100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: 10 questions that every intelligent Christian must answer | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
You people are not at all using the word delusion right. Find a new word or quit the discussion. You have no idea how ridiculous you sound. I think funches is hung up on the word... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You people are not at all using the word delusion right. Find a new word or quit the discussion. You have no idea how ridiculous you sound. I think funches is hung up on the word...
I am trying to be diplomatic, shush!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You people are not at all using the word delusion right. Find a new word or quit the discussion. You have no idea how ridiculous you sound. I think funches is hung up on the word...
but yet no one can describe their god without sounding delusional |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You people are not at all using the word delusion right. Find a new word or quit the discussion. You have no idea how ridiculous you sound. I think funches is hung up on the word...
but yet no one can describe their god without sounding delusional Because God is indescribable, and so is LOVE. 
And quite frankly, people who feel God in their lives don't give a rats a$$ if you or anyone thinks they are "delusional."
You are delusional if you think so.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
And quite frankly, people who feel God in their lives don't give a rats a$$ if you or anyone thinks they are "delusional."
 Your right about that JeannieBean
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Because God is indescribable, and so is LOVE.
neither can be described without sounding delusional and/or acting delusional And quite frankly, people who feel God in their lives don't give a rats a$$ if you or anyone thinks they are "delusional."
hummmm...that was the same mentailty at the inquistion just before they proceeded to stick a blade up someone's apse You are delusional if you think so.
maybe if I was claiming there was imaginary beings hovering around me .. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
And quite frankly, people who feel God in their lives don't give a rats a$$ if you or anyone thinks they are "delusional." Your right about that JeannieBean
probably the millions that died in the holy wars would disagree |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
And quite frankly, people who feel God in their lives don't give a rats a$$ if you or anyone thinks they are "delusional." Your right about that JeannieBean
probably the millions that died in the holy wars would disagree No we wouldn't disagree. I died in many holy wars in many of my former lives.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
funches. One of the things that is incumbent upon Christianity is the preservation of the revelation of God's offer to receive the Holy Spirit, through Christ. To do otherwise here is disengenuous. There is a prerequisite which is each man's choice to determine for oneself. God has already determined how the invisible miracle is revealed to the individual. Make you own judgement about whether it is necessary to be apprehended of or not. I testify of the truth that is available to all, not vaingloriously bandy it about. It comes from God on God's terms, not mine, and certainly not yours. Nothing new there. 
...er.."wouldee".. that is the point the video was trying to get around that intelligent people have the delusion that there are imaginary beings around them..you keep bringing up that there are invisible holy spirits and the occurence of invisible miracles which the medical term for this is called "paraniod delusions" ...now explain how you know the holy spirit is there are that invisble miracles are occuring without sounding delusional ... Questions lead to more excuses, funches. the answer is in the act of being apprehended by the Holy Spirit. The better question would be, "why would one want that?"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
And quite frankly, people who feel God in their lives don't give a rats a$$ if you or anyone thinks they are "delusional." Your right about that JeannieBean
probably the millions that died in the holy wars would disagree No we wouldn't disagree. I died in many holy wars in many of my former lives.
so why wouldn't the innocent ones that got caught up in the holy wars of others not disagree or care if those people fighting in those wars are delusional |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am going to go make some popcorn....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
wouldee
on
Mon 05/12/08 02:40 PM
|
|
I am following Noah Webster's definition of delusion which follows that illusion and lucidity are also relevant in discerning the use of the word. oh oh ..once someone comes into a debate asking people to define words or that they don't know the meanings of words that are clearly obvious it's a sign of fear ... so "wouldee" since you are relying on webster to give you definitions then do webster defines god beyond being more than a concept funches. to your first point. Communication is key. Someone offered a different definition of the word you love to use, than the definition that I usa for it. Where you fall in that is inconsequential to how I use the word. To the second point. excellent side note. (Noah) Webster's Dictionary of 1828 is the one I use most when studying the Old English of King James' commission for the transliteration of scripture from the original languages, that he ( King James ) might read it intelligently. Subsequently, he thought it good (pun intended) to have it published and distributed to his court and courtiers. This is an interesting definition of the word, "God". God "As this word and good are written exactly alike in Saxon, it has been inferred that God was named after his goodness. But the coreresponding words in most of the other languages, are not the same, and I believe no instance can can be found of a name given the Supreme Being from the attribute of goodness. It is probably an idea too remote from the rude conceptions of men in early ages. Except the word Jehovah(JHWH), I have found the name of the Supreme Being to be usually taken from his supremacy or power, and to be equivalent to lord or ruler, from some root signifying to press or exert force. Now in the present case, we have evidence that this is the sense of this word, for in Persic goda is rendered dominus, possessor, princeps, as is a derivative of the same word. See Cats. Lex. Col. 231. 1) The Supreme Being ; Jehovah ; the eternal and infinite spirit, the creator, and the sovereign of the universe. 2) A false god ; a heathen diety ; an idol. 3) A prince ; a ruler ; a magistrate or judge ; an angel. "Thou shalt not revile the gods, nor curse the ruler of thy people." Ex. xxii Ps. xcvii [Gods here is a bad translation.] 4) Any person or thing exalted too much in estimation, or deified and honored as the chief good. "Whose god is their belly." Phil. iii. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Well, there you have Noah Webster's exhaustive definition of GOD as published in his work of 1828. The first of its kind of the English language. The standard by which all others are judged, as far as dictionaries themselves are concerned, since that time. Hardcover copies can be had from: Foundation for Americam Chirstian Education. SF, California. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Questions lead to more excuses, funches. it appears so the answer is in the act of being apprehended by the Holy Spirit. see "wouldee" you're still on those imaginary beings ..you're just proving the point of the video ..that intelligent believers try to hide the fact that they may be delusional by maneuvering their belief in such a way that they don't have to justify it by claiming imaginary beings are doing everything and have apprehended their life and then at the same time claim they have "Free Will" The better question would be, "why would one want that?" and the answer would be....insecurity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is an interesting definition of the word, "God". God "As this word and good are written exactly alike in Saxon, it has been inferred that God was named after his goodness. But the coreresponding words in most of the other languages, are not the same, and I believe no instance can can be found of a name given the Supreme Being from the attribute of goodness. It is probably an idea too remote from the rude conceptions of men in early ages. Except the word Jehovah(JHWH), I have found the name of the Supreme Being to be usually taken from his supremacy or power, and to be equivalent to lord or ruler, from some root signifying to press or exert force. Now in the present case, we have evidence that this is the sense of this word, for in Persic goda is rendered dominus, possessor, princeps, as is a derivative of the same word. See Cats. Lex. Col. 231. 1) The Supreme Being ; Jehovah ; the eternal and infinite spirit, the creator, and the sovereign of the universe. 2) A false god ; a heathen diety ; an idol. 3) A prince ; a ruler ; a magistrate or judge ; an angel. "Thou shalt not revile the gods, nor curse the ruler of thy people." Ex. xxii Ps. xcvii [Gods here is a bad translation.] 4) Any person or thing exalted too much in estimation, or deified and honored as the chief good. "Whose god is their belly." Phil. iii. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Well, there you have Noah Webster's exhaustive definition of GOD as published in his work of 1828. The first of its kind of the English language. The standard by which all others are judged, as far as dictionaries themselves are concerned, since that time. Hardcover copies can be had from: Foundation for Americam Chirstian Education. SF, California. wow so "wouldee" didn't you notice that Webster didn't describe or endorse god as being the creator of the universe ..the description in webster didn't describe god as being anything more than a mere concept ...I guess webster is not delusional ... and you mean that the foundation for american christian education is selling hard copies of this? ...hummmm not a good sign ...or perhaps it is ... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
wouldee
on
Mon 05/12/08 03:17 PM
|
|
As you have said, it appears so that more questions lead to more excuses.
Insecurity is an excuse for not contemplating the apprehension of God's offering to man, which is to "whosoever will." Free will is a doctrine in debate with predestination as a doctrine of protestant apologetics which are more concerned with establishing advantage and privilege to the authority over the Church of Jesus Chirst than anything else. Both doctrinal arguments are distractions from the message that is pertinent to Jesus' teachings. Both are nothing more than excuses as well for sitting in judgement of man for God, which is a foolish redundancy. The one accord of the Holy Spirit is the how Jesus statement of " I am the way and the truth and the life" is best left to his care andnurturing of his fellow worshippers of His Father, the Creator.(our adopted Father, in Christ) We are begotten of a lively hope rendered real by His presence, that being the presence of the Holy Spirit, in our being. He leads his Church through the Holy Spirit, not through the machinations and apologetics of excuses for not partaking of Him. It is to the doer of the Word, that has heard and acted upon the Word. No excuses tolerated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No excuses tolerated. it's good that you say that "wouldee" now will you finally proceed to describe god without sounding delusional? ..either you can or you can't ...remember ..like you said.... no excuses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
MorningSong
on
Mon 05/12/08 04:23 PM
|
|
Funches..what if you were to say, " the Air sure feels cool today"....
and lets say someone named Joe,for instance, were to walk up to you and say," you must be delusional, Funches ...why ,I don't SEE any Air "..... And Joe would further say to you ," PROVE to me there is Air, and I will believe ". And you would say, " I can sometimes feel the Air blowing...and when I breathe, it fills my lungs and sustains life in me "..... and Joe would say," see...told you that you are delusional , cause you STILL can't prove Air exists... just because you sometimes feel the Air blowing..or because you breathe it, doesn't prove nothing....cause you and no one else can SEE any Air ".... The fact that you cannot see Air.... would that make you delusional, Funches? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No excuses tolerated. it's good that you say that "wouldee" now will you finally proceed to describe god without sounding delusional? ..either you can or you can't ...remember ..like you said.... no excuses you're in the wrong thread for that
any other day 
But I was the first one to answer your question when you first got here and couldn't argue with that one. Look it up. 
peace. out
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am going to go make some popcorn....  Have any white cheddar cheese to go on it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Funches..what if you were to say, " the Air sure feels cool today".... and lets say someone named Joe,for instance, were to walk up to you and say," you must be delusional, Funches ...why ,I don't SEE any Air "..... And Joe would further say to you ," PROVE to me there is Air, and I will believe ". ahhh "MorningSong" ..that senerio is to easy...I would just say to joe to hold his breathe for atleast 10 minutes |
|
|
|
|
