fool said:seems like my doctor would have said somthing
Doctor: Hmmm. Should I tell fool that he looks like a neandertal or should I keep taking his money and let him think he is normal?
fool said:seems like my doctor would have said somthing
:chuckle:ebenz47037 said:Doctor: Hmmm. Should I tell fool that he looks like a neandertal or should I keep taking his money and let him think he is normal?
seems like if my doc thought I was one he would have made a study instead of writing a script for my itchy feetebenz47037 said:Doctor: Hmmm. Should I tell fool that he looks like a neandertal or should I keep taking his money and let him think he is normal?
Nah, I was just kidding around.The Berean said:Is that bad?
We may be getting somewhere. Any theory advanced which involves modification or negation of entropy is a rejection of physical reality and be, to put it mildly, unscientific. Correct?Clete said:None. That's just the point. Entropy is the most tested and best confirmed law of the natural universe in all of science. To reject it and believe in the perpetual motion machine is to reject science altogether.
Resting in Him,
Clete
In this context aren't they both sorta the same thing?The Berean said:Knight,
As believers are we supposed to "know" God or "experience" God? I had a debate with someone about this recently.
Originally Posted by The Berean
Knight,
As believers are we supposed to "know" God or "experience" God? I had a debate with someone about this recently.
Knight said:In this context aren't they both sorta the same thing?
Good points, I now see better what you mean.The Berean said:I'm not sure. If I go to concert to hear a singer I am experiencing a part of who they are. But I do not know them personally. I will only know them if I speak to them and get to know them. When we are born-again we enter into a personal relationship with our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. We want to know Him. By knowing Him we experience His love, mercy, and grace. But to experience these things don't we have to know Him first?
There is no way you can live "righteously" (as you put it) - you cannot do it.death2impiety said:I'd love some insight:
I understand that we are not saved by our works (thank God) but do we subconsiously use grace as an excuse to sin? I know I can't be perfect, but should I be striving for righteousness knowing it is unattainable? I frequently find myself praying for the strength to refuse temptation and yet, on occaision, I still find myself succumb to it. I spoke with a missionary who told me that if I still sin, than I do not see Christ, that my actions speak louder than words. I feel a strong connection to my faith and to Christ but I wonder:
-Do I need to boost my willpower?
-If so, how much willpower is enough? It doesn't seem like there could be a point where an individuals level of sin is acceptable.
-If we all sin, and accept Christ as the redeemer of sin, does that not mean that our actions are accouted for by Christ?
-With the above as my vision of Christianity, am I justifying my sinful behavior? Does guilt for my actions and repentance show my understanding of my need for Christ?
I see what the missionary was saying, because it seems like if I sin, I'm justifying it by grace...if I catch myself in the act and neglect to stop it, I believe I'm taking advantage and I've missed the point. This seems unacceptable to me...
-Can a person be righteous? Or are we to live righteously...if so...how righteous is righteous enough?
(There should be a smile in the smile list that's pulling its hair out in frustration)
Knight said:There is no way you can live "righteously" (as you put it) - you cannot do it.
Trying to be "good" will only drive you further from the mechanism that will eventually give you the willpower you desire.
The less you lean on yourself and the more you lean on Him the more He will produce good fruit through you.
So what does this mean in real terms?
Focus on loving God, and being thankful that you have liberty in Christ and He will produce through you . . .love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control.
As long as they are a legal American what difference would it make?fool said:Should we amend the Constitution to allow non-natives to be president?
I think we should.Knight said:As long as they are a legal American what difference would it make?
What do you think fool?
I agree.fool said:I think we should.
We're a nation of immigrants.
Seems like they should be able to be Prez.
I might prevent us from getting the best possible President.Knight said:I agree.
Although I think this is a very minor issue. Don't you?
No, the founders got this one right. Anyone can become a citizen, anyone. Doing things the way you guys suggest would allow a much greater chance of a "mole" from an enemy nation to end up becoming the president and causing incredible damage from the inside. I think leaving this filter in place is a good thing.fool said:I think we should.
We're a nation of immigrants.
Seems like they should be able to be Prez.