# Is God in the 2% difference?



## jollyroger (Mar 25, 2021)

I figured I'd throw something more light-hearted out here to change it up a bit.

First, somebody with more knowledge on the subject correct me if I'm wrong, but from what I understand the genetic differences between humans and chimps (and bonobos) is almost 2%.

In that mere 2% difference there is a massive gulf in the the species' respective intelligence.

Now imagine a being--let's call him God--had a 2% difference in intelligence to us humans. Heck, let's say 5%, 10%, or 20% or even more.

With that being stated, it's not so hard for me to imagine that a being with that unfathomable level of intelligence would be considered a god, or even a creator of worlds.

If this being were able to realize beyond the 3rd dimension we would have no idea it even existed, it's not out of line to assume that it actually could know what we are thinking and doing at any given time.

That difference in intelligence would be like an ant walking across a football field during the Super Bowl and trying to explain to it what was going on around it. Not just the field, but the players, the teams,, the significance of the event,, etc. It's just so entirely preposterous and impossible to comprehend.

I guess all of this is to say that we do not know what we do not/can not know, and that we might be pretty insignificant in the grand scheme of things.

The things that run through my head when I rediscover the AAA sub.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Mar 25, 2021)

jollyroger said:


> I figured I'd throw something more light-hearted out here to change it up a bit.
> 
> First, somebody with more knowledge on the subject correct me if I'm wrong, but from what I understand the genetic differences between humans and chimps (and bonobos) is almost 2%.
> 
> ...





> If this being were able to realize beyond the 3rd dimension we would have no idea it even existed



This is lightening it up?


----------



## WaltL1 (Mar 26, 2021)

jollyroger said:


> I figured I'd throw something more light-hearted out here to change it up a bit.
> 
> First, somebody with more knowledge on the subject correct me if I'm wrong, but from what I understand the genetic differences between humans and chimps (and bonobos) is almost 2%.
> 
> ...





> The things that run through my head when I rediscover the AAA sub.


Have you been sampling the DMT you were talking about in the other thread? 


> I guess all of this is to say that we do not know what we do not/can not know


Yes. In the search for the answer to the question "how did we all get here"....
we are limited to what the human brain can imagine or come up with.
I think its just as likely the real answer to that question might be something we cant even imagine or fathom.


----------



## jollyroger (Mar 26, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> Have you been sampling the DMT you were talking about in the other thread?



Lol nope definitely not. 

I keep clean as a whistle.

There is a common experience reported with people who have used it though, the majority of people report experiencing another "presence" inside the trip with them, not always benevolent but not malicious either.

It's also been reported that this presence has been the catalyst for people kicking other destructive habits from their lives like cigarettes or even heroin use; the "presence" is all knowing and often compassionate it's been described.

Time is of no importance, in real time the person is said to be under for a few minutes, but the user claims that it was like an eternity.

Pretty wild stuff, I find it fascinating though I'd never try it.

Is it just the brain/chemical combo creating this experience, or is it like opening a window into something we are only ever supposed to see a handful of times in our lives?


----------



## WaltL1 (Mar 26, 2021)

jollyroger said:


> Lol nope definitely not.
> 
> I keep clean as a whistle.
> 
> ...


In another life and long ago, I may or may not have experimented (often) with hallucinogenics. The trip you describe above is very similar to that of peyote buttons.
But this chemical cocktail man made crap these days is downright scary. Folks are nuts taking this stuff.


----------



## Spotlite (Mar 26, 2021)

jollyroger said:


> I figured I'd throw something more light-hearted out here to change it up a bit.
> 
> First, somebody with more knowledge on the subject correct me if I'm wrong, but from what I understand the genetic differences between humans and chimps (and bonobos) is almost 2%.
> 
> ...





> I guess all of this is to say that we do not know what we do not/can not know, and that we might be pretty insignificant in the grand scheme of things.


I gotta a cousin and I swear there’s gotta be lesser than 2% genetic difference in him and chimps. 

But yes, we do not know what we do not know, but after research / development over time, can we know it?? Or, are there things we simply can’t ever know?


----------



## Israel (Mar 26, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> In another life and long ago, I may or may not have experimented (often) with hallucinogenics. The trip you describe above is very similar to that of peyote buttons.
> But this chemical cocktail man made crap these days is downright scary. Folks are nuts taking this stuff.


Walt...I believe you are talking about drugs...but this has been exceeded exponentially with this:

https://www.fastcompany.com/4047780...just-an-injection-away-if-youre-feeling-lucky


----------



## jollyroger (Mar 26, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> I gotta a cousin and I swear there’s gotta be lesser than 2% genetic difference in him and chimps.
> 
> But yes, we do not know what we do not know, but after research / development over time, can we know it?? Or, are there things we simply can’t ever know?



It's always seemed to me and my tiny brain that the more we R&D, the more we realize just how deep this rabbit hole really goes; more and more questions arise, and the wider and wider the gulf gets.

We peel back a layer of the onion trying to find the center, but the center keeps getting moved behind another layer, ad infinitum.

It appears we are really traveling along a lemniscate, but we perceive ourselves as moving in a straight line; we are destined to circle back.



Heck, this phenomenon is evident in nearly everything in our known universe.

Look at an A/C electrical cycle, the electromagnetic spectrum, a nautilus shell, a fractal, even DNA. 


I personally like to call this the Language of God.

The message is written in every aspect of nature and the universe, we just don't have the ability to translate it, as mere three dimensional beings.

That is why I brought up 3D in my other post.

We are not equipped for anything beyond these three dimensions currently. We theoretically know that as many as 11 to 13 dimensions exist, but we are unable to sense them.

Sure we learn stuff and get more and more knowledgeable, but to what end? We appear to be no closer to solving the mystery of a creator, rather we are simultaneously moving forward and backwards


----------



## jollyroger (Mar 26, 2021)

Israel said:


> Walt...I believe you are talking about drugs...but this has been exceeded exponentially with this:
> 
> https://www.fastcompany.com/4047780...just-an-injection-away-if-youre-feeling-lucky


This is wild!

If it can grow me some head hair I'm in.

YOLO!


----------



## jollyroger (Mar 26, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> In another life and long ago, I may or may not have experimented (often) with hallucinogenics. The trip you describe above is very similar to that of peyote buttons.
> But this chemical cocktail man made crap these days is downright scary. Folks are nuts taking this stuff.


I too, may or may not have tried some of these things you speak of in another time, another life....


----------



## jollyroger (Mar 26, 2021)

jollyroger said:


> We peel back a layer of the onion trying to find the center, but the center keeps getting moved behind another layer, ad infinitum.
> 
> It appears we are really traveling along a lemniscate...
> 
> ...



Here is a nice video illustrating the concept better than I can explain it.






We are not without God, because we are God. All of it. Everything.

No, I am not manic right now 

If one likens the story of God and Jesus to the infinite cycles embedded in every aspect of nature (death and rebirth, over and over and over) we can see that the stories are true, albeit a nicely packaged allegory.

Jesus and the Father are symbolic references to this cycle that is in literally everything, that is why they are one and the same in the Bible.

They are interchangeable and can be the Father, Son and the Spirit simultaneously.

Does this makes sense?


----------



## bullethead (Mar 26, 2021)

jollyroger said:


> Here is a nice video illustrating the concept better than I can explain it.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


AKA:
Nature


----------



## jollyroger (Mar 26, 2021)

bullethead said:


> AKA:
> Nature


Winner winner chicken dinner!


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Apr 6, 2021)

Francis Collins noted how odd it was that people could look at the design of the York Minister Rose window on the left which is stained glass and intuitively recognize it as a design with a designer, yet those same people could look at the infinitely more complex and beautiful design of the cross-section of a DNA strand and deny design.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 6, 2021)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Francis Collins noted how odd it was that people could look at the design of the York Minister Rose window on the left which is stained glass and intuitively recognize it as a design with a designer, yet those same people could look at the infinitely more complex and beautiful design of the cross-section of a DNA strand and deny design.


Nothing in the design of either gives any details about who designed them.
One is certainly human design the other is anyone's guess.
The one on the right is just as likely to be the result of the available chemicals and conditions which allow it.


----------



## jollyroger (Apr 6, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Nothing in the design of either gives any details about who designed them.
> One is certainly human design the other is anyone's guess.
> The one on the right is just as likely to be the result of the available chemicals and conditions which allow it.


You are correct, it could be pure coincidence that the manifestations of the creative mind mirror that of nature.

What I find remarkable is that these patterns are in everything, literally everything.

Every conceivable phenomenon in reality can be mathematically reduced to the infinitely repeating ratio that is The Golden Mean, and it's not a matter of trying to find patterns where there are none, it is matter of factly present in all things physical and metaphysical.

From the simplest and strongest of the geometric forms in nature-- the circle and the equilateral triangle--every structure known to man can be formed.

3 sides, the Holy Trinity?

Circle, the cycles of nature?

This isn't grasping at straws, this has been expressed in every holy text from Hinduism to Christianity, and is evident in mathematics and science as well.

I find it utterly fascinating, but that is just my two cents worth, it don't mean nothing in the grand scheme of things.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 6, 2021)

jollyroger said:


> You are correct, it could be pure coincidence that the manifestations of the creative mind mirror that of nature.
> 
> What I find remarkable is that these patterns are in everything, literally everything.
> 
> ...


You had me interested until "3 sides, The Holy Trinity"

People existed, religion existed LONG before the God of Abraham came to be talked about (IE: existed)
There seems to be a serious disconnect among the Christian believers about claiming to have a Monotheistic religion and in the next breath talking about a Father a Son and yet another Spirit among an already two Spirits. 
Trinity is a group of three. The sum of one and one and one equals three.
It is yet another example of suspending the definition in order to suit because the diety worshipped is beyond the rules.
I cannot grasp why if a trinity existed and is symbolized throughout creation from day one why it took so long for humans to come up with the concept. In the scheme of ancient religions the trinity arrived pretty late to the game.
The entire concept and excuses are ridiculous.


----------



## jollyroger (Apr 6, 2021)

bullethead said:


> You had me interested until "3 sides, The Holy Trinity"
> 
> People existed, religion existed LONG before the God of Abraham came to be talked about (IE: existed)
> There seems to be a serious disconnect among the Christian believers about claiming to have a Monotheistic religion and in the next breath talking about a Father a Son and yet another Spirit among an already two Spirits.
> ...


I'm no expert, I'm just drawing conclusions with the overlaps amongst the religions that I've noticed.

I can't speak for the seemingly contradictory monotheism (1) = trinity (3)

My best attempt is with the sacred geometry found within the text and within mathematics.

A trinity is a single shape, a sacred shape as it's been coined by certain mystics and scholars of the geometry.

Honestly, that's the best I've got 

My semi-supported belief is that we lost knowledge some unknown thousands of years prior to Judaism (and subsequently Christianity) and the stories are allegories that attempt to explain this knowledge in a cryptic way because it was a) a threat to some power establishment, or b) there were gaps in the knowledge record and this was the only method they had to explain it.

We may have had more than one "dark age."

Perhaps a mass extinction of some sort, perhaps our species (or some variation of) had risen to a great height in the past and collapsed under its own weight and hubris, and we don't have a complete picture with which to finish the puzzle.

I have more questions than answers, I only speculate because that is really the only thing I can do.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 7, 2021)

jollyroger said:


> I'm no expert, I'm just drawing conclusions with the overlaps amongst the religions that I've noticed.
> 
> I can't speak for the seemingly contradictory monotheism (1) = trinity (3)
> 
> ...


History and archeology really doesn't support the great knowledge prior to Judaism theory and neither does the Bible. The god of the Bible created the Jews to be his chosen people. They were his children, he was their god. That is why they acknowledged and also worshipped other gods and why the god of Abraham got angry if/when they put another god before him. The bible doesn't tell of this particular God's influence or even existence in any other pre Judaism religion because the creation mentioned is the creation of the Jewish race. "The Beginning " is their beginning and history, archeology,  science tells us that a whole lot was going on in this planet a whole lot longer than 6000 years ago.


----------



## jollyroger (Apr 7, 2021)

bullethead said:


> History and archeology really doesn't support the great knowledge prior to Judaism theory and neither does the Bible. The god of the Bible created the Jews to be his chosen people. They were his children, he was their god. That is why they acknowledged and also worshipped other gods and why the god of Abraham got angry if/when they put another god before him. The bible doesn't tell of this particular God's influence or even existence in any other pre Judaism religion because the creation mentioned is the creation of the Jewish race. "The Beginning " is their beginning and history, archeology,  science tells us that a whole lot was going on in this planet a whole lot longer than 6000 years ago.


Have you ever dug into the Gnostics?

Pretty interesting and a bit to your point as well.

I believe it is the Book of Judas, which was the conversation that allegedly took place between Judas Iscariot and Jesus.

In the book, Jesus himself references more than one god.

I'd love to spend a weekend combing through the Vatican Library, just sayin.


----------



## NCHillbilly (Apr 7, 2021)

jollyroger said:


> That difference in intelligence would be like an ant walking across a football field during the Super Bowl and trying to explain to it what was going on around it. Not just the field, but the players, the teams,, the significance of the event,, etc. It's just so entirely preposterous and impossible to comprehend.
> 
> I guess all of this is to say that we do not know what we do not/can not know, and that we might be pretty insignificant in the grand scheme of things.
> 
> The things that run through my head when I rediscover the AAA sub.


But yet, we see people every day who claim to know exactly what God wants, and what his feeling are about various things. I maintain that if a being such as God exists, I would not even be able to comprehend the conditions of its existence, much less know what it wants and speak in its behalf.


----------



## Spotlite (Apr 7, 2021)

NCHillbilly said:


> But yet, we see people every day who claim to know exactly what God wants, and what his feeling are about various things. I maintain that if a being such as God exists, I would not even be able to comprehend the conditions of its existence, much less know what it wants and speak in its behalf.


People claim a lot of things both pros and cons on the existence / non existence...


----------



## bullethead (Apr 7, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> People claim a lot of things both pros and cons on the existence / non existence...


The "god does not exist" crowd has a lot going for them with the lack of evidence that the "god does exist" crowd provides or more specifically the evidence which the Pro crowd cannot provide. The no evidence is a pretty compelling example. It is easy to sit back wait for something, literally any evidence to back up the claims.


----------



## Spotlite (Apr 7, 2021)

bullethead said:


> The "god does not exist" crowd has a lot going for them with the lack of evidence that the "god does exist" crowd provides or more specifically the evidence which the Pro crowd cannot provide. The no evidence is a pretty compelling example. It is easy to sit back wait for something, literally any evidence to back up the claims.


You and I know that’s biased.

God is a spirit, nothing tangible to show you. That’s what I don’t understand about folks that claim they know the Bible, they should know it is a spirit, it existed long before the “Jesus Character a couple thousand years ago”

No evidence is also biased, depending on how convinced the nay sayer is. The same evidence I can provide you that you can dispute is also enough to overwhelmingly convince someone else.

Not the best analogy but in regards to a spirit and someone being in love. You can’t see in love, you do see the fruits of it. All of those fruits are the same fruits you see for lust or someone just being a gentleman to a lady. But for someone that’s never been in love, you can’t prove it’s real love if they’re convinced that love doesn’t exist.

An Apologetic does not have the burden of proof unless he wants to convince you. An Apologetic does nothing but defend / speak in favor / make a case for his belief.

His ability/ inability to make a good / bad case is opinionated by the opposition. As said before, I can win someone with information that I can provide to another that disputes it.

There are those that make a better case than I do, I will admit that. I will also admit the Christian crowd has a lot at stake telling you something is there when they can’t prove it to you.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 7, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> You and I know that’s biased.
> 
> God is a spirit, nothing tangible to show you. That’s what I don’t understand about folks that claim they know the Bible, they should know it is a spirit, it existed long before the “Jesus Character a couple thousand years ago”
> 
> ...


Now, now, now, for 4000 years within the pages of the bible that "spirit" left more evidence than Pee Wee Herman in a theater. The "spirit" was making itself known since day one, talking donkeys, booming voices fire and brimstone, helping win wars, burning bushes parting seas, drowning over 20 million, then the new and improved version was literally walking among people, bringing back dead people, healing lepers, resurrecting and ascending skyward. Where is that evidence outside of those pages? Why did it stop?


----------



## NCHillbilly (Apr 7, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> You and I know that’s biased.
> 
> God is a spirit, nothing tangible to show you. That’s what I don’t understand about folks that claim they know the Bible, they should know it is a spirit, it existed long before the “Jesus Character a couple thousand years ago”
> 
> ...


I fall more into the crowd of believing that there is a higher power/spirit/energy/something bigger than us that connects everything together that is out there somewhere, or is simply in everything. I do not believe that anyone understands it, or that it conforms to any particular religion. I believe that most religions are an attempt to connect with this energy, but each one focuses on a different aspect of it seen through different cultural eyes and beliefs, like the old analogy of the group of blind men grasping at different individual parts of the elephant and each describing the elephant as a totally different creature.


----------



## Spotlite (Apr 7, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Now, now, now, for 4000 years within the pages of the bible that "spirit" left more evidence than Pee Wee Herman in a theater. The "spirit" was making itself known since day one, talking donkeys, booming voices fire and brimstone, helping win wars, burning bushes parting seas, drowning over 20 million, then the new and improved version was literally walking among people, bringing back dead people, healing lepers, resurrecting and ascending skyward. Where is that evidence outside of those pages? Why did it stop?


Lol true, I know I haven’t parted any seas. But, who’s to what “stopped”. Miracles or different miracles? It is explained in the Bible though, then and for now. 


All jurors in a hung jury were presented the same information.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 7, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> Lol true, I know I haven’t parted any seas. But, who’s to what “stopped”. Miracles or different miracles? It is explained in the Bible though, then and for now.
> 
> 
> All jurors in a hung jury were presented the same information.


When god was called to testify he was a no show. The jury stared at an empty seat.

Until recently there was no way to record "miracles".
We can go back through archeology and history to look for evidence of the major miracles of days before technology. We can search the works contemporary historians and scholars for evidence of what the bible says happened on grand scales that would effect more than just a small geographical area yet they show no such mention of this happenings. The small individual miracles of 2000+ years ago are in the exact same boat as the modern ones in that there is nothing to back up that it ever happened, only now and the last 50 years especially there are ways to record such things and document them. But for some reason people dont, or can't.


----------



## Spotlite (Apr 7, 2021)

bullethead said:


> When god was called to testify he was a no show. The jury stared at an empty seat.
> 
> Until recently there was no way to record "miracles".
> We can go back through archeology and history to look for evidence of the major miracles of days before technology. We can search the works contemporary historians and scholars for evidence of what the bible says happened on grand scales that would effect more than just a small geographical area yet they show no such mention of this happenings. The small individual miracles of 2000+ years ago are in the exact same boat as the modern ones in that there is nothing to back up that it ever happened, only now and the last 50 years especially there are ways to record such things and document them. But for some reason people dont, or can't.


A hung jury meant some where, and some wasn’t convinced.

But for the record, I’m walking proof of a miracle and stated the events that took place prior, during and afterwards. That’s still not good enough to convince some here. But it is for me and my doctor who had zero medical explanation / theory. Also, my wife just went through a similar situation with no medical explanation or theories. 6 months of pain, medicines, trial procedures, testing, etc., 4 doctors, and the end result was zero / nothing there. Nothing operated on, nothing fixed, no pain. It’s on an X-ray and MRI though in the beginning, prayer does work ?


----------



## Spotlite (Apr 7, 2021)

NCHillbilly said:


> I fall more into the crowd of believing that there is a higher power/spirit/energy/something bigger than us that connects everything together that is out there somewhere, or is simply in everything. I do not believe that anyone understands it, or that it conforms to any particular religion. I believe that most religions are an attempt to connect with this energy, but each one focuses on a different aspect of it seen through different cultural eyes and beliefs, like the old analogy of the group of blind men grasping at different individual parts of the elephant and each describing the elephant as a totally different creature.


I’m with you in understanding it like a lot claim.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 7, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> A hung jury meant some where, and some wasn’t convinced.
> 
> But for the record, I’m walking proof of a miracle and stated the events that took place prior, during and afterwards. That’s still not good enough to convince some here. But it is for me and my doctor who had zero medical explanation / theory. Also, my wife just went through a similar situation with no medical explanation or theories. 6 months of pain, medicines, trial procedures, testing, etc., 4 doctors, and the end result was zero / nothing there. Nothing operated on, nothing fixed, no pain. It’s on an X-ray and MRI though in the beginning, prayer does work ?


I was one upping your hung jury analogy with a No Show on the stand.

I have no doubt that unexplainable things, aka Miracles happen.
Now, it is easy to give credit to some un-Seeable force for the miracle but that just muddies the waters even more by asserting or claiming that you (on anyone) knows for certain that a specific great overseer of of your faith made it a point to help out.
If Jews and Christians lived a more "wonderful life" , lived longer, had less sorrow, heath health problems, undefeated seasons etc etc etc Id say they were into something.  But the good, the bad and the unexplainable happens across the globe equally. So I have a hard time believing you (no disrespect) or anyone who "knows"  who is responsible for the unexplainable.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 7, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> A hung jury meant some where, and some wasn’t convinced.
> 
> But for the record, I’m walking proof of a miracle and stated the events that took place prior, during and afterwards. That’s still not good enough to convince some here. But it is for me and my doctor who had zero medical explanation / theory. Also, my wife just went through a similar situation with no medical explanation or theories. 6 months of pain, medicines, trial procedures, testing, etc., 4 doctors, and the end result was zero / nothing there. Nothing operated on, nothing fixed, no pain. It’s on an X-ray and MRI though in the beginning, prayer does work ?


Explain to me in detail how you are certain your god is responsible. Prayer to the oak stump has just as good of a track record.


----------



## Spotlite (Apr 7, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Explain to me in detail how you are certain your god is responsible. Prayer to the oak stump has just as good of a track record.


Disagreed. 

I believe I went through my events here and it’s not believed by some. I see no benefit in rehashing that.


----------



## Spotlite (Apr 7, 2021)

bullethead said:


> I was one upping your hung jury analogy with a No Show on the stand.
> 
> I have no doubt that unexplainable things, aka Miracles happen.
> Now, it is easy to give credit to some un-Seeable force for the miracle but that just muddies the waters even more by asserting or claiming that you (on anyone) knows for certain that a specific great overseer of of your faith made it a point to help out.
> If Jews and Christians lived a more "wonderful life" , lived longer, had less sorrow, heath health problems, undefeated seasons etc etc etc Id say they were into something.  But the good, the bad and the unexplainable happens across the globe equally. So I have a hard time believing you (no disrespect) or anyone who "knows"  who is responsible for the unexplainable.


That’s a good perspective. I understand your stance - hence the analogy I previously used for the spirit and in love. 

And no worries, no disrespect taken at all. Always enjoy the challenge / discussion with you.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 7, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> Disagreed.
> 
> I believe I went through my events here and it’s not believed by some. I see no benefit in rehashing that.


If you look up the studies of prayer, its 50/50. No religion has a better track record than another.
I have seen where ill people have responded better when knowing they were getting prayed for but it has been explained as the mind helping the body.


----------



## Spotlite (Apr 7, 2021)

bullethead said:


> If you look up the studies of prayer, its 50/50. No religion has a better track record than another.
> I have seen where ill people have responded better when knowing they were getting prayed for but it has been explained as the mind helping the body.


I realize that in cases and don’t deny that. But I’m speaking of cases where there is no medical explanation / theory.


----------



## jollyroger (Apr 7, 2021)

NCHillbilly said:


> I fall more into the crowd of believing that there is a higher power/spirit/energy/something bigger than us that connects everything together that on a different aspect of it seen through different cultural eyes and beliefs, like the old analogy of the group of blind men grasping at different individual parts of the elephant and each describing the elephant as a totally different creature.


This.

It is my personal belief that it all comes down to energies, or vibrations, or waves.

Science shows us this, the ancients show us this.

It can be detected with Hadron coliders and it was appearing in art work for thousands of years before that all over the planet from cultures that allegedly had no contact.

What is the significance of this? Is this God?

_That_ is my big question, but I'm actually okay with never knowing the answer, I am just humbled to be able to be a part of it.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 7, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> I realize that in cases snd dint deny that. But I’m speaking of cases where there is no medical explanation / theory.


I fully understand about those No Medical or Scientific reason cases. I absolutely agree that they happen.
They happen universally among the religious and non religious. 
What about them leads to a certain deity being responsible other than the beliefs of the individual who credits a certain deity ? It is as if at that point the person insinuates they he or she knows more than the Drs and Scientists.
And then if prayers are indeed answered who/what is responsible for "miracles" among atheists?


----------



## bullethead (Apr 7, 2021)

jollyroger said:


> This.
> 
> It is my personal belief that it all comes down to energies, or vibrations, or waves.
> 
> ...


Energy could be considered or named "god". I have issue with someone telling me that they know which specific god energy is and it's also interesting that in each and every single case that god happens to be the exact same god they worship.


----------



## Spotlite (Apr 7, 2021)

bullethead said:


> I fully understand about those No Medical or Scientific reason cases. I absolutely agree that they happen.
> They happen universally among the religious and non religious.
> What about them leads to a certain deity being responsible other than the beliefs of the individual who credits a certain deity ? It is as if at that point the person insinuates they he or she knows more than the Drs and Scientists.
> And then if prayers are indeed answered who/what is responsible for "miracles" among atheists?


I’ve heard it explained several ways, the most convincing from a Christians view is that God is no respecter of persons. Just as some of those miracles in the Bible, miracles for whoever still happen as a way to get the attention of those he’s dealing with. I believe God can deal with the Atheist, too.


----------



## Spotlite (Apr 7, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Energy could be considered or named "god". I have issue with someone telling me that they know which specific god energy is and it's also interesting that in each and every single case that god happens to be the exact same god they worship.


Yup that is a tough one for Christians to claim / explain it’s our God because the Indian says it’s the.....


----------



## bullethead (Apr 7, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> I’ve heard it explained several ways, the most convincing from a Christians view is that God is no respecter of persons. Just as some of those miracles in the Bible, miracles for whoever still happen as a way to get the attention of those he’s dealing with. I believe God can deal with the Atheist, too.


Again, beliefs, guesses, wants, needs are all anyone has.


----------



## jollyroger (Apr 7, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Energy could be considered or named "god". I have issue with someone telling me that they know which specific god energy is and it's also interesting that in each and every single case that god happens to be the exact same god they worship.



Yea unfortunately man has ego.

Being able to detach from the ego is unfortunately difficult or nearly impossible to do for the vast majority of folks, myself included.

For me personally it's only ever been a fleeting and ephemeral experience that's happened a mere handful of times in my life.


----------



## NCHillbilly (Apr 7, 2021)

Religion is mostly cultural. Most people raised in rural southern America are protestant Christians. Most people raised in the northern US and the Latin American countries are Catholic Christians. If any of those American people who are devout Christians had been born somewhere else, I firmly believe that they would right now be devout Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, or whatever, and would just as firmly believe that their religion is the only true one. I am more of the mind that no organized religion has a patent on The Truth. I think a lot of Native American and Celtic religions may be closer to The Truth than most modern organized religions. I also have a feeling that Jolly Roger's theory of lost ancient knowledge may be more valid than we think.


----------



## hummerpoo (Apr 7, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> I’ve heard it explained several ways, the most convincing from a Christians view is that God is no respecter of persons. *Just as some of those miracles in the Bible, miracles for whoever still happen as a way to get the attention of those he’s dealing with*. I believe God can deal with the Atheist, too.



Always has been ... always will be

John 12
28 Father, glorify Your name.” Then a voice came out of heaven: “I have both glorified it, and will glorify it again.” 29 So the crowd _of people_ who stood by and heard it were saying that it had thundered; others were saying, “An angel has spoken to Him.”


----------



## gordon 2 (Apr 8, 2021)

bullethead said:


> You had me interested until "3 sides, The Holy Trinity"
> 
> People existed, religion existed LONG before the God of Abraham came to be talked about (IE: existed)
> There seems to be a serious disconnect among the Christian believers about claiming to have a Monotheistic religion and in the next breath talking about a Father a Son and yet another Spirit among an already two Spirits.
> ...




Quote:"In the scheme of ancient religions the trinity arrived pretty late to the game.
The entire concept and excuses are ridiculous." end Quote
---------------------------
Or the trinity existed all along, but the philosophy available to consciousness so to express the Divine in this manner, said a trinity, arrived relatively late to the philosophy game and so to consciousness.

A  philosophy observing the mandelas of nature  and a philosophy observing the pulsations of active forms within nature, including philosophy itself through time, might bright to the table of dissertation or comment very different vocabularies let alone assessments of what consciousness is able to grasp at.

I like to think this way, although it might be too simple: Pagan-gentile beliefs- consciousness are usually from the observations of the interconnectedness of nature.  What separates the beliefs  derived from the common processes of nature  with those of the greater religions are the philosophical outlooks of the latter who are willing to release the mind between heartbeats ( like the release of a bow string) and declare things  so unnatural--they are supernatural and so on... And so consciousness of what was is vastly different of what they are at any given point in time and also what it will be. While the skeletons of nature have a great commonality, the life forces built from them have less.

And so the geometry of the fractal is left behind as a model of witness in matters spiritual, rather the new model is man, conscious man conscious that he is hunting in inner worlds which impose designs on all of life.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 8, 2021)

gordon 2 said:


> Quote:"In the scheme of ancient religions the trinity arrived pretty late to the game.
> The entire concept and excuses are ridiculous." end Quote
> ---------------------------
> Or the trinity existed all along, but the philosophy available to consciousness so to express the Divine in this manner, said a trinity, arrived relatively late to the philosophy game and so to consciousness.


So god made people who were incapable of understanding his concept until a certain time then all of a sudden he flicked the switch marked "understand"?
There is absolutely zero evidence that any sort of trinity existed before the writings in the bible or outside of those same writings. That is a leap believers have to make and assert. The conciousness has existed for a long time that allows a person to immediately leap from One god to now Three gods all with different names, titles, tempers and duties. The ability of the conscious to suspend the rules followed in life in every other manner in order to make excuses to try to piece together absurd scenarios because they NEED it to be so has existed pre bible and outside of the bible. That has been proven for 10,000+ years which is longer than it took someone to introduce a trinity of one.


----------



## jollyroger (Apr 8, 2021)

bullethead said:


> So god made people who were incapable of understanding his concept until a certain time then all of a sudden he flicked the switch marked "understand"?
> There is absolutely zero evidence that any sort of trinity existed before the writings in the bible or outside of those same writings. That is a leap believers have to make and assert. The conciousness has existed for a long time that allows a person to immediately leap from One god to now Three gods all with different names, titles, tempers and duties. The ability of the conscious to suspend the rules followed in life in every other manner in order to make excuses to try to piece together absurd scenarios because they NEED it to be so has existed pre bible and outside of the bible. That has been proven for 10,000+ years which is longer than it took someone to introduce a trinity of one.


One could say eating from the tree of knowledge was the tipping point.

That may be the authors way of explaining the genesis of knowledge (consciousness).

It can be thought of just like any other primitive origin story.

The rise to consciousness is packaged into an easily digestible form for people of all intellects.


----------



## WaltL1 (Apr 8, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Now, now, now, for 4000 years within the pages of the bible that "spirit" left more evidence than Pee Wee Herman in a theater. The "spirit" was making itself known since day one, talking donkeys, booming voices fire and brimstone, helping win wars, burning bushes parting seas, drowning over 20 million, then the new and improved version was literally walking among people, bringing back dead people, healing lepers, resurrecting and ascending skyward. Where is that evidence outside of those pages? Why did it stop?





> Why did it stop?


Because "Jesus" was a real dude, a charismatic, rabble rousing preacher of sorts, who ruffled the wrong feathers and ended up like many rabble rousers of the time - nailed to a cross?
Men wrote the rest of the story mixing in factual places, people etc. with miracles, ascending and all the rest to further their particular religious agenda.
I think thats a plausible explanation of why it "stopped".


----------



## bullethead (Apr 8, 2021)

jollyroger said:


> One could say eating from the tree of knowledge was the tipping point.
> 
> That may be the authors way of explaining the genesis of knowledge (consciousness).


Eating from the tree of knowledge (what a silly concept) came Thousands upon thousands of years after modern humans were already modern and worshipping gods before the god of abraham was invented.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 8, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> Because "Jesus" was a real dude, a charismatic, rabble rousing preacher of sorts, who ruffled the wrong feathers and ended up like many rabble rousers of the time - nailed to a cross?
> Men wrote the rest of the story mixing in factual places, people etc. with miracles, ascending and all the rest to further their particular religious agenda.
> I think thats a plausible explanation of why it "stopped".


In reality there were others in Jewish culture that came after him who fulfilled more prophetic accomplishments and still did not meet the title of messiah. The contestants keep coming and their followers keep on wearing the fan gear but the involvement of any actual god or gods came to a halt as technology made it possible to capture these claims of interactions with humans.
I agree on your Jesus assessment and his fans trying to connect dots in their writings.


----------



## jollyroger (Apr 8, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Eating from the tree of knowledge (what a silly concept) came Thousands upon thousands of years after modern humans were already modern and worshipping gods before the god of abraham was invented.


I try not to place my 21st century intellect into that of quasi-prehistoric man.

I could be wrong and probably am, but I see the tree of knowledge being the point where we rose to awareness, consciousness, we branched off from other hominids in the chain.

I think it might be explaining the past farther back than Homo sapien sapien, I think these ancients had some idea that we may have had an ancestor that wasn't quite in our modern Homo sapien sapien form.

It could be just an analogy, we make them everyday to help explain difficult concepts to people not familiar with our fields or our area of expertise.

It could be just an origin story, I dont think the pre-Abrahamic gods are even relevant to the story, its kind of a stand alone thing.

I don’t want to digress too far off topic or get into crazy talk, but check out the Stoned Ape Theory.

Could the Fruit of Knowledge perhaps have been the consumption of psychedelic substances?


----------



## WaltL1 (Apr 8, 2021)

bullethead said:


> In reality there were others in Jewish culture that came after him who fulfilled more prophetic accomplishments and still did not meet the title of messiah. The contestants keep coming and their followers keep on wearing the fan gear but the involvement of any actual god or gods came to a halt as technology made it possible to capture these claims of interactions with humans.
> I agree on your Jesus assessment and his fans trying to connect dots in their writings.


That must be the job interview from he11.
"So tell me Mr. Holy One, what are your accomplishments that you feel qualifies you for the position of Messiah"?


----------



## Spotlite (Apr 8, 2021)

jollyroger said:


> One could say eating from the tree of knowledge was the tipping point.
> 
> That may be the authors way of explaining the genesis of knowledge (consciousness).
> 
> ...


Well it’s no secret that we have more knowledge (concerning morals) of what’s good and bad since then. There are still a few cave men left with wife beater shirts on though.


----------



## WaltL1 (Apr 8, 2021)

jollyroger said:


> I try not to place my 21st century intellect into that of quasi-prehistoric man.
> 
> I could be wrong and probably am, but I see the tree of knowledge being the point where we rose to awareness, consciousness, we branched off from other hominids in the chain.
> 
> ...


I would imagine there was plenty of trial and error going on as to which plants etc went good in a terradactyl omelette and which ones made you imagine gods.


----------



## jollyroger (Apr 8, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> I would imagine there was plenty of trial and error going on as to which plants etc went good in a terradactyl omelette and which ones made you imagine gods.


My Great Grandad × 10^5 made a mean wooly mammoth rib I bet.


----------



## WaltL1 (Apr 8, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Eating from the tree of knowledge (what a silly concept) came Thousands upon thousands of years after modern humans were already modern and worshipping gods before the god of abraham was invented.


Thats something that gets lost in our conversations sometimes. We talk as though this particular god and Christianity etc is somehow the "beginning".
Fact is there were lots of gods/religions, though maybe not as "formal", before this particular one was even imagined.


----------



## gordon 2 (Apr 8, 2021)

bullethead said:


> So god made people who were incapable of understanding his concept until a certain time then all of a sudden he flicked the switch marked "understand"?
> There is absolutely zero evidence that any sort of trinity existed before the writings in the bible or outside of those same writings. That is a leap believers have to make and assert. The conciousness has existed for a long time that allows a person to immediately leap from One god to now Three gods all with different names, titles, tempers and duties. The ability of the conscious to suspend the rules followed in life in every other manner in order to make excuses to try to piece together absurd scenarios because they NEED it to be so has existed pre bible and outside of the bible. That has been proven for 10,000+ years which is longer than it took someone to introduce a trinity of one.




There is a "silly" Jewish saying concerning wisdom --what it is. ( I use silly because it is a word used in present consciousness in this tread): It goes something like this: "What is all wisdom?" answer,  " Do not do to others what you would not want others to do to you. This is all of wisdom." ( paraphrase).

Now why is this in the  collective consciousness of man today, when it was not to some just a few centuries ago say in the consciousness of some the Apache for example?

--------------------

Language changes, people change, cultures change to form new cultures, consciousness changes to form newer consciousness or different consciousness. Sometimes a leap of consciousness ends up a happy accident. Sometimes in the consciousness world there is a new one just on the other side of the Jordan.

If only spiritual people would suspend more "rules" on purpose, like cutting edge science seeks to do everyday, then piecing together concepts might not seem so absurd or be judged attempt at excuse?


----------



## Spotlite (Apr 8, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> Thats something that gets lost in our conversations sometimes. We talk as though this particular god and Christianity etc is somehow the "beginning".
> Fact is there were lots of gods/religions, though maybe not as "formal", before this particular one was even imagined.


Interesting read when thinking about the beginning. Our observation is only as provable as the time frame that we can observe it. The rest of it is assumption. Christians believe this God has always been - even before man was here to write and observe.

https://ucmp.berkeley.edu/education/events/tiffney3a.html


----------



## jollyroger (Apr 8, 2021)

https://www.philosophyforlife.org/blog/the-genesis-theory-of-consciousness


----------



## WaltL1 (Apr 8, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> Interesting read when thinking about the beginning. Our observation is only as provable as the time frame that we can observe it. The rest of it is assumption. Christians believe this God has always been - even before man was here to write and observe.
> 
> https://ucmp.berkeley.edu/education/events/tiffney3a.html







Maybe "He" has always been.
But since man was able to observe and write....... he didnt start out observing and writing about the Christian God. 
Thats interesting to me also.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Apr 8, 2021)

jollyroger said:


> You are correct, it could be pure coincidence that the manifestations of the creative mind mirror that of nature.
> 
> What I find remarkable is that these patterns are in everything, literally everything.
> 
> ...



And this is what baffles me.  It takes intelligence to interpret/understand it, but none to create it?  Like language/communication, it takes intelligence on both ends for it to work.  Otherwise it's just unintelligible.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Apr 8, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> Maybe "He" has always been.
> But since man was able to observe and write....... he didnt start out observing and writing about the Christian God.
> Thats interesting to me also.



That's reaching back to memories I didn't think existed anymore.


----------



## Spotlite (Apr 8, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> Maybe "He" has always been.
> But since man was able to observe and write....... he didnt start out observing and writing about the Christian God.
> Thats interesting to me also.


Lol ?.

That and considering “facts” concerning the timelines that are “evidence”......

There’s a difference in scientific facts that are generally accepted and subject to change and absolute truths that can’t be changed.

It was generally accepted that Biden was a better President, but the absolute truth to that..........speculation and assumptions aren’t absolute truths.


----------



## jollyroger (Apr 8, 2021)

SemperFiDawg said:


> And this is what baffles me.  It takes intelligence to interpret/understand it, but none to create it?  Like language/communication, it takes intelligence on both ends for it to work.  Otherwise it's just unintelligible.


Well said.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 8, 2021)

SemperFiDawg said:


> And this is what baffles me.  It takes intelligence to interpret/understand it, but none to create it?  Like language/communication, it takes intelligence on both ends for it to work.  Otherwise it's just unintelligible.


Its taken MILLIONS of years for a human to gain the intelligence to think about it, interpret it and sort of understand it. Only 150 years ago the "intelligent" people were using the same saw to lop off limbs, the same scalpels to operate on different people and killing more people due to infection from treating their wounds than were killed in battle. We didnt know what germs were let alone DNA. Knowledge is a learning curve and until very recently it has been a slow process.
What in the design points to a specific designer?


----------



## bullethead (Apr 8, 2021)

Why didn't god who reincarnated as his own son to walk among us teach these practices 1,988 years ago? What intelligence from the designer was passed on then other than parables  and things I've seen on Penn and Teller's Fool Us show?


----------



## bullethead (Apr 8, 2021)

In a narrow view using today's knowledge it sounds good about a designer designing intelligent humans, when panned back to a wide angle view that shows how far back "we" started (not to mention the billions upon billions of years "we" didn't exist) and how long it has taken us to become somewhat intelligent the theory loses merit.
Who here now using the technology and products we are all familiar with and use every single day of our lives could hop in a time machine, go back 150 years and explain DNA? Who here could go back and pass on the information on how to make a flat screen tv to Thomas Edison?
Lumping ourselves in with truly smart people is a stretch. Pretending to interpret it, understand it and point to a specific designer based off of the information contained within is an absolute joke.


----------



## jollyroger (Apr 8, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Its taken MILLIONS of years for a human to gain the intelligence to think about it, interpret it and sort of understand it. 150 years ago the "intelligent" people were using the same saw to lop off limbs, the same scalpels to operate on different people and killing more people due to infection from treating their wounds than were killed in battle. We didnt know what germs were let alone DNA. Knowledge is a learning curve and until very recently it has been a slow process.
> What in the design points to a specific designer?


I have nothing to base my claim on other than the few puzzle pieces we have lying around, but I fall back to idea of cycles.

We lost something, some higher knowledge.

We have been here before, and we are destined to tread this same path again.

What we have are the mere whispers of these pasts; a faint footprint being blown away by the wind of time.

In my opinion we had great technology before, a Golden Age if you will; the applications may have been different but it was advanced nonetheless.

The fossil record of early hominids is so incomplete and/or unknown, is evolution itself not just filling in blanks?

How many iterations of evolution did we go through?

Could the first iteration of "us" even be considered human?

Could the fossil records of this iteration be lost to time, liquified into fossil fuels under the Earth?

We can trace our DNA back to (what is now known as) Africa, but what is that really telling us?

We really have no idea what links or how many links there are missing from the theoretical evolution of man, we could be so far off the trail and not even know it.

What round of evolution are we on?

Are we finding records of the first attempt? The third or fourth attempt?


----------



## Spotlite (Apr 8, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Its taken MILLIONS of years for a human to gain the intelligence to think about it, interpret it and sort of understand it. Only 150 years ago the "intelligent" people were using the same saw to lop off limbs, the same scalpels to operate on different people and killing more people due to infection from treating their wounds than were killed in battle. We didnt know what germs were let alone DNA. Knowledge is a learning curve and until very recently it has been a slow process.
> What in the design points to a specific designer?


Is it possible we aren’t as old as what’s generally accepted? I have a hard time thinking we were that slow for millions of years then within the just 150 we got all nerdy and educated. I’d buy being slow on a learning curve for 20,000 years and that’s stretching it, but millions??


----------



## jollyroger (Apr 8, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> Is it possible we aren’t as old as what’s generally accepted? I have a hard time thinking we were that slow for millions of years then within the just 150 we got all nerdy and educated. I’d buy being slow on a learning curve for 20,000 years and that’s stretching it, but millions??


There are inconsistencies within evolution.

Fossil records and soil stratus show in some instances almost no evolution occurring and then all of a sudden a huge proliferation of change in a short period of time.

There is no consistency, or rather we don't have all the pieces to build the puzzle; we don't know the big picture.

Evolution can happen on a micro level and a macro level, it's complicated.

Some species can show evolutionary traits in just a matter of a few offspring, in other instances it takes "forever."


----------



## Spotlite (Apr 8, 2021)

jollyroger said:


> There are inconsistencies within evolution.
> 
> Fossil records and soil stratus show in some instances almost no evolution occurring and then all of a sudden a huge proliferation of change in a short period of time.
> 
> ...


This is where I’m at when it comes to science. And the only reason I always ask are we (earth included) as old as we think? I’m ok with being older than what most Christianity believes. Trying to be realistic somewhere between 7,000 years and millions of years.


----------



## NCHillbilly (Apr 8, 2021)

Any of y'all ever do any research on the bicameral mind theory? It's an interesting explanation of why we stopped being physically visited and communicated to by gods.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Apr 8, 2021)

NCHillbilly said:


> Any of y'all ever do any research on the bicameral mind theory? It's an interesting explanation of why we stopped being physically visited and communicated to by gods.



ain't got a bi nuttin in my body, so don't include me in that "y'all."


----------



## jollyroger (Apr 8, 2021)

NCHillbilly said:


> Any of y'all ever do any research on the bicameral mind theory? It's an interesting explanation of why we stopped being physically visited and communicated to by gods.


Fascinating stuff, watching a video on it now.


----------



## jollyroger (Apr 8, 2021)

On the topic of the bicameral brain I can hear @bullethead saying "okay that's fine for our ancestors, what's your excuse?"


----------



## Spotlite (Apr 8, 2021)

NCHillbilly said:


> Any of y'all ever do any research on the bicameral mind theory? It's an interesting explanation of why we stopped being physically visited and communicated to by gods.


I will say I know a few that speak / argue with themselves .........

“divided between one part of the brain which appears to be "speaking", and a second part which listens ...”


----------



## bullethead (Apr 8, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> Is it possible we aren’t as old as what’s generally accepted? I have a hard time thinking we were that slow for millions of years then within the just 150 we got all nerdy and educated. I’d buy being slow on a learning curve for 20,000 years and that’s stretching it, but millions??


Fossils and where they found and how deep they are found seem to be pretty accurate about our age. We may be older, not younger


----------



## jollyroger (Apr 8, 2021)

I like this ladies presentation of the bicameral brain.

A sweet lil Southern gal too.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 8, 2021)

jollyroger said:


> There are inconsistencies within evolution.
> 
> Fossil records and soil stratus show in some instances almost no evolution occurring and then all of a sudden a huge proliferation of change in a short period of time.
> 
> ...


Need drives adaptation


----------



## hummerpoo (Apr 8, 2021)

jollyroger said:


> I like this ladies presentation of the bicameral brain.
> 
> A sweet lil Southern gal too.


I thought she was kinda funny, in a twisted sort of way, until she said she was a teacher.


----------



## bullethead (Apr 8, 2021)

hummerpoo said:


> I thought she was kinda funny, in a twisted sort of way, until she said she was a teacher.


Lolololololololololol


----------



## jollyroger (Apr 8, 2021)

One researcher into the idea of the bicameral brain made a stunning observation about narrators of ancient text.

There appears to be no "I" or "me" in texts.

The Iliad for example.

Gods take the place of all actions, all conscious decisions are the whims of the various god's and never from the main characters own volition.


----------



## jollyroger (Apr 28, 2021)




----------



## Israel (Apr 30, 2021)

NCHillbilly said:


> Religion is mostly cultural. Most people raised in rural southern America are protestant Christians. Most people raised in the northern US and the Latin American countries are Catholic Christians. If any of those American people who are devout Christians had been born somewhere else, I firmly believe that they would right now be devout Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, or whatever, and would just as firmly believe that their religion is the only true one. I am more of the mind that no organized religion has a patent on The Truth. I think a lot of Native American and Celtic religions may be closer to The Truth than most modern organized religions. I also have a feeling that Jolly Roger's theory of lost ancient knowledge may be more valid than we think.




You're not the first to posit this, and I know you make no claim to be. This argument that "If you were born in a Muslim country, you'd probably be as Muslim as any" to make a case for cultural christianity...or in the extreme that being christian is more attributable to culture than anything else. I won't deny the impact of culture, nor would I deny there are strong cultural influences _in religion. _Any, and all, religion.

And though it might be beyond me to the convincing of any that being a christian (at least so far as I receive the term in strictest sense) is not being a member of christianity, nor religion, but an actual member of a person no man sees except by revelation. And a part and member of a body by inclusion into that person (Christ) of the church, which again, no man sees apart from revelation.

But since it has become so common to conflate being a christian as being in a religion, or a part of some thing called christianity, for me the term has been so strongly assaulted (with a purpose in mind of a thing) to be almost too confusing to many. Just as the term church has been made handy to anyone with a paint brush, chisel, neon, access to a yellow pages, a store front, a cadre of construction workers or devotees for construction of the grandest cathedrals upon which to chisel, paint, engrave or in any way print the word...(as though the structure itself is "a church")...it also has fallen to confusion. And, it is not in man to find his own way out of such confusion. And derogatory use of words. Casual use of word.

So rather than fight the assertion I now simply accept that the many who make such argument (in conflating being a christian as a member of a religion with some devotion to a thing called christianity) in such rest from striving that another thing is made plain.

Cultural atheism...and/or to the extreme including cultural agnosticism. The "you're only a christian because you are in a christian milieu" is no less applicable to it. One may only be an atheist (by common or public proclamation) no less because they too, are in a christian milieu...and if finding themselves in Iran, Sudan, certain parts of the world where a bellicose (or even mild) questioning of state religion would cost them more than numb fingers tapping a keyboard. Where appearing upon a street corner (or even seeming private conversation) with any question of Allah or his prophet in a bravado so commonly seen here could have actual material consequence.

If here they appear at weddings in "churches", calls to funerals, Easter and Christmas family dinners where the name of Christ is not uncommonly mentioned (not wanting to put a turkey leg at risk or family's/friends "feelings") but save their bravado and invective only for anonymous chat rooms...well, the words _empty suit_ comes to mind.

Let them enjoy their comforts of not appearing to themselves as being "rude" people.

But what could be so empty as one seeking to intelligently argue they are not a product of design (intelligent design would be redundant, but is often better used for some understanding) by showing in themselves it _might almost be conceivable_?
The striving of some has even at times _almost convinced me of their proofs_...that they are not intelligently designed.

And though this might appear too unkind a thing to say for a member of christianity... I don't find God shying away from it.


----------



## jollyroger (May 6, 2021)

A movie that touches on the subject of the unknowable; that which we don't have the capacity or intellect to yet understand.


----------



## WaltL1 (May 6, 2021)

jollyroger said:


> A movie that touches on the subject of the unknowable; that which we don't have the capacity or intellect to yet understand.


I thought that was a pretty good movie. Have seen it a couple times over the years.


----------



## jollyroger (May 6, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> I thought that was a pretty good movie. Have seen it a couple times over the years.


Yes it was pretty good, it's been a while since I've seen it, might give the book a try.

I thought it was an excellent candidate for the ideas that have been discussed in this thread, particularly that we probably wouldn't know how to comprehend a higher power/intelligence if ever confronted with it.

I understand it's a scifi story about aliens, but the premise is roughly the same.


----------



## WaltL1 (May 6, 2021)

jollyroger said:


> Yes it was pretty good, it's been a while since I've seen it, might give the book a try.
> 
> I thought it was an excellent candidate for the ideas that have been discussed in this thread, particularly that we probably wouldn't know how to comprehend a higher power/intelligence if ever confronted with it.
> 
> I understand it's a scifi story about aliens, but the premise is roughly the same.


I havent read the book but I think I will now. The book is always 10X better than the movie.


----------



## Israel (May 6, 2021)

I really enjoyed Contact...

and also Arrival...for probably similar reasons...

Memento? Ha!


----------



## jollyroger (May 7, 2021)

Israel said:


> I really enjoyed Contact...
> 
> and also Arrival...for probably similar reasons...
> 
> Memento? Ha!


Arrival was a trip!

I'd recommend pretty much any of Ted Chiang's stories; hard science fiction through and through.

_Exhalation_, the story and the book by the same name is fantastic.


----------



## Israel (May 11, 2021)

jollyroger said:


> Arrival was a trip!
> 
> I'd recommend pretty much any of Ted Chiang's stories; hard science fiction through and through.
> 
> _Exhalation_, the story and the book by the same name is fantastic.



I didn't know that Arrival was based on a Ted Chiang story, or even who Ted Chiang is...thanks.


----------



## jollyroger (May 19, 2021)

Again the concept of 3, the trinity comes up again and again.


----------



## bullethead (May 19, 2021)

Explain a non contradictory trinity in monotheism.


----------



## gordon 2 (May 19, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Explain a non contradictory trinity in monotheism.


 

Christ the Lord was/ is active in the world as the Holy Spirit and the Father. Just different manifestations of the same God. The Father nurtures the Jews. The Holy Spirit nurtures the Christians... and Jesus Lord nurtures all mankind-- same God different dudes.


----------



## jollyroger (May 19, 2021)

I know we'll have differing opinions on the matter, but I've always considered it more pantheic.

Being raised in the Catholic church I've always thought of saints being part of the pantheon.

We have our St. Francis statue in the yard and everything ?


----------



## bullethead (May 19, 2021)

gordon 2 said:


> Christ the Lord was/ is active in the world as the Holy Spirit and the Father. Just different manifestations of the same God. The Father nurtures the Jews. The Holy Spirit nurtures the Christians... and Jesus Lord nurtures all mankind-- same God different dudes.


So Christians pray to a god with different names and one manifestation of the God (Jesus) also talks to another manifestation of himself which he calls Father? Is that accurate?
One part of the trio does not know what the two personalities are doing? Is that accurate?
One can be all three at the same time independently and act like they are separate? Is that accurate?

I will admit that your answer is what I've been told since I was young and it just sounds like something a politician would say in order to give an answer but the answer still equals three different gods. The details do not equal the answer so to say.


----------



## WaltL1 (May 19, 2021)

jollyroger said:


> I know we'll have differing opinions on the matter, but I've always considered it more pantheic.
> 
> Being raised in the Catholic church I've always thought of saints being part of the pantheon.
> 
> We have our St. Francis statue in the yard and everything ?


I was born in St. Francis Hospital in Connecticut


----------



## gordon 2 (May 19, 2021)

bullethead said:


> So Christians pray to a god with different names and one manifestation of the God (Jesus) also talks to another manifestation of himself which he calls Father? Is that accurate?
> One part of the trio does not know what the two personalities are doing? Is that accurate?
> One can be all three at the same time independently and act like they are separate? Is that accurate?
> 
> I will admit that your answer is what I've been told since I was young and it just sounds like something a politician would say in order to give an answer but the answer still equals three different gods. The details do not equal the answer so to say.



Yes accurate on talking to self.  Not correct on "personalities" not knowing what the other is doing. Yes to independence and being all three.


I get it about politics.  Everything seems to be a lie, although truth is everywhere. And the way we know  now might not be what we can understand and know tomorrow. We are time travelers...


----------



## bullethead (May 19, 2021)

gordon 2 said:


> Yes accurate on talking to self.  Not correct on "personalities" not knowing what the other is doing. Yes to independence and being all three.
> 
> 
> I get it about politics.  Everything seems to be a lie, although truth is everywhere. And the way we know  now might not be what we can understand and know tomorrow. We are time travelers...


Can you elaborate on why a god would need to talk to himself?

It seems the personalities do not know what the other is thinking.
"No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father”

"My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me?"

"And Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favour with God and man."

"I can of Mine own Self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and My judgment is just; because I seek not Mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent Me"

Is it sensible that Jesus would pray to himself? Is it sensible that Jesus had to be taught and learn?
Why does one god need three personalities?


----------



## gordon 2 (May 20, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Can you elaborate on why a god would need to talk to himself?
> 
> It seems the personalities do not know what the other is thinking.
> "No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father”
> ...



The nature of spirits ( Spirituality) is interesting. John says of Jesus that he was the logos which I interpret as meaning generally God's wisdom. A wise man talks to himself--- that is a spiritual being, someone ( a person or manifestation) with a spirit ( at least one) is having an inner dialogue. Jesus is said all human and all God. That is a human with all the spirit that is God and therefore God in manifestation. In some of the bible narratives God is indicated as more than one being...  in the name Elohim for example. Also, I seem to recall that in the creation narrative the creator talks as "We". It is ok to understand one God in our conceptions as being with distinguishing spiritual complexities and manifestation.  For most Christians the notion that God is a Trinity in manifestation and yet one entity seems to make the world go round regards eternal life, (that is life with God).

Jesus could forget what man can forget, and Jesus could forget what God can forget. Both forget.


----------



## bullethead (May 20, 2021)

gordon 2 said:


> The nature of spirits ( Spirituality) is interesting. John says of Jesus that he was the logos which I interpret as meaning generally God's wisdom. A wise man talks to himself--- that is a spiritual being, someone ( a person or manifestation) with a spirit ( at least one) is having an inner dialogue. Jesus is said all human and all God. That is a human with all the spirit that is God and therefore God in manifestation. In some of the bible narratives God is indicated as more than one being...  in the name Elohim for example. Also, I seem to recall that in the creation narrative the creator talks as "We". It is ok to understand one God in our conceptions as being with distinguishing spiritual complexities and manifestation.  For most Christians the notion that God is a Trinity in manifestation and yet one entity seems to make the world go round regards eternal life, (that is life with God).
> 
> Jesus could forget what man can forget, and Jesus could forget what God can forget. Both forget.


5 players on a Basketball court make One team but they are 5 individuals.
53 men on an NFL roster make One team but they are all individuals. Each can remember or forget individually because they are not actually One.
God(s) seem to be equally as fallible in those regards.

In the creation story the Jews (where all this started)believe that The God of Abraham (out of all the other gods which they worshiped and believed in and recognized that others recognized) chose to Create the Jews and give them a beginning and give them a Garden and give them everything that is talked about in the Torah/OT. God is their creator, the creator of their world. The creation narrative that you seem to remember has taken on a Christian spin in order to connect the dots that were added later. The "we" and "our" according to the Jews were all the gods that existed along with their God. No Trinity, nowhere does it say specifically three or only three.

Edit to add:
Doesn't God tell his chosen people to not have any other Gods before him?


----------



## bullethead (May 20, 2021)

I have also read Jewish explanations that that explain "our" and "us" in Gen 1:26 as God and the Angels.

Example
https://presenttruthmn.com/the-present-truth/teachings/godhead/jewish-understanding-genesis-126/


----------



## Israel (May 21, 2021)

bullethead said:


> 5 players on a Basketball court make One team but they are 5 individuals.
> 53 men on an NFL roster make One team but they are all individuals. Each can remember or forget individually because they are not actually One.
> God(s) seem to be equally as fallible in those regards.
> 
> ...





> Doesn't God tell his chosen people to not have any other Gods before him?


Yes, He does.


----------



## gordon 2 (May 21, 2021)

bullethead said:


> 5 players on a Basketball court make One team but they are 5 individuals.
> 53 men on an NFL roster make One team but they are all individuals. Each can remember or forget individually because they are not actually One.
> God(s) seem to be equally as fallible in those regards.
> 
> ...




The Trinitarian persons are not a team according to Christians.

"Each person is understood as having the identical essence or nature, not merely similar natures."

The dots to connect is possibly due to the "idea or reality of the all in all" in Christianity versus the idea that Jesus was a prophet.

Jeremiah 24:7  I will give them a heart to know me, that I am the LORD. They will be my people, and I will be their God, for they will return to me with all their heart.

Christians understand that God said He would give a heart to know Him and that this heart is directly provided by Jesus via the Holy Spirit. Christians see that Jesus identified himself a God many times ( co equal in substance /and or power) and knowing full well the will and doing the will of God.

This is but one example of the idea of "the all in all" which includes the believer within the Godhead. Now you have to realize that for Christians what Jesus said he would do he did and does. Christians claim they are not foreigners to the Holy Spirit and that Jesus does reveal or show himself to them individually.

John in his gospel has Jesus say this:

"And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another advocate to help you and be with you forever— 17 the Spirit of truth. The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him nor knows him. But you know him, for he lives with you and will be[a] in you. 18 I will not leave you as orphans; I will come to you. 19 Before long, the world will not see me anymore, but you will see me. Because I live, you also will live. 20 On that day you will realize that I am in my Father, and you are in me, and I am in you. 21 Whoever has my commands and keeps them is the one who loves me. The one who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I too will love them and show myself to them.”

Christians witness that these things happen and that only God  provides and deliver the goods.

"I am in my Father, and you are in me, and I am in you." Is not rocket science to all Christians. Their spiritual witness is as good as the witness that the world is round.

The one who loves Jesus will be loved by the Father and Jesus too will love them. For Christians the ones who love Jesus and the Father love one entity and one God only and the nerve to say this is because they love the Holy Spirit which is co-equal in divinity ... and so on.

Christians might seem like strangers for many but in reality they are just folk who have been "born again" or born twice-- once by nature proper and raised up anew spiritual. Christianity is with this kind of existence.


----------



## bullethead (May 21, 2021)

gordon 2 said:


> The Trinitarian persons are not a team according to Christians.
> 
> "Each person is understood as having the identical essence or nature, not merely similar natures."
> 
> ...


I totally understand what Christians believe and what they had to do to work those beliefs into scripture but there was no Trinity "In the beginning" or anywhere else mentioned in the Bible. Christians took the one god of the OT and morphed him into Three to fit their new god into the mix yet maintain that the term they use "Trinity" somehow equals one.
 I believe most Christians would not be so understanding of the reverse, for example if they bought and paid for the Trinity deal at Dunkin , three items and only one item is in the box. I highly doubt they would be ok with the excuse that while this doughnut seems to be only one, in essence it tastes the same and in every other way is the same as the other two so we are charging you for three.
For every verse mentioned eluding to a Trinity or a duo or any other number anyone can link something else in there, there is a verse that plainly states there is one God. No alter egos, no mini me, no multiple personalities.
"Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD” Deuteronomy 6:4​“Fear ye not, neither be afraid: have not I told thee from that time, and have declared it? ye are even my witnesses. Is there a God beside me? yea, there is no God; I know not any.” Isaiah 44:8​I am the LORD, and there is none else, there is no God beside me: I girded thee, though thou hast not known me: Isaiah 45:5​“Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me…” Isaiah 46:9​The new Testament is based around a man that was morphed into a god and a new religion.
Jesus made divine claims about himself, he indirectly talked about having equalities with god but he never said that he was god.


----------



## Spotlite (May 21, 2021)

bullethead said:


> I totally understand what Christians believe and what they had to do to work those beliefs into scripture but there was no Trinity "In the beginning" or anywhere else mentioned in the Bible. Christians took the one god of the OT and morphed him into Three to fit their new god into the mix yet maintain that the term they use "Trinity" somehow equals one.
> I believe most Christians would not be so understanding of the reverse, for example if they bought and paid for the Trinity deal at Dunkin , three items and only one item is in the box. I highly doubt they would be ok with the excuse that while this doughnut seems to be only one, in essence it tastes the same and in every other way is the same as the other two so we are charging you for three.
> For every verse mentioned eluding to a Trinity or a duo or any other number anyone can link something else in there, there is a verse that plainly states there is one God. No alter egos, no mini me, no multiple personalities.
> "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD” Deuteronomy 6:4​“Fear ye not, neither be afraid: have not I told thee from that time, and have declared it? ye are even my witnesses. Is there a God beside me? yea, there is no God; I know not any.” Isaiah 44:8​I am the LORD, and there is none else, there is no God beside me: I girded thee, though thou hast not known me: Isaiah 45:5​“Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me…” Isaiah 46:9​The new Testament is based around a man that was morphed into a god and a new religion.
> Jesus made divine claims about himself, he indirectly talked about having equalities with god but he never said that he was god.


“Some Christians”. A lot of us don’t buy into the trinity. Scripture in the Old nor the New Testament support “trinity”. There’s not a new God. The God of the Old and New Testaments are the same God. 

The few trinitarians I know ultimately end up explaining a manifestation of God rather than a separate individual in the Godhead. I’m not sure they realize that.


----------



## bullethead (May 21, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> “Some Christians”. A lot of us don’t buy into the trinity. Scripture in the Old nor the New Testament support “trinity”. There’s not a new God. The God of the Old and New Testaments are the same God.
> 
> The few trinitarians I know ultimately end up explaining a manifestation of God rather than a separate individual in the Godhead. I’m not sure they realize that.


I don't understand why a god would manifest into something else and then not understand itself, or ask itself questions.


----------



## Spotlite (May 21, 2021)

bullethead said:


> I don't understand why a god would manifest into something else and then not understand itself, or ask itself questions.


God is a spirit. If he needs to manifest himself into a burning bush to communicate with man, he’ll do it. He didn’t ask himself questions. The humanity of Jesus (flesh) praying to the Father is no different than the average Christian that is part of the “body of Christ” in spirit praying to the Father. The Christian isn’t “asking himself questions” because he’s part of the body of Christ.

The humanity of Jesus let’s us know that we can overcome all temptation as he did.


----------



## bullethead (May 21, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> God is a spirit. If he needs to manifest himself into a burning bush to communicate with man, he’ll do it. He didn’t ask himself questions. The humanity of Jesus (flesh) praying to the Father is no different than the average Christian that is part of the “body of Christ” in spirit praying to the Father. The Christian isn’t “asking himself questions” because he’s part of the body of Christ.
> 
> The humanity of Jesus let’s us know that we can overcome all temptation as he did.


Well so far there is your answer  and Gordon's answer.

Regarding your answer is Jesus the same as the God of Abraham? Same spirit?


----------



## Spotlite (May 21, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Well so far there is your answer  and Gordon's answer.
> 
> Regarding your answer is Jesus the same as the God of Abraham? Same spirit?


Jesus is the Son of God. The same God / Spirit of Abraham. The Son of God (robed in flesh) is a manifestation of God. Not a separate entity. The “Holy Spirit” / “Holy Ghost” is a manifestation of God, not a separate entity.

I know folks ask how can Jesus sit at the right of God if he’s one with God or “I and my Father are one”.

Scripture teaches that Jesus is the path to the Father, he’s the advocate that goes to the Father on our behalf. His blood covers our sins. So being at the right hand of God means all things are subject to him.


----------



## bullethead (May 21, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> Jesus is the Son of God. The same God / Spirit of Abraham. The Son of God (robed in flesh) is a manifestation of God. Not a separate entity. The “Holy Spirit” / “Holy Ghost” is a manifestation of God, not a separate entity.
> 
> I know folks ask how can Jesus sit at the right of God if he’s one with God or “I and my Father are one”.
> 
> Scripture teaches that Jesus is the path to the Father, he’s the advocate that goes to the Father on our behalf. His blood covers our sins. So being at the right hand of God means all things are subject to him.


So when Jesus talks to god, prays to God, asks God questions.....why?
If he is a manifestation of god, IE: God but in another form, wouldn't God already know the answers?

I mean god is supposed to be everywhere and in everything at all times anyway, he shouldn't have to pause to change characters and


----------



## Spotlite (May 21, 2021)

bullethead said:


> So when Jesus talks to god, prays to God, asks God questions.....why?
> If he is a manifestation of god, IE: God but in another form, wouldn't God already know the answers?
> 
> I mean god is supposed to be everywhere and in everything at all times anyway, he shouldn't have to pause to change characters and


He prayed to God just like anyone else would. Character isn’t the right word, it’s not another character, it’s a function. Just like yourself, you function as a husband, you function as a father and you function as a businessman.

I will hop on your side of the fence for a few - IF there’s this supreme being that’s that powerful that can do anything it wants, why can’t this God remove all his glory, robe himself in flesh, take on humanity and dwell among man to conquer death, pave a way for mankind, etc?

Robing a body in flesh is just humanity that’s only connected to God by the spirit. It’s also symbolic as how the Christian is connected by the spirit. Jesus didn’t function as a God. He’s one with Him through the spirit.


----------



## bullethead (May 21, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> He prayed to God just like anyone else would. Character isn’t the right word, it’s not another character, it’s a function. Just like yourself, you function as a husband, you function as a father and you function as a businessman.
> 
> I will hop on your side of the fence for a few - IF there’s this supreme being that’s that powerful that can do anything it wants, why can’t this God remove all his glory, robe himself in flesh, take on humanity and dwell among man to conquer death, pave a way for mankind, etc?
> 
> Robing a body in flesh is just humanity that’s only connected to God by the spirit. It’s also symbolic as how the Christian is connected by the spirit. Jesus didn’t function as a God. He’s one with Him through the spirit.


Again I understand what you are saying but there is now no need to address one as Jesus and one as God if the flesh version is no longer.


----------



## Spotlite (May 21, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Again I understand what you are saying but there is now no need to address one as Jesus and one as God if the flesh version is no longer.



The function never ceased. It’s still part of the Godhead and has it purpose.


----------



## bullethead (May 21, 2021)

So just to clarify spotlite, you do not believe in a trinity...is that accurate?


----------



## Spotlite (May 21, 2021)

bullethead said:


> So just to clarify spotlite, you do not believe in a trinity...is that accurate?


Correct.


----------



## bullethead (May 21, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> Correct.


Do you pray to god and or jesus? One or both?


----------



## Spotlite (May 21, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Do you pray to god and or jesus? One or both?


I don’t see a “more than one” there. It’s all one. You’re praying to God. You ask in Jesus name. Sitting on the right hand of God, he’s (that function) our advocate and his blood covers our transgressions. Everything is subject to that name. Jesus intercedes for us. That’s why I said said the function never ceased.


----------



## bullethead (May 21, 2021)

Very complicated to have to go through a middle man.
The jews don't need one,  it seems much simpler. They testify that god hears them just fine.


----------



## Spotlite (May 21, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Very complicated to have to go through a middle man.
> The jews don't need one,  it seems much simpler. They testify that god hears them just fine.


Not as complicated as you perceive it.

Remember in another thread we mentioned fulfilling the law? The Jews took their animal sacrifices to the priest to offer as offering to God. 

On the cross Jesus said it is finished. You don’t take your animals to the priest anymore, you bring yourself (your sins, your petition) to the alter, Jesus intercedes for us through the spirit. He didn’t abolish that process, he fulfilled it. 

It’s just as it’s always been except the sacrifice has been made for all, and no need to confess to a priest any longer. He is THAT now. 

We say we hear from God. That’s not in question. It’s the covering of transgressions and the sacrifice and the function of Jesus for that that’s in question. In short, if I sin, I have an advocate in Jesus to cover that through his sacrificed blood.


----------



## bullethead (May 21, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> Not as complicated as you perceive it.
> 
> Remember in another thread we mentioned fulfilling the law? The Jews took their animal sacrifices to the priest to offer as offering to God.
> 
> ...


If that is the case then Jesus's work was done when he died on the cross. Keeping him around any longer is just encore stuff.
Or do you believe that Jesus has to still put a good word in for you as if God doesn't know what is going on?


----------



## Spotlite (May 21, 2021)

bullethead said:


> If that is the case then Jesus's work was done when he died on the cross. Keeping him around any longer is just encore stuff.
> Or do you believe that Jesus has to still put a good word in for you as if God doesn't know what is going on?


How? I realize you don’t believe the “Bible story” - to clarify, the fact / fiction of it is not in debate. 

The story will agree with my comments. If his work was done, it’d be useless to sit him on the right of God - symbolic of authority. In many places in the Bible, through the spirit, Jesus is the pathway to the Father.


----------



## bullethead (May 21, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> How? I realize you don’t believe the “Bible story” - to clarify, the fact / fiction of it is not in debate.
> 
> The story will agree with my comments. If his work was done, it’d be useless to sit him on the right of God - symbolic of authority. In many places in the Bible, through the spirit, Jesus is the pathway to the Father.


He died for our sins. No symbol needed.
I will save the "sacrifice" for another time.


----------



## Spotlite (May 21, 2021)

bullethead said:


> He died for our sins. No symbol needed.
> I will save the "sacrifice" for another time.




I’m glad you saw the light lol ? words I never thought you’d say (but I know the context of them) 

But seriously, for his work to be dead at the cross, the story would need to be rewritten.


----------



## bullethead (May 21, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> I’m glad you saw the light lol ? words I never thought you’d say (but I know the context of them)
> 
> But seriously, for his work to be dead at the cross, the story would need to be rewritten.


The OT was rewritten/expounded upon. That god didn't need help.


----------



## Spotlite (May 21, 2021)

bullethead said:


> The OT was rewritten/expounded upon. That god didn't need help.


The Old & New Testaments intertwine a lot more than some think. Same God. 

Checking out - going to run jugs for catfish


----------



## bullethead (May 21, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> The Old & New Testaments intertwine a lot more than some think. Same God.
> 
> Checking out - going to run jugs for catfish


Best wishes on the bites


----------



## Israel (May 21, 2021)

bullethead said:


> If that is the case then Jesus's work was done when he died on the cross. Keeping him around any longer is just encore stuff.
> Or do you believe that Jesus has to still put a good word in for you as if God doesn't know what is going on?



Jesus addresses some of what you ask.


And in that day ye shall ask me nothing. Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my name, he will give _it_ you. Hitherto have ye asked nothing in my name: ask, and ye shall receive, that your joy may be full.

These things have I spoken unto you in proverbs: but the time cometh, when I shall no more speak unto you in proverbs, but I shall shew you plainly of the Father. At that day ye shall ask in my name: and I say not unto you, that I will pray the Father for you: For the Father himself loveth you, because ye have loved me, and have believed that I came out from God. I came forth from the Father, and am come into the world: again, I leave the world, and go to the Father.



By these next words, in which the disciples essentially say "OK, we got it, message received" Jesus has yet some more to say:

His disciples said unto him, Lo, now speakest thou plainly, and speakest no proverb. Now are we sure that thou knowest all things, and needest not that any man should ask thee: by this we believe that thou camest forth from God. Jesus answered them, Do ye now believe? Behold, the hour cometh, yea, is now come, that ye shall be scattered, every man to his own, and shall leave me alone: and yet I am not alone, because the Father is with me. These things I have spoken unto you, that in me ye might have peace. In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world.

Our propensity (in particular _my own propensity_) to think because I hear, I therefore understand is always subject to reproval. "Now we are sure"...they claim...yet Jesus knows even declaring that in spite of their being "sure" (of themselves)...they will soon discover their faith is not as complete in understanding as they imagine.

There will be obstacles, resistances, oppositions of which they (we, not exempting myself) have not yet even become aware. But it is in the getting going, the start of following, the seed of faith planted that determines the course...and growth, even if plainly...not all is seen at the beginning.

But still, even in Jesus telling them plainly they will all soon abandon Him, every man returning to his own, He tells them (us) to be of good cheer...even _in having to receive His word of our abandoning_...because He remains faithful.

"If our hearts condemn us..." it is written in another place...the learning of those matters in which we find ourselves beyond weak, of no faithfulness of our own, of no ability to endure or yet bear the resistance to sin to the shedding of our own blood...we are still given hope. Disciples learn much of themselves, the limits of _their own love_ and their desperate need of salvation as they seek the Lord. And that need being far greater than they once may have assumed they could even understand...need.

Jesus is not ashamed to call the faint of heart, and to be made the sufficiency for such to all need. And needs they do not even yet know.


----------



## bullethead (May 22, 2021)

Israel said:


> Jesus addresses some of what you ask.
> 
> 
> And in that day ye shall ask me nothing. Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my name, he will give _it_ you. Hitherto have ye asked nothing in my name: ask, and ye shall receive, that your joy may be full.
> ...


I've read the bible. I am looking for Apologetic replies. I read those verses and did not get the impression that spotlite was there at the time and Jesus was saying them directly to him. I asked spotlight what his beliefs were as he and Gordon (who read the same verses we all do) differ in opinion on some things. Gordon has been giving his detailed replies from the heart and so has Spotlite. I appreciate them both for taking the time.

I can't speak to whether or not Jesus is ashamed. The people who think they speak for him and know what Jesus feels are never in short supply to step in for that stuff.


----------



## Spotlite (May 22, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Best wishes on the bites


----------



## Israel (May 22, 2021)

It could seem odd that one who says





> "I_ totally _understand _what christians believe_ and what they had to do..."


 (italics mine)
is so very compelled to show he does not.

Yet this is accounted for by the Lord. How that the many divisions within a man can only be healed...and resolved by the Lord's singleness of eye and heart in His faithfulness to the Father.

A man thinks he is one, both numerically and in his own integrity of (some) consistency.
(Integrity coming from the Latin integer signalling such "wholeness")

But he is not. Until the revelation comes of God's integrity and wholeness seen in Christ he knows nothing of himself, despite his many protestations to the contrary.
He is more than content to apply his own understanding of what "one" means (and all other word) in any context rather than be led to the heavenly context of all things...from which all things must derive, and do derive, their true meaning. Their true reason. Till then he seeks to ascend; to "build up" to understanding instead of accepting that understanding must come down to him to be received.

But this too is accounted for in Christ as the One who submitted to coming down that He be made (through many trials of endurance, suffering, and contradiction in obedience to God the Father) to the believer all of

"wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption:"

by God's will.

And only by God's will can any be found there...in Christ.

Why would a man who claims to "totally understand what christians believe" have yet so many questions _for them_?

Why would a man seemingly so averse to assertions to the very pointed protestations of such, yet be so full of his own?

(I have nothing but gratitude for assertions, God asserting Himself through Christ to me is beyond my estimations)

You "know why" Paul did such and such (all his motives and motions presented as Machiavellian religious machinations to garner a following or "create" a new religion) and how that men have inserted words into a mouth



> of some 2000 year old dead preacher...



like a sock puppet.

How that you are a realist, or at least realistic



> I am realistic that life is tough and there is no invisible buddy to help.



Actually thinking...you know what "tough is". And no doubt... what "life is". Unless I am not to believe your approval of your sig line



> Life on Earth is an expression of the available chemistry set.



You, and the some like who say you are searching...truth seekers..."open" as it were to any influence (even God, _as need be_) yet in same breath are saying



> Nobody will see anything. I'll be dead and unable to tell you. You'll be dead and unable to know.



You may think (do you think?) I would, or am seeking to silence your assertions, you who make such protest of their being made. God forbid. You simply make clear what voice you have, and everything is being made clear, and clearer still.

It appears to me you deny the very reality of a thing you claim as your pole star, rationality and reason as being true, and a true thing. If reason and rationality be only a construct of man...(and science would be consequent, not antecedent) absent in and for the universe until man, then, on what grounds can any man find any other's fault for any reason(s) he constructs?

You speak (as though with some deep concern for) the expending of bandwidth, when, if being true to your contentions..._you might _as honestly engage all the day long with a box to your complete satisfaction.
But that is...only...if you are honest.

But I do not believe I am speaking to a box of mere chemicals.
I believe, and so I speak.


----------



## gordon 2 (May 22, 2021)

bullethead said:


> I totally understand what Christians believe and what they had to do to work those beliefs into scripture but there was no Trinity "In the beginning" or anywhere else mentioned in the Bible. Christians took the one god of the OT and morphed him into Three to fit their new god into the mix yet maintain that the term they use "Trinity" somehow equals one.
> I believe most Christians would not be so understanding of the reverse, for example if they bought and paid for the Trinity deal at Dunkin , three items and only one item is in the box. I highly doubt they would be ok with the excuse that while this doughnut seems to be only one, in essence it tastes the same and in every other way is the same as the other two so we are charging you for three.
> For every verse mentioned eluding to a Trinity or a duo or any other number anyone can link something else in there, there is a verse that plainly states there is one God. No alter egos, no mini me, no multiple personalities.
> "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD” Deuteronomy 6:4​“Fear ye not, neither be afraid: have not I told thee from that time, and have declared it? ye are even my witnesses. Is there a God beside me? yea, there is no God; I know not any.” Isaiah 44:8​I am the LORD, and there is none else, there is no God beside me: I girded thee, though thou hast not known me: Isaiah 45:5​“Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me…” Isaiah 46:9​The new Testament is based around a man that was morphed into a god and a new religion.
> Jesus made divine claims about himself, he indirectly talked about having equalities with god but he never said that he was god.




Well maybe your right, but maybe your not. How about if God is revealed to man historically in a  progressive manner. If God becomes progressively more intimate and understood regards mankind, (from insights due myth studies to midrash and personal experiences) the idea that we can know one God in different ways in time is not inconceivable. As a matter of fact in Christianity believers will know God differently than they know God now.

This is from the1 John if you recall.

"
3:2 Beloved, now we are the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be; but we know that, when He shall appear, we shall be like Him; for we shall see Him as He is.

Now that is a mind full.

I would suggest that Christianity is not a new religion, but rather it is a "faction" issued from Jewish religion and remains a very old religion. Everything Christians claim to value can be found in Jewish culture, be it from Torah or the debates within Jewish faith. Which is really what the debate in Christian churches is about today... What is spiritual pretense and what is genuine and how can one know which is which.


----------



## bullethead (May 22, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> View attachment 1081766


That is some Phenomenal eating. Congrats on the Cats


----------



## bullethead (May 22, 2021)

Israel said:


> It could seem odd that one who says (italics mine)
> is so very compelled to show he does not.
> 
> Yet this is accounted for by the Lord. How that the many divisions within a man can only be healed...and resolved by the Lord's singleness of eye and heart in His faithfulness to the Father.
> ...


All of my replies worked within the context of the conversations at those particular times. For you continually cherry pick them out often years later and ramble on about them instead of sticking to the conversation at hand is at the very least an attempt to sway this conversation away from the decent conversations that are taking place to shift focus on yourself in yet another "look what I can do" moment (pulpit or stage opportunity) OR at worst the constant rehashing of those cherry picked and out of context insertions really bug you and you should seek help. 
Either way it takes away from the guys who are really trying to accomplish something here.


----------



## bullethead (May 22, 2021)

gordon 2 said:


> Well maybe your right, but maybe your not. How about if God is revealed to man historically in a  progressive manner. If God becomes progressively more intimate and understood regards mankind, (from insights due myth studies to midrash and personal experiences) the idea that we can know one God in different ways in time is not inconceivable. As a matter of fact in Christianity believers will know God differently than they know God now.
> 
> This is from the1 John if you recall.
> 
> ...


I'd like to think that a progressive approach to easing mankind into knowing one god might be an option but when people on one side of the line in the sand are firing 1500 rockets at people on the other side who then retaliate and the bodies pile up over what is portrayed as a territorial war but in fact has been an ongoing war over who has the better version of god....
These compassionate verses about love for his children,  peace, humanity, interpretations that God wants us all to know him etc as millions upon millions of "his" children kill and have killed each other for thousands of years and still do so today justifying it all in "his" name just does not add up to a progressively intimate revelation.

These possible multi faceted faces and names of potentially the same one god have put a lot of people into graves. An eternal being that is beyond time cannot be that desperate for the company of souls.


----------



## bullethead (May 22, 2021)

Israel said:


> It could seem odd that one who says (italics mine)
> is so very compelled to show he does not.
> 
> Yet this is accounted for by the Lord. How that the many divisions within a man can only be healed...and resolved by the Lord's singleness of eye and heart in His faithfulness to the Father.
> ...


Israel you have the audacity to continually come here and cherry pick my past replies out of context and place them with conversations that they were never originally a part of just so you can ramble on as if you are pointing something out but in fact is not ever really there within the original context.
You overlook that those replies of mine were made to you (or others) while you were spouting off certainties which neither you or anyone else can actually be certain about. Don't point fingers at me for playing your game with your rules and act like I pretend to claim to know anything more then you pretend to pass of as if you know. When I play in your sandbox I have to accommodate to your style sometimes. If that is frustrating to you then my reason for doing it has gotten its point across.


----------



## gordon 2 (May 22, 2021)

bullethead said:


> I'd like to think that a progressive approach to easing mankind into knowing one god might be an option but when people on one side of the line in the sand are firing 1500 rockets at people on the other side who then retaliate and the bodies pile up over what is portrayed as a territorial war but in fact has been an ongoing war over who has the better version of god....
> These compassionate verses about love for his children,  peace, humanity, interpretations that God wants us all to know him etc as millions upon millions of "his" children kill and have killed each other for thousands of years and still do so today justifying it all in "his" name just does not add up to a progressively intimate revelation.
> 
> These possible multi faceted faces and names of potentially the same one god have put a lot of people into graves. An eternal being that is beyond time cannot be that desperate for the company of souls.




Again yes religious hate has killed and deported people from their homelands. However, personally I've found that the reason people fight is because they want resources and power. The two seem to go together-- some Christians under the spell of nationalism organize their societies, citizens to hate the designated enemy of the day.

I was  recently reading a history of how soldiers were recruited in the British colonies to fight against the Germans in the first world war. When England declared war on Germany the colonies were made to fall in line by the politics of being allied militarily and economically to the United Kingdom. Surprisingly at first the Christian clergy in the Commonwealth and colonies were pleading for peace and cautioned their flocks not to demonize Germans who were Christians. It only lasted a yrs or so before the political authorities and military's demonization of the Germans was too much for the clergy to counter.

The roots of most wars if war is politics by another mean is not Christianity going amock, but politics overwhelming it. Politics-political power-political ideology which get you access to resources are what people usually fight over or against.  When the access  to resource or security is  uncertain  and people want land and resources which is not theirs politics usually demonize human beings. Frontiers are made to open up. It is easy then to justify ridding people(s) of desired areas, demonizing them and replacing them with  individuals and groups more in line with the current political schemes.

It is true that religions and factions within religions significantly influence the social makeup of societies. But I find that resources trump religion regards wars. It is easier to kill a Christian that is not of your faction, when your after the same economic territory... but give it a yr of propaganda and your faction on the other side of a dispute is bona fide enemy and might as well be vermin-- Jesus stand back.


----------



## Israel (May 22, 2021)

Your assertions are what they are, I have never sought to inhibit, corral you with them object to their being made or claim your position is diminished in their being made...in fact they very well inform of your estate.

But someone who seems (or wants to appear) to maintain a default position that such assertions except his own could not possibly be fit for anything but derision...well, who was that guy that recently (very recently stated) "I see two standards"?

To this moment I would be more concerned with not being derided by you for my testimony, but then...all is subject to change.

His mercies are new every morning...as I am learning. And God knows how and what any man may be brought to see...and tell.


----------



## bullethead (May 22, 2021)

gordon 2 said:


> Again yes religious hate has killed and deported people from their homelands. However, personally I've found that the reason people fight is because they want resources and power. The two seem to go together-- some Christians under the spell of nationalism organize their societies, citizens to hate the designated enemy of the day.
> 
> I was  recently reading a history of how soldiers were recruited in the British colonies to fight against the Germans in the first world war. When England declared war on Germany the colonies were made to fall in line by the politics of being allied militarily and economically to the United Kingdom. Surprisingly at first the Christian clergy in the Commonwealth and colonies were pleading for peace and cautioned their flocks not to demonize Germans who were Christians. It only lasted a yrs or so before the political authorities and military's demonization of the Germans was too much for the clergy to counter.
> 
> ...


It is easy for leaders to use religion to fuel the fires in order to start wars which like you've stated often have nothing to do with religion. Again though if anyone or anything could stop such atrocities in order to save its children from the misguided actions of power hungry leaders it would be a god. I don't think all the spokes on the religious wagon wheel point to one god as the center hub or really any gods that give a flying hoot about what happens to anyone.


----------



## bullethead (May 22, 2021)

Israel said:


> Your assertions are what they are, I have never sought to inhibit, corral you with them object to their being made or claim your position is diminished in their being made...in fact they very well inform of your estate.


Then what is your reason for constantly avoiding the topics at hand in most threads that I am a part of and instead sifting back through hundreds of my posts so you can cherry pick some of my statements (which were made in context of the conversation where they originally appeared) and re-quoting them to place them into conversations where they did not appear nor where they were directed?



Israel said:


> But someone who seems (or wants to appear) to maintain a default position that such assertions except his own could not possibly be fit for anything but derision...well, who was that guy that recently (very recently stated) "I see two standards"?


Do you think that I am unaware of what I say and the context of the conversations in which I say it?
Since your memory is so good or you have nothing better to do than search through posts ...in which thread regarding what conversation was "I see two standards " posted?



Israel said:


> To this moment I would be more concerned with not being derided by you for my testimony, but then...all is subject to change.


Everybody knows your testimony.
The amen, hallelujah and tell it all brother forums are a few floors up.



Israel said:


> His mercies are new every morning...as I am learning. And God knows how and what any man may be brought to see...and tell.


Once, just once...give us an example of "his" mercies, show us how you learned that it is from "him" and since you'll be on a roll enlighten us as to how you know anything that a god may know.
Or you can try the honesty route and say that it is all based off of what you believe to be true but you really don't know a "him" darn thing.


----------



## WaltL1 (May 22, 2021)

gordon 2 said:


> Again yes religious hate has killed and deported people from their homelands. However, personally I've found that the reason people fight is because they want resources and power. The two seem to go together-- some Christians under the spell of nationalism organize their societies, citizens to hate the designated enemy of the day.
> 
> I was  recently reading a history of how soldiers were recruited in the British colonies to fight against the Germans in the first world war. When England declared war on Germany the colonies were made to fall in line by the politics of being allied militarily and economically to the United Kingdom. Surprisingly at first the Christian clergy in the Commonwealth and colonies were pleading for peace and cautioned their flocks not to demonize Germans who were Christians. It only lasted a yrs or so before the political authorities and military's demonization of the Germans was too much for the clergy to counter.
> 
> ...





> It is true that religions and factions within religions significantly influence the social makeup of societies. But I find that resources trump religion regards wars. It is easier to kill a Christian that is not of your faction, when your after the same economic territory... but give it a yr of propaganda and your faction on the other side of a dispute is bona fide enemy and might as well be vermin-- Jesus stand back


It strikes me that Christianity is but a "faction" itself.
No?


----------



## gordon 2 (May 22, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> It strikes me that Christianity is but a "faction" itself.
> No?


In a wide conception of spirituality perhaps... but in the context of our ideas local to here no.


----------



## WaltL1 (May 22, 2021)

gordon 2 said:


> In a wide conception of spirituality perhaps... but in the context of our ideas local to here no.


Local to here? Where are you considering "here"?
Wait a sec, I just saw where you said -


> I would suggest that Christianity is not a new religion, but rather it is a "faction" issued from Jewish religion and remains a very old religion.


So actually we agree.
So now my question is - You dont see this applying to Christianity's history (in the beginning)? -


> politics by another mean is not Christianity going amock, but politics overwhelming it. Politics-political power-political ideology which get you access to resources are what people usually fight over or against. When the access to resource or security is uncertain and people want land and resources which is not theirs politics usually demonize human beings. Frontiers are made to open up. It is easy then to justify ridding people(s) of desired areas, demonizing them and replacing them with individuals and groups more in line with the current political schemes.


I do. Doesnt make me right, but I think based on history, a valid argument could be made.


----------



## bullethead (May 23, 2021)

gordon 2 said:


> Well maybe your right, but maybe your not. How about if God is revealed to man historically in a  progressive manner. If God becomes progressively more intimate and understood regards mankind, (from insights due myth studies to midrash and personal experiences) the idea that we can know one God in different ways in time is not inconceivable. As a matter of fact in Christianity believers will know God differently than they know God now.
> 
> This is from the1 John if you recall.
> 
> ...


If Genesis is accurate aren't we all sons of god and sons of man?

John the latest written, is the only gospel that mentions anything about Jesus saying he was one with God. The other three gospels don't mention it and it would stand to reason that if they were disciples they would have been around when Jesus said such things. Paul does not say that Jesus is God.


----------



## gordon 2 (May 23, 2021)

I'm not a bible based Christian. I don't think those who are id both sons of God in Genesis and Jesus as the same, but rather possibly the opposite with the sons of God in Genesis being fallen spirits.

Never the less, I think that it would be rewarding to find out in what context it was used by folk  in the Holy Land during the days  concerned re: gospels. I think that son of God means a special relationship with God in the Jewish-Christian context.


Ask Google gets me this:

(The term "*son of God*" is used *in* the Hebrew *Bible* as another way of referring to humans with special relationships with *God*. *In* Exodus, the nation of Israel is called *God's* firstborn *son*. Solomon is also called "*son of God*". Angels, just and pious men, and the kings of Israel *are* all called "*sons of God*.")

Also Jesus is said to be the only begotten son of God by Christians. And so the other sons are viewed in another category... perhaps.

Luke has Peter saying that Jesus was sinless or an individual without sin. Unlike some of the Pagan gods, the God of the Hebrews is the only individual ever without sin--if I'm correct. Do you think Peter was smart enough to know what he was saying? I like to think so.


----------



## gordon 2 (May 23, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> Local to here? Where are you considering "here"?
> Wait a sec, I just saw where you said -
> 
> So actually we agree.
> ...




************ A good part of the Law commentary in the Jewish Tanakh is dedicated to mercy. This is provided by the wisdom of Jewish commentators. They are exceptions or exceptional men and possibly women. Their wisdom is given to Christians without a long apprenticeship or the long apprenticeship required of Jewish commentators. That is how it is supposed to work in the newer faction". Christians are supposed to view mercy from " a God given heart" which they don't built for themselves. The wisdom concerning mercy should not be exceptional for Christians-- or so it is supposed to work. It is in this sense that Christianity is a faction for me...it is a faction on the Jewish tree... ( Hope you know where I'm at here... I'm not always rested for good brains...

************* Well yes arguments could be made. Sectarian conflict is real...but I find it is used in conflicts for territory alot.


----------



## bullethead (May 23, 2021)

gordon 2 said:


> I'm not a bible based Christian. I don't think those who are id both sons of God in Genesis and Jesus as the same, but rather possibly the opposite with the sons of God in Genesis being fallen spirits.
> 
> Never the less, I think that it would be rewarding to find out in what context it was used by folk  in the Holy Land during the days  concerned re: gospels. I think that son of God means a special relationship with God in the Jewish-Christian context.
> 
> ...


Is anger a sin?
Gluttony?
Theft?


----------



## gordon 2 (May 23, 2021)

Depends who's angry. My mom was angry a few times. She raised seven boys. She had PMS bad when she was in here 30s. I would not say her anger was sinful. But it depends who's angry. It's ok for a saint to be angry ( in the sense that it could be justified) but anger from a demonic spirit might make anger a sinful act .  The difference is in the motivation for the anger. Maybe. I'm not sure. Someone quick to anger has a personality problem maybe... Someone slow to anger has  frustration issue going. I don't know.

Gluttony as a sin I never understood. So I don't know if it is sinful. I mean some people have comfort foods and some people have been raised on lots of comfort. I don't know...really. If someone's food does not take the food out of someone else's mouth... I see not great problem it be sin. But I really never understood Gluttony.

I stole .05 cents from my mom's money drawer and bought some penny cadies with it once. I got punished a whole day being restricted physically to my room other than meals. It was not taking the money that was the problem I learn as it was not asking for it because it was not mine.

Theft is a sin because if the thief becomes a habitual offender and has a conscious it will impair their personality. But to dishonor someone by the theft of their assets is sinful, but what is more  sinful is that it dishonors some other.

  And so it is blessed to repent from being a thief.
  Sometimes anger is a just and a natural fight or flight response to stressors.
  Induced anger for the purpose of inflicting pain is sinful.. ( except in boxing...  )
  Theft is generally sinful causing injury to both victims and the thief.

----------------

So this is  where the question of why God wanted to rub out the Canaanites from their homeland might come up? God was sending the Hebrews  to commit theft, because he was angry? I don't know how Gluttony gets in the picture... as I said I don't understand it much but I will try.

So the Canaanites gets sacked. But wait! Historically we know that the Hebrews did not sack the Canaanites. But Hebrews became the political elite. However they married into the Canaanites and had them as officials etc... So if it was genocide that God meant for the Canaanites the Hebrews failed at it--or they assimilated the Canaanites with time and it ended up as the Hebrew God ordered--- which is what historically happened and what would make most spiritual sense.

In other words if the Canaanites were to be rubbed out it was a assimilation project not a genocide. What the God of the Hebrews ordered them to do did happened, but not in the terms we think.  The Hebrews occupied their territory and eventually the pagan practices of the Canaanites were rubbed out-- except for the odd back sliding which happen when the land made everyone too fat. Maybe that's the problem with being a glutton... Dont' know...really. Comfort food is ok, but too much of most things is not.


----------



## bullethead (May 23, 2021)

gordon 2 said:


> Depends who's angry. My mom was angry a few times. She raised seven boys. She had PMS bad when she was in here 30s. I would not say her anger was sinful. But it depends who's angry. It's ok for a saint to be angry ( in the sense that it could be justified) but anger from a demonic spirit might make anger a sinful act .  The difference is in the motivation for the anger. Maybe. I'm not sure. Someone quick to anger has a personality problem maybe... Someone slow to anger has  frustration issue going. I don't know.
> 
> Gluttony as a sin I never understood. So I don't know if it is sinful. I mean some people have comfort foods and some people have been raised on lots of comfort. I don't know...really. If someone's food does not take the food out of someone else's mouth... I see not great problem it be sin. But I really never understood Gluttony.
> 
> ...


1On a sabbath, while he was going through the grainfields, his disciples plucked and ate some heads of grain, rubbing them in their hands.
2But some of the Pharisees said, "Why are you doing what is not lawful to do on the sabbath?"
3And Jesus answered, "Have you not read what David did when he was hungry, he and those who were with him:
4how he entered the house of God, and took and ate the bread of the Presence, which it is not lawful for any but the priests to eat, and also gave it to those with him?"
5And he said to them, "The Son of man is lord of the sabbath." (Matt. 12:1-8; Mark 2:23-28; Luke 6:1-8)

1And when they drew near to Jerusalem and came to Bethphage, to the Mount of Olives, then Jesus sent two disciples,
2saying to them, "Go into the village opposite you, and immediately you will find a donkey tied, and a colt with her; untie them and bring them to me.
3If any one says anything to you, you shall say, 'The Lord has need of them,' and he will send them immediately." (Matt. 21:1-3)

19the Son of man came eating and drinking, and they say, 'Behold, a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!' Yet wisdom is justified by her deeds."'(Matt: 11:18-19; Luke 7:34)

18In the morning, as he was returning to the city, he was hungry.
19And seeing a fig tree by the wayside he went to it, and found nothing on it but leaves only. And he said to it, "May no fruit ever come from you again!" And the fig tree withered at once. (Matt: 21:18-19; Mark 11:12-14, 20)


20Then he began to upbraid the cities where most of his mighty works had been done, because they did not repent. (Matt: 11:20)

21He got angry at several towns for not repenting. He tells them, "But I tell you that it shall be more tolerable on the day of judgment for the land of Sodom than for you." (Matt. 11:21-24)

33"You serpents, you brood of vipers, how are you to escape being sentenced to ****?" (Matt. 23:33)

17You blind fools! For which is greater, the gold or the temple that has made the gold sacred? (Matt. 23:17)

5"And he looked around at them with anger, grieved at their hardness of heart, and said to the man,"Stretch out your hand." (Mark 3:5)

40You fools! Did not he who made the outside make the inside also? (Luke 11:40)


----------



## gordon 2 (May 23, 2021)

bullethead said:


> 1On a sabbath, while he was going through the grainfields, his disciples plucked and ate some heads of grain, rubbing them in their hands.
> 2But some of the Pharisees said, "Why are you doing what is not lawful to do on the sabbath?"
> 3And Jesus answered, "Have you not read what David did when he was hungry, he and those who were with him:
> 4how he entered the house of God, and took and ate the bread of the Presence, which it is not lawful for any but the priests to eat, and also gave it to those with him?"
> ...




Saints can be grumpy-- not unheard of especially when confronted  with the self righteous who being gluttons of tradition disregard the spirit of the law and mercy. Being overly rigid with traditional orthodoxy can be sinful because it makes a person do the opposite the tradition was meant to provide for. The over zealous can become abusive, right? This abuse is sinful.


----------



## bullethead (May 23, 2021)

gordon 2 said:


> Saints can be grumpy-- not unheard of especially when confronted  with the self righteous who being gluttons of tradition disregard the spirit of the law and mercy. Being overly rigid with traditional orthodoxy can be sinful because it makes a person do the opposite the tradition was meant to provide for. The over zealous can become abusive, right? This abuse is sinful.


Grumpy, gluttonous, angry,  stealing...

Saints??? Is Jesus just a Saint?
Its one thing to claim someone has never sinned. It is another thing to say well saints, gods,  sons of gods get a free pass because they are above the law when shown they sin and or break their own commandments. 
Drown 20 million people and every other living thing on earth......the excuse is "ohhh that, lololol, he is god he can do that ".
Tell 2 guys to steal a donkey.....well Josh was having a bad day...he didn't  mean it.


----------



## Israel (May 24, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Drown 20 million people and every other living thing on earth......the excuse is "ohhh that, lololol, he is god he can do that ".


Yes, He does as He wishes.

God needs no excuse, nor any to make excuses for Him. He does all He cares to with what is His own.

Shall the clay say to the potter why have you mad me thus?

Yes, a man might even think himself morally superior to God and have many arguments on which he may believe he can ascend in his own sense of self rightness. Get a "leg up" on God.

Till he discovers the argument ends with knowing the power to argue is not even in one's own hand. Nor think, Nor reason. Nor be. The power to be anything...contentious, contemptuous, petulant to most docile, compliant...even supremely grateful creature comes not in origin being discrete to the creature from within the creature.

All being but God's being is derived, given, and ordained to an end. His good pleasure.
We testify that this is alone found in Christ.

Little man, do you think you are the first or most expert at finding "But there are many things about the Christ I do not like and even find inferior? Surely the god I would make and have made of myself for myself, would do better."

What you may think as "plumbing the depths" is no more than being a tire kicker.
As if Jesus did not know entirely...how He would appear to man.

But I _am_ a worm, and no man; a reproach of men, and despised of the people.

All they that see me laugh me to scorn: they shoot out the lip, they shake the head, _saying_,

He trusted on the LORD _that_ he would deliver him: let him deliver him, seeing he delighted in him.

But thou _art_ he that took me out of the womb: thou didst make me hope _when I was_ upon my mother's breasts.

I was cast upon thee from the womb: thou _art_ my God from my mother's belly.

Be not far from me; for trouble _is_ near; for _there is_ none to help.

Many bulls have compassed me: strong _bulls_ of Bashan have beset me round.

They gaped upon me _with_ their mouths, _as_ a ravening and a roaring lion.

I am poured out like water, and all my bones are out of joint: my heart is like wax; it is melted in the midst of my bowels.

My strength is dried up like a potsherd; and my tongue cleaveth to my jaws; and thou hast brought me into the dust of death.

For dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feet.

I may tell all my bones: they look _and_ stare upon me.

They part my garments among them, and cast lots upon my vesture.

But be not thou far from me, O LORD: O my strength, haste thee to help me.

Deliver my soul from the sword; my darling from the power of the dog.

Save me from the lion's mouth: for thou hast heard me from the horns of the unicorns.

I will declare thy name unto my brethren: in the midst of the congregation will I praise thee.


----------



## gemcgrew (May 24, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Tell 2 guys to steal a donkey.....well Josh was having a bad day...he didn't  mean it.


He told them where to find His donkey.


----------



## WaltL1 (May 24, 2021)

gordon 2 said:


> Depends who's angry. My mom was angry a few times. She raised seven boys. She had PMS bad when she was in here 30s. I would not say her anger was sinful. But it depends who's angry. It's ok for a saint to be angry ( in the sense that it could be justified) but anger from a demonic spirit might make anger a sinful act .  The difference is in the motivation for the anger. Maybe. I'm not sure. Someone quick to anger has a personality problem maybe... Someone slow to anger has  frustration issue going. I don't know.
> 
> Gluttony as a sin I never understood. So I don't know if it is sinful. I mean some people have comfort foods and some people have been raised on lots of comfort. I don't know...really. If someone's food does not take the food out of someone else's mouth... I see not great problem it be sin. But I really never understood Gluttony.
> 
> ...





> She raised seven boys.


Seven boys????
Gee I cant imagine why she would be angry sometimes


----------



## Spotlite (May 24, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Grumpy, gluttonous, angry,  stealing...
> 
> Saints??? Is Jesus just a Saint?
> Its one thing to claim someone has never sinned. It is another thing to say well saints, gods,  sons of gods get a free pass because they are above the law when shown they sin and or break their own commandments.
> ...


When taken out of context.....

Matter of fact, Jesus was saying when John came not eating and drinking he was accused of having a devil. When the Son of Man comes eating and drinking he’s accused of gluttony, wine bearing, eating with sinners......

Where does it say the donkey belonged to who? I’ve sent people after my stuff before and told them if anyone asked, tell them.......that’s not theft.

Anger is not sin. Bible says to anger but sin not.

The “law” - no one gets a fee pass. If God chose to wipe out California because of their wickedness, it can be viewed as natural disasters by some, judgment by others.

Can’t compare history to today on how things are “settled” or dealt with - we no longer gun sling in the streets or throw a rope over a limb because a couple of us saw a man doing....


----------



## gordon 2 (May 24, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Grumpy, gluttonous, angry,  stealing...
> 
> Saints??? Is Jesus just a Saint?
> Its one thing to claim someone has never sinned. It is another thing to say well saints, gods,  sons of gods get a free pass because they are above the law when shown they sin and or break their own commandments.
> ...




Well sometimes the zeal of saints can lead them to sin or can seem sinful. It is true that when God intervenes radically or directly in the world some violence often occurs. The prophets suffer violence or in some cases the prophets "call down violence" on the people. The Egypian plagues and the jog around Jerico for examples are violent interventions. When God speaks via the burning bush, it is violent to the human senses. People can't  stand to hear the voice of God. Adam and Eve get deported from a prized relationship in the Garden and are not longer on Easy Street. The earth gets flooded and humans except a few are oxygen deprived and die, except for Noah and a few of his close.  In the Sinai  Moses via the power he has over his followers rubs out many of his own who bowed to the Golden Calf. The Canaanites get raked by Hebrew ideology.

And Jesus is crucified.  New ways to be, new spiritual movements seems to have a significant violent component in Middle East-Iraqi- Iranian-Mediterranian cultures where people fight for elbow room, farm land and security.

I would suggest that alot of this violence is human driven.  Some prophets will over reach with saintly purity and they are the cause of cringe worthy sudden violence in the name of God. On the other hand there seems to be long term corrector in spiritual designs where Vikings are made to disappear and spiritual factions are made to Peter out.

For some it is expected that the Second Coming will have a significant violent component-- such is our expectation when God gets busy with direct intervention in the lives of people(s) and individuals.

Yet we can point out to violence surrounding the prophets in history, is it the case similar with Christianity. Personally I think not. The Gospel is about peace. Perhaps this is the reason that Christianity can seem to be kin with Buddhism. .

Birth labor is painful...

"  You will hear of wars and rumors of wars, but see to it that you are not alarmed. These things must happen, but the end is still to come. 7 Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be famines and earthquakes in various places. 8All these are the beginning of birth pains.…

Behold what manner of love the Father has given to us, that we should be called children of God. And that is what we are! The reason the world does not know us is that it did not know Him. 2Beloved, we are now children of God, and what we will be has not yet been revealed. We know that when Christ appears, we will be like Him, for we will see Him as He is. 3And everyone who has this hope in Him purifies himself, just as Christ is pure.…

By definition Christians don't have all the answers why thing are like they are. For now they just know that they have the power to stop the Vikings from their warring ideologies with more effect then meeting them as soldiers when they disembark on their booty expeditions.


----------



## bullethead (May 24, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> When taken out of context.....
> 
> Matter of fact, Jesus was saying when John came not eating and drinking he was accused of having a devil. When the Son of Man comes eating and drinking he’s accused of gluttony, wine bearing, eating with sinners......
> 
> ...


Mmmm, sorry guys it was not his donkey, colt, foal or anything else.
https://biblehub.com/commentaries/matthew/21-1.htm

Often I walk from village to village and then send a couple of friends to go get my vehicle that I have stashed in another village. I tell tell them that if anyone asks to say that I need the vehicle and that I will send it back right away...ya know because I have to explain to strangers why I need my own vehicle and why I will return back to people who do not own it.

California/Bible stories. California is a great example of how to blend everyone in an entire area to seem "bad" in order to justify the death of them all by a "good" god if a natural disaster occurred.


----------



## bullethead (May 24, 2021)

Israel said:


> Yes, He does as He wishes.
> 
> God needs no excuse, nor any to make excuses for Him. He does all He cares to with what is His own.


All homicidal maniacs do as they wish.



Israel said:


> Shall the clay say to the potter why have you mad me thus?
> 
> Yes, a man might even think himself morally superior to God and have many arguments on which he may believe he can ascend in his own sense of self rightness. Get a "leg up" on God.
> 
> ...


Gasket Blown


----------



## bullethead (May 24, 2021)

gemcgrew said:


> He told them where to find His donkey.


That would be the correct thing to do, but that is not the case here.


----------



## bullethead (May 24, 2021)

gordon 2 said:


> Well sometimes the zeal of saints can lead them to sin or can seem sinful. It is true that when God intervenes radically or directly in the world some violence often occurs. The prophets suffer violence or in some cases the prophets "call down violence" on the people. The Egypian plagues and the jog around Jerico for examples are violent interventions. When God speaks via the burning bush, it is violent to the human senses. People can't  stand to hear the voice of God. Adam and Eve get deported from a prized relationship in the Garden and are not longer on Easy Street. The earth gets flooded and humans except a few are oxygen deprived and die, except for Noah and a few of his close.  In the Sinai  Moses via the power he has over his followers rubs out many of his own who bowed to the Golden Calf. The Canaanites get raked by Hebrew ideology.
> 
> And Jesus is crucified.  New ways to be, new spiritual movements seems to have a significant violent component in Middle East-Iraqi- Iranian-Mediterranian cultures where people fight for elbow room, farm land and security.
> 
> ...


All good examples but saints, prophets, parents aren't Jesus or God.

The 2nd coming and violence seems so 2000 years ago...


----------



## WaltL1 (May 24, 2021)

bullethead said:


> All homicidal maniacs do as they wish.
> 
> 
> Gasket Blown





> All homicidal maniacs do as they wish.


No-one will ever accuse you of being subtle thats for sure


----------



## Israel (May 24, 2021)

bullethead said:


> All homicidal maniacs do as they wish.
> 
> 
> Gasket Blown


 
That any remnant is found is miraculous demonstration of restraint and grace.

And as Esaias said before, Except the Lord of Sabaoth had left us a seed, we had been as Sodoma, and been made like unto Gomorrha.


----------



## bullethead (May 24, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> No-one will ever accuse you of being subtle thats for sure


It is Beyond that Walt, no sense beating around the burning bush.

Edited to add: "It is"


----------



## Spotlite (May 24, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Mmmm, sorry guys it was not his donkey, colt, foal or anything else.
> https://biblehub.com/commentaries/matthew/21-1.htm
> 
> Often I walk from village to village and then send a couple of friends to go get my vehicle that I have stashed in another village. I tell tell them that if anyone asks to say that I need the vehicle and that I will send it back right away...ya know because I have to explain to strangers why I need my own vehicle and why I will return back to people who do not own it.
> ...


Or he could have placed the donkey there and told them where to find it. The point is the accusation of theft has no weight to it. And since no one knows who the donkey belonged to, or who placed it there, my assumption is just as invalid as the theft accusation.


----------



## bullethead (May 24, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> Or he could have placed the donkey there and told them where to find it. The point is the accusation of theft has no weight to it. And since no one knows who the donkey belonged to, or who placed it there, my assumption is just as invalid as the theft accusation.


You didnt read the link i posted.


----------



## bullethead (May 24, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> Or he could have placed the donkey there and told them where to find it. The point is the accusation of theft has no weight to it. And since no one knows who the donkey belonged to, or who placed it there, my assumption is just as invalid as the theft accusation.


So you reconcile this with yourself by concocting the story that Jesus placed a donkey and it's colt a few miles away, walked back to join his merry band of companions,  walked around miles more and then had the bright idea to send two of his pals to fetch two of his rides that he purposely left miles away all so he can roll into yet another town on the back of one?
And he instructed his friends to tell anyone that asks why they are taking the animals to say that Jesus needs them but he will return them....
Spotlite,  WHY would Jesus need to explain to anyone why he needs his own animals and then also have to tell them that the animals will be returned?? Why would he return his own animals?

They were not his animals. It is theft. You just have to make excuses for why he took something and more importantly instructed others to steal for him things that did not belong to him.
Celebrity status much? Anyone else would have been prosecuted for "borrowing" another's livestock.
Go tell two of your buddies to take a car from a neighboring town and if anyone asks what they are doing have them say "it is for Spotlite, he will return it when finished" and let me know if "theft" has any weight to it when the police arrive.


----------



## gordon 2 (May 24, 2021)

About the donkey. Maybe this is what happened... Mary Magdalene was at the donkey races.


----------



## bullethead (May 24, 2021)

gordon 2 said:


> About the donkey. Maybe this is what happened... Mary Magdalene was at the donkey races.


In a world where the literal word of god is in print in black and white and red..and it supposedly means what it says....there seems to be a lot of wiggle room in the need to make excuses while explaining it.


----------



## Israel (May 24, 2021)

<<<<<<<<<<<<speaking of donkeys, may I be found as true as Baalam's.
Even...all of us.


gordon 2 said:


> About the donkey. Maybe this is what happened... Mary Magdalene was at the donkey races.




But...that is funny. Did she stay to see who the garland belonged to?

Nevermind, the Lord's testimony of her is enuff.


----------



## Israel (May 24, 2021)

No excuse here, the earth is the Lord's and the fullness thereof.


----------



## Spotlite (May 24, 2021)

bullethead said:


> You didnt read the link i posted.


Yes I read the commentaries. That 3 letter word is what I’m calling a donkey. Either way, scripture is not detailed enough to either accuse the theft. I view commentaries differently - they’re someone’s opinion.


----------



## Spotlite (May 24, 2021)

bullethead said:


> So you reconcile this with yourself by concocting the story that Jesus placed a donkey and it's colt a few miles away, walked back to join his merry band of companions,  walked around miles more and then had the bright idea to send two of his pals to fetch two of his rides that he purposely left miles away all so he can roll into yet another town on the back of one?
> And he instructed his friends to tell anyone that asks why they are taking the animals to say that Jesus needs them but he will return them....
> Spotlite,  WHY would Jesus need to explain to anyone why he needs his own animals and then also have to tell them that the animals will be returned?? Why would he return his own animals?
> 
> ...


No lol. I’m only saying “prove it was theft”

There’s not enough detail to prove  that. There’s not enough detail to prove Jesus didn’t tie the donkey there. There’s not enough detail to state anything other than he told them where a donkey is.

And yes just today I told my nephew to ride his 4 wheeler to my neighbors house and there will be a yellow 5 gallon gas can by his hay barn. Get it and if anyone ask him, tell them I sent him after it. That just happened 20 minutes ago. The other neighbor might think my nephew stole it, but he didn’t.


----------



## Spotlite (May 24, 2021)

bullethead said:


> In a world where the literal word of god is in print in black and white and red..and it supposedly means what it says....there seems to be a lot of wiggle room in the need to make excuses while explaining it.


No, we are just asking without assumptions, how do you know it was theft? Based on what is literally written in black and white? And without commentaries that are basing their commentary on an assumption.


----------



## WaltL1 (May 24, 2021)

bullethead said:


> It is Beyond that Walt, no sense beating around the burning bush.
> 
> Edited to add: "It is"


I agree that such an action would fall under the classification of homicidal maniac by most folks including Christians.
Except when it comes to God.
I do (and did as a Christian) find that problematic.


----------



## Israel (May 24, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> I agree that such an action would fall under the classification of homicidal maniac by most folks including Christians.
> Except when it comes to God.
> I do (and did as a Christian) find that problematic.


What?

That God kills and makes alive?

See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god with me: I kill, and I make alive; I wound, and I heal: neither is there any that can deliver out of my hand.

Oh, yes...I read it. 

But I had to learn it.


----------



## bullethead (May 24, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> No, we are just asking without assumptions, how do you know it was theft? Based on what is literally written in black and white? And without commentaries that are basing their commentary on an assumption.


What is written, as it is written points to theft. Same as them eating grain from someone else's fields.

You are using your commentary and your opinion to fill in the blanks to suit your needs while telling me such things are unacceptable.


----------



## WaltL1 (May 24, 2021)

Israel said:


> What?
> 
> That God kills and makes alive?
> 
> ...


I'll be honest with you Israel (as I always try to be), I equate that^ with -
I bashed you in the head with a tire iron, but handed you a couple Tylenol after that therefore bashing you in the head was ok.


----------



## Spotlite (May 24, 2021)

bullethead said:


> What is written, as it is written points to theft. Same as them eating grain from someone else's fields.
> 
> You are using your commentary and your opinion to fill in the blanks to suit your needs while telling me such things are unacceptable.


But I didn’t use any commentaries. Below is what’s written. I changed one word to “donkey” due to the forum censor. You’d find it very difficult to prove theft based on what’s written below. Even eating from another’s field. We don’t know what “gentleman’s agreements” existed based on what’s written. I get things all the time from others gardens.
My only point is there’s not enough detail in what’s written to support mine nor your thoughts. Of course there are tons of commentaries to support our thoughts. 

 And not making excuses for “murder” - the Christian believes that life is only God’s to give and take because it’s his creation. If it belongs to him, it’s his to do as he pleases. If I kill I took something that didn’t belong to me. 

21 And when they drew nigh unto Jerusalem, and were come to Bethphage, unto the mount of Olives, then sent Jesus two disciples,

2 Saying unto them, Go into the village over against you, and straightway ye shall find an “donkey” tied, and a colt with her: loose them, and bring them unto me.

3 And if any man say ought unto you, ye shall say, The Lord hath need of them; and straightway he will send them.


----------



## Spotlite (May 24, 2021)

bullethead said:


> What is written, as it is written points to theft. Same as them eating grain from someone else's fields.
> 
> You are using your commentary and your opinion to fill in the blanks to suit your needs while telling me such things are unacceptable.


And to clarify, I’m not saying your thoughts and the commentaries are unacceptable, I’m just saying they don’t prove theft no more than my thoughts prove it wasn’t. Sorry for the confusion on that.


----------



## bullethead (May 24, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> But I didn’t use any commentaries. Below is what’s written. I changed one word to “donkey” due to the forum censor. You’d find it very difficult to prove theft based on what’s written below. Even eating from another’s field. We don’t know what “gentleman’s agreements” existed based on what’s written. I get things all the time from others gardens.
> My only point is there’s not enough detail in what’s written to support mine nor your thoughts. Of course there are tons of commentaries to support our thoughts.
> 
> And not making excuses for “murder” - the Christian believes that life is only God’s to give and take because it’s his creation. If it belongs to him, it’s his to do as he pleases. If I kill I took something that didn’t belong to me.
> ...


You used your own commentary based off of your own opinion by suggesting that Jesus may have owned the donkey and placed it there earlier. That is no more or no less valid than theft.


----------



## Spotlite (May 24, 2021)

bullethead said:


> You used your own commentary based off of your own opinion by suggesting that Jesus may have owned the donkey and placed it there earlier. That is no more or no less valid than theft.


That is true. I was thinking about others commentaries and didn’t count my own


----------



## WaltL1 (May 24, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> But I didn’t use any commentaries. Below is what’s written. I changed one word to “donkey” due to the forum censor. You’d find it very difficult to prove theft based on what’s written below. Even eating from another’s field. We don’t know what “gentleman’s agreements” existed based on what’s written. I get things all the time from others gardens.
> My only point is there’s not enough detail in what’s written to support mine nor your thoughts. Of course there are tons of commentaries to support our thoughts.
> 
> And not making excuses for “murder” - the Christian believes that life is only God’s to give and take because it’s his creation. If it belongs to him, it’s his to do as he pleases. If I kill I took something that didn’t belong to me.
> ...


I can read 2 & 3 on their own, in 2 different ways -
1. You send your kid over to your good buddy's house next door to grab a wrench knowing full well he will be just fine with it because thats the kind of relationship you have. I dont see that as "stealing".
2. You send your kid next door to grab a wrench from the neighbor next door that you dont know and if he catches you just tell him I need it with the expectation that the neighbor will be ok with it.. 
I see that at the least as "borrowing" it without permission.


----------



## Spotlite (May 24, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> I can read 2 & 3 on their own, in 2 different ways -
> 1. You send your kid over to your good buddy's house next door to grab a wrench knowing full well he will be just fine with it because thats the kind of relationship you have. I dont see that as "stealing".
> 2. You send your kid next door to grab a wrench from the neighbor next door that you dont know and if he catches you just tell him I need it with the expectation that the neighbor will be ok with it..
> I see that at the least as "borrowing" it without permission.


What’s missing though is this ^^^^

But I agree that it can viewed as borrowing without permission.


----------



## bullethead (May 24, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> I can read 2 & 3 on their own, in 2 different ways -
> 1. You send your kid over to your good buddy's house next door to grab a wrench knowing full well he will be just fine with it because thats the kind of relationship you have. I dont see that as "stealing".
> 2. You send your kid next door to grab a wrench from the neighbor next door that you dont know and if he catches you just tell him I need it with the expectation that the neighbor will be ok with it..
> I see that at the least as "borrowing" it without permission.


Or another option is that Jesus being the son of god knows that two villages away there are two animals not being used at the moment. He sends two disciples over to get them. He says if anyone asks, they are for me...either knowing they will be ok with it or because they are followers and he has celebrity status.
It certainly doesn't sound like anyone was expecting anyone else to take a couple of donkeys.

Being these stories are often embellished it may have written that way in order to show loyalty,  god like knowledge and inadvertently poor planning on where to park a couple of donkeys. I mean if he has incredible knowledge he would have known the steps ahead of time and could have gotten a spot closer to the route.


----------



## gemcgrew (May 24, 2021)

bullethead said:


> That would be the correct thing to do, but that is not the case here.


It is exactly the case. Not only is the donkey His, but the owner of the donkey is His as well. This is addressed elsewhere in Scripture. See if you can find it.


----------



## bullethead (May 24, 2021)

gemcgrew said:


> It is exactly the case. Not only is the donkey His, but the owner of the donkey is His as well. This is addressed elsewhere in Scripture. See if you can find it.


Yep, found it, right next to his scriptural slavery.


----------



## Spotlite (May 24, 2021)

To cut to the chase of what if’s on the theft portion, in another area of the Bible......

“And certain of them that stood there said unto them, What do ye, loosing the colt?

And they said unto them even as Jesus had commanded: and they let them go.”


----------



## Israel (May 25, 2021)

You see how easy that was. You are right...there's no need to go back far to any _older posts_ to find the man who "laps the pack" in consideration of his own glory, who thinks his "in depth" research and excellence of sensibility, his own assertions are immune to light and his "total understanding" of all things relating to Christ remain unassailable.


Yep...just beware of that one not ashamed of your own words about Him. He used them first knowing how He must appear to some

“Behold, I am coming like a thief. Blessed is the one who remains awake and clothed, so that he will not go naked and let his shame be exposed.”

Do and speak as you must with reminder that any word spoken against the son of man will be forgiven...so that even the vilest man (such as myself) can glory in _that mercy._

We've all judged God's Christ to whatever extent we have so that God's righteous judgments might come to view...somewhere as "too much of that"...or too little of this...or worse, sought to make Him an idol, dumb.

There's a reason_ for reason_ and it's far more than "but we were having a good conversation".

Accuse Him of thievery?

Homicidal maniac?

And he saith unto him, Out of thine own mouth will I judge thee, _thou_ wicked servant. Thou knewest that I was an austere man, taking up that I laid not down, and reaping that I did not sow:

There's not a man of us here who hasn't first learned the very deepest and burning desire to be able to take back words and actions that can't be...and can only find release from that he11 of inability to "take back"...by mercy.

And mercy continues.

God has taken back what is His through Christ, leading captivity...captive.

He's not vexed by what refuses His ownership. He knows what's His.

The foundation of God stands sure having this seal, the Lord knows those who are His.

It's almost funny how that such a plea by some goes out for a God that is far more universal, less provincial, cutting through traditions, culture, locale (must He be the God of the desert? and those ancient benighted desert walkers?) even history. But nothing _in the world _is more ubiquitous than sin nor more universal and what was once the trap _of all _has a door made...even for purpose of going through.

And I will give her her vineyards from thence, and the valley of Achor for a door of hope: and she shall sing there, as in the days of her youth, 

Faith...is the _only way_ of the knowing. 

Of anything.

Not weakest link...but only link.


----------



## bullethead (May 25, 2021)

Israel said:


> You see how easy that was. You are right...there's no need to go back far to any _older posts_ to find the man who "laps the pack" in consideration of his own glory, who thinks his "in depth" research and excellence of sensibility, his own assertions are immune to light and his "total understanding" of all things relating to Christ remain unassailable.
> 
> 
> Yep...just beware of that one not ashamed of your own words about Him. He used them first knowing how He must appear to some
> ...


Absolutely no accusations needed. I use his own words and his confession of actions directly from his own written statement. I just don't give him the superfan free pass.

But I like your opening statement, I may use that as my sig-line.


----------



## bullethead (May 25, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> To cut to the chase of what if’s on the theft portion, in another area of the Bible......
> 
> “And certain of them that stood there said unto them, What do ye, loosing the colt?
> 
> And they said unto them even as Jesus had commanded: and they let them go.”


Luke 19:29-35 NKJV: And it came to pass, when He drew near to Bethphage and Bethany, at the mountain called Olivet, [that] He sent two of His disciples, 30 saying, “Go into the village opposite [you], where as you enter you will find a colt tied, on which no one has ever sat. Loose it and bring [it here]. *31 “And if anyone asks you, ‘Why are you loosing [it]?’ thus you shall say to him, ‘Because the Lord has need of it.’ “* 32 So those who were sent went their way and found [it] just as He had said to them. 33 But as they were loosing the colt, the owners of it said to them, “Why are you loosing the colt?” 34 And they said, “The Lord has need of him.” 35 Then they brought him to Jesus. And they threw their own clothes on the colt, and they set Jesus on him.

3/4 do not mention "and they let him go" like your Mark example.
Luke mentions the donkey's Owners though.


----------



## bullethead (May 25, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> To cut to the chase of what if’s on the theft portion, in another area of the Bible......
> 
> “And certain of them that stood there said unto them, What do ye, loosing the colt?
> 
> And they said unto them even as Jesus had commanded: and they let them go.”


Subconsciously coerced against their will?


----------



## bullethead (May 25, 2021)

Thanks to Israel and another part of the bible,  the confession:

15 (“Behold, I am coming like a thief! Blessed is the one who stays awake, keeping his garments on, that he may not go about naked and be seen exposed!”)

But know this, that if the master of the house had known in what part of the night the thief was coming, he would have stayed awake and would not have let his house be broken into.

Remember, then, what you received and heard. Keep it, and repent. If you will not wake up, I will come like a thief, and you will not know at what hour I will come against you.

But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, and then the heavens will pass away with a roar, and the heavenly bodies will be burned up and dissolved, and the earth and the works that are done on it will be exposed.

But you are not in darkness, brothers, for that day to surprise you like a thief


----------



## Spotlite (May 25, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Luke 19:29-35 NKJV: And it came to pass, when He drew near to Bethphage and Bethany, at the mountain called Olivet, [that] He sent two of His disciples, 30 saying, “Go into the village opposite [you], where as you enter you will find a colt tied, on which no one has ever sat. Loose it and bring [it here]. *31 “And if anyone asks you, ‘Why are you loosing [it]?’ thus you shall say to him, ‘Because the Lord has need of it.’ “* 32 So those who were sent went their way and found [it] just as He had said to them. 33 But as they were loosing the colt, the owners of it said to them, “Why are you loosing the colt?” 34 And they said, “The Lord has need of him.” 35 Then they brought him to Jesus. And they threw their own clothes on the colt, and they set Jesus on him.
> 
> 2/3 do not mention "and they let him go".
> Luke mentions the donkey's Owners though.



It also doesn’t mention that the owners had an issue with it, either.


bullethead said:


> Subconsciously coerced against their will?


Anything is possible I suppose, but you’d have to ignore the other account that was mentioned where they let them go.

I’m an Analyst and worked the following:

This is a real scenario where an individual was fatally injured and the root cause had to be determined:
1. 10 eye-witness.
2. All 10 differ from in detail for word for word.
3. They are all similar enough to tell the same story.
4. 6 of the 10 failed to mention that the deceased performed one important step.


Being familiar with the process and reviewing the scene, I know that step was covered - the piece of equipment was still there and connected.

If you only read the 10 statements would you say he failed to do it because 6 of the 10 failed to mention  it?


----------



## bullethead (May 25, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> It also doesn’t mention that the owners had an issue with it, either.
> 
> Anything is possible I suppose, but you’d have to ignore the other account that was mentioned where they let them go.
> 
> ...


This a real life happening as told to me by the man (grandfather in the story).
The man gets a call from his grandson at 1am. The grandson is panicked,  crying, pleading "Pop-Pop I need help"
Calm down the man says what is going on.
The grandson proceeds to tell his grandfather that he is on spring break down in Mexico, he was arrested,  and they will not release him unless $5,000 is paid upfront. More panic, crying, pleading continues. Pop-Pop is it me! I will pay you back as soon as I can. Please don't tell my parents until I get home etc etc etc
Long story short.
Pop-Pop western unions the $.
Meanwhile his grandson is at home , sound asleep less than 5 miles away.


Being an analyst I am confident that you can see that not everything is as it appears or as written.


----------



## Spotlite (May 25, 2021)

bullethead said:


> This a real life happening as told to me by the man (grandfather in the story).
> The man gets a call from his grandson at 1am. The grandson is panicked,  crying, pleading "Pop-Pop I need help"
> Calm down the man says what is going on.
> The grandson proceeds to tell his grandfather that he is on spring break down in Mexico, he was arrested,  and they will not release him unless $5,000 is paid upfront. More panic, crying, pleading continues. Pop-Pop is it me! I will pay you back as soon as I can. Please don't tell my parents until I get home etc etc etc
> ...



Very true. So based on what’s written / appears to have happened in these 3 accounts what key words make you believe it’s theft? If he told them to say “tell them the Lord hath need of it” can you relate that to one of you’re clients saying to another go grab this and tell them that “your name” has a need for it......would that indicate they know you already?

Mark 11
5 And certain of them that stood there said unto them, What do ye, loosing the colt?
6 And they said unto them even as Jesus had commanded: and they let them go.

Luke 19
33 And as they were loosing the colt, the owners thereof said unto them, Why loose ye the colt?
34 And they said, The Lord hath need of him.
35 And they brought him to Jesus: and they cast their garments upon the colt, and they set Jesus thereon.

Matthew 21
2 Saying unto them, Go into the village over against you, and straightway ye shall find an *** tied, and a colt with her: loose them, and bring them unto me.
3 And if any man say ought unto you, ye shall say, The Lord hath need of them; and straightway he will send them.


----------



## bullethead (May 25, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> Very true. So based on what’s written / appears to have happened in these 3 accounts what key words make you believe it’s theft? If he told them to say “tell them the Lord hath need of it” can you relate that to one of you’re clients saying to another go grab this and tell them that “your name” has a need for it......would that indicate they know you already?
> 
> Mark 11
> 5 And certain of them that stood there said unto them, What do ye, loosing the colt?
> ...


Again, nothing indicates that the owners of the animals knew Jesus or knew that Jesus was the Lord being talked about.
In ancient times someone's word was all they had. It is possible that the owners never knew who or what their donkey's were for. Two strangers first taking the donkeys, and THEN being asked why they are taking the donkeys does not sound like the owners knew it was supposed to happen. In one story once approached by the owners the disciples tell them that the Lord needs it....being 1st century Jews that could have meant the God of Abraham to them and they allowed it.
In the other stories  Jesus tells his disciples what to do in case they were approached by the owners...those stories never say whether or not they were in fact approached, what was said or what was allowed.


----------



## bullethead (May 25, 2021)

"Lord" to a 1st century Jew had many meanings. Under Roman rule it could mean Emperor or any master, high social order,  or Gov't official.

"My lord needs your donkey, he will return it" . Most people/peasants would oblige. If they thought it was for one person and instead was for another that they did not worship, follow or even like, well...


----------



## Israel (May 25, 2021)

We are (understandably) very cross ways in this.

Where the believer has no issue with understanding that the Lord's words to be given in regards to the donkey accomplished all they needed to...regardless of the owner's understanding, the unbeliever sees many conflicts.

The simplification of all matters in the Lord e.g. in prayer (or speaking in tongues for that matter) is a matter of faith received. I have no worry that if I only say Lord at certain times there's a possibility for confusion at the receiving end. No problem with praying Lord Jesus, Lord, Jesus, Father, or God help me with any concern that I might get the wrong address.Such simplicity...which only points to even greater relief (and correction as need be) is a glorious benefit of knowing a Father is watching over one...with eye of salvation. That the Lord who has brought you to Him is not ashamed of calling one brother.

Unity in spirit can never be explained...only experienced.

And that donkey was ordained to that work...and whatever else the Lord had assigned.


----------



## Spotlite (May 25, 2021)

bullethead said:


> "Lord" to a 1st century Jew had many meanings. Under Roman rule it could mean Emperor or any master, high social order,  or Gov't official.
> 
> "My lord needs your donkey, he will return it" . Most people/peasants would oblige. If they thought it was for one person and instead was for another that they did not worship, follow or even like, well...


All hard to argue with until we get to one area - if it’s theft for Jesus how can we assume “most people/peasants would oblige” and it’s permitted if it pertains to other examples of “Lord” that you’ve given? If these disciples placed themselves under Jesus as their master and Lord, then he is their Lord. Being disciples it’s almost impossible not to be associated with “that Lord”.

And it was prophesied in the Old Testament so the Jews would at least most likely assume whom they were referring to? Their acceptance of Jesus as the Messiah is irrelevant - they are aware of Jesus and his followers.

What we don’t know is what the owners of the donkey thought.


----------



## bullethead (May 25, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> All hard to argue with until we get to one area - if it’s theft for Jesus how can we assume “most people/peasants would oblige” and it’s permitted if it pertains to other examples of “Lord” that you’ve given? If these disciples placed themselves under Jesus as their master and Lord, then he is their Lord. Being disciples it’s almost impossible not to be associated with “that Lord”.
> 
> And it was prophesied in the Old Testament so the Jews would at least most likely assume whom they were referring to? Their acceptance of Jesus as the Messiah is irrelevant - they are aware of Jesus and his followers.
> 
> What we don’t know is what the owners of the donkey thought.


It could be considered theft under the false claim of lord. No written orders. No official family/Gov't/ authoritative seal.


----------



## Spotlite (May 25, 2021)

bullethead said:


> It could be considered theft under the false claim of lord. No written orders. No official family/Gov't/ authoritative seal.


I can buy that. And based on that ^^^^ and what we have written, is it safe to assume it was theft when at least one account says “And they said unto them even as Jesus had commanded: and they let them go.”?

I’m still hung up on a technicality, though - “the Lord” seems to identify who they are speaking of.


----------



## bullethead (May 25, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> I can buy that. And based on that ^^^^ and what we have written, is it safe to assume it was theft when at least one account says “And they said unto them even as Jesus had commanded: and they let them go.”?


No different than the grandfather sending money to what he thought was his grandson. He let his money go thinking it was for one cause but it turned out to be for another.



Spotlite said:


> I’m still hung up on a technicality, though - “the Lord” seems to identify who they are speaking of.


Yes my lord I will do as you wish. Spotlite my lord needs your donkey and he will return it.
Which person am I speaking of?
God, Jesus, my master that I work for, my master that bought me, The King of England, The King of France, The wealthy landowner,  Caesar,  the Governor sent to oversee the area?

Depending on where you live and when you lived there lord has many meanings.

For the believers to think that this stuff happened as written and recorded as written and it is all so low in details to that the reader has to fill in the blanks....it screams ancient fiction and embellishments of every day happenings.

Hey what are you two guys doing? You untied my donkeys and are walking away with them!
Oh yeah my lord said he needs them and will bring them back.
Ohhhh, ok then...shrug shoulders and go back to my business.

Obviously donkeys were not parked for the taking just anywhere,  they had to be a valuable item and doubtful that many had some. As it is written it is more about the story than it actually happening.


----------



## Spotlite (May 25, 2021)

bullethead said:


> No different than the grandfather sending money to what he thought was his grandson. He let his money go thinking it was for one cause but it turned out to be for another.
> 
> 
> Yes my lord I will do as you wish. Spotlite my lord needs your donkey and he will return it.
> ...





Spotlite said:


> I can buy that. And based on that ^^^^ and what we have written, is it safe to assume it was theft when at least one account says “And they said unto them even as Jesus had commanded: and they let them go.”?
> 
> I’m still hung up on a technicality, though - “the Lord” seems to identify who they are speaking of.


----------



## bullethead (May 25, 2021)

I added more to my initial reply


----------



## Spotlite (May 25, 2021)

bullethead said:


> I added more to my initial reply


I done gut a donkey headache lol


----------



## bullethead (May 25, 2021)

*lord*
*/lôrd/*
noun

1.someone or something having power, authority, or influence; a master or ruler:"*lord* of the sea"synonymsmaster, *lord *and master, ruler, leader, chief, superior, monarch, sovereign, king, emperor, prince, governor, commander, captain, overlord, suzerain, baron, potentate, liege, liege *lord*


----------



## bullethead (May 25, 2021)

In the 1st century there were a lot of lords around


----------



## Spotlite (May 25, 2021)

bullethead said:


> In the 1st century there were a lot of lords around


Based on the definition and I’m agreeing with you....

You don’t see a very likely possibility that being Disciples, folks knew who they were referring to as their Lord?


----------



## bullethead (May 25, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> Based on the definition and I’m agreeing with you....
> 
> You don’t see a very likely possibility that being Disciples, folks knew who they were referring to as their Lord?


Pre Christianity in 1st century Israel where 99.99% of the population did not think Jesus was the Messiah....NO.
How would the owners of the animals know who the two disciples were?
Heck, the bible doesn't even say which two it was.


----------



## Spotlite (May 25, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Pre Christianity in 1st century Israel where 99.99% of the population did not think Jesus was the Messiah....NO.
> How would the owners of the animals know who the two disciples were?
> Heck, the bible doesn't even say which two it was.


At this point in his ministry, I’m almost certain they knew who he was, claimed to be, accused of being and who his followers were.

The Bible didn’t say he stole it, nor who the owners were, either.


----------



## bullethead (May 25, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> At this point in his ministry, I’m almost certain they knew who he was, claimed to be, accused of being and who his followers were.
> 
> The Bible didn’t say he stole it, nor who the owners were, either.


The stories in the Bible would lead you to believe that.
History refutes it.


----------



## Spotlite (May 25, 2021)

bullethead said:


> The stories in the Bible would lead you to believe that.
> History refutes it.


We’re talking about 3 accounts given from the same Bible, not history.

At least one account says “they let them go”. The other two accounts in no way indicates theft, if anything, they lead you to believe that the owners knew who the Lord was that they spoke of. They were not instructed to say the king of England needs them.

I’m very familiar where some of the atheist arguments come from concerning the donkey theft theory. It amazes me the depth of denial that’s attempted to prove theft on their sites.


----------



## bullethead (May 25, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> We’re talking about 3 accounts given from the same Bible, not history.
> 
> At least one account says “they let them go”. The other two accounts in no way indicates theft, if anything, they lead you to believe that the owners knew who the Lord was that they spoke of. They were not instructed to say the king of England needs them.
> 
> I’m very familiar where some of the atheist arguments come from concerning the donkey theft theory. It amazes me the depth of denial that’s attempted to prove theft on their sites.


You mentioned how well Jesus would have been known and followed. None of that is evident in those 3 accounts.

I have not perused through them. Give some examples of their denial.


----------



## Spotlite (May 25, 2021)

bullethead said:


> You mentioned how well Jesus would have been known and followed. None of that is evident in those 3 accounts.
> 
> I have not perused through them. Give some examples of their denial.


What I mean is to force theft because two accounts didn’t say “they let them go”. Like there’s no possible way that the owners knew who the Lord was they spoke of. When in general terminology it’s accepted that when it’s that vague, people know who you’re referring to.

Their argument of contradiction would hold more water because at least one account says “they let them go”. But I guess it’s more appealing for them to make Jesus a thief by cherry picking scriptures and denying others.

I’m not sure how well he was followed, but either famous or infamous by the works claimed and who he’s claiming / accused to be, I’m almost certain he was no secret.


----------



## bullethead (May 25, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> What I mean is to force theft because two accounts didn’t say “they let them go”. Like there’s no possible way that the owners knew who the Lord was they spoke of. When in general terminology it’s accepted that when it’s that vague, people know who you’re referring to.
> 
> Their argument of contradiction would hold more water because at least one account says “they let them go”. But I guess it’s more appealing for them to make Jesus a thief by cherry picking scriptures and denying others.
> 
> I’m not sure how well he was followed, but either famous or infamous by the works claimed and who he’s claiming / accused to be, I’m almost certain he was no secret.


Ok, so let that example go.
But there is no way to know how popular or heard of he was


When he and his disciples were eating grain from the fields on the sabbath.
Did the owners of the grain  "let them go"? 
Point being we can go on and on page after page about each example regarding potential sins or breaking of commandments or breaking the laws. Even when shown he clearly did believers say he is above them all and cannot be held accountable...and then say how Jesus is innocent and sinless. Well yeah sure he is when he has a get out of jail free card.


----------



## Spotlite (May 25, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Ok, so let that example go.
> But there is no way to know how popular or heard of he was
> 
> 
> ...


I can see that. I don’t go with the above the law and not accountable route. Too much teaching on being accountable and sharing. I do view it the way I do things today because I can relate to it. I will stop and hit a plum tree, garden, fish pond on my paths to and from because there’s already been something established verbally between myself and those others, although it’s not documented anywhere on paper. But that’s just the way I relate to things.


----------



## Spotlite (May 25, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Ok, so let that example go.
> But there is no way to know how popular or heard of he was
> 
> 
> ...


I’m that stubborn lol ?


----------



## bullethead (May 25, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> I can see that. I don’t go with the above the law and not accountable route. Too much teaching on being accountable and sharing. I do view it the way I do things today because I can relate to it. I will stop and hit a plum tree, garden, fish pond on my paths to and from because there’s already been something established verbally between myself and those others, although it’s not documented anywhere on paper. But that’s just the way I relate to things.


You'd be picked by defense lawyers often to be a juror.


----------



## Spotlite (May 25, 2021)

bullethead said:


> You'd be picked by defense lawyers often to be a juror.


On a side note - I’ve never been selected. I’ve heard that once you are, you are selected a lot more. I know my brother gets selected fairly often.


----------



## gemcgrew (May 25, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Yep, found it, right next to his scriptural slavery.


While I understand your need of diversion, I can only hope that your understanding of Biblical slavery is superior to your understanding of whose donkey is it.


----------



## bullethead (May 25, 2021)

gemcgrew said:


> While I understand your need of diversion, I can only hope that your understanding of Biblical slavery is superior to your understanding of whose donkey is it.


You are in luck. I am able to understand the Biblical version of things. The trick is trying to incorporate them into reality.


----------



## Israel (May 26, 2021)

bullethead said:


> In the 1st century there were a lot of lords around



There still are.


----------



## gemcgrew (May 26, 2021)

bullethead said:


> I am able to understand the Biblical version of things.


We are both slaves to our understanding.


----------



## Israel (May 26, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> I'll be honest with you Israel (as I always try to be), I equate that^ with -
> I bashed you in the head with a tire iron, but handed you a couple Tylenol after that therefore bashing you in the head was ok.


That sure is one way to see it if the matter of being God is to be left upon our approval of His being God.


----------



## WaltL1 (May 26, 2021)

Israel said:


> That sure is one way to see it if the matter of being God is to be left upon our approval of His being God.


I dont see it as a matter of my or anyones approval or disapproval. If God is God then he is, regardless of whether I or anyone approve or not.
I just took those words and applied them to a "real world" scenario as I see them.
Nothing more, nothing less.


----------



## Israel (May 26, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> I dont see it as a matter of my or anyones approval or disapproval. If God is God then he is, regardless of whether I or anyone approve or not.
> I just took those words and applied them to a "real world" scenario as I see them.
> Nothing more, nothing less.



OK, fair enough...I inferred from your previous post that you had a problem with it. If I misread, forgive me.





> WaltL1 said:





> I agree that such an action would fall under the classification of homicidal maniac by most folks including Christians.
> Except when it comes to God.
> I do (and did as a Christian) find that problematic.


----------



## WaltL1 (May 26, 2021)

Israel said:


> OK, fair enough...I inferred from your previous post that you had a problem with it. If I misread, forgive me.


I do have a problem with them, and Im not sure how to put this, but my problem is not based on who said them, its based on how I view the "sentiment" behind them.
Same as the Flood story. I dont find the action atrocious because God did it, I just find the action atrocious. Regardless of who did it.
Should I base my thoughts on an action by who did it or should I base my thoughts on the action itself?


----------



## Israel (May 26, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> I do have a problem with them, and Im not sure how to put this, but my problem is not based on who said them, its based on how I view the "sentiment" behind them.
> Same as the Flood story. I dont find the action atrocious because God did it, I just find the action atrocious. Regardless of who did it.
> Should I base my thoughts on an action by who did it or should I base my thoughts on the action itself?


Again, fair enough.

But you do see the matter at hand...to have issue with the God who takes life with intent is to also have issue with the God who gives life with intent. And any thoughts on the matter you or I might have is in consequence and predicated upon that God giving us life to even be able to appraise actions.

If His intent is to be accused by some and praised by others...what is anyone going to do...but be as intended?


----------



## bullethead (May 26, 2021)

Walt, the surviving children of a murderer that kills his children have nothing to complain about. Daddy might kill you next but he will make another one so it's all good.


----------



## Israel (May 26, 2021)

It is all good. The potter is in all authority over the clay. Who gives being is sole authority to its disposition.


----------



## WaltL1 (May 26, 2021)

Israel said:


> Again, fair enough.
> 
> But you do see the matter at hand...to have issue with the God who takes life with intent is to also have issue with the God who gives life with intent. And any thoughts on the matter you or I might have is in consequence and predicated upon that God giving us life to even be able to appraise actions.
> 
> If His intent is to be accused by some and praised by others...what is anyone going to do...but be as intended?


I dont have that issue remember? Im an A/A. Thats what allows me to focus purely on the action alone without all those other "complications/considerations" getting in the way.
You are viewing it through the lenses of a beleiver. Thats why see you issues that I dont.


----------



## Israel (May 26, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> I dont have that issue remember? Im an A/A. Thats what allows me to focus purely on the action alone without all those other "complications/considerations" getting in the way.
> You are viewing it through the lenses of a beleiver. Thats why see you issues that I dont.


Yes...to know the one who knows all, and ordains all from before there was an all to even be considered... is to just begin.

But if your reason tells you anything...do you believe it does...first off? Your consciousness...logic...reason to appraise "how things are"...or as Bullet put it..."reality"...a few posts ago...if _your reason (_or consciousness_ to reason)_ was not assembled/made/given _with reason..._why and how could you trust it to tell you anything about "how things are"?

Your consciousness with seeming ability to reason then becomes of no more use to you than a randomly assembled altimiter, gas gauge, voltmeter...(whatever instrument in the material world _is used to a determining)_..in your being informed by it. No less any man.

You are correct that the believer is always contending and up against the consequence of sin that totally alienated thought and thoughts, corrupted reason and its reason for having been given. How such alienation to reason is resolved in Christ is the believer's supreme occupation, to look into Jesus Christ in beholding Him open to him...to learn how a thing of clay once so alienated...is made friend of God. There's only one to look to for this, look at, behold.

It's more than full time.
It's eternal.

The Logos has come in flesh.

Some think that "Can God make a pepper so hot he can't eat it" is a matter of consideration for some leading to marvel at what one can do with words.

Not even small potatoes...

That the Word of God appeared in flesh (and does still) is too great an occupation of what God does with Word to be dissuaded. To find, even _in time, _what is pure in all consistency so that very most of opposition that could be summoned to oppose in creation...only serves to manifest its eternal establishment as secure.

And some yet wonder why it's so laughable when a man says "I am honest".


----------



## bullethead (May 26, 2021)

Israel, what is laughable about someone who shares his true feelings about a subject?


----------



## bullethead (May 26, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> I'll be honest with you Israel (as I always try to be), I equate that^ with -
> I bashed you in the head with a tire iron, but handed you a couple Tylenol after that therefore bashing you in the head was ok.


Israel, What is laughable about Walt's honesty?
Or are you cherry picking again in provocation like a good, errr typical little christian?


----------



## Israel (May 26, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Israel, What is laughable about Walt's honesty?
> Or are you cherry picking again in provocation like a good, errr typical little christian?


 if you don't know the difference between a man saying I am trying or seeking to be honest and the man saying I am honest


----------



## bullethead (May 26, 2021)

Israel said:


> if you don't know the difference between a man saying I am trying or seeking to be honest and the man saying I am honest


I see "I'll be honest with you" which is Walt being honest.
Why is it laughable?


----------



## bullethead (May 26, 2021)

Israel said:


> if you don't know the difference between a man saying I am trying or seeking to be honest and the man saying I am honest


Explain it to me in your dishonest way.

You type novels for everything except when you have to make sense.


----------



## WaltL1 (May 26, 2021)

Israel said:


> Yes...to know the one who knows all, and ordains all from before there was an all to even be considered... is to just begin.
> 
> But if your reason tells you anything...do you believe it does...first off? Your consciousness...logic...reason to appraise "how things are"...or as Bullet put it..."reality"...a few posts ago...if _your reason (_or consciousness_ to reason)_ was not assembled/made/given _with reason..._why and how could you trust it to tell you anything about "how things are"?
> 
> ...





> But if your reason tells you anything...do you believe it does...first off?


Yes I believe my reason tells me stuff. Its a culmination of my experiences, what Ive learned up to this point etc that guides how I view things, actions I take or dont take etc.


> why and how could you trust it to tell you anything about "how things are"?


I trust it to a point as my reasoning has certainly been found lacking before. However when that happens, I update my reasoning to include that experience etc.
Heck, you have affected my reasoning by your posts. Spot has, Bullet has, all you guys have.


> Your consciousness with seeming ability to reason then becomes of no more use to you than a randomly assembled altimiter, gas gauge, voltmeter...(whatever instrument in the material world _is used to a determining)_..in your being informed by it.


I disagree. As a human, our reasoning is gigantic part of darn near every move we make. Even if our reasoning is proven wrong, the wrongness has been useful assuming you update your reasoning..


> How such alienation to reason is resolved.


Christians arent alienated to reasoning. They reason everyday just like everybody else. Their/your reason are guided by the same criteria as I noted above for mine.


> And some yet wonder why it's so laughable when a man says "I am honest".


Note, a few posts ago I told you I always TRY to be honest with you. I know better than to say I am ALWAYS honest.


----------



## WaltL1 (May 26, 2021)

bullethead said:


> I see "I'll be honest with you" which is Walt being honest.
> Why is it laughable?


To be fair, I did follow that with (as I always try to be) which I think is what Israel focused on.


----------



## bullethead (May 26, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> To be fair, I did follow that with (as I always try to be) which I think is what Israel focused on.


Who is honest without trying? To this honest guy, trying goes without saying.


----------



## WaltL1 (May 26, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Who is honest without trying? To this honest guy, trying goes without saying.


Fair point.
To be honest, fibbing would be a whole lot easier sometimes


----------



## bullethead (May 26, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> Fair point.
> To be honest, fibbing would be a whole lot easier sometimes


Yes and why it takes effort to be honest which goes back to my point.


----------



## bullethead (May 26, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> Fair point.
> To be honest, fibbing would be a whole lot easier sometimes


I am honestly glad to know that Israel does not consider the content of his posts to be honest in any way nor should he be considered an honest person.


----------



## gordon 2 (May 26, 2021)

To be good do we try to be and do evil sometimes? Does evil's pain send a message home? If human beings know to do evil for good purpose, how much more would a God know?

Is the moral outrage we feel about genocidal floods a message sent that good has its borders? Is the purpose of the Flood narrative that a reasonable person might be outraged that a man might behave in such a way as to provide for a devastating flood? Or given its own time, it might be in the nature of the earth, in nature's design, that those who would think themselves safe on flood plains need to think a bit more?

Nature is violent and oxygen is corrosive. Is thinking that there is a case where these are not, not violent or corrosive, a case of evil being good and an item of nature and in natural design an element to correct human outlook?

In other words, on the Flood or the Crucifixion, that it is morally outrages might be a good part of the lesson?


----------



## bullethead (May 26, 2021)

gordon 2 said:


> To be good do we try to be and do evil sometimes? Does evil's pain send a message home? If human beings know to do evil for good purpose, how much more would a God know?
> 
> Is the moral outrage we feel about genocidal floods a message sent that good has its borders? Is the purpose of the Flood narrative that a reasonable person might be outraged that a man might behave in such a way as to provide for a devastating flood? Or given its own time, it might be in the nature of the earth, in nature's design, that those who would think themselves safe on flood plains need to think a bit more?
> 
> ...


Almost 8 billion people on the planet and the majority either have never heard of the lesson or do not care if they did.
The ones they have heard it and pretend to care do not change their ways anyway, while expecting others to do so.


----------



## bullethead (May 26, 2021)

gordon 2 said:


> To be good do we try to be and do evil sometimes? Does evil's pain send a message home? If human beings know to do evil for good purpose, how much more would a God know?
> 
> Is the moral outrage we feel about genocidal floods a message sent that good has its borders? Is the purpose of the Flood narrative that a reasonable person might be outraged that a man might behave in such a way as to provide for a devastating flood? Or given its own time, it might be in the nature of the earth, in nature's design, that those who would think themselves safe on flood plains need to think a bit more?
> 
> ...


Why doesn't god just cut to chase and vaporize anyone that sins, anyone that breaks a commandment,  anyone that has an impure thought, anyone that is in the act of committing harm or anyone that he know's is not a believer?
It would be a much more effective wiser upper to witness people glow for a second and be carried away with the breeze as a cloud of steam. Talk about a lesson for being good,  talk about incentive!. Much better than trying to pass off a flood story and hoping people understand it and learn from it and then because that didn't work (which a god should know ahead of time ) making up some sacrifice story which has not worked either.


----------



## Israel (May 26, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> To be fair, I did follow that with (as I always try to be) which I think is what Israel focused on.


Yep. I may be able to recognize when a man qualifies himself to some measure (usually due to some experience) vs the man who blithely assumes himself acceptable on his own word.

A man receives this or not...Jesus Christ showed the cost/price in His own flesh, and with His own flesh, of both speaking honestly, and maintaining that standard of truth to His own death. When one sees this...it's impossible to think this gift of faith does not also hold some lessons to be learned about assertions. And especially those inward persuasions of which God and the man are the only witness.

He knew the cost of His assertions, yet never hides from His disciples the tremblings that come when time to "make good" on such arrives. We have no account (nor could we) to anything but the truth of the matter...Jesus was troubled. Said so. Showed Himself so. And does...to his kinsmen.

Silly men whose theology extends no farther than their own thoughts say "well, what was the big deal if He knew He was gonna wake up in 3 days.? Where's the sacrifice...where's the issue?" And such would even use His loud cries and tears (the weakness of Himself to which He has made man privy) as a cudgel against Him  (what He by grace allows man to see) to deny His being as He is. Never knowing that such weakness is precisely what saves through Him...and a weakness they can think they can despise with impunity. Made as a man too weak to seek to resist the will of God. All the while knowing precisely to where it would lead.

Strength...made perfect through weakness. But there is no pity party He seeks nor invites to. No...it is not for Him, but our sakes we are allowed to see, we who so easily boast of what we are, what we "totally understand", what we think in ourselves...of ourselves. For these matters of heart cannot help but come to expression, cannot but spring forth from their abundance where they are the treasure. It is impossible they will not.

The some that will understand this...do. When Jesus speaks He both testifies to "what is"...but no less, having spoken in the world...and into the world He unbreakably ordains things that must _be. _The same authority speaking "Let there be light" is the same authority coming through the mouth in word of Jesus Christ.

For some, as this I know in spirit...there is an odd imagining that Jesus sort of "crystal balls" about things to come. Not yet assured that once the mouth of the Lord has spoken it (though He surely knows the end from the beginning) it is inneffably ordained into the world and no longer any matter "in question"...what He speaks...(precisely _because He speaks it)_ is unquestionably certain. Yes, Jesus Christ has made the world to be just as the world must be even _right now. _It is not even that it is "on track"...for there is nothing to be found apart from its ordaining to be as it is.

Scoffers must come. Offenses must come. Perilous times. Terrible woes, anguish, and betrayals of brother to brother to death. But before this sounds fatalistic there's another coming whose coming consumes all of "other".

And I am no more than one convinced as some of those who have gone before and God knows of what some may yet be.

A "good little christian"? Ha! that the word good ever be applied in some sentence remotely involving me. That's even funnier than claim of honesty.

I am only this man:

Or what king, going to make war against another king, sitteth not down first, and consulteth whether he be able with ten thousand to meet him that cometh against him with twenty thousand? Or else, while the other is yet a great way off, he sendeth an ambassage, and desireth conditions of peace.

God sent me His word through Jesus Christ causing me to believe..."It's hopeless for you to war against me...find out my terms of peace"

The ambassador makes them plain in Himself.


And He has already endured all the change in Himself both necessary for me...and of such sufficiency in that enduring that He will not suffer change again.

_I am_ he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore,

He who knew no sin _became sin for us..._

So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.

Thanks be to God even time cannot get in the way of this.

Those who may think homicidal maniac an appropriate description of such a God only do so because they know nothing in truth of His wrath. It leaves a man no place to think or say anything about Him. It's far purer to a perfection than any man might find to have thoughts _about. _


It's a knowing thing. Where thoughts _about knowing_ vanish.

It's not that thoughts can't be found...they are not there in the consuming...only knowing.


----------



## gordon 2 (May 26, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Why doesn't god just cut to chase and vaporize anyone that sins, anyone that breaks a commandment,  anyone that has an impure thought, anyone that is in the act of committing harm or anyone that he know's is not a believer?
> It would be a much more effective wiser upper to witness people glow for a second and be carried away with the breeze as a cloud of steam. Talk about a lesson for being good,  talk about incentive!. Much better than trying to pass off a flood story and hoping people understand it and learn from it and then because that didn't work (which a god should know ahead of time ) making up some sacrifice story which has not worked either.


.........................


Maybe He does and the vaporizing seems like a human lifetime.  Only we don't get to know who gets to be vaporized.


Jonah wanted the Nins to be zapped. Your comment reminds me of Jonah's attitude.


----------



## gordon 2 (May 26, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Almost 8 billion people on the planet and the majority either have never heard of the lesson or do not care if they did.
> The ones they have heard it and pretend to care do not change their ways anyway, while expecting others to do so.




Darn you sound like Jonah! About 25 % will repent usually if given a heads up. On spiritual matters I like to think that 25% carry the other 75%. Not sure why.


----------



## bullethead (May 26, 2021)

An Honest reply to #248
Honest men say honest things. They calls em like they sees em.
Deceitful men sell their snake oil as a cure all while speaking for invisible friends. These same tiny charlatans harp on and on about the things Honest men say because the truth is so foreign to them that they cannot get it out of their heads.
Since I am an honest guy I will admit that I am flattered to be mentioned and eluded to as much as the invisible. I am honestly talked about constantly and brought up in almost every rant so much so that I look forward to it.
Honestly


----------



## bullethead (May 26, 2021)

gordon 2 said:


> Darn you sound like Jonah! About 25 % will repent usually if given a heads up. On spiritual matters I like to think that 25% carry the other 75%. Not sure why.


Whale honestly if given a heads up is repentance genuine?


----------



## Spotlite (May 26, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Almost 8 billion people on the planet and the majority either have never heard of the lesson or do not care if they did.
> The ones they have heard it and pretend to care do not change their ways anyway, while expecting others to do so.





> Almost 8 billion people on the planet and the majority either have never heard of the lesson.



Not sure where you got your info but I found the attached. I didn’t copy the link because there’s too much in there that I don’t know what else is linked to it. But from there it says “Two-thirds of the world's population -- more than 4.4 billion people -- live in the 10/40 Window” and  “90% of the people living in the 10/40 Window are unevangelized”




bullethead said:


> The ones they have heard it and pretend to care do not change their ways anyway, while expecting others to do so.




I’ve failed to find this, though. Who are “the ones”?


----------



## bullethead (May 26, 2021)

Israel said:


> Yep. I may be able to recognize when a man qualifies himself to some measure (usually due to some experience) vs the man who blithely assumes himself acceptable on his own word.


Honest questions (how can there be any other from a man like me?)
How can you do that when a man's word based off experience is all we have here in this case?
Do you know Walt or me?



Israel said:


> A man receives this or not...Jesus Christ showed the cost/price in His own flesh, and with His own flesh, of both speaking honestly, and maintaining that standard of truth to His own death. When one sees this...it's impossible to think this gift of faith does not also hold some lessons to be learned about assertions. And especially those inward persuasions of which God and the man are the only witness.


If you can answer Honestly for a second, what is your process for whether knowing Christ is honest compared to say an Honest guy like me? Does Christ mention it?



Israel said:


> He knew the cost of His assertions, yet never hides from His disciples the tremblings that come when time to "make good" on such arrives. We have no account (nor could we) to anything but the truth of the matter...Jesus was troubled. Said so. Showed Himself so. And does...to his kinsmen.


Tremblings? Honestly?



Israel said:


> Silly men whose theology extends no farther than their own thoughts say "well, what was the big deal if He knew He was gonna wake up in 3 days.? Where's the sacrifice...where's the issue?" And such would even use His loud cries and tears (the weakness of Himself to which He has made man privy) as a cudgel against Him  (what He by grace allows man to see) to deny His being as He is. Never knowing that such weakness is precisely what saves through Him...and a weakness they can think they can despise with impunity. Made as a man too weak to seek to resist the will of God. All the while knowing precisely to where it would lead.


Is it honest to assume how far another man's theology extends?




Israel said:


> Strength...made perfect through weakness. But there is no pity party He seeks nor invites to. No...it is not for Him, but our sakes we are allowed to see, we who so easily boast of what we are, what we "totally understand", what we think in ourselves...of ourselves. For these matters of heart cannot help but come to expression, cannot but spring forth from their abundance where they are the treasure. It is impossible they will not.


Is that an honest assumption?



Israel said:


> The some that will understand this...do. When Jesus speaks He both testifies to "what is"...but no less, having spoken in the world...and into the world He unbreakably ordains things that must _be. _The same authority speaking "Let there be light" is the same authority coming through the mouth in word of Jesus Christ.


So what you are saying is that someone who understands something understands something. What an honest statement. 



Israel said:


> For some, as this I know in spirit...there is an odd imagining that Jesus sort of "crystal balls" about things to come. Not yet assured that once the mouth of the Lord has spoken it (though He surely knows the end from the beginning) it is inneffably ordained into the world and no longer any matter "in question"...what He speaks...(precisely _because He speaks it)_ is unquestionably certain. Yes, Jesus Christ has made the world to be just as the world must be even _right now. _It is not even that it is "on track"...for there is nothing to be found apart from its ordaining to be as it is.


Just being honest here, you know this in spirit?



Israel said:


> Scoffers must come. Offenses must come. Perilous times. Terrible woes, anguish, and betrayals of brother to brother to death. But before this sounds fatalistic there's another coming whose coming consumes all of "other".


Let's be honest, "in this generation" was a lot of generations ago.



Israel said:


> And I am no more than one convinced as some of those who have gone before and God knows of what some may yet be.


That sounded sincere, not honest though .



Israel said:


> A "good little christian"? Ha! that the word good ever be applied in some sentence remotely involving me. That's even funnier than claim of honesty.


Honestly, I knew that.




Israel said:


> I am only this man:
> 
> Or what king, going to make war against another king, sitteth not down first, and consulteth whether he be able with ten thousand to meet him that cometh against him with twenty thousand? Or else, while the other is yet a great way off, he sendeth an ambassage, and desireth conditions of peace.
> 
> ...


_
Honestly that was your usual moment_



Israel said:


> So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.
> 
> Thanks be to God even time cannot get in the way of this.


Honestly,  When?



Israel said:


> Those who may think homicidal maniac an appropriate description of such a God only do so because they know nothing in truth of His wrath. It leaves a man no place to think or say anything about Him. It's far purer to a perfection than any man might find to have thoughts _about. _


_
Can we be honest here? How can you be trusted to know these things?_




Israel said:


> It's a knowing thing. Where thoughts _about knowing_ vanish.
> 
> It's not that thoughts can't be found...they are not there in the consuming...only knowing.


Honestly that sounds like a typical all bases covered statement.


----------



## bullethead (May 26, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> Not sure where you got your info but I found the attached. I didn’t copy the link because there’s too much in there that I don’t know what else is linked to it. But from there it says “Two-thirds of the world's population -- more than 4.4 billion people -- live in the 10/40 Window” and  “90% of the people living in the 10/40 Window are unevangelized”
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I did not say they did not hear about the gospel.  I said they either did not hear or did not care if they did hear the "lesson" about the Flood that Gordon mentioned.
10/40, over and out.


----------



## Spotlite (May 26, 2021)

bullethead said:


> I did not say they did not hear about the gospel.  I said they either did not hear or did not care if they did hear the "lesson" about the Flood that Gordon mentioned.
> 10/40, over and out.



I’m looking at the entire picture, according Gordon- “In other words, on the Flood or the Crucifixion, that it is morally outrages might be a good part of the lesson?” - if they’ve never heard the Gospel (Crucifixion is an important part of the Gospel of the life of Jesus)then it makes sense they’ve never heard of those (the lesson)^^^^

I found it alarming that “Two-thirds of the world's population -- more than 4.4 billion people -- live in the 10/40 Window” and “90% of the people living in the 10/40 Window are unevangelized” which actually reinforced your comment of “Almost 8 billion people on the planet and the majority either have never heard of the lesson”.


----------



## bullethead (May 26, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> I’m looking at the entire picture, according Gordon- “In other words, on the Flood or the Crucifixion, that it is morally outrages might be a good part of the lesson?” - if they’ve never heard the Gospel (Crucifixion is an important part of the Gospel of the life of Jesus)then it makes sense they’ve never heard of those (the lesson)^^^^
> 
> I found it alarming that “Two-thirds of the world's population -- more than 4.4 billion people -- live in the 10/40 Window” and “90% of the people living in the 10/40 Window are unevangelized” which actually reinforced your comment of “Almost 8 billion people on the planet and the majority either have never heard of the lesson”.


(*This part is so Israel can use it at a later time out of context) *I am being honest here*, (* what the heck, let give him this also) *I've been a Christian.  *I've read the Bible a few times. I've never felt that outrage was part of the lesson.


----------



## Spotlite (May 26, 2021)

bullethead said:


> (*This part is so Israel can use it at a later time out of context) *I am being honest here*, (* what the heck, let give him this also) *I've been a Christian.  *I've read the Bible a few times. I've never felt that outrage was part of the lesson.


Gotcha. Didn’t realize all that.


----------



## WaltL1 (May 27, 2021)

gordon 2 said:


> To be good do we try to be and do evil sometimes? Does evil's pain send a message home? If human beings know to do evil for good purpose, how much more would a God know?
> 
> Is the moral outrage we feel about genocidal floods a message sent that good has its borders? Is the purpose of the Flood narrative that a reasonable person might be outraged that a man might behave in such a way as to provide for a devastating flood? Or given its own time, it might be in the nature of the earth, in nature's design, that those who would think themselves safe on flood plains need to think a bit more?
> 
> ...


All questions geared toward finding the silver lining, the justification, the positive side.... of near genocide.
And why? Well, we know why.


----------



## Spotlite (May 27, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> All questions geared toward finding the silver lining, the justification, the positive side.... of near genocide.
> And why? Well, we know why.




I hear the “condemnation” of the “genocide” of flooding the “innocent” at the same time I hear the pride in “come through my window and leave in a body bag” and, on a larger scale “you bombed my Pearl Harbor so I nuked your Hiroshima and Nagasaki”

The lesson, the justification...........your coming against me and mine comes with a price. The silver lining........eliminating your bad will ensure a safer environment for “mine” (people).


----------



## bullethead (May 27, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> I hear the “condemnation” of the “genocide” of flooding the “innocent” at the same time I hear the pride in “come through my window and leave in a body bag” and, on a larger scale “you bombed my Pearl Harbor so I nuked your Hiroshima and Nagasaki”
> 
> The lesson, the justification...........your coming against me and mine comes with a price. The silver lining........eliminating your bad will ensure a safer environment for “mine” (people).


Humans are expected to act in human ways. Humans do not have the foresight that a god supposedly has.
If god can take your life against your will( as I doubt there was a survey and everyone but 8 agreed death by drowning was the best way) he can snap his fingers and make you the person he wants you to be against your will just as easy. And again and here is the twisted part....god would have known the outcome of his experiment before he created the first human so how could he be so displeased with the wicked that he had to kill them all with the largest one time mass genocide ever?

Did god really eliminate the bad? Did his actions solve anything? Are people better people now?


----------



## Spotlite (May 27, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Humans are expected to act in human ways. Humans do not have the foresight that a god supposedly has.
> If god can take your life against your will( as I doubt there was a survey and everyone but 8 agreed death by drowning was the best way) he can snap his fingers and make you the person he wants you to be against your will just as easy. And again and here is the twisted part....god would have known the outcome of his experiment before he created the first human so how could he be so displeased with the wicked that he had to kill them all with the largest one time mass genocide ever?
> 
> Did god really eliminate the bad? Did his actions solve anything? Are people better people now?


I suppose he could - snap his finger. I, too understand the group that says “if there’s such a Supreme Being how can I possibly know / understand all there is about what it thinks / does” because I sure don’t, either. But I trust it’s the way he intends it to be for whatever reasons. I think the bad was gone for a season, it’s back, and it’s also promised to be dealt with again.

In regards to God being above the law, I didn’t go back through to see what context it’s stated and who stated it but for my thoughts my first question is - who’s law?
Example - Was it God or man that says it’s illegal to buy alcohol on Sunday? 

But in a sense yes he’s above “law” because the “government shall be on his shoulder”. I’m only stating that to say that the Christian isn’t being hypocritical when he sounds like he’s saying the law doesn’t apply to God, the Christian believes the Law is Gods and his to enforce. At some point as described in my previous comment above, we are all subject to where we might be forced to enforce the law, and we wouldn’t be above it by doing so.


----------



## bullethead (May 27, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> I suppose he could - snap his finger. I, too understand the group that says “if there’s such a Supreme Being how can I possibly know / understand all there is about what it thinks / does” because I sure don’t, either. But I trust it’s the way he intends it to be for whatever reasons. I think the bad was gone for a season, it’s back, and it’s also promised to be dealt with again.
> 
> In regards to God being above the law, I didn’t go back through to see what context it’s stated and who stated it but for my thoughts my first question is - who’s law?
> Example - Was it God or man that says it’s illegal to buy alcohol on Sunday?
> ...


If the bad is back why didn't god's cures work? Maybe he likes dealing with it a little too much and why (get ready Israel here comes another for your broken record) he comes across as a homicidal maniac.

You showed the numbers about the worlds population and who has heard the gospel, where has god posted the laws in order for everyone to be able to know them, understand them, and be confident that his laws above all others are legitimate?

Hard to take someone seriously when they command Thou Shalt Not Commit Murder while he is drowning his children in the bathtub Spotlite. Followers who justify it sound even more warped.


----------



## Spotlite (May 27, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Did god really eliminate the bad? Did his actions solve anything? Are people better people now?


Maybe “eliminate” isn’t the correct way to look at it. “Deter” might be a better fit for my thoughts on it. When the seat belt laws came here it was almost “genocide” with tickets. Now you can almost sit next to an LEO at a traffic light and nothing is said. So their initial efforts of loading up the states general funds with violations didn’t stop the non use of seat belts, but it’s always in the back of your mind that you might get a ticket.,


----------



## WaltL1 (May 27, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> I hear the “condemnation” of the “genocide” of flooding the “innocent” at the same time I hear the pride in “come through my window and leave in a body bag” and, on a larger scale “you bombed my Pearl Harbor so I nuked your Hiroshima and Nagasaki”
> 
> The lesson, the justification...........your coming against me and mine comes with a price. The silver lining........eliminating your bad will ensure a safer environment for “mine” (people).





> “come through my window and leave in a body bag”


If a child comes through my window they are going to have to suffer through a cookie and a glass of milk while we wait on their parents or the police so they can get home unharmed. Drowning them in my tub wont even enter my wicked mind.


> “you bombed my Pearl Harbor so I nuked your Hiroshima and Nagasaki”


While effective, the fact of the matter is the vast majority of those who died didnt have squat to do with the planning or participate in the attack on Pearl Harbor. Werent even aware of what a Pearl Harbor was. Nor did we nuke everybody else on the face of the earth for the Japanese government transgressions. We didnt even nuke the whole of Japan for that matter. From a moral standpoint I disagree with what we did also. From a military standpoint I understand why we did it. Apparently it was the best idea our un-God like minds could come up up with. 


> eliminating your bad will ensure a safer environment for “mine” (people).


How did that work out?


----------



## Spotlite (May 27, 2021)

bullethead said:


> If the bad is back why didn't god's cures work? Maybe he likes dealing with it a little too much and why (get ready Israel here comes another for your broken record) he comes across as a homicidal maniac.
> 
> You showed the numbers about the worlds population and who has heard the gospel, where has god posted the laws in order for everyone to be able to know them, understand them, and be confident that his laws above all others are legitimate?
> 
> Hard to take someone seriously when they command Thou Shalt Not Commit Murder while he is drowning his children in the bathtub Spotlite. Followers who justify it sound even more warped.


See above post. 

For murder - your (human) taking life is taking something that doesn’t belong to you. If God is the Creator, then life and death is Gods to give and take. 

The only other option is to not believe in God or those stories. If you do, you also believe life and death belongs to him. if you don’t believe in God nor the stories, I do t understand the concept of using a fake story to beat down a fake God?


----------



## bullethead (May 27, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> Maybe “eliminate” isn’t the correct way to look at it. “Deter” might be a better fit for my thoughts on it. When the seat belt laws came here it was almost “genocide” with tickets. Now you can almost sit next to an LEO at a traffic light and nothing is said. So their initial efforts of loading up the states general funds with violations didn’t stop the non use of seat belts, but it’s always in the back of your mind that you might get a ticket.,


Your claims of gods intent do not match the results. The worlds population is exponentially greater than Biblical times and so is the amount of wicked sinners and unbelievers and "believers " that just do not care about god's deterrent system.

In Pa seat belt laws are a secondary offense.  You'll only be warned or fined if not wearing one if pulled over for something else.


----------



## Spotlite (May 27, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> 1. If a child comes through my window they are going to have to suffer through a cookie and a glass of milk while we wait on their parents or the police so they can get home unharmed. Drowning them in my tub wont even enter my wicked mind.
> 
> 2. While effective, the fact of the matter is the vast majority of those who died didnt have squat to do with the planning or participate in the attack on Pearl Harbor. Werent even aware of what a Pearl Harbor was. Nor did we nuke everybody else on the face of the earth for the Japanese government transgressions. We didnt even nuke the whole of Japan for that matter. From a moral standpoint I disagree with what we did also. From a military standpoint I understand why we did it. Apparently it was the best idea our un-God like minds could come up up with.
> 
> How did that work out?


1. what if it was a child with a bomb?

2. This is supposedly the gripe with things like the flood and God “murdering the innocent”. And back to number 1. Is the innocent really innocent? 

I don’t have the answer to that. Just using an analogy with my small thinking that there always casualties of war. You see a child, God sees the heart of what that child becomes?


----------



## bullethead (May 27, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> See above post.
> 
> For murder - your (human) taking life is taking something that doesn’t belong to you. If God is the Creator, then life and death is Gods to give and take.
> 
> The only other option is to not believe in God or those stories. If you do, you also believe life and death belongs to him. if you don’t believe in God nor the stories, I do t understand the concept of using a fake story to beat down a fake God?


As a human you didn't create your children?

Are you innocent? Would you be fine if god told you that he decided you are not living up to his standards therefore to teach you a lesson he is drowning your kids?


----------



## bullethead (May 27, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> 1. what if it was a child with a bomb?
> 
> 2. This is supposedly the gripe with things like the flood and God “murdering the innocent”. And back to number 1. Is the innocent really innocent?
> 
> I don’t have the answer to that. Just using an analogy with my small thinking that there always casualties of war. You see a child, God sees the heart of what that child becomes?


Kind of throws free will out the window huh?


----------



## Spotlite (May 27, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Your claims of gods intent do not match the results. The worlds population is exponentially greater than Biblical times and so is the amount of wicked sinners and unbelievers and "believers " that just do not care about god's deterrent system.
> 
> In Pa seat belt laws are a secondary offense.  You'll only be warned or fined if not wearing one if pulled over for something else.


Im not claiming Gods intent. I’m stating my explanation as I understand it only. I used GA law as an example because that’s what I’m familiar with. I don’t know what they do today, I wear mine. I used it as an analogy to deter. 

If God chose to wipe out China completely, how could I possibly know why? If God doesn’t exist, why are we blaming God?


----------



## Spotlite (May 27, 2021)

bullethead said:


> As a human you didn't create your children?
> 
> Are you innocent? Would you be fine if god told you that he decided you are not living up to his standards therefore to teach you a lesson he is drowning your kids?


Life, you didn’t give your child breath to breath. If you’re got to use the story, be fair with it, he says he wouldn’t drown us anymore


----------



## Spotlite (May 27, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Kind of throws free will out the window huh?


Not exactly. It actually shows man can be deterred to live right. Knowing how one turns or potentially turns out, out doesn’t mean they didn’t have a choice.


----------



## bullethead (May 27, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> Im not claiming Gods intent. I’m stating my explanation as I understand it only. I used GA law as an example because that’s what I’m familiar with. I don’t know what they do today, I wear mine. I used it as an analogy to deter.
> 
> If God chose to wipe out China completely, how could I possibly know why? If God doesn’t exist, why are we blaming God?


We are blaming god and holding him accountable for his atrocities in order to have a conversation with the people who excuse him and praise him for those same atrocities.


----------



## bullethead (May 27, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> Life, you didn’t give your child breath to breath. If you’re got to use the story, be fair with it, he says he wouldn’t drown us anymore


You told us his wrath is coming again...is killing people any better by another means?

And you absolutely avoided my 2nd part to you. Replace drowning with killing or making them sleep forever. You cool with that?


----------



## Spotlite (May 27, 2021)

bullethead said:


> We are blaming god and holding him accountable for his atrocities in order to have a conversation with the people who excuse him and praise him for those same atrocities.


I do t think anyone praises him for taking a life anymore than praising a soldier for killing ISIS. It’s the destruction of wickedness that’s praised. 

I will make no excuses, it’s his life to give and take if he’s the Creator. If you create a brand new hair cutting machine, you own it. It’s your to keep it destroy.


----------



## bullethead (May 27, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> Not exactly. It actually shows man can be deterred to live right. Knowing how one turns or potentially turns out, out doesn’t mean they didn’t have a choice.


The claims do not meet the facts. 
Are you saying that the majority of the people on the planet are living right out of fear that the god of the bible is holding them accountable?
Id say you'd have a hard time with that statement if you were only using Christians as examples, let alone all of man.


----------



## Spotlite (May 27, 2021)

bullethead said:


> You told us his wrath is coming again...is killing people any better by another means?
> 
> And you absolutely avoided my 2nd part to you. Replace drowning with killing or making them sleep forever. You cool with that?


I plan to go with life. I’m cool with that. My children plan to go with life. If they don’t and they chose another way, God didn’t make them chose that. Put the blame where it belongs.


----------



## bullethead (May 27, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> I do t think anyone praises him for taking a life anymore than praising a soldier for killing ISIS. It’s the destruction of wickedness that’s praised.
> 
> I will make no excuses, it’s his life to give and take if he’s the Creator. If you create a brand new hair cutting machine, you own it. It’s your to keep it destroy.


Hair Clippers = Human Life
Is that really a statement you are hanging your hat on?


----------



## Spotlite (May 27, 2021)

bullethead said:


> The claims do not meet the facts.
> Are you saying that the majority of the people on the planet are living right out of fear that the god of the bible is holding them accountable?
> Id say you'd have a hard time with that statement if you were only using Christians as examples, let alone all of man.


No I never said that. I don’t believe very many at all live for God out of fear.


----------



## bullethead (May 27, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> I plan to go with life. I’m cool with that. My children plan to go with life. If they don’t and they chose another way, God didn’t make them chose that. Put the blame where it belongs.


Didn't answer my question.
You may easily be not living up to god's standards. Is it ok if he takes the lives of your children in order to teach you a lesson?
It is a simple yes or no


----------



## bullethead (May 27, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> No I never said that. I don’t believe very many at all live for God out of fear.


A deterrent is fear


----------



## Spotlite (May 27, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Hair Clippers = Human Life
> Is that really a statement you are hanging your hat on?


Your creation / his creation - the ownership is where I’m hanging my hat.


----------



## Spotlite (May 27, 2021)

bullethead said:


> A deterrent is fear


Or respect.


----------



## Spotlite (May 27, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Didn't answer my question.
> You may easily be not living up to god's standards. Is it ok if he takes the lives of your children in order to teach you a lesson?
> It is a simple yes or no


I’d have to be. The wages of sin is death? If I’m trusting in him for everything, that’s everything? Do I live in fear of that? No way.


----------



## bullethead (May 27, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> Or respect.


I don't respect a traffic ticket.
I don't slap Mike Tyson upside the head out of respect.


----------



## bullethead (May 27, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> I’d have to be. The wages of sin is death? If I’m trusting in him for everything, that’s everything? Do I live in fear of that? No way.


So yes


----------



## WaltL1 (May 27, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> 1. what if it was a child with a bomb?
> 
> 2. This is supposedly the gripe with things like the flood and God “murdering the innocent”. And back to number 1. Is the innocent really innocent?
> 
> I don’t have the answer to that. Just using an analogy with my small thinking that there always casualties of war. You see a child, God sees the heart of what that child becomes?





> 1. what if it was a child with a bomb?


What if the child had a full diaper? What if the child had a saber tooth tiger on a leash? What if the child had a Hillary Clinton tattoo?
We could play the what if game all day.


> You see a child, God sees the heart of what that child becomes?


So God has the ability to see every man, woman and child's future only AFTER he brought them into the world? Doesnt sound very omni-everything.

I respect your beliefs Spot but you are never going to be able to untangle the mess man created about the God story.
And please keep in mind thats exactly what I believe it is - a story made up by man - so Im not attacking "God".

EDITED to add the proper quote


----------



## bullethead (May 27, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> What if the child had a full diaper? What if the child had a saber tooth tiger on a leash? What if the child had a Hillary Clinton tattoo?
> We could play the what if game all day.
> 
> So God has the ability to see every man, woman and child's future only AFTER he brought them into the world? Doesnt sound very omni-everything.
> ...


Kid with the HRC tat is getting both barrels and another 2 for good measure.


----------



## bullethead (May 27, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> What if the child had a full diaper? What if the child had a saber tooth tiger on a leash? What if the child had a Hillary Clinton tattoo?
> We could play the what if game all day.
> 
> So God has the ability to see every man, woman and child's future only AFTER he brought them into the world? Doesnt sound very omni everything.
> ...


Epic point on seeing into the future/their hearts only AFTER brought into the world.


----------



## WaltL1 (May 27, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Kid with the HRC tat is getting both barrels and another 2 for good measure.



Ammo is too expensive right now for me for good measures. I just had to pay almost $50 with shipping for a box of 25 00B.


----------



## bullethead (May 27, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> Ammo is too expensive right now for me for good measures. I just had to pay almost $50 with shipping for a box of 25 00B.


I'd appreciate the ballistic gelatin opportunity.


----------



## WaltL1 (May 27, 2021)

bullethead said:


> I'd appreciate the ballistic gelatin opportunity.
> View attachment 1082485View attachment 1082486View attachment 1082487


Be careful, you might find me crawling through your window to get your ammo if things get much worse.
I dont have a HRC tat but I do have a devil with Born To Raise He11 tat so you wont need the "good measure" shots


----------



## bullethead (May 27, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> Be careful, you might find me crawling through your window to get your ammo if things get much worse.
> I dont have a HRC tat but I do have a devil with Born To Raise He11 tat so you wont need the "good measure" shots


Give me a heads up when you are on your way and you can use the front door plus leave with some that you assembled yourself.


----------



## Spotlite (May 27, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> What if the child had a full diaper? What if the child had a saber tooth tiger on a leash? What if the child had a Hillary Clinton tattoo?
> We could play the what if game all day.
> 
> So God has the ability to see every man, woman and child's future only AFTER he brought them into the world? Doesnt sound very omni-everything.
> ...


I hope I haven’t came across as doing that in my attempt to state what I believe.

And no worries, I respect your disbelief


----------



## Spotlite (May 27, 2021)

Dang bullet, you going to war lol


----------



## bullethead (May 27, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> Dang bullet, you going to war lol


Nahhh, just ready if it wants to come to me.


----------



## Spotlite (May 27, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Epic point on seeing into the future/their hearts only AFTER brought into the world.


It’s an excellent question. Probably a separate topic in itself.,


----------



## WaltL1 (May 27, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Give me a heads up when you are on your way and you can use the front door plus leave with some that you assembled yourself.
> View attachment 1082490


At this point you could retire very comfortably if you sold all that!


----------



## bullethead (May 27, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> At this point you could retire very comfortably if you sold all that!


----------



## WaltL1 (May 27, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> I hope I haven’t came across as doing that in my attempt to state what I believe.
> 
> And no worries, I respect your disbelief


Nope.
My guess is, based on our conversations, that unraveling the story isnt something you worry about all that much. You believe in God regardless if the story makes sense or not as it may not be something man is capable of "figuring out".
And that may be true.


----------



## Spotlite (May 27, 2021)

bullethead said:


> I don't respect a traffic ticket.
> I don't slap Mike Tyson upside the head out of respect.


No I’m saying I respect the law. I’m not afraid of a ticket. 

I respect a man. I’m not afraid of his fist, even if he jumps me first. 

I don’t live for God because I’m in fear of God’s wrath, as asked. It’s rewarding far more than physical and financial.


----------



## Spotlite (May 27, 2021)

bullethead said:


> View attachment 1082495


Very true, though!! I saw a sheet of plywood on the interstate the other day snd stopped to get it. My wife thought I was crazy. I said that’s $70 laying there woman.


----------



## WaltL1 (May 27, 2021)

bullethead said:


> View attachment 1082495


Thats ^ a fact! 
I havent been to the range in a while just because of that. I cant put it off any longer though, thats why I paid the rediculous price for the 00B so I wouldnt have to dip into what I already have.


----------



## bullethead (May 27, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> Very true, though!! I saw a sheet of plywood on the interstate the other day snd stopped to get it. My wife thought I was crazy. I said that’s $70 laying there woman.


I had to laugh the other day. A neighbor down the road had two kids bicycles out in the front yard with a sign that had "free" spray painted on it.
The sign was about 1/5 of a piece of Plywood high but 4ft wide.
I thought about stopping for the sign and leaving the bikes! Laughing at the reality of the times as I drove down the road.
All were gone on the way back through and I am unsure if the board went for the ride along with the bikes.

* Israel, my honesty kept me from doing it. Please add that to your bookmarks.


----------



## Spotlite (May 27, 2021)

bullethead said:


> I had to laugh the other day. A neighbor down the road had two kids bicycles out in the front yard with a sign that had "free" spray painted on it.
> The sign was about 1/5 of a piece of Plywood high but 4ft wide.
> I thought about stopping for the sign and leaving the bikes! Laughing at the reality of the times as I drove down the road.
> All were gone on the way back through and I am unsure if the board went for the ride along with the bikes.
> ...


Yea lumber is crazy right now. We just replaced the handrails and steps on our porch. Really didn’t have much choice, my oldest Grandson is walking now and my porch averages 40 inches off the ground. Hard to keep him off the porch.


----------



## WaltL1 (May 27, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> Yea lumber is crazy right now. We just replaced the handrails and steps on our porch. Really didn’t have much choice, my oldest Grandson is walking now and my porch averages 40 inches off the ground. Hard to keep him off the porch.


Uh-Oh. Better get a leash or something for that boy


----------



## Spotlite (May 27, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> Uh-Oh. Better get a leash or something for that boy


Yup lol. He’s a mess at 1 yrs old. I will let him chase chickens and he loves it!!!. The other one is 6 months old and he’s trying to crawl. It’s getting very active around the house these days. Oldest lives next door and the other is only 5 miles away. We’ve put a thousand miles on my side by side riding in the pasture. Taking the oldest to sale barn next week with me to buy some cows. He’s been watching auctions livestream with me and he’ll bee bop that head like he’s listening to music lol. In other words, me and my wife are having the time of our lives right now!!


----------



## WaltL1 (May 27, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> Yup lol. He’s a mess at 1 yrs old. I will let him chase chickens and he loves it!!!. The other one is 6 months old and he’s trying to crawl. It’s getting very active around the house these days. Oldest lives next door and the other is only 5 miles away. We’ve put a thousand miles on my side by side riding in the pasture. Taking the oldest to sale barn next week with me to buy some cows. He’s been watching auctions livestream with me and he’ll bee bop that head like he’s listening to music lol. In other words, me and my wife are having the time of our lives right now!!


Sounds like well...uh.... Heaven.


----------



## Israel (May 27, 2021)

Jesus did not mince His words when speaking of whom man should fear. He even says He will "show" Him...whom man should fear.

Perhaps it is only the most wicked and depraved that need this instruction and showing to some sobriety, yet Jesus does not qualify it. But, there are those spoken of needing many stripes, those less. And it is clear the Lord Jesus does with what is His as He so chooses; telling Peter not to be concerned with His disposition regarding John.

But there is a working to find the wrath of God something amusing or laughable, quaint or benighted, but it is not that the particular aim of that is toward that at all.
It is aimed more directly at the Lord Jesus, His work, His sacrifice, His very coming into the world as not only unnecessary but that all of His being might be undercut as to His substance. He is not only unnecessary, but liar, fraud not only unable to accomplish what He claims (for it is unnecessary), but worthy of only scorn and derision.

Of what need have decent people, intelligent people, people wise and sufficient in their own eyes...to be sobered up? What could be funnier to such than need of a Savior for a thing so seemingly ridiculous to consider...God's wrath?

But as salvation is intensely personal, so is the merest taste of God's displeasure. It is not mistaken for something else (though for whatever time the mind may refuse to acknowledge) for eventually the accuracy and resolve of God overwhelm what the mind would attribute to mere happenstance...and happy is the man who wakes up in such to find repentance made man's through Jesus Christ. As with all _things in Christ, _repentance holds its own particular glory in that moment.

I have enjoyed the pleasures of it in far more instances than this forum, and probably time remaining me, could possibly allow; precisely because I have needed its welcome resort in more moments than I could remember. 

I cannot recommend all that is found in Him highly enough that those appointed also find no shame in hearing and turning.

Yes, He is faithful...and shows Him whom man should fear, just as He says.


----------



## Spotlite (May 28, 2021)

Israel said:


> Jesus did not mince His words when speaking of whom man should fear. He even says He will "show" Him...whom man should fear.
> 
> Perhaps it is only the most wicked and depraved that need this instruction and showing to some sobriety, yet Jesus does not qualify it. But, there are those spoken of needing many stripes, those less. And it is clear the Lord Jesus does with what is His as He so chooses; telling Peter not to be concerned with His disposition regarding John.
> 
> ...





> And it is clear the Lord Jesus does with what is His as He so chooses


And not bound / limited to what is / isn’t ..........in our eyes.


----------



## bullethead (May 28, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> And not bound / limited to what is / isn’t ..........in our eyes.


Fear him, don't respect him. The 1/3 of the whole that is separate from the three all together tells you to fear his father who is a separate entity when Jesus talks about him but is actually Jesus himself when Christians talk about him except for when Christians separate them to suit. Either way Fear the Prince of Peace and his dad.


----------



## Israel (May 28, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> And not bound / limited to what is / isn’t ..........in our eyes.



yes! 

Before Paul was born He was called and chosen to be an apostle of Jesus Christ; his regard for christians prior to his encounter with the ever living One could not hinder it. He learned his being struck blind by light was to his sight.


He understood the "terror of the Lord" and was not ashamed of it.

Who would be ashamed of anything found in Christ once seeing?

And the spirit of the LORD shall rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the LORD;  Is 11:2

And I was with you in weakness, and in fear, and in much trembling.  I Cor 2:3


----------



## bullethead (May 28, 2021)

Israel said:


> Jesus did not mince His words when speaking of whom man should fear. He even says He will "show" Him...whom man should fear.


Being incredibly honest for this reply I have to agree that Jesus does say that in the bible.



Israel said:


> Perhaps it is only the most wicked and depraved that need this instruction and showing to some sobriety, yet Jesus does not qualify it. But, there are those spoken of needing many stripes, those less. And it is clear the Lord Jesus does with what is His as He so chooses; telling Peter not to be concerned with His disposition regarding John.


Honest assessment on my end: Perhaps those most wicked and most depraved are the ones who follow it due to need.



Israel said:


> But there is a working to find the wrath of God something amusing or laughable, quaint or benighted, but it is not that the particular aim of that is toward that at all.
> It is aimed more directly at the Lord Jesus, His work, His sacrifice, His very coming into the world as not only unnecessary but that all of His being might be undercut as to His substance. He is not only unnecessary, but liar, fraud not only unable to accomplish what He claims (for it is unnecessary), but worthy of only scorn and derision.


Honestly it is aimed at the cheerleaders who tout the fictional expliots of their idols which exists nowhere but within the pages of an ancient book and only because they are unable to show it exists outside of those pages.



Israel said:


> Of what need have decent people, intelligent people, people wise and sufficient in their own eyes...to be sobered up? What could be funnier to such than need of a Savior for a thing so seemingly ridiculous to consider...God's wrath?


Honestly speaking, it seems like those people are not the ones that sobering.



Israel said:


> But as salvation is intensely personal, so is the merest taste of God's displeasure. It is not mistaken for something else (though for whatever time the mind may refuse to acknowledge) for eventually the accuracy and resolve of God overwhelm what the mind would attribute to mere happenstance...and happy is the man who wakes up in such to find repentance made man's through Jesus Christ. As with all _things in Christ, _repentance holds its own particular glory in that moment.


Being honest, It definitely is a personal thing.



Israel said:


> I have enjoyed the pleasures of it in far more instances than this forum, and probably time remaining me, could possibly allow; precisely because I have needed its welcome resort in more moments than I could remember.


Need had a lot to do with it, honest.



Israel said:


> I cannot recommend all that is found in Him highly enough that those appointed also find no shame in hearing and turning.


That honestly reads as self appointed



Israel said:


> Yes, He is faithful...and shows Him whom man should fear, just as He says.


Lets be honest, Him and He and Whom are all the same ProNoun identifying as separate ProNouns.


----------



## bullethead (May 28, 2021)

Israel said:


> yes!
> 
> Before Paul was born He was called and chosen to be an apostle of Jesus Christ; his regard for christians prior to his encounter with the ever living One could not hinder it. He learned his being struck blind by light was to his sight.
> 
> ...


In an honest rebuttle, Paul was called before he was born but God has to wait to see what is in one's heart after they are born?
(Props to Walt)


----------



## Israel (May 28, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Honest assessment on my end: Perhaps those most wicked and most depraved are the ones who follow it due to need.



Yes! That's it!

Jesus says He did not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.

Nor does the physician come for the well, but for the sick.

Who would know the physician except the sick for whom He comes? Who would know of His work and workings and of such manner that those _who do not need Him_...could not? The ones in need of their door being opened to the physician know Him.

Who, if sick unto death with sin, would not hang upon His _every word _for health once the terrors of death are made clear to their desperate need of saving from it?


----------



## Israel (May 28, 2021)

bullethead said:


> In an honest rebuttle, Paul was called before he was born but God has to wait to see what is in one's heart after they are born?
> (Props to Walt)


Who ever said God had to wait on Paul to "see how he would turn out".

I don't know that I have ever maintained God has to find out anything as if He is without perfect sight.

Yes, God searches the hearts, but it is not upon God's necessity...but that a man might know in his very deepest parts he is being seen. It's a gift, even if he discovers he wants no part of what is found there. Especially.

One sees all a man cannot of himself. And unless he is awakened to the reality that there is no hiding, only then can he learn there is no necessity for it...what man would hide (especially from himself) has been borne by Jesus Christ.

Here, if you need an opinion of one who has known me, touched me, seen me, lived with me, heard me in ways I would surely not deny (though this is several years old) at that time she was not too timid to write as she saw...at least then. 

It's called "Two Faced Jesus" written by a woman I love. And love still.

https://chaossection.com/tag/two-faced-jesus/


----------



## Spotlite (May 28, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Fear him, don't respect him. The 1/3 of the whole that is separate from the three all together tells you to fear his father who is a separate entity when Jesus talks about him but is actually Jesus himself when Christians talk about him except for when Christians separate them to suit. Either way Fear the Prince of Peace and his dad.


The Hebrew verb can mean “to fear, to respect, to reverence” and the Hebrew noun can refer to the fear of God and is viewed as a positive. This fear makes a person receptive to wisdom and knowledge.

Fear as you know it may not be fear as you know it  - I know no one that is scared that God is going to wipe them out. I know many that “fear” God in the sense of “he’s been too go to me, I’m not taking him for granite and doing.....”

I fear my wife in the sense that I’m not scared of her, but our relationship is sacred enough that I’m “fearful” of the things I do and do not do - I don’t want to ever jeopardize it or ever make her feel “unloved”

Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling......I refrain from things that I feel would question my walk, I do things I feel that shows my love.

This is the way I was taught and how I believe the fear is.

I was never under the impression that fear in this sense was afraid of something other than my being afraid my actions took things for granted.

It’s why I said “And not bound / limited to what is / isn’t ..........in our eyes.”


----------



## bullethead (May 28, 2021)

Israel said:


> Yes! That's it!
> 
> Jesus says He did not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.
> 
> ...


That could be why I honestly don't need to be swayed by the handbook. I've been in the club for all of time and it's the newbies that are in need that are affected by the words so much. The gung-ho over indulgence and exertion of the newcomers are normal actions with any new hobby, and trying to earn their gang patch in a religious club is no different.
The veterans just look over their shoulder at the commotion and shake their heads.


----------



## bullethead (May 28, 2021)

Israel said:


> Who ever said God had to wait on Paul to "see how he would turn out".


Join me in my honesty for a moment, Whoever said that I was talking about Paul?



Israel said:


> I don't know that I have ever maintained God has to find out anything as if He is without perfect sight.


Honestly speaking, I relied on you reading through other replies and conversations in here and in this case between Spotlite, Walt and myself in order to recognize exactly who and what I was referencing. 



Israel said:


> Yes, God searches the hearts, but it is not upon God's necessity...but that a man might know in his very deepest parts he is being seen. It's a gift, even if he discovers he wants no part of what is found there. Especially.


You are honestly snowballing upon a thought which has nothing to do with my reply.



Israel said:


> One sees all a man cannot of himself. And unless he is awakened to the reality that there is no hiding, only then can he learn there is no necessity for it...what man would hide (especially from himself) has been borne by Jesus Christ.


That honestly sounds like personal thoughts rather than fact



Israel said:


> Here, if you need an opinion of one who has known me, touched me, seen me, lived with me, heard me in ways I would surely not deny (though this is several years old) at that time she was not too timid to write as she saw...at least then.
> 
> It's called "Two Faced Jesus" written by a woman I love. And love still.
> 
> https://chaossection.com/tag/two-faced-jesus/



Being honest, Cherish her but I'll skip the link


----------



## Israel (May 28, 2021)

bullethead said:


> That could be why I honestly don't need to be swayed by the handbook. I've been in the club for all of time and it's the newbies that are in need that are affected by the words so much. The gung-ho over indulgence and exertion of the newcomers are normal actions with any new hobby, and trying to earn their gang patch in a religious club is no no different.
> The veterans just look over their shoulder at the commotion and shake their heads.



I am not ashamed at all "of the handbook" and find it as useful as any thing given by God for His purpose.

But Jesus Christ, not a thing in any sense of that word, though He submitted to being found in fashion as one (man) has been (regardless of all my ineptitude) the only One to which I can commend any man.

I make no claim of my own suitability except of having met the qualification He himself has set for His coming...to sinners.

So, as "been in the club for all of time" you would be able to help a newbie, given to "gung ho and over indulgence" with your knowledge of Jesus Christ. As a veteran, what do you easily see of my failings in speaking of the Founder?


----------



## bullethead (May 28, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> The Hebrew verb can mean “to fear, to respect, to reverence” and the Hebrew noun can refer to the fear of God and is viewed as a positive. This fear makes a person receptive to wisdom and knowledge.
> 
> Fear as you know it may not be fear as you know it  - I know no one that is scared that God is going to wipe them out. I know many that “fear” God in the sense of “he’s been too go to me, I’m not taking him for granite and doing.....”
> 
> ...


Drowning,  turning to salt, a Prince of peace wielding a sword, burning for eternity isn't respect tactics


----------



## bullethead (May 28, 2021)

Israel said:


> I am not ashamed at all "of the handbook" and find it as useful as any thing given by God for His purpose.
> 
> But Jesus Christ, not a thing in any sense of that word, though He submitted to being found in fashion as one (man) has been (regardless of all my ineptitude) the only One to which I can commend any man.
> 
> ...


Honestly, you try too hard. No need to constantly kiss so much rear pockets trying to get in good standings.
The whole catching more flies with sugar rather than vinegar thing.

Jesus knows your loyalty. God knows your heart. The Holy Spirit knows of your spirituality.  The AAA forum knows your stance.
Who is all the constant reassurance for if not for yourself?


----------



## Spotlite (May 28, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Drowning,  turning to salt, a Prince of peace wielding a sword, burning for eternity isn't respect tactics


I think we are talking two separate things. You’re focusing on the “judgment” and I didn’t go back to find it but I remember you (at least I think it was you) mentioning / asking something along the lines of “Christians living in fear of God”. I read it to indicate that they’re only living in fear of God because of ^^^^

But I don’t know any that do. I know many that live and teach “in fear” the way I explained in it.

I’m not excusing the “judgment” with my view, I will acknowledge it’s there, but I’m not living for God and fearing hi because of fear of judgment.


----------



## bullethead (May 28, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> I think we are talking two separate things. You’re focusing on the “judgment” of those things and mentioned / asked something along the lines of “Christians living in fear of God”. I read it to indicate that they’re only living in fear of God because of ^^^^
> 
> But I don’t know any that do. I know many that live and teach “in fear” the way I explained in it.
> 
> I’m not excusing the “judgment” with my view, I will acknowledge it’s there, but I’m not living for God and fearing hi because of fear of judgment.


Are any of those things incentives for you?


----------



## Spotlite (May 28, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Are any of those things incentives for you?


Not at all. Absolutely none. My fear if God is total reverence / respect of who he is (savior / strength / provider / friend) to me. Not what he can be (judgment).


----------



## bullethead (May 28, 2021)

Israel said:


> I am not ashamed at all "of the handbook" and find it as useful as any thing given by God for His purpose.
> 
> But Jesus Christ, not a thing in any sense of that word, though He submitted to being found in fashion as one (man) has been (regardless of all my ineptitude) the only One to which I can commend any man.
> 
> ...


Since I am honest, My membership and veteran status is based on a perhaps or possiblity deduced from your prior dialog.


----------



## bullethead (May 28, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> Not at all. Absolutely none. My fear if God is total reverence / respect of who he is (savior / strength / provider / friend) to me. Not what he can be (judgment).


Would you say that it is possible that people (Christians) who are for the lack of a better term "fake" believe out of fear?
Examples being the ones who literally sin daily but use their belief as a catch net to keep from falling down into the fire upon their death?
The pews and members are full of adulterers,  liars,  cheats, abusers, and on and on. If they respected a god would they continually do such things? Or do they show up and or worship Jesus out of fear?


----------



## Israel (May 28, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Honestly, you try too hard. No need to constantly kiss so much rear pockets trying to get in good standings.
> The whole catching more flies with sugar rather than vinegar thing.
> 
> Jesus knows your loyalty. God knows your heart. The Holy Spirit knows of your spirituality.  The AAA forum knows your stance.
> Who is all the constant reassurance for if not for yourself?


Who would be about flies? 

Beelzebub?


----------



## bullethead (May 28, 2021)

Israel said:


> Who would be about flies?
> 
> Beelzebub?



Close,  say it 3 times and he will exorcise the living.


----------



## Spotlite (May 28, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Would you say that it is possible that people (Christians) who are for the lack of a better term "fake" believe out of fear?
> Examples being the ones who literally sin daily but use their belief as a catch net to keep from falling down into the fire upon their death?
> The pews and members are full of adulterers,  liars,  cheats, abusers, and on and on. If they respected a god would they continually do such things? Or do they show up and or worship Jesus out of fear?


Absolutely they can and do. Usually, they church hop and are never grounded anywhere. And they’re not dependable on being there - it’s here a couple of services, MIA a few. At least that’s been my experience.

If they ever get grounded, that ^^^ “fear” becomes the “fear” I explained.


----------



## bullethead (May 28, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> Absolutely they can and do. Usually, they church hop and are never grounded anywhere. And they’re not dependable on being there - it’s here a couple of services, MIA a few. At least that’s been my experience.
> 
> If they ever get grounded, that ^^^ “fear” becomes the “fear” I explained.


Ok, because that is much of what I witnessed of other Christians except for the Church hopping so I figured it was not a local thing and was sure it happened elsewhere.
Would make an interesting survey of a couple billion if they'd answer honestly/anonymously.


----------



## Spotlite (May 28, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Ok, because that is much of what I witnessed of other Christians except for the Church hopping so I figured it was not a local thing and was sure it happened elsewhere.
> Would make an interesting survey of a couple billion if they'd answer honestly/anonymously.


Anonymously would most likely get more answers. I’m not sure about honest answers. The ones that do this are usually trying to “show” their Christianity instead of living it because if they “look like it” no one will know they aren’t. It’s the feeling of “if the preacher is happy with me, God isn’t mad with me”.

It’s like the little city slicker boys at the rodeos with a new Stetson hat, wrangler jeans tucked down inside their Justin boots with a big belt buckle trying to look like a cowboy in front of everyone. But they can’t tell you the difference between a cow and heifer and gullible enough to believe they can ask for the new bovine colostrum milk at Starbucks.

I’ve got an uncle that comes 5 or 6 times then misses a few months. When he comes he dresses the part and “amens” the preacher.

You can find him passed out at the bar all the other nights he’s not at church. But the day he comes to church he’s quoting scripture and ready to fill in for the preacher if needed.


----------



## WaltL1 (May 28, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> Anonymously would most likely get more answers. I’m not sure about honest answers. The ones that do this are usually trying to “show” their Christianity instead of living it because if they “look like it” no one will know they aren’t. It’s the feeling of “if the preacher is happy with me, God isn’t mad with me”.
> 
> It’s like the little city slicker boys at the rodeos with a new Stetson hat, wrangler jeans tucked down inside their Justin boots with a big belt buckle trying to look like a cowboy in front of everyone. But they can’t tell you the difference between a cow and heifer and gullible enough to believe they can ask for the new bovine colostrum milk at Starbucks.
> 
> ...





> I’ve got an uncle that comes 5 or 6 times then misses a few months. When he comes he dresses the part and “amens” the preacher.
> You can find him passed out at the bar all the other nights he’s not at church. But the day he comes to church he’s quoting scripture and ready to fill in for the preacher if needed.


I think thats why alot of A/As dont want to hear crap from Christians. Especially A/As that were former Christians. Seen it too often, hear it too often, watch it on tv too often etc etc. Its very easy to then lump all Christians together and view them as having 0 credibility. And then getting the standard "well all Christians stumble" just makes it worse.
Im not saying those A/As are right for doing it but thats what happens in alot of cases. Its a human thing - R's dont want to hear crap from D's, D's from R's, whites from blacks, blacks from whites, Baptists from Catholics and on and on and on.


----------



## Spotlite (May 28, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> I think thats why alot of A/As dont want to hear crap from Christians. Especially A/As that were former Christians. Seen it too often, hear it too often, watch it on tv too often etc etc. Its very easy to then lump all Christians together and view them as having 0 credibility. And then getting the standard "well all Christians stumble" just makes it worse.
> Im not saying those A/As are right for doing it but thats what happens in alot of cases. Its a human thing - R's dont want to hear crap from D's, D's from R's, whites from blacks, blacks from whites, Baptists from Catholics and on and on and on.


Maybe if everything that “claimed” wasn’t labeled so....

That’s a labeling fallacy, not a Christianity fallacy. That’s the same as saying every non Christian is an A/A when that’s not the case. There are non Christians that aren’t either one.

Christians are human and do stumble. Folks like I described aren’t stumbling Christians, they’re loster than a ball in high weeds and they’re pretending and Christians are trying to reach them, too.

I’m not judging, the Word judges their actions and behavior, particularly not keeping his commandments. Christian mean followers of Christ, if you’re not following him you’re none of his. Period. You don’t go beating your wife on Saturday night and shouting on Sunday morning. Fooling no one but themselves and those that label. Just my humble opinion.


----------



## WaltL1 (May 28, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> Maybe if everything that “claimed” wasn’t labeled so....
> 
> That’s a labeling fallacy, not a Christianity fallacy. That’s the same as saying every non Christian is an A/A when that’s not the case. There are non Christians that aren’t either one.
> 
> ...


I agree with you.


----------



## Israel (May 29, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> Especially A/As that were former Christians.



I've mentioned this before, but because it comes up again (and since I am wholly convinced it is never far from any of the conversations that take place here) I'm not reluctant to address it again.

What caused you to believe then (or now) that you (or any) were a christian?

I am not asking for a theological exercise as such...but more along the lines of "what in you, or your mind convinced you...you are, or were a christian?"

I am not looking to dismiss anything...from "I made every meeting at the building", "I read the Bible", "I believed (even) the Bible was true..." "I was an altar boy, I was a deacon, I preached on street corners, told all my friends about Jesus..." "I prayed all the time and felt like someone was there..." And the other million permutations that might accrue.

Was there ever an anything that one might identify as having the testimony of Jesus Christ?
What is the testimony of Jesus Christ? Where is the testimony of Jesus Christ?

See, all these things...especially if one says "I believed the Bible"...hold some order in "a life". None on their face are either good nor bad...they are just what they are...but one cannot (if one says I believed the Bible was true) get very far into the writings before coming up against the "having this testimony within ourselves".

If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater: for this is the witness of God which he hath testified of his Son. He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself: he that believeth not God hath made him a liar; because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son. 1 John 5:9,10

And it is not even answer for me, or to me that counts for anything, despite any contentions a man only asks questions to get an answer for himself. Some questions may require years of consideration...or at least much consideration before an answer can be succinctly given, even to the knowing of the one asking when he asks.

When Jesus asked "And why do you behold the mote in your brother's eye but do not see the beam in your own?" Do you think...(even as man just reading the story) he expected an answer...at that moment? But the question stands, nevertheless.

But, if any man does not even understand the question...there's enough "in it" to mine for some period, till first the question is understood, the legitimacy of it, and then finally...coming to some sort of response to the "why do you"? part.

And I understand that some may be inclined to think I am asking to establish a more narrow way to my own set of standards of approval. The Bible says "just believe"...Jesus says "just believe" and the preacher says "just say the sinner's prayer"...so who is anyone (like me) to suddenly feel free to ask what is a way too personal question, or even suggest one (as I surely know it is the _most personal of all questions_)...was there a testimony of Jesus Christ received, given, shared, in even some meager way understood?

NO! don't answer, but if you can...consider. And if you need for this time to think "Israel is just starting a whole 'nother "religion" to himself by making a way narrower than anyone else has ever led me to think about..." so be it. A "religion"...requiring, or based upon a testimony of Jesus Christ inwardly...(which is actually all religion is not) where no man can see except that man, and God. You are all too free, and made such by Jesus Christ to think of me in whatever way you care to. I am not trying to catch flies, sell anything, or enlist anyone to "my side". I have learned being told I am crazy is just as useful as a chorus of amens to me, someone forbids me from paying too much attention to either.

But, you see the matter. Israel is not the "only one" who says there is a personal testimony given to the believer of the Lord's reality of life...and in such manner it is not easily confused with eating too much pizza before retiring. Jesus Himself says:

"Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him."

and also

He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.  

I know from the many posts (generally) who has said "I was a christian...once", and who, based on that belief also believes they "know something of (if not _totally understand_) what _christians believe_". I make no claim of being christian in any sense I see the word so often used..._mostly as a proponent of christianity _(in which I hold no interest nor owing) so that is moot to me. 

 But, if you care to consider me christian (to whatever lumping together is convenient to you)...and you have "never even heard that a christian is one who bears the testimony of Jesus Christ"...then to you I may not at all be one...and am certainly beyond (apart from, separate, crazy...but not exceeding) all one may _totally understand_ about what christians believe.

I am not looking...even have been forbidden in myself to look...for or to any form of thing other than the testimony of Jesus Christ. It matters not to me what I may think I have experienced, endured, come to understand or be disabused of...ultimately my only hope is in the manifest presence of Jesus Christ despite my disposition to anything other. To be made able to hold to the truth of Jesus Christ...having come in the flesh only because _I know_ there is a being in flesh He has not abandoned to itself.

Is this strange to you, or any? Too weird? The making of a way too narrow (isn't just enough I preached...was an altar boy, read my Bible...prayed much...gave alms...made every meeting? Respected the elders? Told everyone I was a believer in Jesus Christ?) that no man might enter?

The apostle (who most "christians" say they receive as true) says "hath this witness in himself". Yet...the apostle, though a man himself, states there is a greater witness...and he spoke of it. Yes, I once believed a report...but a greater than man's reporting came to abide.

And, of course comes the question...am I lying?

True words were spoken recently  "Jesus knows your loyalty. The Holy Spirit knows your spirituality...." and others. Which speak nothing of my estate (could as easily be disloyal and quite un-spiritual) but which are nevertheless true...the Lord knows...no matter my perception of my estate. Empty or full...or whatever other might appear on some continuum between. God knows.


Just as spirits were not incorrect in their recognition to speaking "what have we to do with thee thou Son of God...have you come to torment us before the time?" And speak in part of what is true, not making them "true".

Even devils recognize there is one God...and tremble. (So even any trembling cannot be trusted.)

Yes, I have no qualms about testifying to Jesus as like a thief...even a perfect one who patiently manages to steal every hope a man might have in anything...other than Himself. He is perfect at it...and those who have been robbed so perfectly hold such evidence of His perfect work. It is a treasure beyond valuation...it is all that is...that is...of any hope.

God knows precisely why and how the "fear of the Lord" is made such a poor selling point to what would _market the gospel. _Even and especially in the day when our salvation is nearer than when we first believed.

The same salvation from all false hope(s) is also the One who robs the fear of man from His own...by manifesting Himself.

And when I saw Him I fell as though dead...

That's quite a testimony right there.

Yet, he could only live to give it because he was "touched".

Were you, former christian...touched?

No need to answer me. God knows.


----------



## bullethead (May 29, 2021)

Israel said:


> I've mentioned this before, but because it comes up again (and since I am wholly convinced it is never far from any of the conversations that take place here) I'm not reluctant to address it again.
> 
> What caused you to believe then (or now) that you (or any) were a christian?
> 
> ...


Israel what makes you sure you meet the standards?


----------



## WaltL1 (May 29, 2021)

Israel said:


> I've mentioned this before, but because it comes up again (and since I am wholly convinced it is never far from any of the conversations that take place here) I'm not reluctant to address it again.
> 
> What caused you to believe then (or now) that you (or any) were a christian?
> 
> ...


Dont mind answering your question at all. Its really pretty simple.
Lets start with this as a foundation -
Christian
[ˈkrisCHən]
ADJECTIVE
1. relating to or professing Christianity or its teachings.
"the Christian Church" ·
NOUN
1. a person who has received Christian baptism or is a believer in Christianity.

I realize there is more to it than that ^ (is there really?) but I met all those qualifications. Baptised as a baby, Catechism on Saturday, Church on Sunday, believed and professed in and about the Christian God etc. Read the Bible and believed the Bible, Did all the the things required in Catholicism - prayer, confession, communion, and all that.
Technically, all that qualified me to be called and claim to have been a Christian by definition.
Beyond that, 
Did I ever have a mind blowing, earth shattering, "come to Jesus" experience?
Nope.
Did I feel Jesus/God was with me etc?
Yes.
As I got older did I act like a "good" Christian?
No. But still believed.
As I got older still I began to question, research etc. all that indoctrination, until the point I just simply rejected organized religion.
The belief in the existence of "God" more or less became "collateral damage" at some point after that.
And now, here I sit.
The End.
You can decide for yourself if I met the criteria to claim that I once was a Christian.
I believe, without question or doubt, because I know what was in my heart at one point, that I was.


----------



## ky55 (May 29, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Israel what makes you sure you meet the standards?



That’s an easy one…

God knows.


----------



## bullethead (May 29, 2021)

ky55 said:


> That’s an easy one…
> 
> God knows.


A god had better know. If there is a god he/she/it can surely judge who meets what criteria(although that would be known already in the infinite past). 
I'd like to know why each individual believer is certain that they have made the cut and are somehow alright with themselves judging others.
If one can protest too much it pales in comparison to continuous britches smooching praise and speaking for a God's wants, needs, thoughts and meanings.
All that seems to be for personal reassurance and self gratification.


----------



## WaltL1 (May 29, 2021)

By the way Israel, I know my response may be exactly what you _werent _looking for.
Just keep in mind I break things down to their simplest form. Not necessarily on purpose, thats just what my brain does. So for me, taking the definition of Christian and then seeing if I meet/met that definition is what happens and what you get out of me.
Your brain seems to work very differently on this subject. You've got the whole "mystic" thing going on. So we probably couldnt get much more opposite 
And I didnt really take it as you were seeing if I met YOUR personal criteria of what a Christian is, or was in this case. Though my response probably made it sound that way.


----------



## Spotlite (May 29, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> Dont mind answering your question at all. Its really pretty simple.
> Lets start with this as a foundation -
> Christian
> [ˈkrisCHən]
> ...





> Did I ever have a mind blowing, earth shattering, "come to Jesus" experience?
> Nope.
> 
> As I got older did I act like a "good" Christian?
> No. But still believed.


Ambush once called it a phenomenon. I’d like to call it a Damascus road experience. I’ve always stated “just believing” isn’t it, it’s only the start. The Christian doesn’t read the book and say “oh I believe it” and that’s it. A lot more goes on there that caused him to believe. Without having that ^^^^ how can one state “it ain’t real”?


bullethead said:


> A god had better know. If there is a god he/she/it can surely judge who meets what criteria(although that would be known already in the infinite past).
> I'd like to know why each individual believer is certain that they have made the cut and are somehow alright with themselves judging others.
> If one can protest too much it pales in comparison to continuous britches smooching praise and speaking for a God's wants, needs, thoughts and meanings.
> All that seems to be for personal reassurance and self gratification.





> I'd like to know why each individual believer is certain that they have made the cut and are somehow alright with themselves judging others.


There is no “cut”.
Judging is saying “you wasn’t / you’re not“ People’s actions reveal what they are. David Koresh read the same Bible as I do.


----------



## gordon 2 (May 29, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> Dont mind answering your question at all. Its really pretty simple.
> Lets start with this as a foundation -
> Christian
> [ˈkrisCHən]
> ...




This is kind of fun if I'm right. Both you ( Walt) and you Israel are somehow put off by organized religion. This you have in common. What it has done because "what your different brains do" is for one it has diminished, distanced, destroyed the Absolute to nil and for the other it has increased, joined, and magnified the Absolute.

Kind of interesting.

I noticed that what our brains do to us is consistent regardless of subject perhaps.

For example: I might have been indoctrinated that a marine is the best soldier in the world-- until I meet up with the marine of an other nation at some point. Because I have reason to be discomforted that I was mislead or ill informed on purpose I might have less trust in the internal assessments that the Corps is all it is claiming itself to be. The same might be the case with the Church... where the history of the organization is disregarded for a failing, or two, or three, or...


Personally I find that spirits indwell our consciousness...with lots of chances for extremes in outlook... and seemingly few chances at the narrow and pragmatic gate ( but hey who decides where that is) . I must admit I bounce around... and am not immune to the influences of spirits in my consciousness...

What "our brain does". Hum


----------



## WaltL1 (May 29, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> Ambush once called it a phenomenon. I’d like to call it a Damascus road experience. I’ve always stated “just believing” isn’t it, it’s only the start. The Christian doesn’t read the book and say “oh I believe it” and that’s it. A lot more goes on there that caused him to believe. Without having that ^^^^ how can one state “it ain’t real”?
> 
> 
> There is no “cut”.
> Judging is saying “you wasn’t / you’re not“ People’s actions reveal what they are. David Koresh read the same Bible as I do.





> Without having that ^^^^ how can one state “it ain’t real”?


Probably why I identify as Agnostic which is more "It aint real for me".
And a thought -
My indoctrination started when I was diapers. Maybe I never needed a "come to Jesus" experience?
When I did need it - crickets.


----------



## WaltL1 (May 29, 2021)

gordon 2 said:


> This is kind of fun if I'm right. Both you ( Walt) and you Israel are somehow put off by organized religion. This you have in common. What it has done because "what your different brains do" is for one it has diminished, distanced, destroyed the Absolute to nil and for the other it has increased, joined, and magnified the Absolute.
> 
> Kind of interesting.
> 
> ...


First and foremost we have to get this straight -


> indoctrinated that a marine is the best soldier in the world-


A Marine is not a soldier. A Marine is a Marine. The Army are soldiers. 
Now that we've got that squared away we can move on .
But yes its very interesting. Personally, considering there is no proof of anything one way or another, the entire subject boils down to "individual psychology".


----------



## gordon 2 (May 29, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> First and foremost we have to get this straight -
> 
> A Marine is not a soldier. A Marine is a Marine. The Army are soldiers.
> Now that we've got that squared away we can move on .
> But yes its very interesting. Personally, considering there is no proof of anything one way or another, the entire subject boils down to "individual psychology".



Well "some" indoctrinations just keep on keeping on. Nice to see . Once a marine always a marine. Once a nurse always a nurse ( Israel). I note that Marine is spelt with a capital and soldier is not... just a note. No assembly or reply required.


----------



## Newt2 (May 29, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> You can decide for yourself if I met the criteria to claim that I once was a Christian.
> I believe, without question or doubt, because I know what was in my heart at one point, that I was.



I was raised exactly as you were. I'll add that I sponsored prayer groups throughout the parish and taught religion to teens.

But I came to believe that what I thought was in my heart was just in my head. I played the game to maintain my position in the church. Then I got divorced. I was shunned by the church unless I went through a timely and gruesome annulment. Lifelong friends abandoned me in my time of need. That's when I realized it was all in my head - brainwashed so to speak. I'm glad and happy that I found the truth.


----------



## WaltL1 (May 29, 2021)

gordon 2 said:


> Well "some" indoctrinations just keep on keeping on. Nice to see . Once a marine always a marine. Once a nurse always a nurse ( Israel). I note that Marine is spelt with a capital and soldier is not... just a note. No assembly or reply required.


Yes indoctrination is a very powerful thing.
My religious indoctrination surfaces fairly often too.


----------



## ky55 (May 29, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> Yes indoctrination is a very powerful thing.
> My religious indoctrination surfaces fairly often too.



Mine surface almost daily.


----------



## WaltL1 (May 29, 2021)

Newt2 said:


> I was raised exactly as you were. I'll add that I sponsored prayer groups throughout the parish and taught religion to teens.
> 
> But I came to believe that what I thought was in my heart was just in my head. I played the game to maintain my position in the church. Then I got divorced. I was shunned by the church unless I went through a timely and gruesome annulment. Lifelong friends abandoned me in my time of need. That's when I realized it was all in my head - brainwashed so to speak. I'm glad and happy that I found the truth.


Technically, everything is in our head. The heart just pumps blood. But yes I know exactly what you mean.


----------



## WaltL1 (May 29, 2021)

ky55 said:


> Mine surface almost daily.


Ive come to accept it probably will always be there.


----------



## Israel (May 30, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> By the way Israel, I know my response may be exactly what you _werent _looking for.
> Just keep in mind I break things down to their simplest form. Not necessarily on purpose, thats just what my brain does. So for me, taking the definition of Christian and then seeing if I meet/met that definition is what happens and what you get out of me.
> Your brain seems to work very differently on this subject. You've got the whole "mystic" thing going on. So we probably couldnt get much more opposite
> And I didnt really take it as you were seeing if I met YOUR personal criteria of what a Christian is, or was in this case. Though my response probably made it sound that way.


No, it was far more than I could have hoped for.


----------



## Israel (May 30, 2021)

ky55 said:


> That’s an easy one…
> 
> God knows.


Yes!


----------



## gordon 2 (May 30, 2021)

It is very interesting how the mind of different people work when stressed. I also was divorced and  also re-married (civil) to another. I got closer to the church and Christianity following the experience. I also was a teacher in the church and was permitted to teach regardless of my married state. ( By the way divorce is not a cause for sanction in the CC, but remarriage is and communion has been denied to me for this.) Nevertheless I found out why this was the case and grew closer to the church for it. The subject that is the church was never simple to me but  rather it is/was complex. I did not beat faith up because of my mistakes and misfortunes which the ground zero of Christianity could not ignore. I learned that determination, perseverance and courage were not foreign to love. And in the end as in the beginning it is on this ground the church stands and where I stand also.

It is very interesting how the mind of different people work... when stressed.


----------



## WaltL1 (May 30, 2021)

gordon 2 said:


> It is very interesting how the mind of different people work when stressed. I also was divorced and  also re-married (civil) to another. I got closer to the church and Christianity following the experience. I also was a teacher in the church and was permitted to teach regardless of my married state. ( By the way divorce is not a cause for sanction in the CC, but remarriage is and communion has been denied to me for this.) Nevertheless I found out why this was the case and grew closer to the church for it. The subject that is the church was never simple to me but  rather it is/was complex. I did not beat faith up because of my mistakes and misfortunes which the ground zero of Christianity could not ignore. I learned that determination, perseverance and courage were not foreign to love. And in the end as in the beginning it is on this ground the church stands and where I stand also.
> 
> It is very interesting how the mind of different people work... when stressed.


Another example where my brain works differently.


> and communion has been denied to me for this.


Is that a God rule or is that a man (Church) rule?
Jesus said -


> “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you; he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is real food, and my blood is real drink. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him. As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats me will live because of me. This is the bread which came down from heaven, not such as the fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread will live forever” (John 6:53–58).


No mention of "unless you are remarried" etc. etc.
On the flip side -


> The Catholic Church sets out specific guidelines regarding how we should prepare ourselves to receive the Lord’s body and blood in Communion. First, you must be in a state of grace. “Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord.


As I understand it, your denial of communion would fall under the above ^. True?
What Jesus said vs. what the Church decided (maybe for what they figure to be perfectly noble reasons) you would be guilty of.
Could the Church point to other verses that if translated the way they translate them, supports their position? Probably. Every denomination and every Christian has been pointing to verses that can be translated to support their particular belief since the beginning.
My brain says "something aint right here".
Your brain says - 





> I found out why this was the case and grew closer to the church for it.


Add in, you were permitted to teach.... but denied communion. Really? Good enough to teach God's word but not good enough to receive communion? One would offend Jesus but the other one wouldnt?
Whats that all about?

Again, individual psychology.


----------



## gordon 2 (May 30, 2021)

Can't teach anything or get someone to check with a "higher authority" who don't want to know or is not helped to maybe want to know. Right? "Sometimes you don't know what you got till it's gone" and when it is taken away it forces one to go in depth what the deal is all about if your phycology is made that way.

To my great surprise I found out that communion in the CC need not be via the Eucharist. There are other modes of communion. That is another story however. Think of it this way people who have had strokes and cannot eat ( masticate and swallow) or people who are denied access to mass can still receive communion without the host.  Now that is probably a shock to alot of folk. I had to find out alot about communion before I learned about how the church ministered in this way.

No one individual or organization is perfect. Besides the public has so many definitions of perfection that it is almost funny.

I found that through faith and a little effort to walk in it even when the criquets avoided me, ( and I knew it)  often what was " somethin is not right here" was me, not the church and not their earnest imitation of Christ...

But hey that's me. Like you say individual psychology. We "do you" and I respect that.

Jesus said, " Love God with all you heart" and not " love good with your brains". That is how my brains work...they tell me to use a wrench to turn a nut and not a hammer.


----------



## WaltL1 (May 30, 2021)

gordon 2 said:


> Can't teach anything or get someone to check with a "higher authority" who don't want to know or is not helped to maybe want to know. Right? "Sometimes you don't know what you got till it's gone" and when it is taken away it forces one to go in depth what the deal is all about if your phycology is made that way.
> 
> To my great surprise I found out that communion in the CC need not be via the Eucharist. There are other modes of communion. That is another story however. Think of it this way people who have had strokes and cannot eat ( masticate and swallow) or people who are denied access to mass can still receive communion without the host.  Now that is probably a shock to alot of folk. I had to find out alot about communion before I learned about how the church ministered in this way.
> 
> ...





> often what was " somethin is not right here" was me, not the church


I dont know Gordon....


> “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you; he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is real food, and my blood is real drink. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him. As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats me will live because of me. This is the bread which came down from heaven, not such as the fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread will live forever” (John 6:53–58)


Seems pretty important to me. if man is going to override that, I need a better reason than "because we said so".
Not sure Im the problem here.



> He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him.


Think about the magnitude of that statement.
And man made rules would deny that of me?


----------



## WaltL1 (May 31, 2021)

Hey Gordon, ad on yahoo homepage this morning, clicked the ad link and......
Celebration Cup - Pre-filled Communion Cups Wafer & Juice Sets - Box of 500 (concordiasupply.com)

The gift that keeps on giving?


----------



## Sautee Ridgerunner (May 31, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> In another life and long ago, I may or may not have experimented (often) with hallucinogenics. The trip you describe above is very similar to that of peyote buttons.
> But this chemical cocktail man made crap these days is downright scary. Folks are nuts taking this stuff.



I havent read this whole thread. Who has the time?  But you do realize that dimethyl tryptamine is totally natural AND endogenously made in your own body right?  It’s likely the reason for dream states and end of life experiences.


----------



## WaltL1 (May 31, 2021)

Sautee Ridgerunner said:


> I havent read this whole thread. Who has the time?  But you do realize that dimethyl tryptamine is totally natural AND endogenously made in your own body right?  It’s likely the reason for dream states and end of life experiences.


Yes I do realize that.
I also realize if its a chemical thats bought and sold, its cut/mixed with other chemicals. 

*INGREDIENTS*

DMT-containing plant such as Mimosa hostilis root bark 
Water
Lye (granulated sodium hydroxide)
Vinegar
Naptha VM&P (if unavailable, 40-60 Petroleum Ether can be used)
Now add in whatever crap your local mixologist uses as substitutes, to stretch it further etc.


----------



## Israel (Jun 1, 2021)

Walt, it's kinda interesting you would describe me as a mystic/mystical as in some way different than you...when I see no less in you.

The matter of specific practice of some things can neither endorse nor negate what is true in spirit.

For whatever reasons you and I may believe, even if seemingly far apart in practice (though we may not be at all) you voice a significance to an essentiallity [sic] in what is commonly called communion; and such that you dare not relinquish its ministry or denial to any man or organization. The Lord ministers.

Whether you use the Lord's words as instruction or obstruction is, as for me (and absolutely no less nor more) for the Lord's judging. And my agreement with you that however or whatever is meant by partaking of the Lord's flesh and blood when you say 





> Seems pretty important to me


 adds nothing to your stance anymore than my disagreement might detract. But, since I am allowed to voice agreement, I do. And even more heartily than I care to say.

Yes...it's a pretty firm line there drawn by Jesus Christ...eating and drinking to life, not eating and drinking to "no life". Rather definitive as to the power of it, regardless of what we may think it means to participate (truly) or deny it (truly). And I am persuaded "spirit and truth" are indivisible.

Paul had some cutting things to say to those who "thought they were doing it"...for they had the practice of an "eating together" that he recognized was not a together at all (communion). In fact, the practice of it apart from the spiritual reality of it, was worse in their doing, than not doing it at all.

But this is as_ all matters of spirit and truth, _if the practice is in spirit devoid of life and truth (yes, I am persuaded spirit and life are also indivisible) a man is in worse shape for believing he is walking in the Lord's instruction (when he is not) than to better enter (for him) the place of "I cannot do this rightly". Oh, yes, he surely denies himself "self satisfaction" in opting to acknowledge his own inability...but on the scales of truth...one will stand while another falls.

Bullet thinks I have posts bookmarked...or may, or have such a remarkable memory that I easily recall things said...even years ago. But I am persuaded that a spiritual hi-liter is at work where and when things of spiritual nature jump out at me amongst the many words we exchange here, and leave a sort of indelible mark. I may need at times to see if I remember correctly, or can quote accurately what I believe I recall, as need be...and I know what I remember is only to the measure I have been assigned to remember, probably forgetting many things yet to be revealed...that...if and when I am provoked to review I might have a better sense of what is being, or was, spoken.

Over time a sense (to be judged by the Lord as rightly or wrongly) of a man develops (again, could be rightly or wrongly), and is actually no different than when I read the Bible. Some stuff seems to "jump right out"...other things, even though read, may only years later come to mind as something to now "look into" in the provoking of spirit (rightly or wrongly, God knows) for a confirmation. Did I read that...where did I read that...is my sense of it in accord now? And without question now I am more often stunned at how much deeper is Jesus Christ than I first understood...or believed.

And so Jesus speaks to those gathered around a table with Him of bread and wine, of body and blood. Fishermen, tax collector, a zealot, et al. Whose sole commonality in being around that table is Jesus Christ. This is _all and only_ making them able to eat together...even being Jews. That centrality is all, and still is, unchanged and unchanging. What is not eating at the "Lord's table" eats only judgment to itself. But, judgment is not a bad thing at all when it sobers a man up.

The disciple comes to treasure the Lord's chastenings. And is also not unaware that a stewardship holds demand of faithfulness which, if casually handled or thought some form of bequeathed indulgence, also holds some stripes. (Do you know how many cops I have met...that thought they were "the law"? And also that some who have kept their estate in humility, not thinking what displeased them could be easily equated to disorderly conduct).

But what has this to do with "communion"? Participating in, and proclaiming the Lord's death till He return? What does such a participation look like? Can it be seen? Recognized as to where...and also as Paul recognized to where it is "not where"? And was Paul looking for the "not where"...or just on the trail of the where (it is real)...and couldn't help but recognize a counterfeit when it came up? And its consequent fruit if continued. A man may not be a counterfeiter, and innocently pass a bad bill, but once he knows...if he finds he has a wallet full, he will no longer be innocent if he cleverly (now) seeks exchange. And yes, the believer is, or gets convinced there is a "something" furiously at work in its basement to _not innocently_ pass around what is coming off its presses.

So I look. I look when I am encouraged, I look when I am discouraged. I ask a question and find you responding honestly, openly, with no question of my motive. And I see more in response and furtherance of responses than I had even hope of seeing. A somehow conviction (even if from a declared A/A point of view) that this thing here...is (at least declared by Jesus) as important.

But how would I not already know this of you? What was allowed...what or who is at work to confirm? You see, it was no harder for me to see than this, and only confirmed to me you too, like Jesus Christ...are a bit deeper than the surface may show...(with what could even be described as some sort of mystical info) when not that very long ago you were too plain to make clear something I have sensed of you as more important than confession of doctrines of outer practice. You simply said "Israel, you're always welcome to come and share my campfire".

But I would be remiss to not remember, or in any way eschew the necessity of a probing I sense from Bullet, also. I need my motives challenged, poked, probed, judged...lest I simply assume I am some sort of judge myself meeting a standard I think I can judge and measure others by to their good, or ill. As healthy an invite to communion is (and lovely around a campfire)...the necessity of being probed for any unhealthy smug self satisfaction ...is no less...lovely... and healthy. Despite the immediate feeling of it.

See, Bullet, I don't choose to remember, I simply do. Cannot escape it when to me, matters of spirit are revealed. So I recall a man who years ago said something to the effect (and I will not do a "search"...for you tell me...whether I remember him) that..."just before I shoot an animal (or it may have even been after)...even I (as though there had to be some excuse for utterance) say a little something in appreciation for this life to be taken" As though you had some need to make plain...but it's not really a "real" prayer...just something said or recited to ones self.

Gratitude...always leaves a mark.

Yes, I am a hunter, too.

Recognizing life must be given to live...and even a specific life, that I might have life.

It's just been simplified to me, down to One. The One who gives Himself into His creation, and for it. The One totally invested ...in what is His. And by such investment...showing His own.

"having loved his own which were in the world, he loved them unto the end."



Bread and wine...body and blood...simple food and drink..a someone who day in day out, dark and light, night and day...of His will, of Himself, feeds a once enemy...in His hope.

And, if he has been that kind when finding as enemy...how much more can be shared in true communion?


----------



## bullethead (Jun 1, 2021)

Israel said:


> Walt, it's kinda interesting you would describe me as a mystic/mystical as in some way different than you...when I see no less in you.
> 
> The matter of specific practice of some things can neither endorse nor negate what is true in spirit.
> 
> ...


We all remember. Certain words stick more than others. Repeating them out of context and dragging them back into conversations where they were never muttered in order to make it seem like they were to take the current conversation the way you want it is dishonest.
No doubt you are sharp enough to remember many lines, but also sharp enough to know better on where they fit and were used.
I can remember some of your doozie lines. No reason to repeat them, let alone repeat them constantly out of context in other threads in order to try to make you look like you've said something you did not.

Regarding the post kill ritual. I give thanks for the harvest to who ever or whatever may be listening. Be it gods or the Energy that fuels the Universe. The extra time allows me to not fall out of the tree after the post shot adrenaline kicks in.


----------



## gordon 2 (Jun 1, 2021)

You reason like a rabbi Israel--with much respect shown to all stripes. Once I figured this out, I realized the value of your participation in any forum. 

-----------

Communion is very much from the Jewish tradition. Denial of communion is very much from the Jewish tradition. Jesus was a Jew. He and his followers were spiritual Jews. Given that a human being is a human being it follows that Christian communion would continue with some of the same purposes it had served for the spiritual Jews--which was to guide spiritually. And I think as you point out it guided from participation but also from denial.

So the point is that some seek to be spiritually guided and others might not want to go there for a number of reasons their own, not liking to be so judged and others just decide it is a useless consideration.

It is interesting that one is a Jew even when the person is secular. A Jew remains a Jew be they secular or religious.  But it is not with Christians who might judge their turned secular brothers and sisters not Christian?

The peace of the secular folk seems genuine and so seems their euphoria. There seems to be no fight in it for some. Their reasoning is purely secular. Patient, just, forgiving, honest, plain spoken they own, which opposites perhaps is the bug bear deemed imbecile with some Christianity. We cannot however forget that which we all have in common. Love is everywhere.


----------



## Israel (Jun 1, 2021)

bullethead said:


> We all remember. Certain words stick more than others. Repeating them out of context and dragging them back into conversations where they were never muttered in order to make it seem like they were to take the current conversation the way you want it is dishonest.
> No doubt you are sharp enough to remember many lines, but also sharp enough to know better on where they fit and were used.
> I can remember some of your doozie lines. No reason to repeat them, let alone repeat them constantly out of context in other threads in order to try to make you look like you've said something you did not.
> 
> Regarding the post kill ritual. I give thanks for the harvest to who ever or whatever may be listening. Be it gods or the Energy that fuels the Universe. The extra time allows me to not fall out of the tree after the post shot adrenaline kicks in.




Yes, gratitude has many benefits. Even in regards to what seems gravity's perils if disregarded in excitement.


----------



## Israel (Jun 1, 2021)

gordon 2 said:


> You reason like a rabbi Israel--with much respect shown to all stripes. Once I figured this out, I realized the value of your participation in any forum.
> 
> -----------
> 
> ...



Seeing myself in  times of sobriety, how secular I too must appear. And when (not if) there be that sort of pride that is generally addressed wrongly as "spiritual pride"...it shows I am not merely secular...but quite an enemy of the cross. Succumbing to the basest of things. Conquered as it were by a feather.

Living beyond that judgment when it comes upon me is the miracle, and I don't know many, if any...that when seeing man's estate do not understand to some extent..."No wonder a death was required...and you have come to provide it"...it's the slightest turn that makes all the difference as it did to Paul...from "no wonder man needs a savior" to..."no wonder I do"

"Who loved me and gave himself...for me..." Yes it's too wonderful Christ has come for man...but it takes all the faith of Heaven for me to believe He has no less come ...for me.

All He had to do was convince of the one thing my mother wouldn't, my Father couldn't, and am totally unable to receive of any other man.

That I am just a common man. 

And how often I am prone to forgetting.

But O! The benefits of being reminded... O! the benefits.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 1, 2021)

gordon 2 said:


> You reason like a rabbi Israel--with much respect shown to all stripes. Once I figured this out, I realized the value of your participation in any forum.
> 
> -----------
> 
> ...


Still men deciding they have the right to deny what Jesus plainly said.
If the problem is me its because I dont think they have the right to give themselves that power of denial.
I dont care if its tradition, if its for what they think is best or if or how I am judged for it. For example, Im an A/A openly debating with Christians, pointing out what I feel is wrong or right, on a Forum overwhelmingly pro-Christian. Read by overwhelmingly Christian folks. Judgement is expected, invited and accepted.
I am also able to see that as an A/A, I too am denying what Jesus plainly said. 
I dont trust the men who is telling me what he said. And I dont trust them exactly because of the type of things we are talking about.
For me, its going to have to come straight from God/Jesus.
Man has polluted the he11 out of the rest of it.


----------



## gordon 2 (Jun 1, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> Still men deciding they have the right to deny what Jesus plainly said.
> If the problem is me its because I dont think they have the right to give themselves that power of denial.
> I dont care if its tradition, if its for what they think is best or if or how I am judged for it. For example, Im an A/A openly debating with Christians, pointing out what I feel is wrong or right, on a Forum overwhelmingly pro-Christian. Read by overwhelmingly Christian folks. Judgement is expected, invited and accepted.
> I am also able to see that as an A/A, I too am denying what Jesus plainly said.
> ...




Yea. I know what you mean. Yet, lets say God/Jesus gave you directly the strait deal,  you then would be just like others in front of people like yourself at this present time---- seen as just one of the polluted.

But you are right, its going to have to come straight from the Absolute, which might not come to you like you "think". Jesus might be with you for some time, just waiting to name himself. Who knows? Peace bros.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 1, 2021)

On a side note to my last post -


> For me, its going to have to come straight from God/Jesus.


I'm kinda hoping that if thats gonna happen, it does before I found myself hurtling into the depths of He11. 
Or maybe that would prove God had a sense of humor...


----------



## gordon 2 (Jun 1, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> On a side note to my last post -
> 
> I'm kinda hoping that if thats gonna happen, it does before I found myself hurtling into the depths of He11.
> Or maybe that would prove God had a sense of humor...




He11? I remember when **** was a rubbed out word on here-- I think. Why in the dickens is He11 the duck the censor word now! Do you know that the majority of Christians and Jews don't believe that you need be a Christian or a Jew to go to the "nice place" or "best possible outcome" place?


----------



## Israel (Jun 1, 2021)

If it were a matter of crackers/wafers/matzoh and wine or juice...how much would be "enough" participation to fulfill life? Once? Monthly? Weekly...get a dose? Daily? Hourly?

I am persuaded recognizing Jesus flesh and blood has more to do with "taking in"...receiving...even of one another, than it does with any physical act of eating. So much (if not all) done in the material/physical realm is really just metaphor for what is true in spirit.

Generally...? A man can tell when another is "open" to him...and contrariwise...closed. When a man is willing to take him in...or is less receptive...even to the extreme of utterly rejecting anything about him.

There's a way Jesus has taken me in. And, well, all I can say is I am oft reminded...sometimes especially in my shortcomings..."love one another as I have loved you"...and "as you love your brother, so you love me"...and He is not shy if I present any of my self justifications for refusing to hear or acknowledge that...as heard. He knows what to do with what resists to pig headedness...one who is a danger both to himself and harm to others.

Like a dog I can slip into the red zone, teeth bared, eyes narrowed, hackles up and ears pointed forward. Jesus knows when need be...how to pin ears back.

I'd be lost without His staff...and rod.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 1, 2021)

gordon 2 said:


> He11? I remember when **** was a rubbed out word on here-- I think. Why in the dickens is He11 the duck the censor word now! Do you know that the majority of Christians and Jews don't believe that you need be a Christian or a Jew to go to the "nice place" or "best possible outcome" place?


In the sense that God could choose whoever he wants or for some other reason(s)?


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 1, 2021)

Israel said:


> If it were a matter of crackers/wafers/matzoh and wine or juice...how much would be "enough" participation to fulfill life? Once? Monthly? Weekly...get a dose? Daily? Hourly?
> 
> I am persuaded recognizing Jesus flesh and blood has more to do with "taking in"...receiving...even of one another, than it does with any physical act of eating. So much (if not all) done in the material/physical realm is really just metaphor for what is true in spirit.
> 
> ...





> Like a dog I can slip into the red zone, teeth bared, eyes narrowed, hackles up and ears pointed forward.


Not sure I would want to witness you like that Israel.
Its you seemingly calm, mellow guys that worry me the most


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 1, 2021)

gordon 2 said:


> He11? I remember when **** was a rubbed out word on here-- I think. Why in the dickens is He11 the duck the censor word now! Do you know that the majority of Christians and Jews don't believe that you need be a Christian or a Jew to go to the "nice place" or "best possible outcome" place?



Although the word “Christian” is used too loosely, it does mean to follow the teachings of Jesus. How can one be Christian if they’re not following the teachings of Jesus? 

The teachings of Jesus doesn’t agree with the “majority of Christians”^^^^


----------



## gordon 2 (Jun 2, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> Although the word “Christian” is used too loosely, it does mean to follow the teachings of Jesus. How can one be Christian if they’re not following the teachings of Jesus?
> 
> The teachings of Jesus doesn’t agree with the “majority of Christians”^^^^



Maybe the teachings of Jesus are misunderstood. It has happened before. I'm not certain what the reasons are for this variance in understanding within Christianity. I have not studied this in depth.

I suspect that there is diverge somewhere due to differences in understanding on the nature of Jesus as God. If Jesus is in fact God as Christians claim, then God's ( Jesus's) ministry sweeps all times. If Jesus can minister to people who do not know who he is, such as the biblical narrative of the woman at the well, did he minister to Abraham and Abraham knew him not as Christ?

I can look into it and PM you if you might not have time to do your own study. I suspect that when Jesus refers to himself, he refers to more than Mary's son who's ministry was on earth a little less than four decades.

A simple biblical reference I might point to if the bible is your firm ground:

"He who hears my word, and believes him that sent me, *has eternal life*, and comes not into judgment, but *has* passed out of death into *life*."

"And believes him that sent me"  and so Abraham who was not a Christian has eternal life. Are the " teaching words" of him that sent Jesus are not Jesus' words ( teachings)? The Comforter is a teacher that points to>>>>?

Maybe Christians are not the keepers of the Holy Spirit? as some might understand it?

Now I would not speak for the Jews but a man of faith by definition --- "believes him".


I'm not certain this should be in an AA forum... these are after all not secular notions per say, but rather spiritual in context, so please those who welcome here might forgive my trespass if it seems so .


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 2, 2021)

gordon 2 said:


> Maybe the teachings of Jesus are misunderstood. It has happened before. I'm not certain what the reasons are for this variance in understanding within Christianity. I have not studied this in depth.
> 
> I suspect that there is diverge somewhere due to differences in understanding on the nature of Jesus as God. If Jesus is in fact God as Christians claim, then God's ministry sweeps all times. If Jesus can minister to people who do not know who he is, such as the biblical narrative of the woman at the well, did he minister to Abraham and Abraham knew him not a Christ?
> 
> ...



I too, believe it’s an issue of not understanding the teachings of Jesus. I see it all the time - “Happy birthday in Heaven” to someone who lived a lifestyle completely opposite of “Christianity” and everything the Christian is to turn away from. 

As far as “If you believe” there are a good many that believe in / on Jesus, but they’ll tell you they’re not ready to commit yet - “maybe one day” and for the most part they don’t claim anything except Christian enough not to be an evil person. 

 I dearly loved my Granddaddy but he was rotten / evil as he could be to non family members. He had derogatory words for Jesus, sell you fuel for your tractor and then steal your tractor after he got you drunk. Very deceptive, skin cats out and sell them for rabbits. Every year I have cousins that won’t miss a church service and spend all day Saturday team witnessing that’ll tell him “happy birthday in heaven”  and turn around and condemn you to the burn pit just for an “evil thought”.  The man’s lifestyle contradicts the teachings of Jesus and eradicates the need / purpose for Jesus. 

And, you’re not trespassing here.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 2, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> I too, believe it’s an issue of not understanding the teachings of Jesus. I see it all the time - “Happy birthday in Heaven” to someone who lived a lifestyle completely opposite of “Christianity” and everything the Christian is to turn away from.
> 
> As far as “If you believe” there are a good many that believe in / on Jesus, but they’ll tell you they’re not ready to commit yet - “maybe one day” and for the most part they don’t claim anything except Christian enough not to be an evil person.
> 
> ...


Ok if I barge in with a "devils advocate" question? If not, too late 


> there are a good many that believe in / on Jesus, but they’ll tell you they’re not ready to commit yet - “maybe one day” and for the most part they don’t claim anything except Christian enough not to be an evil person.


Why isnt that enough?
Believes in Jesus.
Apparently Jesus has enough influence on their life to keep them from being evil.
Thats doing pretty good in my book. Sometimes it takes alot of effort not to be evil.
I know all the "supposed to do this" and "supposed to do that" stuff.
But bottom line, they believe in Jesus and He's an influence in their lives.
Maybe they are just cutting out the middle men and getting straight to the point?


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 2, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> Ok if I barge in with a "devils advocate" question? If not, too late
> 
> Why isnt that enough?
> Believes in Jesus.
> ...


I have no issues with cutting out the middle man situation. Rather than “why aren’t you doing these things” it does create the question of “why are you doing that” that goes against the teachings of Jesus.

Are they not in the same category as the ones that gave you zero credibility with Christians?

But if you believe, you’ll also keep his commandments and adhere to his teachings. Just acknowledging his existence is not the same “believe” that you believe he died for your sins and the savior of your soul.

But it does indicate that believing is just the start. Believe and you shall be saved. What is entailed in the shall part is interesting. Doesn’t appear to be an instant fix.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 2, 2021)

It seems many believers want to make more of their beliefs (seeking brownie points?) by taking them to different levels if not extremes and then holding others to the standards which they have made for themselves. 
Believing is like sinning in that A sin is sin A Belief is belief.
I don't know of any system where god says there are levels of each and punishes or rewards accordingly.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 2, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> I have no issues with cutting out the middle man situation. Rather than “why aren’t you doing these things” it does create the question of “why are you doing that” that goes against the teachings of Jesus.
> 
> Are they not in the same category as the ones that gave you zero credibility with Christians?
> 
> But if you believe, you’ll also keep his commandments and adhere to his teachings. Just acknowledging his existence is not the same “believe” that you believe he died for your sins and the savior of your soul.


The absolute majority of Christians that I know, are related to and have conversations with in here all admit that they break commandments and stray from the teachings. And Repeatedly. It is their belief and often their excessive stages of brown nosing that allows them to think that it absolves them of their repeated actions.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 2, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> I have no issues with cutting out the middle man situation. Rather than “why aren’t you doing these things” it does create the question of “why are you doing that” that goes against the teachings of Jesus.
> 
> Are they not in the same category as the ones that gave you zero credibility with Christians?
> 
> ...


Many things Jesus taught were a refresher for the way people acted before his arrival and after his departure.  No belief in him necessary to Be Good. Do Good. Treat others as you like to be treated.
There are some very good people on this planet that do not believe in Jesus. His teachings did not influence their actions.


----------



## Israel (Jun 2, 2021)

bullethead said:


> The absolute majority of Christians that I know, are related to and have conversations with in here all admit that they break commandments and stray from the teachings. And Repeatedly. It is their belief and often their excessive stages of brown nosing that allows them to think that it absolves them of their repeated actions.




Yep. Faith which works by love covers a multitude of sins.


----------



## Israel (Jun 2, 2021)

The bar is set "remarkably" high, and Jesus wasn't ashamed to say it...and pay for it..."be ye therefore perfect _even_ as your heavenly Father is perfect.

Salvation is very welcome to those who find no wiggle room or relative meaning to the words good or perfect. 

Yet Jesus didn't make Himself necessary, He submitted to being made so.

All men make excuses for themselves...(and generally thinks themselves...relatively good or decent) God made Christ to be the propitiation for those who have been made to see otherwise.

The only glory to be found is in Him.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 2, 2021)

Israel said:


> Yep. Faith which works by love covers a multitude of sins.


That seems to be the claims by those that continually sin repeatedly.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 2, 2021)

Israel said:


> The bar is set "remarkably" high, and Jesus wasn't ashamed to say it...and pay for it..."be ye therefore perfect _even_ as your heavenly Father is perfect.
> 
> Salvation is very welcome to those who find no wiggle room or relative meaning to the words good or perfect.
> 
> ...


God made Christ...
One or many to suit


----------



## Israel (Jun 2, 2021)

bullethead said:


> God made Christ...
> One or many to suit


Only One is salvation made through His own blood.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Jun 2, 2021)

Wondered in after seeing this had went 20 pages.  Looked around bemused. Wondering back out.  I'll just drop this on my way out.  Believers and non-believes would do well to realize that AT BEST, believers strain for spiritual progress, not spiritual perfection.  Anything more is delusional on the believers part and misunderstanding on the non-believers part.


----------



## Israel (Jun 2, 2021)

It's not just that Jesus did the heavy lifting (which He surely did), He does all the lifting.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 2, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> I have no issues with cutting out the middle man situation. Rather than “why aren’t you doing these things” it does create the question of “why are you doing that” that goes against the teachings of Jesus.
> 
> Are they not in the same category as the ones that gave you zero credibility with Christians?
> 
> ...


I get what you are saying. But...


> Just acknowledging his existence is not the same “believe” that you believe he died for your sins and the savior of your soul.


I would agree with that.
But heres the wild card. IF what keeps them from doing evil traces back to their belief that Jesus exists thats a whole different ball game. Thats acknowledging his existence
AND incorporating at least some of his teachings into their life.
Maybe Jesus would say "ya know, in these screwed up times, I'm good with that. I'm not going to worry about all that mumbo jumbo. Believes in me and puts it into action.
Now if they all would just do that........".


----------



## Israel (Jun 2, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> I too, believe it’s an issue of not understanding the teachings of Jesus. I see it all the time - “Happy birthday in Heaven” to someone who lived a lifestyle completely opposite of “Christianity” and everything the Christian is to turn away from.
> 
> As far as “If you believe” there are a good many that believe in / on Jesus, but they’ll tell you they’re not ready to commit yet - “maybe one day” and for the most part they don’t claim anything except Christian enough not to be an evil person.
> 
> ...


LOL...even if they lived the most exemplary life..."Happy Birthday in Heaven" would still be kinda ridiculous, no?
But...perhaps that's why those who celebrate the flesh...do. Not yet seeing anything else?


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 2, 2021)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Wondered in after seeing this had went 20 pages.  Looked around bemused. Wondering back out.  I'll just drop this on my way out.  Believers and non-believes would do well to realize that AT BEST, believers strain for spiritual progress, not spiritual perfection.  Anything more is delusional on the believers part and misunderstanding on the non-believers part.


Some (most?) believers do strive for spiritual progress.
Some believers feel right where they are at is perfect and God himself couldnt evolve their views.
In my limited experience/observation.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 2, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Many things Jesus taught were a refresher for the way people acted before his arrival and after his departure.  No belief in him necessary to Be Good. Do Good. Treat others as you like to be treated.
> There are some very good people on this planet that do not believe in Jesus. His teachings did not influence their actions.


Absolutely - you don’t have to be Christian or even believe in Jesus to be a good person.  

But if you profess Christianity, you should live according to the teachings you’re placing yourself under - walk the walk.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 2, 2021)

bullethead said:


> The absolute majority of Christians that I know, are related to and have conversations with in here all admit that they break commandments and stray from the teachings. And Repeatedly. It is their belief and often their excessive stages of brown nosing that allows them to think that it absolves them of their repeated actions.


We do struggle. I’m not looking at good / bad Christians. I’m referring to this - “Do you know that the majority of Christians and Jews don't believe that you need be a Christian or a Jew to go to the "nice place" or "best possible outcome"?”

I can’t speak for the Jew, but for the Christian the issue with this is its impossible to believe that^^^^

To be Christian, weather you’re a good one or a bad one, at a minimum you believe that you must be “one of his” to go. To be one of his is Christian - a follower of the teachings of Jesus.

I can understand what Gordon is saying, the “majority” is questionable.


----------



## gordon 2 (Jun 2, 2021)

I don't what to say this, but I will just the same:  Jesus does not offer a recipe so that when we rise again with Daniel if we have not got the proportions right in the corn bread to at least qualify for a ribbon in the county fair competition... there is no chance our bread will make it the ribbon category in the BIG ARENA.  I personally think that if the corn bread is made with love... its a winner. And I think in the BIG ARENA love's proportions will account for many ribbons-- the  judge's pallet will be most to that spice.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 2, 2021)

gordon 2 said:


> I don't what to say this, but I will just the same:  Jesus does not offer a recipe so that when we rise again with Daniel if we have not got the proportions right in the corn bread to at least qualify for a ribbon in the county fair competition... there is no chance our bread will not make it the ribbon category in the BIG ARENA.  I personally think that if the corn bread is made with love... its a winner. And I think in the BIG ARENA love's proportions will account for many ribbons-- the  judge's pallet will be most to that spice.


Jesus has no plan of salvation? One is very descriptive in Acts. I wished it was as simple as “I believe”. I’d went that one service only and got my ticket. What’s the fuss about going to service and striving? I’m good with goof ups, failures, burnt bread and missing ingredients. I have heart burn with “nothing”.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 2, 2021)

Israel said:


> LOL...even if they lived the most exemplary life..."Happy Birthday in Heaven" would still be kinda ridiculous, no?
> But...perhaps that's why those who celebrate the flesh...do. Not yet seeing anything else?


I realize it helps them cope with reality of losing a loved one and I get it. I would never disrespect them by stating what I believe / disbelieve about the situation. I hear it but let run it’s course. 

I’m not the best at getting the thoughts in my head to the keyboard in the manner that I’m thinking lol. When it comes to this - “Do you know that the majority of Christians don't believe that you need be a Christian to go to the "nice place" or "best possible outcome"?”

I don’t want to sound like I’m disagreeing with Gordon, I’m just puzzled at how this can be accurate. It leaves me to question the majority of Christians as to what drives and motivates them to not only become a Christian, but remain Christian if this is the case.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 3, 2021)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Wondered in after seeing this had went 20 pages.  Looked around bemused. Wondering back out.  I'll just drop this on my way out.  Believers and non-believes would do well to realize that AT BEST, believers strain for spiritual progress, not spiritual perfection.  Anything more is delusional on the believers part and misunderstanding on the non-believers part.


I may be reading this wrong but I’m not one that sees believers in constant struggle, downtrodden, “oh woe is me” and AT BEST - “straining for spiritual progress”. In Jesus you’re joint-heirs to the Kingdom, a royal priesthood - his yoke is easy, burden is light, and in him is rest. Delusional is always referring to yourselves as such ^^^^ when Jesus thinks the opposite of you.

When a baby is born and it does not grow or at best, strains to grow - something is wrong.

True - you don’t strain for perfection, you do strive for it.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Jun 3, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> I may be reading this wrong but I’m not one that sees believers in constant struggle, downtrodden, “oh woe is me” and AT BEST - “straining for spiritual progress”. In Jesus you’re joint-heirs to the Kingdom, a royal priesthood - his yoke is easy, burden is light, and in him is rest. Delusional is always referring to yourselves as such ^^^^ when Jesus thinks the opposite of you.
> 
> When a baby is born and it does not grow or at best, strains to grow - something is wrong.
> 
> True - you don’t strain for perfection, you do strive for it.



Yeah you’re reading it wrong.  I may be perfect in Christ, but my walk isn’t.  I struggle and fail constantly and on my best day I’m no better than the worst of the worst.  Some days I prove that.  It does me well to remember that here in the present Im not on a higher plane than anyone else.


----------



## gordon 2 (Jun 3, 2021)

Bemused or inspired by the perfection talk here. I think to myself birds and God are perfect. Now if I strain or strive for the perfection of a bird I will want a boxer's body and a fancy shirt. Straining or striving for perfection as pertains to the God of Abraham what does this Catholic boy seek?

So I imagine myself as Johnny  in grade four and sister Carmelite picks me out of the class and asks me: "Johnny, what perfection does the good Catholic strive or seeks to attain? And myself as Johnny replies: "Sister the good Catholic tries to seek and attain holiness in the perfect Holiness of God as God is perfect holiness."  And sister Carmelite says to Johnny. " Correct. You deserve a star."  And so I feel good about myself... Sister seems happy with the answer. Might be what she's personally after too-- besides the lesson.


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 3, 2021)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Yeah you’re reading it wrong.  I may be perfect in Christ, but my walk isn’t.  I struggle and fail constantly and on my best day I’m no better than the worst of the worst.  Some days I prove that.  It does me well to remember that here in the present Im not on a higher plane than anyone else.



I get what you’re saying, but that’s not what I’m referring to - being “better” than others. That is irrelevant to having rest in him.

Either the scripture is true about rest in him, an easy yoke and a light burden or it isn’t.

I don’t have a perfect walk but I’m not struggling with things he delivered me from. One must claim deliverance or live in bondage to those things. A man isn’t a recovering alcoholic if God delivered him, he’s a former alcoholic that now finds peace in God. Things I wasn’t in bondage to and am tempted with is a daily learning process if that’s what you’re intending to say. That’s striving for perfection. There are goof ups but you learn from your mistakes and can recognize it next time and leave it alone. I don’t find that to be a struggle.

 And for the record, biblically speaking - perfection is complete obedience to God, not being “on a higher plane than others”.


----------



## gordon 2 (Jun 3, 2021)

https://holiness.comepraywith.us/?k...9CTdr3qv5P-GGBoIMKbtuvKlARm5TErsaApzHEALw_wcB


----------



## Israel (Jun 3, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> I realize it helps them cope with reality of losing a loved one and I get it. I would never disrespect them by stating what I believe / disbelieve about the situation. I hear it but let run it’s course.
> 
> I’m not the best at getting the thoughts in my head to the keyboard in the manner that I’m thinking lol. When it comes to this - “Do you know that the majority of Christians don't believe that you need be a Christian to go to the "nice place" or "best possible outcome"?”
> 
> I don’t want to sound like I’m disagreeing with Gordon, I’m just puzzled at how this can be accurate. It leaves me to question the majority of Christians as to what drives and motivates them to not only become a Christian, but remain Christian if this is the case.



First it's not my place to speak for Gordon or you, (and I know that is not what you are asking for) so, let's just go for a sec with what you say of yourself.



> I’m not the best at getting the thoughts in my head to the keyboard in the manner that I’m thinking lol.



Obviously, neither am I.

But if we can go with that agreement (though I may not agree you are "not the best")...we can at least have some agreement that together...we know what it is to find some inhibition by the restrictions/limits of, and the disciplines of, language.

So, let's (since Gordon is mentioned) extend this also to Gordon who finds himself no less working with very clumsy raw materials and seeking to hew and hone them for translation from one language (of spirit) pure and uncluttered...to this other thing we call English. 

Though he may be a skilled master craftsman, God knows...but we must nevertheless also know we dare not find fault with him if we acknowledge for ourselves, and even claim some concessions for ourselves, that this translating holds an element of impossibility for all who speak. How to accurately get a thing from one place where its accuracy is perfect...to another...where accuracy is at best defined as...almost.

(Now, watch while I show how inept I am!) Because now I must go even further with what seems casually mentioned above. A thing true in spirit...is true to its essence regardless of how or what "it" might speak. Even if, or when its essence in spirit is corrupt. "But wait! That's confusing, didn't you (Israel) just say spirit is accurate, pure and uncluttered?" Isn't this simply too much a paradox to accept...no less "live in" or promulgate? This is not clarity! This is just adding to confusion! What a whack job you are!

If you can concede to me the simplest example I have by my own experience it might help. But only you will know if, or will at least decide for yourself if
#1 This could possibly be true.
#2 Israel is being true in having this as his experience. (Snipers at the ready! This guy is referring to himself in the 3rd person!...and we all know what that means!...he thinks he has escaped himself...don't shoot at the shadow...aim for the heart!)

It came in a time of what was, for me, severe trial of losing what was for me the "everything" I had, or had as knowing to me as "everything". I sought the Lord for restitution, (it was my birthright as believer to pray)...and pray I did, tears I had, snot and misery presented as best could be squeezed from the vessel I was. There was lots of plumbing being done from porcelain to cesspool. Right into the poop.

You're doing well if you have even borne this far.

In the midst of that came the clearest hearing I had of the Lord's voice to that moment. And I will cover years in a single sentence to that moment:

From the time I had received/believed/accepted the Lord in 1968 to these times around 1983, I had walked...at very best as mercurial "believer", disobedient child, even treacherous,...seeing the Lord's hand at times...and yet blissfully (and purposefully) at times...ignoring for my own pleasure_ and my own reasons._

Any man can wonder, even as I also do in part..."It really doesn't look like you have changed much"

But anyway, in the midst of that fruit bearing of those years leading to utter despair in 1983, the Lord had my attention as never before...my life was "going away". I knew it and now it was so very important to me that, in returning to Him, He knew where I was in this sea of grief. Now I was ready to cry out, wave, shout, search for the rescue copter tirelessly...now I was ready to submit! Now I was ready to "take you seriously Lord!" Ha ha ha.

And so seek I did, Pray I did. Grovel I did. (hey...what's gonna work here, Lord?)...and in the midst of that came one cold evening, like a gong going off so deep inside..."To him who has, more shall be given, but to him who has not, even what he thinks he has shall be taken from him" 

I had never...to that moment seen or heard with such clarity. The implications, though terrible...(I was the guy losing all he thought he had, and knew I was him)...could not eclipse the thing that was going on...I was really hearing! God was speaking to me! I mean...He really was! (of course He had been all along, as I see now in a myriad of ways I was just too conscience seared to not see) I was dying...but...God was speaking...to me.
God was speaking!

Did I suddenly fall on my face and surrender? Ha! yes!...but only with even more fervency for restoration of the life I was losing! 

It was so clear the imagining of it one night not long after. I mean...I saw it! "Lord, if you will bring her back through that door with my child...and home to me...I will fall on my face, rejoice in you as never before...I will...blah, blah, blah" Yes, I saw it! I could envision it! I saw "her" coming through the door with love "back" in her eyes, and me leaping for joy and unutterable gratitude for the God who had done this returning of wife and child. "Look Lord!" Look! see how I will be!


And then...it happened. Oh yes...it happened. This happened. And "this" happening is probably not unfamiliar to anyone who has trod this path...was it me asking the question of myself...was it God asking me the question...did it matter? The question was too right in its perfection, and still is for me too right to vivisect it...it was perfect. Too perfect.

"What's the difference?"

And I saw. I saw the man who was seeking to pray (and seek) the God unchangeable in mercy for a "something". He (God) would not be different _when she_ (or if she) ever walks through that door! And I saw the man willing to present (Look Lord! see...see how I will be!) his "truest" praise...if...and when. And I saw the man. (I think David did, too) I saw the man...in seeing God.

What could I do...but come clean? There was no hiding now. No need of it, no cause for it, no value to it that that question exposed. So, I said it. I said what seems the unspeakable for a man thinking himself a believer, a christian, or even "trying to be" for _whatever reason._

Yes, Lord. I don't love you. I love (want) that woman, I love (want) that child (or at least put them wayyyy before you)...but you? Yes...I see I will only _really love_ you...if...(and that Lord...isn't love at all is it?)

I don't love you...at all.

And here's what I did not hear. God slipping off his throne with a thud at such a revelation! God amazed in any way. God not wanting nor willing to hear such a gross confession. All I heard was:

"Of course I knew"...(and it was with laughter!)

"and now you do too"...

and it's OK, because you have said the truest thing you have ever said. Or could be made able to say...by my Son. (Though this I have come, and am still coming to understand)

Me, this untrue thing...full of guile and cleverness, not even beginning to know what love is...being "given credit" as true when finding the only thing, _the only thing undo-able _(who'd give credit for such a thing? Why...it's like giving a rock credit for falling due to gravity!) "See rock, you obeyed the law of gravity!" Goodonya! Ha!

Finding itself unable to lie in the presence of God.

And it is an odd...strange work, this work of Jesus Christ...in bringing men to God.
Cleansing them...so they can..."come clean" before Him...even if with what is most terrible fear at their knowing of themselves before the God who is His God and Father. To be made to hear...laughter...in the most terrible confessions they could imagine, the most terrible things they know of themselves...that one would think (if not knowing...or still "trying to be a christian") one dare not even consider as anything but un-utterable.

But sin, you see, has no power over us any longer to believe it can hold a hiding place of us, or in us to shame.
And that is one of its great weapons and outworkings...to cause a man to hide...even from himself. Unable to even recognize what is "of himself"? (The woman you gave me...)

And what could a man know of "not lie"...if he starts...and/or remains...in lying to himself? 

'Yes Adam...but where did that woman come from?"

How one who believes these things might speak could be very different from one who is (God forbid there be any condemnation heard in this) "trying to believe". Or even to his best knowledge of himself...wanting to.

“If *thou* canst *believe*, all things are possible to him that believeth.”  Desperate for any kind of *help* for his son, the man cried out with tears, “*Lord, I believe*; *help thou mine unbelief*.” 

No...all my snot and tears, all my pleading, all my seeking...all my (whatever was in my doing) I cannot deride as useless to a condemning...for to the measure they were shown useless...is now of greatest comfort to me.

I discovered the One at work is working just as Jesus said His work is.

This is the work of God, that you believe upon Him whom He has sent.

The faith delivered to the saints through Christ has made everything alright with them, and for them...even...and I am persuaded, _especially when they find themselves_ in that place described:

For if our heart condemn us, God is greater than our heart, and knoweth all things. 

Since we can't even be made able to condemn ourselves through that faith, the love of God that therein constrains...(that is love indeed) is ever working (thanks be to God it is not reliant upon our own recognition...but can be seen, nevertheless by miracle)...and may well be of what Gordon speaks.


God knows.

The love that covers a multitude of sins is saving all in Christ...(even if they don't know His name...yet)...and if believed...a man will show "what he has". It's a law. A thing must be as it is.











the second vid, as the first is somewhat time worn and I am grateful that I never have to stand, nor even will...upon what I was, nor how I have spoken...but the question remains if we are not dancing with joy...why not?

What is left yet to "see" to fulfill us...if not Christ...already...and always...Himself?


----------



## bullethead (Jun 3, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> I realize it helps them cope with reality of losing a loved one and I get it. I would never disrespect them by stating what I believe / disbelieve about the situation. I hear it but let run it’s course.
> 
> I’m not the best at getting the thoughts in my head to the keyboard in the manner that I’m thinking lol. When it comes to this - “Do you know that the majority of Christians don't believe that you need be a Christian to go to the "nice place" or "best possible outcome"?”
> 
> I don’t want to sound like I’m disagreeing with Gordon, I’m just puzzled at how this can be accurate. It leaves me to question the majority of Christians as to what drives and motivates them to not only become a Christian, but remain Christian if this is the case.


I think a lot of people "identify" as Christian due to a number of reasons such as being born into a family that was Christian and being raised that way as children. Once adults they still say they are Christian when asked, they may still believe Jesus is their god but worshipping,  attending services,  and certainly anything beyond those just does not happen. But they do have their own view of what the religion means to them and their beliefs adjust accordingly.
They feel comfortable enough to check the Christian box on a survey yet have not stepped inside a church in many years.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 3, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> I get what you’re saying, but that’s not what I’m referring to - being “better” than others. That is irrelevant to having rest in him.
> 
> Either the scripture is true about rest in him, an easy yoke and a light burden or it isn’t.
> 
> ...


What is being in complete obedience and who here is?


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 3, 2021)

bullethead said:


> What is being in complete obedience and who here is?



To hear, trust, submit and surrender to God’s word. I’m not sure who here is in complete obedience, but I know one (me) who isn’t. I do strive for it. But it’s no struggle because I  I do find rest, strength and help in him for the remainder.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 3, 2021)

Israel said:


> First it's not my place to speak for Gordon or you, (and I know that is not what you are asking for) so, let's just go for a sec with what you say of yourself.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


What state are you originally from Israel?


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 3, 2021)

bullethead said:


> I think a lot of people "identify" as Christian due to a number of reasons such as being born into a family that was Christian and being raised that way as children. Once adults they still say they are Christian when asked, they may still believe Jesus is their god but worshipping,  attending services,  and certainly anything beyond those just does not happen. But they do have their own view of what the religion means to them and their beliefs adjust accordingly.
> They feel comfortable enough to check the Christian box on a survey yet have not stepped inside a church in many years.


I’m good with that. I’m even good with those ^^^^ thinking everyone goes to heaven.

It’s the Bible thumping attend every service praying and fasting Christian that I’m really questioning that believes one doesn’t even need to be a Christian to go to heaven. I’m not even questioning their walk, I’m questioning their motives of being Christian if that’s what they believe.

Unless the majority of Christians are those you described. If that’s case then ok then Gordon’s statement makes sense.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 3, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> To hear, trust, submit and surrender to God’s word. I’m not sure who here is in complete obedience, but I know one (me) who isn’t. I do strive for it. But it’s no struggle because I  I do find rest, strength and help in him for the remainder.


Usually the ones who make headlines are in complete obedience. They do not vaccinate their children. They do not believe in doctors or medicine. They trust that the lord will provide for everything. 
It is shown over and over how incorrect they may be, but I have to admire their dedication.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Jun 3, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> Some (most?) believers do strive for spiritual progress.
> Some believers feel right where they are at is perfect and God himself couldnt evolve their views.
> In my limited experience/observation.



"Some", not "most" is no doubt correct based on my experience, and that's among the ones who are going to Church to actually make progress and not just to make a social statement, or because it's expected.    I've been there, been THAT person who thought they had arrived so-to-speak.  Even then deep down inside I was troubled.  I felt like there was more, had to be more, because if I was honest with myself when I looked in the mirror I didn't look any different: my actions were no different than non-believers.  I was no doubt sanctimonious and it showed in my actions: not as much as some, but enough. Overall, if you would have known me you would have never identified me as a Believer unless I told you.

In short I did all I was told by the Church to do.  I checked all the boxes at least on an existential level, but was still as empty as I was before I ever started.  I just didn't have "it".  Whatever "it" was, regarding belief in God, "it" was eluding me.  I was smart enough to realize that much, but just couldn't figure out how to get "it".
That all changed for me a couple of years ago.  I won't go into how it happened, but what I found out, what I learned from my experience, and my experience only, was that there is a spiritual life/existence that 'encompasses' (for lack of a better term) my physical existence and it's that spiritual existence to which Christ spoke of.  Applying his words and thoughts to my physical existence changed little, if anything.  Applying them to my new found spiritual existence changed everything.  Does it make me a better person than anyone else? NO.  ABSOLUTELY NOT.  My biggest enemy is still me, myself and I, and it's a daily struggle for me to not let my "self" become "self" destructive on the spiritual level.  For those who say they can 'rest' in their perfection in Christ.; I get that, but if "I" want to have my best day, every day, then I've got to put in the work to keep me spiritually centered.  This is where I've found God and what I have to do to stay spiritually alive.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Jun 3, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> I get what you’re saying, but that’s not what I’m referring to - being “better” than others. That is irrelevant to having rest in him.
> 
> Either the scripture is true about rest in him, an easy yoke and a light burden or it isn’t.
> 
> ...



Yeah.  We're still talking past each other, but I don't care to debate the semantics.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 3, 2021)

bullethead said:


> I think a lot of people "identify" as Christian due to a number of reasons such as being born into a family that was Christian and being raised that way as children. Once adults they still say they are Christian when asked, they may still believe Jesus is their god but worshipping,  attending services,  and certainly anything beyond those just does not happen. But they do have their own view of what the religion means to them and their beliefs adjust accordingly.
> They feel comfortable enough to check the Christian box on a survey yet have not stepped inside a church in many years.


I think thats ^ a large number of folks, probably alot larger than people think, and getting larger every year. The numbers show it.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 3, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Usually the ones who make headlines are in complete obedience. They do not vaccinate their children. They do not believe in doctors or medicine. They trust that the lord will provide for everything.
> It is shown over and over how incorrect they may be, but I have to admire their dedication.


I cant decide if its dedication or a form of child abuse in some cases. Maybe both.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Jun 3, 2021)

bullethead said:


> I think a lot of people "identify" as Christian due to a number of reasons such as being born into a family that was Christian and being raised that way as children. Once adults they still say they are Christian when asked, they may still believe Jesus is their god but worshipping,  attending services,  and certainly anything beyond those just does not happen. But they do have their own view of what the religion means to them and their beliefs adjust accordingly.
> They feel comfortable enough to check the Christian box on a survey yet have not stepped inside a church in many years.



100% agree.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 3, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> I’m good with that. I’m even good with those ^^^^ thinking everyone goes to heaven.
> 
> It’s the Bible thumping attend every service praying and fasting Christian that I’m really questioning that believes one doesn’t even need to be a Christian to go to heaven. I’m not even questioning their walk, I’m questioning their motives of being Christian if that’s what they believe.
> 
> Unless the majority of Christians are those you described. If that’s case then ok then Gordon’s statement makes sense.


I'm just guessing here, nothing to back it up.... but I do question whether the "majority" believe that. I think, guessing, no numbers.... the majority dont.
Even though Gordon can provide scripture that supports that, I think it is over-ridden by the very commonly held belief that Heaven is for Christians.


----------



## Israel (Jun 3, 2021)

bullethead said:


> What state are you originally from Israel?


I was born in New York.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 3, 2021)

Israel said:


> I was born in New York.


I guessed NY or NJ from what I heard in your videos.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Jun 3, 2021)

bullethead said:


> I guessed NY or NJ from what I heard in your videos.



I guessed North of the Mason Dixie line because only a Yankee thinks his worth is based on how much he talks.  Not all Yankees are like that, but when you meet someone who is, chances are .....


----------



## bullethead (Jun 3, 2021)

SemperFiDawg said:


> I guessed North of the Mason Dixie line because only a Yankee thinks his worth is based on how much he talks.  Not all Yankees are like that, but when you meet someone who is, chances are .....


I've never heard that stereotype and I have some close southern friends that can yap with the best of them. I cannot say that the gift of gab is geographical or anyone in one specific area uses it as adding it as worth.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 3, 2021)

SemperFiDawg said:


> I guessed North of the Mason Dixie line because only a Yankee thinks his worth is based on how much he talks.  Not all Yankees are like that, but when you meet someone who is, chances are .....


.... he's a Salesman


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Jun 3, 2021)

bullethead said:


> I've never heard that stereotype and I have some close southern friends that can yap with the best of them. .



Carpetbaggers


----------



## bullethead (Jun 3, 2021)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Carpetbaggers


They exist everywhere, Scalawags too


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 3, 2021)

Israel said:


> I was born in New York.


Parents used to take us to the old Catskill Game Farm every year. Always looked forward to that trip as a kid.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 3, 2021)

bullethead said:


> They exist everywhere, Scalawags too


Yep. Ive lived in states from the east coat to the west coast and the one thing Ive learned is that people are people regardless of geography.


----------



## Israel (Jun 3, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> Parents used to take us to the old Catskill Game Farm every year. Always looked forward to that trip as a kid.


Ha! Maybe I saw you there. Many summer vacations in the Catskills included that. My mom and dad used to rent a cabin on the Esopus Creek in a place called Phoenecia.


----------



## Israel (Jun 3, 2021)

SemperFiDawg said:


> I guessed North of the Mason Dixie line because only a Yankee thinks his worth is based on how much he talks.  Not all Yankees are like that, but when you meet someone who is, chances are .....


Now, that's funny.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 3, 2021)

Israel said:


> Ha! Maybe I saw you there. Many summer vacations in the Catskills included that. My mom and dad used to rent a cabin on the Esopus Creek in a place called Phoenecia.


Come to think of it, we may have gotten a picture of you!
This you by any chance?  -


----------



## Israel (Jun 4, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> Come to think of it, we may have gotten a picture of you!
> This you by any chance?  -




Ha! That cracked me up. Thanks
I was kinda blonde but at that age I was barely done eatin' my own boogers and wearin' Fanner 50's in a Davy Crockett outfit, coonskin cap and all.

And besides he looks like he could be a sweet kid.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Jun 4, 2021)

bullethead said:


> I've never heard that stereotype



You're not from around here.  Generally people from the South are people of few words, a lot like Westerners, save California.  There are exceptions of course, but taken as a whole...and I'm not sure any group is as bad as those within a 100 mile radius of NYC, Boston, and Philly.  They seem to feel it necessary to voice a strong opinion on literally, everything.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Jun 4, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> .... he's a Salesman



selling theirself.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 4, 2021)

SemperFiDawg said:


> You're not from around here.  Generally people from the South are people of few words, a lot like Westerners, save California.  There are exceptions of course, but taken as a whole...and I'm not sure any group is as bad as those within a 100 mile radius of NYC, Boston, and Philly.  They seem to feel it necessary to voice a strong opinion on literally, everything.


How long have you lived within 100 miles of those cities? 
Have you read these GEORGIA forums? If one post isn't a small novel the multiple small posts every single day in multiple threads equal a small novel. People like their opinions heard and will say what they think they need to in order to satisfy themselves.
Too many things factor into why a person will talk more or less than others but the mason dixon line is definitely not one of them.
I once had a 3hr conversation with Billy Joe Schaeffer, a land owner of 45,000 acres out in Eastern Montana, where I might have said 25 words. That ol boy was so happy to see someone, anyone that he had a lot to say.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 4, 2021)

SemperFiDawg said:


> You're not from around here.  Generally people from the South are people of few words, a lot like Westerners, save California.  There are exceptions of course, but taken as a whole...and I'm not sure any group is as bad as those within a 100 mile radius of NYC, Boston, and Philly.  They seem to feel it necessary to voice a strong opinion on literally, everything.


Next time you are in Boston, go to the North End (Italian section) to Mike's Pastry on Hanover Street. Awesome cannolis and pastries.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Jun 4, 2021)

bullethead said:


> How long have you lived within 100 miles of those cities?
> Have you read these GEORGIA forums? If one post isn't a small novel the multiple small posts every single day in multiple threads equal a small novel. People like their opinions heard and will say what they think they need to in order to satisfy themselves.
> Too many things factor into why a person will talk more or less than others but the mason dixon line is definitely not one of them.
> I once had a 3hr conversation with Billy Joe Schaeffer, a land owner of 45,000 acres out in Eastern Montana, where I might have said 25 words. That ol boy was so happy to see someone, anyone that he had a lot to say.



Apparently you missed the point where I alluded to exceptions to the rule and took it personal.  Oh well.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Jun 4, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> Next time you are in Boston, go to the North End (Italian section) to Mike's Pastry on Hanover Street. Awesome cannolis and pastries.



Never been to Boston.  Have had a bunch of friends from there.  Don't think you could pay me enough to go.  I despise even driving through Macon and I ain't lost a thing in Boston.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 4, 2021)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Apparently you missed the point where I alluded to exceptions to the rule and took it personal.  Oh well.


No, I did not take anything personal.
I live in Coal country. Much more laid back than the cities but I think like with most things involving people there are a certain percentage that like to talk. Seems like more talkers in the cities because there are more people, but we all have our share.


----------



## Israel (Jun 4, 2021)

New York is a relatively big state and there are lots of places one can be from well outside a 100 mile radius of NYC.

Durn, one can even be from parts of Lon Gisland (pronounced Lon Gisland) and still not be within 100 miles of neither it nor Boston.
And that's just "_the" Island._

You take in rural "upstate" and western NY (a lot of farm country) that's also well beyond 100 miles of "the City", and you really have _most of _the state. Also well outside the seemingly pernicious reaches of the unholy trinity of Boston, NYC, and Philly as mentioned. (Not to mention California).

It may well be I have mentioned where in NY I am from, and in that some may remember. But just saying "New York" apart from an acutely tuned ear to local accents gives one nothing to go by for any surmise of geographically attributable garrulity. (I was gunna go with loquacity but I din't want that cornfused with eloquence cause to me loquacious has always kinda had a nice ring to it despite its rather derogatory definition)

You know like, "Oh, my, she's not only curvaceous but loquacious as well? Va va va voom, what a combo!"

Gee, does va va va voom date me, too?

"Fire control, fire control...we have a fix on both date and location...gimme a firing solution. Open tubes 1 and 4..."

But, I digress.

And I don't want to deny, despite review of SAT prep words and submarine movies, that "divine revelation" could come into play.

As in "My child, He's from within 100 miles of NYC!"

(Does God use abbreviations?) Or would He say...Manhattan? Queens? Bronx? Staten island? Brooklyn? Or would He say..."My best guess is he's from within a 100 mile radius"?

Or...is He even plainer than that? Does He really know where _everyone_ is "coming from"?

When I used to be an American male caucasian, I was also quite casual about (and not without some pride) saying I was from da Bronx.

Ya know, where they may not be all squinty eyed and taciturn like the "man with no name" who lets his plain speakin' and straight shootin' speak for him in Eastwood spaghetti westerns (and as I imagine many still like to see themselves) as opposed to say the easily disposable and easily oppose-able foil to his heroics found in arrogant Yankee dandies, bloated, and all destitute of substance. (Hey, din't ya jes love when he spatooted on dat carpetbagger in Josie Wales?)

But then, I found out air bags don't really need a whole lotta words to show..."where they're coming from".

And that the writer of this may have had more on the ball than the many religious admit:

Of whom we have many things to say, and hard to be uttered, seeing ye are dull of hearing.

Maybe some ain't heard nothin' yet.

Take yer pick. Or is it have your pic taken?

then hang it on the walls of yer heart.

"Lil chilluns, keeps yersefs from idols"


----------



## Spotlite (Jun 4, 2021)

Israel said:


> New York is a relatively big state and there are lots of places one can be from well outside a 100 mile radius of NYC.
> 
> Durn, one can even be from Lon Gisland (pronounced Lon Gisland) and still not be within 100 miles of neither it nor Boston.
> And that's just "_the" Island._
> ...





> Maybe some ain't heard nothin' yet.



I like it!!


----------



## Israel (Jun 5, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> I like it!!



LOL.


*



			Ya know, where they may not be all squinty eyed and taciturn like the "man with no name"...
		
Click to expand...

*
*Should I a'gone with laconic instead of taciturn?*

*Laconic has at least a Spartan reference, and who don't love dem Spartans?*

*Specially wid dat scene where ole Leonidas boots dat Persian emissary into the abyss sayin' "Dis is Sparta! An' we ain't fond o' yer kind roun' heah"*

*Kinda like the Greekacious quivalint of a sundown town.*

*Ya know, I dun thunk bout it a great deal over da decades, over dat 'traction of dat Jesus Christ an His sciples sayin' stuff like He gunna crush yer enemies unner His feet an all. But I bin thinkin if'n yer enemies ain't really His enemies an yer jes hopin to use Him as yer personal dispose all, ya jes might find out ya ain't as bigga friend o'Him as ya thought. *

*Oooops...and even mebee...one a His enemies?*

*But, He's still kind to wut thinks thattaway. He can save...to the uttermost.*

In truth...I am persuaded He'll have it no other way...but to the uttermost


----------



## gordon 2 (Jun 5, 2021)

Israel said:


> LOL.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Mighty fine writin. The print just comes off the page...window, whatever. I liked your reference to Eva Gabor. I still don't understand how Neil Young ever made it past his garage band and much of anything else.

Remember when TV speakers would vibrate their plywood cabinets and the only good thing about when it got all snowy and pounding the set would not get the picture and when it was its time to go it was interesting to see how powerful the speaker magnet was going to be? Well this morning all the snow is gone from your writing. Got any plans for the old magnet?

Personally I got hay fever so I live in the woods.


----------



## Israel (Jun 5, 2021)

Greekacious is the place to be
Farm livin' is the life for me.
Land spreadin' out so far and wide
Keep Manhattan, just give me that countryside.


----------



## Israel (Jun 5, 2021)

gordon 2 said:


> Mighty fine writin. The print just comes off the page...window, whatever. I liked your reference to Eva Gabor. I still don't understand how Neil Young ever made it past his garage band and much of anything else.
> 
> Remember when TV speakers would vibrate their plywood cabinets and the only good thing about when it got all snowy and pounding the set would not get the picture and when it was its time to go it was interesting to see how powerful the speaker magnet was going to be? Well this morning all the snow is gone from your writing. Got any plans for the old magnet?
> 
> Personally I got hay fever so I live in the woods.



Ha!



> Got any plans for the old magnet?



I go a fishin'

to parrotfraze wun dem udder sciples.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 5, 2021)

gordon 2 said:


> Mighty fine writin. The print just comes off the page...window, whatever. I liked your reference to Eva Gabor. I still don't understand how Neil Young ever made it past his garage band and much of anything else.
> 
> Remember when TV speakers would vibrate their plywood cabinets and the only good thing about when it got all snowy and pounding the set would not get the picture and when it was its time to go it was interesting to see how powerful the speaker magnet was going to be? Well this morning all the snow is gone from your writing. Got any plans for the old magnet?
> 
> Personally I got hay fever so I live in the woods.





> I still don't understand how Neil Young ever made it past his garage band and much of anything else


.
Blasphemy. Complete and utter blasphemy.


----------



## Israel (Jun 5, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> .
> Blasphemy. Complete and utter blasphemy.




You gunna rend yer garments?


----------



## bullethead (Jun 5, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> .
> Blasphemy. Complete and utter blasphemy.


While I do like his voice/music(and many others similar) had Neil Young, Bob Dylan, Eddie Vedder etc etc types not made it huge NONE of these tv talent show judges would turn their chair or press a button for any of them had those guys made their appearance on the scene today. Those judges cannot turn around fast enough for people who now sound like those guys because they sound like those guys but I have my doubts that the judges would turn if those voices/styles were not already established.


----------



## Israel (Jun 5, 2021)

Yeah. I remember laughing with a friend about the lyrics on albums of artists his older brothers were listening to who were also buds with my elder brother. Sometimes a secondary exposure introduces you to stuff a bit earlier than you'd find on your own. Somebody's already brought it into the house.

Anyway what the...? "The pump don't work cause the vandals took the handles..."? And that voice! On ears used to all the 50's and early 60's smoothness, harmonies, girls singing about boys, boys singing about girls...guys singing about cars and surfing...

But, just as I'd resisted all the hubbub aboout some guys from England, thinking the whole thing a threat to the likes I was already fondly listening to...it was only a matter of hearing them a few times...then seeing them on Sullivan...and it eventually was like "Paul Revere and the who?" The Beach guys?

So it was just as futile to try to resist this guy whose lyrics included things like..."ya don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows"


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 6, 2021)

Israel said:


> You gunna rend yer garments?


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 6, 2021)

bullethead said:


> While I do like his voice/music(and many others similar) had Neil Young, Bob Dylan, Eddie Vedder etc etc types not made it huge NONE of these tv talent show judges would turn their chair or press a button for any of them had those guys made their appearance on the scene today. Those judges cannot turn around fast enough for people who now sound like those guys because they sound like those guys but I have my doubts that the judges would turn if those voices/styles were not already established.


Agreed.


----------



## gordon 2 (Jun 6, 2021)

Besides the sounds, besides the voice, there are the lyrics and the arrangements of lyrics, the meaning of the lyrics divined from free associations which are always wanting to find somethings in the future to make things right. Cinnamon girl, Old man who thinks like me, ( not!). A lack of experience, empathy, wisdom, or judgment-- The Naive as artistic subject, on and on and on just grinds my gears. The people who could sit at a Neil Young event, thinking "O Man he's just like me, or just like I could be..."was not the place to find my Cinnamon girl and old men I prized in conversations for not being like me.


This was more as my Cinnamon girl. While the airways were roaring with Young's, mine had come and gone... and I was running in a thousand ways,  with that somehow it was best to give than to get and life was more than a bit complex:







( Did you listen to the drum line 320 ish?)


----------



## bullethead (Jun 6, 2021)

I'm more of a Led Zeppelin,  Audioslave/Soundgarden, Pearl Jam, Sammy Hagar/The Circle,, Van Halen, Journey, Foo Fighters, Classic Rock, Hard Rock type. With LIVE performances being much better than studio recordings.


----------



## Israel (Jun 6, 2021)

gordon 2 said:


> Besides the sounds, besides the voice, there are the lyrics and the arrangements of lyrics, the meaning of the lyrics divined from free associations which are always wanting to find somethings in the future to make things right. Cinnamon girl, Old man who thinks like me, ( not!). A lack of experience, empathy, wisdom, or judgment-- The Naive as artistic subject, on and on and on just grinds my gears. The people who could sit at a Neil Young event, thinking "O Man he's just like me, or just like I could be..."was not the place to find my Cinnamon girl and old men I prized in conversations for not being like me.
> 
> 
> This was more as my Cinnamon girl. While the airways were roaring with Young's, mine had come and gone... and I was running in a thousand ways,  with that somehow it was best to give than to get and life was more than a bit complex:
> ...


 This was a fave though I was more inclined to Judy Collin's cover.

So this may be the best of both.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 6, 2021)

I will admit, Bluegrass is mesmerizing. Those banjo players are awesome and I can listen to and enjoy almost all music but this modern stuff where there is no band and is mostly auto tune is revolting.  I have my 80s Hair Band and Metal moments also. I have been listening to Mammoth WVH lately. Eddie Van Halen's Son.


----------



## gordon 2 (Jun 6, 2021)

bullethead said:


> I'm more of a Led Zeppelin,  Audioslave/Soundgarden, Pearl Jam, Sammy Hagar/The Circle,, Van Halen, Journey, Foo Fighters, Classic Rock, Hard Rock type. With LIVE performances being much better than studio recordings.




I thought I would like live performances too... until I did went and the person or person(s) next to me knew and sangs all the repatory and sangs them each and everyone with more gusto than the live  act right in my good ear or screeeemed! high pitch for their excitements. Even the good singers were annoying and most were anywhere gifted in the pipes.

Also disliked when trying to look closely and listen to what the artist is doing and the folk in front of you get up and raise their hands and sing right along with the band...robbing me of eyes and ears and my admission ticket.

I pay my two bits to see and hear the high diving act, not the two bits getting their jaw joy around me. Makes me a Grinch I guess. The worse concert I ever been was a Garth Brook concert. Man the folk were exited in that one. Turned  me right off of his music. It was like buying a canned salmon for samich spead and the fish is no good. That how much I like live performances... But hey its all psychology...


----------



## hummerpoo (Jun 6, 2021)

With the exception of Dylan, I couldn't name a single recording by any artist mentioned above. Now ... Eddy Arnold, Patsy Cline, Bill Monroe, Hank Williams, Flatt and Scruggs, Lorretta Lynn, Tennessee Ernie Ford...I'm a little more familiar with.


----------



## gordon 2 (Jun 6, 2021)

bullethead said:


> I will admit, Bluegrass is mesmerizing. Those banjo players are awesome and I can listen to and enjoy almost all music but this modern stuff where there is no band and is mostly auto tune is revolting.  I have my 80s Hair Band and Metal moments also. I have been listening to Mammoth WVH lately. Eddie Van Halen's Son.




I like bluegrass, always did and alot of the reason is that after my dad died, the only old guys that played music like he did were them kind gentlemen at bluegrass festivals. They became my dads regards music. But I've always liked bluegrass besides... although to keep to my Grinch attitude today, I don't care for alot of the new-modern stuff. It seems to be made for and by people who have an education in music and the natural hard knocks Appalachia hop is out of her.


----------



## gordon 2 (Jun 6, 2021)

hummerpoo said:


> With the exception of Dylan, I couldn't name a single recording by any artist mentioned above. Now ... Eddy Arnold, Patsy Cline, Bill Monroe, Hank Williams, Flatt and Scruggs, Lorretta Lynn, Tennessee Ernie Ford...I'm a little more familiar with.




Hum! That's a fine foundation right there. Like going to the original sources. Bing Crosby should be in your list regards voice, it was in Merle Haggard's. 

And speaking of country music... seem everyone is singing with a tobacco plug in their mouth these days... The boys at least.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 6, 2021)

gordon 2 said:


> I thought I would like live performances too... until I did went and the person or person(s) next to me knew and sangs all the repatory and sangs them each and everyone with more gusto than the live  act right in my good ear or screeeemed! high pitch for their excitements. Even the good singers were annoying and most were anywhere gifted in the pipes.
> 
> Also disliked when trying to look closely and listen to what the artist is doing and the folk in front of you get up and raise their hands and sing right along with the band...robbing me of eyes and ears and my admission ticket.
> 
> I pay my two bits to see and hear the high diving act, not the two bits getting their jaw joy around me. Makes me a Grinch I guess. The worse concert I ever been was a Garth Brook concert. Man the folk were exited in that one. Turned  me right off of his music. It was like buying a canned salmon for samich spead and the fish is no good. That how much I like live performances... But hey its all psychology...


I use Spotify and listen to the live stuff


----------



## Israel (Jun 6, 2021)

hummerpoo said:


> With the exception of Dylan, I couldn't name a single recording by any artist mentioned above. Now ... Eddy Arnold, Patsy Cline, Bill Monroe, Hank Williams, Flatt and Scruggs, Lorretta Lynn, Tennessee Ernie Ford...I'm a little more familiar with.



Ha!
I used to run around singing "another day older and deeper in debt, St Peter doncha call me cause I cain't go...."...
Mommy...what's a company store?


----------



## bullethead (Jun 6, 2021)

hummerpoo said:


> With the exception of Dylan, I couldn't name a single recording by any artist mentioned above. Now ... Eddy Arnold, Patsy Cline, Bill Monroe, Hank Williams, Flatt and Scruggs, Lorretta Lynn, Tennessee Ernie Ford...I'm a little more familiar with.


More my Father's era but I can appreciate those artists.
I do like Johnny Cash


----------



## gordon 2 (Jun 6, 2021)

bullethead said:


> I use Spotify and listen to the live stuff


Your just plain smart and I'm prone to jump to conclusions.

Here's my only Wow concert. It changed how I understood what rockers were trying to do...

<iframe width="950" height="534" src="



" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 6, 2021)

gordon 2 said:


> I thought I would like live performances too... until I did went and the person or person(s) next to me knew and sangs all the repatory and sangs them each and everyone with more gusto than the live  act right in my good ear or screeeemed! high pitch for their excitements. Even the good singers were annoying and most were anywhere gifted in the pipes.
> 
> Also disliked when trying to look closely and listen to what the artist is doing and the folk in front of you get up and raise their hands and sing right along with the band...robbing me of eyes and ears and my admission ticket.
> 
> I pay my two bits to see and hear the high diving act, not the two bits getting their jaw joy around me. Makes me a Grinch I guess. The worse concert I ever been was a Garth Brook concert. Man the folk were exited in that one. Turned  me right off of his music. It was like buying a canned salmon for samich spead and the fish is no good. That how much I like live performances... But hey its all psychology...


You have to be in the right frame of mind when you go to a concert. People are going to sing, dance, block your view, scream shout wiggle all about and occasionally puke on your shoes. Its inevitable. Unbutton that collar and go with the floooow.....


----------



## gordon 2 (Jun 7, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> You have to be in the right frame of mind when you go to a concert. People are going to sing, dance, block your view, scream shout wiggle all about and occasionally puke on your shoes. Its inevitable. Unbutton that collar and go with the floooow.....



Yea...but I don't trust peer pressure. I don't trust the wisdom or the morality of  the mob. I think "What if this crowd of clowns were at The Capitol half naked, with Viking horn caps, waving their stripet banners to the sounds of heavy metal crashing? "--  I cringe with distrust? When I go, when I have to go, the wify makes me do it.   She don't care about the mob's failings.


----------



## hummerpoo (Jun 7, 2021)

Israel said:


> Ha!
> I used to run around singing "another day older and deeper in debt, St Peter doncha call me cause I cain't go...."...
> Mommy...what's a company store?



Another One


----------



## bullethead (Jun 7, 2021)

gordon 2 said:


> Yea...but I don't trust peer pressure. I don't trust the wisdom or the morality of  the mob. I think "What if this crowd of clowns were at The Capitol half naked, with Viking horn caps, waving their stripet banners to the sounds of heavy metal crashing? "--  I cringe with distrust? When I go, when I have to go, the wify makes me do it.   She don't care about the mob's failings.


Lawn seating at a Pearl Jam concert in '96 was more violent than the tour group at the Capitol!! Crowd moved 30 yds left and right all show and mosh pits sporadically appeared.
Still loved it!
They've settled considerably with age


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 7, 2021)

gordon 2 said:


> Yea...but I don't trust peer pressure. I don't trust the wisdom or the morality of  the mob. I think "What if this crowd of clowns were at The Capitol half naked, with Viking horn caps, waving their stripet banners to the sounds of heavy metal crashing? "--  I cringe with distrust? When I go, when I have to go, the wify makes me do it.   She don't care about the mob's failings.


Wisdom? Morality?
Its a concert not Mr. Roger's Neighborhood.


----------



## Israel (Jun 8, 2021)

Saw this...we could all chip in and share a suite at the Waldorf! Maybe rent an RV...or sleep on the streets and wash at water fountains. How fun, no?

https://www.showbiz411.com/2021/06/...unkel-bruce-alicia-keys-diana-ross-stay-tuned


----------



## bullethead (Jun 8, 2021)

Israel said:


> Saw this...we could all chip in and share a suite at the Waldorf! Maybe rent an RV...or sleep on the streets and wash at water fountains. How fun, no?
> 
> https://www.showbiz411.com/2021/06/...unkel-bruce-alicia-keys-diana-ross-stay-tuned


I'd rather go see an up and coming singer or band than most of those Liberals. Springsteen being the worst of them all.
I don't care what political affiliation entertainers are but when they feel the need to spew it at their shows I refuse to support them. I want to hear music at a concert that I am paying to see, not political rants.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 9, 2021)

Israel said:


> Saw this...we could all chip in and share a suite at the Waldorf! Maybe rent an RV...or sleep on the streets and wash at water fountains. How fun, no?
> 
> https://www.showbiz411.com/2021/06/...unkel-bruce-alicia-keys-diana-ross-stay-tuned


Havent done that since me and Jack Daniels parted ways 
You and Bullet in an RV?
We would either find one of you with a phone cord wrapped around your neck or... by the end of the trip you'll be best buds, holding hands and singing Kumbaya.


----------



## bullethead (Jun 9, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> Havent done that since me and Jack Daniels parted ways
> You and Bullet in an RV?
> We would either find one of you with a phone cord wrapped around your neck or... by the end of the trip you'll be best buds, holding hands and singing Kumbaya.


Lolololol
I'd guarantee a handshake and good conversation,  anything beyond that is anyone's guess.
Tho, beaten to death with a Bible would be an ironic end for either one of us.


----------



## gordon 2 (Jun 9, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> Wisdom? Morality?
> Its a concert not Mr. Roger's Neighborhood.




Went to a Lynard Skynyrd concert once with a load of neigbour's kids and my own (14-fisteen yr old, all aspiring musicians 

. Opening act was Ted Nugent. He painted the air blue with profanity, mostly the f word, most of his set.  Also, I found out why people light up their lighters and sway them at some songs there for the first time.

As soon as someone got a lighter out and swaying to some song or tune everyone with a lighter and weed rushed to light up by pulling a joint from denim vests and coats, like bass taking a lure and Charley Chaplin at the assembly line.  And like it was blowing a hurricane in the arena,  sheltering their slim dope cigarette against their lighter flames ( Cops were at arena doors).

They were deep inhalers and while still red in the face their breaths holding on to every last oz of whatever is in them smokes and eyes getting reddened they would offer a toke to their neigbour in the seating. Did not matter it was my kids.

It reeked of dope after a few lighter songs. And the cops at the door somehow didn't care or could not care. It was a happening I guess.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 9, 2021)

gordon 2 said:


> Went to a Lynard Skynyrd concert once with a load of neigbour's kids and my own (14-fisteen yr old, all aspiring musicians
> 
> . Opening act was Ted Nugent. He painted the air blue with profanity, mostly the f word, most of his set.  Also, I found out why people light up their lighters and sway them at some songs there for the first time.
> 
> ...





> they would offer a toke to their neigbour


Sounds pretty moral to me. "Do unto others .....". 


> It reeked of dope after a few lighter songs. And the cops at the door somehow didn't care or could not care.


Cops arent worried about the stoners. Its the drinkers that cause the problems.


----------

