Originally posted by @fmfEveryone has a spirit - I think even you said that not very long ago, though I’m not sure I remember your definition of spirit.
And if someone like Ghost of a Duke does this - consumes and processes all this knowledge - and finds it unconvincing and implausible, what do you say to him? Oh yes... As a non-believer, you lack the knowledge and discernment to understand spiritual matters. Ha ha. It's like a self-sustaining delusion-feedback loop.
But let’s say Ghost examined all the evidence for Christ’s Resurrection and read the Bible and approached both undertakings with humility and an open mind and open heart and sincerely prayed for God to make His presence known.
It’s my position, and I believe I can support this from the Bible, that he would find it convincing and plausible because God would respond.
Originally posted by @fmfYou want to steer and limit the discussion to your SPECIFIC talking points.
What kicked this off was Romans1009's third post on page 3. If you want to distance yourself from that, then do. You have been posting as if you are defending his view.
Guys, don't participate with FMF when he starts doing this.
It is an illegitimate debate tactic that does not facilitate anything.
Originally posted by @romans1009Asserting and reasserting your religious belief does not really tackle what I have put to you.
Everyone has a spirit - I think even you said that not very long ago, though I’m not sure I remember your definition of spirit.
But let’s say Ghost examined all the evidence for Christ’s Resurrection and read the Bible and approached both undertakings with humility and an open mind and open heart and sincerely prayed for God to make His presence known ...[text shortened]... t this from the Bible, that he would find it convincing and plausible because God would respond.
Originally posted by @philokaliaSo, are you distancing yourself from the post that I have been responding to or are you endorsing the post that I have been responding to?
You want to steer and limit the discussion to your SPECIFIC talking points.
Guys, don't participate with FMF when he starts doing this.
It is an illegitimate debate tactic that does not facilitate anything.
Originally posted by @fmfIt does for me because I believe (and think the Bible supports) that God would respond. In other words, I don’t accept your hypothetical as plausible and don’t feel the need to respond on the assumption that it is plausible.
Asserting and reasserting your religious belief does not really tackle what I have put to you.
Originally posted by @romans1009These assertions are very weak in the context of what you claim Ghost of a Duke is and isn't capable of on account of him disagreeing with you
It does for me because I believe (and think the Bible supports) that God would respond. In other words, I don’t accept your hypothetical as plausible and don’t feel the need to respond on the assumption that it is plausible.
Originally posted by @fmfYou’re looking at it from the wrong perspective. I’m not making any claim as to what Ghost is or is not capable of; I’m making a claim as to what God would do in the situation I described.
These assertions are very weak in the context of what you claim Ghost of a Duke is and isn't capable of on account of him disagreeing with you
And, as I said, I believe my position is supported by the Bible.
Originally posted by @romans1009You’re looking at it from the wrong perspective. I’m not making any claim as to what Ghost is or is not capable of....
You’re looking at it from the wrong perspective. I’m not making any claim as to what Ghost is or is not capable of; I’m making a claim as to what God would do in the situation I described.
You most certainly are ~ or perhaps were [and don't realize it] on page 3. I am not particularly interested in your notions about what a supernatural being you happen to believe in would "do" in certain circumstances. You said that Ghost of a Duke lacks the knowledge and discernment to understand spiritual matters. That is a claim you are making about what Ghost is - or is not - capable of. If you want to dial back what you claimed earlier, fine. Do so. Don't think that you can simply fudge it in this way because it was 5 pages ago.
Originally posted by @romans1009Whatever the Bible makes you feel about yourself, and however much comfort and purpose it might afford you, it does not qualify you to make truth claims and declarations about the intellectual capacity of Ghost of a Duke. No matter how sincere you are about your faith.
And, as I said, I believe my position is supported by the Bible.
Originally posted by @thinkofoneAs I said earlier, your interpretation, imo, relies on disregarding or ignoring too much of the New Testament, and you’re substituting symbolic meaning to John 6:51 instead of the plain meaning that supports the rest of the Gospels and Paul’s epistles.
If you understood what Jesus was saying in John 6, you wouldn't have said what you did about John 6:51. I explained why in my post.
From what I've seen of your posts on the whole, you don't understand much at all about the gospel preached by Jesus during His ministry.
If you refuse to take the time to try to understand John 6 and provide a well-thought-out response in turn, then don't wonder why you don't receive "substantive" responses.
It makes much more sense to view the eating and drinking references not as Christ’s words, but Christ’s Spirit given the later event in Acts 2 where God’s Holy Spirit indwelt Jesus’ disciples.
Count how many verses in John chapter 6 alone you have to reject to believe that Jesus Christ was only a man, including verses where Jesus says He came down from heaven.
I once read an interesting statement (can’t remember from who) that said Jesus Christ was either God or insane. There’s no alternative.
I choose to believe, based not just on the Bible but my own independent research, that He was God in the flesh. You believe He was only a man, but to believe that, you also have to believe he was insane given all the statements He made about Himself and where He came from.
Does Jesus’ practical teaching sound like the teaching of someone who was insane?
Originally posted by @fmf<<You said that Ghost of a Duke lacks the knowledge and discernment to understand spiritual matters. That is a claim you are making about what Ghost is - or is not - capable of.>>
[b]You’re looking at it from the wrong perspective. I’m not making any claim as to what Ghost is or is not capable of....
You most certainly are ~ or perhaps were [and don't realize it] on page 3. I am not particularly interested in your notions about what a supernatural being you happen to believe in would "do" in certain circumstances. You said that Gh ...[text shortened]... r, fine. Do so. Don't think that you can simply fudge it in this way because it was 5 pages ago.[/b]
Given his present circumstance, yes. I then said how he could acquire what you refer to as “special knowledge” (the ability to discern spiritual matters) and it would only cost him some time and effort.
I never imagined you could interpret that as me saying Ghost was not capable of something. He’s capable of it if he wants it. If he doesn’t want it, he’s not. How is that different from anything else in life?
Originally posted by @fmfGO back to page 4.
So, are you distancing yourself from the post that I have been responding to or are you endorsing the post that I have been responding to?
My post there pointed out some flaws of your posting style. It got three upvotes. That rarely happens for me.
But I think everyone agrees you'd be better if you actually tried to confront the content and typed honestly and at length on the topic!
You're an excellent candidate for a change of posting style. You fit all the criteria --
- Smart
- Good writer
- Really bad current posting style
- Really unpopular engagements with people
- Poor quality content, etc.
Like... You need a new postign style. The world would be a better place if you stepped up.
Go back to page 4 and review my suggestions.
Originally posted by @philokaliaThank you for your suggestions.
GO back to page 4.
My post there pointed out some flaws of your posting style. It got three upvotes. That rarely happens for me.
But I think everyone agrees you'd be better if you actually tried to confront the content and typed honestly and at length on the topic!
You're an excellent candidate for a change of posting style. You fit all the cri ...[text shortened]... orld would be a better place if you stepped up.
Go back to page 4 and review my suggestions.
Originally posted by @fmfSee my most recent post (before this one.)
Whatever the Bible makes you feel about yourself, and however much comfort and purpose it might afford you, it does not qualify you to make truth claims and declarations about the intellectual capacity of Ghost of a Duke. No matter how sincere you are about your faith.
And if God revealed Himself through the Bible, it only makes sense to rely on what the Bible says if you want to know God.
You can’t claim you want to know God and at the same time say He doesn’t exist. You could logically say you want to know God and are not sure if He exists.
Originally posted by @philokaliaHow about you go back to page 3 instead. Are you distancing yourself from the post that I have been responding to or are you endorsing it?
GO back to page 4.