The blogging will continue until morale improves...
Login | Register
Surely this is a metaphor for something…
Metaphor for Obama’s policy toward ISIS.
“The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason”. B. Franklin
This is just another way to close your eye, kevin.
“No reason is so firm that it can not again be overthrown by reason. there is no counsel, no matter how wise, no thing, no edifice, no matter how magnificient or strong, which cannot again be destroyed by human counsel, wisdom, and strength. And this can be seen in all things. Only the word of god remains to all eternity.” —Martin Luther
“No reason is so firm that it can not again be overthrown by reason. There is no counsel, no matter how wise, no thing, no edifice, no matter how magnificient or strong, which cannot again be destroyed by human counsel, wisdom, and strength. And this can be seen in all things. Only the Word of God remains to all eternity.” —Martin Luther
None of needed to see it twice. You must feel the need for extra blessings today.
How does Luther explain away gravity?
“There is science, logic, reason; there is thought verified by experience. And then there is kevin”. Ed Abbey
I do like your extra blessing explanation, but I think I hit an extra submit before correcting capitalization. We’ll stick with your excellent statement on that one.
Gravity, A blessing from God. Our depraved nature, resulting from sin, cannot perceive the nature, majesty, and divinity of creation in complete context because human reason can be flawed. We think we understand gravity today, but Luther’s point is, in 50, 100, or 200 years, human reason may discover something about gravity we did not know or possibly completely change our understanding of it.
We cannot fully perceive the divinity of creation because our reason is flawed. Thus, why we cannot worship science as perfect, always right, or having the proper understanding of the future under today’s theories.
I truly worry for future generations, including my children and grandchildren, if you are an example of the type of leadership we may have down the road. That is why I will fight my fight in my own way to save us from the incurious, the deceitful, the mindless, and the god obsessed like yourself.
And like always, you fail to answer a question: How did Luther explain gravity?
Luther does not dismiss the current imperfect human reason understanding we apply to gravity. He only put the idea forth that our reason is flawed because of our flawed human nature. Our understanding of reason today, whether it is gravity, black holes, other planets, etc will be replaced by more flawed human reason tomorrow.
Read any science article, the current science reason is constantly displaced by some other flawed human understanding or new, flawed, theoretical point of view.
Of course human reason can be flawed. Luther wrote 65,000 words in a book called “On the Jews and Their Lies.”
When it comes to knowledge about the universe, we’ve refined a methodology for proving facts and relationships, and for correcting the errors within. It’s called “science”. If a new fact comes along, if a new relationship is understood – that’s a refinement, not an obliteration of past statements. Newton’s laws work quite well at human speeds, but Einstein’s developments are needed in special circumstances.
As I’ll never get in the last word with you, as you re-spew the same gibberish, I’ll just say you have some truly faulty reasoning, and a very near-sighted view of the world. And I truly fear for the future if someone like you would have any leadership role in or government. 1984, here we come..
Great, you can call it “refinement”. However, if the prior reason, or understanding, was not incomplete, or not flawed, it would be perfect.
Therefore, to postulate that any human reason is perfect, complete, or without flaw, is a giant leap of faith as well, on your part.
I never said Martin Luther was perfect, just forgiven, through faith in Christ.
The difference between us is: I’ll readily admit my imperfect and flawed human nature as part of my faith in Christ.
Non–Christians, on the other hand, love to convince me thier reasoning is perfect.
What do the non-Christians say when it comes to spelling?
Guilty as charged on typos.
I should do a better job correcting those.
“Non–Christians, on the other hand, love to convince me thier reasoning is perfect.”
Q. What would change your mind about God?
And yet it is the atheist who gets called out as the arrogant one who thinks he knows everything. It’s bullshit.
Be embarrassed if you want. I’m not embarrassed about what I’m saying. It is the religious who think they have Ultimate Truth.
You are right, nothing can change ultimate truth.
“Evidence” is an interesting term, since evidence must be processed by flawed human reason. I find atheists love to extol the “evidence” for the idea there is no God, thus proving the biblical point that our sinful human nature is hostile to God.
Don’t bother with trying to use rational thought and logic with kevin. The best we can hope for is that he doesn’t reproduce, and if he does his offspring escape from his narrow-minded world.
I think Kevin’s argument is that Dilly Bars are made by flawed human processes, therefore you shouldn’t rely on Dilly Bars.
That made me chuckle.
I did try switching to manufactured dilly bars one time and got a ton of customer comments they prefered the imperfect store made dilly bar. One customer summed it up, the in store, “homemade” dilly bar had “character” and tasted better than the “perfect” manufactured product.
So I’m guilty as charged on the imperfect dilly bar.
This is the quinessential problem with the liberal religion, nearly everything liberals propose has to be a one size fits all. Leaves no room for choices, individuality, and character.
My oldest child is on the path to be trained to be a Chrsitian Day School teacher. To teach kids about Jesus.
My youngest would like to be a pastor, but sometimes wants to be a fireman. The other 2 aren’t sure, but since they are not in high school yet, not worried.
Either way, the Holy Spirit will guide in whatever they do.
And if I see their faith waivering at any point, for instance, if I see their life driven by the lies of Hollywood, the abortion cult, liberal academia, or other secular humanists, I will intervene, and to try and get them back on the path to Jesus.
So you think kids are better off not being driven by the Holy Spirit?
You’d rather have the kids driven by the likes of Kanye West or Miley Cyrus?
So I find your comment about my parenting skills interesting. I’d encourage parents toward my standard for child raising vs. the liberal Hollywood standard for child raising.
I think you need logic lessons. Read up on fallacies. You’re inventing characteristics of views you oppose, just to show you can knock them down.
Which is it? Liberals are one-size-fits all, or liberals are always trying to promote diversity? Obama is an all-power tyrant, or he’s weak and ineffective?
And you’re Obama-obsessed. It reminds of the joke “Who is this Rorschach guy? And why did he draw so many pictures of my parents fighting?”
You call me a liberal, but in reality I am far from “liberal” in the classic sense. But I also am not guided by belief in the supernatural, nor get my advice from a 2000 year old book of fiction. See, I made choices right there. Proved you wrong.
My kids weren’t guided by the holy spirit, nor Miley Cyrus. But they turned out to be well educated, independent thinking adults with successful careers and great kids. And they make their own choices. No need for me to intervene. You sound more like Stalin with every utterance.
John made some great points regarding how you create situations to enable you to allegedly “prove” your point. Eight graders would see right through you.
The diversity sect of the liberal religion dictates that no one can be offended at anytime, which yields a “one size fits all” public debate. Every idea, thought, and expression, must be sifted as to not offend delicate snowflakes in the liberal sphere. (Yes, I know “snowflake” does offend, I’ve offended many liberals back in college using that term.)
Obama can’t be a weak and ineffective tyrant?
I can make the case he is.
Bet you can’t make the case he is a strong and effective non-tyrant.
2000 year old book of fiction? The Israelite exodus, King David, King Solomon, the existence of Jesus on the earth are all verified by other accounts of history and archaeological finds. This is a case where historical “evidence” is denied by your faulty reason to justify saying the bible is “fiction”. Archaeologists even think they may have found the ancient city of Sodom.
Also, I’m not saying you cannot raise great kids on this earth without Christian education. I congratulate you on that part. However, when it comes to the preparation for eternity, I want my kids to be properly prepared as well, by having a strong relationship with Jesus. I took some “umbrage” that you would imply I’m narrow minded on parenting because of this. In fact, I would consider myself, possibly, more diverse because I consider parenting a responsibility for educating the child, not only in this life here on earth, but also for eternity.
When you are only concerned to parent for only the life here on earth, I consider that the more “narrow” point of view on parenting.
So when you leave your kids aimlessly wandering on this earth for the eternal answers, is that good parenting?
The fictional part of your guidance document is all the supernatural, unprovable episodes. Like the walking on water stuff, water into wine, etc… You knew that, but are being naturally obtuse.
I have been preparing for eternity by reading all the gibberish you write. That seems like an eternity to me, and no doubt more painful. And until you can prove one little facet of your supernatural beliefs, I’ll let my kids deal with whatever eternity they choose.
As far as you being more “diverse”, how do you explain your statement, “And if I see their faith waivering at any point, for instance, if I see their life driven by the lies of Hollywood, the abortion cult, liberal academia, or other secular humanists, I will intervene, and to try and get them back on the path to Jesus” ?? That defines narrow mindedness on par with Stalin and Lenin. Hypocrite.
““Evidence” is an interesting term, since evidence must be processed by flawed human reason.”
Presto, magico, a little intellectual sleight of hand…and bam! My nonsense is just as valid as your facts!
It’s kind of Kevin’s whole MO.
For a minute let’s say you accept biblical truth—salvation by faith alone in Jesus, what will you say on the judgment seat where you are shown a life review vigorously rejecting Jesus at every turn?
You would let your kids be put in same difficult position?
For a Christian, true faith in Christ means one does as much possible, especially for their kids, to make sure they are not under judgment of the law, but under the grace of Christ by encouraging that their faith in Christ is active and vigorous.
It’s that simple.
…and if you deny that truth, that means there is no eternal punishment for evil doers like Hitler.
I think it’s a pretty cold, insensitive, reality that a monster like Hitler is not suffering eternal punishment for what he has done.
I can’t think of a more insensitive, unjust, eternal point of view that evil is not punished.
And I can’t think of a more perverse and barbaric view of the world than the one that says if you don’t believe a certain thing you’ll be eternally tortured. And then it says this is the ultimate justice.
It’s so far out there you’d think it was invented by a bunch of ignorant, savage desert dwellers who lived thousands of years ago.
Youi can defend nothing you say, so continue to change the topic. I’m OK with my eternity, and if you need to suspend belief to get to yours, have fun. But don’t keep saying your way is right and mine is wrong, as no one has ever been able to prove either.
Since you brought up Hitler and how eternity is treating him, explain the various popes that lead the crusades or the Spanish inquisition? They all died believing they were on the righteous path. Or the good folks in Salem drowning witches? Or the christian missionaries that slaughtered thousands if not millions of natives throughout the Americas? Your “faith” allows you to do or say anything as long as it fits your narrow field of view. Hypocrite.
Scott , Baldy,
It’s tough to defend your eternal point of view because there is absolutely no justice for evil. I can fully understand both of you NOT wanting to address that point because it is a bleak, unjust, unfair, offensive, existence to deal with.
Baldy, you do keep saying your way is right because that should be the only point of view in public sphere….secular humanism.
Many of the popes rejected the gospel truth in action and in writing. That is what led to Martin Luther and the reformers. If any pope died thinking his evil acts, even the acts he thought were righteous, earned him salvation apart from Christ, that would make him judged under the law of God vs under the grace of Jesus. When you are under grace, you are “covered” for your transgressions of the law on this earth.
What it means to be under the grace of Christ on this earth certainly does mean doing evil in the eyes of God.
That that last line should say, “does NOT mean doing evil in eyes of God.”
Accidentally wiped out the “not”, which, of course, changes the intended meaning.