Do Feminist Christians Read The Bible? Facepalm!

1 minute 41 seconds of Biblical truths..

Advertisements


Categories: Bible, Speakers Corner

5 replies

  1. But surely the Christian ‘get-out’ clause is that with St Paul’s account of Jesus (peace be upon him) and the notion of there being no need to follow the Mosaic Law, then they have side – stepped the ‘problem’ of the Old Testament. Is that not so?

    Does the New Testament have violent verses?

    But actually is this whole topic even the right question? Shouldn’t we be asking: ‘How can we verify what was God’s (Allah’s) actual revelation (so we can grasp the actual Truth)?’

    (Thinking out loud.)

    Liked by 1 person

    • ModWestMuse,
      There is no “side-stepping” away from the problem of the OT for the Trinitarian Christian, as Jesus is believed by them to be part of the triune Godhead which then means that the God of the OT who ordered such violence was the very same triune God which in fact includes Jesus himself. This is a BIG problem for Trinitarians to cope with.

      Yes the NT has violent verses for instance in the following verse the Bible portrays Jesus as advocating violent physical Jihad (why else would one purchase a sword): “And He said to them, “But now, the one having a purse, let him take it, and likewise a bag; and the one having no sword, let him sell his cloak and buy one.” Luke 22:36

      With regard to your last question, the Holy Qur’an is the criterion for truth…but I’m sure you already knew that!! 🙂

      Liked by 2 people

    • I.

      The NT connected some of the “violent acts” directly committed by Yahweh. I don’t have comprehensive references but one does come to my mind is 1 Corinthians 10:

      10 For I do not want you to be unaware, brethren, that our fathers were all under the cloud and all passed through the sea; 2 and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea; 3 and all ate the same spiritual food; 4 and all drank the same spiritual drink, for they were drinking from a spiritual rock which followed them; and the rock was [a]Christ. 5 Nevertheless, with most of them God was not well-pleased; for they were laid low in the wilderness.

      6 Now these things happened as examples for us, so that we would not crave evil things as they also craved. 7 Do not be idolaters, as some of them were; as it is written, “The people sat down to eat and drink, and stood up to play.” 8 Nor let us act immorally, as some of them [b]did, and twenty-three thousand fell in one day. 9 Nor let us try the Lord, as some of them [c]did, and were destroyed by the serpents. 10 Nor grumble, as some of them [d]did, and were destroyed by the destroyer. 11 Now these things happened to them as an example, and they were written for our instruction, upon whom the ends of the ages have come. 12 Therefore let him who thinks he stands take heed that he does not fall. 13 No temptation has overtaken you but such as is common to man; and God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted beyond what you are able, but with the temptation will provide the way of escape also, so that you will be able to endure it.

      II.

      Bishop Barron tries to address this.

      He brings up Revelation with the lamb opening the scroll. He says (3:55) the imagery of the gentle lamb is a way of understanding the NT.We should read the Bible according to the standpoint of Christ crucified. (This is a suggestion for exegesis from Origen.) Barron says that if we read the Bible in such a away that God would appear capricious or vindictive, then you are reading it wrong. Apparently, this is a form of eisegesis, that is “reading in” as opposed to “drawing out” meaning from the text; it relies on a future revelation and future salvation history in order to understand it properly. So, since there was no definite incarnation before Christ, then how is one supposed to read the OT?

      He says that the passages should be read in an allegorical and spiritual way. I doubt it address the direct command from God.

      Liked by 1 person

    • I get the impression that saying that Christ fulfilled the Mosaic law is a cop-out for some to avoid answering difficult questions about some of its more violent content, historically however Christians have attempted to implement the mosaic law including the laws regarding women.

      Lets not also forget that Jesus regarded the law as holy as did St Paul, so even if we grant that Christians are not obliged to follow certain commandments, it is not correct to allow for the idea that this means we can reject certain parts of the law as it is still from God, old or new testament (terms that did not arrive until much later after these texts were written)

      Liked by 2 people

Trackbacks

  1. Do Feminist Christians Read The Bible? Facepalm! | kokicat

Please leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: