Re: tsunami impact on animals

In a message dated 1/12/05 7:34:56 PM Eastern Standard Time, gmurphy@raex.com
writes:
1) You would have to say more fully what you mean by a "core religious
idea" but I think some care is needed with theological use of it. One of
the most "core" of religious ideas is the belief that we save ourselves in
one way or another via our religious, ethical, &c works or qualities. &
that of course contrasts sharply with the core Christian belief that we are
saved entirely by the grace of God.

Faith and works were not part of the discussion. That is a contentious area
and I wonder why you present it. I was fleshing out an interpretation of
genesis using non-canonical texts to aid in understanding the "fall." The example I
gave was Jesus' reference in the NG texts that indicate his understanding of
the fall is identical to the nature of the fall in genesis. The core idea is
that if you are shamed by nakedness when you "fall," you will not be shamed by
nakedness when you have "arisen."
Consider genesis again:

When Adam and Eve ate the fruit from the “tree of the knowledge of good and
evil” the “eyes of both of them were opened and they discovered that they were
naked; so they stitched fig-leaves together and made loincloths… and hid
from the Lord God.” (Genesis 3: 6-7)
They have fallen and are naked, ashamed and afraid. To rise, wouldn't you
expect to have to reverse those effects?

Here is that precise reversal from the NG texts. Note the use of nakedness,
shame and fear to describe one who has entered the kingdom of God:
“When you disrobe without being ashamed… you will not be afraid."
 Notice, the NG lines do not make the idea different, nor do they clash with
it. They expand and reinforce the concept by presenting the opposite of the
fall showing clearly the reversal of its effects.
And here is a line from Corinthians with the same idea:
"...We yearn to have our heavenly habitation put on over this one - in the
hope that, being thus clothed, we shall not find ourselves naked." 2Cor.:5

Why is the NG line important? Psychologically, ontological anxiety is fear of
death. To make the sacrifice of a Jesus Christ one has to give up the fear of
death, the ontological anxiety that ONLY man endures due to his self
consciousness. You must have a sense of self in order to be ashamed of your "self."
Jesus is describing a state without shame and without fear, so we can infer that
the self must be given up and self consciousness must be lost in order to
regain the kingdom. If you are not self-conscious, you do not make conscious
decisions, and you must live intuitively or instinctively. It is the only other
alternative to self consciousness. Jesus says he does. He says the law is
written on his heart which is the same as saying he does the will of the Father
intuitively. Now, I can draw the conclusion that when genesis talks about a former
state before the fall, genesis is talking about the instinct of animals who
always do the will of God because they do not make conscious decisions. They
behave instinctively while man must learn the precepts of the Law because he has
eaten from the tree of knowledge and must learn the Law since he does not
behave instinctively. Once the Law is written on a man's heart, he again does
God's will intuitively. He must do so in the face of death without fear. When he
can do that there will be no shame even in his nakedness.

2) Having said that - sure, there are significant influences of the modes
of expression of other faiths on Jewish & Christian throught & scripture.
(E.g., the LXX translation of Gen.1:2, in which the earth was "invisible" -
/aoratos/ - may show Zoroastrian influence - & probably in turn influences
Heb.11:3.) But the fact that an idea is found in a lot of other religions
doesn't mean it's compatible with Christianity.

But when the idea is found in an earlier religion, with a historical route
that shows there was contact between the earlier religion and the later one,
then the later religion may be based on the core idea of the earlier one. This is
a difficult thing to accept for IDers, but when you go back as early as you
can, you find that the primary religious idea is the self sacrifice and Jesus
is the only central religious historical figure I know of to have deliberately
demonstrated it which raises him above the great religious figures of the
world rationally, not because I am a believer. I have made it impossible not to
believe it by rationalizing it. The Buddha for example, only intuited the self
sacrifice.

3) At least as far as Christianity is concerned, I wouldn't say that the
battle between light & darkness is not a "core theological idea" but an
important metaphor used to express theological concepts. Where it's most
prominent, in the 4th Gospel, verses like Jn.1:5 clearly aren't to be taken
literally.

Shalom
George

Some of the OT should not be taken literally, (so say the kabbalists who say
genesis is allegorical). We needn't debate whether or not dualism is a core
idea. I myself find it important. The 6 days of creation, the earthly paradise
and the ruse of the serpent over our primal parents, the punishment of our
primal parents (Adam and Eve), the last judgment, the apocalypse when the sons of
light conquer the sons of darkness and the resurrection of the spirit and the
flesh all can be found in the Bundadesh, according to the Zend Avesta the
oldest religious book of the Parsees, (present day Zoroastrians) and there is
evidence that the law book of Ezra that was read in Jerusalem upon the return of
the exiles was deliberately imbued with Zoroastrian ideas. The sons of light
and the sons of darkness are the good and evil of the tree of the knowledge of
good and evil who will fight until the sons of light (we pray) overcome the
sons of darkness. It is the dualism of good and evil that is personified in these
"sons."

My paper True Religion ignores the historical route of these core ideas to
focus on the ideas themselves, rationalizing genesis by interpreting the
allegory the way it was meant to be interpreted, in a rational way that helps me
guide my personal behavior until the right behaviors are "written on my heart" and
I can live intuitively without shame and fear in the face of God.
Let's look at the ontology. If we are a subject in a world of objects and
give up our selves (our subjectivity) all that is left are the objects since the
subject is gone. Seem far out?

“In heaven, however, no creature will stand between God and the soul. He
himself will be the immediate object of its vision. Scripture and theology tell us
that the blessed see God face to face.”

Notice the word "object" in this Catholic encyclopedia description of heaven.
When the creature is gone (your self) only the soul is left and God becomes
the immediate object of your vision. Get yourself (the subject) out of the way
and see God face to face. So, the psychology works and I can see it in the OT,
the NT and the Gospel of Thomas. I can also see it in Buddhism and the Vedas.
This particular core idea of the self sacrifice is a universal found in all
the major religions. Universals usually have a scientific basis since science
holds true no matter where you are. In my paper True Religion I reveal the
science in genesis, because that's what is there.

rich
Received on Wed Jan 12 21:24:32 2005