Should we hold the prophets in contempt?

[marco]

Alexander the Great was perhaps the greatest military genius of all time. Caesar subdued the fierce Gauls and helped to make the vast Roman Empire efficient. Leonardo da Vinci was a superb inventor and a remarkable painter. Archimedes wrote to Eratosthenes an explanation of his scientific method that was centuries ahead if his time. Jesus wept.

Lot offered his daughter for sexual gratification to men outside his house. Noah got drunk and idiotically cursed his son just for giggling at his nakedness. Abraham told folk that when God spoke to him he was commanded to murder his son. God implausibly needed a human to tell the bad citizens of Nineveh how bad they were and to accomplish this he put Jonah into the belly of a big fish or a whale, as one might expect a god to do. Daniel the dreamer is entertained by lions. The Romans tested this divine trick and unfortunately the lions in the amphitheatres goobled up the would-be Daniels. And of ccourse somewhere on earth we had a "garden" with all sorts of fruit unknown today and in it a man crawls around hiding from God, who shouts: "I can see you. I can see you."



What is the best way to deal with these prophets? They make us smile but is there any case for taking them seriously?

And why is it that some people, even today when we have telephones and aeroplanes, still think Noah - well over 500 years old! - built a boat to rival the Titanic using not steel plating but something called gopher wood?

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 1 by marco]

I don't have contempt for anyone with the exception of Satan and his demons. The bible Prophets were imperfect humans with human weaknesses, while some people look down there noses on others unless they are perfect, Jesus taught Christians not to have contempt for sinners. I supoose modern day Phaisees will be eagre to judge others if they have a drinking problem, make questonable decisions or cede to fear ... Its not a matter of condoning or excusing bad behaviour its a matter of accepting that the the projectory of someones life can be good despite faults and weaknesses. I recall a certain traveling teacher warning ...Judge not lest we be judged.

... we should remember Matthew:

Matthew 7:1-3 (KJV)

Judge not, that ye be not judged.

For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

I recall a recent bible lecture about not "freezing people I time" meaning not to take one action or a series of actions of a person without allowing that they may well have subsequently grown and changed. Noah is recorded as being drunk on al least one occassion, did the subsequent tragic events bring him to his senses? Lot made some very questionable decisions that indirectly played at least a part in the loss of a family member and evidently contributed to his children's low moral standards. Did he regret? Did he put his house in order.

So no, I don't think it is healthy or reasonable to hold the bible Prophets in contempt regardless of whether we believe we would have made better decisions in their place. I believe it is best to glean what is good and positive from their actions, and leave "contempt" for those that feel comfortable with such a worldview.







JW
RELATED POSTS

Did Job rebel against God and join Satan in doing evil?
viewtopic.php?p=1098209#p1098209

Was JOB perfect?
viewtopic.php?p=753100#p753100

Was Noah perfect?
viewtopic.php?p=974937#p974937

Was Noah a Christian?
viewtopic.php?p=1089393#p1089393

To learn more please go to other posts related to ...

NOAH, THE PROPHETS and ... THE FLOOD OF NOAH'S DAY

[marco]

I don't have contempt for anyone with the exception of Satan and his demons.

That is commendably magnanimous but I think we are obliged to point out wrong doing when we see it. Many of us are called upon to judge the work of others - students, for instance - and should we use silence we are not doing our job. Jesus saw flaws in the Pharisees and didn't hesitate to condemn.

The bible Prophets were imperfect humans with human weaknesses, while some people look down there noses on others unless they are perfect, Jesus taught Christians not to have contempt for sinners.

Jesus didn't always act according to his precepts. The Biblical prophets are read as examples; they are held in high esteem. Obviously they are flesh and blood but if they are advertised as being next to divinity we are entitled to expect the best from them. We don't get it. Instead we are treated to tales that strain the credulity of a child. We are surely justified in treating these jesters with the scorn they merit in that they talk as though they are favoured when their actions suggest they are intellectually challenged.

However, if you paint them as sinners, silly and befuddled, of no special worth, then I suppose they merit a modicum of pity rather than scorn.

[The Tanager]

The Bible is full of stories of God coming into the lives of those who mess up and offering grace. That is the gist of the Biblical message. It's not giving humans examples to try to live up to on their own power, but showing humans can't do it without God. "It" being living as they were intended, as what is truly abundant life-giving life for humans, in relationship with God; I'm not saying that non-Christians can't be moral. We mess the world up at times. God pursues us in spite of this. Alexander and the other examples you gave had their mess-ups as well. Alexander the Great is said to have mutilated and executed his rival to the Persian throne, Bessus. He killed others out of paranoia. He killed out of anger. He was plagued by drunkenness. All the others have not so remarkable parts about them as well.

As to taking the Biblical stories seriously, that is a different question than whether we take them as literal history or metaphor. And each story must be taken on its own merit. For many stories, I do not think it does even matter whether it is taken as literal history or not.

[SallyF]

[Replying to post 2 by JehovahsWitness]

I believe it is best to glean what is good and positive from their actions,

So, we are to pick and choose which bits of the supposed "Word of God" we follow ?


Who decides what is good and positive in a collection of human writings not a soul ever demonstrates came from Jehovah in the first place ...?

[SallyF]

[Replying to post 4 by The Tanager]

For many stories, I do not think it does even matter whether it is taken as literal history or not.

What would the criteria be for choosing which of the stories in the so-called "Word of God" are to be taken literally ?

Given that some Christians only take some stories literally, does this mean that they are acknowledging that quantities of the so-called "Word of God" are human-written fantasies ?

[SallyF]

[Replying to post 1 by marco]

What is the best way to deal with these prophets? They make us smile but is there any case for taking them seriously?

For me, gods reflect the attitudes of the mythographers/propagandists/prophets writing the so-called "scriptures" of whichever god they adhere to.

For me, the genocidal, misanthropic, bigoted Jehovah of the biblical "scriptures" gives me nothing but contempt for the "prophets" who wrote "His Word". So, in that way, I take them very seriously.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 2 by JehovahsWitness]

I believe it is best to glean what is good and positive from their actions,

So, we are to pick and choose which bits of the supposed "Word of God" we follow ?

Hello Sally,

Thank you for your question. The answer is, no, as one of Jehovah's Witnesses I believe the bible is the word of God and no part of it is to be considered disposable. The descriptions of the weaknesses of its prophets are, I believe 100% accurate descriptions of their actions and weaknesses and as such there is much that we can learn from the perfectly accurate account. We can glean what is positive from even a negative account, in that not only does it help us to see what not to do but it often demonstrates Gods love, mercy and underserved kindness towards sinners.

To illustrate: The bible speaks about king David (who was we believe both a king and a Prophet) committing adultery. This we believe is a historical and 100% accurate account which must not be ignored or discarded. Of course the lesson from this account is not, in my opinion, that we should do the same and commit adultery. God condemned and punished David for his act, so the value of the account lies in recognising what NOT to do. God also chose to forgive David, so the account also demonstrates Jehovah's great mercy.

I believe God can use imperfect people to achieve His perfect aims, indeed from that point of view for me that is what makes the bible so remarkably precious, it show what God can do, even using imperfect humans.

Thank you again for your question, I hope my answer has been of help.



JW




RELATED POSTS

How do we know the bible (canon) is the word of God?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 255#840255

Why are there so many translations of the bible?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 791#851791

How do Jehovah's Witnesses view the bible?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 125#873125

Go to other posts related to SIN, FORGIVENESS and ...REDEMPTION

[SallyF]

[Replying to post 2 by JehovahsWitness]

I believe it is best to glean what is good and positive from their actions,

So, we are to pick and choose which bits of the supposed "Word of God" we follow ?

Hello Sally,

Thank you for your question. The answer is, no, as one of Jehovah's Witnesses I believe the bible is the word of God and no part of it is to be considered disposable. The descriptions of the weaknesses of its prophets are, I believe 100% accurate descriptions of their actions and weaknesses and as such there is much that we can learn from the perfectly accurate account. We can glean what is positive from even a negative account, in that not only does it help us to see what not to do but it often demonstrates Gods love, mercy and underserved kindness towards sinners.

To illustrate: The bible speaks about king David (who was we believe both a king and a Prophet) committing adultery. This we believe is a historical and 100% accurate account which must not be ignored or discarded. Of course the lesson from this account is not, in my opinion, that we should do the same and commit adultery. God condemned and punished David for his act, so the value of the account lies in recognising what NOT to do. God also chose to forgive David, so the account also demonstrates Jehovah's great mercy.

I believe God can use imperfect people to achieve His perfect aims, indeed from that point of view for me that is what makes the bible so remarkably precious, it show what God can do, even using imperfect humans.

Thank you again for your question, I hope my answer has been of help.



JW




RELATED POSTS

How do we know the bible (canon) is the word of God?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 255#840255

Why are there so many translations of the bible?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 791#851791

How do Jehovah's Witnesses view the bible?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 125#873125

Go to other posts related to SIN, FORGIVENESS and ...REDEMPTION

Thank you.

I find it highly significant that you did not address my second question:

Who decides what is good and positive in a collection of human writings not a soul ever demonstrates came from Jehovah in the first place ...?

[Aetixintro]

[Replying to post 1 by marco]

At least the authors, call them prophets or others, were wise enough to recommend ethical rules with some plausible force, minimally, to end barbarism. That's way over the morally blind of 2019, the insane. Hah, even Atheists have problems choosing ethical rules of force because they evidently reject the Humanists, even if Humanism is a theoretical position as life view.

Please, don't throw rocks out of your own sunhouse! More so, it doesn't proceed that the 100 % true Bible. It can be that criticism arises from a false, faked Bible from somewhere. Whether this false type of criticism is presented dishonestly or not. We don't know, do we?

All this on top of critics who seem to have a (very) small heart for the Bible in the first place. Where's that charitable reading that is actually a rule of discussion and all over the academia? Sorry.