Peace among the Religions

Originally posted by @caljust
Came across this quote from Hans Küng at the Goedgedacht Inter-Faith Chapel near Cape Town:

"No peace among the Nations
without peace among the Religions.

No survival for our globe
without a Global Ethic"

Comments?

Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. And a man's foes shall be they of his own household. He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. (Matthew 10:34-37 KJV)

Originally posted by @thinkofone
Please address my response to you prior to this one.

I've addressed each point you have brought up as far as I'm concern, but that is not saying
I've actually addressed the point you brought up. I may have missed, misunderstood your
point, I'll lay the fault with me not you. If there is point I have not addressed, if you do not
mind ask it again. If I did address it or not, I'll leave it to you.

Originally posted by @kellyjay
I've addressed each point you have brought up as far as I'm concern, but that is not saying
I've actually addressed the point you brought up. I may have missed, misunderstood your
point, I'll lay the fault with me not you. If there is point I have not addressed, if you do not
mind ask it again. If I did address it or not, I'll leave it to you.

Rather than address the post that was in response to yours, you inexplicably responded to a post I addressed to Eladar,

I suppose I could repost it here for you, but then you'd be missing the context of the post to which I was responding.

Not sure why you often refuse to take the time to understand and correct your mistakes.

Originally posted by @eladar
Lol you are so self important and arrogant.

What exactly about my post makes me "so self important and arrogant"?

Originally posted by @thinkofone
Rather than address the post that was in response to yours, you inexplicably responded to a post I addressed to Eladar,

I suppose I could repost it here for you, but then you'd be missing the context of the post to which I was responding.

Not sure why you often refuse to take the time to understand and correct your mistakes.

Well, unless I know I've made a mistake why would I address it?
Everything I have seen as a point I have addressed, so show me my error, if I made one I
will address it.

Being vague on this isn't advancing this discussion.

Originally posted by @thinkofone
What exactly about my post makes me "so self important and arrogant"?

That you can decent if his point has merit. He does not answer to you and you do not have the ability to judge his statement.

You are beyond belief. I suppose all liberals suffer from self delusional importance.

Originally posted by @thinkofone
Not sure what point you're trying to make.

Amongst Christians there is wide disparity as to what God's "ethical standards" might be. That's just a fact.

As such, it's clear that Christians are not of "one spirit". That's also just a fact.

It might help if you directly answer the question instead of talking around it:
<<Given that, how can God's "ethical standards" be reasonably determined?>>

What you are trying to do is justify the term Christian to automatically mean someone
right with God, that is not the case. Those that are right with God, are as I have said, are
right due to Jesus Christ, what they share is the Spirit of God within. You can call yourself
a Christian and not have Jesus in your life. You cannot be right with God without Jesus
Christ, it is as simple as that, nothing disjointed or incoherent about that.

There it is now directly responding to your post not someone else, the message is the
same. Christians are in one Spirit, not everyone who calls themselves Christian have
the Spirit of God.

Originally posted by @kellyjay
What you are trying to do is justify the term Christian to automatically mean someone
right with God, that is not the case. Those that are right with God, are as I have said, are
right due to Jesus Christ, what they share is the Spirit of God within. You can call yourself
a Christian and not have Jesus in your life. You cannot be right with God witho ...[text shortened]... ristians are in one Spirit, not everyone who calls themselves Christian have
the Spirit of God.

Once again, it might help if you directly answer the following question instead of talking around it:
<<Given that, how can God's "ethical standards" be reasonably determined?>>

Originally posted by @thinkofone
Once again, it might help if you directly answer the following question instead of talking around it:
<<Given that, how can God's "ethical standards" be reasonably determined?>>

When you read one in the Spirit what do you think is being said?

Originally posted by @caljust
Came across this quote from Hans Küng at the Goedgedacht Inter-Faith Chapel near Cape Town:

"No peace among the Nations
without peace among the Religions.

No survival for our globe
without a Global Ethic"

Comments?

it does not actually make that much sense.

Generally speaking, religion is a thin pretext for the increase of secular power. It is possible to find small riots and upheavals related only to "religious" purposes, but even here it will often involve some element of class warfare like that of the pogroms in the Ukraine in the late 19th and early 20th century.

It is just a very ahistorical statement that indicts religion as a source of evil.

Originally posted by @eladar
Most Christians are going to hell so what is your point?

Are the little sensational bombs you like to drop here less arrogant than the stuff ThinkOfOne writes ?

Originally posted by @caljust
Came across this quote from Hans Küng at the Goedgedacht Inter-Faith Chapel near Cape Town:

"No peace among the Nations
without peace among the Religions.

No survival for our globe
without a Global Ethic"

Comments?

Good to see you back posting again CalJust.

Originally posted by @thinkofone

Good debate for you ThinkOfOne IMO

On Historical Evidence.

92 Debate - Kenneth Humphreys vs Gary Habermas - Was The Resurrection An Invention - 2008

YouTube : =ResurrectionDebate

Originally posted by @sonship
Are the little sensational bombs you like to drop here less arrogant than the stuff ThinkOfOne writes ?

I'm genunely surprised you can't tell the difference between hostility and apparent hostility after having known ToO for so long. He did gift you a sub not so long ago.