There are three of us (four if you count Dan, but for obvious reasons, he can't be included) who have to suffer being inundated with the unjustly arrogant commenting attempts by feo. feo isn't content with being ignored by just one of us. He feels the pathetically desperate need to be ignored by all of us..."us" being Craig, Stan and myself. feo fills our spam folders. Sometimes I read them before emptying the folder of them, because he never fails to entertain. Here's one I found especially amusing:
"RE Stan’s latest:
You: “ Chick-fil-A stores have never discriminated against anyone.”
Facts:
“Chick-fil-A, the Georgia-based fast-food chain known for its juicy
chicken sandwiches — and for its executives’ conservative strain of
Christianity — has continued donating to anti-LGBTQ charities through
its foundation despite claiming it had no political affiliation.”
You’re not the brightest bulb on the moral porch"
The problem here is who is labeling the charities as "anti-LGBTQ"? Most likely, given feo's moral corruption, it would be another enabler/supporter/champion of sexual immorality. That is, a morally corrupt source.
I guess one can say that to be for one thing...say, the true definition of marriage...means that one is against the opposite...fake "same-sex" marriage. But it isn't honest to regard the former by the latter. That is, it would be dishonest to label feo as "anti-honest" because he's so in favor of the lies he spreads. It would be honest to simply call him a liar.
Of course, more importantly is the lie feo tells by the above. Stan stated a fact: Chick-fil-A doesn't discriminate. That is, they serve everyone who can pay the tab for a chicken sandwich. They don't refuse service, even to the blatantly sexually immoral or disordered.
Donating to charities who support long-standing, traditional notions of morality and virtue by their actions...such as adoption agencies who acknowledge the best placement of children is with husband/wife marriages...is praise worthy, even if the result of their practices is that the sexually immoral are denied...because they're sexually immoral and therefore, in the moral eyes of the charity, not the best people with whom the children in their charge should be placed.
feo lives to prove he's intellectually superior to those like Craig, Stan and myself. He fails miserably with incredible frequency, but continues in the attempt due to his fragile ego as well as his need to avoid facing his chosen path to perdition...his defense of the immoral. He dared suggest Stan is "not the brightest bulb on the moral porch". feo is the stubby, charred wick of a candle burned to the base which is unable to illuminate at all.
Saturday, November 23, 2019
Wednesday, November 06, 2019
No One Is Good...
So apparently, despite Jesus saying that there is no one good but God alone (Mark 10:18), I'm admonished for my foolishness for believing it. I'm not given any reason why I shouldn't take His words at face value here, nor are there any indications in the text that He meant it in any but a literal sense. No "hard data" is offered to correct my allegedly poor understanding. It can only be a "hunch" that Jesus meant what He said in this verse for no other reason than I'm told it is so.
You see, if only God is good, what of all those lovely people who do good things all the time? Gosh darn it, they're good, too! Because of all the good things they do! So they're good and no one can say otherwise without being...something!
It all began here where Stan had the audacity to speak on a very basic...as in Christianity For Beginners...concept that we are all sinners with a sin nature and prone toward sinfulness. Dan Trabue immediately was overcome with horror at the very thought and took issue with Stan here. I pointed out that even Jesus backed up Stan's position when He uttered the aforementioned words of Mark 10:18 and was then told I needed to prove that Christ meant what He said, despite there being no reason anywhere in the text to suggest He didn't. Worse, Dan has yet to offer an explanation, complete with "hard data" that would provide a sensible, logical alternative meaning of such a clear statement that there is no one good but God alone. I'm still waiting for that explanation. I don't mean like I'm actually waiting, as if I truly expect Dan to provide that explanation. More like it's a standing invitation I offered but can now put out of my mind knowing it'll never be provided.
But here's a pertinent thought or two. For most basketball fans, no one epitomized "great" like Michael Jordan. He is what a "good" basketball player is. That doesn't mean there are no other "good" basketball players, per se. It means that none of them are good by comparison. He's that far above them all. So very few would argue the point. All others are only "good" relative to each other, but not to Jordan. He's so good, they're not good at all. They're only good when Jordan's taken out of the equation.
Now, the above analogy only works as an illustration of the difference between God and the rest of us. We're simply not "good" because God is what "good" is, and by comparison, we all have fallen short of that glory. It doesn't mean we can't refer to some of us as good. It's a reference that's a matter of relativity. That is, relative to each other. We can't possibly match God for the term, but we can still use the term.
Dan likes to think he's on God's level. Normal people don't do that. Normal people recognize His thoughts aren't our thoughts...His ways aren't ours...we have no idea what it's like to be Him. He's much farther above us than any athlete like Jordan. Think of the "good-est" person you can and that person is not close...not within a universe...to God as far as being "good". The difference is such that what passes for good among humans isn't good at all. It's only good relative to other humans. It's a term we use for convenience.
More than anything, I can't understand what about this concept so troubles old Danny boy. Stan mentioned several verses that speak to our sin natures in contradicting the notion that people are basically good. Christ claims no one is good. Dan wets himself. In the meantime, I'm perfectly "good" with the concept. I get it and it doesn't do anything than to further teach me just how badly I need Jesus to be my Savior. No one is good but God and that's why we need Him. We are all sinners and that's why we need Him. Our actions are the fruits by which others see that we are Christians...not that we are "good". There's a difference. We are Christians because we accept Christ as our Lord and Savior and because of that, the fact that we are not good won't be held against us when our time comes. But still, no one is good but God alone.
Basic stuff. The invitation stands. I wait in vain.
You see, if only God is good, what of all those lovely people who do good things all the time? Gosh darn it, they're good, too! Because of all the good things they do! So they're good and no one can say otherwise without being...something!
It all began here where Stan had the audacity to speak on a very basic...as in Christianity For Beginners...concept that we are all sinners with a sin nature and prone toward sinfulness. Dan Trabue immediately was overcome with horror at the very thought and took issue with Stan here. I pointed out that even Jesus backed up Stan's position when He uttered the aforementioned words of Mark 10:18 and was then told I needed to prove that Christ meant what He said, despite there being no reason anywhere in the text to suggest He didn't. Worse, Dan has yet to offer an explanation, complete with "hard data" that would provide a sensible, logical alternative meaning of such a clear statement that there is no one good but God alone. I'm still waiting for that explanation. I don't mean like I'm actually waiting, as if I truly expect Dan to provide that explanation. More like it's a standing invitation I offered but can now put out of my mind knowing it'll never be provided.
But here's a pertinent thought or two. For most basketball fans, no one epitomized "great" like Michael Jordan. He is what a "good" basketball player is. That doesn't mean there are no other "good" basketball players, per se. It means that none of them are good by comparison. He's that far above them all. So very few would argue the point. All others are only "good" relative to each other, but not to Jordan. He's so good, they're not good at all. They're only good when Jordan's taken out of the equation.
Now, the above analogy only works as an illustration of the difference between God and the rest of us. We're simply not "good" because God is what "good" is, and by comparison, we all have fallen short of that glory. It doesn't mean we can't refer to some of us as good. It's a reference that's a matter of relativity. That is, relative to each other. We can't possibly match God for the term, but we can still use the term.
Dan likes to think he's on God's level. Normal people don't do that. Normal people recognize His thoughts aren't our thoughts...His ways aren't ours...we have no idea what it's like to be Him. He's much farther above us than any athlete like Jordan. Think of the "good-est" person you can and that person is not close...not within a universe...to God as far as being "good". The difference is such that what passes for good among humans isn't good at all. It's only good relative to other humans. It's a term we use for convenience.
More than anything, I can't understand what about this concept so troubles old Danny boy. Stan mentioned several verses that speak to our sin natures in contradicting the notion that people are basically good. Christ claims no one is good. Dan wets himself. In the meantime, I'm perfectly "good" with the concept. I get it and it doesn't do anything than to further teach me just how badly I need Jesus to be my Savior. No one is good but God and that's why we need Him. We are all sinners and that's why we need Him. Our actions are the fruits by which others see that we are Christians...not that we are "good". There's a difference. We are Christians because we accept Christ as our Lord and Savior and because of that, the fact that we are not good won't be held against us when our time comes. But still, no one is good but God alone.
Basic stuff. The invitation stands. I wait in vain.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)