Showing posts with label bible. Show all posts
Showing posts with label bible. Show all posts

Tuesday, January 7, 2014

What Was the Intention of Biblical Writers, Then?

(Image credit)
Normally, in the St. Louis area, temperatures rarely fall below 20 degrees, and and snowfall doesn't get over 4 inches at most (our biggest problem most years is sleet or sleet/snow mix, actually). Typical pattern is temps in the 20's or 30's (Fahrenheit of course, I'm in 'murica), occasional snow, then it flips back to 40's or even 50's with rain,  and it keeps going back and forth between those two patterns.

This week, that pattern was shattered. 12-15 inches of snow fell over the area, and temperatures feel to lows not seen in over 25 years. Yesterday morning, we had a low of -6. I had pipes freeze in my basement, despite a heater being down there.

What is the relevance of all this snow discussion, you might ask? Well, because of the snow, I couldn't get out the the Unitarian church I've become a part of recently (they canceled services) and the had an experiment with having a form of "e-church" on their Facebook page. I signed up for Facebook, and joined in on my phone. Links were posted to videos of music, and the minister gave a short sermon in a post on their page.

Gutenburg Bible. Credit: Wikipedia
His sermon really got me thinking about how I view the Bible. Of course as a former "fundigelical", I thought of most everything in the Bible as being literal truth, unless it's painfully obvious, even to a child, that it's a metaphor. It's interesting to think that a primarily literal interpretation of the Bible didn't even come about until around 110 years ago.

As writer Jonny Scaramanga points out in his great post Was Jesus a Creationist? early theologians, Christian and Jewish alike, considered much of the Old Testament to be figurative. It wasn't until the birth of the modern American fundamentalist movement that people started taking stories like Adam and Eve seriously as literal truth.

Now, I don't know what to think about the intentions of Biblical writers. Did many of them mean for the Bible to be taken so seriously, or did they play around a lot with metaphors and allegories to get a point across? It's especially possible that the second case could be true, seeing as how common allegorical stories were in the ancient Middle Eastern cultures that the writers came from.

Monday, September 17, 2012

Is the Bible contradictory?.... Of Course It Is!


One of the reasons I love Google + (besides the fact that it has brought so many readers to this blog), is the fact that it's more open than facebook, you post something, and you don't know who will respond. It encourages more discussion than facebook does. Google + is almost the effect of what would happen if you combined a blog site with Twitter. One great example of this is a discussion that started on the Atheist ® page. To give some context, in the posts before this, John, the creator of the page had been posting verses that should the sexism of the Bible, (read post with comments here ). The creator of the page says that this all started because he brought up Paul's statement in I Timothy 2:11: "A woman should learn in quietness and full submission."


OK, Brad the verse that Brad quotes seems to support his view that Paul felt that all are equal, regardless of gender, ethnicity, etc. So the Bible isn't sexist, then?

Wait..... it actually is, read these verses for yourself:

1 Corinthians 14:33-35
"...As in all the congregations of the saints, women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church." 

Ephesians 5:22-24
Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church...."

First, let's address his comment about all being equal. Compare his Galatians 3:23-28 quote with the 2 verses above. Clearly, women are not consider as equals in the rest of the New Testament (and Galatians, I Corinthians, and Ephesians were all written by Paul, so not only is the Bible contradictory, but Paul even contradicts himself!) How in one verse can the Bible say all are equal, when the New Testament/Paul seems to believe that women are not equal to men? I'm just talking about the New Testament, the Bible's view of women in the Old Testament is even worse.

In the Old Testmant days, slavery was allowed, but male slaves were allowed to be freed at the end of 7 years, but not the women....

Exodus 21:7-11:
"When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are.  If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again."

Deuteronomy 22:28-29 (NIV): 
If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, he shall pay the girl’s father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the girl, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives. 

So not only could a woman be forced to marry her rapist, but the man must pay for her as if he is buying livestock? This principle is also present in Islam, and is still practiced to this day in the Middle East. It comes from the ancient ideal that women are property, and their worth is only in their virginity. The rapist was forced to marry her, and pay a price to her father (and also not allowed to divorce her), because since he raped her, she is now "damaged goods", and can't be married off to anyone else. Disgusting that the Bible viewed women this way

So we have here a Christian quoting one verse that supports equality, and a host of other verses (there's plenty more), that contradict that very verse, some even written by the same man who wrote the 1st.

Let's address his comment that Paul's commands regarding women and their conduct in churches, not being allowed to speak, teach, and must have their heads covered when in church or in prayer (I Corinthians 11:4-7). It is true that it was custom in ancient Greek culture (the churches he wrote to were in cities that were highly influenced by Greek culture and most residents worshiped Greek gods), that it was considered disrespectful and irreverent for a woman to speak in a place of worship or enter without her head covered. 
However, if god was for the equality of women, why would he bow down to the whims and standards of a culture, especially when that cultural custom was sexist (and supposedly according to response of the Christian above, god believes in equality for everyone)? Why wouldn't he want his followers to be a positive example to the people around them that women should be equals? Better yet, if he is 'almighty god", then why wouldn't he use his power to change the minds of the people around them? Why would he support equality in one biblical passage (I'm looking at this from the fundamentalist's point of view that the entire bible was inspired by god), but have the rest of the bible oppose it? 

The argument that the bible supports equality doesn't hold up at all....