I know what the problem is. I'm recapping what you're saying, you tell me something new, I reply to that something new, and then you say you said that before without referring to what I said so I knew you read my post and understood be before replying. Haha. Say that three times fast.
Right....there comes a time when I let go, this is the time and you are the lucky one
Dizzy...Dizzy....Dizzy!
You're dizzy? If we saw each other's words as statements not refutes, then we'd have a better conversation.
I am not sure you are aware you tend to always mix what has always been offered as good advice with a spin of dissagrement, then throw the good adivce back as the reponse against what was posted. But maybe you are aware, maybe you like to do this?
Remember, I don't see disagreement (and differences etc) as negative.
So, yeah, I know it sounds like an oxymoron to you, but it really isn't.
The rest, I dont understand what you mean.
Another assertive technique to take with you with people on this board. When someone tells you a paragraph of information or less, take a point of two in your own words, recap it, an then express your reply related to it. Quotes are fine but they also cause more assumptions than summarizing. When you summarize, it makes you think. Quotes is just highlight and click.
For gosh sake how many time has it been said that Deeds and Practice are True Faith. You have used the obvious to refute the Logical.
You have done this again. You change the topic and made an oxymoronic similarity out of it. Don't know how you do it out of two differing statements. Every time I point it out, you don't refer to my new point just repeat the old point in new words.
Just sayin'
-->> My question.
@InvestigateTruth I think said he doesn't look at other people's experiences to know truth only sacred scripture. Is that the same for you?
Now what needs to be practiced has a source in learning. When we are born we are born without these skills, we are born with the ability to learn and practice them.
True (Hope you're reading this. I am agreeing)
True, what I am
saying not debating or refuting, that I see this differently (not the same and not negative just different).
I know you believe in deeds and truth. That's not what I'm talking about.
When a baby learns from his mother, before she teaches him books, she starts with body connection and first mode of communication (sign or spoken). She starts with what the child does-is he hitting his brother or playing with the kid-safe toy or the knife he found under the couch. She focuses on action. When the child gets older, then he goes to pre-k and he starts learning from books.
1. Source->action and connection then 2. Books.
Listening-->Spoken-->Reading-->writing (Cliff notes from our lesson workshop)
You have to connect first. Langauge comes second.
I know you agree with what I'm saying. You disagree (and have been disagreeing) with the position I take on it. Big difference.
Thus who do we learn from? History has shown our Morality comes first and foremost from the Great Beings, in whatever capacity one may see them to be. Thus what has been offered that the first place to learn about Morality is their own Persons, then their Lives and then Their Words and the stories written of them.
This is your belief.
Not saying you're wrong; it is just your belief.
I learned a lot from Christ and I'm taking The Precepts in September 3rd to devote myself to The Buddha's teachings and practices. However, what I do know that's different from you and I is morality is inside out not outside in. Yes, Christ points to god but god is in you. Yes, The Buddha points to the Dhamma but he says the principles of life
is the Dhamma; so, there is nothing to point to but your participation in life through meditation etc.
I know you know this but you disagree with the position I take on it.
I mean, I quoted the bible many times and Investigator thinks I'm seeing it from my own opinion. If I changed my religion to Christian above, maybe that would help. Something about "written/typed words" seen makes people believe more than words. Signatures are more trustworthy for some reason. People who died over 2,000 years ago have more say than your friend down the street.
I don't get it.
Nothing about what you said. The statement: I don't get it.
All this while they are in this material world, can be learnt from observance and listening to their wisdom. Once they pass on, we then have the bounty of what they lived, did and said in the Writings of their Faiths.
If we wish to be True and Just to what they asked of us, we must know what it is. This is the Bounty of the Written Records. It is more than proven that unrecorded sayings passed by word of mouth are always, and I repeat always, altered.
Question: Outside written words being inspired by god, what other authority and sacredness does written words overpower spoken ones?
Go play the Chinese whispers game and be amazed as to how much so. This was a fundamental lesson learnt at school in my time.
Mine
too. Was called something else. Don't think you put too much trust in people. Yet, only people write books not ghosts and goblins
(my words). So that goes to my question above.
Statement
The Logic of this is unquestionable, undebateabe and fankly plain annoying that one would try to keep up this line of unreasonable and illogical arguement.
I would ask which one but too lazy to go back.
Now with that can we now cease that line of refute?
Finally you say you're refuting. I keep saying you are and you're saying you're not. I was going to pull my head off.
I'm not refuting just you don't put trust in people's opposing opinions.
Just thought that differing points of view would help each learn about each other more. I'm trying to figure out ways to understand you by scripture. Thinking of how Christ and Bahaullah can speak for your experiences. That isn't clicking with me.
And I keep going because that's just me. I like to learn. I've been in school what 13 years of my life and I finally, out of all the risk I have, decided to apply for a part time job. I wanted to do full time but I'd be at risk of losing my benefits.
Be well and happy now, Frustration now ebbing.........
You shouldn't be frustrated if you want to make peace. That's probably why peace can't happen, Tony, all of you think us Different-Minded-People want to cause division.
I think you'll find that's wrong or misunderstood when you
want to get to know us. Just sayin'
