The golden rule

Author: Tradesecret

Posts

Total: 61
Topic's author
#1
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,341
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
In Matthew 7 Jesus gives the golden rule. Treat others as you would like to be treated. This of course is UNIQUE to Christianity and perhaps some other religions who have been privy to the bible. 

Sometimes people suggest other religions and person such as Confucius  and Buddha said the same thing but this would be confusing apples with oranges. 

Other statements are mostly put in the negative not in the positive. The difference is profound. The first chooses not to punch their enemy in the face. The latter chooses to build their enemy a hospital. Positive and negative are important to consider.  

The other aspect about Jesus’ golden rule that is conveniently forgotten is that it is prefaced with another item which the others do not even contemplate. Love God with all of you heart and soul and mind and then - love others. Omitting this preface distorts entirely the meaning of the second commandment. It is impossible to love others in the way Jesus indicated without first loving God. 

Hence it is clear that while other religions and cultures had a similar rule, the two are so significantly different that Jesus’ golden rule is unique. 

Do you agree or disagree? Please explain why. 

#2
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 5,086
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@Tradesecret
Confucianism

己所不欲，勿施於人。

"What you do not wish for yourself, do not do to others."

子貢問曰：「有一言而可以終身行之者乎？」子曰：「其恕乎！己所不欲，勿施於人。」

Zi gong (a disciple of Confucius) asked: "Is there any one word that could guide a person throughout life?"
The Master replied: "How about 'shu' [reciprocity]: never impose on others what you would not choose for yourself?"

Topic's author
#3
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,341
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@FLRW
So you agree with me? I assume you read my post and commented on Confucius and his negative position which is VERY different to Jesus. 
#4
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,689
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
The sage has no interest of his own, but takes the interests of the people as his own.
He is kind to the kind; he is also kind to the unkind: for Virtue is kind.
He is faithful to the faithful; he is also faithful to the unfaithful: for Virtue is faithful.

— Tao Te Ching, Chapter 49

#5
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@Tradesecret
 This of course is UNIQUE to Christianity and perhaps some other religions 
Unique? Perhaps?  Do more research. This common theme is shared by over 20 religions around the world, including Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, Taoism,  Zoroastrianism, and Wiccan.

In fact, Norman Rockwell thought it common to virtually all religions.  https://www.nrm.org/2018/03/golden-rule-common-religions/
#6
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 562
Posts: 19,896
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
Treat others as they wish to be treated is an overall much better way to go about life. Obviously, sometimes you need to be sterner with someone than they want or kinder to them than they want, I'm talking in general.
Topic's author
#7
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,341
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@fauxlaw
Wow! Did you even read my post? I have done a significant amount of research. I am not disputing the similarities but rather highlighting the uniqueness.  Most others put it in the negative. That changes significantly the meaning and application. Please indicate which other religion prefaces the golden rule with the love of God? 

Not harming your enemy is not the same as doing specific goods for your enemy.  The contrast is significant and reasonably unique. 
#8
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,217
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Tradesecret
"The contrast is significant"..... If you want it to be....And so you will interpret accordingly.
#9
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,311
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Tradesecret
 Love God with all of you heart and soul and mind and then - love others.




What utter nonsense.

The first mention  of  "love" IN THE BIBLE is when he,  YOUR GOD,  demands  the human sacrifice of a child.. 


Genesis 22:2   – “Then He said, “Take now your son, your only son Isaac, whom you love, and go to the land of Moriah, and offer him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains of which I shall tell you.”

Which speaks only of the love of a father for his son. Which, it appears,  to be something your jealous god doesn't seem understand or is willing to tolerate! 

When it comes to a wife it never speaks of "love"  but commands only  "take" a wife.  

And then there is this utter vile nonsense from the NT:

 
“If any man come to Me and hate not his father and mother, and wife and children, and brethren and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be My disciple.Luke 14:26




So before you start banging on about how much we should love god because gods love us and  "ONLY THEN" should we love one another,please take the time to explain away how god is showing any love towards us by asking anyone to  sacrifice their children and  to "HATE" anyone to show we love him above all else?


Topic's author
#10
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,341
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Stephen
Jesus said the two greatest commandments were to love God and to love others. The golden rule in the context of the sermon on the mount is prefaced with love God and then love others. Love others is the golden rule. 

Your red herrings are irrelevant and not necessary to reply to. My post is to highlight the uniqueness of Jesus ‘ position. Given you have not refuted even a tiny bit of it it is back to the drawing board for you. 

This is not about child sacrifice. Stay on topic. 
Topic's author
#11
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,341
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@zedvictor4
Do you deny there is a difference between a positive and negative position? 

#12
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,311
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Tradesecret
Jesus said the two greatest commandments were to love God and to love others.

And he also says to hate others too, if you are speaking of the same man Jesus who's title is the " son of god and king of the Jews ". 



The golden rule in the context of the sermon on the mount is prefaced with love God and then love others.

  The sermon on the mount is simple bullshite made up of a mish mash of philosophical sayings from all around the globe and before Jesus was even born. Its just that you won't see it never mind admit it.

AND seeing that YOU introduced the Sermon on the mount ( a schoolboy mistake for a lawyer) to the thread, tell me;

Matthew 5:9
Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God.

Why? Why are not the "pure in heart" called the children of god? Or "the merciful"? Or "the meek"?

Matthew 5:8
Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God.
 And what about the peacemakers and the merciful and meek? Will they not see god?

 and to add further to your law-school -  schoolboy mistake:

... to be  offering compensation for these things, rather than teaching that true morality only takes place when you want to do what you are doing, is educationally and developmentally debilitating.  It teaches followers to do good things to get into Heaven and see god , not to do good things simply because it is the right thing to do.



Love others is the golden rule.
 
It might well be in human terms, but the same cannot be said for your god. Your god is a self confessed jealous god of war and blood sacrifice.




Your red herrings are irrelevant and not necessary to reply to.

 So you simply cannot respond to what I have clearly highlighted from THE BIBLE that throws a spanner in your bullshite?
Why not take the time to explain away how god is showing any love towards us by asking anyone to  sacrifice their children and  to "HATE" anyone to show we love him above all else?



My post is to highlight the uniqueness of Jesus ‘ position.

 No it doesn't.  What you claim Jesus is saying or the saying of sermon on the mount are not "unique"  to Jesus in any sense of the word as much as you are trying to present them to be, Reverend,  as was immediately shown above by two other posters. And  I have just highlighted your gods erratic  and contradictory nature from THE BIBLE to that which  you are proposing he is.


 Given you have not refuted even a tiny bit....

And you it appears do not like being faced with what THE BIBLE says for itself. 



This is not about child sacrifice. Stay on topic. 

 Quoting god speaking of LOVE, which is what YOUR  thread is all about,  is totally about .

 I have said it many times to you and others, Reverend;  this is what becomes of adopting a god  that you simply don't understand, from a time that you don't understand and a culture you don't understand.

Get well soon.


#13
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,311
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Tradesecret
@FLRW
Tradesecret wrote: Matthew 7

So let us look at it:

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.
There is no mention of “love “.


No mention of THE “golden rule”,   Or that we should love God first and “only then” to love one another, either. This is about throwing stones in glass houses as many Christians often attempt do to once they have painted themselves into a biblical and theological corner.


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.

This is interesting in that hypocrisy is mentioned considering most of the Christians here all turn out to be hypocrites (not to mention liars) in the end.
There is no mention of love . No mention of THE “golden rule”, Or that we should love God first and “only then” to love one another, either.


6 “Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you to pieces.
This is more than likely to be alluding to non Jews (pigs). Here where Jesus refused heal a woman's child.


“It is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to the dogs.” Matthew 15:26


There is no mention of “love”. No mention of THE “golden rule”, Or that we should love God first and “only then” to love one another, either.




7 “Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. 8 For everyone who asks receives; the one who seeks finds; and to the one who knocks, the door will be opened.

These two verse have to be among the most dishonest not to mention cruel verses in the New Testament. As clearly explained and proven here>.#1
And there is no mention of love. No mention of THE “golden rule, Or that we should love God first and “only then” to love one another, either.


9 “Which of you, if your son asks for bread, will give him a stone? 10 Or if he asks for a fish, will give him a snake? 11 If you, then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give good gifts to those who ask him! 12 So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.


And has already been highlighted by others on this thread that this is not “unique” to Jesus. Here #4 oromagi and here #2 FLRW.

In fact there is not a single mention of a “Golden Rule” and the word “love" doesn’t even appear in the whole of the chapter of Matthew 7 as the Reverend Tradesecret will have us believe and as he has used as some sort of evidence that only he believes proves A/his point..

Typically, our resident Pastor has simply done what all Pastors and Priests like himself are prone to do, that is, preach what the bible doesn't say but only that which he wishes it to say..

The chapter goes on to talk about The Narrow and Wide Gates, True and False Prophets, and Wise and Foolish Builders. Not a single mention of a “Golden Rule” and the word “love" doesn’t even appear not the dictate to love god and  "only then" to love others,  in the whole of the chapter of Matthew 7 .


The whole short chapter of Matthew 7 can be read here.


#14
janesix
janesix's avatar
Debates: 12
Posts: 2,049
3
3
3
janesix's avatar
janesix
3
3
3
-->
@Tradesecret
No, it really isn't different.
#15
janesix
janesix's avatar
Debates: 12
Posts: 2,049
3
3
3
janesix's avatar
janesix
3
3
3
-->
@Tradesecret
It's hard to love others (especially your enemies) and you cannot force yourself to do so. But sometimes when we want badly enough to change our behavior and act like a decent human being, God will grant us the grace of compassion.
#16
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
The Golden Rule was well established before Christ and Christians rarely practice it. 
#17
MarkWebberFan
MarkWebberFan's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 291
1
2
6
MarkWebberFan's avatar
MarkWebberFan
1
2
6
I think you're assuming pessimists don't contribute positively and that they merely refrain from punching someone. That's quite an assumption. A person with trauma could potentially use her negative experience to help those in need. I don't find your OP compelling.
#18
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,311
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@MarkWebberFan
A+1
#19
rosends
rosends's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 766
3
2
6
rosends's avatar
rosends
3
2
6
-->
@Tradesecret
I think you make an interesting point about the focus and underlying positivity of the Matthew presentation. I think that a similar logical point can be made about religions that rely on a slightly different wording.

Leviticus 19 gives a short list of behaviors that one should not inflict on others, but culminates in "Love your fellow as yourself: I am the LORD" in verse 18.

The Matthew version (7:12) reads something along the lines of "So whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets" (ESV). This has 2 shifts from the Leviticus version:

1. It focuses on actions and not attitude. The talk is of "doing" whereas the Leviticus passage is about feeling a certain way towards and about another.

2. It gives its reason as based in "law and Prophets." The Levitical teaching sources it directly to the acknowledgment of God's existence. It needn't be spoken by a prophet or codified in a book, because it is an expression of faith in God to feel a certain way towards others.

Could the argument be made that religions which adhere to the Matthew version get too hung up on "doing" and the law instead of trying to hold to loving and pure faith as justification? I think so.
#20
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@Tradesecret
Yes I read your post. As for the negativity; nope. They're all positive. From whence do you see negative?
#21
Timid8967
Timid8967's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 459
2
2
2
Timid8967's avatar
Timid8967
2
2
2
-->
@Tradesecret
This is not hard to disagree with in the scheme of things.  

There are many religions and people who have used this so called Golden Rule.  

The Golden Rule is the principle of treating others as one wants to be treated. It is a maxim that is found in most religions and cultures. Golden Rule - Wikipedia

Differentiating on the basis of negative and positivity reads to much into it.  

Jesus is not unique in his perspective.  

Lots of other religions have positive treatments. See the Bahais for instance. 

The writings of the Baháʼí Faith encourage everyone to treat others as they would treat themselves and even prefer others over oneself:
O SON OF MAN! Deny not My servant should he ask anything from thee, for his face is My face; be then abashed before Me.
Blessed is he who preferreth his brother before himself.
— Bahá'u'lláh[54][55]
And if thine eyes be turned towards justice, choose thou for thy neighbour that which thou choosest for thyself.
— Bahá'u'lláh[56][57]

#22
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,242
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@Tradesecret
The golden rule “do unto others as you would have them do onto you” has a common variation in many countries and religions.
I wondered if there were any other rules with such commonality.

Rule On Time Saves Nine
….ebuc…
 
Silver rule: Seek fair and just resolution with compassion and empathy for those who violate the laws and moral codes of humanity or any of its distinct tribes.

Wooden rule: Forgiveness by God{es} is instantaneous, forgiveness by humans takes time.

Bone rule: Eye for eye and tooth for a tooth is practiced only by the HUMAN animal, to best of my knowledge.

Molecular rule: Share not with your cousins what you would not have them share with you.

Quantum Cosmic rule: "Know that the uncertainty of mind, being common to all humans, does not necessitate chaos.
#23
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,217
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Tradesecret
A positive position defined by interpretation can also be a negative position defined by interpretation, and vice versa.

It all depends upon the individual making the distinction.
#24
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
The golden rule was created by jews, so when they punch you in the face, you are supposed to still treat them well
#25
FaustianJustice
FaustianJustice's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 150
0
1
3
FaustianJustice's avatar
FaustianJustice
0
1
3
-->
@Tradesecret

Predates Christ by quite a bit.  Predates a bit of the Old Testament by quite a bit.

Christ just delivered the TL:DR
#26
Yassine
Yassine's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 1,085
3
2
6
Yassine's avatar
Yassine
3
2
6
-->
@FaustianJustice
- You live. Sup?
#27
FaustianJustice
FaustianJustice's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 150
0
1
3
FaustianJustice's avatar
FaustianJustice
0
1
3
-->
@Yassine
Been an interesting series of years.  

How things been on your end around here?
#28
Yassine
Yassine's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 1,085
3
2
6
Yassine's avatar
Yassine
3
2
6
-->
@FaustianJustice

Been an interesting series of years.  
- Yeah...

How things been on your end around here?
- Just showed up here a couple of weeks ago.

Topic's author
#29
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,341
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@MarkWebberFan
Assumptions don’t really help. If you had read my post properly - which clearly you did not. You would have realised I never said other religions did not have a similar principle. I was not making a point of that because the evidence is clear. Nevertheless I pointed out that Jesus’ take was unique and respectfully your response does not come close to refuting this idea. 

I never said a negative view of the golden rule was bad. I only indicated that a positive view was clearly different from the negative.  And this is true. Choosing NOT to hit someone is not the same as choosing to do something positive for that same person. If you are unable to see this distinction, well I can’t help that. 

Jesus position is unique - I am not saying it is better or worse. I am saying it is unique. And it is. 
#30
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,311
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Tradesecret

Nevertheless I pointed out that Jesus’ take was unique

 So now you have been made to realise that the sermon on the mount isn't quite as "unique" to Jesus  as you first  proclaimed it to be. You have now shifted the/YOUR meaning to that it was only Jesus' "take " that you were talking about.

Ok, how do you know what a mans "take " was during the time and place and society of the ancients from two thousand years ago?
Or are you know simply going to put words into the mouth of the Christ himself and the mouths of the bible authors?