VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, [5], 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 06:02:26 06/26/18 Tue
Author: Carlo G. Soldevilla
Subject: Poem About Defending Digong on His 'Belief' on a Stupid G-d -- Fruit Salad by Carlo G. Soldevilla

Poem About Defending Digong on His Eternal?, Situational? Belief on a Stupid G-d -- Fruit Salad by Carlo G. Soldevilla
-0-
Fruit Salad
By Carlo G. Soldevilla
Written on June 26, 2018

Great and awesome G-d is He,
Sung in Praises and throughout eternity
-0-
But here’s what surprised many
For Digong to call G-d stupid based on the Creation Story.
-0-
‘Your G-d is stupid, mine is not.’-
Many will tell Digong this, now look what they’ve got.--

Even the evangelical Christians had made a stance
They found the adjective blasphemous, and now what’s the chance?

Many will still adhere to their strong belief that G-d is not stupid and they want to tell Digong that G-d is not stupid, wanting him to believe what they believe.
Finding Digong’s statement as an insult to the faith on which they stand -(G-d, the Divide Provider , the one whom they call upon especially in times of great need.).
-0-
Looking at the context in which those words were said by Digong, he stressed on the original sin—like a stain, then imputed on man after the first parents (Adam & Eve) sinned.

Man fell into sin because of disobedience (partaking of that ‘Chinese’ apple as Digong would say). Digong must have made that stance why G-d allowed such a temptation (somewhat like an experiment?) which could cause man to fail and fall, and be eternally doomed.
-0-
A great debate, then can come out of this: With the statement ‘G-d is stupid.’, the affirmative side will surely lose.
Law is reason beyond passion, and in this situation, one would always seek to be passionate, feeling emotional in his/her belief in G-d, that, come what may and ‘over my dead body’ , “I always believe that my G-d is not stupid and that He surely lives.”
-0-
Now, it’s a question of ‘ Would you believe what Digong believes, and if you don’t believe what he believes, would it then follow that the Philippines has a ruler who is an accuser of G-d and who does not believe in the attributes of G-d? (..but Digong says He believes in G-d.).

One might really fall into a dilemma, thinking about how a great leader is able to call G-d stupid (if one is just not careful to see the context that cause him to say that G-d is so and so.).
-0-
If I would say Digong is wrong in calling G-d stupid, many would really support the idea that Digong is really wrong in his description of G-d.
If I would say Digong is right in calling G-d stupid, it would hurt many, because the Filipinos, being G-d-fearing always believes on the Infinite G-d (in whatever situation that he or she is in.) and it’s a no-no for a Filipino to blame G-d or to curse Him in any manner.
-0-
Was Digong joking or not in calling G-d stupid? Many would believe he was not joking.
People find his words very alarming, and does it sound philosophical then?

Can G-d create a stone that He cannot carry? Can he allow others (the innocent) to be tempted, and afterwhich, falling into sin is the consequence..but for one to suffer the sins committed not by him or her but by others—this is a big question for Digong.
Is it good or proper for one to sacrifice for the sin committed by another?—the original stain or sin to be passed upon which can’t be removed by the local (innocent) stain remover that the latter will have to carry the ‘burden of guilt’ which he/she did not commit?

Theology, philosophy, education, science—The religious, the philosophers, the educators including the guidance counselors, and even the scientists (who mostly believe in facts) can reason at the best they could this time.

In our country where there is freedom of religion and belief, one can’t just proselyte someone to change his/her belief by saying ‘This is the right thing to say or do, and this is the right belief.’ One can’t force someone to call the table a chair if that someone believes with his/her whole heart that what he sees is really a table. (It’s a doctrine of absolute truth and necessary truth. In the latter, one can call the table a chair ‘out of necessity’, although in reality or in the ‘norm of things’, it’s really a table. Calling it then as table by the President (by calling G-d stupid), many have been affected because of the belief that it’s really a chair and not a table.

What makes the table a chair? It’s hard to fight someone who has a unique belief, and to settle things right, the least I could suggest, instead of calling mango an apple, or an apple a mango, for the sake of harmony, call them as fruit salad (not even apple mango).

-0-
This poem I wrote for Digong:
http://www.voy.com/225701/5773.html

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]
[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT-8
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.