Yes and no. We would never have kept A-Rod--he did not like Seattle--and Seattle did not have the money for that couple hundred million that he was looking for. But I do agree with you on some players. Seattle, since moving to Safeco and getting out of that god-forsaken Kingdome has had some talent--but we still SUCK right now. It is really depressing up here right now because the Sonics are leaving (at this point it's just a matter of if--not when) and the Seahawks are, well--the Seahawks. I love them but they've made me go bald prematurely.

Anyway----

Drew

The thing here for people like me who live in (or near) Seattle is that there is almost nothing KG Jr. can do to lose favor in this town. He was back here last season for a game and the ovation was insane. When A-Rod comes back--ummm, not so much. But there is a reason for this and one that will never be forgotten by Seattle fans. EVERY Seattle Mariner fan remembers where they were when Griffey ran the bases to beat the Yankees--back in 95. He'll always be shown love for that run and many more moements.

A lot of Seattle fans believe he is still at the very least and honorary member of the Mariners. He has a few detractors here but not many. The Mariners that year were amazing---Randy Johnson's pitching--Griffs run--it was all amazing.

KGJr is the best!

-Drew

"Having eyes they never see...having ears they never hear. That's what God's word says. Intellectualizing God's word doesn't make one a Christian." -Quikstepper

And not being willing to suspend reason, logic, scientific-minded inquiry and skepticism doesn't make one a worshiper of all things demonic. Trading in intellectual curiosity for a place in the afterlife might comfort the faithful but it just won't do.

-Drew

Foolish? Because I forgot the resurrection? So, the beating is OK, the sacrifice is fine and the torture of a son by his father is not an issue so long as when it is all over he is risen? That is like telling the mugging victim that there is not really a problem because after all--in time, he will heal. Isn't it interesting how the suffering of the innocent Christ is now employed as a reason and riddle solver for the suffering of man? When a man is down and out, when his home burns to the ground some people tend to take the stance that it could be worse---that suffering increases faith, and that the ultimate suffering was Christ and what he gave on the cross.

If you want to keep worshiping a father who for no reason whatsoever felt the need to sentence is innocent son to a torturous death, then my best to you.

-Drew

Imagine the following scene and though it is not mine per se, it is applicable--and, well, you decide. This is an analogy and "WARNING" while not in violation of any rules of conduct here, it paints a disturbing picture.

Forgiven?

You and a very good friend have a falling out. There are hurt feelings and the issue is fairly serious. Still, you begin to miss your friend, to wish for some form of resolution. You recognize in this case that your actions (what caused the divide) were on you. It is bothering you to no end that someone you care for so much has been hurt by your actions. As you begin to recognize the responsibility you have to owning your mistake and poor behavior you arrange to meet your friend at their home for what you hope is healing discussion.

Your friend invites you in, gives you a hug and though there is tension in the air, offers you a chair and something to drink. For the next several hours you discuss the event, the ramifications and ask for your friend to understand that one event, one dramatic disagreement really should not define the entirety of a relationship. Many things are discussed and soon it is growing dark outside. As you stand to leave you once again embrace and thank your friend for the understanding. As you turn to leave your friend, says: "Hold on--we are not quite done."

With that your friend calls for his son to come downstairs. Unsure what his son has to do with the situation it nevertheless holds your interest long enough to find out. Suddenly your friend's mood grows very serious as he states:

"I understand that your apology was sincere and I really do respect your coming forward but I cannot simply forgive you this--it will require a sacrifice to be complete."

With that, your friend grabs his son and begins to whip him violently. You are stunned. You cannot believe what you are witnessing. "STOP", you yell, but it does no good. The beating continues, and soon there is blood everywhere. As the beating grows even more violent you begin to weep and cry out again and again to stop. Attempts to stop your friend don't work and the suffering continues.....and continues.

Finally, his son gasps a last breath and closes his eyes. The pain, the suffering, the horror. Blood is everywhere, his son's lifeless body lay on the floor.

"OK", your friend states, wiping his hands, "Now you are forgiven."

As stated above, this is an analogy and since no analogy is perfect I'm sure I'll get some rather predictable replies. But the questions I'd leave you with are:

Why the need for such a bloody, painful sacrifice? What had the son done? And finally--after witnessing this--would you be able to paint your "friend" as being a loving friend for having forgiven you at the expense of his only son?

-Drew

You could send the Mariners 6 Griffey Jr.s all in their prime and it would not help us one *%*^($ bit. We truly suck this year. No, it's worse than that--help me out here.

Drew

"For the most part yes slavery was wrong, having servants/slaves was how it was. But understand also that for the most part the Jews treated their slaves/servants very well." --From the post above

Two points: My entire argument was based on one of context. I said several times throughout this thread that I did not think that anyone in this group believed that in 2008 slavery was acceptable. But that was NOT the question. The question was whether or not the bible served/serves as an outstanding guide for moral direction. You have your answer when you consider the length of this post. If it were a great moral tome it would not require debate--and any and all of my arguments should have been shut down almost immediately. More likely there would have been no argument in that I would have agreed that it is a great gem of morality and so...no issue.

My second point deals with the quote at the top of my reply. For the most part, yes, slavery was wrong? The problem there is that the bible does not teach that. It just doesn't. It is wrong now because we've moved past the mental justifications that allow for it. Then again, we also know today that epilepsy is not demonic position and that witches probably should not be burned alive at the stake. Then again, it's all about context, right?

That everything quoted below is OT while the NT still endorses slavery is not exactly beside the point but the central question still remains and while it appears that this post is probably ripe to disappear I can't but wonder--and always will why such a cruel practice wasn't strictly forbidden. Working on the Sabbath was, a number of things with far less consequence were outlined as "don't do" but not this one. Odd, for such a great
'moral" work.

-Drew

Bro--Congrats to you man. I wish you nothing but the best and hope that you will keep us posted. You do martial arts a favor--you get it. Don't let the trappings get you and keep up the great work.

Best of luck.

-Drew

To HOPEFULLY put a end to this nonsense..FIRST I DID NOT say that ONLY christians could have those principles..I said it SEEMS they are the only ones who UNDERSTAND...
in an earlier post I said that there are MANY people who CLAIM to be christians and DO NOT live the way Jesus intended us to,those pepole piss me off..THIRD I NEVER claimed to be a representative of the christian faith ( IM STILL trying to figure out how ANYONE read that into it!!!!!!!)
All I can ever hope for people who haev ahd bad experiences such as yourself is that you remeber people are failable and people are NOT GOD dont judge GOD or the christian faith based on HUMAN actions..


I think you are arguing semantics at this point. Your post more than insinuated that Christians "got it" regarding being courteous and honest--those who get it being the truly dedicated Christians. That you are now hanging on to the phrase "it seems" is the semantical part of your argument. Generalizations tend to bring out the worst in responses--I think that is part of what you are experiencing here. There are about a thousand ways you could have written your post that would have avoided what you now claim are people simply misunderstanding your point. Then again, perhaps that was your intention from the beginning.

-Drew

My problems is "owning up"??? Owning up to what exactly? Throughout this debate you have avoided the central issue, that the Bible clearly allows for slavery--that it gives instructions on how to treat slaves and how long certain slaves can be held. The secondary issue is why, if god doesn't endorse it, he did not state, even once, not to do it? Your defense of a defenseless proposition is surprising to me in that even some of the leading Christian apologists recognize the issue with slavery and the bible. They at least take the stance that a number of Christians during the Civil War fought to end Slavery. That position at least makes sense and has validity--and is a great deal more lucid than arguing that it's only the Word of God only when it suits the furtherance of the cause.

-Drew

Where to begin. I know you did not intend when you wrote your post to stir up a memory from my past--but you did. Years ago when I was following the word of god to the point of absurdity I decided that I would go to work for an organization that runs Christian camps for kids. In order to work for this camp employees had to sign a "creed affirmation." I thought it odd, but did so. I was a cook. The camp brought in 250-300 kids every week. There were activities, fire-side prayer meetings, about what you would expect to find. Each group stayed for one full week--arriving and departing on Sunday. The hours were insane. I was generally at work at 4:30 AM and was there for at least 12 hours. Still, I had signed on so I did my part.

As the summer progressed (it was a seasonal job) I began to question some of the practices employed by the camp. Quietly and respectfully but I had some concerns about some of the older camp counselors and some of the Jr. counselors and how some of the younger (15-17 yr olds) were being treated by some of the older counselors. I was told that my concern, coming from a place of Christian compassion, was appreciated but that as a cook I really did not need to concern myself with such things--the implication being that it was just a bit too spiritually intellectual for me. Hubris always fails.

A month or so before the summer was over there was a huge issue, a criminal issue that occurred. A 24 year old male counselor (by his own admission after she reported it) had inappropriate contact with a 15 year old female junior counselor. This incident was HUGE. If it got out, parents would most likely frown on sending their kids to a camp that could not ensure staff or camper safety. So, like so many things, it was "handled" internally.

The whole of the counseling group (along with all support employees) were called to a meeting where we were told that an incident had occurred but that it had been handled. We were told that after the incident that the girl (she was a minor child) had forgiven the highly inappropriate behavior by the adult male counselor--that (in a tearful and sincere outpouring) he had asked for forgiveness in the lord and that she had accepted his apology.

At first I went catatonic--then I just went ballistic. They were going to sweep this away...they were going to disguise the event, call it something like spiritual confusion, allow a child molester not only to molest but to "apologize" his way out of it and "pray for her to forgive" which she was asked to do in that she had been forgiven by Jesus for her own sins. I almost vomited.

These people were not the Branch Davidians. This was a well known, respected Christian Ministry that still exists today and still does business today.

I was 18 at the time, just a cook, but a fairly motivated one. I tried to talk to the leadership, to tell them this was wrong--that he needed to be fired but that law enforcement needed to be called. They were calling this a moment of spiritual weakness (whatever the %*#% that meant) and I was calling it what it was--a CRIME against a minor child.

Not one to shy away from a fight, especially a mental one, I told them, told their leadership, that if they did not handle this more appropriately I'd turn their camp into a parking lot. I have never meant anything more sincerely than I did those words.

Eventually they did. I resigned (in lieu of being asked to go) because of "detrimental behavior to the mission of X-Minsitry." Yeah, seems that spotlighting the organized cover-up of a crime against a child was just amazingly un-Christian like.

My point in hammering out this long story from yester-faith is that when I read your post I read a view from limited experience. I have not seen "it all" and I don't pretend otherwise. I have also seen some good Christians do some amazing work. But when I was 18 and already doubting my own faith (I think I took the job to drown in faith because I really wasn't sure how to believe what I was being asked to believe) I saw manners, decency and the protection of the vulnerable cast aside in order to save a feckless business all run in the shadow of a dollar sign dressed up to look a bit like a cross.

Christians don't have a monopoly on manners, on decency or on respect. If no one else agrees with me, I know of at least one girl who once volunteered at a camp--where a man betrayed her while the ink was barely dry on a creed affirmation he had no intention of honoring.

-Drew

MorningSong:

If, as you have stated many times, the Bible is the Divine and Inspired Word of God, then how is it that you are now arguing that in the case of slavery, those parts of the Bible are not endorsed but simply a reflection of God allowing man to have free will? That is anti-logic.

When the bible states "Slaves, obey your master" is that simply not part of God's Word? If that is the case, which parts of the Bible are God's word and which parts are God taking a break and man taking over?

And if your argument is correct, if God really did NOT endorse or allow or approve of slavery then why, in the entire Word of God is there not one, not a single passage that condemns it? How hard would it have been to add an 11th Commandment? "No graven images" is prominent but an all-powerful, compassionate God could not be bothered to say something like "All people are to be treated with dignity and no one made to serve man in an undignified way."

And if your argument is correct, that God just knew what man would do anyway, so he told them how to deal with slaves--I mean, since they were going to do it anyway, then such a God would not only be unworthy of worship but a feckless thug who instead of just calling something wrong, just told people how to find peace with being abused.

God was the father--he was supposed to instruct. If you are a parent and you are going to be gone for a weekend and don't want your child to have a party what would you say? Most would argue that you would talk to your child and explain the rules--explain that you do not want anyone at the house, that you do not approve of any parties, that absent an adult no gatherings are to take place.

Or, you could say something like: "If you have party, make sure that everyone has enough to drink, that they are inside and that they keep the noise down to some extent. Make sure everyone pays a bit for the food and drink, make sure that the party does not go past 3:00 AM. Make sure that people have a place to sleep."

If you were to leave that note, go away, and come back to evidence of a party having taken place would you be upset? Or would argue that you really did not want the party to occur but because you know how kids will be kids and how they have free will, you just set up some guidelines.

Think that analogy is off? It isn't. If something is not called wrong, how are people supposed to behave? If instructions are given, how do they know it is wrong? Well, we do know it is wrong. But not because of the Bible. The Bible never calls slavery wrong. Mental gymnastics not withstanding, it just doesn't.

-Drew

Yes, Quikstepper, it is plain indeed. I could not help but note that at least you've dropped your argument present in your previous responses that insisted that the Bible did not authorize slavery--as it clearly does. Now you've switched arguments and begun to suggest that we should make peace with our enemies (a terribly immoral proposition in its own right) no matter who is in charge--even if they are our captors.

Are you kidding? Do you think that slaves should have made peace with their captors while their captors were treating them like so much trash? Tell me please that you don't really believe that. Rendering to Caesar what is Caesars was referring to following societal laws, paying taxes and the like. It was not, nor can it be used to justify capturing people and treating them poorly.

What is plain to anyone who reads the bible is that it is a text that allows for and in no way prohibits owning slaves. That we have left that practice behind (not everyone in the world has--far from it) is a great advancement in human compassion, respect, and dignity. And it does so not by embracing the bible but by moving past it--at least as it pertains to this issue.

-Drew

The whole word? Context? OK, if the problem I'm having is one of not taking the Bible in context then please (and I mean this sincerely) point out where I am engaged in such poor understanding. I don't think I am and I offered up more than a few verses from different books--all of which talked about slavery and specifically how to treat slaves.

Finally you make the point that I need the Holy Spirit in me, to give me the right interpretation of God's Word. To me that translates to: "I can't really explain this and I cannot justify it, so just believe in God and take it on faith." If I cannot understand the words due to lack of the Holy Spirit then instead of addressing the issue of the Bible you have simply put the problem back on me.

But it is not my problem. But it is not one that can be solved simply by saying that that part of the Bible was wrong. Because if that part is wrong then it stands to reason that other parts are as well--and that, that admission would wreck the entire foundation.

-Drew

OK, Quikstepper, I get that you are up against a bit of a wall here. What I don't understand is why you believe that beating your head against it will hurt the wall more than it will your head. If the entire Bible is flawless and the inspired word of God then everything in the Bible is part of that inspired word. Slavery is endorsed over and over again. Exodus 21:4 and again in verse 6. In Duet. 15:16-17. In Matt. 10:24 and in John 13:16 there are further provisions. Colossians 3:22 says, "Slaves, obey your masters."

Which part of this is man's sick thinking and which part is the word of God? Help me out here because I thought the entire Bible was taught as the Word of God?

Do I think you approve of slavery? No, and my earlier post is clear on that. I don't think anyone here does but that was not the point. The question was whether or not the Bible is a great source for moral direction? On that issue of slavery it is not, and it is not because today most fair-minded people think the entire institution of slavery to be ugly and detestable.

I'm sorry you don't like what the Bible has to say about the subject but I did not write it--your God did.

-Drew

From Quikstepper---"My point EXACTLY. The carnal mind can't possibly understand. Don't blame God for slavery & those sort of things. That was left up to man's own imaginations."


"Slavery & those sorts of things?" The Bible DOES endorse slavery as my earlier post on this thread points out along with several bible references. The bible absolutely lays out the rules for owning slaves, the length of time a Hebrew slave can be owned versus and pagan slave.

Some of the best apologists for Christianity in this forum stayed clear away from the subject of slavery--because they know what the bible says.

Please, if you would, explain why we should not blame God for slavery when it is endorsed in the very word of God?

-Drew

I have learned what I know about Macs from others and so I like to return the favor when possible. I stumbled upon a very cool application last night called Adium. If you haven't checked out this app. you might considering doing so. It links up all of your IM programs into a single sign on so that you can be linked to AIM, Yahoo, MSN etc. at the same time. No more logging in to five different IMs and keeping the windows organized. Just download Aidum and you'll see all of your contacts from various IM programs in a neat, organized window.

I'm not a shill for them--just a cool application. I am not sure if it is available for PC or not--the link I found stated that it was a Mac application.

Have fun.

Drew

CS--arguments here will go back to "God is perfect" but man is not--therefore, a perfect God he is, but his creation went the way of hubris and became lost.

My argument here has been that one who was perfect had to know that creating a less than perfect being/human would result in exactly that. So, was the design perfect or was there a flaw?

I don't think there is anything perfect. I am also comforted by that idea because perfect would have to be void of feelings, heart, some wold say, humanity.

Just my take and since it is late I trust you'll forgive any missteps.

-Drew

A worthwhile question as it relates to the condition of the world today. It seems as though mankind never tires or runs short of ways to make the world a more dangerous and cold place. There are pockets of warmth and friends we meet and get to know that help to make life more enjoyable but when I look out, I don't see evidence of perfect design or perfect instruction. But I also don't see the antithesis, ultimate imperfection. Still, I think you ask a good question, one that if dismissed without consideration will do little more the perpetuate our current path.

Good to see you my friend.

-Drew

Good luck with the kickboxing. I have heard it is a fairly brutal workout. I am sure the cardio has to be top notch. And yes, when we work on techniques in Jujitsu the degree to which you apply a joint lock on your uke (training partner) is the degree to which you can expect to get it back. I have learned to be careful. Besides, being somewhat new to those techniques my Sensei is very limiting. Very bad injuries occur when people know just enough to be dangerous.

Again--good luck and I hope we can all keep posting here in the sports forum about MMA.

-Drew