PatsFanInVa

First of all, the religion section of any bookstore - including (especially) the most doctrinaire bookstores - are chock full of people pocketing the money by repeating various formulaic praises of God; so the difference in publishing dollars is probably in favor of orthodoxy. It is the single best-selling book in history; it is, therefore, the least likely book to be ecclipsed by sales of sequels.

Secondly: since you don't stick to the "That was then, this is now" application, do you keep kosher? Trim your beard? Suffer witches to live? Kill homosexuals? Take disobedient children to the city gates and stone them?

You are correct that one must read the bible in its context. But reading it in its context consists of "That was then [i.e., those circumstances]; this is now."

Bad assumption

Your parochialism is noted. The value-neutral term is Hebrew bible. The traditional term among the people who produced these works is Tanakh.

"That was then, this is now."

Once again, your heart is in the right place, as your conclusion indicates; but the fact is, you could not live with yourself if you lived the way the recipients of these books lived. By that I mean either at the outset of the religion Jesus practiced, or at the outset of the religion that celebrates Jesus. Hell, not more than a couple of decades went by before Christians found themselves unable to even eat the same diet Jesus ate, or to practice circumcision.

Errors and willful perversions of translation are indeed an interesting subject, and #2 is indeed one of the many pitfalls one can fall into when reading the bible. It is also necessary to take into account the preexistent texts copied into biblical stories in the case of the Hebrew bible, and to take into account the interests of various factions in the case of both the Hebrew and Greek bibles. It is also instructive in studying any ancient texts, to understand that word choice, style, and rhetoric amount to something like a fingerprint, and to understand that just because somebody told you two joined passages were written by the same person does not mean it is so.

God can be infallible, indeed, in most formulations must be infallible. The men who record the bible are not necessarily so -- although the orthodox among Christians and Jews will always insist (as is in their interest) to the contrary.

The Kabalists and of course the Reform, among Jews, and many modern Christians, will admit as much.

PFnV

Harry Boy

The best place on this planet to discuss God (all the peoples God) is by a campfire out in the middle of nowhere with several gallons of red wine (jesus liked wine) and some Lamb Chops to put over the fire and "cook on a stick" in this atmosphere one can feel God inside softly saying, "ahhh, this is good"

Look Up, The Stars Twinkle And Shine, God Is Happy With You, Campfire, Wine, Lamb Chops, Salt Shaker, Friends, God Is Truly Great.

We'll all get together up yonder in a little while---(Johnny Cash)

__________________
Harry Boy (Genius)

In The Absence Of Law And Order Society Will Surely Destroy Itself

patriotspride

heaven without pizza isnt a place i want to be.

PatsFanInVa

They must have pizza in heaven... AND it helps ya get there faster! LOL

JLC

Bump. Too interesting to just let fade away...

My $ .02 - I grew up in a Christian denomination in which ordaining women was a norm from the beginning. Never was an issue for me. The primary reason it seems to me that so many misconstrue what Paul is saying (in Timothy) is that they are committed a priori to the concept of male authority in the church leadership, ignoring the one primary piece of hermeneutic guidance that gets buried more than any other: authorial intent. Paul wrote to the church at Ephesus to correct a specific problem that arose from "false teachers" (Elders no less) who were leading the younger widows into all kinds of crazy behavior, even to disrupting their meetings together for worship and instruction. In that specific situation he speaks to that issue, and provides a corrective remedy, which Timothy is to help carry out. There is no indication that this is a directive aimed at the rest of the home churches in existence, and Paul's primary intent - as stated in the letter - is to fix what's broken at Ephesus.

I also understand that, with my background, others could accuse me of an a priori commitment to female leadership in the church. Could be - no one comes with a clean slate. I dunno, seems like if God is going to gift half the population with the ability to lead...

That's my story and I'm sticking to it. Thanks to all who have contributed to this thread. Including the pizza/heaven thingy.

Note: I more often hear Timothy quoted than 1 Corinthians in support of Girl Gagging, and so used that in my comments. The rationale is the same for both: Paul's intent was directed at specific issues, not creating a theology book.

maryjane

The stuff about "that was in the old testament, so it's negated by "Jesus"", doesn't make any sense.

First, God is a constant. So according to God, it's OK to beat your slaves and kill them (as long as it takes a couple days) and it's OK to kill children who are disobedient, etc. God and Jesus are THE SAME, are they not? Jesus is God, right? Can we agree on that? OK, then, Jesus didn't "change" anything, he is God, the same God who did all those seemingly cruel backwardass things in the Old Testament.

Didn't Jesus say that he didn't come to "change one bit of Mosaic law"? Well, then, why insist that he did? All Mosaic law gets thrown right out the window! Neato. Why? "Cause Jesus, the son, died on a cross for our sins". That is truly a line that is repeated so much that I think people who say it don't realize what utter gibberish it is. "God so loved us that he sent his ONLY SON to die on a cross...so instead of being tortured (which we really deserve, cause like Adam bit an apple a long time ago), we can go to heaven!...well unless you're such a jerk that you don't or can't force yourself to believe this stuff...then you deserve to go to hell! To be tortured. Cause God loves you!".

How can any person in their right mind believe this nonsense? The same group that calls Mormonism a cult is involved in the biggest most idiotic cult of all time. How ironic.

Lifer

No need to be so angry and insulting. There are many intelligent people who happen to believe and interpret things differently than you. I agree that many Christians spend much too much time being harsh and judgemental rather than expressing the message of love that is behind the teachings of Christ. Paying the penalty of our sins so that we may have eternal life, for me, is the greatest act of love I can imagine.

But I do appreciate your questions, for I once had them too, and it wasnt something someone could convince me of, I had to experience it for myself.

There is an excellent book, The Case for Christ, by a former non-believer named Lee Strobel, that explains these things far better than I could. If you get a chance, take a read, not to necessarily change your mind, but to get an understanding on maybe where the believers come by their faith and why.

maryjane

I think most believers don't ask themselves rational questions. They've moved to kind of a "post rational" analysis. It feels good. I had to go to church for years as a kid, a very fundamentalist church, so I'm familiar with all the arguements and have read a lot of the stuff.

God paid the penalty for your sins. And who decided what the penalty was going to be? God. So God sets up a ridiculously cruel punishment system and then comes down to earth and "satisfies" the punishment by spilling his blood so no one has to be punished at all. What a nice guy!

Well, only if they believe the above. IF they don't believe it, either becuase they've never heard of it, or because it just doesn't move them, then they get tortured forever. Even if they've lived a very clean sober life. And if you're a total jerk and have caused much suffering, it's OK, as long as you repent before you die.

How does a Christian believe this stuff? How do you go about yoru day thinking that about 99% of your fellow humans are in for unimagineable permanent torture at the hands of your all loving God? Because they weren't able to make themselves believe in something....how do you make yourself believe something that you don't believe anyway?

At some point do you just say "this is madness"?

Lifer

again, I think you are over-simplifying and putting your harsh and angry spin on the story and im not going to debate it with you. I would say, though, your 99% is way, way off. Unlike a lot of unbiblical teachings, the path is not, in reality, per scripture, that narrow. Yes, a belief in Jesus Christ is required, but all the other hoops that some teach to control, being perfectly holy, doing this or that, is not. And there many, many believers in the world.

beyond that, i wish you luck in your spiritual journey.

nORRis8

Deuteronomy 2:1,2

Such ‘castration’ did not relate to congenital defects or to an accidental condition. (Compare Le 21:17-21; De 25:11,*12.) Evidently, therefore, it had to do with deliberate emasculation for immoral purposes, such as homosexuality. Such a one was to be kept out of the congregation, not being allowed to associate with it, thereby protecting its purity.