Legalistic Jesus

[_ajax18]

What's wrong with trying to be perfect?

Jesus was loving and merciful, but I think He could be pretty harsh too. He did say, "Be ye therefore perfect." He didn't even say try. To me, trying to be the best person you can be and the consequences for how well you do that is what religion is all about. Without that, what are we, but just animals?

[_Sam Harris]

Jersey Girl,

I think my family and those I described that I have come across in the Christian community have less of an understanding of what it means to be saved than perhaps you do. To them, saved means righteous.

I know of many who go to church each sunday who haven't read the Bible. They can't tell you what's in it past what pastor says. But they know they're better than you. It has taken a long time for me to even be able to stand alongside these people in any way shape or form. For a long time I wanted nothing to do with God or Christians because of what I've seen. But I also saw that it wasn't this way everywhere...so I'm trying to spread the message. But in order to do that, sometimes you have to do some internal damage control so that those who think they're doing the world a favor can stop poisoning it.

They called me a witch on nice days, while letting feces rot on the bottoms of their children. They told me they had garnered God's favor, and because I didn't have enough "faith" (mumbojumbo to me, their faith is not the faith I used to stay alive), I was doomed for hell. They even called me a murderer. You can rest assured that those people feel themselves to be more favored by God than me.

I'm sorry, but I'm not turning this into a word game. You do not have to say "I'm more righteous than you" to give off that impression by your actions. Apparently my personal example with regards to what I did to my mom didn't really ring true. If you feel that you can deny someone God, then you are in essence saying you're more righteous than they are. I felt I had the right to judge my mother in the place of God. And I sinned.

I am aware that being saved doesn't exempt you from sin. All the more reason to leave others who are struggling alone (not literally). Perhaps I'm not giving off the impression that I am reading and studying as well as questioning those who feel the need to condemn those who are not Christian or those who are not the right type Christian, those who are gay....etc. If so I apologize, but though I may feel strongly about these issues, it took a lot of personal study to be able to speak on them with a straight face as a Christian.

I hate to have to ask this again with regards to richard. What point are we getting to? What is okay about his judging gay people and finding them wanting? Why is it ok for him to reduce the interaction between two men or two women to just sex (and no, he wasn't the only one on that thread), while his interactions and those like him have the blessing of love stamped on them? I am not being facetious when I say I would sincerely like to know.

Why is it not ok to put some tough love on those who are using the scriptures as a weapon? Just because I say you're being legalistic doesn't mean I'll let you starve or go naked. It means you're being cruel, so stop it.

This is one of the reasons why when people ask me if I'm going into ministry I always have to say "I don't know". I can't sit by and watch while people are abused in the name of God, and yet if you say something, there's something wrong with that. You're supposed to be almost politically correct in telling someone to stop hurting folks in Christ's name. I don't know how to do that.

The quote by Mandela is lovely, I have it written in one of my old journals. Can't remember where I first saw it, but I believe that...that doesn't mean that others do. I know who I am, Jersey Girl. That is why I cannot let others be told they're not loved by God.

I've never been much liked, never been easily accepted. I don't care. Why? Because I know Who I belong to. No person who wants to know tha should be denied based on the estimation of another mortal.

(Edited for clarification so some of my words will hopefully be understood)

[_A Light in the Darkness]

Nehor, I'm the bain of most legalistic (or mildy charismatic) Christian's existence.

Please, go on lecturing others about their pride. I don't think you know what the term "legalistic," much less "fundamentalist" means. I certainly can't make heads or tails of your use here beyond it being a vague pejoritive to describe people who have any confidence whatsoever in their religious beliefs.

[_Sam Harris]

If the basis of your religious beliefs necessitates that you condemn others, then yes, you are a legalist. If you need to tell others that God thinks less of them than he does you, then yes, you are a legalist. If your faith is so rule-based that you cannot breathe, then yes you are a legalist.

I'm very confident in my beliefs...but I do not believe in spiritual disenfranchisement.

Thank you for adding your light to the darkness of this thread.

[_A Light in the Darkness]

If the basis of your religious beliefs necessitates that you condemn others, then yes, you are a legalist.

To be more specific, you have stated that if your religious beliefs condemn behavior in others - such as calling murder wrong - you are a legalist. That is why you can fault Richard for "legalism" if he merely condemns homosexuality per scriptural study. The unfortunate thing about this is that it bears no relationship to the term as it is used in theology. To you it's just a highly personal insult meant to signify that a person thinks religious knowledge can tell them things about how people are supposed to act towards one another. Indeed, in your world it is so broad that merely suggesting your views on religious truth are more reasonable than someone else's is enough to get the term. This is something you condemn; or rather, something you condemn when it differs sufficiently from the vision for human behavior you endorse. Your world is divided up into ultra-liberals drunk on relativist notions of truth and the rest of us who are legalists and fundies.

[_Sam Harris]

If the basis of your religious beliefs necessitates that you condemn others, then yes, you are a legalist.

To be more specific, you have stated that if your religious beliefs condemn behavior in others - such as calling murder wrong - you are a legalist. That is why you can fault Richard for "legalism" if he merely condemns homosexuality per scriptural study. The unfortunate thing about this is that it bears no relationship to the term as it is used in theology. To you it's just a highly personal insult meant to signify that a person thinks religious knowledge can tell them things about how people are supposed to act towards one another. Indeed, in your world it is so broad that merely suggesting your views on religious truth are more reasonable than someone else's is enough to get the term. This is something you condemn; or rather, something you condemn when it differs sufficiently from the vision for human behavior you endorse. Your world is divided up into ultra-liberals drunk on relativist notions of truth and the rest of us who are legalists and fundies.

It doesn't behoove you to play dumb. You ignored the following:

If you need to tell others that God thinks less of them than he does you, then yes, you are a legalist. If your faith is so rule-based that you cannot breathe, then yes you are a legalist.

I'm very confident in my beliefs...but I do not believe in spiritual disenfranchisement.

The above is what makes you look bad. Murder is wrong, that is not what I was talking about. But perhaps taking someone's chance at eternal life from them because you have to feel spiritually superior to them is murder.

[_Sam Harris]

Post thought:

This Little Light of Mine:

My world is not as black and white as you would like it to be, so that your behavior may be justified. I simply feel that religion would be a great deal more effective if the rat race were taken out of it.

That is about as plain as I can put it for you. Any lack of understanding on your part is...well, your doing.

All men are and have been created equal. I do not approve of using God as a diversion when folks who have no self-esteem seek to nullify such a truth (that all men are created equal, because I know you're kind of slow today).

Of course I'm throwing insults when I point out that bashing gay people is wrong. Of course I'm throwing out (as Cog claims facist/racist) insults when I point out that reparations are no longer an issue, and that perhaps his view of my people are a bit skewed. Of course.

I'd give you a tissue, but I only have one box to last me the week. Wait until I get a chance to go to Wal-Mart.

[_Jersey Girl]

GIMR,

I apologize for not getting back to you here. I just didn't feel like it. I don't know your early history or what motivates the relatives that you've mentioned here. I don't know why they called you a murderer.

I think I can make some generalized comments regarding early abuse. When people are abused or neglected early in life, they seem to receive an unspoken message that they have no value. When they grow up, they are often highly sensitive to statements that judge them as inferior. Perhaps that applies to your circumstances, I don't know.

I think I understand what you were expressing about your Mother wanting to join you at church and church having become your sanctuary. I wish I had words of wisdom to offer you. I know it's hard to forgive people who should have taken care of you and failed you. I wonder, in the back of my mind, if your Mother's wanting to join you at church might have had something to do with her wanting to:

1. Establish a loving relationship with you.
2. Find the type of healing for herself that you are finding.

I don't know the answers to those.

Do you know why your mother abused or neglected you? If you know the reasons, maybe that would be of help to you in healing. Maybe she was abused or neglected. Maybe her life was miserable hell and she took it out on you. Maybe she was ignorant or unstable. Maybe she abused drugs/alcohol.

I just don't know.

How hard is it to look at someone who abused and neglected you, in an effort to see her as a flawed human being? How hard is it to forgive the one who hurt you when you were small?

Damn hard.

How hard might it be to dig up all the hurt, look for ways to understand it, to forgive it and attempt to have at least a shot at establishing the kind of mother/child relationship you wish you always had? Is there another kind of relationship you could have with her that would be of value to you now? Something you could live with and actually enjoy?

What would you like your relationship with her to be about and can you have it?

I don't expect you to answer any of those questions publicly. I only ask them as food for thought.

[_Sam Harris]

Hey Jersey Girl,

I appreciate your words of wisdom. Mom and I have a tentative peace, and as time passes, we develop a stronger bond. I know that we'll never have the mother-daughter relationship that I would have liked, but we have moments where we really enjoy each other. The circumstances have made our relationship such that I'm allowed to be more of an adult with her than her child, we joke in ways that my friends would not be able to do with their parents.

Mom did to me what was done to her. I don't know why she didn't realize the cycle she was in, but I can't do anything about that. For some reason I realized that what I was going through wasn't normal or healthy (perhaps in time I was exposed to more than she was, I got out more, who knows?), and got help.

The whole accusation of murder...that was my father's family after he died. I "drove him to his death" because I hounded him to get a job and feed his kids. Dad promised me, and broke that promise. Well, it's over and done now, and no one says those things to my face anymore, not that I'm around much.

I've forgiven my mother, though there are times (luckily fewer and far between now) when the old wounds get ripped open again. I realized after the incident that mom was trying to bond with me, and I know that it's up to me to be strong enough to let that happen. She has asked to go with me again, though I haven't been healthy enough to go these past several months.

As far as the feelings of inferiority, you are right, I did come up with that. And I fought tooth and nail to be able to look at myself and know those who told me I was inferior were wrong. As I grew up I learned to see people as my equals based on the fact that I wasn't always seen that way. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you...including telling me if I was being a bigot. I was the kid who never teased others in school, I didn't join in the pranks, I stayed out of the cliques...because I knew what the pain these things caused felt like. Add to that the five years I spent as a black LDS. Just read Gaz's posts about the whole Cain issue, and perhaps you can understand how I felt about that.

Like I said on another thread, my ex's superman boxers don't fit, and I cannot save the world. But I cringe when I see folks walking around making statements that in essence say that someone is inferior to them. What right have they? Do they know the damage they are doing, or do they care? I speak up because I know how much that hurts, and I'm sorry, but I won't stop.

Speaking up when you see someone mistreating someone else, be it intentional or not is not a sign that one hasn't healed something inside themself. I am very happy with who I am, the most I feel these days is frustration when asked to compromise my integrity (or as my friends call it, "playing the game") for the sake of material gain. I'd rather be poor than do that, I'm sorry. But my speaking against using God as a weapon against others doesn't mean that I'm struggling with something inside myself. The stories I've told are old ones, and the pain is a memory. It's those memories that open my mouth.

I understand that no one wants to be told that they're using their religion as a tool of destruction, even on a small scale. But goodness, what rational reason do we as human beings have to let that continue? Oh, it's just a little harmless opinion.

Many evil acts started out as little harmless opinions.

[_A Light in the Darkness]

So if you approve of condemning murder, why is Richard a "legalist" for condemning homosexuality? The only noticeable difference is that you agree with one condemnation, but not the other. That would be clear evidence the term "legalist" is just an insult you use to describe religious views you don't find likable to your more liberal mindset. You also are not being incredibly consistent here, which is why it is hard to nail down the terms use. You have argued that thinking one has a more correct religious perspective - a more correct path to God if you will - is legalism. Here you appear to be backing down on such a silly, silly misuse of the term.