If Jehovah Can Read Hearts Then WHY

by BlindersOff1 301 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • PSacramento
    PSacramento
    As a gladiator that has won his freedom - Caesar has allowed me to watch the games from his royal podium. As an observer in the lengthy tournaments that take place between Christians and sceptics, I must in all honesty say that from my observation point Christians are down on points. This is because logic can be presented as evidence, whereas internal experience cannot.
    Some Christians believe that the best way to spread the word is to fiercely debate with sceptics in the belief that other looking on will become convinced that Christ exists. Unfortunately this approach is flawed. Belief in a personal Christ who privately speaks to his followers is a private, subjective, internal experience. This being the case, trying to share it with those who have not had this experience is not possible as they can only view such claims objectively. Trying to share internal experiences with those who have been believers and had such internal experiences but then found the experiences were not from the source they thought, is even harder.
    Without belief a person can only look at evidence logically and without emotion before deciding whether they can invest in such a belief. Because a personal relationship with Christ is internal and personal, the only way someone can be convinced is to have the same experience. Logically, if Christ wants someone to be convinced he will give them such an experience. In the absence of Christ’s help, another person’s internal experience can never be presented as evidence. Obviously this is why non-believers have the upper hand in such debates. They have nothing to defend, nothing to lose.
    Once Christians use their faith, their internal experience and belief, to try to disprove scientific findings they are on a hiding to nothing. Resorting to using insults in place of facts or evidence is utterly unconvincing. There are more effective ways of sharing faith that engaging in gladiatorial bouts - entertaining as they are. Still each to their own.

    Much wisdom there my friend.

  • AGuest
    AGuest

    The word "slave" existed long before what those images depict ever did, EP.

    mp... we will simply have to agree to disagree. I have shared what I have shared and have nothing to add or change. One iota.

    The thread wasn't about trying to understand your God aguest...it was about...how we choose a god to believe in in the first place.
    It took many twists and turns along the way...evolution...and YOUR god (lots about your god). Then YOU tried to tie science into what you were saying.

    That's inaccurate, Still. You asked ME if I had the same understanding as RVW. I responded to that.

    I asked you to support it with an explanation of what you meant. I was trying to understand what you were claiming in a scientific context. IE...your definition of ENERGY, since you claimed my definition was different. If you are going to claim you understand this special type of energy...then...explain it.

    I did, as best I could.

    If you can't explain it. How can you claim to understand it?

    The same way some who understands andspeaks fluent Chinese, while understanding but speaking limited Farsi... can be told something in Farsi and understand it. He may not be able to communicate that same thing to another who speaks Chinses and NO Farsi... because there are no CHINESE words to explain what he understood in Farsi. A not so perfect example would be like trying to explain to one who, in Greek, cannot fathom that God COULD leave one, let alone how His Son could think He HAD... that that Son indeed so thought. In other words... "there are no words..." TO explain in the language the audience (you) might speak.

    Like I said...so far I couldn't see why you chose your god as opposed to the 30,000 other possible gods on offer. And you offered very little reason.

    And, so, I offered to bow out of the discussion... which was apparently unacceptable to you.

    I did like RIPs ideas on that thread...in fact I found them interesting. Unlike yours.

    Yet, you wouldn't disengage. As has been your practice with me. You have run the gamut, from "I'm not interested in ANYTHING you think/believe" to "Tell me what you think/believe" to "I don't get/believe what you think/believe," to "On what basis do you think/believe?" and on and on. You're doing it again, here. I posted above that we could just quit. That offer is still open.

    A slave of Christ,

    SA

  • cofty
    cofty

    There are no positive connotations of the word slave in any context, it is always degrading.

    Shelby and Tammy have gnostic beliefs that denigrate humanity so it's hardly surprising.

  • EntirelyPossible
    EntirelyPossible

    The word "slave" existed long before what those images depict ever did, EP.

    And it's never been a good thing.

  • AGuest
    AGuest
    There are more effective ways of sharing faith that engaging in gladiatorial bouts

    Is it possible that the purpose of "gladitorial bouts" not to share faith... but a natural reaction to opposition designed to "devour" (or "stamp out", as it was terms) one who has no intention or desire to even be a gladiator... but keeps finding the "ampitheater" he walked into suddenly turned into a "coliseum" by those whose entertainment tastes tend more toward blood than aria?

    I mean, even a gladiator would try to hold off the "lion," would he not, if not slay it outright? That, is after all, what a gladiator does. Are we to assume, though, that the "christian," who finds himself now in a "coliseum"... and perhaps given only a "sword" (or perhaps even not, maybe a small dagger... but usually nothing at all)... would have just laid down and let the lion chew him to pieces? Are we to think he really didn't even TRY to save his own life... and/or that of those with him?

    I can see how that might be the case for SOME christians, yes. I don't think it was the case with all of them, though. Fight or no fight, you were lunch. Maybe. Maybe slapping a lion on his nose got him to stop and think... maybe even go back into his case. If he wasn't that hungry at the time.

    Peace!

    A slave of Christ,

    SA, who wonders if maybe that's why some who called themselves "christians" turned to war: they got tired of being surrounded and eaten by lions. Not the best thing to do, perhaps, war against lions... or those who loosed them... but seems an understandable, if not natural, thing to do.

  • tec
    tec

    Defense, yes.

    I don't personally share to argue, or to win... but perhaps someone will find something that helps THEM in something I share, or am given to share. Some have told me that this DOES happen, so it IS a win. Not points, and not an argument. But just having helped someone in their faith, or to turn to Christ when they are seeking, but perhaps need a pointing finger, or comforting word, or something shared sparks the faith they do have.

    As well, I do try to answer every question asked, even though some are accusational questions. Because you never know why someone is asking; they might be seeking too.

    Peace,

    tammy

  • AGuest
    AGuest
    There are no positive connotations of the word slave in any context, it is always degrading.

    None? Always?

    And it's never been a good thing.

    Never?

    Interesting. I think there are some... many, even... and even here... who would think you two prudes... and oh, so wrong about that:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Love_slave

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BDSM

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master/slave_(BDSM)

    As well as that your knowledge of technology is isn't current:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master/slave_(technology)

    That your knowledge of geography sucks:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slave_River

    That you have something against Canadians and their languages:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavey_language

    And that your taste in music totally sucks ('cause Slave was da BOMB!):

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slave_(band)

    Just 'cause you don't like a word doesn't mean it has no useful meaning.

    A doulos of Christ,

    SA

  • EntirelyPossible
    EntirelyPossible

    BSDM is not slavery if all participants are there voluntarily, no more than a slave drive in a computer is an actual slave. Slavery has a useful meaning, many, depending on context.

    In no context are you a slave, however. Actual, real human slavery is NEVER a good thing.

  • tec
    tec

    And it's never been a good thing.

    Slavery would have been a good thing in a society that allowed it so a person could work off a debt that they could otherwise not repay (meaning prison or perhaps forfeit their own life); or as a means to allow them to survive, if they were too poor to have food or shelter on their own, for whatever reason, including war.

    The above were reasons for slavery weren't they? Even though there is a wage here: working off debt; food, shelter, safety even. These are slaves by choice, though. These are not ENslaved.

    (unless the time comes that they want their freedom and are not given it, but there were rules about that even in Israel, including rules about how others would have to give a slave shelter/sanctuary if they ran from a former master, because they were NOT to turn them back to the master they had run from)

    Would it be better to give to someone in need (a job for food and shelter, at least, because some do not want charity)? Well, yeah. But the world does not (and has not) always work that way.

    In any case, Shelby has the freedom to call herself whatever she wants, and put herself into whatever station she chooses, right?

    Peace,

    tammy

  • EntirelyPossible
    EntirelyPossible

    Slavery would have been a good thing in a society that allowed it so a person could work off a debt that they could otherwise not repay (meaning prison or perhaps forfeit their own life); or as a means to allow them to survive, if they were too poor to have food or shelter on their own, for whatever reason, including war.

    So, slavery is better than helping the poor out of kindness? Pretty sure both the Bible and Jesus 100% tell you to forgive debts and help the poor. In no way is slavery a good thing.

    These are slaves by choice, though. These are not ENslaved.

    By definition, you cannot be a slave by choice.

    In any case, Shelby has the freedom to call herself whatever she wants, and put herself into whatever station she chooses, right?

    Of course she can call herself a slave. Freedom of speech.

    Reality, however, demonstrates that she is in no actual way a slave of any type.

    It's hilarious that you and Shelby are defending slavery just so she will feel justified in calling herself something she isn't.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit