Freethought & Rationalism Archive

GakuseiDon · 06-05-2006, 02:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mindovermyth

(Text highlighted by MoM)

If christians makes such a wild interpretation of a very clear text, what can one do, but to ask them to take a reading course.

The context again: Rom 12:19 Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God; for it is written, "Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord." 20 No, "if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him drink; for by so doing you will heap burning coals upon his head.

How can this be misunderstood??

This comes from Proverbs 25:21,22. Did people believe that the afterlife included burning coals at the time Proverbs were written? I thought that they didn't -- that they believed that "Sheol" was a place where the dead went to rest? If so, then it may well have been considered an expression referring to guilt.

mindovermyth · 06-05-2006, 09:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GakuseiDon

This comes from Proverbs 25:21,22. Did people believe that the afterlife included burning coals at the time Proverbs were written? I thought that they didn't -- that they believed that "Sheol" was a place where the dead went to rest? If so, then it may well have been considered an expression referring to guilt.

Rom: 12 is supposedly written by Paul. Do you mean that Paul held this belief when he wrote this because he is quoting an earlier saying? Paul did not believe in hell? That is at least good news.

GakuseiDon · 06-06-2006, 03:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mindovermyth

Rom: 12 is supposedly written by Paul. Do you mean that Paul held this belief when he wrote this because he is quoting an earlier saying? Paul did not believe in hell? That is at least good news.

:huh: I don't think it has anything to do with Hell, so we can't tell what Paul thought about Hell from that passage.

mindovermyth · 06-06-2006, 08:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GakuseiDon

:huh: I don't think it has anything to do with Hell, so we can't tell what Paul thought about Hell from that passage.

Now I am getting confused.

I am not confused about what I think Paul means with:

Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God; for it is written, "Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord." 20 No, "if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him drink; for by so doing you will heap burning coals upon his head.

I can not read this in any other way than that Paul says that god will take care of the revenge, so you can indulge your enemy...because he/she will be worse off for it.

Please tell me what you think Paul meant here, and why.

Gamera · 06-06-2006, 01:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mindovermyth

Now I am getting confused.

I am not confused about what I think Paul means with:

Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God; for it is written, "Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord." 20 No, "if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him drink; for by so doing you will heap burning coals upon his head.

I can not read this in any other way than that Paul says that god will take care of the revenge, so you can indulge your enemy...because he/she will be worse off for it.

Please tell me what you think Paul meant here, and why.

You left off the end.

"14 Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse them. 15 Rejoice with those who rejoice, weep with those who weep. 16 Live in harmony with one another; do not be haughty, but associate with the lowly; never be conceited. 17 Repay no one evil for evil, but take thought for what is noble in the sight of all. 18 If possible, so far as it depends upon you, live peaceably with all. 19 Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God; for it is written, "Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord." 20 No, "if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him drink; for by so doing you will heap burning coals upon his head." 21 Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good."

Evil is overcome with good because by blessing one's enemy, the enemy is confronted with the wrongness of his own actions. His conscience is put into play, and he may change.

That's what the burning coal's refer to -- conscience.

He may not change. He may continue to follow a path of hostility. And if he does, then "God will punish him," which is just another way of saying he will remain estranged from God and the loving person God intends all of us to be.

In any case, it is rather odd to take a passage where Paul says to bless one's enemies and treat them kindly, and take that as an attack by Paul.

Gamera · 06-06-2006, 01:45 PM

[QUOTE=mountainman]

Quote:

Two questions:
1) Are you a psychologist, psychiatrist or a layman of such?
2) How do you associate this word "evil" with this word "love"?

One answer: irrelevant.

Quote:

There are no conditions to unconditional love, and emotional
conditions are not preserved in texts, only in the emotional
conditions of the observers of said texts.

Where are you coming from dude?
See the map below, and tell me clearly.

You seem profoundly confused. Jesus tells his disciples to love each other. That's a requirement. Jesus "new commandment" as he calls it. Yet it is not only new but sui generis, since it's not an act but a condition, an emotion.

Focus on the text.

Jn:13:34: A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.

Jn:13:35: By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.

Gamera · 06-06-2006, 01:50 PM

[QUOTE=RED DAVE]From RED DAVE:

Quote:

From Gemara:
I think you just ducked my point. If you are constrained by JC to love your enemies, what explains your own hostility and sarcasm? Or is that what you call love?

What explains yours.

Quote:

From Gemara:
Some people need to study sociology. Monogamy far preceded xtianity.

Yeah, like you. Monogamy didn't exist as a moral requirement until Christianity. Multiple wives were the norm for anybody with enough money to buy them (and people did buy them in those days)

Quote:

From Gemara:
You need to study your own history: from the Crusades to the nazis: xtians all.

Please focus on the texts, which is the issue, not your view of history.

Quote:

And let's not forget the world's most famous xtian: George Bush. 40,000+ Iraqis have been the recipients of his xtian love.

You seem incoherent now.

Quote:

You just let the cat out of the bag. You "love one another" (sometimes) and have murderous contempt for others.

Yeah, and what of it.

Quote:

From RED DAVE:
I mean that a gaze is as good as a fuck. And, by the way, if you think that you're going to get away with "We xtians brought morality into a pagan world," please to recall that I'm a Jew. We hold our morality, whether religious or secular, to be as good as yours. The Inquisition and the Crusades were your idea, not ours.

Try to focus on the issues instead of yourself and your poor understanding of history.

noah · 06-06-2006, 01:52 PM

[QUOTE=Gamera]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

Focus on the text.

Jn:13:34: A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.

There's JC at it again violating those eternal and perfect laws:

Deuteronomy 4:2

Quote:

Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish [ought] from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your G-d which I command you. (KJV)

Deuteronomy 12:32

Quote:

What thing soever I command you, observe to do it: thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it. (KJV)

BTW loving one another is not a new commandment. It's one of the 613 of those pesky laws Christians like to think they don't have to obey.

mountainman · 06-06-2006, 02:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gamera

Focus on the text.

"The Essenes enjoined the loving of enemies." (Philo.)

Pete Brown

Gamera · 06-06-2006, 02:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

"The Essenes enjoined the loving of enemies." (Philo.)

Pete Brown

You need to provide the actual quote and source, not a uncited quote from a webpage.

I would further note that the Essenes and Philo were contemporaries of Jesus, and so the teaching may have been gotten from Jesus.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.