Rocky

It doesn't look like a thread has been started yet. http://www.greasespotcafe.com/ipb/forum/85-questioning-faith/

That would be "projecting." Which it appears you do quite unconsciously and perhaps frequently in your posts. Btw, Stinky (...er, Twinky... sorry, Twinky, I got quite a chuckle out of Grace's faux pas) may have hit the nail on the head. Aspergers may be the kindest way to assess the fact that so many things we write seem to just go right over rrobs' head. We aren't mental health professionals and certainly are not qualified to diagnose anyone. But for background to perhaps understand why Twinky suggested Asperger's as a possibility, this article might shed some light.

Have you not even read what you posted yesterday? If you don't care whether I believe you, why do you refuse to simply set forth the answers to the questions I posed? Your initial response to my invitation for you to spell it out in your own words strongly suggested you do care.

Btw, aren't you prejudging? I invited you to prevent readers of this thread from doing that to you. If you make your case, in your own words, answering those questions, what would there be to be afraid of? Doesn't love cast out fear? Where did you come up with that I don't believe you when you said you didn't mean to hurt anyone? I never said any such thing. Perhaps the thread title, "who do you love?" might have been more poignant changing it to, "how does one love?"

Bullies? Give me a break. Would you rather I just pronounce a judgment that you can simply deny? Why would you care if I believed you or not? At least you could put it out there in your own words and let it speak for itself.

To love... could you please (rrobs) expound on what you believe that entails, what it means? Does empathy and compassion have any place in the definition from your perspective? If so, please expound.

The second reply to your original post in this thread. Later, following up to a response made by GVC, Twinky said,

The key expression is "tell YOURSELF" not "opportunity." But that's okay... regular readers here are probably by now inured to how you respond to insights presented.

Asking rhetorical questions is the opposite/anti-thesis of telling you what to do. It is more fairly described as presenting you with the opportunity to tell yourself what you want to do. Why are you so defensive?

We all were wet behind the ears as young adults. If you overcame it, then there's nothing to be ashamed of.

As always, forum discussions are flat, at most two-dimensional and VERY imperfect in communicating depth of ideas. Perhaps one step closer to providing some depth, youtube videos can be poignant and might be a tad more effective in getting a point across. Please enjoy this brief clip with a soliloquy by the late Robin Williams. I think it's from the movie Good Will Hunting.

Do you even listen to yourself? Point out what God says? To whom? For what purpose? Are you even capable of self-reflection, self-examination or recognition of why you do any given thing? (Don't answer that out loud, it's a rhetorical question) Can you even recognize the difference between posting it in the context of "This is what God tells me to do. This (giving examples) is how I attempt to fulfill this charge," as opposed to "This is what God tells people (you) to do?" Note, SIX rhetorical questions. Not telling you what the answers should be...

Nice thought... but I doubt she'd ever do any of those things... short of a very major and meaningful to her "significant emotional event."

Nope. Just reflecting on the words you wrote. I can say that the words you wrote seem to be geared more toward telling others what to do than to demonstrate that that's how you live your life.

It's awful that you have to go through that. I can relate.

The problem with these passages, is that you presented them as something you believe others should do. Have you ever considered that being more concerned with whether others are conducting themselves out of love, or being loving, or doing things lovingly (etc.) than what you yourself measure up to that standard ... may not be what the scriptures are getting at? Matthew 7:1 Do not judge, or you too will be judged. Just a thought.

For those readers who have not yet subscribed to Penworks's blog, part two of her interview is now up on the American Studies blog.

Great example. That's why I have considerable discomfort with common conceptions that Romans 13 presents a scenario in which Christians have no worldly role in the conduct of politics or government. Even before the era in which governments derive their just powers from the people, human action (beyond simply shrugging one's shoulders and defaulting to "it's a spiritual battle that I can't do anything about") made a huge and important difference for liberation of the people. I continue to maintain that such common misunderstandings serve to keep people in bondage today rather than enable liberty to live in God's freedom.

! I've got my EYE on you!

Huh? I don't see how that proves any such thing. Btw, I'm confident you will not be surprised when there's another mass shooting somewhere in the US sometime in November 2017. I certainly won't be surprised. Saddened, but not surprised.

There's current literature about a prominent American politician that describes Malignant Narcissism in exquisite detail. That book ALSO (who gives a $hit about Bullinger) is an apropos character study about a cult leader most (if not all) of us at one point had fallen under the influence of. If you are interested in the title of the book, PM me... it's a Dangerous Case... My point in mentioning this in response to WW's quoted comment is that it's likely Dictor didn't necessarily have to consciously convince himself of anything in order to come up with the delusions at issue.

Who would knowingly want to associate with this guy? You got the initials correct for $$.

They were named in the R and R attemped coop. Unless they repented, they are probably M and A (mergers and acquisitions?).

I agree.

I suppose you're right. I was thinking that (knowing some political scientists) the focus on statistical data in political science isn't so fascinating for me, but yes, the rest of it is.