From: jfb@macsch.com (John Baskette)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Question on the Bible
Date: 30 Sep 92 05:43:43 GMT
Organization: MacNeal-Schwendler Corp.

In article <Sep.27.21.15.41.1992.741@athos.rutgers.edu> saruman@cats.ucsc.edu (Friend of Entropy) writes:
>
>	
>	Well, I came to a conclusion recently that i wished to share,
>and hopefully get a reaction on.  I cannot possibly accept Christianity
>simply because its tennants, as expressed in the bible, violate many
>of my most deeply held beliefs.  That is, that women and men are equal,
>and that slavery is inherently wrong.  

        < many verses on women and slavery >

>	I find these opinions increadibly offensive, and not merely isolated
>parts of the book, but built into the basic ideas i found:  guilt and
>punishment.
>	I am interested in hearing any possible justification of the book
>that bears these expressions, or of the ideas themselves.
>
>-Nick

I appreciate that you are willing to dialog about these matters in spite
of your reaction to many biblical texts.  I was hoping someone better than
myself would post good answers for you.  My problem as a believer is that
I find many of these texts offensive also.  If I could, I would remove
remove them from my Bible.  I would like to suggest a couple ideas:

1.)  Many of the laws in the Bible are not an endorsement of the activities
     that the law permits, but are restrictions intended to elevate the 
     generally low moral standards of the time.  The restrictions represent
     both an accommodation to the time period and an improvement in the 
     practices then extant.  For example Deut 21:10ff permits some pretty
     terrible things with respect to the treatment of women taken captive
     during a war, but the captive woman is by law to be treated either as 
     a wife or she is to be set free.  This is likely a large improvement
     in the fate of such people under the normal circumstances of the time.
     Jesus speaks of the old testament law in similar terms when in Matt 19:8
     he says that Moses permitted liberal divorce laws because of the 
     hardness of men's hearts, but that this was not God's perfect will in 
     that regard.  Even the well known, "eye for an eye, and a tooth for a
     tooth", pronouncement was intended not to promote retribution but to 
     restrict it.

2.)  Acceptance of every idea in the Bible or acceptance of some doctrine 
     of an inerrant word is not essential to salvation.  Whether or not 
     someone who is a Christian ought to accept the Bible as authoritative
     and inerrant in all respects is a different question, but there are
     many Christians and Christian traditions that do not regard the Bible 
     in that way.

     I suggest that it is possible to be a Christian and not accept those
     ideas that you find offensive and that these offensive ideas are not 
     central.  They are not, therefore, a logically sufficient reason to 
     reject the whole Christian faith.  

3.)  I would hope that you would examine the claims of Christianity that 
     are central.  These claims center around the existence of God and 
     the person and work of Christ.  Is Christ who he claimed to be, the
     unique Son of God and savior of mankind?

4.)  Christian teaching does talk about sin and moral guilt and possible
     punishment for sin.  (an aside:  There is a very widespread but not
     a universal belief in an everlasting Hell.  Belief in an everlasting
     Hell is also *not* essential to salvation.)  Christian teaching, 
     however, is not a matter of rules and regulations intended to
     impose deep feelings of guilt and shame.  Christianity is intended
     to bring about a relationship with God that frees a person from 
     guilt and shame while encouraging people to live lives that are 
     moral and honoring to God.  If a person does not believe then there
     is no reason to live a life filled with fear, guilt or shame based
     on Christian teaching.  On the other hand, there is no reason to 
     live this way if you believe.  Christ came to save us from that.

5.)  Your offense at certain biblical texts shows that you also have a
     moral sense of what is right and wrong (i.e. what is sin) to which
     you hold others accountable.  The Christian concepts of sin and 
     moral accountability ought not to be that foreign to your own
     beliefs.

6.)  The argument that you seem to give:  These ideas are offensive, 
     therefore I cannot accept Christianity,  needs to be developed 
     further.  It should be obvious enough that just because we are
     offended by some idea or don't like some idea does not show that
     the ideas are wrong.  I am not now trying to defend the ideas
     you find offensive.  I am just suggesting that any rejection of 
     the Christian faith, if you finally reject it, ought to be based
     on well reasoned and logically valid grounds.

Once again, Thank you for dialoging with Christians about these questions.
I hope that what I say is of some value.

John