Wow!
Halfway through the introduction and Steve, already hit the nail on the head.
"LOVE THY Neighbour AS Thyself"
His breakdown of how Un-Universal this so called 'Universal law' is very logical. Too many times I see persons try to live by this law and while they may have somewhat good relationships, they often complain about their own wealth and health.
Steve has poke holes by saying: while loving thy neighbour as thyself, is good for maintain relationships, but won’t pay your bills.
I am poking additional holes as follows:
What if you have an unhealthy lifestyle but healthy in your view? Aren’t you damaging your neighbours’ health. Worst yet, your neighbour adopt your habits.
What happens if you both have very different outlooks on life? Are both parties to compromise their morals values? What about if who both hold strict religious beliefs?
What action are you to take in loving thy neighbour, passive or active? Will you achieve this through consent or conquest?
So far I am treating ‘neighbour’ as if singular.
Does this apply in today's urban communities where your neighbour is not your extended family?
Are you to love your neighbour next door more than your neighbour 10 houses down the street?
In conclusion:
‘Love thy neighbour as thyself’ is vague as it gets.
If you can commit a law to memory easily then it is not a law, you are a victim of powerful marketing.
The reading continues........................
