Verses Freebirds ignore or misunderstand when reading their Bibles.

[ALAYMAN]

1Pe 1:13  Wherefore gird up the loins of your mind, be sober, and hope to the end for the grace that is to be brought unto you at the revelation of Jesus Christ;
1Pe 1:14  As obedient children, not fashioning yourselves according to the former lusts in your ignorance:
1Pe 1:15  But as he which hath called you is holy, so be ye holy in all manner of conversation;
1Pe 1:16  Because it is written, Be ye holy; for I am holy.


Rom 14:21  It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak.

Jas 1:26  If any man among you seem to be religious, and bridleth not his tongue, but deceiveth his own heart, this man's religion is vain.
Jas 1:27  Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.

Just a few that quickly come to mind.

 

[rsc2a]

Might want to start by defining "holy", "stumble", "offend", and "the world" in these contexts if you mean to actually say anything.

 

[subllibrm]

Where oh where did I put my popcorn GIF?

Been a while since we have had a good display of Aman and the rodent talking past each other.  8)

 

[rsc2a]

Hush sock puppet.

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

Rom 14:21  It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak.

So... are you a vegetarian?

 

[HeDied4U]

Where oh where did I put my popcorn GIF?

Been a while since we have had a good display of Aman and the rodent talking past each other.  8)

Will this one work for you......?

 

[subllibrm]

Where oh where did I put my popcorn GIF?

Been a while since we have had a good display of Aman and the rodent talking past each other.  8)

Will this one work for you......?

Thank you!

Okay, back to the show. Aman, I believe it is your turn.

 

[Recovering IFB]

Hush sock puppet.

Does this mean I can't talk either?

 

[FreeToBeMe]

Freebird = Anyone who disagrees with an IFB's (per)version of Christianity.

 

[bgwilkinson]

Freebird = Anyone who disagrees with an IFB's (per)version of Christianity.

I guess that makes me one.



I much prefer following scripture rather than the IFB tradition of the last few years.

 

[FreeToBeMe]

Freebird = Anyone who disagrees with an IFB's (per)version of Christianity.

I guess that makes me one.

Welcome to the club.

T-shirts are $7.00

Buttons are $3.00

 

[Smellin Coffee]

Where oh where did I put my popcorn GIF?

Been a while since we have had a good display of Aman and the rodent talking past each other.  8)

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

Rom 14:21  It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak.

So... are you a vegetarian?

What if the fact that I am alive causes my brother to stumble?

The reason I ask is because lots of people use this verse to justify never drinking wine under any circumstances.  But I have never seen anyone uses this verse to justify never eating meat under any circumstances. 

As for your question... if living causes your brother to stumble, well, I guess you need to lobby for legalization of assisted suicide.

 

[ALAYMAN]

Isaiah 5:20  Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!


lol, why doesn't there seem to be the same cooperative participation in this thread as its' sister? 




Maybe for the same reason that you won't find any pro-lifers on the city council in SanFranAbortsco?

8)

 

[FreeToBeMe]

lol, why doesn't there seem to be the same cooperative participation in this thread as its' sister? 

Maybe because it's easier to make light of the hypocrisy of the IFB movement than it is to do the same for your ill-conceived definition of a "freedbird".

 

[Smellin Coffee]

Threads like this one and the original reminded me of this blog post I came across last week. The writer speaks primarily of fundamentalists but I think it really speaks to beliefs of most if not all stripes.

We all have a hermeneutic. We are all interpreting the text to some degree. We are all privileging--deferring to--certain values, doctrines, creedal commitments, traditions, or biblical texts. Something somewhere is trumping something else. In a document as multivocal as the Old and New Testament this is unavoidable.

So we all have a hermeneutic. The only question is whether you are consciously vs. unconsciously using a hermeneutic. Fundamentalists are interpreting the text unconsciously. Fundamentalists are interpreting the text right and left, they are just unaware that they are doing so. This lack of awareness is what produces the sorts of statements described above.

When your hermeneutic is operating unconsciously it causes you to say things like "this is the clear teaching of Scripture."

Which brings me to my point.

What is interesting to me in this phenomenon is not that we are all engaging in hermeneutics, acts of interpretation. That is a given. What is interesting to me is how self-awareness, or the lack thereof, is implicated in all this.

Basically, fundamentalism--denying that you are engaged in hermeneutics--betrays a shocking lack of self-awareness, an inability to notice the way your mind and emotions are working in the background and beneath the surface.

I think statements like "this is the clear teaching of Scripture" are psychologically diagnostic. Statements like these reveal something about yourself. Namely, that you lack a certain degree of self-awareness.

For example, saying something like "this is the clear teaching of Scripture" is similar to saying "I'm not a racist." Self-aware people would never say either one of those things.

Self-aware people would say things like "I don't want to be a racist" or "I try not to be racist" or "I condemn racism." But they would never say "I'm not a racist" because self-aware people know that they have blind spots. Self-aware people know they have unconscious baggage that is hard to notice or overcome.

And it's the same with how self-aware people approach reading the bible. Self-aware people know that they are trying to read the bible in an unbiased fashion. Self-aware people work hard to let the bible speak clearly and it its own voice. But self-aware people know they have blind spots. They know that there is unconscious baggage affecting how they are reading the bible, baggage that they know must be biasing their readings and conclusions. Consequently, self-aware people would never, ever say "this is the clear teaching of Scripture." Just like they'd never claim to be unbiased in any other area of life, racism being just one example.

What I am saying is that when we approach the issue of sola scriptura--using "the bible alone"--there is more to this than pointing out the ubiquity and necessity of hermeneutics. There is also the issue of emotional intelligence, the degree to which you are reading the bible with a degree of self-awareness.

 

[subllibrm]

Isaiah 5:20  Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!

lol, why doesn't there seem to be the same cooperative participation in this thread as its' sister? 

Maybe because you have missed the point of the other thread?

And just for fun, give me some examples of the good/evil, light/dark, sweet/bitter problem that is prevalent in a "freebird" mentality. Since I don't consider myself a freebird, I need your guidance to understand how this verse is ignored or misunderstood.

 

[Recovering IFB]

I think that down of the points of the OP misses is that interpretation of Scripture. Something written 2,000 yrs ago to a certain culture, then taking the same writings and trying to put a 1950's style spin on it and trying to implement it in today's culture.

 

[praise_yeshua]

Rom 14:21  It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak.

So... are you a vegetarian?

What if the fact that I am alive causes my brother to stumble?

The reason I ask is because lots of people use this verse to justify never drinking wine under any circumstances.  But I have never seen anyone uses this verse to justify never eating meat under any circumstances. 

As for your question... if living causes your brother to stumble, well, I guess you need to lobby for legalization of assisted suicide.

I think we've had threads like this many times before...

There is a huge difference between some genuinely being harmed in what another person does and someone that refuses to "grow up" and realize that not everyone is going to be just like him.

I refuse to have my liberty in a thing.... questioned... because some hard-nosed fundamentalist wants to whine about it. 

There is a reason Paul used the word "weak" to describe those so easily offended in another man's liberty.

 

[bgwilkinson]

^^^^ What he said. ^^^^