I realize that this thread is over 40 entries long now, but I'm just starting at the beginning, so forgive me if I'm going over old ground.
Ann, first let me so that I'm impressed with your reading - so many people have a habit of saying that such-and-such religion believes this or that without ever having read the source material. Kudos for not doing that! And I've never read to Koran myself (and for that reason I'm not in the habit of commenting on Muslim beliefs), so I was interested in some of the things you said about it.
Regarding female heroines in the Bible -
First, it's true that a lot of women are portrayed in their contexts as mothers. I certainly believe that there many types of heroism, but don't discount the work and sacrifice that goes into being a parent. Mothers (and fathers) make their mark on history in a very real way. Second, what about Esther? This is a woman who saved thousands of people from genocide. She did it by relying on her feminine attributes to be sure, and perhaps that isn't very feminist, but the point is that she did it.
Paul rather than Jesus who is the founder of Christianity.
It might be accurate to say that Paul founded the
church - the congregation of believers - but he didn't found Christianity. That would imply that he came up with the basic tenants that we follow, and he didn't. He promoted them, and he did a darn good job of it, but they weren't his ideas.
Jesus repeatedly defended precisely the kind of women that his society despised the most: the “fallen” women, the “sinful” women, the whores, the adulteresses. Interestingly, Christianity has continued to despise and punish precisely the kind of women that Jesus himself defended: the “fallen” women, the whores, the adulteresses. When it comes to its view of women, Christian congregations have often been exceedingly bad at listening to what Jesus said on this subject.
I absolutely agree. Jesus said:
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." (Mark 12:30-31) This is hard to do - very hard sometimes - but I have difficulty understanding why so many Christians just ignore the second part completely and think it's ok to hate certain types of people.
Something I heard at my church once, which has always stuck with me is that Justice is getting what we deserve, Mercy is not getting what we deserve, and Grace is getting what we DON'T deserve.
I just heard this for the first time a few weeks ago. A visiting pastor, Ron Something, said it to me and just about bowled me over.
Did you know that it's taboo now to say Merry Christmas to someone in America. It's always Happy Holidays so as not to offend anyone. Christmas trees are called Holiday trees. No more community christmas lights with nativity scenes, it could possibly offend someone else.
You know, I've heard about this, but I haven't actually seen it in action. Around here people still say Merry Christmas and have Christmas trees. Then again, I live in the south, that may have something to do with it.
I personally love that America was founded on Christian principals.
Ah, but were we, really? Do Christians have a monopoly on morality? I don't know much about other religions, but it's my understanding that most of them don't condone things like murder. I think it would be more accurate to say that that America was founded on humanist principals. After all, there is nothing in the constitution about God.
I love that we say "One Nation, Under God" in our pledge of allegiance.
I don't. I do believe in the separation of church and state most wholeheartedly. Think of it this way - what if there is a tidal wave of change and in time the President and Congress are dominated by Muslims or Hindus or Buddhists or Pagans? I don't want "In Allah We Trust" on my coins, either.
Skipping over lots of stuff about polygamy (because I've never thought much about it, honestly) and the role of women in Christian marriages (because others Steph and Doranwen have already eloquently replied)...
But wasn't it the Jews themselves that wanted Jesus to be killed? Well, the Gospels say so, but I don't believe it. I can see no reason for a majority of the Jews to turn against Jesus.
It wasn't the majority of the Jews; it was the Pharisees. The controlling party, if you will. They were threatened by the very fact that so many of their people believed in Jesus. He threatened their power, plain and simple.
I don't believe those parts of the Gospels which claim that Pilate had to kill Jesus because he was scared of defying the bloodthirsty Jews. I think those parts of the Gospels have been added later
Do you have any evidence for this aside from your gut reaction? The Gospels were written as biographies, with the exception John, which is a first person account. And as in all biographies, there is room for error. But, that being said, the Gospels been authenticated in as much as it is possible to authenticate documents that have been around for two millenia. (Check out
The Case for Christ .) Regardless of whether a person believes that the events recounted in the Gospels are true, it is an undeniable fact that the Gospels themselves are valid historical documents. To say that they were tampered with is a pretty big leap to make without anything to back it up.
Ann, your story of how you interpreted Christianity as a child makes me so sad. I wish I could make you feel the presence of Jesus the way I do - love and grace without fear.
Real life mainstream Jesus loving Christians learned some time ago that being violent is not only against the the dictates of Christ, but it tends to turn folks off. That's just plain common sense. As I said before, anybody saying/doing different is after power, with no love of God involved.
Hear, hear!
And why don't we burn witches? Is it because the Bible tells us that we shouldn't? No. The only thing that the Bible says, in Exodus 22:18, is that we should kill witches. It might be argued that this is a command. And even though Paul says that Christians don't have to obey Mosaic law, and therefore are under no obligation to burn witches, it doesn't say anywhere in the Bible that we are not allowed to do so.
Yes, it does. Just what I quoted above - 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' No, Jesus didn't come right out and say "don't burn witches" in so many words, but he was expecting us to follow the spirit of the law, not the letter of the law. That's like a parent telling their child to come straight home after school. Instead, the kid goes to the mall and then says, "Mom, you didn't say I couldn't go to the mall!" Yes, she did, she just didn't use those words. Obviously there have been and continue to be horrific examples of people not following the spirit of Jesus's words, but that's a human failing.
The reason Christians don't follow Old Testament doctrine is simple -
we are saved by grace. We don't need to burn witches or be circumcised because we are not trying to win or keep God's love. We already have it, forever.
recent events and trends have proved that a majority of folks nowdays have stopped raising their children with morals or ethics
It certainly seems that way when you watch tv, and I'm sure there are lots of parents out there that aren't teaching their kids things they need know. But I doubt it's really a majority - if I meet ten random people on the street, I doubt six of them are going to think it's ok to whip out a knife and stab me to death. I'd be suprised if even one thought so. There are still millions upon millions of people with morals and ethics in the world - some are Christians and some aren't.
And I believe in Jefferson's principle of separation of church and state. I believe that the state should not directly associate itself with any church (or religion), nor should the state interfere with the peaceful practice of any organized religion.
But I also believe, unlike many in American government today, that one's religious beliefs cannot be conveniently "left at the doorstep" when entering public service. I do not believe that any religious leader should ever dictate governmental policy, but I also believe that if a president or senator or congressperson or member of the judiciary holds strong religious beliefs, they should not disqualify that person from serving in government. If one is a Christian, for example, those Christian beliefs will inform and guide that person's decisions whether that person is in public service or in private practice.
Now this I certainly agree with. You can separate church and state, but you can't separate a person from their beliefs. When you elect an official, you're electing the whole person. That's why you learn as much as you can about them before you vote. If you don't like their beliefs, don't vote for them.
What the Constitution actually says, by the way is:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.
I mean, who doesn't want forgiveness, giving, faith, hope, love, honesty, generosity, etc. etc. shown and instilled by their government? That sounds like a great society to me.
Steph, I completely get what you're saying here, but you have to remember that Christians don't have a monopoly on these good traits. I know a lot of people who aren't Christians who are still good people. I'm related to some of them, even. I certainly wish they knew the grace of God, but even though they don't, they still have morals, ethics and a sense of right and wrong, and there are a fair few that I would trust to run the government.
Bottom line - I'm a Christian. I believe in the separation of church and state. Those values aren't mutally exclusive, despite with the media likes to tell us!
