Posted on 07/02/2010 6:56:08 PM PDT by Desdemona
Yes and no.
You seem to do so fairly intensely quite well both directly and indirectly . . . evidently when the mood strikes you to do so.
And then dodge, obfuscate, rationalize, redefine and even blame as you do so exhaustingly with the intellectual cosmological exchanges.
Personally, That’s all fine with me. I like intense exchanges.
I don’t like hypocrisy about them.
BTW,
I expected that you’d not deal with the important content of the pulled post.
It appears that the habit is to keep silent on things too difficult to face squarely.
That is one definition but the singing of a bird can be called music also as can the sounds of a brook. so the concept can be difficult to define. The concept exists and definitions do not equal the concept but only attempt to put it into words.
For non-believers. Alms and charity and compassion for Muslims (see the five pillars of Islam). It is also merciless when it comes to some offenses just as Judaism used to be.
Christianity is the ONLY religion that teaches men to be kind
I don't think "do no harm" is exclusively Christian.
Do you know what accounts for a child's best hope for a happy, secure life as an adult? It is to know they are loved unconditionally, so that they learn to TRUST that love
Love is one of those "in the eyes of the beholder" categories, so I consider that statement a fleeting generalization. Many a happy and successful individual was raised on different kinds of love or even without love. What you are proposing is what is currently an acceptable social doctrine, not necessarily something carved in stone.
The trust of the child isn't much different than the trust of the adult
I disagree. Children are easily influenced and misled because they are naïve. They are a gold mine for control freaks.
To not be satisfied with love and met expectations is the definition of neurosis
Maybe in a Jungian sense but not in general.
Kosta: But does that make him real? If I believe in pink unicorns (or Santa for that matter) they are "real" to me, but does that make them real or just imaginary?
A-G:No thing and no one "makes" God real.
Alamo, you missed the easy spike on this one.
God makes everything else real.
(Genesis 1:1 and (after a fashion) Romans 4:17).
Cheers!
The singing of a bird or the "music" of a brook, or the sound of the waves breaking on a beach, etc. are sounds perceived as pleasing to human individuals, and again as such defined by human standards. No matter how you look at it, it always defaults to the humans as the source.
Only about Catholic and / or crevo threads.
Cheers!
But the words of God can only be spiritually discerned.
But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know [them], because they are spiritually discerned. - I Cor 2:14
My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: - John 10:27
Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
This is the first and great commandment.
And the second [is] like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets. – Matthew 22:35-40
You know, people keep forgetting that the stories of Jesus are *verbal* interactions.
Even a fresh text couldn't capture tone of voice, still less a document copied through multiple languages.
Isn't it possible that the intonation and inflection Jesus used indicated to the would-be stoners in John 8 where He was going with his phrase...?
Cheers!
Truly, Jesus was particularly harsh with the outwardly religious (Matt 23) for their hypocrisy.
I am satisfied with that.
No need for me to come in and put my foot in it at *all*. :-)
Cheers!
BTW, I also write a lot more than I actually post. For one thing, I try to reduce my own words as much as possible so someone might actually remember them. LOLOL! But more importantly, some posts require a lot of prayer.
Thank you so much for "taking us there" in your archeological "dig" and project!
And thank God for you, dear brother in Christ!
Well, our bodies do heal themselves. If we're healthy. If they didn't we'd break down as fast as cars.
They do. Ancients didn't live very long. Besides, when you say heal, those are band-aid first-aid repairs. No internal organs can be regrown except the liver and when it heals the new tissue is nonfunctional with the rest of the liver. Hardly a work of perfection.
Why do we have to die?
We don't. There is no reason whatsoever for a cell to die other than an enzyme. Aging and death is really a genetic "disease" which is potentially treatable. One can envision a day in the near future (not in my lifetime) when an injection of telomerase will prolong human life manifold if not indefinitely.
I am sure many will find this a verification of the "Fall" in the Garden of Eden. Sin brought a genetic change in our makeup and made us mortal, essentially changing us (and the whole planet) ontologically. Very possible that some external factors favored a (short-time) survival instead, or that, as you noted, lacking in natural enemies, we would have overpopulated the earth, so inactivation of telomerase was an adaptive change.
It is interesting that the OT speaks of earliest man living much longer than we do today, which is not supported by archeology or historical accounts. But it could be an atavistic memory in ancient peoples who "remember" that their ancestors may have lived longer.
We see evidence of adaptive change in areas where genetic mutation favors resistance to malaria, but also gives rise to a blood disorder common to blacks (sickle cell anemia) as an unwanted side effect. Kind of like natural curing addiction with addiction.
The way the world works, death is necessary for life
Procreation problems could have been naturally adjusted by adjusting reproductive periods and estrus duration, sharply reducing offspring numbers. Instead, nature favored killing to control population numbers (much more efficient).
Much of life feeds on dead matter. The rest of life eats life to live.
That doesn't strike me as an intelligent design but a reactive design. Our history on earth was pretty violent and death resulted from climactic changes and volcanic eruptions, and probably from lack of ability to adapt to geological and climactic changes.
For a changing world, many generations favor genetic adaptation. At some point radiation and other factors damage our cells leading to breakdown. So, all this seems to be adaptive. When longevity becomes an essential survival tool the body will turn on telomerase and prolong cell-life.
If we play God and do it, we will have an overpopulation problem sooner than we anticipated. And don't forget that the consumers are producing faster than producers. None of this points to divine design or even intellect at work. We have the means to live forever, but the conditions favor higher turnover.
Thanks for sharing your similar Biblical perspective.
K:I don't think the Pharisees were empiricists.
Hmmm, what becomes of John 6:49 - 6:52...?
("How can this man give us his flesh to eat?")
And a bit later in John 6:62, where Jesus says ""Does this seem incredible to you? What then if you were to see the Son of Man ascending again where He was before?"
Or of John 14:11 "Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father in me; but if not, believe me for the works' sake themselves."
Or for that matter, past the mere polemics, to action -- John 12:10-11 :
"So the chief priests planned to put Lazarus to death as well, 11 since it was on account of him that many of the Jews were deserting and were believing in Jesus. "
Or during the crucifixion itself, Matthew 27:42:
"He saved others; he cannot save himself. He is the King of Israel; let him come down from the cross now, and we will believe in him."
And this kind of thing continues even after the resurrection, as evidenced in Acts 4:14-16 :
" When they saw the man who had been cured standing beside them, they had nothing to say in opposition. So they ordered them to leave the council while they discussed the matter with one another. They said, "What will we do with them? For it is obvious to all who live in Jerusalem that a notable sign has been done through them; we cannot deny it."
And of course the writings of St. Paul, see 1 Cor 1:22 :
"For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom..."
The point being, they wanted, asked for, and were chided by Christ, with references to *evidence*.
Sounds like empiricists to me!
Cheers!
As much as I would like to, I don't know and cannot know your heart, your hopes, your concerns.
When I'm out walking my dog, each car that goes by reminds me that there is yet another person God loves and I love because He does and yet I do not know him. Each of them has a past, a present and a future - a heart, hopes and concerns - family, friends, associates, enemies - but it is all hidden from me.
All I can do - and do - is pray for them.
God's Name is I AM.
We don't have to, He came out and said so.
Matthew 5:17-20 and John 8:46.
Nice try, though.
Cheers!
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.