Wednesday Night Bible Study: Matthew 9:14-10
Wednesday, January 27th, 2010
Wow, so according to the poll, most of you do like WNBS! For the few who didn’t, I’m sorry! Just don’t visit the blog on Wednesdays! Or make a comment if there is anything I could do that would help you like them better. So we will continue! And if they ever get old or tiring, let me know and I will re-evaluate. I figure at this rate, I will have about 10 years before we finish the entire Bible, and there’s nothing wrong with abandoning the project if it gets old.
Moving forward! Last week, we made it through Matthew 9:13, so that’s where we’ll pick up. Click here to follow along.
Matthew 9:13-45
Last week, I noticed Jesus seemed a bit grumpy and some of his answers didn’t really match the questions asked. No wonder it says throughout the Gospels that the disciples were confused. I’m confused, and I’ve been studying this for a long time! His answers make sense for a sentence, then kind of go off into Huh?! Land. Take this Q&A:
John’s Disciples (wait! I thought John no longer had disciples because the Holy Spirit landed on Jesus in the form of a dove and a voice from heaven proclaimed Jesus was God’s son. Shouldn’t John and all of his disciples have become Jesus’ disciples? That’s a little confusing. I watched a video on The Rivals of Jesus once where they claimed that Jesus actually became a disciple of John before starting his own sect. I thought the evidence was sketchy, and this doesn’t prove it, but it does lend credence to the ideas talked about in the video. It’s a long watch, but worth it!). Backing up, John’s disciples approach Jesus.
John’s Group: How is it that we and the Pharisees fast, but your disciples do not fast?
Jesus: How can the guest of the bridegroom mourn while he is with them? The time will come when the bridegroom mourn while he is with them? The time will come when the bridegroom will be taken from them; then they will fast.
Okay, I’m with him. He’s trying to say that while he’s there, there’s no reason to fast. The reason will come when he’s gone. (I don’t understand the need to speak in parables all the time. I was always taught that he did it because parables are a way for people to understand, but given that his own disciples didn’t understand what he was talking about half the time, I am inclined to think that he didn’t get the message across.) So I understand that. But he’s not done. He continues!
No one sews a patch of unshrunk cloth on an old garment, for the patch will pull away from the garment, making the tear worse. Neither do men pour new wine into old wineskins. If they do, the skins will burst, the wine will run out and the wineskins will be ruined. No, they pour new wine into new wineskins, and both are preserved.
Huh?!! What. the. hell. does that have to do with anything? I have no idea. Time to pull out a concordance. Oh, wait, I got rid of them. The Bible shelf is now full of Steve’s law books. (And yes, now that I blog, I greatly regret getting rid of all of my Bible books.) Oh, well. I’m not putting in a bunch of Biblical scholarship mumbo jumbo stuff on purpose, because that gets incredibly long, dull, and even more confusing. Basically, Biblical scholarship is often (not always) a fancy way of trying to reconcile the differences, discrepancies, and the passages that make no sense whatsoever. Most of the time, they use big words to come to the conclusion that they don’t know, but their opinion is X, so they have major disagreements with the person who believes Y, and in the end, agree on nothing or accomplish anything. Hence why I am going on the bare bones text and trying to point out the little, obvious ways it contradicts and doesn’t make sense in kind of a new approach. When you study the Bible piecemeal, you can justify this or that. But when you put it all together, it makes zero sense. I’m just trying to put it all together.
Okay, moving on.
So then some ruler (no name, hmm!) comes to Jesus and asks him to heal his dead daughter. While he was on his way, a woman who had some sort of 12-year long bleeding disorder touched his cloak and was healed from that moment. Now, I thought Jesus was a bit rude in last week’s study, but this week, he straight up tells the people mourning for the dead daughter to go away. Of course, if people laughed at me, I might be grumpy, too. But at least this time, he didn’t seem to heal her out of spite. He takes her hand, and poof! She’s awake. Sounds kind of like an F-rated version of Snow White or Sleeping Beauty (“F” for “Fundie”.)
Jesus continues healing people. Two blind men who told everyone they were healed even after Jesus told them not to (what were they supposed to do? Continue to pretend to be blind?) and a demon-possessed mute man. Those grouchy Pharisees decide it’s because of the Prince of Demons he can drive out Demons. (Watch: the Pharisees get more and more cranky about Jesus, despite all the wonderful things Jesus does. The Pharisees are the Party Poopers of the Bible. Their modern day equivalent is church committees.)
Then Jesus gets nice and has compassion on people. It’s the first mention of compassion I’ve seen. This is when he decides he does want people to work and minister to other people after all, saying “The harvest is plentiful, but the workers are few. Ask the Lord of the harvest, therefore, to send out workers into his harvest field.”
Chapter 10
(Click here for chapter 10)
Jesus gives his disciples the super power ability to heal and drive out evil spirits. For the first time, Matthew actually lists the 12 disciples. No point in listing them here. 10 points to the first person who can list them all correctly without looking them up. (Hmmm, maybe I need to start a WNBS giveaway. . .) Interesting. Why did they need Jesus after that? I don’t remember reading anything about them actually using these powers until after Jesus was dead and sent the Holy Spirit to give them the powers again. But maybe I’ve just forgotten. Guess we’ll find out!
Jesus tells them not to heal any Samaritans (an unpopular Jewish sect) or Gentiles. So last week, we had grumpy Jesus. This week, we have racist Jesus. Nice. And it gets better. Fundies love Matthew 10.
He gives a long list of instructions to his disciples, but I see no evidence that they actually did any of this while Jesus was alive. His instructions are a mixture of peace and terror. Here is a list of things the disciples are to do:
- Find a worthy house in a town.
- If the people are nice, then they can let their peace rest on it. If the people are mean, then “shake the dust off your feet when you leave that home or town” and Jesus will punish them severely.
- Be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves (I have yet to figure out how).
- Be on your guard against men.
- When they arrest you, don’t worry about what to say or how to say it. At that time, you will be given what to say, for it will not be you speaking, but the Spirit of your Father speaking through you.
- Everyone is going to get mad at each other and they’ll be put to death. “All men will hate you because of me, but he who stands firm to the end will be saved.” (Another place people get the martyrdom, will give up their children to the guillotine rather than deny that they are followers of Christ. I wrote a post on that here.)
- When one place persecutes you, go to another. “I tell you the truth, you will not finish going through the cities of Israel before the Son of Man comes.” (Big, big oops! And why is he talking about himself in the third person? Is Jesus the Son of God but someone else the Son of Man? I always heard that they were one and the same, but reading this, I’m not sure. Of course, this is from the same guy who talked about patching up wineskins when asked about fasting, so maybe he would talk about himself in the third person sometimes!)
- Do not be afraid of the bad guys.
- “What I tell you in the dark, speak in the light. What is whispered in your ear, proclaim from the roofs.” So now he does want people to tell others about him. That changes frequently.
- Do not be afraid of those who kill the body, but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell.
- Don’t worry about anything, because God cares about cheap sparrows and the number of hairs on your head. (Guess he forgot about Haiti while he was busy counting hairs.)
- Acknowledge him before man, or he won’t acknowledge you before God. (Again with the martyrdom thing.)
- Do not suppose I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. (Angry Jesus strikes again!)
- Anyone who loves his family more than Jesus is not worthy of him. Whoever finds his life will lose it (huh?) and whoever loses his life for Jesus’ sake will find it (ok, that part makes sense). But again, this is why conservative and fundamentalist Christians say that they won’t lie to save their children if the choice came down to it.
- If people are nice to Jesus’ followers, they will be rewarded (by hell?! Because of course Jesus’ followers are going to be nice to each other in the context he’s talking about!). And be nice to kids and you’ll be rewarded.
And I’m over my 1500 word limit, but I made it through chapter 10! Chapter 11 to come next week.
Does anyone besides myself find it ironic that I’m writing Bible studies? Just thought I’d ask.
Tags: atheism, Bible study, Gospel of Matthew, Jesus, Matthew, secular Bible study
Loading ...
January 27th, 2010 at 12:41 am
11. Don’t worry about anything…
“I’m worrying about what you’ve got against birds!”
You have seen Monty Python’s Life of Brian, right? Then again, your secular life has been short, so you might not have… if not, see it. It is the funniest movie ever. (In the scene quoted, Brian is trying to give a sermon much like the one you describe, but he’s got hecklers…)
January 27th, 2010 at 12:43 am
hehe, I saw that either RIGHT at the end of my time in ministry or RIGHT at the beginning of my new life. Haven’t seen it since, but you make me want to! Hmm, I bet I could dig up a copy online somewhere!
(edited once because what I wrote the first time didn’t make sense!)
January 27th, 2010 at 12:47 am
Thinking about it, I’ve had liberal religious friends who liked it, and I even had a creationist friend in high school who liked it. Because it doesn’t really attack Jesus directly…
“You’re all different!”
[crowd, in unison] “Yes, we’re all different!”
[one guy] “I’m not.”
[crowd, in unison] “Shhh!”
See it again
January 27th, 2010 at 1:48 am
I always got the impression that Matthew was a grumpy old patriotic sod, and liked to make the point where he could, that J was there for the local Jewish lads.
January 27th, 2010 at 1:48 am
Laura, I have just discovered your wonderful blog (via Bruce @ restlesswanderings.com). I’m just starting to dip into your “bio” stories, and it is fascinating, so much so that it’s keeping me awake – I should have gone to bed two hours ago!
I was an evangelical for 46 years: Bachelor of Theology, missionary in Europe, and in the last 3 years, turned solidly agnostic, borderline atheist!
Your “skeptic” bible study is GREAT! I wondered if I would ever be able to read the Bible purely objectively, ignoring all the theological training and conditioning that used to affect my study when I was a christian. The answer turns out to be “yes”! Isn’t it amazing how the contradictions and absurdities pop off the page now, when you read it without the rose-colored glasses?
So, apart from the fact that I’ve always had a soft spot for redheads, I’ll be following your blog regularly now, to see what your latest bible study reveals!
January 27th, 2010 at 4:20 am
Fun, thanks.
> Does anyone besides myself find it ironic that I’m
> writing Bible studies? Just thought I’d ask.
Ah Laura, you can run from being a missionary but you will never escape your calling!
Jesus really does come across as quite an unpleasant guy in some of the gospels, doesn’t he? Certainly by modern standards. And I’m with you 100% on the whole parables thing. There’s no way it isn’t deliberate confusion in some parts. A lot of that has to do with the fact that these stories come out of Mark, and Mark is clearly trying to portray a mystical, secretive, even gnostic Jesus.
I’m sure it wasn’t the gospel writers intention to make Jesus sound like an ass. But I think Jesus is a mirror. The devoted look to see what he was like and they see only themselves, or what they’d want to be like. Its the same story now with Pat Robertson as it was with Matthew. Matthew sees a political and prickly Jesus. Mark sees a mystical and deep Jesus.
January 27th, 2010 at 7:24 am
The 20th Century saw 65% of all Christian martyrs. Out of the approx. 70 million that have been killed, 45 million of them took place in the 20th century. Most of them were killed in Communists or Muslim friendly countries.
We lived in a world where atheists and muslims will kill simply because of your religious beliefs when given absolute power. Christians are the ones who know that man has a proclivity for evil which has to be restrained and overcome with love. You have little experience outside of the U.S. so you are not aware of how blessed you are to live in a Christian dominated country. Christianity is really built on love which leads to tolerance of others because love is the ground for freedom.
In fact, it is this freedom articulated by Christians that allows this blog to be up and running. Christians know the threat that your words speak into our life and we simply say, “Go ahead” because we are in the Lord’s hand! “What can man do unto me?” We cannot be governed by fear; rather, we have to speak the truth in love which is why we are all strong believers in freedom of speech. The truth will set you free as the Bible says…
God Bless…
January 27th, 2010 at 7:45 am
#10 Do not be afraid of those who kill the body, but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell.
“Body”??? We know what happens to bodies nowadays, they rot, or are burned. How ya gonna torture a body that’s already been cremated? Heat it up again?
ZDenny, You are one funny little man. Where in the world did you dig up your crazy ideas of christian martyr-ship in the 20th century? FYI the Jews are not christian.. can’t count them. They insist on that point, silly jews.
January 27th, 2010 at 8:18 am
Zdenny let’s not forget that the 20th Century also saw several million jews killed at the hands of Christians.
We live in a world where people of all religions feel God justifies them killing others, especially when given absolute power. Atheists are the ones that know that we can overcome our proclivity for evil, simply by dropping superstition and embracing logic and reason. I do have experience outside the US and I can tell you what a blessing it is to live in a secular nation. The more government stays out of religion the better! Atheism is really built on logic which leads to tolerance of others because logic and reason helps us drop our prenotions of other people.
In fact, this freedom is not articulated by any religion. No where in the Bible (nor the Koran) is the idea of democracy mentioned. In fact these books have been used for centuries to promote the divine right of kings and tyrants. Atheists know the threat that your words speak into our life and we simply say, “Go ahead” because its not our place to demand you believe something, but we know that the logic of the human mind can overcome ancient superstition. We will not be governed by fear as the Bible commands; rather, we believe in logic and reason. Which is why we are all strong believers in freedom of speech. Truth will set you free, but I doubt you will find an ounce of it in the Bible…
January 27th, 2010 at 8:54 am
zdenny, nice redirect. Instead of addressing the contradictions and vagueries being discussed, you trot out Christian martyrdom.
Yes, you may be right. For instance Idi Amin created a personal vendetta in Uganda against Christians (knowing that by calling himself a Muslim, Quaddafi would arm him), killing thousands. Christians get killed.
So do Jews, Muslims, Hutus, baby girls and Indian brides. Humans can be a savage lot, and Christians can get right in there and slay with the worst of them.
Laura: I always thought the “new patch on old garments” was talking about how Jesus didn’t expect to fit his new views into the same old same old structure. People would stick to the comfortable structure (like fasting) and miss the message.
Ian: and Judas the Iscaria expected the savior to come in the form of an assassin. You are completely right; even the disciples remade god in their own image.
January 27th, 2010 at 9:25 am
The killing of the Jews was done by Hilter in Germany. Unfortunately due to liberal scholarship, people in Germany did not believe that the Bible was the Word of God. If you are into scholarship, you will know during this time, liberalism which denies that the Bible is the Word of God reigned within the culture.
I always tell Jews, “Beware of Liberals” because it is just a matter of time before they come after you. Liberalism is based on a materialistic doctrine that basically tacks a belief in God onto their sleave. In other words, they were effectively atheists who inconsistently had a belief in a “God.” This God could not be defined providing the justification for killing the Jews. Even today the anti-Semitism is coming out of the left. Just look at the UN!!
I just never heard of conservative Christians being anti-Semites who take the Bible literally. In fact, all conservative Christians I know believe that Isreal is God chosen people which has been expanded to the Gentiles.
God Bless..
January 27th, 2010 at 9:59 am
Zdenny, I appreciate your points, but you are sadly mistaken. Hitler most certainly incorporated God into his political beliefs. Even a cursory reading of Mein Kampf shows how much he respected his “creator”. A man who rejected religion most certainly would not have put “God is with us” on his officers’ uniforms!
I always tell liberal theists, “Beware of faith” because it is just a matter of time before conservative beliefs dominate their faith. Conservatism is based on totalitarianism doctrine that basically forces a belief of God onto others. In other words they are people who force their hateful beliefs onto others with the excuse of “God”. This God can be defined however you choose, providing justification for killing anyone. Even today murder, terrorism, and death is coming out of religion. Just look at the Christian right, and Al-Qaeda.
I jest never heard of secularists using “God” as an excuse to murder. In fact, all conservative theists I know believe that it’s ok to kill people if God tells you to. I sure hope their God doesn’t choose me next!
January 27th, 2010 at 11:47 am
So there is a small chance that I enjoy this blog just for the interaction between Anon and zdenny! jk jk
Also – part of why I like WNBS – is because that is such a Christian Cliche! … lol
January 27th, 2010 at 12:01 pm
My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded only by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God’s truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. How terrific was His fight for the world against the Jewish poison. To-day, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before in the fact that it was for this that He had to shed His blood upon the Cross. As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice…. And if there is anything which could demonstrate that we are acting rightly it is the distress that daily grows. For as a Christian I have also a duty to my own people…. When I go out in the morning and see these men standing in their queues and look into their pinched faces, then I believe I would be no Christian, but a very devil if I felt no pity for them, if I did not, as did our Lord two thousand years ago, turn against those by whom to-day this poor people is plundered and exploited.
-Adolf Hitler, in his speech in Munich on 12 April 1922
We are a people of different faiths, but we are one. Which faith conquers the other is not the question; rather, the question is whether Christianity stands or falls…. We tolerate no one in our ranks who attacks the ideas of Christianity… in fact our movement is Christian. We are filled with a desire for Catholics and Protestants to discover one another in the deep distress of our own people.
-Adolf Hitler, in a speech in Passau, 27 October 1928, Bundesarchiv Berlin-Zehlendorf, [cited from Richard Steigmann-Gall's The Holy Reich]
The Government, being resolved to undertake the political and moral purification of our public life, are creating and securing the conditions necessary for a really profound revival of religious life…. The National Government regard the two Christian Confessions as the weightiest factors for the maintenance of our nationality. They will respect the agreements concluded between them and the federal States. Their rights are not to be infringed…. It will be the Government’s care to maintain honest co-operation between Church and State; the struggle against materialistic views and for a real national community is just as much in the interest of the German nation as in that of the welfare of our Christian faith. The Government of the Reich, who regard Christianity as the unshakable foundation of the morals and moral code of the nation, attach the greatest value to friendly relations with the Holy See and are endeavouring to develop them.
-Adolf Hitler, in his speech to the Reichstag on 23 March 1933
The Catholic Church considered the Jews pestilent for fifteen hundred years, put them in ghettos, etc, because it recognized the Jews for what they were”…. I recognize the representatives of this race as pestilent for the state and for the church and perhaps I am thereby doing Christianity a great service by pushing them out of schools and public functions.
-Adolf Hitler, 26 April 1933, [cited from Richard Steigmann-Gall’s The Holy Reich
Just a few.. I have dozens more Hitler Quotes about Christianity and God,
Want more ZDenny?
January 27th, 2010 at 12:05 pm
May therefore God give us the strength to continue to do our duty and with this prayer we bow in homage before our dead heroes, before those whom they have left behind in bereavement, and before all the other victims of this war.
-Adolf Hitler, in prayer at the end of a radio address on 15 March 1942
Yep, Zdenny, sounds like a staunch atheist there.
Too bad you don’t have the ability to be wrong about anything..
January 27th, 2010 at 12:13 pm
Oh , and lets not forget the other AXIS powers,
Guess what Mussolini was famous for before WW2?
Hint – It has something to do with the Vatican – (Christianity)
Read the who’s who on who was in attendance at the Vatican Christening ceremony. (read the German list of attendees! WooHoo!)
January 27th, 2010 at 12:52 pm
Sorry for the multiple posts Laura!
The fundie Idea that the axis powers, Hitler, and Mussolini were atheists is really a steaming pile of you-know-what.
The Belt buckles, buttons and the scabbard for their bayonets were inscribed “GOT MIT UNS” German for “God is with us”
But The ZDennys of the world have denied reality for so long that they read it as “There is no god”.
January 27th, 2010 at 2:16 pm
Let’s see: Peter, Andrew, James and John sons of Zebedee, Thaddeus, James the Lesser, 2 Judases, Thomas, Matthew, Bartholemew, and Phillip.
That might be wrong– I didn’t look it up. But I never can resist a bible-related challenge. (Reformed? Oh yes.)
Zdenny is getting too ridiculous to address.
I always thought the part about new wine/old wineskins had to do with Jesus saying he had a new way of interpreting the law– the idea of “the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath” was pretty different, along with some other things he did. I took the wine/wineskins thing to be saying that you can’t understand Jesus under the old law.
Parables were a really common way of getting your point across at the time– Socratic method was really popular among rabbis. One of my Bible teachers was an ordained rabbi and a 1st-century scholar, and he said there was evidence of the “Good Samaritan” story being a common parable. Most rabbis would just make the 3rd guy along a follower of that rabbi, and say that he did whatever that rabbi thought was right. (I think there’s written evidence of Akiva using this, but it’s been awhile so it could have been Shammai or Hillel). So Jesus is essentially using stories everybody knows with very small bits changed to get points across. Like Aesop’s Fables, sort of.
I have to admit this is the 1st Bible study I’ve read (mostly because I’ve studied the gospels ad nauseum myself) but it was interesting! And you’re right, Matthew nine is a lot of crankiness from Jesus. Although I think I would also be cranky in his situation.
January 27th, 2010 at 2:36 pm
“No one sews a patch of unshrunk cloth on an old garment, for the patch will pull away from the garment, making the tear worse. Neither do men pour new wine into old wineskins. If they do, the skins will burst, the wine will run out and the wineskins will be ruined. No, they pour new wine into new wineskins, and both are preserved.”
Both of these affirmations are wrong. Shrunk vs unshrunk clothing, the writers of this gem are not weavers obviously, as this is exactly what you would want to do to close a tear. The later shrinking tightens the seam not loosens it.
Secondly, How would the wineskins be affected any differently by “New” wine than of “old”. That’s ridiculous superstition.
January 27th, 2010 at 4:05 pm
**Be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves (I have yet to figure out how).**
I always found this a fascinating verse. It seems like snakes are quite often associated with Satan, given the whole Garden of Eden thing, with the snake convincing Eve to eat the fruit. Yet here, Jesus is telling his disciples to be as shrewd as the very animal that tempted and indirectly caused the Fall in the first place.
**While he was on his way, a woman who had some sort of 12-year long bleeding disorder touched his cloak and was healed from that moment. Now, I thought Jesus was a bit rude in last week’s study,**
I forgot what book I read this in, and the author, and I think the comment was actually in relation to the Gospel of Mark, but the author stated something along the lines that the switch like this — told that 12 year old girl is dead, switches to woman with bleeding disorder, then back to 12 year old girl — actually demonstrated the author’s viewpoint towards menstruating women, and that they “die” in a way, and had a lot less worth … and this would be such a better statement if I could remember exactly what the author said, who the author was, and where I read it. I just remember feeling really chilled at the misogynistic viewpoint after looking at the text that way. It was like basic menstruating and the whole connect to the sexual cycle was something women had to be “healed” from.
January 27th, 2010 at 9:29 pm
Laura, if you want me to respond to the Hitler remarks posted by your readers just let me know. I don’t want to hi-jack a thread on an unrelated issue. In my opinion, this site is really about you and I appreciate the insights into your life even though I am not sure it is really helping you to constantly relive the post.
God Bless….
January 27th, 2010 at 10:40 pm
I don’t care. The conversation goes where it goes, and if I didn’t want the comments to go that direction, I would have deleted the first comments. Far be it from me to let someone write something and not let someone else respond! I’ll start deleting if it gets ugly.
January 27th, 2010 at 10:46 pm
new to the site. fellow redhead too!
excited to read your posts.
January 27th, 2010 at 10:49 pm
Interesting, OneSmallStep. I had not heard that interpretation before. But, you also make a valid point, “The author’s point of view.”
I’ve done a little reading (Crossan mostly), and would like to do more, about the various writers of the Bible and their points of view within the context of their times and political interests. Especially the authors of the gospels. Why are their stories different? Why are their presentations of Jesus different? Who were their audiences? What messages were the authors trying to deliver in their writings? Who borrowed from whom? Who added what to the other’s writings to make things work for the accepted religious doctrine of later times?
To connect the dots, “The Life of Brian” is a great demonstration of the idea of “point of view”.
“Alms for an ex-leper?”
January 28th, 2010 at 5:17 am
Hitler never actually quotes the Scripture which is my point. In Germany, liberals saw God as nature itself. Liberalism teaches that nature caused and designed itself. Liberals see the value of the moral code in the Bible; however, they reject everything else in the Bible.
Hitler did not use the Bible for good reason. The Bible does not teach what he was preaching. Hitler had bought into liberalism which denies that the Bible is the Word of God providing only a moral code for mankind. The Bible says, “Bless those that curse you”; however, Hitler said, “Kill those who (he thought) cursed you.”
Liberalism bought into the premise of social Darwinism which provided the justification for the acts of Hitler. I know most Atheists now condemn social Darwinism in theory; however, it is consistent with their worldview. As with many followers, Hitler knew that using imagery from the Bible was helpful to his cause; however, it was only imagery. His governing philosophy was rooted in the philosophy of social Darwianism which is not a Christian philosophy.
January 28th, 2010 at 5:17 am
In order for Laura to rise above her past, she will have to see the love of God and come to know it for herself.
I think there is a part of Laura that wants to regain her innocence which she had prior to her marriage with Bob. She was married to a guy who was unable to see her because of a selfish bubble that only allowed him to see himself. The idea of being in a marriage that was driven by lust rather than love has been hard for her to grapple with because it seems like a contradiction. Why would God allow her to have such a horrible experience? How could God exist and allow such a thing to happen?
I went to school with a lot of students who got pscyhe degrees. After speaking with a number of them, I found they were getting that degree because they were trying to understand themselves. I now have a theory that most people getting pscyhe degrees have things in their life that they are trying to understand. They generally have emotional currents that they were unable to control and didn’t understand. Laura has always had these feelings which can be extreme within her. She has even mentioned how she use to play the piano in order to deal with these emotional issues.
I believe Laura is going to find that the problem is really inside of her. There is nothing outside of her that makes her feel bad or good; rather, she is looking to fill herself on the inside with love. The problem was not even Bob (even though he is not a nice person); rather, she wants to be loved for who she is. The only person I know that is able to do this is the Lord.
God allows all of us to go through situations which can be terrible. I think about Job as just one example. King David went through a terrible experience. Joseph went through a terrible experience. The difference between Laura and these figures is that they had faith in God regardless of what life threw their way. In the end all of these men found what they were looking for. Laura will too!
God Bless…
January 28th, 2010 at 7:17 am
Hitler was a professing christian, same as yourself, ZDenny. Of course one can always say that someone who doesn’t fit our christian imagery as not a “True Christian ™ ” The idea that someone has to quote scripture and verse every time they speak is laughable. How many of the Pope’s speeches quote book and verse. You do know that it can sometimes be assumed that people either know the scripture, or can look it up for themselves.
If jack booted SS troops are called “Liberals” in your book, I can’t imagine a conservative. Just what is your definition of “Liberal”?
This is the rest of the world’s definition: Note how it differs from yours. (Dictionary.com)
lib⋅er⋅al
/ˈlɪbərəl, ˈlɪbrəl/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [lib-er-uhl, lib-ruhl] Show IPA
Use liberal in a Sentence
See images of liberal
Search liberal on the Web
–adjective
1. favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs.
2. (often initial capital letter) noting or pertaining to a political party advocating measures of progressive political reform.
3. of, pertaining to, based on, or advocating liberalism.
4. favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, esp. as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties.
5. favoring or permitting freedom of action, esp. with respect to matters of personal belief or expression: a liberal policy toward dissident artists and writers.
6. of or pertaining to representational forms of government rather than aristocracies and monarchies.
7. free from prejudice or bigotry; tolerant: a liberal attitude toward foreigners.
8. open-minded or tolerant, esp. free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc.
9. characterized by generosity and willingness to give in large amounts: a liberal donor.
10. given freely or abundantly; generous: a liberal donation.
11. not strict or rigorous; free; not literal: a liberal interpretation of a rule.
12. of, pertaining to, or based on the liberal arts.
13. of, pertaining to, or befitting a freeman.
OK after reading the real meaning of the word liberal, tell me if The Nazi or Mussolini regimes followed any of those tenets, especially numbers 6 and 7. Do you consider the wartime Japanese and Tojo government to have been liberal too?
January 28th, 2010 at 7:38 am
Zdenny, if you had been paying attention at all to the gist of Laura’s blog or her bio, you would see that the “past” that she’s trying to “rise above” is the christian dogma, and contact with men that try to use “a belief in a mythical “sky daddy” as their own personal weapon to subjugate her, not unlike you.
January 28th, 2010 at 11:10 am
Every time I read comments from people like zdenny on ex-christian blogs, it only pisses me off and drives me further away than ever from my former faith.
They can’t handle plain facts or rational thinking (ie Hitler’s christianity), and they COMPLETELY miss the reasons why we left. Somehow they think we didn’t believe deeply enough or have enough faith.
His attempts at analyzing Laura’s life and the way back into the Christian life made me laugh out loud. I admire Laura’s patience and tolerance at letting him continue spouting this crap . . .