Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: Mad Dawg; Judith Anne; Amityschild; Brad's Gramma; Cvengr; DvdMom; firebrand; GiovannaNicoletta; ...

Perhaps I missed it.

I don’t recall seeing any Protty hereon as seeing Christ on The Cross as a weakness or a defeat.

In terms of casting gritches at Paul . . . If the shoe had been on the other foot, it would have been the Roman Catholics et al dog piling on the Protty who had dared to say such things against Paul.

That’s the nature of IN-GROUP/OUT-GROUP feelings and dynamics.

And, if past patterns had been any indication, the fierceness and personal assaultiveness in the Roman Catholic et al dogpiling on said Protty would have been orders of magnitude worse than the total JA has received so far.

Besides all that, JA give more than as good as she gets, routinely.

I think it’s one thing to struggle with, dislike some of God’s dealings with us or even some of God’s ways. I still don’t understand very well the prophet calling the bears down to eat the kids taunting him about his bald head.

It is very much another level of cheek or something to call the scribe of most of the New Testament insane.

However it’s sliced, that’s NOT a MINOR assertion.

Then to try and weasel around and pretend it’s a minor assertion only worsens things, imho.

Certainly God uses everything in His Creation for His glory—even insanity in some sense.

However, asserting that HIS CHOSEN MAJOR SCRIBE of such a huge proportion of Scripture is insane is well beyond reason and well over the line of insult—not just against Paul but against HIS BOSS WHO CREATED, CHOSE, TRAINED, CONDITIONED AND REDEMMED HIM AND THEN TAUGHT HIM more.

It is right, Biblical and honorable to blow the whistle and throw a red flag of enormous caution—even outrage on that.


842 posted on 04/23/2010 8:39:36 AM PDT by Quix (BLOKES who got us where we R: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2130557/posts?page=81#81)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 603 | View Replies ]


To: Quix

Tu quoque (ea quoque?) isn’t much of an excuse.

I have the distinct impression that when we mention crucifixes in our churches we get criticized for portraying Christ in His weakness, pain, and all.

I am not trying to minimize what JA said. I am trying to distinguish it from saying “an epistle of straw,” or saying that Paul shouldn’t be in the Bible.

I do not share her opinion of Paul.


844 posted on 04/23/2010 8:46:33 AM PDT by Mad Dawg (Oh Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to thee.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 842 | View Replies ]

To: Quix; Dr. Eckleburg
I don’t recall seeing any Protty hereon as seeing Christ on The Cross as a weakness or a defeat.

I do. Dr. Eckleburg routinely criticizes Catholics for using the crucifix, opposed to an empty cross.

858 posted on 04/23/2010 9:52:07 AM PDT by Judith Anne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 842 | View Replies ]

To: Quix
If the shoe had been on the other foot, it would have been the Roman Catholics et al dog piling on the Protty who had dared to say such things against Paul.

Not me! I would have been posting: "At last, a prottie I can agree with!" But it's interesting that you recognize dogpiling when it occurs.

867 posted on 04/23/2010 10:22:19 AM PDT by Judith Anne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 842 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson