No it doesn't.
Yes it does!
No it doesn't
Yes it does!
No it doesn't
No it doesn't.
Yes it does!
No it doesn't
Yes it does!
No it doesn't
No it doesn't.
Yes it does!
No it doesn't
Yes it does!
No it doesn't
No it doesn't.
Yes it does!
No it doesn't
Yes it does!
No it doesn't

to induce the suffering of another is not an ethical or loving act - each day has troubles enough of it's own -

I hope you don't think I was suggesting that it is okay to induce the suffering on another or anything of that sort. I'm not sure what you mean by the above.

What I am saying is that things are as they should be.

You had said:



So I was attempting to tell you something good about "suffering."

The law of cause and effect is a law that begins at the quantum level. Some call it "Karma."

All suffering is created by our own thoughts and actions, intentionally or unintentionally. What we do to others, we have done to ourselves.

Ours is a lesson we must learn by our mistakes and the consequences of those mistakes. "Troubles" are of our own making. We learn by our mistakes and by our own suffering.

Repentance is what a person does when he fully realizes the consequences of his past actions and vows to change his ways and he becomes reborn and new.

This rebirth happens many times to a person as they evolve towards a state of love and compassion.

So then I take it from the reading that there is a difference in aggressive spiritual predators and passive aggressive spiritual predators?

arguing sows anger.

anger brings hate.

Hate is the food of the beast.

Arguing pushes some away...

For others it brings out the beast.

no I meant nothing about you - just commenting on suffering as I do not suffer fools gladly

and seriously much suffering does come at the hands of those who mean well or feel they need to "teach" us a lesson or have some other negative agenda

and such things are unethical

nothing about u or to say that you were suggesting to do anything like that

but some do -remember the old saying "Im gonna teach you a lesson"

to me that attitude is unethical - we learn enough lessons without any intentionally induced - what I meant by "each day has enough troubles of it's own"

Well good, because I don't even think it is necessary to spank your children.

People learn their lessons from instant Karma.

Genesis 3

8 And they heard the voice of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God amongst the trees of the garden.

Wow. A walking voice.

subject verb agreement is tricky, even in modern times..lol

let alone being translated hundreds of years later,

I Believe 'they' is in agreement with the verb 'walking'

(excluding the linking verb 'were')

Those two words ("they" and "walking") are not even related the way the sentence reads.

It actually means this: (add "while")

"And they heard the voice of the LORD God [while] walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God amongst the trees of the garden."

They = subject
heard = verb

Second part:

Adam [and wife] = subject
Hid = verb

I think "while walking" would be a prepositional phrase.

**********************


I would have written it like this:

While walking in the garden in the cool of the day, Adam and his wife heard the voice of the Lord God; and hid themselves amongst the trees from his presence.

Adam [and wife] = subject
heard = verb

(Second part:)

Adam [and wife](implied) = subject
hid = verb

(Adam and Wife and heard and hid ...........while walking in the garden in the cool of the day.)

The subject is Adam and wife.
The verbs describe what they did.

They heard and hid.

"while walking" describes when they did it.
"in the cool of the day" describes when they were walking.
"in the garden" describes where they did it.
"amongst the trees" describes where they hid.

You also have to keep in mind who originally wrote these scriptures and or the time period they did. And by who. Then cross that with being translated into a totally different language. Yeah the writers of the bible could have "added" words to make the language structure more correct. But then that wouldn't have been a true "translation" of the scriptures.

Cool. My English teacher if she had to grade Jesus she would have gave him a "F". I can't remember how many times she told me that you never answer a question with a question. But Jesus answered many questions with questions. Though many Northern Europeans think it is extremely rude to answer a question with a question in casual conversation, to answer a question with a question is a traditional element of Jewish scholarly discussion.

The chief priests and elders asked Jesus, "By what authority do you do these things?"

Jesus replied with a question, "Where did John's baptism come from?"

The priests and elders replied, "We don't know."

And that is why Jesus answered with questions. Once they found out Jesus' question, they would have the answer to their question. Jesus wasn't here to hand eternal life on a silver platter. He was here to give the knowledge of how to achieve it to those whom want to achieve. And if they truly wished to know how, they would then investigate and find the answer to his question, thus then answering their own question.

true

little else is instant AND any good

I was very first baptized Catholic.

I dont follow their beliefs,

so I got re-baptized at an "all black" Southern Babtist church.

They showed me no prejudice(being the only white member of the church, and the choir) and if I had not moved, I would still be attending there. The spirit of Christ was very powerful there, and the love, plentiful, between all the members.

Now I go to a Christian church. Its much larger than my old church, but is still a "stand up, and give the glory to God church", which is what I want, because I cant worship God, any other way.

That would be like staying seated, at a rock concert!

I believe, everyone has the right to believe, or not believe, as they wish, as long as it makes THEM happy!

And as far as converting someone?

Its not happening, now or ever,

its not my style.

And yes, my new pastor DOES regularly ask us as Christians, to try to save the lost ones.

But for me, sorry, its not gonna happen.

I believe that a person goes to God when they want, are called, or are ready to. And its their choice, and theirs alone.

Amen.

Very true, we aren't all to preach the gospel. But we are to witness. We are to be an example. We are to display the glory of God through our actions eg., witnessing and not particularly "preaching".

Amen.

I don't know who originally wrote the scriptures. I do know that they were written in a different language. A lot of languages move the positions of verbs and nouns and adjectives around so in trying to translate a passage verbatim in the same order will really turn out awkward.

In this particular verse, as it is written, it is simply wrong. Who ever translated it from what ever language did not do a good job.

If 'adding' a word to get a true translation is necessary, such as in this case, they should have done it. As it stands I am quite sure that it is NOT a true translation or in the very least, bad English.

A Rabbi pointed out some instances to me where a Hebrew word was simply (and purposely) translated (changed) to a completely different word which changed the entire meaning of the verse.

A single word translated wrong can change everything.

"And they heard the voice of the LORD God walking in the garden..."

This is actually saying that the voice is doing the walking.

" in the cool of the day..."

The voice was walking in the cool of the day.

"and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God amongst the trees of the garden. "

And the plot thickens..... they assumed that the voice they heard was God so they hid.