The primary flaw in intelligent design
Quote:
Originally Posted by snowblind
i took it on a literal meaning when i thought about it. that children (aka little people) need to be nourished and feed by us to be healthy. that it is not right to feed adn lavish your dog when your child goes un nourished. but it is ok to feed the dogs the crumbs as the children have had the majority of the food and so are fed. plus this saves on tiding up after the little fuckers.
the trouble with the bible is that it has been translated and reiterated so many times in the past milenia, it is hard to work it out. also time, context and social knowledge plays a great part in any literature. but becomes less relevent as time passes.
take for example the 80's
so if you then factor those 20 years difference and times that by 100 (2000 years ago) things are very distorted.
That doesnt make sense in context with the actual statement. Who are the children and who are the dogs?
Do not give the Childrens' food to the dogs.
I think Jesus meant Children = Jews
Dogs = Gentiles
Whereas what youre saying has nothing to do with the situation in the Bible. If Jesus had meant it like that the transcript would go like this.
Woman: "Jesus please heal my daughter"
Jesus: "Never feed the childrens' food to the dogs because the children need nourishment more than animals."
That just wouldnt make any sense. Im not sure you fully understand the quotation. Either that or you think that Jesus meant the Jews needed it more not because of their religion but because of other circumstances. But then again, it isn't ACTUALLY food, its power, its never ending. It wastes a bit of time, but what's 5 seconds to the Son of God?
The primary flaw in intelligent design
and why couldn't the children be children and dogs be dogs?
The primary flaw in intelligent design
Because that would make absolutely no sense at all in that context.
Jesus can you heal my daughter!
Never feed food to your pets that was otherwise meant for the kids!
Sure that's a good idea but in this context, means fuck all.
The primary flaw in intelligent design
Mark 7:24-30
"And from there He arose and went away to the region of Tyre. And when He had entered a house, He wanted no one to know of it; yet He could not escape notice. But after hearing of Him, a woman whose little daughter had an unclean spirit, immediately came and fell at His feet. Now the woman was a Gentile, of the Syrophoenician race. And she kept asking Him to cast the demon out of her daughter. And He was saying to her, 'Let the children be satisfied first, for it is not good to take the children's bread and throw it to the dogs.' But she answered and said to Him, 'Yes, Lord, but even the dogs under the table feed on the children's crumbs.' And He said to her, 'Because of this answer go your way; the demon has gone out of your daughter.' And going back to her home, she found the child lying on the bed, the demon having departed." (Mark 7:24-30)
Jesus saw faith in this woman, and made the decision to come to her aide based on her faith in God. Jesus saw the persecution she had suffered because of being a) a Gentile Jew (abhorred by mainstream and very religious Jews), and b) because she was a woman and regarded as inferior to the men. Jesus understood that she was still humble and not angry at the Jewish religion that was persecuting her, and that's how He came to know of this woman.
She was a Gentile - what mainstream and overly religious Jews at the time considered unclean, and were sometimes even referred to as dogs. Though Jesus wasn't calling her a dog, he was only making a reference to the gesture by saying that he had come for the children (Israelites - God's children), and that they would need to be fed before all else. It was a metaphor, not an insult. Jesus was referencing that it would be unwise to give all the good food to the pets before feeding the children. He was also stating that all others would be fed after the children. The Gentile woman showed great humility and diligence in saying that "even the dogs feed at the children's crumbs". Because of this, Jesus told the woman to return home to her daughter, who was now healed. She needed not wait, although she was willing to, and Jesus was pleased with her humble determination.
You're right that this could possibly have been interpreted in a manner that was condescending to the woman. Again, it was making a reference to the term "dogs", which was thrown around lightly by many hardcore Jews of the time. But again, this isn't how Jesus was referring to her. He was often considered the same, and many times far worse, to those same Jews.
The primary flaw in intelligent design
Jesus is so convoluted and vague in his messages that he HAD to be the Son of God :)
The primary flaw in intelligent design
It may be foolish to discount Jesus because the people who wrote the books of the Bible may have been vague...
The primary flaw in intelligent design
Quote:
Originally Posted by BathingApes
Jesus is so convoluted and vague in his messages that he HAD to be the Son of God :)
Very few religions are direct and to the point when it comes to spiritual teachings. They're all full of alternate interpretations, hyperboles that may not be easy to recognize, and probably some mistranslations here and there. One of the great things about many religious scriptures is that they're left up for the reader to interpret...but this is also where arguments can pop up over differing interpretations.
The primary flaw in intelligent design
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Clandestine
One of the great things about many religious scriptures is that they're left up for the reader to interpret...but this is also where arguments can pop up over differing interpretations.
And it's also where you get the fundamentalists justifying killing people.
The primary flaw in intelligent design
i think that religon as a whole detracts from the meaning of spirituality. individuality and the spiritualness of the universe.
by putting faith in one being with knowledge you absolve yourelf of power and an ability to react and act
The primary flaw in intelligent design
Quote:
Originally Posted by BathingApes
And it's also where you get the fundamentalists justifying killing people.
Luckily, you don't see very many Christians finding justification for murder in our Bible any more. While I guess there are probably a few that still do, there are bad seeds in any religion. Or, I guess I should say, there are bad seeds in humanity...not just the Christian faith.
I still don't understand why people can get so irate with Christians over this, when there is a far more dangerous and hostile ideology out there that is currently using scripture to justify murder, rape, and hate. Why has it become socially taboo to denounce Islam? You want to read some literature that's violent, cruel, and one-sided? Read the Koran. Here's a book that advocates its followers "lying in wait to slaughter the unbelievers." While the interpretation of this could be construed differently, in most cases it is not. Followers take this, and many other similar passages, literally...and are more than willing to murder for their god. Hell, their "prophet" tells them to. He was a murderer, pedophile, rapist, and plunderer himself.
I study many religions, and am a practitioner of Mahayana (Greater Vehicle) Buddhism...as well as Christianity. I was actually a Buddhist before I really turned myself over to God. Regardless, I'm very fond of several Eastern religions, i.e. - Buddhism, Zen, Taoism, Shintoism, etc. Several of these ideologies were formed during times of civil strife and war, yet they preach compassion, understanding, and goodwill towards your fellow man. On top of this, I am a devout, but not fundamentalist, Christian. I won't stretch the words in the Bible to fit my own needs, I take them at face value and draw my own conclusions from my interpretation. There are many people of the same faith, who express the same goodwill towards others, and yet, at least in America, we are still the targets of unscrupulous and angry non-believers. If you're going to hate someone for what they believe, and not the person they are, then you should at least be considerate enough to take out your frustrations on others who'd be willing to chop your head off at the neck in retaliation.
...after all, that seems like it could become a much more exciting conversation. I'll only try to use peace and understanding in my rebuttals. Where's the excitement in that? :)
