AgnosticWeb.com

Back to the forum index

Linear

THOMAS KELLY (translating Matthew 5, 43, 44 and 45): You heard it said serve your neighbour and neglect your enemy. Different to it I say to you serve your enemies, benefit those who curse you, work for those who neglect you, and pray for those who resent you and persecute you so you may be the sons of your Father who is in the heavens, because he makes his sun rise on harmful and righteous and sends rain on just and unjust.-Darby Translation next.-Ye have heard that it has been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour and hate thine enemy.
But *I* say unto you, Love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who insult you and persecute you, that ye may be the sons of your Father who is in the heavens; for he makes his sun rise on evil and good, and sends rain on just and unjust.-Thomas, you are welcome to this site, which is an open forum whose purpose is to discuss all subjects concerning the possible existence and possible nature of God, the origin of life and the universe, evolution, the role of science and philosophy (including religion) etc. Contributors over the years have included Christians, Hindus, Muslims, Jews, panentheists, process theologians, atheists, agnostics...However, it is not meant to be a vehicle for sermonizing, or for advertising a particular book, and so I hope that your motive for joining us is to enter into a discussion of your beliefs.-To that end, let me challenge the above quotation. Do you think that the surviving children of Houla, for instance, should willingly serve / learn to love / pray for / bless Assad and his soldiers who have slaughtered their brothers, sisters and parents? Do you think that prayers and blessings are more likely than an armed uprising to end a brutal regime?
 
What does "so you may be the sons of your Father" actually mean? Don't Christians believe that all of us are God's children, including Assad, his soldiers, and his victims? Since God makes his sun rise on harmful and righteous and his rain fall on just and unjust alike, is this not an indication that it makes no difference to him how we act? Please explain the exact logic behind the words you have translated, especially the significance of the clause beginning "because".-I hope you will not regard the above as offensive. I'm simply trying to understand what lies behind your posts.

6065 views

dhw,-You posted-"THOMAS KELLY (translating Matthew 5, 43, 44 and 45): You heard it said serve your neighbour and neglect your enemy. Different to it I say to you serve your enemies, benefit those who curse you, work for those who neglect you, and pray for those who resent you and persecute you so you may be the sons of your Father who is in the heavens, because he makes his sun rise on harmful and righteous and sends rain on just and unjust.-Darby Translation next.-Ye have heard that it has been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour and hate thine enemy.
But *I* say unto you, Love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who insult you and persecute you, that ye may be the sons of your Father who is in the heavens; for he makes his sun rise on evil and good, and sends rain on just and unjust."-You put.-"Thomas, you are welcome to this site, which is an open forum whose purpose is to discuss all subjects concerning the possible existence and possible nature of God, the origin of life and the universe, evolution, the role of science and philosophy (including religion) etc."-Thanks.-You put. -"Contributors over the years have included Christians, Hindus, Muslims, Jews, panentheists, process theologians, atheists, agnostics...However, it is not meant to be a vehicle for sermonizing, or for advertising a particular book, and so I hope that your motive for joining us is to enter into a discussion of your beliefs."-I have posted evidence of ancient written works which may be examined, questioned and discussed by anyone like the bible or the koran.-In my posts I have asked a question like "true or false ?" or said something like "maybe you'll agree", those words don't show me claiming the evidence is true.-Also my signature of my AgnosticWeb.com profile is "All guessed" to show anything I post I don't claim to be true or false. If you didn't have some knowledge of that, you do now.-http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/sermonize?q=sermonize-I want to change my screen name to "Thomas Kelly guessed" and I haven't had time to see if it may be done without creating a new account or if I'm allowed to create a new account.-Which meaning of sermonizing did you mean ?-Is composing and delivering a sermon wrong ? Maybe you haven't examined the wording. -A definition of sermonize.-http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/sermonize?q=sermonize-As for advertising, I have a duty to benefit people with anything I own as you may have guessed by the rest of the post which was with the part of the post you posted. -Part of the post.-"Before you compare you may need me to tell you that benefitting people sometimes is not the same as doing like they want you to and being silent may be beneficial as speaking a word to someone. Sometimes doing what a person doesn't want you to do is beneficial for everyone including yourself and serving."-A time to be silent is if you guess by someones words or actions they don't want to help you and no-one else mostly benefits by you speaking.-To help be silent you may need to keep your top lip and bottom lip touching and try not to screw your lips up. -End of part of the post.-Also which kind of websites evidence comes from is subject to what is avaiable. Some are more orderly than others.-I'm not convinced my posts were not right for starting a discussion, part of the evidence is above.-You put-"To that end, let me challenge the above quotation. Do you think that the surviving children of Houla, for instance, should willingly serve / learn to love / pray for / bless Assad and his soldiers who have slaughtered their brothers, sisters and parents?"-I have little knowledge of the slaughterings, I have been working to benefit others as much as I can in many other ways.-Serving enemies does not mean approving them or helping them do more wrong.-As I showed in part of the post you used part of.-Part of the post.-"A time to be silent is if you guess by someones words or actions they don't want to help you and no-one else mostly benefits by you speaking."-End of post.-If anyone is pleased by someones suffering in punishment of revenge or other times or by gaining victory in and after such circumstances they have shown ignorance of divinity.-Why be pleased because of any of it ? If you read the bible you may learn that God is not pleased by the death of harmful people.-Part of bible next, part of Ezekiel 33:11 below.-'As surely as I live, declares the Sovereign Lord, I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that they turn from their ways and live.-New International Version (NIV)-http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ezekiel+33&version=NIV-Continued in next post.

--
All guessed.

6338 views

You put.-"Do you think that prayers and blessings are more likely than an armed uprising to end a brutal regime?"-God uses all authorities, it does not show he causes people to do wrong, people use their own will.-Part of bible, Romans 13 -4 For the one in authority is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God's servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer.-New International Version (NIV)-http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+13&version=NIV-I'm not convinced the authorities of this world have enough wisdom and knowledge sometimes to cause things not to happen, and the only right wisdom and knowledge comes from being blessed by God and a way to receive that is by prayer.-Whoever does wrong will be judged by God in judgement of how much they are ignorant and there may be no defence to God of any claims of ignorance when people receive their final judgement. So may be its wise to do as Jesus said like from Matthew 7:12 below. -So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.-New International Version (NIV)-http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+7&version=NIV-If wrongdoers did not receive the knowledge and wisdom as they grew from being babies and in childhood have been ignorant in their living and you were in that situation, judging by the command in Matthew 7:12 from above, what do you desire for you, that ignorant person ?-Some situations may go beyond talking to settle things and then it becomes a judgement of the loss and gain of lives in a defence of mankind in a desire to save the better people.-Do the authorities have the right motivations to protect people ? Is resentment the right motivation ?-Continued in next post.

--
All guessed.

6152 views

You put. -"What does "so you may be the sons of your Father" actually mean? Don't Christians believe that all of us are God's children, including Assad, his soldiers, and his victims?"-Jesus said in Matthew 12:50 of below-For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother." -New International Version (NIV)-http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+12&version=NIV-Comparing the two different parts of scripture we've used, The words "so you may be the sons of your Father" were used to show us what kind of family we may become a part of and some people in Israel at that time had knowledge of that rank.-You Put. -"Since God makes his sun rise on harmful and righteous and his rain fall on just and unjust alike, is this not an indication that it makes no difference to him how we act?"-Yes it is not an indication, punishment comes in many ways through disease, through human justice and natural disasters and accidents and as a result of our errors. Our suffering is part of teaching us to be wise and you may learn from that how God has blessed us with the will to choose and not do all things by necessity so we may be people of will and be wise. Some people escape from death because of doctors, tools and medicine and similar kinds of things mankind uses and many things are for preservation and enjoyment.-From the early church fathers below part of the evidence of explanation about why God permits evil.-Part of -"Chapter XXIV.âWhy God Permits Evil.-For if, wishing to fill up the number and measure of His creation, He had been afraid of the wickedness of those who were to be, and like one who could find no other way of remedy and cure, except only this, that He should refrain from His purpose of creating, lest the wickedness of those who were to be should be ascribed to Him; what else would this show but unworthy suffering and unseemly feebleness on the part of the Creator, who should so fear the actings of those who as yet were not, that He refrained from His purposed creation?"-From The Recognitions of Clement, Book IV.-From http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf08.vi.iii.vi.xxiv.html-More from an early church father for you.-Part of-"Chap. XIII.âOf the Advantage and Use of the World and of the Seasons.-For if only good things are placed in sight, what need is there of reflection, of understanding, of knowledge, of reason? since, wherever he shall extend his hand, that is befitting and adapted to nature; so that if any one should wish to place a most exquisite dinner before infants, who as yet have no taste, it is plain that each will desire that to which either impulse, or hunger, or even accident, shall attract them; and whatever they shall take, it will be useful and salutary to them. What injury will it therefore be for them always to remain as they are, and always to be infants and unacquainted with affairs? But if you add a mixture either of bitter things, or things useless, or even poisonous, they are plainly deceived through their ignorance of good and evil, unless wisdom is added to them, by which they may have the rejection of evil things and the choice of good things. 
You see, therefore, that we have greater need of wisdom on account of evils; and unless these things had been proposed to us, we should not be a rational animal."-From A Treatise on the Anger of God Addressed to Donatus.-From http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf07.iii.iii.xiii.html -In that collection of works you may gain more knowledge of divine providence.-You put.-"Please explain the exact logic behind the words you have translated, especially the significance of the clause beginning "because".-The words of the clause beginning "because" were used to show how God benefits everybody, friend and enemy, constantly, and He is the greatest Father to imitate. Continued in next post.

--
All guessed.

6090 views

Thomas presented us with a series of extracts from a book forming part of the "Christian Classics Ethereal Library". I'm concerned that his motive is to preach sermons rather than enter into a discussion of his beliefs, and so I challenged one of his biblical quotations (Matthew 5, 43-45), which offered problematical precepts, such as loving / blessing / praying for one's enemies.-Thank you for your response. I must confess that I don't quite know how to deal with it. The sheer quantity of your posts is itself a problem. For a fruitful discussion, we need to focus on individual points, but you have deluged us with unconnected observations concerning how humans should behave, how the church fathers interpret the nature and wishes of their God, what some philosophers believe or don't believe etc. You seem to assume that any quote from the Bible is an authoritative statement that proves what you want it to prove (unless you dislike the translation). I asked if Syrians should love, bless and pray for the president and soldiers engaged in slaughtering them, and if you thought such actions were more likely to end the brutal regime than an armed uprising, but you have simply dodged the questions. This makes me wonder why you offered us the quote in the first place. Your response is: "I have little knowledge of the slaughterings, I have been working to benefit others as much as I can in many other ways." I'm sure you lead a virtuous and philanthropic existence, but that has nothing to do with the quote I am questioning. Nor does this: "if you read the bible you may learn that God is not pleased by the death of harmful people." My question concerned your view of the practicality of Matthew's moral stance, not your personal knowledge of what God likes or doesn't like. You also answered: "God uses all authorities, it does not show he causes people to do wrong, people use their own will." Again, I was not asking you about free will or the causes of evil, but about the practicality of Matthew's advice. You go on to quote Romans, to the effect that rulers are "God's servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer." So the Holocaust was the fault of the Jews? I'm sure rulers such as Hitler, Stalin, Assad and the countless brutal dictators of past and present would cheer St Paul and you to the rafters. -Despite your "true or false?" your posts make it clear that you believe in the Christian God, and that the many authors of the Bible, their translators and their interpreters (e.g. the church fathers) are ... if you approve of the translation and interpretation ... the purveyors of absolute truth. This, of course, is your right, and I have total respect for such beliefs so long as they do no harm to others. But the fact that you have read and can quote the Bible is not going to convince anyone that your arguments are sound. Even if I believed in God (please note, I neither believe nor disbelieve), I would be very suspicious of any human being who told me he knew what God likes and doesn't like. -You should know that I'm aware of the existence of "ancient written works", and you do not need to post evidence of them. I may even have read some of them. Interestingly, in your post of 31 May at 16.43 you wrote: "So in everything, do to others what you would have them do." By sheer coincidence, this echoes my own post to Matt (xeno) under "Evolution in Schools", posted at 14.31 the same day: "Unquestionably many religions offer sound advice on this subject [how we relate to our fellow creatures], and if we cut out all the dogma, it boils down to "do as you would be done by". On matters of morality, you are preaching to the converted-I'll pick on just one more section of your response (there simply isn't time or space to comment on everything) because again it's an evasion of my question. I suggested that your own translation "God makes his sun rise on harmful and righteous and sends rain on just and unjust" might denote God's indifference to our behaviour. After all, life shows us again and again that the wicked often prosper. You have answered with an explanation of why God permits evil. That is beside the point. You have not explained how the equal treatment of 'good' and 'bad' people fits in with the Christian belief that God cares about us, and also that we should live righteously. Perhaps you don't share this belief, but that is what I'm trying to find out.-This is a difficult "baptism", but I'm sure I'm not the only reader who would welcome a genuine discussion of your Christian values, and you clearly know your subject! But we need to keep our posts focused. If you look at past discussions, you will see that individual posts very rarely require a continuation, and it would certainly be easier for all of us if you could condense your arguments, stick to the point, and perhaps explain your views in your own words rather than bombard us with diverse quotations and references. Once again, I hope you will not take offence. I'm only trying to establish some ground rules that might lead to a fruitful and more coherent exchange of ideas.

6203 views

dhw,-That last post of yours looks like a misrepresentation of my work.-Maybe I'll examine your reply and show how you've made errors.

--
All guessed.

5973 views

THOMAS: dhw,
That last post of yours looks like a misrepresentation of my work.
Maybe I'll examine your reply and show how you've made errors.-Perhaps I can save us both a certain amount of time and trouble. I picked on the Matthew example as it was your first and contained obvious points of controversy. You have challenged the conventional translation and wish to substitute "serve" for "love", "neglect" for "hate", though you also wish to qualify your post with "all guessed". If you are not a scholar of ancient Greek (or Hebrew, since no-one really knows what language the original was in), the exercise seems pretty pointless, but if you are, it still doesn't make your version any more authentic than that of other experts ancient and modern. For me, I'm afraid all this is beside the point, and I have focused on the message not the words. In the context of war, brutal dictatorships and massacres, I challenge the practicality of both translations (regardless of your explanation of what you mean by "benefit"), and I have asked for clarification of the message concerning God's equal treatment of the just and unjust.
 
This is my way of challenging your apparent faith in the Bible, which you seem to regard as some kind of authority, since all your posts are based on it and you keep quoting it in defence of Matthew's message. (And I stand by all my objections to those quotes.) Perhaps I should make it quite explicit that although I accept that the Bible is a wonderful collection of stories, is full of wisdom and human insight, and often makes for inspirational reading, I also see it as a collection of books written, selected, translated and interpreted by humans as fallible as you and me. Your apparent faith in it as a guide may go down well in a Christian community, but you have been bold enough to enter a rather more sceptical den!
 
I need to keep emphasizing, though, that you are welcome, and I don't want this reception to seem hostile. Besides, I should imagine your faith is strong enough to deal with folk like me, as you will feel that God is with you. And if I really have misrepresented your work, I apologize in advance and will look forward to having my errors explained to me.

5903 views

dhw,-I haven't examined your replies completely and I may have something to settle this.-You may read part of the work I posted in reply to you from below.-"So may be its wise to do as Jesus said like from Matthew 7:12 below.-So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.-New International Version (NIV)-http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+7&version=NIV-If wrongdoers did not receive the knowledge and wisdom as they grew from being babies and in childhood have been ignorant in their living and you were in that situation, judging by the command in Matthew 7:12 from above, what do you desire for you, that ignorant person ?-Some situations may go beyond talking to settle things and then it becomes a judgement of the loss and gain of lives in a defence of mankind in a desire to save the better people.-Do the authorities have the right motivations to protect people ? Is resentment the right motivation ?"-Will you answer the questions of that part ?-From the work you may have looked at "Some situations may go beyond talking to settle things and then it becomes a judgement of the loss and gain of lives in a defence of mankind"-You may agree that part may be explained as showing a defence of using force for preservation and that's what I desired.-In one of your replies I saw something like this "I also see it as a collection of books written, selected, translated and interpreted by humans as fallible as you and me. Your apparent faith in it as a guide may go down well in a Christian community, but you have been bold enough to enter a rather more sceptical den!"-You may want to investigate the subject of another post I made in this forum. You may read part of it below.-"True or false maybe ?-"Chapter XX.âSome Parts of the Old Testament Written to Try Us-Wherefore every man who wishes to be saved must become, as the Teacher said, a judge of the books written to try us. For thus He spake: 'Become experienced bankers.' Now the need of bankers arises from the circumstance that the spurious is mixed up with the genuine."-To read the rest http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf08.vi.iv.xxi.xx.html-End of quoted post.-The word "try" has the same meaning as the word "test" if you had no knowledge of it.

--
All guessed.

5910 views

Thomas quoted Matthew's advice to love, bless, serve, pray for, benefit etc. our enemies, which I suggested was impractical in certain circumstances. Thomas now says "it becomes a judgement of the loss and gain of lives in a defence of mankind", and there may be "a defence of using force for preservation." So you are now telling me what I was telling you: Matthew's advice requires qualification. What, I wonder, was the point of quoting it in the first place? -I have made it clear that I do not regard the fallible human authors, selectors, translators and interpreters of the Bible as authorities, and you have referred me to a text that says: "every man who wishes to be saved must become [...] a judge of the books written to try us" (try apparently means test) and "the spurious is mixed up with the genuine." So you are now telling me what I was telling you: the books are not to be trusted. And why on earth do you bring in the idea of wishing "to be saved"? Perhaps you are assuming that I wish to be saved or that I need saving? Saved from what? And for what? Here is my situation: I am already well past my three score years and ten, have been lucky enough to have had a wonderfully happy and fulfilling life with a wife and family I adore, a not unsuccessful career, and very few regrets. If this life is all there is, I shall die grateful for having had it. If there is more to come, I hope it'll be as enjoyable for everybody (every soul?) as this one has been for me. -Meanwhile, it saddens me to see the horrible mess the world is in. It has always been in a mess. Organized religion has failed to resolve the mess, and more often than not has added to it or even caused it. Perhaps your Christianity brings you comfort and joy, and that's fine. But if you are living in fear that you will not be "saved", you have my sympathy. You have offered us several sermons full of advice on various subjects. Let me reciprocate. Enjoy every moment of this life, while always doing as you would be done by. Is that not enough for you?

5999 views


> dhw: I have made it clear that I do not regard the fallible human authors, selectors, translators and interpreters of the Bible as authorities, and you have referred me to a text that says: "every man who wishes to be saved must become [...] a judge of the books written to try us" (try apparently means test) and "the spurious is mixed up with the genuine." So you are now telling me what I was telling you: the books are not to be trusted..... If this life is all there is, I shall die grateful for having had it. If there is more to come, I hope it'll be as enjoyable for everybody (every soul?) as this one has been for me. 
> 
> Let me reciprocate. Enjoy every moment of this life, while always doing as you would be done by. Is that not enough for you?-Let me add, I have enjoyed my life to the fullest. It has been a privilege to have lived over four score years. I have found God, not the God of religions, but the God revealed by my own reason. This is much more fulfilling, because I have my own personal relationship rather than being told how I should believe. No religion knows the truth. It is all taken on faith, built on writings by other humans who know no more than I do. Each religion's truth differs. Jewish, Christian, Muslim all have different versions of God. Buddhism and other Eastern religions have a different approach. We are all part of God. He must be amused at this flailing about in trying to relate to him. I feel all religions are correct for their believers. God doesn't care if they differ, for no religion is better than any other. You don't need to follow a crowd for belief. And finally, don't ever attempt to impose your belief on others. Limit your self to explaining your belief. Anything else is insulting to intelligent folks.

5927 views

dhw,-I haven't examined your last post completely. It looks like you didn't answer suitably the questions put to you. Will you answer those questions ? Each one. Then we may see the truth of things.

--
All guessed.

5923 views

THOMAS (2 June at 1.49): I haven't examined your replies completely and I may have something to settle this.-THOMAS (3 June @ 21.27): I haven't examined your last post completely. It looks like you didn't answer suitably the questions put to you. Will you answer those questions ? Each one. Then we may see the truth of things.-Thomas, if you cannot be bothered to examine my posts before replying but are only prepared to follow your own lines of thought, there is no point in continuing this discussion.-By answering "suitably", I presume you mean giving the answers you want, but I hear loud alarm bells when you talk of "the truth of things". -The only unanswered questions (sometimes difficult to follow) that I have found in your previous post appear to concern 1) what I as an ignorant wrongdoer desire for myself. I agree that I am ignorant on many subjects, but I do not identify myself with the term "wrongdoer". For myself and also for others, regardless of ignorance, I desire happiness. I do not consider biblical finger-wagging relevant to my quest. 2) Do the authorities have the right motivations to protect people? Sometimes they do, sometimes they don't. 3) Is resentment the right motivation? No.-Perhaps you will now do me the courtesy of examining my replies completely and responding to them.-*******-I have just seen your latest post:-dhw,
You put.
"Thomas quoted Matthew's advice to love, bless, serve, pray for, benefit etc. our enemies, which I suggested was impractical in certain circumstances. Thomas now says "it becomes a judgement of the loss and gain of lives in a defence of mankind", and there may be "a defence of using force for preservation." So you are now telling me what I was telling you: Matthew's advice requires qualification. What, I wonder, was the point of quoting it in the first place?"
You may look at what you quoted in my answers to the questions of your original post. I have done no wrong. You may look at a post on this website in this forum from the link below and some information is near bottom of the post.http://www.agnosticweb.com/index.php?id=10084
I may answer about Matthew's advice and loss and gain of people later, you may have enough to do in answering the questions you didn't answer suitably.-Thomas, this discussion is becoming pointless. I did not say you had done wrong. I said you were now telling me what I had told you ... namely that Matthew's quote required qualification, and I did not understand why you quoted it in the first place. I see you have now referred us to yet another mini-sermon on yet another subject (Faith and Reason***) from your favourite book, once more pretending to invite discussion by asking "true or false"? I must ask you to stop this practice, please. We are limited to highlighting the last 40 posts, and it would be unfair to others if you monopolized the space simply by posting chapter after chapter and sermon after sermon.-*** Of course I have no objection to this as a subject for genuine discussion. ----

5911 views

dhw,-You put.-"THOMAS (2 June at 1.49): I haven't examined your replies completely and I may have something to settle this.-THOMAS (3 June @ 21.27): I haven't examined your last post completely. It looks like you didn't answer suitably the questions put to you. Will you answer those questions ? Each one. Then we may see the truth of things.-Thomas, if you cannot be bothered to examine my posts before replying but are only prepared to follow your own lines of thought, there is no point in continuing this discussion."-You didn't answer suitably the questions of my answers to your first post.-You put.-"By answering "suitably", I presume you mean giving the answers you want, but I hear loud alarm bells when you talk of "the truth of things"."-Why did you "hear loud alarm bells" ?-As for answering suitably, you may if you have enough knowledge of what you've been asked which it appeared you didn't and you may see how below.-You put.-"The only unanswered questions (sometimes difficult to follow) that I have found in your previous post appear to concern 1) what I as an ignorant wrongdoer desire for myself. I agree that I am ignorant on many subjects, but I do not identify myself with the term "wrongdoer"." -You've not understood what I put and I'm not convinced you have enough knowledge of language. You may read again below.-"If wrongdoers did not receive the knowledge and wisdom as they grew from being babies and in childhood have been ignorant in their living and you were in that situation, judging by the command in Matthew 7:12 from above, what do you desire for you, that ignorant person ?"-The part started with the word "If" and was the start of reasoning of a an unreal situation to discuss. The word "If" shows the doubt in comparing the unknown pasts. So in the question was a desire to cause a comparison of what may be a wrongdoers past and reason of it being yours and not saying it was. -You put-"For myself and also for others, regardless of ignorance, I desire happiness. I do not consider biblical finger-wagging relevant to my quest."-Why did you tell me about biblical finger-wagging ? There may be happiness in the knowledge and wisdom of God. This part of your reply made me reason of if you have looked at and understood my answers to your original post.-You put.-"2) Do the authorities have the right motivations to protect people? Sometimes they do, sometimes they don't. 3) Is resentment the right motivation? No.-Partly done.-You put.-"Perhaps you will now do me the courtesy of examining my replies completely and responding to them."-Maybe after you answering the question of comparison of yourself and ignorant wrongdoer I will.-*******-I have just seen your latest post:-dhw,
You put.
"Thomas quoted Matthew's advice to love, bless, serve, pray for, benefit etc. our enemies, which I suggested was impractical in certain circumstances. Thomas now says "it becomes a judgement of the loss and gain of lives in a defence of mankind", and there may be "a defence of using force for preservation." So you are now telling me what I was telling you: Matthew's advice requires qualification. What, I wonder, was the point of quoting it in the first place?"
You may look at what you quoted in my answers to the questions of your original post. I have done no wrong. You may look at a post on this website in this forum from the link below and some information is near bottom of the post.http://www.agnosticweb.com/index.php?id=10084
I may answer about Matthew's advice and loss and gain of people later, you may have enough to do in answering the questions you didn't answer suitably.-You put.-"Thomas, this discussion is becoming pointless. I did not say you had done wrong."-I didn't say you said I had done wrong . I put "I have done no wrong". I told you of my judgement of myself. -You put.-"I said you were now telling me what I had told you ... namely that Matthew's quote required qualification, and I did not understand why you quoted it in the first place."-That was similar to what I thought.-You put.-"I see you have now referred us to yet another mini-sermon on yet another subject (Faith and Reason) from your favourite book, once more pretending to invite discussion by asking "true or false"? Perhaps you would be kind enough to explain what you yourself hope to gain from all this preaching."-This is a forum, there is no wrong in me posting evidence and asking a question and I wasn't pretending to invite discussion, how is asking "true of false" wrong ? That was a question of discussion. I posted in the religion part, people may choose if they want to answer.-I don't know what I may gain and I'm here to give any knowledge or wisdom I may have. -You put.-"In the meantime, I must ask you to stop this practice, please." -Did I need to tell you I didn't know there was a limit to posting evidence with a question or with other information.-You put.-"We are limited to highlighting the last 40 posts, and it would be unfair to others if you monopolized the space simply by posting chapter after chapter and sermon after sermon."-Sermons are useful and you may need to know I don't know what you may have thought about sermons. I now have some knowledge of the limit you put and what you showed as justice to you.

--
All guessed.

6190 views


> dhw: "We are limited to highlighting the last 40 posts, and it would be unfair to others if you monopolized the space simply by posting chapter after chapter and sermon after sermon."
> 
> Thomas Kelly:Sermons are useful and you may need to know I don't know what you may have thought about sermons. I now have some knowledge of the limit you put and what you showed as justice to you.-Why don't you respond to my previous post?:-> djt: I have enjoyed my life to the fullest. It has been a privilege to have lived over four score years. I have found God, not the God of religions, but the God revealed by my own reason. This is much more fulfilling, because I have my own personal relationship rather than being told how I should believe. No religion knows the truth. It is all taken on faith, built on writings by other humans who know no more than I do. Each religion's truth differs. Jewish, Christian, Muslim all have different versions of God. Buddhism and other Eastern religions have a different approach. We are all part of God. He must be amused at this flailing about in trying to relate to him. I feel all religions are correct for their believers. God doesn't care if they differ, for no religion is better than any other. You don't need to follow a crowd for belief. And finally, don't ever attempt to impose your belief on others. Limit your self to explaining your belief. Anything else is insulting to intelligent folks.-The New Testament Gospels were written 60-80 years after the death of Jesus from oral stories. Gnostic versions have been eliminated. How do you attest to the accuracy of your quotes? I assume you take them on faith, which is fine. But we may not have the same faith you have and may see no need to accept your faith. Please explain why you believe what you believe.

5920 views

Thomas insists on my giving "suitable" answers to his questions, because "then we may see the truth of things". He asks why I hear loud alarm bells when he talks of "the truth of things".-Epistemology has taught us that we can never be sure that what we think we know is the absolute truth. Some people, however, are convinced that they do know the truth, and it is usually impossible to reason with them.-I wrote that your questions were sometimes difficult to follow, but I did my best.-THOMAS: You've not understood what I put and I'm not convinced you have enough knowledge of language. "If wrongdoers did not receive the knowledge and wisdom as they grew from being babies and in childhood have been ignorant in their living and you were in that situation, judging by the command in Matthew 7:17 from above, what do you desire for you, that ignorant person?" The part started with the word "if" and was the start of reasoning of an unreal situation to discuss. The word "If" shows the doubt in comparing the unknown pasts. So in the question was a desire to cause a comparison of what may be a wrongdoers past and reason of it being yours and not saying it was.-The second part of your explanation is as difficult to follow as your question, but since you doubt my knowledge of language, let me try to help you with your syntax. In conditional sentences, when the "if" clause is in the simple past (did not receive/ were in that situation), the main clause needs to be in the conditional (what would you desire?) not the simple present (do you desire?). By switching to the simple present, you have changed from unreal to real ... syntactically impossible ... and so your question appears to change from an unreal hypothesis to a direct and real question. I therefore had to guess whether you were or were not identifying me as an ignorant wrongdoer. I might also point out that if you have a prepositional phrase with a personal pronoun referring to the same person as the subject, you must use the reflexive pronoun (unless the preposition is one of position), and so your main clause should have read: "what would you desire for yourself?". I cannot even begin to analyse "and reason of it being yours and not saying it was". My answer to your question, however, is that if I were (subjunctive) an ignorant wrongdoer, I would desire happiness for myself. This question has nothing to do with the subject of "love your enemy", which we had been discussing but which we should now drop. I suggest we also drop this new hypothesis, as I suspect it will lead in the same direction as the "enemy" one ... namely, nowhere.-You have now asked a series of new questions, but I will keep my response as brief as possible. I have no doubt that some people may find happiness in what they believe to be the knowledge and wisdom of God. Others may find it in love, or wealth, or art, or worldly success. If, however, your object is to give us any knowledge or wisdom you may have, there is no point in bombarding us with limitless numbers of quotations from other people. Anyone could fill this website at a single sitting by reproducing paragraphs from the Bible, from Dawkins' The God Delusion, from Aesop's Fables or from Nietzsche's Also Sprach Zarathustra, and preface the quotes with "true or false". You have, however, kindly allowed us to choose if we want to answer. Your sermons will therefore remain on the forum, and we shall see if anyone chooses to answer. But please don't post any more until we see if there is a response.-In the meantime, there is no need for you to go back over my earlier posts, as David Turell has asked you a couple of extremely pertinent questions, which should be fruitful if you are prepared to do him the honour of answering them. I too am particularly interested in what you believe and why you believe it.

5992 views

Meanwhile, it saddens me to see the horrible mess the world is in. -While I understand why you might feel this way here are a couple of links to cheer you up.
http://agnosticsinternational.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=53&t=1256
and
http://agnosticsinternational.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=18043#p18043-Incidently Thomas has a very similar set of threads on our site.-Enjoy and have fun
rom

6046 views

dhw: Meanwhile, it saddens me to see the horrible mess the world is in. -ROMANSH: While I understand why you might feel this way here are a couple of links to cheer you up.-http://agnosticsinternational.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=53&t=1256
and-http://agnosticsinternational.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=18043#p18043-Romansh, thanks for the two links. No doubt because of my technical incompetence, I couldn't get anything from the Hans Rosling one. Just blank squares. I must have missed something on the homosexuality thread too, but I found the subsequent discussion pretty gloomy. I'm very cheerful by nature, though, and am smiling broadly after a fine Bank Holiday Monday, Jubilee lunch.

5944 views

dhw,-You put.-"Thomas quoted Matthew's advice to love, bless, serve, pray for, benefit etc. our enemies, which I suggested was impractical in certain circumstances. Thomas now says "it becomes a judgement of the loss and gain of lives in a defence of mankind", and there may be "a defence of using force for preservation." So you are now telling me what I was telling you: Matthew's advice requires qualification. What, I wonder, was the point of quoting it in the first place?"-You may look at what you quoted in my answers to the questions of your original post. I have done no wrong. You may look at a post on this website in this forum from the link below and some information is near bottom of the post.-http://www.agnosticweb.com/index.php?id=10084-I may answer about Matthew's advice and loss and gain of people later, you may have enough to do in answering the questions you didn't answer suitably.

--
All guessed.

5947 views

You put.-"Please explain the exact logic behind the words you have translated, especially the significance of the clause beginning "because".-The tranlsation was instruction desired to help people learn how the bible may be mis-translated in parts and how it may be mis-understood. Some people need to learn duty first and not be reasoning of pleasing themselves all the time but serving others to give them what they need in any situation small or great.-People speak and type words to please themselves and have little knowledge of waiting to be spoken to and speaking to benefit others. You may learn something similar in a letter of James part of which you may read below.-James 1:19-My dear brothers and sisters, take note of this: Everyone should be quick to listen, slow to speak and slow to become angry,-New International Version (NIV)-http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=James+1&version=NIV-Can you see the serving of that ? Of doing a duty ?-The instruction was so people may use it and escape the words and actions of harmful people by their own words, silence and actions and maybe benefit harmful people.-If a person has the correct motivation and other knowledge it can be done. Part of the motivation is in Matthew 7:12 which you may read below. Repetition benefits.-So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you,-"So in everything" He said, so in words to people spoken, written or typed and all the other small and great things of life.-There are right ways of doing things and sometimes a person my be convinced they know what is right but in reality they don't. And you must have the motivation of above. A person may learn some of the right ways from the bible.-As an example some people are convinced correction of people is wrong but with the motivation of Jesus's command its not. Disagreeing in order to benefit others is right and to do it with desire to win is wrong or in desiring to annoy others.-Another part of the bible may help you understand the logic. You may read two versions of it below.-Philippians 2:4 -Look not every man on his own things, but every man also on the things of others.-King James Version (KJV)-http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Philippians+2&version=KJV-You may have seen the word "also" in that, so not only your own things.-The other-Philippians 2:4 -not looking to your own interests but each of you to the interests of the others.-http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Philippians+2&version=NIV-New International Version (NIV)-You may have seen the word "but" which sometimes may show that the desire is to show that each sentence before and after the word "but" is different in purpose but in the part of the bible you may have read before this, Philippians 2:4, the purpose of each command is one and the same, to benefit everyone including yourself.-Lets compare looking on things of others, to the interests of others with the instruction of my post you asked questions about. So what does your enemy want but in reality what benefits them, correction if they do wrong. So an enemy may believe he's doing to his own benefit but you may not give him what he wants but benefit him or profit him or advantage him.-I guess may enemies by their words and actions, you may learn how after using So in everything command of Jesus of Matthew 7:12. May be judging of it is too much for me at this time to explain. Sometimes it is hard to have any knowledge of someone being an enemy. Serve people with the motivation I've advised and wait. Another part of the bible may be useful, you may read it below.-Therefore judge nothing before the appointed time; wait until the Lord comes. He will bring to light what is hidden in darkness and will expose the motives of the heart.-1 Corinthians 4:5-New International Version (NIV)-http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Corinthians+4&version=NIV-
You may read another part of the bible below to show you a different kind of thinking.-Do not think of yourselves as wise.-Part of Romans 12:16-Good News Translation (GNT)-http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+12&version=GNT-There are many more commands in the bible in addition to the ten commandments.-Continued in next post.

--
All guessed.

5992 views

You put.-"I hope you will not regard the above as offensive. I'm simply trying to understand what lies behind your posts"-Thanks.-To show you more about the system of things in the world and how harmful people are a part, you may read more from the early church fathers below.-Part of-Chapter XXV.âEvil Beings Turned to Good Account.-let us consider this earnestly, that God the Creator of the universe, foreseeing the future differences of His creation, foresaw and provided diverse ranks and different offices to each of His creatures, according to the peculiar movements which were produced from freedom of will; so that while all men are of one substance in respect of the method of creation, there should yet be diversity in ranks and offices, according to the peculiar movements of minds, to be produced from liberty of will. Therefore He foresaw that there would be faults in His creatures; and the method of His justice demanded that punishment should follow faults, for the sake of amendment. It behoved, therefore, that there should be ministers of punishment, and yet that freedom of will should draw them into that order. Moreover, those also must have enemies to conquer, who had undertaken the contests for the heavenly rewards. Thus, therefore, neither are those things destitute of utility which are thought to be evil, since the conquered unwillingly acquire eternal rewards for those by whom they are conquered.-From The Recognitions of Clement, Book IV. -http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf08.vi.iii.vi.xxv.html-Thats All for now.

--
All guessed.

5974 views

dhw,-Some other early church father work which may benefit you from this forum.-Learning the Sayings of Jesus, How He Taught & What Happened-http://www.agnosticweb.com/index.php?id=10053

--
All guessed.

5977 views

RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum