Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!lll-crg!nike!ucbcad!ucbvax!hplabs!sdcrdcf!ism780c!marty From: marty@ism780c.UUCP (Marty Smith) Newsgroups: net.religion.christian,talk.religion.misc Subject: Re: Reply to Marty Smith Message-ID: <3664@ism780c.UUCP> Date: Thu, 25-Sep-86 14:50:17 EDT Article-I.D.: ism780c.3664 Posted: Thu Sep 25 14:50:17 1986 Date-Received: Tue, 30-Sep-86 00:37:11 EDT References: <5507@decwrl.DEC.COM> Reply-To: marty@ism780c.UUCP (Marty Smith) Organization: Interactive Systems Corp., Santa Monica, CA Lines: 106 Xref: linus net.religion.christian:4769 talk.religion.misc:295 Organization: In article <5507@decwrl.DEC.COM> arndt@indian.dec.com writes: [minor deletion] >Marty takes 'God damm it' to new (not really, only on the net) heights! >In sum: > o it acknowledges God exists > o presumes he has power > o presuems he is listening > > Ergo, actually an act of worship! > >Even in the mouth of an unbeliever it is a 'tribute' to a believer's faith. [minor deletion] >So nice try. But in reality the Apostle Paul nails guys like you way back in >the first century. "Should we sin that grace may more abound" is the way he >puts it. Of course his answer is NO! Because, you see, even further back >Moses passed on the word, "Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God >in vain." > >The entire sin of man may be summed up in the idea that he presumes the >perogitives of God! What does this phrase mean: "presumes the perogatives of God?" (a) takes on the powers of God; or (b) assumes God has those powers. I assume you mean (a) because there is clearly nothing sinful about (b). But how does use of the curse "God damn it" imply that I am trying to take on the powers of God? It does not. If I could take on the powers of God, I could damn whatever I please. But I would be a benevolent God, so I wouldn't really damn anybody. I might put the fear of Me in the fundamentalists though. No, use of the curse does not presume the perogatives of God, because I know I cannot do such a thing. I *do* exist. God saw to that. But I'm neither omnipotent nor omniscient, and there is no danger of me attaining either status soon. So I can't damn anything, and I know it. So, to persist in the belief that cursing presumes the perogatives of God is mere superstition. Now what of Paul's question: "Should we sin that grace may more abound?" If sinning actually increased the amount of grace, then I would say yes, we ought to sin, because grace is certainly something we need more of. Sinning would thus be a form of self-sacrifice, again a form of worship. "I do this fornication willingly, that there may be more grace in the world." Why did Paul have to be unclear about what he was saying? Why didn't he just say, "Sin does not increase the amount of grace. If you sin, your personal grace level will be lowered." He confused the issue by asking the question in such a way that the answer is not clear. As for Moses's statement, "Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain;" this is a command, not an argument that one ought not to take the Lord's name in vain. But such an argument would be obviously true. If God exists, is omnipotent, and is omniscient, only a fool would run the risk of pissing him off. But the important question is, how does one take the name of the Lord thy God in vain? Use of the curse "God damn it" does not. It acknowledges the aforementioned perogatives. I claim you only see it as blasphemy, because your vision is made cloudy by quotes from the Bible. Statements of the form "God does not exist" are statements that take the name of the Lord thy God in vain and are blasphemous. That is, when the statement "God does not exist" is uttered as a declaration that, indeed, there is no God, then the person uttering that statement has, from the Christian point of view, taken the name of the Lord thy God in vain. >Man has a wide legitimate range of 'improvement' and 'movement' designed >and ordained by God. 'Fulfillment' IS finding one's place!! And staying >there. That's were it all comes together for one. Well put. May we both find our respective places. Or have you already found yours? >You try to say presuming the perogitives is 'getting closer to God'. Worship! >Rather it's foolishness. Dangerous and evil. Like jumping off the theological >garage roof with a hanky held by the ends. I say I am NOT presuming the perogatives of God, but this brings up an interesting contradiction. If presuming the perogatives of God is sin (shouldn't we be saying "PRErogatives"?), but I am (a) created in God's image and (b) supposed to strive for the perfection of being one with God, then where must I stop so as not to presume the prerogatives of God? As for jumping off the theological garage roof with a hanky held by the ends, this would be an act of great faith for a believer who knew nothing of parachute-ology. >Care to try your hand on the Trinity? I'm not trying to get you to blaspheme >but you have perhaps a talent for viewing things from a different angle and >I don't beleive you believe what you are saying. You start. Whatever I post won't be blasphemy from my point of view, and I won't deliberately try to offend. But I do believe what I am saying, not with the fanaticism of a fundamentalist, but with the healthy doubts of one who has not yet found his place. One more thing: If you are correct, and use of the curse "God damn it" does presume the prerogatives of God, then so does "God bless you." God bless you, Ken Arndt. Marty Smith