• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

I have to say...

Herr Heinrich

Student of Mythology
I normally do not talk bad about religions nowadays, but I had to vent. Today was one of my little sister's First Communion. My family is Catholic, so it was obviously at a Catholic Church. I have to say: I am glad I am not Catholic anymore. I sat there the entire time just realizing how off Christianity seems to me. It just does not sit well with me.

One thing that bothered me especially was the homily. The reading was John 15. I found this part particularly disturbing, "
5 I am the vine, you are the branches. Whoever remains in me, with me in him, bears fruit in plenty; for cut off from me you can do nothing. 6 Anyone who does not remain in me is thrown away like a branch -- and withers; these branches are collected and thrown on the fire and are burnt."


It annoyed me that this part was completely ignored when the reading was being discussed. How can you ignore something this important? I understand that it would probably make for a pretty touchy discussion, but it is still part of the reading.
 

Penumbra

Veteran Member
Premium Member
The various comparisons of humans to fruit-bearing plants generally seem a bit off and unethical to me.

There are more than one, but they basically go along the lines of, "without me, you're nothing" or "there's an axe prepared to cut you down if you don't bear fruit".

If that's how people want to view themselves- as plants ready to be cut down by their master if they fail to show signs of producing value, then that's fine I guess. I don't see the appeal, or the love.
 

lunamoth

Will to love
The various comparisons of humans to fruit-bearing plants generally seem a bit off and unethical to me.

There are more than one, but they basically go along the lines of, "without me, you're nothing" or "there's an axe prepared to cut you down if you don't bear fruit".

If that's how people want to view themselves- as plants ready to be cut down by their master if they fail to show signs of producing value, then that's fine I guess. I don't see the appeal, or the love.
That's not how I see that parable at all. It is not about producing value or being cut down, but about staying in relationship with God and each other. It is not proscribing punishment, but describing what it is like when we do not love one another.

The love is in recognizing we are all connected, branches of one vine.
 

Vultar

Active Member
It is basically saying that if you don't follow, then you will wither and be dicarded. It is designed to attempt to keep people in the group, nothing more....
 

blackout

Violet.
One thing that bothered me especially was the homily. The reading was John 15. I found this part particularly disturbing, "5 I am the vine, you are the branches. Whoever remains in me, with me in him, bears fruit in plenty; for cut off from me you can do nothing. 6 Anyone who does not remain in me is thrown away like a branch -- and withers; these branches are collected and thrown on the fire and are burnt."


It annoyed me that this part was completely ignored when the reading was being discussed. How can you ignore something this important? I understand that it would probably make for a pretty touchy discussion, but it is still part of the reading.

That's not how I see that parable at all. It is not about producing value or being cut down, but about staying in relationship with God and each other. It is not proscribing punishment, but describing what it is like when we do not love one another.

The love is in recognizing we are all connected, branches of one vine.

I'm usually pretty good at putting a useful- be it unconventional- spin on
metaphorical/alegorical/symbolic type things,
but the end of this one leaves me with nowhere to go.

'Collecting' and 'throwing' are actions taken.
Someone does the collecting and throwing/(casting),
and something (in this case, someone) is collected and thrown (or cast).

So WHO is it that 'collects and throws' the 'withered' people on the fire to be burnt Luna?
Is that like when we throw super unloving people into the electric chair?

It sure sounds an AWFUL lot like the
'God' throwing sinners into hell (or Gehena?)
to either be tortured, or burnt up/uncreated/destroyed.

The Catholic stance would certainly be eternal hell fire as in unending, suffering, and torture.

According to the RC, I am one of those 'former believers',
no longer a 'branch on the vine'
now destined for hellfire.:rolleyes:

*yawns*
 
Last edited:

Thief

Rogue Theologian
I normally do not talk bad about religions nowadays, but I had to vent. Today was one of my little sister's First Communion. My family is Catholic, so it was obviously at a Catholic Church. I have to say: I am glad I am not Catholic anymore. I sat there the entire time just realizing how off Christianity seems to me. It just does not sit well with me.

One thing that bothered me especially was the homily. The reading was John 15. I found this part particularly disturbing, "
5 I am the vine, you are the branches. Whoever remains in me, with me in him, bears fruit in plenty; for cut off from me you can do nothing. 6 Anyone who does not remain in me is thrown away like a branch -- and withers; these branches are collected and thrown on the fire and are burnt."


It annoyed me that this part was completely ignored when the reading was being discussed. How can you ignore something this important? I understand that it would probably make for a pretty touchy discussion, but it is still part of the reading.

Almost became a priest to that form of faith...
just as well they chose someone else for the open position...

But the words of the Carpenter are still firm.
In the next life communication would be of mind and spirit.
They would know you, as if you are made of glass.

To be cut off from that level of interaction would indeed be....'cut off'.

Unable to 'see' others...you would be as if blind.
And lost in a void, with no direction.
 

HerDotness

Lady Babbleon
Very simple response--the clearly ugly, inconvenient or unpleasant portions of the Bible are simply ignored or excused away.

Since the readings texts aren't chosen by the individual parish priest, the priest or layperson doing the reading was stuck with it, wildly inappropriate for a First Communion Mass though it was.

Now, on the other hand, if you mean that this reading was only part of the homily, then there is something seriously wrong with that priest's thinking and judgment.

I agree that such texts were incorporated to frighten people into remaining in the church. The message clearly is "If you don't keep a close relationship with Jesus, your life is essentially worthless, and you're setting yourself up to burn in hell."
 
Last edited:

Gomeza

Member
I normally do not talk bad about religions nowadays, but I had to vent. Today was one of my little sister's First Communion. My family is Catholic, so it was obviously at a Catholic Church. I have to say: I am glad I am not Catholic anymore. I sat there the entire time just realizing how off Christianity seems to me. It just does not sit well with me.

One thing that bothered me especially was the homily. The reading was John 15. I found this part particularly disturbing, "
5 I am the vine, you are the branches. Whoever remains in me, with me in him, bears fruit in plenty; for cut off from me you can do nothing. 6 Anyone who does not remain in me is thrown away like a branch -- and withers; these branches are collected and thrown on the fire and are burnt."


It annoyed me that this part was completely ignored when the reading was being discussed. How can you ignore something this important? I understand that it would probably make for a pretty touchy discussion, but it is still part of the reading.

As an individual who has managed to purge themselves of years of this type of indoctrination, I find it a bit disheartening that the not so subtle disparaging of those not buying into the dogma is still so prevalent in so many church functions (of so many churches) today.

It is little wonder that religious tolerance is nothing more than a laughable catch phrase when so many participants are continuously bombarded with so many subliminal messages like this one which is effectively characterizing non believers and persons of other faiths as withered pieces of brush to be disposed of.
 

Herr Heinrich

Student of Mythology
Specifically what do you find disturbing about that passage?


I interpret it to mean that non-believers are basically cast into Hell. I find that appalling. It is passages like these that cause me to ignore people who try and tell me that Christianity is an accepting faith. How is this accepting at all? It especially disturbs me that this was read at a first communion. To children. This is nothing more than a fear-tactic to keep children coming to church and scaring them into believing in Jesus.
 

Jainarayan

ॐ नमो भगवते वासुदेवाय
Staff member
Premium Member
It is basically saying that if you don't follow, then you will wither and be dicarded. It is designed to attempt to keep people in the group, nothing more....

Or it is saying that by not listening to his teachings and message, you will be lost in your search for God, and not attain God-knowledge? We have the same sort of teachings in Hinduism. Fortunately they've been interpreted for their full meaning.

Jesus's lectures, parables and sermons are far, far deeper than what's on the surface. It's a shame that people cannot see past the face value. :rolleyes: Of course, it's the church leaders and church "fathers" who did a pretty shoddy job of disseminating Jesus's stories and sermons, leaving them at face value.
 

HerDotness

Lady Babbleon
It especially disturbs me that this was read at a first communion. To children. This is nothing more than a fear-tactic to keep children coming to church and scaring them into believing in Jesus.

I think it appalling as well. First Communicants are typically six or seven years old. Telling kids that age that their non-Christian friends are going to burn in hell is inexcusable.
 

4consideration

*
Premium Member
That's not how I see that parable at all. It is not about producing value or being cut down, but about staying in relationship with God and each other. It is not proscribing punishment, but describing what it is like when we do not love one another.

The love is in recognizing we are all connected, branches of one vine.

I agree with your interpretation.

I see it as being about the branch's inability to continue to grow and to bear fruit when cut from its' source of nourishment and growth. I do not see it as being about punishment.
 

Bob Dixon

>implying
Or it is saying that by not listening to his teachings and message, you will be lost in your search for God, and not attain God-knowledge? We have the same sort of teachings in Hinduism. Fortunately they've been interpreted for their full meaning.

Jesus's lectures, parables and sermons are far, far deeper than what's on the surface. It's a shame that people cannot see past the face value. :rolleyes: Of course, it's the church leaders and church "fathers" who did a pretty shoddy job of disseminating Jesus's stories and sermons, leaving them at face value.

See, both sides take them at face-value. This gives both a bad interpretation. The only differnce is that one side believes it, and the other doesn't. But a face-value reading robs the text of its meaning.
 

Penumbra

Veteran Member
Premium Member
That's not how I see that parable at all. It is not about producing value or being cut down, but about staying in relationship with God and each other. It is not proscribing punishment, but describing what it is like when we do not love one another.

The love is in recognizing we are all connected, branches of one vine.
So you view this as a positive verse?

John 15:
“I am the true vine, and my Father is the gardener. 2 He cuts off every branch in me that bears no fruit, while every branch that does bear fruit he prunes[a] so that it will be even more fruitful. 3 You are already clean because of the word I have spoken to you. 4 Remain in me, as I also remain in you. No branch can bear fruit by itself; it must remain in the vine. Neither can you bear fruit unless you remain in me.
5 “I am the vine; you are the branches. If you remain in me and I in you, you will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing. 6 If you do not remain in me, you are like a branch that is thrown away and withers; such branches are picked up, thrown into the fire and burned. 7 If you remain in me and my words remain in you, ask whatever you wish, and it will be done for you. 8 This is to my Father’s glory, that you bear much fruit, showing yourselves to be my disciples.
9 “As the Father has loved me, so have I loved you. Now remain in my love. 10 If you keep my commands, you will remain in my love, just as I have kept my Father’s commands and remain in his love. 11 I have told you this so that my joy may be in you and that your joy may be complete. 12 My command is this: Love each other as I have loved you. 13 Greater love has no one than this: to lay down one’s life for one’s friends. 14 You are my friends if you do what I command. 15 I no longer call you servants, because a servant does not know his master’s business. Instead, I have called you friends, for everything that I learned from my Father I have made known to you. 16 You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you so that you might go and bear fruit —fruit that will last—and so that whatever you ask in my name the Father will give you. 17 This is my command: Love each other.

And other verses on along the similar concept:

Matthew 7:
15 “Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. 16 By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17 Likewise, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.

Matthew 21:
18 Early in the morning, as Jesus was on his way back to the city, he was hungry. 19 Seeing a fig tree by the road, he went up to it but found nothing on it except leaves. Then he said to it, “May you never bear fruit again!” Immediately the tree withered.
20 When the disciples saw this, they were amazed. “How did the fig tree wither so quickly?” they asked.
21 Jesus replied, “Truly I tell you, if you have faith and do not doubt, not only can you do what was done to the fig tree, but also you can say to this mountain, ‘Go, throw yourself into the sea,’ and it will be done. 22 If you believe, you will receive whatever you ask for in prayer.”

Luke 3:
For I tell you that out of these stones God can raise up children for Abraham. 9 The ax is already at the root of the trees, and every tree that does not produce good fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire.”

Luke 13:
Now there were some present at that time who told Jesus about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mixed with their sacrifices. 2 Jesus answered, “Do you think that these Galileans were worse sinners than all the other Galileans because they suffered this way? 3I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all perish. 4 Or those eighteen who died when the tower in Siloam fell on them—do you think they were more guilty than all the others living in Jerusalem? 5 I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all perish.”
6 Then he told this parable: “A man had a fig tree growing in his vineyard, and he went to look for fruit on it but did not find any. 7 So he said to the man who took care of the vineyard, ‘For three years now I’ve been coming to look for fruit on this fig tree and haven’t found any. Cut it down! Why should it use up the soil?’
8 “‘Sir,’ the man replied, ‘leave it alone for one more year, and I’ll dig around it and fertilize it. 9 If it bears fruit next year, fine! If not, then cut it down.’”

Source: NIV version
BibleGateway.com: A searchable online Bible in over 100 versions and 50 languages.


It seems to me that this repeated concept through the gospels is fairly consistent, fairly elementary, and fairly negative. The potential for massive translational issues aside (I read in English only), I do not particularly see how "It is not about producing value or being cut down," can be a well-defended interpretation of this material. You're welcome to clarify your interpretation of this material if you wish.
 

Jainarayan

ॐ नमो भगवते वासुदेवाय
Staff member
Premium Member
See, both sides take them at face-value. This gives both a bad interpretation. The only differnce is that one side believes it, and the other doesn't. But a face-value reading robs the text of its meaning.

There is a book called The Sermon on the Mount According to Vedanta by Swami Prabhavananda. There is another book called Life and Teachings of Lord Jesus by Sri Swami Sivananda. And yet another book What Jesus Really Meant by Richard L. Litke. Funny that two Hindu swamis should dissect and present Jesus's teachings in a way most Christians have never heard, and not even mention the name of a Hindu god or goddess in the process.

These books all delve very deeply into the spirituality behind the parables and especially the Beatitudes. According to Swami Prabhavananda, they are definitely not what we (including me as a former Christian) were taught. The words don't even begin to scratch the surface of their true meanings.
 

waitasec

Veteran Member
"Anyone who does not remain in me is thrown away like a branch -- and withers; these branches are collected and thrown on the fire and are burnt."

sounds like a threat/ultimatum to me...
 

lunamoth

Will to love
'Collecting' and 'throwing' are actions taken.
Someone does the collecting and throwing/(casting),
and something (in this case, someone) is collected and thrown (or cast).

So WHO is it that 'collects and throws' the 'withered' people on the fire to be burnt Luna?
Is that like when we throw super unloving people into the electric chair?
This passage is not about throwing people into a fiery hell, UV, although in today's world I understand why so many read it this way. The references to the withered branches being burned allude to the Temple and the corruption/weaknesses/failures of Temple worship in Jesus' day, and the burning is pointing (probably in retrospect) to the destruction of the Temple, not people. The people were not being nourished by the Temple-based religion because the Temple had cut itself off from God.

It sure sounds an AWFUL lot like the
'God' throwing sinners into hell (or Gehena?)
to either be tortured, or burnt up/uncreated/destroyed.

The Catholic stance would certainly be eternal hell fire as in unending, suffering, and torture.
I don't know. Probably some lay people would interpret it this way. I actually think that Catholic theologians would not read this as being about hell, except in the sense that the Temple-based worship had strayed from God, and hell is being distant from God.

According to the RC, I am one of those 'former believers',
no longer a 'branch on the vine'
now destined for hellfire.:rolleyes:

*yawns*
You are a lovely branch bearing good fruit, UV.

Added: I'm not sure how the quote feature got messed up above. Apologies but when I look at it on my edit screen it looks like it should be OK. :shrug:
 

lunamoth

Will to love
I interpret it to mean that non-believers are basically cast into Hell. I find that appalling. It is passages like these that cause me to ignore people who try and tell me that Christianity is an accepting faith. How is this accepting at all? It especially disturbs me that this was read at a first communion. To children. This is nothing more than a fear-tactic to keep children coming to church and scaring them into believing in Jesus.

I can understand how you could hear it that way, but as I said in my post above to Ultraviolet, the part about non-producing branches being burned refers to Temple worship, which was not meeting the needs, producing fruit, for the people of Israel.

This past Sunday was what I always think of as Love Sunday. The readings are about God being Love, and that being connected to God/Love is the Way (to human happiness, wholeness, flourishing...salvation). The other NT reading yesterday was from 1 John 4: God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in them.

So, the reason the Priest did not address the idea of non-believers being cast into hell is because that is not what this passage is about. While we are not concerned today about corruption of the Temple, the metaphor of the vine still tells of the idea that we are all connected to each other and to God, through love. If we don't have love, then we don't 'produce the fruit' of the spirit.

Really, it is very similar in message to this passage from 1 Corinthians:

If I speak in the tongues[a] of men or of angels, but do not have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. 2 If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. 3 If I give all I possess to the poor and give over my body to hardship that I may boast,[b] but do not have love, I gain nothing.

luna
 
Top