Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,816 Year: 3,073/9,624 Month: 918/1,588 Week: 101/223 Day: 12/17 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Thou Shalts and Thou Shalnts
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 31 of 204 (251218)
10-12-2005 4:30 PM
Reply to: Message 30 by iano
10-12-2005 2:30 PM


Re: knowing how to do the right thing is often much harder
Following up in the other thread. Just wanted to make sure you know I'm not ignoring you.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by iano, posted 10-12-2005 2:30 PM iano has not replied

  
robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 32 of 204 (251254)
10-12-2005 6:09 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by jar
10-12-2005 12:47 PM


Loving nothing
Love God with all YOUR heart, mind and soul.
It is rather difficult to love an entity in whom one does not believe.
I suppose one could argue that one can love a moral principle that is associated with God, if that's what you mean.
I don't think an atheist "tries" to love God.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by jar, posted 10-12-2005 12:47 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 35 by jar, posted 10-12-2005 6:21 PM robinrohan has not replied
 Message 37 by iano, posted 10-13-2005 8:04 AM robinrohan has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 33 of 204 (251257)
10-12-2005 6:15 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by iano
10-12-2005 5:20 AM


Re: Random thoughts on the law
iano writes:
... it wasn't that the law was designed to be impossible for us to obey. It is that we are unable to obey it perfectly. The problem is in us...not the law.
My point was that the law was clearly the work of men - designed to guarantee the priesthood a never-ending supply of roast ox. If it had been possible to obey the law, there would have been no sacrifices. The priests would have starved, or - heaven forbid! - had to get a real job.
As jar has said, it is more important to try to fulfil the law than to succeed in fulfilling it to the letter. Do your best. Fix today's screw-ups tomorrow. And to hell with the priests.
The law is there to condemn you. It's sole purpose is to make you feel condemned.
God! No wonder you wish you were dead.
Well, it ain't workin'. I don't feel condemned - not even a little bit - and there are lots of Old Testament laws that I don't keep. On the contrary, I feel privileged to be alive since I gave up my primitive beliefs (similar to yours ).
No, I would say the primary purpose of the written law was to feed the priests, and the secondary purpose was to keep the people in line.

People who think they have all the answers usually don't understand the questions.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by iano, posted 10-12-2005 5:20 AM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by Chiroptera, posted 10-12-2005 6:19 PM ringo has not replied
 Message 38 by iano, posted 10-13-2005 8:09 AM ringo has not replied

  
Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 34 of 204 (251260)
10-12-2005 6:19 PM
Reply to: Message 33 by ringo
10-12-2005 6:15 PM


Re: Random thoughts on the law
quote:
Well, it ain't workin'. I don't feel condemned - not even a little bit - and there are lots of Old Testament laws that I don't keep.
Indeed. If the Law is so unreasonable that it cannot be expected that anyone keep it, it is not the fault of the person, it is the fault of the jack-ass bureaucrat who thunk it up.

"Intellectually, scientifically, even artistically, fundamentalism -- biblical literalism -- is a road to nowhere, because it insists on fidelity to revealed truths that are not true." -- Katha Pollitt

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by ringo, posted 10-12-2005 6:15 PM ringo has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by iano, posted 10-13-2005 8:18 AM Chiroptera has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 35 of 204 (251262)
10-12-2005 6:21 PM
Reply to: Message 32 by robinrohan
10-12-2005 6:09 PM


Re: Loving nothing
Well, according to Matthew 25 it's not hard at all.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by robinrohan, posted 10-12-2005 6:09 PM robinrohan has not replied

  
Silent H
Member (Idle past 5819 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 36 of 204 (251267)
10-12-2005 6:30 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by purpledawn
10-12-2005 12:06 PM


Re: knowing how to do the right thing is often much harder
IMO, neither Jesus nor his followers dumped the rules.
That's fine, but I disagree.
It seems inconsistent with the fact that he clearly dumped the Mosaic Laws, and expressed quite consistently that everyone should not be judging each other. Saying spirit rather than letter of law, still allows people to judge one another... even if one has concern for the individual. Indeed concern for others is sometimes used to back up judgements (for your own good!).
It really seems to me from the very first to almost the very end, the consistent admonition is holier than thou is really going to screw things up. Live and let live.

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by purpledawn, posted 10-12-2005 12:06 PM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 50 by Legend, posted 10-14-2005 12:06 PM Silent H has not replied
 Message 72 by Mr. Ex Nihilo, posted 10-15-2005 6:01 PM Silent H has not replied
 Message 73 by purpledawn, posted 10-15-2005 7:56 PM Silent H has not replied

  
iano
Member (Idle past 1940 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 37 of 204 (251389)
10-13-2005 8:04 AM
Reply to: Message 32 by robinrohan
10-12-2005 6:09 PM


Re: Loving nothing
Robin writes:
It is rather difficult to love an entity in whom one does not believe.
I would have thought it was impossible myself

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by robinrohan, posted 10-12-2005 6:09 PM robinrohan has not replied

  
iano
Member (Idle past 1940 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 38 of 204 (251392)
10-13-2005 8:09 AM
Reply to: Message 33 by ringo
10-12-2005 6:15 PM


Re: Random thoughts on the law
Ringo writes:
My point was that the law was clearly the work of men - designed to guarantee the priesthood
Thought we were discussing the bible internally rather than externally. Sorry.
iano writes:
The law is there to condemn you. It's sole purpose is to make you feel condemned.
Ringo writes:
God! No wonder you wish you were dead.
The law condemning is the first half in the game of salvation. Salvation, however is a game of two halves...
Well, it ain't workin'. I don't feel condemned - not even a little bit
That's a shame. Truly.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by ringo, posted 10-12-2005 6:15 PM ringo has not replied

  
iano
Member (Idle past 1940 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 39 of 204 (251394)
10-13-2005 8:18 AM
Reply to: Message 34 by Chiroptera
10-12-2005 6:19 PM


Re: Random thoughts on the law
Chiro writes:
Indeed. If the Law is so unreasonable that it cannot be expected that anyone keep it, it is not the fault of the person, it is the fault of the jack-ass bureaucrat who thunk it up.
How would you (assuming your a guy) feel if some guys leered lustfully at your wife (assuming your married) as you strolled down the street. Is Gods law on adultery reasonable.
A rethorical question, to which I probably know the answer. Do you keep the law yourself?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by Chiroptera, posted 10-12-2005 6:19 PM Chiroptera has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by Chiroptera, posted 10-13-2005 5:48 PM iano has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 40 of 204 (251420)
10-13-2005 11:05 AM
Reply to: Message 30 by iano
10-12-2005 2:30 PM


How can any statement stand on its own? What about context?
What about context?
Nuggin writes:
Seems to me that the judeo/christian religion is awfully full of rules.
So lets focus on Jesus. He was said to be the fullfillment of the Law, yet He was not sent to abolish any law.
Jar writes:
The story in Genesis of Adam & Eve and the Garden of Eden is not one of a Fall, but of establishing the fact that there are good and bad choices and that we have a responsibility to TRY to make good choices.
I would say that there may well have been a Fall...we don't really know because we would have already fallen. We DO have a responsibility to make good choices, and I think that Jesus Christ is central to this. Having said that, lets assume, for a moment, that we are discussing choices with a group of secular people uninterested in the religion surrounding the Bible.
Jar writes:
GOD says "You know right from wrong!" It's then left up to the individuals to act on that knowledge.
Jars assertion is backed by Paul.Romans 1:11-18, I believe.
RiverRat writes:
Love God with all your heart mind and soul, and,
Love others as you love yourself.
Then the Holy Spirit lets you know when you are doing wrong, you don't need a Christian to tell when you are doing wrong or right.
Look at context. Jesus was talking to Jews who were already chosen, if not saved. They were asking which commandments were the most important. What were they seeking? A loophole? A conclusion? A revised version? Or...perhaps..they were seeking the Answer from Jesus.
Iano writes:
The law is there to condemn you. It's sole purpose is to make you feel condemned. Should you ever reach that point, then the law will have done exactly what it's supposed to do.
Yet Jesus told us that He was never here to condemn anyone. People felt condemnation only for when they did something that they knew not to do. Paul mentions no condemnation for folk who walk in the spirit.
How do we tell a room of secular peeps to walk in the spirit?
Perhaps we attempt to live it rather than preach it.
Parasomnium writes:
No wonder those Bible-thumpers are confused.
Warning: Anyone who attempts to force the Bible into their head without taking into account the context of the world around them will be subject to brain fog, stubborn behavior, and irrational proclamations!
Iano writes:
It seems 'try' is a conclusion drawn out by your own rationality - not by the bibles rationale.
OK...so when Jesus tells me to love God with everything I've got and I find that I do not, is it because I don't understand the Bible? Im trying, Im trying!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by iano, posted 10-12-2005 2:30 PM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 41 by iano, posted 10-13-2005 12:49 PM Phat has not replied

  
iano
Member (Idle past 1940 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 41 of 204 (251447)
10-13-2005 12:49 PM
Reply to: Message 40 by Phat
10-13-2005 11:05 AM


Re: How can any statement stand on its own? What about context?
Phat writes:
Jars assertion is backed by Paul.Romans 1:11-18, I believe.
Man knows what is wrong alright. Its just that he can't help doing wrong. I can't see any relevance of the passage quoted with respect to Jars assertion that "it is left up to the individual to act on that knowledge"
Look at context. Jesus was talking to Jews who were already chosen, if not saved.
Chosen for what? And if you mean "to be saved" where is the biblical backup for this
iano writes:
The law is there to condemn you. It's sole purpose is to make you feel condemned. Should you ever reach that point, then the law will have done exactly what it's supposed to do.
Phat writes:
Yet Jesus told us that He was never here to condemn anyone. People felt condemnation only for when they did something that they knew not to do. Paul mentions no condemnation for folk who walk in the spirit. How do we tell a room of secular peeps to walk in the spirit?
Agreed Jesus wasn't there to condemn. The law condemns: which is why people feel it when they break it. If there was no law to break you couldn't feel condemned.
Paul mentions no condemnation for those that are 'in Christ'. Only people who are 'in Christ' can 'walk in the Spirit'. A person who is not in Christ eg: a secular person, cannot walk in the spirit no matter how hard they try. Telling them to might make them do 'good works'. But to no avail. Romans 8:7-8 "For the carnal (secular, athiest, non-Christian) mind is emnity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God. Neither indeed can it be. So then, they that are in the flesh CANNOT please God"
Perhaps we attempt to live it rather than preach it.
For sure. But at the end of the day "the Gospel is the power unto salvation" - not us living it. God saves not us. Thank God
iano writes:
It seems 'try' is a conclusion drawn out by your own rationality - not by the bibles rationale.
{Phat writes:
OK...so when Jesus tells me to love God with everything I've got and I find that I do not, is it because I don't understand the Bible? Im trying, Im trying!
You (and the rest of us) don't love God with all y(our)heart..etc. because you/we are a sinner. A Christian sinner or a non-Christian sinner. Its all the same. But the Christian, unlike the non-Christian is no longer under Law (ie: follow it 100% or perish (= practically speaking, you will perish)), he is under Grace. The Law is important, it is good - but for the Christian it no longer applies, salvationally speaking. He is "free indeed"
Not so the person who is remains under Law.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by Phat, posted 10-13-2005 11:05 AM Phat has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 42 of 204 (251458)
10-13-2005 1:41 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by iano
10-12-2005 5:20 AM


Re: Random thoughts on the law
iano writes:
The law is there to condemn you. It's sole purpose is to make you feel condemned.
I did a quick whip-round of the Bible:
quote:
Jos 8:34 And afterward he read all the words of the law, the blessings and cursings, according to all that is written in the book of the law.
Seems that the law contains blessings as well as cursings. Maybe condemnation isn't the sole purpose after all?
quote:
Mat 22:37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
Mat 22:38 This is the first and great commandment.
Mat 22:39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.
Mat 22:40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
Loving God and loving thy neighbour don't sound like condemnation, do they? Jesus seemed to think that was the purpose of the law.
So, sorry, I still can't work up any feeling of condemnation.

People who think they have all the answers usually don't understand the questions.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by iano, posted 10-12-2005 5:20 AM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by iano, posted 10-14-2005 11:15 AM ringo has replied

  
Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 43 of 204 (251518)
10-13-2005 5:48 PM
Reply to: Message 39 by iano
10-13-2005 8:18 AM


Re: Random thoughts on the law
Hello, iano. Long time since we've spoken.
quote:
A rethorical question, to which I probably know the answer. Do you keep the law yourself?
I eat shellfish (despite calling myself a vegetarian) and sometimes wear polyester/cotton blends. How about you?

"Intellectually, scientifically, even artistically, fundamentalism -- biblical literalism -- is a road to nowhere, because it insists on fidelity to revealed truths that are not true." -- Katha Pollitt

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by iano, posted 10-13-2005 8:18 AM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by iano, posted 10-14-2005 11:01 AM Chiroptera has replied

  
iano
Member (Idle past 1940 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 44 of 204 (251727)
10-14-2005 11:01 AM
Reply to: Message 43 by Chiroptera
10-13-2005 5:48 PM


Re: Random thoughts on the law
Chiro writes:
Hello, iano. Long time since we've spoken.
The old friends are the best...
I eat shellfish (despite calling myself a vegetarian) and sometimes wear polyester/cotton blends. How about you?
Me? I'm a filthy, manky, greasy, dirty sinner myself. But someone gave me a coat to wear over the muck. It ain't made out of polyester/cotton. It's made of righteousness.
There's a lot of God-in-my-own-image-and-likeness adherents out there. Vegatarian-in-my-own-image too it seems
Any view on Gods law re: adultery being good?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by Chiroptera, posted 10-13-2005 5:48 PM Chiroptera has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by Chiroptera, posted 10-14-2005 11:12 AM iano has replied

  
Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 45 of 204 (251732)
10-14-2005 11:12 AM
Reply to: Message 44 by iano
10-14-2005 11:01 AM


Re: Random thoughts on the law
quote:
Any view on Gods law re: adultery being good?
Certainly if I were married I wouldn't care much what my wife would be doing with her friends on her own time.
But as far as other people are concerned, I do take a dim view of people lying about issues that are very important to other people (like fidelity). It all comes down to intentionally hurting other people vs going out of your way to help them.

"Intellectually, scientifically, even artistically, fundamentalism -- biblical literalism -- is a road to nowhere, because it insists on fidelity to revealed truths that are not true." -- Katha Pollitt

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by iano, posted 10-14-2005 11:01 AM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by iano, posted 10-14-2005 11:28 AM Chiroptera has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024