"This is NOT the word of the Lord!"

The upper-crust forum for scholarly, polite, and respectful discussions only. Heavily moderated. Rated G.
_Roger Morrison
_Emeritus
Posts: 1831
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2006 4:13 am

"This is NOT the word of the Lord!"

Post by _Roger Morrison »

Spong, visits his home "Ward" ;-) and is very negatively moved by what is implied as "God's word"...


This is Not the Word of the Lord!


I went to my own parish church on a Sunday in June. The music was excellent. The sermon delivered by the Rev. Dr. James Jones, an honorary and part time member of the staff of St. Peter's Church in Morristown, New Jersey, was one of the best I have heard in years. The summer congregation was relaxed, casually dressed and friendly. The only thing wrong with that worship service turned out to be the Bible. What a strange indictment. One of the three lessons from the Bible that Sunday was so dreadful that I first cringed as I heard it read, then I railed against it silently. What I really wanted to do was to shout loudly: "That is not true."

...What was the offending passage that bothered me so viscerally? It was the conclusion to the story of David's adulterous relationship with Bathsheba, which was coupled with David's conspiracy to have Bathsheba's husband, Uriah, murdered on the battlefield. The narrative continues by informing us that David was confronted by the prophet Nathan, armed only with a sense of the righteousness of God, who forced David to acknowledge his wrong doing. Nathan's tactic was to tell a story in which another person has acted in a similar manner to the way David had acted. Upon hearing this story the Bible says that King David's anger was kindled against this villainy and he proclaimed that the person who had acted this way was worthy of death. Then Nathan the prophet, in an act of rare courage, looked at the King and said to David" "Thou art the man!" David had in fact condemned his own behavior.

What is so offensive or so wrong about that, you ask. Well, nothing so far. The story, however, moves on and the prophet Nathan spells out the punishment that God will inflict. God, said Nathan in this narrative, was going to slay the child conceived in this adulterous relationship. God was going to make this child's life the payment required for the sin of David and Bathsheba. That was the dreadful lesson from the Bible that this well-trained Episcopal congregation, would declare to be the "Word of God."

My offense was not caused by a lack of conviction on my part that both adultery and murder are wrong and should not be condoned. The question about the absence of morality found in this biblical passage lay solely in the implication that God's decision to destroy the baby born of this adulterous relationship was in any sense proper. That idea, so clear in this text and so morally bankrupt, was why I wanted to scream in protest.

What kind of God is this? That was my question. Why should the innocent child be destroyed for the sins of the child's parents? Where is there any sense of justice in this presumably divine act? For centuries the Christian Church treated those children it called "illegitimate" as pariahs, sometimes not even allowing them to be baptized. Church leaders apparently believed themselves to be following the clear teaching of the Bible.

There was, perhaps, one other thing that made me particularly sensitive to the horror of this biblical passage as I heard it being read on this Sunday morning. I found myself sitting in our church about four rows behind a family consisting of two parents and their only daughter about whom I care deeply, so I was watching them as the lesson was read. Less than a year ago this family lost their vivacious and lively, twenty-four year old daughter and older sister in a mountain climbing accident. That young woman had been a favorite of mine since she was a small child. The news of her death was heartrending to me and I could only imagine the pain her parents and sister endured, and yet here they were in their church listening to a lesson from the Bible which implied that God might cause a child to die as a way of punishing the parents. Such a God, in my opinion, could only be viewed as demonic.

I have been a pastor for more than fifty years. I know that among the most destructive and debilitating elements in human grief is guilt. There is in human tragedy almost an inevitable question that is raised: "What did I do to deserve this?" Why was my child punished with death, or why was I punished with my child's death? It is a question rising out of a seriously flawed theology, by which many people are violated. This theology defines God as a punishing judge who delights in exacting a literal pound of flesh from those defined as sinful. The assumption is also present that this God operates on a fairness principle dispensing rewards and punishments.

As I heard this lesson read that morning my mind also ranged back to another family that lost a child. Early in my priestly career an eleven year old girl in my congregation received a leukemia diagnosis. She died within a year. I knew this child and her parents well. They were not just church members but also close friends. This child's father was a middle management executive and her mother was a homemaker, a status in that small town thought to be a mark of social rank. This family was indeed upwardly mobile. Their roots, however, were quite humble. As children both of them had been members of a Pentecostal Holiness Church that served a working class, not very well educated, congregation. Their minister was a fundamentalist who constantly railed against the sins of the flesh, proclaiming God's condemnation of sexual sins in particular and suggesting that anyone who deviated from God's path of righteousness as revealed in scripture should expect to receive God's wrath. This little girl's parents had, they believed, violated that rule as their first-born daughter had been conceived out of wedlock. They felt the full disapproval of both sets of their parents and of their Pentecostal church community. They dealt with this crisis by arranging a hasty marriage, hoping that this step might mute the punishment that they were quite sure God had in store for them. For a long time guilt was their daily bread. They, nevertheless, established their home, the new father managed to get his college degree despite the economic pressure that parenthood placed on this family. His career prospered and a promotion took them to a new town where they had a new start. Other children followed. Eventually, they joined the Episcopal Church. It was for them a very different, even a healing experience. Their future looked bright. Then came their daughter's sickness, her diagnosis and finally her death. Their grief was not only overwhelming, but their repressed guilt and the God of their youth also came rushing back with a vengeance. They interpreted their daughter's death as that almost expected vengeful act of a punishing God. God had waited, they thought, for them to reach this new place in life and then God struck. Their "sin" had caused the death of their child. Irrational it was, but also powerful in its demonic terror. Rationality is always a casualty of emotion. Each relieved his or her guilt by blaming the other. The stress was more than the marriage could take. Within a year of their daughter's death, they separated. A literal Bible told them quite clearly that God had killed the child of David and Bathsheba, conceived in an adulterous relationship, as a punishment for their sins. I watched these lives being destroyed by the words of scripture to which they attributed ultimate truth. Having lived through that experience with that couple I can no longer keep silent as the dark side of the Bible and the negative theistic definitions of God claim another victim, distort another life, fill decent people with the fear of judgment, and make guilt the primary gift of the Church to its people.

That approach to the Bible must be challenged as must the debilitating message that so many hear in church. The Bible is filled with dark, unlearned themes that in the hands of "the righteous" give rise to an abusive use. It has in its pages what I have called: "The Sins of Scripture." It is time for the Christian Church to say that publicly, openly, honestly.

John Shelby Spong



Anyone care to have the courage? How would one go about such a "clean-up"? Generally, & in LDSism specifically? Roger
_harmony
_Emeritus
Posts: 18195
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:35 am

Re: "This is NOT the word of the Lord!"

Post by _harmony »

Roger Morrison wrote:Spong, visits his home "Ward" ;-) and is very negatively moved by what is implied as "God's word"...This is Not the Word of the Lord!


He would never survive in Mormondom. Guilt is the most used whip LDS church leaders have in order to keep the members in line. And while most LDS would not understand the guilt felt by the couple he mentions (the Mormon god does not visit the sins of the fathers onto the heads of the children, at least not directly. They would have been instructed to pay their tithing, say their prayers, and attend church and let the prophet worry about their place in eternity), they would understand that feeling, having felt it many times themselves.

The Bible is never taken quite that literally in Mormon wards, since it is not translated correctly. Only the Book of Mormon has anywhere near that power over people's lives, and then it's mostly ignored. We read it, kinda sorta, but we don't live it. We worry more about the words of the living prophets than we do about ancient scripture. Words of the living prophet Trump's every word of the dead ones.

Now if we could just get the leaders to kick Sec 132 to the curb...
_The Nehor
_Emeritus
Posts: 11832
Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2007 2:05 am

Post by _The Nehor »

Guilt is the inevitable result of Christian teaching. Fortunately the true doctrine of the Atonement removes ALL guilt if used correctly.
"Surely he knows that DCP, The Nehor, Lamanite, and other key apologists..." -Scratch clarifying my status in apologetics
"I admit it; I'm a petty, petty man." -Some Schmo
_Roger Morrison
_Emeritus
Posts: 1831
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2006 4:13 am

Post by _Roger Morrison »

The Nehor wrote:Guilt is the inevitable result of Christian teaching. Fortunately the true doctrine of the Atonement removes ALL guilt if used correctly.


Nehor, please explain, "...the true doctrine of the Atonement..." as you understand it. Is "...ALL guilt removed," in the minds of many? A guess...??? IF you are thinking LDS, why was the "Stick-of-gum-passed-around" (now a cup-cake) supposed to be affective without the element of guilt? Is it because LDS are as prone to misinfo as are other sects?

Or, as Harmony suggests in the sort'a-kind'a way obedience to error is as prevelent as it is to truth. Especially as there is great attempt to be saved in ignorance???

Question: Has there been a "scholarly" compilation of "...not correctly translated biblical statements/edicts..." presented by Mormondom to the world? Maybe like Adam's rib becoming Eve's body? Warm regards, Roger
_Livingstone22
_Emeritus
Posts: 117
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2007 3:05 am

Post by _Livingstone22 »

I read some of Spong's book "The Sins of the Scriptures" myself. I like the overall message that God (at least the loving God I wish to believe in) has been skewed by mankind--even in the Bible. The Bible is filled with hate, murder and other horrible "non-Christian" crimes, and it is even worse when people use the Bible and God to justify their horrid actions. I did get the impression that Spong wasn't much of a scriptorian, and he seemed to make some abductive jumps of reason that were purely his speculation and presented it is a strong possibility or fact. So, I had some problem with the particularities of what he wrote in his book, but as I said, the overall message is a good one.
_Roger Morrison
_Emeritus
Posts: 1831
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2006 4:13 am

Post by _Roger Morrison »

Hi L-22, i think you express the opinion of most thoughtful readers of Spong's books. I look forward to reading his latest, "Jesus for the Non-religous" (or something like that) when i can get it discounted :-) at 'Abe Books'.

As well, you describe the Bible as it reads and was applied. IF there is any truth to it... Which i believe there is... Only it's difficult to understand bible-truth, other than its narative, as something that advances humaneness and justice in a world evolving beyond tribalism... Warm regards, Roger
_Sam Harris
_Emeritus
Posts: 2261
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:35 am

Post by _Sam Harris »

Hey Roger,

I think about context a lot when I read the Bible. I cannot understand why it is that human beings refuse to see that other human beings wrote the Bible, and inserted their own prejudices within what it is they were supposed to be inspired to write. Not only that, but we're reading a mere translation, and when you translate documents, meaning can get skewed. I have co-workers who cannot believe that the Bible was used to justify slavery...but it was. Literalism is the worst enemy of the Bible student. That's where we get homophobia from, that's where we get fundamentalism from, that's where we get schism from.

I think if we just look to the things that speak of love in the Bible, and there is a lot, intertwined with the anguish and the war, we can find God. But God is also within us, and since God is within us, God is mixed up in all this crap that we take ourselves through, called the human experience....in my opinion.
Each one has to find his peace from within. And peace to be real must be unaffected by outside circumstances. -Ghandi
_Roger Morrison
_Emeritus
Posts: 1831
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2006 4:13 am

Post by _Roger Morrison »

Hi GIMR, you said:

I think if we just look to the things that speak of love in the Bible, and there is a lot, intertwined with the anguish and the war, we can find God. But God is also within us, and since God is within us, God is mixed up in all this crap that we take ourselves through, called the human experience....in my opinion.



T'would-be-nice, and ya know ... i think that is slooowly happening. We're on a 'learning-slope' on the "learning-curve" that is more like a switch-back hiway winding its way through "crap" which 'fertilizes' thinking-minds to new understanding, discoveries, and applications... Not everyone travels at the same pace. Nor do they sense the same sights/happenings along the route the same way...natural.

However in our human mass there are exceptional 'travelers' ie Jesus, Ghandi, Buddah, Muhammad, MLK Jr, to mention a few... Sort-a-like follow the Leader around some of the more dangerous curves... Sometimes we do, sometimes we don't. Some go over the edge taking others with them; so be it. BUT, as long as the "exceptional' folks are still there with their lights.......

I'm a simple guy who happens to think it's darker behind us than ahead of us. Over my past/passed ;-) 70+ years i've become some what skilled at IDing the edible from the toxic mushrooms. What encourages me: there are many doing that in their teens, 20s & 30s, folks like You gal :-) (Think Live Earth/Live Aid) Warm regards, Roger
_Sam Harris
_Emeritus
Posts: 2261
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:35 am

Post by _Sam Harris »

Aw Roger, you flatter me my dear. :-)

I try...though I think that if I'm supposed to be called to "ministry", I'm gonna piss off a lot of people.

I will soon (hopefully, though I'm sure I'll pass all the background checks, it's the health that's in the way right now) be volunteering with some incarcerated youth, doing Bible study with young girls. My main goal will be not to turn them into fundies, but to let them know just how precious they are, in spite of where they are and what they've done. The woman who is the founder of the organization I'll be working with asked me why I was called to work with these kids, and I told her about my cousins, many of whom have gone the way of these kids. I told her about my earlier self-esteem problems, and my healing.

I unequivocably believe in a God of love, but I understand how reading the Bible "straight" and even with the wrong sort of teacher can distort one's view. It's not an easy text to read. Still, I think that for those who are up to it, we can take this text, and others, and start to look at faith from a more postmodern perspective (we looked at that a lot in one of my classes this past semester, and I still talk with my prof. from time to time). It's time we held ourselves accountable to one another in an ethical sense, and not just a moral one. It's time we focused on cleaning our individual spiritual houses so that we could invite the needy in, instead of just pointing out renovations that need to be done elsewhere.

One of the books that helped me a great deal was Woman, Thou Art Loosed, by TD Jakes. It speaks to women who were abused in their youth. I found I had to kind of get mad at the labels I had allowed to be put on me, and when you live under guilt and stigma, sometimes this is the only way to get out from under it. It is a righteous anger, a rage at the unfairness of being placed under such a guilt. God doesn't want this for us, so why do we endure it?

I agree with you, the path behind us is darker than the path ahead. Now to get the rest of society to realize this. :-)
Each one has to find his peace from within. And peace to be real must be unaffected by outside circumstances. -Ghandi
_Roger Morrison
_Emeritus
Posts: 1831
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2006 4:13 am

Post by _Roger Morrison »

Hi GIMR, sounds like a most worthy cause! Yes guilt, and i think equally--if not more--an impediment to our personal-positive ID is self-doubt/lack of self-confidence. Unfortunately a state (no/little self-confidence) required by subversive authoritarian persons & institutions to maintane their power positions. Such entities ID them selves by discouraging honest & geuine quest that leads to "...'truth' that frees..." rather than blinds and binds.

The power-of-one is Yours! Good tidings... Warm regards Roger
Post Reply