“of the dead, speak nothing but good.”
Some rise by sin, some by virtue fall…
Hell is defined as being separated from God. At the time of your death you will be destined to go to one of two places: to exist in Hell or to reside in the Heavenly City. But your soul, and your eternal body will exist in one or the other.
^ huh ?
Mixed feelings. “The Boss” destroyed MLB, but he did many good things – especially in Florida – with the money stolen from New Yorkers.
One thing that makes human beings different from the “beasts” is language. Where does language go when we die?
^All that we have is witnesses. Our senses are fallible witnesses of the material world around us. Witnesses saw Jesus risen from the Dead. The words of God are proof enough that he exists. Check it out for yourself.
A friend of mine was doing a car wash with her Girl Scouts and after doing Steinbrenner’s car he gave them $50. Not too evil.
^ I would add that language is not a “thing” – because English makes it into a noun it’s all too easy to assimilate language to things, which are the prototypical nouns. (Is an earthquake a thing?) Language is a behavior. It’s more like riding a bicycle than it is like a rock. Where does riding a bicycle go when you die? Where does talking to other people go when you die?
I would suggest that language is the most important difference between human beings and “the beasts”. What other difference is there that doesn’t somehow involve language?
Dr.Canned. I have dealt already with the imprecision of testimony. And I even extrapolated that our senses our merely biological witnesses of our surroundings according to science. That is why the shoe is now on the other foot, Dr.
You have to explain why in Science and Philosophy, the secularist-humanists of TODAY have to believe in nothing (chaos as generative), relegate all intellectual thought to reletavism, and fight for a mere materialistic view of reality in the name of their “rationality”.
You have no authority now to say what is wrong or right; what is beneficial for one may be deleterious to a baby starving in North Africa. Your Philosophy and reality have sunk into paralysis of action and anal-retentive hand-wringing. Such is the state of your higher Thought. You now have to pull some moralistic motivation for your existence out of a paradigm that you have already divested of all its morality. That is probably why DesCartes never recanted his Catholicism - because he _IS_ one of the smartest people ever to have lived.
Now, you can pick up where he left off…and find out why the Theistic Model caused him such anguish; or you can fall into the literal and proverbially grave. For, as one poster just pointed out elsewhere- we are all destined to die, sooner or later.
The words of God are proof enough that He exists. I defy you to study just one of the Four Gospels and come to the conclusion that the Son of God has not indeed come to His people to offer Salvation. And I don’t mean approach it from your list of presumptions you hold about the text and it’s origins: actually try to learn what it says, what it records.
Why were the Jews going to the Jordan to be baptised? Why did John the Baptist wear camel=skin clothing?
Why were the Hebrews expecting a Messiah?
Why did Philip tell Nathanael, “Come see, we have found the Lord?”
As I have pointed out previously:
If you look for a quasi-maybe-kind of God; the chances are you will find a quasi-impersonal kind of god. If you look for a real Personal God who has explained His purposes to His people - the Bible promises that you will find Him.
(1.) A witness is all we have, in most cases, and all we will get. You have to make room for that possibly, even with the supposed technological and scientific advancements you rely on. I find it amusing that the last link I put on a post had a disagreement between two colleagues about the reliability of mDNA research: The scientist there is quoted, ” [his colleague] is not a classical geneticist,” therefore her findings are suspect and his theories are still valid. Even in a “hot” area of study - arguments over whether the science can be trusted still occur between the scientific elite! Hahahaha!
(2.) And you’ll never know because you’ll never try to undrstand. Thanks for your “open-mindedness”. BTW, Christianity, as you know, was not extant long enough to be “reworked legend”.
(3.)”Prepare ye the highway of the Lord”
(4.) Another denial of your own ability to reason and make judgements. I thought that was part of your job - intrepid inquiry? I once was an un-believer - so I know how fear of the Truth masquerades as fear of the Unknown - it’s easier to trust in Death (materialism) and its attendant inevitabilities than to totally toss that paradigm out - its like an old coat that doesn’t protect as well from the elements, but feels comfy nevertheless. Makes me wonder why you have so much faith in your scientific detachment when you never use it, as far as I can see…
Source for Brian Sykes’ quote is here: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/lifestyle/news/article.cfm?c_id=6&objectid=212978