Wash your hands or do not wash your hands when you eat

[Fake Messiah]

That was my take on it - he was saying to be more concerned with spiritual defilement. I have to say that, while not generally a fan of Jesus, he handled the Pharisees pretty well.

Boru

If one reads Mark 7 or/ and Matthew 17 (which is in the 1st post) it does appear as if Jesus was saying to people not to wash their hands before eating since his apostles were drawing attention because they ate with dirty, unwashed hands, as well as from dirty dishes

The Pharisees and some of the teachers of the law who had come from Jerusalem gathered around Jesus and saw some of his disciples eating food with hands that were defiled, that is, unwashed. ... And they [Pharisees] observe many other traditions, such as the washing of cups, pitchers and kettles.

Not to mention that if Jesus was an all-knowing entity who knew about germs, that he was a dick to say to people not to wash their hands even if it was only on a "spiritual level" -- it would be as if someone today told people not to wear a condom if they are having sex with a stranger, just to prove some other point.

"Come on, have unprotected sex with that person you don't yet know if he or she has vd and see what happens to you." -- apologists for that guru would no doubt find some way to make sense of it in their minds.

[The Architect Of Fate]

That was my take on it - he was saying to be more concerned with spiritual defilement. I have to say that, while not generally a fan of Jesus, he handled the Pharisees pretty well.

Boru

If one reads Mark 7 or/ and Matthew 17 (which is in the 1st post) it does appear as if Jesus was saying to people not to wash their hands before eating since his apostles were drawing attention because they ate with dirty, unwashed hands, as well as from dirty dishes

The Pharisees and some of the teachers of the law who had come from Jerusalem gathered around Jesus and saw some of his disciples eating food with hands that were defiled, that is, unwashed. ... And they [Pharisees] observe many other traditions, such as the washing of cups, pitchers and kettles.

Not to mention that if Jesus was an all-knowing entity who knew about germs, that he was a dick to say to people not to wash their hands even if it was only on a "spiritual level" -- it would be as if someone today told people not to wear a condom if they are having sex with a stranger, just to prove some other point.

"Come on, have unprotected sex with that person you don't yet know if he or she has vd and see what happens to you." -- apologists for that guru would no doubt find some way to make sense of it in their minds

Religion is all about twisting doctrine in a way that conveniences the priest class. This is why we have billionaire pastors in a religion that suppose to hold poverty as a virtue.

[Fake Messiah]

In any case, it seems that the apostles were taking Jesus literally about not washing their hands, but then again, Jesus did say they were stupid.

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

Well, I just went out to do some shopping. Masks are mandatory, as is social Distancing of 1 metre. One must either sign in or use a tracing application on one's phone when entering any business. Plus wash hands with that alcohol based cleaner.

Most people tend to comply. We do have a few dickheads who still refuse to be vaccinated or wear a mask. Such people are denied entry to shops such as supermarkets. Some get upset and aggressive. They are arrested and carted off by police.

Doesn't matter to me if dickheads earn Darwin awards. I just become peeved when they put others, such as myself, at risk.

[Fireball]

Well, I just went out to do some shopping.  Masks are mandatory, as is social Distancing of 1 metre. One must either sign in or use a tracing application on one's phone when entering any business. Plus wash hands with that alcohol based cleaner.

Most people tend to comply. We do have a few dickheads who still refuse to be vaccinated or wear a mask. Such people are denied entry to shops such as supermarkets. Some get upset and aggressive. They are arrested and carted off by police.

Doesn't matter to me if dickheads earn Darwin awards. I just become peeved when they put others, such as myself, at risk.

Man, I wish that the US was like this.

[Ferrocyanide]

In any case, it seems that the apostles were taking Jesus literally about not washing their hands, but then again, Jesus did say they were stupid.

It is possible that some kind of conversation had taken place before the event of Matthew 15:1.
For example, Jesus sits down at the dinner table with some of his sect members.
“Hey Jesus. You did not wash your hands.”
“Don’t worry about it. What’s the point of washing your hands? In fact, I order all of you to be like me. Capish?”
“Yes, boss.”

Also, there would need to be a public version.
Let’s say Jesus goes to MacDonald’s with his sect members and the same kind of conversation is repeated.
The Pharisees who are seated at a nearby table notice that they did not wash their hands.

A few days later, the Matthew 15:1 encounter occurs.

The most importing thing as far as I am concerned:
The Pharisees were not able to explain to Jesus why you should wash your hands.
This is why it is important to understand why you should do X instead of simply being told to do it by your leader and then, the obedient sect member just obeys blindly.

In fact, there is this line which is in my first post:
Matthew {15:14} Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.

Did Jesus really unblind people? He says “Don’t be a murderer, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies” but this is something that the average joe from back then already knew.
Jesus did not provided any new information. He makes a poor teacher.

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

In any case, it seems that the apostles were taking Jesus literally about not washing their hands, but then again, Jesus did say they were stupid.

It is possible that some kind of conversation had taken place before the event of Matthew 15:1.
For example, Jesus sits down at the dinner table with some of his sect members.
“Hey Jesus. You did not wash your hands.”
“Don’t worry about it. What’s the point of washing your hands? In fact, I order all of you to be like me. Capish?”
“Yes, boss.”

Also, there would need to be a public version.
Let’s say Jesus goes to MacDonald’s with his sect members and the same kind of conversation is repeated.
The Pharisees who are seated at a nearby table notice that they did not wash their hands.

A few days later, the Matthew 15:1 encounter occurs.

The most importing thing as far as I am concerned:
The Pharisees were not able to explain to Jesus why you should wash your hands.
This is why it is important to understand why you should do X instead of simply being told to do it by your leader and then, the obedient sect member just obeys blindly.

In fact, there is this line which is in my first post:
Matthew {15:14} Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.

Did Jesus really unblind people? He says “Don’t be a murderer, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies” but this is something that the average joe from back then already knew.
Jesus did not provided any new information. He makes a poor teacher.

 Two thousand years ago people were unaware of germ theory so may have been a lot more casual about hygiene. I mean Jesus is reported as allowing some woman to wash his feet with her hair. Yeah, I get the symbolism, but eww just the same. 

Of course it's all moot, what with Jesus probably not existing and all. You might accept there was an historical Jesus. Accepting that as likely, I argue that it's unlikely the New Testament says little or anything about an historical person called Jesus/Yeshua/ Yoshua bar Yusuf. 


((((((((((((((((((((((((((9)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

Off topic on the nature of Jesus.  This question was officially finalised at the first Nicene Council in 325; Jesus, was god and man. But I've always a had problem with that claim . In recent years I've been having some niggles about the Council  itself as well. IE seems to me it was primarily political, about power and control .

 At the Catholic school I attended I was taught that Jesus was God and man.

Well, if Jesus were god, that means he was perfect and incapable of sin.  That means he could not be man.

If he were man, that means he as imperfect and sinned. That means he could not be god.

[HappySkeptic]

At the Catholic school I attended I was taught that Jesus was God and man.

Well, if Jesus were god, that means he was perfect and incapable of sin.  That means he could not be man.

If he were man, that means he as imperfect and sinned. That means he could not be god.

Religions love their contradictions - they just call it "mystery".  The more impossible it is, the more it is worth believing?

[Ferrocyanide]

 Two thousand years ago people were unaware of germ theory so may have been a lot more casual about hygiene. I mean Jesus is reported as allowing some woman to wash his feet with her hair. Yeah, I get the symbolism, but eww just the same. 

Of course it's all moot, what with Jesus probably not existing and all. You might accept there was an historical Jesus. Accepting that as likely, I argue that it's unlikely the New Testament says little or anything about an historical person called Jesus/Yeshua/ Yoshua bar Yusuf. 


((((((((((((((((((((((((((9)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

Off topic on the nature of Jesus.  This question was officially finalised at the first Nicene Council in 325; Jesus, was god and man. But I've always a had problem with that claim . In recent years I've been having some niggles about the Council  itself as well. IE seems to me it was primarily political, about power and control .

 At the Catholic school I attended I was taught that Jesus was God and man.

Well, if Jesus were god, that means he was perfect and incapable of sin.  That means he could not be man.

If he were man, that means he as imperfect and sinned. That means he could not be god.

It is my understanding that various christian sects were arguing as to what Jesus was. Some people claimed he was the jewish god and some claimed that he was the son of the jewish god in man form.
So, after a lot of arguing, they decided that he is a god, a human and also he has a son.
I guess they prefer the number 3, so they threw in a 3 rd guy named the Holy Ghost.

Matthew {28:19} Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

Why not also claim that he is a 4 th guy named the God? Why not also claim that he is a 5 th guy named the Lord?

The Bible also claims that Jesus is suppose to be from the David line. Well, Joseph is from the David line according to the Bible but Joseph is not the father of Jesus.

Christianity is such a mess.