Spammers wasteland

Spammers wasteland


  • Total voters
    1
Status
Not open for further replies.

freelight

Eclectic Theosophist
The 'kook' is on you.............

The 'kook' is on you.............

You're worse than the Urantia kooks

Be not discouraged; human evolution is still in progress, and the revelation of God to the world, in and through Jesus, shall not fail.

- UB, Paper 196

The Urantia Book wholly values, exalts and glorifies Jesus teaching mission to our world, just thought you'd be properly informed in that particular ;)
 

freelight

Eclectic Theosophist
'Interpretation' is subjective to various factors...........

'Interpretation' is subjective to various factors...........

How many different ways could one interpret the scriptures? Does interpretation from God or from man? Why does this make a difference? Is the literal translation the only one with merit? Why or why not? Who holds the power to declare which interpretation is most appropriate? Can one interpretation be more correct or more accurate than another? What evidence or support is available to suggest that an entity has the authority to determine which interpretation is valid and/or more valid than another? Who is interpreting the evidence or support that is being used to come up with the original interpretation? Does one interpretation have all the correct answers and if it doesn't, does that invalidate any of the viewpoints that do make sense? Does any one interpretation make perfect sense? What should we do if someone proposes an alternative interpretation that we know through discernment makes much more sense to us? Is it okay to continue believing one interpretation if we know there is a more accurate one available? What would prevent us from accepting a more true interpretation of the scriptures were it to be presented to us?

Pure absolute reality is what is ever at the heart of all existence,...it is ever-present, all-pervading and all-inclusive :)

Now any and all 'interpretation' must be a distortion, differentiated 'translation' of information since its information being transformed to some degree or variation thru 'translation'. Therefore,...all 'interpretation' or 'translation' suffers some degree of 'distortion' on some level or dimension.

As to your iniquires, of course we ought always be open to receive or perceive a better, more accurate or tenable 'interpretation' of anything, that is if we are serious about getting to the truth of any matter, or really engaged in the process of 'learning'. Otherwise we cannot learn or grow if we refuse to be educated by life in its spiritual purpose, or understand the deeper religious meanings and values at the heart of life in our human experience.

103:1.1 The unity of religious experience among a social or racial group derives from the identical nature of the God fragment indwelling the individual. It is this divine in man that gives origin to his unselfish interest in the welfare of other men. But since personality is unique—no two mortals being alike—it inevitably follows that no two human beings can similarly interpret the leadings and urges of the spirit of divinity which lives within their minds. A group of mortals can experience spiritual unity, but they can never attain philosophic uniformity. And this diversity of the interpretation of religious thought and experience is shown by the fact that twentieth-century theologians and philosophers have formulated upward of five hundred different definitions of religion. In reality, every human being defines religion in the terms of his own experiential interpretation of the divine impulses emanating from the God spirit that indwells him, and therefore must such an interpretation be unique and wholly different from the religious philosophy of all other human beings.

103:1.2 When one mortal is in full agreement with the religious philosophy of a fellow mortal, that phenomenon indicates that these two beings have had a similar religious experience touching the matters concerned in their similarity of philosophic religious interpretation.

103:1.3 While your religion is a matter of personal experience, it is most important that you should be exposed to the knowledge of a vast number of other religious experiences (the diverse interpretations of other and diverse mortals) to the end that you may prevent your religious life from becoming egocentric—circumscribed, selfish, and unsocial.

- UB, Paper 103
 

Nang

TOL Subscriber
And one of them was a devil. (John 6:70)

So the bad one was replaced with Matthias.

O.K.

Still twelve . . .

But then there are the eye-witness testimonies of Jesus' disciples (which is the criteria for Apostleship) of Mark, and Paul . . plus the contempory accounts of Luke and the brother, James.

So now we have sixteen!

What is Revelation speaking of when it refers to "twelve Apostles."

The RCC has their opinion, and I countered it in my answer revealing symbolism. The literalists challenged my answer by using symbolism, so I countered that also.

As AMR would say, QED

What would you say differently?
 

Tambora

Get your armor ready!
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
What is Revelation speaking of when it refers to "twelve Apostles."
The 12 Jesus picked.

Matthew 10:1-5 KJV
(1) And when he had called unto him his twelve disciples, he gave them power against unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal all manner of sickness and all manner of disease.
(2) Now the names of the twelve apostles are these; The first, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother; James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother;
(3) Philip, and Bartholomew; Thomas, and Matthew the publican; James the son of Alphaeus, and Lebbaeus, whose surname was Thaddaeus;
(4) Simon the Canaanite, and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed him.
(5) These twelve Jesus sent forth,
 

Nang

TOL Subscriber
The 12 Jesus picked.

Matthew 10:1-5 KJV
(1) And when he had called unto him his twelve disciples, he gave them power against unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal all manner of sickness and all manner of disease.
(2) Now the names of the twelve apostles are these; The first, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother; James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother;
(3) Philip, and Bartholomew; Thomas, and Matthew the publican; James the son of Alphaeus, and Lebbaeus, whose surname was Thaddaeus;
(4) Simon the Canaanite, and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed him.
(5) These twelve Jesus sent forth,

And ...

How do these particular twelve feed into the RCC beliefs of Apostleship, that is the foundation of their thinking Peter being the first and infallible Pope?

Such basic RCC beliefs of Papistry is what I answered to.

Do you want to leave the subject as simplistic as you present it?

Hint: Judas destroys the RCC claim of Apostlic infallibility. :duh:
 

Nang

TOL Subscriber
Also please note:

Nihilo, the RCC, does not counter my response . . but MAD does.

Why? Why? Why?

Because MADists only have their literalistic reading of the bible, to use as spiritual ammo to counter Roman Catholic beliefs . . . which they oppose . . . and it fails miserably!

Sad.
 

Grosnick Marowbe

New member
Hall of Fame
Also please note:

Nihilo, the RCC, does not counter my response . . but MAD does.

Why? Why? Why?

Because MADists only have their literalistic reading of the bible, to use as spiritual ammo to counter Roman Catholic beliefs . . . which they oppose . . . and it fails miserably!

Sad.

:rotfl: Laughing at you is the REASONABLE thing to do.
 

PneumaPsucheSoma

TOL Subscriber
Also please note:

Nihilo, the RCC, does not counter my response . . but MAD does.

Why? Why? Why?

Because MADists only have their literalistic reading of the bible, to use as spiritual ammo to counter Roman Catholic beliefs . . . which they oppose . . . and it fails miserably!

Sad.

MADs are NOT Literalists. They just cherry-pick their interpretational figurative examples by a false, rather than authentic, hermeneutical perspective.

Their "literal" view of Revelation requires rampant figurative applications. Everything is some non-literal person, group, thing, place, country, or event. All conveniently about them in their lifetimes.

It's sheer stupidity. Antichrist drivel.

And they undermine their own KJV by attacking that which it was translated FROM. They don't even compare differing passages where alternate English words are rendered from the same Greek word, and the various English words show their narrow and false understanding.

They don't know what an oikonomia is, or a steward. And they laughably insist on multiple gospels because they don't understand the gospel is performative as the law is informative. So they can't see both from the dawn of creation, as if God came up with something new all the time because His eternal plan was insufficient.

And they're all functional Tritheists (as evidenced by the whole "synergy for F/S/HS" debacle clearly revealed).

I backed off from calling them all reprobate, but they don't know the one true God and Jesus Christ whom He hath sent. I can't judge them as lost, but I won't judge them as saved. They've belived their gurus and their own false autonomy.

The best any of them can do is occasionally attend multiple different local fellowships without being a regular comitted and affiliated part of any one of them. Literally a thumbnail without the rest of the body. Never serving. Never yielding. Never being in actual fellowship.

There is nothing more pathetic, especially for those who are Open Theists. There are more LDS and UPC who are saved than MADs. They misconstrue repentance and sin because they don't know what they mean, indicating they've likely never had faith OR repentance by God's grace.

And they prattle on and on and on and on, misrepresenting virtually every scripture they quote. Condescending to everyone else in their blind and arrogant ignorance and obfuscational delusion.

In real life, I will no longer fellowship with Futurists. They deny BOTH Law and Gospel and demean the Son of God in their idolatry and blasphemy as they undermine the Apostle Paul in the process.

They're false Rightists, promoting the agenda of the antichrist Leftist world agenda with hyper-Zionist tripe.

They're spiritual abortionists.
 

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
MADs are NOT Literalists. They just cherry-pick their interpretational figurative examples by a false, rather than authentic, hermeneutical perspective.

Their "literal" view of Revelation requires rampant figurative applications. Everything is some non-literal person, group, thing, place, country, or event. All conveniently about them in their lifetimes.

It's sheer stupidity. Antichrist drivel.

And they undermine their own KJV by attacking that which it was translated FROM. They don't even compare differing passages where alternate English words are rendered from the same Greek word, and the various English words show their narrow and false understanding.

They don't know what an oikonomia is, or a steward. And they laughably insist on multiple gospels because they don't understand the gospel is performative as the law is informative. So they can't see both from the dawn of creation, as if God came up with something new all the time because His eternal plan was insufficient.

And they're all functional Tritheists (as evidenced by the whole "synergy for F/S/HS" debacle clearly revealed).

I backed off from calling them all reprobate, but they don't know the one true God and Jesus Christ whom He hath sent. I can't judge them as lost, but I won't judge them as saved. They've belived their gurus and their own false autonomy.

The best any of them can do is occasionally attend multiple different local fellowships without being a regular comitted and affiliated part of any one of them. Literally a thumbnail without the rest of the body. Never serving. Never yielding. Never being in actual fellowship.

There is nothing more pathetic, especially for those who are Open Theists. There are more LDS and UPC who are saved than MADs. They misconstrue repentance and sin because they don't know what they mean, indicating they've likely never had faith OR repentance by God's grace.

And they prattle on and on and on and on, misrepresenting virtually every scripture they quote. Condescending to everyone else in their blind and arrogant ignorance and obfuscational delusion.

In real life, I will no longer fellowship with Futurists. They deny BOTH Law and Gospel and demean the Son of God in their idolatry and blasphemy as they undermine the Apostle Paul in the process.

They're false Rightists, promoting the agenda of the antichrist Leftist world agenda with hyper-Zionist tripe.

They're spiritual abortionists.

Oh.
 

Grosnick Marowbe

New member
Hall of Fame
MADs are NOT Literalists. They just cherry-pick their interpretational figurative examples by a false, rather than authentic, hermeneutical perspective.

Their "literal" view of Revelation requires rampant figurative applications. Everything is some non-literal person, group, thing, place, country, or event. All conveniently about them in their lifetimes.

It's sheer stupidity. Antichrist drivel.

And they undermine their own KJV by attacking that which it was translated FROM. They don't even compare differing passages where alternate English words are rendered from the same Greek word, and the various English words show their narrow and false understanding.

Whoa! I didn't realize the Irreparable harm we "MADs" were causing to the hearts and minds of humanity as a whole? You have brought everything into perspective by exposing the underbelly of those who are maliciously placing their faith in Christ as their Savior. I truly didn't realize that the whole time. Here PPS, all that time, held the answers to all things, "spiritual." I'm now, Thoroughly convinced after all these years, PPS is the ONLY true ingenious Scholar of our time. We were all wrong and PPS "The Lutheran" was correct. Who knew?
 

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
Whoa! I didn't realize the Irreparable harm we "MADs" were causing to the hearts and minds of humanity as a whole? You have brought everything into perspective by exposing the underbelly of those who are maliciously placing their faith in Christ as their Savior. I truly didn't realize that all the time, PPS held the answers to all things, "spiritual." I'm now, Thoroughly convinced after all these years, PPS is the ONLY true ingenious Scholar of our time. We were all wrong and PPS "The Lutheran" was correct. Who knew?

MADs are actually satanists...didn't you know?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top