To love your neighbour like yourself, meaning

[Correa Neto]

Thou shall not kill unless I command you to do so.

Next?

 

[Kirbztomp]

TBH, as one of the people who understood it in Stargate, it didn't really sound like a joke to me. More like a matter of fact statement. That was exactly what was needed, in order to speak the language.

http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-brilliant-movie-jokes-that-were-too-obscure-to-get/

Read #4 in the article and you will get the joke. Yes it was a matter of fact statement in the movie but it was a joke to IRL Egyptologists according to the author of the article, who also provides references.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-tCIRJH9p0

Above link to the scene from Sling Blade in which the main character comes up with the easiest and most obvious answer. But such things never happen IRL right?

 

[HansMustermann]

Kirbz, I'm familiar enough with Egyptian writing, and as I was saying, I got what he's trying to say while watching the movie. I don't need explained that the vowels are missing, since even here I've been posting that since before that Cracked article was written.

ETA: here's one of the more recent threads where I was saying just that about the vowels in Egyptian writing, oh, only 6 years before the Cracked article was written: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=161624

What I don't get is why is it supposed to be a joke, when it's literally what's needed here. And it's what they showed the guy practicing exactly that with the Egyptian woman.

It's akin to saying that the scene from Vikings where Floki explains his new ship design is an inside joke, because, ha-ha, that's exactly how a Viking ship was built. So? What's the joke? What's funny there?

Actually the thing that might make it mildly amusing in a self-effacing way is that they just showed that the shift was bigger than the vowels when he was practicing with the Egyptian woman, and more in line with the shift you'd realistically expect from a language in that time. E.g., Netjer ("god"; well, more complex meaning, but let's go with "god") is apparently pronounced Neda in their language now, which, means it actually has a massive CONSONANT shift. Not only that, but basically the whole second half of the "nTr" got replaced, and you couldn't go rebus with the old signs for most words any more. So the effort would be a lot more than the vowels. But I just guessed that that guy was modest.

 

[Kirbztomp]

Kirbz, I'm familiar enough with Egyptian writing, and as I was saying, I got what he's trying to say while watching the movie. I don't need explained that the vowels are missing, since even here I've been posting that since before that Cracked article was written.

ETA: here's one of the more recent threads where I was saying just that about the vowels in Egyptian writing, oh, only 6 years before the Cracked article was written: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=161624

What I don't get is why is it supposed to be a joke, when it's literally what's needed here. And it's what they showed the guy practicing exactly that with the Egyptian woman.

It's akin to saying that the scene from Vikings where Floki explains his new ship design is an inside joke, because, ha-ha, that's exactly how a Viking ship was built. So? What's the joke? What's funny there?

Actually the thing that might make it mildly amusing in a self-effacing way is that they just showed that the shift was bigger than the vowels when he was practicing with the Egyptian woman, and more in line with the shift you'd realistically expect from a language in that time. E.g., Netjer ("god"; well, more complex meaning, but let's go with "god") is apparently pronounced Neda in their language now, which, means it actually has a massive CONSONANT shift. Not only that, but basically the whole second half of the "nTr" got replaced, and you couldn't go rebus with the old signs for most words any more. So the effort would be a lot more than the vowels. But I just guessed that that guy was modest.

Sorry I slightly misunderstood your post. I suppose though, since I did not write the article, that it is funny that what it could/might take is to travel through time to actually understand what they meant or how they pronounced things. Speculation on my part though and I have an easy sense of humor

 

[Donn]

The sign for Mustermann is henceforth "PWN".

 

[Tassman]

Look, the exemple of the good samaritan is a situation where the samaritan love his neighbour as himself, he took care of his neighbour like he would take care of himself:

ESV:

The Parable of the Good Samaritan

25 And behold, a lawyer stood up to put him to the test, saying, “Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?” 26 He said to him, “What is written in the Law? How do you read it?” 27 And he answered, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind, and your neighbor as yourself.” 28 And he said to him, “You have answered correctly; do this, and you will live.”

29 But he, desiring to justify himself, said to Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?” 30 Jesus replied, “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and he fell among robbers, who stripped him and beat him and departed, leaving him half dead. 31 Now by chance a priest was going down that road, and when he saw him he passed by on the other side. 32 So likewise a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. 33 But a Samaritan, as he journeyed, came to where he was, and when he saw him, he had compassion. 34 He went to him and bound up his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he set him on his own animal and brought him to an inn and took care of him. 35 And the next day he took out two denarii[a] and gave them to the innkeeper, saying, ‘Take care of him, and whatever more you spend, I will repay you when I come back.’ 36 Which of these three, do you think, proved to be a neighbor to the man who fell among the robbers?” 37 He said, “The one who showed him mercy.” And Jesus said to him, “You go, and do likewise.”

Yes, everybody “gets it”; the point is that reciprocity and altruism are evolved qualities and common to most social species, not just the human animal. This explains why the essentially reciprocal Golden Rule has been found in most human cultures worldwide throughout history. There’s nothing original about Jesus.

 

[Gaetan]

Yes, everybody “gets it”; the point is that reciprocity and altruism are evolved qualities and common to most social species, not just the human animal. This explains why the essentially reciprocal Golden Rule has been found in most human cultures worldwide throughout history. There’s nothing original about Jesus.

No but he point out and said: This is the law,

The Golden Rule
ESV
Mt, 7.12 “So ewhatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.

Luke, 6.31 And yas you wish that others would do to you, do so to them.

 

[Leumas]

No but he point out and said: This is the law,

The Golden Rule
ESV
Mt, 7.12 “So ewhatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.

Luke, 6.31 And yas you wish that others would do to you, do so to them.

There is a neighbor of mine who I wish would do all sorts of things to me ..... but unfortunately if I did the same to her, her husband and my wife and I am sure she too (despite my fantasies), would start wishing to do to me things I am sure they never wished I did to them and we would all be breaking quite a few REAL and SANE laws.

Jesus is the most imbecilic fool for saying such silly stuff.... not to mention an insane law maker.

 

[Gaetan]

There is a neighbor of mine who I wish would do all sorts of things to me ..... but unfortunately if I did the same to her, her husband and my wife and I am sure she too (despite my fantasies), would start wishing to do to me things I am sure they never wished I did to them and we would all be breaking quite a few REAL and SANE laws.

Jesus is the most imbecilic fool for saying such silly stuff.... not to mention an insane law maker.

You got to be Wise in applying the golden rule, it doesn't work as it is all the time, like if you like someone piss on your face it doesn't mean that you are allowed to do that on your neighbour.

 

[RoboTimbo]

No but he point out and said: This is the law,

The Golden Rule
ESV
Mt, 7.12 “So ewhatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.

Luke, 6.31 And yas you wish that others would do to you, do so to them.

But it isn't a law, is it? More of a guideline, really.

 

[RoboTimbo]

You got to be Wise in applying the golden rule, it doesn't work as it is all the time, like if you like someone piss on your face it doesn't mean that you are allowed to do that on your neighbour.

Then you've shown that it isn't a law.

 

[Hellbound]

But it isn't a law, is it? More of a guideline, really.

Let's just call it a strong suggestion.

A request?

Something to keep in mind, maybe?

How about the Golden It's-Nice-When-It-Works?

 

[Donn]

Let's just call it a strong suggestion.

A request?

Something to keep in mind, maybe?

How about the Golden It's-Nice-When-It-Works?

The Cleese is strong with this one.

 

[Leumas]

You got to be Wise in applying the golden rule, it doesn't work as it is all the time, like if you like someone piss on your face it doesn't mean that you are allowed to do that on your neighbour.

But then that proves that Jesus was an idiot for not EXPLAINING what he really meant.... you are now explaining what he meant... why could he not expound?

He wasted hundreds of words telling people foolish stuff like how to gouge their eyes out and cut their hands off and how they will go to hell for their THOUGHTS .... so why could he not have explained what he really meant by the statement you are saying is THE LAW?

Why did he leave it up to YOU to come and tell us what it means and what Jesus really meant to say... could he not have said it so that we can understand it for ourselves so that we won't need you or others to explain to us stuff that is not there in the Bible?

How do I know what you say is in fact what Jesus meant to say? Should I just take your word for it?

What made you a better interpreter of the words of Jesus than I?

A really stupid teacher who leaves his teaching open to such interpretations and explanations by others is an IMBECILIC teacher and I will not take your CORRECTIONS for his moronic teachings since they are nothing but attempts at covering up stupid teachings.

 

[Slowvehicle]

The Cleese is strong with this one.

"How blessed are the Cleese-makers..."

 

[Gaetan]

But then that proves that Jesus was an idiot for not EXPLAINING what he really meant.... you are now explaining what he meant... why could he not expound?
.

You just trying to play smart, you know what he meant by the golden rule.

 

[RoboTimbo]

You just trying to play smart, you know what he meant by the golden rule.

Then why did you feel it necessary to interpret it?

 

[Leumas]

....
So could you please Kirbztomp explain what are the basis in reality for the following myths, and who are the real people who were behind the following mythical characters

<snip a load of gobbledygook that does not answer the question above or address the numerous fallacies pointed out in the post it is in>

... and ends with, on A side, a "marked one" and a flower which sometimes means peace.

Who is the marked one? What is s/he/it marked with? Why was s/he/it marked? Who did the marking?

Is s/he/it a mythical being based upon a real person? Who is that real person?

...This is exactly the special circumstances that "God" has set about since "The Fall". Now that can be special pleading or a new idea, take it as you will.

Do you think that by putting the words God and The Fall capitalized and between quotation marks would somehow make us think that you are STILL a skeptic?

You are talking about God, and a marked one and The Fall and God setting up special circumstances.

This is very CLEARLY and UNDENIABLY a claim of CREATIONISM and there is nothing SKEPTICAL about it despite putting words between quotation marks.

...History does show that it takes outside the box thinkers to solve riddles and problems and we are STILL smack dab in the middle of a problem that has been going on seemingly forever because:

1. literal interpretations2. interpretations that end with "My God is greater than your God so I will now kill you"
3. "You are a sinner. enjoy Hell/Hades/whatever"

Yes you are absolutely right history does show that it takes THINKING to solve problems.

But history also shows, not to mention the present as well, that people who use the BIBLE as any kind of a basis for a solution have time and again DESTRUCTIVELY and abysmally failed… even after they have metaphoricated () and allegorized the hell out of it.

...furthermore in all 3 cases above (which you can feel free to add to as I am sure I am not an authority on anything, trust me there) presuppositions are afoot. Sure there are evil people that do and have done wicked things and we as people are doing our best to "correct" that situation.

So your proposal is that it is not the fault of the Bible that people have interpreted it in all sorts of manners and yet managed to find in it justification for their vile and heinous deeds.

So you are proclaiming that The bible is the only True Scotsman and everyone who has ever read it (except you of course) is just a PRETEND Scotsman who does not understand Gaelic?

Can you now see how this could perhaps lead one to think that you might be nothing but as a Pretend International Skeptic who is trying to sneak in the Bible and "God" and the "marked one" and "The Fall" and "Jesus" onto the Stage through the trap door of ILLOGIC while diverting away attention from your attempts by using chicanery and BAD legerdemain?

...Women were not allowed to learn to read and write, in some cultures and throughout history. That is a fact. That is what I meant by not allowed. Today we are getting better about it (not fast enough though I think).

It is not that women were not ALLOWED to learn to read and write… EVERYBODY could not AFFORD the time and expense to learn to read and write let alone women.

It is not that people were not ALLOWED to learn… it was a specialized skill much like a butcher or a baker or a candlestick maker or carpenter or a smith or a fletcher… likewise there was the SCRIBE.

...Educating the young was not allowed but ancient philosophers tried anyway only to be persecuted (or really were boy touchers, whatever) for it. That is very factual and we are now starting child education at what? 3? 4? 5? But still in questionable ways by some accounts (this reaches also to in school versus out of school versus online learning)

You are wrong and it is not a fact.

I suggest you read this ANCIENT EGYPTIAN book called Instructions For Little Pepi On His Way To School

History of education

The Middle East

....Later, when a syllabic script became more widespread, more of the Mesopotamian population became literate. Later still in Babylonian times there were libraries in most towns and temples; an old Sumerian proverb averred that "he who would excel in the school of the scribes must rise with the dawn." There arose a whole social class of scribes, mostly employed in agriculture, but some as personal secretaries or lawyers.[8] Women as well as men learned to read and write, and for the Semitic Babylonians, this involved knowledge of the extinct Sumerian language, and a complicated and extensive syllabary. Vocabularies, grammars, and interlinear translations were compiled for the use of students, as well as commentaries on the older texts and explanations of obscure words and phrases. Massive archives of texts were recovered from the archaeological contexts of Old Babylonian scribal schools, through which literacy was disseminated....​

China

During the Zhou Dynasty (1045 BC to 256 BC), there were five national schools in the capital city, Pi Yong (an imperial school, located in a central location) and four other schools for the aristocrats and nobility, including Shang Xiang. The schools mainly taught the Six Arts: rites, music, archery, charioteering, calligraphy, and mathematics. According to the Book of Rituals, at age twelve, boys learned arts related to ritual (i.e. music and dance) and when older, archery and chariot driving. Girls learned ritual, correct deportment, silk production and weaving.[23][24]

It was during the Zhou Dynasty that the origins of native Chinese philosophy also developed. Confucius (551 BC – 479 BC) founder of Confucianism, was a Chinese philosopher who made a great impact on later generations of Chinese, and on the curriculum of the Chinese educational system for much of the following 2000 years....​

Greece

... For example, in Athens, during the 5th and 4th century BC, aside from two years military training, the state played little part in schooling.[26][27] Anyone could open a school and decide the curriculum. Parents could choose a school offering the subjects they wanted their children to learn, at a monthly fee they could afford.[26] Most parents, even the poor, sent their sons to schools for at least a few years, and if they could afford it from around the age of seven until fourteen, learning gymnastics (including athletics, sport and wrestling), music (including poetry, drama and history) and literacy.[26][27] Girls rarely received formal education. At writing school, the youngest students learned the alphabet by song, then later by copying the shapes of letters with a stylus on a waxed wooden tablet. After some schooling, the sons of poor or middle-class families often learnt a trade by apprenticeship, whether with their father or another tradesman.[26] By around 350 BC, it was common for children at schools in Athens to also study various arts such as drawing, painting, and sculpture. The richest students continued their education by studying with sophists, from whom they could learn subjects such as rhetoric, mathematics, geography, natural history, politics, and logic.[26][27] Some of Athens' greatest schools of higher education included the Lyceum (the so-called Peripatetic school founded by Aristotle of Stageira) and the Platonic Academy (founded by Plato of Athens). The education system of the wealthy ancient Greeks is also called Paideia. In the subsequent Roman empire, Greek was the primary language of science. Advanced scientific research and teaching was mainly carried on in the Hellenistic side of the Roman empire, in Greek...​

Rome

The first schools in Ancient Rome arose by the middle of the 4th century BC.[28] These schools were concerned with the basic socialization and rudimentary education of young Roman children.​

...Blind/sick/diseased people were ostracized and outcast from society whether that be from a religious or a health aspect. That is a fact. But now we keep and care for them and make them better.

You saying that it is facts does not, and will never make it true

History of medicine

This article deals with medicine as practiced by trained professionals from ancient times to the present. The ancient Egyptians, Ancient Indians, had a system of medicine that was advanced for its time and influenced later medical traditions. The Babylonians, Indians[1] and Egyptians had introduced the concepts of medical diagnosis, prognosis, and medical examination. The Greeks went even further, and advanced as well medical ethics. The Hippocratic Oath, still taken (although significantly changed from the original) by doctors up to today, was written in Greece in the 5th century BCE....

Egypt

Ancient Egypt developed a large, varied and fruitful medical tradition. Herodotus described the Egyptians as "the healthiest of all men, next to the Libyans",[2] due to the dry climate and the notable public health system that they possessed. According to him, the practice of medicine is so specialized among them that each physician is a healer of one disease and no more." Although Egyptian medicine, to a good extent, dealt with the supernatural,[3] it eventually developed a practical use in the fields of anatomy, public health, and clinical diagnostics.​

Middle East

The oldest Babylonian texts on medicine date back to the Old Babylonian period in the first half of the 2nd millennium BCE. The most extensive Babylonian medical text, however, is the Diagnostic Handbook written by the ummânū, or chief scholar, Esagil-kin-apli of Borsippa,[10] during the reign of the Babylonian king Adad-apla-iddina (1069–1046 BCE).[11]

Along with the Egyptians the Babylonians introduced the practice of diagnosis, prognosis, physical examination, and remedies. In addition, the Diagnostic Handbook introduced the methods of therapy and etiology. The text contains a list of medical symptoms and often detailed empirical observations along with logical rules used in combining observed symptoms on the body of a patient with its diagnosis and prognosis.[12]

The Diagnostic Handbook was based on a logical set of axioms and assumptions, including the modern view that through the examination and inspection of the symptoms of a patient, it is possible to determine the patient's disease, its aetiology and future development, and the chances of the patient's recovery. The symptoms and diseases of a patient were treated through therapeutic means such as bandages, herbs and creams.[10]​

...These groups of people (and even more) have been in a struggle much longer than any stupid religion and the best way they saw fit (as far as I can tell) is to learn the information on their own (since they would not get help) and weave in their stories into literature that would survive their ever fleeting existence for future generations to find.

Rubbish… every human learns from his society which in itself as a collective also learns from previous societies as well as from surrounding ones.

...To me, that is the greatest treasure map. To me, that is the greatest mythology;

the person living in the gutter caring THAT much about his future gutter dwellers in the hopes that one day their time would come when can live a "normal" life.

Read the above references just on medicine alone and you will see why this is not such a profound revelation as you seem to think it is.

...And they are winning. Just sit back and watch. This is not, as pointed out in some above posts, about religion but about people. Those on high and those below their feet, and those that want to raze and raise equally for a level playing field because (Goddammit) this is their world too.

So the meek shall inherit the Earth… only according to Jesus there will not be much of it left once he is done with smiting everything and everyone in and on it... you read Revelation and seem to love it a lot... so you know what will happen to Earth and its inhabitants as described there before the meek get to eventually inherit the ruins left over.... what kind of Earth will be left over once STARS have been scooped out of the heavens with the tail of a dragon and brought crashing down on it?

...That is my point. Also, the marked one is not born, he rises from the gutter.

Yes, yes… we hear you loud and clear... you are a Pretend International Skeptic trying to shove "God" and "creationism" and "Jesus" and "Satan" and "Angels" and "Bible" on the Stage through the trapdoor of illogic while trying (badly) to divert our attention with chicanery and BARE ASSERTIONS among numerous other illogical fallacies mentioned earlier.

 

[Gaetan]

Then why did you feel it necessary to interpret it?

I did not interpret the golden rule, it says what it is, what i interpret was to love his neighbour as yourself, that's what it says: it means that:

To Love your neighbour like yourself means to treat your neighbour like yourself, it is to have the same attitude towards your neighbour than your own person.

 

[RoboTimbo]

I did not interpret the golden rule, it says what it is, what i interpret was to love his neighbour as yourself, that's what it says: it means that:

To Love your neighbour like yourself means to treat your neighbour like yourself, it is to have the same attitude towards your neighbour than your own person.

So you didn't interpret it but then you interpreted it? And you admit that it isn't a law?