Archive

Posts Tagged ‘Jesus’

Saver

This talisman the Evangelicals flaunt, that they have said words to make Jesus their personal savior, is easily debunked with a little observation.

So Jesus you have contracted as your own personal rescuer? Then what are these bills for house insurance, health insurance? What is this record of your having called the fire department, the police? On this date you begged your banker for a loan. At this meeting you demanded a teacher improve your daughter. You have turned to counselors to keep your marriage and to lawyers gainfully to end it. Every November, you petition governments with votes, and every May, you hang a flag hoping an Army will remember you.

Categories: Polemic Tags: ,

Creatrix

June 6, 2010 1 comment

One always reads I Tim ii.15 with astonishment. The astonishment can abate if one remembers that “saved” is obsolete English, not properly the revenant that does Evangelicalism’s bidding. But now one is bemused.

I contrived the following catechism as a comment on the passage.

Q. According to the Hebraíc scriptures, what were the results of the human disobedience after creation?

A. Conscience, and mortality.

Q. Can these ills be remedied?

A. Yes, by God’s special gifts mercy and eternal life, as his son Yesús taught and showed.

Q. And what were the punishments with which God cursed humanity for the disobedience?

A. For males, to encounter pain in their labors, and to find nature tend to resist them; and for females, to tend to submit to men, and to encounter pain in childbirth.

Q. Can humanity be rescued from these punishments?

A. Yes: by persisting through the pain, thus to renew the joys of creation. Specifically, males can emerge from the sweat of work with a new bounty, and a subjected Nature; while females can pass through the pangs of childbearing to the reverence of husbands, and a baby.

Categories: Exegesis Tags: , , , , ,

Pillars of the Mathetai

February 11, 2010 5 comments

There is an idea in much religion of a metaphysical foundation upon which practical action can be taken. For example, Islam erects the “Five Pillars”

Profession (of the creed),
Prayers,
Charity,
Fasting,
Pilgrimage (to the holy cities).

And ancient Jewish rabbis proposed seven precepts upon which all the world should base behavior; they are the Noachide Laws:

Monotheism,
No murder,
No robbery,
Sexual purity,
No blasphemy,
Kindness to animals,
Just courts.

Another example are the various Catholic religiouses, who generally profess four vows:

Poverty,
Celibacy,
Obedience,
and the fourth varies (e.g., stability, silence, loyalty to the pope).

The Religious Society of Friends has its “testimonies”, which by now have been narrowed to

Honesty,
Simplicity,
Non-violence,
Abstinence from nicotine, alcohol, or recreational drugs.

The Amish – Mennonites among whom I grew up base their copious lifestyle-laws on a three-cornered platform, viz.:

Nonconformity (to American life),
Uniformity,
Obedience.

Perhaps it is my knowledge of these religions that has gotten me thinking: What “pillars” could I discern in Jesus’s and his Envoys’ teaching upon which to base my life’s acts? To list them accurately, I would need to put out of my head all Christian dogma, to read thoroughly but sweepingly, to think systematically. Here, tentatively, is what I propose (roughly in the order the reader can find them):

Slavery,
Poverty,
Love and non-resistance,
Honesty,
Liberty,
Chastity
(with a special meaning for the married).

Addict

December 16, 2009 1 comment

In Jesus and the Envoys’ time, slavery was everywhere and they used it, and its related customs, laws, and emancipation, as a central image — probably the central image — of their teaching. Nowadays we have no slavery and very little idea of it. What could serve as a nowadays analogous image in our teaching? As I puzzle this out, as I look around me, my mind turns more and more to — addiction …

Categories: Exegesis Tags: , , ,

Comma

October 28, 2009 1 comment

I think it is the most important comma in the history of the universe; it can be found in the so-called Apostle’s Creed:

“I believe in God, the Father Almighty, the Maker of heaven and earth, and in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord: Who was conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead, and buried; He descended into hell.”

Let me repeat that:

“… born of the Virgin Mary COMMA suffered under Pontius Pilate …”

That comma obscures the life, temptations, teachings, doings, healings, sayings of Jesus. It obscures Jesus. To do that, I’d think the hymnbooks would need a font at least a hundred stories high.

Categories: Polemic Tags: , , , ,

Powerful new terms

October 20, 2009 9 comments

I’d recently told you about the NIV 2010, which promises to remedy the “obsolete English” of the ’80s.

Now Conservapedia, a popular website begun by a homeschool-cooperative teacher who claims encyclopedias are “too liberal”, has announced a project to retranslate or paraphrase the Bible according to “conservative principles”.

Among the changes they propose to Holy Writ are these:

If the project does become a retranslation, it must be a “thought-for-thought translation” the better to remove “liberal bias”.

The version must use “powerful new conservative terms” to replace existing “defective language”. For example, to prevent anyone from using the Bible to promote “socialism”, the words “friend”, “laborer”, and “fellow-laborer” should be replaced with “the conservative term ‘volunteer’ “; “shrewd” should be replaced with “resourceful”; and “words such as ‘word’, ‘peace’, and ‘miracle’ ” should be replaced with unspecified substitutes.

“Logic” must be applied to the version “with its full force and effect”, by emphasizing the vice of sins (they mention gambling twice) and the “very real existence of the Devil and Hell”.

The version must “fully express Free Market parables”, highlighting the “numerous economic parables” in the Bible and explicating “their full Free Market meaning”.

It must “exclude liberal-interpolated passages” such as “the adulteress story” and Luke’s account of Jesus’s last words. “These quotations are favorites of liberals [but] should not appear in a Conservative Bible, because in point of fact Jesus never said [such things] at all.”

It must “prefer conciseness over typical liberal wordiness.”

Categories: Observation Tags: , ,

On Their Following Jesus

September 24, 2009 Leave a comment

I have seen a certain bulletin plastered on churches by Mathetai so often that I think I must quote at least part of it:

… His [Jesus's] most commonly-repeated command was:

Follow me.

Follow him to where? To his Kingdom of life, through death. Here is a list of questions that ask, Am I following Jesus?

“Have you left your home, your family, and your income?”

“Are you proclaiming, or teaching about, the Kingdom? Are you healing? Are you everywhere doing good?”

“Have you been, or are you soon to be, houseless or arrested?”

“Are you soon to be killed?”

(Once, attached to some Youth Camp caravan, I saw the list limited to the last two questions — but added to them, I think, toothlessness and jailtime — concluded with something flippant such as: “If not, you aren’t doing it right.”)

Biblical

September 21, 2009 Leave a comment

I want altogether to stop saying terms such as “biblical”. I do not believe in a Holy Bible. The book — or really the concept of the book — is for Christian hierarchs a cunningly-used talisman and tabu. It is not a true thing.

What I believe to be true is that there is a Word of God who is Jesus.

When Jesus was alive on earth, the words he said were words of God. Before, in heaven — and now from heaven — he by his Spirit said — and says — words of God.

These latter words of course are said in people’s spirits. But some of them are written down. The ones that are written down are true scriptures. Paul Envoy said: “Every writing that is divinely inspired is also useful for teaching, for argument, for correction, for education in righteousness, so that the man of God may be complete and equipped for every good work.” Himself in these ways used sayings of Jesus; and some passages of Hebrew scriptures, for which he always argued relevance and took care to say the Spirit was speaking the meaning he saw in them; and a few ancient poems of the Hellenes.

And now I will sum up my thinking:

“Biblical” is an Evangelicalist construction used as a weapon or tool; “scriptural” can refer to any writings a religion calls scriptures, but true scriptures are written words the Spirit of Jesus uses to tell me some true words of God.

And, of neccesity and as my own Teacher, oftener he tells me true words of God that are not written anywhere but my heart.

And, above all, Jesus personally is the Word, and the Truth.

I would like therefore to speak of an idea’s or word’s or action’s being of Jesus; or of his Holy Spirit, of his Kingdom; or of simply right and truth.

Silver rules

September 13, 2009 2 comments
One of the anonymously-compiled “Seven Deadly Social Sins” is: “Worship without sacrifice”. I will pass over my immediate reaction to reading this — America! Christianity! — and spare what would be a bored readership. Instead, I will limn some later thoughts I had: that this description touches a seminal difference between Jesus and the religions.

In most religions, they who are called the good are who refrain from bad. Here are capsules of several major religions:

“Do nothing to others that would hurt you if it were done to you” (Mahabharata v.1517).

“Do not offend others, since you would not want to be offended” (Udanavarga v.18).

“The rule of goodness: That which we do not wish to be done to us, we do not do to others” (The Analects of Confucius xv.23).

“That which you do not wish for yourself, you shall not wish for your neighbor” (Talmud Shabbat 31).

Fundamentalist Christianity is likewise characterized by what its good members must not do or must not think.

In contrast, Jesus said, first, “Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone,” and ceaselessly anathematized the religious who called themselves, or wished to be called, the good. Second, he offered this capsule:

“And as you wish men to do by you, so do by them” (Luke vi.31).

There we have it: The religious are to be called the good by doing no bad. Jesus was called the devil’s son while doing good, and he taught doing the good.

Categories: Contemplation Tags: , , ,

Light

September 4, 2009 3 comments
“On his way [back from the temple Jesus] saw a man who had been blind from birth. And his followers questioned him, saying, ‘Teacher, who sinned, this man or his parents, for him to be born blind?’ Jesus answered:

” ‘Neither he nor his parents sinned; it was so the workings of God might be made manifest in him. We must do the work of him who sent me while it is day. The night is coming, when no one can work. While I am in the world, I am the light of the world.’

“So saying, he spat on the ground and made mud out of the spittle, and put mud on the man’s eyes, and said to him: ‘Go and wash in the pool of Siloam’ (which translated means the one who has been sent). So he went and washed, and came away seeing.

“So his neighbors, and those who had seen him before when he was a beggar, said: ‘Is not this the man who sat and begged?’ — Some said: ‘It is he.’ Others said: ‘No, but it is someone like him.’ — But he said: ‘It is I.’

“Then they said to him: ‘How were your eyes opened?’ — He answered: ‘The man called Jesus made mud and smeared it on my eyes and said to me: “Go to Siloam and wash.” So I went and washed, and I saw.’ — And they said to him: ‘Where is he?’ — He said: ‘I do not know.’ Then they took the man who had once been blind to the [churchmen].

“The sabbath was the day on which Jesus had made the mud and opened the man’s eyes. Then the [churchmen] in turn asked him how he had got his sight. And he told them: ‘He put mud on my eyes, and I washed, and I see.’ — And some of the [churchmen] said: ‘This is no man from God, since he does not keep the sabbath.’ But others said: ‘How can a sinful man work such miracles?’ And there was division among them. So they said, once more, to the blind man: ‘What do you have to say about him, because he opened your eyes?’

“He said: ‘He is a prophet.’

“But the [churchmen] did not believe it about him, that he had been blind and got his sight, until they called in the parents of the man who had got his sight and questioned them, saying: ‘Is this your son, who, you say, was born blind? How is it that he can now see?’ — His parents answered and said: ‘We do not know how it is that he now can see, and we do not know who opened his eyes. Ask him; he is of age and he will tell you about himself.’ His parents said this because they were afraid of the [churchmen], because the [churchmen] had agreed that anyone who confessed that he was Christ should be excommunicated. That is why his parents said: ‘He is of age, ask him.’

“Thus for the second time they summoned the man who had been blind, and said to him: ‘Give glory to God. We know that this man is sinful.’ — The man answered and said: ‘Whether he is sinful I do not know. One thing I do know, that I was blind and now I see.’ — Then they said to him: ‘What did he do to you? How did he open your eyes?’ — He answered them: ‘I told you before, and you did not listen. Why do you want to hear it again? Could it be that you want to be his followers?’ — And they reviled him and said: ‘You are his follower. We are followers of Moses. We know God talked with Moses; but we do not know where this man is from.’

“The man answered and said to them: ‘Here is what is astonishing, that you do not know where he is from and he opened my eyes. We know that God does not listen to sinners, but if someone is pious and does his will, to that man he listens. From the beginning of time it has never been heard of that anyone opened the eyes of one born blind; if this man were not from God, he could not have done anything.’

“They answered and said to him: ‘You were born all in sin; and you are teaching us?’ And they excommunicated him.

“Jesus heard that they had excommunicated him, and he found him and said: ‘Do you believe in the son of God?’ — The man answered: ‘Who is that, Lord? so that I may believe in him.’ — Jesus said to him: ‘You have seen him, and it is he who is talking with you.’ — And he said: ‘I believe, Lord.’ And he worshipped him.

“And Jesus said: ‘I have come into this world for judgment, so that those who do not see may see, and those who see may go blind.’

“The [churchmen] who were with him heard this, and they said to him, ‘Surely, even we are not blind?’ — Jesus said to them: ‘If you were blind, you would have no sin. But now you say: We see. Your sin remains.’ “

* * *

We read this passage of Goodnews yesterday at a small gathering for worship. Forthwith the churchmen who were present leapt to render it irrelevant. The first pastor, whom I shall name Gaspar, summed his singsong: “Gee! the Pharisees sure were weird! Jesus was doing something cool here; why couldn’t they dig it?” The second, whom I shall name Goliath, added gravely, “So we see God wants us to accept his salvation with grateful hearts.”

Ah Christians! Yet perhaps they are not the only people who can read without reading, and speak without saying anything at all.

Here is some of what I saw in the passage: sin, work; light, blind; and at the end an astonishing mating of these theses and antitheses — a mating that bends the mind.

Sin: everyone but Jesus is talking about sin all through the passage. His followers: “Who sinned, this man or his parents, for him to be born blind?” The churchmen: “This is no man from God, for he does not keep the sabbath,” “How can a sinful man work such miracles,” “We know that this man is sinful …”, “You were born all in sin.” The man born blind: “Whether he is sinful I do not know”, “We know that God does not listen to sinners.”

Jesus meanwhile talks of: Work. “It was so the workings of God might be made manifest in him,” “We must do the work of him who sent me while it is day,” “The night is coming when no one can work.” And then others catch his refrain: “How can a sinful man work such miracles?” “What did he do to you,” “If someone is pious and does his will”, “… he could not have done anything.”

And Light, which is sight — which is Jesus: “While I am in the world, I am the light of the world.” The blind man, healed, now has “seen [the son of God].”

Last, Blindness — here we come to the astonishing conclusion, the mating of thesis and antithesis a way no one could predict and only Jesus could give sight to:

To begin with he, as always, upends the world: “I have come into this world for judgment, so that those who do not see may see, and those who see may go blind.” Eagerly the churchmen, goaded as always by the prick of their authority to damn themselves, ask: “Surely, even we are not blind?”

Oh you are not blind, says Jesus: You are guilty. You have got light, O religious; but what is light for? “We must do the work … while it is day.” You speak evermore of sin, which is merely blindness, suffering: merely work for healers to do. You are not sinners, are not blind, do not suffer: therefore, you are lighted and unlike those you hate. Then you use not the light for working, for doing, and so you alone of humankind are the damned. “If you were blind, you would have no sin. But now you say: We see. Your sin remains.”

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.