Nobody is good, except one, God.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
no one can tell whether you are right or wrong you have produced no reasons for your assertion.

You seem to be under the impression that I am trying to persuade you or impose something on you. I am not. I am just making an observation that's all. You do not have to accept it.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
another irrelevancy, the question is not whether its a fiat deceleration as you have
erroneously assumed, but what the author actually meant, dismissing it on some
rhetorical basis is simply a diversion, again you have provided no evidence to back up
your claim that it has not been established that no one is good.

first, we have to realize that it is a fiat declaration and therefore, meaningless. it has not been established that "nobody is good, except one, god."

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
i believe the term is rational.

That's what it's called, but we have to be careful about which derives from which. The beliefs from the reasons, or the reasons from the beliefs.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
at least i have reasons why i profess what i do.

This thread topic is not about "what you do" (or I do) it's about your OP and the meaning of that scripture.

Why don't you give your (i.e. the JW's Corporate Body's) thoughts on the scripture you quoted, instead of critising everyone else?

Originally posted by FMF
You seem to be under the impression that I am trying to persuade you or impose something on you. I am not. I am just making an observation that's all. You do not have to accept it.

No, I harbour no such pretensions. When one makes a statement like, 'to be good is at
the core of all religions', based, as you allegedly claim on observation, then one is
entitled to ask and to try to ascertain, what formed the basis of your observation.
Have you actually experienced, good to be at the core of all religions, did you read it,
did a little bird whisper it to you? How indeed have you observed it to be the case. as
one who places great emphasis on forum responsibility, surely your responsibility to
your readers is to explain , how this observation was formed, or simply state that its an
unsubstantiated opinion.

Originally posted by VoidSpirit
first, we have to realize that it is a fiat declaration and therefore, meaningless. it has not been established that "nobody is good, except one, god."

its neither a fiat deceleration nor meaningless, it was a statement made in response to
a cultural salutation, the title, 'good teacher', to which Christ asked a rhetorical
question, why do you call me good? nobody is good except God, your insistence that
this forms a fiat deceleration is a nonsense, and whether it remains to be proven
whether anyone actually is not good, except God again is an irrelevancy, why? because
the import of the statement is not to establish whether anyone actually is good except
God, but that God is good in the absolute and consummate sense. clearly the Bible
indicates that both Christ and christians are capable of displaying goodness, Galatians
5:22,23.

Originally posted by JS357
That's what it's called, but we have to be careful about which derives from which. The beliefs from the reasons, or the reasons from the beliefs.

Indeed, it appears to me to be a kind of symbiotic relationship and quite complicated.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
No, I harbour no such pretensions. When one makes a statement like, 'to be good is at
the core of all religions', based, as you allegedly claim on observation, then one is
entitled to ask and to try to ascertain, what formed the basis of your observation.
Have you actually experienced, good to be at the core of all religions, did you read it, ...[text shortened]... lain , how this observation was formed, or simply state that its an
unsubstantiated opinion.

If you disagree with my observation or have a different observation to offer, just go ahead and say so, robbie.

Originally posted by divegeester
This thread topic is not about "what you do" (or I do) it's about your OP and the meaning of that scripture.

Why don't you give your (i.e. the JW's Corporate Body's) thoughts on the scripture you quoted, instead of critising everyone else?

I have already given my own thoughts, it appears to me to be a statement in which
Christ is stating that God is good in the absolute and consummate sense, for clearly,
Christians are counselled to display goodness elsewhere in the Bible, Galatians
5:22,23. You never mind about the governing body of Jehovahs witnesses, you just try
to understand why you have no reasons for your assertions and why you are prepared
to accept details not explicitly stated in the text, that would be of greater concern to me
than the governing body of Jehovahs witnesses if i were you.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
No, I harbour no such pretensions. When one makes a statement like, 'to be good is at
the core of all religions', based, as you allegedly claim on observation, then one is
entitled to ask and to try to ascertain, what formed the basis of your observation.
Have you actually experienced, good to be at the core of all religions, did you read it, ...[text shortened]... lain , how this observation was formed, or simply state that its an
unsubstantiated opinion.

Unless you can name a religion that does not have, or more correctly, claim to have 'good' at the core of it's dogma, I believe most readers will assume the opposite to be true, and that you are being obtuse.

Originally posted by FMF
If you disagree with my observation or have a different observation to offer, just go ahead and say so, robbie.

No one knows what your observations are based upon FMF and as you have provided
no details, how anyone can evaluate them is not entirely clear, why dont you do so, just
go ahead and post them FMF.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
...surely your responsibility to your readers is to explain , how this observation was formed, or simply state that its an unsubstantiated opinion.

Other posters are welcome to share their observations. They are also welcome to disagree with mine if they want to. What is your observation in this matter? Do you disagree with mine?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
No one knows what your observations are based upon FMF and as you have provided
no details, how anyone can evaluate them is not entirely clear, why dont you do so, just
go ahead and post them FMF.

If you disagree that the ideal of "goodness" or "being good" is at the core of pretty much all religions, just say so, robbie. I am not asking you to agree with me. You can if you want to. or you can offer some observation of your own. But you don't have to if you don't want to.

Originally posted by kevcvs57
Unless you can name a religion that does not have, or more correctly, claim to have 'good' at the core of it's dogma, I believe most readers will assume the opposite to be true, and that you are being obtuse.

I am sorry, did you say assumption? oh dear! we are dealing in assumptions,

bartender will you take my currency, its not really bone fide, its an assumption of value!

why is asking for substantiating evidence obtuse, you have not explained.

Originally posted by FMF
If you disagree that the ideal of "goodness" or "being good" is at the core of pretty much all religions, just say so, robbie. I am not asking you to agree with me. You can if you want to. or you can offer some observation of your own. But you don't have to if you don't want to.

I do not agree or disagree, i merely want some substantiating evidence for your claim
that it is. Why dont you provide some?