Proper Dinner Guests?

Argue for and against Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
Tcg
Savant
Posts: 8487
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2017 5:01 am
Location: Third Stone
Has thanked: 2141 times
Been thanked: 2293 times

Proper Dinner Guests?

Post #1

Post by Tcg »

.
While Jesus was dining at the house of a ruler of the Pharisees, Jesus reportedly gave this lesson:
Luke 4:12 He said also to the man who had invited him, “When you give a dinner or a banquet, do not invite your friends or your brothers or your relatives or rich neighbors, lest they also invite you in return and you be repaid. 13 But when you give a feast, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, the blind, 14 and you will be blessed, because they cannot repay you. For you will be repaid at the resurrection of the just.”
Of course many churches and other groups do an honorable job of feeding the poor and the homeless. This activity usually occurs in church basements or outside. This instruction, however, refers to when one is having their own dinner presumable at their own home.

Are friends, relatives or rich neighbors proper dinner guests?

Are followers of Jesus expected to do this today or is it one of those things like the "Rich Young Ruler" being told to sell his possessions and give to the poor which some suggest is no longer necessary?


Tcg
To be clear: Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods.

- American Atheists


Not believing isn't the same as believing not.

- wiploc


I must assume that knowing is better than not knowing, venturing than not venturing; and that magic and illusion, however rich, however alluring, ultimately weaken the human spirit.

- Irvin D. Yalom

User avatar
Tcg
Savant
Posts: 8487
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2017 5:01 am
Location: Third Stone
Has thanked: 2141 times
Been thanked: 2293 times

Re: Proper Dinner Guests?

Post #11

Post by Tcg »

TRANSPONDER wrote: Wed Nov 10, 2021 5:12 pm Now that's a very pertinent point. It's uncannily similar to 'are you doing this to please God?' To which some apologists in the past have indignantly denied this and asserted that they are doing it because it's the Right Thing to do. To which, of course, Atheism staples in the last nail of the coffin for the Morality argument: "Well, that just what atheists do, too".

So here even though the Biblebrowser might entertain social refuse to lunch knowing that they won't pay them back, isn't there the idea that 'God is going to reward me for this'? That seems to be what the passage in Luke (his own adaptation of the 'ritual cleanliness passage found in Matthew and Mark) is getting at.
The problem is that if we reject that idea that Jesus literal meant not to eat dinner with friends, relatives or rich neighbors, why should we accept the idea that he literally meant there'd be a resurrection of the just with a reward waiting? This part is figurative, but this part right next to it should be taken literally. Odd isn't it?

Of course it also presents a bit of a "the check is in the mail" situation. Obey what I say now. You won't receive a reward now, but in the next life... Imagine of one could pay for food or transportation or housing with such an arrangement.

"Hey, buddy, you got cash?"

'What I can pay with is better than cash.'

"What's better than cash?"

'A bright and rosy future after you die!'

"You got Visa?"


Tcg
To be clear: Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods.

- American Atheists


Not believing isn't the same as believing not.

- wiploc


I must assume that knowing is better than not knowing, venturing than not venturing; and that magic and illusion, however rich, however alluring, ultimately weaken the human spirit.

- Irvin D. Yalom

TRANSPONDER
Savant
Posts: 7960
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:05 am
Has thanked: 932 times
Been thanked: 3486 times

Re: Proper Dinner Guests?

Post #12

Post by TRANSPONDER »

Tcg wrote: Wed Nov 10, 2021 11:12 pm
TRANSPONDER wrote: Wed Nov 10, 2021 5:12 pm Now that's a very pertinent point. It's uncannily similar to 'are you doing this to please God?' To which some apologists in the past have indignantly denied this and asserted that they are doing it because it's the Right Thing to do. To which, of course, Atheism staples in the last nail of the coffin for the Morality argument: "Well, that just what atheists do, too".

So here even though the Biblebrowser might entertain social refuse to lunch knowing that they won't pay them back, isn't there the idea that 'God is going to reward me for this'? That seems to be what the passage in Luke (his own adaptation of the 'ritual cleanliness passage found in Matthew and Mark) is getting at.
The problem is that if we reject that idea that Jesus literal meant not to eat dinner with friends, relatives or rich neighbors, why should we accept the idea that he literally meant there'd be a resurrection of the just with a reward waiting? This part is figurative, but this part right next to it should be taken literally. Odd isn't it?

Of course it also presents a bit of a "the check is in the mail" situation. Obey what I say now. You won't receive a reward now, but in the next life... Imagine of one could pay for food or transportation or housing with such an arrangement.

"Hey, buddy, you got cash?"

'What I can pay with is better than cash.'

"What's better than cash?"

'A bright and rosy future after you die!'

"You got Visa?"


Tcg
The scenario would of course be that, when the invited pavement -dwellers are finishing their after -dinner minds, the host would reach for his wallet. The guests aren't expected to chip in or the invitation gains the host no brownie -points. If of course he tries to tell the waiter (or counter staff with the card -scanner) that if they waive the cost of the dinner they will get their reward in heaven, I should like to be advised beforehand, so I can book myself a table and come and watch.

nobspeople
Prodigy
Posts: 3187
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2020 11:32 am
Has thanked: 1510 times
Been thanked: 824 times

Re: Proper Dinner Guests?

Post #13

Post by nobspeople »

[Replying to Tcg in post #7]
How far should one take it in this case? Consider the last phrase from this quote, "For you will be repaid at the resurrection of the just.” Should this be considered a claim concerning a literal event and a literal reward?
That's one of the many, many, many issues with the bible: the inability to know when to be literal and when not to be literal. I'd say, outside of personal choice, everything should be taken metaphorically.
And I know the 'quote' is the best we have to be an actual quote, but it's not. Unless someone was there, documenting each literal word that was said. At best, it's 'someone said someone else said'. Therefore, IMO, it shouldn't be taken as a literal quote or literal.
Have a great, potentially godless, day!

TRANSPONDER
Savant
Posts: 7960
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:05 am
Has thanked: 932 times
Been thanked: 3486 times

Re: Proper Dinner Guests?

Post #14

Post by TRANSPONDER »

There used to be an old joke that did the rounds:

"I believe the Bible is literally true, cover to cover!"

"What? You believe that the sun stopped moving?"

"Yes, I believe that."

"That a donkey and a serpent spoke?"

"If the Bible says so, I believe it."

"That tombs opened and dead people walked the streets of Jerusalem?"

"If the Bible says so, it happened."

"That you should give all your money to the poor and follow Jesus?"

"Well...I always took that to be Metaphorical.."

It's one worth remembering.

User avatar
Tcg
Savant
Posts: 8487
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2017 5:01 am
Location: Third Stone
Has thanked: 2141 times
Been thanked: 2293 times

Re: Proper Dinner Guests?

Post #15

Post by Tcg »

TRANSPONDER wrote: Thu Nov 11, 2021 6:41 am
Tcg wrote: Wed Nov 10, 2021 11:12 pm
TRANSPONDER wrote: Wed Nov 10, 2021 5:12 pm Now that's a very pertinent point. It's uncannily similar to 'are you doing this to please God?' To which some apologists in the past have indignantly denied this and asserted that they are doing it because it's the Right Thing to do. To which, of course, Atheism staples in the last nail of the coffin for the Morality argument: "Well, that just what atheists do, too".

So here even though the Biblebrowser might entertain social refuse to lunch knowing that they won't pay them back, isn't there the idea that 'God is going to reward me for this'? That seems to be what the passage in Luke (his own adaptation of the 'ritual cleanliness passage found in Matthew and Mark) is getting at.
The problem is that if we reject that idea that Jesus literal meant not to eat dinner with friends, relatives or rich neighbors, why should we accept the idea that he literally meant there'd be a resurrection of the just with a reward waiting? This part is figurative, but this part right next to it should be taken literally. Odd isn't it?

Of course it also presents a bit of a "the check is in the mail" situation. Obey what I say now. You won't receive a reward now, but in the next life... Imagine of one could pay for food or transportation or housing with such an arrangement.

"Hey, buddy, you got cash?"

'What I can pay with is better than cash.'

"What's better than cash?"

'A bright and rosy future after you die!'

"You got Visa?"


Tcg
The scenario would of course be that, when the invited pavement -dwellers are finishing their after -dinner minds, the host would reach for his wallet. The guests aren't expected to chip in or the invitation gains the host no brownie -points. If of course he tries to tell the waiter (or counter staff with the card -scanner) that if they waive the cost of the dinner they will get their reward in heaven, I should like to be advised beforehand, so I can book myself a table and come and watch.
It also remind me of a story Bill Murray's character, Carl Spackler, told a fellow caddy in Caddy Shack. Carl was caddying for the Dalai Lama and was afraid the Dalai Lama was going to stiff him after the 18th hole.

C.S. - “Hey, Lama, hey, how about a little something, you know, for the effort, you know.”

D.L. - “Oh, uh, there won’t be any money, but when you die, on your deathbed, you will receive total consciousness.”

C.S. - (To his fellow caddy) "So I got that goin’ for me, which is nice."

Of course not all are as gullible as Carl Spackler.


Tcg
To be clear: Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods.

- American Atheists


Not believing isn't the same as believing not.

- wiploc


I must assume that knowing is better than not knowing, venturing than not venturing; and that magic and illusion, however rich, however alluring, ultimately weaken the human spirit.

- Irvin D. Yalom

Post Reply