Re: Lying is wrong, deception not always wrong


<qspirit@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:26d9u153kmkbr3jpctblltidr4qqn511et@xxxxxxxxxx

Indeed, it's a thought that the men who controlled Judaism, and who
still control the apostate church through the teachings of Paul (and
those who wrote in his name) would also well have heeded (and should
heed today). Their (and your) thoughts of male supremacy are not
God's thoughts (even though you quote "God's" words, actually written
by men who have reason to talk up this ideology, to prove they are).
Their (and apparently your) way of relegating women to the social,
political, spiritual and marital margins for the sake of their (and
apparently your) own gratification is certainly not God's way. God
marginalizes no one. God certainly does not sanction exploitation.

a few points here.

Firstly, I'd like to ask you to consider whether your use of 'apostate' to
describe the more conventional flavors of Christianity might not convey more
than you wish. I believe I understand why you choose that word, and I am to
some extent in agreement with you, assuming that understanding is correct.
However, I have to admit that this particularly charged word makes my
stomach tighten almost every time I come across it. I'm afraid your usage
is no exception.

I am not 100% in agreement with all Quaker thought. For that reason, I will
likely never seek membership, despite my enormous respect for the Quaker
tradition (in fact, I perhaps _would_ seek membership, were a 'traditional'
body to be found in my area!) One aspect of Quaker thought that I agree
with without caveat is the idea that we should look to that of God in
everyone. That fairly complex concept carries a lot of punch for me. It
has the ring of God in my ear. The very idea of apostacy seems in
opposition to it. I'm sure you haven't used the word thoughtlessly. I'm
only asking that you take a second look at it, keeping in mind that it might
carry overtones that you did not wish to convey.

Secondly, it would be possible to go too hard on Paul. I agree with you
completely that Paul was not acting as some creature blown infallibly on
God's very breath. However, there is no denying that he was a man
exceptionally devoted to God. I don't mean to suggest that you believe
otherwise, but I felt it good to interject that as food for thought in the
current discussion.

I have never met a man who was more devoted to God than Paul was, even by
the accounts of his critics. The same man who was by modern standards
almost certainly a misogynist (but not by his own culture's standards), also
wrote some of the more beautiful bits of Scripture. Bits that also have the
ring of God in my ear:

"If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but do not have love, I
have become a noisy gong or a clanging symbol. If I have the gift of
prophecy, and know all mysteries and all knowlege; and if I have all faith,
so as to remove mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. And if I give
all my possessions to feed the poor, and if I surrender my body to be
burned, but do not have love, it profits me nothing.

Love is patient, love is kind and is not jealous. Love does not brag and is
not arrogant, does not act unbecomingly. It does not seek its own, is not
prevoked, does not take into account a wrong suffered, does not rejoice in
unrighteousness, but rejoices with the truth. Bears all things, believes
all things, hopes all things, endures all things.

Love never fails, but if there are gifts of prophecy, they will be done
away. If there are tongues, they will cease. If there is knowledge, it
will be done away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part. But when
the perfect comes, the partial will be done away.

When I was a child, I used to speak like a child, think like a child, reason
like a child. When I became a man, I did away with childish things. For
now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part,
but then I will know fully just as I also have been fully known.

But now faith, hope, love, abide these three; but the greatest of these is
love."


It's ironic that this passage became the cliche of weddings throughout the
'Christian' world. It is such a wedding cliche, that I have difficultly
seeing through that association to the beauty behind Paul's writing.
Weddings celebrate a love that is in some sense selfish. It is a narrow
love that is the focus of a wedding. Paul was not talking about a narrow
love, and IMO his writing here comes as close to expressing what God yearns
for us as anything I've read anywhere.

I can forgive the man who wrote such a passage his human failings (being
careful to not attribute to him what certainly doesn't justify attribution.)
The man who wrote that was either a gifted charlatan, or a man who heard the
small voice more clearly than most of us have. Not inerrantly, but....



You can quote Paul's words over and over--about women and about Paul's
special relationship with God--but that doesn't make those words true.
It just makes them Paul's words. Those have to be validated by the
Living God, in the hearts of believers, not by church councils and by
a paid clergy that has every reason to serve the political and
cultural establishment that under girds their power and control.

But these attitudes cannot be validated by reference to the Holy
Spirit. The attitudes of Paul vis a vis women (and slaves) can only
be upheld and "validated" through reference to dead words in a book
written, edited and compiled by men. Fallible, human, men; men who
had more than one agenda. These included Paul who had no more special
relationship with God than we are capable of having--if we choose to
replace legalistic forms and illusions with a living relationship with
God.

You are absolutely correct here. But I would like to emphasize that, IMO,
Paul _did_ have a more special relationship with God than most of us in fact
do; you are perfectly correct in saying that we are all capable of having
such a relationship if we choose to. But it should be remarked that most of
us don't, despite the potential. Paul did. That bears some measure of
respect. It was not dead words in a book that lead Paul to lead the life he
did.

It should also be kept in mind that Paul should not be held accountable for
what his writings have been made into by later Christians. It should be
kept in mind that much of what is attributed to him most likely had little
to do with him personally. Significant to this thread in particular, the
frequent quotes from Timothy and Titus are almost certainly not from Paul.
These days mostly only the adherents of inerrancy and status quo stick to
that theory, for obvious reasons.


Scott


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Lying is wrong, deception not always wrong
    ... God certainly does not sanction exploitation. ... The basic meaning it has to me is to describe the church of the ... completely that Paul was not acting as some creature blown infallibly on ... Spirit who writes its "law" not in books but in the hearts of people. ...
    (soc.religion.quaker)
  • Re: What is Trinity, The Father, The Son and The Holy Spirit ?
    ... deity whatever save God; and, verily, God - He alone - is almighty, ... Trinity was invented by Paul or his jewish name Saul. ... Paul: Greatest or False Apostle? ... Christianity, it was a shock to family and friends when I began to ...
    (soc.culture.malaysia)
  • THE SHACK I & II
    ... Religious books become best-sellers when they connect with our deep ... 'Where is God when tragedy crashes in on us, when the innocent suffer, ... The Shack tries to contemporize C. S. Lewis's approach, ... Paul Young was brought up among the stone-age Dani people of New ...
    (soc.religion.christian)
  • DN The Joy of Recollection 2/10/2006
    ... "I thank my God in all my remembrance of you" (Phil. ... I'm sure Paul remembered when he preached in Philippi and God opened ... prison, commanding the jailer to keep them securely. ... 26 "The servant therefore fell down before him, saying, 'Master, ...
    (alt.religion.christian)
  • Re: You fools!
    ... 'Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God' ... Paul once more stresses and contrasts the *material* that Adam was made ... Better and more complete than Jesus *before* the resurrection. ...
    (uk.religion.christian)