That makes every position in face of god incomplete, and all together complementary. So god is one and he is many, the Bible is his word and any other holy book too, Jesus was and wasn't the messiah, god exists and doesn't exist.
If you don't have any insight into god's dimension, you can not know the truth about god at any extent or distinguish between true and false. All we have are guesses.
All notions about god are wrong if seen alone. Just as a cylinder is neither a circle nor rectangle.
That is NOT what this video is meant to illustrate at all. This is primarily meant to challenge fellow Christians on what Paul calls disputable matters.
@TheEdge012 I agree on what you are saying when it comes to divisiveness. So the way I see it, it follows from your argument that none is right about it. So to worship a 2D shape in a 3D+ world is wrong, you are worshiping something else: a circle/square, and not the cylinder. So making moral claims on that belief (2D) is divisive and it is wrong in a 3D+ world. I agree.
But do we mix all shapes? Some? Which ones? How we do it? How do we know we got it right? etc
It doesn't follow from my argument that none are right. It follows that we should not be so dogmatic in areas where Scripture isn't perfectly clear. I give a couple of examples in the video like Calvinism Vs. Arminianism and Pre or Post Trib rapture.
@TheEdge012 I could not find those videos in your channel.
It does. That is why we should not be dogmatic, because we think we know but we know we couldn't know: other interpretations ought to be considered. A cylinder is not a circle; it is not a matter of discussion. There are irreconcilable discrepancies over religious views, I thought that was your point, how all could be true. But now I think what you meant was about the gray areas of your particular view. Why exclude the other options?
Those were not separate videos but rather admissions in this video (if memory serves me) of examples as to some of the Christian issues that we tend to dogmatically defend, using Scripture. Instead of taking Paul's advice we tend to argue over matters that don't actually deserve the focus and passion we give to them.
If I understand the parting question...you are asking why not let the video also be a lesson on all things religious? If not, please clarify and I will try to answer.
I am sorry I have a very bad memory, I watched it again. I share your outlook and I find your argument very interesting, but I do find some problems in it that can be tricky to surpass.
@TheEdge012 Superficially it makes your point, but dimensions is a bad choice.
A-God is 1D: we know him for what he is, a line.
B-God is 2D: we can know him for what he is, circle or rectangle.
C-God is 3D+: you suggest a square circle, not a cylinder as we (2D) would not know what a cylinder could be like. I remind you can not measure or define god unlike geometrical figures, and we do not even know which shapes to combine or how.
D-He is not a higher, equal nor lower dimensional being.
This is what I was thinking about today. Many try to explain God and their thoughts on Doctrine and Beliefs along the lines of or with the support of Human Philosophies and Logic. But isn't our God much much bigger than that! :D
No. If you read the description box I actually ask that you NOT infer that. This is only about what Paul calls "disputable matters" or the doctrines of opinion that are not foundational to salvation or faith in Christ.
It's a great demonstration. I think this particular one might be the best solution to the predestination/free will paradox that we all keep running into with the Bible.
One of the problems so many people have is that they can't reconcile apparently contradicting ideas. My favorite such contradiction is freewill vs predestination. Both are biblically founded so why are people on each side of the debate so quick to throw out the scriptures for the other side? That is very dangerous, IMO, because one has to discount scripture to cling to the doctrine. Perhaps, just perhaps, the truth lies somewhere in the middle.
Good points! Frequent auditing is the key. The debate between Dispies and Covenantalists, for example, is easily resolved when you find out in Bible, that God structured the covenants for given TIME periods.
So the two ideas actually fit together, much as you portrayed in this video. The 2D covenantal circles sit side by side, in the 'box' of God's Rectangle of Time. :)
I can only tell you my perception of the truth, my knowledge of the truth, or what I believe that I understand of the truth. I can also be honest and tell you that there are times when I know little of what you see as truth and I am sure you could say the same of me. Fact is there is only one truth about such matters that are taken as truth by one and untruths by another. We must weight each others opinions (reason together) to realize what truth is.
I can see where this is going before you've finished ... and I like it! (a minute later...) whoops! It went the another way. I was expecting the 2D rectangle to be shown to be a hockey puck shape (which would also work for your illustration).
That makes every position in face of god incomplete, and all together complementary. So god is one and he is many, the Bible is his word and any other holy book too, Jesus was and wasn't the messiah, god exists and doesn't exist.
If you don't have any insight into god's dimension, you can not know the truth about god at any extent or distinguish between true and false. All we have are guesses.
All notions about god are wrong if seen alone. Just as a cylinder is neither a circle nor rectangle.
elploky 1 year ago
That is NOT what this video is meant to illustrate at all. This is primarily meant to challenge fellow Christians on what Paul calls disputable matters.
TheEdge012 1 year ago
@TheEdge012 I agree on what you are saying when it comes to divisiveness. So the way I see it, it follows from your argument that none is right about it. So to worship a 2D shape in a 3D+ world is wrong, you are worshiping something else: a circle/square, and not the cylinder. So making moral claims on that belief (2D) is divisive and it is wrong in a 3D+ world. I agree.
But do we mix all shapes? Some? Which ones? How we do it? How do we know we got it right? etc
elploky 1 year ago
It doesn't follow from my argument that none are right. It follows that we should not be so dogmatic in areas where Scripture isn't perfectly clear. I give a couple of examples in the video like Calvinism Vs. Arminianism and Pre or Post Trib rapture.
TheEdge012 1 year ago
@TheEdge012 I could not find those videos in your channel.
It does. That is why we should not be dogmatic, because we think we know but we know we couldn't know: other interpretations ought to be considered. A cylinder is not a circle; it is not a matter of discussion. There are irreconcilable discrepancies over religious views, I thought that was your point, how all could be true. But now I think what you meant was about the gray areas of your particular view. Why exclude the other options?
elploky 1 year ago
Those were not separate videos but rather admissions in this video (if memory serves me) of examples as to some of the Christian issues that we tend to dogmatically defend, using Scripture. Instead of taking Paul's advice we tend to argue over matters that don't actually deserve the focus and passion we give to them.
If I understand the parting question...you are asking why not let the video also be a lesson on all things religious? If not, please clarify and I will try to answer.
TheEdge012 1 year ago
@TheEdge012 Yes, that is what I mean.
I am sorry I have a very bad memory, I watched it again. I share your outlook and I find your argument very interesting, but I do find some problems in it that can be tricky to surpass.
elploky 1 year ago
@TheEdge012 Superficially it makes your point, but dimensions is a bad choice.
A-God is 1D: we know him for what he is, a line.
B-God is 2D: we can know him for what he is, circle or rectangle.
C-God is 3D+: you suggest a square circle, not a cylinder as we (2D) would not know what a cylinder could be like. I remind you can not measure or define god unlike geometrical figures, and we do not even know which shapes to combine or how.
D-He is not a higher, equal nor lower dimensional being.
elploky 1 year ago
This is what I was thinking about today. Many try to explain God and their thoughts on Doctrine and Beliefs along the lines of or with the support of Human Philosophies and Logic. But isn't our God much much bigger than that! :D
Love this video.
AlyssaLovesLife 1 year ago
Thanks!
TheEdge012 1 year ago
So what your saying is 'it doesn't matter what I believe because I could be right'?
kevinscales 1 year ago
@kevinscales Or 'God works in mysterious ways'
kevinscales 1 year ago
He is mysterious but the point here is more-so that we cannot always see in the BIG picture type way that our Creator can.
TheEdge012 1 year ago
No. If you read the description box I actually ask that you NOT infer that. This is only about what Paul calls "disputable matters" or the doctrines of opinion that are not foundational to salvation or faith in Christ.
TheEdge012 1 year ago
Woo-Hoo!
Gentle135 1 year ago
It's a great demonstration. I think this particular one might be the best solution to the predestination/free will paradox that we all keep running into with the Bible.
Kanbei85 1 year ago
again, good object lesson, shared it with my facebook friends too.
themoderateextremist 1 year ago
I like this example.
themoderateextremist 1 year ago
bringin out some good ol' Rob Bell! great stuff man!
spikesofgrace 1 year ago
One of the problems so many people have is that they can't reconcile apparently contradicting ideas. My favorite such contradiction is freewill vs predestination. Both are biblically founded so why are people on each side of the debate so quick to throw out the scriptures for the other side? That is very dangerous, IMO, because one has to discount scripture to cling to the doctrine. Perhaps, just perhaps, the truth lies somewhere in the middle.
VioletKitty411 1 year ago
LOVE IT~!!! Great Great Video. So totally agree! :D Lisa
AlyssaLovesLife 1 year ago
Good points! Frequent auditing is the key. The debate between Dispies and Covenantalists, for example, is easily resolved when you find out in Bible, that God structured the covenants for given TIME periods.
So the two ideas actually fit together, much as you portrayed in this video. The 2D covenantal circles sit side by side, in the 'box' of God's Rectangle of Time. :)
brainouty 1 year ago
I can only tell you my perception of the truth, my knowledge of the truth, or what I believe that I understand of the truth. I can also be honest and tell you that there are times when I know little of what you see as truth and I am sure you could say the same of me. Fact is there is only one truth about such matters that are taken as truth by one and untruths by another. We must weight each others opinions (reason together) to realize what truth is.
huckster271 1 year ago
The key to what you just said is to "reason together'. Too often that idea is thrown out on YouTube. Thanks for watching!
TheEdge012 1 year ago
Calm, cool....and circtangular.
Very nice, E.
justchemicalz 1 year ago
Winky Smile...
TheEdge012 1 year ago
I can see where this is going before you've finished ... and I like it! (a minute later...) whoops! It went the another way. I was expecting the 2D rectangle to be shown to be a hockey puck shape (which would also work for your illustration).
An excellent illustration, Edge.
God bless!
mtcanz 1 year ago
That would have been another good analogy. Great minds think alike! Thanks for watching.
TheEdge012 1 year ago
yes I see what you mean. BTW what happened to saturday
alamo11 1 year ago
I can always count on you for a good joke Alamo!
TheEdge012 1 year ago
Maybe the S and the T decided to take a Sabbath rest...
TheEdge012 1 year ago
@alamo11 I was thinking the same thing. The REAL question is "Where is the "S" and the "T" in saturday. :)
JeromeStein4U 1 year ago
@JeromeStein4U Probably .sublinimally referring to the biblical referance "being without beginning and end"
alamo11 1 year ago