nodAmanaV wrote:
140:8.10 (1580.5) Jesus was not, therefore, a political reformer. He did not come to reorganize the world; even if he had done this, it would have been applicable only to that day and generation. Nevertheless, he did show man the best way of living, and no generation is exempt from the labor of discovering how best to adapt Jesus’ life to its own problems. But never make the mistake of identifying Jesus’ teachings with any political or economic theory, with any social or industrial system.
140:8.13 (1580.8] He made it clear that indiscriminate kindness may be blamed for many social evils. The following day Jesus definitely instructed Judas that no apostolic funds were to be given out as alms except upon his request or upon the joint petition of two of the apostles. In all these matters it was the practice of Jesus always to say, “Be as wise as serpents but as harmless as doves.” It seemed to be his purpose in all social situations to teach patience, tolerance, and forgiveness.
140:8.18 (1581.5) Jesus would make all men Godlike and then stand by sympathetically while these sons of God solve their own political, social, and economic problems. It was not wealth that he denounced, but what wealth does to the majority of its devotees. On this Thursday afternoon Jesus first told his associates that “it is more blessed to give than to receive.”
nodAmanaV wrote:
140:8.21 (1582.2) Jesus had little to say about the social vices of his day; seldom did he make reference to moral delinquency. He was a positive teacher of true virtue. He studiously avoided the negative method of imparting instruction; he refused to advertise evil. He was not even a moral reformer. He well knew, and so taught his apostles, that the sensual urges of mankind are not suppressed by either religious rebuke or legal prohibitions. His few denunciations were largely directed against pride, cruelty, oppression, and hypocrisy.
Just get with God.
3:2.2 (46.6) Within the bounds of that which is consistent with the divine nature, it is literally true that “with God all things are possible.”
140:8.19 (1581.6) 5. Personal religion. You, as did his apostles, should the better understand Jesus’ teachings by his life. He lived a perfected life on Urantia, and his unique teachings can only be understood when that life is visualized in its immediate background. It is his life, and not his lessons to the twelve or his sermons to the multitudes, that will assist most in revealing the Father’s divine character and loving personality.
196:1.3 (2090.4) Of all human knowledge, that which is of greatest value is to know the religious life of Jesus and how he lived it.
Thank you for the quotes.fanofVan wrote:
Wasn't Jesus social reform non-violent? And Ghandi's? And MLK's? There was violence attended upon these social reformers but the reform which came was not favorable to the source of the violence, no?
Wrong again!
Was Jesus a social reformer? And thank you for admitting to the violence. There is a price to be paid. Jesus was a willing subject to the violence. The others would have been content for others to suffer for the cause instead. And suffer they did. Jesus admitted that he did not come to bring peace, the others were fools to think they could.
fanofVan wrote:
I am quite confused regarding your position on women's status among primitives and how radical you find full equal standing as though this is some revolutionary and anti-evolutionary development when it is but the way of the universe - the natural order and the inevitability of progress.
I have no position on women's status, primitive or modern. As a man, I stand beside them as spiritual equals.
fanofVan wrote:
You speak of depriving individuals control over their own choices by the elimination of all choices - just say no, eh?
Saying "no" is a free will choice. Just as is saying "yes". These are our free will choices. We must live with our free will choices and suffer their consequences; and I don't mean maybe, baby.
fanofVan wrote:
I'd appreciate some text supporting your claim that "the goal is self governing individuals". On what world and in what universe??!! Seriously....what book are you reading?
Why quote when I can say it in one word, Havona.
fanofVan wrote:
Civilization does not form and cannot exist without coordination and cooperation of the body of self governing individuals and the governance of those who are not self governing- the two are not oppositional nor contradictory - obviously. You would then be a "holy anarchist"?
Individual maturity results in combined efforts for the common good and this is our destiny but evolutionary experience brings less than ideal results, especially early on.
Why then, keep stating the obvious?
fanofVan wrote:
Are you really going to attack Gabriel again??? What a dead horse.....but beat away on that corpse if you wish.
Why project attack when no such attack is present?
fanofVan wrote:
Oh to be so displeased and suspicious of everything. A pity really. Any good news or joy to share?? Is there any doubt to our destiny as the Shrine of Nebadon? Maybe it will all work out after all, no? Granny always said everything will be alright in the end...if it's not alright, then it's not the end. Lighten up Brother.
I will borrow the quote provided by nodAmanaV.
nodAmanaV wrote:
140:8.21 (1582.2) Jesus had little to say about the social vices of his day; seldom did he make reference to moral delinquency. He was a positive teacher of true virtue. He studiously avoided the negative method of imparting instruction; he refused to advertise evil. He was not even a moral reformer. He well knew, and so taught his apostles, that the sensual urges of mankind are not suppressed by either religious rebuke or legal prohibitions. His few denunciations were largely directed against pride, cruelty, oppression, and hypocrisy.
Do you pity Jesus for his denunciations against pride, cruelty, oppression and hypocrisy? I can be as positive as the next person but we are on the topic of eugenics and abortion and what TUB infers about it.
Any racial pride out there?
Is there any cruelty to the unborn?
Is there oppression of the inferior class by the superior class?
Does the phrase, "for the common good" smack of hypocrisy?