tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post7077098002640282659..comments2024-03-18T11:28:36.841-07:00Comments on bionic mosquito: Living By The Sword bionic mosquitohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12002548958078731031noreply@blogger.comBlogger56125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-34100414031091841602020-12-06T06:38:27.884-08:002020-12-06T06:38:27.884-08:00Wonderful post Bionic that got the juices flowing....Wonderful post Bionic that got the juices flowing. This isn’t a “Catholic” blog, but I feel that the Church has been vetting this question for a long time. The below was shamelessly cut and pasted from another blog. It starts with citations to the Catholic Catechism, which relies heavily on quotes from Thomas Aquinas.<br /><br />2263 The legitimate defense of persons and societies is not an exception to the prohibition against the murder of the innocent that constitutes intentional killing. “The act of self-defense can have a double effect: the preservation of one’s own life; and the killing of the aggressor…. The one is intended, the other is not.”<br /><br />2264 Love toward oneself remains a fundamental principle of morality. Therefore it is legitimate to insist on respect for one’s own right to life. Someone who defends his life is not guilty of murder even if he is forced to deal his aggressor a lethal blow: “If a man in self-defense uses more than necessary violence, it will be unlawful: whereas if he repels force with moderation, his defense will be lawful…. Nor is it necessary for salvation that a man omit the act of moderate self-defense to avoid killing the other man, since one is bound to take more care of one’s own life than of another’s.”<br /><br />Bl. Pope John Paul II gave the issue a more extensive treatment in his encyclical, March 25, 1995, Evangelium Vitae ## 54-55:<br /><br />54. As explicitly formulated, the precept “You shall not kill” is strongly negative: it indicates the extreme limit which can never be exceeded. Implicitly, however, it encourages a positive attitude of absolute respect for life; it leads to the promotion of life and to progress along the way of a love which gives, receives and serves….<br /><br />As time passed, the Church’s Tradition has always consistently taught the absolute and unchanging value of the commandment “You shall not kill”. It is a known fact that in the first centuries, murder was put among the three most serious sins — along with apostasy and adultery — and required a particularly heavy and lengthy public penance before the repentant murderer could be granted forgiveness and readmission to the ecclesial community.<br /><br />55. This should not cause surprise: to kill a human being, in whom the image of God is present, is a particularly serious sin. Only God is the master of life! Yet from the beginning, faced with the many and often tragic cases which occur in the life of individuals and society, Christian reflection has sought a fuller and deeper understanding of what God’s commandment prohibits and prescribes. There are in fact situations in which values proposed by God’s Law seem to involve a genuine paradox. This happens for example in the case of legitimate defence, in which the right to protect one’s own life and the duty not to harm someone else’s life are difficult to reconcile in practice. Certainly, the intrinsic value of life and the duty to love oneself no less than others are the basis of a true right to self-defence. The demanding commandment of love of neighbour, set forth in the Old Testament and confirmed by Jesus, itself presupposes love of oneself as the basis of comparison: “You shall love your neighbour as yourself ” (Mk 12:31). Consequently, no one can renounce the right to self-defence out of lack of love for life or for self. This can only be done in virtue of a heroic love which deepens and transfigures the love of self into a radical self-offering, according to the spirit of the Gospel Beatitudes (cf. Mt 5:38-40). The sublime example of this self-offering is the Lord Jesus himself.<br /><br />Moreover, “legitimate defence can be not only a right but a grave duty for someone responsible for another’s life, the common good of the family or of the State”. [The quotation is from # 2265 in the first edition of the Catechism of the Catholic Church.]Perry Masonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12188665697411384557noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-32606236420132098422020-12-05T10:39:55.996-08:002020-12-05T10:39:55.996-08:00What is all this about Babylon? That means nothing...What is all this about Babylon? That means nothing at all unless someone is clued in on the "Code", which you did not communicate. And it was brought into the discussion out of left field like your comment above about "volunteering to kill people you don't know for the State", which you have never explained even though you were asked to. <br /><br />Two things:<br /><br />1. There may be people reading this who don't know what you mean by "Babylon". Please explain this in plain English for their benefit. Don't worry about mine. <br /><br />2.Explain what you meant about volunteering to kill people you don't know for the State. If you don't want to do this, then retract the comment. Rogerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08156823478509665137noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-80251624773665298332020-12-05T05:42:38.905-08:002020-12-05T05:42:38.905-08:00Roger, I didn’t stop at “going alone to get along”...Roger, I didn’t stop at “going alone to get along”. You go along to get along, and you you die for what you believe. Attempting to transform some iteration of Babylon into the kingdom of heaven on earth, by Babylonian means, is not advocating the gospel. It is advocating for Babylon while hiding behind the mask of Christianity. <br /><br />“For, as it is written, “The name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you.””<br />(Rom. 2:24 ESV)<br /><br />BM: I think I have addressed each verse you posted. There is no advocation, justification, rationalization of violence by men in the kingdom of heaven. That is above our pay grade. All of that began to arise with the corruption and syncretism of the third and fourth centuries. The lust for power is strong. <br /><br />“But I say to you, Do not resist the one who is evil. But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.”<br />(Matt. 5:39 ESV)<br /><br />“Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.” <br />Rom. 12:19<br /><br />See that no one repays anyone evil for evil, but always seek to do good to one another and to everyone.”<br />1 Th. 5:15<br />Mikehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03680256805530929082noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-68408943471531377852020-12-05T05:21:36.866-08:002020-12-05T05:21:36.866-08:00Nat, even when you say you are moving on, you are ...Nat, even when you say you are moving on, you are unable to move on.bionic mosquitohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12002548958078731031noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-76920788362962121542020-12-05T00:32:01.769-08:002020-12-05T00:32:01.769-08:00That's fine and let's move on. To Roger (...That's fine and let's move on. To Roger (and others), I may not have answered "the question" because you can't - it's loaded as in "Did you stop beating your wife today?" I've attempted to point out the futility with the approach - any short answer will incriminate you. <br /><br />As with Abraham, it is up to us to live moment to moment interacting non-violently with other people (follow Christ). Let's not get ahead of ourselves and attempt to predict our own or other's behaviors.Natnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-68885109672181084692020-12-04T22:26:21.784-08:002020-12-04T22:26:21.784-08:00Yes, Nat. Let's conclude this discussion.Yes, Nat. Let's conclude this discussion. bionic mosquitohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12002548958078731031noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-42480645358237442662020-12-04T22:20:50.886-08:002020-12-04T22:20:50.886-08:00Roger, you are right. Nat will not answer the que...Roger, you are right. Nat will not answer the question.bionic mosquitohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12002548958078731031noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-5234915150087834042020-12-04T22:18:57.207-08:002020-12-04T22:18:57.207-08:00One verse. I guess that settles it.
I had perha...One verse. I guess that settles it. <br /><br />I had perhaps 20 passages in this post. So far, none of the critics have addressed these.bionic mosquitohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12002548958078731031noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-50042163157204646032020-12-04T22:15:17.577-08:002020-12-04T22:15:17.577-08:00Yes, Mike. ATL said that. And I pointed out the ...Yes, Mike. ATL said that. And I pointed out the difference in my post.bionic mosquitohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12002548958078731031noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-59468540519147918322020-12-04T19:38:07.421-08:002020-12-04T19:38:07.421-08:00Well, it might conclude the discussion...if you qu...Well, it might conclude the discussion...if you quit, but you have still not answered the question. Rogerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08156823478509665137noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-90094279224192595922020-12-04T17:27:44.086-08:002020-12-04T17:27:44.086-08:00"If someone is raping your daughter [wife], a..."If someone is raping your daughter [wife], and you could stop it with physical force - even if killing the rapist was necessary - would you do it?" --Bionic Mosquito<br /><br />This is a simple question and all it requires is a simple answer. "Yes, I would", or, "No, I would not."<br /><br />I submit that these people are not going to answer the question, preferring instead to obfuscate the issue with long, evasive, rambling arguments instead. They do this because to answer the question directly would result in one of two things. <br /><br />1. If they said, "Yes", then this would come into conflict with what they profess to believe and contradiction would enter their theology, meaning something would have to change, or, <br /><br />2. If they said "No", then this would show their own wives and daughters how much they could rely on the man of the house to protect them in case of an intruder bent on rape and mayhem. Can you imagine what would happen if someone was honest enough to state that he would NOT forcefully intervene to stop the rape of his wife or daughter? Chances are that the next time she saw him, there would be hell to pay. My wife wouldn't wait until I got home, she'd be burning up the phone. <br /><br />A "Yes" answer would cause spiritual agony. It would mean that my theology was wrong and that I must change my beliefs. A "No" answer would cause marital agony and might mean the end of the relationship with my wife and daughter. It is easier to simply avoid the question, which they do, trying to cloak the indecision with high-sounding words. <br /><br />Here's another question. If these men are married, then presumably their wives follow the same doctrine. Does this mean that the wives understand that they MUST suffer a violent rape because their husbands will do nothing? Is she OK with that? Would she fight back on her own? Would she passively accept it as God's Will? Would she "love" her enemy even as he was raping her? Would she forgive him as soon as he was done? Would she spend the rest of her life in emotional and psychological turmoil because of the event, never able to fully recover? <br /><br />Greater love has no man than this, that a wife passively accept and allow a rape rather than insisting that he step in to protect her when she needs it most. <br /><br />Personally, I would not want a woman like that. <br /><br /><br /><br />Rogerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08156823478509665137noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-22288290105427286112020-12-04T14:36:22.225-08:002020-12-04T14:36:22.225-08:00. . .“Now I know that you fear God, because you ha... . . .“Now I know that you fear God, because you have not withheld from me your son, your only son.” - Genesis 22:12<br /><br />God wanted to ensure Abraham put God above all else, he had to "dis-posses" his greatest love - in accordance with the greatest commandment - and when he dis-possessed Issac - a kenotic, emptying - the Angel intervened in recognition of Abraham’s metanoia, kenosis. He and Sarah had been getting a bit possessive/treating their son as THEIR object and not as a gift from God (Genesis 21:8+ trying to secure “the inheritance” by their own means). As Mike points out, this story foreshadows the central cosmic event of Christianity and history: when God actually follows through in the greatest sacrifice we are to exemplify, the kenosis of Christ on the cross. Thy Will (not ours) be done.<br /><br />This should conclude this entire discussion and answer your original question? Not really what anyone wants to hear . . . We love to hate the Truth.Natnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-8787069330183866022020-12-04T11:44:50.075-08:002020-12-04T11:44:50.075-08:00“Pacifist: a person who believes in pacifism or is...“Pacifist: a person who believes in pacifism or is opposed to war or to violence of any kind.”<br /><br />Fundamentally, to turn toward Christ, illuminate his way, life, we must give up on the protection of violence - maybe discerning the difference between non-resistance (apophatic) and pacifist (as an end-goal) helps? Two different ways. Will send along a Christian statement of non-resistance from pre-WWI that might help.<br /><br />"If we are not to be called to pacifism, then when are we called to war or violence of any kind? Or is the Bible silent on such matters (which can't be, as far as you are concerned, given your responses)?”<br /><br />We are called to Christ moment by moment. Period. Keep desiring and striving for happiness, the blessed life reunited to and in God (Truth) with others. Don’t get trapped with the false certainties or machinations of other men (or our own calculating minds). Men use time-preference to their advantage. We take the long view. <br /><br />“I keep asking you simple questions, and you keep responding in confusing answers."<br /><br />If this seems confusing go back and read the greatest commandment or the Early Church Fathers. If people are “adverse” to “Christianity” start investigating the mystical theology of the Platonists/Neoplatonists - particularly negative theology that the Early Church Fathers describe as Apophatic (they were well educated, especially in Plato, which is important to understand in what they convey in their writings and the NT). There is a reason the New Testament was written in Greek? Embrace the paradox. <br /><br />Transcending objectification of others (and God) is a personal practice (with Christ). To live without fear and stop controlling others (even in scenario) is very simple (yet may come with suffering): constantly, moment by moment seeking Truth, Revealed. Natnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-4528821835826196732020-12-04T11:43:13.137-08:002020-12-04T11:43:13.137-08:00“Nat, you keep complicating this, and all you are ...“Nat, you keep complicating this, and all you are achieving is to confuse me.”<br /><br />Great - maybe we can start approaching this in a different way and drop the mechanistic way (labeling, objectifying people) that keeps us trapped in “what might happen” as if we ever have some kind of certainty. We don’t own/control our next breath. We are talking about people and people relationships. Not engineering a bridge. Turning from the visceral rationalization toward the intellectual, contemplative nous would be a start. Relationships are moment to moment, dynamic. Pre-empting the future in our own minds then living to make it happen is a form of enslavement. The point is to transcend the objective. <br /><br />“Early on you write: " We aren’t called to be pacifists - that’s a straw man, a political corruption.”"<br /><br />We are called to follow Christ moment to moment. Not pre-empt our future by binding ourselves to an objective label and defend the label above our calling. But we are humans and this happens all the time - a temptation. Once drawn into the objective defense game of “what would you do” labels become straw men and our calling is/may be eclipsed. For example, fundamentally all churches are non-resistant churches, but the temptation to move from a non-resistance standpoint to align with political peace activists (viscerally focused on an end-goal) has drawn many now self-labeled “peace” churches to align with the violent state (the state is not a person, it is a spiritual/religious power of the world we are to not engage with/resist not evil). Focused on “pacifism” as an end-goal, “the means” of the church may be corrupted (the entire way of Christ), and the message of Christ often takes a back seat. Once in this realm, “pacifist” as an objective label becomes a great straw man for other “sides” to resist and attack with their own clever ways of using scripture (or secular rationalization) to justify what they want to happen in the world. Battle of wills is on - everyone wants to play God. This is the world model: objectify others as if we have certainty (play God) and force them to do our will - we all have a tendency to play this game well. It is fear based, and many just don’t know another way. When we turn toward and engage in the survival ethics of the world, we turn away from God, Life.<br />Natnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-76346552393790116202020-12-04T10:45:20.244-08:002020-12-04T10:45:20.244-08:00“Religion that is pure and undefiled before God th...“Religion that is pure and undefiled before God the Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their affliction, and to keep oneself unstained from the world.”<br />(James 1:27 ESV)<br /><br />This is acting. Mikehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03680256805530929082noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-27491865311822156732020-12-04T10:41:47.910-08:002020-12-04T10:41:47.910-08:00ATL: “God did ask Abraham to sacrifice his son, bu...ATL: “God did ask Abraham to sacrifice his son, but He sent an angel to stop him before he did. Apart from this, in the entirety of the Bible, I cannot think of one instance where God asks someone to allow someone they love to die for love of the assailant.”<br /><br />But God did do that himself. It is the central event of Christianity, and of history. Mikehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03680256805530929082noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-38435758458132704002020-12-04T10:27:16.320-08:002020-12-04T10:27:16.320-08:00ATL regarding the verses I cited in the Bible...I ...ATL regarding the verses I cited in the Bible...I know the issue isn't completely black and white, but these verses must be dealt with just as much as those cited in favor of pacifism (and I am still waiting to hear on the fine line between pacifism and resisting - at some point - evil).<br /><br />But just as I recognize the issue isn't completely black and white, it would be nice if the critics would do the same. <br /><br />Hence, the reason I use the example I use: if we cannot find common ground here in this example, and justified through Scripture, then I am at a loss.bionic mosquitohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12002548958078731031noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-86759547260077996022020-12-04T10:20:07.726-08:002020-12-04T10:20:07.726-08:00Thank you, ATL.
I have been wondering: if it is n...Thank you, ATL.<br /><br />I have been wondering: if it is not acceptable for the man to do so on her behalf, is it acceptable for the woman being raped to resist evil?<br /><br />I know it is a what if, but where is the line? <br /><br />I find it better to know beforehand how I might behave in such circumstances. There are principles involved, no matter which side of the line one eventually falls.bionic mosquitohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12002548958078731031noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-74583869419230266352020-12-04T09:09:47.046-08:002020-12-04T09:09:47.046-08:00Amen Roger.Amen Roger.A Texas Libertarianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02980539931923054404noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-60467531901311707732020-12-04T08:02:13.599-08:002020-12-04T08:02:13.599-08:00Nat,
"do not be subject again to a yoke of s...Nat,<br /><br />"do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery.”<br /><br />It isn't slavery to fulfill your obligation as a husband or a father to protect, with or without a sword, those in your care.<br /><br />"You are seeing things merely from a human point of view, not from God’s.”<br /><br />I think Bionic made it pretty clear what God's point of view on defending the weak is (at least as far as we can discern given the best resource we have on the subject: the Bible). Or do those parts of sacred scripture not count?<br /><br />"Turning toward “third party” intervention didn’t work real well for the original two people in the garden and it hasn’t worked real well for the world ever since"<br /><br />Without 'third party' intervention, that is, without some recourse to defensive violence, Christendom would have perished, and we'd have all been subjects of Islam for 1000+ years. There'd have been no flowering of freedom in the West, only submission to Eastern style despotism.<br /><br />Perhaps Christianity would have survived this, but at what cost?A Texas Libertarianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02980539931923054404noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-43046470745026727562020-12-04T07:49:18.972-08:002020-12-04T07:49:18.972-08:00This is probably the best homily I've ever hea...This is probably the best homily I've ever heard. <br /><br />Well constructed, not needlessly eloquent, flowery, or long winded, to the point, quoting multiple places in scripture, from both the Old and New Testament, to weave an understanding of one of the most important questions concerning our lives on earth as Christians, capped with one heck of a clincher. Love it man. Seriously.<br /><br />There's no way God is asking me to sit back and watch my wife or daughter get abused by an intruder. That would be the most extreme example of cowardice I can imagine. And if He is asking this then I guess I'll be dining in hell after I die.<br /><br />So my justification of defensive violence is sort of a rational (NAP) and emotional (gut feeling), but the one you've just assembled is much more important and profound.<br /><br />God did ask Abraham to sacrifice his son, but He sent an angel to stop him before he did. Apart from this, in the entirety of the Bible, I cannot think of one instance where God asks someone to allow someone they love to die for love of the assailant. <br /><br />Well, apart from when God Himself in the man of Jesus is that someone.A Texas Libertarianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02980539931923054404noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-40348725682778256272020-12-04T07:48:57.848-08:002020-12-04T07:48:57.848-08:00I do not have an answer, nor really want to resear...I do not have an answer, nor really want to research it. <br /><br />I have used the violence of rape of a wife or daughter as a thought experiment, to offer what seems to me one of the most offensive acts imaginable against those we are most called to provide for.<br /><br />It seems to be a good dividing line to understand how people see this issue.bionic mosquitohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12002548958078731031noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-4621828248982662462020-12-04T07:42:46.819-08:002020-12-04T07:42:46.819-08:00Matthew 5: 13 Ye are the salt of the earth: but if...Matthew 5: 13 Ye are the salt of the earth: but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be salted? it is thenceforth good for nothing, but to be cast out, and to be trodden under foot of men.<br /><br />14 Ye are the light of the world. A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid.<br /><br />15 Neither do men light a candle, and put it under a bushel, but on a candlestick; and it giveth light unto all that are in the house.<br /><br />16 Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven.<br /><br />I am with you, Roger. We are called to act, not to watch.bionic mosquitohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12002548958078731031noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-34602430611872052212020-12-04T07:39:17.144-08:002020-12-04T07:39:17.144-08:00Mike, I apologize. I am losing track of some of t...Mike, I apologize. I am losing track of some of the threads, these last couple of posts have generated significant discussion.bionic mosquitohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12002548958078731031noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-26462676636130989732020-12-04T06:09:57.518-08:002020-12-04T06:09:57.518-08:00Here is a thought and research question for you. I...Here is a thought and research question for you. I wonder how often, absolutely and relative to the general population Amish women are raped? Mikehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03680256805530929082noreply@blogger.com