Who would Jesus bomb?

Who would Jesus bomb?

Uh... well probably similar to who would Jesus flood. Everyone. Except eight people, right?

Just like, who would Jesus burn? Everyone except four people.

But one problem particularly with using the scriptures in this particular debate, other than many of the people that would ask this question aren't fans of them and bumper sticker type questions aren't meant to be actually responded to, is that the scriptures are even worse than conference about containing anything known as 'women's wisdom,' at least if that means having any produced by women.

I am serious when I say that I am actually not sure I would really want to be in the hands of a bunch of women to decide my fate for being a wicked sinner. Probably before I got burned or flooded I would be gossiped about then bombed. Or my clothes hair weight or housekeeping would be criticised and then I would be gossiped about and then bombed. Unless I happened to be inside their little clique.

OF COURSE I am just stereotyping, except for the gossip part. I have heard some pretty creative ways for women to justify gossip. Men don't usually say things like 'well I am not going to keep anything from my WIFE so I have to tell him why I heard so and so went to the store on Sunday!'

Gossip really deserves its own post because it is much like anything else in that the reason behind it (incidentally, just like Sabbath keeping) usually defines the harm in it or lack of harm. And some people would get off the hook here too, because I do think that motivation like so many things determines harm and it is not some blanket statement like saying something about someone not present. So even if women are telling their husbands for the same reason they would spread it around the ward (telling a juicy story about others' faults or misfortunes) to entertain themselves or their husbands) it is the same act. And just like people use the spirit of commandments keeping to get out of trouble, it can get them into trouble just as easily. But more to the point, any of the actual character differences that I could identify between the sexes, I am not sure women come out so great.

But at the very most charitable toward women, men are at least as wise and virtuous, most of the time righteous men could speak for me. I don't share the obsession either with homemaking (as defined by anyone) except for my kids and don't think that if I would want to have any kind of idea that would be distinguishable form a man's.

The truth is, sometimes doing the right thing takes some guts and I think men come out well on that score too, or at least with resolve - little capriciousness or (Frailty thy name is what?). That is why fathers usually do the disciplining. They usually go into the kids' bedroom with a belt (metaphorically speaking of course) intending to do their duty as a father to try to turn their kids into respectable members of society. Because, not in spite of the fact that, they LOVE THEM.

The women (and men like them) all say, OH NOOOOO, I LOVE my kids. I don't want to hurt them. They are sorry. I am sure. They won't do it again, I promise.

And then you get Lot and his daughters.

WISDOM is being able to defend one's position, if it is worth having at all. If it isn't why would we want to have a certain opinion at all much less advocate it widely? And how do we know an opinion is that strong? One of the ways I do that is by floating my ideas out there as far as I can and listening to those who don't agree with me. At the very least I should know for myself how I account for things that people will say. That is how we can become stronger and wiser. I have often ben surprised when it seems that people haven't exposed themselves to an opposing point of view, not before they have an opinion at all because that is understandable, but I always try to do that before I would make an opinion that would involve criticism of others lifestiles or personal morality.

I am often interested to hear the very strong opinions that call themselves antimaterialist to name one (these come from many different sectors). It is sad to me that there sometimes doesn't seem to be much of a desire to let people off of the hook that the proponents let themselves off of for the luxuries they would claim for themselves. It is a very tricky business trying to argue that WE need something but somene ELSE doesn't. One person's necessity is another person's ridiculous extravagance, and it always goes both ways. So of course it would be better to get rid of the need to characterize or make assessments of the way other people spend money at all.

Overall the main theme to many of my religious/morality posts is that I feel much better when I can blame mistaken thinking or cultural myths for being bad instead of the people who think them them. And I apply the golden rule here, and usually try to, because I would personally rather be wrong about something in my head rather than in my heart, and would rather that someone make that judgement about me - that maybe you could think that my ideas are wrong and thus you could perhaps enlighten me but that my actions might not be. That way we can all evaluate our world vies and make adjustments that lets millions of people off the hook instantly instead of having to condemn them with philosophies of men. Of course it depends on one's purpose if it would be a good thing for everyone, there do seem to be a few people that like to think others are in the wrong, but I am hoping that it is a small group and that it could shrink. If it ever does I think there are lots of potential benefits. In a world where it is hard to forgive, it seems like that would be a great thing if eliminating their sins just by a parameter shift is a remarkable opportunity if ever possible.

And I certainly don't want to have opinions about other people being bad without making sure that I am understanding or representing their views as best I can. If I am making casual statements about large groups of people before I ask a representative why they feel the way I do. It might be painful to ask for feedback from people that don't agree with me, but there is little use getting it from those who we know already feel the same. In this case it is clearly no pain no gain. Only with PAIN will we gain wisdom, just like all of those people who suffer and die in this world. Again, I think God knows what he is doing.

After all, there are many people among us preaching religion. Some selling it for money, some wanting the pride. Flattery and telling people they are already good is their theology. Maliciousness is their original sin. Telling people they are better than others is how they win converts, because we are all so wanting and willing to believe it and willing to practice it as a ritual.

I fear that this religion gets MANY converts among Mormon women. It is easy for them to accept a theology of superiority with the equating of housekeeping with homemaking. That is way too easy, after all, one just has to spend their time vacuuming and then poof they are righteous. Or canning, one mustn't forget canning. Then, how convenient, it just happens that the things that MOST Mormon women must qualify as righteous like, because most of them are crafty homebodies. Gee, how convenient for Most Mormon Women. I wonder who thought of that - because oops I didn't see quilting or canning or scrap booking in the scriptures. And I am not knocking these things if other people like it, (of course any more than the things I like if these are considered what RIGHTEOUS women do.)

But if other women they like these things, all they have is doing something they like. They have a hobby. They can congratulate themselves that they have their hobbies just like I have mine but they don't get to call it religion or least of all righteousness and call what I LIKE, NOT righteousness. After all, anyone of us actually just does something in the church because they like it or it makes them happy they should be very careful, because liking something is its own reward. Christianity according to scripture is about being willing to do things that you don't like for people you don't like. And one should be very ware of needing to convince themselves that lucky them, the things that they like are what God wants them to do with their life. Everyone feels that way initially. It is a long process to get educated that it isn't true. It is called conversion.


So would Jesus let suffer and get sick and die? To be lonely and afraid and abandoned?

Everyone.

That is God's wisdom. Not women's wisdom, and not men's wisdom. It is the kind I don't happen to understand the reason for, I admit it. It is the kind that I would change if I could because I am imperfect and weak and don't want to be punished and don't want to see my children or anyone that I love punished. I don't happen to share that wisdom. Not yet. And we shouldn't listen to any man or woman who pretends to. Or question things that they think are unfair about this wisdom.

The title of this post I actually swiped from Slade. He made this point when we gave talks on 'Love' for V-day. I made the point that there are things that love isn't. It isn't always tolerance. It isn't always pacifism. It isn't always indulging. It isn't always affinity (we will probably get credit for loving our enemy according to the scriptures, but very little for loving the people that it comes natural for us to love. Life isn't about seeking our own comfort level or else there wouldn't be any point to it. That is probably why we have our comfort level removed from us so often.

So Slade made a very good point and I thought I would swipe it, because his talk went over surprisingly well. He was also building on one of my points that the 'Men loves your wives even as Christ loved the church' is comparing for men, marriage to the calcification. And I have seen my husband suffer. He used to, before I got sick, think that nothing bad had happened to him. But he didn't say much about it, just dealt with it.

Because HE IS A MAN. I guess most of the time I prefer a man's approach and if I had the choice I would try for it instead of my own, at least when it is different which is as seldom as possible.

---------
This makes reference to some kind of protest statement by feminists around conference time. You can read my brother's JKH3's blog for the family feud. I don't know if I know all that many about the specifics, I was probably just trying to stay awake during conference.