God’s Purpose –Minds Eye Hi Pat! >From what you are saying, you think that somewhere somehow religious people will one day come to an understanding of the present perilous religious situation and accept each other more openly, and in doing so they would avoid future fighting between religions? I really hope you are right Pat: But what I see here it is going to be very tricky indeed as you said yourself; so, how do you see this change of religious heart is going to start!? What is going to be the catalyst that will start these changes? Do you think that somebody somehow will come up with a theory, which finally will make sense to them all, and so, they will be able to see that they are one and the same thing, and that they all believe in the same God and therefore they should not be fighting each other? What sort of theory may be able to work just that? What would you say to that? Anyhow we have to wait and see I suppose. My regards Manfraco
On Sep 21, 8:17 pm, Pat <[email protected]> wrote: > On 16 Sep, 23:02, Manfraco Frank the Elder <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > Thanks Pat for the information; I guess that you have visited the > > Middle East region personally. I wish I could visit Mt Sinai indeed, > > since I seem interested more and more in religions lately; but I can > > not see it happening in the near future. > > When I talk about policies, I want to talk about future religious > > policies, because I reckon that they are overdue now, people have > > changed since then, so religion needs to change too, so I wish that > > God (whatever God may be) causes something to happen that changes will > > be made, even if those changes may not be universally approved by > > everybody. I am not saying here that old religions will be abolished, > > but rather that there will be a new chapter to add to the existing > > religions. > > I hope you see what I mean? > > Regards > > Manfraco > > Not only do I see what you mean, I already see that process > starting. If I'm right in my physical/religious theories, then we're > on the very verge of that update. The message will be pretty much the > same as before. That is, that morality, as presented in previous > revelations, will be validated. But there's going to have to be some > work done in order to DO that. And one of the first bits of that > work, I think, is to convince Orthodox Judaism that Islam is the > fulfilment of the Torah's statement (Genesis 17:20) that "As for > Ishmael...I will bless him..." and that 'that statement' is a > foreshadowing of a covenant between the 'God of Abraham' and Ishmael's > descendants, i.e., Islam via Muhammed. In return, Muslims need to > undertand that 'The God of Abraham' has no problem with people who > accept either of His covenants (Torah or Qur'an) and that, Muslims > should not bear a grudge against those who have accepted the Sinaitic > (Jewish) covenant. Such a re-understanding could lay the groundwork > for less enmity between the two peoples. But, of course, there will > be great resistance to this from both sides. And, there's still the > question of 'what to do about the Christians?', i.e., those who > believe that one covenant (the Sinaitic) has been superceded by a > philosophy with no direct revelation to support it. Tricky!!! > > > > > On Sep 15, 9:24 pm, Pat <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On 15 Sep, 00:06, Manfraco Frank the Elder <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Hi dj and everybody else! > > > > Yes indeed, Moses was a very thrilling character, what else could he > > > > be, since he had seen the power of God very close at hand; so, every > > > > time Moses is mentioned the masses are bound to tune in and be > > > > thrilled. > > > > I wander though whether Moses saw really God, up on Mount Sinai? You > > > > know it does not explain clearly for me to be satisfied beyond any > > > > doubts. Now God's purpose then was to help the Jews; but what's God's > > > > purpose nowadays is still a mystery to me. > > > > I wish that God's purpose was to satisfy people needs, but it doesn't > > > > seem that way at all; I wish that God would show up one day and put > > > > forward policies about what we would like to have from Him, instead of > > > > sitting on the fence and having fun at us all? > > > > I would have thought that, the God of 'Mt. Sinai', i.e., 'The God > > > of Abraham' has already listed his 'policies' in the Torah and/or > > > Qur'an, depending on whether one wants to adhere to the Isaac-side > > > covenant or the Ishael-side covenant. Why not go to 'Mt. Sinai' > > > yourself and see if you can meet up with God, there? The particular > > > 'mountain' you want now goes by the name of 'Jebel Al-Madhbah' and is > > > a part of the cluster of hills/mountains around Petra in Jordan. The > > > 'Jebel Musa' (old Mount Catherine) was never Mt. Sinai, rather, it was > > > suspected because it's the highest peak in the Sinai peninsula. But, > > > if you read the description of the approach to 'Mt. Sinai' in Exodus, > > > it perfectly describes 'Jebel Al-Madhbah' including the bluish stone > > > (sapphire, in Exodus) and the obelisks found in the 'nether region' of > > > the mountain, as well as the 'High Place' itself. Not to mention that > > > the 'Ain Musa', the spring of Moses, is just outside the entrance to > > > Petra, just where it was described in Exodus. > > > > > On Sep 14, 4:54 am, Don Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Ah, yes. My favorite part in that movie was when Moses says "You can > > > > > have these tablets when you take them from my cold, dead hands!" > > > > > Thrilling! > > > > > > dj > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 6:37 AM, Molly Brogan <[email protected]> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > I don't agree with that. I think it is the greatest story ever told > > > > > > (not original, I know.) But read and you will find myriad > > > > > > interpretations of the bible. It wasn't until I was able to read it > > > > > > for myself, and feel the stories alive in me, that I understood the > > > > > > greatness of the stories. > > > > > > > On Sep 11, 3:34 am, iam deheretic <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > >> Adam the bible is interesting but mostly fiction and or twisted > > > > > >> ideas ... > > > > > >> etc etc > > > > > >> Allan > > > > > > >> On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 11:27 PM, Adam <[email protected]> > > > > > >> wrote: > > > > > > >> > OK. If the Bible is true, then I think I have given a good > > > > > >> > summary of > > > > > >> > how things are. > > > > > >> > If not, then it doesn't matter anyway. I posted this same > > > > > >> > article on > > > > > >> > alt.bible.prophecy > > > > > >> > and got only one reply, and that was abusive. And they are > > > > > >> > supposed to > > > > > >> > believ in God!! > > > > > >> > Adam. > > > > > > >> > On Sep 10, 2:30 pm, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > >> > > This is true, Adam, but you are riding the fence. Obviously > > > > > >> > > the > > > > > >> > > content of the article (thread) is about scripture, which as > > > > > >> > > we all > > > > > >> > > know is founded upon a belief, a concept, therefore it would > > > > > >> > > follow > > > > > >> > > that any and all posts would address that concept. > > > > > >> > > I understand that you are 'not' presenting a position which > > > > > >> > > posits the > > > > > >> > > existence of God, a God or any Deity, but simply presents > > > > > >> > > questions > > > > > >> > > relating to the concept of such an existence. However, still > > > > > >> > > and > > > > > >> > > without any veering, it is still a thread based upon a > > > > > >> > > conceptual > > > > > >> > > God. A discussion in it's most simplistic form regarding > > > > > >> > > "scripture" > > > > > >> > > is indeed a discussion of a conceptual deity. > > > > > > >> > > On Sep 9, 10:13 pm, Adam <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > >> > > > What I wrote was not intended to be a proof of the existence > > > > > >> > > > of God or > > > > > >> > > > of the truth of the Bible. It was just a summary of the > > > > > >> > > > things that I > > > > > >> > > > had discovered through extensive reading of the scriptures. > > > > > >> > > > So when > > > > > >> > > > some of you attacked the concept of God rather than the > > > > > >> > > > content of the > > > > > >> > > > article I did not feel obliged to defend that concept. > > > > > >> > > > Others can do > > > > > >> > > > that more effectively than I. > > > > > >> > > > Adam. > > > > > > >> > > > On Sep 9, 7:34 pm, "[email protected]" > > > > > >> > > > <[email protected]> > > > > > >> > > > wrote: > > > > > > >> > > > > I guess Adam may have been a boxer in a past life, a quick > > > > > >> > > > > jab in and > > > > > >> > > > > then back out agian. > > > > > > >> > > > > On 5 Sep, 05:38, Adam <[email protected]> wrote:- Hide > > > > > >> > > > > quoted > > > > > >> > text - > > > > > > >> > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > >> -- > > > > > >> ( > > > > > >> ) > > > > > >> I_D Allan- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
