Quote:And even here....you can't bring yourself to put the words 'without expecting reward / for who they are inside'....but you can , frequently add 'for recognition'...That's what you keep saying. You keep saying that Christians think non-Christians are generally not as good of people. If that's not what you are saying, then what is it?
...so yet again evidence of your suspicion of non-christians
Quote:I understand it. I said I don't think it necessary. You apparently can't get your head around that.And have you yet understood the concept of salvation from sin?
Quote:Rofl...you really don't understand? This conversation is not about genuinely kind, compassionate people wanting your recognition - it's brought up because of the hypocrisy in your beliefs.And what does it matter to you if Christians trust non-Christians except as a reward or status?
In Christianity:
- Members are meant to love others as they do themselves - they can't do this if they are more suspicious of the Goodness of non-christians than they are of Christians (purely because they are non-christian)...You are applying a different standard of love and acceptance to one group than the other
- Members are not meant to Judge. That is for God....but your greater suspicion of non-christians than christians IS judgement. If you weren't engaging in judgement, you wouldn't be more suspicious of their motives for kindness etc than Christians.
Funnily enough, it's also become an extended conversation because you can't be honest about your suspicion and just say that you are more suspicious of the kindness,compassion etc done by Non-christians (who do so for no external reward, but because that is what they want to be), than you are of the same kindness etc coming from Christians....your writing consistently shows it, but you haven't been able to bring yourself to be honest and actually admit it.
Ok, you're just playing blame games. I'm not going to keep trying to communicate clearly about what you're talking about if that's the case.
But you don't care about salvation enough to understand it
That's not correct. You love your children, but if they lie you can't trust them.
the present day interpretation that observing sin as sin is a form of judgment
so why would you trust someone who avoids such a covenant?
(...)so the question becomes whether there are any atheists who would ever be willing to put their opposition to religion aside in order to simply understand religion and communicate with believers in a way that respects what those believers understand and mean with the language and concepts they use, which are derived from religious culture.
So you know it's part of Christianity, you even know where it's from, but you choose to ignore it.
Your pick 'n mix approach could be considered rank hypocrisy.
Quote:rofl...yet another different way of saying "I'm not going to answer that question". Why not just be honest about what you think.Ok, you're just playing blame games. I'm not going to keep trying to communicate clearly about what you're talking about if that's the case.
Quote:You believe that if a person understands it, they would have no choice but to embrace it. This is faulty logic.But you don't care about salvation enough to understand it
Quote:That's not correct. You love your children, but if they lie you can't trust them.
- how does your example equate to you having less trust for the motivations of a non-Christian who is genuinely kind because that is who they are inside - why would you trust their kindness less than that of Christian?
- Your example also doesn't equate to a genuinely honest non-Christian (who is honest because they think it's a good principle to live by)...you can't say 'well if a child lied then XYZ, when you talk about a non-Christian who doesn't lie. So why would you be more suspicious of their honesty than a Christians?
Quote:Don't know where you got this, and it's not the observation that is the judgement, Funnily enough I was going to use the same example as you relating to judgement. They had judged her as unworthy because of perceived sin. You judge non-Christians as less worthy, and more suspect.the present day interpretation that observing sin as sin is a form of judgment
Quote:Wonderful, so you finally admit your suspicion. The answer is easy - if the motivation is done for 'who you are', 'who you see yourself to be' 'because that is who you are'...it is the strongest motivation that anyone ever engages in. Actions done for acclaim, for recognition, for external reward are no where near as strong. When they do it for who they are, they test their actions and find their principles, and tend to live much more strongly by their principles.so why would you trust someone who avoids such a covenant?
The very best Christians I have met, have been inevitably humble, kind hearted people, who are accepting of others, and who are that way almost by nature. They gain a lot of internal joy from being kind to others. Their religion may ask that of them, but they are that way, in the end, because that is who they like to be.
The most hypocritical Christians I have met, have been that way because of what they perceive to be the rewards: recognition amongst the church, comments of 'how kind you are', people looking up to them, and the loud (sometimes loudly humble) proclamation of right living, confessing their sins, being forgiven by God, etc.
You apparently can't yet understand how strong internal motivation is, likely because, in the end, you are living an external reward driven life. That is resulting in a LOT of problems with your logic. Contrary to that, once you find your principles (and they stand the test of time, and you live by them), life becomes a lot more simplified, and a lot more internally peaceful
But for whatever reason, you want to believe you are better than others (Non-christians).
It's not just "yet another way <insert: of avoiding answering the question>. It's a specific reason"
I explained it. You don't listen to anything I say before responding, so why do you keep responding?
Judging someone as less worthy is a slightly different use/meaning of the word 'judgment' than the one that refers to stoning a sinner to death.
You make all these claims, and I get tired of refuting them
You may like them for whatever reason you do, and you may judge me as being worse than them; but they like me and you are all sinners, so the issue is salvation, not how good we are as Christians or non-Christians.
Stop posting responses that ignore the posts you are responding to. It's not fair and it makes you a liar for pretending to have understood what you are responding to.
Quote:True, but the bible doesn't just talk about that woman, as you well know, because the very well known verse is Matthew 7:1-5 is very clear that 'judgement' does not just relate to death judgementsJudging someone as less worthy is a slightly different use/meaning of the word 'judgment' than the one that refers to stoning a sinner to death.
“Do not judge, or you too will be judged. 2 For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you. 3 “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 4 How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? 5 You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.
Luke 6:37-42, James 4-11, Romans 2: 1-3, Romans 14:10, contains similar sentiments. None of them talk of judgement as the type of judgement passing death sentences in this life.
The first is is one of the most famous passages on judgement in the bible. The others are known if you have ever studied the bible.You must know it very well...so yet again...why the intellectual dishonesty?
This is the problem with your broad strokes - I just your specific behaviours that I've listed, here in this forum, as poor. You as a general person - you might otherwise have a lot of likeable things about you - who can tell.
Start engaging in accuracy and you'll become a lot more intellectually honest with yourself.
Do they ever say that you should ignore or deny sin?
Why the accusations and combative debate
You fire so many accusations, they cease to be meaningful.
I don't like you from what I read of your posts
You tried to frame judgement as only being related to death type judgements, despite how well known the passages on judgement are. It's intellectually dishonest, and should be pulled up.
So before we move the conversation passed that - are you now admitting that your statements relating to that were wrong?
I wouldn't expect you to. It must be very uncomfortable having your more nonsensical behaviours and inconsistencies questions constantly (as you engage in them so, so often). Too bad though, that you can't separate specifics from the broad. Yet another problem we seem to be addressing more recently.
I asked/told you to stop playing master/overlord to me in how you address me, but I could guess that you will continue out of sadism. It's fine, though, because I know you will reap what you sow and be treated as you treat others.
Right, so you've withdrawn your claim that judgement only relates to death type judgements, and we're back to a place, I think, were we have a common understanding of judgement.
Quote:You wish me to stop calling out intellectual dishonesty? I see no reason to. For example regarding intellectual dishonesty - no where have you previously equated it to master / overlord, but now you claim to have done such. Maybe you thought such, but there's not even a paraphrase request in your writing (note: it would have to be very close to be an honest paraphrase, instead of an intent to demonise paraphrase). Your claim is intellectually dishonest.I asked/told you to stop playing master/overlord to me in how you address me, but I could guess that you will continue out of sadism. It's fine, though, because I know you will reap what you sow and be treated as you treat others.
What makes it irritating to respond to you is that I posted a deep and meaningful response to your issue about judgment not exclusively referring to execution and all you do is take it, like a lawyer harassing someone on the stand, as an admission of the superficial point you were trying to make.
Members are not meant to Judge. That is for God....but your greater suspicion of non-christians than christians IS judgement. If you weren't engaging in judgement, you wouldn't be more suspicious of their motives for kindness etc than Christians.
So 'judgment' doesn't refer to seeing sin as sin, but to punishment, and more specifically punishment that goes beyond corrective discipline. Love involves rebuking and correcting sin, but judgment refers to condemning someone to death/hell for their sins.
They had judged her as unworthy because of perceived sin. You judge non-Christians as less worthy, and more suspect.
Judging someone as less worthy is a slightly different use/meaning of the word 'judgment' than the one that refers to stoning a sinner to death.
True, but the bible doesn't just talk about that woman, as you well know, because the very well known verse is Matthew 7:1-5 is very clear that 'judgement' does not just relate to death judgements
Do they ever say that you should ignore or deny sin?
Why the accusations and combative debate
You tried to frame judgement as only being related to death type judgements, despite how well known the passages on judgement are. It's intellectually dishonest, and should be pulled up.
You use language that implies you are some kind of master talking down to a minion.
In reality, you're just playing a rigged blame-game, which is mean-spirited and you don't listen to half of what I explain to you in response to the parts of your posts that actually warrant discussion.
I did the same process to myself to iron out inconsistencies and hypocrisies.
Then why aren't you a good
...kind person in your posts, as you claim is so important to you?
Quote:Oh dear, judgemental again I see.Then why aren't you a good
It's odd how you see standing against:
- hypocrisy
- double standards
- dishonesty
- etc.
As being bad.
Quote:Yes, this is one of the things isn't it - pointing out people are engaging in such behaviours is not generally seen as kind (though I note you provided argument for love while not putting up with lies). Would you consider it kind to not point out any of these behaviours you engage in?...kind person in your posts, as you claim is so important to you?
Does kindness as a social issue, develop in the face of hypocrisy, double standards and dishonesty?
“Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You give a tenth of your spices—mint, dill and cumin. But you have neglected the more important matters of the law—justice, mercy and faithfulness. You should have practiced the latter, without neglecting the former. You blind guides! You strain out a gnat but swallow a camel.
I just figured it out.
