Author Topic: According to Who? – Soli ‘Meo’ Gloria  (Read 107 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Pablo de Fleurs

  • Established Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1948
  • @PablodeFleurs
    • Apologetics Workshop
According to Who? – Soli ‘Meo’ Gloria
« on: July 14, 2018, 09:31:35 AM »
Interesting perspective from Del Tackett




One of the consequences of abandoning the belief in absolute truth is that all truth claims end up being merely personal notions and one soon begins to believe that your personal notion is as good as anyone else’s. This is partially the reason why “traditional” authorities: pastors, teachers, parents, etc. no longer rank high on the “go to” list in our culture.

Why should they?

If I am the genesis of “truth”, then why hold anyone else or their ideas in esteem? They are merely one more barking beast among a sea of barking beasts.

“Seeking” truth becomes not an external search, but an internal one…a quest to find out more of who I am and what I think and what I believe. Getting in touch with one’s self is the modern form of worship. If truth emanates from within, then there is surely something deeply divine about my inner self. Rather than Paul’s cry of “I want to know Him”, we cry, “I want to know myself.”

And, of course, I would like for you to have the blessing of knowing Me, too!

    “Love Me. Cherish Me.”

    “Celebrate and embrace Me.”

    “Affirm who I Am.”


(Or we will call you all kinds of terrible names; label you a hate monger until you give in or give up.)

Who thought evangelism was dead? Balderdash!

We are rabid evangelists… of Me.

This, of course, generates an increasing apathy toward history.  Whatever may have passed muster as wisdom over time is of no importance to me for it is merely more barking from the past. This would include things like that dusty old Book or that dusty old Constitution or the traditional notions of marriage or family or a work ethic…

…or any ethic, come to think of it.

“According to Who?”[1] is the modern skeptic’s question. Not seeking an answer, of course. It is much akin to Pilate’s “What is truth?” He didn’t stay for a response because he wasn’t looking for one. He was scoffing at the notion of truth. So, too, the modern skeptic scoffs at the notion that there is anything of real value, other than entertainment or pleasure, that isn’t from within.

Instead of Soli Deo Gloria, we cry Soli Meo Gloria! [2]

This, of course, does not, nor never will, lead to the nirvana that the Liar promises. It will isolate us further into a culture of manipulators where true love, which requires sacrifice, is lost. Hatred and violence will grow bolder as we discard any notion of self-restraint. Why should I restrain what is obviously divine within me? The Arts will grow more and more filthy and grotesque as we choose to sing and paint and display the depths of our depravity, falsely seen as my internal attributes of godhood… devoid of any true understanding of right and wrong, of righteousness and depravity. So Michelle Wolfe performs her “Salute to Abortion” on Netflix, declaring that abortion should be on the dollar menu at McDonalds. Anyone who knows the sickening things that happen to an innocent baby (over 3,00 babies a day in the U.S.) during an abortion must, if led by the Spirit, be nauseous at Wofe’s cry of  “God bless abortion!” This issue will get a lot of attention as we move into the confirmation hearings for the Supreme Court. Look closely at this argument and all of the other hot social topics of our day: they will always, always come back to this worship of the self and divinity of “who I am”… or that “I Am”… in defiance of the only One who is the great I Am.

This increasingly open display of the depravity of man will be hailed as good and righteous. And because the worldview that promotes this now has control of the megaphone in our culture, it will be increasingly seen in every form of media and communication, art that isn’t art, theater, video, music, comedy, gaming, etc.

But this lie doesn’t set free. Instead, it enslaves.

Isolation and manipulation will breed paranoia and pathological loneliness. When “every man does what is right in his own eyes” the culture eventually collapses.

But what an opportune time this is for the Remnant in the land! The solution will not be found in power changes at the top, but from personal transformations at the bottom, through the attractively winsome “engaging” in deep relationships that the body of Christ must begin to do with their neighbors.

This is our day. This is our time.

Not for us, but for His glory alone. Soli Deo Gloria!
______________________________________________________________________________

[1] I know this is grammatically incorrect, but I’m quoting the comic strip.

[2] “For God’s glory alone” vs “For My glory alone!” My apologies to the Latin language or its aficionados. “Soli Ego Gloria” or “Meus” or “Mihi” would have been more correct, but I was seeking the play on words and to highlight the transformation and transplantation in our culture from “God” to “Me”, from “Deo” to “Meo”. Chalk it up to poetic license.
2 Timothy 1:7
For God did not give us a spirit of timidity, but of power & of love and of calm, a well-balanced mind, discipline and self-control.

Online Pandora

  • Administrator
  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 16834
  • I iz also makin a list. U on it pal.
Re: According to Who? – Soli ‘Meo’ Gloria
« Reply #1 on: July 14, 2018, 10:07:35 AM »
Pablo, why is it okay -- just and right -- to lie to the government/agents of it?
"Under certain circumstances, profanity provides a relief denied even to prayer." - Mark Twain

"Let us assume for the moment everything you say about me is true. That just makes your problem bigger, doesn't it?"

Offline Pablo de Fleurs

  • Established Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1948
  • @PablodeFleurs
    • Apologetics Workshop
Re: According to Who? – Soli ‘Meo’ Gloria
« Reply #2 on: July 14, 2018, 10:26:15 AM »
Pablo, why is it okay -- just and right -- to lie to the government/agents of it?

I'm not sure how your question relates to what you've just read, Pan:
  • Are you interpreting the article as saying that that's O.K.?, or
  • Are you positing that it is O.K. say in the example of denying ones ownership of unregistered firearms (for example) when & if asked (as a means of protecting oneself)?
2 Timothy 1:7
For God did not give us a spirit of timidity, but of power & of love and of calm, a well-balanced mind, discipline and self-control.

Online Pandora

  • Administrator
  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 16834
  • I iz also makin a list. U on it pal.
Re: According to Who? – Soli ‘Meo’ Gloria
« Reply #3 on: July 14, 2018, 11:02:19 AM »
As a matter of conscience, of adhering to that "dusty old Book", of adhering to The Truth.  Your post brought me back to thoughts I often have about "Thou shalt not bear false witness ..." and, in keeping to that, is lying to the government a violation of it?

What I'm asking doesn't relate directly to what I just read; I read, understood, agreed, and continued to a question equally pressing to me.
"Under certain circumstances, profanity provides a relief denied even to prayer." - Mark Twain

"Let us assume for the moment everything you say about me is true. That just makes your problem bigger, doesn't it?"

Offline Pablo de Fleurs

  • Established Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1948
  • @PablodeFleurs
    • Apologetics Workshop
Re: According to Who? – Soli ‘Meo’ Gloria
« Reply #4 on: July 14, 2018, 12:02:07 PM »
Hmm…I’d have to examine the circumstances.

My hierarchy is God, family, country. Country if I’m defending the honor & safety of the country – but NOT if I’m defending myself & family AGAINST treasonous authority. We have freedoms granted us by God - - those looking to usurp those freedoms will face my wrath. The bible says “Thou Shalt not kill” – which is generally interpreted as “don’t murder” & doesn’t come into play if it’s self-defense.

One could choose not to lie & plead the Fifth – or directly lie & send the agent asking the question to eternity.
Bearing false witness usually brings harm to the one you’re bearing it against – but if that one is out to harm you, unconstitutionally or existentially, then bear it, IMO, we must.
We’ll still be judged on it by God - & that’s when you confess & claim Christ’s blood as covering it (not trivially, but in existential actuality).

There could also be individual situations where God is asking you to take a clear stand – and die in the process, bringing glory to Him – but remain unquestioningly truthful. Those one must sort out for themselves within the moment.

And, on a humorous note: here's a question for you: Does answering the question "Does this dress make me look fat?" - in a manner that sustains ones marriage & keeps the other's self-esteem intact, represent "bearing false witness"?  ;)
2 Timothy 1:7
For God did not give us a spirit of timidity, but of power & of love and of calm, a well-balanced mind, discipline and self-control.

Online Pandora

  • Administrator
  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 16834
  • I iz also makin a list. U on it pal.
Re: According to Who? – Soli ‘Meo’ Gloria
« Reply #5 on: July 14, 2018, 12:49:13 PM »
Quote
Does answering the question "Does this dress make me look fat?" - in a manner that sustains ones marriage & keeps the other's self-esteem intact, represent "bearing false witness"?

Similar dilemma, but different.  I believe we are bound to tell the truth, not lie, to those owed The Truth.  But .... there is a tactful, truthful way to deal with such a question by avoiding a yes or no and, instead, suggesting another "dress", i.e. "That outfit does not do you justice but I think that blue whatsit with the thingamajig on the whosit makes you look splendid!"

My question to you was, however, strictly about government and their agents .......... and, inclusively, anybody asking "officially" after anything not their business.
"Under certain circumstances, profanity provides a relief denied even to prayer." - Mark Twain

"Let us assume for the moment everything you say about me is true. That just makes your problem bigger, doesn't it?"

Offline Pablo de Fleurs

  • Established Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1948
  • @PablodeFleurs
    • Apologetics Workshop
Re: According to Who? – Soli ‘Meo’ Gloria
« Reply #6 on: July 14, 2018, 01:06:59 PM »

My question to you was, however, strictly about government and their agents .......... and, inclusively, anybody asking "officially" after anything not their business.

That one's fairly straightforward:

"That, my good man, is simply none of your business. And, if it were ever any of your business, I'd most likely have one of those memory lapses that so plague the upper echelons of elitist politicians -  especially when they're under oath. Do I make myself clear, or shall I 'splain it to you again?"

----------------------------------------------------
I’m a big fan of communicating directly to the issues and/or facts that, while evident, most do not address. If someone tells me “C’mon, Pablo, this one’s a no-brainer!” – I might ask “You’re not trying to intimidate me, are you? Because I’m still not getting it.”

Our son has a speech impediment which is severe when he’s on the phone – he’ll, literally, say “Uhm” 10 times in a row. I’ve told him to tell people that when on the phone: “I have a speech impediment which is severe & pronounced on the phone. I’m much better face to face.”

Strip the conversation down to the essentials and/or the obvious. Otherwise, people fill in the blanks on their own & are often wrong.
« Last Edit: July 14, 2018, 01:33:11 PM by Pablo de Fleurs »
2 Timothy 1:7
For God did not give us a spirit of timidity, but of power & of love and of calm, a well-balanced mind, discipline and self-control.