Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Everyone knows how every thing is going to be, its just that no one says how they know. There is no structure that supports all these facts.
Everyone subjectively preaches, but then anyone can do that, and as subjective, there is little value.
There is no one here who has any authority to state a fact, and fact statements are mere air and a dime a dozen. How is all these facts known especially since these all contradict?
Everyone knows how every thing is going to be, its just that no one says how they know. There is no structure that supports all these facts.
Everyone subjectively preaches, but then anyone can do that, and as subjective, there is little value.
There is no one here who has any authority to state a fact, and fact statements are mere air and a dime a dozen. How is all these facts known especially since these all contradict?
Well, not quite sure what you're trying to say but I get that no one can claim "fact" when it comes to interpretation of scripture. There seems to be scripture to support ET, UR and AN.....depending on the individual interpretation of it. I'm not saying that ET and AN are correct, I'm just saying that those who believe in it can find scripture to allegedly support it.
I have the authority to state a fact, and the fact is that no one has all the answers. But (this is now my own opinion) ET and AN are WRONG.
I was responding to Ironma or what ever alias this person goes by. She quoted me and then just preached, as if her opinion had some truth to it. If I am quoted, a better job should be used to make it clear what one is responding to rather than tell me a bunch of stuff I have known for a long time rather than respond as if am some lame brain novice that needs to hear from such an authority.
The fact you are stating, no one has all the answers, is pretty useless, as it is well known; not taken seriously, however. So basically you are saying you got nothing. One does not need all the answers; that is a totality, one should have some explanations. As to the correctness of a doctrine, your opinion is useless as you are a nobody. It may work for you, but it is useless outside of your own brain. As the saying goes, opinions are like ass holes, every one has one.
In the old philosophy there were three kinds on knowing; the common or ordinary (like much here on these forums; just fell into one's head with a knowing, but a not knowing of what or how), then there is understanding, which is fairly one sided, lacking a dialectic process (an appeal to archeology fits here-although I doubt a data forum person has the power to operate in this, just apes what he hears and tries to make an impression), and finally the thinking (speculative) which attempts to fill out an idea, with content; nearly everyone is capable here with a little effort.
Now when one supports or rejects a doctrine, any, and does not explain how one knows it is wrong, one does not know it is wrong; that is why one resorts to that great meaningless self important "opinion", and generally the choir chimes in because they are at the same ignorance.
One generally, if he or she thinks at all, attempts to fill out or construct a structure that supports their "opinion"; better, theory, so that at least one knows what one knows-what one knows is setting on something, and then can dispense with the opinion and at least have a reason.
The bible is as you say, so only at least half wits should be allowed to read it. To get through these difficulties one should develop a sense for methods (especially theological; of course in our day and age a lot of christians do not know their butts from holes in the ground, but they know all heavenly mysteries) and such to get through it, rather than propagate their opinions.
So I don't really care about what your opinion is, who are you to me? Tell me how you know. What methods gives you such knowing to state such things that men and women smarter than you would disagree. And the sappy little juvenile faces that people use really don't confirm your idea even if one thinks a picture is worth a thousand words; the idea confuses the category of thought with aesthetics.
I was responding to Ironma or what ever alias this person goes by. She quoted me and then just preached, as if her opinion had some truth to it. If I am quoted, a better job should be used to make it clear what one is responding to rather than tell me a bunch of stuff I have known for a long time rather than respond as if am some lame brain novice that needs to hear from such an authority.
I'm pretty sure it's Ironmaw, and he is a HE, not a she. Egads.
Quote:
The fact you are stating, no one has all the answers, is pretty useless, as it is well known; not taken seriously, however. So basically you are saying you got nothing. One does not need all the answers; that is a totality, one should have some explanations. As to the correctness of a doctrine, your opinion is useless as you are a nobody. It may work for you, but it is useless outside of your own brain. As the saying goes, opinions are like ass holes, every one has one.
It's not pretty useless, it's the truth. You may think you have all the answers but YOU definitely don't. No, I got something and it's called the truth. If you want to go there, then we'll go there. UR has been explained to you people time and time again but you refuse to let go of the brainwashing of ET to even consider that you may have it wrong. It's not an opinion, it's fact in my mind. And that's really all that matters. Your opinion is just that, an opinion. I have more cooth than to put like you did.
Quote:
In the old philosophy there were three kinds on knowing; the common or ordinary (like much here on these forums; just fell into one's head with a knowing, but a not knowing of what or how), then there is understanding, which is fairly one sided, lacking a dialectic process (an appeal to archeology fits here-although I doubt a data forum person has the power to operate in this, just apes what he hears and tries to make an impression), and finally the thinking (speculative) which attempts to fill out an idea, with content; nearly everyone is capable here with a little effort.
There is one kind of knowing, and that's knowing God and his true nature. Just follow the teachings of Jesus Christ and you'll be fine. The rest of what you said makes no sense.
Quote:
Now when one supports or rejects a doctrine, any, and does not explain how one knows it is wrong, one does not know it is wrong; that is why one resorts to that great meaningless self important "opinion", and generally the choir chimes in because they are at the same ignorance.
The "choir" as you put it, is pretty silent when it comes to belief in UR. But that's okay, people are coming around and realizing that what they have been taught all of their lives may not actually be the "truth".
Quote:
One generally, if he or she thinks at all, attempts to fill out or construct a structure that supports their "opinion"; better, theory, so that at least one knows what one knows-what one knows is setting on something, and then can dispense with the opinion and at least have a reason.
Honestly, you're doing nothing but blowing hot air now.
Quote:
The bible is as you say, so only at least half wits should be allowed to read it. To get through these difficulties one should develop a sense for methods (especially theological; of course in our day and age a lot of christians do not know their butts from holes in the ground, but they know all heavenly mysteries) and such to get through it, rather than propagate their opinions.
You've been reading my posts in the atheist forum, haven't you? At least, that's what I'm hoping otherwise what you said above makes absolutely no sense, again.
Quote:
So I don't really care about what your opinion is, who are you to me? Tell me how you know. What methods gives you such knowing to state such things that men and women smarter than you would disagree. And the sappy little juvenile faces that people use really don't confirm your idea even if one thinks a picture is worth a thousand words; the idea confuses the category of thought with aesthetics
Well unlike you I care about other people and their opinions, and I listen intently. And what I'm hearing from you is complete nonsense and intentional confusion.
I was responding to Ironma or what ever alias this person goes by. She quoted me and then just preached, as if her opinion had some truth to it. If I am quoted, a better job should be used to make it clear what one is responding to rather than tell me a bunch of stuff I have known for a long time rather than respond as if am some lame brain novice that needs to hear from such an authority.
The fact you are stating, no one has all the answers, is pretty useless, as it is well known; not taken seriously, however. So basically you are saying you got nothing. One does not need all the answers; that is a totality, one should have some explanations. As to the correctness of a doctrine, your opinion is useless as you are a nobody. It may work for you, but it is useless outside of your own brain. As the saying goes, opinions are like ass holes, every one has one.
In the old philosophy there were three kinds on knowing; the common or ordinary (like much here on these forums; just fell into one's head with a knowing, but a not knowing of what or how), then there is understanding, which is fairly one sided, lacking a dialectic process (an appeal to archeology fits here-although I doubt a data forum person has the power to operate in this, just apes what he hears and tries to make an impression), and finally the thinking (speculative) which attempts to fill out an idea, with content; nearly everyone is capable here with a little effort.
Now when one supports or rejects a doctrine, any, and does not explain how one knows it is wrong, one does not know it is wrong; that is why one resorts to that great meaningless self important "opinion", and generally the choir chimes in because they are at the same ignorance.
One generally, if he or she thinks at all, attempts to fill out or construct a structure that supports their "opinion"; better, theory, so that at least one knows what one knows-what one knows is setting on something, and then can dispense with the opinion and at least have a reason.
The bible is as you say, so only at least half wits should be allowed to read it. To get through these difficulties one should develop a sense for methods (especially theological; of course in our day and age a lot of christians do not know their butts from holes in the ground, but they know all heavenly mysteries) and such to get through it, rather than propagate their opinions.
So I don't really care about what your opinion is, who are you to me? Tell me how you know. What methods gives you such knowing to state such things that men and women smarter than you would disagree. And the sappy little juvenile faces that people use really don't confirm your idea even if one thinks a picture is worth a thousand words; the idea confuses the category of thought with aesthetics.
I'm a guy ... Just a heads up.
Perhaps my opinion does hold some truth, perhaps yours does as well ... Its not really a matter of knowledge anyway when it all comes down to it ... The truth is that it is really all about love.
You can know all mysteries, and have all faith, but if you do not have love you are as sounding brass.
God is love, and if something that a person is teaching does not line up with the law of love and liberty, then it is suspect.
I have discovered that very often a person believes what they want to be true, others believe simply what they have been programmed to believe. What a person believes can say allot about who that person is and where they're at spiritually.
Faith is the substance of things that we hope to be true ... Can you say that you hope that most of humanity is damned for ever?
Remember the fruits of the spirit, if any doctrine contradicts these virtues then it is suspect.
You err in your interpretation of scripture, for God's will was, and still is, to turn over the power to choose right or wrong into the hands of free moral agents. Did God not say, "Let us make man in our own image" ? Mankind has freewill, yet some use a few scriptures that they don't understand with their carnal minds to distort God's will in this matter.
Hey scgraham
Yes God said lets make man in our own image and that is what he is doing, but we are not yet in the image of God the process is still ongoing. When he is finished we will be in the image of God.
If we have free will than you are saying we can choose not to be in the image of God and then God is a liar because then he did not create man in his image. Can't have it both ways, either we is or we ain't.
Free will is probably the most revered of all the "idols of the heart" that man pocesses and he does not want to give it up. We want to think that everything is controled by us and not God, even many of those who follow God are proud that it was thier choice to do so. Pride goeth before a fall and I'm telling you we all must fall and rid ourselves of all idols of the heart including free will.
I find it funny that people will say we must choose to follow God but then in the next breath say that he must give us a measure of faith first and we then choose. Can't they see that the faith is a gift from God and if he gives us the faith it is not free will that we have it. You can not refuse faith, you have it ot you don't. If you say I refuse it then you never had it.
Perhaps my opinion does hold some truth, perhaps yours does as well ... Its not really a matter of knowledge anyway when it all comes down to it ... The truth is that it is really all about love.
You can know all mysteries, and have all faith, but if you do not have love you are as sounding brass.
God is love, and if something that a person is teaching does not line up with the law of love and liberty, then it is suspect.
I have discovered that very often a person believes what they want to be true, others believe simply what they have been programmed to believe. What a person believes can say allot about who that person is and where they're at spiritually.
Faith is the substance of things that we hope to be true ... Can you say that you hope that most of humanity is damned for ever?
Remember the fruits of the spirit, if any doctrine contradicts these virtues then it is suspect.
Wonderful post from you this morning. I sure do thank God for all the times your posts have encouraged me in the faith, Ironmaw. Perhaps I sound like one of your earthly "buds", but the truth is, I only know you by the Spirit.
The Sword cuts both ways...
Yes God said lets make man in our own image and that is what he is doing, but we are not yet in the image of God the process is still ongoing. When he is finished we will be in the image of God.
Adam and Eve were most assuredly made in God's image; it is written. However, after they chose to sin, they fell into the devil's image; and consequently, every one born of Adam's seed in born by default with that image too. That's why Jesus came saying, "Ye must be born again". God's image is one of holiness and righteousness.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sschulz
If we have free will than you are saying we can choose not to be in the image of God and then God is a liar because then he did not create man in his image. Can't have it both ways, either we is or we ain't.
Wrong again. Refer to my first post
Quote:
Originally Posted by sschulz
Free will is probably the most revered of all the "idols of the heart" that man pocesses and he does not want to give it up. We want to think that everything is controled by us and not God, even many of those who follow God are proud that it was thier choice to do so. Pride goeth before a fall and I'm telling you we all must fall and rid ourselves of all idols of the heart including free will.
Man made theories, and God has nothing to do with it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sschulz
I find it funny that people will say we must choose to follow God but then in the next breath say that he must give us a measure of faith first and we then choose. Can't they see that the faith is a gift from God and if he gives us the faith it is not free will that we have it. You can not refuse faith, you have it ot you don't. If you say I refuse it then you never had it.
More theories of men. Did Israel inherit the land flowing with milk and honey by just looking at it and longing for it? No. They had to go claim it. However, they were scared of the giants in the land and disobeyed the Word of the Lord; consequently, God was wroth with them and their carcasses fell in the wilderness during a forty-year period. Faith without works is dead. So, if God gives a sinner a measure of faith to repent, but he/she ultimately refuses, then he/she will perish spiritually, just as those twenty and older, save Caleb and Joshua, physically perished in the wilderness because of disobedience.
I encounter Him unmistakably in deep meditation and have done so for 40 years.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
