Love is a well understood physical and emotional state. There's no mystery about it. So is religious devotion, BTW. You may talk about matters of the heart but the heart is just an organ that pumps blood. It can be replaced and the person stays exactly the same (except for the impact of having major heart surgery of course). So everything really happens in our minds. We can choose which part of the mind to use. You use the part that accepts God and the Bible because of how it makes you feel. In that sense it is a crutch to help you through life. I'm not saying this as criticism. I just don't feel a need for it. On of the reasons I have continues this discussion in an effort to make a point. The anger and frustration that many of you feel about the things that I say is exactly what I feel on a daily basis as I am exposed to well meaning but self righteous bible thumpers. What I am trying to say is: Leave my immortal soul to hell alone. It doesn't belong to you. And that goes for gay people as well. Albert -----Original Message----- From: cpf0000-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [SMTP:cpf0000-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Tom Jedrzejewicz Sent: Friday, July 23, 2004 4:59 PM To: Open discssion among iSeries Users Subject: Re: [CPF0000] What is religion? On Fri, 23 Jul 2004 16:10:44 -0700, York, Albert <albert.york@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Alan, > > Thank you for sharing your viewpoint. I consider you one of the "good > Christians" :-) > > You are right that there are self righteous people on both sides of the > fence. If I come across as one then I am truly sorry. It arises from > frustration. I enjoy a good debate but I feel strongly that opinions should > be backed up with facts. If you insist on facts, why are you bothering to participate in this discussion about something which BY DEFINITION cannot be proven. As soon as something is proven, then faith is no longer necessary. It is indisputable that love exists. It is also absolutely impossible to prove, and really cannot be discussed factually. So, by Alberts standards, love should not be a topic of debate. By Albert's standards, since his love for his mother (or her for him) cannot be proven, it cannot exist. That is a fundamental contradiction -- we know something exists, but cannot explain it. I know God exists as surely as I know that love exists. Perhaps you may as well, or perhaps not. > I don't believe the bible can be counted on as > *only* having facts, because of what I know of its history. It was written > by many different people over thousands of years. It was also written a long > time ago in agrarian societies and extrapolation is required to apply it to > the society we live in now. That adds additional errors. Who says that the Bible has only facts? It is most certainly NOT a history textbook. Those who stop at the "literal word of God" are missing quite a story. My experience with the Bible is that one hears/gets from the Bible what one needs to live a better life. There are many priests, theologians and college professors who make careers arguing over interpretations and translations. I think that to some extent misses the point. Take a parable like the Prodigal Son. The layers and meanings are very dense, and what a listener/reader will take from it will depend on where the listener is at that point in their life. -- Tom Jedrzejewicz tomjedrz@xxxxxxxxx _______________________________________________ This is the Open discssion among iSeries Users (CPF0000) mailing list To post a message email: CPF0000@xxxxxxxxxxxx To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options, visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/cpf0000 or email: CPF0000-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives at http://archive.midrange.com/cpf0000.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2014 by MIDRANGE dot COM and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available here. If you have questions about this, please contact