Matthew 5 & Gibran "On Freedom"

Note: I read the Bible to consider whether a specific passage comports to my weak-comprehension of the perhaps 5,000-year-old Sumerian philosophy expressed by Hebrew scholars 3,000 years ago in Genesis 1:28:  Female& male-human-being can& may, independent of other entities, constrain political chaos on earth. I think the next Bible canon should include the law codes of Sumer.

I perceive that the 10,000-year-old Sumer civilization ought to be considered, in order to increase civic-integrity while appreciating private spiritual pursuits in 2022 and beyond.

Matthew 5

(My comments bracketed with yellow highlight.)

5 Now when Jesus saw the crowds, he went up on a mountainside and sat down. His disciples came to him, ² and he began to teach them.

The Beatitudes

He said:

³ “Blessed are the poor in spirit,
    for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
⁴ Blessed are those who mourn,
    for they will be comforted.
⁵ Blessed are the meek,
    for they will inherit the earth.
⁶ Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness,
    for they will be filled.
⁷ Blessed are the merciful,
    for they will be shown mercy.
⁸ Blessed are the pure in heart,
    for they will see God.
⁹ Blessed are the peacemakers,
    for they will be called children of God.
¹⁰ Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness,
    for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. [To this point, I think Jesus is grooming his disciples ---appealing to their nobler motives, borrowing from Dale Carnegie --- with the people as witnesses.]

¹¹ “Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me. [I perceive this a quid pro quo based on opinion. When is someone’s appreciative caution invoked by Jesus? I don’t trust Matthew’s quote of Jesus.] ¹² Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you. [Referring to “before Abraham was born I am”, Jesus may have visited people Matthew calls “prophets”. Matthew may not have known them all, for example, Agathon, quoted by Plato 460 years before Jesus was born. Agathon’s speech, in “Symposium” seems worthy of a SS lesson. It also reminds me that “Before Abraham was born I am” extends both backward and forward.]

Salt and Light

¹³ “You are the salt of the earth. But if the salt loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled underfoot. [I do not agree with this idea at all. The human-being has the potential to perfect his or her unique intentions and achievements before body& mind stop functioning.]

¹⁴ “You are the light of the world. A town built on a hill cannot be hidden. ¹⁵ Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl. Instead they put it on its stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house. ¹⁶ In the same way, let your light shine before others [Never fear civic integrity: I write blogs to not subjugate myself to “scholarship” and other licensure stonewalling. Obviously, I find it rewarding to claim that independence. And there’s no such thing as religious integrity, because it is founded in mystery.], that they may see your good deeds and glorify your Father in heaven. [In V.11, it seems your light should shine because of Jesus. In reverting to “the Father” is Matthew bemused about who Jesus is? Does he cite the Father to try to avoid persecution because of Jesus?]

The Fulfillment of the Law

¹⁷ “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. ¹⁸ For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. ¹⁹ Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. ²⁰ For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven. [If Jews believe keeping the law merits heaven, this paragraph seems anti-Semitic. If it is, civic-citizens ought to be cautious about judging citizens who do not appreciate the practical Jesus --- the Jesus discernable by living people.]

Murder

²¹ “You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘You shall not murder, and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.’ ²² But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, ‘Raca,’ is answerable to the court. And anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of hell.

²³ “Therefore, if you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother or sister has something against you, ²⁴ leave your gift there in front of the altar. First go and be reconciled to them; then come and offer your gift. [I am suspicious of altar instructions, because elsewhere Jesus advocates building character rather than materialism. And philanthropy is a way of re-distributing U.S. taxation without legislative oversight; I oppose it. Matthew 6:21 applies to churches as well as to citizens: “For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.”]

²⁵ “Settle matters quickly with your adversary who is taking you to court. Do it while you are still together on the way, or your adversary may hand you over to the judge, and the judge may hand you over to the officer, and you may be thrown into prison. ²⁶ Truly I tell you, you will not get out until you have paid the last penny. [It’s not that easy in 2022.]

Adultery

²⁷ “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ ²⁸ But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. ²⁹ If your right eye causes you to stumble, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. ³⁰ And if your right hand causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell. [The practical Jesus is more realistic than Matthew’s seeming adolescence. What’s at stake is objectification of women for sexual fantasy. An authentic man perceives every woman a potential crowd, with up to 400 eggs to produce during her fertile years. By no imagination would he engage the crowd for sexual satisfaction.]

Divorce

³¹ “It has been said, ‘Anyone who divorces his wife must give her a certificate of divorce.’ ³² But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, makes her the victim of adultery, and anyone who marries a divorced woman commits adultery. [It’s not that simple. If a spouse’s conduct is ruining the children’s future; hears the complaint without expressing consideration, remorse, repentance, and reform; then resumes the practice, the responsible spouse must take civil action.]

Oaths

³³ “Again, you have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘Do not break your oath, but fulfill to the Lord the vows you have made.’ ³⁴ But I tell you, do not swear an oath at all [Why are most U.S. President’s so arrogant? I think it’s because Christians accommodate religious arrogance. I don’t think Jesus-practitioners would accommodate oaths.]: either by heaven, for it is God’s throne; ³⁵ or by the earth, for it is his footstool; or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the Great King. [I doubt Jesus spoke “city of the Great King”.] ³⁶ And do not swear by your head, for you cannot make even one hair white or black. ³⁷ All you need to say is simply ‘Yes’ or ‘No’; anything beyond this comes from the evil one.

Eye for Eye

³⁸ “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ [Does this reference a Sumer code of law?] ³⁹ But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. [Does anyone trust Matthew on this report? For example, the moment I realize a person is heavily under narcotics, I leave the scene.] If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. ⁴⁰ And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. ⁴¹ If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. ⁴² Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you. [From cheek slapping on, there’s a measure of cautious value in these ideas, provided you appreciatively caution an offender. A wayward citizen needs the chance to reform.]

Love for Enemies

⁴³ “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ ⁴⁴ But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, ⁴⁵ that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. ⁴⁶ If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? ⁴⁷ And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? ⁴⁸ Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect. [This may be the most difficult message attributed to Jesus. Here’s my take on it.

Human beings face necessity& justice: shared subjectivity to physics& progeny with potential to practice, facilitate, and encourage perfect choices --- mimic the practical Jesus. Enemies and persecutors are fellow-citizens encouraged to reform. However, evil, which Matthew did not address, must be eradicated.

Love is often inappropriate, because it is not wanted by the other party. Appreciation is a better goal, dependents seeking to reform are appreciable, and evil cannot be appreciated. Mutual appreciation is a can& may, but love is not practicable without appreciation& fidelity.

Ralph Waldo Emerson’s opinion is that Jesus was a man who asserted that a human-being can perfect their unique person. Read “Divinity School Address”, 1838. Emerson’s encouragement to “virtue” or civic-integrity has been repressed, now for 184 years, by churches that otherwise praise Emerson.

Further, V48 seems a refrain of Genesis 1:28’s, provide order& prosperity in the image of God. This is evidence for a possible Jesus message, “Before Abraham was born I am”. Jesus may be the author of Genesis 1 and its God. I don’t think so but don’t know the-ineluctable-truth. Ineluctable means “not to be avoided, changed, or resisted”, merriam-webster. com.

The above concerns can& may appeal to most people’s experiences& observations. However, the person who hopes the Bible they believe is the infallible word of the entity that judges the consequences of human choice will find a way to castigate the civically-concerned fellow-citizen along with his/her opinion, just as Emerson was banned from Harvard for 30 years. And surely R. E. Lee in 1856 understood Frederic Douglass’s 1852 statement, “There is not a man beneath the canopy of heaven, that does not know that slavery is wrong for him”. We know the fierceness of Bible belief from 2,000 years of divergent chaos, especially in the USA, where Christianity’s European kings, after 15^th century papal bulls, traded with African kings who captured national neighbors as property for sale. No nation may discern the evil Christianity has wrought more than the USA. The practical Jesus can& may inspire most people to reform.

I agree that Jesus meant it, if he suggested that human-beings can& may perfect themselves.]

On Freedom

I happened to respond to a quora question regarding Gibran’s “On Freedom”.  The poem is posted below [with my comments].

Kahlil Gibran - 1883-1931

And an orator said, Speak to us of Freedom.

     And he answered:

     At the city gate and by your fireside I have seen you prostrate yourself and worship your own freedom,

     Even as slaves humble themselves before a tyrant and praise him though he slays them.

     Ay, in the grove of the temple and in the shadow of the citadel I have seen the freest among you wear their freedom as a yoke and a handcuff.

     And my heart bled within me; for you can only be free when even the desire of seeking freedom becomes a harness to you, and when you cease to speak of freedom as a goal and a fulfilment.

     You shall be free indeed when your days are not without a care nor your nights without a want and a grief,

     But rather when these things girdle your life and yet your rise above them naked and unbound.

     And how shall you rise beyond your days and nights unless you break the chains which you at the dawn of your understanding have fastened around your noon hour?

     In truth that which you call freedom is the strongest of these chains, though its links glitter in the sun and dazzle your eyes. 

[I think “truth” is unintentionally vague. And “the-ineluctable-truth” is accurate& precise, even though often unknown. Ineluctable means “not to be avoided, changed, or resisted. The hyphens invite the reader/listener to not separate even one word from the expression.]

     And what is it but fragments of your own self you would discard that you may become free?

     If it is an unjust law you would abolish, that law was written with your own hand upon your own forehead.

     You cannot erase it by burning your law books nor by washing the foreheads of your judges, though you pour the sea upon them.

     And if it is a despot you would dethrone, see first that his throne erected within you is destroyed.

     For how can a tyrant rule the free and the proud, but for a tyranny in their own freedom and a shame in their own pride?

     And if it is a care you would cast off, that care has been chosen by you rather than imposed upon you.

     And if it is a fear you would dispel, the seat of that fear is in your heart and not in the hand of the feared. 

[The human-being develops internal constrains that must be released before they can accept& limit external constraints.]

     Verily all things move within your being in constant half embrace, the desired and the dreaded, the repugnant and the cherished, the pursued and that which you would escape. [Improve the syntax with “the cherished and the repugnant”.]

     These things move within you as lights and shadows in pairs that cling.

     And when the shadow fades and is no more, the light that lingers becomes a shadow to another light.

     And thus your freedom when it loses its fetters becomes itself the fetter of a greater freedom.

[The “shadow to another light” metaphor seems excellent yet lame, absent the “greater”. I suggest this thought:  Independence from both internal freedom and external freedom empowers management of physics& it’s progeny. More concisely, with independence to freedom, metaphysics yields to physics.]

[For Christians, privately accepting Jesus’ spiritual-grace empowers public-fidelity to his civic lessons.]

The book of Esther

 The book of Esther

Note: I read the Bible to consider whether a specific passage comports to my weak-comprehension of the perhaps 5,000-year-old Sumerian philosophy expressed by Hebrew scholars 3,000 years ago in Genesis 1:28:  Female& male-human-being can& may, independent of other entities, constrain political chaos on earth. I think the next Bible canon should include the law codes of Sumer.

I perceive that the 10,000-year-old Sumer civilization ought to be considered, in order to increase civic-integrity while appreciating private spiritual pursuits in 2022 and beyond.

There are scholarly synopses Online at each Part 2: Eunuchs: Eunuchs in the Old Testament - Theology At the Edge and en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Esther, yet I share my bias:

1:1-14 Banquet with abundant wine, separate party for the women hosted by Vashti. She refused Xerxes’s 7 officers sent to summons beauty to the men’s jealousy.

1:15-22 The men feared Vashti’s arrogance would spread, so a prince advised Xerxes to suddenly remove her from office and find an obedient queen; he tried, with fanfare.

2:1-11 Xerxes’s attendants searched for a young, beautiful virgin. In Susa was Mordecai, of Jair, of Shimei, of Kish of Noah. He reared orphaned, beautiful, cousin Hadassah, known as Esther, as his daughter. Under racial secrecy, he offered her for the harem.

2:12-18 After 12 months’ beauty treatments, she slept with the king then returned to the harem. She could go to the palace only if the king summoned her by name. He did and made her queen to replace Vashti.

2:19-23 Mordecai monitored Esther-politics from outside. Overhearing conspiracy to assassinate King Xerxes, he shared the information with Esther, who reported it to the king, crediting Mordecai. The king killed the conspirators.

3:1-9 King Xerxes made Haman the highest noble, but Mordecai would not kneel to a Gentile. The gate keepers hounded Mordecai, who explained he was a Jew. They told Haman, who planned to kill all the Jews.

3:10-15 King Xerxes accommodated Haman’s plan: throughout the land, kill man, woman, and child on a specific day. People of every nationality were to aid; some were bewildered.

4: 1-17 All the Jews panicked, including Mordecai and Esther, especially for her “caring” cousin. Mordecai gave the details and asked Esther to plead with the king. Esther reminded Mordechai that approaching the king without invitation meant death, unless the king extends mercy. Signs were not good: the king had not called for Esther in 30 days. Mordechai argued that she could not save herself with silence, and she may be there to save her people. Esther asked Mordechai to get all the capital Jews to pray during fasting for 3 days. Then she would go to the king, placing her life at the king’s mercy. Mordechai did his part.

5: 1-8 Esther dressed and presented herself to the king, and he was pleased, inviting, and asked her request. She said she’d like to discuss it at table with Haman. The king agreed. Over wine, he again asked her need. She delayed, requesting to meet again the next day.

5: 9- Haman was happy until he saw Mordecai, who showed neither fear nor respect. Haman was cautious. He counselled with family& friends. They suggested tomorrow hanging Mordecai 75 feet in the air.

6:1-11 That night the king recalled Mordecai had saved King Xerxes from an assassination plot, and had not yet been honored. Haman arrived to propose the hanging. First, Xerxes asked Haman how he should honor someone. Haman, expecting the honor, suggested a public parade. The king surprised Haman to honor Mordecai. Haman did.

6:12-13 Mordecai returned outside. Haman rushed home and shared grief. Haman’s wife said Mordecai was a Jew and Haman would come to ruin.

7:1-5 Haman and the king went to Esther’s wine banquet. The king asked Esther’s request. She announced her plea to spare her people, who had been purchased for slaughter rather than for slavery, which would not distress the king. Xerxes asked: who dared such a thing?

7:6-10 Esther named Haman. The king went into the garden in a rage. Haman begged Esther and was compromised to her when Xerxes returned. They hung Haman on the pole he provided for Mordecai.

8:1-10 Xerxes gave Esther Haman’s estate. Queen Esther summoned Mordechai, and the king gave him Haman’s authority. She asked the king to reverse Haman’s orders to slay the Jews. He granted her request with Mordecai in charge.

8:11 “The king’s edict granted the Jews in every city the right to assemble and protect themselves; to destroy, kill and annihilate the armed men of any nationality or province who might attack them and their women and children,^[b] and to plunder the property of their enemies.” 

8:17 “And many people of other nationalities became Jews because fear of the Jews had seized them.”

9:1-32 Mordecai became powerful. “The Jews struck down all their enemies with the sword, killing and destroying them, and they did what they pleased to those who hated them.” But they did not plunder. Xerxes kept track and asked Esther what else she wanted. She asked that Haman’s 10 sons be hung. Good times continued and rural Jews set up a monthly gift day. It became an annual celebration, Purim, in the 127 provinces of Xerxes’ kingdom.

10:1-3 Mordecai . . . worked for the good of his people and spoke up for the welfare of all the Jews.

The ideas I glean from Esther include the follow:

This reader never lost the perception that the Esther-writer assumed the reader knew that each character’s God, if not the-God, was in each character’s mind, excluding many occasions when wine or sex controlled the-particular God-facing-death. In other words the author did not feel the need to write qualifiers like “the Lord said”. Note however, that Esther’s request for prayer with fasting in the capital city is spiritualism, theism, and Judaism.

Immediately, Vashti expresses the independence of women, and that supports my gender-reversal to female& male-human-being in expressing Genesis 1:28. Also, Haman’s wife perceives the ruin Haman invites. Often in history, the woman made more civic-sense than the man. It reminds me of Clytemnestra and Agamemnon on his proposal to sacrifice their daughter so the Greek navy could gain favorable winds.

It seems Mordechai intended to use cousin Esther long before this story begins, and I suspect he perceived in her rare psychological potential, beyond physical beauty.

Esther took her life in her own hands. It reminds me of Huckleberry Finn, who said, “Alright then, I’ll just go to Hell”, except that Esther employed sex and food& wine to manage her challenge.

Human-purchase for slavery was taken for granted (for slaughter, not so much). I’m reminded of papal bulls “authorizing” the African slave trade in the 15^th century.

Granting the Jews the right to defend themselves reminds me of the 1776 declaration of war against England and the eventual dominance of the USA in world affairs as long as we did not plunder. However, mistreating people based on the belief that they hate you is immoral. I am reminded of St. John’s false use of “hate” in John 15:18-23. I am a non-Christian with humble-appreciation toward whatever-controls-the-consequences-of-each-human-choice, and am in no position to judge another human-being’s appreciative-humility.

Esther lost reliability when she hung the sons of Haman. Mordecai became powerful, I assert as he intended when he adopted Esther.

The Jews are portrayed as ruthless, which may be twice arrogant toward Genesis 1:28, perhaps authored by Jesus. (Recall Jesus reportedly said, “Before Abraham was born I am.”) Not only is ruthlessness arrogant, but the scholar who misrepresents defense as ruthlessness is wrong. I don’t blame Martin Luther for considering to purge Esther from his canon. However, the story would still be available.

I found the Book of Esther rich in arrogance to avoid in 2022’s troubled time.

Election and antinomianism: John 13, NIV

Note: I read the Bible to consider whether a specific passage comports to my weak-comprehension of the perhaps 5,000-year-old Sumerian philosophy expressed by Hebrew scholars 3,000 years ago in Genesis 1:28:  Female& male-human-being can& may, independent of other entities, constrain political chaos on earth. I think the next Bible canon should include the law codes of Sumer.

I perceive that the 10,000-year-old Sumer civilization ought to be considered, in order to increase civic-integrity while appreciating private spiritual pursuits in 2022 and beyond.

Election and antinomianism: John 13, NIV

Reading to discover St. John’s possible 1) conformity-to Genesis 1:28’s suggestion that no power can usurp responsible-human-independence (RHI); that is, each human-being is in authority-facing-death and, therefore, can& may choose integrity-to the-ineluctable-truth, and 2) his appreciative-humility-to whatever-controls-the-consequences-of-each-human-choice [and responding as best-PRB can]. Some scholars think "John of Patmos" is the elder St. John the apostle. I contend with much in this passage and take great comfort in my reference to John in 6:38’s “whoever comes to me I will never drive away”, below.

13 ¹ It was just before the Passover Festival. Jesus knew that the hour had come for him to leave this world and go to the Father. [Honored as the saints may be, no human-being can witness for Jesus. Furthermore, no scholar can limit human choice, such as Judas's choice to betray Jesus. That is, under the entity that controls the consequences of human choice, Judas could have chosen not to betray Jesus.] Having loved his own who were in the world, he loved them to the end. [A psychological quid pro quo seems un-hidden by John’s phrase “his own”;, the elect; the antinomians. See John 6:39.
Having acquired high regard for both civic-integrity and civil-order, I decided during my second quarter-century that I am neither elect nor antinomian. However, I reject many of St. John’s opinions about the non-elect (me), especially John 15:18-23.]

² The evening meal was in progress, and the devil [like “soul”, “devil” seems a human-construct. I perceive no obligation to disprove mystery] had already prompted Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot, to betray Jesus. ³ Jesus knew that the Father had put all things under his power [I assert that the-metaphysical-Jesus advocates Genesis 1:28, and St. John missed it; each human-being can& may independently constrain chaos in their life choices. That is, Jesus cannot usurp their opportunity to choose the-good.], and that he had come from God [Cynthia admits neither knowing the-ineluctable-truth nor opining better than St. John yet confidently states that God and Jesus are the same. When pressed, she says, “The mystery of oneness gives me comfort, and I don’t have to explain mysteries”. This illustrates my meaning when I say Cynthia has serene-confidence.] and was returning to God; ⁴ so he got up from the meal, took off his outer clothing, and wrapped a towel around his waist. ⁵ After that, he poured water into a basin and began to wash his disciples’ feet, drying them with the towel that was wrapped around him.

⁶ He came to Simon Peter, who said to him, “Lord, are you going to wash my feet?”

⁷ Jesus replied, “You do not realize now what I am doing, but later you will understand.”

⁸ “No,” said Peter, “you shall never wash my feet.”

Jesus answered, “Unless I wash you, you have no part with me.” [In 2022 vernacular, unless you don your COVID mask you cannot enter my space.]

⁹ “Then, Lord,” Simon Peter replied, “not just my feet but my hands and my head as well!”

¹⁰ Jesus answered, “Those who have had a bath need only to wash their feet; their whole body is clean. [A bath does not prevent your breath or a cough from spreading germs and viruses you may be carrying.] And you are clean, though not every one of you.” ¹¹ For he knew who was going to betray him, and that was why he said not every one was clean. [St. John employed a straw-man fallacy -- bath for betrayal -- that lessens my interest in the remainder of the story. That is to say, a story that offers an agendum is interesting only to the extent of the reader's purpose.]

¹² When he had finished washing their feet, he put on his clothes and returned to his place. “Do you understand what I have done for you?” he asked them. ¹³ “You call me ‘Teacher’ and ‘Lord,’ and rightly so, for that is what I am. ¹⁴ Now that I, your Lord [Using “Lord” may seem competitive with Jewish beliefs, but to me, it creates competition between Jesus and the Father. That’s not possible for Cynthia, who believes they are the same. I would not change her opinion for anything nor would I change my opinion. I reserve the right to be wrong on both counts.] and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also should wash one another’s feet. [Civic citizens "wash each other's feet" each time they facilitate responsible-human-independence.]¹⁵ I have set you an example that you should do as I have done for you. ¹⁶ Very truly I tell you, no servant is greater than his master, nor is a messenger greater than the one who sent him. [I perceive 1) that I am a messenger for myself and any-citizen with appreciation-for& humility-to whatever-controls-the-consequences-of-each-human-choice and 2) that some if not all Nomads seem part of that culture.] ¹⁷ Now that you know these things, you will be blessed [Ceremonial washing of feet to recall the 12 who included one betrayer is not a practice I desire.] if you do them. [Most important is Genesis 1:28, especially since the author of the 5,500 year-old version may have responded to Jesus, metaphysical or not.]

Jesus Predicts His Betrayal

¹⁸ “I am not referring to all of you; I know those I have chosen. [Here again appears the psychological quid pro quo I perceive in V. 1: the unsuspecting individual desires to be confident-in& loyal-to someone who chose them. That’s the sentiment that enslaved me to Christianity’s formula until 1994. With so much St.-John-confusion to contend with, it is difficult for someone who is convinced they are not elect to accept their destiny, perhaps to pursue the-metaphysical-Jesus; the practical Jesus to be acquired by ignoring Bible-nonsense. I am not a Christian, because I pursue Jesus’s message, not John’s “witness”.]  But this is to fulfill this passage of Scripture: ‘He who shared my bread has turned against me.’ [In 2022, we know better than to fall for scholar's predictions. Communion is a form of modern inquisition. In 15 years of “Christian” worship in the Catholic Church with my family, I never took communion, even though I was not then aware that I do not accept transubstantiation. After 1994, I do not take “The Lord’s Supper”, because I am neither Baptist nor Christian. That does not make me better, it’s simply that I accept not being elect. Neither does it imply that I do not appreciate other individual’s faiths for them. On the contrary, it is an act of appreciation for their opportunity to choose: Transubstantiation, Remembrance, or acceptance.]

¹⁹ “I am telling you now before it happens, so that when it does happen you will believe that I am who I am. [Jesus is the “I am” before Abraham was born, which I take as advocate-for if not author-of Genesis 1:28.] ²⁰ Very truly I tell you, whoever accepts anyone I send accepts me; and whoever accepts me accepts the one who sent me.” [See John 6:36-37, especially “. . . whoever comes to me I will never drive away”. That is my strength and comfort for me. I support other civic-people’s private-comforts for them.]

²¹ After he had said this, Jesus was troubled in spirit and testified, “Very truly I tell you, one of you is going to betray me.” [Even at this moment, Judas had the RHI to reject the 30 pieces of sliver, to comply with Genesis 1:28.]

²² His disciples stared at one another, at a loss to know which of them he meant. ²³ One of them, the disciple whom Jesus loved [I understand this expresses John, the author of this bemusement. Regardless, “the disciple” puts into question the meaning of “love” in John 13 and elsewhere in the Bible.], was reclining next to him. ²⁴ Simon Peter motioned to this disciple [John] and said, “Ask him which one he means.” [For the first time, I notice St. John's competitive attitude toward St. Peter. Not only does John claim he is Jesus's favorite of the 12, he chooses to lessen Peter by claiming he asked Peter to ask Jesus rather than speak to Jesus directly. It's duplicitous on both accounts.]

²⁵ Leaning back against Jesus, he [John] asked him, “Lord, who is it?”

²⁶ Jesus answered, “It is the one to whom I will give this piece of bread when I have dipped it in the dish.” Then, dipping the piece of bread, he gave it to Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot. ²⁷ As soon as Judas took the bread, Satan entered into him. [My friend Chris Nalepa told me this week that he, at age 65, wants to warn fellow-citizens that there is evil in the world. I like Chris’s concern. I prefer “evil” to “Satan”. Either way, John, is expressing his fiction. John cannot judge the motive behind another human-being’s intentions before the action.]

So Jesus told him, “What you are about to do, do quickly.” ²⁸ But no one at the meal understood why Jesus said this to him. ²⁹ Since Judas had charge of the money, some thought Jesus was telling him to buy what was needed for the festival, or to give something to the poor. ³⁰ As soon as Judas had taken the bread, he went out. And it was night.

Jesus Predicts Peter’s Denial

³¹ When he was gone, Jesus said, “Now the Son of Man is glorified and God is glorified in him. ³² If God is glorified in him, God will glorify the Son in himself, and will glorify him at once.

³³ “My children, I will be with you only a little longer. You will look for me, and just as I told the Jews, so I tell you now: Where I am going, you cannot come. [For the first time, I notice the phrase "I told the Jews", when every person at the table is a Jew. I am only a civic citizen, and I object to the author's offense to cite "the Jews". I now see this as an editorial oversight by Christian partisans, at best. The passage alienates me to the label "Jesus Christ", much as "Gentile Jesus" would alienate many. It's no wonder that anti-Semitism and anti-racism is alive and well in the USA and in Europe: reform is essential. I can now articulate more clearly why I am not a Christian: I advocate Jesus, who would influence every citizen to civic-integrity plus personal serenity with the mystery of soul.]

³⁴ “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. ³⁵ By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.” [It seems more civic to appreciate one another. “Love” seem overblown, worn out, too vague, and mere slogan. Too often love is unwanted. “I’m in love with you” can seem like abuse of the other party’s preference. In the Christian community, when someone says, “Phil, I love you”, it reminds me of the coercion my E. Tennessee-Southern-Baptist birth-family suffered as Mom (Eastern Star) competed with Dad (32^nd Degree Mason); I guess derived from Paul’s bad words, “Wives submit yourself to your own husbands”. It also invokes the notion that the speaker judges me lost and is praying for my salvation (as though Jesus is not reliable). If someone says “I’m praying for you (to be saved)”, I respond, “I’m praying for you, too.” If someone says, “I love you” I respond “I appreciate you”. I will not submit to psychological quid pro quo. I do not think I am alone in these thoughts, but do think few would study deeply enough to articulate them. I so study.]

³⁶ Simon Peter asked him, “Lord, where are you going?”

Jesus replied, “Where I am going, you cannot follow now, but you will follow later.” [How much later?]

³⁷ Peter asked, “Lord, why can’t I follow you now? I will lay down my life for you.”

³⁸ Then Jesus answered, “Will you really lay down your life for me? Very truly I tell you, before the rooster crows, you will disown me three times! [Is John negatively competing? Where’s Peter’s guilt-acceptance: under attack by sword, I disowned Jesus? We do have John’s report of Peter’s assignment, “Feed my sheep”; John 21:15-17. I don't trust competitive apostles, especially when they purport to speak for Jesus. No one can witness for Jesus.]

Dependent fellow-citizen Paul: Romans 7:15-25

Note: I read the Bible to consider whether a specific passage comports to my weak-comprehension of the perhaps 5,000-year-old Sumerian philosophy expressed by Hebrew scholars 3,000 years ago in Genesis 1:28:  Female& male-human-being can& may, independent of other entities, constrain political chaos on earth. I think the next Bible canon should include the law codes of Sumer.

I perceive that the 10,000-year-old Sumer civilization ought to be considered, in order to increase civic-integrity while appreciating private spiritual pursuits in 2022 and beyond.

Paul

The ancients are our fellow-citizens in the quest to discover the-good. Paul recorded mistakes to avoid.

I can only share my opinion, because I do not know the-ineluctable-truth, which a considerate human-being works to discover (during their individual, 2nd through 4th quarter centuries, after the 1st quarter century to personally accept being a human-being). Fortunate is the person who employs experiences& observations intending to perfect their-unique-good before death.

I think the Bible canonizers erred when they included Genesis-1, a 3,000 year old comprehension of a 5,500 year-old political philosophy, perhaps from Sumer.

I assert “erred”, because a 2022 comprehension (based on the recent 5,500 years’ discovery) holds Genesis-1 to be artful, neglected awareness-if-not-prudent-advice at the dawn of both grammar and monotheism. Then, perhaps 150,000 year-old language& knowledge could be used to ponder individually and collaborate in essential pairs, female& male, then in groups.

Humankind divides into 2 groups, according to willingness to guide actions for necessity& justice or none --- responsible-human-independence (RHI) or dependence; physics& progeny or metaphysics; the-ineluctable-truth or speculation (belief). Those 2 groups subdivide unto 2 diversities. In subsequent millennia, diversity has diverged unto chaos.

My 2022 comprehension of Genesis 1:28 is this: female&male-human-being can& may independently provide order& prosperity to the lesser species and to Earth; provide peace; constrain chaos in personal behavior& in societies; develop humankind. The rest of Bible canon debates whatever-controls-the-consequences-of-human-choices, both individual& group actions. Restating, the rest of the Bible journals, through 2000 years ago, how “Western” civilizations developed today’s Western chaos.

If these opinions seem reliable, consider how to apply them: Societies ought-to practice, encourage, and facilitate self-discipline to all citizens. That’s the can& may, and there remains the how. I contend that each person self-disciplines by learning-to-apply the-ineluctable-truth. “Ineluctable”, first published 400 years ago in translation, means “not to be avoided, changed, or resisted” merriam-webster .com. In practice, each individual can& may accept& say, “I do not know”, when they don’t know.

Now, to Paul:  By developing integrity to the-ineluctable-truth, each human-being can& may appreciate& avoid the miserable dependency Paul shared in Romans 7:15-25. Paul shamelessly cries “my mind . . . a slave to God’s law . . . my . . . nature a slave to . . . sin” as though there is no Paul-personal-discipline to consider! Moreover, Paul disassembles the Trinity in “. . . God . . . delivers me through Jesus Christ our Lord!” He essentially discounts the-God for “our Lord” and the Old Testament’s "the Lord God" and other Gods.

The Christian scheme -- canonizing Jesus to compete with the Gods of the Bible is a consequence of group-search for reliable dependency – bargaining for the-God to usurp the civic-RHI that was suggested 5,500 years ago.

In Sumer’s era, the individual faced the uncertainty of physics& its-progeny. Long before, even more primitive humankind observed that the sun could kill (now we know due to overexposure) and imagined the sun a supernatural power, eventually labeled “God”. Many civilizations bargained with sun Gods, and many speculated that the-God demands human flesh. Some sacrificed their excellent citizens to the-God. Now, despite modern human-sacrifice, we know the sun is a natural nuclear reactor, but have not overcome dependency on the-God for competition among self, individuals,& groups.

In addition to spiritual hope& comfort to believers, does Jesus offer civic influence? I think so:  Jesus’s cryptic messages empower the metaphysics of our collective quest to discover and apply the-good. Recall, we are at the leading edge of 300,000 years’ homo sapiens psychological development. We are obligated to our posterity, including our direct descendants.

Just as Paul expressed opinion 2,000 years ago, Ralph Waldo Emerson expressed opinion 184 years ago: “Alone [Jesus] estimated the greatness of man . . . God incarnates himself in man, and evermore goes forth anew to take possession of his world. But what a distortion did [Jesus’] doctrine and memory suffer . . . Christianity became a Mythus, as the poetic teaching of Greece and of Egypt”.

Emerson advanced the-metaphysical-Jesus, the human collaboration to consider Jesus’ reported statements: be perfect [in your can& may], before founders were born I am, help your magistrate constrain chaos, you are gods-facing-death, be humble, be peaceful, and more.

It seems Jesus affirmed Genesis 1:28, and we good-citizens can& may practice, facilitate, and encourage civic-RHI while privately pursuing personal-spiritual-happiness.

We, the civic-citizens who pursue the-good need not allow Paul to distract us from the-metaphysical-Jesus, if we take interest in that method of perceiving. I prefer discovering the-ineluctable-evidence rather than metaphysics but am willing to collaborate with civic –fellow citizens who prefer the Jesus approach.

Paul? Consider identifying and not making his mistakes.

Physical miracles induce spiritual doubt: Joshua 1-4

Note: I read the Bible to consider whether a specific passage comports to my weak-comprehension of the perhaps 5,000-year-old Sumerian philosophy expressed by Hebrew scholars 3,000 years ago in Genesis 1:28:  Female& male-human-being can& may, independent of other entities, constrain political chaos on earth. I think the next Bible canon should include the law codes of Sumer.

I perceive that the 10,000-year-old Sumer civilization ought to be considered, in order to increase civic-integrity while appreciating private spiritual pursuits in 2022 and beyond.

Joshua

During my first half-century, I paid less than adequate attention to Old Testament (OT) stories, discounting them as mere predictors of the historical Jesus.

During my last quarter century, I dropped out of Christianity to explore what I now call responsible-human-independence (RHI).  Now I view the OT as a record of considerate ancient people struggling for the-good. Jesus-appreciators can refer to the object as the-metaphysical-Jesus, who, when asked about Abraham, claimed existence “before Abraham was born”. However, each civic-citizen’s appreciation for every OT/NT word is precious to me.

With a view to Genesis 1:28’s message (independently constrain chaos), and using merriam-webster.com for word-usage-opinion and creationwiki.org for scripture opinion I comment on each verse, as follows:

Joshua 1:1 That God spoke directly to civil leaders and elites is the author’s understanding, and perhaps-Joshua’s view does not ring true in 2022. Some temporal leaders act on their own, then blame God for their failures and/or proclaim personal morality by thanking God, in this case, the Lord. We, in 2022, need not accept Joshua’s self-evaluation.

It seems to me that my life-influences are direct-associates and unseen fellow-citizens who either choose to pursue the-good or don’t.

1:2 According to Genesis 1:28, humankind is charged to independently constrain chaos on Earth. That is, the Lord won’t . . . can’t usurp RHI (responsible-human-independence). (That’s the Genesis-1, 5,500 year-old political suggestion.)

1:3 Quoting the Lord about his promises is a vain attempt to influence domestic action. Civic people don’t fall for it: the species human-being, that is, each person who accepts being a human-being, has too much independent power, energy, authority, and obligation (HIPEAO) to accommodate lies.

1:5 We know in 2022 that great leaders are rare in history and it’s natural for the next magistrate to claim an exceptional light’s powers. So far, no past president competes with George Washington’s temporal excellence.

1:6 We all want to “be strong and courageous” and we will not be duped into defying physics& its-progeny, such as psychology. That’s right: I assert that psychology develops under the laws of physics. Resisting gullibility requires strength. (Would you believe I once sold a Baton Rouge four-plex and kept the mortgage, believing the buyer and his attorney???? The buyer went to jail, and I bet the attorney did not. I went bankrupt, and my family suffered greatly). I can’t say how much better off I am despite a ruined life, yet think I learned . . . the hard way.

1:8 As a child, my community convinced me that accurate& precise Bible interpretation would make me prosperous& successful.

[My maternal family, from Booker/Inklebarger of Tater Valley Tennessee, thought I would be one of the many Bible-thumpin’ preachers in the family& posterity. Uncle Clyde Booker put 7 children through college from his 120 acre farm and then gave it for a little cash dug from safe keepin’ by a poor man with 5 children when rag-weed took over. I wish I had Uncle Clyde’s goodness. Nevertheless, I read the last two sentences of Revelation and thought: I cannot follow a God that is so weak as to threaten me. Thank goodness I studied STEM, became a chemical engineer, accepted a job offer in Baton Rouge, and later fell-in-love-with a Louisiana French-Catholic woman: I benefited from disruptive change.]

 Also in V. 1-8, the Moses-law notion is not consistent with Genesis 1:28’s necessity& justice. Lastly, “the Lord your God” is less inclusive than “the Lord God” or “the Lord” (or the-God).

1:15 In 2022, it’s important to write toward “dawn” or equal instead of “sunrise” so as to represent the rotation of the earth on its axis rather than the falsity: the sun daily orbits the earth. (And to a few perception dominated people, a flat earth.) Understanding the knwledge is important to appreciating the awe of the universe we are in rather than abiding the perceptions some too readily accept& promote. More importantly, children are better off when adults teach rather than share-perception.

1:18 I do not condone capital punishment on religious opinion about God’s orders, whether the opinion comes from one person, an institution, a nation, or a God. As a civic-citizen to RHI, I think capital punishment is required when harm/injury/damage is unthinkable and the perpetrator needs-to stop living. The God does not . . . cannot usurp the temporal debate and is responsible only to the mystery of afterdeath, that indefinite time when body, mind, and person stop functioning.

2:1 Rahab proves to be a hearsay-believer.

2:4 Rahab lied, which is a bad influence. Everyone knows physics ineluctably exposes both the lie and the liar. How did her lie turn out? I don’t know.

2:10 Rahab accepts the “CNN news/Fox news” about the escape from Egypt, the parting of the Red Sea, and the total destruction of invaded cities’ inhabitants. In 2022, we need not hold the-God to such favor to a civilization.

2:11-13 Rehab claims the reported defiance of physics as evidence of “God in heaven [and] earth” and bargains for salvation from death for her entire family.

2:17-21 The spies agree and give Rehab a red marker to identify her house, where all her people must be when Joshua takes the city.

Readers with humor can imagine Rehab operated a ayahuasca retreat rather than a red-light house. With many possibilities “rehabilitation” seem unescapable.

3:5 Consecrate means make sacred or sanctify. To commend people to self-sanctify seems arrogant against the-God and the person.

3:10 It’s interesting to explore the list of enemies: Canaanites, Hittites, Hivites, Perizzites, Girgashites, Amorites and Jebusites. The sons associated with these tribes are 4^th son of Ham (son of Noah), Heth, Hivi, none, of Ham, Amori, and Jebus, respectively.  Read etzion.org.il/en/tanakh/studies-tanakh/core-studies-tanakh/ki-tisa-nations-canaan-and-girgashites for deeper, amusing scholarship.

3:12 Note that all 12 tribes of Israel were present (in the story).

3:16 The flood-stage river-flow stopped, a different miracle from the parting of the Red Sea; the water “piled up . . . a great distance away”. Hmm: did the pile-up prevent up-river-area flooding-by? Did an ice jam and further freezing stop the flow?

4:7 “memorial . . . forever” not expected in 2022, but who knows what local chapel may own the original stones to attract tourist admission and donations?

4:13 40,000 military from 2.5 tribes, 600,000 men (Numbers); perhaps 2 million people.

4:14 Joshua exalts himself on par with Moses!

4:24 I do not choose to follow a Lord that is so weak as to coerce people with miracles/tricks. It reminds me of Nancy Pelosi saving the U.S. from both AOC and Donald Trump. I want something more reliable for my life and family, and I choose civic-citizens, including those who believe Jesus or believe in-Jesus. I think it is important for believers to pay attention to Jesus’ claim to “before Abraham was born” whether he meant that literally or, under journalist’s repression, expressed personal regard for Genesis 1, including V.28.

Summary: the physical miracles, invasion intentions, unpredictable Israel-geopolitical unity, and personal-boasting by Joshua’s story cause doubt in its value to civic integrity. On the other hand, like individuals, nations must progress in their journey to responsible-human-independence, according to their unique genes& memes. The Jordan crossing, whether metaphysical or not, is a step in Israel’s journey toward civic-integrity. If someone asked my opinion about their progress, I’d say only a fool would answer. But under insistence, I’d admit to being a dreamer and say Israel, the nation, seems to practice, facilitate, and encourage RHI and remain spiritual.

In contrast, the USA is in divergent chaos. Let 2022 be the year the majority of “ourselves and our Posterity” discovers, practices, facilitates, and encourages the-ineluctable-truth and otherwise accepts and publicly proclaims “I don’t know” when that is so.

Like persons, civilizations, and nations, churches may develop the practice, facilitation, and encouragement to RHI. There is nothing wrong with a church adopting the suggestion in Genesis 1:28: accept can& may provide order& prosperity on Earth. For all we know, that message came from Jesus, perhaps only 1300 years before Abraham was born.