The Golden Rule comes from the Bible, and it is not and certainly never has been a standard by which atheists live.....
The golden rules was wellknown long before the first letter was ever started on the first Bible chapter.
The reality is that the golden rules comes not from the bible. The bible just accepted it as a valid and sound way of life guideline.
The golden rule is NOT some form of property of Christianity.
Atheists have - just as all other people - used the golden rule to live a proper , prosperous, and safe life.
Atheists did not abuse the golden rule for their own views. Many christians however abused - and still abuse - the golden rule to support their own religious delusions.

Believe whatever you prefer, but at least accept that others may have different views !
Why can't so many "christians" show more respect for other world views, and drop all their apparent feelings of hatred and revenge?


:)

.

.

Cred,

READ THIS CAREFULLY... I am NOT nor ever have I been SASSYT! I was not rude to you but YOU were rude to me. Sorry but the other thread got closed and I want you to understand that you have once again accused me FALSELY. I may have gotten lippy or even SASSY with you but that is IT!! Good golly girdy, go back and read her posts and then read mine! We don't even sound the same... geesh. MEN! You should say you are sorry... that would be the "golden rule" don't you think? Plus it would make me feel good for you to have to eat CROW! ( I forgive you.. someone else thought I was sassyT once too... geesh give me some credit for imagination)

Cred,

[clip for brevity]

you should say you are sorry...that would be the "golden rule" don't ya think? Plus it would make me feel good for you to have to eat CROW! ( i forgive ya..someone else thought i was sassyT once too...geesh give me some credit for imagination)

classyT,

If you ever get Cred to even admit, let alone apologize for his abusive behaviour, I will be absolutely shocked.

I have seen people with equal hatred of Christians and Christianity, but never one exhibiting more hatred.

Tom

.....credit for imagination
CREDIT??
As far as your imagination is concerned... sassyT and classyT... what an imagination!!

And as to rudeness : just look in the cyber mirror and observe yourself : you will see a really aggressive and rude person : yourself !

Than start reading your own posts on this board...

Matthew 7:3 comes to mind!!

I note that in your anger you forgot to address the topic question, which was about the golden rule...

:D :rolleyes: :p :) :rolleyes: :D

.

.

[clip for brevity] ... Tom
Wrong Tommy : I do not hate Christians and their belief at all. But I do dislike hypocrites!!

Typical Tommy Smith aka Tj3 aka Toms777... lot's of steer waste and innuendo.
He even "forgot" to address the topic : "the golden rule" , which is much older than the Bible...

Now how could he forget that??

:D :rolleyes: :p :) :rolleyes: :D

.

.

Tj3,

I am willing to give Cred the opportunity to prove that he does indeed follow this golden rule and that he doesn't hate anyone.

Cred, you have had an attitude with me from the first time you answered a post on my Catholic, christianity thread. You kind of told me off and I did NOT provoke you... then you proceeded the same behavior on the Halloween thread when you lumped Christians into a bundle and said we were trouble makers and that if there were no Christians perhaps there could be a heaven on earth.

THEN you have fasely accused me of sayinng things that SassyT said to you ( you never forgave them either. That doesn't sound like you are following the godlen rule for poor ol sassyT... might want to work on that) AND worse... accused me of deception. Tsk tsk.. I'm feeling hurt here.

Anyway, please feel free to say your sorry anytime... I am waiting with open arms and great big ol hug. LOL

CREDIT ???
As far as your imagination is concerned ..... sassyT and classyT ..... what an imagination !!!



.

.

One more time.. I am NOT sassyT.. AND further more... that is what I am saying to you.. give me some credit for a little more imagination... I wouldn't have called myself sassyT and then ClassyT.. duh?. did I really have to explain that to you?

NOTE________ wait a sec... my paraphrasing of Mathew 7:3 was offense to you? LOL LOL rude? Unkind? DUDE... seriously you better get another agruement OR better yet a sense of humor. That was not mean or unkind.. calling me a simpleton afterwards was though... want to talk hypocritical... ahhh cred. You don't really want to go there do you. I don't know... it is EMBARRASSING to see a grown man dish it out and not be able to take it. Tsk tsk Now about THAT apology... :)

Cred,

MEN! you should say you are sorry...that would be the "golden rule" don't ya think?

---She did address it.

I don't believe she is sassyT for one because as she said their wording is way too different.
Nothing against sassy but often I can not follow what she is saying or what her point is but classyT is brief and to the point. Also sassyT seems to be younger than classyT.
I have seen many people sign up on boards with some moniker that is similar to someone else's and most often it is just a coincidence. Heck, even when I sign up for a new email address or a new board or something on the internet it tells me several times I have to use something different because the name is already taken.

P.S. I have seen cred acknowledge when he is wrong (not always but a couple times) but don't hold your breath.

The Golden Rule comes from the Bible, and it is not and certainly never has been a standard by which atheists live..... .
That's entirely false of course.

The "golden rule" is also known as the "Ethic of reciprocity" and is certainly not a concept originally thought of in the bible:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethic_of_reciprocity (http://www.religioustolerance.org/reciproc.htm)

Here are versions of the golden rule in various religions: Versions of the Golden Rule in 21 world religions (http://www.religioustolerance.org/reciproc.htm)

I live by this rule as well, plus it's a tenet of my parenting. No bible in our house is required for good morals.

What is the Golden rule?

CREDIT ???


I note that in your anger you forgot to address the topic question, which was about the golden rule ....

:D :rolleyes: :p :) :rolleyes: :D

.

.

LOL. I liked that. Cred. I am NOT angry... sounds like a little PROJECTION to me.. but then what do I know?

Oh never mind just saw NK's Link

LOL. I liked that. Cred. I am NOT angry....sounds like a little PROJECTION to me.. but then what do i know?

Catching on very quickly :D

---She did address it.

I don't believe she is sassyT for one because as she said their wording is way too different.
Nothing against sassy but often I can not follow what she is saying or what her point is but classyT is brief and to the point. Also sassyT seems to be younger than classyT.
I have seen many people sign up on boards with some moniker that is similar to someone elses and most often it is just a coincidence. Heck, even when I sign up for a new email address or a new board or something on the internet it tells me several times I have to use something different because the name is already taken.

P.S. I have seen cred acknowledge when he is wrong (not always but a couple times) but don't hold your breath.

Thank you Nohelp. If I were sassyT.. I'd say so.

BTW I agree with NK's post about the golden rule being here in many forms.
To add one example of following the golden rule:
The Bible:
You reap what you sow
The Hood:
What goes around comes around

In my opinion I don't think the golden rule is a bible thing. I never read the bible and never paid attention in religion class and I have always lived my life by that rule. It's just common sense.

Spit,

Well Jesus actually said to" do unto to others as you would have them do unto you." So it IS a bible thing. I agree that it is common sense AND good manners. But in reality it goes against our very nature to do it. I think I am proving my point REALLY well with Cred. He was WRONG and yet he would rather do anything but apologize. Including placing blame anywhere but on himself. Frankly, it isn't as easy as it seems to some people.

But in reality it goes against our very nature to do it.
I don't think so. I think our nature is to be social animals and the ethic of reciprocity allows healthy communal living. No doubt there are individuals that are selfish and self-centered but I don't think that's the norm.

But really if you look at the 10 commandments aren't they all just common sense. Don't steal, don't kill, obey your parents, etc... The only ones that aren't common sense are the first 3 commandments.

Wrong Tommy : I do not hate Christians and their belief at all. But I do dislike hypocrites !!!

I have yet to see a single post dealing with Christianity where you have not been abusive with respect to Christianity and Christians - one need only look at your posts in this thread.

Tj3,

I am willing to give Cred the oportunity to prove that he does indeed follow this golden rule and that he doesn't hate anyone.

Agreed. I would love to see him follow the golden rule, aned to prove us wrong!

I have yet to see a single post dealing with Christianity where you have not been abusive with respect to Christianity and Christians - one need only look at your posts in this thread.Speaking of the content of this thread, will you admit you are wrong?

Speaking of the content of this thread, will you admit you are wrong?

Perhaps you can tell me precisely what you want me to admit that I am wrong about.

Making some vague undefined statement and question gives me no reason to make such a statement.

Perhaps you can tell me precisely what you want me to admit that I am wrong about.

Making some vague undefined statement and question gives me no reason to make such a statement.
This:


The Golden Rule comes from the Bible, and it is not and certainly never has been a standard by which atheists live.....

There seems to be a major misunderstanding about what is good individual. When groups of animals live together the entire dynamic changes. It is no longer kill the other guy before he kills me. It becomes how can I help the other guy so when I need help he helps me.

For example if we were solitary animals it would be good for me to kill all other male rivals, however in a society it become detrimental to me to kill my rivals because if I do they will group up and remove me from the society and if you haven't noticed removal from the group for humans means death.

By weeding out the ones that don't play nice in groups over the last 500,000 years we have a good percentage of the human population that has empathy for others and generally want to be part of the group and do good for that group. Does it mean everyone? No you will always have one offs and people that feel they are excluded from the group so they don't feel like owe the group anything or feel like they belong to a different group than the one they harmed.

It is this group dynamic that is the origin for the golden rule.

There seems to be a major misunderstanding about what is good individual. When groups of animals live together the entire dynamic changes. It is no longer kill the other guy before he kills me. It becomes how can I help the other guy so when I need help he helps me.

Really? How then would you say that this works in real life in a small hamlet versus the inner core of a large city?

This:This:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tj3
The Golden Rule comes from the Bible, and it is not and certainly never has been a standard by which atheists live...

[/I]

And you want me to admit that I am wrong why?

And you want me to admit that I am wrong why?Read the thread. The evidence is there.

Read the thread. The evidence is there.

Really? Evidence of what? If you have something to say, don't beat around the bush - you are wasting my time, yours and that of others who have to put up with this back and forth.

Really? How then would you say that this works in real life in a small hamlet versus the inner core of a large city?

I would say it works much better in small hamlets versus the inner core of a large city. Crime rates alone would tell you that. The reason is because in small hamlets you get a much stronger group dynamic than you do in a large city. In the small hamlet you know everyone by name or at least association and there for consider them part of your group. However in large cities an individual might have a much larger group that they consider themselves a part of but they don't have the processing power to know everyone in the city and consider them part of the group. It's why you see when people are left to there own devices they group up into gangs in cities. It's why in very backward areas even where there aren't a lot of people you see people organize themselves in to tribes and even in very violent tribal areas the violence within a tribe is minimal compared to the violence against other tribes.

As I said we are far from perfect so this doesn't always work but for the most part you can trust the people in your group to not to harm you because of this. Whether they be Hindu, Jewish, Christian, atheist or the people you bowl with. It doesn't matter why you consider them your group as long as they do to.

No time is wasted for anyone, it's a short thread. What are you getting all mad about?

NK you never waste my time. When you get down to it isn't the golden rule basically Karma?

Karma is originally an Indian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karma) concept that has been popularized in the west but I agree. It touches on the same basic issues - their actions and the effects of their actions.

No one can claim that the Golden Rule is a Christian thing... all they can say is that is it a Christian thing, too.

Every religion, philosophy, way of life touches on the same concept.

All this bickering is out of control.

I don't have a hatred for Christians... I was raised by them. But there is a large section of them that emulate my latest quote (see below). It is ridiculous...

As for Cred, I think he is just fed up... as many of us are. I would probably still consider myself a Christian today if I wasn't exposed to the ugliness that SO many Christians posses in their heart while they preach songs of Love.

If any of you self-proclaimed up-standing Christians stepped back from your own "Glory" for a minute and actually looked at yourself, you would see it, too... that is, if you actually had the courage to.

(I say self-proclaimed because I have also witnessed a handful of real Christians on this site and I do not want to include them in this)

I don't think so. I think our nature is to be social animals and the ethic of reciprocity allows healthy communal living. No doubt there are individuals that are selfish and self-centered but I don't think that's the norm.

OK... yes there are times when we in the flesh or in our natural state without GOD will get along and try to use the "golden rule" because it is good. But not always NK. There have been times when I TOO am guilty of not always turning the other cheek. Im not suggesting that Christians are the only ones that can follow the golden rule.. just that it isn't always EASY. Sometimes it goes against are grain. And certainly it is hard to say we are sorry to someone when we are wrong... and that too is part of the Golden RULE... doing unto others... am I right or am I right... CRED? Nothing like humbling ourselves when we are wrong and I think it isn't always EASY.

The golden rules was wellknown long before the first letter was ever started on the first Bible chapter.
The reality is that the golden rules comes not from the bible. The bible just accepted it as a valid and sound way of life guideline.
The golden rule is NOT some form of property of Christianity.
Atheists have - just as all other people - used the golden rule to live a proper , prosperous, and safe life.
Atheists did not abuse the golden rule for their own views. Many christians however abused - and still abuse - the golden rule to support their own religious delusions.

Believe whatever you prefer, but at least accept that others may have different views !
Why can't so many "christians" show more respect for other world views, and drop all their apparent feelings of hatred and revenge?


:)

.

.


Cred,

Truth? Until you apologize to me... this entire thread is really silly. You don't make your point and your crediability is seriously lacking, nill, nadda the big ZERO. It is simply PROJECTION. Man up... nothing like humble pie for Thanksgiving... :D

No time is wasted for anyone, it's a short thread. What are you getting all mad about?

NK... who got mad? I have been accused in this thread of anger when in fact.. I find it somewhat funny and enternaining... ( I know I know... you think I am WEIRD):p

No one can claim that the Golden Rule is a Christian thing... all they can say is that is it a Christian thing, too.

Every religion, philosophy, way of life touches on the same concept.

All this bickering is out of control.

I dont have a hatred for Christians... I was raised by them. But there is a large section of them that emulate my latest quote (see below). It is ridiculous...

as for Cred, I think he is just fed up... as many of us are. I would probably still consider myself a Christian today if I wasn't exposed to the ugliness that SO many Christians posses in their heart while they preach songs of Love.

If any of you self-proclaimed up-standing Christians stepped back from your own "Glory" for a minute and actually looked at yourself, you would see it, too... that is, if you actually had the courage to.

(I say self-proclaimed because I have also witnessed a handful of real Christians on this site and I do not want to include them in this)

I don't know who is bickering.. and I DO look at myself. I am FLAWED to the HILT. All I can say to you is don't look at christians... we mess up all the time.. look at Jesus. Man will disappoint you every time.. even CHRISTIANS. Sad but true.

I'm not here searching for Religion... or Faith.

And trust me, when I am searching, I am not looking to men.



But I LOVE this:



Man will disappoint you every time.. even CHRISTIANS.


:O NO WAY! Hahah

I would say it works much better in small hamlets versus the inner core of a large city. Crime rates alone would tell you that. The reason is because in small hamlets you get a much stronger group dynamic than you do in a large city.

Exactly, and thus in practice the reality is the opposite of your theory.

No one can claim that the Golden Rule is a Christian thing... all they can say is that is it a Christian thing, too.

Sure we can. It is in the Bible.


Every religion, philosophy, way of life touches on the same concept.

Did you ever stop and think that the God who created all that there is was the source?

I'm not here searching for Religion... or Faith.

And trust me, when I am searching, I am not looking to men.



But I LOVE this:



:O NO WAY!! Hahah

Hey, just trying to be nice and state the truth. I'm not sure why that is so funny to you.. but hey.. enjoy!

Exactly, and thus in practice the reality is the opposite of your theory.

Seriously Tj3 even I don't think you are that stupid.

Seriously Tj3 even I don't think you are that stupid.

Heh heh heh, you don't take disagreement well, do you?

It is one thing if you disagree with me it is another when you try to take things out of context and twist them to prove your right.

It is one thing if you disagree with me it is another when you try to take things out of context and twist them to prove your right.

You gave us all a good example of how the atheists use the golden rule when faced with disagreement, Michael. :D

Did you ever stop and think that the God who created all that there is was the source?Ah yes, back to the "god created everything" response. Circular reasoning at its best. LOL!

Ah yes, back to the "god created everything" response. Circular reasoning at its best. LOL!

Really? I already posted a great deal of evidence for that very fact. You wouldn't just be rejecting all the evidence because you don't want to believe that it is true, would you?

Perhaps you would post your evidence against God having created everything.

What is the Golden rule?Hello spit:

"Him that has the gold, makes the rules".

Since I have some gold, I'm making the rules. Here they are; I've been reading... Holy smokes! You guys HATE each other. That' ain't cool. So, put that hate on me. I'll take your sins upon myself. You are now free to love again. Go forth and multiply.

What? A Jewish carpenter can't offer an opinion?

excon

TJ,
Dude, I'm only talking about the golden rule i.e. the topic of this thread. You seemed to have rejected the evidence I have posted in this thread. I have no idea what evidence you are referring to.

TJ,
Dude, I'm only talking about the golden rule i.e. the topic of this thread. You seemed to have rejected the evidence I have posted in this thread. I have no idea what evidence you are referring to.

NK,

You sdaid that saying that God created everything is circular reasoning thus denying that it happened. Now you are backtracking on that when asked for validation of your claim, it seems.

I have seem no evidence to accept or reject. Where is this evidence? I would be more than happy to look at it if I inadvertently missed it - just post the link or repost the evidence again.

I have seem no evidence to accept or reject. Where is this evidence? I would be more than happy to look at it if I inadvertently missed it - just post the link or repost the evidence again.Ask Me Help Desk - View Single Post - The Golden Rule (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/1395192-post9.html)

Wow NK,how do you do that?
I did not know we could actually view individual posts like that.Is that part of the new features?
I must have been away longer than I realised.:)

Sorry off topic.

wow NK,how do you do that?
I did not know we could actually view individual posts like that.Is that part of the new features?
I must have been away longer than I realised.:)

Sorry off topic.On the right-hand side on every post, where you would click to "Report innapropriate post", there is the post number, that's clickable and will show the single post at the top of the page, you can then copy the link and use it. :) I'm in IT and web development so I love this stuff.

Thanks Nk, I am going to test this stuff :D.

Ask Me Help Desk - View Single Post - The Golden Rule (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/1395192-post9.html)

I saw that. So what do you think that this is evidence of and what are you trying to prove?

Once again, don't make vague comments - say what you mean.

The golden rules was wellknown long before the first letter was ever started on the first Bible chapter.
The reality is that the golden rules comes not from the bible. The bible just accepted it as a valid and sound way of life guideline.
The golden rule is NOT some form of property of Christianity.
Atheists have - just as all other people - used the golden rule to live a proper , prosperous, and safe life.
Atheists did not abuse the golden rule for their own views. Many christians however abused - and still abuse - the golden rule to support their own religious delusions.

Believe whatever you prefer, but at least accept that others may have different views !
Why can't so many "christians" show more respect for other world views, and drop all their apparent feelings of hatred and revenge?


.

You contradict yourself by implying that Christians have religious delusions, then go on about showing more respect for other world views.



---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




The word of God, the bible expects more than just the golden rule!




Matthew 5:

38"You have heard that it was said, 'Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.'[g] 39But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. 40And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. 41If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles.

43"You have heard that it was said, 'Love your neighbor[h] and hate your enemy.' 44But I tell you: Love your enemies[i]








Romans 12:

14Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse.

17Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everybody. 18If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone. 19Do not take revenge, my friends, but leave room for God's wrath, for it is written: "It is mine to avenge; I will repay,"[d]says the Lord. 20On the contrary:
"If your enemy is hungry, feed him;
if he is thirsty, give him something to drink.
In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head."[e] 21Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.

I saw that. So what do you think that this is evidence of and what are you trying to prove?

Once again, don't make vague comments - say what you mean.Sorry mate, I don't know how to dumb it down, I find it quite self-explanatory. I guess we'll just leave it at that.

Have a great day!

NK.

Agreed. I would love to see him follow the golden rule, aned to prove us wrong!

I'm going to pipe in and I hope that Cred is okay with me sharing this story.

When I first came to this site I butted heads with Cred like you wouldn't believe. If we were on the same thread together it would eventually be closed because we would fight like cats and dogs.

One day, after months of fighting with each other, I sent Cred a PM and asked if we could let by gones be by gones and start fresh. He didn't hesitate to accept what I offered and since then we have been very civil to each other, in fact, I consider him a friend.

If he's really as hateful as you all think, how do we both manage to get along? I believe in God, he doesn't, yet we are both kind to each other. Why? Because we're both good people.

Doesn't the bible say, judge no lest you be judged?

Alty,

I am not judging Cred. He brought up the Golden Rule thingy. I as giving him the opportunity to use it. He has been rude to me from day one.. I thought it was because I was a Christian.. but apparently it is because he THINKs I am someone named SassyT. I have assured him several times that I am not and I think since he brought up the whole Golden Rule stuff... he should man up and apologize to me. But if he doesn't... I will survive. I just think if he DOESN'T... His thread will make no sense and simply prove that he in fact does NOT follow the "golden rule". Regardless of whether it came about before Jesus or after.

Sorry mate, I don't know how to dumb it down, I find it quite self-explanatory. I guess we'll just leave it at that.


Well, live in your world if you wish.

ClassyT, I have to admit that at first I too thought you might be SassyT, but your writing styles are very different. Sassy's posts were very difficult to read, yours are very clear and concise. I think it's the fact that you have similar user names and you are both Christian and come onto the Religious discussions boards that had me thinking you might be one and the same.

Personally I think it's best to let by-gones be by-gones, move forward, don't look back.

It's difficult to remain calm when discussing religion, it's a touchy subject. Even when two people of the same faith get together there can be problems, but here we have many different people with many different beliefs. To find common ground is almost impossible.

I don't know where the Golden Rule first started, but I do think all of mankind should follow it.

As for apologizing, I think that we've all said things to each other that we should apologize for, every single one of us. Sometimes it's better just to turn the other cheek. :)

One day, after months of fighting with each other, I sent Cred a PM and asked if we could let by gones be by gones and start fresh. He didn't hesitate to accept what I offered and since then we have been very civil to each other, in fact, I consider him a friend.

I have yet to see Cred be willing to drop his nastiness for a Christian. I have offered him the same and he has rejected it. I have sen him willing to be civil with anyopne who opposes Christianity, but NEVER a Christian.


Doesn't the bible say, judge no lest you be judged?

Read the whole context, Alty. It does not say NOT to judge, but to judge with righteous judgement.

http://www.geocities.com/smithtj.geo/judge.html

As for apologizing, I think that we've all said things to eachother that we should apologize for, every single one of us. Sometimes it's better just to turn the other cheek. :)

Alty, as I said once before, anytime that you are ready to drop the shields, I am here and the door is always open. I hold nothing against anybody, and would love to see you be willing to discuss things respectfully. I think that some apologies are due, but that is not a condition for my willingness to welcome you whenever you are willing to walk through that door.

The ball is in your court. Words are easy. Actions speak louder.

Words are easy. Actions speak louder.

I agree Tom.

I'm going to pipe in and I hope that Cred is okay with me sharing this story.

When I first came to this site I butted heads with Cred like you wouldn't believe. If we were on the same thread together it would eventually be closed because we would fight like cats and dogs.

One day, after months of fighting with eachother, I sent Cred a PM and asked if we could let by gones be by gones and start fresh. He didn't hesitate to accept what I offered and since then we have been very civil to eachother, in fact, I consider him a friend.

If he's really as hateful as you all think, how do we both manage to get along? I believe in God, he doesn't, yet we are both kind to eachother. Why? Because we're both good people.

Doesn't the bible say, judge no lest you be judged?


I don't mind Cred, he keeps it interesting, and he does get me at least to think more about what and why I believe. ;)

I don't mind you Alty. Please don't misinterpret that fact that I disagree with you or Cred as anything more than just that.

Yes - forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us :)

I don't mind you Alty.

LMAO, I don't mind you either inthebox. :) I don't mind when someone disagrees with me, as long as the do it respectfully, but, I have to admit, I will fight back if I feel insulted or pushed. My bad, have to stop that. ;)

I have yet to see Cred be willing to drop his nastiness for a Christian. I have offered him the same and he has rejected it. I have sen him willing to be civil with anyopne who opposes Christianity, but NEVER a Christian.


http://www.geocities.com/smithtj.geo/judge.html

And therein lies the problem. I actually think that if Cred would drop the attitude he might actually LIKE me even if he doesn't agree. But he is more than just a little disagreeable. HE is NASTY AND I believe it is because I am a Christian. There really is no other reason for it. I disagree with plenty of people here... none have treated me as poorly as Cred. I'd like him to put his money where his mouth is and say his sorry and lets start over. This is the perfect thread for it.. the Golden Rule. I will start... Cred, if I have said something that has offended you, (me, NOT sassyT) then I apologize. I don't know what it could have been but nevertheless I am sorry. Now, whether you apologize to me, makes no difference, I forgive you for being nasty to me anyway. THAT is how to follow the "golden rule".

Hello spit:

"Him that has the gold, makes the rules".

Since I have some gold, I'm making the rules. Here they are; I've been reading.... Holy smokes! You guys HATE each other. That' ain't cool. So, put that hate on me. I'll take your sins upon myself. You are now free to love again. Go forth and multiply.

What? A Jewish carpenter can't offer an opinion?

excon

I don't hate anyone.. I disagree with some but HATE... naah. And Uh, you might want to take some of your own advice... 'jewish carpenter"....i have read some of your posts in politics. I'd say you weren't real fond of the "rightys" as you call them. That's OK. There is nothing wrong with having an opinion and speaking your mind. That is all we are doing... I think.:)

ClassyT, I have to admit that at first I too thought you might be SassyT, but your writing styles are very different. Sassy's posts were very difficult to read, yours are very clear and concise. I think it's the fact that you have similar user names and you are both Christian and come onto the Religious discussions boards that had me thinking you might be one and the same.

Personally I think it's best to let by-gones be by-gones, move forward, don't look back.

It's difficult to remain calm when discussing religion, it's a touchy subject. Even when two people of the same faith get together there can be problems, but here we have many different people with many different beliefs. To find common ground is almost impossible.

I don't know where the Golden Rule first started, but I do think all of mankind should follow it.

As for apologizing, I think that we've all said things to eachother that we should apologize for, every single one of us. Sometimes it's better just to turn the other cheek. :)

Alty,

I certainly will turn the other cheek... but I am enjoing ever so slightly making my point about the golden rule. I just think if someone posts that they follow it.. then they should make good on it. That's all.

I'll be the first to admit, I don't always follow the Golden rule. Can I try for Silver or bronze? ;)

Just remember, we're all human, none of us perfect, we all make mistakes. :)

Alty,

I certainly will turn the other cheek...but i am enjoing ever so slightly making my point about the golden rule. I just think if someone posts that they follow it..then they should make good on it. thats all.

Well said. I find it ironic that too often those who speak about respecting other beliefs, about tolerance, etc. are too often those who are the biggest violators!

Well said. I find it ironic that too often those who speak about respecting other beliefs, about tolerance, etc., are too often those who are the biggest violators!

I agree.

I'll be the first to admit, I don't always follow the Golden rule. Can I try for Silver or bronze? ;)

Just remember, we're all human, none of us perfect, we all make mistakes. :)

Hey, I am the FIRST to admit it. I think the "golden rule" is waaay harder than it sounds... I don't care WHAT faith you are.

I have yet to see Cred be willing to drop his nastiness for a Christian.
What a nonsense and steer produce!! The reality is that I have never dropped my by Tommy Smith acclaimed nastiness for any Christian for what he/she BELIEVES. I have always shown respect for the various religious main beliefs.
Where I am strong wording is where theists claim their religious BELIEFS as truths, as if there is even the smallest possible iota of valid supporting evidence for that .
All I do is pick balloons full of hot air, blown up by fundamental theists!!


I have offered him the same and he has rejected it.
More nonsense and steer produce!! Tommy Smith NEVER has offered a fair and even truce. Simply because it is not in his own interest.
He knows that whatever he BELIEVES to be "true" is completely in the area of religious BELIEF and not in the area of reality.
There is nothing for Tommy Smith to be gained from a truce with me.
Any SUGGESTIONS thereto so far were always based on his BELIEFS and on respecting his personal interpretation of these BELIEFS.

If Tommy Smith really want to have some "truce" on this board, why does he not offer that - and the basis of that "truce" - for everyone to see ? As on a fair and equal basis?

We all have seen over the last months how Tommy Smith lamented about being "harrassed" by various people. But we ALSO have seen Tommy Smith "harrassing" various people here on this same board.

We even have seen board management NOT intervening - despite various repeated requests thereto - to moderate in some topics, specially those where Tommy Smith repeatedly and deliberately tried to destroy the entire topic with his repeated creationist's lists full of totally off-topic steer produce.

We also have seen Tommy Smith's participation - if not driving force - in all the aggression, nittpicking, and senseless BS'ing on this same board.

Yes, I have rejected in the past (on Answerway) Tommies unfair, unbalanced, and selfserving offered "truce".
The reality is - as I already stated - that Tommy Smith NEVER offered a real and fair "truce". I would be pleasantly surprised if he ever did, and - specially - if he ever kept to it himself - as specially that last one does not seem to be in his nature...


I have sen him willing to be civil with anyopne who opposes Christianity, but NEVER a Christian.
You only can see if you open your eyes and clear your mind from your own religious bias and personal prejuces.
I fear that the cause of this view mentioned by Tommy Smith is entirely located in that field.
I have lot's of Christian friends, I am married blisfully with one for 40 years, I am connected in many ways with vicars, rabbis, imams, priests, bishops, archbishops, etc. all around the world, with whom I have and had polite and respectful discussions without any nastiness. None of these persons ever resorted to the type of deliberate aggression and nastiness that Tommy Smith is so wellknown for here and on various other Q&A boards.

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

.

.

The topic here is : The Golden Rule :

Tj3 and many other "christians" claim that the golden rule comes from the Bible, and it is not and certainly never has been a standard by which atheists live...

The reality is that the golden rule was wellknown long before the first letter was ever started on the first Bible chapter.
The reality is that the golden rules comes not from the bible. The bible just accepted it as a valid and sound way of life guideline.
Just as almost all other religions did accept exactly the same : the golden rule is therefore NOT some form of property of Christianity.
Atheists have - just as all other people - used the golden rule to live a proper , prosperous, and safe life.
Atheists did not abuse the golden rule for their own views. Many "christians" however abused - and still abuse - the golden rule to support their own religious delusions.

Believe whatever you prefer, but at least accept that others may have different views !
Why can't so many "christians" show more respect for other world views, and drop all their apparent feelings of hatred and revenge?

===

And I still have not seen anything that carries any validity to Tj3's claim that the golden rule comes from the Bible, and that the golden rule is not and certainly never has been a standard by which atheists live...

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

.

.

Hello:

In MY atheist church, they teach us to treat everybody like crap - specially Christians...

Bwa, ha ha ha.

excon

What a nonsense and steer produce!!

The usual first line, eh, Cred?


The reality is that I have never dropped my by Tommy Smith acclaimed nastiness for any Christian for what he/she BELIEVES. I have always shown respect for the various religious main beliefs.

The first half is right when you say that you never dropped your nastiness for Christians. As for the second half - well, it would only be the naïve who have not seen you in action who would fall for that,


Where I am strong wording is where theists claim their religious BELIEFS as truths, as if there is even the smallest possible iota of valid supporting evidence for that .

Just as you claim your BELIEFS as truths, as if there is even the smallest possible iota of valid supporting evidence for that .


More nonsense and steer produce!! Tommy Smith NEVER has offered a fair and even truce. Simply because it is not in his own interest.

Really, Cred? That is interesting, because later in the same message, you say:

----------------------------------------
Yes, I have rejected in the past (on Answerway) Tommies unfair, unbalanced, and selfserving offered "truce".
----------------------------------------

So I have suggested an end to the nastiness and you have every time rejected it. So I stand by my earlier comments.

I am not at war with you, so I do not need a truce, but once again, here is my suggestion - drop your nastiness, drop your abuse, drop your attacks and let's have a respectful discuss based upon the issues. If need be, and if you have personal issues against me, let's take it off line and discuss with a view to putting to aside, and let's move forward, starting anew, and let discuss on the following basis discussions to be respectful, which means stay on the topic alone, with no comments regarding the person.

I await your response.

The reality is that the golden rule was wellknown long before the first letter was ever started on the first Bible chapter.

Well, let's look at the two assumptions that come from this:

1) You are assuming that the source is not Biblical. So far you offered no evidence for that. You assume that some other documents are older than the first instance of this in the Bible, but you have not validated that statement.

2) Second, you have not validated why you believe the source to be not Biblical. This appears to be point that you have missed. Usually where similar things appear in difference document (and for the time being, let's assume that to be the case), it typically refers to a common source. All you have done is identify some documents that you claim to have existed and claim to have been older than the Bible (a point which remains unvalidated in any case), but you have not addressed the point that the source itself of the Bible is God, and in such a case, God would be the likely primary source.

Hello:

In MY atheist church, they teach us to treat everybody like crap - specially Christians....

Bwa, ha ha ha.

excon

Oooooooo can I join

1) You are assuming that the source is not Biblical. So far you offered no evidence for that. You assume that some other documents are older than the first instance of this in the Bible, but you have not validated that statement.
Just as you have never provided OSE for god's existence, but still claim that whatever you believe is factual...
Why should to me apply what seems not to apply to yourself ?


Second, you have not validated why you believe the source to be not Biblical. This is essential the same as your point 1, so once more :
Why should to me apply what seems not to apply to yourself ?

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

.

.

Just as you have never provided OSE for god's existence, but still claim that whatever you believe is factual ...
Why should to me apply what seems not to apply to yourself ?

Still in denial even after a thread that went over 500 posts!

Just as you have never provided OSE for god's existence, but still claim that whatever you believe is factual ...
Why should to me apply what seems not to apply to yourself ?

This is essential the same as your point 1, so once more :
Why should to me apply what seems not to apply to yourself ?


Come on Cred. Just a diversion from not answering or proving your points made in your OP. :confused:











g&p

Tom, I've also tried to reach a truce with you to no avail. You claim to want to discuss respectfully, yet you keep dredging up past conversations and claiming that your way is the only way.

I've extended the olive branch with you and had it thrown back in my face. Now I know what you'll say, you'll claim it's me, that I wouldn't discuss respectfully, and you'd be partly right. After many attempts to have a respectful discussion with you, I gave up and decided to stoop to your level instead.

You have your own agenda, and nothing will get in the way of that. I don't think you really want to hear what others have to say, you're only here to preach you beliefs, to show that you are right and everyone else is wrong.

There is not respectful discussion with someone who doesn't want to listen. Feel free to say the same of me, because again, you'd be partially right. I have no desire to listen to any more of your rantings.

You are the only one of this board that I have a problem with Tom, doesn't that tell you something?

Tom, I've also tried to reach a truce with you to no avail.

Alty,

If you want to have respectful discussion, it is entirely in your hands. Just stop the abuse. And if you do not plan to do so, then why not just stop talking about it, and move on somewhere else.


I've extended the olive branch with you and had it thrown back in my face.

You do not like me disagreeing with you. And that "olive branch" is the only one that I have seen with poison tipped thorns - It comes with conditions that I must do as you say, accept your beliefs, stop disagreeing with you, etc. conditions that you know are not reasonable. I impose no conditions on you. I will treat you respectfully no matter what, but a respectful discussion is a 2-way street. So, once again, if you want to discuss respectfully, all you need to do is to stop the attacks, and lets get into the discussion.


You have your own agenda, and nothing will get in the way of that.

Yes, my agenda is the truth.


I don't think you really want to hear what others have to say, you're only here to preach you beliefs, to show that you are right and everyone else is wrong.

The question is not whether we believe that our religious views are right and your religion is wrong. Every person believes that or they would not hold to their religious views. The problem comes when one person says that the other must accept their views, as you have said to the Christians on here. All of us present our views on here, yourself included, but most including myself accept the right of others to respectfully disagree. Why won't you agree to that also? Why must others accept YOUR religious views?


There is not respectful discussion with someone who doesn't want to listen. Feel free to say the same of me, because again, you'd be partially right. I have no desire to listen to any more of your rantings.

And following your logic, that means that you have no intent to discuss respectfully - BINGO! Alty, I have absolutely no interest in constantly listening to your attacks and abuse. If you don't want to talk to me, put me on ignore. That won't hurt my feelings one iota. IF you want respectful discussions, then drop the axe and let's discuss. I hold nothing against you, and am more than willing to start over with you anytime that you are ready to do so. That door will never close. But either way, your constant attacks against me serve no purpose.

Indeed, it leads one to wonder why you chose to interrupt this discussion to launch a person attack against me. Are you planning to do this on every thread? Kindly get over it and move on. This is beginning to look like an obsession.

Tom, when I say that I would like people to accept my beliefs, I'm not saying that you have to agree with them, simply accept that there are other beliefs than your own.

I don't expect anyone to jump on board and follow my beliefs, I would simply like the same respect that you expect.

You really don't see it do you? You expect everyone to say that your way is the only way, that your "proof" is absolute, that you beliefs are the one true way to God. But, when I ask that you listen to what I have to say you won't. You just quote scripture and say that only you are right.

That's why there can be no discussion with you. A one sided discussion isn't a discussion, it's preaching, that's what you are doing Tom.

So, no matter how hard I try, it's not possible. I know you don't agree, so be it, I think we've already established that you and I don't see eye to eye. Until you drop your guard we cannot have respect for one another, because you do not respect me, so how can you hope to respectfully discuss religion with me? It's not possible.

I wish it were different Tom, but it is what it is and I can't change it, I'm tired of trying.

Maybe I'll see you around the boards, maybe one day we can both be respectful, until then I think it's better for everyone if we just ignore each other.

Cred, I do apologize for getting off topic. Good luck with your thread.

Peace.

Alty out.

Alt,
There is an Ignore feature on this site. Now seems like a good time to use it.

Tom, when I say that I would like people to accept my beliefs, I'm not saying that you have to agree with them, simply accept that there are other beliefs than your own.

That is not what you have done in practice. In practice, you have demanded that we accept that your views are equally right, and of course many Christians have disagreed with your perspective on that and tried to explain to you that your request is not reasonable. Further, you have never practiced that view of accepting Christian views as equal to yours or we would not be having this discussion.



I don't expect anyone to jump on board and follow my beliefs, I would simply like the same respect that you expect.

You have it and always have had. If you want a respectful discussion, then stop the attacks and let's have that discussion. If you don't, then why not just move on or put me on ignore.


You really don't see it do you? You expect everyone to say that your way is the only way, that your "proof" is absolute, that you beliefs are the one true way to God. But, when I ask that you listen to what I have to say you won't. You just quote scripture and say that only you are right.

Alty, this is not true, but there is no value in arguing it with you. If you really believe it, then move on or put me on ignore. These constant rants against me across the board serve no purpose.


That's why there can be no discussion with you. A one sided discussion isn't a discussion, it's preaching, that's what you are doing Tom.

Then why do you carry on these abusive rants?


I wish it were different Tom, but it is what it is and I can't change it,

Sure you can - just stop the rants and start respectful discussion. Or move on or put me on ignore. Simple. It is entirely in your hands. I hold nothing against you and am more than willing to accept either approach. If you chose to drop the axe and start discussing respectfully, I will continue to treat you respectfully. If you choose to put me on ignore, you can do so with my best wishes for your future. Keep in mind that at any time you could always choose to change that decision, and I will keep the door open for you. No matter what you have done to me, or said to me, it will not change that.

Why can't you accept that, make your decision and move on in the path that you choose?

Then why do you carry on these abusive rants?I believe that you are the only one that sees "abusive rants" here. Please stop attempting to paint yourself as a victim, it's not working.

I believe that you are the only one that sees "abusive rants" here. Please stop attempting to paint yourself as a victim, it's not working.

NK,

You are, if course, welcome to your opinion, however you have not been known for taking the neutral middle ground either, so I would not expect any endorsement or agreement from you (and I hardly think that you are in a position to speak on behalf of all members of AMHD). But that does not matter, because while you and Alty try to focus on the person, you appear to have forgotten the topic, and I find that rather ironic. :D I wonder, what would this thread and this discussion have been like if ALL posts in the thread had been written with the Golden Rule as the primary focus?

In any case, I do hope that Alty is able to bring closure to her decision and then move on.

Tom

Alt,
There is an Ignore feature on this site. Now seems like a good time to use it.

I agree. As for the open door that Tom speaks of, it was never open to begin with, and I'm tired of knocking. Ignore it is, I'm done.

I agree. As for the open door that Tom speaks of, it was never open to begin with, and I'm tired of knocking. Ignore it is, I'm done.

Alty, it was and is and always will be open. It is not wide enough for you to carry that axe through it I(nor can you get through it by knocking on it with the axe ;) ) , though it is easy for you to walk through. Drop the axe, and come on in anytime, now or in the future.

Come on Cred. Just a diversion from not answering or proving your points made in your OP. :confused:


Now, in hopes that we can get back on topic, I just wanted to bring the last input on the topic of the thread to the top.

... however you have not been known for taking the neutral middle ground either, so I would not expect any endorsement or agreement from you. The same can be said of you so it's no argument for your side as it were.


(and I hardly think that you are in a position to speak on behalf of all members of AMHD).I've been here a long time and know the mods and admin a little. I know how this place works. I stand by my comments. We've seen people like you come and go. People who think they are smarter than everyone else. You seem to have thin skin for that type of person.

The same can be said of you so it's no argument for your side as it were.

Sigh! I see that you have still not read the thread topic. Why do people so much want to attack others rather than deal with the issue?


I've been here a long time and know the mods and admin a little. I know how this place works. I stand by my comments. We've seen people like you come and go. People who think they are smarter than everyone else. You seem to have thin skin for that type of person.

No, NK, despite your false judgments, it is not true at all. Indeed, quite the contrary. I have learned a great deal from those on boards such as this, but the learning is much greater for all concerned when the participants choose to respectfully discuss the topic.

I have tried to discuss some points with you, but you prefer to be cryptic in your responses. Maybe because you think that you are smarter than me - I don't know, and I don't care. It seems to matter to you, and if so, that is your business and your issue to deal with.

Now, are you done? Can we get back to the discussion, or do you want to carry on in a very ironic sidelight to the thread topic? If you are not done, maybe you should consider the ignore feature also.

Come on Cred. Just a diversion from not answering or proving your points made in your OP. :confused:


Let's try this again (unless someone wants to post another example of what the Golden Rule is not).

Now, in hopes that we can get back on topic, I just wanted to bring the last input on the topic of the thread to the top.

The "golden rule" is also known as the "Ethic of reciprocity" and is certainly not a concept originally thought of in the bible:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethic_of_reciprocity (http://www.religioustolerance.org/reciproc.htm)

Here are versions of the golden rule in various religions: Versions of the Golden Rule in 21 world religions (http://www.religioustolerance.org/reciproc.htm)

I live by this rule as well, plus it's a tenet of my parenting. No bible is required for good morals.

The "golden rule" is also known as the "Ethic of reciprocity" and is certainly not a concept originally thought of in the bible:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethic_of_reciprocity (http://www.religioustolerance.org/reciproc.htm)

Here are versions of the golden rule in various religions: Versions of the Golden Rule in 21 world religions (http://www.religioustolerance.org/reciproc.htm)

And as I responded before, let's look at the two assumptions that come from this:

1) You are assuming that the source is not Biblical. So far you offered no evidence for that. You assume that some other documents are older than the first instance of this in the Bible, but you have not validated that statement.

2) Second, you have not validated why you believe the source to be not Biblical. This appears to be point that you have missed. Usually where similar things appear in difference document (and for the time being, let's assume that to be the case), it typically refers to a common source. All you have done is identify some documents that you claim to have existed and claim to have been older than the Bible (a point which remains unvalidated in any case), but you have not addressed the point that the source itself of the Bible is God, and in such a case, God would be the likely primary source.


No bible is required for good morals.

No one said that the Bible is required for good morals, but unless morals have a standard upon which they are based, they will vary from persons to person, culture to culture and over time. The morals may still be called "good" because relativism is the standard.

Nk your link does not specify dates in most cases.

As to the OP - NK prove where "good" morals come from in the first place.

What is "good" - does that change with time, geography or culture or religion? As Tj points out - that is relative.

A history of human sacrifice and cannibalism (http://www.hyperhistory.net/apwh/essays/cot/t0w13cannibalism.htm)





g&p

.... As to the OP - NK prove where "good" morals come from in the first place.
The Golden Rules is as old as humanity : by serving the interests of the tribe or group you belong to, you serve your own interests just as well. Even under simians and other animals you see this same behavior.
That is why you find the Golden Rule in almost every philosophic and/or religious view also.
Every religion in the Middle East from long before the era described in the Old Testament had the Golden Rule already as one of it's corner stones.

The Golden Rule started as a survival measure, but over time evolved also as basis for moral and ethical thinking.

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

.

.

The Golden Rules is as old as humanity :

Agreed. But this does not validate what the source is.


By serving the interests of the tribe or group you belong to, you serve your own interests just as well. Even under simians and other animals you see this same behavior.
That is why you find the Golden Rule in almost every philosophic and/or religious view also.
Every religion in the Middle East from long before the era described in the Old Testament had the Golden Rule already as one of it's corner stones.

The Golden Rule started as a survival measure, but over time evolved also as basis for moral and ethical thinking.

I accept this as your theory. Can you validate it?

BTW, the Golden rule by itself is not a standard for ethical behaviour. The reason is that as cultures, time, and societal attitudes change, what is considered ethical behaviour also changes, and thus the golden rule, not tied to a specific standard of what is "good" becaomes a matter of relativistic ethics.

Even under simians and other animals you see this same behavior.

Wolf Country, the pack, body postures and social structure (http://www.wolfcountry.net/information/WolfPack.html)

Like wolves? Does the alpha really have to really treat the lowest members the way he does? How would he [ the alpha ] feel if the lowest member treated him that way? Oh, that's right - he is dominant.




How about lions -
LION (http://www.wonderclub.com/Wildlife/mammals/lion.html)

Nope - no golden rule - dominance survives


How about bees - why does the queen get waited on - nope no golden rule there either


How about black widows - sexism and canibalism, but no golden rule there



How about gorillas?

ADW: Gorilla gorilla: Information (http://animaldiversity.ummz.umich.edu/site/accounts/information/Gorilla_gorilla.html)



No golden rule there - dominance against


How about chimps?

The ABC's of Chimpanzee Behavior (http://lessonsforhope.org/abc/show_description.asp?abc_id=31)

No golden rule there - again dominance.


Cred the OSE is against your statement. :confused:;):rolleyes::p





g&p

Even under simians and other animals you see this same behavior.
Like wolves? Does the alpha really have to really treat the lowest members the way he does?
I stated :

The Golden Rules is as old as humanity : by serving the interests of the tribe or group you belong to, you serve your own interests just as well. Even under simians and other animals you see this same behavior.
That is why you find the Golden Rule in almost every philosophic and/or religious view also.
Every religion in the Middle East from long before the era described in the Old Testament had the Golden Rule already as one of it's corner stones.
The Golden Rule started as a survival measure, but over time evolved also as basis for moral and ethical thinking.

First I stated that the Golden Rule is as old as humanity. I also explained why that happened.
Than I stated in an add-on that "EVEN" under simians and other animals...
I did not state all animals, or specified any specific animals.

So why don't you keep to the main line of my reply : that The Golden Rules is as old as humanity : by serving the interests of the tribe or group you belong to, you serve your own interests just as well.

I know why you attack the way you do here : you know that I am correct that the Golden Rule is as old as humanity...

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

.

.

I stated :

The Golden Rules is as old as humanity : by serving the interests of the tribe or group you belong to, you serve your own interests just as well. Even under simians and other animals you see this same behavior.
That is why you find the Golden Rule in almost every philosophic and/or religious view also.
Every religion in the Middle East from long before the era described in the Old Testament had the Golden Rule already as one of it's corner stones.

And as I responded before, let's look at the two assumptions that come from this:

1) You are assuming that the source is not Biblical. So far you offered no evidence for that. You assume that some other documents are older than the first instance of this in the Bible, but you have not validated that statement.

2) Second, you have not validated why you believe the source to be not Biblical. This appears to be point that you have missed. Usually where similar things appear in difference document (and for the time being, let's assume that to be the case), it typically refers to a common source. All you have done is identify some documents that you claim to have existed and claim to have been older than the Bible (a point which remains unvalidated in any case), but you have not addressed the point that the source itself of the Bible is God, and in such a case, God would be the likely primary source.


The Golden Rule started as a survival measure, but over time evolved also as basis for moral and ethical thinking.[/B]

First I stated that the Golden Rule is as old as humanity. I also explained why that happened.
Than I stated in an add-on that "EVEN" under simians and other animals...
I did not state all animals, or specified any specific animals.

So why don't you keep to the main line of my reply : that The Golden Rules is as old as humanity : by serving the interests of the tribe or group you belong to, you serve your own interests just as well.

I know why you attack the way you do here : you know that I am correct that the Golden Rule is as old as humanity...

Cred,

I agreed that it may very well be as old as humanity, but as I asked before if you can validate your claims regarding the source.

I stated :

The Golden Rules is as old as humanity : by serving the interests of the tribe or group you belong to, you serve your own interests just as well. Even under simians and other animals you see this same behavior.
That is why you find the Golden Rule in almost every philosophic and/or religious view also.
Every religion in the Middle East from long before the era described in the Old Testament had the Golden Rule already as one of it's corner stones.
The Golden Rule started as a survival measure, but over time evolved also as basis for moral and ethical thinking.

First I stated that the Golden Rule is as old as humanity. I also explained why that happened.
Than I stated in an add-on that "EVEN" under simians and other animals ....
I did not state all animals, or specified any specific animals.

So why dont you keep to the main line of my reply : that The Golden Rules is as old as humanity : by serving the interests of the tribe or group you belong to, you serve your own interests just as well.

I know why you attack the way you do here : you know that I am correct that the Golden Rule is as old as humanity ....



.

.



I called into question one specific quote. It is not an attack to show OSE that contradicts what you state.



1] I gave you two examples of simians NOT practicing the golden rule.

2] In addition you have not provided OSE for the statement that simians, whatever species practice the golden rule. I am holding you to the same standards that you hold Christians, the Bible, and God to.

3] Humanity's history is contrary to the golden rule. For example;
The Roman empire
Genghis Kahn
Darfur
Rwanda
The Congo
Mumbai
Stalin
Hitler
Eygptian slavery
Slavery in the US
9/11
Pearl Harbor
On and on...

So why is it, that we know what we should do but we don't do it?



You keep on dodging the point- where is your OSE that the golden rule is as old as humanity







g&p

So why is it, that we know what we should do but we don't do it?It's same argument as christians and the ten commandments.






















Nk.

It's same argument as christians and the ten commandments.

Which are also Biblical! ;)






















Tj.[/QUOTE]

Hello:

This thread is CLOSED!

excon

Why? Because the Christians are winning... LOL... hey Cred. You never DID give me that apology. Come on... it will make you feel better... ;)

This thread is ....
It seems that they have a single key to produce that line here on this Board !

BTW : what about the Golden Rule??

:)

.

.

.

You never DID give me that apology. Come on...it will make you feel better....

Click the arrow to read my post #3 on this !!!May I draw to your attention that the topic is "The Golden Rule"??

Please stay on-topic!!

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

.

.

.

Why does it matter where the golden rule originated? What difference does it make? Doesn't the "spirit" of the golden rule prohibit this sort of nonsense bickering?

It's a good rule to follow - be nice to people. You don't have to be Christian to do that. You don't have to be an atheist, a muslim, or a one-eyed-one-horned-flying-purple-people-eater. Christians don't always follow it, nor do atheists, muslims, or one-eyed-one-horned-flying-purple-people-eaters.

The reason the quote in the OP is flawed is because atheists don't have a universal standard by which they live. The only universal among atheists is the lack of belief in a god. Any other "standard" is coincidence, and anyone who says there is a "standard" among atheists is wrong. I know lots of atheists who follow the golden rule, lots of Christians who do, and a few of both who don't.

What's wrong with just being nice to people? Who cares whose idea it was, where it originated, or which religion or non-religion is "better" at it? I kind of think if you are going to argue about being "better" at being nice to people, you probably aren't very nice to begin with... But that's just me.

Carry on with the ensuing flame war (again).

Why does it matter where the golden rule originated? What difference does it make?

I don't know. A number of non-Christians and Atheists seemed to think that it was important.


Doesn't the "spirit" of the golden rule prohibit this sort of nonsense bickering?

Not to mention some of the other nastiness that we have seen on the thread.


It's a good rule to follow - be nice to people. You don't have to be Christian to do that.

You are right - you don't. But the difference, as I stated earlier in the thread, is that the golden rule itself is relative and thus what that means to non-Christians, especially atheists can and will vary over time, by culture and by location. What makes it different in Christianity is that we have a standard for behaviour that godes along with it, which does not allow for that variation. It does not mean that Christians are perfect, but whereas an atheists (for example) could, over time act in various different ways towards others and still claim to be following the Golden Rule, the same is not true for Christians.

It seems that they have a single key to produce that line here on this Board Hello Cred:

I ain't got one of those, and I ain't a thread cop. I AM sneaky, though.

excon

Why does it matter where the golden rule originated? What difference does it make?
It are religious fundamentalists like Tj3 who CLAIM that the Golden Rule is of biblical origin, which it certainly is not!!

And yes, it's a good rule to follow!!
But that does not mean that you have to accept religious fanaticism...

Just read post #113 to see what I mean !

:)

.

.

.

I AM sneaky, though.
Yeah, I know ! :)

How about the Golden Rule ?

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

.

.

.

Is he claiming it originated from the Bible or a Christian only thing or both?
I really don't want to read through all this disagreeing to figure out what Tj3 is claiming but I would like to know

Thank You Credo for explaining :D

Is he claiming it originated from the Bible or a Christian only thing or both?
I really don't want to read through all this disagreeing to figure out what Tj3 is claiming but I would like to know

Thank You Credo for explaining :D


Tom is claiming that the Golden rule originated in the bible and that it isn't something that Atheists abide by. So both.

He claims that some Atheists do follow this rule but that it is not a set standard for them to live by, whereas it is a set standard for a Christian. At least that's my understanding, I could be wrong, goodness knows I have been bofore. ;)

Personally, I think that we should just let whoever has the most gold make the rules. It's a joke, laugh! :)

Well I agree with jill that it is not a set standard for atheists but
It is neither a set standard for many professing Christians either so
Really the question is more who actually does live by the golden rule and what are their standards and beliefs that they live by.
For the origin I would say where was its origination in history before the 10 commandments because the 10 commandments covered the golden rule in so many words.

Hello again:

The thing is, when you're talking about atheists, there is no "they". They don't go to a church. They don't join atheist clubs. They don't operate as a group. They don't subscribe to a particular philosophy...

The only thing atheists have in common is what they DON'T believe - not what they DO.

excon

Yeah so the golden rule would not have likely started with 'them' since 'they' are not a 'they'.

Hello again:

The thing is, when you're talking about atheists, there is no "they". They don't go to a church. They don't join atheist clubs. They don't operate as a group. They don't subscribe to a particular philosophy...

As a matter of fact the only thing atheists have in common is what they DON'T believe - not what they DO.

excon


True, and Cred wasn't saying that the Golden rule originated from an Atheist, he's just saying that it didn't originally come from the bible.

I don't know who's right, I'm just here to learn. :)

Technically it didn't originate with Jesus or Christians
It originated with Moses and the Jews
Jesus simply put it in a simpler boiled down sentence.

I would be interested in finding the original history it would be interesting I am sure.
So far I found this
http://www.personal.kent.edu/~jwattles/GRquotes.htm

And

I did find on wikianswers
The Golden Rule "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" is a paraphrase of a line from Matthew 7:12 in the New Testament. Hillel's precept restates the idea more directly: Do not do unto others what you don't want done to yourself.

FURTHER

Hillel's version is certainly a precept that may follow. However, there is a difference between his advise and Jesus' "Golden Rule."

The words of Jesus to "Do unto others" is a proactive command, and for a positive benefit to others, that is "as you would have them do unto you." In other words, do something positive. ' Don't just sit there. Go and do good to others.'

Hillel's words are more passive, suggesting that 'you don't necessarily have to do anything good to others, just as long as you aren't doing anything bad to them, that's fine.'

The Golden Rules is as old as humanity : by serving the interests of the tribe or group you belong to, you serve your own interests just as well.

So it is much older than the time of "Moses and the Jews".

That is why you find the Golden Rule in almost every philosophic and/or religious view also.
Every religion from long before the era described in the Old Testament had the Golden Rule already as one of it's corner stones.

So the Golden Rule is part of us all, and surely did not originate from the Bible. The Bible just used the Golden Rule as almost all other religions did.

The Golden Rule started as a survival measure, but over time evolved also as basis for moral and ethical thinking.

Atheists use the Golden Rule for the above explained reasons, just as every religion does.

You do not need a supernatural entity to understand that if you are nice to others, your chances that others are nice to you do improve considerably...

:)

.

.

.

I agree and that is why I said it would be interesting to find the historic origins before Moses. I enjoy history of tribes and their customs.

Hello again:

You know, I'll betcha stone aged people practiced the golden rule even though they didn't have language and didn't even know that that's what they were doing. They were just surviving, and tribes wouldn't survive WITHOUT practicing that particular rule.

So, in my view, it's a survival thing rather than a religious thing.

excon

It are religious fundamentalists like Tj3 who CLAIM that the Golden Rule is of biblical origin, which it certainly is not !!!

What I said, Cred, was that it was Biblical. You are claiming that it came from a source prior the source that the Bible got it from, and we are still waiting for you to validate your cute story about it's origins. But each time that we ask, you avoid the question.

What I said, Cred, was that it was Biblical. You are claiming that it came from a source prior the source that the Bible got it from, and we are still waiting for you to validate your cute story about it's origins. But each time that we ask, you avoid the question.

Basically what I gathered when I asked my ? In post #117
I figured you were claiming the first written proof of the golden rule was the Bible.

Tom is claiming that the Golden rule originated in the bible and that it isn't something that Atheists abide by. So both.

Sigh! So many people like to speak for others. I guess that is easier than asking questions.

I did not say that it originated in the Bible. - I am saying that it is a Biblical concept - I am saying that the God of the Bible is the source.
I am saying that Cred is unable to validate his story
I am saying that Cred is unable to show an older source.

When you find a similar concept in a variety of sources, though it is possible for it to have originated independently, it is more likely that it had a single source. In this case, it is clear that the God of the Bible is the source, and that is why we find it in the Bible. The Bible is therefore the record closest to the source, and therefore the remainder of the similar statement are secondary.



He claims that some Atheists do follow this rule but that it is not a set standard for them to live by, whereas it is a set standard for a Christian.

I did not say that either.

I said that it could be followed by anyone, but when you say that you treat others the way that you should be treated, it is relative to what you thing is an appropriate way to be treated. THus for an atheist, that can vary over time since there is no absolute standard of right and wrong. For a Christian there is an absolute standard - the Bible.

Basically what I gathered when I asked my ? in post #117
I figured you were claiming the first written proof of the golden rule was the Bible.

Actually I am saying that it is the God of the Bible since all scripture comes from God.

The Golden Rules is as old as humanity : by serving the interests of the tribe or group you belong to, you serve your own interests just as well.

So it is much older than the time of "Moses and the Jews".

That is why you find the Golden Rule in almost every philosophic and/or religious view also.
Every religion from long before the era described in the Old Testament had the Golden Rule already as one of it's corner stones.

So the Golden Rule is part of us all, and surely did not originate from the Bible. The Bible just used the Golden Rule as almost all other religions did.

The Golden Rule started as a survival measure, but over time evolved also as basis for moral and ethical thinking.

Atheists use the Golden Rule for the above explained reasons, just as each and every religion does.

You do not need a supernatural entity to understand that if you are nice to others, your chances that others are nice to you do improve considerably ....

I am still waiting for you to show us an older source than the Biblical source. So far all you have done is made claims, opinions and show lists of documents that you say are older.

And as I responded before, let's look at the two assumptions that come from this:

1) You are assuming that the source is not Biblical. So far you offered no evidence for that. You assume that some other documents are older than the first instance of this in the Bible, but you have not validated that statement.

2) Second, you have not validated why you believe the source to be not Biblical. This appears to be point that you have missed. Usually where similar things appear in difference document (and for the time being, let's assume that to be the case), it typically refers to a common source. All you have done is identify some documents that you claim to have existed and claim to have been older than the Bible (a point which remains unvalidated in any case), but you have not addressed the point that the source itself of the Bible is God, and in such a case, God would be the likely primary source.

I did not say that it originated in the Bible.
I am saying that it is a Biblical concept.
I am saying that the God of the Bible is the source.
I am saying that Cred is unable to validate his story
I am saying that Cred is unable to show an older source.

Okay, just so I understand.

So you're saying that before the bible was written the Golden rule came from God. How can you verify that?

You say it's a biblical concept, isn't that the same as saying that you believe it originated in the bible?

I think I'm missing something here. Please explain where I went wrong.

Okay, just so I understand.

So you're saying that before the bible was written the Golden rule came from God. How can you verify that?


Well scripture says that it is inspired by God, and since God is omniscient, He did not get it from the Bible.


You say it's a biblical concept, isn't that the same as saying that you believe it originated in the bible?

No. It is Biblical because the Bible is the word of God. But the Golden rule came from God since all scripture is inspired by God. I think that we are dealing with semantics.

Okay, I get what you're saying now.

Like I said, I have no idea where the Golden rule originated from, I'm just here to learn.

I'm sorry if I misquoted you I thought I had it right, that's why I wanted to clear it up, make sure I understand.

Peace. :)

That is why the only way to really answer this is to show written historic proof that a tribe before Moses time followed something that could be considered 'the golden rule. Otherwise this is going no where.

No. It is Biblical because the Bible is the word of God. But the Golden rule came from God since all scripture is inspired by God. I think that we are dealing with semantics.So all those other religions that have a similar moral have all been inspired by your god?

Some "Ethic of Reciprocity" passages from the religious texts of various religions and secular beliefs:



Bahá'í Faith:

"Ascribe not to any soul that which thou wouldst not have ascribed to thee, and say not that which thou doest not." "Blessed is he who preferreth his brother before himself." Baha'u'llah
"And if thine eyes be turned towards justice, choose thou for thy neighbour that which thou choosest for thyself." Epistle to the Son of the Wolf


Brahmanism: "This is the sum of Dharma [duty]: Do naught unto others which would cause you pain if done to you". Mahabharata, 5:1517 "
Buddhism:

"...a state that is not pleasing or delightful to me, how could I inflict that upon another?" Samyutta NIkaya v. 353
Hurt not others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful." Udana-Varga 5:18


Christianity:

"Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets." Matthew 7:12, King James Version.
"And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise." Luke 6:31, King James Version.
"...and don't do what you hate...", Gospel of Thomas 6. The Gospel of Thomas is one of about 40 gospels that were widely accepted among early Christians, but which never made it into the Christian Scriptures (New Testament).


Confucianism:

"Do not do to others what you do not want them to do to you" Analects 15:23
"Tse-kung asked, 'Is there one word that can serve as a principle of conduct for life?' Confucius replied, 'It is the word 'shu' -- reciprocity. Do not impose on others what you yourself do not desire.'" Doctrine of the Mean 13.3
"Try your best to treat others as you would wish to be treated yourself, and you will find that this is the shortest way to benevolence." Mencius VII.A.4


Ancient Egyptian:

"Do for one who may do for you, that you may cause him thus to do." The Tale of the Eloquent Peasant, 109 - 110 Translated by R.B. Parkinson. The original dates to 1970 to 1640 BCE (http://www.religioustolerance.org/bce.htm) and may be the earliest version ever written. 3


Hinduism:

This is the sum of duty: do not do to others what would cause pain if done to you. Mahabharata 5:1517


Humanism:

"(5) Humanists acknowledge human interdependence, the need for mutual respect and the kinship of all humanity."
"(11) Humanists affirm that individual and social problems can only be resolved by means of human reason, intelligent effort, critical thinking joined with compassion and a spirit of empathy for all living beings. " 4
"Don't do things you wouldn't want to have done to you, British Humanist Society. 3


Islam: "None of you [truly] believes until he wishes for his brother what he wishes for himself." Number 13 of Imam "Al-Nawawi's Forty Hadiths." 5
Jainism:

"Therefore, neither does he [a sage] cause violence to others nor does he make others do so." Acarangasutra 5.101-2.
"In happiness and suffering, in joy and grief, we should regard all creatures as we regard our own self." Lord Mahavira, 24th Tirthankara
"A man should wander about treating all creatures as he himself would be treated. "Sutrakritanga 1.11.33


Judaism:

"...thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.", Leviticus 19:18
"What is hateful to you, do not to your fellow man. This is the law: all the rest is commentary." Talmud, Shabbat 31a.
"And what you hate, do not do to any one." Tobit 4:15 6


Native American Spirituality:

"Respect for all life is the foundation." The Great Law of Peace.
"All things are our relatives; what we do to everything, we do to ourselves. All is really One." Black Elk
"Do not wrong or hate your neighbor. For it is not he who you wrong, but yourself." Pima proverb.


Roman Pagan Religion: "The law imprinted on the hearts of all men is to love the members of society as themselves."
Shinto:

"The heart of the person before you is a mirror. See there your own form"
"Be charitable to all beings, love is the representative of God." Ko-ji-ki Hachiman Kasuga


Sikhism:

Compassion-mercy and religion are the support of the entire world". Japji Sahib
"Don't create enmity with anyone as God is within everyone." Guru Arjan Devji 259
"No one is my enemy, none a stranger and everyone is my friend." Guru Arjan Dev : AG 1299


Sufism: "The basis of Sufism is consideration of the hearts and feelings of others. If you haven't the will to gladden someone's heart, then at least beware lest you hurt someone's heart, for on our path, no sin exists but this." Dr. Javad Nurbakhsh, Master of the Nimatullahi Sufi Order.
Taoism:

"Regard your neighbor's gain as your own gain, and your neighbor's loss as your own loss." T'ai Shang Kan Ying P'ien.
"The sage has no interest of his own, but takes the interests of the people as his own. He is kind to the kind; he is also kind to the unkind: for Virtue is kind. He is faithful to the faithful; he is also faithful to the unfaithful: for Virtue is faithful." Tao Teh Ching, Chapter 49


Unitarian:


"The inherent worth and dignity of every person;"
"Justice, equity and compassion in human relations.... "
"The goal of world community with peace, liberty, and justice for all;"
"We affirm and promote respect for the interdependent web of all existence of which we are a part." Unitarian principles. 7,8


Wicca: "An it harm no one, do what thou wilt" (i.e. do what ever you will, as long as it harms nobody, including yourself). One's will is to be carefully thought out in advance of action. This is called the Wiccan Rede (http://www.religioustolerance.org/wicrede.htm)
Yoruba: (Nigeria): "One going to take a pointed stick to pinch a baby bird should first try it on himself to feel how it hurts."
Zoroastrianism:

"That nature alone is good which refrains from doing unto another whatsoever is not good for itself". Dadistan-i-dinik 94:5
"Whatever is disagreeable to yourself do not do unto others." Shayast-na-Shayast 13:29



Some philosophers' statements are:



Epictetus: "What you would avoid suffering yourself, seek not to impose on others." (circa 100 CE (http://www.religioustolerance.org/ce.htm))
Kant: "Act as if the maxim of thy action were to become by thy will a universal law of nature."
Plato: "May I do to others as I would that they should do unto me." (Greece; 4th century BCE (http://www.religioustolerance.org/bce.htm))
Socrates: "Do not do to others that which would anger you if others did it to you." (Greece; 5th century BCE (http://www.religioustolerance.org/bce.htm))
Seneca: "Treat your inferiors as you would be treated by your superiors," Epistle 47:11 (Rome; 1st century CE (http://www.religioustolerance.org/ce.htm))

That is why the only way to really answer this is to show written historic proof that a tribe before Moses time followed something that could be considered 'the golden rule. Otherwise this is going no where.

Yep. Even then that would not prove that it was not Biblical. When we are looking at things back that far, we have only minimal historic records, and we cannot say exactly when Moses received it either. Wew just know that it was earlier. As far as we know at the moment, Moses is the oldest recorded source.

So all those other religions that have a similar moral have all been inspired by your god?

I find it interesting how people like to twist what is said. I never said or even implied that the religions were inspired by God. But Biblical quotes or events recorded in the Bible no doubt were heard by others (such as the records of the global flood that we find in other sources), and passed along, though sometimes the wording or details may vary or get corrupted.

Wow NK, that's some list. :)

I think that we have to agree that every religion has some form of the Golden rule.

From what I've seen here, I have to say that I don't think that it originated with Moses. It makes sense that these words have been uttered in some form or another since the beginning of time, because really, they are words to live by.

From what I've seen here, I have to say that I don't think that it originated with Moses.

No one has been able to validate a source older than the Biblical source. Note also that even if all the sources in that list are correct, not all are the same as the Golden rule.

The golden rule is NOT some form of property of Christianity.
Atheists have - just as all other people - used the golden rule to live a proper , prosperous, and safe life.
Atheists did not abuse the golden rule for their own views.


:)

.

.
Now Cred,

I AM sticking to the topic. You claim to follow the golden rule and I am giving you the opportunity of a lifetime here on AMHD. YOU a Atheist can actually apologize to me a Christian and thus PROVE that you all follow the "golden rule" You have falsely accused me and I am just waiting to here from you as to how very sorry you are. LOL I have a feeling I'm going to be waiting a long long long time aren't I? So anyway, you SAY you use it to live a proper life... I just don't see it in action. I think you just like to argue.:p That's OK.. I suppose there are some Christians that enjoy the argument as well.

Hello again, T:

Let me see, "Do unto others what you would have them do unto you". Hmmmm. It don't say nothing about doing what others EXPECT you to do...

I don't know. Am I missing something?

excon

Ex,

Hey, he said he followed the golden rule... I'd like to see it in action. I EXPECT it because he said he followed it. Am I WRONG? I don't think so...

Hello again, T:

Lemme see, "Do unto others what you would have them do unto you". Hmmmm. It don't say nothing about doing what others EXPECT you to do....

I dunno. Am I missing something?

excon

Different societies and different cultures establish expectations as to what a person understands to be appropriate treatment. Children in such societies may grow up feeling that is what good treatment is because they have known nothing different. That will, of course, influence what they believe is appropriate treatment of others under this rule, assuming that they have ever heard of it.

Hello Tj:

Couple things... You keep thinking people need to "hear" of the golden rule before they can abide by it. I think all they need to do is EXPERIENCE it. It DOESN'T have to be spelled out. It's not something you read. It's something you DO.

Next; I'm baffled how you can discern expectations out of this rule. There just isn't anything about expectations in it. The cool thing about this rule, is that it has NOTHING to do with how others behave. It's only about YOU. Oh, I DO understand that you DO expect certain behaviors due to this rule, but I don't get why. Maybe if you Christians would actually LIVE by it, instead of EXPECTING everybody else to, we'd be better off.

excon

EX,

LOL LOL... yep if it weren't for those darned Christians this whole WORLD would run smoother... lol

Hello again, T:

As noted above, the only thing about those darn Christians is they have "expectations" of me, and how my society should be formulated. As noted above, you seem to have gotten all that out of the golden rule. For the life of me, I can't figure out how.

Tj seems to believe that without God, people wouldn't know how to behave. He believes that, I suppose, because in his own life, without the presence of God, he HIMSELF would possibly misbehave. So, certainly with that belief, he couldn't understand how people behave WITHOUT God in their lives.

But, the truth is there ARE people who behave without any spiritual guidance at all. It's kind of ingrained in them. It's the essence of the word civilized. We became civilized over the ages. We weren't uncivilized one day, and civilized the next.

As I said earlier, I think these behaviors are evolutionery - not religious.

excon

Ex,

From what I can tell of the golden rule, there are no expectations. You should treat people the way you want to be treated.. period. Jesus goes a step further and even says to turn the other cheek. Certainly there are no expectations there. What I take a slight issue with ( and I say slight because I am not the least bit upset really) is that Cred has said that as an atheist he lives by the Golden Rule. I don't really think for one min he is going to appologize to me. But for some crazy, strange, and weird reason.. I am enjoying buggin the heck out of him. He put it out there.. not me.

As for people living under the Golden Rule before Christianity, I don't doubt it one bit. But as Tj3 has said it is biblical. As a Christian it isn't a suggestion... it is a standard. Do I fall short? Yes sometimes I do.

AND I might add, that GOD made you Ex with a conscience. It doesn't matter if you believe in him or not... he gave you that knowing of right and wrong. You can call it evolutionery if you like. Doesn't bother me one bit.

But I do NOT understand why so many people dislike Christians. I am a nice person, you'd like me in real life. So would Cred. We just disagree on GOD. Cred has decided to have it out for me just because I am a Christian. I don't get it??

Hey,I'm not mad at you atheists because you are wrong.. why be mad at me because I'm RIGHT? ;)

As for people living under the Golden Rule before Christianity, I don't doubt it one bit. But as Tj3 has said it is biblical. Those statements are contradictory.

Sure we can. It is in the Bible.
Re-read what I wrote there... I said that you can't say it is a Christian thing, but you CAN say it is a Christian thing, TOO... because it is in the Bible.



Did you ever stop and think that the God who created all that there is was the source?

I have. And THAT is my belief. God, who created all that there is, had a hand in everything... of course, He is not necessarily as described by Christianity... or any Religion, for that matter.

However, He is the same God.

Those statements are contradictory.

Not really. Everyone claims that people were following this rule long before Christ came into the world. In reality, it IS just common courtesy. BUT the Lord Jesus put his stamp of approval on it when he told us that we should treat people the way we would want others to treat us. That is how he ALWAYS lived his life. Look, if it were ingrained in us no one would have to call it the 'golden rule" it would be automatic. It doesn't come naturally to us, it doesn't me anyway, sometimes I kind of want to get even or revenge. I don't think I am any different than anyone else. Christian or non Christian. Does that make sense?

Hello Tj:

Couple things... You keep thinking people need to "hear" of the golden rule before they can abide by it. I think all they need to do is EXPERIENCE it. It DOESN'T have to be spelled out. It's not something you read. It's something you DO.

Read your daily newspapper and tell me if it is something that authomatically key into to.


Next; I'm baffled how you can discern expectations out of this rule. There just isn't anything about expectations in it.

So, you are telling me that you don't think that the environment and culture that a person is brought in affects how they view proper treatment of people within the society.

We disagree. There are far too many examples of oppressive societies where some people or groups of people, or even women within the society are brought up with a mindset that they believe that they arae not deserving to be treated as having anay worth, so their definition of what good or even exceptional treatment is would be considered abusive by most of us.

Everyone claims that people were following this rule long before Christ came into the world. In reality, it IS just common courtesy. That's exactly what we've been saying this whole thread.

re-read what I wrote there... I said that you can't say it is a Christian thing, but you CAN say it is a Christian thing, TOO... because it is in the Bible.

To say that it is not Christian would mean that you would have to prove that the God of the Bible is not the source.


I have. And THAT is my belief. God, who created all that there is, had a hand in everything... of course, He is not necessarily as described by Christianity... or any Religion, for that matter.

However, He is the same God.

He cannot be the same God. There God of the Bible says that there are no other true gods. All other "gods" are demaons or idol, or faolse gods, according to scripture. Therefore, since He claims excluivity, any other gods cannot be the same God.

NK... I know! But where we differ is this.. I don't think it comes natural to us. I don't think people always want to do it and for the christian it isn't optional.. it is the STANDARD. I am guilty of not wanting to at times but I am called to. And Tj3 makes really good points... about environment and culture.

In reality, it IS just common courtesy.

But like common sense, the world would be better off if it were in reality, more common! ;)

Ex,

From what I can tell of the golden rule, there are no expectations. You should treat people the way you want to be treated.. period. Jesus goes a step further and even says to turn the other cheek. Certainly there are no expectations there. What I take a slight issue with ( and I say slight because I am not the least bit upset really) is that Cred has said that as an atheist he lives by the Golden Rule. I don't really think for one min he is going to appologize to me. But for some crazy, strange, and weird reason.. I am enjoying buggin the heck out of him. He put it out there.. not me.

Did you stop to consider he is abiding by the golden rule? That's he's not apologizing because he doesn't think he's wrong, and that's how he would want to be treated? That the way he behaves toward you is the way he would like to be treated? The golden rule imples niceness/forgiveness, but it doesn't require it. And why don't you turn the other cheek and let it go? Be the bigger person. That would be more Christ-like, right?


As for people living under the Golden Rule before Christianity, I don't doubt it one bit. But as Tj3 has said it is biblical. As a Christian it isn't a suggestion... it is a standard. Do I fall short? Yes sometimes I do.

If it were, in fact, held to be a standard, you wouldn't fall short, would you? Praying is a standard, going to church, having faith, believing in god, spreading your faith - those are all standards. Do you fall short on those too? Standard implies consistency, if you deviate (or if other Christians deviate from the standard), it's not a standard. It's a suggestion. Unless, of course, you want to argue it's a standard with a mathematical standard deviation... but that starts getting into some math and numbers I just don't care to examine!


but I do NOT understand why so many people dislike Christians. I am a nice person, you'd like me in real life. So would Cred. We just disagree on GOD. Cred has decided to have it out for me just because I am a Christian. I don't get it??

People dislike Christians because some of them (usually the most vocal ones) are pushy intolerant bigots who justify their actions and words under the guise of their religion and by hiding behind their god. Do all Christians behave this way? Of course not, but a few bad apples can ruin the bunch, right? If you eat Chinese food 100 times, from 100 different restaurants, and 99 times you get violently ill, will you have a favorable opinion of Chinese food? Probably not.


Hey,I'm not mad at you atheists because you are wrong.. why be mad at me because I'm RIGHT? ;)

Who's mad? But with an attitude like that, it's tough to make friends on the other side. And yes, I know you are being sarcastic. In my opinion though, using sarcasm in that manner is better left among friends. I'm not so sure you've made friends on the other side yet.

but I do NOT understand why so many people dislike Christians. I am a nice person, you'd like me in real life. So would Cred. We just disagree on GOD. Cred has decided to have it out for me just because I am a Christian. I don't get it??

I don't dislike Christians, I don't think Cred does either.

What I dislike is when people tell me that my beliefs are not as good as theirs. They insist that they are right, I'm wrong. Is that treating others as you want to be treated? No!

Cred also thinks that you and SassyT are one and the same. I have to admit that I did as well in the beginning. I don't think you are SassyT, your writing styles are too different, you also aren't condescending like she was.

I don't think Cred is convinced that you aren't SassyT.

I don't hate anyone because of their beliefs, I don't "hate" anyone period. Hate is a strong word. How could I hate people I've never met? I do dislike the way some people on this site act. I do find it funny that the people that give me the hardest time about my beliefs are the Christians.

I think that everyone has the right to their own beliefs, it's not for any human to judge who is right and who is wrong. That's God's decision, and I don't believe that he would ever send someone to hell just because they were Deist, muslim, Atheist etc. instead of Christian.

If we were really following the Golden rule, wouldn't we be nicer to each other on this site? I doubt anyone wants to be treated badly, or do they?

I don't dislike Christians, I don't think Cred does either.

You haven't known him long enough. Wait a few years until you have known him as long as I have and then if you don't see the consistent pattern over several years and several different boards, you aren't paying attention!


What I dislike is when people tell me that my beliefs are not as good as theirs. They insist that they are right, I'm wrong. Is that treating others as you want to be treated? No!

First, there is a difference between people disagreeing with your beliefs and treating you badly. You are NOT your beliefs.

Second, Christianity and many other religions hold to exclusivity. By saying that is wrong, you are doing what you say that we should not do. You are saying that by holding to exclusivity, that my belief, my religion is not as good as yours.


I doubt anyone wants to be treated badly, or do they?

Study different societies and different types of people. In some societies, and even some denominational churches, they considered being treated badly to be a blessing (talk to a Roman Catholic about penance and flagellation) and some folk are just masochists.

Did you stop to consider he is abiding by the golden rule? That's he's not apologizing because he doesn't think he's wrong, and that's how he would want to be treated? That the way he behaves toward you is the way he would like to be treated? The golden rule imples niceness/forgiveness, but it doesn't require it. And why don't you turn the other cheek and let it go? Be the bigger person. That would be more Christ-like, right?



If it were, in fact, held to be a standard, you wouldn't fall short, would you? Praying is a standard, going to church, having faith, believing in god, spreading your faith - those are all standards. Do you fall short on those too? Standard implies consistency, if you deviate (or if other Christians deviate from the standard), it's not a standard. It's a suggestion. Unless, of course, you want to argue it's a standard with a mathematical standard deviation... but that starts getting into some math and numbers I just don't care to examine!



People dislike Christians because some of them (usually the most vocal ones) are pushy intolerant bigots who justify their actions and words under the guise of their religion and by hiding behind their god. Do all Christians behave this way? Of course not, but a few bad apples can ruin the bunch, right? If you eat Chinese food 100 times, from 100 different restaurants, and 99 times you get violently ill, will you have a favorable opinion of Chinese food? Probably not.



Who's mad? But with an attitude like that, it's tough to make friends on the other side. And yes, I know you are being sarcastic. In my opinion though, using sarcasm in that manner is better left among friends. I'm not so sure you've made friends on the other side yet.

Jill,
You know what.. I was teasing with Ex. He KNOWS I was teasing and guess what Jill?. HE IS MY FRIEND. Shocking... I know.

AND maybe I haven't made friends with YOU but I have made friends on the "other side". Some people can actually look past the fact that I am a Christian and like me anyway. But I appreciate your thoughts...

Cred also thinks that you and SassyT are one and the same. I have to admit that I did as well in the beginning. I don't think you are SassyT, your writing styles are too different, you also aren't condescending like she was.

I don't think Cred is convinced that you aren't SassyT.


If we were really following the Golden rule, wouldn't we be nicer to eachother on this site? I doubt anyone wants to be treated badly, or do they?

Alty,

I know... he is convinced I am someone I don't even know. UGH. I agree, no one likes to be treated badly. I don't think that I have treated anyone badly, I hope I haven't anyway.:)

If it were, in fact, held to be a standard, you wouldn't fall short, would you? Praying is a standard, going to church, having faith, believing in god, spreading your faith - those are all standards. Do you fall short on those too? Standard implies consistency, if you deviate (or if other Christians deviate from the standard), it's not a standard. It's a suggestion. Unless, of course, you want to argue it's a standard with a mathematical standard deviation... but that starts getting into some math and numbers I just don't care to examine!





Jill,

I fall short of God's standard sometimes. It happens. When the woman was caught in adultry and Jesus stooped and wrote things in the dirt that left her accusers walking away one by one... he told this woman that he didn't condemn her but then he said this... GO and sin NO MORE. That is HIS standard. He can't say... go and try not to sin... or go and do your best. NO. His STANDARD is perfection. The thing with Christianity is this.. when I do fall short of HIS standard, I simply asked for forgiveness.

As far as turning the other cheek, I already did. I just want Cred to see that I am NOT sassyT. I have no other way of doing it but being who I am. AND I AM actually TEASING him about the Golden Rule. You have completely misjudged me and I think that if I were NOT a Christian.. you wouln't have.

Standard implies consistency, if you deviate (or if other Christians deviate from the standard), it's not a standard. It's a suggestion. Unless, of course, you want to argue it's a standard with a mathematical standard deviation... but that starts getting into some math and numbers I just don't care to examine!

My job is dealing with standards every day, and your understanding of standards is not correct. Standards are the objective which we strive to meet, but often fail to meet. The percentage of the set which actually achieves the standard does not define whether it is, or is not a standard.

For example, there is a standard of time, a standard "second", but much less than one percentage of one percent of all clocks on the face of the earth actually measure the standard "second". But it no less the standard. When we want to accurately and precisely know what time it is, we calibrate to the standard.

As for the standards Christians aim for - the truth is that scripture itself says that NO ONE - that is right NO ONE has ever met the standard except for God Himself when He came to earth as a man (Romans 3:23).

Does that make it less of a standard?No, in fact it shows us how far we fall short of the standard, and how much we need to align ourselves to the standard (i.e. receive Jesus as our Savior (Gal 3).

Jill,

I fall short of God's standard sometimes. It happens. When the woman was caught in adultry and Jesus stooped and wrote things in the dirt that left her accusers walking away one by one.....he told this woman that he didn't condemn her but then he said this...GO and sin NO MORE. That is HIS standard. He can't say...go and try not to sin...or go and do your best. NO. His STANDARD is perfection. The thing with Christianity is this..when I do fall short of HIS standard, i simply asked for forgiveness.

As far as turning the other cheek, I already did. I just want Cred to see that I am NOT sassyT. I have no other way of doing it but being who I am. AND I AM actually TEASING him about the Golden Rule. You have completely misjudged me and I think that if I were NOT a Christian..you wouln't have.

No, I haven't misjudged you. I haven't judged you at all, and it has nothing to do with you being a Christian. In my opinion, you haven't turned the other cheek because you keep bringing it up. You might say you are teasing, but when people won't let something go, it's usually because deep down, somewhere, it still bugs them. What I'm trying to do is indirectly tell you that you can be the bigger person here - by letting it go. You have misjudged my remarks - perhaps because I'm an atheist?

And about standards - you won't see my point unless you go by the definition of "standard". I'm not talking about "god's standard", I'm saying, how can something be the standard if one fails at it so frequently? The golden rule might be your god's standard, but it not a standard of Christianity.

Jill,

Again thanks for your opinion concerning turning the other cheek. I am driving him batty but it isn't because deep down inside I am bugged by not getting an "i'm sorry". I know I'm not going to get that. I am really bugged that he thinks I am SassyT. THAT does bug me. I just don't know how to convince him otherwise. So by showing him I have a sense of humor and that I am different than SassyT... well it is the only way I know. It isn't working.. I understand.

All I know for sure about STANDARDS is that GOD has them. We as human beings fail. He demands perfections and since we cannot possibly give him that.. HE did it for us. Through Jesus.

Concerning your comment about the Golden rule not being a standard in Christianity. I am the FIRST one to say that it isn't nearly as easy as it seems. Without putting my pride and self aside.. it is pretty hard to follow. I think that goes for all human beings.. including those of different faiths AND antheists.

ClassyT, you've never judged me because of my beliefs, so I know that you aren't SassyT, it's just unfortunate that your names are so similar and that you both frequent the religious boards.

Guys, if she really was SassyT would she come back and choose an almost identical username? No. Besides, the mods would have booted her off, they do check the IP address of people joining, if it's the same as a former member, or a member that was banned, they are quickly banned as well.

All cleared up now? I hope so. ;)

I think that we can all agree that the Golden rule is very hard to follow, no matter where it originated from or who is trying to follow it.

Let's face it, in most of our discussion on this forum none of us is using the Golden rule as our standard. I know I fall short, I think we can agree that we all do. Or maybe I'm full of it. :)

This argument could go on forever, I don't think we'll ever reach a consensus.

Let's try to remember and use the Golden rule while we're talking to each other. Just a suggestion. :)

So all those other religions that have a similar moral have all been inspired by your god?

Some "Ethic of Reciprocity" passages from the religious texts of various religions and secular beliefs:



Bahá'í Faith:

"Ascribe not to any soul that which thou wouldst not have ascribed to thee, and say not that which thou doest not." "Blessed is he who preferreth his brother before himself." Baha'u'llah
"And if thine eyes be turned towards justice, choose thou for thy neighbour that which thou choosest for thyself." Epistle to the Son of the Wolf


Brahmanism: "This is the sum of Dharma [duty]: Do naught unto others which would cause you pain if done to you". Mahabharata, 5:1517 "
Buddhism:

"...a state that is not pleasing or delightful to me, how could I inflict that upon another?" Samyutta NIkaya v. 353
Hurt not others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful." Udana-Varga 5:18


Christianity:

"Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets." Matthew 7:12, King James Version.
"And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise." Luke 6:31, King James Version.
"...and don't do what you hate...", Gospel of Thomas 6. The Gospel of Thomas is one of about 40 gospels that were widely accepted among early Christians, but which never made it into the Christian Scriptures (New Testament).


Confucianism:

"Do not do to others what you do not want them to do to you" Analects 15:23
"Tse-kung asked, 'Is there one word that can serve as a principle of conduct for life?' Confucius replied, 'It is the word 'shu' -- reciprocity. Do not impose on others what you yourself do not desire.'" Doctrine of the Mean 13.3
"Try your best to treat others as you would wish to be treated yourself, and you will find that this is the shortest way to benevolence." Mencius VII.A.4


Ancient Egyptian:

"Do for one who may do for you, that you may cause him thus to do." The Tale of the Eloquent Peasant, 109 - 110 Translated by R.B. Parkinson. The original dates to 1970 to 1640 BCE (http://www.religioustolerance.org/bce.htm) and may be the earliest version ever written. 3


Hinduism:

This is the sum of duty: do not do to others what would cause pain if done to you. Mahabharata 5:1517


Humanism:

"(5) Humanists acknowledge human interdependence, the need for mutual respect and the kinship of all humanity."
"(11) Humanists affirm that individual and social problems can only be resolved by means of human reason, intelligent effort, critical thinking joined with compassion and a spirit of empathy for all living beings. " 4
"Don't do things you wouldn't want to have done to you, British Humanist Society. 3


Islam: "None of you [truly] believes until he wishes for his brother what he wishes for himself." Number 13 of Imam "Al-Nawawi's Forty Hadiths." 5
Jainism:

"Therefore, neither does he [a sage] cause violence to others nor does he make others do so." Acarangasutra 5.101-2.
"In happiness and suffering, in joy and grief, we should regard all creatures as we regard our own self." Lord Mahavira, 24th Tirthankara
"A man should wander about treating all creatures as he himself would be treated. "Sutrakritanga 1.11.33


Judaism:

"...thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.", Leviticus 19:18
"What is hateful to you, do not to your fellow man. This is the law: all the rest is commentary." Talmud, Shabbat 31a.
"And what you hate, do not do to any one." Tobit 4:15 6


Native American Spirituality:

"Respect for all life is the foundation." The Great Law of Peace.
"All things are our relatives; what we do to everything, we do to ourselves. All is really One." Black Elk
"Do not wrong or hate your neighbor. For it is not he who you wrong, but yourself." Pima proverb.


Roman Pagan Religion: "The law imprinted on the hearts of all men is to love the members of society as themselves."
Shinto:

"The heart of the person before you is a mirror. See there your own form"
"Be charitable to all beings, love is the representative of God." Ko-ji-ki Hachiman Kasuga


Sikhism:

Compassion-mercy and religion are the support of the entire world". Japji Sahib
"Don't create enmity with anyone as God is within everyone." Guru Arjan Devji 259
"No one is my enemy, none a stranger and everyone is my friend." Guru Arjan Dev : AG 1299


Sufism: "The basis of Sufism is consideration of the hearts and feelings of others. If you haven't the will to gladden someone's heart, then at least beware lest you hurt someone's heart, for on our path, no sin exists but this." Dr. Javad Nurbakhsh, Master of the Nimatullahi Sufi Order.
Taoism:

"Regard your neighbor's gain as your own gain, and your neighbor's loss as your own loss." T'ai Shang Kan Ying P'ien.
"The sage has no interest of his own, but takes the interests of the people as his own. He is kind to the kind; he is also kind to the unkind: for Virtue is kind. He is faithful to the faithful; he is also faithful to the unfaithful: for Virtue is faithful." Tao Teh Ching, Chapter 49


Unitarian:


"The inherent worth and dignity of every person;"
"Justice, equity and compassion in human relations.... "
"The goal of world community with peace, liberty, and justice for all;"
"We affirm and promote respect for the interdependent web of all existence of which we are a part." Unitarian principles. 7,8


Wicca: "An it harm no one, do what thou wilt" (i.e. do what ever you will, as long as it harms nobody, including yourself). One's will is to be carefully thought out in advance of action. This is called the Wiccan Rede (http://www.religioustolerance.org/wicrede.htm)
Yoruba: (Nigeria): "One going to take a pointed stick to pinch a baby bird should first try it on himself to feel how it hurts."
Zoroastrianism:

"That nature alone is good which refrains from doing unto another whatsoever is not good for itself". Dadistan-i-dinik 94:5
"Whatever is disagreeable to yourself do not do unto others." Shayast-na-Shayast 13:29



Some philosophers' statements are:



Epictetus: "What you would avoid suffering yourself, seek not to impose on others." (circa 100 CE (http://www.religioustolerance.org/ce.htm))
Kant: "Act as if the maxim of thy action were to become by thy will a universal law of nature."
Plato: "May I do to others as I would that they should do unto me." (Greece; 4th century BCE (http://www.religioustolerance.org/bce.htm))
Socrates: "Do not do to others that which would anger you if others did it to you." (Greece; 5th century BCE (http://www.religioustolerance.org/bce.htm))
Seneca: "Treat your inferiors as you would be treated by your superiors," Epistle 47:11 (Rome; 1st century CE (http://www.religioustolerance.org/ce.htm))



Thank you sooo much for going to all the trouble of putting that together! I'm going to print that out.

Thank you sooo much for going to all the trouble of putting that together! I'm going to print that out.
Actually it was part of a post I made way back on the first page (post #9). I guess it was ignored.

Actually it was part of a post I made way back on the first page (post #9). I guess it was ignored.

Thanks for pointing that out as well. I'll go back there later to read through some of the material... looks good.

ClassyT, you've never judged me because of my beliefs, so I know that you aren't SassyT, it's just unfortunate that your names are so similar and that you both frequent the religious boards.

Guys, if she really was SassyT would she come back and choose an almost identical username? No. Besides, the mods would have booted her off, they do check the IP address of people joining, if it's the same as a former member, or a member that was banned, they are quickly banned as well.

All cleared up now? I hope so. ;)

I think that we can all agree that the Golden rule is very hard to follow, no matter where it originated from or who is trying to follow it.

Let's face it, in most of our discussion on this forum none of us is using the Golden rule as our standard. I know I fall short, I think we can agree that we all do. Or maybe I'm full of it. :)

This arguement could go on forever, I don't think we'll ever reach a consensus.

Let's try to remember and use the Golden rule while we're talking to eachother. Just a suggestion. :)

Alty,

Thanks for trying... ;) guess I will give it up.

This topic was from post one about the Golden Rule. Not about the differences or similarities between SassyT and ClassyT. That subject just hyjacked the Golden Rule topic.

So I like to get back to the real topic again : I started with the statement that the Golden Rule was wellknown long before the first letter was ever started on the first Bible chapter.
The reality is that the Golden Rule does not come from the Bible. The Bible just accepted it as a valid and sound way of life guideline.
The Golden Rule is NOT some form of property of Christianity.
Atheists have - just as all other people - used the Golden Rule to live a proper , prosperous, and safe life.
Atheists did not abuse the Golden Rule for their own views. Many christians however abused - and still abuse - their religious views to support their own religious delusions.

Believe whatever you prefer, but at least accept that others may have different views !
Why can't so many "christians" show more respect for other world views, and drop all their apparent feelings of hatred and revenge?

The Golden Rule is already many tens of thousands of years old - if not older. Having friends instead of enemies increases your chance to survive and multiply. If you do good to others, the chance that others do good to you increases.
Many animals show already the basic understanding and/or application of the Golden Rule.

It is such a basic logic that the claim that the Golden Rule is of Christian origin is totally ridiculous and based on a total and absurd bias, and on total religious blindness!

:)

.

.

The Golden Rule is already many tens of thousands of years old - if not older. Having friends instead of enemies increases your chance to survive and multiply. If you do good to others, the chance that others do good to you increases.
Many animals show already the basic understanding and/or application of the Golden Rule.

Cred,

Please document the proof for your theory as you have been asked to do previously in this thread.

... Please document the proof for your theory as you have been asked to do previously in this thread.
You seem unable to sing any other song, Tommy !
In many groups of animals (and not only in Apes) you can already see that same "Golden Rule" attitude : "I am your friend, you are my friend".
Proof enough for me that we "homo sapiens" are not the inventor of the "Golden Rule".
And that certainly includes Christianity - by more than many tens of millions of years!!

:D :rolleyes: :p :) :rolleyes: :D

.

.

You seem unable to sing any other song, Tommy !

Look whose talking - with your constant demands for OSE already given. And yet when the same is asked of you, you never even try.

I guess that we all know why. We all know that there is no evidence for your theory.

You seem unable to sing any other song, Tommy !
In many groups of animals (and not only in Apes) you can already see that same "Golden Rule" attitude : "I am your friend, you are my friend".
Proof enough for me that we "homo sapiens" are not the inventor of the "Golden Rule".
And that certainly includes Christianity - by more than many tens of millions of years !!!



.

.




Cred - do you have a memory problems - you keep repeating the same statements and the same questions.

See post #102:


Wolf Country, the pack, body postures and social structure

Like wolves? Does the alpha really have to really treat the lowest members the way he does? How would he [ the alpha ] feel if the lowest member treated him that way? Oh, that's right - he is dominant.




How about lions -
LION

Nope - no golden rule - dominance survives


How about bees - why does the queen get waited on - nope no golden rule there either


How about black widows - sexism and canibalism, but no golden rule there



How about gorillas?

ADW: Gorilla gorilla: Information



No golden rule there - dominance against


How about chimps?

The ABC's of Chimpanzee Behavior

No golden rule there - again dominance.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Cred the OSE is against your statement. ;)





g&p

The Golden Rule is already many tens of thousands of years old - if not older. Having friends instead of enemies increases your chance to survive and multiply. If you do good to others, the chance that others do good to you increases.
.



Christianity is more than the golden rule.
Matthew 5:44

God loved us before we loved him - 1 John.

Where would we be if God stuck to a golden rule? I'll wait till these mortals love me before I love them. NO... John 3:16


I don't care who came up with the golden rule or who has sole copyright or patent to it ---What God has done for us and expects of us, with God's help, is so much beyond the golden rule.








g&p

Christianity is more than the golden rule.
That is totally irrelevant here. This topic is about the Golden Rule. Not about Christianity being less, equal, or more than the golden Rule.

All I stated is that the Golden Rule did not originate with Christianity, but is much older, even from a time before homo sapiens developed.
But even when we focus on humanity only, the Golden Rule was already part of almost every religion prior to Christianity. Logical, as it described a good reason for survival and reproduction.

:rolleyes:

OK, now you guys have done it. You really made GOD mad this time. I think he just directed a huge flaming thang-a-ma-jig at us.
And I just fixed the dam roof.

Christianity is more than the golden rule.
Matthew 5:44

God loved us before we loved him - 1 John.

Where would we be if God stuck to a golden rule? I'll wait till these mortals love me before I love them. NO..... John 3:16


I don't care who came up with the golden rule or who has sole copyright or patent to it ---What God has done for us and expects of us, with God's help, is so much beyond the golden rule.

Absolutely.

I think that Cred is having problems seeing through his hatred of Christianity.

Absolutely.

I think that Cred is having problems seeing through his hatred of Christianity.If what he says sounds liked hatred of christianity then you must have a hatred of all that is not christian.

If what he says sounds liked hatred of christianity then you must have a hatred of all that is not christian.

And you seem to have a hatred of me, because every time that I post in a thread where you are, you make a negative personal comment about me.

Didn't you just make a negative personal comment about Cred? Do you have certain rights that others don't? The hypocrisy is outstanding.

Cred never said he hated christianity, he just is not a fan of any religion, just as you are not a fan of those without a religion.

Didn't you just make a negative personal comment about Cred? Do you have certain rights that others don't? The hypocrisy is outstanding.

I made a negative comment about his consistent behaviour in virtually every post that he has ever put on this board and every other other one that I have been on with him.


Cred never said he hated christianity, He does not have to.



he just is not a fan of any religion, just as you are not a fan of those without a religion.

I am not a fan of religion. You appear to be making assumptions.

I made a negative comment about his consistent behaviour in virtually every post that he has ever put on this board and every other other one that I have been on with him.

I was going to stay out of this, but I couldn't let this quote go without commenting.

Tom, you do exactly what you just accused Cred of doing. I've never had anything but negative comments from you because I'm not Christian. You may not see it, it's often hard to see our own shortcomings, but you do seem to dislike everyone that isn't Christian.

I do understand that it's your mission as a Christian to "spread the word" but you're going about it all wrong. You are often confrontational, arrogant and downright rude to people that don't have the same faith as you. No one likes to be talked down to, and that's exactly what you are doing, so it's no wonder that most people turn a deaf ear to you or start an argument with you.

The confrontations you have aren't because of your religion, it's because of your inability to accept anyone else right to their faith or beliefs. You have placed yourself on a pedestal, and have told everyone on this site that only your way is the true way. Of course that's going to create confrontations, how could it not?

I hope that you read this the way it is intended, as advice, not another confrontation.

Maybe now would be a good time to put the Golden rule into practice, no matter where it originated.

Tom, you do exactly what you just accused Cred of doing. I've never had anything but negative comments from you because I'm not Christian.

Not true. Not even remotely close. I do not differentiate between opeople based upon what they believe. I different between whether doctrines are true or not, but you accused me before because you took negative comments about doctrinal beliefs to be the same as negative comments about you.

I see a number of people who interpret things that way, but I am afraid that if people cannot accept disagreement, that is not my issue, and as I said before, if you cannot accept disagreement, perhaps internet discussion boards are not the place for you.

You have a right to your opinion, but I disagree. The only one I really butt heads with is you Tom, what does that tell you?

If everyone disagrees with you, if everyone is confrontational with you, then sooner or later you have to look at yourself and realize that maybe you're the problem, not everyone else.

Tom, is there anyone on this site that you've managed not to alienate? Can you discuss religion with anyone who isn't a Christian? If not, then you have to ask yourself why that is.

I'm not trying to put you down, not at all, I'm merely trying to point out why you have such a problem with the majority of the people on this site.

Tom, if you really are here to discuss things then you have to realize that your way isn't working. All you seem to do is push people away, until you realize that, fix it and start talking to people with respect, well, you won't get any in return and I'm afraid you'll just keep going in circles.

If what he says sounds liked hatred of christianity then you must have a hatred of all that is not christian.

Study The Talmud!

Study The Talmud!
Nah, I don't need a new book of fiction in my life.

Study The Talmud!

Which page Mag, that's a long book I'm not willing to read cover to cover. ;)

You have a right to your opinion, but I disagree. The only one I really butt heads with is you Tom, what does that tell you?

Well, I have seen you butt heads with others, but that does not matter. You told me that we as Christians must accept other religions as equal and when we would not, you went after us. You said that you were unwilling to consider any evidence which disagreed with what you wanted to believe. You said that if we disagreed with you, that we were attacking you as a person.

That is not my issue. You are certainly welcome to believe as you wish, and you are certainly welcome to challenge my beliefs as strongly as you wish. But you have no right to tell me that I cannot disagree with you or challenge your beliefs.

Nor do you have the right to go after me or anyone else as a person.

Now, instead of trying to, as you put it "butt heads" with me, why don't you just discuss respectfully?