In the gospel of Mary, Simon Peter is even more derogatory of women than is here indicated-- as he feels slighted that Jesus talked so much to Mary.
so you truly think that Jesus was a misogynist?
spinning off from another thread, have jesus' teachings been less than universally helpful to mankind?
how do we measure if a particular philosophy is helpful or harmful?.
i am going to use the "universal morals" listed here.
In the gospel of Mary, Simon Peter is even more derogatory of women than is here indicated-- as he feels slighted that Jesus talked so much to Mary.
so you truly think that Jesus was a misogynist?
spinning off from another thread, have jesus' teachings been less than universally helpful to mankind?
how do we measure if a particular philosophy is helpful or harmful?.
i am going to use the "universal morals" listed here.
Really, cofty?
The practical reality of following Jesus' teaching still seems best known by the ignorant slave girls tortured by Pliny's orders. Jesus' teaching had them aspire not to lie,steal or commit adultery. Perhaps they felt they had their sins remitted, felt a return to dignity.
I felt that way. It is not a small thing. If you can give me a way to dignify the poor and the help ones who do wrong to a renewed life, tell me what it is. And how well would it "read" off the page in 2,000 years? Especially if some bumble fingers did the writing instead of you?
spinning off from another thread, have jesus' teachings been less than universally helpful to mankind?
how do we measure if a particular philosophy is helpful or harmful?.
i am going to use the "universal morals" listed here.
Very well for you, you are a saint.
But for the rest of us who needed (and still need) remedial work to function in these areas--who is there to help?
Jesus.
The church that grabbed power as time went on condemned (called other writings "heresies" "Gnosticism" et al) stories of Jesus that varied from their very handy religious construction of him. Yet above all the conflicting stories about him, one teaching dominates-Love one another as I have loved you. Throw all else away and this is the best thing of all.
It straightens out what is crooked. It allows us to separate the dross from the gold even in the undependable propaganda the churches have laid on about him.
spinning off from another thread, have jesus' teachings been less than universally helpful to mankind?
how do we measure if a particular philosophy is helpful or harmful?.
i am going to use the "universal morals" listed here.
Cofty,
Do you realize that by accepting only the canonized, homogenized gospels we can't discuss this topic properly? You concede some value in "sanctified fables", but you don't realize that you only allow for fables/fictions to be discussed. Is it fair to center the discussion of Jesus' teachings on the least reliable stories about him?
Allow for a Jesus who is NOT a designer diety constructed by bishops.
Further, if the Jesus' teachings handed down are found elsewhere in the world--I say,"WHAT OF IT?"
On another of your threads you stated that the core of Jesus' teaching did revolve around the Golden Rule while noting the teaching was not even original with him. WHAT OF IT? Are the value of his teachings generally LESS wonderful if they have been resonating in other cultures, places and times? What could possibly be the problem with that?
I have to say that it is cruel to use your considerable goodness and wit to do further damage to the reputation of a man who, despite the bizarre constructions laid over his grave by others, still shines as an advocate for the desperate, the ignorant and the poor. Oddly if not miraculously, these same desperate, ignorant and poor have been able to mine the gold in he teachings more often than not.
Read other sources, Cofty.
spinning off from another thread, have jesus' teachings been less than universally helpful to mankind?
how do we measure if a particular philosophy is helpful or harmful?.
i am going to use the "universal morals" listed here.
Cofty, have you ever read any of the gnostic gospels? Why do you prefer to quote only the gospel versions of the women-haters and the power-hungry? the ones that created a powerful institution of control.
the poor need/needed Jesus to help them escape this kind of misery.
Pliny the Younger caught a couple of slave women in 112 A.D. had them tortured to get information about the religious meetings they were going to in the mornings. they were Christians. All he could find was that they were encouraging one another not to lie, steal or commit adultery. and they ate a simple meal together(not "holy communion" it is otherwise noted) My guess is that they, like myself listened to the stories which were NOT YET CODIFIED into the troublesome doctines that would later crush women--and other disenfranchized people.
spinning off from another thread, have jesus' teachings been less than universally helpful to mankind?
how do we measure if a particular philosophy is helpful or harmful?.
i am going to use the "universal morals" listed here.
Jgnat-Is it advantageous to take the best of what we imagine the man to be (perfect in love, perfect in truth) no matter what the reality was? Basically, living with an ideal?
Cofty- Yes I can see that. It reduces the gospels to a sanctified Aesop's fable. As long as believers can be honest about that I can see the value.
At last! we have common ground.
spinning off from another thread, have jesus' teachings been less than universally helpful to mankind?
how do we measure if a particular philosophy is helpful or harmful?.
i am going to use the "universal morals" listed here.
Peter and the rest of the apostles fudged on this "leaving the family behind" once the Lord was gone .
According to 1 Cor. 9:5 they hauled wives along with them. Maybe they had the kids in Christian daycare though-- as a partial concession to abandoning their hated ones.
Maybe they were hedging on Jesus. Or they deliberately twisted the definition of "in the recreation". Maybe they were ticked off at Jesus because of his double standard---after all, he handed his responsibility to his mom to another disciple at his death. Piker.
sometimes i have to recheck my motives for doing things.. sometimes i do things for the pure joy of it...dance, yoga, nature walk, listen to music, read something interesting, etc.
but, sometimes when i am engaged in something, like college studies(which i do for the end result and also enrichment), i get flashes of my past that creep in that remind me of a negative message, and it makes me wonder if one of my motives is to also prove something about my self.
at times i recall my ex-husband calling me 'stupid' or 'dumb'.
Fly on over it. You will!
Good for you getting on with life. Blue days come and I can understand not filling the family in on all the details...
You are not dumb--and I don't know you. But I know people who say that don't say it because it is true--they say it to hurt.
Good night, Faery.
Maeve
spinning off from another thread, have jesus' teachings been less than universally helpful to mankind?
how do we measure if a particular philosophy is helpful or harmful?.
i am going to use the "universal morals" listed here.
Tec, thanks for your kind words.
It is surely a difficult position to find myself in--no longer bound by religious doctrine yet guided by the words of a man, though not a charlatan, who may never have made the claims that have been attributed to him.
Yet his example and teachings have and continue to shape my life. I love the Jesus I met.
I am possibly searching through an area of faith that will seem hostile to most views of Jesus. Considering the good he has done for me, some might see me as a traitor.
At any rate, I wish you well as you listen to Him. I, too, have my way of listening.
Maeve
spinning off from another thread, have jesus' teachings been less than universally helpful to mankind?
how do we measure if a particular philosophy is helpful or harmful?.
i am going to use the "universal morals" listed here.
This thread has been on my head all day, Jgnat. I enjoy the posts and these press me to reflect on the teachings of Jesus and their "fit" with humanity.
And speaking of posts, I was out of town when you opened the thread that has its link above. Interesting to see your line of inquiry.
I never dismiss cofty's indictments of Jesus. But in view of the frank tampering and political management of the gospels, it seems too obvious that the early church"fathers" wrote the stories of Jesus to build a highway to control and power. I just do not see Jesus forcing a troop of followers into the binds you describe, cofty. He was too reasonable everywhere else.
It was frightening when I realized that the Jesus I had taken into my life was not the same Jesus that the churches taught.
These last few days of forum discussion have made me face that.
Remembering that I read the gospel of thomas 35 years ago( you know the gnostic gospels were considered heresies), remembering how beautifully they matched the teachings that were "love"-ly in the canonical NT, I found and re-read them at work. I am even now more struck by their freedom: no judgement, no Armeggiddon, freedom from rules and hierarchy--no resurrection and afterlife, no virgin birth. And women were welcome.
I really wonder, without the theological/doctrinal bits to show Jesus as the son of God--would anyone listen to him? If he were simply a good wise teacher?