Deeper Issues Trouble United Methodists

by

by

Comments (6)

Comment Feed

Deeper Issues Trouble United Methodists

It is refreshing to see the issue of scripture finally being raised rather than the focus on gays in the church. There are many contradictory passages in the Bible and even misquotations. These can easily be found online by those willing to investigate. "I have not come to destroy the Law" can be taken to mean the Law is still in effect and should be followed. What are we to make of the lack of any mention of the Virgin Birth in the Gospel of Mark, presumably the oldest of gospels? Could this mean there was no such belief at the time of its writing? One can go on and on in this direction, but the fact is very few parts of the Bible and none of the gospels claim in their texts to be the "Word of God."

I would not get too excited over GC 2019. I suspect the status quo will remain with all proposals for change being voted down. We already know which side has most of the votes.

David 15 days ago

Reply to Rich Peck

I doubt that Rich Peck and I agree on what should happen with the church but his analysis is spot on. How the different sides view the scriptures is at the root of the controversy. Adam Hamilton has split up the scriptures into three categories. I wonder who gave him the wisdom and the authority to decide what scripture goes into what category. Also I wonder if he believes that God did not have the ability to make sure that the scriptures that were passed down through the ages were generally correct, or does he believe that God doesn't care enough to properly reveal to us the proper scriptures, besides his (Hamilton's) own prideful opinion.

Scott 16 days ago

When it Seems Too Good to be True

Those wanting approval of their favorite sin will love Hamilton's "Garbage Can." Anything in the Word of God you don't want to obey, you just drop in the garbage can and it's gone for you! But is it really that simple? Sometimes things seem too good to be true and that is just the case. Turning away from God is the same today as yesterday. It's a good day to turn back to God!

Skipper 16 days ago

Retribution or compensation?

I respectfully disagree that the passage about "an eye for an eye . . . " is about retribution. I recently heard a rabbi explain that it is about compensation. If you wound someone's eye, have you also damaged that person's ability to work? To support a family? Those things are to be taken into account when you are held responsible. I propose that we all should adopt the rabbinic practice of debating interpretation rather than insisting on our own.

Victoria Rebeck 16 days ago

An eye for an eye

Victoria - It's interesting that you raise the response by a rabbi. Dr. Walter Williams theorized the eye-for-an-eye passage addressed the ruthless practice of tribal leaders who would kill a person who punched out a tooth. Occasionally an entire village would be destroyed for the same action. Dr. Williams says this law was designed to reduce the retribution. It called for one eye for one eye and one tooth for one tooth.Jesus called for a response that is way beyond our comfort zone..

Rich Peck 15 days ago

Healthy debate

Now this is what I mean by healthy debate. We are always interpreting, researching, and learning. Thanks, Rich, for engaging!

Victoria Rebeck 13 days ago

     To support Insight's mission, please click on the Donate button above for online giving. Or make checks payable to our sponsoring congregation, St. Stephen UMC, and write "UM Insight" on the memo line. Then mail to United Methodist Insight, c/o St. Stephen United Methodist Church, 2520 Oates Drive, Mesquite, TX 75150. Thank you!


Get United Methodist Insight Weekly!

* indicates required