Any truth to this?

[tessas212]

“Biblical ignorance is an epidemic in the United States,” says Rev. Dr. Mel White. White further states in the article, “Most people who are certain they know what the Bible says ... don’t know where the verses... can be found. They haven’t read them, let alone studied them carefully. They don’t know the original meaning of the words in Hebrew or Greek. And they haven’t tried to understand the historical context in which those words were written. Yet the assumption what the Bible says ...is passed down from generation to generation with very little personal study or research”

True or no?

 

[Sketcher]

From my own observations, I'd say White is on point.

 

[dp07]

Definitely true. Even the people leading the "church" today. I had a debate with my cousins youth minister in High school and from the beginning he pointed to no verses on the subject and then when verses were thrown out, by me, he preceded to say well that is not what I believe which is a ridiculous argument.

 

[Windmill]

Of course that is true.

 

[JesusFreak4L]

definitely have to agree with that!

 

[MysticAngel]

True

 

[Qyöt27]

True, on so many levels. And not just the historical context of Scripture, but the actual history of Christianity. Lots of genuinely misinformed ideas about that as well.

 

[Apollo Celestio]

We can't only complain, and we can't only point fingers at those who cannot be bothered to think. An epidemic, truly, but even I could be on that list. They don't teach Greek and Hebrew in high school.

 

[eugeneandbobo]

i would have to agree with white...no doubts there.

too many christians just take whats been passed down and they never search out answers themselves. too many cliches have entered in. i know people that tell me stuff is in the Bible, but its not. its just good sayings and stuff that get taken as truth

 

[codya517]

heh very true

 

[tessas212]

Original statement:

Reverend Dr. Mel White, in his article What the Bible Says- and doesn’t Say- About Homosexuality, says “Biblical ignorance is an epidemic in the United States” Rev. Dr. Mel White further states in the article, “Most people who are certain they know what the Bible says about homosexuality don’t know where the verses that reference same-sex behavior can be found. They haven’t read them, let alone studied them carefully. They don’t know the original meaning of the words in Hebrew or Greek. And they haven’t tried to understand the historical context in which those words were written. Yet the assumption that the Bible condemns homosexuality is passed down from generation to generation with very little personal study or research”

I've heard a lot of people suggest it is common, and words such as "they", but I haven't seen an "I" yet. Is biblical ignorance an epidemic for everyone else, except for you?

Do you still agree with the statement? I'm going to assume most would not... which, despite how many "yes, that statement is true" have been said in this thread, will prove people's bias towards their own superiority and opinion on anything the bible has to say.

***NOTE: This thread is NOT about homosexuality, or a place to debate it. It is based off the idea of biblical ignorance in general. However, one can note that as such a statement can be seen to be true, until a subject is injected into those words, then everyone suddenly believes they are right and the opposition is wrong.

 

[divinesong]

I actually had a conversation with a friend reciently. she is studying to be a pastor and does not believe that Jesus is the only way to God.... I could not believe i had to quote John 14:6-7 to an intern pastor let alone when she answered me with "well yes but that puts God in a box" WHAT????? I mean i am no theologan but even a 7 year old can grasp that one

 

[Qyöt27]

I've heard a lot of people suggest it is common, and words such as "they", but I haven't seen an "I" yet. Is biblical ignorance an epidemic for everyone else, except for you?

If an issue of context and reference comes up, I do my hardest to try to find an exposition on the topic and verses in question if the approach is questionable or rather cryptic in nature.

Do you still agree with the statement? I'm going to assume most would not... which, despite how many "yes, that statement is true" have been said in this thread, will prove people's bias towards their own superiority and opinion on anything the bible has to say.

***NOTE: This thread is NOT about homosexuality, or a place to debate it. It is based off the idea of biblical ignorance in general. However, one can note that as such a statement can be seen to be true, until a subject is injected into those words, then everyone suddenly believes they are right and the opposition is wrong.

Yes, I would still agree, primarily because of the fact that I know how the nuances of languages and translation can be, after having taken German for 7 years, French for 2, and having a rudimentary understanding of the problems with translating and transliterating between English and Japanese.

That particular topic isn't one I feel a need to focus on because it doesn't do anything for me personally, although I have heard the arguments about how the terms used were more specifically referring to pederasty or other sorts of ritualistic pagan beliefs and whatnot. But as I've said before, I don't have the conviction to pursue that topic because, quite frankly, it doesn't affect me personally.

I actually had a conversation with a friend reciently. she is studying to be a pastor and does not believe that Jesus is the only way to God.... I could not believe i had to quote John 14:6-7 to an intern pastor let alone when she answered me with "well yes but that puts God in a box" WHAT????? I mean i am no theologan but even a 7 year old can grasp that one

I think that topic can't be simplified down to one sentence the way many try to. The understanding of what "no one comes to the Father but through me" entails differs quite radically from segment to segment when talking about Christianity as a whole. One side out of many argues strict exclusivism, others see Christ as the only means through which humanity can be saved but the dispensing of grace is not dependent on what vows or prayers one has spoken, and instead the decision of who to save is left up to whomever God decides to award grace to. This is where things like Age of Accountability doctrines or the theological constructs where those not exposed to the Gospel at all are saved come from.

 

[Windmill]

Original statement:

Reverend Dr. Mel White, in his article What the Bible Says- and doesn’t Say- About Homosexuality, says “Biblical ignorance is an epidemic in the United States” Rev. Dr. Mel White further states in the article, “Most people who are certain they know what the Bible says about homosexuality don’t know where the verses that reference same-sex behavior can be found. They haven’t read them, let alone studied them carefully. They don’t know the original meaning of the words in Hebrew or Greek. And they haven’t tried to understand the historical context in which those words were written. Yet the assumption that the Bible condemns homosexuality is passed down from generation to generation with very little personal study or research”

I've heard a lot of people suggest it is common, and words such as "they", but I haven't seen an "I" yet. Is biblical ignorance an epidemic for everyone else, except for you?

Do you still agree with the statement? I'm going to assume most would not... which, despite how many "yes, that statement is true" have been said in this thread, will prove people's bias towards their own superiority and opinion on anything the bible has to say.

***NOTE: This thread is NOT about homosexuality, or a place to debate it. It is based off the idea of biblical ignorance in general. However, one can note that as such a statement can be seen to be true, until a subject is injected into those words, then everyone suddenly believes they are right and the opposition is wrong.

Biblical ignorance is a pandemic which affects me! I still agree.

Like the above poster, this has no affect on me, so I don't care about the homosexuality part, there are other things to be concerned with.

 

[Sketcher]

I've looked up the Greek, and there is no question that homosexual behavior is wrong. No amount of gymnastics can justify it. The liberal arguments in the NT don't pass the context test either.

I've heard a lot of people suggest it is common, and words such as "they", but I haven't seen an "I" yet. Is biblical ignorance an epidemic for everyone else, except for you?

Do you still agree with the statement? I'm going to assume most would not... which, despite how many "yes, that statement is true" have been said in this thread, will prove people's bias towards their own superiority and opinion on anything the bible has to say.

Now that you've turned it on its head, I'm going to turn this on its head and say that it sounds like he's got that problem. How does he answer the many other pastors who have studied the Greek and the history and who have come to the traditional conclusion?

 

[Penumbra]

I agree that many people don't know very much about their religion and its text. Most Christians I know haven't read their Bible very much, especially the Old Testament.

I don't really have any religious beliefs myself, but I've read the religious texts of many cultures as well as a good number of books about different religions and their sources, both from secular authors and religious ones.

I don't think it's necessary for people to have to learn languages like Greek to have a connection with their god. I haven't learned any such languages myself in order to try to study old texts. If people have to learn a basically dead language as far as most cultures are concerned to learn a divine truth, then it should cast strong doubts about God and his chosen form of communication with humanity.

 

[Sketcher]

I don't think it's necessary for people to have to learn languages like Greek to have a connection with their god. I haven't learned any such languages myself in order to try to study old texts. If people have to learn a basically dead language as far as most cultures are concerned, then it casts strong doubts about God and his chosen form of communication with humanity.

My dad, who spent some time in seminary, summed it up like this: Greek is useful, and an gives a little more depth, but it's not a conviction changer.

 

[Penumbra]

My dad, who spent some time in seminary, summed it up like this: Greek is useful, and an gives a little more depth, but it's not a conviction changer.

Of course studying the old languages can be helpful, and it is obviously needed by those who translate their texts into other languages, but it shouldn't be a requirement for the masses. Millions or billions of people shouldn't have to learn dead languages to communicate with the divine, if there is such a thing.

 

[tessas212]

How does he answer the many other pastors who have studied the Greek and the history and who have come to the traditional conclusion?

One word: interpretation. If people believe homosexuality is a sin, they will find a way that they can make them and others believe that the words were meant in a way to refer to it as a sin. It is the same accusation that others would suggest homosexuals only believe it isn't because they are making excuses for 'what is clear', when to many it obviously is not. It can swing both ways.

And in the end, comes down to whether or not you will humble yourself, or will be self righteous. Too many of times christians choose the latter.

 

[Sketcher]

One word: interpretation. If people believe homosexuality is a sin, they will find a way that they can make them and others believe that the words were meant in a way to refer to it as a sin. It is the same accusation that others would suggest homosexuals only believe it isn't because they are making excuses for 'what is clear', when to many it obviously is not. It can swing both ways.

And in the end, comes down to whether or not you will humble yourself, or will be self righteous. Too many of times christians choose the latter.

So why is it that they're the ones bringing the bias in rather than the gay people?