Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You are still missing the point. Iti s not about how the rule applies in one version or another but the evidence for the Gospel derivation and why it has been reversed.
And you are missing the point that THIS is precisely what I am talking about. You have a SERIOUSLY jaundiced view of wht the reason for the new paradigm IS. SO, the measure of that paradigm is how it CAN work given the to be expected thoughtfulness of those who are COMMITTED to the well being of everyone in any situation that is the basis for the WAY Jesus taught.
Well, Shirina, if you mean eternal damnation, no, Jesus did not introduce the concept, that has been read into the idea that we wlll reap what we sow, but nowhere does Jesus indicate that lessons in living will not allow for change.
Then where did it come from? Certainly not the Old Testament given that the Jews do not believe in a fiery hell filled with unbelievers. If not the Old, then it had to have been the New -- and that's all about Jesus.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nateswift
Such an idea is totally against the idea of a loving God who IS concerned about everyone.
Well, like I've said before - God only ever cared about the Hebrews, not "everyone." For instance, even today the Jews do not proselytize or try to "save souls" or try to convert people to Judaism. That tradition goes all the way back to that (fictitious) Biblical era when the Hebrews were enslaved by the Egyptians.
Nowhere, not a single time, did God care one iota about the lives and souls of non-Hebrews. When dealing wih the strangely nameless "Pharaoh" God could have conceivably converted him to Christianity, thus turning Egypt Judeo-Christian in much the same way Rome was by Constantine.
But no. God simply massacred, starved, and tormented the people of Egypt in order to bully "Pharaoh" into letting the Hebrews go. And when "Pharaoh" finally did just that, the Hebrews left Egypt -- and God went with them. The Egyptian survivors were left to rot on the vine. Who really cares about them, anyway, right? Certainly not Yahweh. Only the Hebrews mattered.
And for a very long time, God's command was to simply butcher non-Hebrews. Not convert them. Simply slaughter them. At least two dozen entire cities met this fate -- which doesn't even count the cities God personally destroyed. It wasn't, "Hey, go down there and try to save the souls of the Canaanites." Instead, it was, "Go down there and murder all the Canaanites -- young, old, male, female, children, babies, the elderly, kill 'em all. In fact, kill all the animals too. Puppies, kittens, lambs, calves, ponies, doesn't matter. Kill. Kill. Kill. Might as well salt the fields, too, and kill the plants! And if there was some practical way to do it, I'd have you sterlize the place so that even bacteria and viruses are killed!"
Strange, that ... don't you think? I mean, few Christians seem at all concerned about the wonky historical timeline. Even if the earth is 6,000 years old, which of course is nonsense, there is at *least* 2,000 years of recorded history where there is absolutely no mention of a God called Yahweh, no mention of Hebrews, no mention of a Jewish faith. And this is *before* the crucifixion, *before* the Exodus when God was diddy-bopping around earth talking directly to ordinary mortals, intervening directly with a crap-ton of magical spells, and not caring overmuch if humanity's "free will" was being curtailed.
It's as if God conjured up Adam and Eve, handed Cain his mark --- and then for at *least* 2,000 years (it's actually more like 4,000 to 5,000 years), there's nothing but silence from or about the Christian God of the Bible. Time literally fastforwards through millennia after millennia of *recorded* history and yet, no God.
Then all of the sudden -- Hebrews! And Egypt! And Pharaoh! And Moses! Wow! It's so sudden historically that it's as if God created the entire Egyptian civilization from a pile of dirt and a rib. Presto! Abracadabra! Egypt and Hebrews suddenly exist!
And I bring all of this up only to point out that God never cared about anyone but Hebrews -- and so apathetic was God about non-Hebrews that he literally sat around and did *nothing* for 4,000 years until there *were* Hebrews and only *then* did God suddenly wake up and decide to get involved again.
Now, I don't know precisely what your beliefs are -- I'm pretty sure you're not a Biblical literalist or we'd have crossed swords before. Which means I'm not accusing you of following the Bible in exacting detail.
However, it is through the Bible -- and *only* through the Bible -- do people get their notions of who and what Jesus is. Without the Bible, Jesus would have been relegated to history as a nameless cult leader that was executed by the Romans. He would barely rank a footnote in most history books.
Yet it's odd how Jesus has actually corrupted morality. How? Ask Christians of all types why they should be kinder, gentler, and more compassionate to other people -- especially people outside of their immediate social circle -- and a large number of them will quote scripture or say, "Because Jesus said ..."
But rare is the Christian who will simply acknowledge that doing so would make the world a far better place, and people generally don't deserve to be treated like garbage.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nateswift
I will never say that other faith traditions do not present much of what Jesus did, but I think you will find that the "Golden Rule" of Jesus is a bit different from others in that it indicates doing what is best for others rather than just treating them as they have treated you.
Doing "what is best for others" isn't just a can of worms -- it's a ball of writhing, squirming worms the size of a small planet.
Especially since what's best for someone else is usually translated as doing what's best for oneself.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nateswift
I am willing to be corrected, it is the Way Jesus embodied that is important as He indicted by saying for us nto DO as He taught if we love Him.... not worship Him. and jimmiej, what Jesus saved us from was futile selfishness.
"In summary, the Bible teaches that Jesus of Nazareth is nothing less than God the Son, the second Person of the Triune God (Trinity). In view of this, He is due our full worship and devotion. To fail to worship Jesus Christ would be sinful."
Then where did it come from? Certainly not the Old Testament given that the Jews do not believe in a fiery hell filled with unbelievers. If not the Old, then it had to have been the New -- and that's all about Jesus.
Actually, the lake of fire imagery in the New Testament comes from the book of 1 Enoch which is Jewish 2nd temple period pseudepigrapha. 1 Enoch is actually a compound book written at various times spanning a period from the 3rd through the 1st century BC. It tells the story of a vision given to Enoch. In the part which is referred to as the book of the watchers, Genesis 6:4 is expanded upon. 1 Enoch tells the story of a group of angels (200 hundred of them) descending to Mount Hermon and then mating with human females and teaching mankind certain things they should not have. The offspring of the angel/human mating are the Nephilim.
As punishment, this group of angels is confined in pits of darkness where they await the day of judgment.
Well, 1 Enoch has references such as;
chapter 10:
4 and his seed may be preserved for all the generations of the world.' And again the Lord said to Raphael: 'Bind Azazel hand and foot, and cast him into the darkness: and make an opening 5 in the desert, which is in Dudael, and cast him therein. And place upon him rough and jagged rocks, and cover him with darkness, and let him abide there for ever, and cover his face that he may 6,7 not see light. And on the day of the great judgement he shall be cast into the fire.
11 that each one of them will live five hundred years.' And the Lord said unto Michael: Go, bind Semjaza and his associates who have united themselves with women so as to have defiled themselves 12 with them in all their uncleanness. And when their sons have slain one another, and they have seen the destruction of their beloved ones, bind them fast for seventy generations in the valleys of the earth, till the day of their judgement and of their consummation, till the judgement that is 13 for ever and ever is consummated. In those days they shall be led off to the abyss of fire: and 14 to the torment and the prison in which they shall be confined for ever. And whosoever shall be condemned and destroyed will from thenceforth be bound together with them to the end of all 15 generations.
chapter 21:
1,2 And I proceeded to where things were chaotic. And I saw there something horrible: I saw neither 3 a heaven above nor a firmly founded earth, but a place chaotic and horrible. And there I saw 4 seven stars of the heaven bound together in it, like great mountains and burning with fire. Then 5 I said: 'For what sin are they bound, and on what account have they been cast in hither' Then said Uriel, one of the holy angels, who was with me, and was chief over them, and said: 'Enoch, why 6 dost thou ask, and why art thou eager for the truth These are of the number of the stars of heaven, which have transgressed the commandment of the Lord, and are bound here till ten thousand years, 7 the time entailed by their sins, are consummated.' And from thence I went to another place, which was still more horrible than the former, and I saw a horrible thing: a great fire there which burnt and blazed, and the place was cleft as far as the abyss, being full of great descending columns of 8 fire: neither its extent or magnitude could I see, nor could I conjecture. Then I said: 'How 9 fearful is the place and how terrible to look upon!' Then Uriel answered me, one of the holy angels who was with me, and said unto me: 'Enoch, why hast thou such fear and affright' And 10 I answered: 'Because of this fearful place, and because of the spectacle of the pain.' And he said unto me: 'This place is the prison of the angels, and here they will be imprisoned for ever.'
67:4 And He will imprison those angels, who have shown unrighteousness, in that burning valley which my grandfather Enoch had formerly shown to me in the west among the mountains of gold 5 and silver and iron and soft metal and tin. And I saw that valley in which there was a great 6 convulsion and a convulsion of the waters. And when all this took place, from that fiery molten metal and from the convulsion thereof in that place, there was produced a smell of sulphur, and it was connected with those waters, and that valley of the angels who had led astray (mankind) burned 7 beneath that land.
Chapter 98:
1 And now I swear unto you, to the wise and to the foolish, For ye shall have manifold experiences on the earth.
2 For ye men shall put on more adornments than a woman, And coloured garments more than a virgin: In royalty and in grandeur and in power, And in silver and in gold and in purple, And in splendour and in food they shall be poured out as water.
3 Therefore they shall be wanting in doctrine and wisdom, And they shall perish thereby together with their possessions; And with all their glory and their splendour, And in shame and in slaughter and in great destitution, Their spirits shall be cast into the furnace of fire.
Chapter 100:
9 Woe to you, ye sinners, on account of the words of your mouth, And on account of the deeds of your hands which your godlessness as wrought, In blazing flames burning worse than fire shall ye burn.
As always, Shirina, you ask good questions and make good points.
One at a time: where the idea of eternal damnation came from is the growing professional clergy of the religion developing around the faith Jesus taught. YOU know how serving self interest and the wish to control can warp people and ideas. A simple overview of the early church, the questions they debated and the tactics to which they resorted should give you some idea.
Your assertion about what God cared about is spot on (as the British say).... as far as the Old Testament is concerned. In the New Testament we have Jesus declaring that Hi mission at the time is only to Israel, but there are many indications of the superior receptivity of other ethnic groups and indications that others ARE well qualified to be part of God's concern in such references as the Parable of the Good Samaritan with the new paradigm of the rather parochial injunction to "love your neighbor." There are also indications of a much greater inclusiveness in such referenced as the last few verses of Matthew 5 and the observation that Jesus was concerned about "other sheep not of this flock." Regardless, the new faith realized fairly early with the inclusion of Cornelius that there was more to it than being Jewish, and, with Paul, the idea that it was not ABOUT a religion or religious practices of Judaism or any other religion (something that not many in institutional religion have realized for some obscure reason ).
What you say about the Bible is largely true, but that does not mean that the story of Jesus did not accrue legendary elements and elements intended to bolster the religion being formed around the simple Way of life relating to God and each other in love, which is best defined as a vested concern for the well-being of everyone in any situation. Yes, it is rare for any Christian to acknowledge that this is just simply more society advantageous than rampant selfishness, but find a society where THAT is practiced any more than in any nominally Christian society. I will not say that there is anything wrong with secular humanism in any way, but I WILL say that the best formulation of that imperative is found in what can be seen in the life and teaching of Jesus filtering away the fairly obvious religious accruals.
Now as to that, what IS "best" for any one IS a tangled "bed of worms," but that does not mean it can't be untangled at least to the extent that obviously imperative needs can be met by people who really ARE concerned about the person in question. After that it becomes a matter of give and take with giver, receiver and actual results.... I'll go that far.
And last point....Hoo BOY! does institutional religion in general have it WRONG!
And you are missing the point that THIS is precisely what I am talking about. You have a SERIOUSLY jaundiced view of wht the reason for the new paradigm IS. SO, the measure of that paradigm is how it CAN work given the to be expected thoughtfulness of those who are COMMITTED to the well being of everyone in any situation that is the basis for the WAY Jesus taught.
You are merely confirming my argument for Why it was changed. That you regard that as praiseworthy whereas I regard it as pernicious doesn't alter that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nateswift
..
Now as to that, what IS "best" for any one IS a tangled "bed of worms," but that does not mean it can't be untangled at least to the extent that obviously imperative needs can be met by people who really ARE concerned about the person in question. After that it becomes a matter of give and take with giver, receiver and actual results.... I'll go that far.
...
I'll agree with you on that, but I'd say that humanist ethics is better for that (including the Golden rule the right way around) rather than Christianity thinking that it knows what is best for everyone, whether they want it or not.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
).
