So what if they want to jump at any gun, it's called faith or maybe hope. I see nothing wrong with either interpretation. It could be 11.3 war manual, R v W 113, both, neither or multiple more meanings too. The whole point is to throw ideas around and believe what you think is most likely. None of us will agree 100%. That's the beauty of freedom.
The whole point is to throw ideas around and believe what you think is most likely.
I disagree.
Truth is not about just ruffling through ideas and taking your pick. It's about finding out what's true. IMO.
Also, there can be unfortunate and even bad consequences to "jumping at any gun". Just ask the guy who picked up and hand gun and thought he was cool and started shooting stuff up without practicing properly or undergoing any safety training.
Also, there are different stages of faith. There's child-like faith, aka blind faith. Then there's adolescent-like faith, aka questioning faith. Then there is mature or adult faith, which is faith with knowledge and discernment.
It's nice that you see nothing wrong with either interpretation. Cool. Personally, I'm more interested in Q's interpretation.
I'll conclude with this point; even while you assert none of us will agree 100% and declare that this is the beauty of freedom, you appear to be reacting against me asking pedes to practice due diligence and discernment, as if that's a bad thing. Sadly, this is often the response of people who simply do not want to bother doing due diligence or practicing discernment. Often because its too much effort, either mentally or emotionally.
So, if you are going to assert "so what if they want to jump the gun?" as if that is somehow a defense of doing just that, in a manner that is obviously critical of my comment, don't do it in the same breath as telling me that's freedom, while criticizing me for expressing my view on the matter.
You clearly have a very different frame from me on how you view lots of things, including: the purpose of discussion, the beauty of freedom, how one should best approach Q, etc.
And that's fine. Just don't criticize me for expressing my view or what I am doing by telling me not to criticize others for expressing their view or doing what they do.
You can't do both and be consistent. Choose one or the other.
We all get to make our choices. THAT"s the beauty of freedom in my view.
So what if they want to jump at any gun, it's called faith or maybe hope. I see nothing wrong with either interpretation. It could be 11.3 war manual, R v W 113, both, neither or multiple more meanings too. The whole point is to throw ideas around and believe what you think is most likely. None of us will agree 100%. That's the beauty of freedom.
Edit: I suggest you might want to read this post: An Important PSA From Bioclandestine https://greatawakening.win/p/15IXpMzrjY/an-important-psa-from-bioclandes/
I disagree.
Truth is not about just ruffling through ideas and taking your pick. It's about finding out what's true. IMO.
Also, there can be unfortunate and even bad consequences to "jumping at any gun". Just ask the guy who picked up and hand gun and thought he was cool and started shooting stuff up without practicing properly or undergoing any safety training.
Also, there are different stages of faith. There's child-like faith, aka blind faith. Then there's adolescent-like faith, aka questioning faith. Then there is mature or adult faith, which is faith with knowledge and discernment.
It's nice that you see nothing wrong with either interpretation. Cool. Personally, I'm more interested in Q's interpretation.
I'll conclude with this point; even while you assert none of us will agree 100% and declare that this is the beauty of freedom, you appear to be reacting against me asking pedes to practice due diligence and discernment, as if that's a bad thing. Sadly, this is often the response of people who simply do not want to bother doing due diligence or practicing discernment. Often because its too much effort, either mentally or emotionally.
So, if you are going to assert "so what if they want to jump the gun?" as if that is somehow a defense of doing just that, in a manner that is obviously critical of my comment, don't do it in the same breath as telling me that's freedom, while criticizing me for expressing my view on the matter.
You clearly have a very different frame from me on how you view lots of things, including: the purpose of discussion, the beauty of freedom, how one should best approach Q, etc.
And that's fine. Just don't criticize me for expressing my view or what I am doing by telling me not to criticize others for expressing their view or doing what they do.
You can't do both and be consistent. Choose one or the other.
We all get to make our choices. THAT"s the beauty of freedom in my view.