Replies

In that post, I derided the practice of "guilt by association," which as you know I oppose on logical as well as ethical grounds.

A completely stupid argument. Hillary Clinton aided and abetted Bill in the intimidation of women, besides putting up with an abuser of women in her own marriage. They are legitimately tied together.

This is simply pathetic rationalizing for refusing to fight necessary battles.

Jesus is God, and He can say what He wants.

And yet the scripture specifically describes Christ as "meek," gentle, "made himself of no reputation, took upon himself the form of a servant," but apparently the same rhetoric that Christ uses, that Elijah uses, that entire books of the Bible uses (Amos), is supposedly off limits! Paul even commanded Christians not even to show common hospitality to heretics, but to turn them out, and you think we're bound to a nauseating and hypocritical refusal to name evil that is nowhere evidenced in the behavior of any Christian, martyr or church theologian for nearly 2000 years!

Your error is projecting your own sissified notions of what rhetoric and truth telling should look like onto an ancient world with very different ideas and standards.

Oh, I never said name-calling was prohibited. I just said that folks need to proceed with extreme caution, because those "sissified" notions of gentle, peaceable communication, not calling people morons, etc., all those are divine authority, God talking to us through Scripture, which is sort of like really important, and you are just some anonymous internet guy. Who do you think I'm more likely to follow?

And I do not offer "godspeed" to heretics, but neither am I rude to them, as they are lost souls who need redemption, just like me at an earlier time in my life. I agree that loving our enemy may require frankness, but love is not unkind or rude:

Love suffers long and is kind; love does not envy; love does not parade itself, is not puffed up; does not behave rudely, does not seek its own, is not provoked, thinks no evil;
(1 Corinthians 13:4-5)
(New King James)

If we love our enemy, we will tell them the truth faithfully, but we will do it in the manner of grace we have been taught.

As for Hillary, attacking her by proxy through her association with Bill is not just poor logic and poor ethics, but poor judgment as well. She is a target rich environment all by herself, and there is no faster way for Ted to get into an ugly mud-wrestling match with no good outcome than to wade into those murky personal waters. Benghazi is enough. Her unsecured computer is enough. Her conflicts of interest in dealing with heads of state is more than enough. Ted will be able to go all day and all night long when he's up against her in the general on all the legitimate targets she presents. He'd be foolish to waste his precious ammo on questionable targets with no clear payout. I like what he's doing. Sorry if that doesn't sit well with you.

Peace,

SR