Posted by Friend [Friend] on March 28, 1999 at 19:38:27 {OgnjR4Br/gYd9gE9iYE2MWUagf9NbHbU2}:
In Reply to: **Moderation posted by Cygnus on March 28, 1999 at 15:31:41:
Cygnus
When Christ was ostensibly in the right, he didn't hesitate to use less than positive terms (e.g., "offspring of serpents," "Satan," and so forth) to address his audience. Why the double standard?
You must admit that Jesus was a special case. After all, supposedly he could read hearts. With that sort of ability he could justifiably make several judgments that less endowed persons could not. On the other hand, Jesus (assuming he is Michael the archangel) demonstrably avoided abusive terms where it was someone else�s place to pass judgment.�Jude 9
The same can be seen in how Israelite men were instructed according to the law of Moses. According to that law individuals guilty of adultery were to be put to death. However, in the case of king David�s adultery with Bathsheba, that death sentence was not invoked. The difference was in who did the judging. The law of Moses was a law for men, not for God. Again, the difference as seen in the case of David and Bathsheba is in ability to judge hearts. When Israelite men weighed evidence they relied upon an already determined judgment, that is, once a certain type of guilt was established they just looked up the corresponding sentence. On the other hand, God needs no such "canned" judgment because He can read hearts. a good condition of heart, a loyal one, is something of greater value than blind obedience to canned laws.
Jesus never resorted to abusive speech when being tried by his own disciples faults. On this forum, how can we be so sure when we are addressing someone with a serious fault verses a bad heart?
Friend