I have a question---where on this earth and the mind's of man where there is a daily of discerment of right choice's and wrong choice and tell me when you get up daily where is there a place where there is no harm --that you pick up the paper and you watch TV that there is not bad that is not heard or seen...a man can make right choice and keep his walls around for the protection of uncleanness...and therefore does this keep him safe and his family as he goes out daily into a world of things that surrounds him...Name a reglion or a group or a culture that does not have in a term evil does not have this...and it is like a chess game and discussion making of what is good for his family--such has well the public schools have to much influncences -such as it could be drugs it could be sex or it could be in the teaching...so you can home school--you can put them in a private school..you can teach them well at home (and teach them well) and some have the oppurnitity's to be born in a family that are well educated and plenty of moeny...and it makes it easier...there were many poor people became learder's of nation's and contributed to causes of good...value's--morals-A man can do everything right for himself and family..follow every rule and authority that is set before him and be very honest at heart--care for his country---pay his taxes--make sure whatever he does is in perfection---and in the end--from poor health---and not able to do these things--in perfection--and so his good standard's is comprised for him and his Family but yet he hangs in there with his morals his intergity to the end...in rags he was in the end--and helped to be a back bone of a nation...and then the ones that he believed in and was faithful to was not faithful to him or his Family ..and had no mercy...is this evil or is it something else?...The good morals--good value's--good standard's---Not just one Man this was done to --but many--so which ones had the better morals-good value's--good standard's...the ones that took the taxes and spent it..and live high off the hog...and the working man with callaus on his hands and knee's...and the people was treated as dog's under such a corrupt nation's ...that any nation the ones that are in authority is and should be servants to the people of these nation's...You can say there is not evil ...but true evil is where the hearts are callous and have no mercy and are takers...greed is it not evil...or is it just greed and is not put in a light or dark ---but put in the area of good and bad...so which is the worse...of images of such a good light or images that seem to be bad values --bad morals--bad standards...there is a dark of this earth that is a disgustiing level...which I will not mention in my opinion...but there is people that have good value's--good standard's---good moral's--that have been pushed to a level or no return...
On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 5:03 AM, Lee <[email protected]> wrote: > That is somthing that I hear quite offten, and whilst I certianly do > understand the sentiments, the reasoning sorta throws me. > > I cannot belive in a God that allows evil. > > So you can belive in a God that denies free will? Yet the denying of > free will itself, can that not be seen as an evil act by God? > > I don't know it tends to go around and around for me, what I can say > for sure though, is belive in whatever God you want, or belive in none > at all, that is your choice and I would not wish to convince you one > way of the other. > > On 23 Nov, 12:21, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: > > I cannot believe in a God that allows evil so I guess I am in league > > with Dante's view- that there is indeed a Hell and a Heaven and they > > may well exist on earth in the consequences of our actions. This would > > explain many of the human problems that plague society. I know I have > > seen these outcomes though they may take years to emerge- and they > > present an elegant logic, all their own.// Church/religious law and > > Divine Laws may not always jibe because the former are instituted and > > run by men who have limited or faulty vision. Nevertheless, there are > > moral laws beyond the reach of mere mortals. I am not saying that > > humans reach perfection- even Mother Teresa had doubts- as we have > > doubts and must struggle and wrestle with our souls. > > > > On Nov 23, 4:51 am, Lee <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Heh I remember a few years back when I mentioned this very thing, you > > > know the immenance of God pervading throughtout the creation, and our > > > young and then much more fiesty Ian, asked, does that include evil, > > > and shit and murder? > > > > > I answerered well yes how could it not? > > > > > Heresy, well isn't that when a relgious establishment says, no what > > > you say does not agree with the accepted doctrine of our particular > > > faith! > > > > > So all-in-all a rather meaningless term. > > > > > On 23 Nov, 04:36, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Then God would also be evil. I believe that is a heresy. > > > > > > On Nov 22, 3:24 am, iam deheretic <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > I think it starts with the realization the God is the entirety of > > > > > everything. People spend years meditating trying to accomplish this > simple > > > > > concept. > > > > > > > Marco you are beginning to sound like a hindu compartalmentlizing > all the > > > > > aspect of God so they can understand Brahman > > > > > Allan > > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 12:49 PM, Lee <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > 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 > > > > ... > > > > read more ยป- 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]<minds-eye%[email protected]> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=. > > > -- 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=.
