Do we have to respect regilions of others ? and what are the limits between discussion and mockery? (disciples, church)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If you can't hold a conversation with someone without mocking them, don't bother. Mocking isn't even in the same league with scrutinizing and questioning.[/quote]
My mother told me when I was a little boy that if I couldn't say something nice about somebody I shouldn't say anything at all. Given where I grew up, I thought that this was extraordinarily bad advise then, and now. I understand your sentiment, I think. I am actually not in the habit of mocking people. But some "personal beliefs" so depart from reality, that when they are imposed upon you (how else would you be having the conversation to begin with) the only adequate response is something approaching mockery-- incredulity, bewilderment, astonishment, take your pick. Some ideas are so irrational, and have such far reaching and devastating consequences, that they do, I think, deserve to be labeled farcical and responded to as such.
When I was in college, a long time ago, "Jesus freaks" were in the habit of stopping students as they crossed a wooded part of campus with the usual-- tracts, preaching, witnessing, you get the idea. A friend of mine was the Lutheran student minister, and a fellow history student. I was more than perturbed by the young zealots and I spoke to him about it. I ask him what i should do or say, as I was not a believer. He said this: "The next time they stop you, kick them in the balls. ( I guess he imagined they were all guys) what they do to people is spiritual rape and kicking them in the balls is the only appropriate response."
I always liked that. I never kicked anybody but I think his point was, it's ok to be aggressive. Some ideas cannot be countered with reason or gentle persuasion. So, yeah, a little mockery is okay by me.
I am actually not in the habit of mocking people. But some "personal beliefs" so depart from reality, that when they are imposed upon you (how else would you be having the conversation to begin with)
Well we're having one now and I am not trying to impose anything on you......so?
They didn't condone them but they did respect them.
But not in a conventional manner..
"....and I will scatter dung upon your faces.. the dung of your festivals"
“Offspring of vipers, how can you speak good things, when you are wicked? For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks. The good man out of his good treasure sends out good things, whereas the wicked man out of his wicked treasure sends out wicked things.
I tell you that every unprofitable saying that men speak, they will render an account concerning it on Judgment Day; for by your words you will be declared righteous, and by your words you will be condemned."
“...but he kept teaching and saying: "Is it not written, 'My house will be called a house of prayer for all the nations'? But you have made it a cave of robbers."
Matthew 12:34 + Mark 15:27
-
“The prophets themselves actually prophesy in falsehood; and as for the priests, they go subduing according to their powers. And my own people have loved it that way; and what will you men do in the finale of it?"
“Her prophets were insolent, were men of treachery. Her priests themselves profaned what was holy; they did violence to the law.”
"And now this commandment is to you, O priests. If you will not listen, and if you will not lay it to heart to give glory to my name," God has said,"I shall also send apon you the curse, and I will curse your blessings. Yes, I have even cursed the blessing, because you are not laying it to heart."
"Look! I am rebuking on your account the sown seed, and I will scatter dung upon your faces, the dung of your festivals; and someone will actualty carry you away to it."
“Even the pit underneath has become agitated at you in order to meet you on coming in. At you it has awakened those impotent in death, ALL THE GOAT-LIKE LEADERS OF THE EARTH. It has made all the kings of the nations get up from their thrones. All of them speak up and say to you, `Have you yourself also been made weak like us? Is it to us that you have been made comparable? Down to the pit your pride has been brought. Beneath you, maggots are spread out as a couch and worms are your covering.'”
“Offspring of vipers, how can you speak good things, when you are wicked? For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks. The good man out of his good treasure sends out good things, whereas the wicked man out of his wicked treasure sends out wicked things.
I tell you that every unprofitable saying that men speak, they will render an account concerning it on Judgment Day; for by your words you will be declared righteous, and by your words you will be condemned."
“...but he kept teaching and saying: "Is it not written, 'My house will be called a house of prayer for all the nations'? But you have made it a cave of robbers."
Matthew 12:34 + Mark 15:27
-
“The prophets themselves actually prophesy in falsehood; and as for the priests, they go subduing according to their powers. And my own people have loved it that way; and what will you men do in the finale of it?"
“Her prophets were insolent, were men of treachery. Her priests themselves profaned what was holy; they did violence to the law.”
Jeremiah 5:31 + Zephaniah 3:4
-
First, Jeremiah and Zephaniah weren't exactly New Testament.
Second, all of the scriptures you posted were directed at those that practiced the same religion Jesus did, Judaism.
So my answers stands.
Last edited by Alpha8207; 08-03-2008 at 04:55 PM..
Reason: spelling
It is good to discuss and express our points of view, but we should do it without hurting the others feelings.
Yes, if the intention of someone is just to hurt someone emotionally so they can express their own point of view I think it would be better if they just kept their mouth shut. I do agree with Haaziq's thoughts that religions share many ideas and tend to borrow them from each other but in the areas where there is disagreement there can be some very hostile feelings among opposing groups. I've noticed that many people tend to lump every member of a particular group into the same category without taking into consideration that every individual is unique and not a carbon copy of other members of the group. For example in some of the more heated threads I've seen atheists talk to Christians like they're ignorant, can't think for themselves and their religion deserves to be ridiculed. On the other hand I've seen Christians tell atheists that they have no basis for their morals, they're selfish and just want to do as they please. Muslims often lump all westerners into the same category of decadence and immoral behavior.
If I want to have a conversation with anyone about any subject I can do it without insulting that person. When you start throwing out insults it's because you're coming up short on giving a good solid rebuttal and you're lacking the intellectual ability or the basic knowledge of the particular subject matter to really express yourself. I do acknowledge that I've read some pretty far out posts on this forum and I know I've made my share of snide remarks but I've never deliberately tried to make someone feel bad. That sort of behavior isn't debating, it's just immature and hurtful to others.
First, Jeremiah and Zephaniah weren't exactly New Testament.
Second, all of the scriptures you posted were directed at those that praciced the same religion Jesus did, Judaism.
So my answers stands.
If they practised the same religion..
why was Jesus so opposed to them.. ?
Was John a Christian.. or a Jew.. ?
----
“Look! I will give those from the synagogue of Satan who say they are Jews, and yet they are not but are lying--look! I will make them come and do obeisance before your feet and make them know I have loved you.?”
“Look! I will give those from the synagogue of Satan who say they are Jews, and yet they are not but are lying--look! I will make them come and do obeisance before your feet and make them know I have loved you.?”
Revelation 3:9
-
1-Letter of the law vs. the spirit
2- yes and yes.
I've given my opinion, but for clarity, are you a Christian accelerator?
Do we have to respect the religions of others? No. We don't have to do anything. Should we respect the religions of others? To a certain extent.
Religion, in my mind, should not have any sort of precedence over another matter. For example, if two of your subordinate workers want time off on the same day but you can only allot one day between the two workers and one of them is trying to take it for religious reasons than it should not matter. Tough. That's your choice to believe in something. You do not have special precedence over another person just because of your religious beliefs. Now, if you weigh measures of seniority, prior time off, time off left, or other circumstances and the weight falls in the favor of the religious person than that's the way the cards fall. But, when trying to decide between two things, religion should not be the trump card that so many try to make it.
Now, do we have to respect the religious right of others? I think that's pretty dependent on what it is we're trying to respect. Are we talking about marching into a Bible School Study on a Sunday afternoon and throwing Koran's at them or books on why God doesn't exist? Well, in that case, I think that most certainly it deserves respect and that people shouldn't do that. That's their own private gathering and it's their choice.
But, should we have to respect it if it affects us? Should we allow it to take precedence over other things? Absolutely not. Should religion be subject to criticism in the same way that politics, movies, book, restaurants, and other things being criticised are? I think so. In fact, I highly recommend that it become more criticised. But criticism, even as a joke or satire is a little different than mockery. Mockery seems to me to try and imply foolishness to every single person adhering to a certain ideology, belief, etc... So, in that sense, I don't think religion should be MOCKED but I do think that it should be able to be satired, criticized and joked about. It should not be this thing that people have to walk on eggshells about. Mockery, to me, implies that the person is so retardedly stupid that the reason they believe something is because they are too idiotic to discern or understand anything and that goes beyond just their religious beliefs but everything else in their life. But satire and jokes... Why can't I joke about God? Why can't I criticize him? Why can't I say I dislike the idea of him without a backlash?
Now I do realize that I am idealizing something I wish society would conform to rather than the reality of the situation. God and religion should be criticized. They should be allowed to be satired and they should be allowed to be joked about. They are not off limits. There is nothing about religion that should or does make it inaccessible to criticism. But there is certainly a difference between criticism (even of the harsh kind), satire, and downright mockery.
Moderator cut: off-topic comments on moderation
If people can't stand to be criticized or don't want to be asked 'tough' questions I ask myself what they are doing here? You should stand up for what you believe and if you are not willing to do that you shouldn't post on this forum. Every post here could (and should) be questioned by others. This is how the truth is shifted out from the rest of the nonsense.
Feeling hunger or an emotion could never be a sin because emotions are the essence of life. The only people who don't hunger or feel emotions are dead, conditioned not to feel (certain) emotions, are deeply depressed, or simply heavily drugged.
And now I see how Marx could compare religion to the opium of the world.
But what could be a sin is demanding that people all feel the same emotion when they actually don't.
Quote:
Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, just as it is the spirit of a spiritless situation. It is the opium of the people.
Karl Marx, Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right
German economist & Communist political philosopher (1818 - 1883)
Last edited by Alpha8207; 08-04-2008 at 06:26 AM..
They didn't condone them but they did respect them.
I think it's in Acts (16, 17, or 18) where Paul used the pagan gods and idols as a springboard for the gospel message. But he didn't mock or ridicule the folks in the process.
I can't remember the exact location, Marian but it's where he talks about them having an inscription 'to an unknown god', do you remember the story I'm thinking of?
I guess your definition of "respect" is differant than mine.
I can't even find any dictionary definitions of "respect" that apply to Jesus' attitude towards false teachers.
Last edited by Towhee; 08-04-2008 at 08:43 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And my own people have loved it that way..
This is how the truth is shifted out from the rest of the nonsense.
Feeling hunger or an emotion could never be a sin because emotions are the essence of life. The only people who don't hunger or feel emotions are dead, conditioned not to feel (certain) emotions, are deeply depressed, or simply heavily drugged.
But what could be a sin is demanding that people all feel the same emotion when they actually don't.
