Community > Posts By > EasternSquirrel

 
EasternSquirrel's photo
Sat 04/30/11 08:22 PM




The real history of the Bible would shock you.


It's pages contain stories of 'God's People' mercilessly slaughtering innocent Midianite children, yet its Believers have the audacity to complain about violence in the Quran?

Not to mention that it's a cobbled-together work, its 'books' being chosen by mortal men from among a whole plethora of ghostwritten works after that crucified guy's death. Most of the 'winning' works were allegedly written by Paul, a murderer.

And it's riddled with contradiction and inaccuracy.


-Kerry O.


You have to be able to read with better eyes and understanding than that.
I'm not denying that it's a jigsaw puzzle. I've seen the various regional dialects oftentimes written in the same sentence.
If you read only the english translations, of course it seems full of contradictions and inaccuracies.
However, when you read it in the language that is closer in date to its origins, you begin to see things that leaves you wondering "why did they change it so much?" (Historically, the Council of Nicene was attempting to unify the empire under one banner ... and it partially explains the cause of the misinterpretations).

The two factions in competition for total power and control of the "holy lands" during the years of the crusades were the muslims and [christians under roman rule]. But that does not mean either side was right in the way they pursued control. In a word, it was the beast.


from EasternSquirrel who said:

"If you read only the english translations, of course it seems full of contradictions and inaccuracies.
However, when you read it in the language that is closer in date to its origins, you begin to see things that leaves you wondering "why did they change it so much?" (Historically, the Council of Nicene was attempting to unify the empire under one banner ... and it partially explains the cause of the misinterpretations)."


All the more reason to totally reject the rewritten version of the Bible we have been told was the "word of God" that is available today. Your average person on the street doesn't have time to seek out and attempt to read the Bible in the language closer in date to its origins. People don't speak or write those languages.

So your solution is unrealistic. No body is going to do that. Period.

Therefore we are left with a book we can't believe or trust.

There are many spiritual books today that reveal the hidden knowledge and wisdom of the ages without having to decode the Bible and try to interpret it. It has been misunderstood for 2000 years. Its time to move on to better things that make more sense.


The real truth to the matter is this....
It isn't the books (or any books for that matter) that should be relied upon for the source of any absolute truths or doctorines. That in of itself is falicious and misleading being biased towards those who wrote it.
The truth comes from within.
The true "word" is written within us. The "word" isn't necessariliy "the spoken or written word", but is the nature of the spirit within us.
We cannot rely upon a "written word" by anyone to tell us what's right or wrong or give us absolute guidance in all matters.
For example:
You're driving along the beach and you see some people trying to dig their car out of the sand before the tide comes in and sweeps it away (or submerges it). You happen to be driving a 4x4 and have a tow rope handy. You see other capable 4x4's passing them by.
Since you're there and have the ability to help, don't you feel an urge to stop and give them an assist?
Here is another example:
Your neighbors' lawn looks really ratty since they don't have a lawnmower (or it's broken for whatever reason) .... You happen to have at your disposal the means to make it better for them. Something inside you urges you to take matters in your own hands and help.
Current events are full of examples on a more grand scale.
See, it's not all about accepting or rejecting what was actually written. It's more about accepting or rejecting what you often don't see that's written in a different way. Those are examples that you can read about and you live in such situations.

EasternSquirrel's photo
Sat 04/30/11 11:20 AM
why would you want to know and that's none of your business.

EasternSquirrel's photo
Sat 04/30/11 11:11 AM


I would say it's possible, but then when it comes down to it what is a god? There could be millions or more easily. It's something as a philosopher I have come to accept.

However "god" by the religious texts I cannot have much faith in.
Please do not take this as a bash on religion, it has its purpose that I will not refute.


You can define god however you like. The point is, does god have an effect on the universe? If so, how can we measure it?

Does god answer prayers, for example? All we'd need is a group of subjects, half of them pray for a result and half do not. We note the findings and compare the two groups. Does the praying group get better results than the non-praying group?


Just "how" would you expect an answer from God?
(Or any god for that matter) (or even an alien intelligence).

EasternSquirrel's photo
Sat 04/30/11 05:54 AM
Edited by EasternSquirrel on Sat 04/30/11 06:03 AM


The real history of the Bible would shock you.


It's pages contain stories of 'God's People' mercilessly slaughtering innocent Midianite children, yet its Believers have the audacity to complain about violence in the Quran?

Not to mention that it's a cobbled-together work, its 'books' being chosen by mortal men from among a whole plethora of ghostwritten works after that crucified guy's death. Most of the 'winning' works were allegedly written by Paul, a murderer.

And it's riddled with contradiction and inaccuracy.


-Kerry O.


You have to be able to read with better eyes and understanding than that.
I'm not denying that it's a jigsaw puzzle. I've seen the various regional dialects oftentimes written in the same sentence.
If you read only the english translations, of course it seems full of contradictions and inaccuracies.
However, when you read it in the language that is closer in date to its origins, you begin to see things that leaves you wondering "why did they change it so much?" (Historically, the Council of Nicene was attempting to unify the empire under one banner ... and it partially explains the cause of the misinterpretations).
The two factions in competition for total power and control of the "holy lands" during the years of the crusades were the muslims and [christians under roman rule]. But that does not mean either side was right in the way they pursued control. In a word, it was the beast.

EasternSquirrel's photo
Fri 04/29/11 05:06 PM
well,
we might not be here. But the earth will continue on.

EasternSquirrel's photo
Fri 04/29/11 05:00 PM



They are just both books for children's bed time stories that have the hidden "do good" messages in the stories...


Oh, I wouldn't call the book of Isaiah (the one dug up from the Caves at Cumran) fictional. Even if the Roman army built up an encampment around Massada, laying seize against a "rebellious nation" (under the leadership of a (hero/false messiah) take your pick). Then they drew lots to slay themselves rather than submit to Roman "subjugation"/"punishment".

You say fictional. So you say.
I say, read history.
Just because it is old does not make it correct, humans have been telling stories as long as they have been able to communicate. I hope you are not trying to prove that it is not fictional because of an army... Do you not remember the Holy Wars? The pope held as much power as the king and he wanted more!


Like I said. READ the history. Don't tell me about it. Look it up for yourself.

EasternSquirrel's photo
Fri 04/29/11 12:06 PM
Edited by EasternSquirrel on Fri 04/29/11 12:07 PM

They are just both books for children's bed time stories that have the hidden "do good" messages in the stories...


Oh, I wouldn't call the book of Isaiah (the one dug up from the Caves at Cumran) fictional. Even if the Roman army built up an encampment around Massada, laying seize against a "rebellious nation" (under the leadership of a (hero/false messiah) take your pick). Then they drew lots to slay themselves rather than submit to Roman "subjugation"/"punishment".

You say fictional. So you say.
I say, read history.

EasternSquirrel's photo
Fri 04/29/11 11:51 AM
Edited by EasternSquirrel on Fri 04/29/11 11:57 AM




Understand the meaning of "image" and "likeness"?

Once that is understood, then you can begin to see the bigger picture.

Historically, (documented).. we have to take a written word and dicern wether or not there is any truth to it.
There was someone who proved that WE are capable of being more than we are led to believe.

Who proved that?

I'll answer your question with a single word. Crucified.
There were a bunch of people who were crucified during the time that the character in the fictional mother-goose-like story book that is call the bible was suppose to have taken place. The bible is not a historical document, it is an unreliable source from many "authors" with little basis in facts. It is basically a book of myths and tales that were wrote down...



Jeeeez ..... you haven't read mother goose lately, have you?
You got part of your rebuttal correct .... about the rash of crucifixions. But you misplaced when that took place historically.
Try around 40 years later ... about 70 A.D. .. If you look at various historic documents (from various authoring countries), it's not too terribly difficult to piece together what happened. Oh yeah, there is documentation, but don't take my word for it. Search for yourself and you'll see it more clearly.

EasternSquirrel's photo
Fri 04/29/11 11:39 AM
Learning to be alone, is the first and most difficult step for anyone to make. It isn't easy, but in the long run you'll be happier that you did and in a much more present state of mind.

EasternSquirrel's photo
Fri 04/29/11 11:35 AM
Finding an attorney that won't cost you the equivalent of the national debt can be daunting. That's why I said, "Oh, and shop".

Taking care of "family" is a priority as is taking care of one's self.

EasternSquirrel's photo
Fri 04/29/11 11:24 AM


"No man knoweth the hour; not even our Lord Jesus Christ".

Anyone on here ever heard of the Bible? You'll find the answer in there. Or is this site for "Agnostics"?


Really?

You know what? Lots of people have read the Bible.

The answer is not there.


HOWEVER:
There are CLUES. You have to see and be able to read the clues (signs) in real time as they relate to this age.
(loose scriptural quote: "... when you see clouds gathering on the horizon, know that a storm is approaching..." (and that was Jesus' words).

But then, you know the time is approaching by reading the signs.
Look at what's going on now.

EasternSquirrel's photo
Fri 04/29/11 11:10 AM
Edited by EasternSquirrel on Fri 04/29/11 11:11 AM




Being separated grants people the opportunity to have their cake and eat it too. Unfortunately, it causes unnecessary pain.

I say nuts to that.
Get your own life.

Also, there is a legal term called "Default" where after a given period of time, you don't have to wait for the other party to sign and return the papers. This I learned about from one of my own attorneys over 20 years ago.

Guess what, even if you're separated, shacked up with someone else and living in a community state, you're putting yourself in double jeapordy.





I dont have any cake,, heck, I dont even have any sugar...lol

my 'ex' and I are on different continents and although I havent seen him in TWO YEARS, he refuses to assist at all in the divorce and I dont have the money and time to invest in seeking him out and filing for a divorce across continents, add to that we have a child together which makes the divorce much less 'simple'......and there you have why IM still just 'seperated'


much less about cake, much more about time, money, and effort,,,,I havent had enough of the three to pursue the legal documentation but we are by no means TOGETHER nor will ever be


"Default".



no default in this case would prevent me from needing MONEY, TIME, and EFFORT,, which I dont have


Sort of begs the question. Give yourself time and a goal. Oh, and shop.

EasternSquirrel's photo
Fri 04/29/11 11:07 AM
The best benefit of being alone?

Getting to know your ... self.

EasternSquirrel's photo
Fri 04/29/11 11:01 AM


Being separated grants people the opportunity to have their cake and eat it too. Unfortunately, it causes unnecessary pain.

I say nuts to that.
Get your own life.

Also, there is a legal term called "Default" where after a given period of time, you don't have to wait for the other party to sign and return the papers. This I learned about from one of my own attorneys over 20 years ago.

Guess what, even if you're separated, shacked up with someone else and living in a community state, you're putting yourself in double jeapordy.





I dont have any cake,, heck, I dont even have any sugar...lol

my 'ex' and I are on different continents and although I havent seen him in TWO YEARS, he refuses to assist at all in the divorce and I dont have the money and time to invest in seeking him out and filing for a divorce across continents, add to that we have a child together which makes the divorce much less 'simple'......and there you have why IM still just 'seperated'


much less about cake, much more about time, money, and effort,,,,I havent had enough of the three to pursue the legal documentation but we are by no means TOGETHER nor will ever be


"Default".

EasternSquirrel's photo
Fri 04/29/11 10:55 AM
People "get away" with saying just about anything on the internet.
Often, they won't pull any punches and take the risk that whoever they're being obnoxious with isn't living in the same neigborhood.

There are tactful ways of saying things without being rude, crude, obnoxious or socially unacceptable.

But there are times when tact just isn't enough.

Keep my mouth shut? Depends on the situation.

EasternSquirrel's photo
Fri 04/29/11 09:39 AM
In a HEALTHY relationship ....
BOTH give to each other ...
NEITHER is depleted ...
BOTH are fulfilled.

EasternSquirrel's photo
Fri 04/29/11 09:35 AM
You really wish to impress your date?
1. Be a gentleman. (Doesn't mean being a wuss or pushover).
2. Show her a good time by doing something challenging enough for both of you to get involved with it.

The results will speak for themselves.


EasternSquirrel's photo
Fri 04/29/11 09:30 AM
nunya and only my friends know.

EasternSquirrel's photo
Fri 04/29/11 09:21 AM
Edited by EasternSquirrel on Fri 04/29/11 09:26 AM
Being separated grants people the opportunity to have their cake and eat it too. Unfortunately, it causes unnecessary pain.

I say nuts to that.
Get your own life.

Also, there is a legal term called "Default" where after a given period of time, you don't have to wait for the other party to sign and return the papers. This I learned about from one of my own attorneys over 20 years ago.

Guess what, even if you're separated, shacked up with someone else and living in a community state, you're putting yourself in double jeapordy.


EasternSquirrel's photo
Fri 04/29/11 05:26 AM
I think there might be an easier way to think of what the kingdom of heaven is like ....

Think for a moment ... if you were God.