I'm not religious for similar reasons to those people have mentioned.

Had to come back to say

1 Muji, holy crap, can I dine with you and hear your stories? I love M. L'Engle!

2. Cosmic, I thought I was the only one who looked up and hunted up and read the books left *out*.....

3. All: Yes, the Bible is, in the OT especially, *history*---we took it from the Jewish Torah, after all (holy heavens, here comes the lightning bolt---wait, nope, still typing)---and that has to be borne in mind as well as the facts that a. they were called Church Fathers for a reason; b. they inherited the misogyny of the late Roman Empire, and its views of women, which were mingled at best in the transition from Republic to Empire to big bowl of chaos; c. a lot was lost in translation from Greek and Aramaic to Latin by Jerome, let alone Latin to anything else on planet Earth....

So, all that socio-historical nerdy stuff aside?

We cannot rely on the Bible to be the absolute word of God or Law, IMHO, because other than a few of us, who really has read it cover to cover? (Us meaning the nations where Christianity is predominant.) I have, but I went to Catholic school----it was mandatory!

Theologians of note have wrestled with the contradictions between Old and New Testaments, with the contradictions between how a queen like Esther is to be praised but women in, say, Deuteronomy better watch their necks----

Frankly, I think people cherry-pick based more on their politics and neuroses than on their faith, but then, I think that becuase it's what I do.... I treat the majority of the BIble as a fascinating record, an dofcus ont eh lessons of the Beaitutdes and the parables.

Once I looked for teachings from ANY religion instructing parents to be kind and fair with their children. Because in my opinion, child abuse and neglect is the root of all evil in human society, so why wouldn't the great, wise teachers such as Jesus and Buddha have warned the parents of the world how important it is to be kind and loving and patient and fair with their children? But all I found was a lot of instructions on beating your kids into a state of virtue and how awful kids are if they don't honor and obey. The only exception was Jesus saying "Let the little children come to me".

But then, it did occur to me that these books have passed through many hands between the original events or teachings and the final written texts - even leaving aside problems of translation. There were many opportunities for the vested powers (such as parents and men) to skew things in their own direction.

I have always been bitter about the position of women, historically and presently. But the lack of teachings about taking proper care of children has shaken my faith more than anything else. Why did these wise men say nothing about it?

Donna, you mae a great point.
"Spare the rod, spoil the child" is an abbreviated version of Proverbs 13 (link here: http://biblehub.com/proverbs/13-24.htm ) which has various versions, but all come down to "Love equals discipline".... and that's very open to interpretation when the proverb starts with "Whowever spares the rod hates his kid." Uh, no, I'd kinda say whoever spares the rod might be giving his kid a chance!

I think that Jesus truly was an exception---otherwise, I cringe.

So much goes back to old ROme (not that anyone likes admitting it), where the father could execute his own child if he so chose for no better reason than feeling his son had offended his moral code. (True, alas.)

I know a lot of people say we can't take any scripture in hstorical context b/c then it has no power---but i think Truths always have power. You're right, DW, we need a Truth about child-rearing...

My mom relied on Dr. Spock, thankfully. My dad, despite being an atheist, was a Proverbs 13 kinda guy. *sigh* Irony. It ain't always funny.

Something we are missing talking about in this thread is the nature of man that we are aware of. Each one of us know first hand how bad mankind to be. That's what we are seeing illustrated in those pages you mentioned in the OT. What that has to do with God, I'm not so sure. Much of the OT are stories about what men did in their own power. There is some indication of God's perspective of these actions by men in the way that He punishes or corrects. But, just because He doesn't punish doesn't mean He was OK with the treatment that women received during that time.

I've also been upset and triggered by sections like these passages in the Bible. Enraged even. But, it's not so different than what can happen/happens today. We just call it by different names.

As a believer in Christ, I have to always seek Him to explain things like these to me through the power of His spirit. Not to rely on religion, church or man to give an explanation. When I look to someone else other than Him, I lose sight of it.

Wow! We have some awesome people here! I love hearing your insights and ideas. I'm also glad I'm not seeing anyone feeling offended. And Dooover - you crack me up with your interpretation. That's just awesome!

I was fortunate to be brought up in a church where we were told to question everything, explore everything, try different religions until we found one that fit. My church, back in the 60's, was among those that welcomed gay and lesbian folks as well and I feel proud of that.

I believe that what we read in the bible we see through our own lens, as Leo says. But perhaps we have to take into account the lens through which the writers took in their experiences of the world and of Jesus. Were they completely neutral and this was divinely inspired? Or did they have their own viewpoints and motivations?

Go...

Constantine was a dictator that allowed only certain parts of the Bible to be shared..

http://www.macquirelatory.com/Authority%20and%20Power.html

When I wrote it was another time I was talking about the controversy of some of the things people struggle with today.... They were trying to populate the world at that time... so behaviour and Bible instruction affected this..

I think much of the Bible is written in 'one liners' to get the points across quickly... So 'I' believe that lines such as "spare the rod and spoil the child" mean that a child needs teaching and discipline in a loving way... People have screwed with it and use the words sometimes unfortunately as a way to hurt children..

I agree that religion and faith are two very different things... The Gospel of Tomas in the Gnostics went right to God and didn't go through an organized religion... That's my preference as well...

As a Christian I would like to take some time to perhaps address some of the issues brought up here. First of all with regard to the Bible itself. It can be difficult to distinguish between what God teaches and what was simply a historical event. Simply because Lot offered up his daughters to protect the strangers doesn't mean that God endorsed such a deed. One must remember that mankind has committed or performed many deeds in the Name of God that God didn't endorse. David and Bathsheba for example. But lets approach one thing at a time. Two Angels are sent into Sodom to find any Righteous People. The term Righteous means, "Right Standing with God." The Word teaches us that no one possesses Righteousness but that it is a free gift from God given to us through a relationship with Him. There is a huge difference between being Righteous and being a good person.
So the Angels are not looking for people who were simply good people but people who were Righteous. Sodom and Gomorrah were both known for their Sinful lifestyles. When the men of the City discovered that Lot had two visitors they came to him and demanded that they be turned over to them so that they may rape them. But the "men' were under Lot's protection. They were guests in his home and he was obligated to protect them at all costs including giving up his daughters if need be to protect his guests. Such traditions are still held through out many parts of the World today. The men of the City refused Lot's offer and demanded the men once more. This is when the Angels step in and reveal themselves. The men of the City are blinded by the light and Lot and his family escape.
Now we come to the discussion of women's rights during this time period. It must be noted that Vast Cultural differences existed in the World during this time. While there were many Queens who held the power of life and death in the palms of their hands most women were considered property. As such it wasn't considered Adultery if a man had sex with a female slave such as Abraham and Hagar. The problem with this story is that God promised Abraham a son. I am sure that he and Sara were having sex like bunnies but nothing was happening. So Sarah, Not God, suggested that he sleep with her personal slave. Without consulting God, Abraham did what many men would have done. Because she was owned by Abraham Hagar was considered part of his household. When she became pregnant Hagar began to act as if she were Abraham's second wife. This pissed Sarah off and she insisted that hubby get rid of the woman. So after she gave birth Abraham sent them both away to die but God appeared to Hagar and saved her. God was not pleased with Abraham. We must note that it was a span of 25 years from the first promise of a son to the birth of Issac. We now use this story to define the difference between man's attempt to fulfill God's promises and man waiting upon God to fulfill His own promises. The Bible is full of examples where God uses women to perform His will. The Bible is also full of confusing verses and stories that seem to contradict. I would be more than happy to explain these to you. I am a graduate of Bible School and I've been a Christian for 42 years. I've read the Bible through many times and I must confess that I've come across many contradictions but through study of His Word I've been able to understand them.
Here is another one that women are easily offended by. In one of Paul's letters he tells women to remain silent in the church. Furthermore he tells them to wait until they get home before they start asking questions and that their husbands will explain everything to them. I must admit that when I first read this passage I was dumbfounded as well. But if we go back in time to that era we see that men were the ones who were educated. Especially Jewish boys. Most women couldn't not read or write and had very little teaching on Religious matters. Jewish Law, notice that I said Jewish Law and not God's Word, dictated that women sit on one side while men sat on the other side of the services. So the practice was carried over to Church because most of the believers at the time were Christian Jews. Since women were not educated much of what was being said was difficult for them to comprehend. So Martha would yell over to Abraham during the Sermon and start asking him questions about what was being taught. Other wives followed suit and you had mayhem in Church. So Paul simply asks the women to remain silent and not disrupt the service by asking their husbands to explain a particular point but rather to wait until they are home so that hubby could educate their darling wives. It would be hundreds of years before women would be allowed to sit with their husbands and many more before women would be allowed to receive the same education as their husbands. But notice this, Paul is saying that women should be quiet in the Church, he did not say that God said that women should be quiet in the Church. Unfortunately many men have taken this passage literally and have used it to abuse their women throughout history. A prime example of "Simply because it is in God's word doesn't mean that it should be doctrine".
Much of the Bible can be understood when we study the practices and beliefs of those who are involved in the passages. There are many stories and customs that are very foreign to us today. But just because they are in the Bible it doesn't mean that God condones them. Jesus came to bring God's Love to mankind. It is important that we understand that Love. God loves the sinner but he doesn't love the act of Sin. I was reading in Mark the other day and Jesus was being ridiculed by the religious leaders for eating with "drunkards and prostitutes". I've heard many use that excuse to imply that Jesus accepted those people as they were and didn't expect them to change their lifestyles. Yet if we continue to read that passage we find that Jesus responded to his critics. He said, "Mar 2:17 When Jesus heard it, he said to them, They that are whole have no need of the physician, but they that are sick: I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance. The word repentance means that we do a 180 degree turn in our lives. In other words if I am watching porn then I do a 180 and I watch it no more. But we must also understand that it is God who changes our hearts, we can only change our minds.
There are many issues that men have clouded over the Centuries. When I was a child I was taught that drinking just one drop of alcohol would land you in Hell for all eternity. But I have found that this isn't what the Word of God teaches. Drinking alcohol is not a Sin. Being Drunk IS. I DON'T have all of the Answers but I will do what I can to help find them. Shoot me a line, I am here to help. What I won't do is argue for the sake of arguing. I want to talk with people looking for answers not those who have an agenda.

Mr MG - Thank you for your perspective. It's true that sometimes we look at the bible and think it's ALL the word of God but a lot of it is simply history and the way things were done at that time. Doesn't make it right - just like the rest of history. And probably for a good deal of the way the world works in this time and place as well!

I'll add that as a born and schooled Catholic---we were actually taught to view the Old Testament as History and Prophecy, Paul as an apostle and not as the Voice of God, and so on---so I have no issue with thinking of the Bible within its historical, social, etc. contexts----

My issue is with people who try to inflict that context today, in a very different world, with a very different understanding of things---

The Bible was used to justify slavery in the US South, the subjugation of Africa and the Americas and South Asia by just about anybody European who got near them---but the scriptures of other faiths are equally mis-used, mis-quoted, and mis-treated.... There's nothing in the Koran that says, for example, to kill CHristians and Jews---- we're all children of the Book, that is, spiritually descended from Abraham, is what an imam told me.

I don't read most of the Bible because I simply don't find most of it relevant to spirituality--- to history, to what the Jews believed, to what individual congregations faced (Pauls' letters also contradict themselves, as was pointed out), and if you throw in translation errors, etc.?

To err is Human.

I hear you. Thats how I feel and then are scriptures that were used in my programming that also shoot out at me like bullets every time I hear them. You ever ask people at church about it?

Leo I hear what you are saying. Too often men and women have grabbed a scripture or two to legitimize their position or actions. But let's place blame where the blame belongs, on the person or persons' and not upon the Word of God. Is it God's fault that man is inherently sinful? Mankind will always seek to justify actions. There is a great deal in the Bible that is relevant today with regards to Spirituality. I look upon our brains as an EIB. Educated Idiot Box. The Bible is Master Handbook on how to live a Godly lifestyle, how to treat each other and ourselves so to speak. Let me use an example. I believe that God speaks to us. After all Jesus said, "My sheep hear my voice, another they will not follow." One day I was reading the 15 Chapter of John. In this Chapter Jesus is referring to himself as the Vine and we are the Branches. The Father is the one who takes care of the Vineyard pruning the branches that do not bear fruit. As I was reading, the Holy Spirit asked me to identify him in the passage. Well he isn't mentioned but he asked me to read it. I did this three times and each time I couldn't see anything written with regard to the Holy Spirit. So the Holy Spirit revealed it to me. Jesus is the Vine, the part that holds the branches together. We are the branches. So how does the branch receive nourishment from the Vine? Through the sap. That is the part that the Holy Spirit plays in this passage and in our lives. He is the Power of God that was sent to Earth when Jesus Ascended to Heaven. He is here to guide us, direct us and help us. So I find this very relevant to my Spiritual life today.
Your passage in Proverbs 13:24 Whoever refuses to spank his son hates him, but whoever loves his son disciplines him from early on is actually pretty clear cut. Now you read it this way, If you don't hit your child then you don't love him. Here is what is actually being said, Whoever loves his son teaches him discipline early on. How to control his tongue, his temper, his thoughts. If that Child disobeys then a parent should enforce that discipline through the use of spanking. I do not believe that God meant for fathers to beat their children senseless simply to show love. There will be times when it will become necessary to enforce that discipline through the use of spanking. But a parent who was brought up by good parents should know when to spank and when not too. My wife and I spanked our children when they were young. We had a rule that spanking was used for Lying, deception and outright disobedience. It was always on the buttocks and hard enough to drive a point home but not hard enough to leave a mark. We usually stopped spanking by the time that they were 8 when grounding became the method of enforcement. We rarely spanked our kids but we did have to on occasion. But then we would take them aside and re-enforce our love for them and point out what they did that deserved a spanking. Now I was badly beaten by my parents so I am no fan of physical punishment that isn't measured with love and wisdom. So what about the first part of the verse? Whoever refuses to spank his son hates him... This whole chapter is about wisdom. Wisdom is knowledge derived from our experiences in life. I am sure that we can pull people out of the headlines who were not disciplined as children. Lindsay Lohan is a prime example of a child who wasn't supervised, disciplined and left to her own devices. I've stood in the store and I've watched parents who ignored their children as they shopped. It was obvious that the kids were hungry and tired and bored but the mother simply ignored them. Then when the children began to cry out, the mother slapped them. Had the mother listened to her kids' needs then she wouldn't have had to take it to that level. Children need to know boundaries. If boundaries are defined then children will simply get out of control. But I think that your main point has to do with how a person interprets scripture. I can tell you that there isn't anything that God could do to avoid that. I am not God and I am misinterpreted all of the time.
Secondly you stated
"I don't read most of the Bible because I simply don't find most of it relevant to spirituality--- to history, to what the Jews believed, to what individual congregations faced (Pauls' letters also contradict themselves, as was pointed out), and if you throw in translation errors, etc.?
I would like to focus on the first part, "I don't read most of the Bible... How are we to know what is contained in Scripture if we do not read it? When I was a child I was taught this verse, "God helps those who help themselves." Imagine my shock when I discovered that this isn't in scripture nor is is definitive of God's Love and actions. All Scripture has been twisted at one time or another to justify our actions. It is important to know what it means so that confusion doesn't reign in our lives.

MrMG, I should reprhase---I no longer read most of it. By 13, I had most of it memorized. (Catholic school.)
I have enough of it memorized to know that Proverbs 13 is open to Human interpretation---
So whatever God's Intent? Or whatever spiritual power lies in any of the words in that book?
It comes down to...
Human Interpretation of it.

Let's hit PRoverbs 13 again. A minister of the Christian faith expained to me that, after all, God told Abraham to sacrifice Isaac on the mountain, and that was to test Abraham's faith---and if God was going ot go that far to test faith, then it was clear that Proverbs 13, in conjunction with the story of Abraham, demonstrates the absolute authority over a child's life as given by God, proven by Scripture.

No joke. THat's a true story. I was 9.

I don't know who or what is "correct"--- I just know that as an adult of 44, with 30 years between me and the people who used the Bible to tell me I was not allowed ot serve as a priest, and it was okay for my dad to belt me, both using the BIble? I do *not* view it without a good dose of cynicism.

Like I said earlier: I follow the teachings/wisdom of Jesus as best I can. I don't ignore the Bible as a source of spiritual comfort---I just don't find it the basis for it all.

I actually love my old illustrated Children's Bible. It left out the parts about hitting, stoning, warring, and made it all seem soooo simple and easy.

I won't even get into doctrinal issues of what it means to be "right with God". Who says? Who knows? I don't take that responsibility on myself. Had too many people decide they did know and use it as a weapon.

Odd to say that despite my lousy experiences with religion, I still have faith, but ther eit is. I'm no less contradictory than anyone or anything else!

I should add, I was raised Old Country Old School Catholic---there was no fluffy bunny post-Vatcan 2 stuff. Uh-uh. You even *think* sinfully, boom, you go to hell. No pass go, no hope, no chance. OUr school principal could find a Bible verse to justify using a cricket bat for a paddle (she did, btw, that's how I know the sport of cricket exists), so...

Interesting to note, most of us who graduated that school are either extremely devout and observant Roman Catholic, or extremely *not*. Not much moderation!

I tried to post, but it got lost. Arg.

What I had said was that the Bible was revised in the Nicean Conference in Iznik, so we don't have access to the actual text. Combine that with translation issues, and who knows what the original book said. (If people debate what Shakespeare meant a mere 400 years ago in MODERN ENGLISH, can you imagine the issues with the Bible?)

I am not trying to force my faith on anybody (I've recently been accused of that on another forum), but I post this link if you are interested. It's NOT to convert anybody to Islam. Rather, I think it does a great job in explaining how closely linked Muslims and Christians actually are. : D

Sometimes, I get the feeling that much of the non Muslim world think we are so different- that we have a different god (Allah is just Arabic for the SAME God as Christians.) or that we worship Mohammad. Nope- that would be having a false idol. Mohammad is "just" the last in a long line of prophets- like Abraham (great job explaining that, BTW- Ishmael and Isaac are the two half brothers that started the split in religions), Moses, Noah, Jesus, peace be upon them all.

Anyway, here's the link, if anybody wants to learn about how closely the Qur'an and the Bible are to one another.

http://www.answering-christianity.com/mucahit_sivri/quran_and_gospel.htm

The Qur'an is a great companion text to the Bible. As always, people will misquote any text to justify their heinous deeds, but those with an open heart and discerning mind will seek and find the truth.

I only say these things to try to bring peace. I hope I added to the conversation in the way I intended.