I saw a girl on the bus today reading the Bible (or the Mormon text, I couldn't tell which). She looked so serene and content. She had the most lovely smile on her face, and I desperately wanted to ask her how she found such peace and happiness in something that couldn't be proven scientifically or has any real proof at all. I know the answer is faith, but I have no idea how one comes to that.
In that instant, I envied her more than I've ever envied anyone. I never thought of her as more than a nice person and religious zealot, but now I understand. Maybe one day I'll find God too.
Anonymous
11:33:09 PM
28 comments:
Faith is just that, I think. I don't know how you come to that-- you'll do it in your own time, I think. Seek out more. Learn. The thirst for knowledge, for learning about something that nobody can prove scientifically, I think that's the first step.
I'm still learning, and I don't think that you ever stop. But I am happy, I am at peace, when I feel myself in a communion with God. And that's an amazing feeling. And yes, it will take time. But if you truly desire it, then it will come.
Maybe one day you will find God. I can only pray that you do.
I kind of envy her now even though I've never met or seen her. I wish I had that sort of certainty about something, anything.
You should come to Beth Meyer. We've got this new rabbi - absolutely amazing. Really allows you to connect with God.
I wish I, too, could have that kind of communion with the divine. With any divine. Of course, being born into this one religion means that if it doesn't work for me, I'm stuck here anyway.
And interesting tidbit: identical twins that are separated at birth generally have the same amount of religious fervor (depending on the family they could be completely different religions, but they're capacity for faith or invovlement is generally very similar), which leads me to believe that genetically (probably with a bit of the family influence) I am incapable of believing in god. I completely understand that people can believe in him (or her or it if you want to be contrary), and I understand some of the theology behind a lot of it, and like most philosophy it makes sense within itself, but I simply cannot believe in it.
Eh, PChis, I had "faith" of some level or another at one point (I could probably tell any of you guys about biblically comprehensive systematic theology then you wanted to know)
but then i gave up on it because i'm an abomination before the god i thought was real?
What does that mean about your theory?
I never said anything about believe in the christian god, or a certain manifestation of it, nor did I talk of giving up religion.
I simply said that I believe I lack the ability to believe in such an entity.
^ To Tinted:
The same book of the Bible that calls you an abomination unto the Lord calls tattoos, shaving, synthetic fabrics, bunny rabbits, vegetable gardens, and hamburgers abominations, too. You are not an abomination in any sense of the word. God created you, and God loves you, no matter what some of His followers may say.
ugh, not to start this debate all over again, but while that book (leviticus) is the one that states homosexually to be bad, there are tons of verses that state and imply it.
Basically the bible says homosexuality is bad...then again I don't put much stock in such outdated literature.
The Bible "says" what people interperate it to "say". The stories are there to guide us along our faith and to illustrate the love of God- not to tell us such limitations as "you may not be a homosexual". Sure it says things like "Thou shalt not kill"- but if one loves God (in the true form- the loving, non-spiteful God) with all one's heart- such things are obvious. Wrath, Greed, Lust, (and the rest of them)aren't specifically prohibited by the Bible anywhere- Christians just /know/ not to do them because they are not God-like.
If you get what I'm saying?
God loves you. There is no reason that God does not love you- you just have to try to return the favor.
Basically the bible says homosexuality is bad...then again I don't put much stock in such outdated literature.
I'm sorry, pchis, but the Bible is just as much a living document as the Constitution. There are new interpretations written about it everyday, and as Jews, we are encouraged to question everything we read.
These chapters of Leviticus form part of the Holiness code. Leviticus 18:22 says:
"Do not have sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman; that is detestable."
and Leviticus 20:13 states:
"If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads."
but we've already discussed how everyone doesn't like leviticus so:
In the Epistle to the Romans 1:26-27 (TNIV), Paul writes
"Because of this [idolatry], God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error."
Now, apparently the argument or "interpretation" of this statement to say that paul didn't condem homosexuality is that he was simply talking about heterosexual men having homosexual relationships to be wrong, and that homosexuality is actually fine. Frankly, thats the biggest load of bullshit I've ever heard.
In 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 (TNIV), Paul says:
"Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor practicing homosexuals nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God."
of course all of these could have been translated "incorrectly," and alot of others could be translated to say homosexuality from things that currently say sexual immorality, or blah blah blah,
but
it is my opinion that many people of the time were indeed against homosexuality, and as such the writers of these various texts were against homosexuality, and that just because we're so liberal now that we can come to accept it does not mean that we should twist what the bible says to make ourselves feel better.
I mean, that's not to say you're going to hell, cause there's that huge argument about exactly what you have to do to get into such a place. It would seem that corinthians says no, but all leviticus says is that it's "detestable," and hell, maybe you can get into this heaven place even doing "detestable" acts if you're just a downright good person.
Then again, as all of you say, this is just my interpretation, but I mean, there can only be one correct interpretation, and the kids from that time, let's face it, were not very liberal (as the term is defined today).
A lot of the churches, the Protestant churches, are questioning the morality of homosexuality, I think? I don't know. I'm a Christian, and I'm still questioning whether homosexuality is wrong... It's confusing. I mean, Tinted is my friend and I'm not going to shun him just because people think that being gay is wrong. That's ridiculous.
ugh... whoops. I didn't intend to reopen the debate, guys, especially since the original post has not much to do with it. I just wanted to make TintedFragipan not feel so shitty about himself, because he shouldn't.
To tie it back to the original poster's subject: God loves all His/Her creatures, great or small, gay or straight, religious or non-religious. That's a constant thing, and whether you can find amazing faith easily and early in life or whether it takes you years of doubt and experimentation to find the right path to enlightenment, God will wait up for you.
I don't think hell can exist and have god love all his creatures...
yup tinty, I'll save you a seat.
"there can only be one correct interpretation"
the mark of a true non-Christian.
Not all Christians believe in Hell. Homosexuality may be wrong- but God loves homosexuals just as much. God loves every being on this earth. God loves the murderers and the rapists just as much as he loves the priests and the saints.
That's why God sent Jesus. Out of God's love he sent his only son, our Lord to die for the sins of mankind. He loves you so much he sent his son to die for you.
Maybe instead of focusing on what is wrong you should focus on what is right?
Optimism is Godliness. Remember that.
maybe you're all forgetting that the bible was written by MEN and not sent down by the almighty voice of god admidst a chorus of angels? it wasn't even written by jesus. not even all the contributors even had close relations with jesus. so basically god might love homosexuals, he might hate them. same deal with hell and everything else. but the bible is really nothing definitive, unless you take the word of the people who wrote it, who might be putting owrd sin "god's" mouth. personally, i'm inclined to believe god loves everyone. that's all.
ahem i meant "words in." sorry about that
the mark of a true non-Christian.
I don't believe that to be true sir, as there are many many many christian sects that believe themselves to be the only true belief.
Quoting a former post-
"Sir is reserved for officers and assholes- remember that."
What gives you the right to assume that I'm a male?
I believe that the sects of Christianity that believe that theirs is the one true faith have a blurred view of what Christianity really is (definitely not exclusive in that respect). I don't personally believe that God will smite you with the force of a thousand mountains if your version of the Faith differs slightly (or greatly- as long as the focus is on God and Jesus). I think that's just a warped view. In fact- I don't believe that God will ever smite anyone. Ever.
To quote 1John 4:8b -
"God is love"
I guess you wouldn't really understand where I'm coming from. No offense intended, sir. :)
the 9th amendment gives me the right to assume that you're a male :). I'm sorry you disagree with my pronoun use, but I feel I will continue to use it sir.
Personally I don't believe that god exists or doesn't exist; I don't have enough faith to put such enormous stock in something we can really know nothing about.
If god does exist as some emperical creature we can touch and see then I'd venture to study such a creature.
If he does exist and (as the more likely case would seem) he somehow transcends or scientific ability, then I believe that if he is anything like us, then there is no more love between us than there is between a piece of pottery I made in 8th grade or the ACSL program I typed recently. I'd respect him for such power (and I doubt he'd respect me any more than I respect a garden rake), but love is something I don't hold for him at this current point in time.
then again that's making an aweful lot of assumptions, I'm just thinking of god as I would think of the popularly believed in christian god melded with sort of a human perspective (which he no doubt, being "perfect" transcends, so this is all wrong).
As to Chrsitianity: I never said what you believed in wasn't christianity; in fact I'd say that the aformentioned sects form my post would probably accept you as a christian. Then again, even in your open minded view you do not accept the unitarians (not the Unitarian Universalists mind you), who are generally grouped under "christianity." The reason your definition does not accept them is because their "thing" is not believing in the trinity. Their view of jesus is perhaps closer to the jewish perspective of jesus, but they don't share much with the Jews other than that (and other than what christianity normally shares with judaism).
But, whether or not what you believe is defined by the broad, overbearing term of "Christianity," that doesn't trump the fact that one view of the world is correct. Whether that be your belief, or perhaps even the universal acceptance of the universalism doctrine, or the very restrictive doctrines of the christian sects that believe their path to be the only right now...who even knows.
How much stock you put in your beliefs, other people's beliefs, and the many texts throughout the world (which I suppose might be a mixture of the first two categories), is completely up to...well...you.
It's all speculation in my mind, that's what's so great about it.
Hey PChis, don't be so anal about the use of "sir." Not sure if you meant it that way, but it came across as dumb and childish and I'd hate for you to detract from what was otherwise a good point.
Also, you "Christians" who are all "God loves everybody even if they sin" make me sick. I'd prefer to think he doesn't exist, thanks.
"Seek out more. Learn. The thirst for knowledge, for learning about something that nobody can prove scientifically, I think that's the first step."
Anonymous 1, to me this is the biggest waste of time imaginable. Sure we can spend an entire lifetime timinking up alternate versions of how our solar system might rotate or listing all the imaginary animals we can think of, but what's the point. If none of it can be proven, if none of it exists in the here and now, why waste your time?
Because there is so much more to the whole shebang than just this world. We're blinded by our humanity.
Stop trying to personify God, I think that's most people's problem. We will never be able to even begin to describe what God is or is not. Try to personify infinity. You can't do it. Why? Because you're an imperfect human. You have flaws. I have flaws. We have flaws. We have to accept the fact that we're just humans. We just have to accept the fact that we just can't do some things.
Michaelangelo was wrong- God isn't some old, pretty man with a long white beard (although, that is a beastly work of art)and Jesus isn't some white guy with mad-crazy musculature who damns masses of people to hell with his amazing wrath. No. God is love. Jesus is love in human form.
You believe what you believe, and I'll believe what I believe. Maybe one day our paths will cross, pchis and/or tinted. Maybe I'm not just talking about in this physical realm.
Sure we can spend an entire lifetime timinking up alternate versions of how our solar system might rotate or listing all the imaginary animals we can think of, but what's the point. If none of it can be proven, if none of it exists in the here and now, why waste your time?
Believing exactly this was what led me to become a secularist. (For all of you to whom that term is unfamiliar, simply someone who believes that religion is not important and that everyone can be fulfilled through their relationship to the material and social worlds. It would be separated from an atheist because of the lack of concern in whether god exists.)
I pray for you.
I hope that someday you will see Reason.
^"If you pray you'll get your way.
If you hope the answer's 'Nope!'"
:)...Moral Orel makes me laugh sometimes. All secular humanists with a religious mean streak should check it out.
Post a Comment