Paranormal Activity??

[eHuman]

Wow... that sure sounds spiritual... all nice and tidy and wrapped with a bow. But again, you imply that if someone doesn't believe the way you do, then they are either knowingly defaming the truth (as you see it) or ignorant... "following their own Gnosis".

What intrigues me is that you give no mention of relationship. No mention of having relationship with God and allowing the Holy Spirit to lead you into Truth. No mention of walking in relationship, allowing ourselves to be ministered to by the Holy Spirit.

Truth doesn't come from studying the Bible. Innumerable folks have studied the Bible with little or no revelation. Truth comes from the Holy Spirit as we seek relationship with God. A lot of that comes from studying the Bible. Jesus came so that the Word would be fulfilled and "written on our hearts". But we treat the Bible as if it is our source of revelation. Perhaps we are close to worshiping the creation rather than the creator.

What you quoted was just my take on what gnosis is, not that you or anyone else has it.
Your whole second paragraph, and the first half of the third paragraph I agree with wholeheartedly, but I summed that up (lol)so as not to write a book like I typically end up doing, with the phrase:

A desire to know and follow the truth, coupled with being saturated in Gods word through self, group, AND corporate study is necessary to battle it. Let's not leave out God here.

I actually deleted what I started to write there (and replaced it with the bolded sentence) because while what you pointed out was so true, I would have invariably tangented too long on it.

While we do not worship the Bible, we revere it as Holy and as the very word of God. We want more of God (as is proper) but have we fully examined what He has already spoken?

I had a friend who "only" followed what the Spirit gave him. While he knew much about the Bible he got hung up on two things.
1. We are not under the Law and more (the whole of the Bible is law by him).
2.Matt 4:4 "It is written, 'MAN SHALL NOT LIVE ON BREAD ALONE, BUT ON EVERY WORD THAT PROCEEDS OUT OF THE MOUTH OF GOD.'" Rhema vs Logos.
The spoken vs the written.

He deemed that the need to study the written word was superseded by the command to listen to the voice of God.

In the end, he had a "thing" with Jesus (because He understood that walking right was impossible for us) so he smoked dope while praising the Lord (Claimed he never felt closer to God than when cranking up praise music and smoking a fatty). He would verbally attack anyone who would mention in ear shot - anything that he didn't agree with including full on sailor mouth cussing. He punched a hole through the pastors office door during a counseling session. He did not have a job or a home, but managed to be taken in and taken care of for 2 years by many of us in the congregation. At a certain point because of legal issues (that the church dropped) and poor witness in front of impressionable teens, the pastor asked him to leave. He outlined what needed to change so that he could be welcomed back. The pastor would have had to dodge a black eye if it were not for someone paying attention standing close enough by expecting it catch the arm on the way out.

Years later now he has come so far from that place and has apologized in tears for his actions.

Without the written word of God to compare to what we think is right, how can we be sure?

Truth not coming from studying the Bible? If you don't confirm the truth that you come by way of the Spirit by seeing it in the Bible than how do you know that the voice of reason that you hear is God's?

Acts 17:11
Now these (the Berean's) were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so.


That's all that I attempted to point out early on is that although the Bible does not come out and say "Beware of ghosts, they are the devil!", it has alot to say about the topic. I don't think that you have come across all that the Bible has to say about it.

If you are concluding that it is healthy to have an intimate interest in ghosts:
"Because the Bible doesn't say anything about it", I would urge you to study more.
If, "Because I'm waiting on the Holy Spirit to tell me it's not cool", I would urge you to see what He has already said.

Filter these last few statements through "who you know God to be".
1. Ghosts exist, they've been seen throughout History and they are eluded to in the Bible.
2. If a Christian is strong, no ghostly experience will cause him to waver in any way.
3. If a Christian is weak, or immature, or for the non Christian, many are drawn to "understand better" by seeking additional wisdom through mediums, séances, Ouija boards, paranormal investigators and the list goes on.

They cause fear in some. Many claim that they or their children or pets have been actually harmed or an attempt has been made. Some that their property has been broken.

Just mull over what you know. Is is good and from God?
Don't get me wrong, all things are lawful to me but not all is profitable to me.

Darn it a book again.

 

[HyOnLyph]

While we do not worship the Bible, we revere it as Holy and as the very word of God. We want more of God (as is proper) but have we fully examined what He has already spoken?

I have run into many who are so insecure in their relationship with God that they couldn't fathom the possibility of anyone living a Christian life without the Bible. I pointed out that this would exclude all of the the first century church in it's entirety if it were so. I don't know the history of the New Testament well enough to say what year the NT Bible began to emerge... If I remember correctly somewhere around 180 AD.

Without the written word of God to compare to what we think is right, how can we be sure?

I think that might be the point. Maybe we are not meant to be sure apart from "knowing Christ". Being "sure" of our position has resulted in supposedly irreconcileable oppositions. All in the name of God over what appears to be silly arguements. Perhaps it's supposed to be messy. Relationships are messy. We know that Jesus gave us two commandments. And within those two actually three are mentioned. Love God and Love your neighbor as yourself. (His inference is that we should love ourself too.... in a healthy way of course). What is there apart from that?

I suspect your friend would have been fine, if he had only remembered those commandments. Instead, it sounds like he chose to defend his position and theology. That's failure to follow the "love yourself" part as well as the "love your neighbor" part. Insecurity in one's relationship w/ God leads to self-defense of one's position in theology.

The Bible tells us what God's Word is. It is the person of Jesus Christ. It isn't words on paper just because it's written. One can get along fine without the written words as long as they have relationship with Christ. But one cannot get along with the written word without Christ.

Truth not coming from studying the Bible? If you don't confirm the truth that you come by way of the Spirit by seeing it in the Bible than how do you know that the voice of reason that you hear is God's?

It's written on your heart. Christ's death and resurrection was the fulfillment of that. We can compare what we believe all day long to scripture. And we can twist all of the words in the Bible to justify our beliefs. But ultimately one cannot escape the Word of God that is written in their heart. They can ignore it, deny it and stuff it. But they can't escape it.

Acts 17:11 Now these (the Berean's) were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so.

I'm not saying that studying the Bible isn't noble. Only that the Bible isn't to be worshipped as something MORE noble than relationship with God. And I think it would be pretty hard to deny that there are huge numbers of people that put the Bible and their theolgy above their relationship with their God.

If you are concluding that it is healthy to have an intimate interest in ghosts.

I've never said that and never would. For you to conclude or imply such a thing would be great error.

I would no more state that it was healthy to have intimate interest in ghosts than I would state that it was healthy to have intimate interests in angels or anything else .... TV for that matter.

If "many are drawn to understand better by seeking additional wisdom through mediums, seances etc etc..." then they err in seeking wisdom where there is none. But even their failure is an opportunity to return to relationship with the Lord.

I'll repeat....
"In it's simplest ... my point is ... Lots of things are possible. It isn't mandatory that we know (absolutely) or judge (absolutely). AND... we don't need to be afraid.

I don't believe in instilling fear in people in order to get them to comply to my personal beliefs or theology. I also don't condone sticking your hand in the fire to see if it's hot. I think it is far more appropriate to present beliefs and possibilities and let the Holy Spirit reveal Truth. I certainly don't feel compelled (most of the time) to take a position as truth when there is not absolute position to be taken.

edited... how's that for a book???

 

[lmrasch]

The Bible tells us what God's Word is. It is the person of Jesus Christ. It isn't words on paper just because it's written. One can get along fine without the written words as long as they have relationship with Christ. But one cannot get along with the written word without Christ.

It's written on your heart. Christ's death and resurrection was the fulfillment of that. We can compare what we believe all day long to scripture. And we can twist all of the words in the Bible to justify our beliefs. But ultimately one cannot escape the Word of God that is written in their heart. They can ignore it, deny it and stuff it. But they can't escape it.

^^^^ +1 ^^^^Romans 2
12) All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law. 13) For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God's sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous. 14) (Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law, 15) since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them.) 16) This will take place on the day when God will judge men's secrets through Jesus Christ, as my gospel declares.

Great discussion folks, I love the spirit of a good debate without shredding each other...kudos .

 

[eHuman]

Yay for books!

Even at times that there are lots of possibilities, through careful examination there are often less valid ones to choose from than we first thought.

I guess part of my take on everything is that nothing is by accident or without purpose.

We're just at different understandings on the ghost thing. You've not seen enough to convince you yet that it may be an issue, and I believe that I have.

Relationship. That's a whole 'nother topic and is what drives and motivates and excites me to talk about the things of God.

 

[eHuman]

Imrasch, I'm not talking losing/gaining salvation or security. Just discussing the will of God. We all fall short. But Romans 8:1.

Salvation by faith through belief in Christ. But now that we are here, "let's move foreward". It's kinda from that stance that I debate, not that anything ghostly would cause us to lose any standing in Christ.

 

[lmrasch]

Imrasch, I'm not talking losing/gaining salvation or security. Just discussing the will of God. We all fall short. But Romans 8:1.

Salvation by faith through belief in Christ. But now that we are here, "let's move foreward". It's kinda from that stance that I debate, not that anything ghostly would cause us to lose any standing in Christ.

Haha...no trouble ehuman, I didn't take it that way I can totally see where you both are coming from, my mantra is and always will be, "Christ and Him crucified"...we can debate until we're blue in the face about a myriad of things in the bible. As long as those debates don't change the salvation message I'm along for the ride . Although I'm not sure how much these debates further the kingdom, the study alone is driving us deeper to seek the face of God, that's gotta be worth something, lol!...Heck, Paul and Peter had a skiff...they still loved each other and worked together for the same goal...

BTW...I am (a) Rasch, L M Rasch

 

[eHuman]

LOL..agreed but that doesn't help us change the neglectful attitude of the masses.

I know it is disheartening for you as a pastor, to prepare for 10-20 hours for every one hour preached; To see not many there, not many interested, some distracted, one sleeping, others playing, some interupting...

To be honest I don't know what the answer is as far as what we as individuals can do to motivate others to the passion and fire that we feel. I didn't have it until the day God gave it to me. I went from 0 to 1000 over night. But there were many that sewed seeds and prayer into my account long before.

We just have to keep going through the motions "as if we could" motivate, encourage, and exhort one another to passion and fire. God will cause it in some and He will use some of what we speak to do it.

Sometimes the Spirit is just there anointing the teaching and moving many hearts at once.
Sadly sometimes there are those who through wisdom of words, clever speach and sophistry get the same appearance of a result, but it is not the same.

 

[Southern Gent]

I know it is disheartening for you as a pastor, to prepare for 10-20 hours for every one hour preached; To see not many there, not many interested, some distracted, one sleeping, others playing, some interupting...

To be honest I don't know what the answer is as far as what we as individuals can do to motivate others to the passion and fire that we feel. I didn't have it until the day God gave it to me. I went from 0 to 1000 over night. But there were many that sewed seeds and prayer into my account long before.

We just have to keep going through the motions "as if we could" motivate, encourage, and exhort one another to passion and fire. God will cause it in some and He will use some of what we speak to do it.

Sometimes the Spirit is just there anointing the teaching and moving many hearts at once.
Sadly sometimes there are those who through wisdom of words, clever speach and sophistry get the same appearance of a result, but it is not the same.

I think the best word to describe it is "rollercoaster".....and the key is you sought to be...everyone is too busy with becoming than being..so no one seeks to be.

 

[eHuman]

Try not, do yes!

Yoda

 

[HyOnLyph]

.......

I guess part of my take on everything is that nothing is by accident or without purpose.

We're just at different understandings on the ghost thing. You've not seen enough to convince you yet that it may be an issue, and I believe that I have.

Hmmm. I agree whole heartedly with your statement and don't see how any of our conversation would lead you to think other wise.

But this is what really intrigues me.... you assume that I haven't "seen enough to convince me"???? ...to cause to me to believe like you. That supposes that if only I were more experienced in my walk with Christ.... If only I were more "mature" (like you) I would believe like you! Are you serious? See Enough what? Believe what? I'm sure you concider yourself very educated and knowlegeable. And I'm sure you are very safe in your theology.. But ... Don't you think it's feasible that two brothers in the Lord can have a discussion about a particular issue without one being "less" than the other? Do you truly believe that because I don't agree with you, or I think that a particular subject may not have an absolute answer available to us, that I have somehow "seen less" or "understand less" than you? I have to say.... You disappoint me.

to continue ...
I've never made any claim about ghosts being "safe" or "holy" or even something to be triffled with or pursued. I've said that to judge all paranormal activity by a particular belief about ghosts is a bit short-sighted. I've said what I think might be some possibilities about some paranormal activity. But I've not communicated any judgement about them being particularly safe...(for lack of a better term).

I've simply said that fear isn't necessary. We don't need to fear ghosts, spirits, entities or whatever you want to call them. (we have authority over them in Christ) And I think propogating fear because we don't trust someone to handle a particular experience (or trust the Holy Spirit in someone) is more than ill-advised. It's contrary to the teachings of Christ. (not suggesting that you do propogate fear... not at all... I don't know that about you one way or the other. )

 

[blondeambition3]

I thank God for opening my eyes because I was once just like the rest following my own Gnosis.

You and me both eHuman!

 

[blondeambition3]

Brilliant minds and beautiful spirits in this place... all I can say.... Love the association!

 

[eHuman]

HM. I agree whole heartedly with your statement and don't see how any of our conversation would lead you to think other wise.

But this is what really intrigues me.... you assume that I haven't "seen enough to convince me"???? ...to cause to me to believe like you. That supposes that if only I were more experienced in my walk with Christ.... If only I were more "mature" (like you) I would believe like you! Are you serious? See Enough what? Believe what? I'm sure you consider yourself very educated and knowledgeable. And I'm sure you are very safe in your theology.. But ... Don't you think it's feasible that two brothers in the Lord can have a discussion about a particular issue without one being "less" than the other? Do you truly believe that because I don't agree with you, or I think that a particular subject may not have an absolute answer available to us, that I have somehow "seen less" or "understand less" than you? I have to say.... You disappoint me.

to continue ...
I've never made any claim about ghosts being "safe" or "holy" or even something to be triffled with or pursued. I've said that to judge all paranormal activity by a particular belief about ghosts is a bit short-sighted. I've said what I think might be some possibilities about some paranormal activity. But I've not communicated any judgment about them being particularly safe...(for lack of a better term).

I've simply said that fear isn't necessary. We don't need to fear ghosts, spirits, entities or whatever you want to call them. (we have authority over them in Christ) And I think propogating fear because we don't trust someone to handle a particular experience (or trust the Holy Spirit in someone) is more than ill-advised. It's contrary to the teachings of Christ. (not suggesting that you do propogate fear... not at all... I don't know that about you one way or the other. )

Please don't misunderstand me. (I'm not blowing smoke here I really mean this) I don't consider you below or behind me, just in a different place. We are both on the path but different parts of the path. There are things that God has shown you that He likely hasn't shown me yet and vice versa.

When I said, "You've not seen enough to convince you yet that it may be an issue, and I believe that I have." I was being literal. (My observation), that in your journey you have not come to a place to believe there is an issue with it. I was "restating" your own proclaimed position, not saying you weren't smart or learned enough to grasp or find it. I stated that my studies have lead me to conclude that there was an issue with it. Both of those statements represent everything that we have both represented all along in our conversation.

I wrote it so that emotions wouldn't take a conversation between two brothers to the level that offense started to be taken, which it was already getting dangerously close to.

A different way to say, I can respectfully agree to disagree with you.

My "angle of focus" was on the more scientific conclusions that you shared on ghosts as possibilities. That it may be vibrations of the past we may be seeing. When in an attempt to get you to really contemplate that, I shared my understanding of the error of that possibility from a physics and scientific stance as well as a theological one. And then you started to become agitated and it began to show in your responses. I tried to graciously back out by saying, "We're just at different understandings on the ghost thing."

If you have a preconceived notion that I was in attack mode then that statement can come across as an attack. You are mistaken though, I was in an "attempt to convince by sharing what he may not yet have considered" mode.

None of this is worth you getting offended over and if I was insensitive and caused it then I apologize. But I would charge you as your brother in Christ to go back and read through all of it and make sure that you haven't become offended just because I presented a different possible solution that didn't line up with yours.

It may shock you in your current state to come to understand that the way that you have presented explanation for the paranormal flies in the face of both science and orthodox Christianity. I was trying to be polite and figure out a way to share enough to get you to think it through and maybe look into it more, or not, but I wasn't trying to rattle your cage and insult you.

Read your post, you are insulted. As a Christian I have to ask, is it insecurity or have I truly offended you?

 

[HyOnLyph]

I'm not offended nor am I aggitated. I'm disappointed. I'm not angry at you or anyone else who disagrees with me. (by the way... remember, I've not made any claims that something IS.... only that it's possible and maybe worth thinking about.) In fact, I've not made any claims about ghosts at all. We were discussing paranormal activity in general. You focused on ghosts.

I was wondering last night if perhaps I misunderstood your comment. It's interesting that in your explanation, you've confirmed it and defended it. I don't accuse you of being in attack mode. I have no "preconcieved notions" about your state (contrary to your inference about my current state).

I'm sure you quite innocently believe what you said. My reaction is, in effect, surprise over the fact that you would assume that IF ONLY someone was as experienced as you or as learned as you, they would see it your way. I'm concerned that your "education and experience" has brought you to a place where it is utterly impossible for you to be wrong. It is certainly possible that my journey will reveal more about the subject. If it does, that's awesome. My concern is that you make a statement to all of us, where you cannot conceive that you might be wrong.... in your mind it is virtually impossible that your journey might eventually lead you to conclude that you were mistaken. As a brother in Christ, THAT is by far a more urgent issue than anything we have to discuss over ghosts.

As to whether or not something "flies in the face of" science; I disagree. I think science has begun to expolore areas that show that what I stated might be possible. It is, at the least, something to think about.

As to flying in the face of Orthodox Christianity... I sure hope so ! Orthodox Christianity is irrelevant as to whether or not something is true. (separating of course Orthodoxy from what the Word of God actually says.) God save us from the religions of man.

I was attempting to challenge anyone reading this thread (and myself as well) to think outside the box a little bit. If that has offended you, I appologize. While I did intend to challenge thought, I didn't mean to push your buttons.

I suggest that we bring this back on topic. May you be richly blessed.

 

[Jason_in_nc]

Oddly enough, I have the same theory as HyOnLyph regarding some of these paranormal occurances, and have in fact, tried to explain it the same way he has. I've never heard anyone else have this theory so it's kinda neat to find someone else that has entertained the same theory.

I don't think our conjecture flies in the face of science since it is something that science cannot measure or understand. That's why it's paranormal after all. IN fact, most scientists tell us that much of what we believe as Christians flies in the face of science.

But like everyone is saying, we're just discussing our thoughts. I don't think anyone is advocating that we go out and try to shake hands with any ghosts and invite them to dinner. The Bible actually says very little about the paranormal (as we are discussing it here) but from what it does say, we know VERY CLEARLY that God says to stay well away from it. I don't think anyone here is arguing with him on that.

;-)

 

[HyOnLyph]

Oddly enough, I have the same theory as HyOnLyph regarding some of these paranormal occurances, and have in fact, tried to explain it the same way he has. I've never heard anyone else have this theory so it's kinda neat to find someone else that has entertained the same theory.

I don't think our conjecture flies in the face of science since it is something that science cannot measure or understand. That's why it's paranormal after all. IN fact, most scientists tell us that much of what we believe as Christians flies in the face of science.

But like everyone is saying, we're just discussing our thoughts. I don't think anyone is advocating that we go out and try to shake hands with any ghosts and invite them to dinner. The Bible actually says very little about the paranormal (as we are discussing it here) but from what it does say, we know VERY CLEARLY that God says to stay well away from it. I don't think anyone here is arguing with him on that.

;-)

Well said! (but then... that's easy for me to say, since we think alike on this topic. )

 

[eHuman]

I don't think our conjecture flies in the face of science since it is something that science cannot measure or understand.

This was really my point.
On the other when I said orthodox Christianity, implied (as I already stated) that it was what the Bible shows me. Not what man has turned it into.

 

[eHuman]

I'm not offended nor am I agitated. I'm disappointed. I'm not angry at you or anyone else who disagrees with me. (by the way... remember, I've not made any claims that something IS.... only that it's possible and maybe worth thinking about.) In fact, I've not made any claims about ghosts at all. We were discussing paranormal activity in general. You focused on ghosts.

I was wondering last night if perhaps I misunderstood your comment. It's interesting that in your explanation, you've confirmed it and defended it. I don't accuse you of being in attack mode. I have no "preconceived notions" about your state (contrary to your inference about my current state).

I'm sure you quite innocently believe what you said. My reaction is, in effect, surprise over the fact that you would assume that IF ONLY someone was as experienced as you or as learned as you, they would see it your way. I'm concerned that your "education and experience" has brought you to a place where it is utterly impossible for you to be wrong. It is certainly possible that my journey will reveal more about the subject. If it does, that's awesome. My concern is that you make a statement to all of us, where you cannot conceive that you might be wrong.... in your mind it is virtually impossible that your journey might eventually lead you to conclude that you were mistaken. As a brother in Christ, THAT is by far a more urgent issue than anything we have to discuss over ghosts.

As to whether or not something "flies in the face of" science; I disagree. I think science has begun to explore areas that show that what I stated might be possible. It is, at the least, something to think about.

As to flying in the face of Orthodox Christianity... I sure hope so ! Orthodox Christianity is irrelevant as to whether or not something is true. (separating of course Orthodoxy from what the Word of God actually says.) God save us from the religions of man.

I was attempting to challenge anyone reading this thread (and myself as well) to think outside the box a little bit. If that has offended you, I apologize. While I did intend to challenge thought, I didn't mean to push your buttons.

I suggest that we bring this back on topic. May you be richly blessed.

You are still over estimating what you think I mean, take it as it is stated but leave out what you are reading into it. As you and Jason have stated, what the Bible does say about the topic is (generically), not good, stay away. What our discussion is about is "where does it come from?"

I still stand on the premise that there are two kinds, good and evil I.E. of God/angelic manifestation and of Satan/demon manifestation. Not a third or neutral manifestation.

Based on that I surmise them as active good or evil manifestations, as opposed to "echos of the past" or "vibrations in time". That they are part of one of the ten dimensions is a safe bet on both of our sides. There is nothing in my mind based on the information that I draw my conclusions from that make it mean or superior or attitudinal to point at those underlined comments and make the statement, that they don't "float", there's something you are missing, or something that I am wrongly assuming. If I'm wrongly assuming a premise, THAT is what you as a logical debater should be addressing, that's what I've been doing. I don't think from your last 3-4 post you could convince anyone that you aren't at least slightly miffed, though I may be wrong.

Maybe I just have a communication problem and have difficulty getting my ideas across, or maybe you aren't prepared to logic out your stance but don't like anyone logic(ing) against it?

Oh Lord what does he mean by that?!?! Is he being snooty AGAIN? No. We all have drawn conclusions on all sorts of things. The debate is "Here's what I think." The response is, "Here's why I think you may be missing something.", your response is "How dare you?" instead of, "Well here is how I draw my conclusion, therefore...".

You "appear" to take offense awful easily. That was an honest observation even if it is wrong. I'm just trying to shake this thing into a logical debate, not one from a, "that's just what I feel or think. Maybe this kind or level of bouncing information is new or uncomfortable with you. It's how I interface with engineers and scientists across the table from me at work, it's called "brainstorming", and "product failure analysis". It's just how I think, no offense intended as I made that abundantly clear in my last post.

That being said, I could be wrong in my understanding of ghosts and such, but until you or someone else can counter with some solid reasoning that makes more sense, how can you expect that I wouldn't remain in the same understanding.

We are both richly blessed, even when we don't feel like it.

 

[Jason_in_nc]

I have to say eHuman, that I kinda got that snooty, "when you get where I am" vibe from you too, even though it may not have been your intent.

But then again, HyOnLyph, you're coming across as probably more offended or miffed than you think as well.

I haven't been as involved in this debate as you guys. Although fun to discuss, I don't think it's ultimately a very important discussion since we all agree on the end result. God said to stay away... end of story. So I don't know that it's worth "convincing" anyone of the other's position, or being offended on either side. It's not an important issue since both sides are taking God at his word when he says to stay away.

Having said that, there are very active paranormal occurances, and very passive paranormal occurances. I can understand Satan having demons scare people by interacting with them in those active situations. What I don't think I buy is Satan saying, "Hey you, fallen angel number 143... I want you to go to this house, and every night, stand in the window and make yourself look like the old woman who used to live there. No, don't DO anything. Just stand there for a couple minutes then you can go on break until the same time the next night."

Yes, I'm being really silly, I know. Just saying, seems like a waste of time. If I were a fallen angel, I'd be saying, "What?! I followed you and got cast out of Heaven for THIS!?!"

;-)

 

[HyOnLyph]

Hmmm. I honestly am not sure where to start.

I'll do my best to ignore most of the acusations and try to address a few points that I think are critical.

There is nothing in my mind based on the information that I draw my conclusions from that make it mean or superior or attitudinal to point at those underlined comments and make the statement, that they don't "float", there's something you are missing, or something that I am wrongly assuming. If I'm wrongly assuming a premise, THAT is what you as a logical debater should be addressing, that's what I've been doing.

Well there ya have it. You seem to insist that I (we) "debate" you. And that I do it based on the information that you have in your mind and according to your expectations. You seem to expect me to play by your rules. I can. I have no problem playing in that park if I chose to. But that's really not what this discussion is about. It isn't about proving something that maybe isn't provable. I've said that over and over. BTW… The premise that you wrongly assume is that the Bible means exactly what you say it means just because you say so.

You may judge my disappointment as being "slightly miffed" if you choose to based on your definition of "miffed". Or you can take me at my word. (according to my definition of miffed) The judgements you make are a statement of who you are. They have nothing to do with who I am.

You chose to take a tactic of superiority (whether innocently or not) and I called you on it. No worries. No fear. I just called you on it. You confirmed it and even restated it. OK ... fine... let's move on.

I'm just trying to shake this thing into a logical debate, not one from a, "that's just what I feel or think. Maybe this kind or level of bouncing information is new or uncomfortable with you. It's how I interface with engineers and scientists across the table from me at work, it's called "brainstorming", and "product failure analysis". It's just how I think, no offense intended as I made that abundantly clear in my last post.

Yeah, I get that. You want to shake this thing into a conversation that is comfortable for you. In your realm... play by your rules. You just didn't establish that in the beginning. If you had said..." these are the rules... no one gets to say what they think... there will be absolutely no postulating here... everyone must present sound logical arguments according to the rules of logic and scientific critical thinking." Had you said that, we all could have made a decision to participate or not. I could have said... well I'm up for a good debate, or I could have said... "nah, not really my thing today". You should have shared the rules with all of us. (yes... I'm being facetious.)

I'm sure you meant no offense. None taken really. At least not in anger. Like I said, disappointment that you would go there??? Sure. I simply believe that it's appropriate to point out to someone when they are taking a position of superiority whether innocently or not.... a) because it's fallacious in it's logic. (What I said is true because you just don't know any better) and b) ...... well... It just ain't nice.

I think we are boring the rest of the group. Let's just move on.. shall we.