do christians enter god's domain by judging others?..Do christians have right to pass judgment about what is right and what is wrong or is it domain of god?..If humans start declaring what is right or wrong ..who is sinner and who is not,is human committing bigger sin by becoming judge themselves?
to answer your question "why christians judge others?" it's simple - because they are human. all people make judgements whether they are christian, muslim, hindu, atheist whatever. the judgements they make may be influenced by their beliefs, but they all make judgements.
you have a point out here...but christians and muslims have judgment day concept...hindus have different concept which does include judgment but it has balance sheet sort of concept and depending on balance sheet one gets rebirth or moksh or what ever...atheist judging others is also a reality but atheist never claim that there is god who would judge people...Christians judging others is violation of their faith or is it not?..that is what my question is upon?..because if god is judge ,do humans have right to judge?
there is a difference between being a discerning person, and just off-judging a person. You need to learn the differences, and not just write off all Christians as what you think.
Being mad at or affronted by religion is one thing, being consumed by emotion is totally different. what you do here is no different than the extreme christians writing off others. You both are wrong.
Grabbing an umbrella and heading out the door when no clouds are directly overhead but around, is being prudent, protecting yourself in case, not blowing off all the TV weathermen as not knowing anything!
slow down and think a bit first. learn to be still
Everyone in this world judges everyone, it's just that Christians are on the spotlight for being a major religion.
I don't believe in religion since it was created by man anyways, yes yes based on a scripture but still I believe to control the masses.
Not everyone claims to be in the "only correct" religion.
Not every religion says you are going to hell if you are not of the same religion.
Not every religion says that if you are of another religion that you need to be saved.
Not everyone says that if you are of another religion you don't know and are not of God.
Islam does, I'm sure other religions do as well.
Islam does say if you don't kill infidels then you are condemned
Islam does as well
I only used Islam because it is another major religion. All major religions do the same.
What IS your religion, Deborah?
You know, the one (per your posts the other day about sex in heaven) that says (from what I gathered from your words) that you and your husband will get to enjoy copulation (and perhaps even procreation) in the afterlife, while OTHERS will not.
And don't forget that you said only SOME believers will go to heaven, while the others will not get to enter heaven even if they're saved. That's what your posts said! I'm just curious, because indeed that religion of yours is very judgemental.
No, I posted scripture from the KJV.
I said new earth. Heaven is for a select few.
You continue to state stuff I did not say.
It was Yahshua and your Bible that teaches no divorce.
I am, as I have said many times, Jewish.
Ancient Jewish Mysticism.
My husband and I believe in all the words of Yahshua.
By Yashua you mean Jesus, correct?
Well, I'm sorry, but Jesus wasn't an ancient Jewish mystic.
So why would you follow a religion like mysticism and yet claim to follow Jesus?
Makes no sense.
And as far as the KJV or any Christian teachings, Jesus is God, and is no respecter of persons (in other words, He doesn't play favorites) so your interpretation of the KJV or any correct Bible is....erroneous.
I can tell, you don't know the meaning of mystic.
The mystics follow the teachings of Yahshua.
Yahshua was a mystic, so was Moses.
Yahshua's name was Yahshua. Only Western Christians call him Jesus.
Yahshua nor Jesus was God.
You err, because you do not know the word of God.
a person who seeks by contemplation and self-surrender to obtain unity with or absorption into God or the absolute, or who believes in the spiritual apprehension of truths that are beyond the intellect.
Of course He was! And is.
Apparently you haven't read the book of John, even; much less your dissing of the Apostle Paul!
It's useless to continue to argue with someone who thinks Moses (and Jesus to boot!) can rightly be called "mystics".
Seek for truth with all your heart and you will find it.
I used to be in the Christian religion until I was led out.
I was led out when I sought truth and righteousness
Of course I was never so blind that I thought Yahshua was God.
Both God and he said he was God's son. He never claimed to be God.
This is one of those interesting trick questions. judgment in and of itself is not wrong. We all make judgment calls every day. We judge what shows to watch what food to eat and who we want to be friends with.
Within the confines of your question (i.e. Christian judgment) The answer Jesus gave is the best ... ultimately, God will judge all, and all of us will be judged by the criteria upon which we judge others. If we are judging for the purpose of helping (taking the sawdust out of our neighbor's eye) we should first make sure we can see clearly (take the plank out of our own.)
The purpose of this is to help save the eye, not to collect sawdust.
May the Lord forgive me when I become proud of my sawdust collection.
I find that all people judge others. Many like to especially judge christians if you notice, so it makes the question a bit ironic.
Jesus had words for those that judged too harshly or wrongly. Remember the woman he helped to avoid getting stoned? The religious leaders of that day all left with bowed heads, because Jesus said, "He who is without sin, cast the first stone."
The woman at the well that was also an adulteress, he encouraged her, and didn't condemn her. He encouraged her to change, but didn't hold her in contempt or judge. These are the teachings of the scriptures that Christians follow. Many try to do that.
I agree with the first answer, that all are human, and all judge.
No I dont believe christians should judge anyone, God call us to save the lost, if you judge you should start with yourself, remember the speck in the eye.
it is the proper place of christians to ascertain what people are doing. Jesus said "by their fruits ye shall know them". Is this not a call for assessment?
Agreed that people should not dictate what is right and wrong, this very fact is why God wrote a book, his word, and this is why many Christians hold this book in such high esteem, because in it are all the instructions for how to assess every situation and thereby when we adhere to the word, we will not be impugning our own judgment but the judgment of Jesus Christ. When we seek Gods attitude toward an issue and we adopt that attitude we are in line with the word of God. Now for those that earnestly enjoy quoting killing and death scriptures out of context i would like to add, this attitude i am referring of adhering to is New testament, guided by love not judgment because as i said that would be judging in a judicial sense. Under jesus christ the christian is to love. Judgment is God the fathers job.
When speaking of judging others.. this is meant in the judicial sense, as in a court of law, as in passing a sentence.. if i say... you are committing adultery that is a fine assessment if it is true but if i add to that you are committing adultery and are going to hell... then i have added a sentence which if the person repents and turns to the lord and stops this evil activity, the sentence will not come to pass, nonetheless i have entered into a judicial judgment and not the pure assessment of right and wrong.
The speck in eye.. a call to watch our own walk. It is an awful place to assess evil people who do the same things as you are doing. This is hypocrisy and to be avoided at all cost but not a call to not ever assess right and wrong.
Let me get this straight. God wrote a divine book, with all the answers, but the first part(OT) doesn't count?
The OT was a previous dispensation, that is why it is called OLD or previous. the NEW testament or covenant is NEW. This is OUR dispensation.
1 Corinthians 10:11 Now all these things happened unto them (Israel) for ensamples: and they are written for OUR admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come.
If i were to abolish the old testament i would not be adhering to the word of God and that if you were to familiarize yourself with my hubbery, you would have realized, i am a staunch lover of the OT.
Sorry i did not cover ALL the basics in my already lengthy post.
hope this corrects my oversight.
Yahshua said the law was not abolished. You follow Paul's lawless teachings.
God said all his covenants are everlasting.
Because man separated scripture and called one old and the other new, means nothing.
You said in another thread that you understand the bible.
Paul taught this to lead people away from Yahshua and the Apostles teachings. It is so obvious even in scripture
Warning people is often mistakenly (or intentionally too) labeled as unBiblical judging.
The New Testament is about the grace of God, but it also contains many warnings, some of them even about specific behaviors; and those warnings tell of the punishment for those behaviors! While it leaves the final judgement and meting-out of punishment to God, it's still the responsibility and the right of Christians to warn people about the wages of sin; that's what God commissions us to do after we're saved. If that is adversely judged by the rebellious as "judging", then so be it.
Nice double-speak. Is that like tough love?
We're just warning you that your actions will result in your being cast into a lake of fire, but we're certainly not judging you. God may be judging you using our words to convey his wisdom and love, but WE are not judging.
Hey, I didn't make the rules. God did. You'll hafta take that up with Him...
There is another option...Don't play the Game. I used to be a fan of wrestling and the problem's started when I discovered it's also fake. Sorry to burst another bubble for some. That simply means that as an atheist I expect the same rights you do if you are a football fan. How would you like it if I stopped you on the streets and fined you $25 dollars for illegal movement. Perhaps you might do the individual the courtesy of asking if we want to hear your god's supposed judgement. You seem to forget that we can find the same source of information you are basing your god's judgement on, in any cheap motel's nightstand. You had the right to discover god in your own way and you pretend others don't have the same right or assume they haven't already made a personal decision about it. Why do you have the right to decide on your own, and not I?
Personally, I don't go knocking on strangers's doors preaching to them. Nor shouting it on the streets. But if I wanted to, I would!
I don't understand exactly your meaning here. Are you accusing me personally of invading your rights by talking about God? I haven't written you personally or contacted you personally; this is a site open to all members.
Or are you just defensive about Christians in general spreading the Word?
By the way, do the Gideons still put Bibles in those "cheap motels'" nightstands? It's been a while since I stayed in a motel.....but I'm glad the Word is still being offered free-of-charge to anyone who wants to read it....
Yes, next to the complimentary condoms.
Yes, Brenda, the Gideons do still put Bibles in motels. I'm in one almost every weeknight. And do you know, some people still steal them.
My someone is paraniod today aren't they, lol. Seriously I was simply making a statement and offering another side to the discussion. As to christians spreading the word, I have to wonder why christians have the right to post any message, anywhere they choose and also have the right to force a company to remove any atheist billboard they disagree with. My point was that most atheists have not made their decision to become one on a whim. Most atheists, as has been shown by a religious backed survey, know more about your religion that most of your religion's own followers. I don't understand the thought process that forces you to assume that an atheist is simply lacking exposure to the words and beliefs you cling to. That is an assumption of mine based upon the defensiveness of you reply.
I was simply trying to find out if all christians made the assumption that since I an an atheist, I obviously need to be preached to in order to show me the error of my ways. I was also pointing out the way christians get riled up when another group publically proclaims their beliefs and the hypocrisy that allows them to believe they and only they have the right to share their beliefs. ie ffrf billboards and bus signs.I have read some of your bible and found it to be lacking truth and reality on almost every page. What makes you think that repeating this to me is going to change anything?
You are right that this is a public site and when you post a comment here it's open to response. If you have the right to spread your version of the world, I have the right to disagree. I on the other hand don't have the right to spread my beliefs now do I? You have the right to force my children to listen to your beliefs in school. I have the right to let you decide how my child is raised. I prefer to let my children make up their own mind once they are old enough to make an informed decision on their own. You feel you have the right to try and force your beliefs onto them at an age when they are ill equipped to make inteligent decisions on their own. I think we have a difference of opinion about who has the right to raise my children, don't you?
Yeah, but come on, Stump, you gotta admit, the New Testement has some really good guidelines to live by.
I wont disagree with that statement. Too bad so few christians feel they need to follow them, IMO. They seem to feel that they have the right to ignore what they choose to and also have the right make sure I follow all of them. The main problem I have with christianity is the lack of christians in it.
"I used to be a fan of wrestling and the problem's started when I discovered it's also fake."
You weren't interested enough to then go and find out about real wrestling? Too bad, you're missing out on something great.
Brenda - with respect, I think Christians are commissioned to spread the word of God, not to warn people of the wages of sin.
That IS the word of God; always has been.
Just because modern "Christianity" wants to leave that part out, isn't my problem, it's theirs.
Why do you like to leave out that part, then, about remarried people living in sin?
Ah, here we go again.
I don't leave that out.
But it's covered under the Blood of Christ. I am no longer living in adulterous sin, no matter how much you continue to accuse me of it.
Anyone who engages in the homosexual lifestyle has the same opportunity as I did or as anyone else does, to REPENT of your sins, stop committing the sin, and thereby get forgiveness for it.
You either don't understand, or else are deliberately clinging to your accusation of me in order to avoid facing your own dilemma, livelonger. I tell you the Truth. It's up to you to either consider it, or else to stay in your dilemma. Legalizing "gay marriage" will not sanction your lifestyle in God's eyes, no matter how much you and other proponents of that activism wish it would.
If you ask for forgiveness and keep on sinning, it's sin.
Atonement means to cover and it does not mean immunity
To cover means, acting as though it didn't happen, not erased.
It can be uncovered if the sin keeps occurring.
Fornication gives the right for divorce but if a spouse divorced his wife for another reason, then it is adultery pure and simple.
But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causes her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced commits adultery
I know, close your eyes and turn your head.
my interpretaton of that is..to remain married to a divorced woman is continuing to sin. perhaps I got it all wrong?
So I take it you have left your second marriage and returned to your first husband?
Ohma, a man and a woman in a traditional marriage is not fundamentally wrong.
Gay activity is.
So your attempt at judging me is off-base from the start.
If you're caring about your fellow man (or woman) stop focusing on my past sins and go help your fellow man resolve his current dilemma, why dontcha?!
I have no dilemma current or otherwise.
I was merely asking for clarification on the issue of what would be considered acceptable under the "stop committing the sin" statement in your post.
Several things in your post stuck out to me.
First, I guess you don't have an issue with repentant gay Christians, then. I hope you are clearer in the future and heap your condemnations on non-Christians (i.e those not drenched in Jesus's blood, or whatever gory metaphor you like to use), since gay Christians are exactly in the same boat as you are with respect to Christian theology. That you follow an English divorce cult that has some Christian elements does not mean that King James or King Henry VIII are the ultimate arbiter of the word of Christianity.
According to Christianity, you are continuing to commit the sin of adultery by staying with your second husband. As several have pointed out, of that there is no doubt. This means you are an unrepentant sinner. The fact that you think all those explicit condemnations of divorce by Christ don't count because you think you've repented enough is further proof that you're not really a Christian, but a follower of a "Christiany" English divorce cult.
Second, I am not Christian (much less a worshipper of King James and King Henry VIII of England) so I couldn't possibly care less what you think about how your interpretation of Christianity views me. I happen to think you're wrong on so many different levels. That you think I'm headed straight to hell is kind of amusing to me.
Third, same-sex marriage under the law is all about equality under the law, not an attempt to have your English divorce cult's God's approval. This struggle for equality is under secular law, not under Christianity's. If it were the latter, you would still be married to your first husband, right?
I don't have a problem with repentant non-practicing-ex-gay Christians, even ones who struggle with their consciences. Because all humans struggle with temptation of one sort or another.
What I have a problem with is people who want Americans to sanction in our Laws the gay lifestyle, who want to call what God has already called wrong, right.
I will say this---
Under your views of Christ's forgiveness, no one would be able to get forgiveness.
Under the Biblical view of Christ's forgiveness, anyone can get forgiveness.
Your view offers no hope for redemption at all.
And that's what Christ came to offer us all----redemption.
He stands at the door and knocks. Not only that, but He promises to help each of us with our temptations and to lift us up lest we fall, when we give our hearts to Him and trust in Him. Will you consider His offer, or will you continue to ignore Him?
Here you go again.
They're not my views.
Either you read the Bible literally or you do not.
You seem to read it literally sometimes (when the condemnations don't pertain to your sins) and very liberally at other times (when they do pertain to your ongoing, unrepentant sins).
You lack consistency, and this lack of consistency is clearly condemned by Jesus in Matthew 7:1-5. Since you claim to be a Christian, why don't you reread that message and internalize it.
As for the legal sanction of gay marriage: your sentiments will be consistent with your stated views when you call for the banning of divorce, since your God clearly calls that wrong. You could take the first step of righting that wrong and return to your first husband, as Jesus commands you to do. Are you trying to defy him? Do you really prefer to worship a couple of dead English kings over Jesus Christ?
You don't have to worry about my soul. What you should be doing is worrying about your own.
I don't think she has one, that's why she worries about yours. Christian love never gets old.
I consider my own, yes. But I don't "worry" about it. Because I know my heart is with the Lord, and my soul is His.
You must not be able to even concieve of how gracious He is.
All He asks for is your Love, and a measure of obedience, for He is God after all.
That's not too much to ask anyone. Yet you won't even entertain the idea of it? He is trustworthy. I wish you would re-consider.....
That's exactly what gay Christians say, Brenda. They're no more damned than you are.
Hmm....if you've been told by practicing-gay "Christians" that all is hunky-dory with living like that, then you've been deceived.
However, there are some ex-gays who are Christians. There's one on this site who tried to witness to people. Any chance you remember her? Hint---she got blasted too, by the liberals. Imagine that.
And if the homosexual christian know their heart is with the lord, what gives you the right to disagree and persacute them for claiming the same thing you do?
God didn't call it wrong.
The small Jewish laws called it unclean
But they called many things unclean. A woman that her time of month was called unclean...............
And False Apostle Paul and his rules are the ones you seem to follow.
The Jewish Law, and Apostle Paul, and Jude, and so on and so forth.
I haven't seen you explain yet exactly what it is you have against Paul...
Read my 3 hubs on him.
He hated Yahshua and taught garbage on purpose to the Gentiles.
Have you read what he wrote?
Please direct me to where this is taught in Jude
Some people get confused when they read his writings, but he does challenge our thinking. It's a shame that so many can't understand his intent though. Could be because he openly states what he was like as a sinner, and then declares himself a follower of Christ after meeting Him, becoming converted. Amazing story of redemption there! Yep, I think that's a lot of the controversy (which he even explains in his writings)----some people just continue to call what God has cleansed, unclean. Yet even Peter's writings uphold Paul's testimony. Paul's conversion from Saul to Paul, his repentance and forgiveness, were a matter of contention amongst those who wanted to hold Paul's past against him. Imagine that!
God cleaned what?
I understand Paul clearly. I am not easily confused.
Paul said it was OK to lie as long as it was to God's glory.
He said if anyone in their church committed fornication to kill his body so his soul would be saved.
He never actually met Yahshua.
He made himself an apostle and did not meet the criteria to be one as in Acts.
There were only twelve Apostles appointed.
In particular, one special point here---yes, Paul met Jesus. Not in the physical, but nevertheless, and even more gloriously, if that's possible.
Your other points I don't really have time to clear up right now. You might try re-reading Paul's writings, because you're mistaken about them...
Read my hub, I understand him perfectly.
An Apostle had to be someone who was with Yahshua from the time of the baptism, until he was killed and taken from them.
Paul was none of those things.
God used Paul to test people in his word. The same way He used Judas to fulfill a prophecy.
Paul was the enemy who sowed tares while men slept.
how can we be sure Paul wasn't delusional ie had a mental illness?
"I (Paul) verily thought with myself, that I ought to do many things contrary to the name of Jesus of Nazareth."
And he did
Yes he did, before his conversion.
And probably was tempted and/or did and had to repent (as we all are) even after his conversion.
What's your point?
My point is simply that he did exactly what he thought to do.
He was a murderer, hated Yahshua and the Apostles. What better way to keep people from worshiping God: Pretend you are a man of God and lead them astray. Infiltration. He changed his name and crept in.
It was prophesied in Numbers 22-30
All of his followers realized he was not of God, and walked away from him.
Numbers 22:30 And the ass said unto Balaam, Am not I thine ass, upon which thou hast ridden ever since I was thine unto this day? was I ever wont to do so unto thee? And he said, Nay.
Acts 9:11 And the Lord said unto him (Ananias), Arise, and go into the street which is called Straight, and enquire in the house of Judas for one called SAUL, of TARSUS: for, behold, he PRAYETH,
Acts 9:17 And Ananias went his way, and entered into the house; and putting his hands on him said, BROTHER SAUL, the LORD, EVEN JESUS, that appeared unto thee in the way as thou camest, HATH SENT ME, that thou mightest RECEIVE THY SIGHT, and BE FILLED WITH THE HOLY GHOST.
If you are now going to say LUKE was not of Jesus you will have to cite references.
[b] Paul is talking of himself prior to his conversion.
Let me see if i can pull this into context for you.
Paul is talking before king agrippa:
Acts 26:5 Which knew me from the beginning, if they would testify, that after the most straitest sect of our religion i LIVED A PHARISEE.
Acts 26:9 I verily thought with myself, that I ought to do many things contrary to the name of Jesus of Nazareth.
Acts 26:10 WHICH THING I ALSO DID in Jerusalem: and many of the saints did I shut up in prison, having received authority from the chief priests; and when they were put to death, I gave my voice against them.
Acts 26:11 And I punished them oft in every synagogue, and compelled them to blaspheme; and being exceedingly mad against them, I persecuted them even unto strange cities.
Paul is talking of his time BEFORE his conversion and apostleship by Jesus Christ.
I think you need a lesson in context quickly.
WHICH THING I ALSO DID points back to the previous verse.
You don't have to explain
I know what you think it says.
There was, is and can ever be just 12 Apostles.
The definition of an Apostle is in Acts.
Paul was a ravenous wolf in sheep's clothing.
He is the false apostle spoken of in Rev., where the Ephesians are uplifted for rejecting.
I know what I have been shown.
But even though Yahshua taught no divorce, it's OK for you.
And Yahshua is the one you say you follow.
Never heard him say anything about gay people.
I wonder.....would Jesus have had to come right out and say it's wrong to murder in order for people to know it's wrong to murder? Some people just don't use their common sense when they want to rebel against God's word.
Matthew 19:18. Jesus explicitly condemns murder...and adultery (i.e. remarriage).
What dead English king that you worship says that you can't be gay and Christian?
What would Jesus say about someone bearing false witness (i.e. putting the words of dead English kings in his mouth)?
Actually her husband was supposed to kill her as soon as he found out he had married a non-virgin. See how closely christians obey the word of god they feel is exactly what our laws and country should be based on. Brenda, do you go to Red Lobster for dinner? If so you are probably going to hell for the oysters you had or the lobster. If you grew up in the 70's, you are definately going to hell for that polyester pants suit you wore. Why do you want to force me to obey the rules that you pick and choose to obey? Hey I am living my life according to the bible. By making that statement I am now free to pick and choose which laws I obey. I choose to ignore them all. What makes me any different than you? What makes you right and me wrong?
I had lamb chops for dinner, whewI'm covered.
So Jesus gives you the right to ignore the abominations you choose to. Why don't other christians have the same right in regards to the abominations they disagree with. Oh Yea that's right. You have decided they aren't truly christian haven't you?
Speak not evil one of another, brethren. He that speaketh evil of his brother, and judgeth his brother, speaketh evil of the law, and judgeth the law: but if thou judge the law, thou art not a doer of the law, but a judge.
There is one lawgiver, who is able to save and to destroy: who art thou that judgest another?
christians are people and people judge, right or wrong, it happens.
The very foundation of Christianity begins with themselves standing over the world so as to Judge.
Take Note of the WAY of winning souls. IT begins with declaring all a sinner and doomed to death. unless he repents and all the yaaarddiddoo we all accustomed with.
This is a sure case of one man standing in judgement. Because to them only Christians knows good and evil.
The book which they have made for themselves, which is merely of men writings ( who are absent or dead) has giving them all the authority needed to condemn all those who are alive...
Now there is much Truth in their words ..mind you but.. with a little variation in the nmeaning of the terms which they use Causes it to be whole different story as to what was the original intention.
Lets take the word " SIN" to understand exactly what it means to christians as it contrast with Life's reality.
Sin to a christian means EVIL. thus they divided all works into good and evil and who soever does any evil works are guilty and declared sinner and without hope unless .....he join christianity of course.
Now SIN in real life as God intended being in a state of double-mindedness. And any act done in that state is an act of SIN...even if you are giving someone a glass of water in the name of JESUS.
ARE there then Evil? Yes of course and the heart that does it knows it, thus their condemnation is never far away.
As long as any remain in that state he is doomed to death.
Much similarity but not the same in meaning of the christian.
This double mind is the enemy of the single-mindedness
Which is the Mind of FAITH.
With that understanding now only you can truly Judge yourself as sinner and only you can excuse yourself as a Child of God.
This is the Judgement of the righteous Heart Which Jesus taught to His disciples.
This is what all should seek after when seeking after God.
With such a mind you cannot help but KNOW TRUTH the ONLY way TO life and you will see all things as GOOD.
All things aren't good at all!
That's common sense to know that.
And if we were all left up to judge ourselves, no one would ever be held accountable for anything.
I disagree, I am accountable to me and to the general public. If I break a law I am convicted. I choose not to break the law based in part upon this thought. I also know what is considered right and wrong. Not because of a book I read, because of common sense, and common decency, and acceptence of all people as equal. For people to live together in harmony there is give and take required by all. I do not need your god to tell me what is right and I am smart enough to know what is right and decent. As far as christians being a morally superior group of people, let me ask this. If electricity comes from electrons, does morality come from morons? SRY I have a sense of humor, go ahead and condemn me to hell for that to.
While they are engaged in this popular activity, they are to busy to look at their own lifes and actions. Of course the feeling of superiority they pocess also removes the need to consider their own actions. Remember they are sure they are heaven bound regardless of how much hate they carry in their heart.
They do it because there is so much justification for it in the Bible:
http://www.parrett.net/~bhcoc/notes/jud … others.htm
It's pretty clear to me: Jesus said worry about the plank in your eye and forget about the spec in everyone else's; he said let he who has not sinned cast the first stone...
I see no justification from the Gospels for judging others but people are people.
Certainly an orderly society requires some level of judgement for criminal activity and as a society we form a consensus around these things. But in the end there is so much to correct in the mirror image that you wouldn't think anyone has the time to judge others.
But that is man's law. Man's law doesn't say "if you murder someone you are going to hell" or "you don't know God"
The law keeps criminals off the street.
The other judgments are only for God.
Is this about Christians being judgemental about salvation or about people's behavior in general?
Man's law isbased upon judging others behavior. It seems we cannot avoid be judgemental at all times.
Salvation and behavior can't be separated.
We can't be saved by faith alone.
We can't keep the law/courts of man from judging.
They have judged many guilty that wasn't.
That is between them and God.
We can control only ourselves and stop judging.
Even Yahshua (Jesus to them) said he judges no man.
Are we greater than he?
And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world
This is true but in regards to trhe laws of man, we dont get to pick and choose the laws we obey. We don't get to force adherance onto others while practicing the exact opposite.
Most of what is said here is man's concept. God, the source, the creator, does not judge. We judge ourselves and when we die based on our beliefs that's where we end up, man has made it so complicated, so off the charts.
We are not suppose to judge others as good or bad.
We are not to say "he IS of God" anymore than say "he is not of God"
1 Samuel 16
6. And it came to pass, when they were come, that he looked on Eliab, and said, Surely the LORD's anointed is before him.
7. But the LORD said unto Samuel, Look not on his countenance, or on the height of his stature; because I have refused him: for the LORD sees not as man sees; for man looks on the outward appearance, but the LORD looks on the heart.
I am not a christian. There are many things in the bible that seem to confuse or contradict logic.
I do think that the bible in general, gives civilization a good moral code to try to live by. Without some type of structure, there would be only chaos.
Let he who is without sin, cast the first stone. Myself included, I don't know anyone who has not judged another person
at one time or another. To err is human.
I don't believe it matters what religion a person believes in. It has and will continue to happen, whether the judgement was meant to castigate someone, or to constructively demonstrate the error of someone's ways and get them on the right track.
It's when judgement is used to make people think that they are damned, that gets a lot of people angry. It's also when one tries to push their beliefs onto another, that the hackles go up.
You have your beliefs and I have mine. Let's agree to disagree, and not try to judge who is right ot wrong. I will fail at this, but I can try to do better next time and the time after that. Then, maybe, just maybe I may reach the point where I am not judgemental.
Judging is not an error neither is wrong doing.
Though we may HAVE sinned, we are not to continue therein.
Sin is not a mistake, sin is deliberate.
Christians are to go into the world and proclaim the word, we may know that something is wrong but we do not accuse someone of anything, if we know that someone is gay, we do dot accuse them of it, we just proclaim the word
You've said that several times.
So strange how you don't get blasted for it, while most Christians get blasted for speaking the Truth.
Where are the human rights activists, who should be here blasting you for advocating killing Christians?
Christians want to save people's souls, and you want to feed them to the lions.
Sorry Deb, I have to disagree with you on this. There's a grace period for children. Until we reach the age of recognition, where we can recognize right from wrong, we cannot sin. But Christians believe we are all born as sinners. I may be wrong, though. Maybe it's that we are all born with a sin nature. You know more about it than I do. Any thoughts?
I'm confused. Where do you disagree with what I said?
Sin, according to scripture, is the transgression of God's law,
A child is different.
CouturePopcafe, I'm sorry but I think you may be thinking of some christians... but not all christians think that way! I believe it is a saying when they speak of "born into sin" not "born as sinners".... I too believe there is an age of accountability! A child is innocent until it knows right from wrong and he understands the consequences of his or her choices! Most christians I know believe the same way as I.
I believe heaven has more children and babies than adults!
Even the words "sin in you" doesn't mean that you sin, it means every adult is capable of sin.
Yahshua said he didn't come to save the righteous, but the sinner. The ones who give in to sin.
But go ye and learn what that means, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.
And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.
Or without sin
That is what I was thinking as well - about the children.
He that is of God hears God's words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God
The Holy Spirit also testifies to us about this. First he says: This is the covenant I will make with them after that time, says the Lord, I will put my laws in their hearts, and I will write them on their minds. Then he adds: Their sins and lawless acts I will remember no more. And where these have been forgiven, there is no longer any sacrifice for sin.
That was said by Paul, not the Holy Spirit.
I have no doubt that you are aware that the general consensus based on textual criticism is that Hebrews was not likely written by Paul. Authorship cannot be determined for this book. (Interestingly, though most orthodox Christian Scholars do concede that it was inspired by the Holy Spirit).
Among certain scholars it is a popular supposition that authorship was not credited because the author was female and it was considered by these scholars to be a brilliant theological piece. (In no small part based on the passage Sandra quoted.)
Rather than admit a female could have such brilliant logic, they attributed it to Paul.
There is, of course, no proof of this and among my aquaintences are those who dismiss this supposition out of hand as well as those who embrace it.
But since Paul signed all his other work and not Hebrews, they are pretty sure it's not Paul.
Many Scholars are split on this but:
It is worded as Paul's writings were. It differs from the other People's writings.
It was written the way Paul's other writings were.
It does not agree with the teachings of Yahshua, nor James or John.
Perrin writes about the provenance of Hebrews (The New Testament: An Introduction, p. 138): "To whom was Hebrews originally addressed? The writer is a Hellenistic Jewish Christian, and his arguments presuppose that he is writing to others who think as he does, i.e., to a Hellenistic Jewish Christian community. Since Clement of Rome knows and quotes the text within what could only have been a few years of its writing, that community may well have been in Rome. This view is supported by the greetings from 'those who have come from Italy' in Heb 13:24
Paul was a Roman citizen.
Besides Paul,of the possible candidates for the authorship of Hebrews, there are two possibilities. They are Barnabas, and Apollos. Many scholars believe Barnabas was the author, and this is based solely on the testimony of Tertullian around 207 A.D. Then, some 20 years later, Origen claimed the author was anonymous! I personally tend to think Apollos is the most likely author of Hebrews for several reasons. Apollos was a leader in the early Christian church and he is mentioned ten times in the NT. Twice in the book of Acts, and eight times by Paul himself. We are first introduced to him in Acts.
Now a certain Jew named Apollos, born at Alexandria, an eloquent man and mighty in the Scriptures, came to Ephesus. This man had been instructed in the way of the Lord; and being fervent in spirit, he spoke and taught accurately the things of the Lord... Acts 18:24
Bear in mind the commentary that Apollos "taught accurately", comes from Luke's point of view. But this description of Apollos would fit the author of Hebrews like a glove. Paul also speaks of Apollos as a prominent leader with a significant following. His name is mentioned right along with himself, Peter, and Yahshua.
Now I say this, that each of you says, "I am of Paul," or "I am of Apollos," or "I am of Cephas," or "I am of Christ." 1Corinthians 1:12
The writer of Hebrews was at least taught by Paul.
Christians do not judge others, people who claim to be Christian might judge others,
the word says judge not
if you keep the whole law yet offend in one point, you are guilty of all,
Why do Christians judge others? For the same reason anyone judges others.
by SandCastles2 years ago
From what I've read in the bible, we are to identify wrong behaviours and speak up but we are not to play judge because that makes us prideful and reluctant to take the beam out of our own eye. Many Christians insist...
by haj33964 years ago
only that if you are judging weather a person is going to heaven are hell, then that's something you can not judge.
by pettidee4566 years ago
Reply to this
by mkrandhawa5 years ago
If you judge people you have no time to love them(Mother Teresa)
by Claire Evans20 months ago
That's the typical Sam Harris argument. How does suffering negate God's existence? Maybe He's just watching. It doesn't mean He doesn't exist and for anyone to bring up suffering as proof of no God is...
by Sooner284 years ago
This isn't going to be the typical argument that the fertilized egg is not a human being. This argument meets the christian on her own terms, and uses one of the most famous christian philosophers to do so, using...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.