Quite a few years ago, a media commentator (i.e., a professional) was profoundly
upset that I had referred to “the Old
Testament” in something I wrote (not
on this blog). This very upset professional said there was no such thing –
in his words, “that was the Hebrew Bible”
. . .
Now, I was raised as an Anglican
(until I escaped in my teenage years),
and I’ve known and discussed aspects of Christianity/neochristianity
with friends and others I’ve known through most of my life, and everyone agreed
that, for better or worse (can’t think of
anything that fits the “better” category right now, but it may be there
. . . maybe the lesbian relationship :) ), the Old Testament was accepted
as being one part of the neochristian Bible.
Furthermore, although some of the books in the various traditions overlap (see here
– and here,
for interest), there are differences between the neochristian Old Testament
and Judaism’s Tanakh
(I keep tending to write “the Torah”,
but that’s just the first part of the Tanakh: I’m not going to get into either
much, as I know very little about Judaism).
The commentator may have been upset because
the context was same sex relationships, and I suspect he was in favour of accepting
same sex relationships, but was deeply and genuinely distressed that some neochristians used
the Old Testament to justify (maybe even
to try to dignify . . . ) their
homophobia.
In any case, he was wrong about the Old Testament not being a part of neochristianity – but so are
those who try to use the Old Testament (I’ll
cut that to OT).
Now, there are a range of rebuttals to those who try to use the OT to justify homophobia, such as: the comments were taken
out of context (e.g., they were actually
about prostitution), the
translations were flawed (this is, as I
understand it, a particular issue around the King James version, owing to Jimmy’s
[yes, that’s right, I have no respect for a homophobe who caused massive
suffering] paranoia over witches which apparently led to “caster of bad spells” being
changed to witch), etc - incidentally, on such matters, albeit a slightly
different focus, I thoroughly recommend the book that Gavin Andrews wrote for
the Pagan Awareness Network: “Paganism and Christianity” (Smashwords, 2011, ISBN 978-0-9871536-0-9;
this is an ebook, and it appears to be no longer available – my apologies: I’ll
see if I can find a source, but anyone who is interested could contact PAN or
Smashwords).
There are a wide range of problems as a
result of continued deference to the OT – including the inconsistency of picking
and choosing which parts are to be accepted and which aren’t, and the appalling
promotion in the OT of things like murder, rape, slavery, etc (as a starting point, you could refer to this,
or maybe here
– there isn’t any really good discussion on this set of problems that I could readily find).
Now, if you wish, you can read summaries of
the “official” neochristian views on the OT here
and here,
but, in my personal opinion, I though Christ had resolved the matter quite
clearly by saying “I bring you a New
Testament”, and then simplified the Old Testament laws into two – both
based on spiritual love (of neighbour,
and Deity).
I guess that’s too simple for some people.
Or maybe the problem was it didn’t allow
people to hold on to their power structures . . .
There’s another problem here, and the main
one I wish to comment on: fear.
As a kid, I saw people fall over backwards
/ fall over themselves / tie themselves in knots / add any other sayings you
consider fit, while they were trying to justify how the god of fear in the OT
could be the God of Love in the New Testament.
When my Sunday School teacher tried to
re-present the very clear wording around fearing the god of the OT as “fearing not doing the right thing”,
child me started to wonder whether they knew what the hell they were talking
about . . .
The doubt wasn’t helped by the attractive
notion that hell wasn’t really a bad place, it was just that you were stuck in
a place with a deity you didn’t worship -
sorry, “adore” - the same way as everyone around you . . . sort
of like an eternally boring party.
As I wrote, attractive . . . but it
didn’t gel with the clearcut, hardline, vicious god of fear in the OT.
Fortunately for me, I’ve evolved
spiritually beyond the old but immature religion I refer to as neochristianity,
and no longer have to worry about trying to resolve such koan-like
contradictions. (I also have other
concerns, such as original sin, but that can wait till another post
. . . maybe.)
Give me BPM, my Spiritual
Guides, my Patron
Deities, and freedom from dogma
and guilt, and freedom to think and be psychic any day – and twice
on Sundays.
