Does Biblical matrimony need a women's liberation revision? chat & forums.

Posted In Forum:

Home

MyForums

Show ALL Forums

Author

Thread: Does Biblical matrimony need a women's liberation revision?

tim49250

Joined: 2/9/2005

Msg: 36 (view)

Does Biblical matrimony need a women's liberation revision? Posted: 11/19/2009 12:48:21 AM
"hey timmy up there now recite the other versions" I don't know of any "other versions" of the Bible. Are you saying you have your own favorite version of the Bible? Please, if it includes women having rights equal to men, lay it on me. That is what my question is all about. Here's my question again. "Does Biblical matrimony need a women's liberation revision?" A revision is just another way of saying new version, right? I had no idea this had already actually been done with the Bible.

tim49250

Joined: 2/9/2005

Msg: 30 (view)

Does Biblical matrimony need a women's liberation revision? Posted: 11/17/2009 10:23:38 AM
Scorpiomover you asked me to "Just revise your interpretation of the OT." Great, I will try but I will need you can help. Let's take my "misinterpretations" point by point.... Genesis 3:16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee. Well said, Greg7001!

tim49250

Joined: 2/9/2005

Msg: 11 (view)

Does Biblical matrimony need a women's liberation revision? Posted: 11/13/2009 11:15:54 PM
Scorpiomover, why are you referencing orthodox Jewish law? Is this what you think the women's liberation revision of Biblical matrimony should or does look like? Interesting analogy though because it was the Old Testament that was considered Jewish law at the time it was written, right? CheshireCatalyst wrote: "The solution for many is an open marriage with a marriage contract, saving biblical references to marriage for those who are conservative or evangelical christians. " This sounds rather reasonable but Jesus Christ is quoted, in the Bible, to say: "Thou shalt not forswear thyself" or "Swear not at all"(Matthew 5:33-34). Below is the entire context of this specific Biblical reference, if you care to read a bit. (King James Version Matthew 5 verses 33- 37) "31It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement:32But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery. 33Again, ye have heard that it hath been said by them of old time, Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths:34But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God's throne:"35Nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King.36Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black.37But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil." CheshireCatalyst. You were the only one who offered any suggestions and that says a lot about your conversation skills. Thanks for your input and for really hearing what my question is. I hope you give the question more consideration from your perspective and share it once again after considering this new information concerning what the the King James text above says about our ability to keep and make "oaths" or contracts of any kind. By the way, what do you mean specifically by "an open marriage" and how do you think this could work better than the monogamous types we see failing all around us these days? Should we just start jumping ship and trying anything because the current marriage boat is sinking? Or do you really see something in your definition of an "open marriage" that might be worth making the switch? In continuing the thread, for those who care, I'm referring to the Bible. Many fellow Christians consider it to be the ultimate authority concerning Christian ethics within the confines of marriage. I just want to know if other Christians would, for conversation and informative purposes only, revise it's text to give other Christians a clearer picture of what type of marital confines we, as Christians, should have in our modern marriage arrangements? Few Christians would argue that the wording of the Bible concerning matrimony should be read with the ability to reinterpret the text to include women having rights. All I'm asking is how would that ideal Biblical marriage fit into modern times? With some obvious need for change, what changes would or should a Christian couple make in order to fit into a long term workable arrangement. Considering women have a lot more rights nowadays, there are some going to be some rather obvious effects as men and women both transition from somewhat of a "master/slave" type of relationship to a full and equal partnership in Christian marriage.

tim49250

Joined: 2/9/2005

Msg: 40 (view)

Everything is moving at the Speed of Light Posted: 11/12/2009 1:15:07 PM
This sounds like a what happens on a monitor or tv when we watch movement there. The screen isn't really moving the light is reconstructing itself to display something that registers as movement to our eyes. Very interesting concept. What relevance do you see this having in our everyday world? Why would it matter if we discovered this today or 200 years from now, NothingLeftToBurn?

tim49250

Joined: 2/9/2005

Msg: 123 (view)

A Human Clone. Will It Have A Soul? Posted: 11/12/2009 12:12:40 PM
Forgive me if I am repeating something that has already been said but identical twins are identical. They are clones, even on the DNA code level, from what I understand, at least. If clones didn't have a soul then one twin would be soulless, right?

tim49250

Joined: 2/9/2005

Msg: 122 (view)

A Human Clone. Will It Have A Soul? Posted: 11/12/2009 12:12:03 PM
Forgive me if I am repeating something that has already been said but identical twins are identical. They are clones, even on the DNA code level, from what I understand, at least. If clones didn't have a soul then one twin would be soulless, right?

tim49250

Joined: 2/9/2005

Msg: 1 (view)

Does Biblical matrimony need a "women's liberation" revision? Posted: 11/12/2009 12:07:47 PM
From all indications on my end, the Bible was written by men who regard women as some sort of property or by men who sympathize with men who regard women as some sort of property. Hence, it only stands to reason that the Bible would advocate women obeying their husbands/owners. If a woman strays she is negating the ownership rights of her husband. The norm for the Bible is that women can only be with their one original husband, sexually, for their entire life. While, if a man can afford, he may have as many women/wives as he chooses without any negative moral ramifications, as long as he doesn't infringe on the rights of another man's female namely her father or husband. Strictly from a Biblical perspective, bigamy (two or more wives) is not a sin or a crime of any kind, as far as I know. There are only assumptions that can be made from some scriptures that bigamy might be considered anything less than just another holy type of matrimony. But there are, however, several passages, on the contrary, that clearly exonerate men who possessed several wives. This was acceptable for those who have the means to support multiple wives. I, personally don't care for the practice of ownership concerning humans of any kind, male or female, so I consider this part of our history "good riddance". Now we have moved to a time when men still want to keep women from straying but are forced to allow them to ultimately make their own decisions concerning weather they will stay married or not, whether they will cheat or not. Without the threat of being penniless, unemployable or being stoned to death some women are choosing to explore both their sexuality and work related efforts with the same vigor as men. Women are now able to choose the work they want to do and simply don't have to stay married if they decide it's not in their best interest. So where does this leave the man who was raised to make good money so that he can have a wife someday who will turn a blind eye to whatever he does outside the marriage bed as long as he's a good provider? If she doesn't choose to put up with his infidelity anymore and will leave he is left single. He finds that single life allows him to have more than one women sexually but these sexual experiences leave him rather empty emotionally. Now the ground is level both men and women want what they want from a long term relationship but their wants are sometimes quite different. While both men and women desire emotional connection and exclusivity from their partner, generally the male partner wants sexual variety more frequently and finds it more difficult to remain exclusive. The female counterparts, on the other hand, tend to want romance more frequently from their partner to go along with that exclusivity. Males will romance new partners but not so much their current partner. Women, in particular, will allow a new male partner to play the field but only for a relatively short period of time before she clips his wings in a long term relationship. Yet, for males, this desire to find and have new sexual partners remains important to him for a lifetime. So, this is the problem, as I see it, at least, how can one find a solution? Is it possible to find a solution that might satisfy the sexual relationship desires of both men and women for years to come? Keep in mind that we do live now live in a modern society where both women and men can come and or go depending on what they feel is best from their uniquely different perspectives and situations? Does Biblical matrimony need a "women's liberation" revision?

tim49250

Joined: 2/9/2005

Msg: 7 (view)

What is wrong with extended nursing? Posted: 11/7/2009 10:39:59 AM
"The "weirdnesses" that a child would develop from serving as an emotional surrogate for its mom are too many and too varied to go into here!" Some would propose that the "weirdnesses" that a child would develop from NOT getting the emotional support needed from extended nursing might be much more numerous and severe to the detriment of the child's development. Consider where we are as a culture who stops breast feeding at an age younger than the recommends. The World Health Organization recommendation is that mothers continue this bonding and feeding practice til age 2 or beyond.

tim49250

Joined: 2/9/2005

Msg: 17 (view)

Has God always existed? Posted: 11/7/2009 10:22:58 AM
God is reality... not a being Interesting angle on this line of reasoning Light Storm, yet my question simply needs to be rephrased since you chose to use a different word for God. If "reality" is the beginning of all that exist then how could "reality" ever have come into existence?

tim49250

Joined: 2/9/2005

Msg: 1 (view)

Has God always existed? Posted: 11/6/2009 10:27:19 AM
If God is the beginning or Creator of all that exist then how could God ever have come into existence? Some say that our Creator has always been in existence. Sorry but simply stating that "God has no beginning or end" doesn't negate any further reasonable thinking on the matter. In other words saying that "God has always been" sounds like a frail assumption created to disguise an explanation that falls short of being completely reasonable. What do you think, has God always existed and if so how could this be possible? Here's my perspective. Perhaps it's not possible to know the answer to this question because certain paradoxes exist when discussing God, for obvious reasons, even if they may not seem obvious to some. My assertion is that if one is going to make claims concerning God then one might want to be prepared for this obvious follow up question and have a better reply than "God has always been".

tim49250

Joined: 2/9/2005

Msg: 3 (view)

What is wrong with extended nursing? Posted: 11/2/2009 9:09:59 PM
I pity the woman whose man has stopped...please.

tim49250

Joined: 2/9/2005

Msg: 19 (view)

Natural vs Man Made Posted: 11/2/2009 9:05:39 PM
I feel you are right, it does seem obvious what is man made and what is not. Still how can someone who is a product of nature use a something that is a product of nature and claim to create something that is not a product of nature?

tim4925

Joined: 2/9/2005

Msg: 1 (view)

Natural vs Man Made Posted: 10/6/2009 10:24:34 PM
What is the difference between something that is natural and something that is man made? This question really gets me. I was asked this question in Jr High School as a rhetorical question then told that if something is made by man then it's considered man made and not natural. According to the definition of natural, if something is man made it is no longer natural. If a man makes a home of mud, the mud is still natural but the house is not. However if a dirt dobber builds a nest both the mud and it's home are considered all natural. What gives with this logic, why is something man builds, no matter how simple or complex considered unnatural just because it's now labeled "man made"? And what if a woman builds a mud home? Is that home natural or man made?

tim4925

Joined: 2/9/2005

Msg: 1 (view)

What is wrong with extended nursing? Posted: 10/6/2009 10:10:24 PM
What is wrong with extended nursing? Over the years I've seen a lot of talk about extended nursing. Those in the know, as in health practitioners, who deal with this question from clients or patients, seem to all say that it is fine and actually healthy for both the Mom and the infant, toddler or child. Yet most women, even some of those who advocate the practice, have a hard time accepting the behavior they advocate. They often say they feel strange doing it or seeing another woman do it. What's up with that?

tim4925

Joined: 2/9/2005

Msg: 17 (view)

Can God be challenged conversationally? Posted: 3/31/2009 8:46:54 AM
what makes the show is the guests God brings on Nice comment, Bengalblue, makes me think. I like that train of thinking concerning what "makes the show". Oldsoul, yes the God concept I'm referring is the mainstream Christian view of God. This God concept is one of God being all knowing therefor God would know all the thoughts of anyone God decided to converse with. Unless He's turning a blind eye. Humm. Being all knowing kind of makes if difficult to be challenged by anyone's conversation doesn't it?

tim4925

Joined: 2/9/2005

Msg: 1 (view)

Can God be challenged conversationally? Posted: 3/30/2009 5:43:00 PM
Can God be challenged conversationally? Since God is all knowing, and capable of doing anything, how might God be able to have an intellectually stimulating conversation? If God converses with humans wouldn't that be like us trying to carry on an intellectual with a three year old? If God only converses with God, how stimulating can that be when all of Gods perspectives are capable of seeing all sides of every story, topic or situation?

tim4925

Joined: 2/9/2005

Msg: 68 (view)

Why is Heaven considered more desirable than Earth? Posted: 3/20/2009 6:06:28 AM
So you don't see heaven as a place of being perfectly content eternally? Or is doing battle after a good rest something that makes you feel perfected content eternally? <div class="quote">it will be an awsome battle after we rest in Heaven a bit. I asked a friend of mine who seems to really know about the context you are referring to and she says it is very open to interpretation. She says that no one really knows because the stories from the bible don't use specific information.

Tim4925

Joined: 2/9/2005

Msg: 156 (view)

Why are we on top of the food chain ? Posted: 2/3/2009 9:49:33 AM
I haven't read all the post on this topic but I'll take the chance that my perspective is unique to others, as usual, so here goes. Communication does give us a giant leap in the area of survival but if I were being chased by a Bear for the first time. I wouldn't make a phone call. I would however look for an opening in a rock wall that would be too small for the bear to fit in. Perhaps this is what other animals would do. But the next thought a human might have would be how can I solve this problem when it comes up again. I know that given time to use my problem solving skills I would most likely come up with a trap to lead the bear in to the next time I got his attention. Human beings ARE the best PROBLEM SOLVERS, TOOL MAKERS and TRAPPERS of all the animal kingdom. Weather our communication equals or betters those of our potential rivals may be in contention, our ability to TRAP our way to the top of the food chain has never been in question. One further comment, Monkeys, wolfs and other creatures are good at ambushing larger prey by using teamwork to take them down this is not a trap in the basic form of the word. Although Spiders are perhaps the best trappers outside humans they simply don't make their "traps" large enough to trap larger creatures.

Tim4925

Joined: 2/9/2005

Msg: 1 (view)

How Can Even God Know The Future If It Hasn't Happened Yet? Posted: 2/3/2009 8:00:20 AM
How Can Even God Know The Future If It Hasn't Happened Yet? Here are my thoughts, what are yours? Some people view the future as something that hasn't been determined yet and still think that one of God's powers is knowing the future. My view is that we are simply blinded from the future much like when we intentionally read a book from the beginning to the end. The way I see it, God has already "written this book" we are living it out as the reader experiencing the book for the first time. Perhaps by viewing God as the author of our "book" and us as the readers. We can, perhaps, understand how God can know our future and know it in it's entirety before we can conceive of it happening.

tim4925

Joined: 2/9/2005

Msg: 13 (view)

Meet and Greet at Derby Junction Posted: 1/30/2009 5:11:13 PM
I hope to be there tonight.

tim4925

Joined: 2/9/2005

Msg: 66 (view)

Why is Heaven considered more desirable than Earth? Posted: 12/29/2008 11:25:51 PM
Mortality is what people most fear I know the survival instinct is very strong in most folks but just imagine if we couldn't ever end our lives. Would it really be a good thing? Could it be that for some getting a fresh start would be better than all the knowledge, money, land, things or even friends in the world and beyond?

tim4925

Joined: 2/9/2005

Msg: 6 (view)

Erectile Dysfunction -- Impact on Love, Sex, Marriage Posted: 12/18/2008 9:19:16 PM
I suppose I'm partially E.D. It does seem to be a problem when I want it to work but it is asleep and isn't interested in waking up. The only time I seem to be able to be spontainous is some early mornings. This issue seems to be directly connected to a loss in testosterone production from my prostate. I was tested last year so I know for a fact that I'm just not producing normal amounts for men. I understand that this is quite normal for men over 40 and I'm 46. Well the best thing about this is that I don't have to listen the constant request I used to get from my midsection. It simply doesn't require nearly as much of my time as it used to. I get a lot more done these days. All in all, I like life with less of a libido. Women who don't understand don't have enough love for a man like me. I will always find a way to please the special woman in my life, no matter what. First of all, I'm very good with my hands and if she can make it past that part she's got to be a sexual dynamo. If she makes it past that part and still wants more, heck, I'll strap something on that spins, wiggles and vibrates in all the right places. I've always been a bit of techno wiz with a slightly perverted side. So if she will work with me I'll work with her and we'll have a ball learning new ways to please.

tim4925

Joined: 2/9/2005

Msg: 191 (view)

What is Wrong with Nudity? Posted: 12/18/2008 6:22:43 PM
With or without clothes some women might cause traffic disruptions. Clothes can be much more sexy than nudity. I personally prefer to stick as close to nature as possible. It seems to be that some of the oldest ways are still the best ways. Like when you get cold, put something on until you aren't cold anymore, and when you get hot, take something off until you aren't hot anymore. When others have a problem with the human body in it's natural state, who really has the problem?

tim4925

Joined: 2/9/2005

Msg: 61 (view)

Why is Heaven considered more desirable than Earth? Posted: 12/18/2008 5:56:55 PM
I really enjoy music and dance but I admit there's some music I can only handle in very short doses. I hope there is a good variety of music and dancers to choose from. One question, about there being "rest" in Heaven. If there is a heavenly resting place for us in the after life, does that mean that there might be some tired souls in Heaven? If the heavenly bodies do get tired I hope it's a good tired.

tim4925

Joined: 2/9/2005

Msg: 58 (view)

Why is Heaven considered more desirable than Earth? Posted: 10/18/2008 7:58:08 PM
Here's the question again, you tell me. Is it dumb? If you think so, perhaps you could elaborate just a bit. Original posted question: "Why is Heaven considered more desirable than Earth? Life without worries. Wow, imagine “the good life” everyday you get up to "good, good, good" everywhere you turn! All your neighbors are constantly being friendly, they are bending over backwards to be "good" to you. Everyone would always give you what you want but you would never want anything because you have no needs and you are only concerned with giving to others. You need nothing, they need nothing. You both want to give because you are good people but no one has any needs. So what do you do? I just don't get it? How can anyone do good without any obstacles? Could it be that worries are, as least in some way are good? Perhaps, if we look at them as opportunities to grow. Could it be these worries give us something to get out of bed for each new day? Perhaps if one has no worries, one has no life. This is not to say that a life full of worries is desirable, rather simply to illiterate that perhaps a life full of all goodness in not so desirable, after all. The life worth living is challenging and contains a good mixture of both challenges and triumphs. Wouldn't it be a good thing if we recognized that both the challenges in life that cause us to worry and the times when we have no worries are necessary for a life a life worth living? If you could have total control over your life, would you keep all the potential problems, challenges or worries to come out of your life? Most would say no. So, why is Heaven considered more desirable than Earth?

tim4925

Joined: 2/9/2005

Msg: 185 (view)

What is Wrong with Nudity? Posted: 9/11/2008 10:56:54 PM
It's all to stop rape. Scorpiomover, in Europe public nudity is not as big a deal. From everything I've heard the rape incidents over there are considerably less than here where public nudity is far less common and much less socially acceptable. Canada had a big thing not too long ago about women not being treated equally. Like here in the states, men don't have to cloth their chest. So they complained "why should women". The women's uproar caused toplessness to be legal for them as well. I have not heard about the men in Canada loosing self control any more than normal since the "unveiling". Sexy clothing or not a man who resorts to rape has serious problems. It will take a lot more than requiring all the people he comes in visual contact with to keep their clothes in order to, hopefully, "fix" his problems. If a woman, for whatever reason, decided to remove some of here clothing and got raped, would you think the courts should hold her partially responsible for being raped? What if the rate of rapes goes up next summer with current clothing laws...Would you think we should make the covering up laws stronger? No tank tops, no low cut jeans or perhaps no skin showing at all? Wouldn't it just make more sense to severely discourage those who might rape by making them the only law breakers? Ask an 18-year-old blonde, with big tits. She'll tell you. When she is around gay men, and straight women, there is no problem at all. When she's around horny young men, who find it really hard to be around her when she's fully clothed without grabbing her a**, and far worse if she's naked, she has a big problem going around naked. Her not being allowed to go around naked is just a way of stopping her getting raped 60 times a day, and it's not fair to demand only one group of people are required to wear clothes. So we all have to. If we actually were to ask a woman who's been completely naked around men in a social environment, (like a nude park or beach and not a wet-t contest), we might be surprised what we might hear about how men just stand back in awe and try not to stare. I was one of those guys once and that's exactly what I did, at first. I got over it in just a few minutes. First, I did have to get past the sensation of beauty I had the privilege of being in the presents of. This same thing has happens in the presents of clothed or partially (legally) clothed women several times in the past. I'm always happy to just get a glimpse and from what I see of the other men around me, at the time, they behaved the same.

tim4925

Joined: 2/9/2005

Msg: 101 (view)

Just what is a hypocrite anyways? Posted: 9/8/2008 11:42:57 AM
Just what is a hypocrite anyways? I'm not sure but I think it has more to do with religion and less to do with childlike behavior.

tim4925

Joined: 2/9/2005

Msg: 104 (view)

What is truth? Posted: 9/8/2008 11:36:40 AM
Gottalight, I agree with what you said about truth being like a two edged sword. Sometimes words of wisdom can feel like truth as they slice through lies and deception. However both swords and fires have been used to destroy both truth and lies throughout history. "I see it as all-knowing, for anything "known" must be true. I see it as being the alpha, because even before nothing existed, it was truth that nothing existed. I see it as being the omega, because even after everything is destroyed, it will be true that all has been destroyed." Presuming that “truth” is possible in the times when "nothing existed" and/or "all has been destroyed", how can any truth be know when there is nothing to know it? Furthermore, If nothing exist except the “truth that nothing exist” then something actually exist: TRUTH. "Neither art, nor truth are subjective, but I would have easily agreed that one's perception of both is subjective." Truth perhaps but Art is subjective by it's very nature because beauty is truly found only in the eyes of the beholder. For example, have you ever been attracted to a chicken? If you were a rooster you might consider them hot but how would we know this. Like you said, "anything "known" must be true" and we just don't know what foul see as beautiful. Still there are tons more examples of differing views of what is considered Art between humans not just humans and animals. Gottalight, I completely agree with this statement of yours. "anything "known" must be true" I agree because I feel that anything God creates, directly or indirectly, is both truth and art. But like some art, some truth can be difficult to look at and understand. As long as there is someone who knows something there will be both truth and art. What we consider to be art in this world is just as reveling about us as is what we consider to be truth. "What is truth" is a great question? If I can be wise enough to explain my own truths or even just what I consider art then I may have wisdom. Wisdom is often considered truth but not always right. Perhaps wisdom is art as well. I do believe that the wisdom that comes from sharing in open discussions like this. The more we talk the more we will be able to get ourselves closer to the elusive "ultimate truth".

tim4925

Joined: 2/9/2005

Msg: 101 (view)

What is truth? Posted: 8/30/2008 12:24:12 AM
TRUTH IS ART Think about it...truth is subjective...art is also subjective. Art and truth is not to be confused with beauty. Beauty is also subjective but beauty is not truth because sometimes truth isn't pretty. Art isn't always beautiful. Like truth, sometime art can be very unappealing but there still exist a somewhat universal understanding that it is art. Sometimes a lie can be so convincing that you would swear it's the truth. I've seen some accidental paint spills I really thought were art too.

tim4925

Joined: 2/9/2005

Msg: 50 (view)

Why is Heaven considered more desirable than Earth? Posted: 8/29/2008 11:39:34 PM
Like I said..........once you've experienced Hi Def and Blue Ray.....would you WANT to spent the rest of your life looking at black/white? Having experienced HD and Blue Ray, kaagwaantaan, I enjoyed the clarity. Still the cost of these newly marketed devices is too great for my budget. I guess you could say that budgeting is my way of balancing my finances. Speaking of balance, this act in my life seems to be what gives me both joy and distress. My biggest concern with the concept of Heaven is that it seems to be void or, at least, lacking when it comes to requiring us to balance our lives or afterlives, if you will. How can we truly appreciate joy in heaven as much as those who experiences both distress and joy on Earth? For me, healthy never feels better than after overcoming illness, like the flu. By the way, I do consider color TV to be worth the cost and I'm hoping HD and Blue Ray come down considerably so I can fit them into my budget as well. 1. No skin on fruit because there is no need to protect them from our diseased world. I like the flavor of some fruit with it's skin. The skin of grapes gives just the right amount of bitterness to go with the sweet flavor inside. :( 2. Grapes the size of your head and with flavour that just can't be described by our current vocabulary. If we desire food does that mean we can experience hunger? When I get food after being truly hungry for a while the food never taste so good. How does hunger fit into this perfect heaven you described? 3. Racing around in Chariots behind horses on streets paved in solid Gold. Why would anyone be "racing around" in Heaven? Do they have to be someplace on time? 4. The colors that don't even exist here. From what I can tell about computers with 16 millions colors, we are already viewing more colors than we can identify. Why would heaven be different, from a color perspective, than the monitor I'm looking at right now? 5. The scent from flowers and plants that are all indescribable with our current vocabulary. That sounds like the Amazon jungle. Aromas, colors and plants are often left far behind when it comes to description vs the actual sensual experience. Earth is still, from what I can tell, potentially better than any definition of Heaven.

tim4925

Joined: 2/9/2005

Msg: 126 (view)

What is Wrong with Nudity? Posted: 8/1/2008 11:52:22 AM
Let’s look at the topic of nudity from two sides. First lets try this more common approach: There are some people who really do need to cover up. Lets face it, given the choice we only really want to see attractive bodies naked. As a matter of fact, some people are so naturally ugly they really should just stay home till they can afford to get a make over and some designer cloths. Here’s another approach to the topic of nudity: Do we really need our laws throwing people in jail for simply being in their natural human state? Could our lives be somehow better if we simply adjusted our views pertaining to this natural state of being human? Why do we attach a word like “naked” to our natural state? Why encouraged and forced to continue to perpetuate the idea that we, for some unclear sexual reason, need be uncomfortable with certain parts of our body around others? Should we really continue to perpetuate the notion that we all have something attached to us that is SO truly distasteful to others that we should considered someone who simply chooses not to cover up these parts of their body to be obscene? Is this what we really want, to sentence those who don’t “know better” to jail? Personally, I just don’t see the crime or harm in being completely exposed and unashamed as a human being in the presents of other human beings? I can, however, see some serious and deep seeded physiological problems created within cultures using laws and social criticism to perpetuates a “cover up or else mentality”. If there are those who are uncomfortable being around others in their natural state perhaps the real “work” should be done with those who are unable to adjust to the sight of other human beings in their nature state? Why do some make such a big deal out of humans not “covering up“? I’ll bet it even bothers some folks that we don’t cover up all animals with sexual organs exposed to the public eye. I know it was said that one of the former British Queens was so against nudity that she even covered up her coffee table’s legs. What is really behind this nervousness about the human body exposed? Is it a good thing that some feel certain parts of our bodies are obscene? If ALL clothing were optional, like hats and belts, would we all be consumed with sexual thoughts all the time? Or would we, on the other hand, quickly realize that the human body, in it’s entirety, is just another part of the whole of nature? I personally believe the ladder would be the natural progression of human adjustment to this change in social awareness. Perhaps, clothing certain body parts suggest there is something really special underneath. Certainly, some women’s clothing designers believe suggestive clothing is more alluring than simply not making a big deal out of having to cover up certain body parts. Perhaps being comfortable with our entire bodies, we might be less aroused or incited by the sight of it in others and more ok with ourselves in general.

tim4925

Joined: 2/9/2005

Msg: 28 (view)

Why is Heaven considered more desirable than Earth? Posted: 8/1/2008 11:37:59 AM
Then an a-hole shows up and puts a damper on things, the mood of the party changes and people start becoming aware of the negative energy and infected by it and thier mood changes.. maybe someone steps up, and throws the a- hole out because they are ruining the party And this negative energy that dampened the party is seen as a necessity to make the party more fulfilling ????? s that what you are saying? Great comment, I know what you mean Consigliere31, what you described is what it means to have a bad experience at a party. Without these bad experiences or the knowledge of their possibility we wouldn't know how to appreciate what a rare and wonderful thing it is to have a great party without an "a-hole" ruining the party. Perhaps if, in heaven, every party were as perfect as you describe, before the "a-hole" ruined it, we might eventually forget what makes a perfect party so good. After a while we might become bored with perfect parties because these parties would just become parties, having no negative party experiences to compare them with. We simply wouldn't be fully able to appreciate just how rare and wonderful these perfect party experiences truly are when all get along without conflict or the occasional "a-holes" who ruin parties. If we can stay away from the "a-hole" he or she simply becomes interesting conversation after the party. And that can sometimes be a good thing for post party conversation. Sometimes interesting and different is good even if it's not our cup of tea. Still that doesn't mean we should be eager to invite the "a-hole" back.

tim4925

Joined: 2/9/2005

Msg: 14 (view)

Why is Heaven considered more desirable than Earth? Posted: 4/11/2008 7:48:25 AM
Just as sin represents different things to different people so does perfection. How could it be possible to have a place with "our loved ones", that is perfection, without sin to everyone there? Even if this kind of Heaven were what someone desires then it seems, to me, it would be a very lonely and narrow minded place to spend an eternity. If you actually want to get to this kind of Heaven, would you be able to go there if you even entertained the thoughts I just shared?

tim4925

Joined: 2/9/2005

Msg: 1 (view)

Why is Heaven considered more desirable than Earth?
Posted: 4/10/2008 1:27:12 PM

Why is Heaven considered more desirable than Earth? Life without worries. Wow, imagine “the good life” everyday you get up to "good, good, good" everywhere you turn! All your neighbors are constantly being friendly, they are bending over backwards to be "good" to you. Everyone would always give you what you want but you would never want anything because you have no needs and you are only concerned with giving to others. You need nothing, they need nothing. You both want to give because you are good people but no one has any needs. So what do you do? I just don't get it? How can anyone do good without any obstacles?

Could it be that worries are, as least in some way are good? Perhaps, if we look at them as opportunities to grow. Could it be these worries give us something to get out of bed for each new day?

Perhaps if one has no worries, one has no life. This is not to say that a life full of worries is desirable, rather simply to illiterate that perhaps a life full of all goodness in not so desirable, after all. The life worth living is challenging and contains a good mixture of both challenges and triumphs. Wouldn't it be a good thing if we recognized that both the challenges in life that cause us to worry and the times when we have no worries are necessary for a life a life worth living? If you could have total control over your life, would you keep all the potential problems, challenges or worries to come out of your life? Most would say no. So, why is Heaven considered more desirable than Earth?

Click any of the Links below to access these Forum Categories:

Closed, but
accessible Forums »»

Politics
Current Events
Religion

Related Links:

Changes to Forums
Links Removed

For the Time being, there is ZERO Tolerance for Trolls posting Flamebait,
Insults, or peddling Agendas. Automatic 28 Day minimum Vacation Package.

Report offensive Posts as usual in the Forum Rule Violations Report Thread

tim4925

Joined: 2/9/2005

Msg: 21 (view)

Would we still believe in God? Posted: 4/9/2008 11:26:46 PM
Stonestongue, I said in the message before your response: "We ( the electrons) would actually be caught up in the movie and it's plan for our lives. We wouldn’t know the future but we could remember the past, as we do in our lives today. So, suddenly, if we all realized just what we actually are, in the scheme of things, how would we be different? Would we still hold to our strong beliefs like family and God?" We watch movies that have already been made. To us, they are new and watching them, especially getting caught up in them IS, on some level, adventurous. So why would we be bored when we don't know what is coming next? Remember this movie feels like real life and is a first run for us. Did I say we can't remember when we became self aware? I think that was your thought and not mine. What I have been asking, is if we became aware that our whole world was already planned out, would we still believe in God? You wrote: "If it involves a creation of the universe which was just proven false, some could get shattered and be unable to continue the program as before... You never can tell these things..." Why would we (as self aware electrons) assume that the creation of the universe has been proven wrong? We have only realized that we (as electrons) are giving life to a small part of a big movie. We didn't discover that anything is false. We just realized that we are trapped in a place that we can't get out of because the creator of the hard drive knows how to keep us in the moment of the now, in this movie. We are stuck here, doing what we have to do till we are no longer needed to complete the movie. So do we still believe in God? As for me, I think I would just change my view of who I really am. Perhaps I might even learn to take a different look at what I'm seeing and experiencing. I doubt I could do anything differently in the movie. but I might be able to feel differently about what I'm doing in each moment that I really think about what part I'm really playing in the grand scheme of things.

tim4925

Joined: 2/9/2005

Msg: 77 (view)

What is The purpose of our existance? Posted: 4/5/2008 10:39:25 PM
SimmahDahnNah , while you seem to feel that an uncomplicated life offers much boredom. Some find it easier to stop, in any given moment, and smell those roses. With fewer complications one might have more availability, without agenda. This frees one's mind and body to both unconditionally love others as well as enjoy the mutual learning experience that often accompanies "teaching others". The uncomplicated can enjoy these things you've expressed, perhaps even more readily, because they have more freedom to exist outside their own complications. Much can be absorbed and readily shared, in the moment, with a less complicated life. Why create complications when there is so much existence to experience?

tim4925

Joined: 2/9/2005

Msg: 19 (view)

Would we still believe in God? Posted: 4/5/2008 9:55:51 PM
Stonestongue, I see your point about the things I suggest in this thread all being moot if we are not able to express ourselves. I offer this back to you and others here for your amusement. Suppose we are actors in a movie. We are living out the first and only run of a movie but the only difference is that we are not actors at all, we are simply the electrons on a "hard drive". A hard drive which holds the movie. In this electronic world, we would do as electrons are suppose to do, move accurately from one appointed place to the other appointed place in order to give life to the movie we are flowing through. Some of us would be sent to be actors (the more interesting roles) while some of us would be props and background. This movie has already been made. But we, the electrons, give the "now playing" part of the movie it's moment by moment life. Take us away and there is only a flat motionless, timeless, "moot" existence within the data banks of the hard drive. Without our life giving energy there is no show. As electrons, we are experiencing this movie for the first time as we "bring each moment to life". Getting caught up in this movie we lose whatever self awareness we might have had before, as electrons, and become completely engrossed in the actors we are giving energy to. We are simply the electrons that run the movie. We energize the artificially intelligent brains we happen to be giving life to. We are also completely unaware of the fact that what we perceive to be "our" brains functioning, in reality, is only us being guided by the natural forces of the physics of the hard drive. We ( the electrons) would actually be caught up in the movie and it's plan for our lives. We wouldn’t know the future but we could remember past as we do in our lives today. So, suddenly, if we all realized just what we actually are, in the scheme of things, how would we be different? Would we still hold to our strong beliefs like family and God? Nice comment, wunderkindt , please don't stop, it seems you might be rather good at this sort of thing. If you choose to respond please take your time. I'm in no hurry.

tim4925

Joined: 2/9/2005

Msg: 16 (view)

Would we still believe in God? Posted: 4/4/2008 12:29:07 AM
I guess I should add that this hypothetical "hard drive" is not networked to other outside sources and DOES have a specific time line . So, Stonestongue, there is a designated future and past for the entire program. The now is also on a specific time line. Do we look at God any differently and/or do we try to escape our "software issues".

tim4925

Joined: 2/9/2005

Msg: 74 (view)

What is The purpose of our existance? Posted: 4/3/2008 11:58:41 PM
What is the purpose of existence? To exist Not much different than the purpose of life. To live Why complicate something so simple?

tim4925

Joined: 2/9/2005

Msg: 14 (view)

God, Creation, Afterlife, Infinity and beyond. Posted: 4/3/2008 10:55:33 PM
So what does the term "God" mean to you, Silentassumptions. Some say Creator, all powerful, all present and all knowing. That's just to name a few, can't forget about the ever ambiguous "perfect". When you describe universal consciousness/everything/God in phrases like "funny symbol on top of your light shade", this leaves a lot to the imagination as far as what you consider God to be. What it seems you've described, after reading your thread, could be nothing more than the holodeck in Star Trec. Who created the holodeck and why did the creator bother? What is the big deal about everything having, at least, some "memory"? Aluminum bats have memory, so much so that they aren't allowed in the "majors", but does that make them capable of creating everything in the universe? It seems as though you would say everything is God or vise versa and that everything is all knowing, all powerful, all present. What about God as a creating force? Would you say that everything creates everything? Silentassumptions there are many "Silentassumptions" needed to get a cohesive recognition of your assertion that everything is God. Why not just ditch the word Creator because, from what I can make out of your thinking, things just created themselves out of themselves? Do you also assume that everything has always existed and nothing can be destroyed, only transformed? Does everything know everything? Does everything possess all powers. Did everything design everything? Did nothing come first or everything come first? Is everything the primary intelligence behind everything? Do you believe that water is just as intelligent as human intellect? Perhaps I should ask these questions to my glass of water before I drink it. Or maybe if I drink the water I will know the answers to all these questions you created from your over oversimplifications of what is really behind the artificial veil. Nope the water just satisfied my thirst. Maybe I just wasn't listening right, my ears are open, to more of your Silentassumptions. Please do continue I really do have faith in your reply. After all you did give me reason to pause with your diverse ponderings.

tim4925

Joined: 2/9/2005

Msg: 3 (view)

How is it that we go from a life in time into eternity? Posted: 3/31/2008 2:42:29 AM
Good question, Steven and good response, Nexthyme. Consider the concept that Eternity can be reshaped like a big ball of clay but not created or destroyed. However, unlike clay, Eternity cannot be completely separated from itself. We could be like little balls of clay which are being pulled out and pushed back into a big reshapable, and undestroyable, clay ball. Perhaps our existence is like these little ball of clay that are pulled out a little but then pushed back in after a while. Maybe we are temporaries entities existing as part of a permanent underlying world of endless time.

tim4925

Joined: 2/9/2005

Msg: 1 (view)

What does the phrase "I AM" mean to you? Posted: 3/31/2008 2:05:44 AM
What does the phrase "I AM" mean to you? "I AM" might have something to do with the old "I think, therefore I am" bullet proof philosophical assertion. Like an artist's canvas, the "canvas" without a complete "work of art" is generally not recognized as an actual creation. Dates on the artist's "canvas" point to the completed "work of art" but the truth is that the entire "work of art" includes the canvas. And the canvas began it's existence with a thought from a completely different person at a completely different time. Maybe the very first thought is represented by the words "I AM" and "I think, therefor I am" could help explain the fact that one must have potential or thought before this concept "I think therefore, I AM" can exist. What does "I AM" mean to you?

tim4925

Joined: 2/9/2005

Msg: 116 (view)

Prior To The Universe Posted: 3/31/2008 12:41:48 AM
Ravenstarr wrote: The "realization" of the "I AM" would have been a manifestation of a certain "probability"..so technically the state of "potentiality" would have no identity...as identity is a manifestation I agree, Ravenstarr, that whatever label one places on "potentiality" doesn't change the fact that the label is simply a manifestation of the original potentiality. Potentiality is given many labels depending on the artist, writer or designer, some may think of it as a very large computer hard drive while others may see it as a piece of paper or a blank canvas. I personally have no problem with the various labels. The purpose of potential is to manifest, so call it what you will, can't we deduct back to the original no named potentiality.

tim4925

Joined: 2/9/2005

Msg: 10 (view)

Would we still believe in God? Posted: 3/31/2008 12:04:26 AM
the discovery would likely only drive us to try and get outside of the program or at least push at the borders... I doubt it would change our spiritual aspect Something to consider, thanks Stonestongue. The only way I can imagine one might even try to "get outside of the program" would be by perhaps adjusting something in the only thing one in such a "program" might be able to make any significant change in. Than change, as far as I can tell, could only be possible in one's personal perception in each moment of one's "programed" existence. Still that raises another key question. How could a change in one's personal perspective in each and every moment make any real difference in one's life considering the future and past are unchangeable? Perhaps it might be possible to adjust the impact of what goes on in our lives with a more aware perspective of what might actually be happening. Thanks for the interesting post.

tim4925

Joined: 2/9/2005

Msg: 57 (view)

Does God Think? Posted: 3/28/2008 3:28:47 AM
Great comments. Thanks for the mental and spiritual stimulation. Bear wrote: "I certainly believe God thinks. As to the question of omniscience, in my opinion, having chosen to give us free-will, God has deliberately chosen not to know all of the future. It's simple logic. If God knows all of the future, He knows how we will choose to act, and thus we really do not have free-will. But He has chosen to give us free-will. Therefore, He does not know all of the future. I don't believe this is a deficiency in God, but a choice." Here's my response to you, if you actually get a chance to read it, Bear. I perceive that God knows the future and chooses to block this knowledge from us. Not knowing our future, we can only logically reconcile that we do, in fact, from our perspective, at least, have "free will". From this perspective, God is remains "all knowing" and we, for all intents and purposes, have "free will". Fibonacci "IMO, it's kinda contradictory to say that God "thinks". For God to think there must be another God who is higher than the former." I don't see what having another God higher than "the former" or "the first thinking God" has to do with God's or anyone's ability to think. "What we term "thought" is God in motion, that Unparticled Matter that pervades and impels all Things." Are you saying that unparticled matter, in motion, is thought and that is perhaps where we might find God? That's what I got out of "Mesmeric Revelation" by Edgar Allan Poe. Thanks for sparking my curiosity with your post. This is an interesting line of thinking that warrants further thought and discussion. Please let me know if you find some more discussion in this area, Fibonacci.

tim4925

Joined: 2/9/2005

Msg: 22 (view)

Philosophy Needed? Posted: 3/28/2008 3:02:36 AM
Great comments Emotionalheat. I think it's always been that the science of the day is also the philosophy of the day as well. Just look at the questions posed by quantum physics. On the cutting edge of todays science one might find it hard to tell the difference between the philosopher and the scientist. The two can be quite complimentary, from my perspective. Sometimes asking the most creative questions can lead scientist to the clearest answers.

tim4925

Joined: 2/9/2005

Msg: 1 (view)

Would we still believe in God? Posted: 3/28/2008 2:43:12 AM
Why do so many people feel that nature or the universe, as we know it, can't be changeable or "reformattable"? Ponder this, if you will, could we and everything around us be could be bits of information on a "hard drive"? Yes, I know, we think of this as our environment yet isn't it conceivable and even believable that EVERYTHING inside, outside and all around us could be software on a very complex hard drive? Are we software? Could we be artificial intelligence made by a software Creator so advanced that we, (the artificial intelligence in this software) don't even know the difference between what is real and what isn't? How do we even know the difference between real life and what could be the holodeck in Star Trek? Today most all parts of our bodies are becoming reality for us to manufacture in one way or another. What could not be created in a software environment that we couldn't conceive of experiencing in real life? What if we woke up one morning and realized that we are software. We suddenly realized that all we know and experience is simply advanced code written on a hard drive? This next question is what seems most interesting about this hypothetical discovery. How could knowing this "secret" affect our daily life from this "moment of discovery" on. What would we do, say or even believe differently from that day forth? Would we still believe in God? Would God still be all powerful, all knowing and all present? Would we know more about our Creator?

tim4925

Joined: 2/9/2005

Msg: 99 (view)

Prior To The Universe Posted: 3/28/2008 1:47:04 AM
Perhaps if we could see back to the moment before this "big bang" we might bear witness to a newly formatted "hard drive". What we now consider the "nothingness" and "timelessness" that might have existed prior to the presumed "big bang" may have actually been the end result of conceivably billions of years of preparation or "formatting" a space or "hard drive", if you will, that could hold the "big bang" or "operating system" for our universe.

tim4925

Joined: 2/9/2005

Msg: 43 (view)

Does God Think? Posted: 2/25/2008 10:53:05 PM
A more satisfactory resolution to this problem has been tried by philosophers like Kretzmann and Stump, using modified concepts of eternity. Still, the question of whether God knows future contingent situations and also how this can be reconciled with human freedom is an outstanding question for theologians and philosophers. Great thoughts Greg, I enjoyed all of your post it was right on topic and well thought out.

tim4925

Joined: 2/9/2005

Msg: 39 (view)

Does God Think? Posted: 1/20/2008 6:42:21 PM
Great comments!!! My favorite response so far was "why don't you ask Him?" I tried that and got something like this in a kind of non verbal reply. Your existence represents my past thought. What I'm thinking now is about what will be the ACTUAL future beyond your existence.

Show ALL Forums