That's not what was being said or even hinted at by dewaddict84.But good heavens..you are are absolutely perfect are you? Never had to say sorry for anything?
We obviously have a paragon of virtue here....
.
Upvote
0
Six and a Half Billion Human Minds at Play?
- Thread starter tucker58
- Start date
.
I did not say everyone would become a christian, only that you would run out of people to be in your small group. Some will just not want to be part of it.
Upvote
0
God is Love and Christ is Love and defines Love by his words and actions. To be Christ like is to be Loving. People have to want to grow Christ like (more Godly Loving) before they would join your small group. You cannot force people to join, but there are lots that would want to become like Christ.
Upvote
0
Everybody wants to feel safe as a personality (at least everybody who has enough mental ability to have a personality ).
the problem comes from those people that in order to feel safe as a personality they have to make others feel unsafe. Those kind of people (personalities) you can not have dialog with because they can never "agree to disagree." Two people that can "agree to disagree" have the ability to allow each other permission to feel safe as a personality. Some people feel safe only when the other person does not feel safe, so they do not have the ability to "agree to disagree."
You can not have any sort of outreach dialog or any kind of dialog with those that do not "at least" have the ability to "agree to disagree."
love,
tuck
(at least everybody who has enough mental ability to have a personality ). the problem comes from those people that in order to feel safe as a personality they have to make others feel unsafe. Those kind of people (personalities) you can not have dialog with because they can never "agree to disagree." Two people that can "agree to disagree" have the ability to allow each other permission to feel safe as a personality. Some people feel safe only when the other person does not feel safe, so they do not have the ability to "agree to disagree."
You can not have any sort of outreach dialog or any kind of dialog with those that do not "at least" have the ability to "agree to disagree."
love,
tuck
Last edited:
Upvote
0
I want to be more loving, but I do not see Jesus as the example. I don't believe Jesus was God, so I want to follow God's ways, not Jesus'. See where the problem is?
Upvote
0
b&w, are you willing to explore God as an "imaginary friend?" with no strings attached?.
love,
tuck
Upvote
0
I'm not sure I understand your question. Could you make it a bit clearer for me to understand?
Upvote
0
Just Love. That's all. Wanting to be this or to be that, if that's ones path, than OK. But not everyone wants to be a Christian, or a Buddhist, or what ever. But everyone DOES want to respond to Love. It's real simple.
.
Upvote
0
May I suggest exploring Love, Compassion and Service instead? The results would be the same, (making God a reality in ones life) but with out the baggage that's often associated with "God" images that religions bring into the discussion.
.
Upvote
0
dlamberth my beloved friend
and I mean that honestly, you understand the true concept of love and most people do not. Which you have accepted as your challenge as a gift to others. Most people also do not understand the true concept of God. Which I have accepted as my challenge as a gift to others. Between the two of us something has got to work you and I and others like us are tag teaming the world. Love = God, God = Love. You and I are approaching things that equal each other from different sides of the equation.
you are loved!
tuck
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Well, perhaps I misunderstood then, in which case, apologies. All I was doing was referring to aspecific point in his post, and suggesting that humans are a lot worse than we think we are, even the 'best' ones. But probably not the best thread to talk about things like that as it would be a whole subject in itself. Again I apologise if my post sounded off or anything.
Upvote
0
Only to open a side discussion with you that is directly related to your response and the OP, this is what I'm thinking... I'm looking at the essence of God, which both you and I know and experience as being "Love".dlamberth my beloved friend
Love = God, God = Love. You and I are approaching things that equal each other from different sides of the equation.
you are loved!
tuck
Outside of that, the way I experience it, because it's not the essence of God, all that can be discussed is the outer form of God. And it’s that outer form that people resist. And I think for the same reason that it's resisted, it's the outer form of God that people generally teach.
So, I'm thinking that if one wants to truly make God a reality, (and to teach God) Love has to be the essence and even out front of what ever one is doing. Otherwise, it's just some sort of form one is trying to make a reality. And the 6 Billion people will remain untouched because the essence of God isn't out there for them to see.
Like you say, that's a challenge to get out there. We talk about Love, but it's really hard to BE Love. But lets turn this around a second and for clarity so that I'm understanding your side of the challenge more, what's the core message your hoping to get across, especially as it applies to the 6 Billion souls out there?
And Much Love to you, tuck.
.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
hmmm. I'm not quite sure what "as a personality" mean, but some people quite bored of being safe and go out and seek excitement.
Uh, what about the exception I mentioned before? Schitzos and sociopaths? The ones that don't really have emotions. They don't respond to love. It simply doesn't exist for them.
Yeah. You did, didn't you. It's alright though. Apology accepted.
No it wasn't a joke, and I wasn't trying to insult you. But I was insulting solipsism. Really, it sucks. It contributes nothing insightful. Um, sorry if you did take offense.
Ah! Human rights. Now theres possibly something that everyone shares, beyond just being human. But I'd say that we assuredly don't all have the right to be happy. That's got some serious logistical issues. However, I would say that we all have the right to pursue happiness.
Also, and this is probably a side issue, but for Dlamberth and tucker: what about people that love to fight? That's a form of love right? Or does that not count?
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Yes, they DO respond to Love. It may be a pretty dysfunctional response, but they do respond.
.
Upvote
0
Originally Posted by dewaddict84
"Also, and this is probably a side issue, but for Dlamberth and tucker: what about people that love to fight? That's a form of love right? Or does that not count?", end of quote
Quote Tucker58, "I love to fight and you dewad are about to become extinct ." There is no roon for you in any kind of peaceful social dialog!
Moderator Supreme we now need your sanity in the middle of what is happening as guidance!
Tuck going to paradise !
Quote Tucker58, "I love to fight and you dewad are about to become extinct
." There is no roon for you in any kind of peaceful social dialog! Moderator Supreme
we now need your sanity in the middle of what is happening as guidance!Tuck going to paradise
!
Upvote
0
oi_antz
Opposed to Untruth.
Um let me see. Body, mind, soul, conscience, need.
Need is the one we should focus on, this propels all human activity including the seeking of God to know who we are in perspective of creation (self-actualization):
Maslow's hierarchy of needs - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Need is the one we should focus on, this propels all human activity including the seeking of God to know who we are in perspective of creation (self-actualization):
Maslow's hierarchy of needs - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
I dunno, wikipedia doesn't seem to agree. It looks like schizoids might be "genuinely indifferent to social relationships", and "impervious to others' emotions". And here's a section:
"This means that it is possible for schizoid individuals to form relationships with others based on intellectual, physical, familial, occupational, or recreational activities as long as these modes of relating do not require or force the need for emotional intimacy, which the individual will reject."
That's a pretty good case that they don't do that whole "love" thing. But honestly, after reading a bit about this topic, I've realized how far I am from having anything near expert advice, so I'm just going to dilute the whole message here and suggest you look into it yourself.
Aye, I'd agree with that. "Need" is another one that qualifies. We all have needs in one form or another. Hardly anyone has the same needs, but as a general concept, I think it still counts.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
