Holier-than-thou Monty

p.s. I didn’t assert, insinuate, postulate, or even pretend that any of the Ten Commandments took precedence over any other of them. Apparently, you’re unaware (or just flat out don’t care) that the number of the Decalogue is not a ranking of them.

OK, color me confused.

The decalogue doesn’t say “don’t lie.” Many other parts of the Bible do, but the decalogue doesn’t.

And AFAICT, the decalogue isn’t the Gospel message.

With all respect, Monty, a little help?

“Bear false witness” is usually taken to mean “utter other than the truth.” One is to witness to a thing of fact; therefore, if one utters an untruth, one has borne false witness.

The Merriam-Webster online dictionary gives one definition of witness as:

The two (in)famous female missionaries who were detained by the Taliban attested that they would not attempt to convert anyone to their religion when they applied to the Taliban for their visa, and yet they did try to convert people.

Does that help?

Regarding the difference between the Old Testament commandments and the New Testament message: Oh, man. I’m not touching that debate in a Pit Thread for all the cash in the world!

Monty, what a load of horseshit.

We have here, assuming arguendo that lying is prohibited, is a conflict between an affirmative obligation - to preach the gospel to all nations - and a negative obligation - don’t lie. To preach the gospel in Afghanistan, one must lie in order to get into the country in the first place.

What to do, what to do? To fulfil the affirmative obligation, one must violate the negative obligation.
I submit that christians of good conscience may disagree as to the solution to this dilemna. Your accusations of ‘rationalization’ and the like when other christians disagree with your viewpoint is an unfortunately intolerant viewpoint on your part.

Correct me if I’m wrong, but I have a sneaking suspicion that if the missionaries in question were Mormon, your answer would be different.

Sua

Thanks, Sua. I was starting to wonder if I was posting in Greek (koine, of course).

Monty: I didn’t realize Jesus’ instruction to His followers at the end of the Gospel of Matthew was “their own reasons”.

Have you been taking lessons from Lib on cryptic responses? I have no idea what you mean.

Are you being deliberately obtuse? The comparison/conflict is not between two of the Ten Commandments. It’s between the Ninth Commandment and the NT commandment popularly known as the Great Commission.

[sub]How many times must a man bang his head…[/sub]

I’d rather take such lessons from Lib than the obvious Jackass lessons you’re present here.

“What to do?” Simple: don’t freaking lie. One can lead a life of example. One such example would be to, get this, not lie.

Regarding banging your head: Is that the source of the stupidities you’ve posted here?

Oh, and calling me intolerant is just rich! I’m not intolerant of other religious viewpoints.

Just because I pointed out the obvious that a particular two people, in the guise of following their religion, were violating one of its basic tenents does not make me intolerant.

Monty: I hear you saying, “The Great Commission doesn’t exist, the Great Commission doesn’t exist, the Great Commission doesn’t exist…”

No, seriously, if your response somehow involved Jesus’ instructions in Matt. 28:19, your words would at least have a snowball’s chance of making sense. Without that, your words are in English, but there’s still no meaning.

Can I presume that the reason the LDS send missionaries all over the globe is to witness by example?

Or are you saying that Christian denominations shouldn’t follow the LDS’ example? (Do as you say, not as you do.)

Have you done so? Because I believe your original complaint was you being characterized as “rationalizing”, not the missionaries. Furthermore, there are many people thawt, strangley enough, prefer physical inconvenience to intellectual inconvenience.

But they’re not. If these people were kidnapping Afghans and torturing them until they accepted Christianity, there would be few people willing to state that “don’t torture people” and “preach the gospel” were at loggerheads; clearly “preach the gospel” simply does not come even close to the urgency of the “don’t torture people” rule.

If people don’t go lie to get into Afghanistan, they are following one command. If they do lie, they are obeying neither. They aren’t obeying the “don’t lie” command, and they aren’t following the “preach the gospel” one, either. You can’t preach the gospel if you don’t live it.

I submit that it is a principle nearly universally accepted that when positive and negative comands conflict, the default is to follow the negative one. If a soldier is given the orders “protect this convoy” and “whatever you do, don’t put your rifle on full auto”, then my interpretation would be that the latter would take precedence. One does not get to diobey one order simply because it makes following another one easier.

What you are proposing is that none of the commandments or prohibitions in the Bible are absolute; implicit in each of them is the modification “unless it helps Christinaity”. “Do not kill… unless it helps Christianity”. “Do not steal… unless it helps Christianity”. I find Monty’s belief that this is a defective belief system to be quite reasonable.

Something else to consider: did any of the disciples preach to any American country in the first few centuries? If not, were they sinning? Or should we interpret Jesus’ command as meaning “… where reasonable”?

Not only are you a liar, you’re a self-deluded liar. Nowhere did I say, nor even imply, that the Great Commission doesn’t exist.

Well, you see, I’m not used to writing for morons–I didn’t expect you here. Sorry I couldn’t get down to your level of intentional misunderstanding.

First off: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints does not sent missionaries “all over the globe,” just to the countries which permit us to send them there. And part of the missionaries’ job is to be examples.

Well, since the LDS aren’t doing the “do as I say, not as I do” bit, that’s not even in the realm of reality, let alone relevance.

Well, sure, but since I’m effectively picking up the missionaries’ argument and running with it, I think it’s safe to say that they made the same rationalization, and I’m rationalizing on their behalf.

I understand that, but don’t you think that’s just a bit excessive?

That reminds me of the ancient Doonesbury strip where B.D. joins the army and goes to Vietnam - to get out of a term paper. (Follow the link, please - it’s a chuckle. :))

I submit I’ve never heard of this principle.

I’d claim it’s the “whatever you do” that makes the second order take precedence.

Very good, Mister Dan-ger!

I don’t, and I’ll bet you don’t really do so either. Would you join the army? “Thou shalt not kill…unless your country tells you to?” which is about how seriously many fundies take that commandment.

Slamming fundies aside, few people would argue with, “Thou shalt not kill…unless not killing would mean that a whole bunch more people would die.” If I’m in Israel and armed, and I see the suicide bomber reaching for the cord that turns him into a bomb, you bet I try to kill him before he blows himself and others up.

Want me to come up with exceptions to most of the others? It’s harder to come up with no-exceptions absolutes than you think, and that includes the last seven commandments of the Decalogue.

Oh, blow me.

Was I sinning a few years ago when I failed to stop a friend’s brother from killing himself? Of course not. Because I didn’t even know he was depressed. Guess I’ll modify the Commandment to “love your neighbor as yourself - where reasonable” per your instructions; it makes about as much sense.

You said it by refusing to acknowledge its existence when the discussion was about two things: the Ninth Commandment and the Great Commission.

I think it’s time to let you lalalalalala by yourself; I’m tired of you.

By myself? Heck, you’re the only one in this thread getting peeved at other people for the stuff you’ve read into simple writings. Just saying “Great Commission” like it’s some magic mantra that absolves you of any wrongdoing doesn’t cut it either.

Here’s the words (from the KJV) of Matthew 5:18-19 (bolding mine):

And here’s the words of the Great Commission (KJV, Matt 28:19-20 (bolding mine):

Nowhere do I see Jesus saying to lie your tush off because you think it’s more convenient to do so.

That’s the horse apples there, Sua. If the missionaries were LDS, then they would’ve been going against the Church’s dictates. Also, I’d still feel the same: they lied.

Out of curiousity, would you two care to respond to the points Sua and I raised?

Here’s a concept, Truth Seeker: Read the thread. I already did.

Um, Monty, I don’t see where RTF said that either.

Good for you, Monty! Now read the commandment and answer the question.

How is lying to the Taliban about yourself bearing false witness “against your neighbor?”

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Monty *
By myself? Heck, you’re the only one in this thread getting peeved at other people for the stuff you’ve read into simple writings.

Well, yeah. You’re the one arguing in support of their actions.

I don’t see what you’re getting at.

And you didn’t know that you didn’t know, either. But not only did the disciples not know about countries in America, they did know that they didn’t know about all the countries in the world.