Right v Left - would this sum up the difference?

[ArmenianJohn]

Okay; same thing! What constitutes extravagance is subjective; you call his spending extravagant, someone from a 3rd world country would call your spending extravagant; thus you are guilty of the same sin you accuse him of.

No, not the same thing. Extravagant has a definition which is not subjective. Extravagance can be relative but not subjective. Again, your deficiency in vocabulary is continuing to hinder your communication.

Well you haven’t shown he worships or has devotion to his money and material possessions; so this is what you need to do before accusing him of mammon

Well I haven't accused him of worshiping mammon so I don't know why you're even arguing over this. The point isn't whether he worships mammon or not - we may never know. However, it is likely he does to some extent considering the extravagances in his life. It's hard for anyone not to worship mammon, let along someone with that kind of material wealth.

No you didn’t do a good job of explaining. I responded according to what you said. And the dictionary says nothing about worship or devotion of those things. Are you sure you ain’t just makin’ stuff up as you go along? It’s starting to sound like it.

I didn't do a good job of explaining initially and I even admitted and owned that. Since then, I've explained it well several times over and you choose to not listen and rather to harp on my initial poor explanation. Because you are playing games and it's obvious to everyone who reads this. You're not fooling me or anyone else.

No it does not. To worship something does not bring a debase nature, and even if it did, you didn’t show that he worships that stuff anyway.

Worshiping mammon is a sin. I know you don't believe that because you choose a moral system (ironically, that of mammon-worship) in which worshiping mammon is good. Christianity says it is opposed to God.

No you did not address what I said. I asked where do you draw the line before an act is considered extravagant, because to someone much poorer than you, your purchases would seem extravagant. You have yet to address this point.

If you knew the meaning of "extravagant" you wouldn't have to ask me to educate you. I already said I won't give you any more free eduation. People pay me to educate them. I already gave you enough free education, I'm not giving you any more. Use a dictionary for once in your life.

I think you’re getting a little confused here. You provided the below definition of “worship:

extravagant respect or admiration for or devotion to an object of esteem

//worship of the dollar

I paraphrased the definition you provided saying:
"The definition of worship you provided is something you do towards that with an actual existence."

You accused me of lying by saying:

The definition I provided in does not say worship "is something you do towards that with an actual existence", so nice try but you are caught in your lie.

THATS when I said I was paraphrasing.

Your "paraphrasing" is your lie. You "paraphrased" in such a way as to change the actual definition I provided right from the dictionary into what you want the definition to be and then when I called you out on it you got upset. You got caught in your lie and now you're trying to say you "were paraphrasing". If you're going to paraphrase then do it correctly. I don't see why you had to paraphrase - the actual definition was just as long as your "paraphrasing" so there was no need for it to be paraphrased. But we both know you wanted to alter the definition into your own words, hence you changed it and then after the fact you call it "paraphrasing" although it actually changes the definition.

Really a transparent and inane game that you're playing all around.

How do you know he has a yacht, a jet, or a fancy car?

You mean a collection of extravagant, fancy sports cars? And a $130 million art collection in just one of his homes? I know from the sources I provided to you in my earlier posts that you continue to ignore and pretend don't exist. Of course, if you actually listened to my side of the argument and/or acknowledged it at any point you'd know better.

About 10 years ago this girl I knew worked at Dickies burgers and Bill Gates was known to go there occasionally. At that time he drove an Audi. I suspect that may not have been his only car, but how do you know he has all the fancy stuff you mentioned? He obviously doesn’t spend a lot of money on clothes; perhaps he doesn’t spend a lot of money on toys either!

I don't believe your story, but who cares anyway? More off-topic nonsense. You're trying to tell me that because you heard from someone that Bill Gates drove an Audi and ate hamburgers he must not worship mammon. And you think this matters. That's how far out of touch you are with the topic at hand.

I spoke of the price of his house as being small compared to his charity; YOU tried to get me to address all of his other spending which I did not agree to do. So my argument stands.

Yes, you tried to limit it to just his house as a way of saying his spending is "tiny" in some way and I made sure to point out that he spends on much more than just one house. And now you're whining that I'm not going along with you setting everything up the way you want to bolster your weak, untenable argument. Go figure.

And the whole time you continue to avoid talking about when money and material wealth is ever "too much" or even "enough" for a person. Why not just say it, we all know what you think. You think it's NEVER "enough" or "too much". You think that living one's life for things is moral. Why not just own it? You have the conservative mindset, we all know it.

 

[Ken-1122]

This all started with the question of "when is enough really enough?" You completely avoid that question. I'll ask you again - when is there "enough" for a person? When does a person have "enough" money or material possessions? Can you answer that? Or do you believe there's no such thing as "enough"?

I thought I already answered this question; in case I did not here goes. Enough (in this case) is when your pursuit for more begins to hurt innocent people

Do you believe in a thing called greed? Do you know what the word "avarice" is??? I doubt it.

Greed/avarice is taking more than your fair share to the detriment of others.

 

[Ken-1122]

No, not the same thing. Extravagant has a definition which is not subjective. Extravagance can be relative but not subjective.

Then where is the line drawn when it comes to extravagance?

Well I haven't accused him of worshiping mammon so I don't know why you're even arguing over this. The point isn't whether he worships mammon or not - we may never know. However, it is likely he does to some extent considering the extravagances in his life. It's hard for anyone not to worship mammon, let along someone with that kind of material wealth.

I disagree. Accumulating extravagances does not amount to worship. One has nothing to do with the other

Worshiping mammon is a sin. I know you don't believe that because you choose a moral system (ironically, that of mammon-worship) in which worshiping mammon is good.

Wrong again. Your Bible is very specific in what sin is. Because I don’t agree with everything in the Bible, I don’t agree sin is always wrong. Also, I don’t find mammon-worship to be good, I find it non-existent.

If you knew the meaning of "extravagant" you wouldn't have to ask me to educate you. I already said I won't give you any more free eduation. People pay me to educate them. I already gave you enough free education, I'm not giving you any more. Use a dictionary for once in your life.

No; I’m not asking for an education, I asked the question because you can’t answer it without proving yourself wrong!

Your "paraphrasing" is your lie. You "paraphrased" in such a way as to change the actual definition I provided right from the dictionary into what you want the definition to be and then when I called you out on it you got upset. You got caught in your lie and now you're trying to say you "were paraphrasing". If you're going to paraphrase then do it correctly. I don't see why you had to paraphrase - the actual definition was just as long as your "paraphrasing" so there was no need for it to be paraphrased. But we both know you wanted to alter the definition into your own words, hence you changed it and then after the fact you call it "paraphrasing" although it actually changes the definition.

Really a transparent and inane game that you're playing all around.

In what way was my paraphrasing different than the actual definition?

I don't believe your story, but who cares anyway? More off-topic nonsense. You're trying to tell me that because you heard from someone that Bill Gates drove an Audi and ate hamburgers he must not worship mammon. And you think this matters. That's how far out of touch you are with the topic at hand.

Again; nobody worships mammon; if you disagree, give an example of someone doing this using the dictionary definition of worship; something you’ve neglected to do

Yes, you tried to limit it to just his house as a way of saying his spending is "tiny" in some way and I made sure to point out that he spends on much more than just one house.

There is no way of knowing how much other stuff he spends his money on, so that is an unfair question to ask unless you have an answer.

And the whole time you continue to avoid talking about when money and material wealth is ever "too much" or even "enough" for a person.

It is too much when you begin to harm other people

 

[ArmenianJohn]

I thought I already answered this question; in case I did not here goes. Enough (in this case) is when your pursuit for more begins to hurt innocent people

Greed/avarice is taking more than your fair share to the detriment of others.[/QUOTE]
Does it "hurt innocent people" when you choose to spend $140 million a home for yourself while another person is literally dying on the street because he's homeless? Would you consider doing that to be greed or avarice?

 

[ArmenianJohn]

Then where is the line drawn when it comes to extravagance?

If you knew the definition of "extravagance" you wouldn't have to ask.

I disagree. Accumulating extravagances does not amount to worship. One has nothing to do with the other

I never said it amounts to mammon worship. I said it CAN amount to mammon worship and I'll even say it is LIKELY mammon worship, but I never said it amounts to mammon worship. That's what you keep trying to put in my mouth despite my never having said it. You're trying to set up the argument the way you want by ignoring what I've actually said this whole time.

Wrong again. Your Bible is very specific in what sin is. Because I don’t agree with everything in the Bible, I don’t agree sin is always wrong. Also, I don’t find mammon-worship to be good, I find it non-existent.

The Bible is specific about sin but applying those specifics to our lives becomes murky for everyone, Christians included. It doesn't matter that you find mammon-worship to be non-existent, that doesn't change the fact that it exists. Just as your rejection of God's existence doesn't change the fact that He exists.

No;

I’m not asking for an education, I asked the question because you can’t answer it without proving yourself wrong!

Do your part and show me that you know what "extravagant" means and I can answer the question for you. Until then, I am not going to engage in another back-and-forth where you are arguing over a term you don't understand and to which have given your own, subjective meaning.

The funny thing is, you DO know what extravagant means and you don't need me to explain it to you, but you are pretending to not understand it in order to continue arguing and as a futile attempt to defend your untenable position.

In what way was my paraphrasing different than the actual definition?

You don't understand how to see the difference between two phrases? Now you want me to educate you on that also? LOL, unbelievable.

Here's the dictionary definition as you repeated in your post:
extravagant respect or admiration for or devotion to an object of esteem //worship of the dollar

Here is your so-called "paraphrasing" of that definition:
"something you do towards that with an actual existence."

You are incapable of seeing the difference? Really? You need me to go through these word by word and explain to you what each individual word means?

Here's my lesson for you: Go through each word and think it through. When you don't know the meaning of a word look it up in the dictionary. Compare the two phrases based on the actual words and list what is similar and what is different. This educational instruction is provided to you free of charge, again; but you need to do the homework yourself.

Again; nobody worships mammon; if you disagree, give an example of someone doing this using the dictionary definition of worship; something you’ve neglected to do

That's easy - @Neogaia777 has admitted to having done it in a post addressed to you. In my response to @Neogaia777 I admitted that I am also guilty of having done it. I can't "prove" it but based on what we know about human nature I'm pretty sure that everyone has done it. I also am pretty sure that many people still do it. Because the root of it is in one's heart it's impossible to know for sure but people's actions often indicate it. It's like lying - you don't know 100% for sure if someone is ever lying because lying depends on the intent of the heart. You can certainly figure a liar to be a liar based on the circumstances but you can never actually read their heart. Same goes for most sins.

There is no way of knowing how much other stuff he spends his money on, so that is an unfair question to ask unless you have an answer.

Then there's no way of knowing if he worships mammon or not unless you can read his heart. However, when someone spends extravagantly much of the time there is likely a good amount f mammon worship going on.

It is too much when you begin to harm other people

You said in another post you're a landlord. If your tenant insisted that they need a new faucet in the rental unit and it was necessary to have a faucet that cost $2,400.00 for the bathroom because it had the right amount of gold and jewels, would that be extravagant? What if that tenant sued you because you didn't provide that? What would your defense be? You apparently couldn't argue that the tenant is asking for something extravagant because you yourself believe that it is subjective. So if the tenant says he needs that faucet then the tenant isn't being extravagant - his needs might be different from what you subjectively think they are. So you would just run out and buy that $2,400.00 faucet for your tenant's bathroom, right? I mean, it's not extravagant, and it's not like the tenant wants it as mammon because mammon doesn't even exist to you. And then if the tenant also insists on a $24,000.00 silk oriental rug, wouldn't you have to buy that for them? It's not an extravagancy, it's necessary. It's certainly not mammon because mammon doesn't even exist. What would you actually do???

 

[stevil]

My view on the Right vs the Left

It is a spectrum and it is complex as there are many things to consider e.g. Fiscal policy, poverty vs wealth divide, environmental issues, economy, foreign policy, housing etc.


But typically the Left focuses on supporting the poor and the Right focuses on supporting companies.
The left recognise that the "haves" can easily feed off, and take advantage of the have nots.
The right recognise that companies create jobs and provide income for workers.

The left are concerned that in an unregulated market and society the companies will pay those at the top lots and lots of money and those at the bottom get very little, and this will lead to atrocious working conditions, with less than a living wage, no tea breaks, little holidays, no sick leave...

The right are concerned that giving the poor money, will make them dependant and lazy and reduce the workforce. Raising minimum wage will cause businesses to go under and hence reduce job opportunities. Giving unions too much power will mean many stop work events, too high pay for unskilled work.

But those concerns are built on an extreme view of left and right.
You don't have to go full left or full right.
There is middle ground. The problem is trying to agree on where the middle is.

 

[Ken-1122]

Greed/avarice is taking more than your fair share to the detriment of others.

Does it "hurt innocent people" when you choose to spend $140 million a home for yourself while another person is literally dying on the street because he's homeless?[/quote]
Of course not! Whether you spend 140 million like bill gates or 140 thousand like you, the person dying in the streets won't even notice the difference.

Would you consider doing that to be greed or avarice?

No, because spending 140 million on a house does more help to the homeless than harm.

 

[Ken-1122]

The Right cares about money and the Left about people?


By 'Left' I don't mean all Democrats, but the true Left.

The difference would be seen if for example a pandemic disease hit the planet and the Right Wing countries would keep people at their jobs to protect the economy and take a wait-and-see approach to how dangerous the disease turns out to be, risking people rather than money.

And in a more Right Wing country the low-paid being very close to insolvent, would agree with that approach.

A more to the Left country would close more down in case it was a dangerous disease rather than use expendable 'human canaries'.

I noticed you preluded your description of the left with "By left I don't mean all democrats, but the true left.
Perhaps you should have preluded your description of the right with "By right I don't mean all republicans but the true right" and then give a positive description of the right like you did the left

 

[Ken-1122]

If you knew the definition of "extravagance" you wouldn't have to ask.

You don’t wanna give an answer because you know it will expose the flaws in your logic.

I never said it amounts to mammon worship. I said it CAN amount to mammon worship and I'll even say it is LIKELY mammon worship,

It isn’t likely to lead to any type of worship!

The Bible is specific about sin but applying those specifics to our lives becomes murky for everyone, Christians included. It doesn't matter that you find mammon-worship to be non-existent, that doesn't change the fact that it exists. Just as your rejection of God's existence doesn't change the fact that He exists.

The likelihood of mammon worship existing is about the same as the likelihood of your God existing. The fact that you keep make empty claims concerning both indicates to me that they don’t exist.

No;
Do your part and show me that you know what "extravagant" means and I can answer the question for you. Until then, I am not going to engage in another back-and-forth where you are arguing over a term you don't understand and to which have given your own, subjective meaning.

The funny thing is, you DO know what extravagant means and you don't need me to explain it to you, but you are pretending to not understand it in order to continue arguing and as a futile attempt to defend your untenable position.

Okay; The first paragraph you claim I don’t understand the meaning of the term. Then in the second paragraph, you completely contradict your previous statement by claiming I DO know what it means but just want to argue.

First of all, you need to get your stories straight; either I know what it means or I don’t you can’t have it both ways. Second, if YOU know what it means you should be able to answer the question even if I don’t

You don't understand how to see the difference between two phrases? Now you want me to educate you on that also? LOL, unbelievable.

Here's the dictionary definition as you repeated in your post:
extravagant respect or admiration for or devotion to an object of esteem //worship of the dollar

Here is your so-called "paraphrasing" of that definition:
"something you do towards that with an actual existence."

Yes! The object of esteem is something with an actual existence.

That's easy - @Neogaia777 has admitted to having done it in a post addressed to you. In my response to @Neogaia777 I admitted that I am also guilty of having done it.

The dictionary definition is:
reverent honor and homage paid to God or a sacred personage, or to any object regarded as sacred.
Definition of worship | Dictionary.com

Perhaps Neogaia777 doesn’t understand what it means to worship because according to the dictionary, worshiping is done to that which is considered sacred and I don't think he considers dollar bills to be sacred, if he did he wouldn’t be able to spend them.

You said in another post you're a landlord. If your tenant insisted that they need a new faucet in the rental unit and it was necessary to have a faucet that cost $2,400.00 for the bathroom because it had the right amount of gold and jewels, would that be extravagant? What if that tenant sued you because you didn't provide that? What would your defense be? You apparently couldn't argue that the tenant is asking for something extravagant because you yourself believe that it is subjective. So if the tenant says he needs that faucet then the tenant isn't being extravagant - his needs might be different from what you subjectively think they are. So you would just run out and buy that $2,400.00 faucet for your tenant's bathroom, right? I mean, it's not extravagant, and it's not like the tenant wants it as mammon because mammon doesn't even exist to

you. And then if the tenant also insists on a $24,000.00 silk oriental rug, wouldn't you have to buy that for them? It's not an extravagancy, it's necessary. It's certainly not mammon because mammon doesn't even exist. What would you actually do???

The lease agreement we both signed says nothing about extravagant, it just says I will replace/repair as needed. It says nothing about being done to their satisfaction.

 

[Neogaia777]

The dictionary definition is:
reverent honor and homage paid to God or a sacred personage, or to any object regarded as sacred.
Definition of worship | Dictionary.com

Perhaps Neogaia777 doesn’t understand what it means to worship because according to the dictionary, worshiping is done to that which is considered sacred and I don't think he considers dollar bills to be sacred, if he did he wouldn’t be able to spend them.

How does one give reverent honor/respect and homage to an object or a thing like money, etc...?

I'll tel you how, as I already have told you how, it is trusting and/or putting faith in it more so than you do God, or a god, or your god/God, etc...

And in the case of money and/or material wealth or possessions, it is putting your faith and trust in it, to give to you more, or do for you more, those kinds of things more, and more of them, and take care of you/provide for you more so, etc, than you actually do God, or your god/God, who gave to you or provided for you those kinds of things, etc...

Many are guilty of this, etc...

Probably including you, etc...

And a person does this "in their heart", just like Jesus described the sins of murder and adultery, etc...

Whether they actually show an outward sign or display of it/this means nothing as long as it is still going on and/or happening in their/mine/yours/theirs "hearts", etc...

And are you going to now tell me that many people do not do this with things like material wealth and/or possessions or money or things, etc...?

Make it/them an idol in their hearts and therefore "worship" them in their hearts, etc...?

Especially with "money", etc...?

God Bless!

 

[ArmenianJohn]

You don’t wanna give an answer because you know it will expose the flaws in your logic.

The answer is the definition of extravagant which you refuse to acknowledge.

It isn’t likely to lead to any type of worship!

It absolutely is

Okay; The first paragraph you claim I don’t understand the meaning of the term. Then in the second paragraph, you completely contradict your previous statement by claiming I DO know what it means but just want to argue.

I'll be more clear - you undrstand what extravagance is but you don't link that knowledge to the word itself. You pretend not to know what the word means and that is why you keep asking me to define it for you yet at the same time you understand the concept and refuse to acknowledge that concept is attached to the word.

First of all, you need to get your stories straight; either I know what it means or I don’t you can’t have it both ways. Second, if YOU know what it means you should be able to answer the question even if I don’t

It is both ways and I just explained it above. For example, I always understood the concept of narcissism before I knew the word "narcissism" itself meant that concept.

Yes! The object of esteem is something with an actual existence.

That's not what the definition is saying. Also, everything has "an actual existence"; it's meaningless to add that to anything.

The dictionary definition is:
reverent honor and homage paid to God or a sacred personage, or to any object regarded as sacred.
Definition of worship | Dictionary.com

OK. Dictionary.com is not a very complete lexicon, but OK.

Perhaps Neogaia777 doesn’t understand what it means to worship because according to the dictionary, worshiping is done to that which is considered sacred and I don't think he considers dollar bills to be sacred, if he did he wouldn’t be able to spend them.

@Neogaia777 knows what it means and provided a great explanation to you right above this post. And "dollar bills being sacred" is your wording, not ours.

The lease agreement we both signed says nothing about extravagant, it just says I will replace/repair as needed. It says nothing about being done to their satisfaction.

Way to not answer the question - more dodge and deflect. The tenant claims that the $2,400.00 faucet is needed, and points out to you that it is in the lease that you must replace the faucet with the $2,400.00 as it is needed. Would you do it?

 

[Ken-1122]

How does one give reverent honor/respect and homage to an object or a thing like money, etc...?

I'll tel you how, as I already have told you how, it is trusting and/or putting faith in it more so than you do God, or a god, or your god/God, etc...

No it does not. As I said before; there is a big difference between trusting and/or putting faith in an objet (dollar bills), vs putting trust and/or faith is something else that your object can be exchanged for. Nobody has faith in the actual dollar bills, they have faith in things the dollar bills can be exchanged for.
And as far as calling worship anything that is put above your idea of God? I put everything that exists above your idea of God because I'm convinced your God does not exist! Does this mean I worship, (give reverent honor/respect and homage) everything that exist? Even the stuff I don't like? C'mon the only way this line of thinking is even feasible is if you change the definition of worship to mean something that it does not mean.

 

[Ken-1122]

The answer is the definition of extravagant which you refuse to acknowledge.

How about if you just answer the question. If my rebuttal is based on a flawed definition of extravagant, you can point that out by giving me it’s true definition at that time

I'll be more clear - you undrstand what extravagance is but you don't link that knowledge to the word itself. You pretend not to know what the word means and that is why you keep asking me to define it for you yet at the same time you understand the concept and refuse to acknowledge that concept is attached to the word.

I’m not asking you to define the term, I’m asking you where do you draw the line. Answer that question and quit stalling.

That's not what the definition is saying. Also, everything has "an actual existence"; it's meaningless to add that to anything.

Are you saying the “object of esteem” referred to in the definition is not something with an actual existence? Because there are countless things and even people we refer to that don’t have an actual existence.

Way to not answer the question - more dodge and deflect. The tenant claims that the $2,400.00 faucet is needed, and points out to you that it is in the lease that you must replace the faucet with the $2,400.00 as it is needed. Would you do it?

If I were stupid enough to write and sign a lease requiring I supply a $2,400 faucet, I would be required by the law of the state I live in to provide this for him. However I am not stupid enough to put something like that in the lease when I write it.

 

[ArmenianJohn]

No it does not. As I said before; there is a big difference between trusting and/or putting faith in an objet (dollar bills), vs putting trust and/or faith is something else that your object can be exchanged for. Nobody has faith in the actual dollar bills, they have faith in things the dollar bills can be exchanged for.

Right, material things. That's why money and material things are both mammon. People have faith in the dollar bill because they also put their faith in the material things those dollar bills can buy. You're admitting here that people do put their faith in material things and money.

And as far as calling worship anything that is put above your idea of God? I put everything that exists above your idea of God because I'm convinced your God does not exist! Does this mean I worship, (give reverent honor/respect and homage) everything that exist?

Yes, that's exactly what it means. It also means you put yourself above God. That's why your conservative worldview is incompatible with Christianity. That's the point of this whole thread, that conservatives put mammon - "things" as you like to call them and talk on and on about them - ahead of people.

Even the stuff I don't like? C'mon the only way this line of thinking is even feasible is if you change the definition of worship to mean something that it does not mean.

No, not the stuff/things you don't like. Only the things you like, love, and thereby worship. Like money and the things you buy with it that you love and put your faith in to take care of you and your needs.

 

[ArmenianJohn]

How about if you just answer the question. If my rebuttal is based on a flawed definition of extravagant, you can point that out by giving me it’s true definition at that time

Your rebuttal is not based on anything, you have yet to show that you know what "extravagant" means and you're dodging it. You're asking me to educate you and I won't do that. Use a dictionary..

I’m not asking you to define the term, I’m asking you where do you draw the line. Answer that question and quit stalling.

The definition makes clear where the line is drawn. Look up the definition and it will give you the answer as to where the line is drawn - it's literally right in the definition.

Are you saying the “object of esteem” referred to in the definition is not something with an actual existence? Because there are countless things and even people we refer to that don’t have an actual existence.

What doesn't have an actual existence?

If I were stupid enough to write and sign a lease requiring I supply a $2,400 faucet, I would be required by the law of the state I live in to provide this for him. However I am not stupid enough to put something like that in the lease when I write it.

You wrote and signed a lease saying you'd replace things as "needed". The tenant is telling you what is needed and you are bound by your own lease to provide what is needed. It doesn't have to say "$2,400.00 faucet" in the lease - you said "what is needed", so that can be anything that is "needed", including a $2,400.00 faucet. Contract law says that you have to abide by that lease. If a $30,000.00 silk rug is needed your lease has you on the hook for that, too.

 

[Neogaia777]

No it does not. As I said before; there is a big difference between trusting and/or putting faith in an object (dollar bills), vs putting trust and/or faith is something else that your object can be exchanged for. Nobody has faith in the actual dollar bills, they have faith in things the dollar bills can be exchanged for.

And as I have explained to you before already, and that you are just now touching on in that last line, that is what "mammon" is, and in God's Word, it is described as a "spirit", and the worship of that spirit (above God) happens or begins in the heart, etc, and one does not have to have an outward display of it, like actually falling down on ones physical knees, and actually physically worshiping a physical dollar bill or coin, to be doing in it ones heart, etc, just as the sins, or spirits, or what embodies the spirit of either being a murderer or adulterous person does or does not have to either, just as Jesus Himself explains/explained to you in His Word or words, etc, it is the same with the spirit of mammon, etc, which is more than just money, but includes money, as I have also explained to you already, and I'm not going to go through the exhaustive work (or wasted words) of trying to explain it to you all over again, etc, cause if you truly wanted to know, you would know already, as I have already explained it to you already in previous posts...

Maybe you should go back and re-read them, etc...?

And as far as calling worship anything that is put above your idea of God?

Not just "my idea", but yes, that's what "idol worship" or idolatry is, etc, putting a thing, anything, above and/or before, or in front of, or in place of, etc, "God", etc, and it happens first in the heart, as even Jesus himself tries/tried to explain to you in His Word, etc...

I put everything that exists above your idea of God because I'm convinced your God does not exist! Does this mean I worship, (give reverent honor/respect and homage) everything that exist? Even the stuff I don't like?

To whatever you idolize/worship (above God) (or before or in place of God) in your heart, I say a most definite and resounding and very, very loud, "yes", etc...

And liking it or not liking it or not is irrelevant, but obviously some part of you "likes it", if you are, etc, so some part of you "likes it", etc...

I suspect you are only rejecting it (and the true God) because you don't like God's definitions of such things, cause then you'd have to admit that your a sinner who does not live up the high mark of the (Jesus) high calling, the calling of God (perfection) and sins, etc...

And I think you worship yourself, etc...

And that is a god I most definitely reject, and will not worship, etc...

C'mon the only way this line of thinking is even feasible is if you change the definition of worship to mean something that it does not mean.

It's how Jesus Himself defined/defines it, and if you reject that/Him, then I really don't know what to say to you, other than I feel very, very sorry for you, etc...

Sin begins in the heart, and straight and right away, I can tell you that there are most definitely a few things your worship above and beyond God in your heart, etc, most definitely, etc...

Or what else did Jesus mean about the sins of murder, or being a murderer, or the sin(s) of adultery, etc...?

Care to explain that one to me...?

Very sorry you reject God and Jesus because of your own selfishness, and your own putting your own self up as your own god, and for the sake of your own all-to-fragile ego, and you own denial, and foolishness and stupidity, of that ego or stupidity, etc...

Reject the truth if you like, but "there is is" anyway, etc...

God Bless!

 

[Ken-1122]

Your rebuttal is not based on anything,

I haven’t provided a rebuttal because you havent answered the question yet. Again; where do you draw the line before you judge someone with extravagant spending? Because someone from a 3rd world country can judge your spending as extravagant making you guilty of the same sin you judge Bill Gates of. So where do you draw the line?

What doesn't have an actual existence?

Ever heard of the story of “Sagan’s Dragon”? Sagan does not exist, neither does his dragon; they are both fictional characters used to make a point.

You wrote and signed a lease saying you'd replace things as "needed". The tenant is telling you what is needed and you are bound by your own lease to provide what is needed. It doesn't have to say "$2,400.00 faucet" in the lease - you said "what is needed", so that can be anything that is "needed", including a $2,400.00 faucet. Contract law says that you have to abide by that lease. If a $30,000.00 silk rug is needed your lease has you on the hook for that, too.

The lease requires I replace things at the same level as what was provided when he first moved in. Unless I had a $2,400 faucet in the apartment when he first moved in, I would not be required to provide him with one when the faucet breaks.

Right, material things. That's why money and material things are both mammon. People have faith in the dollar bill because they also put their faith in the material things those dollar bills can buy. You're admitting here that people do put their faith in material things and money.

Okay; so since I have faith that my car will get me to work everyday rather than God getting me to work, according to you I worship my car?

Yes, that's exactly what it means. It also means you put yourself above God. That's why your conservative worldview is incompatible with Christianity. That's the point of this whole thread, that conservatives put mammon - "things" as you like to call them and talk on and on about them - ahead of people.

First of all, I don’t have a conservative worldview, second there are a lot of liberals who put things ahead of your idea of God as well.

No, not the stuff/things you don't like. Only the things you like, love, and thereby worship. Like money and the things you buy with it that you love and put your faith in to take care of you and your needs

Again; the only way you can conclude me trusting my car to get me to work everyday means I worship my car, is by using the term “worship” out of context

 

[Neogaia777]

No it does not. As I said before; there is a big difference between trusting and/or putting faith in an objet (dollar bills), vs putting trust and/or faith is something else that your object can be exchanged for. Nobody has faith in the actual dollar bills, they have faith in things the dollar bills can be exchanged for.
And as far as calling worship anything that is put above your idea of God? I put everything that exists above your idea of God because I'm convinced your God does not exist! Does this mean I worship, (give reverent honor/respect and homage) everything that exist? Even the stuff I don't like? C'mon the only way this line of thinking is even feasible is if you change the definition of worship to mean something that it does not mean.

And are you actually arguing with people about things existing or else not existing, etc, and is that now the basis for some of your arguments now, etc...?

Everything that exists, exists, etc...

Do you have thoughts and or concepts or ideas in your mind, or do you formulate them, or think about them sometimes, etc...?

And then, does everyone else have or do such or have such or so also, etc...?

Then they exist, etc...

And the Bible says they are some "very real things", etc, and even says they are spirits, or are the basis for spirits, etc, or formulate the basis of many spirits existence, etc, which can be in us, and all too often, are in us, etc, and some either better or worse, or some very much more much worse, than others, etc... And some can have more or less of either or, etc...

This is why worship, and then when it becomes in place of, or in front of, or above God, then becomes "idolization", etc, of certain "spirits", etc, or certain thoughts or concepts or ideas, oftentimes very selfish ones, begins in the heart, etc...

And does not require and outward physical sign, or outward showy physical display, etc...

Jesus tried to make this very, very clear to you with the sins or murder and adultery, and He also mentioned the "spirit" of (and yes he did call it a "spirit") (or thought or concept or idea of) "mammon", etc, that does not just only include physical money, etc, but is the idea behind what money and material wealth can do, or gets and/or provides you with, or does or can do for you, etc, and that "spirit", or that whole complete thought or concept or idea in it's entirety, etc, is the wicked spirit of "mammon", that is constantly trying to rule in our hearts over and above and beyond God, etc...

And it takes hold of many, etc...

You really sure it is not ruling in your heart, etc...?

God Bless!

 

[Neogaia777]

And are you actually arguing with people about things existing or else not existing, etc, and is that now the basis for some of your arguments now, etc...?

Everything that exists, exists, etc...

Do you have thoughts and or concepts or ideas in your mind, or do you formulate them, or think about them sometimes, etc...?

And then, does everyone else have or do such or have such or so also, etc...?

Then they exist, etc...

And the Bible says they are some "very real things", etc, and even says they are spirits, or are the basis for spirits, etc, or formulate the basis of many spirits existence, etc, which can be in us, and all too often, are in us, etc, and some either better or worse, or some very much more much worse, than others, etc... And some can have more or less of either or, etc...

This is why worship, and then when it becomes in place of, or in front of, or above God, then becomes "idolization", etc, of certain "spirits", etc, or certain thoughts or concepts or ideas, begins in the heart, etc...

And does not require and outward physical sign, or outward showy physical display, etc...

Jesus tried to make this very, very clear to you with the sins or murder and adultery, and He also mentioned the "spirit" of (and yes he did call it a "spirit") (or thought or concept or idea of) "mammon", etc, that does not just only include physical money, etc, but is the idea behind what money and material wealth can do, or gets and/or provides you with, or does or can do for you, etc, and that "spirit", or that whole complete thought or concept or idea in it's entirety, etc, is the wicked spirit of "mammon", that is constantly trying to rule in our hearts over and above and beyond God, etc...

And it takes hold of many, etc...

You really sure it is not ruling in your heart, etc...?

God Bless!

And many of these "spirits" do not have to come out and tell you or say to you they are spirits, or even try to get you to directly worship them, most of them have only to appeal to our own selfish and self-serving nature or egos for them to get their hands on us, or have us tightly and firmly in their clutches, etc, and control, etc...

They don't have to, and most oftentimes actually do not ever make it blatantly obvious, etc, but they are very, very slick and very subtle, etc, so subtle, that many of us do not even know or ever come to realize they are even there, etc, but they are none-the-less, etc...

Anyway,

God Bless!

 

[Neogaia777]

@Ken-1122

You shouldn't have mentioned me or I would have probably left you, and this thread, alone for while, let other people deal with you, etc, but since you did, or now that you have...?

Anyway,

God Bless!