Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [Kierkegaardians] Re: The orthodoxy of the Luther's pietist claim that the outer is the inner...

Expand Messages
  • James Rovira
    K s language is very interesting to me -- K says Lutheranism is a sedative, Marx says religion (coming from his own Lutheran Germany) is an opiate -- and not
    Message 1 of 17 , Mar 5, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      K's language is very interesting to me -- K says Lutheranism is a
      sedative, Marx says "religion" (coming from his own Lutheran Germany)
      is an opiate -- and not too many years apart, and undoubtedly without
      each having read the other.

      Jim R

      On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 6:17 PM, Donald Anderson <don@...> wrote:

      >
      > Mederic, thanks for this quote. Is it the only one you could find on Luther?
      > I don't have my Journal volumes handy right now so I can't look this one up.
      > I hope I can get to them in a few days.
      >
      > In the meantime I am wondering what the subject line has to do with Luther
      > or K's quote about Luther. Is it Irony or what?
      >
      > Don
    • Médéric Laitier
      Irony, moi? Quote on Luther: quote on Luther? Well I thought it was a quote on K. on Luther. But who knows... Perhaps the inner and the outer are at a match.
      Message 2 of 17 , Mar 6, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
         

        Irony, moi?


        Quote on Luther: quote on Luther? Well I thought it was a quote on K. on Luther. But who knows... Perhaps the inner and the outer are at a match. Or not...

        If you want to read more: :p


        --- In kierkegaardians@yahoogroups.com, "Donald Anderson" <don@...> wrote:
        >
        >
        > Mederic, thanks for this quote. Is it the only one you could find on
        > Luther? I don't have my Journal volumes handy right now so I can't look
        > this one up. I hope I can get to them in a few days.
        >
        > In the meantime I am wondering what the subject line has to do with
        > Luther or K's quote about Luther. Is it Irony or what?
        >
        > Don
        > --- In kierkegaardians@yahoogroups.com, Médéric Laitier
        > hidepark21@ wrote:
        > >
        > >
        > > 'Luther has literally put Christianity upside down: he has made of it
        > a
        > > sedative, Christ has come down here, says he, to sedate the anxious
        > > consciousness.'
        > >
        > >
        > > Journal 1854
        > > XIi A 193
        > >
        >
      • Donald Anderson
        Meddy, It seems to me that there may be a lack of communication about the meaning of on. I was useing shorthand to say: A quote by K about Luther. Is that
        Message 3 of 17 , Mar 6, 2008
        • 0 Attachment

          Meddy,

          It seems to me that there may be a lack of communication about the meaning of 'on.' I was useing shorthand to say: "A quote by K about Luther. Is that better?

          I still wonder what you are getting at. Care to elaborate?

          Don


          --- In kierkegaardians@yahoogroups.com, Médéric Laitier <hidepark21@...> wrote:
          >
          >
          > Irony, moi?
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > Quote on Luther: quote on Luther? Well I thought it was a quote on K. on
          > Luther. But who knows... Perhaps the inner and the outer are at a match.
          > Or not...
          >
          > If you want to read more: [:p]
          > <http://www.hidepark21.org/Collection/KE/Cahier-NB30-Martyrdom.pdf>
          >
          >
          > --- In kierkegaardians@yahoogroups.com, "Donald Anderson" don@
          > wrote:
          > >
          > >
          > > Mederic, thanks for this quote. Is it the only one you could find on
          > > Luther? I don't have my Journal volumes handy right now so I can't
          > look
          > > this one up. I hope I can get to them in a few days.
          > >
          > > In the meantime I am wondering what the subject line has to do with
          > > Luther or K's quote about Luther. Is it Irony or what?
          > >
          > > Don
          > > --- In kierkegaardians@yahoogroups.com, Médéric Laitier
          > > hidepark21@ wrote:
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > 'Luther has literally put Christianity upside down: he has made of
          > it
          > > a
          > > > sedative, Christ has come down here, says he, to sedate the anxious
          > > > consciousness.'
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > Journal 1854
          > > > XIi A 193
          > > >
          > >
          >

        • Médéric Laitier
          Dear Donatello, Do I care to elaborate? Well, if truth be told, not really but here we go with a careless attempt, how properly improper! A quote by K about
          Message 4 of 17 , Mar 6, 2008
          • 0 Attachment
             

            Dear Donatello,


            Do I care to elaborate? Well, if truth be told, not really but here we go with a careless attempt, how properly improper!

            "A quote by K about Luther. Is that better?"

            Now on, about, concerning or dealing with were all fine with me, not a problem I am not so conservative although one might say I am somewhat so. But not so so... Although also quite so, quite so so!

            Now the issue was more about, had more to do with whether or not this citation had any chance to tell us anything about Luther or, rather, about Kierkegaard.

            I thought it was likely to be telling something about the latter, i.e. Kierkegaard.

            Now there are several ways (seven in fact, don't ask me why though!) to approach things -- this sentence is being careless, is it not?

            To name two, there is an approach by which one outlines the outer, the environmental factors to capture the essential.

            And there is another which tends to consider that the essential is more likely to manifest itself, if ever, then in movements from the inner circles, say in a piece of writing for example.


            Now for the specifix of our present discussion:


            Well either you guess that given K. was raised in a nouveaux riches family of German extraction (is that so?) in Copenhaguen's 19th century, he necessarily was some sort of a weird combination of pietism and Lutheranic hegelianism...

            Or you try to find out what he had to say/write about one thing and the other.


            Now there is no proper answer to which approach is wright and which is rong. For there is here also a matter pov: what pov you adopt to assess the former pov. And again the seven ways of which the two, etc.



            It appears K. favoured the inner way, though. And when he tried to develop it - his inner way - he thought he should write in one of his note-books:

            "Luther has invented that Christianity is meant to calm down. I have more than once noticed that Luther has altered Christianity. As I read it now, Schopenhauer maintains that Luther by altering virginity has altered Christianity. It is an opinion that I have always shared in as well, at least inasmuch as I considered that Luther should have seen to clearly mark, with great care, that his marriage was a bit of an exception, a correction. But the point I would particularly aim at would be that he has altered Christianity by altering martyrdom. Luther has literally put Christianity upside down: he has made of it a sedative, Christ has come down here, says he, to sedate the anxious consciousness. It is here the exact contrary of what stands in the New Testament. Christ has come to save a sinful world which suffers from a sickness."

            Journals 1854, NB30, XIi A 193


            Now what does this tell us? Well I don't know for you, I don't know for the others, but to me it seems quite obvious that he had for the least taken some distance from the Lutheran Church of Denmark. Does it mean he was never influenced by the thought of Luther? Certainly not, the fact that he should mention him suffice to indicate the contrary, that he takes care to mark such a distance entitles to guess he was in fact influenced by him in his own development at some point.


            Now why did I care not to care so much? Well, you know, us mundane we cannot properly care about such elevated matters. It is the kind of business proper only to them prof scholars who have read it all, and in Danish.

            So...

            As a light bird of seriously lurid feathers, I have dropped my dropping:


            'Luther has literally put Christianity upside down: he has made of it a sedative, Christ has come down here, says he, to sedate the anxious consciousness.'


            And you, My Master, have held me into account for the impropriety of such a neglected behaviour.

            And here was my elaborately neglected piece of secondary answer.


            How fit, when you come and think of it!


            Unseriously,

            La péruche Meddy

            :o)


            --- In kierkegaardians@yahoogroups.com, "Donald Anderson" <don@...> wrote:
            >
            >
            > Meddy,
            >
            > It seems to me that there may be a lack of communication about the
            > meaning of 'on.' I was useing shorthand to say: "A quote by K about
            > Luther. Is that better?
            >
            > I still wonder what you are getting at. Care to elaborate?
            >
            > Don
            >
            >
            > --- In kierkegaardians@yahoogroups.com, Médéric Laitier
            > hidepark21@ wrote:
            > >
            > >
            > > Irony, moi?
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > Quote on Luther: quote on Luther? Well I thought it was a quote on K.
            > on
            > > Luther. But who knows... Perhaps the inner and the outer are at a
            > match.
            > > Or not...
            > >
            > > If you want to read more: [:p]
            > > <http://www.hidepark21.org/Collection/KE/Cahier-NB30-Martyrdom.pdf>
            > >
            > >
            > > --- In kierkegaardians@yahoogroups.com, "Donald Anderson" don@
            > > wrote:
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > Mederic, thanks for this quote. Is it the only one you could find on
            > > > Luther? I don't have my Journal volumes handy right now so I can't
            > > look
            > > > this one up. I hope I can get to them in a few days.
            > > >
            > > > In the meantime I am wondering what the subject line has to do with
            > > > Luther or K's quote about Luther. Is it Irony or what?
            > > >
            > > > Don
            > > > --- In kierkegaardians@yahoogroups.com, Médéric Laitier
            > > > hidepark21@ wrote:
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > > 'Luther has literally put Christianity upside down: he has made of
            > > it
            > > > a
            > > > > sedative, Christ has come down here, says he, to sedate the
            > anxious
            > > > > consciousness.'
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > > Journal 1854
            > > > > XIi A 193
            > > > >
            > > >
            > >
            >
          • Donald Anderson
            Mederic, I found the context of the quote you have given below. ... a ... Here is the Hong translation: Thus Luther turns Christianity upside down.
            Message 5 of 17 , Mar 12, 2008
            • 0 Attachment

              Mederic,

              I found the context of the quote you have given below.

              > 'Luther has literally put Christianity upside down: he has made of it a
              > sedative, Christ has come down here, says he, to sedate the anxious
              > consciousness.'

              Here is the Hong translation:

              Thus Luther turns Christianity upside down. Christianity exists to soothe and reassure, Christ came to the world to soothe and reassure, it is added, anguished consciences.

              I think maybe your translation is the best.

              The context indicates that in his final days, that which is usually refered to as his crusade against the Lutheran State Church, K was critical of Luther, very critical, on one point. He felt that Luther had let his whole protest down after he had won the initial battle with the RC's; he got married, settled down, and lived a relatively quiet domestic life, the period of his 'Table Talk.' Luther in his crusade against the RC abuses clearly modeled his sola fides but in this latter period he failed to model his notion of `active righteousness," which K saw as striving for eternal things and `suffering.' He seems to be saying to the church in his time that Luther failed to show them how they should live as Christians and is thus at least partly responsible for their misunderstanding of the gospel, namely the missunderstanding that they had no responsibility to live a changed life after baptism.

              Here is the complete text of the quote. Your portion is highlighted:

              «2550 Being a Christian in the New Testament Restlessness-the Martyr-Luther

              In the New Testament the apostles express what it is to be a Christian; to be Christian is, as spirit, the utmost restlessness of spirit. the impatience of eternity, nothing but fear and trembling, intensified by being in this evil world which crucified love, intensified by trepida­tion over the accounting when the Lord and Master will come again and judge whether they have been faithful.

              If this is so, then having to become a martyr-something Christ predicts for the Christian-is so far from being intensification that it is rather mitigation. One could say that only external sufferings like this and finally a martyr's death are able to mitigate and soothe the soul-agony which is the strain of being a Christian according to the New Testament. Therefore martyrdom is not cruel but, on the con­trary, is what physical suffering so often is in relation to mental tor­ment. On the other hand it would have been cruel if Christ had said 10 the disciples: After I am gone you will have no more to do, so get married, get yourself a nice little job and scrape some money together, be a good, decent fellow who goes to church once a week and to the Lord's Supper three times a year.

              Thus in the New Testament the two belong together: restlessness in the Christian requires martyrdom as a kind of mitigation-and mar­tyrdom is the requirement.

              But soon the restlessness is diminished in "Christendom," this dead mass devoid of spirit.

              Then in the Middle Ages asceticism came into favor (people thought there no longer was occasion or opportunity for martyrdom). As I have frequently pointed out, this was not the mistake but rather that instead of confessing that Christianity had retrogressed and been diluted, a compromise was made with Christendom's vapid mass of millions of Christians to the point that the ascetic came to be honored as the extraordinary Christian.

              Thus it became more and more evident that if a person wanted to live quietly and enjoy life, Christianity would bring troubles.

              - -and this ultimately finds expression in Luther (who otherwise certainly was right in his opposition to Catholic abuses).

              Luther discovers that Christianity exists to soothe and reassure. I have frequently pointed out that Luther altered Christianity. As I note now, Schopenhauer305 maintains that by altering virginity Luther altered Christianity. I have shared this view inasmuch as I thought that Luther should have scrupulously made it clear that his marriage was an exception, a corrective. But my main point has been that Luther altered Christianity by altering martyrdom.

              Thus Luther turns Christianity upside down. Christianity exists to soothe and reassure, Christ came to the world to soothe and reassure, it is added, anguished consciences.

              This is completely opposite to the New Testament. Christ comes to the world to save a sinful world, a world immersed in evil. But a sinful world really does not suffer from an anguished conscience. Here it is a question of arousing restlessness.

              But the tragedy about Luther is that a condition in Christendom at a particular time and place is transformed into the normative. Luther suffered exceedingly from an anguished conscience and needed a cure. Well and good, but must Christianity therefore be converted in toto to this, to soothing and reassuring anguished consciences.

              The more I see of Luther the more clear it is to me that he also is a part of this confusion of mistaking the patient for the physician. He is an exceedingly important patient for Christendom, but he is not the physician; he has the patient's passion for expressing and describ­ing his suffering and what he feels he needs to relieve it, but he does not have the physician's comprehensive view. And to reform Chris­tianity requires first and foremost a comprehensive view of the whole of Christianity.

              XII A 193 n.d., 1854 (J&P, Hong, vol. 3, pp. 99-100)

               

              I can see K's point but I can't quite agree with the whole of it.

              Don

               

            • James Rovira
              Thanks for posting all this, Don, and I m glad you re not hospitalized, at least not yet. I think Kierkegaard disagreed with Luther on several points, free
              Message 6 of 17 , Mar 12, 2008
              • 0 Attachment
                Thanks for posting all this, Don, and I'm glad you're not
                hospitalized, at least not yet.

                I think Kierkegaard disagreed with Luther on several points, free will
                being one of them as I tried to illustrate in my last response to you
                with excerpts from On the Bondage of the Will. I'm not sure I agree
                with K's criticisms of Luther either, though. I don't think the
                Christian is supposed to live in anguish his/her entire life, and Paul
                told some congregations to work with their hands, earn their keep,
                mind their own business -- in short, to live stable, domestic lives.
                He also emphasized joy a great deal. The message in the NT tends to
                vary with circumstances: what is true of churches in an environment of
                persecution is not necessarily true of churches in a stable,
                non-persecutory environment.

                But I think K wasn't just responding to Luther's teachings, but to
                what Lutheranism had become in Denmark and probably Germany as well.
                These are two different things.

                Jim R
              • Donald Anderson
                JR, this is exacly what I said. Of couse K was concerned about the fact that contemporary Christians were following only part of the message of Luther. Do you
                Message 7 of 17 , Mar 12, 2008
                • 0 Attachment

                  JR, this is exacly what I said. Of couse K was concerned about the fact that contemporary Christians were following only part of the message of Luther.

                  Do you delete the message you are responding to so that others can't easily check back to see what was said that you missed? Don't bother to respond to this. I withdraw the question, I know all your stock responses.

                  Don

                  --- In kierkegaardians@yahoogroups.com, "James Rovira" <jamesrovira@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > Thanks for posting all this, Don, and I'm glad you're not
                  > hospitalized, at least not yet.
                  >
                  > I think Kierkegaard disagreed with Luther on several points, free will
                  > being one of them as I tried to illustrate in my last response to you
                  > with excerpts from On the Bondage of the Will. I'm not sure I agree
                  > with K's criticisms of Luther either, though. I don't think the
                  > Christian is supposed to live in anguish his/her entire life, and Paul
                  > told some congregations to work with their hands, earn their keep,
                  > mind their own business -- in short, to live stable, domestic lives.
                  > He also emphasized joy a great deal. The message in the NT tends to
                  > vary with circumstances: what is true of churches in an environment of
                  > persecution is not necessarily true of churches in a stable,
                  > non-persecutory environment.
                  >
                  > But I think K wasn't just responding to Luther's teachings, but to
                  > what Lutheranism had become in Denmark and probably Germany as well.
                  > These are two different things.
                  >
                  > Jim R
                  >

                • James Rovira
                  No, Don, I delete previous messages because it s good listserve practice. Pretty well every listserve I m on asks you to do this -- they ask you to include
                  Message 8 of 17 , Mar 13, 2008
                  • 0 Attachment
                    No, Don, I delete previous messages because it's good listserve
                    practice. Pretty well every listserve I'm on asks you to do this --
                    they ask you to include only the "relevant part" of the message.
                    Since of course everyone can visit the archives at any time to see
                    messages, there's nothing being hidden. That's ridiculous.

                    Understand that some members get messages in digest form, so if every
                    response includes the entire thread that makes reading the digest
                    unweildy. Others only read messages in the archives by visiting the
                    webpage, so it's just a matter of clicking back to a previous post.

                    Now i did fail to include the relevant part of your message, though,
                    and that's a problem, as it may not be clear what exactly I'm
                    responding to in your post.

                    But, you see, I have the same problem with your response to me since
                    you included my entire post. When you say, "This is exactly what I
                    said," I don't know what part of your post is "exactly what you said."
                    Are you also saying that you agree K disagreed with Luther on free
                    will and you have said so in the past? Or is your comment limited to
                    only what you mention below?

                    It seemed to me in your last post before mine you were describing
                    primarily K's critique of Luther himself and not Lutheranism, but I
                    think I recall you saying that K was also involved in a critique of
                    Lutheranism.

                    Jim R

                    On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 1:29 AM, Donald Anderson <don@...> wrote:

                    > JR, this is exacly what I said. Of couse K was concerned about the fact that
                    > contemporary Christians were following only part of the message of Luther.
                    >
                  • Don Anderson
                    You said: they ask you to include only the relevant part Yes but you don t include any part, not even the post number!!!!!!!! But never mind. Don From:
                    Message 9 of 17 , Mar 13, 2008
                    • 0 Attachment

                      You said:

                      they ask you to include only the "relevant part"

                       

                      Yes but you don’t include any part, not even the post number!!!!!!!! But never mind.

                      Don

                       

                      From: kierkegaardians@yahoogroups.com [mailto:kierkegaardians@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of James Rovira
                      Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2008 3:45 AM
                      To: kierkegaardians@yahoogroups.com
                      Subject: Re: [Kierkegaardians] Re: The orthodoxy of the Luther's pietist claim that the outer is the inner...

                       

                      No, Don, I delete previous messages because it's good listserve
                      practice. Pretty well every listserve I'm on asks you to do this --
                      they ask you to include only the "relevant part" of the message.
                      Since of course everyone can visit the archives at any time to see
                      messages, there's nothing being hidden. That's ridiculous.

                      Understand that some members get messages in digest form, so if every
                      response includes the entire thread that makes reading the digest
                      unweildy. Others only read messages in the archives by visiting the
                      webpage, so it's just a matter of clicking back to a previous post.

                      Now i did fail to include the relevant part of your message, though,
                      and that's a problem, as it may not be clear what exactly I'm
                      responding to in your post.

                      But, you see, I have the same problem with your response to me since
                      you included my entire post. When you say, "This is exactly what I
                      said," I don't know what part of your post is "exactly what you said."
                      Are you also saying that you agree K disagreed with Luther on free
                      will and you have said so in the past? Or is your comment limited to
                      only what you mention below?

                      It seemed to me in your last post before mine you were describing
                      primarily K's critique of Luther himself and not Lutheranism, but I
                      think I recall you saying that K was also involved in a critique of
                      Lutheranism.

                      Jim R

                      On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 1:29 AM, Donald Anderson <don@...> wrote:

                      > JR, this is exacly what I said. Of couse K was concerned about the fact
                      that
                      > contemporary Christians were following only part of the message of Luther.
                      >

                    • James Rovira
                      Don...did you read my post? Didn t I acknowledge that was a problem in my previous post? You need to understand that not everyone reads these posts from the
                      Message 10 of 17 , Mar 13, 2008
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Don...did you read my post? Didn't I acknowledge that was a problem in
                        my previous post?

                        You need to understand that not everyone reads these posts from the
                        forum in the same way. I get them by email. I do not know the post
                        numbers. I can only find out by navigating to the website, which I
                        never do -- unless someone directs me to a specific post number, or
                        unless I want to search previous posts.

                        Since I use gmail, all my emails are organized by threads -- so long
                        as replies go to the same subject header they appear in the same
                        thread.

                        So I can easily include all or part of previous messages, but I can't
                        very easily include a post number. I'd have to go to the website to
                        do that. Since you're the one who wants the information you're free
                        to go get it, of course.

                        Jim R

                        On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 4:05 PM, Don Anderson <don@...> wrote:
                        > You said:
                        >
                        > they ask you to include only the "relevant part"
                        > Yes but you don't include any part, not even the post number!!!!!!!! But
                        > never mind.
                        >
                        > Don
                        >
                      • Médéric Laitier
                        Dear Don, I hope you are fine and shall remain fine. Allow me to thank you for providing Pr. Hong s translation of the NotaBene Notebook entry about Luther!
                        Message 11 of 17 , Mar 16, 2008
                        • 0 Attachment
                           

                          Dear Don,

                          I hope you are fine and shall remain fine. Allow me to thank you for providing Pr. Hong's translation of the NotaBene Notebook entry about Luther!

                          You wrote as a sibyline comment:

                          'I think maybe your translation is the best.'

                          One hermetical piece of precision: the translation provided by your servant is b(i)ased on a French (partial) translation exclusively, given I do not have access to the original Danish for this Notebook.

                          As I think I can remember you can read the French, allow me to point unto this direction , should you be interested in getting an insight of how the Froggish scholars Ferlov and Gateau understood this entry in the bloody language of their own.

                          'I can see K's point but I can't quite agree with the whole of it.'

                          Being a deprived and corrupt Catholic and a Frenchman, you will guess I am far too ignorant (and stupid) to be in a position to decide whether or not I can agree with your partial disagreement with K in these matters of second power sedition.

                          As far as I am concerned, there is only one message: Jesus' Love; But of course, stupid and ignorant as I am, I may be wrong here...

                          Yours truly,

                          Avé Maria Meddy


                          Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come.

                          John 2:4, KJV




                          --- In kierkegaardians@yahoogroups.com, "Donald Anderson" <don@...> wrote:
                          >
                          >
                          > Mederic,
                          >
                          > I found the context of the quote you have given below.
                          >
                          > > 'Luther has literally put Christianity upside down: he has made of it
                          > a
                          > > sedative, Christ has come down here, says he, to sedate the anxious
                          > > consciousness.'
                          >
                          > [...]
                          >
                          > I can see K's point but I can't quite agree with the whole of
                          > it.
                          >
                          > Don
                          >
                        • James Rovira
                          Heh...no, Mederic, you re not being stupid and ignorant, just sentimental and self-righteous -- the implication being that those who disagree with you also
                          Message 12 of 17 , Mar 16, 2008
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Heh...no, Mederic, you're not being stupid and ignorant, just
                            sentimental and self-righteous -- the implication being that those who
                            disagree with you also disagree with Christ's love. But that's ok.
                            You're probably right.

                            Jim R

                            On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 8:40 AM, Médéric Laitier <hidepark21@...> wrote:

                            > As far as I am concerned, there is only one message: Jesus' Love; But of
                            > course, stupid and ignorant as I am, I may be wrong here...
                            >
                            > Yours truly,
                            >
                            > Avé Maria Meddy
                          • Médéric Laitier
                            Now, now... If your implication holds then I am sorry but... Then I must insist on this point: I am stupid and ignorant. Besides, it was you who once passed
                            Message 13 of 17 , Mar 16, 2008
                            • 0 Attachment
                               

                              Now, now...

                              If your implication holds then I am sorry but...

                              Then I must insist on this point: I am stupid and ignorant. Besides, it was you who once passed this judgement on me, remember?

                              Now you add that I am also sentimental and self-righteous so my statement, to be complete, must thus be completed:

                              I am stupid, ignorant, sentimental and self-righteous. Quite a collection of qualities! May I be forgiven for all these wonderful qualities!


                              Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven: Give, and it shall be given unto you; good measure, pressed down, and shaken together, and running over, shall men give into your bosom. For with the same measure that ye mete withal it shall be measured to you again.

                              Luke 6:37-38, KJV

                               


                              --- In kierkegaardians@yahoogroups.com, "James Rovira" <jamesrovira@...> wrote:
                              >
                              > Heh...no, Mederic, you're not being stupid and ignorant, just
                              > sentimental and self-righteous -- the implication being that those who
                              > disagree with you also disagree with Christ's love. But that's ok.
                              > You're probably right.
                              >
                              > Jim R
                              >

                            • James Rovira
                              No no, Mederic. You are holy...most holy... Jim R
                              Message 14 of 17 , Mar 16, 2008
                              • 0 Attachment
                                No no, Mederic. You are holy...most holy...

                                Jim R
                              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.