Jump to content






Photo

The problem with this guy called Jesus of Nazareth


  • Please log in to reply
24 replies to this topic

#1 Tonix777

Tonix777
  • Members
  • 26 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scarsdale NY, USA
  • Interests:Philosophy, traveling with my motorcycle, ancient japanese martial arts, RPG videogames

Posted 31 July 2010 - 08:02 AM

This man who lived 2,000 years ago is one of the most clear demonstrations of the long range power of ideas

His concepts modified the history of the World for the last two Millenniums, and specially during the last two Centuries due to the strong influence of the United States of America on the so called Western civilization.

Almost all the Christian commandments are harmful in one way or another to the Mind, the Reason, the Progress and the Self-steem of men but two of them are specially evil in modern times:

1-"You shall love your neighbor as yourself"
2-"You shall not kill"


The first one gives place to consider altruism or un-selfishness as one of the alleged highest virtues of our society, and is often stretched to the even more insane "You shall love your neighbor more than yourself" as the pinnacle of virtue

But who is "your neighbor"? The commandment doesn't mention anything about your relation with him: Is he your friend? your relative? someone you admire? someone unknown? someone known but despised by you? your enemy?
Does your neighbor deserve to be loved by you? Is he wise? idiot? honest, thief, criminal? brave or coward? helpful or useless? hard-worker or lazy? nice or indifferent?
The commandment doesn't specify anything, so we should assume that we should love everyone, anyone.

This commandment is deeply affecting the politics and economics of the World because no one dares to defend Capitalism on moral grounds, simply because it goes against this commandment which is taken as some kind of axiomatic truth, some revealed supreme virtue that everyone seems to agree with...
Why? Simply because it resonates deeply in our brain, in our soul where we have genetically hardwired thanks to our evolution as species other virtues like kindness or compassion or sympathy which are (were at least) essential for our survival as group and individuals because these virtues allow us to live in tribes and societies which in turn has the potential to greatly improve our chances of survival and our standard of life

But I say it is not possible to love your neighbor as yourself, it is an evil ideal impossible to comply in real life and thus created only to make people feel guilty. I say it is not right to love your neighbor as yourself without knowing who your neighbor is, without knowing if he deserves your love or your indifference or scorn or even your hate or your fear or whatever he could deserve according to your own values and to his virtues, his vices, his merits, his faults or his crimes...

The second one "You shall not kill" is a blind blank check extended to your current or potential enemies in order to allow them to harm you, is an invitation to become a sacrificial lamb for anyone that doesn't share the same ridiculous principle
You shall never kill? Not even in self-defense? Or in defense of your loved ones? Or to defend your property, your village, your country?
I hate pacifists almost as much as I hate ecologists. What kind of man offer the other cheek to his aggressor? A coward.

The "combo" of these two commandments exempt people from the responsibility about their own safety, and from the need to analyze more carefully the World and the people living in them, the need to discriminate between others, the "neighbors", on the naif belief that if one is good everybody will somehow love or appreciate us and nobody will finally or seriously harm us, or the mistaken idea that there will be always some one there to defend us. These commandments also encourage anyone else to act with impunity knowing that we are sacrificial lambs ready to be their next victims.
The easiest way to change the World is changing the way you see it

#2 whYNOT

whYNOT

    tony garland

  • Members
  • 3,307 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Republic of South Africa

Posted 31 July 2010 - 09:09 AM

Tonix, hi!

I think you raised some good points under those two Commandments that had me nodding in agreement.
One thing, though, I am reluctant to hate the religious en bloc;
possibly because Ive been atheistic - and before that agnostic -for so long now that I don't feel threatened by a religion, or its practitioners.

As long as they do not get their hands on power and Government, I have to add. Leave me alone, and I'll leave them alone.

With what amounts to mixed premises on their part, one can apply the Objectivist principle of the lesser 'sin', the one of ignorance, not evasion, to them, mainly.
Actually, Christ himself said it : "Forgive them, for they know not what they do."

Anyway, hatred for a group is collectivist,don't you agree? and it is such hard work - impossible to sustain, and grants too much power to the hated over oneself, IMHO.

Welcome to OL. :)

Tony
"To know that we know what we know, and to know that we do not know what we do not know, that is true knowledge". Nicolaus Copernicus (An original objectivist) 1473-1543 ***No man may be smaller than his philosophy...***

#3 Michael Stuart Kelly

Michael Stuart Kelly

    $$$$$$

  • Root Admin
  • 20,250 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 31 July 2010 - 09:15 AM

Tonix,

I find your interpretation to be in line with religion-haters, but not accurate as to how this happens in society.

If you are correct, the USA simply would not exist, much less lead the world in productive achievements. We would have been slaughtered long ago.

What you describe is not how the mainstream sees Jesus, nor the meanings they attribute to the commandments. I'm not defending Christianity, but I am defending the need to be accurate.

Rants are not facts.

Michael

Know thyself...


#4 Tonix777

Tonix777
  • Members
  • 26 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scarsdale NY, USA
  • Interests:Philosophy, traveling with my motorcycle, ancient japanese martial arts, RPG videogames

Posted 31 July 2010 - 12:06 PM

whYNOT, Michael

Even when my post could give that impression I am not a religion-hater at all
I respect religious people, I even used to be one of them long time ago. I understand them probably more that average Objecivists do because I think I know where religious tendencies come from

But in despite of religions and their important role in human history, I think Christian Commandments are harmful to most people in modern times when human evolution is coming to a point where we should be finally able to "walk by ourselves" as conscious species. The very concept of a "commandment" meaning some principle that has to be blindly accepted is against reason
In any case I could think in some Commandments closer to Objectivism :)

Edited by Tonix777, 31 July 2010 - 12:08 PM.

The easiest way to change the World is changing the way you see it

#5 Tonix777

Tonix777
  • Members
  • 26 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scarsdale NY, USA
  • Interests:Philosophy, traveling with my motorcycle, ancient japanese martial arts, RPG videogames

Posted 31 July 2010 - 12:22 PM

Tonix,

I find your interpretation to be in line with religion-haters, but not accurate as to how this happens in society.

If you are correct, the USA simply would not exist, much less lead the world in productive achievements. We would have been slaughtered long ago.

What you describe is not how the mainstream sees Jesus, nor the meanings they attribute to the commandments. I'm not defending Christianity, but I am defending the need to be accurate.

Rants are not facts.

Michael


Michael: I do know that this subject is far more complex than I sated in my short article, it was just a pretext to kick the ball entering this prestigious Forum :)
I somehow like rants because they "motivate" people and move to further discussion
The easiest way to change the World is changing the way you see it

#6 Michael Stuart Kelly

Michael Stuart Kelly

    $$$$$$

  • Root Admin
  • 20,250 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 31 July 2010 - 01:10 PM

Tonix,

We have a Rants section and I am moving this to it.

I will leave a link behind.

Not sure what to do about the other thread on the commandments. That's not really an article either. I might just leave it for now...

Michael

Know thyself...


#7 BaalChatzaf

BaalChatzaf

    $$$$$$

  • Members
  • 11,387 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Currently residing in New Jersey, the Bad-a-Bing State.
  • Interests:mathematics, physics, alternative energy sources.

    I am also involved in preparing recorded books for blind and dyslexic folks.

Posted 31 July 2010 - 05:38 PM

Almost all the Christian commandments are harmful in one way or another to the Mind, the Reason, the Progress and the Self-steem of men but two of them are specially evil in modern times:

1-"You shall love your neighbor as yourself"
2-"You shall not kill"




Those go back to a time before Moses. Read the book called Leviticus by the Gentiles (Vayikrah, by the Hebrews). The commandments were issued three years after the flight of the Hebrews from Egypt. By the way the commandment is don't murder. The commandment is NOT don't kill.

Ba'al Chatzaf
אויב מיין באָבע האט בייצים זי וואָלט זיין מיין זיידע

#8 Tonix777

Tonix777
  • Members
  • 26 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scarsdale NY, USA
  • Interests:Philosophy, traveling with my motorcycle, ancient japanese martial arts, RPG videogames

Posted 31 July 2010 - 07:22 PM



Almost all the Christian commandments are harmful in one way or another to the Mind, the Reason, the Progress and the Self-steem of men but two of them are specially evil in modern times:

1-"You shall love your neighbor as yourself"
2-"You shall not kill"




Those go back to a time before Moses. Read the book called Leviticus by the Gentiles (Vayikrah, by the Hebrews). The commandments were issued three years after the flight of the Hebrews from Egypt. By the way the commandment is don't murder. The commandment is NOT don't kill.

Ba'al Chatzaf


Apparently the translation is not cristal clear and The Roman Catholic Church usually uses the translation "kill"
The easiest way to change the World is changing the way you see it

#9 BaalChatzaf

BaalChatzaf

    $$$$$$

  • Members
  • 11,387 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Currently residing in New Jersey, the Bad-a-Bing State.
  • Interests:mathematics, physics, alternative energy sources.

    I am also involved in preparing recorded books for blind and dyslexic folks.

Posted 31 July 2010 - 07:28 PM

Apparently the translation is not cristal clear and The Roman Catholic Church usually uses the translation "kill"


I speak and write Hebrew. Ignore what the Church people say.

Ba'al Chatzaf
אויב מיין באָבע האט בייצים זי וואָלט זיין מיין זיידע

#10 Ted Keer

Ted Keer

    $$$$$$

  • Members
  • 3,084 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New York City

Posted 31 July 2010 - 07:39 PM

Tonix,

I find your interpretation to be in line with religion-haters, but not accurate as to how this happens in society.

If you are correct, the USA simply would not exist, much less lead the world in productive achievements. We would have been slaughtered long ago.

What you describe is not how the mainstream sees Jesus, nor the meanings they attribute to the commandments. I'm not defending Christianity, but I am defending the need to be accurate.

Rants are not facts.

Michael


What you are defending is the need for factual accuracy about Christianity. That sort of thing will get you banned from RoR.



Confession is always weakness. The grave soul keeps its own secrets, and takes its own punishment in silence.

#11 Tonix777

Tonix777
  • Members
  • 26 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scarsdale NY, USA
  • Interests:Philosophy, traveling with my motorcycle, ancient japanese martial arts, RPG videogames

Posted 01 August 2010 - 08:16 AM



Apparently the translation is not cristal clear and The Roman Catholic Church usually uses the translation "kill"


I speak and write Hebrew. Ignore what the Church people say.

Ba'al Chatzaf


You are right but I "am" indeed talking about Churches, specially the Roman Catholic Church that is very strong and influencing worldwide and affirms she is the voice of Jesus on Earth
The easiest way to change the World is changing the way you see it

#12 Tonix777

Tonix777
  • Members
  • 26 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scarsdale NY, USA
  • Interests:Philosophy, traveling with my motorcycle, ancient japanese martial arts, RPG videogames

Posted 01 August 2010 - 08:50 AM


Tonix,

I find your interpretation to be in line with religion-haters, but not accurate as to how this happens in society.

If you are correct, the USA simply would not exist, much less lead the world in productive achievements. We would have been slaughtered long ago.

What you describe is not how the mainstream sees Jesus, nor the meanings they attribute to the commandments. I'm not defending Christianity, but I am defending the need to be accurate.

Rants are not facts.

Michael


What you are defending is the need for factual accuracy about Christianity. That sort of thing will get you banned from RoR.


The poster of ROR is right about Christianity. Specially in USA "...There is no authoritative voice "Christianity" - it is a collection of different sects with differing details about their common moral and mythical beliefs..."

On the other hand this country was founded with a very strong religious base by people looking for religious freedom long time ago
For me it is hard to imagine the "what if" alternative, meaning what would have happened if this great country had been founded by non-religious people?
We probably will never know...
The easiest way to change the World is changing the way you see it

#13 Brant Gaede

Brant Gaede

    $$$$$$

  • Members
  • 15,301 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tucson, AZ
  • Interests:All kinds of stuff

Posted 01 August 2010 - 09:53 AM



Tonix,

I find your interpretation to be in line with religion-haters, but not accurate as to how this happens in society.

If you are correct, the USA simply would not exist, much less lead the world in productive achievements. We would have been slaughtered long ago.

What you describe is not how the mainstream sees Jesus, nor the meanings they attribute to the commandments. I'm not defending Christianity, but I am defending the need to be accurate.

Rants are not facts.

Michael


What you are defending is the need for factual accuracy about Christianity. That sort of thing will get you banned from RoR.


The poster of ROR is right about Christianity. Specially in USA "...There is no authoritative voice "Christianity" - it is a collection of different sects with differing details about their common moral and mythical beliefs..."

On the other hand this country was founded with a very strong religious base by people looking for religious freedom long time ago
For me it is hard to imagine the "what if" alternative, meaning what would have happened if this great country had been founded by non-religious people?
We probably will never know...

It would have taken longer absent a gold rush. The Pilgrims were basically insane with their faith thing, but it got them over here.

There is also the matter of religion countering the power of the State and with the essential moral equality of everyone before God--all bow down--made individualism practicably possible both within and without all members of society. The bromide, "A man's home is his castle" culturally fleshes that out.

And going to church on Sunday socially binds a community together and provides implicit psychotherapy for those having various hard times which they were having most of the time.

--Brant

Edited by Brant Gaede, 01 August 2010 - 10:04 AM.

Rational Individualist, Rational self-interest, Individual Rights--limited government libertarian heavily influenced by Objectivism


#14 Xray

Xray

    $$$$$$

  • Members
  • 4,179 posts
  • Gender:Female

Posted 01 August 2010 - 02:49 PM


Tonix,

I find your interpretation to be in line with religion-haters, but not accurate as to how this happens in society.

If you are correct, the USA simply would not exist, much less lead the world in productive achievements. We would have been slaughtered long ago.

What you describe is not how the mainstream sees Jesus, nor the meanings they attribute to the commandments. I'm not defending Christianity, but I am defending the need to be accurate.

Rants are not facts.

Michael


What you are defending is the need for factual accuracy about Christianity. That sort of thing will get you banned from RoR.

Ted,
On RoR, you wrote:
"Jesus was both fully divine and fully human, not a "perfect" human, but God who chose to fully assume human nature." (Ted Keer).
http://rebirthofreas...orum/1570.shtml

You made the epistemological mistake of presenting a mere belief as fact. Do you have any idea why they banned you instead of simply pointing out your epistemological error?

Edited by Xray, 01 August 2010 - 02:58 PM.


#15 Michael Stuart Kelly

Michael Stuart Kelly

    $$$$$$

  • Root Admin
  • 20,250 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 01 August 2010 - 03:57 PM

Ted,

At least I (and I believe the vast majority of readers) understand that your comment was implied within the context of "according to Christianity." Thus it could have easily read, "Jesus--according to Christianity--was both fully divine and fully human..."

Don't mind Xray. She's not a bad person and she'll get there one day...

Michael


Know thyself...


#16 Ted Keer

Ted Keer

    $$$$$$

  • Members
  • 3,084 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New York City

Posted 01 August 2010 - 04:25 PM

Rand said according to Christian "philosophy." She didn't say according to the common Christian. You would think Mr. Kolker would see the difference.

As for why I was banned? You'd have to ask Joe. I asked him to quote one statement of mine defending Christianity. He said he had "a feeling."



Confession is always weakness. The grave soul keeps its own secrets, and takes its own punishment in silence.

#17 Rich Engle

Rich Engle

    $$$$$$

  • Members
  • 2,863 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Myers, Florida, USA
  • Interests:Philosophy, Religion, Psychology, Chess, Music, Spirituality.

Posted 02 August 2010 - 08:26 AM

As for why I was banned? You'd have to ask Joe. I asked him to quote one statement of mine defending Christianity. He said he had "a feeling."


That's kind of an easy one, Ted. Here, allow me to elucidate your heretic self... :rolleyes:

Once upon a time, on a website far, far away, many (well, let's face it, not "many," given the specialization, uh, call it like a handful) people you see now were there. And, for a time, It Was Good. It was The Best Alternative At The Time. Many Good Deeds were done there, as well as a stitch of meaningful, heartfelt writing.

But, there was, as usual, a Disturbance In The Force. No one could (or maybe I should say "would") identify the nature of said Disturbance.

Around this time, our Maestro and host MSK's lovely partner, Kat, bequeathed him a gift, and that is where you are now. MSK went on to make something that, at least to my jaundiced eyes, was of greater latitude and of an encouraging, welcome nature, than Those Before It.

And, at or around the same time, Yours Truly had become engaged with new studies involving Mysticism, and, I daresay, even Religion. Essays, and various forms of discourse followed.

But, the Ruler of that Realm ("R.O.R. of ROR" I think is fun to call him) had a very reactive side to him, Yours Truly was given (via site email) an edict to the effect: "no more talk about religion." Now, Yours Truly was not, nor has ever been, in the business of "conversion," nor any other form of soul-harvesting. In fact, I was merely attempting to "circumscribe the topic," to paraphrase William James (Heaven Forbid I Be Accused of Plagiarism, or Other Forms of Witchcraft). Rather than being banned (I was given the choice, in that if I simply adjusted my words into a fashion more appropriate for the Owner's Vision<tm>), I chose to politely withdraw. And, I do believe if one researches that vast pool of posts, you will find this to be True.

A very sad thing happened during that time, in the form of my dear departed friend, Nathan Hawking. Nathan had created a New One of his own, which was more devoted to precision writing; writing more in the style that Technical Philostophers<tm> write in. Our Maestro, MSK, and Nathan, both released an essay I wrote about Mysticism, and both assisted greatly in helping me with edits.

Outside of the shock of Nathan's death, your Gentle Author was both encouraged and content with the future that was now there--a place to write freely.

And that, for the most, remains so.

But it has always been odd to me in regard to Joe's "feeling" (I have heard him invoke said term before). . . because, that is not something a person who Proclaims such as he does would, well, do. It Violates The Rules. I am hesitant to guess, or psychologize, but I am pretty good at it and tend to work off my gut. My gut says that when someone does something like that, it means they are showing some form of fear. Perhaps, in this case, the fear of not-knowing. Of being uncomfortable in one's skin during the not-knowing (which is a constant human condition). I think I even said that to him once--that you have to be able to whistle in the dark.

Now, I will leave you with a funny. I guess it is as good a time as any for the joke to come to a natural death. For all his vigilance with that engagement, he missed something minor. Maybe it is because he doesn't know what he sees. Or maybe, he keeps every single author that has ever written there.

I wonder if he knows that my profile there (look it up--Richard D. Engle) not only still remains, but has a graphic of the Unitarian Universalist symbol there--the chalice and flame. Maybe he was too busy checking his premises (and others) so he couldn't check his own website. That damn thing has been there for years. Heh.

rde
Writer of Cute Beddy-Bye Stories

Edited by Rich Engle, 02 August 2010 - 08:28 AM.

Visit My Blog!

beyondevenbatcountry.blogspot.com


"There is no way that writers can be tamed and rendered civilized or even cured. the only solution known to science is to provide the patient with an isolation room, where he can endure the acute stages in private and where food can be poked in to him with a stick." -- Robert A. Heinlein


#18 Tonix777

Tonix777
  • Members
  • 26 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scarsdale NY, USA
  • Interests:Philosophy, traveling with my motorcycle, ancient japanese martial arts, RPG videogames

Posted 02 August 2010 - 11:22 AM




Tonix,

I find your interpretation to be in line with religion-haters, but not accurate as to how this happens in society.

If you are correct, the USA simply would not exist, much less lead the world in productive achievements. We would have been slaughtered long ago.

What you describe is not how the mainstream sees Jesus, nor the meanings they attribute to the commandments. I'm not defending Christianity, but I am defending the need to be accurate.

Rants are not facts.

Michael


What you are defending is the need for factual accuracy about Christianity. That sort of thing will get you banned from RoR.


The poster of ROR is right about Christianity. Specially in USA "...There is no authoritative voice "Christianity" - it is a collection of different sects with differing details about their common moral and mythical beliefs..."

On the other hand this country was founded with a very strong religious base by people looking for religious freedom long time ago
For me it is hard to imagine the "what if" alternative, meaning what would have happened if this great country had been founded by non-religious people?
We probably will never know...

It would have taken longer absent a gold rush. The Pilgrims were basically insane with their faith thing, but it got them over here.

There is also the matter of religion countering the power of the State and with the essential moral equality of everyone before God--all bow down--made individualism practicably possible both within and without all members of society. The bromide, "A man's home is his castle" culturally fleshes that out.

And going to church on Sunday socially binds a community together and provides implicit psychotherapy for those having various hard times which they were having most of the time.

--Brant


I am aware of the importance of Churches in the development of western civilizations
I was talking here more specifically about Christian Commandments in modern times
About the general concept of God(s) and their role in human history my approach is quite different as stated in this topic whose ideas were polemical to say the least among orthodox Objectivists
The easiest way to change the World is changing the way you see it

#19 Michael Stuart Kelly

Michael Stuart Kelly

    $$$$$$

  • Root Admin
  • 20,250 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 02 August 2010 - 01:20 PM

As for why I was banned? You'd have to ask Joe. I asked him to quote one statement of mine defending Christianity. He said he had "a feeling."

Ted,

I can answer.

Rowlands is a preacher, pure and simple. Your posts were off message to what he wants to preach. So you had to go.

"Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offense unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of Objectivism (with me as guru), but those that be of altruists."

Also, if you bring up the emotions, he claims you are arguing based on them, and not based on reason. Part of his preaching message is that emotions are to be looked down on as fluff.

At this point, you had better not disagree with him. He has a quite thin skin when you tell him he is wrong and his reactions are strictly emotion-based. Boy, can he get pissed over nothing...

:)

Michael

Know thyself...


#20 Rich Engle

Rich Engle

    $$$$$$

  • Members
  • 2,863 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Myers, Florida, USA
  • Interests:Philosophy, Religion, Psychology, Chess, Music, Spirituality.

Posted 02 August 2010 - 01:48 PM

Yeah. He's kind of like "Emotions are not tools of cognition. Unless I say so."

Visit My Blog!

beyondevenbatcountry.blogspot.com


"There is no way that writers can be tamed and rendered civilized or even cured. the only solution known to science is to provide the patient with an isolation room, where he can endure the acute stages in private and where food can be poked in to him with a stick." -- Robert A. Heinlein





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users