*First I must mention that this does not delve into the Divine Command theory of ethics (except for one instance), Jesus' historicity, redactions, mis-transliterations, virtue ethics, Utilitarianism, authorship and dating of the Gospels and I do not refer to the misnomer of the Hebrew Bible, known by Christians as the Old Testament (I find it an insult to Jews and I am not even Jewish)*
INTRODUCTION
I thought it might be best to start a new thread instead of wading through 8 pages to get to the next installment. In the parent thread,
http://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/index.php?topic=8288.0
I asserted that Christianity is immoral by listing certain precepts (amongst other things) of that religion. Here, I would compare the Ten Commandments to the Sermon on the Mount, one sermon that Christians see as paradisiacal, the sermon some would call the Jesus Manifesto. Of course, there will be a great deal of commentary.
*Edited to add 23 Oct 2011: The comparison to the 10C's was lacking. Tremendously lacking. As I went through the Sermon, it became clear that there really is no comparison to the 10C's, although there are some allusions to it.
I have never made use of a thesaurus like I did in this...*chucklin*
Most Christians have a glowingly loving image of Jesus and will often refer to and defer to his alleged highly ethical standards and morality. Even nominal Christians and many non-Christians have considered Jesus to be one of history's great "moral teachers". Is this image of Jesus' accurate? Does he stand up under scrutiny? I intend to explore that issue and hope to shed some light on a matter in a depth never discussed when I was at church. If I cannot shed light, I at least hope to raise more questions than Jesus himself would have a difficult time in answering.
One may find it odd that the more fundamental sort of Christian makes a big issue out of the usual set of Ten Commandments and not the Sermon on the Mount, despite their professed adoration of it. I would suppose the lack of intense adorability and devotion over the SotM is not quite the same because the Sermon's diktats are not featured on, inside of or in front of government buildings. At any rate, fundamental Christians claim they worship Christ, yet they ignore that collection of his teachings. It is equally odd that liberal Christians seem to ignore the Sermon on the Mount altogether.
The Divine Command ethics in the Hebrew Bible generally do not explain their reasoning in any other way than that God commands them. The utility of some commandments can be surmised; others conjectured. Many seem to be embedded in ancient cultural or cult-like connections. Most modern readers would ordinarily regard as unethical and immoral many of God's commands, such as the numerous examples of commanding the slaughter of whole peoples. Furthermore, the ethical injunctions are not laid out in a systematic form; murder may be discussed in one section, while the next may deal with a different topic. God's ethics and morality are the way of life for his chosen people on Earth while, in contrast, the ethics of Jesus' chosen people is one of salvation for the afterlife, for the end is near and the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand.
Ironically, the New Testament's instructions are viewed by most Christians as a manual for living life - for the afterlife, as a "true Christian". The key element of Christian theology (all of which is based on faith) is that the Bible is divinely inspired or, to some, the literal word of God. These Christians claim the Bible as divine and authoritative and that the themes present in the book transcend wisdom and intelligence. Some specifically claim the SotM as an obvious example of the divine nature of Jesus, asserting that one need only read the sermon to see that these are indeed the words of God.
I came away with an entirely different view.
The story builds up in chapter 4 of Matthew with Jesus' three temptations in the desert. Afterwards, he departs the desert and hears that a certain John was put in prison. Jesus then makes his way to Capernaum where, "The people which sat in darkness saw great light; and to them which sat in the region and shadow of death light is sprung up."; alluding to a prophecy of Esaias (Isaiah).
*Esaias is thought by Christians to be the star cast member of the Book of Isaiah from the Hebrew Bible, who prophesied the virgin birth of Jesus: (Isaiah 7:14, KJV): "Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a Son, and shall call His name Immanuel." This has been thoroughly debunked.
The sermon is in chapters 5-7. It parallels Luke's Sermon on the Plain (Luke 6:17-49) as well as a few parallels and some passages from Mark and the Gospel of Thomas. The sermon begins with the Beatitudes: A number of claims that list conditions which are irritating and/or distressful in this life
- Will be rewarded in the life to come,
- Allegedly gives insight into Jesus' views on Jewish law and,
- Gives instructions on prayer along with general instructions on how to live.
While some of the passages have been or are still considered wise advice by readers of varying beliefs, the sermon has many passages which contradict the claim that Jesus was wise beyond mortal men (Matthew 5:16 vs. 6:1, Matthew 6:7 vs. 6:8-13, Matthew 7:20 vs. 7:21 23). The sermon contains several passages that would qualify as bad advice. Some sections switch justification for the advice in the middle: Matthew 6:25-26 vs. Matthew 6:31-33. And it projects philosophical positions not exhibitive of a wise and transcendent being.
Other than bad advice, it has no underlying theme and is a goulash of botched wisdom. On the whole, the sermon is as coherent as reading all the postulations of Nostradamus's quatrains. As a whole, the SotM is a godawful sermon.
Ten CommandmentsExodus 20 & Deut 5:
1. Do not worship any gods in preference to Me
2. Do not worship any idol
3. Do not take God's name in vain
4. Do not work on the Sabbath
5. Honor your father and mother
6. Do not kill
7. Do not commit adultery
8. Do not steal
9. Do not make false accusations
10. Do not covet anything of those that believe the same God as you.
Ten CommandmentsExodus 34:
1. Worship no other god, because I am a jealous god
2. Do not make cast idols
3. Celebrate the Feast of Unleavened Bread
4. All your firstborn are Mine
5. Do not work on the Sabbath
6. Celebrate the Feast of Weeks and the Feast of Ingathering
7. Do not offer sacrifice blood with leavened bread
8. Do not let any of your sacrifices remain until next morning
9. Bring the first fruits of your land to My house
10. Do not boil a baby goat in its mother's milk
Summary of the Sermon on the Mount:Blessed are those that:
• Are poor in spirit
• Mourn
• Meek
• Hungry and thirsty for righteousness
• Merciful
• Pure in heart
• Peacemakers
• Persecuted for righteousness sake
• Reviled and persecuted for Jesus's sake
1. Do not hide your true self or your works
2. Follow the Laws of Moses by exceeding the Pharisees
3. Do not get angry with those that are "brothers" in Christ; agree with your adversary
4. Do not call people insulting names
5. Do not look at a woman with lust; that is adultery
6. Remove parts of your body that make you commit sins
7. Divorce makes you guilty of adultery, except if done by the woman's unfaithfulness
8. Do not swear oaths by anything; just say "Yes" or "No"
9. Do not resist the evil of others
10. Let your enemies continue to attack and exploit you
11. Love, bless and pray for those that hate you
12. If you're being sued, give them what they ask
13. If you are asked to do something, do twice as much
14. Give to those that ask of you
15. Let anyone that asks borrow from you
16. Be perfect
17. Do not be seen giving alms; be covert about it
18. Do not advertise your piety to others in an effort to seem virtuous
19. Use simple, straightforward language in your devotions, and not impressive-sounding repetitious nonsense
20. Pray a certain prayer
21. Forgive other peoples trespasses against you
22. Do not be sad when you fast; put oil on your head and wash your face
23. Accumulate heavenly treasures, like piety and virtue, and not earthly ones, because the latter are vulnerable and can easily be lost or destroyed
24. Do not try to serve both God and money; you cannot serve two masters at the same time
25. Do not concern yourself with your life, because God will do it just as he takes care of the birds and the wildflowers
26. Do not think for it will not add to your stature
27. Do not wear clothes unless God gives them to you
28. Do not judge others so you are not judged by them
29. Do not complain about a speck in someone else's eye when you have a log in your own eye
30. Do not give anything holy to anyone unworthy (referred to as pigs and dogs); it is like throwing pearls to pigs
31. Ask God and you will receive exactly what you asked for; search, and you will find; knock, and the door will be opened to you
32. Do to others what you would want them to do to you
33. Even when it is awkward and troublesome for you to be virtuous, be virtuous
34. Watch out for false prophets, who are like wolves in sheep's clothing; you can recognize them by their actions
35. Do not expect to make it into the Godly Hall of Fame (Kingdom of Heaven) by bragging about what good things you have done
36. Anyone that does not do the above items is foolish
37. Anyone that does do all the above items is wise
38. The above items come from authority of God
...more to come...
It must be said that the Sermon on the Mount produces numerous opportunities for the Way-of-the-Master ethical conundrum of "Do as I say, not as I do" and opportunities for excessive guilt tripping. A Christian might ask himself when he reads the Sermon:
"Have you ever ..."
... hated your enemies?
... fought back when attacked?
... called anyone insulting names?
... accused others of your faults?
... shown a lot of concern for your future?
... tried to accumulate wealth?
... tried to impress others with how pious you are?
... shown a fondness for King James English? *bad joke*
... expected to make it into Heaven by bragging about how good you are?
Etc.
Etc.
Etc.
How s/he reconciles this willingness to reject Jesus's teachings in the SotM and still be a good Christian is beyond my understanding.
As far as the Law is concerned, "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them."
They cite Jesus as saying that he comes to "fulfill" the Laws as meaning they do not need to follow them anymore. That's tantamount to saying "It's okay for us to jaywalk, officer. Our friend over there is using the crosswalk on our behalf so we don't have to." It is the same as having it both ways, recognizing the authority of the law while exempting oneself from having to follow it.
*Edited to add: Those of you who would like to read a good hashing of the Law (the fulfilling thereof) start here:
http://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/index.php?topic=8055.0
Now, the meat...
Biblical criticism raises objections from believers and unbelievers alike because there are too many possible interpretations of too many ambiguities, too many nuances, shadows, implications, allusions and subtleties. I have no choice at this time but to present orthodox views and common understandings (with and mostly) by direct literal observations that best reflect the text and that includes context. The King James Version (despite its flaws) is used because it is this version most used where I live.
Here, I start with...
The Beatitudes
Matthew 5:1-12 – Beginning with 1-4:
And seeing the multitudes, he went up into a mountain: and when he was set, his disciples came unto him:
And he opened his mouth, and taught them,saying,
Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
Blessed are they that mourn: for they shall be comforted.
Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth.
Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled.
The first four beatitudes are also found in Luke 5: 20. Luke's version of the first beatitude is changed to "poor" only. Luke includes two other verses that are not in Matthew. Luke 6:24-25: But woe unto you that are rich! for ye have received your consolation. Woe unto you that are full! for ye shall hunger. Woe unto you that laugh now! for ye shall mourn and weep.
The two verses from Luke put in a different twist as they stress poverty as a virtue and wealth (not simply seeking wealth) as a vice. Regardless the first four (or six) verses deliver traits and conditions that the opposite views of them are undesirable. In essence, Jesus is saying, 'Do not despair or become hopeless or disheartened. No matter how horrid this life is, the next one will be better.' However, the statements are simply assertions without justification serving to pacify the downtrodden, women and slaves; basically, those who are oppressed. A minor case could be made in the defense of those being occupied from an outside state, however, the Jews were allowed to govern themselves for the most part.
Although I stressed there is no theme to Jesus's morality or ethics, the verses do set common motives throughout, and these belie the very mundane nature of Jesus. Instead of offering useful advice how to live the one life we should be certain about, we are told to slough off this life because it is meaningless and focus instead on an unknown and unsubstantiated life to come. Is there no other reason, no worthy reason not to live this life to the fullest even if there IS an afterlife? It would seem to me that any divine and benevolent being which possessed the wisdom and compassion as attributes in its profile should realize this. We should expect much deeper insight into the human condition (after all, Jesus was human) and guided how to improve our life in addition to promises of an afterlife...but instead we get laconic dismissals of this life.
Beatitudes 5, 6 and 7
Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy.
Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God.
Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God.
These three, in contrast to the first negative four are positive traits for instruction in how to live. They are the 'carrot' to the 'stick'. Being merciful, pure and a peacekeeper is a good thing and a reward unto itself. The 'stick' part of this is the inferred "You are not going to Heaven if you do not do these things" and we should expect much more from a wise and benevolent God. One of the contradictions I found comes later in Matthew 10:33: "But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven." This is hardly merciful.
Beatitudes 8 and 9
Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness' sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake.
Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.
Secondary motives: expect persecution and martyrdom. Verily, believers are to rejoice in persecution and martyrdom. There is also an implied armour factor around these beliefs as well. This armour enables believers to compartmentalize their beliefs, keeping them safe from criticism and at the same time ensure their place in Heaven by keeping the beliefs through real or perceived criticism. It's like saying, "You can't critisise me or my beliefs and even if you do, I'm still going to Heaven". It's a bunch of woowoo and hardly wise, good, moral or ethical. It stimulates division; it sets apart from those that believe and those that do not and discourages any cooperation with unbelievers. It provides no incentive for the Christian to seek out cooperation with non-believers. A believer must expect to be rejected or shunned and persecuted and any perceived persecution can only serve to reinforce the belief. It is a rather twisted moral code. Let's us rejoice!
The 4 woes of Luke 6:24-26:
Woe unto you:
• that are rich! for ye have received your consolation.
• that are full now! for ye shall hunger.
• that laugh now! for ye shall mourn and weep.
• when all men shall speak well of you! for in the same manner did their fathers to the false prophets.
Remember that your reward is in Heaven. In Heaven, if you are poor you become rich, if your belly is screaming for food now, you'll have it full in Heaven. If you mourn and weep for your condition now, in Heaven you will laugh and be happy. And by God, don't let anyone speak well of you here on Earth.
So ends the Beatitude portion of the Sermon on the Mount. The conditions described in Matthew's and Luke's Beatitudes are a disgusting morality. They are commandments from a benevolent God *heavy sarcasm* that when followed will gain your salvation and entrance into the Kingdom of God that lies right around that corner. It is not a morality or code of ethics I would subscribe to. It is, however, and unfortunately for Christians, a morality or code of ethics that will keep the vast majority of them out of Heaven...the same Christians who proclaim the United States a Christian nation, built on Christian values. Apparently, just not the values listed above.
Next up is the appalling metaphor/analogy of...*drum roll please*
Salt and Light
Matthew 5:13: Ye are the salt of the earth: but if salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be salted? it is thenceforth good for nothing, but to be cast out, and to be trodden under foot of men.
This statement is meaningless with the exception to those that are superstitious and/or ignorant. Salt does not lose its flavour. What Jesus says is the same as saying "You are water. If the water loses its wetness, how can it be made wet again?" It is no different when Jesus tells us to be 'born again'. It is extremely capricious to assume a wise, divine being made such an awful analogy. Mark 4:31 is a similar horrible analogy. One of three things is obvious; either...
1) The speaker and his audience lack knowledge of salt (and mustard seeds), or
2) The speaker is intentionally dishonest.
3) Whoever wrote this passage deems it necessary to say that those that do not believe are to be cast out and walked over. This does not sound very mericiful, meek or the actions of a persecuted person or martyr.
But the worst of it is, Jesus is saying that not to have him and/or god in their lives makes them worthless. I am beside myself with anger which makes me at a loss for words. Therefore, I will continue on with the light show...
Matthew 14-16: Ye are the light of the world. A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid. Neither do men light a candle, and put it under a bushel, but on a candlestick; and it giveth light unto all that are in the house. Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven.
Jesus is advising believers to do their good works so that everyone may see them - and will contradict himself in Matthew 6. Go figure.
The Dread Law
Those of you that have followed my rantings and wailing's, visualizing my gnashing of teeth know how I feel about this matter. The morality and ethics of Mosaic Law deserves its own chapter, thread...even a book. Here is the short version...
Matthew 5:17-20 is the "fulfill, jot and tittle" conundrum that Christians love to apologise for. Basically, Jewish (Mosaic) Law will not be changed until heaven and earth disappear and anyone who breaks any commandment and teaches others to do the same will be called least in heaven. This is significant.
1) It does not say that breaking the Law will send one to Hell.
2) What it does say is one who breaks the Law will be "least in Heaven"
2b)This flies in the face of doctrine regarding sin and hell. Jesus does however talk about avoiding hell in this very same sermon. Because he does so, it installs a mistaken inference - the belief to be in danger of hell - based on certain actions pertaining to the Law. It is a doctrinal contradiction – there is no resolution.
4) Jesus breaks several commandments (John 8:1-11, Mark 7:18-19 and John 2:4) and teaches others to do the same (Mark 2:27).
"Ahhh..." say the Apologist, as if they have a trump card to play, "Jesus is God and he can do whatever he wishes." (Well, the ethics of that statement and what it implies knows no bounds)
"BUT", says I, "your apology does not correct the contradiction!"
This is not a simple Master/grasshopper "Do as I say, not as I do" outline. It is an unequivocal contradiction. Jesus said he did not come to change the law and that no one should be teaching people to break it...and then he teaches people to break it...and THAT...represents a change in the law! What he actually does is expand the Law and that constitutes an alteration of it.
Can you see Jesus as the least in Heaven? The smallest...the least...in Heaven? Ironic, is it not?
I feel so alone....
Quote from: Gawen on October 07, 2011, 09:58:57 PM
I feel so alone....
It's that lipstick you're wearing, it startles me.
Quote from: Gawen on October 07, 2011, 09:58:57 PM
I feel so alone....
How do you think we feel? A bit like a survivor from Hiroshima sitting among the debris!
Quote from: Tank on October 08, 2011, 10:18:58 AM
Quote from: Gawen on October 07, 2011, 09:58:57 PM
I feel so alone....
How do you think we feel? A bit like a survivor from Hiroshima sitting among the debris!
Aw jeeez, Tank....and I'm only half way through. But I'll give you a tip....don't relocate to Nagasaki....*winkin*
The Thought Crimes BeginethMatthew 5:21-22:
Ye have heard that it was said of them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment: But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire. Thought crime is the concept that a person's thoughts can be illegal or immoral. George Orwell is thought to be the originator of the term, but it goes much farther back than 1949. The Abrahamic religions give fine examples of thought crimes:
- Do not lust (which is the same as covet, I reckon)
- Thinking of breaking a commandment
- Hatred is considered by some as a sin against thou shall not kill.
Jesus continues the thought crime concept of the Hebrew Bible by claiming that certain speech and thought is equivalent to murder and deserving the death penalty. However, we all know that line of thought is morally corrupt. Jesus may or may not have literally meant to put to death people guilty of thought crime, but this is a horrid and unsophisticated view, that represents a morality that constitutes a doctrine where those thought crimes should result in eternal torture. Heil! Big Brother!
The next time you see a Christian hating on someone, revisit unto them the death penalty was prescribed for thought crime as well as for murder, working on the Sabbath, being an unruly child and not believing in Jesus. The worst is that the punishment (eternal torture) does not fit the crime.
Notice - "thou fool" - Jesus states that whoever says that is in danger of "hell fire". Well, Jesus refers to people as fools on several occasions (Matthew 23:17, Matthew 23:19, Luke 11:40, Luke 24:25). Jesus is fond of the "Do as I say, not as I do" ethic.
This type of morality represents a wise and benevolent deity?
Reconciliation between Believers Matthew 5:23-24:
Therefore if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath ought against thee; Leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift. It is fair advice.
However,
as it stands, it stimulates believers to reconcile
ONLY with other believers. Surely a divine being who supposedly claims he loves all people would go the extra mile and extend it to everyone...anyone. This bit here only provides another forced division between peoples of differing belief systems...an "us and (or vs.) them" mentality.
LawsuitsMatthew 5:25-26:
Agree with thine adversary quickly, whiles thou art in the way with him; lest at any time the adversary deliver thee to the judge, and the judge deliver thee to the officer, and thou be cast into prison. Verily I say unto thee, Thou shalt by no means come out thence, till thou hast paid the uttermost farthing. Somewhat of a contradiction can be made between this and the reconciliation bit above. This differs from the above in that the reconciliation is between brothers and this lawsuit one does not specify - therefore it does apply to anyone and not just a brother (believer) of the Lord? The ambiguity of this is borderless: Does it mean to say 'blood brothers'? Brothers as in all
men? Brothers of a town/city/region/nation/state?
What it is saying to settle out of court; to deny your right to fight for your rights. On the other hand, Jesus infers you can start frivolous lawsuits as well. If Christians actually adhered to this, they would have been sued into extinction.
Adultery
(Matt. 5: 27-28 is set up in two parts)
Part one
Matthew 5:27-28: Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.
Jesus expands on the thought crime bullshit. And notice there is no distinction, no implication between married men and unmarried men looking at a woman lustfully. The Jewish age of accountability for boys was 13 plus one day (girls at 12 plus one day), so this would mean unmarried boys from the age of thirteen, with raging hormones, go to hell for "lusting" after a girl who is twelve years old plus one day or older.
Literally, though, ANY man that looks with lust at ANY woman is in danger of Hell fire. This is another one of those "Deny yourself" expunges of your humanity. Lust is a human trait that God made for us, right? Now he's saying don't do it. It's the same as saying, "When you're hungry, don't eat".
Oh, and notice how it seems to protect women when the Bible actually deems women lower than the worm. I do have a question, though: Why does God say that "Anyone who looks at a woman lustfully" implies that it's not a sin for a woman to lust after a man?
Sin as pertains to sex
Part two
Matthew 5:29-30: And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell. And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.
At worst, this is just plain stupid. At best, it is just plain stupid. This again is the "deny yourself" advice. Never mind trying to understand yourself and others. You guys (married or not) out there, you now know that to look at any woman (including your wife) with lust in your eyes - remember, sex was for procreation. Well, you have a couple of choices to make. After that, if you're still thinking of getting at that poon in ways other than reproduction, you have one choice left. But first, let me waffle on a bit.
There is one body part in particular that might tempt you to sin, and it is NOT what you would expect). But in those days and in some circles of this time it would be vulgar to mention 'penis' and 'testicles' here, although it is quite proper to mention 'foreskin' (because it is used in the bible)...*heavy sarcasm again*, so I will therefore go with what Jesus speaks of---the eye and hand. We now know verses 29-30 are ridiculous on several levels. A hand cannot "cause you to sin", neither does an eye or your penis - your brain causes "sin" and I would argue that point as well some other time. Therefore, gouging your eye out or cutting your hand off or lopping off Maximus Johnson may be useless for some.
If you have a problem with "sexual sin" and you are going to amputate something to solve it, you would need to cut out your heart, since that is the organ where all "sin" originates, as was believed in ancient times. But Jr. seems to really mean it when he speaks of making one a eunuch for the kingdom of Heaven's sake. Jesus's moral high ground is to cut off your jewels in the best case so you wouldn't have lust in your eyes while around women. Of course, one can imagine an omniscient being to know these things are just idiotic, but this is one case where Jesus sounds ignorant and moronic and rather emotional instead of thoughtful, moral or ethical. One, however, can be thankful women do not come under the eunuch rule.
Divorce
Matthew 5:31-32: It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement: But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.
Well, everyone is totally fracked in this bad advice that includes sexism. This addresses men divorcing their wives; not the other way around; females are considered inferior - equal to property. What this is trying to say is married couples should stay together no matter how awful the marriage becomes. Suffer is the key word here and that includes the children of the marriage as well or so it seems. Some Christians would say it is meant for couples to work it out, but that is based on an ingenuous or callow view of reality which ignores that people change and that some marriages were not good to begin with. A really sad part to this is the man who marries a divorced woman goes to hell.
On the other hand, this piece of moral wisdom from God says that if you really want out of a marriage, go cheat!
And it's another violation of the Law Jesus commits.
Oaths
Matthew 5:33-37: Again, ye have heard that it hath been said by them of old time, Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths: But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God's throne: Nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King. Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black. But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.
This is primarily good advice, but it does have drawbacks (see below). Unfortunately for Christians, most do not to live up to it...and you know what that means. Such is their happiness to be sworn in on a Bible that they proclaim this loud and clear. They are more than happy to pledge allegiance to the Bible and God in the form of creeds, to the American flag and for some, a Christian flag.
It is recorded in Acts 18:18 that Paul swore an oath. Since most Christians (I know of) are not really Christian, but Paulinian, still, I can hardly fault Paul, after all, it's not the only thing about Jesus' life and ministry that he doesn't seem to be aware of. Apparently, neither do most Christians.
This wonderful piece of moral wisdom borrows from and contradicts Deuteronomy 23:21-23 where one is to avoid vows or 'swearing' so that one is not obliged to follow through on it. The loving, wise, to be feared and glorious God/Man/Father/Son/Ghost is quite ambiguous here, as one may take this two different ways. Either "let your oaths be none" or "let everything you say be an oath." Either way the effect is contractual oaths are devalued by their overuse, or ignored and never used.
However, the underlying theme of honesty is a good one. Unfortunately, getting rid of contractual oaths is legal suicide.
This next one is a really good one!
Become the victim – for Christ's sake – abuse is your friend
Matthew 5:38-39: Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.
After saying he didn't come to change the law, he changes it...again. Getting rid of the "eye for an eye" mindset was a really good move, but to replace it with equal stupidity is...well, you fill in the blank _________.
This is not advice. Jesus TELLS believers to not defend themselves to protect their rights and lives. Unfortunately for unbelievers, Christians do not adhere to this astonishing piece of Godly morality for they are in danger of Hell Fire. Fortunately for Christians in day to day life, they are quick to dismiss this verse.
Matthew 5:40-41: And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also. And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain.
This should have been included in the Lawsuits section, but Jesus must have had an afterthought and set up an addendum.
Bad advice. There's no good reason, even the thought of going to Heaven, to set yourself up as a willingly abused victim. Where indeed is the wisdom in this? A wise and loving god, I would think, would have taught people how to build a society that would not encourage victimization. Why is it the ancient Israelites could not think it?
Matthew 5:42: Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away.
Must I really have to say anything about this?
I must.
Since there is no distinction of who does the asking, it is not just a charitable contribution after all. Therefore, ask every Christian you meet for 2% of their income. When they look at you as if you are insane or shout a curse at you, remind them of Matt 5:42, Matt 6:19 and if the Christian has more money than you – Luke 18:22.
*winkin with a grin*
Love those that hate you
Matthew 5:43-48: Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust. For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same? And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so? Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.
I can only speculate, but this piece of crap must have been the scripture Neville Chamberlain had in mind when appeasing Hitler before the war.
When you stop to think about this, there are no enemies until you or the other guy cause such to exist. This piece of morality does not take into account the cause of who started the process. Did Christians love the "Infidel" during the first crusade? Did Christians love Bin Laden after he had people fly aircraft into buildings?
This may have become marginally good advice if it encouraged tolerance, compassion and cooperation between all people. But it seems to apply only to the Christ Brotherhood Country Club. Of course, some Christians may follow this and love their enemy, but it is rare. And there is no reason to think it wise or moral or ethically sound at all. I submit, no one really loves their enemies and apparently Jesus doesn't either, as he's planning on torturing them forever.
How Jesus reconciles this with other passages that induce divisiveness is unknown and a contradiction. For us mere mortals, it is an impossible task.
Do good works in secret
Matthew 6:1: Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them: otherwise ye have no reward of your Father which is in heaven.
A contradiction to Matthew 5:16, above. In the very same sermon, he just told people to do their good works where they can be seen.
Some Christians claim that Matt 6:1 only pertains to charity and 5:16 covers "other" good deeds. It is obvious word play to avoid the contradiction. In any case, God, such as he is claimed to be would surely have avoided any ambiguity that would lead to confusion. Sadly, that seems to apply to the bulk of the Bible and not simply this sermon or specifically this verse.
Matthew 6:2-4: Therefore when thou doest thine alms, do not sound a trumpet before thee, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may have glory of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward. But when thou doest alms, let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth: That thine alms may be in secret: and thy Father which seeth in secret himself shall reward thee openly.
The general concept of rewards implies a general concept of a "good deed" before it. This assuages the apologetic appeal of charity being separate from good works. Anyone arguing that there is no contradiction here is rationalising to avoid facing the difficulty of reconciling the two verses. Those who reconcile the contradiction by doing good deeds in public, but don't broadcast it ignores the order to do there alms in "secret".
You can't win for losing.
These are also another carrot and stick type passages that mandate an action/reward/or punishment system of morality instead of just......do good for its own sake.
Prayer
I love the subject of prayer. There is so much to be said of it. But alas, I must confine my thoughts to the Sermon.
Matthew 6:5-8: And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward. But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly. But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking. Be not ye therefore like unto them: for your Father knoweth what things ye have need of, before ye ask him.
This would be the outstanding verse in the entire sermon. Pray in private! But very few Christians follow it. A proper understanding and adherence to this verse would make obvious that prayer would not be in schools or any public place at all. It means no swearing at all. No city council meetings with prayers like they do where I live. No Christian television and radio, no Chick tracts, no Watchtower magazine, no public prayer meetings, etc. Christians who support prayer in otherwise non-private venues are hypocrites. They willfully disobey a direct order from their Saviour.
Verse 7 says that you need to pray what is in your heart and avoid recitation and chanting.
But what, of all things, do you see in verses 9-13...
After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread. And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors. And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen.
...the Lord's Prayer; in direct violation of what Jesus said. It is a clear indication that believers pick and choose as it suits them. I wonder how the poster here, Ecurb Noselrub views this.
Matthew 6:14-15: For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you: But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.
This seems to be very good advice - forgive people. But it builds on the self-victimization Jesus would have you do in previous verses of the Sermon; after you let your enemies slap both cheeks and give your cloak to the guy that's suing you, forgive them. Oh boy! I can hardly wait to try this out!
Matthew 6:5-8 does not seem to immoral or unethical, but taken as part of the whole sermon....
Starve yourself
Matthew 6:16-18: Moreover when ye fast, be not, as the hypocrites, of a sad countenance: for they disfigure their faces, that they may appear unto men to fast. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward. But thou, when thou fastest, anoint thine head, and wash thy face; That thou appear not unto men to fast, but unto thy Father which is in secret: and thy Father, which seeth in secret, shall reward thee openly.
Fasting in this sense is idiotic and can be very dangerous, not only to one's body, but to their mind as well. It is a ritual as old as time that by depriving yourself of food you will eventually be susceptible to hallucinations and programming, otherwise known as a "religious experience". It allows those willing to suffer in this way pliable to the will of an authority figure. Why does God need people to torture themselves in order to communicate, all the while knowing it is immoral, absurd and unhealthy?
Treasure
Matthew 6:19-23: Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal: But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal: For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also. The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light. But if thine eye be evil, thy whole body shall be full of darkness. If therefore the light that is in thee be darkness, how great is that darkness!
Well, here we are expanding the motive begun in the beatitudes of shifting away from this life to the promise of an afterlife by using greed (treasure) and fear (Hell). What these verses say is life as you know it is futile and that to acquire wealth and experience pleasure is evil. Since there is no evidence that any life beyond this exists, it is double stupidity.
Two masters (or more)
Matthew 6:24: No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.
How utterly simplistic. How fallacious. What a forced and unwarranted exaggeration. Do not many people have two or more jobs, for example? Is it true that if people who have two jobs that they will automatically hate one master and love the other? Wouldn't it be a tad bit better to say, "don't let any one thing run your life"?
Including your religious beliefs?
Be happy, take no thought for the future
This is one of my favourite pieces of scripture. The idiocy therein actually requires no commentary, but you all know me...
Matthew 6:25-34: Therefore I say unto you, Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink; nor yet for your body, what ye shall put on. Is not the life more than meat, and the body than raiment? Behold the fowls of the air: for they sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are ye not much better than they? Which of you by taking thought can add one cubit unto his stature? And why take ye thought for raiment? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they toil not, neither do they spin: And yet I say unto you, That even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. Wherefore, if God so clothe the grass of the field, which to day is, and to morrow is cast into the oven, shall he not much more clothe you, O ye of little faith? Therefore take no thought, saying, What shall we eat? or, What shall we drink? or, Wherewithal shall we be clothed? (For after all these things do the Gentiles seek:) for your heavenly Father knoweth that ye have need of all these things. But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you. Take therefore no thought for the morrow: for the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself. Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof.
This extremely immoral, unethical and simply bad advice sets up Christians to detach themselves from their responsibility to see to their needs. Jesus would have you see this his way, but birds scavenge and/or hunt. Their primary concern is survival; something Jesus abhors because the end of the world is nigh. Jesus does not seem to know that rational concern for your well being (worrying) is a good thing and that process is what keeps us from giving up.
Jesus wants us to be as driven to life as....I really can't stand to say it, such crap that it is....but he wants us to be like flowers. Comparing humans to a life form that doesn't think, move about or interact with other life forms (like we do) does nothing whatsoever to address the very real issues and concerns that people had at that time, a previous time, today or concerns we may have for the future.
Don't worry about tomorrow, don't save money, don't store food for the winter, don't plan for retirement, don't plan that holiday, don't plan for children or if you have children, don't plan for their needs, never mind the infection might turn to gangrene and better yet...don't even plan to be alive a week from now. Live only for today and trust that God will make everything work out and regardless of what that outcome may be, it is God's will. Rejoice that you never need lift a frackin finger, the lord will provide!
*shaking my head*...This is some of the worst, inane morality in the entire sermon, even if Christians pay lip service to it. Typically, they ignore it. Reality pushes people to ignore it. How Christians reconcile their lifestyles today with ignoring this command from their Saviour...well, only they could say.
You are...thorough, Gawen ;D
Just so you all know, I stayed up till 1:15am last night preparing some of these. On top of that, I was working off less than 5 hours sleep from the night before...so I'm sure there will be...defects.
Hypocrisy
Matthew 7:1-5: Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.
If there was a time to say Amen, this is it! The best piece of advice in this sermon yet - don't be a hypocrite. So why is it that every single Christian I have contact with every single day is a hypocrite?
Who let the dogs in?
Matthew 7: 6: Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.
This has a couple possible meanings and has been the subject of much contention.
Don't spread the word to others not Jews or non-believers (Gentile dogs)
Don't spread the word to others not proto-Christian Jews or non-believers (Gentile dogs)
Don't spread the word to literal dogs
Don't give to money or wisdom to bad people or the ungrateful or actual pigs because either of the above may not give a shit and turn against you anyway.
Pick one. Or two....or all of them. Jesus, the man behind the curtain uses such ambiguous language, I reckon one would have had to have been there to understand it. Never let it be said the Son of God was well spoken, despite his expertise of the Torah/Tanakh.
Hide and seek
Matthew 7:7-8: Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you: For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened.
Good grief....what nonsense. What is the old saying? If it sounds to good to be true...
To promise that which you seek you will actually find is false hope.
Golden?
Matthew 7: 9-12: Or what man is there of you, whom if his son ask bread, will he give him a stone? Or if he ask a fish, will he give him a serpent? If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children, how much more shall your Father which is in heaven give good things to them that ask him? Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.
The so-called Golden Rule is not original to Jesus nor the Hebrew Bible.
There are two formulations: "So whatever you wish that people would do to you, do so to them" (Matthew 7:12; Luke 6:31), or "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you". Jesus is also credited with having been the originator of "Love your neighbor as yourself" (Matthew 22:39; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27) even though this was, in fact, an Old Testament idea which he borrowed from Leviticus 19:18.
But despite all of this, Jesus himself often did not follow these rules. Although he taught that people should love their enemies, he accorded much less than that to people who simply disagreed with him. He displayed barely concealed contempt for his gentile neighbors, equating them with "dogs" (Mark 7:27), and once instructing his disciples to "Go nowhere among the gentiles" (Matthew 10:5). He even refused to heal a gentile child until the child's mother came up with a clever saying (Matthew 15:21-28).
The Golden Rule is known as the 'ethic of reciprocity' and is a basis to many secular concepts of morality and ethics. However, "Do unto others what you would have them do to you" isn't nearly as wise as "Do unto others as they would have you do unto them".
*edited to add*
Jesus spoke out specifically against anger: "Anyone who is angry with his brother shall be liable to judgment" (Matthew 5:22); in fact, the context here actually equates anger at a fellow believer of Jesus with everlasting torment. So it would be reasonable to conclude that Jesus would not exhibit the anger he would not want to receive from others. Can anyone imagine Jesus actually engaged in actions which punishments are equated to the punishment of murder? No, but it is surprising therefore, to find that on several occasions Jesus displayed anger.
Quote from: xSilverPhinx on October 08, 2011, 06:07:38 PM
You are...thorough, Gawen ;D
Almost done...*grinnin*. The SotM is a bit longer than I realised! Fortunately, I had a good portion of it already saved in other documents I use for other purposes.
The Gate is as Narrow as the Vision
Jesus says that admission to Heaven is very selective.
Matthew 7:13-14: Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: 14Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.
Encouraging people to do good when it's difficult and impossible is not very good advice because...(must skip a bit to...)
Matthew 7: 21-23: "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22: Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?' 23: Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!'
This contradicts the passage I had to skip over (Matthew 7:15-20 - that deals with false prophets) by pointing out that you, in fact, cannot judge them by their fruit. So, to use Jesus's example, someone believed they prophesied and drove out demons...which would mean they were doing God's work by God's will, but in fact they were not. What is this to say of Jesus himself?
This raises other questions about salvation because there are people who sincerely believe that they are doing the work of God and believe that they will be saved, yet they are not and will not be saved and this contradicts the concept that belief is a key element of salvation.
False prophets
Matthew 7:15-23: Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.
This is so horribly, logically flawed that no one could ever imagine a wise god could ever have thought it up, let alone said it. So how do you tell a false prophet from a legitimate one? Look at their actions! Apparently false prophets simply cannot do good. In reality, trees can bear good and bad fruit and all people, prophets or not can do good and evil. With all this immoral, unethical, unwise advice from Jesus, what can we make of him? A...dare I say it...false prophet?
This concludes the ethical and moral critique of the Sermon on the Mount. I have tried to keep it simple, but many of you could easily expand each section, finding the immorality and disfunctional ethics therein. It is not difficult to see why Christians overlook this; to adhere to the SotM, Christians simply could not function in today's society...for the same reasons they could not function in their society of yesteryear.
I have one more post to make.
Well, piss...I forgot the last one
Do these sayings and you become wise
Matthew 7:24-29: Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock: And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock. And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand: And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it. And it came to pass, when Jesus had ended these sayings, the people were astonished at his doctrine: For he taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes.
Oh what fun it is to point out that Jesus' words aren't any more stable than building on sand. Those superstitious folks that lived around Capernaum may have been amazed to the point of stupefaction but there is no reason any one today should be impressed.
There's nothing in this sermon that provides the great insight that we'd expect from a divine, all good being. The mistakes, poor analogies, dreadful morality and ethics and otherworldly promises and turning men to beggars seem to eliminate any claim that Jesus was anything more than a mentally disturbed, megalomaniacal psycho/sociopath.
When one searches Matthew outside the confines of a diabolical sermon for other moral teachings of Jesus, one finds:
(4:1-7) Don't expect God to reveal himself to you
(8:18-20) Don't expect to have a home
(8:21-22) Be willing to desert your parents, even when they die
(10:5-7) About the coming Kingdom of Heaven, spread the message only among fellow Jews; ignore the Samaritans and Gentiles
(10:8-14) Live off of the local population and cure people; ignore those who will not listen to you
(10:17-20) If you get in trouble, don't worry about what to say; God will know what to make you say
(10:32-33) Acknowledge Jr., and he will acknowledge you; disown him, and he will disown you
(10:34-37) Break up your family, because you ought to love JC more than your family members
(12:1-14) It's OK to work on the Sabbath if you really need to, like collecting food to eat and curing disease
(12:31-32) Do not ever expect to be forgiven for blaspheming the Holy Spirit
(12:46-50) Treat your fellow believers as your real family, more important than your biological or marital family
(13:1-52) Put a lot of effort into getting into the Kingdom of Heaven, it is like a super valuable pearl, etc. etc. etc. -- Jr. repeats this message in several parables elsewhere
(15:10-11) Don't concern yourself with what you eat as much as with what your say
(16:4) If you are wicked, don't expect any divine sign other than divine disapproval
(16:5-12) Beware of the teachings of the Pharisees and Sadducees
(16:27-28) Expect Jesus Christ to make his Second Coming in your lifetime
(17:20-21) Have lots of faith, and you can move mountains in a very literal sense, by telling them to move
(18:1-6) To be worthy of the Kingdom of Heaven, you must be like a little child
(18:7-8) Repeat of how you must remove body parts that make you commit sins
(18:7-15) Try to resolve differences between you and your friends and family
(19:3-9) Divorce is a no-no, except for unfaithfulness, and remarrying makes you guilty of adultery
(19:10-12) Consider neutering yourself for the sake of the Kingdom of Heaven
(19:14) Repeat of be like little children in order to get into the Kingdom of Heaven
(19:16-24) Sell everything you have and give the money to the poor, because a rich person can no more enter the Kingdom of Heaven than a camel or a thick rope can pass through the eye of a needle
(21:12-13) Don't be afraid to throw a temper tantrum in a house of worship ruled by moneygrubbing pious frauds
(21:18-22) Pray for something, and you will get it, just like Jr's zapping of a certain fig tree
(22:15-22) Pay your taxes; give to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's
(22:23-32) Don't expect your marriages and relationships to continue into the Kingdom of Heaven
(22:37) Love God with every possible bit of effort
(22:39) Love your neighbor as yourself
(23:9) Treat only God as your real father
(23:10) Treat only Jr. as your real teacher
(25:31-46) Help those who are down and out
In fact, some of the Kid's teachings are much like those of the Cynic philosophers, who wandered around in similar fashion. That may explain some of the oddities. In Mark 6, our Hero tells his followers to take only a staff and sandals, no bag or an extra cloak. But in Matthew 10 and Luke 9, he says take none of that. By comparison, the Cynics were known for traveling with a staff, a bag, and a thin cloak, but no sandals. Many of the teachings attributed to Jesus are the same as Cynic teachings.
And "the poor" that we're supposed to be helping? Those are the wandering preachers (Cynic or proto-Christian), who were dependent on handouts. Woe unto thee for not giving to the panhandling preachers! This Cynic-like lifestyle also explains why JR. warns that you will not have a permanent home if you follow him: When Jesus saw the crowd around him, he gave orders to cross to the other side of the lake. Then a teacher of the law came to him and said, "Teacher, I will follow you wherever you go." Jesus replied, "Foxes have holes and birds of the air have nests, but the Son of Man has no place to lay his head." (Matthew 8:18-20)...the bum!
To expand:
The Gospel of Thomas is a collection of sayings without biographical details. Much of it is rather cryptic, like where it says that the Kingdom of Heaven is within you and you have to look within yourself to find it. Does that mean that that kingdom is a state of mystical enlightenment? That's the "mystery" of the gospel? What's more, much of the gospel of John was written to counter Thomas, not the other way around.
Much of the rest of Thomas's content parallels Matthew, Mark, and Luke: you must desert your family, you must give to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's, you will not be forgiven for blaspheming the Holy Spirit, the Pharisees are wicked, etc. Some of it is just plain weird, it must be said. At its beginning, we find that if you understand this Gospel, you will live forever.
At its end, we find that a woman must get a sex change before she can enter the Kingdom of Heaven...
*scratching my head in total wonderment*...I guess I'm going to live a finite life beause I simply cannot wrap my head around superstition such as this.
Turning to the Infancy Gospel of Thomas, we find that Jesus worked lots of miracles when he was a little boy. As in the canonical Gospels, most of them are beneficent miracles, like curing disease, but there is one where he zaps a little boy who had run into him. There are not many moral teachings, but the gospel repeats the teaching of the other gospels that it's alright to do certain sorts of work on the Sabbath. Like making clay statues of sparrows and turning them into real ones. Suffer not the children...
I lied...
One more and then I feel a vacation coming on...
Are there immoral, unethical acts in the Bible? You betcha; many of which the Bible does not discuss. Rape is treated as an offense against property rather than as a crime against human dignity. Pulling out of coitus with your deceased brother's widow and spilling semen on the ground is considered a crime against your deceased brother and of God. Modern concerns such as abortion, stem cell research and cloning are not mentioned, so readers who object to these practices must either rely on extra-biblical sources of authority, or tease these "Thou shalt not do" from or into the biblical text.
It is, however, apparent that Jesus' ethical views were not based solely on Mosaic Law. According to the authors of the New Testament, in some ways, the laws put forward by Jesus are easier to follow than those in the Torah, while in some ways they are harder. The text depicts Jesus as observing the dietary laws and not observing them in others. We know that the Jewish laws were controversial in the early church; see Acts 15 for example. It is possible that the author of Mark was taking Jesus' words slightly further or out of context than Jesus had intended in order to make a point on one side of the debate.
In some ways, Jesus' ethics were more strict than those of the Law. The Jewish rules on divorce were simple from the point of view of the man; only he was required to give his wife a certificate of divorce. Jesus alters this completely in Matthew 5:31 and the change does not benefit women at all, who would have been allowed to remarry under the Law.
All of the commands attributed to Jesus are impossible to follow completely, the same as with the Law. As shown above, the Sermon on the Mount contains instructions to love one's enemies, and to "give to all who ask." Since one commonly-accepted ethical rule is "ought implies can"...in other words, if one is unable to do something, then it makes no sense to say that one ought to do it, which then renders Jesus' ethical system unrealistic.
Matthew 16:28, Mark 9:1 and Luke 9:27 are fatal Biblical flaws in that Jesus says that some of his listeners will not taste death before he comes again in his kingdom. This was said almost 2000 years ago so there must be a few listeners at that time still alive. This and many other passages indicate that Jesus was to come again in a relatively short period of time and not just "quickly" as present day Biblicists assert. Although I can't prove it, I think it is safe to say all of his listeners are now dead, yet Jesus has not come again in his kingdom. All of the alleged words of Jesus recorded in the Bible are therefore suspect.
Mark 16:17-18 is also a fatal Biblical flaw in that a believer can handle snakes or drink poison and experience no harm. Many unfortunate believers have died as a result of handling snakes and drinking poison. This kind of assertion standing on it's own merit negates the entire Bible as a useful guidebook for life.
Do a search in the Bible of 'family values' and the first thing to pop up should be Leviticus 20:5: "Then I will set my face against that man, and against his family, and will cut him off, and all that go a whoring after him, to commit whoredom with Molech, from among their people." It certainly cannot be ethical or moral to turn against a man's family because that man makes you angry. In fact, it reminds me of a joke: "Our high school football team was so bad; they would sack their own quarterback and then go after his family." God is a lot like that in the Bible.
In the New Testament, we find much the same thing. In fact, many of the references of the word "compassion" and "trust" come directly from the Torah. Possibly the worst example of all regarding family values comes from the New Testament: Matthew 10:34 – 37: "Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. And a man's foes shall be they of his own household. He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me."
Imagine sacrificing the love of your parents, your children, and your spouse and exchange it for the love of an unseen, unknown, unimaginable God that you must fear at the same time. That any God should ask such a sacrifice should make him completely unworthy in the eyes of any reasonable human being. These are the family values of Christianity?
Ethics teachers commonly develop full and coherent ethical systems that would provide a comprehensive basis for teaching proper behavior and attitudes. Unfortunately, no such system is to be found in the Bible. Instead we find a patchwork quilt of homilies and pronouncements, some of which are unclear and others are contradictory and none of which, it seems, can be verified.
Given that Jesus thought the world was ending, the Day of Judgment was coming, and all would be sorted into the saved or damned camps (Matt. 25:31-46), it makes perfect sense that his ethics were utterly and radically junk. He puts no value on earthly wealth, fame, power, or family. He urges his followers to forsake wealth, fame, power, or family to focus on entirely and impossibly purifying their own character, doing good works, seen by others or not, and spreading the gospel. Believers are not seeking to have a pleasant or successful life on Earth. You are applying to get into Heaven when the Earth is destroyed.
If he didn't have a system, what about his main principle? Many Christians will quickly refer you to what is considered his primary principle: Matthew 22:37-38: "You shall love the Lord God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind. This is the great and first commandment." However, it must be remembered that the context of Jesus' ministry was not only anti ethical and immoral, but harsh, otherworldly, and urgent - therefore casting a slightly different light on this so-called "great commandment." I submit Jesus' main principle was preaching the end of the world with salvation as an end to worldly suffering and his teachings are the ways to achieve this.
How do we achieve everlasting life through the teachings of Jesus? Well, it is not as simple as one may think if you read or have read this thread.
I wonder what it's like in Germany this time of year?
Full of beer and sausages if you go to the right place!
Quote from: Tank on October 08, 2011, 08:27:18 PM
Full of beer and sausages if you go to the right place!
*laffin*...
And I bet that was the only line in the entire thread you read....*laffin harder*
Quote from: Gawen on October 08, 2011, 08:43:38 PM
Quote from: Tank on October 08, 2011, 08:27:18 PM
Full of beer and sausages if you go to the right place!
*laffin*...
And I bet that was the only line in the entire thread you read....*laffin harder*
Drat! You sussed me there!
Quote from: Tank on October 08, 2011, 09:15:31 PM
Quote from: Gawen on October 08, 2011, 08:43:38 PM
Quote from: Tank on October 08, 2011, 08:27:18 PM
Full of beer and sausages if you go to the right place!
*laffin*...
And I bet that was the only line in the entire thread you read....*laffin harder*
Drat! You sussed me there!
*mourning heavily*....Why do I do it.....why do I punish myself so.......where's stevil when you need him....
Quote from: Gawen on October 07, 2011, 09:58:57 PM
I feel so alone....
I'm waiting for the film version. ;) Seriously, do you have a pdf/epub version of the complete essay? I'm more comfortable reading from an ebook reader than sitting at the computer.
Quote from: Attila on October 22, 2011, 01:00:57 PM
Quote from: Gawen on October 07, 2011, 09:58:57 PM
I feel so alone....
I'm waiting for the film version. ;)
Hmmmm...profiting from my own misery. Never thought of that.
QuoteSeriously, do you have a pdf/epub version of the complete essay? I'm more comfortable reading from an ebook reader than sitting at the computer.
You could always copy and print it.
I guess I'm going to have to get that blog going...
Quote from: Gawen on October 22, 2011, 01:21:17 PM
Quote from: Attila on October 22, 2011, 01:00:57 PM
Quote from: Gawen on October 07, 2011, 09:58:57 PM
I feel so alone....
I'm waiting for the film version. ;)
Hmmmm...profiting from my own misery. Never thought of that.
Profiting??? Obviously you don't know who you're dealing with. Hint: I wear a round earring in my left ear and have owned 2 parrots in my life.
QuoteSeriously, do you have a pdf/epub version of the complete essay? I'm more comfortable reading from an ebook reader than sitting at the computer.
QuoteYou could always copy and print it.
I guess I'm going to have to get that blog going...
I would certainly hope you do... and soon.
Quote from: Gawen on October 22, 2011, 01:21:17 PM
Quote from: Attila on October 22, 2011, 01:00:57 PM
Seriously, do you have a pdf/epub version of the complete essay? I'm more comfortable reading from an ebook reader than sitting at the computer.
You could always copy and print it.
I guess I'm going to have to get that blog going...
Attila now has the epub version, optimised for his brand of e-reader. Took me about 20 minutes. So you can test him on it tomorrow. ;)
Quote from: Ildiko on October 22, 2011, 01:54:37 PM
Quote from: Gawen on October 22, 2011, 01:21:17 PM
Quote from: Attila on October 22, 2011, 01:00:57 PM
Seriously, do you have a pdf/epub version of the complete essay? I'm more comfortable reading from an ebook reader than sitting at the computer.
You could always copy and print it.
I guess I'm going to have to get that blog going...
Attila now has the epub version, optimised for his brand of e-reader. Took me about 20 minutes. So you can test him on it tomorrow. ;)
But has Gawen released his essay under copyleft? (https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fthumb%2F8%2F8b%2FCopyleft.svg%2F200px-Copyleft.svg.png&hash=62672cb134880e138f2ad37001b7061705998d79) If not, then it's probably released with DRM which is the sort of thing a theist would do. If Gawen did it, it was surely a slip of the computer key. I will have no truck (lorry?) with DRM.
It was a real pleasure to read this, Gawen. I don't know that I've ever encountered such a thorough dissection of the Sermon on the Mount. I hope that one or another of our Christian members provides some feedback from their perspective. Meanwhile, I'd say you've done an excellent job exposing the issues inherent in one of the most revered statements in the Christian canon. Thank you for your effort, sir. (https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.rationalskepticism.org%2Fimages%2Fsmilies%2Feusa_clap.gif&hash=17bb7aae9a87f5225de32c8361c9e9bae843b85d)
I'll have to re-read it at some time in the near future and see if I can come up with a more critical response. (https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg717.imageshack.us%2Fimg717%2F2339%2Fbluethumbup.gif&hash=5fe03c6701607da88624dfc89a3acd7df124c467)
Quote from: Attila on October 22, 2011, 01:33:16 PM
Quote from: Gawen on October 22, 2011, 01:21:17 PM
Quote from: Attila on October 22, 2011, 01:00:57 PM
Quote from: Gawen on October 07, 2011, 09:58:57 PM
I feel so alone....
I'm waiting for the film version. ;)
Hmmmm...profiting from my own misery. Never thought of that.
Profiting??? Obviously you don't know who you're dealing with. Hint: I wear a round earring in my left ear and have owned 2 parrots in my life.
Not you......ME!!!....*laffin*
Quote from: Recusant on October 23, 2011, 03:19:17 AM
It was a real pleasure to read this, Gawen. I don't know that I've ever encountered such a thorough dissection of the Sermon on the Mount. I hope that one or another of our Christian members provides some feedback from their perspective. Meanwhile, I'd say you've done an excellent job exposing the issues inherent in one of the most revered statements in the Christian canon. Thank you for your effort, sir.
QuoteI'll have to re-read it at some time in the near future and see if I can come up with a more critical response.
Now you make me want to go back and reread it again (6th, 7th, 8th time?) now.
Thanks, Recusant. I know there's more can be said, but not being a psychologist or sociologist, I can't dredge up any more.
One thing I won't do is take criticism from a Christian on
'context'. I won't even acknowledge a statement of the sort "You're taking it out of context". We all know Jesus's ministry (overall context) was apocalyptic; the end of the world is near, and to prepare believers by showing them the way to gain salvation.
BTW...no copyright...copyleft....copyup...copydown...copysideway or copyinverted. This is a public discussion board. What I say here is for everyone to use as they see fit.
QuoteBTW...no copyright...copyleft....copyup...copydown...copysideway or copyinverted. This is a public discussion board. What I say here is for everyone to use as they see fit.
Music to my hears (no pun intended regarding other activities). Spoken like a true godless one. Brings a tear to my eye.
I have just proof read this again. I've made changes (in blue) to fix typos, and make sentences flow better. I haven't deleted anything, but have added a bit in almost every post.