More biblefic
Sep. 1st, 2007 03:00 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
farlaBecause I can't really do anything about Livejournal being evil. New biblefic - Traditional Values - A Parable of Tenants and Tenets posted. I'd already written two, so I figure I might as well post them up. Plus, the new chapter of Pokemon Revolution is particularly sucky, and I need to let it percolate through my brain until I figure out how to completely rewrite it without jeopardizing the rest of the story.
(Jesus' parables are incredibly bizarre. This one is actually one of the more reasonable ones. Many of the parables are more inscrutable than stories in the old testament, which is to say harder to understand than stories that predate them by several thousand years, written in a dead language from even older oral legend, and having gone through several steps of translation. I don't know what this means, but whatever it is, it's pretty weird.)
(Jesus' parables are incredibly bizarre. This one is actually one of the more reasonable ones. Many of the parables are more inscrutable than stories in the old testament, which is to say harder to understand than stories that predate them by several thousand years, written in a dead language from even older oral legend, and having gone through several steps of translation. I don't know what this means, but whatever it is, it's pretty weird.)
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2007-09-01 08:01 pm (UTC)Okay, I need to read through the Gospels sometime. I've only ever heard the more famous parables - the Prodigal Son (which, come to think of it, was fairly messed up anyhow), the Good Samaritan, etc.
Chapters and verses for the less reasonable ones?
no subject
Date: 2007-09-01 08:34 pm (UTC)See, Jesus was preaching forgiveness without any strings attached in a lot of them, which meant that he was saying the person who lived a good and blameless life was the equal of the person who lived a life of sin and hurting good people as long as they repented before they died. So a lot of his parables are about loving the sinners at the expense of the nonsinners.
And then there's just stuff like Matthew 18:
12"What do you think? If a man owns a hundred sheep, and one of them wanders away, will he not leave the ninety-nine on the hills and go to look for the one that wandered off? 13And if he finds it, I tell you the truth, he is happier about that one sheep than about the ninety-nine that did not wander off. 14In the same way your Father in heaven is not willing that any of these little ones should be lost. So...doing what god says will make him abandon you to the wolves.
Or, right after, Jesus' endorsement of eye for an eye behavior.
The servant's master took pity on him, canceled the debt and let him go.
28"But when that servant went out, he found one of his fellow servants who owed him a hundred denarii.[h] He grabbed him and began to choke him. 'Pay back what you owe me!' he demanded.
29"His fellow servant fell to his knees and begged him, 'Be patient with me, and I will pay you back.'
30"But he refused. Instead, he went off and had the man thrown into prison until he could pay the debt. 31When the other servants saw what had happened, they were greatly distressed and went and told their master everything that had happened.
32"Then the master called the servant in. 'You wicked servant,' he said, 'I canceled all that debt of yours because you begged me to. 33Shouldn't you have had mercy on your fellow servant just as I had on you?' 34In anger his master turned him over to the jailers to be tortured, until he should pay back all he owed.
There's also this one that's like predestination - it talks about how people's faith is like grains tossed on the ground. Some people's faith will start to grow, but because it landed on rock, will die. Other people's faith will be eaten up before it can grow, etc. Only some people's faith will grow in good soil. I mean, it's a good description of how faith behaves, but you're telling me it's supposed to be like that?
And Jesus is very much in favor of his followers abandoning everyone for him - 27Peter answered him, "We have left everything to follow you! What then will there be for us?"
28Jesus said to them, "I tell you the truth, at the renewal of all things, when the Son of Man sits on his glorious throne, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. 29And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother[f] or children or fields for my sake will receive a hundred times as much and will inherit eternal life.
And then there's the bizarre pro-capitalist Matthew 25:14-30 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2025:14-30;&version=31;), where the moral is...something?29For everyone who has will be given more, and he will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him.
Really, easily half of them are WTF inducing. Check out Bible Gateway (http://www.biblegateway.com/keyword/?search=parable&version1=31&searchtype=all&limit=none&wholewordsonly=no).
no subject
Date: 2007-09-01 09:29 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-09-06 10:01 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-09-09 04:28 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-09-09 04:36 am (UTC)Seriously.
no subject
Date: 2007-09-09 05:24 am (UTC)Although that scene does make you wonder about his off-screen adolescence and early adulthood. Maybe he had a falling out with Joseph of the "you're not my real father" variety, and that led to estrangement from his mother and siblings as well.
no subject
Date: 2007-09-10 03:16 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-09-10 04:16 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-09-03 02:59 pm (UTC)Here we learn that when you're in Heaven you can see the people suffering in Hell, but you're incapable of going to them to help. Doesn't sound much like Paradise to me. Sounds like the exact opposite. I think I prefer oblivion, 'k thanks.
Also: 31"He said to him, 'If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.' "
First of all, what does this say about Christianity? Second of all, because I'm skeptical of a book written thousands of years ago under dubious authorship and with no corroborating evidence, that means I'm so closed-minded that if someone I knew to be dead came to me and told me that those damn Christians were right about everything and I better convert I wouldn't start considering my options a little more carefully.
no subject
Date: 2007-09-06 10:13 pm (UTC)First of all, what does this say about Christianity? Second of all, because I'm skeptical of a book written thousands of years ago under dubious authorship and with no corroborating evidence, that means I'm so closed-minded that if someone I knew to be dead came to me and told me that those damn Christians were right about everything and I better convert I wouldn't start considering my options a little more carefully.
That's actually a longstanding problem with Christianity. On the one hand, you've got to have miracles to prove that God's really in your favor, so it's claimed that all sorts of stuff happened. But at the same time, you don't actually have the power to cause miracles, so you need people to convert without seeing any of them. As such, miracles are done to convince people in stories, but the actual prophets claim their unsubstantiated words are more convincing than any miracle, and you should just trust them.
The Old Testament is even more rife with this bizarre doublethink, because it's both a religious document and a history of the Jewish people. So it dutifully records all the times the priests fell out of favor or the dozen times they started worshiping foreign gods, while at the same time having a god doing miracles (and smitings) left and right. It's never explained in the bible why the Jewish people kept rejecting their active, miracle-working savior god for a bunch of pretty statues that had no magic powers.
All religions are weird this way - God has to exist and have power, and so he must give signs. But at the same time God doesn't seem to be giving any signs, and that has to be reconciled somehow. The idea of faith in the absence or even in defiance of proof is a good example of the final form of this - to be a true believer you must have no evidence for your belief and yet believe sincerely that this evidence could be given in spades at God's whim at any moment.
no subject
Date: 2007-09-08 12:39 am (UTC)I like that. But it both makes you wonder why we can't skip the part about Hell altogether and reiterates the Old Testament theme of people talking God down. I've always found said theme problematic. The idea of an omnipotent being that's somehow more self-absorbed, vengeful, and sadistic than humanity is quite possibly the most terrifying thing imaginable. it also makes you wonder how He came to be regarded as the ultimate moral authority. (Just a guess, but it probably has something to do with the omnipotent-vengeful-terrifying bit.)
I think I'd like these stories a lot more if people would just go ahead and admit that God's a bit of a bastard – or maybe just alien and inhuman – and our moral imperative isn't as much to work His will as it is to stay on His good side enough that He'll listen to our prayers in situations like the one above.
no subject
Date: 2007-09-08 03:55 am (UTC)If you keep people in hell for eternity, then that's horrible, and anyone good enough to get to heaven is going to feel upset.
So they say you'll get out.
Except - that means everyone's equal. The person who lived a flawless life and devoted all their time helping hurt puppies and the person who divided their time between kicking those puppies and kicking the person helping them are now both getting into heaven. Um.
There's really no way to get around it. Punishing people forever in the Old Testament is pretty nasty. But the New Testament's "Repentance and forgiveness for everyone!" just raises a whole mess of new problems.
it also makes you wonder how He came to be regarded as the ultimate moral authority. (Just a guess, but it probably has something to do with the omnipotent-vengeful-terrifying bit.)
Good and evil are actually pretty modern things. One of the more disturbing linguistic tidbits I've learned is that they originally stem from words referring to class, kind of like the word "noble" does today. "Good" refers to the alpha family of the tribe/region, "bad" refers to the omega. Goodness is defined by what the ruling class says it is, because the word originally meant something to the effect of "what the guys with the big sticks say they want". God is therefore good by definition - he's got the biggest stick and longest reach, so his orders take priority over everybody else. The idea of enforcing some sort of human morality is really a newer addition.
I'm not sure if this works beyond the proto-European bunch, but I'd suspect it would because human societies have certain stratifying patterns that repeat, and the alpha/omega good/bad bit is one of them. (There's a reason they were godless communists, you know.)
no subject
Date: 2007-09-08 07:06 pm (UTC)I think the key problem here is the "forever" part. The old Catholic idea of Purgatory makes more sense. The Hindu idea of transient heavens and hells makes far more sense.
But my favorite idea is one that I came up with myself back when I was a theist: to just make Heaven the sort of place where no one truly evil could really be happy. No outlandish sensual delights, just peace, equality, and modest prosperity for everyone – a Marxist-styled Heaven. Just let it be impossible to hurt others or raise yourself up above anyone else. That would drive them crazy. And if they ever grew to the point that they could enjoy it, that would probably in and of itself mean that they had earned it.
Good and evil are actually pretty modern things. One of the more disturbing linguistic tidbits I've learned is that they originally stem from words referring to class, kind of like the word "noble" does today. "Good" refers to the alpha family of the tribe/region, "bad" refers to the omega. Goodness is defined by what the ruling class says it is, because the word originally meant something to the effect of "what the guys with the big sticks say they want". God is therefore good by definition - he's got the biggest stick and longest reach, so his orders take priority over everybody else. The idea of enforcing some sort of human morality is really a newer addition.
Ah. That would explain a lot. Thanks.
no subject
Date: 2007-09-09 03:27 am (UTC)But my favorite idea is one that I came up with myself back when I was a theist: to just make Heaven the sort of place where no one truly evil could really be happy. No outlandish sensual delights, just peace, equality, and modest prosperity for everyone – a Marxist-styled Heaven. Just let it be impossible to hurt others or raise yourself up above anyone else. That would drive them crazy. And if they ever grew to the point that they could enjoy it, that would probably in and of itself mean that they had earned it.
The problem is that this ends up begging the question of why God can't just make the current world be that way. With the traditional Heaven/Hell setup, God comes off as a total bastard, but it at least justifies why people can do bad on Earth without any apparent punishment, since Earth is just the current sorting ground and good/evil is determined by action.
(Admittedly the traditional begs its own set of questions, like, if a sadistic child murderer type was scared of Hell and so never committed actual crimes and led a blameless life, what exactly would their heaven experience entail?)
no subject
Date: 2007-09-09 05:10 am (UTC)Some of the newer evangelical sects have an age of accountability type of deal. That age is typically, surprise surprise, puberty. Do you ever get the feeling that there would be a lot fewer religious people if we could somehow get humanity to just unload all of its sex-related psychological baggage?
The problem is that this ends up begging the question of why God can't just make the current world be that way.
Pretty much. It's always the state of the "current world" that brings me back to the conclusion that God is either impersonal, morally fallible, or nonexistent. I usually go with that last, for the sake of parsimony.
With the traditional Heaven/Hell setup, God comes off as a total bastard, but it at least justifies why people can do bad on Earth without any apparent punishment, since Earth is just the current sorting ground and good/evil is determined by action.
Okay, how's this: The sorting proceeds along the traditional lines. Heaven fits the traditional ideal. Hell, on the other hand, is a lot like Earth, but without any of the Heaven-bound people to redeem it. Let the damned build their own Hell, basically.
(Admittedly the traditional begs its own set of questions, like, if a sadistic child murderer type was scared of Hell and so never committed actual crimes and led a blameless life, what exactly would their heaven experience entail?)
There's a story in Jack where you meet a dead woman who has built her little slice of Heaven into something that looks a lot like Hell in order to entice her sadistic and currently damned boyfriend into repenting. All of the people in it besides herself are her own creations, so she's gotten away with it so far. It does cause problems when people from other areas of Heaven pass through, though.
That aside, this question really only applies to the works side of the never-ending works vs. faith debate. Someone around Luther's part of the spectrum, for example, might tell you that your hypothetical would-be child murderer probably isn't going to make it into Heaven anyway. It's also good to remember that the Tenth Commandment deals with thoughtcrime, so actions are clearly not everything.
no subject
Date: 2007-09-10 03:27 am (UTC)Yeah, well, they suck.
Seriously, the entire point of baptism is that there's some sort of weird physical thing that you are innately born with that needs removal before you can get into heaven. If it's a matter of accepting Jesus Our Lord or Whatever into your heart at a certain age, then that should be it. The entire idea of baptism is that no matter how good or god-accepting you are, there is something that physically needs to be removed that people are born with. Way to miss the point, random Christian sects.
Okay, how's this: The sorting proceeds along the traditional lines. Heaven fits the traditional ideal. Hell, on the other hand, is a lot like Earth, but without any of the Heaven-bound people to redeem it. Let the damned build their own Hell, basically.
That...is a surprisingly good solution to such a generally unsatisfactory arrangement. One could even add in the stipulation that the amount of time it takes a soul in hell to clue in that the world is miserable and repent is roughly equivalent to the amount of cruelty they caused on earth. That would then have punishment-that-fits-the-crime without getting rid of the repentance aspect.
Someone around Luther's part of the spectrum, for example, might tell you that your hypothetical would-be child murderer probably isn't going to make it into Heaven anyway.
But then there's no point in telling us about heaven and hell. The whole setup is a reward/punishment system based on coercing people into behaving rightly in defiance of their natural impulses. If it's the thought that matters, there's little point in telling us about religion at all - God is still going to be pissed you thought your neighbor's ass was kinda hot even if you immediately go "oh shit badthought".
no subject
Date: 2007-09-10 04:13 am (UTC)I'd noticed.
Seriously, the entire point of baptism is that there's some sort of weird physical thing that you are innately born with that needs removal before you can get into heaven.
Isn't it supposed to be the Original Sin?
That...is a surprisingly good solution to such a generally unsatisfactory arrangement.
Isn't it? Fucking Jhonen Vasquez came up with that – or something like it, at any rate. I found it in a sadistic, self-indulgent blood book called Johnny the Homocidal Maniac, which the freaky psuedo-goth daughter of my Mom's boyfriend used to call her "Bible." She even proselytized it by buying several copies and passing them around the school. I'm not kidding. The world is really that strange.
But then there's no point in telling us about heaven and hell. The whole setup is a reward/punishment system based on coercing people into behaving rightly in defiance of their natural impulses. If it's the thought that matters, there's little point in telling us about religion at all - God is still going to be pissed you thought your neighbor's ass was kinda hot even if you immediately go "oh shit badthought".
I think you may have just stumbled onto the reason so many hardcore Christians are batshit insane. People who grew up with religion but later rejected it frequently express that they used to suffer from the anxiety that their stray thoughts would get them sent to Hell.
no subject
Date: 2007-09-19 03:00 am (UTC)Oh, hey - turns out Jesus has said just this!
Mathew 5:28
But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.
Yes, it's impossible to win playing by these rules. Jesus knew that, and that's where the sacrifice comes in. From the Christian viewpoint, no one is "good" enough to get into Heaven. We're all filthy, evil, impotent little worms, but if we give our sins to Jesus we'll go to Heaven anyway. Because God is just that amazing, and He loves us even though we aren't fit to lick the dirt from His shoes. In fact, He doesn't wear shoes – and even if He did they'd never be dirty!