Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Applied Materials -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: zonder who wrote (68164)	3/3/2003 9:07:26 AM
From: Sarmad Y. Hermiz	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 70976

>> You mean like the consistency in "Turn the other cheek" and "Eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth"? No. The two phrases are not from the same book or the same religion. The "turn the other cheek" is an explicit repudiation of the "eye 4 eye".

To: zonder who wrote (68164)	3/3/2003 9:20:14 AM
From: Fred Levine	Respond to of 70976

There was a significant evolution within Judaism after the destruction of the temple. From the militant Mosaic view, came the view from Isaiah of universal compassion. Indeed, this was the view of the Pharisees, who had a major influence on Jesus. Remember, Jesus was a Jew who taught Jewish teachings. Matthew's description of the Pharisees was described by Karen Armstrong, an ex-nun and historian, as libilous and slanderous. The Isaiah view, from around the 4th century BC, has been considered the modern Jewish view. From the chosen people being defined as one favored by God, the modern interpretation within Judaism is that of chosen to bear the moral burden proscribed by the laws. That is why the rituals that Zeev stated are so prominent. Still, there are things in the New Testament that are incongruous with the Jewish view of compassion. E.g., in Luke where Jesus states that he has come to teach father to hate son, son to hate father, mother to hate daughter etc. I have discussed this with two priests who interpret that passage to indicate that love of Jesus is primary. However, there is nothing in the biblical context to support that interpretation. Back to teachers teaching ethics. I see nothing wrong with that, and as a teacher, I loved doing that. However, my goal was to present a case, some ethical principles, and have a discussion. For a teacher to merely make judgments is, well, unethical. fred