Chrisnu Reads the Bible [Archive]

D_Davis

03-15-2010, 06:00 PM

Women in Church: Cover Your Head! ...and Be Quiet! (No, Really. That's What It Says.) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zGHX77Emd54)

Paul is at the root of most of the problems I have with modern Christianity. While I admire some of the things he had to say, I think he missed the point a lot.

It's funny how so many Christians are anti-homosexual because of Paul, and yet they don't expect women to wear head scarfs or to remain quiet in Church. Also, how many Christian men have had sex with their wives while they're on their period? That, too, is condemned by Paul.

Christians sure do base a lot of their religious practice on Paul - why? He was just a man like you and I.

chrisnu

03-15-2010, 07:08 PM

Christians sure do base a lot of their religious practice on Paul - why? He was just a man like you and I.
Many Christians go off the presupposition that all canonical scripture is equally inspired by God. The proof-text given for this is usually 2 Timothy 3:16-17, a Pauline epistle (although some scholars do not believe he wrote 2 Timothy). However, even those who believe that we're in a "new covenant" (an idea which appears in Paul's writings, particularly 2 Corinthians) pick and choose which Christian scriptures to put into practice. The only group entirely consistent in upholding them all, I believe, is the Orthodox Church.

megladon8

03-15-2010, 07:12 PM

Have I only ever seen links to these on MatchCut? I feel like I've seen links to these videos elsewhere.

I honestly had no idea it was you, Chrisnu.

chrisnu

03-15-2010, 07:16 PM

Have I only ever seen links to these on MatchCut? I feel like I've seen links to these videos elsewhere.
I've posted links on Icine, but that's it. Anything else must be the Internet working its magic. :D

megladon8

03-15-2010, 07:19 PM

I've posted links on Icine, but that's it. Anything else must be the Internet working its magic. :D

I guess I kind of expected you to look a little more like Billy Bob Thornton.

My mind works in weird ways like that.

And for your information, I actually am a purple skull beast.

Mara

03-15-2010, 07:26 PM

Can I put in a request for Balaam and the Donkey? Because I'm curious regarding your thoughts on talking donkeys.

chrisnu

03-15-2010, 09:26 PM

Can I put in a request for Balaam and the Donkey? Because I'm curious regarding your thoughts on talking donkeys.
Yes, ma'am.

Milky Joe

03-15-2010, 09:49 PM

A more interesting, challenging idea might be to go through the Bible to find the parts that are actually worth listening to...

Ezee E

03-15-2010, 09:57 PM

I enjoyed watching your cat in the background.

chrisnu

03-15-2010, 10:21 PM

A more interesting, challenging idea might be to go through the Bible to find the parts that are actually worth listening to...
That question is too boring! :P

I haven't read it in a while, but it's coming up next month - I'd say that Ecclesiastes definitely has interesting things to say, as well as Proverbs. I've never read the Wisdom of Solomon, because it was considered part of the untouchable Apocrypha that you're supposed to ignore. I'll have to make that an elective, since the reading plan I'm going through doesn't include any deuterocanonical books.

megladon8

03-15-2010, 10:24 PM

I appreciate some of the moral lessons the Bible has to teach, particularly to children when they are at the stage in their life when they are beginning to explore the difference between "right" and "wrong".

However, I find it brazenly stupid when people take the Bible literally, and as historical fact.

To quote David from The Mist, "are you being willfully dense or something?"

Mara

03-15-2010, 10:57 PM

The Song of Solomon is beautiful poetry. Please read it (King James Version) for the literary merit alone.

Mara

03-15-2010, 10:58 PM

However, I find it brazenly stupid when people take the Bible literally, and as historical fact.

I'm confused by your statement. Do you mean that you don't believe that any of the Bible should be read as literal or historical fact? That it is a complete allegory? Or do you mean that readers should pick and choose what they take literally and what they take metaphorically?

D_Davis

03-15-2010, 11:19 PM

I prefer the Apocrypha.

D_Davis

03-15-2010, 11:23 PM

I read the bible as a collection of divine fictions, myth, allegory, and metaphor told within an historical context and setting, that convey a version of the divine mystery.

chrisnu

03-15-2010, 11:24 PM

I prefer the Apocrypha.
I'm interested in what you've read, if you don't mind sharing. I have thought in passing about why inter-testamental literature is considered contraband by most Protestants. The only explanation I've been given in the past is "there weren't any prophets, so the books weren't inspired".

D_Davis

03-15-2010, 11:25 PM

The Song of Solomon is beautiful poetry. Please read it (King James Version) for the literary merit alone.

Yes it is.

Derek

03-15-2010, 11:28 PM

A more interesting, challenging idea might be to go through the Bible to find the parts that are actually worth listening to...

That's what church is for, dude. Knock yourself out.

I'm confused by your statement. Do you mean that you don't believe that any of the Bible should be read as literal or historical fact? That it is a complete allegory? Or do you mean that readers should pick and choose what they take literally and what they take metaphorically?

I think he's referring to people who read the Bible as literal, factual truth as in there really was a talking a snake, a burning bush, a Garden of Eden, 2 of every existing species on Noah's arc, that the world is 6,000 years old, etc.

Mara

03-15-2010, 11:32 PM

I think he's referring to people who read the Bible as literal, factual truth as in there really was a talking a snake, a burning bush, a Garden of Eden, 2 of every existing species on Noah's arc, that the world is 6,000 years old, etc.

I believe in a literal Garden of Eden, burning bush, and I believe that the world literally flooded with Noah.

The 6,000 year old thing is, I think, nonsense, and is a complete conjecture. I also think that the world wasn't created in seven days, but more in seven distinct periods.

megladon8

03-15-2010, 11:34 PM

I'm confused by your statement. Do you mean that you don't believe that any of the Bible should be read as literal or historical fact? That it is a complete allegory? Or do you mean that readers should pick and choose what they take literally and what they take metaphorically?

I think very little of the Bible is factual. I believe Jesus existed, but he was just a man.

People who believe that the world is only a few thousand years old, that we all descend from two people, and that reading the Bible cures everything from psychological to physical ailments make me lose faith in humanity.

I also find it maddening when people attribute any bad event in their life (from illness and death to financial ruin) to "God's plan". Take some responsibility for your own life. If you go to jail for killing someone while driving drunk, it's not "God challenging you".

Milky Joe

03-15-2010, 11:34 PM

That's what church is for, dude. Knock yourself out.

*smirk* Is it really? I thought it was for the free bread and wine.

D_Davis

03-15-2010, 11:37 PM

I'm interested in what you've read, if you don't mind sharing. I have thought in passing about why inter-testamental literature is considered contraband by most Protestants. The only explanation I've been given in the past is "there weren't any prophets, so the books weren't inspired".

I can talk a little bit about it at some point. I'm not too concerned with the prophets, or the books that people think were more inspired than others. I'm far more interested in personal experience. It is my belief that personal experience trumps scripture, and so all the prophecy or inspiration in the world means nothing in the light of what happens to you. As far as I'm concerned, the authors of the bible were just men like you and I. No better, no worse. In this sense, I find what you have to say about God in your own words far more relevant and meaningful than what some author said thousands of years ago.

The bible is a kind of People's History, a book that reflects a certain society's perception of God (it is more of a reflection of them than it is a reflection of who or what God is), and therefor I think each generation should add to it their own unique perception. I don't understand why it is a book that is closed off and sealed. It should be viewed as a living document to which new experiences are constantly being added. At one time, the books of the bible were new and radical - why stop adding? If God continues to work today, then shouldn't we continue to relate experiences? Why define our faith, the religion, based on writings thousands of years old?

megladon8

03-15-2010, 11:38 PM

And as an aside, more than once I've had this exact conversation with people who are believers of different Christian faiths...

PERSON: I have absolute proof that God exists.

ME: Oh really?

PERSON: Yes.

ME: And what would that be?

PERSON: He gave me faith. My faith is proof of his existence.

This kind of thing makes me want to dig a hole and live in it for the rest of my natural life.

D_Davis

03-15-2010, 11:41 PM

I also find it maddening when people attribute any bad event in their life (from illness and death to financial ruin) to "God's plan". Take some responsibility for your own life. If you go to jail for killing someone while driving drunk, it's not "God challenging you".

Me, too. Can't stand this. God didn't give you that job. God didn't give your child cancer. God didn't help your team win the big game. It's all up to you, or nature, or biology, and sometimes dumb luck - good or bad.

The sooner we realize that God is not in control, the better off we will all be.

Milky Joe

03-15-2010, 11:42 PM

This kind of thing makes me want to dig a hole and live in it for the rest of my natural life.

Also as an aside: are you incapable of speaking in anything other than hyperbole?

D_Davis

03-15-2010, 11:43 PM

*smirk* Is it really? I thought it was for the free bread and wine.

Basically - a social club.

megladon8

03-15-2010, 11:44 PM

Also as an aside: are you incapable of speaking in anything other than hyperbole?

Why does it matter?

I like hyperbole.

Mara

03-15-2010, 11:45 PM

I like hyperbole.

I LOVE IT BEST OF ALL THINGS.

Melville

03-15-2010, 11:46 PM

I haven't read it in a while, but it's coming up next month - I'd say that Ecclesiastes definitely has interesting things to say, as well as Proverbs.
I love me some Ecclesiastes.

megladon8

03-15-2010, 11:47 PM

I LOVE YOU BEST OF ALL THINGS.

:pritch:

chrisnu

03-15-2010, 11:49 PM

Per your request, Mara, I will make a video about Balaam and his donkey. However, I'm not sure I will be able to top this.

Balaam's Donkey my Ass! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6EOsiD6Uv30)

Mara

03-15-2010, 11:50 PM

:pritch:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v254/maragirl/what-you-did-there-i-see-itthumbnai.jpg

D_Davis

03-15-2010, 11:51 PM

Per your request, Mara, I will make a video about Balaam and his donkey. However, I'm not sure I will be able to top this.

Balaam's Donkey my Ass! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6EOsiD6Uv30)

:D

megladon8

03-15-2010, 11:52 PM

Do other people on this forum agree that hyperbole is a moderately pleasing exercise that can be used sparingly to somewhat enhance areas of text which may or may not be large or small?

Milky Joe

03-15-2010, 11:53 PM

Why does it matter?

I like hyperbole.

Doesn't matter. Just grates on me sometimes. Maybe because my mom does it: every movie she sees is "the best movie I've ever seen in my life." It's like, how can you... well, nevermind. Doesn't matter.

megladon8

03-15-2010, 11:54 PM

Doesn't matter. Just grates on me sometimes. Maybe because my mom does it: every movie she sees is "the best movie I've ever seen in my life." It's like, how can you... well, nevermind. Doesn't matter.

I find it annoying as well, but I blame it (partly) on the way I was taught writing in elementary school.

We were taught to use AS MANY ADJECTIVES AND ADVERBS AS HUMANLY POSSIBLE!!!

This is why I use words like "really" a lot, despite it almost never being necessary. After nearly 10 years of never writing a noun or verb without a modifier, it's a hard habit to drop.

Sycophant

03-16-2010, 12:35 AM

Chrisnu, I had come to be convinced you look like Billy-Bob Thornton. I'm very interested in these. Will check out later. Hope to respond with some kind of response that'll avoid the standard pitfalls of Match Cut Religious Discussion.

chrisnu

03-17-2010, 12:02 AM

Here is an example of why the Old Testament/Tanakh should not be read by children:

Yet she increased her whorings, remembering the days of her youth, when she played the whore in the land of Egypt and lusted after her paramours there, whose members were like those of donkeys, and whose emission was like that of stallions. Thus you longed for the lewdness of your youth, when the Egyptians fondled your bosom and caressed your young breasts.

:eek:

The word of the Lord. Praise be to God.

I should have another video up tonight.

bac0n

03-17-2010, 01:02 AM

Holy shit, i never knew it was actually you doing those videos. I thought you were posting videos of some guy going through the bible cuz you found them interesting.

FWIW, I find them interesting too. Quite.

Mysterious Dude

03-17-2010, 04:24 AM

It's been so long since I actually believed in Christianity, it might as well be Voodoo now.

chrisnu

03-17-2010, 08:48 AM

Regarding the Nephilim, and Biblical Retconning (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IdoDPiHSBU4)

chrisnu

03-17-2010, 09:33 AM

As promised:

Balaam (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Z37QLZrdrY)

chrisnu

03-17-2010, 04:20 PM

I received a response on FB from a former church acquaintance regarding the second video on the Nephilim, and I can understand the point of view. I expected such:

For there to be retroactive continuity, doesn't it assume that the (A)author was inconsistent and needed to patch up the holes afterward? If that is the premise then I have no response.

If it can be assumed that there are no inconsistencies in the canon then it's not that far-fetched for Gen 6 to have repeated.

Ultimately anything not explicitly stated in the canon is speculation.

But, that almost exactly fits the point I was trying to make. I let that go, and tried to rephrase. My response:

I think that the question the evidence raises is this: can non-contradiction be a claim upon which speculation is created in order to justify it? The fans and writers of The X-Files and Star Trek make the same claim. Folks have to answer that question for themselves, based upon the evidence we have.

*shrugs*

Mara

03-17-2010, 04:55 PM

Regarding the Nephilim, and Biblical Retconning (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IdoDPiHSBU4)

I use the KJV of the Bible almost exclusively, and it doesn't appear to use the word "Nephilim," but instead simply defines the word as "giant." So, for fun, I looked up in the LDS study helps what they said about giants.

Unusually large, tall persons, apparently having great physical strength. They are mentioned both before the flood (Gen. 6: 4; Moses 8: 18) and after (Num. 13: 33; Deut. 2: 10-12, 20; Deut. 3: 11-13; Deut. 9: 2; Josh. 15: 8; Josh. 18: 16). Raphah of Gath was said to be the father of several giants of whom Goliath was one (1 Sam. 17: 4-7; 2 Sam. 21: 16-22; 1 Chr. 20: 6). A 12-fingered, 12-toed giant is also mentioned as one of the sons. The giants in Palestine were also known as Ankims, Emins, and Zamzummins.

There's no discussion of how these giants existed both before and after the flood, or if the word was simply a generic one used to describe very tall persons who may or may not be descended from the same genetic line. Interesting.

By the by, in the tv show Torchwood they have a little memory-erasing pill they slip to people whenever it's convenient to the plot. They call the drug "retcon." Har har har.

Mara

03-17-2010, 05:36 PM

As promised:

Balaam (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Z37QLZrdrY)

Very intriguing.

The story of Balaam has always interested me for multiple reasons. Mostly because it's clear we're not getting the full story. Given that he is respected by Balak, and that his name begins with a B and has the double As in it, Balaam is almost assuredly from the people who worshipped Ba'al and not Elohim. There is no evidence that Balaam is an Israelite or a Levite (which would give him the authority to offer sacrifices.)

So, if Balaam has no authority, why is God speaking to him at all? Why the divine manifestations and angels?

Obviously, the story was written down as a faith-promoting anecdote for the Israelites, because it proves that a man cannot curse God's chosen people, even if he tries. So, one would assume that Balaam is a sort of hero figure, since he blesses Israel thrice.

But later mentions of Balaam are not complimentary.

We are informed of Balaam's death in Numbers 31:8 when the Israelites go after the Midianites:

And they slew the kings of Midian, beside the rest of them that were slain; namely, Evi, and Rekem, and Zur, and Hur, and Reba, five kings of Midian: Balaam also the son of Beor they slew with the sword.

So, they killed all the men. But Moses specifically wants them to kill the women, too:

14 And Moses was wroth with the officers of the host, with the captains over thousands, and captains over hundreds, which came from the battle.

15 And Moses said unto them, Have ye saved all the women alive?

16 Behold, these caused the children of Israel, through the counsel of Balaam, to commit trespass against the Lord in the matter of Peor, and there was a plague among the congregation of the Lord.

17 Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him.

18 But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.

So there's this whole story that we're missing. At some point, Balaam apparently counseled the women of Midian to tempt the men into sin (presumably sexual sin) which caused a plague among the Israelites.

This story, which we are never told directly, is cited several more times.

Peter has an interesting view of the donkey story in 2:14-15:

...cursed children:

15 Which have forsaken the right way, and are gone astray, following the way of Balaam the son of Bosor, who loved the wages of unrighteousness;

16 But was rebuked for his iniquity: the dumb ass speaking with man’s voice forbad the madness of the prophet.

Jude cites Balaam's sin as being priestcraft (of prophesying for money) in Jude 1:11:

Woe unto them! for they have gone in the way of Cain, and ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward, cand perished in the gainsaying of Core.

In Revelations, John talks about the plague story again, so one may assume it still existed in some form in New Testament times, even though it doesn't anymore. He provides a couple more details: (Rev. 2:14)

But I have a few things against thee, because thou hast there them that hold the doctrine of Balaam, who taught Balac to cast a stumblingblock before the children of Israel, to eat things sacrificed unto idols, and to commit fornication.

So many questions.

chrisnu

03-17-2010, 05:44 PM

I use the KJV of the Bible almost exclusively, and it doesn't appear to use the word "Nephilim," but instead simply defines the word as "giant." So, for fun, I looked up in the LDS study helps what they said about giants.

There's no discussion of how these giants existed both before and after the flood, or if the word was simply a generic one used to describe very tall persons who may or may not be descended from the same genetic line. Interesting.

That's true. I think that the KJV translated the Hebrew word nephilim as giants because they already read ahead into Numbers and Deuteronomy, as I did, and realized to whom the word was referring. Other translations followed in kind, while others leave the word untranslated. Some folks have tried to say that Genesis 6:4 is referring to the commingling of the descendents of Seth and Cain, but I think that's extrapolation which is not followed by the evidence.

chrisnu

03-17-2010, 06:01 PM

The only first-hand account of Midianite women enticing the Israelites is in Numbers 25. This confused me because the passage first talks about Israelite men having sex with Moabite women, but that abruptly changes to a Midianite woman in verse 6, and the chapter ends with God commanded the Israelites to exterminate the Midianites.

chrisnu

03-18-2010, 04:41 PM

I finished reading Numbers last night. The video on Numbers 31 is going to get animated. Seriously, how is this rationalized?

chrisnu

03-19-2010, 05:08 AM

Mosaic Vows, and Jephthah (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQd5rRNuj4w)

BuffaloWilder

03-19-2010, 05:13 AM

Sigh.

chrisnu

03-19-2010, 05:25 AM

Sigh.
Was it something I did?

chrisnu

03-19-2010, 05:36 AM

Numbers 31. (Part I) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RHmXVkaetW8)

BuffaloWilder

03-19-2010, 06:04 AM

Was it something I did?

You're not really bringing anything new to the discussion of the moral worth of these old fables and laws, and that kind of thing - it's just that same kind of self-conscious "gee, aren't these old scientific laws and morals wacky and antiquated?" that you can see all over Youtube, and elsewhere. It's really annoying.

This goes both ways, too - if you're nonreligious and looking to make a legitimate argument for or against certain doctrines, then something like this isn't going to really help accomplish that.

So, yeah.

BuffaloWilder

03-19-2010, 06:08 AM

Also, on Paul -

- there's a burgeoning movement popping up here and there among theologians that is disregarding Paul entirely; John H. Yoger's stuff seems to be a big reference point.

chrisnu

03-19-2010, 06:18 AM

I apologize that they are annoying. I suppose I've been quite unaware of the sheltered and toxic environment I have been in. I've mostly making these videos from the perspective of asking questions of those who believe the Bible to be the inerrant word of God.

Would Christianity even have existed without Paul? Certainly not what's considered to be "orthodox" today.

chrisnu

03-19-2010, 06:25 AM

Numbers 31. (Part II) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z0GW8CQJ9Lk)

BuffaloWilder

03-19-2010, 06:26 AM

...so, coming from that perspective, what is this going to change, exactly?

I'm sure most educated Christians acknowledge some of the Old School barbarism of the Old Testament; and, there are many, many, many rationalizations for it - ranging from the OT acting mainly as a cultural documentation of fables and laws and all of that good stuff of many groups of people over many, many different periods of time, all the way down to 'well, god mellowed out because he had a kid,' said in all seriousness.

So, what I'm asking is, what's new here?

chrisnu

03-19-2010, 06:38 AM

So, what I'm asking is, what's new here?
Probably nothing. I certainly don't claim to have any original thoughts. Maybe I'll be able to find another person who isn't educated about the Bible they believe in (and I probably fall into that group) to look beyond their unquestionable dogma and see what's actually in there.

Mara

03-19-2010, 12:31 PM

So, what I'm asking is, what's new here?

Color me deeply confused.

Are the film reviews up in FDT bringing new and never-before-seen insight to films that have been watched thousands of times before? Are the reactions to books in this forum bringing up and clarifying points that have baffled scholars for generations? Are we, as Match-Cutters, solving the philosophical and literary problems of our generation?

Chrisnu is posting his reactions to a fascinating and deeply influential literary/philosophical/spiritual work that most people are too lazy to read all the way through. I consider that an admirable endeavor.

Your little comments, on the other hand, aren't enriching the conversation much.

BuffaloWilder

03-19-2010, 05:25 PM

Are the film reviews up in FDT bringing new and never-before-seen insight to films that have been watched thousands of times before? Are the reactions to books in this forum bringing up and clarifying points that have baffled scholars for generations?

Most of the time, no - but, there's certainly a far greater chance of some type of new ground being covered, even if it's not entirely fleshed out, in both of these aspects. At least, from what I've read.

Are we, as Match-Cutters, solving the philosophical and literary problems of our generation?

I think you misunderstand me - I'm not chiding Chrisnu for not providing any answers to these kinds of things. I'm saying that his criticisms of these old works as they stand aren't really unique in either their approach nor are do they seem to be confronting anything at all other than 'these laws and morals from an antiquated culture sure are - antiquated.' Which doesn't say much at all, really.

Chrisnu is posting his reactions to a fascinating and deeply influential literary/philosophical/spiritual work that most people are too lazy to read all the way through. I consider that an admirable endeavor.

Listen, it's great that he's reading The Bible, but - just like with any religious tome - you can't just apply a skimming surface read over it and then act shocked when you come upon something like the Levitical Laws, even from a secular standpoint. I mean - right?

Your little comments, on the other hand, aren't enriching the conversation much.

Ooh, um - how pithy? I guess?

Mara

03-19-2010, 06:02 PM

Listen, it's great that he's reading The Bible, but - just like with any religious tome - you can't just apply a skimming surface read over it and then act shocked when you come upon something like the Levitical Laws, even from a secular standpoint. I mean - right?

Look, I'm sorry, but coming in, sighing, and then being condescending about the content isn't, in my opinion, an appropriate reaction to the thread. It's called "Chrisnu Reads the Bible." Which is exactly what he's doing. He at no point has made a pretention of conversion, criticism, or confrontation. If you disapprove of the content, start your own thread.

It takes a certain amount of bravery to discuss spiritualism on a board like Match Cut, where the gross majority of posters are not religious, and respected and well-liked number are fiercely and vocally opposed to religion in any form. Chrisnu was raised in a very sheltered environment with a limited worldview, and as an adult, he needs to figure out what he believes and why. Taking a step out from unquestioning faith into a troubling and careful reading of Chritianity's precepts can't be easy.

It's a difficult journey to take, this is a difficult place to take it, and (as an added measure of vulnerability) he's doing it by showing us his own face, his own words, and his own home. (And cat.) In other words, he's putting himself out there, and I respect him for it. We may or may not agree on content-- that doesn't really matter too much.

I'm annoyed because this seems like a singularly inappropriate moment to take shots at him. In five years, Chrisnu may be deeply religious. Or he may be an athiest. Or he may still be searching for truth. But right now, he's just reading the Bible.

Hugh_Grant

03-19-2010, 07:25 PM

My biblical knowledge is close to nil. I'm convinced that this lack of knowledge will be my downfall on Jeopardy! someday, so I've been watching your videos to help me out with this gap.

However, I'm really distracted by the cats on the bed. A fluffy tuxedo!

Melville

03-19-2010, 07:37 PM

I really like this project and its emotional honesty. Sure, it's not the most original or insightful analysis (and unlike Mara, I think we actually have had plenty of that in discussions about movies), but it's an interestingly personal, forthright journey, and it has enough particulars to be intellectually interesting as well. Kudos to chrisnu.

EDIT: came off as more negative than I intended.

BuffaloWilder

03-19-2010, 07:47 PM

Look, I'm sorry, but coming in, sighing, and then being condescending about the content isn't, in my opinion, an appropriate reaction to the thread.

Condescending?

It's called "Chrisnu Reads the Bible." Which is exactly what he's doing. He at no point has made a pretention of conversion, criticism, or confrontation. If you disapprove of the content, start your own thread.

...but why? My criticism is of this thread, and its content. Why would I create a wholly separate thread to talk about my problems with this thread, I mean who does that?

Chrisnu was raised in a very sheltered environment with a limited worldview, and as an adult, he needs to figure out what he believes and why. Taking a step out from unquestioning faith into a troubling and careful reading of Chritianity's precepts can't be easy.

Well, I haven't read the guy's biography yet, so don't spoil it. But, that's the thing - I'm kind of repeating myself at this point, but look. That's great - if this is the case, then I applaud him for the effort. But, it doesn't really seem like a "troubling and careful" reading - to me, at least.

It's a difficult journey to take, this is a difficult place to take it, and (as an added measure of vulnerability) he's doing it by showing us his own face, his own words, and his own home. (And cat.) In other words, he's putting himself out there, and I respect him for it.

To be fair, he isn't really taking on any unpopular viewpoints, here.

We may or may not agree on content-- that doesn't really matter too much.

Well, that's generally where my qualms were aimed, you see.

I'm annoyed because this seems like a singularly inappropriate moment to take shots at him.

What the hell is your problem? This is an open forum - I'm not taking any cheap or personal shots at the guy. He is - like you said - putting himself out there, which means he should be okay with receiving some criticism, right?

In five years, Chrisnu may be deeply religious. Or he may be an athiest. Or he may still be searching for truth. But right now, he's just reading the Bible.

Well, that's great! Still, if this really is his first time taking both books on the entire way through, then shouldn't he be putting more emphasis on staying away from unnecessary cynicism?

Mara

03-19-2010, 08:00 PM

Condescending?

You disagree? Go ahead and read your comments again.

...but why? My criticism is of this thread, and its content. Why would I create a wholly separate thread to talk about my problems with this thread, I mean who does that?

Oh, for goodness' sakes. I'm not going to argue just for the sake of arguing, but I meant if you want to have a different sort of discussion on the Bible, go ahead and have one. Make a thread that would fulfill your own expectations of what you think biblical criticism should be, without imposing them on someone else.

BuffaloWilder

03-19-2010, 08:15 PM

You disagree? Go ahead and read your comments again.

'Kay, I read them.

...pluh?

Make a thread that would fulfill your own expectations of what you think biblical criticism should be, without imposing them on someone else.

Which would be...not saying the same old things over and over again? Not to simply apply a base reading to old cultural texts?

Huh. Well, I'll keep that in mind.

D_Davis

03-19-2010, 09:31 PM

I think this is a cool project. It interests me because I am far more interested in what certain religions mean to individuals, apart from what they mean to organizations concerned with canon and orthodoxy.

BuffaloWilder

03-19-2010, 09:36 PM

Would Christianity even have existed without Paul? Certainly not what's considered to be "orthodox" today.

Probably not in anything resembling its modern form, so I suppose you could say he's served his purpose, but - I think a lot of people are beginning to realize what Thomas Jefferson was on about, that Paul's writings just don't gel with what came before in the Gospel texts.

D_Davis

03-19-2010, 10:09 PM

Probably not in anything resembling its modern form, so I suppose you could say he's served his purpose, but - I think a lot of people are beginning to realize what Thomas Jefferson was on about, that Paul's writings just don't gel with what came before in the Gospel texts.

Yep.

Christianity would probably exist without Paul because we would still have the teachings of Christ.

Paul came up with some crazy rules. I think he really missed the point. But then again, so have many religious leaders.

chrisnu

03-19-2010, 10:28 PM

I guess I just know the wrong people. I've asked quite a few about most of the topics in the videos I've recorded, and I seem to have unpopular (disagreed-with) opinions about Matthew's use of Old Testament prophecy, Jephthah and his daughter, the questionable use of science (apparently by God) in Leviticus, Paul's opinions regarding women and outsiders, sanction of human sacrifice, and the origin of the Nephilim.

I'm not finished reading through the gospels yet, but when I am, I'll probably start making videos about their use of Old Testment prophecy, not just the two examples in Matthew. If this is all common knowledge which should be taken for granted, I'm sorry.

chrisnu

03-21-2010, 05:25 AM

This isn't really related to anything specific I've been reading in the Bible, just thoughts I've been having about coincidences, intercessory prayer, and Biblical morality:

Religious Apophenia and Biblical Worldviews (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CsIlW3BQc7I)

I may get something up later.

chrisnu

03-25-2010, 05:14 PM

Moses: an Unreliable Witness (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=peIxyNIq5ak)

I wonder if this persists with Moses' continued retelling of events in Deuteronomy.

I also first noticed what may be an anachronism which I didn't pick up before in Deuteronomy 8:9 - the mention of iron. I just took the mention of it for granted. It turns out that the first mention of iron is in Genesis 4:22, which mentions Tubal-cain working with iron. Tubal-cain is three generations removed from Adam, and the most popular date I've seen for his existence is around 4000 BCE. I'm going to have to research dates for the discovery of iron, but that doesn't sound right.

chrisnu

03-31-2010, 08:33 AM

:eek:

Yahweh: One Among Many Elohim? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CVEsA6gYy9s)

chrisnu

03-31-2010, 09:25 AM

I seriously want to find a Bible translation which does not translate the different names of God into English. I'm getting a feeling that much more is lost in translation than I've realized.

Mara

03-31-2010, 05:20 PM

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v254/maragirl/Bible_stat_jpg_445x1000_upscal e_q85.jpg

Mara

03-31-2010, 05:47 PM

:eek:

Yahweh: One Among Many Elohim? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CVEsA6gYy9s)

This is a tricky one.

I was taught in my faith very differently than most Christian churches regarding the nature of God. For one thing, although we believe in a god who is omniscient, we do not believe in a God who is omnipresent-- we believe that he has a body both like an unlike our own. (Like in the sense of arms and legs, as we are created in his image, but unlike in that he is not mortal.)

We also don't believe in the trinity exactly, but in God the Father, Jesus the Son, and the Holy Spirit being three distinct entities, although one in purpose and intent. We also believe that Jesus was the literal son of God.

I was therefore taught that Elohim was the name by which we know the father, and Yahweh the name by which we know the son-- that Jesus the Son was involved in the creation and governing of mankind before he gained an earthy body and walked amoung us. (By mankind I mean both generally, but also specifically those of the Abrahamic covenant-- the Israelites-- the chosen people.)

Now in terms of plurality and pantheons, I can't pretend to know all the answers, but it's important to note the "Elohim" is, by definition, both singular and plural. (The singular is El, which just means "God"-- not just to the Hebrews, but to everyone in that general area of the world at that time. Deities under the name El were worshipped in multiple mythologies.)

Good ol' Wikipedia says: "In the Torah, the word sometimes acts as a singular noun in Hebrew grammar, and is then generally understood to denote the single God of Israel, while in other cases, it acts as an ordinary plural and refers to the polytheistic notion of multiple gods."

chrisnu

03-31-2010, 08:55 PM

I can understand the concept of an anthropomorphic God being supported by different passages in the Hebrew Bible, which clearly describe a body. On the surface, that seems to be in tension with John 4:24, which states that God is only a spirit. I can also see how Yahweh in the Hebrew Bible could be interpreted as being Jesus, particularly with statements such as John 6:46, which says that no one has seen the Father but the Son. However, based on what I'm reading, that (Jesus being the manifestation of Yahweh) seems to be an understanding superimposed onto the Hebrew Bible, rather than drawn from it.

Perhaps my mistake is expecting things to be consistent. :) (Or failing to recognize revisions)

Mysterious Dude

04-04-2010, 06:53 PM

I find it hard to believe that the Hebrews took 40 years to get from the Red Sea to Jerusalem. They're not that far apart.

D_Davis

04-04-2010, 08:35 PM

The idea of an anthropomorphic God is, IMO, simply projection, superstition, and wishful thinking. It is easier for humankind to relate to and identify with something that we understand. This goes along with my own understanding of the bible, in that it is simply a reflection of a certain group of people's perception of who or what the divine is; it gives us one view of the divine mystery. If God does have a "body" at all then it is the universe in its entirety. We are all part of it, and it is part of us.

chrisnu

04-05-2010, 08:25 AM

I find it hard to believe that the Hebrews took 40 years to get from the Red Sea to Jerusalem. They're not that far apart.
Unless God had them deliberately going around in circles...

On an unrelated note:

Aggressive Negotiations and Manifest Destiny (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_W2pEhpOa4)

chrisnu

04-13-2010, 04:05 PM

Long-winded, yes, but this was a fairly disturbing recurring theme. I think I'll start getting to the prophecies in the gospels and the book of Acts next.

Paul Doesn't Appreciate Questions (Part I) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NHLwiTZjC4)

Paul Doesn't Appreciate Questions (Part II) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nKirKGV9sjo)

Paul Doesn't Appreciate Questions (Part III) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WELBq4z0Z_4)

chrisnu

04-19-2010, 09:12 PM

I've gotten into a little tiff with someone I used to know from church, who wanted me to put up or shut up with evidence which refutes the Doctrine of Inerrancy of the Scriptures®. I have lots of examples, but I picked a couple whoppers which even someone with a dogmatic presupposition such as his may need to think about. Reading through the book of Judges, it's difficult to find a page where there isn't a contradiction, but here they are:

In Judges 1:10, the capture of Hebron is attributed to Judah. In Judges 1:20, the capture of Hebron is attributed to Caleb. In Joshua 10:36-37, and 14:6-14, the capture of Hebron is attributed to Joshua. Which of these is correct?

In Acts 7:15-16 states that Jacob's body was buried in a tomb in Shechem, which Abraham purchased from the sons of Hamor. Genesis 23:27-28 states that Abraham purchased the field of Ephron in Machpelah, to the east of Mamre, from the sons of Heth (the Hittites). Genesis 33:18-19 states that it was Jacob who purchased the field in Shechem from the sons of Hamor. Genesis 50:13 states that Jacob's body was buried in the field Abraham purchased, at Machpelah. Which account is correct?

Mara

04-22-2010, 02:59 PM

I've only known one family that really, really believed in what you would call "inerrancy." Most people accept that any ancient document translated dozens of times from dozens of sources is going to have some problems.

chrisnu

04-22-2010, 04:19 PM

Five days later, and I haven't received a response. Not a surprise. Inerrancy is HUGE among evangelical and Reformed Protestant Christians. It is a fairly new phenomenon, though, which mostly arose as a response to theological liberalism.

This is going to end up a fairly lengthy series, so here goes. If anyone's offended, I mean no offense, just looking for the truth.

Old Testament Prophecy in the New Testament: Isaiah 7:14 (http://youtube.com/watch?v=vl1tr29eBk8)

D_Davis

04-26-2010, 11:25 PM

Five days later, and I haven't received a response. Not a surprise. Inerrancy is HUGE among evangelical and Reformed Protestant Christians. It is a fairly new phenomenon, though, which mostly arose as a response to theological liberalism.

Yep. Inerrancy Doctrine is a relatively modern concept, one that stemmed from the early Protestant movement; I'd bet that you'd be hard pressed to find a serious, scholarly theologian who believes that the Bible is the infallible, literal word of God, as opposed to being a collection of documents conveying a certain group of people's perception of the divine along with other works of divine fiction and ancient history. You sure will find lots of church goers who believe it because their pastor told them, though.

D_Davis

04-26-2010, 11:26 PM

In Judges 1:10, the capture of Hebron is attributed to Judah. In Judges 1:20, the capture of Hebron is attributed to Caleb. In Joshua 10:36-37, and 14:6-14, the capture of Hebron is attributed to Joshua. Which of these is correct?

It doesn't matter. Remember, to the evangelicals all that matters is that you're wrong for questioning the "word of God."

chrisnu

04-26-2010, 11:39 PM

I've been taking notes on these as I've been reading along, and am starting to post videos on how different prophecies in the Old Testament have been used in the New. Isaiah 7:14 (http://youtube.com/watch?v=vl1tr29eBk8), Micah 5:2 (http://youtube.com/watch?v=t6C7k3BTOTg), Hosea 11:1 (http://youtube.com/watch?v=52-2n3_dhSw), Jeremiah 31:15 (http://youtube.com/watch?v=NRhsHb3xZzs), "He Will Be Called a Nazorean" (http://youtube.com/watch?v=StsOaPA2qw0), Isaiah 40:3-5 (http://youtube.com/watch?v=mb5RlBe2OhI), and Isaiah 9:1-7 (http://youtube.com/watch?v=7OsqKTCWphg) are done. I'm eventually going to get through all the prophecies in the gospels, the Acts of the Apostles, and the epistle to the Hebrews. I also put together some thoughts on Jesus' temptation by Satan (http://youtube.com/watch?v=K_QZ10dMjx0), and the "greatest commandment" given by Jesus.

I don't believe I've mentioned it yet, but Yale University has put entire courses of Introduction to New Testament History and Literature (http://oyc.yale.edu/religious-studies/introduction-to-new-testament/) and Introduction to the Old Testament (Hebrew Bible) (http://oyc.yale.edu/religious-studies/introduction-to-the-old-testament-hebrew-bible) on-line. I've been going through the New Testament course, and Dale B. Martin is very insightful. He's confirmed some things I've seen in my own observations, and well as plenty of new things, particularly about the authorship and intent of the Book of Daniel in his lecture on Judaism in the first century.

chrisnu

04-30-2010, 01:10 AM

More prophecy discussed: Isaiah 53 (Part I) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4T0Nd9T7BlI), Isaiah 53 (Part II) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J43NUSQfIZg)

Also:

The 1 Samuel Timeline Makes No Sense (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKaGExXqFsM)

Prophetic Frenzy! Now with Copious Male Nudity! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jrs11c6AkT8)

chrisnu

04-30-2010, 06:17 PM

Sometimes, the bible has its uses. If I lived in Arizona, I'd put up a sign everywhere with this verse:
I didn't want to beat a dead horse in the News thread, since I have my own thread on this. I'll hop on the bandwagon and quote these. Emphasis mine:

Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets; I have come not to abolish but to fulfil. For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth pass away, not one letter, not one stroke of a letter, will pass from the law until all is accomplished. Therefore, whoever breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches others to do the same, will be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.

I love the very creative ways to make this say something it doesn't. It becomes really bleeding obvious further in the same chapter:

So when you are offering your gift at the altar, if you remember that your brother or sister has something against you, leave your gift there before the altar and go; first be reconciled to your brother or sister, and then come and offer your gift.

But, but...

But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. For he is our peace; in his flesh he has made both groups into one and has broken down the dividing wall, that is, the hostility between us. He has abolished the law with its commandments and ordinances, so that he might create in himself one new humanity in place of the two, thus making peace, and might reconcile both groups to God in one body through the cross, thus putting to death that hostility through it.
Lalalalala! No contradiction here!

chrisnu

04-30-2010, 06:43 PM

I'm glad that Archbishop Lazar got to put this video back up. He mentioned the Human Rights Watch needed to talk to him about it. I guess it's been cleared.

t_NNU7bBGgc

chrisnu

05-05-2010, 06:14 PM

Some more prophecy: Isaiah 61:1-2 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MslRnDz6YwA), Malachi 3:1 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cP1RW4HjRtA)

I also found this pretty interesting:
Yahweh, El and Baal - Crossing the Streams (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F3U3Uy4kZR4)

Sycophant

05-05-2010, 07:13 PM

Chrisnu, I wanna watch these one day. I always try when I'm at work or some other place that's kinda noisy, and your recordings are always too quiet to hear without straining myself. But I will watch some or all of these at some point.

Related:

34 I tell you, in that night there shall be two men in one bed; the one shall be taken, and the other shall be left.
35 Two women shall be grinding together; the one shall be taken, and the other left.
Awwwww, yeah.

chrisnu

05-05-2010, 08:13 PM

Too quiet, really? Hmm. I suppose I do test these videos primarily on a single sound system. Perhaps mine is quite loud.

Awwwww, yeah.
I hate squashing people's fantasies, but:

There will be two women grinding meal together; one will be taken and the other left.

You're still free to think that, though. :)

Sycophant

05-05-2010, 08:19 PM

True story! I was once taken out of a Christian private school by my mother because they stopped using the KJV as their primary Bible.

It may be a KJV-exclusive accidental double entendre, but I'm still enjoying it.

chrisnu

05-10-2010, 10:15 PM

Here's the latest stuff:

Urim, Thummim and the Ephod: Divination and Cleromancy in Ancient Israel (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CDQSWerokow)

and my entry in the Educational round of coughlan666's Pwnage Olympics:

You Fought the Law, and the Law Won (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qn2TTWcczPo)

chrisnu

05-15-2010, 06:00 AM

More Old Testament prophecies covered: Psalm 2:7 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUxWlD6NUiY), Isaiah 6:9-10 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NrgjqMHj1h8), Psalm 78:2 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ese3pO_ptic), Isaiah 29:13 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W04Rpi68vR0)

Also, as a bonus: My Christian Stuff (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D_9pg6VIG_c)

chrisnu

05-18-2010, 11:27 PM

The latest stuff:

My Christian Music (Part 1) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Aui4AWTmV0)

My Christian Music (Part II) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hLeXlCoxWrc[/url)

The Molten Sea or: Yam Has Been Constrained (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3RcuzyQvvgw)

I know some folks who have their pet conspiracy theories, and now I have one. It would take quite a while to piece together the evidence, but I believe it's there: David overthrew Saul in a coup, and killed his entire family; the last three chapters of the book of Judges, and the books of 1-2 Samuel are pro-David propaganda.

Also, throughout the books of Samuel and Kings, there have been theophoric names which contain the name of the deity the people worshiped. Elijah, Obadiah, and Jonathan are some examples of Yahwistic names. Jerubbaal, Gideon's original name, and Ethbaal, the name of the father of Jezebel (changed from Jezebul, a Baal epithet) are Baalistic names. However, the names Ishbosheth (Saul's son) and Mephibosheth (Jonathan's son) in the books of Samuel are Eshbaal and Meribbaal in the books of Chronicles. Either the editors of the books of Samuel deliberately changed the theophoric names because of what they indicate: Baal worship in the royal court, or they didn't care about those implications, and simply wanted to be as polemically against Saul as possible.

chrisnu

05-20-2010, 08:07 AM

Hey, I figured I could use the YouTube tag in this thread as well.

qeniPUEwqTU

SaqwO93btMQ

chrisnu

05-26-2010, 02:23 AM

More prophecies covered: Isaiah 56:7, Jeremiah 7:11 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e4C5odhxMVw), Psalm 8 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llMOGamTuD8), Psalm 118:22-23 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_E3UelpKQ0c), Psalm 110 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VmwkaTVbyDc)

Also:

l_DeDyYoSak
A Literal Interpretation of Genesis 1 Cosmology

6KogGwlAzEU
A Word of Advice When Reading the Bible: Think For Yourself!

chrisnu

05-30-2010, 04:59 PM

QCpX_XMDf30
Jesus Teaches on the Resurrection and: The Revealing of the Divine Name

chrisnu

06-02-2010, 06:28 AM

wAQZjEerel4
OT Prophecy in the NT: Psalm 128:26, Psalm 148:1

z4ZDcdSukbc
Jesus: Lord of the Sabbath?

rdioMLvwgGc
To ChristoferL Re: Homosexuality and Divorce (Part I)

SEHykM19kT4
To ChristoferL Re: Homosexuality and Divorce (Part II)

chrisnu

06-04-2010, 05:20 PM

ZK438unGnP4
Biblical Inerrantists Who Think Paul Was Wrong

chrisnu

06-10-2010, 05:37 AM

d2SzjLrwq8Q
When and With Whom Was Israel Betrothed? (Part I)

RiRvAxEYP9A
When and With Whom Was Israel Betrothed? (Part II)

lDG4S_lG7DQ
OT Prophecy in the NT: Psalm 69:9

chrisnu

06-13-2010, 06:16 PM

hkJUVCG_HOM
OT Prophecy in the NT: Isaiah 54:13

IyuiF03Ntto
OT Prophecy in the NT: "Rivers of Living Water"

evyFwZ-9JMw
The "El" of Ugarit and the Hebrew Bible (Part I)

RERg0AyHM7o
The "El" of Ugarit and the Hebrew Bible (Part II)

D_Davis

06-14-2010, 03:19 PM

While I've been meaning to for some time, I will soon be starting an in depth study of Daniel and Job. Looking forward to sharing my thoughts with you.

chrisnu

06-14-2010, 04:26 PM

While I've been meaning to for some time, I will soon be starting an in depth study of Daniel and Job. Looking forward to sharing my thoughts with you.
Sooner than later I will be getting to Job, so I'll definitely be interested in your thoughts. It seems like it contains some very old ideas, and also contains some important information about ancient Hebrew cosmology.

Daniel is definitely an interesting book. Quite clever. After you've read the book, you may be interested in the following lecture from the New Testament course from Yale which I watched a short while ago:

http://oyc.yale.edu/religious-studies/introduction-to-new-testament/content/sessions/lecture04.html

D_Davis

06-14-2010, 10:04 PM

Last year I bought a book on Job written by Carl Jung. I haven't read it, yet, but plan to when I get to this study later this year. I'm approaching Job as a work of divine fiction, which I believe it is.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Answer_to_Job

chrisnu

06-23-2010, 01:12 AM

dK1-MfbVGLk
The "El" of Ugarit and the Hebrew Bible (Part III)

8uE0rLo_Sjk
Boiling with Fire

JJrnAotP6v8
The Chronicler's Piety and Need to Know

chrisnu

06-28-2010, 08:04 AM

lvSYn_6ThRg
OT Prophecy in the NT: Psalm 82:6

What a horrid book this was. I just needed to fly off the handle about this one.

htryRCX33Bn5w
Esther Rant (Part I)

8lrTp-oyp0w
Esther Rant (Part II)

Sven

06-28-2010, 08:37 AM

Your room is too clean. Get some posters 'r something.

chrisnu

06-28-2010, 09:33 AM

Your room is too clean. Get some posters 'r something.
I'll get on it!

Kurosawa Fan

06-28-2010, 02:50 PM

I'll get on it!

And what single guy makes his bed every day? You're just doing that for the camera, right?

Mara

06-28-2010, 03:21 PM

He doesn't sleep there. Only the cat sleeps there.

Chrisnu has to sleep in the closet.

Kurosawa Fan

06-28-2010, 03:24 PM

He doesn't sleep there. Only the cat sleeps there.

Chrisnu has to sleep in the closet.

This makes more sense.

chrisnu

06-28-2010, 05:17 PM

And what single guy makes his bed every day? You're just doing that for the camera, right?
My cover is blown! :eek:

chrisnu

06-30-2010, 05:13 PM

X5lNsjvSEh4
Creating Continuity by Admitting Discontinuity (Part I)

1VXui9rOboA
Creating Continuity by Admitting Discontinuity (Part II)

I particularly like the following... :D

EYUdNu6CJP4
OT Prophecy in the NT: Isaiah 51:9

Also, Ecclesiastes is by far the best book in the Hebrew Bible thus far. Hopefully, I can put together some meaningful thoughts about it.

chrisnu

07-05-2010, 11:52 AM

Z1vQMYIMce8
OT Prophecy in the NT: Psalm 41:9

QAtFqHEcGs0
Balaam's Oracles: Was El the Original God of the Exodus? (Part I)

eQedPYerKXg
Balaam's Oracles: Was El the Original God of the Exodus? (Part II)

pu6oWzFqVew
Kohelet: Don't Bet On An Afterlife (Part I)

pU3yBzMY9tM
Kohelet: Don't Bet On An Afterlife (Part II)

chrisnu

09-02-2010, 08:53 PM

Haven't posted anything here in a while, but I thought I'd post this. Reading this for the first time was one of the last things before my faith just evaporated.

w-YpJ52Ie80
Divine Justice: The Apocalypse of Peter (Part I)

wYCGpclBlxY
Divine Justice: The Apocalypse of Peter (Part II)

Irish

09-04-2010, 02:41 PM

The Song of Solomon is beautiful poetry. Please read it (King James Version) for the literary merit alone.
Agreed. It's goddamned beautiful piece of work.

Here's a question for the OP -- because I swear to go nobody has ever been able to give me a good answer, and I've asked around a bit:

At the Home of Mary and Martha, Luke 10:38-42

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%2010:38-42;&version=NIV;

One sister runs around preparing stuff for her guest. The other sits down and keeps him company. The one doing the work chides the other, asking Christ to tell her to get off her butt.

And Christ says, "Mary has chosen what is better, and it will not be taken away from her."

What exactly did he mean by that?

chrisnu

09-04-2010, 05:58 PM

Here's a question for the OP -- because I swear to go nobody has ever been able to give me a good answer, and I've asked around a bit:

At the Home of Mary and Martha, Luke 10:38-42

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%2010:38-42;&version=NIV;

One sister runs around preparing stuff for her guest. The other sits down and keeps him company. The one doing the work chides the other, asking Christ to tell her to get off her butt.

And Christ says, "Mary has chosen what is better, and it will not be taken away from her."

What exactly did he mean by that?

I think that this may be referring to something eschatological. In the synoptic gospels, at the end of time when the Son of Man returns, people are going to be judged according to their works. In this light, Jesus is making a value judgment on Mary and Martha's actions. While Martha is portrayed as a busybody whose actions are ultimately inconsequential, Mary's actions have eternal import. This is not only because through Jesus' teachings, Mary is being prepared for the world to come, but also that her focus on the kingdom of heaven will be rewarded, while Martha's actions will receive no heavenly reward.

Irish

09-04-2010, 06:02 PM

I think that this may be referring to something eschatological. In the synoptic gospels, at the end of time when the Son of Man returns, people are going to be judged according to their works. In this light, Jesus is making a value judgment on Mary and Martha's actions. While Martha is portrayed as a busybody whose actions are ultimately inconsequential, Mary's actions have eternal import. This is not only because through Jesus' teachings, Mary is being prepared for the world to come, but also that her focus on the kingdom of heaven will be rewarded, while Martha's actions will receive no heavenly reward.
Wow. That's the best and most complete answer I've ever gotten to that question.

You have no idea how much I appreciate the insight. You've given me quite a bit to think about. Thank you!