I kinda addressed this upthread; I don’t know if Czarcasm believes/suspects that the different translations of the same verse are radically different, or what.
As another Protestant, I’d say that there isn’t really “denomination-specific translations,” so much as many denominations prefer specific translations/versions (e.g., many conservative/fundamentalist Protestants strongly prefer the King James Version).
Well I have actual Islamists, the way you define it, in many of the WhatsApp groups of alumni of my undergraduate Alma mater in Pakistan. People who believe that global domination of Islam is the long term goal of all Muslims and the intermediate goal is an Islamic state wherever practicable. They are not that rare.
Maybe they are not as rare as I thought, but my point stands that Islamist means something different than Muslim. It’s like saying that Evangelist is synonymous to Christian.
OK, hopefully they understand Americans are likely to overlook the distinction.
As to which bible they were using, I assume each member is using their own bible, whatever version that may be. RD didn’t say anything like “We all use the King James version.”
Well that’s fair enough. Your OP sounded partially hostile or mocking, but there’s nothing wrong with being a cultural tourist with new people in an unfamiliar subject. There won’t be the typical American evangelical thing. Maybe we’re all wrong about it. Could be interesting.
I work in HR here in the United States, so my answer might differ from my European counterparts. I’d view it no differently than an employee asking a coworker if they wanted to come over on Sunday to watch the game. I’d only be concerned if the employee making the invitation couldn’t take no for an answer, was in a position of power over the invited employee, or they were using company equipment for their meetings.
I was on a panel interviewing people for an entry level position. The hiring manager, a fairly religious woman, asked our candidate about the volunteer work he put on his resume. It was church activity, which closely matched hers, and she ended up inviting the candidate to her church. During the goddamn interview. I ended up having a very uncomfortable discussion with the manager after the interview where she basically blew me off. She was close to retirement and had the ear of the CEO, so she could basically tell me to pound sand.
The OP mentioned that their colleague who is involved in the bible study group said that they were meeting over Teams, which suggests (though not definitively) that they are using the company’s Teams program.
Most HR departments and managements would probably view it as no different than any non-business use of company electronic communications: most companies of any significant size have an IT policy which clearly states that use of company IT equipment and programs for personal use is either (a) to be minimal, or (b) forbidden. But, unless it becomes egregious, or someone complains, they tend to look the other way, IME.
i have a lot of meetings on teams using my personal equipment. All my volunteer work for the casualty actuarial society is done in teams, and since retiring the first time, I’ve exclusively used my own equipment for those meetings.
my prior employer’s explicit policy was that we weren’t supposed to use company equipment in ways that detracted from their official use or put the company and its equipment at risk. Using teams to meet with known people in off hours for something social would have been allowed.
I know I’m late to this thread, but the alarm bells (comedically) went off in my head as soon as I read the OP. . .
Here’s where my brain went . . . “A cold-call invitation to a “bible study” with coworkers after work? This has ‘live minefield’ written all over it.”
. . . which you deftly, and politely avoided. Well done.
Tripler
I’ve navigated a few social ones here and there, sometimes less elegantly than you.
You made the right decision to gracefully refuse to go if you truly think the way you do. In all likelihood he was inviting you to something that is important to him and he wanted to share that with you.
What I find shocking is the amount of ignorance and prejudice about religion in general and Christianity in particular. I am no longer a Christian myself, but I went to a conservative evangelical seminary and was a missionary in Africa among many different religions and cultures. People have every right to believe or disbelieve anything they choose. If they are making their decision about ‘spiritual matters’ based on narrow or prejudicial information, they are doing themselves a disservice.
Most Bible studies that I have been a part of were actually looking at the text of the scripture and attempting to understand what it is about in the context of the other parts of the Bible. The issue of ‘versions’ is generally not a matter of dogma, but of style. What Christians consider the Bible is a collections of writings that are considered authoritative based on their authorship. The writings were copied around the world. Those writings were written in a casual (not formal) type of Greek. Those writings have been translated at various times and places into various languages. Translating an ancient language and culture into a modern language and culture is not easy, and you have to consider the meaning of the original Greek from 2000 years ago and express that in a modern setting. The translator has to make decision about both and go for it. A better way of having a Bible study is to study it in Greek. I have and it is rich in meaning often not captured in a translation. Religions (particularly Protestant) all agree that the original Greek is authoritative. Catholics have added ‘the apocrypha’ for their own reasons.
Generally speaking, religious people have very little knowledge about the theological depth of scripture and stay pretty close to the surface ‘Bible stories’ and are interested in learning how to ‘be a good person’. And of course, there are many many evil practitioners who have selfish reasons for promoting their religion. Understanding the basic construction of the Bible is important if you are trying to find meaning, just like learning about the Torah, Quran, or really anything else. But a basic understanding allows you to find meaning, and if that meaning is important, you can choose to ‘believe’. I put believe in quotes because you need to understand that what you are believing is not a religion, but a faith. I’ve found that anything that is called a ‘religion’ is pretty useless. I met a witch who disdained Wicca because of too many rules. Same with a Buddhist I met, too many rules. And Christians. And Jews. And Muslims. I assume Hindus but I’ve never had one tell me. It is my idea that ‘religion’ is a good idea gone bad. Religions take a messenger’s words and turn them into the authority, rather than the focus of the words which is God. Religions then take that authoritative messenger and create a theological fortress around Him (Her, It). Long lost is what the messenger was actually asking you to focus on.
As you can imagine, I could say much much more about this. My point is that a spiritual message need not carry the religion’s associated baggage. Just like looking at an art exhibit. You don’t need to buy into what ‘the experts’ say is fine art. Find what you enjoy and enjoy it. You may find more you enjoy as you learn. You don’t have to agree with the ‘experts’ say, but they may have insight into things to help you enjoy more art. The one doing the enjoying (believing) is YOU. No one can tell you what to believe.
So I would encourage you (and most everyone) is to learn about any scripture at all and see what it says. Don’t worry if you have a different POV from the religion. They aren’t going to abduct you and make a slave of you (at least not anymore!). There are many ways to understand spiritual truth, maybe one of them is for you. At least it would give you a personal experience with the faith, and hopefully less so with the religion.
Wow, Numbers is a tough one. I can’t imagine why Christians would study numbers or even Leviticus, because those books concern the minutia of the Jewish faith. Mostly genealogies and sacrificial laws, and Very little is relevant to someone coming from a Christian perspective
I think you will find that true in any form of ‘group’. Whenever you establish an ‘us’, you have suddenly created a ‘them’. How you treat the ‘them’ is contingent on how you define the ‘us’. Bible studies are usually not a place for coercion, but sometimes people do get carried away. I’ve been to meetings where a self described ‘atheist’ was harangued about their faith and they had a bad experience. I have also gone to scientific atheist meeting as a theist and was treated the same way. I don’t believe it is associated with the subject matter as it is of human nature. A ‘them’ is in error and needs to be convinced of it. That never works for good, but people feel compelled find virtue for ‘us’ by denigrating ‘them’.
Excellent writeup, @BobEmbl. I like the analogy with fine art. Imagine looking at a painting, and art “expert” comes along an imposes twenty rules on how you’re supposed to view it and interpret it.
As a former Catholic, I’d say that the Protestants removed ‘the apocrypha’ for their own reasons, but that’s probably mostly a ‘tomato-tomahto’ distinction.
Yes, that is a large part of those kinds of interactions. Two points: I wasn’t supposing that haranguing would occur, as most people know that would drive people away, I was supposing a more friendly proselytizing by people just asking questions. Which leads to my second point – I believe (although I have no statistics to back it up, just general life experience) that one is much more likely to be invited to join a religiously-oriented study group than an atheist-oriented one (which although I am sure they exist, I have yet to see or hear of). Atheists don’t seem to go out and look for religious people to talk to about, well, anything relating to their religion. I know I wouldn’t, knowing such efforts to be largely useless as well as unwelcome. In contrast, proselytizing is an important part of some religions, as well as being important to many individuals in them. They imagine that they are working to spread the light and save our souls; or they just like being “proved” right as shown by the number of conversions they are able to effect.
To be fair, I have never been actively denigrated to my face by a religious person for my atheism. And vice versa, I have never behaved that way (at least not after college).
Still a topic best avoided unless you know them very well.
I have a friend who was at university with me, studying philosophy at the time, who became a Church of England Canon.
I can discuss this sort of thing with him… but he is an unusually open minded fellow (and to give it credit, the Chuch of England is nowadays a fairly liberal organization).
Truly, I never understood the Bible less than when I was an evangelical Christian. But it would be wrong to say I was practicing the religion and not the faith.
I’d be careful about painting religions with the same broad brush. Not only is Christianity unlike Buddhism, Buddhism is unlike Buddhism and Christianity is unlike Christianity. The way religions are practiced depends a lot on the culture in which they are practiced. The idea that faith is separate from religion smacks a lot of the, “I’m not religious, I just have a close personal relationship with Jesus Christ” exceptionalism that is part and parcel of American evangelicalism and actively destructive to others’ religious freedom.
I’ve had a number of people insist that I’m not really agnostic, etc. I don’t mind the discussion, but it can be awkward when circumstances don’t permit me to respond, “You’re telling me what I believe and that I don’t understand what I believe. Trust me, I’m accurate about this.”
What they really mean is, “I don’t think you are the type of person who should burn in hell, so I’m going to believe you’re secretly faithful to make myself feel better. Otherwise I would have to confront the cognitive dissonance of a loving God torturing good people for all eternity.”
Also a lot of people raised in Christianity cannot fathom not believing in God so they assume you must be fooling yourself, or something.