[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I think our rules for society today are far superior to your rules, HH[/quote]
Trouble is that those rules you guys embrace aren’t possible to follow, for very long. Eventually, your desire for happiness overcomes what you’ve been taught, that unselfishness is good.
Then, since you equate unselfishness with morality, you regard your desire for happiness as a source of guilt and self-derision.
This is when priests and government leaders ‘cash in’ on your guilt, assume power over you to tax you and turn you into a mindless robot, taking moral dictums from power mad priests and politicians. You become meek and humble slaves.
[/quote]
I do not think I am a mindless robot . I will agree we are taking moral dictums from religion and politicians .
I do not think following more primitive rules would do away with that . It may make it worst
If I could ever get you into the epistemology thread I’d show you how your entire consciousness is at this very moment a mass of grotesquely contradictory beliefs. Micheal Card REALLY gets it. As does the man calling himself “irvinemuscles” who made the first comment on that page. [quote]“Nothing will ever separate me from Christ, nothing. I am a Prisoner of Christ Jesus forever and ever, Amen.”[/quote] Amen indeed my dear brother who I’ve never met.
[quote]MattyG35 wrote:Tiribulus, you have mental issues.[/quote]Wadda drag =] “Paul, called by the will of God to be an apostle of Christ Jesus, to the church of God that is in Corinth”. 1st epistle, 1st chapter, verses 18-31 (ESV)[quote]18-For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. 19-For it is written,
“I will destroy the wisdom of the wise,
and the discernment of the discerning I will thwart.”
20-Where is the one who is wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? 21-For since, in the wisdom of God, the world did not know God through wisdom, it pleased God through the folly of what we preach to save those who believe. 22-For Jews demand signs and Greeks seek wisdom, 23-but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles, 24-but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 25-For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
26-For consider your calling, brothers: not many of you were wise according to worldly standards, not many were powerful, not many were of noble birth. 27-But God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong; 28-God chose what is low and despised in the world, even things that are not, to bring to nothing things that are, 29-so that no human being might boast in the presence of God. 30-And because of him you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, righteousness and sanctification and redemption, 31-so that, as it is written, “Let the one who boasts, boast in the Lord.”[/quote]
EDIT: Here’s a pdf with a bunch of my posts I put together at the request of the leadership of my church. http://tiribulus.net/dox/1Brother_Greg_refromed_apologetic.pdf That will condense it down some. Without begging the question he says LOL!! Don’t read 3 sentences and assume. Please? If you come back and tell me you’ve read it we’ll talk some more. DBCooper is next and I’m dealing with a monumental family situation today and tomorrow. Not to mention trying to prepare for a discussion o Romans 2 and all of my real life responsibilities which at the moment are immense to say the very least. Not a lot of time except copying and pasting like this.
[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:
No mention of, commentary, or rebuttal of Kamui’s philosophy in there? I did just skim over it so I might have missed it, but if there isn’t why?
In the three threads you posted up there, I thought you and Kamui were the philosophical heavy-weights.[/quote]I’m not sure what you’re referring to Fletch. Kamui asks all the right questions and gives wrong answers to them all in my view. We both agree that final “proof” is impossible in the nature of the case of epistemology which is by definition unprovable. We each take our answers on faith because those are the answers we like best. From his point of view. From my point of view he adopts his answers to escape my answers, like everybody does. Can I “prove” that to the satisfaction of finite autonomous man? Nope. And he will concede that neither can he. The methodological difference between us is that he thought himself to the questions and then formulated answers. I had my answers before I knew how to properly formulate the questions. (true story). I didn’t really understand the questions the answers I had were to until long after I had them. That’s how God works sometimes.
Kamui is genuinely brilliant and a joy to tussle with. He paid me one of the very highest compliments I’ve ever gotten here as well. There’s mutual respect, but I didn’t know how much further we have to go. Some more on the problem of the one and the many would be constructive maybe. Brother Joab gave me a real zinger from a Christian perspective that I still am yet to properly deal with though too. My point wit these guys like Matty is they walk up and start tellin me stuff like they are going to be the very first to give me that devastating argument or evidence that has me crying in my bible. That will not ever happen for the rest of my natural life. As I think even you may concede.
EDIT: Wait a minute. Are you referring to that pdf fie?
Thanks for the well thought out response. And as far as your last words go I certainly do concede that. I find myself surprised that the person that makes me at the least almost wish I could believe in Christianity again is some ‘random’ dude on the internet lol. Your faith is unshakable and sound and makes me green with envy.
[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:
Thanks for the well thought out response. And as far as your last words go I certainly do concede that. I find myself surprised that the person that makes me at the least almost wish I could believe in Christianity again is some ‘random’ dude on the internet lol. Your faith is unshakable and sound and makes me green with envy. [/quote]
Ya know that may may wind being enough Fletch. One night when you’re alone and quiet and getting ready to go to sleep, tell Him the truth. He knows anyway. Tell Him you want to believe, but why you can’t. Ask Him to teach you how. If you do that with an honest heart? I guarantee you He will make Himself real to you. I do fully understand that I sound like an unhinged screwball mystic when I say things like that to 21st century western people. I don’t mind. I just want to please Him.
[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:
I was referring the pdf, yes.[/quote]Most of that is from before our (Kamui and I) big conversation in the epistemology thread, but Pastor Phil primarily wanted some samplings of my writing style anyway. He just told me to mix in some theological/philosophical stuff. BTW Fletch, despite not believing anything I say, I do appreciate the way you’ve always been kind to me. It may appear that I float out here in some detached religious stupor, but I care what people think of me. It would be easier if I didn’t.
[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:
I was referring the pdf, yes.[/quote]Most of that is from before our (Kamui and I) big conversation in the epistemology thread, but Pastor Phil primarily wanted some samplings of my writing style anyway. He just told me to mix in some theological/philosophical stuff. BTW Fletch, despite not believing anything I say, I do appreciate the way you’ve always been kind to me. It may appear that I float out here in some detached religious stupor, but I care what people think of me. It would be easier if I didn’t.
[/quote]
Since words have origins in perception and God is a being that no one can perceive, how can you guys even discuss these concepts?
[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:
I was referring the pdf, yes.[/quote]Most of that is from before our (Kamui and I) big conversation in the epistemology thread, but Pastor Phil primarily wanted some samplings of my writing style anyway. He just told me to mix in some theological/philosophical stuff. BTW Fletch, despite not believing anything I say, I do appreciate the way you’ve always been kind to me. It may appear that I float out here in some detached religious stupor, but I care what people think of me. It would be easier if I didn’t.
[/quote]
Since words have origins in perception and God is a being that no one can perceive, how can you guys even discuss these concepts?
[/quote]
[quote]Headhunter wrote:Since words have origins in perception and God is a being that no one can perceive, how can you guys even discuss these concepts?[/quote]God is a being no one can avoid perceiving.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:Since words have origins in perception and God is a being that no one can perceive, how can you guys even discuss these concepts?[/quote]God is a being no one can avoid perceiving.
[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:
I was referring the pdf, yes.[/quote]Most of that is from before our (Kamui and I) big conversation in the epistemology thread, but Pastor Phil primarily wanted some samplings of my writing style anyway. He just told me to mix in some theological/philosophical stuff. BTW Fletch, despite not believing anything I say, I do appreciate the way you’ve always been kind to me. It may appear that I float out here in some detached religious stupor, but I care what people think of me. It would be easier if I didn’t.
[/quote]
Since words have origins in perception and God is a being that no one can perceive, how can you guys even discuss these concepts?
[/quote]
[/quote]
