Re: 'I" wrote..

Mordecai wrote:

> lynx wrote:
>
>> Mordecai wrote:
>>
>>> Now there was a saying in Judaism - which was ...
>>> "That which is hateful unto thee do not to your neighbour."
>>> Note the key is your own actions  - avoid doing anything which YOU find
>>> distasteful
>>>
>>> The saying in christianity is the same - but allows people to misunderstand
>>> namely "do unto other as you desire them to do to you."
>>> And the misuse of this saying has been to try to force onto others what
>>> they themselves do.
>>> In actual fact - the concept of self discipline is the same.
>>>
>> Yes. However the Jewish version seems to have a negative aspect to it,
>> while the christian one a positive.
>>
>
> Perhaps - but tell me - if you find something distasteful - you would not have
> anyone do this to you.
> So that the positive commands of christianity must also INCLUDE the negative
> commands of Judaism.
>

correct. However the Jewish version does seem to lack the positive
aspect so it would seem, especially in view of this remark, that the
christian version is more comprehensive.

> On one level, your positive commands might be useful but the problem is the
> hypocrites.
> These people actually have a blind spot - their own sin.
> They react to some issue - say "left handed red heads" whom they think
are evil.
> And in their fear of left handed red heads - they think to remove the threat of
> left handed red heads ...
> And they preach of the evil of left handed red heads ...
>
> And do unto others like they would also be treated.
>
> JC comes along and says to these people "Hypocrites ... beam ...
splinter."
> So if you have an issue - such as left handed red heads ...then this positive
> command makes you into a hypocrite.
>

That's just a silly argument. You're saying that people who persecute
left handed red-heads, would want to be persecuted by them?? The maxim
is 'do unto others as you would have them do unto you', not 'do unto
others as you are treated by them'.

btw.. Julia isn't left handed is she? :)

> OTOH consider someone who loves ...
> Now if you love - this whole command is useless .. negative or positive. You act
> from love and this does not matter at all.
> There does not seem to me to be anything to be gained by a positive command.
>

Disagree. A positive command is always better since it encourages
action. Is it better to say to a child.. "don't climb on the furniture.
sit still and don't move" or "don't climb on the furniture. go outside
an play"

> Except  in the proposed future when the temporary covenant of JC becomes the
> permanent covenant of JC
> (at the time of the coming of the covenant of Jeremiah ...)
> At that time we have a supposed modification of the world so that he who takes
> into captivity, to captivity will go.
> IOW what you do to others will happen to you in return ...
> but that is then, this is now.
>
> I honestly cannot find much use for the positive command myself.
> It creates errors, hypocrisy - has nothing worth seeking from it ... and even as
> a (possible) prelude to the future, I cannot find anything good in this.
>
> I think I will stick to the negative command.
> Only because it seems to me that the negative command is more powerful and more
> useful.
>

Whatever turns you on.

>
> --
> Mordecai!
>
> When words and actions disagree, believe actions.
> When rhetoric and reality disagree, either rhetoric is wrong or reality is wrong,
> and reality is Never wrong.
>
>
>
[ Auf dieses Posting antworten ]