A response to the video "Why does every intelligent Christian disobey Jesus"?

[AlexBP]

I just saw the video on YouTube and I find virutally everything in it to be untrue.  First of all, the video says that I am intelligent--an obvious falsehood.  And my lack of intelligence may mean that I'm unfit to make a response, but nonetheless the links invited me here, so here I am.

First of all the video attempts to prove that Christians disobey Jesus.  In this it fails because it misinterprets what Jesus said.  To see why we must understand the concept of a metaphor, which is a type of figurative language wherein someone says one thing that's not literally true because it illustrates a point in a vivid way.  Hence when William Blake wrote:

Tiger, tiger, burning bright
In the forests of the night.

He did not actually mean us to infer that there was a tiger on fire in a nighttime forest; rather, the "burning" is a metaphor for the tiger's ferocity.  (And the tiger itself is a metaphor for human impulses, but I digress.)  Likewise when Shakespeare wrote:

All the world's a stage and all the men and women merely players.

He did not literally mean it, but instead meant it to deal metaphorically with how human behavior is shaped by the social roles we are expected to play.

So similarly, when Jesus said: "If your hand causes you to sin, cut if off", he was not advising us to get a saw and cut off our hands, but rather to remove any portion of our personal attitudes or behavior that was leading us into sin.

Similarly with most of your other demonstrations of supposed disobedience to Jesus, once His words are interpreted correctly your argument vanishes.

As for the claim that the United States having a military somehow proves that we don't love our enemies, it does not.  Why would killing our enemies indicate that we don't love them?  Throughout most of history there's been no contradiction between the two.

There are other things in the video that I disagree with as well.  For example, it says that "our prisons are overflowing with criminals who are Christians."  I don't believe that this claim is true and no source is provided to backup the claim.  Further, just because someone is in prison doesn't mean that he's violent.  Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr., was sent to prison because he was peaceful.

[HAL]

First of all, the video says that I am intelligent--an obvious falsehood.  And my lack of intelligence may mean that I'm unfit to make a response, but nonetheless the links invited me here, so here I am.

So does that mean you'll restrict yourself to the Chatter board from now on?

[Emily]

Welcome to the site.

  For example, it says that "our prisons are overflowing with criminals who are Christians."  I don't believe that this claim is true and no source is provided to backup the claim. 

Here are some figures of the religious population in jail.
http://www.adherents.com/misc/adh_prison.html

Something like 65 percent are religious.

Further, just because someone is in prison doesn't mean that he's violent.

Yeah but those Christians in prison did something to break Jesus' rules. It doesn't matter what they did to land in jail; but there are there and did something to make Jesus cry, ergo, they disobeyed Jesus.

[MockTurtle]

So similarly, when Jesus said: "If your hand causes you to sin, cut if off", he was not advising us to get a saw and cut off our hands, but rather to remove any portion of our personal attitudes or behavior that was leading us into sin.

What about when he said "Sell your possessions and give to the poor." (Luke 12:33)

[screwtape]

Welcome Alex

To see why we must understand the concept of a metaphor, which is a type of figurative language....

Thank you for treating us like uneducated idiots.  We appreciate the condescension.  Not really.  We hate it.  Maybe it would be better to assume we are at least as educated as you.  If you feel we are having a hard time keeping up, address it then.

So similarly, when Jesus said: "If your hand causes you to sin, cut if off", he was not advising us to get a saw and cut off our hands, but rather to remove any portion of our personal attitudes or behavior that was leading us into sin.

How do you know that?  How can you be sure?  You see, with the literary examples you used, we can interpret them many ways without fear that we are "doing it wrong".  The penalties for that are nil.  But with jesus H, we are presumptively talking about potential eternal damnation.  So getting the interpretation right is literally everything.  Jesus H said some things that he meant literally, right?  Not everything was a metaphor.  So how do you tell which is which.  I would like a little more in the way of guidelines to know which things jesus H said were literal and which were metaphorical.

Why would killing our enemies indicate that we don't love them?

It seems pretty obvious to me why we would not kill people we love.  It is kind of a tautology.  Have you ever killed anyone you loved?  Can you even imagine killing someone you love without feeling uncomfortable?

Throughout most of history there's been no contradiction between the two.

What the flip are you talking about?  Please give me an example.

[Agamemnon]

Hi AlexBP!

Mind if I borrow your magic decoder ring for a while, so I can "correctly" interpret the bible?

[kin hell]

Tiger, tiger, burning bright
In the forests of the night.

Firstly .............if you are here to school us then please attempt to get it right.


Or if you are going to alter reality to promote your altar reality

try "s"  for subtlety      

Tyger Tyger, burning brights,
In the forests of the night :
What immortal hand or eye,
Could frame thy fearful symmetry?

William Blake + s

EDIT   removed toothache spasm

[plethora]

First of all the video attempts to prove that Christians disobey Jesus.  In this it fails because it misinterprets what Jesus said.

Let me guess... your particular denomination out of the 38000 possible denominations has the one truely correct interpretation of the bible?

Sucks to be the other 37999, not to mention the other 66% of the population of the planet that's not christian. What makes you so special that your interpretation of the bible is the correct one?

So similarly, when Jesus said: "If your hand causes you to sin, cut if off", he was not advising us to get a saw and cut off our hands, but rather to remove any portion of our personal attitudes or behavior that was leading us into sin.

Interesting ... that's a metaphor... saying his body is bread and his blood is wine is a metaphor... so...

When the bible says Jesus fed thousands of people with a few loaves of bread and fish... is that meant to be taken as metaphor? How should I interpret this?

The bible claims Jesus fed 5000 people with 5 loaves of bread and 2 fish (Matthew 14:13–21, Mark 6:31-44, Luke 9:10-17 and John 6:5-15) and also 4000 people with 7 loaves of bread and 7 fish (Mark 8:1-9 and Matthew 15:32-39).

Metaphorical?

Similarly with most of your other demonstrations of supposed disobedience to Jesus, once His words are interpreted correctly your argument vanishes.

You would think that Jesus, the son of god and in essence god himself ... would have made their holy book... the supposedly most important book of all time... clear and easy to understand instead of a bunch of "metaphors". If it's god word it should mean what it says.

Fact is, you are interpreting the bible they way it makes sense to you.

You need to reconcile the vile disgusting verses written by primitive barberic men thousands of years ago with your own modern sense or morality. This leads to spinning, bending and twisting bible verses to mean what you want them to mean and not what they actually mean.

There is no god, there was no jesus (the the biblical character anyway) and the book is a bunch of myths written thousands of years ago. Our morality and understanding of the universe and our place in it has moved on vastly since then. Get with the times.

[Anfauglir]

...once His words are interpreted correctly your argument vanishes.

And there's the rub, as has been pointed out.  You may want to consider these questions....

1) How do you know how to correctly interpret Jesus' words?
2) When two Christians differ on their interpretations, how do you determine who (if either) has it right?
3) Why would a loving, benevolent god write a book that required interpretation?  That two equally devout believers are capable of interpreting differently?

Welcome to the forum, by the way.  Hope you stick around.

[AlexBP]

Welcome to the site.

Here are some figures of the religious population in jail.

Something like 65 percent are religious.

Yeah but those Christians in prison did something to break Jesus' rules. It doesn't matter what they did to land in jail; but there are there and did something to make Jesus cry, ergo, they disobeyed Jesus.

Emily, thank you for welcoming me to the board so politely.

In response to the figure that 65% of those in jail are religious, even if that's true, it would hardly justify that claim that "our prisons are overflowing with Christians who have committed violent crimes".  Also, since 83% of the American population is Christian, that means the percentage of those in jail is much less religious than the population at large.  Here's a poll for that figure.
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/dailynews/beliefnet_poll_010718.html

But the real question is the last two sentences in your response.  You say that "those Christians in prison did something to break Jesus' rules", but you don't provide any justification for that statement.  There is no necessary connection between the two things.  If I recall correctly, Stephen, Peter, Paul, and other members of the early Church went to jail precisely because they did obey Jesus.  In fact, I'm pretty sure that Jesus himself had a run-in with the law.  The bottom line is that you're assuming, if you agree with the video, that anyone who goes to jail has done something violent, but there's no reason t assume such a thing.  Again, like I said, Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. and members of his congregation were sent to jail because they spoke and marched for their God-given rights.  As Rev. King himself said:

"There are two ways to break the law, from below or from above.  We should never forget that on calvary, three men were executed for breaking the law.  Two thieves broke the law from below.  Jesus Christ broke the law from above.  ...  So when you call me a law-breaking extremist, I will accept that title with pride."

So do you think that what Rev. King did was wrong, or are you willing to admit that some people go to jail for doing what is right?

[AlexBP]

What about when he said "Sell your possessions and give to the poor." (Luke 12:33)

Telling people to sell their possessions and give to the poor sounds like excellent advice to me.  Christians all over the world follow this advice all the time.

[HAL]

Telling people to sell their possessions and give to the poor sounds like excellent advice to me.  Christians all over the world follow this advice all the time.

Really?

[plethora]

What about when he said "Sell your possessions and give to the poor." (Luke 12:33)

Telling people to sell their possessions and give to the poor sounds like excellent advice to me.  Christians all over the world follow this advice all the time.

An observation ...

It's funny the verse doesn't say 'give away your possesions'... it says to sell them. In order to sell them, people need to pay for them with money. If everybody tried to sell there would be no buyers and so no one could follow this rule. Duh!

[Don_Quixote]

What about when he said "Sell your possessions and give to the poor." (Luke 12:33)

Telling people to sell their possessions and give to the poor sounds like excellent advice to me.  Christians all over the world follow this advice all the time.

An observation ...

It's funny the verse doesn't say 'give away your possesions'... it says to sell them. In order to sell them, people need to pay for them with money. If everybody tried to sell there would be no buyers and so no one could follow this rule. Duh!

Oh noo you get it the wrong way! The idea is to sell your sins to the devil so you can give away your good personal things to the ones who need it!
(SARCASM) Yeah that's my own interpretation and they all got it wrong 

[hickdive]

So, the story of christ rising from the dead is a metaphor?

Or are the stories of miracles performed by jesus metaphors too?

If not, why not and how do we tell the difference between what is intended as a metaphor and which is literal truth?

[Agamemnon]

hickdive: You need the magic decoder ring, but you're going to have to wait, because I get it first.

[frofrodajimmyboy]

AlexBP, welcome to the forums.  I must strongly encourage you to address the posts that question your knowledge on the "correct" interpretation of the bible.  I feel they strongly counter your point and am quite interested in how you might refute them. 

[William]

As Rev. King himself said:

"There are two ways to break the law, from below or from above.  We should never forget that on calvary, three men were executed for breaking the law.  Two thieves broke the law from below.  Jesus Christ broke the law from above.  ...  So when you call me a law-breaking extremist, I will accept that title with pride."

So do you think that what Rev. King did was wrong, or are you willing to admit that some people go to jail for doing what is right?

That is the same false reasoning that underpins burning witches at the stake, doing 9/11 style terrorism, or gunning down a doctor who performed an abortion.

There is no such thing as "breaking a law from above." EDIT: Laws can be unjust, or stupid, or impractical - but that is to do with the law itself, regardless of some moral stance of the law breaker.

Plenty of people go to jail unjustly, or are persecuted for courageously standing up for good causes.  But a good cause is good whether it is religiously motivated or not.  The problem that atheists see is when bad causes are advanced in the name of religion by otherwise good people.  Religion is wrong about so much - it's a dangerous place to look for what is right.  

[velkyn]

I just saw the video on YouTube and I find virutally everything in it to be untrue.  First of all, the video says that I am intelligent--an obvious falsehood.  And my lack of intelligence may mean that I'm unfit to make a response, but nonetheless the links invited me here, so here I am.

love the false humility.

As usual with theists and especially Christians, you have decided that you and only you know what God "really" meant.  Funny on how Christians disagree with each other.  Can't your holy spirit get the same message through? You all claim that you and only you know how to "correctly" interpret and you all contradict each other.

As for the claim that the United States having a military somehow proves that we don't love our enemies, it does not.  Why would killing our enemies indicate that we don't love them?  Throughout most of history there's been no contradiction between the two.

Bwwaaahahaaaaaaaa   oh my.  And I loev how you appeal to "history" for you nonsense.  Yep, please do show how love someone and killing them is connected, other than a mercy killing which is a rarity, though it does happen.

There are other things in the video that I disagree with as well.  For example, it says that "our prisons are overflowing with criminals who are Christians."  I don't believe that this claim is true and no source is provided to backup the claim.  Further, just because someone is in prison doesn't mean that he's violent.  Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr., was sent to prison because he was peaceful.

Appeal to ignorance. As long as you don't believe it, it's magically not true.  I love how you try to claim that even *if* there were plenty of Christians in prison(a fact that has been demonstrated) well, the would all be just lambs.  It's just too funny.  I believe that MLK was in the Birmingham jail.  And indeed good people can findn themselves in jail.  I don't think the millions in our prison system who self-identify as Christians are like MLK, various other civil rights activists, etc.

[AlexBP]

Tiger, tiger, burning bright
In the forests of the night.

Firstly .............if you are here to school us then please attempt to get it right.

Or if you are going to alter reality to promote your altar reality

try "s"  for subtlety      

Tyger Tyger, burning brights,
In the forests of the night :
What immortal hand or eye,
Could frame thy fearful symmetry?

William Blake + s

EDIT   removed toothache spasm

There is nothing wrong about changing Blake's original "Tyger" to "Tiger".  Changing archaic spellings to modern ones is perfectly normal when quoting old material.  In any case, nitpicking about spellings does not accomplish much as far as building a defense of the incorrect statements in the video.

[MockTurtle]

What about when he said "Sell your possessions and give to the poor." (Luke 12:33)

Telling people to sell their possessions and give to the poor sounds like excellent advice to me.  Christians all over the world follow this advice all the time.

So after running it through the magic decoder ring, Luke 12:33 says "Sell some of your possessions, you know, the crap you were not really using anyway, spend most of it on more frivolous crap, but if it's not too inconvenient, give to the capital campaign to build a new wing on our mega-chuch with a coffee shop and recreation center, support ultra-conservative politicians in their defense of big corporations, and if there is any left over, put it in this box and we'll pretend to use it to build an orphanage in Guatemala."

[Dante]

There is nothing wrong about changing Blake's original "Tyger" to "Tiger".  Changing archaic spellings to modern ones is perfectly normal when quoting old material.  In any case, nitpicking about spellings does not accomplish much as far as building a defense of the incorrect statements in the video.

Well, he's got you there......

[kin hell]

Tiger, tiger, burning bright
In the forests of the night.

Firstly .............if you are here to school us then please attempt to get it right.

Or if you are going to alter reality to promote your altar reality

try "s"  for subtlety      

Tyger Tyger, burning brights,
In the forests of the night :
What immortal hand or eye,
Could frame thy fearful symmetry?

William Blake + s

EDIT   removed toothache spasm

There is nothing wrong about changing Blake's original "Tyger" to "Tiger".  Changing archaic spellings to modern ones is perfectly normal when quoting old material.  In any case, nitpicking about spellings does not accomplish much as far as building a defense of the incorrect statements in the video.

non-sense of humour eh Alex?

not two brights are we ?






fundamentally there's you
and freely I admit there's me

on either side of  this the...ism chasm
you with your faithful stance
me with my ridicule


so you raise the subject of your god's book being ?riddled?[1] with metaphor
I'll see that cynical abet
and raise you an eyebrow,  a pause, and a weary ...........sez who?

1.	riddle 2 |?r?dl| |?r?d(?)l| verb [ trans. ] 1 (usu. be riddled) make many holes in (someone or something), esp. with gunshot : his car was riddled by sniper fire. • fill or permeate (someone or something), esp. with something unpleasant or undesirable : the existing law is riddled with loopholes.

[AlexBP]

Welcome Alex

Thank you for the polite greeting.

Thank you for treating us like uneducated idiots.  We appreciate the condescension.  Not really.  We hate it.  Maybe it would be better to assume we are at least as educated as you.  If you feel we are having a hard time keeping up, address it then.

You hate condescension?  How do you think we Christian feel while watching all those videos that treat us like idiots?  We hate it to.  So if you're to lecture me about not being condescending, I think there's a quote from somewhere about "removing the beam from your own eye before complaining about the mote in someone else's" that might be relevant here.

I'm perfectly willing to believe that most people on this forum understand the concept of metaphors, but whoever made this video obviously does not, since he took metaphorical passages and interpreted them literally.  Therefore he is having a hard time keeping up with an idea that most people learn in elementary school, and I was hoping to get a response directly from him, though it appears that I won't.  Explaining what a metaphor is certainly shouldn't be necessary, but in the case of this particular person it is necessary.

How do you know that?  How can you be sure?  You see, with the literary examples you used, we can interpret them many ways without fear that we are "doing it wrong".  The penalties for that are nil.  But with jesus H, we are presumptively talking about potential eternal damnation.  So getting the interpretation right is literally everything.  Jesus H said some things that he meant literally, right?  Not everything was a metaphor.  So how do you tell which is which.  I would like a little more in the way of guidelines to know which things jesus H said were literal and which were metaphorical.

Regardless of whether we're looking at "Tiger, tiger", "All the world's a stage", or "if thy hand causes thee to sin", the metaphorical interpretation is the correct one.  Jesus, Shakespeare, and Blake all simply assumed that their audience would be competent at recognizing metaphors and other types of figurative language.  To say that metaphors get in the way of proper understanding is untrue.  I've never encountered any trouble from anyone in interpreting any of these correctly until I saw that video.  Even small children can get it right, so the fact that the video's maker got it so totally wrong doesn't to much to justify the tone of smug intellectual superiority that pervades the video.

Also, the name is Jesus Christ, not Jesus H.

[AlexBP]

It seems pretty obvious to me why we would not kill people we love.  It is kind of a tautology.  Have you ever killed anyone you loved?  Can you even imagine killing someone you love without feeling uncomfortable?

What the flip are you talking about?  Please give me an example.

I am not a professional soldier, so the question of my personal feelings is moot here.

As for the second question, there are plentiful examples.  There was a famous episode during World War One where the British and German soldiers were in te trenches, shooting at each other.  On Christmas Eve,  1917, they laid down their guns, go out in "no man's land" between the two sets of trenches, and played a friendly game of soccer.  Later they returned to their trenches and the war continued.  During the American Civil War, soldiers on the two sides often traded with each other, offering things that were hard to find in the opposite side's camp such as tobacco and whiskey.  And for centuries there was a tradition that a solider killed in enemy territory would be buried in a nearby cemetary or other appropriate spot with full military honors.  So there's ample evidence that it's possible for two nations to go to war while people on each side still hold appropriate attitudes towards the other.




[modbreak]Attributed quotes[/modbreak]

[Agamemnon]

You hate condescension?  How do you think we Christian feel while watching all those videos that treat us like idiots?  We hate it to.  So if you're to lecture me about not being condescending, I think there's a quote from somewhere about "removing the beam from your own eye before complaining about the mote in someone else's" that might be relevant here.

No it is not relevant here. Screwtape didn't make the videos. I didn't make the videos. The person that made the videos actually has very little to do with the forum.

So you have no reason to abuse us with condescending language for something someone else did.

Edit: Also, I would like to point out that this isn't a very "Christian" attitude you have.

[AlexBP]

Anfauglir, thank you for your polite response.  I will respond to one question at a time since my browser starts causing trouble when I try to make long posts.

And there's the rub, as has been pointed out.  You may want to consider these questions....

1) How do you know how to correctly interpret Jesus' words?

I don't claim to have a completely correct understanding of everything Jesus said, but some examples, including the relevant ones from this video, are quite straightforward and I interpret them as I'd interpret everything else.  Every day I have scores of conversations, read several books or articles, watch TV, and listen to the radio.  As I do so I encounter figurative language all the time and I interpret it using common sense.  If someone says, "It's raining cats and dogs", I interpret that as meaning that it's raining hard, because that's the logical interpretation.

It's clear that most people in this thread are going to attack me because they're unable to defend the video, but I get the impression that you're looking for an honest debate.  Assuming that you're a defender of the video, the question can be turned around.  The video's entire case is based on the assumption that Jesus meant each of the quoted phrases to be taken literally, and based on this claims that Jesus was "crazy" and "insane".  Lose that ridiculous interpretation of Jesus' words and the whole video falls apart and looks rather pathetic.  So how exactly do you, on behalf of the video maker, know how to correctly interpret Jesus' words? 

[screwtape]

You hate condescension?  How do you think we Christian feel while watching all those videos that treat us like idiots?  We hate it to.  So if you're to lecture me about not being condescending, I think there's a quote from somewhere about "removing the beam from your own eye before complaining about the mote in someone else's" that might be relevant here.

Save your righteous indignation for the right person.  I did not make the videos.  Nobody here did.  I would not have to lecture you on manners if you did not come into our living room and act like a twat.  You could have inquired about it first or explained your point of view without talking down to anyone. But you didn't. So, I felt you needed some schooling in manners.  If you don't like it, feel free to whine ineffectually like a little girl with a skinned knee some more.

Regardless of whether we're looking at "Tiger, tiger", "All the world's a stage", or "if thy hand causes thee to sin", the metaphorical interpretation is the correct one. 

Sez you.  Why should I believe you, of all people, have the correct answer?  Explain why you are so sure.  I am specifically referring to the bible, not the literature.  I don't actually care about the literature because no one is telling be I should live my life according to the works of either William.

Jesus, Shakespeare, and Blake all simply assumed that their audience would be competent at recognizing metaphors and other types of figurative language. 

That is just restating your initial claim and does not answer my question.  Jesus intended for some things to be taken literally, correct?  And some of those literal things are preposterous.  Like walking on water, multiplying fish and bread, banishing demons, and dead rising from the grave.  How do you know those are not metaphors too?  How do you know the difference?  What are the rules/ criteria by which you judge whether these stories are metaphors?

To say that metaphors get in the way of proper understanding is untrue. 

They can get in the way if the metaphor is crap or if it is not an obvious metaphor.  To say they never get in the way is just as silly as saying they always get in the way.  

I've never encountered any trouble from anyone in interpreting any of these correctly until I saw that video. 

That still does not answer my question.  Is the flood that noah escaped a metaphor?  How about the creation myth?  How about the whole Babel fiasco?  There is a great deal of argument amongst xians whether those were literal or metaphorical.

Even small children can get it right, so the fact that the video's maker got it so totally wrong doesn't to much to justify the tone of smug intellectual superiority that pervades the video.

So saying we/ the video maker is dumber than small children is not taking a smug, intellecutally superior attitude?  

Also, the name is Jesus Christ, not Jesus H.

meh.  You know who I mean.

[HAL]

So how exactly do you, on behalf of the video maker, know how to correctly interpret Jesus' words? 

How do you know how to interpret Jesus word's? Did he tell you how himself?