|
Post by chuck on Apr 7, 2021 2:28:50 GMT -5
Could you explain how you think it's relevant? You denied us total accurate information by refusing to answer the question As you can now see Bob was not after information for accuracy in the context of this debate, he already had concluded the statement he wanted to make beforehand. It just made it more impactful when using my wife......and also has a elememt of guilt/shame built into it. I ask you again, how do you think it's relevant?.
|
|
|
Post by chuck on Apr 7, 2021 2:32:57 GMT -5
Before or after I didn't believe the socialist ideology? Dragging ones family into a debate.......One may also recognise the underhanded tactic of trying to embarrasses and promote shame or guilt. You haven't strayed to far from 2x2ism Bob. Did you even realise you did this?. Yes, I realized I did this. I occasionally do it on purpose to figure out why exactly a person acts the way they do -- no effort to disparage your wife, bless her heart. I didn't accuse you of disparaging my wife......nor did I think you did. That was never my point.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Apr 7, 2021 19:59:36 GMT -5
Yes, I realized I did this. I occasionally do it on purpose to figure out why exactly a person acts the way they do -- no effort to disparage your wife, bless her heart. I didn't accuse you of disparaging my wife......nor did I think you did. That was never my point. You're right on all counts. It helped me greatly.
|
|
|
Post by chuck on Apr 7, 2021 20:51:59 GMT -5
I didn't accuse you of disparaging my wife......nor did I think you did. That was never my point. You're right on all counts. It helped me greatly. So I'm a liar then?
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Apr 7, 2021 22:40:42 GMT -5
You're right on all counts. It helped me greatly. So I'm a liar then? No, I believe you were absolutely believable.
|
|
|
Post by chuck on Apr 7, 2021 23:30:09 GMT -5
No, I believe you were absolutely believable. So im not a intransigence and you did knowingly or unknowingly try to guilt/shame me by using my wife. Good to know.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Apr 7, 2021 23:50:16 GMT -5
No, I believe you were absolutely believable. So im not a intransigence and you did knowingly or unknowingly try to guilt/shame me by using my wife. Good to know. I'm not so stupid as to think I could shame you. I just asked a question, you answered. But I suspect you are an intransigent. That's all.
|
|
|
Post by chuck on Apr 8, 2021 0:06:13 GMT -5
So im not a intransigence and you did knowingly or unknowingly try to guilt/shame me by using my wife. Good to know. I'm not so stupid as to think I could shame you. I just asked a question, you answered. But I suspect you are an intransigent. That's all. Why would you feel the need to use someones wife to make a point?. Edit, in that manner Essentially what you said was she must be a good woman to put up with that stubborn sob. Which was unknowingly a guilt shame based tactic. That is like me disagreeing with your views and then saying,"and you taught all those kids from that perspective, what a schmuck"..... Which leads back to, my wife putting up with my intransigent behaviour, was that before or after I stopped believing socialist ideology?. So Bob, does your refusal to see it my way make you an intransigent?.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Apr 8, 2021 0:55:37 GMT -5
I'm not so stupid as to think I could shame you. I just asked a question, you answered. But I suspect you are an intransigent. That's all. Why would you feel the need to use someones wife to make a point?. I didn't use your wife. I don't know her and never talked to her. That did cross my mind. I'm quite aware of that tactic. However, you're wife will never know unless you tell her about my question. And I take it, from the posts you've made here, that you aren't easily shamed by people who just disagree with you. So I sked. Yes, it is like that, except that you couldn't shame me with that. Because I was highly evaluated by a good variety of professors, professional supervisors, and parents as well. You haven't. Before. I only mentioned your wife to see how argumentative you would be with me. Not at all. I have no obligation to agree with you. Furthermore, I have no reason to agree with you.
|
|
|
Post by chuck on Apr 8, 2021 2:38:41 GMT -5
Why would you feel the need to use someones wife to make a point?. I didn't use your wife. I don't know her and never talked to her. That did cross my mind. I'm quite aware of that tactic. However, you're wife will never know unless you tell her about my question. And I take it, from the posts you've made here, that you aren't easily shamed by people who just disagree with you. So I sked. Yes, it is like that, except that you couldn't shame me with that. Because I was highly evaluated by a good variety of professors, professional supervisors, and parents as well. You haven't. Before. I only mentioned your wife to see how argumentative you would be with me. Not at all. I have no obligation to agree with you. Furthermore, I have no reason to agree with you. You did use my wife, the intent was there, I just never let you go through with it in the manner you were trying to. It has nothing whatsoever to do with you knowing or not knowing her or her knowing or not knowing about this. I didn't try the shame tactic to make my point more powerful Bob, that's the difference. Good to see you bring up credentials again.... I'm the same person Bob I haven't changed. So if I could change my view before I can and will again. So my wife puts up with the same non intransigent person as before. Of course you only mentioned it to see how argumentative I was..... I call bull on that one Bob. There was more motive than that. Right but when applied to me you suspect intransigence.........
|
|
|
Post by speak on Apr 8, 2021 16:38:55 GMT -5
throughout a lot of human history credentials were at best minimal. things got done by people interested in a subject and they went for it. credentials in one of two subjects doesn't matter all that much if you are too stupid at everything else or can't tie your own shoes.... The human history of credentials. Is that called "histrionics"? Which comes after gastronomics
|
|
|
Post by speak on Apr 8, 2021 16:40:24 GMT -5
Wally and I and others would like to see meaningful leadership in the world. No one should be jealous and belittling of that. Here’s where I see atheists have something in common with theists, theists, whose concept of salvation so denies the bodily resurrection of Christ it lures them into dismissing Gods entire purpose for which He created. Its as though atheists were a secondary affect of the mis-theist. What God would like is for you to be a son or daughter actively engaged with his creation so as to preserve and participate with him. The only time that will happen is in the thousand year reign.
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Apr 9, 2021 10:30:34 GMT -5
To me, the millennium refers to the last two millennium where Christianity acquired its present gravity in political, social, and spiritual terms. Today we’re seeing a desparate, final assault on the church of God before the kingdom of man is restored to the father.
I Corinthians 15:24
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Apr 9, 2021 10:44:20 GMT -5
I already know how dust and spirit (even the Holy Spirit) reside together. In my mom, in my dad. In all my friends and loved ones and I suppose, in all human beings. Lee, Can you explain how you know that "dust and spirit reside together?"
Can you explain how you know they reside in your "mom, dad, friends and loved ones?"
PS: what is your definition of the term "spirit," -what does it mean to you? In my view, the foundation of life, even all creation is God the Holy Spirit. God is supremely understood to be spirit, even if in Christianity we refer to God as expressing himself as The Son and The Holy Spirit, for the way we relate and interact with these principals. The best evidence the human being is a composite of dust and flesh is the richness and complexity of our personality. While I believe all animals are animated by the Holy Spirit, its the distinguishing feature of mankind that he has a brain that is capable of “watching” the interaction between God and the more local features of our bodies, features that can be roughly categorized as our need for security and our desire for pleasure. In some persons, their immediate needs devolve into a maniacal and despotic quest for power as an end in itself. But for most of us, the “sin” of our pursuit of security and pleasure can be summarized as excessive self centeredness, practiced at the expense of ‘other’ -centeredness. Thus mankind uniquely considers his behavior in moral and ethical terms. He habilitates himself, he redirects according to his conscience and the witness of The Lord. Salvation is the appropriate ‘creed’ or foundation of the human being until we “come into our own”. That is our faith, hope, and joy.
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Apr 9, 2021 12:28:51 GMT -5
A third category of our immediate local needs, but no less important, is our longing for meaning. Typically, our search for meaning, like every child’s natural relationship to a loving father and mother, extends from a desire to be loved. While they are often formulated together, our needs of security and desire pale in comparison.
Denial of love can cause confusion and pathos. I’m a fan of Victor Frankl’s insights of the soul.
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Apr 9, 2021 15:57:35 GMT -5
And our spirits, the Holy Spirit returns to the father. What meaning does death have to the Christian?
|
|
magpies39plus
Senior Member
WHY? Does quoting relevant scripture send the 2x2;s into sometimes a nasty response??
Posts: 573
|
Post by magpies39plus on May 3, 2021 2:46:13 GMT -5
What have you all been fighting over "IT"is a simple question the answer yes or no followed by a Biblical reason why you think the way you do. Magpie
|
|
|
Post by intelchips on May 3, 2021 8:51:19 GMT -5
What have you all been fighting over "IT"is a simple question the answer yes or no followed by a Biblical reason why you think the way you do. Magpie Perhaps we haven't got a broad enough vocabulary to sort this problem out. We should try each day to expand our vocabular so todays word is: bellwether
|
|
|
Post by curlywurlysammagee on May 11, 2021 0:48:18 GMT -5
What have you all been fighting over "IT"is a simple question the answer yes or no followed by a Biblical reason why you think the way you do. Magpie Perhaps we haven't got a broad enough vocabulary to sort this problem out. We should try each day to expand our vocabular so todays word is: bellwether Is that an emasculated bell?
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on May 11, 2021 5:13:43 GMT -5
Perhaps we haven't got a broad enough vocabulary to sort this problem out. We should try each day to expand our vocabular so todays word is: bellwether Is that an emasculated bell? good question, curly. A bellwether is a leader or indicator of trends. The term derives from the Middle English bellewether and refers to the practice of placing a bell around the neck of a castrated ram (a wether) leading the flock of sheep.
A shepherd could then note the movements of the flock by hearing the bell, even when the flock was not in sight.
Anyone have any ideas about how the term castrated would fit into how we use the term today?
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on May 11, 2021 14:48:23 GMT -5
Is that an emasculated bell? good question, curly. A bellwether is a leader or indicator of trends. The term derives from the Middle English bellewether and refers to the practice of placing a bell around the neck of a castrated ram (a wether) leading the flock of sheep.
A shepherd could then note the movements of the flock by hearing the bell, even when the flock was not in sight.
Anyone have any ideas about how the term castrated would fit into how we use the term today? Well, the poor ram, rather than being constantly overactive with "his hormones" might more reliably indicate where they all were headed.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2021 16:12:25 GMT -5
I thought because a bellwether is a leader maybe our leaders have no balls.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on May 11, 2021 20:06:44 GMT -5
I thought because a bellwether is a leader maybe our leaders have no balls. Some do, -some don't
Our last one didn't, -all he cared about was himself.
Never saw one in my lifetime who more narcistic and cared only about himself and forget what was best for the country.
But we need to remember that a "bellwether" doesn't necessarily mean a "good leader," -but just tells where herd is & where they are tending to go.
To our sorrow it appears that there a lot of the herd out there which is headed in a very dangerous direction.
|
|
magpies39plus
Senior Member
WHY? Does quoting relevant scripture send the 2x2;s into sometimes a nasty response??
Posts: 573
|
Post by magpies39plus on Jul 25, 2022 0:09:57 GMT -5
1652 replies??? 1 Corinthians 9 v 5-6 "Haven't I (Paul)the right to follow the example of the other Apostles and the Lord's (Jesus) brothers and Peter by taking a Christian wife with me on my travels??? Or are Barnabas and I the only ones to "work" for a living??? One reply from scripture is enough and "All scripture is inspired by God" So why would any one dis-inspire God's inspired Word??? So much of the above rantings and brick throwing to justify ones self ain't very Godly/Christlike/Holy(God's)Spirit guiding to many replies above "true?"--I do not think so? Magpie PS Just pick the question in a new thread.search the word of God,study and cross reference,remembering the Law,Culture and Religiousness of Jesus era,would have lessen the replies by about 1600 MMMMM?
|
|
magpies39plus
Senior Member
WHY? Does quoting relevant scripture send the 2x2;s into sometimes a nasty response??
Posts: 573
|
Post by magpies39plus on Jul 25, 2022 0:18:56 GMT -5
"Opening act 34" ,G'day, In around Jesus time before and after a wife was often called "Sister". Look it up,might open your eyes to those verses.. Regards Magpie.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2023 1:09:12 GMT -5
So were they socialist's?. Was Hitler a capitalist? Hitler represents the far right. Stalin and Mao represent the far left. Hitler killed somewhere in the area of 6 million (non-combatants) Stalin 20 million. Mao over 100 million. And even though far left ideology has caused much more mayhem, we constantly reference Hitler. Even the Beatles used to know that far-left ideology was dangerous: "If you go carrying pictures of General Mao, you aint gonna make it with anyone anyhow" We must avoid both extremes. Watching Bill Maher, who just quoted this exact line from the beatles, 5:30 in. youtu.be/yysKhJ1U-vM
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2023 2:43:09 GMT -5
Hitler represents the far right. Stalin and Mao represent the far left. Hitler killed somewhere in the area of 6 million (non-combatants) Stalin 20 million. Mao over 100 million. And even though far left ideology has caused much more mayhem, we constantly reference Hitler. Even the Beatles used to know that far-left ideology was dangerous: "If you go carrying pictures of General Mao, you aint gonna make it with anyone anyhow" We must avoid both extremes. Watching Bill Maher, who just quoted this exact line from the beatles, 5:30 in. youtu.be/yysKhJ1U-vMNot that big of a fan.... but sometimes he hits the nail on the head...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2023 9:14:51 GMT -5
Watching Bill Maher, who just quoted this exact line from the beatles, 5:30 in. youtu.be/yysKhJ1U-vMNot that big of a fan.... but sometimes he hits the nail on the head... Him and Jon Stewart are two liberals in the media who I have a lot of respect for. They are unafraid to criticize "their side". The crowds reaction when he was criticizing the "woke apologists" was pretty telling- loud cheers and applause from a left leaning crowd. Gives me some hope.
|
|