billvon 2,416 #551 July 10, 2006 >Can both interpretations be correct? For two different people? Yes, they can. >Is it all just “whatever it means to whomever reads it?” For the most part, yes. >Do you apply that same concept to your studies? Nope. I have different constraints. If I design a product that doesn't meet its specifications, I have done a bad job. Fortunately, there are rules I can use (based on the laws of physics, which are NOT redefinable or changed by translation) which help me do that. There are no "specifications" for faith. If a person's faith leads him to be able to live a good/fulfilled/moral/(insert your own definition of goodness here) life, then it works for him. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rebecca 0 #552 July 10, 2006 QuoteQuoteBut what about sheep-people who want to be told and lead by another, and what if that person is really bad at figuring out the meaning and intent? There are a lot of sheep who can't tell a good shepard from bad. That happens a lot but what has that got to do with the need for proper and thorough Biblical discernment? Absolutely nothing - that is totally valid. I was just pointing out that it happens a lot, and those misguided sheep think they're on the path - are convinced of it in fact - and think everyone else should follow them. How are they to know they are mistaken when they think they know all the Bible has to teach them? you've got to ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel loquacious?' -- well do you, punk? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rebecca 0 #553 July 10, 2006 Quote>Can both interpretations be correct? For two different people? Yes, they can. >Is it all just “whatever it means to whomever reads it?” For the most part, yes. >Do you apply that same concept to your studies? Nope. I have different constraints. If I design a product that doesn't meet its specifications, I have done a bad job. Fortunately, there are rules I can use (based on the laws of physics, which are NOT redefinable or changed by translation) which help me do that. There are no "specifications" for faith. If a person's faith leads him to be able to live a good/fulfilled/moral/(insert your own definition of goodness here) life, then it works for him. But isn't the outcome measurable in action? That is, if a person's "faith" leads him to judge and condemn others, while it may work for him, it doesn't work for them. Therefore his faith is misguided. Does that hold any water? you've got to ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel loquacious?' -- well do you, punk? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,416 #554 July 10, 2006 >But isn't the outcome measurable in action? Definitely. >That is, if a person's "faith" leads him to judge and condemn >others, while it may work for him, it doesn't work for them. Therefore >his faith is misguided. >Does that hold any water? His faith may be misguided in my eyes. I think that people who condemn gays are misguided, but that's my morality, not necessarily theirs. The only "hard" morality we have are laws, imperfect as they are. So you could say that if someone's faith led him to murder others that there is a very specific and objective problem with his faith. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rebecca 0 #555 July 10, 2006 Quote>But isn't the outcome measurable in action? Definitely. >That is, if a person's "faith" leads him to judge and condemn >others, while it may work for him, it doesn't work for them. Therefore >his faith is misguided. >Does that hold any water? His faith may be misguided in my eyes. I think that people who condemn gays are misguided, but that's my morality, not necessarily theirs. The only "hard" morality we have are laws, imperfect as they are. So you could say that if someone's faith led him to murder others that there is a very specific and objective problem with his faith. I didn't want to take it into moral law territory. I meant, the Bible rather specifically says something to the effect of, "Judge not, lest ye be judged." If that's your reference of choice, but you DO judge as a course of faith, and don't accept that it's hippocritical, you're not doing a very good job at being faithful. you've got to ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel loquacious?' -- well do you, punk? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SpeedRacer 1 #556 July 10, 2006 QuoteThat is, if a person's "faith" leads him to judge and condemn others, while it may work for him, it doesn't work for them. Therefore his faith is misguided. As we can see in this thread, even atheists can use their beliefs to judge & condemn others. Speed Racer -------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rebecca 0 #557 July 10, 2006 QuoteQuoteThat is, if a person's "faith" leads him to judge and condemn others, while it may work for him, it doesn't work for them. Therefore his faith is misguided. As we can see in this thread, even atheists can use their beliefs to judge & condemn others. Well yes, but they're not invoking Jesus and the Bible when they do it. Not saying it makes it OK, just doesn't make 'em hippocrites. Unless they feel others judge THEM unfairly, in which case, it does. you've got to ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel loquacious?' -- well do you, punk? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,416 #558 July 10, 2006 > If that's your reference of choice, but you DO judge as a course of > faith, and don't accept that it's hippocritical, you're not doing a very > good job at being faithful. That's my interpretation as well. But a great many people _do_ use the bible as a moral measuring stick, and judge others according to their interpretation of that document. Again, if it works for them, that's fine with me - what I see as inconsistency in other's beliefs doesn't really bother me. What matters the most is if their faith allows them to build a moral framework that helps guide them through life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pajarito 0 #559 July 10, 2006 QuoteHis faith may be misguided in my eyes. I think that people who condemn gays are misguided, but that's my morality, not necessarily theirs. The only "hard" morality we have are laws, imperfect as they are. So you could say that if someone's faith led him to murder others that there is a very specific and objective problem with his faith. Ahhh.... The shifting sands of moral relativism. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,416 #560 July 10, 2006 >The shifting sands of moral relativism. Everyone here is a moral relativist. It goes with any moral system. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pajarito 0 #561 July 10, 2006 Quote>The shifting sands of moral relativism. Everyone here is a moral relativist. It goes with any moral system. ***Moral Relativism - Moral or ethical propositions do not reflect absolute and universal moral truths but instead exist relative to social, cultural, historical or personal references, and that no single standard exists by which to assess an ethical proposition's truth. A Christian's basis for right and wrong comes from God's moral law. This is the universal moral truth. It is a standard which is above and not relative to the shifting sands of each individual. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,416 #562 July 10, 2006 >A Christian's basis for right and wrong comes from God's moral law. Is killing right or wrong? >It is a standard which is above and not relative to the shifting sands of each individual. Unfortunately for that position, all churches' "moral standards" have shifted with time. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pajarito 0 #563 July 10, 2006 QuoteIs killing right or wrong? Murder is wrong. QuoteUnfortunately for that position, all churches' "moral standards" have shifted with time. I agree. Many have indeed. They have from the beginning which is why Paul had to write letters to and rebuke some of the early churches. Not much has changed. People are still selfish and want it their way. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nightingale 0 #564 July 10, 2006 QuoteQuoteIs killing right or wrong? Murder is wrong. Define murder. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,416 #565 July 10, 2006 >Murder is wrong. I didn't ask you that. I asked you if KILLING was wrong. A simple moral question. >Not much has changed. (in that things keep changing.) I agree, but that's not being selfish; that's being realistic. We don't follow the laws of Leviticus because times have changed. Does that mean that people who follow the laws of Leviticus are wrong? No. Does that mean that YOU are evil for not following them? No. Two different people, two different sets of morals, both based firmly on the bible - and both valid, for them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pajarito 0 #566 July 10, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuoteIs killing right or wrong? Murder is wrong. Define murder. Premeditated, unjustified, intentional killing without cause. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nightingale 0 #567 July 10, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteIs killing right or wrong? Murder is wrong. Define murder. Premeditated, unjustified, intentional killing without cause. So a wife who kills her husband's lover in the heat of the moment has not committed murder? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pajarito 0 #568 July 10, 2006 Quote>Murder is wrong. I didn't ask you that. I asked you if KILLING was wrong. A simple moral question. It is justified in some situations. >Not much has changed. (in that things keep changing.) I agree, but that's not being selfish; that's being realistic. We don't follow the laws of Leviticus because times have changed. Does that mean that people who follow the laws of Leviticus are wrong? No. Does that mean that YOU are evil for not following them? No. Two different people, two different sets of morals, both based firmly on the bible - and both valid, for them. God's moral law stands firm. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,416 #569 July 10, 2006 >It is justified in some situations. Agreed. So the morality of that act changes depending on the issues. Moral relativism in action; we all do it. >God's moral law stands firm. You yourself have given reasons why the law in Leviticus (surely part of God's word) should now be overlooked. I do not disagree with your reasoning - but keep in mind that other people use the same logic to define what _they_ believe. And it's still God's law. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pajarito 0 #570 July 10, 2006 QuoteSo a wife who kills her husband's lover in the heat of the moment has not committed murder? Her action is not justified and I think it would be accurate to state that she has broken the 6th Commandment. Remember, my basis is from God's moral law. His standard. Not what you're studying in school. You can't plead temporary insanity in God's courtroom. He knows your heart. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pajarito 0 #571 July 10, 2006 Quote>It is justified in some situations. Agreed. So the morality of that act changes depending on the issues. Moral relativism in action; we all do it. No. God set the boundaries. Not any of us. >God's moral law stands firm. QuoteYou yourself have given reasons why the law in Leviticus (surely part of God's word) should now be overlooked. I do not disagree with your reasoning - but keep in mind that other people use the same logic to define what _they_ believe. And it's still God's law. We're not bound by it anymore. The Bible makes that clear. It's still part of history. We just have to understand the differences in Old Testament law (e.g. civil, ceremonial, moral). Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,416 #572 July 10, 2006 >We're not bound by it anymore. The Bible makes that clear. And other people have different interpretations of the Bible. Which is fine. The important part is that your interpretation works for you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pajarito 0 #573 July 10, 2006 Quote>We're not bound by it anymore. The Bible makes that clear. And other people have different interpretations of the Bible. Which is fine. The important part is that your interpretation works for you. No. It is important that we find out what it means for "all of us." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,416 #574 July 10, 2006 >No. It is important that we find out what it means for "all of us." We shall continue to disagree, then. I think that the important part is that it means something for _you_. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nightingale 0 #575 July 10, 2006 QuoteQuoteSo a wife who kills her husband's lover in the heat of the moment has not committed murder? Her action is not justified and I think it would be accurate to state that she has broken the 6th Commandment. Remember, my basis is from God's moral law. His standard. Not what you're studying in school. You can't plead temporary insanity in God's courtroom. He knows your heart. But you just defined murder as premeditated. She didn't know she was going to do it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
