Jump to content
The World News Media


Guest Nicole

Recommended Posts

  • Member
1 hour ago, Shiwiii said:

 

I do not adhere to what the gb states, I only try to adhere to what the Bible states. That should answer your questions, if not then please by all means start a thread and ask away. I have nothing to hide from you or anyone else. 

It's good you have nothing to hide. You do hide your name, however. Is it truly Shiwii?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Views 6.5k
  • Replies 64
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

My BOOKS, you old hen! You know it very well. My BOOKS, written by the most astute mind of our times, a person who, despite being undeniably brilliant, is unfailingly respectful of all persons an

Who doesn't? Besides, you know full well that beheading is no more than an auxiliary point, nowhere presented as the main reason. These days (thankfully) it recedes even more as a factor when the

I think he needs to chill a bit, and take a handful of Blamitol (tm). Blamitol edited higher res .mp4

Posted Images

  • Member
3 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

It's good you have nothing to hide. You do hide your name, however. Is it truly Shiwii?

No it is not, but it also matters not. 

Shiwi is a native american word from the Zuni tribe

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
On 5/30/2017 at 0:07 PM, Shiwiii said:

I do not adhere to what the gb states, I only try to adhere to what the Bible states. That should answer your questions, if not then please by all means start a thread and ask away. I have nothing to hide from you or anyone else. 

There is the person who will not do a single thing unless he sees it in the Bible. It sounds very pious, doesn’t it? Very holy. Instantly it casts aspersions upon the one who will do things not expressly spelled out in the Bible. Noble though it sounds, however, it is but an indication of timidity at best, and rebelliousness at worst.

This person is like the citizen of a country who will not do a single thing unless he reads it in the Constitution. He distrusts those idiots on the Supreme Court. What right have they to adapt the Constitution to modern times? They are liars and impostors, most likely, he tells himself.

If the Bible does not specifically say that there will be a governing body for 2017, it certainly gives carte blanche. God has always provided some human agency to adapt his Word to those trusting in it. He is not the Grand Idiot, so as to think it obsolete just when the going gets rough. Today, it is Matthew 24:45-47, a passage which admittedly takes some interpretation. I’ve had someone tell me that it is merely a nice little story with the moral to always do your best.

‘It is necessary to shut the mouths’ of certain rebellious scoundrels, Paul wrote to Titus in the first century. Is it no longer necessary? Did the scoundrels all become saints the moment the apostles died? Who today is going to shut the mouths of the liars? Plainly, there is to be an organization in the modern day.

So obvious are the benefits of organization - so many things you can do with it that you cannot do without it - that it is inexcusable not to be that way. That being the case, why would anyone resist the idea? All I can come up with is that they really don’t want to stray too far from this world and its definition of what is normal. They aspire to be smilely gumdrops in this system of things, and nothing more. ‘It is not bad how the world is arranged,’ they say. ‘All that is needed is for people to be nicer.’ As a smilely gumdrop, they gush joy and love to everyone. Then it turns out that one thinks Trump is the best hope for achieving his aim and another thinks it is Hillary, at which point they assassinate each other. Or they fall into the mindset of the national king, who will invariably convince them that their fellow religionists in that other kingdom have it all wrong and will not straighten up until their butts are kicked.

At heart, they like this system of things. It just needs a little tweaking – that’s all. Nothing drastic. They are like Demas, who departed because ‘he loved this system of things.’ Unlike Demas, who most likely re-assimilated into the world he once left – for we never hear of him again – they do all they can do denigrate the Apostle Paul and the organization he represents. That way they don’t look so bad. ‘How can I put up with someone telling me what to do?’ they explain. ‘Why, they don’t even do birthdays over there.’

It’s a template. I don’t know who specifically fits into it and who does not. I’m not saying you do, Shiwii – how do I know? But it is a template nonetheless. If you like, I’ll say more. I’ve got nothing to hide from you  or anyone else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
18 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

 

It’s a template. I don’t know who specifically fits into it and who does not. I’m not saying you do, Shiwii – how do I know? But it is a template nonetheless. If you like, I’ll say more. I’ve got nothing to hide from you  or anyone else.

It is a template, I agree but it puts restrictions and limitations. I understand your position and have seen the world through the same lens before. I try my very best to not assign labels to people based on their opinions, as times I fail though. I DO assign labels to groups who profess to have the whole truth and anyone and everyone outside of the group is in the wrong. This is a narrow minded view held by MANY religious organizations. There are many religions who claim they are God's chose people, the only ones who know what God wants and the sole channel for communicating with God. Hogwash to all of that mess. If God wanted an strict group or organization, He would have laid out the structure and rules within the Bible. Some will argue that that IS what the Bible says, I beg to differ and would gladly discuss this in depth as long as it is an intellectually honest discussion. Of course there will be people who won't do anything unless they are told, and others who will be so stubborn as to not receive correction or guidance, but on the other hand you have those who DO ponder their relationship with God and other people without outside influence (other people's/groups opinions). 

19 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

God has always provided some human agency to adapt his Word to those trusting in it.

I would have to disagree with you. The eunuch from Ethiopia was not a part of ANY organization and nor did he have any agency to guide him when he was speaking with Phillip. The lands that the early disciples went to and converted folks had no "agency" as told to us in the Bible. Also,  Paul and Barnabas did not appeal to an agency about those in Jerusalem over the idea of circumcision of the gentiles, but rather corrected the Pharisees (who converted) about bringing additional restrictions/ unfair yoke, upon the believers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

.

Thomas Thom, Thommy Thom Thom ....

I thought Shiwiii had an extremely well reasoned argument that was based in fact, and that further discussing it with you would put your position held in extreme jeopardy, if not ALREADY completely demolished with reason and logic.

I hold a view somewhere in the middle, but because I can see BOTH sides ... it was crystal clear to ME that you have resoundingly LOST THIS DEBATE, and embarrassingly BADLY ... with your infantile debate concession comment ...

22 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

'Hogwash' is my word, from the second book title. You may not use it.

It will be interesting to see, although I already see the current outcome, and forsee the ultimate outcome, if you decide to continue this exchange using Scripture, reason and logic.

It is embarrassing to see someone cut off their OWN head, to have someone else hand it back to them ... on a platter.

.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
15 hours ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

.with your infantile debate concession comment ...

Suppose I took the crass words you use and threw them around, like Kim and his nukes. Would you like it?

Most things are arguable, and as you know, I'm not one to argue. Shiwii wanted to celebrate his birthday. I told him he could. What more can he ask for? Is he upset that some are convinced by the explanations that failed to convince him? What's it to him? Why is he here?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
16 hours ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

It will be interesting to see, although I already see the current outcome, and forsee the ultimate outcome, if you decide to continue this exchange using Scripture, reason and logic.

It is embarrassing to see someone cut off their OWN head, to have someone else hand it back to them ... on a platter.

Nothing else need be said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
2 hours ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

Nothing else need be said.

Rather, I think it important to stick with the original theme of this theme. My last reply was a noble attempt to do that. Look, if you want to take on the Librarian, be my guest.I don't want to sit in detention for a month.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

Tommy Tom Tom:

I have spent several hours reading your blog "SheepandGoats", and I was impressed with the quality of your communication skills in that forum ... I especially liked your treatment of Mickey Spillane .... but when in a discussion of things where people's viewpoints strongly differ .. IT IS A DEBATE ... and that is how adults sift out bad ideas, and set them aside .. on the intellectual battlefield.

IN CONTEXT of the discussions, you "took your ball, and went home ...", thereby AVOIDING THE ISSUES, which were left to stand.

... like turning over your King, half way through a chess game.

Debate is sometimes a war of attrition ... until the last of the opponent's ideas are individually squashed.  That is basically how the "Scientific Method" works also ... and that effort is the ONLY way that real truth is separated from comfortable fiction.

You cannot LEAVE THE BATTLEFIELD while the opponents' army of ideas are still standing erect and strong.

I can see BOTH viewpoints .. but to "win the day" you have to finish the fight.

The "Rubber Duck" theory states that you have to explain what you believe to the rubber duck until it becomes crystal clear what ideas we hold are real, and which are stupid.

This forum is our "Rubber Duck".

This is the issue that Shiwiii proposed, and that you avoided by conceding the battle:

" I would have to disagree with you. The eunuch from Ethiopia was not a part of ANY organization and nor did he have any agency to guide him when he was speaking with Phillip. The lands that the early disciples went to and converted folks had no "agency" as told to us in the Bible. Also,  Paul and Barnabas did not appeal to an agency about those in Jerusalem over the idea of circumcision of the gentiles, but rather corrected the Pharisees (who converted) about bringing additional restrictions/ unfair yoke, upon the believers."

.

 

 

.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites





×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.