Great, I am interested in seeing what you have that your belief backs up and supports ‘your belief and claim’, “That’s why God incarnated”.
But will you explain further the words, “That’s why God incarnated”, first?
Love (quality) is not love (being) without demonstration (action).
So, I will take that as a ‘No’ to my question.
Are you programmed to do what you’re doing? Then I s’pose I can’t blame ya. But I know God ain’t your programmer. You should fire your programmer & ask God to fix you (he’ll do it pro bono).
LOL Imagine “growing up” believing that God is male gendered.
So, if you, really, would ‘like to’, then when are you ‘going to’ back up and support your belief and claim, “That’s why God incarnate”, exactly?
Because he is (they are) love, and love (quality) is not love (being) without demonstration (action).
Are you asking me to defend that^ statement, or to link back to threads regarding evidence of the demonstration? Imagine asking me to show you… me… li’l ol’ me… when everyone in the world has access to the Amazon app & Internet. But you want me to dig up old threads? I can do that.
Who and/or what do the “he” and “they” words here refer to, exactly?
I asked you what I did:
Remember, that was regarding your belief and claim, “That’s why God incarnate”.
To which you replied:
I am not asking you to defend that statement in any way.
you said and claimed you sure would like to defend that statement, belief, and claim of yours.
I just wait, patiently, for you to do so. But I am not sure why I am still waiting, considering you claim you sure would like to back up and support your statement, “That’s why God incarnated”.
I do NOT want you to do anything that you do not want to. Again, I just asked you if you would like to share anything that could back up and support the belief and statement of yours that “That’s why God incarnated”, And, again, you said you sure would like to.
As for what else you said and wrote I have absolutely NO idea what you are talking about.
1 Like
Forget about it. Don’t bother. Pearls don’t work on someone who thinks he/she is prophet over and above all prophets. Nothing better than the diamonds anew1 has!
Out of respect to anew1’s request to explain proposals:
One meaning of the term ‘prophet’ is …
An inspiring spokesperson who leads a new movement, cause, or way of thinking.
Anew1 also foretells a future similar to what a prophet does …
According to anew1,
"If a view of what is thought, presumed, or believed to be what is true or right came from one’s own or some people’s only Past Experiences, then that ‘view’ could be False or Wrong. Only when absolutely everyone could agree with it and accept it, then ‘you’ KNOW, for sure, that it is what is actually irrefutably True and Right, in Life.
Again, when I look to what EVERY one, as One, for guidance, I find and obtain ‘the knowledge’ of what is irrefutably True and Right, in Life."
“This occurs and happens through the One and only Mind, where empathy and the ability to KNOW what others are thinking and feeling comes from as well.”
So we’ll just have to wait for this lofty future.
If you believe that you do not ‘currently’ have this empathy and ability, then you will, unfortunately, have to wait for ‘the future’ that you still ‘secretly wish for’ and desire.
The future I have hope in and the future you hint at varies considerably.
Maybe you’re talking about personal renewal/transformation?
God. The persons of the Trinity.
I am not sure if you are being patient. I don’t have unlimited time. Sometimes you have to wait. Even if I didn’t have a lot of downtime at work, I also sleep (not at work), plus It takes time for me to work up the motivation to go find a bunch of old threads and properly link to them, especially considering that the comments I made to those threads reflect embarrassing mistakes. People do learn, so I’m not trying to hide my mistakes. I’m just being honest that they are embarrassing. I will make more.
You didn’t want me to defend the statement so here are the links in support of this:
Are you mimicking that one adorable kid on the Ellen DeGeneres show (https://youtu.be/GnBExQ3dGM4?is=ipVwI1a_jlcGZbzu)? Anyway, y’got me. I’d do anything for that kid. The links:
- We discussed Tim Keller’s “The Reason for God” on ILP. Specific to the incarnation and resurrection are chapters 12 and 13. Listed in reverse:
- This never panned out into a discussion: Discuss Groothuis' "Christian Apologetics"? But I did it on my blog (and in person with some locals at a coffee shop) … here’s the index on my blog… Blog index for Douglas Groothuis’ "Christian Apologetics: A Comprehensive Case for Biblical Faith" | Ichthus77 see chapters 19-22.
- WLC on the resurrection in Reasonable Faith… I don’t think I shared this on ILP for some reason: WLC's case for the resurrection - National Christian Apologetics | Examiner.com
- A "Twelve Facts" resurrection logic puzzle
- Undesigned coincidences in the Gospels - #7 by Ichthus77
I have other books that cover the incarnation and Resurrection, but I don’t think I discussed them on ILP. If you’re interested in discussing one of them and want a list to choose from, let me know. I have been wanting to discuss Cold Case Christianity for quite some time (I’ve mentioned it a handful of times on ILP). I discussed it in person with some locals at a coffee shop already. I’d be happy to discuss it here.
Are you absolutely sure?
If yes, then how exactly?
To you, what future do you hope in, and, what future do I hint at, exactly?
Not at all.
What you are talking about ‘we’ wait.
So ‘now’, to you, God is a ‘person’, and, to you, people have female and male genders; is this why you call God a “he”?
you also claim God is ‘love’. Will you elaborate further on this belief and claim of yours here?
Okay, but if you Truly would like to share something that could back up and support ‘your belief’, then, again, I am not sure why ‘the wait’.
you seem to find ‘the time’ to say and write what you are here now, but not able to find ‘the time’ to share what you said …you would like to…
Okay. But, if I actually already had something that could back up and support ‘my belief’, “That’s why God incarnated”, then I would probably find just presenting ‘that’ would be quicker, simpler, and easier than saying and writing what you are here now.
But, ‘each to their own’, as some say.
I am not sure what led you to this Truly Wrong and False conclusion, but people with an ‘inferential communication style’ do tend to completely or partly misinterpret or misunderstand what I actually meant.
But none of that backed up and supported ‘your belief and claim’ that “That is why God incarnated”.
Firstly, what is the ‘why’ word referring to, exactly? In other words, what is ‘the reason’ why God incarnated?
Answer this first, then ‘we’ can move along here.
I’m as sure as all out of doors (that’s an idiom btw).
It has to do with prophesying. You speak as a prophet speaks in the form of a guider of a movement; a voice who supports an idea and looks to a one-minded future world where everything is true and right and correct for all.
It’s your own made up kind of strategy with high conviction and low execution. You focus on the high of a “big picture”, a grand narrative, skipping the hard work that would be required to implement such a structural change in a world that’s on a trend towards deterioration.
I am more prone to listen to whom I consider to be be the greatest prophet, Jesus who promises an eternal better life not of this world. Some 2 billion people have that same hope.
Looks like we’re in the same boat anew1. You’re a deluded visionary and I’m a Jesus freak.
So how do you like them 
s?
Love. To communicate/demonstrate unconditional love to those willing to receive it.
I do not know what this is meant to mean.
What is the ‘it’ referring to, exactly?
Okay. To you, is there something, inherently or not, wrong or bad about me doing this?
How could you or anyone else who has not yet seen, read, and heard ‘the words’ Accurately be able to purport to know this?
What is this supposed ‘hard work’, which you somehow believe you know I am skipping, exactly?
What do the words ‘the world’, which you just said and use, mean or refer, to you, exactly?
Are you here finally getting around to answering and clarifying the questions I posed, and asked you?
There is, by the way, NO real difference at all between the eternal better life I talk of and the eternal better life that person known as “jesus” spoke of and promised.
The only real difference is that I can and will show to everyone HOW ‘that life’ can and will come about for everyone.
Why do ‘you’ believe that puts ‘us’ in some same boat, exactly?
And, once more, how can you logically classify some writings as delusional when you have not yet seen nor heard them?
But there were no apples. So, who has deluded visions here, now?
By the way, you appear to have missed the actual questions I asked for clarity or purposely chose not to answer them. Just in case you did miss them, they were:
Are you absolutely sure? (In regard to ‘your claim’ that the future you have hope in and the future I hint at varies considerably). And,
If you are sure, then how exactly?
Furthermore, the future you ‘hope in’ and the future I ‘hint at’, and know HOW it can and will come to be, actually do not differ in any real way at all. If the Truth be told.
Does the ‘Love’ that you are talking about and referring to have to come through human beings?
If yes, then although every child is willing to receive it, unfortunately none of them do in ‘this ‘current’ world’. And, obviously, one has to have received or experienced something to be able to communicate/demonstrate it.
The Fact that you older human beings are NOT yet able to define clearly what ‘Love’ is, exactly, and certainly are still, in the day this is being written, no way near close to coming to agreement and an acceptance about what ‘Love’ is, exactly, shows and proves that you people did NOT receive ‘unconditional love’ in your childhoods.
But, ‘soon’ EVERY child will be.
The following quote you provided really does not say nor point to anything really, in ‘the way’ you presented it.