Who is Neg Repping Who and Why?

[aikido7]

Good grief. You think it's your job to correct the entire world? :doh:

Of course not. I am plenty busy enough trying to correct myself!

Everyone needs to toe your line or they have to listen to you drone on and on about how horrible they are. :baby:

You are playing the victim again. I am sharing what I have learned and talking about my own beliefs and thinking. And based on that, you should always make your own choice.

Never, ever take anything I say for granted. Always check things out for yourself.

"Juvenile gangs roaming this site"? You bet there are, and they're all these whining liberals like you who cry because they are disrespected and picked on. You people should find a liberal board, and then you'd be petted and stroked....poor little itty bitty egos. :nono:

Lots of anger between the lines here. Sounds like you want to build a conservative utopia by marginalizing those “other” people you don’t agree with.

But humans--in all their contradictions and complexity--are here to stay.

I don’t know about you, but I like being petted and stroked. But I am certainly not “crying” because others treat me badly. I stand up for myself and have learned to do so without blame or disrespect. The bullying I experience has much more to say about the bully than it does me.

 

[aikido7]

Oh? You heard my Blimp story then?

Just let me know when you want to discuss contradictions and discrepancies in the Bible.

You failed to chime in after I presented just one of many obvious contradictions in the New Testament.

It’s strange that we all accept the contradictions in our own lives, but will not admit to them in the Bible.

At any rate, I will be glad to go over my interpretations of biblical contradictions with you I have a pretty strong faith and I am not threatened by reading contradictions and understanding them.

 

[glorydaz]

Of course not. I am plenty busy enough trying to correct myself!

You are playing the victim again. I am sharing what I have learned and talking about my own beliefs and thinking. And based on that, you should always make your own choice.

Never, ever take anything I say for granted. Always check things out for yourself.

Lots of anger between the lines here. Sounds like you want to build a conservative utopia by marginalizing those “other” people you don’t agree with.

But humans--in all their contradictions and complexity--are here to stay.

I don’t know about you, but I like being petted and stroked. But I am certainly not “crying” because others treat me badly. I stand up for myself and have learned to do so without blame or disrespect. The bullying I experience has much more to say about the bully than it does me.

Before I respond to this post....are you male or female? Inquiring minds want to know.

 

[aikido7]

Before I respond to this post....are you male or female? Inquiring minds want to know.

Sometimes I am subjective and open and feminine, but other times I am objective and single-minded like most men.

Sometimes I put on after-shave or cologne and dress nice and view it from a woman's perspective as to if a woman would think I smelled good or looked good. Other times I focus on a home repair and are able to problem-solve and keep flexible.

Sometimes I appreciate being cuddled. Other times I want to initiate cuddling.



If I am a woman would you treat me any different as far as my beliefs and thinking are concerned? I would hope not.

Let's put it this way: my parents named me james and basically forced me to wear pants and a t-shirt and gave me toy guns and trucks to play with.

They clearly had an agenda.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Just let me know when you want to discuss contradictions and discrepancies in the Bible.

You failed to chime in after I presented just one of many obvious contradictions in the New Testament.

It’s strange that we all accept the contradictions in our own lives, but will not admit to them in the Bible.

At any rate, I will be glad to go over my interpretations of biblical contradictions with you I have a pretty strong faith and I am not threatened by reading contradictions and understanding them.

Contradictions are seen by those who don't know how to Rightly Divide the word of God.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Just let me know when you want to discuss contradictions and discrepancies in the Bible.

You failed to chime in after I presented just one of many obvious contradictions in the New Testament.

It’s strange that we all accept the contradictions in our own lives, but will not admit to them in the Bible.

At any rate, I will be glad to go over my interpretations of biblical contradictions with you I have a pretty strong faith and I am not threatened by reading contradictions and understanding them.

This thread isn't about that subject?

 

[aikido7]

Contradictions are seen by those who don't know how to Rightly Divide the word of God.

To use but one example, the obvious discrepancies between both Luke and Matthew's birth and infancy narratives is because both had a different theological agenda. And, as I have said before, the glaring contradiction between John and the synoptics as to when Jesus was crucified demonstrates my point in spades.

Differences in the Bible have to be taken seriously. We really cannot ignore them. We should know what the original authors meant by their writings. We need to start avoiding looking at the Bible through our post-modern lenses. It is only when we see what the passage or verse meant to the authors and the people they wrote for can we attempt to wrestle a meaning that can make sense in our own world.

Let me be clear: a statement like "Rightly Divide" is a generalized and subjective interpretation. What one believer regards as "right" will be totally different from another's opinion.

This fact is essential to understanding what my personal theology is all about.

I sometimes see everyone on TOL convinced of their own ability to "rightly divide" and yet seem somewhat suspicious and argumentative of others' ability.

They see the Bible as "inerrant" yet they also insist on believing their own human understanding is also inerrant. I may be way off base, but that is how I see your comments.

 

[aikido7]

This thread isn't about that subject?

I see that as a dodge and one that I have recognized many times before.

I mentioned contradictions, and you countered by asking me if I see the Bible as containing differences and contradictions.
As long as posters give those little red boxes to commenters' beliefs about theology, then I would think our recent back-and-forth is perfectly okay. Did you get caught up in the moment and had forgotten that the discussion about contradictions can be seen in all of our recent posts?

 

[glorydaz]

Sometimes I am subjective and open and feminine, but other times I am objective and single-minded like most men.

Sometimes I put on after-shave or cologne and dress nice and view it from a woman's perspective as to if a woman would think I smelled good or looked good. Other times I focus on a home repair and are able to problem-solve and keep flexible.

Sometimes I appreciate being cuddled. Other times I want to initiate cuddling.



If I am a woman would you treat me any different as far as my beliefs and thinking are concerned? I would hope not.

Let's put it this way: my parents named me james and basically forced me to wear pants and a t-shirt and gave me toy guns and trucks to play with.

They clearly had an agenda.

Still in the closet, eh?

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

To use but one example, the obvious discrepancies between both Luke and Matthew's birth and infancy narratives is because both had a different theological agenda.

Differences in the Bible have to be taken seriously. We should know what the original authors meant by their writings. We need to start avoiding looking at the Bible through our post-modern lenses. It is only when we see what the passage or verse meant to the authors and the people they wrote for can we attempt to wrestle a meaning that can make sense in our own world.

Let me be clear: a statement like "Rightly Divide" is a generalized and subjective interpretation. What one believer regards as "right" will be totally different from another's opinion.

This fact is essential to understanding what my personal theology is all about.

I sometimes see everyone on TOL convinced of their own ability to "rightly divide" and yet seem somewhat suspicious and argumentative of others' ability.

They see the Bible as "inerrant" yet they also insist on believing their own human understanding is also inerrant. I may be way off base, but that is how I see your comments.

You do realize that the Bible is Inspired by God correct?

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

A7, what does this mean: "To use but one example, the obvious discrepancies between both Luke and Matthew's birth and infancy narratives is because both had a different theological agenda." You wrote it, so explain it?

 

[aikido7]

A7, what does this mean: "To use but one example, the obvious discrepancies between both Luke and Matthew's birth and infancy narratives is because both had a different theological agenda." You wrote it, so explain it?

What have you done when I have given proof from the biblical texts and you choose not to answer me with scriptural proof yourself?

All one has to do is read Luke and Matthew in a parallel Bible--side-by-side--and make note of every detail. And then write an essay on what actually happened without leaving out a single detail.

It cannot be done.

You will find yourself having to combine different and diverse details and will end up constructing your own version of a gospel.

Just as children's pageants have conflated shepherds and wise men, stars and angels, livestock and people, houses and mangers, we have read these accounts so much (especially during the Christmas season) that we have become deadened to what Luke and Matthew really say.

Do not give in to the urge to "add to" the Bible. See what is actually IN the text before making up stories about things simply because "It seems that way to me."

If you aren't a self-starter and aren't a curious sort, I will provide a few examples from the actual scriptures. But I won't be going into my documents on the subject in my iMac because I am having trouble getting online with it. So I can turn you in the direction of some online information. Or I can just cut and paste some glaring examples of what I am saying compiled by others.

But you probably know just as well as I do that facts like these will barely register with you. You are more of a "belief-based" believer who has no grasp of both the history as well as the diverse beliefs and theologies found in the Bible.

Every gospel writer wrote for his or her own community of believers. They espoused and included many different theological ways of seeing the history that actually happened. We do the same. We demand a Jesus that makes sense to US.... A Jesus that does, says and believes whatever we do, say and believe.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

All one has to do is read Luke and Matthew in a parallel Bible--side-by-side--and make note of every detail. And then write an essay on what actually happened without leaving out a single detail.

It cannot be done. Just as children's pageants have conflated shepherds and wise men, livestock and people, houses and mangers, we have read these accounts so long that we have become deadened to what they really say.

Do not give in to the urge to "add to" the Bible. See what is actually IN the text before making up stories about things simply because "It seems that way to me."

Do you believe that the Bible is God inspired?

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

A7, you seem to be saying that the separate writers of the Bible had their
own personal agendas? How do you combine that with the Bible being God
inspired?

 

[glorydaz]

A7, what does this mean: "To use but one example, the obvious discrepancies between both Luke and Matthew's birth and infancy narratives is because both had a different theological agenda." You wrote it, so explain it?

You're a brave man, GM. I hope you're only planning on listening with one ear....or reading with one eye, rather.

 

[aikido7]

Still in the closet, eh?

Sometimes it is sometimes hard to stand in the closet and to pick out the best shirt--or find my cleanest dirty shirt.

I suppose you could say that I am worse than some women. And I would agree.

 

[aikido7]

You're a brave man, GM. I hope you're only planning on listening with one ear....or reading with one eye, rather.

In other words, are you saying that you should recognize that you feel you have the facts and your mind is made up?

To retain one's balance in a world of dizzying change, a fundamentalist needs to

1. Fully feel the alarm and defensiveness when forced with learning something new.

2. Place both index fingers in each ear.

3. Say "La, La, La, La, La" in a loud, sing-song voice.

4. Or, only use half your God-given human senses. Use one eye and one ear, even though Jesus said "Those with two ears better listen up."

Then crawl back into your cocoon. With some folks it's just not worth the effort to grow naturally into the final stage of human life and freedom.

 

[aikido7]

A7, you seem to be saying that the separate writers of the Bible had their
own personal agendas? How do you combine that with the Bible being God
inspired?

God "inspires" everyone.

That is a personal belief and I have no way of knowing that I am in fact "right."

And those who are inspired describe the divine in their own individual ways. It's all about interpretation. And that is exactly what the Bible is: a collection of different interpretations. And a trip to one's local Christian bookstore will show you that the one, "God-breathed" Bible comes in diverse translations as well as many different versions.

Even unbelievers and atheists will say the same thing and feel the same spiritual stirrings as anyone else when they stand before God's creation.

It is in our DNA to exclaim "WOW !!!" when we apprehend the holy and the sacred.

But God always has to manifest himself through the trials and tribulations of living on earth. In other words, there will always be human conflict, earthquakes, floods and lightning flashes. There is a "divine consistency" in the laws of physics which have been continually present since the universe began.

As Jesus said, God lets his sun to shine on both the good as well as the evil. He plays no favorites. We have free will since the mythology of the garden and we can do what we want on earth--and often do.

 

[aikido7]

A7, you seem to be saying that the separate writers of the Bible had their
own personal agendas? How do you combine that with the Bible being God
inspired?

John disagrees with the synoptics who claim that Jesus died on Passover.

Mark's gospel has the paralytic's friends digging through the mud and the branches of the Galilean roof to make sure their friend would be healed by Jesus.

Luke's gospel, which was written some 30 years after Mark, explains that those same men "removed tiles" from the roof instead. Luke's audience was more settled and urban. Those believers might not understand Mark's story as it was first written. So Luke felt free to adapt his message in ways that could be more easily understood.

Paul engaged in this same skill when he preached about his audience's "unknown God" and related their concept to the Jewish God Yahweh.
It was a great example of Paul's rhetorical skills.

 

[glorydaz]

In other words, are you saying that you should recognize that you feel you have the facts and your mind is made up?

To retain one's balance in a world of dizzying change, a fundamentalist needs to

1. Fully feel the alarm and defensiveness when forced with learning something new.

2. Place both index fingers in each ear.

3. Say "La, La, La, La, La" in a loud, sing-song voice.

4. Or, only use half your God-given human senses. Use one eye and one ear, even though Jesus said "Those with two ears better listen up."

Then crawl back into your cocoon. With some folks it's just not worth the effort to grow naturally into the final stage of human life and freedom.

Fortunately, I was talking to GM and he knows what I was saying. :chuckle: