fullmer@dover.sps.mot.com (Glen Fullmer) (09/11/89)
A number of passages in the Sermon on the Mount bother me:
1. Speaking of lust, Jesus says "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."
He continues with the same wording replacing eye with hand.
Does that mean the Jimmy Carter is not a true follower of Christ
because he still has sight in his right eye? Or has his right
hand? How many of you would be missing an eye or hand?
Why only the right eye, or hand? Why not the left?
Why only man lusting after woman? Can't women go to hell for
lusting, too? Was Jesus a sexist?
2. "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."
Why only fornication? Aren't there worse things that happen
in a marriage? (like lack of trust?) Does Jesus want people
to remain in a very bad marriage? Is the happiness of his
followers important? Does anyone else see the sexism in the
"marry her that is divorced committeth adultery" passage?
3. "Resist not evil"
Does that mean that only pacifists are Christians?
"Onward Christian Soliders" seem an oxymoron.
4. "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:)..."
It seems from this passage that we shouldn't work for a
living. Is that what He really wants?
5. "For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seekth
findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened."
Dear Father would you make me independently wealthy by
tomorrow. Sort of like a Santa Claus in the sky, no?
In summary it seems that a true follower of Christ would be
a blind faith bum who's missing his right hand and eye, unhappily
married, male pacifist.
Other than these passages, I enjoy the Sermon on the Mount.
Any true followers like to respond?
BTW, SOM = Matt 5-7.
--
___ _ "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence"
{__/ // "over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled."
\ // _ ___ Dick Feynman, Appendix F of Shuttle Disaster Report
{__/ </_</_// <_ fullmer@sps.mot.com sun!sunburn!dover!fullmerilw%chem@ucsd.edu (Ivy Blumberg) (09/13/89)
I believe Jesus' sermons are best understood when taken in context of the whole Bible--not just isolated verses. Many of the things he said were not meant to be taken literally, i.e. plucking out your eyeball. He said this to get across an important principle: Sin is terrible. God hates it and we need to have a radical attitude about getting it out of our lives! God also hates divorce. Marriage is meant to be for life and we need to do everything in our power to make it work. This is a command, not an option. Usually, at least half the problems in our marriages are our fault, so if we get rid of the resentments, pride, lack of love, and selfishness we probably wouldn't need a divorce! God wants us to work hard and be productive (read Proverbs), but he doesn't want us to worry (phil.4:6) and be consumed with worldly treasures. Matt.6:21 Jesus was NOT a pacifist.(John2:13-17) but we are to love our enemies the way he did. He never backed down from the truth but he gave his life up for it.
geoff@pmafire.UUCP (Geoff Allen) (09/13/89)
In article <Sep.11.02.54.47.1989.6608@athos.rutgers.edu> alfalfa!fullmer@dover.sps.mot.com (Glen Fullmer) writes: >A number of passages in the Sermon on the Mount bother me: Then at the end of the article: >Any true followers like to respond? I'll bite: >1. Speaking of lust, Jesus says "And if thy right eye offend thee > pluck it out, and cast it from thee ... I believe Jesus is trying to point out the seriousness of sin here. You'd be better off blind and lame if you could avoid Hell. He is not saying that this is what you should do. It's impossible to prevent yourself from sinning. The only solution to sin is Christ's sacrifice on the cross. > Does that mean the Jimmy Carter is not a true follower of Christ > because he still has sight in his right eye? Or has his right > hand? How many of you would be missing an eye or hand? All of us would be severely maimed of we followed this truthfully. > Why only the right eye, or hand? Why not the left? > Why only man lusting after woman? Can't women go to hell for > lusting, too? Was Jesus a sexist? Jesus is only illustrating one example here. Any sin will suffice to make the point. >2. "But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, > saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit > adultery... > Why only fornication? Aren't there worse things that happen > in a marriage? (like lack of trust?) Does Jesus want people > to remain in a very bad marriage? Is the happiness of his > followers important? Does anyone else see the sexism in the > "marry her that is divorced committeth adultery" passage? God hates divorce (Malachi 2:16). The Biblical concept of marriage is of an entity that is different from the individuals ("The two shall become one flesh"), thus divorce is the killing of this one flesh. Jesus allowed divorce for fornication (I believe), because the fornication has already killed the marriage. I don't think that there is any sexism in the passage, because it goes both ways. A woman marrying a divorced man is as guilty as a man marrying a divorced woman. >3. "Resist not evil" > > Does that mean that only pacifists are Christians? > "Onward Christian Soliders" seem an oxymoron. No. C. S. Lewis said it better than I can (quoting from _Mere Christianity_): It is, therefore, in my opinion, perfectly right for a Christian judge to sentence a man to death or a Christian soldier to kill an enemy. ... When soldiers came to John the Baptist asking what to do, he never remotely suggested that they ought to leave the army: nor did Christ when He met a Roman seargent-major -- what they called a centurion. ... We may kill if necessary, but we must not hate and enjoy hating. We may punish if necessary, but we must not enjoy it." I think the point is that we should not be seeking our own interests. >4. "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:)..." > > It seems from this passage that we shouldn't work for a > living. Is that what He really wants? No. We just shouldn't center our lives on the material. "For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also." (Matthew 6:21) In fact, II Thessalonians 3:10 says, "If a man will not work, he shall not eat." >5. "For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seekth > findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened." > > Dear Father would you make me independently wealthy by > tomorrow. Sort of like a Santa Claus in the sky, no? I John 5:14 says, "This is the assurance we have in approaching God: that if we ask anything according to his will, he hears us." ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Note the condition. God is still supreme, and He will not make you independently wealthy tommorrow unless He wants to. >In summary it seems that a true follower of Christ would be >a blind faith bum who's missing his right hand and eye, unhappily >married, male pacifist. A true follower of Christ would be a thinking, hardworking, happily married man or woman who's willing to defend others with his or her life if necessary, and who recognizes the incredible gift that God has granted in the sacrifice of his Son to pay the debt owed for our sins. Hope this makes some sense and helps to answer some of your questions. -- Geoff Allen {uunet,bigtex}!pmafire!geoff <or> ucdavis!egg-id!pmafire!geoff "May the God of Peace, who through the blood of the eternal covenant brought back from the dead our Lord Jesus, that great Shepherd of the sheep, equip you with everything good for doing his will, and may he work in us what is pleasing to him, through Jesus Christ, to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen." -- Hebrews 13:20,21 (NIV)
davem@watmath.waterloo.edu (Dave Mielke) (09/13/89)
In article <Sep.11.02.54.47.1989.6608@athos.rutgers.edu> alfalfa!fullmer@dover.sps.mot.com (Glen Fullmer) writes: >In summary it seems that a true follower of Christ would be >a blind faith bum who's missing his right hand and eye, unhappily >married, male pacifist. These comments were made with respect to a few difficult to understand passages from what is known as "The Surmon on the Mount". It can be found in Matthew 5-7. I'm sure you will forgive my decision to break from tradition by not quoting this Scripture in its entirity here. I shall, however, quote each passage that is being questioned and give an explanation for it. Several questions have been raised, and I am perhaps dealing a bit scantly with a number of them. Please bear this in mind, and by all means ask further questions with respect to any point which I am making. I will be glad to deal with any particular set of issues in greater detail. I have also omitted the original questions to conserve space. I believe that I have answered all of them, and would ask that you do your best to infer the original questions from the content of their answers. In Matthew 5:27-28 Jesus says "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.". No, Jesus is not a sexist. He is stating a number of examples to show that it is our inward actions, i.e. our thoughts and intents, and not our outward actions which count with God. He is telling us that we may well be guilty of the sin of adultery even if we haven't actually performed the physical act. God considers us to have already committed adultery if we have merely entertained the slightest thought of the act. The fact that we may have managed to restrain ourselves from actually doing it has merely hidden our intents from our fellow human beings, but the law of God has already convicted us of that sin. Remember that Jesus used adultery as an example of each and every sin that any one of us might ever contemplate. He teaches elsewhere, for example, that hatred for a brother is considered by God to be equivalent to murdering him. Jesus was not formally stating a law here; He was just giving us the principles by which the law of God must be interpreted. He could have chosen either a man or a woman to be the subject of His example. Read 1 Corinthians 7 for examples of how God holds both men and women responsible for their own behaviour. I suspect that He chose a man because the pharisees, who were all men, were the ones who were going around self-righteously enforcing all of those laws. They were so outwardly pure that He found it necessary to show them how really spiritually impure they were. We should all take this as a reminder that whenever we wish to judge someone else to be guilty of some sin, we had better make sure first that we ourselves are not guilty of that same sin even in our passed, present and future thinking. Since we know that such pureness is impossible for any one of us, we ought to forgive others with the same furver with which we seek their forgiveness. Our own sins, of course, are never committed on purpose and are always committed by accident ... right? If that's what we really think then we had better give everyone else that same benefit of the doubt! In Matthew 5:29-30 Jesus says "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.". Jesus is not saying that we must necessarily cut off our various anatomical components if they cause us trouble. He is saying, however, that we are condemned to hell if we sin and that we should, therefore, be prepared to do whatever it takes to remove sin from our lives. He is using our eyes as a picture of that which entices us toward a sin and our hands as a picture of that which we use to commit a sin. We must not only avoid the doing of a sin, but we must also remove ourselves from whatever circumstances are drawing us toward a sin. If, for example, watching pornographic movies causes us to have adulterous thoughts then we must stop watching them. If, for another example, we cannot stop having adulterous thoughts about a colleague at work then we should stop going out to lunch with him and perhaps even request a transfer to avoid sitting near him. Failure to take deliberate evasive action to avoid sin in our lives is merely a reflection that we still worship our desires more than we worship God and trust in the wisdom of His commandments. We must never forget that the penalty for sin is hell. Hell is such an awful, long-term penalty that any shorter-term hardships we may have to endure in order to avoid sin, even if they are as bad as plucking out our eyes or cutting off our hands, are immeasurably less painful. I believe that Jesus referred to the right hand and the right eye because the right side of a person is, in the Scriptures, the side of preference. By this terminology He is telling us very emphatically that we must even avoid those sins whose short-term results we find more preferable than obedience to God. In Matthew 5:31-32 Jesus says "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.". The Scriptures teach beyond the shadow of a doubt that there is not to be divorce for any reason whatsoever. A few Scriptures that you may wish to read are Genesis 2:24, Malachi 2:16, Matthew 19:4-6, Mark 10:6-9, Romans 7:2-3, 1 Corinthians 7:10-12, Ephesians 5:31. While it is true that the Scriptures teach how a divorced person is to act, and even state that if an unbelieving spouse wishes to leave then the believing spouse should let him do so, one must never infer that they actually sanction divorce. The person who has left has committed a very grievous sin before God. Jesus may have said in this passage that divorce except for the cause of fornication is a sin, but He has not said that divorce for fornication is not a sin. Fornication, lack of trust, physical abuse, or any other excuse that one may choose to invent can in no way be used, before God, as the grounds for a divorce. The Bible says that when two people marry they have become one flesh, that God hates divorce, and that it is God who indivisibly joins the two partners in a marriage together and that no man ought ever attempt to sever this divinely bonded couple. These declarations of God regarding our marriages ought to cause us to give much more careful consideration than most of us do when it comes to the decision of whom we should marry. God does not offer a way out once the final decision has been made. Once we are married, if we wish to be obedient to God, we must make it work. God equates our marriages with His relationship with His believers (Ephesians 5:32). If we leave our marriages just because our spouses do not please us for one reason or another then we ought to expect God to leave us because our sins most certainly do not please Him. Jesus is indeed concerned about the happiness of His followers. This concern is, however, for their long-term happiness and not for their short-term happiness. A follower of Jesus will find true, eternal happiness in heaven. For the time being he is commanded to show his love for God by obeying His commandments regardless of what others, including his spouse, may do to him. Failure to see the long-term outcome of the suffering which God permits may never be used as an excuse for cattering to the short-term suffering of any individual event. We employ this same principle when disciplining our own children. We permit them to endure short-term punishments, even inflicting them ourselves, so that they will learn valuable long-term lessons for which they are very greatful when they are much older. Whatever hardships a follower of Jesus endures here on earth during this phase of his life are either for the glory of God or are Fatherly chastizements to mold his character, and are, according to Scripture, not even worthy to be compared with the glory that is to be revealed in heaven (Romans 8:18). I believe that I have dealt adequately with the perceived sexism of these passages in a previous paragraph. In Matthew 5:38-39 Jesus says "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.". God has commanded us to love our enemies (Matthew 5:44), and has reserved for Himself the right to take vengeance on those whose sins He has not chosen to forgive (Romans 12:19). We ought not retalliate against someone whose sins have been forgiven by God because we would be attempting to overrule Him. We need not retalliate against someone whose sins God has not forgiven because he will eventually be sentenced by God to spend an eternity in hell. We should, rather, feel a great deal of compassion for this latter group because hell is so unendurably horrifying that we would never wish it on our worst enemies were we given the choice. We must never forget that we ourselves, for our own sins, truly deserve to suffer hell too, and that it is only due to the grace of God that we have been spared that fate. What we really ought to do for them is tearfully and endlessly plead with God that if it would be His will He would please forgive them too so that they too will not have to endure the horrors of hell but will rather share in the glories of heaven together with us throughout eternity. We must remember that we are really just as sinful as they are, even though our sins may be a bit harder to spot, and even though it is so tempting for us to find ways to justify all those sinful things which we do do and are aware of. Let us never forget the example of the pharisees who lived such outwardly perfect lives that the only one who could see how truly sinful they were was God who went out of His way to tell them exactly what He thought of them. We aren't really much different from them. In Matthew 6:31-33 Jesus says "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.". Jesus is not saying that His followers should not work. He commands us elsewhere to earn our own living and not to live off others, going so far as to state that he who does not work should also not eat (2 Thessalonians 3:10). Jesus is saying that our time and thoughts should not be preoccupied with our physical necessities. They should, rather, be preoccupied with the seeking of the Kingdom of God. If we preoccupy ourselves with the seeking of God's Kingdom, i.e. the settling of our eternal destiny, then, as we go about our daily activities, we can expect God to bless them such that our physical needs are met in accordance with His will for them to be met. We must continue to sincerely make all the right efforts, but we must place our trust that those efforts will be fruitful in God and not in ourselves. We must also thank God if He, in His infinite wisdom, has decided that our physical needs should not be met to the degree that we believe they should be, even if we experience significant discomfort. In Matthew 7:7-8 Jesus says "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.". Jesus is not speaking of asking God for physical things here. He is in no way saying that God will give us whatever physical desire that we ask Him to satisfy. Jesus is restating a promise which God makes over and over again and again throughout the Bible, that if we sincerely ask Him for salvation, coming to Him on His own terms, then He will grant it to us. Some additional Scriptures you may wish to read pertaining to this promise are Psalm 51:17, Isaiah 55:1-3, Isaiah 55:6-7, Matthew 5:6, Revelation 3:20, Revelation 21:6-7, Revelation 22:17. Salvation is an item that everyone would do well to beg God for because failure to be saved means an eternity in hell. The asking must be sincere, though, as God will not honour an action that is not initiated from one's heart. Once again I would like to state that I have dealt rather briefly with each issue in this posting. It did not appear as though the person who asked about these passages wanted to get into a deep theological discussion about all the various subtile points contained therein. I would be more than pleased to go into greater detail if asked to do so. Dave Mielke, 613-726-0014 856 Grenon Avenue Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K2B 6G3
fullmer@dover.sps.mot.com (Glen Fullmer) (09/15/89)
In article <Sep.13.04.19.15.1989.13074@athos.rutgers.edu> ilw%chem@ucsd.edu (Ivy Blumberg) writes:
I believe Jesus' sermons are best understood when taken in context
of the whole Bible--not just isolated verses. Many of the things he
said were not meant to be taken literally, i.e. plucking out your
eyeball. He said this to get across an important principle: Sin
is terrible. God hates it and we need to have a radical attitude
about getting it out of our lives!
How do you know that it was not meant to be taken literally? That is a
real convienent way to cop out. Perhaps we should not take literally that
he was the Son of God!
Jesus was NOT a pacifist.(John2:13-17) but we are to love our
enemies the way he did. He never backed down from the truth
but he gave his life up for it.
If Jesus was NOT a pacifist, then he was a hypocrite, as the "resist
not evil" seems pretty clear. Not backing down from the truth and giving
up ones life does not mean He wasn't a pacifist! In fact, He had the
power over His own life and could have killed all those who tried and
delievered Him to the cross, don't you think? If that is not pacifism,
then what is?
--
___ _ "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence"
{__/ // "over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled."
\ // _ ___ Dick Feynman, Appendix F of Shuttle Disaster Report
{__/ </_</_// <_ fullmer@sps.mot.com sun!sunburn!dover!fullmerfullmer@dover.sps.mot.com (Glen Fullmer) (09/15/89)
In article <Sep.13.04.21.23.1989.13095@athos.rutgers.edu> geoff@pmafire.UUCP (Geoff Allen) writes:
I believe Jesus is trying to point out the seriousness of sin here.
You'd be better off blind and lame if you could avoid Hell. He is not
saying that this is what you should do.
No he is not saying that this is what you *should* do, he is commanding you
to do it! "If your right eye offend thee, pluck it out".
No. C. S. Lewis said it better than I can (quoting from _Mere
Christianity_):
It is, therefore, in my opinion, perfectly right for a Christian
judge to sentence a man to death or a Christian soldier to kill
an enemy. ... When soldiers came to John the Baptist asking what
to do, he never remotely suggested that they ought to leave the
army: nor did Christ when He met a Roman seargent-major -- what
they called a centurion. ... We may kill if necessary, but we
must not hate and enjoy hating. We may punish if necessary, but
we must not enjoy it."
Everybody knows that John the Baptist was not a Christian but a Baptist!
C. S. Lewis's opinion is just that! The "resist not evil" passage seem
clear to me.
Geoff Allen {uunet,bigtex}!pmafire!geoff <or> ucdavis!egg-id!pmafire!geoff
--
___ _ "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence"
{__/ // "over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled."
\ // _ ___ Dick Feynman, Appendix F of Shuttle Disaster Report
{__/ </_</_// <_ fullmer@sps.mot.com sun!sunburn!dover!fullmergeoff@pmafire.UUCP (Geoff Allen) (09/18/89)
In article <Sep.13.04.21.23.1989.13095@athos.rutgers.edu> I wrote: >A true follower of Christ would be a thinking, hardworking, happily >married man or woman who's willing to defend others with his or her life >if necessary, and who recognizes the incredible gift that God has >granted in the sacrifice of his Son to pay the debt owed for our sins. I recieved some friendly e-mail about this (whoever it was - I forget - thank you for pointing out my shortsightedness). Basically, it was pointed out to me that I should have said: "A true follower of Christ would be a thinking, hardworking, happily married (or single) man or woman ...." This takes into account that God doesn't intend for everyone to be married (cf. I Cor. 7). I apologise for letting my own happily married bias slip into this discussion. -- Geoff Allen {uunet,bigtex}!pmafire!geoff <or> ucdavis!egg-id!pmafire!geoff "May the God of Peace, who through the blood of the eternal covenant brought back from the dead our Lord Jesus, that great Shepherd of the sheep, equip you with everything good for doing his will, and may he work in us what is pleasing to him, through Jesus Christ, to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen." -- Hebrews 13:20,21 (NIV)
dg@lakart.uucp (David Goodenough) (09/18/89)
In message <Sep.11.02.54.47.1989.6608@athos.rutgers.edu>, alfalfa!fullmer@dover.sps.mot.com (Glen Fullmer) says: > A number of passages in the Sermon on the Mount bother me: > > 1. Speaking of lust, Jesus says "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." etc. etc. etc. It's rather interesting, because just this last Sunday, the Rector at our Church spoke of some of the apparent contradictions in the Bible: Matt 16:24 "If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me." vs. Matt 11:28 "Come unto me all ye who labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest" Or Matt 12:31 "Wherefore I say unto you, all manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men" vs. the comment above. Or Luke 14:26 "If any man come to me and hate [1] not his father and mother and wife and children and ....." Matt 15:4 "..... Honour thy father and mother ....." [1] I don't know anything of the original Greek, but I'd guess there ought to be a better word here - it's not really hate, more a case of "if it ever comes to a choice between Christ and your Father, Christ has to come first", i.e. if your Father forbids you to go to Church, you are caught in a dichotomy: do you honor Christ and go to Church, or honor your Father and stay home? In this case, go to Church. The sermon on the mount is sometimes referred to as the sermon of attitudes, in one way it can be seen in part as an "up to date" Leviticus, although it covers some other material. I would also hazard a guess that Christ said a great deal more, Matt 5-7 can be read out loud in a few minutes, and I'll bet the sermon itself took a while longer. Add to that the losses in the translation from Greek to English, and I for one can begin to see how it came out the way it did. Coming back to OUR sermon last Sunday, the final comment was "Don't take passages out of the Bible, for sometimes the context in which they are found explains a lot." I think with the sermon on the mount, this is the case - Christ tells of the blessings of Heaven, He reminds people of the law. He also provides advice on the best way to pray and to fast, and warns that they (and we) should take his advice if they (and we) want to enter the Kingdom of Heaven. Taken as a whole, it's a very good sermon, on life, your relationship to God, and your relationship to others. -- dg@pallio.UUCP - David Goodenough +---+ IHS | +-+-+ ..... !harvard!xait!lakart!pallio!dg +-+-+ | AKA: dg%pallio.uucp@cfisun.cfi.com +---+ [Sorry. The Greek word really is "hate". --clh]
kilroy@mimsy.UUCP (Nancy's Sweetie) (09/18/89)
[This is in response to the discussion of plucking out your right eye.
geoff@pmafire.UUCP (Geoff Allen) says it is not meant literally, but
is pointing out the seriousness of sin.
alfalfa!fullmer@dover.sps.mot.com (Glen Fullmer) says "No he is not
saying that this is what you *should* do, he is commanding you to do
it!" In a separate posting, Glen says "How do you know that it [ the
instruction to tear out one's eye ] was not meant to be taken
literally? That is a real convienent way to cop out." --clh]
The problem I always have with the suggestion that Jesus is literally
teaching self-mutilation is that it strikes me as ineffective: a blind
man can lust too, after all.
So let's suppose that you rip out your eyes per your interpretation, and
you find yourself visualising what you can no longer see. Now what?
You've cured a symptom, but the disease goes merrily on.
(I suppose you could get a lobotomy or something, but that wasn't
available in Jesus' time.)
Since interpreting the command literally does not seem to gain you
anything in terms of solving the problem of sin, I find that method
of interpretation lacking -- so perhaps we should go beyond the words,
and try to get to the message.
>Perhaps we should not take literally that he was the Son of God!
If you mean literally in terms of "God has a body and he engaged in
sexual congress with Mary impregnating her prior to her marriage" (which
I think qualifies as fornication), then I don't take it literally anyway.
I'd guess that most people don't take "Jesus was the son of God" the same
way they understand "Seth was the son of Adam".
Uhhh.... do they?
kilroy@mimsy.umd.edu Darren F. Provine ...uunet!mimsy!kilroy
"Soft and weak overcome hard and strong." -- Lao Tsu, _Tao Te Ching_mike@unmvax.cs.unm.edu (Michael I. Bushnell) (09/20/89)
I'd like to point out that the hymn "Onward Christian Soldiers" has nothing
to do, other than allegory, with actual battle. Here's the first verse:
Onward Christian soldiers, marching as to war
With the cross of Jesus, going on before.
Christ the royal master, leads against the foe;
Forward into battle, see his banners glow!
They are marching AS to war. That is to set the sense of the hymn.
The point here, and I think this classic hymn makes it very well, is
that the fight for Christ must be as diligent and permanent and
sacrificing as any soldier fighting in battle.
--
Michael I. Bushnell \ This above all; to thine own self be true
LIBERTE, EGALITE, FRATERNITE \ And it must follow, as the night the day,
mike@unmvax.cs.unm.edu /\ Thou canst not be false to any man.
Telephone: +1 505 292 0001 / \ Farewell: my blessing season this in thee!