In poking around Facebook recently, I came across the True Love Waits group (link only works if you’re, you know, in Facebook). I’m not much a believer in it myself, but I do think that overall it’s a good idea, because the numbers of young people who are too stupid to be having sex before marriage seems to be growing (because they won’t stop having sex, you see, which often results in reproduction). If we could maybe get all these folks in one place and maybe get them to hold off on the nooky as long as possible, or lordy at least until they’re in HIGH SCHOOL for heaven’s sake, the world would be a better place. Unfortunately, of the people that I’ve met who joined the True Love Waits organization, all tended to be people who weren’t going to be having any pre-marital sex even if they weren’t opposed to it, due to significant personality/body mass/acne problems.
Upon viewing the group, I noticed the “Recent News” section, and read through it, and it’s a bit terrifying. It starts rather tamely:
Purpose of Group: I do not want to be the one who secludes others because they simply believe differently than myself and how I interpret God’s moral code. Even though I believe in absolute truth, I believe in showing love and respect to all first (even though I heavily disagree). First, I want to address why I created this group, this group is meant to be a place of encouragement to others who have decided to be virgins until marriage.
Great idea. If someone wants to remain chaste until they get the gold band, I’m all for it (though I have to admit, if I were single, and went on a date with someone who revealed they intended to wait until marriage to give up the punani, well… I probably would not call her back). But scroll down further, and things start to get a bit creepy:
This group is based on God’s absolute word revealed to us in the Bible, and the God that I serve is a God of love (who is also a God of justice and wrath)…
Uh, okay, sure. Unfortunately, the love>justice+wrath prioritization doesn’t seem to hold with what comes next:
The concept of Homosexuality if [sic] strongly forbidden in the Bible. Such examples include Leviticus 18 (Old Testament) and Romans 1 (New Testament). I cannot and will not condone such actions to be pure or holy in any shape or form. Homosexuality is a direct perversion of God’s created sex and therefore I will not allow any such discussion in this group.
Whoa, whoa, whoa. Okay, first of all, congratulations on not having made any intellectual progress since, oh, about 1840. Secondly, looking above, it seems like you’re FAR more interested in the God of Wrath than you are in either the God of Love or the God of Justice. Thirdly, let’s talk about the absolute truth mentioned in the first quote. As I see it, the Bible can be looked at in one of three ways:
- The Bible is the absolute truth: God made the universe in 6 days and partied on the 7th; He really did kill all but 8 people and 2 of each animal with a huge worldwide flood; and he actually sent His Son to earth, had him killed, and then raised him from the dead; etc. If this is what you believe, then you’re ignoring valid science (which led to, among other things, the computer you’re looking at, the construction of which isn’t detailed anywhere in the Bible) in favor of a document that is between 1800 and 6000 years old, depending on which section you’re reading. At least no one will ever tell you “Don’t be so smart.”
- The Bible is Man’s version of God’s word, and therefore flawed, but still contains valid instructions that must be followed. Of course, these instructions include things like:
- Deuteronomy 22:5 – The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman’s garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God.
- Deut. 21:18-21 – If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them:
Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place;
And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard.
And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear. - Deut. 22:23-24 – If a damsel that is a virgin be betrothed unto an husband, and a man find her in the city, and lie with her;
Then ye shall bring them both out unto the gate of that city, and ye shall stone them with stones that they die; the damsel, because she cried not, being in the city; and the man, because he hath humbled his neighbour’s wife: so thou shalt put away evil from among you.
Those are from the King James Version, and say, in order: if a woman wears pants, it is an abomination to the Lord; if your son is a jerk, you and your friends must kill him; and if your fiancee gets raped but doesn’t scream loud enough, she and the rapist get killed. Definitely an authoritative moral code for the 21st century. Oh, and don’t forget all the dietary laws that somehow get ignored these days.
- The Bible is, at best, a collection of jazzed up stories handed down by word of mouth and eventually put to paper. It contains some nice ideas about love, and how to treat other people, particularly in the New Testament, but should never be taken literally.
How anyone can believe option one is beyond me. And yet a surprising number of people do, even young folks, which astounds me. How can you sit through a basic 5th grade science class and still believe that the world was created in a matter of days? Doesn’t it make more sense that, maybe, JUST maybe, some skeevy priest made that story up in 4000BC because people kept asking him how the world came to be and were getting tired of just hearing “God did it?”
The second option I can at least understand; follow the rules, and you go to heaven. Don’t, and you go to hell. Super simple. However, since the Bible contains all those crazy Old Testament minor commandments about keeping kosher and stoning disobedient children, which even hard core conservative Christians seem to ignore these days, folks are just picking and choosing which rules they want to follow. Which leads to the question: what exactly makes you think that the rules you’ve chosen are the ones that really count? For example, the most frequently quoted Anti-Homosexuality Bible provision is 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.
But in Lev. 11:12:
Whatsoever hath no fins nor scales in the waters, that shall be an abomination unto you.
So crawdads, lobsters, shrimp, crabs, etc. are all abominations too. Not to mention, of course, how pigs are unclean (which I gather is one step below abominable), and yet I don’t see the churchgoers at the Bob Evans on Sunday afternoons asking the servers to make sure the cooks hold the bacon. What fundamentalists are saying is basically “Okay, you only have to obey the IMPORTANT rules, and we get to say what those are.” Sorry, but no; either you obey ALL the rules, or you don’t get to condemn others for saying that the prohibition on homosexuality is no more valid than the prohibition on eating delicious pork chops.
What scares me isn’t that some people believe that gay folks are going to hell. You can believe that Jesus appeared to you in a vision and told you to sell all your possessions, buy a used Harley Softail, and ride around Arkansas preaching Rastafarianism for all I care. What terrifies me is that folks that believe this crazy stuff have a tendency to band together and convince the government that they have some kind of True Path, and that True Path involves telling the rest of the world what they may and may not do. Religious fundamentalism is religious fundamentalism; the difference between telling homosexuals they can’t get married or adopt kids and stoning them in the streets is just a matter of degree. And time.
Even if fundamentalist Christianity starts to decline, I’m still saddened by the fact that, assuming popular statistics hold true, 10% of them are repressed homosexuals. The likelihood is that they’ll force themselves into marriages, and then get divorced many years later when they can no longer contain their own sexuality; the results of this are never pleasant, particularly if there are kids involved. I was hoping we were moving into a time where we’d see less of it, but I guess not.
I apologize for this not being even remotely humorous; I don’t know what came over me. Stupid facebook.
Whoo hoo! This will be interesting.
How anyone can believe option one is beyond me.
Well, I do.
Interestingly, the Bible itself really presents you (in numerous places) with an all or nothing proposition. It either is all true, or it’s a complete lie. Doesn’t really give you a middle ground, sadly.
The second option I can at least understand; follow the rules, and you go to heaven. Don’t, and you go to hell.
That would be missing the entire point of the Bible, however. You get close here: Sorry, but no; either you obey ALL the rules, or you don’t get to condemn others for saying that the prohibition on homosexuality is no more valid than the prohibition on eating delicious pork chops.
The whole point of the Law was to show people that they were, metaphysically speaking, in deep doo-doo. No one could keep the law of God perfectly, therefore all justly stand condemned before a holy, omnipotent God.
Most people read the Bible like some sort of rule book. And while it has rules, the Bible is actually a story whose main character comes into full view starting at the beginning of the New Testament.
Having said that, let me loop back for a second:
it seems like you’re FAR more interested in the God of Wrath than you are in either the God of Love or the God of Justice.
You can’t separate the three. God = Holiness + Justice + Love + Wrath Against Sin. God without wrath/justice/holiness is neither God nor loving.
God’s love is shown in His gracious plan to redeem people who justly deserve damnation (at the cost of the torment of Christ). “In this is love, not that we have loved God but that he loved us and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins.” (1Jo4:10)
We are agreed that “fundamentalism” is a massive problem, though obviously for vastly dif’rent reasons. From where I sit, fundamentalism is awful because it builds a mentality in people that we are justified before God because of what we do. The fact is that nothing I can do is of eternal ‘merit’ for me. The point of the Bible is that we were helpless to save ourselves, so a loving God stepped in and saved us for His own sake. We get no credit, He gets it all.
Nonetheless, there are things the Bible says are wrong/wicked and we should not do them. And, despite you constant reference to the Levitical ‘food code’, there is a difference in how the Bible refers to sexual sin and food – especially in the New Testament discourses (see 1 Corinthians).
I’ll stop for now and wait for another shot across the bow. That probably won’t come, but I’d be interested to continue the discourse.
One last, last note… It might be worth noting that there are more modern translations of the Bible that are both more accurate representations of the Biblical texts (particularly for the NT) and much more readable/understandable that the King James. I would suggest checking those same passages in the English Standard Version for comparison…
Amen Matt Hearn, PREACH BROTHA!!
And yet another sterling point from the religious right!
“You can’t separate the three. God = Holiness + Justice + Love + Wrath Against Sin.”
That’s four, not three. I’m glad you spent so much time in Sunday school and not so much in math class.
“From where I sit, fundamentalism is awful because it builds a mentality in people that we are justified before God because of what we do.”
Which is the basic tenet of Calvinism, which was one of the worst ideas ever in Christianity (well, that and the crusades and the spanish inquisition…)
Ah, but you left out the part of the bible (from and old and new testament perspective) which is the one people have by far the hardest time being in accord with, fundamentalist, liberal theologian, …From Mark 12:28 One of the teachers of the law came and heard them debating. Noticing that Jesus had given them a good answer, he asked him, “Of all the commandments, which is the most important?”
29″The most important one,” answered Jesus, “is this: ‘Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one. 30Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’ 31The second is this: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’There is no commandment greater than these.”
32″Well said, teacher,” the man replied. “You are right in saying that God is one and there is no other but him. 33To love him with all your heart, with all your understanding and with all your strength, and to love your neighbor as yourself is more important than all burnt offerings and sacrifices.”
34When Jesus saw that he had answered wisely, he said to him, “You are not far from the kingdom of God.” And from then on no one dared ask him any more questions.
I don’t pretend to be a deeply theological person, but I feel we’ll never really get anywhere in understanding what God’s intentions in this world are until we can understand the context of this passage. For what it’s worth.
And, having said that, I hope even that wasn’t offensive. I just think if there’s something we should attain to, regardless of our religious convictions, or lack of, if you take the bible letter-for-letter, or haven’t ever cracked one, or are fully devout to another religion, who can argue with the concept of love for each other. And certainly, sometimes love hurts, and sometimes love means letting go, and sometimes, love means doing something that may hurt someone’s feelings. Anyone who has ever been in a relationship knows that. But how can love for each other be fallible? Sorry to waste board space with this. Just struck a nerve I guess. When you spend half of your life in a church, sometimes you have to remind yourself why.
Rob said: I just think if there’s something we should attain to, regardless of our religious convictions, or lack of, if you take the bible letter-for-letter, or haven’t ever cracked one, or are fully devout to another religion, who can argue with the concept of love for each other.
Well, unless you (or your neighbor, or your enemies… all those we’re supposed to love) are gay. Then you’re an abomination.
So much for love being endless and boundless.
Interesting. And did you also see the part where I said only gay, straight, short, tall, black, white, three-legged, bald, shaggy-headed, intelligent, ignorant, blah, blah, blah people? right…because I didn’t. And neither did Jesus. And that’s the thing of it. He and his teachings were something totally revolutionary. Love of your neighbor. Which is what I mean when I say that is the one tenet of Christianity which virtually no person, let alone Christian in this world is actually living up to, myself included, unfortuately. I would say, however, that if Christianity is rooted in the teachings of Christ, and Christ taught that we should “Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.” and “Love your neighbor as yourself”, then Christianity is not the problem. And yes, that puts a lot of teaching into a small nutshell, but when He said that those were the two most important commandments, then He was putting it in that shell for me. God is a fair and just God. People aren’t always that way.
Sorry for the lag in responding here… Life called.
I’ll be more attentive from here on.
Stefan said: That’s four, not three. I’m glad you spent so much time in Sunday school and not so much in math class.
Matt referred to three characteristics in his post: “Unfortunately, the love>justice+wrath prioritization doesn’t seem to hold…”
I was simply referring to that. My point was that to tease out any of God’s characteristics and say, “I’ll take the love and not the justice, thank you,” misrepresents the nature of God *and* the characteristic you’re pulling aside.
That’s all… I can count, you know. Just not read or write.
[Justification by what you do] is the basic tenet of Calvinism, which was one of the worst ideas ever in Christianity (well, that and the crusades and the spanish inquisition…)
Ummm… No, it’s not.
To quote Calvin himself: “Justification was discussed more cursorily, because it seemed of more consequence first to explain that the faith by which alone, through the mercy of God, we obtain free justification, is not destitute of good works; and also to show the true nature of these good works on which this question partly turns.”
Calvin’s point, just like Luther, was that justification is by [real] faith in Christ alone (Solus Christus). However, unlike Luther, Calvin took the time to wrestle with the epistle of James which states clearly that “faith without works is dead”. So, there’s a tension: The central tenant of Calvinism re: works is simply that genuine faith overflows in (non-salvific) works, done in gratitude to the one who saves.
Did I mention I’m a Calvinist. So, please, don’t misrepresent my theology.
Rob said: “Anyone who has ever been in a relationship knows that. But how can love for each other be fallible?”
You are right, though I cringe at the use of the word ‘fallible’. The fact is that our emotions and desires can often follow after the wrong thing. But you are right that ‘love’ is a critical concept. But…
xtingu said: “Well, unless you (or your neighbor, or your enemies… all those we’re supposed to love) are gay. Then you’re an abomination.”
You’re confusing the definition of love with ‘toleration’. Christians should – to a certain degree – be tolerant.
Listen, let me state first off that I completely agree that much of the modern church is arrogant and elite – and that is completely WRONG. The truth of the Christian faith should breed overwhelming humility rather than pride. We are dead sinners who could do nothing to reconcile ourselves to God – and God did it all for us. Humbling stuff.
That said, re: your ‘love’ comment. You see your child getting ready to stick a finger in an electric socket. Maybe you let them do it once just to get a little buzz. After all, you love them and want them to learn not to do that again.
But would you behave the same way if the child was walking out into oncoming traffic? Of course not: Your love for them compels you to stop them from hurting/killing themselves.
In the same way, if the Christian faith is right, letting someone go on living in complete (and I stress that word) rebellion to Christ is essentially giving them a death sentence.
Now, why did I emphasize complete? Because we’re all – saint and sinner alike – in rebellion against God. The only difference between me and the worst sinner is that, through faith in Christ, I stand justified before God.
But, that makes all the difference. We can’t do enough good ourselves, so we need Christ to do it for us.
More later… the kids just got up and it’s actually time for church.
Well, Mr. Matt, “you’ve got a live one here”… hehe.
I don’t want to discuss the ins and outs of the Bible except just to premise my point. My understanding (with support from my r0x0r5 Scofield NLT bible) is most of the New Testament (NT), what is considered the blueprint of modern Christianity, was penned between 30 and 70 AD. It was most likely scribed, as the disciples that knew what the heck paper was (and stole it from the gov’t) were probably kickin’ it with the Spirit so hard, they couldn’t write. All that anointing oil and stuff.
And in the centuries to follow, it’s been translated. Most kids today can barely handle ENGLISH, much less Aramaec. So, what does that means for the modern Bible thumper of 2007? Know your #^&$. It’s not literal, but versions like the Message don’t TAINT the fundamental message. Man is separated from God by Sin. Jesus died to cover that Sin so man can be with God. If we CHOOSE to. Those that choose to have a calling to meet everyone else where they are and show them how much God loves them.
So, my point: fundmental Christianity and the Church in general is not only flawed, it’s failed. While polls show >90% of Americans believe there’s a God, less than 25% of those attend church and I’d venture about a 20% participation rate (i.e., more than attending a Sunday service). I believe in great part, this is because Christianity has focused on being the Bible derived version of a Christian rather than the character of being a Christian. In doing so, Christians have damaged their credibility.
However, there is a new movement in the church today. It’s based on the the first 10 or so chapters of Acts and used quite well in the Left Behind saga. The New Testament Church focuses on meeting in homes during the week, not the sunday “church”, to build inter-personal relationships to build each other up. It’s the fix for a broken system.
In the NTC, you don’t preach. You don’t condemn. You befriend and love….without the LSD and The Doors playing in the background. You waste time with those around you and in doing so, they see that Christians face the same struggles as the rest of the world – living paycheck to paycheck, having a daughter declare she’s lesbian, being a grandparent at 38. The difference? When those events in our life happen, we have a support net. People that are an extension of your family. And because you’re family – you inconvenience yourself to help the other.
In all, I believe there are two MAJOR truths of the New Testament: Love God with your whole being and love you brother as yourself (Mat 22:34-40). Mainly due to verse 40.
I’ve been apart of a NTC, or Cell Church, for about 15 years. It’s been a huge influence in my life and I’ve been able to meet and befriend people in a way I never would have before because of it. Am I perfect? No. I struggle to care most days. But, there’s those instances in time where I’m doing exactly what I need to be doing (not being selfish) and God shows up and does something amazing.
That’s what Christianity is really about. And, I’m happy to share it with ya.
While my deleted post was meant for the one previous to stringer, i’ll just say, yeah, stringer, you have the right idea. My hope is that attitude will begin to permeate the “Sunday” church as well. I think it’s essential. I’m gonna leave this alone though, I don’t think i’m accomplishing anything good with it. Hope I see you Friday, Hearn.
Just a quick aside re: stringer’s comment:
In all, I believe there are two MAJOR truths of the New Testament: Love God with your whole being and love you brother as yourself (Mat 22:34-40). Mainly due to verse 40.
This is true… But the point is that none of us do that. Do you love your neighbor the way you should? Do you honor God with everything in you?
If not, then we have an ‘existential crisis’ – namely, our existence is threatened by a God against whom we’ve sinned.
The point of the ‘whole law being summed up in these two commandments’ is to show that we violate the whole law all the time. We need the grace of God extended to us to reconcile us.
When we get that message, condemning others for their sin(s) should be the farthest thing from our minds. However, God does call us to righteous living in both the New Testament and the Old. If we want to embrace the grace of God extended in Christ, then there is a mandate on how we live.
We are made slaves to Christ… Bought from one master to another. Not the most pleasant of metaphors, but it is the biblical one.