![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 65 to 89 of 194. Go back in thread:
Posted by Lou Pilder on October 23, 2002, at 17:33:12
In reply to Re: clarification » Dr. Bob, posted by IsoM on October 23, 2002, at 16:48:52
ISO M,
I share your concerns for clarification in regards to expressing your faith here. My model would be based on the following principles:
1) That telling of your faith does not disrespect others.
This means that when someone tells me of their Christiandom faith, that I am to be tolerant and know that it is their faith, and that I have my faith, and that my faith is no more disrespetfull to their faith than their faith is disrespctfull to mine. This is the principle of freedom of religion. I do not get offended or think that one is disrespecting me when another tells me that he is a polytheist, and I do expect, even here, that people do not accuse me of disrespect because I am a jew and believe in one God.
I welcome your quotes from your bible for it is my beleif that All scripture is God-inspirerd.
So my position is that anyone can express their faith and not have to be subjected to being accused of disrespect to others that believe a different way, or no way at all.
I would like to hear more bible quotes here. For I beleive that The Word of God does not come back void. It is the Water of Life. It is the Power to become The Sons of God.
Now if someone here does not want to beleive that, then I am not expecting that they have to, anymore than those that do not beleive, expect me to be like them.
So let freedom ring. Let those that are Christians praise their faith and I will love them. Let those that are jews praise their faith and I will love them. Let them that are Islamic people praise their faith and I will love them. Let them that are all the other faiths praise their faith and I will love them. Let those that are of no faith praise theres also, and I will love them. For God is not a relgion. God is Love.
Lou
Posted by IsoM on October 23, 2002, at 18:26:43
In reply to Lou's shared concerns with ISO M » IsoM, posted by Lou Pilder on October 23, 2002, at 17:33:12
Lou, I just want Bob to clarify his last comment, that's all. I don't wish to publicize my beliefs in these forums. As I said before, I don't think forums are a good place to discuss one's beliefs. But Bob's comment can be viewed in more than one way & I'm not sure which way he means. Nothing more. There's better ways to reach people, if that's one's goal, than through internet forums or boards.
Posted by Lou Pilder on October 23, 2002, at 20:06:52
In reply to Re: clarification » Dr. Bob, posted by IsoM on October 23, 2002, at 16:48:52
Friends,
The next principle that I am suggesting for the faith board is:
(2)That any part of the person's faith can be expressed without being accused of disrespect or putting aothers down. This would include, but not limited to:
A)The writing of Any verse or passage from that person's faith book(s). This could be the bible, the koran, the tenach, the talmud,the Catholic book of catachisms, L.Ron Hubbards Dianetics, Mary Baker Edy's Key to the scriptures and her other writings, the Watchtower society publications, and any other written document. We should be tolerant and accept that what is quoted is from that person's faith and that does not disrespect other faiths anymore than the other faiths disrespect the one that quoted the passage. If anyone is allowed to accuse someone that expresses their faith as being disrespctfull to others that are not of that faith, or no faith at all, then we could not have any expression of faith at all!
To have freedom of religion means to not have to be accused by others of another faith, or no faith at all, of disrespecting them becaue they express their Faith . The church on one side of the street is not disrespecting the mosque on the other side of the stret any nore than the mosque on its side of the street is disrespecting the church on the other side of the street. All faiths have to be welcome here. If the moderators can not or will not honor all faiths here, then shutting down the faith board would be preferable to me than to have a board that does not welcome all faiths, or accuses a faith of disrespecting others because of what their faith beleives.
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on October 23, 2002, at 20:16:56
In reply to Lou's suggested model for the faith board(2), posted by Lou Pilder on October 23, 2002, at 20:06:52
Friends,
The next suggestion that I have for the faith board is:
3) That the topic of the afterlife , according to that person's faith, be allowed to be expressed without restraint. This includes, but not limited to, the fate of the wicked, hell, the lake of fire, purgatory, Greek mythology, new age, heaven, the Kingdom of God, eternal death, anihliilation, reincarnation, karma, and anything else about the expression of that faith in relation to what happens after death.
Lou
Posted by Dr. Bob on October 23, 2002, at 21:46:58
In reply to Re: clarification » Dr. Bob, posted by IsoM on October 23, 2002, at 16:48:52
> So does that mean if anyone says such-and-such says "..." OR that I experienced someone telling me "..." it would be okay? But if one was to say something DIRECTLY themself, that's what's wrong?
Hmm, I see this is a slippery slope... On third thought, I think I should go back to my original position:
> > if I said that the Rider said that one should not have any other Gods before Him, then would you admonish me as being not respectfull of "others" that are polythiests?
>
> Yes, that's a constraint at PBF.To return to Dinah:
> Now you see, I wouldn't have guessed that. I would have guessed that it would be ok to say that the rider told you to have no other gods before God.
>
> I would have guessed that the first was just recounting an experience, without saying anything insulting to anyone elseWhile I wouldn't consider them insults, either, statements like that do put down alternative beliefs. And could be considered pressure. So I think it would be more civil here not to have those experiences recounted.
> I wonder if it would be ok to say "I believe that there is but one God, and that I should have no other gods before him." Perhaps it was the imperative that Dr. Bob objected to.
Yes, it's definitely the "should" that I consider the problem, the above would be fine.
Bob
Posted by IsoM on October 24, 2002, at 0:56:57
In reply to Re: re-clarification, posted by Dr. Bob on October 23, 2002, at 21:46:58
Aackk, Bob! This has been bounced around so much, I'm not sure what your original position is now. Please, just once more - state what your position is in so many words for mentally confused fellow posters like me. Make it clear so there's no confusion if you can.
Posted by Dinah on October 24, 2002, at 3:29:12
In reply to Re: re-clarification » Dr. Bob, posted by IsoM on October 24, 2002, at 0:56:57
IsoM, I must confess that I am more confused than ever. I thought the rule was to not insult those who had different beliefs.
Dr. Bob says it's the "should" he objects to and the same thing could be said without the "should" as a statement of belief and it would be ok.
Lou asked if he could say "the Rider said to me, "You shall have no other Gods before me"," and Dr. Bob says that is not OK, nor would it be OK to quote any particular scripture that states that only one God or one belief should be embraced, even if there is no insult implied to anyone else who follows a different belief. So is it true that you could not say "The New Testament says that you should have faith in Jesus as your Lord and Saviour" or "The Koran teaches that there is no God but God".
Hmm, kind of does away completely with the idea of the faith board. So one couldn't quote the first commandment, even if one was an atheist? Or only if one agrees with the first commandment...
So if I were to say, "I was reading the Bible one day, and I read "I am the Lord thy God, and thou shalt have no gods before me" and I was really struck by that passage and decided to adopt that as my belief." would that or wouldn't that be allowed.
If I were to say "I was reading the Bible one day and I read "I am the Lord thy God, and thou shalt have no gods before me" and I don't really believe that because I am a nature worshipper" would that or wouldn't that be allowed.
After all, we are allowed to quote other literature, or tell our experiences with people other than the Rider freely. Could I say that my mother told me I should believe in Jesus? Would it matter whether I was saying it in a positive or negative way?
Talk about slippery slopes, Dr. Bob. You're standing at the top of the peak with slopes to each side of you. :) Best put on some hob nailed boots.
Dinah
PS. I think I'll retire from the lists now. I just hate ambiguity. I'll just try to stay away from posting on the faith board.
(PPS. Is it so different than someone saying "My doctor told me that no one should ever prescribe antidepressants for an anxiety disorder?" Would that be a put down to anyone who is using antidepressants for an anxiety disorder?)
Posted by Lou Pilder on October 24, 2002, at 5:51:28
In reply to Re: re-clarification, posted by Dinah on October 24, 2002, at 3:29:12
Dinah,
I am delighted that you were able to place th main issue here in your post. I am awaiting the answers from Dr. Bob to our questions for the answer will determine if I can be a jew here or if I have to hide my judaism and not say that I believe in one God and that there is a commandment to jews to not hve any Gods before Him.
I like your analogy about the drug people that say that ADs should not be taken.... and your statement asking if you could say that you read in your bible that there was a commandment in it to not have any Gods before God.
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on October 24, 2002, at 5:55:21
In reply to Lou likes Dinah » Dinah, posted by Lou Pilder on October 24, 2002, at 5:51:28
Friends,
Sorry that the last two words were left out in the subject line. It is my faulty computer's fault. Not that I do not like Dinah , anyway, for I do .
Lou
Posted by NikkiT2 on October 24, 2002, at 6:12:10
In reply to Lou's shared concerns with ISO M » IsoM, posted by Lou Pilder on October 23, 2002, at 17:33:12
Lou,
quoting is fine... but when those quotes are offensive, I don't think its OK...
Use your judgement... are you happy upsetting people??
Nikki
Posted by NikkiT2 on October 24, 2002, at 6:18:19
In reply to Correction:should be Lou likes (Dinahs's post), posted by Lou Pilder on October 24, 2002, at 5:55:21
It would be Ok to say "my literature says you should have no god other than the one I worship"... but NOT ok to say "my literature says you are a fool if you don't believe in my god".
I simply don't like being called a fool (or anything similar!)
Nikki
Posted by Lou Pilder on October 24, 2002, at 6:54:49
In reply to Re: re-clarification, posted by Dinah on October 24, 2002, at 3:29:12
Friends,
Dinah has said that if the administration here says that one can not state their beleif that their faith says that they shall have no other Gods before God, that they will be restrained from saying that, which would prohibit the faith board to exists, as Dinah says,"humm kind of does away completly with the idea of the the faith board".
I agree with Dinah, but there are also other questions that arise out of Dr. Bob's stance on this issue that I would like addressed here. One would be if his stance , now, is a (change) from his original making of the faith board, where all faiths were welcomed, and that it is now being changed to something other than that. For the post that said that the poster beleived in the father, the son and the holy ghost was not restrained, along with numerous other posts that were not restrained that expessed their faith beliefs, and even Dr.Bob citing a passage from the new testament from the book of James,which I did not demend that he be restrained from quoting, and now there is a change that prohibits jews that beleive in one God to state that their God commands them that they shall have no other Gods before them. This is the foundation of judaism and I am not going to adulterate that beleif of mine by changing that wording of my beleif to accomodate any one elses beleif any more than I would demand that the christian be restraind and not state that they believe in Jesus, the father and the holy ghost. Now if Dr. Bob's prohibition of me saying my foundation of my faith is allowed to stand, and at the same time allowing the christian person to say that they believed in the father the son and the holy ghost , which is the foundation of christianity, is going to be allaowed,or for bible verses to be quoted, then I would preferr that this site be shut down iimmediatly. I also would want an apology made to all those that were lured into this site on Dr. Bob's invitation to tell of their fiath experiances and then told that their faith could not be expressed because their faith is different from, in this case chritianity for the chritian foundation of the father , the son , and the holy ghost was not restrained,and christian bible verses are not restrained, and therfore jews would be accused of disrespect when the christian person was not accused of disrespect when they expressed their faith of the foundation of their beleif of the father, the son, and the holy ghost or cite their christian bible verses.
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on October 24, 2002, at 7:03:18
In reply to I think..., posted by NikkiT2 on October 24, 2002, at 6:18:19
NikkiT2,
Good morning NikkiT2. First, I want you to know that the verse that is upsetting you could not and will not be quoted again, for it was in its context when it was quoted and that context has passed.
Also, are you say that you agree with me that I should be allowed to say that my God told me that I shall have no other Gods befoe Him?
Lou
Posted by NikkiT2 on October 24, 2002, at 7:44:21
In reply to Re: I think... » NikkiT2, posted by Lou Pilder on October 24, 2002, at 7:03:18
Like I said, I think its ok to say "xxx told me to have no other god but him"... but its when you use phrases like the fools one that you're crossing the lines.
I used the fools comment as an example. i would hope you have learnt that phrases that make me out to be less of a person for not believeing in god are not acceptable.
I believ its fine to discuss and tell of your experiences without putting others down. Try and double check what you say to make sure you're not saying such things.
Just to re-iterate.. I think its OK to say things like only one god, as long as you're not saying that others are less of a person for not believeing in that god.
Nikki
Posted by Lou Pilder on October 24, 2002, at 8:22:11
In reply to Re: I think... » Lou Pilder, posted by NikkiT2 on October 24, 2002, at 7:44:21
NikkiT2,
I am sorry that you feel that I was offending you, for it was not, and will never be, my intention to offend anyone and apologise to you for any thing that I have reiterated here in my experiance.
The quote in question involved spiritual implications,(in his heart) not intellectuall ones. What I am tellng in my experiance "The 7 Gates on the Road to the Crown of Life is a spiritual unfolding, not an intellectual one. I am sorry that this could not be brought out without me being able to complete the complete revelation that was given to me, and I do recognise that there will be some quotes that some will not approve of, and that there will be disagreements about them.
Now if I am able to complete telling of my experiance here, then it would be brought out in more light what the phrase in question really means.
Actually,I have heard the phrase in question quoted by christian groups on national television and world-wide radio broadcasts. It is found in our jewish book called the tenach, and the christian groups include the psalms, which this is number 14 and 53, in their bibles.
The correct understanding of the verse is, I must admit, clouded because it can only be properly understood when more light is revealed. It is my intention to bring all of this together shortly to explain that verse and others in its spiritual context, if I am allowed to. And I want to be allowed to do that for people like yourself so that I can bring out the full meaning of that verse and others. As of now, unless I am allowed to complete my experiance here, there will be unfinished explanations that could be cleared up only if I will be allowed to finish my experiuance here. So if I am given more opportunity here to finish the 7 Gates on the Road to the Crown of Life, then I will have the opportunity to clarify this to you and others.
I hope that we can stay in touch,
Lou
Posted by Dinah on October 24, 2002, at 8:45:34
In reply to I think..., posted by NikkiT2 on October 24, 2002, at 6:18:19
> It would be Ok to say "my literature says you should have no god other than the one I worship"... but NOT ok to say "my literature says you are a fool if you don't believe in my god".
>
> I simply don't like being called a fool (or anything similar!)
>
> NikkiHi Nikki,
That was always my belief about the rules as well, but Dr. Bob has specifically said something different. He has said that it is not ok to say "my literature says you should have no god other than the one I worship"... ".
Dinah
Posted by Dinah on October 24, 2002, at 8:46:11
In reply to Re: I think..., posted by Dinah on October 24, 2002, at 8:45:34
Posted by Dinah on October 24, 2002, at 8:54:58
In reply to Dinah's observations-Lou's response » Dinah, posted by Lou Pilder on October 24, 2002, at 6:54:49
Lou, I too am confused at what is allowed. And I wonder how constrained the faith board can be without becoming a board absent of faith.
However, I don't think it is at all fair to put an anti-Semitic slant on the argument. Dr. Bob is equally limiting the ability of people of all faiths to post their doctrine on the board. In fact the first statement prohibited was a Christian statement about the only way to be saved being through Jesus Christ. And many people were upset at not being able to quote the new testament to that effect.
For myself, I am willing to abide by whatever rules Dr. Bob imposes, since it is his board and really I have no choice anyway. :) Perhaps if it were my board the rules would be slightly different.
But please don't take it personally, or as an affront to Judaism in particular. I have seen absolutely no signs of anti Semitism in Dr. Bob's decisions and have the utmost respect for Dr. Bob.
And Dr. Bob didn't say you couldn't say you believed in one God, merely that you couldn't say (even through quotes) that you "should" believe in one God. A subtle distinction, but the one Dr. Bob is trying to make, I think.
Dinah
Posted by Lou Pilder on October 24, 2002, at 9:14:24
In reply to Re: Dinah's observations-Lou's response » Lou Pilder, posted by Dinah on October 24, 2002, at 8:54:58
Dinah,
Sorry, but the christian poster recieved no restraint to post that she believed in the father, the son, and the holy ghost which is the foundation of Christianity, and I will be restrained to say the foundation of my jewish faith, thatI beleive that my God requireres me to have no other God before Him.
I'm sorry, but I will not accept this and I have asked Dr. Bob to give me his descriminatory rational for allowing one and not the other. Are you saying that a christian has the option of beleiveing that christianity requirers the acceptance if beleiveing in the Father , the Son, and the Holy ghost or to not believe in the Father, the Son amd the Holy Ghost? There is a (should) in that foundation to be a christian. Why is the christian (should) to believe in the Father, the Son and the holy Ghost any different than the (should) in the foundation of the jewish faith to believe only in one God? If you can clarify the differences between the (shoulds) then I will be better able to understand why you are supporting Dr. bob when to me it is plainly visible on this board that there are two different standards.
Lou.
Posted by Lou Pilder on October 24, 2002, at 9:37:50
In reply to Re: Dinah's observations-Lou's response » Lou Pilder, posted by Dinah on October 24, 2002, at 8:54:58
Dinah,
Could you take a look at the folowing post?
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/fith/20020527/msgs/196.html
If you could, then I would be appreciative because the content of this post , I believe, is relavant to what you have posted and I believe that if we examine this post together, that we could be better able to communicate with each other in regards to this discussion.
Thanks in advance if you could examine the post thatI have requested for you to examime,
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on October 24, 2002, at 9:47:31
In reply to Re: Dinah's observations-Lou's response(2) » Dinah, posted by Lou Pilder on October 24, 2002, at 9:37:50
Dinah,
This is the URL in its corrected form:
http://dr-bob.org/babble/faith/20020527/msgs/196.html
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on October 24, 2002, at 10:21:33
In reply to Correction to the URL in the above » Lou Pilder, posted by Lou Pilder on October 24, 2002, at 9:47:31
Friends,
Below is another post that I feel is relavant to the discussion on this thread.
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faith/20020527/msgs/189.html
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on October 24, 2002, at 10:29:08
In reply to other relavant posts » Lou Pilder, posted by Lou Pilder on October 24, 2002, at 10:21:33
Friends,
Below is another post that I feel could be relavant to this discussion.
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faith/20020527/msgs/466.html
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on October 24, 2002, at 10:42:19
In reply to Re: other relavant posts (2), posted by Lou Pilder on October 24, 2002, at 10:29:08
Friends,
Below is another post that I feel could be relavant to this discussion.
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faith/20020527/msgs/486.html
Lou
Posted by NikkiT2 on October 24, 2002, at 10:42:48
In reply to Re: I think... » NikkiT2, posted by Lou Pilder on October 24, 2002, at 8:22:11
I do understand the meaning of the sentance... I was a regular church goer for a number of years (not taken by parents) and am also confirmed (int eh Church of England) and have studied many religious texts with a friend study religions.
But I found I just couldn't believe in god. So being told I'm a fool for this is vry hurtful.
Your apology is gracefully accepted though. Thankyou.
Nikki
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Administration | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.