Errors and Contradictions in the Bible

[Jim Alfredson]

  Big Al said:

My point is, there are many MANY churches out there who welcome gays & lesbians with open arms. Staying away from the cold rigid legalistic churches is easier than finding the loving open churches, I’ll grant you that; but for my money, finding them is worth the search.

That's great, but is it not considered a sin in the Bible?

Leviticus 18:22

Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.

Leviticus 20:13

If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

Corinthians 6:9

Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind (Bible speak for homos)

So it's great that these churches are welcoming them, but isn't that hypocritical? Or is this another instance of "picking and choosing"?

[JSngry]

Maybe it's an instance of a living, evolving faith that refuses to be trapped into a death by dogma?

Those who would view the delineation of tribal laws and a letter from a regional manager as the final say on such a matter are doing nobody any favors if their goal is to further the ongoing unfolding revelation of the universal love.

We have no choice but to pick and choose in matters such as this, if for no other reason than we understand more about the subject now (as well as the possibility that the nature of homosexual relationships has also evolved over centuries and cultures, although that's definitely a "chiken or egg" deal...). The picking and choosing is between words directed towards a specific time and words directed towards all time. Fostering a continuation of tribal laws based in limited knowledge (to say nothing of the need to keep the population strong and growing) seems to me to be in direct conflict with the spirit of neverending love and mercy.

If faith is static, it ceases to be faith and turns into dogma. Faith is based on principles, dogma on laws. Faith knows no end, dogma reaches forgone conclusions. Faith is life, dogma is death.

Just my opinion, and I know I'm in the minority amongst the "Christian" community. Big whoop. It's a big world, and it's getting smaller every day. Let's see how useful and love/harmony producing dogma's going to be as it does.

[Big Al]

  b3-er said:

That's great, but is it not considered a sin in the Bible?

Leviticus 18:22

Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.

Leviticus 20:13

If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

Corinthians 6:9

Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind (Bible speak for homos)

So it's great that these churches are welcoming them, but isn't that hypocritical? Or is this another instance of "picking and choosing"?

Absolutely not. If churches only welcomed non-sinners, they’d be empty. Like Christ said, “I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners.” (Mark 2:17, non-KJV)

BTW, why only quote verse 9 from 1st Corinthians? There’s more sinners listed in verse 10: thieves, greedy, drunkards, slanderers, swindlers all will get their due. Do any of us NOT fall in any of these categories? Are we all going to Hell in a handbasket?

There’s this mistaken notion out there that if you accept Christ as your Savior, that you automatically stop sinning. To focus on the topic at hand, there’s an even more dangerous misconception out there that says something to this effect: if you accept Christ as your Savior, you’re cured of your homosexuality; conversely, if you’re still a homosexual, then you must not be a “real Christian.” (I live in Texas; I see it all the time) To that, I offer a resounding BULLSHIT!!!!! It’s usually the idolaters, slanderers and swindlers making that dangerous claim to begin with!

So what do we do? Say, “Well the Bible got it wrong on this one?” No. But at the same time, Christians absolutely MUST NOT exclude one person because of their sin, but casually ignore the sins of the other. This is the true essence of “Judging not others, lest you yourself be judged.” Or as Jesus also said, when a woman caught in sin was brought to Him, “Sure, I’ll condemn her; right after the first one of you lot COMPLETELY WITHOUT SIN casts the first stone.” None of them did. Christians condemn themselves when they (and I) cast that stone as well.

As for Leviticus, well..... don’t get me started! Mainly cuz I’ll get even more lost than I already am!

[Noj]

  JSngry said:

  Noj said:

I sincerely hope there is a God, so that I might one day extend my gratitude..

If you have it, it's already extended, no?

Good point. If there is an omnipotence that rules the universe, then every thought and action would be a prayer. I am thankful for my life, I have it so easy compared to many.

[Jim Alfredson]

See, but I don't view homosexuality as a sin, like stealing. Once you accept Jesus Christ you're supposed to do your best not to sin, right? Wouldn't that mean ending a homosexual relationship and trying to become straight?

I guess Jim's answer makes more sense... that these things were part of a tribal law that are no longer valid for our modern society. But then that whole "picking and choosing" thing comes into play and kind of messes the Bible up for me. Is it the Word of God or no?

[JSngry]

If you need to look at it like that, it is the "Word of God" as told through a sppecific geo-cultural-historical lens, but that "word" continues to unfold and reveal itself far past tha specific time and those specific people. If it were fully revealed, life would basically be a matter of going through the motions, no? Instead, we are given a set of fundamental principals (and some stories to ponder as to how they illustrate those principals), and that's about it. The rest is up to us. It's reall easy to project prejudices and ignorance onto it, but that's falling into the trap of dogma again, and that's going to happen with any belief system, Biblical or otherwise, if challenges and discoveries don't/aren't allowed to come along.

If you're looking for a "one stop" set of rules with all the answers, answers that can be applied to every situation at every time in history, you're looking for dogma, and you can certainly get that from the Bible.

But if you want more/better, you can find that, too. It all depends on what you're looking for.

Free will's a bear, ain' it?

Edited August 28, 2004 by JSngry

[Noj]

  JSngry said:

If you need to look at it like that, it is the "Word of God" as told through a sppecific geo-cultural-historical lens, but that "word" continues to unfold and reveal itself far past tha specific time and those specific people. If it were fully revealed, life would basically be a matter of going through the motions, no? Instead, we are given a set of fundamental principals (and some stories to ponder as to how they illustrate those principals), and that's about it. The rest is up to us. It's really easy to project prejudices and ignorance onto it, but that's falling into the trap of dogma again, and that's going to happen with any belief system, Biblical or otherwise, if challenges and discoveries don't/aren't allowed to come along.

If you're looking for a "one stop" set of rules with all the answers, answers that can be applied to every situation at every time in history, you're looking for dogma, and you can certainly get that from the Bible.

But if you want more/better, you can find that, too. It all depends on what you're looking for.

Free will's a bear, ain' it?

From my post in one of the other religion threads:

"I also see no reason why science would conflict with religion at all save a stubbornness to update obsolete data. Religion should be more about the lessons than the details, anyway."

[couw]

  7/4 said:

  WD45 said:

I must be the only one not tired of Take Five.  Love that Joe Morello drum solo at the end.

Great tune as long as it's played in it's original form, "Takin' Five" doesn't count.

you obviously never heard Helge take it apart five times over stir fried with a stumbling horn and wavering lines. Ka Chinggg!

[7/4]

  couw said:

  7/4 said:

  WD45 said:

I must be the only one not tired of Take Five.  Love that Joe Morello drum solo at the end.

Great tune as long as it's played in it's original form, "Takin' Five" doesn't count.

you obviously never heard Helge take it apart five times over stir fried with a stumbling horn and wavering lines. Ka Chinggg!

Clue me in: who's Helge? And where can I check it out?

Good to see you back couw.

[Jazzmoose]

  JSngry said:

Free will's a bear, ain' it?

Oops...there goes another fine myth rearing it's head...

[couw]

that'd be Helge Schneider, he did various versions of the ditty. One is vocal (ladidadidadidadidaa take fiiive! just take fiiiive!) and pretty hilarious, but I don't have that one. The one I have is with an tenor/organ/drums trio and rather straight, but also funny as anything if you can appreciate the humour. A bit like Shepp doing Girl from Ipanema (which Helge performs as well on the same disk as this Take 5).

take a listen (2.2 Mb mp3, crappy sound and may need right-click-download).

[Big Al]

  b3-er said:

See, but I don't view homosexuality as a sin, like stealing. Once you accept Jesus Christ you're supposed to do your best not to sin, right? Wouldn't that mean ending a homosexual relationship and trying to become straight?

And if one fails to overcome that temptation, then what? You're doomed forever? I'd hate to think that God is so petty as to overlook an honest, contrite, and repentant heart because someone failed to escape from one sin! I don't believe He is.

I'll use the example of my lesbian friends again, who worship Christ as their Savior, bring their daughters to church practically every Sunday, teach them the Commandments and the example of Christ. Do you honestly think that God is looking down at them with some holy scorecard and saying, "Yeah, you worship my Son and call Him your Savior, but yer still a coupla queers. See ya in hell, babes." I know there's a lot of Christians who think that; I'm not one of 'em. I'm not saying he overlooks their sin, but then He doesn't hold their sin against them any higher than anyone else's sin.

  Quote

I guess Jim's answer makes more sense... that these things were part of a tribal law that are no longer valid for our modern society.  But then that whole "picking and choosing" thing comes into play and kind of messes the Bible up for me.  Is it the Word of God or no?

Jim is absolutely right. But isn't it our nature to wanna pick and choose how we wanna live? Does our pickin' & choosin' diminish the importance of the Bible? I honestly don't think so. And this is where I see the true beauty of Christ, as His life and sacrifice serve as that reconciliation between the way I wanna live and the way God expects me to live. It's rarely ever the same, unfortunately.

Heaven would be a pretty barren place if the only people up there were those that lived completely sinless lives.

[Uncle Skid]

  Big Al said:

I'm not saying he overlooks their sin, but then He doesn't hold their sin against them any higher than anyone else's sin.

How can two loving people, that just happen to be the same sex, be "sinners"? Respectfully, I think you are missing Jim's point.

If gay people are sinners, we all better stop eating shrimp!!

God Hates Shrimp!!

Edited August 29, 2004 by Uncle Skid

[Jim Alfredson]

  Big Al said:

And if one fails to overcome that temptation, then what? You're doomed forever? I'd hate to think that God is so petty as to overlook an honest, contrite, and repentant heart because someone failed to escape from one sin! I don't believe He is.

Now I'm totally confused. So if I am a professional thief and make my living stealing from other people, as long as I go to church every Sunday and repent my other sins (sorry about that guy I had to kill to get his Rolex, God... but it's a nice watch!) then I'm cool?

What about a Christian hitman?

Like I said, it's great that the church is open to homosexuals but it seems like a total contradiction.

And as for the whole "specific geo-cultural-historical lens" Word of God stuff, why doesn't God have someone write a New New Testament for our day and age?

[7/4]

  couw said:

that'd be Helge Schneider, he did various versions of the ditty. One is vocal (ladidadidadidadidaa take fiiive! just take fiiiive!) and pretty hilarious, but I don't have that one. The one I have is with an tenor/organ/drums trio and rather straight, but also funny as anything if you can appreciate the humour. A bit like Shepp doing Girl from Ipanema (which Helge performs as well on the same disk as this Take 5).

take a listen (2.2 Mb mp3, crappy sound and may need right-click-download).

Sounds good to me.

Takin' Five is a smooth jazz ripoff that doesn't use that bridge.

What would Jesus think of such a rip off?

[couw]

the bridge needs to be crossed. best is that these guys give new meaning to the song with the edgy playing like they just drunk five double shots straight. jesus probably thinks them smoothies is jerks.

one minute sample of the vocal version (real audio stream)

Edited August 29, 2004 by couw

[7/4]

Scary!

[JSngry]

  b3-er said:

And as for the whole "specific geo-cultural-historical lens" Word of God stuff, why doesn't God have someone write a New New Testament for our day and age?

What makes you think that we'd get it any more right than we have with the one we already have? Another "snapshot of the moment" would be just as misused and misunderstood as the ones we already have, I think.

But if you want a book that gets to the point through a more modern/relevant lens, give this one a shot:

[JSngry]

  Jazzmoose said:

  JSngry said:

Free will's a bear, ain' it? 

Oops...there goes another fine myth rearing it's head...

You don't believe that people have free will as to the decisions they make?

Please, elaborate!

[couw]

  JSngry said:

  Jazzmoose said:

  JSngry said:

Free will's a bear, ain' it? 

Oops...there goes another fine myth rearing it's head...

You don't believe that people have free will as to the decisions they make?

Please, elaborate!

depends on the level at which you view it.

[connoisseur series500]

  JSngry said:

  Jazzmoose said:

  JSngry said:

Free will's a bear, ain' it? 

Oops...there goes another fine myth rearing it's head...

You don't believe that people have free will as to the decisions they make?

Please, elaborate!

I think Moose was being ironic...

[JSngry]

Or maybe he thought that I was saying that homosexuality was a choice. That would be understandable, given my imprecise communication, but it would not be what I meant.

Again, it's about the mix of the fixed and the fluid forming the whole - not of creating barriers of "either/or" that do noting but create the same old same old over and over again. I believe, based on what I know, that sexual oreintation is first and formeost a matter of biochemistry, and is no more a "choice" than being right- or left-handed. That's the fixed. No "choice" there.

But after that, all that's left is fluid. There's all kind of choices to be made (as there are for heterosexuals), choices of how the individual will handle their sexuality, and choices of how society will respond to it. Like it or not, all these choices are interconnected at some level/point, and in their degree of nuance/extrmety, these choices are darn near infinite.

Some things there are no choice about. But there are choices about how we respond to those things. That's what I meant.

[Big Al]

  Uncle Skid said:

How can two loving people, that just happen to be the same sex, be "sinners"?  Respectfully, I think you are missing Jim's point.

It's not their sexuality that makes them sinners. In terms of sinfulness, they're no more sinners than my wife and I, who are straight. In the eyes of God, we're all equals on that plane known as "humanity," nobody more sinful than the other.

I understand (or at least I think I do) that Jim's point is that homosexuality isn't a sin. On this, I can only agree to disagree. But the point I've made all along is that it's not anything we do that makes us sinners; it's our being. It's the fact that we are imperfect (assume for a moment that the only perfect being is God), but being imperfect does not make us or anyone else "bad people."

Edited August 30, 2004 by Big Al

[Big Al]

  b3-er said:

Now I'm totally confused.

Me too, and I'm the one writing this stuff! Talk about the blind leading the blind here.....

  Quote

So if I am a professional thief and make my living stealing from other people, as long as I go to church every Sunday and repent my other sins (sorry about that guy I had to kill to get his Rolex, God... but it's a nice watch!) then I'm cool?

If you believe that God is omniscient, then He can tell the truly repentant from the ones who are just trying to see what they can get away with. Going to church is no guarantee of admittance into Heaven, Icantellyouthat!

  Quote

And as for the whole "specific geo-cultural-historical lens" Word of God stuff, why doesn't God have someone write a New New Testament for our day and age?

Once again, JSngry nailed it on the head--because we'd fuck it up just like we did last time we tried!

[Jim Alfredson]

  Big Al said:

Once again, JSngry nailed it on the head--because we'd fuck it up just like we did last time we tried!

So are you saying that the Bible was written by man and is not the word of God? Again, doesn't this throw the whole thing out the window?

Like I said, the Bible has some nifty stuff in it, some good lessons. But no more than an Aesop's fable, no more than reading The Illiad, no more than reading some old fairy tales. So why then it is considered the word of God and put on a pedastle above all others? Because it says it's the word of God? I just don't buy it.