Controversial Anniversary

[revsdd]

Maybe revsdd can help answer that.

Sorry, Kimmio. I confess I have not followed this thread "religiously" so to speak, and so didn't notice you had mentioned my name. I can't access the mind of God, obviously, but I can offer an opinion.

I have a milder form of the same thing. Is it God's plan for me to be the way I am, or not? Is it a matter of degree?

If by "the way I am" you mean living with a "disability" then I do not believe that it is God's plan that you be the way you are. Nor is it God's plan for me to be the way I am. I do not believe that God plans for specific people to be "disabled" or "able-bodied" or "mentally impaired" or whatever other term we choose to use. I believe that God's plan is more "cosmic" in scope, you might say. I believe there is a divine plan that is being worked out and that will be fulfilled, but that does not require that God plan out every detail, including what specific things are going to happen to people, what specific medical conditions individuals may have, etc., etc. Those have more to do with genetics and sometimes human error or even sin than anything else (doctors making errors during childbirth that leave babies brain-damaged, mothers who smoke or drink or do drugs during pregnancy that impact their babies' quality of life, fathers who abuse their own babies and leave them scarred and sometimes injured - things like that) than anything else.

Because I'm thankful to be alive, despite the challenges, and have never had any ambitions, physically, to fit a perfect norm set by society. Only my personal best.

I think we are called to be grateful and to live life with gratitude and thanksgiving. Seeking to be the best we can be is not a phrase that's found in the Bible, but I believe it's a worthy goal for a person of faith.

I guess those with "superior" bodies are God's responsibility and those with perceived "faults" are not God's work?

I think I answered this point above, but I'll reiterate - God is not responsible for the qualities that make us superior in human eyes or for what people might perceive to be our faults. Those are a combination of nature and nurture. And, as I just noted and as you note "superior" and "faults" are human perceptions rather than divinely granted attributes. I believe that we are all equal before God, and that as people of God we should strive to see each other and to treat each other as equals who are equally valuable and equally worthy of dignity and respect. The inequalities we see in this world that often take away dignity and respect from some groups are more a reflection on what I would argue is the fallen-ness of this world rather than any plan of God.

Can you show me one perfect human who never acquires any "faults" with their body?

No. Certainly from a Christian perspective our bodies are not perfect. If they were then presumably there would be no concept of the need for our bodies to be redeemed. If they were then Paul would not have been inspired to write words such as these in 1 Corinthians:

"I declare to you, brothers and sisters, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. Listen, I tell you a mystery: We will not all sleep, but we will all be changed - in a flash, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. For the perishable must clothe itself with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality. When the perishable has been clothed with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality, then the saying that is written will come true: “Death has been swallowed up in victory."

We can get caught up in the imagery of the passage (twinkling of an eye, trumpets sounding) but that would miss the point of the passage. Somehow, Paul says, and at some moment, "we will all be changed." How exactly or when exactly that will happen we don't know, and focusing on those questions get us away from the point Paul was making. None of us are what we will become. The most accomplished scholar, the greatest athlete, the wealthiest and most powerful among us - not what they will become. The person using a walker, the person born without limbs, the person with a condition leaving them unable to walk or speak or see or hear - not what they will become.

Paul sees our "imperfections" illustrated by the fact that we all die. He also sees death being ultimately defeated. Ultimately he sees victory over the fallen state of the world that leaves us all as something other than what God desires us to be and is determined to transform us into. That is redemption of the body. Since all of us must be redeemed, it stands to reason that none of us are superior or inferior to others - at least not spiritually, morally or ethically.

 

[Luce NDs]

God is an emotional thought ... thus disturbingly bringing on chaos of the alternate kind ... out there?

 

[revjohn]

Since all of us must be redeemed, it stands to reason that none of us are superior or inferior to others - at least not spiritually, morally or ethically.

This with a quibble.

We may, in fact, be superior to others spiritually, morally, ethically or even in all three areas. That doesn't mean we in and of ourselves meet God's threshhold for being considered righteous.

"All have sinned."

Even those who may be superior morally, ethically or spiritually.

We are not judged against the ability of others, we are judged on our own merits or lack thereof. The existence of grace ensures that we need not get what our deeds deserve, Again, all have sinned and the wages of sin are death.

Grace and redemption mean that there is hope for all of us even those who may, in comparison to others, be of inferior spirituality, morality or ethicality.

 

[Luce NDs]

The quibble allows for wobble, weaving and waves that shake up the near dead ...

 

[revsdd]

This with a quibble.

We may, in fact, be superior to others spiritually, morally, ethically or even in all three areas. That doesn't mean we in and of ourselves meet God's threshhold for being considered righteous.

"All have sinned."

Even those who may be superior morally, ethically or spiritually.

We are not judged against the ability of others, we are judged on our own merits or lack thereof. The existence of grace ensures that we need not get what our deeds deserve, Again, all have sinned and the wages of sin are death.

Grace and redemption mean that there is hope for all of us even those who may, in comparison to others, be of inferior spirituality, morality or ethicality.

A quibble in response.

We are not superior spiritually, morally or ethically but some may indeed have greater or lesser spirituality, morality or ethicality. The two are not the same thing. If Person A has greater "spirituality" than Person B that does not make them "spiritually superior."

Perhaps a more secular illustration: Person A may write with great grammatical precision, while Person B may not have the foggiest concept of the basic rules of grammar, but both are quite capable of making themselves easily understood. In one sense, Person A may have superior communication skills, but both are equally capable of communicating.

 

[revjohn]

Perhaps a more secular illustration: Person A may write with great grammatical precision, while Person B may not have the foggiest concept of the basic rules of grammar, but both are quite capable of making themselves easily understood. In one sense, Person A may have superior communication skills, but both are equally capable of communicating.

I think you blew the illustration and handed me the win.

You probably meant to say, "In one sense, Person A may have greater communication skills but both are equally capable of communicating."

Or maybe there is a semantic issue.

Depending on the referent there is a possibility that Person A may have greater or lesser spirituality/morality/ethicality. I am guessing that you are not talking quantitatively here but qualitatively. If the quality of Person A's spirituality/morality/ethicality is greater then it qualifies as superior.

So Person A can be superior to Person B.

Person A being superior to Person B does not mean that Person A satisfies the criterion for righteousness or holiness that God demands. In that sense Person A being superior or inferior to Person B matters not at all since both belong to the All that have sinned.

 

[revsdd]

I think you blew the illustration and handed me the win.

Quibbling over analogies or metaphors or illustrations is pointless. No analogy or metaphor or illustration ever perfectly reflects what is being represented. Nor do I believe that analyzing such is a win/lose proposition, so I "handed" you nothing except an opportunity to reply and continue the conversation.

You probably meant to say, "In one sense, Person A may have greater communication skills but both are equally capable of communicating." Or maybe there is a semantic issue.

It's always dangerous for one person to try to tell another person what they "probably meant." I meant what I wrote. I could have added (had I chosen) something like: "In another sense, Person A may have greater communication skills but both are equally capable of communicating." Or maybe there is a semantic issue.

Depending on the referent there is a possibility that Person A may have greater or lesser spirituality/morality/ethicality. I am guessing that you are not talking quantitatively here but qualitatively.

I meant both qualitative and quantitative.

If the quality of Person A's spirituality/morality/ethicality is greater then it qualifies as superior.
So Person A can be superior to Person B.

It is my contention that a person who has greater spirituality (either quantitavely or qualitatively) is not spiritually "superior." Greater is a measure; superior is a value judgement.

Person A being superior to Person B does not mean that Person A satisfies the criterion for righteousness or holiness that God demands. In that sense Person A being superior or inferior to Person B matters not at all since both belong to the All that have sinned.

Here we agree.

In any event, I suspect that our disagreement is, indeed, more semantic than substantive.

 

[chansen]

Uh oh. The revs are fighting. They're all revved up.

 

[revsdd]

Uh oh. The revs are fighting. They're all revved up.

Proof texts at 20 paces.

Everybody else - DUCK!

 

[revjohn]

Here we agree.

In any event, I suspect that our disagreement is, indeed, more semantic than substantive.

Looks like.

 

[Kimmio Laughterlove]

Sorry, Kimmio. I confess I have not followed this thread "religiously" so to speak, and so didn't notice you had mentioned my name. I can't access the mind of God, obviously, but I can offer an opinion.


If by "the way I am" you mean living with a "disability" then I do not believe that it is God's plan that you be the way you are. Nor is it God's plan for me to be the way I am. I do not believe that God plans for specific people to be "disabled" or "able-bodied" or "mentally impaired" or whatever other term we choose to use. I believe that God's plan is more "cosmic" in scope, you might say. I believe there is a divine plan that is being worked out and that will be fulfilled, but that does not require that God plan out every detail, including what specific things are going to happen to people, what specific medical conditions individuals may have, etc., etc. Those have more to do with genetics and sometimes human error or even sin than anything else (doctors making errors during childbirth that leave babies brain-damaged, mothers who smoke or drink or do drugs during pregnancy that impact their babies' quality of life, fathers who abuse their own babies and leave them scarred and sometimes injured - things like that) than anything else.


I think we are called to be grateful and to live life with gratitude and thanksgiving. Seeking to be the best we can be is not a phrase that's found in the Bible, but I believe it's a worthy goal for a person of faith.


I think I answered this point above, but I'll reiterate - God is not responsible for the qualities that make us superior in human eyes or for what people might perceive to be our faults. Those are a combination of nature and nurture. And, as I just noted and as you note "superior" and "faults" are human perceptions rather than divinely granted attributes. I believe that we are all equal before God, and that as people of God we should strive to see each other and to treat each other as equals who are equally valuable and equally worthy of dignity and respect. The inequalities we see in this world that often take away dignity and respect from some groups are more a reflection on what I would argue is the fallen-ness of this world rather than any plan of God.


No. Certainly from a Christian perspective our bodies are not perfect. If they were then presumably there would be no concept of the need for our bodies to be redeemed. If they were then Paul would not have been inspired to write words such as these in 1 Corinthians:

"I declare to you, brothers and sisters, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. Listen, I tell you a mystery: We will not all sleep, but we will all be changed - in a flash, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. For the perishable must clothe itself with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality. When the perishable has been clothed with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality, then the saying that is written will come true: “Death has been swallowed up in victory."

We can get caught up in the imagery of the passage (twinkling of an eye, trumpets sounding) but that would miss the point of the passage. Somehow, Paul says, and at some moment, "we will all be changed." How exactly or when exactly that will happen we don't know, and focusing on those questions get us away from the point Paul was making. None of us are what we will become. The most accomplished scholar, the greatest athlete, the wealthiest and most powerful among us - not what they will become. The person using a walker, the person born without limbs, the person with a condition leaving them unable to walk or speak or see or hear - not what they will become.

Paul sees our "imperfections" illustrated by the fact that we all die. He also sees death being ultimately defeated. Ultimately he sees victory over the fallen state of the world that leaves us all as something other than what God desires us to be and is determined to transform us into. That is redemption of the body. Since all of us must be redeemed, it stands to reason that none of us are superior or inferior to others - at least not spiritually, morally or ethically.

No problem. It was a year ago. I forgot I asked. Thanks for the thoughtful reply.

 

[ChemGal]

in the U.S. by denial of health care...

Not just in the US, it happens in Canada too, although smaller numbers, due to delays in approving drugs, refusing to give drugs to those in hospital, etc.

Oops sorry, old post although it's still true.

 

[Luce NDs]

No problem. It was a year ago. I forgot I asked. Thanks for the thoughtful reply.

Thus the posts wobble alone directed by great weavers ... and many strings gone astray trying to connect to what we don't know by refusal to gently inquire ... without difficult handling ... an almost impossible task with determined hosts ...

If only we could find the way despite the blind demands ...