Psycho-Babble Faith | about religious faith | Framed
This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | List of forums | Search | FAQ

Lou's reply to spriggy--C

Posted by Lou Pilder on February 26, 2007, at 21:04:16

In reply to Lou's reply to spriggy--B, posted by Lou Pilder on February 26, 2007, at 20:27:46

> > > I also believe completely that:
> > > "the Lord will give grace and glory, and God will not withhold the goodness of life to them that walk uprightly."
> > >
> > > If I understand, are you saying that you believe that God does not offer this grace to Gentiles?
> > > Only to Jews?
> >
> > Spriggy,
> > You wrote,[...are you saying that you believe that God XXX?...].
> > Could you tell me why did you ask that? If you could, then I could have he opportunity to respond accordingly.
> > Lou
> > >
> Spriggy,
> I do not see any part of the the grammatical structure of the statement in question that could be a foundation for your question. So if there is, could you specify such?. For I am not saying what you asked me if I was saying.
> Lou

If this question of yours to me {are you saying}, is related to the statement that Dr. Hsiung and AM are approving, allow me to explain further.
The grammatical structure of that stetment has the potential to be interpreted various ways. That is why I asked the author so that she could have the opportunity to rule out what could be an interpretation.
The grammatical structure of that statement in question has the conjunction {but} which could have the potential to join the two statements together with
A. except for that there is this other fact
B. unless
C. Yet
D. with exception that
E who not
F other interpretations using the conjunction {but}
I feel inferior when I read that quote because of the grammatical structure having the potential IMO to have one think those questions that I asked the author to rule out .
I asked because it was unclear to me what interpretation the author wanted to be meant because there is the potential for the conjunction to mean various meanings.
But historically, the quote has been used to arrouse antisemitic feelings and has the potential IMO to lead a Jew to feel put down and I wanted to give the author the opportunity to refute any possible potential for someone else here to think that they could interptret it differntly from the author's intention.
It is the potential for the interpretation that is the issue. But as the quote stands by itself, it has the potential IMO to arrouse antisemitic feelings and the potential to lead a Jew to feel put down, because of the conjunction {but}, in the quote.
The quote could be put into a context that could not lead a Jew to feel put down and I could do that, but the rules here made to me by DR. Hsiung say that if I was to post the foundation of my faith, in relation that I have a commandment to me from my God to me, that that would be uncivil.
The statemnet in question using the conjunction {but}, could be IMO interpreted as being a foundation of that author's faith. And if the foundation of my faith can not be posted without sanction, then could not the foundation of that author's faith also not be posted without sanction?

> >




Post a new follow-up

Your message only Include above post

Notify the administrators

They will then review this post with the posting guidelines in mind.

To contact them about something other than this post, please use this form instead.


Start a new thread

Google www
Search options and examples
[amazon] for

This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | FAQ
Psycho-Babble Faith | Framed

poster:Lou Pilder thread:736533