| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
AlexDOM 
Forum Senior Member
Joined: February 02 2011
Location: Indianapolis
Status: Offline
Points: 775
|
 Posted: July 24 2012 at 17:18 |
 Smurph wrote:
AlexDOM wrote:
I think it all comes down to do we trust God to keep His Word preserved or not, can the God who created the whole universe not keep Scripture divine and true and without major error (yes there are little errors with humans writing, but the message of the Gospel is preserved)
This is a doubt issue.. |
It's also an issue of freewill. God might have wanted his Word to be preserved but if there is really free will, then man had the ability to destroy it.
I have little faith in humanity in general, so I find it hard to believe that God's word is preserved. |
So who wins God or man's freewill?
|
 |
Epignosis
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: December 30 2007
Location: Raeford, NC
Status: Offline
Points: 32581
|
Posted: July 24 2012 at 17:59 |
AlexDOM wrote:
So who wins God or man's freewill? |
Both. 
|
|
|
|
Dean
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout
Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
|
Posted: July 24 2012 at 18:16 |
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
Well I assume that for something to be thrown out of whack, in must have first occupied whack, or the term "out of" would be referencing two identical states of whackness for the before and the after states as a result of the action which provided the throwing. The second case just seems silly and vacuous so I assume a clear difference in the whack level. Since we usually apply the discrete metric to the space of whack, this would force the previous state to be in-whack or having a characteristic function value of 1. I find it highly dubious that astrology has ever or will ever take on this value of the characteristic function with respect to the set of whack. |
A not unreasonable assessment of Logan's comment, except whack is synonymous with "kilter" and both mean out of balance or harmony (with or without the "off" or "out of" prefix), ie if something is kilter it has the same meaning as off kilter, and so it would be for whack, [like flammable and inflammable mean the same thing], execpt we never use whack as a stand alone word in this context. However my use of throw was simply in the sense of discarding and wasn't referring to whack.
|
|
What?
|
|
Epignosis
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: December 30 2007
Location: Raeford, NC
Status: Offline
Points: 32581
|
Posted: July 24 2012 at 18:20 |
Deep down inside I knew my Christian thread would eventually come down to what is or isn't whack. 
|
|
|
|
Raccoon
Forum Senior Member
Joined: February 17 2012
Location: 444 Grove St RZ
Status: Offline
Points: 763
|
Posted: July 24 2012 at 18:43 |
I always felt bad for loving The Devil by The Enid  but all kidding aside, it's man's freewill to choose God.
|
|
Equality 7-2521
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
|
Posted: July 24 2012 at 18:43 |
Dean wrote:
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
Well I assume that for something to be thrown out of whack, in must have first occupied whack, or the term "out of" would be referencing two identical states of whackness for the before and the after states as a result of the action which provided the throwing. The second case just seems silly and vacuous so I assume a clear difference in the whack level. Since we usually apply the discrete metric to the space of whack, this would force the previous state to be in-whack or having a characteristic function value of 1. I find it highly dubious that astrology has ever or will ever take on this value of the characteristic function with respect to the set of whack. |
A not unreasonable assessment of Logan's comment, except whack is synonymous with "kilter" and both mean out of balance or harmony (with or without the "off" or "out of" prefix), ie if something is kilter it has the same meaning as off kilter, and so it would be for whack, [like flammable and inflammable mean the same thing], execpt we never use whack as a stand alone word in this context. However my use of throw was simply in the sense of discarding and wasn't referring to whack. |
While I certainly respect your linguistic prowess, the origin of the phrase seems to be itself in question. In support of my viewpoint I present an exert of a letter authored by secretary John Hay regarding President Lincoln.
| The Tycoon is in fine whack. I have rarely seen him more serene and
busy. He is managing this war, the draft, foreign relations, and
planning a reconstruction of the Union, all at once. |
This would indicate that being in whack is indicative of positive and dependable function.
|
|
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
|
|
Dean
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout
Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
|
Posted: July 24 2012 at 19:59 |
|
Words can have more than one meaning and it does not follow that both meanings will apply simultaneously or the definitions are interchangable, however, since the etymology of many common words is uncertain, especially in idomatic usage in different countries, we are both as correct as we want to be.
|
|
What?
|
|
Equality 7-2521
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
|
Posted: July 24 2012 at 20:16 |
|
I'm just happy to be derailing a thread regardless of the winner of our tangential discussion.
|
|
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
|
|
Slartibartfast
Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam
Joined: April 29 2006
Location: Atlantais
Status: Offline
Points: 29630
|
Posted: July 24 2012 at 23:26 |
Dean wrote:
A not unreasonable assessment of Logan's comment, except whack is synonymous with "kilter" and both mean out of balance or harmony (with or without the "off" or "out of" prefix), ie if something is kilter it has the same meaning as off kilter, and so it would be for whack, [like flammable and inflammable mean the same thing], execpt we never use whack as a stand alone word in this context. However my use of throw was simply in the sense of discarding and wasn't referring to whack. |
Getting into whack sounds a bit like S&M. And my name is not Bobby Brown...
Edited by Slartibartfast - July 24 2012 at 23:26
|
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened... 
|
|
Smurph
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 11 2012
Location: Columbus&NYC
Status: Offline
Points: 3167
|
Posted: July 25 2012 at 09:04 |
AlexDOM wrote:
Smurph wrote:
AlexDOM wrote:
I think it all comes down to do we trust God to keep His Word preserved or not, can the God who created the whole universe not keep Scripture divine and true and without major error (yes there are little errors with humans writing, but the message of the Gospel is preserved)
This is a doubt issue.. |
It's also an issue of freewill. God might have wanted his Word to be preserved but if there is really free will, then man had the ability to destroy it.
I have little faith in humanity in general, so I find it hard to believe that God's word is preserved. |
So who wins God or man's freewill? |
God wins because he is God, so man loses.
Freewill wins because man used this freewill to manipulate God's word, so man loses.
Both God and freewill win in the end, but man is the one that is at a loss because we will never know truly what God intended for us and can no longer fully trust the institution.
|
|
|
|
Equality 7-2521
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
|
Posted: July 25 2012 at 09:19 |
|
I understand the silliness in evoking the concept of fairness with respect to a transcendent metaphysical entity. However, is it really fair that subsequent generations of man must lose because a prior generation's group of a small number of people did a less than immaculate job of preserving the integrity of God's word? Would it kill God to shoot down a revised copy sometime?
|
|
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
|
|
Smurph
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 11 2012
Location: Columbus&NYC
Status: Offline
Points: 3167
|
Posted: July 25 2012 at 09:38 |
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
I understand the silliness in evoking the concept of fairness with respect to a transcendent metaphysical entity. However, is it really fair that subsequent generations of man must lose because a prior generation's group of a small number of people did a less than immaculate job of preserving the integrity of God's word? Would it kill God to shoot down a revised copy sometime? |
It's not fair.
I mean, if the whole thing were fair, God would instruct someone to write their own version of the Bible that can truly teach people about the Word.
It's called "The Poem of the Man God"
And while that sounds completely crazy, look up the information about that book. This woman was insane and bedridden and gave perfect descricptions of landscapes of places she had never been, and she would write this book randomly everyday. She might write a few pages early in the story, and a few pages in the middle, and a few at the end all in the same day. None of the stuff would make sense but when someone actually compared all the stuff and made them fit, they realized she had told this story insanely out of order.
The only problem is that it doesn't speak a lot of all the rules and ideas that cause so much turmoil in the church. It's just a detailed account of the life of Jesus. Well, maybe he didn't want us to be worried about so many of those laws because so many were just made up.
It's worth reading for sure.
But really, I think man screwed himself over. The only thing left to do is trust in what you feel in your heart to be true. No need to worry whether or not you are correct. Because I don't know anything in the end, and neither does anyone. Uncertain could be an adjective to describe everyone who isn't already dead.
|
|
|
|
Equality 7-2521
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
|
Posted: July 25 2012 at 09:56 |
Man didn't do anything mostly because Man does not exist. Abstract categories used for higher order brain functions have no physical reality and cannot commit actions nor bring judgement. I prefer science fiction to fantasy so I'll refrain from reading the ramblings in the "The Poem of the Man of God" 
Edited by Equality 7-2521 - July 25 2012 at 09:56
|
|
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
|
|
thellama73
Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: May 29 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8368
|
Posted: July 25 2012 at 09:57 |
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
Abstract categories used for higher order brain functions have no physical reality and cannot commit actions nor bring judgement.
|
This is why I always react negatively to people talking about "society" as if it were a physical entity.
|
|
|
|
Equality 7-2521
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
|
Posted: July 25 2012 at 10:00 |
|
Yes. I especially hate it when people get thrown into prison for "crimes against society."
|
|
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
|
|
Dean
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout
Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
|
Posted: July 25 2012 at 10:28 |
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
Yes. I especially hate it when people get thrown into prison for "crimes against society." |
What is a crime against society?
|
|
What?
|
|
Smurph
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 11 2012
Location: Columbus&NYC
Status: Offline
Points: 3167
|
Posted: July 25 2012 at 10:33 |
Dean wrote:
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
Yes. I especially hate it when people get thrown into prison for "crimes against society." |
What is a crime against society? |
Anything to do with Kanye West.
And actually insane ramblings are normally very interesting to read. :-D
|
|
|
|
Equality 7-2521
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
|
Posted: July 25 2012 at 10:35 |
Dean wrote:
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
Yes. I especially hate it when people get thrown into prison for "crimes against society." |
What is a crime against society? |
Really all criminals cases would be crimes against society the way the US formulates it. However, I refer to thinks such as drug use, prostitution, not wearing a seat belt, etc. Things that are usually called victimless crimes.
|
|
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
|
|
Dean
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout
Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
|
Posted: July 25 2012 at 10:40 |
Okay - so those are not really crimes against society in the literal sense then.
|
|
What?
|
|
thellama73
Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: May 29 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8368
|
Posted: July 25 2012 at 10:41 |
|
There is no such thing as a crime against society in a literal sense, because there is o such thing as society in a literal sense.
|
|
|
|
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
The Christian Thread
