Conversation with Emily continued...

I have a new installment of my ongoing conversation with my cousin Emily, Enjoy!


Here is Em's response to my last reply to her,

I know it's taken me a long time to reply to this, but It's taken me a while to formulate a response. lol, it was such a long message, I still can't take it all in, so I just want to address a few things. Ezekiel does say that gluttony was one of their sins, but there are many other verses in the Bible, such as Jude 7. (I put all of it below, just to keep the context right.)
(Now I want to remind you, although you once fully knew it, that Jesus, who saved a people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed those who did not believe. And the angels who did not stay within their own position of authority, but left their proper dwelling, he has kept in eternal chains under gloomy darkness until the judgment of the great day— just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which likewise indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural desire, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire.)
That clearly states that the sin they were punished for was sexual immorality and unnatural desire.

The next thing I want to address is your view of Jesus. Yes, He was a great man, a loving, kind teacher, and he taught wonderful lessons, like you said. But, He said some very shocking things, such as claiming to be God. Now, either He was a good teacher, or He wasn't. If a teacher teaches a lie, that's not a good teacher. So in order to agree that He was a good teacher, we must agree with what He taught, specifically His deity. Also, I would argue that you have rejected God, though you say different. God has revealed Himself to us as fully as we can know Him in the Bible, and if you reject parts of the Bible, you reject parts of God. I think you have made a version of God that agrees with your lifestyle and beliefs rather than conforming your life and beliefs to God's unchanging truth.

Yes, many Christians have missed the point of Christianity, and what God commanded them to do, but that doesn't give anyone license to ignore it.

Homosexuality is sin. The Bible says it plainly. I agree with the popular idea that people can be born homosexual, but I don't think that gives them the freedom to indluge. Many people inherit the sin of alchoholism, but just because it's in their genes doens' tmean they should indulge. Again, people can actually be born with a "killer" gene that gives them a desire to murder people for enjoyment, but that doens't mean they should, and it doesn't make it legal. If you love Jesus, like you've said, if you have a close relationship with God like you said, you must take the Bible at face value, you must believe what it says, regardless of how much you like it or how nicely it fits into your life.

Sorry about the name slip, you've been Susie in my head for so long, lol. I didn't hear that you preffered Susanna. I'll try very hard to keep that in mind.


Now here is my response :)
This is kind of scattered and really long(I'm probably going to have to break it up into two messages). I don't mean to overwhelm you, I just have a lot to say on this subject:)

The problem with taking the Bible at face value is that it means different things to different people. To the Amish, it means living a life apart, wearing dark austere clothing, allowing no dolls with faces, no movies, no cars, no electricity in their homes and much more. To a liberal Christian, it means that they accept that the Bible was written by men and is in many ways a reflection of the times it was written in and, while there are divine truths within one should live by, God did not mean for every word to be considered inerrant truth.

But even among those Christians who consider it inerrant truth, there are thousands upon thousands of different interpretations of the bible by people claiming they are taking the Bible at "face value". There are around 38,000 denominations of Christianity. They all feel they are taking the Bible at face value yet in doing that have come up with thousands of different interpretations as to what exactly that means. Who is "right"? Is it Baptists? Catholics? Lutherans? Unitarian Universalists? It is the Charismatics, the Pentecostals, the Mormons, the Church of God, the Presbyterians, the Old German Baptists, the Mennonites, the Quakers or the Amish? Who is right? They all claim they are right and they claim they are taking the Bible at face value yet they have come to very very different conclusions.

You said
"I think you have made a version of God that agrees with your lifestyle and beliefs rather than conforming your life and beliefs to God's unchanging truth."

This is what everyone, including yourself, does. You interpret the bible in such a way that you can live the lifestyle you do, movies, music, being politically involved, going to college. Have you ever talked about the sermon or biblical teachings in church with males? That is wrong according to the bible, women are supposed to remain silent in church. Do you ever wear pants? It's an abomination to wear clothing of the opposite sex. Do you keep your head covered when you pray? Failure to do so is a sin according to the Bible. Have you ever had short hair? Do you ever braid your hair? There are biblical verses against those things as well. You know your Christmas Tree? There is a verse in Jeremiah(I quoted it on facebook) that says not to bring trees inside and decorate them with silver and gold like the heathens. But you manage just fine to wear pants, discuss sermons in church with males, pray without head coverings, have braided hair and sit around Christmas trees and you still feel like you are following "God's unchanging truth". You've chosen to believe in a version of God that agrees with your lifestyle and beliefs rather then conforming to (what you believe is) God's unchanging truth. If you truly want to live by "God's unchanging truth" you would be living a life very much like the Amish. But you don't, you enjoy your lifestyle so you conform your God to that rather then truly following everything in the New Testament. To mirror your words back to you, if you truly believed that the Bible is the inerrant truth it seems you would be living it no matter how much you like it or how nicely it fits into your life. If you were to do what Jesus said to do to truly follow him, you would reject your family(even your fiancee) give away all your belongings and go live a life of service to the poor. But you aren't going to do that, you wouldn't even consider rejecting your family and your fiancee to go and serve the poor. So like me, you pick and choose what parts of Gods words to apply to your life and which to ignore because it's inconvenient and does not fit into your chosen lifestyle. The difference is I don't consider it the inerrant truth I consider it an ancient work written by man that has divine truth within. I don't think I'm meant to live by the social structure of biblical times that are reflected in many "sins" in the Bible. I think many edicts of the bible are reflections of the men who wrote them and the times they were written in. I don't believe God intended women never to speak in church or to never cut or braid their hair or people to be homosexual as it exists today. I especially don't believe that God intended his followers to ever make laws regarding their personal morality for the masses to follow.

You were right that Jesus said some really shocking things. Jesus was in fact a liberal. Nothing conservative about him. He came to upset the conservatives of his day and to shake up the old ways. He ate with tax collectors and prostitutes, he broke the laws and he threw the moneychangers out of the temple. He did indeed say he was God, but he also said we are all God and Children of God just like he is.

I do take the Bible at face value and I don't deny that there are Divine truths within and I don't think Jesus was lying when he said he was Divine. But I don't think that Jesus telling the truth about his divinity means I have to accept every single word of the Bible as divine truth. And I don't see why anyone has to accept other peoples interpretations of the scriptures. With so many to choose from it's next to impossible to say "this is the ONE CORRECT interpretation" about any of them so one has to listen to the voice of God that they hear and decide for themselves what they feel God means.

As for the sexual immorality and unnatural desires Sodom and Gomorrah was punished for perhaps that was sex with multiple partners, incest, or having relations with an unwilling partner or chidren. It does not say that the sexual immorality is monogamous relationship between two people of the same sex. As for being unnatural, homosexuality has existed in some form in every culture and in every era of history. It exists in the animal kingdom as well. Seems pretty natural to me. In the end I suspect we'll have to agree to disagree on this subject.

I have to say it bothers me greatly to have homosexuality as a inborn trait being compared to being a natural born killer(which there are out there). When we look at the "sin" of homosexuality we have a sin that involves two consenting adults. When we look at people killing others we have violence and people who cannot consent involved. We have people being violently robbed of their lives verses someone only engaging with consenting others. I don't see the fact that some people are born with a killing gene as evidence that people born gay should live a celibate life.

But considering it's a belief, we have the fact that it's not fair for one man to be forced by another man's chosen belief. Do you believe in freedom, or freedom for yourself and those who believe as you do only? Would you want to be forced to follow another religions moral beliefs? If not why is it okay to force the gay people to live by your moral code? You believe they are immoral, but they don't believe they are. Should it not be up to each person to decide their own moral code outside of harm caused to others and their things? Also, think about this, on the day you are married, there will be gay people exchanging vows, in America, in Canada, in Brittan, will the fact that that's happening have any effect on the vows you exchange with your beloved? Will it undermine or lessen the feeling and devotion you and Gary feel for each other?

As for my name, yeah, I don't care for Susie at all anymore :P I never was thrilled with it as a nickname, but once I became an adult I knew it had to go! Tad is the name I go by, but for those who don't find that suitable I would rather them call me Susanna and me feel uncomfortable then to insist they call me the name all my friends and almost all of my family call me. I don't particularly understand why Tad is unsuitable as a nickname, but that's neither here nor there. The only ones I don't insist change what they call me are my grandparents and aunts and uncles(I gave my parents the choice as well but they both graciously opted to call me by what I feel most comfortable being called). They are the only ones I'm OK with calling me Susie. There is a story behind the nickname, when I went backpacking on the Appalachian Trail at age 21 I went by the trail name Tadpole. Some of the other hikers called me Tad and it really clicked, when I came home I spread the word I wanted to go by the nickname Tad and it's stuck tight. The people who have only known me as Tad tell me "I can't imagine you being a Susie, it doesn't fit you at all, Tad suits you perfectly". It's been ten years now so you'll have to excuse me that it feels odd for people to call me by my formal name.

I'd like to say I'm enjoying our exchange, I don't mind being told I'm wrong, I'm always willing to re examine things. I can't promise I'll come to the same conclusions the person I'm discussing things with wants me too, but I will always try my best to be respectful of other peoples deeply held beliefs.

How are your wedding plans coming along? It's so much fun, I had a blast picking out everything and finding things that fit in my theme and the budget. You will be such a beautiful bride!

Bright Blessings Emily,
Love,
Tad

I am finding this conversation extremely enjoyable. I love talking to people about religion. I think religion practiced personally is a beautiful thing, but I think when people try to make laws that others must live by based on their religion it's a very bad thing. The standard of laws being based on harm done to others and their property is one that America should strive for and one can live by their beliefs without supporting legislation that restricts the freedom of others.

Happy Holidays vs Merry Christmas

So the battle cry of the holidays is heard and it's over wishing people well. Ironic no? People are all up in arms, "We aren't allowed to wish anyone MERRY CHRISTMAS anymore!!! We have to say HAPPY HOLIDAYS now, it's a travesty, Political Correctness gone amuk!!eleventyone!1!". I say Balderdash! There is no need for this to be a divisive issue.


So you may be asking, "well Tadpole, why should I stop wishing people a Merry Christmas?". My answer is that you shouldn't with the qualifier of there are times where Happy Holidays is the more considerate and polite greeting. Are you going to church? Wish everyone there Merry Christmas with plenty of joy. Are you at your families Christmas gathering? Greet everyone a bright and robust Merry Christmas. Are you going to a party that was called a Christmas Party, it's a pretty safe bet you can wish people there jovial Merry Christmas. Did you meet friends who celebrate Christmas on the street? They will appreciate and return your cheery greeting of Merry Christmas.

So now you may be asking "Well then smarty frog pants, why do we need Happy Holidays at all then?". My answer to this is simple, when you are wishing a stranger well at this time, unless they are wearing something that indicates their religious beliefs, by wishing them Merry Christmas you are making the assumption that they celebrate the same holiday you do and frankly, making assumptions is rude. They may be of any number of religious beliefs, including sects of Christians who don't believe in celebrating Christmas. It makes no sense to wish people a Merry Christmas if they don't celebrate Christmas.

So here's a quick guide to who to wish what :)

People who you know celebrate Christmas: Merry Christmas!

People who you know are other beliefs, wish them happy whatever they celebrate: Happy Hanukkah or Blessed Yule or whatever greeting goes with their holiday!

People you don't know well enough to know their religious beliefs: Happy Holidays!

So we see that Merry Christmas is not on the verge of being abolished, it should be alive and well within groups that celebrate the holiday. Being considerate, kind and not making assumptions are a part of basic manners so it has nothing to do with being "Politically Correct". It has everything to do with being polite and not making assumptions.

So it's been a little while...

but I'm back with more froggy thoughts. Life has been going well enough. Mr. Tadpole has been enjoying his new job. It's work he really enjoys doing and he hasn't had a bad day yet:). It would be nice if they would have him go full time, but I'm just grateful it's working out so well.

I've been thinking a lot about how some people get worked up over the names for things. Call a Christmas tree a Yule tree or Holiday tree and watch the heads spin. That apparently is a very bad thing and (somehow) anti-Christian even though there is nothing particularly Christian about decorating trees to begin with . And the fact that many people who celebrate the midwinter holiday season are not Christian also is selectively ignored.

I'm not upset that people are Christian. Everyone has a right to their dearly held beliefs. Christians have every right to their beliefs and to have them respected. But so do Pagans as well, and Jews, and Atheists and Muslims and Buddhists and everyone else. I don't think it's fair for anyone to expect their world or society to be centric to their personally chosen belief system. It's a shame we can't seem to find a happy medium. Where we are free to shape our lives to our personal beliefs but we recognize that there are lots of other people with lots of other beliefs that deserve the same respect ours do.

That's what this season is supposed to be about, goodwill, respect, generosity and kindness of heart. It's supposed to be about love and warmth and togetherness, with families, with friends, as people sharing common celebrations. Does it really matter that the Christians are celebrating Christmas, the Neo Pagans are celebrating the Solstice and Yule and the Jews are celebrating Hanukkah? I can't think of one reason why it should.