Modern Christianity has created generations of weak men who turn the other cheek.
Kinda makes me wish I'd paid more attention in sunday school, because I swear there's gotta be some misunderstanding with this "turn the other cheek" business. The trope it's turned into doesn't match the other messages I've heard, so there must be some missing context.
Yet, I agree completely; this trope has been effectively made a reality thanks to weak men aplenty. The strong and righteous still exist, but they have little reason to announce themselves.
It's why Rome kept feeding Christians to lions, to try to get them to go rebel so they could crush in a proper standup fight like the Carthaginians. But they just kept stubbornly forgiving the Romans and dying without a fight. Eventually the Romans got bored of it, started believing as well, and then a short while later the Goths invaded.
It was a mistake of the Councils to preserve the Old Testament. The two texts and their perspectives are fundamentally incompatible.
The two texts and their perspectives are fundamentally incompatible.
That's sort of what I'm getting at. There's an obvious schism between old testament and new testament. That's a terrible decision for established dogmatic texts. There should be a more unified vision.
Relatedly, it's been my view that the most successful way to read this mishmash bible is to rely heavily on personal interpretation. But this gets into other matters, like whether a religion should be taking the place of philosophical learning, or what the true purpose of a religious text should be.
People such as yourself (and younger me) foolishly believe that you can teach most people philosophy. Most people do not have the intellect, inclination, or patience to understand philosophy, whereas we think nothing of it and find it fascinating. We're blinded by our high intelligence.
I can't really refute that, but I wanted to share the shorthand I started using: that such people that have no capacity for self-improvement or a desire to question the world aren't really on the level of "human", they are merely "people".
I have already conceded that many people desire the authority and guidance present in religion. Others simply don't give a damn about anything greater than the present moment. I'm not convinced they're all hopeless, but I do try to rearrange my expectations in understanding the difference.
Kinda makes me wish I'd paid more attention in sunday school, because I swear there's gotta be some misunderstanding with this "turn the other cheek" business. The trope it's turned into doesn't match the other messages I've heard, so there must be some missing context.
Yet, I agree completely; this trope has been effectively made a reality thanks to weak men aplenty. The strong and righteous still exist, but they have little reason to announce themselves.
Nope.
It's why Rome kept feeding Christians to lions, to try to get them to go rebel so they could crush in a proper standup fight like the Carthaginians. But they just kept stubbornly forgiving the Romans and dying without a fight. Eventually the Romans got bored of it, started believing as well, and then a short while later the Goths invaded.
It was a mistake of the Councils to preserve the Old Testament. The two texts and their perspectives are fundamentally incompatible.
That's sort of what I'm getting at. There's an obvious schism between old testament and new testament. That's a terrible decision for established dogmatic texts. There should be a more unified vision.
Relatedly, it's been my view that the most successful way to read this mishmash bible is to rely heavily on personal interpretation. But this gets into other matters, like whether a religion should be taking the place of philosophical learning, or what the true purpose of a religious text should be.
Religion is philosophy for dummies.
People such as yourself (and younger me) foolishly believe that you can teach most people philosophy. Most people do not have the intellect, inclination, or patience to understand philosophy, whereas we think nothing of it and find it fascinating. We're blinded by our high intelligence.
I can't really refute that, but I wanted to share the shorthand I started using: that such people that have no capacity for self-improvement or a desire to question the world aren't really on the level of "human", they are merely "people".
I have already conceded that many people desire the authority and guidance present in religion. Others simply don't give a damn about anything greater than the present moment. I'm not convinced they're all hopeless, but I do try to rearrange my expectations in understanding the difference.