If deliberately broken—as Jesus had done twice—there is but one punishment: It is also important to say that love does, indeed, require many things! Long after some Christian peoples had freed their slaves the Church still held on to hers.
I do not myself feel that any person who is really profoundly humane can believe in everlasting punishment. But this is not genuine love in any sense of the term. They are a radical call to live according to a new set of standards. Pious Christian Americans, most of them southern Baptists, believed the Bible sanctioned slavery and felt the religious teaching of the Bible i.
It is possible that Jesus himself could have meant a myriad of different things in his call to love our enemies, and Barnes interpretation is agreeable, but my criticism is of the moral implications as the teaching stands according to the gospel.
Sure enough, Christians are defining themselves by way of their faith. It is remarkably easy for a person to arrive at this epiphany—and yet, it had to be spread at the point of a bayonet throughout the Confederate South, among the most pious Christians this country has ever known.
There were the texts; there was no mistaking their meaning; she was right, she was doing in this thing what the bible had mapped out for her to do. Lewis has used the argument from morality to show that there is an all-powerful, moral being; now, he proposes that Christ was the human embodiment of that all-powerful moral being.
But are they really? From early on Jesus was known to have back-talked to his mother a crime punishable by death in Jewish law.
Thus his intention was a deliberate show of defiance, in which Jesus added: It is remarkably easy for a person to arrive at this epiphany—and yet, it had to be spread at the point of a bayonet throughout the Confederate South, among the most pious Christians this country has ever known.
Therefore it stems to reason, historically speaking, that Jesus was fine with slavery in the social and historical context of his day. But luckily, I have it on record, that I detest the act of rape—so my own testimony adds clarity to what I actually meant in the previous quote, which was merely misrepresented.
But because these extra set of rules and guidelines were all manmade, it allowed the Pharisees to overstep their bounds with dictating these rules in holy terms. Pious Christian Americans, most of them southern Baptists, believed the Bible sanctioned slavery and felt the religious teaching of the Bible i.
Suddenly Christians have confused labors of work with duties or obligations to God the original meaning of the Sabbath according to Mosaic Law—obey God even if it means putting to death a person who picked up sticks on the Sabbath Numbers On Jesus and Slavery Other teachings of Jesus bother me as well.
However, when reported to the authorities and confronted and questioned by the Pharisees for picking and snacking on grains during a time of fasting Mark 2: There are better analogies that I, or anyone else for that matter, can think of to explain the same parable—without invoking slavery.
This obvious back talk should startle well versed Bible scholars, since traditionally such back talk was punishable by death in Jewish culture. By analyzing the content of the scriptures and juxtaposing it to the political climate of the time we can be sure that Jesus meant to insult Herod and not shower him with praise.
Unlike my later testimony which decries rape, however, Jesus nowhere decries slavery. Once, not so long ago, Christianity justified slavery as a God-given right. Although an authoritative text for Jews who follow Pharisaic tradition, much of the Halakah is not directly supported by scripture, but is intended more along the lines as a set of rules to enhance and distill the true meaning of traditional Mosaic Law.
In fact, the importance of maintaining the Sabbath is so imperative that it made the Big Ten, from the lips of God almighty himself. Obviously Christ has committed the same crime as the children by openly insulting Herod the Great and the Pharisees, calling them a brewed of vipers.
Rather, our enemies are those who want to harm us, inflict unmentionable evils against us, and who attempt to devalue our worth as autonomous individuals with basic human rights.
The Bible says God cannot break his own laws, yet even if we could make the exception on behalf of his omnipotence, then we have the problem of a bad example. Having argued that morality is universal and not a human construct, Lewis further argues that the existence of a universal, unchanging morality implies the existence of a God—an omnipotent, spiritual being.
He was just another one of the thoughtful wise moral philosophers who happened to speak about an already commonly accepted human concept of moral conduct. It is impossible to love the conduct of a person who curses and reviles us, who injures our person or property, or who violates all the laws of God; but, though we may hate his conduct, and suffer keenly when we are affected by it, yet we may still pity his madness and folly, and we may aid him to see his sin.
Even the Chinese philosopher Confucius came up with the Golden Axiom five-hundred plus years before Jesus ever did! Conveniently ignoring the consequences of breaking the fourth commandment Exodus Psalmand set out the attributes of God that must be reflected in the life of a 'true follower. Jesus also never denounces anything that happened in the Old Testamentincluding the God -ordained genocides.
Besides, considering the context, praise would come off sounding even more sarcastic and my argument would still hold. There is one very serious defect to my mind in Christ's moral character, and that is that He believed in hell.
Another point worth raising is that as far as Matthew 5:In Book One of Mere Christianity, C. S. Lewis attempts to use reason and logic to prove the existence of God—in the sense of an all-powerful, non-material being—and later to argue for the divinity of Jesus Christ.
These two arguments—the so-called “argument from morality” and the “Christian trilemma”—are two of the most famous aspects of the book, and reflect Lewis’s overall. Upon closer investigation, however, some of the teachings of Jesus turn out to be strange, misguided, absurd or even outright immoral, while the "good part" is anything but novel.
Therefore, the popular reputation of Jesus as a great moral teacher is more appropriately interpreted as a result of Christian privilege and a concerted effort on the part of others not to offend them, rather than a result of his true.
Nov 24, · Indeed, if Christianity (following the teachings of Christ) was a source for morality, then it is not a particularly good source. And to paraphrase Sam Harris, anybody who thinks the Bible is the best guide we have on the question of morality has some very peculiar ideas about either guidance or.
Christian morality, then, arises from our union with God in Christ.
It is simply the faithful living of the Love of God according to the heart and mind of Jesus who dwells in us. Like Faith, which is a participation in Jesus’ knowledge of God, our sharing in His Love is incomplete during our pilgrimage on earth.
The Social Teachings of Christ Jesus A Manual for Bible Classes, Christian Associations, Social Study Groups, Etc by William Beatty Jennings The Social Teachings of Christ Jesus A Manual for Bible Classes, Christian Associations, Social Study Groups, Etc.
Christ s teaching, then, is a yoke. He is the Son of God, sent by God to be mankind s rightful king, to govern us and to get us to obey God s rule.Download