What part of Genesis gonefishin, the part where Adam, Eve and the serpent are all punished because they all did wrong?

No the bit where Eve gives Adam the apple and causes the fall from grace, that bit.

To those asking which parts are meant to be true – well you read different genres of literature every single day and you can make up your mind about what you’re reading. You understand that a novel is fiction, you understand that a newspaper or history text book is someone’s version of the truth. You understand that a Haynes manual is simply a book of instructions to follow for a set task.

It’s the same with the Bible. Did the writer of the Genesis creations acounts expect them to be taken literally? I doubt it very much, so what point was he/she trying to make? Did Matthew, Mark and Luke expect their readers to believe they were reading factual accounts? Quite probably. Whereas John is more a spiritual interpretation of the events of Jesus’ life.From what you describe the bible is a combination of novel, newspaper and history text book. Problem is this leaves you to pick and choose which bits you want to be which and in reality what’s needed is the Haynes bible manual.

Why were the four Gospels chosen and not the Gnostic texts? why not the gospel of Mary or of Thomas?

Understand why they were ommited.

this leaves you to pick and choose which bits you want to be

Nah, it’s not as random as that. There’s a key message.

bencooper – but do they really have a problem with women, Judaism and Christianity at least? Again have you actually read the Bible yourself?

Look at the massive schisms over the idea of women priests or bishops. Look at those old men who got together to vote for another old man to be pope. Yes, they do have a problem with women. Yes, I have read the Bible – what about the story of Samson (brought low by a woman), the story of the man who offered his daughter up to be raped by a mob (Judges somethingorother), what about Paul calling for women to submit themselves to their husbands?

Nah, it’s not as random as that. There’s a key message.

Okay, what’s the key message? Chapter and verse, please.

gonefishin – I wasn’t primarily referring to the Bible having being written by male human beings, but primarily to them being the ones who have had the power over the centuries to be the ones interpreting it for the masses.

Rusty, are you a Jew living in the wilderness having just escaped from slavery in Egypt?

No, which is why the Bible is completely irrelevant to my morality and my behaviour.
It seems that those who advocate the Bible as a source of moral guidance are remarkably selective in which bits to follow and which bits to ignore.

Okay, what’s the key message? Chapter and verse, please.

Hmm… BC, you’ve read the Bible and you don’t know what the key message is?

What would Rex Harrison say?

Hmm… BC, you’ve read the Bible and you don’t know what the key message is?

No, I honestly don’t. The key message seems to be that of a computer virus – “make multiple copies, disseminate widely, do not alter”.

The reason I was asking for chapter and verse is that I have the sneaking suspicion that what you think of as the key message isn’t actually written down anywhere in the Bible.

the older generation of Christians often refuse to engage with material like that for fear it will weaken their faith.

If reading a book can weaken your faith, it’s a pretty poor faith and probably could use a bit of weakening.

It’s an interesting point, but it seems so massively alien a concept to me. If I held a religious belief I’d want it challenging, because if I’m right then it gets reinforced (and of course, I’d expect it to be right, that’s what faith is); and if it’s wrong then I get to find out what is right and I’ve not wasted a metric buttload of time praising and hallelujahing to a work of fiction and a bloke in a frock.

Beliefs and theories should be challenged, it’s how we learn things.

I have the sneaking suspicion that what you think of as the key message isn’t actually written down anywhere in the Bible.

Interesting. I’ll double check that.

Done.

“You have heard the law that says, ‘Love your neighbor’ and hate your enemy. But I say, love your enemies! Pray for those who persecute you! In that way, you will be acting as true children of your Father in heaven. For he gives his sunlight to both the evil and the good, and he sends rain on the just and the unjust alike. If you love only those who love you, what reward is there for that? Even corrupt tax collectors do that much. If you are kind only to your friends, how are you different from anyone else? (Matthew 5:43-47 )

bencooper – Samson is not meant to be a Biblical hero. Paul also calls husbands to love their wives as Christ loves the church, as well as calling all Christians to submit to one another out of reverence to the Lord.

Regarding the issue of women in leadership, as I understand there are three houses in the Church of England; Bishops, Preists and Laity. Both the Bishops and Priests voted in favour of women bishops but the Laity didn’t get quite a high enough vote. All three houses needed to be in agreement for the motion to carry. Actually the majority of people who voted, voted in favour. Baptists have been ordaining women for over 100 years and we don’t have bishops, or priests for that matter.

if it’s wrong then I get to find out what is right and I’ve not wasted a metric buttload of time praising and hallelujahing to a work of fiction and a bloke in a frock.

That’s the whole problem. It’s pretty hard for some people to admit that 29″ is a fad, so imagine how hard it is to admit that your whole spiritual basis is wrong 😉

Cougar, again we are in agreement. But we are post-modern thinkers (or perhaps even post-post modern!) The majority of churchgoers are stuck in modernity where the overarching ‘truths’ they have grown up with cannot be challenged or questioned.

It’s pretty hard for some people to admit that 29″ is a fad, so imagine how hard it is to admit that you’re whole spiritual basis is wrong

Don’t bring Singlespeeds into this.

camo16 – ah, okay, “love everyone” is the overall message. And it’s a good one. Maybe that should be at the front in bold type or something, otherwise people might miss it amongst all the other stuff.

Okay, I’m kidding – but the basic problem is that either you take your religious text as gospel, in which case you are a dangerous fanatic, or you selectively take from it and reinterpret it, in which case what basis do you use for your editing?

My feeling is that most people are basically decent, so nice religious people take the nice bits from the Bible and ignore the rest – they impose their values on the Bible, not the other way around.

And of course evil bastards can find plenty of justification in the Bible for their views as well.

I love you, bencooper.

😀

Maybe that should be at the front in bold type or something, otherwise people might miss it amongst all the other stuff.

People had more time and patience in the olden days. Surely, you can’t blame the Bible for a short attention span?

kja78, you really are turning yourself inside out trying to justify your position. What has not being a biblical hero go to do with anything? It is another case of a man being brought down by a woman, you know like you asked for.

As for your examples about the CofE and the baptist comunity almost accepting women as equals in the church, why not mention the catholic church. It seems odd to not mention the fact that women are excluded from the preisthood in what is the single largest christian church, well other than the fact that it doesn’t support your argument.

One is tempted to ask, especially after so many abuse scandals, why the church is so obsessed with sex?

You put a bloke in a dress, tell him he can’t have sex with women, and surround him with pubescent boys in nighties. It’s only going to go one way really, isn’t it.

What passages in the Bible specifically deal with homosexuality as we see it now? Erm, none.

Quite a few, it’d seem. See:

http://christianity.about.com/od/Bible-Verses/a/Bible-Verses-Homosexuality.htm

How about Leviticus 20:13 for a start?

“If a man practices homosexuality, having sex with another man as with a woman, both men have committed a detestable act. They must both be put to death, for they are guilty of a capital offense.”

Judges 19:16-24 is fun too. Bloke takes in a traveller for the night, and later a gang turn up on his doorstep demanding a spot of organised buggery. The old chap tells them his house guest’s bottom is exit only, and offers up his virgin daughter for a bit of gang rape instead.

I think we all learned a valuable lesson here.

Seems Genesis 19:1-11 is ostensibly the same story, only with a bit of smiting and mass blinding thrown in for good measure.

Rusty, are you a Jew living in the wilderness having just escaped from slavery in Egypt? If not then I wouldn’t worry about it.

Hang on a minute. We were told a minute ago that these stories were supposed to be allegorical. Which is it?

😉

People had more time and patience in the olden days. Surely, you can’t blame the Bible for a short attention span?

Of course in the olden, olden days this wasn’t an issue – the Bible was in Latin which no-one bar a few priests could read, so everyone was reliant on someone else’s interpretation anyway. Who knew if your priest wasn’t making stuff up (“The Bible says you should give me all your money”) – in fact wasn’t that Martin Luther’s point?

Well, people having a “conversation” with a few people who have an imaginary friend.

It’s going entirley as predicted so far.

in fact wasn’t that Martin Luther’s point?

And you say Christians are sex obsessed. 😉

Taking advantage of translation issues is, again, not the fault of the Bible, but of those who sought to continue (or abuse) its message.

Both the Bishops and Priests voted in favour of women bishops but the Laity didn’t get quite a high enough vote. All three houses needed to be in agreement for the motion to carry. Actually the majority of people who voted, voted in favour.

This is correct, surprisingly the House of Laity has the highest percentage of women members.

If they’re the representatives of god here on Earth and doing as his will commands, shouldn’t they have all voted the same way?

Well, people having a “conversation” with a few people who have an imaginary friend.

Chapeau, sir.

Aren’t we all imaginary friends here?

If they’re the representatives of god here on Earth and doing as his will commands, shouldn’t they have all voted the same way?

Are they representatives of God, though? Apart from the Pope, these guys/gals are just elected members of the clergy, aren’t they?

If they’re the representatives of god here on Earth and doing as his will commands, shouldn’t they have all voted the same way?

Pesky free will, again

Sorry, but it’s men (and I mean male human beings) which are sexist, not the God spoken about in the Bible.

What about that bit in Genesis, where the Christian God supposedly said to Eve (who he thoughtfully constructed from a rib as an afterthought), “Your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you”?

As much as I love and desire Mr Toast, he doesn’t rule over me (nor me over him).

EDIT: Oh, and the bit where women are supposed to go into seclusion when they’re on the rag and blokes aren’t allowed to talk or look at them, and afterwards the women are supposed to burn doves to ‘purify’ themselves. They should totally put that in a Bodyform advert…

Oh, and the bit where women are unclean after childbirth, but the ‘unclean’ time is shorter if they’ve had a boy.

Or the bit where Lot offers up his virgin daughters and his concubine for rape. Or the bit where he has sex with his daughters.

Are they representatives of God, though? Apart from the Pope, these guys/gals are just elected members of the clergy, aren’t they?

If they don’t represent god but they picked the pope, how can the pope be a representative of god? what if they picked the wrong guy?

Or did god give them a hand in picking? in which case why did they need to vote or have more than one person doing the picking?

Aren’t we all imaginary friends here?

Touché 😉

Funnily enough, I am good mates with a minister in the church. We don’t discuss religion, ever. He tell me about stuff he does (binding people in holy monotony (his words!), telling a family their son has killed himself, stuff like that), I tell him about stuff I do (building weird bikes, exploring old shipyards, stuff like that).

We get on very well. He’s a thoroughly decent bloke. I’m sure he’d be a thoroughly decent bloke even if he was an atheist.

If they don’t represent god but they picked the pope, how can the pope be a representative of god? what if they picked the wrong guy?

I believe that, at times like this, a bit of faith is required.

I don’t see how I’m turning myself inside out. The Bible is full of stories of women bringing men down, yes. This is a good thing. That’s my point. God calls women to subvert the unacceptable male dominated society in which the Bible was written.

Why not mention the Catholic Church, well I’m not a Catholic for a start. But from what little I do know, what goes on in local churches comapared to what the media chooses to tell you about denominational hierachies are often not the same thing. I think that the Roman Catholic Church, and the Church of England, and many other denominational heirachies lost the plot a long time ago when it comes to issues of leadership. Jesus said ‘Whoever wants to be first should be slave to all’. By that reckoning the true ‘leaders’ of the Catholic church are not the ones living in palaces in Rome.

Cougar – If you’d like to read an essay I wrote entitled ‘A Biblical attitude to Homosexuality’ you’d be very welcome, it deals with the passages of scripture you’ve quoted. I did offer the last time there was a discussion on STW about the church and homosexuality but on one person actually read it.

We get on very well. He’s a thoroughly decent bloke. I’m sure he’d be a thoroughly decent bloke even if he was an atheist.

Good news! I reckon you’re right…

I’m not Christian, but I have big problems with atheism, especially aggressive atheism, given that our minds are not particularly impressive in galactic terms and we’re so easily distracted by nice MTBs, the weather and Dannii Minogue.

http://www.thebricktestament.com/epistles_of_paul/instructions_for_women/1co11_04.html

the old testament is full of woman hating

3 pages in 4 minutes

the lord doe sindeed work in mysterious if predictable ways

‘A Biblical attitude to Homosexuality’ you’d be very welcome, it deals with the passages of scripture you’ve quoted. I did offer the last time there was a discussion on STW about the church and homosexuality but on one person actually read it.

i read the essay it is a good read and he is on the liberal end of the church

given that our minds are not particularly impressive in galactic terms

well as afr as we know they are unique and impressive in their ability to understand things, the world etc

As for aggressive aethism I am never really sure what this means. For sure some peole dislike the message and the believers more than others but it is an importnat issue – i find it used as a bit of a lazy slur tbh used to charicature folk.

the old testament is full of woman hating

WOMEN KNOW YOUR PLACE – it is by your mans side, as he is the head of christ, doing what you are told
Surely everyone relaises a god would be sexist and hate gays and not have a n issue with slavery ..If that is not a moral code to live your life by then what is …..anyone who says different and i will do an intifada on you and murder you to death for your intolerance

the lord doe sindeed work in mysterious if predictable ways

I don’t know. The gratuitous image of Rex Harrison from the Agony and the Ecstasy on page 4 came as a big surprise to me.

Mrs. Toast – How about the bits where both Jesus and Paul state catergorically that Christians are not bound by Old Testament Law? In fact Jesus was touched by a woman who had a permanent menstrual bleed and didn’t consider himself to be unclean, indeed he alone in the society was kind to her, and showed she was valued.

As for Lot and his daughters, as with many things in the Bible it is recorded as ‘history’ but not neccessarily as a good thing. It seems to me that Lot wasn’t thinking straight and was desperate for the two angels (if that’s what they were) not to be raped. As it was, the angels prevented Lot from giving his daughters to the men of the town, and struck them down with blindness to protect Lot’s family.

Lot and his daughters lived in a time when not having children or family was a disgrace and so slept with him to get pregnant, again though, the Bible doesn’t comment on whether they were right to do this.

As for aggressive aethism I am never really sure what this means.

It means getting in touch with your inner Woppit.

The Bible is full of stories of women bringing men down, yes. This is a good thing.

Because they’re strong, dynamic characters easily equal to their men, or because women are deceptive harlots and not to be trusted?

Cougar – If you’d like to read an essay I wrote entitled ‘A Biblical attitude to Homosexuality’ you’d be very welcome, it deals with the passages of scripture you’ve quoted. I did offer the last time there was a discussion on STW about the church and homosexuality but on one person actually read it.

Sure. Email in profile, I’ll take a look at least. Whether I read it all depends on how long and tedious your writing is. (-:

Why not mention the Catholic Church, well I’m not a Catholic for a start.[\quote]

Well you’re not a member of the CofE either but you saw fit to talk about them.

But from what little I do know, what goes on in local churches comapared to what the media chooses to tell you about denominational hierachies are often not the same thing

Well I can tell you what used to go on in the very recent past, women are considered suitable for general menial work, like cleaning the church and looking after the priest but nothing more than that. How about answering MrsToast’s points or have you written an essay about how what the bible says on those matters isn’t really what the bible says on that too? edited for cross post.

How about the bits where both Jesus and Paul state catergorically that Christians are not bound by Old Testament Law?

You asked for “biblical” examples and that is what you got. To now say that “oh the old part doesn’t count” is a pathetic attempt to change the goalposts when you don’t like the responses you got.

I don’t think the Church is obsessed with sex, it is pretty much the only area that the mainstream media reports about, so many conclude that it is all that is discussed.