On May 8, 10:10=A0pm, monkfish <monkfish@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> arah wrote:
> > Sorry, that is not a myth, that was the true statement by Esau or
> > Jesus
>
> Thanks, actually that is my point.
>
> Some atheists here are adamant that
> Christianity is nothing but borrowed myths.
> So, I am asking them to find the myth
> where we are told to love even our enemies.
> They couldn't, so far.
The Historical Jesus in Context
http://press.princeton.edu/chapters/i8265.html
>Both the Jesus of the Gospels and the Rabbis of Mishnah and Talmud follow
t=
he approach of what Basser terms =93literal unacceptable: stretch apt=94;
th=
is reshaping of a verse=92s words or structure typically served to
alleviate=
any hard****p created by following the more literal sense. Exemplifying
this=
process in the Gospels are the =93Antitheses=94 of Matthew 5 that follow
th=
e formulaic structure, =93You have heard that it was said . . . But I tell
y=
ou. . . .=94 While the interpretation of Matthew 5:44, =93But I tell you,
lo=
ve your enemies and pray for those who persecute you,=94 is novel
(although =
Proverbs does insist =93Do not rejoice when your enemies fall=94 [24:17]
and=
=93If your enemies are hungry, give them bread to eat; if they are
thirsty,=
give them water to drink=94 [25:21]), the means by which the Gospel
derives=
this interpretation are not: as Basser observes, the word =93neighbor=94
ca=
n be stretched to include =93enemy=94 because the terms in Hebrew share
the =
same consonants; only the pronunciation differs. To this we also might add
t=
hat Epictetus voiced a similar point: =93[The Cynic] must be flogged like
an=
ass, and while he is being flogged he must love the man who flogs him, as
t=
hough he were the father or brother of them all=94 (Discourses 3).<
> monkfish =A0 * alt.atheism is removed from the header because trying to
pr=
ove
> the existence of God is prohibited by their undebatable policy.
Huh? Failing to and spamming, more lik.
> ** Atheists have blind faith in their ability to know of all actual or
> possible modes of existence. Such hubris cannot be good for science.
It's not faith; it's logic and maths. There are no married bachelors.
-Aut
|
