Some Christians Shun Easter Celebrations

Post Reply New Topic

No.

No.

I did:

"We all judge others all the time, and we hope our occasional condemnations of others (such as in a court of law) are actually virtuous."

Isn't that a contradiction?

I really don't understand you. Sorry.

"We the people" do as we believe we should, and that includes an occasional condemnation.

OK... But it's difficult to verbalize that. I suppose I could have said it is ALTERNATELY a virtue and a sin, depending on the intent. Call a spade a spade. But if doing so is done with, say, the intent of harming a person through embarrassment or public disgrace, it is a sin. If what is done is in the spirit of kindness and correction, i.e. for the good of the person who has been judged, there is nothing wrong with it.

The money-changers in the temple, for instance. Jesus "judged" them and reacted angrily towards them. He ran them out of the temple. In doing so He protected the sanctity of the temple without doing harm to those who desecrated it.

In making a judgment call in which harm DOES come to someone, the question has to be whether it is absolutely necessary that harm should come to anyone? When I used to teach in the classroom, there was always the risk that SOMEONE was going to get in a fight. It was my job to keep kids out of danger, which sometimes meant I'd have to expose myself to a dangerous situation. It's entirely possible that in breaking up a fight, especially with extremely violent kids, my actions to prevent further harm MIGHT result in injury to an attacker. It's not intentional, but no one is going to "judge" me for using necessary force to keep my classroom safe. But I have to decide what level of force is really necessary AND which kid I'm going to target in order to stop a violent situation.

In war, a nation judges another nation as to whether it is necessary to attack or come to their aid. Soldiers have to assess whether a person poses a threat and act accordingly. These are life/death calls. So who is a soldier to judge between who lives and who dies?

As to condemnation in terms of eternity: Those who are saved will live in the presence of God. Those who are not will not. If you get upset with me because I say you're going to hell, then I'm very sorry but that's what the Bible says. I didn't write it. But if I say, for instance, that you're going to hell over something else specific, like, say, spitting on the sidewalk, then who am I to make that call (the Bible doesn't say you're going to hell for spitting on the sidewalk, just dying in your sin which may include spitting on the sidewalk) when I'm even more guilty of J-walking (breaking the law)? That would be an unjust judgment. It is that kind of spirit against judgment that the Bible refers to.

That's exactly what I'm always trying to explain to people. People like MCalavera.

Absolutely.


I look at that differently and simply ask whether or not the action is absolutely necessary (such as with the money changers) ... and then just let the chips fall wherever they may. For example: Any money changer that "saw me coming", so to speak, would have the option of getting up and leaving all on his own without ever having to feel the end of any whip.


An authorized agent of his or her ruler.


No issue there, but then one man's version of "hell" might appear to the fool as his own pleasure. So, the problem there has more to do with the preacher's motive and/or extrapolation and not with the actual message of Scripture.


No. Scripture only says to not judge without being willing to be judged by the same measure ... and yet nowhere does it say that is what will actually happen.

Agreed. I also apply the same context to the occupation of Israel post-Exodus. You got a bunch of Hebrews wondering around on in the Transjordan... Gee, what do you THINK they're planning? MAYBE now is a good time to check out some nice real estate in Lebanon...


Absolutely. So... If the call is a wrong one, the responsibility is ultimately on some higher-up in the chain of command. This is, of course, assuming any "rules of engagement," through which the soldier would have an understanding of HOW to decide who to kill or not to kill.


I don't know. Yes, scriptures get twisted all the time for all kinds of reasons. But are there really different "versions" of hell in truth? If hell is just the complete eternal separation from any presence at all of God, then there is no provision at all--nothing--and not even for a fool's own pleasure. The picture of Gehenna in the NT depicts hell as a burning garbage dump. How picturesque this is in terms of what hell is ACTUALLY like is anyone's guess. I just know I don't want to be the one to find out.


I went back and read that passage--Matthew 7, I think. The picture of justice is a direct reference to ancient laws about honest weights and measures. If you hold back justice from someone, acting unfairly, then you will be denied justice in the same way. The ancient lex talionis required that someone who accused someone of wrongdoing who was actually innocent and gave false testimony to bring about personal vengeance against someone through the law, whatever punishment would have been given to the accused would be met out on the accuser instead.

If there is a city ordinance against spitting on the sidewalk AND a city ordinance against J-walking, a person who brings a charge against another for spitting on the sidewalk has "unclean hands" if the only way he'd have witnessed someone spitting on the sidewalk was by J-walking. Why is it ok for one person to break the law by J-walking and not ok for the one spitting on the sidewalk? Would it not be better and equitable justice if the J-walker made a commitment to never J-walk again, see if the sidewalk-spitter was still spitting on the sidewalk, pull the sidewalk spitter aside and tell him not to do that anymore, and only THEN when the reformed J-walker can honestly make a claim of having clean hands THEN issue a citation against the sidewalk-spitter for having been in the wrong? Moreover, it would be even better if the J-walker turned himself in and paid the fine, showing his willingness to confess his errors and turn from his mistakes, not fearing the consequences for the sake of doing what is right. THEN, being an upright citizen he could encourage others to do likewise. Perhaps he could get the sidewalk-spitter's friends to intervene, or perhaps get in to counseling for compulsive sidewalk-spitting. This would be much more fair. It is still justice and judging. But it is seeking justice in the right spirit, "doing for others..."

Not sure what you mean by "nowhere does it say this is what will actually happen." The language is such that the consequences for inequity of justice WILL be repaid those who are unrepentant. The passage as a whole is part of a much larger section outlining Christ's ideal for Christian behavior. "Judge not" comes immediately before the passage about the "speck in your eye," as though they are the same thought. It indicates a relationship in which judging is actually acceptable provided it is in the correct spirit and motive. Following that, too, is the "pearls before swine" passage. This seems to also be a warning about knowing your place and avoiding needless persecution. I.e. if you know what you say has no chance of being received, it is better not to test the limits and patience of obstinate people, especially those in power. Jesus repeatedly avoided this, but in the end it was the "dogs" and "swine" that sought Him out to put Him to death--for example refusing to perform miracles when they were DEMANDED of Him. The Bible doesn't suggest that Jesus only performed miracles in the absence of religious leaders. Typically verses like these have a connection to the preceding ones. I can see a connection somewhat (pearls/swine and "judge not") but I'm not that clear what it is exactly. I suppose it is a way of saying be careful what you say when you correct people who are wrong, even if it is the right thing to do, because it changes nothing and prevents you from doing more good elsewhere.

Whatever hell is, there is only one ... and I really like the way you worded that "not even for a fool's own pleasure"!


Same here, and I now see I was wrong in what I said.


Removing any thought/concern about "fair" there -- no relativity or situation ethics -- I think you would have judged and handled all of that rightly.


I had never before now ever heard/considered that particular angle, but I think you make some good points there ... and all of that just might relate to part of a certain legal proceeding I will soon be attending, and I thank you.

I don't feel condemned even if you are subtly condemning those who celebrate Easter. But it doesn't mean I feel condemned by your condemnation.



But they are still professing Christians (just as you are a professing Christian). Not all fundamentalist Christians have a problem with celebrating Easter.

And why avoid them if you're not subconsciously condemning them?

You don't get it. You don't know what God said exactly. What you do see is what men wrote in the Bible, nothing more.

In my book, it's ridiculous to tell others what to celebrate. You really have no divine basis for what you say. All you have is a collection of books written by men who didn't even have any awareness of anything to do with Easter.

If this was the 14th century and I wanted to sail across the ocean this is what our conversation would sound like.

MCalavera: But you cannot sail across the ocean to the other side. It's flat! You would fall off the edge!
Me: I assure you it is round.
MCalavera: Flat!
Me: Let me show you. Here in Isaiah 40:22 God himself says the earth is a circle. Who better to know this than the one who made it, right?
MCalavera: You heretic! You know the earth is flat!
Me: In Job 26:7 God himself says that the earth is hanging upon nothing. It sounds like the earth is a sphere in the heavens.
MCalavera: You heretic! I'm reporting you to the church for spewing lies and not going along with what EVERYONE knows is the truth... the earth is FLAT!
Me: *sigh*

Last edited by kxmode on 18 Apr 2011, 7:01 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Nice canned speech, kxmode. Unfortunately, it doesn't address my argument that you really don't know what God (if he exists) actually said. You can only go by what the Bible says.

I can turn the same canned speech on you by the way. Doesn't mean a thing, though. As I don't know what you or I would've been like in the 14th century.

By the way, the Bible doesn't say that the Earth is spherical in shape, so don't go that route.

Ancient Greeks, for example, used to believe the Earth was some flat circular disc. So it doesn't imply "sphere".

My answer to every comment and question you have from now on is 2 Timothy 2:23-26. Go read it, or not. I don't really care.

And my answer is 2 Timothy 2:23-26 my ass!