He may or may not skip it, but he hasn’t explained it, nor does he seem to see that getting from where things are now to his utopia is much trickier than his suggestions would suggest. For example, answering any question honestly one gets from anyone in any context is problematic because we are not in a utopia.
We love unconditionally as a result of being loved unconditionally (this love was demonstrated/communicated on the cross). That originates in God (omnitemporal Trinity). Only God loves perfectly, and apart from them (original personhood) our love diverges from the recognition of all personhood. The solution is continually refocusing/pivoting back to them in every thought, behavior, and revaluation.
LOL, AGAIN, ‘this one’ has not yet seen nor hear ‘the words’, yet, somehow, “greenfuse” has remarkably believes that it knows what is written.
For ‘this one’ to say and claim what it has here clearly proves that it has not yet read nor heard ‘the words’
Who does the ‘we’ word here refer to, exactly?
Does the so-called “president” of the laughably called “united states of america” ‘love unconditionally’ when it orders the bombing and obliteration of human beings, children and babies included?
Do adults ‘love unconditionally’ children when adutls judge, punish, ridicule, or shame children and/or adults?
Please explain how anyone has been ‘loved unconditionally’ just because a human being was nailed to a couple of sticks?
But yet ‘you’ cannot inform the readers here who and what God, Itself, is, exactly. In fact, you, still, consider God to have a penis, based solely on the fact that some, coincidentally, males wrote down “he” when referring to God in some book labelled “the bible”.
Well, of course, I know what is written. I asked you a number of times and saw your answers. They were contradictory for a while and then ended on always answer any questions honestly. Full stop. So, yeah. I know what you wrote. I asked, you answered. I read it. It is just that uncomplicated.
Incorrect. It’s right there in the Honesty and Oppenness thread. I read the words you wrote in answers to questions specifically on that. If you don’t like what you wrote, that is not my problem.
And, now we are in a repeating cycle, so as not to hijack, I’ll leave this here. Anyone curious can go to that thread and see what anew gave as answers.
If we are not loving unconditionally, we need to be reminded we are loved (and the Lord disciplines those he loves).
Jesus def had a penis as an infant, or he couldn’t have been circumcised. Someone woulda said somethin.
LOL, So, ‘this one’ is now believing, absolutely, that it knows ‘what is written’, but yet it has never seen what is written.
LOL, Obviously, I would have had to present ‘what is written’, which I have not. Therefore, there is no possible way “greenfuse” could have seen and know ‘what is written’.
How deluded could a human being become?
But, most of ‘that’ had absolutely nothing to do with ‘what is written’.
What “greenfuse” imagined, and then believed, absolutely, was contradictory, was, in fact, not. But “greenfuse” would not yet be aware of this because it had, once again, chosen to “run away” and hide, instead of just continuing the discussion.
This is another prime example of when “greefuses” believes something to be absolutely true, although “greenfuse” laughably believes, absolutely, that it does not believe anything absolutely.
But those little minuscule amount of words are not ‘the words’ that I am talking about and referring to, obviously.
See how “greefuse” literally believes some things to be absolutely true. This is a common occurrence with “greefuse”, and as I have pointed out and shown previously, this believing absolutely is why “greenfuse” is really a very closed person, and thus why it was not open to understand and come to know the actual irrefutable Truth.
But, LOL, ‘the words’, ‘that are written’ are NOT ‘right there’ in the Honesty and Openness thread at all. In fact, I have informed you of this Truth and Fact previously. But, because you are absolutely closed up here, you were not then and still not able to ‘see’ the actual Truth here.
So, what?
Those answers are NOT ‘the words’ in ‘what is written’. How many times do I have to keep informing you of this before you can comprehend?
As usual, “greenfuse” adds in something to ‘try to’ deceive you readers here.
But you will just introduce ‘it’ in another thread when you want to hijack that thread and turn attention ‘back onto me’ again.
And, you are only, once again, leaving and “running away” because there is not a single thing that you could say or write that could counter the Truth that ‘the words that are written’ you very clearly have not yet seen.
Again, I am still waiting for those who are interested, whom I will then share ‘those writings’ with.
And, if anyone does, then you can see what “greenfuse” asked and wrote and see, again very clearly, what it missed, misinterpreted, misconstrued, and misunderstood, completely.
To you, so to God also, and absolutely hilariously, definitely has a penis as well.
Imagine being a judgemental person who believes in punishment, while still believing that you ‘love unconditionally’.
It is like people like ‘this one’ here has never really even thought about what ‘loving unconditionally’ would actually entail and mean exactly.
You don’t believe in guiding children, coaching athletes, training employees, mentoring … yada … ?
Here is ‘another one’ who introduces the most completely “out there” claims, which has absolutely nothing at all to do with me.
I’m sorry, sir. You appear to be lost. Are you a sandwich?
Yes: If a theory is false, then you can always make up a complimentary theory which posits the complement of it. So, if the first is false, the second is true and viceversa.
Explanations are how to remember the theory, not why it is true (or false).
When you put it like that, you trigger an imagining of the memetic (gradual) evolution from one theory into a completely different theory. Which feels very dialectic.
…but can you see (and you probably do) how some memes in a structure of belief are more … loadbearing? If you change that kind of meme, it changes the global landscape of their belief structure. It is an identity-crisis level paradigm shift.
Yeah, paradigms make no difference, they are just global descriptions
1 Like
Well, that’s one paradigm.
…are we sure it’s a global one?