The Word of God

How Important is the Word of God to the Church Today?

Published on December 3, 2004 By preacherman In Religion

How important is the Word of God for the church today? Does the church seem to be a falling away from the truth of God's Word supplanting it with a gospel more palatable to the flesh?

preacherman

Comments (Page 1)

Danny Bassette

on Dec 03, 2004

The word of god should be the basis for the church. As for it falling away, I would say it varies between churches, which in itself brings up the whole things about why there is more then one. Some churches are clearly about being palatable, others arn't. Yep, that's my answer, and I'm sticking to it until I change it

T_Bone4Justice

on Dec 03, 2004

I think God is playing to an audience that is afraid to laugh at its own humanity. I think the Church is too caught up in the letter (i.e. literalist interpretation) of the Bible and has fallen away from the spirit in which it was written. Not the other way around. Who did Jesus hang around with: the poor, the down-trodden, the outcasts of society, the sinners, or the Pharasees? The Church has continued to be too involved in politics. Jesus did not "mandate" that we follow him or his teachings...it was an invitation. He relished in humanity's free will and never sought to impose Himself on anyone.

preacherman

on Dec 03, 2004

I agree Danny, I think there are some churches, few and far between, (not really contingent on denominational affiliation) that does believe the Word of God. Does there seem to be a more blatant and open rebellion by many denominations to areas that are not grey, but black & white issues?

preacherman

preacherman

on Dec 03, 2004

Who did Jesus hang around with: the poor, the down-trodden, the outcasts of society, the sinners, or the Pharasees?

Good point T-Bone, but what should Lot have done in Sodom. Should he have said something about the sin?

preacherman

T_Bone4Justice

on Dec 03, 2004

"what should Lot have done in Sodom."

Ahhhh, the old Genesis 19 defense! You know, I wrote a pretty interesting article about literalist interpretation of the Bible and discussed Geneisis 19 at length in it. The article is entitled "Targeting Gays: A History of Oppression, Part II; Morality or Selective Application of Religious Doctrines?" I think you might find it interesting. In the context that the English version of Genesis 19 is most likely misinterpreted, I don't really know what Lot should have done in Sodom. I think there are many ways in which you can interpret Genesis 19. Here are a few examples:

“Some pastors cite Genesis 19, a passage that condemns homosexual rape, as proof that God hates all homosexual behavior.” However, “Some pastors switch between Bible translations in order to find the version that is most critical of homosexual behavior. When quoting Deuteronomy 23:17 some deviate from their usual usage of the New International Version (NIV). It accurately translates the original Hebrew condemnation of male and female prostitution in the temple (a common Pagan practice). They prefer the King James Version (KJV), which incorrectly translates the passage as condemning female prostitutes and male "sodomites."

David Bartlett, professor of divinity at Yale Divinity School regarding Genesis 19: "Many of the Bible's stories don't mean what they seem on their face. Many mainstream scholars say it [the Genesis passage] is about hospitality and how to deal with the messengers of God. If it does refer to homosexual behavior, it's homosexual rape. They don't just want to lie down with them voluntarily; they want to rape the angels."

Reuven Kimelman, professor of near Eastern and Judaic studies at Brandeis University regarding Genesis 19: "In the Mid-east then, once a man has entered into your home, your responsibility to his protection is your primary moral obligation, even if it's at the expense of your own daughters. The Bible is recording a story; it is not mandating behavior."

The Rev. Jill Nelson, associate pastor of the Sunshine Cathedral Metropolitan Community Church in Fort Lauderdale, Fla., which ministers to a largely gay congregation: “If you read it literally, in its English translation, without considering its context, one could say the Bible condemns homosexual activities. When we look at the Bible and try to draw moral rules for living, but we take it out of the context of the time when they were written, we do them a great injustice."

Given that there are so many ways to interpret this passage and many others in the Bible, I don't think the Church should be trying to mandate the "morality" of homosexuality via government. It is one thing if a particular Chruch wants to take a "moral" position on the issue but it should not presume to try and mandate their particular "interpretation" of the Bible on the whole of society via governmental laws. If anything, I think the Church should acknowledge that there are many ways in which to interpret the story of Genesis 19 and teach all of them. Shouldn't the Chruch want to err on the side of caution regarding this matter? I mean, if you look at Jesus' teachings...he never mentions homosexuality at all yet the Church is fixated on some old Testament passages that were most likely misinterpreted. I find that particularly strange and leads me to question the motives behind it.

preacherman

on Dec 03, 2004

Quite impressive.... the detail of your verbiage.

It is one thing if a particular Chruch wants to take a "moral" position on the issue but it should not presume to try and mandate their particular "interpretation" of the Bible on the whole of society via governmental laws.

You bring up a valid point T-Bone- it is probably an exercise in futility to try to change the heart of man through the law of the land. Man can not change the color of his skin nor the leapord his spots and the law of the land will never change man the way Christ's intends. That is why He made ample provisions (His Spirit) for changing man from within.

But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentelness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance, against such there is no law- Galatians 5:22 Only the Spirit of God can change man and until He does God is merciful and longsuffering- but consider the woman taken in adultry.... Christ did not condone the sin of the religious leaders nor condem the sin of the woman. He said "go and sin no more." Christ did not try to make the sin of the woman or the religious leaders palatable. Do you think?

preacherman

preacherman

on Dec 03, 2004

T-Bone if you have a copy of the scriptures, read Act chapter 17 Paul's witness to the Athenians. (vs30) The Word says that because of their idolatry, God had winked at (overlooked) their sin and wilful rejection of His Christ in times past but now it is time to get serious about their condition because He hath appointed a day in which He would judge the world in righteousness, by that man (Christ Jesus) He hath ordained. Do you think God is "playing to an audience that is afraid to laugh at their own humanity"?

It sounds like God considers our sin a serious business.

preacherman

MarcieMoo

on Dec 03, 2004

I'm just a down-home, simple girl from Minnesota. I don't know much...but here's what I think about the Bible:

I take it literally. I don't try and peel off all the "messages" and "codes" in the Bible...because I don't think there are any. What kind of God would God be if His word had to be interpreted? I also don't that God would allow His word to be mis-translated. Granted, the Greek and Hebrew that the Bible was written in is different from English, but I think if you take a generally-accepted version of the Bible...like the NIV, NRSV, NKJV, or the KJV, they're going to be really really close to what the Hebrew and Greek said. I think lots of different groups use versions of the Bible that most people have never heard of because the translation is more liberal, and more accepting of the things that the world accepts, and to me, that's not okay.

God says that certain things, like homosexuality, are wrong for a reason. It's even metioned in the NEW Testament that its wrong in First Corinthians....hmmm...don't remember what verse it is. People argue that Jesus didn't say it, so who knows what He thought about the issue? Well...if Jesus is God...and God says its wrong...and if Jesus taught Paul, who wrote his letter to the people at the church in Corinth from prison, that homosexuality was wrong...well...all signs point to the fact that God deems homosexuality as sin.

And you know what? You're right. Jesus DID hang out with people who were downtrodden...who had tons of sin in their lives, and even those you had just a little sin that cause them to be very pompus (can you say PHARISEE?). But he also had people to fall back on...people of faith...his disciples...you know? We have to be out there in the world with unbelievers...but we also have to have that place where we can go and get refreshed ourselves so we can go back out into the world...you know? And Jesus said told people that their sin was wrong...but He offered them a way out.

I think in our society we just come up with circumstances where sin is okay...and we grow more and more accepting of sinful behavior. I mean...look at murder! There's lots of times now where it's okay to kill someone or its more okay than it was 50 years ago...like you were drunk/high so you didn't know what you were doing...self defense...etc. etc. I don't know...I'm playing the devil's advocate a little (ehehehe)...but its true...right?

preacherman

on Dec 03, 2004

Hello Marcie, I gave you an insightful for that. Seems to me, it's pretty simple.... God can reveal His word to anyone.

I agree, it seems we live in a society that has found every reason to tolerate what the Bible has said is wrong.

It's kind'a like the frog that was boiled to death- old days of science. If you take a boiling pot of water and throw a frog in, he immediatley expells himself from the uncomfortable temperature of the water. If you start off with the frog in tepid water, a comfortable environment, and gradually increase the temperature, he becomes acclimated to the increase in temperature and does not realize the water is getting to a dangerous temperature. Hence he is boiled to death. It seems to be happening spiritually in the church. Do you think?

preacherman

MarcieMoo

on Dec 04, 2004

Exactly...that's it...we have homosexuality and other issues forced on us, and we're ostrascized because we don't think its "right"...and it's because it's more and more talked about...and therefore, accepted.

Granted, I don't have that much experience with people who are homosexual. The contact with homosexuals that I've had has been very positive. I guess what burns me is when a person's sexuality is all-consuming. A homosexual walks up to you and says "Hi, my name's Terry, and I'm gay." That's his identity...where he puts his worth...and I don't think that's okay.

And while I don't think that homosexuals should have leadership positions in the church...ALL are welcome...I want drug addicts, wife-beaters, murderers, and homosexuals to come to my church...they're obviously hurting in some way...and the church is an exellent place to find refuge. It's our job as those who are in the church to build relationships with those who are hurting and then gently correct them and align their lives with Scripture. No one's ever going to be perfect...we all have addictions, hang-ups, tendencies towards certain things...that's the wonder of the amazing power of Jesus!

Jesus built relationships first...He didn't cry out "Hey whore! Quit sleeping around and getting divorces and living with men before you're married to them!" He built a relationship with her first...he touched her life and then gently rebuked her.

Wow...I'm really babbling. lol...and thanks for the insightful preacher.

philomedy

on Dec 04, 2004

Ok so here's my bit of wisdom and/or lunacy:

My problem with saying that homosexuality is wrong, or that anything is wrong, based purely on the Bible (any version), is that the Bible is a book, just like A Clockwork Orange is a book, just like Green Eggs and Ham is a book. No one can prove that God wrote or dictated it, and this brings up what I feel is an even problem. No one can prove the existence of God, and I don't see how you can base a system of morality on the supposed word of a being who may or may not exist. There are no systems of morality based on the word of the unicorn, or the word of the yeti. I think that, in order to be logically defensible, a moral system has to have its basis in something tangible. This is the only way that any discussion is available.

If we condemn homosexuality simply because God says its wrong, any potential for discussion is retarded. If you say "homosexuality is wrong" and I say "why" and you say "because God said so" and I say "prove it" and you show me the Bible and I say "so you saw God write this" and you say "no" and I say "so you saw God dictate this to someone" and you say "no" then the argument goes nowhere.

Just as easily as you can say God says homosexuality is wrong, I can say God says homosexuality is right, and you can't disprove me any more than I can disprove you. Its never good when your own argument can be used just as effectively by an opposing party, whether we are talking about a religious debate or otherwise.

philomedy

on Dec 04, 2004

And while I don't think that homosexuals should have leadership positions in the church...ALL are welcome...I want drug addicts, wife-beaters, murderers, and homosexuals to come to my church...they're obviously hurting in some way

I don't know if I would say that homosexuals are "obviously hurting," and if they are, I think a large part of that hurt must come from being shunned by society. I don't think they would feel any relief from any attempts to "correct" them, gentle or otherwise.

I will agree with you that drug addicts, wife beaters and murderers are hurting, or perhaps imbalanced in some way, but I'm not sure if church is the first place that they should go to deal with their problems.

T_Bone4Justice

on Dec 04, 2004

"Quite impressive.... the detail of your verbiage."

I'll assume that you were being sincere when you said this and not being sarcastic...so thank you. I get so tired of the religious right assuming that because one does not agree with their ideological position, we either hate religion or we simply don't understand it.

"consider the woman taken in adultry.... Christ did not condone the sin of the religious leaders nor condem the sin of the woman. He said "go and sin no more." Christ did not try to make the sin of the woman or the religious leaders palatable. Do you think?"

Ahhh, yes...but you fail to mention what else Jesus did and said here...He was drawing in the sand as the religious leaders ranted on and on about how this woman was a sinner and should be stoned to death. Some say He was writing their own sins in the sand and He said, "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." I think the Church should get the log out of it's own eye before going on rants about homosexuals and claiming to have won some imagined "moral mandate" to criminalize them. I am not saying that the Church has to make homosexuality "palatable." I am saying that the Church should stay out of politics and I am also saying that there is a very good chance that the modern Bible has been misinterpreted to say something that it never originally said.

Interestingly, the words “homosexual” and “homosexuality” are not present in the original Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek texts. These words (or their equivalent) didn’t even exist until the late 19th century. Most Theological scholars argue that the authors of the original books of the Bible didn’t even understand or had little knowledge of committed same-sex relationships even though they existed in society at that time. The ancient languages at that time had no words for “homosexuality” or homosexual relationships. The assumption in society at that time was that everyone was straight but some heterosexuals, from time to time, engaged in homosexual sex. As such, when homosexuality is found in the English translation of the Bible, one must examine the original Hebrew or Greek text to determine what those words actually mean. To take the English word “homosexual” at face value and to then strictly interpret that to mean “God is against gays and homosexuality” is to misinterpret what the original texts mean.

For example:

“‘qadesh’ means a male prostitute who engaged in ritual sex in a Pagan temple. This was a common profession both in ancient Israel and in the surrounding countries. It is often mistranslated simply as "sodomite" or "homosexual." (e.g. the King James Version of the Bible, Deuteronomy 23:17).”

“The companion word ‘quedeshaw’ means female temple prostitute. It is frequently mistranslated simply as "whore" or "prostitute." A qadesh and quedeshaw were not simply prostitutes. They had a specific role to play in the temple. They represented a God and Goddess, and engaged in sexual intercourse in that capacity with members of the temple.”

With all of this confusion, misinterpretation, and lack of clarity, why would certain religious institutions and Conservative Christian leaders tell people that they are absolutely certain that God, through strict interpretation of a few Biblical passages, says that homosexuality is a sin and that God is against gays?

kingbee

on Dec 04, 2004

A homosexual walks up to you and says "Hi, my name's Terry, and I'm gay."

ive never experienced that and ive been dwelling in the latterday sodom & gomorrahs of detroit, chicago and los angeles most of my life. even on those occasions (prolly a total of 6 months added all together) when ive been fortunate enough to escape to the northernmost areas of michigan and wisconsin--sometimes by way of minnesota--nothing similar to that occured.

how many times has it happened to you?

T_Bone4Justice

on Dec 04, 2004

"He hath appointed a day in which He would judge the world in righteousness..."

The operative phrase being that GOD will judge the world not the Church, the religioius right, or anyone else. This does not say that the Church or anyone else was appointed as prosecutor, judge, and jury of man's "sins" while they wait around for God's judgment day. The Biblical passage you selected speaks of "their idolatry" not homosexuality. And yes, I do think that God is playing to an audience that is afraid to laugh at its own humanity. That does not mean that we are free to murder, rape, and pillage...I am not suggesting that these things are funny. I meant we are afraid to laugh at our own humanity in more general terms.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!