|
|
|
|
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 11/2/2009 10:36:51 PM | The Apostle Paul wrote in the first century about what sin would look like just before Jesus returned to earth again. It reads like today's news:
2 Timothy 3:1-7
"Difficult Times Will Come"
But realize this, that in the last days difficult times will come.
For men will be lovers of self, lovers of money, boastful, arrogant, revilers (false accusers), disobedient to parents, ungrateful, unholy, unloving, irreconcilable, malicious gossips, without self-control, brutal, haters of good, treacherous, reckless, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, holding to a form of godliness, although they have denied its power; Avoid such men as these....always learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. (NASV)
1 John 4:1-3
Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.
Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:
And every spirit that confesses not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world. (KJV) | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 11/2/2009 10:44:34 PM |
if you want to talk about hot monkey love, then start a thread with that topic.
Careful--considering all those paeans to our primate relatives, that phrase may have been meant more literally than you imagine. If someone doesn't believe in sin, I don't see why anything at all should strike them as unnatural. The monkeys, though--with the keen moral sense and awareness of sin I've learned they unfailingly have--might regret their indiscretion. | |
|
| |
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 11/2/2009 11:34:46 PM | Since the topic of shunning has come up, perhaps we should discuss it. I was just wondering myself the extent to which important information for me might come in unpleasant packaging and what to do about it. To what extent am I willing to see through the packaging to the valuable truth that might be lurking underneath? Do I have the courage and patience to wade through the derision directed at me to see what might be being offered me?
Or, am I too caught up in the pretty picture I have of myself to recognize the truth of who I am? Will I shoot the messenger and shun the message? Or can I relax a little bit, see the message for what it is and the messenger as a fallible and indoctrinated human being just like me, albeit with different instructions about what to think? After all, teaching us what to think was the predominant mode and purpose of our education, but it in Sunday School or in public school.
On the other hand, abusive bullshit is what it is, and there is no point in me paying any attention to it or investing any energy whatsoever in responding to it. There are times when shunning is appropriate.
The truth is that we can all get triggered into negative places where it feels like we're once again being abused and helpless. And when we get there it is awfully hard to remember that we are adults now, we don't have to take any of that stuff any more--especially not when it's being patronizingly positioned as "for our own good." And, we certainly don't have to defend ourselves when we realize we've lapsed into a mode that we consider beneath us. All we have to do is step back and resume functioning like adults. Simple, but not always easy.
PN is a provocateur. That doesn't make him bad. Match is a lawyer. Well, I suppose that might (just kidding you Match). I give GG all kinds of hell and he comes back just fine. I think I'm rougher on him than just about anybody else I've ever worked over. If anyone has a right to be pissed, it's him. Boomer's doing her best to live up to her ideals. That can be tough with a brat like PN around--but he's such a great brat! These forums would be dead as a doornail if you had to rely on me to liven things up.
So let's just chill, remember who we are, where we are, and why we're here. It's supposed to be fun, gang. A bit of mirth at one another's expense is great, but when it's coming from a place of infantile rage, we're really off track and it stops being fun.
I can't be 100% sure about this, but I think the days are over when the mods would take a thread down just because it was fun. I sure hope so. But if things get so heated that all we wind up doing is abusing each other in the name of our respective positions, somebody ought to shut it down. Who needs it? | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 11/2/2009 11:43:03 PM | Thank you Ace for a voice of reason and common sense.
I'm waiting for my 700 page creative novel from Boomer. What about it Boomer? You say it should be a snap for you to produce... simply because you're human
One again PN has reading comprehension problems. I never said that! He is misquoting me and trying to taunt me by putting words in my mouth. I merely asked if KoKo the ape could write a 700 page work of fiction.
Since animals cannot express intangible concepts or use imagination (which is a creative process they do not have), I do not expect to see any works of fiction written by Koko or any other species except a human on the NY Times bestseller list. Might see one of mine, but not Koko's.
Man has the ability to imagine and to take intangible concepts and turn them into tangible reality. Show me an animal which can draw a set of plans for a space station, then turn it into reality, and go there. God gave man dominion over the animals--we are not equal. | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 11/2/2009 11:47:59 PM | | You could be right, or it could simply be that we don't have the tools yet to accurately assess the way animals process information. We certainly don't know enough about dolphins to make any sort of blanket judgment about them and their capacity for abstraction or projection. | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 11/2/2009 11:53:57 PM |
We certainly don't know enough about dolphins to make any sort of blanket judgment about them and their capacity for abstraction or projection.
Well, let's give them all iPhones and Twitter accounts and see what they come up with... | |
|
| |
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 11/2/2009 11:56:59 PM | True, but they can't send ME or YOU a message. With a Twitter account, they could ----If, BIG IF HERE, they had the capability.
Man has studied, documented and understands the anatomy and behavior of most of the animals, fish, reptiles, birds, plants, flowers, trees, insects, etc of the entire planet. Which of these has studied and documented anything about man? | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 11/3/2009 12:06:26 AM | Yep, it's a big if. So, the bottom line for me is that we still can't be sure that we're utterly superior. However, as long as we've figured out how to keep the bears and big cats from eating us, I don't think we need to be. I think we can take a respectable and respectful place within this world while we're here, even if we aren't of it.
We can be good guests on our sojourn here. Do we really have to own it all? | |
|
| |
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 11/3/2009 1:36:51 AM |
But if things get so heated that all we wind up doing is abusing each other in the name of our respective positions
I don't see many people doing that. But there's one specimen who likes to say things to people I know he'd never dare say to their face. And though it's probably a sin, I'm not much on turning the other cheek to personal insults from a coward. | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 11/3/2009 6:16:30 AM | Actually, based on my experience with the individual in person, there's very little he says here that he wouldn't say to your face. But when you see the look on his face, you realize that it's really just mischief. When you see the delight in his face when _you_ laugh, you'll both be laughing the entire time.
It's only when you lash out at him for having baited you at all that he lashes back.
Yes, there are times when he could be a better sport in here considering the extent to which he likes to start controversies, but I can think of far worse faults. At least he isn't boring. I'm actually surprised people read any of my stuff. Talk about longwinded blather!!!!
Here's why I respect PN: Even when things get superheated like they just did, he does his best to keep is criticisms on the beliefs and ideas he finds objectionable. Lately he's been doing a better job of that than I have been. Yes, he's clever enough to really make a person feel like shit for believing as they do, but if we can' t take a ribbing for what we stand for, we probably need to examine our attachment to it anyway.
For myself, I'm finding that tit for tat doesn't work. It only sets a bad precedent. For all I know y'all read and respond to my stuff just to watch the token liberal dance, but if I'm going to dance, I'm going to dance my own dance--not Rush's. Y'all will just have to sit there and observe it in wonder and amazement, just like PN. How the hell does he get you to bite so hard so often?  | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 11/3/2009 6:29:15 AM | The only reason it makes a difference is if people like PN can convince enough people humans are just animals, they can control us in ways...oh wait, isn't what they're already trying to do? If animals are like us then we can't kill them and eat them...but aren't some people saying plants are intelligent too? I guess we'll just have to starve to death and let the rest of existence take over. Maybe that's what the dinosaurs did  | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 11/3/2009 6:45:08 AM | | As far as proof of the existence of God is concerned, saying we can't prove it shows a closed mind and complete ignorance. If a person is willing to take the time to study the science that is used to prove God exists they wouldn't be so sure it isn't possible to prove. Regular science refuses to even consider the supernatural, so nothing regular science does will ever prove God exists. They will always find a way to rationalize away anything that is best explained by the supernatural. But creation science or ID does look at ALL of the evidence and when you do that, the evidence is so incredibly strong that it's very difficult not to conclude that God exists. Can it be refuted? Only with weak arguments and ad hominem, the type we have seen here. | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 11/3/2009 7:24:52 AM | PN
As far as sheep are concerned, there is a huge difference between a metaphor and equality. These are the kinds of really weak arguments I'm talking about.
The Shroud of Turin means nothing to me, especially by iteself. Even if we succesfully found the Ark of Noah or the Ark of the Covenant you would find a way to dismiss them. It's when you add everything together that you get the answer. It's like a puzzle. The more pices you get, the clearer the picture becomes.
Word play doesn't a good argument make.
PN, you can't prove anything like this with just one piece of evidence and you know it. You are being totally rediculous. | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 11/3/2009 7:32:18 AM |
The Shroud of Turin means nothing to me, especially by iteself. Even if we succesfully found the Ark of Noah or the Ark of the Covenant you would find a way to dismiss them. It's when you add everything together that you get the answer. It's like a puzzle. The more pices you get, the clearer the picture becomes.
Word play doesn't a good argument make.
PN, you can't prove anything like this with just one piece of evidence and you know it. You are being totally rediculous.
Is this not the case when it comes to the Bible as well.... Word play doesn't a good argument make.
One must learn the complete story... and all of the History.... Not just what you're taught by your church. | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 11/3/2009 7:43:25 AM | Nobody has proven God exists... some (a few) have made a case for the notion that we can't prove He doesn't.
This is how I see it. Unlike the ether--the medium through which light was thought to travel, it is not true that no measurable evidence means God doesn't exist.
We didn't have dedicated testimony of principled martyrs attesting to the existence of the ether. We didn't have the evidence of lives changed for the better among those who attribute their reformation to their faith. All of that that testimony stands against the lack of scientific evidence. If God is supernatural there can never be any physical evidence that would ever be predictive, so looking to science to establish the existence of God is looking in the wrong place.
God must be taken on faith, and that is the entire point. So, my Christian friends, you might as well let go of the idea that you'll ever be able to prove it through science. The chinks in evolutionary theory will eventually be ironed out and we will have a complete explanation of how speciation occurs without any direct intervention by anyone. But you don't need that anyway.
You only need a scientific justification if you're going to continue making the absurd claim that every word of the Bible is factually true. However, you don't need to make that claim. All you need, indeed, all that the Apostles had, was the words of Jesus that they remembered hearing and the testimony of those who saw Him after His resurrection.
The rest of it is just an overlay of nonsense put forward by politicians who came later.
I can accept the possibility of your claims about the resurrection because of the testimony of the Apostles. Miracles do appear to occur on occasion, human logic has its limits, and there is simply no explanation for their martyrdom unless they truly believed what they claimed to have seen. But as for the rest of it? There's so much superstitous and prejudiced nonsense embedded in your doctrines that it's a wonder you haven't driven off everyone. Good grief! Where do people get this stuff?
You cannot use science, or any physical evidence, to prove the existence of God or the validity of the Bible. The only proof unbelievers need is that of your fidelity--your ability to continue living in grace and growing in gratitude regardless of how many portions of the Bible turn out to be just stories. There is one story in there that is essential, and it is too profound and compelling to be dismissed. | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 11/3/2009 8:18:23 AM | You cannot "prove" God, just as you cannot "disprove" God. . However, the sum total of truth is not limited to what Man is able to prove or not prove. Gravity and DNA worked every day long before man was able to prove their existence through scientific means. There was evidence of their existence that could be observed and studied long before the "Proof" happened.
150 years ago scientists and highly educated doctors laughed at those doctors who advocated washing their hands and sterilizing instruments before and after performing surgery. Women were dying by the thousands in maternity wards and so were soldiers on battlefields due for lack of this one fact. Why? Simply because science had not yet proven the existence of bacteria. Just because something has not been discovered or proven yet does not mean it cannot or does not exist. Science has often gotten it wrong and many times reversed its stance on important issues which supposedly had been "proven".
There IS evidence of a spiritual realm that surpasses our limited ability to explain it. To limit your understanding of all that life encompasses in the physical and especially the spiritual realm to only what science can prove is to willingly make yourself into a fool.
Evidence is there that God exists. Do we understand all of it? No. But, those who choose to deny that the evidence exists have chosen through arrogance and pride to remain blind. They, in their blindness, are also vastly outnumbered by both ordinary people and brilliant scientists who humbly acknowledge what is right before their eyes. | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 11/3/2009 8:22:58 AM |
eally? Do you believe each of those who died at Jonestown or Waco believed Jones and Koresh were the messiah? I sure don't.
It's possible that the Apostles were bamboozled cult members, but unlike Koresh and some of these others, the story Jesus told made sense. | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 11/3/2009 8:23:58 AM | but if we can' t take a ribbing for what we stand for, we probably need to examine our attachment to it anyway.
It's not a matter of that. It's a matter of personal insults people are too yellow to back up. That's why they make them here, where it's easy. What kind of pathology's at work in that, I can only guess. | |
|
| |
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 11/3/2009 8:25:48 AM | Yeah, well. I think you'd be mistaken about the "yellow" part. Nothing cowardly about walking away from a needless fight.
I can't talk you out of your enmity, even though I do think it is somewhat misplaced. | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 11/3/2009 8:28:30 AM |
The evidence of God is found in both spiritual and physical things.
What physical evidence do you have that can't also be interpreted as either a misunderstanding of fact or superstition?
Evidence that isn't measurable or repeatable isn't evidence. It's coincidence. I don't deny the existence of little miracles. They happen every day, and they are indications that a person is in the spiritual flow. But whether that is through the operation of God or intuition is a matter of debate. You take it on faith or you don't. | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 11/3/2009 8:40:26 AM | | Ace, once again, it's like a puzzle. The more pieces to the puzzle, the clearer the picture. I don't have the desire or the time to post all of the evidence here. If you are truly interested in knowing, the science of ID looks at all of the different sciences, not just biology, to find pieces to the puzzle. | |
|
|
| Page 23 of 50
|
10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50 |
|
Home
login 
