Re: Why Christians Are Viewed Poorly

On 5/22/06, Janice Matchett <janmatch@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> At 08:23 AM 5/22/2006, Rich Blinne wrote:
>
> On 5/21/06, Janice Matchett <janmatch@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>
> At 02:46 PM 5/21/2006, Rich Blinne wrote:
>
>
> Rich: "...I have been going back and forth with Janice about the importance
> of not imputing motives."
>
>
>
> @ That's news to me.
>
> What did I say in this "back and forth" with you on that subject?
>
>
> Rich: If you don't recall what you said you can check the archives here:
> http://www.calvin.edu/archive/asa/
> @@ Not even once did I engage with you on the subject of "imputing motives",
> so it's impossible for me to "recall" things I never said.
>
> So if you continue to insist I engaged in a "back and forth" with you on the
> subject, it's incumbent upon you to provide the referenced quotes, or
> retract your -- (I'll be charitable here) -- "misleading" statements.
>

For the record here is what I said with emphasis added where I was
discussing imputation of motives. You responded to my posts below with
demands for specific examples even though I expressed moral
reservations about this, "tee hee", and calling me a "one-oar boat
rower" and a "flip-flopper". So, yes, it is true that not once did you
engage with me on the subject of imputing motives (and how
constituents reward their leaders for doing it). It does not mean,
however, I didn't raise the issue multiple times. I now see that this
really isn't back and forth because you were non-responsive. So, I
publically retract going "back and forth" with you on the subject.

Sure. First let's have an exposition of what violates the commandment.

Q. 145. What are the sins forbidden in the ninth commandment?

... ***misconstructing intentions, words, and actions*** ...
unnecessary discovering of infirmities ... evil suspicion ...
rejoicing in their disgrace and infamy; scornful contempt ...
neglecting such things as are of good report

The ****imputation of motives**** is the clearest way politicians and
pundits violate this commandment. So, if the sentence consists of
Senator X voted for Y because of nasty motive Z (lacking overwhelming
evidence for the motive), then it is likely the Ninth Commandment has
been violated.

Given the overheated immigration debate the violators are not the
elected officials for once. Here we have an example where the
politicians are for once heeding the Commandment and the
***"constituents" are punishing them for it***. The other side cannot merely
disagree they must be ***dissembling or have some other rotten motive***. If
some people refrain from doing this, ***others attack them for attempting
to think the best of others***. I will not give specific examples here
because to do so would be to fall into the same sin that I am
discussing. Yet, it should not be too difficult to see that this is
exceedingly widespread. And if we are honest with ourselves this also
strikes exceedingly close to home. This is not a Republican problem
nor a Democrat problem. This is a fallen human problem.

-- and --

I have a very specific example that not only in theory advanced the
career of a politician but in actuality did because he slandered
Democrats ***imputing motives*** that he could not possibly know and then he
did not even do it to their face allowing for a defense.
Received on Mon May 22 12:25:36 2006