the new archbishop of canterbury

But it doesn't concern me there are contradictions, it's for us to debate and explore.

And piece together so it all fits. And we obey.

Pointless discussing Christianity with a non Christian

Well there are so many shades of belief just in the Anglican Church its not

"a christian or not a christian", since there is no one way of "being a real christian"

its about how we interpret texts and teachings, and of course (if working from commentaries) who is doing the interpreting.

Anniebach

Pointless discussing Christianity with a non Christian

Wow!

AGAA4

I may be wrong but didn't she say she would not tolerate mysogeny? Good for her if she did.

Will she tolerate misandry. It does happen you know. Men also suffer domestic abuse, maybe be not in the same numbers,nevertheless it occurs.

I'm sure she won't, Freya. Abuse is abuse!

But why do people assume that if someone criticises misogyny they might in any way be pro-misandry?

Its neither true not logical.

There has been a rise in misogyny due to Tate and others and worries about young men being influenced by this.
I don't know if there has been a rise in misandry but no women equivalent to Tate as far as I know.

Well, he was contradictory, truly. There's also the Classic 1 Peter 2 "wives obey your husbands".

They were of their time.

Part of an alive faith not one carved in stone.
Yes. Otherwise it might wither and die.

The thing is anyone can say they will challenge misogyny, doesn't actually mean it will happen.

How about a bit of trust and seeing if she does, before doubting?

Anniebach

Pointless discussing Christianity with a non Christian

Of course there is a point to discussing Christianity.

Paula Vennells was shortlisted for Bishop of London and everyone thought that was great at the time. Just because the new AC is a woman doesn't mean she's going to be any better. Let's wait and see shall we.

My reaction to that is "oh ye of little faith" because why damn a woman, who is being ripped to shreds already by sections of Social Media, before she has even started?

Weird to me - for one woman to do this to another with no evidence whatsoever.

I don't cheer on women because they are women.

Oh, I do, in a world still full of misogyny, especially when they have a record on the tackling abuse front and have specifically spoken up on misogyny, of which I have had my fill more recently in my life including in a religious setting.

Unless there are good reasons for not supporting that particular women, as a feminist, yes, I will cheer her on heart and soul.

Damning someone who is new in post and is being ripped to shreds by social media is not the same as refraining from cheering on someone for being a woman.

That is very false equivalence.

The church I go to follows biblical teaching as closely as we can. We only have male Pastors and they don’t wear robes or Druidic headdresses. I used to go to a Baptist church and I still believe and accept adult baptism of believers even though this isn’t generally followed by many in our particular church. I believe Jesus is the son of God and not a man, just came in the form of man. None of us can judge others, only God can do that and everyone sins, churchgoer or not. I certainly don’t think I am ‘better’ than non believers, just different.

But I am not damning her. I simply said saying you will challenge misogyny doesn't mean that you will do that.
The government said they would halve violence against women, do I think they will, well of course not. There tends to be lot of noise about misogyny that results in very little.

I know you didn’t. But you replied to the comment about her being damned with one about not championing women because they are women. That’s what created the link.

But she wasn't being damned by the post before either, people were saying let's wait and see, a perfectly reasonable response.
Her sex means many things, but it doesn't mean she will be any better or worse than her predecessor.

My experience and historical records of changes to empower women has been that it's the "push" and struggles of women to demand and effect that change has only come because of women's efforts. Of course many good men have also been involved along the way too:

But its this historical and life experience (for me starting at maybe 3 when I was aware of my mums union struggles in the NUT (teachers) to get equal pay

Tells me that a powerful and effective woman is a very good way of starting to tackle, even to "call out" misogyny in and out of the church, to move forward yet further for women - or stopping them dropping back!

I can't understand feminists who don't see this, I genuinely admit, welcome the appointment of a powerful women to this position.

Do you think God is a mysogynist?

I try and follow God and Jesus.

What they do, I do.

I dont see anything in the New Testament about changing courses as time goes on.

The opposite really.

The Bible ends with the Book of Revelation.
So it has the beginning, the middle[Jesus] and the End.
Is the way I see it. And always shall.

fancythat

Do you think God is a mysogynist?

No, he/she is not a misogynist.

I accept that your path is right for you and wouldn't have any problems over a cuppa listening to your feelings and beliefs. But I could never believe just one particular version of Christianity is "The Truth":

neither do I believe that Christianity is in itself superior and more "True" than other religions, because they arise from different cultures so are bound to be different world wide.

The spiritual instinct that some people feel and others dont imo can take many forms;

... and although I believe very strongly in critiquing any religion when it leads to hatred or war, whichever it is, I'm not going to write off the believers because they were born in a different placer in the world and into that culture and that religion.