November 26, 2020, 04:03:26 pm

Recent posts

Pages 1 ... 8 9 10
91
General Discussion / Re: Fun story.
Last post by jiminpa - July 20, 2020, 07:22:48 pm
If "flows brokenly" refers to mild whitewater then yes. If not, I may be using it wrong.
92
General Discussion / Re: Retirement Sucks
Last post by JohnDB - July 20, 2020, 05:29:36 pm
I seen the MRI...
My patella is sitting off to one side. There is a lot of wear and damage to the cartilage in the groove my kneecap rides in.

It sits crooked. And there's a flap in there as well. So much that it sounds like a drumstick hitting that empty block when walking up the stairs or ladders. Which is how my femur became bruised begin with. (You can hear it across the room...it's loud)

So some silicone in there will smooth out the rough spots. (Nothing is growing back at this late in life)

Might need to cut some tendons to even things out too.

But with some orthodics in my shoes, tape, and exercises to strengthen particular muscle groups I got a chance.

It's not perfect yet but it hurts a lot less.
93
General Discussion / Re: Retirement Sucks
Last post by flaglady - July 19, 2020, 04:43:52 pm
I can promise you that silicone injections won't work, not at all. What you need is a patellar grove surgery to create a proper track for the patella to ride in and a patella button if you don't already have one. Either that or reconstruction of the ligaments - see image - that keep the patella in place.

Please don't let that doctor inject your knee with silicone. It sounds to me more than likely he doesn't have a real clue how to deal with your problem and what he is proposing will likely cause more harm than good.

MPFL
94
General Discussion / Re: Fun story.
Last post by flaglady - July 19, 2020, 04:38:08 pm
Quote from: jiminpa on July 18, 2020, 02:27:58 pmriffles
Hi Jim - this word is new to me. But I Googled it and found this definition a rocky or shallow part of a stream or river where the water flows brokenly.  "the river's sweeping riffles and deep pools provide a superb habitat for salmon". Would this be correct?
95
General Discussion / Re: Curious
Last post by Pete - July 18, 2020, 09:26:49 pm
Each experience is unique. Sometimes experience follows belief, sometimes belief follows experience. 

The feeling of God's unconditional Love for me is one of those things where it's hard to tell what came first. Knowing and understanding that there is nothing I can do to separate me from His Love is a knowledge that lead me to an experience, a feeling as you said, that God Loves me because He is Love. Not because I earned it. In fact, when I deserve it the least, that is when I experience it the most. 

O0
96
General Discussion / Re: Curious
Last post by JakeELee - July 18, 2020, 09:08:45 pm
Quote from: Pete on July 18, 2020, 08:06:52 pmNothing.

Everyone believes what they believe is correct, otherwise, they wouldn't believe it. ;)

You are correct that there is no irrefutable, empirical evidence that our beliefs are the absolute truth. There cannot be, by the very definition of the word "faith".

That doesn't mean there is no evidence. While I know that correlation does not equate to causation, I have, as scripture says, tasted and seen that the Lord is good. I can't prove that to you, and I won't even try.

Generally speaking, I'm a facts and figures guy, so all of your arguments make logical sense to me. But that all pales in comparison to the Love, grace and mercy that I've experienced.

O0

Thanks Pete I appreciate your reply,

How do experience those things?

Did you have to believe first and then the feelings came?

Thanks

JEL
97
General Discussion / Re: Curious
Last post by Pete - July 18, 2020, 08:06:52 pm
Quote from: JakeELee on July 18, 2020, 06:55:02 pmSo what would what would preclude someone from another faith of claiming that they had the absolute truth?

Nothing.

Everyone believes what they believe is correct, otherwise, they wouldn't believe it. ;)

You are correct that there is no irrefutable, empirical evidence that our beliefs are the absolute truth. There cannot be, by the very definition of the word "faith".

That doesn't mean there is no evidence. While I know that correlation does not equate to causation, I have, as scripture says, tasted and seen that the Lord is good. I can't prove that to you, and I won't even try.

Generally speaking, I'm a facts and figures guy, so all of your arguments make logical sense to me. But that all pales in comparison to the Love, grace and mercy that I've experienced.

O0
98
General Discussion / Re: Curious
Last post by JakeELee - July 18, 2020, 06:55:02 pm
Quote from: Bryan on July 18, 2020, 06:27:23 pmHas it ever occurred to you theres a reason its called faith?  "Substance of things hoped for, evidence of what isnt seen."  It wouldnt be faith if you had every waking detail laid out for you.  Id encourage you to stay.  Just find a different/better way to express yourself.

Of course! - It's called "faith" because there is no evidence. If there were evidence then there would be no need for faith? You have confirmed from your scripture that faith is "evidence" of "things not seen" i.e. nothing,

And with respect I have come to THIS forum for answers so to tell me that I need to find a different or better way to express myself is at best a cheap shot - I sincerely hope that this is not your standard answer when faced with different views......good luck with "street evangelism" :P

So what would what would preclude someone from another faith of claiming that they had the absolute truth? Reason and argument please, not appeals to absolute authority or assertions - thanks :)

Or am I missing something?

@Pete thanks for your reply - my post did genuinely disappear and it appeared to have been removed...thanks for clarifying.

JEL
99
General Discussion / Re: Curious
Last post by Pete - July 18, 2020, 06:35:14 pm
Just a quick comment;

Nothing was removed or censored here. I have no idea what may have happened to your post, but I am the only person that has the ability to edit or remove posts, and I can assure you that I did not. 

O0
100
General Discussion / Re: Curious
Last post by Bryan - July 18, 2020, 06:27:23 pm
Quote from: JakeELee on July 18, 2020, 05:37:58 pmSorry but I am done here :

I posted the following reply about 2 hours ago and yet I see it has been censored which leads me to believe that you people aren't interested in conversation, just confirmation of your beliefs. O well time to move on and leave you all to fantasy :

Thanks for your reply - appreciate the time you took to write it. A lot to discuss and I believe you won't take offence if I offer an alternative :

"Faith without objective reasoning is presumption and not real faith at all.  Faith is simply the superlative of belief.  It is a belief so strong that you know that you know that you know."

Faith is not the superlative of belief. Faith is the reason that people give when they have no objective reason for the belief".

If "faith" can lead you to a belief in Jesus and can also lead a muslim to a sincere belief in Allah then it is no longer objective - it is subjective. Therefore "faith" is no longer a pathway to truth or reason.

We need some other mechanism to determine what is true and what is false.

You ask the question about how did I come to the conclusion that 1 + 1 =2. Because it is demonstrably true. It is not an assertion but is proven. "Faith" in a "God" is not demonstrably proven - it is an assertion. Logical reasoning demonstrates that assertions are meaningless and that the burden of proof is on the one making the assertion.

I am NOT asserting that 1+1=2 : I am able to demonstrate that is it is true.

You bring into the argument that of evolution, and for some reason jump to the big bang and the assertion of the infinite regress - i.e. "I can't think of anything that would have created the universe ergo "God". That is an argument from incredulity and therefore a logical fallicy.

Whilst I agree that the universe deserves and explanation, to jump to "God" is rediculous. Why not Allah, or not Thor, or Imhotep. Yet I presume you are arguing that "I can't think of anything else other than "Yaweh" so therefore He created it all is a case of special pleading - again another logical fallicy.

Then you jump to pointing me to a book "Evidence that demands a verdict" - I have read it, and also read "Further evidence that demands a verdict" a number of times, both of which make assertions that are not backed up by science.

You sum things up by again confusing objective reasoning and faith. As your scripture asserts "Faith is the evidence not seen, the substance of things hoped for". Basic logic says that if you have empirical evidence then you do not need faith.

You are clearly confused about "objective", "subjective" and "faith".

"Faith" can NEVER be "objective" until there is a test for objective faith. The Hindu who claims that he has "faith" that his path is correct is no different from your claim of Christianity.

You have chosen the God that you want to, have agreed to the assertions but until you can demonstrate that those assertions are testable, empirical and investigatble then you are no different from any other faith claim.

Thanks for your reply btw - no offense intended, but I find the basic grasp of logic and reason sincerely disturbing. If your world view is correct then surely Yaweh could have bothered to provide more substantial proof?

Thanks

JEL

Has it ever occurred to you theres a reason its called faith?  "Substance of things hoped for, evidence of what isnt seen."  It wouldnt be faith if you had every waking detail laid out for you.  Id encourage you to stay.  Just find a different/better way to express yourself.
Pages 1 ... 8 9 10