<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Ambiguity: God&#8217;s Love for Us / Our Love for God</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.sixsteps.org/2008/02/21/ambiguity-gods-love-for-us-our-love-for-god/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.sixsteps.org/2008/02/21/ambiguity-gods-love-for-us-our-love-for-god/</link>
	<description>Usually life’s greatest gifts come wrapped in adversity</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 21:14:06 +0000</pubDate>
	
		<item>
		<title>By: Bryan</title>
		<link>http://www.sixsteps.org/2008/02/21/ambiguity-gods-love-for-us-our-love-for-god/#comment-2198</link>
		<dc:creator>Bryan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Feb 2008 15:01:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sixsteps.org/2008/02/21/ambiguity-gods-love-for-us-our-love-for-god/#comment-2198</guid>
		<description>Oh, nice. We'll have to get together sometime and show each other what's going on. At least, you can show me how to do a though flow diagram, I'd love to be able to do both.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh, nice. We&#8217;ll have to get together sometime and show each other what&#8217;s going on. At least, you can show me how to do a though flow diagram, I&#8217;d love to be able to do both.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alex S. Leung</title>
		<link>http://www.sixsteps.org/2008/02/21/ambiguity-gods-love-for-us-our-love-for-god/#comment-2196</link>
		<dc:creator>Alex S. Leung</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Feb 2008 06:48:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sixsteps.org/2008/02/21/ambiguity-gods-love-for-us-our-love-for-god/#comment-2196</guid>
		<description>I think I agree with ya there, bro:P

Kewl, I'll check that out. Though, in Pennington's class, we're doing "Thought Flow Diagrams" instead -- which is 'conceptual' diagramming, instead of the grammatical diagramming that you're doing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think I agree with ya there, bro:P</p>
<p>Kewl, I&#8217;ll check that out. Though, in Pennington&#8217;s class, we&#8217;re doing &#8220;Thought Flow Diagrams&#8221; instead &#8212; which is &#8216;conceptual&#8217; diagramming, instead of the grammatical diagramming that you&#8217;re doing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bryan</title>
		<link>http://www.sixsteps.org/2008/02/21/ambiguity-gods-love-for-us-our-love-for-god/#comment-2195</link>
		<dc:creator>Bryan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Feb 2008 22:03:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sixsteps.org/2008/02/21/ambiguity-gods-love-for-us-our-love-for-god/#comment-2195</guid>
		<description>Oh, I don't know if you saw it or not, but I also have 1 John 2.4 diagrammed on my blog. If you have to diagram it make sure to diagram it before checking it out!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh, I don&#8217;t know if you saw it or not, but I also have 1 John 2.4 diagrammed on my blog. If you have to diagram it make sure to diagram it before checking it out!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bryan</title>
		<link>http://www.sixsteps.org/2008/02/21/ambiguity-gods-love-for-us-our-love-for-god/#comment-2194</link>
		<dc:creator>Bryan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Feb 2008 22:02:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sixsteps.org/2008/02/21/ambiguity-gods-love-for-us-our-love-for-god/#comment-2194</guid>
		<description>Yeah, I dealt with that not too long ago. I think that taking it as a objective genitive has a strong case. Can God's love really be perfected? Was there something deficient with it? No, but our love for God can be. 

However would we say that we feel our love for God is in fact completed? I know I sure feel like that is continues daily. 

That being said, I tend to prefer option number 1. "but the person who keeps his word, the love of\for God has truly been perfected/complete in Him."</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah, I dealt with that not too long ago. I think that taking it as a objective genitive has a strong case. Can God&#8217;s love really be perfected? Was there something deficient with it? No, but our love for God can be. </p>
<p>However would we say that we feel our love for God is in fact completed? I know I sure feel like that is continues daily. </p>
<p>That being said, I tend to prefer option number 1. &#8220;but the person who keeps his word, the love of\for God has truly been perfected/complete in Him.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
