Leviticus 20:1, 13: The Lord said to Moses... If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.
Some Christians love to quote the old phrase "God said it, I believe it, That settles it!" Usually followed by the proud question "Amen?" You may have even seen this on a bumper sticker. Now, they cleverly update this proud saying by omitting the middle portion. They say it doesn't matter whether you or I believe it or not, because if God said it, then that settles it whether we believe it or not. They prefer: "God said it, That settles it!" It's a nice little phrase, but unfortunately, none of the phrase is true. For one, God didn't "say it." What they mean is, "it is written in some ancient texts, by someone we don't know who actually wrote it, and I trust what has been passed down, and personally have faith that God inspired someone to write it and that it was accurately re-written and transcribed and recorded and then later translated correctly over thousands of years into many languages. And most importantly, I personally like that verse and want to follow it so I don't argue about it's context or applicability to the Jews, or to an ancient culture, like I do the verses I don't like and never would follow." Either way, God never said it to me. Or to anyone I have ever known.
In our justice system, this type of utterance would be deemed "hearsay." It would be excluded from evidence of every court in the land due to it being inherently unreliable.
Imagine if every court allowed people to testify what someone else said to someone else about a crime they allege we committed. "Bob told me that Jim stole the money." And I believe Bob would never lie, so it has to be true. Well, folks, our courts would require Bob to come in to court and tell us what Jim did and what he saw. And even then, we could cross examine Bob as to his memory and most importantly, as to his credibility. Jim would be available to give his side of the story. So, we can't even know the premise is true that God said it. And even if God did say it to a bronze age Jewish man, he didn't say it to YOU, therefore, it's only a revelation from God to him. It's not a revelation of God to you. We call that hearsay. It's unreliable. Therefore, it's not allowed into evidence and it's not sufficient for rendering a verdict.
The "I Believe it" part is equally ridiculous. We say we believe much of the nonsense I have previously posted about in my recent posts simply because "God said it and he is inerrant and infallible." We don't believe in talking serpents or talking donkeys. We don't believe in the sun revolving around our earth. We don't believe in stoning our disobedient children. We don't believe women should remain silent. We don't believe in raping a woman and if she is not a virgin, stoning her. We don't get outraged at the adulterer, but instead we choose to get all tore up about gays. Which hurts the institution of marriage more: Adultery or same sex marriage? I could go on and on. But I do agree that this middle part of the phrase is not needed, because whether you or I believe it or not, does not make it true. Amen?
Finally, "That settles it!" Really? Do a little research on that "settled" viewpoint. Or just listen to any preacher anywhere, any time, on any subject of faith and then listen to another view. You will find literally hundreds of other preachers that disagree with him. That's why we have so many denominations and so many fights within denominations. And even if God did miraculously appear to you (by way of talking animal or burning bush or ancient text) and actually did tell you to kill your child, would you do it? If he told you to kill an abortion doctor would you do it? If he told you to kill Muslims would you do it? If he told you to fly planes into buildings would you do it?
So allow me to rephrase the slogan:
God Didn't Say It to Me, I don't believe it just because you tell me to, and even if God did happen to say it, nothing is settled. Amen?
21 comments:
Only when I had stopped listening to clergy of all stripes and persuasions did the peace which surpasseth all understanding settle upon my pointed little head.
The problem starts when you allow some self-appointed PooBah to get between you and God.
I keep waiting for these guys to give up bacon, shrimp, pork chops, lobster, and catfish....
When Josh Duggar or Bill Cosby can't get a cake from a Christian baker, then we'll know the refusal is truly based on religious beliefs and not on discrimination against homosexuality.
Well, I guess this is what fundies really mean: "my man-o-God said God said it, I believe my man-o-God, that settles it".
Regarding the admissibility of the Bible as proof the events recorded therein occurred, you should check out Simon Greenleaf's "Testimony of the Evangelists." In case you didn't know Greenleaf was a renowned legal scholar whose treatise on the law of evidence had a large impact on American law. Greenleaf argued that indeed it WOULD be admissible under the exception to the hearsay rule for ancient records.
If you applied the Hearsay Rule that applies in the legal system to history, then essentially all of history that occurred before the lifetime of anyone alive today would be "inherently unreliable." So applying the Hearsay Rule you'd have to conclude that there's no way to prove that the Civil War ever occurred or that there ever was a man named Abraham Lincoln. Now I'm not arguing that the factual accuracy of the events of the Bible is just as reliable as historical reports of the Civil War, because the accuracy of historical records are subject to deterioration over time. I'm just pointing out that you can't discredit the factual accuracy of the Bible just because its factual accuracy wouldn't hold up in court. Neither would the fact that the Civil War occurred.
Anon 5:53...Very good response. Additionally, one cannot prove God. Some dare to say that "if He should reveal Himself to me then I would then believe". We have to believe the Word of God mainly because the Word of God was given to the Jews. They were very meticulous in the accuracy of what they wrote down. He the Word of God was on the earth for 33 years and proved that He was who He claimed to be. One can believe this or reject it as it is still a free country. But, if Jesus is God and His Word is truth it is a real gamble to not take Him at His Word because He holds the keys to Heaven and Hell!! An old Bible believer.
Sure, people can believe what they want. My point is that it is not a "revelation" from God to me when all I have to go on is an ancient text telling me that a bronze age jewish man said God told him to kill disobedient children, or kill homosexuals, or to conquer other societies and rape the women and kill the men and children. The Jews also say they are God's chosen people (according to God in a book THEY wrote.) and they reject the notion that Jesus is God. But again, let's all be thankful that no one, (not Jew or Christian) believes those verses or applies them today. All the rapes, killing, plundering of other people and of babies and children is not love. It's not justice. And it's not to be believed and acted on in a civilized society. We all know it. Yet, some people still insist that in order to be a Christian you have to believe it all. Say waaaaat?
Old Bible Believer - According to scripture, and thousands of years of teaching, I thought the Catholic church and/or pope held those "keys" to heaven and hell. But don't worry, I don't believe that nonsense either, so I am not a Catholic. Why aren't you one? Some disagreements over their teaching? Don't believe some of their interpretations or application of scripture? Same here.
Anon - there is no need to prove God. The problem is trying to prove that he wants us to kill each other, or its okay to rape others, or that only our beliefs are the "correct" ones, that he doesn't want us to issue marriage licenses to some people or bake cakes for others, and those that don't do what we want, or believe what we insist on, are therefore going to hell. That's where the proof is needed. I would think most people believe there is a God. (Jews, Muslims, Catholics, Protestants, Mormons, JWs all agree on that.) It's all the rest of the religious nonsense that people claim to be required beliefs or otherwise they will be burned in hell forever and forever that I am blogging about.
Watchpuppy, you're too kind to the 5:53 guy. We are talking about ancient writings, "bronze age" as you call them. They are for the most part completely anonymous. And do we have identifiable, historical people that wrote these ancient documents? Are the events corroborated by other witnesses who are not anonymous either?
We have plenty of events in the past 2000 years that we regard as "history", because known people, verified human beings whose writings match what other have noted the same or nearly the same events.
However, 5:53 misses the point you are trying to make. I would not read one person's account of history in say 1200, and assume that is true and infallible and perfect. I would take what he wrote and what others wrote concerning the same event, and be able to come up with what I think is the truth. Imagine how silly it would be to read about an event in the year 500, and there was only ONE source, and he was anonymous. No name. Just a writing. How idiotic would I believe to think that is "truth". Unless some pompous ass stomping on his stage convinced me that the anonymous, unknown person was "inspired by the holy spirit"....ok, then I might believe that one unknown, unnamed account of an event that no one else saw.
I guess then what we chose to believe is just as valid as what jo blow chooses to believe since it's a faih thing anyway. None of us can absolutely prove what is truth and what is not. We should be a lot more tolerant of others and not get on our high horse and say we got it and nobody else has.
An old Bible believer:
Actually, any "originals" or direct copies of "originals" of the OT, the part before the return to Jerusalem after the Babylonian exile, including the Pentateuch, the "history" books, the Psalms and much of the older prophesies, were destroyed when the Babylonians razed the temple and nearly everything else in Jerusalem. Before that, there were few copies. During the exile, these were recreated from the memory of the people in Babylon. The Psalms, because these were memorized as songs, are the part most likely to be the closest renditions of the content of the originals.
The Bible does not describe itself as the "Word of God". Only Jesus is described as the "Word".
We are blessed to have the New Testament, but even it has some dodgy history, but has much more to speak of its validity, if properly read and understood, than does the OT.
BTW, anyone who preaches hate should not be called a "man of God", because hatred is not of God.
7:09. The originals are gone and have been for centuries. God was and is able to preserve His words down through the ages and even the Dead Sea Scrolls are a match to the Isaiah text. Just for clarification. Old Bible believer for 64 years.
FBC Jax Watchdogs,
You don't believe in "talking serpents or talking donkeys" etc., I assume because this seems incredible?
If so, would you also disbelieve in the virgin birth and Jesus resurrection from the dead because these to go beyond science making them also seem incredible?
Q - I don't believe in talking donkeys and talking snakes and neither do you. They don't talk. Period. End of rational discussion. I would tell the same to an Indian who told me trees have spirits and a talking tree once said...
As for the virgin birth and Jesus resurrection, if anyone today claimed a virgin conception, or resurrection from the dead, I wouldn't believe it. But by grace through faith, I can believe/trust that indeed those two things did happen. There is some evidence to support that. But talking snakes and talking donkeys? Come on Q. You know better than that. Please don't be another one who tries to convince me not to have faith in the virgin birth and resurrection just because I don't believe in talking animals.
FBC Jax Watchdogs,
Your logic seems a bit off.
I assumed by "talking serpents or talking donkeys" from your article, you meant, the serpent in Genesis, and Balaam's donkey?
Your logic seems to be there are no "talking donkeys and snakes", now, so I do not believe it happened in the past, and there are no virgin births or resurrections, now, but I do believe it happened in the past. And I believe in these two incredible events because of some incredible ability given to me by God, but do not believe in other incredible things God has done. Odd.
"But talking snakes and talking donkeys? Come on Q. You know better than that." Is an attempt to ridicule effective for you?
Oh, and I would never try to convince you not to believe the bible, that's a misnomer, I just didn't know where you are at because you call yourself a Christian and ridicule the bible, now I know it's liberal 'Christian'.
Yes. I am liberal to many fundies. I am conservative to many others. I guess it depends on who I am being compared to. And logically, yes, I shouldn't believe in the virgin birth or resurrection either. But that is something that seems to have happened in my opinion. Talking trees, no. Talking animals, no. Magic underwear no. Sun standing still, no. Tower of Babel origin of different languages, no,
When Josh Duggar or Bill Cosby can't get a cake from a Christian baker, then we'll know the refusal is truly based on religious beliefs and not on discrimination against homosexuality.
Honestly think that real issue is repentance not the sin per se. When a person who has tattoos is told to leave a congregation that is blocking the doors, that is Pharisism. I know of assemblies that did this to a fellow with full body tattoos.
A more practical picture you should put out is how the child that was abused by a male in a church 20 years and now is gay. There are a good percentage of them that will attest to this.
http://adam4d.com/selective-inerrancy/
October 21, 2015 - I cut and pasted your URL and read the seemingly logical cartoon and its reasoning. Don't you see that it illustrates the exact point I am trying to make and have been making in recent posts regarding taking your religion too seriously and hurting the cause of Christ? I'll keep it as short and simple as possible. It IS absolutely logical to place one's trust in Christ, based on scripture, the same as it was the day you or I accepted Christ as our savior. Someone shared selected passages, and we "understood/believed/agreed" that we are sinners, that God provided salvation and he did so through Christ. We made an act of faith by accepting those passages as truth. HOWEVER, there was no mention that I had to also believe in tithing, or the transformation of the wine into actual blood, or the bread into Christ's body to eat, and if you aren't a Catholic, neither do you. You also don't believe or practice verses regarding stoning your disobedient child. Or killing homosexuals. Or talking donkeys, or the sun rotating around the earth. Or only virgins being able to marry. So, I can believe in Christ without HAVING to believe the rest. (if you really can, and do, believe EVERYTHING in it, that's okay with me, just don't make it a requirement for ME.) By indicating that a reasonable, thinking, logical person MUST believe it ALL, you drive people away from the message of the gospel that you and I accepted in faith. I hope this makes sense. Let's not keeping telling people they can't logically accept Christ as Savior unless they believe in talking donkeys or killing homosexuals.
Post a Comment