Magdalenbrother
February 5th 2005, 02:25 AM
Sometimes, when one looks for an answer to the vexing questions of theology such as the role of faith, the trinity and predestination, one finds that more light is to be found in indirect evidence than in passages that apparently directly deal with the issue at hand.
Take as an example the anger displayed by Jesus at the rejection of his message by the cities that had been the focus of his ministy in the Galilee.
Matt 11:20ff
Then began he to upbraid the cities wherein most of his mighty works were done, because they repented not:
Woe unto thee, Chorazin! woe unto thee, Bethsaida! for if the mighty works, which were done in you, had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes.
But I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon at the day of judgment, than for you.
And thou, Capernaum, which art exalted unto heaven, shalt be brought down to hell: for if the mighty works, which have been done in thee, had been done in Sodom, it would have remained until this day.
But I say unto you, That it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom in the day of judgment, than for thee.
The Jewish philosopher Baruch Spinoza said that our anger at others' faults is aroused by the misconception that they are free agents that could have avoided doing wrong. Just like Reform theologians, Spinoza denied that people have free will and he made this discovery one of the pillars of his ethical doctrine. He taught that if we would meditate diligently on the fact that human beings act as they act not because of a free choice within their conscience but because they are helplessly caught in an infinite series of causes, we would cease to grieve and be angered.
I think that Spinoza's insight is right. I mean, as far as the cause of our anger at others' faults is concerned.
Turning to Jesus and His holy anger at the cities on the Sea of Galilee, we now marvel at His hot temper: did He ignore that human beings are totally depraved, the incurable slaves of sin, totally devoid of free will? How could he have expected the Capernaumites to listen to Him? Didn't He know beforehand who would receive Him and who wouldn't?
Why so much anger?
Besides, being supposedly omniscient, didn't He know from the beginning that the cities of Galilee would remain indifferent to His Gospel? One wonders why He even bothered to teach there. Why didn't He embark on a mission to Antioch or Corinth where they would have welcomed Him?
Personally I don't think that Jesus got into fits of anger because he was temperamentally somewhat unbalanced. I think that His anger was totally justified. The Capernaumites and Chorazinites could have repented and welcomed Him, for they were free agents. They had a choice. They were not in bondage. And of course, He didn't know in advance how successful his ministry would be...
Hence the anger and the disappointment...
PS: Let us note that during the First Jewish War the cities around the lake were completely destroyed because of the intense fighting that took place there. Is that the source of the prophecy?
Take as an example the anger displayed by Jesus at the rejection of his message by the cities that had been the focus of his ministy in the Galilee.
Matt 11:20ff
Then began he to upbraid the cities wherein most of his mighty works were done, because they repented not:
Woe unto thee, Chorazin! woe unto thee, Bethsaida! for if the mighty works, which were done in you, had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes.
But I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon at the day of judgment, than for you.
And thou, Capernaum, which art exalted unto heaven, shalt be brought down to hell: for if the mighty works, which have been done in thee, had been done in Sodom, it would have remained until this day.
But I say unto you, That it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom in the day of judgment, than for thee.
The Jewish philosopher Baruch Spinoza said that our anger at others' faults is aroused by the misconception that they are free agents that could have avoided doing wrong. Just like Reform theologians, Spinoza denied that people have free will and he made this discovery one of the pillars of his ethical doctrine. He taught that if we would meditate diligently on the fact that human beings act as they act not because of a free choice within their conscience but because they are helplessly caught in an infinite series of causes, we would cease to grieve and be angered.
I think that Spinoza's insight is right. I mean, as far as the cause of our anger at others' faults is concerned.
Turning to Jesus and His holy anger at the cities on the Sea of Galilee, we now marvel at His hot temper: did He ignore that human beings are totally depraved, the incurable slaves of sin, totally devoid of free will? How could he have expected the Capernaumites to listen to Him? Didn't He know beforehand who would receive Him and who wouldn't?
Why so much anger?
Besides, being supposedly omniscient, didn't He know from the beginning that the cities of Galilee would remain indifferent to His Gospel? One wonders why He even bothered to teach there. Why didn't He embark on a mission to Antioch or Corinth where they would have welcomed Him?
Personally I don't think that Jesus got into fits of anger because he was temperamentally somewhat unbalanced. I think that His anger was totally justified. The Capernaumites and Chorazinites could have repented and welcomed Him, for they were free agents. They had a choice. They were not in bondage. And of course, He didn't know in advance how successful his ministry would be...
Hence the anger and the disappointment...
PS: Let us note that during the First Jewish War the cities around the lake were completely destroyed because of the intense fighting that took place there. Is that the source of the prophecy?