Wow, look what I happened across on youtube by accident.... - cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board

il Padrino Ute · 05-30-2007, 04:25 AM

our favorite evangelical, Aaron:

I can't help but laugh at the video as it freaks out a bit. Or maybe he really does talk that way?

YOhio · 05-30-2007, 04:47 AM

It is interesting that he didn't appeal to scripture to back up his certainty regarding the purpose of life. I'm not saying he can't do that, but he didn't.

I'm not certain if anybody else feels this way, but I have a hard time conceptualizing the evangelical (protestant?) view of the eternities. Loving more, enjoying more, worshiping more, praising more, and knowing more God is difficult for me to comprehend. It sounds like a form of eternal progression, but to what ends I don't understand. He says that it's not like climbing Mt. Everest, which is not a claim made by Mormons, but why would God not want us to find accomplishment by meeting the measure of our creation? For what did He create us for? Just to love Him or to feel satisfaction that we are created in his image, where the difference is in degree, not kind? To use an imperfect metaphor, it seems as if the view offered by Aaron is more like an owner-pet relationship as opposed to a parent-child relationship.

Jeff Lebowski · 05-30-2007, 04:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by YOhio

It is interesting that he didn't appeal to scripture to back up his certainty regarding the purpose of life. I'm not saying he can't do that, but he didn't.

I'm not certain if anybody else feels this way, but I have a hard time conceptualizing the evangelical (protestant?) view of the eternities. Loving more, enjoying more, worshiping more, praising more, and knowing more God is difficult for me to comprehend. It sounds like a form of eternal progression, but to what ends I don't understand. He says that it's not like climbing Mt. Everest, which is not a claim made by Mormons, but why would God not want us to find accomplishment by meeting the measure of our creation? For what did He create us for? Just to love Him or to feel satisfaction that we are created in his image, where the difference is in degree, not kind? To use an imperfect metaphor, it seems as if the view offered by Aaron is more like an owner-pet relationship as opposed to a parent-child relationship.

Well said.

non sequitur · 05-30-2007, 05:01 AM

Once again Aaron is arguing about whose fairy tale is most appealing. Its like he's debating who is hotter: Snow White or Cinderella?

YOhio · 05-30-2007, 05:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by non sequitur

Once again Aaron is arguing about whose fairy tale is most appealing. Its like he's debating who is hotter: Snow White or Cinderella?

Nice. But that point isn't even debatable. Cinderella is easily hotter than Snow White, if only for the fact that she changes clothes every once in a while.

All-American · 05-30-2007, 05:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by non sequitur

Once again Aaron is arguing about whose fairy tale is most appealing. Its like he's debating who is hotter: Snow White or Cinderella?

When we all know Esmerelda is much hotter.

non sequitur · 05-30-2007, 05:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by YOhio

Nice. But that point isn't even debatable. Cinderella is easily hotter than Snow White, if only for the fact that she changes clothes every once in a while.

I'll give you that Cinderella is hotter, but Snow White is a freak. You can't tell me that she keeps those dwarfs around because they're good conversationalists.

All-American · 05-30-2007, 06:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by non sequitur

I'll give you that Cinderella is hotter, but Snow White is a freak. You can't tell me that she keeps those dwarfs around because they're good conversationalists.

You saw Shrek, right?

"She lives with seven men-- but she's not easy!"

myboynoah · 05-30-2007, 11:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by YOhio

It is interesting that he didn't appeal to scripture to back up his certainty regarding the purpose of life. I'm not saying he can't do that, but he didn't.

I'm not certain if anybody else feels this way, but I have a hard time conceptualizing the evangelical (protestant?) view of the eternities. Loving more, enjoying more, worshiping more, praising more, and knowing more God is difficult for me to comprehend. It sounds like a form of eternal progression, but to what ends I don't understand. He says that it's not like climbing Mt. Everest, which is not a claim made by Mormons, but why would God not want us to find accomplishment by meeting the measure of our creation? For what did He create us for? Just to love Him or to feel satisfaction that we are created in his image, where the difference is in degree, not kind? To use an imperfect metaphor, it seems as if the view offered by Aaron is more like an owner-pet relationship as opposed to a parent-child relationship.

Yes, this is very well said. The contrast makes the doctrine (can I use that word?) of exaltation all that more beautiful and appealing.

I love talking to evangelicals about exaltation, and not just because they react with such "I can't believe you said that!" surprise. To me it is the only logical conclusion to our existence here on earth.

Will I go to hell for portraying the evangelical god as possessing self-esteem problems? Else, for what purpose would he create such lesser beings that would never approach his greatness and whose concept of "heaven" is eternally worshipping him?

I know, I know NonSeq, we're just debating fairy tales. But I like the ending of mine much better. At least I don't spend the eternities as a donkey; I get to be king with Esmerelda as my queen.

BarbaraGordon · 05-30-2007, 12:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by myboynoah

Else, for what purpose would he create such lesser beings that would never approach his greatness and whose concept of "heaven" is eternally worshipping him?

...At least I don't spend the eternities as a donkey; I get to be king with Esmerelda as my queen.

When we've been there ten thousand years, bright shining as the sun
We've no less days to sing His praise, than when we'd first begun

05-30-2007, 04:25 AM	#1
il Padrino Ute Board Pinhead Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: In the basement of my house, Murray, Utah. Posts: 15,941	Wow, look what I happened across on youtube by accident.... our favorite evangelical, Aaron: I can't help but laugh at the video as it freaks out a bit. Or maybe he really does talk that way? __________________ "The beauty of baseball is not having to explain it." - Chuck Shriver "This is now the joke that stupid people laugh at." - Christopher Hitchens on IQ jokes about GWB.

05-30-2007, 05:01 AM	#4
non sequitur Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 1,964	Once again Aaron is arguing about whose fairy tale is most appealing. Its like he's debating who is hotter: Snow White or Cinderella? __________________ ...You've been under attack for days, there's a soldier down, he's wounded, gangrene's setting in, 'Who's used all the penicillin?' 'Oh, Mark Paxson sir, he's got knob rot off of some tart.'" - Gareth Keenan

05-30-2007, 04:47 AM	#2
YOhio AKA SeattleNewt Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 7,055	It is interesting that he didn't appeal to scripture to back up his certainty regarding the purpose of life. I'm not saying he can't do that, but he didn't. I'm not certain if anybody else feels this way, but I have a hard time conceptualizing the evangelical (protestant?) view of the eternities. Loving more, enjoying more, worshiping more, praising more, and knowing more God is difficult for me to comprehend. It sounds like a form of eternal progression, but to what ends I don't understand. He says that it's not like climbing Mt. Everest, which is not a claim made by Mormons, but why would God not want us to find accomplishment by meeting the measure of our creation? For what did He create us for? Just to love Him or to feel satisfaction that we are created in his image, where the difference is in degree, not kind? To use an imperfect metaphor, it seems as if the view offered by Aaron is more like an owner-pet relationship as opposed to a parent-child relationship.