Key

Yah, I enjoyed that trilogy. Enjoyed them more at home with captions and the sound turned off. Hate hearing Keanu.

Sure, as per your example, not all laws are negotiable or contestable. But say your speeding was captured by a camera. That has been contested before, and won from time to time. Even radar guns have been contested, and turned over. So while the posted limit never changed, other issues make it negotiable, so to speak. Challenges can make laws debatable. Btw, my comment was in reference to your opening statement, not your example.

Depends on if you take the blue pill, or the red one.

False. Unless you're looking at it from space, you know the earth looks flat, not spherical. Know is subjective to perspective.

Not really. This is why cases are often revisited, as "interpretations" do change from time to time. So even what seems so black and white at one time either fades or darkens to grey another time.

Often people can have their thinking in black and white, then learn more about all the grey areas and how to deal with them when they actually go about experiencing their chosen profession or life. Cops, for example, can become jaded in their view due to their experiences, but every once in awhile...something different surprises them. Drawing lines can trip folks up, but only if they can't accept and adapt any grey matters that come up.

Society often places a higher or different standard on clergy than upon other professions. So, yes, it can have hard tasks. The rewards for serving others can also be great, though. Glad you're enjoying your learning. Blessings and peace upon your journey.

It has been said by someone a long time ago, but I don't remember who, "if you can't find happiness in the little things, you will always find misery in the big things." Now, I'm not too sure about the misery with big things part, but I do find that things are bearable when you can find something to make you smile or smirk just a little bit. Maybe that is a small murmur of contentment, or promise of not everything seeming bleak? In any case, to me, it seems easier to obtain happiness or contentment with someone, rather than alone.

It can be argued (and has been in another thread) that one doesn't need a God to know right from wrong anymore than they need one to know what feels good or bad. Which, by the way, can also be an argument for the question that came after. As for the monkeys, simply put, not all species had evolved, obviously.

Sorry to confuse you. I was merely fleshing out my thoughts on the statements as they were made. 1. Belief is necessary for knowing something is true. Knowing is results that have been proven. Because one may have belief without results to prove it, the statement is false. 2. Knowledge presupposes belief. Depends on which belief. The one that uses proven results to find an end result, or the one that still needs to be tested. Still confused? Then I'm really not able to articulate any better. Sorry.

Collective is more reliant on many separate variables, whereas an individual has only the self in regards to obtaining contentment. If you are inquiring about fear, you are looking at a variable or motivator. Variables or motivators instill an action or reaction differently to an individual than it would a collective. An example: fear would only either cause a collective to flee, confront, or to disperse to do both. An individual would only have fight or flight. In the greater picture, I might well be wrong. Just further proof that the issue of contentment isn't simple.

1. False. Example: faith is belief without facts to back it up. One can believe in something until evidence is provided to debunk it. Thus, knowing isn't really part of the equation until it supports belief if it is true by investigation. Belief can therefore be false without knowing. 2. Belief may be the basis for which knowledge is obtained. Knowledge only comes before belief in the way tools are constructed to test it. Knowledge may be the results or the vehicle of discovery then. We wouldn't know much of what we do, if it weren't for someone believing it could be tested to find truth. Just my 2%.

Avoid complications? A little difficult with the position of "I don't know".

I see what you're saying. Character, priorities and etc. greatly influence our situations and goals, and therefore our destinations, too. So, while circumstances may be identical, the goal may rarely be. Thus, it still falls that the roadblock is the only common denominator. At least in my view.

Interesting quandary. However, it could also be viewed that those obstacles, or roadblocks, are just strengths towards contentment that we don't realize at the time. Think of it...when one comes to a roadblock in the path of their destination, one could quit the journey, or find a way around it and continue on. That fork in the road, as you will, is about all we have in common with EVERYONE, as situations, goals, or destinations may differ from one person to the next.

Far more helpful than I was, Rev Calli.

You may perform all functions pertaining to your faith for your church or ministry, as long as it is legal according to the law of the land, as is indicated by the tenet of the ULC, "Do that which is right". There is helpful reference material available in the ULC bookstore. You'll find a link at the bottom of the forum page that lists all the threads. Some ministers have also found useful resources at a local library. Can't say for sure if that would be true of all libraries, though. Perhaps you may even find something by researching online, too. The bookstore is easiest for me. Might require more time for you to wait due to postal service and your distance.

Yes, that was quite helpful. Thanks.

Not everyone here is a lawyer, either. So, to determine what is legal in your location is best to consult with one in your area who knows, or an official that records such events. As for title, you are allowed to use whatever you deem is appropriate to your ministry or religion.

Had to break it to you, my friend, but nobody ever mastered philosophy. Folks have gotten degrees in it, yes, but it isn't limited by that and therefore isn't ever truly mastered. There are thoughts that have been considered before, but there haven't been considered the thoughts that have yet to come.

Eh, could be worse. Could be trying to join some Fundamental Anarchist group, but you never know when and where the meetings are.

One might think so. But also, as you pointed out, there are those who might not think so. It has been suggested in another thread that the reason for differing interpretations of scripture is that it is revealed to the person who is willing to believe it by the Holy Spirit, whereas others are blind to the true meaning. Problem I feel with this is how do others know if the truth has really been revealed to someone and that person, (or persons, as there may be accomplices, no?), is really just perpetrating a scam?

Yes, and still a judgement made.

This is true. I know of no Native American stories of spiritual damnation. Rather, if spirits were malcontent or mischievous, bad things happened to the living. But, as I said I have no knowledge of any, doesn't mean there aren't any.

If anything for your fellow students to learn, it is the concept of open thought to consider very different points of view to arrive at a conclusion or possible avenues to one. Even while a philosophers view may be argued, oftentimes their view does hold a ring of truth to them which makes them interesting to ponder. I find this valuable to understand in debate and teamwork. So, kudos to you on your discovery of this.