All Activity

lol... yeah waysider.....and that's the way it is

I believe what has been proven to me, also. Until, of course, a new, stronger, more convincing proof is presented. But this is not the question. You said the Britannica definition of faith is laughably wrong. I knocked, asked and sought your insight. If you can’’t or won’t answer the question, fine.

That doesn't seem to define what most people would call faith.

I believe what has been proven to me. If you want my definition then there it is.

I'm asking for and seeking your definition of faith. I'm listening.

If you want to advance your understanding then listen Or do as Jesus instructed ask seek knock.

I have claimed nothing and assumed nothing. Or show me what the f you are talking about.

You said that dictionary is laughably wrong. What would be a satisfactorily correct definition of faith? Claims have been asserted. Assumptions have been made about people's understanding. I am asking to advance understanding and discussion.

No, I don't think so. You know when only 2 options are presented then there is always more

Here is another, very beautiful, carol that we are also singing in the concert on Saturday.

Are those the only options?

Either Paul's writtings are a great lie or he's talking about something you know nothing about

I'm looking for life AFTER the presidency. Assuming the current President even lives out his term, he's not likely to go more than a few years afterwards. George H. W. Bush was the second-oldest at death (94.5 YO), but he only survived his presidency by 25 years. The man I'm looking for was a 20th-century President who outlived his term by 31 years. George

Let's Twist Again "There's a man who leads a life of danger." George

Yes. In the remake, Heston played the head gorilla, but used the same line. George

Would you provide a more fitting or personally agreeable definition? I realize the theological definition is more complicated than Brittanica’s. And it depends on which theologian or charlatan you ask. Victor wierwille certainly endeavored his own creative, ever-changing definitions. In the context of spiritual matters, I usually define FAITH as a letting go, a complete openness, a complete trust, which is the opposite of white-knuckled, clenching, clinging BELIEF. What definition works for you, cman?

The opening two paragraphs to her story…or account… or examination… or observation… or whatever one needs to cal it: The experiences related in this story are mine. This report is based on my personal recollections supported by an archive of contemporaneously written notes, journals, and photographs*. Most of the information about The Way’s beliefs and practices I either witnessed firsthand or were reported directly to me by members of and recruiters for The Way. This report is highly factual, and like every report may contain an error. I apologize for any such errors, but they are few and most likely superficial in nature. The truth is that this high control group still follows many of these spiritually and financially abusive practices in one form or the other. They have never apologized or publicly acknowledged responsibility for any harm that has come to their followers. And that is a true shame. My recounting is corroborated by hundreds of reports and articles about the Way online. In addition there are thousands of personal experiences recounted in social media posts that echo my memories and validate many reports of extremism, sexual and financial abuse. At least three books have been written about the fake scholarship, traumatic experiences and abuse in The Way. These authors and myself all fell victim to The Way under Victor P. Wierwille’s direction.

Presumption is the only kind of reasoning which supplies new ideas, the only kind which is, in this sense, synthetic. Induction is justified as a method which must in the long run lead up to the truth, and that, by gradual modification of the actual conclusion. There is no such warrant for presumption. The hypothesis which it problematically concludes is frequently utterly wrong itself, and even the method need not ever lead to the truth; for it may be that the features of the phenomena which it aims to explain have no rational explanation at all. Its only justification is that its method is the only way in which there can be any hope of attaining a rational explanation. — Charles S. Peirce

Yes, showing my age there. Yoda was not in Star Wars: A New Hope at tall.

I don't think we get this George.

i agree

While it might not always be that obvious or apparent or easy to identify, all logic and reason starts with and builds on a premise that is simply accepted and presumed to be true, regardless of whether it is properly identified, or how common and universally accepted that premise is (or isn't.) I don't think this is missing from Paul's writings... but, perhaps it is not all that obvious. I think parts of it show up in places like Romans 3:23. Unless or until someone relates to that, there probably isn't going to be much sense in (or need for) a personal savior, much less any change in the already common and universally accepted basis for reality in their heart. Where or how does any change start? Well, regardless of whatever words are spoken, even by the apostle Paul himself, it appears they are only attended to when the Lord opens someone's heart. see Acts 16:14.

U.S. presidents aren't known for a long life expectancy, current president excluded. I don't think that its an early president then. My guess it might be one of the last presidents to pass away. I'll go with George Bush then, George.

that dictionary is wrong. lol

She can do what she wants, obviously. It's not a matter of me (anything). It's a matter of what she wants to do or accomplish with what she writes. More power to her. However, for her to see more impact (power) from her writing, she's got some work to do. If all she wants is to say it, great. She'll get all the feedback her readers care to give her.