The First Test Is Merely to Be Believing

General discussion
MichaelB
Posts: 679
Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2016 11:17 pm

Re: The First Test Is Merely to Be Believing

Post by MichaelB » Tue Sep 12, 2017 11:46 pm

But whether you said "can't" or "will not," you are saying that you don't believe I'm accurately reporting what you said on Nov. 1, 2013, aren't you?

And since I am reporting it accurately, you can't know that, right?

So does that mean you don't love me?
Last edited by MichaelB on Tue Sep 12, 2017 11:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.



log
Posts: 881
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2016 6:20 pm
Location: Bakersfield, CA
Contact:

Re: The First Test Is Merely to Be Believing

Post by log » Tue Sep 12, 2017 11:46 pm

.
Last edited by log on Tue Sep 12, 2017 11:49 pm, edited 2 times in total.



log
Posts: 881
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2016 6:20 pm
Location: Bakersfield, CA
Contact:

Re: The First Test Is Merely to Be Believing

Post by log » Tue Sep 12, 2017 11:48 pm

log wrote:
Tue Sep 12, 2017 11:46 pm
Do you love me when you lie to me?

Do you love me when you lie about me?

Do you love Jesus when you don't believe his words?

Do you love Jesus when you will not keep his commandments?

Do you love the Bible when you regularly misrepresent what it says?
I'll wait on these questions.



log
Posts: 881
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2016 6:20 pm
Location: Bakersfield, CA
Contact:

Re: The First Test Is Merely to Be Believing

Post by log » Tue Sep 12, 2017 11:59 pm

I'll add this one.
And if your interpretation of 1 Corinthians 13:7 is true...
Do you deny that what it pleases you to call "my interpretation" of 1 Corinthians 13:7 is, in fact, the literal facial reading of the verse, and not "my interpretation" at all? In calling it "my interpretation," aren't you merely saying you do not believe that "charity ... believeth all things," and doesn't that mean you love neither Paul, nor the Bible, and if Paul was speaking the truth, neither do you love the truth?

And since you picked up Augustine to oppose Paul, doesn't that mean you love Augustine, and hate Paul?

As I said: I know you to be a liar.



MichaelB
Posts: 679
Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2016 11:17 pm

Re: The First Test Is Merely to Be Believing

Post by MichaelB » Wed Sep 13, 2017 12:24 am

I edited the previous post you found offensive, and changed the word "can't" to "will not."

That was a minor memory error, not a lie, and I wonder if you'd still accuse me of lying if I had used a contraction ( i.e. won't instead of will not )?

I didn't, so I guess it doesn't matter.

It says "will not" now.

Does that make you happy?

I don't lie ( present tense ) to or about you.

I do love Jesus, I do believe his words, and I just gave the eleven dollars I had in my pocket for gas to a woman who interrupted a conversation I was having with a Russian lady outside the Paris Foundation here in Elkton ( where the Russian lady, and I, and a lot of poor and homeless people had a free dinner. )

I think she said something about having a vehicle that was out of gas somewhere herself, and being schizophrenic, and needing eleven dollars to get her prescription filled at a drug store down the street.

I knew I had exactly eleven dollars in my pocket, and knew that was what she asked for, and I was already looking for some way to testify of Christ to this Russian lady ( who I had already offended by asking her her opinion of Gorbachev, was trying very hard not to offend again, and who I suspected of being an atheist ), so I gladly gave the other woman the eleven dollars I had in my pocket, and said "in the name of Jesus."

I then said goodnight to the Russian lady, who said she should have stopped me because the other woman would only use the money on drugs.

Anyway, that must have been around seven or eight o'clock, I don't know how long we continued talking, and I'm in the parking lot at the library using the free wify now.

I do believe in Christ's words, I do try to keep His commandments, and I don't believe I misrepresent the words in the Bible.

And I'm pretty sure I love you more than you love me.

And whether it's "can not" or "will not," aren't you saying you refuse to believe that you said what I said you said on Nov. 1, 2013?

And I'll add this--Augustine was a Latin father, not a Greek ( and may not be the best source on the meaning of any NT Greek text ), but the English text certainly says "all things, not "all men," and I do think we're talking about your interpretation here.



log
Posts: 881
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2016 6:20 pm
Location: Bakersfield, CA
Contact:

Re: The First Test Is Merely to Be Believing

Post by log » Wed Sep 13, 2017 12:57 am

MichaelB wrote:
Wed Sep 13, 2017 12:24 am
And I'll add this--Augustine was a Latin father, not a Greek ( and may not be the best source on the meaning of any NT Greek text ), but the English text certainly says "all things, not "all men," and I do think we're talking about your interpretation here.
Augustine in your approving citation seems to have been responding to a text purporting to be 1 Corinthians 13:7 that read substantially the way the current KJV English does, and he was undermining the literal, facial reading of 1 Corinthians 13:7 with your approval, and yet you "think" "we're" "talking" about my "interpretation" of 1 Corinthians 13:7 here instead of the facial, literal reading of the text and not my interpretation at all.

You'll have to pardon me - that's not belief. That's disbelief. That's like your saying "Jesus didn't say he was telling the truth, but you say he was, therefore that's not Jesus's teaching, but your own!"

I wonder why you don't pull that on Paul - "Paul didn't say he was telling the truth, but you do say he was, so that's your teaching and not Paul's!"

Actually, come to think of it... you are effectively making that claim here.

How ironic. I'm saying the Bible is true, and you're effectively saying that it isn't.



MichaelB
Posts: 679
Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2016 11:17 pm

Re: The First Test Is Merely to Be Believing

Post by MichaelB » Wed Sep 13, 2017 2:08 am

He's not undermining it, he's explaining it, and his explanation makes a lot more sense than yours.

Take a close look at what he said, and really think about what you're saying.

He says "We are not told that it believes all men: it believes all things, but it's belief is given to God. There can be no doubt that the faith commended by the apostle is that whereby God is believed."

In other words, if you have charity, and the covenant offered September 3rd is really of God, and God tells you that, clarity will believe that, because it believes all that God says.

Things like "the laborer is worthy of his hire," "God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son," and maybe the covenant September 3rd ( if it's of God -- and you haven't gotten an answer on that one yet, have you? )

But ( given Augustine's interpretation ) it will only believe all things that are of God.

Given your interpretation, it will believe anything it's told by anyone, unless it has absolute knowledge to the contrary.

So do you have absolute knowledge about whether the border wall with Mexico is going to be built, and who's going to pay for it?

If not you must be without charity toward president Trump, or the president of Mexico, because you can't believe both of them ( and if you doubt either of them, without absolute knowledge to the contrary, you have no charity, and no eternal life abiding in you. )

What Augustine said 1600 years ago makes much more sense than what you're saying today ( and some apparently said back then. )

And could you please tell me if you believe I misrepresented what you said to Ausie on the LDS Freedom Forum that night?

Or if you believe me when I tell you that I didn't?

And just out of curiosity, do you believe I gave some stranger the eleven dollars I had in my pocket tonight, and that I only have 90 dollars in my checking account?

And that I have no savings account, and I don't get paid until the 21rst?

Please reply.



log
Posts: 881
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2016 6:20 pm
Location: Bakersfield, CA
Contact:

Re: The First Test Is Merely to Be Believing

Post by log » Wed Sep 13, 2017 9:23 am

MichaelB wrote:
Wed Sep 13, 2017 2:08 am
He's not undermining it, he's explaining it, and his explanation makes a lot more sense than yours.
You are lying again. "Mine" doesn't exist. Augustine is denying the literal, facial reading of the verse, and you agree with Augustine.
Given your interpretation, it will believe anything it's told by anyone, unless it has absolute knowledge to the contrary.
You are lying again. "My interpretation" doesn't exist. You are denying the literal, facial reading of Paul's words.
What Augustine said 1600 years ago makes much more sense than what you're saying today ( and some apparently said back then. )
I understand you think "what Augustine said 1600 years ago makes much more sense than what" Paul "apparently said back then."

You have been very clear that you disbelieve Paul, and believe Augustine.

Again: You are in effect arguing that the Bible is not true ("not literally true" means "literally false").

You are in effect saying: "The Bible doesn't say that it is literally true, but YOU do, therefore the words of the Bible are YOUR teachings, not the Bible's!"

I said elsewhere we'd find out that you reject a whole lot more than, let's see, Matthew 10:40, Luke 10:16, Luke 14:26, John 13:20, John 17:3, and now 1 Corinthians 13:7, as we go on.

Shall we continue?

By the by, not only are our prayers supposed to be in secret, and not published to men as self-justifying hypocrites will do, but also our almsgivings are to be in secret, and not published to men as self-justifying hypocrites will do, right? What did Jesus command?

What do you hope to gain by pretending to men to believe what you do not believe?

Let's have more fun with Paul.
Titus 1:15-16
15 Unto the pure all things are pure: but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving is nothing pure; but even their mind and conscience is defiled.
16 They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate.
Romans 2:1 Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things.
Michael, if you had charity as you would fain claim, you would not be asking me if I believed you. You would assume I believed you, because you, being pure, would believe me to be pure and therefore you would believe me, and would assume that I believe you likewise.

Remember: I only know you don't believe because you come to me and tell me I'm wrong when I repeat the words of the scriptures you say you believe, and you test and try and persecute me and lie to me and about me because I repeat those words. If you left me alone, I wouldn't know you to be an unbelieving liar.

You might respond "But Jesus asked the one guy if he believed." Jesus knew the man did not believe, as the man apparently confirmed when he said "help thou my unbelief." Just as your hypocrites' tests and declarations of disbelief show you to be an unbelieving liar.

You'll find that we'd get along a lot better if you'd stop lying and stop pretending.



MichaelB
Posts: 679
Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2016 11:17 pm

Re: The First Test Is Merely to Be Believing

Post by MichaelB » Wed Sep 13, 2017 11:23 am

The dedication prayer at the Kirtland Temple was a public prayer, and Jesus also said to let your light shine before men, and not to hide it under a table.

And Paul told the Corinthians, and other believers he wrote to, that he prayed for them.

The fact is that Jesus never said that we must do all our praying and alms giving in secret, and I didn't give that woman who asked for money the eleven dollars I had in my pocket to tell you about it (or to be seen by men.)

I gave it to her because she asked, because Christ said to give to those who ask, and to politely and testify of Christ by saying "in the name of Jesus" in front of another woman I took to be an atheist.

And the timing of your interrogation concerning keeping Christ's commandments indicated to me that I should tell you and those reading along about the incident.

And accusing someone of being a hypocrite because all their prayers and almsgiving aren't done in secret seems very judgemental and uncharitable.

Were Joseph and Paul unbelieving hypocrites?

And what about Denver?

Hasn't he said that he donates the profits of his books to the LDS Relief fund?

And weren't public prayers said at the Boise conference September 3rd?

And "not literally true" does not "mean untrue."

If it did, it would be untrue to say the earth is God's footstool, or that heaven is His throne.

And you never did answer me.

Do you believe that I gave that woman eleven dollars last night?

And don't you think the timing was interesting?

Right around the same time you were accusing me of not being a believer, not loving Jesus, and not keeping His commandments, this woman I don't know comes up and asks me or a woman I was talking to for some help, and says she needs exactly what I have in my pocket to get a prescription filled.

I give it to her, share that with you, and you again accuse me of being a hypocrite and an unbeliever.

And we were discussing charity, weren't we?

I know this happened, and I'd like to know if you believe me when I tell you it happened.

And if you believe me when I tell you that you told someone, on the LDSFF, on November 1rst 2013, that you had received a rebuke from the Lord for speaking stout words against His servants after you read PtHG?

I'm not asking you if you said that, or if you remember saying that, or if I've ever lied to or about you in the past.

I'm asking you if you believe me when I tell you that you said that, and I'm requesting that you please answer me here.

And that you tell me if you still believe that God told you that you had spoken stout words against His servants, and that you correctly heard and understood what He said at that time.

You talk a lot about receiving personal answers, and about the difference between knowing and believing.

Do you "know" that God said that to you then?

And do you "know" that you understood Him?

Please reply.

Thank you.



log
Posts: 881
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2016 6:20 pm
Location: Bakersfield, CA
Contact:

Re: The First Test Is Merely to Be Believing

Post by log » Wed Sep 13, 2017 12:03 pm

MichaelB wrote:
Wed Sep 13, 2017 11:23 am

The fact is that Jesus never said that we must do all our praying and alms giving in secret, and I didn't give that woman who asked for money the eleven dollars I had in my pocket to tell you about it (or to be seen by men.)
And yet, you did tell me about it.
And accusing someone of being a hypocrite because all their prayers and almsgiving aren't done in secret seems very judgemental and uncharitable.
Or I could be warning you that inasmuch as you look to men for approval for your deeds (not to mention bringing your "righteousness" into competition with others'), you aren't getting approval / reward from God, per Jesus. Unless, of course, you indeed only do care about getting approval from men and not from God. In which case, said Jesus, you have your reward. So, you see, your assumption of uncharitability is itself uncharitable. You judged me according to the contents of your own heart.

Moral: don't bother protesting your works to me.
And "not literally true" does not "mean untrue."
"Not literally true" means "literally false."
If it did, it would be untrue to say the earth is God's footstool, or that heaven is His throne.
Is that not simply to say you believe it is literally false that the Earth is God's footstool, and that you believe that it is literally false that Heaven is his throne? But isn't that merely to say you disbelieve these things? What do you know about these things that you have not read in the Bible? And if all you think you know about these things is in the Bible, then what does it mean about your beliefs when you disbelieve what the Bible has to say about these things? Doesn't that mean you have no grounds - at all - for any of your beliefs in these things, having rejected the only possible grounds for belief?

I'll have to go look up those verses and add them to the growing list of things in the Bible you reject.



log
Posts: 881
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2016 6:20 pm
Location: Bakersfield, CA
Contact:

Re: The First Test Is Merely to Be Believing

Post by log » Wed Sep 13, 2017 12:14 pm

Let's see: Isaiah 66:1, Lamentations 2:1, Matthew 5:35, Matthew 10:40, Luke 10:16, Luke 14:26, John 13:20, John 17:3, Acts 7:49, 1 Corinthians 13:7.



log
Posts: 881
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2016 6:20 pm
Location: Bakersfield, CA
Contact:

Re: The First Test Is Merely to Be Believing

Post by log » Wed Sep 13, 2017 12:21 pm

Do you know the parable of the unjust steward, Michael? It can be read here.

Despite his being unjust - this word means, in context, not executing his lord's commands - he was his lord's servant, correct?



log
Posts: 881
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2016 6:20 pm
Location: Bakersfield, CA
Contact:

Re: The First Test Is Merely to Be Believing

Post by log » Thu Sep 14, 2017 1:14 am

Why don't I humor you.

You ask do I believe your story about someone asking for whatever exact amount of money you had. Yes*.

You ask do I believe you when you say I said on LDSFF around four years ago that God rebuked me for something. Yes*.

*These statements may or may not be intended literally.



MichaelB
Posts: 679
Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2016 11:17 pm

Re: The First Test Is Merely to Be Believing

Post by MichaelB » Thu Sep 14, 2017 1:36 pm

log wrote:
Thu Sep 14, 2017 1:14 am
Why don't I humor you.

You ask do I believe your story about someone asking for whatever exact amount of money you had. Yes*.

You ask do I believe you when you say I said on LDSFF around four years ago that God rebuked me for something. Yes*.

*These statements may or may not be intended literally.
Thank you.

But what you actually said ( and this is an exact quote ) was that God "told" you that you had spoken stout words against His servants ( after you had read PtHG, and said something "inappropriate" about the leadership of the LDS church.

Do you believe "told me" is an exact quote?

And would you please tell me if you still maintain that God "told you that after you read PtHG, and after you spoke out against the leadership of the LDS church ( as you said He did four years ago )?

P.S. I just noticed this ( in your post, in very snall print ) "*These statements may or may not be intended literally."

Does that mean you may not have been speaking literally four years ago?

And if you weren't, does that mean you were lying?



log
Posts: 881
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2016 6:20 pm
Location: Bakersfield, CA
Contact:

Re: The First Test Is Merely to Be Believing

Post by log » Thu Sep 14, 2017 1:58 pm

It means that I may, or may not, be speaking as you do, and as you say Jesus and Paul and basically the entirety of the Bible does - I may or may not be speaking literally. Yes may, or may not, mean yes, or no, or some third thing, or maybe not. Therefore - and I may or may not be speaking literally - you can't really tell what I'm saying by words.

I'm possibly making explicit your actual beliefs about my words, and the words of the Bible - or I might not be. Who can possibly, or not, tell?

I wonder, or I may not, whether the best interpretation is no interpretation?

Is it possible, or impossible, or some other third thing, or not, whether communication presupposes literality, and departure from literality must be clearly indicated or else the speaker is lying, or telling the truth, or something we can't really tell, or we can?



MichaelB
Posts: 679
Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2016 11:17 pm

Re: The First Test Is Merely to Be Believing

Post by MichaelB » Thu Sep 14, 2017 2:36 pm

So if you were speaking literally, do you still believe that God told you what you said He told you four years ago?

Under the circumstances you said you received that message?

And do you still believe you understood Him correctly at the time?

Please reply.

Thank you.



log
Posts: 881
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2016 6:20 pm
Location: Bakersfield, CA
Contact:

Re: The First Test Is Merely to Be Believing

Post by log » Thu Sep 14, 2017 2:47 pm

If only my words were to be understood literally, or not, then they would be understood, or not. Or would they be, or not?

And if my words were believed, the question would not be asked, therefore repetition of the veracity of the claim will be ineffective, or is it, or is it not, or is it impossible, or possible, no meaning can or cannot be meant?



log
Posts: 881
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2016 6:20 pm
Location: Bakersfield, CA
Contact:

Re: The First Test Is Merely to Be Believing

Post by log » Thu Sep 14, 2017 3:04 pm

To others: I wonder how many times a claim must be repeated or affirmed before someone who does not believe the claim in the first place, and has no means to check the claim (or, alternatively, will not deploy the sole means necessary to check the claim independent of the claimant), will choose to believe the claim.

Is it once? Twice? Thrice? Some other finite positive whole number, let's call it N? If N exists, do you suppose we may simply stipulate the claimant has made the required number of affirmations or repetitions, rather than actually requiring him to repeat or affirm the claim N times? And, if so, doesn't that imply that N doesn't exist (because substituting a stipulation implies the real number of required repetitions or affirmations is M, which is strictly less than N)?

And if N does exist and no stipulations are acceptable, what changes between repetition / affirmation N-1 and repetition / affirmation N that forces the unbeliever to believe? Is mere repetition / affirmation a magic spell, or something? If the answer is "nothing," then finite N does not exist, and repetition / affirmation in and of itself cannot produce the belief of the unbeliever: nothing changes from the initial claim through any repetition or affirmation of the initial claim. If the answer is "something" then whatever that is is the magic stuff that compels belief; we gotta get some of that and bottle it and market it. We'd literally be able to rule the world with that.

Therefore, it seems the proper response is to respond as the once-blind man in the Bible is reputed to have said, "I have told you already, and ye did not hear: wherefore would ye hear it again? will ye also be [my] disciple[]?"
Last edited by log on Thu Sep 14, 2017 3:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.



MichaelB
Posts: 679
Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2016 11:17 pm

Re: The First Test Is Merely to Be Believing

Post by MichaelB » Thu Sep 14, 2017 3:29 pm

So once we cut thru all that, I take it you're saying ( again, here ) that after you read PtHG, and said something against the leadership of the LDS church, you heard God's voice telling you you had sinned by speaking against His servants?

And you still believe you heard and understood Him correctly at the time?

Thank you.



log
Posts: 881
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2016 6:20 pm
Location: Bakersfield, CA
Contact:

Re: The First Test Is Merely to Be Believing

Post by log » Thu Sep 14, 2017 3:31 pm

I am saying that or I am not saying that.



Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests