I think this thread is a defense of using the No True Scotsman fallacy, not an argument to believe in a god. It all rests on the premise that all Christians are required to be non-violent and loving, which is of course up to interpretation.
In our covenant >
By entering into covenant with God, we have become His children. And children grow in how we become able to love and to know.
I think it is not only one or the other.
but also combined relating with God.
Probably not. I think he's just trying to prove this so that Christians only get credit for good stuff, and don't get blame for bad stuff.
True, but as an outsider looking in, it is impossible for me to distinguish who is a True Christian and who is a false one. I've been informed many times that as a non-Christian, I lack spiritual discernment and guidance by the holy spirit when I am reading the Bible, so my interpretation of it is off. Maybe they're interpreting those passages wrong, but if they're right, I lack the ability to test that. So if someone says that they are a Christian, they get labelled a Christian by me.
That's all well and good, but since I might be incapable of interpreting scripture, I am incapable of telling what is a good fruit and what is a thistle. I have my own subjective opinion on what is good and bad, but often that contradicts what I would interpret the Bible to say is good and bad. So who am I to say someone is not a Christian?
The thread is not meant to argue God exists which should be in another separate thread. It presumes God exists.
Nope.
If Hindus kill, one must find out whether their specific school of Hinduism [Shiva, advaita, etc.] condone killing of enemies or those who threaten the religion.
I know. The other fellow was assuming it was an existence thread, and I was helping him understand your point.
I posted this to someone else, I'm just going to cut and paste it here:
What is critical with the doctrine of the covenant is, when one has established the covenant with God, is the relationship with God, the connection of the holy spirit and that one must comply with the covenanted terms with the ideal overriding pacifist maxim of love all, even enemies.By entering into covenant with God, we have become His children. And children grow in how we become able to love and to know.
But there is gesture loving which can seem agape, and there is prideful knowledge which has people expecting to lord themselves over others.
So, it can be wise for you to say you have known people who "seem" this or that
And thank you for this reminder, that I do not need to be just showing and telling something.
But my opinion is a child of God needs to grow to get really somewhere, and this takes our lifetime. So, what could be interesting is to see if and how someone "seems" from one time to another, how the person is changing well or not exactly.
With the doctrine of the covenant, one has to comply with the covenanted terms [nothing else] and an overriding pacifist maxim of love all, even enemies.I think it is not only one or the other.
But yes each of us has our own development in the New Covenant, but God works each of us with one another and also the whole body of Jesus.
For a sort of an example > yes God wants me to pray and to submit personally to Him. But also He has me praying for various other people, since our Covenant includes how God wants us to pray "for all the saints" (Ephesians 6:18), and "for all men" > 1 Timothy 2:1-4.
So, included in my personal covenant is how others are praying for me while I am caring about others, in prayer.
So, you can't make it totally group or totally individual, I would say . . . not to mention how we are members of one body, of Jesus.
Also, this covenant includes how we are all being changed into the image of Jesus > Romans 8:29. So, then, there are things which go for all of us, though there might be individual details for each person. God is our Creator, He is not a copier. So, yes there is individuality in the mix, like I think you are saying
Yes, but this is the Christian's God strategy [not mine] to ensure it is fool proof that no one can blame Christianity, the Christian-proper, the Christian God and Jesus as associated with evil and violent elements.
This doctrine of the covenant re this thread is more to absolve and prevent the Christians, Christianity, the Christian God and Jesus from as associated with evil and violent elements, given there were evil and violence committed by SOME Christians, e.g. crusades, inquisition, pedophile priests, and other crimes.
