The Bible narrative of man's relationship with God begins with the story of his first disobedience and all of Christian theology is summed up in verse 19 of the fifth chapter of Romans:
For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.
Obedience is the theme of most Bible stories—Noah, Job, Abraham and Isaac—but few believers understand the degree of obedience demanded by Christianity. Oswald Chambers, who wrote the devotional, My Utmost for His Highest, put it this way:
Are you prepared to let God take you into total oneness with Himself, paying no more attention to what you call the great things of life? Are you prepared to surrender totally and let go? The true test of abandonment or surrender is in refusing to say, “Well, what about this?” Beware of your own ideas and speculations. The moment you allow yourself to think, “What about this?” you show that you have not surrendered and that you do not really trust God. But once you do surrender, you will no longer think about what God is going to do. Abandonment means to refuse yourself the luxury of asking any questions.
I don't believe I have met many Christians who go that far, but I did know one. When I was a teenager working the soda fountain in a drug store, the owner of the photography shop next door became intoxicated with Roman Catholicism. He began to display religious pictures and statues along with cameras and photographic equipment. Gradually the religious items displaced the merchandise and customers became fewer, but he persisted in his delusion despite the pleas of his friends and family until his business was utterly ruined.
Does anyone else know of examples of this type of total devotion?
The above idea seems wise, but he expressed other views too.
1. The early church adopted his "Only forms matter; the real is unimportant."
2. A view attributed to him: No one should consider not having a leader to obey.
3. One critic said that in his Republic his requirements for a philosopher king excluded everyone but him.
Tom, I agree with your statement. My ethics professor at Gonzaga U. required that we read and analyze 12 philosophers, all male, Plato being one. I requested, in writing, to write about women philosophers. He denied my request stating there were no women philosophers worthy of being read. So I wrote on each male philosopher and his positions on women.
Plato is not a person I would go to for counsel. He didn't perceive women as equal to men. Why? because women didn't have physical strength of men and women nurture, men protect. There were other points, but he defined with too wide a brush for my liking. Some women have more physical strength than some men, some women protect better than some men. He believed women had no role in civil society, but only in the domestic domain. Ah ha! poor deluded man.
For me to pick one sentence out the man's repertoire is as foolish as panting him with too broad a brush. However, I am all in favor of smorgasbord if it suits my purpose.
Joan, your professor was ignorant.
I am no student of philosophy, but I am well aware of Hypatia.
It's true that most of what comes down to us is biased toward men. Also, profoundly Western Roman / Greek biased. What do we know of Inca, Aztec, Maya, and what do we in the West know of Chinese, Monogolian philosophers.
Still, nothing wrong with a well stated quote from Plato. I am vegetarian. If I only ate in vegetarian restaurants, and only went to vegetarian grocery stores, I couldn't eat anywhere. I chose what works for me.
Going way, way back, there was Enheduanna. " the earliest author and poet in the world that history knows by name." ~2350 BCE Among other works, Enheduanna wrote "3 hymns to Inanna which survive and which illustrate three quite different themes of ancient religious faith. In one, Inanna is a ferocious warrior goddess who defeats a mountain even though other gods refuse to help her. A second,... celebrates Inanna's role in governing civilization and overseeing the home and children. In a third, Enheduanna calls on her personal relationship with the goddess for help in regaining her position as priestess of the temple against a male usurper."
I think it is time I stop complaining about that gross insult of the Ethics Dept of Gonzaga University and get back into the literature. Thanks, dear friend, I have no excuse now! You have done my homework to update my women philosophers list.
Thanks, SB; this is the first I've seen of early, perhaps short, written poetry.
The earliest long writing I heard of, and read, was the Gilgamesh story. I understand its story was first told about 2900 BCE and passed along orally for a thousand years before being written. I was pleasantly surprised that the Victorian-era translator kept a sexual component in the story.
I clicked on your Enheduanna link and find it reasonable:
1. that shorter writings appeared earlier, and
2. that writings by women were suppressed.
I now want to read more.
k.h. ky I agree.
It is more than obedience. It is submission without questioning. There is also suffering within the religious theme because they knew everyone could identify with suffering even if it was not real and only imagined. We
all think we "suffer." In this way too yuo could identify with the sufering of Christ.
It appears none of us would make good soldiers or military personnel.
At least there can be some degree of rationality in the military. In religion, insofar as the dogma is concerned, there is NONE.
I would make a terrible soldier in these wars since 1945. I have been opposed to all of them, including the Korean war and all the little wars the war-lover-Reagan sent all over the world.
I am enjoying pocking my finger in the balloon of religion now.
No! I don't want to pock my finger, I want to poke it! Excuse me!