Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 (Tek) 9/28/84 based on 9/17/84; site mako.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!whuxl!whuxlm!harpo!decvax!tektronix!orca!mako!seifert
From: seifert@mako.UUCP (Snoopy)
Newsgroups: net.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Whats wrong with this eqation? (Paul=Jesus)
Message-ID: <720@mako.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 21-Apr-85 20:17:13 EST
Article-I.D.: mako.720
Posted: Sun Apr 21 20:17:13 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 23-Apr-85 06:38:20 EST
References: <765@ccice5.UUCP> <700@mako.UUCP> <493@hou2b.UUCP>
Reply-To: seifert@mako.UUCP (Snoopy)
Organization: The Daisy Hill Puppy Farm
Lines: 85
Summary: 

In article <493@hou2b.UUCP> gkm@hou2b.UUCP (G.MCNEES) writes:

> As Paul the apostle says none of us now understands fully; but THEN
> we will fully understand even as we are fully understood.(BY GOD)
> For this reason we have disagreements as to the meaning of the
> scriptures.

Yes, if we understood everything, life could get rather boring, no?

> The Spirit within me bears witness that what is written in the Bible
> is all from God.  ...  However, all that is written is not binding
> upon Christians today.  For example, the various laws that were given
> to the Jewish people were specifically NOT GIVEN to us Christians
> to follow.

Agreed.  And it is precisely the fact that Jesus did away with "the Law",
that makes it seem so odd that Paul would be making up a bunch of new rules
(e.g. not wearing braided hair) for us to follow.

>I find it very interesting to see that new Christians expect to be
>able to understand everything God has said in just a short time when
>many devoted men of God have spent their lives serving Him and
>studying His word and still readily admit that there are many things
>they don't understand.

I'm not sure what you mean by "new" Christians.  Speaking for myself,
I don't expect to understand everything right away.  However, if there
are certain rules to obey, I do expect to understand them, and I
expect there to be understandable reasons behind them.  If the rule is
"don't wear braided hair", I don't understand.  What is wrong with braided
hair?  If the rule is "don't spend a great deal of time and money on
personal appearance, there are better uses for those resources.", then
the rule and it's reason are understandable. (Of course people will
then argue over how much time and money is "too much")  If the
rule is "don't look like a prostitute, prostitution is sinful",
this is also understandable. (again, people may argue over just
what constitutes looking like a prostitute)

> If we remove from "our" scriptures those portions we
> don't like, I'm sure that soon very little would be left.

It's not a matter of removing things we don't like. (although that
would certainly be convienant!)  It's a matter of trying to understand
*why* Paul (or whoever) wrote those things.  Was he writing to Christians
in general, for all time, or was he only writing to a specific group
of people at a specific time?  I think there are cases of both, the
question is, which is which?

Certainly Paul had a special relationship with God,  if I ever attain
1/10th the understanding Paul had, I will be doing well.  I certainly
wouldn't casually "throw away" anything he said.  However, I do
question whether everything he said applies today.  Am I to avoid
women who braid their hair?  Am I to avoid churches in which women teach?
These are serious questions.  Perhaps I am supposed to do these things.
If so, that's fine, but I want good, understandable reasons for them.
Following rules blindly is quite dangerous.

Sure, I may someday understand this.  That will be very nice.  In
the meantime, I have to live to best life I can.  I have to figure out
whether to steer clear of women with braided hair or not.  It can
ba argued that I should "play it safe", and take Paul's writings
literally.  I claim that this isn't so safe.  There is a commandment
about keeping the Sabbath, but if your sheep falls into a pit...
We have brains, and the Lord expects us to use them.  What we have to
do is study the word, try and figure it out.  Discuss the difficult parts
with family/friends (this includes usenet) to get other viewpoints.
Pray about it.  And after all of this you come up with some sort of
conclusion.  From time to time the conclusions need to be reexamined,
as you gain in knowledge, experience, and wisdom.

At the moment, what I get out of the braided-hair bit is the "don't waste
too many resources on personal appearance" interpretation, which seems
to me to be what Paul is really saying.  It even makes sense!  I'm
still having trouble with the bit about women not being allowed to teach.
The only way I see it making any sense is if you say that women are
inferior to men, and I just can't buy that.  I've got a whole pile of
personal experience that shows that women are *not* inferior to men.
If anyone has any insights here, I'd like to hear about them.


        _____
        |___|           the Bavarian Beagle
       _|___|_               Snoopy
       \_____/          tektronix!mako!seifert
        \___/