This is a pretty minor rant, but it was still getting beyond what was appropriate for GD (the evangelizing-in-Afghanistan thread), so here we are.
The dialogue went something like this:
dublos (OP): people…were going to a country (Afganistan in this case) with the surface reason of providing relief/support to the undertroddden poor’s physical needs and the “hidden” adjenda of trying to convert the undertrodden poor to their religion.
RT: In the case of Afghanistan, the alternatives were to either lie or be barred from the country; there was no legal way to bring the Gospel to people there while the Taliban was in power. I agree with them that in this case, lying was justified.
Monty: And exactly where in the Decalogue does it say “Thou shalt not bear false witness except when you think it’s okay?”
RT: I don’t see where Jesus said, “Go preach to all nations, except where they tell you you can’t,” either.
We each resolve such ambiguities in our own ways.
Monty: Yeah. I see that you resolve it by rationalizing away disobeying the commandment.
Well, pal, you resolve it by:
- Apparently rationalizing away disobedience to Jesus’ commandment to preach to all nations.
- Setting yourself up as the authority regarding which commandments take precedence when they appear to directly clash. And
- Suggesting that anyone who doesn’t resolve the conflict your way is someone who has no qualms about rationalizing away the dictates of Scripture. (Nice looking-down-your-nose tone, too. :rolleyes:)
All in all, I find that quite contemptible.
[sub]Like I said, folks, a pretty minor rant. But it was more than I could say in GD.[/sub]