Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

"You are not a Bible character"

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Are_grits_groceries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-16-09 01:02 PM
Original message
"You are not a Bible character"
I know there are many differing views on religion at DU to put it mildly. The following audio clip is not meant to start the inevitable haggling about theologies or beliefs.

In dealing with people in SC who are Christians, I have found that one of the best ways to try to get through is to speak to them in their own language. They may never get the message no matter what, but I make an effort.

Since I had to go to church growing up, I speak fluent Bible. I can even hold my own in the Evangelical dialect.

The following clip is a 'sermonette' by Stephen Freeman about Mark Sanford and others who quote the Bible for everything. I have added many of the points to my arsenal. I want to be a WMD against hypocrites.

http://audio.ancientfaith.com/freeman/gtg_2009-07-04_pc.mp3
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Taverner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-16-09 01:04 PM
Response to Original message
1. There wouldn't be a transcript anywhere would there?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Are_grits_groceries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-16-09 01:05 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. I'll try to find one.
A friend sent this to me in an email.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snagglepuss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-16-09 01:18 PM
Response to Reply #2
6. If you could a transcript it'd be much appreciated.
Very interesting OP.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lunatica Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-16-09 01:07 PM
Response to Original message
3. Well Bush may not be God, but he speaks for him
Sorry, I can't help my knee jerk religious snark spasms. Call it Biblical Tourettes
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lib_wit_it Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-16-09 01:12 PM
Response to Original message
4. Thanks for this. I really wish I knew the Bible well enough to use it that way. But I just find it
such a chore to wade through, that I can't seem to stick to it.

Not too long ago, there was news of a rising tide of baptist and evangelical preachers who were pointing out the hypocrisy of the RW brand of so-called Christianity, and who were supposedly going to lead the great shift of Christian America (back?) to the kind, compassionate, liberal Jesus. Does anyone else remember this?

I've googled it and can't seem to find the right search terms to find a single reference, but I know I didn't imagine it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Are_grits_groceries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-16-09 01:21 PM
Response to Reply #4
8. I'm not sure.
I'll try to find something if I can.

I wouldn't recommend wading through the Bible. I use what I remember, and look up what I don't know or need to clarify. When the fundies were bleating that Sarah Palin was their 'Queen Esther', I reread that story in order to remember what the hell they were talking about now.

Many times the stories that are used are not told correctly or only partly told. That was the case when Sanford compared himself to King David. That one I knew, and I was sure he had made a big mistake by using it. Sure enough, he got raked over the coals for not knowing the whole story. BTW the King David meme is one that C Streeters use.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lib_wit_it Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-16-09 01:38 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. Great to know enough to call them out on their biblical delusions! I did know about TheFamily's
misuse of the King David bio, thanks to Keith and Rachel. Also, I knew it was bullshit just by the fact that such a twisted RWer as Sanford employed it!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TokenQueer Donating Member (762 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-16-09 01:53 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. "BTW the King David meme is one that C Streeters use."
Indeed. I am reading "The Family" right now. The truly terrifying thing about Sanford invoking King David is not that he misrepresented the story as it applies to his very real world situation. King David is invoked by The Family within their "prayer cells" because they (like King David) were "chosen by God." Regardless of their indiscretions, Doug Coe reminds the brothers often that they too have been chosen...
:scared:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Are_grits_groceries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-16-09 01:14 PM
Response to Original message
5. Here is a transcript:
Events which receive more than their share of news coverage are not my favorite topics for blog posts. However, this past week’s revelations of yet another politician’s infidelity offered one aspect worthy of comment (or so it seems to me). That is the use of the Bible as a means for reflecting on one’s personal situation in life.

There is a long history of just such usage. The pilgrim fathers who came to America read their situation into the Bible (or the Bible into their situation) with the result that white pilgrims were seen as fulfilling the role of the Israelites in this, the Promised Land, while native Americans were cast in the role of Canaanites. Thus generations of Joshuas arose feeling Biblically justified in the genocide of America’s native population. Some of that Biblical reading continues to echo in the popular imagination to this day. It was Bad theology in the 17th century and it is bad theology today. Stated in a fundamental way: you are not a Bible character.

This past week saw a sitting governor confessing his infidelity, choosing to stay in office, and reflecting out loud to his cabinet members about the story of King David. King David was, of course, guilty of adultery (and in the Biblical account it cost him the life of his child). It is a story of great repentance and internal suffering as well as the mercy of God.

But it is not a pattern story to which individuals are invited for their own comparisons.

The Old Testament is authoritative Scripture for Christians and has a history of interpretation by the Church. Largely, that interpretation is typological in character – its stories are seen as types and foreshadowings of the truth to be revealed in Christ Jesus. Thus Christ is the “second Adam,” and the opening chapters of Genesis are best read with that interpretive fact in mind. Had the pilgrims read the Old Testament correctly (in the light of the new) they might very well have applied the story of the Promised Land, but only as the Kingdom of God to which they might have gently offered as servants of those to whom they preached. The story does not bless a Christian to violate the commandment: thou shalt not kill. Holy war is foreign to Christianity and is heresy plain and simple where it is preached.

Some years ago I recall the story of an Episcopal priest who abandoned his vocation with a great flourish during the course of a Sunday service. The confusing detail for many was his explanation: he saw himself as Jonah – his Church as the sinking ship. The only way to save the sinking ship was to throw Jonah overboard. It seems not unlikely that whatever was the case, he needed to resign his position. But the story of Jonah is not about throwing priests overboard to save “sinking” congregations. It has a different meaning. It is better for a priest with a problem to seek help and repentance and not Biblical drama. The drama is delusion.

The problem with such use of Biblical imagination is that it simply has no controlling story. Nothing tells us which story to use other than our own imagination (which is generally a deluded part of our mind). A governor gets to play King David, and, surprise, he should be forgiven and not resign his office. A group of white settlers get to play conquering Israelites and feel no compunction about murdering men, women and children. A priest, likely in need of therapy, plays the role of Jonah before a crowd who has no idea they are in a play. The gospel is not preached – souls are not saved – the Bible is simply brought into ridicule.

For all of us – Scripture is relevant. However, its relevance should not come as a personal revelation that tells us which character we are within its pages. Such games seem frightfully like the games on Facebook: “Which ancient civilization are you?” or some such nonsense.

You are not a Bible character – other than the one indicated in the New Testament – those who have put their faith in Christ and trusted him for their salvation. Our conversion experiences are whatever they may have been – but the Damascus Road conversion of St. Paul is not required of any but St. Paul.

The behavior of pilgrims, priests and governors should be guided by the same moral teaching that applies to all Christians. There are no special circumstances that, as Bible characters, exempt us from the repentance and responsibility required of all. The words of Christ addressed to each and everyone are the same: “Repent! For the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand.” If such repentance should cost us a political office or even a continent – so be it. This is the character we were meant to be.
http://fatherstephen.wordpress.com/2009/06/


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blogslut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-16-09 01:19 PM
Response to Original message
7. Wheee!
An excuse to post my Sanford-as-David graphic:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun May 05th 2024, 09:17 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC