Post by: PP on August 26, 2005, 02:44:46 PM
Post by: rankus on August 26, 2005, 04:26:27 PM
I am not trying to be negative. Or confrontational. I have my beliefs as well, but do not foist them on others publicly. The subject matter around here is Pro Audio....
These forums also have a "real names" policy...please include yours.
Sorry if this post seems harsh. It is not intended to point fingers, or single anyone out, but rather to educate in "netiquette"
Peace to you and yours.
Rick
Post by: PP on August 26, 2005, 06:21:04 PM
Post by: J.J. Blair on August 26, 2005, 07:16:20 PM
No offense to anybody who is 'saved' or what have you, but please exclude bringing the good news to the audio forum. I find it almost as offensive as Josh Binder saying "Auto tune is supposed to be part of the vocal sound." Otherwise this will turn into a debate about the historical accuracy of the New Testament, and how many liberties were taken with translating the King James version, etc.
Thanks.
PS - You left out Ephesians 4:32. "Be ye kind to one another."
Post by: Ross Hogarth on August 26, 2005, 09:19:31 PM
| ****** wrote on Fri, 26 August 2005 15:21 |
Q : ?PS: To "*****" Religion should to be kept to oneself on public forums... This type of post is considered improper etiquette. The are many faiths on the net and it can easily lead to flame fests, and religious wars... in short it can be offensive to many..? P |
i received a message to moderators .... my hands here are tied
since
1) you do not have an appropriate profile with your real name
i/we have no idea who you are and
2) you do not accept private messages so at this time you are completely behind your tree ..
please come out and play ...whoever you are
I'm not agreeing or disagreeing, I am only posting here in reply since I cannot PM you until you accept PM's with a profile inclusive of your name
thanks
Post by: compasspnt on August 26, 2005, 10:49:20 PM
Post by: Bill Mueller on August 26, 2005, 11:07:00 PM
Nice to see from you again.
Best Regards,
Bill
Post by: Ross Hogarth on August 27, 2005, 12:01:57 AM
| ****** wrote on Fri, 26 August 2005 15:21 |
Q : ?These forums also have a "real names" policy...please include yours.? I betcha Thom, Tik, and Terry..... Uncle Tom Cobbly and all the Wombles know exactly WHO it is who's writing. P |
By the way ..I don't know who you are and would like to know
since I am sure we agree on a lot of issues inclusive of cigars and old black and white movies,
thanks again
Post by: rankus on August 27, 2005, 05:19:49 PM
EDIT: Just figured out why he has singled me out... my company name!!! ROTFLMAO ....
To: "*****"
hellfire - it's named after a missile dude, alot worse than satan..
Gods cool too... just not here please
Post by: t(h)ik on August 27, 2005, 05:44:43 PM
I find Peter's posts very provocative.
Rick, I am not taking issue with your criticism but in my opinion he is a part of this virtual place as much as anything else.
I remember about six or seven months ago he alluded in a thread that people here tell you a lot, but really tell you nothing at all.
I found this to be inciteful until just the last three days. When I realized that this was indeed not true.
Amazing.
His words stuck with me all that time.
He is also a premium piss taker and I think he comes off as arrogant because of the limitation of the medium employed.
I think he is here for the same reasons a lot of us are. The intimacy and the access to people who actually know shit and can utilize it.
It fukken rocks.
So,
Sonic Bukkake to all of you.
There's really no reason to be cross, if Peter lays it on ya just be glad for the attention.
Since I am an American I just pretend that as he basting me with his knowledge he would be delighted to see my goofy Yank grin like it was all going over my head....as I sip at my elixir and nod like the doggie on the back dash.
I love it.
I love Pete.
And you guys ain't too bad either.
Lemme nough
Tik
Post by: rankus on August 28, 2005, 01:10:05 AM
What are you doin online at this time anyway?
You rock too Buddy! Good to have you around!
Post by: Tomas Danko on August 28, 2005, 11:51:11 AM
I'd say you just got Poysered.
There goes all of our arrow-down buttons, as Mr. Manning pointed (er) out...
Cheers,
Tomas Danko
Post by: PP on August 28, 2005, 02:43:21 PM
Post by: rankus on August 28, 2005, 04:06:05 PM
| ****** wrote on Sun, 28 August 2005 11:43 |
Peter Poyser - Oxford Q: “I felt badly for the tone of my earlier post all evening” Please don’t feel bad Rick for no offence whatever is taken. I understand your point of view entirely, I can really truly see it. I hope that if you have read this you will also have a better understanding of mine. P |
I have, and I do.
You are a kind sole Peter...
Post by: J.J. Blair on August 28, 2005, 04:16:33 PM
Anyway, to address the points that caught my attention, because I can't read the entire thing, mmy point about not testifying about one's faith (or lack there of) in here go to not diverting us from out primary purpose: Discussing audio, music, production and other related events. I just don't personally see how attributing quotes to Jesus about treating people nicely was necessary, rather than just discussing the rewards of that behavior. Sure, you have a first amendment right to talk about Jesus, but that doesn't mean that it's appropriate.
Fairly or unfairly, Christianity is viewed by many as an oppressive force. And even though you may feel that your beliefs on the matter do not reflect that sort of thing, you have to be sensitive to the fact that based on lifetime of experiences with less considerate 'Christians', people are going to have a knee jerk reaction to Bible quotes. Remembering that is not only good for not pissing people off, but also for if you truly want to have your message heard, being able to get around such prejudices. And to be fair, even if I agreed with them, I would not want somebody to post things disagreeing with Christian beliefs, out of consideration for the people in the people who might take offense to that.
Personally, I subscribe to the belief of attraction rather than promotion. I live my life a certain way, and I let people approach me and ask me what it is that I believe, rather than going around sharing this with anybody within earshot.
I could post for pages and pages about why I'm not 'born again' any longer, and it would all make perfect sense to you, and perhaps enlighten you as well. However, this is an audio forum. As much as I love sitting with my cousin, who graduated from James Dobson's Focus on the Family University, and explaining to her why gay people are not going to hell (by pointing out things like that Jesus never talks about homosexuality and if it's such a big sin, why didn't it make the top ten?), this really isn't the place for such matters. People get polarized enough over discussions of 'tube vs. solid state' here.
Post by: PP on August 28, 2005, 04:56:49 PM
Post by: AndreasN on August 28, 2005, 06:45:57 PM
[regarding Poyser]
>>Q: I think he comes off as arrogant because of the limitation of the medium employed.
Poyser wrote:
>This is absolutely the most profoundly perspicacious insight I have read anywhere on P.S.W.
..
Seen a lot of great stuff on this board. At times true revelations! The common denominator in all those posts have been audio. Your expertise is much welcomed.
Then, there's all the other stuff.. I'm in no position to ask anything of anyone in here, but may I plead that you head over to the Saloon with the non-topic matters?
I'm keen on reading what younger dudes does in the studios..
Best wishes,
Andreas Nordenstam
Post by: J.J. Blair on August 28, 2005, 08:14:40 PM
As far as attraction rather than promotion goes, I am speaking purely of spiritual matters, which I thought was obvious. I can't feed my family with faith alone. You will find that in terms of spiritual beliefs I don't try to push my views on anybody, unless they start pushing theirs on me. I even try that with politics, but that is considerably harder for me, since somebody's religius belief doesn't effect me as much as the way they vote does.
Post by: Barry Hufker on August 28, 2005, 11:06:39 PM
I am a born again Christian and even I don't want to get into a religion discussion in an audio forum.
I don't wear my faith on my sleeve and I don't discuss it at the drop of a hat. I believe the best way to express one's faith is by living it. Let that be the lamp on the hill rather than posting in a forum.
You must of course follow your conscience, but that would be my take.
Barry
Post by: VagrantSt on August 29, 2005, 01:34:08 AM
35:2 Six days shall work be done, but on the seventh day there shall be to you an holy day, a sabbath of rest to the LORD: whosoever doeth work therein shall be put to death.
And I still get heathens wanting to work on Sunday. I guess it's time to start making a list.
And another fave...
24:16 And he that blasphemeth the name of the LORD, he shall surely be put to death, and all the congregation shall certainly stone him: as well the stranger, as he that is born in the land, when he blasphemeth the name of the Lord, shall be put to death.
keep the holy vibes coming!!!
Post by: t(h)ik on August 29, 2005, 01:52:19 AM
| VagrantSt wrote on Mon, 29 August 2005 07:34 |
Oh goody, bible quotes 35:2 Six days shall work be done, but on the seventh day there shall be to you an holy day, a sabbath of rest to the LORD: whosoever doeth work therein shall be put to death. And I still get heathens wanting to work on Sunday. I guess it's time to start making a list. And another fave... 24:16 And he that blasphemeth the name of the LORD, he shall surely be put to death, and all the congregation shall certainly stone him: as well the stranger, as he that is born in the land, when he blasphemeth the name of the Lord, shall be put to death. keep the holy vibes coming!!! |
I don't think it's really fair to judge the whole movement based on just a few stern examples. I mean, I agree with the passages above anyway, because a good clean society has to have it's limits. Otherwise you have what America has turned into today.
Please help save the ten commandments in our public buildings.
Lemme nough
Tik
Post by: VagrantSt on August 29, 2005, 02:05:11 AM
Post by: George_ on August 29, 2005, 04:10:49 AM
| Quote: |
What you obviously require for your studio and indeed your life is a system of Christian ethic’s to fill the vacuum…… |
I'm with you.. christian or not christian.. I don't belive in god or allah, or mohammed.. whoever.. anyway..
but the 10 commandements are the esence of a good society.. and it doesn't depend if you believe in someting or not..
maybe the 11 was forgotten:
- thou shall not apply phantom-power to royer-ribbonmics..
huh;)
TIK,
how do you explain your blackmetallbands, why you there are some bible-texts around?
I'm curious how a band like darkthrone would react;) hum.. please keep a camera in preparation;)
cheers George
Post by: t(h)ik on August 29, 2005, 05:14:55 AM
Well George, if I ever recorded a band from Austria I guess a fantasy of mine would be Pungent Stench....but I am pretty sure they have their own studio...but I am also sure they would be down with the commandments.
I have only seen them live once at gay-assed (NTTAWWT) Wacken and they were great but they had to limit their show because of time which is reason #348 that Wacken fukken sucks donkey dick.
As far as this thread goes, as an atheist, nothing would be more replusive to me than an atheist church or atheist religious fruitcakes.
I think blasphemy is cool, because noone can throw me in a pit for it anymore (thank god).
What I think is rather tasteless is when people go out of their way to shut a christian down or show a lack of respect. They are just reacting to something that makes them uncomfortable but when they strike out they don't realize how much they hurt that poor person who is grasping to their faith to avoid the hurt that is their life.
So be cool to christians you fags.....
Lemme nough
Tik
Post by: George_ on August 29, 2005, 05:19:15 AM
Post by: t(h)ik on August 29, 2005, 05:22:42 AM
| noGearslut wrote on Mon, 29 August 2005 11:19 |
.. we are riding on the same wave.. |
The smoking lamp is lit....
light 'em up
Post by: CCC on August 29, 2005, 06:46:34 AM
| sixtiksix wrote on Mon, 29 August 2005 10:14 |
I think blasphemy is cool, because noone can throw me in a pit for it anymore (thank god). |
Apropos the penultimate comment in your message; excellent use of irony. If audio doesn't work out for you (it will) you should consider trying to move into socio-political satire, like Stewart or Mahar. Yes - I'm actually serious....
| sixtiksix wrote on Mon, 29 August 2005 10:14 |
What I think is rather tasteless is when people go out of their way to shut a christian down or show a lack of respect. They are just reacting to something that makes them uncomfortable but when they strike out they don't realize how much they hurt that poor person who is grasping to their faith to avoid the hurt that is their life. |
Yep. Leave it to the atheist metal-rocker to make such a deep and insightful comment. What's the world coming to when Christian religious leaders call for the assassination of world leaders, while at the same time atheist audio engineers make eminently sensible pleas for mutual understanding? Hilarious!
Post by: John Ivan on August 29, 2005, 07:14:43 AM
What is now known as evangelical Christianity, I think is a very very dangerous thing run by the WORST FUCKING PEOPLE on earth. So please,, I already know that you people think I'm going to hell for not having your "mind" I sure as fuck don't want you here quoting the Bible. PERIOD.
Taking quotes from the bible is useless any how. If people don't read the whole thing and then figure out which to disregard and which to live by, they end up thinking like GW Bush.. And we sure don't need that now do we..
I am deeply offended by the religion these days and if this is going to keep up here. I will be gone. When I feel like arguing with the angry bearded guy in the sky, I go to the BB basement..
I've had my fill of being abused by the "??Christian??" people!!!
Post by: Barry Hufker on August 29, 2005, 08:05:30 AM
1) Not all Christians are Republicans
2) We who are not weak didn't let an extreme segment "take over." While extremely conservative Christians did vote for Bush, it took more people than that to put Bush in office.
3) Not all Christians are for Bush. I actually see this administration as this country's most evil.
4) Not all Christians support the war in Iraq, started with Bush's lies, but I am sure we all support the troops.
I am not saying this to get a religious-political discussion started. I am saying this to express a not-often heard Christian view. So if you're opinion or belief is different, don't rebut this posting. We already know those 'arguments.' I just want an opposite opinion posted.
Extremely conservative Christians want to legislate morality. That didn't happen in Israel under the Kings and it isn't going to happen now. Morality comes from the heart.
Extremely conservative Christians want Christianity in the schools and courtrooms. That shouldn't happen. Somehow they figure if it is in those places they have taken back a "Christian" country. Well, countries can't be "Christian." Only people can. And this country, no matter what the conservatives say, was never built on the principles of Christianity, but rather Humanism.
Smart Christian parents prepare their children to live in a non-Christian world by teaching them the faith at home. You don't need schools and courthouses. Be strong enough to teach the faith at home so your kids are prepared to live in the world.
From an orthodox, born-again Christian.
Barry
P.S. I ask the moderator to move this topic to the Saloon.
Post by: John Ivan on August 29, 2005, 08:40:54 AM
| Barry Hufker wrote on Mon, 29 August 2005 07:05 |
Things to know: 1) Not all Christians are Republicans 2) We who are not weak didn't let an extreme segment "take over." While extremely conservative Christians did vote for Bush, it took more people than that to put Bush in office. 3) Not all Christians are for Bush. I actually see this administration as this country's most evil. 4) Not all Christians support the war in Iraq, started with Bush's lies, but I am sure we all support the troops. I am not saying this to get a religious-political discussion started. I am saying this to express a not-often heard Christian view. So if you're opinion or belief is different, don't rebut this posting. We already know those 'arguments.' I just want an opposite opinion posted. Extremely conservative Christians want to legislate morality. That didn't happen in Israel under the Kings and it isn't going to happen now. Morality comes from the heart. Extremely conservative Christians want Christianity in the schools and courtrooms. That shouldn't happen. Somehow they figure if it is in those places they have taken back a "Christian" country. Well, countries can't be "Christian." Only people can. And this country, no matter what the conservatives say, was never built on the principles of Christianity, but rather Humanism. Smart Christian parents prepare their children to live in a non-Christian world by teaching them the faith at home. You don't need schools and courthouses. Be strong enough to teach the faith at home so your kids are prepared to live in the world. From an orthodox, born-again Christian. Barry P.S. I ask the moderator to move this topic to the Saloon. |
Barry, I'm glad to read this. However, you said yourself that your point of view is rarely heard. I think you need to change this and I never hear Christians like yourself in the media denouncing the nut cases. As distasteful as this sounds, {having to go on these shows} this is where a huge segment of the American public get there "information" Something has to be done.
I did a session for a Christian Friend of mine this weekend and she stopped attending her church. The church she grew up in, because they have all gone nuts!! this is very very sad and Dangerous!!
The point I'm making is that there is nothing conservative or Christian about most of these highly visible "Christians" and I do believe that the public face of a religion can and has been hijacked. I think the rest of you and the kind hearted,calm minded,and loving Christians that I know need to do something about this.
I can tell you this. When a public Figure starts talking about being Born again, I automatically assume he's nut's. To assume anything else is dangerous until proven otherwise.
Post by: Barry Hufker on August 29, 2005, 09:51:37 AM
I agree with all you have said. I too stopped going to church. It was killing me emotionally and spiritually to be the only liberal (truly the only one) in a sea of Republicans.
When someone says they are born again, I also am wary until I've learned enough one way or the other. The word "Gospel" is a "contraction" of "Gut Spiel" (good news). These days the Gospel isn't good news. It isn't the thing in which people rejoice. It is the thing causing them to live in fear.
As I drove to work today I was reminded of the movie, The Usual Suspects. Kaiser Soze says, "the greatest trick the Devil ever played was convincing people he doesn't exist." I would say the greatest trick he has ever played in the U.S. is convincing conservative Christians they must spend time, money, energy on reclaiming a "Christian country" rather than actually saving souls by feeding the poor, sheltering the homeless, working for justice for all people.
Frankly, I don't know how we change things. Conservatives tend to be business people and so tend to have a lot of money. It was conservative money that got Clinton impeached. And it's funny how all Clinton had was a stained dress, but Bush has got blood-stained hands from lying to start a war. I think that certainly calls for impeachment, but it will be hard to do because there is too much money and power against us.
All I can do is to keep yelling to anyone who'll listen to what I believe to be the truth. It is my desire that my message is one of hope.
Barry
Post by: Fig on August 29, 2005, 02:55:02 PM
| ****** wrote on Fri, 26 August 2005 13:44 |
Q: “I found some ground into the indian rug in the control room - still can't get it out, any suggestions?” Dear Thom, The correct way to deal with this is to use a cube or block of ice. You have to apply the ice until the gum is completely frozen solid. It can then be relatively easily removed cleanly in one piece. Clean the area with a brush or the serrated edge of a knife and some liquid cleaner mixed with water to finish off. |
Peter, oh Peter,
Welcome back. I hope you are feeling better, and if not - a speedy recovery, then.
I am saddened I had to leave the correct forum just to find your reply. But alas, I found it. (Thanks Tik for quoting Peter in the correct forum - I knew there was more info somewhere).
I will try your solution tonight and report back. Thank you.
Regarding the Almighty, music is one of His greatest gifts to us monkeys with laptops. Y'all gotta remember, at a certain time in history, praising Him with music was the only music there was!
So mind your manners. Respect your elders.
Thanks Peter.
Your friend,
Thom "Fig" Fiegle
(quick edit for spelling)
Post by: PP on August 29, 2005, 03:03:42 PM
Post by: PP on August 29, 2005, 03:13:59 PM
Post by: VagrantSt on August 29, 2005, 04:00:57 PM
Post by: t(h)ik on August 29, 2005, 04:53:08 PM
| VagrantSt wrote on Mon, 29 August 2005 22:00 |
Hi ***** I truly appreciate your agile and thoughtful response to my admittedly snarky post. I guess I was asking in a flippant sort of way if and at what point you would consider any passages of the Bible not intended for literal interpretation. I may be participating on a more crass level than the spiritual quality of this thread is aspiring too. If I come to that conclusion after a bit of reflection I'll respectfully bow out and just listen and learn. I was a little fired up to log onto my fave audio forum after an intense 11 hr mixing day preceded by 4 hrs of sleep, winding down my adrenaline rush and find full on christian sermonizing. Religion, Audio and Politics are three of my favorite subjects, but it is a volatile mix. As you can see by my post count I'm a new contributor (long time lurker) so I have a bit to learn about netiquette. So, excuses are like assholes, and other cliches Take care...Michael |
Wow
Post by: Barry Hufker on August 29, 2005, 06:26:38 PM
If you remember, Christ is an offense to some and foolishness to others. That is the basic nature of the world. Any place you can mention any hair-brain philosophy or trendy religion and it's fine. Mention Christ and people are turned off, frightened or angry. That is part of the proof that Christ is Christ.
But Christ never came to "clean up" the web or the world. He came to preach the good news of salvation, to be rejected by his own people (which includes you and me as sinners) and to offer himself as an atonement for all sin.
Even in his own life Christ never punished the blasphemous. He never raided brothels, he never stopped abortions. He had one message - salvation.
I am not offended by the language or ideas here. This is how the world works and I know I am in the world, just not *of* the world. Christ never separated himself from the world. Paraphrasing, he said, "after all who needs a doctor but the sick?" Christ didn't sit and wonder why he wasn't accepted and he didn't bemoan the state of the world. He just kept saying one thing -- Mercy and Hope.
And it does no good to mention Old Testament laws and punishments. Christ fulfilled all those and so we are free from them. All the law has ever done is act as a mirror to reveal sin. From the beginning when there was only one law -- don't eat from the tree; to when there was no law -- the time between the flood and the establishment of government; to the time when there were 10 laws -- the Commandments; to the time when all laws were fulfilled -- Christ's resurrection. No law has ever brought about salvation. So why spout laws instead of the Good News? Christ didn't spout law but spoke of Mercy and Hope.
Laws don't matter. People don't go to hell because they broke a law. The unsaved are doomed because of one thing -- the refusal to accept the gift of salvation that would save them from doom.
So, now there is no law for saved or unsaved. There is sin and salvation. The last commandment was to "love one another as I have loved you." and the last commission was to go through out the world preaching the Good News.
All I tend to see from my fellow Christians is condemnation of others, whining, smug self-righteousness and bullying. Where is Christ in *any* of this?
Barry
Post by: George_ on August 29, 2005, 11:12:49 PM
| Quote: |
Mention Christ and people are turned off, frightened or angry. That is part of the proof that Christ is Christ. |
mention christ and I will tell you to leave my location;) shure, I hate people telling you all the time that christ blah and christ blahblah.. normally they mention christ if they did something bad and uuuups.. no problem: he died on the cross for our sins.. cool..
in my opinion christ was one of 1000's of preachers at this time. maybe he was a good showmaster (like manson is) and that's why he made his way up to heaven.. or to be written in the holy book.
my theorie: if christ would be able to see what people do and don't in the name of christ he would turn not only 360
Post by: John Ivan on August 30, 2005, 12:21:43 AM
| Barry Hufker wrote on Mon, 29 August 2005 17:26 |
Peter, If you remember, Christ is an offense to some and foolishness to others. That is the basic nature of the world. Any place you can mention any hair-brain philosophy or trendy religion and it's fine. Mention Christ and people are turned off, frightened or angry. That is part of the proof that Christ is Christ. But Christ never came to "clean up" the web or the world. He came to preach the good news of salvation, to be rejected by his own people (which includes you and me as sinners) and to offer himself as an atonement for all sin. Even in his own life Christ never punished the blasphemous. He never raided brothels, he never stopped abortions. He had one message - salvation. I am not offended by the language or ideas here. This is how the world works and I know I am in the world, just not *of* the world. Christ never separated himself from the world. Paraphrasing, he said, "after all who needs a doctor but the sick?" Christ didn't sit and wonder why he wasn't accepted and he didn't bemoan the state of the world. He just kept saying one thing -- Mercy and Hope. And it does no good to mention Old Testament laws and punishments. Christ fulfilled all those and so we are free from them. All the law has ever done is act as a mirror to reveal sin. From the beginning when there was only one law -- don't eat from the tree; to when there was no law -- the time between the flood and the establishment of government; to the time when there were 10 laws -- the Commandments; to the time when all laws were fulfilled -- Christ's resurrection. No law has ever brought about salvation. So why spout laws instead of the Good News? Christ didn't spout law but spoke of Mercy and Hope. Laws don't matter. People don't go to hell because they broke a law. The unsaved are doomed because of one thing -- the refusal to accept the gift of salvation that would save them from doom. So, now there is no law for saved or unsaved. There is sin and salvation. The last commandment was to "love one another as I have loved you." and the last commission was to go through out the world preaching the Good News. All I tend to see from my fellow Christians is condemnation of others, whining, smug self-righteousness and bullying. Where is Christ in *any* of this? Barry |
I think this is very well stated and I admit that I was rude,and I snapped earlier today.. For this, I owe P. and who ever else I might have offended,an apology.
It doesn't bother me when sane people want to talk about their faith. I'm on the fence about where this all started and while I have no doubt that Jesus was an enlightened cat, and had many many profoundly beautiful things to say, I'm not so sure he's any more the son of god than I am.
There are any number of things written in the Bible that clearly are not meant to be taken literally and this is where MOST folks who call them selves Christians, make a huge mistake.
The other thing that I notice about MOST of these folks is they without cause,and without doubt, feel they tower above who they consider to be "nonbelievers",no matter how one might live their life.
We have four or five Bibles around the house and I pick one up here and there because there can be no argument that it is an incredible read and has shaped the hearts of many people over the years. It's not at all clear to me that this shaping has always been a good thing and I am very very afraid for the world at this point in history because, quite frankly, what comes from the mouths of the people most commonly known as the "Christian community", is pure evil. We now have in this country of {ours?} national leaders who believe that people who don't share their view regarding God are all going to hell and for this reason, we can just go kill them. They have made this clear over and over again.
The KKK also claimed Christianity as there excuse. For those of you who have deep faith and believe in the word of Christ,I would suggest that it might be time to very very loudly and clearly denounce these mean, damaged people before they get us all killed.
I've had many long wonderful talks with really great people who love Jesus and found this experience to be very fulfilling and I'm not interested in dismissing the word of Christ but, the religion has been deformed and hacked to bits by people who are only interested in themselves and I just can't stand it anymore.
Just some thoughts I had walking by the i-mac on the way upstairs to edit audio and get these stupid machines locked together...%^&*()!@#$%
Ivan..........
Post by: J.J. Blair on August 30, 2005, 12:50:40 AM
Since we are no longer in th audio forum...
You know, one of the fascinating things about the Bible is how open to interpretation it is. One of the reasons that there is so much room for interpretation is that there are many contradictions, as well as blatantly mythical accounts, which if taken literally, defy all logic. Even the literalists, who believe that the Earth is only 6,000 years old, are plagued by hypocrisy. They point to Romans II and Leviticus for proof that homosexuality is a sin, yet they ignore the other 98% of the Leviticus Code. OK, it's not kosher for "man to lie with another man as with a woman", but ignore all that stuff about staying six feet from women on their periods.
And the idea of giving up the Jewish traditions was the idea of Paul, who never met Jesus. The leader of the Christ movement before Saul became Paul and hijacked the movement was Peter, Christ's brother. Peter, like Christ, was a Jew, and the agreement he had with Paul (who was not a Jew), was that if Paul were to spread the word of Christ, he must not tell people that they don't need to follow Jewish law. Paul ended up renegging on his deal.
Another modern (mis)interpretation, when confronted with the hypocrisy of the "culture of life" being in favor of the death penalty, they frequently quote "an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth." Well, perhaps they misunderstand that. Perhaps it means that you if take an eye, you must give one up in return. Maybe it is a way of making amends, not a prescription for punishment.
I'm a big fan of the Emmet Fox book The Sermon On the Mount. Fox was castigated for his ideas that stated things like how God could not possibly be an angry or vengeful god, because those are finite human qualities, that humans have assigned to an infinite god. He made statements like "We are punished for our sins, rather than by our sins." And the idea that the Kingdom of God is in the here and now, not something to be attained after you die.
I have spent a great deal of time over the years studying the history of the Church, and how certain ideas have evolved over time. Certain ideas such as the Apocalypse and the Rapture, are notable themes which have morphed, and whose evolution is well documented. For example, the now popularly held idea that the Rapture will occur before the End of Days, doesn't even exist in Revelations. The origin of mixing this idea from the book of Daniel, with the themes in Revelations, didn't appear until the 19th century. Revelations doesn't even include the term "Anti Christ". The identity of the the author of Revelation is not even known, other than his first name, the location where he lived (Patmos), and the fact that he was a prisoner.
The evolution of the idea of Hell is fascinating. Notice how Jews don't believe in Hell, but believe in the same Old Testament? In the original Hebrew and Aramaeic texts, the references are to Hedra, which is actually a geographical location of caves, where the dead were brought. The mythology of Satan is actually traced more to extra biblical writing, like John Milton's Paradise Lost.
These are just a handful of inconsistencies that Christians are faced with. I think that it is important for each person to study the Bible with an open mind, and find the message in there that works for them, and can hold logic to all situations. I have seem too many people have a crisis of faith when life contradicts the narrow precepts of their dogma. It is for this reason that I believe people should not prostlytize their interpretations. When Billy Graham goes on Larry King and pronounces that all men who do not accept Christ as their savior are going to go to Hell, it is the height of arrogance. The idea that any man has better or more exclusive knowledge about the existence of God or of God's will than any other man is nothing other than didactic grandiosity, IMO. But I could be wrong.
YMMV.
Post by: George_ on August 30, 2005, 12:56:25 AM
| Quote: |
These are just a handful of inconsistencies that Christians are faced with. |
that's a problem for jewish too.. because their belief is based on the old testament, there are a lot of incompabilties and they had to invent their own book of reglemenations.. tora..
well.. endless discussions..
Post by: t(h)ik on August 30, 2005, 02:31:02 AM
thought provoking.
I wasn't lucky like these yungin's that come to my studio that have the luxury of being raised as atheists.
When you mention that there is no god....they're like "what? of course not"
I was raised in 'merica.
I don't know how you came to be born again JJ but for me being in America, it was very difficult to become an atheist.
I didn't even know anyone with the attitude like the kids have today.
Where I spent my adolescence, everyone went to church.
I really wanted to believe and the world was not so big. Looking back I didn't have any access to a single person that was worldly or intelligent. But lot's of great shooters...but I digress.
It wasn't until I started to study the new testament that I realized that it was....well...kinda suspect.
Traveling the world and seeing other peoples gods was also a great benefit. It was like....hmmm elephant head, mans body...that's realistic...just like coming back from the dead.
Again, the kidz who are 22 years old here laugh at me when I reveal that I was such a back woods cretin. But you work with what you have. In my case it's about a 25 Watt bulb.
Your point about Billy G. It's the focus of their entire relationship with mankind. If you do not accept the anglo-saxon looking hippie YOU WILL BURN!
Like you say it's arrogance beyond the pale.
A real christian attitude would be.....
Said in a hick accent...
"Did you accept the hippie as your personal saviour boy?"
"No sir! I accepted him for Bobby Joe. Now he's goin' to heaven and I'm a gonna burn for him."
That would be....well...christ-like wouldn't it.
That wouldn't work though because popular people like Britney Spears would be saved millions of times and people that spend all their time in the studio making cables would surely face eternal incineration.
Thanx again for the great post.
Did you write it yourself....
lol
Tik
Post by: CCC on August 30, 2005, 05:25:13 AM
| J.J. Blair wrote on Tue, 30 August 2005 05:50 |
Since we are no longer in th audio forum... |
Hey, JJB - great post. Maybe you might enjoy "The Pagan Christ" by Tom Harpur. He is a theologian, and I believe also a former man-of-the-cloth. In this book he traces the roots of Christianity and debunks many myths ... interestingly he is a faithful person and a believer in God - but like many people he feels that modern interpretations are really off-the-rails.
Edit; oh yeah - I forgot - http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0802714498/qid =1125399464/sr=8-1/ref=pd_bbs_1/104-3252528-5969538?v=glance &s=books&n=507846
Post by: Fig on August 30, 2005, 08:42:37 AM
| sixtiksix wrote on Tue, 30 August 2005 01:31 |
That wouldn't work though because popular people like Britney Spears would be saved millions of times and people that spend all their time in the studio making cables would surely face eternal incineration. |
See, I knew it would come back to audio.
And it also teaches the lesson that Tik needs to learn dem yunginns... live and let live, right? Leave nothing but footprints, blah-blah. Maybe they'll listen, perhaps they will remain ignorant. Let us "nough".
I also cannot deny and wanted to share with y'all how the "loyalties" in this thread are as strong as when we're discussing digital or analog, ITB or Out, compressed two-mix bus or wide open, ribbons, tubes, ICs, etc... Possibly stronger?
For those keeping score (you ARE keeping score, aren't you?), the gum came right out of the rug using Peter's remedy. Thank you sir, you are a true gentleman & scholar... in ANY forum
Warm analog regards,
Fig
Post by: Barry Hufker on August 30, 2005, 08:53:29 AM
A major, if not *the* major problem with Christians is indeed that they feel superior to others. I don't know why this should be so. Christians are sinners like everyone else. Salvation is a gift from God. It can not be bought or earned. All gifts (from anyone) are given to the recipient for no reason other than the giver wants the recipient to be happy. If the recipient becomes smug because of the gift then all are diminished.
Let me say again, the laws of the Old Testament, and again actually *all* laws *anywhere* at *any time* are only for condemnation. They don't bring about any kind of "salvation."
I believe if one reads the Bible cover to cover, the meaning is very clear and non-contradictory. It is a very consistent message -- Man (people) has fallen short of God's standards and will persih horribly without a mediator. The law can not save. Man can not save himself. God can not lower his standards so there must be someoene who will pay the price for Man's sins so all who believe in that act can be saved from the punishment. That mediator has to be fully human (because all sinners are human) and fully God, because only God could pull this off. So that leads us to Christ.
Christ: please don't confuse the "religion" with the person. Christianity is used and abused. Horrible things have been done in the name of God and Christ. Does God condone these things? No, but people have free will to choose good or evil.
Salvation through Christ is simply and *only* about this: each person is in peril, Christ wants to have a true and lasting friendship with each person -- and because of his unique position as God and Man, he can save each person from peril.
*Nothing* else matters -- no churches or laws or traditions or words or anything else. That is the sum of Christianity.
The Apostle Paul: JJ, the facts are slightly different. Paul was a Pharisee (a very important and influential Jew). Believing he was doing God's will, he vowed to kill every Christian he came across. He did this until God stopped him. He then spent several years in the desert learning from God and when he returned from the desert, he was named Paul.
Peter and Paul had a hard time getting along. Peter was still bound up in Jewish traditions and rules, even tho' he knew "better." Paul you see had learned that all the previous laws and traditions were meaningless because Christ had fulfilled them all and thus they weren't needed. So Paul kept pushing for people to abandon what were now needless things, but people have a hard time changing. So, he had to concede somewhat because some people weren't willing to change to such a great extent.
Peter was not Christ's brother, James was. The writer of Revelation was the Apostle John, who was a prisoner on Patmos. In fact he mentions himself early on in the book.
"An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth" is not a statement of "let's get even." It is actually a statement of mercy. Prior to this, punishments under Jewish law tended to be out of proportion to the crime. So by saying the above, the statement really means, "Let's don't punish the criminal in any manner worse than what was done. Let's have fairness."
The Rapture is dubious in its origin and there may not be much if anything to support it.
The Apocalypse is mentioned in Revelation -- the four horsemen of the Apocalypse.
I believe the Bible to be great literature. As such some parts are meant to be taken literally and others not. If one studies the Bible (and not just reads it), it becomes apparent which are which.
Billy Graham: people are people afterall, with all the failings people have. If one looks at Billy Graham, it soon becomes apparent he is the *only* well-known evangelist who has consistently preached God's word without personal sexual or financial benefit -- in other words no sex or money scandals.
Is he correct about everything? No, he's a guy. He has extremely conservative, anti-communist politics for instance. Is he wrong when he says the unsaved are going to hell? Well, that's a long story. Here's the briefest explanation I can give.
1) If it were my world, everything would happen differently and no one would need to worry about salvation or anything like it.
2) It isn't my world. God created it and us. Therefore he gets to make up the rules.
3) I don't like the rules.
4) Most people don't like the rules.
5) God wants people to know the rules. He wrote them in a book and he occaisionally tells people, such as Billy Graham, to go and tell the rules to others.
6) Telling the rules to others is a very unpleasant task (see 3 and 4 above)
7) Some people accept the rules, others don't
I *still* don't like the rules, but I accept them (no other choice really).9) Billy tells people the rules.
10) Some people get angry with Billy and blame him as tho' he made the rules
11) Billy is just doing what he was told. Please don't shoot the messenger.
This posting is too long and if you've read this far you're amazing!
Barry
Post by: t(h)ik on August 30, 2005, 09:32:51 AM
| Fig wrote on Tue, 30 August 2005 14:42 |
I also cannot deny and wanted to share with y'all how the "loyalties" in this thread are as strong as when we're discussing digital or analog, ITB or Out, compressed two-mix bus or wide open, ribbons, tubes, ICs, etc... Possibly stronger? Warm analog regards, Fig |
Actually, (the word actually is not meant to contradict, but I have to get behind the console and am too lazy/ short on time to find the right word, which I could have done instead of typing this explanation) I think this thread is much more civil.
I have seen threads here where the guys who have actually done something in audio get called "cocksuckers".
I think the work these guys have accomplished speaks for itself.
That's the funny thing about this thread, with special emphasis on people who had emotional input and then toned it down.
A: People call accomplished engineers names arguing about a stupid DAW. There is a certainty that these accomplished engineers are well....accomplished. Even in light of the evidence, and the TOTAL lack of professional achievements of the detractors this rampant fantasy world is unleashed on the rest of us.
B: You have an afterlife. None of us have been there....have we?
There is an element of doubt. Anyone of us could close our eyes for the final time and find out....hmmmm...oh shit...but you don't see the fuming on this thread. I continue to be mentored by you all.
Hopefully someday I will be above fuming...
Until then..
SONIK BEEKKEKKE TO YOU ALL!!!!!!
Penultimate!!!
Post by: Fig on August 30, 2005, 11:20:38 AM
| sixtiksix wrote on Tue, 30 August 2005 08:32 |
I think this thread is much more civil. I have seen threads here where the guys who have actually done something in audio get called "cocksuckers". |
I agree,
But this one got banished to the saloon.
Lotsa folks reading it, too.
I find it interesting is all.
Osci-later,
Fig
Post by: Barry Hufker on August 30, 2005, 11:55:17 AM
Barry
Post by: J.J. Blair on August 30, 2005, 12:45:08 PM
Post by: J.J. Blair on August 30, 2005, 01:30:40 PM
You are correct about Saul being a Pharisee and being born a Jew. What I misrecollected and meant, was that Paul was not Israeli and was a Roman citizen. The struggle between Israel and Rome was well known, and at one point Paul sought protection as a Roman citizen from the Jews who were upset about his pronouncing the old laws invalid.
BTW, I did not say that the Apocalypse was not in Revelations. I said that the Rapture and the Anti-Christ are not in Revelations. Another liberal interpretation out of the End of Days mythology is Armagedon, which actually traces its original translation to a final battle to take place in the town of Megedo, in Israel. I believe that this comes from the Book of Daniel as well.
The majority of biblical historians believe that the writer of Revelations was not the Apostle John. There are timeline problems with these letters being written by John, as well as linguistic differences between the letters of John the Apostle and John of Patmos. For example:
| Quote: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The vocabulary and style of the Gospel of John and the Johannine letters are different from those of the Book of Revelation: "For the former are not only written in flawless Greek, but also show the greatest literary skill in their diction, their reasonings, and the constructions in which they are expressed. There is a complete absence of any barbarous word, or solecism, or any vulgarism whatever....But I will not deny that the other writer had seen revelations and received knowledge and prophecy; nevertheless I observe that his style and that his use of the Greek language is not accurate, but that he employs barbarous idioms, in some places committing downright solecisms." The author of the Book of Revelation did not compose according to the stylistic conventions of standard literary Greek, but is characterized by a peculiar Greek style that has a Semitic flavor to it, which Dionysius found uncultured and offensive. For example, the author often does not use the proper case of a noun after a preposition (see Rev 1:4) What is even more significant for the question of authorship, however, is the fact that the author of the Book of Revelation uses different words or forms to express the same idea found in the gospel and the letters. For example, although Christ is called metaphorically a "lamb" in both, in the Book of Revelation the word used is arnion, whereas in the Gospel of John it is amnos. Similarly, the author of the gospel uses the form Ierosoluma for the city of Jerusalem, whereas the author of the Book of Revelation uses the form Ierousal Post by: Fibes on August 30, 2005, 03:09:23 PM A man as brutal as King James should never have had a shot at it. Jehova or Elohim? Was the true fall of man (Adam and Eve)in Gen. 1 or the less popular story of the angels coming from heaven and mating with the creatures of earth in Gen. 3? Creationism or Darwinism? The battle rages in the oldest books of the Old Testament (Gen. Ex. Lev.) where the great Mother, represented by vegetation gods and godesses was embattled by the notion of the sky father (Yahweh). Ultimately Baalim and Ashtoroth were losing until pagan gods were folded into the Christian faith as Angels. As a man who does not subscribe to traditional Christian dogma or blind following i find it interesting how many stones are left unturned by those "saved" individuals. I find it more interesting to talk with the scholars who aren't as scared of Harry Potter the young Magi. "Because I know" is not the answer to everything. EHEIEH! Indisputable is the correlation between the body and khat and also the soul and ba. The dead sea scrolls- Gnostic propaganda? Pistis Sophia- Merely and allegory paralelling Cupid and Psyche? The world soul as represented by Mary Magdaline? maybe it's just some speech on the Mount of olives whose historical reference in the Xtian faith overlooks the teaching presupposing an inner world of aeons and powers of considerable complexity and instead focuses on the (aside) repentance of the individual soul. Whatever, propaganda and selective memory, just like an all knowing god who had to ask "where's your brother?" I for one approach all things on a quest for deeper understanding rather than darkness. Any Rosicrucians out there? Visita Interiora Terra Rectificando Invenies Occultum Lapidem The universal solvent not something to spout. Psychobabble out. Post by: Barry Hufker on August 30, 2005, 07:08:51 PM JJ., sorry for my mistake about the Apocalypse. Well, we are getting into very deep subjects here. There are several important concepts, one of which you mention. There are the Children of God, the Kingdom of God and the Kingdom of Heaven. Certainly living Christ's principles in this life will lead to a better life in some ways and a tough life in others -- too long to explain. But there is an immediate, practical value to practicing them here on earth. Forgive me for jumping around. I keep writing then scrolling down for a subject in your email to respond to. Christ's message, no man's comes to the Father except by me is extremely important. As such it is important not to shorten it. It is "I am the Way, the Truth and the Life. No man comes to the Father except by me." The emphasis here is "the." "The" meaning "only." And if the Father is in Heaven, then the connection to me seems plain. Apostles are only those who have been personally taught by Christ. No one else can be an Apostle. As such Paul, as an Apostle, was taught personally by Christ while Paul was in the desert. Jesus as a Jew: Jesus comes out of the same "tradition" as Samson. That one takes a *long* time to explain. Jews believing in the Devil is something I don't know anything about, but they did (and do??) believe in Sheol. Sheol is where *all* souls went until Christ rose from the dead. And one must be careful about Jewish views as it was the official position of the Jewish religion up until the '60s that women didn't have souls! John and Revelation. Certainly your source JJ. is a fine one. It sounds as if it is an excellent linguistic study. My immediate sources are not nearly as good. One says John was a "Pastor of Patmos." One sources says "2nd and 3rd century witnesses testify it was written by John." Then goes on to say some critics say it couldn't have been him (this includes Martin Luther) while a third set says it is an open question. As I said in an earlier posting, I didn't make the rules. Even I have a hard time accepting them because I worry about how seemingly unfair it sounds. But that's where faith comes in. I have to believe that if God has created us and the world, then his justice is perfect. After that, I just pray for those I know (like them or not) that the fate you describe for the unsaved is not their fate. Changing the Laws of Physics: I would say that exact thing is mentioned several times in the Bible: One is in the Old Testament (and I don't know where it is exactly). God is asked to stay the sun so it doesn't set while the Israelites fight a battle and God complies. Another is lighting aflame a water-soaked stack of logs (and I don't remember where that is); another is God appearing to Moses in a burning bush that didn't burn up; another is the seven plagues on Egypt (such as turning water into blood); another is Christ turning water into wine; and another is raising Lazurus from the dead. I think the physics thing happens a lot! Christ's conception: in brief 1) the Immaculate Conception is actually a Catholic doctrine that Mary (NOT Jesus) was conceived without sin so she could bear Jesus. According to Catholic doctrine (and I'm not making this up), The Holy Spirit inseminated Mary through her ear. 2) Jesus is the first child born to Joseph and Mary. Mary is pregnant with Jesus before she is even "known" (remember that one!) by Joseph. So Jesus is born first and then the rest. And can't you picture the other kids always being asked, "Why can't you kids be more like your brother Jesus?!" 3) OK, this one is tough but it is fundamental. While Jewish society was (is?) partiarchal, the determination for actually being a Jew is if your *mother* is Jewish. Now, we have to stroll a little further. Human sin nature is passed from one generation to the next from the father through sperm (OK, I said you had to hang on!). Now, Joseph and Mary were both from the "House of David." That meant they were extremely distant members of royalty, but from a royal lineage never the less. Because Joseph didn't impregnate Mary but God did, then the seed of God (Christ) was implanted in her. And because Joseph didn't impregnate Mary, no sin was passed to Christ. And because Joseph and Mary were both from a royal household, Christ could officially have a real claim to being "the King of the Jews." OK this is way too long. Let me touch on one or two other points briefly. 1)Baal and Ashteroth were never "folded in as angels." Except possibly fallen angels. Only three angels are mentioned in the Bible, Gabriel, Michael and Lucifer. 2) An omniscient God can ask "where is your brother?" in the same way a parent asks "what have you been doing?" when coming upon his child in the bathroom with a roll of toilet paper strewn about. The parent (God) knows the answer but he wants us to acknowledge it. 3) Creation or Darwinism -- doesn't matter. Can't be proved one way of the other. 4) Adam and Eve as literal. I take it that way and I will tell you why. Original sin came into the world because A and E ate from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. Christ was crucified on a tree (a reference to original sin), literally suspended between Heaven and Earth as a bridge between God and Man. OK, thanks for reading. I don't know how you do it. Barry Post by: Fibes on August 30, 2005, 07:47:31 PM
1. Angels were folded in from pagan religions, my examples are merely a couple appropriated. Even my Jehova Witness bud agrees. It was a ploy by the Constantine era "high ups" to help ease the transition. 2. You missed my sarcasm. "I've heard about Gahena but I've never..." Whoops i did it again. 3. Nice. The early hebrew texts can be translated either way. No matter what, light plays a big role. 4. I'm not going to form a polemic against your beliefs because they are yours and dear to you. There is a strong correlation between gnostic teachings and the earth, i see what i see, you see what you see; no amount of rhetoric is going to do either of us any good. FWIW I'm Mithraic. Amazing resemblence to modern day Christianity, in fact it was so similar that St. Augustine called it heresy. Constantine decided Xtianity would be better and switched from being a Mithraic to a Xtian before slaughtering all of the heretics. Funny thing, the Mithraic faith (not the one on hokey websites) was beleived by scholars as the bridge between eastern and western religion. It migrated through the trade routes through Petra and was assimilated into western thought. The irony is that the current Jihad ignores it as much as the Jihadees. This conversation is what i get for studying this for years and debating with my seminary buddies/roomates. Have you ever read the book of the dead? Post by: Barry Hufker on August 30, 2005, 08:24:58 PM Sorry I missed the sarcasm. I am sometimes not very quick. If anything, I offer pagan religions adopted angels. I am afraid there are many things your Jehovah's Witness friend and I would not agree upon. Mithraic: No, I don't know it. I'll have to learn more about it. Sounds interesting. Constantine: political leaders use what they will to get what they want. Instanbul, not Constantinople -- it's nobody's problem but the Turks! Oh. And I wanted to use this to end my last post. YSMV - Your Salvation May Vary. Barry Post by: Fibes on August 30, 2005, 08:35:52 PM Watch out for the bogus Mithraic websites there are many falsehoods but the facts as written by scholars are just as interesting. The Persian connection, feast day similarities and God as man scenarios are well documented and unfortunately not always fairly represented due to bias. Thanks for being a part of a discourse; in the south sometimes I can't bear the fear of God mongers that leave all reason at the door. No matter what the faith a deeper understanding is something all should ascribe to. Faith to me is more than a deer in headlights; i think we agree on that one point... Post by: Barry Hufker on August 30, 2005, 09:03:19 PM Thanks! I too am enjoying the discussion very much. It's been informative for me and extremely friendly. Trust me... I have no wish to push anything on anyone. I know what it's like! Barry Post by: J.J. Blair on August 31, 2005, 01:46:42 AM But as far as the rules, as you have learned them, that is basically an interpretation you have learned. If we gave the Bible to a group of people who had absolutely no prrior knowledge of Christianity, etc. and we said 'here's your new religion', I bet you they would have a completely different ethos and dogma than what we understand Christianity to be. They might not even find the idea of eternal damnation. I love what Einstein said: "The greatest obstacle between man and God is religion." (At least I recall it was Einstein that said it.) I think it is important for each man to discover God on his own, and not blindly accept what some religious leader tells him. If I had not looked beyond what I was taught in the church, I would surely be dead of a drug overdose by now or in jail. The paradigm that I was indoctrinated into required ignoring much of my common sense. I found it was necessary to find a new paradigm that applied in every single situation. I have been through way too much brutal shit in my life to experience a crisis of faith. I call my God a 100% God, because it works 100% of the time. I saw Pat Robertson on the news praying for the removal of a Supreme Court Justice the other day. I'm glad I don't think God works that way. It helps me limit my prayers to ones that I know will be answered 100% of the time. It works for me. Post by: Fibes on August 31, 2005, 07:59:07 AM I musta had a long day yesterday because i got angels confused with saints. Yep. I apologise for the brain fart, i was too occupied with some LA dude calling me crazy about the copyright office mail screening and mixing from 9am-1am. 6 hours sleep does a man good and once again I'm ashamed at my oversight. When i find that book i'll let you know. Post by: Barry Hufker on August 31, 2005, 08:16:24 AM It's true that "everyone must work out their own salvation." And I don't disparage for a moment your experience or beliefs. You have been kind and not disparaged mine. I don't think you can "assume" anything about Moses or hyperbole. Remember the old saying about "assume!" If one believes God to be omnipotent, then you don't need hyperbole or exaggeration. If one has the power to make the rules, then one has the power to suspend or break the rules. It's true I was raised Catholic and so was exposed to Christian teaching, such as it is for Catholics. But I too ran screaming from it. And I don't believe the Bible because I "learned" it. I believe because it has proven in my life to be true. From what you've said, you've had a very different experience. I am life's most reluctant Christian. In fact, it bothers me a lot to be posting all this stuff. Why? Because as I said in an earlier posting, I don't like the rules. In fact, I have often said someone is going to have to drag me kicking and screaming into heaven. And if I have to share that place with the likes of George Bush and Pat Robertson (to whom I sent three blistering emails), then I will need Divine Prozac. But I believe there is a God and that I am loved enough that he has saved me from myself. And I believe what Einstein said -- religion is a great barrier between God and Man. But as I said in another posting, Christianity is simply a friendship (rather than animosity) between God and Man. Nothing more. Nothing less. Anything else is bulllshit. I would offer a corollary to Einstein. People are the second greatest barrier between God and Man. We form our opinion of God and some brand of faith based on our experiences, not so much with God, but with people who profess to be Godly. Those people are the ones who drive us away, not God. JJ. I respect you and Fibes as audio professionals and people. I know we each must find our own way. Fibes, No problem about Angels. In "my" version, a saint is anyone who has been saved whether in heaven or not. I find it interesting that Catholics believe Michael the Archangel is a saint. That doesn't make sense to me theologically. Angels don't become saints and people don't become angels. I'll have to ask the "patron saint of copyrights" to look after you today! ; >) Barry Post by: lucey on August 31, 2005, 03:42:36 PM I was permanently ejected from BBs only-my-friends-are-allowed-to-talk-like-that and any-conflict-is-intolerable forum for inciting a riot of ideas in suggested (and then defending the ensuing attacks) that a computer mouse injury and an MD were incompatible ... it was just too hot a topic! So Peter, did you meet the same "blame and ban" fate for one or more of your posts here? Did you get the same "it's a pattern of behavior I will not accept" speech? Or are you ill? Or did you just decide that "*****" is your true Christian name? In general, there would seem to be little tolerance for any conflictual topic from some folks 'round here. Which is pretty sad 'cause if we can't have a passionate debate on a deep topic, we're just talking to ourselves in a cross between Country Club banter disguised as audio and mutual masturbation disguised as sharing. The last episode on Whatever Works that got everyone's feathers ruffled was at the exact time as the end of the the 3 week Mercury Retrograde and the Full Moon combined. So it made perfect sense to me. There is reason to look beyond the earthly sciences for whatnots and insights if we really care to learn and dont just give knowledge and understanding lip service on the way to showing how smart we are already. Peter is long winded, yet the point about Christians being mummed is valid ... and older people are allowed to rant in my book. I dont always understand why he does, but I dont need to. Nor do I need to approve. Rant on as the Good Book tells you Pete, but understand that the mandate to spread the word has run it's course of good faith with most of us. Almost everyone has a friend or familiy member who thought there were Jesus' right hand PR person for a time, and it gets rude and condescending in a hurry. Not always from you, but it's so easy to see why people the world over are tired of Christians on a mission. Yet if I get bored or tired I can drag the bar down the page, clicking the down arrow is for newbies! Post by: bblackwood on August 31, 2005, 04:20:43 PM
We both know that was not the reason for your loss of access to my forum. Now drop it - it's not open for discussion.
Peter chose to change his alias for reasons known only to him - there was no pressure from moderators afaik. Post by: PP on September 02, 2005, 03:44:30 AM Post by: t(h)ik on September 02, 2005, 06:24:42 AM Are you refering to Nelson's third wife? What's she like? Thanx for the links. Lemme nough Tik Post by: PP on September 02, 2005, 07:34:47 AM Post by: Jerry Tubb on September 02, 2005, 11:58:50 PM It's great to see you back in action and "holding court" in the REP Saloon. ... your posts continue to grow in longevity ! I guess a true missionary -would- take his sermon to the Saloon Best Regards p.s. is that really your photo ? ... that Level posted a few months ago... gazing into large vacuum tubes? Post by: t(h)ik on September 03, 2005, 04:55:05 AM Well the thread also contains "and whatnot" in the title. Not that I am arguing. Interesting about #3. You mentioned the whole charity thing. I am reading here on the ding dong net how some people think that charity actually hurts Africa. The story goes something like when we Western types send down 2000 shoes to a village the shoemaker goes tits up and on and on. Hmmm. And that giving up the cash just makes them reliant. From my own brief charitable exploits in Cental America this sounds like bullshit but who knows. I'm going down to Africa just north of #3's place and want to find out about it first hand. And after I finish my studio jaunt I want to look into doing some kind of work in this area. Just like in America (North) there are people who are left outside the system and would never be a contributor to the economy. When I do see people in the States that are lounging around in sustained poverty I just want to give them a boot in the ass. What is the best way to help humanity....besides not being an arrogant kunt, recording new style country music or victimizing your fellow man? NE Thoughts? Tik Post by: danickstr on September 04, 2005, 10:31:24 AM Here are brief points: Who made god? Some will say, "he was always there." That doesn't really make sense to me. If it does to you, then you deserve to believe it. Since the infinite is not comprehensible by us, it is the easiest way to defend a god theory. Why is it that there is no direct proof of god? Some say, "look around, the proof is everywhere!" I say, let god come down here and show his face as a 200 foot projection in the sky, levitate some mountains, etc. Then I might believe in him. Circumstantial evidence is not enough to send a shoplifter to jail, should I really let it decide my spiritual path? Jesus is a nice role model. A bit quirky, but a generally good guy. I read the Tao for my spiritual enlightenment, but believe in no gods. The bible is not bad if you edit the god ego trip stuff. I won't be reading long biblical rebuttals, FYI. But these are my thoughts and they are genuine. cheers Post by: Barry Hufker on September 04, 2005, 04:48:03 PM I guess that's why it's called "faith." If it could be proved then it wouldn't take anything much to believe in it. Christianity could be dead wrong -- then again, it could be dead right... Barry Post by: danickstr on September 04, 2005, 10:40:18 PM Post by: PP on September 05, 2005, 07:37:10 AM Post by: danickstr on September 05, 2005, 01:19:33 PM I am certain that there will always be more than one view on this topic, and my opinion tends to coincide with that of Sigmund Freud: Sigmund Freud, Austrian physician and pioneer psychoanalyst (1856-1939). "The whole thing is so patently infantile, so foreign to reality, that to anyone with a friendly attitude to humanity it is painful to think that the great majority of mortals will never be able to rise above this view of life." I mean no disrespect, although innocence should never even be considered a thing for which to disrespect someone. God or Jesus has not made a personal appearance of public record (as themselves, that is in human form and announcing their deity) for two thousand years. I will not apologize for being sceptical of their existence based on this fact alone. Stephen Hawking was a great scientist. There are many more examples you could give I am sure. But the opinions of others are only incidental to my own. I just don't feel any invisible guy darting in and out of my mind or soul. As a social creature, I konw when I am in violation of certain creature rights through instinct. My conscience is a byproduct of social evolution and I am happy to comply with it, for as I may have said, I am a follower of the Tao. You might want to read it. I have read the bible, and found it to be worth the time. Thanks for your kind responses. cheers Post by: eligit on September 07, 2005, 01:26:13 PM what if i were to just one day say: "there is this invisible dwarf under my bed. he is an amazing all powerful guy. can do pretty much anything. also he created the earth a couple thousand years ago. this is all true. my friends and i all agree on this. if you do not believe this you either 1)DO believe this and just don't realize it or 2)don't believe it at all and are thus damned for eternity, whereas those who follow the invisible dwarf and what he has decreed (as written in this confusing and contradictory book which i just happen to have right HERE!) will be blessed and have eternal life. BTW terrible and good things happen all the time and the dwarf told me that he takes credit for all the good stuff and the bad stuff....well, that's on you. you must have sinned or something. also carbon dating, evolution, fosils, gravity, earth being round,all that stuff....nevermind, it's all a test of your FAITH!" i mean how credible is this? i know it feels great that you will live forever and be able to tell everyone what to think and do. but man is mortal, just like all animals from ants all the way up to us. don't get me wrong, i love animals! the brain dies and with it does the person. i know this is painful to face for all of us. there is NO evidence to the contrary. mary's face on a tree trunk or piece of bread really does not cut it. Post by: Barry Hufker on September 07, 2005, 05:10:54 PM There isn't supposed to be any proof of the truth of any religion, except the difference made in your life. If it were science, it could be proved, but it's not. It takes a certain amount of courage to believe in something that others don't think exists. And if I am wrong about my belief, what harm has been done? My faith demands I serve others to the best of my ability. It will be that I am wrong but have tried to do good towards others during my life. True Christians should NEVER tell you how to live or condemn anyone. Christ never condemned anyone. He took people where they were in their lives and spoke only a message of hope to them. The problem with Christianity is the Christians. I am a born again Christian and many is the time I've wanted to have the bumpersticker -- "Jesus, save me from your followers" plastered all over my car. In Christianity, all will fail except Christ. Laws fail, countries fail, commandments fail and the Church ultimately will fail -- largely because of the Christians filled with self-righteous bullying. As for the Bible, it can't be readily understood except by fervent prayer and study. God must grant you the insight to see the clear message. Does that mean a person who has that message is superior to anyone else or somehow "special?" Absolutely not. Why? Because the message is for any who will seek it. Because the very clear message is that I have fallen short of God's standards and I need help in my life. Christ is that help. That's the message. That's it. No more. No less. Nothing confusing about that. No, really. That's the message. Really! No kidding! ;>) As for Man being mortal, even you Eligit, must admit you don't know that for sure. It is your conclusion. You have to admit you have no evidence to prove it. You've never been anything else but alive (as far as you can remember) so you have no personal testimony about anything else. So, your theory is your best explanation. That's fine, but don't rain on someone else's best explanation. Mary on the wall, on the bread, in the sky with diamonds. People are people. Some times they have faith. Some times they are fearful. People who seek these signs obviously need something to confirm their faith. They need to be told what they hope for is real. They run from thing to thing hoping some how to be changed or "bettered," to prove to others they are right. And that can be very sad. Don't get caught up in the failings of people. People will always disappoint. It is only God who is constant in his love for you. As for me, I couldn't give a shit about you! ; >) Barry Post by: danickstr on September 07, 2005, 06:41:01 PM I enjoy your light-hearted pragmatic approach to this issue. It has me laughing and shows your sense of humor about what is of course a serious topic. I am glad people don't take it all too seriously. An area where we might disagree (besides the deity part) is with respect to people. I don't believe that people will always disappoint me. I actually have a ton of "faith" in the goodness of the heart of my fellow man. This may make me out to be a fool and someone who gets disappointed every now and then, but I guess I feel I have to "believe" in them and sometimes they fulfill the "self-fulfilling prophesy", and rise to the occasion. Other times, they leave me out to dry. It hurts to be the "mark" but other times I actually feel that it was my faith in them that got them to come around. It doesn't always work of course. Again, I have tremendous respect for you and what you do here. Helping people. You have only strengthened my faith in guys like yourself to do good. I know you might be doing it because of your faith in a higher power, but I can't help "believing" that you would do it anyway. Hope this is amusing to you in a good way, since it is all with acceptance and goodwill from my end. cheers Post by: Barry Hufker on September 07, 2005, 07:27:25 PM I can't tell you how much your kind words touch me. I hope that doesn't sound sappy in print. But it's true. Thank you. You are absolutely right about people. It is important to have faith in them. You're right again, given a chance, people will often rise to meet your expectations. I guess my fear is that sometimes a person hopes another will somehow be different than the rest of us, better than the rest of us, only to be disappointed when the idolized person turns out to have the failings of all humans. Nick, that you see good in others obviously reflects the goodness in you. I feel I've gotten to know you a little bit through these postings and the ones in other forums. The kind words you've said about me, I can easily say back to you. I have come to have great respect for you as a person and professional. Best, Barry Post by: danickstr on September 07, 2005, 07:32:33 PM
Post by: Barry Hufker on September 07, 2005, 08:48:39 PM Barry Post by: eligit on September 07, 2005, 10:52:39 PM
enjoy your fantasy my man. i'm sure it is a good feeling. life here on earth is a biological event. chemicals interact and things grow, interact, breed, die, fight, and so on. i can see this. i have watched my grandparents die. it was not like turning off a light switch. one minute there's a "spirit" and then next it's gone to heaven or whatever. it is a process of chemical reactions slowing going wrong.... there is no "clear" message in the bible. every other chapter says some other disturbed jibberish written by some different person. there is no one author. there is ZERO connection between any one religion and being a good person. i have good friends of all sorts. the athiests are as moral and good as the religious. perhaps the athiests are more moral. after all they are not being promised anything for their humanity. they just do good cause it feels good. not because they are threatened with hell or damnation or whatever. about not giving a shit about me, doesn't the bible tell you you HAVE to? follow your orders bro! kneel! "love" your fellow man. unless they're gay or buddist or whatever else is not allowed. in that case, you can try and convert them so they can "see the light" in time not to die as a heathen. in the mean time, relax. Post by: danickstr on September 08, 2005, 01:53:40 AM (its the right one...I checked) Post by: archtop on September 08, 2005, 08:39:02 AM 
Post by: Barry Hufker on September 08, 2005, 08:44:53 AM I thought that smiley was perfect. It was a friendly, funny touch. Eligit, I owe you an apology. I don't tend to use smilies. I type them the old way. So you didn't get that I was trying to be funny. That is entirely my fault. And I was just trying to end with a light touch after so much seriousness. Obviously that didn't come across to you and I am sorry. I am sincerely glad you have a philosophy that works for you. And you're right -- at least as far as Christianity goes -- there is no connection between good people and heaven. As I said in my posting, some Christians are the worst people. Some people I know would tell you I'm in that bunch -- and I'm not being modest, but truthful. And you're right even further, many atheists, etc. are much more loving and giving. The problem is (and please don't shoot me. I'm only the messenger, not the writer of the message) is that God says the human notion of "good" doesn't get you into heaven. His forgiveness does. Again, Eligit, you don't have any more proof of what you say than I do. You say people die and you've seen it. But you've only seen it from the "outside." You haven't died and so you can only follow the process so far. You can't say for sure what happens to the person, only the shell of that person. So until you've experienced the whole thing (visible and invisible) then how can you say for sure? There are many things we can't readily see -- atoms would be one. Yet they exist whether we can directly observe them or not. Why can't there be something going on at death that can't be readily observed? As far as the Bible being gibberish written by the disturbed, it doesn't offend me that you hold this opinion. You've considered the topic and this is your conclusion. But if I were offered a book written in Sanskrit or in military code, I might also call that gibberish written by a disturbed person because I couldn't understand it. That doesn't mean people who know how to read those things don't understand it. And even when a medical book is written in English, I can read the words but that doesn't mean I understand fully what's being said. If I live in a fantasy, I don't mind. It's my fantasy and I don't force others to live there with me. You are happy with what you have and I wouldn't try to change that. Barry Post by: eligit on September 08, 2005, 09:11:04 AM as far as the bible being like a medical text book or something in the precise code i really cannot see it. as far as i can tell, that book has been used for EVERY possible purpose and people pretty much focus on and/or translate it in what ever way suits their particular pupose. which i think is a testament to its complete lack of specificity or unified purpose OR applicability to modern life, post feminism, post slavery, post the dawn of reason...etc find me any 2 people who read any of it the same way. impossible. it's like an ink blot test. if you are hateful you will use it to hate, if you are loving, you will use it that way. and then there's the scary shit like Job or revelation. what a freakin nightmare. whatever the message is, it is some mean spirited stuff. and there sure is no ONE message no matter how you study it. then take a science text book. 90% of the info can be agreed upon by any group of educated scientists. because it describes actual things in explicit ways. and as far as it being all harmless and good, there's just that one annoying thing. serious christians seriously think i am going to hell because i don't buy their story. i just think that's not nice and wish we could all just see each other as human beings, not just candidates for heaven or hell as dictated by a bunch of arbitrary rules about praying and stuff. it's like you're saying "I love and accept you, but that's not good enough for god. to get into heaven you must follow THIS." since people created this idea of god (and there are only about a million different opinions on that as well so it is pretty much impossible to choose the "right" one), i just find all this very exclusionary and, well, anti-human. not to mention that any all powerful being would have to be one SPITEFUL mofo to allow (or actively CAUSE)the stuff that goes down every day. or simply non-existent. peace. Post by: Barry Hufker on September 08, 2005, 09:47:50 AM With that in mind, it must be acknowledged that people have agendas. Some are political, some are social, etc. So people use the tools at hand to get what they want. Some people use the Bible. That doesn't make it the Bible's fault. Like all great literature (and the Bible is great literature), it is often quoted. The quotations are often paraphrased or taken out of context. In fact, Satan (pardon me but I don't know if you know who this is. And I'm not being funny), the leader of the rebellion against God, quotes a portion of the Bible to Jesus. And as many humans do, he takes the passage out of context and quotes it only as far as it suits his purpose. Jesus then quoted the entire passage to put the phrase into proper context. What's my point? Anyone can and will quote the Bible, the Constitution, a science book, a comic book,etc. to get what they want. Science is broad as you know. And while scientists can agree on many things, they don't agree on all things. And today's theory (and a theory is an educated guess) can be quickly changed by tomorrow's observation. So science is not "fixed" in place but is "living" constantly being reborn based on new information. That means there should be a warning at the beginning of every science textbook "all information is subject to change." I am not anti-science. In fact, I love science. I have always been fascinated with it. Just a point I'm telling to let you know. People Made God: well, yes and no. I am not trying to be argumentative or mean here when I say the notion that "people made God" is a little like saying "the chair created the carpenter." The explanation I have is that God made people. And when they found out he wasn't quite to their liking, they decided to make other gods who were. Please note that these other gods are in the shape of humans and/or animals. All of these gods are equal or inferior to actual people. Even the Greek gods are just superhumans. They have exaggerated strength and exaggerated failings. But there is no image of the one true God. He is bigger, something more and something other than we can imagine. So the Bible tries to tell us something of him and his love for us. A Mean God: I don't like mean people, so why would I like a mean God? You think that way based on what you say. And I too think exactly that way. I'd have to be an idiot to obey that person and an even bigger idiot to want to spend an eternity with that person. So I must not believe him to be that kind of person. Then why is there so much evil in the world if he's so good? I guess a parallel question is "why do your parents let you smoke when they know it harms you?" The answer is free will. Your parents respect you enough as a person to let you do with your life as you will. Should they forcibly stop you? No, because you wouldn't be stopped. You'd find another way to get what you want and you would resent them even more. So that's pretty much God's attitude. "I gave you the freedom to choose between good and evil." Another reason for evil in the world: if there is no evil in the world, then good can't exist either. Evil is a force and good is a counter-force. People always talk about the "triumph of good over evil." And they use the word triumph because good doesn't always win but people are better off when it does. It's funny how this works: God tries tirelessly to show you he exists and Satan does his best to convince you he doesn't exist. So if the question is "why does so much evil exist if there's a God?" For me the answer is, given God's effort to reach people who don't believe in him and given that all good comes from God, it's amazing there's any good at all. Barry Post by: danickstr on September 08, 2005, 10:18:54 AM the book Tao Te Ching is over 4000 years old and I think it is a great summarization of a very accepting way to look at life in general. It is sort of the foundation of the "old master" who is wise and sees everything as balanced in some way. It is like 8 bucks at Barnes and Noble. The nice thing about it is that it isn't long. Each entry is about 5 to 20 lines in a poetic format. If anyone wants one, I will even send it, not that I am advocating anything, but it does represent a way to look at things that is accepting. Just PM your address and I will get you a copy. Here is a BRIEF example: He who stands on tiptoe Doesn't stand firm He who rushes ahead Doesn't go far He who tries to shine Dims his own light He who has power over others Can't empower himself He who clings to his work will creat nothing that endures It's kind of like a daily affirmation, but deeply aimed. I actually think a lot of it has ended up slightly changed in verse on posters with pictures of mountains. Thanks for a good exchange of ideas! cheers Post by: eligit on September 08, 2005, 11:47:09 AM
ok, i hear you. here's the rub. if a "thing" can be used for any purpose and said to mean anything it ceases to exist as a moral compass. as far as "free will", ok i understand your "parent" argument. i don't agree but at least i understand the "logic". what about natural disasters? surely if god is all powerful then he would not allow things that slaughter thousands or millions of innocents. he would be like "nuclear bomb? well you brought that on yourselves! huge earthquake that kills millions? i think that's just uncalled for." what does "free will" have to do with that? "he" did not "allow" man to bring a gigantic earthquake on himself. it just happened. millions died. there is no lesson there. only mass death. did they"deserve it" because they made the wrong choice with their "free will"? whatever. edit: to follow up the "parent" analogy: ok, a good parent can allow a child to smoke, knowing it is bad for them. free will. but what kind of parent goes to the child's bedroom when they are sleeping and tosses a bomb in (ie an earthquake)? since that would be one psychotic parent i'd rather "believe" that the parent is just not on the scene. the whole thing is silly. things happen without supernatural control. i believe in the devil about as much as i believe in god. which is not at all. Post by: Barry Hufker on September 08, 2005, 05:05:38 PM I didn't say the Bible could mean *anything*. I said people use it to say what they want. Such use is a perversion of the Bible. Imagine a brick of gold. It has a certain value. Someone takes that gold and feeds the poor. Another person takes that gold and buys weapons so they can kill people. The gold is still gold and still has value. It hasn't been corrupted by the people using it. Natural disasters: this is going to be a tough one. I'll explain it, but I am pretty sure you won't buy it. OK, here we go... when God created the earth, he gave it to Man to use and enjoy. God had a simple rule (too much to go into here) and Man broke that rule. Well, God couldn't send Man to his room, as the whole earth was "his room", so God allowed the earth to be the kind of place Man had chosen for himself through his act of rebellion. It's one of those "be careful what you ask for, because you may get it" kind of things. Man got what he asked for and the world, even today, reflects that. Did Man understand the consequences of his rebellion? I don't think so, but every mis-deed has a punishment. So instead of being a blessing to Man giving him every good thing easily, the earth is hostile towards Man. He must work and fight for all he gets. Part of the earth's hostility then is earthquakes, hurricanes, tornados, floods, pestilence, disease, etc. Are these horrible things? Yes. Do we deserve this punishment? I don't know. If you read my earlier postings then you will remember I am a person who does not like the rules of this life at all. I don't like bad things happening to people no matter who they are and what they've done. And if it were up to me, there wouldn't be anything bad in this life or the next. But it's not my game and we don't play by my rules. Given that, all of these horrible things brought on people are things Man originally brought on himself through rebellion. The purpose of a hostile world gives Man a challenge and a certain purpose -- help your fellow Man. Overcome moral evil with moral good. Overcome physical evil with physical good. This gives each person an opportunity to bring out the best in themselves and to be a blessing to others. Finally, a hostile planet is supposed to remind a person about the worthlessness of the things in this life. It is supposed to make one hope for and believe in a better place than this world where material goods decay, bodies decay, hope decays. If one is dissatisfied with this world and this life then maybe a person will seek someone who can take him to a better place. The person to be sought is Christ. He can save us all from this life and can ensure our well-being in the life to come. OK, that's the story. I know it hasn't swayed you. But at least you were kind enough to let me tell you. Thanks Elegit! Barry Post by: eligit on September 08, 2005, 05:36:35 PM
ok, i think i got it. punishment for mis-deeds/rebellion. even tho those who are "punished" have done nothing wrong and those who do TERRIBLE wrong go unpunished. what you call god i call pyschotic insanity. to each his own.... however i can dig the idea that bad situations can bring the good out of others. too bad people have to be slaughtered to make this happen...i'll all for overcoming moral evil with moral good. unfortunately what many religious folks consider "moral evil" these days I consider people simply living their lives and those who i see who have atrocious morals (like those in the white house currently whose priorities are ALL screwed up and wield MASSIVE power) hold the banner of christianity over their heads while ignoring rational thought... another thing: a hostile planet is supposed to remind us that our current existence is worthless?? what? i hope you were referring to material wealth and not our friends and family, things i consider priceless. and if you do not like all the rules god made then why do you worship "him"? fear? good luck to us all. Post by: Barry Hufker on September 08, 2005, 06:14:47 PM People are what this is all about, so when I say the things which are worthless in this life, I mean awards, money, cars, houses, etc. Saving people, those whom we love and hold dear, those whom we dislike, even those who would do us harm, is what this is all about. It would be great if all would be saved. Misdeeds and punishment: all have done something wrong. No matter how large or how small the misdeed, everyone, myself included of course, is guilty. Therefore the same punishment falls on us all. What's the proof of that? We all live in the same world and all face the same difficulties. I agree with you completely about the current political situation. I have often said and put in print that this administration is the most evil in U.S. history. This is the beginning of terrible losses of our freedom. This is the beginning of a certain facism we may never destroy. It is the worst kind of self-righteous bullying. People can do anything when they believe "God is on our side." Take a look at Al-Qaida. Take a look at Bush and his thugs. Bush et al. are a great example of the misuse of Christianity and the Bible. There is no defense for his actions and those members of his administration. I know Eligit, we have a pretty good gulf between us. I will look for any reply you make to this posting. After I have read it, I hope you won't be offended, but I think I'm going to need a break from this subject. I've enjoyed the conversation and will happily join in again after I've had a chance to rest up a bit! Best regards, Barry Post by: Paul Frindle on September 08, 2005, 06:51:23 PM
But then the venerable Mr Freud had difficulty rising above a view of life that sought to explain away much of the human condition in terms of sexual relationships - declared or otherwise, appropriate or otherwise? A cynic might say that religion - like any other form of human control heirarchy - seeks to control people by taking ownership of all facets of the natural human condition and giving it back to people with strings and conditions attached. At present our capitalist controllers seek to do this by generating a permanent state of 'material dissatisfaction and personal insecurity' on every level and promising satiation in terms of our financial ability to replace stuff endlessly and comfort in terms of protection (real or otherwise) against enemies (real, imaginary or cooked up by bad foreign policies if needed). Religion has always sought to do this by creating a permanent state of unworthiness and righteousness, promising resolution in terms of acting as the sole conduit to God and thus heaven - provided one gives up the right to personal will and discernment and surrender entirely to their will instead. Sorry guv, firey furnace for you if you don't sign up. It's all about exercising control over others  However - despite the fact that I have never met anyone in a church that seemed to truly reflect anything other than self interest (in conforming as a paid up traveller to heaven and subverting anything religion states into personal gain) - I have none the less witnessed what is refered to in the Bible as the 'presence of the holy spirit' at least twice in my life! Can't possibly say what it was and how it happened - but my understanding of it all was totally changed the first time and refreshed from nothing 40 years later. Extraordinary and scary stuff - especially for someone who considers himself a technologist and 'scientist' believing wholy in cause and effect. But more to the point - it was these life changing experiences that convinced me that the organised Church in it's modern guise has little to do with any God - but has everything to do with 'religion' in the literal sense of age old human generated control and comfort cycles In the literal sense of the word - religion is an extremely dangerous human 'system bug' which has caused more strife than just about any other human attribute. But God? Well this concept might indeed be real! Post by: eligit on September 08, 2005, 08:53:33 PM
well, at least you seem like a reasonable guy about it and consider our shared human experience here on earth a valuable thing, and not just a prelude to the main event and that the value lies in our friends and family rather than material goods. we agree on that. i just wish by this philosophy we all did not have to have this punishment meted out to all even if you do not deserve it. while those who really do bad shit get away with it with little or no punishment because of their priviledged position in society. good luck eli Post by: danickstr on September 08, 2005, 10:02:59 PM that is an insightful response! i would not presume to defend or attack mr freud or his life since I never knew him. I simply find his insights...insightful. As men we think about sex...well I don't have to tell you how many times a day, since you are one. He of course gave us a clear view of the Id, Ego and Superego, which was kinda helpful as well. So without going too far off-topic, I think he may be onto something. His quote was simply one of many from eccentric visionaries, and I could have just as easily quoted such persons as Mark Twain, Thomas Edison, and the man who was probably William Shakespeare. Marlow, I believe. Whether or not these people are great thinkers in any one person's book, I can say that their contributions to society have given me enough reason personally to call upon them as friends in philosophy when it comes to thoughts on the hereafter, god-guy or, more precisely a lack of them. this topic has been a wild ride!! 
Post by: t(h)ik on September 09, 2005, 02:28:10 AM
Actually (and what the fukk do I know), I think the concept you are describing is freedom, where the only limitation is stupidity. I am just as limited as the next guy but try not to buy into phrases such as these. Noone put a gun to your head and told you to buy that hideous green sofa, so don't blame in on your controllers pal. Lemme nough Post by: PP on September 09, 2005, 05:41:48 AM Post by: danickstr on September 11, 2005, 11:33:20 AM you assume a lot to think that I will read all of that. I wouldn't do that to anyone quite frankly. I did, however read it, and I will just briefly address a few points: Regarding the arrogance of athiests: Who is more arrogant, the man who thinks he crawled from the muck of a primordial stew or the man who thinks he is the creation of a divine thing made in that thing's image? I have my own opinion of course about the answer. was Sigmund F a distrubed psycho? Yes. But I only agreed with what he said that time, not his entire life history. You made the classic argumentative error of attacking the man. Ad Hominum I believe is the term. Let's not be like our political contemporaries and fall into that rabbit hole. We are not so desperate to prove our points, I am sure. Thanks again for your repartee! cheers Post by: PP on September 11, 2005, 01:34:04 PM Post by: Larrchild on September 11, 2005, 02:47:14 PM Post by: danickstr on September 11, 2005, 03:43:24 PM I am impressed not only by the stature of your personal acquaintances, but by your professorial position at Oxford. I could never hope to drop any similar type of reference into my arguments. Just a guy from the States who has only seen pictures of Blair and Clinton, and didn't finish college. But I certainly like to talk with intellectuals of license such as yourself. Hopefully, our arguments represent the intentions of the person, regardless of their letters. I think it is safe to assume that we have the same intentions. To bring our view of the truth to light for our fellow man and hopefully empower them to see through the clouds of other men's "versions" that held less noble purposes. In that regard I do respect and welcome your skewering of Siggy F. I really did pick a winner there, didn't I? But to defend this tormented individual is not my real intention. There is a popular Christian argument that claims athiests are arrogant because they think they are "above god's law" and did not need him to spawn themselves. Well in a sense I feel that is correct, but I would not reference it to god. I am of the belief that evolution has lead us through unique celestial events that are ripe for organic life, to the place we are now. The alternate view is that a god has always been around, without a beginning, and he created us in his image and in some religions listens to our thoughts, keeping a ledger of deeds and thoughts, so to speak. This view seems really incredible to me. As in, not credible. I also never really like the idea of Hellfire as a torture device. Just seems too mean-spirited. If I caught the killer of my family (hypothetically, of course) and the court allowed me the right to dispose of this villain in any manner I saw fit, I don't see myself trying to draw out his (or her) life as long as possible, so that I could burn parts of their body as "punishment" for the crime. After an hour of their screaming and apologies and begging to die, wouldn't I get bored, or at least find a bit of compassion and shoot them in the head with a good blast of flamethrower to end their misery? Well I guess that's not good enough for god, so if the scales of our life's deeds tip 51% the wrong way, an eternity of charred extremeties is waiting for us? Golly I hope not, and as a matter of fact I am betting against it. Fear is no reason to change my bet. I will stick to more practical things like conviction and a deep yearning for the truth, and such. So finally, people who have actually listened to me blather on for so long may wonder, "what is the meaning of life for an athiest?" Well the answer is simple. There really isn't one. It is what you define it to be and requires you to use your own values and the one's put in you by your family and friends to make you (hopefully) a great person. The meaning of life for me, is just to try to help others in ways that make them better souls, if I am allowed to use that word, and let them help me in the same manner. I assigned it to myself, because I have found it is a talent that I have developed through my life that fills me with a goodness I can't get anywhere else. I am glad there is no specific profound meaning to life (as far as I have found so far), since I am sure it would be anti-climactic. Thanks again for your good character and fairplay in our exchange of ideas! cheers Post by: CCC on September 11, 2005, 04:30:59 PM
In which department are you a professor, sir? Theology? Engineering Science? Music? Physics? All of the above? Post by: PP on September 12, 2005, 08:46:25 AM Post by: danickstr on September 12, 2005, 09:33:16 AM There is never a shortage of rhetoric at your house. But that is not a bad thing. As you say and I agree, there is not really a big difference between us. On one hand I am grateful that most of the world still believes in a deity, for the mere reason that without an idealized model, many people would become corrupt so easily, for as you point out, many god-fearing men are already corrupt. How much worse would they be without an ideal to fear and respect? The world in general is not really ready to graduate from a deity-based mentality. But that does not allow me to believe in it, if the evidence is not within my grasp. I used to want to find god, but then I started thinking, "who is he to tell me that I am evil inside and without his help I am never going to make it?" Now I am free from this sort of self-loathing. I can't say I am happier, cause there is no happy ending for me at this time in technology's development (more on that later). But I am not so sure I would have enjoyed the "glory" of being in God's heaven sitting around in a robe singing choir songs for all eternity. Sounds boring. Rather be dead. I do have an idea for eternal life, however. If we advance the genetic knowledge of our own DNA then we can repair ourselves and life can continue for us until a big disaster mushes us or burns us to smithereens. But we could also make things safer. These are all idealistic concepts I know, but it is feasible. I would like to sail away in a space ship once DNA repair is feasible. Kinda like a sunday drive that lasts 5000 years. Hope AAA can come out to Alpha Centauri. Too Jetsons for you? Well stranger things will happen, for we are on the cusp of some marvelous technological breakthroughs! Sit tight and watch the magic unfold over the next 30 years. You mentioned volcanoes and heavens. I think this is where man first got the idea for gods. The clouds look solid enough to walk on to a person that cannot touch them. and when the earth opens up and fire comes out, it would stand to reason that some guy is angry downstairs. And that is where you go when you are bad. To see that guy. The angry guy with the fire. Good guys go to the clouds. Sounds reasonable. Here is a bit of Tao for the journey: If you want to know me, look inside your heart. cheers Post by: PP on September 12, 2005, 09:45:10 AM Post by: t(h)ik on September 12, 2005, 10:36:26 AM Do you proof read your posts? Lemme nough Tik Post by: Paul Frindle on September 12, 2005, 04:54:44 PM
LOL! Wonderful response - you're right of course and believe it or not I actually HAD such a hideous sofa once (which in fact was even green) that I moaned about incessantly - so my wife called in the 'interior designers'. Now several thousand quid later, I have no where to sit at all and holes all the way through to the outside walls (I had to drill myself) just to hold up a sodding curtain pole - I kid you not Problem is, the controller in this case really is a higher power - my wife! Post by: Paul Frindle on September 12, 2005, 05:30:18 PM
Rarely have truer words been spoken. And this IMVHO underpins and illustrates a great deal of what is wrong with organised religion and fundamentally why man's unrelenting desire to reduce anything and everything to a 'list of rules' actually disconnects us from the essence of feeling that inspired religion in the first place. And the often used argument that such 'simplifications' are required to make the message 'available to all', displays an even greater misunderstanding - since by it's very nature the emotion that underlies and motivates appreciation of a higher power is not an intellectual experience in the slightest. That is of course WHY it is truly 'available to all'. The idea that one can gain a greater understanding of it by simply interpreting, developing a list of rules (like a recipe) and following them ever more strictly, is the very antithesis of what is actually needed to connect with the insights required to perceive what it all means. However many times the 'words of religion' are read, chanted and re-read, their actual meanings will remain obscured Post by: danickstr on September 12, 2005, 08:11:18 PM That person may or may not remain grateful to you 15 minutes later, but that is not the point. The point is you reached out to a fellow human and gave them the insight or assistance that they neede at that time and you touched their lives in at least a temporarily profound way. I just can't see that kind of relationship happening with gods. It's up to us to fill in where they cannot. Dogs risk their lives for the pack, and we as humans often are afraid to reach out to risk, for lack of a better term, embarrassment to help someone. It's not something I really fear anymore, embarrassment that is, since I have found that people who mock me for trying to help someone are actually the ones who want the help or need it the most. It is a cry for help to ridicule help. lol. Kids do it all the time, as a by-product of being "cool". Too bad for them that they have been programmed to see help as a weakness. I try to baffle them with kindness until they are truly confused, consider me a complete idiot, or actually find strength in my actions to be more helpful. If you are human, you need to be touched by someone (no need to burlesque this). It is a profound desire within us to be a part of a happy community. Unfortunately, the reality of limited resources will eventually cause a conflict. Understanding is the key here and so many of us are limited by our own lack of self-awareness. Through self-awareness it is easier to sacrifice our own desires for the greater good. Then the reward is achieved through the way we feel about our sacrifice. Many better men than I have given huge sacrifices for us to be where we are, and they did so unselfishly. Sorry I am babbling around mixed topics. I will stop now. cheers Post by: PP on September 13, 2005, 03:28:09 AM Post by: Invisible Member on September 13, 2005, 03:12:37 PM
Christianity is a group of desciple's who follow after the teachings of Christ. Institutionalized and organized religion are not to be confused with Christianity because they are re-organized to meet a specific dogma usually based upon selfish ambition. People are confused, this ain't Burger King. Many denominations have separate books or doctrine that either constricts or loosens the teaching of Jesus. Thats your(my)perogative. Jesus condemned denominationalism as did the Apostle Paul. Just a observation. If the number of industry people treated the tech manuals to their gear like most people do the bible then complete albums might not exist. Maybe building nuclear weapons based on gut feeling would be safer. If people realized the gravity of the situation the line editing might happen less, but people are often less bright the bigger the bulb. Speaking from personal experience of course. When it come to rules, some folks just don't like them because of multiple reasons that are much deeper than they like to admit and will happily protect that information with whatever ego can be mustered up. Sad but true. Culture grows more selfish each and everday and the problems of society worsen by the minute yet the coorelation is ignored because the alternative is unacceptable. Similarly when religion(of any kind)is hijacked by these self serving types then religion suffers the same fate. A nice reading of the book of Jude and 2nd Peter show the problem has been hilighted yet the ego prevents people from saying "Is it I Lord?". Peace, Dennis Post by: Paul Frindle on September 13, 2005, 07:33:14 PM
Oh boy, I have lots I could say about all this and my entirely self-observed experiences that would probably bore people to sleep, this subject is absolutely fascinating to me. But I am currently somewhat worn out and ill and another time would be better But just to say that (yet again) I am reminded of just how inadequate words and language are in describing the concepts and feelings involved. It's so horribly frustrating and difficult to describe any of it when you absolutely know that the words you must use have a different meaning after an experience than before - and you suspect that the 'before' meanings are all that will be read and understood from anything you write. But then in my case, having scarcely set foot in a church before the age of 50 and having eschewed it even AFTER my life changing experiences, any comment I might make seems a bit inappropriate? Certainly, that is the view of many people I have met within the church. The only thing I could honestly do is describe what actually happened to me in detail and what I learned from it? But then this would also be repeating exactly what many people did as they struggled to impart the magnitude of what they percieved within the collected writings of the bible. And probably like them, since I could never fully understand exactly how it could happen, any attempt I made to explain it would negatively colour any message contained within the experiences? Post by: danickstr on September 13, 2005, 11:33:15 PM I can assure you that this is not always the case. When you take a concept that is supposed to be a reality for so many that has no actual basis in evidential fact, you have a vacuum filled with nothing but hope. And hope is a good thing, for sure, but to assume that people who are seeking credible evidence are self-serving is just another form of attacking the man and not defending your position. Take any man of god and analyze how much he serves himself. I was always a bit shocked as a child in the church to see many priests all too willingly accept favors from the parishoners. Admittedly, it was none of my business, but it seemed a bit presumptuous to me. Heaven is a self-serving concept. Take heaven away as the prize and see how many still show up on Sunday to get their laundry list of areas they need to improve upon. Cheers Post by: PP on September 14, 2005, 05:51:02 AM Post by: danickstr on September 14, 2005, 06:33:02 AM None of my arguments are "universally sustainable" any more so than an attempt to prove the existence of god would be. We are just people without any proof other than what we can muster from the past. There are no voices from the sky for all to hear. We must pull data from the belly of mother earth and look into the sky to try to discern the truth about our surroundings and how they lead to our existence. As far as this conversation being an attempt at attention seeking, well I really don't know how to respond to that. Here we are discussing one of the greatest questions of our spiritual destiny, and it turns out that I am being accused of doing it for alterior motives? Maybe to score chicks? Not likely. Let's try to stick to the argument at hand and not distract ourselves by attacking the man. I am seeking the truth, just like many other people do, for the purpose of answering questions that tend to wrap themselves in our minds on a regular basis. PC footnote: I do think that the church or synagouge or mosque does give poeple quite a bit of positive reinforcement for their lives and for this reason I am glad that they are there. I am not trying to tear religion out of the fabric of society. Not right away, anyway. Some people would not function without it. It would be cruel to try to rip it from them. I see it as a weaning process and I am just taking the bottle from a few folks that are already willing to give it up. Not everyone wants to think that they are innately bad and must believe in a guy in the sky if they want to be good. It honestly is a silly notion, but it does work for many folks. Not for me. Post by: PP on September 14, 2005, 06:57:03 AM Post by: Invisible Member on September 14, 2005, 01:59:50 PM
It's not a slam but an observation about human nature. Whether you believe in evolution, creationism or Intelligent Design, the fact that infants are born selfish doesn't change. My generalization is meant to be provacative and confrontational like any debate. Just like if we were playing a sport of some kind (not golf though).
How can one be "seeking credible evidence" when they already state there is "no actual basis in evidential fact"? Faith and hope are everyday ideas that exist without religious context. But even evidential facts are sidelined for any readily available emotion. (Enter politics) The clincher is that faith is required and the magic bullet form the smoking gun was taken away. I've never taken a multiple choice test that I've liked. My position was mainly about how men screw everything up and then place blame in places other than themselves. This covers disorganizing the Church into a corporate conglomerate to raping the land of it's beauty and destroying our childrens childhood. I don't undertand why you feel attacked? I'm not a fluffy PC type I admit, mostly mono-tone and dry.
Good eyes for a kid. Now if everyone could see it and then stop doing it. My parents raised me as an athiest because of religious corruption. If I wasn't so rebellious I might have not researched it out for myself. Truth as you say.
Some whatnot questions: When you visit a friend is it so they can see you? or for you to see them? What is your motivation for you laundry list? If none of this for you then why be drawn into the thread? Is it because you know that the current non-religious explanations leave you feeling "slimy"? Using evolution as your best defense what exactly from a genetics standpoint does this debate do for you? How does this discussion increase the probability of you having children that have mutations that increases his/her survivability in a yet to be discovered life or death threat? Are murderers of their own children weeding out the gene pool because their genes said so? Is there a respect mutation? Don't answer these openly but contemplate them for yourself. If there is no God then the answers do not matter the slightest do they? If our purpose is to hump like bunnies and pass a better gene to our offsping then why get offended when the "word" "selfish" is attached? What's the point really? Peace, Dennis Post by: Paul Frindle on September 14, 2005, 08:04:43 PM
Quite amazing - I have also such an infection that has gone on for just as long - but they are telling me it's bacterial. As for symptomatical of an inward need; well inward or from outward I don't doubt. Matters at the moment are not exactly speeding recovery.
Hmm.. Not sure what audio and my profession really has to do with it - certainly my profession hasn't often enough prevented me from speaking out - mostly ill-advisedly some would say Ok then - long post warning coming up! I hope you guys have the stomach for this and surely people will think me totally crazy after it - but what the heck - as you say 'no one's perfect'? The first of what I would interpret as a spiritual encounter of this ilk happened when I was 9 or 10 years old (I had experienced other oddities of an entirely different nature before which I won't go into - so I may have been just mad). It was school hols and one morning as I awoke and lay in bed I became aware of a deep sense of presence, it was like I was being introduced to somebody - a personality. Of course no one was actually there and the room was empty. But what I percieved for the first time is best described as a vast connection between all living things, trees, flowers animals and people - they all contained this 'personality' it pervaded all that was living. I spent ages dwelling quietly on this new experience. This 'personality' was just that - abstract, neither male, female, human or otherwise - it was a pure knowing of a personality without form or origin - very very strange - not in the least frightening, it was more like an awakening, or an unveiling - an enlightenment. In the days that followed this I was definitely a person undergoing deep change, I spent lots of time looking at all aspects of the world through this new-found perception and considering the terribly deep ramifications of it all. My personality was being re-arranged - my whole outlook was being modified by the enormity of it all and the effects it was having on my approach to the world and relations with everything else in it - people, nature, science - everything. It was after this I developed a great love of impressionist classical music, Chopin, Debussy etc.. as many of these pieces seemed to embody and exude the atmosphere of this 'personality'. I would concoct whole orchestral pieces in my head and orchestrate them at will as they unfolded - whilst riding my bike to school or when bored in lessons. Also, despite hardly ever having set foot in any church, attended any religious schools or ever having read the bible, I was inexplicably top of religious education classes at school. I had no idea why or how - but I somehow just knew what was being taught - at the start of the lesson I would think "oh yes, this is going to be about this or that". Having never had the slightest interest in art before, I began spending time actually drawing trees and plants - I was fascinated by the angles of branches, curves of stems, patterns in leaves, symmetry in flowers and such - as though trying to find the source of this personality. Certain angles and curves evoked this 'personality' even if drawn in complete isolation. Obviously my mates gave me stick over this - after all, I was the geek who spent all his time reading science journals and doing wierd experiments with bits of old radios!! But I had also changed from being quite an academically bright child to one who didn't do well at school any more - because I had ceased being interested in actualities and detail and had instead become obsessed with underlying trends, dependancies and parallels between disparate subject matter - much as the thought processes involved in the personality perception event. I went on to fail my 11+ exams and end up in the duffer's school, much to my father's complete amazement and anger. It was also at that time that I became aware that there was something I must do - I had no idea what it was - but whatever WAS actually going on at the time, school, friends, music, whatever, it was nothing more than a step along a path going somewhere significant - I couldn't quite see. Events had somehow aquired a higher but unknown purpose? This was actually a comforting perception - nothing that was going on at any time had the complete significance that it used to have before - it was somehow part of a scheme I couldn't quite grasp. In effect I began to look upon the world and myself within it slightly from the outside almost in the position of an onlooker or spectator - but even more strangely - time took on a similar indistinction as well. It was as though the 'present' was no longer a single infinitely small instant, but it had been blurred somewhat and now included a little bit of past and future as well - like a window or continuum. Things played out as though one was looking through a small time window with out of focus edges - like you had stepped back from a line that was the progress of time. I remember thinking it was a bit like those old petrol pumps where the last digit always showed a bit of the numbers before and after the one displayed in the middle. I also did some pretty strange things in those days, which although starting off by causing amusement with my parents, became increasingly odd eventually causing real embarrassment to them. I would just 'know stuff' I wasn't supposed to - no idea how - I would casually refer to stuff as though it was forgone conclusion and general knowledge, which in their estimation I could never have known or surmised - and it often caused all sorts of upsets. My elderly mother in her more animated moments still has a stack of these odd stories about me she comes out with even now, much to my embarrassment - my children think they are hilarious After being chastised heavily for some of these events I remember going to my room and racking my brain for ages trying to remember exactly when I was told this stuff and by whom - so I could go back and rightly claim I had done nothing wrong and it wasn't my fault - but oddly I could never pin down how I knew it. Even worse - I began characterising people on sight instantly. I would look at them and they would look back at me and I knew immediately whether they were being honest or not and whether their intentions were being hidden - and even worse still, I felt that they knew that 'I' knew too!! Some people that came to the house began to overtly avoid me and avoid looking me in the eyes. I sometimes knew their intentions even before I knew what these intentions actually meant - and they were often disturbing, after all I was only a kid. For instance in one instance I opened to door to this visitor, looked into his eyes and immediately visualised my mother having 'physical relations' with him! Of course I didn't know what this visualisation actually represented - but being inquisitive I soon set about finding out what it meant! On another occasion I came up the drive home from school and felt a horrible malevolent presence surrounding the house and would not enter. From the outside I looked through the window and saw an old woman, who my mother informed my father later was going through the graveyard over the road and come in for a cup of tea (the follow on of that story is too strange and sad to even recount here). With all this I quickly became what people refered to as "stange child" - and increasingly I was becoming quiet, pensive and aloof from the goings on around me. I would be inexplicably missing when 'certain people' were around even when everyone else was apparently having 'lots of fun'. Quite simply - my whole world had changed and I was running a different 'algorithm' to the rest of my family and friends. All I could sensibly do was to hide it all as much as possible and keep it all to myself - and that's what I eventually resolved to do. I concluded that I had somehow been allowed to percieve the world a little bit through the eyes of this 'personality' and people's reaction to it showed that it hadn;t happened to everyone around either. I asked myself if this 'personality essence' without form, gender or body could actually represent a notion of God, after all it had lots in common with stuff people said about God? Having seen this it couldn't be erased or un-learned and although I couldn't quite see what exactly it was - if this was indeed God's purpose might it be revealed one day and I might finally know what this inner purpose I felt I had aquired - would actually be? But I was just a kid and wasn't supposed to understand these things - in the 1950s religion was definitely sissy 'adult stuff'. All I could say with absolute certainty was that this personality was totally real - nothing in my life had ever been more real. And amazingly I had become a believer in 'something that didn't exist' in any solid worldy sense. As far as I was concerned it was totally natural - but I do remember thinking how totally strange it all seemed - certainly not stuff to tell my mates about after school (or perhaps recount now on a public forum)!! There is a second phase to this that happened much more recently which has much more relevance - but I have no more time right now. I have no idea if any of the above blurb is of interest to anyone else? Post by: Barry Hufker on September 14, 2005, 10:21:09 PM Many thanks for taking the time -- and courage -- to tell your fascinating story. In our spiritual lives the only story we have to tell is our own personal testimony. Your life has obviously been guided by this spiritual experience. That fact that there is a "second phase" makes the experience even more exciting as it may lead (or may have lead) you to a "place" you never expected to go. I can't speak for others but I hung on every word and would love to hear the remainder if you wish to tell it. I firmly believe the eyes are the windows to the soul. Quite often I am surprised by what I see in someone's eyes. I've never had as specific a "feeling" or insight about someone as you, but looking into someone's eyes has often given me an important clue about that person's life. Sometimes when relating a spiritual experience people are offended or distance themselves from the teller. You already know that to be true in your life. It is my hope that won't be true in this thread. Best regards, Barry Post by: bblackwood on September 15, 2005, 05:32:13 AM
YES! Please tell us more when you have the time... Post by: Paul Frindle on September 15, 2005, 07:42:44 AM
I don't really know if that's true. As I grew up things got worse, I couldn't decide if it was a blessing or a curse, whether I was crazy or not. The gain had been turned up and effectively life was screaming at me, just a room full of certain people could be totally insupportable. There was significantly less comfort from people around me - there were significantly less 'benevolent and kind uncles'! In my teen years I developed all sorts of strategies to minimise it, I would just quit places if I sensed the atmosphere turning bad - even when everyone else was having a good time. And I simply wouldn't go places that I had bad feelings about beforehand. At a time when it is important for adolescents to conform and form social bonds - I struggled to find a way to be part of it all. My now congenital inability to deceive and complete inability to hate even my worst enemies put me at a terrible disadvantage in the dog eat dog world that is increasingly the social condition as you grow up to adulthood. I no longer had any desire to compete with anyone (only cooperate) - and I felt only sorrow and sadness for those that wronged me. I always knew what they were doing and why and simply tolerated it best as I could (still do). There were advantages and disadvantages. For instance it enabled me to avoid conflict and defuse dangerous situations - I could wander around the city as an adolescent and identify anyone who had less than noble intentions towards me long before they had any chance of doing anything. Quite often just their realisation that 'I knew' was enough for people to back off - even in potentially quite violent situations, like muggings and such. And of course sometimes I had the comfort of knowing things - for instance when many of my mates were ligging around in the 60's making no effort fearing that the world would end in nuclear war anyway, I knew categorically that it wouldn't - no idea how - but I never worried about it like they did. On the other hand I was often racked with concerns about things that no one ever considered and my mood would change inexplcably in the light of some event no one else seemed to even notice. I was definitely strange as far as most people were concerned. And I was permanently dogged by total frustration that my worst predictions always seemed to occur - however much I longed for them to be wrong - and I still am daily!! Most of my adult life was supported by prescription drugs - they didn't stop the thoughts and feelings but they prevented them actually making me ill. Throughout the whole period I worked in France, later at Trident, Virgin and SSL (1975 to 1988) I was supported by drugs without which I would become pretty much useless after a few weeks. I finally got shot of all this 'medicine' when we formed Oxford Digital - but it took around a year to re-learn old strategies again and the restrictions I had to re-impose were unwelcome and unhelpful. I am not describing a recipe for a happy life here - and the culmination of this story will not end in much comfort for anyone searching out religion Post by: Barry Hufker on September 15, 2005, 08:15:06 AM When I say "guided" I mean that for good and bad. I mean it has had a profound influence upon you. And if your tale ends poorly for someone seeking out religion, then that's fine too. As I said, you have an important story to tell. It's *your* story and we are fortunate you are sharing it with us no matter what the conclusion. You have been, what I imagine to be, painfully honest in telling your story. You have explained what happened and your reaction to it. Have you ever considered "why" it happened? I don't mean "what caused it." If things happen for a reason, what is the reason (as far as you can discern) that this happened to you? Is there a lesson to be learned or a lesson you learned? It would be interesting to know if anyone else in your family has had a similar experience. Or if you've run into anyone else with this kind of "gift." Based on what you've said so far, I would guess the answer to both of these is "no." Barry Post by: maxdimario on September 15, 2005, 08:25:31 AM To me the act of spontaneous creation of art is an act of 'god'. The best songs, performances, writers etc. are talented individuals who have come in contact with a greater total truth than the others. The act of listening, to sound... and 'listening' to an audience, and ultimately 'listening' to an inner voice... or the voice of humanity..or indeed the spirit of our universe and making something that can be communicated. The truth that is being expressed by the artist or artists together, represents the total spiritual moment of the time of creation. They have 'tuned in' their total inner capacity to channel the truth, and make sense out of chaos. the act of creation. Christianity as with all man-made texts and traditions, has been subject to the corrupting influences of those concerned with power and control. The original prophets in my opinion were the mystical version of today's (yesterday's maybe is more correct) artists. Improvised speeches, and meditative thoughts were probably the building blocks of their inspiration and cultural statement. What is the difference between a melody that 'works' or one that doesn't? The one that works is built on an inner truth. Chopin said it, and many successful artists have made reference to this. You may already know in your heart. The word of god carries a weight that stands out among the endless dribble that comes out when we focus on ourselves and on identity, trends. by following our spirit and accepting our innermost sense of truth we are letting god exist through our actions. Some people have a spirit which is prone to destruction. Nature has an evil side, there is no way of getting around that. some of the worst things that can happen to us happen when we let our guard down too much and not accept that we must make a choice between good and evil. inside and outside ourselves. more appropriately hate or love. to deny the existance of hate and destruction, which are tied to power and control, is to deny existance of love and creation. creation needs to be assisted, we need to participate by promoting love and 'battling' against hatred, power-lust, control and greed..which produces nothing of truly good for mankind, but is part of it and must be considered. But I think that to do good we must accept our own destructive side as a reality and learn to deal with it as well, just as we must learn to deal with outside destructive forces. otherwise all that is evil and destructive will tip the scales to the wrong side and make a big mess of it all, as is happening now, as it has been happening forever, more or less. there is no permanent state of peace, other than death I suppose. Nature is not all good and there will always be turmoil and suffering if it is allowed to grow and spread. if we are to truly know god personally we must act as individuals, and give voice to the spirit inside us. If we desire to do good for mankind and to live in a peaceful world we must act with love as an ideal. So Religious texts if interpreted word-by-word, just as religious leaders who treat religion as a law, are not the way to get to know god as a reality. religious texts and traditions if interpreted (interpretation is an art in itself) will bring you closer to your own truth, and if you live the truth and make it real for others you are doing god's will. This comes down to your work as well as your daily actions, and It's hard sometimes. there is more than meets the eye, and so much that has been overlooked for so long. In the end, these are things that were inherently tied to music at it's origins, but later became replaced by the less meaningful and artistically productive ideals of success, money, power etc. No good art comes as a result of empty economics. Post by: Paul Frindle on September 15, 2005, 08:32:28 AM
I have no idea why any of this happened and no one else in the family had this experience. But I have met a number of people in whom I have identified similar feelings. I'm sure this isn't particularly novel or special in the grand scheme of things - and I wouldn't for a moment consider I am particularly gifted in any way at all. Post by: maxdimario on September 15, 2005, 08:50:03 AM
This isn't the first time I've heard about this, It's been a common thread among creative artistic people I've met. Art expresses 'underlying themes', as you said. we have more built-in sensitivity to the 'unknown' than modern culture will have us believe... Post by: Paul Frindle on September 15, 2005, 07:30:02 PM
Ok here goes - I'll try to keep this shorter, I will try to explain exactly what happened During the years quite a few events occured that were strange which I won't go into - the 'personality' kind of faded into the background most of the time - but I was changed for good. I had several contacts with religious people - many really strange ones - but never took up with any of it. I remained somewhat aloof and disconnected from what was around me. My very limited success in life bore witness to my continued inability to accept authority or play the game. Around 7 years ago I was invited by a friend to attend an Alpha course and I went along with it basically out of courtesy and intrigue. The alpha course consisted of a bunch of people getting together once a week to eat a meal, watch a video on christianity and discuss the contents - the purpose of which was to enrole more people into the emptying churches. The presenter of the video was personable guy, fashionable and modern, not too young or too old, going through the basics of Christianity putting the most palatable spin on it possible. The setting was a very well funded church in the heart of Londons Knightsbridge area - no ordinary church, no ordinary congregation. To give it acceptability references were constantly made to normal stuff like going to the gym, wine parties and the good things in life - and various 'successful people' from the gongregation were called upon to testify - people one could easily aspire to become. Very clever stuff indeed - but no surprise to a cynic like me. The group on our course consisted almost entirely of long term church goers still searching God - I felt totally out of place. Each week the video would play and at the finish I would inevitably launch off about the contents - it was mostly me as I was the one with the dissenting opinions - lots of them. We heard all the language about sacrifice, forgiveness, enlightenment - and it fell completely flat IMVHO. Every week I felt I was simply being offensive, but I hung on anyway. Almost every week the guy that invited me would come back to my house and we would drink Tequila until the wee small hours while discussing exactly what we didn't agree with from the content of the course. Cutting a long story short, the culmination of the course was an 'away day'. This was supposed to be when we finally asked the holy spirit to visit us. Feeling as big a misfit in this group as in general life, I was in 2 minds whether to go or not. I had no desire to enter into a happy-clappy deliberately orchestrated 'religious pray-in', I had witnessed them before and they were cheesy in the extreme. In the end I resolved to go - but I made every effort to take no one else in my car so I could make a sharp exit, if (and inevitably when) the whole thing became completely unbearable. When the day came no one expected me to go - I needed to get up at 7:30am and something very important was needed to provoke this. However, strangely I was up an awake in uncharacteristically good time. It was held in a rather drafty and cold farm building converted into to conference center - some religious retreat run by catholics I think. Several other alpha groups were there so there were quite a few of us - maybe 30 or so. The morning consisted of yet another video about asking the holy spirit into our lives - then we had dinner and a walk in the mud. At this point I was about to quit out and go home - it was saturday after all and i had been up since 7:30am - not something i do often! But I felt somehow compelled to stay - almost annoyingly so. When we went back in I sat there in a thinly veiled state of dissatisfaction and agitation - and in that state I said to myself 'o.k. then, since I am here spending my valuable time, if there's a God in heaven and this sham has anything to do with you for heavens sake make yourself known - or I'm going home'! I remember feeling something of a pang of guilt about thinking this. There was some more praying, some songs and then we split into 2 groups. A leader of the group asked if there was anyone who wanted to be prayed for? Someone said that they wanted us to pray for her sick sister - so we did. Then the lady next to me asked to be prayed for as she had been a church goer for decades and never once felt she had recieved the holy spirit!! I remember thinking 'typical, that just about say's it all'! This time myself and a woman the other side of this lady were asked to stand and put a hand on her shoulder whilst they prayed - I thought to myself 'here we go, time for the sharp exit - I was dying for a cigarette anyway'. But I did it. The praying started and suddenly I could feel what seemed like a build up of tingling and heat in that arm and hand. It built up to almost unbearable levels just like moderate electric shock. When it was over I sat down still feeling this tingling sensation and heat - I felt very strange, if this had happened spontaneously at home I would have been poised by the phone to call the emergency Doctor's number! But amazingly the lady said it had failed - she had felt nothing the spirit had not visited her. However the woman who has stood the other side said she had also felt it - I knew she had just looking at her - she had changed, she actually looked different, almost kind of irridescent and surreal. At this point I just wanted rid of this feeling so I got up and went outside to have cigarette, still tingling and feeling hot and confused. I walked around in the mud smoking for some time but the feeling didn't go away entirely and I was still hot despite the cold air. When I went back in things had changed - it was as though another person was there - I even looked around to see if there really was - the 'personailty' I had witnessed in my childhood was actually there - I could feel it! And everyone seemed different, people who had got on my nerves in the previous weeks, people with exasperating opinions and annoying ways suddenly seemed like family - beautiful and precious - loved even! It was as though I were looking at them through the eyes of their fathers - it was entirely odd - i looked at them one by one and the impression I had of each was entirely different from only moments earlier. Was I seeing them though God's eyes, rather than my own? I sat around there for a few more moments, decided I couldn't hack it and went out for yet another cigarette in the hope that normality would return - I'm an old hippy and no stranger to mind altering substances - but this was truly something else! But outside normality wasn't resumed at all, now the world looked different too - it was like someone had removed blinkers from my eyes. Surely this must have been enlightenment that is talked of in the Bible - this was no simple 'yeah I get it' moment when someone is trying to explain something - this was more like a complete and total removal of some lifelong filter from the mind. As I paced around in the mud looking up into the dark sky I was being changed, I was unloading all the bad pent up feelings I didn't even know I had for other people - like an emptying of a rotten stinking trash can, in an unstoppable rush. And at the same time I was also forgiving myself (or being forgiven) for all the stuff I had done in the past - there was loads of it - I have made many mistakes and hurt many people, many more than I could have ever imagined. Now I knew what was meant by forgiving and receiving forgiveness that is talked of in the Bible. This wasn't just saying sorry or tolerating a wrong and saying it didn't matter - this was a total unloading of ALL the bad feeling and disappointment anyone had ever caused me - it was all being re-set - I was being cleansed of it! It was truly amazing and I will never forget it -the whole experience will live with me forever. When I went back inside the atmosphere was totally electric I have never witnessed anything like it - it seemed that in such immense power anything was possible - I swear that if a dead person had been brought back to life in front of my very eyes I wouldn't have been surprised - and it seems amazing that anyone could even imagine such a possibility. When we said our goodbyes and finally left that place I drove away a different person to the one that had arrived - and amazingly I was aware that for the first time in decades I wasn't in the least depressed or unsatisfied. I was kind of floating on a totally comfortable plane with greatly hightened awareness that was both amazingly exciting and not in the least troubling. It seemed unthinkable that I could ever again be the troubled person I had been before that day. When I arrived home my wife was waiting in anticipation of the usual tirade I would launch into after such events, but all I could tell her was that I had had the most incredible day - I couldn't even begin to explain to her the enormity of what had happened - I was a different person. In the weeks that followed life was completely changed - this heightened awareness continued unabated and the 'personality' was with me all the time. I would walk down the street and be aware of people's personalities and situations just by looking at them. People would respond to me in a different way from before - my eyes could meet a perfect stranger and something would be exchanged between us as though they knew that 'I knew' - just like when I was a child but more so - I now had the experience of an adult as well - and somehow, whoever they were and however bad their presence seemed, I actually still loved them. I would sense situations with perfect strangers, I could sense the pain and the sadness or the life and excitement - just like a father can for their children. I could spark up conversation about their issues and know it was pertinent and helpful - I cared for them without reserve and somehow people felt it and responded - it was amazing. I CAN say that finally I knew what sacrifice, enlightenment and forgiveness REALLY meant when refered to in the Bible and why people had been motivated to write what they did - I now actually understood what it was all about. How this understanding clashed so badly with interpretations I found amongst the religious community is quite another story. And - sadly, no the feeling didn't last. If people haven't yet written me off as a complete barking looney I could explain this another time - if I find myself up all night being ill again But I am acutely aware that if I hadn't experienced this myself and had instead read this account by someone else - I wouldn't have believed a single word of it!!!!I have knocked this out in one go as quickly as possible without review or correction - I hope it still makes sense. Post by: Barry Hufker on September 15, 2005, 09:02:01 PM Words are so inadequate here. I want to say what a great "story" but that's wrong -- "tale" is worse. "Witness" and "testimony" are too sanctimonious. I don't know which word is correct. You experienced what I have been trying to say. "Religion" stinks. I can't stand religion. I don't go to church because I can't stand religion. Relgion in any form with any tradition with any denominational bent is completely wrong. You experienced what I would pray for everyone to experience. The essence of what I have been trying to explain appears to be in your experience. Christianity is simply -- and only -- a peaceful relationship with God through Christ. That's it. I don't know how you feel about that or what your present idea of Christianity is so I am reluctant to go further in this discussion of your experience. Yet, every Christian would love to have that. Even I, who am a born-again Christian, have not had that. I am an extremely cynical person. In fact cynicism is too nice a word. I too run screaming (even today)when people start singing contemporary Christian music, when people speak in tongues, when people hold hands and want to "embrace each other and God." I don't need or want that. I have a relationship with God and it works for us (OK me -- I am sure God isn't always happy). And you're right. Some people will read your remarks and will say that all sounds like bullshit. Or will say well that's just "so-and-so." But because it has happened to you, your life has been changed. It also doesn't surprise me that the intensity faded. There is something to learn about moths and flames. A continued exposure to such intensity could actually prove harmful. The Bible reports several stories where a close encounter with God was powerful -- Moses receiving the Commandments, Saul knocked from his horse and blinded by the light (sorry Bruce Springsteen). Even in the New Testatment, the night Christ is arrested he is asked by the Roman Soldiers if he is Jesus of Nazareth. He responds with "I Am" which is the name God gives himself in the Old Testament. Saying only those two words is so powerful the solders are knocked off their feet. So the point is, it is hard to have a prolonged direct contact with God. In any event, no matter how you view your experience, it sounds as if it has brought you to a better place. Maybe there is more to come that will prove of even greater benefit. But the fact remains, you are kind and brave to tell your story as directly and honestly as possible. Your vulnerability is a chance for us all to reconsider ourselves. Barry Post by: danickstr on September 15, 2005, 10:22:15 PM sorry we are redoing the computer area so I was out of commission for a bit there. Well, me and my empty athiest existence of selfishness are back here to gain your pity and prayers. Actually, by putting that sentence in writing, I run the risk of having myself taken out of context again by the zealots. Selfishness is much more suspect in a person who has to create a possibility of giving themselves eternal life than in a man who accepts the finality of his own end. Nothing selfish about that menial of an exit. No horns and halos to perpetuate the ego's need for a spectacular ending. Not having a meaning to life that is pre-determined does not mean there is no meaning possible. It's so easy to skew meanings. And not exactly pretty to see exercised. The ultimate irony is to see it followed up by a god bless you. funny stuff. Keep it coming, please. My spirit needs the challenge. cheers Post by: danickstr on September 15, 2005, 10:51:50 PM This is not about who is selfish or not. It is about thoughts on god. There is currently no way to go talk to god in person. There is no ladder to heaven, nor a place in the galaxy that could be hiding heaven, as far as our current technology can determine. Based on this information, I can either assume that god has figured out a way to monitor my thoughts and everyone else's without wires or antennae or spys (neat trick) and from this extra-dimensional lair, or he is a made up thing. I am going to go with my gut here and call him a figment of someone's imagination. It is a wonderful thing to believe in god. I remember it. If you can ignore all the practical evidence, go for it. I have to reject the idea based on the absolute lack of current evidence, other than what people are sure has happened to them in their hearts and minds, which is real for them, but not evidence. cheers Post by: maxdimario on September 16, 2005, 03:09:10 AM but I don't know if it's better to get to know god, or more simply becoming part of god by serving god. in the end the word 'god' shouldn't even be used, because giving god an identity forces our limited understanding upon god. we can't be heavenly on the earth, but getting close to the source of life and creation will let us live a better life here and now. Love is also enlightenment and forgiveness. you may very well be induced to get to that heightened level through the church, although perhaps it is not OK for everyone. everyone has their own road to follow. But the most important thing here and now is to ACT through inspiration, to let god live through our actions. Post by: maxdimario on September 16, 2005, 04:09:52 AM
as there is no way for us to even remotely conceptualize creation or the origins of life. technology pales when compared to nature every time. Post by: Paul Frindle on September 16, 2005, 06:20:46 AM
I have lots of sympathy with this - after all what is God? Had I really experienced God at all? The fact that the experience finally related to what 'I alone' thought the Bible talked about does not mean that the whole thing IS what it says it is - and christianity or any other religion REALLY is the word of God. Who would 'I' be to assume I could be the judge of that?! I had witnessed something of unimaginable beauty and seemingly infinite power - this surely was something of vast importance - but how could I know this was God, or just some human mental process involving a rush of seratonin in the brain or some such? What was belief and reality anyway? Is reality for a human only what we percieve it to be or is there a higher meaning of reality that transcends normal human perception? To admit that there might be suggests purpose - and purpose suggests will - and if this will is not human then....? Is there a fundamental flaw in the human perception of 'reality' that normally prevents us seeing this stuff - just like we can understand the concept of infinity but never actually percieve it? These issues are what I needed to find out ASAP, I certainly had not simply 'been converted and given myself to the Lord' and therefore suspended my usual thought processes (as was unelpfully suggested by others I should do immediately!). Quite the contrary, I felt more than ever that I had aquired a perception that might just allow me to get closer to an understanding! Even if there was a God in heaven who had provided everything, he hadn't given us the power of reason and intelligence simply so we should abandon it at the first hurdle - such a notion was absurd! And that's what the next part is all about - if I can muster the time and energy and anyone really wants to hear it. Post by: Paul Frindle on September 16, 2005, 08:34:43 AM
Post by: Barry Hufker on September 16, 2005, 08:54:14 AM I believe you are absolutely right about the ability to reason. God does not want drones or zombies. He wants people who think critically. He wants people who have suffered. He wants people who have been challenged. These are the people he draws to himself. Nowhere will you find in the Bible the punishment of those who have questioned God's existence. But all people are body, spirit and soul. So when one reasons out how life works, to my way of thinking, one must seek solutions that satisfy all three parts. Barry Post by: danickstr on September 16, 2005, 09:52:25 AM Post by: PP on September 16, 2005, 09:58:25 AM Post by: Tomas Danko on September 16, 2005, 04:13:59 PM This has been an amazing read. And all this in a forum where I'd the least expect such a topic. I am in awe that you managed to open up to this level, and can only say that I now admire you not only for your talented work in the past and present but also for who you are. Thank you for sharing. Respectfully yours, Tomas Danko Post by: Paul Frindle on September 16, 2005, 07:55:45 PM
You may be correct that this was indeed the likely obstruction - but an obstruction it must remain IF we are to search the truth. The terrible danger of relinquishing ANY level of personal reason and questioning is that you risk becoming a slave to ideas that you may not question deeply enough. However above reproach those ideas may seem - for the good of all mankind - we are absolutely under obligation to remain alert, sentient and in full command of our senses - with the mic turned up at full gain - listening, thinking, considering always This next (last) part I a hessitate to write since this is where offence is most likely to occur. I fully appreciate other people's absolute right to legitimately hold their own beliefs. So anything I say here is entirely my own experience and not for a moment am I suggesting that it can be universally applied or in any way relates to the other people's religions, experiences or conditions. Indeed I would really wish the contrary. O.k. Armed with what I considered to be this 'personality entity' I was completely enthused to introduce people to the amazing effects it could have on one's life. Every time I passed anyone who emanated need or pain I was aching to do something to help - absolutely anything. The longer it went on the worse the strain became - the world was screaming at me again with even greater volume and for different reasons. Two things happened: Firstly believing that I had at last understood the reason for religion, I got involved in the church. This was easily done since my wife is a life long church goer and most of her friends are also. I hosted another Alpha course at our home and was involved in a further one after that. I was in the church every Sunday living and doing as they did. But all was not well from the outset - with some notable exceptions there was virtually nothing in common between their view of God and that inspired by this 'personality'. In fact whilst involved in the church I witnessed some of the most astonishingly selfish actions and twisted thoughts I had ever experienced - it was occasionally truly frightening! What seemed to be the case was that every single aspect of the inspiration had been turned and twisted to reflect an entirely human interpretation. The words I thought I had finally understood - sacrifice, enlightenment, forgiveness were being completely misused within the church community. Far from being the harbinger of freedom, release and potential which I had felt, most of what was being taught was restriction, limitation and despair due to inaction and repeated reminders of unworthiness - to keep people in their place. The whole thing seemed totally unhealthy and the people were suffering unduly with awful misconceptions about what 'God' expected of them. Sacrifice for most of them meant - getting closer to God by identifying something important to themselves and grudgingly denying themselves some of it. The more uncomfortable this was the better. All kinds of cyclic self-induced discomfort loops were being acted out in the belief that one was unworthy and therefore needed to sacrifice yet more. The worse one felt then the more one needed to approach God's requirements - thus the more one had to sacrifice etc etc.. Enlightenment was mostly - getting closer to God by reading, re-reading and re-reading again selected parts of the Bible wrenched from their context - until such a point that you were persuaded to believe something other than what it actually said! Most notably arriving at some interpretation that had some trivialised resonance to everyday (modern) life people could understand without discomfort. And even worse - the notion that one should simply accept without question any disparity this tortuous process caused 'until one had become sufficiently enlightened'! It could take a lifetime - people were often told!! Forgiveness seemed for them to mean grudging tolerance in the face of attack and subjugating oneself to inaction in the face of blatant wrong doing. Whilst constantly feeling unworthy and inadequate for the times when anger finally crept in. Blessed with what they thought was God's will - all sorts of personal desires were being acted out under the excuse that is was God's will and not their own. They didn't have sufficient understanding of this 'personality' to discern what was their will and what was motivated by it's presence. I could go on and on - but in short it was entirely evident that for the most part, whatever was motivating them it most certainly hadn't involved an encounter with the 'personality' I had experienced. Such interpretation and behaviour wouldn't have been possible otherwise. All this was a very great shock to me and I stuggled for some time to reconcile all this - until finally I left the church for good. For those that are interested in this struggle I have uploaded a document I was writing at the time to try to hang on to what I felt in those days and hopefully communicate this to others at the time. It's incomplete as I realised eventually that it was useless - words could never convey the thoughts - what words there were had already been subverted and no longer had the potential to carry any other meaning. http://www.pfrindle.free-online.co.uk/thoughts.DOC The other thing that happened was that most of the people from the away day formed a home group that would meet once a week to study the teachings etc.. In reality we all wanted to persue what had started that momentous day. These were lively meetings with the subject matter running fast and with fluidly - intially there was much common understanding and progress - the group became notorious within the church. One thing that came over was the people who had most experienced this presence were in fact myself and the other woman - both newcomers! It became evident that it had been lost on the long term religious people. As time wore on and the group became ever more lively - disapproval started to inevitably descend. It was suggested that my opinions were upsetting people who had been in the church a long time - even to the point of driving one member back into a previous 'psychological condition'. The curates were sent in to -redirect our efforts on the 'right path' - which of course meant reading and re-reading bits of the Bible until some obtuse pre-ordained explanation (that was given in advance) was at the limit feasible to battle-weary and defeated minds. All this eventually came to a head when an all-out argument between myself and the curate broke out one night over issues to do with personal wealth and closeness to God. In the end I blasted him saying that 'not being content with controling mere mortals with their own intentions - amazingly they actually wanted also to control the very will of the creator by acting as a biassed conduit to each and every impression anyone ever had of him'!! And after it was over and people left in silence - the guy waited for me to leave and approached me stating that he had a great deal of sympathy for the views I had expressed - but felt that members of the church were not well enough equiped to understand them - it would be better if we had such discussions between ourselves in the pub one night!! Jeez!! That was it - I had to quit the last bastion of my attempts at religion - and the search for whether this 'personality' was indeed the God of the church, was well and truly over. I had to sadly conclude that the very actions of the church were actually preventing people from ever experiencing the God they were trying to find - it was a terribly sad feeling indeed. But as a final positive comment - there was much of great wisdom in the Bible - it is amazing! From the point of view of this personality, the most pertinant to it was to be found in the accounts of the life and teachings of Jesus. The overwhelming impression from reading it was that it was a collection of writings by people struggling to convey what they had experienced under the sad limitaton of mere words - sometimes getting a bit carried away in the process. The experience they were trying to convey WAS indeed the one I had the honour to experience myself - the atmosphere permeates the whole Bible (new testament) - but it is only really evident AFTER you have actually had the experience. No amount of reading and learning by rote or interpretation can invoke the experience. The whole perception of this personality is NOT an academic process - that's how and why it's available to everyone So what do I believe right now? It is indeed the presence of this personality that has inspired religion. Therefore this personality as far as religious people are concerned is called GOD. I prefer to call it a personality still - and I still have no idea what it actually is - but it's definitely there IMVHO. Post by: danickstr on September 16, 2005, 08:12:53 PM I used to believe in the standard Jesus thing. What changed me? I guess the beginning of my disbelief was the teachings at college about the different types of religion in the world. I wondered why mine was the "special" one. It lead to a general analysis of athiest readings and finally a discovery of non-deity wisdom in the form of the Tao readings. And that is where I ended up. If you are certain of your faith, then why not read Bertrand Russell for example? He is witty and can't change anyones opinion that isn't open to change. we proved that here! cheers Post by: Paul Frindle on September 16, 2005, 08:30:10 PM
Yes I would agree - this isn't about changing opinions, it's really just an exchange of ideas and chat. But I'm fascinated by what other people think and percieve I'm not at all sure that a conclusion is possible? Except that religious thinking in human terms is a very dangerous thing. As for all the religions - which is the right one? I have the impression that they are all human constructs bearing the flavours of different cultures - inspired basically by the same underlying 'personality'. In my heart I feel that what we all need most is this 'personality' - and not the religion, but somehow we cannot communicate it within the human paradigm? Post by: Barry Hufker on September 16, 2005, 10:28:43 PM I really have the feeling friends are sitting in easy chairs, sipping a bit of their favorite refreshment and talking about the great occurrences and influences affecting their lives. No agendas, not egos. THAT IS SO COOL!! Paul, I agree with you and will again state: the worst thing about Christianity are the Christians. Why? Because they are people and all people have failings. They can't help but twist Christ to fit their own needs and agendas. When I teach college, 10% of the students really "get it." The next 10% sort of get it and the rest will never know or couldn't really care. You know this has got to apply to the Church as well. Even if they are "saved," many still don't get it. One of my favorite people was Roger. Right before he would get up from the congregation to speak the lesson from the pulpit, he was some times known to whisper to friends sitting next to him, "this will really fuck with their minds!" Roger was one of the people I believe you would have liked, Paul. He saw past the crap. But as I said before, the rest of it is why I don't go to church. How can I "fight" each week trying to teach students, work with other faculty, work with administration just to spend my weekend "fighting" politics in the church I'm attending. I think the 1st century Christians had it right -- meet in people's homes. Rotate the meeting houses and the first time someone mentions actually building a church, run like hell to get out of there. All throughout the Acts of the Apostles, you will find churches that are selfish and those that aren't. In fact, that's the reason for all the letters written to the various churches (as found in the Bible). People screw up. Even when they have the teaching right, people screw up. There was a time when I searched long and hard to find a church I could call a spiritual home. It took a long time to even come close. In the meantime, I visited every congregation I could find. Each had something that appalled me. The most horrible sermon I heard included the statement, "if you are physically sick, then go to the doctor. If you are mentally ill, all you need is Jesus!" YIKES!! I couldn't leave fast enough. I did find a place for a while. But even that became a burden I didn't want to bear. Just as Jesus with the Pharisees and Sadducees, the Christians who are the most fun are those who work against the hypocrisy of religious infrastructure so that ultimately the relationship is God and the individual. NOTHING else matters! Sorry for the caps. Barry Post by: Paul Frindle on September 17, 2005, 07:54:49 AM
Yes I agree - how refreshing it is (so far) And in a way, this is where the discussion comes full circle and the reason I ever chimed in in the first place.Whether or not one believes in this or that God or religious persuasion, the single most important lesson to be learned from all this is that people's realities are NOT the same. The importance of this fact cannot be overstated. We have the illusion of synchronicity of ideas and concepts because we use the same communication tools and exchange the same language. But listening to someone and interpreting what they say within your own experience, then 'understanding' what they mean and finally stating agreement - DOES NOT guarantee that you both actually have the same concepts in your minds. This happens at all levels even for simple concepts. For instance, despite having designed the inflator plug-in and written the blurb about it (and twice re-written it), I have spent at least 2 years trying to unseat people's assumption that it is in fact a limiter!! So great is their propensity to believe is IS a limiter that they would prefer to think that I was in fact deceiving people with marketing spin - rather than consider what I have actually said. The latest release of something which actually IS a limiter has re-fuelled the whole debate all over again - and people have actually SOLD their inflators in the belief that this limiter replaces them. Words simply are not enough to reverse an existing concept (however simple) and the thought processes attached to it - I appreciate this all too well. Now, I have had my concept of reality radically changed at least twice in my life, almost in an instant! I was forced to consider the 'unthinkable' on the last occasion. After both these events my words did not change, but what was inside my head engendering those words was completely changed in ways I could never describe using language. But when it comes to such fundamentally spiritual stuff such as we have been discussing here - who's to say which particular version of reality is correct? IMVHO - this lack of conceptual synchronicity coupled with the false perceptions of accord we imagine we have within the limits of language - is the single biggest cause of conflict between people - of all time!! And the single greatest thing we can do as a human race to reverse division, conflict and strife is to seek to understand the magnitude and ramifications of this human perceptual failing, allow ourselves the licence to entertain the idea that different versions of reality exist that may indeed be as valid as our own (however alien they may seem) - open up our minds so that we can start to appreciate the atmospheres of these realities - so we can learn and progress together - rather than assuming that the divisions between people represent deliberate intentional malevolence and are therefore irreconcilable When Einstein stepped out of the frame and asked himself the 'unthinkable' he completely transformed our view of physical reality and in the space of year published a suite of papers that rocked the world. I wouldn't imagine for a moment that this process was anything less than very deeply humbling. Certainly this experience wouldn't have left him inclined to dismiss the possibility of further paradigm shift? And as far As I understand - neither did it make him any more inclined to dismiss the concept of a 'God' Post by: Eric Bridenbaker on September 17, 2005, 08:46:41 AM Paul, your argument concerning the limits of language as the cause of our differences is inspiring. Very reminiscent of Jiddu Krishnamurti's concept of the "fragmented" mind being the cause of conflict throughout world history, and the cause of suffering for the individual. Also, for those interested in the connection between physics and consciousness, there is a neat movie out called "What The Bleep Do We Know?": http://www.whatthebleep.com It's a very entertaining and thought provoking film. They make quite a few crazy jumps as far as the quantum/consciousness issue is concerned. My apologies if this film has already been mentioned in the thread. Best Regards, Eric Post by: PP on September 17, 2005, 09:20:01 AM Post by: Barry Hufker on September 17, 2005, 10:02:32 AM Pardon me for asking, but to whom are you posting? I don't think it is entirely clear. And I read your entire posting. I know you are tired and ill, but this one point would do so much to clarify your points. Unless the person to whom you refer understands the comment directed to him. With thanks, Barry Post by: Paul Frindle on September 17, 2005, 01:34:04 PM
When I qualified my statment with - "(for now)" - I actually meant it Having read Peter's post and tried to digest what it was actually expressing - and found the post to which he appears to be refering - with all due respect (and with great regret) I must say that this bears all the hallmarks of a barely controlled rant. I can see nothing in the guy's post which warrants character assumption of the kind P refers to, or anything in the discussion in general that requires consideration of one's credentials or one's affiliation with any recognised belief group - to qualify for a valid opinion? This is truly sad and probably marks the end of what was a fascinating (open) discussion - as all such discussions inevitably end thus? Post by: PP on September 17, 2005, 01:58:24 PM Post by: Paul Frindle on September 17, 2005, 05:39:13 PM I have to be honest, I am finding it very difficult to understand your posts and the language you are using is becoming increasingly accusative. I don't believe this is the best way to get the point across. There is much in what you say I agree with and there's much that would warrant further discussion. For instance the reasons for subversion within society wrt the dangers of religious thinking in it's literal sense. I can certainly conceive of a point of view that might indeed see religious thinking as the root of all evil and strife within humanity. But I sense that this isn't a subject we could visit comfortably. But I would be very pleased to read any comments you (and everyone else) have about the thoughts I have already expressed
Post by: PP on September 17, 2005, 06:41:43 PM Post by: PP on September 18, 2005, 04:42:29 AM Post by: Paul Frindle on September 18, 2005, 07:53:47 AM
Ok I'll try to do this sometime.
Yes, and the day before what is likely to be one of the worst weeks for a long time - I have been waiting for it Today really is a day of mental preparation for what I have known for at least 2 years would eventually come. But ho-hum, no one promised life would be an easy ride hey? Post by: Barry Hufker on September 18, 2005, 09:32:45 AM Good to know you're in the thick of things. That's where the Lord is working! Yes, all good things should have a beginning, middle and end. Only God manages to get eternity correct. As you stated (if I'm paraphrasing you correctly)people often use perpetuity as a reason to root in one place, thereby becoming ineffective. Goodness knows The Son of Man never had a place to lay his head! The church (building) may be stuck in one place but the Church (believers) should never be. Barry Post by: danickstr on September 18, 2005, 01:35:54 PM Thanks for sticking with this conversation and keeping it above the belt. I would like to also thank everyone for sharing their inner thoughts on this most profound topic. Many moving passages. I really am not about to respond to character attacks from anyone and feel to do so is to just rake in the muck. I respect all views as much as they warrant, and this is often a reflection of the man. A person who is sincere and not spouting rote is much more likely to win the consideration of others. again, thanks to all of you for exploring this deep cavern of human unknown. cheers Post by: Barry Hufker on September 18, 2005, 01:54:40 PM It continues to be a good discussion and I am enjoying the exchange of ideas, as I have said. All the Lord ever called us (Christians) to do was to "preach the Good News" of salvation. That's it. Not to accuse anyone. Not to try to convert anyone. Only God knows the heart and only God can change it. We tell the Good News and God works from there. The Lord never accused anyone, except the Pharisees and the Sadducees, of being sinners. And he accused them because they were self-righteous, making it impossible for Jews to worship God because of all the rules and regulations they created. To all others, Christ only spoke God's mercy, calling us to love all people as we love ourselves. It is my hope to (someday)follow that example. (and yes, I know I don't by a loooooonnnnnnngggggg shot). Barry Post by: Paul Frindle on September 18, 2005, 07:19:23 PM
I have quickly pasted all the relevant posts and the linked doc file into one text - but do you really want me to post it all here again? It will make a very very long post? Would it not be better if I either sent it as email or private message? Post by: Paul Frindle on September 18, 2005, 08:10:43 PM
I couldn't agree more - we should never allow ourselves to stay in one place mentally and spiritually - we must always move onwards and forwards and this must always involve considering other possibilities and realities. The biggest human failing of all is to ever consider that we know it all and have nothing more to learn - or ever become persuaded that we are right beyond any possible question. Even within my professional life, many times I have had things demonstrated that I formerly considered highly unlikely and had even dismissed before. And the question of 'where was Jesus' grand cathedral?' was another point of heated argument I had with the establishment. As far as I was concerned, the very existence of such grandiose buildings, constructed by the sweat and toil of disadvantaged people, bore witness to an amazing and enduring misunderstanding of what it was all about. They were more of an ostentatious demonstration of the power that the church wielded over 'it's subjects' than any expedient of God's will. When I think back on it I am amazed they tolerated me even as long as they did - there were so very many such issues I even remember actually saying on one occasion that some of them were so obsessed with their own importance within the hierarchy of their own man-made organisations and their own entirely academically contrived 'interpretations' of God's word, that if Jesus himself turned up to venture an opinion his views would most likely be dismissed as 'unqualified babble'!
This para was interesting. During the period I hosted the alpha courses 4 people became confirmed Christians and are still active in the Church. And one other person managed to 'lose' a crippling psychological condition which was ruining their lives and had resisted all conventional means of treatment. On a more strange note - immediately following that 'away day' whilst this 'personality' was with me, I could invoke that tingling feeling and 'heat' almost at will. It did occur to me when I touched someone that something was passing between us like a sort of electricity (similar to the away day experience). For instance if one of our children was feeling bad I would hold my hand over them about a centimetre away and feel this rush of heat and 'exchange'. Of course I did wonder if this was some kind of 'healing event' - but even in those heady days of discovery I couldn't entertain an idea so bizarre - and of course I never actively tried it. Now the whole notion that I even imagined such things seems totally silly and of course I have never seen anyone actually 'healed' of anything, other than a psychological state of mind. Post by: PP on September 19, 2005, 08:15:28 AM Post by: George_ on September 19, 2005, 08:47:50 AM sorry guys, I read not through all these posts.. esp. the ones from ****** are terrifing long posts:) Post by: PP on September 19, 2005, 08:50:42 AM Post by: George_ on September 19, 2005, 09:54:06 AM yes, I forgot to add the coming events.. I will change this.. believe me, I try to upgrade my knowledge in nuclear-physics and IT-analysis of algorithmstructures.. then I am rebuilding my trackingroom.. and of course I do a lot of livemixing.. well, you are right, the time has come to improve my poor english;) what kind of languages do you speak sir ******? Post by: PP on September 19, 2005, 10:34:09 AM Post by: Barry Hufker on September 19, 2005, 11:21:50 AM I am worried you are getting carried away. If your conscience dictates this tack then please continue. Otherwise, I think the tone of the last few messages has gotten needlessly belligerent. The Bible says, "For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms." Beating up on someone who cares enough to stay involved in this thread is unacceptable to me. Further, chastising and speaking condesceningly suggesting to someone they stay in this thread if only to further their English puzzles me as an attitude. Also, you speak of the ordinary person being protected from horrible things in this life of which they are not aware. I *want* to be aware of all things dangerous, whether spiritual or fleshly. Right now, I've got a government that is protecting me right out of my freedom. I am much better off being aware of obvious enemies (anywhere) and wolves in sheep's clothing running government. Peter, returning some good advice I read elsewhere in this thread, "Let go and let God." Barry Post by: PP on September 19, 2005, 01:13:03 PM Post by: Barry Hufker on September 19, 2005, 05:22:33 PM I simply don't agree. With hardly anything you said. I am not "afraid." And I happen to be an excellent judge of character. I see very clearly the motivation of others. And I don't wear my faith on my sleeve. People do know I am born again as I have no problem saying it to anyone. I think this thread should be evidence of that. I *know* everyone I work with in the School of Commuincations where I teach is fully aware of my being an orthodox, born again Christian. I prefer to let my works be my testimony and not endless words. So, please don't think you understand me or my behaviour. And it was never my intention to participate in this thread. Originally, I was pointing out that I don't take offense at the people of this world and their beliefs. As I said, I am in this world but am not of it. This means to me that I understand how the world works and I do my best to stay Godly within it (with God's help of course). But I participated thinking it was a chance to meet others where they are in their lives and speak to them. If God works here, then fine. If not, then fine. So I understand how the world works and people's motives. And I am not blind to who is really saying what and why. I'm no fool. I understand people just fine. But I believe it serves no purpose to be confrontational. My approach is to tell the Good News and let God convict people in their hearts. And I think it is patronizing to tell me what I want to know and don't want to know, just as you think me incapable of understanding your motives. I am not shy. I am not afraid. And knowing anything, I can still sleep at night because my faith tells me God is in control and not men. This is one of my favorite passages: When a man's ways are pleasing to the LORD, he makes even his enemies live at peace with him. Yes, the Lord said to "teach." He didn't say to berate. Further, he didn't say "go pray", but he himself prayed constantly. Peter, I so flabberghasted by the self-righteousness in your post that I don't even know how to respond to it. The Lord, who judges men's hearts righteously doesn't convict me of my attitudes or actions, so I certainly am not going to justify myself to you. Peter, your posts are unneccesarly long. They are a scorching wind withering all in its path. They are arrogant. They are tiresome. You use far too much space to say not much. Am I angry? No. Disappointed. I think someone should have said these things to you long ago. Brother, remove the log from your eye before you worry about my mote! Barry Post by: Ozzy on September 19, 2005, 07:43:32 PM Post by: danickstr on September 19, 2005, 10:31:55 PM I have my beliefs and they tend to be different than most of the world's views on this subject. I accept this and I repeat that my way is not much more than depressing. In christian terms I am the classic doubting Thomas, but Christ has not come to my door and let me put my hand in his wounds. I am sure he knows the address. I hear nothing in my head when conflict arises for me other than my own thoughts. Perhaps I seem to others to not have a reason to rejoice. But I do. As trite as it sounds, I rejoice in the people around me and the good I believe they can do. I have been fortunate enough to encounter many of them here on this forum, and throughout the journey that still continues for me. It's all the hope I have and all I need. I believe in all of us. Cheers Post by: PP on September 20, 2005, 04:51:36 AM Post by: danickstr on September 20, 2005, 10:29:22 AM what a piece of crap I am for not believing some book that is 2000 years old and has been altered by who knows who during its subjugation to the reigns of corrupt kings. I would like to know who has first hand knowledge that this stuff is not just a collection of letters written by regular men? I don't. I wasn't there. Neither were you. You are guessing. It's a great system of ethics. gotta love the golden rule. I don't need the god part of it though to make it real for me. When genetics is fixing bodies and regrowing parts and technology is making spaceships that can carry us out to forever, we'll see heaven here in the galaxy. I hope the young kids read this so that they can get proactive about heaven. Start to make a heaven here in this part of the universe. It doesn't mean that there is for sure no god, and no heaven. I may beleive that, but I can't ever prove that. This is just my way of taking what we do know is real and using to make our lives better here. Just in case there is no god and no heaven, and the people waiting to go there are wrong. cheers Post by: Paul Frindle on September 20, 2005, 01:36:53 PM
I agree with this sentiment. Waiting is definitely not what we should be doing - we have an obligation to make things better on earth whereever we find that possibility. The only problem would be is to decide what actually is 'better' and how we actually do it? In many ways loads of things definitely are better year by year - but sadly IMVHO not all are progressing thus and large parts of the human condition which are essential for happiness and contentment are being drowned in the ever-increasing cacophony of society. I find that saddening Post by: PP on September 20, 2005, 02:25:07 PM Post by: Paul Frindle on September 20, 2005, 06:58:00 PM
What happened to Peter's posts!? Has he removed them all? Post by: danickstr on September 21, 2005, 12:36:59 AM
??????????????????????
Post by: Fig on September 21, 2005, 02:59:08 PM Amazing. Post by: dcollins on September 22, 2005, 12:08:21 AM
When it gets out that ****** is posting, the "word" must travel fast! I think it has something to do with his true identity... DC Post by: Invisible Member on September 22, 2005, 01:39:45 PM Sometimes I wish I could remove mine. But removing the words won't change anything. Peace, Dennis Post by: Tomas Danko on September 22, 2005, 05:28:23 PM
Are you saying..... but surely it can't be.... Jesus? Post by: Paul Frindle on September 23, 2005, 06:36:46 AM
Well who is he then that he requires such secrecy? Everyone knows who I am and I stand by my posts without seeking any identity cover what so ever. If this were not the case absolutely nothing I said would have any validity? And as for removing posts, I stupidly did this once (under pressure) on another forum and it caused massive grief all round - I would never do it again however great the pressure. The proper response to exasperation or escalation like this is to either apologise if one has been disrespectful, or courteously decline to continue if the discussion has become unpalatable. Post by: dcollins on September 23, 2005, 07:04:45 PM
He is a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma. Fwiw, this book may turn the most Scientific Agnostic around: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0465036732/103 -7752216-9507015?v=glance Highly reccomended. DC Post by: danickstr on September 23, 2005, 09:45:21 PM as for a book on numbers changing the mind of an athiest/agnostic, I can only reply...highly doubtful from my point of view. but if it works for you...that's great cheers Post by: Barry Hufker on September 24, 2005, 12:24:00 AM "You'll never figure me out. I am a cipher, wrapped in an enigma, covered in 'Secret Sauce.'" Barry Post by: Paul Frindle on September 24, 2005, 07:55:17 AM
The thing that strikes me most about 'number theories' and 'numerical relationship revelations' is that they seem significant only because WE tend to percieve numbers as significant. Counting, numbers and quantity evaluations are part of a human logical thought process - they are very useful but they do not necessarily describe any absolute wider 'reality' IMVHO. For instance people get all strung up about irresolvable numbers like pi or e believing that such relationships hold magical powers, when in reality all they represent are relationships that cannot be resolved entirely in any given limited precision in base10 math. What they are telling us is that our math is actually an approximation of reality. Pi and e are real relationships - but don't lend themselves to quantised thinking in a chosen number base - that's all. Post by: PP on September 24, 2005, 10:21:36 AM Post by: PP on September 24, 2005, 01:57:21 PM Post by: danickstr on September 24, 2005, 04:02:19 PM It is true that I do not belong to any organization. Nor do I have any accolades or letters, and did not finish college. It is true that my views on an athiestic universe are depressing, especially for someone who has held to a thiestic one for their liftime. I would not begin to guess my motives, but as we all have selfish motives, I guess self-aggrandizement cannot be ruled out altogether. In the case of ******, I would say that no plea on my part for believing that I am truly seeking to make sense of the world as it has been presented to me will be accepted. In any case, I have to just plod along and if I am perceived as a thread usurper, it actually came accidentally. I did not really think aoubt who was posting, but according the the title of the thread, it seemed logical that thoughts on god meant thoughts on god not existing. I am certainly not apologizing, and was actually laughing out loud at the amount of time and effort and thought that had gone into dissecting me. I hardly consider myself worth so much trouble, but am flattered in a way by it. I hope everyone finds the answers they seek, and angry responses just belie a crumbling of the foundations from my experience, so my advice is to not let anger get the best of you, although I can't follow that advice myself all the time. cheers Post by: Paul Frindle on September 24, 2005, 05:50:35 PM
I do appreciate any ideas/notions/perspectives that would bring me to a greater understanding of any subject at all - and I am therefore willing to recieve any wisdom anyone has to offer on any subject. However maintaining the open mind necessary to allow any wisdom to BE appreciated does require a large degree of latitude and willingness to consider other people's views - from their perspectives (not mine) - without the assumption of malice or suspicion of bad intent. Even IF the person has bad intent, I am still eager to listen to them, because it IS within what actually motivates people to harbour bad intent where often their truths and realities lie - if only people would throw off their prejudices and actually see it IMLE people are not usually motivated to bad will without good reason - within their own perspectives (within their own realities), and I would even apply this principle to the people which you would call enemies of our society, way of life and belief standards. It isn't at all a given that such people are out to destroy us out of sheer malice. They may only be out to preserve what they believe is crucial, against an onslaught from ourselves, which we ourselves cannot even see or appreciate, because - we cannot and will not see things from other people's perspective, - cannot and will not imagine their motives are honourable in their own opinion, - cannot and will not see any dissent as anything other than deliberate personal or collective attack! Post by: danickstr on September 24, 2005, 06:23:37 PM considering the other man's perspective makes, for example, suicide bombers at least rational, if still wrong. They see their actions as leading to a logical conclusion...that of a life in paradise for their sacrifice. It has a logical motive. My opinion of whether or not they are right is irrelevant to them, I am guessing. But to call them madmen is not actually correct. They are men who are following a conclusion to its outcome. In the name of god, by the way, but that is not my point. Post by: Paul Frindle on September 24, 2005, 08:21:45 PM
The suicide bomber phenomenon is obviously an extremely delicate subject close to many people's hearts and a subject almost certain to cause grief. But just to say that before my experience I could never begin to understand how anyone could act out the ultimate sacrifice of giving one's life to a cause - the notion was totally alien to me. Not least of all because (even ignoring matters such as self preservation and bravery) logically the loss of your life removes the possibility of furthering your cause in practice. It must always be counter-productive? If everyone committed to a particular cause indulged in this kind of action the end point would inevitably be that the cause would die out due to the absence of any living supporters. However - after my experience and having really understood the reality of what sacrifice actually meant in a religious sense (as far as I know universally across all religions) I could finally comprehend such things - i.e. how sacrifice is not a negative thing with human negative connotation. And I could therefore also fully understand just how devastatingly dangerous religious thinking potentially is - if it is subverted - regardless of particular faith group or denomination. The obvious next phase was the realisation of just how far (IMVVHO) religious thinking had already been subverted - within much of our own western culture perceptions - actually amongst some people within my apparently 'normal and unremarkable' community I encounter daily. After this it didn't take vast leap of intelligence or insight to extrapolate the utter horror of some of the things we are witnessing these days The very act of 'handing over your will' to a 'higher power' and within this state of mind allowing oneself to 'receive the will' of this higher power via the INTERPRETATION of others, is the very factor which enables such extreme action. I have witnessed views and perceptions amongst everyday Christians (often highly regarded within the local community) where the thought processes involved are horribly and terrifyingly close to this! Of course the consequences of such thinking are barely discernible within the hum-drum march of everyday small town life. But given the right circumstances, sufficient discomfort and (religiously 'blessed') motivation and the power and means, coupled with an unassailable (religiously fuelled) belief that they were 'right'..... I dread to think what's possible. But worst of all - whatever atrocity that might result from the above - however abhorrent and unjustified such things were to me - I would actually still understand what was in their minds, how they could do it and why they were doing it Another terrible perception which is a legacy from my 'enlightening experience' - it would be so very much easier if I had never ever perceived such things!!!! These perceptions haunt me daily - hourly - these perceptions were why I stayed awake at night for weeks and became physically ill when it became obvious that our foreign policies were leading to inevitable conflict - that straddled religious divisions. Blind rage and anger polarised by black and white perceptions would be so very much more bearable to live with Post by: Paul Frindle on September 24, 2005, 10:01:15 PM
Hmm... This is a bit of an extrapolation IMVHO. Not believing in the idea that the 'convictions of one's conscience are entirely correct' - is a wholly sensible way to stay open minded IMO. The opposite of this might be - believing entirely in the convictions of one's conscience, one would no longer suffer self loathing - because one's inner conviction would provide the justification for one's own beliefs? A highly dangerous self-supporting cycle that could lead almost anywhere IMVHO! Yes this might be a recipe for unloading oneself of the burden of 'inferiority', but can anyone truly state that one's beliefs are not self-motivated? And what of the idea thats one's conscience is in a permanent state of flux anyway - is it to be trusted explicitly from day to day? What is your conscience like on a 'bad' day - would you trust it? Self - selfishness - self-consideration: Do we really believe that anyone is utterly emotionally devoid of any of the above? The very fact that we can say the word rules this possibility out IMO. Soon as the concept of 'self' is installed it cannot be deleted. The concept of 'self' is a perceptual part of our whole being - without it almost no human intelligence could follow. Yes it can exist at different partially removed levels, but it's still there. Messages repeated in the Bible refering to peace, good will, supporting one another both practically and financially are not truly and purely altruistic. They could easily be interpreted as a reflection of the truism that 'the quality of our lives is heavily dependent of the quality of the lives of the people around us'? Something perhaps we could well re-learn in our current socially differentiated fiscally fuelled society. Exactly how many levels removed does the 'consideration of self' need to be in order that we are declared free from self-centredness? Because sure as day follows night it cannot be totally erased. Which brings me to another point I have often considered - the only truly pure person is one who is completely devoid of knowledge - completely naive - a blank sheet - both impossible and undesireable IMO. The very existence of concepts engenders responsibility (arguably the salient message from the garden of Eden?). The very illustration and introduction of concepts within our society engenders the need to protect ourselves from them? Something that perhaps isn't entirely lost on govermnents who might have a vested interest in creating a sense of unease - and graciously providing us protection from it? Those that would seek to install a 'more advantageous common reality'? I was a school governor up until recently at a school my daughter was attending. Among the many government directives we received (almost weekly) was the racial equality directive. The school was required to generate a policy regarding racial inequality issues with a set of rules outlining what would not be tolerated. These were to be published and explained to the parents and children. At that time the only black child in the school was my 8 year old daughter's best friend - no one thought about it - no one cared and if I asked if my daughter if there was anything different about her friend compared with other children she really couldn't think of anything. That was as far as I wanted to go on 'racial issues' wrt to my daughter. In discussing this in the governor's meeting - I said "so due to this legislation, I am required to take my daughter to one side, explain that Melissa is different from other children because she has different coloured skin. And then point out that people might think she's inferior because of this completely irrelevant fact and outline what she is allowed to say and what she is not as a result"! Of course this had to happen (it was law) - and effectively what we did was to introduce a whole school to a prejudice they previously hadn't aquired. We had forcibly downloaded those children with a prejudice from OUR own sick society - thereby ensuring that THEY adopted it at a very early age - and would become 'comfortable' with the idea that black people really ARE different - but we are not allowed to say so!! How very much better it would have been for them to have faced this issue when they were much older and could develop a more mature perspective - and simply laugh at those who thought colour made a person different!The guardians of our morality and the purveyors of our protection are very often the very perpetrators of the concepts that poison our societies and minds - concepts against which we will ultimately be forced to fight and thus require protection - in the form of ever-increasing restriction. Those that seek to remove the concept of 'self' from the human condition are posing an impossible and unobtainable goal for those that chose follow the doctrine - and are thus denying people God's given right to the freedoms of being 'human' and engendering needless and lifelong struggle against 'innate inadequacy'. Do we believe this would indeed be God's will? Post by: maxdimario on September 24, 2005, 10:18:02 PM sometimes you lose it, sometimes you fall asleep, sometimes the pain makes you realize that nothing is really that important. we struggle to get our point across, to understand, to obtain something from life, but in the end WE are just slaves. WE don't exist, but for a temporary sense of identity. Post by: danickstr on September 24, 2005, 10:26:55 PM the depressed, lost, trolling, (other things I have already forgotten but are equally negative) ego-maniac. cheers Post by: danickstr on September 24, 2005, 10:34:23 PM edit: oops you also said sick and tired. sorry. ya depression from mortal coils tightening never helps perspective. it's true we are here but a second. I got nothing for that. we're in the same boat at least. Post by: bushwick on September 25, 2005, 02:50:55 AM Post by: Tomas Danko on September 25, 2005, 12:02:06 PM
I have noticed throughout the years that people tend to speak in a bigger and bolder way whenever being incognito. Peter is certainly no exception here, regardless of what he says. During my stay here at PSW I have grown to appreciate and respect the words of Peter. Up until now, that is. I do not expect to regain my respect until a real identity comes along. I think we've all put up with Peter's secrecy because he always had so much to share of high quality (albeit someone should revoke his ENTER key and we'd all be keeping our SPACE BAR keys in a better shape) and never said a bad word towards anyone. Up until now, that is... As interesting and fruitful as this thread first started out, I have to say that the only really rewarding read came from you Mr. Frindle. The way the thread developed afterwards feels like a disappointment and the lack of mutual respect and willingness to meet others halfway is truly saddening. Sincerely, Tomas Danko Post by: Paul Frindle on September 25, 2005, 01:06:32 PM
Yes - and the point was that left to their own devices the children were perfectly able to accomodate physical differences between them without any hint of racism. Of course there was typical childlike chiding of the kind that kids always do - but this was not racism as we know it. Until of course it was introduced to them. ...... I just deleted the rest of this post. Having read it again, I decided it was a memory with implications just too rotten for me to leave on here - sorry
Post by: t(h)ik on September 25, 2005, 07:33:16 PM I left this thread around page 7 because......booorrrinnng!!!! And well, my customer is done fukken around with the drums and I am putting off tinkering in the studio so I thought....what the fukk, maybe a nice Christian love in.... But jesus christ on roller skates what are you guys up to? I mean, I just read the last page....glad I didn't hang the whole time for this. Holy Shit! Now my brough Nick is an asshole...what the fukk happened.... Man, leave you guys unsupervised and I come back here and the rosary beads are being loaded in the slingshot.... Anyway hope you guys get back on track, I plan on coming back after Peter does another sixty-thousand mouse clicks to drive the total views up and I expect to see some goddamn dignity or I'm going to turn you all in to the mother fukken superiouer. Lemme nough Hail Satan! 666 Tik Post by: t(h)ik on September 25, 2005, 08:09:05 PM Lemme nough T Post by: danickstr on September 25, 2005, 08:52:37 PM I don't know if you are joking or serious. I don't think you are an asshole, so I will assume you are just kidding. If you aren't kidding, please use specific examples, since heresay is not allowed  And I do enjoy most of your posts either way you go with this, which won't change, so don't worry about losing one of your 4 faithful listeners. The ones where you are obviously drunk off your @$$ are not always cohesive, but the other ones usually make sense. lemme nough cheers Post by: t(h)ik on September 26, 2005, 03:37:37 AM Re-read this the next morning...lmao... I meant to say somebody is calling my brough Nick an asshole. I was actually miffed that you were being so respectful and then someone started taking your inventory. So that was definitely a total typing/limitation of my competence/this medium dick up on my part...lol... Sorry and thank you for understanding I am a stupid twat. Now back to the regularly scheduled program. Post by: JGreenslade on September 26, 2005, 07:47:55 AM
If ever I read a true insight relating to "Blair's Britain" that has to be it. One could draw a parallel between the "audiophile fraternity" and the UK's current govt. - they both focus in on the peripheral issues, whilst totally ignoring the main causal factors / root of the problem. Eugene McDaniels' "Headless Heroes of the Apocalypse" springs to mind (let's outlaw freedom of speech - drive 'em underground...we'll have more excuses to spend taxpayers' money on wars then...) - a quote from the record: http://www.metrotimes.com/editorial/review.asp?id=49270
Finding examples worthy of comparison are a weak-spot of mine, but the political-correctness at Paul's daughter's school reminds me of the recent Trafalgar celebration. For those unaware, a mock battle was staged to re-enact part of the Battle of Trafalgar; however, in order so as not to offend our French cousins, each team was labelled either the "white" or the "blue" team, instead of English / French. When I spoke to French associates they were outraged! It was felt that the cure was infinitely worse than the "problem" itself - "It was 200 years ago man, part of history... We're over it, honestly... Did your politicians really think we'd take offence?". A bizarre analogy I know, but one can draw parallels... I better get back to work before I dwell any further on these issues and get angry. Justin BTW: make your own religion - it's a "DIY" thing - "brand image" is nothing. Post by: danickstr on September 26, 2005, 12:23:17 PM good analogy thermionic Post by: t(h)ik on September 27, 2005, 07:35:43 PM
I HEART HUCKABEES!!! Nick you SONOFAB <no message body> I can't believe you said that you must come from a broken ho< no message body> If you were an intellectual like me, instead of a fu< no message body > you wouldn't be so fu <edited by the god squad> You're obviously deficient in yo < edit by the Anglo-Saxon looking hippie with the halo > So just take your pathet < no message body > And stick up your a < holy verbage abstainment > You < no message body > Lemme nough (before the cock croughs) Tik Post by: t(h)ik on September 27, 2005, 07:55:10 PM Nick were you accused of being a thread usurper? This whole fukken thread was started during the boxy room thread.....WTF? Hey you....yeah you....WTF are you doing, can't you see I'm being crucified? Um, I wasn't doing anything.... Yes you were! You were trying to look up my robe! Um, well, it's not really like that. I'm from out of town and everyone I talk to just doesn't have time for me. Sooooo....I thought I would wander up here and see what was going on. That's pathetic, you think just because I'm nailed up here that I don't have anything better to do? Well... Hmmm... pss pss pss.... mmm... Shitty weather today huh? Yeah. Fukken cold last night...goddamn it was cold. Yeah.... hmmm... Say, whatchaya doin' Sunday? Post by: danickstr on September 27, 2005, 09:52:58 PM |