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.
Here is the method, I will answer my own inquiry, that way I won't be preached at and can have a real discussion (after all, the text in post modernism is its own thing, not mine). To answer the original post would be interesting if it was structured up, rather than seemingly like a vote.
There is no biblical methodology here-so it is not christian, and really belongs in religion and philosophy (although there seems to be way to much religion already in that forum). Here in this thread there is subjective desire wedded to some biblical ideas as well as a large pile of common ideas of desire (maybe this should be called the Ophra method); no exposition, no theological process. There are no foundations for these subjective opinions except "feeling" or "I believe", which means it is all suspect; and more of an on the back of the car bumper sticker exclamation.
There is also the mush process-or a reductionism. This is an attempt to remove distinctions (when this happens physically to the mind one has psychological problems as one can not distinguish between oneself and one's environment-idea formation will also suffer as categories and concepts become confused). One can read in a post above that the term "christian" is merely a label. This is a reductionism (just as a "law of love and liberty" which is, somewhat like political correctness and such, is an attempt to reduce reality to a simple mindless formula that decides for the thinker-like blinders on a horse. It is an ideological method or hot system used to avoid inquiry and preload thought with a bias or to arrive at a predetermined end). Any half wit will recognize that the term christian, as notion, contains a structure which is designed to distinguish it from every other term (at the lowest level of true thought we have dictionaries that draw these distinctions of terms through giving some content, take away the content and the dictionary might be good for a door stop); such as through the historical working out of doctrine, distinct ideas that relate to the christian, jesus as god, and such. This reductionism is to render the term meaningless so that it is all inclusive, which means all the other distinctive terms are really not distinct as well. This gets all the rest (islam, jew, pagan, etc) into something else or a new "label", not mentioned (maybe "general religion"), or that the christian is not distinct, ie, jesus is not special, losing the revelation and re-generalizing the god: back into the unknown-this is a return to the primitive.
These so called "labels", emptied of meaning are as stated, truly just labels; but the emptiness is in the empty head that wishes to remove the content from them and have them mirror the reductionist's empty mind, because there are structures in these concepts that further solidifies the boundaries between all concepts (the growth of system specific knowledge furthers this boundary construction, for the christian this is theology; the desire for mush is one reason theology has been dying and ignorance is celebrated in churches). Empty them and one has nothing but mush. It is well known that ideas divide people, and perhaps I too have reached a universal profound fact with this statement, so the solution is to rid the world of ideas. I have attended a church like this, no theology as theology gets people upset, but then an inquiry into baptism revealed that no one knew exactly why baptism was being done or what it was about, but all smiled and applauded when ever there was one!
Since no one likes vacuums, after the notion is emptied (I am using notion instead of label as notion has within it the idea of specific knowledge that compliments the structure at every point, which gives the term a rich and deep content in order for it to be what it is), one immediately likes to fill it. Usually there is a deconstruction, I would image to get rid of it entirely is a prime goal of this method, such as many atheists would have it-course they are lamed brained because religion is a societal structure with specific ends in "mind" that only it as a subsystem of society can inquire into, naturally the modern hard work within christianity to make christianity irrelevant does do much damage because if it is not distinct; it has nothing distinct to "say" and loses its function-one might as well play bingo on sunday morning, and I am pretty sure that I will be able to withdraw from the christian fairly soon and occupy myself with more important tasks; as a christianity emptied is no longer a task. With nothing to say it has no societal purpose. Otherwise, one deconstructs to formulate a new content to displace the old.
With all knowledge building, at least when men thought, if one attempted to rebuild the structure with one's unsupported ideas, one was laughed at. Today this passes as the profound.
I don't care what you have encountered and for how long. What is your experience to me? From my side I can just as easily say you have encountered your own reflection within mind, your own fabrication derived from books you read, elevated feelings, people you have admired, I don't know, could be lots of stuff. You say unmistakable-how do you know this? Maybe you are in a colossal error.
A guy once told me in a discussion, I don't remember what it was about, but he did not like theological structures. He told me that he knew what he was hawking was the truth because he "knew in his knower". I guess I am to take this stuff on some guys word, especially when all men are liars. Oddly I have since heard this goofy saying several times. It has lots of problems and disables the social process.
I once talked with a homeless guy in New Orleans. He was having trouble with another guy; a very heated argument. I asked him what the problem was. He explained, but I didn't see anyone else-but I am sure he knew in his knower this other guy.
I think all this is getting to the original post and why this world is a big mess.
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.
Wrong again. Refer to my first post
Man made theories, and God has nothing to do with 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.
Hey scgraham how ya doing?
If Adam and Eve were in the image of God how was that. God is spirit not flesh so they did not look like him, God knew good and evil they did not, God was not carnal, they were. If they were the image of God they would be like him and they were not, or they would not have sinned because God can not sin. They would have been perfect and perfect people do not make imperfect choices or they are not perfect. The tense in the KJV is man was created in God's image, the literal translations say that in his image God is creating man, it is on going not a past completed act.
Of course we make choices and do deeds and have works but they are all controlled by God. God never loses control of his creation, never.
If Adam and Eve were in the image of God how was that.
To reiterate, God's image is one of holiness and righteousness, which Adam and Eve were made in that image. That image would have remained, too, but they used their free will to sin; therefore, that image was lost, and they took on the devil's image of sin and unrighteousness. The sour fruit of that image abounds yet today in our world. But, as it is written, Jesus will usher in the Perfect Age after God destroys this wicked one. Yet, there will be people who will use their free will not to serve God, even though it will be the Perfect Age.
Zechariah 14
[16] And it shall come to pass, that every one that is left of all the nations which came against Jerusalem shall even go up from year to year to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, and to keep the feast of tabernacles.
[17] And it shall be, that whoso will not come up of all the families of the earth unto Jerusalem to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, even upon them shall be no rain.
[18] And if the family of Egypt go not up, and come not, that have no rain; there shall be the plague, wherewith the LORD will smite the heathen that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles.
[19] This shall be the punishment of Egypt, and the punishment of all nations that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles.
I suppose many think to be perfect means that one will no longer be able to make choices; that's an inherently false belief.
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.
