Rocky

Nicely done Bolshevik.

Wow! You seem to have been in quite the contrarian mood today. "You are speculating..." since you didn't even bother going. Have you ever considered that there is often (usually) more than one way to look at any given situation? And how certain are you that the situation (highlighted above in the quote of your comment) is only either/or?

You may have a point. But it may also be a distinction without a difference. I'm not going to argue your semantics (or mine). But does the expression , "God was able to use that error in judgment for profit..." fail to take in, or consider the wisdom that comes from experience? (See Romans 5) 1Therefore, since we have been justified through faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, 2through whom we have gained access by faith into this grace in which we now stand. And we boast in the hope of the glory of God. 3Not only so, but we also glory in our sufferings, because we know that suffering produces perseverance; 4perseverance, character; and character, hope. 5And hope does not put us to shame, because God’s love has been poured out into our hearts through the Holy Spirit, who has been given to us. And might "gained access by faith into this grace wherein we now stand," presuppose that we have to abstain from making errors in judgment in order to benefit from that access into grace? Nevertheless, what you posed suggests an intriguing quandary and/or paradox.

I understand. I did too, for years.

$82.33! You inferred correctly, sir.

Indeed, I get what you're saying. I can think of things I'd rather have and rather do than what I do have and do now. Yet, I have (hopefully) learned that the obstacle is the way. I no longer look at my time in twi as having wasted 12 years of my life but as preparation for what I get to be and do today.

Have you ever considered, or rather pondered and reflected on your life experiences questions about whether you have or had been exactly where you were supposed to be at any given time in your life? John 16:33 New International Version (NIV) 33 “I have told you these things, so that in me you may have peace. In this world you will have trouble. But take heart! I have overcome the world.” I am reluctant anymore to retrace my specific cult learning by taking apart or parsing scriptures the way wierwille modeled for us. So, I won't explore any of the Greek words in the quoted passage. But despite wierwille's admonition that "experience is no guarantee for truth," I will share insights from "trouble" I recall that I experienced. Without oversharing, I can easily cite my marriage which ended in divorce. It was a dark and stormy time. Well, much of it. Yet there were good times. And next week, my daughter will reach her 30th birthday. Her two children, my grandchildren, are truly the biggest joy of my life. But the divorce was hard. Much harder than anything I went through in MY time in twi. (Your mileage may (WILL) vary). I mention it to highlight that rather than having wasted 12 years of my life, my fundamentalist cult history provides context in which I can share stories that some of the more than 6 billion people alive today can relate to in the journey through this life. And telling my own stories is how I choose to carry out my ministry of reconciliation. TWI is no longer the "church" into which I try to recruit people in hopes they would find a path to reconcile them to God. Rather, twi is a major part of the context of my life that I can share with them to provide insight. Because in this world you WILL have trouble. But take heart. Jesus said he overcame the world. He didn't do so by getting rich, winning the lottery, or having an easy time of life. He did so by enduring more of the trouble than you and I have. That being said, I'll offer you this, from a daily reading of brief insights from Stoic philosophy. There's no group to join, or class to take. It's YOUR life.

Or perhaps the Dotsies are easy to connect. Okay Brother Skyrider, please refresh our memories. What is the title of said book? Is there any place that book can currently be obtained? Thanks

Btw, I believe the speaker wrongly identified the time frame of Galileo's life and statements. But that doesn't negate her main points.

I posted this in the Open Forum also. But I believe it also fits here.

A TED talk by a former JW.

Truth.

Are you okay?

Selah... and again, Peace. I truly enjoy reading your perspective on the things of God.

Seriously Mark? I'll repeat what I have said before, "I do not speak for Bell." If you want to know what Bell sees, ASK HIM. You seem to suggest that you have a handle on the Book of Revelation. Perhaps you can reach him and try to educate him with your immense knowledge. Bottom-line, I'm disappointed in your ("not-so") subtle attack on him.

Did you mean to post this in the other thread? Respectfully, I don't see how the post relates to this thread.

Peace! I may or may not agree with any or all of your points. However, I can't say that I know with a degree of certainty that could possibly cause me to debate, argue or bicker any of those points. Where I rest is that it's bigger than us (me). To me, the value is in seeing how you (or Rob Bell, or anyone else) articulates it and pondering it over and over.

Which is to say, overall, that life is complicated and so is God and Christianity. My apologies if I didn't get that right. I very much agree with at least some of what you wrote there. Paradox(es)... absolutely. To me, the bottom-line is that God is bigger than what any human or humanity in the aggregate can comprehend. That's part of the nature of paradox -- trying to put in human understanding what may be beyond our grasp to neatly put into a box... or an ancient book. Which is one of the big reasons why I resist fundamentalism. I'm not convinced that Bell misinterpreted anything in particular. Rather, I think he's trying to grasp what's beyond our human capacity to grasp. I do see your point about Bell's thesis seeming to make Christ's sacrifice extraneous. I don't know how to reconcile that with anything at this point. Your post does a great job, IMO, of trying to weave together related, complicated ideas. I appreciate that.

For perspective only on "all the people who ever lived."

Are you saying that -- There's no 'reason' for 'LIFE', so there's no reason to exist after 'life' in any form -- IS a flat statement of fact that is accurate? That seems like a philosophical question/statement. IF you believe and claim it is a statement of fact, please support the claim. It seems odd to me. Maybe if you explain your reasoning, it will help. Thanks.

How right you are. One doesn't need an advanced degree in psychology to recognize how Wierwille personified narcissism. One also doesn't need to spend much time reviewing the dark history of his ministry in order to find parallels to Paul's admonition to Timothy regarding what was the actual root of all evil. What Are the Traits of a Narcissist? It’s easy to slap the “narcissist” label on someone who spends a bit too much time talking about her career or who never seems to doubt himself, but narcissism is more complicated than it may seem: It’s not a surplus of self-esteem, but more accurately encompasses a hunger for appreciation or admiration, a sense of specialness and a desire to be the center of attention, and an expectation of special treatment reflecting perceived higher status.

Indeed. Peace to you (and to Mark, and to WW).

I very much appreciate and relate to the various points you made above. From my perspective, I just don't see how we can truly appreciate with depth of understanding about what's recorded in the Bible without understanding the history and culture of the people who wrote it down. To a degree, I have to credit Wierwille's introduction of Orientalisms for that. Even so, he approached that field of study apparently in the same way he did with the text of the book itself. Which I believe was overwhelmingly myopic. Your description of your friend's experience with Rob Bell offers insight not just on Bell, but the cultural environment in which he developed. To me, that's as fascinating as any of the rest of it (i.e. the text of his book). Importantly, the reactionary approach his critics took to ostracize him (label him a heretic) speaks to the box those people put God and themselves in. The bottom-line, to me, is that now we see as through a glass, darkly. But then, face to face. In the meantime, some people are curious enough to challenge the limits (blinders) religion has put on people.

How incredibly human. It seems a similar pattern has been identified in current affairs in the news lately. But I won't go into the current affairs situation. But yes, that looks like rationalization. Rationalization is an unconscious defense mechanism in which perceived controversial behaviors or feelings are logically justified and explained in a rational or logical manner in order to avoid any true explanation, and are made consciously tolerable – or even admirable and superior – by plausible means.[1] Rationalization encourages irrational or unacceptable behavior, motives, or feelings and often involves ad hoc hypothesizing. This process ranges from fully conscious (e.g. to present an external defense against ridicule from others) to mostly subconscious (e.g. to create a block against internal feelings, for example guilt or shame).

Wow!... copy a bunch of the comments from the other thread and suddenly you've got a hot topic.