Originally posted by FetchmyjunkIs see, so when you responded to the OP posted by FMF:
[b]Are you saying that in order to understand a god's purpose, the followers are required to be able to read their god's mind?
No, they generally read their holy book.
Do you "read (your) God's mind" when seeking to understand his purpose?
Nope, his purpose has already been revealed and is recorded in the holy book.
If you d ...[text shortened]... you believe them and if so would you therefore join with them and follow their way?
Nope.[/b]
"Do Christians believe that their God figure created the Zika virus?"
If so, what do they believe the purpose of creating it was?
By saying:
"I haven't met any Christians who claim to be able to read the mind of God."...
You are affirming, albeit somewhat obliquely, that "reading the mind of God" is the only way to effectively for you to answer the OP?
Originally posted by FMFI find absolutely nothing "straightforward" about you.
Whether Suzianne's "paranoia" about hidden agendas or imagined purposes ~ when supposedly discussing things with people who disagree with her ~ is real or merely a deliberate affectation, I cannot say for sure.
What is clear though is that she resorts to bringing it into play time and time again either to deliver ad hominems or to sidestep proper discussion of straightforward observations or questions put to her.
Originally posted by SuzianneI am probably one of the most straightforward posters here and basically civil with it. I think this ~ in harness with your obvious difficulty processing dissent or keeping your composure in the face of disagreement ~ is why the stances I take and the views I express bend you out of shape so much. 😉
I find absolutely nothing "straightforward" about you.
Originally posted by divegeesterMayyybe really, really obliquely. So obliquely that he's not actually "affirming" that at all.
By saying:
"I haven't met any Christians who claim to be able to read the mind of God."...
You are affirming, albeit somewhat obliquely, that "reading the mind of God" is the only way to effectively for you to answer the OP?
The only one actually saying what you claim he's saying, is you.
Originally posted by FMFNo. Straightforward? You? Don't make me laugh. You "bend me out of shape" when you fail to respond with facts and instead twist people's words until it has no recognizable similarity to what they actually said. You put words in people's mouths (i.e. "Is that what you mean?" ) and you constantly put people down with your interrogations. You treat forum engagements, primarily those with people who dare to vocalize their disagreement with you, as "forum combat". Any "civility" you pretend to have is the same "civility" of the person who smiles at their victim as they push the shiv in. In actual fact, you are one of the people here manifestly guilty of victimizing anyone who disagrees with you, and your new tactic of claiming that others do things that you are guilty of is obvious in the way you claim that it is me who has "difficulty in processing dissent" when in fact the "difficulty" is clearly yours. MY "difficulty" is with how you treat people, demonizing those who disagree with you, by twisting their words and assuming things they did not say, and by repeatedly asking the same question over and over, regardless of any answer you receive. I've told you this so many times in the past and I can only guess that's why you've started including this "difficulty in processing dissent" in your diatribe so that you can "head me off at the pass" by claiming I do it before I say that you do it. I've also told you time and again that I really can't be bothered whether you disagree with me or not, so your claim is curious and suspicious on the face of it. It's not the "stances you take" or the "views you express". Far from it, because I really couldn't care less about your opinions. My problem is the sheer volume of your derision and disrespect that you routinely pile on other posters in these forums, mainly for the high "crime" of disagreeing with you.
I am probably one of the most straightforward posters here and basically civil with it. I think this ~ in harness with your obvious difficulty processing dissent or keeping your composure in the face of disagreement ~ is why the stances I take and the views I express bend you out of shape so much. 😉
Originally posted by FMFThere you go again.
Whether Suzianne's "paranoia" about hidden agendas or imagined purposes ~ when supposedly discussing things with people who disagree with her ~ is real or merely a deliberate affectation, I cannot say for sure.
Do you feel that this new tactic of yours, mirroring and reflecting my similar, and often-stated, criticism of you, is recovering any of the ground you've lost in previous "forum combat" with me?
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkExplain the difference and why you can know one without knowing everything and not know the other. I have at least demonstrated that you do not believe the claim that you must know everything in order to know something, so you need to explain why for particular things you claim that you must know everything before you can know them.
Knowing the answer to 2+2 is not the same as claiming to know that the Zika virus was NOT genetically engineered and you know that.
Originally posted by googlefudgeClaiming one thing when any actual observation would yield the opposite claim, isn't "observing", it's just making stuff up.
I don't choose not to observe things, I have observed things and I'm telling you what I've observed.
And I will include my observations in any cohesive thought I feel like.
My point is that your "observations" are really "non-observations" of what is actually there, and that your "cohesive thought", obviously isn't. By all means, keep on taking his "blue pill".
And you claim to be a champion for logic. If this is the quality of your "logic", it doesn't seem very useful to me. How many bridges have you purchased recently?
Originally posted by SuzianneNo. Straightforward? You? Don't make me laugh. You "bend me out of shape" when you fail to respond with facts and instead twist people's words until it has no recognizable similarity to what they actually said. You put words in people's mouths (i.e. "Is that what you mean?" ) and you constantly put people down with your interrogations. You treat forum engagements, primarily those with people who dare to vocalize their disagreement with you, as "forum combat". Any "civility" you pretend to have is the same "civility" of the person who smiles at their victim as they push the shiv in. In actual fact, you are one of the people here manifestly guilty of victimizing anyone who disagrees with you, and your new tactic of claiming that others do things that you are guilty of is obvious in the way you claim that it is me who has "difficulty in processing dissent" when in fact the "difficulty" is clearly yours. MY "difficulty" is with how you treat people, demonizing those who disagree with you, by twisting their words and assuming things they did not say, and by repeatedly asking the same question over and over, regardless of any answer you receive. I've told you this so many times in the past and I can only guess that's why you've started including this "difficulty in processing dissent" in your diatribe so that you can "head me off at the pass" by claiming I do it before I say that you do it. I've also told you time and again that I really can't be bothered whether you disagree with me or not, so your claim is curious and suspicious on the face of it. It's not the "stances you take" or the "views you express". Far from it, because I really couldn't care less about your opinions. My problem is the sheer volume of your derision and disrespect that you routinely pile on other posters in these forums, mainly for the high "crime" of disagreeing with you.
Maybe you're right. But, personally, I think this response of yours bears out what I said in my earlier posts.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
30 May 16
2 edits
You may hold God the Creator as ultimately responsible for the Zika virus.
When God told Adam that thorns and thistles would arise from the earth cursed under man's sin, I think we can account the nuisance and troublesome things of the natural world like mosquitoes bites, wasp stings, poison ivy, poison oak, leeches, parasites and germs as things associated with things being altered in some way in conjunction with man's fall.
In all these things and in all cultures there are inherent lessons which human beings can benefit from during this time of the fall of man.
We know that in the consummation of God's salvation all these troublesome things which He either created or allowed or engineered in creation will be no more troublesome. In the meantime they serve as warnings that things are not right in the world. And they teach us spiritual and moral lessons. And this is true of all cultures and in many beliefs.
You may hold God the Creator ultimately responsible for the Zeka virus, as also tornadoes, earthquakes, diseases, thorns and thistles. etc.
" And to Adam He said, Because you listened to the voice of your wife and have eaten of the tree concerning which I commanded you, saying, You shall not eat of it;
Cursed is the ground because of you; In toil will you eat of it all the days of your life.
And thorns and thistles it will bring forth for you, and you will eat the herb of the field; By the sweat of you face you will eat bread until you return to the ground,
Because from it you were taken; For dust you are, And to dust you shall return." (Gen. 3:17-19)
30 May 16
Originally posted by sonshipWhat "moral lesson" is Zika currently teaching us in your view?
You may hold God the Creator as ultimately responsible for the Zika virus. [...] In the meantime they serve as warnings that things are not right in the world. And they teach us spiritual and moral lessons. And this is true of all cultures and in many beliefs.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
30 May 16
4 edits
Originally posted by FMFI did not read your response rightly the first time.
What "moral lesson" is Zika currently teaching us in your view?
The second time I did.
I have no comment on the specifics of Zeka.
FMF, you're welcome to have a different opinion about it.
I do not wish to argue over it.
All kinds of lessons from varied cultures utilize the negative things in nature to make moral points. I think God who cares for all men, has let these things "speak" to people everywhere and in all times about many things including moral lessons.
Aesop's fables, for example, draw from nuisance aspects of the created world.
I cannot dictate what each and every lesson should be.
I only point out that humans look out upon the creation, which unfortunately includes some negative things, and we muse on them for moral, ethical and spiritual lessons.
You're welcomed to think that this is a weakness of the Christian faith if you prefer.
That's how I view it.
These matters are temporary as Romans 8:18-23 indicates about the restoring of creation to utter harmony and peace with the sons of God as heirs of the restored world.
Originally posted by sonshipUsing a virus such as Zika as a reference (although it doesn't have to be Zika specifically), can you give some examples of "moral lessons" it could currently be teaching you or "moral lessons" you think it ought to be teaching me?
All kinds of lessons from varied cultures utilize the negative things in nature to make moral points. I think God who cares for all men, has let these things "speak" to people everywhere and in all times about many things including moral lessons.
Originally posted by sonshipIf we agree that morality is concerned with the distinction between good and evil or right and wrong, and that it is also concerned with the behaviour and interactions of humans and - according to your ideology, supernatural beings too ~ and not concerned with the "behaviour" of natural phenomena, when you "muse" on the moral, ethical and spiritual repercussions of a pandemic viruses, what kinds of results does this have in terms of your perception of "good and evil". I am not asking you to "dictate what each and every lesson should be". Not at all. I'm just interested in what you think about "good and evil" when you "muse" about them.
Aesop's fables, for example, draw from nuisance aspects of the created world.
I cannot dictate what each and every lesson should be. I only point out that humans look out upon the creation, which unfortunately includes some negative things, and we muse on them for moral, ethical and spiritual lessons.