Paradisedreams2

I was homeschooled for 5 years. I don't like to think about it. Who ever said homeschoolers aren't sheltered must be doing it differently that every other homeschooler I have known.

Hi Frostymama,

Thats unfortunate that you didn't like homeschooling, I heard homeschooling is kinda like "public school" at home (I think I would hate it too)

I keep my daughter very busy shes only three and not of age but I apply the principles. Were well off financially so that helps alot. She has swimming classes she loves, (second ofcourse to ballet and tap), gymnastics, gymboree music class. Library story time and arts and crafts, then to micky D's for slides when its too cold out. Theres so much to do. Keep it fun for her. She meets the girls in the neighborhood and I hope I continue to do with her all I have set out to do. I might have her go to school when she wants but I think after the "novelty" wears off and she thinks about the learning she could do at home (that she loves) verses whats crammed down her throat I would hope she'd continue... But hey... It won't kill you to go to school (well... I keep forgetting what day and age were in lol!)

Sad but true

Paradisedreams2

Schu,
I didn't see your post, pretty good one, I don't know... I'm testing them out and as I do they seem to be working themselves out in the little bit of time I take with them. Theres alot of verses and this looks like a good one to see what it points too. I don't think they are "spiritual" interpretations in the way of becoming one with the verse or anything like that.

I don't have Gods hotline or hear voices and niether am I His interpreter. I just look into what I feel "might be something"... I get an "itch" and I follow it.

I wouldn't have the time to look into everyone and I don't care to I have enough on my plate and am satisfied with what I'm getting out of it for myself.

Honestly I don't know about the verse you posted, but I am interested in the first one but I have to look.
I'm finding Him in the days of creation, Abel the longest one. The picture of Rebbeca, and a few others are looking good.If I can find The Law in the Tree of knowledge of good and evil and find more about that Law in a picture of a preist and a woman drinking bitter water, I might find the law in war as well I'll go check that chapter because its usually inside the chapter picture.

I found the picture of Christ as abel and a back and forth dialog on the cross to God and on our behalf. Thats one of the best ones, this runs right through Seth and into God blessing them.

I love looking at these they are beautiful. No matter how often you read it more keeps coming in.

I have fun

Buckster

Even after reading the above, I'm afraid I fail to see a specific rebuttal to read the following in a way other than literally, which was your original premise. You said, "The verses... are not what they seem to be. Taken literally is incorrect."

Here they are again: You will notice there are no references here to "womb" nor "belly". How shall we interpret the fate of unborn childred with the statement, "pregnant women ripped open"? And why would we try to make this somehow less reprehesible by describing a "belly" instead, as though it draws attention from the abominable acts described in the bible in those verses?

Subscribing to the notion that this is some allegory depicting the coming of Jesus more than a millenium later is to understate the circumstances, I believe. This is supposedly a sequence of events as unfolded in the time period of the OT, by the Hebrew god's will.

Were pregnant women ripped open or not? If they were, then the text stands as written and cannot be taken any other way than "literally". If they were not, then the OT is a lie.

Your choice.

[ February 21, 2002: Message edited by: Buckster ]</p>

schu

QUOTE]Originally posted by Paradisedreams2:
<strong>Schu,
&gt;I didn't see your post, pretty good one, I don't know... I'm testing them out and as I do they seem to be working themselves out in the little bit of time I take with them. Theres alot of verses and this looks like a good one to see what it points too. I don't think they are "spiritual" interpretations in the way of becoming one with the verse or anything like that.&lt;

Well, my point was, and Num. 31 seems to support it, that the bible myth stories were made up or were written about a savage nomadic tribes peoples. That was true in the beginning. They later became city dwellers who seem no less crude and savage. I ask myself why a loving god would kill a baby to punish the parents. Why would he have to kill all the people of the world, except an old drunk and his family, when he made all those people exactly the way he wanted them.

&gt;I don't have Gods hotline or hear voices and niether am I His interpreter. I just look into what I feel "might be something"... I get an "itch" and I follow it.

I wouldn't have the time to look into everyone and I don't care to I have enough on my plate and am satisfied with what I'm getting out of it for myself.

Honestly I don't know about the verse you posted, but I am interested in the first one but I have to look.
I'm finding Him in the days of creation, Abel the longest one. The picture of Rebbeca, and a few others are looking good.If I can find The Law in the Tree of knowledge of good and evil and find more about that Law in a picture of a preist and a woman drinking bitter water, I might find the law in war as well I'll go check that chapter because its usually inside the chapter picture.

I found the picture of Christ as abel and a back and forth dialog on the cross to God and on our behalf. Thats one of the best ones, this runs right through Seth and into God blessing them.

I love looking at these they are beautiful. No matter how often you read it more keeps coming in.

I have fun </strong>[/QUOTE]&lt;

I'm glad you have fun, and by your handle I would expect you to overlook the difficult passages, but there is a real world your young daughter and my young son have to live in. The fanatical, fantasy world of the judo/christian/muslim religion can bring down large buildings. It seems to have it's origin in hate and prejudices and hasn't changed much. I think rational humans have to get beyond that kind of savage thinking and overlooking the difficult passages in the book that spawned those religions does nothing to advance rational thought.

Paradisedreams2

You will notice there are no references here to "womb" nor "belly". How shall we interpret the fate of unborn childred with the statement, "pregnant women ripped open"? And why would we try to make this somehow less reprehesible by describing a "belly" instead, as though it draws attention from the abominable acts described in the bible in those verses?

Buckster, I haven't adress the two verses you quoted I believe It was jacks I copied and adressed those particular ones. For me it makes great sense.

The verses you quoted I haven't adressed but I'm just looking at them hoping to see something, I'm not avoiding them and I don't pretend to have all the answers. But there seems to be a patern and its not that important to me that anyone sees them as I do.

Heres Hosea 13:16 Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up.

I'm curious to look into this one and then the next one so hold tight if I find something I'll post back because I have an "itch" on this one. I can take only one at a time and I do have a sick daughter who needs her mommy and its hard for me to give this my full attention. But I will try.

If not they come in handy for arguments

Paradisedreams2

I'm glad you have fun, and by your handle I would expect you to overlook the difficult passages, but there is a real world your young daughter and my young son have to live in. The fanatical, fantasy world of the judo/christian/muslim religion can bring down large buildings. It seems to have it's origin in hate and prejudices and hasn't changed much. I think rational humans have to get beyond that kind of savage thinking and overlooking the difficult passages in the book that spawned those religions does nothing to advance rational thought.


Schu,

I have just stayed up to 2:30am answering various posts of mine and have answered to the best of my understanding "a verse" someone posted. I am a mother with a three year old who is sick and I have done my best to tackle one thing at a time. I have not "disregarded" anything nor do I think I understand everything, its a BIG book and even if I can make sense on two hundred verses there will be ones I'm not familiar with or have looked into close enough to know what its talking about but I believe a "patern" has appeared in this way of consideration of scriptures and the scriptures. The scriptures THEMSELVES say they speak in a "similitude" so if someone else would think thats heretical that I don't see them literally (even when I don't understand them) I'm moving in the right direction according to what the book has to say about itself.

Fanatical fantasy world of christianity?

I'm sorry hun but I don't involve myself with religion at all and if you have read any of the other posts I have posted on you would not have projected your stereotype onto me. I DO believe in logic, and science, evolution and most of what an athiest thinks I can find myself more in agreement with them on about every issue, with the exception of my belief in a God.

Now you can jump on this but you neither understand how I veiw God and can "presuppose" how I configure everything, or how I believe but that is your interpretation of me without getting to know me. Christians do the same so I then make no distinction between you and them because of these remarks. Logically it makes sense to look into everything before reaching a conclusion about it.

If I wanted my daughter (which is my own business anyway) to have "religion" I'd send her to a christian or catholic school,and to church. Instead I have taken this great and excellent burden on myself and choose for her the best possible path that I believe that should be taken for HER to think on her own,"free thinking" one by "unscooling her".

I live in anything but a "fantasy" world in relation to what I think about God. I consider myself as someone with integrity enough to pull myself out of an absolutely contradictory system of religion full of hypocricy and confusion (12 years ago) and to study the scriptures myself in order to draw my own conclusions to the validity of them. For me not to look and not study it would be to condemn it before I knew anything about it. THAT would NOT be "logical". If it can be proven it will if not it won't theres alot in there I'm looking over and testing.


I don't approach it like this...

"SEE??? SEE??? What about THIS verse HUH??? HUH??? HUH???"

If I see something weird I look at other verses with the same word and see how it transformed from place to place dropping hints about other questions I have as well. I put down what I don't understand and pick up in another direction and sometimes the very thing that was unclear becomes clearer to me, its happened so many times that I have come to study it this way in a relaxed way.

But carry on in proving your point in the current issue you guys are pursuing namely the "intent" is to "smack an anti abortionist puke". Whatever makes you guys feel good and right just like the christians who get under your skin. To each his own I guess.

So my "intent" is to understand the scriptures

I'm only guessing yours is to swing them about and smack anyone who does not believe as you do. I don't think I'm the one in fanatical world.

[ February 21, 2002: Message edited by: Paradisedreams2 ]</p>

Amos

I agree Jack but it is all metaphor. The "thy" is the strongest muscle of man and implies the stronghold of courage. When our courage deceases our belly shall swell with dispair and we can become "pregant with despair" in as Joyce suggested in the "Wake." It is equal to "involutional malancholia" and should never be aborted but most often is because of premature labor pains.

Have fun and don't mind my objection.

schu

I think you protest a little too much. Could it be as Bertrand Russell said? "There is something feeble and a little contemptible about a man who cannot face the perils of life without the help of comfortable myths. Almost inevitably, some part of him is aware that they are myths, and that he believes them only because they are comforting. But he dares not face this thought! Moreover, since he is aware, however dimly, that his opinions are not rational, he becomes furious when they are disputed."

You could know the bible says the sun stopped in the sky and in one passage even went backward. From that you can know it is only a myth. You can know that the bible says a snake and a donkey spoke in a human voice. From that you can know it is only myth. You pretend to make sense out on nonsense when you are only rationalizing.

You know I never said how you were to raise your child. I only said our children will have to live in a world that may become more and more violent as anti-intellectualism and anti-science grow. My feeling is that a belief in any supernaturalism no matter how bland only contributes to this.

Why don't you approach it from the other side for a while? Get a book like C. Dennis McKinsey's "The Encyclopedia of Biblical Errancy" and find out what the problems are with the whole of the bible. Just rationalizing the problems away and getting huffy "hun" allow you to keep the warm and fuzzy Jesus Christ myth you have bought into, but it does nothing to further rational thought.

Just as an aside: It ain't us rationalist who are flying planes into bulidings!

Paradisedreams2

""If men who are fighting hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman's husband demands and the court allows"

This is the second one I found mentioned on the second post.

I'm using my version because I follow its langage better and it says the same thing but differently

Exodus 21:22

If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the womans husband will lay upon him and he shall pay as the judges determine.

Again the woman is Isreal the child is the body of Christ born the day of the cross. The kingdom of God was ripped from her and given to others.

Children... "for of such are the kingdom of God"

"Kingdom taken away","struck blind at the door". "House left desolate". He wanted to gather them but they were unwilling. they depart from her.

This is a similitude not for bethlehem but for Rachel weeping for her children for they are NOT. The fruit she longed for has departed from her.

If you think the "infants" are little babies heres a verse in the scriptures which contradicts that very thought and once again speaks a similitude...

** (Isaiah 65:20) There shall be no more thence an INFANT of "days", nor an old man that hath not filled his days: for the CHILD shall die a hundred years old...

Another confirmation of who the woman represents in the new picture is when Christ says to His disciples, "As a Woman giving birth to her child has her pain because her time has come so it is with you.

So there you go, you asked how I can see it "non literally" I gave you two examples from your post thread" On the last one I gave you what an "infant" represents according to its own word but I don't think you really care what I find.

So use the verses as you will whatever does it for ya, you know?

Buckster

Paradisedreams2

From your responses thus far, it would seem that the OT, in your view, is nothing but a collection of writings to foretell the coming of JC that have no bearing on any actual events they appear to describe during the time they were written.

Do you see anything at all in the OT that can be taken literally, such as: Creation? Adam? Eve? Original sin? The flood? etc., etc., etc...???

Or do you only do this with passages that offend your sensibilities in some way, as in the ripping open of pregnant women by god's army of goat herders? (can't be true!! )

Just wondering, because it sounds pretty silly to literally believe only the parts you like but to reinterpret the parts you don't until they appear to be something you can live with. How can you possibly find any "truth" in the thing, if you just make it up as you go along?

I'm really not trying to be confrontational here. I'm just really, really curious. <img src="confused.gif" border="0">