Rocky, there was a legitimate point there- you didn't make a distinction between two things that can sound similar but are very different things. Please spell out the differences for those following along at home.
So Jesus forgiving people is an apple, but me forgiving people is an orange?
Perhaps you need to explain your botanical classification. How are these two things that sound similar but are very different things?
If I have hurt my brother, but I repent and I change and I seek to amend and I seek forgiveness from him, but he still won’t forgive me, who remains in bondage?
This would depend to me on what you mean by “hurt”.
Did you “hurt” me by calling me a name on an online forum?
Did you “hurt” me by murdering a family member?
While liberation from the first is easy and forgiveness would be inconsequential, saying I would be in bondage for giving that second account to God to settle is ludicrous.
Philosophically, the entire premise of Christianity is wrapped around the concept of redemption, isn't it?
From my perspective these days, it seems early homo sapiens probably developed awareness of humanity's emotional and behavioral awkwardness and frailty. They had to come up with both an origin story or (myth) and a way to overcome the human tendency to hurt other people they cared about.
Jesus wasn't the first or only person or character to meet that need.
IDK, I'm just thinking "out loud" so to speak.
If Christ is a man who is the son of God only, then Jesus forgiveness from him would not be involved in redemption in the least.
It is his life sacrifice on the cross that redeems us. And enables God the Father to forgive and redeem.
If Christ has divine elements like many Christians believe then his forgiveness would be involved in redemption indirectly.
I read. Any and all subjects in which I become interested in.
Further, my guiding scripture verses, which I have cited multiple times on GSC, are Proverbs 2:1-5.
If, however by chance, you might be looking for a way to catch me in contradictions or inconsistencies, more power to you. For I view any such thing that may arise as an opportunity to either or both broaden and deepen my puny human understanding of "things."
I read. Any and all subjects in which I become interested in.
Further, my guiding scripture verses, which I have cited multiple times on GSC, are Proverbs 2:1-5.
If, however by chance, you might be looking for a way to catch me in contradictions or inconsistencies, more power to you. For I view any such thing that may arise as an opportunity to either or both broaden and deepen my puny human understanding of "things."
I don’t have to even look for that it seems to show up in successive posts - contradiction and inconsistency.
I am seeking to logically reason through ideas presented in scripture or derived from scripture.
I am seeking to logically reason through ideas presented in scripture or derived from scripture.
Good luck with that. Please keep us posted.
There are, as I understand it, quite a few contradictions and/or inconsistencies in Christian scriptures.
I realize Victor Wierwille indoctrinated us with his PFLAP class to view scripture as something without error or contradictions or inconsistencies. I simply no longer believe him on that point.
For examples regarding stories I present this brief clip with Simon Sinek. Take it or leave it, I don't care whether you believe it or not.
There are, as I understand it, quite a few contradictions and/or inconsistencies in Christian scriptures.
I realize Victor Wierwille indoctrinated us with his PFLAP class to view scripture as something without error or contradictions or inconsistencies. I simply no longer believe him on that point.
For examples regarding stories I present this brief clip with Simon Sinek. Take it or leave it, I don't care whether you believe it or not.
It seems that the best “luck” I will have with logical reasoning would be to avoid those without it.
I do not believe the Bible is an anthropological story telling novel. I do not believe that aligns in the least with Prov 2:1-5 that you quoted as your underlying ruling principle.
Without the acknowledgment of some kind of divine inspiration influence or other synonym in the Bible then there isn’t much reason to spend reading it.
I read the “Epic of Gilgamesh” and was entertained by that story. I don’t view that as equal to the Bible.
That is where my logic begins - with the acknowledgment there is something spiritual going on in the Bible. If you don’t believe that than it makes sense you would waffle on your position not use logic and change your beliefs with every passing cool breeze:
Do you magically gain understanding without any logical reasoning?
please explain coherently instead of posting a link underlined sunesis pointing not to any definition of the word but to Carl Sagans argument against religion.
Another synonym for “telling stories” is “lying” in the sense of being untruthful and replacing a truthful story with a fictional or imagined story.
I guess we're just going to have to disagree. No skin off my nose if you don't agree with me. Thankfully, I'm not dependent on your approval. And I would hope you don't need mine either. That way, we wouldn't need to view disagreement as one picking on the other.
Ambiguity tolerance is a fancy term for “operating in the gray.” It reflects an ability to accept unclear, uncertain, or novel situations and work effectively in this environment.
I do not believe the Bible is an anthropological story telling novel.
Neither do I.
I believe it's an anthology of stories.
On 10/19/2023 at 5:43 PM, chockfull said:
I do not believe that aligns in the least with Prov 2:1-5 that you quoted as your underlying ruling principle.
I respect that you disagree. You obviously have a right to disagree with me.
On 10/19/2023 at 5:43 PM, chockfull said:
Without the acknowledgment of some kind of divine inspiration influence or other synonym in the Bible then there isn’t much reason to spend reading it.
Okay. I, again, respect your declaration of belief about motivation or lack thereof for reading the Bible. That is, I respect it without judging it.
Ambiguity tolerance is a fancy term for “operating in the gray.” It reflects an ability to accept unclear, uncertain, or novel situations and work effectively in this environment.
I hope your ambiguity tolerance is growing.
I find “ambiguity tolerance” and flipping like a Teflon waffle iron between two opposite positions as different things.
My lack of “ambiguity tolerance” helped to define what was improper about the Ways teachings on debt and “the household” and most of what they try to dissect from Corinthians. It also helped me form the requisite logic that I could leave and stake my future on.
I find “ambiguity tolerance” and flipping like a Teflon waffle iron between two opposite positions as different things.
My lack of “ambiguity tolerance” helped to define what was improper about the Ways teachings on debt and “the household” and most of what they try to dissect from Corinthians. It also helped me form the requisite logic that I could leave and stake my future on.
But you do you.
I get it. Of course, I will continue to do me.
I appreciate your candor and that hopefully you will no longer find disagreement an attack on you or picking on you.
Indeed, there has been plenty from what was shoveled off on to us from Victor Wierwille's teachings and the fallout from his emotionally deficient subculture that was and has been woefully lacking in terms of logic.
I would wonder (out loud, but in no way solicit a response from you) if what helped you decide to leave the cult was more emotionally based than the deficiencies in logic.
Also, I have come upon a hunch that you and I may have been, for a long time, friends on FB but perhaps are no longer.
If that's the case, I still feel bad for having offended you, but am hopeful that both you and I will emerge more hopeful in this life.
From Michael Meade and mosaic voices (note, I'm NOT recommending his anything paid, just that I saw something on FB a friend posted): The world as we know it is already gone. The point now is to inhabit a bigger, unifying living myth in which the words "we are all in this together," have genuine heartfelt meaning.
From ME: the myth that we are separate from "the world" may be at the heart of polarization and hate that has engulfed so much in and of the world these days.
That mental framework did not originate with Wierwille, but he sure did his best to amplify it.
To me, "we are all in this together" flows more naturally into a loving view of our neighbors, no matter how alike or different each may look or sound from each of us. IOW, despite one's best efforts to love those who do not look or sound or believe like each of us, there ARE (ravenous) voices suggesting we should be afraid and unwelcoming to any person or group different from us. The MORE different, the more afraid.
Fear doesn't play well with love. Inherently, fear stokes survival instincts and causes us to bypass our logical reasoning mental processes.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
47
20
51
14
Popular Days
Sep 29
29
Sep 5
19
Oct 18
17
Oct 1
15
Top Posters In This Topic
Rocky 47 posts
Stayed Too Long 20 posts
chockfull 51 posts
OldSkool 14 posts
Popular Days
Sep 29 2023
29 posts
Sep 5 2023
19 posts
Oct 18 2023
17 posts
Oct 1 2023
15 posts
Popular Posts
WordWolf
It does seem evident that the sinner's REPENTANCE is a necessary part of the equation. We forgive IF HE REPENTS. If he continues in sin and demands forgiveness regardless, that's nothing at all l
chockfull
Let’s look at this forgiveness topic from another perspective. The BODummies recently sent out a “come on home” postcard to a certain select group in their list of former member/slaves. They did not
OldSkool
The real crux of the issue is offshoots using this garbage as an excuse to keep the cash cow running and preservinvg their jobs. Of course offshoots and anyone still idolizing false prophet wierwille
Posted Images
chockfull
So Jesus forgiving people is an apple, but me forgiving people is an orange?
Perhaps you need to explain your botanical classification. How are these two things that sound similar but are very different things?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
This would depend to me on what you mean by “hurt”.
Did you “hurt” me by calling me a name on an online forum?
Did you “hurt” me by murdering a family member?
While liberation from the first is easy and forgiveness would be inconsequential, saying I would be in bondage for giving that second account to God to settle is ludicrous.
Edited by chockfullLink to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
If Christ is a man who is the son of God only, then Jesus forgiveness from him would not be involved in redemption in the least.
It is his life sacrifice on the cross that redeems us. And enables God the Father to forgive and redeem.
If Christ has divine elements like many Christians believe then his forgiveness would be involved in redemption indirectly.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
In Luke 23:34 it records Christ not forgiving people himself but rather praying to the Father to forgive them.
Why?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
History of humankind is ALL about stories. For example, I consider the bible to be an anthology of stories.
How do I piece together ideas? Sunesis.
I read. Any and all subjects in which I become interested in.
Further, my guiding scripture verses, which I have cited multiple times on GSC, are Proverbs 2:1-5.
If, however by chance, you might be looking for a way to catch me in contradictions or inconsistencies, more power to you. For I view any such thing that may arise as an opportunity to either or both broaden and deepen my puny human understanding of "things."
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
I don’t have to even look for that it seems to show up in successive posts - contradiction and inconsistency.
I am seeking to logically reason through ideas presented in scripture or derived from scripture.
Is not sunesis a logic based reasoning?
Edited by chockfullLink to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Good luck with that. Please keep us posted.
There are, as I understand it, quite a few contradictions and/or inconsistencies in Christian scriptures.
I realize Victor Wierwille indoctrinated us with his PFLAP class to view scripture as something without error or contradictions or inconsistencies. I simply no longer believe him on that point.
For examples regarding stories I present this brief clip with Simon Sinek. Take it or leave it, I don't care whether you believe it or not.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
How so??
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
It seems that the best “luck” I will have with logical reasoning would be to avoid those without it.
I do not believe the Bible is an anthropological story telling novel. I do not believe that aligns in the least with Prov 2:1-5 that you quoted as your underlying ruling principle.
Without the acknowledgment of some kind of divine inspiration influence or other synonym in the Bible then there isn’t much reason to spend reading it.
I read the “Epic of Gilgamesh” and was entertained by that story. I don’t view that as equal to the Bible.
That is where my logic begins - with the acknowledgment there is something spiritual going on in the Bible. If you don’t believe that than it makes sense you would waffle on your position not use logic and change your beliefs with every passing cool breeze:
Edited by chockfullLink to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
How is it not?
Do you magically gain understanding without any logical reasoning?
please explain coherently instead of posting a link underlined sunesis pointing not to any definition of the word but to Carl Sagans argument against religion.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
Another synonym for “telling stories” is “lying” in the sense of being untruthful and replacing a truthful story with a fictional or imagined story.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
I guess we're just going to have to disagree.
No skin off my nose if you don't agree with me. Thankfully, I'm not dependent on your approval. And I would hope you don't need mine either. That way, we wouldn't need to view disagreement as one picking on the other. 
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
The answer lies within your own mind, does it not?
How do YOU define paradox? Do you have any tolerance for paradox?
from The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition.
How much tolerance for ambiguity can you muster?
Ambiguity tolerance is a fancy term for “operating in the gray.” It reflects an ability to accept unclear, uncertain, or novel situations and work effectively in this environment.
I hope your ambiguity tolerance is growing.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Neither do I.
I believe it's an anthology of stories.
I respect that you disagree. You obviously have a right to disagree with me.
Okay. I, again, respect your declaration of belief about motivation or lack thereof for reading the Bible. That is, I respect it without judging it.
Edited by RockyLink to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
I find “ambiguity tolerance” and flipping like a Teflon waffle iron between two opposite positions as different things.
My lack of “ambiguity tolerance” helped to define what was improper about the Ways teachings on debt and “the household” and most of what they try to dissect from Corinthians. It also helped me form the requisite logic that I could leave and stake my future on.
But you do you.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
I get it. Of course, I will continue to do me.
I appreciate your candor and that hopefully you will no longer find disagreement an attack on you or picking on you.
Indeed, there has been plenty from what was shoveled off on to us from Victor Wierwille's teachings and the fallout from his emotionally deficient subculture that was and has been woefully lacking in terms of logic.
I would wonder (out loud, but in no way solicit a response from you) if what helped you decide to leave the cult was more emotionally based than the deficiencies in logic.
Also, I have come upon a hunch that you and I may have been, for a long time, friends on FB but perhaps are no longer.
If that's the case, I still feel bad for having offended you, but am hopeful that both you and I will emerge more hopeful in this life.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
From Michael Meade and mosaic voices (note, I'm NOT recommending his anything paid, just that I saw something on FB a friend posted): The world as we know it is already gone. The point now is to inhabit a bigger, unifying living myth in which the words "we are all in this together," have genuine heartfelt meaning.
From ME: the myth that we are separate from "the world" may be at the heart of polarization and hate that has engulfed so much in and of the world these days.
That mental framework did not originate with Wierwille, but he sure did his best to amplify it.
To me, "we are all in this together" flows more naturally into a loving view of our neighbors, no matter how alike or different each may look or sound from each of us. IOW, despite one's best efforts to love those who do not look or sound or believe like each of us, there ARE (ravenous) voices suggesting we should be afraid and unwelcoming to any person or group different from us. The MORE different, the more afraid.
Fear doesn't play well with love. Inherently, fear stokes survival instincts and causes us to bypass our logical reasoning mental processes.
Therefore, I tend to believe it's easier to forgive when we set aside social fear.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Is THIS logical?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
And there are times, places, situations in which it is EASIER to set aside social fear.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Is this Pitty motivated by fear? Certainly not as shown in this clip.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.