Paul Harvey Years Ago...

[mymistake]

There is nothing special about relationships.  Right now everybody reading this is in a relationship of gravity as the atoms in our bodies pull on each other or twist space or however it works.  It's not special.  Just about anything you name has some kind of relationship to just about anything else you can name.  Relationship is how we sort ideas.

 

How in the world do you accomplish a relationship?  What does that even mean?

[Guest end3]

 

I disagree. It very much relates to the Christian message. Vigile just acknowledged things are in relationships. Instead of rehashing that, I am asking specifically for means of accomplishing those relationships or must we say it just can't happen.

I'm not sure how you want this to go.

 

Relationships exist, it's unavoidable. It's the way things work; my taxes pay for your disability, your orange tree provides my dessert, my brother works for your company and he used the money to buy me a motorcycle that I got killed on. No magic required.

 

What clear point are you trying to make?

 

Long story short, there are relationships that immediately gel....very similar to natural law, and then there are relationships that require more. The more being what I would term compromise or sacrifice. I just find it more that remarkably similar to what is presented in the Bible.

 

Two Republicans can agree. Two Democrats. Two believers, two non-believers. What is the mechanism for making a pair of Republican/Democrats or believer/non-believer. Grace, sacrifice?

[Guest end3]

How in the world do you accomplish a relationship?  What does that even mean?

It means what do we have to find balance and peace. Do we kill those that don't believe as we do?

[mymistake]

I'm going to go out on a limb here.  End did you ever hear a sermon where the preacher really impressed you with something he called a "relationship of Grace"?

 

 

Oh and to answer your question negotiation is a very old concept for humans.  It's not the Bible.

[Orbit]

 

Elaboration.  It's your friend.

It doesn't change the fact that ego dictates the non-believer because they have no choice...

 

What? Can you please elaborate?

[Orbit]

 

How in the world do you accomplish a relationship?  What does that even mean?

It means what do we have to find balance and peace. Do we kill those that don't believe as we do?

 

If you're a Christian a few hundred years ago you did. If you're a fundamentalist Muslim today you do.

[Orbit]

 

Long story short, there are relationships that immediately gel....very similar to natural law, and then there are relationships that require more. The more being what I would term compromise or sacrifice. I just find it more that remarkably similar to what is presented in the Bible.

 

Two Republicans can agree. Two Democrats. Two believers, two non-believers. What is the mechanism for making a pair of Republican/Democrats or believer/non-believer. Grace, sacrifice?

 

A confluence of interests.

[florduh]

Two Republicans can agree. Two Democrats. Two believers, two non-believers. What is the mechanism for making a pair of Republican/Democrats or believer/non-believer. Grace, sacrifice? 

 

Ah, I see. it seems to me that two people who share an important goal or have more in common than they have differences can have a viable relationship. It all depends on how exclusive your beliefs are; there are people who can only get along with other Dallas Cowboy fans, other Tea Partiers who believe anything left of Limbaugh is a Commie Pinko, other Skinheads, other La Leche Leaguers, other crystal healers, well, you get the point. 

 

Example:

 

I was walking across a bridge one day, and I saw a man standing on the edge, about to jump off. So I ran over and said "Stop! don't do it!" "Why shouldn't I?" he said. I said, "Well, there's so much to live for!" He said, "Like what?" I said, "Well...are you religious or atheist?" He said, "Religious." I said, "Me too! Are you christian or buddhist?" He said, "Christian." I said, "Me too! Are you catholic or protestant?" He said, "Protestant." I said, "Me too! Are you episcopalian or baptist?" He said, "Baptist!" I said,"Wow! Me too! Are you baptist church of god or baptist church of the lord?" He said, "Baptist church of god!" I said, "Me too! Are you original baptist church of god, or are you reformed baptist church of god?" He said,"Reformed Baptist church of god!" I said, "Me too! Are you reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1879, or reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1915?" He said, "Reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1915!" I said, "Die, heretic scum", and pushed him off. -- Emo Phillips

 

[Guest end3]

 

Two Republicans can agree. Two Democrats. Two believers, two non-believers. What is the mechanism for making a pair of Republican/Democrats or believer/non-believer. Grace, sacrifice?

Ah, I see. it seems to me that two people who share an important goal or have more in common than they have differences can have a viable relationship. It all depends on how exclusive your beliefs are; there are people who can only get along with other Dallas Cowboy fans, other Tea Partiers who believe anything left of Limbaugh is a Commie Pinko, other Skinheads, other La Leche Leaguers, other crystal healers, well, you get the point. 

 

Example:

 

I was walking across a bridge one day, and I saw a man standing on the edge, about to jump off. So I ran over and said "Stop! don't do it!" "Why shouldn't I?" he said. I said, "Well, there's so much to live for!" He said, "Like what?" I said, "Well...are you religious or atheist?" He said, "Religious." I said, "Me too! Are you christian or buddhist?" He said, "Christian." I said, "Me too! Are you catholic or protestant?" He said, "Protestant." I said, "Me too! Are you episcopalian or baptist?" He said, "Baptist!" I said,"Wow! Me too! Are you baptist church of god or baptist church of the lord?" He said, "Baptist church of god!" I said, "Me too! Are you original baptist church of god, or are you reformed baptist church of god?" He said,"Reformed Baptist church of god!" I said, "Me too! Are you reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1879, or reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1915?" He said, "Reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1915!" I said, "Die, heretic scum", and pushed him off. -- Emo Phillips[/size]

 

Yes that was funny thanks. I find this whole struggle analogous to a race and have the opinion that non-believers would rather quit running and walk because it's easier. Lower stress. Faithfully relying on science and relegation to lessen the mental warfare. IMO.

 

So, like you didn't know my stand before....but there's iteration 916 for record. Happy Weekend folks.

[mymistake]

 

Yes that was funny thanks. I find this whole struggle analogous to a race and have the opinion that non-believers would rather quit running and walk because it's easier. Lower stress. Faithfully relying on science and relegation to lessen the mental warfare. IMO.

 

 

 

 

I agree.  It is a race against your own cognitive dissonance.  And non-believers have quit that struggle.  It is easier and lower stress to stop fighting against your cognitive dissonance.  

[florduh]

Faithfully relying on science and relegation to lessen the mental warfare. IMO.

 

That may be your uninformed opinion but no faith is required to believe in demonstrable fact. I tend to rely on what works, what provides provable answers, disciplines that will and must theorize but not guess. The only mental warfare I encountered was as a Christian trying to fit the square peg of observable reality into the round hole of an ancient religious system.

[Guest end3]

 

Faithfully relying on science and relegation to lessen the mental warfare. IMO.

That may be your uninformed opinion but no faith is required to believe in demonstrable fact. I tend to rely on what works, what provides provable answers, disciplines that will and must theorize but not guess. The only mental warfare I encountered was as a Christian trying to fit the square peg of observable reality into the round hole of an ancient religious system.

 

Lol, grouchy old bastard.

[florduh]

 

Lol, grouchy old bastard. 

 

 

Thanks. I appreciate your cogent rebuttal.

[Guest end3]

 

Lol, grouchy old bastard.

Thanks. I appreciate your cogent rebuttal.

 

Didn't know you were really soliciting one. Faith has to be utilized on so many accounts each day as "demonstrable facts" are never part of the complete picture. Nevertheless, this doesn't sway the opinion. Enter ego again.

[Guest end3]

 

 

Lol, grouchy old bastard.

Thanks. I appreciate your cogent rebuttal.

 

Didn't know you were really soliciting one. Faith has to be utilized on so many accounts each day as "demonstrable facts" are never part of the complete picture. Nevertheless, this doesn't sway the opinion. Enter ego again.

 

What can you really refute to this response? Really, honestly?

[florduh]

 

What can you really refute to this response? Really, honestly? 

 

 

I confess I don't know how to discuss this topic, assuming I even understand what the topic is.

 

When it's 32 degrees Farenheit I have faith that water will freeze. It's proven to be thus every time, so my "faith" that it will happen this time isn't based on wishful thinking or what someone told me but didn't show evidence for. It's not faith so much as a reasonable expectation based on observation and past performance. I say that A causes B because by reason of C and you respond that it's "grace" or something else once observed by those who wrote the Bible.

[Guest end3]

 

What can you really refute to this response? Really, honestly?

I confess I don't know how to discuss this topic, assuming I even understand what the topic is.

 

When it's 32 degrees Farenheit I have faith that water will freeze. It's proven to be thus every time, so my "faith" that it will happen this time isn't based on wishful thinking or what someone told me but didn't show evidence for. It's not faith so much as a reasonable expectation based on observation and past performance. I say that A causes B because by reason of C and you respond that it's "grace" or something else once observed by those who wrote the Bible.

 

Doesn't work with humans... or at least not yet.

[florduh]

What doesn't work with humans?

[Orbit]

 

Yes that was funny thanks. I find this whole struggle analogous to a race and have the opinion that non-believers would rather quit running and walk because it's easier. Lower stress. Faithfully relying on science and relegation to lessen the mental warfare. IMO.

 

Two Republicans can agree. Two Democrats. Two believers, two non-believers. What is the mechanism for making a pair of Republican/Democrats or believer/non-believer. Grace, sacrifice?

Ah, I see. it seems to me that two people who share an important goal or have more in common than they have differences can have a viable relationship. It all depends on how exclusive your beliefs are; there are people who can only get along with other Dallas Cowboy fans, other Tea Partiers who believe anything left of Limbaugh is a Commie Pinko, other Skinheads, other La Leche Leaguers, other crystal healers, well, you get the point. 

 

Example:

 

I was walking across a bridge one day, and I saw a man standing on the edge, about to jump off. So I ran over and said "Stop! don't do it!" "Why shouldn't I?" he said. I said, "Well, there's so much to live for!" He said, "Like what?" I said, "Well...are you religious or atheist?" He said, "Religious." I said, "Me too! Are you christian or buddhist?" He said, "Christian." I said, "Me too! Are you catholic or protestant?" He said, "Protestant." I said, "Me too! Are you episcopalian or baptist?" He said, "Baptist!" I said,"Wow! Me too! Are you baptist church of god or baptist church of the lord?" He said, "Baptist church of god!" I said, "Me too! Are you original baptist church of god, or are you reformed baptist church of god?" He said,"Reformed Baptist church of god!" I said, "Me too! Are you reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1879, or reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1915?" He said, "Reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1915!" I said, "Die, heretic scum", and pushed him off. -- Emo Phillips[/size]

 

Yes that was funny thanks. I find this whole struggle analogous to a race and have the opinion that non-believers would rather quit running and walk because it's easier. Lower stress. Faithfully relying on science and relegation to lessen the mental warfare. IMO.

 

So, like you didn't know my stand before....but there's iteration 916 for record. Happy Weekend folks. 

 

 

Quit running? To/from what? What is easier? What the hell are you talking about?

[midniterider]

 

 

Lol, grouchy old bastard.

Thanks. I appreciate your cogent rebuttal.

 

Didn't know you were really soliciting one. Faith has to be utilized on so many accounts each day as "demonstrable facts" are never part of the complete picture. Nevertheless, this doesn't sway the opinion. Enter ego again.

 

 

Faith in Jesus every day? Or faith in people, systems, and machinery?

[midniterider]

What doesn't work with humans?

 

Humans can freeze at 32 degrees as well. :-)

[FreeThinkerNZ]

 

 

 

 

Then this goes against everything you preach. "We know the mechanisms, we know the science, we are rational, thinking, able to see the consequences", "By god, if we sow it, we know what will come up"......Which would make sense if you were an Omni type. And that boils down to humanity putting themselves above God as usual.

 

Someone debunk this for me in 300 words or less.

There's no point in me trying to debunk anything you believe in.  You think it's wrong for humanity to "put themselves above god" therefore you believe in a god therefore you're not openminded enough to think about a world without one.  Waste of time trying to talk with you about it.

 

Sounds reasonable. Would like you to participate in a few more thoughts if you don't mind. Ok, if we have no ready/natural agreement, is it still possible for us to have a meaningful relationship? (This is not personal, just asking for the sake of discussion. )

 

 

Let's see now, do these comments sound like the foundation of a meaningful relationship?

 

"We reap what we sow sister."

 

"Did you watch the clip? Pull something out of it and let's discuss rather than just hatin' on right-wingers."

 

I prefer not to spend my limited energy having a discussion with someone who is disrespectful and misrepresents my words.

 

You are misunderstanding. I wish to discuss to illustrate something. It's not personal. If it were personal, I'd tell you I think you are a pretty good person....even leaning left and all. I don't know you, but that's my impression.

 

Being in a different time zone to you and the majority of posters gives me an advantage: While I am sleeping, a couple of pages of to and fro gets posted, so that when I wake up I can read the thread to see if you were able to illustrate something or not.  It looks like you haven't yet illustrated a point clearly enough for me to follow what you're talking about.  I will probably keep reading in case you do though.

[Guest end3]

 

 

What can you really refute to this response? Really, honestly?

I confess I don't know how to discuss this topic, assuming I even understand what the topic is.

 

When it's 32 degrees Farenheit I have faith that water will freeze. It's proven to be thus every time, so my "faith" that it will happen this time isn't based on wishful thinking or what someone told me but didn't show evidence for. It's not faith so much as a reasonable expectation based on observation and past performance. I say that A causes B because by reason of C and you respond that it's "grace" or something else once observed by those who wrote the Bible.

 

Doesn't work with humans... or at least not yet.

 

Just saying I don't see humans acting predictably like natural law and don't see how we can reasonably exclude an inordinate amount of variable acting on a human system.....that we must apply faith to compensate.

[Orbit]

 

 

 

What can you really refute to this response? Really, honestly?

I confess I don't know how to discuss this topic, assuming I even understand what the topic is.

 

When it's 32 degrees Farenheit I have faith that water will freeze. It's proven to be thus every time, so my "faith" that it will happen this time isn't based on wishful thinking or what someone told me but didn't show evidence for. It's not faith so much as a reasonable expectation based on observation and past performance. I say that A causes B because by reason of C and you respond that it's "grace" or something else once observed by those who wrote the Bible.

 

Doesn't work with humans... or at least not yet.

 

Just saying I don't see humans acting predictably like natural law and don't see how we can reasonably exclude an inordinate amount of variable acting on a human system.....that we must apply faith to compensate.

 

Can you define "natural law"? People's behavior does fall into rather predictable patterns when you look at them as a group. Apply faith to compensate for not being able to tell the future? Why? What for?

[Guest end3]

 

 

 

 

What can you really refute to this response? Really, honestly?

I confess I don't know how to discuss this topic, assuming I even understand what the topic is.

 

When it's 32 degrees Farenheit I have faith that water will freeze. It's proven to be thus every time, so my "faith" that it will happen this time isn't based on wishful thinking or what someone told me but didn't show evidence for. It's not faith so much as a reasonable expectation based on observation and past performance. I say that A causes B because by reason of C and you respond that it's "grace" or something else once observed by those who wrote the Bible.

 

Doesn't work with humans... or at least not yet.

 

Just saying I don't see humans acting predictably like natural law and don't see how we can reasonably exclude an inordinate amount of variable acting on a human system.....that we must apply faith to compensate.

 

Can you define "natural law"? People's behavior does fall into rather predictable patterns when you look at them as a group. Apply faith to compensate for not being able to tell the future? Why? What for?

 

To know them, and they know you.....a relationship. Love.