The Political Thread

[Richmond Clements]

If God truly did exist then His Word shouldn't even be open to interpretation. The Bible, as with every other religious text, should be able to withstand scientific and societal scrutiny without the need for metaphor or archaic understanding. Buggered if that shouldn't also go for human sexuality.

^^This.

[JOE SOAP]

Their version of the Bible - which was probably written a few months ago when they set up their own church - likely does have extensive quotes about bumming being bad, because as far as I can tell, it's something they like to talk about.  A LOT.
I can sort of sympathise if they can't stop thinking about muscular men rubbing their penises together to the extent they have to stand in the street shouting about it.  Clearly it is something they feel passionate about and want to talk and think about as often as they possibly can in the hopes of making it stop, as it probably even distracts them to the point that last thing at night before they go to sleep they have to have a good think about oiled-up men rubbing each other - if they can even sleep at all with such thoughts keeping them up.  Clearly they need to get out in the streets and scream about buggery at random strangers - including children - because, you know, it's gay people that have the problem in this equation.

I can tell you've put a lot of thought into this.

[The Prodigal]

While I have absolutely no problem with someone quite rightly pointing out all those other rules that have since been allowed to slide, the article itself does smack of someone wanting to be a member of some club that -- by its own rules -- is already letting in people it shouldn't.

If God truly did exist then His Word shouldn't even be open to interpretation. The Bible, as with every other religious text, should be able to withstand scientific and societal scrutiny without the need for metaphor or archaic understanding. Buggered if that shouldn't also go for human sexuality.

Good thought provoking post Eric. A proper answer would get into all sorts of hermeneutics (that word always sounds like an old artificial sweetner to me) as to the Bible's nature etc. I was raised theologically in the old "faxed down directly from God's desk" model of inerrancy etc. Nowdays I think its all rather more complicated.

Often does my head in tbh. Sometimes I would like to be an atheist.

[Frank]

If God truly did exist then His Word shouldn't even be open to interpretation.

A guy I used to work for trained for the priesthood. He explained to me that one of the great sources of theological debate was a single line from The Crucifixion, where Jesus promises one of his fellow dying criminals "Truly I say to you today you shall be with Me in Paradise." (Luke 23:43). The debate centred on whether that line should read

I say to you (comma) today you shall be with Me in Paradise or
I say to you today (comma) you shall be with Me in Paradise.

The first implies that the souls of both Jesus and his companion (and therefore all souls) leave the body and are in Heaven at the instant of death, or at least soon after. The second line relegates the use of the word "today" to the ranks of a rhetorical flourish on the part of Nazareth's favourite chippie. As I'm sure The Prodigal can confirm, there's no such thing as a comma in the language systems originally used to encode the direct Word Of God, so any punctuation used in modern day translations - and how they affect the interpretation of the text - are entirely the work of man and his imperfect tool of written communication.

That's before you get onto the thorny issues of translation, the many different versions of the texts included in The New Testament, the texts excluded from The New Testament by the early Church, and the problem of many words having multiple or ambiguous meanings in the original languages of the authors but especially in the promiscuous and polysemous English language. If you haven't read The Bible I urge you to read it, but if you want to read it in translation you might have to polish up on your Polish. It'll add another string to your bow, and I bow before anyone who doesn't bow under the pressure from above to have the meaning of texts handed to them, neatly tied up with a bow.

[Professor Bear]

I can tell you've put a lot of thought into this.

I can only think about it in 5-6 minute bursts.  Then I usually have a nap.

[Dandontdare]

If God truly did exist then His Word shouldn't even be open to interpretation.

A guy I used to work for trained for the priesthood. He explained to me that one of the great sources of theological debate was a single line from The Crucifixion, where Jesus promises one of his fellow dying criminals "Truly I say to you today you shall be with Me in Paradise." (Luke 23:43). The debate centred on whether that line should read

I say to you (comma) today you shall be with Me in Paradise or
I say to you today (comma) you shall be with Me in Paradise.

That's nothing - the Great Schism of 1054, which led to the separation of the Catholic and Orthodox churches hinged on whether the credo should say that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father; or from the Father AND the Son.

[JOE SOAP]

That's nothing - the Great Schism of 1054, which led to the separation of the Catholic and Orthodox churches hinged on whether the credo should say that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father; or from the Father AND the Son.

Typical nerds.

[TordelBack]

... a great illustration of the way what you're told about scripture differs from the experience of reading it for yourself.

As I've often trotted out, I was quite the religious spode with one eye on a vocation when I set about reading the Bible cover-to-cover, and pestering a well-meaning curate about details and meanings as I went on. I was an atheist long before I got to the end. 

By that token maybe I should try bumming (or rather, being bummed, as like most so-called 'straight' folk I've done the former, albeit with a lady) as a means of inoculating myself against late-onset gay?  If that were to happen I just don't think I could cope with the level of personal grooming that seems to be a prerequsite.  Not at my age.

[The Prodigal]

... a great illustration of the way what you're told about scripture differs from the experience of reading it for yourself.

As I've often trotted out, I was quite the religious spode with one eye on a vocation when I set about reading the Bible cover-to-cover, and pestering a well-meaning curate about details and meanings as I went on. I was an atheist long before I got to the end. 

By that token maybe I should try bumming (or rather, being bummed, as like most so-called 'straight' folk I've done the former, albeit with a lady) as a means of inoculating myself against late-onset gay?  If that were to happen I just don't think I could cope with the level of personal grooming that seems to be a prerequsite.  Not at my age.

I could see where that would be the case TordelBack. There's enough in there particularly in the Old Testament that is weird, whacky and abhorrent, never-mind issues around historicity that would raise some very fundamental questions. I've been knee deep in that territory myself and re-visit it often.

I think I might shut up now. I'm beginning to bore myself tbh.

[JayzusB.Christ]

Sometimes I would like to be an atheist.

Lord Dawkins' door is always open, my child. 

[Definitely Not Mister Pops]

Sometimes I would like to be an atheist.

Lord Dawkins' door is always open, my child. 

When did they make that proselytizing polemicist a feckin' lord?

[Hawkmumbler]

Mr. Pops, one does not simply question Mr. Dawkins!

[The Prodigal]

Will Lord Dawkins give me a black exo-skeleton and a light sabre?

[Stan]

Sometimes I would like to be an atheist.

Lord Dawkins' door is always open, my child. 

I think thy Lord Dawkins is agnostic.

[JayzusB.Christ]

Have to say, I really liked the God Delusion and can find little in Dawkins' work I could disagree with, but he gets on my tits a bit these days. He used to be known as a revolutionary science writer; now it's all about atheism.