Fw: Situation Ethics in the Bible

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

>RON

> The nation of Israel was created and nurtured by God in an environment 

>that was extremely violent. I would compare it to that of the Sioux 

>indians in North America. Within their own tribes they practiced virtues 

>that were nearly Christian. They valued generosity to the point where 

>some people gave away everything they had. Stealing was virtually 

>unheard of. But when they bumped up against neighboring tribes all rules 

>were dispensed with. Lying, cheating, violence were acceptable. They, 

>just as the ancient Israelites, could not call on the police to defend 

>them, or expect government welfare to provide food and clothing. 

>Violence and aggression were the only means of survival. Similarly, if 

>the Israelites, a very small nation in the midst of greater nations who 

>treated them just violently, had not responded with violence they would 

>have been eradicated. And God had big plans for Israel. 



CREA
    I find it immensely amusing that the "standard" response by Xians to the
charges that the Israelites, as "God's Chosen People" HAD to behave in what
we moderns would term "depraved behaviour" due to the circumstances in which
they found themselves.  Stripped of all the fancy verbiage and arguments, it
really boils down to the Xian claiming that it was NECESSARY behaviour and
both commanded and approved by God.  But this amounts to blaspheming God,
inasmuch as it limits God.  After all, the Bible teaches that God is
omnipotent  (Jeremiah 32:27 -- "I am YHVH, the God of all mankind.  Nothing
is too difficult for me".  Matthew 19:26 --"...but for God all things are
possible.") -- that there is literally NOTHING God CANNOT do.  Thus it was
fully within God's purview to have miraculously transported all the
Canaanites to, let us say, Greenland, rather than having the Hebrews
slaughter them, if He so desired.  Or else to have transformed all the
weapons of the invading armies and internal foes into flowers if He so
chose. At the very least, He is guilty of condoning excessive and
unnecessary force.

BRIDEAN
Not to mention that saying that God allowed to Isrealites to behave in ways
that would be considered immoral today because of their situation, would be
SITUATION ETHICS!!

RON

> We have a right to defend ourselves. Only in comparatavely recent times 

>have we been able to have the luxury of attempting to love our neighbors 

>and our enemies. Loving your neighbors and friends, as practiced by the 

>Sioux, is not so difficult. Loving your ENEMIES is the real challenge. 

>Can you think of any other religions that have preached that?


CREA
     Try getting your head out the sand and investigate other religions
besides your own for a change.  You'll find, for example, that Buddhism was
teaching the systematic cultivation of Loving-kindness (Mettaa) directed
towards all beings, including one's enemies and foes, some five hundred
years before Jesus.  The paradigmatic text is found in the Kakacuupama Sutta
(#21 of the Majjhima Nikaaya) where the Buddha advised his monks/bhikkhus as
follows:


    "'Bhikkhus, even if bandits were to sever you savagely limb by limb with
a two-handled saw, he who gave rise to a mind of hate towards them would not
be carrying out my teaching.  Herein, bhikkhus, you should train yourself
thus:  "Our minds will remain unaffected, and we shall utter no evil words;
we shall abide compassionate for their welfare, with a mind of
loving-kindness, without inner hate.  We shall abide pervading them with a
mind imbued with loving-kindness, abundant, exalted, immeasurable, without
hostility and without ill-will."  That is how you should train, bhikkhus.'"

BRIDEAN
Interesting, I wasn't aware of that sutra.  Thanks for the info.

• Previous message: ISP's (Bud scale)
• Next message: Fw: Situation Ethics in the Bible
• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]