prophecy revelation for jpappl

davewhite04 said:
Since your reality is based purely on science
Click to expand...
Assumptions again?
Re-read what I wrote:
"But science offers valid testable explanations.
Objective ones, unlike art/ poetry etc."
I didn't say that art and poetry etc have no value.

I assume you have no relationships for example?
Click to expand...
Another incorrect assumption.
 
davewhite04 said:
So who do the vampire, perfect beings etc. relate to in the bible? In your opinion.
Click to expand...

well, i see vampiric reference in relation to communion. drinking the blood of christ. the blood of christ being sinless (perfect), allowing restored communion with god and each other.
 
Dywyddyr said:
Can't understand nuance?
Science is an objective view of reality.
Art etc isn't.
Note I did say explanations of reality.
Click to expand...

Everything I mentioned is part of reality, objective or subjective.

You just can't accept that you're in fact wrong.
 
Lori_7 said:
well, i see vampiric reference in relation to communion. drinking the blood of christ. the blood of christ being sinless (perfect), allowing restored communion with god and each other.
Click to expand...

Lori_7:

This is an interesting take on holy communion.

I wonder what inspired the vampiric myth(not belittling the fact that it may be true)...
 
Lori_7 said:
maybe i'm wrong but betrayal kind of implies a false loyalty and/or dishonesty and i don't like that.
Click to expand...

What if a Nazi got feelings of remorse and blabbed to the Allies about Hitlers whereabouts ? Would you condemn that ?
 
Enmos said:
What if a Nazi got feelings of remorse and blabbed to the Allies about Hitlers whereabouts ? Would you condemn that ?
Click to expand...

no. shame he was loyal in the first place though huh? hitler couldn't have accomplished much on his own.
 
Enmos said:
So then betrayal is not always a fault.
In fact, loyalty can then be a fault, do you not agree ?
Click to expand...

i don't think that the fault lies in loyalty itself, but in the reason for the loyalty, or the thing or person you're loyal to, which may or may not be sinister.
 
Lori_7 said:
i don't think that the fault lies in loyalty itself, but in the reason for the loyalty, or the thing or person you're loyal to, which may or may not be sinister.
Click to expand...

Oh, could that also be true for betrayal then ? Maybe.. perhaps ?
 
Enmos said:
Oh, could that also be true for betrayal then ? Maybe.. perhaps ?
Click to expand...

well if you're loyal because you're being lied to (betrayal) then the lie is the fault (the betrayal).
if you're loyal because you're stupid, careless, or evil, then those things would lie at fault.
if there is no fault in the reasons for loyalty, then there is no need for a betrayal. if you find that you've been lied to, or have a change of heart, then there is no betrayal, because there is no longer any loyalty.
 
davewhite04 said:
It is easier for people with compassion for people to act this way, but it is also achievable by people with low compassion.

Acting against your nature is a tough thing to do, but it is achievable.

For example there is a homosexual Indian prince, and if he lead a homosexual life style it would disgrace his family and he would not become king.

He decided to not lead a homosexual life style.
Click to expand...

That is mere surface, they aren't changing what they feel.
 
spidergoat said:
That is mere surface, they aren't changing what they feel.
Click to expand...

I think it's the surface that is important.

Like when your a kid you don't want to eat your veg, but you eventually reap the rewards, being healthier. The easiest or more natural thing to do is to eat a big mac, because it's tastier but obviously bad for you.

Certain things can change your emotions I think but it's rare you can actually change them permanently. A leopard never changes its spots but actions speak louder than words.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top