When you analyse the so-called "proof texts" there isn't one which really says it isn't either. The Bible is at best neutral and has as litle answer for homosexuality as it has for nuclear physics.
For centuries people believed that the Bible taught that the sun went around the Earth and that the World was flat and that God literally made things in seven days period. It might be hard to believe or stomach but the Bible does not have the answers to all the world's questions - TWI pretended it did but it was all a lie and a deception.
I no longer believe that things are so simple in black and white.
It might be hard to believe or stomach but the Bible does not have the answers to all the world's questions
So, its all clear now, thanks for explaining that for us....I guess its just a nice book after all and doesn't really pertain to all life and Godliness then.
Hmmm
The truth is hard to stomach to those who don't want to hear it.
quote:
When you analyse the so-called "poof texts" there isn't one which really says it isn't either. The Bible is at best neutral and has as litle answer for homosexuality as it has for nuclear physics.
Thats a good one...The Bible is neutral on homosexuality.
quote: I do not take the accounts of Sodom and Gomorrah literally. I believe the message was about Hospitality not Homosexuality.
You sayin God allowed all those Sodomites to be killed because they weren't hospitable. Damn, I better remember that.
I guess the Word is not neutral on that then!
You carry on advertising your ways, or should I say "opinions" and rationalisations, or is it research, but I have wasted enough pearls.
Your interpretation of the Sodom story has been challenged - not because it is some perverse attempt to "rationalise" but because it is not as you think and without it the "wrath of God" scenario has foundations of clay.
I did not say the Bible had no keys to truth and godliness - just that it doesnt have everything - pearls can be made artifically too :D-->
"I did not say the Bible had no keys to truth and godliness - just that it doesnt have everything - pearls can be made artifically too"
Tref, wait till you get to the second half of the book you picked up! I may not agree with all of the hypotheses, but he sure has some very valid points, particularly about the bible.
For example......
1) The Bible makes no clear statement one way or another on Jesus' marital status- it is tradition which has taught he was not and believed by most. BUT, if Jesus was a Jew who fullfilled all the law and was, as the Bible states, a Rabbi, he must have not only married, and in all likelihood had children as well.
Jewish law requires a man to be married before he can become a rabbi. It also holds giving birth in very high esteem. Orthodox Jewish law would also prohibit birth control.
2.) If Jesus was arrested on Passover by the Sanhedrin, this too would contradict Jewish law. It would mean the Sanhedrin violated their own laws and performed "work" during a high holiday. Additionally, why did they need Pilate to execute him? Why not just stone him for heresy? They had the legal right, as they had the right to stone the woman caught in adultery.
3). The word "Messiah" did not and does not refer to a divine being in Jewish custom. In other words, when the Jewish dicsiples and Jesus himself referred to Jesus as the Messiah, they were not referring to a divine being or even a spiritual leader, but to a king/political leader who would once again reign in Jerusalem. In fact, this is the entire reason the Jewish people of today do not believe Jesus was the Messiah(anointed one) spoken of in the old testament.
4) It was against Roman law to bury someone who was crucified - they left them on the cross for the carrion to eat. So why then, did Pilate allow Jesus to be taken down and buried?
Additionally, it usually took two to three days for a person whose legs had not been broken to die on the cross, yet Jesus died in less than a day.
5) Why is it the resurrected Jesus still had holes in his hands and a wound in his side?
In 303 A.D., a pagan emperor named Diocletian sought out to destroy all Christian writings. This is one of the reasons there are no originals in existence today. It was almost 30 years later, after the council of Nicea and the vote to make Jesus a divine being, that Constantine arranged for copies of the Bible to be written. These Bibles are the ones the current Bibles of today are based on.
They were written by a man who worshipped the sun, a man whose political aims were to bring about a unified nation under one God, a man who played a very major role in melding pagan traditions and holidays such as "easter" and "Christmas" with Christianity.
It was also Constantine who installed a Bishop in Rome (and it was a Bishop in Rome who eventually declaired himself Pope). Constantine was never even baptised as a Christian until he lay on his deathbed. Is it not remotely possible, if not entirely likely, that what is and is not included in the Bible was slanted to forward Constantine's agenda?
Nice stuff. I wish Twi had done there research historically on J.C and the BiBle. Instead they promogated a book that was "GOD BREATHED" and promoted there own interpretation. As a result of this type of research or lack thereof, we "followed" a man, a cult of personality, into the depths of blind obediance and mental slumber.
A book that might be able to undo the legalistic view of sexuality is "LIVING IN SIN" by John Shelby Spong. After reading that book you might have a different take on Christianity as we know it today. It might even challange you to think for yourself.
quote: It might even challange you to think for yourself
Imbus -- from my perspective, Abigail IS thinking for herself already. All that was mentioned can be found in the book "When Jesus Became God" by Richard Rubenstein.
If vpw was being cited, I would have to agree with you -- but since he wasn't, I don't.
If we read "LIVING IN SIN" by JSS, I bet you would not criticize. What Abigail stated is historical fact, and not the presumptive postulations of a small town preacher trying to hit the "big time". -->
I do apologize for how I communicated. My imput was in support of what Abigail said. Totally! My comment was aimed at those who are still intrenched in literalism and traditional beliefs abot sexuality. Not twards her historical view. (I wish I had known this stuff when I was with TWI).
My point was not aimed at her diolog at all. A matter of fact I would love to talk to her personally and swap spiritual truths that are not biblically related. There are other sources that speak more to me than the Bible.
So let me say it this way... There is other biblical research out there, that has been done on sexuality that is quite the opposite of what we have been taught by TWI. Spong's book is one of them. This book will challange the very core of your existence as a man or a women.
dmiller - it was very sweet of you to "defend my honor". :)-->
Imbus, I didn't think you meant "you" literally, as in me. I figured by the context of your post and based on some of your other posts that you meant "you" collectively.
Anyway, I don't get into the chat room too often by you can always PT me or email me, my addy's in my profile. Not sure how many spiritual "truthes" I would have that might interest you, but I sure have spent a lot of years studying outside of TWI in a lot of different directions and avenues.
Abigail - I am currently ploughing through the history of Prieurie de Sion in the book but I am sure some interesting stuff is to come - I would also like to read Spong when I can find a copy.
It is good to read challenging stuff - it keeps us from some cosy self-delusion that we have arrived.
Jeez, this is what I get for avoiding a topic for too long...
Abigail, WOW!!!!!!!! Why weren't you on the Board of Trustees?!? Or at least the Chairperson of the Research Deparment???
Imbus, I will seek out that book you mentioned by JSS. It sounds interesting, even though I know not much more than the title. My unceremonious "exit" from TWI, along with my near suicide, is the result of the type of research that Abigail laid out in front of us. Many of these things were never taught us by VPW, LCM or any others in leadership positions. And that whole set of curcumstances taught me to "think for myself." I will never again allow someone else to dictate to me what I should believe. There is too much at stake. Like, life itself.
Trefor stated, "I no longer believe that things are so simple in black and white." And so I have found out that nothing in life is so binary as the Bible claims it to be.
The Bible contains nuggets of truth. No one can deny that. So does the Koran. And the book of Mormon. And the Kama Sutra. And... (Get the point?)
No one person, or group, or nation has a monopoly on truth. That said, I will paraphrase:
"Love God with all your mind, soul, heart, this is the first and greatest commandment, then do unto others as you would have them do unto you."
Okay, who is excluded here? Left handed people? Dyslexic people? Red haired people? People who limp? Those who follow a belief system different than your own? Homosexuals?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I see that statement as all-inclusive.
well gee Daryll, I didn't know much of that myself when I was in TWI or I would never have stayed with them for 10 years. I've been studying various religions since I left though, and recently I am reading a book which laid out much of that history for me.
Normally I probably wouldn't have even shared it. I generally try to be respectful of other people's religious beliefs and cautious as well. Some people really need to hang on to their beliefs for their own sanitys sake.
But when I see those beliefs as hurting other people it becomes very difficult for me to keep my mouth shut.
Thanks to the influence of TWI we thought we had everything, that we had arrived so to speak - there was a catch all, cover all, formula for everything.
We were, in some respects, like the Pharisees in the story of the man born blind in the gospel of John - we insisted on saying "we see."
Now some of us can find inspiration and insight from other sources also. We are no longer limited to a book which has no originals extant, has many textual variations, has been tranlsated in many different ways and understood in many different ways and whose contents were decided by a council in the fourth century AD.
Realising that has for me at least been a liberation and the quest for fuiller truth goes ever onward.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
13
28
35
18
Popular Days
Mar 9
46
Mar 12
30
Mar 10
29
Mar 11
19
Top Posters In This Topic
Catcup 13 posts
Zixar 28 posts
Trefor Heywood 35 posts
dmiller 18 posts
Popular Days
Mar 9 2004
46 posts
Mar 12 2004
30 posts
Mar 10 2004
29 posts
Mar 11 2004
19 posts
Bluzeman
Geeze, delete some of those question marks so the page doesn't scroll a half mile to the right!
Rick
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Snoballer
Ahh, thats better
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bluzeman
Thank you!
Rick
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Trefor Heywood
Did your ? key stick Snoballer?
:D-->
When you analyse the so-called "proof texts" there isn't one which really says it isn't either. The Bible is at best neutral and has as litle answer for homosexuality as it has for nuclear physics.
For centuries people believed that the Bible taught that the sun went around the Earth and that the World was flat and that God literally made things in seven days period. It might be hard to believe or stomach but the Bible does not have the answers to all the world's questions - TWI pretended it did but it was all a lie and a deception.
I no longer believe that things are so simple in black and white.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Snoballer
So, its all clear now, thanks for explaining that for us....I guess its just a nice book after all and doesn't really pertain to all life and Godliness then.
Hmmm
The truth is hard to stomach to those who don't want to hear it.
Thats a good one...The Bible is neutral on homosexuality.
You sayin God allowed all those Sodomites to be killed because they weren't hospitable. Damn, I better remember that.
I guess the Word is not neutral on that then!
You carry on advertising your ways, or should I say "opinions" and rationalisations, or is it research, but I have wasted enough pearls.
Have a nice day (being hospitable
:D-->)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Trefor Heywood
Your interpretation of the Sodom story has been challenged - not because it is some perverse attempt to "rationalise" but because it is not as you think and without it the "wrath of God" scenario has foundations of clay.
I did not say the Bible had no keys to truth and godliness - just that it doesnt have everything - pearls can be made artifically too
:D-->
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Abigail
"I did not say the Bible had no keys to truth and godliness - just that it doesnt have everything - pearls can be made artifically too"
Tref, wait till you get to the second half of the book you picked up! I may not agree with all of the hypotheses, but he sure has some very valid points, particularly about the bible.
For example......
1) The Bible makes no clear statement one way or another on Jesus' marital status- it is tradition which has taught he was not and believed by most. BUT, if Jesus was a Jew who fullfilled all the law and was, as the Bible states, a Rabbi, he must have not only married, and in all likelihood had children as well.
Jewish law requires a man to be married before he can become a rabbi. It also holds giving birth in very high esteem. Orthodox Jewish law would also prohibit birth control.
2.) If Jesus was arrested on Passover by the Sanhedrin, this too would contradict Jewish law. It would mean the Sanhedrin violated their own laws and performed "work" during a high holiday. Additionally, why did they need Pilate to execute him? Why not just stone him for heresy? They had the legal right, as they had the right to stone the woman caught in adultery.
3). The word "Messiah" did not and does not refer to a divine being in Jewish custom. In other words, when the Jewish dicsiples and Jesus himself referred to Jesus as the Messiah, they were not referring to a divine being or even a spiritual leader, but to a king/political leader who would once again reign in Jerusalem. In fact, this is the entire reason the Jewish people of today do not believe Jesus was the Messiah(anointed one) spoken of in the old testament.
4) It was against Roman law to bury someone who was crucified - they left them on the cross for the carrion to eat. So why then, did Pilate allow Jesus to be taken down and buried?
Additionally, it usually took two to three days for a person whose legs had not been broken to die on the cross, yet Jesus died in less than a day.
5) Why is it the resurrected Jesus still had holes in his hands and a wound in his side?
In 303 A.D., a pagan emperor named Diocletian sought out to destroy all Christian writings. This is one of the reasons there are no originals in existence today. It was almost 30 years later, after the council of Nicea and the vote to make Jesus a divine being, that Constantine arranged for copies of the Bible to be written. These Bibles are the ones the current Bibles of today are based on.
They were written by a man who worshipped the sun, a man whose political aims were to bring about a unified nation under one God, a man who played a very major role in melding pagan traditions and holidays such as "easter" and "Christmas" with Christianity.
It was also Constantine who installed a Bishop in Rome (and it was a Bishop in Rome who eventually declaired himself Pope). Constantine was never even baptised as a Christian until he lay on his deathbed. Is it not remotely possible, if not entirely likely, that what is and is not included in the Bible was slanted to forward Constantine's agenda?
Just a few things that make me go hmmmmmmm.....
Edited by abigailLink to comment
Share on other sites
imbus
Abigail,
Nice stuff. I wish Twi had done there research historically on J.C and the BiBle. Instead they promogated a book that was "GOD BREATHED" and promoted there own interpretation. As a result of this type of research or lack thereof, we "followed" a man, a cult of personality, into the depths of blind obediance and mental slumber.
A book that might be able to undo the legalistic view of sexuality is "LIVING IN SIN" by John Shelby Spong. After reading that book you might have a different take on Christianity as we know it today. It might even challange you to think for yourself.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
Imbus -- from my perspective, Abigail IS thinking for herself already. All that was mentioned can be found in the book "When Jesus Became God" by Richard Rubenstein.
If vpw was being cited, I would have to agree with you -- but since he wasn't, I don't.
If we read "LIVING IN SIN" by JSS, I bet you would not criticize. What Abigail stated is historical fact, and not the presumptive postulations of a small town preacher trying to hit the "big time".
-->
Link to comment
Share on other sites
imbus
I do apologize for how I communicated. My imput was in support of what Abigail said. Totally! My comment was aimed at those who are still intrenched in literalism and traditional beliefs abot sexuality. Not twards her historical view. (I wish I had known this stuff when I was with TWI).
My point was not aimed at her diolog at all. A matter of fact I would love to talk to her personally and swap spiritual truths that are not biblically related. There are other sources that speak more to me than the Bible.
So let me say it this way... There is other biblical research out there, that has been done on sexuality that is quite the opposite of what we have been taught by TWI. Spong's book is one of them. This book will challange the very core of your existence as a man or a women.
Is that better? Sorry about the misunderstanding.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
imbus
I just read my previous post. I should have used the word "someone" instead of "you". I did not mean to point at Abigail. That was not my intent.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Abigail
dmiller - it was very sweet of you to "defend my honor".
:)-->
Imbus, I didn't think you meant "you" literally, as in me. I figured by the context of your post and based on some of your other posts that you meant "you" collectively.
Anyway, I don't get into the chat room too often by you can always PT me or email me, my addy's in my profile. Not sure how many spiritual "truthes" I would have that might interest you, but I sure have spent a lot of years studying outside of TWI in a lot of different directions and avenues.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Trefor Heywood
Abigail - I am currently ploughing through the history of Prieurie de Sion in the book but I am sure some interesting stuff is to come - I would also like to read Spong when I can find a copy.
It is good to read challenging stuff - it keeps us from some cosy self-delusion that we have arrived.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
imbus
TH,
If you cannot find a copy where you are at then I'll send you one. O.K? O.K!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Trefor Heywood
Great offer! Thanks imbus! Will let you know!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ExWayDaryl
Jeez, this is what I get for avoiding a topic for too long...
Abigail, WOW!!!!!!!! Why weren't you on the Board of Trustees?!? Or at least the Chairperson of the Research Deparment???
Imbus, I will seek out that book you mentioned by JSS. It sounds interesting, even though I know not much more than the title. My unceremonious "exit" from TWI, along with my near suicide, is the result of the type of research that Abigail laid out in front of us. Many of these things were never taught us by VPW, LCM or any others in leadership positions. And that whole set of curcumstances taught me to "think for myself." I will never again allow someone else to dictate to me what I should believe. There is too much at stake. Like, life itself.
Trefor stated, "I no longer believe that things are so simple in black and white." And so I have found out that nothing in life is so binary as the Bible claims it to be.
The Bible contains nuggets of truth. No one can deny that. So does the Koran. And the book of Mormon. And the Kama Sutra. And... (Get the point?)
No one person, or group, or nation has a monopoly on truth. That said, I will paraphrase:
"Love God with all your mind, soul, heart, this is the first and greatest commandment, then do unto others as you would have them do unto you."
Okay, who is excluded here? Left handed people? Dyslexic people? Red haired people? People who limp? Those who follow a belief system different than your own? Homosexuals?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I see that statement as all-inclusive.
ExWayDaryl
Lives in Franklin Park, Illinois with his cat
Link to comment
Share on other sites
parsley
Love God
Love others
amen brother!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
imbus
Daryl,
Well said brother, well said!
;)-->
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Abigail
well gee Daryll, I didn't know much of that myself when I was in TWI or I would never have stayed with them for 10 years. I've been studying various religions since I left though, and recently I am reading a book which laid out much of that history for me.
Normally I probably wouldn't have even shared it. I generally try to be respectful of other people's religious beliefs and cautious as well. Some people really need to hang on to their beliefs for their own sanitys sake.
But when I see those beliefs as hurting other people it becomes very difficult for me to keep my mouth shut.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Trefor Heywood
Thanks to the influence of TWI we thought we had everything, that we had arrived so to speak - there was a catch all, cover all, formula for everything.
We were, in some respects, like the Pharisees in the story of the man born blind in the gospel of John - we insisted on saying "we see."
Now some of us can find inspiration and insight from other sources also. We are no longer limited to a book which has no originals extant, has many textual variations, has been tranlsated in many different ways and understood in many different ways and whose contents were decided by a council in the fourth century AD.
Realising that has for me at least been a liberation and the quest for fuiller truth goes ever onward.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
Tref -- how true. Lots of books,ideas out there that vpw never did plagiarize from, that we are discovering now.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.