Freethought & Rationalism Archive

CX · 01-07-2003, 09:28 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Vinnie
CX, what do you think was Jesus' essential philosophy?

Vinnie

1)Radical egalitarianism to the point of socialism

2)Unbrokered relationship with god

3)Rejection of the Temple Cult system

4)Rejection of traditional social mores

Bobzammel · 01-07-2003, 11:02 AM

Buddha also had some similar attacks against the prevailing religious system.
I find it odd that God would go to all the trouble of setting up the elaborate temple cult, say it's "eternal" and what-not, and then simply wipe it away. While it is stated that God is sometimes displeased with sacrifices in the OT, it is clear that it's the way the sacrifices are being done(without "heart") not that he hates them in the first place. Second, the "New Covenant" would still contain the Law.
As for "Social mores" Jesus seems contradictory on this issue. In one verse he supports the family system--he even criticizes the Pharisees for actually breaking it with some rule they made--and there's also his prohibition against divorce--but then we have all the other "leave or hate your family" stuff.

Radcliffe Emerson · 01-17-2003, 08:01 AM

My reverend friend finally responded back to me with info on his sources about those teachings of Jesus:

The particular source for what I did with "Turn the other cheek," etc.,
is in the works of Walter Wink, minister, social activist, and scholar. I
heard him go through this material at a meeting of The Jesus Seminar,
probably in Spring of '97. I do not know the title of his published work with
this discussion in it.

Toto · 01-17-2003, 10:52 AM

http://www.walterwink.com/

Wink's CV on Westar also his conversion experience which is worth reading.

Can Love Save the World? seems to have the most detailed explanations of his positions:

Quote:

The classical interpretation of Matt 5:38-42//Luke 6:29-30 suggests two, and only two, possibilities for action in the face of evil: fight or flight. Either we resist evil, or we do not resist it. Jesus seemingly says that we are not to resist it; so, it would appear, he commands us to be docile, inert, compliant, to abandon all desire for justice, to allow the oppressor to walk all over us. "Turn the other cheek" is taken to enjoin becoming a doormat for Jesus, to be trampled without protest. "Give your undergarment as well" has encouraged people to go limp in the face of injustice and hand over the last thing they own. "Going the second mile" has been turned into a platitude meaning nothing more than "extend yourself." Rather than encourage the oppressed to counteract their oppressors, these revolutionary statements have been transformed into injunctions to collude in one's own despoiling.
But that interpretation excluded a third alternative: active nonviolent resistance. The word translated "resist" is itself problematic; what translators have failed to note is how frequently anthistemi is used as a military term. Resistance implies "counteractive aggression," a response to hostilities initiated by someone else. . . .

In short, antistenai means more in Matt. 5:39a than simply to "stand against" or "resist." It means to resist violently, to revolt or rebel, to engage in an insurrection. Jesus is not encouraging submission to evil; that would run counter to everything he did and said. He is, rather, warning against responding to evil in kind by letting the oppressor set the terms of our opposition. Perhaps most importantly, he cautions us against being made over into the very evil we oppose by adopting its methods and spirit. He is saying, in effect, Do not mirror evil; do not become the very thing you hate. The best translation is the Scholars Version: "Don't react violently against the one who is evil."

Radcliffe Emerson · 01-17-2003, 11:11 AM

Thank you Toto.

Goliath · 01-17-2003, 03:43 PM

I never found the supposed teachings of Jesus to be that impressive. The genuniely good things that he supposedly had to say (ie the Golden Rule) were around long before he was supposedly born.

But I definitely don't give the title of "Prince of Peace" to someone who:

1. Advocates self-mutilation (specifically the chopping off of hands and the ripping out of eyeballs).

2. Advocates that one should hate themselves and their family if they are to follow Jesus.

3. Comes not to bring peace, but a sword.

4. Throws a temper tantrum that would make most five year old children take pause as he curses a fig tree for not producing figs out of season.

Sincerely,

Goliath

PS I can find bible verses for 1.-4., (or you can find them at http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com ) and there are other things that Jesus allegedly did or said that I find quite unsavory.

beyelzu · 01-18-2003, 09:35 AM

you know,

when i started reading the op i really had high hopes, but then the poster had no proof. and that makes me sad

luvluv · 01-18-2003, 10:00 AM

Golliath says:

Quote:

1. Advocates self-mutilation (specifically the chopping off of hands and the ripping out of eyeballs).

2. Advocates that one should hate themselves and their family if they are to follow Jesus.

3. Comes not to bring peace, but a sword.

I never thought I would ever meet a large body of intellgent people who are totally incapable of processing metaphors.

Then I found II.

Radorth · 01-18-2003, 10:24 AM

Yes Toto. Radcliffe appreciates your doing all his work for him, while he provides absolutely nothing, not even a hint about where you might find something.

Unbelievable.

Rad

Radorth · 01-18-2003, 10:28 AM

Quote:

I never thought I would ever meet a large body of intellgent people who are totally incapable of processing metaphors.

Then I found II.

:notworthy :notworthy

Well they did pretty good on the "Doherty is right" thread, you must admit.

Oh man. That's precious. Toto, look for my style to change immediately.

Rad

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

01-07-2003, 11:02 AM	#32
Bobzammel Regular Member Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Boston Posts: 276	Buddha also had some similar attacks against the prevailing religious system. I find it odd that God would go to all the trouble of setting up the elaborate temple cult, say it's "eternal" and what-not, and then simply wipe it away. While it is stated that God is sometimes displeased with sacrifices in the OT, it is clear that it's the way the sacrifices are being done(without "heart") not that he hates them in the first place. Second, the "New Covenant" would still contain the Law. As for "Social mores" Jesus seems contradictory on this issue. In one verse he supports the family system--he even criticizes the Pharisees for actually breaking it with some rule they made--and there's also his prohibition against divorce--but then we have all the other "leave or hate your family" stuff.

01-17-2003, 08:01 AM	#33
Radcliffe Emerson Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: the dark side of Mars Posts: 1,309	My reverend friend finally responded back to me with info on his sources about those teachings of Jesus: The particular source for what I did with "Turn the other cheek," etc., is in the works of Walter Wink, minister, social activist, and scholar. I heard him go through this material at a meeting of The Jesus Seminar, probably in Spring of '97. I do not know the title of his published work with this discussion in it.

01-17-2003, 11:11 AM	#35
Radcliffe Emerson Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: the dark side of Mars Posts: 1,309	Thank you Toto.

01-17-2003, 03:43 PM	#36
Goliath Banned Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Fargo, ND, USA Posts: 1,849	I never found the supposed teachings of Jesus to be that impressive. The genuniely good things that he supposedly had to say (ie the Golden Rule) were around long before he was supposedly born. But I definitely don't give the title of "Prince of Peace" to someone who: 1. Advocates self-mutilation (specifically the chopping off of hands and the ripping out of eyeballs). 2. Advocates that one should hate themselves and their family if they are to follow Jesus. 3. Comes not to bring peace, but a sword. 4. Throws a temper tantrum that would make most five year old children take pause as he curses a fig tree for not producing figs out of season. Sincerely, Goliath PS I can find bible verses for 1.-4., (or you can find them at http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com ) and there are other things that Jesus allegedly did or said that I find quite unsavory.

01-18-2003, 09:35 AM	#37
beyelzu Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: the peach state ga I am a metaphysical naturalist Posts: 2,869	you know, when i started reading the op i really had high hopes, but then the poster had no proof. and that makes me sad

01-18-2003, 10:24 AM	#39
Radorth Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 1,872	Yes Toto. Radcliffe appreciates your doing all his work for him, while he provides absolutely nothing, not even a hint about where you might find something. Unbelievable. Rad

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.