Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Roland · 06-02-2004, 05:06 PM

In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus tells His audience, "You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for and eye and a tooth for a tooth.' But I tell you not to resist an evil person. But whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also." (Matthew 5: 38-39)

But WHO did Jesus believe TOLD these people that? Wasn't it He, Himself, the 2nd person of the Triune God? Why is He now contradicting Himself and acting as if His previous statement was absurd and false?

In the same way, Jesus says, "I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you..." (Matt. 5: 44).

How do we then square that with Jesus telling the Israelites to brutally massacre every man, woman and child in the Land of Canaan? Is this a case of divine schizophrenia, hypocrisy or just another of many contradictions in the Bible that fundamentalists claim do not exist?

Mageth · 06-02-2004, 05:23 PM

Another option, one few theists will support I'm afraid, is that God, perhaps due to self-reflection on his interactions with humans, changed from the rather vindictive, demanding, petulant warlike character presented in the OT into the somewhat nicer God depicted in the NT (though Revelation makes it seem that the old God will return). God grew up, IOW. Indeed, the Bible, if viewed as a biography of God, shows him changing quite dramatically throughout. See Jack Miles' God: A Biography.

Magdlyn · 06-02-2004, 05:50 PM

Did God change, or just the Jews' perception of "him?"

Newton Joseph · 06-02-2004, 05:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roland

It is not ONLY the triune gods that is schizophrenic but ALL those who believe in that concept
New 10

Toto · 06-02-2004, 06:09 PM

Walter Wink has a different take on these verses:

Quote:

Nevertheless, I agree with Mr. Kelly that pacifism must go. It is endlessly confused with passivity. In the nations in which Christianity has predominated, Jesus’ teaching on nonviolence has been perverted into injunctions to passive nonresistance, which, as we shall see, is the very opposite of active nonviolence. Jesus had said, “You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’ But I say to you, do not resist an evildoer. But if anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also; and if anyone wants to sue you and take your outer garment, give your undergarment as well; and if one of the occupation troops forces you to carry his pack one mile, go two�? (Matthew 5:38-41). As it stands, this saying seems to counsel supine surrender. If you are a woman and you are struck by your spouse on one cheek, turn the other; let him pulverize you. If you are sued for a piece of clothing, give all your clothes voluntarily, as an act of pious renunciation. And if a Roman soldier forces you to carry his pack one mile, be a chump: carry it two. And the crowning blow: don’t resist evil at all.

For centuries, readers of this advice have instinctively known something was wrong with this picture. Jesus always resisted evil. Why would he tell us to behave in ways he himself refused? And that’s where the trouble starts. The Greek word translated as “resist�? (antistenai), is literally “to stand (stenai) against (anti).�? The term is taken from warfare. When two armies collide, they were said to “stand against�? each other. The correct translation is given in the new Scholars Bible: “Don’t react violently against the one who is evil.�? The meaning is clear: don’t react in kind, don’t mirror your enemy, don’t turn into the very thing you hate. Jesus is not telling us not to resist evil, but only not to resist it violently.

Jesus gives three examples to explain his point. The first is: “If anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also.�? Most people picture a blow with the right fist. But that would land on the left cheek, and Jesus specifies the right cheek. A left hook wouldn’t fit the bill either, since the left hand was used only for unclean tasks, and even to gesture with it brought shame on the one gesturing. Jesus is speaking about striking the right cheek with the back of the right hand. This was not a blow to injure. It was symbolic. It was intended to humiliate, to put an inferior in his or her place. It was given by a master to a slave, a husband to a wife, a parent to a child, or a Roman to a Jew. The message of the powerful to their subjects was clear: You are a nobody, get back down where you belong.

It is to those accustomed to being struck thus that Jesus speaks (“if anyone strikes you�?). By turning the other cheek, the person struck puts the striker in an untenable spot. He cannot repeat the backhand, because the other’s nose is now in the way. The left cheek makes a fine target, but only persons who are equals fight with fists, and the last thing the master wants is for the slave to assert equality (see the Mishnah, Baba Kamma 8:6). This is, of course, no way to avoid trouble; the master might have the slave flogged to within an inch of her life. But the point has been irrevocably made: the “inferior�? is saying, in no uncertain terms, “I won’t take such treatment anymore. I am your equal. I am a child of God.�? By turning the other cheek, the oppressed person is saying that she refuses to submit to further humiliation. This is not submission, as the churches have insisted. It is defiance. That may sound a bit idealistic, but people all over the globe of late have been taking their courage in their hands this way and resisting, nonviolently, those who have treated them thus.

Toto · 06-02-2004, 06:11 PM

Let us not insult the mentally ill. "Schizophrenia" is a medical category with defined symptons. It should not be used as a general term for things that do not make sense.

dado · 06-02-2004, 06:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Newton Joseph

It is not ONLY the triune gods that is schizophrenic but ALL those who believe in that concept
New 10

how do posts like this aid in discourse?

Toto · 06-02-2004, 06:36 PM

[mod hat on]

Please keep your comments focussed on Biblical Criticism. If another poster's comments do not aid in the discourse, the most effective technique is to ignore them or report them.

Magus55 · 06-02-2004, 07:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Newton Joseph

It is not ONLY the triune gods that is schizophrenic but ALL those who believe in that concept
New 10

Don't think that falls under the DSM IV.

Magus55 · 06-02-2004, 07:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Let us not insult the mentally ill. "Schizophrenia" is a medical category with defined symptons. It should not be used as a general term for things that do not make sense.

The irony is... He's a psychologist supposedly..

06-02-2004, 05:06 PM	#1
Roland Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: California Posts: 748	Is the Triune God Schizophrenic? In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus tells His audience, "You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for and eye and a tooth for a tooth.' But I tell you not to resist an evil person. But whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also." (Matthew 5: 38-39) But WHO did Jesus believe TOLD these people that? Wasn't it He, Himself, the 2nd person of the Triune God? Why is He now contradicting Himself and acting as if His previous statement was absurd and false? In the same way, Jesus says, "I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you..." (Matt. 5: 44). How do we then square that with Jesus telling the Israelites to brutally massacre every man, woman and child in the Land of Canaan? Is this a case of divine schizophrenia, hypocrisy or just another of many contradictions in the Bible that fundamentalists claim do not exist?

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

06-02-2004, 05:23 PM	#2
Mageth Contributor Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas Posts: 29,689	Another option, one few theists will support I'm afraid, is that God, perhaps due to self-reflection on his interactions with humans, changed from the rather vindictive, demanding, petulant warlike character presented in the OT into the somewhat nicer God depicted in the NT (though Revelation makes it seem that the old God will return). God grew up, IOW. Indeed, the Bible, if viewed as a biography of God, shows him changing quite dramatically throughout. See Jack Miles' God: A Biography.

06-02-2004, 05:50 PM	#3
Magdlyn Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Massachusetts Posts: 2,230	Did God change, or just the Jews' perception of "him?"

06-02-2004, 06:11 PM	#6
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	Let us not insult the mentally ill. "Schizophrenia" is a medical category with defined symptons. It should not be used as a general term for things that do not make sense.

06-02-2004, 06:36 PM	#8
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	[mod hat on] Please keep your comments focussed on Biblical Criticism. If another poster's comments do not aid in the discourse, the most effective technique is to ignore them or report them.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.