Comment on Maranatha by braven

braven · 1/19/2026, 6:46:34 PM · permalink

Thank you again for your thoughtful responses.  This is a bit of a tough one to respond to.  
I might have to reprimand you a bit on this one?  My apologies if it seems a bit heavy handed, but gaslighting is ubiquitous in the Bible and you not yet avoiding that pattern.  
Odd stuff for sure...as the gaslighting is strong in this one.  
  
*"The Bible is the true Word of God, because it comes from the God who is truth and cannot lie."*  
What is written in the above, is gaslighting and little else....yes?    
If you do not agree, please explain how/why you used circular reasoning to make your point.  
God cannot lie?   This makes no sense.  Please read that back to yourself.  
God can create the universe, Satan, disease, cancer....etc...but cannot lie?  
Why can't God tell a lie?    
  
*"God didn't invent lying; lying entered through free choice against truth*."  
So we started with gaslighting....and it won't venture too far from this.  Odd that?  
In my previous post, I made the point that it would be wise to avoid using metaphysical agents to explain your God of the Bible...and I gave the very specific example of Free Will.  And yet....here we are.😅  
  
Maybe we can have a bit of fun with the grammatical structures you used in the above sentence to demonstrate the semantic gymnastics you used to land that ending.  
*Free choice against truth* - wow....there it is Free will....and truth.  
  
  
*God didn't invent lying* \- active verb for denial of a fact  
You give direct agency to God and his ability...or lack thereof.  
No proof, only gaslighting from the Bible.  
However:  
*lying entered* \- passive verb - no agency?    
As if lying just emerged of its own agency?  
Can you see the slight of hand you used there?  Intentionally...or not??  
  
Please explain lying...as either God invented it, or it doesn't exist.  
If this is not a good working definition on the existence of everything....who else, what else, other than God, is inventing things....including....Lying?  
  
"Y*ou mentioned (paraphrasing here) that before Asha, you were considering creating an archetype out of Mary. Doesn’t that involve thought and choice?*
  
I mentioned that I do not like the archetype of Mary...it is flawed in too many ways.  
So I chose other archetypes to describe that pattern.  
It does involve choice...yes?    
Choice does not equal free will...two completely separate linguistic patterns.  
However, many people often conflate them....and we end up with more gaslighting.  
  
"*When you talked about reframing hope as Asha, it made me wonder if you’ve done something similar with other figures - like Mary (whether the biblical Mary or the Catholic one) - treating her as an archetype or companion and then reshaping it to fit your experience?*
  
You have made mention of my....reshaping things to fit my experience.  Yes?  
I am not reshaping things to my experience...not sure why you are suggesting this...again?  
If you look into the etymology of Asha, you will find hope and novelty were already there.  As well as the spark of life.  
Others have already made that connection.  
  
"*I’m curious how you ended up choosing Asha over those more traditional figures, and whether she (or any archetype you follow) points back to Christ in some way, or if she stands completely on her own."*
  
Asha  - is a great word...has power to it.  
The archetype is brilliant....from Novelty to Hope.  The spark of life.  
Also, she has a counterpart....Ash.   
The Giant Ash.....all material existence...the roots to this one run deep.  
Asha and Ash are older than Mary and Jesus.  Perhaps more traditional than some might initially think.    
  
"*Restless spirits or not, grateful we’re talking."*  
Thank you for this....you and me both...grateful to be having this talk*.*  
  
Peace.😇

11 bumps

sonatime · 1/20/2026, 12:48:35 AM · permalink

Asha, Ash... any more rabbits in the warren?:)  
  
Again, there's no amazing order to my thoughts, bear with me if you can.  
My use of Scripture is mainly to relate to anyone who might be reading, to share my enjoyment, and so you can understand where I'm coming from. I don't mean to antagonize on purpose, but there is that aspect of the Word of God being "alive and active, sharper than any double-edged sword—it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit" (Hebrews 4:12).   
Our paths, journeys, experiences, reasoning, and worldviews were probably always going to cause some friction, just like in the world right now. Either people are too much alike, without critical thought, or too diverse to find common ground. That's something about current reality that really stands out to me.  
  
I find most things in the world: culture, trends, etc. - are gaslighting us against overwhelming reality.  
Your stance (relying on empirical evidence for free will and the God of the Bible) also falls short in explaining most of our current existence: logic, truth, the math of the universe.  Your logic cuts both ways - it slices away God and free will, but accidentally chops off the handle you're holding (logic itself, truth, morals). It can't stand on its own without borrowing from the very worldview you're attacking.   
  
Logic and truth aren't physical.    
Moral judgments (like calling God "brutal") assume non-physical standards.    
Science and reason depend on non-physical assumptions.  
  
If Zoroastrianism embodies the concept of free will as the gift that makes the choice between truth (Asha) and deceit (Druj) real, then wouldn't authoritarianism be the suppression/denial of free choice?  
I feel like I'm getting bogged down in this line of reasoning.  
  
My choice falls on the God of the Bible who actively cultivates relationship. The Bible doesn't present God as some distant, abstract "metaphysical agent" who set up free will and then bailed out. It shows a God who repeatedly, personally steps into history to reveal Himself and build actual relationship with imperfect humans - something no purely material worldview can even make sense of.  
  
Examples:   
God walking and talking with Adam &amp; Eve in the garden.    
God creating a relationship with Abraham, making a personal covenant/promise (Genesis 12–17).    
God speaking face-to-face with Moses, writing the commandments Himself.  
Prophets getting direct messages, dreams, visions - not vague feelings, but clear "Thus says the Lord."    
Jesus: God's Son literally becoming human, eating with people, healing, teaching, dying, rising - the ultimate revelation.   
Ongoing: The Holy Spirit promised to dwell in believers, guide them - personal relationship.  
  
The Bible doesn't "venerate" Mary the way the Catholic Church does, but Jesus' origins are as the firstborn begotten Son.  Colossians 1:15-17 (ESV):  
"He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him. And he is before all things, and in him all things hold together."  
  
Maranatha, "even the demons believe—and shudder" (James 2:19)  
:)  
 "No one can serve two masters, for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and money \[or mammon—anything that rivals God\]."

7 bumps

braven · 1/21/2026, 6:27:07 PM · permalink

*Asha, Ash... any more rabbits in the warren?:)*
Yes....and hopefully they will breed like rabbits.🤣  
  
"I don't mean to antagonize on purpose, but there is that aspect of the Word of God being "alive and active, sharper than any double-edged sword—it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit" (Hebrews 4:12)."  
  
*I don't mean to antagonize you...**on purpose**...**but*****.**....lol🤣  
**But**...*by the powers of Whitesnake...."here I go again on my own*."  lol  
I don't mind the antagonism....intentional or not....it could be when discussing the Bible that it is impossible not to antagonize someone who is looking for truth....yes?  
  
If I ask anyone for the most accurate writing ever produced and then they came back with a Biblical phrase....all one could do is chuckle....ah ha very funny...good one....well played...something like that?  😅  
  
But just to make this even clearer....you can read that again to yourself.  
Does that line sell something to you?  
That line has been used here at Sojooo before and I have commented on its use and the glaring lie that it is.   
  
I can prove and have proven, easily, that that statement is a bald face lie....and yet here it is again...how is that possible?  
So, as you can intuit, I am not writing this to antagonize you...just raise the bar a bit.  
This line does not sell.  It makes your own personal opinion have less veracity.  
  
Lets take a look at the linguistic structure of the Perfect Word of God.  
*"the Word of God being "alive and active, sharper than any double-edged sword—it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit."*
  
First off....the word of God is not alive and active....it is dead and passive.  
  
Second - *sharper than any double-edged sword*.....  
Really.....it can't even make an honest comment in the physical world....it always degenerates to metaphysics....always.  
It cuts nothing....it avoids truth and runs back to metaphysics....every time.  
  
And to prove this point.....  
Thirdly - *it penetrate even to dividing soul and spirit.*  
*Soul and Spirit....wow....not just Soul...but Soul and Spirit....ouch???*  
What is soul and what is spirit?   ....metaphysics on parade.  
Really...it can do that...it can do something in metaphysics?  Odd that  
  
*"Your logic cuts both ways - it slices away God and free will, but accidentally chops off the handle you're holding (logic itself, truth, morals). It can't stand on its own without borrowing from the very worldview you're attacking.*"  
  
It does not 'accidentally' chop off the handle I am holding.  
God and logic do not fall on the same archetype.  
God and Morality do not fall on the same archetype.  
God is amoral.  This is not contentious.  
  
But if you read your statement again, you will find that you used a circuitous pattern again.  
*Your logic cuts off your logic?*  Do you see that?  All good...just observation.  
  
"*If Zoroastrianism embodies the concept of free will as the gift that makes the choice between truth (Asha) and deceit (Druj) real, then wouldn't authoritarianism be the suppression/denial of free choice?*
  
Does Zoroastrianism do that?  Honest question?  
Maybe we could set up a standard of excellence as we find patterns that work and don't work.....something like that....on the level of excellence.  
  
Christianity.....may have patterns of excellence...and if so...we could 'borrow' them and add them to the patterns of excellence that others have found, too.  Something like that.  
However, we would be wise not to get too bogged down in trying to demonstrate that there are patterns in other religions that make no sense what so ever....all good.  
  
We don't have to walk in dog shit...just step over it....and move on.  Something like that?  
If Zoroastrianism is making some claim that seem like 'dog shit' to you....just leave it alone...all good.  
  
I am using patterns that work...literally work.  If you find a flaw in any of my patterning, please point it out....glad to update improve and move forward.  
  
Once again, if I have overlooked some of your finer points...my apologies.  
Your contributions to this conversation are greatly appreciated...thank you.  
  
Peace.😇

3 bumps

Signature