The Religion of Blinding Bluster

[Right Divider]

I understand that I can and will be wrong about a great many things in life. It's inevitable, as I am neither omniscient nor am I trying to embody perfection. I don't presume to ever possess either of these. They are conditions belonging to a realm far beyond the one I inhabit.

So all I can do is the best I can given the many flaws and limitations that I have. It's never 'wrong' to love, but HOW best to love someone can be very complicated and confusing. And because it is so complicated and confusing, I (we) are bound to screw it up even with the best of intentions. Often without ever even knowing that we have screwed up. Which is why we ALL need forgiveness. And why we all need to forgive each other, often. Even when we or others aren't even aware of needing it.

All this focus on righteousness is just a waste of time in the service of ego. None of us are ever going to be righteous. We are all going to screw up even with the best of intentions, and we are all in need of forgiveness as a result. Whether we even realize it or not. And in the meantime, to love God, and to love one another is all the same activity. So that is where we should try to keep our focus. Not on delusions of divine omniscience or righteousness that we are never going to possess.

Just love each other as best we can, and forgive each other when we fail at it. And trust (in faith) that this will be good enough to get us all to the 'promised land', someday.

Since you don't believe that God has said anything, there is no way that you can know if anything that you said is true.

 

[Right Divider]

A human being is not defined simply by having a body.

I never said that, Mr. PuttingWordsInMyMouth.

 

[PureX]

Since you don't believe that God has said anything, there is no way that you can know if anything that you said is true.

Neither can you or anyone else. Welcome to the human condition, where you have to determine for yourself what you hope to be the truth, and then live by that truth, in faith, to find out. Because you don't get to know in advance.

 

[ok doser]

I understand that I can and will be wrong about a great many things in life.

Are you sure about that?

Are you sure that that is a correct statement?

 

[Right Divider]

Neither can you or anyone else.

Of course I can. God gave us a book.

Welcome to the human condition, where you have to determine for yourself what you hope to be the truth, and then live by that truth, in faith, to find out. Because you don't get to know in advance.

You are a "practical atheist".

 

[Right Divider]

Neither can you or anyone else. Welcome to the human condition, where you have to determine for yourself what you hope to be the truth, and then live by that truth, in faith, to find out. Because you don't get to know in advance.

Just guess and hope for the best.

 

[annabenedetti]

It doesn't breathe until it's forced to. It doesn't feel pain until it has a sufficiently developed nervous system and brain to interpret the nerve signals as 'pain'. And we don't actually know when these occur fully enough to be considered this 'horrible suffering' that you are ascribing to a fetus of any stage of development. The truth is that you don't actually know at what point this is so, and neither does anyone else. We do know that it becomes very likely to be so at some point before the child is born. And we do know that we do not want to inflict that kind of suffering on any unborn babies.

But the fact of the matter is that no matter how certain you are that you are right, you don't really know any more about what a fetus thinks or feels at any particular stage of development than anyone else. Which is why most people believe that it is the mother's responsibility to decide the fate of the fetus UP TO A CERTAIN POINT. That point being when we can be reasonably sure that the fetus has sufficiently developed to be considered a "child" even while still in the womb.

The courts decided years ago that point should be 22-24 weeks, based on that being the amount of gestation required for a child to survive outside the womb if it had to. And although I understand their reasoning: that this is when the fetus becomes (or can become) an "autonomous person", I believe that to be too far along in the process of development to reasonably avoid the kind of suffering that you refer to. (Keep in mind, however, that a fetus can be totally anesthetized and thereby feel nothing at all.) I think the cut-off should be sooner. But in those early stages, I do think that it must logically be the mother that has the right to make the decision on whether or not to continue with a pregnancy. It's her body, and it's her "sin" if it is a sin to commit. Not yours, and not mine.

It's a baby, PureX. I started feeling my babies move between 4-5 months. I don't ascribe ill intent to you, but calling it a fetus (when no expectant parents said ever "we're having a fetus!") distances one from the idea that a human baby is being aborted. No one should ever lose sight of that.

 

[Hoping]

I understand that I can and will be wrong about a great many things in life. It's inevitable, as I am neither omniscient nor am I trying to embody perfection. I don't presume to ever possess either of these. They are conditions belonging to a realm far beyond the one I inhabit.

So all I can do is the best I can given the many flaws and limitations that I have. It's never 'wrong' to love, but HOW best to love someone can be very complicated and confusing. And because it is so complicated and confusing, I (we) are bound to screw it up even with the best of intentions. Often without ever even knowing that we have screwed up. Which is why we ALL need forgiveness. And why we all need to forgive each other, often. Even when we or others aren't even aware of needing it.

All this focus on righteousness is just a waste of time in the service of ego. None of us are ever going to be righteous. We are all going to screw up even with the best of intentions, and we are all in need of forgiveness as a result. Whether we even realize it or not. And in the meantime, to love God, and to love one another is all the same activity. It's all the same love. So that is where we should try to keep our focus. Not on delusions of divine omniscience or phony self-righteousness that we are never going to possess.

Just love each other as best we can, and forgive each other when we fail at it. And trust (in faith) that this will be good enough to get us all to the 'promised land', someday.

If none of us is "ever going to be righteous", then Jesus suffered and died for nothing.
We could have all just been Jewish Law keepers, falling short over and over again.
Thankfully, though, He provided us a way to "be in Him", thereby making all who are "in Him" righteous.

 

[annabenedetti]

The "red words" were spoken at a time that Jesus said (in RED words) that He came only to the lost sheep of house of Israel.

That's the whole point of the Red Letter Bible. To highlight the words that Jesus spoke, regardless who he was speaking to. If the OT laws can be trotted out for executing homosexuals, the NT words of Jesus can be spoken to all of us.

 

[JudgeRightly]

My answer is that your questions are irrelevant.

Saying it doesn't make it so.

They are completely relevant.

Remember, YOU'RE the one who started talking about the law. We're simply testing your claims.

It matters not at all to me

It should matter to you, because it does matter.

Answer the question, PureX:

Was Moses a real person, who led the nation of Israel out of Egypt around 1500 BC?

Because factuality is not why these stories are created, told, written, and saved for posterity. Like all stories of this kind, the Exodus story was created to represent a set of ideals that were important to the people in the culture that created it. And it has been saved because those ideals are still important to people, today. The factuality of the story is irrelevant to it's ability to present us with the ideal(s) it was intended to present.

There is plenty of evidence for the exodus of Israel from Egypt.

Denying that it happened is to deny history.

The story of Moses wasn't "created." It is a record of actual events that did, in fact, happen.

All this nonsensical bluster about believing in it's factuality is just an attempt at forcing your 'inerrant Bible theory'

Straw man.

Once more: I DO NOT HOLD to the "inerrant Bible theory" you keep accusing me of holding to. Don't bear false witness, PureX. It's not very loving of you.

into the conversation so you can use it to render yourself and your own interpretations of the story unquestionably righteous.

Nonsense.

And I don't care at all about how unquestionably righteous you need to pretend you are to yourself, or to me, or to others.

What if I'm right, PureX? Have you ever stopped to consider that?

What if Christianity is correct? And I don't mean the "God loves everyone, forgive others, don't judge, turn the other cheek" brand of Christianity that's popular these days. I'm talking about the hardcore Bible-thumping, fundamentalist, Mid-Acts-Dispensationalist, judge with righteous judgement Christianity.

What if you're wrong?

What kind of harm could you be doing spreading your new-age doctrine, or even just believing it yourself?

Have you ever asked yourself those questions?

Your beliefs have turned you into a hypocrite. Mine have not.

I can firmly, without hesitation, say that my beliefs, and what I post on TOL and elsewhere, are consistent with each other.

Can you? Because from what I've read of your posts, you can't, not honestly, at least.

It doesn't breathe until it's forced to. It doesn't feel pain until it has a sufficiently developed nervous system and brain to interpret the nerve signals as 'pain'. And we don't actually know when these occur fully enough to be considered this 'horrible suffering' that you are ascribing to a fetus of any stage of development.

You say that, but then you still insist that killing the baby be allowed.

The truth is that you don't actually know at what point this is so, and neither does anyone else.

Therefore, the only logical solution is to protect the life of the baby from conception to natural death.

Not "kill it because it's inconvenient."

We do know that it becomes very likely to be so at some point before the child is born. And we do know that we do not want to inflict that kind of suffering on any unborn babies.

At what point does it become a baby, PureX?

But the fact of the matter is that no matter how certain you are that you are right, you don't really know any more about what a fetus thinks or feels at any particular stage of development than anyone else.

Knowing what the baby in the womb feels or thinks is irrelevant.

Which is why most people believe that it is the mother's responsibility to decide the fate of the fetus UP TO A CERTAIN POINT.

And what if that "certain point" is too late?

That point being when we can be reasonably sure that the fetus has sufficiently developed to be considered a "child" even while still in the womb.

Supra.

The courts decided years ago that point should be 22-24 weeks,

The courts don't write law.

based on that being the amount of gestation required for a child to survive outside the womb if it had to. And although I understand their reasoning: that this is when the fetus becomes (or can become) an "autonomous person", I believe that to be too far along in the process of development to reasonably avoid the kind of suffering that you refer to. (Keep in mind, however, that a fetus can be totally anesthetized and thereby feel nothing at all.) I think the cut-off should be sooner. But in those early stages, I do think that it must logically be the mother that has the right to make the decision on whether or not to continue with a pregnancy. It's her body, and it's her "sin" if it is a sin to commit. Not yours, and not mine.

Abortion is wrong because it's a baby and it's always wrong to intentionally kill a baby and that's because children are made in God's image and God said, "Do not kill the innocent."

Killing the innocent is called murder.
Thus, abortion is murder, and therefore a crime, and our laws should reflect that.

And you still haven't answered my question, PureX. You said:

I'm sure.

Doesn't that make you a hypocrite, since you have previously claimed to not believe in absolutes?

 

[Right Divider]

That's the whole point of the Red Letter Bible. To highlight the words that Jesus spoke, regardless who he was speaking to. If the OT laws can be trotted out for executing homosexuals, the NT words of Jesus can also be spoken to all of us.

The entire Bible are "Jesus' Words". Trying to limit that to SOME of the words that He spoke while in the flesh is not wise.

Here are some of the "red words":
Matt 5:17-20 (AKJV/PCE)
(5:17) ¶ Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. (5:18) For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. (5:19) Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach [them], the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. (5:20) For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed [the righteousness] of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

 

[annabenedetti]

The entire Bible are "Jesus' Words". Trying to limit that to SOME of the words that He spoke while in the flesh is not wise.

As God in three persons, yes. I don't disagree. However there's no reason why His words spoken in the flesh should be less valued.

Here are some of the "red words":

Matt 5:17-20 (AKJV/PCE)
(5:17) ¶ Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. (5:18) For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. (5:19) Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach [them], the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. (5:20) For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed [the righteousness] of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

According to your beliefs are you yourself held to the old law?

 

[Right Divider]

As God in three persons, yes. I don't disagree. However there's no reason why His words spoken in the flesh should be less valued.

Who is claiming that His words in the flesh should be less valued?

According to your beliefs are you yourself held to the old law?

The law was based on universal principles that are valid regardless.

One of those principles is that God created MAN and WOMAN and that their sexual interests are to be between a husband (man) and his wife (woman). This is why God calls homosexual behavior an abomination.

 

[ok doser]

According to your beliefs are you yourself held to the old law?

According to your beliefs are you yourself held to Thou Shalt Not Kill?

 

[JudgeRightly]

Neither can you or anyone else.

Sure we can.

Did Christ rise from the dead? If no, then the faith of Christians is vain, vanity.

But if Christ did rise from the dead, then Christianity is true, and all other religions are false, including yours.

Welcome to the human condition, where you have to determine for yourself what you hope to be the truth, and then live by that truth, in faith, to find out. Because you don't get to know in advance.

Is it absolutely wrong for a man to rape a woman?

 

[marke]

It doesn't breathe until it's forced to. It doesn't feel pain until it has a sufficiently developed nervous system and brain to interpret the nerve signals as 'pain'. And we don't actually know when these occur fully enough to be considered this 'horrible suffering' that you are ascribing to a fetus of any stage of development. The truth is that you don't actually know at what point this is so, and neither does anyone else. We do know that it becomes very likely to be so at some point before the child is born. And we do know that we do not want to inflict that kind of suffering on any unborn babies.

But the fact of the matter is that no matter how certain you are that you are right, you don't really know any more about what a fetus thinks or feels at any particular stage of development than anyone else. Which is why most people believe that it is the mother's responsibility to decide the fate of the fetus UP TO A CERTAIN POINT. That point being when we can be reasonably sure that the fetus has sufficiently developed to be considered a "child" even while still in the womb.

The courts decided years ago that point should be 22-24 weeks, based on that being the amount of gestation required for a child to survive outside the womb if it had to. And although I understand their reasoning: that this is when the fetus becomes (or can become) an "autonomous person", I believe that to be too far along in the process of development to reasonably avoid the kind of suffering that you refer to. (Keep in mind, however, that a fetus can be totally anesthetized and thereby feel nothing at all.) I think the cut-off should be sooner. But in those early stages, I do think that it must logically be the mother that has the right to make the decision on whether or not to continue with a pregnancy. It's her body, and it's her "sin" if it is a sin to commit. Not yours, and not mine.

If you don't know whether a baby experiences pain during slice and dice abortions then you should not support abortion until you find out.

 

[marke]

If none of us is "ever going to be righteous", then Jesus suffered and died for nothing.
We could have all just been Jewish Law keepers, falling short over and over again.
Thankfully, though, He provided us a way to "be in Him", thereby making all who are "in Him" righteous.

When we see Him then we shall be like Him.

1 John 3:2
Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.

 

[Gary K]

If none of us is "ever going to be righteous", then Jesus suffered and died for nothing.
We could have all just been Jewish Law keepers, falling short over and over again.
Thankfully, though, He provided us a way to "be in Him", thereby making all who are "in Him" righteous.

You need to do a study on the Hebrew concept of ga'al. It blows the "in Him" misconception out of the water. We didn't pay for our own sins by being "in Jesus" on the cross. Jesus died a substitutioary death according to the law of kinship expressed in the Hebrew laws concerning the ability of the closest relative of someone who had to sell his children, himself, his land, etc... to pay his debts to ransom them from slavery. The entire gospel is built around this for it is the legal reasoning behind the plan of salvation.

The idea is found throughout both testaments. Jesus' disciples talked about how they believed that Jesus was the one to ransom Isreal in Luke 24:13 as the Greek translated as redeem means to ransom. Paul uses the same terminology as well as all the gospel writers and all of the OT authors who spoke about the messiah to come. In fact the word ga'al is translated as Redeemer 18 times in the OT and every one is in reference to the messiah to come.

 

[annabenedetti]

Who is claiming that His words in the flesh should be less valued?

When you say "Jesus said (in RED words) that He came only to the lost sheep of house of Israel" and "Trying to limit [the Bible] to SOME of the words that He spoke while in the flesh," it's not hard to see the red words don't seem to carry the same weight with you, or maybe even applicable to you.

Do they have the same value to you? Apply to you? If they do, then I'm not sure why you're pursuing this. You're not arguing against my initial comment that people rarely read the red letter words, you're arguing about the significance of the red letter words.

 

[ok doser]

... people rarely read the red letter words ...

People rarely read ANY Scripture.

They should. They should read ALL of scripture. Repeatedly. Continuously. God speaks to them, God speaks to you, God speaks to me, through scripture.