http://GodisMichaelJackson.net
would make excellent sense to guys like that's his name..the one afraid of being flaccid.
Wednesday, September 9, 2009
Monday, September 7, 2009
सो एंड गोद
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/
http://www.godismichaeljackson.net/
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
Friday, July 10, 2009
बेबी पोस अस मन्हूद
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.
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.
Tuesday, July 7, 2009
.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.
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?
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?
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?
Saturday, July 4, 2009
मार्क द्रिस्कोल्ल इसं;टी flaccid
(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.
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.
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
ओने reality
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.
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.
Saturday, April 25, 2009
व्हो काल्स आईटी सिन?
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?
;"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?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
