Bible gripes
May. 8th, 2023 10:57 amLuke 9:50 talks about an exorcist and putative rival to Jesus whom the Apostles want to stop, but Jesus tells them, "Whoever is not against you is with you." But not too much later in Luke 11:23, Jesus says, "Whoever is not with me is against me." Meshugah.
Luke 13:26 echoes a passage in Matthew (and maybe Mark?) about how disciples should be ready to give up their whole extended families for Jesus, but as if that weren't creepy enough, the one in Luke goes so far as to demand that disciples hate "life itself". I can't get on board with a religion that's anti-joy. Screw all those guys for that, and at least to some degree Buddha & co. too. This is where the Jews and, yes, even the Muslims have an edge: they recognize ordinary human needs as, well, needs.
The Parable of the Ten Pounds in Luke, called the Parable of the Talents in Matthew, looks to modern eyes like an excuse for the prosperity gospel. Even if that's not how it's meant, it's not the Gospels' finest passage.
Luke 20:27-40 is Jesus arguing why resurrection is a thing. It all sounds very medieval, or maybe Talmudic. The New Testament has two faces: there's theological, supernatural, and prophetic nonsense on the one hand, and a heartfelt plea for better ethics on the other. It's a pity there isn't more of the latter.
Luke is definitely the clearest, most cogent, and just plain best writer among the Evangelists. Maybe that's why he's pissing me off more than the others: his meaning is more transparent. I think I understand now what![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
tylik meant about the New Testament being irritating.
Luke 13:26 echoes a passage in Matthew (and maybe Mark?) about how disciples should be ready to give up their whole extended families for Jesus, but as if that weren't creepy enough, the one in Luke goes so far as to demand that disciples hate "life itself". I can't get on board with a religion that's anti-joy. Screw all those guys for that, and at least to some degree Buddha & co. too. This is where the Jews and, yes, even the Muslims have an edge: they recognize ordinary human needs as, well, needs.
The Parable of the Ten Pounds in Luke, called the Parable of the Talents in Matthew, looks to modern eyes like an excuse for the prosperity gospel. Even if that's not how it's meant, it's not the Gospels' finest passage.
Luke 20:27-40 is Jesus arguing why resurrection is a thing. It all sounds very medieval, or maybe Talmudic. The New Testament has two faces: there's theological, supernatural, and prophetic nonsense on the one hand, and a heartfelt plea for better ethics on the other. It's a pity there isn't more of the latter.
Luke is definitely the clearest, most cogent, and just plain best writer among the Evangelists. Maybe that's why he's pissing me off more than the others: his meaning is more transparent. I think I understand now what
tylik meant about the New Testament being irritating.
