----- Original Message ----- From: "Deborah Harrell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, June 28, 2004 4:54 PM Subject: [L3] Re: Jesus-anity
> > Dan Minette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >From: "Deborah Harrell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > <snippage throughout> > > > --I should have added that the last time I > > > semi-seriously studied the Bible (i.e. in a class > > with > > > an actual doctor of theology) was over 2 decades > > >ago, so unless it was earth-shaking news I wouldn't > > > have heard of new information-- > > > The stuff I'm talking about has been pretty standard > > for 30-40 years among non-fundamentalists. > > Ooof. > <whoosh of air leaving from that kick> > I was answering from 'the best of my knowledge.' No kick at you intended; I'm just surprised the Good Dr. didn't teach this. > > But I think you can see the agendas pretty clearly > > from what was written. > > Paul's was to proclaim the Lord Jesus, Christ until > > he comes again in > > glory. His writing is filled with the transforming > > power of Jesus, who died on the cross, in his life. > > > > That's all Christian cliché now, but it was new at > > the time. I agree that we do not > > have Jesus directly; we have the early church > > testifying to the meaning Jesus has in their life. > > I can give you multiple present day Christian > > sources on the community in relationship to > > Jesus coming first, and scriptures coming second. > > Yet what that boils down to is 'we believe because we > believe' -- *I* don't have a problem with that, but I > _will not_ permit somebody to tell me what I ought to > believe, when the best evidence they can give is "it's > written in the Bible." But, there is no real emperical evidence for any belief about ethics. Shared beliefs is a foundation for an ethical discussion. Without agreement on premises, logic avails us not. If someone says they believe in X because they believe in X, then I can see no way of discussing this with them if you believe in ~X. If one can find a common ground of Y, then there is a chance for dialog. > Again, I do not question the fervor, but what evoked > it. And the "authority" of those who would order my > life to their desires/beliefs. What evoked it was a life changing experience. In many ways it is very hard for folks who grew up in a socially Christian to read Paul afresh, to see what he really was writing; because we have the image of what people have used his writing to defend so stuck in our heads. > When so much of what is supposed to be 'the word of > God' makes little sense to my learning and experience, > I would be scissoring out merely the few bits that > mesh with my reasoning. If I was actually looking for > religious text to support my views. That's funny, because most of scripture makes sense to my learning and experience. Part of it, I think, is that I have studied the context a bit more than you have. From what it sounds like, your interpretation seems to be influenced by the folks with baggage that you have talked with. > > Read any of the Creeds again -- the boundaries are > quite clearly laid out. And "binding God" is > precisely what nearly all religions embrace, in that > 'this is the best (or only) way.' I bet you have not read Anthony De Mello, then. :-) > But how others who profess to believe _behave_, as a > result of that belief, has valid impact on how I > interpret that belief. [Note that I have already > pointed out in other posts the good works and kindness > of many Christians, which is very real and admirable.] > Again, as I do _not_ know what Jesus actually said or > did, except through the filter of many before me, some > of whom had their own slant on godliness and > salvation, I must closely examine what I believed as a > child. If it does not make sense to me, I am under no > obligation to continue professing such beliefs. That is really not what I am talking about. I am talking about the advantages of having faith within a community. Of being in dialog with other people of faith, both living and dead. Take the example of the confirmation student who would not profess faith in Jesus as Messiah. Our church community said that they would support her in her spiritual journey; one of the more conservative members offered to take the time to answer any questions that she had, and generally worked to continue to support her > <only slightly exaggerating> If you've accepted a > leash all your life, it is quite reasonable to defend > wearing it. Indeed, to fling it off as a hobble > invalidates and belittles your earlier and dearly-held > views. Think 'something along the lines of Stockholm > syndrome.' I did not chose "spiritual vampirism" > accidentally. I realize that, but I don't see it as all that more prevalant in the fundamentalists I know. Sure there are fundamentalist homes where dad rules with an iron fist; but there are also many where mom rules with the force of her personality. There probably is a higher % of male dominated households among fundamentalists, but it isn't as automatic as one might think. > >In many > > cases, it was clear to me that they were the > > dominant partner in their relationship too. :-) > > <sigh> I want an _equal partner_. Have you ever > glanced through drivel like _The Total Woman_? > Domination via manipulation and subterfuge. }:P I've heard of it second hand. To borrow from math, it is rare to see actual equality between two reals that have originated independantly. Most relationships that I've seen have one partner that is a bit more of a leader and one that is a bit more of a follower. I wasn't thinking so much of Domination, as the stronger personality leading the family. > > Its true that those who are that sexist would listen > > to me more than you. > > But, my daughter, Amy, has had some success > > discussing theology with > > fundamentalists, too. She has tremendous > > advantages, reading Greek and > > Hebrew, and taking her Old Testament from someone a > > Jewish scripture > > scholar I talked to after a synagogue service called > > "the dean of Old > > Testament scholars." But, she's done a fine job > > overcome the bias against women. > > <no sarcasm> Good for her. But those of us who don't > have time to learn Greek and Hebrew cannot compete on > a level playing field... She obviously has a blow you away advantage now, but she did pretty well before seminary too. As soon as she could stand toe to toe in discussing scripture, there was at least a begrudging respect from most fundamentalists. With all due respect, I don't get the feeling that you've studied the bible as well as the typical BSF person. Amy and I understand it better, so that helps a lot. > <raises eyebrows> It's difficult for a child of 6 or > 8 to put things into context; *that* is what makes > much scripture so insidiously degrading. From Eve on. No, but it shouldn't be hard for a qualified director of Christian Education to chose Sunday School lessons that are appropriate for 6 or 8 year olds. It is certainly the job of those doing the instructions to put things in context, not the kids themselves. Let me take the example of Adam and Eve. The problem with it is that folks have chosen to use Eve being the first one tempted as an indication of the lesser state of women. There is no reason in the world use that interpretation when teaching kids. Adam tells God that its Eve's fault, she told him to eat it. You can ask the kids, if they have ever blamed someone else for something they did wrong. Was it just making excuses? Who's fault was it? Then Eve blames the serpent. Adam and Eve really got it wrong, first they did the wrong thing, and then they tried to blame it on someone else. What Adam did was Adam's fault, what Eve did was Eve's fault; they are both equally to blame for the mess they created. I don't teach 6-8 year olds its true, but it was easy to get this across to 7th and 8th graders. The essence of the story is not about the differences between Adam and Eve, so it should be straightforward to get this right. The bottom line is that there are many communities which don't believe in the lesser status of women, and they can find a way to teach scriptures that is not sexist. Dan M. Dan M. _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
