FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 10-30-2003, 07:32 PM   #51
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Barrayar
Posts: 11,866
Default

Quote:
beast (an image of the first beast: a representation, the realm of human will/consciousness aimed at God but in truth afraid of God, he's a bit of a control freak) comes from the earth (because the earth means the will of man; once Adam and Eve aquired knowledge they were cast out of Eden and on to the flat earth).
Man, I sure hope you and Amos aren't planning to have kids.
Vorkosigan is offline  
Old 10-30-2003, 07:38 PM   #52
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
Posts: 374
Default

Hi Vork.

Did you enjoy what I wrote?
Devilnaut is offline  
Old 10-31-2003, 06:36 AM   #53
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Bartlesville, Okla.
Posts: 856
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Devilnaut
The sea is our soul. Water is dynamic form (where ice would be static form and this would be the metaphorical realm of consciousness) and this means that it is perfect form because it can contain God (because it is really formless!). This is why Catholics call Mary the perfect vessel (perfect blue!), because she has no identity (no ideas "of her own") and this is why Jesus was born of her (also why it was called a virgin birth, virgin is without the presence of human will, only the will of God at work: no images/representations!) and this is also why the complex beast (a big and complicated ego) comes from the sea and why the simplified beast (an image of the first beast: a representation, the realm of human will/consciousness aimed at God but in truth afraid of God, he's a bit of a control freak) comes from the earth (because the earth means the will of man; once Adam and Eve aquired knowledge they were cast out of Eden and on to the flat earth).
I hate to do this but I'm going to say what Dr.X would here . What you have done is an ipse dixit in that its a statement without supporting evidence, ( kinda like I said so , you know?).

Actually, the sea in prophecy represents peoples, multitudes, nations and tongues, Rev 17:15. So when the "beast" comes up out of the sea it is representing a "power" which comes up out of a populated area where a lot of people are.

I agree with what you said about the writers not being prejudiced per se' about the soul. Its amazing to me how tangential our philosophies can get on these things when the Bible is "pretty" plain on what a soul is. It is the breath of life plus a body. Take either of them away and you don't have a soul. Gen 2 says this. The Bible doesn't contradict itself on this issue .
Jim Larmore is offline  
Old 10-31-2003, 10:09 AM   #54
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
Posts: 374
Default

"What you have done is an ipse dixit in that its a statement without supporting evidence"


Well you have me pegged wrongly I think Jim because I'm not trying to gather believers. I'm no saint and I'm afraid that providing evidence in my case would make me more like a pop song than a leader.
Devilnaut is offline  
Old 10-31-2003, 05:23 PM   #55
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 3,794
Default

Quote:
I hate to do this but I'm going to say what Dr.X would here . What you have done is an ipse dixit in that its a statement without supporting evidence, ( kinda like I said so , you know?).
Hmmmm . . . knew the neural chip would work wonders. . . .

However,

Devilnaut:

Quote:
Did you enjoy what I wrote?
You mean . . . "was it as good for you as it was for me?"

Seriously:

Quote:
. . . I'm not trying to gather believers. I'm no saint and I'm afraid that providing evidence in my case would make me more like a pop song than a leader.
then what is the point in debating a position if you cannot reveal your justification? If Amos, for example, stated that he "believed" his interpretation was relevant, one could at least understand that and respond with a "fine, but what you believe may not be relevant to what the writer believed or tried to convey," and leave it at that.

--J.D.
Doctor X is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:36 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.