https://images.theweek.com/sites/def...resize=807x807
https://images.theweek.com/sites/def...resize=807x807
https://images.theweek.com/sites/def...resize=807x807
https://images.theweek.com/sites/def...resize=807x807
|
For weeks, Trump whipped up his far-right supporters with unfounded conspiracy theories about election fraud, then summoned them to DC for his "Save America" rally, promising them that "it will be wild". At the rally, he urged thousands to march on the Capitol, showing "strength" and "fight like hell" to keep the Democrats from "fraudulently taking over our country".Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Clearly, his behavior smacked of rebellion, insurrection, seditious conspiracy and incitement to a riot - take your pick.
You're the master of twisting words around on these pages. Your "not knowing how to respond" is just another of your evasions.Quote:
CBen, if you want to refer to something specific, then feel free to. I don't know how to respond to something like, "...that includes twisting things and arguing the toss."
There was Trump's call to the Georgia Secretary of State pressuring him to "find 11,780 votes" - the exact number he'd need to win the state. He openly threatened the secretary with a crime if he didn't accede to Trump's bogus claims of fraud.
People died because of Trump's incitement, hundreds have been arrested with more to come, even members of Congress are now believed to have been criminally involved. Trump will be facing civil and criminal, state and federal charges for the rest of his life - a fitting end to a man truly touched by evil.
If you see me twisting words, then point it out. Your general criticisms just come across as angry remarks that accomplish nothing.
Just like with the Bible, you cherry-pick.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Sorry you feel that way, but I think you simply don't like some of the verses I "pick". I would think that for every verse I present that you consider to be "cherry picking", I can find ten or more others that say the same thing. At some point the numbers become overwhelming.
But as I've said many times, when you feel that is the case, then point it out. These vague, generalized accusations just sound like the complaints of angry people.
Consider the context. Just because it's said ten times doesn't mean it has the meaning you think it does. The Bible is packed with poetry, history, allegories, parables, etc. and each fits into the context in some way.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
True of all Bible literalists. The trees always get in the way of their seeing the forest.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Like I said, if you see a particular instance of that happening, then point it out. But honestly, I cannot point it out in the case of the two of you since you practically never quote the Bible. There is just this never ending appeal to some mystical "forest" that, I suspect, exists only in the minds of two people who simply don't want to accept the clear and plain teaching of the Bible. You certainly don't seem to be able to articulate that "forest" by using the Bible.Quote:
Consider the context. Just because it's said ten times doesn't mean it has the meaning you think it does. The Bible is packed with poetry, history, allegories, parables, etc. and each fits into the context in some way.
Here's one: The Garden of Eden story didn't actually happen. It's an allegory.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
It's a figure of speech. I'm surprised someone who claims your credentials doesn't know that.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
The forest is the big picture. The trees are the details. The big picture is the basic message of the Bible. The trees are the details that, taken as a whole, make up the message. When the trees (details alone without context) prevent you from seeing the forest (the Bible as a whole) you are missing the basic message.
Thank you, captain obvious. Still you cannot articulate that "forest" or point to any passages of scripture to support your view. And when a person puts "forest" in quotes (like that), it is an acknowledgment that it is being used to mean something other than a literal collection of trees. "I'm surprised someone who claims your credentials doesn't know that."Quote:
It's a figure of speech. I'm surprised someone who claims your credentials doesn't know that.
The forest is the big picture. The trees are the details. The big picture is the basic message of the Bible. The trees are the details that, taken as a whole, make up the message. When the trees (details alone without context) prevent you from seeing the forest (the Bible as a whole) you are missing the basic message.
An example of an opinion. However, Paul certainly believed it happened as did Jesus. There is, in fact, not one shred of support for your position from any author of the Bible. Rather troubling, don't you think??Quote:
Here's one: The Garden of Eden story didn't actually happen. It's an allegory.
Whoops. I forgot. You guys don't think you need the Bible to support your ideas about...the Bible.
Oh,yes, we do. This allegory (tree) is one of many that support the Bible's message (forest). I wonder if you know what that is. Hmm.... The Flood story is another allegory (tree), as is Jonah and the Great Fish.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
You have not identified what is, in your view, the Bible's central message, so no one could have any idea if your supposed allegories, an idea that I will say (again) is supported nowhere in the Bible, support your supposed central message. And why am I not surprised at that state of affairs?
You don't KNOW the Bible's central message??? Wow!Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
You know what I said. You're not stupid. Be honest.
This is why any discussion with you is just an exercise in futility. You will go to any length to avoid actually saying anything of real substance due to, I think, your fear of having to answer any truly serious questions.Quote:
You have not identified what is, in your view, the Bible's central message
Exactly.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
This is what I'm talking about, rather than addressing the entirety of the response you focus on one, or two, small elements.
This isn't conducive to an open discussion and just serves to get people's backs up.
If all you want to do is be objectionable, then you are firmly on that path.
Please post like the articulatable adult that you are rather than some spoilt child that has been found with their hand in the cookie jar.
It isn't "in my view"; it IS the Bible's central message.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
from Matthew 22: Love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: Love your neighbor as yourself.
Those are the two greatest commandments, so that's a good answer.Quote:
from Matthew 22: Love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: Love your neighbor as yourself.
I would suggest a passage from Colossians. "13 For He rescued us from the domain of darkness, and transferred us to the kingdom of His beloved Son, 14 in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.
Or we could go with this passage in Ephesians 1. 7In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace, 8which he lavished upon us, in all wisdom and insight 9making knownc to us the mystery of his will, according to his purpose, which he set forth in Christ 10as a plan for the fullness of time, to unite all things in him, things in heaven and things on earth.
How would you put it in your own words? Honest question.
Love.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Care to expand on that? What, for instance, is "love"?
Unconditional.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Good reply.
Let me add this. Unconditional describes the word "love", but it still does not tell us what love IS. So if I am told to love my wife, and I ask you what that means, if you reply "unconditional", I still would not know what to do to love my wife. I cannot go out and "unconditional" a person. So I guess I'm really asking what this love you describe looks like.
Unconditionally -- with no limits in any way : without restriction by conditions or qualificationsQuote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
This is about love between humans.
Accept them for who they are, faults and all.
We all have faults, that’s what makes us human. Even more, that’s what makes us individuals. When you can truly embrace someone for ALL their qualities, including their faults, you are choosing to love unconditionally.
Go out of your way for them no matter what the distance.
Loving someone unconditionally sometimes means you have to go travel great emotional distances to meet them. This isn’t always the most fun thing to have to do, but it is the road unconditional love will take you.
When they are happy, you are happy.
Unconditional love creates a special bond between two people. Their happiness and yours become so closely tied that making them happy is what you must do to be happy yourself. It’s the ties that unconditional love creates between two people:
It pleases you to be around them.
When you love someone unconditionally you always want to be around that person. You always want to be there for them, especially when they are sad. That’s when they need your love the most. Unconditional love is the love that draws you closer to your lover when they are the hardest to reach emotionally.
You are open to living their way of life.
Before your lover, you were likely quite set in your ways. You probably thought you wouldn’t change for anything. When you love someone so deeply you will accept them wholeheartedly. Their way of life will become your way of life too.
You are quick to forgive.
When you love someone unconditionally you really forgive them for their mistakes before they even make them. That doesn’t mean you’re giving them a golden ticket to mess up, it just means forgiveness comes easily.
https://lovewideopen.com/what-does-i...conditionally/
Christian love is giving to others those things (not necessarily material things) that you would want them to give you if you were in their situation -- and it's doing so even if they can't pay you back. In fact, it's doing so especially if they can't pay you back! -- agape, a selfless, giving love, unselfish and unconditional.
Even unconditional love leading to forgiveness has a balance and the example which illustrates this best can be found with the families of the victims of Dylann Roof forgiving him of murders, but not stopping his lawful trial for his actions.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Victims' Families Meet Dylann Roof: 'I Forgive You, And Have Mercy On Your Soul' | HuffPost
Victims' Families Speak Passionately About Forgiveness at Dylann Roof Murder Trial Video - ABC News (go.com)
I like most of what you copied. The part about Christian love is particularly good.
Here I see a problem. Pedophile? Violent person? Thief? Drug abuser? Conservative republican? (Sorry...I couldn't resist.)Quote:
You are open to living their way of life.
Many a child has become a poor quality adult because of parents who did that very thing. Don't want to study? Fine. Don't want to do chores around the house? Fine. Stay out all night doing drugs? No problem. Disrespect adults including your parents? Go for it.Quote:
Accept them for who they are, faults and all.
Man alive, you guys sure didn't apply that UC love trait to Trump! At any rate, unconditional acceptance is not how God operates. It's a bad idea for us as well.
Plainly there are limits to those two.
You must be a terrific dancer, the way you twist and shout.
Many a child has become a poor quality adult because of parents who did that very thing. Don't want to study? Fine. Don't want to do chores around the house? Fine. Stay out all night doing drugs? No problem. Disrespect adults including your parents? Go for it.
That's not what loving another person unconditionally means, and you know it!
Man alive, you guys sure didn't apply that UC love trait to Trump! At any rate, unconditional acceptance is not how God operates. It's a bad idea for us as well.
If only I had been a Trump aide in the WH....
Well, we are back to nonsensical replies. Disappointing but certainly not surprising.
Don't make me start loving you unconditionally!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Perfect analysis. WG has accurately called it cherry-picking.Quote:
Originally Posted by Curlyben
That is the defining feeding behavior of a troll.Quote:
If all you want to do is be objectionable, then you are firmly on that path.
Not a chance of that happening. But good of you to suggest it.Quote:
Please post like the articulatable adult that you are rather than some spoilt child that has been found with their hand in the cookie jar.
Just asking a question. Calm down. I was simply probing your view of two aspects of UCL. "You are open to living their way of life." "Accept them for who they are, faults and all."Quote:
That's not what loving another person unconditionally means, and you know it!
I am questioning details. That's how discussions proceed. If you don't like it, then find something else to do. You are most welcome to participate, but do bear in mind that you were not invited.Quote:
This is what I'm talking about, rather than addressing the entirety of the response you focus on one, or two, small elements. This isn't conducive to an open discussion and just serves to get people's backs up.
Thank you for giving a great example of those "volatile" responses you claim to dislike. And you think your response is in any way, "conducive to an open discussion"??? You might want to try out your own advice before giving it to others.Quote:
Please post like the articulatable adult that you are rather than some spoilt child that has been found with their hand in the cookie jar.
Yeah, be open to living their way of life in a musty pup tent in Utah two weeks out of the year instead of staying in a decent motel with a real bathroom. And yeah, accept them even though they prefer rum raisin ice cream and refuse to try butter pecan, my favorite.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
I couldn't disagree with any of that.
Sir, you forget yourself.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
A thought provoking read:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-55773123
Last I heard is that Trump is contemplating forming a 3rd Party ;the Patriot Party . If he does I expect the same results as when Teddy Roosevelts led the Progressives out of the Republican party . The spit led to the election of the Democrat radical Woodrow Wilson.
All the legal pile ons and impeachments reminds of the death of the Trojan champion ,Prince Hector at the hands of Achilles . The Greek soldiers were terrified of Hector .He had killed many Greeks and one of their champions . Achilles defeated Hector . The Greeks still wanted their revenge after his death . Achilles troops surrounded the corps stabbing at it repeatedly and Achilles ties Hector to his chariot and drags his lifeless body around Troy .
I would caution the Dems about over playing their hand .The Cadaver Synod is an example of how that could back fire Pope Steven VI exhumed the corps of Pope Formosus ,and put it on trial 7 months after he had died. Well he was convicted and stripped of his papacy and thrown into a river . The trial turned public opinion against Steven ;especially after Formosus' body washed up and was purported to perform miracles . There was an uprising against Steven . He was strangled in prison.
Trump and Trumpism could come back in 4 or 8 years stronger than ever .
So maybe the Dems had best think twice about continuing to pile on the defeated Trump.
I don't think the dems can pursue impeachment with a vigor clearly born of hatred, but then turn around and make calls for unity. If they really want unity, they should take their victory, tainted as it is, and move on. It makes me conclude that unity for them means everyone agreeing with their views. That could very well prove to be dangerous for both them and the country.
And already the new president's bias is showing. After all the dems nearly went crazy over the incident on 1/6, the riots in Oregon go unmentioned by any of them.
Those attacks in Seattle and Portland are not part of the Uncivil war Quid wants to end.
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:55 PM. |