posted by:
mimi (
reply)
post date:
04.02.08 (8:36 am)
in the infamous words of my daughter, AMEN! pastorboyfriend!
xoxox
posted by:
OldSchool (
reply)
post date:
04.02.08 (8:38 am)
Yes indeed, it truly is. Everything happens for a reason, but it sometimes may take a while to discover (and/or accept) that reason.
posted by:
squirrelzone (
reply)
post date:
04.02.08 (9:16 am)
Rolling with the punches far outweigh going at it head first and without a helmet to deflect the blows.
posted by:
bipolarexpress (
reply)
post date:
04.02.08 (9:51 am)
aaww...sniff sniff... that was actually really sweet. Now I have to go find my spawn and give him a huge bear hug...
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
04.02.08 (9:55 am)
Reply to: mimi
pastorboyfriend! Alright, you are gonna get some rumors started in my church...
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
04.02.08 (9:56 am)
Reply to: OldSchool
I'm big with claiming this truth of Roman 8:28. I'll simply add that sometimes we never know all of the reason, at least not on this side of eternity.
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
04.02.08 (9:57 am)
Reply to: squirrelzone
Rolling with the punches? Now that is a good way to describe this most helpful philosophy of life.
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
04.02.08 (9:57 am)
Reply to: bipolarexpress
Yes, a big bear hug, sticky fingers and all.
posted by:
bipolarexpress (
reply)
post date:
04.02.08 (10:04 am)
Reply to: PastorDave
I tired but he is still in the bed so I got a wack with the pillow lol (mine were the sticky fingers lol)
posted by:
squirrelzone (
reply)
post date:
04.02.08 (10:20 am)
Reply to: PastorDave
Bob and weave and make sure the helmet is tight, wouldn't want it to pop off at the wrong moment.
posted by:
FinalyFree (
reply)
post date:
04.02.08 (10:45 am)
I can't believe it's been 3 years!!! I remember reading your original post like it was yesterday. I commend you, your wife, your congregation and family for surrounding this child (and her young mother) with love and acceptance--something other "christians" sometimes have a hard time doing! After reading many later posts about Skylar I wondered if I would be as 'loopy' over my first grandchild as you were, the answer, of course, being YES!
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
04.02.08 (11:04 am)
Reply to: FinalyFree
Loopy? Did you say loopy? Maybe obsessed, perhaps overly attentive, perhaps.... Well, loopy is a good word.
posted by:
bawdy (
reply)
post date:
04.02.08 (11:18 am)
Thank God for small blessings. I just became an uncle for the sixth time today.
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
04.02.08 (11:21 am)
Reply to: bawdy
6 times an uncle? Well, that is grand. And I imagine you enjoy it better than being 6 times a daddy, at this point in your life, anyhow.
posted by:
fractalmom (
reply)
post date:
04.02.08 (1:48 pm)
i have found out that we don't really become fully human until we have suffered great loss, and then loved even greater love. congrats PaPa....;)
posted by:
mimi (
reply)
post date:
04.02.08 (3:48 pm)
Reply to: PastorDave
that is what April always says! silly...she always says "sistergirlfriend"...but, if you wanna "give 'em sumpin' to talk about", we can work out somethin! LOL!
xoxo
posted by:
bipolarexpress (
reply)
post date:
04.02.08 (4:01 pm)
Reply to: bawdy
Congrats on being a 6 time uncle..
posted by:
surrogate (
reply)
post date:
04.02.08 (6:50 pm)
Wow. Three years. Unbelievable. We're all growing together - older and otherwise.
posted by:
docsavage (
reply)
post date:
04.02.08 (6:56 pm)
Human beings are equipped to have an intense drive to procreate. Harnessing this natural drive rationally is a core feature of civilization. Religion typically seeks to repress sexuality and to seek to address teen sexuality activity via moralistic teaching as if two consenting young adults having sex is something immoral. The stats in America show that that teen pregnancy and abortion are identical inside the "church" and outside the "church".
The lesson with these stats isn't that Southern Baptists are hypocrits -- the lesson is that Southern Baptist teenagers are just like all other human teenagers -- they are wired to be sexually active. During "Biblical" times, if a woman wasn't carrying around a couple of kids by 16 or 17, something was seriously wrong.
Further, sexual repression rather than responsible sex education coupled with making contraception easily available without stigma is a terrible idea and a proven failure.
Read my lips -- teenagers are going to have sex. They had sex during King David's time, they had sex during Jesus' time, they had sex in the 1940's and 50's, they had a lot of sex in the 60's and 70's and they are having a lot of sex today.
What's more -- the are entirely right to want to be sexually active! We know now that kids who don't have sex until their 20's often develop all manner of sexual dysfunction and unhealthy sexual behaviors.
Promiscuity is certainly very dangerous and almost always damaging to a teenager and the risk of sexually transmitted disease is scarry as heck. Abstinence, however, will never be the answer for most kids and the best we can likely do is help our kids understand the equation of sexual activity the very best we can. Tell them the whole story and be honest about our sexual history. Explain the risks and provide access to protection.
Doc Savage repsects your journey from this event, but, I still feel its a little sad that it was ever considered to be a crisis. I'm glad it has turned out the way it has and that is a credit to you that at the end of the day, you love your children (and grandchildren) more than your dogma. Ol' Jepthah could have learned a thing or two from you.
It's also a good thing your community doesn't take that whole stoning women for various sins too literally anymore. THAT would have been a crisis!
As for all your positive changes these last several years, say what you want but we here at tBlog believe we deserve most of the credit ;-)
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
04.02.08 (7:22 pm)
Reply to: fractalmom
To experience great loss, I guess, is inevitable for all of us somewhere along the way. Great love, now that is an amazing and wonderful gift from life. So many yearn for it and never find it. I think the secret is to busy yourself seeking to give it, instead of trying to find it. That's something some seem never to learn. I feel fortunate.
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
04.02.08 (7:23 pm)
Reply to: mimi
Sistergirlfriend, they can think whatever they want!
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
04.02.08 (7:26 pm)
Reply to: surrogate
In June I will be on t-blog for 3 years! That's a long time for one blogging site. And, I think, you've been around here even longer. I wonder who has been here longer than the 2 of us? Cutter? kurtmaddox?
posted by:
auntconi (
reply)
post date:
04.02.08 (7:31 pm)
All the best to you and yours ~ and please give Skylar a 'hug' from auntconi!
posted by:
auntconi (
reply)
post date:
04.02.08 (7:33 pm)
Reply to: PastorDave
"In June I will be on t-blog for 3 years! That's a long time for one blogging site."
umm, you're not thinking of leaving, are you?
Oh I hope not!
posted by:
TheRockSays (
reply)
post date:
04.02.08 (7:47 pm)
Reply to: docsavage
Speaking of dogma, your comments are full of opinions dressed up as facts (the dictionary definition of "dogmatic") without a single citation. Where does it say that teen pregnancy and abortion are just as bad in the ""church"", and why do you put "church" in quotes?
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
04.02.08 (7:52 pm)
Reply to: docsavage
A 17-year-old in our society is not a young adult, but most often a hormone-charged, confused, and sometimes stupid man/woman/child/enigma. He and she are certainly ready and willing for the mechanics of sex, but totally unprepared for parenthood. You make a bit of leap in judgment to presume my home to be a victorian respite of repression. I think we have a happy, reasonable, and open family. I seek to practice my faith with honesty. I don't think any of my kids would say I am a crazy, overbearing, fundamentalist who beats them with the Bible.
You don't think it is a crisis to have a pregnant teenage daughter? In what universe do you live? I certainly do not wish this experience upon you, or anyone. At 17 she is just a kid. She has so much ahead of her, including a lot of maturing. Having a baby so complicates things. And, she having a baby has forever complicated my life, even as I rush to add it has equally enriched my life. And this baby does not have a mom and dad who live and love together, an intact family. Every other week she is carted off to her dad's home. She cries as she goes out the door, wondering why I can't save her from being taken away. That's just not fair to her.
Not all teenagers are going to have sex. There are many, many teenagers who abstain from intercourse until adulthood. We are not animals. We are free moral agents who can make choices. We are not slaves to our instincts. Many things that we have urges to do are not good to do, or at least not good to do at that time. I think that self-control is a virtue, a noble value that need to be promoted and honored in our society. We'd be a much better world.
I do believe in making contraceptives easily available.
I dispute your statistics about the dangers of sexual abstinence.
And, I agree, the story of Jephthah is rather sad.
Teenagers need all the support and moral training they can get. I think a big component to the great ethical void with the teenagers of today is that 90%+ have no church/religious affiliation. And I think a key mitigating factor to this is the moral and religious laxity of their parents. A loving church and a healthy faith will help these kids. All will still struggle and teenage girls will still sometimes get pregnant. But I can't imagine where my K would be, right now, if she did not have the support of her church and....yes, her moral grounding which is based upon her Christian faith that she still holds onto.
You know, Doc, sometimes I'd like to punch you between the eyes. In a Christian kind of way, of course.
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
04.02.08 (7:58 pm)
Reply to: auntconi
I've thought about expanding my blogging to other sites. I actually have another blog at pdaveDOTvoxDOTcom, but I don't maintain it and it is just a rehash of blogs from here. Theres just not enough time and inspiration for me to go elsewhere. I like it here. I know we continue at the mercy of Nick and Rocky, and sure hope they keep us going. Folks like yourself, and even the likes of DocSavage, make it an interesting place.
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
04.02.08 (8:06 pm)
Reply to: TheRockSays
A problem with quoting statistics about "the church" is that there are so many kinds, with such a jumble of values and teachings. Some brands of Christianity seem to me to be little different from the world in general. However, some teach we should be different, to live in a way to shows us to be different. And this would include sexual mores. As a Christian, I applaud a fellow believer who is willing to say "I have a different set of sexual values, based upon my faith in Jesus Christ and my understanding of the Bible." Those kind of people exist. They are not understood nor appreciated by some, and Jesus warned this would be true.
Doc and I approach these matters from very different perspectives. We need to hear what he has to say.
posted by:
FinalyFree (
reply)
post date:
04.02.08 (8:25 pm)
Reply to: PastorDave
Oh ya, you're loopy alright. But that's a good thing :)
posted by:
docsavage (
reply)
post date:
04.02.08 (9:31 pm)
Reply to: TheRockSays
Actually, there was a recent study of rates of sexual transmitted diseases in teens that showed absolutely no differenc between rates in teens who report they "attend church regularly" and those in the general population. I'll dig it up. It was widely publicized and was only a few weeks ago. I think PastorDave may have read it, too, and that we may have exchanged a comment or two about it -- not sure.
These are blogs -- not peer reviewed medical papers! lol!
I put "church" in parentheses for two reasons. One is that the term is tossed around as a single label. The other is that I don't believe it matters one iota whether a kid belongs to a "church" or not when it comes to these issues.
Oh brother, another Christian calling me "dogmatic"... hilarious!
posted by:
docsavage (
reply)
post date:
04.02.08 (9:49 pm)
Reply to: PastorDave
You almost never really read Doc Savage carefully. I think Doc Savage's way of expressing has a special way activating PastorDave's inner-Yahweh ;-)
First, I was actually complimenting you on the way you and your family handled the situation that you've made internationally public here in this space. Like so many religious people I know, you are a wonderfully loyal and committed family person. You likely would be with or without Christianity, but, Christianity has enough emphasis on the challenge to love everyone -- even the unloveable (like me) that those Christians who focus their devotion in that area are usually exceedingly kind people on an interpersonal level. Of course, they are also often co-conspirators in things like slavery, discrimination and forcing their morality on free adults who don't share their moral code -- but hey -- that's part of the flavor of living in a world full of diverse thoughts and opinions.
Second, the "crisis" of a 17 year old having a child is entirely a modern phenomenon for the most part as it seems God "designed" human beings to be really into sex right about that time. (I guess God didn't forsee the industrial revolution, longer life expectatancies and societies that would value women getting educations and careers before having kids.)
I didn't say it was an entirely preferrable situation for a 17 year old to become pregnant. Your own story, however, proves how much of a non-crises it is in situations like yours. Most of the emotional difficulty lies in the perceived judgment of others and violating the expectations of the unique social circle of a "church family".
Unless I still some residual marijuana in my system from my own 17 year old indescretions, I believe you support the sending of 18 year old into war to fight and die for their country in Iraq? I guess they do a whole lotta growin' up in that year between 17 and 18? I'd think that if 18 year olds can handle the emotional burden of fighting a war then they can certainly adjust to the life of being a single parent.
Also, what the heck are talking about that 90% plus of teens have no religious/church affiliation?
Also, what do you care if they are Jews or Muslims? You really mean they have no "Christian church" affiliation, right? What good would it do to have a nice Jewish family that taught you great morals only to die without accepting Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior and then burn in hell for eternity?
I bet they'd like to punch you right in the nose, in a Judaic sort of way ;-)
posted by:
docsavage (
reply)
post date:
04.02.08 (10:00 pm)
Reply to: PastorDave
Thanks for validating the need for the world to hear what Doc Savage has to say! It is always cute how evangelicals stick together. Muslims, Jews and Catholics do the same during similar dialogues with them. Actually, the arguments you all make for your "truth" are exactly the same arguments just with different vocabularies. They all argue for the supreme morality of their code versus the "world". They all dislike non-believers the most even though they should logically appreciate the non-believer much more than they appreciate believers in other mutually exclusive faiths. The fact that believers of all stripes stick together against those who reject faith all-together is a very telling phenomenon -- completely irrational, but, very telling.
Ethics pre-ceded Christianity and human ethics will survive in a post-Christian world, which you will likely live to see. Your grand-daughter certainly will live a good bit of her life in a world that is not dominated statistically by Christianity. Doc Savage will have to leave it up to you Christians to sort who is and who ain't really part of the "church"! lol!
posted by:
docsavage (
reply)
post date:
04.02.08 (10:04 pm)
Reply to: OldSchool
Yes, it does happen for "a reason". It's called "survival of the fittest" or "natural selection" :-) We live. We replicate. We experience life. We die. Our genes, however, live on just as they have since the beginning of life in the universe and by exactly the same means -- replication, evolution, natural selection.
Evolution: The Original "Old School"
posted by:
docsavage (
reply)
post date:
04.02.08 (10:09 pm)
Reply to: TheRockSays
PS - I'm all ears, Rocky! Let's hear your "facts" that you don't believe are "dogma". Start anywhere you like... Adam and Eve, Jonah, Moses, Noah, Abraham, Santa Claus...
posted by:
mimi (
reply)
post date:
04.03.08 (3:36 am)
Reply to: PastorDave
Awwww!
xoxo
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
04.03.08 (6:47 am)
Reply to: docsavage
I know you were actually trying to be nice. And I should have acknowledged it, especially since it might encourage you to do so again! With this exchange I have problem with your tone- maybe we will yet see the emergence of a kinder and gentler Doc?
I do appreciate your point about the inconsistency of sending an 18-year-old off to war, yet not thinking a 17-year-old is of sufficient maturity for parenthood. It's a good point. I'll have to consider it. I guess it does not take much emotional maturity to be engaged in acts of war. Now, the careful deliberation that will lead to an understanding of whether war is justified, and whether one has the moral right to end another life- that I think requires more seasoning than most 18-year-olds can muster. The adolescent would have, I think, the same difficulty with whether to bring a life into the world and whether to end a life. Interesting matter.
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
04.03.08 (6:49 am)
Reply to: docsavage
CORRECTION: "...With this exchange I have NO problem with your tone- maybe we will yet see the emergence of a kinder and gentler Doc?..."
posted by:
docsavage (
reply)
post date:
04.03.08 (8:57 am)
Reply to: PastorDave
Correction accepted and appreciated. Of course, you would expect that I wouldn't have been personally offended either way. As for a "kinder and gentler Doc", the truth has an inherent benevolence that transcends "tone". I believe you to be an excellent human being and a very good father and exemplary citizen. I also believe you teach mythology as literal truth. Lots of good people do.
Thanks for not punching me in the nose, even in a Christian way of doing so ;-)
posted by:
docsavage (
reply)
post date:
04.03.08 (11:23 am)
Reply to: PastorDave
Correction accepted and appreciated. Of course, you would expect that I wouldn't have been personally offended either way. As for a "kinder and gentler Doc", the truth has an inherent benevolence that transcends "tone". I believe you to be an excellent human being and a very good father and exemplary citizen. I also believe you teach mythology as literal truth. Lots of good people do.
Thanks for not punching me in the nose, even in a Christian way of doing so ;-)
posted by:
ggirl (
reply)
post date:
04.03.08 (12:40 pm)
The worst things that have happened in my life have always been gifts from God. It's good to remember and be grateful. Congratulations. :-)
posted by:
TheRockSays (
reply)
post date:
04.03.08 (3:19 pm)
Reply to: docsavage
So, what are you saying? That no Christian (or no one perceived to be Christian) can call a non-Christian dogmatic? The way I see it even atheists and pagans of all kinds have the ability to be dogmatic, relative to any one Christian (or any person perceived to be Christian).
What "facts" are you looking for? I didn't pretended to have any facts. If one doesn't pretend to have facts, one cannot be dogmatic.
posted by:
docsavage (
reply)
post date:
04.03.08 (4:13 pm)
Reply to: TheRockSays
It would be more effective if you responded to what I said instead of what you wish I'd said. Of course a "non-Christian" can be "dogmatic". I passed Logic 101 with flying colors and I'm not prone to non-sequitor arguments.
Tradition Christianity is dogmatic by definition as it presents a dogma to be believed without supporting evidence.
When I use "dogmatic", the usage I'm referencing is as follows:
The word dogma (Gr. dogma from dokein) signifies, in the writings of the ancient classical authors, sometimes, an opinion or that which seems true to a person; sometimes, the philosophical doctrines or tenets, and especially the distinctive philosophical doctrines, of a particular school of philosophers (cf. Cic. Ac., ii, 9), and sometimes, a public decree or ordinance, as dogma poieisthai.
In Sacred Scripture it is used, at one time, in the sense of a decree or edict of the civil authority, as in Luke, ii, 1: "And it came to pass, that in those days there went out a decree [edictum, dogma] from Caesar Augustus" (cf. Acts 17:7; Esther 3:3); at another time, in the sense of an ordinance of the Mosaic Law as in Eph., ii 15: "Making void the law of commandments contained in decrees" (dogmasin), and again, it is applied to the ordinances or decrees of the first Apostolic Council in Jerusalem: "And as they passed through the cities, they delivered unto them the decrees [dogmata] for to keep, that were decreed by the apostles and ancients who were at Jerusalem" (Acts 16:4).
Among the early Fathers the usage was prevalent of designating as dogmas the doctrines and moral precepts taught or promulgated by the Saviour or by the Apostles; and a distinction was sometimes made between Divine, Apostolical, and ecclesiastical dogmas, according as a doctrine was conceived as having been taught by Christ, by the Apostles, or as having been delivered to the faithful by the Church.
But according to a long-standing usage a dogma is now understood to be a truth appertaining to faith or morals, revealed by God, transmitted from the Apostles in the Scriptures or by tradition, and proposed by the Church for the acceptance of the faithful. It might be described briefly as a revealed truth defined by the Church -- but private revelations do not constitute dogmas, and some theologians confine the word defined to doctrines solemnly defined by the pope or by a general council, while a revealed truth becomes a dogma even when proposed by the Church through her ordinary magisterium or teaching office. A dogma therefore implies a twofold relation: to Divine revelation and to the authoritative teaching of the Church.
Of course, there are secular dogmas. There just isn't anyone in this debate suggesting anyone should adhere to them! lol!
posted by:
docsavage (
reply)
post date:
04.03.08 (4:14 pm)
Reply to: ggirl
I'm glad you see that God is trying to teach you a lesson!
posted by:
docsavage (
reply)
post date:
04.03.08 (4:15 pm)
Reply to: TheRockSays
I'm glad you are admitting publically that you don't base your faith on any facts. Honesty is always the best policy!
posted by:
TheRockSays (
reply)
post date:
04.03.08 (5:28 pm)
Reply to: docsavage
Wow, when you get busy, Doc, you don't fool around!
What faith are you so certain I have Doc? When did I imply that I have any at all? Are you as certain that you understand what my faith is, as you are certain that Christian teen sexuality is the same as secular teen sexuality, or that "we know now that kids who don't have sex until their 20's often develop all manner of sexual dysfunction and unhealthy sexual behaviors"?
posted by:
docsavage (
reply)
post date:
04.03.08 (6:41 pm)
Reply to: TheRockSays
Well, do you believe Jesus Christ is God and the only path to salvation or do you believe something else or nothing at all? It is a simple question? If I assumed incorrectly, then just clarify the record and I'll admit the mistake. I don't find it very difficult to admit a mistake, do you? I make about a thousand a week or more. I don't make claims about absolute truth. You and anyone else have every right to any notion you care to espouse in the public sphere.
Do you want to play word games, which I happen to enjoy immensely or do you want to discuss a topic by exchanging opinions on which we might agree or disagree. If you have evidence to the contrary to any of my statements, present them as I'm likely more interested to learn the new info than most.
There are lots of studies that demonstrate the positive influence of faith. The subject is very interesting to me. I think I'll study up on that subject tonight and get back with you on it.
So, to answer your questions in order:
1. When did you imply that you have any faith at all?
You didn't. Satan revealed it to me by Anti-Divine revelation.
2. Am I as certain of your faith as I am that teen sexuality is the same among Christians and non-Christians?
No, I'm not certain of anything. I am certain that there is a new peer reviewed study that indicates that STD infection rates are the same for religious teens as they are for those who do not list any church affiliation. (Now I gotta find that one too - thanks for ruining my Thursday night!)
Oh, and I'm not sure of what your faith is at all, but, it would seem to be a simple matter for you clear up.
Geesh, hard *ss ;-)
posted by:
TheRockSays (
reply)
post date:
04.03.08 (7:22 pm)
Reply to: docsavage
My beliefs... are my own. Sorry if you find that sort of thing interesting, but I'm afraid I'm going to have to be a disappointment to you. There are just certain things that I don't apply to my tBlog persona. One of them is where I live. I'm careful to be very sparing about dropping hints as to where I live (within Canada). Another is my religion. I might talk *about* faith from a factual POV (for instance, you are a Christian if and only if you believe Jesus Christ is God and the only path to salvation) but talking about what I believe brings a chemistry here that I don't want.
So speculate all you want, but unless I slip up, speculation is all it will be.
posted by:
docsavage (
reply)
post date:
04.03.08 (8:56 pm)
Oooo... you're such a mysterious Canadian! Doc Savage isn't even a real person so I guess only my creator knows my TRUE beliefs. Sometimes it seems my creator changes my beliefs in mid-comment, which can be quite confusing to me. Not as confusing as being a mysterious Canadian, but, still a bit disconcerting non-the-less.
So, if I'm going to speculate, I'll assume you worship The Great Flying Spaghetti Monster. The GFSM is just as likely to exists as any of the other brand name Deities...
posted by:
docsavage (
reply)
post date:
04.03.08 (9:24 pm)
Reply to: TheRockSays
To be as objective as possible, I found an article written by a Southern Baptist (PD's particular Sect) on the newly released study from the Centers for Disease Control. Here's a snippet:
=================
The results come from data collected from 838 randomly selected girls age 14 to 19 who participated in a government health survey in 2003 and 2004. The teenagers were tested for HPV, which can cause cervical cancer and affected 18 percent of the girls studied; chlamydia, which affected 4 percent; trichomoniasis, which affected 2.5 percent; and herpes, which affected 2 percent, the Associated Press reported.
Allen Jackson, professor of youth ministry and director of the Youth Ministry Institute at New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary, said Southern Baptists who read the statistics need to keep in mind their own children's health could be at stake.
"Some in Southern Baptist life would be surprised that statistics on sexual activity are not significantly different between Christians and non-Christians," Jackson said.
======================
Other articles point to the obvious failure of the Bush administrations "abstinence eduction" bias, a $1.5 BILLION program which was found to be riddled with misinformation and which is being shown to lead teens to a false sense of security and an irrational belief that condoms don't really protect you from STD's. As is so often the case, the unintended consequence of the religious right's insistence on bashing the benefit of simple factual sex ed that fully educates on protected sex and makes sure protection is as widely available as possible is that church kids who are clearly having sex anyway -- even if not intercourse so that they can "technically" remain a virgin -- are having much higher rates of unprotected sex. The Law of Unintended Consequences strikes again!
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
04.04.08 (3:11 am)
Reply to: docsavage
"Doc Savage isn't even a real person so I guess only my creator knows my TRUE beliefs. Sometimes it seems my creator changes my beliefs in mid-comment, which can be quite confusing to me." I guess I need some clarification. When you enter into conversation around here, are you being honest with what you have to say? If it is true that you are willing to change your beliefs for the sake of argument, I'd say that is patently unfair to anyone wanting an honest exchange of ideas. It seems you see yourself as a cartoonish character who likes to hang around here and poke fun at what others hold to be dear, all the while refusing to invest your true self into the arena. I guess such is permissible, but it seems dishonest. And maybe some of us may choose at times ignore such an unpleasant fellow?
posted by:
docsavage (
reply)
post date:
04.04.08 (11:08 am)
Reply to: PastorDave
What possible difference would it make if the person making a point actually believes the point or not? The point stands on its own, doesn't it?
Don't you believe that the Bible stands on its own merit regardless of some individual "character" might or might not believe about the Bible's "truth"?
When Doc Savage makes a point, Doc Savage always believes the point is a fair point to make. Sometimes Doc Savage's creator agrees with the point and sometimes Doc Savage's creator believes the point is an important point that deserves an airing and an answer. Surely you are aware of the right honorable practice of arguing another point of view so that one can understand that point of view more completely and therefore be forced to either clarify their own arguments based on the exercise or sometimes even abandon their previous opinion in favor of that which they previously disagreed?
"Unpleasant" schmeasant! What are we, third graders? I certainly know how to be unpleasant. It ain't hard! I vigorously engage you on valid intellectual and factual points of debate. If you can't handle that type of engagement, then ignore away! lol!
Most importantly, you ask if I'm being "honest" when I engage tBloggers?
The answer is not only am I honest, but, I'm a good degree more honest in my engagements that anyone blogging here as themselves because I'm free from the constraint of self-edited thought and fear of social recrimination.
Points are points and evidence is evidence. That's why religion is so pointless to begin with and why you're charge of dishonesty rings so hollow when you demonstrate time after time your unwillingness to address the inconsistencies and factual proven errors of your beloved Bible.
You talk around them but you NEVER address them head on. You never address the undeniable evil of so many of the Bible's stories. The genocide. The rape. The misogyny. The callous murder of innocent life because they belong to another "tribe". The polygamy. Last, but, not least, that true history of "the church" from the Apostle Paul forward to the reality of today's Southern Baptist Convention.
My creator believes every word in this statement so if that helps your willingness to address the actual points, then that's a good thing!
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
04.04.08 (2:17 pm)
Reply to: docsavage
In other words, you are full of crap? Instead of wanting to engage someone in thoughtful conversation, you insult by pretending an interest while in truth you are simply playing a word game, and seeing how deeply you can insult the other guy before the poor schmuck finally catches on. I know your type. They are rather common. The fellow who loves to talk politics, but doesn't even bother to vote. The lady who drones incessantly about the details of Revelation, and slaps her kid around. When I come across this person, I'll allow conversation about the weather and perhaps a joke. But I'll reserve more thoughtful conversation to those who really care.
posted by:
docsavage (
reply)
post date:
04.04.08 (3:19 pm)
Reply to: PastorDave
That's right, PD! Keep telling yourself that! lol! Again, you completely ignored the intellectual challenge I presented to you, as you always do. You are clearly a very good person, but, you also clearly pick and choose what you are willing to answer about your religion and what you aren't interested to discuss.
It's your freakin' book -- all I did was read it and understand what it actually says without the lens of a brain-washed believer.
Nice cloaked ad hominem argument, by the way!
You are a very linear thinker, which is common with religious literalist.
Your continuing unwillingness to seriously examine the evidence that your Bible teaches a bunch a very nasty stuff that any thoughtful person today should reject completely suggests you aren't at interested in "truth" anymore than Osama bin Laden or Pat Robertson is interested in "truth". (Speaking of "shmucks"!)
Why is it that you are so brave about taking Doc Savage to task, but, I've never read one word of condemnation from you about the horrific racial history of the Southern Baptist Church or the decades of ignoring the civil rights of a majority of the non-white/non-male human beings on the planet.
There's a lot of admirable teaching in the Bible as well, particularly in the what scholars believe to be the most authentic teachings which can attributed to the historical Jesus, who didn't seem to care much for the ancient scriptures either.
Ignore and complain and delete all you like, but, know that a serious challenge was made to your public statements about your faith and your scriptures and you took a pass. I actually don't blame you because you don't have a very easy position to defend. Really, it is an impossible position to defend.
Lots of thoughtful Christians reach that conclusion and accept the clear evidence about the history of their "Bible" and they make the appropriately honest adjustments. Some leave their faith as a result and some simply admit that although the scriptures are the flawed writings of flawed men, they pin their hopes that there is a loving God working through those flawed men to work a good work in humanity.
Either position is at least "honest". Your position is simply intellectually AWOL because you never answer the challenge -- did the God of Universe really ask Jepthah to vicously murder his only child or not? Did Your Loving God really order the GENOCIDE of entire tribes or not? Did Your Heavenly Father sit idly by while an angel and a loyal believer allowed a young girl to be raped multiple times by multiple men so that God's angel could be spared?
Since you are all about telling it like it is -- why you just tell us like it is regarding these scriptures instead of always focusing on the "love of Christ" and the "glory of your Redeemer"!
Or, just hit the delete button and know you aren't quite up to defending the actions of the God you serve...
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
04.04.08 (3:40 pm)
Reply to: docsavage
Because...this particular post has nothing to do with the issues you that you shout my way. Nothing. Which further supports my suspicion that you simply like to pick a fight. It doesn't seem to be a search for the truth, or a delight in the mutual learning that comes from a healthy point and counterpoint exchange. You've admitted to the personal of a cartoon character. You've admitted that you are willing to change your point of view from one sentence to the next. Therefore, in reply, there will be times that I will enter the arena where you happen to be playing your games. I'll play with you. Other times, I'll want to leave you out on the playground and go find an adult with which to converse. That's fair, I think.
posted by:
docsavage (
reply)
post date:
04.04.08 (4:50 pm)
Reply to: PastorDave
Fairness isn't an issue... it's your blog! I've always respected that. I take a point where it goes. Threads evolve just like biological creatures do.
But, sure... have a nice day ;-) We'll battle again when you deem prudent, fun or just cuz...
Did you catch that part about how I know you are a very good person? You just proved me right once again. (I like being right!)
posted by:
kurtmaddox (
reply)
post date:
04.04.08 (5:01 pm)
Reply to: PastorDave
You handled Doc pretty well, PD! Much better than I do ;-)
Remember, good guys need great enemies. It's what puts butts in the seats. Witness the 55 comments. Docs good for your business so make sure and keep him rambling here from time-to-time. Trust me, he just makes your people love you more ;-)
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
04.04.08 (5:25 pm)
Reply to: kurtmaddox
Oh, Doc's alright. Certainly not an enemy. I'd just like for him to be honest with what he has to say, instead of this amoralist approach of believing and saying whatever is most provocative.
Besides, is it time for you to finally admit that Doc is but one of the many facets of kurtmaddox?
posted by:
kurtmaddox (
reply)
post date:
04.04.08 (10:23 pm)
Reply to: PastorDave
Sometimes I think it might be fun to be like Doc Savage. Mostly, I think Doc Savage is best kept as a concept -- a "Devil's Advocate" if you will.
However, I'm definitely NOT Doc Savage. On this point, I want to be perfectly clear! I enjoy Doc Savage and I've gotten to know Doc Savage a bit -- enough anyway that I better understand where that fine line exists in discussions between productive exchange and ineffective vective.
Laboratory experiments often test theories that the researchers suspect isn't quite the right solution so that they can cross that area of inquiry off their list. Of course, each experiment uncovers findings that might very well contribute to the ultimate solution.
Does any of this make sense to you, PD? I know it won't make sense to Doc Savage so I'm not even going to ask him. Besides, he'd just find the hole in my logic and beat me over the head with it ad nauseum anyway ;-)
I suspect Doc Savage knows he has exhausted this debate here with you, PD, and that he's on to other sand boxes where the kids are more deserving of the bullying :-)
After all, Doc Savage should always be focused on areas where there is most injustice being perpetrated and not just where he enjoys playing the most! I'll have a talk with the good man, point out his over-reaching ways and remind him that the exercise only works so long as people want to play.
posted by:
Cuz (
reply)
post date:
04.05.08 (9:20 am)
Umm...somewhere in all this...I believe there was something about how blessed your family has been by the birth of that darling little Skylar!!! It is sometimes much easier to recognize our blessing when looking backwards. When K first became pregnant...your fears were for your own little baby girl. A parents worries of the heart are eternal as far as mine can tell. The joy is too. I remember your call and how upset you were...I'd already been there, done that, and knew the unbelievable experiences of delight you would soon come to recognize. Your heart has grown as much as little Skylar herself. I believe she is what keeps you young and allows you to get beyond your box. Hope we can get our granddarlings together sometime so we can keep some family ties going for another generattion.
posted by:
chrisflea (
reply)
post date:
04.07.08 (2:25 pm)
Being a PK is hard. You have so much to live up to. I feel for her. It must have been so hard for her to tell you. I am glad that you are loving life more now.
posted by:
Lisa (
reply)
post date:
05.01.08 (4:23 pm)
Pastor Dave, What if your daughter decided not to keep her baby? I am hoping that your words of faith can help me get through this painful journey. My 17 year old daughter and I are very close. She told me that she missed her period and wanted a pregnancy test. We went to the doctors and her test was positive. We cried together and she said, ' I can't have this baby, I'm to young.' Her mind has changed many times regarding her decision to keep the baby or not. Today we went to her OBGYN and she had an ultrasound. She is now 5 1/2 weeks pregnant. We briefly talked to the doctor about her options and she needs to decide this week if she wants to schedule an abortion or not. My husband and I have made it clear that we are 'pro-life' and we will help her raise her baby, however we will support her with either decision. As of yesterday I felt like I was split 50/50 as to what is the best thing to do for everyone involved. I felt confident that I could trust my daughters decision and I would be okay with either choice she made... Then I took my daughter to a place yesterday where they sat her down and informed her in detail about her options. She wasn't very happy with me because she has been trying to block it out and does not want to face reality. I thought that she might change her mind about aborting her baby but today she told me to make the appointment to terminate her pregnancy. When I made the call to the doctor I had tears in my eyes, a lump in my throat, and felt like I was going to vomit (and I still do). I want to support her but it is so difficult. My heart is breaking and now that she has made her decision I feel like it is so wrong and it hurts so badly. I can't understand why she won't let my husband and I raise the child since she feels that she is too young to do it herself. I can't wrap my brain around aborting a life that was given to you by God. I even told my daughter that she was "my little mistake" and I didn't think twice about not aborting her even though I was only 22 with 2 other small children and I was living with an abusive boyfriend with barely enough money to get by. I know that she is not me and I don't want to feel this way about her decision. It is so hard to look at her right now - I feel like she can see my pain without me saying anything. I don't want to make her feel guilty for her decision. Please help me understand... Please help me see why she made this choice... Please give me the strength to be a supportive loving mother to my daughter while she goes through this...
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
05.01.08 (4:48 pm)
Reply to: Lisa
Lisa, check out my reply to your comment on "My Teenage Daughter Is Pregnant". If she had chosen an abortion? I don't think I would have handled it much differently than yourself. It would have broken my heart. I would have ached. But, I think, I would have continued to love and support my daughter. Disappointed and angry? Well, yes. I could tell you some stories about the behavior of my daughter that deeply challenged our relationship and my resolve to connect with her. But, in the end, love just would not allow me to let go. I'm sure you understand. Your unyeilding love will win this battle!
