The sins of scripture by John Shelby Spong

by moanzy 11 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • moanzy
    moanzy

    Has anyone read this book? John Shelby Spong is a retired Bishop who is trying to expose what religion has done to scripture by how they interpret them.

    In chapter 25 on The bible and certainty he writes " My contention, which I will seek to defend in this section of the book, is that the moment any religious tradition claims certaintly, it turns demonic. It also gives up at that moment the very reason for which it was originally created. Whether such a tradition lives or dies, therefore, becomes of little significance. Above all, I contend that something called "the faith of the church" has never existed; truth, whether it be religious truth or any other kind, is always evolving and changing, and the moment truth is codified, it begins to die. That makes it very difficult to be triumphal and certain. We Christians are pilgrims walking into the mystery of God, not soldiers marching off to war. There is a great difference."

    I wish the GB could realize all this!!!!!!

    John Shelby Spong also makes an interesting case for why there is so much prejudice against homosexual/lesbian relationships. He proposes that possibly the apostle Paul may have been anti-gay because of his own stuggles with it.(Rom7:23). He writes from his own experience and study of the scripture and much of it is his own opinion.

    He discusses religion and child abuse, degredation of women, anti-semitism....makes some good points of where these things started and why.

    Moanzy

  • peacefulpete
    peacefulpete

    I have not that book but others by him. He has found a market within a community of believers who struggle with the unsavoury effects Bible literalism. I found his work a good introduction to a more scholarly approach to the Bible though soon felt uncomfortable with his mixing in irrational religiosity. I know this is not an unpopular place to be but to me it is strange and foreign.

  • the_classicist
    the_classicist
    Has anyone read this book? John Shelby Spong is a retired Bishop who is trying to expose what religion has done to scripture by how they interpret them.

    Note: when a bishop retires, he's still a bishop. It is customary to call him Bishop Spong, and if you are addressing him, call him "Your Excellency" (in the US) or "Your Grace" (in the UK & the Commonwealth). I'm just saying this b/c JW's (I would think this opinion would extend into ex-JWism) seem to think that when a bishop or priest retires, they are no longer a bishop or a priest. In reality, they are, but they don't carry out the office.

    I actually wanted to buy this book, but I haven't found the time to pick it up (w/ so many other books to buy and so little money).

  • Euphemism
    Euphemism

    Sorry, Classicist, I don't think I could bring myself to call a bishop Your Excellency. Maybe it's a United States thing... but even our President is referred to as "Mr President", not "Your Excellency". Governors, Senators, etc. are addressed by their titles. The only exception is judges, who are referred to as Your Honor, but even that's only when court is in session.

    I'd be happy to call him Bishop Spong, however.

  • the_classicist
    the_classicist
    Sorry, Classicist, I don't think I could bring myself to call a bishop Your Excellency. Maybe it's a United States thing... but even our President is referred to as "Mr President", not "Your Excellency". Governors, Senators, etc. are addressed by their titles. The only exception is judges, who are referred to as Your Honor, but even that's only when court is in session.

    It is rather outdated nowaday, especially in America. But it's good to know proper etiquette, b/c you... well... it's just good.

    In Canada, we call judges either "My Lord," or "Your Worship"... sometimes "Your Honour," but that's American, eh.

    We also call our head of state's representitive (the Governor-General), "Your Excellency."

    And then the Prime Minister is, "the Right Honourable Paul Martin."

    I want a title too. How about Lord Sean? (of course, it wouldn't be Lord Sean, it would be something like Lord N., the name of the place which the Lord rules over).

  • Satanus
    Satanus

    Oh, these british columbians

    S

  • Satanus
    Satanus

    I guess calling him 'the sponge one' would be right out, then.

    S running away

  • the_classicist
    the_classicist

    Then did he raise on high the Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch, saying, "Bless this, O Lord, that with it thou mayst blow thine enemies to tiny bits, in thy mercy." And the people did rejoice and did feast upon the lambs and toads and tree-sloths and fruit-bats and orangutans and breakfast cereals ... Now did the Lord say, "First thou pullest the Holy Pin. Then thou must count to three. Three shall be the number of the counting and the number of the counting shall be three. Four shalt thou not count, neither shalt thou count two, excepting that thou then proceedeth to three. Five is right out. Once the number three, being the number of the counting, be reached, then lobbest thou the Holy Hand Grenade in the direction of thine foe, who, being naughty in my sight, shall snuff it."

  • Euphemism
    Euphemism
    I want a title too. How about Lord Sean? (of course, it wouldn't be Lord Sean, it would be something like Lord N., the name of the place which the Lord rules over).

    Well, you would be Lord Sean if you were the second (or later) son of a Duke. At least, that's what I learned from Dorothy Sayers. P.S. Sorry for the thread hijack, Moanzy! I read Spong's book about the Jewish origins of the gospels. I tend to agree with peacefulpete's evaluation.

  • moanzy
    moanzy

    Thanks Classist, I wasn't aware that it is proper to refer to him as Bishop Spong.

    I wouldn't say I agree with everything he says, particularly the chapter on Blood and how men treated women because of their fear of blood. However he made some interesting points about child abuse and how whether hitting an adult or hitting a child it is still abuse. That corporeal punishment was a way to keep people in line. I also believe that religion has interrpreted scripture to justify wrong like anti-semitism, anti-gay rites etc. It may seem elementary to some, but it is quite interesting to me--someone who has never been allowed to open their mind to view any of this in a different way.

    Thanks for your comments all!

    Moanzy

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit