Stanek weekend question: Is President Obama delusional?
There probably isn’t a pro-life activist alive who didn’t think what I thought when watching President Obama give his speech about Syria this week. To garner support for his plan to attack that country, Obama implored the American people to view the images of innocent children who had been poisoned to death by their own president. It was clear Obama wanted us to emotionally invest in their tortured deaths:
The images from this massacre are sickening: Men, women, children lying in rows, killed by poison gas. Others foaming at the mouth, gasping for breath. A father clutching his dead children, imploring them to get up and walk. On that terrible night, the world saw in gruesome detail the terrible nature of chemical weapons….
Indeed, I’d ask every member of Congress, and those of you watching at home tonight, to view those videos of the attack, and then ask: What kind of world will we live in if the United States of America sees a dictator brazenly violate international law with poison gas, and we choose to look the other way?
I thought, So President Obama endorses the use of graphic images of murdered children? Does he not hear what he is saying? Does he not think of the graphic images of aborted babies?
Furthermore, as Francis Beckwith noted on Facebook about another line in Obama’s speech:
Sounds like the President has changed his mind about supporting the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act: “To my friends on the left, I ask you to reconcile your belief in freedom and dignity for all people with those images of children writhing in pain and going still on a cold hospital floor.”
It is becoming more difficult to understand how President Obama could so wholeheartedly support all forms of abortion, to the moment of birth and beyond, while thinking he has the moral superiority to condemn other countries that kill children – on a much smaller scale.
Sometimes I have thought Obama must simply compartmentalize abortion in his mind; he has a purposeful blind spot.
But I read something this week, II Thessalonians 2:10-11, and it hit me a new way:
They perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie.
We know the destruction of the wicked begins in this life (I Corinthians 1:18) and ends in the beyond, and at a certain point God allows the lusts of evil people to control them (Romans 1:24). As the quoted verse indicates, as part of His judgment God either makes these people delusional or removes His holy protection, any semblance of His counsel, so they become delusional.
So I have come to wonder if Barack Obama is delusional? I have always given him credit for being an intelligent person who was just purposefully ignoring the reality that preborns are human, and that abortion murders them.
But in actuality, Obama may have come to a point where he is delusional. He really may not see it.
Your thoughts?
[Bottom image (click to enlarge) via Created Equal]
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
I prefer the term “evil” to the term “delusional”.
President Obama, like a lot of Americans, appears to not believe a fetus is a person, thus the distinction. I don’t agree with him, and you folks don’t – but this basic concept essentially negates anything else in the article.
It’s just like Peta – they could write an identical post today about suffering, because they see animals on the same level.
I think anybody asks if a pro-choicer is delusional (or vice versa – a pro-choicer saying that about a pro-lifer) shouldn’t have arguments/debate about the subject, because they obviously don’t understand the fundaments, or understand how reasonable people can disagree.
Let me say it like this. I’m a Christian. If a Christian friend of mine went around yelling that all non-Christians were the stupidest, most illogical people in the world, I would want that friend of mine to shut the he** up – because they are doing more harm to the overall debate than doing good.
Ex, aren’t you tired of being the waterboy?
I’m tired of a generation of people that can’t have any sort of debate without degrading the other side, calling names, or calling people evil. That’s tiring.
He’s not delusional, and neither are other proaborts. They know abortion kills a human being, they just intentionally blind themselves to the reality, which is why they’re against us using pictures for “emotional appeal”.
I’m not tired. I’m just getting started. I refuse to engage in psychoanalyzing a man who recognizes baby killing as as the undergirding of his social justice platform. Ascribing the term “evil” to someone MEANS something, and if it not ascribable to this man, then we might as well just excise it from the dictionary altogether.
Obama uses the images of those children for their emotional appeal and because they may help serve his purpose. To him they are objects to serve a purpose and nothing more. Syrian children have been dying from bombs and bullets for several months. Apparently that’s more “civilized” than gas.
Do not project your thought processes, emotions, and reasoning onto this man. Don’t assume he thinks and reasons as you do. He painted himself into a corner and was looking for a face saving out. If this meant killing Syrian children with missiles he wouldn’t have given it a second thought.
Shorter Ex-GOP: Abortion isn’t evil, because Obama. Also, a person should never opine, lament, instruct, or reflect on abortion. Only “debate” is allowed, because politics is everything.
Obama is evil and he is also willfully delusional. Willfully, because the facts are all there and he is not a stupid man (by IQ standards anyway) but he chooses to believe a lie instead. Simple.
I am doing a Bible study right now, and this Bible study stresses the similarity between sin and self-deception. It notes how self-deception is a huge part of sin. In order to sin we need to lie to ourselves – this Bible study notes. From this perspective, it makes sense that President Obama would be deceiving himself about the truth that abortion is a sin similar to the child killings in Syria.
All of us sinners are delusional to some extent or another – unfortunately for President Obama his sin and delusion is in the public eye. It is harder for the sinner to see his own sin so it is good that websites like this point this out to him. It would great if we could do that for each other more often as well.
I thought people weren’t evil, only their actions. People contradict themselves all over the place here.
I don’t know about delusional, but it’s quite disappointing he won’t advocate for unborn children like he does for born children.
It does seem to beg the question though, if Obama is delusional for advocating for living children while not caring about the preborn, are people equally delusional for caring for the preborn if they don’t seem to give a rip about living children both here, and in other countries?
“Quite disappointing”????
No, Jack, it’s quite disappointing when Pottery Barn doesn’t carry the pima cotton sheets anymore that I like so much. It is an outright TRAGEDY that this atrocity of abortion is championed by the most powerful man in the world (well, besides Putin).
Gawd I am sick of this blog. It is disappointing. It’s also tragic. I could even call it evil (though I wouldn’t call Obama himself evil, because for some crazy reason Christians tell me that people are separate from their actions). All those are perfectly apt descriptions and not worthy of self-righteous tirades that people didn’t use your preferred word choice.
Hey Jack – you are supposed to know we are Christians by our love!
You feeling it?
if Obama is delusional for advocating for living children while not caring about the preborn, are people equally delusional for caring for the preborn if they don’t SEEM to give a rip about living children both here, and in other countries?
No, not seeming to care isn’t enough. But they would be delusional if they truly don’t care about living (both born and unborn are living) children both here and in other countries.
Lrning – and for the record, I believe a group of people who won’t intervene in darn near any international situation (because we can’t police the world), or who make arguments that health care for children is not a right – I believe those folks truly don’t care about living children.
Heh, Ex. If people were consistent about it then it probably wouldn’t bother me as much. Either we’re all evil (because we all sin, repeatedly if I understand right) or all of us are made in the image of God, meaning we’re all sinners who do evil things but aren’t evil ourselves. I don’t think there’s an Obama clause in the Bible, that he’s the one person who’s intrinsically evil. It doesn’t make any sense like that.
I don’t see how people expect me to believe the “love the sinner, hate the sin” thing when they’re willing to call other humans evil though. Some Christians I do believe just hate sin but love other people. Others not so much.
Since none of us are good in and of ourselves (http://www.biblestudytools.com/gw/luke/18-19.html) we can say we all have a touch of evil.
But I wouldn’t say that about Obama. He’s just willfully ignorant.
Hey Ex-GOP, since you never look the other way when people aren’t as gung-ho for the poor and the Holy Grail of Obamacare, I won’t look the other way when the prez ignores millions of babies being slaughtered.
Hans – my only point of my first post was that I don’t think smart people advance anything in the world of debate by simply calling the other side delusional, stupid, idiots, evil, etc…
Rise above it good sir, rise above it.
Based solely on what you wrote and not all the assumptions that may be behind the words, I agree.
Edited to note my above refers to Ex-GOP’s post of 6:16.
Jack, regarding your 6:21 post: You would probably find that not all Christians define sin and evil exactly the same, which might account for what you think are inconsistencies. Also, who said Obama was intrinsically evil? Some people are blessed to be able to see Christ in everyone, no matter how evil they may appear to be. Others, not so much. What % of a person’s choices, actions, thoughts need to reflect evil before you think that is a term someone can use to describe another? Or is it never appropriate in your opinion?
Oh, I do try to rise above it, Ex. But Obama is delusional. Not in a mental failing kind of way, but self-delusional. He just doesn’t give it a second thought. Just like a man-on-the-street interviewee who doesn’t know the state capital and doesn’t care to know.
It’s human nature to pick on the smaller flaws when we have no way of combatting the big ones. That’s why I think of Assad as a “camel-necked” disgrace to his profession. (I think he was an opthamologist like Rand Paul. :) )
Or why I obsess on Obama’s speech impediment (He whistles on his “esses.”). But we won’t forget that he’s so myopically a “champion of women’s rights” that he cares not a whit when they are being slaughtered both in and out of the womb. (Women were young once, were they not?)
He doesn’t really care about children. Just voters and supporters, who can make his caring worth the while.
And see Hans – I see both parties as just caring about voters and supporters quite frankly- I don’t see the fundamental difference at the end of the day. Most Democratic politicians are fine with 100% of abortions, and most Republicans these days are fine with about 98% of abortions.
I don’t want to get in a long debate but here are two possibilities for the contradicting messages/verbal statements made by Christians:
1) Not everyone is as precise in their thinking or with their use of language. Some of us, myself included, often fail to make the distinction between the sinner and their action. Sometime the passion or outrage at certain immoral acts causes me to label the person instead of the action.
2) Not all Christians share the same doctrines. Some denominations do not make this distinction and/or some denominations believe there are evil people
“What % of a person’s choices, actions, thoughts need to reflect evil before you think that is a term someone can use to describe another? Or is it never appropriate in your opinion?”
I don’t think it’s particularly appropriate to call people themselves evil. I don’t see what good it does. I’ve never fixed any bad behaviors by being told I’m a bad person, don’t see what the point is.
And plus, I think it’s really just an excuse for some people to act holier-than-thou. “Well, I might have cheated on my wife but at least I’m not gay!”- that kind of stuff. I think it’s horribly self-righteous. It’s basically just another flawed human being sticking up their nose and deciding this other person’s sins are just so much worse than anything that THEY could possibly do.
I don’t care if you are a child’s teacher, physician, counselor, babysitter, pastor, neighbor, parent, or president of his country, you are delusional if you expect me to believe you truly care about a child whose death you promoted while he was in the safety of his mother’s womb.
Wait..wait. I thought pro-life conservatives were hypocritcal b/c they were war mongers. Now it’s b/c they don’t support wars? Give me a break. The Syria situation has made for some strange bedfellows on both sides of the aisle, and I’m personally happy to see that. It deserves more than a partisan response. The rest of your premise is bull too. All but the most strident minimal government libertarians support making sure children have access to health care.
As for Obama being evil, only God knows the ultimate state of his soul. What we can and do know is that he is deeply committed to promoting and supporting the repulsive evil of abortion. He has blood on his hands for his actions in that regard. I agree with the others who said he’s willfully blind rather than delusional.
Jack – There are no inconsistencies. But you stumbled on it: The self-righteous are evil.
I’m seriously never going to understand you people or the religion.
ex-GOP,
Rading this thread, I agree that you never tire of carrying the water for Satan. Playing the Devil’s advocate, you have BECOME the Devil’s advocate. And no, it isn’t name-calling, no more than Jesus calling the Pharisees “vipers’ brood”, “hypocrites”, and “whitewashed tombs.” Was Jesus being judgmental when He told them that they were going to Hell and dragging others down with them?
In advocating for the slaughter of babies, your vision has become so clouded and distorted that it is laughable to see you pontificating about intelligent discourse and Christian virtue– laughable in a truly tragic way because you’ll be joining the Pharisees whenever God calls you home, lest you repent. You’re not fit to questin Jill’s intellect or integrity by your snarking at her question on this thread. So, after years of ading your own delusional ideations, here’s a simple lesson for you.
Christians ARE supposed to judge behavior. In fact, discernment is a gift of the Holy Spirit. When Jesus said to judge not, lest we be judged, He was talking about condemning others with an unforgiving heart, which is why He followed that teaching by saying that the manner in which we judge others will be the manner in which we are judged. However, discerning evil is foundational in the spiritual life. So is fraternal correction, which requires discerning and correctly labeling behavior for the benefit of hose who are on their way to Hell.
To Jill’s question, yes Obama is intelligent. Most humans who engage in malignant evil usually are. Delusional? Most latter day messiahs usually are too.
Get your head together GOP. Satan’s waterboy is hardly a legacy worth carrying into eternity.
I don’t know how anyone can fight for the most basic rights of all humans and not hurt all the time. My head hurts, my heart hurts… I am tired. Lord, give me rest. Lord, help me to be strengthened and to be love. Lord, we need you.
We need God so so much.
The delusion is the comparison of the Syrian children with abortion.
But, delusion is not a crime.
Obama is no dummy. He is a very smart man. And he knows exactly whats up. Unfortunately the sheep lining up to hear his words don’t know up from down.
Jack, I don’t know who is saying people aren’t evil, only actions but the Bible is very clear that eventually some people become so engrossed in sin and absolutely refuse to repent that God indeed hands them over to a “reprobate mind”. God says our hearts are wicked. God also says in His Word that those who reject Christ follow their father the devil. So yes…people are indeed evil. Some do more evil deeds than others though. And some have a heart still ready to hear of God and repent of doing wrong while others are completely closed up, hardened and fully controlled by their father the devil. It isn’t inconsistent. It is in God’s Word.
it’s kinda like women who abort. Some are coerced, scared, alone, ashamed and uninformed. Then there are other women who know full-well what they’re doing, what their babies look like but they literally glory in the act of killing their baby. Yes, those women are evil. That is why I get tired of ascribing victimhood to ALL women who abort. Cause some of them are not victims. They are as evil as Jeffrey Dahmer and Ted Bundy. Other women are not evil. Maybe it is the intent? Some people sin but they don’t intend to sin. They want to be good people and live good lives, they just mess up. Others fully intend to hurt others and live wickedly.
Wow good Doctor – I suppose it would be in your general interest to write your thoughts backing how Christians should be judgmental – because in one fell swoop – here is what I saw:
Some Doctor that I’ve never met, who doesn’t know me, and has had a handful of interactions through the years on an internet blog site, feels that his intellectual and moral compass is fine tuned enough to call me an advocate for Satan and a Pharisee.
Now, if you’d actually read the thread, you’d see that I never once said Christians shouldn’t judge. What I said was, I think it’s foolish, when trying to win hearts and souls over to an issue, to start the conversation by belittling the opposition. The comment regarding Christians was when Jack was jumped on for using words people didn’t like, even though what he was saying had merit.
Heck of a job, Sir Gerard Nadal though, of twisting an argument and attacking a position that isn’t being advocated by anybody. Heck of a job, Sir Gerard Nadal, of rushing to judgment without even reading the thread. Heck of a job, Sir Gerard Nadal, of quickly displaying the imperfect picture of everything wrong with the intellectual Christian/Catholic of today’s times.
Take a few minutes – read and understand first.
Merit, the delusion is Obama’s willingness to hold fundraisers and to fight for the right for abortionists to deliver babies up to the shoulders and reach inside the woman’s vagina to stab said baby in the back of the head with the scissors wide to create a gaping hole in order to suck the babies brains out so that they can deliver the baby dead and claim it was never a real person cause it was born dead. That is either delusional or it is EVIL. You and Ex-RINO will have to take your pick from those two cause there is no option 3. I could understand that there can be people who are either that delusional or that evil; but I can’t fathom that they got elected to be president of a country that supposedly champions a person’s right to life.
Jack, you are going to have to come around in baby steps. Do you understand and agree that people who support the slaughter of unborn children are either deluded or evil?
truth – can you define “support”? For instance, up until a few years ago, the GOP’s own insurance plan covered abortion – so if “support’ means paying for abortion, anybody that gave to the GOP up until 2009 supported abortion.
I think you need to define ‘support’ for Jack.
Eh, I’m not particularly interested in continuing the conversation truthseeker, especially with you.
I will say I’m just gonna start laughing next time I see the “no, no, no, we’re judging the behavior, not the person. We love people, just hate sin!” garbage. I believe a few people when they say things like that, but the majority? Nah.
While I am very flattered my 12:13PM post received 9 likes, it seems no one has heeded a thing I said in it.
My friends you are doing exactly what I advised you not to do: Projecting onto this man your thought processes and reasoning. He does not think and reason as you do.
This man is a sociopath/narcissist. I say both because I see traits of both these closely related disorders in him. As such he is not ruled by emotion or empathy. He is ruled solely by self interest. Evil? A matter of perspective. Not all people viewed Hitler, Stalin, and Mao as evil. President Nixon shook hands with Chairman Mao of China, the greatest mass murderer of the 20th century.
Obama throws the unborn under the bus for political expediency like he did his own minister, like the Democrats he bamboozled into supporting Obamacare, and who lost their congressional seats for doing so. People are objects to be used or dispensed with as needed. That includes our unborn, and the children of Syria.
I speak from a strictly earthbound perspective. I refuse to get into religious debates or see this from a religious perspective. I see this from the mind of Obama. The type of minds I have grown up around. The mindless adulation by Americans in 2008 of an empty suited unknown community organizer with a big smiile was a red flag from the depths of hell.
Yes Obama is intelligent. Are his actions deliberate efforts to bring this country down? Some argue they are, I’m inclined to agree though I think the Syria situation was his inadvertently painting himself into a corner. He learned that words mean something.
Do not underestimate this man for a minute. He is not the least bit delusional. Whether he is truly evil is not as important as how he thinks and reasons.
I’m not getting into philosophical or religious debates. To me this is a matter of looking at the mind you are dealing with here, and you have your answers.
Jack, you speak the truth when you say that Christians should hate the sin and not the sinner. But Christians also rightfully despise any support of the abortion industry. The two are easy to reconcile.
But let me also say Jack, I acknowledge there is a natural contention in loving a person who does things that you despise. And this contention is what is brought to the forefront in the Christian saying. Hate the sin and not the sinner.
Unfortunately Mary, if I were to agree with your assertion that Obama is not in the least bit delusional; then that would mean we have an evil sociopath/narcissist leading the free world.
Regarding Obama, delusional or intentional, he is in many ways, the least of these. We are called to forgive and love our neighbor. How will we treat him?
Blessed Mother Theresa of Calcutta said, “The dying, the cripple, the mental, the unwanted, the unloved– they are Jesus in disguise.” She also said, “Service means an unceasing and wholehearted labor in making ourselves available to Jesus so that He may live, in and through us, His life of infinitely tender, compassionate and merciful love, for the spiritually and materially poorest of the poor.” (emphasis added)
Shall we be merciless, then, because a man is persecuting children? Shall he be shown the compassion which he shows?
Love & compassion do not mean turning a blind eye to the sin. They also do not mean writing the sinner off as “evil”- we are ALL evil. What does it take for me to throw Christ back on the cross?
“The saying is sure and worthy of full acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners—of whom I am the foremost. But for that very reason I received mercy, so that in me, as the foremost, Jesus Christ might display the utmost patience, making me an example to those who would come to believe in him for eternal life.” -1 Timothy 15-16
Jack,
I might have to start laughing next time you pretend to be all about the benefit of the doubt. I mean good grief – exactly ONE person said she preferred the term evil and ZERO said intrinsically evil. Yet off you go with the accusations of widespread hypocrisy and lying on the part of the people here. Why? I thought Lrning’s thoughts were good on the shorthand use of the term for someone engaged in persistent, unrepentant evil behavior, without necessarily being a condemnation of the person’s soul.
The Question of the day: Is President Obama delusional?
A: You’re just asking this NOW?
Beautiful Mary Rose! Also I cannot remember the exact quote, but Mother Teresa was also very adamant that spiritual poverty (which certainly plagues all abortion proponents) is as great (and in some ways greater) poverty than physical poverty.
“I thought Lrning’s thoughts were good on the shorthand use of the term for someone engaged in persistent, unrepentant evil behavior, without necessarily being a condemnation of the person’s soul.”
Yes, because when you tell someone they are evil, they definitely hear “you’re a child of God but you’ve hardened your heart by repeatedly engaging in behavior that God thinks is evil”. That’s definitely what’s coming across. That’s where I don’t think it’s loving, and it really does put lie to all the baloney about loving people. Why in the world would anyone, ever, want to go to church and learn more about anything if they just hear “evil”?
What I see a lot is people deciding they know exactly who is repentant and who isn’t, who has a “reprobate heart”, who they think is deserving of compassion and understanding, etc etc. It just looks like a lot of people speaking for God.
I thought Lrning’s thoughts were good on the shorthand use of the term for someone engaged in persistent, unrepentant evil behavior, without necessarily being a condemnation of the person’s soul.
For some reason the part of CT’s comment copied twice, dunno why, but it’s too late to edit. Sorry.
Jack,
Relegated to the corner for improper and overzealous use of the copy-paste function ;)
Why in the world would anyone, ever, want to go to church and learn more about anything if they just hear “evil”?
My church doesn’t preach “evil” and neither do many other churches. But a lot of folks who don’t attend like to use that as a reason they don’t attend. Before I attended church regularly and became involved in my church, I knew on some level that if I made that leap of faith, I would be required to do a little house cleaning. And I hate house work.
“The Bible tells us to love our neighbors, and also to love our enemies; probably because they are generally the same people.” G.K.C.
”Grant me chastity and continency, but not yet” Augustine in Confessions
ts,
Don’t underestimate the man for a minute. Obama is not the least bit delusional. His “evil” is a matter of perspective. We do not understand his rhyme and reason, we don’t agree with or like it, that does not make him delusional. He knows exactly what he’s doing and why.
Mary Rose, you wrote that beautifully and I respect your religious conviction.
I see a mind working exactly as I expect it to. One that is potentially very dangerous and that recently brought us to the brink of war.
Understood Mary. I would have to be delusional before I ever supported abortion. But I shouldn’t project that other people must be delusional when they support abortion; when it could just be that they do not have a properly ordered conscience.
“Beware of no man more than yourself; we carry our worst enemies within us.” – GKC
Jack, perhaps you’ve discovered the inconvenient truth that Christianity can’t be boiled down to a couple of sound bites. Sorry if that doesn’t suit you.
Do you really think Obama is reading this? It doesn’t read to me like the article or any of the comments are written for/to him, so not sure why you interpret this as telling him he’s evil.
However, thank you Jack for pointing out that what happens when we Christians fail to give glory to God through our actions. When our actions fall short of holiness, it reflects negatively on our Lord. We need to do better.
Hi Jack –
This is entirely unrelated to the discussion at hand but I saw this and thought of you, since we were talking a while back about platonic male affection and whether or not it has waned with an increase in cultural visibility of homosexuality or whether it was never really much of a thing in the US at all: http://www.artofmanliness.com/2012/07/29/bosom-buddies-a-photo-history-of-male-affection/
The dude who put this collection together dates the period just post-WWII as the sharp identifiable decline in displays of affection between men, which does line up with cultural awareness (and fear) of homosexuality.
Just thought it was interesting! And this seemed like the thread to find you in. I think these pictures are very sweet and I feel sad for men in the US today, who can’t express affection for each other like men elsewhere or in other times could. Actually, for a brief time in his 20s, my gentleman thought he might be gay, because he got out of a really dramatic and horrible break-up with a girlfriend and went to stay with a gay couple he knew until he sorted things out; and seeing them, he so strongly wanted “what they had” – he wanted that kind of companionship and open camaraderie with a close friend. He wanted, to oversimplify it, a hug. It makes me very sad to think of people in our culture being so alienated from affection that they don’t even know when that is what they are craving.
Jill has hit upon a problem, but it is NOT THE problem. Abortion is NOT ONLY an American problem. And we do an immense amount of harm by personifying all that evil in the person of the president. Reality and Hal are both Obama supporters, but it is obvious that he does not give them personal marching orders. Pro Lifers (Americans) are too often under the illusion (delusion) that Obama is THE problem – he ain’t, not even close!
Years before R vs W ever happened, I wrote a poem called ‘The Night’. At the time, even moreso now I think of this as The New Dark {very Dark} Age ///
‘A library turned to dust …(computers, abortion, empty pews… on and on) no shadow to mark its passing, in the Night’
We are all in this age, and we love pointing fingers at others. Jack sin ‘blinds’ …. makes us all delusional. Sin is the ‘darkness’ of Night!
Alexandra. What is your definition of ‘gay’? I have camaraderie with other males but we don’t need to be gay in order to have that camaraderie. Do you agree that the most basic part of the definition of what it means to be ‘gay’ includes ‘homosexual’ sex? The sadness I feel for these gay men is that they think they need a sexual relationship with one another in order to experience camaraderie.
John McD. I am not under the illusion that Obama is the cause of all abortion. But he is a surrogate of the abortion industry and used his position as leader of the US has to do everything he can to promote the abortion industry and hinder our ability to end the slaughter. That is not delusional.
“Jack, perhaps you’ve discovered the inconvenient truth that Christianity can’t be boiled down to a couple of sound bites. Sorry if that doesn’t suit you.”
I don’t need it “boiled down to a couple sound bites”, it just drives me crazy when things are inconsistent. I think that’s my fault for trying to see Christianity as a whole rather than the truth, that there’s like ten gazillion different denominations and doctrines.
And plus I think at least the basics should be simple and easy to follow and figure out. If it’s required for eternal life, it shouldn’t be hard to understand what you’re supposed to do. It doesn’t make sense that it would be too complicated.
“Do you really think Obama is reading this? It doesn’t read to me like the article or any of the comments are written for/to him, so not sure why you interpret this as telling him he’s evil.”
No, he’s not reading it. Other people who support the abortion industry are though. This blog is pretty popular, I figure that it gets a non-negligible amount of traffic from “personally pro-life” people doing research or even those pro-choicers who became pro-choice because they think it’s caring. Do you think it is a good idea for them to read pro-lifers calling them evil and such? I personally don’t. And plus, I don’t think it’s makes it more moral, to call people names if you think they aren’t gonna see it? If you call me some awful names privately, I might not find out about it but it probably isn’t the best thing to do.
“However, thank you Jack for pointing out that what happens when we Christians fail to give glory to God through our actions. When our actions fall short of holiness, it reflects negatively on our Lord. We need to do better.”
I can’t tell if you’re sarcastic or not, but I feel bad. I was way ruder than I should have been yesterday.
“Just thought it was interesting! And this seemed like the thread to find you in. I think these pictures are very sweet and I feel sad for men in the US today, who can’t express affection for each other like men elsewhere or in other times could. Actually, for a brief time in his 20s, my gentleman thought he might be gay, because he got out of a really dramatic and horrible break-up with a girlfriend and went to stay with a gay couple he knew until he sorted things out; and seeing them, he so strongly wanted “what they had” – he wanted that kind of companionship and open camaraderie with a close friend. He wanted, to oversimplify it, a hug. It makes me very sad to think of people in our culture being so alienated from affection that they don’t even know when that is what they are craving.”
I like the pictures, they seem really nice. I definitely don’t remember having any non-sexual physically affectionate relationships, like ever in my entire life, and I do think that’s sad. I do think some of it has to do with homophobia and American men being so afraid of being seen as gay that they act stand-offish to each other. Some of it is just that we have a standoffish (comparatively) culture. I see the Latin American immigrants, male and female, stand way closer to each other when talking than people in the US generally do, as well as WAY more touching than I would ever be comfortable with. It tends to be some weird dance where I’ll continually back up while they move forward when I am talking to one of those guys lol.
I certainly don’t think the lack of affection is a good thing though, I’ve read that men tend to be more emotionally devastated by divorce and other interpersonal relationship problems than women are because they are more likely to lack emotionally close friends. I do remember my ex had like a gazillion friends to help her through our divorce when I couldn’t imagine calling a buddy and telling him I was feeling down and wanted some friendship, the idea is completely foreign to me. I really think some of that is just me, but I do think that research bears me out that it’s a problem with our society too. I don’t think it’s healthy to expect half the population to suppress emotion and friendship.
“Alexandra. What is your definition of ‘gay’?”
Someone who is having sex with a person of the same gender. Why do you ask?
Jack –
I’m sorry you felt emotionally isolated in your divorce. I think women have a lot more freedom in our culture to be openly affectionate with and supportive of each other like that, and I think it sucks. :(
I think those pictures are nice too. The part that made me saddest was when the author talked about the men who served in WWII and often experienced intensely close and even affectionate platonic bonds with other men, and then returned home into the social landscape of the 1950s, which were in many ways one of the more isolated and un-affectionate periods for men in US history. My grandfather served in WWII and he was always a very unaffectionate, isolated man; I have very few memories of him hugging me, even as a little girl. I definitely never saw him hug my dad or any of his other children. Actually, when he died, my mom told me that now he could hug me all the time, because he wouldn’t be bound by the discomfort such things had given him in real life – that in some ways he was actually closer to us now than he was on earth. That’s how unaffectionate he was. But after he died I stumbled on some of his war-era stuff and there was a picture of him hugging his army buddies and smiling like it was honestly the happiest days of his life. I remembered what my mom said – about how now that my grandfather was in heaven he could hug people without feeling uncomfortable about it – and I thought how strange it was, that those were the two places he apparently felt free to hug: in heaven, and at war. I think men deserve better than that.
Yeah, Alexandra, that is sad. I feel bad for all those WWII vets who lost that close connection when they came home, that really struck me too.
I’ve been thinking about this all day, I was particularly thinking about how much of this possibly might be biological and how much is cultural. It’s seems to me that it must almost solely be cultural, because like we’ve mentioned men in other cultures don’t seem to have the same hangups about physical affection and emotional intimacy.
I was really surprised when my son was just starting to walk and talk about how affectionate he was. I was, for some reason, expecting him to be like me and not have much interest or ability for physical affectionate. I was completely wrong, the kid thinks every moment not spent hugging, kissing, holding onto his sister’s hand or my leg or whatever, is a moment wasted! I was really surprised, I’m actually still surprised (and pleased) that my problems with physical affection don’t seem to have rubbed off on him. He also doesn’t have any trouble talking about what he’s feeling or what he needs emotionally, which also pleases me because I’m the opposite (in real life, I babble a lot online but that’s mostly because I’m anonymous lol). I’m wondering if we’ll see a change in our culture about the expectations of affection both physical and emotional for males (and people in general), if there are more dads with sons like me who can see how much happier and healthier it is for our boys to express themselves and affection freely. I can hope at least. And the boys at the shelter where I volunteer, we do have them try to talk to us about their pain and feelings (pretty much all of them come from abusive circumstances, they have bottled up a lot of pain from that just like I have). Maybe there will be a cultural shift with the next couple generations, I do think in general my generation was more open with affection between men then the last one, maybe this will continue improving. It would probably be best for men AND women (if my ex is any indicator, women aren’t any happier with men being less able to express affection).
No, obama is not delusional, ignorant or evil. Not intentionally, wilfully or otherwise.
What is, is equating his support for women to have the right to individually control their own reproductive choices with a country, a regime, which of its own devices, directives and people/military/weapons, kills men, women and children en masse.
Hi Jack,
Your son sounds so much like mine. I could cry when I think of what a tender hearted and sensitive little boy he was. I saw it from early infancy. My boy is now 28y/o and still is very thoughtful and loving to his mom. I must admit he was a pistol as a teenage but it only matters that he turned into an outstanding adult. His dad was never affectionate and that always hurt me, so I tried to make up for it. My son doesn’t seem to have suffered too much. He loves us both dearly.
Mary I’m glad that your son grew up to be the kind of man he is, and I hope he didn’t lose that tender heart or internalize those social messages that would cause him to lose that part of himself. I’m glad that you were affectionate with him. I do think it’s depressing, I don’t think little boys start out with the idea that hugging and kissing and talking about how you feel is “girly” or “gay”, but they learn pretty quickly that a lot of people don’t find that appropriate behavior so they suppress it. It’s like that old myth that boys are looking for sex and girls are looking for love. It might be somewhat true that some people are just being promiscuous, but I think it’s likely that the social message that nonsexual intimacy is not appropriate for males has a lot to do with that problem to. People need affection, and if you’re taught that sex is what intimacy is, no wonder people sleep around. I do think that’s part of the reason I was ridiculously promiscuous as a teenager, I had no concept of affection that wasn’t sexual. I refuse to let happen to my kid. I do want him to grow up knowing that he can have close friendships and relationships and there’s nothing “girly” or “gay” about it. And of course the same for my daughter, though the social messages in regards to affectionate are less restrictive regarding her gender.
Hi Jack,
No, he hasn’t lost that tender heart. Its just too much a part of him, he was born with it.
He was always “all boy” and still is. To his dad, boys and their dads didn’t hug and kiss. To my son it was just natural. It would break my heart when my husband would hug and kiss our daughters but not our son. My girlfriend said her husband was the same way to their sons and it infuriated her. They’re children for heaven’s sake, male or female. A little boy doesn’t understand that love and affection from his father isn’t “manly”. I let him know how cruel this was and he did change somewhat.
You’re starting out on the right foot Jack and I’m glad to see a father recognize and encourage this as something positive in his son. My husband still won’t hug our son but he accepts that this is his father and loves him no matter what. Its just his nature.
And plus I think at least the basics should be simple and easy to follow and figure out. If it’s required for eternal life, it shouldn’t be hard to understand what you’re supposed to do. It doesn’t make sense that it would be too complicated.
See the Ten Commandments. One for each finger. (:
Is it really that simple Praxedes?
No Beliebers?
No working, shopping etc. on sundays?
No wars?
No death penalty?
How come?
Interesting discussion, Alexandra and Jack.
Last fall, one of the religious ed teachers in my town gave a talk on the topic of the disappearance of affection between male friends in our country. I do have to say I see a lot of affection on my son’s high school football team. They pat each other, high five, and help each other up, including helping guys from the opposing teams.
During my first marriage, my ex would tell our sons but not our daughter, “to stop crying like a little baby” or “be a big boy and stop your crying.” He’d never want me to go to pick them up at night when they cried, even when they were newborns, saying that they were manipulating me. I’d have to point out that they are crying like babies because they were still in diapers for goodness sakes. I think he was jealous of the attention I gave the children and both his parents were very cold to the children. I have always told the children I love them and to my ex’s credit he picked up on this too and says it at the end of phone conversations. My folks never told me and my siblings this and I always thought it was great when other families did this so naturally and was determined to do this with my own family someday. We also hug each other when they leave, which was never done in my home growing up either.
After we divorced, the children were never allowed to have friends over at their dads but have always had many friends over to my house, often overnight. My daughter always crammed her room full of girls with several in the bed and several in sleeping bags on the floor. (She has just started her second year of college and I never thought I would miss the shrieks of teenage girls in my home, but I do.) Just last week my sixteen year old had two friends over. Two in the bed and one on the floor. My oldest son had no problem sharing a bed with his guy friends that stayed over either.
It’s really that simple if you make it that simple, Reality.
Check off each finger each day and see if you have followed all Ten each day. If you miss some of them, commit yourself to try your best not miss them the next day.
Your life will become so much simpler.
Reality – it is actually much simpler than that – Matthew 22:36-40 covers it.
And contrary to people on this board, you can even lean left and still be a Christian.
Here is a further breakdown of the Ten Commandments from the Catechism of the Catholic Church:
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s2c1a1.htm
I have never seen anyone on this board say you cannot lean left and still be a Christian. Ex-GOP. I challenge you to find someone who said this. If leaning left causes you to break one of God’s commandments or supports others breaking God’s commandment, you do well to check on what topics you are leaning left on, especially if you call yourself Christian. I don’t box people in to the left/right box. I’m a Christian before anything else.
Prax – I’d have to dig through the archives – but I’ve had folks make that case.
On this thread, all I’ve gotten is that I’m an advocate for Satan.
Good times.
Is it that simple for you Praxedes?
You are against the death penalty?
You are anti-war?
You’re not amongst the crowds of well dressed folk who cause me to chuckle when I see them clogging fast food restaurants late on sunday mornings?
If only people would Ex-GOP. Unfortunately I don’t see a whole lot of what those verses say being practised.
Here is a further breakdown of the Ten Commandments from the Catechism of the Catholic Church – what about non-catholic believers?
Amen to that Reality.
Given the varying situations and degrees to which various believers apply the seemingly simple words of the ten commandments, and the ways and means by which they do so, it’s quite obvious that following them is extremely open to interpretation. It is therefore rather appropriate to say that at least the basics should be simple and easy to follow and figure out. If it’s required for eternal life, it shouldn’t be hard to understand what you’re supposed to do. It doesn’t make sense that it would be too complicated. Because that’s not how it is.
I oppose the death penalty. I oppose war. If you are interested in what else I believe please check out the breakdown of the Ten Commandments from the Catechism of the Catholic Church that I posted above.
I usually wear jeans and a clean blouse to church unless it is a wedding or funeral and then I will put on dress slacks (no dresses for me, thanks). I don’t frequent fast food joints after church or at other times but wouldn’t laugh at folks who choose to eat after church at a place of their choosing. I’m no better than them. Maybe it makes you feel better to chuckle at people different than yourself?
what about non-catholic believers?
What about them? They and you should feel free to post the commandments that you follow. I can’t state what they or you believe. I’m sharing my faith with you. Feel free to share what commandments you live by with me.
Unfortunately I don’t see a whole lot of what those verses say being practised.
Well, your old enough to realize that you can’t change other people. You can only change yourself. Are you following what those verses say?
it’s quite obvious that following them is extremely open to interpretation.
It is for you, because you don’t want to do the hard work of putting God first (you aren’t even open to believing in Him), praying, reading the Bible, discerning, getting into a church, dissecting your life, looking closely at your failed relationships and childhood issues, asking forgiveness and confessing your sins (do you even have any?) How can you expect to know what God asks of you, when you won’t even acknowledge His existence?
It’s so easy to dis on those who choose to follow the Commandments that God asks us to follow rather than to be open minded to trying them on for yourself. How can you rip on what you’ve never even taken the time to understand?
Most people, including yourself, don’t want it to be simple. Because like I said earlier, you would have to do a little housework and maybe change a little bit of your heart and lifestyle. He might ask you to get dressed, put down that glass of wine and get out there and make amends and help others. But you are perfect the way you are, right?
You really seem to be a miserable old self-centered fellow, Reality.
Ex-GOP, If you believe in the Ten Commandments, give my a breakdown of your beliefs in regards to them.
Prax -
My belief is that the commandments are important, but salvation is not obtained through the ten commandments. Only Jesus leads to salvation.
Exceptionally well-stated, Prax.
So you can be found outside prisons during executions holding big placards with post-execution mortuary photos and praying?
It is neither their attire nor where they choose to eat which causes me to chuckle Praxedes. It’s their lack of adherence to the 4th commandment, straight after church.
They and you should feel free to post the commandments that you follow. I can’t state what they or you believe. – so its not as simple as you claimed?
Feel free to share what commandments you live by with me.
Feel free to share what commandments you live by with me. – I don’t feel the need to proselytize. I wouldn’t call them commandments anyway.
Are you following what those verses say?
36. no
37. no
38. no
39. perhaps, depends how you interpret it. Possibly better than some.
40. meh
Wait, how is eating fast food on Sunday breaking the fourth commandment? Like, at all?
Only Jesus leads to salvation.
Right. He leads me to salvation by telling me how to live through His Commandments listed in the Bible. How does He lead you?
So you can be found outside prisons during executions holding big placards with post-execution mortuary photos and praying?
I have visited those in jail (there is no prison nearby). I cannot afford to take off work and travel to prisons where executions take place. I’d be willing to go, if you are willing to pay for my trips. As it is, I do the best I can close to home with what little money my husband and I make.
Thank you, Mary Rose.
so its not as simple as you claimed?
Not for you, no. You don’t want it to be simple. You’d have to sober up, stop the blame game and face your demons. It’s apparent that you like living your life for Reality’s sake.
I said it’s quite obvious that following them is extremely open to interpretation, to which you have said what you’ve said below, ending with Ex-GOP, If you believe in the Ten Commandments, give my a breakdown of your beliefs in regards to them. If it’s so simple why the need to ask such a question?
It is for you, because you don’t want to do the hard work of putting God first – well it must be very, very hard work because I don’t see it being achieved very much by anyone.
(you aren’t even open to believing in Him), – tried it, hard, for years, found nothing.
praying, reading the Bible, discerning, getting into a church, – yep, did all that. Even did a little committment/conversion thing in my early teens. Nothing there.
dissecting your life, looking closely at your failed relationships and childhood issues, – yes I do these things, they are on me. I don’t seek a get out of jail free card.
asking forgiveness and confessing your sins (do you even have any?) – yes I make mistakes, I confess to and ask forgiveness from those my mistakes have impacted. Not sure what you mean by sins though, that’s very open to subjective interpretation and application.
How can you expect to know what God asks of you, when you won’t even acknowledge His existence? – can’t acknowledge what isn’t there.
It’s so easy to dis on those who choose to follow the Commandments that God asks us to follow rather than to be open minded to trying them on for yourself. – what I dis on is how and why people people select the how, when, why and extent of their adherence to such things as the commandments.
How can you rip on what you’ve never even taken the time to understand? – I spent time trying to understand earlier in life, From what I’ve seen believers don’t seem to have got much further.
Most people, including yourself, don’t want it to be simple. – most believers, theologans, leaders of different branches, evangelical groups etc. etc. etc. demonstrate that it is not simple.
Because like I said earlier, you would have to do a little housework and maybe change a little bit of your heart and lifestyle. – yeah, while I watch theists tying themselves in knots and arguing vehemently over biblical meanings and interpretations.
He might ask you to get dressed, put down that glass of wine and get out there and make amends and help others. – ‘he’ can’t ask me to do anything. Why are you so fixated on the miniscule amount of time I spend naked apart from sleeping and showering? Make amends for what? I already have and do do quite a bit to help others.
But you are perfect the way you are, right? – oh I assure you I most certainly am not.
You really seem to be a miserable old self-centered fellow, Reality. – really? Yet here you are telling me that I need to believe, think, feel and behave as you would have me do. What is it about a belief that needs to exhort believers to do everything they can to make believers of others? Interesting psychological dilemma.
Ex-GOP, If you believe in the Ten Commandments, give my a breakdown of your beliefs in regards to them. – remembering how simple they are.
Jack, according to the 4th commandment there shouldn’t be any shops, stores, restaurants etc. open on sundays for people to patronize.
Right. He leads me to salvation by telling me how to live through His Commandments listed in the Bible. How does He lead you? - again, if it’s all so simple, why the need to ask such a question? I thought it was all about the commandments.
Not for you, no. You don’t want it to be simple. – actually, from what I have seen and heard all my life, it is a lot simpler for me than for theists.
You’d have to sober up, – I don’t drink to excess.
stop the blame game – oh yes, who am I blaming and for what? Do tell.
and face your demons. – ‘demons’? What do you mean by ‘demons’?
It’s apparent that you like living your life for Reality’s sake. – ooo, you’re nearly there. Try ‘It’s apparent that you like living your life for reality’s sake.’
Nice link to the Ten Commandments Praxedes. I wish Reality would take the time to read them but I guess that wouldn’t be simple enough.
Get real truthseeker, I’ve read them oodles of times, several today.
It is not as simple as ‘follow them’.
Every single day we witness the extent to which believers bend, break, adjust, interpret, twist and apply the commandments to suit their own needs, beliefs and situations.
Heck, you can’t even agree on thou shalt not kill let alone any of the potentially more complex ones.
Reality, comprehending what is expected of you is the easier part of faith. A harder part is proper regulation of our passions.
Reality, You posted to Jack above “according to the 4th commandment there shouldn’t be any shops, stores, restaurants etc. open on Sundays for people to patronize.”. And then you said that you have read them oodles of times, several today.”
Reality, I am not sure where you are reading the commandments but the fourth commandment really has nothing to do with not working on Sundays. Did you try reading the commandments at the link Praxedes posted?
comprehending what is expected of you is the easier part of faith. – not from a lifetime’s experience of what I see and hear.
A harder part is proper regulation of our passions. – and from what I see and hear this doesn’t seem to be working all that well.
I’ve been reading them since early childhood, they usually go like this
http://www.godstenlaws.com/ten-commandments/#.UjaN93-rPEQ
And at Praxedes link it says stuff like “The seventh day is a sabbath of solemn rest, holy to the LORD.” and If God “rested and was refreshed” on the seventh day, man too ought to “rest” and should let others, especially the poor, “be refreshed.” The sabbath brings everyday work to a halt and provides a respite. It is a day of protest against the servitude of work and the worship of money.
Do you oppose the death penaly truthseeker?
It’s “thou shalt not murder”. It would really be confusing otherwise since there are plenty of death penalties in the other chapters.
The seventh day isn’t Sunday. Now, that one is even more controversial.
The link I provided, and other sources, state ‘thou shalt not kill’.
Now Hans, remember what I said ;-)
Not every translation is perfect. The King James has “kill”, but the New King James has “do murder”.
Not every translation is perfect. – really? Gosh, you could have knocked me over with a feather!
Which one is ‘perfect’ then? And according to who? Are different translations perfect in different parts?
The English Standard Version says ‘murder’. The American Standard Version says ‘kill’. Apparently.
All right. No version is perfect. But they weren’t intended to be. God is not desperately trying to save everyone from sliding into “Hell”. There’s a slyer Plan in the works, I believe. The parables weren’t meant to be crystal clear to everyone.
Oh, now you’ve got me in trouble, Reality!
Reality, You are confused. The fourth commandment does not mention the Sabbath. The fourth commandment says not to worship graven images.
Oops, ts.
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus%2020&version=NKJV
I seem to remember some discrepency in how Catholics quote and order the graven images Commandment. Does it knock off the Fourth?
Told you I’d be in trouble, Reality.
No version is perfect. But they weren’t intended to be. – why is that? Is it some sort of guessing game? What happens if you get it wrong?!? How is anyone supposed to believe in and follow any part of it all?
God is not desperately trying to save everyone from sliding into “Hell”. – gee, there’s a few questions waiting to be asked there.
There’s a slyer Plan in the works, I believe. – uh oh, pandora’s box, can of worms, trouble on the horizon…..
The parables weren’t meant to be crystal clear to everyone. – to who then? And why? Are you saying that some peoples future is predetermined and it’s not gonna be good? What’s the point in trying to adhere to god’s word then?
Oh, now you’ve got me in trouble, Reality! – oh no you don’t. I warned you not to tread this path, the consequences will be all your own doing.
It’s not me who’s confused truthseeker, I don’t even believe them to be real!
The confusion seems to be between catholics and protestents (the LDS seem to agree with the protestants). Does that mean that one or the other of you is doomed? Which one? Why?
Anyway, which one it’s numbered as wasn’t my point. My point was that an awful lot of people break it whether it’s number 3 or number 4.
More trouble on the Horizon than you know, Reality. It’s best for me not to get into a theological discussion here. When I’m brave and satisfied enough, I’ll link to a blog where I muse about these topics.
OK Hans, live to fight another day eh.
Same god, same book, little else the same, that’s what I see. Can’t even agree on something supposedly cast in stone. It really isn’t simple at all.
My three (or four cents):
I view our “wonderful” “commander-in-chief” as in full possession of his faculties. My assessment thus further leads me to conclude from this premise, that he engages in the behaviors described in this article with premeditation. He knows what’s up folks! He does it for himself to support his ego-integrity and by pandering to groups that will support his “presidency.”
See, delusional implies that this man has no idea about what he is doing and thus allows some to excuse his decisions. Not me. I hold him fully responsible and accountable for the sorry state of affairs that his tenure represents…
Now, where is my copy of “dreams from my father?”
Yep, Reality … simple?, but ‘simple’ is not easy to a confused/delusional mind. I just a few minutes ago tried and tried to plug-in an electric-plug into the very recepticle it had come from. All I needed to do was turn the plug over – it fit! Simple! [After much study and a little gleaning, I found that God loves to ‘hide’ things/truths – right out front. [ think of hiding a gemstone in a chandaleer … is a close image.] As Prax intimated: much work is required … and often the results are painful and wholly unexpected. Is it worth the effort? Don’t pretend to KNOW: very personal!
My journey is as close to a nightmare as can be imagined. Any kind of self-acceptance is difficult, let alone any sense of self-appreciation or pride. Thinking that a juvenile perspective (rejecting God’s existence) suffices as THE answer, is lazy/cowardly. [I told you that sometimes ANSWERS ARE pain-filled.]
Each of us is evil. It is the task for each of us to figure this out, acknowledge it, get humble before God, then go on and live accordingly for the rest of our lives.
After we ask and receive forgiveness, we are on a path in life that some call “sanctification.” We are still in our mortal, earthly phase of life, but working on becoming more Christ-like every day.
I have changed a lot since becoming a Christian. But no one around me looks at me and says I am perfect. I live less selfishly than I did BC. After a few years as a Christian, I did some Dave Ramsey financial management. The right way: I began tithing. After practicing this for a while, I grew in wisdom a lot – what I figured out was how selfish I had been all my life, and how selfish I still was.
I see many more opportunities to give nowadays. That is relatively new in my life versus a couple decades as a selfish adult, assuming I did plenty of good things for others.
Every day I give others the opportunity to criticize me as being a Christian yet not being charitable. I am not perfect.
On paper, on my tax return, my charitable deduction line is generous; it is over ten percent for the past 7 years or so. Yet, I now see more times where I simply failed to give or help than I see myself selflessly helping.
That just keeps me on point. I cannot sit back and collect my laurels. I have been blessed with a lot, and need to be aware of this regularly. It is impossible, though. But God understands and moves me, anyway.
In fact, I have evil-ness in me. It is only by God’s grace that I get to spend life with God forever.
Some people here are getting pretty judgmental about imperfect Christians. the truth is that nearly all or all are much better in the present day than they were before giving their lives over to God.
That is a pretty sad state of affairs, I know.
I live in a suburb with lots of Christians, and I cannot believe how self-centered we are as we drive around – people don’t let others into traffic, and so on.
I have not yet given up my faith because of this, however.
This atheism argument is dumb: “if I can show a less-than-perfect Christian, then the Bible is not true.”
My church is full of amazing, generous people who are at the same time very humble. I know very well many are very low-income. Then every now and then, someone tells me about a fellow church member who is a millionaire. Half the time you would never guess.
Despite their generosity with the money God has allowed to flow through their hands, they are involved in their religious life, and that includes being shown, and reflecting on, how they are not so great despite millions in the bank.
It is simple, but not easy. Each of us is inherently self-centered and evil. Sorry to tell everyone, but it is the truth. Each of us deserves hell. If we can put our self-centeredness to the side enough to acknowledge God, we can get mercy we don’t deserve, instead of the justice we do deserve.
oh yes, who am I blaming and for what? Do tell.
1. I was bright but my peers demeaned those who stood out so I did less well than I should have.
You did less well than you should have because you chose to do less well.
2. Sunday school, and later church, were regulars from the age of three until the age of 16. I’m sure I’ve mentioned this ended because I found no god.
You decided (made a choice) in your early teens to believe that there is no God so it certainly must be true today. How old are you now?
3. Some time back I mentioned that my parents were beaten at catholic schools for being left-handed.
And this further proves there is no God or why was it mentioned as a part of your childhood memories? It’s actually a part of your parent’s childhood, not yours. Cut the umbilical cord already. My grandmother is left-handed but learned to write with her right hand as well because a nun in a Catholic school rapped her knuckles when she wrote left-handed. Not okay of the nun to do, but certainly not a beating. Grandma didn’t associate having her knuckles rapped with there being no God, though. She just figured the nun didn’t like herself very much. Does focusing on these “beatings” continue to fuel your fire to hate on the Catholic Church and all her members because of the actions of one or a few misguided teachers your parents had?
4. My father was very severe.
And you say your mom was grand. However she chose to marry, chose to stay with, and chose to allow your father to be very severe with you. When one parent is dysfunctional, the other is too, unless they separate.
5. I am currently avoiding women because they make my baggage and issues seem like the lightest luggage one could carry. Toooo much trouble.
All women are Tooooo much trouble? Sounds like mommy issues. Reminds me of the drunks complaining in the bar that they still have not found the right woman. It’s not about finding the right one, it’s about being the right one. And you’re not it. Maybe consider that you are the one that is Tooooo much trouble.
6. I lost a good chunk of this because my ex-wife had a much better lawyer than me
No, you lost a good chunk of that because you couldn’t make a marriage work. That’s not any lawyer’s fault. Lawyers just do what they are hired to do.
7. I drink wine from a glass which is filled from a bottle
Only an alcoholic would get defensive about how he drinks his wine. A real drunk would drink it straight from the box or the bottle, eh? LOL. The social drinker puts it in a glass first, right? Actually, you can’t be a social drinker because you have admitted several times that you drink by yourself (anti-social) and the reason alcoholics drink alone is because they think they are fooling people about how much they are actually drinking. Drinking alone is one of the main signs of being an alcoholic. You can’t fool an old bartender. I’ve met hundreds, if not thousands, of your type. They drink a little at home before they hit the bar and then a little more when they return back home if they don’t pass out first. There is very little that a drink won’t make worse. Alcoholics tend to complicate their problems as much as possible and blame others for their misfortunes so they are advised to KEEP IT SIMPLE.
John is right. The answers are pain-filled.
Would you like to book an appointment for next week? :)
I just a few minutes ago tried and tried to plug-in an electric-plug into the very recepticle it had come from.
Some years back my mom bought my grandma (the same one who had her knuckles rapped) a new vacuum cleaner. She called my mom and told her she didn’t think the new vacuum was sucking up the dirt very well. When mom went over, grandma turned on the switch and started vacuuming and sure enough it wasn’t picking up any dirt. Grandma is deaf and she hadn’t plugged the vacuum cleaner in.
Just last week my husband noticed the water wasn’t draining in the tub after his quick shower. Me and my daughter both have long hair and he assumed the drain was plugged. He poured in some Draino and checked later and the water still had not gone down. He ran to the hardware store and bought a different product and poured some of that in. Still the water didn’t drain. He called me up to the bathroom and I pointed out that the stopper was in the up position. I pushed it down and the water drained. We had a good laugh and I told him I couldn’t wait to share this story with our family and friends. He’s shared a few funnies about me over the years!
Jack ~ God wants our whole hearts – nothing more, nothing less. We are saved by GRACE through FAITH in Jesus – nothing more, nothing less. Our faith is visible through how we live our lives. If we trust God with our whole heart, we must trust Him with our time and lives – following His commands because we know He loves us and knows what’s best for us, and to work to love others out of thankfulness. It’s simple to me.
Hans, See my post from 12:39 am as a reference. If you want to help Reality here then you need to post the translation where the fourth commandment says we shouldn’t work on the Sabbath. Happy hunting.
but ‘simple’ is not easy to a confused/delusional mind. – no need to be so harsh on yourself John, we’ve all made amusingly simple errors with appliances, devices, tools etc. I don’t see what that has to do with the 27 or more different ways the ten commandments are written and the umpteen different ways they are interpreted and applied though.
Thinking that a juvenile perspective (rejecting God’s existence) suffices as THE answer, is lazy/cowardly. – well lazy maybe, not so sure about cowardly though. In my case however, it was not a case of rejecting god, it was finding, through deep and prolonged examination, that there isn’t one.
I told you that sometimes ANSWERS ARE pain-filled – in what way do they cause you pain John?
You did less well than you should have because you chose to do less well – indeed, my blame.
You decided (made a choice) in your early teens to believe that there is no God so it certainly must be true today. How old are you now? – yes I made that decision, in my mid teens, based on a deep and prolonged examination. All that I have heard, read and seen since only serves to confirm it. What’s the ‘blame’ factor here? You are trying to show that I apportion blame away from myself aren’t you? Isn’t that the point of your words? Otherwise what?
And this further proves there is no God or why was it mentioned as a part of your childhood memories? -not at all. This has been mentioned more than once, in regard to what has been considered ‘bad’ or a ‘sin’ by the catholic church.
It’s actually a part of your parent’s childhood, not yours. Cut the umbilical cord already. – I simply spoke of what I had been told. Again, it was in relation the the point I mention above. Or did you forget?
My grandmother is left-handed but learned to write with her right hand as well because a nun in a Catholic school rapped her knuckles when she wrote left-handed. – that’s exactly what happened with my parents, but with some added ‘extras’. Have you not cut the umbilical cord?
Not okay of the nun to do, but certainly not a beating. – agreed, again, as above.
Grandma didn’t associate having her knuckles rapped with there being no God, though. – neither did my parents. And I have not used this sort of event as a reason why there is no god. I’m not sure why you are inferring such.
She just figured the nun didn’t like herself very much. – yes, I have observed people demonstrating this sort of behavior…..
Does focusing on these “beatings” continue to fuel your fire to hate on the Catholic Church and all her members because of the actions of one or a few misguided teachers your parents had? – I do wish you would familiarize yourself with when and why I spoke of my parents experience. It has nothing to do with whether god exists or not. It is to do with the changing of what is classed as ‘bad’ or ‘sinful’ by the catholic church, amongst others. See if you can recall the debates in which it arose.
And you say your mom was grand. However she chose to marry, chose to stay with, and chose to allow your father to be very severe with you. When one parent is dysfunctional, the other is too, unless they separate. – which is what they did. Are we still on you trying to address whether or not I blame others for various things or has this just become some sort of generalized attempt at disparagement?
All women are Tooooo much trouble? – no no, just the single ones in my age group that I have interacted with.
Sounds like mommy issues. – seriously? You’re trying this? Please inform me, with some sort of intellectual accuracy, how my finding single women in my age group to have issues constitutes my having ‘mommy issues’.
Reminds me of the drunks complaining in the bar that they still have not found the right woman. – I wouldn’t know, I don’t frequent bars. How do you know so much about this?
It’s not about finding the right one, it’s about being the right one. And you’re not it. – well that may be true. Is this part of the ‘blame’ thingy or are we still roving more broadly?
Maybe consider that you are the one that is Tooooo much trouble. – this is something that I have pondered and continue to do so. If I can blame myself I’ll try hard to do so. Just for you. After all, this is all about making you feel better isn’t it.
No, you lost a good chunk of that because you couldn’t make a marriage work. That’s not any lawyer’s fault. Lawyers just do what they are hired to do. – I was not blaming her lawyer for being better than mine, or my ex for engaging that lawyer. I blame myself for not engaging a lawyer as good as hers. Now this one does sound like we’re back to focussing on the ‘blame’ thing. Cool.
Only an alcoholic would get defensive about how he drinks his wine. A real drunk would drink it straight from the box or the bottle, eh? LOL. – ah, so I should just sit silently and allow you to cast baseless aspersions because if I challenge them they are confirmed? Nice thinking. Glad I don’t live in your mind.
The social drinker puts it in a glass first, right? – assuming you served your patrons drinks in glasses, did this turn them from alcohollics into mere social drinkers?
Actually, you can’t be a social drinker because you have admitted several times that you drink by yourself (anti-social) and the reason alcoholics drink alone is because they think they are fooling people about how much they are actually drinking. – I drink socially when I am socialising. I am not anti-social. When I drink alone it is because I live alone. Are you saying that those who live on their own must not consume alcohol? Why?
Drinking alone is one of the main signs of being an alcoholic. – it’s also one of the main signs of living on one’s own. I repeat my question from above.
You can’t fool an old bartender. I’ve met hundreds, if not thousands, of your type. – no you haven’t. You haven’t met me. You know almost nothing yet here you are wielding a vast brush of your desires of denigration.
They drink a little at home before they hit the bar and then a little more when they return back home if they don’t pass out first. – that may be the case. It’s not something I’ve ever done. But since, as with everything, I don’t drink to excess, don’t get drunk and have never passed out, I wouldn’t know. There’s also the fact that given my physical ailments, consuming more than a little alcohol isn’t wise with medication. And given that I live alone, I also ensure I stay safe and legal so I can drive if an emergent need should arise. I look forward to seeing how you turn these factors into a discourse of denigration.
There is very little that a drink won’t make worse. – so they say.
Alcoholics tend to complicate their problems as much as possible and blame others for their misfortunes so they are advised to KEEP IT SIMPLE. – hm, I haven’t had the need to delve into these things. You have apparently?
John is right. The answers are pain-filled. – I would have thought that finding the answers would be what alleviates the pain. Maybe you just haven’t found them yet.
“I would have thought that finding the answers would be what alleviates the pain. Maybe you just haven’t found them yet.”
I think the idea is that this life is painful because it’s a fallen world, but God’s love is supposed to be worth it. That’s why gay Christians for example say they’re okay with being alone and never having a relationship, because the end game makes up for it. Though it seems as though some people are given much more pain and sacrifice than others though, which doesn’t seem fair.
When I drink alone it is because I live alone.
Social drinking by yourself. LOL.
It would be interesting to know how you concluded that I suggested that drinking when on one’s own is social drinking Praxedes.
I stated - I drink socially when I am socialising. I am not anti-social. When I drink alone it is because I live alone. – which part did you not comprehend?
You are painting a clearer picture of yourself.
You are painting a clearer picture of yourself.
I’ve mentioned many times that I have loads of experience with alcoholics and am pretty good at picking them out. The fact is that you drink when you are alone. This is the behavior of an alcoholic whether you ever admit it or not. Denial is also another big factor among alcoholics. So is turning the tables as you just did by stating I am painting a clearer picture of myself! LOL, again.
I’m not even a single woman in your age group and I irk you.
Make it a tall one since nobody’s watching.
truthseeker,
Well, yes. I did bookmark away the Catechism. I’ll refer to it often. But it does quote the “do no work” part. Of course we know the Pharisees and others overdid it so you practically couldn’t scratch your nose on the Sabbath.
The fact is that you drink when you are alone. This is the behavior of an alcoholic whether you ever admit it or not. – I did not disgaree with that, at all. I still consume alcohol when I am not alone. I also stated that it’s also one of the main signs of living on one’s own. Nothing to say about that? No?
I then asked if you were saying that those who live on their own must not consume alcohol? Do you have nothing to say about this? Or might that devalue your case?
So the question I ask here is what is it about you that makes you need to ignore the fact that I drink alone part of the time because I actually live alone and choose to persist in only espousing the not so healthy possibility?
Denial is also another big factor among alcoholics. – why do you need me to reiterate what I said about this earlier? – “ah, so I should just sit silently and allow you to cast baseless aspersions because if I challenge them they are confirmed?” I thought it is said that silence is tacit agreement?
So is turning the tables as you just did by stating I am painting a clearer picture of myself! LOL, again. – your insistence on repeating your claims and the fact that you are either unable or unwilling to honestly address the responses I have given says it all really.
I’m not even a single woman in your age group and I irk you. – you think that you need to be a single women in my age group to irk me? Deep.
Make it a tall one since nobody’s watching. – red wine doesn’t come as a ‘tall one’. I am watching.
red wine doesn’t come as a ‘tall one’.
It does if you drink directly out of the bottle. Save the glass for when someone stops by. (;
It does if you drink directly out of the bottle. Save the glass for when someone stops by. (; – I have stated that I always drink from a glass. You seem unable to take this fact on board. Would that invoke some sort of cognitive dissonance or something in you?
You have made it quite clear Praxedes, that you chose to work amongst sad and lonely alcoholics in seedy bars for many years.
A number of less than salubrious conclusions could easily be drawn from this as to why, and to what you did.
Of course any denials you might make would be taken as a clear indicator of confirmation of one or more of these conclusions. Any alternative reasons or harmless causes would be willfully ignored.
That’s how it works isn’t it?
It is also quite telling that you have chosen not to answer any of the questions I posed in regard to some of your claims.
Quite :-)
Wow that got ugly quick.
Maybe a breather, folks?
Yes, you are right, MaryRose. Thanks for the nudge.
I am following Carla’s lead and am choosing to stop communicating with Reality altogether. He really is a downer and I’m not getting tipped to listen to his sob stories. I chose to quit listening to arrogant, lonely, emotionally-crippled depressed alcoholics for a reason and I let myself get sucked in here by him.
It’s bar time.
You simply can’t let it go can you.
Even your faux parting shot is a plethora of baseless, unjustified, cheap shots. Are you so used to serving up cheap shots?
Any ‘sob story’ is what lies behind your need to conduct yourself this way.
You keep claiming that I am an alcoholic because I drink alone.
I have informed you more than once that the reason I often drink alone is because I live alone.
I have also informed you of various reasons why I do not drink to excess.
You repeatedly and willfully choose to ignore or deny these reasons and persist with your claim.
When asked on what basis people who live alone should not consume alcohol, you choose to refuse to offer a reply.
It’s bar time – why am I not surprised.
They told us in rehab that drinking alone is a bad idea because then friends and loved ones can’t see how much alcohol you’re consuming and will be unable to help or call you out on it if it’s getting out of control. It doesn’t mean that drinking alone makes you an alcoholic, but they do consider it a warning sign. I know when I drink alone it’s usually a really bad thing, but everyone is different.
You can’t really answer this w/ out the administration sicking a host of Atf & FBI agents on you, but yes, they don’t get any more delusional than this!
A great future Q of the week might be, “Is it too late to save our country from the self destruction of abortion, is the shedding of blood of 55 million innocent babies too many to over look? Is a major chastisement imminent?
You appear to be talking about folk who have developed problems Jack. What they say makes sense in those circumstances.
The simple fact is Jack, that I usually have two glasses of wine. One with dinner, which I make the effort to cook, and another as the night advances, usually with some chocolate or something. I don’t drink every night. I’m not one of those folk who slip into some sort of sloppy, lazy way of living either. I have self respect. I choose to live alone, I’ve come to appreciate it. I also usually drink two glasses of wine when I am socialising with others! As I explained, I also ensure that I am safe and legal to drive at all times.
Reality,
I’m sure you’ve only commented in a sober condition. Which makes it all the more disturbing. ;)
Oh Hans, so cutting. I am deeply wounded. Oh, woe is me. ;-)
That’s good one Hans *applaud*
Wow, when did this become the “Reality” show? Got off topic fairly quickly and degenerated from there…
Actually a couple of glasses of wine has health benefits. I like a glass alone in my woman cave every nite as I relax in my easy chair. I can’t drink much more than two drinks a nite, socially or alone, without feeling miserable, and I mean miserable, in the morning. A very effective deterrent to alcohol abuse. Certainly a far cry from my younger days.
Indeed Matushka! You would need to ask my assailant :-)
You have a woman cave Mary? Very cool, equality rules! I don’t have an easy chair but I do have a day bed thingy.
Reality, when I have lived alone I often have had a glass of wine with dinner. I have always preferred to treat my meals like meals, whether I’m alone or with friends, and so it would feel quite strange to me to not be able to pair a wine with a great meal just because I’m eating alone. Or some nights I would get in from a long cold day at work and take a hot bath with a terrible book and a great glass of wine. Did I “need” wine to feel better? No. Did I enjoy that glass? Yes. I am a light drinker, so I always drink more when I’m with friends – “social drinking” – than I do alone. Not binge drinking, I’m talking two beers instead of one. The point is, I don’t drink alone to “hide” the “amount.” I drink alone because I’m alone and want to have a beer while I watch a movie, or wine with dinner, or whatever.
I know alcoholics. I know drinking alone is “often” a warning sign. I also know that it is not always a warning sign, or unhealthy. (Or, at least, not unhealthier than drinking in the presence of another person.) I know it depends on the person quite a bit and I find this line of conversation really frustrating to watch. You hold some problematic beliefs and do some problematic things but I’ve never seen any evidence that you have a problem with drinking, so I don’t really know by you’re being told to sober up or to save the glasses for when the friends come over to keep up appearances or whatever. Then again maybe this is something “simple” I can’t understand because I’m not a Christian.
Goodness me Alexandra, that all sounds so familiar!
Except for the bath and book bit. I prefer to sit on the deck and gaze at the world, the sky, the night birds.
Perhaps some people get so bogged down in their own experiences and outcomes they struggle to envision that things may be different for others.
” Perhaps some people get so bogged down in their own experiences and outcomes they struggle to envision that things may be different for others.”
That’s probably fairly true. I’ve always been an addict and have been around addicts using various substances for most of my life, so the image of people drinking alone immediately conjures up thoughts of alcoholics hiding bottles and such. I wasn’t trying to accuse you of being an alcoholic btw, I was just sharing my unsolicited two cents earlier lol.
S’ok Jack, I understood where you were coming from.
Hi Reality,
LOL, probably as close to a woman cave as I’ll ever get. Its our computer room but its got an easy chair, big screen TV, and its just turned into my retreat. Other than the computer, my husband doesn’t spend time in there. Ayway its my little bit of heaven.
I also enjoy my wine on the back deck with a night sky full of stars, except for those blasted wasps!
To me the entire point on drinking is defined by the content of alcohol in your wine/vodka or mixed drink but not by how many glasses one consumed or whether one drinks alone or socially. I would deem you an alcoholic if it would take you less content of alcohol to get a buzz. Tolerance they call it. Maybe it only takes one glass of wine or one shot or mixed drink to get you “loosened up.” Does it?
This leads me to wonder if our “commander-in-chief” had some kind of buzz before he spoke up? I can’t blame nicotine although he is a chain smoker…
HI Thomas R,
I would deem you an alcoholic if it takes more alcohol. The more a person drinks alcohol, as like the more they take pain medication, the greater their tolerance. This is how so many accidental ODs take place. In fact we can usually determine that a person abuses drugs, or imbibes, though is not necessarily an alcoholic, by their tolerance to pain meds and sedatives. I often refer to this as “a liver in overdrive”.
I have also seen very high tolerance go down to zero as the liver begins to fail and the health begins to deteriorate so we can’t always assume these people will tolerate the meds we give them.
I have seen people with blood alcohols that would paralyze a bull elephant still walking around and I know one in particular that was a frequent flyer in the ER when I worked there over 30 years ago who is still alive today.
You have described alcohol dependence. Tolerance very often results in resistance to the development of alcoholism but a multitude of psycho-social factors may lead one on a path of dependence, which more directly signals alcoholism issues. Also you must consider “reverse tolerance” as perhaps relevant when discussing the case you mention.
I guess I’ve never been an addict, since I have high tolerances to most things lol. Score.
Thomas I’ve been in alcohol and drug classes and researched it a lot and I’ve never in my life heard anything about alcoholism being dependent on how quickly you can get drunk. In fact, I’ve heard quite the opposite, that one of the signs you’re developing a problem (with any drug, not just alcohol) is that it takes bigger and bigger amounts to get to the level that the addict is seeking. The only thing I’ve heard like what you’re saying is that some populations (I think Native Americans are one) process alcohol differently, get drunk quicker and are more susceptible for addiction. But most addictive processes work like Mary described. Do you have a source for what you’re saying? I am being serious, I’d be interested in reading it.
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/157163.php
And plus, particularly with opiate addiction, the addict’s brain literally rewires to REQUIRE the drug to function properly (that’s where withdrawal comes from, and why it’s so painful and dangerous). Your brain stops producing neurotransmitters because you’re flooding yourself with them. That’s why you have to take more and more. One day, snorting a couple oxycodone makes you high as a kite, a few months later you have to mainline heroin to get the same feeling. Same with alcoholism, you start out with a few drinks every night, and eventually you’re downing a six pack before you go to work just to function. You don’t even get drunk or high half the time when you’re in the middle of addiction, you just can’t function if you don’t consume it.
Some of us just don’t automatically jump to classify someone as an alcoholic. There are so many psycho-social factors to consider together with the person’s ability to function despite his dependency. What I am saying, is that often labels are not helpful at all. I prefer to put everything in the appropriate context to the individual affected. But I don’t speak from personal experience thus your input is invaluable. Thanks for sharing.
“What I am saying, is that often labels are not helpful at all. I prefer to put everything in the appropriate context to the individual affected”
Well that’s certainly true, but labels can be helpful if they are true. That’s why you see people who are currently clean and sober call themselves “recovering addicts/alcoholics”, because if you have the propensity, you’re never fully “cured” and able to partake in a glass of wine at dinner or whatever. It just doesn’t work like that for many people who have struggled with addiction. When I broke my ankle I was clean for about a year, and when I had pneumonia I had been clean for about four years, but I still had to make sure no one prescribed me any opiate painkillers, because I am never going to be able to take them as prescribed without abuse. When my ex wife got Vicodin prescribed for when she got her tooth pulled she kept them hidden from me by my request, I didn’t need to give myself that temptation (and I’m ashamed to admit I did spend a couple hours looking for them when I went through a bout of depression, luckily she had kept them on her so I didn’t find them). I think it’s difficult to explain this to people who’ve never had problems with addiction, but it is helpful in a way to “label” yourself and tell yourself “no, I can’t pop a couple Vicodin/have a couple drinks/borrow just one Ritalin/whatever, I’m an addict”. At least that’s been my experience. Not saying I’ve never relapsed or slipped (because I have, mostly with alcohol because it’s so easily available), but it is something that’s helped me for the most part. It’s a disease and it doesn’t depend on whether you’re actually imbibing right now or not.
Of course there are those who have had problems with substances at some point in their lives without actually being addicts. A lot of times that’s due to depression or their life situation, like you said, different psycho-social behaviors. But for those of us with a high propensity for addiction (I swear I could get addicted to baking soda, not even joking), sometimes acknowledging that we have this propensity by labeling yourself, I guess, helps and it can be dangerous not to.
“Well, yes. I did bookmark away the Catechism. I’ll refer to it often. But it does quote the “do no work” part. Of course we know the Pharisees and others overdid it so you practically couldn’t scratch your nose on the Sabbath.”
Yes Hans, the Catechism speaks of not working on the Sabbath but not in reference to the fourth commandment. Any luck yet finding a Bible or a Bible study that says the fourth commandment teaches us not to work on Sunday? Unless your father and mother tell you not to work on Sundays and you do it anyway.
All right then. I did remember that you Catholics number the Ten Commandments differently than non-Catholics. You combine the First and Second and split the Tenth.
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/command.htm
While we don’t.
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus%2020&version=NKJV
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%205&version=NKJV
I would say “our way” makes more sense, because the Tenth looks like one statement to me.
http://www.biblestudytools.com/kjv/deuteronomy/5-21.html
I very much sympathize with what both Jack and Reality articulated above, that even though we are Christians are individual beliefs as congregations and as unique individuals is highly complex and not easy to figure out. For instance, Prax defines her-Catholic beliefs as following the ten commandments. Many, many Christian faiths do likewise. {Some would say that … we fear the devil! [Heck, we are the devil! lol]} I remember trying to explain that the primary focus of Christians was loving God and not fearing the devil. But I fear this got lost someplace.
I have similar problems with what Prax says, even though I understand this Catholic view is very popular. Following the ten commandments [the core of the Jewish Torah] makes her a fundamentalist-Jew. A Christian is a Christ-follower … two commandments, not ten.
This gets very tricky because of who Jesus is. Words common in human language begin (through experience) to acquire (to me) some remarkable transformations. We humans talk endlessly about love. But human notions of separate-affection does not correlate with being ‘one in God’ as Sts. John and Paul speak of it. This transformation also alters time … the past (historical Jesus being God) becomes the present. His grace/favor IS (not just ‘was’). To me a Catholic is God’s adopted child/’kid’.
Jesus is my Lord and Savior who I live for and would die for. He is my Best Friend and my Everything. Because I follow the Ten Commandments does not mean I disregard the other two for goodness sakes, John!
You can insinuate that I am not a Christ-follower all you want, and that is your right.
But I know who my Judge is, Who I belong to and Who I do my very best to follow (in spite of failing many times per day).
I am a Beloved Child of Christ.
fantastic Prax!
You do not have a very difficult time sticking out your frail hand and seeking support from Him. Jack and Reality do because (at least for Reality) his hand as a child (and now) is about strength, not frailty. [That is our NA cultural stance, especially males!] I mean we claim a man killed and tried as Our Lord – good heavens!
Jesus didn’t even give us those two. They were a lawyer’s synopsis of the Law. His commandment to ‘Love one another as I have loved you’ is indeed His, but implementing such simplicity has befuddled us since the words were spoken. Maybe we should ask how this can be done, or has Jesus given us an impossible task without His help?
” You do not have a very difficult time sticking out your frail hand and seeking support from Him. Jack and Reality do because (at least for Reality) his hand as a child (and now) is about strength, not frailty. [That is our NA cultural stance, especially males!] I mean we claim a man killed and tried as Our Lord – good heavens!”
What are you talking about?
John,
Jesus summarized the 10 Commandments as each of the Two Tablets: Love of God, Love of Man. Not only did He not “do away with the Law and the Prophets” (HE’S the One Who wrote them!), He AMPLIFIED them.
Not in the extraneous ways of the Pharisees. The Sermon on the Mount showed this, saying hate was much like actual murder.
There is a metaphysical ‘delusion’ unlike psychological ‘delusion’ and it comes about as a consequence of sin. One who has experienced forgiveness is very much aware of these things.
Think of sight – – it would be hard to describe color to a blind man. Sin is kind of a ‘darkness of the soul’. Prax understands that she is much beloved and I very much enjoy her wild sense-of-humor.
Thanks John that totally cleared it up.
hey Hans,
try this – Jesus did not write the ten commandments only as our guide but they are descriptions of Who God is …. they ARE Jesus… so following the ten commandments IS FOLLOWING JESUS.
Jack,
I don’t like “lol” any more than little circles or hearts dotting an “i”. But, LOL!
John,
Yes, He is the Word. The Word is Him. Let’s see if THAT doesn’t blow Jack’s mind!
You’re right Hans I have no idea what that actually means lol.
Danged if I know either Jack. Whose hand? Metaphysical ‘delusion’? Gosh.
“Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place.”
Jesus Christ
John,
Can you please rephrase your last few comments in layman’s terms? I’m a practicing Catholic and I’m still struggling to understand them.
Hi MaryRose,
I”ll get back to you on another thread.
In the meantime, I just had this thought: ‘I AM MY Word!’ . synopsis of scripture? … your thoughts … ts; Hans, Thomas R, any others …
Jack, just to simplify for you what Hans meant by “He is the Word. The Word is Him” - please pick up a copy of Dan Brown’s The Lost Symbol. This would be a very informative source to get you started for now.
The Word is self-explanatory. The Logos. The Spokesman for the Father. The One Who spoke the worlds into existence.
His Old Testament Name is YHWH which is actually also equivalent to descriptions in the New Testament: the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow. Because it is literally the three Hebrew tenses squeezed together: Was, Is, Will Be.
The Self-Existent One, the Eternal One, or as He told Moses: “I AM.”
The Word was made flesh. And dwelt amongst us.
Jack, it is really a pretty simple concept. Jesus is the revelation of all Scripture…thus the Word made flesh.
ts, Hans, Thomas R… thanks very much for this input. And ts – fearing letting down the Holy Spirit is a sentiment shared by/with one of my favorite spiritual leaders, my parish priest when younger. He died at 93 about 10 years ago. It sure was nice to be reminded of him again!