Agape and its significance

[Betterave]

Semantic games. Actual actions “speak” louder than mere words. And I am pretty sure you understaood what I meant.

I’m pretty sure you did *not *understand what I meant, or the issue at hand. Actions “speak” louder than mere words only to those who are capable of speech. Without words, *actions *don’t speak at all.

Again, you state the obvious. The goals themselves do not belong to the mathematics. And I never said otherwise. The strategy to achieve those goals is where the mathematical modeling comes into the picture.

If no (real-life) goals, then no (real-life) modelling. Do you understand that and what it implies??

Probably not, so I’ll explain: see your post 184. It implies modelling of real-life, therefore (name removed by moderator)ut of real-life goals. Yet you admit that these lie outside the mathematical model, while claiming that simple ignorance of your mathematical model is a sufficient explanation for the ‘false’ teaching of Jesus. (I hope this is explicit enough for you to understand how you’ve contradicted yourself. Please try really really hard to understand this time before delivering another lame comeback.)

What else would “turn the other cheek” mean? Or “do not resist evil”?

What do you seriously think it means (read intelligently and in context)? I suggest not *answering *this question, but *thinking *about it instead (I’m predicting that you’ll be unable to do both, especially if you jump right into one of your so-called ‘answers’).

You guessed wrong.

It wasn’t really a guess, so much as an attempt to get you to see a point. Assuming you have punished your child(ren) before, was this because you loved them or because they were your enemies? (For me it’s because I love them. )

 

[R_Daneel]

I’m pretty sure you did *not *understand what I meant, or the issue at hand. Actions “speak” louder than mere words only to those who are capable of speech. Without words, *actions *don’t speak at all.

Sheer nonsense, as usual. I mute person can pull a drowning child out of water - and his action speaks of love. A loud-mouthed person can declare his “love” and fails to demonstrate it with actions. You are really stubborn and obtuse to deny such obvious things. But, hey, it is your time, you waste it.

If no (real-life) goals, then no (real-life) modelling. Do you understand that and what it implies??

Not a thing. The “not-real-life-goals” are simply wishful thinking.

We are talking about real-life interactions of real-life people. We are talking about real-life conflict resolution. Jesus “advised” to “turn the other cheek”, and he “recommended” the “do not resist evil” as real-life methods to deal with other real-life people. Which is a bad, sub-optimal solution. I advise you to learn a bit of mathematics, especially game theory before you put you foot into your mouth. (Though I admit, it is funny sight. )

 

[Betterave]

Sheer nonsense, as usual. I mute person can pull a drowning child out of water - and his action speaks of love. A loud-mouthed person can declare his “love” and fails to demonstrate it with actions. You are really stubborn and obtuse to deny such obvious things. But, hey, it is your time, you waste it.

If you want to respond to my comments, please read them. This is just stupid. As if mute people are not capable of speech! (I’m guessing you don’t know any mute people.) And as if my point had anything to do with a necessary connection between love and asseverations of love! (Good grief, man!)

Not a thing. The “not-real-life-goals” are simply wishful thinking.

We are talking about real-life interactions of real-life people. We are talking about real-life conflict resolution. Jesus “advised” to “turn the other cheek”, and he “recommended” the “do not resist evil” as real-life methods to deal with other real-life people. Which is a bad, sub-optimal solution. I advise you to learn a bit of mathematics, especially game theory before you put you foot into your mouth. (Though I admit, it is funny sight. )

Are you serious?! What “not-real-life-goals” are you talking about? You have no idea what you’re talking about. A mathematical variable is not a “not-real-life-goal.” It’s a mathematical variable. The “real-life-goal” is contained in the purpose stipulated as the end of the algorithm. Game theory requires well-defined mathematical objects for it to have any application to the ‘optimization’ of some field of strategy. Why don’t you tell us what those objects are in the case of optimizing ‘life’?

As for Jesus, you are wilfully ignorant, that’s obvious. Not much I can do for you there.