CNN's Belief Blog has published op-eds from the opposite perspectives of
whether the Bible condemns homosexuality.
Daniel A. Helminiak went first with his What The Bible Really Says About Homosexuality. Now they have published the other side of that debate, Southern
Baptist Theological Seminary President R. Albert Mohler Jr.'s The Bible condemns a lot, but here's why we focus on homosexuality.
From a purely objective standpoint, I think Mohler did the better job of
explaining the Bible in context. Helminiak gets points for creativity, it has to
be granted. But that his interpretation is a reach is obvious from the fact that
it is a novelty which flies in the face of centuries of biblical interpretation.
Helminiak is as convincing as are those scientist Bible teachers who
attempt to fit the ancient biblical creation myth with modern understandings of
astrophysics, biology, and geology. Hey, it's creative, but is it what the
original authors intended?
If these types of interpretations are allowable, even necessary, it seems
clear to me that the Judeo-Christian religion was never a revelation from God in
the first place.
Helminak makes that clear at the end of his piece when he admits:
Were God-given reason to prevail, rather than knee-jerk
religion, we would not be having a heated debate over gay marriage. “Liberty and
justice for all,” marvel at the diversity of creation, welcome for one another:
these, alas, are true biblical values.
Yes, if everyone were to agree to go by reason rather than the "revelation"
of the Bible, this whole debate about extending equality to everyone would
indeed be moot. (And I don't see how anyone upon an honest reading of the Bible
can declare that "Liberty and justice for all" is a true biblical value.)
When I examined for myself the question of whether the Judeo-Christian
Scriptures were "God-breathed" and found that theory woefully lacking, it opened
to me a whole world of possibilities.
One of these possibilities was that of ceasing to attempt to reinterpret
these old writings in light of modern knowledge and just dismissing them as
ancient prejudices and errors of thought.
That is also the explanation of why I am no longer a Christian.
12 comments:
Amen on this one. I rather agree with Jung's observation that the problem with organized religion is that it gets in the way of knowing God.
excellent illustration of the point
You examined for yourself! You sir, are an heretic!
@ pinkpackrat,
I think I know what he meant.
@ DoOrDoNot,
Some people are very touchy when it comes to the Bible. It's sad that so many are too lazy to really dig into the history of how we got what we call the Bible and then into how it has been interpreted down through the centuries. I think it's really worth the trouble.
@ Exrelayman,
But I try to be a good one!
I think Mohler is correct on what the Bible says. Attempts to reinterpret or explain away the offending verses seem well intentioned but indefensible from a theological or textual viewpoint.
The Bible is the problem and the only answer is to reject what the Bible says. Another reason I am an atheist.
I think those things we fear most are the things we try to explain away or condemn. Perhaps "God" was a flaming queen and we, the straight people are defects in His eyes. That would explain why so many Christians are so UnChrist-like.
@ Bruce,
I agree. The place to start, it seems to me, is the question of whether or not the Bible is God's revelation to man. I think clearly it isn't.
@ Mildred,
Now that is really thinking outside the box. :)
I think your explanation is excellent. Helminiak was one of the first "Christian" sources on homosexuality that I read. Like you said, trying to make the Bible fit into modern times, ethics and morals is a difficult undertaking.
@ Don,
And I appreciate the effort and prefer it to fundamentalism, to be sure. But I don't find it at all convincing.
Post a Comment