|
Post by Always on Feb 8, 2006 12:32:32 GMT 10
When we consider the present "war for truth" that currently rages in the world, there is a tendency to think of it mostly in terms of the contentious political and ethical issues that divide those who hold to traditional Christian values from the liberal Humanists who hold such power in the world community. But this war encompasses much more than just the realm of politics and ethics. As believers, we need to consider how our commitment to Christ and His Word affect not only our political and ethical convictions, but also the way we think about science, theology, philosophy, psychology, economics, law, and a host of other areas of contemporary thought. This collection of convictions is what we call a "worldview." And it is in the area of worldviews that one of the greatest wars of our time is now being waged, a war for our hearts and minds.
|
|
migy
Moderator
moderator in his designated rooms
Posts: 2,544
|
Post by migy on Feb 8, 2006 18:20:13 GMT 10
How about a round of applause. But the Glory still belongs to God. ======================= This is nice Pre, thing is we are standing for the wake of truth to those who disagree with the Faith that we have, I mean surely we cannot land on their Freewill, it's a choice. But the important factors is to share what we have within our Faith. That's Standing for Christ Jesus. a Blessed Day Bro. migz
|
|
ruth
Moderator
moderator in her designated rooms
Posts: 903
|
Post by ruth on Jun 26, 2006 19:46:48 GMT 10
a war of hearts and minds
I guess it would be unfair to think that only Christians are waging war against lies...
our world views are patterned by something which is totally invisible that we are not even aware that it exists...
that there is a force trying to make us believe in one thought...organized religion..organized society...government & politics..
it is exactly the reason why we would never reach a state of EUTHOPIA...
we can only do some changes in our circles of influence (e.g. self, family & friends) but not the world as a whole..
because even God made it so..(e.g. story about the Tower of Babel)...when He introduced many different langugages so that peopl will misunderstood each other and never be able to finish that project --Tower of Babel...in order that mankind will realize that their knowledge is limited compared to the wisdom of God...
it is part of God's Divine Plan that man will never attain infinite wisdom...man can do all sorts of permutations to provide answers to present maladies...but man will still not provide complete answers as to how we can cure man's universal miseries..
even us who proclaim that we are Christians, cannot provide answers to great mysteries
and it would not be fair to say that we know the TRUTH...unless we are God himself.
we are in the process of knowing the TRUTH
even John the APostle in his visions (Revelations) was not allowed to see the scroll were all the mysteries of our time is written..
so how can we so called Christians will be able to have access to that TRUTH?
|
|
migy
Moderator
moderator in his designated rooms
Posts: 2,544
|
Post by migy on Jun 27, 2006 11:16:35 GMT 10
Please bear with me to share this,
With Relavance rin kase yung Truth to Salvation, sige let us check kung pano nga...
And the Only Truth we have is Christ Jesus for He is the only name has been given...
Acts 4:12 - Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved."
<Acts 4:10 then know this, you and all the people of Israel: It is by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified but whom God raised from the dead, that this man stands before you healed. Acts 4:11 He is "'the stone you builders rejected, which has become the capstone.' Acts 4:13 When they saw the courage of Peter and John and realized that they were unschooled, ordinary men, they were astonished and they took note that these men had been with Jesus. >
and it seems that God always letting us study how it becomes parallel...
Psalms 25:5 guide me in your truth and teach me, for you are God my Savior, and my hope is in you all day long.
Who is the truth ba?
And God said in our Memory Verse in John 14:16
Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.
Hope this shared us an encouragement...
|
|
ruth
Moderator
moderator in her designated rooms
Posts: 903
|
Post by ruth on Jun 28, 2006 18:50:27 GMT 10
migy,
the verses you mentioned are limiting....it causes non-Christians to believe na tayo ay magpagmataas...
yes, Salvation is thru Christ...kaya nga may provisions pati sa mga non-christians hanggang sa end of times...bago sya maghukom...magpapakita sya sa lahat..para lahat may equal chance to reject & accept Him
|
|
migy
Moderator
moderator in his designated rooms
Posts: 2,544
|
Post by migy on Jun 30, 2006 3:46:00 GMT 10
HI Ruth,
Yeah i agree ruth, thanks for saying so, dun lang inabot ng study and i just wanted to share na talaga lang na even one way or the other dapat me transparency for believing or not believing the salvation thru Christ the least we shared what is from within our hearts, i mean for a fact na dapat wide pa rin ang pananaw natin at dapat kumpleto para makuha at maintindihan even our readers yung paniniwala at inspirasyon natin na ang Diyos pa rin ang may control ng lahat ng bagay ipaglaban man natin o hindi ang katotohanan na ating napag alaman...
Thanks Sis, i respect and agree your points...
Rgds,
tuloy lang po readers and all our regular and non-regular poster...
|
|
|
Post by hottyfecehh on Jun 30, 2006 14:12:46 GMT 10
nasan na kaya si IKAW ay ikaw ha, nawawala ka.... hmmmnnn..
|
|
migy
Moderator
moderator in his designated rooms
Posts: 2,544
|
Post by migy on Jul 29, 2006 22:35:16 GMT 10
Ho nga always, c ako nandito na, c ikaw na lang..
hala continue this WAR FOR TRUTH!
Gandang araw...
|
|
|
Post by rafael on Sept 25, 2006 2:52:15 GMT 10
When we consider the present "war for truth" that currently rages in the world, there is a tendency to think of it mostly in terms of the contentious political and ethical issues that divide those who hold to traditional Christian values from the liberal Humanists who hold such power in the world community. But this war encompasses much more than just the realm of politics and ethics. As believers, we need to consider how our commitment to Christ and His Word affect not only our political and ethical convictions, but also the way we think about science, theology, philosophy, psychology, economics, law, and a host of other areas of contemporary thought. This collection of convictions is what we call a "worldview." And it is in the area of worldviews that one of the greatest wars of our time is now being waged, a war for our hearts and minds.
Therefore who speaks of the truth and what is truth?
|
|
|
Post by rafael on Sept 25, 2006 2:56:18 GMT 10
Choosing in the name of virtue has led the mind and the heart to be at war with each other , can one go without the other?
|
|
|
Post by Always on Sept 25, 2006 13:05:00 GMT 10
There is still a need for skepticism in order to prove the nature of things we, atheists are defending for. Would it be a better way without them? I doubt that for the simple reason that chaos is needed in order to have the fulfilment of peace and harmony. It is not our burden to prove it but it is the load to disprove such
|
|
|
Post by rafael on Sept 26, 2006 3:45:44 GMT 10
There is still a need for skepticism in order to prove the nature of things we, atheists are defending for. Would it be a better way without them? I doubt that for the simple reason that chaos is needed in order to have the fulfilment of peace and harmony. It is not our burden to prove it but it is the load to disprove such A measurement of war and revolution? It is impractical to think that God advocates such unless there are subjects responsible so that chaos must manifest in order to give way for harmony.
|
|
|
Post by Always on Sept 26, 2006 9:32:18 GMT 10
There is still a need for skepticism in order to prove the nature of things we, atheists are defending for. Would it be a better way without them? I doubt that for the simple reason that chaos is needed in order to have the fulfilment of peace and harmony. It is not our burden to prove it but it is the load to disprove such A measurement of war and revolution? It is impractical to think that God advocates such unless there are subjects responsible so that chaos must manifest in order to give way for harmony.
First of all it should read as: There is still a need for skepticism in order to prove the nature of things we, theists are defending for.
Now, I am not talking about war and revolution here in reference to the term Chaos I used. I am just trying to connote on how skepticism brought chaos into the well being of other theists by way of confusion. And for me , the way of deterring this is by installing them in the middle of any argument and putting the burden on them (atheists.)
Again, would it be a better way without them?
|
|
|
Post by rafael on Sept 27, 2006 2:16:34 GMT 10
This is the exact meaning of what you said. Chaos bringing harmony.Therefore in order to prove what is good there must be evil? And so with darkness bringing out the essence of light and death so that life would spring fourth? Therefore chaos is necessary? Could you say that God created chaos and evil which most of the Christian apologists termed it in different ways in order to manifest and defend His truth? or twist the truth?
|
|
|
Post by Always on Sept 27, 2006 10:53:55 GMT 10
Not really First, I specifically asked; "Would it be a better way without them?", Second, I stated; "I doubt that for the simple reason that chaos is needed in order to have the fulfilment of peace and harmony.". Thus, it is not about war and revolution BUT, are you now conforming that theism is good and atheism is evil, since you mentioned about them in retrospect?
Again, would it be a better way without them?
|
|
|
Post by rafael on Sept 28, 2006 1:17:27 GMT 10
Yes it is. Why would a master put his dog on a leash? The dangers outside are for the strong to put up with, allowing the weak to lurk amidst the danger(chaos) would put them in jeopardy for the simple reason that they cannot take it. Chaos would bring harmony only to those who are strong and capable. The first man and woman believed the serpent’s lie according to “the bible”, and everything was destroyed. Perhaps there is another way to arrive at the same conclusion (mayber)we want to prove.There is an impliction of death first before life which is again contrary to the pattern handed to mankind.
|
|
|
Post by Always on Sept 29, 2006 5:14:45 GMT 10
Yes it is. Why would a master put his dog on a leash? The dangers outside are for the strong to put up with, allowing the weak to lurk amidst the danger(chaos) would put them in jeopardy for the simple reason that they cannot take it. Chaos would bring harmony only to those who are strong and capable. The first man and woman believed the serpent’s lie according to “the bible”, and everything was destroyed. Perhaps there is another way to arrive at the same conclusion (mayber)we want to prove.There is an impliction of death first before life which is again contrary to the pattern handed to mankind.
Yes it is ... what? Do you mean to say that theism is better without atheism? Or theism is good whilst atheism is evil? This's 1of 2
|
|
|
Post by Always on Sept 29, 2006 5:39:34 GMT 10
|
|
migy
Moderator
moderator in his designated rooms
Posts: 2,544
|
Post by migy on Sept 29, 2006 19:15:13 GMT 10
Off topic, kumusta sa inyo rafael at Parekoy Always, basta babawi ako pag naka luwag luwag sa time. Sige lang maganda ang topic. Regards sa lahat at God Bless.
|
|
|
Post by rafael on Oct 1, 2006 3:50:30 GMT 10
Atheism can be considered man's way of knowing more. Hard Science approves it.
|
|
|
Post by rafael on Oct 1, 2006 4:13:44 GMT 10
When you say that
Even boonie dogs that are not on leash or tied to the house are domesticatedly trained to protect the master. Then why would masters try to put their dogs on leash ? Try to read my aforementioned statements.
You should have known now the weak and the strong points i am trying to say.
|
|
|
Post by Always on Oct 1, 2006 16:07:12 GMT 10
Atheism can be considered man's way of knowing more. Hard Science approves it.
Atheism can be considered by a theist like me as my way of knowing more about the trueness of God Yes, hard science aprroves it that such belief is a failure and the more they get closer to the meaning of the universe the more of knowing God closer to them
|
|
|
Post by Always on Oct 1, 2006 16:53:09 GMT 10
When you say that
Even boonie dogs that are not on leash or tied to the house are domesticatedly trained to protect the master. Then why would masters try to put their dogs on leash ? Try to read my aforementioned statements.
You should have known now the weak and the strong points i am trying to say.
Why do dog barks at night? This is the dog's way of telling its master that someone is around his premises. Why do the master feeds his dog the following day? It is his way of showing appreciation to his dog as leashing is a mere practical way of showing a buddy relationship. Would your best friend defend you if you are in a big fight or would he run away leaving you behind? Perhaps, this is the easiest illustration on why dogs are called man's best friend and not cats
Whatever the case may be, atheists will embrace virtually any idea about evolution as long as it fits such worldview. Atheists have undergone a number of changes since embracing Darwin's theory. Such changes demonstrate the willingness of atheists to revise and distort the theory of evolution in an effort to make it more compatible wiht their dialectic. Your survival to the fittest does not fit well with a punctauted equilibrium at a much faster pace and in a isolated segments of a population [/size][/color]
|
|
|
Post by rafael on Oct 3, 2006 4:19:24 GMT 10
Atheism can be considered man's way of knowing more. Hard Science approves it.
Atheism can be considered by a theist like me as my way of knowing more about the trueness of God Yes, hard science aprroves it that such belief is a failure and the more they get closer to the meaning of the universe the more of knowing God closer to them
How could man know this God? It is like pouring a river into a small tea cup.
|
|
|
Post by rafael on Oct 3, 2006 4:28:16 GMT 10
Why do dog barks at night? This is the dog's way of telling its master that someone is around his premises. Why do the master feeds his dog the following day? It is his way of showing appreciation to his dog as leashing is a mere practical way of showing a buddy relationship. Would your best friend defend you if you are in a big fight or would he run away leaving you behind? Perhaps, this is the easiest illustration on why dogs are called man's best friend and not cats
Whatever the case may be, atheists will embrace virtually any idea about evolution as long as it fits such worldview. Atheists have undergone a number of changes since embracing Darwin's theory. Such changes demonstrate the willingness of atheists to revise and distort the theory of evolution in an effort to make it more compatible wiht their dialectic. Your survival to the fittest does not fit well with a punctauted equilibrium at a much faster pace and in a isolated segments of a population [/size][/color][/quote] Dogs do bark,but the master being more superior in intelligence must protect his dog, when on the loose. Have you heard of dogs that disappeared? So the master gives reward to anyone who can bring back his dog?
Likewise any religious man would also embrace his church statements because religion is also man made.Nature dictates that the fittest survives.
|
|
|
Post by Always on Oct 3, 2006 10:41:35 GMT 10
Perhaps you do not really adhere in a buddy system between dogs and man. Yes, there are dogs that disappears, but how many times do you see them advertise in the newspapers? And if your main reason is to protect them in having dogs, then, this is not very different from PAL people, who just stay in your house feeding them and doing nothing. It is very illogical to say the least on why you get dogs for your house. You get them for the main reason of protection not you protecting them but they protecting you. Feeding them is just a way of consolacion of paying them back. Simply take a look at the presidential guard dogs of GMA, they were hired to protect the president and not vice versa. Or take notice on the real sniffing dogs at the international airport, they protect not only the people but the country in general just by doing their job
Now what kind of relationship is that? Any person who believes that everything can be explained in natural terms can not tolerate the concept of supernatural things. Religion does not save mankind but for theists, the world is only comprehensible in light of God's existence
|
|
|
Post by rafael on Oct 4, 2006 4:09:51 GMT 10
Perhaps you do not really adhere in a buddy system between dogs and man. Yes, there are dogs that disappears, but how many times do you see them advertise in the newspapers? And if your main reason is to protect them in having dogs, then, this is not very different from PAL people, who just stay in your house feeding them and doing nothing. It is very illogical to say the least on why you get dogs for your house. You get them for the main reason of protection not you protecting them but they protecting you. Feeding them is just a way of consolacion of paying them back. Simply take a look at the presidential guard dogs of GMA, they were hired to protect the president and not vice versa. Or take notice on the real sniffing dogs at the international airport, they protect not only the people but the country in general just by doing their job
Now what kind of relationship is that? Any person who believes that everything can be explained in natural terms can not tolerate the concept of supernatural things. Religion does not save mankind but for theists, the world is only comprehensible in light of God's existence
A buddy system between dogs and men can be agreed upon but dogs represent an inferior state, compared to man, likewise, man is inferior to God. Between a superior and inferior being, who takes the responsibility to protect?Can dogs protect their masters against bullets? Man took animals as beasts of burdens and it does not take aside reciprocity in terms of "friendship" or complementing each other.
Does religion save? Is God religion? or man made his own religion.
Basing from the world's news between the Arabs and the Jews, between Pakistan and India, between Christians and Moslems, religion strictly fulfills the definition of conflict and death among believers
|
|
|
Post by Always on Oct 4, 2006 7:22:25 GMT 10
A buddy system between dogs and men can be agreed upon but dogs represent an inferior state, compared to man, likewise, man is inferior to God. Between a superior and inferior being, who takes the responsibility to protect?Can dogs protect their masters against bullets? Man took animals as beasts of burdens and it does not take aside reciprocity in terms of "friendship" or complementing each other.
Can your best friend protects you against impending bullets? Since you talk about reciprocity, can you do the same as a complementary with each other? That's the challenge isn't it no one can outperform what a man's best can do in order to show his loyalty to his master. Most theists consider God to be his best friend not just their Creator; even though they know that they are far inferior to the very nature of God. But God has His own way of letting us know that we are loved and fed with food of thoughts. Hence, dogs act the same way toward their master.
Let me rephrase a question for you: Will you protect your belief against bullets?
|
|
|
Post by Always on Oct 4, 2006 7:38:20 GMT 10
Does religion save? Is God religion? or man made his own religion.
Basing from the world's news between the Arabs and the Jews, between Pakistan and India, between Christians and Moslems, religion strictly fulfills the definition of conflict and death among believers
Why ask again on something that has been anwered Here's my previous take on that; " Religion does not save mankind but for theists, the world is only comprehensible in light of God's existence " Now, to your 2nd querry Do you believe, trust and follow your parents? If so, then in essence, your parents can be termed as religion too Religion fulfils something as you defined it is not different to the religion of unbelievers.
|
|
|
Post by rafael on Oct 5, 2006 1:43:35 GMT 10
You initially introduced chaos, before we get lost on something else, it is best to define who is more superior to face chaotic situation, with an example between dogs and man and who plays the protector and the protected.I earlier mentioned that man made animals beasts of burdens due to his intelligence, Reciprocity and/or complements do take place between two forces complementing each other. Who does get lost in confusions? Is it the upper intelligence or the lower ones? Assuming that dogs protect the master that could only be possible if the dog is domesticated and trained to protect. That is again possible when master-dog relationship is eshtablished In this stage, the master develops the protective mechanism for his dog.
In the wild it isn’t so, man and dog has only one way process each, both to protect themselves from each other.
Man develops more sophistications in terms of protection, he made bullet proof vests, walls, windows, electrically charged fences, security guards and a keen sense of analysis against enemies.Man has developed bunkers, underground shelters and many more as forms of protection. Dogs cannot do this.
What I am trying to say is that “chaotic situation” you earlier stated is a phenomenon suited only for the fittest to survive and between man and dog the latter will die.
Between God and man, the latter will fall.
|
|