Jesus' Goal of Breaking Up Families

How is this good news?

Matthew 10:35-36

“35 For I have come to turn
“ ‘a man against his father,
a daughter against her mother,
a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law—
36 a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household.”

When I think about the things that divide my family, words from the Gospels come to mind not Micah. This is reportedly a quote from Micah 7:6.

Last night, there was a cookout at the church I grew up at. Regardless of our financial situation, I didn’t want to attend, but other family members attended. Had it come down to the option between skipping a meal, and attending a church cookout, I would have skipped the meal. As far as taste goes, I probably would have preferred the food served at the cookout. This is not about taste or allergies. It is about principle, and frankly Jesus was not good enough for me to believe that he was the messiah as a king, or as a deity, such that I want no part in that.

The “Gospel” story is about a man, Jesus, who is psychologically disturbed. Yet, Jesus wins on this one. The words of Jesus come true in Matthew 10:35-36, a quote from Micah 7:6. Yet, it didn’t take a messiah to say that. Anyone with access to Micah could have read it long before Jesus walked the earth.

So, what’s so bad about Jesus that I refuse to attend a church cookout? It is because I reject many forms of human sacrifice, and animal. Fasting, studying Torah, giving to charity, and/or cognitive reframing are ways to go to achieve forgiveness. The sacrifice of Jesus accomplished nothing that I would call “Good,” but get this; Jesus may have agreed with me in Matthew 10:38. The Tanya, a Jewish compilation of sacred spirituality, sometimes called the Hasidic Bible has this to say:

"whoever would be affected by many fasts...
is forbidden to undertake numerous fasts...
But whoever cannot fast yet does so, is called a “sinner” in Tractate Taanit, ch. 1.2...
comply with the verse that says,4 “Redeem your sin with charity.” - from Igeret HaTeshuva , middle of Chapter 3 available at chabad.org

Igeret HaTeshuva does not resemble the Christian claim of the power of the sacrifice of Jesus. Jesus may have agreed with me given Matthew 10:38.

Matthew 10:38 Whoever does not take up their cross and follow me is not worthy of me.

Before jumping to conclusions that this is the answer, realize, there are many contradictions to this New Testament quote. Most Christians I know report praying to Jesus for forgiveness is the way to go, because that is what the sacrifice of Jesus supposedly accomplished, but praying is hardly carrying one’s own cross. Here, I agree with Jesus demand to metaphorically carry one’s own “cross,” meaning taking responsibility for one’s own actions. Thus, the local Christians that celebrate the supposed death and resurrection of Jesus, are placing Jesus on the cross as a form of shirking their sins, such that they aren’t worthy of my company via attending the cookout. Yet, if Jesus told that his followers that they must take responsibility, then what good is it beyond what had been already known for hundreds of years? That would place Jesus in the category of a teacher, and certainly not a messiah, or deity.

Transient Physics of The Evolving Universe

Ask yourself these two questions:

1.  It is well known now that the universe is expanding.  Please Google something like, "Expanding universe," if there is any doubt as to the authenticity of this claim.  Consider that as the universe changes size, will its expansion cause physical laws to evolve, such that a universe’s physical laws are impermanent and in need continual reevaluation?

2.  This may not seem obvious at first, but when asking: Do scientists claim that the laws of our universe existed prior to its creation? hopefully it should become clearer.

Physical laws, which govern our universe are not absolute because they had to have evolved as the universe chronologically expands from nothing.  This currently means that at this time different equations for calculations are used, actual equations verifiable through data, that are size dependant, as one cannot use an equation for the large when calculating the physics of the very small (involving quantum physics), nor can they calculate the converse, very small for very large; and what's more it is currently impossible to calculate both big things and very small things together in the same equation!  The laws of the physical universe often depend upon dimensions, but yet the dimensions of the universe are continually changing!

Therefore, I suggest that the explanation for the mathematical discrepancies between the physics of the large and quantum reality (physics of the small.) are actually both transient, such that constants must be added that adjust for discrepancies.  

As a religionist my thought is that as we enter the age of Moshiach, the physical laws the govern the universe will continue toward perfection and ease of use, such that one day we will have a confluent mathematical system for all calculations both large and very small.

The Higgs Boson or God or Both?

Scientists have discovered - evolution explains our origins, gravity explains why apples drop, solubility explains salt water and so on. Yet, scientists can't explain why particles exist. Science tells us about the Higgs boson, which some people call the "God particle," but why does there need to be this particle? There are answers to that question, but what about this one: why is there existence in the first place? Science can often tell us about the cosmos, and science may even say, "There is a cosmos because there is a Higgs boson," but why does the cosmos require the Higgs boson? The faithful say; it was G-d, yet under scrutiny the answers of science, religion, and history are full of empty answers. For instance, the faithful can't tell us why is there Gd in the first place. In all disciplines, one "why?" leads to another "why?" ad infinitum until we are forced to contemplate the absurdities of this world, such as why Hashem gave the Jews Torah, or why Allah gave Muslims a Qu'ran, etc.