Paul Osborne wrote:You will get no words of compassion from me. I'm glad he is dead.... The Book of Mormon has judged him, not me. So, don't anyone give me the liberal "judge not" the sinner crap. (Are we allowed to say crap in the middle kingdom?)
This was announced today in a thread at MADB. Since the OP, Pahoran has compared him to medieval anti-Semites, called him "smarmy and insincere," accused him of being "devious," and insinuated that the Lord should smite him in the afterlife.
Well, bad form on Pahoran's part perhaps, but, well, he may be, after all, correct.
The face of sin today often wears the mask of tolerance.
Must we really mourn and slobber over the inevitable end of someone who, himself, did not behave as a believing Christian? Where, pray tell, in the Bible, is the mandate for the entire phenomena of the Christian counter cult? Where is the mandate to spend one's entire adult life in a "ministry" dedicated to the defamation and delegitimization of the religions of others?
EVs have termed this "apologetics" but the sheer aggressiveness and proactive nature of this cultural phenomena among Evangelicals belies its actual intent. The absence of similar polemical organizations or structures among those the counter cult attacks is also telling (except on the Dawkinoid secular left, who despise anything and anybody remotely more religious than B.F. Skinner).
Its one thing to express condolences toward the loss of a loved one, but quite another to roll over and spread one's legs because a major life change occurred. And make no mistake, to me, death is a major developmental task of life, it is not the end of anything except the mortal probation. One's legacy lives on, for good or ill. Condolences yes, but we need not play make believe.
The face of sin today often wears the mask of tolerance.
Coggins7 wrote:Must we really mourn and slobber over the inevitable end of someone who, himself, did not behave as a believing Christian?
No, we don't have to mourn and slobber over someone we didn't know. That would seem patently obvious. But I would imagine it behooves us not to act like spiteful asses when someone dies. I suppose it's too late for you and Pah this time to behave with some common decency.
Coggins wrote:Condolences yes, but we need not play make believe.
Who is playing make believe? People who KNEW the man are simply saying that they thought he was a nice, decent person. Explain to me how that is "make believe"?
liz3564 wrote:Who is playing make believe? People who KNEW the man are simply saying that they thought he was a nice, decent person. Explain to me how that is "make believe"?
Isn't it strange that for Cogs and Russell, it's wrong to say nice things about someone you know, but perfectly acceptable to say hateful things about someone you don't know? Still trying to figure that one out.
liz3564 wrote:Who is playing make believe? People who KNEW the man are simply saying that they thought he was a nice, decent person. Explain to me how that is "make believe"?
Isn't it strange that for Cogs and Russell, it's wrong to say nice things about someone you know, but perfectly acceptable to say hateful things about someone you don't know? Still trying to figure that one out.
Strange, indeed. If you figure it out, Runtu, let me know and explain it to me.