Contributors

Sunday, December 09, 2012

Love Thy Neighbor


49 comments:

Anonymous said...

Define "love".

Mark Ward said...

Well, obviously there are many different definitions but in this case it's mainly twofold. First, it's accepting people for who they are and not judging them (saying they are going to go to hell for not believing in Republican Jesus etc). Second, it's serving those less fortunate than us-a central tenet to the works of Jesus Christ.

Juris Imprudent said...

Fuck your continued reliance on religion to advance your agenda. That makes you fundamentally no different than right-wingnuts.

Juris Imprudent said...

Another one bites the dust... looks like states that like Obama aren't so hot on PPACA.

Anonymous said...

First, it's accepting people for who they are and not judging them

So let me get this straight…

Is your claim that there is no good vs. bad, right vs. wrong, and/or beneficial vs. harmful?

Or that if there is, that any attempt to warn someone of these things is not, in fact, loving the person, but "judging" them?

Mark Ward said...

Only God judges whether there is good or bad, right or wrong, beneficial or harmful. At least, that's the ideal of which I fall short on a daily basis. For example, I think rapists are bad, wrong, and harmful and obviously I support laws that would put them jail and/or kill them. But it's not my job to judge, even then, only to love as Christ did. A hard task indeed if something happens to someone you love.

So, yes, that is judging them. I get that you are concerned about gays going to hell or people of other faiths going to hell but their business isn't yours. Odd, that I am telling you this considering the very basis for conservatism is staying out of people's business. If, as you have said previously, we are all wretched sinners, then you are as well and should concern yourself as you see fit with redemption and love everyone else...as Christ commanded...and spend your life serving the less fortunate and sick. Really, if you guys put half the energy into that as opposed to worrying about people's sex lives, world hunger would be eliminated in a matter of months.

Larry said...

But it's not my job to judge, even then, only to love as Christ did.

Bwa-ha-ha-ha!!! The complete and utter lack of self-reflection here is classic in its monumental cluelessness. You are are as spiteful and judgemental (accent on the 'mental') as any of the leftist cockholsters on Democratic Underground. A never-ending fount of hypocrisy.

Anonymous said...

I think rapists are bad, wrong, and harmful and obviously I support laws that would put them jail and/or kill them. But it's not my job to judge, even then, only to love as Christ did.

You can't even condemn rape because of your definition of "love"?

I couldn't give a better example of why your definition of "love" is totally worthless!

My job here is done.

Mark Ward said...

Of course I condemn rape but in my doing that, I'm judging. Perhaps from civil point of view, this is justified. But from a universal, moral, immortal soul point of view? It's not my place.

why your definition of "love" is totally worthless!

Odd that you would say that considering you claim to be a Christian. What does Matthew Chapter 5 mean to you, then? In particular, verses 21-26, verses 38-48. "Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you." It can't get more clear than that, Noni.

Anonymous said...

Odd that you would say that considering you claim to be a Christian.

Your definition of "love" is not my definition, nor the Bible's definition of "love". For example:

Whoever spares the rod hates his son,
but he who loves him is diligent to discipline him.

— Proverbs 13:24

For the Lord disciplines the one he loves,
and chastises every son whom he receives.

— Hebrews 12:6

Those whom I love, I reprove and discipline, so be zealous and repent.
— Revelation 3:19

Now this is the commandment—the statutes and the rules—that the LORD your God commanded me to teach you, that you may do them in the land to which you are going over, to possess it, that you may fear the LORD your God, you and your son and your son’s son, by keeping all his statutes and his commandments, which I command you, all the days of your life, and that your days may be long.
— Deuteronomy 6:1–2

[Love] does not rejoice at wrongdoing, but rejoices with the truth.
— 1 Corinthians 13:6

Brothers,if anyone is caught in any transgression, you who are spiritual should restore him in a spirit of gentleness. Keep watch on yourself, lest you too be tempted.
— Galatians 6:1

Biblical love does not deny right and wrong (sin), good and bad, beneficial and harmful; it restores and protects from sin.

“For God so loved the world,that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God. And this is the judgment: the light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the light because their works were evil. For everyone who does wicked things hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his works should be exposed. But whoever does what is true comes to the light, so that it may be clearly seen that his works have been carried out in God.”
— John 3:16–21

“I have not come to call the righteous but sinners to repentance.”
— Luke 5:32

How can there be repentance (literally "changing of the mind") about sin if there is no sin? Notice that even in the famous passage which includes John 3:16, right and wrong, judgement, light and dark are what Jesus spends most of His time on. They are the problem He came to correct! If there is no problem, there is no need of correction.

One more:

Pay attention to yourselves! If your brother sins, rebuke him, and if he repents, forgive him,
— Luke 17:3

As for the passage you're sure to quote, read the whole thing in context:

“Judge not, that you be not judged. For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you. Why do you see the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when there is the log in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye.“
— Matthew 7:1–5

Question: WHY should you take the log out of your own eye? What does Jesus hope you will accomplish by doing so?

Anonymous said...

Furthermore, what does the word "judge" mean? You're normal usage is "identifying something wrong". But if that is the case, then why did Jesus say this?

You judge according to the flesh; I judge no one.
— John 8:15

But it seems to me that Jesus was perfectly willing to tell someone that what they were doing is wrong:

He said to them, “It is written, ‘My house shall be called a house of prayer,’ but you make it a den of robbers.”
— Matthew 21:13

“Woe to the world for temptations to sin!For it is necessary that temptations come, but woe to the one by whom the temptation comes!”
— Matthew 18:7

“Woe to you lawyers! For you have taken away the key of knowledge. You did not enter yourselves, and you hindered those who were entering.”
— Luke 11:52

“Do you think that these Galileans were worse sinners than all the other Galileans, because they suffered in this way? No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish. Or those eighteenon whom the tower in Siloam fell and killed them: do you think that they were worse offenders than all the others who lived in Jerusalem? No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish.”
— Luke 13:2–5

Again, if there was nothing to repent from, then why does Jesus say repentance is necessary?

So if Jesus Himself says that He's not judging when He says that we are all sinners in need of repentance, then He is directly contradicting your definition of "judge".

And when Jesus says this…

If anyone hears my words and does not keep them, I do not judge him; for I did not come to judge the world but to save the world. The one who rejects me and does not receive my words has a judge; the word that I have spoken will judge him on the last day. For I have not spoken on my own authority, but the Father who sent me has himself given me a commandment—what to say and what to speak.
— John 12:47–49

…then how are we judging someone when pass along words that came to us from God the Father, through Jesus?

Mark Ward said...

Well, first of all, you can throw out all the verses from the Old Testament. Christ is the New Covenant.

And you've also avoided what you think is meant by the verses I listed. So, again, when you say..

Your definition of "love" is not my definition, nor the Bible's definition of "love".

And Christ says...

43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor[i] and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46 If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47 And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

and

38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’[h] 39 But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. 40 And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. 41 If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. 42 Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.

...it seems to me that you aren't paying attention. Don't quote any more verses from the Bible. Focus on these and tell me what you think they mean.

Anonymous said...

And you're right back to your idea of a powerless god. The meaning of those passages is entirely dependent on the definition of "love". If you don't get the definition of words right, you don't get the meaning right.

Maybe I simply should have stopped at "Your definition of 'love' is not my definition, or the Bible's definition of 'love.'" That is why you fail.

BTW, I didn't only quote from the Old Testament. I also quoted from the New Testament, especially Jesus Himself. But "somehow" (sarc!) you missed that.

One final thought:

Well, first of all, you can throw out all the verses from the Old Testament. Christ is the New Covenant.

That's not what Christ says about the Old Testament.

Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.”
— Matthew 5:17–19

“So whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.
— Matthew 7:12

“And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets.
— Matthew 22:39–40

In other words, He's saying that the Old Testament is the "how to" of loving your neighbor.

Mark Ward said...

You're just giving me more quotes again and not explaining your understanding of the passages that I used above. I'm looking for an evaluation from you. After that, I'll offer further comment on what you wrote here.

Anonymous said...

I already started giving it to you. But apparently it didn't sound enough like the Voices In Your Head™ for you to recognize. The meaning of that passage depends on the meaning of "love". The quotes were to clarify that meaning.

Here are some more quotes for you:

"There can be no useful debate between two people with different first principles, except on those principles themselves."

And since we cannot even agree on the definitions of words, there can be no useful debate between us at all.

(Emphasis in the original.)

The definition of words must be settled before interpretations are possible.

Anonymous said...

Let's try a practical example to clarify things.

You wrote:

it's accepting people for who they are and not judging them

My daughter had a friend who was living with her boyfriend. My daughter was telling her that she should leave him. According to what you wrote, she was wrong to do so because that's "judging". Is that an accurate representation of your position?

Mark Ward said...

I'd like you to clarify the meaning of what Christ is saying in these passages, not other quotes from the Bible. The problem is that you don't like the message in either of these quotes because it involves capitulation to an enemy in the name of peace. Would you, as Christ commands, hand over your coat as well? Would you give to the one that asks you and not turn away?

Anonymous said...

you don't like the message in either of these quotes

Bzzt. Wrong. What I don't like is you twisting the meaning of these passages to suit your own purposes. We've argued about them before, and you're maintaining your distorted take on them. I'm not interested in wasting any more time trying to correct someone who is unwilling to look at the whole picture.

So what about my real life example? Was my daughter loving to her friend under your definition of love?

Mark Ward said...

Distorted? I simply repeated what Christ said. Sorry, dude, but until you actually offer an evaluation of the passages above in your own words, I'm not going to answer any of your questions. Aside from the usual obsession to keep the focus on me, the dodging is evidence that this is a part of the Bible that perhaps you don't like. So, let's hear it and be honest. Should we do as Christ commands with our enemies?

Anonymous said...

You demand the IMPOSSIBLE: interpreting a passage saying that you should love when you refuse to discuss the definition of what love IS.

Do you use jello for the foundation houses too?

Nope, not going to waste my time. That dance has been done on your blog before and I have no interest in engaging in yet another of your dishonest, goalpost shifting, powerless God, Mark trumps everything, pig wrestling matches.

YOU made the claim. I tried to test YOUR claim. YOU refused that test (as usual). What's the matter? Are you afraid that your claim will fail?

Mark Ward said...

Yes, we have done this dance before and you are the one avoiding discussing it because you don't want to be "proven wrong." You don't want to stand for something, you'd rather be against what I am saying, hence the reason why you keep shifting the focus back to me. This is what you guys have been all about for the last decade or more and it's why you lose elections. It shouldn't be impossible to explain your point. You certainly have no trouble with words when you obsess over me.

And I've already answered your question about the definition of love in the second comment. I expanded on it further in subsequent comments. Your turn now. What do those passages mean to you? Would you hand over your coat as well? Would you walk two miles if a man forces you to walk one? Would you love your enemy? What form would that take?

Anonymous said...

you don't want to be "proven wrong."

That can only happen in your narrow little mind where you're the Sole Judge Of All That Is Truth. And then only when you ignore what you don't like. For example: the verses I quoted.

Tell me again why I should be concerned about being "proven wrong" by a narrow minded, prejudiced bigot who ignores evidence and uses reasoning which has been well known to be invalid for several millennia? In other words, why should I be worried about you judging me? (Yes, you are judging me, in direct violation of your own standard.) There is only one Judge and He is Trustworthy and True and cannot be fooled.

I've already answered your question about the definition of love in the second comment.

Yes you did. In return, I pointed out that my definition is different than yours and showed you important parts of the Biblical definition which contradict yours.

Now I'm asking about a real life application of your definition. Was my daughter wrong to tell her friend to stop living with her boyfriend because that's "judging" her?

Mark Ward said...

I pointed out that my definition is different than yours and showed you important parts of the Biblical definition which contradict yours.

You gave me quotes but no real evaluation of your take on the quotes I listed above. I'm not answering any of your questions until you answer mine. After that, I'll be happy to tell you what I think about your daughter as well as you OT silliness.

So, again....Would you hand over your coat as well? Would you walk two miles if a man forces you to walk one? Would you love your enemy? What form would that take?

We can do this all day and I will no longer play the game where you encourage more statements from me in order to avoid putting yourself out there.

Anonymous said...

Here's my summary definition of love: "wanting what is best for the one being loved." And as Jesus pointed out, the Old Testament was built to teach about loving God and loving your neighbor; a "how to guide" using principles (laws) and examples, both positive and negative. In order to know what "best" is, you must be able to recognize the difference between good and bad, moral and evil, beneficial and harmful, both in the short term and the long term.

Can you see how that differs from your definition? Can you see how that would produce actions which you call "judging"?

So how about it, was my daughter "judging" her friend, and thus being unloving?

Mark Ward said...

I'm happy that you gave your definition of love here but you didn't answer any of my questions. Given your definition of love, how would you interpret the passages above?

Anonymous said...

What about "not wasting my time" do you fail to understand?

Mark Ward said...

But it's OK to waste mine, I guess. Until I hear otherwise (and based on what you have written), you would not, in fact, hand over your coat, walk two miles if a man forces you to walk one, turn the other cheek or love your enemy.

Anonymous said...

You made the original claim, not me. You're the one trying to avoid defending that claim by bringing up something else. I'm not going along with your avoidance. As I already pointed out, you've had that debate before. I agree with Speaking Truth in that thread. I'm not going to waste my time repeating the same points you've already ignored.

Your definition of "love" allows evil to flourish. 'Nuff said.

Mark Ward said...

Your definition of "love" allows evil to flourish.

Since you haven't offered me any further explanation to your position regarding these verses, I would assume that you think that Christ's definition of love allows evil to flourish. So you do not love your enemy? You do not pray for them?

Anonymous said...

Since you haven't offered me any further explanation to your position regarding these verses…

I HAVE!!! I told you to go look at Speaking Truth's explanations from the last time you tried this dodge. They are correct.

What part of "not wasting my time" do you not understand?

As typical, your claims do not stand up to scrutiny, and you know it. So all you can do is close your eyes, stick your fingers in your ears and shout "Na, Na, Na, I can't hear you!" at the top of your lungs while you dodge, spin and do literally anything to avoid the point.

Stop your dishonest dodging and defend YOUR initial assertion and definition. Was my daughter wrong to tell her friend to stop living with her boyfriend?

Mark Ward said...

your claims do not stand up to scrutiny

That's only possible if you answer my questions which you, thus far, have refused to do. I think what's happened here is that you haven't figured out a way yet to wriggle around Christian Pacifism so you want the focus back on me. Not going to happen. As soon as you answer my questions, I'll answer your questions.

Would you hand over your coat as well? Would you walk two miles if a man forces you to walk one? Would you love your enemy? What form would that take?

Anonymous said...

One last time…

Read what Speaking Truth wrote here. His answer is dead on. I refuse your unreasonable demand that I waste my time rewriting what he already wrote.

I have answered your questions. You just don't like the answer. Now answer mine.

By your "no judging" standard, was my daughter wrong to tell her friend to stop living with her boyfriend?

I should I simply go off of your "can't judge rape" comment?

Mark Ward said...

I have answered your questions.

Really, where? Nowhere in that thread...feel free to cut and paste whether or not you would love your enemy or give a man your coat under duress. I'll happily admit error but I didn't see them.

Our conversations are going to be equal from now on. You answer one of my questions and then I'll answer one of yours. You're going to have to actually stand for something, Noni, as opposed to being against everything I say:)

Anonymous said...

Posted by Mark at 9:59 AM:

First, it's accepting people for who they are and not judging them

Posted by Mark at 8:00 PM:

Only God judges whether there is good or bad, right or wrong, beneficial or harmful.

So even though He gave us descriptions of right and wrong in writing, you still cannot find it within yourself to recognize that those things are right and wring, let alone agree with them.

it's not my job to judge, even then [in the case of rape], only to love as Christ did. A hard task indeed if something happens to someone you love.

Your standard of "love" does not even permit you to condemn an obviously harmful crime like rape. That is total moral bankruptcy, pure and simple.

So, yes, that [warning someone of good/bad, right/wrong, and/or beneficial/harmful] is judging them.

By this standard, it is wrong to save someone's life when they're about to step in front of a train. By this standard it is wrong to warn someone of a situation that is likely to cause grave physical and/or mental harm. (Some examples: walking on thin ice, driving drunk/recklessly, playing with matches, etc.) By this standard, it is wrong to try to help someone escape self-destructive behavior such as cutting, drug abuse, anorexia, etc. By this standard, it is somehow noble to knowingly and deliberately stand back, or even encourage someone to destroy or even end their life.

There is no way to put this but simply:

YOU ARE A MORAL MONSTER!! Your "standard" permits and even encourages pure evil. You may even believe that your intentions are good, but when your actions lead to preventable harm, then your actions are EVIL.

You asked about loving your enemy. When you deliberately stand back and watch them come to harm, whether you justify it as some twisted kind of "love" or as "they deserved it", you are helping evil have it's way instead of "overcoming evil with good." (see Romans 12:20-21 and note that you need to be able to distinguish good from evil.) Proactively (and unjustly) harming your enemy or allowing them to come to harm through willful negligence both result in harm to your enemy. There is no possible way to justify the unjust harming of an enemy as "love".

There are some words I would very much like to say to you because I think you richly deserve them. But the Bible does teach that it's wrong for me to do so. (That would be judging in the sense that God says not to.) So I'll just let Jesus' words do the talking.

“But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you shut the kingdom of heaven in people’s faces. For you neither enter yourselves nor allow those who would enter to go in. Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you travel across sea and land to make a single proselyte, and when he becomes a proselyte, you make him twice as much a child of hell as yourselves.”
— Matthew 23:13–15

Mark Ward said...

Well, now you've totally lost me. Do you think homosexuals and Muslims are your enemy?

I suppose you answered in the only way you know how so here are my answers to your questions.

It's not up to me to judge your daughter. That's God's job. If He thinks that she was out of line, He'll take care of it.

I'm only human, of course, so I do wonder why conservative Christians such as yourself are so concerned with other people's sex lives. My personal view is that it's really a projection of all that balled up passion that you think is evil (except in very strict conditions). You assume quite wrongly that sex is the same for everyone and so the things you feel are the things that others feel. That's not true at all.

Further, it makes no sense to me that you rail against government meddling into people's lives in the name of good but feel perfectly comfortable doing that from a religious authoritarian point of view. Why is that? That's why I try (and often fail) to live by Matthew 7:1-5. Take the plank out of your own eye, hypocrite, right?

So even though I have these views, in the final analysis, I should spend my time reflecting on myself and not others.

Your turn. Pick one of my questions above and answer it.

Anonymous said...

Well, now you've totally lost me. Do you think homosexuals and Muslims are your enemy?

Those Voices In Your Head™ must be really clamoring loudly. The reason you're lost is because you just pulled an entirely baseless slander out of thin air. In order for this to be even slightly plausible, you have to believe that only enemies are to be loved, and no one else; DEFINITELY standard response #12.

I think you need to be reminded of Jesus' words again:

For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you.
— Matthew 7:2

It's not up to me to judge your daughter.

Really? Then what was your purpose in posting this picture? Heck, what is the general purpose of your entire blog?

It's passing judgement against all conservatives as evil, "unloving", sub-human creatures who must be defeated. Then when challenged about applying the same standard to a single individual within the group that you judge as mentally defective Every. Single. Day. then you suddenly feign non-judgementalism.

I'm convinced that you're lying. You think my question is a trap, so you suddenly change your tune for a bar or two. Then you go right back to judging us right in the same comment:

… conservative Christians such as yourself are so concerned … it's really a projection … You assume … the things you feel …

Every single one of these phrases is passing judgment. You claim you can read my mind (you can't) and are therefore in a position to lay out my supposed internal thoughts in negative and highly critical (as in judgemental) fashion.

You violate your own "non-judgemental" standard. Oddly enough, that's exactly the definition of "hypocrite".

1. a person who pretends to have virtues, moral or religious beliefs, principles, etc., that he or she does not actually possess, especially a person whose actions belie stated beliefs.

2. a person who feigns some desirable or publicly approved attitude, especially one whose private life, opinions, or statements belie his or her public statements.


I have to wonder what the parents of your students would do if they could see what you've written on this thread; nevermind your entire blog.

Mark Ward said...

sub-human creatures who must be defeated.

No. What I'd like to see is conservatives actually follow the words of the book they put so much stock into as opposed to picking and choosing what fits for them based on their insecurities and fear.

At least I recognize that when I judge someone, I fail in the eyes of God. You think you are somehow saving them but what you are really doing is attempting to support your faith which, based on what you are writing here, appears weak. Why do you need others to believe? Who cares what other people do? Even in my failures, I recognize that God will forgive me because of my faith in Christ.

You don't have to wonder what my students would think. Why don't you find a few random young people and show them this thread? Unbiased audience, please:)

Anonymous said...

…as opposed to picking and choosing what fits for them based on their insecurities and fear.

That is precisely what you do. You even admit it! What you don't like is that we follow the WHOLE thing, including the parts you despise.

Who cares what other people do?

Perhaps you missed how I summarized the Bible's definition of "love". (Typical of you.)

You don't have to wonder what my students would think.

You really have trouble reading, don't you. I said parents. Specifically the ones who's children you are indoctrinating. The people to whom it matters most, and with experience and developed skills to examine your ideology.

Unbiased audience, please

You really, really can't understand anything, can you?!? Within the last week it was pointed out to you over at TSM that there is no such thing, yet here you are immediately making the exact same mistake. And still you "can't understand" why we don't respect you.

Mark Ward said...

Perhaps you missed how I summarized the Bible's definition of "love".

You mean the part about coming to Jesus being a choice? Yes, I must have missed that part.

So tell me, Noni (and no quotes from the Bible or others), in YOUR OWN WORDS, how is your "love" different from the "love" you constantly complain about that stems from progressive policies? Both seek to right a wrong and do so in a proactive way.

pecifically the ones who's children you are indoctrinating.

Ah, the bubble. Considering one of my former students works for the Cato Institute, I'd say I'm not doing a very good job.

The people to whom it matters most, and with experience and developed skills to examine your ideology.

You mean the ones that...live in a bubble, perhaps? Ah, that's why you don't want to bring arguments out of there. Nothing like reality to hit you in the head like a shovel:)

Anonymous said...

You mean the part about coming to Jesus being a choice? Yes, I must have missed that part.

There's a reason you missed it. Because it didn't come up. The words "choice" and "choose" did not appear anywhere in our discussion up to this point. The reason is that it's not directly relevant to defining "love". That's classic moving the goalposts logical fallacy.

But even your dancing goalpost can be easily answered:

Everyone makes choices. We do it many, many times a day. Some choices are good, some are bad. (Wait, where have I heard that before?) As I've already explained, when you want what's best for a person (i.e., you love them), you will warn them about bad choices and encourage good choices. Even so, you cannot make the choice for them. (Otherwise I would have made you choose to change your mind years ago!)

Again, note that Jesus taught, cajoled, warned, rebuked, and gave all the evidence anyone could need, but some people still chose to oppose Him. And He taught His disciples to do the same. What makes you think acting contrary to how The Originator of Love acted is "loving"?

So tell me … in YOUR OWN WORDS

I'll type this slowly so you can understand…

I … ALREADY … DID … !

and no quotes from the Bible or others

I'm not you, Mark. I have REASONS why I have reached the conclusions I have. I WILL NOT abandon those reasons* just because you want me to. In short: NO!

Both seek to right a wrong

You keep claiming there is no right and wrong, no sin, and that all is forgiven so we are free to act however we like. (Which is why you keep trying to abuse Hebrews 8.) That turns this statement into complete nonsense.

You have managed to convince me of one thing over the years; the only "wrong" you are trying to correct is "people disagreeing with you."

live in a bubble

Are those your current "Mommy, make it go away!" words? They're no more of a valid argument than "Abracadabra" or even "Supercallifragilisticexpialidocious." In other words, you've fallen back into your rut of using Standard Response #5.

(* Better reasons, backed up by solid evidence and sound reasoning does cause me to reconsider positions I hold. You don't even recognize such, which is why you are totally ineffective against conservatives like me.)

Mark Ward said...

That's classic moving the goalposts logical fallacy.

No, it's not. According to what you wrote above, your definition of love is trying to save someone from what you perceive as being wrong. It's not up to you...it's their choice to come to Jesus.

all is forgiven so we are free to act however we like.

That's not true at all. All is forgiven if we accept Christ as our savior because he died for us. Nothing else is needed.

which is why you are totally ineffective against conservatives like me.

No one will convince you, Noni, because admitting fault or thinking outside of the box is strictly forbidden by your ideology. But, really, I don't have to convince you because this sort of ideology has largely failed.

You've lost the popular vote in 5 of the last 6 elections. You haven't gotten above 300 electoral votes since 1988 and that was when you nominated a RINO who committed the sin of raising taxes. Your demographic base is shrinking every day because the things you say aren't real/don't exist/are complete and total fabrications. Your solutions to the problems we face aren't viable and voters know it. Honestly, you don't stand for anything...just against anything liberals do.

Anonymous said...

According to what you wrote above, your definition of love is trying to save someone from what you perceive as being wrong. It's not up to you...it's their choice to come to Jesus.

Where did I say that the person being loved does not have a choice to make? I explicitly talked of warning some of good/bad, right/wrong, beneficial/harmful, not preventing or forcing them, which implicitly leaves their choices up to them. This is yet another classic example of the Voices In Your Head™.

That's not true at all. All is forgiven if we accept Christ as our savior…

Changing your argument? Are you now saying that engaging in homosexual behavior is a sin (which is what the Bible says) and harmful (also said by the Bible) which should be avoided, though it can be forgiven (again, also what the Bible says)? That's not what you have asserted repeatedly and doggedly in the past.

You've lost the popular vote…

Since when is truth, morality, and reality changed by popular vote? If you got 98% (or even 105%) of the votes to change it, would an orange sun rise in a green sky tomorrow?

Mark Ward said...

which is what the Bible says

Again, with the lack of qualitative analysis. The OT says it and so does Paul but what did Jesus have to say on the subject?

But that doesn't really matter because I don't think the Bible is right about everything. Neither do you, for that matter, although you pretend to think that in your fundamental belief in scriptural literalism (how is that different, again, from other religious extremists...say Muslims?)

But the general answer to your question about sin is YES. Sinning breaks your fellowship with God but doesn't prevent you from getting into heaven. Accepting faith in Christ is what does get you in because he died for our sins. Now, that doesn't mean you should go around and sin as much as you want. We're supposed to emulate Christ as best we can which includes loving your neighbor, accepting people for who they are, serving the less fortunate, and worrying more about our own salvation than that of others (the point of this post).

Anonymous said...

but what did Jesus have to say on the subject?

A) In regards to love, already answered. Jesus says the OT (the Law and the Prophets) is BUILT on the two greatest commandments.

B) He quoted Genesis. One Man, One Woman, For Life.

Neither do you,

Voices In Your Head™, Mark. Voices In Your Head™.

Now, that doesn't mean you should go around and sin as much as you want.

And yet you go full bore in arguing against me when I point this out. And you bring up Hebrews 8 to try to argue that homosexuality isn't a sin. Why the contradiction?

and worrying more about our own salvation than that of others (the point of this post).

What was Jesus' final commandment before He left? Also, what did He tell us to seek first? And didn't He say something about loving your neighbor as yourself?

Mark Ward said...

That we would do his works and greater than these. Greater, Noni. What does that mean to you?

Regarding seeking, you're going to have to be more specific. Because if you think that Matthew 7 helps your argument, you must have skipped past the first line. Or you could just present your case without the weasel avoidance. It smacks of an insecure or weak position.

Loving your neighbor does not entail, in any way, telling them how to live their life or intimating that they are going to hell if they don't listen to you.

Anonymous said...

That we would do his works and greater than these.

Wrong. Try again.

When you get the actual right answers, you will see that Jesus directly contradicts your last claim.

Mark Ward said...

Look, Noni, I think you need reminding that I don't believe in Republican Jesus. That's you. Further, you feel that your interpretation of the Bible is the "right" one and mine is the wrong one. The fact is that there is no right interpretation and I think that's the way God intended it to be. You need there to be one right way (and for everyone to think exactly the same way you do...ironic, coming from someone who makes claims against collectivism) which, in my view, betrays a weak faith. That's why you focus so much on sin. Without the threat of the wrath of God, you would sin more.

I don't need that threat to not sin. I'd rather pay attention to the message of love since we are in a period of grace, after all. Moreover, I'm not certain that my interpretation of the Bible is accurate. I'm human, after all, and can't fully know what God intends. I can only do my best and know that he always forgives as long as I believe in Jesus.

Anonymous said...

There's that trump card again. "I'll believe what I want to believe. I ignore the parts of the Bible I don't like."

What makes you think a powerless god is able to save you from death?

In case anyone else reads this, here are the correct answers to my questions:

What was Jesus' final commandment before He left?

And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.”
— Matthew 28:18–20

Also, what did He tell us to seek first?

But seek first the kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all these things will be added to you.
— Matthew 6:33

And didn't He say something about loving your neighbor as yourself?

That was in response to this:

worrying more about our own salvation than that of others (the point of this post).

That's loving yourself and ignoring your neighbor's needs.

And he said to him, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the great and first commandment. And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets.
— Matthew 22:37–40

Mark Ward said...

This whole discussion is very easily settled, Noni. Do you think it's possible that your interpretation is in error? For myself, I have no doubt that I can't fully know what God intends because I am not God and I am a flawed human. Because of these flaws, I know that I'm not right all the time, especially about stuff like this. Wouldn't you agree that this is the case for you as well?