Bible Study..

[Steven]

Steven, I understand what Christ represents to you, Dignity, Honor, Honesty, ect... all the good values a person can have on life. However All the good values in life aren't strictly limited to Jesus and Jesus only. I'm not trying to put words in your mouth however that is the impression I got from your previous threads here. Buddha stands for that in in a different light, Allah, ect. It's basic values and principles of which every person of any faith can embrace (shit, boondock saints quote!)

The extra attention focused souly on Christian values always having to be mentioned with our form of government really does make me very uncomfortable due with the ridiculously high evangelical wackjob numbers that don't seem to understand the importance of separation of church and state. I'm not talking about all evangelicals, I'm talking about the ones that believe jesus is coming extremely soon, and that we should indulge and rape the planet earth for everything it has, and go against the teachings of tolerance of difference, and let god be the only judge on any mans soul, and hypocritically pass negative judgment on anyone not in their faith. True there's always whack jobs out there, however this number is surprisingly high. They've even admitted to having large enough numbers to sway political votes. What scares me is this isn't some pissed off atheist's libeled blog rant, it's a reality. And though I know you truly do wish to defend your views and beliefs against challengers, and I will never get on your case for doing so. Just understand, a lot of people who take such a high defensive stance to your religious views with the issue of church and state may have a bad idea of Christianity as a whole because of this large group of people who call themselves "Christians". They're breeding a lot of counter resentment and intolerance that is blindly labeling ALL Christians just as badly as they're being intolerant of people with different views and lifestyles than them. And yes, they're tied in with the government so badly that I can't even recognize the separating line between their church, and our government anymore. And like I said, Jesus stands for alot of good as you stated as well, however these political power figures who are using his name don't exactly try to follow in the same footsteps. So I feel Jesus's name is being used unfairly amongst politics to try to manipulate people into this cultlike blending of church and state.

I feel that yes we did jack the thread and yes you made some good points here and kudos is deserved.

but I also feel like Huckabee has as much right as anybody to work via his beleifs and agenda, because anybody would do that, anybody human at least.

[Steven]

Well said, I feel the same.

There's crazy whack job Christians who actually want the "end times" as much as Mummadh Ahmadinijad (I know...there's a good chance I butchered that) and those people are just as evil and horrible as he is.

There's Evangelicals that are trying to supply NUKES to Israel, trying to spark a war between Iran and Israel (nuclear war) because they think that if they bomb the planet and destroy everything than Jesus will magically fly out of the sky (because there will be no more people, must be time then, right? He HAS to come then! ) and take us all to heaven.

I feel for my two cents, that as a Christian I think Revelations was the biggest crock of shit ever put in the bible. It was written MASSIVELY long after Christ even died as a scare tactic into getting people to join the church. As a Christian I am almost offended by it, really, and to think people this day and age buy into it is sad...

In my beliefs, when we die we go to heaven...you know right then and there. Not everyone rises out of the ground as a CORPSE and flies up into the air with Jesus (because you know, people from 1,000s even 100s of years ago still have a corpse still kicking around, right? Note the sarcasm people!). As a matter of fact, I'm not even sure if humanity will EVER end, and I see no problem with that. If it does happen, it will be when the sun explodes in a few 100,000 years and engulfs us all, Jesus will have nothing to do with it. He came, He solved, He conquered and went home. His physical job is done here, imo.

I feel you should transfer this to another thread so we can discuss it.

I feel I'd like to know about these eveangelicals who are smuggling nukes to bring in the onset of Jesus millenial reign, do tell please.

and I feel you are mistaken about Revelations - especially in light of who wrote it and his position among the 12.

[hunhee]

I wanted to talk more about Saul of Tarsus, but lets talk about Revelations, because well.. it's actually one of the most interesting books in the bible. At least to me.

As you can see, I moved some of the posts above (points) to this thread because they didn't fit in the other thread.

[hunhee]

You (personally) know very well Troy - exactly what type of man Saul of Tarsus was. You know he was a wonderful critical thinker. You know his faith caused him tremendous pain as he wrestled with it, and you know he was no hack and was a highly educated and respected man. he did not take the position you are suggesting is biblical, and he wrote a great deal of the New Testament. I feel as if you are confusing the bitter end results of "religion" with that which you see as biblical.

You say an all knowing God would have been so much clearer, much less mysterious.

Why?

Lets look at say.....relationships for an example.

its a huge mystery - th ones that work. Sure there are plenty of books out there. But in the end - to make a long term commitment work it takes tremendous self sacrifice and a great deal of ditch digging just to understand - so that in the end - when you've really built something - you have FAITH in it, and you know how to nurture it, and you know in your heart why it works and all of othe nuances.

But nobody gets there in 6 months, let alone 6 years.

But I cant prove it and I certainly cant sell it in here.

Lets talk about Saul of Tarsus.. you said "nobody gets there in 6 months, let alone 6 years." Guess what, your precious author of most of the New Testament got there in less than three days. He supposedly had some "vision" on his way to Demascus where he was blinded by a light and supposedly heard the word of Jesus asking him why he is persecuting him. After that, he lost his sight for three days, and he neither ate nor drank. He became a believer. If that isn't blatant meddling on God's part, i don't know what is. Why isn't there more of this today? but then again, if this were to happen in today's day, umm.. guess what, we'd put them in the looney bin.

Saul was in demascus, and the locals drove him out, he went to jeruselum, but god's followers didn't trust him, so he went to present day Turkey which was populated by believers in Mithras which roots from Zoroastrianism (their god Ahura-Mazda). The Magi Zarathustra predicted the savior birth to believe to be Jesus. Well..here's where it gets better.. The festival of Mithras (or his birth) is December 25 (Winter Solstice), where he was born in a manger surrounded by shephards.. get this, that's where the whole gift giving thing comes in, from since 200 BCE. These aren't the only similarities between Jesus and Mithras.. So, when Saul came to present day Turkey and preached about his "Jesus" it's no wonder why he got takers, they didn't have to change things up too much from what they were already doing.

[Steven]

Lets talk about Saul of Tarsus.. you said "nobody gets there in 6 months, let alone 6 years." Guess what, your precious author of most of the New Testament got there in less than three days. He supposedly had some "vision" on his way to Demascus where he was blinded by a light and supposedly heard the word of Jesus asking him why he is persecuting him. After that, he lost his sight for three days, and he neither ate nor drank. He became a believer. If that isn't blatant meddling on God's part, i don't know what is. Why isn't there more of this today? but then again, if this were to happen in today's day, umm.. guess what, we'd put them in the looney bin.

Saul was in demascus, and the locals drove him out, he went to jeruselum, but god's followers didn't trust him, so he went to present day Turkey which was populated by believers in Mithras which roots from Zoroastrianism (their god Ahura-Mazda). The Magi Zarathustra predicted the savior birth to believe to be Jesus. Well..here's where it gets better.. The festival of Mithras (or his birth) is December 25 (Winter Solstice), where he was born in a manger surrounded by shephards.. get this, that's where the whole gift giving thing comes in, from since 200 BCE. These aren't the only similarities between Jesus and Mithras.. So, when Saul came to present day Turkey and preached about his "Jesus" it's no wonder why he got takers, they didn't have to change things up too much from what they were already doing.

first, I admire someone who does her homework and kudos to you....

ok, let's dig in a little....

first, my statement: "nobody gets there in 6 months, let alone 6 years."

Do you remember how I went on to exemplify that statement with a nod toward solid relationships and the mystery therin?

there was a reason for that. It was an answer to Troy's suggestion (if I understood him correctly) that the Bible insists that we dont use our noodles and simply do as we're told. Ansd so I brough in Saul of Tarsus (Paul).

why?

why would I choose him?

lets start with an interesting bit of data I read about a month or so ago.....that Saul (the new testament Paul) made the top 6 in the 100 most influential people of all time.

I dug that.

I dug that - because Paul was a highly educated man under Gamliel, and had the rare priviledge of having dual Roman/Jewish citizenship and authority (since youve done your homework you know he was a force to be reckoned with in the early churches persecution and was on hand at the murder of the first Christian Martyr - Steven).

But what I have always loved about Paul was his duality - he was a very deep thinker and extremely articulate and impassioned, and he did indeed help to found and build the first solid chruches.

And yet if you read on into this man - he was also personally burdoned and tortured and yet he is very transparant with that. Quick question to ponder - in terms of leadership and influential people in the modern era....how many of them are so forthright in their weaknesses? How many of them volunteer their failiars - especially those on a personal level?

Paul did not have to do this. He simply chose to.

The cannonizers of scripturte did not have to include this (bad press no?), they just chose to.

In fact I constantly make the point that for such an allegedly biased peice of work the Bible is chock full of ugliness that could have and should have been edited out, translation after translation as the argument goes. But that bad shit never gets thinned out.

OK, you were telling me about the story of Christ's interaction on the road to Damasics when he blinded Saul ("Saul, why are you persecuting me???" and yes I know that story - but you missed my point, Love.

a walk with God - as the biblical model suggests - is a relational model. Paul definately did NOT "get it" in a matter of days. Yes he was given hard truth, enlightenment, a calling, a purpose, but he did not suddenly "arrive" as you seem to suggest. And nobody does. You dont convert, get batised and suddenly understand the cosmos.

Paul himself, years later - describes this struggle as goes on to write about how he does the things that "he does not want to do" and the things that he knows he should do for the glory of God "he does not do". He calls himself cursed. cursed.

and this is exactly what I meant by: "nobody gets there in 6 months, let alone 6 years."

watch Paul as he does his ministry Hun Hee.

Watch the young people who journey with him. who he mentors.

Watch the churches he rebukes for overt legalism and division.

Watch how he rebukes the Apostle Peter (the same Peter the Pope is built on - Peter "The Rock" as Chrsit named him) to his face and writes about it because Peter was enlightened by Christ himself and was one of the original 12 and yet he STILL clung to legalism and seperated himself form gentiles.

Watch Paul as he gets shipwrecked, hunted, imprisoned, stoned almost to death, becomes a tentmaker and ultimately says that he has "learned to become content with alot, and leanred to become content with a little"

Watch him as he states that all he has accomplished is worthless in the pursuit of christ.

watch how he calls himself the "Prince of all sinners' long after his conversion.

you have the "facts"

you have the man himself.

You have the times.

you have the people affected by him

and then you have to take on the challange of putting it all togethor.

just like you have to do with any other literary peice of work when considering the writer. We do that stuff in classrooms every day - but then seem to call that unreliable when it comes to Biblical wiritings. I trip on that. I have a book in my collection about the life of Hemmingway written by a man who was never there. He simply askes us to do everythign I just asked you to do with Paul.

what I'm getting at Hun Hee - is that the understanding of knowing God, and knowing your individual calling, is a process - even for a man like Paul, which is beautifully illustrated throughout the new testament. For the most part, I am a beleiver because of Paul's writings, especially in light of his struggles.

I also brought in Peter, the Rock. Peter walked, ate with, performed miracles with, hung with, and was personally called and converted by Christ. And he was probably the most dynamic of the original 12. Yet he was hung up in legalism - to the point of his rebuke by Paul - and also to the point of writing about supernatural things in dreams where he was wrestling with God over what was "clean" to eat....because God was calling him away from his Judaism and its tradition and limitations....and Peter had a very hard time with it. He was saying no to the same God who walked on water and raised the dead. And he wrote about it, it did not flatter him by his writing it. Hmmmmm.... relationships take time. Understanding takes time...and it conflicts with our basiuc human nature. Even if your the guy that watched a crucifixtion and then saw the raised dead days later. Interesting (to me at least)

ok - you had mentioned divine intervention and why it does nto happen today.

I beleive this happens all the time.

I beleive in thappened to Laura and I at the beginning of our to dip into Christianity (which ill tell you in PM because I have learned that in here its pointless trying to justify my own personal experiences that I feel are supernatural - that stuff just gets picked apart to death and snickered at)

I beleive that miracles still exist - and remember Hun Hee - the state and mindset of man as biblically described in the last days.....a precurser to what I think is this current age. We live in an age of spiritual blindness according to biblical writings. We live in an age where the name of Christ causes a person to be repulsed. Also bear in mind that Paul's calling was unique - he was the Apostle called to the gentiles - people like you and I. Peter and the rest - set up salvation thru the Jews.

By the way I know about these other seemingly parrallel religeous symbols and histories and faiths that you cite.

And I have no problem admitting that Christmas and the like are rooted in paganism and were adopted in - thats all true. If anything Christ was probably born in October and CHrist himsefl told us to remember and celebrate his death, not his birth. I get all of that, no argumetn whatsoever

So here is the personal challenge: what are the "nitty gritty" foundational aspects of these various faiths?

Do they REALLY parrallel one another at the core? personally, I do not belevie they do at all, oncve you get down to the absolutes or framework of each faith.

For example, people who like to say Christianity is about Love are wrong. Just because the Bible says "Love they brother as thyself" does not mean that is what christianity is about.

Love is a big part of Christianity - but its not about love - its about the NEED - absolute - of a divinely appointed singular Mediator between man and God - a MUST HAVE - not a suggestion. Do these other faiths really teach that Hun Hee? Do they teach about one singular representative with a Divine orgin that is the ONLY way to a workign relationship with God the Father? There's your rubber meets the road mark. And this is why I say that when people try to link Christianity with other pre-orgin faiths - I vehemently disagree. To me that's like sayign that all of these relgions have holy men so they are all the same. Thats like saying that everyone who walks upright is the same.

Even enlightenment is not what Christianity is about, although I beleive enlightenment is a big offshoot of the relationship simply because you learn and grow.

its not about playing nice.

its not about "having faith" (shit everybody has faith Hun Hee - lots of people reading this have faith that Im full of shit)

so my question to you is WHY?

Why does this three year jewish carpenter with no home of his own, no wealth, no army, no social status, no education (especially that - how we lovvvvvvve our wall plaques and degrees) - how does THIS man in particular - remain so divisive and so controversial?

why dont some of those other discoveries that you've made - why do they not carry the same degree of concussive force?

One other thing to consider - if its not too big of a stretch...(going out on a limb here)

remember that YHWH called Lucifer the "God of this world".

and Lucifer was caste down thousands of years before Christ.

And Christ's coming was the first prophesy spoken to adam and eve in the garden (the passage about the bruised heal on the serpants crushed head....look into it) that sugggested that God was allready looking to a future mediative process...

and within this understanding or theory (just a throry mind you...go with me here)

if there was an opposer form the start (from the beginning - even before Man was created)

one who was vastly powerful and wise and 2nd only to the most high and he had full dominion over this world and KNEW the pre-incarnate Son of God....

is it unreasonable then to think that he (The Opposer) would manufacture various "alternatives" to be discovered in modern times?

remember that a spirit creature has no deteriorating matter, therefore it is not bound by time as we are - it can literally be at beoth the future and past at the same time...(allegedly...in theory)

and after all - his sole purpose is to oppose YHWH.

and so he influences/creates/sets up world powers and cultures (look into the book of Daniel at the Prince of Greece and Persia) for a specific purpose....since if all thigns culminate at the end of days then he too must build a presence and a generational mindset of oppostion for the end of days....

then it really a new grand revelation to discover these alternatives your looking at?

to me its all a form of spiritual propoganda to erode any thought of an absolute. I mean, we drop leaflets on cultures in their native languages to affect their thinking at the root level to set up future end results. its not a new idea. If your goal is the future.....how bout setting up some alternative "truths" in the past for future use?

improbible? maybe.

but definately possible.

[Troy Spiral (13)]

Generally i discount the importance of the K & A story's "details" all that much, since there isn't any. Cain was jealous of (whatever) and killed Abel (bad Cain bad) and got punished for it and doomed his decedents (or rather god doomed his decedents). Really the only "point" there. The moral of the story would be the same regardless of the details.

I never really spent that much time looking into it until just recently due to this post (even though i think most of us knew/know the general story). If we try to read into it to much, its all just going to be opinion since the details are far to sketchy and the language to vague. Any attempt to pretend biblical stories are "crystal clear and fully detailed" is special pleading.

In terms of Paul... I have no idea "what sort of person" he was. I do know he made some very beautiful statements, but there's also a lot of what today would be considered hate-crime encouragement there. He , that is the actual "man" i don't pretend to have any secret time-travel device to know what his actual character was. We could make some educated guesses (probably a good subject for a separate, interesting post) but we'd generally just be fooling ourselves if we think we really "know for sure".

I used to have quite a different opinion, but more recently I've come to trust facts & figures far more than "guesses" or "faith". Its not necessary to force myself to "feel" the truth when there's not enough information to get an accurate picture of things without making lots of assumptions and mental (unjustified) leaps.

I try to hold to the idea that i could be wrong about just about anything, but that the way to "factual" truth is probably best traveled through reason and research , rather than "feelings" and faith.

[know_buddy_kares]

Hmm... you know I could have SWORE that...

Long ago,

In a thread far far burried...

The Cain and Abel topic was brought up and discussed lightly...

But the memory is very vague, coulda been somewhere else..

...or I coulda smoked too much weed back in the day and my mind is gone...

But I wouldn't mind finding some good sources to post here eventually that would tell different versions of Cain and Abel.

[Troy Spiral (13)]

Hmm... you know I could have SWORE that...

Long ago,

In a thread far far burried...

The Cain and Abel topic was brought up and discussed lightly...

But the memory is very vague, coulda been somewhere else..

...or I coulda smoked too much weed back in the day and my mind is gone...

But I wouldn't mind finding some good sources to post here eventually that would tell different versions of Cain and Abel.

Its possible, use the search if your particularly curious. Some subjects just tend to come up very often, this one not so much. I doubt (for instance) we'll ever be very long without an "abortion" topic , as an example.

In terms of the "different versions" just google it, the first few links go right to a lot of detailed breakdowns.

[Steven]

Generally i discount the importance of the K & A story's "details" all that much, since there isn't any. Cain was jealous of (whatever) and killed Abel (bad Cain bad) and got punished for it and doomed his decedents (or rather god doomed his decedents). Really the only "point" there. The moral of the story would be the same regardless of the details.

I never really spent that much time looking into it until just recently due to this post (even though i think most of us knew/know the general story). If we try to read into it to much, its all just going to be opinion since the details are far to sketchy and the language to vague. Any attempt to pretend biblical stories are "crystal clear and fully detailed" is special pleading.

In terms of Paul... I have no idea "what sort of person" he was. I do know he made some very beautiful statements, but there's also a lot of what today would be considered hate-crime encouragement there. He , that is the actual "man" i don't pretend to have any secret time-travel device to know what his actual character was. We could make some educated guesses (probably a good subject for a separate, interesting post) but we'd generally just be fooling ourselves if we think we really "know for sure".

I used to have quite a different opinion, but more recently I've come to trust facts & figures far more than "guesses" or "faith". Its not necessary to force myself to "feel" the truth when there's not enough information to get an accurate picture of things without making lots of assumptions and mental (unjustified) leaps.

I try to hold to the idea that i could be wrong about just about anything, but that the way to "factual" truth is probably best traveled through reason and research , rather than "feelings" and faith.

this to me is a form of personal processing, and we all do it.

from past statements made by yoruself about Paul I had always been under the impression that at some point in your life he had made quite an impression.....

Yes, everything is a guestimation when it comes to recognizing what we feel makes up the inner workings of a particular historical figure.....and any figure for that matter can only be measured by his or her actions and the end result thereof....but all historians take into account the surrounding times, background et, al....and move up from there. its the best any of can do.

for example none of us knew Joh F Kennedy....and I dount we know anybody that did know him personally. Same thign with Abe Lincoln, or George Washinton....and yet I remember beign taught in Junior college about his moral charactor by profesors, and his style of interpersonal communication by the same. In fact I remember a whole lecture devoted to one very breif passage of "history" where George was about to be removed by the powers that be for a string of defeats......and as he addressed the aristocrats he removed his glasses and made a statement akin to the war having robbed him of his sight as well as his strength, which in turn moved the crowd an proved to be a pivitol moment in the public viewing of his leadership and strength in the eys of his peer group. We studied and discussed that little scene - because it painted a picture that somebody thought was worthy to record....for a purpose. at best thats all anybody can do. and I think we've lost sight of the need to do so, to put any effort into that search in favor of cynical pragamaticsm.....so my question is how is that workign for you? Does it fortify you? Give you peace of mind?

to me there are a great many thigns to consider regarding Paul's personality and charactor when researching him because its laid out plainly to see.

In terms of "factual" truth and the need to not feel......

I feel....

as if you "feel"....

that this is a much safer approach. and that you've made a change that affords you far less personal risk and therefore far less potential disaster when faith gets worn down paper thin. thats a very painful processd....one that I know very well.

and I mean no disrespect to you Troy but I think your decision is 100% "feeling" based....because I think all of our decisions are made that way, based on what we "feel".....about the potential end result. We make specific decisions that are indicitive of lifestyle choices......we pick the process that serves us the best.

and that too.....is "faith" based. You seem to place your faith in that which you can much more readily grasp at, digest, compartmentalize, and possibly control. I understand that, I do. I just have a different approach and vision.

[Troy Spiral (13)]

this to me is a form of personal processing, and we all do it.

from past statements made by yoruself about Paul I had always been under the impression that at some point in your life he had made quite an impression.....

Yes, everything is a guestimation when it comes to recognizing what we feel makes up the inner workings of a particular historical figure.....and any figure for that matter can only be measured by his or her actions and the end result thereof....but all historians take into account the surrounding times, background et, al....and move up from there. its the best any of can do.

for example none of us knew Joh F Kennedy....and I dount we know anybody that did know him personally. Same thign with Abe Lincoln, or George Washinton....and yet I remember beign taught in Junior college about his moral charactor by profesors, and his style of interpersonal communication by the same. In fact I remember a whole lecture devoted to one very breif passage of "history" where George was about to be removed by the powers that be for a string of defeats......and as he addressed the aristocrats he removed his glasses and made a statement akin to the war having robbed him of his sight as well as his strength, which in turn moved the crowd an proved to be a pivitol moment in the public viewing of his leadership and strength in the eys of his peer group. We studied and discussed that little scene - because it painted a picture that somebody thought was worthy to record....for a purpose. at best thats all anybody can do. and I think we've lost sight of the need to do so, to put any effort into that search in favor of cynical pragamaticsm.....so my question is how is that workign for you? Does it fortify you? Give you peace of mind?

to me there are a great many thigns to consider regarding Paul's personality and charactor when researching him because its laid out plainly to see.

In terms of "factual" truth and the need to not feel......

I feel....

as if you "feel"....

that this is a much safer approach. and that you've made a change that affords you far less personal risk and therefore far less potential disaster when faith gets worn down paper thin. thats a very painful processd....one that I know very well.

and I mean no disrespect to you Troy but I think your decision is 100% "feeling" based....because I think all of our decisions are made that way, based on what we "feel".....about the potential end result. We make specific decisions that are indicitive of lifestyle choices......we pick the process that serves us the best.

and that too.....is "faith" based. You seem to place your faith in that which you can much more readily grasp at, digest, compartmentalize, and possibly control. I understand that, I do. I just have a different approach and vision.

Oh hell yeah certain apostle Paul writings made an impression. Some of which i still try to live by today. I can quote fairly accurately a lot of biblical passages i "like" or "feel are true" and weave a lot of bibilical stuff into my everyday thinking.

I guess on the "feeling" subject its a semantic issue. Its true that we still, even with a mountain of data about say... how much the price of tea at meijer is, still are just "feeling" that we know the true price of tea at meijer. Even if we are looking right at the price tag. We could be wrong, the tag could be mislabeled, we could be just having a dream, etc.

I just prefer to start out with what at least "feel" to be actual facts / details / historically verifiable/ actual scientific studies . Especially if its something as huge as what to base our whole worldview around.

I like to try and find "the truth" i guess i took all the JW talk about "the truth" when i was young a bit too literally, wanting to find "the truth" regardless if i liked the answer or not or if it conformed to what was written in the bible or not. I WANT the bible to be all 100% true and 100% acurate, i'm just not sure it is.

As far as i can tell , the closest way to find "the real truth" is via reason / logic / science. Emotional / Intuition based "reasoning" is automatically suspect due to many factors. Not that its necessarily WRONG, its just more LIKELY to be wrong than searches based on studies/logic/data. Both can still be wrong or right, i just think one thinking system is far more likely to at least approximate "the real truth" of a given subject than the other is.

[hunhee]

HEY! this is Bible STUDY, facts, testaments, scriptures.. this isn't "Feelings" cut that girlie shit out!

OH and Steven, about the George Washington thing.. well I read this book (I will try to find it I can't remember the title, it was when I was reading a billion books at a time for school) about him, this was not the George that I learned in grade school. I was very disheartened by the whole thing, but yet it was based on facts, and more accurate descriptions of the events that took place. I heightened George to levels of fairy tale, and was crushed with reality. I guess what I'm saying is, in this case, solid historical facts and evidence speak louder to me than what we've built someone up to be.

Back to our originally scheduled program

I've read some things about Saul of Tarsus that lead me to believe he was a slight touched (delusional), he may have suffered epileptic seizures. I can't remember where I read this from, so I will look this up again as well.

[Steven]

HEY! this is Bible STUDY, facts, testaments, scriptures.. this isn't "Feelings" cut that girlie shit out!

OH and Steven, about the George Washington thing.. well I read this book (I will try to find it I can't remember the title, it was when I was reading a billion books at a time for school) about him, this was not the George that I learned in grade school. I was very disheartened by the whole thing, but yet it was based on facts, and more accurate descriptions of the events that took place. I heightened George to levels of fairy tale, and was crushed with reality. I guess what I'm saying is, in this case, solid historical facts and evidence speak louder to me than what we've built someone up to be.

Back to our originally scheduled program

I've read some things about Saul of Tarsus that lead me to believe he was a slight touched (delusional), he may have suffered epileptic seizures. I can't remember where I read this from, so I will look this up again as well.

I've heard that theory too about him possibly being epilectic.

personally I think the "thorn in his side" was related to blindess as hinted at in one of his letters where he talks about writing it himself in large text......

was he touched???

well, would you follow a man who was touched?

would you entertian a man as caesar did, and feel compelled by such a man to the edge of conversion, if you felt he was touched?

would a touched man be able to impact so many - even into modern times?

me - I thinks not.

but I can see the "need" for others to think yes.

the problem is that anybody can pick anythign apart and suggest anythign to build or take away....based on our own faith based principles.

which is one of the things I love about the cannonized scripture. it tends to force a choice and leave out middle ground. I suppose I respect that....

so you were bummed to find out George did not actually chop down the cherry tree?

how bout Jefforson's salves and his theory on how many gnerations it took to restore pure white blood?

I can appreciate your insight on the George thing.

I try to do one thing with leaders and notable historical figures: bring the humanityback into it.

was his dad a dick?

did he have hangups?

an achilleese heal?

was he prone to depression?

was he articulate?

did he have any addicition issues?

even biblical patriarchs are just men, save for one man.

when I go thru the text....I always try to see it that way. it actually solidifies my faith

[Steven]

Oh hell yeah certain apostle Paul writings made an impression. Some of which i still try to live by today. I can quote fairly accurately a lot of biblical passages i "like" or "feel are true" and weave a lot of bibilical stuff into my everyday thinking.

I guess on the "feeling" subject its a semantic issue. Its true that we still, even with a mountain of data about say... how much the price of tea at meijer is, still are just "feeling" that we know the true price of tea at meijer. Even if we are looking right at the price tag. We could be wrong, the tag could be mislabeled, we could be just having a dream, etc.

I just prefer to start out with what at least "feel" to be actual facts / details / historically verifiable/ actual scientific studies . Especially if its something as huge as what to base our whole worldview around.

I like to try and find "the truth" i guess i took all the JW talk about "the truth" when i was young a bit too literally, wanting to find "the truth" regardless if i liked the answer or not or if it conformed to what was written in the bible or not. I WANT the bible to be all 100% true and 100% acurate, i'm just not sure it is.

As far as i can tell , the closest way to find "the real truth" is via reason / logic / science. Emotional / Intuition based "reasoning" is automatically suspect due to many factors. Not that its necessarily WRONG, its just more LIKELY to be wrong than searches based on studies/logic/data. Both can still be wrong or right, i just think one thinking system is far more likely to at least approximate "the real truth" of a given subject than the other is.

Dude.

the JW thing.

that machine has wrecked so many people it uncanny.

the first thing it does, is rob your hope and shut down your faith.

to this day I still have JW programming at war with myself....