Jonathan H. B. Lobl

To my understanding; God is a projection. A cruel people, will project that cruelty, onto their God. It is the God that makes sense to them. Even now -- look and see who resonates with that God.

I take people at their word. Who wants this? They are Legion. Mark 5:9 And he asked him, What is thy name? And he answered, saying, My name is Legion: for we are many. In Context | Full Chapter | Other Translations

Yes. Of course.

Now that you mention it -- yes.

How Godly of them. God kills his enemies. Why not the Church?

Yes. If only faith -- and prayer -- actually made a difference. A real difference. Alas, we are stuck with reality.

I pause now for some religious humor. The scene is the woman taken in adultery. We all know the story. The crowd has gathered their stones and the execution is about to begin. Jesus makes his big statement to the crowd. Let the one who is sinless, cast the first stone. From out of the crowd comes a rock, that draws first blood. Jesus turns to see who threw the first stone -- and says -- Oh, Mother! 😛

The Prosperity Gospel has a simple premise. Wealth is a display of God's favor. That means the rich are favored by God. the poor are getting what they deserve. Beware of shepherds who enjoy the taste of mutton. Psalm 23: "The Lord is my shepherd........"

Socrates was put to death by Hemlock.

In this context, punishment is another word for retribution. The punishment of stoning is the punishment for breaking God's law. A non-virgin woman on her wedding day -- gets the same punishment as a man gathering sticks on the Sabbath. The punishment is not for the severity of the crime, but for breaking God's Law. When all violations of the law get equal punishment -- because the real crime is breaking the Law -- even the concept of justice becomes a joke. Along comes Dan, who says that his sympathy is for the victim, instead of the assailant. In this context -- the woman found guilty of adultery -- who is the assailant? Yet Dan takes this as the example of his ability to nuance. Continuing, in the Gospels, where is this situation dealt with? The woman taken in adultery. A woman is to be stoned to death, when Jesus is present. What does Jesus do? Does he commute the sentence? Does he declare that the Law is unjust? Does he say that the Law is being changed? No. He announces -- Let the one who is sinless cast the first stone. What fool thinks this is a good solution? Following that guideline -- nobody could enforce -- or punish -- the violation of any law. It stinks of sanctimony, but there is nothing useful there. Now, we can talk about equality before the Law. Where in God's Law, is God demanding that men be virgins, on their wedding day? There isn't any such command. Of course. Because concepts like equality and justice are not part of the structure of this Law.

Thank you.

although they would probably make an exception if I broke a law No. I don't have any desire to see you suffer. I have an opposition to brutality too, mine is just geared toward the victim rather than sympathy towards the assailant. How's that for nuance? Sad. You have missed the point.

No. Not every topic needs to devolve into a political diatribe. I kept my remarks brief. I kept my remarks relevant. I don't think that constitutes a diatribe. Neither do I feel the need to self censor. When politics are relevant, I don't feel the need to tip toe around them. What did I say, that bothered you that much?

For me, the core issue here, is opposition to brutality -- death by stoning -- being conflated with pacifism. I understand that Dan doesn't understand distinction and nuance. Even for him, this is extreme.

Words change their meaning over time. Individual usage varies. It's easy to get stuck, in a war of words, over definitions. For all that, even the attempt at communication, falls apart without words. What else do we have?

The Unitarian Universalist Church, has various Pagan congregations. More than that, I can't say. Patheos has Wiccan bloggers. Again, I don't know if that helps. Good luck with your search.

Yes.

Being against cruelty, brutality and sadism; is not the same as being a pacifist. Neither is opposition to an unjust law. Neither is opposition to the death penalty. Justice is an important concept. Throwing around words like pacifist is not helpful.

Threads wander. They wander off topic. They wander back on topic. Is there anything you care to add? Thoughts? Observations? Feel free.

Your observation is valid. The Bible's God is sick and twisted. Do you think you can explain that to Dan?

The Evangelical right keeps telling me, that Trump is God's anointed. Trump agrees with them. It makes even the idea of God seem silly. Trump? An agent of God?

I think it's all mythology. In mythology, snakes and donkeys talk. It's all literal, unless it's not.

I think I'm there. I can't take even the idea of God, seriously, long enough to argue about it. It's not even about disbelief. It's all so silly.

There is nothing to be gained in arguing Scripture with Dan. No matter what we say, Dan will tell us that we don't understand. That we have the wrong understanding. The wrong context. The wrong translation. The wrong meaning. The wrong word. The wrong what ever. Remember. Dan cares only about his faith. Facts and reality are nothing to him, because his beliefs trump all. Reason will not penetrate. At best, Dan will change the subject and drag you off into a different -- meaningless -- direction. He will back it all up with endless Bible quotes. When Dan's Scriptural quoting fails to impress you -- Dan will then insist, that it is because you hate God. Or the Bible. Or religion. Or Christ. The cycle is endless. I can't do it any more.

Just so.