History Main / ArtisticLicenseTraditionalChristianity

19th May '18 3:15:19 PM Stormtrooper68
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* One of the most prevailing myths about Catholic Missionaries is that they are there to force something on people. There may be other [[ChurchMilitant Christian groups]] that do do this, but the Roman Catholic Church is not one of them. The main point of a mission is humanitarian aid, missionaries become missionaries for the same reason people volunteer for other charities - they want to help people. The first buildings established by a mission tend to be rudimentary medical facilities, then moving on to schools. It is generally the people themselves who ask for them to build a church. Missionary work is some of the hardest and most dangerous on the planet, the fact that missionaries protect the communities they join and are often ''celebrated'' by them, and the fact that the mission brings things like sustainable water, food, [[http://theologicalscribbles.blogspot.co.uk/2011/07/catholic-church-and-healthcare-in.html health care (including medicines for people with AIDS)]], education, good moral teachings, and hope to ''billions'' is entirely lost on most people. When a missionary priest approaches a tribe ''they can ask him to leave'', and he has to go. The priest is there only as long as the people want him, he is NOT allowed to force Christianity on them because they have to come to him. During the mission the priest (and often volunteers) will go and build pumps, [[http://theologicalscribbles.blogspot.com/2011/07/catholic-church-and-healthcare-in.html a hospital]], a school, and ''start teaching people to read''. The actual teaching of Christianity happens when the priest asks people if they would like to learn about the faith, the people then come to the priest to find out about Christianity and it is often ''them'' who ask for the priest to build a church. The priest is not there to force another culture on the people or tell them that their current beliefs are wrong - often a missionary will be the only person making sure the local children know their own history and culture. The Vatican has numerous letters on file thanking them for the word of God, including one from a tribe of native Americans, which is written on tree bark.
* Unfortunately, for most of Christian history, spreading the cross was not such a rosy act. At that point, the religious authority was inseparable from political authority, having large populations of non-Christians in your domain is seen as a failure in asserting dominance. Missionaries of the old ilk generally ''do not'' leave when asked, and can usually call on the local colonial power to help. Witness the Bloody Verdict of Verden, where Charlemagne executed 4500 Saxons for refusing to convert. The inquisition of Goa, India (like their Spanish counterpart), while they did not directly punish pagans, still allowed the enactment of extremely anti-Muslim/Jewish/Hindu laws as "encouragement", and punishment for recidivism is generally not pleasant. Furthermore, successful missionary work could entail the replacement of the former local culture and religions, which can be considered a crime in of itself. And things really heat up when Christians try to convert ''each other'' (e.g. the Albigensian Crusade against the Cathars or the UsefulNotes/ThirtyYearsWar against the Protestants). It's really only in the modern world and with the recognition that correcting someone's religious affiliation is not the most important goal that a much more in-depth and humanitarian missionary work can flourish.

to:

* One of the most prevailing myths about Catholic Missionaries is that they are there to force something their faith on people. There may be other [[ChurchMilitant Christian groups]] that do do this, but the Roman Catholic Church is not one of them. The main point of a mission is humanitarian aid, missionaries become missionaries for the same reason people volunteer for other charities - they want to help people. The first buildings established by a mission tend to be rudimentary medical facilities, then moving on to schools. It is generally the people themselves who ask for them to build a church. Missionary work is some of the hardest and most dangerous on the planet, the fact that missionaries protect the communities they join and are often ''celebrated'' praised by them, and the fact that the mission brings things like sustainable water, food, [[http://theologicalscribbles.blogspot.co.uk/2011/07/catholic-church-and-healthcare-in.html health care (including medicines for people with AIDS)]], education, good moral teachings, and hope to ''billions'' billions is entirely lost on most people. When a missionary priest approaches a tribe ''they they can ask him to leave'', leave, and he has to go. The priest is there only as long as the people want him, he is NOT not allowed to force Christianity on them because they have to come to him. During the mission the priest (and often volunteers) will go and build pumps, [[http://theologicalscribbles.blogspot.com/2011/07/catholic-church-and-healthcare-in.html a hospital]], a school, and ''start start teaching people to read''. read. The actual teaching of Christianity happens when the priest asks people if they would like to learn about the faith, the people then come to the priest to find out about Christianity and it is often ''them'' them who ask for the priest to build a church. The priest is not there to force another culture on the people or tell them that their current beliefs are wrong - often a missionary will be the only person making sure the local children know their own history and culture. The Vatican has numerous letters on file thanking them for the word of God, including one from a tribe of native Americans, which is written on tree bark.
* Unfortunately, for most of Christian history, spreading the cross was not such a rosy act. At that point, the religious authority was inseparable from political authority, having large populations of non-Christians in your domain is seen as a failure in asserting dominance. Missionaries of the old ilk generally ''do not'' do not leave when asked, and can usually call on the local colonial power to help. Witness the Bloody Verdict of Verden, where Charlemagne executed 4500 Saxons for refusing to convert. The inquisition of Goa, India (like their Spanish counterpart), while they did not directly punish pagans, still allowed the enactment of extremely anti-Muslim/Jewish/Hindu laws as "encouragement", and punishment for recidivism is generally not pleasant. Furthermore, successful missionary work could entail the replacement of the former local culture and religions, which can be considered a crime in of itself. And things really heat up when Christians try to convert ''each other'' each other (e.g. the Albigensian Crusade against the Cathars or the UsefulNotes/ThirtyYearsWar against the Protestants). It's really only in the modern world and with the recognition that correcting someone's religious affiliation is not the most important goal that a much more in-depth and humanitarian missionary work can flourish.
19th May '18 3:11:59 PM Stormtrooper68
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* There were attempts to smear Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI by claiming he was a Nazi because he was drafted by them at age sixteen (membership was mandatory at that point). Not only was the Pope never a Nazi, his family had to keep moving house because of their strong anti-Nazi beliefs. The 'Hitler Youth' part of the equation never even happened - they told him to join, and he got a note saying he was excused. His fourteen-year-old cousin was taken away and killed by the Nazis because he had Down Syndrome. And he deserted from the army during the war.
* Similarly, Pius XII neither supported the Nazis nor deliberately turned a blind eye towards their atrocities. Though it could be debated whether the Vatican's relative silence during the war was justified in attempting to prevent the Nazis' persecutions against Jews (and Catholic clergy) from worsening, [[http://www.ewtn.com/library/CHISTORY/PIUS12.HTM it is clear from the actions he DID take]] that the silence was not out of support nor apathy.
* ''The Catholic Herald'' has been under attack for several years now for publishing an article claiming that the books of Philip Pullman should be piled up and burnt. Pullman has even put (what we are told is) the offending Herald quote in his book and the controversy is such that it has actually become a long-standing part of Pullman's introduction and featured on the BBC's Big Read. The truth? ''The Catholic Herald never said anything of the sort!''. While book burning is ''mentioned'' in the text, it is done so in the context of ridiculing the furor of MoralGuardians over the alleged anti-Christian nature of ''Literature/HarryPotter'' at a time when there are children's fantasy books such as ''Literature/HisDarkMaterials'' which ARE rather explicitly anti-Christian; the woman who wrote this wasn't saying that Pullman's works ''should'' actually be burnt. [[http://archive.catholicherald.co.uk/article/29th-october-1999/7/the-stuff-of-nightmares Here's the actual article]] (apologies for a few minor typos, the CH recently digitized their entire archive and the speed-typing shows somewhat). In short, what the Herald actually said was:

to:

* There were attempts to smear Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI by claiming he was a Nazi because he was drafted by them at age sixteen (membership was mandatory at that point). Not only was the Pope never a Nazi, his family had to keep moving house because of their strong anti-Nazi beliefs. The 'Hitler Youth' part of the equation never even happened - they told him to join, and he got a note saying he was excused. His He also deserted from the army during the war. To make matters worse, Benedict's fourteen-year-old cousin was taken away and killed by the Nazis because he had Down Syndrome. And he deserted from the army during the war.
Syndrome.
* Similarly, Pius XII neither supported the Nazis nor deliberately turned a blind eye towards their atrocities. Though it could be debated whether the Vatican's relative silence during the war was justified in attempting to prevent the Nazis' persecutions against Jews (and Catholic clergy) from worsening, [[http://www.ewtn.com/library/CHISTORY/PIUS12.HTM it is clear from the actions he DID did take]] that the silence was not out of support nor apathy.
* ''The Catholic Herald'' has been under attack for several years now for publishing an article claiming that the books of Philip Pullman should be piled up and burnt. Pullman has even put (what we are told is) the offending Herald quote in his book and the controversy is such that it has actually become a long-standing part of Pullman's introduction and featured on the BBC's Big Read. The truth? ''The Catholic Herald never said anything of the sort!''. While book burning is ''mentioned'' in the text, it is done so in the context of ridiculing the furor of MoralGuardians over the alleged anti-Christian nature of ''Literature/HarryPotter'' at a time when there are children's fantasy books such as ''Literature/HisDarkMaterials'' which ARE are rather explicitly anti-Christian; the woman who wrote this wasn't saying that Pullman's works ''should'' actually be burnt. [[http://archive.catholicherald.co.uk/article/29th-october-1999/7/the-stuff-of-nightmares Here's the actual article]] (apologies for a few minor typos, the CH recently digitized their entire archive and the speed-typing shows somewhat). In short, what the Herald actually said was:
19th May '18 3:03:36 PM Stormtrooper68
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* There were attempts to smear Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI by claiming he was a Nazi because he was drafted by them at age sixteen (membership was mandatory at that point). Not only was the Pope never a Nazi, his family had to keep moving house because of their strong anti-Nazi beliefs. The 'Hitler Youth' part of the equation never even happened - they told him to join, and he got a note saying he was excused. Not exactly a leader of the SS here. Oh yes, and his fourteen-year-old cousin was taken away and killed by the Nazis because he had Down Syndrome. And he deserted from the army during the war, hardly the action of a rabid National Socialist.

to:

* There were attempts to smear Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI by claiming he was a Nazi because he was drafted by them at age sixteen (membership was mandatory at that point). Not only was the Pope never a Nazi, his family had to keep moving house because of their strong anti-Nazi beliefs. The 'Hitler Youth' part of the equation never even happened - they told him to join, and he got a note saying he was excused. Not exactly a leader of the SS here. Oh yes, and his His fourteen-year-old cousin was taken away and killed by the Nazis because he had Down Syndrome. And he deserted from the army during the war, hardly the action of a rabid National Socialist.war.



* One of the most prevailing myths about Catholic Missionaries is that they are there to force something on people. There may be other [[ChurchMilitant Christian groups]] that do do this, but the Roman Catholic Church is not one of them. The main point of a mission is humanitarian aid, missionaries become missionaries for the same reason people volunteer for other charities - they want to help people! The first buildings established by a mission tend to be rudimentary medical facilities, then moving on to schools. It is generally the people themselves who ask for them to build a church. Missionary work is some of the hardest and most dangerous on the planet, the fact that missionaries protect the communities they join and are often ''celebrated'' by them, and the fact that the mission brings things like sustainable water, food, [[http://theologicalscribbles.blogspot.co.uk/2011/07/catholic-church-and-healthcare-in.html health care (including medicines for people with AIDS)]], education, good moral teachings, and hope to ''billions'' is entirely lost on most people. When a missionary priest approaches a tribe ''they can ask him to leave'', and he has to go! The priest is there only as long as the people want him, he is NOT allowed to force Christianity on them - THEY have to come to him! That's right! During the mission the priest (and often volunteers) will go and build pumps, [[http://theologicalscribbles.blogspot.com/2011/07/catholic-church-and-healthcare-in.html a hospital]], a school, and ''start teaching people to read''. The actual teaching of Christianity happens when the priest asks people if they would like to learn about the faith, the people then come to the priest to find out about Christianity and it is often ''them'' who ask for the priest to build a church. Oh yes, and the priest is not there to force another culture on the people or tell them that their current beliefs are wrong - often a missionary will be the only person making sure the local children know their own damn history and culture. The Vatican has numerous letters on file ''thanking'' them for the word of God, including one from a tribe of native Americans, which is written on tree bark.

to:

* One of the most prevailing myths about Catholic Missionaries is that they are there to force something on people. There may be other [[ChurchMilitant Christian groups]] that do do this, but the Roman Catholic Church is not one of them. The main point of a mission is humanitarian aid, missionaries become missionaries for the same reason people volunteer for other charities - they want to help people! people. The first buildings established by a mission tend to be rudimentary medical facilities, then moving on to schools. It is generally the people themselves who ask for them to build a church. Missionary work is some of the hardest and most dangerous on the planet, the fact that missionaries protect the communities they join and are often ''celebrated'' by them, and the fact that the mission brings things like sustainable water, food, [[http://theologicalscribbles.blogspot.co.uk/2011/07/catholic-church-and-healthcare-in.html health care (including medicines for people with AIDS)]], education, good moral teachings, and hope to ''billions'' is entirely lost on most people. When a missionary priest approaches a tribe ''they can ask him to leave'', and he has to go! go. The priest is there only as long as the people want him, he is NOT allowed to force Christianity on them - THEY because they have to come to him! That's right! him. During the mission the priest (and often volunteers) will go and build pumps, [[http://theologicalscribbles.blogspot.com/2011/07/catholic-church-and-healthcare-in.html a hospital]], a school, and ''start teaching people to read''. The actual teaching of Christianity happens when the priest asks people if they would like to learn about the faith, the people then come to the priest to find out about Christianity and it is often ''them'' who ask for the priest to build a church. Oh yes, and the The priest is not there to force another culture on the people or tell them that their current beliefs are wrong - often a missionary will be the only person making sure the local children know their own damn history and culture. The Vatican has numerous letters on file ''thanking'' thanking them for the word of God, including one from a tribe of native Americans, which is written on tree bark.
24th Apr '18 6:35:43 AM bydlo
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* The traditional view of FireAndBrimstoneHell is due to distinctions LostInTranslation. The word "Hell" is used as a translation for FOUR words used in the initial writing of Literature/TheBible in its original languages: ''Sheol'', ''Hades'', a single mention of ''Tartarus'' (2 Peter 2:4), and ''Gehenna''. ''Sheol'' is a Hebrew word and ''Hades'' is Greek; both mean the same thing, the abode of the dead for all humans, whether good or bad, at least until Armageddon, and used in conjunction with Ecclesiastes 9:5 would refer to CessationOfExistence. ''Gehenna'' is a Greek word that when translated means "Valley of Hinnom", which was a trash dump where garbage filth, corpses of criminals, and the like were burned. Jesus re-purposed this word to refer to the future eventual end and KarmicDeath of the wicked, whether human or demon, and also has the same symbolic meaning as the Lake of Fire in Revelation. Not everyone agrees whether it is a place of eternal torment or [[KilledOffForReal eternal]] [[DeaderThanDead destruction]]. Unfortunately, Bible translators usually translate all four words as "Hell", despite that ''Gehenna'' has a different meaning from the first two, thus causing a lot of confusion. More recent translations such as the New Living tend to put Sheol and Hades as "The Grave" and Tartarus and Gehenna as "Hell" (or leave them untranslated).

to:

* The traditional view of FireAndBrimstoneHell is due to distinctions LostInTranslation. The word "Hell" is used as a translation for FOUR words used in the initial writing of Literature/TheBible in its original languages: ''Sheol'', ''Hades'', a single mention of ''Tartarus'' (2 Peter 2:4), and ''Gehenna''. ''Sheol'' is a Hebrew word and ''Hades'' is Greek; both mean the same thing, the abode of the dead for all humans, whether good or bad, at least until Armageddon, and used in conjunction with Ecclesiastes 9:5 would refer to CessationOfExistence.Armageddon. ''Gehenna'' is a Greek word that when translated means "Valley of Hinnom", which was a trash dump where garbage filth, corpses of criminals, and the like were burned. Jesus re-purposed this word to refer to the future eventual end and KarmicDeath of the wicked, whether human or demon, and also has the same symbolic meaning as the Lake of Fire in Revelation. Not everyone agrees whether it is a place of eternal torment or [[KilledOffForReal eternal]] [[DeaderThanDead destruction]]. Unfortunately, Bible translators usually translate all four words as "Hell", despite that ''Gehenna'' has a different meaning from the first two, thus causing a lot of confusion. More recent translations such as the New Living tend to put Sheol and Hades as "The Grave" and Tartarus and Gehenna as "Hell" (or leave them untranslated).
15th Apr '18 6:46:18 AM LadyPedantica
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* The theory of Limbo is commonly misunderstood, and sometimes confused with purgatory. Limbo is supposedly a place for those who cannot enter heaven, but do not deserve Hell, and is actually a term for two realms: the Limbo of the Infants, where infants who die before being baptized end up, and the Limbo of the Fathers, where folks like Moses and Samuel ended up before Jesus allowed them to enter heaven. It is therefore distinct from purgatory as being a permanent residence (or semi-permanent in the case of the Fathers) rather than a temporary place of purification. Also, while purgatory is a place of punishment, if only temporary, Limbo is essentially heaven-lite: a place of "natural" (as opposed to divine) happiness. The most important difference between the two, however, is that, while Limbo has been postulated by several important church figures (like St. Augustine), it has ''never'' been adopted as an official church doctrine. The Church officially takes no position on the matter, except to essentially say "GodIsGood, so He will make sure everyone gets what they deserve". A plurality of opinions exist on the subject, which the Church maintains are all equally valid. For example, Pope Benedict XVI, when he was still a Cardinal, went on record to say that he believes that he believes unbaptized infants would enter heaven, to absolutely no controversy.

to:

* The theory of Limbo is commonly misunderstood, and sometimes confused with purgatory. Limbo is supposedly a place for those who cannot enter heaven, but do not deserve Hell, and is actually a term for two realms: the Limbo of the Infants, where infants who die before being baptized end up, and the Limbo of the Fathers, where folks like Moses and Samuel ended up before Jesus allowed them to enter heaven. It is therefore distinct from purgatory as being a permanent residence (or semi-permanent in the case of the Fathers) rather than a temporary place of purification. Also, while purgatory is a place of punishment, if only temporary, Limbo is essentially heaven-lite: a place of "natural" (as opposed to divine) happiness. The most important difference between the two, however, is that, while Limbo has been postulated by several important church figures (like St. Augustine), it has ''never'' been adopted as an official church doctrine. The Church officially takes no position on the matter, except to essentially say "GodIsGood, so He will make sure everyone gets what they deserve". A plurality of opinions exist on the subject, which the Church maintains are all equally valid. For example, Pope Benedict XVI, when he was still a Cardinal, went on record to say that he believes that he believes unbaptized infants would enter heaven, to absolutely no controversy.
6th Apr '18 2:30:38 PM Toadofsteel
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

** It doesn't help that the New Testament made no attempt to avert OneSteveLimit, as there are at least three different Marys and three different Johns to be found.
11th Feb '18 7:32:26 PM nombretomado
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* The pentacle, which (among other things) was used by Christians for centuries to represent the five wounds Jesus suffered on the cross, and to provide ''protection'' from evil spirits. It was a common Christian symbol as recently as the advent of the Mormon church. In Wicca, {{Onmyodo}} and most other non-Left Hand Path forms of Pagan belief, the symbol uses a meaning developed within alchemy: the five points are the five elements, and again as a "protection from evil" seal. The Satanist or other Left Hand Path version, the pentagram, is, for this very reason, an inverse (upside down) pentacle, which often gets confused with the upside down cross above.

to:

* The pentacle, which (among other things) was used by Christians for centuries to represent the five wounds Jesus suffered on the cross, and to provide ''protection'' from evil spirits. It was a common Christian symbol as recently as the advent of the Mormon church. In Wicca, {{Onmyodo}} {{UsefulNotes/Onmyodo}} and most other non-Left Hand Path forms of Pagan belief, the symbol uses a meaning developed within alchemy: the five points are the five elements, and again as a "protection from evil" seal. The Satanist or other Left Hand Path version, the pentagram, is, for this very reason, an inverse (upside down) pentacle, which often gets confused with the upside down cross above.
1st Feb '18 11:10:12 PM Historian1912
Is there an issue? Send a Message


*** The Thirty Years War wasn't really about Christians trying to convert each other; it was about a war of succession and political-religious loyalties that quickly devolved into a prolonged mercenary war where everyone realized that they would be worse off financially if the war ever stopped, and kept finding excuses to keep it going. Individual armies had a mixture of Catholics, Calvinists, Lutherans, etc. regardless of the denomination of their commanders or princes. A great number of soldiers were forcibly conscripted and soldiers would sometimes provoke wars with other armies to avoid returning home, or conduct raids and pillages to make up their (lack of) pay. Back then many soldiers were paid mainly by the loot they could gain too.


to:

*** ** The Thirty Years War wasn't really about Christians trying to convert each other; it was about a war of succession and political-religious loyalties that quickly devolved into a prolonged mercenary war where everyone realized that they would be worse off financially if the war ever stopped, and kept finding excuses to keep it going. Individual armies had a mixture of Catholics, Calvinists, Lutherans, etc. regardless of the denomination of their commanders or princes. A great number of soldiers were forcibly conscripted and soldiers would sometimes provoke wars with other armies to avoid returning home, or conduct raids and pillages to make up their (lack of) pay. Back then many soldiers were paid mainly by the loot they could gain too.

16th Dec '17 12:23:24 AM Perey
Is there an issue? Send a Message


*** While it is kind of true that Easter has some ''symbolic'' things in common with pagan beliefs, it's more complex than that, and Easter does in fact have much more than "a vague "baptism" of being Jesus' Resurrection." Early Christians used to call the celebration of Christ’s resurrection “Pesach,” the Hebrew word for Passover; today, many languages use a variation of that name: “Pesach” in French, “Pascua” in Spanish, “Pasqua” in Italian, “Pashkë” in Albanian and “Pask” in Swedish. The English word, Easter, comes from a stranger source: a pagan fertility goddess named Eostre (also known as Astarte or Oster). The festival of Eostre always took place around the spring equinox, so early Christian missionaries in Europe (only in Europe mind you) gradually melded the festival’s name, timing, and some of its symbols into the Christian celebration. “The missionaries adapted a tremendous amount of the cultures from where they were doing their work into the faith, in large part to make people feel comfortable,” says Ace Collins, author of ''Stories Behind the Traditions and Songs of Easter''. “Eventually, the Christian celebration took the place of the pagan festival.” So Easter doesn't really have pagan roots seeing as how many cultures don't even call the holiday Easter or celebrate the pagan aspect of it, and even then Easter or Pesach was celebrated by early Christians long before they added in any pagan traditions in to it (Christmas is a similar case).

to:

*** While it is kind of true that Easter has some ''symbolic'' things in common with pagan beliefs, it's more complex than that, and Easter does in fact have much more than "a vague "baptism" of being Jesus' Resurrection." Early Christians used to call the celebration of Christ’s resurrection “Pesach,” the Hebrew word for Passover; today, many languages use a variation of that name: “Pesach” in French, “Pascua” in Spanish, “Pasqua” in Italian, “Pashkë” in Albanian and “Pask” in Swedish. The English word, Easter, comes from a stranger source: a pagan fertility goddess named Eostre (also known as Astarte or Oster).(or Eastre). The festival of Eostre always took place around the spring equinox, so early Christian missionaries in Europe (only in Europe mind you) gradually melded the festival’s name, timing, and some of its symbols into the Christian celebration. “The missionaries adapted a tremendous amount of the cultures from where they were doing their work into the faith, in large part to make people feel comfortable,” says Ace Collins, author of ''Stories Behind the Traditions and Songs of Easter''. “Eventually, the Christian celebration took the place of the pagan festival.” So Easter doesn't really have pagan roots seeing as how many cultures don't even call the holiday Easter or celebrate the pagan aspect of it, and even then Easter or Pesach was celebrated by early Christians long before they added in any pagan traditions in to it (Christmas is a similar case).
20th Nov '17 12:16:08 PM CaptEquinox
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* Claiming that God declared the human body sinful during the Fall of Man (after Adam and Eve were kicked out of Eden). Actually, after being tempted by Satan to eat the ForbiddenFruit, Adam and Eve's (spiritual) eyes had opened, and they began to see everything as shameful, including their own bodies (they were unaware of their nudity until now). So, they attempted to cover them up by making "aprons" out of fig leaves (some versions of the Bible imply that only their genitals were covered with a single leaf) and hiding from God in the trees, but He calls them out on this. God did give them better clothing than the "aprons" after kicking them out, mainly because He had cursed the Earth with things like thorns as punishment, so their bodies would occasionally need protection from the harsh world outside; never did He say that they must be covered up at all times. Plus, He still loved and cared for them even though they sinned. [[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis%203:1-24&version=NIV]]

to:

* Claiming that God declared the human body sinful during the Fall of Man (after Adam and Eve were kicked out of Eden). Actually, after being tempted by Satan to eat the ForbiddenFruit, Adam and Eve's (spiritual) eyes had opened, and they began to see everything as shameful, including their own bodies (they were unaware of their nudity until now). (They already knew about sex; God asked them to 'be fruitful and multiply' while they were still in the garden.) So, they attempted to cover them up by making "aprons" out of fig leaves (some versions of the Bible imply that only their genitals were covered with a single leaf) and hiding from God in the trees, but He calls them out on this. God did give them better clothing than the "aprons" after kicking them out, mainly because He had cursed the Earth with things like thorns as punishment, so their bodies would occasionally need protection from the harsh world outside; never did He say that they must be covered up at all times. Plus, He still loved and cared for them even though they sinned. [[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis%203:1-24&version=NIV]]
This list shows the last 10 events of 462. Show all.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=Main.ArtisticLicenseTraditionalChristianity