Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

I do not believe that the New Testament provides support for the act of judging another or condemning another. As my support for this view are the following scripture:

If you agree and have more support present it, if you disagree, provide support for the opposing stance.

I believe that all men are brothers, and thus all men are held inclusive when the term "brother" is used. If you disagree with this assumption provide reference that states that all men are not brothers.

Why has no one posted on this thread? Maybe some Christians don't want to hear that they are doing wrong.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Why has no one posted on this thread? Maybe some Christians don't want to hear that they are doing wrong.

I don't know, perhaps they don't believe that saying that someone else is going to hell or similar is a judgement. And so don't see themselves as judging.

There were very long lists of bible passages....when I look at it...I get dizzy.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Why has no one posted on this thread? Maybe some Christians don't want to hear that they are doing wrong.

Is my guess too. Its funny how much of the bible, contrencated on good and spiritual side, certain Christians do not follow.

The less tolerating ones, are almost always quoted and followed, and used for discrimination.

Originally posted by Regret
I do not believe that the New Testament provides support for the act of judging another or condemning another. As my support for this view are the following scripture:

If you agree and have more support present it, if you disagree, provide support for the opposing stance.

I believe that all men are brothers, and thus all men are held inclusive when the term "brother" is used. If you disagree with this assumption provide reference that states that all men are not brothers.
Interesting post, thank you.

Originally posted by Alliance
There were very long lists of bible passages....when I look at it...I get dizzy.

I know what you mean.

Reading and learning about something takes more effort than talking about it based on prejudices.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Reading and learning about something takes more effort than talking about it based on prejudices.

Hence why I didn't respond...even though I've read it once already...but if its from the BOM, I've only read its NASB cousin...well...distant cousin.

Key:
BOM - Book of Mormon
NASB - New American Standard Bible

Originally posted by Alliance
Hence why I didn't respond...even though I've read it once already...but if its from the BOM, I've only read its NASB cousin...well...distant cousin.

Key:
BOM - Book of Mormon
NASB - New American Standard Bible

Yeah, I typically don't post BOM quotes. They would hold little value for those that don't believe in it. If I feel the quotes would be useful and enlightening as to my views or Mormon views I provide them, but it would be a waste of time and of little value in most instances. Would be like quoting Bible at someone who doesn't believe the Bible.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Is my guess too. Its funny how much of the bible, contrencated on good and spiritual side, certain Christians do not follow.

The less tolerating ones, are almost always quoted and followed, and used for discrimination.

Interesting post, thank you.

Thanks

Well...you're right...

Regret, you are probably the smartest Christian I've come across on these forums. Such a shame that other Christian Debators have betrayed you by not dignifying your questions with a decent answer.

I think that it's part of human nature (or atleast Societal nature) to judge someone else, regardless of whether your religion or philosophy encourages it.

It makes all of us feel much better with ourselves when we can see ourselves as superior to someone else in some way. This much is true, as it is one of the largest problems in childrens, adolescents, and even adults.

If you cannot see yourself as better looking than, stronger than, more successful than, etc. than someone else..then religion/morality may be a way to make oneself feel they are somehow above another.

IF you feel you are a "better person" than someone else, you have feel like you have more power over them. If you think they are going to Hell, and you are going to Heaven, you also feel much better with yourself.

It's pathetic when an Individual cannot value themselves enough unless they degrade someone else. I think that's the root to the issue, not just when it comes to Christian-based judgement, but when it comes to discrimination of ALL sorts as well.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Regret, you are probably the smartest Christian I've come across on these forums. Such a shame that other Christian Debators have betrayed you by not dignifying your questions with a decent answer.

I think that it's part of human nature (or atleast Societal nature) to judge someone else, regardless of whether your religion or philosophy encourages it.

It makes all of us feel much better with ourselves when we can see ourselves as superior to someone else in some way. This much is true, as it is one of the largest problems in childrens, adolescents, and even adults.

If you cannot see yourself as better looking than, stronger than, more successful than, etc. than someone else..then religion/morality may be a way to make oneself feel they are somehow above another.

IF you feel you are a "better person" than someone else, you have feel like you have more power over them. If you think they are going to Hell, and you are going to Heaven, you also feel much better with yourself.

It's pathetic when an Individual cannot value themselves enough unless they degrade someone else. I think that's the root to the issue, not just when it comes to Christian-based judgement, but when it comes to discrimination of ALL sorts as well.

Agreed, I think the ideal of being nonjudgmental should be pursued, but it is probably beyond the reach of most, if not all men, imo. At least as far as being perfectly nonjudgmental.

Your post is accurate I think, I wanted a discussion of the fact, but I do not believe that one is forthcoming from the Bible following crowd.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Regret, you are probably the smartest Christian I've come across on these forums. Such a shame that other Christian Debators have betrayed you by not dignifying your questions with a decent answer.

I think that it's part of human nature (or atleast Societal nature) to judge someone else, regardless of whether your religion or philosophy encourages it.

It makes all of us feel much better with ourselves when we can see ourselves as superior to someone else in some way. This much is true, as it is one of the largest problems in childrens, adolescents, and even adults.

If you cannot see yourself as better looking than, stronger than, more successful than, etc. than someone else..then religion/morality may be a way to make oneself feel they are somehow above another.

IF you feel you are a "better person" than someone else, you have feel like you have more power over them. If you think they are going to Hell, and you are going to Heaven, you also feel much better with yourself.

It's pathetic when an Individual cannot value themselves enough unless they degrade someone else. I think that's the root to the issue, not just when it comes to Christian-based judgement, but when it comes to discrimination of ALL sorts as well. Who're you to judge who's smart?

Before I start, let me just say that I actually agree with Regret on this, I do think that there are opposing viewpoints though, so for just a moment I'm going to play devil's advocate.

Here are a few verses that suggest that judging is allowable at times:











So there's my bit as devils advocate, of course even if you take the view that these call for judging of others, you have to at the same time keep in mind all the rest about loving thy neighbor, and turning the other cheek, and all that.

Originally posted by docb77
Before I start, let me just say that I actually agree with Regret on this, I do think that there are opposing viewpoints though, so for just a moment I'm going to play devil's advocate.

Here are a few verses that suggest that judging is allowable at times:











So there's my bit as devils advocate, of course even if you take the view that these call for judging of others, you have to at the same time keep in mind all the rest about loving thy neighbor, and turning the other cheek, and all that.


But it's a contradiction, don't you think? How can you "turn the other cheek" and "love thy neighbor" and at the same time pass judgement on the same person ?

Aren't all those quotes from Old Testament?

Corinthians is NT.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
But it's a contradiction, don't you think? How can you "turn the other cheek" and "love thy neighbor" and at the same time pass judgement on the same person ?

The bible is contradictory...

Its full of incidences where public stoning is recommended...the new testament however, as a general stance, moves judgement away from humans and puts it in gods hands.

Thats the problem with literalism though. When things contradict, people ignore it and choose a side. This combined with the general vagueness of the Bible, creates multiple literalisms...which can be easily exploited by lets say....certain movements.

Originally posted by Alliance
Corinthians is NT.



The bible is contradictory...

Its full of incidences where public stoning is recommended...the new testament however, as a general stance, moves judgement away from humans and puts it in gods hands.

Thats the problem with literalism though. When things contradict, people ignore it and choose a side. This combined with the general vagueness of the Bible, creates multiple literalisms...which can be easily exploited by lets say....certain movements.

Or they just pretend there's no contradiction.

Ask JIA, ask Feceman, ask many Christian debators, they will somehow try and convince you that no contradiction exists....

To them...there is no condradiction, becuase they likely don't look for one.

Everything is exactly how they think it is and there is no room for opinions other than their own.

Actually, in this instance, I think there may be a way to reconcile the 2 positions.

When we're told not to judge, that's referring to judgement of people. We have no way of knowing what's actually in their hearts, God does. That's why judgement is reserved for Him.

On the other hand, the verses I gave told us that we should judge. We've already said that we shouldn't judge people, so what's left? If we read the verses I gave in context they're generally talking about judging between good and evil. So since we can't judge peoples intentions, we are left with judging situations and actions. By their fruits ye shall know them and all that jazz.

So one possible reconciliation is:

Judge people = big no-no
Judge environment/actions = ok if we have the gift of understanding

The gift understanding being the Christian faith....

I don't think you can reconcile...you need people to judge to keep them away from other faiths and in "the right path." However, you don't want it to come to the point where everyone condemns every one else within your own religoin. Thus...you make two contradictory statements to attempt to keep a balance.

Or...the people who wrote the book were just morons.

Originally posted by Alliance
The gift understanding being the Christian faith....

I don't think you can reconcile...you need people to judge to keep them away from other faiths and in "the right path." However, you don't want it to come to the point where everyone condemns every one else within your own religoin. Thus...you make two contradictory statements to attempt to keep a balance.

Or...the people who wrote the book were just morons.

It seems to me to be one or the other

To judge one's "actions" is the same thing as judging the person. You don't know the intent or motive or situation to successfully judge someone else's actions. So don't claim to.

Christian Faith does not equal understanding...my intepretations of a situation could be just as valid or invalid as your own.

Do you have the right to judge? I don't know, but we all engage in judgement don't we ? The only difference is I don't claim my judgement is righteous or fair , while you will argue that yours is.

Judgement is bias..plain and simple. There is no "fair judgement" when it comes to human intepretation.

Originally posted by docb77
Before I start, let me just say that I actually agree with Regret on this, I do think that there are opposing viewpoints though, so for just a moment I'm going to play devil's advocate.

Here are a few verses that suggest that judging is allowable at times:

So there's my bit as devils advocate, of course even if you take the view that these call for judging of others, you have to at the same time keep in mind all the rest about loving thy neighbor, and turning the other cheek, and all that.

I would state that these are speaking of teaching and judging the "people", not judging those that are not of the "people." Also, judging whether one, meaning oneself, should do something or not do something is not the same as judging the actions of another. Reproof and correction is different than judging also, but even this is reserved for the "people."

I feel that scripture should not contradict, and so I would lean towards an interpretation that doesn't require contradiction. Also, I would err on the side of caution, many verses that speak of the saints judging use the term shall, or other future tense. It is not necessarily the case that this future tense has reached present/past yet, particularly when the scripture references Christ's second coming.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Aren't all those quotes from Old Testament?

Old and New Testament should not contradict. Teachings of behavior should be consistent, method of enforcement may not necessarily be. Judging another is typically deemed acceptable in law if one is in the position of judge or similar, so verse referring to one in designated judgement seat would be allowed to judge based on the law without fear of religious reproof. These positions are discussed in the Old Testament frequently and would not be valid if the position is not currently in place.

Originally posted by Alliance
Corinthians is NT.



The bible is contradictory...

Its full of incidences where public stoning is recommended...the new testament however, as a general stance, moves judgement away from humans and puts it in gods hands.

Thats the problem with literalism though. When things contradict, people ignore it and choose a side. This combined with the general vagueness of the Bible, creates multiple literalisms...which can be easily exploited by lets say....certain movements.

There isn't contradiction, Jesus merely stated that his followers should not judge another if they aren't perfect, and then said his followers weren't perfect neither could be before judgement.

I view it as man(entire species through time) is a child, God is the parent, as a child matures the methods used for discipline change. I believe that man as a species has matured through history. I do believe the methods applied in the old testament were warranted given Israel's behavior at Sinai. They had seen miracles on a scope that no one had previously witnessed, and they still built the Golden Calf. I would state that they seemed a bit slow in learning. Also, discipline tends to follow knowledge, these people had very close in time miracles on a highly frequent basis, if discipline is more harsh with knowledge it stands to reason that theirs should have been more harsh.

Originally posted by docb77
Actually, in this instance, I think there may be a way to reconcile the 2 positions.

When we're told not to judge, that's referring to judgement of people. We have no way of knowing what's actually in their hearts, God does. That's why judgement is reserved for Him.

On the other hand, the verses I gave told us that we should judge. We've already said that we shouldn't judge people, so what's left? If we read the verses I gave in context they're generally talking about judging between good and evil. So since we can't judge peoples intentions, we are left with judging situations and actions. By their fruits ye shall know them and all that jazz.

So one possible reconciliation is:

Judge people = big no-no
Judge environment/actions = ok if we have the gift of understanding

Agreed, I'm sorry I missed this before my other post.

Originally posted by Alliance
The gift understanding being the Christian faith....

I don't think you can reconcile...you need people to judge to keep them away from other faiths and in "the right path." However, you don't want it to come to the point where everyone condemns every one else within your own religoin. Thus...you make two contradictory statements to attempt to keep a balance.

Or...the people who wrote the book were just morons.

I think the contradiction is perceived through the actions of much of Christianity, I don't think it is necessarily that of the text.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
It seems to me to be one or the other

To judge one's "actions" is the same thing as judging the person. You don't know the intent or motive or situation to successfully judge someone else's actions. So don't claim to.

Christian Faith does not equal understanding...my intepretations of a situation could be just as valid or invalid as your own.

Do you have the right to judge? I don't know, but we all engage in judgement don't we ? The only difference is I don't claim my judgement is righteous or fair , while you will argue that yours is.

Judgement is bias..plain and simple. There is no "fair judgement" when it comes to human intepretation.

Judging one's own actions, not other people's actions. The Bible says stay away from things you shouldn't do, or in other words, judge what things you will be a part of or not.

Originally posted by Alliance
The gift understanding being the Christian faith....

I don't think you can reconcile...you need people to judge to keep them away from other faiths and in "the right path." However, you don't want it to come to the point where everyone condemns every one else within your own religoin. Thus...you make two contradictory statements to attempt to keep a balance.

Or...the people who wrote the book were just morons.

No, the gift of understanding is completely separate from the christian faith. Paul gives a sermon in one of his epistles that basically says that God gives all men gifts, he lists charity/love as being the best, but also mentions others. I don't see why understaning or discernment couldn't be one.

I don't see the point of the rest of your rant. Isn't it possible to say that stealing or murder is wrong without presuming to know the intent of other peoples hearts?

Perhaps taken as a whole what it means is that while we shouldn't judge others we should judge what we choose to do ourselves.

Open your mind, sure they might be contradictory, but then again maybe it's your reading of them that's contradictory. Being stuck in a given paradigm makes it harder to see the truth. True in both science and religion.

Originally posted by docb77
No, the gift of understanding is completely separate from the christian faith. Paul gives a sermon in one of his epistles that basically says that God gives all men gifts, he lists charity/love as being the best, but also mentions others. I don't see why understaning or discernment couldn't be one.

I don't see the point of the rest of your rant. Isn't it possible to say that stealing or murder is wrong without presuming to know the intent of other peoples hearts?

Perhaps taken as a whole what it means is that while we shouldn't judge others we should judge what we choose to do ourselves.

Open your mind, sure they might be contradictory, but then again maybe it's your reading of them that's contradictory. Being stuck in a given paradigm makes it harder to see the truth. True in both science and religion.

It wasn't a rant at all, so "open your mind" to other possibilites.

I don't understand at all how half of what you said connects to your argument.

I disagreed with your original argument...especially "given the gift of understanding" I provided a simple rationalization on why the authors of the bible created contradictory statements.

So, because I stated a rationalization seperate to your own...I'm suddenly stuck in a paradigm?

Originally posted by Regret
There isn't contradiction, Jesus merely stated that his followers should not judge another if they aren't perfect, and then said his followers weren't perfect neither could be before judgement.

Wait. This does not contradict with statements in the OT that clearly give a list of reasons to use catpital punishment? I believe death is a pretty severe judgement.

Originally posted by Regret
if discipline is more harsh with knowledge it stands to reason that theirs should have been more harsh.

I don't understand. The "knowledge" didn't decrease between Moses and Christ, it increased. Given this logic, by the time Christ rolls around, if you f*ck up, you should really get it because "the son of god" has told you. You would expect NT punishment to be harsher than the OT.

* according to the Bible...

"Judge not, that ye be not judged."
Matthew 7:1

* this statement is true but to whom does this statement really applies to? let us continue...

"For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured unto you.
And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me cast out the mote out of thine eye; and lo, the beam is in thine own eye?
Thou hypocrite, cast out first the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye."
Matthew 7:2-5

* those people who are hypocrites that always tend to judge others whilst they are the ones doing worse...

* the Bible also supplies that there are instances that people are permitted to judge but with this condition...

"Judge not according to appearance, but judge righteous judgment."
John 7:24

* it was somewhat synonymous to, "don't judge a book by its cover"... a good judgment is a righteous one... but to whom should people judge? can people judge everyone?

"But God will judge the ones outside. And you shall put out from yourselves the evil one."
I Corinthians 5:13

* people can judge righteously within their own group, those who are outside their group, it is God's judgment that should be respected...

* so basically, if a religious group professes that those people who are outside their Church will not be saved, then that group is not in accordance with the Bible...

Originally posted by Alliance
It wasn't a rant at all, so "open your mind" to other possibilites.

I don't understand at all how half of what you said connects to your argument.

I disagreed with your original argument...especially "given the gift of understanding" I provided a simple rationalization on why the authors of the bible created contradictory statements.

So, because I stated a rationalization seperate to your own...I'm suddenly stuck in a paradigm?

Sorry, I misunderstood. please accept my apology. I'm used to the bible being bashed and disregarded in many of these threads. But, it was rash of me to call your post a rant.

I agree, some christians might think that "being saved" is the gift that allows some kind of superior judgement.

I do still hold that most of the Bible "contradictions" can be reconciled once we understand the intent of the authors.

No problem . This is the "Judgement" thread.

I'm just saying that the Bible also was used and serves as a very political tool. It is possible, if you believe that the writers intent was to create such a tool, to explain contradictions as intentional.

The NT authors could have been taken aback by the OT's seemingly condemning nature and post-Christ decided to modify it, retaining a sense of religious identity, but also introducing a sense of restraint and reservation.

Originally posted by Regret
Judging one's own actions, not other people's actions. The Bible says stay away from things you shouldn't do, or in other words, judge what things you will be a part of or not.


That is different. I thought Docb77 was saying that as long as you are a "good Christian" who turns away from "sin", then that gives you the right to judge other people.

You can judge yourself, as long as it causes you no harm. To judge yourself too much, however, can be self destructive. You are still human no matter what, and should give yourself some lee way, because you can never be "perfect". Wouldn't you agree ?

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
That is different. I thought Docb77 was saying that as long as you are a "good Christian" who turns away from "sin", then that gives you the right to judge other people.

You can judge yourself, as long as it causes you no harm. To judge yourself too much, however, can be self destructive. You are still human no matter what, and should give yourself some lee way, because you can never be "perfect". Wouldn't you agree ?

Nah, I don't think whether or not a person is a christian has anything to do with whether or not they've got good judgement. I doubt anyone would say Confucius had bad judgement.

I think when you take all the verses together they just mean "keep your nose out of things you don't know anything about".

I doubt they mean that a judge in the legal system shouldn't do his job, or a cop. They could be telling us to use a little common sense, wisdom you know.

Originally posted by docb77
Nah, I don't think whether or not a person is a christian has anything to do with whether or not they've got good judgement. I doubt anyone would say Confucius had bad judgement.

I think when you take all the verses together they just mean "keep your nose out of things you don't know anything about".

I doubt they mean that a judge in the legal system shouldn't do his job, or a cop. They could be telling us to use a little common sense, wisdom you know.

Fair Enough. However, I think Laws should stay as being created by mutual agreement, rather than on the foundations of a 2000 year old book.

But is popular opinon always right?

Originally posted by Alliance
But is popular opinon always right?

Not always, but if we make the wrong choice, we kind of deserve what we get. Don't you think?

Originally posted by Alliance
Wait. This does not contradict with statements in the OT that clearly give a list of reasons to use catpital punishment? I believe death is a pretty severe judgement.

Old Testament statement was written for preservation of the Hebrew religion, and is written for people that have a prophet of God with them. They had near constant divine communication. Also, as to the contradiction between OT and NT, Jesus wasn't teaching people who had just left a strongly idol worshipping culture. He did not have to stop those behaviors. To take a common behavioral quote, punishment must be instant and severe to alter behavior effectively. God needed to change the behavior of the Israelites leaving Egypt. At the time of Jesus, the behavior of the Jews was not in need of altering. Behavior needed to be shaped. The difference between shaping and punishing is great, shaping involves reinforcement of proper behavior, punishment is self explanatory. Given the spread of Christianity the behavior was shaped fairly well for its purpose.

So, in summation, I would just state that the religious behavior of Israel at the time of Moses compared to the time of Christ was very much different, single subject design relies on the individual for the baseline to which treatment is to be applied. Two treatments were used, they are not in conflict, they treated two separate behavioral modifications. The first brought israel from a state of idol worship to the point of ignoring seeing God in a cloud and pillar of fire to a point of fanatical observance of the treatment provided. The second, similar, brought man, through the use of Israel (the Jews), to an understanding of the overall intent of Hebrew/Christian religion, to a point that has once again become fanatical (e.g. JIA, JBF, etc.) Once again the treatment has begun, for a third stage in the modification of man's behavior. They do not conflict, their subject has merely altered, and so must the treatment.

Originally posted by Alliance
I don't understand. The "knowledge" didn't decrease between Moses and Christ, it increased. Given this logic, by the time Christ rolls around, if you f*ck up, you should really get it because "the son of god" has told you. You would expect NT punishment to be harsher than the OT.

Knowledge has altered. Prior to Christ, miracles and prophets abounded. Following Christ it appears that the two have been nearly absent, the Christian religions cannot agree on if miracles have happened, and they deny that prophets have. There is no longer the knowledge as it existed during the OT. The NT has governed life in Christianity for nearly two thousand years, it was written for that period of time. The OT and NT are not unnecessary, they are evidence of a treatment that worked, they should be studied for their impact on their subject and their description of the treatment from the subjects view.

This, is my view, in a way. It isn't necessarily absolute and it evolved as I considered your remarks, and may evolve further. I also believe varying perspectives exist, and so I look at it from varying perspectives, some fall away due to an evidence making that view wrong. Some persist and depending on what area of thought I am studying, I will shift from one view to another. Urizen has commented on this from time to time, and gets frustrated if it occurs while speaking with him, so if it happens in the future I apologize.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
That is different. I thought Docb77 was saying that as long as you are a "good Christian" who turns away from "sin", then that gives you the right to judge other people.

I think that is what occurs in many Christians, but I don't think it was Docb's intent.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
You can judge yourself, as long as it causes you no harm. To judge yourself too much, however, can be self destructive. You are still human no matter what, and should give yourself some lee way, because you can never be "perfect". Wouldn't you agree ?

I believe we can't judge ourselves either. We should merely attempt to do good and show charity to everyone as frequently as possible, we should live to serve others. This should be our goal, imo, to impact as many individuals in a positive manner while we have the ability, with no regard to our personal "salvation", "heaven", "reward", etc. Perfection isn't the goal, near perfection might be a byproduct to achieving this though, but in this life? Doubtful we'd get close. Perfection is not a goal, it is a marker reminding a person of his position as an equal to most people in position by comparison.

Originally posted by peejayd
* according to the Bible...

I don't have time to read and consider this, I'll try to tomorrow.

Originally posted by Regret
I don't have time to read and consider this, I'll try to tomorrow.

Likewise.

Originally posted by Regret
Old and New Testament should not contradict. Teachings of behavior should be consistent, method of enforcement may not necessarily be. Judging another is typically deemed acceptable in law if one is in the position of judge or similar, so verse referring to one in designated judgement seat would be allowed to judge based on the law without fear of religious reproof. These positions are discussed in the Old Testament frequently and would not be valid if the position is not currently in place.

I see.

I always thought that the Christians were all about the NT, because OT is Jewish cripture.
Hmm...interesting.

Originally posted by Regret
I do not believe that the New Testament provides support for the act of judging another or condemning another. As my support for this view are the following scripture:



I think i know the exact passage you are talking about. Funnily enough I had only looked it up once and when you read on it says something like this....how can you tell your brother that he has something in your eye if you have something in your eye too? Remove the object in your eye then advise your brother.

Nothing wrong with that, but it basically says if you are going to judge others then sort yourself out first.

Yes this is the passage.

Originally posted by peejayd
* according to the Bible...

"Judge not, that ye be not judged."
Matthew 7:1

* this statement is true but to whom does this statement really applies to? let us continue...

"For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured unto you.
And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me cast out the mote out of thine eye; and lo, the beam is in thine own eye?
Thou hypocrite, cast out first the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye."
Matthew 7:2-5

* those people who are hypocrites that always tend to judge others whilst they are the ones doing worse...

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
I see.

I always thought that the Christians were all about the NT, because OT is Jewish cripture.
Hmm...interesting.

Many Christians tend to discount the OT due to the statement that Christ fulfilled the Law. They take this as meaning the Law is no longer in effect and thus can be ignored if it doesn't fit them. I am Mormon, so our view is often dissimilar to many Christians in that our perspectives are different. To understand a Mormon's view one should read the Book of Mormon (BoM) and perhaps the Doctrine and Covenants (D&C) as well, but the D&C should often be read in context with the Church history at the time for more clarity on its text. All the same Mormon's believe the Bible and feel our views fit and are supported by the Bible, the Book of Mormon is just another record of God's dealings with man, not a replacement to the Bible.

Originally posted by peejayd
* according to the Bible...

"Judge not, that ye be not judged."
Matthew 7:1

* this statement is true but to whom does this statement really applies to? let us continue...

"For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured unto you.
And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me cast out the mote out of thine eye; and lo, the beam is in thine own eye?
Thou hypocrite, cast out first the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye."
Matthew 7:2-5

* those people who are hypocrites that always tend to judge others whilst they are the ones doing worse...

This text, imo, should be read while considering this:



The pharisees were not all adulterers, they were merely sinners. They were unable to judge and condemn the woman because they were sinners, not because they were adulterers. It is not enough to not have that sin, one needs to have no sin if one is going to judge righteously. And this is within the Jewish group, where Christ states judgement may occur. So is the group really capable of judging even amongst themselves?

Originally posted by peejayd
* the Bible also supplies that there are instances that people are permitted to judge but with this condition...

"Judge not according to appearance, but judge righteous judgment."
John 7:24

* it was somewhat synonymous to, "don't judge a book by its cover"... a good judgment is a righteous one... but to whom should people judge? can people judge everyone?

But is it speaking of judging the individual? Also, he is speaking to the Judges in Israel when he states this, it is their duty to Judge in Israel because they have been directly appointed to do such. Also, once again, the Judges were not worthy to judge righteously because they were sinners, which the Bible states all men are, so who is without sin that may judge?

Originally posted by peejayd
"But God will judge the ones outside. And you shall put out from yourselves the evil one."
I Corinthians 5:13

* people can judge righteously within their own group, those who are outside their group, it is God's judgment that should be respected...

I can agree to within their group, because the group has agreed to live in a specific manner. Thus they have agreed to be judged. But this does not validate the idea of judging those not of their group.

Originally posted by peejayd
* so basically, if a religious group professes that those people who are outside their Church will not be saved, then that group is not in accordance with the Bible...

Agreed.

Originally posted by Alfheim
I think i know the exact passage you are talking about. Funnily enough I had only looked it up once and when you read on it says something like this....how can you tell your brother that he has something in your eye if you have something in your eye too? Remove the object in your eye then advise your brother.

Nothing wrong with that, but it basically says if you are going to judge others then sort yourself out first.

Yes this is the passage.

I hope my post responding to Peejayd was adequate for addressing this as well.

Originally posted by Regret
Knowledge has altered. Prior to Christ, miracles and prophets abounded. Following Christ it appears that the two have been nearly absent, the Christian religions cannot agree on if miracles have happened, and they deny that prophets have. There is no longer the knowledge as it existed during the OT. The NT has governed life in Christianity for nearly two thousand years, it was written for that period of time. The OT and NT are not unnecessary, they are evidence of a treatment that worked, they should be studied for their impact on their subject and their description of the treatment from the subjects view.

This, is my view, in a way. It isn't necessarily absolute and it evolved as I considered your remarks, and may evolve further. I also believe varying perspectives exist, and so I look at it from varying perspectives, some fall away due to an evidence making that view wrong. Some persist and depending on what area of thought I am studying, I will shift from one view to another. Urizen has commented on this from time to time, and gets frustrated if it occurs while speaking with him, so if it happens in the future I apologize.

Lil's comment is a good starting place for the first part.

For the second, if god has some hand in spreading the Bible around (unconscious or not) (which I believe you would believe in, since you believe in continuous prophets), I don't think people really could have an excuse. If "god" "came and died for our sins"...and then people wrote about it in the first and most widely published book in history...which has then been translated into practically every languace I know perhaps save Mandalorian....I would think that god would be pretty angry that we didn't get it by know.

My Deism says that God, if he is there, gave use reason and intellect. Humans are not stupid, though they may act as such. Repetativeness shouldnt have to matter.

Originally posted by Alliance
Lil's comment is a good starting place for the first part.

For the second, if god has some hand in spreading the Bible around (unconscious or not) (which I believe you would believe in, since you believe in continuous prophets), I don't think people really could have an excuse. If "god" "came and died for our sins"...and then people wrote about it in the first and most widely published book in history...which has then been translated into practically every languace I know perhaps save Mandalorian....I would think that god would be pretty angry that we didn't get it by know.

My Deism says that God, if he is there, gave use reason and intellect. Humans are not stupid, though they may act as such. Repetativeness shouldnt have to matter.

I don't think the Bible is what they are supposed to get. It is the behavior that God is trying to get us to grasp. The Bible isn't the "what" it is merely a tool to aid us in grasping how we should behave. Christ's Atonement is the satisfier of justice, it is the event that allows God to in effect take the brunt of the consequences of our inappropriate actions without denying justice. While this is in a Christian's view the most important event in history, it is not what God wants us to get. He wants men to behave unselfishly, to care for the well being of others above our own. I don't believe these concepts are easily placed into action in our lives, due to the ease with which desires can be sated in manners that are inconsistent with these teachings. The Bible, and all of God's word to man is merely direction that is needed to help use return to the proper manner of behavior when we stray from it. And at times we have strayed very far from it.

Of course humans can't judge eachother: that's God's job.

Just like the title of the Tupac song: "Only God Can Judge Me".

Originally posted by Regret
This text, imo, should be read while considering this:

* i'm sorry, my friend, but John 7:53 up to John 8:12 were spuriously added in the Bible and are not included in the original manuscript... so i'm going to be on the safe side - "no comment"...

Originally posted by Regret
The pharisees were not all adulterers, they were merely sinners. They were unable to judge and condemn the woman because they were sinners, not because they were adulterers. It is not enough to not have that sin, one needs to have no sin if one is going to judge righteously. And this is within the Jewish group, where Christ states judgement may occur. So is the group really capable of judging even amongst themselves?

* therefore, the members of the true Church in the Bible really do have the authority to judge...

"Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin ; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God."
I John 3:9

"We know that whosoever is born of God sinneth not; but he that is begotten of God keepeth himself, and that wicked one toucheth him not."
I John 5:18

* but still only within their group...

Originally posted by Regret
But is it speaking of judging the individual? Also, he is speaking to the Judges in Israel when he states this, it is their duty to Judge in Israel because they have been directly appointed to do such. Also, once again, the Judges were not worthy to judge righteously because they were sinners, which the Bible states all men are, so who is without sin that may judge?

* John 7:24 clearly states that it is okay to judge but with the condition of not have it based on a person's appearance, but unto the will of God, so the judgment would be a righteous one... let us read a scenario regarding the prophet Samuel...

"But the LORD said unto Samuel, Look not on his countenance, or on the height of his stature; because I have refused him: for the LORD seeth not as man seeth; for man looketh on the outward appearance, but the LORD looketh on the heart."
I Samuel 16:7

* so basically, people can judge others (only within their group) carrying the basis of the word of God...

* that's why there are suspensions and excommunications in the true Church in the Bible, the ground of judgment is based on the teachings of Christ, if a person violates the doctrine, there should be a disciplinary action...

* for first and second offense...

"After the first and second warning, avoid a man of heresy,"
Titus 3:10

* if the person still continues to violate the doctrine inspite of those warnings...

"But God will judge the ones outside. And you shall put out from yourselves the evil one."
I Corinthians 5:13

* excommunicate the person... that is a righteous judgment within the true Church in the Bible...

Originally posted by Regret
I can agree to within their group, because the group has agreed to live in a specific manner. Thus they have agreed to be judged. But this does not validate the idea of judging those not of their group.

* yes, because if a group claims that they are of God, then they should not judge people outside their group, for the Bible tells us that God will judge those who are outside the Church (provided, if the group is really of God and abides the law of God in the Bible)...

Originally posted by Regret
Agreed.

* agreed...

Originally posted by peejayd
* i'm sorry, my friend, but John 7:53 up to John 8:12 were spuriously added in the Bible and are not included in the original manuscript... so i'm going to be on the safe side - "no comment"...



* therefore, the members of the true Church in the Bible really do have the authority to judge...

"Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin ; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God."
I John 3:9

"We know that whosoever is born of God sinneth not; but he that is begotten of God keepeth himself, and that wicked one toucheth him not."
I John 5:18

* but still only within their group...



* John 7:24 clearly states that it is okay to judge but with the condition of not have it based on a person's appearance, but unto the will of God, so the judgment would be a righteous one... let us read a scenario regarding the prophet Samuel...

"But the LORD said unto Samuel, Look not on his countenance, or on the height of his stature; because I have refused him: for the LORD seeth not as man seeth; for man looketh on the outward appearance, but the LORD looketh on the heart."
I Samuel 16:7

* so basically, people can judge others (only within their group) carrying the basis of the word of God...

* that's why there are suspensions and excommunications in the true Church in the Bible, the ground of judgment is based on the teachings of Christ, if a person violates the doctrine, there should be a disciplinary action...

* for first and second offense...

"After the first and second warning, avoid a man of heresy,"
Titus 3:10

* if the person still continues to violate the doctrine inspite of those warnings...

"But God will judge the ones outside. And you shall put out from yourselves the evil one."
I Corinthians 5:13

* excommunicate the person... that is a righteous judgment within the true Church in the Bible...



* yes, because if a group claims that they are of God, then they should not judge people outside their group, for the Bible tells us that God will judge those who are outside the Church (provided, if the group is really of God and abides the law of God in the Bible)...



* agreed...

I think I agree with what you have stated, although I am still leery of conceding that many, if any, fit into these verses:

Originally posted by peejayd
* therefore, the members of the true Church in the Bible really do have the authority to judge...

"Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin ; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God."
I John 3:9

"We know that whosoever is born of God sinneth not; but he that is begotten of God keepeth himself, and that wicked one toucheth him not."
I John 5:18

I believe that if a person is truly born of God, that that individual "doth not commit sin", but I believe it to be a proud individual to claim such a thing. And if a person were such, they would not, imo, judge another. Christ himself stated that he, being perfect, would not judge unless it was necessary, and only with the father would he do so.



This supports the idea that judging is not something man should do, and while we may among our group, this would lead me to be very cautious about making a judgement about another.

Originally posted by Regret
I think I agree with what you have stated, although I am still leery of conceding that many, if any, fit into these verses:

* yes, but believe me, there is only one group that will fit in those verses, and that is the true Church in the Bible...

Originally posted by Regret
I believe that if a person is truly born of God, that that individual "doth not commit sin", but I believe it to be a proud individual to claim such a thing. And if a person were such, they would not, imo, judge another. Christ himself stated that he, being perfect, would not judge unless it was necessary, and only with the father would he do so.

* i do agree with you in that instance but, the Bible also supplies and suggests that there are really people that are perfect in the eyes of God and have the authority to judge... however, you are correct, my friend, claiming is one thing and PROVING is another thing... only God can justly say that this certain person is perfect, not a person just only claiming that he is perfect...

"Ye therefore shall be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect."
Matthew 5:48

"Finally, brethren, farewell. Be perfected; be comforted; be of the same mind; live in peace: and the God of love and peace shall be with you."
II Corinthians 13:11

* there is a commandment from Christ and Saint Paul for the people of God to be perfect, so it would be impertinent for them to command it if no one can really achieve perfectness... not perfectness according to the eyes of man but of God...

"These are the generations of Noah. Noah was a righteous man, and perfect in his generations: Noah walked with God."
Genesis 6:9

* for example, Noah is perfect...

"There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name was Job; and that man was perfect and upright, and one that feared God, and turned away from evil."
Job 1:1

"And the Lord said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil? and still he holdeth fast his integrity, although thou movedst me against him, to destroy him without cause."
Job 2:3

* as is Job...

"Let us therefore, as many as are perfect, be thus minded: and if in anything ye are otherwise minded, this also shall God reveal unto you:"
Philippians 3:15

* and the Christians in the first century... because they prosper in love and charity...

"And above all these things put on love, which is the bond of perfectness."
Colossians 3:14

* blessed are those whose sins are forgiven, whose sins are not counted, not imputed and not reckoned by God...

"Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, And whose sins are covered.
Blessed is the man to whom, the Lord will not reckon sin."
The Romans 4:8

* because those people were washed, sanctified and justified by God...

"And such were some of you: but ye were washed, but ye were sanctified, but ye were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and in the Spirit of our God."
I Corinthians 6:11

* so that's it...

Originally posted by Regret
This supports the idea that judging is not something man should do, and while we may among our group, this would lead me to be very cautious about making a judgement about another.

* agreed, we should all be cautious...

Originally posted by peejayd
* yes, but believe me, there is only one group that will fit in those verses, and that is the true Church in the Bible...

* i do agree with you in that instance but, the Bible also supplies and suggests that there are really people that are perfect in the eyes of God and have the authority to judge... however, you are correct, my friend, claiming is one thing and PROVING is another thing... only God can justly say that this certain person is perfect, not a person just only claiming that he is perfect...

"Ye therefore shall be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect."
Matthew 5:48

"Finally, brethren, farewell. Be perfected; be comforted; be of the same mind; live in peace: and the God of love and peace shall be with you."
II Corinthians 13:11

* there is a commandment from Christ and Saint Paul for the people of God to be perfect, so it would be impertinent for them to command it if no one can really achieve perfectness... not perfectness according to the eyes of man but of God...

"These are the generations of Noah. Noah was a righteous man, and perfect in his generations: Noah walked with God."
Genesis 6:9

* for example, Noah is perfect...

"There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name was Job; and that man was perfect and upright, and one that feared God, and turned away from evil."
Job 1:1

"And the Lord said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil? and still he holdeth fast his integrity, although thou movedst me against him, to destroy him without cause."
Job 2:3

* as is Job...

"Let us therefore, as many as are perfect, be thus minded: and if in anything ye are otherwise minded, this also shall God reveal unto you:"
Philippians 3:15

* and the Christians in the first century... because they prosper in love and charity...

"And above all these things put on love, which is the bond of perfectness."
Colossians 3:14

* blessed are those whose sins are forgiven, whose sins are not counted, not imputed and not reckoned by God...

"Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, And whose sins are covered.
Blessed is the man to whom, the Lord will not reckon sin."
The Romans 4:8

* because those people were washed, sanctified and justified by God...

"And such were some of you: but ye were washed, but ye were sanctified, but ye were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and in the Spirit of our God."
I Corinthians 6:11

* so that's it...

* agreed, we should all be cautious...

Agreed.

As to the following. I basically agree with you, I don't know for sure if these people would "know" that they were in the position, and I doubt they would judge unless told to. And if they know, I believe they would probably keep it to themselves. Mormons also believe that Moses achieved it by the end of his time.

Originally posted by peejayd
* i do agree with you in that instance but, the Bible also supplies and suggests that there are really people that are perfect in the eyes of God and have the authority to judge... however, you are correct, my friend, claiming is one thing and PROVING is another thing... only God can justly say that this certain person is perfect, not a person just only claiming that he is perfect...

Originally posted by Regret
I think that is what occurs in many Christians, but I don't think it was Docb's intent.

I doubt any person has the qualifications to truly judge.



Originally posted by Regret
I believe we can't judge ourselves either. We should merely attempt to do good and show charity to everyone as frequently as possible, we should live to serve others. This should be our goal, imo, to impact as many individuals in a positive manner while we have the ability, with no regard to our personal "salvation", "heaven", "reward", etc. Perfection isn't the goal, near perfection might be a byproduct to achieving this though, but in this life? Doubtful we'd get close. Perfection is not a goal, it is a marker reminding a person of his position as an equal to most people in position by comparison.

Sounds very Liberal

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
I doubt any person has the qualifications to truly judge.

As of today, I agree, but I do believe there may have been a few throughout history.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Sounds very Liberal

Perhaps

Originally posted by Regret
As of today, I agree, but I do believe there may have been a few throughout history.

Maybe Mother Teresa. But even she never judged anyone..she only aimed to help and alleviate suffering....now SHE is a truly good person...a real Saint...none of this yelling "Blasphemy" bullshit.

Just genuine love, that lacks judgement of any kind.



Originally posted by Regret
Perhaps

I know...i know...u dread that word.

Yeah...because Liberalism was only the greatest philosophy to grace mankind...

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Maybe Mother Teresa. But even she never judged anyone..she only aimed to help and alleviate suffering....now SHE is a truly good person...a real Saint...none of this yelling "Blasphemy" bullshit.

Just genuine love, that lacks judgement of any kind.

Like I said, if people like this exist, I doubt they would judge another.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
I know...i know...u dread that word.

I dread the word due to the fact that things like Penthouse, Bill Clinton in the Oval Office with Monica, and other things like this are considered liberal, and I don't want to be lumped in with that type of thing.

Hah. That stuff is not liberal at all.

True. Bill Clinton having a bit of fun with the hired help is not indicative of liberal ideas. Just like a conservative having an affair (which also happens) is not indicative of conservative ideals.

The closest it comes is that generally liberals are seen to support sexual freedom. But it is only the more extreme liberals that advocate affairs as necessary or right.

Originally posted by Alliance
Hah. That stuff is not liberal at all. Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
True. Bill Clinton having a bit of fun with the hired help is not indicative of liberal ideas. Just like a conservative having an affair (which also happens) is not indicative of conservative ideals.

The closest it comes is that generally liberals are seen to support sexual freedom. But it is only the more extreme liberals that advocate affairs as necessary or right.

I understand this, but, it is seen as liberal. It is the attitude that people in general see, regardless of accuracy. I abhor the term conservative on the same level, Bush, Cheney, Rumsfield, others, they all cast a horrible shadow on the conservative side that is not better than the examples of liberal I presented.

We'll, if you think Joe and Jane American are intelligent enough to understand politics....

Originally posted by Alliance
We'll, if you think Joe and Jane American are intelligent enough to understand politics....

I don't think people choose properly, they choose the best of two "evils", as it were. I think politics isn't fully understood by many, if any, outside the politicians themselves.

Yes, because fortunately, life does not come in dichotomies.

Originally posted by Alliance
Yes, because fortunately, life does not come in dichotomies.

Which makes a two party system an error, imo.

Yes, but unfortunately, that likely won't change in the US.

Originally posted by Regret
Like I said, if people like this exist, I doubt they would judge another.

People like that DO exist...


Originally posted by Regret
I dread the word due to the fact that things like Penthouse, Bill Clinton in the Oval Office with Monica, and other things like this are considered liberal, and I don't want to be lumped in with that type of thing.

Having affairs has nothing to do with Liberalism, as plenty of Conservatives have had affairs as well.

Liberals and Conservatives alike look at things such as Penthouse...the difference is, Liberals have the balls to admit it, while Conservatives deny thier participation in the promotion of these kinds of things.

Originally posted by Regret
Which makes a two party system an error, imo. I'll probably vote 3rd party next time.............I've learned the lesson.

Oh and many many protestant churches hand out literature for telling you how to vote Republican...........I don't believe Catholic churches do that.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen



Having affairs has nothing to do with Liberalism, as plenty of Conservatives have had affairs as well.

Liberals and Conservatives alike look at things such as Penthouse...the difference is, Liberals have the balls to admit it, while Conservatives deny thier participation in the promotion of these kinds of things.

Er you're not saying that because it happens that makes it ok are you?

Well, morality is a relative issue.

Is it?

Yes.

explain it to me then??
How is mortality relative.......hmm?

Because people have different interpetations on what is right and wrong. These interpretations are not endowed they are taught and self edited.

Since there is no ONE correct culture and no ONE correct way of thinking...morality (inexorably intertwined with these concepts) is also relative.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Having affairs has nothing to do with Liberalism, as plenty of Conservatives have had affairs as well.

Liberals and Conservatives alike look at things such as Penthouse...the difference is, Liberals have the balls to admit it, while Conservatives deny thier participation in the promotion of these kinds of things.

The facts mean nothing as far as my aversion to the term. My aversion comes directly from the perception of the term, which is as I stated. Liberal is viewed as being morally grey. Conservative is often viewed as religious fanaticism, or a similar stance. Whether liberals and conservatives really are or are not this way is irrelevant, I do not like the connotation.

Thats really narrowminded. You know those terms do not mean that. Why not use them?...simply out of fear from public opinion?

Originally posted by Alliance
Thats really narrowminded. You know those terms do not mean that. Why not use them?...simply out of fear from public opinion?

No, I don't hold it as such. The reason to avoid the use of the terms is to avoid someone misinterpreting my views based on a preexisting bias or prejudice. Terms that do not hold their meaning among people should be avoided. Thus liberal is not something I would label myself because by doing so, someone could have the wrong impression of me. It isn't fear, it is prudent caution.

But their misinterpretation is not your fault...its theirs. They need to be educated...and you do nothing but perpetuate these pathetic stereotypes by not breaking them.

Originally posted by Alliance
But their misinterpretation is not your fault...its theirs. They need to be educated...and you do nothing but perpetuate these pathetic stereotypes by not breaking them.

Did some research on the use of the term liberal, and here is a statement that I believe better describes what I have been trying to state:



So, I guess I should accept the term. But I do dislike the often viewed opinion of the term.

Thats a product of politicians playing on the uneducated populous.

Originally posted by Alliance
Thats a product of politicians playing on the uneducated populous.

Yes, but it exists, no matter the accurate definition.

Originally posted by Regret
I understand this, but, it is seen as liberal. It is the attitude that people in general see, regardless of accuracy. I abhor the term conservative on the same level, Bush, Cheney, Rumsfield, others, they all cast a horrible shadow on the conservative side that is not better than the examples of liberal I presented.

However Bush and co. are actually operating with conservative values - or at least perceived ones. They are seen as defining policy and political progress for them. It is simply unfortunate for more intellectual conservatives that the conservative ideals are being put in practice so ineptly.

The difference there is that Bill Clinton and his affair was not a matter of liberal ideals. George Bush using a veto on stem cell research however is a matter of conservative ideals.

Originally posted by Regret
The facts mean nothing as far as my aversion to the term. My aversion comes directly from the perception of the term, which is as I stated. Liberal is viewed as being morally grey. Conservative is often viewed as religious fanaticism, or a similar stance. Whether liberals and conservatives really are or are not this way is irrelevant, I do not like the connotation.

I dislike the connotation that comes with Christianity. The popular view of Christians is that they are hypocritical, unrealistic, prejudice, and overtly judgemental.

Does that mean I should be offended if someone were to call me Christian? Does that mean I should beleive that All Christians are that way ?

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
I dislike the connotation that comes with Christianity. The popular view of Christians is that they are hypocritical, unrealistic, prejudice, and overtly judgemental.

Does that mean I should be offended if someone were to call me Christian? Does that mean I should beleive that All Christians are that way ?

I wasn't offended. That is an oversimplification of what I have been saying. I never stated that, I only stated that I disliked the inference that the average person has associated with the term. I dislike it when you, and others here, refer to myself and some of the mainstream "Christians" here using the same term. I would be separate from them as their views are illogical, and imo, unsound biblically or otherwise. I am Christian, but I'd prefer not to be lumped with some "Christians." My aversion is the same in the two instances. I am liberal, but I don't want to be lumped in with the many "liberals" that I disagree with.

People all over are different. You cant lump people in one group and expect it to be accurate. Thats just foolishness. Other people can worship or not worship how they like. Not for me to say if their living right or not.

...a rational position.

Originally posted by Alliance
...a rational position.
Thanks, I try to be. Common sense goes a long way. Its to bad not enough people use it.

Rationality can be in the eye of the beholder...I try to think beyond that.

Originally posted by Alliance
Rationality can be in the eye of the beholder...I try to think beyond that.
Thats very true. I have my own definition of "common sense" I suppose. Having been raised and taught that " A mans as good as his word" and "do on to others" has most definitely had a major impact on my rational and way of thinking.

Originally posted by Regret
I do not believe that the New Testament provides support for the act of judging another or condemning another. As my support for this view are the following scripture:

If you agree and have more support present it, if you disagree, provide support for the opposing stance.

I believe that all men are brothers, and thus all men are held inclusive when the term "brother" is used. If you disagree with this assumption provide reference that states that all men are not brothers. Just thought I'd bump this.

I think many Christians - as well as many non-Christians, mistake correction with *judgement*(often times, purposely so - so they can continue to engage in sinful behaviour). The apostle Paul corrected Peter - when Peter sat at the table with the Pharisees, to avoid sitting with those considered undesireable(at least by man's standards). Peter received correction(from Paul) with humility - and repented of his sins.

So to make things simple - *judgement* , is not synonomous with correction. In the end - God makes all final judgements on his children's positive/negative behaviour - however, it is our responsability - as brothers and sisters of Christ, to correct and/or inform our bretheren of any sinful behaviour they have unwillingly(or willingly) engaged in.

Originally posted by usagi_yojimbo
I think many Christians - as well as many non-Christians, mistake correction with *judgement*(often times, purposely so - so they can continue to engage in sinful behaviour). The apostle Paul corrected Peter - when Peter sat at the table with the Pharisees, to avoid sitting with those considered undesireable(at least by man's standards). Peter received correction(from Paul) with humility - and repented of his sins.

So to make things simple - *judgement* , is not synonomous with correction. In the end - God makes all final judgements on his children's positive/negative behaviour - however, it is our responsability - as brothers and sisters of Christ, to correct and/or inform our bretheren of any sinful behaviour they have unwillingly(or willingly) engaged in. The Apostles are not on the same level of understanding as the lay individuals. There is no Biblical example of a lay individual correcting another without being reprimanded. Correction as shown in the Bible is reserved for those in a position of authority.

Originally posted by Regret
The Apostles are not on the same level of understanding as the lay individuals. There is no Biblical example of a lay individual correcting another without being reprimanded. Correction as shown in the Bible is reserved for those in a position of authority.

A very prideful, egotistical, and incorrect statement above.
This is the same rationale - used against Jesus when he preached to the masses. The Pharisees did not want to acknowledge Jesus as the son of God - due to the fact that they considered him a *lay* person(for he was only a carpenter's son) - to them - he was not as educated/versed/or did not carry as much earthly authourity regarding the scriptures as themselves. Jesus would also consistently correct them regarding their misrepresentations of the scriptures(often times - willingly misinterpreted, in order to boost their egos - as well as power base).

Correction is something that can be received from anyone - for we are all sinners. As a Christian, If I have commited any sin, then I do not care who corrects me regarding my sinful behaviour, just so long as I have been informed by someone that I have sinned - so I can repent of it. I'll admit, it initially doesn't feel good when corrected - by anyone, but as one grows in their faith - they learn to appreciate all forms of correction. Remember as it is written in the bible -

"My child, don't turn away or become bitter when the LORD corrects you. The Lord corrects everyone he loves, just as parents correct their favorite child--"

Originally posted by usagi_yojimbo
A very prideful, egotistical, and incorrect statement above.
This is the same rationale - used against Jesus when he preached to the masses. The Pharisees did not want to acknowledge Jesus as the son of God - due to the fact that they considered him a *lay* person(for he was only a carpenter's son) - to them - he was not as educated/versed/or did not carry as much earthly authourity regarding the scriptures as themselves. Jesus would also consistently correct them regarding their misrepresentations of the scriptures(often times - willingly misinterpreted, in order to boost their egos - as well as power base).

Correction is something that can be received from anyone - for we are all sinners. As a Christian, If I have commited any sin, then I do not care who corrects me regarding my sinful behaviour, just so long as I have been informed by someone that I have sinned - so I can repent of it. I'll admit, it initially doesn't feel good when corrected - by anyone, but as one grows in their faith - they learn to appreciate all forms of correction. Remember as it is written in the bible -

"My child, don't turn away or become bitter when the LORD corrects you. The Lord corrects everyone he loves, just as parents correct their favorite child--"

How could someone like you give me correction? Your beliefs are ignorant and egotistical. If I listened to you, I would live a miserable life filled with hate and delusion.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
How could someone like you give me correction? Your beliefs are ignorant and egotistical. If I listened to you, I would live a miserable life filled with hate and delusion.

Oh man, no one took my bate.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
How could someone like you give me correction?


Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Your beliefs are ignorant and egotistical. If I listened to you, I would live a miserable life filled with hate and delusion.


When one produces irony - it is often followed by hypocrisy..which is then followed by laughter..He..He..He..

Or in some specific cases...a shaking of the head.

Originally posted by usagi_yojimbo
When one produces irony - it is often followed by hypocrisy..which is then followed by laughter..He..He..He..

Your response is strange.

You are not a person who can give me correction, so to try and do so is silly. I do not mean this as an insult, but because I realize you know nothing of my life, my beliefs or my faith, any correction would be ill advised to follow. Sense you know only what is written here, you are not equipped to do anyone any correction.

Don't worry he does it to everyone.

I found a relation between Buddhism and violence

Originally posted by Alliance
Don't worry he does it to everyone.

I found a relation between Buddhism and violence

And what would that be?

Originally posted by usagi_yojimbo
A very prideful, egotistical, and incorrect statement above.
This is the same rationale - used against Jesus when he preached to the masses. The Pharisees did not want to acknowledge Jesus as the son of God - due to the fact that they considered him a *lay* person(for he was only a carpenter's son) - to them - he was not as educated/versed/or did not carry as much earthly authourity regarding the scriptures as themselves. Jesus would also consistently correct them regarding their misrepresentations of the scriptures(often times - willingly misinterpreted, in order to boost their egos - as well as power base).

Correction is something that can be received from anyone - for we are all sinners. As a Christian, If I have commited any sin, then I do not care who corrects me regarding my sinful behaviour, just so long as I have been informed by someone that I have sinned - so I can repent of it. I'll admit, it initially doesn't feel good when corrected - by anyone, but as one grows in their faith - they learn to appreciate all forms of correction. Remember as it is written in the bible -

"My child, don't turn away or become bitter when the LORD corrects you. The Lord corrects everyone he loves, just as parents correct their favorite child--" Wrong. Remember the statements regarding the mote and the beam. Also, you are not the Lord, so, your last quote is in error if it is meant to suuport you correcting others. Christ was never a lay person, so referencing him as support for you correction of others is also in error. Also, Christ stated that he who is without sin should cast the first stone, and Christ was without sin, so he was capable of correcting others.

Also, usagi, remeber that parent aren't supposed to have a favorite child.

Originally posted by Regret
Wrong. Remember the statements regarding the mote and the beam. Also, you are not the Lord, so, your last quote is in error if it is meant to suuport you correcting others. Christ was never a lay person, so referencing him as support for you correction of others is also in error. Also, Christ stated that he who is without sin should cast the first stone, and Christ was without sin, so he was capable of correcting others.


Umm..I never claimed to be Christ - nor did I claim to have his authourity. However - with all of us being *sheep* under the same flock, we are commanded to watch over one another -- or as Christ so eloquently puts it - we are commanded to "Love one another." As referenced in my prior verse, *correction* is a form of love.

Those who *love* Christ - will understand and appreciate the necessity of loving correction from their peers(which includes everyone on this earth - for all have sinned, and all are considered *lay* persons from Christ's perspective) - despite being initially offended by any such correction. For as it is written "He who refuses correction despises his own soul, but he who listens to reproof gets understanding(Proverbs 15:32)" - and it is also written "Be careful. If your brother sins against you, rebuke him. If he repents, forgive him(Luke 17:3)."

In addition - as spoken to Eziekel(by God) - If we are given any knowledge of our brother's sin by God, and do not inform him of his sin with this knowledge - then we will indeed be judged and punished by God for this.

Eziekiel 3:18 When I tell the wicked, You shall surely die; and you give him no warning, nor speak to warn the wicked from his wicked way, to save his life; the same wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at your hand.

^ I'm not a sheep.

Originally posted by usagi_yojimbo
Umm..I never claimed to be Christ - nor did I claim to have his authourity. However - with all of us being *sheep* under the same flock, we are commanded to watch over one another -- or as Christ so eloquently puts it - we are commanded to "Love one another." As referenced in my prior verse, *correction* is a form of love.

Those who *love* Christ - will understand and appreciate the necessity of loving correction from their peers(which includes everyone on this earth - for all have sinned, and all are considered *lay* persons from Christ's perspective) - despite being initially offended by any such correction. For as it is written "He who refuses correction despises his own soul, but he who listens to reproof gets understanding(Proverbs 15:32)" - and it is also written "Be careful. If your brother sins against you, rebuke him. If he repents, forgive him(Luke 17:3)."

In addition - as spoken to Eziekel(by God) - If we are given any knowledge of our brother's sin by God, and do not inform him of his sin with this knowledge - then we will indeed be judged and punished by God for this.

Eziekiel 3:18 When I tell the wicked, You shall surely die; and you give him no warning, nor speak to warn the wicked from his wicked way, to save his life; the same wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at your hand. But you used Christ as an example supporting your right to judge, or using your terminology "correct", others.

The key term in your references being "sin". Letting someone know they are sinning is much different than correcting them.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
^ I'm not a sheep.


SHEEP droolio

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
SHEEP droolio


You are one sick puppy.

Originally posted by Regret
But you used Christ as an example supporting your right to judge, or using your terminology "correct", others.

The key term in your references being "sin". Letting someone know they are sinning is much different than correcting them.


The example used was not meant to compare myself to Christ, I apologize if it came across that way. The example was meant to show you that *correction* is something that is considered *loving* - and as those who follow Christ, we are commanded by him to correct or inform one another - when we have sinned. Again - *correction* and *judgement* are two different things. *Correction* has a positive connotation to it, while judgement has a negative one.

If the statement I made was truly *judgemental*, then I would have attached some form of punishment along with the correction. I did not do this - I merely stated that your opinion was in err.

*Correction* is something that all Christians(and all individuals for that matter) should take with humility, as well as with great thanks - seeing as how many times such correction, can save one from experiencing very grave consequences - if they had never received it.

^ About time you apologized.

Judging others is not any human's responsibility, and it's not what Jesus taught. Bottom line.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
You are one sick puppy.


PUPPIES droolio

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Judging others is not any human's responsibility, and it's not what Jesus taught. Bottom line.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
PUPPIES droolio Will ya cut it out........