[Jerseee]

KT,



Good points. Here's my responses:



KT: Doesn't it go without saying that you can believe what you wish? Ok, but your point is "without reprisal or persecution". I agree. Is it ok if the reprisal comes from God? Keep in mind, that ideas carry consequences. I can believe that fire will not burn me all I want to. I can believe that Jesus is only a story book character. I can believe that I can kill anyone that gets in my way. It is clear that these beliefs would carry reprisal and persecution. This is reducing it to the ridicules, I know but where do we draw the line?



We draw the line when Man intervenes and causes havoc in the name of God--and then through a subtle form of duress and persuasion offer a religion as a solution to your problem. When in fact, if the fraud and manmade havoc around us was not there--there would be no need for the duress and one can turn to God not only in their time of need--but through pure love of God as salvation would be just a side effect of the love--not the purpose.



KT: None of what can exist? -- It IS true for them. I agree. A good example of my previous point is that You yourself have demonstrated that You believe that it is not ok for Iamfree to believe what he believes, about the successfulness of Redemption. It IS true for him though.



Aaahhh, none of any beliefs can exist without acceptance. Iamfree's accusations by me are of a different nature but somewhat inline to what you have mentioned. He has accepted both doctrines (UCC and Bible) to access redemption. Re-read my posts to him on this issue and you find that contradiction to the Word on the money changers and usury are in direct conflict of the UCC (the money changers doctrine). If you read my opinions on the UCC redemption crap--you will find that I cannot dismiss their successes totally as I have no documented proof to even verify the validity of those successes. So the UCC redemption crowd can claim successes by hearsay and BELIEVE such things are true--since they have accepted the hearsay as possible truth. Now we are back to acceptance. So I condemn the mixing of doctrines more than I condemn their beliefs as I already have enough unproven claims to support beliefs. I can only urge those contemplating UCC redemption to do their homework and ask for proof of their claims and not the greatest stories ever told.



KT: Interesting but doesn't answer my question. right now---no. in the next second--maybe. The real teaser is if I do recognize such an event will I ACCEPT it as truth or not?



KT: Good answer. Now, since you can not be 100% certain that your entire life has not been a figment of your imagination, how can you be 100% certain about anything besides what you know you feel at the present time? Since I cannot be 100% certain of the first part--isn't the second part relative to the first? Or is there a difference you are trying to expose to me?



KT: Not exactly, I am questioning your trust in your ability to perceive and interpret what your senses or your brain are telling you. Are you 100% certain that you are not dreaming right now? For me only, I must trust some part of my senses to gather a feel for any "reality" that may surround me--if I didn't totally trust this--then you could not read my responses as I would even question do you exist to even challenge my senses.



KT: Well, the crossword puzzle is offered as an analogy to "Absolute Truth" or the "Facts" that exist apart from our understanding. The "Fact", in this case, is that there is only one solution to the overall puzzle. This fact remains only a theory to the puzzlers until the puzzle is indeed solved. I would say that if our answers did not correspond to the "Absolute Truth" (solution) then yes, those answers (theories) were false. Did you have a different perspective on this? I am sensing that you got something else out of my parable. The "answers" were predetermined of general known facts whose answers are dependent on those known facts. But if one was to match letters so they would line up (not coherently) whose to say that those are not the answers? They may not be the answers to the general facts known but the puzzle added up. picky--yes...but tell that to a minor who sees the blocks as places to put letters and tell them that they did not solve the puzzle.



KT this is great thought fertilizer....but my piont still remains---ACCEPTANCE IS KEY. :-)