This topic contains 22 replies, has 11 voices, and was last updated by 
-
Posts
-
Thank you guys for making me feel comfortable bringing my concerns here. As I said previously, there are issues relating to faith that still affect me because I live in this predominately religious country. I’m going to start with two of my biggies; Apologists and homosexuality. I’m not quite sure if I was fortunate or unfortunate to attend a church with an Apologetics Pastor and also be related to a published Apologists, but my experience with them shaped so much of my faith and my current lack of faith.
When I was struggling, I started a notebook documenting the things that I was told were sinful, the Biblical origin of that belief, and how all believers applied it. Homosexuality was a big one for me because some of the people I love the most in this world are gay. Additionally, knowing my stance on it, a member of the church’s youth group came out to me. It’s been 5 years and he still dares not tell his family. This young man loves God. His faith is rock solid even with the possibility of his family shunning him if they ever found out. His father once suggested that I was not fit to work with youths because of my support for homosexuality. He said this in the presence of his son who was devastated. David has a cartoon that I believe is called “The Gay Friendly Church.” In it there is a lone person sitting on one side. I remember thinking that in my church it wouldn’t be a gay person sitting by themselves – it would be me since no one else would openly admit to being gay or supporting those who were.
The more I worked with the Apologists in my life, the more I realized that I wasn’t getting what I needed. I coined the term, “Context vs. Convenience” for what they had to say to me. It seemed that on some occasions the context of scripture was of the most importance, however when convenient, exegesis was disregarded to get the required outcome. Like in this Minute Apologist video. It’s not the only take on homosexuality and the book of Leviticus I’ve heard, but I find Michael Brown’s theory of Universal Moral Prohibitions to be absolute bullshit. I’ve studied Leviticus in detail and I can’t seem to find where it was laid out has he claims. One of the benefits of struggling with this as Christian was my opinions weren’t influenced by my lack of faith. I sincerely wanted to know why inclusive Christian communities utilized the same Bible so lovingly while others used it as a weapon. Now that I’m on the other side of this, I still don’t understand it.
Is there merit to Brown’s theory of Universal Moral Prohibitions, or is this just another Apologist’s spin on it?
-
This topic was modified 2 years, 1 month ago by
David Hayward.
-
This topic was modified 1 year, 11 months ago by David Hayward.
Well dammit janet if that isn’t a nice little 60 second “case closed” from a “credible” source. Forgive me, but I find apologetics rather like a one sided discussion :P. It’s like the “Leave Britney Alone” guy of scripture deciphering. (Hopefully you know who that is..but if not..basically any one can defend something they think is worth it and make a case, build a little mental podium and create a pie chart or whatever that seem legit. if they try hard enough. This little video went down the wrong pipe for me, simply because if one reads chapters 17 and 18 of Leviticus, they both basically start with “Say to Israel”. Period. They’re talking to Israel. What’s more, the fact is, not ALL of the sexual conduct laws have always been “universal” no-nos…Hello, royal inbreeding! And there are more examples of commonly occuring marriage between close relatives (cousins) in some countries today as well if you look into it…
It reminds me of how the scriptures say that for a man to have long hair and a woman short or shaven is shameful, and then it refers to nature or beasts of the field or something as proof. Obviously none of them had ever seen a Lioness and a Lion because as we all know..the male has a long mane and the female has none. In real life I had someone sit and tell me that homosexuality is not anywhere in nature, and neither is incest, and that these are perversions created by Satan. I just dropped my jaw and asked, “Have you never seen a nature program about monkeys?”
Of course, I am not suggesting that I think we should compare our behavior to other species to find out if we’re normal or not. But that’s aside from the point: There’s simply no proof to back up everything this man says. I’m not a professor in anything…but I have a brain, and I use it and don’t let someone else tell me how and when to do so.
By the way, I hope my manner doesn’t come across too harsh..I am not directing it at you in ANY way..my filter is a bit thin these days and my sarcasm is leaking through..:o
Moxie I heard you loud and clear and knew where you were coming from.
omg
I love the manner in which you speak Moxie. We all carry a little baggage from our days on the inside and sometimes that sarcasm that leaks through can be a great tool to help draw the focus to the absurdity of it all.
I hope it can be a useful thing…I just know that it boils over from me since I was forced to hold it inside for years..I’m naturally a bit smartass-ish. I know someday it will return to whatever my normal level would have been.
Anyway, servantgirl, I’m glad you did’nt feel like I was directing it at you. I find that I flounder around and can’t get to the point if I’m not speaking “really”. At the same time, I’m not quite as bitter, angry and sarcastic as I seem. It’s just the topic of religious junk like this one that bring it all out of me! I would really love to hear someone elses’ take on that video, though..so curious what others are thinking!
Well, my take was “OMG!” But I’ll be a little more wordy. I have problems with it because, #1, it takes the bible literally, and #2, it is just a simplistic cliche-ish answer that people can spout out without thinking and without effort. I can’t stand this kind of reasoning. It lacks respect and mystery.
Moxie, we should “really” talk one day:)
I’ve always been one to ask questions. I have YEARS of theology that was spoken into me that often brings out my inner smart ass. I’ve filtered a lot here, but I’m not going to be doing that anymore. When I say I get you, believe me I get you. I’ve shared before that my ex-pastor and I are still really good friends. Our friendship has endured because he did not dare to insult my intellect by giving me dismissive scripted answers like this. One of the most dangerous things I find happening in the Church today is the Pastor’s interpretation of scripture being the final word. When you go to your spiritual leader with genuine struggles and he turns it around on you, or gives you some form of one-faith-fits-all answer, the red flags should go up immediately. Faith, and even lack of faith are active processes; or at least they are to me. I never believed in the “flock” mentality. God as I saw him, did not create us to only be fed. He gave us big minds, inquisitiveness, and the ability to go seek our own answers. If in the end we come to the same place as every one else, awesome. If not, I thought he wanted that too. When someone dares to stand and speak for God, providing an understanding that is uniquely their own, it pisses me off. I did not know all the answers when I was a believer. I don’t know all the answers now. Granted my opinions are now colored by the fact that I don’t believe in God, it does not change the fact that there are asshats who use the Bible as their own personal battleaxe. There is just so much hurt caused by Apologists like this, so at times I am quite as bitter, angry, and sarcastic as I seem. I believe things like this are deserving of that response regardless of where you stand on religion.
“Granted my opinions are now colored by the fact that I don’t believe in God, it does not change the fact that there are asshats who use the Bible as their own personal battleaxe.”
It’s like you are inside my mind!
I would love to have a real talk with you, servantgirl.
I think we are at the very least in the same chapter, if not the same page!Ok, can I just say, um “it’s universal for a man not to have sex with another man.”
Funny he said nothing about women. I guess that lesbian sex is not universally outlawed. Whew! Glad he cleared that up. (snarky comment to follow
)It seems to me that apologetics puts the cart before the horse. I’m pretty sure that few or none of us here consider ourselves Biblical literalists. The thing is, the folks who DO consider themselves Biblical literalists actually are not. They pick and choose just like everyone else. The difference is, they have mostly not examined the reasons for picking and choosing very carefully.
The fact is, a lot of people are disgusted by homosexual activity. And I’m convinced that one of the great weakness of theism is the tendency to project one’s own feelings onto God. Worse still, in monotheism God’s will is essentially the same as the nature of reality, so it’s possible to project one’s own views onto reality itself!
I think that happens in the Bible all the time — it’s why you have several quite contradictory views of God in there. Apparently, some of the authorities in ancient Israel were disgusted with homosexual activity, just like some modern folks.
The question of how to understand God without projecting one’s own personality and views is one I don’t see monotheisms working to fix — at least not in any organized way. And that worries me, honestly…
“The question of how to understand God without projecting one’s own personality and views is one I don’t see monotheisms working to fix — at least not in any organized way. And that worries me, honestly…“
Thanks for your insight Shira. One of the things I know with absolute certainty is faith cannot be practiced without us making it our own. Bits and pieces of our personalities slip into our spiritual life, as pieces of our spirituality shape our personalities. For example, I had a very specific way of praying. I remember being in a church filled with “prayer warriors” who would say such elegant prayers it sometimes left me feeling inept. Deciding that wasn’t for me, my prayers sounded more conversational. I simply spoke to God as if he were right there beside me in a t-shirt and jeans. My praise was no less sincere, just less elaborate. I don’t believe there is a way to understand God without projecting your own personality. That is true of believers and non-believers talking about any deity. It gets sticky however when those in leadership start making the rules up as they go along based on their personal beliefs and interpretation of the text.
However, while vast inconsistencies exists in monotheism, I actually think I’d be more worried if they started trying to create a fix that removed the individual from the mix. Religion without autonomy stinks of cult to me. Anything without autonomy worries me. In the atheist community, there are groups of people who’d believe that being on a site like this would only be beneficial if I were devoting my time to start debates and state why I think religion is wrong. That kind of narrow thinking is no different than people like Brown who publicly declare what’s right and whats wrong.
So for me the issue here is less about the personalities of believers, but of the actions and words of trying to set the rules for the masses by pulling it out of thin air. Most people on this site don’t exactly play by the rules or I’m thinking David’s cartoons would have no appeal and we wouldn’t be here
that’s SO right on servantgirl
Anonymousservantgirl and moxie – I love your passion and sarcasm! A couple friends and I once referred to ourselves as “Smart Asess for Jesus” – does that count?
-
This topic was modified 2 years, 1 month ago by
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.