Originally posted by LCKob
... but of course my stance in no way takes away your right to feel and believe it
WHEW! I was nearly ready to disavow all I believe LCKob!
Originally posted by LCKob
merely that as you have stated earlier makes it "less than comprehensible" to those you talk to
Yes I agree "less than comprehensible" is acurrate in that people can't/wont wrap their brain around what /how I preceive and believe thus they
can't comprehend it... but is that indicative of it being less than valid, or just of a failure of me to express it... or a faliulre of people to
understand that which is unconventional, seems paradoxical, and is limited by their conventional thinking and.or the need for absolute adherance to
the value and meanings of specific words which can not accurately express the nature of such thought for which there are no other words?
What is incomprehensible is my paradoxical beliefs -no matter how you spell it out or what words chosen, it's the nature of the paradox that usually
is incomprehensible, don't you think?
My largest problem with linguistics is it usually just keeps me from appearing intelligent while my IQ would indicate otherwise
But really only
interferes with the SM types such as yourself using semantic arguement to understand my philosphical belief or broader scope.
Many people merely find me open minded and think I should subscribe to agnostic beliefs, and claim I don't know either way of the existancce of a
God...or the possibility of God, and the possibility of no God... But I do believe in God, not just a god either, but in a specific opne-our God and
creator- and have confirmation of the existance of God, and faith in that God and belief and confirmation
I just allow for the possibility that one day as I evolve in life and understanding... that I may be wrong...I don't think so, but I've been wrong
about things before...have you?
I allow for this...that as I grow my perceptions may change, as I become more knolwedgeable I may
think/realize/understand differently than I do now...and so I allow for the fact I am imperfect and progressing and thus, could be wrong....it
doesn't make me doubt my faith in anyway however! But I allow for the possibility I am wrong and there is no God
I believe contrary to that, that we are creations of our God, and even that I am more right than most "believers" usually
but when I question
my myself in my beliefs, its not...perhaps there is no God as much as "What if"... You know? What if: there was no God...we were wrong...faith and
confirmation was an illusion...etc" ...make sense?
Religious types find me heretical many times, because I go as far as saying maybe we don't understand who God is completely...and what it all
means...to worship God, believe, and maybe there is much more to know, making our limited knowledge almost in error in comparrison to the bigger
picure...they don't like this, nor the fact I propose God has a family etc...or other non-traditional believes or views or proposed possibilities of
God the father and Jesus.
and athiests are by far the biggest SM users who find me a linguistic target example of why "believers" are "confused" in an effort to split hairs
about what I believe by splitting hairs about how I express it-this is merely what I assumed from you most the time.
This is usually done in effort to exploit my paradoxical belief that I believe God exists (by direct belief and basic philosophy) with no proof
(Discounting the confirmation faith brings full circle) but still allow that there may exist the possibility there is no God (Hippocritical at worst,
confused at best) and that I am possibly in error in what I do believe,(wishy washy or agnostic) or believe we could be in error as far as we perceive
him/understand Him etc. (lack of faith/belief) etc...and it's not the case as it would appear
Trust me I see the logic of those arguements its just not the case...this is why I can't hang with angostics as I believe way to strongly, and in a
specific God and have faith...can't hang with traditional mainstream believers...well for about 1000 reasons! LMAO!
as evidenced by people here
who tell me I have to speak in tongues to prove something...whoa...that is just sooo far from FAITH AND REASON and Biblical knowledge to me that I
can't even go there...even confident that no one reads this thread anymore
But seriously, the varying denominations and beliefs within Christianity and the only thing they seem to agree on is that people like me are
heretical!
And the one things agnostics, athiest and believers will agree on is my beliefs all seem illogical and unREASONable by agnostics, athiests and
believers alike-what can I say-sorry folks-I refuse to subscribe to ALL of your ways of thinking, and believing!!
But linguisitcally, it's just usually the agnostics saying then you don't really believe...or athiests saying...you know it can't be true logically
then but rationalize it is true through faith...blah blah blah.
They believing then its my rationalized faith that believes, and my logic that accepts the possibility there is no God...and they want to point
out...shouldn't I go with logic?
Paradox incarnate-logic and faith can coexist
it's like believing religion and science can co-exist...faith and logic
God created the world...but not with a magic wand or out of free will...out of universal elements that exist and are scientifically sound etc...
people just want to believe in absolutes, (even linguistically) which is fine, but don't cut the absolutes in half and believe absolutely in one
half! Or a fraction...etc...
you lose so much that way...
Originally posted by LCKob
So I would say that as long as you don't use the context of conventional logic and SM as the context for your present stance ... I won't have any
real problems with it (by using your own "liquid" definitions for things)
well Ok...thats notcontested nor a a matter of semantics anyway-faith isn't consiidered logical anyway, is it???? So I don't have a problem with
those who don't believe thinking it illogical to believe, or likewise it is illogical to be paradoxical-I understand that in the context of
conventional logic and SM that any belief in God, or co-existing beliefs in God and in the possibility of no God is illogical!
Originally posted by LCKob
... but if you do, then my assessment will continue by force of method.
ROFL! sorry but now that you don't annoy me, (you haven't in some time) you entertain me (you have for some time) and in a good way.
Originally posted by LCKob
So, what is the context for your stance? Mine is SM ...
my stance being...? My paradoxial belief of faith coexisting with logical reason, without one canceling the other out?
...hmm...now what could be the context for such stance?
(enlighten me, is what I'm saying )
or do I misunderstand the rhetorical nature of your statement, er, I mean question?
Ah...thanks for the distraction LCkob
