March 12, 2003
-
Sigh…
Thanks again for all your opinions, comments, and support. I would like to especially thank Ms. poop johnson’s latest rant. Extremely articulate and well written. I suggest y’all read how brilliant she is. Thanks poop!
I would also like to thank SJHockey’s desire to educate himself about this matter, and keeping an open mind. Thanks B!
Anyway… just to continue on this arduous debate, and to procrastinate further on my studying, I will propose more questions to spark further analysis. I would also like to apologize for the lack of clarity and articulation in this blog, but my brain is fried from school.
Before I start on this rant, I would like to say that I am not against Christianity, the Bible, or its teachings… but what I am trying to do is to pose questions in order to open new doors of thinking as opposed to taking things as face value. Everything is interpreted differently by people with different experiences. Let this be whatever you want it to be.
In response to tkd’s comment that things are black and white in the Bible when it comes to women’s rights and homosexuality in the Bible, I beg to differ. Here’s an article that supports my claim that various denominations of Christianity interpret things differently (a grey area):
http://www.metroactive.com/papers/metro/03.01.01/mpnews3-0109.html
If things were black and white, wouldn’t every single Christian on this planet be in the same denomination? Wouldn’t we follow the exact same practices of baptizing our children when they’re born, take communion on the same day, sing the same hymns if everything was black and white? What’s the purpose of having Babtists, Presbyterians, Evangelical, etc.?
Furthermore, when I posed the question to tkd whether he believed that Christian men were superior to Christian women, his response was “no.” I agree with tkd with this issue, but if we take SJHockey’s comment that “God’s Word is true and infallilble,” this would mean that, yes, Christian men are more superior to Christian women. For example 1 Timothy 2:11-14 says “Women should listen and learn quietly and humbly. I never let women teach men or lord it over them. Let them be silent in your church meetings. Why? Because God made Adam first, and afterwards he made Eve.” Would this mean that all women pastors are going against God’s wishes? This, of course, is based on interpretation (a grey area).
Another verse. 1 Peter 3:7 says “You husbands must be careful of your wives, being thoughtful of their needs and honoring them as the weaker sex…” Men are superior!
And here’s the most interesting I’ve found: Titus 2:4-5 says “These older women must train the younger women to live quietly, to love their husbands and their children, and to be sensible and clean minded, spending their time in their own homes, being kind and obedient to their husbands…” And verse 9-10 also says “Urge slaves to obey their masters and to try their best to satisfy them. They must not talk back, nor steal, but must show themselves to be entirely trustworthy…”
Does this verse say that women are not allowed to work outside the home and pursue careers such as social workers, nurses, or perhaps the future president of the United States? Does this also mean that slavery is okay? If this is God’s Word being true and infallilble, does this mean that we should take black people and enslave them again?
Other verses that deal with women’s subordination: Col. 3:18, Ephesians 5:21-33, and more… if you’re interested.
My point:
Interpretation… interpretation… interpretation. Everything is grey, nothing is ever black and white. This can include homosexuality… Sodom and Gommorah: Gang rape; 1 Cor. verse: greedy (Capitalism?), swindlers (Robin Hood?), homosexuals (Greek practices of power [refer to my Feb 10 blog]); 1 Romans verse: Issues of lust not love. Interpretation… interpretation… interpretation…
As for Leviticus, I have always had difficulty with this book and how to associate it with modern Christian practices. If we still practiced what was said in Leviticus, we wouldn’t be able to to play football? Women couldn’t go into church while wearing a tampon? Not being facetious, but I’m completely flabbergasted with this book. If anyone has ideas, I’m all ears.
And in response to SJHockey’s article he found (which I appreciate)… there are, afterall, two sides to every story:
http://www.skeptictank.org/hs/exodus.htm
Comments (3)
Hey. I have responses to every single thing you brought up here. I had a huge debate with two pastors from More Light- a homosexual priest association type deal. They brought up all those- Paul’s letter, the Leviticus codes… I prefer to debate, not type rants- IM me and we’ll talk about all this.
sn: a readymade life
but not tonight. i’m tired. in the morning.
one thought about God’s word being the truth and infallible — the bible itself does has certain situations where there are multiple “voices” on certain topics.
there are different voices when it comes to things like gender equality and women pastors. a pastor i once heard said his belief is that wherever scripture records 2 different voices on one issue, we are free to choose whatever will advance the gospel the best.
the bible is speaks with one voice on things like murder and adultery. but does it on homsexuality?
the way i figure it, whatever’s not univocal and doesn’t impede the advancing of the gospel in our modern day and age is a non-issue. Jesus didn’t die so we could/couldn’t be homosexuals but that we could be reconciled with God.
this thought doesn’t add much in terms of insight, but it’s another thing to think about in terms of our focus, the bible, and interpretation…
nice xanga btw…but yeah…the bible is partly about interpretation but Christianity is based on belief and faith in God but yeah…i support anyone’s choice to believe or not to believe.