.

Dear George and Yuyutsu,,

.

"Though throughout its history Christianity used to overemphasize the “jealous” aspect, I think what is here quoted as having been said by the incarnate god Krishna, could have easily been said also by the non-fictional Jesus, seen by Christians as the incarnate God." (George)
.

King James Bible:

"Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me" [Exodus 20:5]

" For thou shalt worship no other god: for the Lord, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God" [Exodus 34:14]

" And Joshua said unto the people, Ye cannot serve the LORD: for he is an holy God; he is a jealous God; he will not forgive your transgressions nor your sins." [Joshua 24:19]

"For the Lord your God is a consuming fire, a jealous God." [Deuteronomy 4:24]

"They provoked Him to jealousy with foreign gods; With abominations they provoked Him to anger." [Deuteronomy 32:16]

"God is jealous, and the Lord revengeth; the Lord revengeth, and is furious; the Lord will take vengeance on his adversaries, and he reserveth wrath for his enemies." [Nahum 1:2]

" For the LORD thy God is a jealous God among you lest the anger of the LORD thy God be kindled against thee, and destroy thee from off the face of the earth." [Deuteronomy 6:15]

"Therefore will I also deal in fury: mine eye shall not spare, neither will I have pity: and though they cry in mine ears with a loud voice, yet will I not hear them." [Ezekiel 8:18]

As George astutely notes, Christianity has "overemphasized" the "jealous" aspect:

- nine crusades (1096 to 1272) resulting in an estimated 2 to 6 million deaths;

- the inquisitions (1184 to 1860) with widespread torture and burning at the stake;

- the holocaust and the extermination of 6 million Jews.

Though presumed alive and well, the "resurrected", non-fictional Jesus remains silent.

"Qui tacet consentit" ?

.

Dear Banjo,

Since you addressed me, may I ask what your point is?

Are you claiming that God is jealous because you read so in the bible?

Or are you claiming that even after a lifetime of suffering among the Jews, Jesus has no right to retire in peace, sitting at God's right hand while his followers below riot?

Yes, his followers (or shall I say, those pretending to follow him!) overemphasised the jealous aspect. Are you claiming that he could do more about it?

Si Zeus intorserit fulmen super omni peccatori, mox fore, sine relicti munitionis quoadusque!

Dear Banjo,

I suppose I could not have expected you to understand what I - or the author of the EB article, or e.g. Toynbee (http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=9038#144777), etc - wanted to say. (You might or might not agree with my description of different types of knives, but pointing out the many cases where people were stabbed to death by knives seems to be somewhat irrelevant.)

We already had such talk-past-each-other encounter on another thread, that time in connection with (mathematical) models in contemporary physics. I think we just have to live with our differences in both cases.

.

Dear Yuyutsu,

.

"Since you addressed me, may I ask what your point is?"

As I was intruding into your conversation with George, I thought it was polite to address myself to both of you instead of to George alone, ignoring you completely.
.

"Are you claiming that God is jealous because you read so in the bible?"
.

I was quoting from the bible in which various authors claim that the Abrahamic god is a jealous god. I provided this as supporting documentation in order to illustrate what George was referring to when he mentioned "the jealous aspect".

I think your question is better directed to George.

For my part, I understand there is no "god" therefore I do not claim that "he", "she" or "it" or whatever, is jealous simply "because I read it in the bible".

If somebody or something does not exist, he, she or it cannot be jealous.
.

"Or are you claiming that even after a lifetime of suffering among the Jews, Jesus has no right to retire in peace, sitting at God's right hand while his followers below riot?"
.

No. But it seems you are claiming that Jesus spent "a lifetime of suffering among the Jews". I am no expert but I thought his suffering occurred during the three hours he spent on the cross before he died. Would be so kind as to let me have some more details on that.

As regards Jesus's "right to retire in peace", that, again, is a question for George to answer, if he can, though I suspect you are being a little facetious.

I hope that is not the case, because if it were, it would not be very befitting of you, Yuyutsu, as an adept of Ramakrishna.

Swami Vivekananda would not be so proud of you either.

.

.

Dear George,

.

"We already had such talk-past-each-other encounter on another thread ..."
.

Well, I thought I was talking to you but I do sometimes have the impression we have difficulty understanding each other. Admittedly, we also have our occasional disagreements.

I see nothing unusual about that since we come from immensely different backgrounds. In addition, I am as ignorant as you are knowledgeable and my thought patterns are as vagabond as yours are disciplined.

As I just indicated to Yuyutsu, my previous post to you was in two parts:

In the first part, I provided documentation from the bible illustrating your reference to what you termed "the jealous aspect".

In the second part, I indicated some practical examples of your observation that "Christianity has "overemphasized" the "jealous" aspect".

Ninety percent of my post was pure documentation.

Only the last two lines were personal:

"Though presumed alive and well, the "resurrected", non-fictional Jesus remains silent. "Qui tacet consentit" ?

I see this as polemic and open to debate.

I do not see it as "talking past each other". But as you say it is, I am more than willing to take a step sideways in order to catch whatever it is you are saying.

I promise to do my best to understand.

.

Dear Banjo,

OK, I should not have said “talk-past-each-other” but maybe “irrelevant”. My bracketed parable about the knives should have explained this. I was not arguing a point (except by mentioning the rather obvious fact that modern science and technology originated in the cultural West rather than East).

And I certainly did not want to start a "polemic", about the truthfulness or not, usefulness or not, of perceptions of “ultimate reality” offered by religion. Or about how non-Christians should understand, if at all, Christ’s resurrection. I was just quoting insights offered by people more experienced than us about things I thought Yuyutsu was about. Not arguments, but insights to be understood or not, shared or not. One way or another depends on the background one comes from, as you rightly point out; it is not a question of being knowledgeable or ignorant.

"The test of a phenomenological description is that the picture given by it is convincing, that it can be seen by anyone who is willing to look in the same direction, that the description illuminates other related ideas, and that it makes the reality which these ideas are supposed to reflect understandable." (Paul Tillich)