Quote:
Hi Shelby,
Hey, dear Skalls (peace to you!)...
Quote:
When Char said "who knows", it was a brilliant deduction.
In your opinion (and perhaps hers/others), perhaps. I agree it was really GOOD; however, whether it was "brilliant" might depend on who you "ask". Many people believe many different things.
Quote:
And I gave her the book title of a book I read years ago about that very concept when talking about the 'knowing of god or a "higher power type thingy". So, I grabbed it [her declaration, if you will] and shared that with her.
Coolness!
Quote:
Ever hear of the book? It's author is Og Mandino. It's a fast read. Check it out sometime and then you'll say: "oh, THAT is what she was referring to. Got it."
I'm think you explained it a nutshell, dear one, so I can't see the need, just now. But thank you for the recommendation!
Quote:
And before you say: but you said the word ASK.
Simply, and pardon me for not clarifying, ASK ones SELF.
(Smile) I can't claim to know that you mean the term rhetorically, luv. Even so, I took the opportunity to share what I did, for which your comment opened the door.
Quote:
The answer will be the same too. It is fabulous, as far as I see the concept, to ask yourself this question and get the answer in the same relation...who knows? Indeed.
If one GETS that answer. All do not. Which is evident by some of the comments.
Quote:
It is a win win if you will.
Indeed. Even if you ask... and the answer is that there is One who DOES know... and can/will tell YOU! Even better! A TRUE win-win... and not just a... mmmmmmm... rhetorical (and so illusion of win-win) situation! Win... because there is someone who IS worthy and so CAN "open the scrolls"... and TRULY win... because you can find out from HIM... what's IN them!
Quote:
Shelby, I wasn't talking about going anywhere with anyone, as you thought, even metaphorically. I was just talking about the discussion. I suspect that I tend more towards the abstract than you do, and possibly this will be at the root of past misunderstandings.
I thought we'd found "common ground" on that, dear Char (peace to you, as well!): you explained yourself quite well and I "got" it. Did I miss something?
Quote:
Neither mode is more right than the other. It's just a matter of different styles.
Mmm-kay; forgive me, though, 'cause I'm not sure what you're referring to - I THINK it's with regard to my comments to dear Skalls... but I'm not really sure, given this issue (metaphors, which was part of a previous discussion that I thought had reached conclusion. I could have been wrong, though, so...)...
Quote:
But Shelby, I don't "claim" anything.
Okay, dear Char.
Quote:
I have spoken merely of what is. No onus on you to accept it, and your non-acceptance, if the use of the word claim implies that, does not affect what is in any way.
Sigh. My use was for SKALLY's purposes, dear Char; not yours. The "who knows" implies that there is no one who does. As a member of Christ's Body, I have to reject that presumption. And I meant (to help dear Skalls "see") that as a member of that Body also, you... who she was addressing... would, too.
Quote:
Nor am I taking offence at the word.
Okay.
Quote:
It may be different linguistic patterns across the Atlantic, but to me, to say that someone "claims" something carries an inherent implication that they may claim it but its existence is in doubt.
Then my apologies - I used the word because of whom I was ADDRESSING (Skally)... not who I was speaking OF. I make the SAME claim... belonging to Christ. Whether the claim is TRUE or NOT true was not the issue. It was about what SKALLY "believes." Or what she apparently doesn't. Hopefully, my comments above will clarify.
Again, peace to you, both!
Your servant and a slave of Christ,
Shellamar