Top critical review
A DEMIGOD NAMED DIALOGUE
on 10 January 2016
Let's talk about it:
A street thug takes you by the arm and begins to enlist your company toward his next intended exploit; to rape, to rob, and, to plunder. You pause, and consider in christian charity; ‘how would Jesus and Mary respond to this, MY BROTHER’? [reference 1 kings 20:32,42 for flavor]. ‘let us sit together in this thing and discuss it; let us come to an agreement by common ground’. ‘There is no need for us to part company; or, to go our separate ways. We will have communion. Let us be one’. [Proverbs 1:10-18]
The Church through the centuries will always prevail in the Power of Logos [the Gospel], her Sword of offense and Shield of defense. As to our parable above, there may be an exchange-of-words [a clash of monologues] in an effort to renunciate the madness of this thug; the madman. In the end, he needs be restrained; if he will not be taken with hands [the reasonableness of words/Logos] then by the sheer execution of force [2 Samuel 23:6-7]. There is no reasonable man [God-Forbid Christian], who will enjoin himself in a dialogue; and, thereby enjoin complicity upon himself. Will some mad claim to an interest in maintaining a civil discourse of ENCOUNTER justify such a man before the judge? Such a ridiculous cloak would serve to aggravate the just charges of complicity, rather than to mitigate them.
How can we see the clarity of such a matter in the microcosm; yet, miss it entirely in the overall grand-scheme-of-things which is working so much chaos and confusion in the Church and the world today? How is it that the highest offices in the Church are enjoined the communion table of sodomites? Globalists? Eugenicists? Collectivists? New Ageism? Environmentalist Spiritism?
For centuries the Logic and Right-Reason from the Church is the repudiation of irrational ABSURDITIES. How do you ‘discuss’ from NONSENSE? The Church standpoint has always been the recognition that to sit and discuss the nonsensical would only serve to the validation of an absurdity. CONSIDERATION:
Why on Heaven and Earth were the faithful not exhorted to address the real gravity inherent within the ‘marriage’ referendum? Fair warning should have thundered from the pulpits of God to remind the people that it does constitute a mortal sin to vote yes in that referendum. But, rather, there is a concord with the evil agenda! [Read ‘On Heaven and Earth’ chapter 16 p.p. 119 ‘....... SO THAT PEOPLE OF THE SAME SEX CAN ADOPT’ [!!!] Jorge Mario Bergoglio!!!
Let us Remember: ‘the friendship [dialogue] of the world is enmity against God’ James 4:4.
This is only the exercise of good sense, for, ‘what fellowship [dialogue] has light with darkness ….the righteous with the unrighteous [as in the parable above],
‘what concord has Jesus with the devil?? 2 Corinthians 6:14-15.
Whosoever therefore will be a friend [dialoguer] of the world is the enemy of God.