Luke 14-16

[wolfpurplemoon]

Jesus says that when you hold a banquet you shouldn't invite people you hope will return the favour but instead the poor and needy because then you'll be repaid in the afterlife. You'd still be doing it in hope of a reward though wouldn't you, rather than helping the needy for the sake of helping them.

It still seems to me that people who sin and then repent will be treated better than those who never ever sin, this sort of arrangement seems to favour doing whatever you want for most of your life and then just repenting before the end.

A rich man who goes to hell for his general selfishness and particular bad treatment of a poor man who died at his gate begs Abraham to send the poor man from heaven to the rich man's family to warn them so they can avoid going to hell. Abraham says that if they've not responded to the prophets so far then someone returning from the dead wouldn't convince them either.

Comments

[zteccc.livejournal.com]

Sorry for the delay in responding. Life has gotten very busy.

You suggest that my posts are about me. I think everyone's posts are about them. A person wouldn't post if they didn't think they had anything of value to post. So, yes, my posts are somewhat about me, just as your posts are somewhat about you and Wolf's are somewhat about her. Are they all about me? No.

Outside of my first name, there is little in my posts that indicate anything about me. Not where I live, who I am, what denomination I adhere to, etc. I only started posting my first name because another poster couldn't determine my gender from my posts. So the posts clearly aren't about me very much. They are about my beliefs, same as everyone.

If, as you suggested, I created a journal, that journal would definitely be about me. It would even be more about me if I then tried to link to my journal from this one, dragging people from here to read mine. I think that would be rude to Wolf. The discussion is here, not on any journal that I may create, so here is where I'll post.

Am I confusing fact with belief? Not really. Most people post their beliefs and support them with fact. I certainly include them in the same paragraphs, but just as clearly, you were able to determine which portions were factual and which portions were from my beliefs. Contextually, there is no confusion. Of course some of my text is not so much my beliefs as my understanding of the scripture. For example, my post regarding Verses 25-33 is a simplification of those verses. I took 9 verses, and distilled them to one simple sentence. That isn't a historical fact, nor my opinion, but a simplification to make the scripture easier and more accessible.

As to my "assumption" that anyone wants or needs my information, I'll refer to the same information that you did. Wolf has admitted that she doesn't have any experience or background with the scripture. As such, her interpretations are based on this lack of experience and background. That's fine as far as it goes, but to understand a response to the posts, one often needs that background. I'm attempting to do so since her preface obviously shows that she understands that this lack could color her views (very insightful of her by the way).
You are correct that an opinion isn't wrong based on the information given, but with additional information, an opinion might be shown to be uninformed and therefore incorrect. I'm helping to provide that information in the same way that any of us would provide information to anyone that we perceived as needing assistance to understand something.

If you need an example, consider the opinion of President George W. Bush regarding Iraq's ability to produce nuclear material prior to going to war. It was clearly his opinion, based on the information he had been given, but it was also clearly incorrect.

You are complaining more about my style of posting than the content of my posts. I'm sure, from your posts, that you don't agree with me, but you don't challenge my content or conclusions, rather you challenge my style. I find that interesting because that is a tactic often used by those who cannot mount a substantive challenge in a debate. If you don't like one of my posts or have examples of me using questionable logic or translations, challenge the content of it. I'll be happy to respond.

As I said in my first response, I'm working on my style. Wolf asked me to earlier and I made some changes. I'm still working on it.

Finally, at the end of the day, this is Wolf's journal. She can decide if she wants me to stop posting and if she requests me to do so, I'll stop. No questions, no arguments. Until she does so, I'll continue and reserve the right to post opinion mixed with fact, just as all of us do.