all in it together? yeah...it's greek.

Are molars for chewing stones?

2011-09-14T17:47:00.004-03:00

an associate sent me an interesting line of inquiry to be chewed upon whil searching for the Body of Christ.
it appears that some time ago, somebody ordered the deaths of thousands of trees to stimulate the economy of pilpul, by writing a book "proving" the resurrection.
it appears that this person committed the sin of not agreeing with albert mohler's vision for world conquest, and mohler was understandably non-plussed.
citing salient parts of mohler's response to the non-event of somebody thinking they, not Christ, can proive the resurrection, here are a few crumbs that fell from my paws.

:"that the Bible is “free from all falsehood or mistake” — is an essential safeguard for the Bible’s authority as the very Word of God in written form."
spot on.
because??
:"Those who profess faith in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior are called to show the reality of their discipleship by humbly and faithfully obeying God’s written Word."
by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>whom???????????<<<<<<<
back to authority >>>over<<.
:"The 700-page volume is nothing less than a masterful defense of the historicity of the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead."
does it contain even >>>>one<<< independent eyewitness?
does it contain one statement from someone not a "co-conspirator"??
did he find the restaurant tab for the honey and fishes?
then there is no "historographic" anything.

since i firmly, totally "believe in the resurrection" and have spent much time travelling to and fro, up and down looking for the Body of Christ i'm puzzled.
so is occam, and his progenitor, iorek byrneson.

:"has argued that a historical fact is “something that happened and that historians attempt to ‘discover’ through verification procedures.” "
"since we believe it must be true".... hmmmm

events are their own verification.
that is, if a tree falls in the forest w/o moeler's permission, does it go to hell?
the tree remains indifferent, but now insects get new homes.

mohler notes, settin g up his trantrum that " Crossan operates out of a naturalistic worldview that precludes belief in anything supernatural, such as the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead."
:"In taking on Crossan [lincona demonstrates ] first of all, that Crossan operates out of a worldview that simply denies that a resurrection can happen."
given that he is agreeing with crossan over what crossan said, where is the "taking on?"
when did "you said what you said" become a contrary or meaningful statement when the "accused" does not deny what he said?

The center of the problem for mohler appears to be whether mat 27:51-4 is a "newspaper account" or a " truth". and yet, the romans nor the Jews, nor the random samaritan have any records of those events.
nor does archeology provide any evidence of such a happening.

:"First of all, if we ever accept the fact that we are to explain what anyone in the Bible was doing when the Bible does not tell us, we enter into a trap of interpretive catastrophe."
indeed. and???

the only "way out" of that one is to note that actors in a play who are not reciting their lines are offstage.
that, by itself, blows mohler's standard for "inerracy" to "Thy Will be done."

:"In his treatment of this passage, Licona has handed the enemies of the resurrection of Jesus Christ a powerful weapon "
in my random samplings to and fro amongst " believers in the resurrection" i seem to be the only one who ever asks "is Christ here now?" and answers "yes" without equivocation.
which makes me an enemy of the resurrection.
intriguing.

:"Norman Geisler addressed two open letters to Michael Licona, charging him with violating the inerrancy of Scripture in making his argument about Matthew 27:52-53."
is anybody with a german last name the pope?
somebody is... but i don't recall ratzinger starting with a "g." but then, i am a simple beast of the fields, and as such miss ever so much.

:"As one evangelical scholar retorted: “For Gundry, then, the nonexistent house was where the nonpersons called Magi found Jesus on the occasion of their nonvisit to Bethlehem."
well...yes. what's your point?

lincona states:" I always regarded the entirety of Matthew 27 as historical narrative containing apocalyptic allusions.”
and mohler asks, "But what can this really mean?"
most likely it means that lincona regards "the entirety of Matthew 27 as historical narrative containing apocalyptic allusions."
lincona may be operating under the understand that Christ is the Judge, and not mohler, so he may be forgiven.
or not.
:"What could one possibly find in the Greco-Roman literature that would either validate or invalidate the status of this report as historical fact?"
independent verification?
objective witness?
an explanation for how the phreaking romans were running jerusalem?
explanations for how "egypt" was outside herod's control?
:"That is what makes The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy so indispensable and this controversy over Licona’s book so urgent."
to whom???
when did Jesus prophesy chicago?
where in Revelations does Christ assert "Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy"????
perhaps in matthew 10:17.

the Hand of the Body of Christ

2011-05-21T21:08:00.003-03:00

In another exercise of hunting the Body of Christ yet another rule of hunting emerged:
in the midst of a conversation about authenticity and the signifiers of dates and times, this weekend when so many will be disappointed, and so many rejoice,
3 men discussed a stranger. They of course claimed to know the stranger. i did not, do not, and from what was offered as signifiers of her, could never.
There was no conflict at 4 corners of table that True goals involve something like increasing the number of voices singing their joy at being brought to the Table of the Lord.
(Opinions might vary as to the shape the Table, the Table cloth, and the Feast--but, is there any Tale but the Lord's Table??)
The 3 thought it highly appropriate to speak about the stanger not in their midst--and how to further implicate that stranger into their understanding of the nature of the Table--never mind that the Table Self-Declares, is by Its Essence beyond the limitations of understanding of the rotting meat. Assured of "something" they could insist that their understanding of the Table is the Table.
It being mentioned that "community" involves a sharing of walls and therein the safety to engage, initiate, explore--be a human soul--the 4 points collapsed to 2... +/-.
Us, and "other."
"We are trying to have a private conversation."
to which my answer, simple beast of the field, was "if there is One God, there is only One conversation."
So.. to the shape of the Body of Christ, some data about the hand: flat for slapping away, not so rounded for cupping and greeting.
'Cause some believers are more equal than others..
And the Bible has many Verses and some of them are shorter than others....

2011-04-17T19:54:00.005-03:00

does any of this sound familiar??
"1. you shall not do [it], but worship the [Lord].
2' Judge the sla[ve] and the wid[ow] / Judge the orph[an]
3' [and] the stranger. [Pl]ead for the infant / plead for the po[or and]
4' the widow. Rehabilitate [the poor] at the hands of the king.
5' Protect the po[or and] the slave / [supp]ort the stranger..."

hmmm... according to Professor Gershon Galil of the Department of Biblical Studies at the University of Haifa it's an an inscription on a pottery shard discovered in the Elah valley dating from the 10th century BCE (the period of King David's reign), and is, by the speciation of verbs, a Hebrew inscription. The discovery makes this the earliest known Hebrew writing.

in other words, by the time of David, it was already patently clear that the Divine's levitical chewing out of tea partiers and such was already established over a broad area.

to my simple beast of the field eye, the sherd looks a lot like part of an hand axe, the beginnings of the perception of the Subtle Knife that has been the #1 tool of human techno advancement when measured over a say, 100, or 300k year period.
because? what is justice?? giving each its portion.

in my continuing search for the body of Christ, this will make a handy additional tool.

btw, thus far the only reason i can come up with for the lack of outrage..talked about in the last post, was that the guy selling babies was a guy, and well. ya..know...
it's not like some woman making a decision.

and that too will be a marker point for mapping the body of Christ.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/01/100107183037.htm

where's the outrage...????

2011-04-13T21:18:00.002-03:00

a few weeks ago, in a neiborhood close to here, somebody was asking why people had the limbic response to a serial killer/dope dealer that somebody wanted them to have.
in a co0ntinuing series of mappings of the body of Christ, i'm going to be waiting to see
signs of outrage about this story:
and be asking "Christian" philosophers what they would do to change the odds on such events happening...

love is a deed "because" Sophie's Choice is to Bring a Knife.

2011-04-08T13:03:00.006-03:00

a day or 2 ago, south of the missouri, west of the mississippi, in a place where tectonic stability is a matter of functional discussion, and not a theoretic, because >>choices<< are being made, $$$ moving, carbon and hydrogen dancing by proxy, i had a meeting w/ a social worker. what is a "social worker"??
for purposes involving another site, and this, a social worker is someone who interfaces between human beings and those rights that sociologists and politicians assign to persons.
it needs noted again that "person" is a legal term," human being" a philosophical one, with direct implication into ars medica, zoology, etc., as linnaeus proved in 1747.
the social worker's complaint on the ever popular theme "what's wrong with america?" was specifically that america lacked philosophers. when questioned, the definition was , ya know, like 19th century europe and kant and hegel and those guys. when pointed to the fact that at places like princeton and berkely and grand rapids there were those holding themselves out as such, the answer was "they make no sense, and they don't do anything. mill and hegel and hobbes wrote books, and something happened." (the anachronism of leviathon was passed over by this narrator.)
on the often amusing neighboring locale intellectual currency there was recently a discussion about, hehe,
"rights." to that discussion i offered that, uhuh, and?? amusing rationale for continued male chauvinism, but, in the meantime, belly to the ground, the materialist are eating ur lunch on this whole "humans are persons" argument. nice job of getting conned by the little head directing the world view. (well, actuallly, i did my best, simple beast of the field that i am, to be courteous on the stylings, being in another's domain, but, hey look... this ain't there.
to the specific point in question, and to the header, whilst engaged in the praxis of courtship of the Maiden,
which is always either the thing onan didna do but gets blamed for, or taking it to the streets, i was directed to this link http://repairstemcell.wordpress.com/oprah-michael-j-fox-dr-oz-stem-cell-debate-is-dead/
which is an excellent bit of positioning, except of course that ruffly $6 billlion is in play every day based on the discussion not being dead.
because, in reality, the esc and hesc stem cell people are arguing that personhood attaches, like it always has, to the landed, blooded aris, tho these days "land" is defined differently, and that "human" means, "cool like us, cause we all know we are the cool ones."
the esc and hesc communitys argue that the 14th amendment does not attach to the unborn. and they are doing direct commerce in said bodies as ownable chattel entities...
i'll believe that the likes of the southern baptists, acts 29, etcetc are arguing for the soul instead of for their right to control women when i see them in that arena.

does daisy reallly give a roo's rump?

2011-02-16T17:30:00.002-03:00

i recently overheard a conversation about a play.
in this play, a village has been afflicted with a diseaase. as a result, all of the villagers are blind,
except one, a woman.

as a direct result of the blindness there are differning praxes concerning visual beliefs.

sp: a "true belief" (according to the audience) is that one's "private parts" be not displayed.

the villagers, "having knowledge" that no one can see anything, "know" they are acting in accord with "true belief" when they wear no clothes.

thus, their actions are "true."

leaving the center of the village towards some given perimeter for the purpose of losing bodily waste violates the teleogic truth of "don't risk your life for your own gratification." as a result, material waste is deposited in situ, and the visual belief "i see no dangerous mess" is true. the epidemiologic belief "all are at risk" cannot exist without a pre-supposition in which some vaguery like "the germ theory" is forcibly operative. it cannot be operative by the proof that "disease cause blindness." since no one can observe another's death, the proposition "germs cause death" is no more "true" than "germs cause denominations."
the only visual belief available is _causation_ --which cannot be tested, since the results cannot be independently verified.

being a simple beast of the field, i brought a simple beast of the field, a dairy cow named daisy, to a market place. i offered to trade for a mess of pottage, or a handful of magick beans, or (if "hope" were not a 4 letter word) a map for local occurrences of the Body of Christ.
indeed, i traded for a map to the village of gettier case.

the truth statement delivered from the village was
"you have no approved form, and thus praxologically, you are not there."

since even in the idiocy of cartesian dualiam, i am "there", and in that village i am not, and the quest was for the body of Christ, by the reality of the contrapositive, the body of Christ was not found in the so named village, and the map was false, the currency counterfeit.

the venn space endowed by gen 1:2 to john 1:1 leaves no room for a reasons based reality, but 100% enforces a Rule-based one.

both james and freud, from differing routes, demonstrated that visual beliefs are a function of the need to fit resident in the observer and the surround.

where is the body of Christ?
de naturis, in the Kingdom.

and where It is not is the kingdom of the whited sepulchre.

hubris vs hubris--i'm betting on Verses.

2010-07-30T15:20:00.005-03:00

in the course of rambling, gambling, doing what i think i should...which evver so often has nothing at alll to do with what other people think, i encounter calculi--little stones, some of which are pretty, some of which stick in my feet, all of which are made of dust.
here's one, with a little polishing--which is a courteous word for grinding..

:"We wouldn’t have science without theology, and we won’t continue to have the benefits of science long without it।"

........
The abracadabra here is the cojoining of a true statement with a wish list, on the premise that the associational magick will make the wish come true.

There's nothing wrong with this construct. Practitionerss of Vodun and Santeria do it all the time.

:"It’s interesting that in every film in which all of human society collapses, it’s never because society forgot science. It’s always because of we used science to destroy ourselves."

Granted, movies are reality. if it were not so, FaceBook would have told us...There's no reason to interject Pol Pot, Hitler, the genocide of the first nations of North America into the discussion when Hollywood has the answers. One can read John Stoddard on the subject of dogs, or one can know that whenever some "scientist's" ego combines with dollars from the ideologically (that is to say, "world view") pure, then most likely giant ants will invade Chicago, or robots from the future will make life unpleasant for the cool people who just want to be told what to do and have it get them into situations where they can breed.

Yet, strangely enough, :"Humans do not merely appreciate what science has done for them, they also fear what science can do to them. And rightly so. Science can neither guarantee its own progress nor its positive use."
---
a casual reader might be led to overlook the :"And rightly so" offered, overlooking the critical element that in Hollywood post-Apocalypsism it is the hubris of ideologic assumption---which is the very essence of Theology---that causes doom.

For examples of such, one might note, :"Whether he knows it or not, what Sanderson actually values is the world view and not the science, since science has no inherent value."

Those who caught the ride on the clue bus note that nothing has "inherent value." Value is always assigned.

Those who "understand" that Hollywood is reality also understand statements like, "Salvation is a 144 zillion dollar value, but it's yours free if you act now. (10% of lifetime earnings for shipping and handling will be billed later.) Operators are standing by, confess now."

:"There are still civilizations of millions of people who have existed for thousands of years and they’re still busy worshiping the Sun, thinking that thunder is the anger of a god or gods, and they dance to get it to rain. " Other than the literally fabulous lack of documentation for that claim, the objective observer will note that it does in fact rain, so something is working. he will also note that Job's lesson in Theology was "get over it, you'll get hit by the lightning whenever it pleases Theos"--which is substantively the same as being "scienceless".

:"if his world view of Chaos and Old Night had had its way, science would have never existed. Without Christian theology in which it grew, there’s a fairly good chance he’d view of nature as the ancients did." and yet oddly enough Heraclitus, who has a really good excuse for not accepting Jesus, was accurate enough about the necessity of a scientific world view that the Holy Ghost Chose to quote him in john 1:2...

to do the associative pairing correctly (Newton on logic is recommended to budding exegesists) :"economic strength is dependent upon personal responsibility and trust of one’s neighbor. "--the perfectly true statement understood by the average water buffalo--is associated with "Christian theology"-- a pairing the average water buffalo knows to be false.

मार्क द्रिस्सिल्ल एंड फेअर ऑफ़ डेथ

2009-11-06T15:14:00.000-03:00

Three Theists were due to be executed one day -- a Jew, a Samaratin and a Mark Driscoll fan.

The Jew was the first to be brought in front of the firing squad. Just when they were about to fire, he shouted, "Whirlwind" The guards all turned around, and he escaped by jumping over the wall.

Next in line was the Samaritan, now confident that he too will be able to escape. So, just when they were about to fire, he shouted, "Flood!" The guards turned around and he too managed to escape.

Now it was the turn of the Mark Driscoll fan, wondering what Bible image he could scream about(now that whirlwind and flood had been used). Finally, just when the guards were about to shoot, he shouted, "Fire!"

ब्रोठेर पट एंड टेलर..नोट जैक

2009-10-16T20:58:00.002-03:00

there cannot be a war over religion.
on the other hand, it's easy to have wars over $$$ and claim that such satanic materialism is the Lord's Will..Whichever Lord that might be.
an example that has come to mind is "brother pat"..he of the theory that Jesus' return is linked to geosynchronous satellite technology making world wide tv possible.
I like the idea, since it makes arthur c clarke the Holy Ghost.
on the other hand:
try this one:
http://www.google.com/search?source=ig&hl=en&rlz=1G1GGLQ_ENUS329&=&q=pat+robertson+liberia&aq=0sx&oq=%22pat+roberson%22+%22lib&aqi=g-sx1
or to narrow it down a little:
http://blog.blogpulse.com/archives/000336.html
http://www.skeptictank.org/robem2.htm
and getting a little closet to taylor..not zack, that kentucky boy who made good by slaughtering non-protestants, (unlike george yell, the arkansas boy with the same resume, but fewer connections to the eastern bankers).. either way...jackson lite: all the miltant genocide with 1/2 the political theory...
http://www.msmagazine.com/sept03/sizemore.asp

and aiming towards the dialog that causes this post:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Taylor_%28Liberia%29#Taylor_and_Pat_Robertson

so,, a guy who was like, eating his enemies during the inaugural ball.. and i mean like ....bbq... no metaphor....

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1910365,00.html

is a good enuff Christin for brother pat....since it is , evidently, from diamonds and gold that blessings flow, praise them all creatures here below...
hmmmmm... seems like the book of Daniel suggests that is >>>not<<< the Plan...
mene, mene, tekel upharsin.... which evidently translates into virginian as "go on, take the money and run."
ever need a working metre stik for the Divine's patience?? now u got one.

रीडिंग वावेस इन्तो थे सुन्सेट ऑफ़ ओब्स्कुरिटी

2009-10-06T21:59:00.003-03:00

somebody trying to place the ghost of newton into the throne rooms of the towers built by those who stood on hs shoulders
by refuting the absolute relativity of observation, the inability to claim to perceive an unmoved mover, for the exaltation of their own foundations, rather than in submission to the Effulgence....
annnnyway.. for anybody tempted by the apple of a newtonian Creation, the following may be useful:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpSqrb3VK3c&feature=related

and if u wanted a verrry weird take
that pythagoras et al were hunting on "see thru a glass [mirror] darkly.....
or the >physical< proof that the "materialist" argument for intentionality relies on the non-material, or a way of thinking about the reality that Holy Ghost is observable in action, invisible in appearance,

watch, from the same movie...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWyTxCsIXE4&feature=related

something that was once a useful tool for me in dealing with 11-14 yoas when it wasn't like 5 minutes ago...
does mario think he is rescuing the princess?
if you can imagine that--can u ask in what realms of glory wthe soul is actually participating..and all our "intelligence"..yadayayda is more
than an illusion as energy reacts with a medium.

others might note that this elegant demo demos that "materialists" are reaching for the same androsterone induced posture that those who ar afraid of being flaccid reach for. but that would be like flogging a dead whore...er...horse... er...horse's rump...
errr... hmmm what the bleep do we know other than beg for the mercy of standing n the Presnce of the Divine...a mercy granted before our birth...

बेरेंस्तैन बार्स एंड नैंसी पारसी

2009-09-15T16:38:00.002-03:00

Nancy Pearcey says that the Berenstain Bears are part of a "naturalism" tat makes Theism impossible. maybe she and mark driscoll can donate dna and clone torqumada.

गोद इस मिचेल जैक्सन???

2009-09-09T00:54:00.001-03:00

http://GodisMichaelJackson.net
would make excellent sense to guys like that's his name..the one afraid of being flaccid.

2009-09-09T00:51:00.000-03:00

8aw76ymbdx

सो एंड गोद

2009-09-07T03:34:00.001-03:00

so while dealing with th idea that people's words are as reliably unreliable as ever, an that texas wants to award a master's degree in the science of conning people into thinking that Adam rode His dinosaur to school...i find
http://www.godismichaeljackson.net/

इन्देपेंदेंट इन्वेस्टीगेशन ऑफ़ truth

2009-07-28T19:01:00.000-03:00

बेबी पोस अस मन्हूद

2009-07-10T18:30:00.002-03:00

so, after an amusing visit to those who think that mark driscoll the guy who put together storis of bashing the morals of his parishioners and calling it death by love, and seeing their "manhood" examples, i am left with about the same opinion i had before the visit.
people who think their penises matter are very afraid of losing them.
anybody ever have the experience of watching little boys playing at being men, and when somebody tells them to back it up...they fold??
:"Quit misrepresenting us."
uhuh... so some fans of mark driscoll evidently think the Holy Ghost has empowered them to decide who is or is not a heretic. let's see, who else seems to think they have such power? nicea? the pope? so, mentioning to people that when they are calling other people herretics or non-heretics they are making such a pretense?
probably not. this is the kind of behaviour that boys who have been told to act like men and go beat up somebody, or go push around some woman generally call manly and righteous, until somebody asks them to back it up....then they go silent, muttering about whatever..usually, "ah, u don't get it.." or some other random variant of the theme that little boys playing king of the hill are the meaning of life.
a while back there were a bunch of such in jerusalem.
Jesus took a whip to them.
may driscoll get the Jesus he asks for.

2009-07-07T13:13:00.003-03:00

.g.k. chesterton oce wrote an essay called "why i am a roman catholic" i;ve often wonderd if one could be a "stationary catholic" ..bu that would b a different topic. right ow, i've bee thinking about the punk poser macho fanboyism inspired by mark driscoll.

so, here's a rewrite of somthing i might call, "why i'm not an evangelical".

let's see if i can clairify just a little how it is i hold the thought that mark driscoll is not providing value to the Christian community.
let's start with the idea that no human at alll could ever do such a thing. if it were possible, then what would be the point of Jesus??
i mean, if mark driscoll and other manly men could walk around being msculine nd not flaccid, could brng about the City of God, Jesus, being Smart enuff to like heal lepers and all, coulda been outa town that passover, and just mailed in the money for the ticket on that charge of being King of the Jews, skipped the court appearance, and...yeah.
maybe only Christ Adds value.
my reading of Text makes it impossible for "machom macho man" followers of mark driscoll to be correct about the Son of God being sarcastic, and gamey. "gamey" is how manly masculine uneffeminate men smell after a good workout with outher manly men.
my reading of the Covenant of God makes it impossible for so-called evangelicals who want to spend their time decididing who's on first about what is a heresy these days to be Authorised to "explain it to me." unless of course they have the balls to admit that 2 counts of heresy gets you a trip to the fire, and thy get a funny feeling in their tummiues thinking about joan of arc.
that would require my submitting to a claim by people that their connection with the Holy Spirit is inherently closer than mine.
people can share the interpretation thry have gleaned from Text. indeed, it's a primary obligation of Chrisitians, to bear witness... share with others, and show how thy see their view conform to a view that includes the Totality of Scripture, not the picking of flowers along the path, a Verse here, a Verse there, to make a bouquet of "repent for the kingdom is at hand" to court the favour of those who would undo the work of salvation.
what work? the sanitising of sin by the intaking of the Word of God.
that's what evangelicals can do.
i recently saw an evangelical use these words as a defense of the poverty expressed by mark driscoll in his counselling and preaching.
:"in a time when the world does not define their words well, twisting them to make them mean whatever, it is even more important that we clarify what we mean."

and this same evangelical then tries to play the story of the woman at the well, Jacbo's well, a well founded by a man who wrestled with an angel all the night long..
since we know mark driscoll woulda kicked the angel's butt i 8 minutes, it must not be a very good well.

:"that she changes the subject… she starts into the argument about where people are supposed to worship. "
yeah. immediately after He tells her of her life, she declares Him a Prophet.
she then proceeds to spiritual matters.
th evangelical notes, speaking of Jessus--the Jesus Whose Name gets capitaised, even in the pronoun, in english and american... ya know, like the Divinity does...and mark driscoll does not.
:"he allowed people’s consciences to condemn themselves."
that's what Jesus does. what does driscoll do?
that is the issue. tht is allllways the issue in the evangel. what would Jesus do? and the answer is nevvvver, well, if H was a macho man like me, He'd chew on some sinner butt and generically let people know how cool He was.
Jesus, fully Aware of this woman's past, approaches her. He does not reproach her.
what does driscoll do, by his own continued admission in "death by love"?
in death by love, driscoll recounts event after event (cause, well, actually he;s writing soft core Christian s&m porn..and making lots of moeny from it. good for him. dollars are good. Christ is Better)
heres a typical evangelical trick , an atempt at dupcoloty:
:"Let’s honestly think this through"

amusing. the evangelical holds forth as the judge of honesty. how special. if you don;t agree with him, thn u are under the influence of dishonesty, lis. and who is the prince of lies? ahhh. those who disagree with the kind of...wimpish tantrum yoga pouting and "if i close my eyes you re not there" of "conservative" evangelicalism are....satanic?
so this driscoll fan asks me of the woman at the well,

:"how could she EASILY lie?"
very easily. some random Jew is at the well of jacob, acting wrongly by being willing to touch her vessel, and talking about never thirsting again.
it's not like He's saying, o you slut, stay away from My Water until you repent and have somebody approved by me bring fresh water vessels to drink from.
No. He's Jesus...not driscoll.
:"Jesus is setting up the conversation to prick her conscience"

no..that would be what driscoll would be thinking about. Jeus would be thinking about saving it.
actually, what is the basis so many of these guys have for claiming to read the Mind of Christ??
their reasoning ends yup with them saying things like
:"He’s not genuinely congratulating her"

Jesus isn't Genuine?
until i can see that Jesus isn't genuine in All Ways, at All Times, i cannot understand what He Said the way someone who likes driscoll does?
since, ok, that's a true statement, let us continue.
:";”People who are offended at his imperfect holiness may be in a zone that the rest of us should avoid anyway”
i’m not offended by his imperfections. when Jesus looked at the woman at the well, He saw an imperfect holiness. i can read how He responded to it.
and it wasn’t like mark driscoll says he responds to people who seek his counsel. at all.
the offense, therefore is in driscoll calling how he counsels “Christian.”
the offense, as noted in my deleted post, is in taking the angst of american males and twisting it such that machismo and virtue are synonymous.
the offense is in any class of "true beleivers" setting themselves as authority above the Holy Inspiration of the apostolic or nicean creeds and declaring those unlike themselves to be heretics.
the offense is claiming power to decide the form and colour of the offerings to be brought to the Lord.
some guys used to do that. Jesus took a whip to them.

according to Jesus,God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

notice how He doesn;t SAy " in their testosterone induced angst at not being good enuff, or their bullyin poses of righteousness."
no. He does't say that at all.
not once.
byt then Jesus reportedly told nathniel,
Verily, verily, I say unto you, Hereafter ye shall see heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of man.
...not the upright masculinity of mark driscoll.

वहत इस द्रिस्कोल्ल'स मीट?

2009-07-07T02:14:00.004-03:00

on another rnadomly amusing blog, where some folks are cliaming that mark driscoll is not ...dangerous?? ...not flaccid?? a manly man??
the idea was offered that Jesus, Word Made Flesh is sarcastic when speaking to the woman at the well. (john 4ish for those whio want to foolow along from whatever random trasnlations are approved by...whoever... it's handy for me to stick to kjv...i figure of shakepearan english was good enuff for Jesus, it's goof enuff for me... o..wait.. Jesus spoke aramaic, so all the discussion about "what Jesus said" whn had by people who don;t wanna look at tri-consonental roots are kinda like people holding stuff up to a mirror and asking their friends "Does this doctrine make me look fat??"
those who are used to accepting driscoll, piper, et al as authroitative might take a look at an onjective source or 3 on this "Messiah" issue, and samaritans.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samaritan#History_and_origin_according_to_Samaritan_sources
and especiallly,
http://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt1045.htm#1

so... somebody,,,lol... who evidently thinks there is soe othr "subhect" to the New Testament other than Jesus, offers that when Jesus tells the woman at the well, yeah, I know, the dude is not ur husband..so..this is somehow a "techincality". of course, if the offerer of this thought cannot show me examples of samaritan marraige law....i;m gomna figure "technicaloty" is some effeminate term for "she has an active social life"...thus, i ask him:

what technicality?
realllly, name me the technicality here.
she says, when she could easily lie, she has no husband.
He's "forcing her" ??? to do what??
see that the Messiah is standing there??
she "changes the subject" ????
4:19 The woman saith unto him, Sir, I perceive that thou art a prophet.
and so she asks, directly, is a Noahite or Mosaic placing of ther point on worship more correct.
and Jesus, being Messiah, and not a manly man wanting to make sure she gets this whole sin thing properly, sees herelf as the idol worshippin slut that everybody >>is<<. not "in effect" as some flaccid softening of tone for palatbility and political correctness: >is<,
goesto the point that
:"when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him."
and woman, in her imperfect holiness stays on point:
:"The woman saith unto him, I know that Messias cometh, which is called Christ: when he is come, he will tell us all things."
and once again, Jesus refuses to call her out on her foibles, but proclaims the Living Christ:
:"4:26 Jesus saith unto her, I that speak unto thee am he."

so what does the woman do??? she proclaims Christ:
:"4:29 Come, see a man, which told me all things that ever I did: is not this the Christ?"
what is it the manly disciples do???
o yeah... they woof at Jesus for talking to her.
Jesus Says: "My meat is to do the will of him that sent me, and to finish his work."
so..what's driscoll's meat, other than not flaccid?

मार्क द्रिस्कोल्ल इसं;टी flaccid

2009-07-04T22:39:00.002-03:00

(subtitled: Christ Rising is not a viagra ad)
for those who do not speak hindi,
that title is "mark driscoll is not flaccid".
for those who do speak hindi "flaccid" is the state of an un-erect penis.
lately there has been some random discussion elsewhere about a book called "death by love" in which some guy praches the idea that the Jesus who forgives is flaccid... but the real Jesus, the One Who Kicks pharisee butt and takes names , is all about not being impotent.
being the simple beast of the field that i am, i joined the discussion, since, well,
i had always thought that Jesus got His Power from being the Word Made Flesh, not being, yaknow, a manly man. silly me.
driscoll states, "new Christian, you possessed the raw masculine integrity that so many docile, neutered church guys" etc...
evidendly the Christians who fried witches, martyred joan of arc, wre led by constantine into battle, those were the real Christians, and augustine, aquinas, francis of assisi, and the guys who recall that since they are not the Mark, they have missed it are...well...in need of some mark driscoll's manhood potion...that u rub vigourously on ur righteousness and then proceed to have fantasies about Jesus torturing sinners.
anybody recall what is the shortest Verse in the New Testament???

yeah.

ओने reality

2009-06-30T18:46:00.002-03:00

on another blog i read the phrase"But it also requires that people strive for agreement on the basis that there is one reality that all are to investigate using their own intelligence."
i offered: "so, other than the Logos,Who is It, who can perceive a "one reality"?
and if imperceptible, is this not functionally the same as "not so much"?"
and for random passing Christians, atheists, adeists, agents of the magisterium or boyce guys....:-) ...i offer a return to the premise of setting the 4 pillars for a foundational theology.
if the is One Divine (whether lubing into the plane as 3'n'one Oil, or Effulging as the Cup, the Pouring & the Water.. or just being....One... "Tawhid" (Arabic for, loosely, if u think u are and something else is.. get over it, there' only It), then what is the One Reality? it would likely be Known in the Mind of the One (Theos) doable by what ever of th whatever (Deus) nothing in the brain cells of the god who, not being there, has no brain, and none of the above scenarios encompass any capability of human understanding.
for the Theist, of whatever colour, a logical solution to this problem is to pistualate that the Theos is aware of this problem, and simultaneously solves it by Logos being Logos, and the Voice Speaking.
Those who seek Christ in their lives will be looking for the clarity, the Essential Clarity of that Voice.
others will be looking for ever increasingly boggleful ways for driscoll, behe et all to show that Mind as chaotic and hateful, the better to impale believers on any of the 4 pillars they set.
i would offer that the true beginning of the independent investigation of reality is to notice that none of us are it....while yet being that part we are....thereby noticing that someone else's answers might very well work....for them.

व्हो काल्स आईटी सिन?

2009-04-25T22:24:00.002-03:00

an occasionally insiteful theologist opined on a blog:

;"Suppose a man should come to his dinner table, and there should be a knife laid down, and it should be told him, ‘This is the very knife that cut the throat of your child!’ If the man would use this knife as a common knife, would not everyone say, ‘Surely this man had but very little love to his child, who can use this bloody knife as a common knife!’"
the analogy gos on to compare:
How can sin not be hateful to us—if we seriously consider how hurtful it was to Jesus Christ?”

to which i ask, as i would.....and?
who told him? if it was in random places of my certain knowledge the teller would e a backbiting drama starter.
when was the last time we got a report of Jesus caring what people thought of Him?

but, let us stick with the image offered thru the inestimable mj:

if such an event occurred, would a loving father say, "i never want to see that knife again" ???
if so, then why do "Christians" cover the earth with images of the cross??

seems vaguely tacky to me.

sin isn't a knife that murdered Jesus. it's the natural state of not being Him.

the cross?

And jesus was a sailor
When he walked upon the water
And he spent a long time watching
From his lonely wooden tower
And when he knew for certain
Only drowning men could see him
He said all men will be sailors then
Until the sea shall free them

--leonard cohen...
And the sun pours down like honey
On our lady of the harbour
And she shows you where to look
Among the garbage and the flowers
There are heroes in the seaweed
There are children in the morning
They are leaning out for love
And they will lean that way forever
While suzanne holds the mirror

so....is perhaps not the real choice not turning from sin, but turning towards those in need?

what would buffy do?

नोट ओनली दोएस चार्ली वीं---हे acts

2009-03-31T22:48:00.005-03:00

this was sent to me aftyer a conversaton about charlie and Jesus, with someone expressing some wonder at how the convdrsation fit a sermon. and i sad back.. no... carl jung... synergy... we're all in it together...which in greek mught be sunergos..

while checking the links to the ever dreadful esv, my eyes reported the words,
greek this...
and so....:-)

23 *When they were released, they went to their friends and reported what
the chief priests and the elders had said to them. *24 *And when they heard
it, they lifted their voices together to God and said, “Sovereign Lord, who
made the heaven and the earth and the sea and everything in them, *25 *who
through the mouth of our father David, your servant,
[3]said by
the Holy Spirit,

“‘Why did the Gentiles rage,
and the peoples plot in vain?
*26 *The kings of the earth set themselves,
and the rulers were gathered together,
against the Lord and against his Anointed’
[4]
—

*27 *for truly in this city there were gathered together against your holy
servant Jesus, whom you anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, along with
the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, *28 *to do whatever your hand and
your plan had predestined to take place. *29 *And now, Lord, look upon their
threats and grant to your servants
[5]to
continue to speak your word with all boldness,
*30 *while you stretch out your hand to heal, and signs and wonders are
performed through the name of your holy servant Jesus.” *31 *And when they
had prayed, the place in which they were gathered together was shaken, and
they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and continued to speak the word of
God with boldness.

which to me, reads, It Does What It Does.
while She Who Dances....dances. and rome, and caiaphas are long gone...but the Dance Goes On.

inspector #13 and the golden Calf

2009-03-29T17:07:00.001-03:00

But...it did get me thinking more about this notion of "approved by God." I know it is also an expression which appears in some of the Pauline writings, that he and his fellows were "workers approved by God." But clearly, that's not what this fellow had in mind. His was a singular mark of "approval of God" for Jesus.

Perhaps those of you who have engaged in such past dialogues with Christians with this mindset have some thoughts on this; and for those who haven't had such encounters, your thoughts are welcome too. I would just like to sit back and see what if anything other folks have to say. Thanks.

---------
i just got thru with a discussion about how i could get harmony of biology/genetics and Bible/religion by letting paul define sin and original sin.
towards the end of it, i pointed out that charlie stamped the seal "approved by God" on the brow of doctrines, and mentioned several that have become endangered species, if not extinct.
to wit: "see any money with caiaphas' or caesar's pic on it being minted???" thus, that which goes extinct is no longer good doctrine.
is Christ standing here now (Christians seem always so....perplexed when i ask this...dunno why...hehe) thus...charlie wins.
charlie votes for Christ, who is anyone to say Christ can't vote for charlie?
---------
OK...I think I'm with ya...kinda...?

But, I'm not sure about the Darwin aspect. Clue me in...this bulb is a bit dim today.

---------

let's get a little Biblical on charlie here.
"know them y their fruits"...
a general sense of this is "tasty fruit"..
how about "viable seed"??
>>that's<<>>is<< the Substance will be recognised as "God approved".
:-)

l;et's go further into left field..

i know this guy who reaises this bacteril glop that s smwehere in betwen brewers yeast and slime mold... and people eat this stuff, after tey have enuff of it, and it comfortaly drops into the guit and eas random nasties and kep on truckin as a spore, and passes, and people feel better balanced accordin to some whatever nutritutinal theory becuase tis is done.

so this stuff is from asia. and as a reuslt of this guy and oter slike him, these sporeis now ,aking their way along the mississippi to trhe gulf of mexico.

he's tellng me about this... there's this oter guy, who gets some of what i am saying about this...and i tirn to him and say, wow...smart yeast...and he laffs...

while he is watwering his cacti, some runs out the bottom of the pot, and he wipes it up, and i tell him, they are nevvvver going to act responsibl;y if u keep cleaming up after them. and he says i know, but they seem so happy playing in the sun, i don;r want to yerll at them about it. and i say, don;t yell... but it's about time you gave tem boundaries and responsibilities so they can become mature and get along without you...otherwise ur just anoter co-dependent enabling emo 8989889 head (dale says not to use p8inctuation marks to indicate bad language) . and he says, ur right, and tell the cacti, from now on, if you spill ur water and don;t clean it up, u'll get less the next time.

and.....it's working.

"viable seed." the tree that is know by its fruits does not comsider ur desire for tasty as anythig other than rt of its strategy to get u to carry its seed. you get asty, it gets transported. it's just bizness.

so..ur a doctrine...like.... hmmm... Eucharist? surrrre. let's do Euharist. you make urself tasty, pretty, eye-catching, and warm/fuzzy delivering. as a result of 20k years or so of evolution u can now reproduce without it looking like te death of maron brando in apoclaypse now.

sudddenly, ur being propagated farrr more easily. older species, like the bull getting lopped ito chunks by martin sheen are nowhere nearr as able to reproduce as you. in a mere 1814or so years you have taken over 98% of te ecologic niche that other "drink My bloods" used to occupy,and they re all starvingut and not reprodicing.

charlie says: good doctrine, God approves of you.... and in fact, here's u and me, in our rando,ly various pov, in more agreement about the Eucharist and transubstantion than pail probably had with james, so Godf must truly approve of this doctrine...charlie says so.

now it sas put out a Mutant offsring, where daily eating of the Word eliminates the eed for the cracker/grape. i am uttterly sure that this mutant seed from the Tree of Life is better able to fill the ecologic niche.

and charlie wins.

and Baha'u'llah's Point that the Symbol >>is<< the Subtance will be recognised as "God approved".

the doctrien is jsut another organ-ism, organ-ising, building the body of Christ.

imho tielhard de chaerdin would go... o ur a sick puppy, but ur right, and de loyola would burn me, and then go, whoops, he was right... hmmmm..., write a book about why i had to be burned, then go..ok, de chardi will deal with why h was right later...

and pythagoras will be like, don;t u hate it when that happens, but wait, lemme light a cigarillo off u before we put u out,,,

what's God Approved? i dunnno....what is?? yeah... it is what it is, and therefore is God approved, or heading to extinction.

cause charlie wins.

the doctrine is just another organ-ism, organ-ising, building the body of Christ.

imho tielhard de chaerdin would go... o ur a sick puppy, but ur right, and de loyola would burn me, and then go, whoops, he was right... hmmmm..., write a book about why i had to be burned, then go..ok, de chardin will deal with why h was right later...

and pythagoras will be like, don't u hate it when that happens, but wait, lemme light a cigarillo off u before we put u out,,,

what's God Approved? i dunnno....what is?? yeah... it is what it is, and therefore is God approved, or heading to extinction.

cuase charlie wins.

----------
Believe it or not -- and does it really matter? -- I think I get what you are getting at. :-)

-----------
matter?? it's...it's kinda like the ice in mn...its still water...but for now, the fct that it is solid seems to matter to a number of people...

u may or not, recall a conversation i had with someone a while back about the sea of reeds, and dale was n this dialog, and. the guy was actually maybe intersted in soeting... wo kows what...but was... and i pointed out that ..sort. of...

kinda...ineluctibly...(tho i should nevvver use a word like ineluctibly....it's so....dark...:-) and besides, ratzinger might agree with it...:-) ) the fact that Abraham and sara are Brahman at the sarasvati river, and the fact that Abraham is hammurabi, and the fact that Joseph was from egypt, in no wise contradict, but rather, siiport and enforce the fact that Abram and sarai left from around basra and trevelled to egypt, and left there with a 2nd wife.

was Jesus approved by god? no. and
He got nailed for it.

did Jesus demonstrate a proof of the Divine?

hmmm...are we having the conversation?

charlie wins.

(pause for cigarillo, and 40 deg wet wind, seeing the stitches on the ball spinning; so... the jet stream must have fingers.... the North Wind has manifested Itself as a mercy to minnesota and told the dogwood trees of the south (from whch we all know the cross was made) to fear their Lord as the petals fall in the cold rain, and told te tulips to trust in the Sun Alone, reaching thru the dirt to the bulbs......

so... this guy ur talking to understands, cuase it is True, the Manifestation Is His Own Proof, just like any Moslem knows..but thinks It's Jesus...and so is worshipping a graven idol. and 2500 years before Jesus when Abraham was asked if that made sese any more, He Said....not so much....but you'll figure that out without Me...becuase of Me...

and charlie wins.