waysider

It reminds me of a very old (but still relevant ) joke). A man was in NYC to attend a concert. He lost his way and stopped a beatnik to ask directions. Man: "Excuse me, Sir, how can I get to Carnegie Hall?" Beatnik: "Practice, man, practice." I don't play piano but I do play a couple of other instruments. Practice is the key to success. Developing muscle memory is a crucial part of the process. Practice can easily become tedious and demotivating. A lot of apps I've seen are meant to reduce the tedium and inject a dose of fun. They can be very valuable in that respect. I see them more as a way to augment more formalized instruction. Well, that's just my opinion. Take it with a grain of salt.

Hello, Karin. I see you are new to GSC. Welcome aboard.

Maybe the imagery being discussed was simply a common theme in the art work of that particular time in history. Just a thought.

Wouldn't it be great if there was one definitive answer to this? Unfortunately, there isn't. I think it becomes rude, though, when the statement becomes condescending or mean spirited. When my son was young, he wanted to take an old lawn mower engine and make a go cart. It can be done, for sure. But, that's not the point I'm leading to. Rather than tell him outright that we had neither the materials or tools or the know-how to take on such a project, I asked him a series of questions, things like "How will we bolt the engine on?", How do we go about connecting the engine to the axle?", and on and on. He concluded for himself that the project was probably beyond our reach. You can do the same type of thing with scriptural discussions. You can pose questions like "How is _______ scientifically possible?" or "Are you aware that event conflicts with historical reality?" Well, I think you get the point. You ask lead-in questions that call for them to draw a conclusion for themselves. That may not be the best answer but it's the only one I have at the moment.

That makes three of us.

You know, for a guy who liked to rail against private interpretation, VPW was quite an expert at doing it himself.

I agree with you 100%. I was responding to your post on the last page. (7/14 @ 7:55 AM) I apologize for not making that clearer.

This means nothing to me, so this argument is moot. Regardless, whether or not this means anything to you does not make the argument moot. Did you take the PFAL class?

II Timothy 3:16 "All scripture is God-Breathed (theopneustos)".

We're not talking about "many (other) things in life", though, are we?

Which further illustrates my point that it's circular, self validating.

That's my point. And yet, within the context of those letters, he declares that everything he writes is God-Breathed. It's self validation and a great example of circular reasoning.

Do you honestly not see how this is circular?

When did Paul's writings become "scripture"?

There are a couple problems with this approach. 1. I may be remembering incorrectly, but, in PFAL, Wierwille says (I'm paraphrasing.) "All means all, from Genesis 1:1 through Revelation 22:21." Later, perhaps in another teaching, he invokes the "foreknowledge" angle to explain God already knew what would be included in the canon as he was inspiring it. (Not that I place much value on VPW's opinion but that's another matter.) *Someone please correct me if I am remembering this wrong* 2. There are many demonstrable, historical and scientific errors in the Torah. Why would God inspire scripture that lacked integrity? If you're using the Torah as the gold standard of what is and what isn't God-Breathed we might have a problem. 3. Scripture, in the least common denominator, means something that has been preserved in textual form. Does that not describe Paul's letters? If it doesn't, that would mean that Paul's words were devoid of authority until they were incorporated into the Bible.

Why, that would be none other than Paul, himself. (See II Tim. 3:16 for further elaboration.) Sounds a bit circular to me. I'm just sayin'.

Here's an interesting discussion we had about Paul.

Did somebody say ramblin'?

I would like to point out, for new arrivals, that being a Christian is not a requirement of this site. People from a wide variety of belief systems and those with no belief system at all are equally welcome here. This public service announcement has been brought to you by the makers of.......

I really just come here for the blueberry scones. Have one, if you like. They go well with Twinky's coffee. YUM!

You do have to admit, though, it has a more melodic sound than "I am a chump in a mighty scam".

For most people, I would venture to say it's a combination of both, usually biased in one direction or the other. Finding an acceptable balance seems to be the problem that vexes most.

Covenant An annoying insect that pestered a '60s rock band featuring Ozzy Osborne.

I think the point being made here is that Jefferson did not believe in the supernatural.

And now for something totally outta sight, man...HERE