Religion II

[hcap]

Originally Posted by boxcar

No, you did not post what I wanted. You have utterly failed to cover the specific issues and interpret the writings allegorically for us. Are we supposed to believe that you have a one-size-fits-all allegorical interpretation for every single passage that you don't like?

I knew you could not support your straw man about interpreting

"On the Jews and Their Lies"

You only questioned me about allegorical interpretation to try to distract me and get me talking about metaphor and allegory to divert from your f**k**g idiocy about Luther. You are as transparent as your convoluted bible interpretations

[hcap]

Here is a simple excerpt from Luther's "On the Jews and Their Lies"
Allegorize away

In the treatise, Luther describes Jews as a "base, whoring people, that is, no people of God, and their boast of lineage, circumcision, and law must be accounted as filth.

Whores? Filth?

Should be a cinch fore a biblical scholar such as yourself

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by hcap

I knew you could not support your straw man about interpreting

"On the Jews and Their Lies"

You only questioned me about allegorical interpretation to try to distract me and get me talking about metaphor and allegory to divert from your f**k**g idiocy about Luther. You are as transparent as your convoluted bible interpretations

It's your hypocrisy that is so transparent. Luther said terrible things about the Jews? So what? The God of Israel did terrible things to all Egypt's first born and the Jews did horrible things to Jesus by delivering him up to the Romans on trumped up charges to have him murdered? So...I want your allegorical interpretation of these events, then I, too, will dream something up for Luther to sugar-coat his words.

Get busy...you hypocrite!

[hcap]

Ok, I feel generous. I will give you yet another chance yo allegorize your pathetic fool.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the...and_Their_Lies

Section XI of the treatise advises Protestants to carry out seven remedial actions. These are

to burn down Jewish synagogues and schools and warn people against them;
to refuse to let Jews own houses among Christians;
for Jewish religious writings to be taken away;
for rabbis to be forbidden to preach;
to offer no protection to Jews on highways;
for usury to be prohibited and for all silver and gold to be removed, put aside for safekeeping, and given back to Jews who truly convert; and
to give young, strong Jews flail, axe, spade, and spindle, and let them earn their bread in the sweat of their brow.[9]


Got it bunky?

[hcap]

Originally Posted by boxcar

It's your hypocrisy that is so transparent. Luther said terrible things about the Jews? So what? The God of Israel did terrible things to all Egypt's first born and the Jews did horrible things to Jesus by delivering him up to the Romans on trumped up charges to have him murdered? So...I want your allegorical interpretation of these events, then I, too, will dream something up for Luther to sugar-coat his words.

Get busy...you hypocrite!

So what?

Hey ass****, you claimed yo be able to interpret Luther allegorically. Remember"?

Originally Posted by boxcar

You can't Luther literally. He must be understood allegorically. He's talking strictly about his inner conflicts which he likens to the conflicts the Jews had with Jesus.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by hcap

So what?

Hey ass****, you claimed yo be able to interpret Luther allegorically. Remember"?

I will as soon as you give me some allegory lessons on the two specific issues I raised.

[hcap]

Originally Posted by boxcar

I will as soon as you give me some allegory lessons on the two specific issues I raised.

Obliviously you can't Stop lying

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by hcap

Obliviously you can't Stop lying

And you can't quit being a hypocrite.

Give us YOUR allegorical interpretation of the two specific biblical issues I have raised.

What's the matter: Is the job above your pay grade? Or you can't find any help from any allegory apologist guru online?

[hcap]

Originally Posted by boxcar

Explain these allegories to me:

1. God killing all Egypt's firstborn.

2. The Christ-rejecting Jews delivering up the righteous man Jesus, on false, trumped up charges, to the Romans to be crucified.

Explain these "allegories" to me in your words.

The allegorical or metaphorical explanation of The killing of the Egyptian first born OR the killing Amalekites suckling infants is identical.

The post I linked to about the Amalekites is applicable

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/s...postcount=6446

I will copy it here.

Originally Posted by boxcar
A loving, righteous God would most certainly exact justice. And that's what the Amalekites received from God's hand through the Israelites -- justice.

Of course, you "don't buy"...because you have no conception of what it means to be a righteous being. And the character of an infinitely righteous being would demand an infinitely just remedy for lawbreaking and all unjust acts.
The story is not literally true. Makes no sense historically, or ethically, or empathetically.

Oy gevalt! And you speak of morality?

Psychologically, although distorted, if applied properly it does.

Whenever we attempt to discipline ourselves aiming to change or overcome a destructive habit, we may observe the resulting friction we often find in this attempt to alter our automatic ingrained behaviors. Frequently the elimination of that habit is not total. It can re-surface just when we assume we have been successful and begin to take credit for our success.(the usual patting oneself on the back)

Remnants of the destructive behavior, although almost discarded sneak back in.

Evil "spirits" or "demons" in the NT. properly understood......

Then goeth he, and taketh with himself seven other spirits more wicked than himself, and they enter in and dwell there: and the last state of that man is worse than the first. Even so shall it be also unto this wicked generation...Matthew 12:45

Similar to physically removing a bacteriological disease:.

Remove the main body of germs and if you don't get all the infection, small remnants grow back and these descendants of the original problem re infect you. These "infants", or first born of the new infection, are the potential problem. Some disguise themselves as minor other species, or "farm animals"

Metaphorically speaking of course.

The O.T. was composed for an earlier time and meant to Shock listeners into action. Of course it assumed those listeners were able to understand and witness themselves inwardly.

However Jews are smart. My Rabbis agree of course.
.................................................. ..........................

As above so below. The external story of the Egyptian first bnornm, or the suckling infants of Amalekites is just a "map" of the pwshco-spiritual territory it describes within.

[hcap]

So obvioudsly you did not read this or understand the psychological principle behind "being a witness" to the ever changing drama within. Of course I must mention much of this is from my time studying Gurdjieff and Ouspensky, and the great Maurice Nicoll.

Ok bunky your turn.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by hcap

The allegorical or metaphorical explanation of The killing of the Egyptian first born OR the killing Amalekites suckling infants is identical.

The post I linked to about the Amalekites is applicable

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/s...postcount=6446

I will copy it here.



Oy gevalt! And you speak of morality?

Psychologically, although distorted, if applied properly it does.

Whenever we attempt to discipline ourselves aiming to change or overcome a destructive habit, we may observe the resulting friction we often find in this attempt to alter our automatic ingrained behaviors. Frequently the elimination of that habit is not total. It can re-surface just when we assume we have been successful and begin to take credit for our success.(the usual patting oneself on the back)

Remnants of the destructive behavior, although almost discarded sneak back in.

Evil "spirits" or "demons" in the NT. properly understood......

Then goeth he, and taketh with himself seven other spirits more wicked than himself, and they enter in and dwell there: and the last state of that man is worse than the first. Even so shall it be also unto this wicked generation...Matthew 12:45

Similar to physically removing a bacteriological disease:.

Remove the main body of germs and if you don't get all the infection, small remnants grow back and these descendants of the original problem re infect you. These "infants", or first born of the new infection, are the potential problem. Some disguise themselves as minor other species, or "farm animals"

Metaphorically speaking of course.

The O.T. was composed for an earlier time and meant to Shock listeners into action. Of course it assumed those listeners were able to understand and witness themselves inwardly.

However Jews are smart. My Rabbis agree of course.
.................................................. ..........................

As above so below. The external story of the Egyptian first bnornm, or the suckling infants of Amalekites is just a "map" of the pwshco-spiritual territory it describes within.

Oh...so you do have a one-size fits all allegorical interpretation for passages wherein a sensible sense interpretation doesn't float your boat. Your post for the Amalekites is a universal interpretation, heh?

I wonder why, though, the Hebrews' firstborn weren't slaughtered? Does your one-size-fits-all Amalekite allegory tell us that?

By hey...this is quite possibly what Luther had in mind when he wrote his stuff.

"Remove the main body of germs and if you don't get all the infection, small remnants grow back and these descendants of the original problem re infect you. These "infants", or first born of the new infection, are the potential problem. Some disguise themselves as minor other species, or "farm animals"

Maybe he just had in mind to get rid of the main body of germs.

Pretty Kool coincidence, huh?

[hcap]

Originally Posted by boxcar

Oh...so you do have a one-size fits all allegorical interpretation for passages wherein a sensible sense interpretation doesn't float your boat. Your post for the Amalekites is a universal interpretation, heh?

I wonder why, though, the Hebrews' firstborn weren't slaughtered? Does your one-size-fits-all Amalekite allegory tell us that?

By hey...this is quite possibly what Luther had in mind when he wrote his stuff.

"Remove the main body of germs and if you don't get all the infection, small remnants grow back and these descendants of the original problem re infect you. These "infants", or first born of the new infection, are the potential problem. Some disguise themselves as minor other species, or "farm animals"

Maybe he just had in mind to get rid of the main body of germs.

Pretty Kool coincidence, huh?

No, one size does not fit all. This is only to explain god apparently killing infants. so we can understand it need never ever happened as actual history.

The major overriding metaphor in all scripture is the possibility of inner growth. And this various variations on this metaphor often uses "historical" events as a model or "map" to illustrate the process taking place in the inner psycho-spiritual territory. Characters and events sketched out on the external "map" serve as guideposts to help dramatize and impress very strong themes on our psyche.

The Hebrew first born were not of Pharaoh's Egypt, the purveyor of of captivity. That which Moses and the Hebrews had to escape from

I do not buy Luther was saying anything like my iknterpretation. If so he was calling Jews the remnants of an internal spiritual disease. If so he totally misunderstood that the Jews, and the scribes and pharisees represented taking the spirit of the law as the letter of the law. Confusing the map for the territory.

Hate to tell you but he was calling Jews a real external disease.
that should be almost eradicated. He is not killing Jewish children , but torturing all Jews.

Eradicating the remnants of a left over spiritual struggle to move closer to the divine, never involves torturing oneself. But not "going" along with those remnants. The struggle is to be aware of their attraction and "turn the other cheek"

Silence often defeats noise

I repeat...

Section XI of the treatise advises Protestants to carry out seven remedial actions. These are

to burn down Jewish synagogues and schools and warn people against them;
to refuse to let Jews own houses among Christians;
for Jewish religious writings to be taken away;
for rabbis to be forbidden to preach;
to offer no protection to Jews on highways;
for usury to be prohibited and for all silver and gold to be removed, put aside for safekeeping, and given back to Jews who truly convert; and
to give young, strong Jews flail, axe, spade, and spindle, and let them earn their bread in the sweat of their brow.[9]

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by hcap

No, one size does not fit all. This is only to explain god apparently killing infants. so we can understand it need never ever happened as actual history.

The major overriding metaphor in all scripture is the possibility of inner growth. And this various variations on this metaphor often uses "historical" events as a model or "map" to illustrate the process taking place in the inner psycho-spiritual territory. Characters and events sketched out on the external "map" serve as guideposts to help dramatize and impress very strong themes on our psyche.

The Hebrew first born were not of Pharaoh's Egypt, the purveyor of of captivity. That which Moses and the Hebrews had to escape from

I do not buy Luther was saying anything like my iknterpretation. If so he was calling Jews the remnants of an internal spiritual disease. If so he totally misunderstood that the Jews, and the scribes and pharisees represented taking the spirit of the law as the letter of the law. Confusing the map for the territory.

Hate to tell you but he was calling Jews a real external disease.
that should be almost eradicated. He is not killing Jewish children , but torturing all Jews.

Eradicating the remnants of a left over spiritual struggle to move closer to the divine, never involves torturing oneself. But not "going" along with those remnants. The struggle is to be aware of their attraction and "turn the other cheek"

Silence often defeats noise

I repeat...

Section XI of the treatise advises Protestants to carry out seven remedial actions. These are

to burn down Jewish synagogues and schools and warn people against them;
to refuse to let Jews own houses among Christians;
for Jewish religious writings to be taken away;
for rabbis to be forbidden to preach;
to offer no protection to Jews on highways;
for usury to be prohibited and for all silver and gold to be removed, put aside for safekeeping, and given back to Jews who truly convert; and
to give young, strong Jews flail, axe, spade, and spindle, and let them earn their bread in the sweat of their brow.[9]

Blah, blah, blah, blah. Like I said: One-size-fits-all. Not surprising.

All Luther was doing was cleaning up the causes of the spiritual disease so that everyone, including the Jews, could grow spiritually and become enlightened as you are.

[hcap]

Originally Posted by boxcar

Blah, blah, blah, blah. Like I said: One-size-fits-all. Not surprising.

All Luther was doing was cleaning up the causes of the spiritual disease so that everyone, including the Jews, could grow spiritually and become enlightened as you are.

You are making this up. Some of Luther's real EXTERNAL life. No allegorizing or ant metaphor.

Paul Johnson writes that "Luther was not content with verbal abuse. Even before he wrote his anti-Semitic pamphlet, he got Jews expelled from Saxony in 1537, and in the 1540s he drove them from many German towns; he tried unsuccessfully to get the elector to expel them from Brandenburg in 1543."[21]

Michael Berenbaum writes that Luther's reliance on the Bible as the sole source of Christian authority fed his later fury toward Jews over their rejection of Jesus as the messiah.[10] For Luther, salvation depended on the belief that Jesus was the Son of God, a belief that adherents of Judaism do not share. Graham Noble writes that Luther wanted to save Jews, in his own terms, not exterminate them, but beneath his apparent reasonableness toward them, there was a "biting intolerance", which produced "ever more furious demands for their conversion to his own brand of Christianity". (Noble, 1-2) When they failed to convert, he turned on them.[22]

[hcap]

As I said Christians confused the allegory of Jews giving up Jesus to the Romans with an actual event. Assuming it was history. The Jews, scribes and pharisees represented mistaking the letter of the law with the spirit of the law. Which in fact Jesus allegorically came to fix. The entire fable only has some rough correlation to the actual archaeological and historical events of the time and place. Just like all of scripture. Look at it more as a "cookbook" to practically bake a spiritual "cake"

It seems you are a "Jew" in the allegorical sense. You constantly confuse the map for the territory. Analyzing using only your head without your heart.

Like the kids in elementary school memorizing baseball statistics and players names, never learning to play ball. Try yoga or meditation


More on Luther's lack of depth, and allegory, and more of his vile antisemitism aftereffects

The prevailing scholarly view since the Second World War is that the treatise exercised a major and persistent influence on Germany's attitude toward its Jewish citizens in the centuries between the Reformation and the Holocaust.[23] Four hundred years after it was written, the Nazis displayed On the Jews and Their Lies during Nuremberg rallies, and the city of Nuremberg presented a first edition to Julius Streicher, editor of the Nazi newspaper Der Stürmer, the newspaper describing it, on Streicher's first encounter with the treatise in 1937, as the most radically antisemitic tract ever published.[24] Against this view, theologian Johannes Wallmann writes that the treatise had no continuity of influence in Germany, and was in fact largely ignored during the 18th and 19th centuries.[25] Hans Hillerbrand argues that to focus on Luther's role in the development of German antisemitism is to underestimate the "larger peculiarities of German history."[26]