Posted: 05/14/2015
Paul F. McNamara HUFF POST
1. The concept that the bible is the
inerrant word of God
There are countless contradictions in the bible that are obvious
(and many more that are not as evident). One just has to read the
bible (not even study it in detail) to find these. I recall a
pastor tell me that if the bible is not inerrant then we might as
well just throw the whole thing out. The bible is an important book
like others books. And inspired by God is a much more accurate
manner to describe the bible. However it is far from
inerrant.
While there are many discrepancies in the bible,
here are just a few examples of some; let's start with Genesis
chapters 6-9 about Noah and the flood, there are two stories
combined. One account has two, a pair of every kind of animal.
Another account says seven pairs of the clean animals and only two
of the unclean animals. Another one from the Old Testament is Psalm
145:9 and Jeremiah 13:14 where in the prior God is good and
merciful to all and in the latter God will destroy all that worship
a different deity.
In the New Testament, Matthew 10:34-36 describes
Jesus telling the disciples that He came not to bring peace to the
world, but a sword. However, in Matthew 5:43-48 Jesus says to love
your enemy. Paul of Tarsus in Galatians 3:28 wrote: "There is
neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are
all one in Christ Jesus." However 1st Timothy 2:11-15: says "A
woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not
permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must
be silent...". Religious scholars unequivocally agree that Paul
wrote Galatians but did not write 1st or 2nd Timothy. The
historical Paul of Tarsus was well known for supporting women's
equal rights.
2. Warped theology by Christian exclusivists which includes
ignoring the human rights violations in the Middle
East
A friend of mine, a professor of theology recalled a
disturbing event while on his trip to the Middle East in the 1980s;
a Christian fundamentalist attempt to bomb the Dome of the rock to
somehow start the events for the second coming of Jesus. This
action was endorsed by American Christian fundamentalists.
Christian Zionists or dispensationalists believe Jews should
control the Middle East to set the stage for the second coming of
Jesus. Yet Christian Zionists do not endorse Judaism.
Jerry Farwell believed that a Jew would be the
Anti-Christ. Of course if he had really studied his theology he
would understand that Roman ruler Nero during the time of antiquity
was considered by the early church to be the anti-Christ. Nero was
persecuting early Christians. "666" was a code used by John of
Patmos to disguise his criticism of the Emperor Nero---the Greek
alphabet assigns a numerical value for each letter, and Nero
Caesars full name adds up to either 666 or 661, depending on how
you translate the name.
To understand the biblical gospels academically, the
second coming of Jesus and the end of the world were thought to
have been within or shortly after his lifetime. As one example,
Jesus is quoted as saying in Luke 9:27 "But I tell you truly, there
are some standing here who will not taste death before they see the
kingdom of God." So for Christian Zionists or dispensationalists to
act in this manner (ignoring the atrocities) is not only unethical
but also prophetically erroneous. The conflict in the Middle East
involves a denial of the right to vote, segregation, violence and
the death of innocent civilians, and many are children. This type
of warped theology is demeaning true Christianity which include,
first and foremost the care of innocent women and
children.
3. Refusal to
get acquainted with people of other religions
Exclusive Christians have generally no interest in
learning another religion. I spoke to a local pastor suggesting I
give a short lecture on Islam. He replied that this would be
polarizing to Christians. This pastor wasn't really criticizing
Islam with this statement but instead was acknowledging that many
Christians know almost nothing more than the propaganda by certain
media outlets that Islam is equated with terrorism. On the
contrary, two of the 'Five Pillars' of Islam include the concern
and charity for the needy and the other is fasting to remember
those, especially children that don't have enough (or anything) to
eat.
According to Buddhist scholar Edward Conze, Buddhist
missionaries had been proselytizing for centuries (before and after
the time of Jesus) around Alexandria, Egypt. To say Buddhism
influenced early Christianity is not by any means unprecedented.
Yet exclusive Christians have little or no knowledge of Buddhism
and for the few that do, to say to them that Buddhism likely
influenced Christianity would result in a staunch
rebuttal.
4. More
concerned with legalism than humanism
Some Christians are overly concerned with legalism (rules) and
forgetting all together the concern and well-being of one's
neighbor (humanism). Which should include all neighbors of all
faiths. The legalistic perspective has sin being perceived as
disobedience to God and/or offending God and the humanistic one
describes sin as what degrades or harms the person. But in reality,
there is really no difference; disobedience to God is like
disobeying a father or mother with the child doing something to
harm themselves or others. A father or mother is seldom stunned
with being offended directly. As an example, it is commonplace for
a child to occasionally say they hate us (as parents).
Parents typically want the child to learn to adapt
within society and respect all persons. If parents tolerate
misbehavior, then the child will believe it to be acceptable in
society. Since humanity was made in the image of God, then it would
be logical to assume we would mimic His actions as parents. Sin is
about what harms ourselves and subsequently others, not so much
about offending God. God is concerned about the well-being of all
of his children.
5. Thoughts, quotes,
philosophies, and music from other religions have no
merit
In the social media, and news, one will rarely (if ever) see an
exclusive Christian quote someone like Rumi, the Dalai Lama or
Gandhi. Why is this? Is it really because they are considered to
have no merit by these people? Additionally, if a famous Christian
musician becomes ill or dies, the exclusive Christian will ask for
prayers yet if a Hindu or Muslim with similar fame faces a tragedy,
seldom will there be the same request for prayers.
6. Overly
concerned with homosexuality as being a serious and grave
sin
Seldom do we hear in the conservative Christian media strong
condemnations of frivolous sexual activities. Society has a
tendency to elevate in status the irresponsible sexual undertakings
of the young male, despite it being highly discouraged in the
bible. This is not at all the case of homosexual activities. The
bible clearly discourages irresponsible sexual activities but this
is not exclusive to just homosexuals.
The responsible homosexual couple is much more
likely to adopt orphans than the heterosexual couple simply because
they cannot conceive. All of the synoptic Gospels quote Jesus
saying "whoever may cause to stumble one of the little ones, better
is it for him if a millstone is hanged about his neck, and he had
been cast into the sea." The proper nurture and care of children is
central in Christianity. Jesus certainly didn't say cast into the
sea the homosexual as a consequence for their sins. As a matter of
fact, Jesus never even once mentioned homosexuality in the gospel
accounts of his life.
7. Belief that
religious/theological academia is somehow falsehood, destructive
and/or distorted
An article in the Christian post from John Piper where he reveals
"Why PhDs in Theology Commit Adultery; Says They Cheat 'Probably
More' Than 'Less-Educated People'" is just complete nonsense.
According to the Associated Press Journal of Marital and Family
Therapy, 54-57% of spouses commit adultery and the large majority
of these people do not have Phds in
theology.
It is a belief by many exclusive Christians that biblical scholars
like Dr. Bart Ehrman or Dr. Michael Coogan agenda is to attack
Christianity. Instead of understanding their results are from
dedicated and countless hours of honest research and academia. Both
are top scholars in their field of study. What exactly might either
of these scholars or others like them gain by trying to undermine
Christianity or another religion? I mean really? Bart Ehrman reads
Hebrew and Greek and Michael Coogan reads Hebrew, Greek and
Aramaic. I doubt most of their critics have even the smallest grasp
of these ancient languages.
8. Their concept of being
"saved"
Countless times over the years, I've been approached by evangelical
Christians in their effort to 'save' me as if I just fell off the
boat. "I was raised Roman Catholic" I say; yet they still ask me if
I'm saved, and I often respond with "saved from what"? Then when
they get to know me and that I am a scholar of religion, it stifles
them. One has to wonder if some of these people are too consumed
with the being saved concept forgetting the importance of love your
neighbor and enemy. If every Christian in the world including those
overly concerned with personal 'sin' and being 'saved' would adopt
(or foster) just one orphan, there would be no orphans and a lot
less hungry children.