Religion II

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by boxcar

Didn't you get my prophecy memo that likened prophets standing on tall mountain peaks looking out to other mountain peaks, not being able to see the earth below (representing a span of time) that separated the two peaks because the very mountain upon which they stood wouldn't allow them that view? I even gave a NT example of same.

Also, the OT very clearly paints two very different portraits of God's Sent One. One portrait is of a humble, lowly, suffering servant who would deal with Israel's sins by offering up himself as a sacrifice to his Father, while the other portrait is of a powerful, majestic king who will judge and rule the nations in righteousness and establish his visible kingdom here on the earth forever and ever. It's not very likely these portraits are talking about the same person in a single time frame; but it is very feasible that they're talking about the same person in two different time frames. Do you know what a "logical inference" is?

Even Jesus' disciples failed to understand the biblical mountain peaks analogy; for on Christ's fortieth post-resurrection day, they inquired of him if he was going to restore the kingdom to Israel before ascending to his Father in heaven. (See my 1766.)

Yup, I know. You have an answer for every problem in the Bible. Cool to be you.

Well, I congratulate you for creating your impervious bubble...I hope it suits you well in the end.

[traynor]

Originally Posted by boxcar

You did well until you got to the second sentence of the first paragraph. I know more than most but not as much as some. But I am working on that...

Also, most here have told me I'm wrong but have never been able to back up their wishful thinking with biblical truth. If that makes me "infallible", then so be it...according to your word.

Not snarky questions.
1) Do you understand the old language (the multi-channel language)?

2) If so, have you communicated in that language to/with anyone here?

[HalvOnHorseracing]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

And that's why it makes no sense to keep talking to you.

The inevitable conclusion. And yet...

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by traynor

Not snarky questions.
1) Do you understand the old language (the multi-channel language)?

2) If so, have you communicated in that language to/with anyone here?

Many of my electronic devices are multi-channel but not my mouth.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

Yup, I know. You have an answer for every problem in the Bible. Cool to be you.

Well, I congratulate you for creating your impervious bubble...I hope it suits you well in the end.

Not all of us can crawl into the sack with Ignorance. Someone has to try to minister to the minds she infects.

[traynor]

Originally Posted by boxcar

Many of my electronic devices are multi-channel but not my mouth.

That implies you have not spoken to anyone here in that language. It still leaves the first question unanswered: Do you understand the old language (the multi-channel language)?

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by HalvOnHorseracing

The inevitable conclusion. And yet...

And yet..I knew very early on, before we even interacted with one another, that
you would not find me to be your cup of tea. I seem to recall that I even gently warned you that you should just keep on truckin' and forget about me. And yet...

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by traynor

That implies you have not spoken to anyone here in that language. It still leaves the first question unanswered: Do you understand the old language (the multi-channel language)?

In some 'hoods I visit I have difficulty understanding what is supposed to be the English language. So, I guess my answer is "no".

[traynor]

Originally Posted by boxcar

In some 'hoods I visit I have difficulty understanding what is supposed to be the English language. So, I guess my answer is "no".

I appreciate your honesty and response. I will withdraw. There is nothing further here that I need. See ya.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by traynor

I appreciate your honesty and response. I will withdraw. There is nothing further here that I need. See ya.

Have a pleasant evening, sir.

[Greyfox]

Originally Posted by boxcar

In some 'hoods I visit I have difficulty understanding what is supposed to be the English language.

How true.
I saw an interview of Kamau Bell with street gang members in Chicago last evening.
I had a hard time understanding any of their sentences.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

Originally Posted by boxcar

And yet..I knew very early on, before we even interacted with one another, that
you would not find me to be your cup of tea. I seem to recall that I even gently warned you that you should just keep on truckin' and forget about me. And yet...

Which begs the question, other than one poster that comes to my mind, whose cup of tea are you?

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by HalvOnHorseracing

Which begs the question, other than one poster that comes to my mind, whose cup of tea are you?

Ahh...you want another shot at using your sycophant insult, eh?

[Actor]

Originally Posted by Show Me the Wire

Of course you leave out the main point. It is your admission you are here to mock.

Do you or do you not agree with the following?

• "Religion is not off the table. Religion is not off limits." -- Richard Dawkins
• "We have a right to mock bad ideas." -- Basil Said Al-Matar

[Actor]

Originally Posted by Show Me the Wire

Great, give us the peer review support for your assertion.

I have searched this thread. Not once have I used the words "peer review." Others have but I have not. This can only mean that you are referring to my use of that phrase in the previous thread.

In the previous thread the word "peer" appears in 57 of my posts. The word "review" appears in 43. Unfortunately the PA search engine does not provide for searching for multi-word phrases like "peer review" so a lot of work is needed. I think you are misrepresenting my position on peer review so I am going to do it. However, I am already in the midst of writing my series on science, the purpose of which is to lay the groundwork to refute the claims of certain science deniers on this thread. That project takes precedence. As soon as I've done that I'll get on with the "peer review" project.