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.
hey, you're actually acute to what's being said ... sort of.
It's not a matter of "crass dismissal of people isn't worthy of who you are" ... it's a dismissal of people having no intention of hearing \ that value the truth.
I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "acute to what's being said".
But, let me ask you this, and please sincerely think about it, okay?
Do you understand that people are expressing what they actually believe to be truth, even if they are disagreeing with what you understand to be truth? They value the truth they believe they have grasped, just as you do. We all obviously think the other doesn't have truth in any given area that we disagree about, but that doesn't mean the "other" is a fool or swine or a dog.
ETA: None of us have any "intention" of accepting what someone else is saying is truth when it is in conflict with what we ourselves believe to be truth. Only if they explain something in a way that allows us to see their perspective in a way that makes sense -- that allows us to see truth in what they say -- will we be swayed.
I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "acute to what's being said".
But, let me ask you this, and please sincerely think about it, okay?
Do you understand that people are expressing what they actually believe to be truth, even if they are disagreeing with what you understand to be truth? They value the truth they believe they have grasped, just as you do. We all obviously think the other doesn't have truth in any given area that we disagree about, but that doesn't mean the "other" is a fool or swine or a dog.
ETA: None of us have any "intention" of accepting what someone else is saying is truth when it is in conflict with what we ourselves believe to be truth. Only if they explain something in a way that allows us to see their perspective in a way that makes sense -- that allows us to see truth in what they say -- will we be swayed.
Yeah, it was the sentence structure that was throwing me ... and the addition of "sort of", which contradicts the term.
So, what am I supposedly understanding sharply? That he is dismissing people? But I'm only sort of right about that, because he thinks he has a really good reason to? Or am I understanding sharply that dismissing people who disagree with him as fools, swine or dogs is not worthy of who he is?
Ps. Not looking for an answer from you... you can't read his mind. Just sharing from where my confusion stemmed.
I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "acute to what's being said".
But, let me ask you this, and please sincerely think about it, okay?
Do you understand that people are expressing what they actually believe to be truth, even if they are disagreeing with what you understand to be truth? They value the truth they believe they have grasped, just as you do. We all obviously think the other doesn't have truth in any given area that we disagree about, but that doesn't mean the "other" is a fool or swine or a dog.
ETA: None of us have any "intention" of accepting what someone else is saying is truth when it is in conflict with what we ourselves believe to be truth. Only if they explain something in a way that allows us to see their perspective in a way that makes sense -- that allows us to see truth in what they say -- will we be swayed.
I would ask this ... do you believe in absolute truths in general, even if it's beyond a way that makes sense?
What you are implying (if understood correctly) is that something isn't the truth unless it's at the top of making sense to a person "food chain" so to speak.
As far as the exchange between Freak80 and myself; I was speaking in terms from which he should have known where I was coming from ... even if it took a little prodding.
Remember this?
Originally Posted by twin.spin (speaking to Freak80)
Your self announced lack of belief doesn't stem from a character flaw
Your mental blockage to correct Biblical teaching doesn't stem from a character flaw if you think the correct faith is some sort of "bargain" with God.
Originally Posted by Freak80 Ok, so what's the problem? Why do people like me deserve never-ending torture after we die?
part of the correct question involves an in depth understanding of the answer to the OP.
His self-admittance to the LCMS ought to have taken him to that profound in depth understanding.
The answer is what makes the "wow" in understanding the full impact of God's grace on me that lead Jesus to Calvary.
Yeah, it was the sentence structure that was throwing me ... and the addition of "sort of", which contradicts the term.
So, what am I supposedly understanding sharply? That he is dismissing people? But I'm only sort of right about that, because he thinks he has a really good reason to? Or am I understanding sharply that dismissing people who disagree with him as fools, swine or dogs is not worthy of who he is?
Ps. Not looking for an answer from you... you can't read his mind. Just sharing from where my confusion stemmed.
Understanding Psychology would help understand him...You know, looking for common patterns of thought...
I would ask this ... do you believe in absolute truths in general, even if it's beyond a way that makes sense?
What you are implying (if understood correctly) is that something isn't the truth unless it's at the top of making sense to a person "food chain" so to speak.
I think we've covered this before. If something does not make sense in that it is self-contradictory, then it cannot be an "absolute truth". It may contain some truth, but it also contains some untruth.
Regardless, my question to you remains unanswered by you:
Do you understand that people are expressing what they actually believe to be truth, even if they are disagreeing with what you understand to be truth? They value the truth they believe they have grasped, just as you do. We all obviously think the other doesn't have truth in any given area that we disagree about, but that doesn't mean the "other" is a fool or swine or a dog.
Quote:
As far as the exchange between Freak80 and myself; I was speaking in terms from which he should have known where I was coming from ... even if it took a little prodding.
Remember this?
Originally Posted by twin.spin (speaking to Freak80)
Your self announced lack of belief doesn't stem from a character flaw
Your mental blockage to correct Biblical teaching doesn't stem from a character flaw if you think the correct faith is some sort of "bargain" with God.
Originally Posted by Freak80 Ok, so what's the problem? Why do people like me deserve never-ending torture after we die?
part of the correct question involves an in depth understanding of the answer to the OP.
His self-admittance to the LCMS ought to have taken him to that profound in depth understanding.
The answer is what makes the "wow" in understanding the full impact of God's grace on me that lead Jesus to Calvary.
I'm not sure, but I think you are saying that what enables you to "understand" (ie. accept) what to others of us is nonsensical, is trusting that the LC-MS doctrines are true, whether you understand them or not?
The LCMS narrative goes something like this: in the beginning, there was no death (or at least no human death) but then Adam/Eve disobeyed the Christian God, resulting in Original Sin (tm) and death as God's punishment. But luckily God sent Jesus as a human sacrifice to appease God's wrath and thus save us from sin and death.
Yeah, there's more detail than that, but that was the core narrative.
The problem is not that I failed to pay attention in LCMS schools and confirmation classes. The problem is that I DID pay attention and then had to go out and live/work in the real world outside of the compound walls.
The LCMS narrative (and similar evangelical / fundamentalist narratives) just doesn't hold up under rational and scientific scrutiny.
The LCMS narrative goes something like this: in the beginning, there was no death (or at least no human death) but then Adam/Eve disobeyed the Christian God, resulting in Original Sin (tm) and death as God's punishment. But luckily God sent Jesus as a human sacrifice to appease God's wrath and thus save us from sin and death.
Yeah, there's more detail than that, but that was the core narrative.
The problem is not that I failed to pay attention in LCMS schools and confirmation classes. The problem is that I DID pay attention and then had to go out and live/work in the real world outside of the compound walls.
The LCMS narrative (and similar evangelical / fundamentalist narratives) just don't hold up under rational and scientific scrutiny.
Maybe I'm getting this thread mixed up with another, but I thought your question to Twin was along these lines...
"The LC-MS teaches that
* all men are dead in their sin and incapable of believing in God
* faith is %100 a gift from God, worked in a believer's heart by the Spirit, and not conjured up by the person's own will, (because they're spiritually DEAD)
but
* if someone does not believe, it's their own fault, even though they are dead and incapable of believing in God
So, Twin, how does that make sense?"
(If that wasn't the basic gist of what you had asked before, I apologize. I don't feel like scrolling back through the pages to refresh my memory.)
Maybe I'm getting this thread mixed up with another, but I thought your question to Twin was along these lines...
"The LC-MS teaches that
* all men are dead in their sin and incapable of believing in God
* faith is %100 a gift from God, worked in a believer's heart by the Spirit, and not conjured up by the person's own will, (because they're spiritually DEAD)
but
* if someone does not believe, it's their own fault, even though they are dead and incapable of believing in God
So, Twin, how does that make sense?"
(If that wasn't the basic gist of what you had asked before, I apologize. I don't feel like scrolling back through the pages to refresh my memory.)
Then regeneration unto belief would be a gift from G-d...
Maybe I'm getting this thread mixed up with another, but I thought your question to Twin was along these lines...
"The LC-MS teaches that
* all men are dead in their sin and incapable of believing in God
* faith is %100 a gift from God, worked in a believer's heart by the Spirit, and not conjured up by the person's own will, (because they're spiritually DEAD)
but
* if someone does not believe, it's their own fault, even though they are dead and incapable of believing in God
(If that wasn't the basic gist of what you had asked before, I apologize. I don't feel like scrolling back through the pages to refresh my memory.)
Yes, I had asked that question of Twin before, and received no answer. I honestly can't remember if it was in this thread or another. I think it was, but I am also unwilling to scroll back.
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.
