“Is that wrong in the eyes of man and or in the wisdom of God.
Is it wrong because church is worried about what man thinks or what God thinks.
Those that were for; are they for because it feels right or because God says its right and visa versa.
There are too many people in the church worrying about what the masses think who probably dont real give a fig and in a couple of months time; wont even cross their minds.

Is this debate about what is right before man or God. If its about what looks right then the focus is wrong.

Gods ways are foolishness in the sight of man.”

“No women! Even gods upset, just check out the weather today, he's mad as hell!”

“Thank you barrtribe my sentiments precisely, it makes one wonder how far from the scriptures some of the C of E are prepared to go, does this mean for some they can disregard the whole of 1Timothy 3 and what makes for a good bishop.

A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach. 1Timothy 3: 2”

“Females know they are better than men and do not need organised religion to confirm this, I wish they would stop feeding these weak old men's egos”

“@JJLee The majority of the Bishops voted for women bishops, it was the Laity that voted against.... did you watch the news? Most of those speaking against women bishops were women”

“I was referring to the publicity rather than who did the voting you silly old fool, I have no time for the church or the weak that follow it or watching TV as seems to be everything for you, so No i never watched the news as I have a life”

“Around a dozen elderly people attend my local branch of the English church formed to allow for the sexual dalliances of the then English King. I think that speaks volumes for the established church, don't you?

Kernow bys vyken!”

“They allow women to be the workers, but never management?

Something wrong there, surely?”

“"English church formed to allow for the sexual dalliances of the then English King" (Henry VIII, 1491-1547)

Didn't Henry have something to do with the establishment of Oxford University?

Which did a study, recently, about "Cornish genes"

Funny what goes around...LOL”

“Yes it is strange what goes round, a bit like the same English King having the University at Glasney destroyed, probably the finest in the world at that time.

And the study wasn't only aimed at the Cornish but people across the British Isles. Do get your facts straight, English!

Kernow bys vyken!”

“Lol here we go again.”

“"Lol here we go again."

Yes so it seems, "always learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth"”

“agreed”

“You talk of 'the truth' 'young' cornwall and buddies. Here it is. I know it is Wiki and that is no authority, but it will give you a rough idea, won't it?:

http://tinyurl.com/bwhz9x6”

“PS. Reading the article and in particular, some of the words on the memorial stone may upset some of the English on here but there you have it - on a tablet of stone, Cornish granite to be exact.

http://tinyurl.com/bwhz9x6

Kernow bys vyken!”

“"And it came to pass, as soon as he came nigh unto the camp, that he saw the calf, and the dancing: and Moses' anger waxed hot, and he cast the tables out of his hands, and brake them beneath the mount."

(Exodus 32:19)”

“A modern, neo-Celtic, whoever they are, monument, erected for what real reasons, I wonder.”

“On a "tablet of stone"?

"The truth isn't always carved in stone"

(Jimmy Saville)”

“'This commemorates the loss of Glasney College and the death of thousands of Cornish Patriots in defence of the faith, language and Celtic customs' 1549 to 1999

Erected with the full authority of Penryn Town Council, Falmouth Town Council and Cornwall Council and attended by the then Lord Lieutenant of Cornwall, the High Sherriff of Cornwall and the Bishop of Truro as well as the Grand Bard of Gorsedh Kernow and others and commemorated each year by hundreds.

That would be the same Bishop of Truro, the Right Reverend Bill Ind, who in 2007 described the Church of England's role in the massacre of thousands of Catholic rebels during the suppression of the Prayer Book rebellion as an "enormous mistake". "I am often asked about my attitude to the Prayerbook Rebellion and in my opinion, there is no doubt that the English Government behaved brutally and stupidly and killed many Cornish people. I don't think apologising for something that happened over 500 years ago helps, but I am sorry about what happened and I think it was an enormous mistake." He then went on to discuss the 'English problem and their propensity to violence'.

Now suffering with cancer, Bishop Bill was Barded along with the Lord Lieutenant for services to the Celtic Nation of Cornwall.

Kernow bys vyken!”

“Posters here must be really annoyed that they live in Cornwall, administered for convenience as a County of England for convenience but not of England.

Cornwall, next to England just like Wales. Cornish not English following receipt of report signed by Professor Sir Walter Bodmer.

Kernow bys vyken!”

“I think the "Prayer-Book Rebellion" says it all.

Similar rebellion in Norfolk?”

“Please can we get back to the point of this article.”

“Who erected this stone?”

“Throughout history many wrongs have been done by all and sundry, it is a sad fact of life; commemorate all who die through persecution.
What are the true motives in the minds of some, for such a monument, that is what modern minds should be asking. The question does not detract from the seriousness of an historical occurrence, one which was being carried out all over our country.”

“Cornwall, my Cornwall, your Cornwall: Cornwall, a county of England as established by extant legal and ancient fact.”

“The admission by the Bishop of Truro firmly "put the blame" on the deaths on the Church and not "racial cleansing".

The fact that this "massacre" has disappeared from many nationalist forums, blogs, etc. may give a clue...LOL”

“What has all this got to do with women bishops.”

“Ah, the English Fox!

From the Cornwall Council timeline of Cornwall's history:

1855-58

Legal arguments of the Duchy of Cornwall defeat the Crown's aspirations of sovereignty of the Cornish foreshore. The Duchy argues that the Duke has sovereignty of Cornwall and not the Crown. During the same case, Parliament defines the Cornish as "aborigines".

Also on behalf of the Duchy, the following submission was made.

That Cornwall, like Wales, was at the time of the Conquest, and was subsequently treated in many respects as distinct from England.

That it was held by the Earls of Cornwall with the rights and prerogative of a County Palatine, as far as regarded the Seignory or territorial dominion.

and:

1889 - Cornwall 'County' Council created - now Cornwall Council - Lys Kernow. (the word 'county' dropped)

Cornwall, next to England just like Wales - as established by extant legal and ancient fact.

Kernow bys vyken!”

“Enjoy:

http://tinyurl.com/c2895oy


Kernow bys vyken!”

“There, there, TK, never let fact get in the way of your cause, carry on with your 'Celtic national' fiction.

My Cornwall, your Cornwall, Cornwall, a county of England, fact.”

“Looks like your article has been hijacked once again youngcornwall”

“Truro_Kernow, The Reform Acts of the 1800's began to remove tyranny which was the way people had been ruled. You'd do well to understand that, tyranny was the way it was before we got the vote. This was a turning point in the history of this Country. You seem to be thinking Cornwall has never had the vote and still hasn't, we have all moved on I am sorry to tell you. Fly your flag by all means and speak any language you like it matters to no one really, what really matters is we have the vote.

Start you learning here:

http://tinyurl.com/bo8auph”

“When the Church is driven by or conforms too the wishes of the world, it ceases to be the Church.
Not that the Church of England has any similarity to a Biblical Church and hasn't done so in any of our lifetime, if ever.
" I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man ...." 1 Timothy 2:12
That refers to the Church.”

“"When the Church is driven by or conforms too the wishes of the world, it ceases to be the Church."

"Satan, who is the god of this world, has blinded the minds of those who don't believe. They are unable to see the glorious light of the Good News. They don't understand this message about the glory of Christ, who is the exact likeness of God." 2 Corinthians 4:4”

“Amen to that”

“Well, I will argue politics with anyone, but religion is where I draw the line.

I have seen it cause so much death down the years.

I am Cornish first and foremost and all I can say is that I wish I could believe in your Christian God, I really do. Sadly I see little real evidence of him when over half this planet is starving and innocent people dying.
I admire those of you who believe and I mean that genuinely. I only wish I could.

Kernow bys vyken!”

“"I see little real evidence of him when over half this planet is starving and innocent people dying."

And whose fault is it that half this planet is starving and innocent people dying? Gods? It is so easy to shift the blame, God has provided and we are squandering it on self indulgence, because one of the greatest gifts given to mankind was the gift to choose, and we choose to let innocent people die, we can bomb them with bombs, but when it comes to food and fresh water that is a different thing, just see how much will be spent on food again this Christmas, and we know what Christmas celebrates don't we, the birth of Jesus, born in a humble stable and crucified on a more humble cross.”

“Well, I just watched this about Christmas:

http://tinyurl.com/cpgux73

A little at odds with the church I should imagine.

Kernow bys vyken!”

“Different churches, different religions opposed to each other. Well, they can´t all be right. If christians think they are right, that is just cultural chauvanism. It seems to depend on where and when you grow up as to which god you believe in. In the future it will be blasphemy to believe in the jesus story just as it is now to believe in zeus or the horned god cernunos.”

“Just because you don't believe it doesn't mean its not true.
Thats why it's called faith.
Believing in what is unseen.
You will never see it until you are ready and God opens your eyes to the truth.

But that aside

What have 99% of these posts got to do with anything except prove that 99% of people really don't care if there are women bishops or not. Yet they insist that those who do care must say yes because why? It seems right? Right by what measure? In their eyes or God's.”

“Believe in what is unseen? A matter of faith? Until your ready? Most christians believe in what theyve been TOLD. Not personal revelation, how post-modern. Father figures passing their WISDOM down the ages, usually at a knifes blade if questioned. Its laughable how the modern church bases its morals on its own teachings, how remarkably diiferent they were not a few centuries ago. Modern secular society allows freedom of views and freedom of religion. We discuss what is right as a public discourse, not behind closed doors. The church of england has proven that it is part of the modern world by having the discussion in the first place. However, they have also shown themselves to be conservative chauvanists.”

“you are correct in part re passing down of "knowledge/wisdom"; is that not how all wisdom and knowledge is aquired; in part. Then there is personal growth and wisdom that comes through study and relationship.
Knowledge and wisdom is a continuous process is it not.
I am not sure where you make you assumptions; or maybe its you personal experience;
"Most christians believe in what theyve been TOLD. Not personal revelation, how post-modern. Father figures passing their WISDOM down the ages, usually at a knifes blade if questioned."

Yes there are people who chose that path; as in secular gathering of wisdom/knowledge; but there are a great many more who study, read and listen.
Are you saying secular society doesn't base it's morals on its own teachings?
If not what does it base it's morals on?
In regard to freedom of choice; it's quite clear that that this is an important part of Gods way.
God allows you to make a choice and take the concequences of those choice's.
Are you saying that a Christians choice to follow Christs teaching are any less valid than secular society maing their choice not to; or any other person chosing a different path.

The "church" discusses what is right in public discourse continually; if you are prepared to listen objectivly and without bias.

In regard to discussions behind closed doors; this is very common practice in every walk of life; it is a normal part of the worings of or society.

Are you implying that there should be one rule for one and a different rule for another.

Re your last statement the have a process that has been in place for a long time that is tried and tested. Just because the result wasn't what some peole wanted doesn't make it a wrong result.

Shall we just discard or democratic system of voting as some suggest we do; just because it doesn't always give the result we want.”

“"Are you saying secular society doesn't base it's morals on its own teachings?
If not what does it base it's morals on?
In regard to freedom of choice; it's quite clear that that this is an important part of Gods way.
God allows you to make a choice and take the concequences of those choice's.
Are you saying that a Christians choice to follow Christs teaching are any less valid than secular society maing their choice not to; or any other person chosing a different path."(barrtribe)
The point I was trying to make is that secular society has allowed for "choice". Public discourse has grown despite the church and that the church operates between two habitas, one of tradition and conservatism and one of pragmatism and change. The church having such discussions is a consequence of modern secular society, it picks and chooses its moral teachings within a greater moral landscape. As far as god allowing you to make a choice, can you please clarify who god is and how you have come to KNOW this information.”

“Whats the point in answering my questions with a question, do you not have answers.
Question 1. no in fact I was asking you the same question but the other way round. (which you have not answered)
question 2. same as above.

God allows us to chose full stop there is no distinction between either.

Public discourse has always been art of life not the domain of any section of society.

In regard to your last question you will have to experience the answer to that yourself. There are people out there far more intelligent and knowledgable than me, who have spent their whole lives trying to explain who God is. Maybe that is a personal quest you may like to persue.”

“Men and women are equal. So why not both at all levels of their English church?

BUT, a more serious and very sincere question please. What proof is there of God?

And what proof of a Christian God rather than any other?


Kernow bys vyken!”

“"As far as god allowing you to make a choice, can you please clarify who god is and how you have come to KNOW this information."

How would you go about trying to explain a beautiful Constable painting to some who has been blind from birth, you can but only describe it as you see it, how the blind person sees it in their minds eye, we can but only imagine, this is how it is with knowing God, myself personally I know that I know that I know, the answer to my prayers is enough for me, I feel so very privileged that by God's grace God saved me and opened my eyes to the truth.

I'm content in the arms of Jesus
knowing He is there by my side
Life's journey has not been easy
but He has been there every step that I stride.
yc”

“Good questions,
Men and women are equal; the question for the christian is not a case of equality.
The question should be;" is it scriptual".

Second question is very valid and all I can say is there is plenty of information out there both scientific , spiritual and experiential as to the proof of God. I do not have sufficient space or knowledge to communicate it well enough to do it justice.

Again if answers to the questions are sought with an open mind and not an agenda, there are thousands of people who have ased the question and found it.
The problem as in any question is if the one asking has an agenda.

Apologetics is the attempt of man to offer some answers.

As for proof I would have to say this is a matter of revelation to those who believe by faith.
God promises to reveal himself to those who Truly seek him.

I know it's probably not an answer that will satisfy most but maybe that's as it should be.

God even says in his word that we will only know him in part until the day of resurection.

As for proof of a Christian God; all the above apply. God is God; Christian's are the followers of christ; who believe than he was/is God.

I love questions; i have many myself still unaswered so I understand and respect those who don't believe and have questions.

I could quote scripture here but I dont think there is any point if peole have the opinion that the bible is just fantasy or a book about a good way to live .

Like any religion be that spiritual or football :); prefer rugby myself. There is a manual/guidance on how to outwork what you believe.”

“That was well put youngcornwall”

“"Are you saying secular society doesn't base it's morals on its own teachings?
If not what does it base it's morals on?" Christianity claims to have its morals from Jesus or even god but these morals change over time, does god change his mind? Society changes and institutions either take control or adapt.Certain examples of what was deemed morally correct 500 years ago would not wash today. Yes through a secular moral discourse. As for the second question; what moral philosophy one follows is indeed their choice but what is "right" for a community must be for all its members. What message is the church sending out to modern Britain when it denies a section of society (50%) an influential voice among its ranks.

You say there is scientific evidence for god? Enlighten us. "Belief" in the unseen, "faith" were the words muttered, wholely unscientific. Christians claim to have the truth on no evidence, at the same time most of the worlds population don´t agree with them, how arrogant? Believing you have the truth is far from having it. Maybe there is an all powerful creator of the universe but you and I know nothing about it.”

“I once believed in the Christian God. I know the bible well. During a time of need as arises in all our lives, I got down on my knees and prayed for hours using the Lords Prayer in Cornish and English and much else besides.

No help came.

I stopped believing. Since then, I have seen God turn away many times in others' lives. I wish I could have the beliefs of some here, even those I am diametrically opposed to politically but I no longer do.

Yes, I still have two bibles here, in Cornish as translated beautifully by Professor Nicholas Williams and in English. I know them well. But now I cannot believe any more.

I want harder evidence that posters here often ask for.

Kernow bys vyken!”

“on praying. As the late American comedian George Carlin said: god has a devine plan so why would praying achieve anything? Praying for this that and the other is futile as god has his own plan. THY WILL BE DONE. And anyway what if what you pray for isn´t in gods plan, what do you want him to do, change his plan? Just for you, doesn´t that seem a little arrogant. Whats the use in being god if some shmuck with a two-dollar prayer book can come along and mess up your plan ( not his exact words but of course Carlins language was a little more colourful).”

“myghternda : - God never changes. Yes his followers have made decisions based on their belief/ interpretation or as you say what they are told to believe.
Like all society we aim to be the best we can and follow the teaching we believe in as best we can. Christians are imperfect people just the same as the rest of society.
With Knowledge and wisdom we try to outwork what we believe and are continually seeking wisdom in the interpretation and the outworking of of what we believe.
Yes as the rest of society we dont always get it right.
But there are many scriptures that are very clear but dont necessarily suit how secular society may want to live or act.
That is their choice. Again what is "right" for society has many influences.
As is documented throughout history What is "right" as you said quite eloquently ; in the eyes of society has changed. It is dependant on you stand point, nowledge and uderstanding.
certain aspects of society can apply to all but it is totally naive if you think that every aspect of everyones life should and can be the same.
Even amongst christians or any society people have different lives but a common belief and as with all knowledge people are on a different part of the journey.
As for you last statement; what do you base it on . you can make that statement for yourself but not for anyone else.
Darwin himself who later became a christian, yet his "theory" is treated as fact; said it was only a theory. Personally I dont see why both creation and evolution cannot be true. But hey that's another subject.

TK :- I cannot know your pain or circumstances.
I too have not seen answers too many of my prayers but have also seen many prayers answered.
I still have more questions than answers.
Sometimes I have felt let down but sometimes i have realised that maybe I was asing the wrong questions .
without wanting to sound flippant .
Sometimes what I wanted wasnt what I needed. Sometimes it was years later that I realised this.
Doesnt make it any easier to take especially when it involves people close.
I don't pretend to have all the answers, just that over the 25 odd years I have been a christian life has not always been plain sailing and I have had my doubts but I know God has never let me down even when I doubted at times.
As with the vote on the female bishops; what is right is not always black and white or what society as a whole deems right or acceptable.
Again please do not take anything written here as anything but a hand of hope.”

“Correction: when did Darwin become a christian? He was never an atheist. He only had an interest in what was real. He found it difficult to reconcile scripture with reality. Whereas he didnt BECOME a christian neither was he a confirmed atheist.”

“Correction: evolution is not just a theory, in fact "theory" in science must be based on evidence. Do you really think that evolutionary biology and genetics is simply guessing. Science has moved on since Darwin and some of Darwins work has been proven incorrect but evolution by natural selection is still prominent among biologists in explaining the complexity of life. Creationist theories dont have any evidence.”

“"I once believed in the Christian God. I know the bible well.
I stopped believing."

Nothing is cut and dried, our lives is but an apprenticeship and are called at different times of development 8 or 80 who knows, but we will all be used for His glory when our time come, if we are persistent.

Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be filled. Matthew 5:6”

“Wait a minute. If pain and suffering is caused by man why does god intervene during the "apprenticeship" to take the "untrained" to heaven. So god doesnt intervene when man is doing his worst but does when there is fresh meat to be had. God doesnt intervene so much in the rich west where the prayers are answered. But in the 3rd world where thousands of children die everyday from hunger and illness he´whistles while he works. Either god is evil or christian chauvanists are plain wrong.”

“"Wait a minute. If pain and suffering is caused by man why does god intervene during the "apprenticeship" to take the "untrained" to heaven."

Does He?

To live without Jesus can be for life, but to die without Jesus will be forever.”

“re darwin :- Christian or not will depend on which commentators you choose to read and believe. Again theory or fact of evolution or a little of both will depend on where you stand when researching and what your bias is. If you have no bias then there is plenty of evidence.
Why there is suffering again there are plenty of theories.

Is it cause and effect, is it the outcome of choice. Why do some peole die/suffer while others live /are healed ( I have seen both). I dont have the answers; but I do have personal experience and testimony. You can scoff and snort and poke fun all you like . It really doesn matter or have any lasting effect. You cant take away personal experience.
There are more people who are supernaturally healed in the so called third world than in the western world.
Are you really saying pain and suffering isn't caused by man.

Is it really easier to believe that all this came out of nothing; that all the creation we see around us came out of some goo acidently; even the elements and conditions in all the right propotions to create the big bang and following evolution. than believing that there is a creator god.

Scientist are continualy finding smaller and smaller particles as their skill and knowledge grows.
There are many non biased scientists who through all their reasearch have come to the conclusion that after all the evidence then what remains has to be truth. The unfathomable riches of Gods creation.

You have the likes of stephen hawkins and his followers who's only goal in life is to disprove the existence of a creator God. But they can only come up with half truths and theories themselves.
I wondered what happened in his life to effect him so badly.
we will only ever now in part until the resurection.

Natural selection plays a part in life; doesn't me it's not part of Gods plan in and through creation. You may say there is no evidence in creationist theories ; but that is just you bias. That is not the conclusion of an open mind without agenda.

Is it really so terrible/terrifying to believe in something greater than yourself.”

“True! we will never know exactly how Darwin felt in his last hours, but testimony from his family stated that no such admission occured. He didnt need to become a christian, he never became an atheist. I think the problem with many theists is that they think science is their enemy and that scientists only do science to disprove god. Most scientists have very little interest in this except some very vocal ones like Dawkins. Hawkings actually questioned Dawkin´s obsession with the god question. His current interest has probably been fanned by many asking his opinion on the subject. He simply states that the universe could "theoretically" come into existence without help, due to current discoveries in particle physics. There is no need for god in this model. In reality, well thats the big question and science is far from solving it. We are slowly building a picture of the universe and how it came into existence. I think the problem with the theist stance is that it assumes an intelligent creator before looking at the evidence, the evidence then is coloured, it is the "the work" of the creator (and maybe the observer). Personal experience is fine, but using it to claim an undeniable truth is intellectually dishonest. THAT is bias. Maybe it is all gods plan but we dont KNOW that. Believing in god is not what Im criticising, believe all you like, and it MIGHT be true but to claim your subjective experiences and revelations of others as proof of the truth is open to question.”

“Who said he was an atheist . It was his nurse who was with him too the end; family wer not present . Who said that he was reading and quoting scripture before he died. Hardly the actions of someone who had totally lost faith.
I agree with much of what you say to a degree.

"I think the problem with many theists is that they think science is their enemy and that scientists only do science to disprove god".
Yes this is true but also there are a great many chritians /religous people who embrace science as an amazing tool to be able to see and understand the world around us in all its amazing glory and detail.

Doesn't really help the bishops in their quandry does it :)”

“Thats what I said, we dont know what Darwin said or did in his last moments. However, the testimony of his nurse is not necessarily the truth, maybe she had motives. Darwin criticised bible literalism in the face of natural evidence. It was highly unusual for a man in the nineteenth century to be an out and out atheist and he never claimed that. To claim there absolutely isnt a god would also be intellectually questionable. Its about how we know what we know. What goes against many a scientific mind is claiming fact without testable transparent methods and hard evidence. The intellectually honest have to hold their hands up and say "I dont know" until such evidence comes along. What is true for someone personally is fine, but to claim it as true for everyone based on personal bias is chauvanism. As for the bishops, you are right, none of what im saying helps the original question. I think all I can say is that the Church can decide who it wants to lead it as long as its a "private" institution, but if it claims to represent its "flock" then I feel it needs to be a little more flexible and or representative.”

“We are all wondering where God is at this time. Perhaps as they used to suppose in the 50's and 60's, he is dead?”

“Can't answer that for you.
Paul said he was the Jew of all Jews and he percecuted the christians of the day to death.
It took God speaking to him through a donkey to get his attention.

From a Christians point of view God is here all the time he just hasn't got everyones attention yet.

No amount of apologetics and scolarly discourse will convince some of that.
The majority of people are experiential in how they learn/accept truths.

EG:- no amount of telling a child that if they touch something hot it will burn; unfourtunatly it takes an experience to know and accept what is being said is truth.”

“It took God speaking to him through a donkey to get his attention.

Where on Earth did you get that drivel from ?”

“If it pleases you and makes you feel better mock all you like it doesn't change anything.
But if you are really asking then read the gospels and you may be enlightened; or not.”