love your enemy

[Unveiled Artist]

so it's ok to be indifferent and watch a life be taken? even if it's murder, or negligent vs defensively?

I don't like life being taken callously either but being indifference to abuse and suffering of others at the hands of antagonist is loving and moral?

I dont like seeing lives taken:I dont even like seeing animals do it.

Just because I say it is wrong, doesnt mean abuse etc is loving. I dont know how the two go together as opposites.

How do you love your enemies by killing them for what you feel is justifable crimes for death?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Yes I completely understand what you're saying. But if God is love and he is good and our perspective Him contradicts that then our perspective is probably wrong.

Evil won't belong in heaven
Good won't belong in hell

Pardon my french. Sin is only sin when humans commit it (like killing) but its not when god does it?

Killing is evil. So killing is evil only when humans do it but not when god does it?

 

[Etritonakin]

This is what I believe. We are all in a cycle from life to life. Im mostly talking about the christian god. I dont know how the Quran, Torah (as Im told it is different than christian bible), pagan god/s etc.

It does not make sense that god created life but has the right to kill it. Thats like saying my mother has the right to kill be because whe bore me.

Life is to sacred to be taken outside the natural order. If the natural order is god, I understand. Nature doesnt make decisions. So, the decisions of the christian god is unjustified.

Life is sacred on its own accord.

If I were the creator I would not feel its right to kill humanity I created. That defeats the purpose of the sacredness of life and natural death if one chooses to kill for his own needs.

I dont agree with "god causes people to fall asleep". In scripture it does say sinners are punished. We cant sugar coat death.

Yes -it does say sinners are punished. It also says it is appointed for men to die once -then be raised to the judgment.

It says that as in Adam all die -even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

God is not killing for his own needs, but ours -and is not actually killing -as in perand death is moving us from from life to life.

It is not accurate to consider only one scripture on the subject.

Scripture says that line must be upon line, and precept upon precept.
It must be taken together -not separately.

Few actually understand what the old and new testaments say -because they have not studied them thoroughly.

Scripture does say -in many places -that those who die are as asleep -that they are not aware of anything until resurrected.

That does not mean God does not punish or judge. God metes out punish,met and judgment now -before we die as men -then we sleep -and some who awake will awake to judgment and punishment -but that judgment and punishment is for their good.

The following is true -but it is not complete. It cannot be understood properly if taken alone.
It does not mean there is no hope for those who awake to that disgrace -but other scriptures must be referenced for a proper context....

Dan 12:2 Many of those who sleep in the dust of the ground will awake, these to everlasting life, but the others to disgrace and everlasting contempt.3"Those who have insight will shine brightly like the brightness of the expanse of heaven, and those who lead the many to righteousness, like the stars forever and ever.…

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Yes -it does say sinners are punished. It also says it is appointed for men to die once -then be raised to the judgment.

It says that as in Adam all die -even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

God is not killing for his own needs, but ours -and is not actually killing -as in perand death is moving us from from life to life.

It is not accurate to consider only one scripture on the subject.

Scripture says that line must be upon line, and precept upon precept.
It must be taken together -not separately.

Few actually understand what the old and new testaments say -because they have not studied them thoroughly.

Death as a means for life no matter how its describe just doesnt make sense. I read the full bible; but, I forgot a lot of it given once you found a home you really dont visit where you were unless needed or wanted.

God shouldnt kill period.

That is basically my point. I cant justify killing.

 

[Etritonakin]

Death as a means for life no matter how its describe just doesnt make sense. I read the full bible; but, I forgot a lot of it given once you found a home you really dont visit where you were unless needed or wanted.

God shouldnt kill period.

That is basically my point. I cant justify killing.

Though you read the bible, you read it with your mind -from your perspective at the time. Many read it but still do not realize what it actually says.

You said something about a cycle from life to life.

If you are living forever, God has not killed you.

All of life on Earth is basically made of recycled material.

We are even made from some of what made up previous humans.

God will move us out of that cycle -so that we do not die -after causing the psychological effects which will prepare us to be gods. Some of those seem excessively harsh or unnecessary -but they are not. They are harsh and extreme -but that is necessary now to create the end result.

You do not have to justify what God does -and it is not necessary that you understand it.

It is definitely understandable to believe as you do -but what he does is necessary -and the end result will show why.

It will happen whether or not we believe in it or agree with it.

The same thing is happening, regardless -and I am glad it is not in vain.

I am not trying to be rude or offensive, but though you may see no reason to revisit the bible now, the future will visit us all regardless of belief.

If what is written was not true -then what is written would not happen. If it is true, it will happen.
when it happens, many will then understand why the past was necessary.

It is understandable that we see things from our present temporary perspective.

 

[truelight Mike]

Pardon my french. Sin is only sin when humans commit it (like killing) but its not when god does it?

Killing is evil. So killing is evil only when humans do it but not when god does it?

If humans were created by a creator he might have some liberties and higher perspectives that his creations don't.

Sometimes a child can't understand why their parents don't want them to do something, but when they get older they understand

I don't understand hell, but I have faith that God is good. So again whoever ends up there I believe it will be there own fault by choice.

If we choose darkness in this life, it makes perfect sense to me that we will get darkness in the next

We can try to point a finger at God,
But when we stand before Him I think it will be obvious to Him and us where we belong.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Though you read the bible, you read it with your mind -from your perspective at the time. Many read it but still do not realize what it actually says.

You said something about a cycle from life to life.

If you are living forever, God has not killed you.

All of life on Earth is basically made of recycled material.

We are even made from some of what made up previous humans.

God will move us out of that cycle -so that we do not die -after causing the psychological effects which will prepare us to be gods. Some of those seem excessively harsh or unnecessary -but they are not. They are harsh and extreme -but that is necessary now to create the end result.

You do not have to justify what God does -and it is not necessary that you understand it.

It is definitely understandable to believe as you do -but what he does is necessary -and the end result will show why.

It will happen whether or not we believe in it or agree with it.

The same thing is happening, regardless -and I am glad it is not in vain.

We move from life to life and the Buddha does not say we can kill because we have another life to live. I am conpletely against unnatural killing and any killing regardless of how it justified (we dont die, really so it its not death) it is still wrong.

The Bible is not hard to grasp its spiritual significance as well as its intellectual one. You may read the Lotus Sutra/scripture and understand it in full. I would not say you dont. Id say, rather, that it is your choice to believe In what it says or not. The Bible isnt special in this regards.

Our being "recycled material" doesnt justify taking another person's life prematurely.

We naturally by no external cause move from one life to the next. How we conduct ourselves in this life from taking a life to being compassionate will give consequence or benefit in the next.

This is true whether we believe it or not.

To love our enemy does not involve taking a life. This applies to me, to every other human, and as the Buddba says, all the gods, devas, skankasx bodhissatvas, everyone and being. The christian god included.

I dont see how this could be false. More to the thread, how love for one's enemy can involve taking a life. That is a contradiction in terms.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

If humans were created by a creator he might have some liberties and higher perspectives that his creations don't.

Sometimes a child can't understand why their parents don't want them to do something, but when they get older they understand

I don't understand hell, but I have faith that God is good. So again whoever ends up there I believe it will be there own fault by choice.

If we choose darkness in this life, it makes perfect sense to me that we will get darkness in the next

We can try to point a finger at God,
But when we stand before Him I think it will be obvious to Him and us where we belong.

My mother bore me but she has no right to take my life. Her role does not excuse her from the sacredness of life that was given at conception.

If I found out my mother killed my sister, I would not say it is right no matter how old I am. Her role, title, our age, our knowledge, etc does not justify taking a life.

Taking a life leads to darkness. To whomever does so, it would make sense they will have darkness in the next....unless they make merits to balance their bad karma: change the light bulb, and cut on the light. It doesnt cut on its by itself.

 

[Deeje]

A Christian can find love for the rebels. He does not need to punish them for their misdeeds; but, from their actions not from the Christian's, they wil suffer the consequences. In the real world, the law would take over in this case; however, that is not my point.

A Christian should find love for the rebels.

How can love for the rebels be expressed any better than to offer them the opportunity to change their ways and live? This is what Christians do. This is what Christ urged his disciples to do....he said...

"When you enter any town or village, find out who is worthy, and stay there until you leave. 12 Greet a household when you enter it, 13 and if the household is worthy, let your peace be on it. But if it is unworthy, let your peace return to you. 14 If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, shake the dust off your feet when you leave that house or town."

Who are the "worthy" ones Jesus mentioned here? The ones who welcome his disciples and listen to what they have to say and act on it. Peace will come to that household, but if the message is rejected, the peace will return to the disciples. 'Shaking the dust from their feet' was a sign that their responsibility towards those 'unworthy' ones was finished. They had their opportunity and threw it away.

Likewise with god.....

God should find love for his "rebels."

He loves the sinner but hates the sin. When he cleanses the earth of all sin, only those who separate themselves from sinful activity will live. Those who cling to the sins (actions) they know are wrong, (in God's eyes) will go down with the ship by their own choice. They already know how to save themselves but refuse to give up what they love. It is all about the heart's desire. (Jer 17:9) They get to do whatever they want, but they somehow think it will end well for them. Who said? Its a dead end street. (Matt 7:13, 14)

If a Christian is required to love his enemies and, this includes, not punishing them (which is contrary to love), why cannot god do the same as what he asks of the Christian?

Because he told us why we should not retaliate.
"Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Try to do what is honorable in everyone’s eyes. 18 If possible, on your part, live at peace with everyone. 19 Friends, do not avenge yourselves; instead, leave room for His wrath. For it is written: Vengeance belongs to Me; I will repay, says the Lord. 20 But If your enemy is hungry, feed him.
If he is thirsty, give him something to drink. For in so doing you will be heaping fiery coals on his head. 21 Do not be conquered by evil, but conquer evil with good." (Rom 12:17-21)

Retribution belongs to God. It is his right, and no one can contest it or question it....(if they want to keep living.)

If you break the laws of the land you expect the stated punishment, so if you break God's laws why expect something different. He made the laws in the first place. If we choose to practice what he says is wrong, who can we blame when the penalty is enforced?

Satan is an enemy of god yet Christian's are told that treat enemies as children of god (if I got that right in the gospels)

No you didn't. Enemies were to be treated as fellow humans and treated as we would like to be treated. (Golden Rule)

Satan is a powerful enemy of God, so he is to be treated as one who can deceive us with an "angel of light" routine (2 Cor 11:14, 15) that can lead us in the wrong direction by appealing to selfish desires....blinding us to the truth. (2 Cor 4:3, 4)

why can't god satan?Great Disciples of The Buddha?

Why?....because Yahweh will not tolerate rival gods. It's that simple.(Ex 20:3) They did not give creatures life, nor do they get to give a different set of rules. If you want to worship other gods, you have the freedom to choose them...but you choose what goes with that. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

The Christian faith doesn't need to be justified correct. If it is true that god can go against his own commandment of loving others (thou shall not kill, for example), let me know.

Other than that, the confliction with what he tells Christians to do and what he does yells out literally and metaphorically that I dont see how any Christian can overlook it.

Is it because people want God to be what THEY want him to be? They want him to condone their lifestyle choices and if he won't, they will choose a god who will? Is that how it is?
This describes all those who want to dictate their own standards of "right" to their Maker. Sorry, that just won't work. He will never accept what he has condemned. He does not change.

For the sake of the righteous, God must act to eliminate all wickedness. We need a definition of "wickedness" from God's perspective, not from man's.

All sin is wicked in God's view. He tells us in his word the kinds of things he deems to be sinful. So can people do what they want to do and not consider how God feels about it? They can pretend he is not there..but it doesn't make him go away.

"So whoever knows the right thing to do and fails to do it, for him it is sin." (James 4:17)

At the end of the day, people choose what they will do based on what is in their heart. Are there any good sinners? YES! But they are not the ones who willfully and deliberately flout the laws of God. The sinners Christ died for are the ones on their knees begging for forgiveness, leaving that course behind....not the ones shaking their fist at God because he doesn't condone their choices.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I hear whatcha saying.

Who are the "worthy" ones Jesus mentioned here? The ones who welcome his disciples and listen to what they have to say and act on it. Peace will come to that household, but if the message is rejected, the peace will return to the disciples. 'Shaking the dust from their feet' was a sign that their responsibility towards those 'unworthy' ones was finished. They had their opportunity and threw it away.

Many other religions value diversity. We respect others who disagree with our faith and some of us, depending on culture and religion, welcome those who are interested. If they do not believe what we believe, we do not "shake the dust from our feet" and tell them "they had the opportunity."

That is judging or defining someone else's view of what makes up their reality, their religion on what you believe. I have a very hard time swallowing the Abrahamic concept of Me vs. Them.

I do not think this is explainable. It's a fact and really can't be repeated no more because it's an insult to those faiths who value other people's path. In some faiths, that "Value other people's paths" is part of their religion.

Don't know what to say.

He loves the sinner but hates the sin. When he cleanses the earth of all sin, only those who separate themselves from sinful activity will live. Those who cling to the sins (actions) they know are wrong, (in God's eyes) will go down with the ship by their own choice.

How can you love a sinner who does not repent if he wants to continue what the bible defines as sin?

do not avenge yourselves; instead, leave room for His wrath. For it is written: Vengeance belongs to Me; I will repay, says the Lord. 2

That is the problem, right there. There is no justification for vengengefulness nor wrath. Being a Creator and being a human doesn't matter in regards to the sacredness of life.

If you break the laws of the land you expect the stated punishment, so if you break God's laws why expect something different. He made the laws in the first place. If we choose to practice what he says is wrong, who can we blame when the penalty is enforced?

That is another issue. Not everyone lives by Christian laws. So, it would be silly to assume this makes sense to non-christians and myself as it does not apply.

If we break the laws of the land, whichever society we are in is whatever punishment we receive. If I am in a foriegn country and do not have a Burka on, I could be arrested. If I am somewhere else and put my a thumbs up to mean OK, I have just insulted someone. In America, if you J-Walk in DC, you get a fine If you do so in parts of VA, you wont.

So, it depends. We can't use that example to justify that god is allowed to bring wrath on people who he feels deserves it. When a mother bores a child, once that child is born, that child has it's own personality, own spirit, and interest. That child is separate from his mother as well. Christians are separate from god in that respect.

Once we came out of god's "womb", that was it. The sacredness of life began. We are each different. We have the right to equality, to be diverse, to believe whatever is healthy for us to believe, and we have the right to say no.

Christianity does not like the word "No"

I know why, but I never understood why. I mean, really, understand it morally. Scripture, I know. But this is beyond quoting scripture.

Satan is a powerful enemy of God,

He shouldn't be. Love your enemy.

 

[Fool]

I dont like seeing lives taken:I dont even like seeing animals do it.

yet you are consuming something?



http://www.theguardian.com/environm...ligent-sentient-book-brilliant-green-internet

Just because I say it is wrong, doesnt mean abuse etc is loving. I dont know how the two go together as opposites.

because you're focus is solely on the murderer and not on the murdered. to be a murderer requires a victim.

[QUOTE="Carlita, post: 4602267, member: 55631]"How do you love your enemies by killing them for what you feel is justifable crimes for death?[/QUOTE]there is no call to kill enemies.
there is a call for restraining/restricting their free will. again we do not allow vicious animals to roam free at will, the same with vicious people.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

yet you are consuming something?



http://www.theguardian.com/environm...ligent-sentient-book-brilliant-green-internet

because you're focus is solely on the murderer and not on the murdered. to be a murderer requires a victim.

[QUOTE="Carlita, post: 4602267, member: 55631]"How do you love your enemies by killing them for what you feel is justifable crimes for death?

"I don't like" and "I believe it is wrong" is completely different than I need food to survive and I will not second guess defending myself if I needed to for that split second.

How do you combine the two?

I still don't like killing. Even if I were a victim my morals would not change. My action would depending on the situation and need for survival.

 

[Fool]

"I don't like" and "I believe it is wrong" is completely different than I need food to survive and I will not second guess defending myself if I needed to for that split second.

How do you combine the two?

I still don't like killing. Even if I were a victim my morals would not change. My action would depending on the situation and need for survival.

so loving your enemies, entails allowing them to do what ever they will?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

so loving your enemies, entails allowing them to do what ever they will?

Where did you get that. I don't like it. It's not my moral. If the situation arises and I have no choice, I'm not going to think "hey, it's against my moral Bad Guy. Stop"

Cant you tell the difference?

 

[Fool]

Where did you get that. I don't like it. It's not my moral. If the situation arises and I have no choice, I'm not going to think "hey, it's against my moral Bad Guy. Stop"

Cant you tell the difference?

this isn't personal. this is just questions that anyone could ask themselves. introspection


we all have a shadow; which is part of psyche that we sometimes hide from society. most morals are based in cultural ideas of purity. they, in fact, have no basis in truth.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

this isn't personal. this is just questions that anyone could ask themselves. introspection


we all have a shadow; which is part of psyche that we sometimes hide from society. most morals are based in cultural ideas of purity. they, in fact, have no basis in truth.

Religion is subjective. It's personal and each person has criteria to judge what they believe is truth or not.

What benefit can we get for prooving that their truth is false because it's not based on objectivity?

 

[Fool]

Religion is subjective. It's personal and each person has criteria to judge what they believe is truth or not.

What benefit can we get for prooving that their truth is false because it's not based on objectivity?

because the law and love are not respecters of persons. the law of one is love all as ONE, because tat tvam asi


if there is an absolute, then that would define the religions of all mankind and not vice versa.
it's like the jain parable of the ten blind men. they don't define the elephant, they just experience it from each's own space/time. that is what love is like. each experiences from his/her own space/time but that doesn't define love in it's infinite forms that transcend space/time.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

because the law and love are not respecters of persons. the law of one is love all as ONE, because tat tvam asi


if there is an absolute, then that would define the religions of all mankind and not vice versa.
it's like the jain parable of the ten blind men. they don't define the elephant, they just experience it from each's own space/time. that is what love is like. each experiences from his/her own space/time but that doesn't define love in it's infinite forms that transcend space/time.

I dont understand all you said, but I agree love all as one. I don't agree that we should make a one-party system to where religions have to be based on objective truth in order to see each other as one.

I rather have diversity in unity where I am respected for my differences as others theirs. I find people use religion for unhealthy means, but prooving them false to change that (as someone else said) doesn't help. People have their own motives.

It's a nice thought for everyone to be as One. However, the definition of it does not need to be objective for it to be healthy and respected given our diverse natures.

 

[Fool]

I dont understand all you said, but I agree love all as one. I don't agree that we should make a one-party system to where religions have to be based on objective truth in order to see each other as one.

I rather have diversity in unity where I am respected for my differences as others theirs. I find people use religion for unhealthy means, but prooving them false to change that (as someone else said) doesn't help. People have their own motives.

It's a nice thought for everyone to be as One. However, the definition of it does not need to be objective for it to be healthy and respected given our diverse natures.

the diversity is just a reflection of the culture in space/time. if more people would look at comparative religions, they would see that they share a lot of ideas in common but express them differently.


Rev 10:11
11 And he said unto me, Thou must prophesy again before many peoples, and nations, and tongues, and kings.

The golden rule is not unique to one culture vs another

Luke 6:31
And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

the diversity is just a reflection of the culture in space/time. if more people would look at comparative religions, they would see that they share a lot of ideas in common but express them differently.


Rev 10:11
11 And he said unto me, Thou must prophesy again before many peoples, and nations, and tongues, and kings.

The golden rule is not unique to one culture vs another

Luke 6:31
And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise.

They do. Why scripture?