What religion/church do you belong to? [Archive]

Vin

10-01-2002, 12:54 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by wannabenaked2001:
I have noticed that many people identify themselves as Christians, but I also know there are many faiths that fall under this category, and many more that do not. Just curious, what religion are you? I thought about making this question a poll, but I am sure I would manage to leave many faiths out, as there are so many. I am Roman Catholic.

Jim /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Hope I'm not upsetting anyone here, but I'm Wiccan (as much as I'm anything). "Eclectic Religious Mutt" may be more like it. /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I was raised in a very open household, but attended a Southern Baptist church for a time as a teen. It just wasn't for me. I finally found my current path a few years ago. I have a lot of respect for people who have found their paths and know what they want from life.

Vin

David77

10-01-2002, 03:03 PM

Unitarian Universalist and Ethical Society.

californiabare

10-01-2002, 03:48 PM

I'm a Baptist, active--but a Christian above all.

GAR

10-01-2002, 06:13 PM

I am Wiccan /infopop/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

10-01-2002, 10:17 PM

I'm a Baptist at the moment and have been since accepting Christ 39 years ago at age 17. However, my denomination may change.

Be nude and have fun. /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif /infopop/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

wannabenaked2001

10-02-2002, 09:48 AM

David77, Just curious, but could you explain the very basics of being "Unitarian Universalist and Ethical Society". I have never heard of this before.

Also, I think I have a clue, but what is the Wiccan religion all about? I belive it is what my religious leaders would call a "pegan" religion, honoring more "earthly" forces, but I really don't know.

I am not trying to make fun of anyone's religion, I am just curious.

Jim

David77

10-02-2002, 11:04 AM

wannabenaked2001,
To answer your questions, here are two web pages;

Unitartian Universalist Association Principles and Purposes -
http://www.uua.org/aboutuua/principles.html

Ethical Culture - Eight Commitments -
http://www.aeu.org/8commit.html

Vin

10-02-2002, 02:07 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by wannabenaked2001:
[W]hat is the Wiccan religion all about? I belive it is what my religious leaders would call a "pegan" religion, honoring more "earthly" forces, but I really don't know.... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Jim,

Wicca is, indeed, a neopagan religion. It's largely earth/nature-centered and sees Deity as a duality (male/female). There's sometimes more emphasis on the Goddess than the God. Some Wiccans believe that all gods are merely different faces of one godhead; others think that they're all distinct entities. The forms of worship are pretty eclectic, unless you belong to a group or tradition that has set rituals. Religious holidays are the equinoxes and solstices together with the days that fall approximately midway between them. Most Wiccans (not all) practice some form of psychic working, and most adhere to a basic philosophy of "If it harm none, do what you will." And most believe that whatever personal energy you send into the universe (happiness, love, anger, vengeance...) comes back to you.

Note the looseness of this response. Not all Wiccans believe or practice in exactly the same way, and that's cool. In fact, there's a sort of inside joke that if you ask 5 Wiccans what they believe, you'll get at least 6 different answers. It's very much about listening to your inner voice and following your intuition to develop your own relationship(s) with the god(s).

Any other Wiccans feel free to help me out here.... /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

BB,
Vin

gamblefish

10-02-2002, 06:37 PM

Original post by outdoorbare:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Hi! I was baptized Roman Catholic at age 12, dropped out...became Presbyterian with marriage ,I truly try to live a good Christian Life, ...feel I should be doing more toward my salvation....feeling guilt but hoping for eternal life after death. Believing God created us and this world....loves us and will not abandon us when we die! That about sums it up. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hey outdoorbare,
Read Ephesians 2:8-9.
Also, John chapter 3 & 14.

Just want you to know that we don't earn our salvation...it is a free gift. Reach out and receive it today!!

PS-If ya don't have a bible...check this out:
Blue Letter Bible (http://www.blueletterbible.org)

GOD BLESS YA!!

Douglas George

10-02-2002, 06:46 PM

I didn't attend church until a year and a half ago. I now attend a United Pentecostal Church, and was baptised there last spring. My being a nudist has nothing do do with my religion. You can be both a Christian and a nudist. /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif /infopop/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

wannabenaked2001

10-02-2002, 07:42 PM

David77

I have to admit, your belive system is interesting. It seems to use all the "do onto others" and "love your fellow man" teachings of most religions while leaving the "higher power" stuff up to the individual. From what I read, one could follow these teachings and still be a Christian, Jew or one of many others.

Thanks for helping me understand!

Jim /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

GAR

10-04-2002, 07:19 AM

Vin. I have to agree with you. For all others go to a book store and read a book by Starhawk called The Spiral Dance. this will answer most of your questions. /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif /infopop/emoticons/icon_cool.gif If not you can find alot of info on the internet. Good hunting.

Trailscout

10-11-2002, 06:49 PM

I was raised in the Methodist church and still make frequent visits to Methodist worship services. I don't give rubber-stamp approval to everything I have ever heard from the pulpit, but I would say that Methodists are basically orthodox in what they teach. The thing I like the most about them is that in matters that are not essential to Christian doctrine, (such as social nudity), Methodist culture is remarkably tolerant.
I have several Methodist friends who have enjoyed going to a nude beach. There are perhaps some who would not approve, so we don't flaunt it, but we don't live in fear of being cast out of the congregation if discovered.

Bob S.

10-11-2002, 10:50 PM

I was raised Methodist.

I unofficially (in my heart, not by a rabbi) converted to Judaism. However, I bascially use Judaism as my base religion and have beliefs ranging from Hinduism to Buddhism to Wiccan with a bit of atheism bouncing around. In other words, I am a mix of religious beleifs giving me a very individualistic view of religious ideals.

Bob S.

Vin

10-23-2002, 09:15 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Bob S.:
...In other words, I am a mix of religious beleifs giving me a very individualistic view of religious ideals. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Sounds like a good start on Paganism to me. /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

BB,
Vin

RalphVa

11-07-2002, 04:20 AM

church of Christ, non-traditionalist, just follow the Bible.

Ralph

nudistwheelchair

11-08-2002, 11:23 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by RalphVa:
church of Christ, non-traditionalist, just follow the Bible.

Ralph <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>are you part of the Boston Movement

11-12-2002, 01:25 PM

The older I get, the less important I think about denominationalism. But, out of sentimental value and I guess basic beliefs, I am a conservative Quaker (Religious Society of Friends).

Out of my concerns I started NaturistChristian@yahoogroups.com which Yahoo deleted. In one month we have grown to over 3000 members, apparently the largest Christian Naturist group. We would love to have you take a look an participate with us. We are linked to INA and strictly limit our posts to Naturism consistent with Christianity. Much of our material comes from INA.

Come join us: (at our new sites)

NaturismWorldwide-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

We also have a permanent website which is to be our permanent home: www.naturist-christians.org (http://www.naturist-christians.org)

WE are exploring means of greater cooperation to avoid duplication of efforts so as to put more into gaining public acceptance of Naturism.

At the present time we have outstanding forums, hundreds of quotes, the beginning of a listing of every Naturist Friendly Place in the world and now we have over 1100 outstanding Naturist Photographs. Wehave links to 500 moral Naturist sites (no porn allowed)

Bill Martin Friend@comcast.net

serpes

11-19-2002, 02:56 PM

I was raised a Roman Catholic and the Church looks gravely at nudity as they teach after the fall of Adam and Eve, they looked at their own bodies shamefully and clothing began. Man and Woman should only be naked to each other within the bounds of marriage and to no other public even their doctors. Even a parent should respect the privacy of a child within their own family.

How can we reconcile the conservative Catholic philosophy with the healthy attitude of INS toward nudity?

JohnDreamwhistle

11-19-2002, 03:06 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by serpes:
I was raised a Roman Catholic and the Church looks gravely at nudity as they teach after the fall of Adam and Eve, they looked at their own bodies shamefully and clothing began. Man and Woman should only be naked to each other within the bounds of marriage and to no other public even their doctors. Even a parent should respect the privacy of a child within their own family.

How can we reconcile the conservative Catholic philosophy with the healthy attitude of INS toward nudity? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

JohnDreamwhistle

11-19-2002, 03:18 PM

Actually, the naturist position on the human body and the position of the Catholic Church are not all that far away when understood in the proper context. The Catholic Church teaches The human body shares in the dignity of ?the image of God? The reason the church comes out against modern day nudity is that in a clothed society, all nudity is equated to sexual nudity and is therefore immodest.

For example, if you travel to a primitive part of the world where nudity is part of the natural style of life, then being nude is not immodest and therefore not sexual. You have to interpret things within their cultural context.

The church simply teaches that the human body is holy and should not be used as an object to promote lust. The nudist position in discriminating between social versus sexual nudity.

The only real difference, in my opinion, between the church teaching and the nudist position is that the nudist position says that social nudity is worth the risk of attracting exhibitionists and voyeurs and the church position is that it is not.

izzynude

11-20-2002, 12:11 AM

Born in to non-practicing Methodists, raised to be tolerant, converted (with a rabbi) to Judaism, and am now a modern Orthodox Jew living in Israel.

TomorrowMan

11-20-2002, 01:03 AM

Deeply spiritual, but not the slightest bit religious. There's a big difference /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Rik

11-20-2002, 02:14 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by TomorrowMan:
... There's a big difference <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Which is?

Vin

11-20-2002, 06:22 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by TomorrowMan:
Deeply spiritual, but not the slightest bit religious. There's a big difference /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>There is, indeed. /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

11-20-2002, 10:04 AM

For example--The Pharasies in Jesus' day were very religious, but they weren't in the least bit spiritual. They were hypocrites who wanted people to look at them and be impressed by their self- righteousness. They condemned others in an effort to make themselves LOOK spiritual. /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif /infopop/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

TomorrowMan

11-20-2002, 04:49 PM

Good example, Jon-Marc.

Religion is a vehicle we can use to explore and practice our spirituality, but ultimately it is always up to the practitioner as to how much he/she gets out of the experience. After being a practicing Catholic, Protestant, Wiccan and Buddhist at different stages in my life, I found what I was really seeking was a far more direct spiritual experience than any religion could provide me with.

It sounds ironic, but shedding religion actually made me more spiritually aware! Most of all it taught me that each of us has to seek our own path. Whether that path be via religion or some other means, none of us are 100% right or wrong. We're just doing what we're here to do /infopop/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

izzynude

11-21-2002, 04:11 AM

I like what you said Tomorrowman about each finding out own path to spirituality. For many, organized religion provides a framework, tradition, "how to", and considerable resources in terms of writings, books, and comentary,etc. to help each of us to find that path to a higher spiritual level.
Of course, many orthodoxies also have their constituents that go through the motions maybe having forgotten the purpose behind it all.
Hopefully, our recent history will continue to stir up the questions that begin to reveal that path.

MWK

11-21-2002, 09:49 AM

I used to strongly identify with Southern Baptist. SB's think that any kind of work is works salvation, which isn't the case. Even Catholics don't always realize this and even they sometimes think they are working their way to heaven.

At any rate we have freedom of religion in the U.S. and wiccans are free to practice it. I can see lots of problems for wiccans in eternity, but I am not accountable to God for what wiccans practice, so I cannot judge them.

David77

11-21-2002, 12:14 PM

MWK,
Surprise! (At least I was very surprised when I read about it).

About two years ago the Roman Catholic Church and the Luthrans signed a document agreeing that man is not saved (gain salvation) by "Works" but by "Faith" alone. They came to this agreement after studying scripture and discussing this together for about 14 years.

However, unlike the other Luthrans, the very conservative Missouri Synod Luthrans would not sign, as they will never participate with any other churches.

Vin

11-21-2002, 03:49 PM

MWK,

I have to point out that it is not only Wiccans who take advantage of religious freedom, but Southern Baptists, Buddhists, Taoists, Muslims, Asatruar, etc. We all have the right to approach the divine in our own way, and all paths are equally valid.

I have to agree with you about one thing, though: I wouldn't mind have Southern Baptists as friends, provided we had something else in common. /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

BB,
Vin

TomorrowMan

11-21-2002, 07:44 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by izzynude:
For many, organized religion provides a framework, tradition, "how to", and considerable resources in terms of writings, books, and comentary,etc. to help each of us to find that path to a higher spiritual level. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Very good point Izzy. In fact you've just caused me to consider that if I hadn't been exposed to religion in the past, I may never have discovered the value of spirituality. This little revelation you've sparked in me is a classic example of how spiritual lessons can come from anywhere! We just have to keep our hearts and minds open.

Thanks for the lesson /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

David77

11-22-2002, 01:57 AM

MWK,
The document of agreement, which I mentioned yesterday, was signed on 10-31-99 by the Lutherans and Catholics and is called "Joint Declaration of the Doctrine of Justification". You may read about it on the web.

Trailscout

11-22-2002, 07:57 PM

MWK,

I must respectfully disagree with your contention that nudity cannot be defended scripturally.

Of course, we both disagree with those who say, "nudity is okay, so let's see if we can line up some Bible verses that give us permission to engage in mixed social nudity".

The scriptures teach that a certain amount of public nudity occured in everyday life in ancient Israel and that God did not object at all.

There are certain verses of the Torah part of the Bible that, if one were to read them literally, would forbid nudity in certain instances, but a little recognition of the context of the command will plainly show that what is actually forbidden is incestuous sexual relations. In the Jewish culture (as well as many others) undressing a person of the opposite sex was for the purpose of having sexual relations with the one you just undressed. Poor scholarship condemns the nudity that preceeded the fornication, when it was the fornication itself that God objected to. Neither does the Bible teach that public nudity generally leads to sin. The Bible is replete with examples of innocent nudity and even of a case where God commanded nudity of a prophet in order to dramatize the prophecy that unrepentent people would be led away from their homes as naked captive slaves.

Outside of the tropics, the weather makes clothes a necessity at times. To lack them during those times is a tragedy and a sign of poverty.
Some scriptural references speak negatively of nudity, but it was only in the context of physical or spiritual poverty.

Thorough exegesis of Bible verses relating to nudity exists on the Web, so I will limit my discussion for now.

Beyond the verses that seem to condemn all nudity, but actually do not, an overview of Biblical principles can guide us as to how to best show the love of God by being nude or clothed depending on the sensibilities of those we are with.

I do believe that it is possible to establish that God's original intent was for humanity to live life in the nude. It is not too hard to show that mankind's fall from grace did not mean that clothes were suddenly necessary for decency. To the amazement of some, I would even contend that God still prefers us to be nude social conditions and weather permitting.

11-23-2002, 03:27 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by JohnDreamwhistle:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by serpes:
I was raised a Roman Catholic and the Church looks gravely at nudity as they teach after the fall of Adam and Eve, they looked at their own bodies shamefully and clothing began. Man and Woman should only be naked to each other within the bounds of marriage and to no other public even their doctors. Even a parent should respect the privacy of a child within their own family.

How can we reconcile the conservative Catholic philosophy with the healthy attitude of INS toward nudity? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

11-23-2002, 03:34 AM

If your Catholic Church teaches and promotes such a position how does it reconcile its position with the position stated by Pope John Paul II. We use his statement frequentlly on NaturistChristian@yahoogroups.com

Bill Martin, Venice, FL

Trailscout

11-23-2002, 06:58 AM

Dear Friend,

You skimmed over one noteworthy point about privacy for children.

As I grew up, I felt an increasing need for privacy. But it was primarily the need for private time in a room of my own. I began closing doors, not to physically hide from my family, but because I wanted a quiet place to meditate. I think this sentiment is motivated by a developing sense of individuality, not body shame.

If I am blessed with children I will try my best to raise them to feel comfortable and open about their bodies. If outside influences cause them to feel body shame, I will not force them to be nude, but gently suggest that their bodies need not look like an athlete's, a fashion model or film star, that my children will be loved for their inner self. And I believe a parent should practice household nudity, setting a quiet example, but still show respect for a child's feelings and personal space.

nudeboots

11-23-2002, 11:15 AM

I was born and raised Catholic but I consiter myself a pagan or a Unitarian as I believe all religions have a similar basis that gets perverted by man. By the way my first encounter with large scale nudity was a painting in Mother Superior's office of Heaven and Hell. Heaven was set on a white cloud with a group of men sitting around the central figure of Jesus, all dressed in robes. Hell was a scene of fire and nude bodies (mostly women) being tormented by demons. In the Church across the street from the school there was another painting featuring nudity, this time it was a group of Jesuit missionaries being burned at the stake nude by Indians. So my relationship to the church and nudity is very negative. The pegan religions, like wiccan, embrace the human form with all its faults and beauty so now I am drawn towards these religions.

BillyD

11-23-2002, 05:55 PM

My religion (SDA) has been the incubator of my spiritual growth. I am thankful for it and continue to appreciate the fellowship and nurture I find there. I do not think, however, that there would be "corporate approval" for my nudism, and so it is part of my private life. Only my family and a couple of friends know. I don't believe my Creator has trouble with my nudity.

SapporoRob

11-23-2002, 09:08 PM

I was raised Baptist and now attend a largely nondenominational church. I am firmly in the evangelical Christian camp and would like to here from fellow Christian naturists to here about both their naturism and their faith.

Rob

JakeNY

12-05-2002, 10:02 AM

Hi Everyone!
I am new to this site. I have a question?
To the Christians who are Baptist, UPC, non-Dominal when you go to a nudist camp are you with unbelivers?
Thanks

luvnaturism

12-05-2002, 11:41 AM

The answer to JakeNY's question is "Yes," but I'm not sure what the question is. /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

If Jake wants to know if there are other Christians there with me, the answer is yes. And not just casual Christians, but devout men and women who are deeply committed to and involved in their churches. It's not uncommon to meet a pastor.

If Jake wants to know if there are people there who are not Christians, the answer is yes. The non-Christians tend to be fully as delightful and enjoyable as the Christians. Their presence is a plus for me.

I've never figured out how a Christian would fulfill the obligation to share the faith without associating with those who aren't there yet. And why would a non-Christian care to join in with people who won't even associate with him or her in the first place? /infopop/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

Snoboy

12-06-2002, 10:53 AM

I am a Methodist and sing in the choir of my church. I am not ashamed of my nudism but I do keep that separate from my church family to keep things simple. I am quite verbal and public about my nudism/naturism at the University where I attend full-time. Many of my classmates think it is cool. I hope and pray to win some over to naturism by next summer in Alaska.

Snoboy /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

12-06-2002, 11:13 AM

Snoboy ....I admire your ability for openess at the university.You sound like a good example for getting more young people to enjoy the freedom of naturism. /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Frank R

12-07-2002, 08:05 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by JakeNY:
To the Christians who are Baptist, UPC, non-Dominal when you go to a nudist camp are you with unbelivers?
Thanks <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I'll go one step better than that. When I go to church, I am with unbelivers. When I go to work, I am with unbelivers. When I go to the mall, I am with unbelivers. Why would it be any different at a nudist resort?

nudistwheelchair

12-07-2002, 11:30 AM

Even Jesus was with non-believer but he still cared for them and told them they had a choce.

12-07-2002, 12:00 PM

I don't understand the point of Jake's question. As was stated, we are with unbelievers wherever we go. It's impossible for believers to live in this world without being around unbelievers. In fact, I used to be one of those unbelievers.

I've gotten very discouraged and disalusioned with my fellow believers. It's unfortunate, but I often find unbelievers to be much nicer people, and certainly less judgemental. It took me a great deal of my life to learn that I'm not the judge, God is. Many believers haven't learned that yet.

I haven't ceased being a believer or a Christian, but I may consider changing denominations. /infopop/emoticons/icon_confused.gif

Trailscout

12-08-2002, 07:29 AM

In general, a Christian should try to meet people where they are, imitating the behavior of Jesus when he walked the Earth.

However, I can understand the wisdom of avoiding places that are given over to evil. I have some friends who left a nudist resort where the women in their families were continually pestered for sex. Management was turning a blind eye to the harassment and turning a deaf ear to my friends' pleas for relief. They found another resort just up the road that did not have such problems.

Most nudist resorts have both good management and a sense of community and shared responsibility that makes nudist resorts among the safest and friendliest places around to take a family. AANR is not perfect, but it does work to keep individual member resorts accountable for their behavior.

I have not pushed my faith on anyone, but I found quite a few people in nudist resorts who were genuinely interested in hearing about my Christian faith. Nudists tend to be very friendly approachable folks.

I have also met Wiccans and a strident atheist at a nudist resort, but we parted as friends.

Going to nudist resorts has been a blessing.

12-13-2002, 10:41 AM

In answer to the general question about religion I would consider myself a Buddhist. It isn't that straightforward with Buddhism because the philosophy generally veers away from 'labels' as they tend it cause attachment to identity and they are also divisive.

I suppose the one thing I am attached to is my clothing. Being a 'confirmed' textile, I'm not into getting my kit off - at least not in the presence of other people!

Stu /infopop/emoticons/icon_mad.gif Cover yourself up at once! /infopop/emoticons/icon_mad.gif

kiskatinawbares

12-13-2002, 08:56 PM

My wife and I and our children are Seventh-day Adventists and have been our whole lives.

In regards to some other posts that we have read in the forum about our denomination and naturism, we have found that people have been fairly accepting. Either they shrug and say "each to his own" or they actually like the idea.

FRMJL

12-13-2002, 09:26 PM

I am a Roman Catholic Christian. The icon used for the Religion section of this forum is a depiction of Michelangelo's painting in the Sistine Chapel at the Vatican.

Pope John Paul II's Theology of the Body provides an excellent understanding of the Catholic Christian view of the human body.

Naturist4Christ

12-15-2002, 01:38 PM

nakednudes

12-16-2002, 05:13 AM

ditto my friend also a baptist anf there are 4 other naturists in our church

Nytro

12-20-2002, 09:45 AM

I see other Baptists here, but it looks like I am the only "regular Baptist". A regular Baptist church is an independent Baptist church, that is a Bible preaching and teaching Baptist church, with no hierarchy outside of the local church.

I accepted Christ as my Savior at the age of 9. I believe in a holy creator, the 6 day creation, Jesus's gift of salvation through faith, and his future return.

I also believe that, as the Bible says, we were created in his (God's) image, and since he created our bodies, and they were good enough for him, they are good enough for me. I have no problem enjoying what the Lord has given me, inside the comfort of my house, or outside in God's creation!

12-20-2002, 10:38 PM

Nytro, You're not the only "regular Baptist" her at all. Meet another one. I won't reiterate all you said, but I agree with all of it, except that we are "saved by grace through faith", Eph. 2:8. Without God's grace our faith would be in vain. /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif /infopop/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

Nytro

12-23-2002, 11:37 AM

Jon-marc,
I stand corrected about "saved by grace through faith"! I need to re-read my post's!

I am glad to see that I am not the only RB'er here!

Nytro

wannabenaked2001

01-16-2003, 08:28 AM

I have found all the replies to my question very interesting. I see that most of the contributors to this post are of Christian faith of various denominations. Also I have seen replies from a few Pagans of different sorts and one Buddist, as well as a few people who are too eclectic to be put into any particular category (at least by me).

Do we have any one of the Jewish or Islamic faiths here?

Also, I see that Christians can be broken down to various denominations like Methodist, Lutheran, Catholic, and a wide range of Baptists, just to name a few. What, if any, are the different denominations of Pagans? /infopop/emoticons/icon_confused.gif

Vin

01-16-2003, 01:34 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by wannabenaked2001:
What, if any, are the different denominations of Pagans? /infopop/emoticons/icon_confused.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Whew! That's a big question. /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

First, it's more accurate to think of the different Pagan paths as totally different religions, rather than denominations of one faith. Christianity comes in a variety of flavors (denominations) that differ on the details of doctrine, but mostly agree on the broad strokes. Paganism is more an umbrella terms that catches dozens of completely different religions, each with its own concept of divinity, view on the afterlife, belief in whether psychic phenomena (sometimes called the Craft) exist and how to use it, structure of rituals, required nudity during worship,... the list goes on.

Probably the best-known Pagan faith is Wicca, which comes in almost as many denominations (traditions) as Christianity. Then there's is Asatru (Nordic Reconstructionism), Hellenismos (Greek Recon), Druidry (Celtic Recon),.... Again, the list goes on.

A few good sites for more info:
About's Pagan/Wiccan site (http://paganwiccan.about.com) (heavily Wicca-focused, but many links to other paths)
Witches' Voice (http://www.witchvox.com) (again, heavily Wiccan)
Beliefnet (http://www.beliefnet.com)

There are plenty more. A Google search for "pagan" would probably turn up some. Or anyone here who's Pagan can probably add to the list (especially non-Wiccans, since I'm less familiar with those paths).

Good luck!
Vin

Rik

01-16-2003, 02:24 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Vin:
Paganism is more an umbrella terms that catches dozens of completely different religions, each with its own concept of divinity, view on the afterlife....etc <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>So which one's right?

Rik

Vin

01-16-2003, 05:45 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Rik:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Vin:
Paganism is more an umbrella terms that catches dozens of completely different religions, each with its own concept of divinity, view on the afterlife....etc <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>So which one's right?

Rik <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I'm not sure I understand the question.

GAR

01-16-2003, 08:31 PM

which Christian faith is right? It is the same with the Pagan faith's. It depends on the person you ask? /infopop/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

01-16-2003, 08:41 PM

Everyone is sure that their beliefs are the right ones whatever they may be (I KNOW mine are. Of course, I could be wrong). As stated--it depends on who you ask. I've learned that most people here don't want to read what I have to say on that subject--so I'm keeping quiet. /infopop/emoticons/icon_confused.gif

01-16-2003, 10:15 PM

Rik

01-17-2003, 01:26 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Vin:
Me:So which one's right?
You:I'm not sure I understand the question. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Sorry Vin, it was supposed to be ironic humor - guess I failed /infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif . What I was getting at is that many devoutly religious people seem to claim that their brand of religion represents the truth (usually spelt TRUTH /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif ) which to me implies that they believe all the others to be false for surely there can be only one version of the truth. I thought perhaps that paganism might be different but when you talked about different views on divinity etc it struck me as yet another load of versions of the truth - hence my question "which of the many versions of paganism is right?".

Rik

Vin

01-17-2003, 06:10 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Rik:
Sorry Vin, it was supposed to be ironic humor - guess I failed /infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif . What I was getting at is that many devoutly religious people seem to claim that their brand of religion represents the truth (usually spelt TRUTH /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif ) which to me implies that they believe all the others to be false for surely there can be only one version of the truth. I thought perhaps that paganism might be different but when you talked about different views on divinity etc it struck me as yet another load of versions of the truth - hence my question "which of the many versions of paganism is right?".

Rik <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Rik,

NOW I get it! /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Pagans _tend_ to believe that everyone can be right, that there is no ONE TRUE WAY. It sometimes reminds me of quantum mechanics, where a subatomic particle can simultaneously occupy more than one location. The fact that this appears self-contradictory does not change the fact that it's real. Most Pagans think that the universe is big enough for all of us to be right. The metaphor that makes the most sense to me is a mountain with many paths. They all lead to the top, and each is different from all the others. But they all go to the same place, without any one being more right. And some people change paths along the way without invalidating what they've done before.

So, the short answer: each individual chooses or constructs the path that's best for him/her, but doesn't claim that it's the only path for everyone.

There, that should be clear as mud.... /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Vin

wannabenaked2001

01-17-2003, 06:31 AM

My understanding of various religions (at least the three largest Christianity, Judism, and Islamic) is that each teaches tollerance of others. Maybe instead of claiming, for example, "The Catholic Church is the RIGHT church!", we could say, again for example "The Catholic church is the right church for ME!"

I also understand that most religions, if not all seek converts. Guess what???? So do nudist. But I don't think any of us feel we have the right to force nudism on others. As nudists we seek acceptance of others, is this too much/not enough to ask of others reguarding our religious beliefs?

If a textile co-worker just discovered you are a nudists, would you rather he/she ask you questions about nudism, or simply pass judgment on you and see you as some sort of a deviant?

The same question is true with religion! Ask questions, and try to understand the religion/lifestyle/individual. Acceptance does not mean you are "joining up"! /infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

florida-david

01-17-2003, 06:46 AM

hello, i guess i will be the lone partial jew, actually i consider myself a "bad jew" in that i really couldn't care less one way or the other. lots of religious people tend to "stick with the clan" in a self-preservation sort of mentality. i like people not based on their religion, car, jewelry, clothes, etc. but more on their actions and beliefs. i don't believe that we can be mean to everyone our whole life and be "saved" 5 seconds prior to death. that is an outdated philosophy. i had a friend in college and we were having a religious debate (he being christian), and he said that he felt bad for me since i would not be "saved" due to my beliefs. i said he was wacked and we should not be hanging out together since i was "unsavable" and than i went home. we never spoke about religion again and stayed good friends.

if anything, i am a jewish, existentialist, Taoist, Pagan, Wiccan mixed mutt with a bit of Atheist thrown in. Now you see why i consider myself a bad jew. i think i should have been an indian and worshipped the land. my wife is christian (bad christian as well) so we celebrate all holidays (christian/jewish). my sister is wiccan and pagan (goddess), so we celebrate those with her when possible. all religions seem to celebrate the same ideas, just follow the teachings of the earth and you will see how the holidays all seem to align (equinoxes, harvests, full moons). i just don't believe in the "interpretted book" and all the organized brainwashing. if it makes you 'whole' to be part of an organized religion, than more power to you. i still won't like you if you are mean, torture animals, kill people, rape children, drive selfishly, etc, etc. (these ideas are from the front page of the newspaper, why does society dwell on bad thoughts??)

wannabenaked2001

01-17-2003, 06:56 AM

Florida-Dave,

Yeah! That's what I'm talkin bout!

Thanks! /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Rik

01-17-2003, 07:12 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Vin:
The metaphor that makes the most sense to me is a mountain with many paths. They all lead to the top, and each is different from all the others. But they all go to the same place, without any one being more right. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>OK Vin, I understand that but, to continue your mountain metaphor, all the different paths lead ultimately to a single mountain top which sort of suggests that there is an ultimate single 'truth' shared by everyone. If so, do Pagans share that truth with Christians and do Christians share that truth with Muslims etc?

Rik

Vin

01-17-2003, 08:32 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Rik:
OK Vin, I understand that but, to continue your mountain metaphor, all the different paths lead ultimately to a single mountain top which sort of suggests that there is an ultimate single 'truth' shared by everyone. If so, do Pagans share that truth with Christians and do Christians share that truth with Muslims etc? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>From the point of view of most Pagans, I think yes. There's only one universe, and the ultimate goal is to understand it, to be spiritually fulfilled. How you get there is immaterial.

Now that I think about it, it may be more fair to say that the mountaintop represents understanding, and the paths represent truths.

I know that those of some other faiths hold other ideas on this subject. /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Rik

01-17-2003, 02:01 PM

Vin,

So Pagans maintain that there are many truths all of which can lead to a single understanding. Or put another way, Pagans are open to the concept of different truths rather than different versions of the same truth (which of course is illogical). Ok I can accept that.

Presumably Pagans acknowledge that other non-pagans can also have their own truths (e.g. those of Christianty or Islam etc) and thus have no issue with the fact that such religions are very different from Paganism.

But Christians often talk about "the truth" (in the singular) so do Pagans accept that Christianity can lay claim to "the truth" when "the truth" must surely be false for Pagans believe there are many truths: not just one.

If not then surely they must reject Christianity as a valid belief system.

Or perhaps Pagans are really saying "What the hell - you get on with your lives and we'll get on with ours".

Confused? Me too. /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Rik

Vin

01-17-2003, 03:47 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Rik:
Vin,

So Pagans maintain that there are many truths all of which can lead to a single understanding. Or put another way, Pagans are open to the concept of different truths rather than different versions of the same truth (which of course is illogical). Ok I can accept that.

Presumably Pagans acknowledge that other non-pagans can also have their own truths (e.g. those of Christianty or Islam etc) and thus have no issue with the fact that such religions are very different from Paganism.

But Christians often talk about "the truth" (in the singular) so do Pagans accept that Christianity can lay claim to "the truth" when "the truth" must surely be false for Pagans believe there are many truths: not just one.

If not then surely they must reject Christianity as a valid belief system.

Or perhaps Pagans are really saying "What the hell - you get on with your lives and we'll get on with ours".

Confused? Me too. /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Rik <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Rik,

Yes, most Pagans believe that there are many truths, all of which lead to understanding. And I'm not sure it's any more illogical to believe that there are different versions of the same truth than to acknowledge that there can be differing valid viewpoints on a given topic.

For example, you're from the UK, right? How do your history texts present the war fought in North America beginning in 1776 or so between England and her American colonies? If I recall correctly, it's generally presented as a civil war. From the US perspective, it was a struggle for independence. Both are true, yet at least somewhat contradictory.

So to answer you question about Christianity laying claim to "the truth," no, Pagan's don't generally recognize that as a valid claim. It is A truth, certainly, but not THE truth. The fact that Christians don't generally return the favor is a bit annoying, but that doesn't invalidate their path. /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

How's that?
Vin

HansM

01-17-2003, 05:39 PM

Hello Everyone,

I am new here and this is my first post. Once again I just wanted to read, but this topic makes me post. My first love is my faith Roman Catholic and second is cloths freedom.

David 77 You stated:
"About two years ago the Roman Catholic Church and the Luthrans signed a document agreeing that man is not saved (gain salvation) by "Works" but by "Faith" alone. They came to this agreement after studying scripture and discussing this together for about 14 years."
Catholics do not believe in faith alone. We believe that it is through both works and faith working together. One without the other will not lead to sactifying grace.

Jon-Mark "It's unfortunate, but I often find unbelievers to be much nicer people, and certainly less judgemental."
I could not agree more. I made a mistake, my wife and I, went to Hedonism II for our first nude trip, but I still found goodness there. I often say I saw a lot more good there than I do in many church congregations. People were very friendly and respectful, I find a lot of hate in many Christian churches.

Find a church community that resembles what you want, it does not really matter the denomination that much. I converted to Catholicism in 1996 from the United Chruch of Christ. I do believe it makes a difference, but not that much.

The more that I study about nakedness and faith, I find that God is not just nuetral about nakedness, he wants us to be naked as much as possible. The Lord's Prayer tells us that "Thy will be done on earth as it is in Heaven" Does anyone think that we will be wearing cloths in Heaven? I certainly don't and if his will is that we act on earth as in Heaven, that his desire is for us to be naked, without shame.

We have just had a bit of a scandle in our little town (see my post in the legal section). It appears (I had known for a couple of years) that a local nudist club uses our Rec Center for their witner swims. Someone just complained and it hit our local hometown (weekly) paper.

My wife asked our priest (I feel I must say at this point that I am also discerning on becoming a Deacon and in Theology classes) if he had read the article, he said that he hadn't. Well they proceded to discuss the issue. He said that he has been researching non-sexual social nudism and doesn't see anything wrong with. She actually told him that I believed in nudism, I wish she had left that up to me to tell him, but he was not phased by that.

Wow, I cannot believe this. I have been sweeting over this for the past year. I have not found one person yet that has reacted negativly. In fact one person says that they want to join me, but their spouse is dead set against it.

Those are my views.

Shalom (peace) in Christ,
HansM

wannabenaked2001

01-17-2003, 06:09 PM

Welcome HansM!! /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

David77

01-17-2003, 07:48 PM

No one has a monopoly on "the truth" of the great questions and mysteries of the universe. I suppose that each person of whatever religion can have, or has, reverence or awe for what he sees as the highest, ultimate values in life. No one has complete insight into life, but merely partial, and hopefully is always on the brink of new insights and understand of what he sees as reality (truth?) and his spiritual appreciation deepens. Thus dogma and one rigid concept of "Truth", hopefully evaporates and one uses his own personal resources for his religious development. The summary below, which is in part borrowed and condensed, explains the means to accomplish this journey.

Religious pluralism can enrich lives and ennoble faith and inspire a deepening of understanding and expand our vision. Wisdom from the world's religions (not just one religion) can inspire us in our ethical and spiritual life. The words and deeds of prophetic women and men can challenge us to confront power and structures of evil and justice, and confront compassion and transforming power of love.

Direct experience of that transcending mystery and wonder, is affirmed in all cultures, which moves us to a renewal of, and an openness to, the forces which create and uphold life. Also, guidance of reason and the results of science can assist our living in harmony with the rythms of nature and help deeper our appreciation and our concept of ultimate reality and our understanding of what we see of our "truth" or reality in our personal changing time and place.

wannabenaked2001

01-17-2003, 08:05 PM

David77,

I thought I already said that! Just kidding,
LOL

Actually, I wish I had said that, and I agree compleatly. I know it won't happen in my lifetime, but wouldn't it be great if all the belief systems of the world were to come together to form a single, world wide belief system or religion, and everyone accepted it??

But then, what would we have?????? World Peace??

/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

David77

01-17-2003, 08:48 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by wannabenaked2001:
I know it won't happen in my lifetime, but wouldn't it be great if all the belief systems of the world were to come together to form a single, world wide belief system or religion, and everyone accepted it? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>WBN,
If everyone believed uniformly, it would prove that they are not thinking for themselves. Instead, each should be encouraged to use their own intellect, and their knowledge from, for example, reading and learning from their life experiences, and use their own individual insights to develope their own spirituality with out influence from, as you call it, a "single, world wide belief system or religion, and everyone accepted it".

For example, my own liberal church does not believe in prosalitizing and thus has no missioneries. Instead, it fosters each individuals developing or searching for himself. It has no creed or dogma and respects each others differing thought, so long as they behave in the spirit of love. I believe in independence and not a world wide belief system.

Rik

01-18-2003, 04:09 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Vin:
How's that? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>So it's live and let live. Sounds good to me.

Rik

Vin

01-18-2003, 07:35 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Rik:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Vin:
How's that? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>So it's live and let live. Sounds good to me.

Rik <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Obviously, it works for me, too. /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

The challenge, sometimes, is being actively accepting of others, rather than passively saying "You leave me alone, I'll leave you alone, and we'll pretend that our differences don't exist." Being one who occasionally enjoys a lively debate, it's hard for me to know when just to accept something and when to compare viewpoints.

Bright Blessings,
Vin

Vin

01-18-2003, 07:41 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by wannabenaked2001:
David77,

Actually, I wish I had said that, and I agree compleatly. I know it won't happen in my lifetime, but wouldn't it be great if all the belief systems of the world were to come together to form a single, world wide belief system or religion, and everyone accepted it?? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I wish I'd said it, too.

I don't care if there's one system that everyone believes. Frankly, and perhaps paradoxically, I think there's real strength in the multiplicity of viewpoints we have on spirituality. We can always learn from each other, even from those with whom we disagree. But worldwide acceptance and tolerance would be nice.

Maybe it won't happen in this lifetime, but there's always the next one, or the one after that! /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

wannabenaked2001

01-18-2003, 07:54 AM

David77,

I must agree with your views of individual thought. I never ment that anyone should stop thinking for him/her self (actually, maybe not enough people think for them selves now). And we certainly don't need another Jim Jones who's followers were most certainly not thinking for them selves!

I simply don't understand why some people feel they need to kill (or other wise attack) others for having different spiritual beliefs.

Is there really any such thing as a "Holy War"? The two words just don't go together!

I do think that the world's belief systems and all of the people of the world should try to find what they/we all have in common, and work together from there. You are right (and I stand corrected) in that a single belief system would detract from what makes each culture unique. The world would be a pretty boring place! But wouldn't it be great if we could learn to appreciate those differances instead of fear and despise them. /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Rik

01-18-2003, 08:44 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by wannabenaked2001:
I simply don't understand why some people feel they need to kill (or other wise attack) others for having different spiritual beliefs. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Maybe it's part of their belief system and should therefore be respected.

/infopop/emoticons/icon_confused.gif Rik

Vin

01-18-2003, 11:30 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Rik:
Maybe it's part of their belief system and should therefore be respected. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Maybe it is and should be. They can believe whatever they want, no matter how reprehensible it may be to anyone (or everyone) else. They are not, however, free to act on it. That's a very different thing.

Vin

Rik

01-18-2003, 11:55 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Vin:
They can believe whatever they want, no matter how reprehensible it may be to anyone (or everyone) else. They are not, however, free to act on it. That's a very different thing. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Hmmm! Setting aside legal and cultural issues for a moment why should they not be free to act on it? If my "belief system" is that those who disagree with me should be killed and your "belief system" is that everbody else's "belief system" should be respected then you should have no objection to me killing you unless of course your "belief system" is really that you will respect all other "belief systems" except those which you choose not to respect.

What a strange world we live in. /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Rik

David77

01-18-2003, 12:45 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by wannabenaked2001:
"I do think that the world's belief systems and all of the people of the world should try to find what they/we all have in common, and work together from there".
-and -
"But wouldn't it be great if we could learn to appreciate those differances instead of fear and despise them". <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Wannabenaked,
There is a international group of many world religions that promotes what you are referring to. It is called "Council for a Parliament of the World's Religions". You are the type of great person who would enjoy attending their next world wide meeting in Barcelona Spain in 2004. Hope you sigh up soon and plan to attend. You can read about the philosophy and work of this organization at;
http://www.cpwr.org/

Clicking on the days listed on the right hand side of the main web page tells of the interesting speakers and their thoughts for each day during their last world-wide meeting.

Speaking of inter-religious group, a Muslim family invited me for Thanksgiving dinner in November 2002 since I have no relatives in this state to go to. The head of this family is from Egypt and is a medical doctor. There were about 20 persons present and about half of the crowd were Muslim and the rest were Chritians plus two of us were more or less of the Naturalistic Humanist philosophy.

It was also the season of Ramadon, so we had our Thanksgiving meal after the sun went down. We had a great time together.

Your post also suggests to me a world document which I revere, but which many would say is not a religious document, but to me, at least, it ranks along side the great religious documents, as religion deals with life. Elenor Roosevelt, one of my social actionist heros, worked tirelessly for its creation. It may not be perfect in scope, but we all know it as the United Nations Declaration on Human Rights. It is good reading, at;

http://www.un.org/rights/50/decla.htm

Vin

01-18-2003, 01:59 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Rik:
If my "belief system" is that those who disagree with me should be killed and your "belief system" is that everbody else's "belief system" should be respected then you should have no objection to me killing you unless of course your "belief system" is really that you will respect all other "belief systems" except those which you choose not to respect. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Not at all. Belief systems are a part of society; they do not supercede it. Society, as an organism, has a self-preservation instinct. It cannot allow wanton killing without risking self-destruction, therefore that behavior is (usually) prohibited. Each individual can believe whatever he wants, and I fully respect his right to do so. He may not, however, act on those beliefs simply because he holds them and we respect his right to hold them.

Think about it: most of us here hold a belief that there is nothing wrong with nudity. Yet we don't (well, most of us) go about in the general public while nude. Why? It's the same thing. We have a right to our beliefs, but not the right to act on them simply because we hold them.

Most Wiccans (not necessarily most Pagans) hold a philosophy that states, in part, you can do whatever you want so long as it doesn't harm anyone. (There is an allowance for self-defense in most versions). So, you can believe whatever you want, but that doesn't give you the right to harm anyone. Killing someone involves harming them, ergo it's ethically not allowed.

Rik

01-18-2003, 02:59 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Vin:
Society, as an organism, has a self-preservation instinct. It cannot allow wanton killing without risking self-destruction, therefore that behavior is (usually) prohibited. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Vin, thanks for the repsonse. I always enjoy reading you posts.

Given what you said above, am I alone in thinking that society, as an organism, is set on a path of self-destruction rather than self-preservation?

We may have different ideas about 'society' but to me society is made up of individuals and groups of individuals (such as religions, countries etc) i.e. the human race. Humans kill more of their own kind than any other mammal - directly and indirectly - and what stops the wanton killing you refer to are, to some extent, national and international laws. So given that some individuals (and groups)do kill, and more would if wasn't illegal, it doesn't seem to me that the desire to preserve society is inherent in the individual (or group): rather it is the desire to preserve the individual (or group) which is inherent.

If on the other hand the desire to preserve the species was inherent in indiviuals (or groups) as you suggest, then there would be no need for laws to prevent killing for any such killing would only be done for the benefit of the species as a whole. Indeed if you consider the history of man, the legal bar to wanton killing has only existed relatively recently yet man has become the second most successful mammal on earth (after the rat of course!).

You could also argue I suppose that the world is a very over populated place and with current birth rates what they are and the over exploitation of natural resources the future looks rather bleak. Perhaps wanton killing is now necessary to protect the species as a whole in which case artificial laws against killing, based on intellect rather than biological necessity, are helping to destroy the very thing they are trying to protect.

I'm really just thinking aloud as I write this so I'm sure you can shoot me down in flames. In fact please do (but don't kill me) because this looks like a reason to go to war. /infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

Rik

Vin

01-18-2003, 04:56 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Rik:
Given what you said above, am I alone in thinking that society, as an organism, is set on a path of self-destruction rather than self-preservation?

We may have different ideas about 'society' but to me society is made up of individuals and groups of individuals (such as religions, countries etc) i.e. the human race. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Rik,

This is turning into quite a socio-religio-politcal examination of the human condition. I'm having fun, too. /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I think we're using about the same definition of "society" here. And I agree that individuals don't have any instinct to preserve the species. They do, however, have an individual survival instinct, and when they come together in a society, that instinct is transferred and becomes a characteristic of the society they form. Whether our current one is on a self-destructive path, I don't know. I tend to think that we're going through another painful skinned knee, but we'll be okay in the end.

And I'm not sure the legal bar to wanton killing within any given local society is new. We've always acknowledged that it's in everyone's best interests to prevent murder. It is, however, only recently that we've extended that consideration to a global perspective and applied to "others."

As for the need to "cull the herd," I'm not sure I can argue against it. However, I don't think wanton killing (either locally via murder or planet-wide via war) is the best tool to do it. There are others that are more effective; well-run national birth control campaigns come to mind.

If we do get totally out of hand, though, I'm certain we'll get reined in, either through evolution or by the planet herself shaking us off. (Now I suddenly see us as flies on a horse's bum. /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif )

Vin

nakedinsandiego

01-18-2003, 06:33 PM

Hi,

I identify myself just as Christian, and I currently attened a Baptist church. I was raised in the Christian Churchs/Church of Christ.

RIVERRAT

01-19-2003, 07:32 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by wannabenaked2001:
I have noticed that many people identify themselves as Christians, but I also know there are many faiths that fall under this category, and many more that do not. Just curious, what religion are you? I thought about making this question a poll, but I am sure I would manage to leave many faiths out, as there are so many. I am Roman Catholic.

Jim /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Hey Jim, I to am a Catholic, why does faith have anything to do with being nude, Peter was naked on his boat a few feet from shore when Jesus was cominng to see them, he put his clothes on, David was bringing the Arc of the covenant back to Jeruselem, he was celebrating naked, the profits when in profetic ways, they were naked, if Adam and Eve hadn't sinned we would all be naked as GOD intended. Our bodies as GOD has given us are not evil, they are beautiful, GOD, gave us this for ,yes we must cover up when in public , but we are an image of the creater, even mister ANGELO who painted the Sistine chaple painted GOD and Adam his creatian nude. We are GOD's creatian we were nude, we are not wrong to be nude now?? Be as GOD has made us when possible, and cover up when needed.

wannabenaked2001

01-20-2003, 06:09 AM

Hey RiverRat,

In your post above you wrote " why does faith have anything to do with being nude, ".

Many points have been made to justify (or not) nudity thru religous writings. But to answer your question, it is simply this: One of the primary issues some people have with nudism is religion/faith. By addressing these issues, we hope to feel better about ourselves and others, as well as to help textiles accept, if not join, our way of life.

I also hope we will be able to better understand the values of other faiths, stop stereo typing, and discover more things we may have in common.

To me nudism/naturism is about more than "Body Acceptance". It is also about acceptance, respect and tollerance of other human beings. /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

sunaddicted

01-23-2003, 04:21 AM

I am a Jewish nudist and consider myself a good Jew as opposed to Florida-David, I attend services and love my faith. There is a group of us on line. I believe that all of us should get along and that to each his own. Man was created in the image of God "B'Tsalem " so I have never been ashamed of being naked and consider the human body to be beautiful.

I do not agree that all religions preach love and peace for one another. Unfortunately more people have been killed in the name of religion than been saved.

Vin

01-23-2003, 05:23 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by sunaddicted:
I do not agree that all religions preach love and peace for one another. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I think most of them PREACH some version of this. Unfortunately, not so many people PRACTICE it. As you say, more people have been killed in the name of religion than just about any other cause.

NoodJuggler

01-27-2003, 07:49 AM

In reply to HansM and some others. "Faith without Works is Dead" James 2:26 That is for the one that believes the bible is the word of God and if that person believes in a God. You can have faith without works, but you cannot have works without faith, Works produce greater faith, take away the works and you lose the Faith, a mans faith is shown by his works...Keep the Faith. Show Me the Works...Bye..Keith /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif Sorry forgot..Faith has nothing to do with Nudity. You can be nude or fully clothed and have faith.
http://www.NaturalandNude.com/NaturalandNude.gif

Croydon

01-28-2003, 05:45 AM

I have always been someone who has a distaste for organized religion. Growing up, my mother forced church and religion down my throat thus my only way to rebel against it all was to turn against religions.

I grew up catholic but my mother participated in the protestant religion and I must say that from my observations of many religions including protestant, it is all about control. The congregation have no clue that they are being controlled. The rules and restraints placed on church goers yells out CONTROL. For example, in my mom's pentecostal church, women may not wear phants, jewlry or make up. I can go on and on and on.

I honestly believe that many (not all) religions, denominationsm, churches are filled with a bunch of hypocrites. Many say so much yet fail to practice what they preach.

I think that in a decade or two, religion will not be strong as it is today because so many young adults are moving away from religion ideologies and the bible. A lot are rebelling against religion.

gamblefish

01-30-2003, 01:36 PM

Original post by Rik,

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Given what you said above, am I alone in thinking that society, as an organism, is set on a path of self-destruction rather than self-preservation?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>You are not alone, Rik. Although I know we both have very different ideas about God, I also believe that humanity is on a downward spiral toward destruction.

I believe that as soon as Adam sinned, the "death" of the earth and everything on it began. You can almost draw an analogy between the earth and a person. As soon as you are born, you start dying. In like manner, as soon as Adam sinned, the earth started dying, and now we are in the twilight of our years...

I don't mean to sound all "gloom and doom", but you have to admit, matters here on earth are not going along as well as we would like...

01-30-2003, 10:35 PM

Gamblefish.....Down with the doom and gloom....Think positive!!!!!!After birth we have our great lives...A Time To Live and a time to die ...and then we will have eternal peace and happiness with our Savior Jesus in that great naturist resort above. /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Jochanaan

02-01-2003, 05:42 PM

Hi, everyone! Many interesting posts, and no offensive ones.

I was lucky. My upbringing encouraged me to be Christian but to think for myself, and my denomination, the Seventh Day Baptists, are mostly free from being controlled or the desire to control. Also, I was never taught nakedness was sinful, only that it was inappropriate in many situations; and it has not been hard for me to revise my thinking about which situations are appropriate.

There is a big difference between acceptance (really an aspect of love) and approval. We can accept a person, as a person, while disapproving his actions or beliefs. I can accept a racist as a worthy person, for all persons are worthy, while rejecting his values as worthless. I can be friends with a reckless driver while disapproving his recklessness. Jesus set the example by saying to the woman caught in adultery, "Neither do I condemn thee. Go and sin no more."

But this is something a majority cannot understand. So many people insist that to disapprove their beliefs is to reject them as people. And so many Christians get caught in unloving condemnations rather than loving rebukes. It's enough to drive me to my knees!

I wish I could say to all of you, out loud, with all the passion in my voice: "Even though I disagree with your beliefs or actions, I accept you." I hope my writing conveys my acceptance.

gamblefish

02-02-2003, 03:59 AM

Hello Jochanaan,

Excellent post! Particularly like your statement:

"So many people insist that to disapprove their beliefs is to reject them as people. And so many Christians get caught in unloving condemnations rather than loving rebukes. It's enough to drive me to my knees!"

Couldn't agree more and I thought you conveyed your message (and acceptence) very well.

nudist_in_Tn

02-02-2003, 09:16 AM

Im a Christian a Methodist in fact, I enjoy being nude as much as possible and I do not associate my nudity with anything sexual, I was allowed to play outside naked as a child and to me nudity is as normal and acceptable as breathing, I do so feel sorry however for those who have had other peoples beliefs thrust on them. /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

scottnc

02-08-2003, 08:58 PM

I was raised a Mormon & was very active in the church till my 30s. I attend no church now & don't consider myself to be spiritual, but I pray daily. I'm often invited by friends to attend their church but politely decline. I think religion is a personal matter between God & me. I think God expects me to be honest, considerate, & charitable, but I don't think he expects me to try to influence the beliefs of others.

Christian Bare

02-09-2003, 12:07 PM

Church of the Nazarene as far as denomination... But following Christ is the main point...

02-09-2003, 12:16 PM

Christian Bare,

Very true. I'm a Christian first and foremost--then a nudist. There is no conflict in the two, but my Christian beliefs come first. Denomination isn't the important thing. What we do about Jesus Christ is. /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Croydon

02-09-2003, 06:23 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by scottnc:
I was raised a Mormon & was very active in the church till my 30s. I attend no church now & don't consider myself to be spiritual, but I pray daily. I'm often invited by friends to attend their church but politely decline. I think religion is a personal matter between God & me. I think God expects me to be honest, considerate, & charitable, but I don't think he expects me to try to influence the beliefs of others. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Scott, I couldn't have agreed with you more. Your comment is well said and should be practiced by many "christians." I think many "christians" cross the boundary when they try to recruit others. A lot don't have much respect for others who are in other denominations or are not religious at all. I have a friend who is a churchgoer and active in her religion. I am not much of a religious person nor do I care for religion. This friend, as much as I love her, tries all the time to recruit me into religion and her church. I have made it clear I am not interested yet she never gets the message. This is where many (not all) christians go wrong, they have little respect of others choices and/or beliefs

scottnc

02-09-2003, 06:45 PM

Croydon,

The proselyting part of my church is one of the things that soured me on organized religion. That said, I still believe in God & that Christ is the Son of God. My former religion is high - extreme - on modesty & covering up. I don't think I could be a nudist & a practicing Mormon, but I've seen posts on a site for Mormon nudists, so there are some who've reconciled the two lifestyles. I've read posts on various sites of people "pushing the envelope" by going nude in situations where nudity is not expected. My approach on nudity is the same as my approach on religion - it's not my role to force either on others. I think people should show consideration for all people, even if (and especially if) they disagree on subjects that are important to them personally.

Vin

02-09-2003, 07:07 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by scottnc:
I attend no church now & don't consider myself to be spiritual, but I pray daily. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Something to consider: I would say that you are very spiritual, but not religious. There can be a canyon-size gulf between the two.

BB,
Vin

Christian Bare

02-10-2003, 05:04 AM

This appears to be a common theme amongst us Christians that are nudists. We may belong to a denomination or we may have been in a denomination at one point in our lives, but we were detracted from them for one reason or another.

The one great thing I see here is that most continue their journey as Christians even once they are out of the denomination. The one sad thing is that God wants us to come into fellowship under his name, and too often we become what I was for years and that is a "Loner for Jesus".

Though we can maintain a spiritual life that way, we often miss the mark of spreading the Gospel which is a central theme of our mission here on earth.

Coming from that background, I know that many times we feeled too burned by other people. Yes, there are many other reasons too, but we need to keep in mind that Christ said that we would suffer for following Him, just as HE suffered on the cross.

I'm not going to say we all should become so involved in a denomination that we lose our focus on Christ. JUst that we continue to meet with CHristians in the name of the LOrd and we spend some fellowship time, worshipping. Not in a cult, but purely in the name of JEsus and with basic doctrinal truth as our foundation. Christ died for our sins, he calls us to love GOd and others and to spread the good news of HIs death and resurrection.

Peace and Love!

Vin

02-10-2003, 06:14 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Christian Bare:
The one sad thing is that God wants us to come into fellowship under his name, and too often we become what I was for years and that is a "Loner for Jesus".

Though we can maintain a spiritual life that way, we often miss the mark of spreading the Gospel which is a central theme of our mission here on earth. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Keep in mind I mean this gently. I'm debating posting it even as I write it.

Some of the most functional Christians I know are loners. It took getting away from the church and learning to think for themselves, but they seem to have sorted out most of what Jesus actually said from what Paul & Co. wrote decades and centuries after the fact. What he actually preached is a beautiful thing.

That's not to say that there's not something to be gained from fellowship. But there may be too much potential for "herd mentality" to set in. That may explain why those who are solitaries do better; it's what works best for them. And we should respect their choices for how to follow their paths.

Finally, I'd say there's not a person on the planet who hasn't heard "The Good News (tm)" about Christianity by now. Those who want to follow the path are likely doing so; the rest of us have chosen other ways to the Divine. The job is done. You guys can stop now. /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Bright Blessings,
Vin

Trailscout

02-10-2003, 06:55 AM

Vin,

I took no offense at your remarks and I don't think anyone else should either. I do disagree with you and I hope I can share my thoughts with equal kindness to yours.

I have been a loner Christian for many years and I have come to the conclusion that both solitude and fellowship are essential in every soul's progress toward the Lord. Even Jesus, who had a very public ministry, also set aside time of going directly to God alone in prayer. His most famous time was 40 days in the Wilderness of Judea immediately prior to the beginning of his public ministry, but throughout his time on earth, he regularly took time out for direct communion with God.

I think your warning about the herd mentality is well-taken. But I discovered that if my personal experience with the divine is solid from my solo time, I can then plug into a group of believers somewhere and not go off center from weird teachings. That does not mean that we can't learn from other people. There is a synergistic effect to learning that a total loner cannot take advantage of. That is true in a secular context as well. I remember having a girlfriend who shared my faith. There were times when we silently held each other close. Although we were not learning anything, I drew great comfort from her love and I am sure she felt the same. I see that you agree, since you said, "
That's not to say that there's not something to be gained from fellowship".

You stress the danger of fellowship, but I contend that it is a managable risk if you are centered.

Some organizations are disfunctional and very controlling. Some relationships are like that as well. Some people are drawn to controlling cults and authority figures. It would be foolish to assert that all relationships are negative experiences and equally wrong to assume that a gathering of people of faith is necessarily an evil thing.

I must also disagree with your comment that "...there's not a person on the planet who hasn't heard "The Good News (tm)" about Christianity by now".

I contend that most people have heard snippets of it, and millions have heard a warped version of the gospel, but I honestly think very few people have assimilated the core teachings of Jesus and the apostles and prophets.

I do not believe that strong arm tactics, high pressure sales pitches and endless door knocking is what God had in mind for the way to tell people that he loves them!

If a used car salesman is selling overpriced defective cars on television and concludes his remarks with "God Bless America", his last three words do not sanctify his crooked sales pitch.

I am convinced that the core of the gospel is love and that there is far too little love in this world. I intend to show it in word and deed.

Christian Bare

02-10-2003, 09:04 AM

Vin,

Following along with Trailscout's comments, I take no offense to your response either.

I appreciate and agree with the remarks that Trailscout had for us all.

Not just for you, but for me to, don't give up on other people because of negative experiences you've had with them. We are all under construction and will remain so until our final breath on this earth.

I have thoughts of how wonderful it would be to start up a church for nudists. But then I fear that man would take over and we would make a doctrine that said you had to be naked to worhip. That's where we get messed up in outside corporate churches.

Sticking to the basic teachings of Christ is essential. Even if just to gather with other Christians, reading the sermon on the mount, haveing a potluck and sharing prayer time.

As we see how others are affected and improved by their belief in Christ, we will have other areas of our lives revealed to us that can be improved. "Iron sharpens Iron".

I think, especially in the community that we participate in, it is essential to come together. Not to judge those around us who are not Christian, but to show that Christians can participate in this form of life.

I sometimes wonder, when at camp, how many folks around me that are not Christians, once were, but were shoved off by insensitive remarks from fellow Christians. I wonder how many around me have heard a distorted gospel and want nothing to do with such a thing. I wonder how many will be eternally lost if not for me teaching a simple faith, the life Jesus lead.

The other night I was in a History of Western Civilization class, it focusses on the Church. And the instructor mentioned a time in which men and women were baptized nude. A laday in the class (only 6 students) blushed and was completely offended by such an idea. Though I'm sure she shows the love of Christ almost all the time, she couldn't share to a non-Christian nudist. But we who Believe and believe can. And should continue the job to stop false teachings and bring faith back to a central theme as preached by the Son of God!

Peace and Blessings to you and yours...

Vin

02-10-2003, 01:14 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Trailscout:
I took no offense at your remarks and I don't think anyone else should either....

I have been a loner Christian for many years and I have come to the conclusion that both solitude and fellowship are essential in every soul's progress toward the Lord....

There is a synergistic effect to learning that a total loner cannot take advantage of....

I must also disagree with your comment that "...there's not a person on the planet who hasn't heard "The Good News (tm)" about Christianity by now".... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Whew! Glad I've not offended anyone. That truly was not my intention. /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I quite agree that both solitary and group time are beneficial in one's spiritual walk, regardless of path. As you say, there's a synergy in group work that is absent when working solo. Likewise, there is a strength and power to working alone that is lost with a group. Some people need both, others are successful with only one.

The comment about "you can stop now" was somewhat tongue-in-cheek. However, realizing that I live in an area that is predominantly Christian, and that some of those groups believe that if they could just preach the ENTIRE gospel to non-Christians they would see the light, it is frustrating to see the lack of respect paid to non-Christian spirituality. I've heard all the gospel I care to. I can debate it as well as some Christian ministers. It's not my path, and I don't really want anyone spreading the gospel over me with a trowel. I'm quite happy with my path, thank you very much, and would appreciate being left alone. /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

As for the world needing more love, I agree entirely! I'm not always successful at harming none, but I try.

Vin

02-10-2003, 01:27 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Christian Bare:
Following along with Trailscout's comments, I take no offense to your response either....

Not just for you, but for me to, don't give up on other people because of negative experiences you've had with them....

I think, especially in the community that we participate in, it is essential to come together. Not to judge those around us who are not Christian, but to show that Christians can participate in this form of life.... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I really am glad I didn't offend. /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I think it's only human nature to protect oneself from those one has learned have a negative effect. For some, unfortunately, that includes Christianity. Sometimes, this is because we've been brow-beaten, blackmailed, and terrorized with the gospel until we perceive the whole organized Christianity thing as dangerous.

There is also an element of expecting Christians to return our respect of their spiritual path. For some, that is very hard (read: impossible). I understand why, but that doesn't make it right.

As for Christian nudists, I would love nothing better than to see more of them. Not only could Christianity stand some lightening up, but I think a lot of hypocrisy and other negativity that has crept into the church over the millenia would be erased. It's awfully hard to be "holier-than-thou" standing around in your birthday suit with no social status symbols to fall back on. /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

I personally love the idea of a nude church, by the way. Of course, some Wiccan traditions _require_ nude rituals, so the idea isn't exactly new to me. But it would be a great idea, and might even lead to some interfaith dialog on how to help it succeed.

BB,
Vin

Christian Bare

02-10-2003, 03:34 PM

Vin,

Glad to see we are all one happy family here... I know I'm new to the group and being a minister I may go on a tangent and get off topic from now and again (habit with speaking).

I did have one very nice experience with other Christian Nudists. I met up with Cheef Dan, his wife and other Christians at Avalon a couple years ago for a marriage retreat. It was quite a nice time, sharing and Worshipping together.

There is a community out there and I have been plesantly surprised at the number of Christians I have met at other camps. TO keep this note somewhat on topic, I've met people of many deniminations, Methodist, Baptist, Church of God, and a couple other I cannot recall at this time.

One thing we all had in common was that we knew that we were free to worship in whatever manner we desired. None of our conversations ever went into the doctrinal grey area. We just keep to our common love of Christ.

Fresh Air

02-11-2003, 10:01 AM

I'm a Seventh-Day Adventist. Nudism was actually something I discovered on my own. While I don't go to church and advertise that I like nudism, I feel my church is very open minded and leaves much of 'how to believe' upto the individual rather than dogma. While some lifestyles are not condoned (such as some homosexual lifestyles) an individual is accepted by the church regardless of their orientation. I believe God's love is like that too. We are changed by Him, not for Him.

...I speak for the church families I have been a part of, I know views can vary with each church, but hopefully others share the same views.

Jochanaan

02-11-2003, 01:23 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by scottnc:
I think God expects me to be honest, considerate, & charitable, but I don't think he expects me to try to influence the beliefs of others. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I agree, but with one quibble: I would say that God doesn't expect us to try to influence others' beliefs BY FORCE. After all, do we not, in many ways and by many means, try to influence others to believe in Jesus? Or to be more caring? Or to accept the possibility that nudity is not sinful? But force, physical, rhetorical, or otherwise, is not only a violation of free will, it's useless. As I've quoted before, "A man convinced against his will/Is of the same opinion still." Logic and facts backed by compassion are far better at breaking mental defenses than force.

gamblefish

02-11-2003, 02:46 PM

That's good Jochanaan.

One quote I've always liked but dunno who said it:

"Preach the Gospel everywhere...use words if necessary."

Christian Bare

02-11-2003, 07:40 PM

I know it just may be a case of wording, but I do think that God expects us to influence others beliefs.

Well said that this is not by force, nor is it mainly by words, but in our actions and our words we should be influencing others.

Purposefully and actively we should be presenting the Gospel, the simple but perfect Gospel. Teaching others gently with our love.

Never hiding the fact that we are Christians!

We are the messangers, we just need to preach and teach the pureness that Christ did.

Other topic in response to the Seventh Day Adventist noted above. I agree that we cannot surely speak for an entire denomination, but certainly and privately I've noted that few pastors can question me on nudism.

gamblefish

02-12-2003, 01:53 AM

I agree Christian.

I think the people we can influence the most are the ones with whom we have the most contact, those we work with and live around. Our way of living in front of others is our best witness.

Rather than exhausting someone with endless words I think it best to present our witness, preach the Gospel, and if it is not received we "shake the dust from our feet...".

Vin

02-12-2003, 06:59 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by gamblefish:
...I think it best to present our witness, preach the Gospel, and if it is not received we "shake the dust from our feet...". <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>But therein lies the rub. What gives anyone the right to present witness or preach the gospel uninvited? That is disrespectful of others' beliefs in that it implies that they are somehow inferior or invalid and must be improved or changed. It is an invasion of privacy, purely and simply. It is discourteous in the extreme.

Now, if I freely walk into a religious environment (say a church, synagogue, mosque, temple...) or ask a question, that's another thing. I expect to hear about those people's beliefs. But no one has the right to accost me on the sidewalk or at work (and certainly not at my own front door) to promote his/her religion.

Slightly off-topic, but...

A couple of my favorite Pagan responses to opening gambits of Christian witnesses:

"Have you found Jesus?"
"What?! You mean you lost him?"

"Jesus loves you."
"Yeah, I know. But Apollo loves me more, and he's a hotty!"

Bright Blessings,
Vin

Christian Bare

02-12-2003, 07:11 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Vin:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by gamblefish:
...I think it best to present our witness, preach the Gospel, and if it is not received we "shake the dust from our feet...". <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>But therein lies the rub. What gives anyone the right to present witness or preach the gospel uninvited? That is disrespectful of others' beliefs in that it implies that they are somehow inferior or invalid and must be improved or changed. It is an invasion of privacy, purely and simply. It is discourteous in the extreme.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>No Vin, it is discourteous if we do not present the truth. How would you feel if someone had kept from telling you the truth and you ended up in hell for ever? Maybe you would have understood and responded...

There are not many paths to one end. To believe so contradicts the direct and simple teachings of Jesus. This is not denominationalism, this is Christianity...

Far off topic now...

Jochanaan

02-12-2003, 07:37 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Christian Bare:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Vin:
But therein lies the rub. What gives anyone the right to present witness or preach the gospel uninvited? That is disrespectful of others' beliefs in that it implies that they are somehow inferior or invalid and must be improved or changed. It is an invasion of privacy, purely and simply. It is discourteous in the extreme.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>No Vin, it is discourteous if we do not present the truth. How would you feel if someone had kept from telling you the truth and you ended up in hell for ever? Maybe you would have understood and responded...

There are not many paths to one end. To believe so contradicts the direct and simple teachings of Jesus. This is not denominationalism, this is Christianity... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>The key word here is "uninvited." The proselytizing spirit cannot be exorcised from Christianity without undoing it completely. We Christians indeed believe that the Lord has visited us in the person of Jesus of Nazareth; this is radical and sectarian to outsiders but life and health to us who believe it. But this best news has far more impact coming from a compassionate friend than from a thundering preacher.

Soooo--it behooves us to make friends of those who have never heard! Not just so we can spread the Word and build His church, but for our sakes as well, for we all need friends. The invitations will come--if we who believe live inviting lives.

Vin

02-12-2003, 10:28 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Christian Bare:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Vin:
What gives anyone the right to present witness or preach the gospel uninvited? That is disrespectful of others' beliefs in that it implies that they are somehow inferior or invalid and must be improved or changed. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>No Vin, it is discourteous if we do not present the truth. How would you feel if someone had kept from telling you the truth and you ended up in hell for ever? Maybe you would have understood and responded...

There are not many paths to one end. To believe so contradicts the direct and simple teachings of Jesus. This is not denominationalism, this is Christianity... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>No, it is discourteous to present your own version of truth as superior. It is particularly discourteous to do so uninvited. I am quite happy and comfortable with my spiritual path, thank you, and I don't for a minute believe that the God and Goddess want me to change it. I find them accepting and respectful of us all, not running an exclusive club that only the initiated can enter. I also find them to be simply different aspects of the universal godhead, so in one sense there's no need to tell me about your truth -- I've already accepted my own and they all come from the same source.

All religions are indeed valid paths to whatever end religion serves. They all lead to the same place. Since I reject the Christian hell or a god who feels the need for it, I don't really believe that is where these paths lead.

Vin

02-12-2003, 11:59 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Jochanaan:
But this best news has far more impact coming from a compassionate friend than from a thundering preacher. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Amen! /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Even more than needing friends, though, we need to respect each other and to learn to find the strengths in our differences. Rather than try to convert you to a Pagan path (which wouldn't happen -- Pagans don't generally proselytize), I would far rather sit down and discuss what _you've_ learned about the Divine. When we put that together with what _I've_ learned and with what CB has learned and with what everyone else has learned, we may each walk away with something new that enriches us. We come away far stronger for our sharing than for trying to belittle or to change each other.

Vin

Christian Bare

02-12-2003, 01:06 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Vin:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Jochanaan:
But this best news has far more impact coming from a compassionate friend than from a thundering preacher. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Amen! /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Even more than needing friends, though, we need to respect each other and to learn to find the strengths in our differences. Rather than try to convert you to a Pagan path (which wouldn't happen -- Pagans don't generally proselytize), I would far rather sit down and discuss what _you've_ learned about the Divine. When we put that together with what _I've_ learned and with what CB has learned and with what everyone else has learned, we may each walk away with something new that enriches us. We come away far stronger for our sharing than for trying to belittle or to change each other.

Vin <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>And thus we reach the point at which we must brush the dust from our sandals and move on to other territory. There is one truth and one way. To accept something only true for yourself serves no eternal purpose.

For those who are Christian here, which Vin has stated he rejects, keep focussed on the teachings of Jesus. He is the one way. We must, kindly and gently, but at times strongly share the Gospel with all.

The person who does not believe in one eternal truth is not necesarily a bad person, but certainly misguided. We should still shine our light in loving kindness around them.

But that same person is the most difficult to evangelize and takes a toll on those who try. This is why we were told to move on. If we stay too long in the darkness, we risk our own beliefs.

Vin

02-12-2003, 01:29 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Christian Bare:
There is one truth and one way. To accept something only true for yourself serves no eternal purpose....

The person who does not believe in one eternal truth is not necesarily a bad person, but certainly misguided. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I'd say we have, indeed, reached the time to part ways. I am not at all "misguided," nor do I appreciate the implied conceit in that judgment of my beliefs. You are entitled to your beliefs, certainly, and I can respect them. I can even respect the fact that you think I'm wrong. I would even defend your right to hold them. I do not respect your need to pass judgment simply because I believe differently from you. That is offensively discourteous, and one of the reasons I object to Christianity in most of its forms.

And of course it serves a purpose if one accepts a truth only for him/herself. Since we are each ultimately a part of the universal spirit, each individual truth represents one more contribution to the ultimate truth, whatever that is.

Bright Blessings,
Vin

Rik

02-12-2003, 02:05 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Christian Bare:
The person who does not believe in one eternal truth is not necesarily a bad person, but certainly misguided. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>What utter arrogance! It is attitudes such as this that create many of the problems we see in the world today.

Rik

Vin

02-12-2003, 02:08 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Christian Bare:
For those who are Christian here, which Vin has stated he rejects, keep focussed on the teachings of Jesus. He is the one way. We must, kindly and gently, but at times strongly share the Gospel with all. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>And another thing.... /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

If you want to quote me, by all means do so. But please quote ME, not what you wish I'd said to make the argument easier.

I never said I reject those who are Christian. I said I don't accept the Christian need for a place of eternal torment as a tool of fear to keep people in line. And I don't know about you, but any "god" who needed such a place to terrorize its followers into behaving is not one I consider worthy of worship anyway. Pity maybe, but certainly not reverence.

And I maintain that NO ONE has the right to "strongly share the Gospel with all." The minute I tell you to leave me alone, it's over. If you continue, I have the right to file a harrassment complaint. Mention hell and I'll add terroristic threatening to it.

I really don't see why Christians have such a need to be Right. They have no more insight into spiritual matters than the rest of us.

BB,
Vin

wannabenaked2001

02-12-2003, 04:01 PM

I agree with Vin for the most part. I am a Christian, but I do not belive in forcing my beliefs on anyone. If I know someone I may invite them to join me at my church service, but I will not push it any farther. If anything, I spread the teachings of Jesus by example.

I would also like to point out that the basic beliefs of Christians, by this I mean how we are to interact with our fellow man, are similar if not the same as most religions. Christians, and Muslims both have their roots in the Jewish religion.

I admit, I am not the least bit capable of quoting from the Bible with much accuracy, and I am sure there is some kind of scripture to discredit everything I have written, but I do not think our maker wants mindless sheep. I was raised and still am Catholic, but I do not allow the church to think for me. I have reached a place in my spirituality that I can disagree with some of the positions of my church and still be apart of my church. I have also reached a place where I can disagree with other religions and people of the human race and still be a member of the human race.

I even enjoy seeking out other religions/belief systems, not to take issue of our differances, but to discover and celebrate what we have in common.

By the way, the people who come knocking on my door so they can "save" me, really tic me off! /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

gamblefish

02-12-2003, 04:38 PM

Hi Vin and all...

Boy, this has come quite some way since this morning!

Originally posted by Vin:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> But therein lies the rub. What gives anyone the right to present witness or preach the gospel uninvited? That is disrespectful of others' beliefs in that it implies that they are somehow inferior or invalid and must be improved or changed. It is an invasion of privacy, purely and simply. It is discourteous in the extreme. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I guess I should have been more clear when I posted this morning but I was kinda in a hurry. I never go knocking on doors, or grabbing people in the street to preach to them. Rather, I try to live my life by biblical principles and when someone asks me about my faith I am more than ready to share my beliefs with them. That's all. It is no secret to the people I know and work with that I am a Christian, but I do not go standing on my soapbox uninvited, unless it is in the spirit of debate. If someone feels comfortable in telling me their beliefs, I think it ok to fire back with a rebuttal if I feel the need.

I got a chuckle out of your "Pagan responses to opening gambits of Christian witnesses". But it's not "Have you found Jesus..." but rather, "Has Jesus found you"!!

Here's one for you: On a door in our neighborhood is a sign that reads- "Religious solicitors will be hideously martyred"!!

Jochanaan

02-12-2003, 04:58 PM

I see now the truth of Jesus' saying, "I came not to send peace, but a sword." (Matt. 10:34) It would be nice if indeed all religions were paths to the same end, and all belief systems could be discussed without mentioning eternal consequences. Unfortunately, Jesus said some very dogmatic things about himself: "I am the way, and the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." (John 14:6) "Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away." "Matt. 24:35 et al) It would be dishonest to pretend the One in whom we have faith didn't say such things. But the Bible also describes how the universe's Creator paid the ultimate price to save us from the consequences of our harmful actions and false beliefs.

Eternity will show which of our beliefs leads to Light.

And please, I'm not condemning anyone. As I said in another post, there's a big difference between disapproving actions and rejecting a person.

Christian Bare

02-12-2003, 05:52 PM

Vin,

I apologize, my quote was not written correctly. I did not mean that you reject Christians, I see that you are accepting of all. I meant that you are not a Christian. My apologies.

All,

As for Christians that do not spread the Gospel in one manner or another, you are not following the simple commands of Christ. I have been guilty of this as well.

For some of us spreading the Gospel is not hiding our Christianity and being examples of Christ. FOr others it is preaching and for others it is knocking on doors. Some help to build hospitals and schools, some help to teach children. All these things can be done in serving Christ and setting an example for the world. For some of us it is debating on an internet forum.

Again, non-Christians have the right to be who they are, no arguments. But they are missing out...

Hiding our light under a bucket is certainly against Christ. There is only one way and that way is Christ. I will shout from a mountain top and let all know. Those who decide not to believe, I will not continually shove it in their face, but I certainly will still remain an example to them.

As for the problems the world is in. It is simple, man is sinful and not all will follow Christ. We can look at many points in history to see where the agression has come from. the Greeks insisted that you pray to their gods or you die...The Romans said you prayed to the emporer or you died...

No one is forcing you to choose Christ. He is not even forcing you. He may be tuggin at your heart. You may wake up in the middle of the night and find that you wonder if these words can be true. You don't have to worship the one and only God. No one should kill you for that. No matter how twisted history has been...

Rise up Christians and follow your command from the one you follow. Go unto all nations and make disciples. Love God with all you have and love your neighbors.

Vin

02-12-2003, 07:28 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by wannabenaked2001:
If I know someone I may invite them to join me at my church service, but I will not push it any farther....

I would also like to point out that the basic beliefs of Christians, by this I mean how we are to interact with our fellow man, are similar if not the same as most religions....

I even enjoy seeking out other religions/belief systems, not to take issue of our differances, but to discover and celebrate what we have in common.

By the way, the people who come knocking on my door so they can "save" me, really tic me off! /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>One thing I noticed in my required Humanities (world philosophy) class in college: all religions serve the same functions in their societies. They offer, first and foremost, a simple basic set of guidelines to keep the society running smoothly (don't kill each other, don't take each others' things, help each other out...). They offer a leader trained in what we now call psychology. And they offer an answer to the questions "Is this all there is? What comes after this life?" Some offer more, but this seems to be more or less the basic list.

I also enjoy comparing notes on spirituality. Heck, I generally learn a thing or three. There are usually more commonalities than differences. At the very least I have to think about what I believe and why. That's always a Very Good Thing.

About people knocking on doors (and getting this at least marginally back on topic), one of my favorite stories along that line is from my childhood. We lived in a very rural area, well out of sight of the neighbors. One day my dad, the son of a Baptist deacon and great-grandson of a Methodist minister, go wind of a small group of men out "saving" people. When they drove up our road, he simply waited for them to park in front of the house and to get too far from the car to retreat. Then he went out to greet them -- totally stark naked. For the next hour they debated the finer points of Job. I don't think they were probably ever so glad to LEAVE a place. /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

For the record, I think Jesus was one of the good guys. He taught much wisdom. And I'm truly happy for people who find Christianity fulfilling. I didn't, but that doesn't invalidate it as a spiritual path.

BB,
Vin

Vin

02-12-2003, 07:36 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by gamblefish:
I guess I should have been more clear when I posted this morning but I was kinda in a hurry. I never go knocking on doors, or grabbing people in the street to preach to them. Rather, I try to live my life by biblical principles and when someone asks me about my faith I am more than ready to share my beliefs with them. That's all....

Here's one for you: On a door in our neighborhood is a sign that reads- "Religious solicitors will be hideously martyred"!! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I posted in a hurry a few times today, too. I'm not sure I said a few things in the best possible way.

I tend to approach faith in the same way as you. If someone asks, I'll tell them anything I know or point them to another resource. But it's not a conversation I generally initiate. I don't have the right to try to influence someone's beliefs. I'll gladly share my own, but it's each individual's responsibility to make sense of the universe, and what works for me may not work for someone else.

I LOVE the sign, BTW. If it weren't for the fact that the only proselytizers who've ever come to my door in this neighborhood were children, I'd probably print one and post it. /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Vin

02-12-2003, 07:50 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Christian Bare:
For some of us spreading the Gospel is not hiding our Christianity and being examples of Christ. FOr others it is preaching and for others it is knocking on doors. Some help to build hospitals and schools, some help to teach children. All these things can be done in serving Christ and setting an example for the world. For some of us it is debating on an internet forum....

Hiding our light under a bucket is certainly against Christ. There is only one way and that way is Christ. I will shout from a mountain top and let all know. Those who decide not to believe, I will not continually shove it in their face, but I certainly will still remain an example to them. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Christian Bare,

I owe you an apology as well. I got hot under the collar this afternoon. I should have taken time to cool off before posting. And I should have remembered that I gave up anger as a useless emotion at last year's Spring Equinox.

When we can all tolerate and respect each other's beliefs, the world will be a much better place. I certainly do not believe that one should pretend to be something he/she isn't. Spirituality is a part of us as humans, for whatever reason. For some it is a larger part than others. To deny that is to deny a part of what makes us who we are.

We're going to have to agree to disagree on the "one way" bit. And that's fine. There's a saying in Pagan circles that if you ask five of us a question, you'll get at least six different answers. We're used to disagreeing, even with ourselves. /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Heck, for all I know, we agreed before this life that having open questions is related to a lesson we wanted to learn.

I have to pass on a message, too. I had lunch with a dear Christian friend of mine (and my wife's) with whom I sometimes debate theology. (It's good for both of us, and we both agree that it's safe -- neither of us is going to change his/her mind, but we have to THINK about our beliefs.) Anyway, I related the salient bits of the conversation from this morning. She asked me to tell you that we totally ruined her lunch; she was looking forward to a relaxing meal and she got a hot-headed Wiccan instead. /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

BB,
Vin

02-12-2003, 09:59 PM

We're told in 1 Peter 3:15, "be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear."

We're not to browbeat, try to intimidate, or try to force the gospel on anyone. We are to live Jesus Christ before others--to show His love to others. I've seen what happens when someone comes on too strong with someone and turns them off to the gospel instead of drawing them to it.

Unfortunately, there are too many people who claim to be Christians but have no idea what a Christian really is. They do more harm than good. Those of us who truly know the Saviour are just people with faults who are trying to live as God wants us to live. We often fail, but God is very forgiving if we confess our sin and ask for His forgiveness. He takes the rest of our lifetime changing us into what He wants us to be--conformed to the image of His Son: Romans 8:29. We don't suddenly become "perfect" when we accept Christ. There's a lifetime change if we allow Him to work in us (unfortunately many won't allow Him to work in them, including many who say they're Christians), and then perfection comes at the end of our lifetime when He calls us home.

There are some obnoxious people calling themselves Christians who could do the rest of us a favor and cease calling themselves Christians if they're not going to at least TRY to show the love of Christ in their words and actions. We are COMMANDED to love others, but NOT to condone what God says is sin, and certainly not to LIVE in sin.

I'm a lot like Thomas in the New Testament; I tend to be a doubter. I have a very difficult time trusting and living by faith. However, I figure that though I may miss out on a lot of "fun" in life like getting drunk and having a hang-over the next day, or suffering with lung cancer from smoking, or destroying my mind with drugs, I KNOW that because of what Jesus did on the cross, and the fact that I've trusted in Him and His sacrifice, then I've got an eternal home waiting for me. Not becasue of any goodness in me because says our righteousnesses are as filthy rags in His sight. It is HIS righteousness that makes US righteous. As I said, this change takes a lifetime, but GOD does the changing.

I look at it this way: If I'm wrong and Jesus didn't die on the cross to save us from our sins, or there's no such thing as sin and no heaven or hell, then I've lost nothing by believing and striving to live the way I believe I should. However, what if it IS all true?

Christians don't serve God for fear of being sent to hell. We get saved and trust in Jesus Christ and lose the fear because we have His assurance that we are His. Then we serve Him because we love Him for what He has done for us. Heaven is a reward for those who trust in the Saviour Who was sent. Hell is a place that was originally prepared for the devil and the fallen angels. Unfortunately, many people are rejecting God and the sacrifice of His Son. They refuse to believe the truth, and God cannot allow them into the heaven that He has prepared for those who accept Him. Hell is a real place where those who reject God and His Son will spend eternity. Believe it or reject it; it's up to you. Being forgiven doesn't give us a license to sin and get away with it. Our desires are changed by God. If they're not changed then a person needs to make sure He REALLY knows the Lord.
/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Vin

02-13-2003, 05:41 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Jon-Marc:
We're not to browbeat, try to intimidate, or try to force the gospel on anyone. We are to live Jesus Christ before others--to show His love to others....

I look at it this way: If I'm wrong and Jesus didn't die on the cross to save us from our sins, or there's no such thing as sin and no heaven or hell, then I've lost nothing by believing and striving to live the way I believe I should. However, what if it IS all true?

Christians don't serve God for fear of being sent to hell.... Hell is a real place where those who reject God and His Son will spend eternity. Believe it or reject it; it's up to you. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I really don't have time for this, but I just can't seem to let it go.... /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I'm truly glad that Christianity works for you and for anyone else who has freely chosen to follow that path. The argument "what if it IS true?" is the one that was most often pulled on me as a teen to try and keep me in line. It is the single most abusive thing any "Christian" ever said to me. When I finally recognized it for the mindgame it was, I realized that the entire religion (at least the flavor I was most exposed to) is one of fear, not love. I don't have time for that. Life is for living and enjoying, not for going about in terror of some eternal damnation. And my experience is the one that makes me think a large number, perhaps a majority, of Christians remain in the church out of fear. Just look at attendance v. membership to see evidence of that. People don't generally go somewhere frightening or that they perceive as irrelevant.

And I'll admit now that some churches artificially influence that number by listing people on their roles who are not members -- my wife's church, for example. They apparently feel that it was just an oversight on my part that I have only visited once in all the years I've lived here, so they list me as a member. Hah! /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

As for the claim that hell is a real place, I submit that this is a matter of faith. So far as I know, no one has ever been there and returned to report on conditions. No one can pinpoint it on a map (either terrestrial or "out there"). There is no scientific test to identify artifacts from there. There is nothing in rational thought or world philosophy that indicates such a place exists or needs to exist. The only mention of it is a few obscure references in an anthology of ancient philosophies collected and used as the guidebook for a religion. I submit that it was a human creation to frighten children into behaving, much like the boogeyman of modern times.

And now that I've written my own book, I'll stop for a while.... /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

BB,
Vin

Rik

02-13-2003, 06:04 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Jon-Marc:
I look at it this way: If I'm wrong and Jesus didn't die on the cross to save us from our sins, or there's no such thing as sin and no heaven or hell, then I've lost nothing by believing and striving to live the way I believe I should. However, what if it IS all true? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>This sounds extremely self-centred in that your adherence to your religious teachings is based on the potential impact on you depending on whether or not your beliefs prove to be correct. I am presumably wrong but isn't such concern for saving one's own skin contrary to Christian teaching?

Rik

02-13-2003, 07:30 AM

Jon-Marc...Very well said...Amen /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

theoldman

02-13-2003, 07:49 AM

Well in reading all the previous posts I think my long held belief of NEVER discuss religion (and polotics) is correct. In either category you seldom change a person's views and you probably will allienate them.

As for me when the subject comes up I tell people I belong to the Round Church so the devil can't corner me. (Alas, I've encountered a few round churches, but what the heck, it's still a good response!)

Trailscout

02-13-2003, 08:32 AM

Vin,

I wanted to jump into this cyber mudwrestling just for fun.

The "what if it is true?" is not from the Bible. My best guess is that some evangelical group came up with it around 20 years ago as a conversation starter.

I prefer starting with, "what makes for the ideal life?"

Teenagers pagan and Christian alike are notorious for living just for the moment, the consequences be damned. There may be some benefit in helping them slowly acquire the virtues of acts of selflessness, thinking about consequences, yet also learning to live in the moment without living for the moment. I don't think you can scare someone into a change of character or to change of worldview.

I do believe there is a hell and to some extent we all live in it right now. It is quite easy to prove. Forget all the jargon about flames and pitchforks. Hell is the disconnect between people and God, the disconnect among people with each other. Hell is not as much a place as it is a condition. It is not even a thing in itself as it is the absence of a thing, that thing being peace, harmony, love, light, kindness, etc.
If you prefer not to call this Hell, fine! It is a demonstrable reality right here in this life.

We teach that inn the afterlife, there will be a graduation, some to greater love and harmony and light. Some will descend to an abyss of isolation and separation and darkness. We teach that both places are merely the ultimate destination we choose for ourselves if you remain on one path or the other.
Oh this is a little oversimplified; our destiny also hinges on grace, (unmerited favour) we receive that may help us find the Shining Path, the impact of other wise souls in our life, etc.

In addition, love is personified in the Creator of all things. Ardent Calvinists most of all admit that irresistible grace and love of God is what draws us, not fear. Granted many are logically inconsistent and attempt to use pressure and fear, but their own highest teachings insist that we are called, not driven to the Holy One. I looked up the definition of God in the dictionary. The dictionary that I used said that the derivation of the word "God" comes from pagan times and literally means, "The One Who Calls Us". Again this is not Christian thought exclusively. It comes from ancient, ancient pagan Germanic roots.

Bright blessings!

Trailscout

Vin

02-13-2003, 11:16 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Trailscout:
I wanted to jump into this cyber mudwrestling just for fun.

The "what if it is true?" is not from the Bible. My best guess is that some evangelical group came up with it around 20 years ago as a conversation starter....

Teenagers pagan and Christian alike are notorious for living just for the moment, the consequences be damned. There may be some benefit in helping them slowly acquire the virtues of acts of selflessness, thinking about consequences, yet also learning to live in the moment without living for the moment. I don't think you can scare someone into a change of character or to change of worldview.... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Come on in! The more the merrier! /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I didn't mean to say that I think the "What if..." question is biblical. I'm almost certain that you're right and it was created as an evangelizing tool. That doesn't change the fact that it's been used to try and frighten people into behavior/personality changes.

Teens, no matter their spiritual path, are definitely still learning about personal responsibility. Teaching them that lesson is one of the most important parts of parenting. Mentors may help, but they don't have the right to substitute their values for the family's. We all benefit by teens (and those older than them) taking personal responsibility for their actions and the consequences.

I don't know whether you CAN scare someone into a behavior change. I tend to agree with you and think it's unlikely, although I think it depends on the kid in question. I do know that some people at least TRY to use fear as a tool to bring others in line. That's not very nice. I think it's certainly un-Christian. /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I've never come across that history of the word "god." Interesting. It does seem to be the way that just about every religion describes its deities.

BB,
Vin

gamblefish

02-13-2003, 02:06 PM

Originally posted by Vin:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> I don't know whether you CAN scare someone into a behavior change. I tend to agree with you and think it's unlikely, although I think it depends on the kid in question. I do know that some people at least TRY to use fear as a tool to bring others in line. That's not very nice. I think it's certainly un-Christian.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>If this is true, then our legal punishments are a waste of time. And I think our high crime rates here in the US are an indication that this is indeed true. To change the behavior, you must change the person's heart. And that is exactly what God goes about doing, but our co-operation is necessary.

But for a Christian, anyway, fear does at least play a small role in our conversion.

Psalm 111:10---The fear of the LORD [is] the beginning of wisdom: a good understanding have all they that do [his commandments]: his praise endureth for ever.

Who would not have just a little fear of the One who created the Heavens and Earth, and Who could, if He chooses, destroy all with a wave of His hand? As children, did we not fear the wrath of our parents when we disobeyed?

I think fear does play a small role in our conversion, but as Jon-Marc said: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> Christians don't serve God for fear of being sent to hell. We get saved and trust in Jesus Christ and lose the fear because we have His assurance that we are His. Then we serve Him because we love Him for what He has done for us. Heaven is a reward for those who trust in the Saviour Who was sent. Hell is a place that was originally prepared for the devil and the fallen angels. Unfortunately, many people are rejecting God and the sacrifice of His Son. They refuse to believe the truth, and God cannot allow them into the heaven that He has prepared for those who accept Him. Hell is a real place where those who reject God and His Son will spend eternity. Believe it or reject it; it's up to you. Being forgiven doesn't give us a license to sin and get away with it. Our desires are changed by God. If they're not changed then a person needs to make sure He REALLY knows the Lord.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Vin,
I have a sincere question for you: Do the deities that you believe in have any kind of power over humans? Did they have anything to do with the creation of the universe? (OK, that's two questions!). I am not asking in disrespect, I am truly interested in learning more about what you believe.

Vin

02-13-2003, 07:55 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by gamblefish:
Vin,
I have a sincere question for you: Do the deities that you believe in have any kind of power over humans? Did they have anything to do with the creation of the universe? (OK, that's two questions!). I am not asking in disrespect, I am truly interested in learning more about what you believe. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Gamblefish,

First, I agree totally about our legal system not really working. That's an excellent example of fear not actually effecting change.

To answer the question about deities is a bit more challenging. And I need to preface it by saying that there are more Pagan faiths than Wicca. Even within Wicca, there is a large degree of "live and let live." There is a loose set of guiding principles, but the details are up to the individual or group.

That said....

I personally happen to believe that all gods are different aspects of one godhead. Zeus, Thor, Diana, Brigid, Eostar, the Christian God... all are one. It's easier for me and makes more sense to me to relate to it/them as a duality of God and Goddess. They permeate the universe, both the physical and the spiritual. They exist in the ways stars and galaxies relate to each other, in the head and heart of each animal and plant in the universe (including us), and in the way all life comes together to form an interdependent web (that may have its own brand of consciousness).

Did they create the universe? Do they influence our daily lives. I'm not sure the questions have meaning. I think the godhead predates the big bang, and probably set the whole thing in motion by dreaming up quantum mechanics and whatever unified Theory of Everything we finally discover. I think that physical life is an inevitable outcome of the resultant chemistry anywhere conditions are even remotely right in the universe. I think that spiritual life (the spark that makes us more than the sum of our parts) is a direct reflection of the deity itself. I think each of us has an individual drive to understand life and ourselves personally, and that each bit of that understanding goes back to and helps the God/dess/es understand it/themselves. I think that even spiritual energy is conserved, so when one physical form wears out, the spirit/mind/soul spends a time reflecting on what it learned this time around, selects a new set of lessons to learn, and is reborn to do the whole thing again.

Physically, each of us is made of raw materials that come from the earth. I see the planet itself as the Goddess, the one who nurtures us, who protects us, who provides us what we need to keep going. The energy to keep the whole thing moving comes from the sun, our local star, the God. But again, those are just representations so that I can wrap my head around the concepts. They/it are actually much larger, as I say, filling the entire universe and beyond. They have minds and personalities, so you can relate to them individually while at the same time being part of them. They will help you out if you ask, mostly by providing guidance or lending energy to accomplish a task using your own abilities.

So, to offer short answers to your questions....

Did they create the universe? In a sense yes, but at the same time they ARE the universe. Do they have any kind of power over us? Again, in a sense yes, but it's more a nurturing relationship than one based on justice/punishment. I think they tend to sit back and see how the experiment is going. I don't think they directly caused my computer to crash because I swore at the idiot driver behind me this morning. (I think my computer crashed because they set up the universe to reflect back to each of us whatever we put out. If you put love and neighborly help in to the world, people will love and help you in return. If you put out anger and swearing at idiots on the road, people will be angry with you and treat you like an idiot.)

It's late here. Is this making any sense? /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Vin

Dolby

02-13-2003, 08:35 PM

Vin,

You made a great deal of sense. I couldn't have given a better answer. BB

Christian Bare

02-13-2003, 08:39 PM

Now we are getting into the dep darkness of the discusion.

What a wonderful saying "to use fear to try to change someones mind is bad" (my word, possibly bad paraphrase). People love to focus only on the fear aspect or religion. Through outh the ages, like a pedulum (sp?) we have rocked back and forth with fear and love. Mostly denominationalism or flavor of the day.

In the Old Testament, man quite often focusses as God is the GOd to fear... There are many direct references to this... But what is even more prevelant from the OT though the NT is the love that God has for us ALL.

Yes, God destroyed this city and that city for their Pagan idol worship and such and such. But He did it out of love. Love that others would see His presence in their lives. He only asks for a simple relationship with each and everyone of us.

It's not about "If it works for you." To say that Christianity "works for me" would be an irrespective statement. Let's see, there is a narrow path to follow, you need to take a message to places you aren't wanted, you are to suffer, and so on and so on. Yeah, I guess it works for me.

No. The God who created all that is and all that ever was wants a relationship with me and He sent His Son (fully God and fully man) to earth to show me how to live my life. And He sent Him for YOU too. Who is YOU? ALL who would follow. Will ALL follow? No... Why bother evangelizing? Because that GOd that Loves me and that I love wants me to show my love to others. Yes, to save them from damnation, but more so that He can have a loving relationship with them.

The "what if it is true" statement is valid for those in certain states of growth. That one statement will not "save" you, but for someone it may be the right word to get them in a bit deeper.

For those who choose not to talk about religion. Well, that is certainly your choice, just as it is my choice to talk about it and some people's choice to follow pagan religions. But if you are a Christian, you are not sharing the love that is given you from above and I beseech you to shine the light. It's not always comfortable. Much like the first trip to the nudist resort. But once you are there, you won't even realize you've bared it all.

Vin, I judge you to the point that I know you need a relationship with God, through Jesus Christ. But I would not say where you will end up eternally, because for as much as I know, God is tugging at your heart right this moment. Something I've said or something someone else has said is touching a nerve deep inside you. You may reject it today, and again tomorrow, and for years, but that tugging will always be there.

The more hardened your heart gets, the harder it will be for you to feel that tugging. But it will still be there. And no matter what you've stood for, what you've done, what others have done to you, the God of the universe, the creator of the heavens and the earth loves you... He knows all you've been through in your life... In an instant He could snap you into belief, but He allows you to come. He doesn't want Christianity to "work for you". He wants to serve you and show you the joy of serving others. Nothing you have done will keep Him from accepting you.

Or for that matter, anyone on this board. Christian or non-Christian. It's not about FEAR, it's a story about LOVE. God changes people. He is as alive today as He was 2000 years ago... He works in our lives daily. He comforts our sorrows and washes away our shame. He restores us.

All who have been hurt by Christians, be careful. Those who hurt you may have been facing challenges themselves that you cannot understand. It's not a good excuse. But we are all people who are trapped in sin and many times we may fail. BUt Christ will pick you up again. He loves YOU, no matter who you are.

He doesn't judge you partaking in nudism! He will judge you for partaking in those things that sometimes go along with it. But most of us would say that those things are the exception and not the rule. DOn't let the exceptions become the rule. Stay pure and enjoy His world as you spread His Gospel.

I must agree to disagree with you Vin. But that does not mean that GOd will stop tugging. I need to move on... But I'm always here to answer your questions...

Fear not! For the Lord is with you! Stand Tall and walk that narrow path.

Love for Christ

Vin

02-14-2003, 06:10 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Dolby:
Vin,

You made a great deal of sense. I couldn't have given a better answer. BB <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>MM,

Thanks. /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I always get nervous about trying to answer the "What do you believe?" question. I can say what _I_ believe, and that it's primarily Wiccan, but I don't want to misrepresent the variety that is Paganism/Neopaganism.

BB,
Vin

Vin

02-14-2003, 06:25 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Christian Bare:
Now we are getting into the dep darkness of the discusion.... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I don't think we're into darkness at all. Gamblefish asked what I believe and I answered him/her (sorry I don't remember). We're shining the light of tolerance and reason on the discussion of religion. Your brand of Christianity _can_ withstand that, no?

If you want to learn what I believe, that's fine. But I can't tell from your posts if your argument is with me, with my beliefs, or if you're trying to keep the flock in line. There seems to be an undercurrent of "Don't listen to, don't read this person. He's trying to lead you astray."

And may I remind you at this point that your practice of nudism would be enough to get you removed from the pulpit in most Christian churches? That most congregations would not let you talk to them for fear of being led astray. Neither one of us is exactly in the mainstream.

As I've said before, I'm truly happy for you that you find your path fulfilling. It is a rewarding path for those who freely choose to follow it. My path is equally fulfilling and rewarding to me and to the thousands (millions?) of others who follow _it_.

I guess I'm wondering at this point how Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Taoists, Zoroastrians, etc. react in real-life when you get into these discussions? How do they handle your opinion that their religions are invalid?

BB,
Vin

Frank R

02-14-2003, 01:38 PM

"If this is true, then our legal punishments are a waste of time. And I think our high crime rates here in the US are an indication that this is indeed true. To change the behavior, you must change the person's heart." by Gamblefish

"First, I agree totally about our legal system not really working. That's an excellent example of fear not actually effecting change." by Vin

Both of these posts miss the true intent of prison. The reason for locking people is to punish and that should be all. Any "rehabilitation" that may occur is a fringe benefit, not the reason for locking criminals away. The reason it is not working is that our legal system is breaking down due to bleeding heart judges who let criminals go free for some alleged error by the police or sentencing them with a slap on the wrist for some felony.

Vin

02-14-2003, 02:10 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Frank R:
The reason for locking people is to punish and that should be all. Any "rehabilitation" that may occur is a fringe benefit, not the reason for locking criminals away. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I disagree. The purpose for locking people up is to keep the rest of society safe from them until you can be reasonably sure they won't re-offend. If you make no effort to keep them from re-offending, you can never release them. Therefore it's illogical to think that the purpose of incarceration is simply punishment. After all, isn't the goal of punishment to change behavior? Since the only long-term behavior changes result from techniques besides punishment, it isn't logical not to use them. Simple fear of prison is obviously inadequate to modify behavior.

gamblefish

02-16-2003, 07:12 AM

Thanks, Vin, for sharing your beliefs. You were quite clear in your explanations.

I will agree that what we put out is what comes back to us...in the bible this is known and "sowing and reaping". If you sow good things, then you will reap good things. If you sow evil, then you will reap evil. Over and over, the bible tells us that we should choose good (love, kindness, gentleness, patience...) over evil (shelfishness, hate, deception...).

Originally posted by FrankR:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> Both of these posts miss the true intent of prison. The reason for locking people is to punish and that should be all. Any "rehabilitation" that may occur is a fringe benefit, not the reason for locking criminals away. The reason it is not working is that our legal system is breaking down due to bleeding heart judges who let criminals go free for some alleged error by the police or sentencing them with a slap on the wrist for some felony.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I think I agree with both you, Frank, and Vin on our system of punishment...
As I see it, the fear of prison is what is supposed to deter someone of commiting a crime.
Unfortunately, most criminals do not fear prison. Therefore, prison is an ineffectual deterrent to crime. This is partially because, as Frank said, punishments are too soft (i.e.-slaps on the wrist). I think the only benefit of prisons is as Vin said, to keep the offender away from society, thus making society a little safer.

From a biblical standpoint, prison is just not scriptural. The "eye for an eye" system of punishment as used by Isreal in the Old Testament would be a far more effective tool for reducing crime.

Vin

02-16-2003, 09:26 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by gamblefish:
Thanks, Vin, for sharing your beliefs. You were quite clear in your explanations. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>You're welcome. Glad it made sense. /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Jochanaan

02-17-2003, 03:51 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Trailscout:
The "what if it is true?" is not from the Bible. My best guess is that some evangelical group came up with it around 20 years ago as a conversation starter.

Trailscout <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>It's actually older than that! /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif My father, a physicist who died/went to his reward/changed continua (you see I'm not hung up on words) 40 years and a few days ago, believed something very similar. One day at work another scientist asked him, "Prove to me there's a God!" He replied, "I can't prove it to you, but I've bet my life on it." I'm certain he won eternal currency.

I'm glad to see passion and reason take their rightful places in this discussion. /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

02-18-2003, 01:57 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>
I think I agree with both you, Frank, and Vin on our system of punishment...
As I see it, the fear of prison is what is supposed to deter someone of commiting a crime.
Unfortunately, most criminals do not fear prison. Therefore, prison is an ineffectual deterrent to crime. This is partially because, as Frank said, punishments are too soft (i.e.-slaps on the wrist). I think the only benefit of prisons is as Vin said, to keep the offender away from society, thus making society a little safer.

From a biblical standpoint, prison is just not scriptural. The "eye for an eye" system of punishment as used by Isreal in the Old Testament would be a far more effective tool for reducing crime. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>If what you said was true then the murder rate would have gone down when they started the death penalty back up. It not only didn't go down but now we are putting some innocent people to death. As faulty as the US judicial system is the government has no right to put anyone to death. The former governor of Illinois had the right idea when he changed all the death sentences to life in prison. Not only did he save innocent lives but he saved the taxpayers millions. It costs much more to put a prisoner to death than to hold them for life.

02-18-2003, 02:45 PM

I've heard that it's cheaper to keep someone in prison for life than to execute him. However, I can't understand how it can cost more to inject poison into someone , or however they execute these days, than to pay to keep him imprisoned for 20 or more years, feeding him, clothing him, supplying him with entertainment, an exercise gym, and whatever else they give them in prison. Prison is supposed to be a punishment. For some criminals it's a reward, because it's a better life than they had on the outside, and everything's free for them there.

The fear of prison only keeps "honest" people honest. It doesn't deter criminals from committing crimes. I have often said that the only reason I work for a living is because I'm too proud to beg and too scared of getting caught to steal. Besides, I like to be able to come and go as I please, and I'm not strong enough to survive in prison. I consider myself to be an honest person, but no one is above temptation. /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Suntied

02-18-2003, 02:53 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by cyndiann:
If what you said was true then the murder rate would have gone down when they started the death penalty back up. [/QB] <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I don't mean to be intruding on a long time debate. But...

Cyndiann, Four score and fifteen years ago their forefathers (independence declaration mimic)left them to fend for their selves in a brutal, violent society. The life these criminals have grown up with has left our inadiquate judicial system a complex dillima. The problems you people are debating are much larger than "eye for an eye" or "rehabilitation instead of exicution". The criminals that get caught need to be punished, yet the reason they are criminals is the real problem. The reason there is a problem isn't the judicial system... it is the society that has made nudity a crime. The legal Mumbo-Jumbo that has created the illigitamate law-suits has also created the laws to protect us from those law-suits. In the same adjenda, the laws that incarserate the sex offenders... have made it illegal for us to be naked. I think the point is (if I have one) the society we have been raised with is not the society we want to grow old with!
Forgive my spelling... and believe in a new society were a human is just that. /infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

02-18-2003, 04:09 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Jon-Marc:
I've heard that it's cheaper to keep someone in prison for life than to execute him. However, I can't understand how it can cost more to inject poison into someone , or however they execute these days, than to pay to keep him imprisoned for 20 or more years, feeding him, clothing him, supplying him with entertainment, an exercise gym, and whatever else they give them in prison. Prison is supposed to be a punishment. For some criminals it's a reward, because it's a better life than they had on the outside, and everything's free for them there.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>The reason it costs so much is because you have to add the cost of all the courts one must go through before being truly eligible to die. It is appealed again and again till there are no apeals left, and for good reason. Our system is so faulty that even with this we still find innocent people on death row. It can take years for those trials to proceed and so you'd have to add the cost of keeping them incarcerated as well. It is common for a deathrow inmate to spend well over ten years just going through the necessary motions of appeals.

When Florida started using DNA testing as legal evidence they had to let many people on death row go because the tests found them innocent. Even today these tests aren't automatically given as they should be. You have to ask to have evidence tested and they can say no (which is so silly) for years, even till death!

02-18-2003, 04:48 PM

Cyndiann,

Unfortunately, it's very true that many innocent people have been incarcerated and even executed. That's why I wouldn't want to be a defense lawyer or a prosecting attorney. I would hate to be responsible for sending an innocent person to prison (or worse yet, to his death), and I wouldn't like the idea of an innocent person I defended being found guilty.

When I was called for jury selection, I told them in the court room that I would rather set a guilty man free than send an innocent man to prison. I said I didn't know what "reasonable doubt" meant. I said that I would have to be 100% possible that he was guilty, or I would find him not guilty. I wasn't selected for jury duty.

I read recently that 1800 imprisoned people were set free after DNA tests found them not guilty. I hate to think how many innocent people have been imprisoned or executed over 1000's of years.

While I believe in getting rid of killers, there should be absolutely NO doubt as to their guilt. Unfortunately, there too often is no doubt even when they're NOT guilty.

The other problem is that many killers, rapists, child molesters, thieves and many other criminals are set free too soon because there isn't enough room to hold them all.
/infopop/emoticons/icon_confused.gif

scottnc

02-18-2003, 06:53 PM

[QUOTE]Originally posted by SuntiedinOhio:
Four score and fifteen years ago their forefathers (independence declaration mimic)...

I think it's "Four score and seven years ago..." from the Gettysburg Address (my guess is you already know that..it's a good opener). The Gettysburg Address can be interpreted as A declaration of independence even if it isn't THE Declaration of Independence.

Speaking of declarations of independence, my most recent one was joining this forum as a naturist. I enjoy reading the posts and seeing the diversity of opinions.

Signing off -
Scott - frequent tourist at historical sites
BA in History - Magna *** Laude - for the love of history;
MBA - By the skin of my teeth - for the job marketability & money

Suntied

02-18-2003, 07:13 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by scottnc:
(my guess is you already know that..it's a good opener). The Gettysburg Address can be interpreted as A declaration of independence even if it isn't THE Declaration of Independence.

Speaking of declarations of independence, my most recent one was joining this forum as a naturist. I enjoy reading the posts and seeing the diversity of opinions.

QB] <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I was just trying to be funny; hope you didn't sign off because of me??? I don't have all the BS you have enjoyed... but I am for real. Nudity is the best, most unaccepted, pleasure the world has to offer (a bit extreme) and welcome to it... enjoy the experience.

Declaration of Freedom??? /infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif /infopop/emoticons/icon_confused.gif /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif /infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Frank R

02-20-2003, 02:01 PM

If what you said was true then the murder rate would have gone down when they started the death penalty back up. It not only didn't go down but now we are putting some innocent people to death. As faulty as the US judicial system is the government has no right to put anyone to death. The former governor of Illinois had the right idea when he changed all the death sentences to life in prison. Not only did he save innocent lives but he saved the taxpayers millions. It costs much more to put a prisoner to death than to hold them for life.[/QB][/QUOTE]

One point. You say "the government has no right to put anyone to death." If true, then we have a new class of super criminals for whom there is no punishment. PA state trooper Phillip Kessner was murdered by three men who had escaped from prision where they where already life sentences for murder. So your punishment is going to be what? We are going to give them two or three life sentences? That ought to really make someone think before they kill again. I can, and have, written rather long articles on why we should have the death penalty but do not intend to do so now. Why?
This is a nudist website. I hope the vast majority of us are nudist and support having greater freedom to be nude, more places to be nude etc. If I want to oppose gun control, I will go the NRA web site. If I want to oppose abortion, I will go to the National Right to Life web site. Since we all (or at least most) of us here support nudism, let's just stick to the things we agree on. Let's work together as a team to fight for what we agree on and let's not divide ourselves because there are things we do not agree on. So team mates, let's keep our eye on the ball of nudism and not be distracted by what we do not agree with others nudist about.

Suntied

02-20-2003, 04:34 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Frank R:
So team mates, let's keep our eye on the ball of nudism and not be distracted by what we do not agree with others nudist about.[/QB] <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Frank R,
You have an excellent IDEA!!! I don't know anything about criminals, except they were forced to crime by there surroundings, whether it was one exteam or the other. Many of the posts get so far away from naturism because we are all flustrated with the world and it's problems... one is that we have to wear clothes.

Let's stick to that problem and how it RELATES to the other problems!!!

They won't even let them be naked when they exicute them. That's the way I want to go (along time from now)

Keep your eye on the ball freinds!
Good one Frank

Bart/Suntied /infopop/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

BigTim

03-12-2003, 12:53 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Vin:
But therein lies the rub. What gives anyone the right to present witness or preach the gospel uninvited? That is disrespectful of others' beliefs in that it implies that they are somehow inferior or invalid and must be improved or changed. It is an invasion of privacy, purely and simply. It is discourteous in the extreme.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>That "right to present witness uninvited" depends on whether you live in a democratic environment or a communistic environment. Seeing as how you live in the USA, surely you must support freedom of religion and speech, which gives all of us the freedom to speak about our religions to others. If you don't want to hear it, all you have to do is indicate that you're not interested. For many Christians, following in Christ's footsteps means carrying on a public ministry. Jesus sent his disciples into the towns two by two and from house to house and from door to door to preach the message. He also commanded his disciples to 'go and make disciples of people of all the nations, baptizing them.'

So, that right is not only granted by government, even better, it is a God-given right. No one here publicly condemned or was rubbed the wrong way by your religious views, it would be big of you to reciprocate.

03-12-2003, 02:09 PM

BigTim...Right On! /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Vin

03-12-2003, 07:55 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by BigTim:
[QUOTE]That "right to present witness uninvited" depends on whether you live in a democratic environment or a communistic environment. Seeing as how you live in the USA, surely you must support freedom of religion and speech....

No one here publicly condemned or was rubbed the wrong way by your religious views, it would be big of you to reciprocate. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Great gods, this thread simply will not die! /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I don't see where I condemned anyone's religious views. As I've said -- repeatedly -- I respect all spiritual paths. They are all ways to approach the same thing, and as such each is equally valid and deserving of respect.

I also don't see where I've said that I don't support anyone's right to freedom of religion or freedom of speech. On the contrary, I strongly support both of those. Not having any test for God/dess, the only provable grantors of those rights, in the US, were the men who wrote the US constitution. They were very wise to do so. Government and economic systems really have nothing to do with it.

However, the exercise of any right is not unlimited. I think (without re-reading this entire thread), that my point was that to disrespect anyone's path is simply rude and will not likely endear you to them. Presenting witness uninvited is just about as disrespectful as it gets for the reasons I've already outlined. And as I've already said, it's my experience that a simple "No, thank you" never stops it. That's all I was saying.

Now, if I ask you what you believe, I hope you would feel free to tell me. Just as I'll tell you if you ask what I believe -- assuming there's anything not already answered in this thread. /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I can't believe you signed up today just to respond to one of my posts. What drew you to this discussion that had been dormant for a month? Which church/religion to you belong to? What do you believe and why?

BB,
Vin

sailorman72

03-13-2003, 12:42 AM

This sure is a long thread, so I'll be short and get back to the original message that started it all. I attend an Assembly of God church in the US and now attend one here in Singapore. Not too many Pentecostal christians in the nudist venues in which I have been associated.

Regards,

Steve

Vin

03-13-2003, 05:29 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by sailorman72:
This sure is a long thread, so I'll be short and get back to the original message that started it all. I attend an Assembly of God church in the US and now attend one here in Singapore. Not too many Pentecostal christians in the nudist venues in which I have been associated. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I'll bet! I wouldn't expect too many AOG churches in Singapore, either. /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

BB,
Vin

sailorman72

03-13-2003, 02:07 PM

Vin,
It may surprise you that there are almost 50 AOG churches here in Singapore ranging in size from a home fellowship to the one I attend which has over 5000 members. The one I attend has 6 english services, 4 chinese, tamil, indonesian, philippino and malaysian services each weekend.

There are several other pentecostal or charismatic churches here in Singapore that also have over 5000 members.

Yep, I was surprised too.

Vin

03-13-2003, 08:31 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by sailorman72:
Vin,
It may surprise you that there are almost 50 AOG churches here in Singapore ranging in size from a home fellowship to the one I attend which has over 5000 members. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>You're right -- I am surprised. /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Now finding a nudist among all those people... in Singapore... that's just amazing. /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Bright Blessings,
Vin

03-23-2003, 10:00 AM

WE have been taking a religious poll on www.naturist-christians.org (http://www.naturist-christians.org) To my surprise the number of members of the Jewish faith has increased to over 30%. We have about 18% Catholic and the balance are other denominations including a significant number of Mormons, Mennonite, Quaker, Seventh Day Adventist and virtually every denomination in the US and worldwide as our membership is from perhaps 25 countries.

Bill Martin

raven

03-24-2003, 04:17 PM

I'm native american. We do not have a specific name to call our religion. Some go to the native american church but it is not like the usual churches you think about. To us religion is part of our daily lives. We wake up and pray to the creator for letting us live to see another sun rise. When we go to sleep we pray to the creator to keep our family and friends safe through the night. We pray for guidance, strength, courage, wellness, and thankfulness. One of the things different about us is that we pray anywhere we feel like it. There is no need to go to a church or temple. The creator created everything here on earth and in the skies. All is part of him, so when we tie a prayer bundle to a tree and say a prayer the creator hears. Religion is not something we do it's who we are.

Jochanaan

03-26-2003, 12:41 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by raven:
I'm native american. We do not have a specific name to call our religion. Religion is not something we do it's who we are. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>That is the way true religions should be. Not just one day in seven, but every day, even every moment.

I have read that, before the white Europeans arrived on this continent, the natives were generally much less concerned with exposure of the body than Americans are now. It is implied that our white ancestors taught the native Americans to be ashamed of their bodies. Can you comment more on this?

wannabenaked2001

03-26-2003, 04:41 PM

Excellent question! /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

raven

03-26-2003, 06:12 PM

It is true that before the Europeans, Spanish, or any other culture arrived many tribes thought nothing of body exposure. The people saw their body as a gift from the creator. To feel ashamed about it meant that you felt ashamed about the one who created it. Many southern tribes, like my own Houma tribe, traditional dress was a woven palmetto skirt for the women and a breechclout for the men. Nothing else. The climate was and is so hot and humid that to wear anything else would be unthought of. Even today all prayers and ceromonies are encouraged to be done in the nude as to be closer to the creator. The personal prayers at my home are either done nude or traditional dress. Northern tribes also sometimes prayed nude or in as little clothing as possible. I was told as a child that we were brought in to this world nude and were given everything we needed to survive. If we needed more as we grew older the creator provided it. If he did not provide clothing when we were born it meant we did not need it. Also our clothing was made of plants or animals. To take more than you needed was a bad thing to do. Take only when and what was necessary not just to say you have it.

raven

03-26-2003, 07:03 PM

What really makes me laugh is that the colonist or missionaries thought that we were immoral because we bathed so often. When in reality we were only swimming. We swam in the nude in the old days(I still do) and the colonist thought that since we had no clothing on we were bathing. Although we bathed every day, mostly in the morning to greet the new day, swimming occured whenever time or the temperature allowed us to do so. And while in the water we had an opportune time to clean ourselves at the same time. It seems that they saw many of our ideals and culture as immoral with our lack of clothing on the top of the list. To tell you the truth I think that humans in general lost many good things in the name of civilization. And civilization is only a facade. I turn on the tv or radio or read the news paper and see all the war's and killing and abuse and neglect and think how things use to be before.

Oceanair

03-28-2003, 05:20 AM

Jim /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif [/QB][/QUOTE]

I have enjoyed the Assembly Of God Church They have great bible teaching and also seem to have some of the best worship services I have seen.

Cardiff

03-29-2003, 01:58 PM

In answer to "what religion am I?", I am a Seventhday Adventist. I ahve been for all my life. Most Adventists are against being a naturist but I feel comfortable about it.

Jochanaan

03-29-2003, 04:11 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by raven:
What really makes me laugh is that the colonist or missionaries thought that we were immoral because we bathed so often. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Ah, 'tis true, 'tis true.

I have long felt ashamed of my forefathers (well, not mine specifically, but you know what I mean) who took the land, livelihood, and lives of the natives here. We came in the name of God, the Just and Merciful Father, and in His name destroyed people made in His image (although it must be said that some missionaries protested the slaughter). One can see why many Tsalagi, Lakota, Dine', and others both fear and hate those of European ancestry. But I am glad, raven, that you have entered this dialogue and seem to bear no ill will. After all, we're all human under our skins. (I was about to say, all the same, but if that were true we'd all be nudists!) /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Ginge of Oz

03-30-2003, 05:21 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by raven:
It is true that before the Europeans, Spanish, or any other culture arrived many tribes thought nothing of body exposure. The people saw their body as a gift from the creator. To feel ashamed about it meant that you felt ashamed about the one who created it. Many southern tribes, like my own Houma tribe, traditional dress was a woven palmetto skirt for the women and a breechclout for the men. Nothing else. The climate was and is so hot and humid that to wear anything else would be unthought of. Even today all prayers and ceromonies are encouraged to be done in the nude as to be closer to the creator. The personal prayers at my home are either done nude or traditional dress. Northern tribes also sometimes prayed nude or in as little clothing as possible. I was told as a child that we were brought in to this world nude and were given everything we needed to survive. If we needed more as we grew older the creator provided it. If he did not provide clothing when we were born it meant we did not need it. Also our clothing was made of plants or animals. To take more than you needed was a bad thing to do. Take only when and what was necessary not just to say you have it. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>You are so right, Raven!

The creator has given us all we need, but many of the people in my culture (I live on the east coast of Australia) want more than they need. My upbringing as a Roman Catholic also meant no discussion of nudity, the changes that happen in the body at puberty, or sex, so I was quite surprised to learn that adult females actually had pubic hair! In your culture, I'm sure the familiarity with daily, ordinary nudity would have meant that you grew up knowing about the changes in the body as people grew up, whereas in my culture the genitals and female breasts were always hidden. I am still a Catholic, and believe in the way Jesus taught, but I know that both Jesus and my creator God love me and all others as they were made. I came into this world nude, hope to leave it nude, and want to be nude as often as possible in between.

My Anglo-Saxon ancestors also messed up the traditional culture of Australia's Aborigines, and made them wear clothes as well. Where I live (160km north of Sydney) you can go nude for at least 9 or 10 months of the year, so, as you say, wearing clothes is using more than you need!

I hope your people never forget the wisdom of their forefathers! As I sat nude on a rock by the sea today, feeling the sun and the wind, and watching the power of the waves, I talked to my creator and felt him close to me. I know and understand why your people always prayed nude. There is no other way to pray!

Peace be with you, Raven!
/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Naturist Mark

03-30-2003, 08:27 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> My upbringing as a Roman Catholic also meant no discussion of nudity, the changes that happen in the body at puberty, or sex, so I was quite surprised to learn that adult females actually had pubic hair! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I used to think adult females DID HAVE pubic hair! Doesn't seem to be so true anymore, hmmm ...

raven

03-30-2003, 05:27 PM

Not all women have pubic hair. Many native american women that I know of have a very light dusting of hair. So little in fact that if looking from more than 10 feet it looks like they don't have any at all. And I know atleast 3 women not including me who went through puberty without growing pubic hair. Most natives with little or no European blood have very little hair any where on the body except the top of the head. Some really have no need to shave.

raven

03-30-2003, 05:40 PM

One other thing I'd like to add is that when both native boys and girls go through puberty it is celebrated. Every one in the family and all the friends know about it. Ceremonies are done and prayers said and songs sung. And on the last day of the celebration the shaman walks through the rez singing about how the child now considered an adult has cast of his or her childhood. Feasts are prepared and the dances last long into the night. Every child dreams of this day. It means more to us than Christmas.

Jochanaan

03-31-2003, 02:50 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by raven:
One other thing I'd like to add is that when both native boys and girls go through puberty it is celebrated. Every one in the family and all the friends know about it. Ceremonies are done and prayers said and songs sung. And on the last day of the celebration the shaman walks through the rez singing about how the child now considered an adult has cast of his or her childhood. Feasts are prepared and the dances last long into the night. Every child dreams of this day. It means more to us than Christmas. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Like yours, many old cultures worldwide celebrate puberty as the beginning of adulthood. Civilization, unfortunately, seems to push back adulthood and introduce excessive inhibition regarding sexuality. In going "forward" we have actually tied up part of our humanity.

I hesitate to make too many comments on this subject for fear of being labeled a hedonist or worse, but excessive sexual inhibition is as destructive as improper indulgence. We need balance. We may well be able to learn it from those old cultures that were formerly despised as "primitive."

missouriboy

04-01-2003, 03:08 AM

One major reason for the ancient rush to sexuality was survival of the species, due to the much lower life expectancy back then. If people were going to reproduce, they had better get started just as soon as they were physically able.

The longer expectancy of modern times has just extended every phase of life, that's all. I guess the main one now, as opposed to then, is our much longer period of formal education, which ideally needs to be finished prior to starting the reproduction phase.

David77

04-01-2003, 03:37 AM

Missouriboy, Very good point.
Having worked in the field of social work for over 35 years, I have seen the tragedy of "children having children".

Vin

04-01-2003, 07:00 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Jochanaan:
[Excessive] sexual inhibition is as destructive as improper indulgence. We need balance. We may well be able to learn it from those old cultures that were formerly despised as "primitive." <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I agree entirely. Unfortunately, in the US anyway, I'm not sure we'll ever manage to throw off the Puritans and regain that sense of balance. And so long as it takes at least 13 years to get a barely adequate education, we'll still have the problems created by an extended childhood. Has anyone considered that humans spend more of their lifespans in "childhood" than any other species? Why is that?

I agree with David77 that children having children may be tragic in our current society. Yet it doesn't appear to be that way in societies where young parents are still the norm. I wonder if the reason it is so here may be that we've withdrawn the support mechanisms for young parents as a form of "punishment?"

missouriboy

04-02-2003, 01:45 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Vin:
...humans spend more of their lifespans in "childhood" than any other species? Why is that? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I would suggest it's because humans are the only species with culture, and it takes long education to instill and preserve that culture.

Other species have societies (chimps, for example) but it's all instinct, and never changes over eons.

Primitive humans grew from early reproduction and minimal culture, to later reproduction and higher culture, in noticeably relative proportion.

Cardiff

04-02-2003, 07:24 AM

I know I am changing the subject a bit but I wanted to post here because of the religious subjects, and I need your prayers.
I am off to war. I am a Navy physician's assistant attached to the Marines. I am going to a forward combat hospital "somewhere" east. I do not know if I will be able to communicate for a while.

Cardiff

wannabenaked2001

04-02-2003, 09:13 AM

Cardiff, My thoughts and prayers go with you.

God bless.
God's speed.
And thank you for your service! /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

krlough

04-02-2003, 06:42 PM

I was baptised and confirmed in a Lutheran church,but was driven away from Christianity by the attitudes there.I spent a few years as a pagan/wiccan.I have since found what feels like "home" with the Seventh Day Adventists,and am happy to have been saved again. /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Kevin

Dale B

04-02-2003, 07:58 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by nudistwheelchair:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by RalphVa:
church of Christ, non-traditionalist, just follow the Bible.

Ralph <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>are you part of the Boston Movement <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I believe that this "Boston Movement" is actually known as "The International Churches of Christ".

I have attended services in KC, MO; Denver, CO; and Des Moines, IA. In my opinion (just an opinion) that there can be no other "true" church. Again, this is just my opinion.

missouriboy

04-03-2003, 01:45 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Dale B:
...there can be no other "true" church... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I read a quote once, I can't remember by whom, that went something like this:

"There are over 200 organized religions in the world, each one claiming to be the only valid one, and that if you don't ascribe to their teachings you will burn in hell. Now, with odds like that, how can I be assured of picking the right one? So that's why I am an atheist."

I'm not saying whether I agree or disagree with it, I just thought I'd share here what I thought to be the best argument for atheism I've ever seen. I have to admit it makes just as much sense as having 200 different religions...

shãybare

04-03-2003, 06:05 AM

Cardiff, I wish you well as I do all our troops. May you all return home soon-safe and sound. Peace always, Shaylin

shãybare

04-03-2003, 06:12 AM

I somehow got caught in a loop and couldn't get out. SWorry 'bout that. /infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

BrianM

04-03-2003, 06:32 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Dale B:
In my opinion (just an opinion) that there can be no other "true" church. Again, this is just my opinion. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I am thinking of joining this new church I found. It seems to be the only "true" church also.
www.landoverbaptist.org (http://www.landoverbaptist.org)

Vin

04-03-2003, 11:06 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by BrianM:
I am thinking of joining this new church I found. It seems to be the only "true" church also.
www.landoverbaptist.org (http://www.landoverbaptist.org) <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>LOL! I'd forgotten about that site. I might even consider converting if I could have Ms. Bowers for a spiritual advisor. /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

gamblefish

04-03-2003, 12:49 PM

I have to say that I found that site rather disturbing...

I love to poke fun as much as the next guy, but that site is downright blasphemous.

Vin

04-03-2003, 07:21 PM

BrianM

04-04-2003, 10:20 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by gamblefish:
I have to say that I found that site rather disturbing...

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I have to agree...but probably for different reasons.
It has little to do with nudity & religion, however, one of the Bible quizes mentions the Isaiah, preaching nude issue.
Just as the puritan influence has affected issues related to public nudity, I think this website only goes to show that 1) Bible teachings have changed drastically over the last few thousand years and conversly 2)There are many contradictions in the Bible and many "sins" which modern religions ignor. This creates a new perspective when tying to use Judeo- Christian Bible scripture to support the right to practice nudism. Whether it is supported or discouraged in Bible scripture, really shouldn't matter, since you should be able to spin the right to be nude any way you want. If it is good for teh public and doesn't hurt others, then it should be allowed. Likewise, just as many horrible actions depicted in teh Bible are now illegal, one could say that modern day reform of religious beliefs has changed public nudity from an accepted action to a forbidden one. Look at all the horrible things that are practiced in the Bible (as normal actions), like slavery, rape, child abuse, yada, yada, yada..... Society has deemed those acts as not good, and we have laws today to forbid them. On the other hand, many sins in the Bible are no longer "sins", like eating certain foods, divorce, etc. etc. etc.
So in summary, the Bible is a reference of how things used to be in a certain world. One who believes that it is the infallable word of God and that we should live by the Bibles words believes in a strange and wicked God.

gamblefish

04-04-2003, 01:14 PM

I'll just say this:

We Christians have brought alot of ridicule upon ourselves with foolish behavior. I will agree that some of the stuff on that site is right on the mark when it comes to some of the goofy things Christians have done.

I guess what I don't like is that the site in general makes a mockery of the message of Christ. I realize it is tongue in cheek, but it still bothers me.

Please realize that I just wanted to voice my opinion. If you get a kick out of that site, then knock yourself out.

raven

04-04-2003, 07:44 PM

Not sure if this has any importance to this discussion but tonight I watched a show about the Branch Dividians who lived in Waco, Texas and the ten year aniversery of the tragedy there. Seems to me that they were a peaceful bunch of people who wanted only to practice thier religion. Some one said that there was child abuse going on and that they were stock piling weapons. No evidence was found in the child abuse issue and it was stated by the government officals that they were owning and selling guns and that it was legal to stock pile them. What I can't seem to figue out is that if these people were innocent how come so many were killed. As I watched the two and a half hour show it seemed to ME that the ATF and the FBI some how used thier power to kill these people, which included women and children, for the fact that three ATF officers died. Many press people and onlookers not with either the Davidians or the ATF and FBI say that the ATF shot first and that the Davidians only defended themselves. To ME this seems as a way for the government to wipe out religions it finds offensive. Out of all the evidence shown that the government was in the wrong they were accquited of all charges while the surviving Davidians were jailed for the murder of the three ATF officers. What do you think of this?

Frank R

04-05-2003, 04:18 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by raven:
...I watched a show about the Branch Dividians ... they were a peaceful bunch of people who wanted only to practice thier religion.... No evidence was found in the child abuse issue and it was stated by the government officals that they were owning and selling guns and that it was legal to stock pile them. What I can't seem to figue out is that if these people were innocent how come so many were killed... it seemed to ME that the ATF and the FBI some how used thier power to kill these people,....To ME this seems as a way for the government to wipe out religions it finds offensive. Out of all the evidence shown that the government was in the wrong they were accquited of all charges while the surviving Davidians were jailed for the murder of the three ATF officers. What do you think of this? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>A small national magazine, The New American, did an extensive investigation and supports everything you said. Also, the so called child abuse only was claimed AFTER the "jack booted thugs" stormed the compound and murdered so many people. Does anyone think that a court run the government where all the evidence came from the government is going to find the government guilty of anything? Our national government has gotten so powerful, with the aid and assistance of (the vast majority) our so called free press that many people are not even aware of the problem. While the people in Waco were not nudist, I think this is an excellent example of what can happen to anyone the attorney general (Janet Reno or even our current one) happens to take a strong dislike to.

Ginge of Oz

04-05-2003, 05:12 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by raven:
Not all women have pubic hair. Many native american women that I know of have a very light dusting of hair. So little in fact that if looking from more than 10 feet it looks like they don't have any at all. And I know atleast 3 women not including me who went through puberty without growing pubic hair. Most natives with little or no European blood have very little hair any where on the body except the top of the head. Some really have no need to shave. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Yes, Raven, I was aware of the fact that it is common for many native Americans to have very little body hair. I am personally very fond of the "smooth" look for both females and males. It must be good though not to have to shave!

I was going to ask which of the two traditional costumes you might have worn, but I see now it would have been a palmetto skirt. I hope you still get to pray nude, and to follow the nude ways of the Houma.

May the Creator give you all you need!
/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

David77

04-05-2003, 05:47 AM

I suppose this sparseness of body hair of Native Americans, may be yet another suggestion that, originally, Native American ancestors migrated here from Asia. Physical anthropologists tell us that Asians, in general, have sparce body hair. These anthropologists consider that this racial characteristic is high in the evolution process.

David77

04-05-2003, 06:39 AM

P.S. Raven, since you state that you are from Louisiana and are of the Houma tribe, I now can know from what source the town, Houma Louisiana got it's name. I was stationed at the Naval Air Station in the town of Houma briefly many years ago and was fasinated with the tropical vegetation in swamp-like conditions along the highways. I never saw any alligator around. The huge, spectacular dirigible/blimp hanger on base, then used as an aircraft hanger, was also very impressive.

raven

04-05-2003, 04:22 PM

I am glad David77 that you like my home town in which I was born. Even tough I don't live there anymore I visit family there atleast every two weeks. I always get home sick for the land and my family when I leave for to long. As for the traditional dress we wear palmetto or breechclouts when there are people who are a little shy about nudity but at home prayers are always said in the nude.

As for the show I watched about the Branch Davidians it was a shame to see that these are the people we chose to represent us. To know that this could happen even in your very own home is frightening. I personally do not like guns. But if someone came to my house with guns and started firing at me you can bet your last hard earned dollar that I would shoot back to protect those I love. To know that at any time someone with power who does not like what your doing could harm or even kill your family and friends and you pay the punishment for what they did really makes me wonder just how fair and just this country is. And even worse /infopop/emoticons/icon_eek.gif just how free are we as people.

As of last night I pinned a small note written on cardboard to my shirt saying "In memory of the 82 men, women, and children killed in the Branch Davidian Massacare on April 19, 1993". This is my way of showing my support and letting others know that I do not support what the govenment does to innocent people that they find as a threat. /infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

Oceanair

04-05-2003, 05:24 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by missouriboy:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Dale B:
...there can be no other "true" church... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I read a quote once, I can't remember by whom, that went something like this:

"There are over 200 organized religions in the world, each one claiming to be the only valid one, and that if you don't ascribe to their teachings you will burn in hell. Now, with odds like that, how can I be assured of picking the right one? So that's why I am an atheist."

... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>The reason there are so many religions is because men have manufactured rules in the guise of religion. The rules that they use are mainly to exalt themselves and gain power over people. Just as in the days of Jesus the religious leaders were blinded by their religion.

You do not need a religion to read the Bible, and if you ask God to reveal himself to you and mean it, I think you will be pleasantly surprised.

missouriboy

04-06-2003, 05:05 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Oceanair:
The reason there are so many religions is because men have manufactured rules in the guise of religion. The rules that they use are mainly to exalt themselves and gain power over people... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Yes, I have long realized that organized religion is a creation of man, and is very similar to governments in their purpose. The biggest difference is that governments use coercive force to control their subjects, while religion creates, and then exploits, shame and guilt to subjugate their flocks (victims?). Both then demand, as you say, exaltation and fealty from the riff-raff.

This has been examined thoroughly and reported at www.stormy.org (http://www.stormy.org) for those who wish to study it in depth.

I tend to agree with you and Raven that true religion, and respect for our Creator, is within each person and doesn't require one to lionize any other humans.

VictoryV92SC

04-16-2003, 05:11 PM

VictoryV92SC

04-16-2003, 05:11 PM

Naturist Mark

04-16-2003, 05:49 PM

Zen Methodist

Jochanaan

04-16-2003, 06:30 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by gamblefish:
I have to say that I found that site rather disturbing...

I love to poke fun as much as the next guy, but that site is downright blasphemous. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>What would be disturbing to me is if anyone took it seriously!

Actually, that website reminded me about a book by John C. McDonald, "One More Sunday," about a megachurch whose founder is slowly dying of Alzheimer's, whose current pastor is covering up an affair, and whose tithing department develops a high-tech scam whereby members answer the phone to hear the founder ask for money with words he no longer can say. It has sometimes seemed to me that excessive legalism encourages just such scandals.

As for the "evils" the Bible supposedly commands, not all of the Bible is meant to be taken literally. A prime example: "If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children...yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple." (Luke 14:26, KJV) Compare this to, "Love your enemies..." (Matthew 5:44, KJV) So we are to treat our enemies better than our families? (Abusers do just this.) I don't think so! It's reasonable to suppose Jesus was using hyberbole in Luke 14 to suggest that we should love God more than anything, even who on Earth is most dear. "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds." (Ralph Waldo Emerson)

Well, I'd better cut this short. (Too late!)

gamblefish

04-16-2003, 06:36 PM

Naturist Mark

04-16-2003, 06:53 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by gamblefish:
I guess what I don't like is that the site in general makes a mockery of the message of Christ. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I think it makes a mockery of the mockery that extreme fundamentalists make of the message of Christ.

'That Old Time Religion' wasn't about hating in the name of the Lord. But the RRR seems to think so.

The LandoverBaptist site is a satire of hating for Christ.
Here's the real thing: Westboro Baptist (http://216.173.214.13/main/manifesto.html)
and another 'nicely' hateful:AFA (http://www.afa.net/)
Here's what they think of US. (http://www.afa.net/culture/pc022601.asp)

NoodJuggler

04-16-2003, 08:20 PM

I am probably opening a can of worms here but here goes.. /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>"If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children...yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple." (Luke 14:26, KJV) Compare this to, "Love your enemies..." (Matthew 5:44, KJV) So we are to treat our enemies better than our families? (Abusers do just this.) I don't think so! It's reasonable to suppose Jesus was using hyberbole in Luke 14 to suggest that we should love God more than anything, even who on Earth is most dear <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>These two scriptures are not really related. Jesus was talking about two different things. In Luke 14:26 when it says "hate", the wording according to the original Greek text says "love less". The scriptures tell us that we are supposed to love our families and to love our wives as ourselves, but Luke 14:26 is also saying that we are to love God more that anything, Yes, even more that our families, as hard as that maybe to some. We love our Family less than God, putting Him above all things. We are to provide and take care of our families but it is God who provides us with all that we need and have. Jesus was not using hyberbole, it means what it says, "Love God more than anything or Anyone".

At Matt 5:44 where it says to love your enemies, that also is what that means. You hate what they are doing or what they say but it is not up to us to judge the person themselves. God gives everlasting life. You can not be hating someone and loving God at the same time, as hard as that may be, but if a person is a disciple of Christ this is what they are expected to do. This is what his disciples did. When Peter cut off the ear of the slave of the high priest, Jesus said that he was to put away his sword and said "He who lives by the sword will die by it". No, we do not treat our enemies better than our families and never should. We love them in the sense that they were created by God and that one's life belongs to God; and only God has the right to take a life. But you have to remember also that the Devil, our main enemy, was created by God as all the angels, and loved by God, but in time will pay for all that he has done.

I'm getting off my soapbox...I know that some will disagree with me and that is their choice, these are not my renderings of the scriptures but just what they say. I think some of them are hard to understand, and I might not agree with some of them, but we are not the ones who created God but God who created us and it is He who has the final word. If we want to be His disciples we have to live our lives according to His will, not ours.

OK, You can start throwing stones now. /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif Bye..Keithmj

Vin

04-17-2003, 06:27 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Keithmj:
In Luke 14:26 when it says "hate", the wording according to the original Greek text says "love less"....

OK, You can start throwing stones now. /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif Bye..Keithmj <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Not throwing stones, but I do feel compelled to point out that, according to your post, all translations of the Christian Bible are not equal. Some got it wrong (ie. translating "love less" as "hate"). This raises serious questions about the "infallible" nature of that book. Wonder what else the translators got wrong? And how many people have died over it?

Just a thought. /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

04-17-2003, 09:31 AM

I have heard it said that our love for God is supposed to be SO great that our love for family and friends would SEEM like hate in comparison.

However, it seems to me that it could have been translated a little more clearly. Even as a Christian I've been questioning some things I read in the Bible--Like "Ask, and it shall be given you", and it's not given. What do those words mean if they don't mean what they say? There are no conditions given that have to be met Like "If you're sinless, ask--", or "Ask for anything except money--".

Claiming a promise in the Bible and having that promise not answered does raise some serious doubts. It's not as though God is limited because He's omnipotent!

BrianM

04-17-2003, 12:05 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Jon-Marc:
I have heard it said that our love for God is supposed to be SO great that our love for family and friends would SEEM like hate in comparison.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Worshiping Christ can be fullfilling for many, and one should have that right. I understand the meaning of this and similar passages, but still have a big problem with it. If it comes between Christ (God) and my family, I'll take my family and burn in Hell for it if I have to. I'll burn in Hell knowing that I did the right thing, rather than live in the clouds knowing I did a Bad thing. Besides, why would God need your or my support. These are just passages to make sure followers continue to tithe, even during bad times, and to always give to "God" (just like he needs it) no matter what. All BS if you ask me. But again, if it makes you feel good, then do it, we all waste our money on something.
BTW...I also beleive that this passage was refering to "hating" all that were Jewish, ones that did not believe in Christ. Meaning if your mother or father was Jewish, then you should hate them for not beleiving in Christ.

BrianM

04-17-2003, 12:10 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by BrianM:
I'll take my family and burn in Hell for it if I have to. I'll burn in Hell knowing that I did the right thing, rather than live in the clouds knowing I did a Bad thing. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I'll reply to my own message...adding some levity today.
I beleive that Mark Twain said, that he would enjoy Heaven for the climate, and enjoy hell for the company.

Vin

04-17-2003, 12:20 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by BrianM:
I beleive that Mark Twain said, that he would enjoy Heaven for the climate, and enjoy hell for the company. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>LOL! I've never heard that one, but it sounds like Twain. I've heard a similar one along the lines of "All the interesting people are in hell, anyway." /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

BB,
Vin

Vin

04-17-2003, 12:24 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Jon-Marc:
I have heard it said that our love for God is supposed to be SO great that our love for family and friends would SEEM like hate in comparison.

However, it seems to me that it could have been translated a little more clearly. Even as a Christian I've been questioning some things I read in the Bible--Like "Ask, and it shall be given you", and it's not given. What do those words mean if they don't mean what they say? There are no conditions given that have to be met Like "If you're sinless, ask--", or "Ask for anything except money--".

Claiming a promise in the Bible and having that promise not answered does raise some serious doubts. It's not as though God is limited because He's omnipotent! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Jon-Marc,

Very good thoughts here. I honestly wish I had ever heard any good responses to the issues they raise.

But maybe it's not SUPPOSED to make sense. Maybe that's what makes it "faith."

BB,
Vin

04-17-2003, 01:25 PM

Yes, the Bible does say that "the just shall live by faith", but that's very difficult for me, particularly when it comes to trusting promises. Life has taught me not to be too trusting after being wronged so many times by people I cared about.

What is faith? It's believing something to be true without any physical proof. I have faith, but it's weak. There's a passage in the Bible that says, "Lord, I do believe. Help thou my unbelief." That's where I am. I believe but with many doubts.

gamblefish

04-17-2003, 03:43 PM

I think when you ask for something, you should do it with a "God willing" attitude.

Jesus asked, "...take away this cup from me: nevertheless not what I will, but what thou wilt.". As most of us know, Christ was asking to not be crucified. But God saw fit to crucify Christ for the sins of mankind...an ultimate good.

God knows the greater good, and sometimes what we ask for may only bring us heartache.

Just like a kid who would eat a gallon of ice-cream in one sitting if you let him. The kid thinks that would be great, but a parent knows that he will live to regret it...

04-17-2003, 06:58 PM

It's not like I'm asking God to make me a millionaire (although I wouldn't complain if He did). My requests have usually been simple, and sometimes they're even unselfish because they're for someone else. Those requests aren't answered either. I recently prayed for someone to find a job. There was nothing in that request for me personally.

Yes, I know that it has to be God's will, or it won't be answered. Although I have been told that sometimes He will give someone what they ask for to teach them a lesson. I've been taught many lessons during my 40 years as a Christian, and I've still got a lot to learn and a lot of growing to do spiritually.

j4king

04-17-2003, 07:00 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by gamblefish:
As most of us know, Christ was asking to not be crucified. But God saw fit to crucify Christ for the sins of mankind...an ultimate good. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>This is why I am always amazed when Christians wonder why God is "allowing" them to suffer through something, or is not granting them something they ask for--just look what happend to his own Son!

I used to pray for things for myself, which would just get my hopes up, and then when they didn't happen it would seem even worse than before. So that is why I stopped praying for things for myself. Actually, I have stopped praying altogether, but that is another story.

To answer the original question: I was a nondenominational "evangelical" Chrisitan for almost 30 years but am now an agnostic.

BrianM

04-17-2003, 07:44 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Jon-Marc:
What is faith? It's believing something to be true without any physical proof. I have faith, but it's weak. There's a passage in the Bible that says, "Lord, I do believe. Help thou my unbelief." That's where I am. I believe but with many doubts. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>As we all search for answers to questions we will probably never know, we ponder whether or not we simply evolved into what we are, with our "souls" being just some electro-chemical-physical reaction to stimuli, or if they are something else, with a divine creator with a particular purpose. We can explain the development of the "soul" as we mature in life, but what about the dacay of the "soul" as we age, get alzheimers or other mental illness. Our conciousness is not what it used to be.... has it began its trek to heaven or hell? Or is it just the simple fact that the physical- chemical processes are not allowing that "soul" to function anymore? What makes us think that when we die, our soul doesn't just go away, just as it does gradually with the alzheimers patient? Actually, neither seems to be supported with a lot of evidence, the scientist say, it must be evolution, because their science is all they know, and everyone else says, that since nothing makes sense, it must be divine intervention. While we have "Bibles" in various religions, they are the only bits of evidence of any "God" existing. They seem flawed, however, and when you get to the bottom of them, they really do not make much sense either. Miracles are hard to come by, everybody can say that they know of one, but all I have seen are things that could have been a misdiagnosis or natural healing. Never heard of anyone coming back to life after being decapitated, growing limbs back, etc, things that would be true miracles. Modern day Saints are even given Sainthood, by the number of "Miracles" they perform. You would think the true miracles would make headlines???
Bottom line, is that the only evidence of "God" existing, is just folklore and the "Bible". Even Jesus' life was writen about many years after his death, there is know real time evidence of his actual existence or the things he really did while alive. Science has some pretty good explanations to cration and life, but a few pretty big holes there that need explaining. Could it be that we had a "god" or "gods" that got everything started here on earth, and they either left or died or both? The earliest of civilizations had pretty good descriptions of "Gods" (mythology) that did a lot of things with hard to conceive powers (unless the writers had found some "early lsd" also)...where did all that come from? Even separate civilizations in different parts of the world had some of those same "hallucinations"...maybe "God" was physically here on Earth, just as Moses describes (to Moses, God is a real being, not a spirit). Christian religions like to forget these things, because it is not consistent from start to finish...God was here, then he wasn't, then Jesus came (actually God, not his son, or which was it?) and then he was gone again, not to be seen for over 2000 years now. God is either dead or alive, which is it? I know I am rambling, but just trying to say that there is much evidence to be agnostic or athiest, much more that beleiving in Judeo- Christian religions. Although, as long as you are happy being Christian, I must admit that the consequences of being wrong are safer if you pick the Christian route.

stevenf64

04-18-2003, 08:56 PM

gamblefish great answer john marc I hope your bad times are over and never lose your faith in GOD someday when we all stand at the great equalizer it will all make sense

04-18-2003, 09:10 PM

Thank you, Steven. No, while my faith may waver and even be weak at times, I've never completely lost it. God has a purpose for everything that happens even though we don't understand it. We have to go through trails as Christians to increase our faith and to become what God wants us to be--holy. I'm a loooooooooong way from being holy. /infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

gamblefish

04-19-2003, 04:03 PM

Tanks steven64.<"))))))>{

Hey Jon-Marc, you're closer than I am...

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by j4king:
This is why I am always amazed when Christians wonder why God is "allowing" them to suffer through something, or is not granting them something they ask for--just look what happend to his own Son!
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>The bible says that "...Jesus...for the joy that was set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God."

Understand that Christ willingly went to the cross in obedience to God. He knew His reward would be far more glorious than any temporary pain He would endure.

I remember a guy I knew once had a sports t-shirt that said something like "Pain is temporary, Pride is forever".

unkat27

04-19-2003, 05:31 PM

So, somebody wanna explain to me why my message was not posted? I'm new to this forum, so I might be doing something wrong. I'd hate to think it was a religious prejudice. What, is ten pages the limit?
Unkat27

j4king

04-19-2003, 09:12 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by gamblefish:
Understand that Christ willingly went to the cross... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Jesus fell with his face to the ground and prayed, "My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me. Yet not as I will, but as you will." Matthew 26:39

gamblefish

04-20-2003, 04:21 AM

I think Christ was under tremendous pressure here. I know I would be. He is asking the Father for a way out, but a moment later He willingly resigns Himself to the task at hand.

04-20-2003, 09:50 AM

Christ knew that He would have to take the sins onto Himself of all those who would accept Him. He died for everyone but knew that not everyone would accept Him. He knew that the Father wouldn't be able to look at Him while He was on the cross. That was why He cried, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" The Father turning away from the Son was the most painful part of what Jesus had to go through!

BrianM

04-30-2003, 07:54 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by gamblefish:

Jesus asked, "...take away this cup from me: nevertheless not what I will, but what thou wilt.". As most of us know, Christ was asking to not be crucified. But God saw fit to crucify Christ for the sins of mankind...an ultimate good.

God knows the greater good, and sometimes what we ask for may only bring us heartache.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>A couple of questions about this:
1) Was Christ Schitso, because isn't he talking to himself when he talks to God? Or was he really not God? Which is it?
2) How does the death of Christ's flesh body solve any of the worlds problems at that time? The Jews won that war, and Christ was gone. His time would be better served, if his purpose was rightious, to convince the jews of the "proper" ways, and continue his ministry of teaching, healing, etc. This is synomous of any failed effort claiming victory, because they were beaten so badly.
3) If Jesus was "God on Earth", then why would he fear death? He should have known that he couldn't be killed, rather than fighting and then conceding once he knew he was had. Why didn't lightening strike and why didn't he bring his wrath down on the jews then, to prove he was "God", rather than sneak away from a tomb, with only subtle clues of his wearabouts. Its seems that he was either just not very committed to converting the jews, or just getting out of Dodge
I know this sounds sacreligious, but these are really very basic questions that any 8 year old Sunday School student could ask. I just cannot fathom how his life (if it even existed) meshes with any prophesy of a return of "God".

David77

04-30-2003, 02:56 PM

Brian M,
I agree that many of these bible fables make no sense. Much of the bible presents a concept of God as an evil monster. For example, God committed the most atrocious genocide by drowning everyone on earth except Noah and Company. God later was sorry of it and said he would never do that again! God also killed many precious babies if the parents did not put a sign on the door post to "Passover". God killed Lot's wife by turning her into a pillar of salt. How evil!

God's genocide, baby killing, much murder by God listed throughout the bible (including the torturous murderer of his own son) does not stop people from worshiping this particular God concept.

I would hope that a person would develope for themselves a consistantly and totally good God to worship, or simply develope spiritual meaning for themselves that embrace the highest values.

A good book (that was on the best seller list and winner of the Pulitzer Prize) examines the developing concepts of God in the Bible. The title is is;
"A Biography of God", by Jack Miles and is in the major book stores.

Trailscout

04-30-2003, 04:56 PM

[/qb][/QUOTE]A couple of questions about this:
1) Was Christ Schitso, because isn't he talking to himself when he talks to God? Or was he really not God? Which is it?

Brian,
You do not demontrate that you have a multiple personality disorder simply because you talk to me. We are two different persons. Now we are both part of the human family, and Jesus was part of the divine family: God the Son talking with God the Father. It is a little different because they are one in a way that no two humans can be, yet they are also two distinct personalities.

2) How does the death of Christ's flesh body solve any of the worlds problems at that time? The Jews won that war, and Christ was gone. His time would be better served, if his purpose was rightious, to convince the jews of the "proper" ways, and continue his ministry of teaching, healing, etc. This is synomous of any failed effort claiming victory, because they were beaten so badly.

God had planned to send Jesus to earth to die for us since the beginning of time. There is foreshadowing of Messiah all through the Old Testament, and even exact descriptions of his crucifixion in the books of Psalms and Isaiah.
It was necessary for Messiah to die. The animal sacrifices just covered our sins until the Lamb of God could take our place on the cross. What you call failure is the ultimate victory.

Jesus never gave up on the Jews. His last words to his disciples was to carry the gospel to the Jew first and then the gentiles. Many Jews are already turning to Jesus as Messiah, but after the time of the gentiles is over, we shall see even more come to worship him.

3) If Jesus was "God on Earth", then why would he fear death? He should have known that he couldn't be killed, rather than fighting and then conceding once he knew he was had. Why didn't lightening strike and why didn't he bring his wrath down on the jews then, to prove he was "God", rather than sneak away from a tomb, with only subtle clues of his wearabouts. Its seems that he was either just not very committed to converting the jews, or just getting out of Dodge
I know this sounds sacreligious, but these are really very basic questions that any 8 year old Sunday School student could ask. I just cannot fathom how his life (if it even existed) meshes with any prophesy of a return of "God".[/QB][/QUOTE]

Jesus did not fear death, but the human side of him did dread the agony of a tortuous death on the cross. He was tempted in every way like we are, but he stood strong and died for us.

Jesus could have called 10,000 angels to strike the Jews and Romans all dead, but that was not God's plan. Jesus loved his enemies and prayed for them as he was dying. By his mercy some of these evil people became Christians after his death.

There was nothing sneaky about the resurrection. A garrison of Roman soldiers guarded the tomb and yet they were no match for the angels who rolled away the stone. Mary and the disciples were just a few of the witnesses to Jesus' resurrection. He appeared to many in Jerusalem and along with him, many of the prophets were brought out of Sheol, the waiting place and went to heaven with Jesus, but first they walked the streets of Jerusalem.

BrianM

05-01-2003, 06:08 AM

Trailscout:
Those are good explainations for these questions...It looks like you have done your homework. I'm not sure I understand it all, or beleive it all, but really, this is not what this thread was supposed to be about anyway. It is easy to get distracted when one person diverts the conversation away from the subject, to follow that diversion off subject, but the discussion is good nonetheless. One point that is relavent, however, is that the Jewish and Christian scriptures represent a life and times that is much different from the way we live our lives, be it nude / clothed or otherwise. People have modified its teachings to fit the times and these new teachings may mean that we don't abuse children , own slaves, concubines, or run around naked. For the ones so against running around naked, I would conclude that that those teachings are perceived by the "conservative Christians" as being similar to the other reformations that have occured. If so, then then non-nudist groups may have a good case against non-sexual nudity....thus, the Bible doesn't condemn it, but public opinion does, just as it condemns slavery, child abuse, and "ownership of women", etc. I do not agree with this, since it isn't a repressive, abusive situation like the others, but their case would still be valid and arguable.

Trailscout

05-01-2003, 08:29 AM

BrianM,

As we got deeper into the issue of why some churches allow non-sexual nudity and others don't, inevitably we have to ask, "where do they get this opposition to simple nudity?"

I think that in many parts of the earth, there has long been a stigma against nudity. Rich people could afford to wear fine clothes all the time and the poorest people had to wear little or nothing when they worked in hot weather, so that their clothes would hold up through the winter.
God never commanded people to be snobs, its something that developed dispite teachings against it.

I have read that baptisms were done in the nude in the days of the early church. It was reportedly done to show that you leave all behind to begin a new life with God and it also shows that there is no rich or poor, Jew or Greek with God, we are all God's children.

As the church grew in power in influence in the last days of the Roman Empire, some people who had been trained in Greek philosophy introduced the idea that the physical world, including the human body was evil or at least impure and that only things of the spirit were good. This flies right in the face of Jewish and Christian teaching that God's creation, including the physical world and the nude human body were proclaimed, "Good" by God. But the church was tightly controlled by these men who taught body shame and there were few educated people to oppose the introduction of this into the church.

Into the middle ages in Europe, there was still a lot of casual nudity in everyday peasant life. Children in Germany played nude in the streets until adolescence. When people swam in the summer, there were no bathing suits for them to wear.

With the coming of the Rennaisance, church attitudes about nudity began to soften and Michaelangelo was permitted to portray the human body in his paintings in their nude natural condition.

The Protestant Reformation brough much needed reform into the religious life of Europeans, but at some point in the 1800's it began to be dominated by people who took body shame to great extremes. Some of these people took self-denial to great extreme in many areas of their life and their opposition to nudity was just one manifestation of it. Things got so bad that people even covered the legs of tables with skirts so that no bare legs, even table legs were visible. This extreme body shame was quite common in America and could be found in most denominations and in society at large. In a society it was widely assumed that the only purposes of nudity were for bathing and sex and there were a few people who managed to do both without completely undressing.

Within fairly recent times, pastors and laymen of some denominations realized that body shame is scripturally indefensible and that nudity is not always a sexual situation. Unfortunately our society has not made steady progress toward a healthier, more biblical view of nudity.
Apart from nudists and the counterculture "back-to-nature" crowds on California beaches, mainstream American society seems to offer their children less opportunity these days to experience simple nudity informally or in school than previous generations.

Christian naturism or simply a casual attitude about nudity does seem to be gaining strength in some quarters of the church. There is a very vocal politically conservative element of American Christendom that seems more determined than ever to stop all nudity, even non-sexual nudity, but I am running into more and more Christians on the Internet who reject body shame.
In my off-line time, I have met several people who happen to be members of the Methodist church who have either gone skinnydipping on a campout or even visited a public nude beach. I doubt if they would openly propose taking the church's teens for a day of fun at the nudist resort, but they don't mind telling friends about their body freedom. In another thread, I mentioned meeting a few Baptists who were open to non-sexual nudity, but they are much more cautious about who they say this to than my Methodist friends. I suspect that the Baptists as a whole are more influenced by body shame.