Forums on i.UCC are devoted to introductions, prayer, Bible study, spiritual conversation and questions about the United Church of Christ. To participate, please register or log in as a user. Your registration information will be confidential, and we'll send you no unsolicited emails.  Register
Log in
|
| You are not authorized to post a reply.
|
|
| Author |
Messages |
|
Stekala
Posts:46
 |
| 04/27/2007 4:49 PM |
|
Please re-consider your position, as it is doing much more than rejecting Paul's words, but God's Word
Ben, I can say nothing more than that I just don't believe they are God's Word. I just don't. As I mentioned before, there are a number of passages in the Bible that I don't agree with. I think there is a great possibility that Paul's words were misconstrued, misinterpreted, mistranslated, etc. I am not going to bring forth the idea that it was a cultural difference, because I too consider these teachings ageless. But speculations aside, at the end of the day I will not attempt to explain away these passages to you. They are, as we understand them, clear and direct; but when I look into my heart, to my conscience, to the place where the Holy Spirit lives in me, I cannot reconcile such a philosophy.
I must say, your total interpretation of the Biblically prescibed roles and value of husbands and wives is rather generous for a literal approach. If I could find a man like Jesus Christ, indeed I would strive to be a submissive wife! But alas, I have yet to meet such a man...No man on earth is perfect as Christ is, and thus, I cannot trust in any man as I do in Christ. Telling women to submit to their husbands as men do to Christ is absolutely rediculous, and almost blasphemous (e.g. "Let no man call another Father" - i do not recall the location of this passage, but I will hunt it down...). A similar idea can be found in Harriet Beecher Stowe's "Uncle Tom's Cabin." Tom is a servant of CHRIST by choice, and of MAN by injustice. We humans are fallible - both men and women, so what praytell makes men more capable of saving women's souls as Christ did? Christ came as a perfect human to a sinning people to teach them the way. No man on earth can do this. I refuse to live in inherent submission to a husband or any other fallible human. I belong to God and God alone.
And thus, if it must be that a part of the Bible teaches otherwise, I openly break with that part of the Bible. I do so not with shame or pride. I see no evidence in Jesus' words (the few that were recorded) that support these claims I break with. As I understand it, the message of Christ defies it in every way.
Thank you for this new facet of the conversation. I think it is a very important one, that ought to be considered carefully in these discussions of the inerrency of the Bible.
With Love, Kathy |
|
"The shackles are undone/The bullets quit the gun/The heat that's in the sun..will keep us when there's none
The rule has been disproved/ The stone it has been moved/ The grave is now a groove/ All debts are removed" - "Window in the Skies" - U2 (third world debt relief - visit www.jubileeusa.org) |
|
|
bstritesky
Posts:41
|
| 04/27/2007 5:42 PM |
|
I will add more at a later time, but I must say this now:
The analogy between Christ and the church and the husband and wife is an an analogy. Therefore, when it says for the woman to submit to the man as the church does to Christ, it does not mean that the woman is to submit to the man as if he were Christ himself. The man is clearly not deserving of total worship and devotion--Christ is. But with the analogy, the relationship is quite similar, but both husband and wife are to have ultimate devotion to no one else but Jesus Christ, above their earthly relationships. |
|
Isa 40:8 The grass withers, the flower fades, but the word of our God will stand forever. |
|
|
jimk
Posts:35
|
| 04/27/2007 9:54 PM |
|
| Ben,
I'll pray for your tormented soul.
Jim |
|
|
|
|
Stekala
Posts:46
|
| 04/27/2007 10:40 PM |
|
Actually, I'm not arguing a point here, just curious as to what you mean...
Therefore, when it says for the woman to submit to the man as the church does to Christ, it does not mean that the woman is to submit to the man as if he were Christ himself. The man is clearly not deserving of total worship and devotion--Christ is. But with the analogy, the relationship is quite similar
I'm just wondering what you meant. How is the relationship similar? The Ephesians passage clearly says women should submit to their husbands as men do to Christ, so...they SHOULD treat their husbands as men do Christ ("total worship and devotion"), but they SHOULDN'T worship them as Christ?
I'm sorry, I'm sure that's not exactly what you meant to express, I'm just a bit confused. Thanks! |
|
"The shackles are undone/The bullets quit the gun/The heat that's in the sun..will keep us when there's none
The rule has been disproved/ The stone it has been moved/ The grave is now a groove/ All debts are removed" - "Window in the Skies" - U2 (third world debt relief - visit www.jubileeusa.org) |
|
|
bstritesky
Posts:41
|
| 04/28/2007 12:26 AM |
|
To Pastor: I hope I'm not treating her unfairly; please let me know if I am, Kathy or anyone.
Paul wrote both 1 Timothy 2 and Romans 5, so I don't think it is much of an issue that these appear to say something different than each other. He was basically describing the same event from different perspectives. In the one (1 Tim 2), Paul is mentioning the act, the sequence of events, where Eve was the one who was deceived by the snake; Adam was not. But yet both sinned in doing so, and Paul makes clear in Romans 5 that it was because of Adam's sin that all persons inherit a sin nature.
If I am skirting something, please point out what it is; these texts do not present a great challenge to my viewpoint, are easy to address, and seem to be distracting issues from the main point of this discussion. If I am right in the main point about salvation through Christ alone, my point is is that you will have a great deal to explain at the judgment seat; as a result of your view, I should still be fine even if I continue believing the way I do.
I don't say these things in a condescending or as a retort, please don't see them in this way. I am just very concerned about dismissing divinely-inspired Scripture which has everything to do with eternity. The weight of eternity and judgment has not had enough weight in this whole discussion.
So would you address these texts as a whole that I have given many posts above pertaining to salvation being through Christ alone? I want to hear you speak honestly as Kathy has, so that we can have a good discussion. Do you agree that these texts are in my favor? They clearly present a case for it. So then it is a matter of disagreeing with Scripture, an issue we can address next. I want to keep this discussion with an air of humility and kindness, for these are not matters to be discussed in a hasty, unthinking, or overly-emotional manner.
To Stekala: I was a bit hasty in writing my last post because I was ready to go to work. By similar, I mean that there is a correlation in roles between Christ and husbands, and the church and wives. Both Christ and the husband have a role of authority (a word which now has near-swear-word connotations) over their respective "wives."
The wife of Christ is the Church, and he has authority over her, and the church must submit to the Lordship of Christ, letting Him and His Word rule all our thinking and doing, so that He might be glorified and we presented as a spotless bride for Him at the Marriage Supper of the Lamb in heaven.
The wife of a husband is, of course, the wife. The husband has Scripture-bounded authority over her; he is not a dictator, an authoritarian, but a servant-leader who loves his wife and gives himself up for her so that he might mirror the love and giving up of himself that Christ has shown to the church. Likewise the wife ought to respond in loving submission, which is the delight of her heart, since the husband's love is motivating him to lead and to serve her so that she might become more like Christ.
Everything in the earthly husband and wife relationship is designed to be a mirror of what Christ is to the church. Christ loved the church and gave Himself up for her; husbands must be willing to do the same for their wives. This is the point of Ephesians 5, is that God is glorified when we seek to conform ourselves to His will in all things. It should give us the greatest joy, too, in obeying and conforming ourselves to what His Word says regarding our many different kinds of relationships (to our boss, to people we don't know, to our children, to husband, etc.). This is why God gave His Word to us, so we could live lives of godliness and Christlikeness in accordance with His Word. We would have highly misguided concepts of love if it were not for the words of Scripture.
I hope this is helpful!
To JimK: Please refrain from this short, emotional kind of post, as it really does not help facilitate discussion, and I cannot address anything which is causing you to say what you have about me. According to your view, I am a very loving person, I love others, and am concerned that they be happy in God through Jesus Christ. Speaking in light of your posts, I should be fine for eternity. What's the rub?
Again, thanks everyone for this illuminating discussion. As Christ made a line in the sand, we need to do so here as well. We're not discussing favorite cereals or ice cream flavors, we're talking about matters of eternity. |
|
Isa 40:8 The grass withers, the flower fades, but the word of our God will stand forever. |
|
|
jimk
Posts:35
|
| 04/28/2007 4:24 PM |
|
| I apologize Ben. We do agree on one thing now. That is that my last comment to you was an inappropriate barb.
Its just that your perspective catalogues for me just about all the things I think plague Chistianity. If what you said was really the message of Jesus, I’d leave the church tomorrow.
You talk about how important it is to “draw lines in the sand.” Did the father draw a line in the sand, when the Prodigal Son came home? Did he expect a show of contrition or a confession. No. Actually he rushed out to embrace him. Why is that? If drawing lines and hearing a proper confession are so important, then why didn’t the father pause to draw attention to the possibility of exclusion? Why didn’t he first want to hear his son’s confession? Could it be that this story is about a God/father who is circumventing the whole legal process in order to embrace his child?
You know, I was redeemed by the love of people who just opened up their hearts to me and extended what the UCC calls “extravagant welcome.” They weren’t waiting for a confession in order to embrace me as one of the family.
But what you do repeatedly is determine whether someone is in or out, then condescend to share with them your ideas about what it takes to be an insider, warn them that the consequences will be serious if they don’t comply and then imagine all the while that what you are doing is an act of love and concern.
I think your approach is sorely misguided.
Jim
|
|
|
|
|
bstritesky
Posts:41
|
| 04/28/2007 5:18 PM |
|
Dear JimK,
In all due respect, your view leads to something that is distinctly non-Christian. I'm not promulgating a gnostic-like Christianity, but a Christianity that is faithful to the Bible. Christ is not at the center of your Christianity, but your perception of a God who loves without any distinctions. As I have said before, God is indeed a God of love, but He is also holy and just and must punish sin. We all need to see ourselves as desperate sinners in need of wholly divine cleansing. In this parable it needs to be taken into consideration that the son had disowned his old way of life and the father knew it already in his coming home. This parable is not ultimately about sinners returning, for the great majority of this parable is meant to picture the Christian/Jewish distinction, where the prodigal son represents the non-Jewish Gentile believers who were called sons through Jesus Christ, and the jealousy that the Jews felt towards them was pictured in the person of the jealous brother.
But besides this, I do not seek to be condescending or setting up any barriers that Christ himself does not set up. Jesus said that He Himself was a stumbling block to many. And barriers isn't even a good name, because there really are none. All who desire to come to Christ may, but they must hear the gospel, otherwise they cannot exercise faith in Him. I didn't invent this as the master of a secret club; the Bible shows this clearly. That's why we are meant to call all persons to be reconciled to God through Christ:
2Corinthians 5:18-21 All this is from God, who through Christ reconciled us to himself and gave us the ministry of reconciliation; (19) that is, in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting to us the message of reconciliation. (20) Therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ, God making his appeal through us. We implore you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God. (21) For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.
Reconciliation implies a previous enmity and opposition from God toward those who are sinners -- everyone. But God sent His sinless Son Jesus Christ to reconcile persons to Himself, to make the impure pure, and the unclean clean, by the precious blood of His Son. The book of Hebrews is so saturated with this beautiful imagery, and it shows clearly how there can be no Christianity without Christ and his cross at the center. |
|
Isa 40:8 The grass withers, the flower fades, but the word of our God will stand forever. |
|
|
bstritesky
Posts:41
|
| 04/28/2007 5:31 PM |
|
I think it's appropriate to set forth one of my favorite hymns, "There is a Fountain Filled with Blood" by William Cowper. It is a hymn about the precious uniqueness of Jesus and what He accomplished on the cross, and how it is free to all who will come to that Fountain. All our sins are washed away by faith in Christ Jesus! It's at no physical cost, but a life given over to the King of Kings and Lord of Lords. This is the song that no doubt will be sung by saints in heaven. Is this your song? Is this how you see Jesus Christ?
There is a fountain filled with blood drawn from Emmanuel’s veins;
And sinners plunged beneath that flood lose all their guilty stains.
Lose all their guilty stains, lose all their guilty stains;
And sinners plunged beneath that flood lose all their guilty stains.
The dying thief rejoiced to see that fountain in his day;
And there have I, though vile as he, washed all my sins away.
Washed all my sins away, washed all my sins away;
And there have I, though vile as he, washed all my sins away.
Dear dying Lamb, Thy precious blood shall never lose its power
Till all the ransomed church of God be saved, to sin no more.
Be saved, to sin no more, be saved, to sin no more;
Till all the ransomed church of God be saved, to sin no more.
E’er since, by faith, I saw the stream Thy flowing wounds supply,
Redeeming love has been my theme, and shall be till I die.
And shall be till I die, and shall be till I die;
Redeeming love has been my theme, and shall be till I die.
Then in a nobler, sweeter song, I’ll sing Thy power to save,
When this poor lisping, stammering tongue lies silent in the grave.
Lies silent in the grave, lies silent in the grave;
When this poor lisping, stammering tongue lies silent in the grave.
Lord, I believe Thou hast prepared, unworthy though I be,
For me a blood bought free reward, a golden harp for me!
’Tis strung and tuned for endless years, and formed by power divine,
To sound in God the Father’s ears no other name but Thine.
|
|
Isa 40:8 The grass withers, the flower fades, but the word of our God will stand forever. |
|
|
Pastorbogy
Posts:121
|
| 04/28/2007 6:21 PM |
|
Ben, you may not seek to be condescending, but that is the way you come off. You have set yourself up as the final arbiter of the faith. You state it that you are not making judgments, or erecting barriers, but are just pointing out the judgments and barriers Christ made and erected. But your judgments are made on some very flimsy evidence. Anyone who does not agree with your view, your interpretation of scripture, on the most minor point, is in severe danger of going to hell. In your judgment. You really don't know what is at the heart of the faith of people here, but if they don't completely agree with you, you make the condescending judgment that it isn't Jesus. Not your Jesus, anyway. I'm not sure where you got the authority to be the gatekeeper to Jesus. Have you watched the "bouncer" ads of the UCC? We let more people in than you seem to do.
Actually, that brings up my real point. Why are you here? This is meant to be a place where we discuss, share, learn from each other. What have you learned from anyone here? Much has been shared here, but I don't recall a thing that wasn't in harmony with what you already believed that you didn't immediately reject. The original question was about the UCC and our Interfaith relations. Your purpose here doesn't really seem to be one of seeking to learn about interfaith relations, or to share your perspective in a give and take with others. Your purpose seems to be to prove that the UCC's stand on interfaith relations is wrong, and that any form of interfaith relations is sinful. If I am wrong, please correct me. |
|
|
|
|
bstritesky
Posts:41
|
| 04/28/2007 6:39 PM |
|
Pastorbogy:
I by no means see myself to be a gatekeeper to the faith. It does not take a very learned person to read the Bible and come to the very conclusions I have. Like I have said before, I gladly share this faith with so many who would be the last persons on earth I would naturally relate to--but that is the beauty of the body of Christ--persons redeemed from all nations, tongues, and races. What I have stated is the historic view of Christianity up until the Enlightenment era. To modern minds, the gospel seems so offensive, even to those in churches. That is because it is offensive, because it is exclusive by its nature, as the Scripture says, "for those who have faith in Christ Jesus." There are plenty of things I likely could agree with you on outside of issues we have discussed here, but your view of Scripture makes such seeing eye-to-eye very difficult. It's one thing to have debate between two persons who hold Scripture as their ultimate authority, and a whole different story to have debate between one who does and another who does not. It is quite similar to quoting Scripture to an atheist--it really won't convince him unless the Holy Spirit is moving through the words of the gospel message to break his hardened heart. So many of our differences are irreconcilable because of our view of Scripture. If we get it wrong there, we can get it wrong nearly everywhere else. I view Scripture to be God's revelation of Himself to His people, and thus must be handled with due respect and carefulness, not letting our own presuppositions dictate what we want it to say, but handling it rightly, as Paul says. There is a right way to handle Scripture, and I do not claim to possess it anywhere near fully. But again I can make it plain that the church over her history has overwhelmingly been in my favor. It is only recently that the view that all persons deserve favor and good things from God has arisen. By nature, we are all sinners, and the only thing that we deserve is God's just wrath. This is not popular in the public square, nor is it in many UCC churches. Read Romans 1 about the wrath of God. God is both wrathful and loving, neither diminishes the other.
God's wrath is poured out against ungodliness and unrighteousness of men.
Sin produces ungodliness and unrighteousness of men.
All are sinners.
The wages of sin is death.
Christ paid the wages of sin for those who believe in Him.
Believe in Him.
Outside of Him there is no payment for the sin debt we owe.
This is all in harmony with the Bible; it is the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. Thanks be to God that He sent His Son, and that He did not leave us all to perish in our sins. How arrogant of us to think that all persons DESERVE grace; none of us do; but God gave us grace in Christ Jesus and in no other name. This is the gospel. You either believe it or you don't. You embrace Christ or you reject Him. There is no middle ground or way around the cross to get to God. Jesus is the only way. I don't say this out of arrogance, but out of necessity for preaching the truth. Many were offended when Jesus taught this, seeking to stone Him. Paul was beaten, imprisoned, and nearly killed several times for preaching this exclusive gospel. I'd rather be persecuted for preaching this gospel which Jesus and Paul preached than to deny Christ and say "peace peace" to those outside of Christ when there really is no peace for them. |
|
Isa 40:8 The grass withers, the flower fades, but the word of our God will stand forever. |
|
|
bstritesky
Posts:41
|
| 04/28/2007 7:22 PM |
|
And Pastor, to answer your post more fully, I do not believe that having interfaith relations is wrong. It is healthy to be able to understand and live harmoniously with those of other religions. But this doesn't mean that we have to view all religions as equally right. For instance, if Christianity is true (and I believe it to be so), then its claims about Jesus and faith in him are to be taken seriously. To deprive someone of the gospel is to do eternal disservice to that person, because "faith comes by hearing." The truth deserves heralding, and that is what this whole discussion is about: truth. We cannot both be right on this issue; we can both be wrong, but not both right. That is why in interfaith relations it is necessary for Christians to bring the whole Bible to the plate, and say some things that no doubt are offensive to many. Some may see preaching Christ alone as the way to God and salvation as deeply offensive, but that is because the gospel is offensive in its exclusiveness for those on the outside.
Like I've described above, most of the issues we have discussed are non-negotiable first-tier issues; you either believe them and are Christian or disbelieve them and fall outside of Christianity. There may be disagreements over minor theological items on first-tier issues, but to disagree generally with first-tier items is unacceptable for one claiming to be a Christian. I disagree with many brothers in the faith over second-tier issues, which is healthy and good because it produces good discussions flowing from our views of Christ and Scripture. I wouldn't say those who disagree with me in these areas are hell-bound, for they are not. But I begin to question the faith of one who denies that Jesus is the only way to the Father, since it is a first-tier issue. If Christ's exclusivity is lost, then Christianity is not unique, and we might as well import Korans and Bhagavad-Gitas into our pews so that we might be able to better piece together who God is, since the Bible cannot do so alone.
I have no problem discussing these issues, but I ought to be able to put forth what I believe to be the truth to which the Bible attests. It only makes sense that if the Bible is true that its opponents be refuted. That's why I have let the Bible speak so much for itself in the posts above, so that those who do not believe in the God of the Bible may be made known. That's also why I have written the gospel down so many times, so that eyes and ears might be open to see and hear the truth of Scripture, to fall in love with Jesus as the greatest treasure, and to be redeemed by Him. An evidence of false faith of Jesus is a lack of hungering after His Word and for seeing His name made known among the nations. The whole of history is pointing to the day of Jesus' Lordship over all the earth; the task has already begun. That's why I'm here, to make Jesus known and loved, the Jesus of the Bible who demands persons to be born again, to repent, and to place their faith in him alone for salvation.
So I do not exclude any from coming to Jesus. Along with Isaiah, I say to everyone, "Come to the waters..." Come and be washed in the blood of Christ Jesus. Put your trust in Him and trust Him alone for salvation, for He is making all things new. Those who come to Christ are forever changed, and when they come as they are, they don't remain as they were.
|
|
Isa 40:8 The grass withers, the flower fades, but the word of our God will stand forever. |
|
|
Pastorbogy
Posts:121
|
| 04/28/2007 11:22 PM |
|
Ben, you once again make the judgment that just because people don't agree with you, don't interpret the scripture the way you do, they don't take it seriously, they don't treat it carefully. For myself, I spend a tremendous amount of time in the scripture. I'm not sure you take it as seriously as I do, because you seem to think it is so clear and easy to understand, and I, after receiving an M.Div. and doing all the work for a D.Min. (except for writing the thesis, other things happened in my life when it came time to do that), with close to 5 decades studying the Bible and preaching it (my first sermon was preached at the age of 4, to my parents, my text was "Jesus Loves Me"), I discover things I never realized before all the time. When people say they think the Bible is very clear and easy to understand, my thought is that they not only don't have all the answers they think they do, they don't even have a clue as to what all the questions are. An example of how I feel you don't take scripture seriously enough is your almost flippant answer to the problem of 1 Timothy 2. You wanted to test me on the scripture with another passage, but you failed the test with this one. You could have said that this was a very difficult passage to understand. You could have said that Paul states that this was his opinion, and he was writing from the perspective of the Jewish and Greek culture and theology of the time. These are among the responses authors of the commentaries in my library, for the most part conservative theologians, give for this passage. But you see no problems with the passage. You find it easy to understand. You state that not accepting this passage with the interpretation you give it puts someone in danger of going to hell. You don't take the scripture seriously enough, and you don't spend nearly enough time considering the people to which you are responding. I conducted a wedding this afternoon (in a service which mentioned Christ, Jesus, and God quit often, and directed the couple to keep the love of God at the center of their marriage and to treat each other as Christ treated the disciples). I read 1 Corinthians 13. In that passage Paul states that now we see in a mirror, dimly (I hope you won't once again condemn me to hell if I point out that mirrors in the time of Paul were not of the quality of mirrors today). Paul at times seems to admit that not everything is perfectly clear, even to him.
You not only don't understand the Bible nearly as well as you think you do (you also could use a few more classes on church history and the development of Christian theology. Your theology was not quite so universally acknowledged as you think it was by early Christians.
Your last post was particularly condescending, because you pretty much state that those of us here who don't accept your view of things not only do not love Jesus, do not have faith in Jesus, but also need to have the scripture quoted to us so that we may come to know the God of the Bible. Ben, you may not accept it, but I already know God. God called me, long ago, to be a pastor, in a very personal experience. I didn't go blind like Paul did, but it was for me almost as dramatic an experience. I stated much earlier in this thread that I preach Jesus Christ. That is the faith I know. My faith in Jesus is not swayed because Paul, had some gender bias. I don't worship Paul. If he has something good to say, I use it. When I think he was off base, at least for our times, I ignore it. Doesn't affect my faith in Jesus one little bit. If someone wants to know how to find God, and they come to me, they are going to hear about Jesus, because that is the faith I know, the faith I am qualified to share. If someone wants to find God through Islam, then they will have to go somewhere else. So no, we won't be putting the Koran in the pews anytime soon. But I find enough evidence in the Old Testament and in the sayings of Jesus to provide at the very least the shadow of doubt that keeps me from saying that only those who profess faith in Jesus alone have any hope of coming to God. And the number one reason for that? Because its God's decision, not mine, not yours, and God's love and grace are far to great and grand for me to put any limit's on it. |
|
|
|
|
subear
Posts:770
|
| 04/29/2007 8:27 PM |
|
Bravo! Well said, Pastorbogy.
|
|
"We are not human beings having a spiritual experience. We are spiritual beings having a human experience." Pierre Teilhard de Chardin |
|
|
jimk
Posts:35
|
| 04/30/2007 2:34 AM |
|
| This is to Ben.
Is it really not possible for you to see that your views represent one set of views among many and that most schools of Christian thought can trace their main thrust to apostolic origins?
Most interpretations of scripture also draw on ideas that are really present in scripture, but put the emphasis at different places. They may even be contradicted in other places, but contradiction doesn’t necessarily invalidate a position. It can also qualify a position, showing us another perspective or a greater complexity to things.
Why should your particular understanding trump all comers? The answer is that there is no reason why it should. Your position simply represents one stream of thought on who Jesus was and what he means. I would go further and suggest that lifting your position (which after all was arrived at by human striving) to absolute truth over against all others is by definition an act of idolatry.
There are many assumptions that you make, stating them as though they are obvious and irrefutable. But I do not think they are self-evident at all.
Here is a small sampling. 1. You say that “God is indeed a God of love, but He is also holy and just and must punish sin.” - I disagree that a just God must punish sin. When a person turns away from God and seeks to live by his or her own agenda, that separation from God can be suffering enough, without the infliction of additional punishment. On top of that, who are you to say what God must or must not do. Finally, it seems to me that God’s response to a “sinner” is often more effectively acceptance. My point is that your statement is not self-evidently true.
2. A second assumption that you make is that “Reconciliation implies a previous enmity and opposition from God toward those who are sinners.” That’s one way of looking at it. I guess I more often think of God as grieving at our blindness and its consequences, than as having bad feelings (enmity) toward us.
3. You say “The truth deserves heralding, and that is what this whole discussion is about: truth. We cannot both be right on this issue; we can both be wrong, but not both right.” - I disagree. That seems to me to be a very polarizing and overly simplistic view of reality. There is no reason why two people can’t have different perspectives on the same issue and both be partially right. Also, it seems to me that you see the truth of the Gospel as primarily the acceptance of certain propositions, whereas I think that it is primarily relational. So in answer to you I would say “This whole discussion is about love and not about truth, unless by truth, you mean love.”
|
|
|
|
|
Pastorbogy
Posts:121
|
| 04/30/2007 11:22 AM |
|
Now that we have covered that, and following what Jim said, here's my take on Ephesians 5, from the CEV, one of my favorite translations (perhaps because it was written for about a fourth grade level).
"(21)Honor Christ and put others first. (22) A wife should put her husband first, as she does the Lord. (23) A husband is the head of his wife, as Christ is the head and the Savior of the church, which is his own body. (24) Wives should always put their husbands first, as the church puts Christ first. (25) A husband should love his wife as much as Christ loved the church and gave his life for it. (26) He made the church holy by the power of his word, and he made it pure by washing it with water. (27) Christ did this, so that he would have a glorious and holy church, without faults or spots or wrinkles or any other flaws. (28) In the same way, a husband should love his wife as much as he loves himself. A husband who loves his wife shows that he loves himself. (29) None of us hate our own bodies. We provide for them and take good care of them, just as Christ does for the church, (30) because we are each part of his body. (31) As the Scriptures say, "A man leaves his father and mother to get married, and he becomes like one person with his wife." (32) This is a great mystery, but I understand it to mean Christ and his church. (33) So each husband should love his wife as much as he loves himself, and each wife should respect her husband." Ephesians 5:21-33
First off, Paul says marriage is a great mystery. Imagine, something Paul doesn't completely understand, even though he is inspired. He may understand God, but women he can't quite figure out. Which is obvious from a lot of what he wrote. :D
Also, it isn't even quite clear if Paul is really writing about the church, or marriage. But while people start quoting this at verse 22, but if we start with verse 21 we see it applies to EVERYONE in the church. We are all to submit, or as this translation puts it, to put each other first. Now while wives are to put their husbands first, husbands are called to love their wives. In the first place, as far as I am concerned, part of loving someone else is to put them first. If we are going to love someone like Jesus loved the church, or as he loved his disciples as the representatives of the church, then we are to wash their feet. Jesus was a servant, not a "lord and master" type. In my opinion, the command to love demands a higher degree of servanthood and sacrifice than just putting the other first. This may be how Ben also interprets this passage, but it is not the interpretation that a lot have men have used for a long time in interpreting this passage. As far as I am concerned, Paul is requiring the same thing from both the woman and the man. I think it is just another part of Paul's cultural shortcoming that he couldn't just come out and use the same word for each of them. Since I have a little better understanding of the capabilities of women (having been successfully married for 30 years, giving my wife ample time to put me first, love me, and knock some sense into my head), when I marry couples I tell them if they want "submit" in the vows I'm going to make them both promise to submit, otherwise they can just both promise to love each other.
So, to bring this back to the subject, as Jim said, its all about love. Because the real truth is love. In all our relationships, as couples, as the church, as children of God.
|
|
|
|
|
Stekala
Posts:46
|
| 04/30/2007 5:48 PM |
|
Pastobogy, thank you for your words on the Ephesians passage. Such language eludes me as well, because, as you said, loving one's wife as one's own flesh and acting as a Christ-servant is indeed putting the wife first, as the wife is commanded to do for her husband.
Moreover, the relationship that is implied in this passage and how it is interpreted has been troubling me. Taking the text literally, it commands clearly for a woman to "put her husband first, as she does the Lord," which IS total worship and obedience. If the Church is in fact to act such towards Christ, the wife IS treating her husband as Lord, which is just not right. Here, Ben, you seem to be the one turning the text to make it seem less commanding. And furthermore, what is the evidence that the husband intrinsically has the moral authority to act as Christ-servant to the wife?
Christ did this, so that he would have a glorious and holy church, without faults or spots or wrinkles or any other flaws.
This is wonderful, but is the husband -- as opposed to the wife -- inherently in the position to do this? Is it always, or even most often, that it is the man who comes wise and holy and spiritually with God to the wife who is sinful, lost, and far from God? I completely reject a notion that any one gender has greater authority to act as a human agent of grace. Sometimes it is the woman who must bring her husband back to God. Sometimes it is the man. As a man and woman enter a union, why not both love one another as they do themselves? Why not both act as Christ-servants to eachother? Perhaps in Paul's time it was more likely that the husband would be the one to act so, because he was out in the world to a greater degree and would be the one to receive the teaching. But now, do you - any of you - truly believe that we are not equals before God who must encourage EACHOTHER mutually to come to God to smooth out our wrinkles and wash away our blemishes? I just don't see, to get to the bones of it, what SHOULD give men natural authority...
In any case, under consideration nothing Paul says is really in conflict with my views on love and marriage. I believe it is in the words used to express it, and the interpretation following, that have had - and are still having - disasterous effects for women. Trust me, from personal dealings with it, marriage simply does not work under the pretense of one partner in inherent control of the other, even if intended with love. We are all so fallible. None of us ought to pretend to have the authority of Christ to save souls. God through Christ's gospel made us equal before Him. God is the authority. All others must humble themselves before Him - totally and completely, which simply does not leave room for any of us to demand one-sided submission. |
|
"The shackles are undone/The bullets quit the gun/The heat that's in the sun..will keep us when there's none
The rule has been disproved/ The stone it has been moved/ The grave is now a groove/ All debts are removed" - "Window in the Skies" - U2 (third world debt relief - visit www.jubileeusa.org) |
|
|
subear
Posts:770
|
| 05/01/2007 12:13 PM |
|
Kathy,
I love where you're going with that.
Have you every read the Sufi poets? Rumi and Hafiz? They have a way of writing about the divine (God) as their "Beloved." Very much like the Song of Solomon, which I see as an expression of the ideal marriage relationship. My husband/wife is as my Beloved, just as God/Holy Spirit is my Beloved. It's a way of seeing God or Christ or that which is Holy in others (and in ourselves). Loving and being Loved may be the closest expression of God that we get in human form.
Namaste,
Susannah |
|
"We are not human beings having a spiritual experience. We are spiritual beings having a human experience." Pierre Teilhard de Chardin |
|
|
subear
Posts:770
|
| 05/02/2007 3:38 PM |
|
| "We find comfort among those who agree with us - growth among those who don't." --Frank A. Clark |
|
"We are not human beings having a spiritual experience. We are spiritual beings having a human experience." Pierre Teilhard de Chardin |
|
|
Stekala
Posts:46
|
| 05/14/2007 4:54 PM |
|
So! It seems as though we have taken this conversation as far as it can go at this point (I apologize for being awol for a while - I've been down having a ball at the state capitol for YMCA Youth Legislature!). As the creator of this topic, I'd like to thank you all for some of the livliest discussion I've ever had. It has actually really affected my stance on my own faith. This discussion has led me to delve so deep into my convictions - it has both reaffirmed my faith, and made me acknowledge what is fundamentally important to me.
It's kind of incredible how far we've taken the topic as well. In case anyone has forgotten, it began with my asking how the UCC was involved with interfaith relations; it ended up as a debate over the inerrancy of the Bible. This is fantastic, because it shows us what is really at the heart of our schisms in faith.
Again, thank you to all, and to all who participated, Bravo!
In Peace,
Kathy |
|
"The shackles are undone/The bullets quit the gun/The heat that's in the sun..will keep us when there's none
The rule has been disproved/ The stone it has been moved/ The grave is now a groove/ All debts are removed" - "Window in the Skies" - U2 (third world debt relief - visit www.jubileeusa.org) |
|
|
jimk
Posts:35
|
| 05/14/2007 10:27 PM |
|
| If this were to go farther, I think it would be interesting to look at how we UCC insider types responded to Ben. I have to admit, I feel a little like a dutiful antibody that rushed to the scene to try to minimize the damage of an invading virus or something (I'm obviously not a biologist) that was attacking the "healthy body of the UCC." I'm sort of uncomfortable with my fascination with what Ben had to say. It felt a little unhealthy, like when you are in an argument in which you just can't help wanting to get the last word, or better , it was like the morbid fascination of watching a poorly constructed tower that could lurch over and collapse at any time, bringing Ben down with it. Who knows? But what was this about from the point of view of self-examination? What motivated us to pour so much ink into it, rather than just let it pass? It was pretty clear to me from the beginning that Ben wasn't listening or was he? I was too damn busy at the time, but couldn't help it. I guess is that there is much more, on an unexamined level, to the way we bond and establish our acceptable explanations than we think. Sometimes I think that words are an illness. I wonder how Ben feels about the exchange, I mean apart from the argument itself. How do you feel,Ben, if you are there? Do you feel happy, sad, rejuvenated, deflated, lonely, connected? It seems to me that the argument doesn't mean much unless it touches a us in this basic way. I guess I would say that I feel "unmoved" by it. |
|
|
|
|
subear
Posts:770
|
| 05/15/2007 12:56 AM |
|
As a reader, it was exhausting.
I disagreed, often, but felt compassion for bstritesky, as he frantically "witnessed" his faith to the heathens. So many words. (that I didn't even read). I wish the conversation had been more real and less Bible quotes.
I felt awe for pastorbogy. Awe and respect. This was something I could learn from. and I did.
Kathy, I loved your sweetness and intelligence.
Jim, you often spoke my thoughts.
and Rebecca: hope you had a good drive to Boston.
I'd like to say that I think "interfaith dialogue" could be a little be more diverse than this one turned out to be. The secret is, dialogue does not try to prove anything to anyone. It doesn't argue, or condemn. Dialogue is simply sharing our truth, honestly with one another and learning from what the other has to say. We don't have to agree. But we can listen and we can be heard. with Love.
Blessings,
susannah
|
|
"We are not human beings having a spiritual experience. We are spiritual beings having a human experience." Pierre Teilhard de Chardin |
|
|
Stekala
Posts:46
|
| 05/15/2007 1:38 AM |
|
Yes, it was rather exhausting, wasn't it? :) I must say I do understand what Jimk was referring to by a sort of morbid fascination with this discussion. I saw the fervor in the debate, and often I think we came a bit too close to attacking eachother (I'm guessing Ben felt the same way about my views as I did about his!). Especially towards the end, when the conversation moved towards roles of women, etc, I only prayed that I would be able to express myself articulately and not completely lose it.
However, for me it was quite transformative, because pondering the subject -- and being someone young, both in years, and in the faith, I pondered deeply -- I was eventually moved to make some big decisions on how I wish to practice as a believer. I actually surprised myself in how honest I was about my opinions; I've always had problems with this - wanting so badly to keep things non-offensive and pleasant that I looked almost ashamed for what I thought. It was a good lesson for me.
As for those who weren't completely satisfied with the way it went (neither am I, I assure you!), I'm sure we all got a bit more perspective from this, at least in learning how a discussion on this subject could be improved for another time.
Peace and a great week to All!
Kathy |
|
"The shackles are undone/The bullets quit the gun/The heat that's in the sun..will keep us when there's none
The rule has been disproved/ The stone it has been moved/ The grave is now a groove/ All debts are removed" - "Window in the Skies" - U2 (third world debt relief - visit www.jubileeusa.org) |
|
|
Pastorbogy
Posts:121
|
| 05/15/2007 12:32 PM |
|
| Unfortunately, I have been in far more "discussions" of this sort than I care to remember, on several other forums. I have often found it easier to dialog with atheists than with fundamentalists. There is no discussion with someone who believes he has received a message direct from God's lips to his ear. I wrote one marvelous post, filled with great wisdom and insight, only to have it disappear into the wisps of the ethernet when I hit the submit button. Probably lost due to not having been validated. I was very upset, until I realized that the tone of the post was not really what I wanted to convey. It is exhausting. On other forums there are those who know I am a pastor and will ask me my understanding of the Biblical perspective on various issues. I am more than willing to answer those who are really seeking information and are willing to consider what I offer. Then there are others who I know only ask so they can shoot down any answer I offer. All depends on my mood whether I am willing to get sucked in or not. A few years ago I had several surgeries and was incapacitated for months at a time, while on heavy medication (oxy-contin and similar drugs). I had a lot of time to write. Of course not all of it made much sense. But at least then I had an excuse. :) |
|
|
|
|
Stekala
Posts:46
|
| 05/15/2007 1:12 PM |
|
Pastorbogy, I understand what you mean. I have quite a few friends who are oriented towards more fundamentalist Christianity, and though I wholly respect them and have in fact learned much from them, I find it absolutely fruitless to have a discussion with them about religion. In some cases, I can understand and appreciate where they're coming from in being so stubborn, but at other times...
Anywho, again to Pastorbogy I would like to ask a question. Though I've been spiritual all my life, I'm fairly new on the journey of Christianity - in relative terms, I suppose. I'm also between churches right now, and will be until the fall, so I would so much love to talk with you about the Bible, etc.
Also, Subear, did you say you were/are a minister as well? I really admire your sense of spirituality. You could very much help me find perspective in my faith.
As of now, really the only Christians I'm around lean very far to the right, and I just can't get the advice I need from that. I would so appreiciate it if I could come to both of you (as well as i.UCC in general, of course!) with a few questions now and then, particularly about passages from the Bible.
Blessings and Peace,
Kathy |
|
"The shackles are undone/The bullets quit the gun/The heat that's in the sun..will keep us when there's none
The rule has been disproved/ The stone it has been moved/ The grave is now a groove/ All debts are removed" - "Window in the Skies" - U2 (third world debt relief - visit www.jubileeusa.org) |
|
|
subear
Posts:770
|
| 05/15/2007 3:03 PM |
|
Kathy,
I am not a minister, but I am studying to become one (see my profile for details).
I came to these forums (i.ucc and the ucc forum) for spiritual conversation and Bible learning. I loved participating in the Lenten devotionals; I read and contemplated them every day. I have found this forum (i.ucc) to generally be open to a variety of Biblical interpretations. I was raised in the UCC and was taught to think for myself. I really appreciated pasterbogy's (do we know his first name yet?) Bible knowledge, and Pastor Jim's too.
Generally, my beliefs go beyond standard Christianity. I have been on paths of Spirit all my lives. (yes, that's plural).
Right now, I'm writing an exhausting paper on the re-uniting of Science and Spirituality, with an emphasis on Quantum physics.
It was due yesterday. . . so I'd better get back to it.
Love and Blessings,
Susannah |
|
"We are not human beings having a spiritual experience. We are spiritual beings having a human experience." Pierre Teilhard de Chardin |
|
|
|
| You are not authorized to post a reply. |
|
|
|
ActiveForums 3.6
|
|
 UCC 101
Learn more about the UCC's past and present, and the future of our "united and uniting church" which we hope will include you! We've got blogs, videos and a discussion space where you can ask questions about the church—and about this online community. UCC members are also welcome! Opening the Bible
We believe that when you explore the Bible, you don't have to check your mind at the door—or your curiosity. Scripture can do great harm when used as a weapon, but it also opens a door to the story of God's loving relationship with humanity. Spirit Café
We invite you to an interactive space for spiritual inquiry and exploration. Learn about new and ancient spiritual practices, and share your spiritual journey with others on a quest like yours. Prayer Chapel
End your day with a simple, quiet, meditative experience of evening prayer. We gather in our virtual Prayer Chapel every night at 9 p.m. (Eastern). At all other times, you're welcome to post your prayer requests in our Prayer Chapel Forum.
| |