Word Association for Random Blessings
- By RileyG
- Blessings Exchange
- 1426 Replies
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Both are real.Login to view embedded media
Love to get reassurance like this about the fact hell isn't real, but heaven is.
Mayor Johnson is an absolute failure.Yes and rhe people of Chicago are recognizing the overall failure of Mayor Johnson to protect the people of Chicago.
Mayor Johnson’s 6% Approval Shows: Race-Baiting Can’t Cover up Epic Public Safety Failure
And the police themselves are not supportive of him either.
Shots fired! Police union boss calls Chicago mayor 'piece of garbage' for saying law enforcement a 'sickness' to be 'eradicated' - CWB Chicago
And the FOP doesn't support the top cop. This is a mess in Chicago and people are seeing it.
The very real evil present within everyone is definitely both under the law and condemned by the law, rightfully so.And just asking , ARE we. under the Law. ??
The tempter or his own in NO PERSON is under the New Covenant.Are we UNDER. the NEW COVENANT. ??
People are. Devils are not.Are we UNDER GRACE ??
And a verse that says THE people of Israel and ALL. Mankind have ALWAYS been God.'s children. ??
Peace for our time.You really think that the USA and Russia will be just with Ukraine?
Welcome!My name is Sam Naccarato. I have a B.A. in philosophy (1981) and I’ve spent over 45 years thinking about philosophical questions. For the past twenty+ years, I've focused on epistemology, the study of knowledge, with a strong Wittgensteinian approach drawn from his later work, especially On Certainty.
My Recent Work:
I recently completed a book titled From Testimony to Knowledge: Evaluating Near-Death Experiences, which applies epistemic standards to testimonial evidence. The book introduces what I call JTB+U (Justified True Belief plus Understanding) and introduces "guardrails" for responsible belief: No False Grounds (NFG), Practice Safety, and Defeater Screening. This framework applies broadly to evaluating knowledge claims, including those based on testimony.
I've also written a paper connecting Wittgenstein's hinge epistemology to Gödel's incompleteness theorems, exploring how both reveal necessary structural limits of formalized systems. I'm also working on a second book, which I'll introduce later.
My Philosophical Approach:
My epistemology is grounded in Wittgenstein's later philosophy, particularly his concept of "hinges," those bedrock certainties that function as preconditions for inquiry rather than conclusions within it. Chapters 6 and 7 of From Testimony to Knowledge develop this Wittgensteinian foundation in detail. I've identified that hinges operate at three levels: prelinguistic (before language acquisition), nonlinguistic (shown in action), and linguistic (expressed propositionally). Some hinges are metaphysically necessary (like "other minds exist"), while others are contingent.
I believe this framework has proven remarkably powerful for distinguishing between genuine foundational certainties and beliefs that require justification but often avoid scrutiny by claiming foundational status.
Why I'm Here:
I'm deeply interested in how we evaluate historical claims, especially those that rest on testimony. What standards should we use? How do we distinguish between strong and weak testimonial evidence? When does testimony rise to the level of knowledge, and when does it remain mere belief?
These questions apply universally, to scientific claims, historical events, legal proceedings, and yes, to religious truth claims as well. I believe the same standards should apply consistently across all domains.
I'm here to engage in philosophical discussion and welcome serious engagement with these ideas. I'm not interested in dismissing anyone's beliefs, but I am interested in understanding what justifies them and whether those justifications can withstand careful examination.
Looking forward to thoughtful conversations.
Sam
Well, it's very "Tristram Shandy" so far, so your consultants are at least cribbing from a tried-and-true model.
When Jesus was confronted by the Pharisees with what is the greatest commandment, as you know He replied with love your God and love your neighbor.
kstp.com
I don't see the problem. Hearing and learning is not the same as receiving Christ. Listening to the prophets enabled one to come to Christ, in other words, you would be drawn. If you ignore the prophets, you would ignore ChristSo you're suggesting "hearing and learning" may provide a condition to being drawn, which in turn enables one to come? How could someone who is unable to receive Christ in the first place "hear and learn"?
I can neither verify nor refute your grammatical and theological claims. I will say this: John 6:45 identifies those who are drawn as listening and learning, describing those who come as God-taught. The text does not explain why they listen and learn, why they are God-taught. It simply presents these as qualities of those whom God draws.The phrase διδακτοὶ θεοῦ ("taught by God" or "God-taught") in John 6:45 uses a predicate adjective derived from διδάσκω. Its function here is descriptive, not conditional. It describes individuals who have received the benefit of a divine act of teaching, not the offering of a teaching that may be accepted or refused. The genitive θεοῦ marks God as the source of the imparted knowledge. In other words, it is the effect of God's action, not a prerequisite for it.
Compare to "God-breathed" in 2 Tim. 3:16. It's the same sort of predicate adjectival idea. It's descriptive of a divine act. Just as Scripture is described as being "breathed out by God," those in view in John 6:44-45 are described as "having received God's instruction."
Grammatically and contextually, "taught by God" parallels "drawn" in the preceding verse: just as drawing is an effective divine act that enables ability, so being God-taught is a description of the outcome of that divine action (which actually further makes the point that the "him raised" refers to the one drawn). John 6:45 therefore does not suggest that hearing and learning is a condition to be drawn; rather, the hearing and learning are the result of God's effective action. They describe the means by which the knowledge and understanding is imparted by God to those whom He draws.
Yes.Yes it does. And Jn 12:32 is about Jesus will doing the drawing
if their faith is genuine, they will obey God and do those works