Got bread and cheese?

Originally posted by sonship
I remember I would always look intensely into the faces of the Christians and ask myself - "Look at his face. Is he or she telling the truth? Do they REALLY believe these things that they are saying ?" I always found myself trying to figure out how these Christians could believe these matter about Jesus Christ. I would scrutinize their faces to see if they were telling me what they really believed or were trying to sell me merchandise.

I know what you mean, but I'm never convinced to believe by another person's earnest belief. Take the JWs here for a case in had example; is there anyone in this forum who would doubt that they earnestly believe what the they say they believe and to probably everyone observing it is obvious they are in error and don't display the working of spirit of Christ (I don't mean righteousness I mean discernment).

Because something is written or spoken does not make it truth. Because a million people earnestly believe that something doesn't make it truth. In the Christian context truth is always revealed when sought after, or indeed sometimes when not sought after.

Originally posted by FMF

Why is it OK for you to be judgemental about others, but not OK for you if others are judgemental about you?

This passage, Matthew 7:1-5, is a warning and a question with an instruction.

The warning is to be prepared to be judged with the standard you judge others. I think it is directed towards the disciples of Christ, in my opinion.

Some people say that the passage is a directive not to judge. But that is not exactly what it says. What it says is that the one judging should be aware that he will be examined with the same precision with which he examines another.

We Christians cannot help to have some judgments of people.
Not all need to be voiced.

But Matthew 7:1-4 is warning us that we will be examined by the standard that we use to examine another.

That is the warning part of the passage - "How you judge is how you will be judged."

The question and instruction part of the passage is that you should be strict with yourself first. Then you will have the ability to help another. You will see clearly because you have dealt with your own fault.

The principle of the kingdom of the heavens is always -Strict towards one's self and merciful towards others. This is contrary to typical human nature. We all tend to be strict towards the OTHER guy and merciful towards OURSELVES. The kingdom of the heavens that Christ preaches runs on the reverse procedure. You must be strict and exacting towards yourself. You must be accommodating and liberal towards the other.

Helps to this passage are a few others:

"Blessed are the merciful, for they shall be shown mercy." (Matt. 5:7)

"For judgment is without mercy to him who has shown no mercy; mercy triumphs over judgment." (James 2:13)

"Should you not also have had mercy on your fellow slave even as I had mercy on you ?" (Matt. 18:33)

Originally posted by sonship
This passage, Matthew 7:1-5, is a warning and a question.

The issue I have raised with Grampy Bobby, for all intents and purposes, is whether someone who is as judgemental about others as he is, is being hypocritical when he brandishes Matthew 7:1-5 at people who take exception to his "judgementalism".

Originally posted by FMF

The issue I have raised with Grampy Bobby, for all intents and purposes, is whether someone who is as judgemental about others as he is, is being hypocritical when he brandishes Matthew 7:1-5 at people who take exception to his "judgementalism".

I understand. I have no particular opinion on that.

I'm a bible verse freak. Clarification of the passage is my main concern.

And I would add a little bit more from my spiritual experience. There are two important angles for the kingdom people:

1.) To judge or correct someone is not easy. You have to be clean and pure in your motive, in your intention, in your thought. If you intend to correct someone you should be free from mixed motives.

To correct a person is something like surgery. If the doctor's hands are not clean, germs will get into the person he is trying to heal. So to voice judgment to correct another person has to be done with purity, love, cleanness of thought and motive.

2.) On the other hand, if you are a kingdom person and someone corrects you or judges you, do not spend too much time analyzing how pure he was. Do not spend too much time to figure out if that person was pure or impure.

Just take the criticism before God with an open heart to God. God will bless you.

It is not easy to rebuke or judge another for you must be pure as Jesus was pure, on one hand.

If you are rebuked do not over indulge in figuring out how pure the person who rebuked you was. Humbly listen and be open to God. God will bless you for your humility regardless.

That is how I try to live as a Christian.

Originally posted by sonship

[b]The issue I have raised with Grampy Bobby, for all intents and purposes, is whether someone who is as judgemental about others as he is, is being hypocritical when he brandishes Matthew 7:1-5 at people who take exception to his "judgementalism".

I understand. I have no particular opinion on that.

I'm a bible verse freak. Clar ...[text shortened]... God will bless you for your humility regardless.

That is how I try to live as a Christian.[/b]

Perhaps your lecture on what Matthew 7:1-5 means and when it can be used non-hypocritically ought to be directed at the Christian who used it a few posts ago and not at me. 🙂

Originally posted by sonship
If you are rebuked do not over indulge in figuring out how pure the person who rebuked you was. Humbly listen and be open to God. God will bless you for your humility regardless.

I am not a Christian, sonship. Comments and suggestions such as these should surely be addressed to Grampy Bobby who ostensibly wants God to "bless" him for his humility. 🙂

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby (OP)
Got bread and cheese?

Got bread and cheese? Good. Got a roof over your head and a warm bed? Good. Got a job and means of transportation? Good. Got friends? John 15:13, "Greater love has no one than this, that one lay down his life for his friends."

No Roman Centurion [in command of one hundred men] took Christ's Life. Christ dismissed His Spirit when the work of propitiating [satisfying] God's Justice and Righteousness [Divine Integrity] in order to make possible the reconciliation of depraved, helpless and hopeless mankind to God the Father was done. Christ's Unfailing Love was His motivation.

He loved us while we were at enmity with Him and Royal Family Member Status was still potential. You, personally, are the object of God's perfect plan? If there is a God who has revealed Himself and who has a perfect plan for every human being, doesn't it stand to reason that you owe God a hearing? Nothing is required except an open mind to what God says through His Word. We have nothing in this world to give except a hearing. It's your decision. The consequences are eternal....

"Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and you shall be saved." Acts 16:31 "And there is salvation in no one else; for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men, by which we must be saved." Acts 4:12 "But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name." John 1:12
John 15:13, "Greater love has no one than this, that one lay down his life for his friends."

Originally posted by FMF
Don't just cop out.

You've sought to 'pair yourself' with LemonJello in terms of your levels of open mindedness and spirit of "conciliation". You see yourself as his counterpart on your side of the Christian-atheist thing. [Which is not my view by the way].

So who would you 'pair' off stellspalfie, twhitehead, Proper Knob, SwissGambit and JS35 with from th ...[text shortened]... of their levels of open mindedness and spirit of "conciliation", according to your observations?

I've sought to pair myself?

Are you having a laugh or are you really that daft?
You asked me for the comparison.
I look at all of the posts in which LJ is the originator, or even his contributions, and I feel that he makes an honest attempt to do what I do: poke/prick/pry at the other's mindset.
Beyond that, there is no comparison.
He's far more disciplined (and skilled) intellectually, has a broader palette of learning, more concise measure of communicating and he even has a better score in chess, if all the rest wasn't enough!

I couldn't care less your view of it or any other comparisons, because I think such an endeavor is a colossal waste of time, in addition to being a failure to disprove what has been stated previously.

Other than that, it was a nice try, FMF.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
I couldn't care less your view of it or any other comparisons, because I think such an endeavor is a colossal waste of time, in addition to being a failure to disprove what has been stated previously.

Well if you couldn't care less then you are hardly going to be able prove what you have stated previously. It's you who wanted to compare Christians to atheists. Now when I ask you to dig a little deeper or substantiate what you're saying you are evasive and you suddenly "couldn't care less". You did, however, compare yourself to LemmonJello, which I think is off the mark. I would say your 'counterpart' among the atheists is googlefudge.

Originally posted by Proper Knob
Atheists read GB's posts?

When I read Grampy's postings and I see that it is not his own thinking, but pasted from another source, I usually stop reading. When we ask him questions then he quote other authorities, or verses from the bible, showing further, that he doesn't have any ideas of his own.

Originally posted by FMF
Well if you couldn't care less then you are hardly going to be able prove what you have stated previously. It's you who wanted to compare Christians to atheists. Now when I ask you to dig a little deeper or substantiate what you're saying you are evasive and you suddenly "couldn't care less". You did, however, compare yourself to LemmonJello, which I think is off the mark. I would say your 'counterpart' among the atheists is googlefudge.

It's you who wanted to compare Christians to atheists.
Please provide that quote.

Now when I ask you to dig a little deeper or substantiate what you're saying you are evasive and you suddenly "couldn't care less".
What I dismissed--- quite pointedly--- is your boneheaded method of counter-argument to the original claim.

You did, however, compare yourself to LemmonJello, which I think is off the mark.
At your insistence of having me find someone who was similar in posting here, LJ came to my mind.
Had you never asked, I would have never done so.

I would say your 'counterpart' among the atheists is googlefudge.
Hey!
Look at me over here not caring...

FMF: It's you who wanted to compare Christians to atheists.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
Please provide that quote.

Comparing Christians to atheists on this forum has been your entire thrust since page 1.

You started with "I really don't recall a single time over the last nine years wherein any atheist showed any type of conciliatory acceptance toward a Christian's message/delivery."

Then you said "The underlying point of my previous post was to point out that: • no matter the poster • no matter the topic • no matter the approach if it came from a Christian, it is simply not received by the atheist."

When asked if the same was true the other away around, you said "To a degree, yes. But I think it's far heavier weighted the other way."

You have been constantly comparing Christians to atheists since your first post on this thread.

Since I called on you to substantiate your comparison with reference to specific posters, you have been in a kind undignified retreat. 😀

Originally posted by FMF
You have been constantly comparing Christians to atheists since your first post on this thread.

What's wrong with this?

"I think this and you don't" is comparing. What's the harm?

Originally posted by FMF
Comparing Christians to atheists on this forum has been your entire thrust since page 1.

You started with [b]"I really don't recall a single time over the last nine years wherein any atheist showed any type of conciliatory acceptance toward a Christian's message/delivery."

Then you said "The underlying point of my previous post was to point out that ...[text shortened]... r comparison with reference to specific posters, you have been in a kind undignified retreat. 😀

Comparing Christians to atheists on this forum has been your entire thrust since page 1.
And you rightfully pointed out the one person who has been the exception to the rule, JS357.

You have been constantly comparing Christians to atheists since your first post on this thread.
Well, you provided the opening post, but beyond that you haven't shown this to be the case.

Since I called on you to substantiate your comparison with reference to specific posters, you have been in a kind undignified retreat. 😀
I don't think you get how this works.
I made a claim for which you provided ONE person who could fairly objectively be considered an exception to the stated rule.
The only way you can accurately refute the claim would be to give counter-examples of atheists doing the opposite of what I claim, i.e., behaving in a conciliatory manner toward the Christian message/messenger.
This you have (thus far, at least) failed to do.

Instead, you come up with a trading card-type scheme, ostensibly in an effort to... well, quite frankly, I'm really not sure what you expected it to prove!

My claim is readily substantiated beyond mere personal testimony.
Do your own research: pull out your list of good/bad guys and find a small sample group of posts originating from each--- say, five.
Posts must be an intentional effort to persuade the opposing viewpoint.
Next, record the tone from the first three opposing posters, as well as the same from the first three agreeing posters.
Finally, analyze the information and compare the analysis to my original claim.

Originally posted by FabianFnas
What's wrong with this?

"I think this and you don't" is comparing. What's the harm?

Nothing's wrong with it. There is no harm in it. But FreakyKBH seems to be denying that's that he's been doing it.