I want to go back to the ‘50s to berate the post war town planners in the UK, as the saying goes at least the Luftwaffe had the decency to replace our buildings with nothing uglier than rubble.
Part of me wonders if this is just me getting older and well into the "back in my day" stage of life when I worry that things are getting significantly worse. But it really feels like this poor country is in a serious backward arc and I'm genuinely worried for my kids.
Actual Christian here. This decision is not extreme, whatsoever, though I get that it appears extreme to non-believers and feminists. The thing to understand here is that Christians follow the Bible. And conversely, those who do not follow the Bible are not Christian. So let's take a look at a relevant Bible passage (1 Timothy 2:11-12):
Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
Now that's the word of God. It's eternal, unchanging, and dictates how He wills us to live.
It's definitely out-of-step with modern secular culture, and that's a very good thing from the Christian perspective. We are God's peculiar people (Titus 2:11-15).
It's argued that Paul didn't write Timothy 1. But beyond that, Paul was a false prophet, who took the good work of Jesus and twisted it into his own religion. I often ask Christians who they follow: Jesus or Paul?
Do you think Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, Mormons, Scientologists, etc should question their most sacred doctrines? I assume you think they're incorrect about what they believe, and questioning their faith would open them up to the truth, right?
If you then think that you shouldn't question your faith, isn't that a bit of a double standard? If you've got the truth, after all, it should have greater and clearer explanatory power than anything else, and, therefore, questioning it will only result in understandable, clear answers that strengthen your faith rather than weaken it.
I was raised an atheist and didn't find Christ until adulthood. So I am quite familiar with dismissing Christianity and any other religion for a variety of reasons.
Incidentally, I was also nihilistic and depressed for all those years, but I can only identify that in retrospect, because at the time, living in secular culture, the nihilism and depression just seemed like the normal way of being for people.
I'm a Christian because I know without a doubt in my heart that Christ is real, and He really is the way, the truth, and the life.
I suppose I'm a former actual Christian, raised in the church, homeschooled K-12, not SBC but not unfamiliar with it. Point is, I know enough to know that modern Christianity is the accumulation of a series of compromises, concessions, and reinterpretations of the eternal Word of God over the centuries.
Interpreted literally, that passage also outlaws woman from teaching even Sunday School, much less my mom from Home Schooling me. Certainly I should have been in authority over her by the time I was, what, 13?
So basically, I appreciate and respect the perspective, but I'm not entirely buying it as a rational explanation for this.
Thank you for being respectful! I can't claim my interpretation of scripture is any better than yours or anyone else's. I get your point, truly. But my point is just that the SBC's decision is firmly rooted in scripture, and that makes it a pretty normal decision for a Christian organization to make. If you wish to interpret that passage differently, nobody's going to stop you, and I'm sure you're not alone. But at the same time, you can understand the SBC's perspective.
but I’m not entirely buying it as a rational explanation for this.
This literally could go for anything in the Bible. As the person said, the Bible is the word of God, Christians follow the Bible without questioning the word of God. It is, inherently, not based on rational, it is based on Authority.
This sort of nonsensical thinking has poisoned human minds for long enough. It is a waste of human potential. Now that it's finally fading into irrelevance, I say good riddance.
It’s definitely out-of-step with modern secular culture, and that’s a very good thing from the Christian perspective. We are God’s peculiar people (Titus 2:11-15).
People are well aware of the 'why' behind these types of decisions. There's a reason Christianity is considered abhorrently sexist by a huge number of people.
It's definitely out-of-step with modern secular culture, and that's a very good thing from the Christian perspective
I assume you think slavery should be reinstated as well, since the new testament tells slaves to obey their earthly masters?
I's the words of many men claiming they know what God says. The divinity of Christ wasn't even decided on the church until the 4th century during council sessions like that of Nicea.
This is the primary lens which so many who prosthelize are happy to ignore. The words in the Bible are words written by humans over centuries. It is an iterative document which is still being tweaked by people, and to claim that any part of it is the untarnished word of God is to ignore the fact that humans are terribly fallible.
The Bible was written with a Human agenda, and the faith which organized religion fetishizes is more correctly described as faith in the humans who represent their words as of divine origin. It is a faith that the human representation of a divine will is correct, and that those who claim to speak with divine authority have no incentive to misrepresent reality in exchange for positions of power, status, and wealth.
The sheer number of abuses made in the name of divinity, all ascribing to speak with the will of the single divine truth, make it incredibly obvious to anyone not indoctrinated that if 99.9% of religions are bunk by virtue of their own definition (this religion is true and others are not), the chance that 100% are is pretty high, and the chance that any truth which may have been heard is not twisted is so small as to not be worth considering.
I think even from a christian perspective the right thing to do wouldnt be to just accept a collection of scriptures as absolute truths (or to be precise the exact interpretation of those scriptures by the leaders of the group they happened to get into).
If you dont examine your beliefs with regard to historic evidence, and critical thinking you would have no way of knowing if there was some work by people (or if you believe in that even satan) when the current biblical canon was set up or when jewish tradition formed the old testament, etc.
Church leaders obviously dont talk about this that much, but being a follower of jesus and a good christian doesnt require one tho view the whole bible and one specific reading of it as a unified work of truth.
I dont know your exact stance on this topic, but in my experience there are too many people that dont examine the way current day teachings of their community got formed throughout history and just treat it like if god revealed it himself to them here and now.
If you happen to be interested here is a video by a yewish guy (though he views the bible from a historical viewpoint not in an orthodox way) exploring what we currently know about the bible: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KqSkXmFun14
Hope i didnt sound disrespectful, i just like when discourse makes us revise our deeper beliefs.
Thank you for staying respectful! I've opened that video, but at 2.5 hours, even at high speed that's a challenge. If I love it, then I'll watch it all. I'm writing this reply before having watched any of it, though.
Are you familiar with the Karaite Jews? They reject the Midrash and the Talmud, standing in stark contrast to Rabbinic Judaism, and taking an approach close to Jesus's values (though they'd probably never admit that). They actually read scripture, and strive to interpret it intelligently.
I do agree with you in principle that it's good to do that, and I know Jesus does too. That doesn't mean established beliefs are wrong, necessarily, but it's always good to consider that they might be. You can certainly find historical and contemporary examples where self-professed Christians didn't / don't follow the Bible.
With all of that said, while I am somewhat open-minded, I do accept the holy Bible as the word of God, and I believe all extra-biblical historical documents, like the Apocrypha, only serve to reinforce its truth. What precisely that truth means, in detail, we may argue about, and Lord knows many do.
And in any case, this is all about SBC more than myself. Their interpretation of scripture is fairly literal and straight-forward. So while obviously some disagree with them, they can hardly be blamed for being a Christian group who follows the Bible.
Is that your version of "kill 'em all and let God sort it out"? No, I don't "prohibit" anything. My point was just that this is a Christian organization following the Bible, which is to be expected of them.
Hiding behind some text that was written by uneducated morons more than a thousand years ago does not give you justification. What the bible is stating that is illegal in most western countries, and rightly so imo. This forum has stated that it does not want that sort of chatter. Just give the forum the respect it deserves.
I grew up in a church that was consciously literalist and held the Bible as inerrant. I'm no longer religious, but looking back with the blinders of those doctrines on, I have to wonder if I might still be a believer if those ideas hadn't been drilled into me.
Let's not even mention that weird bit of erotic literature that's tucked into the middle for some reason (and don't try to sell me on the idea that "Your breasts are like two fawns, twins of a gazelle" is a metaphor for anything other than really nice boobs)...
Then, on the other side of the coin, you have the letters of Paul where, when you look at it without bias, it's plainly clear that he's a religious conservative trying to pull the radical early church back into line with his own personal mores. Small wonder that hundreds of years later, when the church was The Church and falling into conservative patterns of orthodoxy, they picked the epistles they did to canonize as The Complete and Unerring Word of God...
What a well-written, intelligent, and respectful rebuttal. Thank you.
I really wish the message of Jesus, exactly as you described it, was better understood by all of the anti-Christians. It's a seriously good message, yet so many people want to hate on it without giving it a chance.
As for the Old Testament, I'm continually blown away by how much of it foreshadows Jesus, His ministry, and His apostles. The number of times this happens is far too great for me to count, though I'm sure some biblical scholars have attempted to do so. Having grown up in the church, and clearly having read the good book, you may well be more familiar than I am with all of the foreshadowing, as I'm a convert who was raised atheist and didn't find God until my 30s. I still have a lot of catching up to do, and I'm sure I always will. But suffice it to say, there's foreshadowing through and through.
Before Christ, we made God's work more difficult. Humanity wasn't wholly ready to follow Him. Abraham and his descendants were, at least they were enough to form a series of binding covenants. But until we were ready to receive Christ, God did what needed to be done to lead His first non-begotten son to the point when Christ could successfully arrive. And that, I believe, explains why the OT played out the way it did.
As for twin roe deer, I have no doubt God appreciates the form of a woman. Otherwise He'd not have made her look as He did, and He'd not have predicated our entire civilization upon marital intimacy.
As for the scripture that we now consider canonical, do you really think God had no hand in the Church's selection? I find it implausible that He'd take the effort to inspire various works of scripture, but then leave their canonicalization unguided.
also even Christians can't agree on what it means--do you know how many fucking schisms Christianity has? (and don't ask about the one which created the Southern Baptists...)
We're still trying to learn our lesson from the Tower of Babel. It's a work in progress. All of the disagreements, though, are over relatively minor details. If you read statements of faith from various churches, you see they're basically all the same in the essentials.
The ability of women to hold leadership positions in the church they are members of might seem like a minor detail to you, but it probably doesn't seem minor to the women who feel called by God to lead and are told by men that, actually they are pretty certain God said they can't.
The Apocrypha are considered canon by some, but not by all. The question is whether or not they're God's inspired word. In any case they're good reading for those who want some biblical details to be more fleshed-out.
The concept that you seem to be failing to grasp -- and I can't blame you because it escaped me as a Christian as well -- is that these are rules that you are welcome to follow. Your religion tells you what you can and can't do. You can make that choice. The problem comes when you try to apply that to anyone else who doesn't accept it. Your religion's rules don't apply to me, because I'm not part of your religion.
I'm willing to coexist with Christians. But that coexistence has to go both ways.
I was raised an atheist and didn't find Christ until adulthood, so I do grasp that it's all voluntary. I also recognize that you can't force anyone to be Christian against their will.
So on those points we agree. Where we differ is that I firmly believe my God is your God, and neither of us could ever change that, no matter how much we may want to. Christ came to save all people, with a focus on those who need it most. So yes, Christianity does apply to you, even though you don't want it to.
I fully understand your "get off my back" perspective, honestly. Telling someone else how to think or what to do is a remarkably terrible way to make friends. I'm not here to be a jerk. Promise. I know you're going to do what you're going to do, irrespective of me. I only want to take every chance I can get to give testimony of my own experiences with God, and to follow the Great Commission for anyone who actually cares to let a seed get planted.
So does that mean we can coexist? I certainly hope so, but I recognize you may think I'm overbearing.
Hey i think it would be best if you could keep any proselytising to a Christian Curious specific community. A lot of us have deconstructed but still bear the scars of religious trauma so it can lead to hostile conversations that aren't productive for either of us. Giving some objective "this is the verse used to justify this action." and explaining that action without devolving into "My god is your god" is fine.
I fully respect that, and I've created m/Christianity for just that reason. I'm so sorry for whatever religious scars you may bear. I appreciate your respectful explanation.
Where we differ is that I firmly believe my God is your God, and neither of us could ever change that, no matter how much we may want to.
That sounds like a you problem. If your god expects me to believe that it's real, then it's going to need to move itself to prove it. Your testimony isn't sufficient. I've already been there, done that and bought the t-shirt.
So yes, Christianity does apply to you, even though you don’t want it to.
You're entitled to think that's the case. What you think in the privacy of your own head is your business. The moment you think you have the authority (as too many Christians do) to make me follow it is when we have a problem.
I only want to take every chance I can get to give testimony of my own experiences with God, and to follow the Great Commission for anyone who actually cares to let a seed get planted.
And this is why we can't be friends. We've heard the story. We've heard the testimony. We remain unmoved. At this point, the only way to describe this behavior is harassment.
The world has heard the message. Let it go and leave us alone.
So does that mean we can coexist? I certainly hope so, but I recognize you may think I’m overbearing.
Christians in Europe have been highly successful at coexisting with non-Christians without harassing them. You might look into their example.
If you were raised Christian, you should know how much God loves human faith. He would never do anything to deprive us of the challenge of faith, because He knows how healthy it is for us to live on faith. Everything He directs us to do is for our own good. Revealing himself would deny us that opportunity. There will be a second coming, but by then it'll be too late.
Let it go and leave us alone.
You know where to find us when you're ready. Wishing you all the best.
If you were raised Christian, you should know how much God loves human faith. He would never do anything to deprive us of the challenge of faith, because He knows how healthy it is for us to live on faith. Everything He directs us to do is for our own good. Revealing himself would deny us that opportunity. There will be a second coming, but by then it’ll be too late.
The reason I'm no longer a Christian is because I committed the unforgivable sin: I put these claims to the test. There was no answer. No fire from on high to consume the altar. No dove descending from the heavens. No whisper on the wind. Just confirmation bias.
Try to survive on faith and you'll starve quickly. Trying to convince me that your beliefs are true is just going to annoy us both. Mission accomplished.
You know where to find us when you’re ready. Wishing you all the best.
Trust me, I do know where to find you. Until I go looking for you, leave us alone.
Trust me, I do know where to find you. Until I go looking for you, leave us alone.
As someone who was raised in a Calvinistic Baptist sect I second this in the strongest possible terms. If satan himself turned up at my old church the faithful would fall down and worship at his feet because they couldn't tell the difference between him and their god.
What do you expect from an ideology so doggedly sectarian they do mental gymnastics to justify why a loving god would create people predestined for eternal conscious torment in Hell rather than admit they might be wrong?
These people ‘solve’ the problem of evil like a bag and a river solves the problem of too many kittens.
As a former SBC kid, I'm more shocked they would kick out one of their highest grossing businesses out, purely from financial standpoint. Typically, they used to just gloss over this stuff and pretend they didn't know.
I just want to point out that a group of people are gathering to ensure that they don't agree to follow a person that they don't have any obligation to follow anyway.
I unfortunately spent around 15 years in a SBC church growing up. I do believe that is one of the reasons I no longer have anything to do with religion. They are a very hateful bunch.
This is not surprising as SBC membership has been steadily declining and this, alongside the overall decline of Christianity in America, is leaving only the most conservative and extreme views behind. This act will only serve to ensure the decline continues as they are really just digging their own grave.
This is such a great observation that it seems obvious as soon as I read it, but it didn't occur to me at all, especially in the sense you have framed:
The decline of Christianity isn't a dissipation, it's a contraction towards the hard core.
Gaming that out leads to some pretty alarming scenarios, and that's relative to the alarming scenario we are currently living through!
This is why religion is indoctrinated. While I can accept, even while not believing, the argument that spirituality is innate, organized religion is entirely a human construct.
"Spirituality is innate" is such a copout for me. In my opinion, it just means people have an imagination and emotions, but I don't want to admit magic isn't real so I'll call it spirituality.
Yep, spirituality is an emergent property with respect to imagination and a lack of omniscience; if something happens that is not explainable by an individual's knowledge they'll find it easy to come up with an imagined explanation.
This is why earlier religions explained things like the seasons, weather, earthquakes, volcanos, stars, etc through imagined gods while those same, evolved, religions don't attempt to do so anymore. We understand them scientifically now.
Is it useful to view spirituality as makeshift philosophy and psychotherapy? When I pick out the good parts of religion, I see it's not so different to what a stoic or my therapist might say. You can either pray for or visualize positive outcomes and either way it works to ease the mind. Hell, Nietzsche's work has basically a religious conception (the Eternal Return) without claiming absolute authority of reality.
I ask because my Mom focuses on this aspect of her religion rather than dogma. I hope it gives her what she needs.
SBC also voted to affirm the explusions of two churches, including Saddleback Church, which was founded by highly respected author Rick Warren and is one of the largest baptist churches in the country. They claim nearly 25,000 people in weekly attendance. And Warren's books, including "The Purpose-Driven Life," are used all over, including in my then-relatively liberal Lutheran church. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saddleback_Church
They were expelled because a woman acted as a youth pastor.
Wow. That's like kicking the Yankees out of MLB because the league thinks that players should be able to have long hair.
Add comment