|
Post by goz on Feb 20, 2018 2:12:14 GMT
Do you understand what that means? I don't. Yeah I know what that means. Although it is a bit odd. But he is saying intentions do not matter, only results. Thanks. I though it would be more complicated than that.
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Feb 20, 2018 2:16:20 GMT
Yeah I know what that means. Although it is a bit odd. But he is saying intentions do not matter, only results. Thanks. I though it would be more complicated than that. It does not seem to be.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 20, 2018 2:35:58 GMT
The OQ is a joke, right? The original meaning of 'perfect' is 'complete'. He can be complete and still change his mind.
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Feb 20, 2018 15:52:36 GMT
tpfkar I'm an atheist, but I agree with the comments of the religious side in this. Changing one's mind only implies that one stance or another was incorrect when we're talking about things that are context independent, supposing there are things that are context independent. (Which I personally find dubious.) Religious believers still believe that God created a dynamic world, even if God supposedly transcends time, etc. (That idea is rather the one to pick on--it doesn't make any sense; it rests on a misunderstanding of what time is.) That doesn't imply that God's interaction with humans, including moral commands and so on, wouldn't be context dependent .The idea that perfection and change aren't compatible is absurd . . . and it's also very western, where it's actually rooted in some of Plato's balderdash (though it's misleading to only blame him--surely seeing unchanging things as the "ultimate" is in Plato because it was a cultural norm for him). At any rate, eastern culture, influenced by Buddhism, Hinduism, etc. certainly does not see perfection as incompatible with change/dynamicism. The "dynamicism" you speak of includes inherent malevolence and brutality. So a perfect cartoon villain, perhaps. And supposedly he knew/knows all. Why would he need to change anything from what he created whole cloth, including the very concepts of everything, knowing all outcomes at the outset? Other than it gave him grisly giggles, or something. Perfect Day
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Feb 20, 2018 15:55:31 GMT
tpfkar I'm an atheist, but I agree with the comments of the religious side in this. Changing one's mind only implies that one stance or another was incorrect when we're talking about things that are context independent, supposing there are things that are context independent. (Which I personally find dubious.) Religious believers still believe that God created a dynamic world, even if God supposedly transcends time, etc. (That idea is rather the one to pick on--it doesn't make any sense; it rests on a misunderstanding of what time is.) That doesn't imply that God's interaction with humans, including moral commands and so on, wouldn't be context dependent .The idea that perfection and change aren't compatible is absurd . . . and it's also very western, where it's actually rooted in some of Plato's balderdash (though it's misleading to only blame him--surely seeing unchanging things as the "ultimate" is in Plato because it was a cultural norm for him). At any rate, eastern culture, influenced by Buddhism, Hinduism, etc. certainly does not see perfection as incompatible with change/dynamicism. The "dynamicism" you speak of includes inherent malevolence and brutality. So a perfect cartoon villain, perhaps. And supposedly he knew/knows all. Why would he need to change anything from what he created whole cloth, including the very concepts of everything, knowing all outcomes at the outset? Other than it gave him grisly giggles, or something. Perfect DayIf I know everything about how a song goes, including that I know how it's going to end, etc. that doesn't imply that I don't have to change the notes, chords, etc. I'm playing as the song goes along. That's how you play the song after all. If I just stick with one note, I'm not playing the song. What I'm doing has to change.
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Feb 20, 2018 15:58:58 GMT
tpfkar The "dynamicism" you speak of includes inherent malevolence and brutality. So a perfect cartoon villain, perhaps. And supposedly he knew/knows all. Why would he need to change anything from what he created whole cloth, including the very concepts of everything, knowing all outcomes at the outset? Other than it gave him grisly giggles, or something. Perfect DayIf I know everything about how a song goes, including that I know how it's going to end, etc. that doesn't imply that I don't have to change the notes, chords, etc. I'm playing as the song goes along. That's how you play the song after all. If I just stick with one note, I'm not playing the song. What I'm doing has to change. You're not changing your plan. And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Feb 20, 2018 16:10:17 GMT
tpfkar If I know everything about how a song goes, including that I know how it's going to end, etc. that doesn't imply that I don't have to change the notes, chords, etc. I'm playing as the song goes along. That's how you play the song after all. If I just stick with one note, I'm not playing the song. What I'm doing has to change. You're not changing your plan. And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.You'd have to explain that in a bit more detail.
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Feb 20, 2018 16:13:50 GMT
tpfkar You're not changing your plan. And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.You'd have to explain that in a bit more detail. I don't think so. Can you elaborate on that?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 20, 2018 17:01:27 GMT
Do you understand what that means? I don't. When I talk about my wife, who I know better than anyone, I say "she claims to be a Christian." I do this because the condition of the heart is not something I can judge. Conversely, someone I don't know - like Gadreel - who has some beliefs that are far different than mine, but yet claims to have followed the basic action required to receive the promise of salvation, has, in my book, an equal claim. I cannot discern Gadreel's "true" beliefs any better than my wife's "true" beliefs. Matters of the heart (a.k.a., spiritual matters) are isolated specifically to the individual and no one outside that individual can declare with any certainty what the individual does or does not "truly believe." "Fruit," a.k.a., "works," a.k.a." "behavior" is something I can and should judge constantly. Matthew 7 says: Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them. Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity. So what I am saying is that I only judge behavior, which includes ideas and speech. I do not make judgments about whether someone is going to heaven or hell. Because I am not privy to the information that determines that.
|
|
|
Post by goz on Feb 20, 2018 22:37:58 GMT
Do you understand what that means? I don't. When I talk about my wife, who I know better than anyone, I say "she claims to be a Christian." I do this because the condition of the heart is not something I can judge. Conversely, someone I don't know - like Gadreel - who has some beliefs that are far different than mine, but yet claims to have followed the basic action required to receive the promise of salvation, has, in my book, an equal claim. I cannot discern Gadreel's "true" beliefs any better than my wife's "true" beliefs. Matters of the heart (a.k.a., spiritual matters) are isolated specifically to the individual and no one outside that individual can declare with any certainty what the individual does or does not "truly believe." "Fruit," a.k.a., "works," a.k.a." "behavior" is something I can and should judge constantly. Matthew 7 says: Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them. Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity. So what I am saying is that I only judge behavior, which includes ideas and speech. I do not make judgments about whether someone is going to heaven or hell. Because I am not privy to the information that determines that.OK, so here comes my favourite word...'conundrum'. According to your beliefs, God is privy to that information. IF God knows and is the only other individual to know what is in your 'heart', then why do Christians have to go through all the hoops to prove it to themselves, others and mostly God?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 20, 2018 23:05:31 GMT
When I talk about my wife, who I know better than anyone, I say "she claims to be a Christian." I do this because the condition of the heart is not something I can judge. Conversely, someone I don't know - like Gadreel - who has some beliefs that are far different than mine, but yet claims to have followed the basic action required to receive the promise of salvation, has, in my book, an equal claim. I cannot discern Gadreel's "true" beliefs any better than my wife's "true" beliefs. Matters of the heart (a.k.a., spiritual matters) are isolated specifically to the individual and no one outside that individual can declare with any certainty what the individual does or does not "truly believe." "Fruit," a.k.a., "works," a.k.a." "behavior" is something I can and should judge constantly. Matthew 7 says: Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them. Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity. So what I am saying is that I only judge behavior, which includes ideas and speech. I do not make judgments about whether someone is going to heaven or hell. Because I am not privy to the information that determines that.OK, so here comes my favourite word...'conundrum'. According to your beliefs, God is privy to that information. IF God knows and is the only other individual to know what is in your 'heart', then why do Christians have to go through all the hoops to prove it to themselves, others and mostly God? Conundrum has nothing on "phantasmagoric" or "verdure," but it's a great word nonetheless. I'm not sure it's accurate to say that the Bible claims that Christians need to do good works to prove to other Christians that they are Christian or even to themselves. But I know why you posit that and it's because a lot of Christians are interested in how others perceive them. This is one of the reasons I stopped going to church a long time ago, because I don't play the game that way. I'm only interested in following the scriptures. What the scriptures do indicate is that faith without works is dead. The reason it says this is because a.) if one is going to claim Christ-likeness, one should act like Christ (He despises it when fake religious people claim to do things in His name and then lead people away from biblical truth) and b.) the testimony and lifestyle of the living Christian is supposed to be an example of Christ, thus, one way in which non-believers are drawn to Christ. I hope that's even what you meant by "hoops." For me, personally, it doesn't seem like jumping through hoops at all. it seems like all the things he taught are righteous and good to me.
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Feb 21, 2018 1:23:56 GMT
|
|
|
Post by lowtacks86 on Feb 21, 2018 2:47:11 GMT
Well it would could be kinda of absurd for an alleged perfect, all knowing God to constantly be pulling a Trump, "I never said that!", "What I meant to say was this!". I guess he could theoretically change his mind on something and then just alter reality so people don't remember him taking a new stance on a position. A sort of divine "Mandela Effect" if you may.
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Feb 21, 2018 11:43:38 GMT
When I talk about my wife, who I know better than anyone, I say "she claims to be a Christian." I do this because the condition of the heart is not something I can judge. Conversely, someone I don't know - like Gadreel - who has some beliefs that are far different than mine, but yet claims to have followed the basic action required to receive the promise of salvation, has, in my book, an equal claim. I cannot discern Gadreel's "true" beliefs any better than my wife's "true" beliefs. Matters of the heart (a.k.a., spiritual matters) are isolated specifically to the individual and no one outside that individual can declare with any certainty what the individual does or does not "truly believe." "Fruit," a.k.a., "works," a.k.a." "behavior" is something I can and should judge constantly. Matthew 7 says: Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them. Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity. So what I am saying is that I only judge behavior, which includes ideas and speech. I do not make judgments about whether someone is going to heaven or hell. Because I am not privy to the information that determines that.OK, so here comes my favourite word...'conundrum'. According to your beliefs, God is privy to that information. IF God knows and is the only other individual to know what is in your 'heart', then why do Christians have to go through all the hoops to prove it to themselves, others and mostly God?They want to lol.
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Feb 21, 2018 19:47:05 GMT
tpfkar We've already set straight the ignoramuses who don't understand covenants and how they work, so continuing to push an argument that has already been defined is either ignorance or willful ignorance. Ineptly blustering through with fatuous apologia fueled by voices in your head doesn't count as "set straight". Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 21, 2018 19:56:43 GMT
tpfkar We've already set straight the ignoramuses who don't understand covenants and how they work, so continuing to push an argument that has already been defined is either ignorance or willful ignorance. Ineptly blustering through with fatuous apologia fueled by voices in your head doesn't count as "set straight". Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ.Who said anything about any of the nonsense you just vomited? It's the scriptures themselves that define the covenants and how they work, it's Jesus Himself who told Peter to kill and eat and it's the scriptures themselves we are discussing. I'm only repeating what the scriptures say, since it's the defining work on that topic at hand.
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Feb 21, 2018 19:59:12 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 21, 2018 20:13:46 GMT
Sorry, when someone is asked to leave someone alone and they do the opposite, we call that "stalking" in our society. Normal people oblige these requests (we're all made in the image of God, after all, and He's gracious enough to bow out when He's asked to do so). So the fact you're abnormal and a stalker, I can't help but take the next logical step and be concerned about how much spiked black leather you own. I particularly like my quote in your sign-off this time. The deal is still on the table. All you have to do is agree to it.
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Feb 21, 2018 20:15:49 GMT
tpfkar We've already set straight the ignoramuses who don't understand covenants and how they work, so continuing to push an argument that has already been defined is either ignorance or willful ignorance. Ineptly blustering through with fatuous apologia fueled by voices in your head doesn't count as "set straight". Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ.Who said anything about any of the nonsense you just vomited? It's the scriptures themselves that define the covenants and how they work, it's Jesus Himself who told Peter to kill and eat and it's the scriptures themselves we are discussing. I'm only repeating what the scriptures say, since it's the defining work on that topic at hand. Speaking of your normal nonsense flows. You think that jabber-spew in any way covers the crass bestial immorality of cursemaking and grossly narcissistic sadomasochistic torture display as an excuse for removing His own inane histrionic malediction or your "What a stupid thread, initiated on the rubbish of ignorance" aggrieved ragey vacuous chatter? hair's breadth difference
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 21, 2018 20:27:31 GMT
tpfkar Who said anything about any of the nonsense you just vomited? It's the scriptures themselves that define the covenants and how they work, it's Jesus Himself who told Peter to kill and eat and it's the scriptures themselves we are discussing. I'm only repeating what the scriptures say, since it's the defining work on that topic at hand. Speaking of your normal nonsense flows. You think that jabber-spew in any way covers the crass bestial immorality of cursemaking and grossly narcissistic sadomasochistic torture display as an excuse for removing His own inane histrionic malediction or your "What a stupid thread, initiated on the rubbish of ignorance" aggrieved ragey vacuous chatter? hair's breadth differenceEasy with the Chevy-Chase-boss-rant-in- Christmas-Vacation-routine. It's not funny when you do it.
|
|