================================================ Subject: Re: Odp: RE: question From: "Creed - 7M3 - Live" To: Date: Mon 7 May 2001 23:34:14 -0400 ================================================ I think that as long as the discussion relates in a more intellectual and less of a fear the wrath of God type of discussion. It is fine to express your views as what you find inspirational or applicable to the Christian faith. The only problem would be that being in a diverse discussion group with a lot of varying ideals. The result might not be what you want to discuss. The way that Steve expressed his views was enjoyable to read. Plus, I realize that the ability to express ones views could be most informative and debatable. I proffess that I am closest to the "stuff happens" type of religious philosophy. But I like to suppose about dream connectivity to time escape and the like. As a first protest against all superstitions and faiths based on sacrificing good to forgive evil. I have always disagreed with this aspect of religion and is a primary fault that I find with these types of customs and/or religious belief. I base this on the primative cultures that used to throw virtuous people into active volcanoes and the like to calm the volcano gods and the like. I asked this question to my "God" and he replied. "Why would I want you to destroy the good that I created." "I created it all, so why would I want you to destroy the good that I did. I dreamed the conversation with "God" So most likely it was a representation of my views put into a super-being. Customized to my order. I don't think I could truely support this feedback with a clean conscious. But my question to people that believe in destroying the good to appease a viewed perfect being. Why would he want to destroy the bad. Wouldn't he rather you unseat the parasites that bleed his other creations? Such as governments, organized crime, multinational companies and the like. I'd feel better to say to "God" here is the chump that became the most gluttunous and strangled the free will of your people. I'd feel bad about offering a cute little animal or a faultless man up to my image of a "God" But I'd feel less about offering a super-parasite up to the super-being. To show him that I cleaned up the world a bit. Sort of like taking out the trash and burning it. JC Lisa G King wrote: >On Mon, 7 May 2001 15:29:26 -0500 Jackson Crawford >writes: > >>Now let's get our asses off of this subject before it >>turns in >>to another "Stapp in Nightclub Brawl" thread, eh? >> Not that I'm cowering away from the topic, anyone who feels like >>arguing >>about it can email or im me personally. >> > >One question I have is why does this have to stop since I have seen no >arguing, insulting, or anything other than insightful conversation. I >have said nothing about the other topics you have brought up that does >have a controvery aspect to it. I simply hit delete. I ask for the same >consideration. No subject is too controversial that intelligent people >can not discuss it together without anger. How else do you learn about >others and their beliefs. You do not have to agree with them but give >them the respect that has been given you. > >Lisa King > >To unsubscribe or change your preferences for the Creed-Discuss list, visit: >http://www.winduplist.com/ls/discuss/form.asp > -- Ever since prehistoric times, wise men have tried to understand what, exactly, make people laugh. That's why they were called "wise men." All the other prehistoric people were out puncturing each other with spears, and the wise men were back in the cave saying: "How about: Would you please take my wife? No. How about: Here is my wife, please take her right now. No How about: Would you like to take something? My wife is available. No. How about ..." -- Dave Barry, "Why Humor is Funny" To unsubscribe or change your preferences for the Creed-Discuss list, visit: http://www.winduplist.com/ls/discuss/form.asp