The Bible and Love and Christians

[CensoredAlso]

problem with post, see below

 

[dwayne1115]

The Bible is the word of God.

 

[CensoredAlso]

Yes I did and I appreciate that very much. Still, the Bible has a lot of strange or ambiguous passages that require much explanation and investigation.

OK thanks, I'm glad that made sense, lol. And yes, I can't argue with that.

I just always find it odd that many Christians feel a need to over-share and enforce their beliefs on my life

Well the thing is, part of it is cultural. Some denominations of Christianity are very into proselytizing to others and take it just as seriously as saving their own soul. To do otherwise would be seen as failing to help and care for others. So it it important to understand that frame of mind. Other denominations, such as Catholicism, don't stress proselytizing quite as much, or at least not in the same way. I mean as a child we weren't really taught much about proselytizing to people. Nor were we taught that non-believers were doomed for eternity. Catholicism is more into loopholes, heh, like Baptism by Desire, which is one way non-believers go to Heaven. Now granted Catholicism has a long history of missionary work in other parts of the world. But whatever people may think of the idea, missionary work has done a lot of charitable good for people through the years.

(By the way, not a fan of the Gaga song. Too preachy and talks about God too much for my taste. Plus I liked it better as Madonna's Express Yourself.)

Hehehehehe. Heck, I'm Catholic and I'd DEFINITELY choose Madonna over Gaga! Not a huge difference anyway since Gaga is just trying to be her.

 

[frogboy4]

The Bible is the word of God.

Well, you believe it is and I respect that, but one cannot state that as fact until the afterlife - such is the concept of faith that is at the heart of Christianity. So such a proclamation without "I believe" before it is condescending and forcefully dismissive to those who believe differently. It's how information is shared and not the sharing of it itself that so many non-believers find offensive. It all comes down to intent. Christianity is inherently social and requires believers to recruit others so they must take extra care in how this is done in order to avoid irritating others into turning away from your message. It's not my intention to recruit anyone to my way of thinking - just to allow me my civil rights to live my life to the fullest and free from the arbitrary religious shackles of oppression.

Hehehehehe. Heck, I'm Catholic and I'd DEFINITELY choose Madonna over Gaga! Not a huge difference anyway since Gaga is just trying to be her.

At least she copied the good stuff. Pop music is cannibalistic by nature and Madonna has certainly made an artform of that herself so it's no surprise she supported the recent single. Well, even though I think gay folk deserve a better anthem. I personally prefer this one by Lily Allen. (it's the clean version)

 

[CensoredAlso]

Well, you believe it is and I respect that, but one cannot state that as fact until the afterlife - such is the concept of faith that is at the heart of Christianity.

The way I see, I believe the Bible is the word of God. But I also believe that we are not God, we are imperfect human beings. So it's not out of the question that some parts of the Bible are misinterpreted by well meaning people.

It's how information is shared and not the sharing of it itself that so many non-believers find offensive.

Like I said, some people think by sharing information that way, that they are helping to save others. If they stop, it means they have failed to help a fellow human being, in their eyes. Some of this is just different cultural viewpoints clashing a bit.

 

[dwayne1115]

I have not read alot of this thread but I know to talk alot about God and the Bible it would be a good idea to have a Bible handy. Cause if you don't you could really miss use the word.

 

[frogboy4]

The way I see, I believe the Bible is the word of God. But I also believe that we are not God, we are imperfect human beings. So it's not out of the question that some parts of the Bible are misinterpreted by well meaning people.



Like I said, some people think by sharing information that way, that they are helping to save others. If they stop, it means they have failed to help a fellow human being, in their eyes. Some of this is just different cultural viewpoints clashing a bit.

Completely agreed. On a personal note - proselytizing has personally affected my life. My family, for the most part, accepts me and encourages me no matter who I'm dating, but I have one particular family member who still has this false assumption that I'll come around, do a 180, settle down with a nice girl who'll pop out some grandchildren. It's sad because this sort of magical thinking has no bearing on the other wonderful realities of my life that I can't share with this family member and it deprives us of a deeper relationship. That's one of the toxic components of religion that separates people. There's no changing my mind and I'm not out to change her's, but there comes a point to respectfully agree to disagree and enjoy the delicious donut without focusing on the hole. In my experience Christianity has both bonded me to some family members due to their adherence to the spirit of it and estranged me from other family members due to its dogmatic judgment.

 

[GonzoLeaper]

Can I ask a hypothetical question? Putting aside people's ways of delivering information (and I agree that there are many who don't do it in a good way and I'm sorry that you feel that I'm among that number - I don't necessarily want to offend or upset anyone- just trying to present what The Bible says)
But anyway- what I was trying to get to was- outside of what The Bible says about homosexuality, are there any other issues you have with believing what it says?
I hope I worded that well. I was just curious, if you're willing to talk about it- if you don't want to answer it, then don't bother- that's fine.

 

[RedPiggy]

And honestly, I don't want to deny anyone their rights. However, I can't ordain a gay marriage as it doesn't fit the definition of marriage- a union between a man and a woman.

It is under your religious paradigm. The bible also allows for polygamy, yet magically that seems to go under the rug when discussing what is “marriage”. Of course, then there are the gazillions of concubines ….

I would just feel it would be more honest if one would declare that such “declarations” are really one dogma from one flavor of one religion, because it’s clearly not from the source material at all.

(Though if it comes down to obeying the government or obeying God, I must obey God rather than men.)

Understand, though, that Jesus, if you want to call Him God, noted that “marriage” doesn’t really exist in Heaven like we view it down here on the ground. So, any loyalty to certain definitions of marriage is CLEARLY from man, not God, since God Himself said He really doesn’t think about it much.

And honestly I think it's a little unfair to judge what my "brand of witnessing" is without knowing how I treat people in real life.

Also understand that criticisms are meant to clear up some things, not a personal attack or anything. If I see a claim that has issues, I’m going to bring it up, just as you feel that you must speak up to “educate” us.

but I can't see it as loving to not explain what The Bible says about such things

Well, at least for me, what I’m trying to explain is that you seem only partially aware of what the Bible says. You pick oft-quoted verses, while never investigating the context.

The Bible is the word of God.

And yet, all the traditional authors named are human. Go figure.

But anyway- what I was trying to get to was- outside of what The Bible says about homosexuality, are there any other issues you have with believing what it says?

Well, since you asked ….

1. Parables, no matter who’s using them, are useful to the extent that it develops a healthy attitude for theological exploration. However, as with any analogy, there are major flaws sometimes. For example, Jesus uses a lot of agrarian and royal imagery to discuss the Kingdom of God. However, when the king has to invite homeless people to his shindig, why does he kill the guy who came in without a tux (so to speak)? I mean, is the king so brain-dead that he didn’t know poor people don’t have good clothes? Wasn’t the compassionate and rational thing to do just giving the guy a rental? Has it ever occurred to the king that maybe his friends didn’t show up because they thought he was a major jerk? Or what about the story of the gardener and the seeds? Yes, I get that the seeds being planted are metaphors, but what idiot would put a seed on a sidewalk and expect that to work? Sometimes parables actually make God look far more incompetent than tradition holds if you continue to explore all the implications.

2. The convenience of the danged. Have you ever noticed that, even if the speaker is engaged in false piety and false humility, all the danged people are those the speaker doesn’t like? Even after the bible, such as in Paradise Lost or Left Behind … it all comes down to “my group is awesome and yours is not”. I don’t really recall having seen someone with MY attitude, which is “I’m not in control of the labeling so whatever?”.

3. Religious code. No, I don’t mean that silly crossword puzzle nonsense. I mean that there is a lot of stuff that goes on in the bible that is clearly some political dig at someone else, but whole groups of people have suffered due to biblical political bias that is mistaken for literal history. When a tribe’s origins come from some nasty daughters who get their father drunk, or city folk are descended from the first murderer … these things are just digs, nothing more. The bible has a pro-priest/rabbi and pro-rural bias, at the least. If a character or group didn’t suck up to the author or the group the author represented, amazingly negative stories came out. However, it’s not 100%. After the rule went out that Jewish men had to ditch their foreign wives, the book of Ruth came out to counter such bigotry. None of it has to have happened at all. It is merely, so to speak, the liberal counter-ad to the conservative governmental dictate.

Two and three are related, of course. Still, the fact that there are issues that crop up with serious study of the nuts and bolts should give us pause. I believe the bible is the Word ABOUT God, not OF. I can believe and see for myself that the bible shows evidence of evolving theology and political nagging. I can see for myself that the bible does not encompass everything that has ever happened on the planet. How, then, can I continue to be loyal to the Divine, the characterization of Which I concede comes from this particular theological tradition? Well, in all honesty, it’s because the fact God didn’t hand-write the bible didn’t shake my faith in a loving and compassionate divine element of reality. I am a modern American Caucasian woman. I will never be able to act like I belong in ancient Mesopotamia. And, if those who “speak” for God would concede, neither will they. No sect of any of the Abrahamic faiths act like they did centuries ago. I can believe God’s relationship with us evolves because I can see the process itself in other areas of life. A parent who still acts like their 30-year-old offspring is a toddler is downright pathological. Similarly, God’s relationship can evolve. Adam and Eve were punished for wanting to become like God. Jesus commanded that is precisely our goal in life. Clearly, something has changed. A lot of people fear change and believe “eternity” means a single snapshot of life that never changes in any way forever and ever. Since this is objectively not the case, and a lot of it is proposed by some ancient Greek dude who was very stuck on himself, I am in no way bound to agree to it. I try to appreciate life for what it is, not what Platonic philosophy tried to pull on me.

 

[dwayne1115]

It is under your religious paradigm. The bible also allows for polygamy, yet magically that seems to go under the rug when discussing what is “marriage”. Of course, then there are the gazillions of concubines ….

I would just feel it would be more honest if one would declare that such “declarations” are really one dogma from one flavor of one religion, because it’s clearly not from the source material at all.


Understand, though, that Jesus, if you want to call Him God, noted that “marriage” doesn’t really exist in Heaven like we view it down here on the ground. So, any loyalty to certain definitions of marriage is CLEARLY from man, not God, since God Himself said He really doesn’t think about it much.


Also understand that criticisms are meant to clear up some things, not a personal attack or anything. If I see a claim that has issues, I’m going to bring it up, just as you feel that you must speak up to “educate” us.


Well, at least for me, what I’m trying to explain is that you seem only partially aware of what the Bible says. You pick oft-quoted verses, while never investigating the context.


And yet, all the traditional authors named are human. Go figure.


Well, since you asked ….

1. Parables, no matter who’s using them, are useful to the extent that it develops a healthy attitude for theological exploration. However, as with any analogy, there are major flaws sometimes. For example, Jesus uses a lot of agrarian and royal imagery to discuss the Kingdom of God. However, when the king has to invite homeless people to his shindig, why does he kill the guy who came in without a tux (so to speak)? I mean, is the king so brain-dead that he didn’t know poor people don’t have good clothes? Wasn’t the compassionate and rational thing to do just giving the guy a rental? Has it ever occurred to the king that maybe his friends didn’t show up because they thought he was a major jerk? Or what about the story of the gardener and the seeds? Yes, I get that the seeds being planted are metaphors, but what idiot would put a seed on a sidewalk and expect that to work? Sometimes parables actually make God look far more incompetent than tradition holds if you continue to explore all the implications.

2. The convenience of the danged. Have you ever noticed that, even if the speaker is engaged in false piety and false humility, all the danged people are those the speaker doesn’t like? Even after the bible, such as in Paradise Lost or Left Behind … it all comes down to “my group is awesome and yours is not”. I don’t really recall having seen someone with MY attitude, which is “I’m not in control of the labeling so whatever?”.

3. Religious code. No, I don’t mean that silly crossword puzzle nonsense. I mean that there is a lot of stuff that goes on in the bible that is clearly some political dig at someone else, but whole groups of people have suffered due to biblical political bias that is mistaken for literal history. When a tribe’s origins come from some nasty daughters who get their father drunk, or city folk are descended from the first murderer … these things are just digs, nothing more. The bible has a pro-priest/rabbi and pro-rural bias, at the least. If a character or group didn’t suck up to the author or the group the author represented, amazingly negative stories came out. However, it’s not 100%. After the rule went out that Jewish men had to ditch their foreign wives, the book of Ruth came out to counter such bigotry. None of it has to have happened at all. It is merely, so to speak, the liberal counter-ad to the conservative governmental dictate.

Two and three are related, of course. Still, the fact that there are issues that crop up with serious study of the nuts and bolts should give us pause. I believe the bible is the Word ABOUT God, not OF. I can believe and see for myself that the bible shows evidence of evolving theology and political nagging. I can see for myself that the bible does not encompass everything that has ever happened on the planet. How, then, can I continue to be loyal to the Divine, the characterization of Which I concede comes from this particular theological tradition? Well, in all honesty, it’s because the fact God didn’t hand-write the bible didn’t shake my faith in a loving and compassionate divine element of reality. I am a modern American Caucasian woman. I will never be able to act like I belong in ancient Mesopotamia. And, if those who “speak” for God would concede, neither will they. No sect of any of the Abrahamic faiths act like they did centuries ago. I can believe God’s relationship with us evolves because I can see the process itself in other areas of life. A parent who still acts like their 30-year-old offspring is a toddler is downright pathological. Similarly, God’s relationship can evolve. Adam and Eve were punished for wanting to become like God. Jesus commanded that is precisely our goal in life. Clearly, something has changed. A lot of people fear change and believe “eternity” means a single snapshot of life that never changes in any way forever and ever. Since this is objectively not the case, and a lot of it is proposed by some ancient Greek dude who was very stuck on himself, I am in no way bound to agree to it. I try to appreciate life for what it is, not what Platonic philosophy tried to pull on me.

Wow! that is some strog words.

You know I have really tried to stay away from this thread, and so far I have but now I feel i should say something.
We all here have very differnt lives, past presemt anf future. Most of us want to have some form of religon based on God, and the Bible. I think a conversation like this could be great, but what I think should happen is a "Bible Study". We are talking about God and the Bible and we are getting things confused I feel. I propose that we start from the first of the book, and we each talk about what the passages mean to us. I mean isnt that what the word is there for. We could sit here and talk about homosexualtiy in the Bible till we turn blue in the face, but if we don't have a better understanding of the whole story, then we are talking in vain. The Bible can and has been used as a guide for people's lives, and I think that if we really started to studyit together we would see that deep down we all agree on a lot of the things we are aruging about.
So what do you all think, would you all like to start a "Bible Study" here? I would be more then happy to help with it, and I personaly think it would be helpful. Even if you have read the Bible through before, It would be interesting to hear others views on what the scripture is saying.