|
|
|
#21
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
I think, before I get to the actual Bible verses you quoted, I'd like to pick up with some of your thoughts in the post I quoted. I don't know if you meant them tongue-in-cheek, so I'm going to assume you didn't. You bring up good points, either way. You are exactly right when you say that the average Christian hasn't and can't really get into an exhaustive study of scripture. And that applies whether the person is conservative, liberal, evangelical, progressive or whatever other flavor that Christians come in. The reality is that most people know what they have been taught about the Bible, and most learn it from others who learned the same way. If I can, I'll use an analogy from my previous life. I trained opticians - you know those people whos sell glasses. Most opticians learn on-the-job from people who learned on-the-job who learned from people who learned on-the-j... I used to train opticians to design the lenses they fit, and then select a frame that would work best with the lenses they designed. Unfortunately, most opticians learn how to sell frames and tell people they look good on them - the biggest asset was being able to choke a gag reflex. They're frame salespeople who let a lab, a few hundred miles away and who have never seen the patient, design the lenses. In the way they learn, there is generally a diminishing return on the repetitive training investment - the opticians got weaker and weaker because their trainers were weaker and weaker. Every now and then, however, one of those opticians would decide they were just geeky enough to want to know more than their trainer, and they would immerse themselves in the study of technical optics and anatomy/physiology. These people would end up raising the bar for many opticians, becasue when they taught, they taught well and trained very good opticians. It is similar for Bible readers. Literal interpreting, many times, is easier - it requires less study and less training. It ignores the nuances of scripture, and glosses over the tough parts that seem to contradict or stand in contrast to other passages. Soundbyte theology sometimes results. Occasionally, someone is either taught by another who has great exegetical and language skills, or decides to really delve into the Bible and learn the original lnaguages and such, and they become very good Bible scholars. These people can run the gamut of theologies - conservative, liberal, etc. Mostly, however, people have learned from ministers who didn't really take the study of scripture as seriously as the memorization of scripture. Or they had Bible studies with people who learned the Bible from what someone else told them. This can have just as much of a diminishing return as my example above. It is my belief that good Bible study and good theological reflection don't happen much anymore. And those who do it well, whether lay or ordained, teach people how to really delve into the scriptures for meaning and context. A young, but very adept, Bible study teacher who I knew (he happened to be very conservative and very good) used a process he called "The Preview, the View, and the Me View" and stressed the importance of the order. Preview = context and what had come before. View = what it meant to those hearing it in the time it originated. Me View = only after the two other steps, find its meaning for you riht here and right now. While I'm not one personally for dealing with scripture as infallable, I can set aside my bias on that notion and deal with the notion of infallable reading of scripture. No matter how perfect the scriptures may or may not be in reference to God's intent, scripture is understood in the human brain - that apparatus of God's magnificent design that resides in the human body. Generally, the more conservative a Christian is, the more weight is placed on original human sin and the need for God's redeeming action through Christ. Humans are far from perfect - in this world, at least - and theitr sinful and fallen nature make their judgments fallable, especially when they rely on their own understanding. How, then, (I ask myself) can fallable humans read infallable scripture and understand the message and will of God infallably. Add to that a tendency to read and quote scripture in broken snippets, and it seems highly unlikely to me that an infallable reading of scripture is possible. Literalists, however, seem to assume that their understanding of scripture is the one right way to grasp it, and anything else is tampering with God's intention. It strikes me that this assumption is proof positive of human idolatry - to elevate to the status of God's will a human reading of the Bible.
__________________
www.revandylittle.com - Andy's blog Sins are always worse when they're different than mine |
|
#22
|
|||
|
|||
|
Since he said all that, I'm not going to.
As far as this: Quote:
If I had to guess, though, I would think it exactly as andrewlittle described it--too much literalism, not enough scholarship. These people truly believe they're right. Dash, you funny. If that was directed to me, I'm no one's fragile flower. I can't speak for simpleman, though. |
|
#23
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
When you're serious you make me think -- when you're being silly you make me laugh ! .... but I'm still waiting to see whatca got
|
|
#24
|
|||
|
|||
|
Simp, if I was taking it any easier, I'd be comatose.
Quote:
Quote:
I sorry, but even in translation those few biblical passages are TOO TISSUE PAPER THIN to account for the intensity of the passion around this issue. People don't HATE divorced and remarried people intensely enough to go out and picket and the Bible is even clearer about that being sinful. So I ask again, and ask that you think about it a little more deeply-- because your insight might actually be helpful --- why do some Christians WANT it to be against God's will to be gay? Last edited by u-dog; 05-04-2007 at 07:14 AM. |
|
#25
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Oy veh...the pressure! Nevertheless, . You may proceed.
__________________
DraneSpout.com |
|
#26
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Insecurity. Keeping up with the Joneses. Uniformity. If GAY is OK, then what are they supposed to do with their own aberrations? This reminds me of 9/11, to which I had front-row seats, living four blocks away as I then did. That morning and afternoon were horrific not just because of the nightmare unfolding in Lower Manhattan; it was also horrific because many, if not all, Americans saw baldly the wafer-thin glue that holds our society together and keeps out of complete anarchy. They saw this glue poised at the moment before failure. And, for some very, very uncomfortable moments, they felt the fear that accompanies panic. Oh my God, what is going on?? Is today the day I die? Is the world ending? Heavy pizza, right? If GAY is OK...if airliners can take down two iconic skyscrapers...well, then what's to say nothing makes sense anymore? Who's to say there's even a God? The fear this causes some is intolerable to them. There always has to be a scapegoat. I wonder who it'll be once GAY is OK....
__________________
DraneSpout.com |
|
#27
|
|||
|
|||
|
I know many of the myriad reasons why 9/11 was a horror, but I'm wondering if there was a special horror to that day as AN ARCHITECT? The WTC was iconic not just for New Yorkers, but for people in your profession particularly. Was there a particular helplessness or violation that you experienced that would have been added to what all New Yorkers and all human beings felt?
Have you reflected on that at all? and could you share about That particular sliver of the horror of 9/11? Just curious. Dave |
|
#28
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
Better to light one candle than to curse the darkness. Johann Wolfgang von Goethe |
|
#29
|
||||
|
||||
|
The major question to ask here is one we (evangelicals ... I am one, and I'm assuming you are too, Simpleman ... am I right about that?) must always be very clear on ... what, EXACTLY, is Scripture against in this matter ... we use this principle all the time, but for some reason, the evangelical community has been unwilling to apply the same standard to the Bible's comments on same-sex sexual behavior as it applies to many other issues.
Just one example. In Galatians 5:2-3, Paul says: "Mark my words! I, Paul, tell you that if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no value to you at all. Again I declare to every man who lets himself be circumcised that he is obligated to obey the whole law." Paul's words are "plain" and "clear." But, in the US, almost all infant males are circumcized as a matter of routine. Christian parents routinely allow their male children to undergo circumcision, and adult males (presumably some of them Christian) are sometimes circumcised for medical reasons. Have they thereby repudiated their faith? Is Christ of no value to them? Have we, in fact, ignored the PLAIN sense of these verses? We as evangelicals say of course not! We recognize that the meaning of circumcision in the first century church and in our day is distinctly different. Therefore, Paul's prohibition against being circumcized (as a religious practice) is presumed not to apply to our practice of circumcision (as a medical/hygenic practice). So, we MUST ask (to be true to Scripture), when Paul spoke negatively of men having sex with men (which he certainly did), what exactly did he have in mind? Almost certainly, he had in mind the homosexual practices that were going on in his immediate environment. I'll give you only the very brief version here (there are extended studies of this available ... I'll point you at some if you like): The Greco-Roman model of homosexuality that Paul would have been making reference to was almost exclusively PEDERASTY. The idea of two adult men in a mutual committed relationship simply would not have been in his mind, because he'd never seen it. What he would have seen (and therefore condemned) was the habit of older men using younger youth (and even boys) for sexual gratification. The relationships were, not surprisingly, notoriously non-mutual, as the youth involved had little to no say over whose partner they might be ... they might have been slave or free, but they were certainly not "partners" in any meaningful sense. Pederastic prostitution (involving youth prostitutes who often dressed as women) was also quite prominent. So, when Paul speaks of "homosexuality" (he didn't use that word, it didn't exist), it is VERY likely this is what he had in mind. Does a prohibition against pederasty and prostitution logically extend to any and all homosexual relationships? Certainly not. I believe, that by extending the prohibition beyond what Paul was most likely referring to is ADDING TO SCRIPTURE ... which is a dangerous practice indeed! Helpful at all?
__________________
Better to light one candle than to curse the darkness. Johann Wolfgang von Goethe |
|
#30
|
|||
|
|||
|
All excellent answers.
I think that a lot of Christians' hatred for homosexuals comes out of fear of it as a social stigma, not out of fear of it because the Bible says it's wrong. I won't go quite as far as to say that these people often use the Bible to rationalize their social fears, but I'll get close to it. This is something that you all know all too well, but it's true: many people are simply scared of homosexuals. Why? Who knows. Maybe because they are different, maybe because they see the parades and the rainbows, maybe because they've never met a gay person and they think that there's something wrong with them. People have millions of conscious and subconscious reasons for their fears of gay people. And, of course, in the face of being pressed on the issue, i.e. someone says "why do you think being gay is so bad?" the best answer seems to be: because the Bible says so! So maybe the more pertinent question isn't why do Christians want to think that the Bible condemns homosexuality, but rather why are people scared of homosexuals? I think that what you are running up against in society is this: nobody can come up with any rational reason that homosexuality is wrong, or that it is wrong for gays to marry, or that it is wrong for gays to adopt and raise children, they just don't like it. They can point to the Bible, but people go back through and rip through their "paper thin" truth. They don't try to work through translations, and counter point, they just block it out. Essentially they are saying this: I'm really sorry, and I don't know nearly as much as most people, but: go away, gay people, go away. It's not right, it's not fair, it doesn't really even make sense, but I think that's what you are seeing. And then the politicians want to appease this group, because that's how politics work. Politics work like the open market. Whoever will buy you (vote for you) you sell yourself to. Don't get me wrong, I'm not about arguing with you on these things, I just thought I'd bring some insight into what society you are working against. Even though you probably already know, I just thought that would answer some questions. |
|
#31
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
I was wondering that just like there are people who are scared of homosexuals, there could also be people who are scared of Christians? Like, there is a saying that homosexuals have agenda to do away with freedom of speech, there is also a saying that Christians have an agenda to take over the world and create theocracy. Don't you see a similarity between the two saying, by having a fear of people? |
|
#32
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Just as a clarification, when I say "fear" I don't mean like "Oh we're afraid of the angry gay people who might hurt us" I mean it as they don't want to talk about it or think about it and would rather it just go away. |
|
#33
|
||||
|
||||
|
Simpleman (have you told us your first name ... I don't like calling people by screen names)
Thank you, thank you, thank you. I feel heard, and valued. You are exactly right in this. It was the conclusion I ultimately came to as a gay man who is serious about his Christian faith: That the CHURCH has had far more to say about (against) homosexuality than God and the Bible ever did! As to the "why" ... it's anybody's guess. I'd put it down to a number of causes: mistrust of the unfamiliar, resistance to change in general, personal insecurities or discomfort with any topic related to sex ... at a deeper level, I think it's about a deep human need to have a person or group to scapegoat our anger, fear, and despair onto when we see our world falling apart. That's why I can say without hesitation that I believe homophobia is sin, because I think it's rooted in that desire to evade responsibility, like the pharisee in Jesus' parable: "'God, I thank you that I am not like other men—robbers, evildoers, adulterers—or even like this tax collector." (Luke 18:11) For those who might not know that story: Quote:
__________________
Better to light one candle than to curse the darkness. Johann Wolfgang von Goethe |
|
#34
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
It's a really interesting question. (I promise to keep this short so as not to interrupt the thread flow.) To be honest, I really only put my architect hat on once the discussion got around to the collapse. I knew that the towers basically had an exoskeleton of closely placed columns around a central, concrete shaft. This design allowed for maximum salable square footage and a column-free floor plate for maximum flexibility for the interiors. The Achillies Heel was the connection of these floor systems to the exterior columns, and that's why the floors "pancaked" the way they did. That day...and for the days after...all my thoughts were those of a New Yorker, an American, a human being. I also had worked in the towers years ago. My first job after college was on the 59th floor of Tower One. I worked there for about a year and a half...and we did evacuate once because of some substation fire. So on 9/11, it took little imagination for me to put myself in those stairwells. My boyfriend and I (and dog) were out of our apartment for 8 days, and the fire at the site smoldered until Thanksgiving. There's nothing like coming back from the gym, after work, and walking by the charred remains of your neighborhood slowly being brought down by wrecking balls and carted away 'round-the-clock, or walking around during the day cursing the huge amount of extra sunlight into a neighborhood no longer blocked by the huge sundial. And, ironically perhaps for an architect, I couldn't bring myself to care about the flurry of interest around the various replacement proposals. The void, to me, was sacred. But, then, that's not how our society works, is it?
__________________
DraneSpout.com |
|
#35
|
||||
|
||||
|
I've been away from Soulforce for a while. It's great to read all of the dialogue going on here. I wanted to comment on the discussion of why we (GLBT folks) are feared.
Isolation and separation create fear. Talking about a group (i.e. homosexuals, the mentally ill, cultural groups, etc.) divorces the conversation from the human being. In such cirumstances, lack of knowledge leads people to use their imaginations. Now the stereotypes pop up. As gross and misleading as they are, they become the discussion. The human being from that group stands off to the side wondering why their humanity is being questioned. It seems so surreal. When someone who only knows only what they hear from the sterotypes is confronted with the human being it makes them nervous. The stereotypes aren't usable. This definitely causes one to consider the possibility that all of your assumptions may be wrong. If that's the case, then what? The fear is mounting! Back to aguing for "the known", or take a step and ask a question, or be quiet and listen. The responses are as varied as human beings are. Participants in the Equality Ride put their human selves out there to say we are the reality, we won't harm you, we want to talk. As far as groups go, GLBT folks are unique in that they also belong to every ethnic, religious, cultural, and professional group that can be named. I'm grateful for Soulforce. We can all be our human selves here. Montanna |
|
#36
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
.To answer your question, imagine that you were born and grew up as a boy -- yet were the same person inside -- the Marcie you think of yourself as today. Same goes for you Simpleman. You imagine you were born and grew up as a girl. You'd be a lesbian. How would you then answer the question: Quote:
And my answer to that would be, What evidence do you have that I am confused? What if I do know something that's not explained in the Bible?
__________________
Nothing bad can ever happen. ~God |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|