I offer my services to the Pope of Rome / The Vatican / of the Catholic Church on these grounds:
Job [Job's book, 42 pages or so] in the Bible IS the job to accomplish [or job list to finish]!!!
Jesus as Revenge of Jesus
-> Under Revenge of Jesus it may now be a duty to arm oneself with one or more guns and include an arsenal of other "deterrents".
The first commandment may imply to worship truth!
-> Under the line above, that we have a duty to STAY WITH the principles of Truth and live dutifully to God and life, incl. offspring!
It may also be noted that I'm an author of a whole new psychiatric theory!
I've also suggested the writing of the "Scientific [Hebrew] Bible"!!!
I've also made God/Deity belief for the World wide population by 4-fold solution to God, thus intellectually defeating Atheism in general!
There's an immediate DUTY for the Church to immediately embrace a two children / one child strategy and the widespread use of contraception pills and condoms _BECAUSE PLANET EARTH IS GOD'S CREATION IN ALL IT'S DIVERSITY and solemnly so!!! If we fail to /carry Earth as such/, we may infringe on God's will and benevolence to us!!! From the WWF it's easy to come to grips with animals in great distress over the whole World!
Whether it is common to think so or not, I must say that The Church of Christianity surely may speak against the suicide, but I think this is directed to a friend in hardship and not the friend's own wish to end it! Thus, the Church of Christ. needs / has the explicit duty to let these people seek their own ends, including that of the suicide. This may also entail that the Church now has the duty to facilitate suicides on the common basis, regardless! I mean, the Church can't sit and watch people being tortured to death and be silent about it or remain an authority of consciousness to people of character and of sound faith!!! This must be clear.
Even the very excellent philosopher Kant (1724 - 1804) seems to agree that suicide is something that must be allowed and that staying in life despite of hardship is praiseworthy, i.e., please look to his 80 pages moral text, a text inline with the critiques, I think!
Link to Wikip. on one of his critiques: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critique_of_Practical_Reason !
What I talk about here is: (1785) Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals (Grundlegung zur Metaphysik der Sitten)!
This is written on p. 45 in one version, where he explains the First principle!
Remember, that when you read this, you should separate "duty" from "natural inclination" so that every time you uphold a duty, you get "stars of respect" from your humanity, but when you stick to "lawful" natural inclination, pertaining to the Principle of Categorical Imperative that is the main message of this text it must then be clear, this must be allowed and in compliance with general humanity!
Because committing suicide does not mean that you destroy other people's ends, no, it means you end yours and leave others to their ends, which is commonly respected in this text!
I am inspired and I may offer "a good deal". It's up to you, the readers of this to pass the correct judgments!!! That is, formally speaking, the services from above are offered on the basis of a consultant from "the far east", finding great reflections valuable to everyone, but in one Catholic Church with a theology that I'm not prepared to accept just yet. This also applies to most other Christian Churches. However, the Unitarian Church may be acceptable, but I'm happy with Scientology and I see no immediate need to offer more than insights at this point in time!
It should be obvious that these are very important to Christianity all over the World and I hope others follow up if my chances for doing this are lost or if I'm too encumbered with other matters, one way or another.
[More?]
Note: all of this is first published to Facebook over the span of some days.
Note2: one part is first published to Facebook, yesterday at 19:00(?) CET or so.
Note3: Norway isn't to be trusted toward its intellectual duties toward being compatible to The Catholic Church in terms of legal practice and more. This falls under this sentence: "I can't take this stupid country, Norway, anymore!!!"
Note4: this has been transferred now to this blog from Whatiswritten with 4 comments by Sat. 22:00 CET, 18. Feb. 2012.
4 comments:
A little note on entailment of the Modal Argument for God, NDNID: It has really been entered earlier (by note on knowledge of Heaven under the NDNID document), but I just note it again that the possible God, ◊(Gx), _logically, entails the necessary God, □(Gx), insofar (or iffy, if you want) as true God has a place within the possible God, ◊(Gx)!!!
Some Biblical inspiration: "James 4:17": Anyone, then, who knows the good he ought to do and doesn't do it, sins. [The New Int. Version, 1984!]
Numbers 15:30 NIV
" 'But anyone who sins defiantly, whether native-born or alien, blasphemes the LORD, and that person must be cut off from his people." This one is very hard and good, I think!
Numbers 16:26 NIV
"He warned the assembly, "Move back from the tents of these wicked men! Do not touch anything belonging to them, or you will be swept away because of all their sins."
I've also quoted Ezekiel under Revenge of Jesus and it fits very well: When you have the idiot in front of you and you know you have the power and you get to exercise some moral character, I can only advise this for the good vigilante/pistolier:
The Classic Ezekiel 25:17, it goes,
"The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the iniquities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men. Blessed is he who in the name of charity and goodwill shepherds the weak through the valley of darkness, for he is truly his brother's keeper and the finder of lost children. And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who attempt to poison and destroy my brothers. And you will know my name is the Lord when I lay my vengeance upon thee."
Ezekiel is likely to mean that the _protector_ of fellow person and of humanity! There is NO doubt to this point!
New: I am inspired and I may offer "a good deal". It's up to you, the readers of this to pass the correct judgments!!! -> That is, formally speaking, the services from above are offered on the basis of a consultant from "the far east", finding great reflections valuable to everyone, but in one Catholic Church with a theology that I'm not prepared to accept just yet. This also applies to most other Christian Churches. However, the Unitarian Church may be acceptable, but I'm happy with Scientology and I see no immediate need to offer more than insights at this point in time!
Above also, protector can also be written defender. The humanity is implied by "my brother's keeper" that has an equivalent in the French flag to Fraternity from a country, France, that adores their unifying force impersonated by Jeanne D'Arc, who has been known to be adamant in the Christian belief and to gather France under her King!
However, while the other blog gets Seattle time stamp this one now above has CET time stamp as I want it to have.
ReplyDeleteThat is, probably, the main posts get the "settings" time stamp while the comment above has the Seattle time stamp. Perhaps this is just the "stupid" or "weird" convention of Blogspot (with or without the intention to appear this way)!
ReplyDeleteNot only is Job's book introduced by a tale (as known by the numbers), but this is probably the complaint over how the "many stories" appears as a diversion to many people on how to stay on the path to God and Heaven. Job's Book is there the job list to accomplish with respects of explanations and guidances like advise!
ReplyDeleteSo, while the Bible is under many people's conception complete, my consideration or my perception of this matter of Job's Book makes this untrue. The Bible ISN'T COMPLETE! The people of that time had many theological questions they wanted answers to!
I usually cite spending 400 hours back in the days of youth and adolescence for thinking about Jesus of Nazareth and in the end I threw it all away, but stayed with the words of Søren Kierkegaard and had a "marginal" view of Religion, throwing myself over the cut of a believer, (OVER/AWAY) FROM the agnostics, those who doubt in God. Not only has this "marginal" view stayed with me, but other life mysteries/"mysteries"/existential questions of the World have kept toward a God belief!
ReplyDeleteNot that I do not say that religions are now forever defended by Non-Dogmatic Intelligent Design in that it forces the opposition to prove ~◊G, not possible God, that is likely to put them away for good. But I have also additional news for religious people everywhere in the World: this notion against the "747 Jet" that they have launched against the Religious, "Against the Header of "Deductive Arguments", you know, I'm just very much AGAINST this misnomer of a header that says "Deductive Arguments". First of all, they never consider God with any charity, a failure in itself. Secondly, they fail to provide any clear deductive structures that are valid in and by themselves. Thirdly, for providing some fireman's work, I write: "(Important: not to say that Deductive Arguments are exclusive to the Arguments against God as such)". Fourthly, fx. for God to create the 747 airplane all by itself in one "miracle" of nature, they never bother to check in the Bible that it says that God can create this, any less than God can create pyramids, to roll back on technology a few steps! Again, these people don't CARE!
ReplyDeleteNote: I'm uncertain whether the anti-"747-jet" notion has been written to Wikipedia Talkpages first or Facebook. Either way, I have put it there in MY OWN NAME, not giving up the slightest intellectual work that I've made!
Cheers!
To be fair of both the maker of the 747 air plane argument and Atheists, the 747 air plane argument can be set up as logical argument this way, by modus tollens:
ReplyDelete1 | If God exists then God should be able to make the 747 all by itself
2 | God hasn't been able to make the 747 all by itself
3 | God does not exist!
Symbolically:
UoD: Everything
G: If God exists
A: God should be able to make the 747 all by itself
1 | G -> A P
2 | ~A P
----------------------------
3 | ~A 2 R
----------------------------
4 | ~G 1, 3 MT
(by SD, modus tollens, that you can more or less easily derive from the standard logics, Sentential Logics of the usual routines.
Note: The above is then, of course, sentential logic.
The counter-attacks by us, the Religious, then, are this: THERE ARE NO examples in the Bible where God makes buidlings or constructions characteristic og human beings! Perhaps, you can write the stone bricks with the 10 commandments on, but the Bible only say that "Moses came down from the mountain with 10 stone bricks that had the 10 commandments which were given to him by God", NOT that God did anything else than to "instruct" him to write the 10 commandments on stone bricks! You get it, please?
Fx.: Exodus 34:28-30, New International Version 1984 (NIV1984)
"28 Moses was there with the Lord forty days and forty nights without eating bread or drinking water. And he wrote on the tablets the words of the covenant — the Ten Commandments." From
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus+34%3A28-30&version=NIV1984 !
Moses was there with the LORD forty days and forty nights without eating bread... Check it out! Cheers!
First, some on Jesus (Weapon/Metaphorical): King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)
ReplyDeleteJesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. (John 14:6)
Second: It has been said that John of the Bible, by book of John, is /the/ most dubious book in the Bible and that he really may have been outside the Christian belief because he's disposition wouldn't be suitable for it! Agree?
Thirdly. Formal notice: I am strictly devoted to a kind of *commentary* to the original documents of the Bible, adding everything, from the Torah/Talmud, Bible (most comprehensive version, Ev. Luth, and Cath., some research), Quran and some matters from the Bahai faith. So, I do not touch nor "contest" (as if I could ever do that) any of these holy documents (to believers).
For pre-emptive strike toward "any retard" out there in the World who thinks I do not understand the notion of (necessary) God as modal notion. Here are the 4 "components" more definitely put, in terms of religious belief:
ReplyDeleteNec. E -> Nec. God
(Nec. E biconditional Nec. God)
Nec. M -> Nec. God
(Nec. M bicond. Nec. God)
Nec. H (Heaven, "entailment") -> Nec. God
(Nec. H identity Nec. God)
Nec. D (definition of God) identity Nec. God)
These are all logical and /easy/ to deduce to *Nec. God!!!*
Upon my other efforts to religiousness around the World, I bring also this (as happy they may always be, Jesus, God, the Holy Ghost combined):
ReplyDeleteI bring these good news today, despite general difficulties of society and I hope you like them:
Given this Foundation, I'd like to point out that religious faith now lies inside the fortress of 3 very hard notions:
Privacy - the Atheists bring NOTHING extra when it comes to religion and we are entitled the religious belief (always, insofar as this is commensurable with law and order, the vitae of human kind) because it's a private matter (or pertaining to specific/legal places of worship, the churches, temples, mosques or whatever, well, well, red in face or not, "synagogues"?)!
2nd, Modal God of Logics, the hardest academic notions, stand (almost) theoretically irrefutable to the Atheists! They are struggling with the logical questions nowadays! Ref.: also Kripke on Modal Logics!
3rd, the notions of the Cardinal Sins are so distasteful that it even shatters Kierkegaard's doubt be "Either/Or", witness, please, Se7en/Seven with Brad Pitt and Morgan Freeman as "evil or evil" by the Cardinal Sins and add as Priest's final words: "with this [fetus in a box] I've brought (my) Wrath clean!" as the "Priest" has then conducted an insane wrathful war against the (hidden lust of his of the) Cardinal Sins, as Wrath over the other 6!
All in all, You are very defended, the fortress likely to stand forever! Good?
(You may take this also to the Humanism by https://www.facebook.com/RichardDawkinsFoundation?fref=ts .)
Also by a friend's story to another by Perfect Lovers Slash Perfect Strangers (also as "flow" and "oceans" by Deep Purple).
Best wishes,
Lenny Olsnes-Lea
More under "Seven" as the sins of distaste:
It, the notion of the seven cardinal sins, is also propelled by Kierkegaard's notion of "aesthetics" and as importance grow by the 3 steps, like rocket stages lifting a cargo to outer space, to the stars, so also is aesthetics giving power to ethics and aesthetics and ethics to religiousness! Note also that the seven cardinal sins are found /in/ the Bible "and not somewhere arbitrary", that is, the Bible gets the moral virtue for describing them overall and thus impels the readers (further) to believe in it, becoming (more) Christians, as the Bible makes the case for winning "hearts and minds"! /Therefore/, by logical deduction, "Seven" is a case for Christianity and other religions and not "something else"!
This url also enters as pro-God in the Atheism-Religions-debates, even over /those/ Nobel-laureates (Sartre etc.): http://whatiswritten777.blogspot.no/2011/09/part-of-easy-way-to-religion-and.html .
ReplyDelete(Comment above to be deleted. Sorry.)
I am still to be considered Evangelical-Lutheran Christian after having let down my former membership to the State Church of Norway in January 2003, and found NO peace to enter congregation since then, also after a little secular revolution "here in Norway".
ReplyDeleteI hereby also claim that I have been central in bringing confidence to the Catholic Church's addition of all the science it has added under:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.casinapioiv.va/content/accademia/en.html and
Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontifical_Academy_of_Sciences
which has been preceded by the Galileo considerations and the colleagues he must have had with the Catholic Church as they have been the star-gazers, the early astronomers of those times.
This has lead me to find the Catholic Church's "Scientific Section", one that at the time only contained two documents, I can't remember the titles, but of the more typical theological kinds. However, after my reporting to the Vatican that "in identifying God's ways in nature", they could expand the "Scientific Section" greatly and thus present a kind of "God's Science" to its followers, generating (much) more, possibly, confidence with them that the Catholic Church now has gained "control" in scientific questions, and yes, that the old lines have now been picked up again. I've been part of this effort (or central to it) and I, one way or the other, have put my name behind this turn ALL THE WAY to the end (of my life, at least)! Cheers!
(Only a bit of bragging, I guess. I also happen to lack the very message I've sent to the Catholic Church at the time, but I'll look for it and "suspects" are the Facebook groups of the Catholic Church or one of Christianity. I also have some private files for it, after reporting "American Psycho" to it, the Church for "banning", that it is "unholy"!)
Although, I'm not Catholic, I have great ecumenical sympathies and see the Catholic Church as a great Church too among the other Christian Churches, the Ev.-Lutheran, the Orthodox!
ReplyDeleteSome inspiration to serve today.
ReplyDeleteI seem to recall (with my "native" US American /accent/ of the Mid-West):
There is a story of the Blue Jacks, the US Army, which says that every unit of a given size had to bring along with it the word of God, The Holy Bible, and for this it brought with it a special priest, the Army Priest, but at other times, this responsibility went with the leading officer of his unit (no women allowed).
It's also said, by faint memory, that every officer of the Blue Jacks were obligated to carry one with them (in two senses), The Holy Bible.
Now, I also happen to think that the General's office, by tradition, are sided by two smaller buildings, one, the strategists' office and the other, the priest's office and a prayer's room.
Also, it should be clear that morality must have been important for the Army to do the right, in representing a properly religious army, and that consequently, in a sense, the priest has thus represented the army's sanity and the moral /aim/ of the General!
This is a notion of pride, I think, for those who are Religious, Christians, Buddhist, Jewish, or Muslim...! Enjoy!
What if we now call this General's Annex a chapel! That's right: CHAPEL,
and from Wikipedia you may also look up:
Church Army Chapel, Blackheath .