• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Your Core Belief(s)!

cloudyday2

Generic Theist
Site Supporter
Jul 10, 2012
7,381
2,352
✟591,302.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single

Does a God necessarily NEED to exist to have 'meaning'? If so, why?

Alternatively, if life has no meaning, then what?

And lastly, do we care about what is actually true, or instead what comforts?
"Meaning" requires an observer who can assign "meaning". The ideal observer is God, because his judgment cannot be questioned and he continues to exist after we die.

If life has no meaning then it is much more tempting to end it prematurely.

Everybody cares what is true, but religious claims are more difficult to conclusively prove or disprove. Thus there is more latitude for choosing to believe what comforts.

Hope that answered your questions.
 
  • Friendly
Reactions: cvanwey
Upvote 0

Halbhh

Everything You say is Life to me
Site Supporter
Mar 17, 2015
17,340
9,285
catholic -- embracing all Christians
✟1,223,341.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
And to answer your goal post shifting remark...

I happily admit that had I felt I received revelation, I might be a believer too. But then moving forward, if I wanted to critically challenge my own core belief(s), my 'viewpoint' leads me to acknowledge the topic of EWS, as stated in post #1. Meaning, was my contact actually from God, verses anything else?


Thus, my 'viewpoint' here WOULD be challenged, had I concluded I believe in God because of revelation. But I don't. So no, let's now get back to you.

But in your case, we can still go to the beginning of post #1, where I state:

"whenever the topic heads towards the core reason(s) for their belief that Christianity is true, I often times sense push-back, or even retreat from the interlocutor prior to getting to the 'heart' of the matter? It seems as though many do not want their true and core belief thoroughly challenged.?.?.?"

You obviously have no intent on answering my repeated question, about the 'sheep and the goat', which is also explained in post #156.

But as it stands, your 'reason' for your core believe does not look to jive with consistent rationale. Why?

You state in post #2:

"I tried doing what Christ said to do, to see if I could gain anything, and His instructions for living work far better than other ways of doing things, I learned by experience."


So if I were to always follow what Confucius says to do, and it works for me, over and over and over again, is he divine?

To your OP question:
...believers coming to God. If you have any more, please indulge...

Here's a key part of my answer (in case you didn't get to that point) --

" If I see the sun rise 1,000 times, I start to understand/believe it will rise tomorrow."

And that's a key, central part of my answer.

Trying to say post #2 (in entirety) is not an answer -- by that it seems you appear to be trying to "move the goalposts" (your own wording you chose to accuse someone else about) -- it seems you've projected what you are doing.

Projection is normal. A wide mature person says something akin on some level to "oh! whoops, that was me" when they see they have projected, that they did what they accuse someone else of doing.

Of course it is humble to admit you are just human, and do something like projection, which humans do.

And if you could, then everyone would suddenly feel more sympathetic to you (instead of seeing you being hypocritical on it). So, it's a win-win for you if you can admit you accused me of what you are actually the one doing.

I want you to win on that. :)
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

cvanwey

Well-Known Member
May 10, 2018
5,165
733
65
California
✟151,844.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Skeptic
Marital Status
Private
"Meaning" requires an observer who can assign "meaning". The ideal observer is God, because his judgment cannot be questioned and he continues to exist after we die.

If life has no meaning then it is much more tempting to end it prematurely.

Everybody cares what is true, but religious claims are more difficult to conclusively prove or disprove. Thus there is more latitude for choosing to believe what comforts.

Hope that answered your questions.

Though this is a very interesting topic, for which I could go 'ham' upon, it may be best if we save this for another completely different conversation :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: cloudyday2
Upvote 0

cvanwey

Well-Known Member
May 10, 2018
5,165
733
65
California
✟151,844.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Skeptic
Marital Status
Private
To your OP question:

Here's a key part of my answer (in case you didn't get to that point) --

" If I see the sun rise 1,000 times, I start to understand/believe it will rise tomorrow."

And that's a key, central part of my answer.

Trying to say post #2 (in entirety) is not an answer -- by that it seems you appear to be trying to "move the goalposts" (your own wording you chose to accuse someone else about) -- it seems you've projected what you are doing.

Projection is normal. A wide mature person says something akin on some level to "oh! whoops, that was me" when they see they have projected, that they did what they accuse someone else of doing.

Of course it is humble to admit you are just human, and do something like projection, which humans do.

And if you could, then everyone would suddenly feel more sympathetic to you (instead of seeing you being hypocritical on it). So, it's a win-win for you if you can admit you accused me of what you are actually the one doing.

I want you to win on that.

I did not bother to attach this statement, as it added nothing more to your response. Please look at what I actually asked you:

"So if I were to always follow what Confucius says to do, and it works for me, over and over and over again, is he divine?"

I sense that you are grasping at straws, to not answer straight forward and basic questions.

You know if you honestly answer the above question, as 'no', it immediately implicates you in faulty logic :) Likewise, following Jesus's core assertions, which lead you 'right', over and and over and over again, is not what deems Him God. Does it? Thus, the merry-go-round we go....

ALSO....


9th request placed! Are you a 'sheep or a goat'? --- Please see post #156, for why I ask.

P.S. Like I stated in post #4. I reckon you only follow the rules you like, and when you like.
 
Upvote 0

Halbhh

Everything You say is Life to me
Site Supporter
Mar 17, 2015
17,340
9,285
catholic -- embracing all Christians
✟1,223,341.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I did not bother to attach this statement, as it added nothing more to your response. Please look at what I actually asked you:

"So if I were to always follow what Confucius says to do, and it works for me, over and over and over again, is he divine?"

I sense that you are grasping at straws, to not answer straight forward and basic questions.

You know if you honestly answer the above question, as 'no', it immediately implicates you in faulty logic :) Likewise, following Jesus's core assertions, which lead you 'right', over and and over and over again, is not what deems Him God. Does it? Thus, the merry-go-round we go....

ALSO....


9th request placed! Are you a 'sheep or a goat'? --- Please see post #156, for why I ask.

P.S. Like I stated in post #4. I reckon you only follow the rules you like, and when you like.


It wasn't merely that things Christ said worked.

Not only that. More.

I said I'd tried a lot of different things, and what Christ said was always the best solution/way of all of them, working better than competing unalike ways.

Sometimes pointing this out leads some to say that since other teachers have said some similar best ways to live like those Christ said, he must have 'copied' (sic) what they said or some such.

But since these are just best ways to live, dependent on human nature, they ought to be discovered over and over.

After all, if something is the best way to live, it ought to be discovered over and over and and the teaching last also.

What is true lasts, what is false fades away.

A best way to live depends on human nature -- what we all have in common, and is therefore fixed by human nature, and ought to be discoverable.

But, as you might guess or could learn -- Christ said more than only what Confucius said.

You could stick with Confucius, but if you want so much more people are saying is there, you'd better learn that more from Christ.

There's a reason he is the most well known and appeals to people from every nation and time period.
 
Upvote 0

cvanwey

Well-Known Member
May 10, 2018
5,165
733
65
California
✟151,844.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Skeptic
Marital Status
Private
How about this...? I stop asking, even one question. You never give me a straight answer anyways.

Sorry if you think I'm going to 'strawman' you, moving forward, but in continuing to having conversations with you, I appear to have little choice? I will answer for you, for now; until you correct me otherwise.

If you feel I've answered for you inappropriately, please amend me accordingly :)


It wasn't merely that things Christ said worked.

Not only that. More.

I said I'd tried a lot of different things, and what Christ said was always the best solution/way of all of them, working better than competing unalike ways.

Sometimes pointing this out leads some to say that since other teachers have said some similar best ways to live like those Christ said, he must have 'copied' (sic) what they said or some such.

But since these are just best ways to live, dependent on human nature, they ought to be discovered over and over.

After all, if something is the best way to live, it ought to be discovered over and over and and the teaching last also.

What is true lasts, what is false fades away.

I trust we both agree Confucius is not divine. However, here are only some of his stated rules to live by:

  1. Just keep going. Share. ...
  2. Your friends matter. Share. ...
  3. Good Things Come With a Price. Share. ...
  4. To be Wronged is Nothing. Share. ...
  5. Consider the Consequences. Share. ...
  6. Make Adjustments. Share. ...
  7. You Can Learn From Everyone. Share. ...
  8. All or None. Share.
Not only have these rules not 'faded away', they were presented before Jesus came on to the seen. So what....? Furthermore, you do not follow all of Jesus's rules regardless. I'm pretty sure of this.... Just the ones you like.... Please reference the 'Serom on the Mount', just for starters. Everything you have stated above is irrelevant. If this is the reason you trust that Jesus is divine, then you may want to re-evaluate.

A best way to live depends on human nature -- what we all have in common, and is therefore fixed by human nature, and ought to be discoverable.

But, as you might guess or could learn -- Christ said more than only what Confucius said.

You could stick with Confucius, but if you want so much more people are saying is there, you'd better learn that more from Christ.

There's a reason he is the most well known and appeals to people from every nation and time period.

This goes right back to post #4, and beyond. Sure, Jesus's rules do not completely parallel Confucius. And like I keep saying, you only adhere to the ones you agree with anyways. Thus, it becomes irrelevant regardless :) (i.e.)

- You do not invite bums into your house, over and above your own family.
- You do not give your enemy your other cheek.
- When someone takes from you, you do not ask them what else they want to take.

In the end, even IF you someday agree with everything said above, this is STILL likely NOT why you ACTUALLY believe 'Jesus is Lord' :) Why? Because you would likely still believe in the same God, if this argument completely falls apart for you :)

Like I stated long ago.... If I feel I had received revelation, I might be arguing on your side. And like I stated in post #1, all these 'apologetics' arguments, are nothing more than exercises in futility.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Halbhh

Everything You say is Life to me
Site Supporter
Mar 17, 2015
17,340
9,285
catholic -- embracing all Christians
✟1,223,341.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
You do not invite bums into your house, over and above your own family.

I don't consider the people, including strangers that knocked, and who I invited into my house, to be "bums", even if some of them had ratty clothes.

Do you actually call some some people "bums", and if you do, are you devaluing them as not having value?

Why is inviting a stranger into your house "over and above your own family"?

That doesn't even make sense, honestly. If you help someone, it isn't to be "over and above" other people's needs.

We are not to hurt Paul or Jane in order to help Ralph.

If Ralph needs help, we simply find a way to help Ralph that doesn't hurt Paul or Jane. It's just ordinary good sense.

The story of the Good Samaritan could help you on these types of questions. The Samaritan did what was most needed, and then continued on his own duties and tasks and purposes.
 
Upvote 0

cvanwey

Well-Known Member
May 10, 2018
5,165
733
65
California
✟151,844.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Skeptic
Marital Status
Private
Before I answer all your raised concerns, I noticed you still completely shied away from my given point:

If someone gives rules, which stand the test of time, and also work for you over and over again, this is not what deems them a divine agent. And yet, this is, somehow, how you have concluded 'Jesus is Lord'? I don't think so... :)

Even when this above epiphany finally sets in for you, you will still be a believer. So please tell me the real reason you believe. Cough cough.... 'revelation.' The same reason I would be a believer as well :)


I don't consider the people, including strangers that knocked, and who I invited into my house, to be "bums", even if some of them had ratty clothes.

Do you actually call some some people "bums", and if you do, are you devaluing them as not having value?

No. You gloss over so much, I was wondering if you were even paying attention. :) I might need to inject more slang buzz terms to get you to address something of importance, moving forward it seems...


Why is inviting a stranger into your house "over and above your own family"?

That doesn't even make sense, honestly. If you help someone, it isn't to be "over and above" other people's needs.

It makes sense to Jesus :) And He tells you why....

When you give a luncheon or dinner, do not invite your friends, your brothers or sisters, your relatives, or your rich neighbors; if you do, they may invite you back and so you will be repaid. 13 But when you give a banquet, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, the blind, 14 and you will be blessed."

We are not to hurt Paul or Jane in order to help Ralph.

Since you did not quote where I apparently stated "to hurt Paul or Jane in order to help Ralph", I cannot respond here.


The story of the Good Samaritan could help you on these types of questions. The Samaritan did what was most needed, and then continued on his own duties and tasks and purposes.

I would assume it is always more-so needed to invite the poor, crippled, lame, blind, over and above your own friends and family.

But like I stated, you only adhere to the rules you like, and ignore the ones you don't. Hence, is God going to deem you a sheep or a goat? Sorry, I asked that pesky question again :)
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Halbhh

Everything You say is Life to me
Site Supporter
Mar 17, 2015
17,340
9,285
catholic -- embracing all Christians
✟1,223,341.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Before I answer all your raised concerns, I noticed you still completely shied away from my given point:

If someone gives rules, which stand the test of time, and also work for you over and over again, this is not what deems them a divine agent. And yet, this is, somehow, how you have concluded 'Jesus is Lord'? I don't think so... :)

Even when this above epiphany finally sets in for you, you will still be a believer. So please tell me the real reason you believe. Cough cough.... 'revelation.' The same reason I would be a believer as well :)




No. You gloss over so much, I was wondering if you were even paying attention. :) I might need to inject more slang buzz terms to get you to address something of importance, moving forward it seems...




It makes sense to Jesus :) And He tells you why....

When you give a luncheon or dinner, do not invite your friends, your brothers or sisters, your relatives, or your rich neighbors; if you do, they may invite you back and so you will be repaid. 13 But when you give a banquet, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, the blind, 14 and you will be blessed."



Since you did not quote where I apparently stated "to hurt Paul or Jane in order to help Ralph", I cannot respond here.




I would assume it is always more-so needed to invite the poor, crippled, lame, blind, over and above your own friends and family.

But like I stated, you only adhere to the rules you like, and ignore the ones you don't. Hence, is God going to deem you a sheep or a goat? Sorry, I asked that pesky question again :)
You are have to try (attempt) to read more neutrally, without using your assumptions to demand the text mean what you prefer or thought once or heard wherever, but instead to actually listen.

He didn't say invite the poor to your banquet and be sure to ignore and stop loving your family and refuse to let them participate.

No.

He said that instead of only inviting your friends and family or rich people, to instead invite the poor, the crippled and such -- include them. Make your banquet for the poor, the disadvantaged, primarily.

Make it for them.

He didn't say stop ever eating with your brothers and sisters in the church, your friends, your family.

No.

He said when you give a special banquet, be sure to invite those who cannot pay you back, who are disadvantaged, and such.

See?

If you happen to have friends that are believers in Christ, they will often want to come too, and bring some of the food or such, or help, so that they also can help the poor and disadvantaged.
 
Upvote 0

cvanwey

Well-Known Member
May 10, 2018
5,165
733
65
California
✟151,844.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Skeptic
Marital Status
Private
You again completely ignored the main premise of our prior exchanges:

(post #208) If someone gives rules, which stand the test of time, and also work for you over and over again, this is not what deems them a divine agent. And yet, this is, somehow, how you have concluded 'Jesus is Lord'? I don't think so... :)

Even when this above epiphany finally sets in for you, you will still be a believer. So please tell me the real reason you believe.

Okay, now to even more off-topic stuff, which has absolutely nothing to do with why you do/don't believe.


You are have to try (attempt) to read more neutrally, without using your assumptions to demand the text mean what you prefer or thought once or heard wherever, but instead to actually listen.

He didn't say invite the poor to your banquet and be sure to ignore and stop loving your family and refuse to let them participate.

No.

He said that instead of only inviting your friends and family or rich people, to instead invite the poor, the crippled and such -- include them. Make your banquet for the poor, the disadvantaged, primarily.

Make it for them.

He didn't say stop ever eating with your brothers and sisters in the church, your friends, your family.

No.

He said when you give a special banquet, be sure to invite those who cannot pay you back, who are disadvantaged, and such.

See?

If you happen to have friends that are believers in Christ, they will often want to come too, and bring some of the food or such, or help, so that they also can help the poor and disadvantaged.

Did you already forget what you stated in post #207?

"Why is inviting a stranger into your house "over and above your own family"?"

Because according to Jesus, you 'will be blessed.'

"That doesn't even make sense, honestly. If you help someone, it isn't to be "over and above" other people's needs"

According to Jesus, you should. You receive a greater reward for inviting the blind, lame, other. They cannot pay you back. You do it to not hope or expect they will later return the favor. Sure, your friends or family might be in need, but they may also later pay you back ;)

So, are you ever going to answer the 2 points? It's only two, this should not overwhelm you :)

1. Does longevity in a rule, which always works for you, mean it came from a divine agent? Likely not.
2. Are you a sheep or a goat? I say we are both goats :)
 
Upvote 0

Halbhh

Everything You say is Life to me
Site Supporter
Mar 17, 2015
17,340
9,285
catholic -- embracing all Christians
✟1,223,341.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
You again completely ignored the main premise of our prior exchanges:

(post #208) If someone gives rules, which stand the test of time, and also work for you over and over again, this is not what deems them a divine agent. And yet, this is, somehow, how you have concluded 'Jesus is Lord'? I don't think so... :)

Even when this above epiphany finally sets in for you, you will still be a believer. So please tell me the real reason you believe.

Okay, now to even more off-topic stuff, which has absolutely nothing to do with why you do/don't believe.




Did you already forget what you stated in post #207?

"Why is inviting a stranger into your house "over and above your own family"?"

Because according to Jesus, you 'will be blessed.'

"That doesn't even make sense, honestly. If you help someone, it isn't to be "over and above" other people's needs"

According to Jesus, you should. You receive a greater reward for inviting the blind, lame, other. They cannot pay you back. You do it to not hope or expect they will later return the favor. Sure, your friends or family might be in need, but they may also later pay you back ;)

So, are you ever going to answer the 2 points? It's only two, this should not overwhelm you :)

1. Does longevity in a rule, which always works for you, mean it came from a divine agent? Likely not.
2. Are you a sheep or a goat? I say we are both goats :)
He gave more than only instructions for how to live in relation with other people, and those further instructions are for those who believe.

As to the rest, it shows you aren't reading the answers I already gave. Read the rest of post #209.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Rachel20

Well-Known Member
May 30, 2020
1,954
1,443
STX
✟73,109.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
For me it is a desire that there be some purpose to life.

I don't see how there could be without a creator-God, if everything were just random chance. But knowing there is brings me fulfillment in mere existing and the simplicity of that makes me happy. I like to watch the squirrels in my yard and I admire how they just run around being squirrels and doing what squirrels do and thinking no more of it.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: cloudyday2
Upvote 0

Rachel20

Well-Known Member
May 30, 2020
1,954
1,443
STX
✟73,109.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Observing the 8). points in the OP, which one would you state applies to you the most?

And in observance of the topic of EWS, how were you able to successfully discern God, verses not God?

The 8 were methodologies of how believers come to God and none are how I came to him. For me, I read scripture and was drawn to him. I wanted him to exist (agreed with him, admired his character, desired his love & promises). At the same time I thought it all entirely possible. If the idea of life after death was difficult, I had already experienced that first-hand (where was I before this life if not dead?)

As far as discerning God then, I don't know how or if I even did. I can discern him now though, though I can't explain it. It's like knowing but you don't know how you know. This must sound so off to the skeptics I hesitate to say it, yet it's true so how can I deny it?
 
Upvote 0

cloudyday2

Generic Theist
Site Supporter
Jul 10, 2012
7,381
2,352
✟591,302.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
I don't see how there could be without a creator-God, if everything were just random chance. But knowing there is brings me fulfillment in mere existing and the simplicity of that makes me happy. I like to watch the squirrels in my yard and I admire how they just run around being squirrels and doing what squirrels do and thinking no more of it.
Something I try to remember is this: human society is focused on certain goals - money, power, popularity, etc. Where does a squirrel fit into that? Yet squirrels are an important part of creation, and we don't judge them as "losers" and so on. Why don't we allow for the possibility that the purpose of some humans does not necessarily lead to the goals that human society tries to impose on all of us? I often find myself wishing that certain people in my life would be different or that I would be different, but what I am really doing is judging other people and myself according to those human goals - money, power, popularity, etc. We don't treat squirrels that way, so we should not treat ourselves that way. We need to have faith that everybody is on the path that God planned for him/her.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rachel20
Upvote 0

Par5

Well-Known Member
Nov 5, 2017
1,013
653
79
LONDONDERRY
✟69,175.00
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
The 8 were methodologies of how believers come to God and none are how I came to him. For me, I read scripture and was drawn to him. I wanted him to exist (agreed with him, admired his character, desired his love & promises). At the same time I thought it all entirely possible. If the idea of life after death was difficult, I had already experienced that first-hand (where was I before this life if not dead?)

As far as discerning God then, I don't know how or if I even did. I can discern him now though, though I can't explain it. It's like knowing but you don't know how you know. This must sound so off to the skeptics I hesitate to say it, yet it's true so how can I deny it?
If reading the bible drew you to your god and got you to admire his character, then that means you must admire the character of a being that ordered the mass slaughter of people with none to be spared, not even children and infants. I keep raising such slaughter recorded in the bible, the slaughter of the Amalekites and the Canaanites, and I make no apology for doing so.
If I knew nothing else about this god, then these acts of barbarity are all I need to know that I would want nothing to do with such a god.
Never in all my years have I ever heard a Christian say that their god was wrong to order such an act. A lot of tap dancing around the subject and plenty of excuses, but not once have they said that such a thing was wrong.
What say you? Do you also think it is not wrong to have children and infants put to the sword?
 
Upvote 0

cvanwey

Well-Known Member
May 10, 2018
5,165
733
65
California
✟151,844.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Skeptic
Marital Status
Private
He gave more than only instructions for how to live in relation with other people, and those further instructions are for those who believe.

You are completely and continually hand-waving away my observation(s). Are YOU a sheep or a goat? I say you are considered a goat.

You also appear to have now completely abandoned your assertion, that you believe because Jesus's Words work for you, over and over again. Otherwise, you would need to also acknowledge that someone, whom claims Confucius's words work for them, over and over again, could also be from the divine.


As to the rest, it shows you aren't reading the answers I already gave. Read the rest of post #209.

I did, and answered.... (i.e.)

Did you already forget what you stated in post #207?


"Why is inviting a stranger into your house "over and above your own family"?"

Because according to Jesus, you 'will be blessed.'


"That doesn't even make sense, honestly. If you help someone, it isn't to be "over and above" other people's needs"

According to Jesus, you should. You receive a greater reward for inviting the blind, lame, other. They cannot pay you back. You do it to not hope or expect they will later return the favor. Sure, your friends or family might be in need, but they may also later pay you back.

Furthermore, He does not stress to [ALSO] invite the lame and the poor, He states [DO NOT] invite family/friends. And even if it did state this, do you invite the lame, blind, and poor, for which (you do not know)? So please, go on, keep rationalizing the Verses to 'taste' :)


Like I've been saying, you only follow the issued guidelines you like.

So what be the REAL reason you believe?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Halbhh

Everything You say is Life to me
Site Supporter
Mar 17, 2015
17,340
9,285
catholic -- embracing all Christians
✟1,223,341.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Aid to anyone attempting to understand the banquet passage in Luke chapter 14:

12 He said also to the man who had invited him, “When you give a dinner or a banquet, do not invite your friends or your brothers or your relatives or rich neighbors, lest they also invite you in return and you be repaid. 13 But when you give a feast, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, the blind, 14 and you will be blessed, because they cannot repay you. For you will be repaid at the resurrection of the just.”
Luke 14 ESV


While you could read commentaries, which are helpful, I want to explain in simple language (further below).

First:

Ellicott's commentary: (13) When thou makest a feast.--Literally, as in Luke 5:29, a reception. In practice, it need hardly be said, the form of obedience to the precept must, of necessity, vary with the varying phases of social life, and with the lessons of experience. Relief given privately, thoughtfully, discriminatively, may be better both for the giver, as less ostentatious, and for the receivers, as tending to the formation of a higher character, than the open feast of the Eastern form of benevolence. The essence of the beatitude, as distinct from its form, remains for all who give freely to those who can give them no recompense in return, who have nothing to offer but their thanks and prayers.


-----------
Simple language:

Notice that Christ didn't say to only invite the poor and disadvantaged to your banquet and also ignore and stop loving your family and refuse to let them participate.

No. That would be a distortion.

He said that instead of aiming to just invite your friends and family or rich people, to instead have as your goal to invite the poor, the disadvantaged -- those who cannot pay you back.

Make your banquet for the poor, the disadvantaged, as the goal.

Make it for them.

He didn't say stop ever eating with your brothers and sisters in the church, your friends, your family. Not the instruction. That would be a distortion.

He said when you give a banquet, be sure to invite those who cannot pay you back, who are disadvantaged, and such.

If you happen to have friends/family/neighbors that want to come and bring some of the food or such, or help, so that they also can help the poor and disadvantaged, it's perfectly fine to have them come also.

Also, the point isn't to make a big show either.

This instruction is kept if you simply take out someone(s) disadvantaged to lunch or supper, or give groceries even. Those who cannot pay you back. In addition to the benefit of food, you can and should also give your friendliness to them. A banquet or luncheon, or taking someone out to dinner -- these are a nice way to socialize also.
 
Upvote 0

cvanwey

Well-Known Member
May 10, 2018
5,165
733
65
California
✟151,844.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Skeptic
Marital Status
Private
Aid to anyone attempting to understand the banquet passage in Luke chapter 14:

12 He said also to the man who had invited him, “When you give a dinner or a banquet, do not invite your friends or your brothers or your relatives or rich neighbors, lest they also invite you in return and you be repaid. 13 But when you give a feast, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, the blind, 14 and you will be blessed, because they cannot repay you. For you will be repaid at the resurrection of the just.”
Luke 14 ESV


While you could read commentaries, which are helpful, I want to explain in simple language (further below).

First:

Ellicott's commentary: (13) When thou makest a feast.--Literally, as in Luke 5:29, a reception. In practice, it need hardly be said, the form of obedience to the precept must, of necessity, vary with the varying phases of social life, and with the lessons of experience. Relief given privately, thoughtfully, discriminatively, may be better both for the giver, as less ostentatious, and for the receivers, as tending to the formation of a higher character, than the open feast of the Eastern form of benevolence. The essence of the beatitude, as distinct from its form, remains for all who give freely to those who can give them no recompense in return, who have nothing to offer but their thanks and prayers.


-----------
Simple language:

Notice that Christ didn't say to only invite the poor and disadvantaged to your banquet and also ignore and stop loving your family and refuse to let them participate.

No. That would be a distortion.

He said that instead of aiming to just invite your friends and family or rich people, to instead have as your goal to invite the poor, the disadvantaged -- those who cannot pay you back.

Make your banquet for the poor, the disadvantaged, as the goal.

Make it for them.

He didn't say stop ever eating with your brothers and sisters in the church, your friends, your family. Not the instruction. That would be a distortion.

He said when you give a banquet, be sure to invite those who cannot pay you back, who are disadvantaged, and such.

If you happen to have friends/family/neighbors that want to come and bring some of the food or such, or help, so that they also can help the poor and disadvantaged, it's perfectly fine to have them come also.

Also, the point isn't to make a big show either.

This instruction is kept if you simply take out someone(s) disadvantaged to lunch or supper, or give groceries even. Those who cannot pay you back. In addition to the benefit of food, you can and should also give your friendliness to them. A banquet or luncheon, or taking someone out to dinner -- these are a nice way to socialize also.

Nice try buddy. The NIV states "12 Then Jesus said to his host,When you give a luncheon or dinner," This could be any old run-o-da-mill food gathering, not just "special events". Unless you feel the NIV is not a legitimate rendering????????

And I already addressed the family/friends, as well as strangers:

"And even if it did state this, do you invite the lame, blind, and poor, for which (you do not know)? So please, go on, keep rationalizing the Verses to 'taste'"

The point of the Verses would really be no different than stating to help a stranger on the side of the road. You will likely never see them again, to ever come across them again, in hopes of receiving further gratitude, further thanks, or maybe even some return favor of some sort.

Are you a sheep or a goat, according to Christ?
 
Upvote 0

Halbhh

Everything You say is Life to me
Site Supporter
Mar 17, 2015
17,340
9,285
catholic -- embracing all Christians
✟1,223,341.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Nice try buddy. The NIV states "12 Then Jesus said to his host,When you give a luncheon or dinner," This could be any old run-o-da-mill food gathering, not just "special events". Unless you feel the NIV is not a legitimate rendering????????

And I already addressed the family/friends, as well as strangers:

"And even if it did state this, do you invite the lame, blind, and poor, for which (you do not know)? So please, go on, keep rationalizing the Verses to 'taste'"

The point of the Verses would really be no different than stating to help a stranger on the side of the road. You will likely never see them again, to ever come across them again, in hopes of receiving further gratitude, further thanks, or maybe even some return favor of some sort.

Are you a sheep or a goat, according to Christ?

You'd do better to trust mainstream leading bible commentaries above yourself.

Also, you won't be able to understand much of all that you read, perhaps almost nothing, without reading an entire gospel as a whole, so that each passage is part of the whole, and with a listening attitude where you expect to learn new things. And it may also be that there are many things you won't ever understand without faith additionally.
 
Upvote 0

cvanwey

Well-Known Member
May 10, 2018
5,165
733
65
California
✟151,844.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Skeptic
Marital Status
Private
You'd do better to trust mainstream leading bible commentaries above yourself.

Also, you won't be able to understand much of all that you read, perhaps almost nothing, without reading an entire gospel as a whole, so that each passage is part of the whole, and with a listening attitude where you expect to learn new things. And it may also be that there are many things you won't ever understand without faith additionally.

I've already addressed this type of response many times now....

If earnestly reading the entire Bible would achieve complete and real understanding, you would not see 100's, if not more, of conflicting conclusions - (via opposing denominations). ;)

Now, I'm only asking you two questions. Remember, you stated you did not want to address more than 1 or 2 at a time:

1. Are you a sheep or a goat?
2. Does a given rule, which works for you over and over again, deem this rule giver divine?
 
Upvote 0