Joanne Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 I think that if you do not take the Bible as literal.... you can't really take it at all. It is just a book of stories. NO real relegion or faith. Why? Because we have NO authority or great knowledge to pick & chose which verses we would like to be real and those which are not. If you do not accept the Bible as a literal, then you can't accept Christ as who he professes to be.... remember it might not be accurate. If one verse isn't accurate.... and subject to all's interpretation... then NONE is accurate & subject to all's interpretation. So, you can't believe any of it. (I do not follow this thinking & believe it is literal). I find most people only pick & chose what they want to read & apply. This makes it neat & tidy in our minds. NOT IN our LIVES though.. I am trying to say this respectfully and kindly. Clearly you are a passionate believer. I love when I encounter great faith. But the above statemetns are 1) hurtful and 2) not true. You might "believe" them but they are not true. It's absolutely, positively and 100 percent possible to believe the Bible is Truth and yet not literal. I will never be surprised when science or archeological discoveries affirm accuracies in the Bible. But I don't need thw Bible, a God breathed work of love, creativity, art and metaphor to be *literal*. I certainly don't need it to be literal in order to be a Christian, accepting Jesus as Lord and the Bible as my authority. That's YOUR expression of faith; have at it. But please don't dismiss or disregard or diminish mine with platitudes of "if you don't believe it all, you don't believe." There are many rooms in my fathers mansion. He's called me to mine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caitilin Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 I am trying to say this respectfully and kindly. Clearly you are a passionate believer. I love when I encounter great faith. But the above statemetns are 1) hurtful and 2) not true. You might "believe" them but they are not true. It's absolutely, positively and 100 percent possible to believe the Bible is Truth and yet not literal. I will never be surprised when science or archeological discoveries affirm accuracies in the Bible. But I don't need thw Bible, a God breathed work of love, creativity, art and metaphor to be *literal*. I certainly don't need it to be literal in order to be a Christian, accepting Jesus as Lord and the Bible as my authority. That's YOUR expression of faith; have at it. But please don't dismiss or disregard or diminish mine with platitudes of "if you don't believe it all, you don't believe." There are many rooms in my fathers mansion. He's called me to mine. :iagree:Thank-you, Joanne, for saying it so kindly and so well. I totally agree with you. :grouphug: all around. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruby Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 I have 4 chidren and love my dh. We have lived together since we were married. We hold a Biblical view of marriage: one man and one wife no porn (hard, soft, or any other kind) Celebrating 14 yrs of marriage here. Totally agree with you all, only three kids though. I too am starting to realize how strange it seems to others to have this type of lifestyle. This thread has been an eye opener and I've really received an education on this board. Love to have great conversations (peaceful, thoughtful, respectful) despite different views. Ruby Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kate CA Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 I agree that it is a parable , I read the Bible non -literally for this very reason. You just gave evidence of my point . If you assert that the Bible is to be read literally, as is done so often to justify positions on social issues, and at the same time assert it to be the infallible word of God there is an impossiblity that both propositions are true as it is internally contradictory. So some parts are to be read literally when it says what you wish it to say on a particular issue and other parts are to be read figuratively ???It is not a consistent approach to interpreting scripture but to each his/her own. I was not using that passage as evidence that polygamy was Biblical just to show that fundamentalists read it literally when it suits and figuratively when it does not. I was not arguing for an extreme literal interpretation for every portion of the Bible. Indeed, I do not believe that God brought the Israelites out of Egypt on eagles' wings as one would have to interpret the scripture as saying if one was to be exactly literal: Exodus 19:4 'You yourselves have seen what I did to Egypt, and how I carried you on eagles' wings and brought you to myself. With that said, I don't think that I am interpreting that passage to suit my moral opinions. *I* am not interpreting it at all - the whole of scripture interprets scripture. God does not anywhere condone polygamy. That some of His people partake of this sin, does not mean He condones it. We are willful sinful people and often do as we wish. I do assert that the Bible is the living active Word of God. There is no internal conflict with scripture because some passages must be interpreted literally and some figuratively. And frankly, I am not choosing which ones to interpret *my* way. As I said before, scripture interprets scripture. It is often quite obvious which are which, and then some portions are not so clearly obvious. This does not indicate that scripture is at fault or errant. I was not arguing for or against the literal interpretation of scripture. I was arguing against that passage being in support of polygamy since you seemed to indicate in your post that you felt it supported it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joanne Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 Yay for all happy, functioning and healthy families trying to do their best in a complex world in a complex time. (((((Hugs)))) and prayers for healing and resources to families who fall short of the "healthy" mark for whatever reason. Respecting traditional "death us do part" marriage between a man and a woman exists in the FAR majority; even by people who ALSO accept a wider range of arrangements. The long term one marriage with kids and mother and father has not been displaced as an icon or even as an ideal. Please don't be so passive aggressive as to suggest "traditonal values" (as defined in this thread) are scarce. Accepting, tolerating, embracing or even participating in a different arrangement does not automatically put down or diminish yours. Play the minority card only if you are, indeed, a minority. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Firefly Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 Yay for all happy, functioning and healthy families trying to do their best in a complex world in a complex time. (((((Hugs)))) and prayers for healing and resources to families who fall short of the "healthy" mark for whatever reason. Respecting traditional "death us do part" marriage between a man and a woman exists in the FAR majority; even by people who ALSO accept a wider range of arrangements. The long term one marriage with kids and mother and father has not been displaced as an icon or even as an ideal. Please don't be so passive aggressive as to suggest "traditonal values" (as defined in this thread) are scarce. Accepting, tolerating, embracing or even participating in a different arrangement does not automatically put down or diminish yours. Play the minority card only if you are, indeed, a minority. :thumbup: You go girl!! Kelli (in a "traditional" marriage with my college sweetheart for almost 20 years...) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5kidsforME Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 Yay for all happy, functioning and healthy families trying to do their best in a complex world in a complex time. (((((Hugs)))) and prayers for healing and resources to families who fall short of the "healthy" mark for whatever reason. Respecting traditional "death us do part" marriage between a man and a woman exists in the FAR majority; even by people who ALSO accept a wider range of arrangements. The long term one marriage with kids and mother and father has not been displaced as an icon or even as an ideal. Please don't be so passive aggressive as to suggest "traditonal values" (as defined in this thread) are scarce. Accepting, tolerating, embracing or even participating in a different arrangement does not automatically put down or diminish yours. Play the minority card only if you are, indeed, a minority. This is hurtful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildflower Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 I have 4 chidren and love my dh. We have lived together since we were married. We hold a Biblical view of marriage: one man and one wife no porn (hard, soft, or any other kind) Please note that I am not asking for anyone to agree or disagree with me. I'm just sharing. ;) an alternative lifestye! LOL good for you! i think we can say the same thing..... you know all these posts about porn has me wondering- does my husband secretly watch porn? in 13 years we've never mentioned the word once (maybe a joke on my part about my 'breast feeding physique' being a potential money maker) but nothing serious. do you just go out and ask DH- are you pro- or con- porn? seriously i am just this slow...:confused: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beansprouts Posted July 2, 2009 Share Posted July 2, 2009 I have 4 chidren and love my dh. We have lived together since we were married. We hold a Biblical view of marriage: one man and one wife no porn (hard, soft, or any other kind) Please note that I am not asking for anyone to agree or disagree with me. I'm just sharing. ;) Now I've seen it all... :lol: I am unclear about the use of the word "minority" in this thread. When more than 50% of marriages end in divorce, and countless other families are non-traditional in structure, it would seem to me that those of us who remain married are the minority. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tree House Academy Posted July 2, 2009 Share Posted July 2, 2009 Hmmmm...what I believe in and wish I had done now does not always match up with what life was really like. i.e. My parents were divorced and I never wanted to be...but then I found that I didn't much care for fist fighting my ex husband NOR did I care to be called a stupid b*tch daily...so I divorced. I am assuming this post was sarcasm meant to be a slap in the face to the poster about her family choices. I, in no way, believe in or wish to practice polygamy...but I absolutely applaude the OP of the polygamy thread for being so open and honest about a lifestyle that many of us would never even consider. She is showing us that it is not just freaky "out there" types who have different beliefs - gosh... aren't we, as homeschoolers, already going against the social norms? Why, some (inlcuding myself 10 years ago) would call US freaks..... I am thinking glass houses and stones here.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laura in VA Posted July 2, 2009 Author Share Posted July 2, 2009 (edited) Hmmmm...what I believe in and wish I had done now does not always match up with what life was really like. i.e. My parents were divorced and I never wanted to be...but then I found that I didn't much care for fist fighting my ex husband NOR did I care to be called a stupid b*tch daily...so I divorced. I am assuming this post was sarcasm meant to be a slap in the face to the poster about her family choices. I, in no way, believe in or wish to practice polygamy...but I absolutely applaude the OP of the polygamy thread for being so open and honest about a lifestyle that many of us would never even consider. She is showing us that it is not just freaky "out there" types who have different beliefs - gosh... aren't we, as homeschoolers, already going against the social norms? Why, some (inlcuding myself 10 years ago) would call US freaks..... I am thinking glass houses and stones here.... Sarcasm? Maybe. Meant to be a slap in the face? Absolutely not. I never made any disparaging remarks regarding the thread you are referencing. I'm just sharing. Guess you missed the deleted posts, huh. Me, too, but they were indeed personal attacks on me. I've made more mistakes than I care to remember. I'm sure a lot of us have. Edited July 2, 2009 by Laura in VA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Veritaserum Posted July 2, 2009 Share Posted July 2, 2009 God does not anywhere condone polygamy. That some of His people partake of this sin, does not mean He condones it. What about Abraham, Sarah, and Hagar? Or Jacob and his wives? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MomOfOneFunOne Posted July 2, 2009 Share Posted July 2, 2009 Now I've seen it all... :lol: I am unclear about the use of the word "minority" in this thread. When more than 50% of marriages end in divorce, and countless other families are non-traditional in structure, it would seem to me that those of us who remain married are the minority. In interpreted in a setting in which a speaker "of national renown" stated that the divorce rate in Oklahoma is at "52% of all marriages." She also said that the national average is getting closer to 51% everyday. and for what it's worth, it was a secular, government-sponsored event and she seemed in every way a secular speaker. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kate CA Posted July 2, 2009 Share Posted July 2, 2009 What about Abraham, Sarah, and Hagar? Or Jacob and his wives? "That some of His people partake of this sin, does not mean He condones it. We are willful sinful people and often do as we wish." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Storm Bay Posted July 2, 2009 Share Posted July 2, 2009 What about Abraham, Sarah, and Hagar? Or Jacob and his wives? It happened, but wasn't condoned, and there's a difference. That becomes very clear when you look at the Bible as a whole, not just it's parts. In both Genesis and again when Jesus Christ was on earth teaching and in at least one of the epistles that the standard was one wife one husband. However, you certainly do see stipulations laid out in the law given to Moses about divorce and about taking a second wife. But the Bible teaches that Jesus fulfilled the law and didn't marry, so these rules weren't requirements of the law that had to be carried out. At any rate, I think this thread was meant more tongue in cheek than anything else. I finally found the original thread (no one here linked it for me so I had to look and look.) As for divorce, even though the Bible doesn't condone it, I think anyone who outright condemns it in every case is legalist. You cannot expect someone to live in abuse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Veritaserum Posted July 2, 2009 Share Posted July 2, 2009 It happened, but wasn't condoned, and there's a difference. That becomes very clear when you look at the Bible as a whole, not just it's parts. Hmm.... I guess I disagree about it becoming "very clear". ;) When I read the stories about Abraham and Jacob I don't get the sense that they were sinning. I agree that the norm is one man, one woman and I think that God designed it to be that way. However, I think it's possible that some of the polygamous relationships were sanctioned by God. Anyway, this thread is probably long enough. :tongue_smilie: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tree House Academy Posted July 2, 2009 Share Posted July 2, 2009 Guess you missed the deleted posts, huh. Me, too, but they were indeed personal attacks on me. I guess I did miss the deleted posts...are you talking about in this thread, or the other thread? Someone attacked you personally for your family values? My opinion...to each his own. If I believe in something strongly, then I make sure to stick by what *I* believe. But it is surely never my place to judge others or try and make them feel the way I do about things. I leave that up to the God that I believe in...and if I die and figure out I was wrong all this time, that is okay too. I lived my life the way I felt was right and didn't let anyone tell me different. That, in itself, is pretty darn good. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soph the vet Posted July 2, 2009 Share Posted July 2, 2009 Hmm.... I guess I disagree about it becoming "very clear". ;) When I read the stories about Abraham and Jacob I don't get the sense that they were sinning. I agree that the norm is one man, one woman and I think that God designed it to be that way. However, I think it's possible that some of the polygamous relationships were sanctioned by God. Anyway, this thread is probably long enough. :tongue_smilie: Sanctioned, like set apart or considered holy? I have to respectfully disagree. Sovereign over but not sanctioned. God obviously knew the choices Abraham and Jacob would make and the resulting consequences. Sin has consequences...I know because I live it....we all do in some way. Abraham was promised a son and instead of waiting on God's perfect timing he and Sarah took matters into their own hands by having him sleep with Hagar. Look at the result, Ishmael. A great nation according to God but also a people who would always be at enmity with those around them. We see that even to this day. As for Jacob he was tricked by Laban into marrying Leah, not that it should let him off the hook for then marrying the sister he truly loved, Rachel, but God caused her to be barren for a long time because of this and then she dies in childbirth with the second one. Joseph grows up the envy of his brothers because his dad plays favorites and family strife reigns in this household. Jacob's polygamy resulted in one of the most famous dysfunctional families of all time. Did God know every detail, orchestrate our sinful ways for His Glory and remain in control over it all yes? But to say He sanctioned it, to ignore the obvious sin in each of these stories, God would not sanction sin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kate CA Posted July 2, 2009 Share Posted July 2, 2009 Sanctioned, like set apart or considered holy? I have to respectfully disagree. Sovereign over but not sanctioned. God obviously knew the choices Abraham and Jacob would make and the resulting consequences. Sin has consequences...I know because I live it....we all do in some way. Abraham was promised a son and instead of waiting on God's perfect timing he and Sarah took matters into their own hands by having him sleep with Hagar. Look at the result, Ishmael. A great nation according to God but also a people who would always be at enmity with those around them. We see that even to this day. As for Jacob he was tricked by Laban into marrying Leah, not that it should let him off the hook for then marrying the sister he truly loved, Rachel, but God caused her to be barren for a long time because of this and then she dies in childbirth with the second one. Joseph grows up the envy of his brothers because his dad plays favorites and family strife reigns in this household. Jacob's polygamy resulted in one of the most famous dysfunctional families of all time. Did God know every detail, orchestrate our sinful ways for His Glory and remain in control over it all yes? But to say He sanctioned it, to ignore the obvious sin in each of these stories, God would not sanction sin. Thanks, Soph! I agree completely. :001_smile: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laura in VA Posted July 2, 2009 Author Share Posted July 2, 2009 I guess I did miss the deleted posts...are you talking about in this thread, or the other thread? Someone attacked you personally for your family values? My opinion...to each his own. If I believe in something strongly, then I make sure to stick by what *I* believe. But it is surely never my place to judge others or try and make them feel the way I do about things. I leave that up to the God that I believe in...and if I die and figure out I was wrong all this time, that is okay too. I lived my life the way I felt was right and didn't let anyone tell me different. That, in itself, is pretty darn good. :) Rebecca- Yes, I'm referring to this thread. Attacked not for my family values, but for mistakes I have admitted to and repented from in my past. No worries- :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tree House Academy Posted July 2, 2009 Share Posted July 2, 2009 Rebecca-Yes, I'm referring to this thread. Attacked not for my family values, but for mistakes I have admitted to and repented from in my past. No worries- :) Yeah, see, judging people in one way or another for their life choices is just not my thing. Glad the posts were deleted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lovedtodeath Posted July 2, 2009 Share Posted July 2, 2009 I really don't get the point. You are not sharing any details about your life, there are no updates, and to my knowledge no one here has asked about your marital status. I just don't see the need for a spin-off with such a 'plain' OP. *shrug* I was thinking the same thing. ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lovedtodeath Posted July 2, 2009 Share Posted July 2, 2009 God made the example in for us in the Garden. We goofed it all up. I think that if you do not take the Bible as literal.... you can't really take it at all. Why on earth are you not on my friends list? :001_smile: That will be rectified shortly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WishboneDawn Posted July 2, 2009 Share Posted July 2, 2009 I think that if you do not take the Bible as literal.... you can't really take it at all. It is just a book of stories. NO real relegion or faith. Why? Because we have NO authority or great knowledge to pick & chose which verses we would like to be real and those which are not. If you do not accept the Bible as a literal, then you can't accept Christ as who he professes to be.... remember it might not be accurate. If one verse isn't accurate.... and subject to all's interpretation... then NONE is accurate & subject to all's interpretation. So, you can't believe any of it. (I do not follow this thinking & believe it is literal). I find most people only pick & chose what they want to read & apply. This makes it neat & tidy in our minds. NOT IN our LIVES though. Also the arguement of Monks changing verses as they copied isn't good today b/c so many translations skip the latin & go back to the oldest verses found (in Greek & other languages.... and some date very closely to the time of Christ's life) The most accurate accounts are the ones closest to the event or person. I think you simply need to read up on liberal and moderate Biblical scholarship. The idea that everyone who doesn't interpret scripture literally is always picking and choosing is flawed. There are systems of interpretation that make good sense that aren't literal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marylou Posted July 2, 2009 Share Posted July 2, 2009 I think you simply need to read up on liberal and moderate Biblical scholarship. The idea that everyone who doesn't interpret scripture literally is always picking and choosing is flawed. There are systems of interpretation that make good sense that aren't literal. And all Christians should also read up on others who consider themselves Christian, yet and have said if the bones of Jesus are found someday it would not change what they believe at all! :001_huh: But that would have to be another thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.