Religion and Estrangement/No Contact.

To be fair Starblaze, Skye17 wasn't lecturing you; she's simply putting her thoughts down like everyone else, and she's using a similar analogy (parachutes/belts/dogs) to illustrate her point of view. I'm sure she wasn't lecturing anyone; just discussing a very interesting subject.

Within the context of Skye's beliefs she is sharing her interpretation with others.

She has acknowledged that we all have free will. Her words do not appear to be "lecturing" just heartfelt beliefs and those heartfelt beliefs, I would guess, are a "solution" for her.

They may well not be a solution for anyone else but I think she has the right to say them in a thread about "Religion". She is giving her perspective which may feel uncomfortable for some, too simplistic for others but is not unpleasant, rude or abusive as far as I can see

Quite right Skye17. As I have often said on these threads, Jesus never promised perfection in this life, only the next. This is just the rehearsal, and He has told us what to do to be saved.

Madgran the individual interpretation of it might .....someone who is following a religion might then use that as a reason for their actions and those actions might cause estrangement

Rosecarmel It's the "wielding" of interpretations of the words that cause hurt, the fixed expectation of their meaning and that others see it and agree

We seem to be in agreement Rosecarmel

Skye if you were terrified of dogs, do you think me lecturing you on how wonderful dogs were would fix the issue or do you think it would be better that you see someone qualified to undo that trauma before I tried to persuade you to go sit in a room full of dogs.

Please understand you are not being helpful here.

rosecarmel I’m not sure what you mean.

//Skye I don't think you understand what I mean, the problem was never the belt, it was the abusive person using it. Trauma is not undone by simple explanation, or preaching I'm afraid and it's not appropriate in this case. People are able to choose their own way and your responsibility is to respect that.//

In my example, the problem was never the parachute (the Bible message); it was the abusive person using it.

I didn’t mention trauma or how to undo it at all. That’s a separate issue.

Of course people are able to choose their own way, and I fully respect their freely made choice to do that. I think God has given us free will to turn to him or turn away.

It would be a shame for someone to miss out on being saved by a parachute because they had bad associations with parachutes.

Skye, you're interpreting you're version of what's been written as if it were the gospel itself-

It's not-

It's the "wielding" of interpretations of the words that cause hurt, the fixed expectation of their meaning and that others see it and agree-

It's a successful tactic- But one has to ask what one is seeking to succeed at by proclaiming to know what God wants rather than inquiring what it might me-

My current personal inquiry: Did the writers get God wrong?

It's very possible that they projected their human hate onto "fog" and considered it fixed, as if it even existed to begin with, never considering what their own hate was dependent upon, therefore deemed it as acceptable, applicable and God-like-

"Beliefs can change and often do. Does that mean you are a different person if you change your mind about something, or just better informed/educated?"(Baggs)

Yes. There is no essential person. A person is what a person does.
The procedure for identifying someone is to check dental records, documentation, DNA, or finger prints. Not beliefs or hair colour.

Beliefs can change and often do. Does that mean you are a different person if you change your mind about something, or just better informed/educated?

Baggs, surely a person's beliefs are part of who they are. I am generally a 'live and let live' sort of person, but I cannot respect someone who holds religious or political views which are abhorrent to me. I agree with Hannah that this would include racism, homophobia and misogyny.

I guess it depends how you define abhorrent, petitfromage. I think I can still have some respect even for a human being whose beliefs I think are abominable. I think it gets more difficult to respect an individual whose behaviour has been abominable. Beliefs can change. Behaviour has happened and can be hard to forgive. But a human being is still a human being.

On a day to day basis, I don't find it hard to respect someone whose political or religious beliefs are different from mine and I wouldn't find it hard to respect the male clerics in your example even though, like you, I think they were profoundly wrong in their outlook. But then, I don't find that sort of prejudice abhorrent, only stupid and irrational in the modern world.

Skye I don't think you understand what I mean, the problem was never the belt, it was the abusive person using it. Trauma is not undone by simple explanation, or preaching I'm afraid and it's not appropriate in this case. People are able to choose their own way and your responsibility is to respect that.

It wouldn’t be wise to refuse to put on a parachute because you had been abused by someone using a parachute (say, to suffocate you or tie you up).

The message of the Bible is not like a belt for someone who has braces. It’s like a parachute for someone who’s in a plane that’s about to crash.

Starblaze I agree, they can live a good and moral life (by human standards) their own way. But can they be right with God, and escape judgement for wrongdoing, their own way?

According to the Bible, there is no one who has kept the laws of God. Probably no one has even kept the Ten Commandments - especially the way that Jesus added to them in the Sermon on the Mount.
youtu.be/BvwdNHqrsTU

Who has never done anything wrong?

God is a perfect judge. He can’t just ignore wrongdoing that hurts others and the person who does it. But he is also loving, so he has offered a way out at his own cost.

It is a shame to miss out on salvation, and all the benefits of a relationship with God in this life, because of being put off by the wrong actions of humans.

(Ten Commandments:
www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus%2020&version=NIVUK

Number 9, together with other Scriptures, includes all lying (except for reasons such as to save a life - not for selfish reasons) ).

I think for children of abuse that ship often sails Skye. If people are hit with a belt often enough they may develop a strong fear of belts and that's fine as long as they don't need one to hold their trousers up. Meaning, People can live a good and moral life their own way.

HolyHannah, all the teachings for children that you list aren’t meant to be followed in isolation from the rest of Scripture. They’re meant to be read along with passages like Romans 12:18, “If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone” and “The prudent see danger and take refuge” (Proverbs 27:12). Also with passages that show followers of God escaping from danger. David fled from Saul when Saul tried to kill him, though Saul was his king and in authority over him. Joseph and Mary fled from Herod into Egypt. Jesus escaped when religious leaders tried to throw him off a cliff. Paul escaped from Damascus by being let down from the wall in a basket. It’s OK to protect yourself according to the Bible.
unholycharade.com/2020/03/30/sometimes-it-is-the-christians-duty-to-flee-from-danger/

If someone has done their best to ‘live at peace’ with an abusive parent, and they feel they are being harmed by contact with that parent and there is nothing more they can do to improve things, according to the Bible it’s OK to end contact as a last resort. God is not in favour of people being abused.

Surely it’s hypocrisy and the misuse of Christian teachings that can cause estrangement, not the teachings themselves.

Following the teaching of the Bible would lead to parents humbly recognising wrong or unhelpful things they have done, apologising and making amends; avoiding hypocrisy; and loving their children as well as they can with actions as well as words. Also following the passages in Ephesians and Colossians on not exasperating your children, which have already been mentioned.

Hypocrites were the only people Jesus spoke to harshly. God hates hypocrisy and the ill-treatment of the powerless. If you were powerless and ill-treated as a child, he was on your side. He loves you now. Don’t let the wrong actions of humans put you off him.

Smileless2012 Thanks!

I really enjoyed your post Skye, thank you

Sparkling

What I can't understand is why anyone woukd even bother to engage with this.

And yet again, you enter the discussion .. ?

//Just had to point out that the 'old testament' is not a Christian Text. Christianity started with Jesus.//

Granny23, Jesus specifically endorsed the Old Testament when he said “‘Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfil them. For truly I tell you,until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.” (Matthew‬ ‭5:17-18‬ ‭NIV.)

‘The Law and the Prophets’ was an expression meaning what we call the OT.
www.learnthebible.org/law-and-the-prophets.html

Another New Testament passage says, “All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness” (2 Timothy‬ ‭3:16‬). ‘Scripture’ at that point meant the OT.

The OT is the story of how God prepared a nation for the coming of the Messiah, Jesus, so that people would understand and spread his message of how to be right with God. It is full of prophecies about him, even to the time of his coming, fulfilled hundreds of years later. Have a look at Isaiah chapter 53.

It also contains accounts of his pre-incarnate appearances (appearances before he became a man).
youtu.be/sEkm5QGZoWw

As for bad things happening to good people: the Bible doesn’t teach that following Jesus guarantees you a happy life. in fact, Jesus said, “In this world you will have trouble. But take heart! I have overcome the world.” (John‬ ‭16:33‬ ‭NIV.) If prayer worked like a slot machine - put in the prayer and get what you want out - people would follow Jesus for what they could get, not out of love and gratitude. God wants a loving, trusting relationship with each individual, not people who say ‘Lord, Lord’, but their hearts are far from him.

For that, we have to be able to trust him when we don’t understand why he does things. (Why should we? He knows everything and we don’t.)

However, there have been many miracles in response to prayer. I have personally received healing after prayer and I know others who have. There is a very readable book called ‘Miracles’ by Eric Metaxas (4.5 stars on Amazon with 496 reviews), if anyone is interested in examples.
www.amazon.co.uk/Miracles-What-They-Happen-Change-ebook/dp/B00MNGZY6E?tag=gransnetforum-21

Granny23 I agree it is not a Christian text, coming from the Old Testament. I was raised a Christian and still believe but not in the C of E anymore. I went to a Congregational Chapel as a child and the difference in attitude was colossal.

The C of E refused to christen my son unless my husband a non-believer went to christening classes. In my old neighbourhood when I went to church a lady would shake my hand but if I saw her in the street would ignore me - the hypocrisy of it. Jesus can teach us many things about love for all our fellow men and women. The organised church from the start has corrupted his teachings.

Are you saying there actually is a Jedi religion HolyHannah? I had no idea. I don't know what your theory regarding the picture of Yoda is; it was intended to be humorous as I took you statement in your OP, that you're a Jedi to be.

I don't know what the reporting and deletion of posts, or pm's have to do with this discussion, but as you've raised the subject, I'll respond.

On the whole I agree that it's better to leave the less savoury posts, as their content says all that needs to be said about the person who posted them. That said in addition to the ones you have mentioned, I would add posts that are clearly intended to upset and/or hurt another poster because of a personal dislike.

I'm sure the majority of GN's make use of pm's, to say things they would feel uncomfortable putting on the forum because they are particularly personal. I occasionally get pm's from a GN who, because of the battering she received on one of the threads she initially posted on, no longer feels comfortable posting on the forum.

Why would anyone want to quote from someone else's pm; they're private?

The ordination of women into the C of E is a great example of misogyny PF within organised religion. I don't know of course and it's only my opinion but I don't think it was the "consciences of the male members of clergy* that were offended, but their 'masculinity'.

Thankfully we have women vicars and Bishops and gay clergy so good sense prevailed in the end.

Baggs, surely a person's beliefs are part of who they are. I am generally a 'live and let live' sort of person, but I cannot respect someone who holds religious or political views which are abhorrent to me. I agree with Hannah that this would include racism, homophobia and misogyny.

Many years ago, when I was at university, the debate was raging as to whether or not women should be ordained. A friend of mine felt called to the ministry, but was told by one of her fellow theology students 'Ordaining you would be like ordaining a potato'. If it weren't so appalling, it would actually be quite funny.

Then, having finally admitted women to the ministry - and I am confining my comments to the C of E, obviously - there had to be another debate as to whether or not women could become bishops. It's like saying you can join the company, but only if you take on a lowly role, you can never aspire to be in a managerial role. It was to take another 20 years for that to happen. Apparently it offended the consciences of the male members of clergy. And don't get me on to other religions!

Sorry, that was a bit of a rant for so early in the morning!

What I can't understand is why anyone woukd even bother to engage with this.