Judge not?

[Zzyzx]

WHY does the bible judge people while saying 'judge not'?

WHY do Christians judge people while claiming to follow the bible that clearly says 'judge not'?

[tam]

Peace to you,

That doesn't make it judging.

"Silly" is an adjective. Placing an adjective, as a descriptor of someone's actions, is generally considered a judgment -- (specifically an evaluation) rather than a pure assessment, though the exact distinction depends on the specific adjective used and the context.

You are speaking of judgment meaning evaluation.

I am speaking of judgment meaning sentencing, condemning, casting a stone. Telling someone they are playing silly games does not mean you are judging the person FOR playing silly games.

Do you understand the difference I'm trying to highlight?

Here is how the two terms break down in linguistics and psychology:

But I am not interested in that definition, POI. What should matter here is the meaning of judgment according to 'the bible' (since that is what the OP is asking about.)

Are you saying Christ taught his disciples that they are not permitted to disapprove of behaviors, ideas or objects?

No.

Then I do not understand your insistence that bjs judged you, and did so in contradiction to the commands of Christ.

John 8 does not prove any point other than the point that judging (the kind that we are not to do, condemning, threatening others as if God has judged them) is not the same as evaluation and assessment.

Calling someone's actions (fill-in the-adjective) is a personal subjective judgement.

What does that have to do with John 8?

You didn't answer my question.

Not when the shoe fits.

So you don't think the evaluation-judging that bjs did is wrong. You may think the evaluation-judgment was incorrect, but the act of evaluation-judging is fine.

Is that correct?

[tam]

Peace to you,

He did not. The quotes you supplied earlier in the thread prove that He did not.

His Father gave Him authority to judge.

YWHW and Jesus are two (different/distinct/separate) entities? If so, maybe a new thread needs to be started?

God (YHWH) is the Father.
Christ (Jah'eshua) is His Son.

2 persons.

There are already many threads on the issue, however. You and I should not need to debate it because the verses you supplied state in black and white that Christ received that authority from His Father.

One person received authority from another person. That is the opposite of being 'self-appointed.'


Peace again.

[POI]

[Replying to tam in post #31]

Tam, I no longer want to expend any more energy going into hyper-depth about what is 'judgement'. Calling something 'silly' is judgmental if it is meant 'negatively.' Which is exactly why he apologized if he offended me. If I was to say someone's ideas were 'silly', and the person on the other end stated, 'hey, I did not ask for your judgement', I would not go on a forensic tirade as to (whether or not) 'judgement' was the best or most appropriate word to use.

Anywho, I have bigger fish to fry. How about you and I expend energy here -- (in a thread I actually give two licks about and recently created...)--> ( viewtopic.php?t=43253&start=30)

[POI]

There are already many threads on the issue, however.

There are many threads on many topics, both here and elsewhere. Which means it/they must not be settled?

[tam]

Peace again,

[Replying to tam in post #31]

Tam, I no longer want to expend any more energy going into hyper-depth about what is 'judgement'.

I hear you. This is exactly why the term needed to be defined first. To avoid arguing simply because we are thinking of two different meanings of the same word.

Anywho, I have bigger fish to fry. How about you and I expend energy here -- (in a thread I actually give two licks about and recently created...)--> ( viewtopic.php?t=43253&start=30)

Lol, thanks for the invite, but I must decline. I have nothing new to say on that thread that I did not state on previous similar threads.

Peace again.

[bjs1]

This claim seems suspect. Wouldn’t you agree that many atheists, absent any book, are extremely judgmental?

You didn't address what I said, so I'll copy/paste it to save time:
"The book does have the power to control some humans to judge those around them. Absent the book, there would be no judgement." (Atheists are irrelevant to this claim about the Bible).
To your question, yes, an atheist can be judgmental.

This remains suspect. First, a book doesn’t have the power to control anyone. Books can’t do that.

Beyond this, if as you say, “Absent the book, there would be no judgment,” then the logical conclusion is that those who have no book would not judge. Yet, as you have agreed, that is not the case.

How rude! I supply a valid definition for how I am using the word and you dispute my clarity. I am using the word 'worship' in the way I have described and my use is valid.

Rude? Really? I first provided a definition, and you disputed that. Was that rude on your part?

Beyond that, when there are multiple definitions for a word, then we should use the definition that is most appropriate in a given setting. I have done that using the source you provided.

Again, this is rude. I provided the entire definition and bolded the how I was using the word. This was done to be curious and to provide clarity.
Are you trying to drag me down to your level so you can beat me with experience? I bolded it for you and you want ask me if there are teachings against being an umpire?
Copy/paste: one who gives an authoritative opinion <---- This was my intended use of the word, made obvious by it being in bold for your benefit in a failed attempt to try to increase your chance of comprehension.

So you are saying that a book can be “one who gives an authoritative opinion.” This is unusual since saying “one who…” generally applies to a person, not a thing.

However, to make sure I understand your argument, are you saying that the Constitution of the United States is judgmental? The California Penal Code, all posted speed limits, and the rulebook to the boardgame Monopoly would all also be judgmental, correct?

[Clownboat]

This claim seems suspect. Wouldn’t you agree that many atheists, absent any book, are extremely judgmental?

You didn't address what I said, so I'll copy/paste it to save time:
"The book does have the power to control some humans to judge those around them. Absent the book, there would be no judgement." (Atheists are irrelevant to this claim about the Bible).
To your question, yes, an atheist can be judgmental.

This remains suspect. First, a book doesn’t have the power to control anyone. Books can’t do that.

Beyond this, if as you say, “Absent the book, there would be no judgment,” then the logical conclusion is that those who have no book would not judge. Yet, as you have agreed, that is not the case.

How rude! I supply a valid definition for how I am using the word and you dispute my clarity. I am using the word 'worship' in the way I have described and my use is valid.

Rude? Really? I first provided a definition, and you disputed that. Was that rude on your part?

Beyond that, when there are multiple definitions for a word, then we should use the definition that is most appropriate in a given setting. I have done that using the source you provided.

Again, this is rude. I provided the entire definition and bolded the how I was using the word. This was done to be curious and to provide clarity.
Are you trying to drag me down to your level so you can beat me with experience? I bolded it for you and you want ask me if there are teachings against being an umpire?
Copy/paste: one who gives an authoritative opinion <---- This was my intended use of the word, made obvious by it being in bold for your benefit in a failed attempt to try to increase your chance of comprehension.

So you are saying that a book can be “one who gives an authoritative opinion.” This is unusual since saying “one who…” generally applies to a person, not a thing.

However, to make sure I understand your argument, are you saying that the Constitution of the United States is judgmental? The California Penal Code, all posted speed limits, and the rulebook to the boardgame Monopoly would all also be judgmental, correct?

Christians regard the Bible with great respect, honor and devotion (Worship 2: to regard with great or extravagant respect, honor, or devotion) and it provides them with authoritative opinions (judge c: one who gives an authoritative opinion).
Christians worship a book that provides them with judgement. Therefore, take away the book and its judgements would vanish.

Do you understand the argument? I feel like you don't as you are now asking questions about Monopoly and Penal Codes. Do you want those to be considered judgmental, because I'll grant that they are or aren't for the sake of this debate. I care not either way, so you pick and then see if you can address my claim about Christians and the Bible.