User talk:BPMoldovan

Comment. First and only edit so far. To "fillibuster". Being totally neutral can be difficult. I'm not at all going to say I succeeded, just that I tried. It's hard not to have SOME personal views seep in. Edit was noting the foolishness of vague undefined term as "extraordinary circumstances". Intent was not to propogate a political point of view - did it come out that way? Time will tell. First edit, and I forget to put something in the edit summary. I'm not sure I'd have known what to put there anyway.

05-24-06. Deleted statement in Divorce article, section on religious aspects of divorce. There was a blatantly false, and not very well written statment - apparently demonstrating not terribly great intelligence also, IMO - trying to say that Jesus was ok with cohabitation.

The two verses sited say no such thing, and really, Jesus gives no opinion one way or the other in those verses (John 4: 18-19). As I said in the discussion page, Jesus was backing up his claim to be the long awaited Messiah by demonstrating his power - in this case, by showing personal knowledge of the woman which no ordinary stranger could have.

While one could infer my personal opinion on cohabitation, I really have no intention of propogating my opinion in the article or the discussion page. It simply seemed that someone, with a personal vested interest / agenda of pushing the idea that cohabitation is a-okay, was taking an isolated set of scriptures to try to say that Jesus is cool with it, or at least doesn't think it's any big deal.

This is completely false. I didn't intened to get into a protracted religious debate on the relative merits or rightness of cohabitation over there, merely to delete a statement providing untrue information. I will say here though, that Jesus' demonstration of knowledge could also be taken as a gentle chiding of the woman - showing that as the Omniscient God he knows everything she does, every sin she commits, and that she can't hide anything from God. It could be seen also as a subtle urging for her to repent of her sins.

I don't want to drag this on too much longer, but I also want to touch briefly, since we're on the subject, on Jesus' moral judgements and reactions. Jesus didn't always react the same way to sin. With the self-righteous and hypocritical religious leaders he could be very harsh, and once he even whipped the people turning the Temple into a market and "a den of thieves" on the Sabbath. On the other hand, he rescued the woman caught in adultery (note the Pharisees / religious leaders didn't hold the man accountable too), said for this situation to them to "let he who is without sin cast the first stone [at her]". Jesus was bending over and writing in the dirt at the time. It is thought by some that he was writing names in the dirt - of the Pharisees' mistresses. Also note that as without sin himself and as God, he could have cast a stone if he had wanted to. He finally told her to "go and sin no more". He was roundly criticized by the religious leaders for consorting with tax collectors and sinners, but said to them "it is the sick, not the well, who need a physician", and "I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners, to repentance." Jesus was all about grace and repentance, not only punishment and holding you to the letter of the law.

Sorry, it's hard to be brief, there's so much to say. Well, it's late, good night all.