JenellYB

That did rather gallop off on a side trail, didn't it? Jenell

And following that, at a later point, after Jesus's ascention, according to the accepted "authoritative scriptures" of the Christian religion, Jesus personally instructed the "after-the-fact" chosen discple/apostle, Saul aka Paul, to do just that, take the message of salvation to the gentiles. Some have interpreted Saul/Paul's call and commision as the Divine appointing of the "replacement 12th disciple", to replace Judas, who betrayed and fell from among the orginal 12. There seemed some reason at the time why it was important there be 12, as the remaining 11 after Jesus' death thought there neded to be 12, and so undertook to elect among themselves the man Mathias to fill the vacancy left by Judas. However, there's really nothing convincing I can find related to that appointment of Mathias that held any 'divine sanction or authority' or even any authrority on part of the 11 to make that choice and appointment themselves....each of them had been personally chosen by Jesus himself. Beyond the appointment of Mathias by the 11, there is nothing much more about him in scripture, he seems not to have then done anything of note or importance. And, if we accept the call/conversion/commission experience of Saul/Paul, he too was personally chosen, called, and commissioned by Jesus (risen) himself. Jenell

PaulS...I'd suspect so. Expect so? Keep 'em pregnant and barefoot. Honestly, a big part of what eventually destroyed both my first marriages was that attitude...I am of the 'older' generation that was just beginning to break free of it, both myself and my husbands from families with tradtional atttudes and beliefs, that being one of them. In my 2nd marriage especially, that lasted over 20 yrs, it was probably the greatest and most heartbreaking chalenge I was unable to overcome in the relationship. His being unable to accept I was there because I wanted to be, was in it freely, of my own desire to be there, but he couldn't turn loose of the deep belief that his only 'security' in "keeping" me was in keeping me hobbled and hogtied, unable to run, and that included pregnant even if he had use intentional subterfuge and manipulation to try to accomplish it as often as he was able. Sadly, in both those early marriages, it was both at top and forefront, and underlying everything else, that led to my eventually having to run. Once, even while quite pregnant and barefoot. it is also entirely possible that if either of them had actually performed their "role" in that old "system'" even marginally with any consistency, as "provider and protector", I might have, as generations of women, and even some of my own generation, never be driven to that point of having to break and run....a painful and bitter irony in those situations in many ways. So it is a tactic, a ploy, of the really powerless, the really incompetent, to force dependency upon another, to keep control over them. Jenell

Most people, even Christians, are entirely unaware, uneducated, about how any of the forms of Christianity or Christian doctrine came about, to come to us as we have them today. They are unaware that what got carried down was through the sifting and sorting and preferences of the few most politically/socially powerful and influential. When I took Religious studies courses that got into history and development of Christianity and Christian doctrine, the professor's first lecture was to the effect that those in the class that are Christian are going to have every thing they'd been told about the origins and history of our religion and the church will be challenged, and explains their choice...stick with the course, and at the end of it, know more about Christianity, it's origins and the history of doctines and theology of the religion than 99.9% of their fellow Christians, including most of their pastors, or, head right on over to the admin office at the end of the class and drop the course. Jenell

Oh, I feel so honored! You chose my favorite! Jenell

The "anti" position on most anything is the weaker and most error-prone position, for reasons inherent in that position itself. Logic does not allow prooving the negative. It's a position that in and of itself offers no positive alternatives. The "anti" position is often left with nothing more than unsound reasoning, fallacies of logic, and irrational emotionalism, usually quickly deteriorating into pettiness and even absurdity, on which to begin, proceed, or stand. Imo, we can just look at the aparant present strategies of GOP party and candidates for a pretty obvious example of that. Jenell

I think you hit a good point here....one's accepted theology on larger matters, the oversall scheme, certainly colors and filters how one interprets smaller points within the text...in the case you mention, a focus on personal salvation as a basic element of theology is going to interpret smaller matters in way consistent with and complimentary to that. Jenell

In considering the question of what the theology is pertaining to anything in the bible, Jesus's words or otherwise, I think on a lot ofit, there couldn't be said to be 'a' theology, in sense of being even fairly universally accepted. one can find any number of ways people have interpreted and thought to apply something from something like this, but I don't think we could call any of that, a theology. I think its natural for human thought to often have difficulty discerning between such concepts as understanding, meaning, and interpretation, opinion. This is especially so with what are sometimes called 'the hard sayings'. Early reference to Jesus' sayings often called them 'the secret sayings of Jesus', not that they were kept secret, people not allowed to hear them, but that it was understood there were levels of deeper meaning below the obvious. That Jesus didn't always say the same thing, seems to have said different even opposing things at different times....some of that, I think might be understood in the observation, Jesus didn't say the same thing to everyone. (this a point relevant to other scripture as well). I think it is common to miss, misunderstand, or misinterpret points when we neglect to consider who is speaking to whom and under what circumstance and conditions. I think there's a great deal of that in common Christian intepretation, assuming something said to someone in one sitiduation is taken to be applicable to any and everyone in all situations. For some of what might be called 'the hard sayings', ones either no one seems to make 'fit' just right, that one can often find as many different interpretations as you have people in a room, yet none of them 'feel right', I have come to feel these are the sayings we might find most productive to mind for hidden gold. Now it may be so that some of these things in the text really weren't as Jesus said them, added by others, but, before assuming that, I've found it good to consider, maybe what is reallyt here just hasn't hit me yet. Or many of us. There are several such things in NT scripture especially I have been ready to snip out, throw away, as it made no sense to meand none else seemed to have a good interpretation either, but at some point something emerged fromwithin it that snapped the lightbulb on...I saw, understood something, that upon further reasonable test, held up well. Jenell

Read through some of the threads on this board awhile...we have a hard time even explaining it to ourselves and each other, lol! Jenell

ROFL @ Norm....I wonder if some bright, young research student could publish a scholarly study on the decline of RCC authority and disappearance of the full size passenger van. Jenell

David: We saw Tillich put justice in a secondary position in the first chapter and suggested that those who are most righteous/just may have a problem experiencing forgiveness/love. In this chapter Tillich states, “the justification of him who is unjust is the fulfillment of God’s creative justice, and of His reuniting love”. Read the sentence again and underline “unjust”. Two very good points here. In the first, are those that a placed in contrast to the weeping woman at Jesus's feet, having loved much, for having been forgiven much. Of course, the matter there is pride, self-righteousness...if you are righteous, you don't need forgiveness, you've 'earned your own merit.' In the second, as Jesus said, I come not for the righteous but to call the sinners....the 'well' have no need of a physician. The fatal flaw there, i guess you'd call it, is that righteousness in one'sself is a delusion. In their very beleif in their own righteousness, in no need of forgiveness, mercy, are they brought down, even down below the "recognized sinner." In my own matters of learning about forgiving others, some that have offended against me that I have forgiven, i would not go to tell them I have forgiven them, because I know it would anger, even enrage them, they would take it as my offending against them, for that they've never recognized or acknowledged that they had done something'wrong' to begin with, that might even warrant forgivenss. I think that is very much why the religious of Jesus' day hated him so much, he dared suggest they even were in need of forgiveness for anything. They cannot "accept" forgiveness, because accepting forgiveness demands accepting there is a wrong, and offense, to be forgiven. Jenell

Norm, "withdrawal method" fits "interruptupting" natural consequences of the 'act'.....rythym "works" by not engaging in the "act" at certain times. Ie the farmer can choose not to plow the field, but once he's started plowing the field, he's gotta go ahead and plant the crop and tend the harvest,not waste the seed. and I see a signfificant 'if 'technical' difference there. Jenell

Definitely! It was into a nerve and had been pretty rough this past week while I took antibiotics to prepare..It had been filled some years ago, some serious deterioration had gone on deep inside under the filling, not evident since I'd not had xrays in some years, until it broke through on one side, and hit the nerve, bringing on the immediate crisis..he was a bit concerned it bould break up, collapse, when he tried to pull it, for being pretty badly hollowed out inside, but it came out okay.. couple more I'd hoped he'd take care of, just need to come out, not far from crisis, but dentist didn't like that much trauma at once...And I think his was the best judgement, because by the time he got this one out, i was starting to have a pretty bad adrenaline/ephedra-like reaction as my body processed the anesthetic...either my body had changed or the anesthetic has over the years, never experienced anything like that..very unpleasant, and even now, 13 hours later, still feeling it....awful feeling. Muscles tensing up, bouts of hard shivering as if very cold, tho don't feel real cold, and just quivering inside.....painful, and I know I'm going to have some soreness in my muscles for a few days. And a sore tongue, lol, where I bit the side of it pretty hard a few times after, before I wised upand shoved gauze between the side of my tongue and my teeth until the numb wore off! But I know it uphill from here! i am thankfulI I have a real sweetheart of a dentist, very gentle and kind as well as efficient. And very considerate and understanding working with me having to try to manage these kinds of things as I can on a very limited income and budget.

Went well. Really feel so much better now...one was badly into a nerve....Pretty wiped out though. Headed for early bed time....nap, anyway. Jenell

About to be off for to the dentist...can't put if off any longer...been on anti-biotics a week to get ready for today...at least 2 are going to have to come out. Mixed, ready to get it over and done, and dread.... Jenell

I think the sense of paradox is in that it is at once both oversimplified and infinitely complex. The more you think about it, the harder it gets to wrap your mind around. I think another way of framing it is, what I allow to others I allow to myself. What I allow against others, I allow against myself. Again,that seems simple,until you really think about it. Jenell

I can sure understand that. Jenell

Paul, in your comments in the last post, response to Joseph, I'm just kind of thinking, perhaps this IS a matter you are, within yourself, personally ,struggling with at this point...no one else can give you,YOUR answers, that are the ones you seek, want, need. Jenell

Rivanna, Whether you, or any, at least here in this country, grew up in a time and place in which you were personally, directly exposed to the socio-religious culture and attitudes of that passed generation, or not, you were none the less definitely touched by it, as the whole of our culture, society, within which you were raised,and have lived, was pervaded, influenced, shaped, molded, by it, in ways you probably don't even know or realize. Perhaps those directly, closely, personally touched by the searing hot iron of it, burn with a greater and brighter fire from it, but the conscience and sensibilities of whole of this culture, society, is yet struggling mightily to break free of it and move on to something better. I thank God, or whatever one wants to call it, that those such as Tillich were raised up, and brought forth, to strike the match to it. Jenell

Thank you, Bill, for having walked a ways along the path with me. You've helped me learn and grow, been I feel a friend, and hope I've helped serve the same for you. Godspeed on the next stretch of your path, the next leg of your journey! I trust the next place for you is ready and waiting for you now.... Jenell

And please, I hope none take me as criticizing, judging others, how others live and make choices. Just trying to honestly work toward the core, the heart of it. I know some of what I'm saying is to hit hard, not pulling the punch, but I have and am trying to hit myself as well as any other. Maybe more than any other. Jenell

Joseph, understood, and agree. It is only ourselves, each of us, that we must address our judgments and efforts. Yet also, do we each make up one of the cells of the entire body. As each cell does, is the whole body's well-being affected. That is at a different level of perception, perspective, we might say. Yet both interact and effect the other. Jenell

And yet, as you say, others took care of you. Your needs WERE met through others. Even those poor, for whom, unlike yourself, it wasn't by their volunatry choice, shared what little they had with you. You were cared for. Made it. Even when without money, you had resources. Options. That many do not. And do not survive. Your own experience did not take you to where they are, and where they live every day, without choice or option. Jenell

George wrote: We have a different worldview. I think there is a moral imperative, whether Jesus said it or not, for the comfortable to help the distressed. But out of what does that moral imperative arise? From whence does it come? And what really IS that "moral imperative" we speak of? Is it that we are supposed to accumulate the abundance that we can, even when it is coming to us at the expence of others, and then should be willing to dole back to those at whose expense it came, some small portion of it that they might at least survive? Jenell

Joseph wrote: The world to me is not broken. Yes, it is evolving as are we all, and even in the hunger and lack that appears present, it is to me as designed a perfect self regulating system. Now that is hard to accept when you look at pictures such as you have posted but nevertheless that is the way it is. Maybe it's not broken, but functioning just as intended for our learning what we need to learn. As (sorry, can't recall the SA Catholic preist (?) that said it, but..."Why is it that when I feed the poor, I'm called a saint. But when I ask why they are poor, I'm called a Communist?" Jenell