Monday, July 14, 2008

Who's hurt most by moral failure?

We've talked before in this blog about how some believers insist on concrete answers about matters of faith while others have a greater comfort with leaving some questions up in the air. Naturally, that first group tends to think of moral rules as black and white. The others are more likely to see shades of gray.

But could these differences be based less on upbringing, theological preference or personality traits and more on what these groups stand to lose?

In a mostly political column in The Dallas Morning News, Rod Dreher makes this interesting observation in passing: "The poor and working class tend to prefer non-squishy religion prescribing a stark moral code — even if they struggle to live up to its demands. It's not hard to see why. Unlike ... social elites, folks living nearer the economic margins have far more to lose from individual and communal moral failure."

Is it true that moral failure hurts the lower classes more than it does those with wealth?

The individual moral failure of a man who abandons the children he fathered hurts those children and their mother, whatever their circumstances. The loss of his guidance and love will be felt by rich and poor alike. But the loss of monetary support can be devastating to a family living on the edge.

The communal moral failure of a nation that, for example, condones a corrupt judiciary will fall more heavily on those who are unable to pay bribes or pull strings.

But does that really account for the appeal of "non-squishy" religion? What do you think?

296 comments:

«Oldest   ‹Older   201 – 296 of 296   Newer›   Newest»
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

I am attracted to some Christians because of the love they seem to have. I can find something good in their religion and it kind of leads me to maybe accept a part of it. But 'Cock's and Danbo's comments cause me to see their religion (fundamental evangelical Christian) as something to be defeated. Probably not what their God would have wanted.

Anonymous said...

There are no "incorrect" interpretations of the Bible, but Danbo is right about the childish part. The Matthew passage raises extremely interesting questions about the authority to interpret Biblical law and the way to do it. Here's a start, Izzie: read Jesus' lines with a sacrastic tone of voice. Then with a tone of exasperation. Then with a tone of anger. Then with the dull tone of utter seriousness with which you started. Do you get the same meanings?

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

Danbo, do your homework.

Porn addiction doesn't exist. Women chose to do porn. Sex isn't, and never was, usually an act of love. Sex is an animal urge.

Some men and women have a problem with looking at too much porn. Most Americans have a problem eating too much. Some watch too much sports, some spend too much time blogging, etc.. Porn addiction is not mentioned in the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. It is very often mentioned by Christians who have problems with nudity, sex and being horny.

This faux morality is harmful to marriages because many churches advise women to leave husbands who enjoy porn.

Since the "pornification" of America and in spite of the harmful influence of many Christians, the divorce rate is the same and the number of rapes is down.

Anonymous said...

'Cock, your personal website and redstate.com blog are resumes because you used them to show your abilities.

I expect more truth from someone who claims to know the Truth. A testimony to your religion's weakness.

Anonymous said...

'Cock - "I was spanked as a child, yet, finished college, law school, built a career in law, business and writing and raised two children that finished college."

Now he's an accomplished child beater and his kids will likely be child beaters as well.

Catholic101 said...

pornstudent argues, "Porn addiction doesn't exist. Women chose to do porn. Sex isn't, and never was, usually an act of love. Sex is an animal urge."

You sound very much like the alcoholic who denies that he has a problem with liquor. You're too close to the problem, I suppose.

Maybe to you, sex is an animal urge. To me and to my wife (and countless others) it is something much more meaningful than that. I pity you.

Anonymous said...

danbo,

The American Psychiatric Association does not think porn addiction exists. This is a fact that you ignore. Your denial of it makes me think you ignore other facts.

You don't know how much I look at porn, yet you insist I'm a porn addict. Your lack of sincerity makes me think you are insincere in your religion as well.

As a matter of fact, sex is an animal urge. For you not to see this makes me think you can't see much else that is obvious.

I love my wife, too. I tell her I love her, I tell her she's pretty, I encourage her, etc.. But when we have sex, like everyone else, it's because we're horny.

Has your religion made you so phony that you can't even admit to yourself that it is animal lust that gets your pecker hard?

Catholic101 said...

Pornstudent, I feel all the more sorry for you AND your wife. Crass and vulgar only begin to describe you. But then again, that's one of the symptoms of pornography addiction.

Anonymous said...

I don't believe it when you say you feel sorry for us. It's just a part of your come-on. I don't feel sorry for you even though I think your pathetic.

Iztok said...

Gamecock: "I was spanked as a child, yet, finished college, law school, built a career in law, business and writing and raised two children that finished college."

Wow, imagine how fare you would have gone without abuse if you came thus far with being abused.

Iztok said...

"A more childish and incorrect interpretation of Mt 15:1-9 cannot be found, Izzie. Do your homework."

Danbo, Bible is clear "For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death."

No room for interpretation. Jesus was complaining that people were not following God's commandment about killing kids that curse parents.

Just some of us are more moral then to follow God's commandments.

Iztok said...

"The Matthew passage raises extremely interesting questions about the authority to interpret Biblical law and the way to do it."

It is simple, if Bible is inerrant the it is written so that it can only be interpreted the correct way. So all interpretations are correct. If God didn't want any misinterpretations of the Bible then I am sure he would have in his infinite wisdom made it so. That is unless Bible is not really God inspired and/or God is not all knowing - which would make more sense altogether.

Catholic101 said...

Iztok wrote, "Bible is clear "For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death.""

Based upon the quote you provided, what the Bible is saying is that children who curse their mother and father shall 'die.' It does not say they shall be killed by their parents or by the authorities. It says they shall 'die.'

Die 'spiritually' -- anyone who dishonors his own mother and father (without repenting) shall have died spiritually in the eyes of God. You can't enter the kingdom of Heaven if you tell your own parents to 'go to hell.'

What Jesus was telling the Pharisees in Mt 15 was "How dare you cast judgment simply because we don't 'cermoniously' wash before eating."

What He is saying is why not judge yourselves according to the same law, you who have told your own parents that you have nothing for them because you have sought to serve God alone. He is saying, remember the law; should you not die for your sin?

Jesus would have then said, "Ridiculous, isn't it? In the same way it is ridiculous that you chastise us for not washing 'ceremoniously.'"

[It should be noticed that it doesn't say the disciples didn't wash, it says they didn't cleanse/purify themselves according to the law before eating. Different animal.]

Catholic101 said...

Iztok wrote, "Just some of us are more moral then [sic] to follow God's commandments."

If that could be true (how silly), it wouldn't be you, dear boy.

Iztok said...

Danbo: Jesus was referring to old commandment from OT. (See Ex.21:15, Lev.20:9, Dt.21:18-21)

As it is obvious from the context of that paragraph.

Catholic101 said...

Iztok babbles, "It is simple, if Bible is inerrant the it is written so that it can only be interpreted the correct way. So all interpretations are correct. If God didn't want any misinterpretations of the Bible then I am sure he would have in his infinite wisdom made it so. That is unless Bible is not really God inspired and/or God is not all knowing - which would make more sense altogether."

Ahh, the old trap of man-judging-God. How many souls mourn in Hell because of this sin of pride?

God speaks His word through the Bible and through those who love Him. Just as Satan speaks through people like you and pornstudent, Izzie. Evil exists in the world because we allow it to exist -- some (wink, wink) allow it to exist a bit more willingly than others.

I pray for your eternal soul, because Christ came for all of us -- sinners though we are. But Satan won't leave you until you give him a good swift kick in the arse.

Iztok said...

Danbo: "If that could be true (how silly), it wouldn't be you, dear boy."

Matthew 7:1

I know, you go by 1 Cor.2:15 anyway.

Catholic101 said...

Iztok wrote, "Jesus was referring to old commandment from OT. (See Ex.21:15, Lev.20:9, Dt.21:18-21)"

...and pointing out that the Pharisees had misinterpreted it. As do you.

Iztok said...

Danbo: "Ahh, the old trap of man-judging-God. How many souls mourn in Hell because of this sin of pride?"

Can you provide of any evidence of souls in Hell? Because if you can't your whole point is well... pointless.

Catholic101 said...

Iztok wrote, "Matthew 7:1 I know, you go by 1 Cor.2:15 anyway."

It is truly written, even the Evil One can quote Scripture.

Iztok said...

Danbo: "...and pointing out that the Pharisees had misinterpreted it. As do you."

Sure, they did not kill their kids for cursing their parents. He was telling that that not killing kids for cursing is not right.

Catholic101 said...

Iztok wrote, "Can you provide of any evidence of souls in Hell?"

I can. Your soul is already in Hell, Iztok. So deep in despair and without the greatest love in your life that you --among other things, I am sure -- seek out blogs where people come to share the joy of their faith and attempt to beat them down.

This, though, only intensifies your feeling of loneliness and despair, because your vitriol cannot succeed here. Knowing that there are people who exist to love their Lord and God and look forward to the day we shall be with Him is intensely uncomfortable for those like you.

Misery loves company. If you were truly happy, you wouldn't be here trying to make everyone else as miserable as you are so that you can feel like you're not the only fool -- you're not, believe me.

Your unhappiness pervades your entire existence resulting in nothing but raw anger and hate -- the essence of Satan himself. The only difference between the hell your soul is in now versus the Hell you are ehaded for is that once there you can find no reprieve.

Let go of your anger, let go of your hate for God, breathe in, breathe out and open yourself to His love. It doesn't hurt, I assure you.

The Hell you are in now is escapable.

Anonymous said...

Danbo babbles the words of his imaginary dictator.

Danbo's the one telling us how miserable we are. Maybe he's the lonely one.

Anonymous said...

Danbo - "Let go of your anger, let go of your hate for God, breathe in, breathe out and open yourself to His love. It doesn't hurt, I assure you."

Sounds like he's dying. A painless suicide. All that's left for him is his dictator's will.

Anonymous said...

Hey Danbo,
I'm updating my blog in between commenting here. I'll have some new porn for you in 30 minutes.

Iztok said...

Danbo, you do talk a lot but provide again no evidence of souls in hell. Try again, this time with some real EVIDENCE.

Anonymous said...

Ask Pornstudent about "The Devil in Miss Jones."

Anonymous said...

Danbo cries out, "Oh, please dictator God, deliver me from my despair. I am so miserable. I am so lonely."

Anonymous said...

Danbo pleads, "Please, dictator God. I admit I'm not worthy to live and I deserve the worst punishment imaginable. I'll do anything you say. I accept that everyone who doesn't call you dictator will be tortured forever.
Whatever doubts I ever have about your authority I will immediately deny. I can't live without you, dictator God, please save me."

Anonymous said...

Public Notice: No intelligent atheist -- indeed, no intelligent person -- shares Iztok's reading of Matt. 15:1-9. The passage is obviously not about executions or lack thereof. We regret any association with this kind of buffoonery.

Anonymous said...

After surrendering to dictator God, Danbo feels peace and some joy. He believes dictator God has saved his miserable person. The dictator receives his subjects as much as his subjects accept him. Dictator God has a grand plan. He gives the world's Danbos a purpose. The lonely and unloved feel loved. Eternal life replaces the fear of death. The dictator's subjects have found a way to be happy--as long as they keep believing.

Anonymous said...

So what?

Anonymous said...

Is there some part of that question you need to have repeated?

Anonymous said...

Dictator God's subjects have tortured and killed those who wouldn't surrender to their Lord. They have tortured and killed scientists who have discovered realities of the Universe that weaken their belief in the imaginary.

Anonymous said...

We ask dictator God's subjects, "Did you torture and kill thousands of people because they did not accept your belief in God. Did you kill scientists for sharing their discoveries of the Universe?"

Their defense, "Stalin murdered more people than we did."

Anonymous said...

Pornstudent, what does your wife do when she gets horny and you're not around -- and with whom? After all, it's just animal lust, right?

Iztok said...

Anonymous: "what does your wife do when she gets horny and you're not around -- and with whom?"

Does it matter? Something like that is between two consenting adults. If they want to have an open marriage, so be it. Works for some, doesn't for others. Who are we to regulate that?

No Kings,
Iztok

Anonymous said...

Anonymous,

My wife masturbates when she gets horny and I'm not around. Sometimes she masturbates when I am around.

Why doesn't she have sex with other guys/women? There are several reasons. Concern about STDs, not wanting the emotional risks and complications, concern for my jealousy and not having the desire.

I guess your reason for asking is to show that sex is more than animal lust. Yeah, there's the need to have something to clean up the mess, some participants may want a pregnancy and STD inhibitor, a firm bed is nice, no distractions, brushed teeth and mouthwash, recently washed genitals, and love for the person we have sex with is good (for me anyway). Still, it's "just" animal lust that gets my pecker hard.

Anonymous said...

Iztok

What do you mean by "regulate?" What about what's best for the children? Could there be no more clear example for Jane's question than this where the perpetrators of moral failure harm innocents not yet morally accountable?

Iztok said...

Gamecock: Original question doesn't involve kids. I am assuming that Pornstudent's wife doesn't abuse them as you suggest you did yours.

Anonymous said...

Moral failure is parents telling their children that human nature is evil and that they will go to Hell if they don't surrender to Jesus. We need to "regulate" these parents. Some victims of Christian child abuse.

Anonymous said...

The abuse continues:

Previously spanked as a child (PSAAC)Railroad carman and Baptist begats GC's Dad, who is spanked as a child. GC's Baptist PSAAC Dad is valedictorian of his HS and goes on to be Sportswriter and 3rd VP of railroad. GC, also a Baptist, is spanked as a child and goes no to practice law and write for major Dead-Tree MSM newspaper and co-found major political websites. GC and his brother (also a Baptist PSAAC) raise two children apeice, all of whom are either in college, finished college or are performing well in HS.

No charges of child abuse are pending nor have any such charges ever ben brought against or by any of the above.

O the humanity!

Anonymous said...

Porn student:

Stalin tried to regulate religious child abuse. It was called the New Soviet Man. A little too ambitious for today's more conservative climate. But I bet Danbo would promise not to torture and kill any more scientists, if you asked him nicely.

Anonymous said...

Bob

Be prepared for being accused of laziness by filthdisciple. Wise "Brevity is the soul of wit" comments with humour is smutprotege's definition of sloth.

Anonymous said...

I was going to suggest that, just to be on the safe side, Porn student should keep his wife away from Gamecocks, but now I guess I won't.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

'Cock - "God gets to be God."

Meaning God gets to do what he wants and we shouldn't criticize him.

If a dictator ordered us, "Do not be horny or I'll punish you," we'd think the dictator a creep. Since we are all horny at times, we'd wonder what kind of punishment the dictator has for us and if he's able to catch us.

We may be afraid of him, but we'd realize that this dictator hasn't said anything in two thousand years. And people are everywhere calling him a creep, yet, he doesn't do anything. He is weak.

His followers tell us we may live happily now, but when we die, we will go to a lake of fire where we will scream in agony forever.

Does our fear of Hell cause us to bow our knee to the dictator? Do we believe the dictator's followers? Or do we take a chance on living our lives free? I choose to be free.

Anonymous said...

Quite the contrary, God allows you to be your own God and to criticize the actual God. And if you can figure out how to gain eternal life and create your own universe, have at it.

Anonymous said...

Bob,

I had to google the "New Soviet Man." The Soviets were really into molding people into what they supposed was the ideal person. I have a very different view of people. I like diversity. I want everyone to be themselves. I know there are many who want others to fit a mold and this view is part of what they are. But it is hard to not be angry with them, especially when they think that they are better and deserve privileges that those different from them aren't allowed.

I think that people like Danbo and 'Cock would want laws that imprison people for porn. They'd likely want sodomy illegal. They would change the Constitution to fit what they think is the will of God. They have their reasons, as did the inquisitors and witch hunters. I don't trust them. Several hundred years ago they would have been in the cheering crowd, approving the burning of heretics and witches.

Anonymous said...

Of course Iztok and anyone else with a mortgage, just as that mortgage has only one interpretation, so the books of the Bible and the US Constitution, have the meaning the author(s), signers and ratifiers intended to convey.

Anonymous said...

Porn student:

Unless that chapter of the God Delusion is tongue in cheek,
Dawkins advocates a Soviet-style "regulation" of autonomous family life to prevent impressionable children from being abusively coerced into the religion of their parents. No? If you like diversity, why not look for it in the religious traditions that you lazily lump into one straw-man of fundamentalism? I'm just saying is all.

Anonymous said...

Wrong Bob

I do not favor 5 lawyers usurping the right of We the People to capital L, Liberty, i.e. self government, i.e. consent by the governed, by re-writing the Constitution which clearly left police powers over such issues as porn, obscenity, marriage, and sodomy to the states.

Laws of this kind should be up to states and localities and their particular standards, unless We the People deem an issue so important that we pass a Constitutional Amendment.

I would prefer one defining marriage nationally as one man/one woman.

But as to other issues, I actually preferred the situation we had with regard to sodomy, fornication and adultery in which it was on the books as the standard but was hardly ever (2 times in 100 years and then by accident) enforced.

Laws against adultery were sometimes used as leverage in divorce settlements, but no one was charged and punished.

In any event, I would not ban all porn at all. Only would regulate time, place and manner of distribution.

Anonymous said...

Whether one agrees or disagrees with Bob, the guy makes substantive, thoughful comments and has a sense of humor.

God bless

Anonymous said...

'Cock - "God allows you to be your own God and to criticize the actual God."

Dictator God won't punish me for calling him a creep? There isn't an eternal lake of fire for nonbelievers?

"And if you can figure out how to gain eternal life and create your own universe, have at it."

I don't think I'll be figuring out eternal life, but I'll try to live in the moment and appreciate my humanness.

I haven't a need to create my own Universe.

Anonymous said...

Bob,

I read The God Delusion but only vaguely recall your reference.

"If you like diversity, why not look for it in the religious traditions that you lazily lump into one straw-man of fundamentalism?"

You're right. Will do.

Anonymous said...

Chapter 9 of The God Delusion equates relgious instruction of children to child abuse in ways that I find anathema to human dignity, if not intended in jest. It's hard to tell because Dawkins' sense of humor is often as absent as his diety. The stuff about "memes" was pretty stupid, too, if you ask me. But the rest was good, especially the parts that extoll the virtues of Bible study. You really have to be an atheist to do the Bible justice.

The last was in jest. Sort of.

Anonymous said...

test2

Iztok said...

Perspective of someone who used to believe in Jesus:

Perhaps worth reading.

http://unreasonablefaith.com/about/

Anonymous said...

This blog reminds me of putting a potato in a microwave and watching it explode.

Except instead of a potato it's several enormous egos.

Iztok said...

Anonymous: "Except instead of a potato it's several enormous egos."

I agree! I find the mere notion that this universe was somehow designed with us as a center of it in mind very egoistic.

Anonymous said...

These people with oversized egos should try to more like Jesus and me.

Catholic101 said...

All praise and glory to God our Father, the Creator of the Universe and to our Lord Jesus Christ who suffered and died for us so that we may have eternal life. All praise and glory to the most Holy Spirit who works the wonders of our God through each one of us who have an open heart.

What a great life!

Iztok said...

Let us sing praise to the Flying Spaghetti Monster, for He is a loving God. Of His might and dominion, there is no compare; of His mercy and deliciousness, there is no equal. No other god can challenge Him; in the taste test, He is invincible. Through His pasta, He has blessed us with everlasting life, and holy is His Name. For He is the Flying Spaghetti Monster: the One, True, and Most High God, creator of man and midgit, giver of pasta, giver of sauce, from age to holy age; not created He was, but ever He lives, through the glory of spaghetti, now and forever.

R'Amen.

Catholic101 said...

Izzie, were you born stupid, or is it the result of years of study?

Anonymous said...

Years of praying, it looks like.

Catholic101 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Catholic101 said...

Izzie, what is a midgit. Is that what you call someone who is not a full-blown git? A term of self-endearment? What?

Iztok said...

Danbo: "Izzie, were you born stupid, or is it the result of years of study?"

Flying Spaghetti Monster is real. One just needs to have faith. It is obvious that it is He who created God and thus resulted in everything created in this universe and beyond. It is widely accepted that FSM has even larger balls then Christian God.

"what is a midgit. Is that what you call someone who is not a full-blown git?"

According to The Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster would enlighten you that Midgit is first sentient being being created in full pirate regalia.

Danbo, now questions for you:

What are satyrs? (Isaiah 13:21)

What are fiery serpents? (Numbers 21:6)

What are cockatrices? (Jeremiah 8:17)

What are unicorns? (Isaiah 34:7)

What are dragons? (Malachi 1:3)

You doubt existence of any of the above?

Anonymous said...

You guys are funny. I got to hand it to you, Iztok. You don't let Danbo's barbs slow you down. And you're able to keep from throwing the insults back at him. You are nicer. Maybe I'll convert to atheism.

Iztok said...

Peter: "Maybe I'll convert to atheism."

No need to convert. Simple skepticism and through reading of the Bible will do the trick. When one realizes why they reject all other gods and able to impartially apply the same to theirs most work is done.

It is really good and liberating I can tell you that.

Catholic101 said...

Izzie asked, "What are satyrs (Isaiah 13:21)?"

Satyrs: in the popular mind, demons of goatlike form dwelling in ruins, symbols of immorality; [cf Lev 17:7.]

Do I believe in demons? Absolutely.

Iztok said...

Danbo, what about other monsters in the Bible?

In my opinion midgits are just as real as monsters I've mentioned earlier. I have just as much evidence as you.

Catholic101 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Catholic101 said...

Izzie asked, "What are fiery serpents? (Numbers 21:6)

Fiery, re: poisonous, re: burns like hell when they bite.

Izzie babbled on, "What are cockatrices? (Jeremiah 8:17)"

Cockatrices = poisonous snakes.

What are unicorns? (Isaiah 34:7)

Isaiah 34:7 reads, "Wild oxen shall be struck down with fatlings, and bullocks with bulls; Their land shall be soaked with blood, and their earth greasy with fat."

Izzie drooled, "What are dragons? (Malachi 1:3)"

Malachi 1:3 reads, "Was not Esau Jacob's brother? says the LORD: yet I loved Jacob, but hated Esau; I made his mountains a waste, his heritage a desert for jackals."

I do indeed believe in 1) poisonous snakes, 2) oxen and bulls and 3) jackals.

Next....

Iztok said...

Danbo:

Isaiah 34:7 And the unicorns shall come down with them, and the bullocks with the bulls; and their land shall be soaked with blood, and their dust made fat with fatness.

Malachi 1:3 And I hated Esau, and laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness.

cockatrice: a: a legendary serpent that is hatched by a reptile from a cock's egg and that has a deadly glance

Mythological creatures.

Catholic101 said...

Izzie, you're reading from a "protestant" Bible. Don't blame me. Blame Marty Luther.

Catholic101 said...

Sorry, Izzie, I don't see the word cockatrice or unicorn in my bible.

Dragon is used, mainly in depicting Satan -- whether literally or figuratively. But speaking of dragons. They exist, even today. Please look up "kimodo dragons."

Catholic101 said...

Oh, by the way, Einstein-tok, the word cockatrice has its origins in 14th centrury French and Latin. I believe the books of the "Catholic" (Catholic = Universal) Bible were written a bit before that time. Don't blame me that Marty and his gang put ina word that had no meaning when the Biblical books were written.

Catholic101 said...

Unicorn -- word has its origins in the 13th century -- again, a bit after the books of the Catholic Bible were written.

Next....

Anonymous said...

Jane

Let me, after much contemplation, provide a more complete answer to your blog question by posing the following question:

Who is helped more by virtue, i.e. or moral success, if you will?

I would suggest that most wealthy families got that way via eschewing sin, relatively speaking for at least one generation and probably more and that most of those who earn higher incomes do so, at least in part, because they work hard and play by the rules instead of wasting their earnings and time on bohemian pursuits.

But then again, don't we often see a phenomenon amongst the affluent in persons and nations, as they sometimes grow soft. Don't we see this in Europe and the Kennedys in Mass?

Jesus, camel and needle come to mind.

Ironically, it is the churches that draw bright lines that are and have been growing for decades now and the mushy so-called mainline ones that are dying.

God bless

Anonymous said...

Jane

(I put this answer on my blog below.)

And in closing, all are helped by virtue. Certainly eschewing drugs, crime, sex outside marriage and its attendant results of disease and illegitimacy, and guilt rendering abortions, increase the odds of making a better physical living and are the key to receiving God's gift as a spiritual being.

Mike DeVine, Legal Editor
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson


http://gamecock.blogtownhall.com/2008/07/25/who_is_helped_more_by_virtue.thtml

Anonymous said...

At least Iz and Danbo proved that talking asses exist!

Anonymous said...

Comment imported from Conservabear at

http://www.townhall.com/youropinion/comments.aspx?g=3f3c431b-59c6-48e6-a45f-6adbd08485ed

I agree with you and would add.

With the anointing of the Holy Spirit a believer than realizes one has choices and free-will, one is no longer bound by sin but is given the grace through faith in Jesus Christ to rise above any occasion of sin or temptation because one now has the strength and conviction of the Holy Spirit. Virtue is therefore attainable and desirable and brings blessings and growth for all rich, poor, middle class, scholar, cleric or working-man and or any combination of the above.

Next Topic:
Matthew 19:24 (New King James Version)
New King James Version (NKJV)
Copyright © 1982 by Thomas Nelson, Inc.

24 And again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.”

Anonymous said...

McCain committed adultery with his current wife, Cindy Hensley. "He married Cindy in May 1980 -- just a month after dumping Carol and securing a divorce... McCain followed his young, millionairess wife back to Arizona where her father helped catapult McCain into politics."

Iztok said...

Danbo, sorry I just figured out that if your God would object KJV he would have prevented its printing. So from my perspective one of the most popular versions of the Bible in US is just as representative as any other. Unless your God disagrees with its content and destroys it. Just mere fact that it exists seems to me that he agrees with it.

Anonymous said...

Elizabeth Edwards?

Anonymous said...

Gamecock:

Does the "kingdom of God" in the Matthew quote refer to a place where individual souls go when individuals die, or to a transformed Earth after end times and a raising of the dead, or to our current Earth as it is unfolding? There is more about this passage that I find hard to grasp, but serious discussion seems to have a short shelf life around here, so little bits at a time.

Anonymous said...

Bob

I believe, based on the scholarship of theologians I respect and who respect the original meaning of the authors, that it means a spiritual Kingdom that believers can experience here and on the other side of eternity in the perfected way.

Anonymous said...

Gamecock:

Quite a lot in one sentence. Thank you. I am inclined toward the humanist argument that the eternal prospect (either individual or end-times) detracts from the meaningfulness of the here-and-now experience. But I can see ways in which the experience could be enriched, as well, by that kind of hopefulness. What, then, is the problem with wealth for purposes of entry (to any version of the Kingdom)?

Anonymous said...

Bob

Nothing is wrong with wealth, per se. It is the LOVE of money, not money, that is the root of evil. Money just provides a convenient vehicle for the embodiment and acting out of pride, of following the temptation in the Garden, that "ye shall be as Gods". It is easier to be a God on Earth with money.

more later

Anonymous said...

I wonder what would happen if the lot of you actually attempted to consider the merits of each other's positions rather than going to work on destroying them as quickly as possible and by any means necessary?

By the tone of this conversation you'd think that there was at least one person in the room who could really speak with certainty.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous is a part of the lot of us. Of this, I am certain, after seriously considering his argument of course!

smile

Iztok said...

"I wonder what would happen if the lot of you actually attempted to consider the merits of each other's positions rather than going to work on destroying them as quickly as possible and by any means necessary?"

Anonymous, I don't know for the others but while I really do love Christians it is Christianity that one dislikes. You know, love the sinner (Christian), hate the sin (Christianity). It is not like non-religious are sinners, that is religious concept but just to put it on their level (homosexuals vs. homosexuality etc.). (Thus by definition rest of us are simply not sinners.)

«Oldest ‹Older   201 – 296 of 296   Newer› Newest»