Replies

“(Serious issues on your part on how to “vet” someone, Vette)”

You know I try to adhere to the posting rules here on FR. But I can’t abide people of “one faith (or religious persuasion)” trashing someone else’s religion (or faith or whatever you choose to call it). Until each of us dies, we don’t KNOW the truth about a supreme being (or for some, if there is even a supreme being at all). So all this religious hubris is really a disgrace for those who practice it. It seems to me that it is a misuse of this exceptional forum for people to use it to further their views of religion at the expense of others.
The corollary to this crap are those who think that the whole solution to our country’s problems is to get rid of California (or whatever state or city floats their hatred boat). Because, despite the leadership in these “places they despise,” there is a very large group of decent people who don’t like their political circumstances very much either and are trying their best to change things.
So the biblical admonition “let he who is without sin cast the first stone” applies to all these folks. I had to laugh when I read recently here a comment by someone from Texas who said “that Texas was fast becoming California, with guns!” So we had better start trying to make things better by stopping all the religious and geographical hypocrisy and start pulling on the same rope!!

Vette, please calm just a bit; and please prayerfully ponder upon what I have to say...which is mainly just two considerations.

First Consideration: Let's say you & I were together and we observed a third party who we both agreed seemed to be awfully "judgmental" toward others.

In response, I chose to try to be "tactful" in commenting to them one-on-one; you decided to announce to the entire room that the person in question was "judgmental."

So let's assume, for the moment, since we BOTH thought the person was "judgmental," that your "announcement" to the entire room was "on the mark."

Yet...Have you EVER considered that to call someone "judgmental" absolutely REQUIRES an element of being "judgmental" yourself?

And that's the parallel here: You think of Elsie as a "trasher" of others' religious beliefs before the FREEPER world; and so what do you do? Why you proceed to trash Elsie's religious beliefs before the entire FREEPER world!

So, tell us, based upon your personal religious standards...what are the rest of us to do? Trash BOTH of you for trashing others' religious beliefs? But doesn't that simply widen the problem -- and make us "trashers" of others' religious beliefs, too?

And how have you done anything distinct from what you accuse Elsie of doing?

(IoW, there's absolutely no moral one-upsmanship on your part).

And, as for my assessment of most of Elsie's posts: Hey, what you might label "trashing" or "bashing" or "judging"...I call it practicing discernment.

My second point?...next post...

Until each of us dies, we don’t KNOW the truth about a supreme being (or for some, if there is even a supreme being at all). So all this religious hubris is really a disgrace for those who practice it.

Second Consideration (based upon what you said above):

Earlier this month, I posted the following lines in a FR vanity:

**************************************

To believe, receive, see, know, honor, confess Jesus is to believe, receive, see, know, honor, confess God Himself!

What did Jesus and the New Testament writers say about this?
* Believing Jesus is believing God (see John 12:44; John 14:1)
* Receiving Jesus is receiving God (see Mark 9:33)
* Seeing Jesus is seeing God (see John 12:45; John 14:9)
* Knowing Jesus was knowing God (see John 8:19, 24; John 14:7)
* Honoring Jesus is honoring God (see John 5:23)
* Hating Jesus is hating God (see John 15:23)
* He who denies the Son, will be denied before the Father (see Matthew 10:33)
* He who confesses the Son, is confessed before the Father (see Matthew 10:32)
* To have God is to have the doctrine of Christ (2 John v. 9)
* 3 The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. (Hebrews 1:3)
* "For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form..." (Colossians 2:9)

********************************

So how does the above apply to your post?

Your worldview claim -- that you want to either expose to everybody, or even seemingly stronger, something you want to impose upon us all, is that we all need to confess Vette 3:16:
"Until each of us dies, we don’t KNOW the truth about a supreme being (or for some, if there is even a supreme being at all). (And all else competing with this absolute is simply 'religious hubris')." -- Signed, Vette 6387 -- as an "absolute" for ALL FREEPERs to absolutely adhere to...

But your truth claim runs absolutely COUNTER to what Jesus said above. Jesus claimed we KNOW the truth of Who God is by seeing/knowing Jesus. Since the fullness of God indwells Him, Jesus IS the Living Revelation of who God is!

Furthermore, Jesus defined eternal life by this very measure: "Now this is eternal life: that they KNOW you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent." (Jesus, John 17:3)

You essentially claim that the whole world couldn't possibly know who God is ... which takes a rather arrogant omniscient vantage point to insist such an imposition upon the entire world.

(Quite ironic, too: Here in the name of opposing others' supposed "religious hubris" because you think it's rather arrogant of them to claim they have absolute truth about a supreme being, you take the opposite ABSOLUTE stance that nobody could possibly know and that you somehow know this...as if you've scanned the entire cosmic data base and we're simply to take you at your absolutely authoritative word on this matter).

Your absolute is just as insistent as those you oppose!

And what's more, Jesus assumed an opposite posture.

Who are we to believe: You, or Jesus?