Indeed, but the trick is in seeing this huh.

On 18 Nov, 11:35, iam deheretic <[email protected]> wrote:
> LOL  but Lee God is in everything!
> Allan
>
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 10:49 AM, Lee <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Heh I of course realise that as my particular faith emphasises seeing
> > God in everything.
>
> > On 17 Nov, 17:28, Pat <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > On 17 Nov, 16:39, Lee <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > Hah My dear Rigsy I swear to your right now that it is complelty the
> > > > other way around for me.
>
> > > > My wife has made a honest man out of me, she veritably saved me from
> > > > myself, and for that I owe her everything.
>
> > > Your debt is to God alone, as He worked THROUGH your wife to do those
> > > things.  It's OK, though, if you thank your wife, as God gets all
> > > thanks through us as well, even if we don't realise it.  ;-)
>
> > > > On 17 Nov, 16:04, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > In a way, you do- by making an honest woman out of a bedmate and all
> > > > > the stuff you will need to provide plus kids, etc. But the woman must
> > > > > be calculating to begin with. Somehow, I missed that class but find
> > > > > the whole thing pretty amusing at this point in life.
>
> > > > > On Nov 17, 9:57 am, Lee <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > Haha my dad tells me that we men always pay for sex.
>
> > > > > > Now now that's my dad not me you understand?
>
> > > > > > On 17 Nov, 15:41, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Do you think all women should be paid for sex?
>
> > > > > > > On Nov 17, 8:43 am, archytas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > Did you lose a few slates from your roof while you had turned
> > into a
> > > > > > > > motel Slip?
>
> > > > > > > > To me, it's immoral to argue from holy text in any kind of
> > > > > > > > fundamentalist manner.  We could argue we have been trapped in
> > this
> > > > > > > > kind of mistaken argument and need to break out of it.  Science
> > > > > > > > probably does and at least allows things to be put to the test.
> >  Like
> > > > > > > > Slip I have something of a penchant for being ministered to by
> > women,
> > > > > > > > though as yet have not experienced being as a motel yet.
>
> > > > > > > > On 17 Nov, 12:42, Pat <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > On 16 Nov, 17:03, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > Jesus said 'Our
> > > > > > > > > > Father...', not 'My Father...'  Pat
>
> > > > > > > > > > Yes in some context such as:
>
> > > > > > > > > > Mat 5:16  In the same way, let your light shine before men,
> > that they
> > > > > > > > > > may see your good deeds and praise your FATHER in heaven.
>
> > > > > > > > > > Mat 6:9  "This, then, is how you should pray: "'Our FATHER
> > in heaven,
> > > > > > > > > > hallowed be your name,
>
> > > > > > > > > > But then again:
>
> > > > > > > > > > Mat 7:21  "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will
> > enter the
> > > > > > > > > > kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my
> > FATHER who is
> > > > > > > > > > in heaven.
>
> > > > > > > > > > Mat 10:32  "Whoever acknowledges me before men, I will also
> > > > > > > > > > acknowledge him before my FATHER in heaven.
> > > > > > > > > > Mat 10:33  But whoever disowns me before men, I will disown
> > him before
> > > > > > > > > > my FATHER in heaven.
>
> > > > > > > > > > Working on the Sabbath:
> > > > > > > > > > John 5:17  Jesus said to them, "My FATHER is always at his
> > work to
> > > > > > > > > > this very day, and I, too, am working."
>
> > > > > > > > > > John 8:53  Are you greater than our father Abraham? He
> > died, and so
> > > > > > > > > > did the prophets. Who do you think you are?"
> > > > > > > > > > John 8:54  Jesus replied, "If I glorify myself, my glory
> > means
> > > > > > > > > > nothing. My FATHER, WHOM YOU CLAIM AS YOUR GOD, is the one
> > who
> > > > > > > > > > glorifies me.
>
> > > > > > > > > > There are more but remember when Mary and Joseph found
> > Jesus in the
> > > > > > > > > > temple, Mary asked "Son, why have you treated us like this?
> > Your
> > > > > > > > > > father and I have been anxiously searching for you."
>
> > > > > > > > > > Jesus replied, Luke 2 49
> > > > > > > > > >  "Why were you searching for me?" he asked. "Didn't you
> > know I had to
> > > > > > > > > > be in my Father's house?"
>
> > > > > > > > > > And of course the Garden of Gethsemane:
> > > > > > > > > > "O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me:
> > > > > > > > > > nevertheless, not as I will, but as thou wilt."
>
> > > > > > > > >     Interesting.  But I note there were no quotes used from
> > The Gospel
> > > > > > > > > of Mark, which is the oldest and, therefore, probably(!) the
> > most
> > > > > > > > > reliable for quotes of Jesus.  Are there any quotes in Mark
> > where
> > > > > > > > > Jesus uses 'my Father', as Matthew was based on Mark?  If
> > not, then we
> > > > > > > > > know those "my Father"s in Matthew were added and any Gospel
> > after
> > > > > > > > > that (Luke and John), quite likely, would/could have added
> > even more.
> > > > > > > > > Luke was written by Paul's close friend and would naturally
> > reflect
> > > > > > > > > Paul's 'spin' on Jesus.  The most surprising is Matthew.  The
> > 7:21
> > > > > > > > > quote at least acknowledges that it is the Will of God that
> > matters
> > > > > > > > > and not whether or not one calls Jesus 'Lord'.  The 10:32-33
> > quote,
> > > > > > > > > though, seems a bit out of kilter with the 7:21 quote, as it
> > implies
> > > > > > > > > that, if an individual acknowledges Jesus (in what way? As
> > 'Lord' or
> > > > > > > > > 'Son of God'?), Jesus will then acknowledge (again, in what
> > way?) that
> > > > > > > > > individual to God, but, because of the 7:21 line, that may
> > not
> > > > > > > > > actually help an individual in any way.  So what's the point
> > of the
> > > > > > > > > acknowledgement?  Or was it just a simple way of subtly
> > injecting
> > > > > > > > > Pauline theology?
>
> > > > > > > > > > Then there is the ongoing controversy concerning the
> > "Trinity".
>
> > > > > > > > > > I've never come across any scripture that indicated any
> > "Mother in
> > > > > > > > > > Heaven" therefore excluding any  feminine aspect of God.
>
> > > > > > > > > No right-minded Jew would envisage a trinity, as God is One
> > in
> > > > > > > > > Judaism.  Always has been, always will be.  The Trinity was
> > another
> > > > > > > > > compromise to bring 'pagans'/polytheists into the Faith by
> > making
> > > > > > > > > Christianity more polytheistic.  Which, of course, is a
> > complete
> > > > > > > > > misunderstanding of Judaism and/or Jesus' teachings and
> > anathema to
> > > > > > > > > them.
>
> > > > > > > > > > However in Luke 8:1-3 it clearly shows that Jesus traveled
> > about not
> > > > > > > > > > only with his disciples but also with women.
>
> > > > > > > > > >  Luke 8:1-3 After this, Jesus traveled about from one town
> > and village
> > > > > > > > > > to another, proclaiming the good news of the kingdom of
> > God. The
> > > > > > > > > > Twelve were with him, and also some women who had been
> > cured of evil
> > > > > > > > > > spirits and diseases: Mary (called Magdalene) from whom
> > seven demons
> > > > > > > > > > had come out; Joanna the wife of Cuza, the manager of
> > Herod’s
> > > > > > > > > > household; Susanna; and many others. These women were
> > helping to
> > > > > > > > > > support them out of their own means.
>
> > > > > > > > > > This was probably very much the scandal in the time, I'm
> > surprised
> > > > > > > > > > there weren't some stoning deaths related to the way Jesus
> > scoffed at
> > > > > > > > > > the traditional Jewish ruled with his treatment of women.
> >  Still
> > > > > > > > > > though with the inclusion of the many instances of women in
> > the
> > > > > > > > > > presence of Jesus, there remains the absence of women
> > concerning
> > > > > > > > > > Divine Heavenly reference.
>
> > > > > > > > >    That's because God is beyond gender.  That and the fact
> > that
> > > > > > > > > Semitic languages don't hae a Neuter/Neutral gender, leanving
> > only 'he/
> > > > > > > > > him' or 'she/her' as valid pronouns to use for God.  The
> > 'default'
> > > > > > > > > gender in Semitic languages is Masculine, therefore, God is
> > referred
> > > > > > > > > to as 'He'; not because it was felt that God had gender, but
> > that
> > > > > > > > > there was no way of saying 'It'.  Also, it avoids the
> > possible thought
> > > > > > > > > that God, if referred to as female, could be viewed as a
> > begettor,
> > > > > > > > > which, again, would be anathema to the beliefs of Judaism.
>
> > > > > > > > >     There is, in the Kabbalah, though, The Shekinah, the
> > Presence of
> > > > > > > > > God, and THAT word, Shekinah, is feminine.  Again, this is
> > because of
> > > > > > > > > how gender is determined in a Semitic language.  If the
> > object can be
> > > > > > > > > used (and how sexist is THAT!!), then the noun is feminine.
> >  Thus
> > > > > > > > > 'tree' would be masculine but 'wood' would be feminine.  The
> > Shekinah
> > > > > > > > > is/was used by prophets and the High Priest to determine
> > God's Will,
> > > > > > > > > so, because that presence could be utilised, the noun is
> > feminine.
> > > > > > > > > God cannot be used, per se, but His Presence can be and THAT
> > is the
> > > > > > > > > best Male/Female relationship that I can offer up.  But, it's
> > all down
> > > > > > > > > to the linguistics and grammar of Semitic language than any
> > real
> > > > > > > > > reflection on the nature of God.  I.e., it's more insight
> > into man
> > > > > > > > > than God.
>
> > > > > > > > > > On Nov 16, 6:57 am, Pat <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > On 15 Nov, 16:40, iam deheretic <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > Ordination of women, My feelings on that are very
> > personal. I know a lot of
> > > > > > > > > > > > women who have some very
>
> ...
>
> read more »- 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=.


Reply via email to