Celsus

An obvious problem is that by taking something from the Bible, you do not practice the critical thinking required in determining right and wrong for yourself. If you already have those faculties, then there is hardly much point in gleaming wisdom from an antiquated book of Iron Age theology. If you don't have those faculties, then you should practice them until you do, rather than taking it from authority.

Joel

AJ113

Well it's old hat, and the Bible does not have the monopoly on it, but I think that the Golden Rule is a pretty good principle to live by.

AJ113

I was inspired by the sermon in Matthew where Jesus advises his listeners not to swear in order to add weight to their words. "Let your yes be yes and your no be no."

I have always tried to adhere to this ever since I first read it.

kalamasutta

I was running out of time on my last post........just a bit more re an "eye for an eye" and the subject of this thread.

"Eye for an eye" as equality before the law......It was some long gone book I read by a Jewish guy - perhaps a rabbi - that first introduced me to the idea. His point was that the words "eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth" were given by God to the Jewish people within the context of an ancient world dominated by cultures such as the Babylonian and Egyptian. Slavery was commonplace. Should a slave strike a Babylonian citizen the slave could expect death in return...perhaps even the death of his whole family as a retaliation. God is depicted as demanding that such should not be the case in the land he would give to his people........."for you it shall be an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth."

It just seems tragic that now in that very land the inequality between an Israeli and a Palestinian shows the limitations of "almighty" edicts, however understood. Yet also in many other places - think of your own! - the lesson needs learning....(In England, according to statistics, a person from an ethnic minority is far, far more likely to face a custodial sentence than others - for the self-same crime) Obviously it can go beyond courts of law or whatever. I only need reflect upon the prejudices I carry inside myself, great and small, that colour the passing of each day.

Is the Bible a place where we should just look for moral lessons and inspiration?

There is an painting by Rembrandt, "An Old Woman Reading", deeply moving, yet from a bygone age, at least for most....an age when scripture nurtured the entire person - where its guidance was sought throughout life....and not just moral guidance. As William Blake, the English poet and mystic once said......."If moral virtue were Christianity then Socrates was the Saviour"

There seems no need to wait for Bibles to speak. For me "truth" is natural and needs no "revelation", and is open to all with ears to hear and a mind/heart to respond.

Then again, perhaps truth CAN still come from the Good Book, whatever our beliefs, or lack of them......"with all your science, can you tell how light enters the soul?" (Thoreau)

[ December 17, 2002: Message edited by: kalamasutta ]</p>

Stephen T-B

Thank you, kalamasutta for your enlightening post: I’d not thought of the tooth-for-tooth, eye-for-an-eye doctrine in those terms.
Jesus, whether “he” was a real individual or an amalgam of real individuals, is an interesting figure.
The Jewish world, I’ve read, was going through a period of intellectual upheaval at around the time he is said to have lived, with a crowd of self-appointed teachers developing new ideas about the nature of the Jewish God.
In some of “Christ’s” teachings we see, I think, evidence of an extraordinary humanism in head-on collision with a harsh, ancient religion (which survives to this day in conservative Moslem and Jewish communities) based upon an arbitrary, violent, vengeful Semite god.
The revolutionary thinkers in Judaea at around 60BC were beginning to perceive a very different god, whose characteristics have come down to us in the recorded teachings of Christ - and the story of the woman taken in adultery illustrates the enormous divergence which was opening up between them and the Temple.
The Sermon on the Mount, and the notion that god requires us to love each other and to forgive each other, as he loves and forgives us, are breathtakingly novel. They have given us an idea of god which was so ahead of its time that the vast majority of so-called Christians would, even today, rather adhere to an Old Testament-type deity casting souls into hell and demanding Belief and Obedience rather than the qualities of love and forgiveness espoused by Christ.
People who are temperamentally disposed to be kind, generous and gentle will find much in the New Testament to validate their inclinations - the great 19th century philanthropists including Lord Salisbury Elizabeth Fry and Wilberforce attributed their live’s work to the loving inspiration of Christ.
They are not, unfortunately, typical Christians: the fact that, despite much of its revolutionary content, the teachings of Christ are of their time and reflect many contemporary imperatives and assumptions means that they are open to interpretations which also suit people who veer towards the authoritarian, shrivel-minded, self-righteous, condemnatory end of the spectrum of human characteristics.

Pseudonymph

I do not believe that by "turning the other cheek" that it is implied that you are opening yourself to more pain or abuse in every situation. I believe that it can be inferred to turn the other cheek, as in to look away and not continue to antagonize the situation.

I would not of course allow my assailant to harm me again in that way. I do think, however, that the idea of turning the other cheek can be a useful way to check yourself and pick your battles.

If I had a child, I would encourage him to use his words against the bully. Contrary to what many people say, this can and does work.

I fondly recall calling someone who was throwing rocks at me a cocksucking asshat...(keep in mind we were all about 9 or 10 years old) The look on that kids face was priceless and I never got any shit from him again. So it does work if you can truly be assertive. If he is physically picking on him, then I would take that in stride...first kindly letting the school know that if they don't do something about it, I will then give my child free reign to do what he wants about it.

After reading your points, I agree.


Thanks everyone else for your replies...when I have more time I will respond, and look foward to more replies.

lugotorix

If I recall correctly, in the book The Unvarnished Gospels, the translator Andy Gaus translates the original Greek word (don't know it off-hand) as mistake instead of the usual sin. He explains this choice in his notes by saying that the term used meant literally "missing the mark" (as in archery).

WRT the thread topic, from the OT I can't get anything good, except for the occasional quote that contradicts some Christian teaching (like Ecclesiastes 9:5 "For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not any thing, neither have they any more a reward"). The basic theme seems to be blind obedience to a psychotic god.

The NT has some inspired moments, like "Love thy neighbor as thyself", and "Judge not, that ye yourselves shall not be judged". But they're not enough to balance the bad, like Jesus chasing the money-changers out of the temple (seems pretty judgemental, doncha think?) and Paul's misogyny.

lugotorix

Boro Nut

None actually, unless you are small enough to fit inside and are sort of shiney or have a highly reflective surface, I don't think it is possible for a person to gleam from the bible.

If, on the other hand, you mean 'what good can you "glean", as in 'collect' or 'gather' from the bible, in respect of information, knowledge or moral guidance, then in that sense the answer is none.

Boro Nut

You're going to make a complete arse of me now aren't you. I bet you're small and shiney aren't you? You are aren't you?

Pseudonymph

[canadian]Hey fuck you buddy![\canadian]

Well excuuuuse me. Next time I'll be sure to have dictionary.com up and running...lol

-DM-

Yes, but according to every other so-called autoritative source that I have come across, it means missing "God's" mark.

-Don-