I wouldn't get mad at Fleet. they are not dealing with arguments. they always attacking me personal. everyone expect me to just for get it. I'm an elephant.mdsimpson92 wrote:Likely, but it has made you preemptively angry which often makes it difficult for some people to talk with you. Not me normally because I'm normally on your side, if not with your temperament.Metacrock wrote:I probably have used the self esteem issue wrongly with atheists. of course I do. because they are still treating me like a know nothing shit hole. they always will because that's the way they deal with people.
so called "Oivet" discourse
Moderator:Metacrock
Forum rules
(1) be interesting (2) be nice.
(1) be interesting (2) be nice.
Have Theology, Will argue: wire Metacrock
Buy My book: The Trace of God: Warrant for belief
Buy My book: The Trace of God: Warrant for belief
Re: so called "Oivet" discourse
I suppose we can only look to what Jesus wrote himself to know what he REALLY thought.Metacrock wrote:sure I said in my thing the early chruch expected it. That doesn't mean Jesus did.
One of the hallmarks of freedom is that when you recognize someone is being intellectually dishonest or arguing with you in bad faith, you have the option to walk away without being punished, imprisoned or tortured.
Re: so called "Oivet" discourse
well did you read the essay I put up on CARM? I argue that I doubt that he would say "I don't know" then try to say when it would be.Magritte wrote:I suppose we can only look to what Jesus wrote himself to know what he REALLY thought.Metacrock wrote:sure I said in my thing the early chruch expected it. That doesn't mean Jesus did.
Have Theology, Will argue: wire Metacrock
Buy My book: The Trace of God: Warrant for belief
Buy My book: The Trace of God: Warrant for belief
Re: so called "Oivet" discourse
There is no contradiction between "it's coming soon, very soon - some of you will be alive when it happens" and "no one knows the hour or day".
One of the hallmarks of freedom is that when you recognize someone is being intellectually dishonest or arguing with you in bad faith, you have the option to walk away without being punished, imprisoned or tortured.
Re: so called "Oivet" discourse
It gives plausible deniability too. It's not "thus says the Lord, it will be next Thursday."Magritte wrote:There is no contradiction between "it's coming soon, very soon - some of you will be alive when it happens" and "no one knows the hour or day".
So what if he thought it would soon, but he has limited omniscience and he's not speaking as God himself form on high.
Have Theology, Will argue: wire Metacrock
Buy My book: The Trace of God: Warrant for belief
Buy My book: The Trace of God: Warrant for belief
Re: so called "Oivet" discourse
Lord, lawyer or lunatic, eh?Metacrock wrote:It gives plausible deniability too.
I think you'd better define what you actually think, because "honest mistake by non-omniscient guy" contradicts your redaction scenario. I don't see how this can function as a fallback given your primary redaction belief.So what if he thought it would soon, but he has limited omniscience and he's not speaking as God himself form on high.
One of the hallmarks of freedom is that when you recognize someone is being intellectually dishonest or arguing with you in bad faith, you have the option to walk away without being punished, imprisoned or tortured.
Re: so called "Oivet" discourse
It's clear from a straightforward reading of the Gospels - or at least of the Synoptics- that Jesus isn't meant to be omniscient,even if fundies tend to docetism with Jesus (as well as taking a docetic hermeneutics to Scriptures)....
The “One” is the space of the “world” of the tick, but also the “pinch” of the lobster, or that rendezvous in person to confirm online pictures (with a new lover or an old God). This is the machinery operative...as “onto-theology."
Dr Ward Blanton
Dr Ward Blanton
Re: so called "Oivet" discourse
met wrote:It's clear from a straightforward reading of the Gospels - or at least of the Synoptics- that Jesus isn't meant to be omniscient,even if fundies tend to docetism with Jesus (as well as taking a docetic hermeneutics to Scriptures)....
there you go.
Have Theology, Will argue: wire Metacrock
Buy My book: The Trace of God: Warrant for belief
Buy My book: The Trace of God: Warrant for belief
Re: so called "Oivet" discourse
LOL you still got it!Magritte wrote:Lord, lawyer or lunatic, eh?Metacrock wrote:It gives plausible deniability too.
So what if he thought it would soon, but he has limited omniscience and he's not speaking as God himself form on high.
Explained by Paul:I think you'd better define what you actually think, because "honest mistake by non-omniscient guy" contradicts your redaction scenario. I don't see how this can function as a fallback given your primary redaction belief.
phil 2:6
Who, being in very nature[a] God,
did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;
7 rather, he made himself nothing
by taking the very nature of a servant,
being made in human likeness.
8 And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
by becoming obedient to death—
even death on a cross!
9 Therefore God exalted him to the highest place
and gave him the name that is above every name,
10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
11 and every tongue acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father.
He chose to divest himself of the full accoutrements of Godhood and become an actual man; albeit one with 2 wills and 2 natures. apparently the omnis were turned off.
Have Theology, Will argue: wire Metacrock
Buy My book: The Trace of God: Warrant for belief
Buy My book: The Trace of God: Warrant for belief
Re: so called "Oivet" discourse
Well there you go. If Jesus was fallible then you needn't reach for excuses like redaction when his fallibility is in evidence.
One of the hallmarks of freedom is that when you recognize someone is being intellectually dishonest or arguing with you in bad faith, you have the option to walk away without being punished, imprisoned or tortured.