Sufficiency of Scripture

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

2 hours ago, mererdog said:

If I say my wife is pretty, I have said nothing about how anyone else looks. If I dont tell your wife she is pretty, it is likely because I don't think she cares what I think.

 

 

And if you tell my wife that she's going to burn in Hell -- again, nobody will care.  But it's still irritating.     

[mererdog]

2 hours ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

 But it's still irritating.

Personally, I don't like yodeling. Some people enjoy it. 

[cuchulain]

18 hours ago, mererdog said:

If I say my wife is pretty, I have said nothing about how anyone else looks. If I dont tell your wife she is pretty, it is likely because I don't think she cares what I think.

if you say your wife is pretty, but mine is ugly...that would be a closer analogy i think.  and its an attack personally, just as this subject started with the preacher(who should preach in the section for it anyway) stating we were the blind and ignorant.  we responded.  i think turnabout is fair...or maybe we should just hit that report post at the onset instead of having a civilized discussion on why we think hes wrong to say something so sweeping about everyone elses beliefs.  

but a good test for me is when he can irritate Rabbi...

 

[mieshec]

OK....i said this from the beginning....This is my canvas.....i am an artist....i am a man of God.....my discussion was not meant to offend or label anyone reading its content....if you dont like what is written.....dont read it......but instead you viciously attack my Christianity........reply's were based on an assumption i was attacking your beliefs.....I said nothing wrong.....I was apologetic on more than one occasion.....but its not myself and my Christianity that's on trial here....its making truthful statements which offends your way of thinking.....it answering the call of authenticity.....and you cannot give me an answer based on what you believe....you talk in circles......without an approach to an intelligent answer.....just a continuing barrage of questions without an intelligent answer.....the burden of proof i gave was supporting my beliefs....but you provided nothing but a continues barrage of unanswered questions intended to breakdown and dismantle the way i believe.....IT DOSNT WORK....I said.....its only ignorance if you cant understand a 2000 year legacy.....when some of the top minds in science and archaeology......sociology....have tried for years to find that one piece of evidence that makes scripture null and void.....Im not dissuaded by your threats.....REPORT MY POST....i dont care....Ive said nothing wrong.....but the reply's attacked myself and my Christianity...

[cuchulain]

2 hours ago, mieshec said:

OK....i said this from the beginning....This is my canvas.....i am an artist....i am a man of God.....my discussion was not meant to offend or label anyone reading its content....if you dont like what is written.....dont read it......but instead you viciously attack my Christianity........reply's were based on an assumption i was attacking your beliefs.....I said nothing wrong.....I was apologetic on more than one occasion.....but its not myself and my Christianity that's on trial here....its making truthful statements which offends your way of thinking.....it answering the call of authenticity.....and you cannot give me an answer based on what you believe....you talk in circles......without an approach to an intelligent answer.....just a continuing barrage of questions without an intelligent answer.....the burden of proof i gave was supporting my beliefs....but you provided nothing but a continues barrage of unanswered questions intended to breakdown and dismantle the way i believe.....IT DOSNT WORK....I said.....its only ignorance if you cant understand a 2000 year legacy.....when some of the top minds in science and archaeology......sociology....have tried for years to find that one piece of evidence that makes scripture null and void.....Im not dissuaded by your threats.....REPORT MY POST....i dont care....Ive said nothing wrong.....but the reply's attacked myself and my Christianity...

Point to where I attacked you.  

 

You can state from the beginning that you are not attacking...however, when you say that Atheists are blind, and ignorant, and you have the truth while we do not...THAT IS AN ATTACK.  It doesn't matter if you say it's not.  I could tell someone I am not attacking them and then slap them, but it wouldn't be a truthful statement now would it?

 

And...if you reread my response to where you ask for proof, I stated quite clearly that there are MYRIAD museums, dinosaur bones, and other archaeological pieces that coincide with scientific discoveries(that being as close to belief as I get).

[cuchulain]

Better proof that science works...you are using a computer created through scientific principles utilizing scientific principles in order to transmit information.

[mererdog]

6 hours ago, cuchulain said:

if you say your wife is pretty, but mine is ugly...that would be a closer analogy i think. 

If that is what you think, you did not understand the analogy. Probably my fault. Let me try to be more direct-

If I say that someone is engaging in personal attacks, that in no way implies that anyone else is not engaging in personal atracks. If I don't point out when someone engages in personal attacks, it is likely because I don't think doing so will have the effect of deescalating the situation. 

[RabbiO]

Mindful of my role as a member of this community and mindful of my responsibility as a mentor I have been wrestling with the right words to use to respond to the OP - words that would reach the OP and would not be seen as hurtful and uncharitable. I'm not sure those words exist, but the path these threads have been following demand I say something.

 

Shabbat is approaching and, again, there is the expectation that I will be in the synagogue for services, so again I ask your indulgence until the end of the Sabbath.

 

L'shalom.

[mieshec]

....SEE......Their you go again.....you are saying nothing intelligent...I HAVE SAID NOTHING ABOUT ATHEISTS BEING BLIND AND IGNORANT....in any of my discussions have i ever mentioned that....NO........

 

[cuchulain]

On ‎4‎/‎7‎/‎2018 at 5:25 PM, mieshec said:

its just ignorance if you dont see truth in God

This is where you say it is ignorance...see right there?  That was you second or third post in this topic, and it wasn't that hard to find.  I am not technologically inclined enough to multiquote where you also said where we are blind or cannot see or whatever, so I may...MAY...feel up to looking that up as well and highlighting that lie as well.

[cuchulain]

On ‎4‎/‎7‎/‎2018 at 7:15 PM, mieshec said:

I apologize.....i just get frustrated.....I see things differently....and my eyes are open....i just dont understand how to make people see with their own spirit....and not the false image they see evryday....because its the most easy way to come to the throne of God.......just believe

This is ONE example...though not the one I was thinking of, where you were saying other people do not see(or are blind) and that YOUR eyes are open, presupposing of course that others' with different beliefs or ideas are closed, or blind.

[cuchulain]

On ‎4‎/‎10‎/‎2018 at 5:17 PM, mieshec said:

Believe in what???.....no hopes......no dreams.....no fairy tales........    NO LOONEY TOONS....

This is where you say we believe in "Nothing" that is, we have no hopes, no dreams, no fairy tales...and our beliefs are looney toons.  That's something I found insulting.  Again, I don't know how to multiquote, so I apologize for the splitting of all these responses.

[cuchulain]

On ‎4‎/‎10‎/‎2018 at 9:27 PM, mieshec said:

.......and you certainly have no credentials verifying your capable of giving me an educated answer

This is where you assume we don't have the credentials to give you an educated answer, or in other words...we just aren't smart enough to discuss it with you.  Again, apologies on the multiple posts, don't know how to multiquote, and I think too many posts is annoying at least in so far as others dismissing my ideas because I am "not educated enough"...so I will just leave it here.

Edited April 14, 2018 by cuchulain

[cuchulain]

23 hours ago, mererdog said:

If that is what you think, you did not understand the analogy. Probably my fault. Let me try to be more direct-

If I say that someone is engaging in personal attacks, that in no way implies that anyone else is not engaging in personal atracks. If I don't point out when someone engages in personal attacks, it is likely because I don't think doing so will have the effect of deescalating the situation. 

I can understand that, thank you.  The problem here is this subject rightfully belongs in the pulpit, where response is not allowed.  I believe the person who began this subject was preaching, and that should go there.  BUT...when I recommended that to someone in the past, they threw fits telling me I was trying to silence them.  This section is able to be replied to for a reason.  Using logic, I would hazard that the reason is for discussion of beliefs in matters of philosophy and theory.  If a person posts a topic here, there are several factors in play.  First, they have an account here and agreed to terms of service.  Those terms say(paraphrasing here) that a person shouldn't attack other people directly, and shouldn't run down their beliefs or ideas.  I have crossed that line on occasion, but I at least attempt not to do so.  Second, if they post here, they should understand the make up of the board is various.  There are many people here from many different beliefs and ideas and philosophies.  In other words, they aught to try to moderate what they say about those other beliefs, etc... Third, this particular area is a discussion area and able to be replied to.  So, some of those other beliefs that disagree with the posters, they are going to see this topic and they MIGHT have input that seems less than flattering because it doesn't agree with what they are saying.  I don't know why people think disagreement is attack, sometimes it's just polite discussion and attempts to sway the person to their way of thinking and any other number of things, but most people think if I disagree with their ideology I am attacking them.  I asked this particular person to point out my attack...AND THEY FAIL TO DO SO.  That's because it doesn't exist.  

So what we have is this.  The person who posted this topic, mieshek(for some reason that name just doesn't stick in my mind and I have to look back, maybe it's just because they are newer here or maybe its strangely phrased or something, I apologize), is a preacher.  He thinks he has found THE truth, the only truth...and all others are simply wrong.  That's his right.  He is free to speak however he wants, within those terms of service.  I even stated early on that I don't think he should apologize for stating things that he believes to be true, so long as he isn't crossing that line and attacking someone else.  

But he does.  He does the passive aggressive thing and says that he doesn't, or puts a disclaimer on his statements saying if we don't like what he says we shouldn't read it(now here's a conundrum for you, how do we know what he says UNLESS WE READ IT!!!)  But I digress...this is all good reason for why he should post in the appropriate area, namely the Pulpit...and he knows about the pulpit.  He has responded in other areas of the forum where I tried to point another member in that direction, and he saw that post.  Yet he chooses to post here.  That's his prerogative.  It's also my prerogative to respond, whether he likes what I have to say or not.  

 

And again...I ask.  Since there seems to be some indication that I am attacking miechek...please point out where!!!!!!  If not...quit saying so.

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

4 hours ago, cuchulain said:

I can understand that, thank you.  The problem here is this subject rightfully belongs in the pulpit, where response is not allowed.  I believe the person who began this subject was preaching, and that should go there.  BUT...when I recommended that to someone in the past, they threw fits telling me I was trying to silence them.  This section is able to be replied to for a reason.  Using logic, I would hazard that the reason is for discussion of beliefs in matters of philosophy and theory.  If a person posts a topic here, there are several factors in play.  First, they have an account here and agreed to terms of service.  Those terms say(paraphrasing here) that a person shouldn't attack other people directly, and shouldn't run down their beliefs or ideas.  I have crossed that line on occasion, but I at least attempt not to do so.  Second, if they post here, they should understand the make up of the board is various.  There are many people here from many different beliefs and ideas and philosophies.  In other words, they aught to try to moderate what they say about those other beliefs, etc... Third, this particular area is a discussion area and able to be replied to.  So, some of those other beliefs that disagree with the posters, they are going to see this topic and they MIGHT have input that seems less than flattering because it doesn't agree with what they are saying.  I don't know why people think disagreement is attack, sometimes it's just polite discussion and attempts to sway the person to their way of thinking and any other number of things, but most people think if I disagree with their ideology I am attacking them.  I asked this particular person to point out my attack...AND THEY FAIL TO DO SO.  That's because it doesn't exist.  

So what we have is this.  The person who posted this topic, mieshek(for some reason that name just doesn't stick in my mind and I have to look back, maybe it's just because they are newer here or maybe its strangely phrased or something, I apologize), is a preacher.  He thinks he has found THE truth, the only truth...and all others are simply wrong.  That's his right.  He is free to speak however he wants, within those terms of service.  I even stated early on that I don't think he should apologize for stating things that he believes to be true, so long as he isn't crossing that line and attacking someone else.  

But he does.  He does the passive aggressive thing and says that he doesn't, or puts a disclaimer on his statements saying if we don't like what he says we shouldn't read it(now here's a conundrum for you, how do we know what he says UNLESS WE READ IT!!!)  But I digress...this is all good reason for why he should post in the appropriate area, namely the Pulpit...and he knows about the pulpit.  He has responded in other areas of the forum where I tried to point another member in that direction, and he saw that post.  Yet he chooses to post here.  That's his prerogative.  It's also my prerogative to respond, whether he likes what I have to say or not.  

 

And again...I ask.  Since there seems to be some indication that I am attacking miechek...please point out where!!!!!!  If not...quit saying so.

 

 

It took me a while to see the situation for what it is.

 

Pretend for a moment that we  -- you and I -- have wandered onto a children's playground.  We have been confronted by a large boy.  At first, you think he's an adult.  You quickly discover that -- no.  This is a large child.  At that, not a very bright child.  He tries to intimidate us.  He insists that his invisible friend will take us to his invisible dungeon, where he will torture us forever and ever.  We should be afraid of his invisible friend.  We should be in terror.

 

The silly child goes on.  He has proof of everything.  He has proof that his friend is real.  He has proof that we should be afraid of his friend -- and if we are too stupid to see -- then we're just a couple of big doody head grownups.  Of course, he talks big about his proof.  Of course, there is no proof.  Of course, he will insist that he has not insulted us.  Only told us the truth.

 

This boy is damaged.  There is nothing to gain here.  No reason to listen to his rants.  I think we should do the adult thing and walk away.  After we walk away, his tantrum will follow. He will say that he has won.  I see nothing to be gained by sticking around here.

 

My friend, I think we both need the company of adults.  Shall we push on?  

 

Oh, if I get pushed out over this--feel free to use my e-mail.  JonathanLobl at Yahoo dot com  

 

I'm also on Face Book.

 

 

 

 

Edited April 14, 2018 by Jonathan H. B. Lobl

[cuchulain]

25 minutes ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

 

 

It took me a while to see the situation for what it is.

 

Pretend for a moment that we  -- you and I -- have wandered onto a children's playground.  We have been confronted by a large boy.  At first, you think he's an adult.  You quickly discover that -- no.  This is a large child.  At that, not a very bright child.  He tries to intimidate us.  He insists that his invisible friend will take us to his invisible dungeon, where he will torture us forever and ever.  We should be afraid of his invisible friend.  We should be in terror.

 

The silly child goes on.  He has proof of everything.  He has proof that his friend is real.  He has proof that we should be afraid of his friend -- and if we are too stupid to see -- then we're just a couple of big doody head grownups.  Of course, he talks big about his proof.  Of course, there is no proof.  Of course, he will insist that he has not insulted us.  Only told us the truth.

 

This boy is damaged.  There is nothing to gain here.  No reason to listen to his rants.  I think we should do the adult thing and walk away.  After we walk away, his tantrum will follow. He will say that he has won.  I see nothing to be gained by sticking around here.

 

My friend, I think we both need the company of adults.  Shall we push on?  

 

Oh, if I get pushed out over this--feel free to use my e-mail.  JonathanLobl at Yahoo dot com  

 

I'm also on Face Book.

 

 

 

 

i was coming to that conclusion albeit much slower.  i thank you for the timely wake up call.  if push comes to shove i will use the email, though i hope that doesn't happen.

[Geordon]

20 hours ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

This boy is damaged.  There is nothing to gain here.  No reason to listen to his rants.  I think we should do the adult thing and walk away.  After we walk away, his tantrum will follow. He will say that he has won.  I see nothing to be gained by sticking around here.

 

My friend, I think we both need the company of adults.  Shall we push on?  

 

 

19 hours ago, cuchulain said:

i was coming to that conclusion albeit much slower.  i thank you for the timely wake up call.  if push comes to shove i will use the email, though i hope that doesn't happen.

 

I came to the same conclusion and I have learned how the "block/ignore" function works here.  

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

35 minutes ago, Geordon said:

 

 

I came to the same conclusion and I have learned how the "block/ignore" function works here.  

 

I understand.  Now and then, I remember the words of W. C. Fields.  "Cease your equivocations!  Declare yourself!"  Of course, he was being ironic.  

[Geordon]

34 minutes ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

Now and then, I remember the words of W. C. Fields.  "Cease your equivocations!  Declare yourself!"  Of course, he was being ironic.  

 

Hipsterish irony asside, the world would be much easier if people would speak directly, rather than hiding in euphemism, weasel words, and couched references.  Many people do not understand how to deal with someone who speaks plainly and directly.

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

2 hours ago, Geordon said:

 

Hipsterish irony asside, the world would be much easier if people would speak directly, rather than hiding in euphemism, weasel words, and couched references.  Many people do not understand how to deal with someone who speaks plainly and directly.

 

 

We still need tact and civility.  Rudeness tends to come off as disgusting.  Sometimes, I need to be blunt.