St. Peter denying Jesus
#1
Posted 2009-April-10, 09:18
I always think of this tradition when I see Christians claim that their opposition to teaching evolution is based on science, rather than religion. Some things haven't changed much over the centuries.
The infliction of cruelty with a good conscience is a delight to moralists — that is why they invented hell. — Bertrand Russell
#2
Posted 2009-April-10, 09:30
PassedOut, on Apr 10 2009, 10:18 AM, said:
Not everyone's. I could not have told you which disciple it was that denied Jesus three times (or even recalled that there was denying done until you mentioned it).
Nor did I realize it was Good Friday until I read your post.
#3
Posted 2009-April-10, 09:36
TimG, on Apr 10 2009, 10:30 AM, said:
I remembered it when I saw my stock quotes were not moving.
The infliction of cruelty with a good conscience is a delight to moralists — that is why they invented hell. — Bertrand Russell
#4
Posted 2009-April-10, 12:54
My thoughts did not turn to St. Peter.
However, I knew it was Peter that denied knowing Jesus. "Thrice you will deny me" etc. I consider Christianity as part of my history/culture despite my rejection of the theological claims. Jews seem far more comfortable than Christians at retaining their cultural identity without getting tied up in arguments over literal interpretations of the Bible. I would like to see more of this spirit in Christianity. Of course many Christians agree. It's also Passover, btw. Mazel Tov.
I saw that church attendance was up on Ash Wednesday, and there was thought that this was linked to the economy. Maybe we could update an old saw about foxholes: There are no atheists on Wall Street during a meltdown.
I didn't know the stock exchange was closed. My attitude towards my stocks has largely been "Que sera, sera". Aka, "Wake me when there is some good news".
I wish a beautiful colored egg for each of you this Sunday.
#5
Posted 2009-April-10, 13:01
kenberg, on Apr 10 2009, 01:54 PM, said:
are there parts of the new testament you're specifically referring to, or just the crucifixion and resurrection?
#6
Posted 2009-April-10, 13:15
luke warm, on Apr 10 2009, 02:01 PM, said:
Can't speak for Ken, but here's a start:
Quote
Blessed are the merciful, for they shall receive mercy.
Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.
Blessed are those who have been persecuted for the sake of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
The beatitudes bring Jimmy Carter to mind for sure.
The infliction of cruelty with a good conscience is a delight to moralists — that is why they invented hell. — Bertrand Russell
#7
Posted 2009-April-10, 14:08
kenberg, on Apr 10 2009, 01:54 PM, said:
Hmm, although I was raised in a Christian household and regularly attended church (and Sunday School), I do not consider Christianity to be a part of my cultural identity.
My wife, who was raised in a Jewish household and regularly attended Temple and went to Hebrew School, probably does consider Judaism to be part of her cultural identity even though she has also rejected religion.
I imagine there are a few reasons for this, but that the primary one is that Jews are a minority. As such, their communities are more close knit and there is more of an us vs. them attitude, not in a confrontational way, perhaps more in a way of pride in community achievement.
There is an Italian Heritage Center in this area; I can't think of any White Anglo-Saxon Heritage Center in the area.
#8
Posted 2009-April-10, 16:01
PassedOut, on Apr 10 2009, 02:15 PM, said:
luke warm, on Apr 10 2009, 02:01 PM, said:
Can't speak for Ken, but here's a start:
Quote
Blessed are the merciful, for they shall receive mercy.
Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.
Blessed are those who have been persecuted for the sake of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
The beatitudes bring Jimmy Carter to mind for sure.
yeah, but carter was only human ... but i'm not sure that's what ken was talking about
#9
Posted 2009-April-10, 17:22
luke warm, on Apr 10 2009, 02:01 PM, said:
kenberg, on Apr 10 2009, 01:54 PM, said:
are there parts of the new testament you're specifically referring to, or just the crucifixion and resurrection?
Neither of the above. Until I got into the WC, I have had an almost fifty year hiatus in thinking about such things at all. So don't expect brilliant commentary here. But I'll give you my thoughts.
In pre-adolescence I learned many things. Columbus thought the world was round, everyone else (the poor fools) thought it was flat. George Washington chopped down a cherry tree and confessed to his father, saying "I cannot tell a lie". I also learned some things by rote. The Gettysburg address. The Apostle's Creed. I can still pretty much recite them, with a few glitches.
In adolescence I began to learn differently. Actually, the King of Portugal was well aware that the world was round and he refused to finance Columbus because he felt, correctly, that Columbus had seriously understated the distance involved. The cherry tree story is just that, a story. I also learned that skepticism about Columbus and about the cherry tree was treated differently than skepticism about the content of the Apostle's Creed. This latter sort of skepticism put my soul in mortal danger.
It's my totally unproven, maybe unprovable, opinion that Christianity loses a fair number of followers to this "my way or the highway" approach. Really "my way or the fires of hell". No one likes to be bullied. So I walked away. If the minister believes skepticism will lead to damnation then you can't fault him for saying so, but I'm outta there.
I have no particular opinion on any particular event in the Bible. Well, that's an exaggeration. Virgin births and rising from the dead are not up for serious consideration with me. I am not going to debate such things, I simply don't believe it and that's that. But mostly I just don't care for the whole approach. People tell me I have to believe, or say that I believe, things that strike me as unlikely. No thanks.
I won't be debating my skepticism or asking you to defend your faith. If ever I were to return to the fold, and don't hold your breath, it would be based on the wonder of the universe, not logical argument.
#10
Posted 2009-April-10, 20:00
I have yet to hear a single scientific explanation stated with the condition that "It's a matter of faith" or "Neutrons move in mysterious ways".
I prefer the truthful "we don't know" over the "we know because we were told - for a 10% surcharge, we'll tell you, too".
#11
Posted 2009-April-10, 21:18
#12
Posted 2009-April-11, 04:33
Quote
I guess so, more people without a job means more people with time to go to church.
Quote
I don't get this one. My stocks will plummet just as well as yours in a meltdown.
#14
Posted 2009-April-11, 08:18
jonottawa, on Apr 10 2009, 10:18 PM, said:
I assume that they mean Deists rather than Diests, but it is an interesting collection of views. Asimov's "I don't have the evidence to prove that God doesn't exist, but I so strongly suspect that he doesn't that I don't want to waste my time" pretty much sums up my approach over my adult life.
As with many things, I wouldn't want my life to depend on every quote being verifiable but we can always hope. Or take it on faith.
#15
Posted 2009-April-13, 21:47
TimG, on Apr 10 2009, 03:08 PM, said:
I imagine there are a few reasons for this, but that the primary one is that Jews are a minority. As such, their communities are more close knit and there is more of an us vs. them attitude, not in a confrontational way, perhaps more in a way of pride in community achievement.
I think it may also be because we've been persecuted for so much of our history.
You don't even have to be a minority. There's a feminist movement because woman have been subjugated in most societies, but woman aren't a minority (they're actually a slight majority).