The beauty in religion

[bunyip]

Here's another true story that shows a positive side of religion.
I don't say it shows the beauty of religion - I think the word 'beauty' does a poor job of accurately describing religion - but there's no question that many people have changed their lives for the better as a result of religion.

I was present when the minister of our church stood up in front of the congregation and told this story.
Here it is in his own words, as best I can remember it.

A small boy grew up in a violent family. His father was a drunk and a womaniser who habitually subjected his wife and children to abuse and physical violence.
His mother finally turned to alcohol herself as a way of dealing with the abuse and beatings.
One by one, the children of the family started spending more and more time on the streets, mixing with the wrong crowd and getting into petty crime....anything was better than being at home and getting yelled at and beaten by their father.
By this time the boy reached his teenage years he was spending most of his time as a street kid, rarely going home to his family. He'd been in a number of scrapes with the police and was well on his way to becoming a junkie and alcoholic.
He was aware that his life was spiralling out of control but he felt powerless to change it. At the age of nineteen he was suicidal and on the verge of killing himself to end the pain and misery of his life. Only a lack of courage to actually 'do it', held him back.
In a desperate bid for help before it was too late, he wandered into a Salvation Army hall and poured out his heart to one of the Salvo men.
He visited the Salvos frequently after that. They steered him back on the right path, taught him that he was a person of worth and potential, got him an electrical apprenticeship.
After qualifying as an electrician, he expressed his desire to join the ministry.
That young boy is now a grown man with a wife and family, and is a fully ordained minister of the Uniting Church. He stands before you today....that man is me.

Well, there were quite a few wet eyes in the congregation after he told that story, believe me. This particular minister was one of the most likeable and decent people you'd ever meet...it was very difficult to associate him with the image of a street kid who was into drugs and booze and petty crime.
I spoke to him at some length after the service, and he told me that if he hadn't found Christianity there is no doubt whatsoever that he would have killed himself or have been killed or ended up in jail.

 

[noirua]

I would rather the church stands up clearly for what it believes in and what it was built upon, rather than be swayed by the mainstream opinion of the day.

That's all very good, but there are matters that have nothing to do with belief that the church will not budge on. St Peter, the first Pope, no doubt believed that Apostles,and disciples should be allowed to marry. Strange that the present Pope is strongly against its Priests marrying and this is a sad disaster of Catholicism.

However, If a priest of another religion, Church of England for instance, joins the Roman Catholic Church he is allowed to become one of its Priests and this, even if he is married.

 

[peterh]

That's all very good, but there are matters that have nothing to do with belief that the church will not budge on. St Peter, the first Pope, no doubt believed that Apostles,and disciples should be allowed to marry. Strange that the present Pope is strongly against its Priests marrying and this is a sad disaster of Catholicism.

However, If a priest of another religion, Church of England for instance, joins the Roman Catholic Church he is allowed to become one of its Priests and this, even if he is married.

Personally I would have thought there is enough to keep us going within the Bible, so I would tend to agree that adding more complexity on top of this might not be a good idea.

 

[bunyip]

You are right that an awful lot of evil has been committed by people taking the Bible out of context. An obvious example is the 'Christian' crusades. Those people called themselves Christians, but they can't have been based on what we are taught in the Bible.

Why not?

 

[bellenuit]

Here's another true story that shows a positive side of religion. I don't say it shows the beauty of religion - I think the word 'beauty' does a poor job of accurately describing religion

IMO that's an excellent way of putting it. There is no beauty in religion itself, but it does have a positive side that inspires many of its followers to do beautiful things and create beautiful things. But such inspiration is not the exclusive domain of religion, as some previous examples have attested.

 

[Sean K]

IMO that's an excellent way of putting it. There is no beauty in religion itself, but it does have a positive side that inspires many of its followers to do beautiful things and create beautiful things. But such inspiration is not the exclusive domain of religion, as some previous examples have attested.

Nice point.

Perhaps it's a matter of assessing the act and whether it is based on religious dogma, or on general modern day social customs.

 

[bunyip]

1.



3. This is gonna be a very long thread. Why start it for? This forum is supposed to be about stocks/trading.

Matty ol' son.......It's a stock forum in name but it also encourages discussion on a wide range of issues unrelated to stocks. You can confirm this for yourself by having a quick look through the topics of the various threads, or you can email Joe, who owns and moderates this forum, and get his take on it.
You'll find that he confirms what I'm telling you.

 

[darkside]

This will be a matter of context and interpretation, but I agree that the verses in isolation look extremely nasty. I need some time but leave it with me and I'll provide a fuller response.

Peterh, thanks for looking into that for me , when your done perhaps you could explain to me in what context we could all take this ;Genesis, the first book of the Bible, has Abraham preparing to sacrifice his son to God. "Take your son, your only son – yes, Isaac, whom you love so much – and go to the land of Moriah. Sacrifice him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains, which I will point out to you." (Genesis 22:1-18) Abraham takes his own son up on a mountain and builds an altar upon which to burn him. He even lies to his son and has him help build the altar. Then Abraham ties his son to the altar and puts a knife to his throat. He then hears God tell him this was just a test of his faith. However, God still wanted to smell some burnt flesh so he tells Abraham to burn a ram.

Even though he didn't kill his son, it is still an incredibly cruel and evil thing to do. If Abraham did that today he would be in jail serving a long sentence as someone's prison-bitch. It amazes me how Christians see this story as a sign of God's love. There is no love here, just pure unadulterated evil.

 

[ColB]

Originally Posted by Tink:

well you never know - Banjo Patterson and the like might have...lol

Its all history talk - they arent gonna change the words to redo it..
You gotta read between the lines...

Originally posted by Bunyip:

The only reason 'you gotta read between the lines' is if you don't want to accept the confronting reality that the Bible is in many respects a very harsh and cruel book that promotes, glorifies, and instructs people to commit some very nasty crimes.

Your assertion that 'you gotta read between the lines' is a good example of you seeing only what you want to see.

I believe this is something that you accused others of earlier in this thread in post 108 when you said, in reference to posters who had spoken out against religion..."They only see what they want to see."

Well put Bunyip! I was rather bemused by the fluffy reply to my post and it does show that when some hard questions are put some people go missing.

 

[Tink]

Another beautiful story Bunyip, thanks for sharing
I still dont agree with you that I see what I want to see

I gave you my interpretation, if you dont agree with it, then thats your problem..

I see what I have seen in the Catholic Church all my life, and as I have stated, it has been all good, for myself, my family and the billion of others that are involved in the Church.

The Catholic Church is one of the oldest Religions with alot of history

I noticed you said 'our church' - what church are you in?

and for the record, my childrens school has a 3 year waiting list and its not a small school. Part of the acceptance is that the people have to attend Church

Alot of people still have the Catholic faith... like it or not...

 

[Tink]

well Matty, this thread is about beauty in religion, but people cant help hijacking it..
Plenty of other threads but they always seem to come in this one......
If they arent interested, they keep wanting to be interested...

Unless you want to add something about the beauty of religion, I will leave this thread to MS+T, who started it...

On topic folks

 

[bunyip]

Another beautiful story Bunyip, thanks for sharing
I still dont agree with you that I see what I want to see

I gave you my interpretation, if you dont agree with it, then thats your problem..

I see what I have seen in the Catholic Church all my life, and as I have stated, it has been all good, for myself, my family and the billion of others that are involved in the Church.

The Catholic Church is one of the oldest Religions with alot of history

I noticed you said 'our church' - what church are you in?

and for the record, my childrens school has a 3 year waiting list and its not a small school. Part of the acceptance is that the people have to attend Church

Alot of people still have the Catholic faith... like it or not...

No Tink, my disagreement with your interpretation is not my problem at all - it's simply my view and it's no more a problem for me than it is for you or anyone else.

What church am I in? I'm not in any church.

I'm not sure why you're defending the Catholic church so strongly to me. Have I attacked your church? Not that I'm aware of.
My opinion that you're seeing only what you want to see was related to your interpretation of a command in the Bible, and had nothing to do with your church.

However, I must challenge your statement that it's been 'all good' for the billions who have been involved in the Catholic church.
Here again, you appear to be seeing only what you want to see.

The thousands of people who were molested by Catholic priests as children would be highly unlikely to agree that their experience with the Catholic church has been 'all good'.
Neither would a friend of mine, and thousands of others like him, who were subjected to regular beatings as children in Catholic boarding schools.
And the orphans who were subjected to beatings and sexual abuse at the hands of nuns and priests in Catholic run orphanages - I doubt if they'd agree with your contention that it's been 'all good' for members of the Catholic church.

My sister in law spent years in a convent, training to be a Catholic nun, before she quit with less than a year to go. She can tell some harrowing stories of what goes on in those convents.
She's another one who would strongly disagree with your contention that it's 'all good' for everyone in the Catholic church.
Her experiences in the Catholic church are the reason why she's no longer a Catholic.

Anyway, I'm not here to attack your church - I'm just trying to bring a bit of balance to the discussion. If your church has been good for you and your family and the people you know through your church, then that's great.


Tink, on this thread we have people who are so enraptured with religion and Christianity, and in your case Catholicism, that they appear to be completely unable to acknowledge the uglier side to churches, Christianity and the Bible.

At the other end of the scale we have people who can never say a good word about churches or religion, and appear to be completely blind to the tremendous amount of good in these organizations.

In the middle you have people like me who try to embrace a more balanced viewpoint.
I'm more than happy to acknowledge that the Bible contains some very good advice and lessons for life. But I'm honest and realistic enough to also point out the more unsavoury and contradictory side of the Bible.

I readily admit that Christian churches are for the most part decent institutions comprised of decent people who live decent and wholesome lives.
They're supportive of people who are less fortunate than themselves, and will go to extraordinary lengths in some cases to help these people.
I've told two true real life stories to support this.
But at the same time, I'm not so unrealistic as to claim it's 'all good' for everyone who is involved in churches, whether it's the Catholic church or any other.
I'm well aware that there's an uglier side of religion as well as the good side.
And you're aware of it too.

 

[Tink]

Sorry if I came across as blunt Bunyip, wasnt suppose to sound like that

Of course I have heard of the bad side, by the billion, I meant the ones involved now and happy..

I am not defending the catholic church, there is good and bad in all religions

This thread is about the good..

 

[bunyip]

Sorry if I came across as blunt Bunyip, wasnt suppose to sound like that

Of course I have heard of the bad side, by the billion, I meant the ones involved now and happy..

I am not defending the catholic church, there is good and bad in all religions

This thread is about the good..

No apology needed really, but I'll graciously accept it anyway.

Yes, there's good and bad in churches and religion and in the Bible too.

What do you think of my suggestion that the Bible needs to be re-written to better reflect true Christian values?
I see no point in subjecting people, particularly young children in religious instruction classes in schools and Sunday schools, to stories of respected Biblical characters committing rape and murder and other evil behaviour, all in the name of Christianity.
I see no point in instructions that tell you to stone your son to death for drunkenness, no matter what interpretation we put on that command.

There's a lot of bad mixed in with the good in the Bible....there's no question about that.
Don't you think that an updated version is in order - a version that tosses out the references that glorify violence and incite people to commit murder and other cruelty in the name of Christianity and God?
Such a version would keep all the good and solid foundations of the Bible, and get rid of the bad. I doubt if it's going to happen.
But don't you think it should happen? The Bible would surely be better for it.

 

[Sean K]

What do you think of my suggestion that the Bible needs to be re-written to better reflect true Christian values?

Couldn't happen bunyip. Their authority is written in the pages. It was probably easier to alter it centuries ago due to a lack of readily available photocopy machines and scanners, but we're stuck with the rules now, as absurd as they may be.

I actually have a small project underway tentitively titled 'The New 10 Commandments', which I hope will capture modern day moral values.

I'll be keeping most of the 10th Commandment in of course. I definately do not want to covert my neighbour's goat, or male or female slave.

Actually, maybe the female slave is OK....

 

[GumbyLearner]

Couldn't happen bunyip. Their authority is written in the pages. It was probably easier to alter it centuries ago due to a lack of readily available photocopy machines and scanners, but we're stuck with the rules now, as absurd as they may be.

I actually have a small project underway tentitively titled 'The New 10 Commandments', which I hope will capture modern day moral values.

I'll be keeping most of the 10th Commandment in of course. I definately do not want to covert my neighbour's goat, or male or female slave.

Actually, maybe the female slave is OK....

I like this quote Kennas

The Christian's Bible is a drug store. Its contents remain the same; but the medical practice changes.

Mark Twain

 

[peterh]

So true a lot of evil has been performed in the name of christianity, a favourite Tee shirt of mine says " if you can get a man to believe absurditys, you can get him to commit attrocities". But by the same token , it is obvious that christians believeing they are doing the right thing , tend to use a lot of lattitude regarding interpretation of the babble.
If the Bible is our moral guide, then how can it make pornographic statements such as: “...they may eat their own dung and drink their own piss with you” (2 Kings 18:27)? Also consult Numbers 31 where a whole tribe of people, including the elderly and children are slaughtered. The only survivors were the virginal women, who were later raped by the “just and perfect” Moses and his men. Is that what you want your children reading on Sunday?And how else can you interperate this other than disgracefull and evil.

This will be a matter of context and interpretation, but I agree that the verses in isolation look extremely nasty. I need some time but leave it with me and I'll provide a fuller response.

2 Kings 18:27
"He replied, 'Do you think you and the king are the only ones the emperor sent me to say all these things to? No, I am also talking to the people who are sitting on the wall, who will have to eat their excrement and drink their urine, just as you will.'"

Who says this? One of the three highest officials of the Assyrian emperor.

Who is he saying it to? Directly to Eliakim, Shebna and Joah, three officials of Hezekiah, king of Judah. Indirectly to King Hezekiah and all the inhabitants of Jerusalem.

Context? The Assyrian emperor has sent an army to conquer Jerusalem. The army is right outside Jerusalem and the three Assyrian officials are threatening three officials of King Hezekiah. The officials of Judah ask the official of Assyria to speak in Aramaic, not Hebrew:

2 Kings 18: 26
"Then Eliakim, Shebna, and Joah told the official, 'Speak Aramaic to us, sir. We understand it. Don't speak Hebrew; all the people on the wall are listening.'"

They didn't want the soldiers and citizens in Jerusalem to hear the conversation as it could effect their morale. That only encouraged the Assyrian official to continue speaking in Aramaic and become even more threatening. The Assyrians were going to siege Jerusalem and force all its inhabitants to "eat their excrement and drink their urine...". These words were a threat to the people of Jerusalem to make them terrified and surrender the city to the Assyrians.

Hopefully that helps with the context of those words. I'm still to look into Numbers 31.

 

[darkside]

2 Kings 18:27
"He replied, 'Do you think you and the king are the only ones the emperor sent me to say all these things to? No, I am also talking to the people who are sitting on the wall, who will have to eat their excrement and drink their urine, just as you will.'"

Who says this? One of the three highest officials of the Assyrian emperor.

Who is he saying it to? Directly to Eliakim, Shebna and Joah, three officials of Hezekiah, king of Judah. Indirectly to King Hezekiah and all the inhabitants of Jerusalem.

Context? The Assyrian emperor has sent an army to conquer Jerusalem. The army is right outside Jerusalem and the three Assyrian officials are threatening three officials of King Hezekiah. The officials of Judah ask the official of Assyria to speak in Aramaic, not Hebrew:

2 Kings 18: 26
"Then Eliakim, Shebna, and Joah told the official, 'Speak Aramaic to us, sir. We understand it. Don't speak Hebrew; all the people on the wall are listening.'"

They didn't want the soldiers and citizens in Jerusalem to hear the conversation as it could effect their morale. That only encouraged the Assyrian official to continue speaking in Aramaic and become even more threatening. The Assyrians were going to siege Jerusalem and force all its inhabitants to "eat their excrement and drink their urine...". These words were a threat to the people of Jerusalem to make them terrified and surrender the city to the Assyrians.

Hopefully that helps with the context of those words. I'm still to look into Numbers 31.

Peterh , thank you for that , and as i asked before if you could also give me your spin on Abraham preparing to sacrifice his son to God, and how that isn't the most evil wicked bit of child abuse a father could ever perform on his son , i would really appreciate that as well.

 

[peterh]

So true a lot of evil has been performed in the name of christianity, a favourite Tee shirt of mine says " if you can get a man to believe absurditys, you can get him to commit attrocities". But by the same token , it is obvious that christians believeing they are doing the right thing , tend to use a lot of lattitude regarding interpretation of the babble.
If the Bible is our moral guide, then how can it make pornographic statements such as: “...they may eat their own dung and drink their own piss with you” (2 Kings 18:27)? Also consult Numbers 31 where a whole tribe of people, including the elderly and children are slaughtered. The only survivors were the virginal women, who were later raped by the “just and perfect” Moses and his men. Is that what you want your children reading on Sunday?And how else can you interperate this other than disgracefull and evil.

This will be a matter of context and interpretation, but I agree that the verses in isolation look extremely nasty. I need some time but leave it with me and I'll provide a fuller response.

I assume these are the verses you speak of:

Numbers 31

1-2: "The Lord said to Moses, 'Punish the Midianites for what they did to the people of Israel. After you have done that, you will die.'"

7-8: "They attacked Midian, as the Lord had commanded Moses, and killed all the men, including the five kings of Midian: Evi, Rekem, Zur, Hur, and Reba. They also killed Balaam son of Beor."

17-18: "So now kill every boy and kill every woman who has had sexual intercourse, but keep alive for yourselves all the girls and all the women who are virgins."

Numbers is an account of a people who were often discouraged and afraid in the face of hardship, and who rebelled against God. This is during their 40 years in the wilderness.

God sent the Israelites to war against the Midianites because the Midianite women (daughters of Moab) enticed the Israelites to sexual immorality and idolatry. Before God sent them to war he severely punished the Israelites. See Numbers 25 for more on this.

The Midianite women were killed because they led the Israelites astray, they were not spared. The surviving women were not raped by Moses and his men, though they were taken to the Israelite camp. This war was waged due to sexual immorality, so this wouldn't be continued through rape after all that blood had just been spilt.

God provided rules for the Israelites to follow, and when they turned away from God, the punishment was often severe.

As for children reading this at Sunday School, they wouldn't as it isn't age appropriate. The focus at Sunday School would be mainly the New Testament.

 

[peterh]

Peterh, thanks for looking into that for me , when your done perhaps you could explain to me in what context we could all take this ;Genesis, the first book of the Bible, has Abraham preparing to sacrifice his son to God. "Take your son, your only son – yes, Isaac, whom you love so much – and go to the land of Moriah. Sacrifice him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains, which I will point out to you." (Genesis 22:1-18) Abraham takes his own son up on a mountain and builds an altar upon which to burn him. He even lies to his son and has him help build the altar. Then Abraham ties his son to the altar and puts a knife to his throat. He then hears God tell him this was just a test of his faith. However, God still wanted to smell some burnt flesh so he tells Abraham to burn a ram.

Even though he didn't kill his son, it is still an incredibly cruel and evil thing to do. If Abraham did that today he would be in jail serving a long sentence as someone's prison-bitch. It amazes me how Christians see this story as a sign of God's love. There is no love here, just pure unadulterated evil.

Peterh , thank you for that , and as i asked before if you could also give me your spin on Abraham preparing to sacrifice his son to God, and how that isn't the most evil wicked bit of child abuse a father could ever perform on his son , i would really appreciate that as well.

Genesis 22: 1-18

These are complex and thought provoking verses. God was testing Abraham's faith in a very powerful way.

(v2) "'Take your son,' God said, 'your only son, Isaac, whom you love so much, and go to the land of Moriah. There on a mountain that I will show you, offer him as a sacrifice to me.'"

Would he be willing to forfeit the promise of being a great nation [Genesis 17: 1-8]? Would his love for God be greater than love for his son? Would he forfeit the security of his only son to help him in his old age? Would he trust God to show him his destination later? Would Abraham be obedient?

Abraham proved his obedience to, and faith in, God.

Abraham didn't lie when Isaac asked about the sacrifice and he said "God himself will provide one." (v8) Abraham knew that he would have many decendants through his son Isaac (Genesis 17: 2, 16, 18-19), so he assumed he would not have to kill his son, or if he did he would be brought back to life (clearly this is the hardest test a father could undertake). Also in verse 5 he says, "Stay here with the donkey. The boy and I will go over there and worship, and then we will come back to you." He assumed that Isaac would be coming back with him.

Isaac was a young adult when this occurred, and Abraham an old man, so this can't be considered child abuse. Isaac could easily have overpowered his father, but he chose not to. There are clear links in this story to God sending Jesus to die on the cross as the ultimate sacrifice.