Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site umcp-cs.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!qantel!dual!lll-crg!gymble!umcp-cs!mangoe
From: mangoe@umcp-cs.UUCP (Charley Wingate)
Newsgroups: net.religion
Subject: Re: The Principle of Non-interference
Message-ID: <1688@umcp-cs.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 26-Sep-85 18:10:02 EDT
Article-I.D.: umcp-cs.1688
Posted: Thu Sep 26 18:10:02 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 29-Sep-85 07:07:36 EDT
References: <1652@umcp-cs.UUCP> <1782@pyuxd.UUCP>
Organization: U of Maryland, Computer Science Dept., College Park, MD
Lines: 41

This is one of two replies to this article; the other will be found in
net.philosophy, where it belongs.

In article <1782@pyuxd.UUCP> rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Rich Rosen) writes:

[Frank Adams is talking about how even trivial actions might be considered
 interference]
>>>> It causes me to have experiences I do not wish to have, which I would not
>>>> have had without your actions.  How do you define interference? [ADAMS]

>>>Certainly not that way.  To use THAT definition would mean that everything
>>>in the world is "interfering" with me all the time. [ROSEN]

>> I should point out that christian morals ARE based on pricisely this
>> principle, on sound biblical authority. [WINGATE]

>Charles, this is perhaps the most ridiculous statement I have ever seen you
>foist upon us.  The supposedly fundamental tenet of Christianity may be
>based on this principle (which is something I have said more than once, if
>you were listening), but the body of Christian morality (with its numerous
>"thou shalt not"s chosen at whim from the Old Testament) is much more
>restrictive than you indicate.

Well, first off, let me relieve Rich's lamentable ignorance by quoting
chapter and verse from the NT:  In Romans 14:15 Paul says "If your brother
is being injured by what you eat, you are no longer walking in love."  In I
Corinthians 8:10 he says, after aknowledging that eating food that has been
offered to idols is not in itself a sin, "For if anyone sees you, a man of
knowledge, at table in an idol's temple, might he not be encouraged, if his
conscience is weak, to eat food offered to idols?"  So as for it being
rediculous in that regard...

As for the "thou shalt not"s chosen at whim from the OT, well, this can only
be taken either as ignorance or a deliberate untruth.  There are in fact
solid reasons for the prohibitions listed in the NT, reasons which are
complex and which Rich will not accept anyway.  What this has to do with
non-christians anyway is beyond me; the point is not that they shouldn't
lead christians astray, but the christians should not take actions which
encourage them to sin.

Charley Wingate


Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com