Why would I want to waste my precious time on such obvious drivel?
:yawn: He asks some important questions that frankly--must be answered (Ps 14:1).
Why would I want to waste my precious time on such obvious drivel?
That's the idea (Ps. 33:21). :dizzy:
The same goes for how Christianity meets the nature of man and being. Anyway, don't let me keep you if your inclination is lighter.
My still small voice seems more fond of saying "What's for dinner?"
Reciting what words? I think I like the opening move, but then I'd consider Brother Lawrence and even a bit of Peck's Road. If they were up for it, or the sort inclined to sustained consideration I might be inclined to suggest Merton. But Lawrence to be sure. A quick, simple and profound approach to life within a larger context.If I were a therapist trying to help a distraught and discontented person, I would start them with the introspective side of Christianity. And once started (they do not have to resolve all negativity from the past immediately) I would put them on a diet of Buddhism. But they should never forget who brought them to that epiphany and catharsis. And always be grateful for the contentment that was given to them. I am not sure that reciting specific words as some sort of magical incantation is a real solution.
Reciting what words?
I think I like the opening move, but then I'd consider Brother Lawrence and even a bit of Peck's Road. If they were up for it, or the sort inclined to sustained consideration I might be inclined to suggest Merton. But Lawrence to be sure. A quick, simple and profound approach to life within a larger context.
Would this qualify for you? "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life." Because it isn't the fallibility of man, but the transcendence of God that, to me, imbues that with a life altering meaning.Dogmatic creeds because they do not recognize the fallibility of man.
I see Buddha as a very wise man struggling to make a contextual sense of being. I see Christ as God offering the context.I see Jesus and Buddha as preaching some of the same concepts to potential followers. But Jesus dwelt more on a Freudian resonance of recapitulating past errors and misconceptions. Where Buddha was more Jungian in proposing that going over that might be helpful, but what really matters is how you are living right now.
Would this qualify for you?...
Always good to bump into you, Nog.
I see Buddha as a very wise man struggling to make a contextual sense of being.
I see Christ as God offering the context.
I would say that we live on an evolving natural world that doesn't need an explanation for why it isn't perfect, it's natural!Sure (Mt 5:45). We live in a fallen word (Ge 1:31).
Oh dear, there goes my salvation then. :chew:For those who humble themselves before him, yes (Jas 4:6).
I would say that we live on an evolving natural world that doesn't need an explanation for why it isn't perfect, it's natural!
Oh dear, there goes my salvation then. :chew:
While I do respect and value philosophy more generally it often seems to me that a great deal of pointless philosophical effort has been spent on fine-tuning the assorted versions of Christianity.Some atheists are more humble than some Christians I have witnessed. Some Christians only use their belief in God as a way to feel superior to others. Which is why I kind of leaned towards the Calvinist view at one point. Calvinism in its true essence, though it may seem to make humans haughty, generally brings greater humility than Open Theism. Many Open Theists are quite taken with their choice to believe, and feel that they are superior to others that have not made that choice. Calvinists generally accept that it was not their doing, and hence they have the saying "There but for the grace of God go I" and sincerely believe that. Which makes them humble and empathetic to the "non elect". Since no man can really know who is "elected", only God knows that.
While I do respect and value philosophy more generally it often seems to me that a great deal of pointless philosophical effort has been spent on fine-tuning the assorted versions of Christianity.
Esteemed academic theologians arguing about "how many angels can dance on the head of a pin" is the usual derogatory expression I believe?
Philosophy sometimes seems more about just having an "intelligent, worthy" open ended debate rather than actually getting anywhere useful and practical. What better than religion for doing that?
However imo the actual proof of the pudding is in the eating.
I sometimes wonder if philosophy is really all about examining life or ...?"The unexamined life is ... you know?
Philosophy? | |
I sometimes wonder if philosophy is really all about examining life or ...?
I'll have to report you to bybee for being needlessly provocative if you're not careful C.I had wondered
if
you ever did wonder
it's a good start
:yawn: He asks some important questions that frankly--must be answered (Ps 14:1).
While I do respect and value philosophy more generally it often seems to me that a great deal of pointless philosophical effort has been spent on fine-tuning the assorted versions of Christianity.
Esteemed academic theologians arguing about "how many angels can dance on the head of a pin" is the usual derogatory expression I believe?
Philosophy sometimes seems more about just having an "intelligent, worthy" open ended debate rather than actually getting anywhere useful and practical. What better than religion for doing that?
However imo the actual proof of the pudding is in the eating.
When the World is Running Down | |
Why is it that you completely ignore 99% of what I post and then pick out a single sentence? Surly you can see that that sentence should be taken in context of the points made. That makes you either dishonest or a Dunning Krugar style dunce. Or both maybe.
Some people spend so much time and effort trying to be clever in their avoidance of reality, that they end up making themselves fools.