[July 2006 journal entry]
The terms ‘righteous’ and ‘pure’ (4:17) are very common terms. Peterson’s use of ‘more’ captures the Hebrew comparative. Does the ‘religious’ T/O paradigm in fact build around concepts of ‘God’ as righteous and pure? If so, then what do the breadth and depth of innocent human suffering imply about the definitions of righteous and pure in reference to ‘God’? If the ‘religious’ T/O paradigm does not in fact build around such concepts, then the ‘God’ of the ‘religious’ T/O paradigm is above accountability and, therefore, represents a brutal ‘might makes right’ ethic.
The terms ‘righteous’ and ‘pure’ (4:17) are very common terms. Peterson’s use of ‘more’ captures the Hebrew comparative. Does the ‘religious’ T/O paradigm in fact build around concepts of ‘God’ as righteous and pure? If so, then what do the breadth and depth of innocent human suffering imply about the definitions of righteous and pure in reference to ‘God’? If the ‘religious’ T/O paradigm does not in fact build around such concepts, then the ‘God’ of the ‘religious’ T/O paradigm is above accountability and, therefore, represents a brutal ‘might makes right’ ethic.
