a reply to: dfnj2015
The quotation from Jehovah's word listed under "Christianity" was encouraging a positive action (doing something positive).
The following quotations were all about what not to do (as in no action warranted or encouraged):
Baha’i Faith, Buddhism, Confucianism, Hinduism, Judaism, Zoroastrianism.
Islam was talking about wishing stuff. Which won't do much good either, especially when little is said about how genuine these wishes need to be and
to whom these wishes need to be addressed, a God with no name that cannot save? Or is it just wishing to yourself, not a literal wish? As in the
phrase: "I wish you well"? It doesn't seem to encourage much action to help in making things go well for others...(especially those who are not
muslim, such as Jews or other banned religions and minorities in Muslim countries; their spiritual leaders and political leaders that claim to be
Muslim don't seem to live up to that quotation either, unless it really doesn't matter how genuine this 'wishing' is).
Jainism seems to encourage inappropiate relations with animals as well if one were so inclined, or put animals on equal footing with humans (as per
the evolutionary philosophies+Pantheism+Mother Nature worship that came from the same area).
The following list of religious quotations seemed to have little to do with what in Christianity is often referred to as "the Golden Rule" and were
merely teaching a doctrine of their own devising:
Native Spirituality, Sikhism (a guru talking about himself in a positive manner), Taoism, Unitarianism.
Meaning the quotation from Jehovah's word encouraging positive action towards others (and these are works of obedience to His word) is still unique
and special compared to the other religions in the OP since that's all of the ones mentioned in the OP.
3 songs seemed appropiate for those who like the number 3.
"Not harming" is easier to enact then "Doing Good" because: 1) we don't know what the other considers 'good' nor 2) can we know to any certainty what
the consequences of 'our decision' of good for others will in fact be. Will the "not harm" approach you don't run into those moral problems.
"First do no harm" still requires nobel intent but is easier in practice.
"do no harm" would be included when following this advice:
12 “All things, therefore, that you want men to do to you, you also must do to them. This, in fact, is what the Law and the Prophets mean.
I would not want people to do harm to me (as all human beings would), so I would avoid doing harm to someone (because it's not included in "all
things...that you want men to do to you + all the other teachings in the bible that elaborate on Jesus summary of the Law and the Prophets, i.e.
Jehovah's word, the bible, which has plenty to say about 'do no harm' as well), even regularly consider if I'm doing it inadvertently (or
indirectly by for example voting for a political party like the Nazis, which were voted into power by those who refer to themselves as "Christians",
mostly, of course other people voted for them too, millions of people who were not at the Nuremberg trials where all the scapegoats were publicly
displayed for judgement and condemnation). Surely most people can agree that doing no harm is a good thing? 'Do no harm' is just a start, there's more
one can do (good things or good behaviour towards others). Acting with other forms of kindness towards others would not be included in the phrase 'do
no harm' (which is already kind not to do) but it would be included in the commandment or Law (principle to follow) described above. It's more
encompassing. 'Do no harm' is a bit of a stripped down version of it (only focussing on 1 aspect of it). Actually, 'do no harm' is not as easy as it
sounds, people are easily deceived into doing harm to others when thinking it's helping yet other people or for other motivations or arguments that
make them believe they're doing the right thing (protecting others for example; such as those in the military fighting wars in the middle east;
however, the teachings from the bible including Matthew 7:12 would not allow that behaviour to be perceived as the "right" or "good" way to act
towards others, especially once you also consider what Jesus said about turning the other cheek and loving even your enemies). Perhaps the quotations
from a Pastor in the US about terrorists can help explain what I'm talking about and what I'm not talking about when mentioning those last 2 things
about turning the other cheek and loving even your enemies before it's misinterpreted (which it often is by those arguing for the righteousness of
military service especially when protecting people from terrorists or conspiring Jews as in the case of the Nazis which was their main argument*):
* = Some historical religious and geographical (Germany) background information:
Certainly, the handiest trick of the propagandist is the use of outright lies. Consider, for example, the lies that Martin Luther wrote in 1543
about the Jews in Europe: “They have poisoned wells, made assassinations, kidnaped children . . . They are venomous, bitter, vindictive, tricky
serpents, assassins, and children of the devil who sting and work harm.” His exhortation to so-called Christians? “Set fire to their synagogues or
schools . . . Their houses [should] also be razed and destroyed.”
Source: article in my signature (the page before the one that is linked)
It's not a good thing to burn a man alive for being suspected of harming (supposed holy) cows: a Muslim suspected of transporting beef was burned
alive by Buddhists, Hindus or those following the teachings of those popular in Sikhism in Burma or India, I think it was India but it's been a while
since I read the story, but these people are putting animals on equal footing with human beings (or even higher, more respect for animals than some
humans) and since they don't like Muslims anyway...these things regularly happen because of the influence of Babylon the Great, see multiple videos in
the playlist I linked before the video I linked for details.
Here are some other good (or wise, or right, or beneficial) things to do which counts for all people in this world (which in turn helps with being
kind to people, which in turn helps with 'do no harm', which makes it the good, wise, right and beneficial thing to do regardless of people's opinions
about what is good or not):
edit on 24-5-2017 by whereislogic because: (no reason given)
a reply to: whereislogic
edit: Here are some other good (or wise, or right, or beneficial) things to do which counts for all people in this world (which in turn helps with
being kind to people, which in turn helps with 'do no harm', which makes it the good, wise, right and beneficial thing to do regardless of people's
opinions about what is good or not or what qualifies as "harm" cause a person could have their own opinion and argumentation about that subject as
I was actually looking for the song with a phrase about saying harmful words but I haven't found it yet. When it comes to do the subject of 'do no
harm' people often forget about the way words or what one is arguing for can often do more harm than intended by the person using those words. The
tongue is what can set a forest of hatred on fire (see James chapter 3 I think) if used unwisely (figuratively of course, that also includes the
fingers if one is typing). Jesus taught that it's what proceeds out of someone's mouth is what defiles him (as in that's the real issue here, even
more so than the resulting actions).
edit on 24-5-2017 by whereislogic because: (no reason given)
a reply to: Akragon
You can go to a Kingdom Hall in your area to find out. For me it's about the message (the words) primarily. Not so much the style of singing allthough
the quality in that playlist does help in appreciating and taking the message to heart.
Also note the bible quotations in the videos, I would have to copy-paste (and edit out all the plusses and stars) all of those if I wanted to use them
in commentary otherwise (and I do want to use them, they're my main points).
edit on 24-5-2017 by whereislogic because: (no reason
Ah, found the one about the harmful effect thoughtless words can have...
18 Thoughtless speech is like the stabs of a sword, But the tongue of the wise is a healing. (Proverbs 12:18)
And this one is just fun all around (not taking away anything from its message).
11 “Happy are you when people reproach you and persecute you and lyingly say every sort of wicked thing against you for my sake. 12 Rejoice and
be overjoyed, since your reward is great in the heavens, for in that way they persecuted the prophets prior to you. (Matthew 5:11,12)
Note that Matthew 5:11 connects the concept of "lyingly say every sort of wicked thing against you" to 'persecution'. The article in my signature uses
a quotation that describes it this way (see the bolded and red part and take note that "cult" is a synonym for "sect"):
Some people insult those who disagree with them by questioning character or motives instead of focusing on the facts. Name-calling slaps a negative,
easy-to-remember label onto a person, a group, or an idea. The name-caller hopes that the label will stick. If people reject the person or the idea on
the basis of the negative label instead of weighing the evidence for themselves, the name-caller’s strategy has worked.
For example, in recent years a powerful antisect sentiment has swept many countries in Europe and elsewhere. This trend has stirred emotions, created
the image of an enemy, and reinforced existing prejudices against religious minorities. Often, “sect” becomes a catchword. “‘Sect’ is
another word for ‘heretic,’” wrote German Professor Martin Kriele in 1993, “and a heretic today in Germany, as in former times, is [condemned
to extermination]—if not by fire . . . , then by character assassination, isolation and economic destruction.”
The Institute for Propaganda Analysis notes that “bad names have played a tremendously powerful role in the history of the world and in our own
individual development. They have ruined reputations, . . . sent [people] to prison cells, and made men mad enough to enter battle and slaughter their
edit on 25-5-2017 by whereislogic because: (no reason given)
This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.