In a
letter in Tuesday's Villages Daily Sun, a writer offers the opinion that
handing out "Voter Guides for
Christians" shouldn't be
considered unconstitutional. The issue here should be, "Do 'Voter
Guides for Christians' really
encouraging voting in accordance with Christian precepts? I would submit that
they do not.
Christian believers who consider the
New Testament as lifestyle guidance
might want to examine the operator's manual closer. The focus by the extreme
Right against gay rights and a woman's
right to her own reproductive choices is
simply not supported by Biblical teaching.
The sole specific Biblical reference to abortion is Numbers 5: 12-28 which specifies that if a man's wife is pregnant by another he shall take he to the priest who shall provide her with the "bitter waters" to terminate the pregnancy. This, the only specific reference in the Bible, implies that abortion was known to the Hebrews and there was no prohibition against it in the Laws of Moses which cover almost every conceivable aspect of life. It is interesting to note that the Bible defines in detail many types of both justifiable (self-defense, executions, wartime) and criminal killing (various types of homicides and relationships to those killed -- strangers, neighbors, Israelites, family members, etc.) are discussed, along with any applicable penalties. Even when the subject of the fetus' existence or death comes up, it still does not prohibit the well-known practice of abortion. So, obviously it was not an oversight, either in the original pronouncements or the failure of the later prophets, Jesus or the apostles to clarify. The Bible neither promotes nor discourages abortion. Period. The intentional omission of prohibitions against abortion obviously mean they intended that to be left to personal choice, unless you believe God made a mistake. The New Testament is mute on the point. Regardless of the Missouri Congressman's opinion, abortion in cases of rape, however is not prohibited, it is Biblically mandated!
Homosexuality, similarly is
remarkably absent from most of the Bible, including totally absent from the
Gospels, and referred to by Paul only in the context of homosexual prostitution (as he also does with
heterosexual prostitution) and even this reference is disputed by real scriptural
analysts because of contextual
ambivalence. There is not a single Greek
word or phrase in the entire New Testament that should be translated into
English as “homosexual” or “homosexuality.” In fact, the very notion of
“homosexuality”—like that of “heterosexuality,” “bisexuality,” and even “sexual
orientation”—is essentially a modern concept that would simply have been
unintelligible to the New Testament writers. None of the four gospels mentions the subject.
This means that, so far as we know, Jesus never spoke about homosexuality, and
we simply have no way of determining what his attitude toward it might have
been. Moreover, there is nothing about homosexuality in the Book of Acts, in
Hebrews, in Revelation, or in the letters attributed to James, Peter, John, and
Jude. Only Paul mentions it, and then in doubtful context; strange in light of Paul's
misogyny and criticism of women and marriage. In this writer's humble opinion Paul
should have written one more letter: "How Tight was my Closet." Seems
to me that if Jesus had problem with Gays, there would be some reference, since
he consorted with a group of men most of his adult life.
Similarly, tithing, a mainstay of
far right Christians is not original with Judaism or Christianity, but extends
back in to early Mesopotamian cultures. Examples of early references include : "...(the sun-god) Shamash demands the
tithe...", "four minas of silver, the tithe of [the gods] Bel, Nabu,
and Nergal...", "...he has paid, in addition to the tithe for
Ninurta, the tax of the gardiner" "...the tithe of the chief
accountant, he has delivered it to [the sun-god] Shamash" "...why do
you not pay the tithe to the Lady-of-Uruk?" So why adopt these pagan customs? -Money!
Just as the priests of Bel, Nabu, Ninurtna, Shamash, Baal, et al benefitted
from the concept of being supported by mandatory contributions from the
populace, so did the scribes, Pharisees etc. of the Hebrews. In fact if there
was one area where Jesus was pretty damned specific, it was his view of the
money flowing into the temple and those who benefitted from it, and yet....!
The early church leaders (after
those first few poorly organized local groups had been hijacked by Priests,
Elders, Bishops, and ultimately a Pope) simply realized the benefits of holding
believers' eternal souls hostage to force mandatory contributions in support of
what has become an obscenely bloated lifestyle at the top of the Ecclesiastical
food chain. as an aside, Conservatives, such as Ann Coulter, are fond of pointing out that, as a group, statistically they make larger
contributions to "charity." The problem here is that they include
church contributions as charity, which only a small percentage (single digits,
in most cases) actually benefit.
Conversely, references to
Christians' obligations regarding caring
for the poor, the downtrodden, and the
alien are voluminous throughout both Old and New Testament. at least 75 OT and over
20 NT verses directly refer to helping
the poor as an article of faith (and in some cases harshly condemning those who
don't! Examples include:
"He who oppresses the poor to
increase his wealth and he who gives gifts to the rich — both come to
poverty." Proverbs 22:16
"The people of the land
practice extortion and commit robbery; they oppress the poor and needy and
mistreat the alien, denying them justice." Ezekiel 22:29
"If anyone has material
possessions and sees his brother in need but has no pity on him, how can the
love of God be in him? Dear children, let us not love with words or tongue but
with actions and in truth." 1 John 3:17-18
"Beware of the teachers of the
law . . . They devour your widows' houses . . . Such men will be punished
severely." Luke 20:46-47
No comments:
Post a Comment