TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

What the Bible Says

Go To

TheStarshipMaxima NCC - 1701 Since: Jun, 2009
NCC - 1701
#576: Apr 5th 2012 at 11:32:27 AM

Um, Aon, my point was that while not literally on the subject, it's a bit impossible to argue "What the Bible Says" and not discuss how it's members are viewed, the results of Biblical teaching, and it's future as a shared faith.

If you mean, "keep it civil", well, don't worry. We will.grin

edited 5th Apr '12 11:33:08 AM by TheStarshipMaxima

It was an honor
shimaspawn from Here and Now Since: May, 2010 Relationship Status: In your bunk
#577: Apr 5th 2012 at 11:35:13 AM

@Starship, did you watch the video I linked? The guy has actually do the research on it. The Bible supports gay marriage more than it condemns homosexuality.

Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick
TheStarshipMaxima NCC - 1701 Since: Jun, 2009
NCC - 1701
#578: Apr 5th 2012 at 11:43:10 AM

[up] His "research" relies on a lot of conjecture and interpretation. Yes, yes, I know, so do my views.

But still. I'm actually watching it now on another screen. Like I said, my views on this whole thing is in progress.

It was an honor
feotakahari Fuzzy Orange Doomsayer from Looking out at the city Since: Sep, 2009
Fuzzy Orange Doomsayer
#579: Apr 5th 2012 at 12:13:57 PM

I don't really consider the pain it's caused a reasonable argument against its existence. This is however because I place absolutely no faith in humans not to treat each other like that even without religion.

While I agree with this, I do think there are certain ways religion can be used to influence people. If it can be used to make them do good in the world more than it can be used to make them do bad, it's not a net loss, even if it's not necessarily a net win, either. This is why I support whatever interpretation of religion would lead to the most good in the world, even when I don't personally agree that the people who wrote the holy books meant things to be that way.

(One problem with this, of course, is that it seems that religion by its very existence acts as an enabler for the sin of pride. If its doctrines explicitly condemn pride, many people will simply ignore those doctrines, while still honestly believing and loudly proclaiming that the reason for their superiority is that they follow all the doctrines!)

edited 5th Apr '12 12:16:20 PM by feotakahari

That's Feo . . . He's a disgusting, mysoginistic, paedophilic asshat who moonlights as a shitty writer—Something Awful
TheStarshipMaxima NCC - 1701 Since: Jun, 2009
NCC - 1701
#580: Apr 5th 2012 at 12:28:32 PM

If its doctrines explicitly condemn pride, many people will simply ignore those doctrines, while still honestly believing and loudly proclaiming that the reason for their superiority is that they follow all the doctrines!

What?!

It was an honor
Lawyerdude Citizen from my secret moon base Since: Jan, 2001
Citizen
#581: Apr 5th 2012 at 1:18:46 PM

As in, "I'm a sinner, but at least I admit it, unlike those infidels who don't accept Jesus. And because I admit it, Jesus forgives my sins. I'm a million times more humble than they are!"

After all, if it's a sin, but Jesus died to wash away your sins, it sure would be a waste if you didn't go out and commit some, right?

edited 5th Apr '12 1:19:15 PM by Lawyerdude

What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly.
TheStarshipMaxima NCC - 1701 Since: Jun, 2009
NCC - 1701
#582: Apr 5th 2012 at 1:21:12 PM

After all, if it's a sin, but Jesus died to wash away your sins, it sure would be a waste if you didn't go out and commit some, right?

That would be a horrific thought.

Paul asked, "Should we sin so that grace may abound?? God forbid!"

It was an honor
abstractematics Since: May, 2011
#583: Apr 5th 2012 at 1:23:28 PM

I would just like to say, how much of the posts here so far actually stuck to "What the Bible says"? I thought it was supposed to be about taking specific passages and interpreting them.

Now using Trivialis handle.
Boredman from the divided circus tent of america (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
#584: Apr 5th 2012 at 1:34:10 PM

I think it should be said that one can be a Christian without considering the Bible to be the absolute truth. For example, my dad is a non-denominational Christian, but his sense of morality is determined mostly independently from the Bible, and he interprets many sections metaphorically. After all, Christianity, at its core, is based on Jesus of Nazareth, not the Bible itself.

edited 5th Apr '12 1:34:38 PM by Boredman

TheStarshipMaxima NCC - 1701 Since: Jun, 2009
NCC - 1701
#585: Apr 5th 2012 at 1:37:31 PM

And yet Lawyerdude, I know personally of the type of people you're referring to.

I cannot overstate just how false that idea is. Perhaps I can't speak for all, but..when I started trying to be a serious Christian and I came face to face with all the things I failed at...I couldn't conceive of being all "Oh, those poor little kiddies" when I couldn't wash all the blood off my own hands.

It was an honor
LMage Since: May, 2011
#586: Apr 5th 2012 at 1:38:02 PM

@Bore

I think of that if Christianity wants to survive in the modern age, and I am talking in much wider terms here then the next few years or even decades, but in the next few generations, that this will have to become the primary mindset of Christians world wide. If it does not, people who are taking more and more moral issue with the Bible will simply dismiss Christianity as a whole, until their follows dwindle into non-relevance.

edited 5th Apr '12 2:21:24 PM by LMage

pagad Sneering Imperialist from perfidious Albion Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: Showing feelings of an almost human nature
Sneering Imperialist
#587: Apr 5th 2012 at 1:49:13 PM

But if you choose to join a church, you are REQUIRED to believe certain things that are set out in its official doctrines. If you do not, then you have no business being a member. Period.

This is ridiculous. You honestly think the churches never change because of internal pressures? Churches aren't monoliths. Internal dissent can and DOES change attitudes within them.

Honestly, I feel sorry for Starship here, because I think he is being unfairly dogpiled - and I'm as antitheistic as they come.

With cannon shot and gun blast smash the alien. With laser beam and searing plasma scatter the alien to the stars.
Lawyerdude Citizen from my secret moon base Since: Jan, 2001
Citizen
#588: Apr 5th 2012 at 1:54:05 PM

Internal dissent can and DOES change attitudes within them.

Do they? Do churches change their doctrine based on ther own internal dissent, or do they do it in response to society at large? Has any Christian church changed its teachings based on their own biblical reading and reflection before society at large has?

Or to put it another way, has there been a time in history where churches have liberalized their beliefs, based on their own Bible readings, before society at large has?

Change doesn't exist in a vacuum, after all. Something has to cause a church to sit back and say, "Maybe what we've been doing for the past several centuries isn't what we should be doing."

(I am honestly trying hard to stay on-topic here.)

edited 5th Apr '12 2:00:44 PM by Lawyerdude

What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly.
Boredman from the divided circus tent of america (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
#589: Apr 5th 2012 at 2:00:06 PM

It's a bit hard to define exactly when society at large mostly supports something, since we're talking about an entire country full of diverse backgrounds and beliefs.

pagad Sneering Imperialist from perfidious Albion Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: Showing feelings of an almost human nature
Sneering Imperialist
#590: Apr 5th 2012 at 2:01:01 PM

[up][up] Given that for large tracts of history society and the church were more-or-less interchangeable, do you think they have never done so? How do you account for liberal thought and liberal factions within churches?

edited 5th Apr '12 2:02:44 PM by pagad

With cannon shot and gun blast smash the alien. With laser beam and searing plasma scatter the alien to the stars.
Lawyerdude Citizen from my secret moon base Since: Jan, 2001
Citizen
#591: Apr 5th 2012 at 2:03:15 PM

OK. For example, did the Lutheran Church repudiate Martin Luther's virulently anti-Jewish statements in the 1980s and 1990s based on their understanding of the Bible? Or did they do it in response to what had happened to the Jews in Europe?

Did the Southern Baptists apologize for their support of slavery and racism in 1995 based on their understanding of the Bible or the realization that they couldn't survive as a white supremacist organization for long?

As far as factions go, if you are in a time and place where there is no religious freedom, and where church and state are pretty much the same, then you don't have much of a choice as to which direction to go to pursue positive change. On the other hand, why people would willingly choose to remain in a church that they didn't agree with, I have no idea.

edited 5th Apr '12 2:07:27 PM by Lawyerdude

What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly.
TheStarshipMaxima NCC - 1701 Since: Jun, 2009
NCC - 1701
#592: Apr 5th 2012 at 2:07:09 PM

Honestly, I feel sorry for Starship here, because I think he is being unfairly dogpiled - and I'm as antitheistic as they come.

Thanks bro. But, I'm being not dogpiled. I willingly swore primary allegiance to the way of The Christ, it was never done to gain acceptance from anyone else. And like I said, I believe that Lawyer and Mage's (and others) objections aren't with Christianity but with some of the heinous things that have been done under the banner. And in this I'm in agreement with them.

I think of that if Christianity wants to survive in the modern age, an I am talking in much wider terms here then the next few years or even decades, but in the next few generations, that this will have to become the primary mindset of Christians world wide. If it does not, people who are taking more and more moral issue with the Bible will simply dismiss Christianity as a whole, until their follows dwindle into non-relevance.

True points Mage. Thing is though, true Christians don't really give a shit about all that. We don't care if our numbers are 20 million or just 20. We don't care about relevance. We don't care if we're a niche group like Firefly fans.

We only care insofar as we want our religious freedom. I don't want somebody to trace my online activity to this TV Tropes discussion and fire me for believing homosexuality is wrong.

Past that point, I couldn't care less. I'm here to live my life, do good for my fellow man, and hopefully make peace with my creator. The rest, to quote Solomon, is vanity.

Or to put it another way, has there been a time in history where churches have liberalized their beliefs, based on their own Bible readings, before society at large has?

Going back to the very start of the country you had Christians who loudly decried slavery based on the fact it offended their Christian beliefs. That's one example.

You'd be surprised by the amount of Christians that fought for the right thing long before it was hip because they felt it was right before God and man.

It was an honor
pagad Sneering Imperialist from perfidious Albion Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: Showing feelings of an almost human nature
Sneering Imperialist
#593: Apr 5th 2012 at 2:07:45 PM

[up][up] You're framing it as things the churches could only ever renege on because of societal pressures, without accepting the possibility that they reneged on it because members of the churches realised that these things were wrong. You're presupposing one conclusion without taking into account any other.

If people believe that a position that their organisation - if it is one that they otherwise passionately believe in - takes is wrong, I do not believe their first action would be to immediately give up on it as a lost cause. I believe they would try and change it from within.

edited 5th Apr '12 2:10:48 PM by pagad

With cannon shot and gun blast smash the alien. With laser beam and searing plasma scatter the alien to the stars.
Lawyerdude Citizen from my secret moon base Since: Jan, 2001
Citizen
#594: Apr 5th 2012 at 2:11:22 PM

[up] Not at all. I do acknowledge the possibility. What I want to know is if the possibility is true.

What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly.
pagad Sneering Imperialist from perfidious Albion Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: Showing feelings of an almost human nature
Sneering Imperialist
#595: Apr 5th 2012 at 2:12:53 PM

But you're not giving the possibility a chance. You said it yourself, you believe if the members don't agree with a church, they should leave rather than try to change it.

With cannon shot and gun blast smash the alien. With laser beam and searing plasma scatter the alien to the stars.
TheStarshipMaxima NCC - 1701 Since: Jun, 2009
NCC - 1701
#596: Apr 5th 2012 at 2:15:37 PM

And I see my point about early abolitionists is ignored. Ah well....

My point is, no Christians don't just do the right thing when it is 'in' to do so.

Sometimes, they lead they charge. Sometimes, they stand alone on moral principles, even to the death.

It was an honor
pagad Sneering Imperialist from perfidious Albion Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: Showing feelings of an almost human nature
Sneering Imperialist
#597: Apr 5th 2012 at 2:19:41 PM

Dammit, Starship, I was trying to convince Lawyerdude that churches aren't unchanging monoliths, not ignoring you tongue

With cannon shot and gun blast smash the alien. With laser beam and searing plasma scatter the alien to the stars.
Lawyerdude Citizen from my secret moon base Since: Jan, 2001
Citizen
#598: Apr 5th 2012 at 2:22:34 PM

You said it yourself, you believe if the members don't agree with a church, they should leave rather than try to change it.

I said that's what I did, and that I couldn't understand why somebody would stay in if they didn't agree.

@Starship: I wasn't ignoring your bit about abolitionists. But how many of them took up abolition because of what the Bible said, as opposed to reaching an anti-slavery position first, and then using the Bible to back up their beliefs?

What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly.
TheStarshipMaxima NCC - 1701 Since: Jun, 2009
NCC - 1701
#599: Apr 5th 2012 at 2:25:32 PM

Damn, my bad. [lol]

Nvm, I read it again.

I'm not sure Lawyerdude, I can't poll the 17th and 18th century church. To be honest, most...devout...Christians don't want to be influenced by outside pressures. The belief that the right thing is the right thing, not the popular thing, etc.

With that said, in my experience, it wasn't the current rise in political and popular influence of the LGBT community that fuels my tolerance, it was a direct result of the Bible as I understood it.

Not being a dick seems to be the a base requirement for the faith.

edited 5th Apr '12 2:28:10 PM by TheStarshipMaxima

It was an honor
DeMarquis (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
#600: Apr 5th 2012 at 2:30:56 PM

Lawyerdude is changing the goalposts. Originally he wanted to claim that what the man in video was doing (presenting a pro-gay argument in a church) was futile because Christians never change their mind. Now he wants to argue that they never change their mind except in response to outside influences. Which, you know, was exactly what the man in the video represents.

As for changing one's mind based only on what one reads in the Bible, that isn't relevant if one isn't a fundamentalist. As a traditional, humanitarian Christian I don't regard the Bible as the sole source of spiritual truth. Nor is church doctrine. God speaks to us through the Bible, and the church, but also from other sources, including my own inner conscience and the insights of other people.

Lawyerdude, you appear befuddled regarding why anyone would believe in a religion they regard as less than perfect, or why anyone would hold religious beliefs that they acknowledge may require change over time.

As for specific verses, here's a very relevant one: Jn 4:12 "No man hath seen God at any time. If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us."

With serious implications for those who would take the bible literally, or place any commandment before "love thy neighbor".

edited 5th Apr '12 2:34:43 PM by DeMarquis

I'm done trying to sound smart. "Clear" is the new smart.

Total posts: 795
Top