Note from Guru Kurt: I had a lot of fun writing this piece, for the work I was writing against was indeed "devilish," striking low blows at the Christian faith with wild abandon. Yet, I was able to meet every single objection, without relying on quotations from Biblical sources. One would think this was an easy feat, given all the attention it has received (none at all). When I wrote this, I did not understand man's true situation, the real problem of humanity, the cause of mankind's paucity of rational thought. I believed that they were merely trapped in the world, but now I understand their faults are much deeper than this, and there was a good deal of sense in beginning the tradition of the "fall of man." O man, what, or who, is the source of all your rational thinking? Do you think your own thoughts, or does the Father need to lend a helping hand at times? The answer to this question is too much to contemplate, even for me. Still, I hope that you enjoy reading this essay, which I think is rollicking good fun!
A Neo-Christian Defense of Jesus or The
Devil in the Atheist
I once passed through a dark
period where I did not believe in God. This was because I read many books
disparaging religion, for instance "The Death of God." These books
contained what I considered good reasoning, much of it based on historical
accuracy and strict literal interpretation of statements found in the Bible. As
I grew older, I came to see that the Atheists begin with the belief that God
does not exist, that the possibility of God existing is zero. They then prop up
this position with various arguments. The Atheists have faith that God does not
exist, whereas Christians have faith that He does. Which position is stronger? I
submit that once one takes the step of believing that Jesus Christ is indeed the
only Son of God as He claimed, the arguments of the Atheists fall and are
crushed under logical thinking as compact cars and tricycles are crushed by an
onrushing M1 Abrams tank.
The Freedom from Religion
Foundation has posted a list of written assaults on Jesus Christ, at http://www.ffrf.org/nontracts/jesus.html,
many of which are egregious and offensive. Although they call themselves
"free-thinkers," they are really "bound-thinkers" in that
their minds are closed to the glorious and holy nature of Jesus Christ. Their
arguments are poorly stated, weakly supported, and mostly specious. Jesus was
God incarnate. He was the personality of the Father expressed as a human being.
He was beyond imperfection, and may be easily defended on the basis of rational
arguments, without relying on previously revealed scripture. Their criticisms of
Jesus’ life are largely based on a poor understanding of the divine
personality, which is radiant, pure, and flawless. I think you will find this
appealing and motivating reading.
I will preface the web page
claims with "Freedom from Religion Foundation," and my replies with
"Guru Kurt."
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
Why Jesus?
Jesus has been held in high
regard by Christians and non-Christians alike. Regardless of whether he existed
in history, or whether he was divine, many have asserted that the New Testament
Christ character was the highest example of moral living. Many believe that his
teachings, if truly understood and followed, would make this a better world. Is
this true? Does Jesus merit the widespread adoration he has received? Let's look
at what he said and did.
Guru Kurt:
There are three separate
claims here, starting this disrespectful, disjointed document off with an
annoyingly unclear and evasive tone. If one’s purpose is not stated clearly at
the outset it is difficult for anyone else to spot erroneous thinking, since no
one (including the writer) knows what the argument is exactly about! I will
number the claims to help clarify the intent of the Freedom from Religion Foundation, spelling out the
rational basis for this discussion.
1. Christ’s character was
the highest example of moral living.
Jesus Christ led anything
but a normal or average life, so it is not possible for the rest of us to follow
His example exactly. Only He Himself knows why He did the things He did, and
said the things He said. The claim they are affronting here is that Jesus’
"character" is a moral example for us to follow, in other words His
statements and teachings can give us some clues as to His underlying holy and
divine disposition, and that by trying to emulate His revealed nature to the
best extent we can, we will be more moral than we would have been otherwise.
2. Christ’s teachings, if
truly understood and followed, will make this a better world.
This is a completely
separate issue from 1, since His teachings may be considered separately from His
character, as objective truths revealed by God for man’s help and edification.
They may not be considered as mere moral claims, however, for reasons that I
will discuss later.
3. Does Jesus merit the
widespread adoration He has received?
Again, this is a separate
point of contention from 1 and 2. Adoration comes from a deeper level than mere
moral reasoning, for it is a matter of the heart. One does not even adore
Christ’s character, as revealed by His actions and words, but His very person.
One adores the living God, the living Christ within one’s own heart, and the
expansive, all-powerful Lord of the universe that He is.
The Freedom from Religion
Foundation thus aims to assail Christ’s character, His teachings, and His very
personality. Let us see how successful they will be.
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
Was Jesus Peaceable And
Compassionate?
The birth of Jesus was
heralded with "Peace on Earth," yet Jesus said, "Think not that I
am come to send peace: I came not to send peace but a sword." (Matthew
10:34) "He that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one."
(Luke 22:36) "But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign
over them, bring hither, and slay them before me." (Luke 19:27. In a
parable, but spoken of favorably.)
Guru Kurt:
I will deal with each of
these three verses in turn, and then give a general explanation of the violent
and aggressive language that is common in the Bible. First, "Think not that
I am come to send peace: I came not to send peace but a sword" (Matthew
10:34). Jesus did not come to congratulate man on his splendid society, to
applaud his laws and civil institutions, or to pat him on the back for his
impeccable personal relationships. He came to foment change. There are two kinds
of peace, the peace of the sluggard, the slob and the lazy man, and the peace of
the man or woman of God. The peace of the former is a dead kind of peace, which
is not really peace but a kind of slumber. Jesus came to wake mankind up into a
new kind of peace, one which is active, vibrant, and alive. The first kind of
peace results in a cruel society, such as existed in Jesus’ day, where people
do not care about one another, beggars are left to starve on the street, and war
and violence are rampant because no one does anything to contain them. America
is a land of peace because we enforce that peace with policemen and the
military, not because we sit on our hands and do nothing when evil men act in
malevolent ways. Even today the words of Jesus shout: "Get up! Wake up!
Make changes, make the world a better place. Do not just sit there and do
nothing, get active!"
The second verse, from Luke
22, is better read with the verse following it included:
36. He
said to them, "But now, let him who has a purse take it, and likewise a
bag. And let him who has no sword sell his mantle and buy one. 37. For I tell
you that this scripture must be fulfilled in me, 'And he was reckoned with
transgressors'; for what is written about me has its fulfillment."
This is the closest Jesus
ever came to actually recommending violence, but He is suggesting this solely
for the safety of His disciples, for their self-defense. He sees that there is
going to be a potentially violent confrontation, and is asking His disciples to
at least make a show of self-defense when the police arrive, so that they are
not harmed. The "free-thinkers" here neglect the fact that ancient
Israel was a violent place, and defenseless men were often harmed by corrupt
police and soldiers. It is important in reading the Bible to recall that the
primitive society of those days was violent and dangerous, and practical
measures were required for safety’s sake. Jesus had His disciples make a show
of force, nothing more, for their own protection.
The third verse, from Luke
19, should be considered in the context of the whole parable:
12. He
said therefore, "A nobleman went into a far country to receive a kingdom
and then return. 13. Calling ten of his servants, he gave them ten pounds, and
said to them, 'Trade with these till I come.' 14. But his citizens hated him and
sent an embassy after him, saying, 'We do not want this man to reign over us.'
15. When he returned, having received the kingdom, he commanded these servants,
to whom he had given the money, to be called to him, that he might know what
they had gained by trading. 16. The first came before him, saying, 'Lord, your
pound has made ten pounds more.' 17. And he said to him, 'Well done, good
servant! Because you have been faithful in a very little, you shall have
authority over ten cities.' 18. And the second came, saying, 'Lord, your pound
has made five pounds.' 19. And he said to him, 'And you are to be over five
cities.' 20. Then another came, saying, 'Lord, here is your pound, which I kept
laid away in a napkin; 21. for I was afraid of you, because you are a severe
man; you take up what you did not lay down, and reap what you did not sow.' 22.
He said to him, 'I will condemn you out of your own mouth, you wicked servant!
You knew that I was a severe man, taking up what I did not lay down and reaping
what I did not sow? 23. Why then did you not put my money into the bank, and at
my coming I should have collected it with interest?' 24. And he said to those
who stood by, 'Take the pound from him, and give it to him who has the ten
pounds.' 25. (And they said to him, 'Lord, he has ten pounds!') 26. 'I tell you,
that to every one who has will more be given; but from him who has not, even
what he has will be taken away. 27. But as for these enemies of mine, who did
not want me to reign over them, bring them here and slay them before me.'"
Luke 19:27 is the
continuation of Luke 19:14, for it is about the citizens, and the servants with
their money are not related to this statement about violence. One may begin by
arguing that telling a story that includes violence is not tantamount to
promoting violence. For instance, if I were to tell a war story to bring some
point about life to light, this would be seen by a generous reader as an
effective tool to emphasize and enliven truth, to make it interesting and widely
read. It is also a way to connect the truths of life to reality, for the world
is indeed a violent place. If Jesus had used only non-violent parables, He would
have run the risk of appearing out of touch with real life, a utopian dreamer
with no experience of life’s pain and suffering.
To answer the ungenerous
reader, I must explicate the entire parable, for the servants and the citizens
are related. The nobleman is clearly Jesus Himself. The kingdom is earth, and
its citizens those who have never heard of Jesus. God has given earth to His Son
to rule as His kingdom. The servants are citizens of earth who hear and respond
to Jesus’ word. Even to hear the gospel, you become His servant, in other
words He has given you coins that you are to use to try to convert others, to
bring the truths of the Gospel to others. If you read the Gospel carefully and
become a good teacher of others you are like the man that made ten pounds. The
man who merely attends church and never talks to anyone outside church, who
never reads his Bible, is like the man who did nothing with his money. The
rewards that Jesus dispenses are treasures in heaven, the greatest treasure
given to the one who did the most while in this life.
Now, notice that the man who
has done nothing is still considered one of Jesus’ servants, and although he
receives no reward he is still not killed. He is allowed to enter heaven, only
without any treasure. Jesus assigns a completely different classification to the
citizens of the country, who are people that never go to church at all, who
rebuff His teachings, and who disregard the Bible. Jesus makes a sharp
distinction between His servants or followers, however weak and vacillating they
may be, and the citizens, those who ignore religion entirely and lead
materialistic, selfish lives. Here is where the Freedom from Religion Foundation
falls flat on its face, since Jesus was not a great man. He was not a great
moral teacher. He was God Himself, in a human body but possessing a mighty
divine mind and all the powers of God at His command. It is wrong to try to hold
Jesus to a human standard of "peaceableness" here.
As God, Jesus has promised
to return and judge mankind, sending many into hell when He does. This is going
to be a divine purifying action, and although we may not fully understand His
purpose, we should not judge Him by our standards. I do not argue that this
planned divine action is peaceable, for it certainly is not. This does not mean
Jesus did not want peace on earth, for naturally He did. His moral character
cannot be impugned on the basis of the coming judgement, and those following His
commands and spreading His message will be spreading peace in the world.
Although the judgement will not be peaceful, its net effect will be to make the
earth a peaceful place, for Jesus will not be throwing peaceable people into
hell, but the non-peaceable ones. The Freedom from Religion Foundation writer here forgets that God is just,
and fallen man is the cause of all the trouble. God will establish peace on
earth by a non-peaceable action, by declaring a holy war, if you will, upon
evildoers. He is able to do this. When God acts in a non-peaceable way, it is
against those who deserve it. Jesus, therefore, is very peaceable, for He wants
nothing but peace on earth. Since He is God, too, He will enforce His wishes
against those who are not peaceable. This is the meaning of this parable, and
that the Freedom from Religion Foundation writer includes it as criticism here shows the poverty of his or
her spiritual understanding.
Jesus frequently used
violent and intense imagery in His language in order to have an impact on
men’s minds, an impact that would last for thousands of years. That He was
successful is attested to by the immense popularity of the Christian religion.
You must understand that man, as stated in the Christian tradition, is fallen.
He is selfish, brutal, violent, and arrogant. He is naturally attracted to
violent images and concepts. This is the source of all wars, all violent crime,
all domestic disputes, and all hatred. Man cannot get along with his fellow man.
He always needs a confrontation, a battle of some kind, whether at home or
abroad. At the office, there is what is called the "food chain."
People eat up their competition with back-stabbing and false rumors if necessary
to win that promotion. At home, husband and wife are often pitted against one
another about the budget, the children, or the state of their sex life. Just ask
any typical American, and he or she will verify these claims of mine, for they
are true. The success of violent television, violent movies, and violent video
games are also indisputable proof of the craving that most people in the world
today (and in the past, assuming we are not getting worse), for violent images
and thoughts in their minds, although not necessarily in their actual lives.
Men like violent images, and
the Bible responds to this craving by supplying words full of fire and fierce
threats. The question becomes, do these violent images in the scriptures have an
overwhelmingly good effect, or is the effect essentially a negative one? Do the
words of the Bible increase man’s tendency to commit violent acts, or do they
attract his attention and make the less violent, peaceful images that accompany
them more palatable and sweet? I say that the violent language used in religion
is placed there for just this reason, and if it were absent men would find
endless talk about peace, peace, peace to be insipid and boring. It is just the
nature of man, and although there are a few who take these statements literally
and respond by actually killing and committing other violent acts, these people
are rare. The violent words and images in the Bible are placed there as salt is
placed into bland soup to make it tastier. Some there are to whom the scriptures
would be engaging reading indeed without any mention of violence, but these are
advanced religious souls such as Mother Teresa or St. Francis of Assisi, not the
majority of mankind.
There is a stronger argument
that I can present, and that is that there are many ways of presenting a single
truth, not just one way. Truth may be simple, but like a multi-faceted ruby or
diamond, one may look at it from many different angles and behold new beauties.
Imagine owning a diamond ring, and then looking at it from only one angle! Newly
engaged women hold up their ring into a bright light, twist it this way and
that, and exclaim, "Ah, how beautiful! See the lovely facets! Look how it
sparkles!" You must remember that life on a planet filled with humans is by
its very nature violent. Few there are indeed that escape untouched by violence
throughout their entire life, be it rape, robbery, spousal abuse, or even worse
crimes such as murder. If God presented religion in the total absence of violent
language, it would be like handing man a diamond with no setting or metal band
to hold it.
God is completely
non-violent, but the people that He has made have violent tendencies, mostly
because He was generous enough to give them completely free wills. He did not
make religion for Himself, but for mankind. Including some violent images and
language in scripture gives man a ring into which the diamond of the real truth
is set. Man can identify with the message, because part of it corresponds to his
daily experience on earth. The violence in scripture is the way that God
connects with man, for otherwise God’s word would be too nebulous and
out-of-reach for real people, if not outright out-of-touch with reality. Mankind
can take the diamond ring of religion, place it on his finger, and gaze at it
from many directions: "There are so many interesting stories and ideas in
the Bible! How the truth sparkles!" Without the metal band, without the
mention of violent experiences with which every man is well acquainted, and
often forced into, the diamond of truth would fall onto the floor, never to be
thought of again.
If you hold the ring just
right, you can even obscure the band around your finger, for the diamond is
large, and see the truth as God intended it to be seen. This is the attitude of
most people that go to church, who consider themselves real Christians. They
look for the parts of the revealed scriptures that apply to their lives, and
hardly notice the violent imagery sometimes employed. The vast majority of
Christians are peace-loving, well-adjusted, moral people. You won’t see anyone
today buying swords because Jesus suggested that they do that, but you will see
many people more attracted to Jesus’ overall message because they hear an echo
from their everyday reality at church. Life itself is violent on planet earth.
By reflecting this violence in a small way, the scriptures connect with man, get
his attention, and help him to go beyond violence.
There is something else. I
have said that the world is a violent place, but I haven’t said that all
violence is bad or evil. This is the Pollyanna approach to life envisioned by,
for instance, Mahatma Gandhi. There are circumstances under which violence is
appropriate. The first and most obvious is self-defense. If I am attacked I can
decide not to resist, and resign my fate to God. This is indeed a valid
approach, and Gandhi was not far from right here. It requires tremendous faith,
however, and a firm belief that God is waiting to rescue you as you cross
death’s threshold into eternity. God, however, is a realist. The man who
protects himself from violence by another is completely, utterly innocent in the
eyes of God. This is true even if he inflicts greater injury than was absolutely
necessary through anger. In a dangerous situation, no one has time or the
rational thought necessary to know when to stop. The person who has attacked is
fully to blame, and he gets what he deserves.
This applies not just to
individuals, but to nations as well. Osama Bin Laden has provided us with the
perfect example of a just war. There he stands, in freedom, arrogantly and
haughtily avowing that he will use any and every means available to turn
America’s own power against itself, killing as many innocent civilians as he
possibly can. God is not going to say, "Resign yourself to your fate, and
let your children suffer at the hands of that madman, for all violence without
exception is evil." No. As I said, this is one approach, but the realistic
approach, the take-charge approach of most Americans, is vindicated before God.
He will certainly rescue a completely non-violent person in the life to come,
but a person who commits violence in a just cause is also noble in the eyes of
God.
World War II is also an
example of a just war. Germany, Italy and Japan were completely out of control,
acting like savage, uncivilized races in a brutal attempt to dominate the earth.
America was right to enter the war, and help to finish it. God even approved of
the dropping of the Atomic bombs on Nagasaki and Hiroshima. I know this is a
horrifying thing, but God is a realist. He saw both outcomes, one where America
did not use the bomb and lost hundreds of thousands of innocent servicemen as we
hopped from island to island, and one in which the true aggressor of the war was
punished, even though the lives of many innocent civilians were lost. It is a
terrible truth about nations that the people are often not responsible for the
actions of their leaders, but in this case this was the least evil alternative,
and Harry Truman made the correct decision.
The meaning of this is that
each and every American serviceman in World War II or in the recent Afghanistan
conflict, no matter how many others they kill, maim, or wound, is innocent in
the eyes of God. To Him, it was as though they stayed at home, in the United
States, and never left for war. One must be sure, however, that the cause is
just. The same may not be said of all the members of the Nazi army. The typical
Nazi soldier was innocent, even though the cause of his country was not just,
because he was trapped in a situation beyond his control. This is why I say the
citizens of Nagasaki and Hiroshima were also by and large innocent. However, the
Nazi soldiers that committed atrocities against the Jews in the concentration
camps were not innocent, but were guilty of heinous crimes, and will be
punished. There is a point at which a soldier must take personal responsibility
for his actions, and when asked to herd naked, innocent people like cattle into
a gas chamber, he has gone far past that point. He should instead submit himself
to be shot, rather than participate in such action, which is clearly evil and
reprehensible.
God is a realist, as I say.
He foresaw the necessity for just violence on earth, and this is why Jesus
included violent references in His speech. Although these words may be
despicable to you, the Freedom from Religion Foundation writer in your protected, sheltered life, they have
been consoling and comforting to millions upon millions of American servicemen
who have participated in, and even given their very lives in a just cause. You
are enjoying your freedoms so carelessly, but many have given their lives, and
would you tell them these lives were thrown away? They were not wasted, and
those men are precious in God’s sight. This is even true of Vietnam, a war
that was admittedly on shaky moral ground, but in which the soldiers themselves
were blameless. Imagine losing your entire life at the tender age of twenty or
even younger. You will never have the chance to enjoy the beauty of a park, or
take your children to the zoo. You won’t have a house, a car, or a television
set. You have nothing but the grave. I say, if you are a Christian, you have
heaven too.
This is one reason Jesus
exhorted men to buy swords, because there are some things in this world that are
worth fighting for. Freedom, the kind of freedom we enjoy in America, is one of
them. The defeat of Hitler was a just cause, as was the defeat of Saddam Hussein
in the Persian Gulf War, and as are our attacks on Afghanistan. In a world
filled with evil men, righteous men must stand and fight. You may think that God
should be more like a lamb and less like an eagle, but you would be wrong. You
would also be under Nazi rule, or perhaps working on a collective Soviet farm,
instead of being free to think, as you can see I am also free to think.
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
The burning of unbelievers
during the Inquisition was based on the words of Jesus: "If a man abide not
in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and
cast them into the fire, and they are burned." (John 15:6)
Guru Kurt:
I will include the entire
context of this quote from John 15, since it is not possible to discuss it out
of context:
1.
"I am the true vine, and my Father is the vinedresser. 2. Every branch of
mine that bears no fruit, he takes away, and every branch that does bear fruit
he prunes, that it may bear more fruit. 3. You are already made clean by the
word which I have spoken to you. 4. Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch
cannot bear fruit by itself, unless it abides in the vine, neither can you,
unless you abide in me. 5. I am the vine, you are the branches. He who abides in
me, and I in him, he it is that bears much fruit, for apart from me you can do
nothing. 6. If a man does not abide in me, he is cast forth as a branch and
withers; and the branches are gathered, thrown into the fire and burned.
Jesus is describing here the
proper relationship between God and man. He says that man should abide in God,
which means thinking about God, performing all one’s actions for God’s sake
alone, trying to serve God in this human life. Nothing that is done without God,
in other words that is done for selfish reasons, for revenge, out of greed or
out of pride, for instance, will hold in eternity. If God does not smile on the
action, then you are acting like a person cut off entirely from God, and since
He created earth and all the people that live on earth, you are like a branch
that has been pruned from a grapevine. You lie on the ground until you dry, no
longer bearing grapes, and after a time the vineyard workers come by, collect
the branches, and burn them.
Again, the use of figurative
language that includes the concept of burning does not impugn the moral
character of the storyteller. This is where the Freedom from Religion Foundation
writer is extremely shallow
in his or her criticism. Was Jesus supposed to tell stories about fairies in a
never-never land, who flutter daintily about on gossamer wings? Shouldn’t He
rather use real examples from real life, that actual people can understand and
relate to? Of course. That certain depraved people would see the word
"burned" and decide Jesus was giving approval for witch-burning is
merely a sad coincidence, nothing more. Those people were just as wrong in their
interpretation of this parable as the Freedom from Religion Foundation is today, for no one may judge man
except the blameless one, Jesus Himself. Man cannot tell whether other men are
abiding in God or not. Only God can do this, and Jesus used other analogies,
such as about the log and the speck (Matthew 7:3-5), to emphasize this fact of
life.
Jesus did, however, use the
analogy of burning intentionally. He will come again to judge mankind, and at
that time unrepentant sinners really will be thrown into the fire of hell.
Although it is more positive to want to serve God because He is a noble,
wonderful being and pleasing Him brings one joy, there is another reason why
one’s actions should be done for His sake, that one should "abide in
Him" and not perform actions apart from His approval, and that is to avoid
hell. Jesus is giving a clear warning here, and the warning was meant for such
as the Freedom from Religion Foundation, who unthinkingly put forth ideas that
distract others from the truth of God’s message, and end up leading many
others into hell. Jesus was merely relating facts in these verses, facts that he
knew with certainty.
Suppose, in the old American
West, an Army brigade had sent a envoy, at considerable risk to himself, to an
Indian tribe a few months ahead of their arrival. This envoy states, "You
must adopt civilized ways. You must stop killing and scalping your rivals. You
must stop having incestuous relationships. You must adopt peaceful ways, for the
Army is coming. When they get here, if you have heeded my advice you will not be
harmed, but will be welcomed into the white man’s society as friends and
equals. If you have not, you will be judged unworthy of us, and either
imprisoned or killed." Some of the Indians respond, "We have seen the
messenger, but where is this Army? He is not to be believed, so let us ignore
him. There is no danger." These are like the Freedom from Religion Foundation, who do not take Jesus
seriously, and do so at their own peril. Other Indians respond, "We have
never seen a white man. Let us go partway with him. Let us stop having incest,
and stop scalping, but we will not stop warring with the tribe over the
hill." These are like men who take Jesus seriously and make some attempt to
mend their ways, just in case He was indeed the Son of God. Other Indians, the
wise elders, counsel and some listen to them, "Let us heed this fellow’s
advice entirely. We don’t really like incest, scalping, or warring anyway. We
will be good people and await this Army. Even if the Army never shows up, we
will still lead happier lives."
Several months goes by and
the Army arrives, bristling with rifles and artillery pieces. The Indians that
would not listen make war on the Army, and most of them are killed. The Indians
who have renounced everything but war, upon seeing the potent Army with its
impressive bugle corps and disciplined battle formations, decide not to fight
and are spared. However, the Army envoy reports that they are still war-like,
although they are not completely beyond hope. The second group of Indians are
thus detained in a special area and watched carefully until it is certain they
are reformed. The Indians who adopted the well-meaning suggestions of the Army
envoy are welcomed with open arms into the civilization of the white man, for he
reports that they are worthy of civilization.
Jesus is like this envoy,
and the Army He warned about is like the second coming, where many will be
thrown into hell by His Father in heaven. The Army envoy said many would be
killed by the Army. Does this reflect poorly on His moral character? Of course
not! He was merely relating facts. One may indeed argue that His action was one
of the utmost compassion, for with or without a warning the Army would still
have come. Similarly, Jesus kindly warned us about an action of divine wrath,
retribution and vengeance that will occur. This was compassionate on His part,
not cold or harsh. He was simply relating reality, and trying to help man avoid
hell.
There are other less violent
analogies Jesus could have used. He could have said, "It is like a woman
schoolteacher in the 1800’s whose kids are misbehaving. A child who misbehaves
is warned with a stern verbal statement by the schoolmarm, ‘Stop your
misbehavior young man, or there will be consequences.’ When the child
continues to misbehave, eventually the schoolmarm loses patience and raps him on
the knuckles, or makes him wear a dunce cap. Similarly, if you misbehave God
will not be pleased. The worse your misbehavior, the worse the punishment!"
This is a weak and poor parable, and it should be obvious that Jesus’ choice
of the grapevine and the branch was intended to have a more powerful effect on
people, which indeed it does. Whether one is revolted, as the Freedom from Religion Foundation
writer
apparently is, or flattered, as are the Christians, depends on whether your
heart is open to the possibility that Jesus may really return and are working to
prepare yourself for this eventuality.
Jesus used a vivid and
precise analogy to warn of the dangers of everlasting damnation. If He had used
childish and juvenile analogies in His speech, people would have laughed at Him
and His Father too, for being effeminate and weak. If He had used such
analogies, the Freedom from Religion Foundation would have been the first to level this criticism, that such
a God could never have real power to do the things He says He will do! With
people like this, you can never win. They have already decided they are right,
and will apply any smarmy argument they can dream up to "validate"
their untenable position. So be it. Such as these will be the ones that Jesus
will cast into fire, as He promised to do.
My analogy of the Indians
and the white men is also imperfect, for such a thing never occurred in the old
West. The Indians were treated unfairly, but it is also wrong to say that the
white man did not benefit them at all. They now lead civilized lives, and many
of them are quite happy and successful members of our society. They have medical
and dental care, and do not face the constant risk of cold and starvation. They
live much longer lives, for the lifespan of primitive peoples is generally
short, around 50 for the oldest. The story I related was not meant to be an
absolute parallel to reality, but it was meant to convey a deeper truth in an
interesting manner. The Freedom from Religion Foundation can call it violent and untrue, but I still
maintain there is a place for the parable, the story that makes deeper realities
comprehensible to the human mind.
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
Jesus looked at his critics
"with anger" (Mark 3:5), and attacked merchants with a whip (John
2:15).
Guru Kurt:
There is a type of anger
that is righteousness. This is the kind of anger that God expresses again and
again in the pages of the Bible. I like to call it divine wrath, to make a
distinction between this type of anger and the irrational anger of an impetuous
human being who does not get his way. This type of anger is strength, it is
pure, and it belongs in the divine character. It makes Jesus more loveable and
adorable, because it shows He cares about what happens in the world, and not
only cares, but is willing to get angry about it and actually do something to
set things right.
I will give you an example.
Suppose you arrive home from work one day, and find your neighbor has strung his
cat out with stakes in his front yard, and is pulling the hide off the cat
slowly, in strips, while the cat is still alive. The cat is howling terribly,
for it is in immense pain. What is your response? Are you not incredibly angry
with this man? Are you not furious, and will you not take immediate action by
calling the police as quickly as possible? Of course you will! Now, does this
make you a despicable person, that you have become angry? Are you not a
peaceable man, are you not compassionate, because you are infuriated by this
callous disregard for the suffering of an animal? No. You are peaceable, you are
compassionate, and therefore you are very angry! Therefore you take action! This
is Jesus’ anger. He was always righteous, but the behavior of the people
around Him was often so despicable, they were often acting so contrary to
God’s wishes, that He became angry. It is a noble trait to become angry about
wickedness and evil even in a human, and more in God, who sees truly.
Let us examine the passages
cited. Here are the relevant verses from Mark 3:
1. Again
He entered the synagogue, and a man was there who had a withered hand. 2. And
they watched him, to see whether he would heal him on the sabbath, so that they
might accuse him. 3. And he said to the man who had the withered hand,
"Come here." 4. And he said to them, "Is it lawful on the sabbath
to do good or to do harm, to save life or to kill?" But they were silent.
5. And he looked around at them with anger, grieved at their hardness of heart,
and said to the man, "Stretch out your hand." He stretched it out, and
his hand was restored. 6. The Pharisees went out, and immediately held counsel
with the Herodians against him, how to destroy him.
I believe it should be clear
to anyone with an open mind that Jesus was correct to be angry, for the
Pharisees would have deprived this man of the use of his hand because of their
rigid regulations. The outrage Jesus felt would be similar to the outrage the Freedom from Religion Foundation
would feel if tomorrow Christians were to gain control of our government,
and make laws that hospitals and ambulances could not operate on Sundays. In
finding fault with Jesus here, the Freedom from Religion Foundation are in effect stating that they would
personally endorse such laws! They state that Jesus should not have been angry
here! He should have agreed that this poor man should keep his withered hand,
and let the Pharisees win the day. Thus, their arguments come back against them
in this instance. Of course, no Christian and no Freedom from Religion Foundation
person would really
endorse laws like this. But, there were the Pharisees with a ridiculous and
callous position. Jesus stood up to them, and this shows the real strength of
His character. It is not a sign of a lack of peacefulness, but of a noble divine
character that stands up for righteousness, and is angered by injustice and
careless, brutal thinking such as the Pharisees exhibited here.
Here are the pertinent
verses from John 2:
14. In
the temple he found those who were selling oxen and sheep and pigeons, and the
money-changers at their business. 15. And making a whip of cords, he drove them
all, with the sheep and oxen, out of the temple; and he poured out the coins of
the money-changers and overturned their tables. 16. And he told those who sold
the pigeons, "Take these things away; you shall not make my Father's house
a house of trade." 17. His disciples remembered that it was written,
"Zeal for thy house will consume me."
This is Jesus’ most
violent action, and there is no report of any injuries, so we may safely rule
out the possibility of Him actually physically harming anyone seriously.
Certainly if He would have done so, He would have been arrested immediately. I
suspect the money-changers were essentially afraid of this whip-wielding man
with blazing eyes, shouting against their activities. They probably turned and
ran and were never even touched by the whip Jesus wielded. Or, perhaps He used
the whip solely to drive the animals out. Obviously, no one stood and fought
with Him or this would have been reported, so my account is probably accurate.
With this said, it is
obvious that here Jesus was filled with the divine wrath or anger that I have
described. Imagine if today the local church were to open a McDonald’s
franchise inside its doors, or allow The Gap to sell clothing in the basement.
There you have the sanctuary on the first floor, and a garish sign above the
stairway leading downstairs proclaiming the businesses that are operating down
there. You have advertisements posted on all the bulletin boards, "Special
today: two for the price of one!" This is the scene Jesus came upon, one in
which religion and commerce were intermingled in a very disgraceful manner. This
angered Him greatly, and He took action. Probably when Jesus moved on, the
money-changers and animal sellers came back, but we have this Bible story to
remind us that God deserves His own place, that He deserves our full attention,
that the pursuit of material wealth and the pursuit of spiritual health are two
separate things.
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
He showed his respect for
life by drowning innocent animals (Matthew 8:32).
Guru Kurt:
Here is the whole story from
Matthew 8:
28. And
when he came to the other side, to the country of the Gadarenes, two demoniacs
met him, coming out of the tombs, so fierce that no one could pass that way. 29.
And behold, they cried out, "What have you to do with us, O Son of God?
Have you come here to torment us before the time?" 30. Now a herd of many
swine was feeding at some distance from them. 31. And the demons begged him,
"If you cast us out, send us away into the herd of swine." 32. And he
said to them, "Go." So they came out and went into the swine; and
behold, the whole herd rushed down the steep bank into the sea, and perished in
the waters. 33. The herdsmen fled, and going into the city they told everything,
and what had happened to the demoniacs.
This was a divine miracle,
and the Freedom from Religion Foundation "free-thinkers" fall on their face here in two ways.
First and most obviously, they are finding fault with a miraculous event. Here,
Jesus was expressing His divine authority, and they are criticizing the way He
used His awesome powers, about which they know nothing! It is truly outrageous
and arrogant that they should do this. God is free to use His powers as He
chooses, and we ought not to be critical of Him in this regard. He is not a
human being, and it may be dangerous to criticize Him. For instance, if there
were a magician that was turning people into toads left and right, one is indeed
free to come up to this magician and state, "Say, you shouldn’t be using
your powers in this way. It is not proper." The magician will reply,
"Do you have powers like mine, that you may be critical of me? I am turning
these people into frogs because they do not believe in magic. I am persuading
them of the error of their ways in an effective manner! I now turn you into a
toad, too!" How foolish this person was, and how foolish these so-called
"free-thinkers" are! Do not insult the bearer of immense powers that
you do not comprehend, or you court your own destruction! Isn’t this obvious?
Of course it is, but not to these hard-hearted, conceited people.
The second way that they are
wrong is that Jesus is making a distinction here between humans and animals.
Humans are higher than animals, and animals may be killed in order to benefit
human life. Do the Freedom from Religion Foundation people think that it would have been better to leave
these men in their insane condition than to destroy a herd of pigs? I suppose
they would also argue against animal testing where the benefit to man is direct
and obvious. I would not so argue, for I believe man is higher than the animals,
and under certain circumstances animal life may be sacrificed to improve the
life of man. However, the Freedom from Religion Foundation do not even bother to state their position
clearly here, but merely bring out this quote in a half-hearted attempt to sling
mud upon the precious name of Jesus. I will assume they would agree with me,
since I have no other evidence, and that they would admit their position here is
weak and preposterous, if they are indeed rational as they claim. Respect for
life must be qualified as to the type of life. Would they also argue that no
plant may be killed? If so, then they would quickly starve.
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
He refused to heal a sick
child until he was pressured by the mother (Matthew 15:22-28).
Guru Kurt:
Here is the whole passage,
from Mathew 15:
22. And
behold, a Canaanite woman from that region came out and cried, "Have mercy
on me, O Lord, Son of David; my daughter is severely possessed by a demon."
23. But he did not answer her a word. And his disciples came and begged him,
saying, "Send her away, for she is crying after us." 24. He answered,
"I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel." 25. But
she came and knelt before him, saying, "Lord, help me." 26. And he
answered, "It is not fair to take the children's bread and throw it to the
dogs." 27. She said, "Yes, Lord, yet even the dogs eat the crumbs that
fall from their masters' table." 28. Then Jesus answered her, "O
woman, great is your faith! Be it done for you as you desire." And her
daughter was healed instantly.
We must remember that in
Jesus’ day prejudice was much more prevalent than it is today, and He needed
to be sensitive to this or risk the disillusionment of even His closest
followers. It is a very common error of people who criticize the Bible that they
assume the world that the ancient Israelites knew was just like today, where
prejudice is frowned upon and all are thought equal, as bravely declared in the
U.S. Declaration of Independence. It was not so! The Jews were very prejudiced
against other groups. They were the chosen people, and no other group had status
in their eyes. Jesus here actually made a big stride towards reducing prejudice,
for this story read by anyone with an open mind shows His tender and
compassionate response to a person that His onlookers despised. Realize, Jesus
was always in danger of arrest, or being stoned to death at any moment. These
people were violent and unpredictable. In the face of this, He here shows real
compassion to a person that His companions and onlookers hated, and thus shows
the real divine preference that all should be treated as equals. Far from
impugning Jesus’ character, this passage shows brightly forth His equanimity
towards all, regardless of their origins or religious beliefs.
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
The most revealing aspect of
his character was his promotion of eternal torment. "The Son of man [Jesus
himself] shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom
all things that offend, and them which do iniquity; And shall cast them into a
furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth." (Matthew
13:41-42)
Guru Kurt:
Here again the Freedom from Religion Foundation
writer
misses the divine nature of Jesus’ character and mission. He was relating a
simple fact, He was not "promoting eternal torment." Jesus knew that
hell was a real place, not a fiction designed to scare people into behaving
correctly. Hell is not imaginary, it is real. People that do not follow Jesus’
advice, who do not believe that there is any possibility that God would send His
Son as a divine messenger to warn mankind of the coming judgement day, run the
actual risk of being cast into hell. There, they will indeed rue and regret
their earthly life, where they could have made wiser choices. This does not
impugn Jesus’ character. Instead it shows His compassion, for He would be
remiss not to warn people of coming destruction, if it were real. It is like the
warnings that the U.S. gave Slobodan Milosevic before the recent Bosnian war:
"Repent and stop the atrocities or we are coming, believe us!" He did
not repent, so the Americans along with their allies came as they promised, and
stopped him. Now he is gnashing his teeth in jail, as anyone but Milosevic could
easily have predicted would happen.
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
"And if thy hand offend
thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having
two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched."
(Mark 9:43)
Is this nice? Is it
exemplary to make your point with threats of violence? Is hell a kind, peaceful
idea?
Guru Kurt:
Again, the so-called
"free-thinkers" here miss the entire point, and they have chosen the
most powerful passage of scripture to ignore. This passage is meant entirely to
emphasize the real nature of hell. It is so real and so certain, that you are
better off maiming yourself than being cast into it. The torments of hell are
terrible, actual, and everlasting, and one should avoid them at all costs, even
of something dear. Jesus here meant these verses as an analogy, as anyone with
an open mind would readily admit, for anything dear to you that threatens
perdition. If your wife is a drug dealer, and bringing you into sin through
this, divorce her. If your friend tries to persuade you to go to a whore-house,
break off with him immediately. If you have a vast fortune and it causes you to
forget God and live a wholly materialistic life, give much of it away – as
many have done, because of this passage. Hell is not an idea, it is a real
place. In calling it an idea the free-thinkers are really chaining themselves,
they are closing their minds who assert arrogantly, and erroneously, that Jesus
could not possibly have known that hell is real. They do not know this. A true
free-thinker would see that it is incumbent upon him here to explain why he or
she thinks hell is not a real place, in order to make a proper argument against
Jesus. It is another half-hearted, poorly considered attempt to sling mud, but
Jesus emerges from under their onslaught untouched, shining, and pure.
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
Did Jesus Promote
"Family Values"?
"If any man come to me,
and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and
sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple." (Luke
14:26)
Guru Kurt:
Here Jesus meant something
that is rather subtle and difficult to understand. There is something unsavory
in family life as it is lived by worldly people, in America and elsewhere, that
Jesus draws attention to in a graphic and effective manner. He doesn’t really
mean that one should hate one’s near relatives. He means that God should
actually be the center of one’s life, and by comparison with one’s feelings
of love for God, the way one feels towards one’s family is very much lower.
Above all, one should love God. Second to this comes love for others, and this
Jesus does state in other places! Luke 14:26 is meant to elevate the idea of
love of God above the love of people in a graphic and striking way. After God
one should love people, but all people, not just one’s family. In a typical
family, the secular "nuclear" family in America, the father loves the
wife and the children. The wife loves the husband and the children. The children
love each other and the parents. This is all well and good, but if they stop
here and do not extend the circle it is unsavory, as I say, because it is too
limited. This love should extend to all people on earth, to one’s neighbors,
to one’s friends at church, to one’s co-workers. This is the point Jesus was
making here.
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
"I am come to set a man
at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the
daughter in law against her mother in law. And a man's foes shall be they of his
own household." (Matthew 10:35-36)
Guru Kurt:
We must recognize that Jesus
was starting a new religion, and He knew it well. A new religion is begun person
by person, and often one’s own relatives will be opposed to it. Jesus was
trying to strengthen the people who would experience this antagonism directly,
so that they could truly feel that they would have Jesus, the Son of God
Himself, on their side in the face of all human opposition, even opposition from
the closest quarters.
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
When one of his disciples
requested time off for his father's funeral, Jesus rebuked him: "Let the
dead bury their dead." (Matthew 8:22)
Guru Kurt:
The supercilious tone of
this criticism is insensitive and careless. The relationship between Jesus and
the disciples was not one of employer to employee. It was much warmer than this,
for Jesus loved His disciples and they loved Him in return. Now, Jesus was the
holy Son of God, the personification of the Father on earth. As such, He was the
Creator, who made the earth and all the creatures upon the earth. The disciples
not only loved Him, they were also very privileged to be with Him, although they
did not always recognize this. Therefore Jesus rebuked this man, who did not
realize his good fortune to actually be in the presence of the Creator.
Certainly the man’s family would not have appreciated the Creatorhood of
Jesus, but the disciples were different. They were chosen from among mankind
because of their more advanced spiritual status. It is clear that this disciple
responded to Jesus’ rebuke, understood that it was more important to remain
with Jesus, and did so willingly. Furthermore, Jesus knew He had just a few
short years of ministry, and every second was precious. His words here sparked
the interest of the disciple, and benefited the world, for others who read this
story are inspired with the importance of following Jesus above all else.
There is something else that
the "free-thinkers" miss here, and that is the relationship between
Jesus and the dead. To Jesus death was not a reality, for He could see directly
into the soul of a man. He knew that all souls were immortal and death merely
the passing away of the body. While to ordinary men it seems of the utmost
importance to attend funerals, Jesus, who certainly at the time the disciple
asked knew exactly where the dead man’s soul was, did not see the funeral as
having importance. Realize, the disciple was with the one person, the divine
person, who held the keys to life and death in His very hands! Why mourn, why
leave, when the very source of eternal life and joy is right before you?
Therefore Jesus rebuked him, and was right to do so.
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
Jesus never used the word
"family." He never married or fathered children.
Guru Kurt:
The reply to this is similar
to the one about hatred of family members. Jesus did not hate families, but He
hated the isolationism, the "our family vs. the world" attitude.
People cut themselves off from the community of all humans by relying on ties of
sex and reproduction, which are artificial and shallow. In so doing, they cut
themselves off from most of the joy of life, from a most exciting and thrilling
adventure of getting to know a wide assortment of people from a variety of walks
of life. You must realize that even in Jesus’ day families "loved"
each other. It is easy to "love" five or six people at most. What is
hard is to stretch your love to encompass the world, and this is what Jesus
really meant when He used the word love, a love that includes all the people on
earth. Love of family members only does nothing to stem the tide of violence in
the world, to prevent wars or other conflicts. "The Godfather" movie
comes immediately to mind, where the family is everything, and it is acceptable
to kill those outside the family. This is why Jesus did not emphasize the
concept of family. It is the natural state of the world already, and He
propounded instead a universal love for all mankind.
The statement, "He
never married or fathered children," is perhaps the shallowest and least
perceptive criticism that has ever been leveled at Jesus throughout all history.
Is there anyone who will state that the welfare of the whole world is not more
important than the family life of a person, that Jesus was not wise,
compassionate, and generous to all mankind to forego a family in order to focus
entirely on the needs of the whole world? Is there such a one? If there is, I
regard his criticism as vacant, thoughtless, puerile, and ignorant. Imagine, if
you will, a very strong man. There is a footbridge across a raging river upon
which a number of travelers are walking. Suddenly, one of the supporting timbers
starts to buckle! The bridge is in danger of falling, and fifty or more people
are about to lose their lives! The strong man quickly runs to the bridge, and
with all his strength pushes against the weakened and splintering timber to
prevent it from breaking completely. He is successful, but it requires intense
effort, all his strength. As he strains every muscle in his body, and the sweat
beads up on his forehead, the timber buckles some more! He fears he will not be
able to hold it for long. He shouts to the travelers, "Run quickly off the
bridge, if you value your lives! I’ll hold it as long as I’m able!"
In the midst of this, the
man’s wife comes up with their three-year old son on her hip. Ignoring all the
people on the bridge, she starts berating and nagging the man, "Junior here
needs to have his shoes tied. Why don’t you tie them? The new baby needs its
diaper changed! Why don’t you change it? You don’t care about us at all, you
only care about those travelers. Let them go! Your family needs you!" She
even tries to dislodge his hands from the timber! Not only is the strong man
distracted by this obstreperous woman, he is angered. He does not let go of the
timber, but waits until the travelers have left safely. He is so angry with his
wife that he divorces her and finds a new wife, one with common sense. Truly,
only an insane person would interfere with a man engaged in such a task, bent
only on the safety and well-being of human beings outside his family, but still
people in their own right, and ones he cares about because of their humanity.
Only a very irrational and irresponsible person would find fault with Jesus for
loving the whole world enough to forego a family.
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
To his own mother, he said,
"Woman, what have I to do with thee?" (John 2:4)
Guru Kurt:
Jesus was again here showing
the world that love of God comes first, and love of family members comes second.
One should try to love the whole world, and then love one’s dear ones, one’s
family members, with this same love. This love is detached, it is not about
attachment. It allows freedom. His mother here has not cut the apron strings
yet. She is still clinging to Jesus, whom she will not admit is a grown man, but
treats Him like her child still. Jesus has important work to do, work that will
benefit the whole world, and He frees His mother from her clinging and selfish
attachment with this statement.
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
What Were His Views On
Equality And Social Justice?
Jesus encouraged the beating
of slaves: "And that servant [slave], which knew his lord's will, and
prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with
many stripes." (Luke 12:47)
Guru Kurt:
Here is the whole passage,
from Luke 12:
42. And
the Lord said, "Who then is the faithful and wise steward, whom his master
will set over his household, to give them their portion of food at the proper
time? 43. Blessed is that servant whom his master when he comes will find so
doing. 44. Truly, I say to you, he will set him over all his possessions. 45.
But if that servant says to himself, 'My master is delayed in coming,' and
begins to beat the menservants and the maidservants, and to eat and drink and
get drunk, 46. the master of that servant will come on a day when he does not
expect him and at an hour he does not know, and will punish him, and put him
with the unfaithful. 47. And that servant who knew his master's will, but did
not make ready or act according to his will, shall receive a severe beating. 48.
But he who did not know, and did what deserved a beating, shall receive a light
beating. Every one to whom much is given, of him will much be required; and of
him to whom men commit much they will demand the more.
Jesus was a realist, and
based His parables upon the everyday life of people in ancient Israel. Beating
was common, and in those days everyone knew exactly what He was talking about.
We forget what life was like in that primitive society, where thrashing of
servants and children was thought acceptable. Jesus merely framed His truths
within the customs and practices of His times. They still apply to today, but we
must make a transposition in our minds, realizing that modern times and
conditions are very different. Most Christians do this easily and freely, for it
is a matter of common sense. The "free-thinkers" here do not, and they
apparently regard this shallow interpretation of Christ’s words as an
effective argument. It is not. For instance, if I told a story about a mother on
a work-welfare program, in 1000 years someone may come and say, "What is
all this talk about welfare? Didn’t he know that it’s better to care for all
people, without making them fill out forms and without expecting mothers of
young children to work? What a sluggard! He was not progressive." It is
ridiculous and immature to expect Jesus to have spoken to people in future
metaphors that they would not have understood. Instead He spoke in the
vernacular, and everyone comprehended his meaning. Generous and thoughtful
people today still understand exactly what He meant. Only ungenerous,
thoughtless so-called "free-thinkers" seem unable to make this common
sense transition.
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
He never denounced
servitude, incorporating the master-slave relationship into many of his
parables.
Guru Kurt:
It is all very easy for
someone who was not there to state this, from the comfort of his or her living
room lazy-boy recliner. Anyone who was there would tell you that Jesus faced
extreme danger every day of His ministry, and He did so resolutely to the last.
He could not denounce servitude without incurring the real, although irrational,
anger and immediate retribution of the slaveholders all around Him. He was not
protected by any Army. He did not have 2000 years of social progress to rest
upon, an effective police force in the vicinity, or a constitution that
guaranteed freedom of speech. This is the only reason He never denounced
slavery, which He certainly knew was wrong.
With this said, the
Master-slave analogies used by Jesus are still useful to us in many ways, for
they describe the relationship between a superior and an inferior being.
Although in today’s modern world we recognize that a slave is not really
inferior, yet in those days the slave submitted to the Master’s will and acted
according to his wishes, not the other way around. The relationship we all have
to God is like that of His bound servants. In this case, however, the Master
really is superior to the servant, superior in wisdom, power, compassion, and
righteousness. A servant of God in reality serves his own best interests, for
God only wants the best for His creatures, their optimal spiritual growth. A
servant relies upon the Master to provide food and clothing, and we rely upon
God to provide us with the earth, with oxygen to breathe, with land to plow and
other beings to share it with. It is good to think of oneself as God’s
servant, for one finds one’s own best interests truly served thereby.
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
He did nothing to alleviate
poverty. Rather than sell some expensive ointment to help the poor, Jesus wasted
it on himself, saying, "Ye have the poor with you always." (Mark
14:3-7)
Guru Kurt:
I thought that the
"free-thinkers" could sink no lower, but here they have proven me
wrong! There should be something within the human intellect, within the human
mind, that can distinguish between God and man. Furthermore, there should be
something in the human heart of compassion. Both of these are conspicuous by
their absence in this tactless and reckless criticism. One must realize that
Jesus was very shortly to face a violent death at the hands of the authorities,
and would indeed be publicly condemned and humiliated by the very people that He
came to save. This Freedom from Religion Foundation writer coldly and brutally would have refused Jesus even
this tiny comfort. He should be made to serve us! God should give us everything,
and take nothing for Himself! He should sacrifice His entire personal life, be
willing to die for us, and we will give Him nothing in return! This is the
callous attitude expressed here, and my contempt for this attitude knows no
bounds. I am certain most Christians would agree with me here that Jesus, the
holy Son of God, did deserve some comfort before drinking the bitter cup that He
knew awaited Him.
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
No women were chosen as
disciples or invited to the Last Supper.
Guru Kurt:
Jesus was careful to observe
the customs and habits of His day. If He wanted His teachings to have a lasting
impact on the world He needed to speak to men, to have men in charge of
dissemination. Women in those days were not respected, and to have entrusted His
teachings to them would have ensured their loss. No one listened to women in
those days. There is evidence aplenty for this, for instance the fact that none
of the books included in the New Testament were written by women. They had a
very different place in life in ancient Israel than they do today, and Jesus
realized this. His teachings were effectively spread by zealous disciples, but
this would not have happened had He selected women for this task. There is
considerable evidence that He did respect women in the Gospels, however, and He
stood up for abused women on more than one instance.
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
What Moral Advice Did
Jesus Give?
"There be eunuchs which
have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able
to receive it, let him receive it." (Matthew 19:12) Some believers,
including church father Origen, took this verse literally and castrated
themselves. Even metaphorically, this advice is in poor taste.
Guru Kurt:
By eunuchs, Jesus here meant
those who have renounced sex life, who have decided not to engage in marriage or
family life in order to focus their entire minds on God and heaven. In other
words He meant the monks and the nuns of religious orders, who lead holy lives
in seclusion from the world. Although the language is graphic, it is not in bad
taste. It again falls within the purview of the times, in which eunuchs were
common. People were familiar with the concept. It is as if I were to say,
"There are even now people who are homeless for God." A future person
might say, "Homeless! What an inadequate word to describe these holy
wandering mendicants, who are searching with all their hearts for God. This is
poor taste!" It is difficult to imagine the mindset that Jesus spoke to
when He mentioned eunuchs. Recall, in those days the gladiator was still extant,
and for many years the early Christians were actually fed to lions. People’s
hands were cut off for stealing, people were stoned to death on a whim, and many
other atrocities occurred that were not even recorded. To those ancient people,
eunuchs were not such a big deal. They were common enough that no one thought
much of it. Most people who are true free-thinkers are able to make the mental
transition to today, and recognize Jesus’ underlying metaphorical meaning.
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
If you do something wrong
with your eye or hand, cut/pluck it off (Matthew 5:29-30, in a sexual context).
Guru Kurt:
Here is the full passage,
from Matthew 5:
27.
"You have heard that it was said, 'You shall not commit adultery.' 28. But
I say to you that every one who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed
adultery with her in his heart. 29. If your right eye causes you to sin, pluck
it out and throw it away; it is better that you lose one of your members than
that your whole body be thrown into hell. 30. And if your right hand causes you
to sin, cut it off and throw it away; it is better that you lose one of your
members than that your whole body go into hell."
Jesus used graphic language
to wake man up. He never intended people to mutilate themselves in these ways.
It is impossible to fully justify the ways of God to man, but the secret is in
man’s psychology. One must imagine the effect of these words upon the human
mind, and the effect of a weaker statement, and then judge for oneself whether
Jesus was right to speak as He did. I will rewrite these four verses in a weaker
form:
"In the Old Testament,
it was suggested that you not commit adultery. I would extend this, and state
that you should try not to even think about committing adultery. Try to control
your thoughts, and if you are tempted, think more strongly about your own wife,
about her attractions and charms. If you are strongly tempted by looking at the
bodies of other women, turn and run away! If you are on a bus and feel tempted
by someone you see, get off the bus! If you are seriously tempted to commit
adultery with a coquettish co-worker, quit that job! I tell you, you are better
off walking, or finding a new job, than risking everlasting torment in hell. God
frowns very much on adultery, and considers it a grave sin."
Yet again the free-thinkers
stumble all over themselves. Earlier they complained that Jesus did not promote
family life, yet here He is its staunchest defender! There is absolutely nothing
that tears a family apart more than adultery does. The emotional scars upon the
children last a lifetime, and the person committing adultery forgets all about
his responsibilities. He will not give his son the advice he needs as he grows
up, or share special time with his daughter. He will be cold to his wife, and
think only about himself. In speaking against adultery this strongly, Jesus
clearly showed how important the sound family was in his thinking, for it is
extremely important. Without a sound family, the society crumbles in disarray.
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
Marrying a divorced woman is
adultery. (Matthew 5:32)
Guru Kurt:
Here is the verse and the
preceding verse, from Matthew 5:
31.
"It was also said, 'Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a
certificate of divorce.' 32. But I say to you that every one who divorces his
wife, except on the ground of unchastity, makes her an adulteress; and whoever
marries a divorced woman commits adultery
Guru Kurt:
Here again, Jesus is
defending marriage and the family, unobserved by the negligent
"free-thinkers." I will rewrite these verses in modern terms, and let
the reader judge whether or not Jesus was justified to speak as strongly as He
did:
"It was said in the Old
Testament that when you divorced a woman, you should give her a certificate of
this fact. I say to you, divorce is evil and abhorred under the eyes of God
except under special aggrieved circumstances. Harmony in the home is of the
utmost importance, for two people have come together, having made a commitment
to each other. One abandoning this relationship will find his troubles haven’t
left him as he moves into a new relationship. He is still the same person.
Furthermore, if the couple has children the effect of a divorce is extremely
destructive on their mental and emotional development. Children need to see an
example of adults who can cooperate with each other and do not bicker
constantly, who have fun together, who do not hate each other and tear each
other apart with endless fighting. A man and a woman should both try as hard as
they possibly can to get along, to live peacefully, to provide their children
with a good example so that they too can grow up to become well-adjusted,
contributing members of our free society."
The effect of Jesus’ words
is much stronger than mine, because He made His comments sound stern and
uncompromising. As God, His role was to lay down commandments so that people
would have a clear and high standard to follow. If they fall short of this
standard, they do have a recourse. They can ask for forgiveness, and this is why
Jesus came, so that a sinner would not necessarily be thrown into hell for his
sin, but could pray for redemption, and be redeemed in truth. He set a very high
standard, and knew that many could not follow it. However, many marriages have
indeed been saved by His words. Many couples have worked out their problems who
otherwise would have quit and gone on in confusion looking for love somewhere
else. Often these marriages are the most satisfying and the longest lasting,
because going through troubled times together brings people closer. They get to
know one another very well, and love deepens.
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
Don't plan for the future.
(Matthew 6:34)
Guru Kurt:
The entire reading, from
Matthew 6, is:
25.
"Therefore I tell you, do not be anxious about your life, what you shall
eat or what you shall drink, nor about your body, what you shall put on. Is not
life more than food, and the body more than clothing? 26. Look at the birds of
the air: they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns, and yet your heavenly
Father feeds them. Are you not of more value than they? 27. And which of you by
being anxious can add one cubit to his span of life? 28. And why are you anxious
about clothing? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they neither
toil nor spin; 29. yet I tell you, even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed
like one of these. 30. But if God so clothes the grass of the field, which today
is alive and tomorrow is thrown into the oven, will he not much more clothe you,
O men of little faith? 31. Therefore do not be anxious, saying, 'What shall we
eat?' or 'What shall we drink?' or 'What shall we wear?' 32. For the Gentiles
seek all these things; and your heavenly Father knows that you need them all.
33. But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things shall
be yours as well. 34. "Therefore do not be anxious about tomorrow, for
tomorrow will be anxious for itself. Let the day's own trouble be sufficient for
the day.
This is one of the most
beautiful things Jesus ever said, and the so-called "free-thinkers"
would offhandedly toss it into the garbage as being worthless! It has provided
real solace for millions of people who were in trouble down the ages. It is not
worthless, but gives a profound attitude that all should strive to possess, even
if they do work for a living, and use money as we all do. It is the attitude of
a little child, that its Father will provide come what may. What if you live in
a society that requires money? Your Father knows this, and will help find a job
for you when you earnestly search. Jesus doesn’t say here do no work, or do
not try to solve your problems. As verse 34 states, you should meet the day’s
own trouble on that day. However, He is pointing out that without God, there
wouldn’t be an earth! There wouldn’t be a you, for He made your soul too!
Being worried all the time about your future just doesn’t help. You should
take real steps to solve your problems, as Christians do everywhere, but
Jesus’ words here are intended to provide mental comfort. Things work
themselves out, if you do what you can each and every day.
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
Don't save money. (Matthew
6:19-20)
Guru Kurt:
Here is the full context,
from Matthew 6:
19.
"Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust
consume and where thieves break in and steal, 20. but lay up for yourselves
treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust consumes and where thieves do
not break in and steal. 21. For where your treasure is, there will your heart be
also.
This is another of the most
beautiful things that Jesus said. You must understand, money is not in and of
itself valuable, it is only a means of purchasing the things that you need.
People in today’s modern society, however, often go after money as an end in
itself. Money does not satisfy. Money does not return the love we lavish on it.
Money is cold, hard, and empty, and the emotional capital you spend on money is
capital that you cannot spend on any of life’s truly rewarding pursuits, such
as friendships, marriage, and love for God. It is truly "of the
devil," meaning that one dwelling upon money alone loses much of the joy of
life. He lives in a little world of his own, one that is covered with green
wallpaper everywhere. He cannot enjoy the beauty of a summer day. He doesn’t
appreciate a still, clear mountain lake. He doesn’t stop to smell the roses.
He lives his life in a box, in a shell of his own making, alone with the only
God that he worships, money.
What are the treasures of
heaven, then? A peaceful heart, happy with what the day brings. A broad and
perceptive mind, able to consider diverse topics in an open and interesting
fashion. The ability to form long-lasting relationships with the hallmark of
happiness, instead of sorrow. The ability to feel deep compassion for the
suffering of others, and to take joy in relieving this suffering when possible.
The capacity for kindness, and an overflowing of the heart into goodwill for all
mankind, a beautiful, rapturous feeling that sings through each day, days that
are lived with real pleasure and joy because you feel that you are somebody in
reality. You are not a cold, calculating machine, but someone with a deep
personality, able to respond to all the people around you with a cheerful heart
and a comforting voice. These treasures never leave you, although money
certainly will, if not tomorrow then on the day that you die.
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
Don't become wealthy. (Mark
10:21-25)
Guru Kurt:
Here is the whole passage,
from Mark 10:
17. And
as he was setting out on his journey, a man ran up and knelt before him, and
asked him, "Good Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?" 18.
And Jesus said to him, "Why do you call me good? No one is good but God
alone. 19. You know the commandments: 'Do not kill, Do not commit adultery, Do
not steal, Do not bear false witness, Do not defraud, Honor your father and
mother.'" 20. And he said to him, "Teacher, all these I have observed
from my youth." 21. And Jesus looking upon him loved him, and said to him,
"You lack one thing; go, sell what you have, and give to the poor, and you
will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me." 22. At that saying his
countenance fell, and he went away sorrowful; for he had great possessions. 23.
And Jesus looked around and said to his disciples, "How hard it will be for
those who have riches to enter the kingdom of God!" 24. And the disciples
were amazed at his words. But Jesus said to them again, "Children, how hard
it is to enter the kingdom of God! 25. It is easier for a camel to go through
the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."
Jesus is indeed here
disparaging the accumulation of wealth, but as in many of His assertions He is
merely setting a high standard with the full awareness that most people will not
be able to follow this to the letter. Where is the person today who can do this?
There is no one, except for the monks and nuns of renounced orders. Are these
the only saved people then? Certainly not. Jesus’ intention here was to
promote an attitude of detachment from material objects. It is not possible in
today’s world to live without some material possessions, but it is possible to
live unattached to them. In truth, God looks at the heart of a man, and if he
thinks about his money and his accumulated possessions all the time, he has no
time to think about God, no time to try to apply any of Jesus’ positive
precepts in his life. He has no time to become a good Christian, only a good
businessman. But, if God looks into your heart and finds that you possess
material things only as a means of living a full life, that you really cherish
high ideals within yourself, that you strive to love your fellow man, contribute
to the community and set a good example for the young people around you, He
doesn’t see a man rich with material possessions. He sees a man with wealth of
the spirit, a man He will gladly welcome into His kingdom, the kingdom of
heaven.
You must also remember that
when Jesus spoke, He was aware that there would be many monks and nuns, people
of real renunciation, that would read His words. While it is true that a man of
inward renunciation that otherwise leads a worldly life is dear to Him, God
looks with especial favor upon people who make the stark and brave commitment
that He requested of this young man, and which the disciples had already done.
It is not easy to renounce inwardly, as people of the world try to do. Inward
renunciation is much easier when accompanied by outward renunciation as well,
and although this outward renunciation is difficult the spirit of such a one is
lifted very high. Of such people saints are made. Jesus cherishes these men and
women, and these words are meant to comfort them, for they have made a wise
though hard choice, a choice that will certainly lead them straight through the
gates of heaven.
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
Sell everything and give it
to the poor. (Luke 12:33)
Guru Kurt:
Here is the verse, from Luke
12:
33. Sell
your possessions, and give alms; provide yourselves with purses that do not grow
old, with a treasure in the heavens that does not fail, where no thief
approaches and no moth destroys.
There are few things more
repugnant to God than a person who thinks only about money and possessions. Such
a person is trapped by life, trapped by the material world, totally dead to the
spiritual world that underlies everything and of which he is a part. Everyone
has a soul, and the man who denies this in others denies it also in himself.
Real joy of the spirit comes from interacting with other living beings, with
other souls. It is the contact of souls that new lovers feel as they walk
through a park, hand in hand. It is the contact of souls that gives the father
that warm feeling as he embraces his newborn infant. It is the contact of souls
that makes us shake hands when we greet, and makes close family members hug one
another.
Here, Jesus is again setting
a high standard in asking that people sell what they have. In truth it is not
necessary to meet this standard, although some people will. God is an ocean of
mercy, a well-spring of forgiveness, an overflowing aquifer of understanding and
love. He will not condemn a wealthy man who still tries to follow His commands
in other respects. Each should contribute as he can. One does not need to sell
all one’s possessions, but perhaps there are some things you don’t need that
you could sell in a rummage sale, and donate the proceeds to charity. This is
done every day in churches across the country, and God does indeed smile on
these activities.
Jesus urges the best, what
He has done, what the disciples have done, and what He knows the religious
orders will do in the centuries to follow. He never expected everyone to do
this, for it is difficult. Most Christians know this as a matter of common
sense, but even though they know this, and know they will never become a monk or
a nun, they still experience a thrill to read about it. Reading of high
spiritual ideals uplifts the soul of the earnest Christian, even if he is a
wealthy man, and encourages a fresh mental attitude of renunciation in him. Even
though he owns many possessions, he can be free from their pernicious influence
and be able to focus on his relationships with the other people around him, with
his wife, his children, his co-workers, and his acquaintances.
The Bible is meant to be
read and followed, but not necessarily lived in literal truth. Only the
renounced orders take these verses literally, and they are right to do so, but
heaven is not only for them but for many, many others. Every person who reads
the Bible with an open heart will find the stark, stern language that is often
used will free his mind from its worries and concerns. He will find his peace of
mind increasing, his joy in life deepening, and his sorrow lessening. The words
are meant as much for the positive impact they will have on people’s minds as
instructions meant to be taken in full literalness. They are meant as high
standards, and all people should approach them and give what they can. When
Jesus implored man to follow His commands, He meant, "Follow my commands to
the best of your ability and according to your station in life. Pray to me
daily, and if you honestly strive with a sincere heart, my Father will recognize
this and welcome you into My eternal kingdom."
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
Don't work to obtain food.
(John 6:27)
Guru Kurt:
Here is the verse, from John
6:
27.
"Do not labor for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures
to eternal life, which the Son of man will give to you; for on him has God the
Father set his seal."
Jesus used stark language
here, which I will put into the modern idiom. Your whole focus shouldn’t be on
trying to provide for yourself. You need food, certainly, but even as you labor
for your food your mind should be on God. Part of your mind should always be
drawn to God, and you should perform your work as His servant. If you do this,
you will find yourself fed within, spiritually, and fed without, materially. If
you only labor for material reward, if you only think about the potato chips you
will eat tonight or the hamburger you will barbecue tomorrow, your mind will be
spiritually impoverished. Do your work with love of God in your heart, and you
will have your potato chips, you will have your hamburger, but you will also be
rich in spirit. This is the only way to work in happiness, for if you work only
for the object in view, you will certainly get that object. If you work for that
object in the spirit of service to God, He will bless you inwardly with
unbounded joy, and your heart will become fruitful, even as you achieve your
outward end or goal.
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
Don't have sexual urges.
(Matthew 5:28)
Guru Kurt:
The verse is, from Matthew
5:
28. But
I say to you that every one who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed
adultery with her in his heart.
There is more than one way
to say a thing. One way is to bend down to meet people exactly where they are,
speaking in ways and using language that is completely familiar to them. Another
way is to be extreme, to state everything as if it were a black and white
question. This is an art form, and Jesus was a Master at it. If you state
everything in black and white, you achieve a certain effect on people’s minds,
a huge, lasting effect. If you admit the shade of gray, as I have been doing,
the effect is smaller although with civilized people this approach is perhaps
best. The ancient Israelites were not very civilized, as I have already
discussed, with the existence of gladiator contests, public stoning, and worse.
They needed a bigger impetus to change than modern man, so Jesus used language
that was more vivid and striking.
The
"free-thinkers" again are stumbling over their own feet here, for
earlier they complained about Jesus not being a family man, but here they are
themselves condemning the family! What could be more harmful to a marriage than
a partner who cannot keep his eyes and mind off other women, off other men’s
spouses? Jesus knows people cannot control their urges, but He here provides
real, efficient help for these people. The man who keeps this verse in his mind
will find himself retracting when he thinks about a woman other than his wife in
an adulterous way. He will recoil within himself. He will do his best to think
about other things, and to avoid the woman who tempts him whenever possible. As
I said, Jesus’ central message was about forgiveness, so He is not here
condemning people for their biological urges. He is trying to help them control
their thoughts as much as possible, to keep their marriages happy and carefree
places, instead of fetid hotbeds of abuse, scorn, and ridicule as two people are
torn apart by the sin of adultery.
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
Make people want to
persecute you. (Matthew 5:11)
Guru Kurt:
Here is the verse and the
one that follows it, from Matthew 5:
11.
Blessed are you when men revile you and persecute you and utter all kinds of
evil against you falsely on my account. 12. Rejoice and be glad, for your reward
is great in heaven, for so men persecuted the prophets who were before you.
Here the
"free-thinkers" are truly being unfair and prejudiced. They are not
free at all, but clearly are party to the devil, with whom they obviously keep
close company. A free mind is an objective mind, not one slanted against a thing
before examining the evidence. A rational mind is an open mind, that will
consider carefully the meaning of language before jumping to prejudicial
conclusions. There is absolutely nothing in Jesus’ statement suggesting that
the victim of persecution has anything to do with motivating the people that
persecute him. Nothing! This is the sheerest propaganda, the vilest slander, and
direct evidence of an immature and self-indulgent mind, certainly not that of a
true free-thinker.
Persecution is a reality. It
happens to people that do not deserve it, which is its very definition:
"the subjecting of a group of people to cruel or unfair treatment because
of their ethnic origin or religious beliefs." Jesus provided this part of
His sermon on the mount to console His followers who would be facing real
persecution, and would need comfort. He is able to supply real comfort, because
although the world is a violent place and His people will be ostracized,
maligned, and even killed, Jesus is the living God. He holds the keys to the
gates to heaven, and He stands there with open arms to welcome those who go to
this extent for His sake, as many have done and continue to do even today in
many countries. Earth is filled with evil, but the man who dies because of his
belief in Jesus can count on the reward of heaven. Heaven is not an evil place
and persecution does not exist there, for the people who would persecute are not
allowed to enter. Another place is reserved for them, hotter and more in tune
with their hellish and selfish natures.
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
Let everyone know you are
better than the rest. (Matthew 5:13-16)
Guru Kurt:
Here is the entire passage,
from Matthew 5:
13.
"You are the salt of the earth; but if salt has lost its taste, how shall
its saltness be restored? It is no longer good for anything except to be thrown
out and trodden under foot by men. 14. "You are the light of the world. A
city set on a hill cannot be hid. 15. Nor do men light a lamp and put it under a
bushel, but on a stand, and it gives light to all in the house. 16. Let your
light so shine before men, that they may see your good works and give glory to
your Father who is in heaven.
The
"free-thinker’s" claim here is a libel against Jesus, for which He
would be entitled to sue if He were alive in today’s world, and were so
inclined. They are here calling the most selfless being ever to set foot on the
planet, who gave His very life for the benefit of all mankind, who renounced
home, family, and all property to teach, a very selfish creature. I tell you, it
is not sufficient to print such libel. It must be backed up by solid reasoning.
It is incumbent upon the "free-thinkers" here to explain how in the
world they are able to summarize Matthew 5:13-16 in the brutal, unkind,
unthinking way that they do. They give no explanation, and thus this is mere mud
slinging, barely worthy of a reply. I will state their case for them, which they
appear incapable of doing, and answer it myself.
The
"free-thinkers" are stating that since Jesus recommended that you let
your light shine before men, He meant you should crave and seek their attention.
They would further claim, were they capable of stating their position with
accuracy, that attention-getting behavior is evil. They are therefore
incorrectly applying their own moral code to Jesus’ statements here, and the
question becomes, Where did they get this moral code? The answer, of course, is
in the New Testament, where Jesus says that you should pray in secret, that you
should hide yourself from men when you pray. Humility was a virtue also
championed frequently by the Apostles. If the "free-thinkers" did not
get this moral standard, that lack of humility is wrong, from the New Testament,
then they should state their source. It is upon them to state how any moral code
that man can devise will show that attention-getting is logically evil. I submit
that this cannot be done, and that this could only have been revealed by God
incarnate, Jesus Himself.
What Jesus meant here, and
if you read the verses carefully this is completely clear, is that you should
share the truth of Jesus’ ministry with others, that you should proudly do
good works in His name, not your own, that you should be willing to stand up and
be counted for Jesus. This is what, by and large, most Christians do. The
emphasis on this verse is clearly, unerringly placed upon giving glory to the
Father, not to oneself. What is more, this is difficult, not easy, for it places
one at the mercy of public opinion, which is often hostile and cruel. The
attention one gets for proselytizing is often negative, not positive. This is
why the Freedom from Religion Foundation position here is baffling. I wish they would explain it, for it is
truly nonsense. They denounce Christians for letting the world know they are
Christians, and think the Christians will be happy and pleased to be denounced!
This is the trouble Atheists get into when they try to argue rationally against
religion, and this really shows where their faith lies. They have utter faith
that Jesus Christ could not possibly be God, and all their arguments follow from
this misplaced faith. It is hard to imagine even an idiot making the current
claim, however, but there it is. You can look it up on the website yourself.
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
Take money from those who
have no savings and give it to rich investors. (Luke 19:23-26)
Guru Kurt:
We have already discussed
this verse, but they are now finding fault with it for a different reason. This
kibitzing gets tiresome after awhile, but here it goes. They are stating that
the nobleman who took the one pound from the servant who did not invest his
money and gave it to the servant who made one pound into ten pounds by investing
it, was setting an example for all to follow, and that this is what Jesus’
meaning in this parable was. This is a bizarre misinterpretation of the parable,
whose meaning I have already described, and appears to be the remark of an
idiot. Is it an idiot, or is it the devil in the atheist? Could any rational
being have produced such a nonsensical statement, or is the devil really at work
here, twisting the thoughts of the writer in ways that he cannot see, making his
fiendish case for there being no God? Does the devil have anything to gain by
making people believe there is no God? Of course he does.
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
If someone steals from you,
don't try to get it back. (Luke 6:30)
Guru Kurt:
Here is the complete verse,
from Luke 6:
30. Give
to every one who begs from you; and of him who takes away your goods do not ask
them again.
It is not strange that
Jesus, who stated in other places that one should sell all one has to follow
Him, and that a rich man has less chance of making it to heaven than a camel has
of getting through the eye of a needle, should once again proclaim that
detachment from material possessions is beneficial for the soul of man. The
arguments I have already propounded about this topic apply here as well. Here,
in particular, He made statements that were meant to be very consoling to those
who are the victims of robbery. He knows that most people will attempt to get
their property back, but while they are doing so they can now think, "Jesus
said that it’s O.K. if I don’t get my things back. If I don’t get them
back, I can rest assured that at least Jesus, my Lord and Savior, will be
pleased with me. Therefore, I will not worry and fret so much." The impact
of this statement of Jesus is to ease the mind of man, and it is therefore much
more than a moral contribution to humanity. This is real evidence for the
divinity of Jesus. It would be nearly impossible for any human to conceive of
psychological effects like this, much less perpetually bring such statements out
over a period of three years, and then finish it all off with a historical
sledge-hammer blow, His death on a cross and triumphant resurrection. The
"free-thinkers" have erred in taking Jesus too literally, but they
have also uncovered clear evidence of a divine mind behind it all, a real and
living God that planned to introduce all these statements to mankind, to provide
relief, comfort, and help to humanity down the centuries. What human would care
to even try?
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
If someone hits you, invite
them to do it again. (Matthew 5:39)
Guru Kurt:
Here is this verse and the
one preceding it, from Matthew 5:
38.
"You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a
tooth.' 39. But I say to you, Do not resist one who is evil. But if any one
strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.
People who return evil for
evil are applying their own unstated moral standard, and it is not the correct
one. They think, "This person has done evil to me, therefore I must do evil
to him. Then everything will be set right." Why do they think this? Why do
people pursue a course of revenge, of vengeance, when they have been wronged?
You probably have even heard the phrase, "Revenge is a dish best served
cold," implying that you must harden your heart against the person you
dislike and be extremely ruthless in seeking your revenge, for it to be the most
effective and satisfying. Why do this, though? Where is the connection between a
wrong that someone has done to me, and a wrong that I do to him to redress his
wrong? Hasn’t it also been said, "Two wrongs don’t make a right?"
In any case, it is clear that the Freedom from Religion Foundation here is relying on this unstated standard
to make their case. They assume that everyone will know what they are talking
about, so sure that they don’t bother to fill in the details, which I now must
do. Isn’t it obvious that if someone hits you, you should hit them back? I
don’t think it is so obvious at all.
People seek revenge out of a
misplaced sense of justice. They use a human standard of justice that tries to
balance things out. It is a rather primitive concept, and Jesus here moves to a
very sophisticated level, for in truth there is no real justice done when you
return wrong for wrong. All that occurs is that you may succeed in changing the
person who has committed the wrong, in convincing him that he should not do such
actions. Jesus is much more clever than this. If someone does wrong to you, and
you do not return this wrong, you "heap coals upon his head," you make
his entry into hell more certain. Why should you help him learn the error of his
ways? God is watching everything, and justice will indeed be served. If a man
hits me and I hit him back, I experience some release of tension and I walk away
thinking, "He’ll never do that again!" If I do not strike him, I
think, "Now I am doing what Jesus suggested. It hurts now, for I do not
have my retribution, but I know that a reward awaits me in heaven. Jesus
respects me now, and He does not respect that other person, for I have done as
Jesus would have wanted me to do and he has committed a sin. I may be in pain
now, but I will rejoice then. He has hurt me, but how happy I will be in heaven,
and when I am there I will think about this man, now in hell."
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
If you lose a lawsuit, give
more than the judgment. (Matthew 5:40)
Guru Kurt:
Here is the verse, from
Matthew 5:
40
…and if any one would sue you and take your coat, let him have your cloak as
well.
It is interesting that Jesus
here enters the world of business, seemingly contradicting His advice of selling
all that you own. This is not a contradiction, but is a real clue as to what He
was actually thinking. If at one place you counsel selling all that you own, and
in another you give counsel for people involved in business who are trapped in
litigation, it can mean only one thing, and that is the point I already
presented: Jesus was holding up ideals for all mankind, knowing full well that
they would not, could not be strictly followed. He knew two things, first that
these ideals would have a beneficial, freeing effect on the minds of the people
that read them, comforting them as they travel through the cold and heartless
world, reminding them that even if they have lost material goods, they still
have their eternal soul, and this is all that matters in the end. The second
thing is that people who cannot follow the ideals will still "hitch their
wagon to a star," and do the best that they can within the real context of
their own situation to live out these ideals. Such people may still rightly call
themselves Christians, and this verse gives us a view into Jesus’ real
thinking process, for He knew fully that these things were true. Here, a man who
loses a lawsuit will think, "You know, I lost a lot, but Jesus says I could
even have given my opponent more! I am actually quite fortunate. It is O.K. to
lose a lawsuit, Jesus at least still loves me. How I will enjoy heaven, once
this troublesome life at last is over!" Jesus here steps in to bring solace
to the loser in an earthly transaction with a heart of pure love, showing
clearly the deeply compassionate nature of the Son of God.
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
If someone forces you to
walk a mile, walk two miles. (Matthew 5:41)
Guru Kurt:
This is a strange verse to
find fault with, for the modern world has shown that walking and other exercise
is very beneficial for the heart, lungs and circulatory system. Jesus’ advice
here presages modern medical research, and there is something more. Walking is
one of the best ways to alleviate stress, to increase mental comfort and joy, to
work through all your problems. The most tangled and intricate problem will seem
easier, and will be solved more quickly, after a refreshing walk in the
countryside. Jesus’ advice here is very good from a medical and from an
emotional standpoint, and the Freedom from Religion Foundation really should explain what they think is
wrong with it, for I can see nothing. If a man forces you to walk behind him for
one mile, walk another mile without him and you will forget most of the pain and
shame you felt, if you felt any, during the first mile.
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
If anyone asks you for
anything, give it to them without question. (Matthew 5:42)
Guru Kurt:
Here is the verse, from
Matthew 5:
42. Give
to him who begs from you, and do not refuse him who would borrow from you.
The Freedom from Religion Foundation
here has broadened
Jesus’ statement unacceptably, as any open-minded reader who does not have a
bias against religion will readily see. He was not saying that if someone asks
you for anything, give it to them without question. A beggar will normally be
asking for food, clothing, or shelter. Even from a humanitarian, non-religious
standpoint Jesus gave good advice here. It takes a hard and cruel heart indeed
to see another human being hungry, without adequate clothing for the weather,
with no roof over his head when it rains, and not feel some compassion and an
urge to do something about it. America is a land where people do respond to
other people out of compassion like this all the time. We have food drives, coat
drives, homeless shelters, and a welfare system, all free from religious
connotation and merely as expressions of our common humanity. I would hope
therefore that the Freedom from Religion Foundation is not finding fault with the first half of Jesus’
statement here, or they will have to explain their total lack of human
compassion not just to Christians, but to the whole society of America at large,
for we are a compassionate and merciful people on the whole.
In the second half of the
statement, it is not specifically stated that anything at all should be given.
The key is in "…him who would borrow from you." People generally
understand that you don’t ask to borrow just anything, and Jesus was well
aware of this. There is no danger that people will come up and start asking for
things at random, that you must give. People follow social rules. If they do not
follow these rules, one is free to exercise discrimination. To know what He
really meant one would need to be Jesus Himself, but most Christians interpret
this in generous manner, and one that is not inconsistent with the words used,
that one should exercise good judgment in what one allows another to borrow. If
someone asks to borrow your car, for instance, on the same day that you need it
to drive to work, you will obviously refuse and be right to do so. If you are at
a theater and someone asks to borrow your shirt, you will refuse because you
will not be allowed to see the movie, since you have now become shirtless!
There is something unstated
here that will make the meaning of this verse clearer. Jesus really intended to
have the following effect on people: when someone comes up to you and asks to
borrow something, your attitude should not be one of immediate refusal. You
should instead assume that the request is likely to be reasonable, the item is
likely to be returned, and you will be able to deepen your friendship with the
borrower by lending it. By and large in human society this is what happens, and
the borrowing and returning of material things such as lawn mowers, power tools,
cooking ingredients and the like enrich the sense of community that everyone
feels considerably. Since human beings are spiritual in nature, i.e. they have
eternal souls, joy comes from sharing things like this, as any good, neighborly
person will assure you.
If your items are not
returned, as does happen on rare occasions when dealing with selfish people, you
will genuinely be comforted by Jesus’ words here. He will love you even more
if you lend something and lose it! This is the reason He used such strong
language, so that generous people who are taken advantage of will be comforted
by the Lord, the hope of their immortal life. This is again proof of Jesus’
divine stature, for what human would think to use language in this way? Jesus
came for the lowest, the lowliest, and the lost, and not only does He offer the
repentant sinner the hope of forgiveness and eternal life, His message is one of
consolation for those who lose in life, who find themselves destitute, who lend
and do not receive back, who are hurt in business dealings, who are victims of
physical or verbal abuse. He truly was the Son of God, as He claimed, for what
mortal man would or could devise such noble teachings as this?
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
Is this wise? Is this what
you would teach your children?
Guru Kurt:
As I have repeatedly stated,
Jesus was not a human being, He was verily the Father, the Creator of the entire
universe, embodied in a mortal human frame. He was a spiritual powerhouse, a
home for the divine creative intellect, a perfect being who served the Father in
truth because in a very real way He was the Father. To expect Him to reveal
teachings in the same manner that a human father would use to teach his children
about the practical everyday issues of life is a childish and immature attitude.
His teachings were for all humanity, but especially for the lost, the poor, and
the sinners. He never expected that fathers and mothers should teach their
children these things except in the way that He revealed them, as scripture.
This is what Christian parents do when they bring their children up in the
Christian lifestyle. They take them to Sunday school, they have Bible readings
as a family, and they answer all the child’s questions about death and life in
the happy way that they have learned: Jesus came to bring eternal life to man,
who otherwise would have been condemned owing to his sinfulness. He came to
bring forgiveness and hope to the whole world. The teachings of Jesus were wise
indeed. They should and are being taught to children all over the world, and
these children are glad of it, for otherwise their lives would have no hope and
all their joys would be inconstant, passing away like a vapor or mist as they
walk through that inevitable, final door known as death.
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
Was Jesus Reliable?
Jesus told his disciples
that they would not die before his second coming: "There be some standing
here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his
kingdom" (Matthew 16:28). "Behold, I come quickly." (Revelation
3:11) It's been 2,000 years, and believers are still waiting for his
"quick" return.
Guru Kurt:
Jesus uttered these
prophetic words from the perspective of the eternal God, to whom 2000 years is
as but a day. If He were to come today, at this very minute, the statement that
He is coming quickly would be completely fulfilled. The first verse cited was
given to add to the immediate sensation of the person reading the scripture.
They both can be read just as though Jesus were here with us, right now. Jesus
knew He would not return quickly according to human reckoning, but He was an
intelligent divine psychologist, who knew that a warning of a distant return
would have very little impact on men’s minds. If He had said, "I will
return after several thousand years," no one would have taken His return
seriously or expected that He would actually come. They would wait until just
before His arrival, then try to act good! As it is, people for generation after
generation have expected His return at any moment, and for this reason they have
followed His teachings much more closely. The secret of this is that one
following Jesus’ teachings not only ensures his entrance into heaven, but
unlocks the door of a happy life on earth too, as any Christian will tell you.
By warning of an immediate return, Jesus has increased the overall happiness of
the world. When He does return, it will indeed seem like His warning was too
weak, for at that moment there will be no more time to repent, no more time to
try to live according to His teachings. It will be too late, and who knows? This
may indeed be the generation when He returns.
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
He mistakenly claimed that
the mustard seed is "the least of all seeds" (Matt. 13:32), and that
salt could "lose its savour" (Matthew 5:13).
Guru Kurt:
The Freedom from Religion Foundation
is here pointing
out that smaller seeds than the mustard seed exist in the world, which is a true
statement. However, they must also show that the people who listened to Jesus
would also have heard of these seeds. Suppose, for instance (for I do not know),
that the seeds of certain varieties of lettuce are smaller than the mustard
seed, but that the ancient Israelites did not grow lettuce (which I also do not
know). If Jesus had said, "The kingdom of heaven is like a lettuce
seed," all His followers, and many succeeding generations, would have
asked, "Pray tell us, kind sir, What is lettuce?" He would have lost
all these listeners, because He would have been talking about a type of plant
with which they were not familiar.
There are two other reasons
for choosing the mustard seed as His example, however. The first is the bitter,
astringent taste characteristic of mustard. The leaves of the plant lend
piquancy to salads and its seed is ground to make a condiment. Although mustard
is not sweet, people still enjoy eating it. Leading the spiritual life as Jesus
recommends, not running after material pursuits as the sole end of life, trying
to love those around one, doing unto others as you would have them do unto you,
tastes a lot like this to the mind of a true follower of Jesus. It is not easy,
for there are difficulties within yourself, and people outside who do not agree
with you. The Christian life is not always sweet, sometimes there is a sharp
taste, like the taste of mustard. Overall, however, the effect is pleasant, and
Christians are generally happier than they were before they became Christians,
which is why they remain in the fold.
The second reason for using
mustard as an example is because the mustard flower is in the shape of a
crucifix, the cross. Jesus knew His whole life that He would face death on the
cross, and the mustard seed was chosen by His Father as the perfect symbol both
for the suffering of His followers, who would be subjected to trials in the
world but would triumph in the end, and as a symbol of His Son’s life offering
to redeem the lost among humanity. The way of the cross that Christians follow
is a beautiful, consoling way for all sufferings of life are transformed into
joy through the act of self-sacrifice performed by the Savior. If God Himself is
willing to endure brutal persecution and abuse at the hands of evil men, our
sufferings are reduced by comparison, and this very being, this Jesus, has shown
us through the resurrection that He is the almighty Lord of life, who conquers
death and has the power to give eternal life to all those who believe in Him and
try to follow His commands. If they should slip along the way, they can always
count on His tender compassion to bring them back to the path, if they are
earnest and sincere.
The analogy of salt losing
its savor, or flavor, is an accurate one. The Freedom from Religion Foundation has overlooked the fact that
salt can be dissolved in water, and the bigger the volume of water, the less
salty the water will taste! Jesus here likens His followers to salt, and the
closer they follow His teachings, the saltier they are, the bigger the pile of
salt they accumulate. Like His own disciples, they will have a big impact on the
world around them, bringing many to Christ and giving hope to all around them.
If, however, they forget the teachings of Christ and merge into the world, it is
like throwing a bucket of salt into a large lake. For a little while, if you
taste right where the salt was thrown, you will taste salt. In a few days, you
will taste nothing. People lost to the devil or worldly ways, the situation in
which the Freedom from Religion Foundation crowd appears to be, will lose all sense of uprightness, respect,
dignity, and virtue. They will begin saying anything and everything,
uncritically, without thinking. They dig themselves into a pit from which they
never emerge, and when Jesus returns they will find themselves in a deeper and
much darker pit, for they will then be in hell.
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
Jesus said that whoever
calls somebody a "fool" shall be in danger of hell fire (Matthew
5:22), yet he called people "fools" himself (Matthew 23:17).
Guru Kurt:
Here is the first verse,
from Matthew 5:
22. But
I say to you that every one who is angry with his brother shall be liable to
judgment; whoever insults his brother shall be liable to the council, and
whoever says, 'You fool!' shall be liable to the hell of fire.
Jesus gave this instruction
to mankind, and only the Son of Man can contravene this injunction as He does in
Matthew 23:16-17. Here are those verses:
16.
"Woe to you, blind guides, who say, 'If any one swears by the temple, it is
nothing; but if any one swears by the gold of the temple, he is bound by his
oath.' 17. You blind fools! For which is greater, the gold or the temple that
has made the gold sacred?
God can and does call man
foolish when man acts like a fool. Where is the mystery in this? The Freedom from Religion Foundation
people
have made an error in thinking they could examine Jesus’ teachings
independently of whether He was a true divine being or not. Here is a clear
example where they run into trouble, for the response I have given is obvious.
One cannot be a Christian or really follow Christ’s teachings without
believing that He was who He claimed to be, the only Son of the living God. If
you try to apply a human-sized ruler to this divine-sized being, you end up
looking like fools yourself, as they do here. The real issue underlying all this
argument is whether Jesus was or wasn’t who He said He was, and that is God.
They are trying to attack the Christian belief that Jesus was God by showing
that if Jesus was a man, His teachings would be inconsistent. To me, this is
clear evidence of the influence of Satan. They are trying to blindside the
Christian community by pretending Jesus could have been a man, and if He was
then He has contradicted Himself here. People will be confused and misled by
this fallacious argument, for you cannot judge God’s statements by man’s
standards. Jesus Christ was not a man, and He did not speak like a man. He was
the Son of God, who spoke as a true God. But the Freedom from Religion Foundation
will succeed in misleading
many, and is there a better proof of Satanic influence? I don’t think so.
I will even defend Jesus’
statements here. The temple is the house of God, the churches of our day. The
teachers of Jesus’ day were apparently of the opinion that swearing by the
temple was meaningless, but Jesus called them fools. Such people would be fools
even today. Churches are not made sacred by the pews, by the stained glass
windows, by the organ or by the banners which people put up. They are sacred
because they were built as houses of worship, and the worshippers that come
every week sanctify the place. Enter those doors, and your thoughts are
immediately drawn to God, for it is a holy and sacred building. People
congregate there, and improve the quality of their lives by hearing God’s
message related by competent and knowledgeable priests, who are true servants of
Jesus on earth. Even to walk inside a church sanctifies a person, whose life
becomes more holy thereby. It is foolish to state that the church is worthless,
for it is a sacred vessel, it is a Noah’s ark upon which God’s people travel
through the flood of modern, secular, sacrilegious society and times.
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
Regarding his own
truthfulness, Jesus gave two conflicting opinions: "If I bear witness of
myself, my witness is not true" (John 5:31), and "Though I bear record
of myself, yet my record is true" (John 8:14).
Guru Kurt:
Here are the relevant verses
from John 5.
30.
"I can do nothing on my own authority; as I hear, I judge; and my judgment
is just, because I seek not my own will but the will of him who sent me. 31. If
I bear witness to myself, my testimony is not true; 32. there is another who
bears witness to me, and I know that the testimony which he bears to me is true.
33. You sent to John, and he has borne witness to the truth. 34. Not that the
testimony which I receive is from man; but I say this that you may be saved. 35.
He was a burning and shining lamp, and you were willing to rejoice for a while
in his light. 36. But the testimony which I have is greater than that of John;
for the works which the Father has granted me to accomplish, these very works
which I am doing, bear me witness that the Father has sent me. 37. And the
Father who sent me has himself borne witness to me. His voice you have never
heard, his form you have never seen; 38. and you do not have his word abiding in
you, for you do not believe him whom he has sent. 39. You search the scriptures,
because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear
witness to me; 40. yet you refuse to come to me that you may have life. 41. I do
not receive glory from men. 42. But I know that you have not the love of God
within you. 43. I have come in my Father's name, and you do not receive me; if
another comes in his own name, him you will receive. 44. How can you believe,
who receive glory from one another and do not seek the glory that comes from the
only God? 45. Do not think that I shall accuse you to the Father; it is Moses
who accuses you, on whom you set your hope. 46. If you believed Moses, you would
believe me, for he wrote of me. 47. But if you do not believe his writings, how
will you believe my words?"
Here are the verses from
John 8:
13. The
Pharisees then said to him, "You are bearing witness to yourself; your
testimony is not true." 14. Jesus answered, "Even if I do bear witness
to myself, my testimony is true, for I know whence I have come and wither I am
going, but you do not know whence I come or whither I am going. 15. You judge
according to the flesh, I judge no one. 16. Yet even if I do judge, my judgment
is true, for it is not I alone that judge, but I and he who sent me. 17. In your
law it is written that the testimony of two men is true; 18. I bear witness to
myself, and the Father who sent me bears witness to me." 19. They said to
him therefore, "Where is your Father?" Jesus answered, "You know
neither me nor my Father; if you knew me, you would know my Father also."
In both sets of verses,
Jesus was establishing His authority and to explicate the apparent contradiction
between them we must enter into the mystery of the holy trinity. I have said
that Jesus was a portion of the spirit of the Almighty Father poured into a
human vessel. The Holy Spirit represents the power with which the Father moves
in the minds and lives of men. All three, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, are one,
yet all are different. In the first set of verses, Jesus is setting up His
authority as coming from the Father. He is trying to represent to people that
the awesome power of the Almighty is present before them, the personality of the
Father is expressed before them, in the person of Jesus Christ. Therefore He
begins this soliloquy by stating that He cannot bear witness to Himself. What He
really conveys here is that His authority comes from a much higher plane than
the men He is talking to can comprehend just by looking at His mortal frame. The
Father is such an incomprehensibly vast and mighty being, that by comparison
with the human body of Jesus, Jesus is nothing.
In the second set of verses,
Jesus fills in the meaning of the triune God, for He now states that both He and
the Father bear witness to Him. It is another way of looking at the situation,
but here He states the truth in a bolder fashion. As a portion of the Father, He
speaks with the Father’s voice. In truth, the people before Him are beholding
the Father Himself, who appears as Jesus. Jesus’ body is much smaller than the
Father, therefore He first states that He cannot bear witness to Himself. He
does, however, speak with the Father’s voice, and therefore He next states
that He can bear witness to Himself. It was Jesus’ choice to be mysterious
here, but the open heart will apprehend the truth of what I say. He might have
said, "I, whom you see, do not speak for myself. The almighty spiritual
being who is God speaks for me, whom you do not see." Again, "I and
this mighty being both speak for myself, for He and I are one." It is a way
to bring this part of the mystery of the triune God out into the open, that the
Father, who is truly Almighty, has yet expressed Himself truly in the Son, in a
frail human body. That He did not fail is testified by the fact that even today
Christians think of God in a three-fold manner.
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
Was Jesus A Good Example?
He irrationally cursed a fig
tree for being fruitless out of season (Matthew 21:18-19, and Mark 11:13-14).
Guru Kurt:
The Freedom from Religion Foundation
here again falls
into the trap of second-guessing miracles, which as I stated earlier is a
dangerous business. However, Jesus was not irrational when He cursed this fig
tree for He gave us another parable, this time from His actions and not His
words. He came up to the tree hungry, and cursed it for not having fruit when it
should have been full of luscious figs. The tree was not doing what it was meant
to do, what it was created to do, and that is to bear fruit. Similarly, human
beings are meant to bear fruit, to be kind, generous, loving beings, not
parsimonious, vulgar, cruel creatures. When He returns, Jesus will indeed throw
spiritually fruitless humans into hellfire, and so as a warning He cursed this
fig tree, killing it. By killing a tree, which is a lower form of life, Jesus
provided a parable not of words, but of action, describing what will happen to
unrepentant sinners upon His return, and it will indeed be Him doing the cursing
and casting of sinners into the lake of fire.
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
He broke the law by stealing
corn on the Sabbath (Mark 2:23), and he encouraged his disciples to take a horse
without asking permission (Matthew 21).
Guru Kurt:
Here is the first verse,
from Mark 2:
23. One
sabbath he was going through the grainfields; and as they made their way his
disciples began to pluck heads of grain.
As God, Jesus was
responsible for making the original law of the sabbath that he now breaks!
Cannot a King change his laws as his people evolve in grace and culture, or must
they be cast in stone forever? The Old Testament, too, was the work of God.
Jesus here broke His own law to show His followers, and the many that were to
come down the centuries, that He was indeed God and had authority to change the
law. He accomplished this in a graphic and visual manner here, even bucking the
authorities of the day. There are many Christians today who do work on the
sabbath, although they still consider it a holy day and use it to remember God
to the fullest extent they can. They have Jesus' example to follow here. Work is
good for the soul of man, but the original commandments were given to people who
did not have a well-established religious tradition, so it was emphasized that
work should not be done on one day a week, the sabbath. When religious tradition
became established, when the people were all familiar with the idea of one God
and one religion, then Jesus came and faced the very authorities of that
tradition, changing the law by His actions. It is a beautiful divine image, for
He stood up to the people that represented the very reason that the law could
now be changed! Society marches on, and before it God leads, establishing rules
and commandments that complement the society at its current state of development
and help it to grow. When Christ returns, He will certainly have new revelations
for those who join Him in His kingdom, those who are not thrown into hellfire
but enter heaven.
Here is the second verse,
from Matthew 21:
1. And
when they drew near to Jerusalem and came to Bethphage, to the Mount of Olives,
then Jesus sent two disciples, 2. saying to them, "Go into the village
opposite you, and immediately you will find an ass tied, and a colt with her;
untie them and bring them to me. 3. If any one says anything to you, you shall
say, 'The Lord has need of them,' and he will send them immediately."
Although this looks like
robbery, you must understand that Jesus was expressing His divine power here,
and with all likelihood the disciples were asked about the horse and allowed to
bring it. If they were not asked, then you may rest assured that the horse and
ass were returned after the festival of the palms. However, you must also
realize that the concept of ownership of property breaks down completely when it
comes to the Lord, Jesus Christ. He has made everything, all matter and all
living creatures. What does not belong to Him? By what right do we call our
property our own, and not His who made it? By no right. Everything and everyone
belongs to Jesus Christ, for He is responsible for their very existence. If you
do not believe Jesus was God, this action of His looks like thievery. If you do
believe, it becomes a beautiful action that has inspired and touched the hearts
of countless millions down the ages who have celebrated palm Sunday with joy and
reverence in their hearts. What horse owner would not gladly lend his horse to
such a purpose? Probably a Freedom from Religion Foundation follower would not.
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
The "humble" Jesus
said that he was "greater than the temple" (Matt 12:6), "greater
than Jonah" (Matthew 12:41), and "greater than Solomon" (Matthew
12:42).
Guru Kurt:
I do not understand where
the Freedom from Religion Foundation people get the idea that Jesus was humble before man. What reason would
He have for this? He was meek and mild, suffering without complaint at the hands
of man. He was like an innocent sheep, dumb before its shearers. He always
respected all the men around Him, even the lowest, such as the tax collectors
and the Gentiles. Yet nowhere is it stated that He was humble, nor should He be,
who is the embodiment of God Almighty, Creator of the universe. Why would this
mighty spiritual being be humble before man? He never was. He knew exactly who
He was every minute of His life, and man should humble himself before God, not
vice-versa, which is a ridiculous claim.
The Freedom from Religion Foundation
people are once
again applying their own moral standard, which they believe is widely accepted
and with which they hope people reading their wicked web page will sympathize,
and that is that humility is a virtue. Who has said that it is? The Christians
do believe that man should be humble and respectful before God, but where in the
secular world is this considered a virtue? Nowhere. There are many books by
"gurus of self-will" available today espousing just the opposite, that
man should not be humble before God or before any other person either, such as
"Looking out for Number One." Indeed, the Freedom from Religion Foundation
people would probably
agree with these "gurus" that humility is not a virtue, so they are
here attempting to use a Christian belief against Christianity, which is
ludicrous. They are in effect stating, "You Christians, who are so humble
before God, don’t you realize that God Himself was not humble before you? Why
do you worship Him?" I think I’ve said enough here about this, although
if the Freedom from Religion Foundation do think humility is a virtue and are not just using the concept for
the argument’s sake, they should state the source of their belief. If they
reply, "Society," then I ask, "Did not this belief sneak into
society by the back door of Christianity?" I do not think they could prove
that this was not the case, for the reasons behind assuming a humble demeanor
are not obvious and apply mainly in a religious setting.
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
He appeared to suffer from a
dictator's "paranoia" when he said, "He that is not with me is
against me" (Matthew 12:30).
Guru Kurt:
Jesus was not a dictator, He
was God. As such, He has full power to back up His statements, awful power and
spiritual strength the likes of which the world has never yet beheld. He was not
being paranoid here, but stating a reality. It is like a man with an ant farm,
say a scientist, who is trying to end up with a colony of ants that only eat
honey, and do not eat other ants as many are accustomed to doing. He can state
to the ant colony in ant-language (although many may not listen to him, as the Freedom from Religion Foundation
people do not listen to Jesus here), "Do not eat each other, since
this is evil. If you eat each other and not honey as I suggest, I will kill you.
The ants that are left will be my friends, and I will feed them as much as they
can eat." If the ants do not understand his reasoning, he could at least
tell his colleagues about his plan, who would surely approve and find it
interesting. He then carries out his experiment, and ends up with a colony of
honey-eating ants that never eat other ants. Note that none of the ants, neither
the honey-eaters nor the ant-eaters, are free to question the scientist, for he
can and will do everything he has stated. They are not his equals, but obviously
his inferiors. His reasons are his own alone, and he does not need to explain
them to the ants. If they are wise ants, they will follow his advice. If they
are foolish, they will not heed and will be killed.
If God has decided that He
will implement a similar plan upon humanity, who are we to question His
decisions, or the processes and thoughts He used to arrive at those decisions?
He is a mighty scientist, and we are but ants. If He is kind, He will hear our
pleas for mercy, but we do not know that He is merciful except for His own
revelations of Himself! In truth, He is kind, but man is hard-hearted and many
will not listen. The divine plan is to arrive suddenly in power and majesty,
eliminating those who do not heed the divine will from the population, leaving
heaven for the rest. Whether this is due to Jesus’ status as a dictator, or
even due to paranoia, doesn’t matter. He has the power. He will do what He has
said He will do.
He is not a dictator and He
is not paranoid, however. Would a dictator offer His life as a ransom for the
world? Would a dictator suffer the humiliation of crucifixion, when He could
just as easily have killed all His oppressors with a wave of His hand? No. Jesus
loves humanity very deeply, as a father loves his only child. There is just no
other way to reach heartless man than the stern path that He has chosen. He has
placed a light burden on mankind: believe in Him and try to do His commands. For
some even this is too much, but these people are like the unwise ants that do
not like eating honey, but prefer dining on other ants. These ants may even call
the scientist vile names and impugn his character. The scientist doesn’t
listen, and indeed finds their arguments amusing, for they do not understand his
purpose and his potency. They are doomed to be squashed under the heel of a
being that is much wiser, larger, and more powerful than they, but so be it,
foolish ants.
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
Why Jesus?
Although other verses can be
cited that portray Jesus in a different light, they do not erase the disturbing
side of his character. The conflicting passages, however, prove that the New
Testament is contradictory.
Guru Kurt:
I have resolved the
contradictions stated as being due to Jesus being God, not a man. If God has a
side that is disturbing to man, that is because He is God and beyond
comprehension. The Bible states that mankind is fallen, and if this is true then
God has got to deal with it in some way. The second coming of Jesus is His way,
and it will be successful. We do not understand a mind that would create a large
number of humans, and then throw the worst ones into a place of everlasting
torment, keeping the best for heaven. If we were God, we would perhaps not do it
this way. But, we are not God. Our Creator is free, entirely free to act as He
chooses. If you want a harsh analogy, think of a prisoner of war camp in Germany
during WWII. Which prisoner will be the first to go up to the stalag commander
and try to tell him how to run things? No one would be so foolish! God has this
kind of power over us. He who made us can unmake us just as fast. The threats in
the Bible of an end times are violent and may offend our modern sensibilities,
but they are as real as the threats of a stalag commander. They are not empty,
but straightforward promises of divine aggression and retribution against the
sinners among mankind. A wise person, as most Christians are, will try to remain
on God’s good side, for His wrathful side is severe and terrifying indeed.
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
The "Golden Rule"
had been said many times by earlier religious leaders. (Confucius: "Do not
unto others that you would not have them do unto you.")
Guru Kurt:
The fact that the teachings
of other major religions resemble those of Jesus do not invalidate Him. One may
indeed argue that the golden rule is obvious and that any profound thinker could
discover it. One may also note that this whole web page of Atheistic arguments
against the stark, black-and-white nature of Jesus’ statements, is an eloquent
case for Jesus and not against Him, because He has stated truths in a unique way
that is different from all others. In any case, He brought a new revelation to
Judaism, one that revolutionized thinking about religion, eternal life, love,
mercy, and the future of mankind. There are untold millions that have benefited
from Jesus’ teachings who probably would not have heard about any of the
others. The Atheists make the continual mistake of assuming that the ancient
world was a global world, as if the Jews around Jesus could ever have heard of
Confucius! They had not, and for almost two millennia the millions of European
peasants that became Christians also did not hear about Confucius, but they did
hear the magnificent and glorious message of Jesus Christ. To deny the
tremendous impact that this Son of God had on all history borders on delusional,
and appears to be the work of the devil, Satan himself.
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
"Turn the other
cheek" encourages victims to invite further violence.
Guru Kurt:
The analogy that Jesus uses
here is a sharp one, a very graphic and vivid one. Two men are standing in a
confrontation, and one strikes the other. This man has three options: he can
strike back, he can flee, or he can stand his ground. This is the course that
Jesus recommends, that a man should not flee like a coward, or return violence
for violence, but should stand up for his principles against all comers. Mahatma
Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Jr. have both applied this principle on a large
scale, and both gave credit to these lines from Jesus as being the source of
their inspiration. Both of these men showed that this process works, reforming
society in deeper and more lasting ways than violence ever can, for it changes
the heart of the oppressor, who now sees the nobility of those he has oppressed.
He begins to feel like he is the less noble, and he relents from his tyrannical
ways.
Non-violence can only be
practiced with a stout heart, for it can result in death, or at the very least
more violence as the Freedom from Religion Foundation people point out here. Yet such efforts are blessed by
God, and the sufferer will have his reward in heaven for standing up and forcing
positive change here on earth. If anyone ever deserved heaven, it is certainly
Martin Luther King, Jr. In truth, all of us have a deeper spiritual basis, as
eternal souls. This material world is just a passing show, that will end for all
of us one day. At the moment of death, only the soul continues. The body falls
away. At this point, the fate of all of us is in the hands of our Maker, nowhere
else. One who dies in a non-violent action is certain to be warmly received, but
the perpetrator of the violence is not. Jesus here recommends siding with the
only being that really matters, God in heaven. This is immensely practical
advice.
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
"Love thy
neighbor" applied only to fellow believers. (Neither the Jews nor Jesus
showed much love to foreign religions).
Guru Kurt:
The practices of the early
Christians do not reflect on the religion that Jesus began, for in those days
there were very strict societal dictates about what was acceptable and what was
not. People generally remained within the paradigm that was around at the time,
for to venture outside this paradigm often meant punishment or death. The writer
here forgets our liberties were hard-won, and in those days the divisions
between different nations and different religions were harsh and violent. You
must also realize that Jesus was starting His own religion. What would be His
reason for comparing Himself to other extant religions? As God, He gave mankind
a fresh, brand-new revelation in the person of Jesus Christ. He wanted His
followers to follow Him alone, not follow a mish-mash of Christianity mixed with
the other religions of the day. This gave the new religion a purity, unity, and
consistency that it would not otherwise have had.
"Love thy
neighbor" is meant to be applied to all without exception, and most
Christians today do try to practice it in exactly this way. Christians show
respect to all religions. Although they believe the practitioners of other
religions are in error, they do not persecute them but tolerate their practices
within, for instance, the American society. This toleration is indeed a form of
love. However, there is a special bond between Christians, for they are all in
the same boat. There is a deeper love between Christians than between Christians
and the world, for they are indeed set against the world. Although many of us
are Christian, many are not, and secular people are like piranhas in the Amazon
river. They will eat Christians alive if they get the chance, as the Freedom from Religion Foundation
attempts to do on a frequent basis. The church, the community of Christ, is like
a dugout canoe that people can use to ride safely down the dangerous river to
the Atlantic Ocean which is Christ’s eternal kingdom.
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
A few of the Beatitudes
("Blessed are the peacemakers") are acceptable, but they are all
conditions of future reward, not based on respect for human life or values.
Guru Kurt:
The rewards promised in the
beatitudes are real, just as the threat of damnation for sinners is real. On the
one hand you have the joys of heaven, and on the other hand you have the terrors
of hell. This is life as Jesus presented it, and it is a true picture. Jesus
respects human life, but as God He makes decisions regarding life and death.
Human life is not an undifferentiated good to God. Quite the opposite is true.
Evil people are not respected by God, and run the risk of His wrath and
retribution. Human values, if they are based on human life alone, similarly are
not esteemed. God has revealed the values to which humans should cling, and they
are based on the eternal soul of man, not on his brief span of life on this
planet of less than 100 years.
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
On the whole, Jesus said
little that was worthwhile.
Guru Kurt:
Jesus gave a complete plan
of life for man. He has provided immense consolation and solace throughout the
ages to soldiers forced to fight and die, to persecuted and hated peoples, to
people suffering remorse after committing crimes, and to the unfortunate victims
of those crimes. To those who lose life, property, and hope Jesus supplies a
sure remedy, the promise of eternal life in a heaven free from crime, hatred,
and abuse, where all live in peace, joy and harmony. He sparked a revolution in
man’s thinking, and had a great positive impact on the development of society,
for without the constant undercurrent of Christianity isn’t it possible we
would all still be living in mud huts and brandishing swords? Many have argued
that in three short years this divine being had a greater impact upon mankind
than any other person in history. Yet, the Freedom from Religion Foundation makes this outrageous statement.
Inspired by Satan? I’m certain of it now!
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
He introduced nothing new to
ethics (except hell).
Guru Kurt:
Here the
"free-thinkers" are very wrong. Jesus is the only one who said He
would come again, in glory, to judge the living and the dead. He will return as
He promised, rewarding His friends even as He destroys His enemies by casting
them into the lake of fire. Hell has been described in many religions, as in for
instance the Bhagavad Gita of the Hindus. The Old Testament of the Bible too
alludes to it on numerous occasions. But nowhere else does anyone promise to
personally perform judgement and act as executioner. Jesus has threatened the
sinners of the world, and if the Atheists are wrong, which they are, they run a
serious risk of being on the receiving end of the wrath of Almighty God, which
is a place where most Christians probably will not find themselves.
As I have shown several
times in this document, Jesus also supplied a good deal of emotional relief for
the suffering peoples of the world. The poor, the needy, victims of robbery, all
may take consolation knowing that Jesus and His disciples braved the world with
no possessions, and found great joy and delight in doing so. The disciples, in
particular, became mighty forces for bringing Jesus’ teachings into the world,
dynamic speakers and thinkers, and started a church that has had a tremendous
impact on world thought and action. Jesus championed detachment from material
possessions, even when one owns them, as a way of freeing the mind from worry
and concern. This is a profound contribution to world thinking, although it may
not fall solely under the cold heading of "ethics," for it has a
gentle psychological effect on every reader, increasing his or her happiness. It
is clearly the product of a divine and holy mind, the mind of the only Son of
God.
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
He instituted no social
programs.
Guru Kurt:
The
"free-thinkers" are caught in an endless cycle of not understanding
what daily life was like in ancient times. They would do well to read the
history of those days, the accounts of the coliseums and the Roman wars of
conquest. Social programs were non-existent, and are indeed a modern invention.
There are other societies where such things might have been possible, but they
were a complete impossibility in ancient Israel. Again, is it the work of an
incarnation of God to implement social programs, or is this the work of His
followers? The incarnation is an authority on spiritual matters, on God and the
soul. His task is to inspire mankind, to lay down the basis of a moral society
that strives for the good of all. Jesus’ followers have indeed implemented
social programs. Even today the missionary societies provide untold aid to
undeveloped countries, aid in food and clothing as well as spiritual
instruction. Jesus told man the truth about Himself and his God, and the social
programs followed after. This is as it should be.
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
Being
"omniscient," he could have shared some useful science or medicine,
but he appeared ignorant of such things (as if his character were merely the
invention of writers stuck in the first century).
Guru Kurt:
Jesus did indeed know about
all the advances that would come, but He did not reveal them to mankind. The
reason for this is that a civilized society must develop before technology can
occur. The two must arise side by side. Can you imagine Genghis Khan with a
nuclear arsenal? In those days, respect for life was poor. Death by violence was
an everyday occurrence, familiar to all, and killing someone was not viewed with
the abhorrence that we feel today. There were no concepts of human rights, of
innocence until proven guilt, no freedom of speech, not even any economic
mobility. If you were poor, you certainly would so remain, whereas today poor
people can become rich if they work hard and use their ingenuity. Jesus was wise
to withhold this information, which would probably have resulted in the
destruction of man. During World War II the dictators Hitler and Mussolini had
little remorse or concern for human life. Can anyone imagine if all the world
leaders of those days had little remorse? The result would have been total
destruction of life on earth.
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
Many scholars are doubtful
of the historical existence of Jesus. Albert Schweitzer said, "The
historical Jesus will be to our time a stranger and an enigma." No
first-century writer confirms the Jesus story.
Guru Kurt:
The main evidence for
Jesus’ real existence is the wide acceptance of Christianity by intelligent,
thinking people the world over today. If He were simply imaginary, there is no
way all this would have arisen. There are plenty of fictional characters in
modern literature, such as Kahlil Gibran’s "The Prophet," who will
never and could never cause such a huge stir. Jesus had a gigantic impact
because He was real, because He knew the human soul inside and out and, as God,
prescribed a way for man that would lead him to eternal life in heaven. Albert
Schweitzer was wrong, for Jesus is no stranger today, He is mankind’s greatest
friend. Having taken man by the hand for all these centuries, will Jesus abandon
him now? His message was timeless, and will ever remain so. Just reading the
Gospels of the New Testament can lift the sorrows of the worst sinner, and even
warm the cold heart of the most recalcitrant non-believer. The words of Jesus
vibrate with divine power. They resonate within the spirit of man, lifting him
above the level of the beast, and make of him a being just a little lower than
the angels.
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
The New Testament is
internally contradictory and contains historical errors.
Guru Kurt:
I have shown all the
inconsistencies claimed by the "free-thinkers" to be
misinterpretations, or shallow interpretations, of Bible text. They must produce
better evidence than this if they are to espouse a rational argument.
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
The story is filled with
miracles and other outrageous claims.
Guru Kurt:
Miracles are only outrageous
if they are not true. Why do you state that they are not true? Were you there?
Are there not an awfully lot of them, and are they all not unique and inspiring
to the people who witnessed them? The fact that one does not see miracles
nowadays implies, but does not guarantee, that miracles never occurred. The fact
is, you have used the word "outrageous" here to bolster your claim, as
if tremendous meaning that everyone will recognize could be contained in a
single word. I claim that it would be outrageous if the miracles did not happen,
for it would require a fertile imagination indeed to invent them, and a strange
power to force them to be written down for century after century, until finally
arriving at our day and age. Perhaps when Jesus returns we will see more
miracles, but I doubt that even a miracle performed before your eyes would have
any effect at all upon your stone-cold hearts. Jesus’ teachings stand alone,
without the miracles. Subtract all the miracles, and you are left with the
greatest miracle of all, a mighty teacher of mankind who had an immense impact
on world history, a being that could perhaps, and indeed did, have the right to
call Himself the only Son of the living God, a creature of divine origin that
brought hope of eternal life, joy, and a promise of everlasting peace to the
good men of planet earth.
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
Consisting mostly of
material borrowed from pagan religions, the Jesus story appears to be cut from
the same fabric as all other myths and fables.
Guru Kurt:
Your evidence, please?
Saying something does not make it true. Rational argument requires good
reasoning, good evidence, or both. You supply neither here, leaving us
helplessly wondering what was going through your mind. Is there a devil in
there? I think so.
Freedom from Religion Foundation:
Why is Jesus so special? It
would be more reasonable and productive to emulate real, flesh-and-blood human
beings who have contributed to humanity--mothers who have given birth,
scientists who have alleviated suffering, social reformers who have fought
injustice--than to worship a character of such dubious qualities as Jesus.
Guru Kurt:
I will not grace these
appalling insults with a reply, for I have already countered them above. Jesus
is special because He was the true Son of God, as He claimed. As God, He
possessed awesome powers that should strike fear into the heart of man, for He
has proclaimed that He will return on a day of wrathful vengeance, seeking
justice among mankind. Many wrongs that have been committed will be righted on
that day, and many of those that seek justice will find it. Even some lukewarm
Christians are in danger, for as Jesus said, many will come begging to Him that
claim to have been His followers but He, who sees into the heart, will say,
"Depart from me; I never knew you." Again, He is a God of complete
love and mercy, who will rescue the fallen, the weak, the humble and the
powerless. It is only mankind’s recalcitrant nature, and the actions of the
devil on earth, that make it absolutely necessary for Jesus to come as He said
He will. He will not destroy the righteous, but the sinner should beware, for
2000 years ago a dire warning was issued, and its fulfillment may be closer at
hand than anyone realizes.