“So what exactly is it Dave are you saying I… “cannot seem to grasp or even understand” that means something?”
I just drove in from a road trip, Oregon to Mesa Az, to purchase a new camper, thence to Sierra Vista Az and back to Oregon, with misadventures a-plenty but also spent time with good friends, good food, big beautiful open skies. Good time to decompress and renew.
On the last leg, from Fresno this morning to home in Medford this evening, I had a little time to reflect on your question, and my motives/reasons for taking the tack I did. As I mentioned to Brad, I was in part poking fun at the way ‘some folks’ ridiculed ‘others’ by saying the ‘others’ could not see, nor understand, or grasp what the ‘some folks’ thought should be obvious. I don’t like being talked down to, or condescended to, and my perception was that I (we) were being lectured to. That was my perception, though I freely admit I may have construed the offending language as ridicule, where it might not have been meant that way. If so, I’m sorry.
As to the ‘exactly’ business: I remember being impressed, during the OJ Simpson trial for murder, at the power of ‘story’. Almost everyone knew that OJ was guilty, but the defense was able to tell an alternate story that accounted for all (or most) of the facts, and was able to sow a seed of doubt with the jury.
Now in our disagreements re: pantelism - noone is guilty or innocent of course; my point just being that there are two stories being told - one is pantelist, the other is not - and each pretty much covers all the evidence, but interprets it differently. And the reason for that difference is probably pre-suppositional; or more to the point, a basic difference in suppositions about what type of book(s) the Bible is; a difference in interpreting the ‘arc’ of the entire Biblical story; a difference in understanding what hermeneutics is; and other things as well.
Those are ‘exactly’ the things that I am talking about - what is very obvious to me as to the answers to the basic differences are NOT at all obvious to you (and perhaps others) - likewise, what you take as a given, and should be obvious, even to muddle-headed David Bagwill, is in fact NOT obvious to me at all.
Overall I think Chad was right when he opined that we will probably never agree on some of those differences, and though we are invested in our ‘take’ on things we consider to be crucial, we just have to live with that and aim for Christian charity.