Posts Tagged: Bible


25
Jun 09

Queer Look Podcast to Return Soon!

It’s a long story why I stopped producing the queer Look at the Bible Podcast, but the short answer is that it is about to return! Each week, I’ll look at the week’s lectionary readings from the QP (the queer Perspective, and assign each a QP ranking. That is, just how “queer” is the scripture on a scale of 1 bible (not at all queer) to 5 bibles (way way queer!). Most consider that the Bible is condemning of homosexuality, but I think what we are going to find is that the vast majority of it has absolutely nothing to do with homosexuality, and will score a 1bible ranking. The passages that appear to be about homosexuality will be few and score a 5bible ranking. There is just the question about what to do with the issue of passages that appear pro-homosexual, and those which appear as anti-homosexual. In terms of my QP ranking, I won’t make any distinction/ for or against, it is still queer. but I will talk about each to see what we can learn about how pro- or anti the passages might actually be.

A Queer Look at the Bible isn’t intended only for the religious, but for everyone, even those who see themselves as atheists or agnostics. But I’m not trying to convert you. You are welcome here, no matter what your faith (or lack of faith) tradition. and here is why. If you are a gay, lesbian, bisexual, straight, or transgendered person, the Bible impact your life today, here in 2009. Doesn’t matter if you are a believer or not. The Bible serves as the foundation of all of the opposition to GLBTQ rights, as well as many of the conservative movements, such as to deny a woman’s right to choice. The growing battle cry of this radical right movement, is Religious Liberties, as if they own the Bible, and everything in it is on their side. but they don’t, and it isn’t. and the more everyone knows about that the easier it is to see through the fallacious arguments that they put forth.

Let me say, as straight (ha ha) forwardly as I can. I am not anti-God. I am not anti-Bible. I am not anti-Faith. I just think that the Bible has been co-opted by the radical right, and t is time to take it back and put it out there for anyone to pick up and consider. And the best way to do that it to take a new look at it- a Queer Look. If I can rightfully be accused of anything, it may be that I can come across as anti-religious. Like many theologians since the beginning of the Judeo-Christian story, I ask that rather than simply wearing “religious” as an adjective to describe oneself, consider it a journey to be traveled. Consider it a puzzle to be pondered. consider it a question to be asked rather than answered. I am fairly anti- those who self-righteously think they have all the answers. I certainly don’t have them. But I have and can ask and explore questions. I think that when we are willing to ask, and see where the question takes us, we can find things we never anticipated. That for me, is about hearing God.

I’m going to start by producing an audio podcast in the iTunes enhanced podcast format, but there will also be an MP# file to download for other brands of players. Each week’s podcast will be a part of a blog post that has notes and stuff I want to share. Feel free to comment here, but please be warned. I have no patience for folks who can;’t do any more than tell me I’m going to hell, or can’t say anything except to quote scripture, or issue some blanket generalized statement with out anything backing it up. I will only accept comments from real people (no anonymous postings) who register for the site. If you don’t have the guts to have a name and an email, I don’t have the time for you. But feel free to disagree with me- just be man or woman enough to represent yourself authentically.

So you ready for a Queer Look! Great! Glad to have you along!


15
May 09

Changing Homosexuality or Suppressing the Self?

Years After Resigning in Disgrace, Archbishop Speaks Out – NYTimes.com

This piece from the New York Times contains a few very large issues to ponder. I can’t necessarily speak to all of them in this blog entry but will raise them at least. Over the next week, I hope to write a blog entry for each question. But weigh in- let me know what you think- leave a comment.

1) The organized Church’s role in maintaining the status quo. Who is benefitted by the status quo?

2) Do people change their sexual orientation or simply suppress their real selves and delude themselves about who they are and/or their orientation?

3) The problem of understanding God as a “loving God” when there are so many homosecxuals.

4) What is the nature of a faith journey?

I think the last 2 are the most interesting of the topics for me, however, all 4 are big and there can be valid or thoughtful viewpoints from divergent opinions.

Years After Resigning in Disgrace, Archbishop Speaks Out – NYTimes.com.


11
May 09

Blogging the Bible — a Nadder!

When I imagined starting “Queer Look at the Bible: I didn’t think it was, my any means, a unique idea, yet, I didn’t really see it happening all that much. Now, you can’t turn around without knocking into someone reading and discussing the Bible! :-)

I haven’t ready any of this yet, but the premise is interesting to me, a Jewish Atheist blogging the Bible. Just finished AJ Jacob’s “The Year of Living Biblically” which is a very good read. Enjoy!

Blogging the Bible — a Nadder! .


8
May 09

Remembering Galileo Galilei

I’ve been thinking so much about the Biblical scripture being used against GLBTQ people as proof that Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgendered people are less than acceptable in today’s world, and clearly unacceptable to God. The Bible thumpers argue that God says these things about gay and lesbian people. I think we really don’t know what God would say about 21st century gay and lesbian people, as the social structure that exists today, that allowed relations to be as they are never existed in Biblical times.

And that got me thinking about Galileo. From Wikipedia:

Galileo’s championing of Copernicanism was controversial within his lifetime, when a large majority of philosophers and astronomers still subscribed to the geocentric view that the Earth remained motionless at the centre of the universe. After 1610, when he began supporting heliocentrism publicly, he met with bitter opposition from some philosophers and clerics, and two of the latter eventually denounced him to theRoman Inquisition early in 1615. Although he was cleared of any offence at that time, the Catholic Church nevertheless condemned heliocentrism as “false and contrary to Scripture” in February 1616,[8] and Galileo was warned to abandon his support for it—which he promised to do. When he later defended his views in his most famous work, Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, published in 1632, he was tried by the Inquisition, found “vehemently suspect of heresy”, forced to recant, and spent the rest of his life under house arrest.

Today, even Creationists who accept a literal Biblical age of the planet Earth, do not still think the earth is the center of the universe! How is it that = or better question- will it take 400 or so years, before modern understandings of sexual orientation are accepted as fact, instead of dismissed and condemned as false and contrary to scripture? Are there any similarities to be drawn between the Inquisition and what groups today, lile focus on the Family and the Family (AFA) and National Organization for Marriage (NOM) are doing? That comparison is most likely way too strong, but a comparison would be interesting, none-the-less.

Galileo Galilei – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.


15
Mar 09

Cool Web Site

I found this cool web site and think you should check it out if you are of the belief that GLBTQ people belong on the inside of the children of God. I have added it to my blogroll as well as linking it here.

http://straightnotnarrow.blogspot.com/


6
Mar 09

Lectionary Reading for March 5, 2009

Waiting for the California Supreme Court Ruling on Prop 8

Gospel
Mt 7:7-12

Jesus said to his disciples:
“Ask and it will be given to you;
seek and you will find;
knock and the door will be opened to you.
For everyone who asks, receives; and the one who seeks, finds;
and to the one who knocks, the door will be opened.
Which one of you would hand his son a stone
when he asked for a loaf of bread,
or a snake when he asked for a fish?
If you then, who are wicked,
know how to give good gifts to your children,
how much more will your heavenly Father give good things
to those who ask him.

“Do to others whatever you would have them do to you.
This is the law and the prophets.”


5
Mar 09

How Religion Fails us- Covenant Marriage

This post may seem politicaly based, but I decided to post it here due to the religious motivations behind the law being discussed in this linked blog.

This is a story about something called Covenant Marriage, a type of legal marriage began as an attempt to stem divorce rates, begun in Lousiana, but now available in several states. My purpose in writing about it is to illustrate the ways in which conservatives apply a double standard when it suits them.

You can follow te link at the bottom to the full story. I have pulled out some stuff, and it is displayed as quoted text, and the rest are my comments/text.

The Definition of Marriage may not be re-defined!

The first line of attack towards same-sex marriage is that it would be redefining marriage, as if the definition of marriage has never been re-defined. Covenant Marriage is one example of a redefinition of marriage. While it remains a marriage between a man and a woman, it is still a different definition and type of marraige. If there can already be 2 types of marriage with 2 different sets of rules or qualities how would adding another destroy the definition of marriage?

The definition of marriage is biblical and may not be altered!

There are 2 sets of scripture often used to justify marriage as between a man and a woman. Adam and Eve as the original husband and wife (even though I’m not sure the Bible ever says they were married), and the words of Jesus. Jesus was actually talking abot divorce, and the passage ends with te idea that who God has joined no one may tear apart. Interestingly, even though the Bible says there can be no divorce, Covenant Marriage allows for divorce.

Ending a marriage is still possible, though no-fault divorce is eliminated, and grounds for divorce are limited. They include physical or sexual abuse (of either a spouse or child), infidelity, a felony conviction or abandonment.

Note, that sexual abuse is an acceptable reason for divorce, and yet rape is not an acceptable reason for abortion (according to some such as Governor Jindal of Louisiana). where conservatives draw the lines varies even where the Bibler does not. Why must the Bible be followed literally at times and at others it can be modified?

Don’t use the government to advance social change!

When legislation is advanced that gives GLBT people more rights, it is attacked as an attempt to force social change upon people- or blamed on activist judges. Covenant Marriage was developed by a professor at a law school and a congress person. The purpose? To advance a social agenda.

…an attempt to strengthen the family and protect children.

Critics called it a potentially dangerous injection of religious belief into a civil commitment…

The sky will fall!

Conservatives have a very hard time predicting the results. They are sure that if same-sex couples can marry, that all hell will break loose. They were also sure that Covenant Marriage would take off big time, and it has totally not happened. It hasn’t done what it set out to do, and has not been embraced by the american people, even in some of the most religious states.

Then-Rep. Tony Perkins, R-Baker, predicted, “I think in about a year a majority of couples will make it [covenancy] part of their marriage plans.” Today, nearly 12 years later, the total has edged closer to 2 percent. Nor has covenant marriage reduced general divorce rates. In 1997, when covenant marriage became law, 13,836 divorces were granted in Louisiana. In 2003 (the most recent year for which statistics are available), the divorce total was 15,230.

Gays want special rights!

“Louisiana has elected to confer special benefits on covenant marriages, such as a 10 percent cut in auto insurance rates,” wrote Pat Buchanan…

So it is OK to provide special benefits to some but not others. How hyocritical is that?

Being gay is a choice!

If gays can marry, then there will be no limits, anything goes!

According to our opponents, being gay is a choice and therefor, we do not deserve to be a protected class. But the truth is, choice makes a difference. Straight couples who chose Covenant Marriage, had a lower divorce rate. These are couples who actively chose to define their relationship as special and more than just being together.

Though covenant marriage has had little effect on divorce as a whole, those who opt for it do have lower divorce rates.

But so many of the gay and lesbian couples seeking marriage are already in a committed relationship. They are chosing to define their relationship as more than just being together.

For gay and lesbians don’t mean it! They are only doing it for the show!

…then-Gov. Mike Huckabee ­— who, though he was an ordained Baptist minister, did not “upgrade” his own marriage at the time. And Bush and his wife Laura chose not to upgrade their own. Later, Huckabee did in a very public way. Columnist Margaret Carlson saw the $65,000 spectacle as a political ploy: “If moral values helped President Bush win the White House, why not Gov. Huckabee?

Don’t force tour ways on the American people!

Though the 2008 Republican Party platform made no mention of covenant marriage, the Texas GOP platform called for it, along with the complete abolishment of no-fault divorce, as well as making it a felony to issue a marriage license to a same-sex couple ­— this despite the fact that during the 2007 Texas legislative session, a proposed covenant marriage bill failed to clear the state house.

Covenant Marriage is an idea that some want to push on the American people, who have shown that it is not their choice. And even though it has been shown not to create the desired results, andhas not been embraced, even in religious states, conservatives don’t give up.

But Perkins says he has not given up. “When the Jindal administration gets through some of these challenging times,” he says, “I hope they’ll focus on some of these family laws.”

The Independent – I Don’t


3
Mar 09

Commentary on Dobson and Focus on the Family

While I usually post this type of stuff to my other blog, thomascwaters.com, I thought this was really appropriate here.  Focus on the Family bases its message on christian values and the Bible. How easy it is (or is it?) to lose track of one’s original message and go off on some side path, that seems connected but maybe doesn’t have the same value in the end?

If Christians want to uphold the Family and strengthen Family Values, they can do that by focusing on families, not by trying to keep others from having rights.

When groups like “Focus” take the focus away from the family, everyone loses out. The real issues that are destroying the family become lost in the shuffle as the attention s turned towards other things. The problems facing our society  and the traditional family unit will not change if same sex couples can get married, or if GLBT people have equal rights.

I’m all for strengthening families, including traditional families, and if people find the power for that in the Bible, that is fine by me. I’m even OK, of traditional family types do not want to accept that “Family” can mean different things to different people. But, as long as there are reports of sexual abuse in heterosexual households, and drugs and violence, and physical abuse, and a lack of good communication and love, then you folks have enough to worry about. You don’t need to turn your focus to gay people.

IndyStar.com | Thou Shalt | The Indianapolis Star.


28
Feb 09

Do Family Values Lead to Family Violence?

Wanted to post think link here, as so much of the arguments raised or discussed are biblical.  A long article well worth the time to read it.

Matthew Herbst : Do Family Values Lead to Family Violence?: A consideration of the idea of family – Quodlibet Journal.


19
Feb 09

GOD.LOVES.GAYS.COM

Came across this link today as gays.com began to follow me on Twitter. I certainly no fan of Westboro Baptist Church, but I’m wondering.. what will this accomplish? Fred Phelps and his loonies are a fringe element- very fringe even for most conservative evangelicals. So we have a very real and very big battle looming those who seek to oppress us with the Bible.  What do we need to accomplish more: this interaction with a fringe cult or real dialogue and discourse addressed towards the majority of Christians?

GOD.LOVES.GAYS.COM.