That is not RIGHT!

@kellyjay said
A historical Jesus removes from us the ability to reject it and maintain the same course as those who embrace Him.

Why would anyone be interested in embracing someone who will choose to torture for eternity those who happen to not believe in him?

@KellyJay

I didn't say anything about "shades of gray." I said the terms (right, just, righteous, etc.) need to be defined before we can say that anyone (anyone) acts according to those criteria – i.e. what is right or just or righteous. (And I suggested that those definitions themselves would likely by subject to argument -- at least I suspect that would be the case.)


I think the questions in the OP are good questions, and not easy questions. I think that for a perpetrator of some (otherwise unjustified, whatever that might mean) harm – murder was your example (rape would be another) – to “get off” just because they appeal to the mercy of “the court,” while the victim is punished just because they don’t … Well, I don’t see how that could be considered to be right or just, under any reasonable definitions that I can think of. Do you?

@vistesd2 said
I think that for a perpetrator of some (otherwise unjustified, whatever that might mean) harm – murder was your example (rape would be another) – to “get off” just because they appeal to the mercy of “the court,” while the victim is punished just because they don’t … Well, I don’t see how that could be considered to be right or just, under any reasonable definitions that I can think of. Do you?

The discursive elephant in the room is that KellyJay believes that not subscribing to the same religious views as he has is a "crime". So, in KellyJay's world, there's [1] murder [2] rape and [3] a lack of belief in Jesus. I have found it nigh on impossible to discuss morality and justice with him.

@fmf said
I have a moral compass too. It's not just "others" who have one. Gosh. Have you not understood anything I have ever said about this?

You apply your personal opinion to everyone else while dismissing theirs because they only have their opinion, yes I have listened to you. You are the only standard you go by which more than likely is why you reject God’s who unlike all of us is the standard for good and righteousness.

@divegeester said
Why would anyone be interested in embracing someone who will choose to torture for eternity those who happen to not believe in him?

Sin and evil are why anyone will be judged and sent to Hell; the Lord made it so only faith in Him is required for salvation, not a rule book we cannot follow because of our nature.

@vistesd2 said
@KellyJay

I didn't say anything about "shades of gray." I said the terms (right, just, righteous, etc.) need to be defined before we can say that anyone (anyone) acts according to those criteria – i.e. what is right or just or righteous. (And I suggested that those definitions themselves would likely by subject to argument -- at least I suspect that would be the c ...[text shortened]... ld be considered to be right or just, under any reasonable definitions that I can think of. Do you?

If each of us defines right, just, and righteousness, they are broken terms that are
nothing more than opinions; they are not like that. They don't change with the
person, with the more intellectual argument over others. I would say that they
point something greater, because from time to time where conflict between them
arises when choices are made that are not a rule of direction like what is right or
wrong that is something above them all, a holy scale that directs the proper way
to go, personally.

@fmf said
The discursive elephant in the room is that KellyJay believes that not subscribing to the same religious views as he has is a "crime". So, in KellyJay's world, there's [1] murder [2] rape and [3] a lack of belief in Jesus. I have found it nigh on impossible to discuss morality and justice with him.

So you say, again, your opinion, and you constantly misrepresent my point as you
do now. You reject Christ in the flesh, and you claim you once believed in Him;
you now reject Christ. The reality of Christ in you never occurred; if it had, you
couldn't deny His reality as you do now.

You forever leave God out of the equation as if He is an afterthought, a point of
discussion only, not the prime reality in whom we live and have our being. So you
make all about us, all about our personal opinions. Such is your anti-Christ stance.

Many agree with many of the things I believe that does not save them; if they
don't know the Savior Jesus Christ agreeing with me is completely meaningless

@kellyjay said
Sin and evil are why anyone will be judged and sent to Hell; the Lord made it so only faith in Him is required for salvation, not a rule book we cannot follow because of our nature.

Thanks for that personal faith assertion; however my question is:

Why would anyone be interested in embracing someone who will choose to torture for eternity those who happen to not believe in him?

@divegeester said
Thanks for that personal faith assertion; however my question is:

Why would anyone be interested in embracing someone who will choose to torture for eternity those who happen to not believe in him?

It is not what we want that matters here, it isn’t righteousness by popular opinion, it is the righteousness of God who will not tolerate sinners in His Kingdom that have not been cleaned by Christ. His love made the way back to Him, rejecting it is a rejection of God Himself.

@kellyjay said
It is not what we want that matters here, it isn’t righteousness by popular opinion, it is the righteousness of God who will not tolerate sinners in His Kingdom that have not been cleaned by Christ. His love made the way back to Him, rejecting it is a rejection of God Himself.

Thanks for this further personal faith assertion.

I didn’t use the word “want”.

Just tell the forum why any person “should” embrace a version of Jesus who eternally tortures those who don’t believe he exists?

@divegeester said
Thanks for this further personal faith assertion.

I didn’t use the word “want”.

Just tell the forum why any person “should” embrace a version of Jesus who eternally tortures those who don’t believe he exists?

If God’s righteousness demands justification by the blood of Jesus Christ because every other path comes up wanting yes! We need to put our faith in Jesus not our opinions of what God should do.

@kellyjay said
So you say, again, your opinion, and you constantly misrepresent my point as you
do now.

I am not misrepresenting your point. I am describing your point. Your point is a subjective personal opinion.

@kellyjay said
You forever leave God out of the equation as if He is an afterthought, a point of
discussion only, not the prime reality in whom we live and have our being.

I do not leave your God figure, or your belief in him, out of the equation. It's virtually all we talk about. What more than "a point of discussion" can your particular God figure between us?

@kellyjay saidMany agree with many of the things I believe that does not save them; if they
don't know the Savior Jesus Christ agreeing with me is completely meaningless

Your assertions about someone who has been stone dead for 2,000 years, and your misanthropy/ threats/warnings attendant thereto, are pretty much "meaningless" to non-believers, KellyJay, aside from the fact that the subjective nature of your claims is "a point of discussion".

@kellyjay said
Such is your anti-Christ stance.

You should go the other thread to discuss your egocentric banter about me being "an Anti-Christ". Don't be a coward.