Posted on 09/29/2004 4:41:17 AM PDT by walden
I'm pretty sure that the "Golden Rule" originated in the New Testament but I can't find it. Can anyone point me to the verse(s)?
Also, am I right in believing that it formed no part of any other religion or ethical system prior to Christianity?
Thanks so much!!
http://www.jcu.edu/philosophy/gensler/goldrule.htm
Google'golden rule'
"Do Unto Others Before They Do Unto You"
Before? hehe
The golden rule, "He who has the gold, rules."
And just as you want men to do to you, you also do to them likewise.
Matt 6:12 And forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors.
That's the Old Testament Preemption Rule. :~)
Thank you!
I got to thinking about this because the Golden Rule is the only moral law that most non-believers at least agree is right, even if they do not observe it. C.S. Lewis also wrote on the issue, but I can't find the essay, so I did some research.
A couple of web sources claim that the Golden Rule is a universal ethical principle, and is supported in all religions. On one of them I found this collection of quotes:
Christianity
All things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye so to them; for this is the law and the prophets.
Matthew 7:1
Confucianism
Do not do to others what you would not like yourself. Then there will be no resentment against you, either in the family or in the state.
Analects 12:2
Buddhism
Hurt not others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful.
Udana-Varga 5,1
Hinduism
This is the sum of duty; do naught onto others what you would not have them do unto you.
Mahabharata 5,1517
Islam
No one of you is a believer until he desires for his brother that which he desires for himself.
Sunnah
Judaism
What is hateful to you, do not do to your fellowman. This is the entire Law; all the rest is commentary.
Talmud, Shabbat 3id
Taoism
Regard your neighbors gain as your gain, and your neighbors loss as your own loss.
Tai Shang Kan Yin Pien
Zoroastrianism
That nature alone is good which refrains from doing another whatsoever is not good for itself.
Dadisten-I-dinik, 94,5
I think there are some important differences between the Christian formulation and all others. First, most are stated negatively-- i.e., do no hurt or wrong to others, that you would not want done to yourself. A very good principle, but not over-arching like the Christian statement, which covers both doing positive good to others and avoiding doing harm to others. The formulations explicitly stated in this way are the Confucian, the Buddhist, the Hindu, the Jewish, and the Zorastrian.
Second, the Christian formulation is active, exhorting one to "do". The remaining formulations are passive: Islamic ("desire"), Taoist ("regard"). Neither carries a duty to actually DO anything.
It could be said that these are merely nits I'm picking, but I don't think so-- the difference between a correct mathematical theorum and an flawed one can be minute. And, if you examine the practical consequences of the differences as demonstrated in the actions of true believers today and in history, I think it is clear that there are real-world manifestations of those differences. What we believe does show forth in what we do.
Nevertheless, the Golden Rule isn't the highest statement of Christian ethical principle, merely the highest one that non-believers generally can understand and believe in. I believe that the highest ethical statement of Christianity is found in this logically arranged compliation from Jesus's gospel:
"Follow me . . ." Luke 9:59, and throughout all the gospels
"I am the way, the truth, and the life . . ." John 14:6
"I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me." John 5:30
"I and my Father are one." John 11:30
"Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect." Matthew 5:48
". . . Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God." Matthew 4:4
"Feed my sheep." John 21:16 & others
This is the calling of the disciple of Christ.
It would be interesting to see in what context these quotes are used. Some of them like Confuses or Buddha sound very moralistic. (If you do this you'll have lots of friends or everything will be alright.)
Unlike other religions, Christianity offers no reward for doing good to someone else. Its expected of Christians to behave well and be willing to be servants one of another. God has richly blessed us with His Son and He expects us to be on our best behavior. Consequently, our Lord Jesus told us to pray
forgive US our debts as we forgive our debtors. Our focus should be on how we fail in this task not on how well people return the kindness.
Whats also interesting is how many people interpret Christianity Golden Rule in a moralistic fashion when its not that at all.
You won't find "The Golden Rule" in the bible. Some use the words of Jesus "Do unto others...", but they aren't the same.
I don't know about the context of these quotes, but from what I remember of C.S. Lewis's essay (and he, no doubt, did copious research), his conclusion was the same as mine, that the formulations are different enough to make a difference. (I SHOULD say that my conclusion is the same as his!)
I agree completely with what you say, though, about moralism, and how it appears to be the what the other statements offer, but how Christ's total message to us goes far beyond that. Over and over, Christ says to follow Him. His plan for us is much larger than mere morality.
I was arguing a case in Federal Court in Colorado and trying to keep from having to arbitrate it before a "Christian" panel because the other side was a large familiar Christian organization. I was arguing that the Bible requires Christians to "turn the other cheek" and to "suffer the loss" etc. in proving my client could not get a fair shake on the damage issue. The judge asked for more evidence from the Bible so I quoted that phrase in the Lord's Prayer, "forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors". I argued that the "Christian" arbitration panel could hold my client to that standard which conflicts with Colorado law and we would have no redress. He seemed satisfied with that argument and I thought we were home safe until he turned to opposing counsel and asked, "Counsel seems to have a point there, what do you have to say about that "Golden Rule?" Right then I knew I lost the argument.
But I think the oldest formulation is from Ancient Egypt: "Seek for others the good you desire for yourself".
I agree. In all cases save the Catholic, there is this idea of self-serving definition and a lack of confession of any overarching and common morality. The rule is - LOVE GOD. Adore none other. Not money. Not even family. Place none before God. Confess God, and therefore His Church. Place none before God. And having done so, love even your enemies - even if you hate what they say and do. Don't die hating your torturers, however distant they may be. Desire that all come to confess God and His Church, and that none are consigned to the fires of hell. We all know most go there, by a sheer act of their concupisence and surrender to fallen nature. But we can pray that all are saved. We know only a handful, by comparison, even have been written in the Book of Life. We can't possibly know who, in this life. As far as we know, all can be saved, and particularly the worst of sinners; those who consider suicide because they falsely believe God cannot forgive them.
I remember something C.S. Lewis said about Jesus and the moral law. He said that Jesus wasn't an innovator but that he referred to basic moral precepts that people have recognized throughout the earth, regardless of their degree of success in following them.
Another gloss on the "Golden Rule", never stiff your barber or your plumber!
I don't have to worry about stiffing my plumber. Right now I think it's the other way around. :O)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.