To be furious at local church carol service

[YogaGrinch]

With our new "fundamentalist " vicar who included genesis 3 16

And other misogynistic patriarchal quotes and suggestions throughout the service -

Listening to the King's college Cambridge service tonight was a completely different service although there too there were some dated patriarchal views shared?

And basically using opportunity of a full church to preach hellfire and brimstone snd call us all hypocrites and sinners rather than preaching love kindness beauty

Never heard anything like it

Was absolutely 💔

Agree ...organised religion....just a group of men making stuff up to grasp a bit of power and respect and often money. Don't be surprised when they preach a load of outdated rubbish.

Hmmmm I mean you can’t really expect a vicar to selectively edit bits of the bible. You are free to interpret it any way you want but surely the vicar is going to just say whatever he wants from the bible?
I was raised Catholic, now consider myself a general Christian in that I believe that Jesus Christ was the son of God but that’s about it. I find the whole thing very confusing and pretty certain I’ll spend the rest of my life trying to figure it all out.

One of the incidents....a young mother gave him a lift home. She got out of the drivers seat and went to open the boot when they got to the vicarage. Her daughter ( aged 3) was in a front facing car seat on the back seat behind her. As she got out he turned in his seat and put his fingers between her daughter legs.

Came here to say this. The Bible doesn't need rewriting but it does need to be understood properly. And Christmas services (with lots of non-regulars) should focus on the wonder of Jesus coming to Earth

Um the 4th century definitely wasn't 'in the Middle Ages' just for starters.

Last Easter service we were shown a clip from a film about the Easter story. Unfortunately I had seen the actor playing Jesus in something where there were some really rude scenes and I spent the rest of the service feeling vaguely horrified.

Also worth pointing out that Adam gets punished too, equally severely IMO. And its notable that the rest of the Old and New Testaments always emphasis ADAM as the one who fucked up, its Adam's sin, Adam's curse etc etc. Also I think that whole passage in Genesis is actually quite a funny comment on human nature. Adam throws up his hands and tries to blame Eve. Eve throws up her hands and tries to blame the serpent. Whenever I read it I imagine God as a sort of exasperated parent trying to figure out who actually got playdoh all over the rug. And its very much how we humans actually behave.

It’s really not. The official teaching of all mainstream denominations is that the whole Bible is the word of God.

He should have included some Revelation for good measure - full of festive joy!

I had a relative, now deceased, who was a Methodist minister. He always said the Bible was "word of God" not "The Word of God". He had traveled the world for the church and was very wise.

@UsernameMcUsername
You are correct in that the decisions re the scriptural canons were commenced in the 4thC but they was definitively reaffirmed at the Council of Florence in 1442 and finally in 1546 at the Council of Trent after opposition by the early Protestant leaders.
However I still maintain that the fact that the Bible as accepted by most Christian churches I random collection of parts chosen centuries ago by not always very ethical/pious men.

How can you complain about them quoting the bible and echoing the patriarchal views therein when it's supposed to be the word of God?

What's the difference?

I don't see the relevance of Gen.3,16 (except it's about childbirth) but Jesus is the second Adam. He comes to undo the wrong that Adam did (Ever is really the vehicle, the sin is Adam's) so Genesis is relevant to the Christmas story, but not the bit your vicar quoted.
But why not go to a different church? You don't have to put up with misogyny - find one with a woman vicar!
And anyway carol services are supposed to concentrate on the events in Bethlehem with a side-swipe at Isaiah. What was the man thinking?

ya'll all can blame king james for most recent version
cults are the causeof most wars so no

Genesis is the OT. The babe of Bethlehem re-set the covenant and so though the OT backs up the claim tha Jesus is the Messiah its rules no longer apply. And Jesus was remarkable in his time, in paying as much attention to the ideas and activities of women as men. He describes God in female times at least twice that I can think of off-hand (as a hen with chicks, and as a woman sweeping the house to find a lost coin). He was not a misogynist and misogyny has no place in Christianity properly applied.

Except people do pick and choose all the time! It would be impossible not to. It always amuses me how many American Christians ignore the bit saying that it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven.

Well yes, there were numerous gospels doing the rounds before the final best sellers were settled on, large parts of the NT were written by Paul, a Jewish mystic with his own agenda. The first account of the resurrection (Mark) was re written as, arguably the original is extremely ambiguous about any resurrection.

But then Religions are developed with a purpose. Take Islam, made up to justify and facilitate expansion into judaeo Christian territory to provide a trade route to the Mediterranean. Misogyny has been kept even more alive and well there..

The thing is much of Christianity is about tradition rather than scripture within UK culture. It’s facing another change where arguably it’s being brought back to its original purpose, expect to see some er interesting uses and reactions of the faith over the next few years. - Christianity is not fluffy lovely dovey

Christians follow the word of Christ- so New Testament, with a nod to the old.

Christians are not required to follow the tenets of the OT. Misogynistic men have insisted on the punishment of Eve (Adam's is the greater sin, in fact and it is Adam's sin that Jesus comes to rectify).

This is isn't right,. The last redaction of the Hebrew Bible (OT) was long before Christ and the NT in the early centuries CE. Saying this to respect accuracy.

Nearly all religious writing has been done by males as apologia for the patriarchy, i.e. to keep women in line: be good little women at home etc. The word 'obey' was removed from the C of E vows only in 1928. The Catholics, bless 'em, kept it till the seventies.

Yes, how “evil” of her to eat an apple! Fruit is generally considered to be a healthy snack. What should she have had instead, a packet of pringles? Seems odd to punish someone for making good dietary choices. Or put an apple tree around at all if apples are for some reason “forbidden”? Why make humans that need food at all if this “God” has such a problem with people eating it?

Not a very nice “God” to be wishing pain on her for this abominable culinary “crime”, not to mention on billions of women as yet unborn who had nothing to do with the fruit snack situation. It seems rather abusive, controlling and psychopathic, in fact. As is impregnating another woman without her knowledge or consent. Not seeing much worthy of worship really. Perhaps this “God” and “Satan” are one and the same?

Meanwhile this “God”, according to the bible, has at various times murdered people en masse including innocent children, used chemical warfare, deliberately caused famines, instructed people to murder their own children, demanded animal cruelty, legitimised rape and degradation of women as sub-humans that are allegedly male property.

Very odd to idolise such behaviour but feel so strongly about a woman eating an apple.

@YearOfTheDrizzle If you had a 50 room house and gave your guests free rein of it, not bills, all the food they want, luxuries galore and only asked your guests not to go in a certain room (just one) but they were free to use the other 49, would you expect them to respect your wishes?

Same with the tree. They had 1000s of other trees to eat from, nuts, seeds etc etc. Just one tree they were asked not to touch as a test of obedience. They had free will, nothing wrong with God giving them a small test to see how they would act.

If someone put me in a paradise, gave me everything I could possibly want, but one tiny restriction - I think I would respect their ask.

Well tbf it wasn’t an apple