i do not wish to debate anything here like i have said in the past i have much respect for most on this forum (believers and non believers) i am simply wondering if the atheist or non god believers every worry about what if your wrong?
it seems that many who were jw for so many years attach jehovah/yahweh with the watchtower and since the wt is wrong than god does not exist.
i ask this question only because i care about people and salvation thats why i want to help as many as possable come out of this cult,and since i truly believe in god i dont know what is in the cinscience of those who dont.
Of course you could JUST look at Christ... instead of looking back (as Lot's wife did) and getting trapped under/blinded by the law all over again. This makes the most sense to me. Seek and know Him first... then all else will come.
Are you suggesting that people that look at the OT as part of their Christianity are like Lot's wife? I don't see any correlation at all here. Lot's wife looking back had nothing to do with the OT law. I find this an odd connection.
i do not wish to debate anything here like i have said in the past i have much respect for most on this forum (believers and non believers) i am simply wondering if the atheist or non god believers every worry about what if your wrong?
it seems that many who were jw for so many years attach jehovah/yahweh with the watchtower and since the wt is wrong than god does not exist.
i ask this question only because i care about people and salvation thats why i want to help as many as possable come out of this cult,and since i truly believe in god i dont know what is in the cinscience of those who dont.
For those who call themselves Christian... who follow and belong to Christ... there is only one 'place' to look for the Truth of God. His Image, Word, and Truth: Christ.
Not all Chrisitians agree with this statement.
in a discussion with some other dear ones, the question was asked as to what such ones put their faith in.
in response to one comment that"one can't function without faith," another disagreed, stating ones can, that "many do so every day... the ones who have trust" (in things like the sun rising in the east versus the west).
that trust extended to "faith" based "on nature and the natural order of things.
Sure, bullying is wrong. I didn't bully---so maybe that was meant for someone else. I haven't cloaked anything either. I committed to being more careful how I post, and I've held up to that. In some ways, it seems to make people even more jumpy, but maybe that will calm down in time.
in a discussion with some other dear ones, the question was asked as to what such ones put their faith in.
in response to one comment that"one can't function without faith," another disagreed, stating ones can, that "many do so every day... the ones who have trust" (in things like the sun rising in the east versus the west).
that trust extended to "faith" based "on nature and the natural order of things.
Ok I hear what you're saying and will attempt to take you at your word
That's all I can ask. I'd like to say, I did not tackle anybody. I really didn't. I was quite mild and just stated my mind. I didn't get personal. I just said what from my viewpoint was correct to say. But I suppose you attempting to take me at my word is progress.
May I suggest that you are also biased? When I made a very mild comment, that included no personal attack at all, you called it tackling. It wasn't a tackle. I know how to tackle. I kept it pretty clean. It is uncomfortable for me to know that if I ever disagree with Aguest, I will get accused of many things I did not do. It's disturbing, but I'll deal with it.
in a discussion with some other dear ones, the question was asked as to what such ones put their faith in.
in response to one comment that"one can't function without faith," another disagreed, stating ones can, that "many do so every day... the ones who have trust" (in things like the sun rising in the east versus the west).
that trust extended to "faith" based "on nature and the natural order of things.
There are no 'churches'. Christ leads the Church (all those who belong to Him - the Body of Christ)
I don't understand. There are many churches. Are you saying those aren't really churches being led by Christ? Then where do they come from (those that claim to be a church) who leads them?
in a discussion with some other dear ones, the question was asked as to what such ones put their faith in.
in response to one comment that"one can't function without faith," another disagreed, stating ones can, that "many do so every day... the ones who have trust" (in things like the sun rising in the east versus the west).
that trust extended to "faith" based "on nature and the natural order of things.
I'm only continuing now because you're asking me about it. (and now you are defending Michelle, btw)
If you think that trying to see something from someone else's POV, a POV that I used to share, is a defense, then I guess. I think of it differently. Empathetic, perhaps. But also as a spring board for an interesting conversation. I see that was a mistake though. Some things appear to be off limits. But I was drawing a contrast.
So let me ask you. Who do you think is leading the churches? Is it God?
in a discussion with some other dear ones, the question was asked as to what such ones put their faith in.
in response to one comment that"one can't function without faith," another disagreed, stating ones can, that "many do so every day... the ones who have trust" (in things like the sun rising in the east versus the west).
that trust extended to "faith" based "on nature and the natural order of things.
This is the last post I can make for the next 24 hours. I should have saved them up to make them count!
Welcome Benj. I just wanted to tell you that saving them up does not work. It's 10 posts every 24 hours, and it does not accumulate. When you reach 100 posts, you get 100 posts every 24 hours. So it's better to use them so you reach 100 more quickly. If you skip a day, you will still only have 10 until the 100 mark is reached.
in a discussion with some other dear ones, the question was asked as to what such ones put their faith in.
in response to one comment that"one can't function without faith," another disagreed, stating ones can, that "many do so every day... the ones who have trust" (in things like the sun rising in the east versus the west).
that trust extended to "faith" based "on nature and the natural order of things.
People lose thier tempers when they are constantly picked at.. Why is Shelby being held to a higher standard than the rest of the people on the planet?..
Sure, but we just had a very constructive and involved discussion where a consensus somewhat agreed that we not take all bait. So I don't think she is being held to a higher standard, as most of us put that standard on ourselves. If you think we shouldn't put those standards on her, just say so. I think it is important to remember that Myelaine had already been corrected by authority. That could have been enough. I think it should have been enough, but who am I? Can you see my point just a little?
in a discussion with some other dear ones, the question was asked as to what such ones put their faith in.
in response to one comment that"one can't function without faith," another disagreed, stating ones can, that "many do so every day... the ones who have trust" (in things like the sun rising in the east versus the west).
that trust extended to "faith" based "on nature and the natural order of things.
You didn't call her on them here though NC, you said you disagreed with her beliefs, then called AGuest on what you perceived to be hers. Why? Couldn't you have let the two of them sort their own disagreement and not take a side? Then in comes Cofty and EP, and all within minutes.
I can see why you view it this way, Loz. But think about it. Myelaine had just been corrected by Ang. That was pretty much the final word, and I certainly did not post any disagreement to it. Should I have piled on to a point that had been clearly made, actually dramatically made? It should have been the last word. But then Aguest came and posted some very mean things about Myelaine after Ang had spoken. Personally I would have let it sit, since the final authority had already handled it, but that is not everybody.
So here is how I looked at it. Try to see it from my eyes for a moment. I felt that Myelaine had already been pretty firmly put in place over some remarks. It was done. I thought it was wrong to use it as an excuse to come and batter her personally. I didn't feel it was inappropriate to point that out. In a sense, the judge had spoken, but does that give us an excuse to come in and kick the accused? I don't think so. And please remember, I did not lob insults in stating what I stated. I just made it clear that I was uncomfortable with coming after someone that had been reprimanded, and hadn't posted since. I don't think this is wrong.
Can you see my viewpoint a little? Just a little? I just ask that you stop assigning motives to me, and look at this as a whole. As far as Cofty and EP, I think they did the same, but we didn't discuss it at all. So they acted independently, and I think they can speak for themselves.
in a discussion with some other dear ones, the question was asked as to what such ones put their faith in.
in response to one comment that"one can't function without faith," another disagreed, stating ones can, that "many do so every day... the ones who have trust" (in things like the sun rising in the east versus the west).
that trust extended to "faith" based "on nature and the natural order of things.
Michelle thinks that Aguest follows a demon, that I follow a demon, that I and any who agree with Aguest (though she might be putting me in the same category now, who knows?) are sycophantic. Though in truth, any who agree with Aguest are just listening to the same One. (who, according to Michelle, is a demon) I had to look that word up (sycophantic) because i just skipped over it the first time, then Cofty used it too, and I figured I'd best check it out. One of the most insulting words I have read.
First, LOL, let's just agree to not use metaphor with each other! It's always a trainwreck.
Well, I don't think it is a nice thing to say, that a person is following a demon. Of course, it means more to some than to others, because if it was said to me, I would find it exceedingly silly and giggle. I don't believe in demons. But if you do, then it does feel insulting to have that thrown out there.
And yet, that is what she truly believes. I can say I understand that, because when I used to believe in those things, I did believe that some followed the teachings of demons. I said so, too. Because that was being true to my god to point it out.
But maybe SHE thinks it is merciful to point out if she believes it. Maybe she thinks she is putting out a warning, and hoping that some will listen. Maybe she thinks it is true. Now think about it. If you REALLY believe it is true, and that there is danger, wouldn't you say so? I don't believe it's true, so let's put that aside. I'm speaking from a different POV. Would it not actually be an expression of love to put out a warning, IF YOU REALLY BELIEVED?
See, I know it feels insulting, but I think Myelaine really believes that. Because I used to. Aguest really believes that she has a tiny mind and heart---and says it was not meant as an insult, but as mercy. What if Myelaine said such out of mercy and not out of the desire to insult?
Or does that go against your understanding of Christ, and therefore, is wrong?
You know, Penn Jillette does this video blog thing sometimes, and he talked about a man who had given him a bible with a note in the front. Penn is a pretty vocal atheist, but he was deeply touched by this gift. He said it touched him because this man really believed this, and really had concern for Penn's soul. He didn't take it as an insult, but he saw through that. He actually got a bit choked up about it. He said that if he believed such things, he too would feel the need to proclaim it loudly. That it would be the loving thing to do. I'll look for the video if you are interested. He didn't react like this though, and he's an atheist.
