6 Comments | leave a comment | RSS 2.0 for this post | trackback |
Nice thoughts, Matt. I don’t always internalize the beatitudes to the extent that I should, because humility is not one of my stronger attributes. But they definitely are rich, way beyond the bumper-sticker “Jesus Was A Liberal” sentiment they evoke so often in contemporary christendom. |
Interesting insights. Great post. I wish I’d have been able to make it out to Sunstone to hear it. Unfortunately, when I tried to book my room, the nearest room available was in a hotel in Provo. I guess I’ll have to wait until the JWHA conference to get my Mormon Studies fix. Regarding the content of your post: Surely, if suffering in the flame of affliction and persecution purifies a people, then the moral precepts that Judaism developed in the 1st century (and to which Jesus gave voice in the gospels) are proof. I think that it’s a shame that people reflect so fondly on Jesus’s sayings while giving so little credit to the larger tapestry of Jewish morality of which they are an integral part. Much of this is due, no doubt, to the lies that Christ Himself propagated in His own virulent and slanderous attacks on the jews (or at least as they were recorded by those who told the story). Dan Ellsworth, I think it’s uncharacteristic of the attitude expressed in the Beatitudes for liberals to claim exclusive domain over Jesus’s moral maxims. |
I think we all suffer, though, Dan. I think Jesus was talking about everybody, giving us hope. Maybe I missed the point again. Although, I don’t find any particular elevation in suffering. I don’t think I’m better for it, but I’m still in the “oh, shit, why me?” stage. I never think of the lesson, I only think God loves everybody else more than me. I ask often, “do you ever think that God has favorites? And you’re not one of ‘em?” But I read about myself last night in a book and I think it’s a mental illness. Well, blessed are the crazy, for they will find drugs. |
“I think that it’s a shame that people reflect so fondly on Jesus’s sayings while giving so little credit to the larger tapestry of Jewish morality of which they are an integral part.” That’s interesting, Dave, but I’m not actually sure I agree. The ultimate source of the Beatitudes is as contested as virtually everything else in the Gospels (or in the Revelation); but it seems to me that if we agree to accept these words as scripture, context and source and all that is relatively irrelevant to the demands the word makes on our lives. Not that we shouldn’t approach the New Testament with open eyes - the thread about the probable lack of a First Presidency among the original apostles and other faulty NT assumptions is really important. However, what I think it should make us wary of is culturally contextualizing scripture, either in 21st century American Mormonism or first century Judea. The former - making excuses about conspicuous consumption, say - is as important to be aware of as the latter. It’s really easy to end up defining Christianity as whatever makes us feel comfortable and comforted. |
Matt B: …if we agree to accept these words as scripture, [then] context and source and all that is relatively irrelevant to the demands the word makes on our lives. I think that this is true. But you’re conditional seems to be the exact reverse of what you state in your post:
So we have two different hypotheticals: (A) In your post:
The word makes certain demands on our lives (B) In your comment
I accept the word as scripture (A) and (B) are the converse of each other. To the extant that you are claiming (A), it is a shame to deny the jews credit for their morality. To the extant that you are claiming (B), the source of the scripture doesn’t matter. |
Dave - Good eye. What I described is something of an theological ideal; something of which we always fall short - and this may apply to belief as much as to praxis. My own faith - as reflected in my description of myself, rather than the theology I teach - is somewhat based in aesthetics as much as spiritual knowledge, and thus slightly messy. Which probably means I’m not the sort of Christian I’d like to be; thus the next clause after what you quoted. |