Good deeds?

You are just creating a Porky Strawman.You do know that not all Jews keep Kosher don't you?What I'm saying is that there is no Catch 22 unless someone wishes there to be a Catch 22.

It is about what and how we love. It is about where we find joy. If we find joy in our altruistic acts then I'd suggest that we are on the right track. If however, we are finding a certain smugness about our altruism, or if we find satisfaction because now God owes us one then I'd suggest we are on a track going in the wrong direction.That's one of the downsides of being a Christian I suppose, as there is so much self examination of our motives. Atheists have it so easy.

Nope. You are just misunderstanding - perhaps on purpose. Is that your idea of a strawman?
The fact that not all believers follow the same religious doctrines has no bearing on the issue.
The Jews that do refuse to eat pork are doing so knowing it is in their best interest to please their god. What I am saying is that there is a Catch 22 even if someone wishes there not to be a Catch 22.

How do you know that's their reason?

Then should we change our direction?
If so, why? Come....Join us....

So yet again, as I said, there is only a Catch 22 if the individual wants there to be a Catch 22.

Helping yourself can be a good deed.Altruism is not the only possibility of doing something good.

Not really. All I'm saying is that if we are altrusitic for selfish reasons that it isn't really altruism at all. However, maybe if we get enough practice at doing good deeds for the wrong reasons it will become part of our nature and what had been being done for selfish reasons actually becomes altruistic. You mean so we can both be wrong....

Helping yourself is NOT a GOOD deed.Its a modern day CONSERVATIVE deed.

On the other hand, from a Jewish perspective, it doesn't matter what the motivation is.. the deed got done!A hungry person doesn't care if the motivation of the giver is to get brownie points, or just truly enjoys giving. The hungry person is just glad to get fed.

No, that is not the attitude of the religious Jew to the mitzvahs. It isn't so much to avoid God's displeasure so much as it is to symbolicly live a specific life. It is a set of rules THEY chose to follow, and by following the rules, they 'uplift their mundane life to live a more sanctified life'... and become closer to God.I think it's nuts, but then again, I am not religious.

Perhaps, but I'm not sure that altruism in the strict sense is what's required. For example, you might well decide to visit a convalescent home for purely altruistic reasons, but you might come to enjoy the fellowship with fellow humans. I sincerely doubt that Jesus would question your visits because they no longer met a strict definition of altruism.What counts is being a cheerful giver. I don't personally believe that most people can give cheerfully to people that they despise.

And I think that would also have been Jesus position. Of course, Jesus was a Jew after all.

I dunno, when the plane's going down, you gotta put your own oxygen mask on before you assist your child. You have to have helped yourself enough to be able to help other.And Jesus taught to love others as you love yourself. If you don't love yourself (insert fap joke here), then that can affect how well you love others.

I see it as that is the way it is supposed to work. There is joy in bringing love to others. I think Paul, with a sense of humour, covers this off rather ironically in Romans when he says:

quote:

---

BUT IF YOUR ENEMY IS HUNGRY, FEED HIM, AND IF HE IS THIRSTY, GIVE HIM A DRINK ; FOR IN SO DOING YOU WILL HEAP BURNING COALS ON HIS HEAD.

---

It's like that expression - love your enemy, it'll drive him crazy.I guess the point is that there is joy in reflecting God's love to the world regardless of who the recipient is. Who knows, maybe the one I despise might be so moved that he is changed or maybe by loving the one that I despise I find that it is me that is changed.