Faith and UFO's

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

There are passages in the Old Testament that state that "angels" had sex with humans. Who were these "angels"?? WHAT were these "angels"??

And.... what about that "incest"?? We've been taught that incest is wrong. Why?? Again, something else that's rife throughout the Old Testament.

Where did all of these other "humans" come from that became wives of Adam and Eve's sons??

See, this is why TVDOC and I recommend talking to rabbis on OT matters.

I think you're referring to the nephilim of Gen 6:4. In more literal terms the nephilim were rebels and apostates. The Hebraic traditons depict them as men of great, noble, excellent--albeit ungodly--stature. Only those hungry to make a reference to the fallen angels imposed that reading onto the text.

[MrsSmith]

There are passages in the Old Testament that state that "angels" had sex with humans. Who were these "angels"?? WHAT were these "angels"??

And.... what about that "incest"?? We've been taught that incest is wrong. Why?? Again, something else that's rife throughout the Old Testament.

Where did all of these other "humans" come from that became wives of Adam and Eve's sons??

And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat [a son] in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth:
And the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years: and he begat sons and daughters:
And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died.

Note in this passage, the only son named is the 3rd one we know by name, no mention of Cain or Abel.    It mentions that he begat sons and daughters, but no mention of other names, numbers, anything.  However, even if Eve spaced her children very carefully, and was only fertile for half of Adam's lifetime, we're talking quite a few kids in that 465 year fertile span... 


As I mentioned in another post, I can tell a story about my 2 sons that is similar to the story of Cain and Abel, but that doesn't tell you how many kids I have.  The Bible very seldom names all the children of any couple...and Adam and Eve could have had hundreds of kids.  If the Bible gave every detail anyone demanded, it wouldn't be a book, it would be a library.

[MrsSmith]

Just musing.....and admittedly avoiding the more specific points presented in your thoughtful post, I believe that much of the problems that exist in modern (at least American) Christianity today stems from deficiencies in the level of knowledge in the Christian clergy.  My experience is that most Christians try very hard to avoid "theological discussions".

American Christians (particularly Protestants) study their Bible, and follow the teachings of their pastor.....and as "leader of their flock" rightfully so.  However, over the years, I have had discussions with literally hundreds pastors, and found them woefully deficient in knowledge of "Theology".  Many have had a couple of years at some seminary somewhere (the minimum required for ordination), perhaps even qualifying for a four-year degree, however many are "Lay ministers", with very little formal training at all.  Universally, most are quite conversant in their particular doctrine, but also universally, most have nearly no knowledge of religious history, or a comparative understanding of religion in general.

I mentioned in another thread a while ago, that if I wish to study the Old Testament......a protestant minister would be the LAST person that I would seek out for a fact-based discussion.....I would speak to a Rabbi.......as I mentioned before, they wrote it, and have been studying it several milennia longer than Christians have...  I think that this lack of formal training on the part of the ministry leads many Christians into a certain myopia that tends to fail to place their beliefs in true context, both theologically and historically.

Perhaps the best analogy is the public school system.......if you start with compromised, untrained, and ideologically motivated teachers, you get a  result that is less than desirable.  Perhaps this phenomenon has made me more skeptical than I should be, but when I ask a pastor a theological question, particularly an interpretive one, and the answer is a quotation from Scripture, out of context, and the sentence is ended with "God said it......end of discussion".......I know that I'm wasting my time.........

doc

Perhaps you are looking in the wrong churches.  The more conservative the congregation, the more likely they are to have serious theological discussions.  I found some of the best were in the college and young adult classes, but it largely depends on the teacher.  The more conservative churches tend to have well educated pastors, also.  My husband, for example, is very, very well educated on Christian doctrine and theology, though he no longer works in the ministry. 

Another thing that you may be running across the the simple fact that pastors are human.  They may not actually be thinking of exactly your question when you ask it.  Why, they may actually have to give it some thought to get to a good answer for you.  Or you may be wanting an answer that isn't theologically correct at all, and so become disappointed by what is actually the right answer.

[vesta111]

Just musing.....and admittedly avoiding the more specific points presented in your thoughtful post, I believe that much of the problems that exist in modern (at least American) Christianity today stems from deficiencies in the level of knowledge in the Christian clergy.  My experience is that most Christians try very hard to avoid "theological discussions".

American Christians (particularly Protestants) study their Bible, and follow the teachings of their pastor.....and as "leader of their flock" rightfully so.  However, over the years, I have had discussions with literally hundreds pastors, and found them woefully deficient in knowledge of "Theology".  Many have had a couple of years at some seminary somewhere (the minimum required for ordination), perhaps even qualifying for a four-year degree, however many are "Lay ministers", with very little formal training at all.  Universally, most are quite conversant in their particular doctrine, but also universally, most have nearly no knowledge of religious history, or a comparative understanding of religion in general.

I mentioned in another thread a while ago, that if I wish to study the Old Testament......a protestant minister would be the LAST person that I would seek out for a fact-based discussion.....I would speak to a Rabbi.......as I mentioned before, they wrote it, and have been studying it several milennia longer than Christians have...  I think that this lack of formal training on the part of the ministry leads many Christians into a certain myopia that tends to fail to place their beliefs in true context, both theologically and historically.

Perhaps the best analogy is the public school system.......if you start with compromised, untrained, and ideologically motivated teachers, you get a  result that is less than desirable.  Perhaps this phenomenon has made me more skeptical than I should be, but when I ask a pastor a theological question, particularly an interpretive one, and the answer is a quotation from Scripture, out of context, and the sentence is ended with "God said it......end of discussion".......I know that I'm wasting my time.........

doc

Just sent you a high 5 Doc.

People get so darn defensive about that faith that when asking questions make them angry' you know they have great fear that " Satan sent you to corrupt their faith "

At a study class of the Catholic rites I was curious about communion and the differences of the practice in other Christian Churches.

This Priests take on things was that a Priest could in fact turn wine into the blood of Christ and wafers into his flesh. 

I asked what happens to the unused wafers, the body of Christ after the service, can a Priest turn them back into wine and bread or what and how were the leftovers disposed of.

I was young then and very interested in the different Rites of Christianity and the cultures and traditions that followed Jesus.

Poor Priest he was old school and much different by 3 generations of his joining the Priesthood.

He most likely had never had that question put to him before and he replied that the wafers were taken to the kitchen soaked in water and disposed of.

Some smart Ass on the other side of the room blearted out, So you flush Jesus down the toilet??

I wanted to walk over and smack the fella but the look on the faces of everyone including the Priest kept me in my seat.

I did one day receive a great honor from and elderly woman when she took me to her Temple for a high holy day the one where the rams horn is blown.   It comes in as a close second to the Black Gospel Church's for feeling the power of faith.  Most everything I saw and heard that day Jesus himself had grown up seeing and hearing. all men of the Bible at that time had seen and heard the same as I was witnessing.   

Makes me wonder in reincarnation as I felt some kind of familiarity with the service, sort of like going to a totally strange place and feeling at home.

Allo is going to kick my Butt for this post with a few others, but I don't care, one has to be there to see and feel the experiences of others.

[soleil]

The more conservative the church, the smarter the pastor or the people of the church? I certainly don't agree with that at all. And I am not sure where you get that notion from. Is it because you belong to a pretty conservative church? I would think that doc has talked to all kinds of churches. Conservative, liberal, in between.

I think the discussion one wants to have depends on what message they want to get across. Literal interpretation of the Bible. Figurative. Somewhere in between. Some don't want to talk about the negatives in the Bible. And yes, there are some.

[vesta111]

The more conservative the church, the smarter the pastor or the people of the church? I certainly don't agree with that at all. And I am not sure where you get that notion from. Is it because you belong to a pretty conservative church? I would think that doc has talked to all kinds of churches. Conservative, liberal, in between.

I think the discussion one wants to have depends on what message they want to get across. Literal interpretation of the Bible. Figurative. Somewhere in between. Some don't want to talk about the negatives in the Bible. And yes, there are some.

Oh am I going to get in trouble here.    Getting read to run.

A few negatives you say.?

A man that God decreed to lead his people sees and lusts after a married woman.  This ruler sends her husband to his death so he can claim her. King David.

The story of Saul and Jonathan drives me nuts-----

Lott who found shelter with a family that was willing to send their own daughters out to be sodomised by the town folk, rather then have harm come to Lott's family, then this family was vaporised by God and Lott's wife turned into a pillar of salt.

 Not to mention that when later Lott's daughters became pregnant he blamed it all on the daughters for getting him drunk and molesting him their father.

Every time men got in trouble they blamed it on the woman from Eve and the apple to all the mayham that the men were too weak to resist.

Even Danial that walked into the lions den complained it was due to his not consorting with his masters wife.

The New Testament calls Mary Magline a whore, yet if she was Jesus had no problem having her around.

Salomi a young girl teased her father sexually until he brought her the head of John the Baptist.

The only female in the Bible that got off Scott free was Jesus's Mother.

What the Heck was wrong with these men that they could not controll themselves when a female walked by.?     




 

[soleil]

Oh am I going to get in trouble here.    Getting read to run.

A few negatives you say.?

A man that God decreed to lead his people sees and lusts after a married woman.  This ruler sends her husband to his death so he can claim her. King David.

The story of Saul and Jonathan drives me nuts-----

Lott who found shelter with a family that was willing to send their own daughters out to be sodomised by the town folk, rather then have harm come to Lott's family, then this family was vaporised by God and Lott's wife turned into a pillar of salt.

 Not to mention that when later Lott's daughters became pregnant he blamed it all on the daughters for getting him drunk and molesting him their father.

Every time men got in trouble they blamed it on the woman from Eve and the apple to all the mayham that the men were too weak to resist.

Even Danial that walked into the lions den complained it was due to his not consorting with his masters wife.

The New Testament calls Mary Magline a whore, yet if she was Jesus had no problem having her around.

Salomi a young girl teased her father sexually until he brought her the head of John the Baptist.

The only female in the Bible that got off Scott free was Jesus's Mother.

What the Heck was wrong with these men that they could not controll themselves when a female walked by.?     

You shouldn't feel like you have to run off. You should be able to question the Bible. Like I said before, you don't have to like the answers, but we should all have questions.

[MrsSmith]

The more conservative the church, the smarter the pastor or the people of the church? I certainly don't agree with that at all. And I am not sure where you get that notion from. Is it because you belong to a pretty conservative church? I would think that doc has talked to all kinds of churches. Conservative, liberal, in between.

I think the discussion one wants to have depends on what message they want to get across. Literal interpretation of the Bible. Figurative. Somewhere in between. Some don't want to talk about the negatives in the Bible. And yes, there are some.

Doc said:

Many have had a couple of years at some seminary somewhere (the minimum required for ordination), perhaps even qualifying for a four-year degree, however many are "Lay ministers", with very little formal training at all.  Universally, most are quite conversant in their particular doctrine, but also universally, most have nearly no knowledge of religious history, or a comparative understanding of religion in general.

  This may be mostly true for some of the less conservative churches, or the charismatic churches, but is simply not true in the conservative "fundamentalist" evangelical churches.   

From past discussions, Doc has suggested that an accurate theological view is not exactly what he seeks.  However, it is what most conservative Christians seek, study for, and expect of their pastor.  As the pastor is an employee of the congregation, if he doesn't "know his stuff," he doesn't keep his job.  Obviously, this is not the set-up in many liberal churches, or those like the Catholic church.  If Doc hasn't found someone with the answers, he either hasn't checked with a truly conservative pastor, didn't allow the pastor the time to really consider the question deeply, or didn't appreciate an accurate theological answer.

[MrsSmith]

Oh am I going to get in trouble here.    Getting read to run.

A few negatives you say.?

A man that God decreed to lead his people sees and lusts after a married woman.  This ruler sends her husband to his death so he can claim her. King David.

The story of Saul and Jonathan drives me nuts-----

Lott who found shelter with a family that was willing to send their own daughters out to be sodomised by the town folk, rather then have harm come to Lott's family, then this family was vaporised by God and Lott's wife turned into a pillar of salt.

 Not to mention that when later Lott's daughters became pregnant he blamed it all on the daughters for getting him drunk and molesting him their father.

Every time men got in trouble they blamed it on the woman from Eve and the apple to all the mayham that the men were too weak to resist.

Even Danial that walked into the lions den complained it was due to his not consorting with his masters wife.

The New Testament calls Mary Magline a whore, yet if she was Jesus had no problem having her around.

Salomi a young girl teased her father sexually until he brought her the head of John the Baptist.

The only female in the Bible that got off Scott free was Jesus's Mother.

What the Heck was wrong with these men that they could not controll themselves when a female walked by.?     




 

The Bible doesn't hide the sins of God's people, does it?  That's a big argument in favor of it being true.

[colehart]

He was taken up in a mother ship?

[TVDOC]

Doc said:  This may be mostly true for some of the less conservative churches, or the charismatic churches, but is simply not true in the conservative "fundamentalist" evangelical churches.   

From past discussions, Doc has suggested that an accurate theological view is not exactly what he seeks.  However, it is what most conservative Christians seek, study for, and expect of their pastor.  As the pastor is an employee of the congregation, if he doesn't "know his stuff," he doesn't keep his job.  Obviously, this is not the setup in many liberal churches, or those like the Catholic church.  If Doc hasn't found someone with the answers, he either hasn't checked with a truly conservative pastor, didn't allow the pastor the time to really consider the question deeply, or didn't appreciate an accurate theological answer.

Err.....a total bastardization of my past questions and positions, you twist my words at your peril........I have asked questions in order to stimulate discussions here, and repeatedly you have dug in your heels and stated that unless the rest of us accept YOUR interpretation as the correct one, we are basically hypocrites and apostates.......

"Theology" is the study of ALL religions, and that is the area that we are basing this discussion in.......it is true that Christianity and Judaism (as well as Islam  and several others) share similar descriptions of the origion of man.  As such, this is NOT a discussion of a Christian concept, but a generally religious one.  Let's keep it that way.

Although I consider myself a Christian, I look at all religions with a skeptical eye........that skepticism allows me to question and learn.  I have had many discussions with "conservative" pastors, after all, I was raised in a Southern Baptist church that was quite conservative.......I found little difference between the true knowledge demonstrated by conservative pastors regarding "theology", and liberal ones........you seem to suffer from the same blindness when reading what I actually post, as you demonstrate when the issue being discussed is a concept in Christianity.....

The OP refers to the possible origins of life vis-a-vis what is stated in the Old Testament.......to be perfectly frank, I don't consider you (or your "brilliant" husband for that matter) a conversant expert on the Old Testament......you are certainly entitled to your opinion, and are free to discuss it here, however don't expect your thoughts on the subject to carry any more weight than anyone elses........

To further be frank......when it comes to a general theological discussion, I consider Mr. Snuggle Bunny to probably be the most knowledgeable poster here on this subject.......his understanding of religious history, ancient languages and interpretations, and associated subjects is vast........he is further perfectly willing to back up his statements and positions with factual research, (I have learned much from his posts).......madame, you do not.......academic research and knowledge is not quoting scripture.......it is providing the facts (or lack thereof) and sources that lie BEHIND the scripture. 

These simple concepts are what separates an "academic" from a "zealot".........it has become more than apparent to the rest of us that you fall in the latter category.  Not that zealotry is a bad thing.....it isn't, and I certainly admire your persistance and depth of faith........however in an academic theological discussion, that is simply not enough for you to carry the debate.

doc

[soleil]

Err.....a total bastardization of my past questions and positions, you twist my words at your peril........I have asked questions in order to stimulate discussions here, and repeatedly you have dug in your heels and stated that unless the rest of us accept YOUR interpretation as the correct one, we are basically hypocrites and apostates.......

"Theology" is the study of ALL religions, and that is the area that we are basing this discussion in.......it is true that Christianity and Judaism (as well as Islam  and several others) share similar descriptions of the origion of man.  As such, this is NOT a discussion of a Christian concept, but a generally religious one.  Let's keep it that way.

Although I consider myself a Christian, I look at all religions with a skeptical eye........that skepticism allows me to question and learn.  I have had many discussions with "conservative" pastors, after all, I was raised in a Southern Baptist church that was quite conservative.......I found little difference between the true knowledge demonstrated by conservative pastors regarding "theology", and liberal ones........you seem to suffer from the same blindness when reading what I actually post, as you demonstrate when the issue being discussed is a concept in Christianity.....

The OP refers to the possible origins of life vis-a-vis what is stated in the Old Testament.......to be perfectly frank, I don't consider you (or your "brilliant" husband for that matter) a conversant expert on the Old Testament......you are certainly entitled to your opinion, and are free to discuss it here, however don't expect your thoughts on the subject to carry any more weight than anyone elses........

To further be frank......when it comes to a general theological discussion, I consider Mr. Snuggle Bunny to probably be the most knowledgeable poster here on this subject.......his understanding of religious history, ancient languages and interpretations, and associated subjects is vast........he is further perfectly willing to back up his statements and positions with factual research, (I have learned much from his posts).......madame, you do not.......academic research and knowledge is not quoting scripture.......it is providing the facts (or lack thereof) and sources that lie BEHIND the scripture. 

These simple concepts are what separates an "academic" from a "zealot".........it has become more than apparent to the rest of us that you fall in the latter category.  Not that zealotry is a bad thing.....it isn't, and I certainly admire your persistance and depth of faith........however in an academic theological discussion, that is simply not enough for you to carry the debate.

doc

  and I agree about Mr. Snuggle Bunny. He seems  quite knowledgeable on the subject. As do you.

[MrsSmith]

Err.....a total bastardization of my past questions and positions, you twist my words at your peril........I have asked questions in order to stimulate discussions here, and repeatedly you have dug in your heels and stated that unless the rest of us accept YOUR interpretation as the correct one, we are basically hypocrites and apostates.......

"Theology" is the study of ALL religions, and that is the area that we are basing this discussion in.......it is true that Christianity and Judaism (as well as Islam  and several others) share similar descriptions of the origion of man.  As such, this is NOT a discussion of a Christian concept, but a generally religious one.  Let's keep it that way.

Although I consider myself a Christian, I look at all religions with a skeptical eye........that skepticism allows me to question and learn.  I have had many discussions with "conservative" pastors, after all, I was raised in a Southern Baptist church that was quite conservative.......I found little difference between the true knowledge demonstrated by conservative pastors regarding "theology", and liberal ones........you seem to suffer from the same blindness when reading what I actually post, as you demonstrate when the issue being discussed is a concept in Christianity.....

The OP refers to the possible origins of life vis-a-vis what is stated in the Old Testament.......to be perfectly frank, I don't consider you (or your "brilliant" husband for that matter) a conversant expert on the Old Testament......you are certainly entitled to your opinion, and are free to discuss it here, however don't expect your thoughts on the subject to carry any more weight than anyone elses........

To further be frank......when it comes to a general theological discussion, I consider Mr. Snuggle Bunny to probably be the most knowledgeable poster here on this subject.......his understanding of religious history, ancient languages and interpretations, and associated subjects is vast........he is further perfectly willing to back up his statements and positions with factual research, (I have learned much from his posts).......madame, you do not.......academic research and knowledge is not quoting scripture.......it is providing the facts (or lack thereof) and sources that lie BEHIND the scripture. 

These simple concepts are what separates an "academic" from a "zealot".........it has become more than apparent to the rest of us that you fall in the latter category.  Not that zealotry is a bad thing.....it isn't, and I certainly admire your persistance and depth of faith........however in an academic theological discussion, that is simply not enough for you to carry the debate.

doc

I said that you don't want an accurate answer based in Christian theology...and you don't.  If you were looking for that, a good conservative preacher can, and possibly has, given it to you.  A good conservative pastor also understands the culture in place at the time different books or letters were written, and has either studied the original languages or at least done specific word studies.  Your attitude is that they're all ignorant and untrained because they don't give you the answer you want, and they don't refer to heresy in their arguments.  You are free to study whatever you want, true or false, but that doesn't mean you the right to smear those that prefer to thoroughly learn a subject based on the most factual information possible.  In fact, many consider it very foolish to study what may be truth mixed with certain lies unless they have a very strong basis for telling one from the other. 

If studying known truth instead of heresy makes me a zealot, then so be it.  I am, after all, a bondservant of Christ, so I suppose I really should be a zealot.

[soleil]

I said that you don't want an accurate answer based in Christian theology...and you don't.  

I don't think the answers lie with a good conservative preacher. There are many foolish conservative preachers out there. And that goes for any preacher. Also, educating oneself in the ways of all religions doesn't make one more succeptible to be led astray. It should reinforce what you already know. I think having an open mind helps you to be able to learn more instead of just taking your preacher's word for everything (and by "your preacher" I mean that generally).

Why are you so stuck on a conservative preacher? Do you believe others don't have anything to offer? Even if someone isn't religious, they can have a vast knowledge of the Bible, Koran, etc. And just because someone isn't religious or Baptist doesn't mean they are clueless. I thank God that I stepped out of my box and learned something. After all, religion separates more than it unites. The Bible certainly doesn't fall into any one religion.

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

What is this catch-phrase "good conservative pastor"?

Does it imply/claim politically liberal pastors/ministers/priests are not as well-educated or theologically sound?

I can see a liberal pastor believing in socialized medicine or welfare while simultaneously affirming the Apostle's Creed and being well-versed in the finer points of hermeneutics.

I'm not opposed to the idea asserting a more orthodox reading of scripture would lead one to oppose modern sexual mores, gay marriage, pro-abortion etc but "good conservative pastor" seems more self-congratulatory than anything else.

[TVDOC]

I said that you don't want an accurate answer based in Christian theology...and you don't.

,snip>

If studying known truth instead of heresy makes me a zealot, then so be it.  I am, after all, a bondservant of Christ, so I suppose I really should be a zealot.

Good grief, madam......You're enough to convince me to convert to Buddism, just so that we can have peaceful religious discussions without your proselytizing, but we'd likely find that your first cousin is a dge long monk, and you're an expert on that religion as well.......it isn't a reach to see why many people who are ambivalent about religion are turned off by some "Christians"......and why we need to keep the zealots as far from political power as possible......

doc

[MrsSmith]

I don't think the answers lie with a good conservative preacher. There are many foolish conservative preachers out there. And that goes for any preacher. Also, educating oneself in the ways of all religions doesn't make one more succeptible to be led astray. It should reinforce what you already know. I think having an open mind helps you to be able to learn more instead of just taking your preacher's word for everything (and by "your preacher" I mean that generally).

Why are you so stuck on a conservative preacher? Do you believe others don't have anything to offer? Even if someone isn't religious, they can have a vast knowledge of the Bible, Koran, etc. And just because someone isn't religious or Baptist doesn't mean they are clueless. I thank God that I stepped out of my box and learned something. After all, religion separates more than it unites. The Bible certainly doesn't fall into any one religion.

I know what is involved in becoming a conservative preacher.  At the very minimum, the degree is equivalent to the degree a lawyer has.   My own husband has 2 Masters and is working toward a Doctorate.  Every pastor we know in this area has a minimum of a Masters.  The head of the Southern Baptist association in this area has a Doctorate.  I don't know if other denominations require a less rigorous study, but I do know what we require, and ignorance doesn't cut it.  

As I mentioned before, our pastors are employees of the congregation.  They are forced, therefore, to be more educated than our most educated members in order to keep their positions.  Not only are we not required to "take their word for" anything, it is not uncommon to have a deep theological discussion.  Our pastor once taught a Sunday School that my husband attended.  Discussions in there became very deep and spirited.  Many of the other members were very well educated, also.  It was a very educational group...a lot of fun!  

Doc and I seriously do not see eye-to-eye on theology...and that's fine.  He is completely free to study anything he wishes.  And I'm completely free to point out when he's wrong about something.

[MrsSmith]

Good grief, madam......You're enough to convince me to convert to Buddism, just so that we can have peaceful religious discussions without your proselytizing, but we'd likely find that your first cousin is a dge long monk, and you're an expert on that religion as well.......it isn't a reach to see why many people who are ambivalent about religion are turned off by some "Christians"......and why we need to keep the zealots as far from political power as possible......

doc

Proselytizing?    OK.  I'm sorry you always get angry at what I say, you are totally free to believe whatever you want...and to talk about it all you want.  At least, until you say something blatantly untrue, like calling all pastors "ignorant."  

I take it, however, that you'd rather I was not free to believe what I want and talk about it??  

[MrsSmith]

What is this catch-phrase "good conservative pastor"?

Does it imply/claim politically liberal pastors/ministers/priests are not as well-educated or theologically sound?

I can see a liberal pastor believing in socialized medicine or welfare while simultaneously affirming the Apostle's Creed and being well-versed in the finer points of hermeneutics.

I'm not opposed to the idea asserting a more orthodox reading of scripture would lead one to oppose modern sexual mores, gay marriage, pro-abortion etc but "good conservative pastor" seems more self-congratulatory than anything else.

It implies that I know what educational standard is required of a conservative pastor.  I don't know the same for others.  It's possible that Doc has run across some ignorant ones, but they most certainly aren't all.

[soleil]

I know what is involved in becoming a conservative preacher.  At the very minimum, the degree is equivalent to the degree a lawyer has.   My own husband has 2 Masters and is working toward a Doctorate.  Every pastor we know in this area has a minimum of a Masters.  The head of the Southern Baptist association in this area has a Doctorate.  I don't know if other denominations require a less rigorous study, but I do know what we require, and ignorance doesn't cut it.  

As I mentioned before, our pastors are employees of the congregation.  They are forced, therefore, to be more educated than our most educated members in order to keep their positions.  Not only are we not required to "take their word for" anything, it is not uncommon to have a deep theological discussion.  Our pastor once taught a Sunday School that my husband attended.  Discussions in there became very deep and spirited.  Many of the other members were very well educated, also.  It was a very educational group...a lot of fun!  

Doc and I seriously do not see eye-to-eye on theology...and that's fine.  He is completely free to study anything he wishes.  And I'm completely free to point out when he's wrong about something.

You know what is involved in becoming a preacher for the church you go to. That is not true for every conservative church. I grew up in the Bible belt, and I went to many southern Baptist chuches. That doesn't hold true for every conservative preacher.

My Episcopal (liberal) and Methodist preachers hold Doctorate degrees as well. I wouldn't consider these men and WOMEN so conservative.

*I used to be Episcopal, and I am now a Methodist. I still hold a lot of love for the Episcopal church. And also, let me say that for me it is somewhere to go that is holy to worship God. That can be found in many places and many religions. You just have to find one that suits you best. I don't agree 100% with any religion I don't think. And this is no offense to you at all, but the Baptist religion has turned me off so bad that I almost won't go to a Baptist church. Many of my firiends are Baptist though, so I will go for their sake.

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

It implies that I know what educational standard is required of a conservative pastor.  I don't know the same for others.

That's quite the mantle you claim for yourself. Declaring to know the final standard in a matter presumes you have exhausted all study and you are no longer to be taught but you are the teacher.

Again, I say this seems self-congratulatory and overly so since your exposition.

But how can there be an educational standards based on political leaning? That places politics above spiritual matters. One would hope whether a minister was of a conservative or progressive bent that their studies of a singular source--the Bible--led them to their conclusions, not their voter affiliation leading their studies.

A man can easily and without fault read that there is neither, "Jew nor Greek...but we are all one in Christ Jesus" and feel the unction to become an open borders advocate so people may flee the hell holes they were born into in order to seek opportunity in the US or elsewhere. While this would hardly endear him to the conservative political set his expressions of agape would be hard to fault and might even be seen as a thing to admire (perhaps even spiritually/scripturally correct).

If you look at the disciples you will see the motliest assortment of political and educational leanings and yet the only one to be any real suspicion was Judas and he probably voted for Lyndon LaRouche.

Anyway, I seriously doubt that a soul arriving in St Peter's presence is asked to pull-out a No. 2 pencil for a theology exam and as part of the student ID process they have to produce their voter registration cards.

I take it, however, that you'd rather I was not free to believe what I want and talk about it??  

You are free to believe and talk.

You are also free to be questioned and critiqued.

Perhaps you were too busy hammering your own cross to understand what TVDOC  has to say.

If someone as demanding as God can say, "come, let us reason together" and thereby invite others to question Him why should you, a person of no particular import, escape scrutiny?

[Thor]

Yeah, Christianity, the religion which clearly states in the bible that homosexuality is an abomination and yet...... it's believers, participants, etc are all to willing to embrace the homosexual. Some bullshit about love the person, hate the sin. I'm sorry, but that just doesn't wash with me.

Furthermore, organized religion is little more than a way to exercise control over the masses. This is why I've freed myself from the bondage that's called the "Church". (I was raised Episcopalian, in the High Church) But, we are WAY off the topic at hand.

[soleil]

Yeah, Christianity, the religion which clearly states in the bible that homosexuality is an abomination and yet...... it's believers, participants, etc are all to willing to embrace the homosexual. Some bullshit about love the person, hate the sin. I'm sorry, but that just doesn't wash with me.

Furthermore, organized religion is little more than a way to exercise control over the masses. This is why I've freed myself from the bondage that's called the "Church". (I was raised Episcopalian, in the High Church) But, we are WAY off the topic at hand.

While I don't agree with you on your first statement 100%, I do agree with you that organized religion can serve and does serve often as a way to control people and their thoughts. That is why I went with what I felt fit me most, but I also know that I don't have to agree with everything that is said, believed, preached.

[Thor]

We are ALL entitled to our own beliefs. I find it reprehensible that the Episcopal Church in America has homosexual Priests and even a Bishop. A little research will show the chasm that has developed over that issue. Just one article of 2.75 MILLION: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE4B30Q320081204

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

Yeah, Christianity, the religion which clearly states in the bible that homosexuality is an abomination and yet...... it's believers, participants, etc are all to willing to embrace the homosexual. Some bullshit about love the person, hate the sin. I'm sorry, but that just doesn't wash with me.

Homosexuals are no better--and no worse--than adulterers and drunkards.

Make of that what you will in scriptural terms.

Furthermore, organized religion is little more than a way to exercise control over the masses. This is why I've freed myself from the bondage that's called the "Church". (I was raised Episcopalian, in the High Church) But, we are WAY off the topic at hand.

Disorganized religion can just as easily be exploited for personal gain. Where do you think sham cults come from? And many of them form on the basis that they contain a special truth that the orthodox schools have failed to discern.

Yes, the orthodox schools may become stultified and resistant to exploring new ideas but in that same vein they also serve as hedge and bulwark against nonsense.


It's almost as if people are  being prodded away from extremes on either side.