i don’t think this is true.
the sin of gluttony come from the logismoi of gastrimargia, which means “madness of the stomache” and it always was about wasteful consumption of food.
the hording wealth and resources is also a sin, but the very specfic “greed”
My favorite thing about the Fediverse is bumping into people who know more than me and learning these cool new things. Thanks for sharing.
Your timeline is off…
Back when they were making this shit up, having a full stomach most days made you wealthy. Wealth inequality was worse than it is now. If someone wore gold, that hoarded wealth belonged in the economy where it would change hands and people would be able to eat.
And besides all that…
Shit wasn’t written in English first bro…
In Deuteronomy 21:20 and Proverbs 23:21, it is זלל.[2] The Gesenius Entry[3] (lower left word) has indications of “squandering” and “profligacy” (waste).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gluttony
They translated the original word into gluttony, as part of the coverup to make wealth inequality no a big deal when it was one of the biggest points of Christianity. Like, for centuries longer they couldn’t charge interest on loans. The “gluttony switch” was earlier but for the same reason.
People should know that:
- /u/givessomefucks is a persistent liar who rarely knows what they’re talking about. They persistently grossly misinterpret excerpts from Wikipedia either because they don’t care or because they literally can’t read.
- They’re deliberately taking the Wikipedia article out of context hoping people won’t read it if they say it authoritatively enough:
- [edit: ‘zll’ since the original Hebrew is turbofucking the formatting on desktop] literally translates to excessive eating.
- The sentence after states: “In Matthew 11:19 and Luke 7:34, it is φαγος (phagos).” (anyone who knows their roots knows what this one means)
- The citation on that sentence is completely broken, meaning there’s no chance they actually checked it.
- There’s zero chance they understand what Gesenius’ work is; it does not at all indicate “it was wrongly translated as a cover-up but also somehow 19th-century theologian Gesenius was the only one to allegedly discover this even though it’s also essentially gluttony in Greek and Hebrew.”
Edit: Here’s what Brown–Driver–Briggs (based partly on Gesenius) says:
transitive make light of = be lavish with, squander (compare II. zol), especially of gluttony [bş̂r′z] Proverbs 23:20 ([soovai yain]), absolute Proverbs 23:21; Deuteronomy 21:20 (both [soove]), Proverbs 28:7.
to be mean, be vile, to be a glutton
Deuteronomy 21:20 and Proverbs 23:21
And wow, what a weird coincidence that Deuteronomy 21:20 and Proverbs 23:21 both have it used in conjunction with the word “drunkard”, an obvious companion to eating too much.
I have no idea how you are all such turbonerds and how you don’t get physically ill from absorbing every detail of some fictional metaphysics, or how it is even possible to maintain all this knowledge within 24 hours a day.
Well I did read the Bible cover-to-cover years ago, but almost none of this was off the top of my head. I already knew of Brown–Driver–Briggs and the Klein Dictionary, but that’s kind of abnormal, and you could find them on your own if you were totally new to this.
This was pretty much all cursory research from trying to actually evaluate what they said with an open mind. The only thing I knew going into this is what the prefix ‘phago-’ means.
Greed is greed, which is also a sin. Gluttony specifically refers to food. You’re just lying at this point, intentionally or not, you’re spreading misinformation.
There are 5 specific types of gluttony, and none of them involve wealth hoarding.
Laute - This is eating costly and luxurious foods when a sandwich would tide you over. It’s one thing to have a fine meal every once in a while, but it’s a bit much if it’s every night. The extra money spent on the finest foods your palate desires could go towards feeding someone who has nothing.
Studiose - Eating too daintily, which means you’re an excessively picky eater who wastes great energy on meal preparation or pursuing delicacies. Energy that’d be more wisely used elsewhere.
Nimis - This is what people typically think of when it comes to gluttony. These are those who eat beyond the point of satiety and fullness.
Praepropere - These are those who eat at the improper time or too soon after eating an earlier meal.
Ardenter - Those who eat too eagerly and derive all of life’s satisfaction from their eating experiences. I take this one too mean when they are ready to eat, eating is all they can think about.
Please stop making shit up. If you don’t understand what a word means, it’s ok to do some research or even just keep your mouth shut to avoid spreading misinformation.
If you’ve got no idea what you’re talking about, it’s ok to not talk.
This guy reads Aquinas.
Interesting information but wtf is with that shitty attitude, acting like you’re an authority on what people can talk about? Being wrong isn’t lying. OP reposted something they saw elsewhere and didn’t make anything up.
It’s ok to talk about things, even when you’re wrong about them. IMO that’s the best time to talk about them because then you might realize it due to the resulting comments or conversation. Plus, belief and understanding don’t work like that, where you know when it’s wrong or even questionable before you say it.
Very interesting points, and I see your point between all five, although except maybe praepropere? while in theory i can see this helps syncronizing communities, especially people with different lives (such as families), to sit down for the same dinner ritual. But in practice I have friends and family some of whom 1) have very active lifestyles such as running to/from work, and so requires more snacks to keep stable energy levels and 2) they have different eating habits for other reasons such as avoiding the psychological effects of truly feeling hungry. In either way, we keep having shared dinner rituals, they just eat different amounts.
So i dont really see how the is a bad lifestyle or some ethical shortcoming, but just a rule to adhere to a specific social norm.
The seven sins can all be boiled down to just greed.
Lust: greed for sex/love
Sloth: greed for relaxation
Envy: greed for other people’s things
Wrath: greed for violence
Gluttony: greed for sustenance
Pride: greed for affirmation
Greed: greed for money (though avarice is a better word)
I really like the Buddhist take, the three poisons. Greed, hatred, and ignorance.
There are a lot of different ways to state each one, but damn if those don’t sound like the RGB components of the varied spectrum of shit we have going on in the world.
In this context, greed refers to excessive attachment: “I want [thing], so when I can’t have [thing], I suffer.”
Hatred refers to excessive resistance: “I don’t want [thing], so when I must have [thing], I suffer.”
Ignorance refers to delusion, specifically about the origin of suffering and the means to its end. “I’m suffering because I can’t have the things that I want, and I must have the things that I don’t want.” When really the true reason we suffer is because we’re attached to the things we can’t have, and we resist the things we must have.
In a broader sense, the “delusion” part is about the nature of reality itself. We expect permanence when everything is actually transient. I eat an ice cream cone, and then it’s gone. I enjoy the weather, and the next day it rains. I have a friend, and then we part ways. I have a house, but without constant repairs, it decays. All loved ones will someday die. I too will some day die, and this body will decompose and become dirt. In a word, life is entropy.
So if we think the means to escape suffering is to seek pleasure and avoid pain, we’ll be doomed to suffer forever. The true means to overcome suffering is to transcend pleasure and pain, to maintain equanimity throughout the cycles of samara: to feel transient pleasure without becoming attached to it, and to feel transient pain without resisting it. Only then can we overcome suffering.
While the criticisms are correct, they’re also missing the important context that historically, the sin was heavily associated with hoarding or consuming extravagant amounts while leaving others to go hungry.
Financial obesity is an existential threat to any society that tolerates it, and needs to cease being celebrated, rewarded, and positioned as an aspirational goal.
Corporations are the only ‘persons’ which should be subjected to capital punishment, but billionaires should be euthanised through taxation.
In Deuteronomy 21:20 and Proverbs 23:21, it is זלל. The Gesenius Entry (lower left word) has indications of “squandering” and “profligacy” (waste). – Wikipedia
Christian philosophers seem to insist it’s concerning food. I wonder how the sin of gluttony intersects with envy and avarice.
If it really is waste every consumer is going to hell lol
People usually decide whether religious material is literal or an allegory to suit whatever point they’re trying to make, and using the precise wording of whichever translation works best for that.
That’s why greed is also a sin.
Wait till you tell them homosexuality was introduced into the bible.
There’s a lot of the bible’s scriptures that I believe are sullied by deliberate misinterpretation. Apparently that Leviticus verse was about pedophilia and not homosexuality. Which makes sense as they were probably displeased with the amount of young sex ancient Greek and Rome had.
Very easy to confuse Gluttony with Greed, or Anger with Wrath. But they are each unique.
Gluttony:
https://dwightlongenecker.com/the-seven-deadly-sins-gluttony/
Greed:
https://dwightlongenecker.com/the-seven-deadly-sins-greed/
Wrath:
https://dwightlongenecker.com/the-seven-deadly-sins-wrath/
While we’re on the topic:
Sloth:
https://dwightlongenecker.com/the-seven-deadly-sins-sloth/
Lust:
https://dwightlongenecker.com/the-seven-deadly-sins-lust/
Envy:
https://dwightlongenecker.com/the-seven-deadly-sins-envy/
Pride:
https://dwightlongenecker.com/seven-deadly-sins-pride/
Easy way to keep them straight:
Gilligan - Gluttony
Skipper - Wrath
Ginger - Lust
Mary Ann - Envy
Mr. Howell - Greed
Mrs. Howell - Sloth
The Professor - PrideThat’d be an easy way to remember them if Gilligan’s Island was relevant, but I’d be hard-pressed to find anyone my generation (Millennial) that’d seen it. Unless there’s been some sort of revival that I’m unaware of.
This should be more culturally relevant I think.
While I agree for anyone younger, Millennials may actually be a more knowledgeable group than you’d first expect. I remember it being on quite a bit during the day (looking out up, it was syndicated on TBS and TNT), and as part of the “Nick-at-Nite” lineup.
Kinda feels like the Skipper is Gluttony, AND wrath.
You look at bone skinny Gilligan and thing glutton?
Gilligan was always eating, especially when it came to Mary Ann’s coconut and banana cream pies. 😉
Oh god…I hadn’t considered the rule 34 of Giligans Island…
Pretty much all the deadly sins modern christians will violate. The bible is just a suggestion book to them.
it’s okay, since they’re Christian’s they’re good people, and it’s forgiven
— what many of them think
Doesn’t that overlap with greed?
There are a lot of responses that this is just wrong and maybe that is true but I see merit in this. The thing with greed it is generally means wanting things one does not have where as gluttony is overindulgence in what one has. Gluttony being limited to food seems then a limitation of the ages. From my modern perspective overindulgence in anything is very similar. An opposition from moderation. Wanting for what one does not have and I sorta feel for it to be bad has to be something someone does not necessarilly need or wanting for far more than one needs feels like it could be money or land or food or cars or whatever. So is this technically wrong. I honestly do not know. But from my life experience I see it as appropriate.
Ohhh, so god was a woke Islamodem Communazi socialist! /s
