Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Good example of 'speaking the truth in love'

1…45679

Comments

  • #242
    lmaopml
    Registered Users Posts: 3,080 ✭✭✭lmaopml


    Northclare wrote: »
    We are all slaves one way or the other we have to accept our social status.

    Some people are slaves to internet forums :)

    :pac: True! *Puts hand up*


  • #243
    HamletOrHecuba
    Registered Users Posts: 676 ✭✭✭HamletOrHecuba


    Northclare wrote: »
    We are all slaves one way or the other we have to accept our social status.

    Some people are slaves to internet forums :)

    Some? I think its a little more than some. ;)

    But yes the vast majority of us our slaves; and no one is more a slave than one who believes that he is free and yet is not.

    At the end of the day internal freedom is all that matters.


  • #244
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    lmaopml: I'm not sure if it actually does mean significantly different things. The belief that people are saved by God's grace alone (which is essentially what people mean by Total Depravity) is common across pretty much every mainstream denomination. It means essentially, that there is no hope of being saved without Jesus as we are morally corrupt in God's sight.

    It's a general term that is used, and has been used pretty much throughout Christian history. Although, I think that HamletOrHecuba is mistaken in his view of it. I'd suggest that if he thinks that Calvin argues it he should look up his Institutes of the Christian Religion and find it so we can have a look at it.


  • #245
    tommy2bad
    Registered Users Posts: 4,255 ✭✭✭tommy2bad


    HamletOrHecuba wrote: »
    Some? I think its a little more than some. ;)

    But yes the vast majority of us our slaves; and no one is more a slave than one who believes that he is free and yet is not.

    At the end of the day internal freedom is all that matters.

    What?? slaves?? No we are not. Please don't use the term as if it could mean anything. It doesn't.
    Slavery is a system under which people are treated as property to be bought and sold, and are forced to work.[1] Slaves can be held against their will from the time of their capture, purchase or birth, and deprived of the right to leave, to refuse to work, or to demand compensation.

    This is what God never condemned. This is what both Christian and Jew have defended.
    Don't pretend that they understood it as anything else.


  • #246
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    tommy2bad wrote: »
    What?? slaves?? No we are not. Please don't use the term as if it could mean anything. It doesn't.

    Slavery is a system under which people are treated as property to be bought and sold, and are forced to work.[1] Slaves can be held against their will from the time of their capture, purchase or birth, and deprived of the right to leave, to refuse to work, or to demand compensation.

    This is what God never condemned. This is what both Christian and Jew have defended.
    Don't pretend that they understood it as anything else.

    It would create more open and honest discussion if you explored the biblical meaning of terms, rather than posting a simplistic English definition and then pretending that somehow defines how the word is used biblically.

    For example, the Greek word used in the New Testament is doulos: here's a brief summary of its various meanings from Vine's Expository Dictionary http://studybible.info/vines/Bondman,%20Bondmaid
    Bondman, Bondmaid
    [ 1,,G1401, doulos ]
    from deo, to bind," "a slave," originally the lowest term in the scale of servitude, came also to mean "one who gives himself up to the will of another," e.g., 1 Corinthians 7:23; Romans 6:17, Romans 6:20, and became the most common and general word for "servant," as in Matthew 8:9, without any idea of bondage. In calling himself, however, a "bondslave of Jesus Christ," e.g., Romans 1:1, the Apostle Paul intimates

    (1) that he had been formerly a "bondslave" of Satan, and

    (2) that, having been bought by Christ, he was now a willing slave, bound to his new Master. See SERVANT.

    The feminine, doule, signifies "a handmaid," Luke 1:38, Luke 1:48; Acts 2:18.

    [ 2,,G3814, paidiske ]
    "a young girl, maiden," also denoted "a young female slave, bondwoman, or handmaid." For the AV, "bondmaid" or "bondwoman," in Galatians 4:22-Galatians 4:23, Galatians 4:30-Galatians 4:31, the RV has "handmaid." See DAMSEL, HANDMAID, MAID.

    It would be grossly inaccurate to take every instance of the word 'slave' in an English translation of the Bible and then to pretend that it refers to 'slavery' as understood today in the light of the North Atlantic Slave Trade etc. Some references do carry such a meaning - others don't.


  • Advertisement
  • #247
    HamletOrHecuba
    Registered Users Posts: 676 ✭✭✭HamletOrHecuba


    tommy2bad wrote: »
    What?? slaves?? No we are not. Please don't use the term as if it could mean anything. It doesn't.

    This is what God never condemned. This is what both Christian and Jew have defended.
    Don't pretend that they understood it as anything else.

    I wasnt pretending otherwise.

    But the words slave and slavery can be used in other senses.


  • #248
    tommy2bad
    Registered Users Posts: 4,255 ✭✭✭tommy2bad


    Me;
    Don't pretend that they understood it as anything else.
    Knew you would pull this one,
    PDN;
    It would be grossly inaccurate to take every instance of the word 'slave' in an English translation of the Bible and then to pretend that it refers to 'slavery' as understood today in the light of the North Atlantic Slave Trade etc. Some references do carry such a meaning - others don't.

    Cop out! Because it is our understood term that was used by popes and theologians to defend what we understand it to mean.
    This is one thing that cant be wriggled out of, Christians failed to condemn slavery, directly because their was no biblical injunction against it.
    If it were not for individual Christians, methodist mostly, BennyXXIII would still be defending it. We had to be dragged kicking and shooting.
    If we want to understand the context the bible was written in, OK then its wrong, but to condemn the sins of omission committed by Christians, no it's absolutely fair.


  • #249
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    tommy2bad wrote: »
    This is one thing that cant be wriggled out of, Christians failed to condemn slavery, directly because their was no biblical injunction against it.
    Nonsense. There are plenty of things with biblical injunctions against them that Christians continued to support. The problem here is human sin, greed and selfishness.
    If it were not for individual Christians, methodist mostly, BennyXXIII would still be defending it. We had to be dragged kicking and shooting.
    If we want to understand the context the bible was written in, OK then its wrong, but to condemn the sins of omission committed by Christians, no it's absolutely fair.
    Not trying to be funny here - but I think it would be a really good idea to get hold of a good Church History book and read up on how the Christian Church has responded to slavery over the centuries.

    I don't want to belittle those Methodists whom I greatly admire, but I can't ignore the various times excommunication was declared against slavers, or indeed the heroic defence of native South Americans by the Jesuits.


  • #250
    tommy2bad
    Registered Users Posts: 4,255 ✭✭✭tommy2bad


    Church History book and read up on how the Christian Church has responded to slavery over the centuries.
    Will do, I suspect that he actions of some individuals will be used to whitewash the institutional inertia rather than any institutional opposition. Tho in fairness the fact that we have a defense means their was an opposition.

    (how do I mess up UBB so often??)


  • #251
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    tommy2bad: One of the advantages of having a lot of posts on boards.ie is that I can bring up some stuff I've done before here. About 3 years ago I posted on the Atheism and Agnosticism forum about slavery explaining how the Biblical concept of slavery in the Torah clearly differs from colonial slavery. You might find it interesting, you might not but it's there if you want to look at it.


  • Advertisement
  • #252
    tommy2bad
    Registered Users Posts: 4,255 ✭✭✭tommy2bad


    philologos, nice post but misses my point.
    If we as Christians are to be credible we must live the faith.
    If Christianity as a religion is to be credible it should at the least have a consistent moral position. It dose not and never did. This isn't a problem for me, I don't think a religion is a set of morals but to someone outside looking in?
    You and PDN do the predictable thing of saying "but it doesn't mean what you think it means" OK so what? It meant exactly what I think it means when it suited.
    The other big excuse is "but that was then..." Again so what? either God is consistent or hes changeable. We always claim consistency but again the evidence is against that so we fall back on "but it doesn't mean what you think it means"
    Lets call a spade a bloody shovel; people made it up as the went as it suited, some to advance their own ends, some to advance their cause, some even, I know it's hard to believe, thought long and hard about right and wrong and still screwed up.
    It's what we do, muddel through.
    Sounds atheistic but I am not. This is about grace. Defending the people who f..ked up dose not help. Pretending that the bible is the same now as it was then?? Come on we cant even read it as it would have been read 50 years ago never mind 2 or 3 thousand years.
    Im not a tod interested in how we understand the bible now because thats not how it was read then.
    The fact is that people understood slavery in the bible as the same as the African slave trade and used biblical text to justify that. Some didn't but that cant be used as evidence of biblical inveteracy if another view held sway.


  • #253
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    It does have a consistent moral position. It's not just one point, but several posts throughout the thread. I believe that the Torah is actually encourages freedom for those who were taken in slavery. A law which allows clear protections for those who are being mistreated by their employers / masters is a moral law. A law which allows for people to make restitution for their debts if they have stolen in particular and a law which protects people from mistreatment at the same time, IMO is a fair and reasonable law.

    There is no state of Israel any longer, which means that Christians live within societies rather than ruling them, but the ethical principles of the Torah IMO are sound even if they have different consequences following Christ. Christianity is a powerful ethical guide, and my morality is firmly based on it.


  • #254
    tommy2bad
    Registered Users Posts: 4,255 ✭✭✭tommy2bad


    A law which allows clear protections for those who are being mistreated by their employers / masters is a moral law. A law which allows for people to make restitution for their debts if they have stolen in particular and a law which protects people from mistreatment at the same time, IMO is a fair and reasonable law.
    Crap if it just rules for implementing evil.
    Thats the kind of talk I would expect of a seperate but equal apologist, not a Christian who professes the Gospel.
    but the ethical principles of the Torah IMO are sound even if they have different consequences following Christ.
    By the by, did you hear the Jewish woman on newstalk lastnight? She has written a book on the Torah and was very good at explaining it .(of to google the book now, thanks for the remind)


  • #255
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    I don't believe that the Torah is evil as a law system. Again, I've explained rather clearly as has PDN as to how it differs from colonial slavery. In the thread I linked to, I've spent a lot of time examining it in comparison to colonial slavery, and looking to what Paul wrote about the subject in the New Testament. I'd recommend you take the time to read some of it and then come back and criticise my POV.


  • #256
    tommy2bad
    Registered Users Posts: 4,255 ✭✭✭tommy2bad


    philologos ;
    I'd recommend you take the time to read some of it and then come back and criticise my POV.
    But your POV is total acceptance of the bible as meaning what you say it means. As I said somewhat circular. I don't take that view.
    I'm not saying the Torah was evil but if it merely set rules for the facilitating of evil...

    The Torah-Sunday 19th February
    The Torah-Sunday 19th February
    Duno if a podcast is up yet, my interwebs is too slow for the newstalk site tonight.


  • #257
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    My POV is really simple. It's a simple case. Consider my argument and PDN's argument before dismissing it. We also need to decide if we are going to discuss this how much value are we going to place on the Bible from a scale to high importance to low importance. If you are going for low importance, we start to move away from Christianity essentially as far as I can tell. Perhaps you disagree. If so I'd like to know a little bit about why you might.

    If you do regard the Bible as being of high importance and you disagree with how I view what's on its pages, that's entirely different to not valuing it highly at all. So we need to find out what you're arguing. If we disagree with what's on it's pages I have a very simple rule that I have. If someone can show me Biblically that I am wrong, I will accept it humbly and thank them because they have shown me how I can know and love my God a little better. There's been a few situations like that in my own life.

    However, to claim it's my way or the highway is false. It's Jesus' way that we follow. If you think I'm wrong, that's fine, I'm not going to point you to me, I'm going to point you to God and His word.


  • #258
    lmaopml
    Registered Users Posts: 3,080 ✭✭✭lmaopml


    I think the debate around the 'Problem of Evil' is vast - Slavery is a tricky subject, considering how absolutely rampant it was and ingrained in the human psych - and accepted too, by virtually the entire world.

    We, in Ireland where whisked off too at one stage from our beds to be slaves at one time, much like many different western nations, so I suppose it's something worth sorting out in our minds in relation to our faith, and worth exploring further.

    In fairness, this is not something I have looked into vastly. I'm aware of the slave trades, indentured service etc. - and even today a subtle form of slavery exists everywhere imo. some not so subtle.

    However, the way I have considered it so far, is in light of humanity and the fall and exactly what the message was in the OT - it was pretty much to, not treat a 'slave' as anything less than a human, which did happen in the Pagan world, if you were different, you were basically fodder.

    It's very difficult to actually place yourself in those times and wonder at God's wisdom - why he didn't just click his fingers and make everything 'ok' for everybody or say something like the proclamation of independance and make all people free. He did let the Jewish people themselves be slaves for nigh on 400 years? I wonder why? Perhaps that's what it took - the first pebble in an ocean of change.

    However, belief in God, I firmly believe shows him like a Father pretty much of some pretty wild kids, who guides but with a firm hand - and the fulfillment of the OT came in the form of Jesus, who came at a time and place that was obviously perfect for it's purpose - he said to 'render onto Ceasar that which is Ceasars, and render onto God that which is Gods' - That went for everybody, no matter whom, slave or free person. We're actually meant to pick up our crosses here to follow him - I think the world would have been vastly different without Christ, he seems to awaken in people a sense of equality among all people, but with a deep humility too that we are still part of this world with all it's imperfections.

    I think this is something I would like to explore a little deeper though. I liked your posts Phil on the subject - Got a kindle for Christmas, and I think I may explore Amazon on the topic - if anybody has any recommendations I'd be glad to hear them too.


  • #259
    Andrewf20
    Registered Users Posts: 3,187 ✭✭✭Andrewf20


    philologos wrote: »
    I believe that we are inclined towards evil, and because of our sin, we are unable to be regarded as wholly good. We are totally depraved in so far as there is no means for us to save ourselves from our sin.

    I dont think I agree with this entirely. As Hitchens said, we would not have gotten this far as humans over 10s of thousands of years if we didnt have some level of compassion for others that precedes religious doctrine.
    PDN wrote: »
    In other words, the doctrine of total depravity declares that even our best actions are still tinged with selfishness (as when we put money in a charity collection box, but then hope that someone saw us doing it and thought us to be generous). It also declares that we lack the goodness to pull ourselves up to heaven by our own bootstraps, but we need the grace of God to reveal the Gospel to us.

    But doing a good deed in the hope of eternal reward in the next life / to please God could also be considered a depraved act by this definition. I cant think of an act of kindness done by a believer that could not be done by a non believer. I also feel a non believer who does a good deed is perhaps more noble if they dont expect reward in this life or the next.


  • #260
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    ^^ Christianity doesn't teach that we do what is good to please God. In fact in terms of Christian living our good deeds have been planned by God in advance:
    For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing;it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.

    Nothing we can do can bring us into God's good books. The only way we can be saved is by Jesus' death and resurrection. It would be a misunderstanding to say that we earn our way to heaven in terms of Christianity.

    You seem to have also misunderstood my position. It's not based on "religious doctrine", but rather on God's role in creation. The very fact that we can do anything good at all is because 1) God has told us what good and evil is, 2) That He has given us a conscience to work under those principles and finally 3) what is evil is simply what goes against God's standard for how we should live in this world (what is good). That's the framework by which most Christians understand ethics.


  • #261
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    Andrewf20 wrote: »
    I dont think I agree with this entirely. As Hitchens said, we would not have gotten this far as humans over 10s of thousands of years if we didnt have some level of compassion for others that precedes religious doctrine.
    .

    While quoting Hitchens as an authority is particularly pointless in this Forum, it is also pretty irrelevant. Nobody here has argued that you can't feel compassion without religious doctrine.
    But doing a good deed in the hope of eternal reward in the next life / to please God could also be considered a depraved act by this definition. I cant think of an act of kindness done by a believer that could not be done by a non believer. I also feel a non believer who does a good deed is perhaps more noble if they dont expect reward in this life or the next.
    That might be true, but again it is totally irrelevant. I don't believe that doing a good deed to gain a reward in the next world is a good motivation for anything.

    Maybe the Atheist/Christian debate thread would be a better place for you to offer up these ideas rather than inserting them randomly here?


  • Advertisement
  • #262
    Fanny Cradock
    Registered Users Posts: 10,245 ✭✭✭✭Fanny Cradock


    Andrewf20 wrote: »
    I cant think of an act of kindness done by a believer that could not be done by a non believer. I also feel a non believer who does a good deed is perhaps more noble if they dont expect reward in this life or the next.

    No, I can't think of an single act either. Then again I've personally never encountered any Christian who did. It's a superficially compelling argument that shows a deep misunderstanding of what Christianity says. It's also debatable about whether all Christians do good deeds because they want some reward in the afterlife. Any Christians I've met who work out there on the front lines do good because they are driven to do so out of loving compassion for the people they care for. They see charity as a necessary extension of their faith, not in the crude way you imagine.


  • #263
    Benny_Cake
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,205 ✭✭✭Benny_Cake


    lmaopml wrote: »
    I think this is something I would like to explore a little deeper though. I liked your posts Phil on the subject - Got a kindle for Christmas, and I think I may explore Amazon on the topic - if anybody has any recommendations I'd be glad to hear them too.

    Since you have a Kindle you might try the autobiography of Frederick Douglass, which is available for free online. He was an escaped slave who went on to become one of the great abolitionists. Although he was a Christian himself, he was despairing about how many of the slaveholders who proclaimed their faith the loudest and attended Methodist camp meetings could commit the cruellest of acts. A number of American denominations split over the issue of slavery, most notably the Methodists and Baptists.


  • #264
    Andrewf20
    Registered Users Posts: 3,187 ✭✭✭Andrewf20


    PDN wrote: »
    Nobody here has argued that you can't feel compassion without religious doctrine.

    I agree, however some people say they believe that we are inclined towards evil which I cant entirely agree with.
    PDN wrote: »
    That might be true, but again it is totally irrelevant. I don't believe that doing a good deed to gain a reward in the next world is a good motivation for anything.
    Fanny Cradock wrote: »
    They see charity as a necessary extension of their faith, not in the crude way you imagine.

    Its hard to prove for sure whether people in general do good deeds out of a hope of eternal reward or not (i.e. theres no way of knowing the minds of others for sure), but I believe its plausible that some religious people do good with thoughts of pleasing God in mind. I have been one. However I do believe you (Fanny Cradock) are right in that alot of people you mentioned do charity work due to honest compassion to help others.
    PDN wrote: »
    Maybe the Atheist/Christian debate thread would be a better place for you to offer up these ideas rather than inserting them randomly here?

    I have a Christian background and am interested in the arguments in alot of forums & debates. My comments were in response to items mentioned in this forum.


  • #265
    Northclare
    Closed Accounts Posts: 724 ✭✭✭Northclare


    Can anyone explain Luke 19 Verse 27


  • #266
    Andrewf20
    Registered Users Posts: 3,187 ✭✭✭Andrewf20


    philologos wrote: »
    Christianity doesn't teach that we do what is good to please God. In fact in terms of Christian living our good deeds have been planned by God in advance:

    Nothing we can do can bring us into God's good books. The only way we can be saved is by Jesus' death and resurrection. It would be a misunderstanding to say that we earn our way to heaven in terms of Christianity.

    I have grown up in a Christian family and have attended Mass most of my life however these ideas you mention were never made clear to me. I have never heard of our good deeds being planned in advance. I was always taught that we should do good deeds do please God. Its frustrating that so much ambiguity can occur in relation to this. I guess its a matter of interpretation - for example - different homilies from different priests presenting the Bibles teachings in different ways from parish to parish.


  • #267
    tommy2bad
    Registered Users Posts: 4,255 ✭✭✭tommy2bad


    Andrewf20 wrote: »
    I have grown up in a Christian family and have attended Mass most of my life however these ideas you mention were never made clear to me. I have never heard of our good deeds being planned in advance. I was always taught that we should do good deeds do please God. Its frustrating that so much ambiguity can occur in relation to this. I guess its a matter of interpretation - for example - different homilies from different priests presenting the Bibles teachings in different ways from parish to parish.

    No it not down to individual priests, as you said mass I'l presume you were brought up catholic and thoes ideas are not the main focus of catholic teaching.


  • #268
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    Northclare wrote: »
    Can anyone explain Luke 19 Verse 27

    Yes, Jesus told a parable that taught us that we should use our gifts and talents for good, rather than letting them lie dormant. Parables are illustrative stories that feature fictional characters. In this parable the fictional character of a king condemned his servant to death, demonstrating the adverse consequences that can come from not using our talents and resources.

    A similar use of violent death in a story would be in the tale that my Dad told me when I was little, about the boy who cried 'Wolf'. Unlike Aesop's version, in my Dad's version the boy got eaten by the wolf. Even though I was only 5 years old I instantly understood the meaning of the story. If you tell lies and create unnecessary alarm then no-one will believe you, even when you are telling the truth. Even at 5-years old, I would have been an exceptionally moronic child if I had thought my Dad was advocating that all liars should be fed to wolves.

    And so with the parable of Jesus. Only an exceptionally moronic person would take it as meaning that Jesus wanted people to be killed. Amazingly enough, at least once a year, we get the occasional atheist who claims that must be the meaning of the words of Jesus. I am unable to make up my mind whether they really are exceptionally moronic or whether they are just trolls taking the pee.


  • #269
    Northclare
    Closed Accounts Posts: 724 ✭✭✭Northclare


    Thanks for that it makes sense to me now :)

    I'm learning loads from these discussions.

    I also like the Sufi stories in Islam too.


  • #270
    HamletOrHecuba
    Registered Users Posts: 676 ✭✭✭HamletOrHecuba


    Northclare wrote: »
    Thanks for that it makes sense to me now :)

    I'm learning loads from these discussions.

    I also like the Sufi stories in Islam too.

    If you havent already you should check out the Hassidic stories, they contain a lot of wisdom as well as being entertaining.

    Sufism is interesting because a lot of its practices and "spirit" were actually taken over Christianity, the below is a really good book on its relationship primarily to Hesychasm. There is another good book on the subject but I cant remember its name.

    http://www.amazon.com/Paths-Heart-Sufism-Christian-East/dp/0941532437


  • Advertisement
  • #271
    lmaopml
    Registered Users Posts: 3,080 ✭✭✭lmaopml


    Benny_Cake wrote: »
    Since you have a Kindle you might try the autobiography of Frederick Douglass, which is available for free online. He was an escaped slave who went on to become one of the great abolitionists. Although he was a Christian himself, he was despairing about how many of the slaveholders who proclaimed their faith the loudest and attended Methodist camp meetings could commit the cruellest of acts. A number of American denominations split over the issue of slavery, most notably the Methodists and Baptists.

    Thanks Benny, I'll download it - even better when they're free :)


Advertisement