Nathan_Jr
-
Posts
2,988 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
67
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Calendar
Gallery
Everything posted by Nathan_Jr
-
You just affirmed what has been proven here dozens of times. (The 2nd time established it.) We do the interpreting. You finally got it right! What you got wrong is “using material from within itself.” Material? Not just internal evidence, also, external evidence must be utilized. No matter how (H-O-W) you parse it, the Bible cannot and does not ever interpret itself. “The Bible interprets itself” is a stupid sentence that should never be repeated. How stupid? Four crucified stupid, that’s how.
-
"Superstar scientists" Kinda like a knock-knock joke, but not.
-
I’ve looked for an image of this bronze idol on TWI’s site, but can’t find anything. If anyone has a photo image of this vulgarity, please share.
-
Then why did he wish he could have been the man he knew to be? Does no one realize these two “poor me” statements are incongruent? The hands don’t fit the gloves.
-
songs remembered from just one line
Nathan_Jr replied to bulwinkl's topic in Movies, Music, Books, Art
Walk on the Wild Side - Lou Reed -
Really? Like, actually? Or, are you joking?
-
How ironic. How hypocritical. Wow. Just wow. Confirmation bias and a closed mind limit one’s own knowledge and ability to see clearly. The observer is the observed. Not everyone is able to see this.
-
With victor only one is involved.
-
You beat me to it, Waysider. https://digitaloccultlibrary.commons.gc.cuny.edu/cults-and-the-occult/
-
Captain Obvious L. Ron Hubbard was more influential than Gurdjeff on VPW.
-
Yep. Real simple. Thanks.
-
It's not a matter of looking for them to find them. It's a matter of the flaws literally leaping off the page for anyone with eyes to see and ears to hear.
-
Gawd, I miss Bernie Mac!
-
That's riiight. Orders of magnitude more patriarchal than mid-20th century Merica.
-
I don't get this attitude from the early, authentic letters of Paul. It could be that I just don't know how (H-O-W) to read the YourBelieving+ChristInYou+TheBible+YourWalk.
-
Right. Not nitpicky at all. The topic is a bait and switch. And it’s ironic. And it’s bullshonta. These are all figgers of speech. mogadishu
-
I keep trying to nudge everyone back on track to the original stated topic - T7TMOG.
-
I agree. I admitted to some of the benefits of his work. He is a good STARTING point. A good way to get a taste. HOWEVER, I do find his ideology distracting - that's me. As you have surely found out, another man's work is no substitute whatsoever for one's own work on matters such as these. Regurgitation is no substitute for serious inquiry.
- 1,462 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- dark persuasion
- delusion
- (and 10 more)
-
Back on topic… One of Ethelbert’s appendices is called “THE Man of God.” He provides a long list of OT verses, but no names. HOWEVER, a simple mathematical equation is presented: 6 x 13 I’m not saying I have the secret decoder ring, but I bet that 6 is the number of THE The Men of God to which the music coordinator referred.
-
Ah, scientism. A dogmatism. Like the dogmatism of victor’s private religion. Yeah, no, that ain’t science. But, sure, I’ll accept that scientism is a type of religion. Like all dogmatic ideologies, there is no science involved with scientism. Honest scientists don’t try to explain God.
-
You can see what YourBelieving+ChristInYou+Bible+YourWalk says?
-
Science is not a religion.
-
He probably has some good insights. He clearly has the patience and diligence for minute details, but he is not the only theologian to have ever walked the Earth. (For him, walking on Earth is only possible because it's flat.) It's stupid stuff like flat Earth and four crucified and hyper dispensationalism that cause me not to waste my time. Though, for a minute, I was intrigued by his treatment of the genitive case in one appendix, only to be let down by his omission of objective/subjective. (Maybe he handles that elsewhere.)
-
Whew! All that tracking and tabulation. Gosh! Sure, it’s neato, but one might risk paralysis by analysis. And after all that effort for granularity, the Gospels aren’t even written TO him, according to him. Thank for the link!
-
Confabulous! Thanks, OS. So, it looks like he believes Matthew was written first? I think that was the consensus private opinion of his day. That’s what I’m asking. jakarta kiwi
