IV.
Christian-Political Catechism
/ „I'm
not a grapevine branch, and you're not fish.” /
1.
It is not hard to believe in God according to Monotheism, Polytheism,
Panentheism or Pantheism, by understanding philosophical arguments or
witnessing wonders. (Don't exclude the possibility of what can
possibly be proven true, and don't believe what can possibly be
disproven.) However, the essence of religions is not this, but
instead, the real or supposed will of God and the opportunities
offered by him, and also the image of the ideal state as the Kingdom
of God, and preparations for its realization.
2.
Good conduct in school, respect of the law, eco-friendly lifestyle
and vote for social justice can be approached by Philosophy as the
will of God. Religions, however, tend to approach even those parts of
God's will and his opportunities which are harder to realize by
thinking… such are the questions of eternal life, the causes of
wonders, or the ideal form of state.
3.
Religious communities may regard not only universal commandments as
the will of God, but they can also include ethical commands that are
only fit to the members of the given community. Thus, for the
advantages of belonging to the community (as an opportunity), they
have to make sacrifices, for example, according to the biblical Old
Testament or New Testament (or „New Covenant”), and thereby
increasing the chances of survival for the community. It is also
possible that Sunnite Islam has to pray facing towards Mecca for this
reason.
4.
The source of Christian faith may be the Bible in its original
languages, the unbroken traditions (like the Credo) of the Roman
Catholic and the Greek Catholic Churches, as well as the Orthodox,
Coptic and other Eastern Churches (and maybe the Anglican Church),
and all the historical sources and artifacts related to them, and
History showing that God supported Christianity. If there were a lot
of believers, we could deduct that this had to have some reason, so
we simply believed in what the majority held, as we did with the rest
of History. Apart from this, there could be people who could witness
God's wonders related to Christianity, and this was the main thing
which made them believers.
5.
Christianity tells a story about the Jesus of Nazareth going to be
successful in teaching and healing (and casting out demons) in a
proactive way, and to make his environment (and thereby the world)
better. During this activity, he claimed to commit less of those sins
which are usually commited by the rich and the politicians (i. e.
hipocrisy and injustice), so he claimed to commit those sins less
than the other people or the Pharisees. In spite of this, his
activity came with risks, and for the promotion of his teachings he
had to pay with his life. Jesus accepted the risk of death
voluntarily in order to change his environment, and thereby the
world, as he is thought to have passed his 30th year, and probably
suffered a lot before that. The authorities condemned him to death,
because he considered himself too great and talked about himself in a
way that looked like blasphemy. He was crucified, and according to
the Bible, he died and his corpse was put in a tomb, but (according
to the Bible) he resurrected from death in three days (and this is a
central motif of Christian faith).
6.
According to the story, the causes of Jesus of Nazareth's death were
the laws of the Roman Empire, as well as the laws of the Jewish
people and the accumulated sins of humankind. Thus his followers got
disappointed in the Jewish (and probably also the Roman) laws, as
well as in the sins of humankind, and it seems that God's wonders
also supported the changing of these, at least in a way by which
Jesus's disciples got his spirit. Instead of the many compulsory
things of the Jewish religion Jesus Christ and his followers created
a new spiritual system based on faith (and probably on the story of
Noah). This was to lessen the sins caused by bureaucracy and by the
multitude of laws, and instead of them, they focused on love
(charity) and on local churches similar to ancient communities, where
the members of a community knew one another very well, and even their
sins were common for the public confessions.
7.
Thus, it seems that Jesus of Nazareth could conquer for the thorough
understanding of things, and he could really be much more talented
than his contemporaries. As a shell crystallizes a marble, the world
crystallized the Word inside Jesus Christ's human brain, i. e. the
teaching that he promoted. Whenever speaking about the Son of God, we
probably liken it not to the shell (or person, or destiny), but to
the marble, which could be (partially or entirely) passed to another
man, and improved like the „science of apostles”.
8.
For
Christians, the Christian knowledge seemed to be more valuable than
to spread it
for
free, thereby putting others (like their enemies) in a more
advantageous situation (than themselves). Even according to Jesus:
„Give not that which is holy unto the
dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample
them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.”
(Matthew 7:6). However, there were no copyright laws
that
time (and God has probaby seen, that it was good), so the teaching
was
hidden in the New Testament of the Bible (Matthew
13:10-15),
and they kept the secrets of its
interpretation (and probably also
passed
it to the bishops of the Roman Catholic Church, who live in
celibacy). It is also possible that this knowledge does no good when
going into unauthorized
minds,
as one of the Ten Commandments says:
„Thou
shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain; for the Lord
will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.”
(Exodus
20:7.) Even
today, the deep medical books written for physicians
are not promoted to the general public, as one man's medicine can act
as a poison to another one. It
is also imaginable that Christianity recruited (baptized, dipped)
people in a similar way as the mafia does, and then the knowers of
secrets mixed/mingled with the recruited people.
9.
Based on the description of the Bible, it seems that Christianity was
born in a huge quantity of suffering, and many teachings of Jesus
Christ may refer to this, and do not aim to tell any secret wisdom.
He mainly wanted to gather those people who suffered a lot themselves
(e.g. those who had to hate their fathers and mothers for their sins,
or who had no food except that given to them by Jesus Christ), so
that the motivation of his disciples should be strong enough to
achieve the common goals, for the change. It has to be acknowledged
that part of these goals were political (but probably not with a
purpose of governing), and maybe this was the reason of their being
supported by wonders (like Julius Caesar was). Jesus Christ tried to
do a lot of good to more and more people, so that he could get their
gratitude (with interest) according to the commandment: „Love your
brethren as yourself”, and thereby influence even more people.
Maybe this was even worth it for them, but it seems that to the age
of Renaissance this conquest preparing for the Apocalypse, and
suggesting the search for the more sustainable Kingdom of God to
others, came to its end, and became harmful instead. Otherwise, Power
usually did not consider the lot of poor activists' movement good,
but it seems that the followers of Jesus Christ (sooner or later)
managed to compromise with it: in case of the Jews, by accepting
crucifixion (or its appearance) and thereby excluding governmental
claims and civil war, and in case of Romans, by adding more Catholic
popular elements to the movement (like the Trinity, as the
Triumvirate), and in case of later kings, by making the confessions
secret.
10.
Jesus
Christ (or
at least, the apostle Paul) aimed
to lessen the number of laws in order to make it easier to comply
with them perfectly. Apart from that, he suggested to
his disciples the
search for the Kingdom of God, on which he probably meant partly an
Utopistic Earthly or worldly empire (Luke 1:33 … „and
of his kingdom there shall be no end”),
and partly its spiritual expansion,
which can exist in space and time, and maybe in other dimensions
hidden to the average people, but can any time appear by revelation
(or apocalypse). Thus it seems that he did not consider only
that
model good where he is the head, and his disciples are the parts of
the body, but he also wanted to use the heads of his disciples, and
he did not sit passively either. This comes from the wisdom saying
that
the Lord should take attention to his servants, and in this respect
he is not entirely free, but becomes
a servant himself, who is
interested
in
helping his servants more than not. The main use of the Kingdom of
God is probably the better political system, which diminishes the
sufferings of the people and/or increases the sustainability of the
Natural environment.
11.
The system of villeins proved to be a better system than agriculture
and industry by slaves, and this success is partly caused by
Christianity and the Kingdom of God. It is hard to do agriculture
without a family, so the system of villeins is built around families.
When there is no family, then cooperatives can also be formed, which
are like religious orders of monks, and their slogan is „Ora et
labora” (Pray and work). (By the way, it is possible that the monks
did intellectual work instead.) Free smallholder families, artisanal
handicrafts in towns, together with producer cooperatives of
restricted sizes can probably form the most humane economic system,
which would surely be better than the lower 50% of the jobs in
capitalism (like work in night shifts, too many trade secrets, etc).
12.
In
the medieval times nobles were usually soldiers or politicians, and
for this risky business they got their rights (as feudum).
However,
since about the Industrial Revolution the justice for the inherited
riches is not inherited together with the riches (according to the
slogan „the land is of those who protect it”), so the system
became unstable and problematic. (The
nobles abused their powers and/or they did not fulfill their duties
as soldiers, which could easily happen as villeins
became nobles and
nobles became villeins too rarely,
like in the caste system of
India.)
It is true that it would be better when neither real estates, nor the
rights and obligations of being a soldier were inheritable, but the
essence is this: however the political system changes, land is of
those who protect it. It is also possible that this wisdom comes from
Christianity too, from Jesus's parable of the „good
shepherd”
who owns the sheep, and that's why he takes
a risk
to
protect them instead of fleeing (John 10:11-12). Maybe even Communism
considered
this wisdom when it made the military
training compulsory for
most
of the
young people. Even
according
to the present state of the world, it does not seem favourable
to
sustainability
either that the rich enjoy life, its joys and its
riches
in an unjust manner, while the poor make sacrifices, take risks and
suffer for nearly nothing.
13.
The religions aiming to win support from the believers and conquering
by focusing on faith (also mentioning salvation) are not the original
goals of a Godly life, as they do not focus on sustainability, but on
the Apocalypse or the Armageddon, and other big changes of the
future. The organizations of priests before Jesus Christ in the
antiquity might have been better, which could be parts of the system
of the State, e.g. with teaching, judging, blessing tasks and maybe
also limiting harmful sciences, and blind faith was probably not the
condition of salvation here. It may be necessary to limit the harmful
sciences (like cloning), and this can be the reason why the
scientists accepted by the society should also be priests, otherwise
civilization may collapse for the too big advances of science.
14.
If we speak about the blessings of Christianity, then it is not
negligible that in the absence of Christianity, perhaps something
worse could fill the curiosity of the people who search for God (like
witchcraft, or polytheism which allowed human sacrifices, or Islam
which conquers by the force of the body and makes prayers towards
Mecca compulsory). It is possible that Christianity was better than
the previous Roman state religion, i. e. it was better and more
plausible than the polytheism which applied diviners or future
tellers (and it was more Catholic and general than the Mithras cult),
and that's why its existence had been justified. Also, both the Roman
state religion and Christianity seemed to be better than the
Carthagian and Celtic religions which often made human sacrifices
(however, there were killings among the gladiators independently from
religion).
15.
Founders of religions, who accomplished great things, usually meant a
blessing for one part of the people, but meant a curse for another
part of them due to the greatness of their deeds. However, generally
all of them had some excuse to do so, according to the teachings of
the given religions: Moses liberated people from slavery, the
disciples of Buddha lived on donations, Jesus was presumably
struggling against the oppression in the Roman Empire, and Muhammad
probably wanted to take revenge for the harms done by Christianity
and by Mecca in his territory.
16.
The Bible (or Christianity) shows an alloy of the Jewish culture
and the culture of the Roman Empire. The Eucharist seems to be Roman:
maybe referring to „Panem et circenses” - „Bread and circus”,
or to the king Italos mentioned by Aristotle. Aristotle mentions King
Italos (or Italus) in his work Politics, as Italos instituted a
„system of common meals” for his people, and it is also to be
known about him that the Italian Peninsula was probably named after
him (as he lived there). By the way, I don't know whether there was a
connection between the system of common meals instituted by King
Italos and the priestly service of (King) Melchizedek, about which
the apostle Paul (or maybe someone else) had written in his epistle
to the Hebrews (Hebrews 6:20-7:28), referring to the Old Testament
(Genesis 14:18-20). Thus, the Eucharist may have been traced back
even to Melchizedek. The Trinity may be related to the „god”
Triton or the Triumvirate (from the conflict of Julius Caesar and
Pompeius Magnus). The deaths of Spartacus and Socrates (as well as
the exile of Themistocles) are the prototype (or incomplete image) of
Jesus Christ's death. Diogenes and the cynic philosophers remind of
the Bible in their teachings, and of course, there are some cultural
effects made possible by the Roman Empire which can be in a cause and
effect relationship with Christianity, e.g. the Egyptian culture,
Buddhism, Greco-Roman culture, and (opportunity to know) more, and
the probable Jewish enlightenment caused by them. This way the
„Catholic” (like universal) attribute of the religion might be
better (more pertinent, more appropriate) than the „Christian”
one. Here one could also speculate that the following saying of Jesus
(Matthew 4:19):
„And
he saith unto them, Follow me, and I will make you fishers of men.”
may be
in connection with the RETIARIUS-type gladiators (equipped with a
knife, a net and a trident) invented to entertain the Romans.
According to another speculation, the Christian Chi-Rho symbol: ☧
might also refer to the centaur Kheiron (Chiron) in ancient Greek
mythology. Others relate the ancient Greek mythological figure Adonis
to Adonai, a Hebrew name for God (in James Frazer’s work „The
Golden Bough”), and Adonis is famous for dying and resurrecting (as
well as Dionysus, the „god” of wine, who might be related to the
Last Supper and the Eucharist this way).
17.
It can even be imagined that Jesus Christ, in English „Anointed
Liberator” is nothing else than the ink by which the New Testament
was written in the Aramaic and Ancient (Koine) Greek languages, and
which might also be related to Triton, a Greek sea God (like a
squid), and which might also be drunk. So, while Jesus could just be
a man, the survival of his writing (the „anointed” Jesus) can be
as sure as of a god, or a son of God, if the writing was really
inspired by God (and if it is „catholic”, or „universal”,
then in some degree it was really inspired by God, even if it's
untrue). Saint Peter might be the owner of a chalk (used for
writing), a stone coming from the island of Crete, or something like
that. Moreover, the irod rod (or iron stick) prophetized in the Bible
might be a tool used for runic writing. Maybe the apostle Paul could
make the religion so popular only by his relations with Seneca and
the emperor Nero (and the religion became more popular than the
reforms of the Pharaoh Echnaton). The statement (saying that)
„Christians set Rome on fire” can be as true as „Nero gave
commands to set fire to Rome”. The name Maria is very similar to
the latin Mario, etc. This means that there is a very concise and
deep philosophy and spirituality in the background of Christianity
with many esoteric secrets, with the summary of the philosophy,
medicine, popular stories and other lore of the given age and with
many possibilities of misinterpretation, as Jesus might be the „light
of the (ancient) world” (John 8:12).
18.
For a better understanding of Christianity, the Jewish culture of
that age is worth knowing, too, which was also having a lot of
changes. Notable persons: Hillel the Elder, Gamaliel the Elder, Bar
Kochba. Notable concepts: sanhedrin (city council), nasi (Jewish
prince, head of sanhedrin), Sukkot (holiday). Other notable things:
Citrus medica, Phoenix dactylifera (date palm and its leaves), Myrtus
(myrtle branch), Salix (willow twig), sandwich of Hillel, Kebap /
Kebab, Gyros. Thus these things can be checked in WikiPedia, for
example. Judaism is probably called Judaism because it is mainly
based on the traditions of the tribes of Juda and Benjamin (and maybe
part of the Levites) from the tribes of Israel. Apart from them, ten
tribes of Israel were lost (according to WikiPedia), and maybe
wandered towards the East, but we don't know exactly what their
further destiny was. This split goes back to the age of the Jewish
king Solomon (deemed wise by many) in „1 Kings 11:30-32”. Thus
rabbies and Levites are probably not the same.
19.
Israel, the presumed venue of the Bible occupies a special, central
place on the maps, and maybe this was seen in the antiquity too.
Thus, of the three big monotheistic religions present there (Judaism,
Christianity, and Islam) one could even be God's favourite. However,
this is not the only interesting place on the maps, as Italy looks
like New Zealand, and Great Britain looks like the Philippines, and
the shape of the Carpathian Basin looks like Australia (these
however, cannot be explained by plate tectonics like the similarities
between the coastlines of Africa and South America). Otherwise,
Australia looks more analogous to Antarctica, while Eurasia is
analogous to North America, and Africa is analogous to South America…
and it's an interesting question what causes the analogy between the
narrow lands of Suez and Panama (this might give another God argument
for us). Another Geographical curiosity in connection with the Bible
is the Garden of Eden. According to the Bible, the four rivers of the
Garden of Eden originated at one place (probably from Heaven in the
form of rain) and they did not necessarily arrive at one place, so
putting them into Mesopotamia (for the present rivers of Tigris and
Euphrates) is not surely correct. There is, however, at least one
place on the maps, Switzerland (part of the onetime „Holy Roman
Empire”) from where four big rivers originate (Inn/Danube, Rhine,
Rhone, Lago Maggiore/Po), and which flow towards different seas
(Black Sea, North Sea, Mediterranean Sea, Adriatic Sea). Maybe the
strategic value of this had inspired the lyrics of the Swiss national
anthem („God lives there”), as well as the story of the garden of
Eden… at least it can easily be imagined that the onetime writer of
the Bible was thinking about this when writing his work… from which
it may also come that it was not inspired by God in an absolute
sense, but it was inspired by a very powerful person, or alien
creature.
20.
The old Catholic Christianity tried to lessen the authority of
writing (and thus of speech and of thinking by symbols) not only in
Politics, i. e. in legal issues and Laws (by building small
communities), but a significant part of its creations materialized in
tangible things (not using well-known signs) and customs outside of
the Bible, like mosaics, crosses, organization by sacraments, Holy
Water, works of Art and mystic figures (instead of always the same
letters), clothes of the religious orders, and through other
non-trivial elements of culture even to the wine of the Mass, etc.
spread in the world, and not only transmitting always the same Bible
without forces superior to it (e.g. saints who made wonders). It is
possible that even God made the unaccompanied (on one’s own)
understanding of the Bible harder just in order to direct our
attentions to elements of Christian culture outside of the Bible
(like the Christian community itself), which might make the
understanding of Christianity much quicker. It is also worth
mentioning that Jesus Christ's (foster and/or biological) father,
Saint Joseph had the occupation of a carpenter, and this made him
able to create interesting objects, like a kite with a cross
framework (for kite-flying), or maybe a rudder (in case he was a
shipwright), which could have been similar to the Chi-Rho sign (☧),
and might have been made even for the apostles, although this is only
speculation.
21.
After the rise of the Roman Empire, the Indoeuropean and Christian
culture spread in Europe, of which the most significant exception was
the area of Hungary, and maybe it is also today. The Hungarian
language is related mostly to the languages of the Finnish
(Finno-Ugric) and Turkish people, which is well-known, but there can
be differences in the explanation of its reasons. It seems probable
that the Finno-Ugric and Turkish words got into one language after
the mixing of two more ancient nations, and together with other
loanwords (and e.g. definite articles) that appeared in History, the
Hungarian language of today came into being. According to the
official explanation, the Turkish words entered into the language in
the East, before the conquest of the Carpathian Basin by Hungarian
Tribes, but there were also a lot of opportunities for the Hungarians
in their Carpathian History, too, to mix with Turkish-language
tribes, more specifically, with Avars who lived there before the
conquest (together with Slavs), and maybe the Cumans, who helped to
populate the country after the Mongol invasion… not to mention the
Turkish people themselves in the age of Turkish occupation… The
mixing of people here (Gepids, Huns, Avars, Slavs, ancient Hungarians
from the East, Cumans, etc.) and classifying them into language
families can be (at least for Hungarians) such an interesting
research area as the History of Christianity, which was also about
meetings of peoples (e.g. Egyptian, Babylonian, Hebrew, Aramaic,
Greek, Latin, etc.), and the sign of the cross may even refer to
crossing (i. e. cross-breeding).
22.
The
success of the Hungarian conquerors of Hungary might have come from
their spiritual preparedness. For example, Arianism (that denied
Trinity) spread more quickly than the Catholic faith (of Trinity) on
the areas bordering the Roman Empire, so Arianism could be more
easily mixed with the traditions of the given people (e.g.
Shamanism), so it's possible that the Hungarian leaders converted to
the Catholic or Orthodox faith from Arianism (but it's even more
probable that they were followers of „Tengrism”, although
this might have also been influenced by some form of Christianity).
It
is also possible that the seven legendary Hungarian
chiefs (leading
the occupation of Hungary) might be a reference to the seven cardinal
sins, the seven virtues or the seven sages of ancient Greece.
Stories
of ancient Hungarians or
symbols
of their
runic writing may
contain other secrets in connection with Christianity.
23.
Some sayings of Jesus Christ look cynic rather than true. For
example:
-
„Blessed are the merciful: FOR they shall OBTAIN
mercy.” (Matthew 5:7)
Better
formulated, this can mean that, although they will have more chance
to obtain mercy than otherwise, they can generally descend in rank of
society as a result of their generous practices, and therefore they
will have more chance for getting into the need of mercy as well. The
Bible contains a lot of other sayings like this, which, as a
double-edged sword, seem to urge to do something, but spiritually
they support just the opposite direction (and this can be true for
the scolding of Pharisees as well, as the Bible reads: „As many as
I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent.” in
Revelation 3:19).
-
„Blessed are the pure in heart: FOR they shall see God.”
(Matthew 5:8)
This can
be combined with the following verse: „And he said, Thou canst not
see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live.” (Exodus
33:20). No comment.
- „…
whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the
other ALSO.” (Matthew 5:39)
This can
mean to face the problem coming from the outside, as both of one's
cheeks are visible this way.
-
„And whosoever shall compel thee
to go a mile, go with him twain.”
(Matthew
5:41)
The
executor of this commandment or advice revenges his economic loss by
getting into the suspicion of spying, so next time they would not
dare to ask him. The real spies can more easily mix in the mass this
way. (Maybe this advice is obsolete in the 21st century for
Informatics.)
- „…
what ye hear in the ear, that preach ye upon the housetops.”
(Matthew
10:27)
The
consequence of this: don't allow anybody to get close to your ears
who can whisper such things by which you can come off badly when
preaching them upon the housetops.
-
„And if thy hand offend thee, cut it
off...”
(Mark
9:43)
Although
this cannot really happen with my own hand, as I usually do not sin
against myself, so I usually regret nothing, it could take place in
the antiquity that someone cut off the hand of a „purchased slave”
thief or robber, based on the philosophy of „I am the lord on my
own land”, or „the land is of those who protect it”. Otherwise,
this verse probably means just to excommunicate those who offend us.
- „…
and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the
kingdom of heaven's sake...” (Matthew 19:12)
They
could not enter the harem otherwise… or an alternative
interpretation, that they fought for the „Kingdom of God” too
much, which had a great effect on the world, and maybe for this
reason, they had daughters like the English king Henry the VIII.
- „If
any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife,
and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also,
he cannot be my disciple.” (Luke
14:26)
This
seems to contradict the commandment of honouring our parents from the
Ten Commandments (Exodus 20:12), and also contradict a proverb of
Solomon (Proverbs 6:16-19) which says that the Lord hates the
one „that soweth discord among
brethren”.
This
verse can also mean that Jesus Christ was WORSE than those not worthy
of being
his disciples.
- „He
that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the
beginning...” (1 John 3:8)
Based on
this, the whole of the Roman Catholic Christianity (that usually says
the „mea culpa” text and undertake confessions) may be of the
devil. The apostle John, as the son of Zebedee, could take from the
ancient Greek and Latin culture when writing his „Catholic letter”,
or even from Zoroaster he could imagine the Devil as a match of God,
without it our world might not even exist, and the apostle Judas (who
wrote an epistle in the Bible) also warned of the interpretation of
the Devil as being too evil (Judas 1:9-10).
24.
It is interesting about the Ten Commandments that the different
Christian denominations and the Jews break up this part of text
(Exodus 20:2-17) into ten points differently, so the Ten Commandments
in different denominations may be somewhat different. These
commandments shall probably be broken down into points in a way that
they shall be (able to be) easily enumerated on the five plus five
fingers (or thumbs) of two hands, which also means that this way they
will be somewhat symmetrical. Here is a listing of the Ten
Commandments that is made in a liberal communist, or anarchist
spirit:
1.)
I am the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of
Egypt, out of the house of bondage. Thou shalt have no other gods
before me. (Comment: it may be
acceptable not to have any god at all except
oneself, for those people who
have never been to Egypt.
Moreover, try,
with all your power not to
submit to other people or
their gods... once
this commandment is kept, there are others as
follows.)
2.)
Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of
any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath,
or that is in the water under the earth. Thou shalt not bow down
thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the Lord thy God am a jealous
God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the
third and fourth generation of them that hate me; And shewing mercy
unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.
(Comment: it may be acceptable
to make some graven image for the public domain, not
for oneself, not for
entertainment or business.)
3.)
Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain; for the
Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.
(Comment: Try to avoid even the thought of servitude. Otherwise, „the
name of the Lord” may also mean his fame or the knowledge about
him.)
4.)
Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou
labour, and do all thy work: But the seventh day is the sabbath of
the Lord thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy
son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy
cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: For in six days
the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and
rested the seventh day: wherefore the Lord blessed the sabbath day,
and hallowed it. (Comment: Let
it be forbidden,
or in other words, a
taboo to
violate the Sabbath resting day on Saturday.)
5.)
Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon
the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee. (Comment:
Respect or
honour those who patronize or give life to you.)
6.)
Thou shalt not kill. (Comment:
Do not kill or
murder, and
maybe do not attack so
dangerously with that purpose
in mind.)
7.)
Thou shalt not commit adultery. (Comment:
Do not commit
adultery, debauchery, fornication and/or
submission.)
8.)
Thou shalt not steal. (Comment:
Do not steal, not
even from the commons.)
9.)
Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.
(Comment: Do not be a liar or swindler or false witness to the
expense of your brethren or neighbour. Warning: this may still allow
lying against those who are not our brethren, e.g. proletarians may
be allowed to lie against the rich.)
10.)
Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet
thy neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor
his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour's. (Comment:
this may still allow coveting
something from those who are not our neighbours
or brethren, e.g.
proletarians may be allowed to covet something from the rich. By
the way, it is an interesting question whether purchase is prohibited
by this commandment, for if it is, then it means
that God suggests self-sufficient economy for the people.)
25.
„I'm
not a grapevine branch, and you're not fish”
- I have used this sentence
as a motto for this chapter… I would like to explain it
here. „I’m not a grapevine branch” refers to the 15th chapter
of the Gospel of John (John
15:1-6):
I am
the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman.
Every
branch in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away: and every branch
that beareth fruit, he purgeth it, that it may bring forth more
fruit.
Now
ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you.
Abide
in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself,
except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me.
I am
the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him,
the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing.
If a
man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered;
and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are
burned.
In my
opinion the perfect God cannot speak like this, so he must not use
metaphors, he can only speak in such a way that his words shall be
taken literally. Similarly, the following Bible passage may belong
here as well, for example (John 10:9):
I am
the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go
in and out, and find pasture.
Or the
following one (Mark 1:17-18):
Come
ye after me, and I will make you to become fishers of men.
And
straightway they forsook their nets, and followed him.
Although
this latter Bible passage
may refer to gladiators of the RETIARIUS type fighting by tridents
and nets (and maybe they
forsook their nets thinking
about that), we may still
think, based on the Christian sign of the fish (ichthys),
that Jesus might have used a
metaphor here instead, and this is against his divinity. Well,
we might still try to defend this biblical passage by the fact that
mammals (and among them, humans) evolved from fish during the process
of evolution, which might mean that they still remained „fish”
according to a different kind of biological taxonomy. This might be
justified by the argument
that according to the mathematical approach, it is not clearly
defined what is called fish and what is not. Thus, we can start to
examine the question by whether Jesus had a mathematical approach? It
is not that easy to examine
this question, as I have found a biblical passage in
the Book of Genesis that may
have been written by a
mathematical approach (Genesis 1:1-2):
In
the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
And
the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face
of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
I
thought that "the Earth was without form" part might mean
that the Word of God (see: John 1:1-3) still did not have such an
expression that could describe the form of Earth by mathematical
precision (for example, if the form of Earth is geoid, then it is a
good question what else can be called geoid and what not). Thus, the
Creation might have happened in such a way that the Word of God gave
name to the form of Earth, and thereby the Earth took this form…
never mind. The point is that this speculation is still quite weak to
justify what entitled Jesus to call himself „vine” (or even
„door”), and his disciples „branches”. Namely, if we ignore
the metaphorical interpretation, this seems to be false in a strict
sense, but God must not speak falsehood. I do not believe that we
cannot differentiate these two biological creatures: the vine and the
human… thereafter, only one thing has come to my mind that could
support the literal interpretation, and this is that the wine could
have been speaking from Jesus when he spoke the quoted speech (John
15:1-6)! He might have liked wine so much that he might have
identified himself with it, and therefore, also with grapes… and
afterwards, his environmentalist activity might have covered mainly
grapes (besides sheep), as the priests drink wine made from grapes,
so they protect it as well.
The
majority of Christians, however, still interpret the mentioned
biblical passage (John 15:1-6) metaphorically, so they see an analogy
in it with
the relationship of Jesus and the disciples believed to be ideal.
However, in summary, in my
opinion the use of metaphors (false statements in a strict sense)
might suggest that Jesus was not a perfect God (or not one I like).
Therefore, I preferred to use this („I'm not a grapevine branch,
and you're not fish”) as a motto for this chapter.
