Deconversion

Over on the decons board they have a thread: Convenient categories: The “real reasons” de-cons leave the faith « de-conversion

Between the initial post and the discussion you get an interesting list of why people left the Christian faith (apostasy) and the sorts of accusations which were thrown at them that they found to be false. I've heard many of these for people who are leaving abusive denominations as well and so I thought these lists might be helpful:

Reasons Given:

1. Non effectuality:
• God never shows up. Not in visions, miracles, visitations, angelic appearances, or challenge matches (think of Elijah and the Baal priests) .
• Prayers are NOT answered.
• Having “Jesus in my heart” didn’t give me joy or peace
• There is no proof of ANYTHING supernatural
2. Morality:
• Christians are NOT different from non-Christians.
• Church disunity.
• God is NOT loving, merciful, good, just, etc.
• The idea that God would hurt someone to test their faith is completely disgusting
3. Apologetic failures:
• The Bible is contradictory with itself, reality, and morality.
• Everyone makes up their faith and their ideas of God as they go along.
• The Universe is capable of functioning without divine influence
• Christians use dishonest tactics to support their belief (ie Ben Stein’s new movie Expelled, teaching that Darwin refuted evolution on his death bed, multiple Kent Hovind youtube videos which present bold-faced lies about carbon dating)
• Pascal’s Wager is a horrific false dichotomy
• I took a Systematic Theology class and discovered all my deepest questions were answered with, “It’s a mystery.”
• Visited the Natural History Museum in NYC.
• Analyzed my own religion in the same way I had others.
• Realized Christianity’s stories are just as ridiculous and fantastical as every other religion’s.

Supposed reasons:

1. Hedonism
• You’re indulging your desire to live hedonistically.
• You want instant gratification.
• You are self-centered/serving yourself.
• You never dealt with sin in your life. (i.e. You were a carnal Christian.)
• You want to be your own god.
2. False initial conversion
• You never had a true personal relationship with Jesus.
• You never experienced/received the Holy Spirit.
• You were “religious” but not born again. (OR, in better church jargon) You had a “said faith, not a real faith.”
• You weren’t following the real (or historical) Jesus.
• You were never saved/Christian to start with. (Good ole Calvinism)
• You’re harboring sin in your heart.
• You’re too prideful/arrogant to humble yourself before the Lord.
• You are shutting your eyes to the obvious truth of God.
• You didn’t really understand the scriptures (Bible).
• You love/serve science/job/hobbies more than God.
• You looked to your own will/emotions instead of God’s will.
• You didn’t “take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ.”
3. Problems with church is bad
• Your decision is based on other Christians’ behavior, not on Jesus’ teachings.
• You were hurt by your pastor/other Christians.
• You were in the “wrong” denomination or sect.
• People disappointed you and so you “threw out the baby with the bathwater”.
• Psychologically flawed
• You’re looking for an excuse not to believe.
• You’re being manipulated by Satan.
• You’re not thinking about the future/afterlife.
• You’re angry and resentful and taking it out on God.
• You’re mad at God for some misfortune in your life.
• You can’t accept authority.
• You are having a mid-life, or some other life wide, crisis.
• You’re, “going through a phase.”
• You were unequally yoked (e.g. wife is Catholic, you were Protestant).
• You’re mind was poisoned by man’s philosophy.
• You became “wise in your own eyes.”
• You have a rebellious spirit.
• Poor personal practice:
• You quit seeking, or stopped “growing in the faith”, or allowed your faith to become stagnant.
• You were too legalistic.
• You were trying too hard to see God, and your own efforts kept you from success. (OR, said a little differently) You never “let go and let God.” (OR, said a little differently) You depended too much on your own strength/intellect.
• You didn’t pray/read the Bible enough.
• You forsook assembling together.

___

See also:

• A similar list for Mormons (link)  

1Tim 2:12 terrific discussion

I'd like to recommend to people interested in the issue of 1Tim 2:12 they head over to Theological discussion and read the excellent debate between Sandy Grant and Suzanne McCarthy regarding the use of the term "authority" in this verse. Its a fantastic discussion based on evidence on real evidence for both sides. Suzanne is defending the belief that "exercise authority" here means illegitimate authority and so a good translation would be something more like N.T Wright’s Translation of 1Ti 2:9-15

9 In the same way the women, too, should clothe themselves in an appropriate manner, modestly and sensibly. They should not go in for elaborate hair-styles, or gold, or pearls, or expensive clothes; 10 instead, as is appropriate for women who profess to be godly, they should adorn themselves with good works. 11 They must be allowed to study undisturbed, in full submission to God. 12 I’m not saying that women should teach men, or try to dictate to them; they should be left undisturbed. 13 Adam was created first, you see, and then Eve; 14 and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived, and fell into trespass. 15 She will, however, be kept safe through the process of childbirth, if she continues in faith, love and holiness with prudence. (Women’s Service in the Church: The Biblical Basis)

Large tables in blogger

Anybody know of a good way to handle large tables in blogger? I'm getting ready to start my study bible spreadsheet and I'm trying to figure out if I should have the sheet link from a blogger post or be in one. I'd rather have it on blog but it seems that tables run off the edge and you don't get a scroll bar.

Any ideas out there?

5 Questions about abortion

1. In the Scandinavian countries and the Netherlands women who have access to free abortions  in convenient state clinics have few abortions per million women than women in the USA, at a rate between one third and one quarter of the USA rate. This is due to excellent sex education and easily available birth control. That is if the USA were to make birth control easily accessible and free we could have a 70% decrease in abortion.  Yet the "pro life" movement has hindered birth control availability in the USA at every turn.  Why? 
2. Should women who miscarry be charged with involuntary manslaughter?  What if they did something like trip because they weren't be careful, negligent homicide?  
3. If life starts at fertilization then what should we do about all these couples carelessly having sex 9 or days after ovulation. According to NHS these are the implementation failure rates for the average women in days after ovulation:
   
• 3% by day 9
• 26% on day 10
• 52% on day 11
• 86% on day 12 or more
Death rates this high certainly mean that late sex constitutes negligence in the extreme.

4. Statistics show that things like good education, economic opportunity and higher wages for people at the bottom of the socio-economic ladder reduce unplanned pregnancy and abortion.  Why the opposition to social programs from the pro-life movement, when these policies could save hundreds of thousands of lives per year?  
5. Can we name one country that has banned abortion where the lives of women have improved within 20 years of the ban?  

NLT Study Bible Seminar + Giveaway

Over on the NLT blog they are having a bible giveaway contest You actually have a pretty good chance if you keep playing. And the seminar should be good. This bible has been reviewed all over the blogosphere:

Bryon
David Ker
Rick Mansfeld
Better Bibles Blog: More NLT buzz
An old discussion on theologica
The original NLT vs. CEV cage match (part1, part2, part3)

I'l be including the NLTSB in my Study bible spreadsheet coming out around December. The more time I spend with the NLT/NLTSB the more I like it. I've moved my recommendation for first evangelical study bible from TNIVSB to NLTSB as I've spent more time with the translation and the notes (the notes are both more correct and more useful). The NLT as a translation offers many of the dynamic advantages of the REB while being almost as readable as a paraphrase, on par with the CEV. It has the same "more literal" translation notes as the HCSB, and thus offers most of the advantages of more formal translation. NLTSB offers a sort of NISB both more conservative and lite. It also trains people in how to use tools they may not be exposed to. Basically it does 85% of what the NISB, TNIVSB and Learning Bibles (see Dave's review) offer, making it a broader choice. Also the maps are striking clear, best I've seen in a study bible.

Most of my readership are evangelical protestant, so do yourself a favor follow the link and try and win yourself a copy.

Priscilla, A female leader

In the church of St John at Heidelberg we have the window pictured to the left of Aquila & Priscilla; note in the lower pane we can see Priscilla teaching.

There are several mentions of Priscilla in the New Testament. The first is in Acts 18 where she instructs Apollos:

Acts 18:1 After this Paul departed from Athens and went to Corinth. 18:2 There he found a Jew named Aquila, a native of Pontus, who had recently come from Italy with his wife Priscilla, because Claudius had ordered all the Jews to depart from Rome. Paul approached them 18:3 and because he worked at the same trade, he stayed with them and worked with them (for they were tentmakers by trade)...
18:19 When they reached Ephesus, Paul left Priscilla and Aquila behind there, but he himself went into the synagogue and addressed the Jews...
18:24 Now a Jew named Apollos, a native of Alexandria, arrived in Ephesus. He was an eloquent speaker, well-versed in the scriptures. 18:25 He had been instructed in the way of the Lord, and with great enthusiasm he spoke and taught accurately the facts about Jesus, although he knew only the baptism of John. 18:26 He began to speak out fearlessly in the synagogue, but when Priscilla and Aquila heard him, they took him aside and explained the way of God to him more accurately.

The next is in Romans where Paul uses the term synergoi, colleague to refer to her:

16:3 Greet Prisca and Aquila, my colleagues in Christ Jesus, 16:4 who risked their own necks for my life. Not only I, but all the churches of the Gentiles are grateful to them.

Co-worker which is how the word is often translated is too weak. This term can even be used as a euphemism for sex (though I'm not arguing or implying Paul means it that way), colleague, good friend perhaps. What the word is never used for is a subordinate, while the word in "co-worker" in English can imply a subordinate. That is Paul considers Priscilla an equal, he is addressing her as an equal. This means that at least in Paul's mind she is not beneath him either directly or diagonally. This rules out the usually counter claimto Priscilla being a leader, that Aquila was a peer and Prisca worked under Aquila, because then Priscilla would be a diagonal subordinate and the word choice would be inappropriate.

I'd point to 1Cor 3:9 shows again Paul stating that he and Apollos are working together, another use of synergoi, not that Apollos works for Paul. When one reads 1Cor 3 the whole point of the chapter is rejecting the sort of hierarchy which would put one or the other on top; Jesus is on top.

Then in first Corinthians he mentions how she runs a house church (this one in Emphasis):

1Cor 16:19 The churches in the province of Asia send greetings to you. Aquila and Prisca greet you warmly in the Lord, with the church that meets in their house.

Finally in 2Tim 4;19 he greets them again indicating they travel as well:

2Tim 4:19 Greetings to Prisca and Aquila and the family of Onesiphorus.

As can be seen above, Priscilla is mentioned before Aquila in (Acts 18:18,26, Rom 16:3, 2 Tim 4:19). The reason this is so key, is that normally the man would be named first or exclusively; meaning she is the better known and more prestigious of the two. And this is occurs in books addressed to various cities, so she is not just some well known/respected person locally rather she is well known and respected within the whole of the Christian community; and better known and more respected than Aquila.

Moreover there is strong evidence according to the experts that the shift in Acts 18:2 was a later change. Ben Witherington for example in he anti-feminist tendencies of the "Western" text in Acts (Journal of Biblical Literature 103 no 1 Mr 1984, p 82-84.) mentions the shift of Acts 18:2 and argues that Priscilla was consistently named first. Metzger in the textual commentary on the NT has this verse with Priscilla named first and gives the same reason. The Teachers' Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles By Francis Nathan Peloubet, is cited by both as for the importance of this shift (i.e. diminishing her role).

So in other words we have Prisca approximately equal to Paul in Paul's mind; and Priscilla generally regarded as well above Aquila by the broad Christian community. Those two facts together are strong evidence of the extent of her leadership. But there is even more evidence. In Acts 18:26 she is portrayed as teaching a theologian about theology. Again she is listed first, with regard to the act of teaching. And this is devastating to the argument that women should not teach because it means that she is well respected as a teacher / missionary not because of some secondary factor.

Karl Josef Rudolph Cornely in Commentarius in ep. ad Romanos" (Paris, 1896) collected the various ancient authorities on this subject and there seems to be agreement that Prisca is the more important of the pair since otherwise she would never be named first. Chrysostom held a similar opinion regarding her being named first indicated she was the teacher of Apollos.

This too is worthy of inquiry, why, as he addressed them, Paul has placed Priscilla before her husband. For he did not say, “Greet Aquila and Priscilla,” but “Priscilla and Aquila.” He does not do this without reason, but he seems to me to acknowledge a greater godliness for her than for her husband. What I said is not guess-work, because it is possible to learn this from the Book of Acts. [Priscilla] took Apollos, an eloquent man and powerful in the Scriptures, but knowing only the baptism of John; and she instructed him in the way of the Lord and made him a teacher brought to completion (Acts 18:24-25). (John Chrysostom, “First Homily on the Greeting to Priscilla and Aquila”)

In his commentary on 2Tim he says essentially the same thing. Incidentally in Homily 40 on Acts he indicates Paul left them in Ephesus specifically so they could teach. Again another direct reference to Priscilla being a teacher.

The current Pope commented on church tradition, "Later hagiographic tradition has given a very singular importance to Priscilla, even if the problem of identifying her with the martyr Priscilla remains."

A few more pieces of evidence are archeological. In Rome to this day there is still a street named after her (but not him) in the aventine Via de Santa Prisca. There is a large church built in her honor, that goes back to the 4th century and possibly earlier, which legend says was the location of her house. Incidentally under the church was a mithric temple, so it may have been that Prisca's "house church" was really quite nice, a converted temple, it also contains Christian catacombs from no later than the 2nd century. Her grave still has veneration.

So to summarize the bible teaches

• Paul does not consider her an inferior.
  
• That she outranked Aquila.
• That she taught theology.
  

External sources teach

• Church fathers agree she was a teacher.
• As that the interpretation of her being named first indicating primacy was upheld in both the ancient and modern world.
  
• Archeology indicates she was the more important of the pair.

Finally while highly speculative we have Adolf von Harnack's view that Priscilla wrote Hebrews (link to Ruth Hoppin summary). Luther suspected Apollos was the author. In either case we have the differences between the Pauline theology and the theology of Hebrews coming from Priscilla's school, and indicating the importance of her theological and philosophical teachings.

Why was Sodom destroyed?

It is often asserted that the defense that Sodom was destroyed for lack of hospitality is a modern interpretation part of the gay rights movement. I found the following little passage in the Zohar from many centuries ago:

As for S'dom, its people were punished because they refrained from giving charity. As it is written: "neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy" (Yechezkel 16:49). And this is why the Judgment upon them came solely from heaven--because "charity" and "heaven" are one. As it is written: "For your kindness is great above the heavens," (Tehilim 108:5) INDICATING THAT "CHARITY" AND "KINDNESS" ARE BOTH DRAWN FROM THE HEAVENS ABOVE. Because charity depends on the heavens, their Judgment is also drawn down from the heavens, as it is written: "from Hashem out of heaven." (Zohar 3.20.285)

Judeans and the scholars version

There is always a bit of complexity in trying to figure out what the best way is to handle the translation of Hoi Ioudaioi. A common literal translation is "The Jews". The problem with "The Jews" is that Judaism is seen primarily as a religion or ethnicity not a nationality. One someone uses the term "Italian American" what they mean is an American of Italian descent. They don't mean a person with dual citizenship. When someone uses the term "Catholic Americans" they mean an American who is a member of the Catholic church. "The Catholics" means the religious group. When Romans use the term Ioudaioi they were thinking of the people of Judea, or the religion of the people of Judea (the sacrificial cult from Jerusalem). A reasonable and literal translation of that term is "The Judeans".

The scholars version does precisely this, it translates the word literally. It doesn't tie it to a current day religion but rather to an ancient province. To avoid some of the anti-Semitic leanings of Acts and John translation like the CEV and the NLT typically use terms like "Jewish leaders" which is not justified by the text nor likely accurate. Their heart is in the right place since these verses are quite harmful in the current day. But I think the way the SV handles this accomplishes the same task is more accurate and more faithful.

Anyone agree or disagree?

Is it a choice?

This is a rather informative 4 minute commercial on the homosexuality issue. It addresses:

• Is homosexuality natural
• Is it genetic
• Is it curable

While it is not terribly biblical it is a fast and entertaining way to address many of the scientific issues

For those disbelieving the claims of homosexual behavior in animals here is a link to a wikipedia article and the following video from National Geographic is rather striking:



The Wikipedia article on prenatal hormones and sexual orientation contains links to Bearman- Blanchard study in the video.

A few quotes by Ellen White

SDA is often accused of being a cult. Generally I've found them to be pretty reasonable on most issues. Here are a few quotes regarding discipline from Ellen White herself. We've recently been discussing what good leadership would do in trying to take a church which has become overly harsh and judgmental in a more reasonable direction. Those churches which many of my regular readers come from might do well to learn something from what she had to say to her lower leadership:

Perverted Discipline

In dealing with the erring, harsh measures should not be resorted to; milder means will effect far more. Make use of the milder means most perseveringly, and even if they do not succeed, wait patiently; never hurry the matter of cutting off a member from the church. Pray for him, and see if God will not move upon the heart of the erring. Discipline has been largely perverted. Those who have had very defective characters themselves have been very forward in disciplining others, and thus all discipline has been brought into contempt. Passion, prejudice, and partiality, I am sorry to say, have had abundant room for exhibition, and proper discipline has been strangely neglected. If those who deal with the erring had hearts full of the milk of human kindness, what a different spirit would prevail in our churches. May the Lord open the eyes and soften the hearts of those who have a harsh, unforgiving, unrelenting spirit toward those whom they think in error. Such men dishonor their office and dishonor God. They grieve the hearts of his children, and compel them to cry unto God in their distress. The Lord will surely hear their cry, and will judge for these things.--Review and Herald, May 14, 1895

Control Self First

Those who control others should first learn to control themselves. Unless they learn this lesson, they can not be Christlike in their work. They are to abide in Christ, speaking as He would speak, acting as He would act,--with unfailing tenderness and compassion.--Review and Herald, April 28, 1903. {ChL 65.2}

Pastoral Ministry 36.1:

Those with incorrigible, unbending, stubborn traits of character, when transformed, make the most valuable ministers.--Ministers have been presented to me, with their course of action and their character before they were converted--the hardest and most incorrigible, the most unbending, the most stubborn--and yet, every one of these traits of character was what they needed in the work of God. We don't want to kill that. It is needed in order to fill important positions of trust in the cause of God. There must be a transformation of character. The leaven must work in the human heart, until every action is in conformity to the will of God, and they are sanctified; then they become the most valuable. It is this very kind of individuals that God can use in the different branches of His work.--9MR 61.PaM36.1