That is an excellent example. I think that everyone should remember it whenever somebody pisses about and says, “There are no Christian values because none of those values are unique to Christianity.”
The Greek word daimon did not have the Christian meaning of an evil spirit or “devil.” They were entities which imparted wisdom or guidance from the gods. Socrates’ said he had a daimon inisde him which didn’t necessarily tell him when he was doing good but which always told him when he was doing something wrong. He did not conceptualize this as “possession” but as a personified conscience which consistently warned him not to do things which were immoral. It never controlled him or made him do anything, just told him if it was wrong. It was a good entity, not an evil one, more akin to the popular Christian image of a guardian angel than a devil.
I am sorry to jump into your debate; I am just learning how to do this, and I was responding to the very first question posted.
Linnea
That’s so easy to say but a total misrepresentation of how life actually works. We humans, Christians included, must make judgment calls. When it comes to justification nobody gets a higher score than Christians. Humans in general justify their decisions, actions and choices until we learn to be honest enough to not bother with that.
Yeah good. What about the OP?
I don’t take it as sinning, but as rejection of God, Jesus and Salvation. A willful act of basically telling God thanks for your gift, but I chose not to accept it, and will be aligning myself with Satan against you.
To some degree this is true, but we are avoiding eternal destruction, as jesus has paid our debt.
The exact same Greek word was the word that is in scripture, it is the same being. The split demon/deamon came about in the 17th century. Jesus was talking about the same beings who guided human destiny.
Yeah, let’s keep this in mind the next time you hear somebody say, “this country was founded on boy scout principles”
My point isn’t that Christianity doesn’t teach principles to anyone. My point concerns the specific way those terms are used in current society and what the terms represent. When it comes to what we value and what our priorities are , do we hold certain values such as honesty, compassion, charity, courage, honor, justice, human rights, in high esteem and worthy of promoting as a nation of diverse peoples, or are we more interested in promoting certain labels and the mistaken concept that these values aren’t as significant without the attached label.
IMO it is a not so subtle and fairly important difference. It’s not pissing about either.
I fail to see the relevance of your comment.
In the OP, you clearly implied that it’s meaningless to talk about Christian values because those values are not unique to Christianity. I think that’s an utterly fallacious premise. Whether the country was founded on those values or not has no bearing on their existence.
What I wrote was and idea of what Christan Values are, from me. I consider my values to be something valuable, and positive. It’s an opinion.
I won’t respond again, sorry to intrude on your discussion.
Tris
Welcome. I understand that you are just learning how to do this. When you post we need to know who you are addressing and which post of section of a post in particular. You can do this by hitting the reply button at the bottom of the post you want to respond to and then, with some experimentation, learn how to use quotes and the other tools at the top of the reply box.
So were you responding to the first post or something else?
Before this thread gets hopelessly derailed into the usual rant, I’ll comment that this is exactly right, and captures the point of the original question perfectly.
It might be easier to see this if we compare a similar question: “What are American principles and values, and do they actually exist?” Spoken to a group of Americans, there’s no argument over use of this language, but when it’s directed at non-American groups, IMO it’s intended to illustrate a difference rather than a call to unity.
I was replying to the first question about Christian values. And you are so kind to ask! I think you just answered my original question about metaphor!
Linnea
Yes. In many impoverished countries, the notion of happiness doesn’t exist.
Linnea
Tris you are always welcome. No intrusion. I see your point now that you’ve explained. Sorry to be so abrupt.
As someone who reveres the teachings of Jesus I understand what you are saying. I hope you understand my point as well even though I may have worded it poorly.
the principles and values you mentioned are also taught by other religions and philosophies so IMHO when I attempt to live those, {also falling short as humans tend to do} and when I honor those principles and values when demonstrated by those of other religions and no religion, I am also honoring the teachings of Jesus. I think JC, Buddha, and other religious leaders wanted us to honor the acts born of those values and the sincerity of the heart doing the actions more than the labels that separate us into different denominations and religions.
I’m not saying there are no values associated with Christianity. I’m fully aware that’s not true. I’m saying that since there are none uniquely associated with Jesus, and the principles of brotherly love and forgiveness were taught long before JC visited earth perhaps it would be more productive to stress the principles over the labels. In the context I hear the terms being used that is not the case. The label is added for emphasis. Am I way off?
We as a culture seem more interested in using the label to promote whatever pet cause, scheme, or bigotry we have. Everything from “God wants you to help the poor” to “God hate Fags” to “God wants you to give me money” to “God wants you to vote Republican”. There isn’t any consistant set of “Christian values”, and the values that get that label from whomever is speaking aren’t unique to Christianity, as you said in the OP.
And if you are talking about all of Christianity’s values, you do have to include people like Phelps or televangelists or Christian Dominionists and any number of other highly unpleasant Christians. Many of whom don’t even pretend to go for the whole “peace, love, and brotherhood among mankind” version of Christianity more commonly espoused on this board. I don’t mention them to slam Christianity ( in this thread ), but to point out the impossibility of coming up with a universal set of Christian values in the first place. When someone says he believes in Christian values, you can’t tell if he means “love each other”, “women should submit to men” or “We should go back to stoning heretics”.
“Christian values” is pretty much an information free term.
It’s the same word, it’s not the same being. Socreates was emphatically not talking about an evil entity. The word literally means “god” (small g), a lesser deity or as something FROM a deity. That something could be something figurative like wisdom or something more literal like a divine messenger. The concept was much more like an angel than a demon. The word is used in the NT to refer to devils because as a generic word for minor spirits or deities, it was the best word available for Near Eastern conception of evil spirits. Socrates did not use the word in anything like the Christian sense of “demon.”
I don’t know what you mean about a “split,” (and the Latin spelling is daemon, not “deamon”), but I’m telling you how Socrates used the word, not Jesus. Socrates did not say he was possessed by a demon but that he was guided by a divine spirit who told him when he was doing wrong.
I understand your objection and agree to an extent. It was an over simplification for me to say “there is no such thing”. As I said to Tris.
I’m not saying there are no values associated with Christianity. I’m fully aware that’s not true.
I stand by this statement
As Der Trihs and others have pointed out. Should we take prejudice against gays and abortion to be a Christian value? Values vary greatly among Christians so how are we to know what the those terms mean. It seems more productive and less confusing to me to discuss the specific values and principles as universal themes shared by people of diverse backgrounds and philosophies rather than label them in this way. Other than your objection to my OP can you suggest any reason that adding the descriptor of “Christian” to values and principles serves a particularly useful purpose in the way it is commonly used.
Once again I think we agree. :eek: For the most part there are fairly commonly known principles and values such as “Love thy neighbor” Judge not" “turn the other cheek” and maybe a couple of others that might be widely recognized as Christian principles and values but we also know these are not universally practiced or given priority by Christians so how seriously can we take them from just the “Christian” descriptor. OTOH you point out some pretty serious and valid examples of some other less attractive Christian principles.
I know when I have a customer who identifies themselves as Christian that tells me nothing about what their values are as a human being. I have to observe their actions to see what their values and principles really are.
Right!! For the sake of humanity and honesty we need to stop this kind of divisive language. We need to recognize certain values and principles as belonging to humanity in all our diversity.
I think out founding fathers did a pretty decent job of this in the D Of I with
and we have been struggling ever since to live up to it.