On Sep 26, 7:33 pm, Joe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sep 25, 6:33 pm, Deidzoeb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > > > > 1. Love God (who is Love).
> > > > > 2. Love those around you just as you love yourself.
>
> > > > > Please clearly define "absurd" and "unattainable."
>
> > > > We probably agree on what those words mean, but more importantly, we
> > > > disagree on what specific bits of a moral system would be
> > > > unattainable. (I'm not even going to bother arguing what's absurd
> > > > because it's obviously a personal judgment call.)
>
> > > > The most immediate bit I can think of is the Christian admonition
> > > > against lusting or coveting. Not just that we must refrain from acting
> > > > on bad thoughts that come to us, but holding us guilty for having bad
> > > > thoughts in the first place, even if we don't act on them.
>
> > > That is your own misunderstanding. The Church doesn't teach any such
> > > thing.
>
> > It's not worth trying to reach an agreement with you on how we should
> > understand the term "covet", since your explanation of any given term
> > seems to depend on which meaning would best support your position.
>
> > However, given the common meanings and usage of "covet", and the
> > commandment "Thou shalt not covet", I don't see how else to interpret
> > it.
>
> Would you like to understand, or are you just looking for something to
> mock? I am not assuming you want to understand any of this, but I do,
> and I can help you, if you like.
I think I do understand. Just because we disagree doesn't mean that
you know the truth, that your opinion = THE TRUTH.
I would like to discuss and debate. Maybe by discussing the topic, I
will begin to understand it differently, or understand your
perspective. But it's pretty arrogant to always assume you understand,
that all who disagree are failing to understand or "don't want to
understand."
> But you have to change first and respect me. I doubt you can do
> that. Sorry, that is my honest assessment of your track record.
I don't need to assume the position of student, or treat you like a
master or pretend you are capable of handing down The Truth to me, in
order to understand this topic, or to show that I want to understand,
or to show you proper "respect".
> Respect in this case would be a simple asking me to explain, without
> sarcasm, without venom. Give it a shot!
I'm here to discuss and debate, the kind of thing that two equals do,
not to grovel before a superior in the hopes that he will grace me
with his teachings. Pretending that you have The Truth and that I
ought to act like a student is one of the ways that you consistently
show inadequate respect for me.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "A
Civil Religious Debate" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/a-civil-religious-debate?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
