(July 12, 2013 at 11:34 am)Esquilax Wrote: So, you're just not going to answer the question?

See, I know your answer, if you're being honest, is that no, it isn't possible for someone to disagree with you and have, in your mind, studied the bible sufficiently. That's why I asked the question at all.

Now, will you provide an honest answer?

People around here argue all day with me! Why would I argue if I agreed?

It's about the heart. The letter gets in the way...because words can be understood in several ways. So it comes down to motive. Love. Or lack thereof. That is the bottomline.

---

(July 12, 2013 at 11:34 am)Esquilax Wrote: So, you give him a hard time for copy/pasting, while in the same moment admitting that you wouldn't consider his position at all if he'd just told you directly. Maybe you should just change your avatar to that picture of a guy with his fingers in his ears, already.

"La la la, not listening..."

I've read EVERYTHING available for and against MT.

There is no one against her, or for her for that matter that worked with the poorest of the poor, sickest of the sick, and dying for 50 years!

Most of us would have mentally caved in 40 years earlier!

I never met her personally, but I know friends who have. She was the most humblest, and gentle human on earth! And I love her for all the good she has done.

(July 12, 2013 at 1:52 am)ronedee Wrote: We've been here before mr. cut/paste!

Until someone [better] than her throws a stone... I don't give a rats ass.

She tortured and embezzeled in the name of a god she didn't believe in.
I think you'll have your work cut out finding someone worse.

(July 12, 2013 at 1:32 pm)ronedee Wrote: Most of us would have mentally caved in 40 years earlier!

And it seems that Mother Theresa did exactly that, but people let this unstable person continue in her "efforts".

(July 12, 2013 at 1:24 pm)BadWriterSparty Wrote: You, as the helper, have options in this scenario. You can A. ask them what they're looking for and B. stop searching if they won't give you any information.

I guess you've never had a conversation with a 4 year old? When do you put your kid in school? And why don't they put 4 year olds in school?

I suggest "b" because you are not getting the answers you need from me.

You are trying as Dion, to make sense of something you don't understand. So you just throw material questions at spiritual concepts.

Let me ask you a question?

What are you breathing right now?

(July 12, 2013 at 1:53 am)Dionysius Wrote: Simplicity will take this conversation very far

In what way was the relationship broken?

(July 12, 2013 at 1:10 pm)ronedee Wrote: [Simplicity] makes you look dumb... but I'll play along until one of us gets bored.

I guess we are fortunate Christians don't judge on what something "looks" like but rather consider the substance or the meaning of their beliefs.

(July 12, 2013 at 1:10 pm)ronedee Wrote: We went against God's command. That is "sin".

I see so we were meant to be something similar to cosmic pets?

(July 12, 2013 at 1:53 am)Dionysius Wrote: Sin cause the body to decay. In what way does sin cause the body to decay?

(July 12, 2013 at 1:10 pm)ronedee Wrote: "...because of your sin, you will die and return to the dust you came from."

Sin then is responsible for the molecular decay of organic life comparable to entropy and or catalytic breakdown? Does this only apply to humans/animals or does this affect plant life as well?

(July 12, 2013 at 1:53 am)Dionysius Wrote: Sin destroys the soul by causing it to be burned in everlasting fire.
If the soul is burned in fire for time without end how is it destroyed? Mustn't there be "something" to burn for eternity?

(July 12, 2013 at 1:10 pm)ronedee Wrote: Well, you probably don't have one.... but yes most of us do have a soul.

I guess this means I am exempt from the fiery destruction of the Judeo/Islamo/Christian paradigm.

(July 12, 2013 at 1:10 pm)ronedee Wrote: And that part won't be destroyed. Because it is not made of dirt! It is God's spirit within us. The gift of LIFE, and a part of Him.

Interesting, so God is going to torture a part of himself for the entropic (sinful) tendencies of carbon atoms (dust)?

(July 12, 2013 at 1:10 pm)ronedee Wrote: But it also can't be reunited with Him because of our refusal to love Him, and keep His commandments. So it is separated forever....in the "eternal fire" Whatever that place be that God put's satan and his future buddies.

Satan then wasn't separated from God when he was cast out of Heaven? Why not just send him to the gulag post haste rather than allowing him the opportunity to imprison God in fiery torment?

(July 12, 2013 at 1:10 pm)ronedee Wrote: "Then the LORD God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being."

Your little game is like my 4 year old, asking "why", "why", "WHY". But never really making any sense of things in her under-developed mind. She's looking for simple answers to things that are allien to her.

Well it does say that one must be like a child to enter into the kingdom, I don't see what the problem is.

(July 12, 2013 at 1:10 pm)ronedee Wrote: And just like her... you will never know until you find it though understanding "what" it is you are looking for!

Right now you aren't helping realize anything other than the incoherency of contemporary Christian reasoning.

(July 12, 2013 at 1:10 pm)ronedee Wrote: It's like a family member saying, come out and look in the lawn.... I lost something! And then proceed NOT to tell you what you are looking for! We need to know "what" we are looking for.

Agreed and we need to know what it is we are talking about and the logical implications of such beliefs.

(July 12, 2013 at 1:42 pm)Dionysius Wrote: Agreed and we need to know what it is we are talking about and the logical implications of such beliefs.

OOOOH! Something we agree on?!

Can I ask you a question or 3 Dion? I'm tired of answering questions...or not answering them in your opinion....but....

Is dying logical to you? Do you understand a beginning and an end?

Time? What is that [exactly], in your mind?

Seriously.....What are your views on these things?

(July 12, 2013 at 1:55 pm)ronedee Wrote:

(July 12, 2013 at 1:42 pm)Dionysius Wrote: Agreed and we need to know what it is we are talking about and the logical implications of such beliefs.

OOOOH! Something we agree on?!

Can I ask you a question or 3 Dion? I'm tired of answering questions...or not answering them in your opinion....but....

Is dying logical to you? Do you understand a beginning and an end?

Time? What is that [exactly], in your mind?

Seriously.....What are your views on these things?

Dying is a part of living. Time is change.

(July 12, 2013 at 1:41 pm)ronedee Wrote:

(July 12, 2013 at 1:24 pm)BadWriterSparty Wrote: You, as the helper, have options in this scenario. You can A. ask them what they're looking for and B. stop searching if they won't give you any information.

I guess you've never had a conversation with a 4 year old? When do you put your kid in school? And why don't they put 4 year olds in school?

I suggest "b" because you are not getting the answers you need from me.

You are trying as Dion, to make sense of something you don't understand. So you just throw material questions at spiritual concepts.

Let me ask you a question?

What are you breathing right now?

It's a breath of fresh air (no pun intended, and I will answer your question) to see that you can be a little reasonable. We might actually be able to have a conversation.

To answer your first assumption, your guess that I have never talked to a 4 year-old is wrong. You could have asked if I have, and I would have answered that I actually have a 4 year-old. This is where I get off questioning your methods, even if it only is my opinion. After all, we have this little fact in common with each other.

As for your next assumption, that they don't put 4 year-olds in school, you are, again, wrong. Go read an article on it sometime instead of coming up with baseless claims. But to answer the real question, "Are 4 year-olds developed enough to do well in school at that age," which is contextually exactly what you are asking, then my answer is: it depends on the natural intellect of the child, and the participation of the parent in the child's cognitive growth. I have a nephew who, at 3 years of age, completely understood the concept of gravity. School starts in the home, and, on some level, a child is always ready for it.

You are correct about the Choice B that I proposed. I do not intend on searching for the truth with you because you cannot fully explain what it is we are looking for. That is why we keep asking you questions, but not just for our sake, but as an exercise in critical thinking for you.

If you believe in spiritual concepts, you must first explain what "spiritual" means, or, in other words, put in terms that someone can understand, and then you must prove that "spiritual" concepts are even something we should be considering in the first place. The evidence you provide must be demonstrable, just the same as evidence provided in a court of law.

As for your last question, "What am I breathing right now?" I can certainly answer this for you. I am breathing air, or, more precisely, my body is processing nitrogen (78.09%) and oxygen (20.95%). The remaining 1% is made up of argon (0.93%), carbon dioxide (0.039% as of 2010) and other trace gases (0.003%). Water vapor (water in its gaseous state) is also present in the atmosphere in varying amounts, by up to 2%.

(July 12, 2013 at 1:32 pm)ronedee Wrote: People around here argue all day with me! Why would I argue if I agreed?

Well, you could make the honest judgment that we have looked at the bible, and despite having done so, have come to a different conclusion. Instead, you most often choose to circumvent any kind of argument by just accusing us of not having studied the bible. Instead of looking at the argument on its own merits, you instead jump to "you just don't understand!"

Quote:It's about the heart. The letter gets in the way...because words can be understood in several ways. So it comes down to motive. Love. Or lack thereof. That is the bottomline.

The words can be understood several ways, the multiple iterations of your religion attest to that. However, only one of those interpretations can, obviously, be the one that your god intended when he allowed it to be committed to paper. How do you know you've landed on the right one?

Quote:I've read EVERYTHING available for and against MT.

There is no one against her, or for her for that matter that worked with the poorest of the poor, sickest of the sick, and dying for 50 years!

Career soldiers often work amongst the sick and dying, doesn't mean they're doing any good. Ditto for mother Theresa, whether she cloaked herself in an image of righteousness or not.

Quote:Most of us would have mentally caved in 40 years earlier!

I never met her personally, but I know friends who have. She was the most humblest, and gentle human on earth! And I love her for all the good she has done.

All the good you've chosen to believe she's done, while dismissing all accounts to the contrary out of hand.

(July 11, 2013 at 9:20 pm)BadWriterSparty Wrote: You totally missed the point of my question, which is why you started talking about modern-day findings about lightwaves and reflection (because we know they totally talked about that kind of stuff back when they were writing the books of Moses), so I'll rephrase it for you.

No, I didn’t miss your point at all; I was showing that it leads to absurd conclusions. If you are going to use the argument, “anyone who uses descriptive language rather than scientific language is therefore ignorant of science” you’d have to conclude that NASA, Nature, and AGU are all ignorant of science because they use the term “moonlight”, and you’d have to conclude that anytime someone says they’re wearing a red shirt they’re ignorant of science because the shirt itself is not really red. You cannot suggest that Biblical texts are scientifically ignorant for using the exact same descriptive language many people use today.

Quote: Can you prove that the author of Genesis didn't mean to convey that the moon was a source of light?

If he was trying to convey that it was a light source I would assume he’d use that term and not just “light”. It is a light.

Quote: I don't, and I hope you wouldn't either. For the record, I never accused them of "being geo-centrists", so don't twist this in any such way to make it seem like I did. Please take my words at face value, and I'll do the same for you, SW.

I never said you did accuse them of that, I am saying that if you were applying your reasoning consistently across the board and not just to scripture you’d have to conclude that they are geo-centrists because they use geo-centric descriptive language.

Quote: Now, again, I ask you: are we going to argue that the moon isn't the sun's light?

I do not have to argue that because Genesis never says anything otherwise, it merely calls the Moon a light, which it is.

(July 11, 2013 at 9:28 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote: The terms "sunrise" and "sunset" were coined back when people did think the sun revolved around the earth. Just like "The Big Bang" as originally a derogatory term that didn't describe the theory at all (there was no "bang") but is still used today. People still use terms that were coined by people who didn't know any better because of the persistence tradition or habit.

Why would NASA use the term “sunrise” and “sunset” if they know the sun does not rise and set?

Quote: The people who coined these terms didn't know any better. Yahweh has no such excuse.

Perhaps Yahweh knows motion is relative and not absolute? Go back to the 18th century with your Newtonian understating of kinetics!