The Day Fairness Died
Published on February 7, 2007 By KFC Kickin For Christ In Religion
Last time when I wrote under the topic of religion I posted an article about truth being fair. Is it? I say no, not always, maybe not most of the time. Is Christianity fair? Absolutely not. I never said it was. But if you take what the bible says literally and seriously like I do, the last thing you want is for God to be fair.

In his book, Stanley speaks of the day fairness died. There was a time when life was fair. Everybody had equal opportunities to access and discover God. They all knew exactly what God's standard was and understood the rules and the consequences for breaking them. Things were perfect and everybody was in the same boat. There was only one commandment issued and it was committed to memory. It wasn't a hard life from the sounds of it.

Of course you recognize this as the time of the Garden of Eden which was a perfect environment created by a perfect God. With the perfect environment came the gift of freedom, specifically the gift to choose. They had the option to obey or disobey. Just like us today, obedience revealed their love and gratitude to God as their creator and provider. Disobedience revealed a lack of trust in God and would result in death eventually.

Stanley says this about this day:

"What happened next is of extreme importance. I realize the entire Garden of Eden story may be nothing more to you than an ancient attempt to explain the origins of mankind. But bear with me a moment while I attempt to explain why Christians believe it to be far more. For herin lies the answer to a question that has plagued you since you were old enough to think for yourself-a question that has no answer apart from this ancient piece of human history.

When Adam and Eve ate of the forbidden fruit, they-not God-introduced sin and all its consequences into their fair, just, and perfect world. In that moment, the possibility for fairness came to an end. From that day forward, men, women, and children have treated one another unfairly. God had two choices: start over, or resort to mercy and grace.

So next time you are frustrated with God over the injustices in the world-or in your world-remember, Christianity offers an explanation. We beieve that the current system was not the original system. It is a distortion of what God intended. God's original design was exactly what you might wish for; It was fair. "

See everybody was equal, and all was fair but then they decided to exercise their right to choose and they chose against God, their creator. Some say it's not fair that we suffer for their actions. Give us a chance and we'd. do.....what? Do the same thing? Yes, we would. Besides, we all can relate to this. Chances are we've all suffered as a result of someone else's poor choices. It wasn't fair but it's the truth. It did happen and it still does happen. How many are out there wandering around hurt by my choices? Are their lives forever impacted because of something I did or didn't do?

Anybody know a deadbeat dad out there or a mom who drinks too much? Maybe doing drugs? How do you think their kids fare? How about all the drunk driving accidents. It's not fair that whole familes have even died because of the choice of one who decided to drink too much and get behind the wheel.

God suffered as well the day that fairness died. Because of what we did as humans, he had to send his own son to die. That wasn't fair was it? It seems logical that we should pay for our own sins, but instead God opted for grace and mercy over fairness when he sent his son to die in our place. He knew no sin yet he took ours upon himself. What an awesome God.

"I don't know how you explain the evil and unfairness in the world. I don't know how you account for bad things happening to good people. Christianity offers both an explanation and a solution. The explanation is that when sin entered the world, life became irreversibly unfair." Stanley.

So what's the solution?


Comments (Page 5)
5 PagesFirst 3 4 5 
on Feb 14, 2007
":but.....it seems to me you like to quote from the book when it suits you.


Heck yes, I won't allow documents from primitive and barbaric people to define God for me. I won't tell God that unless he meets the definition carved out by barely civilized people He doesn't exist. If I did, I would be placing the mythology of man over God.

"So actually you've got it backwards. I'd be like the Pharisee if I dismissed the scriptures to make God out to be what I wanted him to be disregarding what he wrote about himself."


No, both of you hold the worldly, the temporal, the man-made as what determines whether or not God is God. You don't even pick the best of us, either, you pick material that lauds awful, barbaric behavior. If Jesus knocked on your door and differed on iota from what your paper and ink says, you'd deny Him.

That's the pharisees in a nutshell, imho.
on Feb 14, 2007
If Jesus knocked on your door and differed on iota from what your paper and ink says, you'd deny Him.


and that's just it....he won't. You talk about "iota." He said every jot and tittle will be fulfilled. So yes, I'm sticking with scripture. He'll come back just as he said he would...you can find that in Rev 19 or before that in 1 Thess 4. Just as he himself picked up the scriptures and read about himself (Luke 4) so too will he be coming back the second time like he said he was according to scripture.

The first time, the Pharisees wouldn't believe it. It's not that they didn't know the scriptures. They CHOSE to believe the scriptures that spoke of his kingly position, they chose not to believe in his servant one. So just like you are doing....they picked and chose what sciptures they wanted forming Christ to be what they wanted. You do the same thing. You put God/Jesus into a specific category and say he wouldn't do such and such. You accept him as lamb of God, but I'm seeing that you don't accept him as Lion of Judah. Many want to talk of the love of God, but leave out the justice of God.

See the OT is full of Jesus first coming as a servant and his second coming as the Lion of Judah, the King of the earth. The Pharisees skipped the servant parts thinking Jesus would come back an elitist like them, and they would be sitting at the King's table since they were such law abiding Pharisees.....only to find out that Jesus bypassed them and went to the lower parts of humanity. So, according to them, using only portions of scripture, this couldn't be the Messiah. He even said he came the first time to serve and to save. But that is not going to be his mission when he returns. It will be one of justice and vengeance so if that's what you're referring to, then it will be you who will be surprised. By then it will be too late.

I don't like to call them Pharisees...they were really Phariblinds.


on Feb 14, 2007
No, I won't accept that God is a hypocrite, a murderer, a Nazi. I don't believe God would hang around with Satan and allow him to kill people on a bet. I don't believe that God is somehow LESS civilized than we are. If you choose to believe that, fine, whatever you can stomach, I guess. Don't pretend it is much different than the God of the Philistines or any other from that time, though.
on Feb 14, 2007
No, I won't accept that God is a hypocrite, a murderer, a Nazi. I don't believe God would hang around with Satan and allow him to kill people on a bet. I don't believe that God is somehow LESS civilized than we are


me either.....WE AGREE!!

my mantra to you again....same evidence, diff conclusion.

on Feb 15, 2007
Do you really think the Bible translates itself?

KFC POSTS: Absolutely. He was pretty clear. He wasn't talking about the physical. That's why he asked what if you shall see me leave and ascend? He was saying....no, it's not physical. I'll be leaving. I'm leaving you with a spiritual truth. The physical or literal meaning of the words was plainly ruled out. So next you have to go to the spiritual meaning. I don't need to write pages to back this up. It's only unclear to the CC. Christ was NEVER about the physical. Just a quick overview of the gospels makes that perfectly clear.



Hi KFC.

May I remind you that with Christ, all things are possible.


KFC POSTS: So in this discourse Jesus is not even making a direct reference to Holy Communion although it does convey the same truth in words as Communion coveys in action.

Actually your are correct, Jesus only make a promise of Holy Communion that He keeps a year later at the Last Supper when He institutes the Holy Eucharist and gives His Body, BLood, Soul and Divinity in the form of consecrated bread. It's awesome!


And you know He made some promises in the discourse He had with the Jews and disciples. He gave these promises at the time of the 3rd Pasch. He fulfilled them a year later when He instituted the most Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist at the Last Supper.

It is clear that Jesus is entirely present in the most Holy sacrament under the form of bread when He says, I am the LIving Bread which come down from Heaven. If any man eat of this bread, he shall live forever. The bread which I give shall be my flesh for the life of the world.

In His discourse, Our Lord distinctly and without using any figurative language at all, foretold the atoning Sacrifice of His Death, telling those present that He would give His flesh and blood for the world. Searching the Scriptures, we find exactly how Christ intended to give His Flesh and Blood for the faithful to eat. The full explanation is in the account of the Last Supper.

"And while they were at supper, Jesus took bread, and blessed and broke it, and gave it to His disciples and said, "Take and eat, this is my Body. And taking the cup, he gave thanks and gave it to them saying,"All of you drink of this, For this is my Blood." St.Matt.26:26-28; St.Mark 14:22-24; St.Luke 22:19-20.

The bread and wine of Holy Communion were not mere symbols or spiritual repositories of Christ as you believe. In truth, the bread and wine are miraculously transformed by the power of Almighty God into His true and living Flesh and Blood, only the appearance of bread and wine remaining. Not only do I have the words of the promise and the words of the fulfillment of the promise to convince me of this, I have the words of the Apostles for they too believed that the bread and wine duly consecrated on the altar became the actual physical Body and Blood of Jesus Christ.

Of this, St. Paul wrote, "The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not the sharing of the blood of Christ? And the bread that we break, is it not the partaking of the body of the Lord?" 1Cor.10:16. "But let a man prove himself, and so let him eat of that bread and drink of that cup; for he who eats and drinks unworthily, without distinguishing the body of the Lord, eats and drinks judgment to himself". 1Cor. 11: 28-29.

Surely, St.Paul wouldn't say that a person brings judgment on himself if he drinks and eats unworthily if Christ only meant what He said figuratively or symbolically.

Christ instituted the Holy Eucharist at the Last Supper. It's sacrificail dimension was revealed. Christ offers Himself for the salvation of mankind. But why? So, we can live with Him eternally. The Church, as one family, celebrating the Holy Mass where the priest following Jesus' command, "Do this in remembrance of me", consecrates the bread and wine into His Body, Blood, Soul and DIvinity, shares in the heavenly banquet and is perfected in love and united in that love. There is absolutely nothing on earth that is better than this.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

KFC POSTS: Actually if you look close at this you'll see this was not said at the last supper where Christ institutes communion. Most don't even think about that. In fact, John is the only gospel where he doesn't even cover the communion service as the other three gospel writers do. So the context isn't even communion.

Yes, KFC, give it up, the context of St.John 6 leads to the context of the Last Supper which leads to the context of Holy COmmunion which St. John doesn't cover in his Gospel. So what? You're pulling the same foolishness here that you did with "Peter , you are the rock" complaining that verse was in all the others and not included in St. Mark. So what? From this are we to think that if all 4 Gospels don't report the same thing, it did not happen?

--------------------------------------------------------------------


KFC POSTS: He was pretty clear. He wasn't talking about the physical. That's why he asked what if you shall see me leave and ascend? He was saying....no, it's not physical. I'll be leaving. I'm leaving you with a spiritual truth. The physical or literal meaning of the words was plainly ruled out. So next you have to go to the spiritual meaning. I don't need to write pages to back this up. It's only unclear to the CC. Christ was NEVER about the physical. Just a quick overview of the gospels makes that perfectly clear.


This is the verse to which you are referring: V 63-64: "If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before? It is the spirit that quickeneth: the flesh profiteth nothing. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life."


KFC, you're private interpretation technique is mis-interpreting this. You better give a quick overview of the Gospel and read how Christ was physically present as He ascended into Heaven, before the disciple's eyes. Equally as clearly as Christ foretold of His atoning Sacrifice of His death, He foretold His Ascension, when He said that the Son of man (the Incarnate Son of God who came down from Heaven-[KFC-this is Jesus-- in human flesh--i.e. physical] would (as Son of Man, and therfore His human nature) return to where He was before His Incarnation.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

KFC POSTS: Read the whole passage in context starting even with Chap 4 with the woman at the well. Then we go to the feeding of physical bread to the 5,000 directly before this present discussion and read for yourself.

Jesus discourse at Capharnaum follows the miracle of multiplication and distribution of the loaves. Our Lord's miracles serve to increase the faith of the disciples. The grace of faith was offered to some of the Jews and they refused...they resisted God's grace. Besides the increase of faith,the miracle of multiplication of loaves (bread) has one special object-----to foreshadow and to prepare hearts for the marvelous Food which He gives us in the most Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist---the gft which He promised on the following day. Our Lord in the Eucharist feeds the souls of the faithful with the most precious bread from heaven, multiplying His own Body and distributing It by the hands of His priests. And with this heavenly Food, all are satisfied, for IT (is the spirit that quickeneth) appeases our spiritual hunger by uniting us with Our Lord's Body, BLood, Soul and DIvinity. Jesus, the author of all grace.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


KFC POSTS: Remember when this was first taught by the CC the scriptures were not open to the general public. When they were, many did leave and this was one of those passages in question.

Ahh, KFC, please tell me more about this allegation of yours.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


KFC POSTS: Bishop Augustine of Hippo (4th Century) said this:

"The hard saying cannot be taken literally since it would seem to be enjoining a crime or a vice: it is therefore a figure, bidding us communicate in the sufferings of our Lord and secretly and profitable treasure in our hearts the fact that his flesh was crucified and pierced for us." He sums the matter up Crede et manducasti. "Believe and thou hast eaten.

All of the Church Fathers were in agreement maintaining that by virtue of the consecration the bread became by the omnipotent power of God ALmighty, the true flesh and blood of Jesus. They wrote a great deal on the subject calling the bread and wine consecrated on the altar "Eucharist". The quote you supplied from St. Augustine doesn't contradict this, rather it goes to His promise to sacrifice His human
body (flesh and blood) for the life of the world. St. Augustine said of the Holy Eucharist, "O Sacrament of Love! O sign of unity! O bond of Charity! He who hath life finds here indeed a life to live and to live by."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




5 PagesFirst 3 4 5