18 Oct 08
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneYou reject this imperative. I pointed out ways in which you willingly deviate from giving the same moral consideration to the welfare of animals that Jesus would, your excuse being simple: you're not Jesus -- you're not perfect.
Matthew 5:48
"Therefore you are to be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect."
Anyone willing to share their thoughts on this verse?
I'm thinking this could be interesting.
18 Oct 08
1 edit
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesI'm thinking you have me confused with someone else.
You reject this imperative. I pointed out ways in which you willingly deviate from giving the same moral consideration to the welfare of animals that Jesus would, your excuse being simple: you're not Jesus -- you're not perfect.
Any thoughts on the verse itself?
18 Oct 08
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneThis verse is taken out of context.
Matthew 5:48
"Therefore you are to be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect."
Anyone willing to share their thoughts on this verse?
I'm thinking this could be interesting.
Read a few verses before too, and the meaning of this verse will be chrystal clear.
18 Oct 08
1 edit
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneMaybe Jesus was a perfectionist? I doubt this though. I think he was saying that we should strive for perfection and try and be like his Father.
Matthew 5:48
"Therefore you are to be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect."
Anyone willing to share their thoughts on this verse?
I'm thinking this could be interesting.
Striving for perfection is entirely consistent with the idea that perfection may or may not be reached in this lifetime. Just as any sportsman will strive for perfection. A racing driver will strive to win every race , a footballer will strive to win every game. However, they also recognise the likelihood that they might well not achieve perfection itself.
Should this stop them from trying ? Of course not , because on occasions it is achievable. Should they view anything less than perfection as not acceptable? Of course not , because it's the striving that's important and to beat oneself up for less than perfection is counterproductive.
This is what I think he was saying. That we should strive for perfection. Nothing wrong with that.However , Jesus later makes provision for our failings and demonstrates the unconditional acceptance of God.
Now , I fully anticipate that you will interpret this differently to say that he meant that anything less than perfection is unacceptable. That's fine , you are entitled to think so. But it's not a well thought out position because it doesn't take account of how God views our motivations and efforts. It's clear in my mind that the only thing that God can ever ask for is 100% striving for perfection. That effort may or may not translate into perfection itself but God has legislated for that anyway.
(===Mind you , since you don't actually believe in God anyway it's all academic. For you a perfectly holy God is not on the table and doesn't exist so you probably have little idea of how anyone could be as perfect as a non-existent God. Nevertheless you will probably do quite a good of making out you are an expert on Jesus's teachings anyway even when you don't adhere to his basic core teaching.=== )
18 Oct 08
1 edit
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneSo I do. Please forgive me and allow me to revise my response.
I'm thinking you have me confused with someone else.
PinkFloyd rejects this imperative. I pointed out ways in which he willingly deviates from giving the same moral consideration to the welfare of animals that Jesus would, his excuse being simple: he's not Jesus -- he's not perfect.
Also, remind if you will, was it you or he who said that his belief system has remained unchanged since he was a toddler? This reminder will help me to better direct my scorn in future discussions.
18 Oct 08
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneI can quote my Swedish bible translated 2000 from the oldest sources. Can anyone quote a few verses before that so we're all talking about the same thing.
It's been my experience that it's pretty widely open to interpretation.
What's your interpretation?
Once quoted, the interpretation is obvious.
18 Oct 08
1 edit
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneI think we at least need enough context to know whether he was talking about this life or the after life. If he was talking about this life, I would be interested if anyone can give evidence of the existence of one single perfect person. Though the question then becomes what is perfect and who gets to judge?
Matthew 5:48
"Therefore you are to be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect."
Anyone willing to share their thoughts on this verse?
I'm thinking this could be interesting.
18 Oct 08
Originally posted by FabianFnasHere's from Matthew 5:38-48 in the American Standard Version:
I can quote my Swedish bible translated 2000 from the oldest sources. Can anyone quote a few verses before that so we're all talking about the same thing.
Once quoted, the interpretation is obvious.
38 Ye have heard that it was said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:
39 but I say unto you, resist not him that is evil: but whosoever smiteth thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.
40 And if any man would go to law with thee, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also.
41 And whosoever shall compel thee to go one mile, go with him two.
42 Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away.
43 Ye have heard that it was said, Thou shalt love thy neighbor, and hate thine enemy:
44 but I say unto you, love your enemies, and pray for them that persecute you;
45 that ye may be sons of your Father who is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sendeth rain on the just and the unjust.
46 For if ye love them that love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same?
47 And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the Gentiles the same?
48 Ye therefore shall be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.
What is your "obvious" interpretation?
18 Oct 08
Originally posted by knightmeisterSince you insist that only faith and grace matter, why did Jesus waste so much time instructing people how they should act in relationship to their fellow man? Shouldn't he just have been telling them "Accept that I am your Lord and Savior and you shall be saved?" Why this rigmarole about giving up your perfectly good cloak to some schmuck?
Maybe Jesus was a perfectionist? I doubt this though. I think he was saying that we should strive for perfection and try and be like his Father.
Striving for perfection is entirely consistent with the idea that perfection may or may not be reached in this lifetime. Just as any sportsman will strive for perfection. A racing driver will strive to win ...[text shortened]... Jesus's teachings anyway even when you don't adhere to his basic core teaching.=== )
18 Oct 08
Originally posted by no1marauderImagine you do what Christ says to do and give up your coat to some schmuck who slaps you and you turn the other cheek, so he slaps you again. And on judgment day the same schmuck is in the kingdom becuase he is born again Christian... and you who tried to be perfect is left out. The OSAS gang sure are crazy.
Since you insist that only faith and grace matter, why did Jesus waste so much time instructing people how they should act in relationship to their fellow man? Shouldn't he just have been telling them "Accept that I am your Lord and Savior and you shall be saved?" Why this rigmarole about giving up your perfectly good cloak to some schmuck?