Posted by Lou Pilder on May 31, 2010, at 6:54:30
In reply to Re: Lou's request, posted by Dr. Bob on May 30, 2010, at 20:32:05
> > The ONLY reason given in God's Word that has or will ever cause someone to miss out on God's forgivness and Eternal life....is to reject the gift of His Son Jesus as Lord and Savior.
>
> He was referring to:
>
> > my Maker ... the God that [I give] service and worship to ... the God that the Christian Bible refers to
>
> so I considered it analogous to:
>
> > People of my faith have one God and no others before him.
>
> which I consider OK:
>
> http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20020918/msgs/7889.html
>
> BobMr. Hsiung,
You consider it to be OK to post that:
[...People of my faith have one God and no others before Him...]
But you do not consider it OK for me to post that I have a commandment from my God to me that (redacted by respondent).
The difference is that in what you would expel me from this community for is if I was to post the imperative in the statement that is the foundation of Judaism. You do suggest that I change the wording of tha commandment to me from my God to exclude the imperative {shall}, as Ok and I have told you that I will not change it to accommodate your thinking about the word {shall}, for If I was to do that, I wouuld be writing a lie, for your form is not the same as what has been given to me as a commandment to me from my God.
Now you say that using an imperative could then preclude others and thearfore is not supportive. Well, the statement in question here is not the same as the one that you say is OK because that statenment in question does have an imperative and the member even writes it in caps which has the generally accepted meaning of being a stronger imperative, if there is such, as being impossible.
Now you are allowing the statement in question to stand, which precludes Jews and others that do not accept the claim of some Christian denominations from having forgivness and they are precluded from Eternal Life since they reject the claim of the poster about Jesus to be their Lord and Savoir. That includes the Jewish children that were murderd by anti-Semites, since those Jewish chhildren have a faith that does reject the claim of the statement in question. Islam aso rejects the claims in question as well as other non-Christian groups and some Christian groups also.
I would like for you to make a more concise statement on the faith board in that thread to let people know that the statement in question is or is not considerd by you to be supportive or not supportive. This is because it has an imperative in it, that precludes, and then by you posting what you are wanting to mean in a more concise statement, that could show the members to know for sure as to if you do or do not think that the statement is OK by itself, or not, as to what the statement purports . If you write that the statement is supportive as to what the statement purports as being OK, since I think that the statement that you say is Ok is diferent from what is posted. as having the imperative as being supportive, that is one thing and I will post my response to you there. If you state in that thread that the statement in question is not supportive, but you are going to allow it to stand anyway, then that is another thing that I can then post my response to you there because what you say is OK is not the same as what is posted in question for that statement has an imperative in it and the OK statement does not use the word {only}.
You have stated that you give a higher priority to support, and that what it not supportive can be taken elsewhere. I would also like for you to post in that thread , if you consider the statement in question to not constitute support for Jews and others that are precluded by the imperative in the statement, that you are giving a higher priority to something else to allow the statement to stand. As to what that priority is for the statment that you consider to be OK that does have an imperitive in it, which is different from what you have posted as your rationale for allowing it to stand because that does not have an imperative in it like {only}, and you have posted that you will expel me from this communty if I was to post the foundation of Judaism that has the imperative in it and not change it to what you say is OK, then I could determine what my response will be to you.
Lou
poster:Lou Pilder
thread:949004
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20100321/msgs/949618.html