I've argued with Horace long and hard that his behaviour is unethical, and would probably attract criminal prosecution if the authorities were ever to catch up with him, to say nothing of the possible implications for his immortal soul if certain religious tomes turn out to be correct and there is a time of eternal punishment in the afterlife.

Where do the forumites think Horace's nocturnal activities rank on a scale of wrongdoing; are there scriptural verses from any belief system that specifically proscribe necrophilia, and in your opinion, is it as ethically questionable as the violation of a living person?

I'm quite pissed off!! One guy asks a question of incredible philosophical profundity (why is the sky blue?) in the appropriate forum and you nimrods vote to delete it because you haven't the depth to perceive it's importance! Meanwhile you let stupid, unscientific, philosophically fruitless threads like the Nibiru, or alien-base-on-the-moon thread go on day after day. I swear it angers me to the point that I'm considering leaving POF. In fact I think I will, just as soon as I can find a forum where such topics can be discussed without the dummies voting them out.

I would like to note that what I am about to say is serious & real.

10 years ago I was involved with a man [for 3 yrs.] who was in reality a bad person. It was the way he was : the things he used to do, I did not understand what was going on. Everything he did was pretty much underhanded. He lied about just about everything, he would manipulate people and use them to get what he wanted ---------------- all this under the guise of a charming smile and a deceptive winning personality.

I saw all this and yet could not really comprehend it. I don't mean to sound confusing nor present you with lack of pertinent information. I am just trying to paint a picture of his overall character. Toward the end of our time together things were very bad. It was during that time that strange things began to occur, about him.

We were standing in Circut City and he was looking at a TV ------- as I looked up at him I saw that he was surrounded by a white aura.

I actually saw this around him..... and I felt hurt..... because I interpreted the occurance as something good happining to him and I could not comprehend how that could be because I was certain he was bad. It wasn't until years later that I was able to comprehend what was really happining.

Anyway very shortly after that we broke up.
After he was gone [very shortly again] after he was gone other things began to happen in the house. I will not type everything that occurred but there is no doubt in mind and understanding that I was being bothered by demons [whispering in my ear using his voice - apparitions] etc ... I know this is scary & it was a long time ago now.

what it boils down to is, how can i accept a God who is willing to throw great people like the monks in the pitts of hell meanwhile people like my mom, serial killers, child molesters, etc... get to go to heaven because they accepted jesus as their lord and savior? i dont buy it and if it is truely the case, id rather burn in hell with the monks, then live in heaven with disgusting trash.

In the bible, that is how Romans 12:18 reads. Is this a tenet that can be achieved?

Is this spiritually possible? In this world?

What are the spiritual steps to attaining this peace?

How do we respond to the negative people who come into our lives?

This thought came to me during a discussion about being empathic. I often find that I pick up on vibes around me. If there is a buzz or high energy in the office, or in large crowds, I will become energetic and almost bounce off the wall hyper. If the air is tense, I become very quiet and sullen. If there is sadness around, I just want to be left alone.

I wonder if empaths aren't in some way energy suckers or energy vampires. Empaths can feel what others are feeling and sense vibes around them that a lot of people don't pick up on, or are not attuned to.

So my thought for the day...are empaths energy vampires?

As an empathic person have you ever sensed you are being intrusive on others by picking up their vibes?

I'm always cautious not to invade on someone's personal issues or emotions - but certain people I do feed off of and easily sense their vibes. I can read people very well because of this and can tell when I am being "read".

So i was wondering, Is there even a noticeable difference between Science and Religion.

They are just made up words and theories to explain the things we really don't even actually understand.

Both science and religion have much in common.

Science explains certain things about the world and religion is a gathering of people who seek to learn the truth about the world and this supposed afterlife- Is there a God?, Why are we the way we are?. So to choose one side over another seems pointless as both are needed for each to survive.

Back in those early times people made explanations for why certain things occurred. In many parts of the world Gods and the supernatural became the basis for things like lightning or wind or things they couldn't define. Science is just like that.

Obviously we have our new technology and understanding of things but there are an extreme amount of things we haven't learned yet and do we ever really even understand the things that go on. It's my belief that humans rationalize everything so that it is completely in their control.

I have a great respect for other religions and non believers. I myself was raised Catholic and while i always loved the stories could never understand why some people took such tales to heart. I was 6 and could tell a story from a reality. I consider myself an optimistic skeptic (if that's even possible).

Anyway comments and additional ideas are welcome. I love talking about theories and beliefs that can't be pinned down. So lets have some fun shall we?

You're one of the first people whose post bothered me. Thank you. I've always been told that if someone bothers you then they're revealing something you don't like about yourself. I will save this and read it over again. There are some parts where I think that you miss the mark, and those are the ones I will look at the hardest.

About 18 years ago, I was still the product of my upbringing. People think I'm joking when I tell them my parents were a violent wino and a hooker. I had very little compassion, and I had very little concern for any human life, my own included. It didn't matter to me whether I lived or died or whether I killed or maimed. After all, that was part of my job.

Then I had a son. There was a human life who depended on me, and he didn't care what I'd done before him. At that point, I realized that I wanted to be a better man.

I remember as a boy watching my grandparents work in their garden, and some of the things they said about gardening apply to everyday life. To keep the garden fertile, you have to break up the soil and work in some compost. The best way to keep out weeds is to pick them when they're small. If you don't plant what you want, something else is liable to grow there. It's hard for a weed to take root if there is already an established plant there.

It is important to take wisdom from many places. Taken from only one place, it becomes rigid and stale.
~Iroh

I know from personal experience that I can't just stop trying to be better. Nobody ever coasted up a mountain. If I don't work at being who I want, I'm liable to turn out to be somebody different. :)

I wish you joy. Thank you for challenging me.

Recently I’ve been evaluating my life. I’m a good man, with many friends who love me as much as I love them. Children and animals love me. I’ve only met a few people who don’t genuinely like me, and they aren’t openly hostile to me. I’m like my job for the most part, and I’m content with my possessions. I don’t have a girlfriend/wife, but I will find the right woman when I’m the right man.

I hold myself to very high standards because I know who I am and what I’m capable of achieving. I like myself, and I’m proud of my character and my positive outlook. I’m strong, reasonably smart, funny, and kind. I can fix almost anything, and have never found anything I couldn’t do if I set my mind to it.

Still, I look at myself and wonder how I can improve. I guess self improvement is like looking at a white sheet in the sunlight. You can always see areas that aren’t perfect, but I at least want to be the best that I can be. So I have been re-evaluating my belief system.

What if my core beliefs about the universe are wrong? What if all that I was taught about society when I was a child is wrong? What if my notions of right and wrong are skewed?

Who am I to judge others’ morality? Who am I to judge their religions? Who am I to judge their culture? Am I any more important than they are? Are they any more important than I am?

When I consider what I can observe through my own senses, I have to admit that I’m a fairly insignificant speck of dust in the grand scheme of things. When I consider my ability to influence the movement of the universe, I am as inconsequential as anybody else.

So what if I’m wrong? Am I living my life in such a way as to make the world a better place anyway? Are my actions a source of encouragement to others with different belief systems and different values? Do I hold myself to high enough standards of conduct that I’d be proud if a stranger’s child imitated me? Am I open enough to be friends with someone who believes differently? Am I compassionate enough to love someone who thinks I’m wrong?

I think so, but I want to continually challenge myself and others to look deeper. I want to nurture and encourage as many people as possible. I want my life to be an inspiration to others even if everything that I hold to be true is completely false.

What do you think are some of the universal truths for humanity that would help me be a better man and a more compassionate human being? If for the sake of this discussion we strip away the trappings of religion and culture what are the things that are important to all of humanity?

I'm going to tone this down a great deal since I first came in here. Sorry if anyone was offended, and sorry your post got deleted on my topic, it wasn't what I would have had take place.

I'd like to talk with believers about what I see as a lynchpin in a failed argument. If you can face that humans have no soul (I assume you already can allow for cows, bacteria, ducks, algae, and computers not having them) then doesn't your entire religion fall apart? I believe it does, I don't see how one can claim to believe in the other parts of a religion (which I also think can be dispelled) once the soul has been debunked.

The case against the soul comes from anatomy, neuroscience, psychology, neurology, sleep science, studies done on corpses, mortician's experiences, our understanding of death, sleep, memory, personality, and the physicality of the mind.

All of these things converge to reveal that there is no soul (in my opinion as it is formed by the evidence available). Of course, nothing convinces true believers, and no one wants to die and not achieve some form of paradise, but the truth sometimes hurts and when it does we can't just throw it away.

So, let's talk about religious claims about the afterlife. What's it like to a Muslim? Apparently it is a harem with abundant fruit, available family members, gigantic trees and rivers of honey. These are Hadith references, not just the ravings of some extremist (unless you consider Muhammad and his biographers extremists (and a case could be made)). To Christians music, clouds, pets, and possible white picket fences all seem to be located in heaven. Until the astronomical revolutions of thought in the enlightenment and after heaven was believed to be a literal place in the stars. Where is it, if you hold this belief? Mars? Andromeda? This alone should make you question, which I hope will lead you to seek evidence.

Where would we find actual evidence for what happens when you die?

Sorry to bring you to this, but a corpse is the best location for evidence on personality, memory, brain function, and life after death.

When considering a corpse it is rather clear that all of the qualities that supposedly reside in the soul are no longer featured. The person's memories can no longer exist because we can 1. not access them. 2. dissect the brain which used to house them and study its structure. 3. observe the absence of the necessary medium for the soul qualities to assert themselves.

I think most people know this on some level, but don't want to face it. It isn't that pleasant, and considering death may cause fear, guilt, shame, disgust, concern, or desperation.

I suspect that all of those emotions can be overcome and the facts of life can be engaged with meaningfully. Tell me what you think.

Thanks for letting me back on to post this, if there's any way I can improve the message and offend people less I'd be happy to adjust it. I hate censorship, but I can always accommodate the community. It is my opinion that the belief in the soul is in the face of evidence and that this should be clear to anyone that looks closely, but that doesn't make the a-soulist any better than the believer in souls. It is just something that we should have come to grips with by now as a culture and as individuals.

exorcisms and possessions are things of the movies... I however am interested in it, does anyone know where to find some good information the subject?

Do you have a story, or personal experience to share(pm me if you'd like to keep it private) I am still quite young so I don't want to jump head first into it, but I do think I should start dabbling.

ouija boards aren't the avenue I'm looking at. I'm talking more about helping people tackle drug addiction, mental illness and other side effects of possessions. I am relatively 'strong' so don't worry about any negativity attaching itself to me, I have thought about it for a while now and want to look into it.

yes I know, being a police officer is a great way to banish negative energy, but I don't want the power, or deal with the law the way they do.

Enlightenment stretches across divisive lines.. no ONE religion or spiritual path can claim exclusive rights toward enlightenment.. so I am curious... what is enlightenment to you?

You may include your opinion of the process in getting there, which is always interesting, but my main focus is:
What do you think enlightenment is?

What distinguishes an enlightened person from a non-enlightened person?

Is it an end in and of itself, or a process/journey?

What is the purpose of enlightenment.. ?

Depends on the person, yes.

More religious though? Maybe the vocal ones , but how many good religious people are quiet about their faith?

I kind of get a kick out of those who like to mention the hate spewed Evangelists, mention the crusades all the time. They do like to forget about the Lennins , Hitlers and Pol Pots though. Put a number, percentage on this? I do not think one can do this.

Comes down to there are good people , some believe and some do not , depends on the person.

A few posters got me thinking about this on the enlightenment thread and I didn't want to steer it off topic so I made this one.

For my friends who believe reincarnation is nonsense, I appologize and feel free to offer your reasons as to why it is nonsense but there's only one part of the concept that bothered me. Non-rememberance.

I do believe everything is energy. I believe the atom is not made up of 99.99% "nothing" because we have proven via vacuum creation that there's no such thing as empty space. I believe the atom is made of 99.99% potential energy since everything is subject to change.

I believe that through decay, energy eventually turns to it's most basic forms once again and returns to where there is no substance... Only to add to the potential which exists within absolutely every atom but needs only the potential for space... To be reborn again to the world of form when the potential is ripe for the form the aspect in question is taking next.

If there is reincarnation, do you think there is an instinctual mechanism built in that makes it so we have an infinite amount of views?

In Zen (notably in the martial arts), there's an anecdote teachers use when students evaluate their teachings against prior teachings before the lesson is done.

"How can you properly taste my cup of tea if you still have someone else's tea in your cup?"

Could there be a key as to why we can't remember past lives hidden in this bit of Zen wisdom?

So my question is, Do people without a religion, truely have no morals?

I'm curious as to what you guys would define as a religious fanatic?

What behavior crosses the line and changes someone from a religious enthusiast to a raving lunatic?

Winston Churchill says, "A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject".

What do you think?

The morning after pill....hmm less see. After what? Conception, perhaps?

Einstein developed the theory of black holes. To this day, black holes have not been proven. Infact, Nothing in science can be proven, only disproven. We can find out what is not, but it is impossible to find the definite truth of what is.

oh, btw.. Here is the information on a white hole, aka as the big bang...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_hole

However, according to my theory gravitational pulls will reorganise the matter that is sucked into a black hole. It wont be exacly like it was before, but it will be close.. Since it's a chaotic theory.. Theory of chaos at work.

Makes little sense simply because I can't explain things all too well. It's part of a disability to articulate words where others can understand.. But if other scientists agree with me, then there has to be something worth mentioning.

trippy, all studies that are formed like the one you describe are in fact logical fallacies.

You cannot survey a group of people with one condition (in this case severe sexual disfunction) and look for a common trait (viewing porn prior to turning 18) and claim causation.

That is the same logic the DHMO group uses when they prove drinking water causes crime (all criminals have drank water within the past 72 hours, right?)

Beyond that, it demonstrates a profound misunderstanding of the current model of cognition. When someone sees something that their mind has no ability to conceptualize it doesn't suddenly explode and cause harm.

It attempts to reconcile the situation by using the closest approximation to an archetype or even mixing archetypes if neccesary. The end result is mommy and daddy are wrestling or hugging. Or more appropriately, big sister is wrestling or hugging.

Beyond all that, if you throw a big enough drag net you are bound to catch something.

If you use the faulty logic required for the argument to be cogent, then all you have to do is claim enough possible things. If you claim: X can cause smoking, drinking, drugs, asexuality (which isn't a disorder anymore than homosexuality is by the way), "bad" relationships, sexual deviance, aggression, or smelly farts. Then it's likely that you can select any group of people and they will meet at least one of those criteria, so you can claim that anything they share in common is the cause. You could just as easily claim wearing jeans or pronouncing tomato as to-mah-toe cause the problems. It's ludicrous.

Just for the record, there are a number of studies that demonstrate violence is more harmful to children (and adults, for that matter) than sexually explicit displays. If you are willing to look at countries that are more progressive (i.e. second or first world nations other than the US) they follow that model.

please take your junk science elsewhere, thank you.

I was watching some news show, and one person was saying porn is bad because it is on the internet and children have easy access to it.

And I just thought so what?

Don't get me wrong, I am not trying to push porn on anybody's kid. But when I was a kid I saw the occasional porn mag.

Why do people act like kids should never see a naked person or see sex?

Why does it seem like it is more ok for kids to watch some horrorific slasher flick than for kids to watch porn?

Is seeing how they were made so much worse than seeing people get brutally murdered?

Intoart, you are mistaken by what qualifies as philosophy and what qualifies as science.
If I were to ask a question that is so ubsurd that the question really has no answer to it, then that is what philosophy is.. Such as, "What if our universe is a drop of water on the ground" That would be philosophy.

However, science is the discovery of what came to be and what is. Such as, the big bang theory... That is science.

As such, the big bang theory was never instantanious. You can tell by the formation of a planet. The planet itself being round. This is based on the gravitational pull, pulling everything around it and condensing it forcing a spherical design.

I would like to begin to explain that which cannot be explained.

First, lets look at something. Consider for a second that your brain is this enormous dictionary. Which, in essence, it is. Now lets look at what words we have inside of our brains and what in this physical world we can attribute to these words. Also, lets look at the senses associated with them.

Wing---Can be seen/Sight---Bird/Bat
Black---Can be seen/Sight---Skin/Color
Stinky---Can be smelled/Smell---Pig/Odor
Loud---Can be heard/Sound---Music/Dog Barking
Spicy---Can be tasted/Taste---Tabasco Sauce/Onion
Hard---Can be felt/Touch---Rocks/Metal

So then, in this dictionary of words that is our Mind, we can associate physical things in our world to words in our heads. What I find to be rather funny is the atheist who can sit here and say there is no god.

Apparently since God cannot be touched, tasted, smelled, seen, or heard{So say the atheist about hearing him} then he cannot possibly exist.

But lets say say a word that is oftentimes used in the world now and again, and see if it has any basis from our own senses.

Soul---Can be not seen, tasted, touched, smelled, heard---no references
Spirit---Can be not seen, tasted, touched, smelled, heard---no references
God---Can be not seen, tasted, touched, smelled---no references

The opposite term is the Big Crunch, however, it seems unlikely to occur since the universe is expanding at an *increasing* rate.

Can you see air? No can you see radio waves? no Can you see microwaves? No
Geesh I can't see it how do I know it exist. It is all based on theories.

No Geesh I can't see it how do I know it exist.

Elder Orson Pratt also described the anarchy that would sweep the nation:
"What then will be the condition of that people, when this great and terrible war shall come? It will be very different from the war between the North and the South. Do you wish me to describe it? I will do so. It will be a war of neighborhood against neighborhood, city against city, county against county, state against state, and they will go forth destroying and being destroyed, [and manufacturing will, [in a great measure,] cease, for a time, among the American nation.]
Why? Because in these terrible wars, they will not be privileged to manufacture; there will be too much bloodshed, [too much mobocracy,] too much going forth in bands and destroying and pillaging the land to suffer people to pursue any local vocation with any degree of safety.
[What will become of millions of the farmers upon that land? They will leave their farms] and they will flee before the ravaging armies from place to place; and thus will they go forth burning and pillaging the whole country; and that great and powerful nation, will be wasted away, unless they repent." (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 20:151, given on March 9, 1879.)

One more thing to consider of this warring within our nation he predicts, could this take place from home grown terrorists and or citizens getting tired of the goverment finally running all aspects of their lives and finally revolt?

Could the citizens of this country actually end up warring with our own police and military agencies?

Leaving many of those people in the police and military agencies not wanting to go and detain and or shoot family/friends/etc.? A decision that could actually weaken the police agencies and military from controlling the possible rebellion?

What are your thoughts?

Is Christianity dying in America too?

What will take it's place?

I just wanted to see if anyone was able to take on this friendly challenge.

I will admit that I don't think it's a do-able challenge for those who believe in a supernatural deity, no matter your religion, and this is for obvious reasons.

One reason, is that everybodys "god(s)" is invisible. Even if there maybe human fashioned representations of their "god(s)" like icons and statues or even the commom tactic (used by most people of differing religions) of pointing to the trees or mountains or just nature in general and claiming that as the proof of their "god(s)", holds no weight b/c anyone and everyone can use this as "proof" and so it proves nothing still.

I think most people would be amazed at how similar we humans are in general.

This becomes very clear when speaking about matters of ones religous faith. Even when there are differing beliefs among religions. The way we as humans have to approach religion in order to embrace it, is typically the same.

Intrinsic to the belief in religion is the compulsion with in its system to use your mind (by way of faith or belief w/o proof) to accept it's beliefs and ideals while at the same time never using your mind (by way of skepticism and analysis) to look at it objectively, honestly and comparetively.

What could be more man-made than this psychological trap? Theres literally no way to win. You either except the beliefs of a particular religion in order to be treated like part of the "fold" or group, or you reject the beliefs of a religion which immediately makes you an outsider who is lost (possibly evil) and an object for a religion to pity and feel sorry for (though most won't openly admit this).

To top it all off the only redeeming quality one has who rejects a religion that teaches the "you must believe or perish" doctrine is the abilty one has to change his/her mind and bow down and humble themselves and admit they were foolish and in need of repentence. Wow!! Again I say, what could be more man-made than that?

The only sure way to overcome this psychological trap is to muster the courage to push aside the fear that any particular religion may attach to thinking outside of its set boundaries. Once someone is able to do this an untapped sense of freedom seems to burst forth. As a matter of fact, anytime someone switches religions they have to go through this process. Sadly, in this case they put behind them the fears, punishments, and rewards of one religion to pick up more-or-less of the same from a new religion.

This is very interesting atuff. Observation is a powerful tool and you can't fix your life w/o it. Yes you may qoute me on that lol. :)

I could go on but I won't. Just keep in mind the brief problems I mentioned above if anyone chooses to reply to this post. I would like to see your thoughts and feedback from this. I am not interested in encouraging anyone to leave their religion. I do encourage everyone I meet and who may read this to think for themselves and draw their own conclusions about any topic or issue, w/ religion just being one of many.
Thanks again.

when all of his other options have run out, and he knows the end is near, will instinctively pray to God for help and/or comfort.

The believer, however, at his time of defeat, does not to feel the need employ logic which debunks the existence of an afterlife in order to comfort himself.

I practice no religion nor do I associate with one by name.

Discuss.

By the way Nice to see you back Trippy glad to see you are feeling much better.

However if you want the cure for cancer that is easy. Stop eating crap and start eating real food that your body needs to replenish the cells of your body.

Give your body the correct fuel and it is self repairing and self rebuilding of damaged cells. That is to say as long as the conditions that surround it, are in it, and even the things that come out of it are setup to promote cell growth instead of cell destruction then you will be granted a new body about every 7 years.

It may have been common some time ago but in todays world the information contained is not so common.

Nope I didn't mislead them at all. They were being paid to do a job. That job was basically created for them and did not pay much. But I did not mislead them I simply gave them the list of duties which taught them the lessons they needed to know and my TRAINING for them to do it was the information I shared.

Nope and yes. Am I certified? No Did I have access to the same materials as a Certified one YES. Do I need some piece of paper that says I am capable of helping someone and a person to tell me how to help someone? NOT A CHANCE!

Just you stating it like that tells me you have not even tried to figure out WHY.

There is more money to be made treating the symptoms that offering the solution. Same with poverty. If you didn't have poor people to do all the work and pass it off to the rich then that means the rich would have to do the work themselves. so their is more money to be had by keeping people working pay check to pay check.

Simple rules for understanding those types of things. Follow the money up and each step study the things the people use the money for to find their motive for doing it to begin with.

Since this is the current area my mind is mainly focused on "Power Grid Structure" i am going to completely disagree with that. The simple cost to run the lines and maintain the grid to distribute the power would far out weigh any benefit it would provide. That kind of system would be too complex and far to unstable. if something happens it would effect too much surface area.

I do however see a similar setup working. But in smaller scales since there will always be bugs to be worked out. I personally are keen on the Windmill abilities right now since they take kinetic energy and my mind see that the earth has too much kinetic energy contained within it. So my thoughts are a bunch of mid sized wind mills in normal areas and large turbines in windy zones will calm the earth. That is my thinking at least and there is no way to see if it will calm the storms and quakes till they are built, inplace, and producing energy.

So far though the data shows amazing chance for it to be true since the areas will kinetic energy devices have less activity than zones that have few or no kinetic energy utilizing devices.

You have shared it in a different thread. I don't remember a single person that directly targeted your message you were sharing. Only thing I have seen is well.... Your delivery method as being in question. But I am not one to talk about it I myself have been known to be quite harsh at times. mostly due to just like you having a built in BS detector.

I know dang well That the bible is similar to other teachings. I also know many say it is a rip off. But even IF there are similar things contained there is still a large amount of wisdom contained within it. Thus why it is my book of choice. my brain is simply the filter for the good the bad and sometimes the ugly contained within it.

How do you share your faith?

In a few threads that have been deleted there were good examples of how people share their faith with others. That information is lost now so this place is for people to explain HOW they choose to share their religion and faith with others.

I will re post the example I used in one of the other threads and then explain WHY I do it that way.
If I had the cure for cancer, wouldn't you expect me to share it?

If I had the answer for poverty, wouldn't you expect me to share it?

So if I have the answer to eternal salvation, why can't I share that? Let's at least talk about it!

I just wanted to point out that those are not the same things. Thus where the problems arise in offering people information.

The reason is the people you are trying to share the information with UNDERSTAND Cancer. So if a cure was offered they would know it is helpful.

They also understand poverty. So offering a cure for it would not be strange to them.

The reason is their mind understands that cancer can kill and the cure can heal and prevent the death.

Same goes for poverty they know being poor has problems and adding to that person the funds needed to thrive would cure the poverty.

The process is the same for both of those. The common factor is comprehension. They can comprehend and understand those problems are there because the evidence is there. But when eternal salvation is concerned it is not chunked in the same level of understanding because the person first would need to be able to understand the problem before they could accept the solution.

Someone screaming fire and brimstone, etc. and telling them to be saved they must do this or do that would be out of step and alignment. That is likely the reason so many like that have so many troubles.

You can not warn someone about something and offer them a solution to something that they have no knowledge or understanding about.

Example...

In my journey I have helped many people. I never did it by walking up to them and saying hey you there if you don't repent and believe then you are gonna die and go to hell. That would be counter productive. It is liken to holding a cube in your hand and telling someone it is a sphere. They look at you confused and assuming that you are the one with the problem because as far as they are concerned they see a Sphere.

I will use a specific example I helped. A man and woman that had major problems fighting all the time and both had drug issues, anger issues, and just a over all lack of knowing what was right or wrong in life.

So instead of walking up telling them "hey you if you don't change your ways you are going to hell" I became their friend. I spent time with them helping them to find the root of their fighting. I helped them find creative ways to vent without needing to resort to physical violence. All the time while sharing a part of their life with them to examine their life patterns in an attempt to weed out the bad behavior they would do and replace it with more constructive activities.

Due to the way human nature is built after a few months of basically me teaching them without them knowing I was teaching them. They came to a head confronted the issues they were suppressing and became better friends and stopped fighting as much.

I didn't change them with words. I changed them by teaching them to find the things to change themselves and then finding ways themselves to change them.

Was I able to make them religious? NO! They were not converted into Christians like I am. But they have a better life than they had before. They now carry with them the tools I offered them.

I didn't force my religion on them by quoting scriptures in the sense of the place holders. I just shared it with them by passing on the information contained and the wisdom those teachings offered in a creative way that allowed it to be accepted.

If I had walked up and said Mark this or luke that or God says this or the bible says that. They would have shut down their desire to hear what I had to say and would have ignored it.

So instead I just solved that problem by passing on the wisdom contained without quoting where in the bible it was located. I may have changed the words around from "Thou shalt not" to "You know, it might help you more if you didn't"

I didn't change the message I was teaching them. All I did was change the way it was packaged. That slight change allowed them to absorb it into their psyche without kicking and screaming or becoming offended.

In the end the messages and what they now understand will remain imprinted on their heart and effect they way they navigate through life impacting others.

We as humans learn and then pass on what we learn to others without even realizing it.

Was it wrong for me to offer them the wisdom of the Bible with out telling them where it was coming from?

I myself do not think so.

My thoughts are you can lead a horse to water but you can't make them drink. Just like you can quote passages from the bible but you can't make them pick up the bible and read them.

I simply offered them the drink and held the glass for them since it was clear to me they didn't have the desire to lift the glass to their lips.

That was a basic example of how in the past I have done it. What some people don’t see is that I planted a seed in them. By teaching them the word of God in that way they allowed it into their hearts.

Some would say I didn’t do anything but that is not true. God says all you have to do is start it and he/she will finish it. All you have to do is plant the seed and He/She will grow it.

I planted the seed by inputing vast amounts of the word into their hearts. So much so that as they walk through life and happen across several of the things I taught them they would recognise those things.

The way the human brain stores information would likely result in a flash back to other things it learned during that time. That flash back would likely cause a curiosity.

So by me planting the seed of that knowledge into their lives their lives became better. They would have been so far away from ever hearing the gospel at that time in their life That if I ever started quoting scriptures our friendship would have ended instantly.

However, Now that the knowledge I passed on is in them when they see things in the world that say them like seeing a scripture in its un edited form they would then be able to relate to it. After several scriptures seen that cause that same effect IMO would cause them to at a latter time become more receptive to knowing more about it.

That being said. My way may seem wrong or odd to many people. But I know that later on down the road the seeds that I planted in them will start to grow and the result will likely cause them to yearn to know more about the Christian faith that has the scriptures that line up with things they already know because I planted them there.

They just didn’t know they were scriptures at that time.

So how do others share their faith with people?