Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Anat · 07-08-2009, 01:34 PM

Quote:

This was because Hillel found ways of excusing people from what Jesus believed God's law required.

Is this a reference to the pruzbul? Going around the Law because the Law was having negative effects was a good thing. Orthodox Jews believe God is happy when they argue against his laws successfully.

xaxxat · 07-08-2009, 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Quote:

Originally Posted by xaxxat

I've heard it mentioned that the total sayings of Jesus would barely fill 2 or 3 pages. Is this a correct assessment? Doesn't that seem like a really low total considering the length of his ministry and his love of lecturing?

Passing on third hand information like this can create problems. I suspect that the origin of this claim is the conclusion by the Jesus Seminar that only 18% of the words attributed to Jesus are authentic to Jesus.

We only know about what Jesus is alleged to have said, or the (short) length of his ministry, or his love of lecturing, from the gospels, which are not reliable sources of information in any case.

Does this mean that Jesus didn't say a lot, or that what he said was not memorable and most of it is lost to history? Or that the gospel writers did not construct a coherent narrative?

I was thinking along the lines that he wasn't concerned about anyone keeping a record of his sayings because he thought everything was going to end soon anyway...

andrewcriddle · 07-08-2009, 02:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anat

There is a tale where 2 guys have a bet where they dare one another to try to anger Hillel, so they come and very rudely ask him silly questions while he is in the midst of Shabbat preparations. He sits with them and answers very patiently, even giving up on washing his hair. While I doubt Hillel believed in turning the other cheek as a general rule, the character in this story had the temper and self-control for it if he wanted to.

It is IMO doubtful whether this material has any basis in the life of the historical Hillel.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anat

Another of Hillel's famous sayings: "If I am not for myself, who is for me? And if I am only for myself, what am I? And if not now, when?" - this one works nicely in a secular humanist context.

This saying is probably genuinely by Hillel.

Andrew Criddle

Petergdi · 07-08-2009, 02:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anat

Quote:

This was because Hillel found ways of excusing people from what Jesus believed God's law required.

Is this a reference to the pruzbul?

That's a big part. What Jesus understood the Law to require was that you must lend freely and not require repayment.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anat

Going around the Law because the Law was having negative effects was a good thing. Orthodox Jews believe God is happy when they argue against his laws successfully.

The problem was that people weren't lending when the date for the annullment of debts came near. Hillel's solution is realistic, but it does end up meaning that the debts are not cancelled and people can still tell themselves that they are obeying God's Law. This is almost certainly part of what Jesus's criticism of "play-acting" meant.

Peter.

Tristan Scott · 07-08-2009, 03:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Petergdi

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tristan Scott

Hillel didn't originate the idea of the Golden Rule, I believe that was originated in the Tobit. Here is a source for Hillel's quote.

Um, you claimed that Hillel taught about turning the other cheek.

Peter.

Your right, my bad-senior moment

-I meant Golden Rool.

Anat · 07-08-2009, 04:02 PM

Quote:

The problem was that people weren't lending when the date for the annullment of debts came near. Hillel's solution is realistic, but it does end up meaning that the debts are not cancelled and people can still tell themselves that they are obeying God's Law. This is almost certainly part of what Jesus's criticism of "play-acting" meant.

Naturally as a secular person I am not impressed with this criticism. I'd take pragmatic play-actors any day, if their solutions bring about good outcomes.

mountainman · 07-08-2009, 05:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Petergdi

What Jesus understood the Law to require was that you must lend freely and not require repayment.

The authors of the NT cast Jesus as a PR front-man
for the importance of the imperial taxation policies.

Step (1): Pay tax to Caesar.
Step (2): God is in second place.

Tristan Scott · 07-08-2009, 08:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

Quote:

Originally Posted by Petergdi

What Jesus understood the Law to require was that you must lend freely and not require repayment.

The authors of the NT cast Jesus as a PR front-man
for the importance of the imperial taxation policies.

Step (1): Pay tax to Caesar.
Step (2): God is in second place.

Well Ya!

That just shows that we have our priorities in order.

arnoldo · 07-08-2009, 09:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xaxxat

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Passing on third hand information like this can create problems. I suspect that the origin of this claim is the conclusion by the Jesus Seminar that only 18% of the words attributed to Jesus are authentic to Jesus.

We only know about what Jesus is alleged to have said, or the (short) length of his ministry, or his love of lecturing, from the gospels, which are not reliable sources of information in any case.

Does this mean that Jesus didn't say a lot, or that what he said was not memorable and most of it is lost to history? Or that the gospel writers did not construct a coherent narrative?

I was thinking along the lines that he wasn't concerned about anyone keeping a record of his sayings because he thought everything was going to end soon anyway...

Nah, his disciples were too busy to sit around and write every single detail as per John 21:24-25

xaxxat · 07-09-2009, 06:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

Quote:

Originally Posted by xaxxat

I was thinking along the lines that he wasn't concerned about anyone keeping a record of his sayings because he thought everything was going to end soon anyway...

Nah, his disciples were too busy to sit around and write every single detail as per John 21:24-25

Kind of hard to record the details 100 years after they happened, huh?

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

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.