Blowy,

<<Where would one start with a response to Spencer Gear's accusatory article. Perhaps start gently by noting the change in church attendance from the 1960s from which time women entered the public workforce in greater and greater numbers. Should supernaturalist Christians send them back to domestic confinement? Is that superrnatural religion in practice? It was certainly the practice for nineteen centuries of Christian orthodoxy.>>

A better place to start would be to deal with the issues I raised in the article.

+ Jesus' bodily resurrection

+ The need for correct grammar and syntax when writing any narrative.

+ The Bible's literal content that applies to reading your reply as much as reading the Bible.

+ Refusing to accept heretical teaching, based on the Bible's understanding of heresy - false teaching.

+ How to continue emptying churches without pursuing a secular agenda.

Chris Lewis,

<<I see it another way.>>

My other way is for you to deal with the content of my article.

What's preventing you from dealing with with the biblical content of my article? Do you lack biblical/theological knowledge?

Spencer Gear- Thanks for your important article. I'll be making efforts to change this trend as these institutions are critical to western culture.

Canem,

<<Thanks for your important article. I'll be making efforts to change this trend as these institutions are critical to western culture.>>

Thank you for your encouragement.

I urge you to join a church where this "rot" is entrenched so you can be part of the rebuilding process. I live in Qld so I see the need for it with the Anglicans, Uniting Church, Roman Catholics (you'll have a lot of trouble changing that denomination) and the Lutherans.

These are the denominations losing attendance in droves.

The one that bothers me most is the evangelical, Presbyterian church that is at the top of the losers. Are there any Presbyterians here who can help me understand the reason why an evangelical church is a leading loser?

Alan B,

<<Guess what Spencer, I don't give a shite how many willfully ignorant positions you take! Or how many times you break the "rules" of grammar and syntax! Or your extreme right-wing/Neonazi interpretation of the Christian ethic?>>

When will you quit using logical fallacies, e.g. "willfully ignorant positions" (red herring); "your extreme right-wing/Neonazi interpretation of the Christian ethic" [ad hominem (abusive)] so we can have an intelligent conversation?

Here goes your flaming again: "your brainwashed or willful misinterpretation of biblical text."

<<Take your sacrilegious poison and peddle elsewhere!>>

This is your dumping an "Appeal to Ridicule" Fallacy on me and the OLO audience.

A better and more rational approach would be to deal with the arguments I raised on why I'm not a theological liberal.

From my understanding the Presbyterian's are suffering because they have merged under the Uniting banner- from what I can see is the most "progressive" (code for Communist) church. It's strange because the Scots in a sense are the Capitalists of Britain in a sense. There is another interesting effect in Ireland where the "nationalist" movement appears to be heavily influenced by communist ideology. In both cases perhaps the reason for the communist ideology is due to the perceived overarching threat being England- but generally English don't try and occupy Scottish land- perhaps they do try and occupy Northern Ireland- unlike immigrants under the support of the Communists (and the larger Industrialists in the interest of cheap wages). But Communism doesn't necessarily mean Marxist in the UK according to some.

Overall there is an interesting interaction between Communist, Capitalist and Nationalist ideologies. But Communists are very good at exploiting these gaps for their own advantage.

It's sad that many seem to have rejected their own families in favour of Communism