 |
Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > Ethics, etc. > (No Subject)
| Forum Quick Jump
|
 | 
Leviathan
Registered Member
Date Joined Sep 2004
Total Posts : 82
| Posted 9/17/2004 10:49 AM (GMT -6) |   | | | |
|
Alan Rhoda
Registered Member
Date Joined May 2002
Total Posts : 680
| Posted 9/17/2004 11:50 AM (GMT -6) | | I think it rather obvious that we are to judge actions, ideas, and, I would argue, people. In context the prohibition "Do not judge lest you be judged" in Matt 7:1 refers to self-righteous and hypocritical judgment, not to judgment as such. Hence a couple verses later Jesus says "Don't cast your pearls before swine", a command that we can follow only if we can successfully discriminate (i.e., judge) between those who are "swine" and those who aren't. There is nothing wrong with judging provided we are judging in an appropriate manner (e.g., not out of pride or self-righteousness) matters of which we are competent to judge. A human resources director as a company, for example, has to judge who to hire and who to fire. Such a decision will likely be based in part on the person's competence, and also on features of their character--whether they are trustworthy, whether they get along well with others, etc.
As far as the idea that an ethics be "directly based on love", I think the idea is right in principle but dangerous in practice if not informed by more specific guidelines of what counts as love. Thus, Jesus tells us that the entire law can be summed up in two commands: love God and love your neighbor. While that is a profound truth we might ask then why the Bible goes into detail about all the specific things that we are to do and not do: Do not take God's name in vain, Do not steal, Do not commit adultery, Pray for your enemies, etc. The reason is that those specific commands tell us what genuine love for God and genuine love of our neighbors looks like. Without such guidelines it would be all to easy for us to rationalize wrong behavior by persuading ourselves that it was the "loving" thing to do. For example, some people will justify the abortion of a child by saying that it's the "loving" thing to do. Love that isn't properly informed is not real love at all.
Regards,
Alan | | Back to Top | | |
|
Similitude
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2004
Total Posts : 4968
| Posted 9/18/2004 5:35 AM (GMT -6) | | Sahid,
quote:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Do not judge lest you be judged" in Matt 7:1 refers to self-righteous and hypocritical judgment, not to judgment as such.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But how can one judge another person without being self-righteous and hypocritical? What can I accuse someone of without also accusing myself and thereby proving my lack of authority. Even if I get super general and say, "That person hasn't accepted Christ. He's going to hell," I might be wrong. I'm sure quite a few Christians said that about Saul/Paul. As far as I can tell, we can only judge people universally. "Everyone is a sinner." "Everyone is loved."
Originally, you said, "Don't kill people except in certain extreme circumstances, because killing people is unloving, and not killing is unloving under the extreme circumstances.". To advocate that, aren't you making a judgement about behavior, and by implication, the one(s) doing that behavior? This would be a specific, rather than universal, judgement wouldn't it?
wjs | | Back to Top | | |
|
Sahid
Megistered Rember
Date Joined Jun 2004
Total Posts : 2013
| Posted 9/18/2004 8:17 AM (GMT -6) | | I'm just spouting libertarian rhetoric and putting my spin on it. It is never morally right to compel (kill, enslave, imprison, injure, threaten, steal) or commit fraud, unless it is to stop someone who is compelling another or commiting fraud. In rare cases the only way to save our neighbor is to kill his oppressor. Nazi Germany is an example of this. There really was no way to liberate the Jews in Germany without the use of force and killing. That's what I mean by extreme circumstances.
However, I don't see this as a judgement of the Nazis. I understand that in real life we/I/everybody judges the Nazis themselves, but I don't think my forementioned ethic requires a judgement of the oppressor. It does not call for trials to punish oppressors after the victims have been liberated. The only way anyone would even be imprisoned is if it was obvious that the oppressor would continue this behavor unless imprisoned. The default response to people who do bad things is forgiveness. And even if their free status is not restored, it is not a punitive measure, but rather protective.
I know I haven't specifically addressed the criticism. The thing is, if we only judge the action, that's as far as it goes. If we judge the person by an action, we throw the baby out with the bathwater, not to mention the fact that all are sinners and in no position to lord ourselves over one another. Our only appropriate judgement of our neighbor is to realize that I am no better than him (whatever value judgements I make about him, I make about myself) and he is just as loved by God as I (and, after all, the value God places on a person is what really matters).
I guess my working definition of judgement is "placing moral value". If we place moral value on an action, we should only go so far as to let that judgement help deside how we are to act. We should never extend our judgement of the act to a judgement of the person commiting the act, because we already know that person's worth: bad enough to deserve death (like us) and good enough to die for (like us).
Watch me fly. Freedom like wings and I will use them. Freedom like wings and I will spread them wide. - Stavesacre | | Back to Top | | |
|
Similitude
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2004
Total Posts : 4968
| Posted 9/21/2004 5:03 PM (GMT -6) | | Sahid,
quote:
If we judge the person by an action, we throw the baby out with the bathwater, not to mention the fact that all are sinners and in no position to lord ourselves over one another.
I'm not sure I follow you. Is lording it over someone mean restraining their behavior as in jailing them? If so, you would have to be a pacifist anarchist wouldn't you? A libertarian would be too judgmental, for he advocates jailing people. If not, what do you mean by lording over people?
quote:
We should never extend our judgement of the act to a judgement of the person commiting the act, because we already know that person's worth: bad enough to deserve death (like us)
But death is the wages of sin - any sin. Evil works, on the other hand, require proportional punishment (from God at least) - i.e., suffering. For it is written, Vengeanence is Mine sayeth the Lord, I will repay. I don't think God is just talking about death here.
Hence, in the standard of works, Hitler may very well have more suffering coming His way than others. Why else would Christ have said things like "Sodom and Gohmorra will judge you in that day..."
wjs | | Back to Top | | |
|
Sahid
Megistered Rember
Date Joined Jun 2004
Total Posts : 2013
| Posted 9/30/2004 9:40 PM (GMT -6) | | First of all, not all names that start with an 'S' represent the same person.
When I was talking about lording over people, I was meant that one sinner is no better than another. What you said about proportional punishment is well taken. But you quote my response yourself: Vengence is the Lord's. Maybe God will make Hitler suffer more than others. I don't know. I'm currently riding the fence on the issue of hell. (Although I'm pretty firmly not a universalist.)
The thing is none of this has any bearing on how we are to judge people. All this talk about what people deserve is fine, but vengence is the Lord's, so no matter what we decide Joe Murderer deserves, we should leave vengence to the Lord. quote:
But you have advocated jailing people for at least a few crimes. The fact that you call it protective as opposed to punitive doesn't change the fact that it IS punitive to the person who is jailed.
Here it goes. First of all, fine, it's punitive to the jailed individual. Are you saying I being inconsistent? If I care for the victim of a shooting, I infringe upon the will of the shooter (in a simplified case) who would have the victim die. Any choice or lack of choice will put one persons will over the conflicting will of the other. I don't think there is anyone here who would disagree that when infringement upon another's will is unavoidable, we should infringe upon the aggressor's will instead of the victim's. I also don't think this is inconsistent with what I've said before. Someone will be punished (from their point of view), and the Christian bystander is not responsible for that. But when we find ourself in the situation where it's either lock a killer up or see more people die, I think the bible is fairly clear that we are to side with the victim. This siding with the victim does not cause subjective punishment; it merely directs it in the least harmful direction. quote:
I take it, then, that you think you have the right to help implement his imprisonment (by voting for it) while he doesn't have the right to arrange yours. Thus, "hard" or not, you seem to have advocated at least this much judgement - even while "looking at Perfection."
I highlighted in bold the part I disagree with. I never said that and am at a loss as to where that could be infered from what I said.
Watch me fly. Freedom like wings and I will use them. Freedom like wings and I will spread them wide. - Stavesacre | | Back to Top | | |
|
JEE
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2004
Total Posts : 1466
| Posted 10/1/2004 2:13 PM (GMT -6) | | Jesus' command to "judge not," must be taken in its own context, which says, "lest you be judged," and, "for with the same measure that you judge, you shall be judged." He then proceeds to use the example of a person with a beam in his eye criticizing someone else who has a speck in his.
However, Jesus does not tell us at this point to simply adopt a passive approach to the whole thing, for he says, "You hypocrite; first remove the beam from your own eye, and then you will be able to see clearly to help your brother remove the speck from his eye."
In other words, "Judge not," in context, simply means, "Don't criticize others without first criticizing yourself and getting rid of your own junk, and THEN you will be able to help your brother with his problem." This has perfectly realistic application to the Christian life, and in a sense goes without saying--we should be part of the solution, not simply professional critics who never raise a finger to help others (like the hypocritical Pharisees were guilty of).
Just a few verses later in Matt. 7, Jesus tells us to be on the lookout for false prophets, who are wolves in sheep's clothing. My, how judgmental a thing to say, that another person is basically an agent of Satan (false prophet).
Jesus also says in another place, "Judge RIGHTEOUS judgment," so Matt. 7:1 simply CANNOT mean "suspend your critical-thinking faculties," or "Don't EVER point out sin in another's life, for you always have your own to deal with." What He is warning against is being critical of others but not critical of oneself first and foremost, and of being guilty of being one who points out problems but doesn't really help anyone to overcome their sins.
http://revivaltheology.net | | Back to Top | | |
|
Truth Aficionado
Registered Member
Date Joined Dec 2003
Total Posts : 1544
| Posted 10/1/2004 2:50 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by Selah
A friend of mine said this "It's hard to judge when you're looking at Perfection."
2c.
love,
selah
Hello Selah,
I take it that your friend had their eyes fixed on Jesus. 
It sounds like your friend might have a lot in common with the heart of Mother Teresa.
Shalom
Mark
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Truth Aficionado
Registered Member
Date Joined Dec 2003
Total Posts : 1544
| Posted 10/1/2004 3:06 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by JEE
Jesus' command to "judge not," must be taken in its own context, which says, "lest you be judged," and, "for with the same measure that you judge, you shall be judged." He then proceeds to use the example of a person with a beam in his eye criticizing someone else who has a speck in his.
However, Jesus does not tell us at this point to simply adopt a passive approach to the whole thing, for he says, "You hypocrite; first remove the beam from your own eye, and then you will be able to see clearly to help your brother remove the speck from his eye."
In other words, "Judge not," in context, simply means, "Don't criticize others without first criticizing yourself and getting rid of your own junk, and THEN you will be able to help you brother with his problem." This has perfectly realistic application to the Christian life, and in a sense goes without saying--we should be part of the solution, not simply professional critics who never raise a finger to help others (like the hypocritical Pharisees were guilty of being).
Just a few verses later in Matt. 7, Jesus tells us to be on the lookout for false prophets, who are wolves in sheep's clothing. My, how judgmental a thing to say, that another person is basically an agent of Satan (false prophet).
Jesus also says in another place, "Judge RIGHTEOUS judgment," so Matt. 7:1 simply CANNOT mean "suspend your critical-thinking faculties," or "Don't EVER point out sin in another's life, for you always have your own to deal with." What He is warning against is beign critical of others but not critical of oneself first and foremost, and of being guilty of being one who points out problems but doesn't really help anyone to overcome their sins
I think your right John. I think people go from one extreme of the judgmental spectrum to the other. We are called to model ourselves after Jesus, not to be hypocrites but to be as holy as we can by setting an example to our children and others. Hmmm....funny as it sounds, it would actually be hypocritical to live a holy life yourself but tell your love ones that it’s ok to live in sin. 
Peace,
Mark | | Back to Top | | |
|
selah
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 1210
| Posted 10/1/2004 3:49 PM (GMT -6) | | | | |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 2:19 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2026 |
|
|