Posted on 09/28/2001 1:21:51 AM PDT by Darlin'
Edited on 04/23/2004 12:03:33 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
In the wake of an atrocity, he shows he hasn't forsaken New York.
God is back. He's bursting out all over. It's a beautiful thing to see.
In the past 17 days, since the big terrible thing, our country has, unconsciously but quite clearly, chosen a new national anthem. It is "God Bless America," the song everyone sang in the days after the blasts to show they loved their country. It's what they sang on television, it's what kids sang in school, it's what families sang in New York at 7 p.m. the Friday after the atrocity when we all went outside with our candles and stood together in little groups in front of big apartment buildings. A friend of mine told me you could hear it on Park Avenue from uptown to downtown, the soft choruses wafting from block to block.
(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...
To try to be right has two meaning:
One to insist that right is what one does or believe, so it is post fact justification.
Second is to search for what is right and trying to adhere to it.
The first way is not commendable but very common, comfortable and used by the multitude, The second is a narrow and rocky and not many bother to go there.
Are you trying to say that there is no ultimate truth avaiable to man, that all there is a product of his wishes and imagination? If so that we can picl/create beliefs which suit us and justify the way of life we prefer. But what is the value of such beliefs? They would be a pure delusion.
So are you saying that we cannot know the truth?
No, there is only one God revealed in creation, in His Word, and in the person of Jesus Christ. A belief in any other "god" is a belief in a false deity. Whether you accept that truth or not does not change who God is. He is the same yesterday, today, and forever.
Why do you think man "made up" religon?
Why do you think man has a conscience?
If we had no moral code how would the world be different?
But if your objective is humility, do you think that negating the truth of "concept or belief" is any less arrogant than asserting it?
Agreed!
Please do not take this as an attack on any religion it is just based upon my suspicion that "people" are not the best sources for important information.
As a test of the improbability of accuracy in any version Bible or the Koran, try to exactly reproduce the phrase in post #6( I think) from 2nd Chronicles 7:14 NKJV WITHOUT going back to read it.
Unless you are a student of the Bible, what are the chances of duplicating this with 100% accuracy.
I have a very hard time believing human beings with their limited memory, tendency to slant things to their liking and down right lying could relay stories for thousands of years in both aural and written form without some errors (to be kind) slipping into the text.
Remember that the "V" in "NKJV" stands for "version".
What did you say? I try not look at your post.
Thank you very much for proving my point!
What exactly is your point? That we know nothing? Are you a skeptic or agnostic?
Well, who do you think has been translating and copying the Bible over its written existence?- and they weren't relying on their memory either! If your assertion that a text cannot be copied accurately is all that stands between you and a genuine faith in Christ, I strongly urge you to do even a modest amount of research on this topic. Even if you assumed that God played absolutely no role in the preservation of His Word, you will be convinced of the accuracy Bible copies (known by comparing modern texts with recently discovered ancient texts) and translations.
No! Absolutely not. I believe firmly in God and Christ. There is no other way in my opinion to expain all the things in the world. Don't attempt to pigeon hole me with some inflammatory name.
I just do not take at face value, 100% of what has been passed on for centuries, as totally accurate. It is not humanly possible. With the numerous religions and their supporting documents it is logical to conclude that at best all but 1 are inaccurate. Note: I did not say "wrong".
Even if I am wrong in my statement above (unlikely) the translation process to other languages is iffy at best.
I simply do not trust humans to be accurate and truthful. Remember our last President?
OK, I can accept this as a starting point. With one exception, some religious/philosophical systems do not make a lot of claims and they might be not in conflict with others, Confucionism for example. Various versions of neo-platonism can be reconciled with the revealed Truth.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.