# jmullaney -- what's the deal? **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [December 5, 2000, 10:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jmullaney-whats-the-deal/44187 "2000-12-05T22:14:04Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 9
**Author:** ![jmullaney](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/85e7bf/32.png) [@jmullaney](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jmullaney)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2000, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jmullaney-whats-the-deal/44187/161 "2000-12-07T18:35:33Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Cantrip \* > What do you, as a juror, do? Cantrip – based on everything I have said in this thread, please take an educated guess. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Gaudere \* > Jhn 7:24 Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment. > > He seems to be saying quite clearly: do not judge by the letter of the law; judge with righteousness, by the spirit of the law. He is referring to _them_ judging his actions wrong, and he does not say “do not judge”, but “judge well”. Neither does Matthew 7:1 mean simply “never judge”, depite your attempt to ignore the context. Point taken, Gaudere. But in Matthew 7 the judging of which is spoken is clearly the kind in which judgement is meted out. On the other hand, if you can not judge another by their actions, you can not rebuke them, and should they repent, forgive them. The issue is a language limitation – to judge can mean “to adjudicate; to mete out justice”, and it can also mean “to form an opinion of another.” So to paraphrase, Matthew 7 begins by saying: do not mete out justice (punishment) or justice will be meted out to you – and, furthermore, do not form an arbitrary opinion of another because what you think you see in them as a fault may really be the result of the mote in your own eye, unless you make sure you can see clearly first, then you can form a valid opinion. > [@](#): > > Seems pretty clear to me. It does NOT say “if you judge at all, you will have to face judgement more terrible than your own.” I don’t know why you think God’s judgement is so terrible. > [@](#): > > We’re not talking about forgiving of debts. Yes, we are. You can’t forgive someone of their debt to society and then expect them to pay it. As a juror, I would be a trustee of that debt. It is not a system of my own design, but as the trustee I have a right to forgive it. > [@](#): > > We’re talking about protecting people from those who wish to harm them Let them protect themselves if they so wish – I will have no part of it. If you are not supposed to resist an evil person, you certaintly can’t arrest them either. You can not love your enemies and put them into prison. **If your enemy asks you to go with them a mile, go with them two.** How is this possible without building REALLY big prisons?? > [@](#): > > But if you don’t want to be shunned, how can you shun another? I don’t mind being avoided by those who wish to have nothing to do with me. Who is my neighbor? My neighbors are those who do not shun me. Right? > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by tomndebb \* > While Jodi’s got him pinned down over here, he isn’t posting non sequiturs and erroneous pseudo-factoids or inventing idiolectic definitions for common words over in GQ. When have I ever done this? > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Jodi \* > you are an idiot, in the sense that you reach conclusions that can only be considered idiotic Better to be an idiot for God than wise for men. I feel sorry for anyone you _don’t_ shun. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Ptahlis \* > If anyone offers factual information to the contrary (like “sin \<\> crime” for instance) he’ll just say “nuh-uh!” and continue arguing along contrafactual lines. That is not a fact – that is an opinion. A sin is a crime against God. A crime is a sin against society. IMHO, they mean the same thing. > [@](#): > > In short, he consistently refuses to engage in honest debate. I appreciate, as should we all, that this medium of communication is prone to misunderstanding. We’re all doing the best we can. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by picmr \* > Any moment now jmullaney’s going to hook up with some tie-dyed alien chick and the credits’ll start rolling. Thanks, **picmr** – with any luck! 😃 ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2000, 7:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jmullaney-whats-the-deal/44187/162 "2000-12-07T19:00:51Z")
> [@](#): > > \*\*Originally posted by jmullaney \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > \*\*Originally posted by tomndebb \*\* > > While Jodi’s got him pinned down over here, he isn’t posting non sequiturs and erroneous pseudo-factoids or inventing idiolectic definitions for common words over in GQ. > > When have I ever done this? Where did I say you did these things? I said that while you were posting in this thread, you were _not_ doing those things in **GQ**. I never said you did them in **GQ**. ---
**Author:** ![jmullaney](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/85e7bf/32.png) [@jmullaney](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jmullaney)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2000, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jmullaney-whats-the-deal/44187/163 "2000-12-07T20:14:27Z")
LOL. OK, Tom. You got me on that one! Mea culpa. * * * Are you really paranoid if they’re really after you? ---
**Author:** ![Gaudere](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e495f1/32.png) [@Gaudere](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gaudere)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2000, 8:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jmullaney-whats-the-deal/44187/164 "2000-12-07T20:53:15Z")
> [@](#): > > Point taken, Gaudere. But in Matthew 7 the judging of which is spoken is clearly the kind in which judgement is meted out. On the other hand, if you can not judge another by their actions, you can not rebuke them, and should they repent, forgive them. The issue is a language limitation – to judge can mean “to adjudicate; to mete out justice”, and it can also mean “to form an opinion of another.” So to paraphrase, Matthew 7 begins by saying: do not mete out justice (punishment) or justice will be meted out to you – and, furthermore, do not form an arbitrary opinion of another because what you think you see in them as a fault may really be the result of the mote in your own eye, unless you make sure you can see clearly first, then you can form a valid opinion. So, in other words, when you want “judge” to mean “mete out justice” it does. When you want “judge” to mean “form an arbitrary opinion of another,” it does. Despite the fact that they’re in adjacent lines and one would expect them to be the same meaning. Sorry, I think you’re weaseling to get out of J.C.'s clear command to judge fairly and righteously. You also did not address the quote I provided where Jesus was judged to have done wrong by others, and he did not tell them do not judge–instead, he told them to judge well. > [@](#): > > I don’t know why you think God’s judgement is so terrible. 'Cause you siad it was. “Do not judge, or you too will be judged. Matthew chapter seven, verse one. _Trust me – you don’t want to be judged._” > [@](#): > > You can’t forgive someone of their debt to society and then expect them to pay it. You can forgive and still punish. Even if someone is sincerely sorry, they may falter in their resolve later. Punishment shows both the offender and any who might be contemplating the offense that there are consequences that cannot be dodged. This is a Good Thing. > [@](#): > > I don’t mind being avoided by those who wish to have nothing to do with me. Who is my neighbor? My neighbors are those who do not shun me. Right? If everyone know that this person did wrong and everyone shuns him, this is a terrible punishment. Imagine, no one ever talking to you and avoiding you–and you think this is _not_ a punishment meted out for a crime and is so different from prison? Bull. ---
**Author:** ![jmullaney](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/85e7bf/32.png) [@jmullaney](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jmullaney)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2000, 9:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jmullaney-whats-the-deal/44187/165 "2000-12-07T21:25:50Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Gaudere \* > So, in other words, when you want “judge” to mean “mete out justice” it does. When you want “judge” to mean “form an arbitrary opinion of another,” it does. Despite the fact that they’re in adjacent lines and one would expect them to be the same meaning. Let me look at Matthew 7 again: > [@](#): > > 1 "Do not judge, or you too will be judged. > 2 For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you. > 3 "Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? > 4 How can you say to your brother, `Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? > 5 You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye. It makes sense to me. Jesus also delineates passing judgement from making a decision about right and wrong behavior in John 8, right after not condemning the woman caught in adultery: > [@](#): > > 15 You judge by human standards; I pass judgment on no one. > 16 But if I do judge, my decisions are right, because I am not alone. I stand with the Father, who sent me. And later in the same conversation: > [@](#): > > 49 “I am not possessed by a demon,” said Jesus, "but I honor my Father and you dishonor me. > 50 I am not seeking glory for myself; but there is one who seeks it, and he is the judge. A few chapters later he again distinguishes between judging and condemning: > [@](#): > > 47 "As for the person who hears my words but does not keep them, I do not judge him. For I did not come to judge the world, but to save it. > 48 There is a judge for the one who rejects me and does not accept my words; that very word which I spoke will condemn him at the last day. So if Jesus judges no one, who am I to do any different? > [@](#): > > You also did not address the quote I provided where Jesus was judged to have done wrong by others, and he did not tell them do not judge–instead, he told them to judge well. I did address it, if tangentally. I believe in this case he was using the word in the sense of “forming an opinion about.” Do not judge by appearances, but make a right judgement. If he meant what you think he does in John 7, why does he go on in John 8 so say he judges no one? Perhaps the teaching in Matthew 7 is made more clear in Luke 6: > [@](#): > > 27 "But I tell you who hear me: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, > 28 bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. > 29 If someone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also. If someone takes your cloak, do not stop him from taking your tunic. > 30 Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back. > 31 Do to others as you would have them do to you. > 32 "If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? Even `sinners' love those who love them. 33 And if you do good to those who are good to you, what credit is that to you? Even `sinners’ do that. > 34 And if you lend to those from whom you expect repayment, what credit is that to you? Even `sinners' lend to `sinners,’ expecting to be repaid in full. > 35 But love your enemies, do good to them, and lend to them without expecting to get anything back. Then your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High, because he is kind to the ungrateful and wicked. > 36 Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful. > 37 “Do not judge, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven. > 38 Give, and it will be given to you. A good measure, pressed down, shaken together and running over, will be poured into your lap. For with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.” > 39 He also told them this parable: "Can a blind man lead a blind man? Will they not both fall into a pit? > 40 A student is not above his teacher, but everyone who is fully trained will be like his teacher. > 41 "Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? > 42 How can you say to your brother, `Brother, let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when you yourself fail to see the plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye. Does any of that help? > [@](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > You can’t forgive someone of their debt to society and then expect them to pay it. > > You can forgive and still punish. Then you do not understand what the word “forgive” means. > [@](#): > > Punishment shows both the offender and any who might be contemplating the offense that there are consequences that cannot be dodged. This is a Good Thing. I agree, but it is not up to man to do so. > [@](#): > > \If everyone know that this person did wrong and everyone shuns him, this is a terrible punishment. Imagine, no one ever talking to you and avoiding you–and you think this is _not_ a punishment meted out for a crime and is so different from prison? Until such time as the person **repents** of what they have done? And not at all after that time? Seems fair enough to me, and vastly different from the current state of affairs. ---
**Author:** ![TVeblen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/4bbf92/32.png) [@TVeblen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TVeblen)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2000, 6:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jmullaney-whats-the-deal/44187/166 "2000-12-08T06:19:28Z")
Yawn. Don’t beat the mule; it tires you out and just makes him more stubborn. **jmullaney** , your position is indefensible, based on the Scripture you carefully select, misquote, distort–and supposedly revere. Your decisions, your choices, and never forget, all based on the complexity the Book you claim to embrace. I’m beyond tired and bored of this whole mess. By the standards **jmullaney** claims to embrace, so will he be judged. That’s what I meant by the razor: embracing a faith can cut. He claims it; okay–let him live his words, and be judged in turn, in full measure, by the creed he invokes. I’ve read enough–_more_ than enough–and am willing to abandon **jmullaney** over to the judgment of his own creed. Not just his interpretation of it; the complex totality he conveniently ignores. That was a curse, amen, and goodbye, btw. Veb [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jmullaney-whats-the-deal/44187.md?page=8)