|
What makes the United States a great country is that its citizens
help run it. Our voice is heard in the voting booth. Our Free Press
keeps us on our toes. I can openly criticize my government, and you need
not agree with me. Although this makes many people uncomfortable, it is
our greatest strength.
We only need look at the former Soviet Union or, particularly, to the
former states of Yugoslavia to see the danger of stifling public debate.
These countries promoted themselves as places of harmonious living. They
suppressed public dissent. They claimed
the world would think badly of them should they argue among themselves.
But beneath their polished veneer latent mistrust, anger, and
disagreement festered without an outlet.
When finally the walls fell and as these communities thawed from the
deep chill of Communism, the visible result of suppression was anger,
violence and power struggle. Indeed, the notion that a lack of internal
debate is healthy is loudly contradicted by
our own headlines from Bosnia.
But we realized this even before the fall of Communism. During the rein
of the Communist Party in the USSR, only those suppressing dissent
thought it was a good thing. Those of us watching from the outside
laughed at the ridiculous notion that there were
no internal conflicts. In fact, it only made us distrust their
declarations as propaganda.
And yet, many of the same people who publicly condemned suppression of
dissent in the Soviet Union openly call for it in their churches and
places of worship.
When I wrote the articles, "Why Focus on the Family
is of the Devil" and "Why Abortion is
Biblical" I set out to make an argument against the type of
leadership and biblical understanding we have in the
Christian community. I expected many people would disagree with me, but
I never expected how strong the reaction would be. I also did not
realize how far suppression had permeated the ranks of the faithful.
Over and over I was lambasted for "attacking" other Christians. I was
asked to remove my article. I was told that my public disagreement with
Dobson and company would make the faith look bad. I was told I was
causing people to reject the faith and causing
weak Christians to falter. I was even accused of splitting Christianity
in two. Responses like this one were quite common: -
"I don't see a benefit in airing Christianity's dirty laundry in public.
It seems to me that this is confusing to new Christians and does harm to
the spreading of the Gospel."
While I seriously doubt I have that kind of power, it's fascinating to
consider why readers would say such things. It is to that question,
then, that I put forth the following expose.
For indeed modern Christianity seems to abhor dissent, pushing, instead,
to be viewed as harmonious and without conflict. Christians are not
really admonished to read the Bible for themselves, but rather are
taught to interpret it according to set standards -- standards set by
those vying for leadership within the greater Christian community. You
will see that more people than not now claim we need to know "how" to
read the Bible, as if it cannot stand on its own.
Modern Christianity is so concerned with showing a united front that a
host of misunderstandings and outright evils are ignored for the sake of
unity. A host of disagreements are suppressed. Differing perspectives
are suspect. And dissent is evil. You only need read the excerpts from
the "Letters to the
Editor" page that are directed at me personally to see these
attitudes in full bloom.
Those excerpts can be found in my expose entitled, "
In the Name of Love: verbal reactions to the
article on 'Why Focus on the Family is of the Devil.'"
The unfortunate side effects of trying to appear unified are grave. One,
non-Christians write us off as phony the same way we wrote off the
Soviet Union. They easily see through the facade and instead see us
trying to cover up our differences -- which is
inherently dishonest. Two, people don't really know why they believe
what they believe. We have been taught to follow Christian authority --
not to publicly question -- and to read the Bible as our leaders tell us
to read it. Thus we get comments like this one when one of us actually
points out things in the Bible that run counter to the Culture of
Christianity we've created:
-
"What you're getting out of your bible, compared to what I'm getting out
of my bible, I really just cannot fathom the contrast."
But don't just take my word for it. The following are excerpts from the
letters I've received. In them you'll find that we not only disagree on
many topics related to our faith, but we also tend to believe that
everyone else believes as we do. You'll also
see Christians simply repeating what they have heard, often quoting the
Bible inaccurately. This is precisely why we SHOULD be airing our dirty
laundry. We need wholehearted and honest debate on what we really
believe and why.
Some readers claim we must only use the Bible:
Most readers claim we must know how to interpret the Bible or that we
should use other sources for inspiration:
Readers showed many different interpretations of the Bible:
On being a Christian.......
About Religious Leaders.......
About Abortion.......
About Homosexuality.......
Homosexuality: It says right there in any bible thats is absolutely wrong ! There's no two sides to that issue. There are plenty of examples of God striking back at people who carried out that lifestyle (floods).
Were I a practicing homosexual, I would live in terror of the Bible and of God's judgment.
On Interpreting Scripture.......
I was stunned. I could not believe that one who implies that he is a Christian would hold such contrary views with what is clearly written in the Bible.
Christianity is not in the Sermon on the Mount.
God did turn his back on people at different times throughout history.
I was also distressed this week when I heard of people involved in healthy, loving courtships and engagements, avoiding sexual activity with their committed partners at all costs, in order to meet God's perceived will. I wonder what God's will really
was for them!
Psalms was written in a time much different than ours. The most important part of the Bible is the many parts showing and telling us that Jesus' blood was shed to take away our sins
Satan can take, and has been given the OK to do so by God, anything and use it to further his cause.
We are commanded to pray. That's it, pray.
Some readers took it upon themselves to judge my faith in God:
I suppose from all this I could deduct that in order to read my Bible I
must have "the ability to read the original languages," I must
"pray for an open mind and true leading," and I must only use
"those areas where it is clearly speaking without allegory." I
guess the Bible doesn't really stand by itself as the Word of God; it
must be interpreted correctly in order to be followed.
Likewise, there are some parts of the Bible that are more God's Word
than others since "the most important part of the Bible" only has
to do with Christ. But then I "cannot know the truth" because I
am not one of "God's Elect, those predestined by Him, for His purpose."
That must be why "none of us need theological training" and why I
shouldn't "attempt to try to back up my views on abortion with
Scripture."
But heck, we don't "need the Bible" to help us "determine the
right or wrong" when we have "The Didache," despite the fact
that "adding or subtracting from the word of God as given in the 66
books, is subject to Damnation." I guess all Catholics are damned
since they have more books in their Bible.
I found that some Christians "take but a slight breeze but to push
in one direction," even though "if any person or organization can
push you out of the Kingdom of God you were never in it." I learned
that "the devil can not destroy fait
h" but I guess his servants can because "we all stand in danger
of following false doctrines, the doctrines of demons who are infinitely
wiser than are we" are.
I learned that the "Bible teaches that the punishment for the
'death' of an unborn child is death," or was it "a man is not
put to death if he hits a woman and kills an unborn fetus." (The
second one is more accurate.) It was also pointed out that, "there
is blood in an unborn child" and that "life is in the blood"
so that means the unborn child is alive and should not be removed. I
suppose I better not get my tonsils out either, since there's blood in
them too.
Through this process we clarified that we "shall never murder"
unless it's "ordered by GOD" but even then we might be
"killed or punished by GOD," but then only if we "shed
innocent blood," whatever that means. We also learned
that one of the "examples of God striking back at" homosexuals
was by "floods." I guess Noah's family were the only
heterosexuals of his day.
I rejoiced that some believers would "try to remember to pray"
for me since they assumed me "to be a brother in Christ." Heaven
help me if they assume I'm not a brother in Christ. I might not get any
prayers at all.
Through all of this what I learned most was that we desperately need to
openly and publicly debate the issues that divide us. We need to be
honest with ourselves and the rest of the world rather than hide behind
the veneer of unity and good feelings. We n
eed to stop pretending that we all agree and that we all know how to interpret the Bible correctly. We need to move away from the attitude represented in this guy's thoughts:
-
"You can disagree and argue with this as much as you would like, but it
is Truth and you cannot overcome that no matter how much you debate it."
If truth is indeed truth then it can withstand debate. If Dobson is
really working for God, then he can withstand attack. If Abortion is
truly condemned in the Bible, then searching the Bible for all possible
understandings of it cannot produce negative results. And if people
truly know why they believe what they believe,
then nothing I say or do will detract from their faith.
And when we start to allow dissent and free debate, when we stop
worrying about being seen as "against" the sanctity of our religious
institutions and for true understanding of God's intentions in this
world, even if they disagree with our dogmas and personal doctrines,
then non-believers may start seeing us as real people
with a real faith rather than plastic Christians hiding behind smiling
faces and forced unity.
|