Why Does Questioning the Bible Make People So Nervous and Defensive?

Why Does Questioning the Bible Make People So Nervous and Defensive?



If you wish to see the good, the bad and the ugly side of people of faith, just question the faith. I was a pastor soaking in Christianity and the Bible for three decades. I heard, read and studied all the plain and simple truth in the Bible from Genesis to Revelation. I can tell you the truth is neither plain nor simple and rather liked Paul's description of it all as being "the present truth." At least calling truth something that is currently understood gives some wiggle room for those times which shall come to grow a bit in the grace and knowledge that most Christians think they are open minded enough to really do. Most I know grow neither in grace, unless they attach a few dozen laws that you must keep to be one of the good people, nor knowledge which seems to scare the bejesus out of them when they really run up against it.


By far, the writings I have done that have proven to be the most popular for the open minded and enraging for those who enjoy that frame of mind a bit less, have been on Questions Your Pastor Will Hate. Many appreciate the questions and admit that they too have had the same questions as they sincerely study the text of the Bible stories and accounts of varied topics. These are the people who see the politics behind the texts. They admit that James and Paul really did bash heads and Peter was bashed by Luke and John as one who was totally unworthy of any authority in the church. Judas had betrayed Jesus and Peter had denied him, so that's pretty much the end of them in the eyes of John, Luke and Paul.


The story of Annias and Sapphira in Acts 5 is not a story about Peter killing two church members for not coughing up all the money they had "pledged" to the church. It is a spoof that the readers of Luke and Paul's community would understand of the buffoon Peter who, like the two church members who said they would give something to the church and didn't, said he'd never leave Jesus and fled. Peter who said he'd do one thing and did another is now punishing a couple who said they'd do one thing and did another. It was hilarious and a poke at Peter the Pathetic according to Luke and Paul. John mentions Peter three times in his Gospel and each time sandwiches Peter stories between two comments about Judas. The point is not missed on the original audience as is the story of Peter being forgiven three times by Jesus tacked on to the end of John's Gospel to show Peter is just as able to be forgiven as anyone else. (Side note: A really fascinating possibility is that the 21st chapter of John is the Missing ending of the pro-Peter Gospel of Mark. Mark is known to have no good ending to the Jesus story. It's ending has been added to make up for the bummer ending at Mark 16:8. John, on the other hand, has two obvious endings in chapter 20, the real ending and chapter 21, the forgive Peter ending.)


At any rate, to question the story is to run great risk of abuse at the hands of the faithful who need the stories to be literally true as they learned in Sunday School and that all the characters of the New Testament Church loved each other in Jesus and got along famously in the faith. That is very far from reality, but don't question it.


I can't tell you how many, while not near as many as those who appreciate the inquiry, take the time to write and remind me I will change my mind when I am frying in the fires of Hell in the judgment. No one has bothered to answer one question posed, but they just know I should go to hell for asking it. Some who write are subtle in their warnings to me. Some sound like a human form of God who will warn me to "gird up my loins" (my loins are just fine) and get ready to answer, but that's where it ends. I guess they feel God himself is about to break out upon me for asking questions about the faith. So far so good. Some talk to me like I imagine Moses talked to the Children of Israel when he was really angry at them in God's name. Some are not so subtle as one reminded me that "Dennis, words can get you killed." Well the history of religion that does not appreciate questions proves that!


Is it wrong to notice the inconsistencies, errors, goofs, bad science, poor examples, contradictions, animosities, politic and real history of the Bible? Depends who you ask. Those who believe that none of those things exist in the Holy Book would shout "yes!" In my view, the answer is "no it is not." Why is it OK and even something one should demand of their honest selves? Because ideas have consequences. Because the stories and ideas expressed in the texts are used to control people in various life circumstances. Because some use the mythologies of the Bible to make up literally real laws that effect women and children, and generally not in a good way. Because many are kept in fear, guilt and life long shame being reminded way too often that they, as a human, are worthless without divine intervention. Being born right the first time, as I have said in the past, is a truth that is kept far from their consciousness.


It is always right to ask questions about that which seems like it deserves to have a question asked. If you can't imagine Joshua raising his hands and stopping the earth from rotating without planet wide consequences...just ask your Pastor how can that be. Of course be ready to hear, "with God all things are possible," which is not what you asked. If you can't picture penguins and polar bears ambling down to the middle east to get on the Ark, just ask your Pastor about that. If you wonder where dinosaurs or Homo Erectus fit in, just ask your Pastor. The answer might be ill informed, but it's ok to ask.


If you notice that Paul never quotes Jesus, yet gets to write most of the NT heavy meaning of Jesus, just ask. If you notice that Paul thinks Peter, James and John, the disciples of Jesus don't seem to have anything Paul needs to learn from them and he learns nothing from them, and think that's kinda strange...just ask. If you notice the Birth or Resurrection of stories as written in the Gospels don't match very well and seem contradictory, just ask. If you say "they seem to be contradictory," be prepared to have the word "seem" jumped upon, but you still have the right to ask. I'm not saying you'll get a good or correct answer. You might, but probably not. But you have the right to ask. And you certainly have the right to notice the many problems in the Bible if you know the Bible well enough to notice in the first place.


One thing is for sure. If you are a genuine seeker and you truly notice that the Bible has some real problems with what we truly know today about many topics and even within itself in the form of many contradictions and editing done by one to correct the problems of the other, it's ok to ask. A real seeker cannot not notice what they notice. You can't go back to the lame apologetics that many offer to explain away the problem as if there is no problem. You can't unsee what you do see. You can't unring a bell. Oh..you also have the right to expect not to be penalized for asking in the first place. Just don't count on it.

DenniscDiehl@aol.com 

Pastors and Honesty

by David Hayward - The Naked Pastor

Rachel Held Evans, author of Monkey Town wrote on her blog the other day about The Epic Fail Pastors Conference and about how many pastors are afraid to tell their congregations what they have learned about the Bible and Christianity because of  "fear and recourse."  She was also calling upon pastors to stop being "Super Pastors' and to be vulnerable and tell their congregations about the struggles they have in life.

That set of a lot of responses to her from pastors who told why they could NOT do such things..  One excellent response is here:  Pastors and Honesty

Here is an excerpt:

So, when Rachel signs her letter from "The Congregation," I have to wonder which "congregation" it is who is eager for their pastor to tell the truth about life, faith, and relationships? Which congregation doesn't only say they want authenticity and honesty, but will actually respond well to it and find God's healing through those things?

My guess is that the congregation she is describing has these characteristics:

1. The church has a culture of grace. When people share honestly with one another, they are not condemned for it but are met with love and empathy. They hear "me too" more than "shame on you."

2. The church has a lot of young people. The college students and young adults I've worked with over the years have been far more eager for honesty than others I've worked with. They are likely immersed in social media and its culture of sharing and are comfortable with opening up the intimate aspects of their lives with others.

3. The church is emotionally healthy. When confronted with weakness or struggle, they search inside of themselves instead of punishing others for what they've done.

4. The church wants to be challenged. Truthfully, a lot of people in churches are not looking to hear something hard or new. They don't want to be led in new ways. They come to church to hear the things they already know and to be comforted. They need to want to be led and to be stretched in new directions in order to be open to the honesty that heals.   

If we're being honest, most churches do not have these characteristics. I don't know how many Rachel Evans there are in most churches who would receive a pastor's honesty with grace and self-reflection. And that's why most pastors are unwilling to tell the truth.

The blog comments that sparked this exchange is here:

Dear Pastors, 

Tell us the truth. 

Tell us the truth when you don’t know the answers to our questions, and your humility will set the example as we seek them out together.   

Tell us the truth about your doubts, and we will feel safe sharing our own. 

Tell us the truth when you get tired, when the yoke grows too heavy and the hill too steep to climb, and we will learn to carry one another’s burdens because we started with yours. 

Tell us the truth when you are sad, and we too will stop pretending. 

Tell us the truth when your studies lead you to new ideas that might stretch our faith and make us uncomfortable, and those of us who stick around will never forget that you trusted us with a challenge. 

Tell us the truth when your position is controversial, and we will grow braver along with you. 

Tell us the truth when you need to spend time on your marriage, and we will remember to prioritize ours. 

Tell us the truth when you fail, and we will stop expecting perfection. 

Tell us the truth when you think that our old ways of doing things need to change, and though we may push back, the conversation will force us to examine why we do what we do and perhaps inspire something even greater. 

Tell us the truth when you fall short, and we will drop our measuring sticks. 

Tell us the truth when all that’s left is hope, and we start digging for it. 

Tell us the truth when the world requires radical grace, and we will generate it. 

Tell us the truth even if it’s surprising, disappointing, painful, joyous, unexpected, unplanned, and unresolved, and we will learn that this is what it means to be people of faith. 

Tell us the truth and you won’t be the only one set free. 

Love, 

The Congregation

Why is Critical Thinking Not Practiced in the COG's?

I have always been taken back by the seemingly total lack of  Biblical  questioning by my former ministerial friends in WCG or in the membership over all.  It is amazing to me how little study into other ways of perceiving the Bible, it's history, it's construction and origins, its many contradictions real or imagined is done.

In the COG groups, the one man show type can get up and declare the Bible "clearly" shows the goofball to be an Apostle, Priest, King or Witness, AND FEW IF ANY QUESTION THE ROAMING AROUND IN THE BIBLE THAT IT TOOK TO DRAW THAT CONCLUSION.

"Duh, boss.  Whatever you say, huya huya...whatever you say." 

When Dave Pack goes on and on qualifying for membership in On and On Anonymous, why can't someone tell the man he talks too much and sees way too much of himself in the scripture.  Why can't someone say the sermons aren't always as amazing and never before understood as they are being led to believe. When he can't explain anything in less than two to four hours each week, where is the common sense of the audience?  When the man says either, "And yes, I am an Apostle," or "Send it in,"  blah blah blah...who are the people who just do this?  Are they defective of mind and common sense?

When Flurridians are told the Guru is "that prophet" or "God wants you to kiss your unconverted family goodbye and please no more talking to them,"  who are the nutcases that say, "ok, ok, whatever you say?"   Have they all been lobotomized?

Evolutionary author Donald Prothero notes...

"Looking over the shoulders of the hundreds of hard working , dedicated, self sacrificing biologists who spend years enduring the harsh conditions in the field to observe evolution in action inspires admiration in us real scientists.  This is in sharp contrast with the creationists who sit in their comfortable homes and write drivel about subjects they have never studied and do not understand."   (Evolution-what the fossils say and why it matters.  Page 113, Prothero)

This is also how ministers "do their hard work."  They skip along as good Bible and booklet readers.  Or as I have often noted, "piously convicted and marginally informed."
  

For as intelligent as GTA was, when he wrote about evolution as the authority on it for the Church, and why the Bible was right and science was wrong, he didn't know what he was talking about.  When Herbert Armstrong droned on and on about the two trees or the word "Elohim" and what it meant, he didn't know what he was talking about theologically.  When he said once in Bible study that dinosaurs were of Satan's world because they, like Satan, can't reproduce, he had no clue as to what he was talking about.  The current issue of National Geographic had dino eggs on the cover.

When Gerald Flurry declares this or that is God's way, he doesn't now what he is talking about.  When Dave Pack spins his sermons and mocks Plato, Socrates and the like, he doesn't know what he is talking about.  When he dismisses Albert Einstein because he had "wild hair,"  he has really run out of ideas and does not know what he is talking about. 

When Ron Weinland declares himself and his wife the Two Witnesses, well you know...it's just bullshit.  When you see yourself spoken of in the scriptures by the prophets, it is not time to start a church.  It is time to get some help.  I ask why Ron never studies what else  the Book of Revelation might be, who really wrote it and to whom for whom about whom?  Of course, if he did or if any of the COG ministers read the other issues raised by that book, it might require taking a lot of fancy literature off the shelves and throwing them into the shredder.

But back to the original question.  Why do COG types and really most Evangelical Christian ministers or members lack the critical thinking skills that would provoke them to ask questions about how we really got the Bible, who really wrote it and why?  Those few who do have good critical thinking skills usually end up teaching them but not at church, disfellowshipped, excommunicated, marked and otherwise marginalized.  God may love a cheerful giver but He is not much for a clear thinker evidently.

When debating Art Mokarow over the issue of creationism vs evolution, his "Oxford trained" side kick on stage blurted out when I was recommending Evolution--What the Fossils Say and Why It Matters,   "I have that book!" I was so tempted to reply, "Well I suggest you actually read it."  However, I restrained myself.  Many have a Bible but few ask much about how it got to be.  The non-Sunday School answer can be pretty darn challenging to one's faith.  Perhaps that is the total reason right there.

He told me I was too dogmatic about the problems in the Bible and too specific, whatever that meant.  I asked him if he was the author of "God's Puzzle Solved?"  He said  yes of course and i noted the words  "Puzzle" and "Solved" are pretty specific and dogmatic.  He said that's not what he meant.  Uh huh.

So, let's try this.  A couple of years ago I wrote a series of articles entitled, "Questions Your Pastor Will Hate."   They can be found here:

Questions Your Pastor Will Hate - The Book - Part One

Questions Your Pastor Will Hate - Part Two

Questions Your Pastor Will Hate - Part Three

Questions Your Pastor Will Hate - Part Four

Questions Your Pastor Will Hate-Part Five


And just for fun and as a bonus....

Why Does the Gospel of Mark Have No Positive Ending and John Has Two?

Now I admit the form was a bit cheeky at times in challenging us to look outside the box or at least how to even notice the Bible has contradictions, but I was processing my own "why was I not taught this?" experience. 

Art Mokarow assured me he had asked himself every one of those questions and that he was able to easily answer them to his satisfaction.  Good, I'm glad.  He had to say that.  It's like the Pope forgiving the guy who shot him.  He has to forgive him!!!!  He's the Pope.  He's a professional forgiver!  In the same way, if one is going to say the Bible is without mistakes or contradictions, one has to get a bit defensive at times, circle the wagons and ultimately feel sorry for the poor slob who even thinks to ask the questions.

So.  Do you even know how to ask questions about the Bible, its purpose, its real authorship, its politics, its errors (real or imagined) its intent?  If you know how to ask the question or what the question even is, why don't you?  Are you going to let others get away with telling you there are no questions or that questions are suspect around here? 

Enjoy the questions. You may or may not like them, but they are oft asked questions, they are not original to me and at least may help one ask enough questions when needed to maybe save them from believing just one too many made up answers that, in fact, are not so.

I think it matters to ask questions when in religion, there can be so much at stake for the questioner.


DenniscDiehl@aol.com  

UCG Ghana Resigns En Masse

A Lesson for the Churches of God

A Lesson for the Churches of God

(and all humans)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=10084L3Pqsc

Was there ever a time in your past when you wondered what would be going on in the year 2011?  If you speculating as someone then immersed in the 50's or 60's or 70's it would have seemed like a million years away.  If you were a member of the Worldwide Church of God, and could know, the following truths now revealed by then would be as follows.

Surely by then...Jesus will have returned

The Kingdom will be here

I'd be ruling over others  (this one never appealed to me. I wanted to go fishing and be left alone for a few thousand years)

The deaf would hear, the blind would see and the lame man leap as a hart

The Lion and the Lamb would be best buddies

Everyone would going to the Feast and I mean everybody....or else.

Sermons would be given by the real Apostles when God and Jesus were away on business

We would be proven to have been right about everything

Well, maybe not Mr. Waterhouse.....

However and Actually...................................

Jesus did not return

The world grinds on

Herbert Armstrong would be dead for 25 years

Garner Ted Armstrong would be dead

Hermann Hoeh would be dead

Dean Blackwell would be dead

Dibar Apartian would be dead

Stan Radar would be dead

Gerald Waterhouse would be dead

All the youthful Evangelists and ministers would be very old

Your local church will be gone

Ambassador would be gone

Ambassador would be sold to Evangelical Sunday keeping, Christmas Keeping, Easter Celebrating Pagans

The Worldwide Church of God would be keeping Sunday, Christmas, Easter and wallowing in the mysteries of the Trinity

The Worldwide Church of God would have broken up into 700 splinter and sliver churches each being the true one. 

Mr. and Mrs. Ron Weinland would be the Two Witnesses

Twenty one other men would also be the Two Witnesses

Dave Pack would be the only true Apostle heading the only true remnant of the only true church.

Gerald Flurry will have recreated a hologram of Ambassador College and continue to be the reincarnation of HWA, but Dave Pack would be upset about that wanting his own hologram of HWA, WCG and Ambassador College

You would still be sending it in to someone if still unconscious. 

The United Church of God would divide again and again.

The Brotherly Love Church of God will forbid you to talk to your brothers unless they belong to said church.  This is commonly known as Influrryating.

The Living Church of God is dying.

60 years later we'll still be waiting "3-5, no more than 10-15, 20 tops years to go brethren, and I mean it."  

The Big Sandy Egrets will have flown to Oklahoma along with HWA's prayer rock

Few will have ever heard of the Plain Truth

Few will have heard of The Philadelphia  Trumpet

Few will have heard about the Grace Whatever Church of God, formerly known as Prince

Whew, and there is a whole lot more where that all comes from.  

Life, in all it's constructs, hopes, dreams, speculations, mess ups and insanity is one big Mandala.  Crafted over time only to be brushed away to return to it's source as if it never existed.   Or rather, it takes on a different form, rejoins the universe and goes on to be part of the much bigger picture.

And now we know....

DenniscDiehl@aol.com