Why I do not like religion...

Post Reply New Topic

YES. ABSOLUTELY CORRECT. And that was a point that prophets, writers, and even kings made about the Law. Jesus even brought this up.



Depends. If you consider the context, then you can shed light on the meaning of scripture. The Bible often interprets itself, explaining what some of the more bizarre statements mean. It helps if you understand figures of speech used in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. Prophets often spoke in highly exaggerated language, and Jesus was no different in that respect. My favorite example is the "mountain-moving" faith speech. Taken in context, it does make sense.




Not really.



As I said, the Bible will often offer explanations for its symbolism. It does take a little work distinguishing between what's literal and what's literally metaphorical, but it's not unreasonably difficult.



Not true. The Bible was originally written in King Jimmy English.

Just kidding.

Actually, new translations of the Bible are done to be consistent with contemporary language to keep it culturally relevant. But they are generally (always, as far I know) derived from the same ancient manuscripts, such as the Masoretic text and the Septuagint, both of which are sourced from texts that have been confirmed by recent archeological discoveries such as the Dead Sea Scrolls. The ONLY translation I'm aware of that is purposefully inconsistent with other translations is the New World Translation. I've tried reading "The Message," which is not contradictory exactly, but is too much of a devotional text for me to consider it a legit translation. I'll eventually come back to it, but I like my HSCB study Bible better--I find the commentary in this particular Bible to be fascinating and it makes this particular translation a much more compelling read. So no, there really isn't any significant loss in meaning here.



Also untrue. I've read an English translation of the Koran.

(I don't mean to be confrontational. I'm just highly sensitive to misconceptions about the Bible and can't help but respond when I see these kinds of things)

I didn't know they had translated versions of the Koran - I'm not an expert in scriptures themselves - more of an interest in the co-existence of religion, politics and society - so I'm looking at it from that perspective - and it is contradictory in practise - like in the debates over slavery - where there were preachers on both sides using religious rhetoric to back up their side.

The way I see it - is that, yes, there are people out there like you who go for the most accurately translated versions and study the history and culture and have a very in-depth understanding of your faith. A lot of people just go by what their religious leader says and they pick their place of worship not based on the accuracy of interpretation but on the fact that their friends and family go there or that the place of worship is in line with their beliefs.

It's ok. It's something in my life that I've found to be very enjoyable and I'd encourage believers and unbelievers alike to examine scripture and actually get to know what's there. It's not all that bad as some like to make it out to be. When I go on about stuff like that, it's not intended to offend anyone, and FYI you haven't offended me. I just feel the need to correct mistakes when I see them.

I agree with you that certain religious leaders will use religious rhetoric to push a certain agenda. I'm very wary of those teachers and avoid them.

To use your example, slavery: Biblical regulations of slavery are not intended to be read as endorsements of slavery. It just means that God understands the evil of man's heart and mind, to include reducing fellow men and women to property. Slavery in the OT served a variety of functions, particularly as a means of punishment since nomadic people would have been incapable of incarceration. Incarceration removes people from society, a place in which they can still be useful even if they are predisposed to criminal behavior. Better to let them work off their debt to individuals or society at large, be productive, rather than sit in jail and rot. Besides, all Israelite slave were to be set free during the Year of Jubilee (every seven years). A slave could, if he so willingly chose, become permanently bonded to his master, which was done in a ritual in which the slave was literally nailed to the door. Their are plenty of good reasons why a slave would want to do this, including a good master who treated servants well and provided protection. At all times servants must be treated fairly.

Contrasted with the American slave trade in which slaves were clearly NOT treated fairly. A world free of slavery would actually hold better to the Biblical ideal. Using the Bible to promote slavery as we understand it is dangerous, since the Bible clearly doesn't support our modern-day concept of the institutions. In the USA, we've learned the hard way that it is a horrible institution, and we all agree that it is wrong to take fellow human beings as property.

I see your point about it being contradictory in practice, but this doesn't mean that the Bible itself is contradictory. We all should examine our behavior and check whether it is in keeping with scripture. Because God gave us all the same morality, we sense those things which are also in the Bible as though they were common sense--senseless, unprovoked violence is forbidden, for example, and we naturally feel some kind of wrongness about doing harm to others. Most of those things you'll find consistent with the Bible, not contradictory to it.

You're also right that people just take what religious leaders say on its face. The pastor of my church repeatedly calls for us to read the Bible ourselves and get to know what's in its pages. I've been doing this for over a year now and am just coming to the last pages of the OT. Even though I've not made an in-depth study of the Gospels, it's been an eye-opening, mind-expanding experience (except without the drugs). Blind acceptance of a sermon message won't really be the most help, but rather seeking whether the Bible actually does support what a preacher/teacher says.

Now, I do think one should pick a church in line with his or her personal beliefs. That's just the beauty of the time in which we live--there are so many different ways to worship no one need feel left out. If you can't align yourself with a certain church or creed, it will be difficult to participate in worship and study in any meaningful way. But it's a good idea to explore various different churches to find where you might best belong. And you do want to be careful that a potential church is one that holds to what the Bible says and isn't confused in its theology (like prosperity Gospel, other TV evangelists). If you can't pick a church you're compatible with, you're going to have trouble really actively plugging into what that church has to offer.

I agree that you have to see scripture in its historical context - for instance I had an angry atheist friend who was offended by Jesus talking about cutting your own hand off saying it was extreme. Wheras I would just imagine Jesus as a historical Rabbi using big figures of speech to illustrate his point.

Also I'm not 100% sure on this but I think lots of Muslims only consider Arabic versions to be the true Koran, thats why english translations are often called "the meaning of the Koran" or "a translation of the Koran". I assuse it is islamic printings which bother to put that qualification and english ones don't bother.

I agree that you have to take things in the time they were written for. I think a lot of things in the bible and koran although they seem harsh to us were written to moderate even worse behavior that was going on at the time.

I personally think most people's beliefs are determined by the environment they settle in or feel happy in. Whatever the most succesful looking people around them are doing.
I think a minority of people can make their own mind up though. Hopefully i am one of them, but i think that is because my AS crappiness makes me not care about looking up to popular and succesful people.

I could be wrong, of course, but you strike me as what I like to call a "genuine" seeker. To illustrate what I mean, I once visited a UU church, having dated a UU girl for a while and learned about what they do/believe. While I respect them for being open-minded, my concern is that they're open minded to the point their heads are about to explode. For them, "seeking" is all about the journey and not at all about actually finding anything. You seem to actually be seeking SOMETHING, and I think on some level you know what you're looking for. The Bible says "Seek and you will find." The problem is, with UUs, you won't find anything if you don't know what you're looking for!

Anyway...

To go back to my example of slavery, the idea is that God knew that slavery would become an issue because He knows the corruption of human hearts. So while there's nothing "wrong" with slavery in the strictest sense, it falls far from the ideal. Slaves/servants must also be treated with respect because they are human beings. The Law regarding slaves/servants was intended to make such a horrible situation more humane.

The status of women was another example. God didn't design women to be below men, else He'd have made Eve from Adam's toe so he could walk all over her. He made Eve from Adam's rib so they would walk side-by-side. But God was looking ahead to a time when the Israelites would conquer other nations and take women from those nations as wives. The Law says that a man may take a conquered woman as a wife (we can assume she had no say in the matter), and that he may divorce her if she doesn't please him (I'm assuming being resentful). But if this happens, she CANNOT be taken as a slave but has all the rights and privileges of a married woman. The reason why is being married to a captor automatically puts a captive woman in a higher status than other captive women (who would be slaves). To casually throw away a such a woman would mean to subject her to the same low status, which would be more unfair than had the man just left her alone in the first place. Having been married implies the marriage was consummated, either willingly or by force (rape), and that makes the woman unfit for marriage to another man. The Law provides relief for even the captive woman, which also hints that God's Law wasn't intended for the Israelites alone, but anyone they came in contact with and even the rest of the world. Despite the sins of man's heart, God still provides justice and mercy in even the worst of conditions.

As far as settling in with what other people are doing, I don't think that necessarily applies to Bible interpretation, though. Human success is weighed differently in the Bible. While OT laws as well as NT morals provide a GREAT ethical business code and strategy, it's not a guarantee of success (greater gains seem to be the product of UNethical behavior rather than Biblical behavior). The hope of financial gain is actually a good reason NOT to believe in the Bible, contrary to what some TV evangelists suggest. The Bible only tells us what our responsibilities are with what we have and proper conduct in earning it. It does not provide a business plan! So I tend to reject the idea that Christianity is a religion for the wealthy, even if there are a lot of wealthy believers. Personally, I don't have much money at all nor any hope for earning very much of it. So for me, the Bible offers hope in that there are more important things than money. You can ask any one of my clients how important money is to me and they can tell you that I've worked out deals with them in trade, allowed delayed/deferred payments, or just forgiven debts outright. It's not about the money; it's about meeting the needs of the people I serve-which often means a lot more than just showing up for a piano lesson. If all I do is teach someone how to play piano, I've already failed.

Often times the Bible tells us to do the opposite of the norm, and that makes us uncomfortable. So I disagree that we just tend to do what everyone else is doing. I mean, yeah, there IS peer pressure. But someone who really wants to follow God's will for their life HAS to accept that might mean following what others may see as an "unconventional" or "eccentric" path. Even my Christian friends think I'm a little weird! But I've also discovered how stepping out and taking risks has had a greater impact on people I come in contact with. I've spent my entire life in Southern Baptist churches, and you may be aware that we tend to be more reserved in our worship than non-denoms, Pentecostals, and CoG's. Very recently I began to feel that I'd been failing at worshiping "at the bench" because I'd been become caught between performing to the best of my ability in worship while not attracting attention to myself and being emotionally invested in worship. But in speaking with other pianists/keyboardists, I've found that this need not be the case. In the last two months I've been working at maintaining the emotional/spiritual investment in what I do and striking a balance between taking risks and the appropriateness of those risks. The result for me has been greater satisfaction in the worship experience itself. Most importantly, though, is the reaction I've gotten from fellow congregants. They've noticed the change, and they tell me that it inspires them in their own worship experience. And I have to ask God why He didn't tell me to do this kind of thing sooner!

But maybe my opinion is colored by being part of what you consider to be the minority. I've definitely felt for a long time that I'm part of a kind of minority within the church, someone who actually cares about "leading from the bench" rather than banging on a bunch of keys, about actually digging into the Bible and trying to understand it rather than just accepting my preacher's word (he actually encourages us to engage him privately if he is wrong about something, and he really does make adjustments in his preaching if/when that happens). I think most people just aren't really up for the challenge. I think you'd have MANY more Christians who actually seem erudite because they KNOW what they're talking about, rather than saying "well, THIS is what I believe." Being saved is the first step and the most important step. It's just frustrating that we are too often content with letting that be our ONLY step.

Didn't want to repost the whole thing But obviously you've thought about your faith a lot - my point is that a lot of people don't. Most people I know go to church or synagogue because it's the one their family goes, or it's in their community, or their kids go to day care or Sunday school there etc. Most have a very limited knowledge of religion beyond what the sermons contain and what they've grown up hearing. And for them, it's not as much about accuracy as it is about belonging.

When it comes to politics and the prosperity gospel mega-churches, those that use religion know this and they use it. They know the average person isn't a scholar of religion so they pick something out of the Bible, add a favourable twist and profit. And to a lot of people, as long as they get the acceptance and community benefits from their place of worship, then that is enough for them.

thanks Rho, very interesting.

Im not really religouse but I believe god looks over everyone no matter what they believe as long as they dont accept satan in their heart.

Yeah well... I believe 'god' is just the force that created the universe. We have given this force millions of different names and characteristics. In addition, we have made this force omnipotent and omnipresent.

Why, though? Do we really like the idea of some unseen entity watching us have sex? Wipe our ass? Stuff our faces? I don't get it.

God just is.