribal property; Our lives are valued again as high as man's. [67] Figure 38, from Exemplar of Liberty, Native America and the Evolution of Democracy, Chp.11, "The Persistence of an Idea, Impressions of Iroquois liberty after the eighteenth century" On the Web:

Krimsa Joined Fri 04/25/08 Posts: 9960	Sat 10/18/08 03:55 PM Edited by Krimsa on Sat 10/18/08 03:56 PM
Tribo you dont need to appease me with this. Many of the North American Indian tribes were matrifocal in their societal structure. Probably not all of them and certainly not after they were moved from their native lands onto reservations. They were then forced to assimilate in certain respects because the federal government took much of what had been traditionally handled by women away and gave control to males in the tribe. This caused a tremendous degree of confusion and upheaval to their homes and family life.