TheInvisibleDan

Yep...he's bench-pressing his way ever closer to the "Happy Acres" sanitorium... one day on air he'll rattle a poop down his pant leg, and they'll be carting him from the stage to the isolation of a padded cell... perhaps he can bunk up with Oral.

Mark, Thank you so much for your gracious words. Though I wasn't really offended by Free2Love's post. Actually, I had hoped that my initial reflections on Free's post didn't strike as equally offensive to him/her. We all speak the truth as we see it, whatever it be; I/you/he'she can't be wrong (lol). We perhaps come to expect to some degree - though we may not desire such - that people may encounter something in our "truth" as personally offensive to them. I'm not put off by the "soul sleep" idea (having believed such in a previous life) but I'm no longer "turned on" by such either. I have found the prospect of being truly "dead" without any conscious existence for an indeterminate period of eons to not be as comforting as it had been promoted to us. Oh, "Jesus will come back to raise us up!" we were told, but when? It's like the "gap" in Genesis 1:2 -"It could be a couple years from now, a thousand years; it could be a million years!" That's a long time to be dead, non-existent. Little wonder (in my opinion) the Way leaders lived like devils. Danny

"Gear Acquisition Syndrome" via Ebay has struck me once again (see pic below)...had to have it...I've had a song going through my mind for the past 3-4 years that requires the distinctive "chord" sounds these things make. I used to have a smaller, plastic version years ago. At least this one has 6 additional chord buttons, and a few extra keys. Hope the damn thing works, though it looks like it could use some refinishing work. Danny

The original "Dr.Smith" from "Lost in Space".

Version 4.5. A few years old, but it still does the trick.

It's interesting how "Hebrews" goes to such literary lengths as to solidify that Jesus was a Man. He was tempted in all points as we are. Took the full measure of suffering for us. Might a certain amount of that unfathomable measure also include the suffering that can be experienced in a marriage? With kids tossed in for a measure hideously complete. And maybe a wood-sided mini-van. If He truly didn't suffer in all things, can Jesus really relate to married people? Is He a "Savior" we can identify with? Or if married to us now, - 'us" being "the Bride" - He suffers still, -- perhaps even all the more? :blink: I don't mean to demean marriage. It's just that in such context, issues of marriage can pose dramatic challenges which tests the endurance of love. Danny

FreetoLove, Is there anything appropriate anyone could have possibly uttered upon the event of your father's untimely passing-away, that could have brought comfort and security to the spirit of a child undergoing such heart-shattering, unimaginable loss ? "It was God's will" would have fell short perhaps just as much as anything else that could have been said to you at the time. It appears to many of us as theologically disgusting. And yet such an expression is not unique to Christianity- or Catholicism. A recent earthquake victim in Indonesia - one of the Muslim religion - upon experiencing the deaths of his wife and other family members - could only utter in seeming resignation "It must have been the will of [Allah]." It's as a cry of despair, a mechanism of trying to deal and make sense of a senseless situation, perhaps intended to affix one's attention upon one's own of purpose in life, that as random and violent and unpredictable that life may appear, there's a reason for me still being here and continuing on, and getting through all this horrible crap. I wonder if we're not being overcritical of this expression - such that now appears to me more a saying arising more out of unspeakable anguish, than a saying that should be dissected beneath a theological microscope. What if, instead of the priest saying "It was God's will", he said to you rather affirmatively, "God is love"? Would that had left you with any less distasteful impression in your memory? It would still hurt. Danny

Very nicely done, Socks. Very cool, and cleanly recorded. The organ sounds great. Wow, good stuff. Danny

It's one opinion among many - not what I would consider common knowlege. Marcion cannot necessarily be pidgeonholed exclusively into either "gnostic" or "orthodox" fields - his ideas appear to me to be an interesting blend of ideas from both camps. The Marcionites had their churches, their bishops, their Bibles, their sacraments. In many respects they bore a striking resemblance to their rival sister. Warnings were even issued to those when passing through any village in search for the Catholic church, not to wander into a Marcionite Church by mistake. It was like Apple versus Microsoft, MacDonalds versus Burger King, Pepsi versus Coke. Which would you decide? You make the call! :unsure: Danny

I would like to hear further elaboration on this myself. Something to do with the Cathars, I think, amidst all the recent "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" hype. "Gnostics" were not a homogenous group, all sharing all the same theories, opinions and beliefs. No more than us today. Danny

Jesus was surrounded with many women, and wealthy ones at that (Luke 8:2-3), and "many others who ministered to Him of their substance"; they apparently waited on Him, prepared dinner for Him, and washed His feet and listened to His teaching. For that place and era, the imagery strikes me as remarkable, perhaps even unusual. But that element of celibacy seems persistent in Christianity, from what we we gather from its earliest records. Mark is correct, the Church regarded herself "The Bride", one which was to maintain herself as an undefiled virgin. Those married to God, who enslaved their flesh to the Spirit, becoming worthy of that Kingdom of the other Aeon, and equal to the angels in heaven. Danny

My recording tools have varied over the years - I began recording myself when I was about 16, using a succession of handheld cassette recorders, and then graduating from there to "multitracking" using two cassette decks, before finally picking up a portable Fostex X-15 4-track recorder sometime in the 80s; but whoa! the recording capabilities computers provide are beyond what I could have imagined a few years ago. It's like having at one's disposal limitless tracks and effects. Among the programs I use most often is Soundforge (for recording) and Cool Edit Pro for recording/multitracking/mixing, with an assortment of f/x plug-ins to clean up the sound and tailor the effects for each track. I like these programs because they're quite straightforward and easy to use; while there have been other progs that I've tried which had left me scratching my head (I don't think I have as high an IQ as you may imagine, lol). Danny

I didn't say "socialist". But I am intrigued by your reaction to the word "social". Was Jesus' words wholly devoid of any "social" context, elements or concerns? Certainly not with the fine material from James which you quoted. I think it is absolutely remarkable that our "works" - as evidence or expression of our salvation - constitutes of helping those in need, toward providing such earthly necessities as food and clothes. Danny

I have yet to venture into the business of marketing canned dog vomit. I still enjoy the Brandenburg Concertos as well. Danny

Through the years, I've had (and have expressed as much before even here) doubts as to the historicity of Jesus - that such a man as Jesus had actually existed. The Bible-as-infallible-Superbook had finally failed in its spell upon me (or if you please, I was no longer held by it). I thought to see limitations to the traditional, doctrinal logic that the Bible as a whole can and should be trusted no matter what. Yet the material which has remained most compelling to me - that convinces me that an extraordinary man existed in Palestine 2,000 years ago - are the parables of Jesus. These literary snapshots of life in a Mediterranean society; these extended metaphors which also provides to us a glimpse of life and culture from a distant era, followed by a "twist" near the end; What was Jesus trying to convey to his closest audience through these short "films"? Is it also important for us - to gather the most from Jesus' masterpieces - to understand the kind of life his audience lived? What kind of people were these folk? "No telephones, no motor cars, not a single luxury. Like Robinson Caruso..."? (sorry, I've watched too many modern bad shows...) I can assume that not all of Jesus' audience lived in houses like we do, had even a crappy car, had even the delicacy of boxed macaroni and cheese. The masses of "unemployed" were vast, and not many found themselves at a place of their own choosing or slothfulness; many were affixed to a life of Lazarus simply by virtue of not having been the first-born of a family, that fortunate one always first in line for all the means and support a family might have at its disposal. Which was not much, amid the strain and pressure of the heavy burdens yoked upon them from the native, local, religious and Roman authorities. The vast chasm that existed between "the haves" and the "have-nots" was far greater than in our own time and country. When Jesus incorporated "administrators" or "stewards" in his parables, it wasn't primarily to convey the lesson, "treat your stuff wisely and well, like that guy in that story handles his stuff"; - the opinions and reactions of Jesus' audience - comprising a good many folks among the "have-nots" - would have been far more cynical. For administrators or "stewards" were also not well-liked as the "strongmen" for the landowners, who oft went through whatever means possible to extort and bleed money from those using and living on the land. "Stewards" were not generally thought about among the "have-nots" to whom Jesus spoke. Which cannot help but make me wonder if Paul chose an unwise comparison in titling himself a "steward" (lol) - little wonder if he was more popular abroad than in that region. This may exhibit a remarkable difference between the classes and societies among whom Jesus and Paul moved and worked. Yet they shared a magnificant ideals of 'equality'. When the savior (as depicted) entered the world, he moved and lived among the outcasts, the needy, the hungry, the sick, the lame, the blind, the deaf, the unclean, the despised, - all those, BTW, as we know from the OT and Qumran material - were deemed unworthy of the presence of Israel's god and angels. Forbidden from the temple, because they were deemed by both "Liberals" (Pharisees) and "Conservatives" (Sadducees) as "unholy" of even standing before a god's presence. But in another parable, these rejects - these losers - these lowest of the lowest - are the very ones invited to celebrate the messianic banquet. "The last shall become first, and the first shall become last". The tables are turned. Like in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus. Wealth, as I have mentioned before in other threads when discussing William Herzog's book, was oft esteemed as a manifestation of one's "righteousness". I find it striking how the aristocratic, religious leaders of the temple held a view stunningly similar to that of the "prosperity" mindset of leaders in twi. But let's think for a moment, if one today becomes discouraged when thinking of ones ' hard-earned taxes going toward supporting a segment of the population, those which for whatever reason, cannot or will not help themselves. If one still believes that we're saved by God saved by His "grace" - and not by "works" or any doings of our own - doesn't that make Christians the ultimate "freeloader" recipients of the eternal social world to come? Perhaps we ought consider twice before presuming woe and blame upon the bums at the gates. Tomorrow, we can be them. In the flash of an eye, one unforeseen event or tragedy can turn one's entire life and world upside down. One can lose their job, their home, their family. Get sick, become unloved and forgotten, only to deteriorate beneath a highway overpass beneath a stinkin pile of speckly-white pidgeon dung. So closes my long-winded thoughts for the evening. It's been a long week. Danny

These may for Allen's benefit, if he still holds to that destructive form of dispensationalism, as taught by Wierwille and Bullinger, which renders the Gospel writings in certain respects inaccessible to himself, with which you evidently agree with me in your comments on point 6. I would have thought attempting to determine the sense of Jesus' own "political leanings" might to some degree enable those who claim Him for their Lord some insight as to what might be the spirit to emulate behind their own political leanings. Danny

Best luck to you, Bluz, on your upcoming electronic project! They are an awful lot of fun. I've got my eye on Paia's "Midi-Brain", a cv-to-midi converter. But I've got to see if it will work with my computer. Danny

1.) Is there anything at the beginning of each of the canonical gospels to indicate "to whom written" or "to whom addressed"? Matthew begins with a genealogy of Jesus; Mark begins with "The Beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God..."; "Luke" begins with a narrative addressed to 'Theopholus" along with the author/editor's attempt to put forth a more perfect treatise to offset the situation that there were many gospels in circulation at the time he wrote; and John begins with the logos prologue, derived in great part from the "Wisdom" genre at the time. But outside of this, no superscription on each of the canonical versions that spells out "to whom addressed"... 2. It is suggested by many scholars that the actual time of writing of the Gospels (or the versions thereof) took place the latter part of the first century; in other words, they were actually written after the Pauline epistles. 3. If there was a specific audience or readership intended by the Gospel writers, then lacking explicit superscriptions, the next recourse we have would be to examine the characteristics within the narrative of each of the Gospels to glean and reconstruct each of the Gospel writers' intent. These four gospels did not start as a unit of four as it might be erroneously supposed ( recall that there were apparently many gospels in circulation at the time 'Luke" penned his version) - they apparently enjoyed a life amidst their unique Christian communities prior to becoming gathered into the canonical collection with which we are now familiar. 4. It is well known that "Matthew" exhibits traits throughout - being commonly supposed as having originally penned in a Semitic language (the fragments of Papias are oft cited here in its mention of a gospel written in the Hebrew language), in addition to its 5-fold narrative structure - suggestive that such would have had especial appeal to a Jewish audience, or, Jewish-Christians. Others have reasonably proposed an Ebionite audience. 5.While on the other hand, "Luke' carries a different emphasis concerning its intended readership, which is highly suggestive of a primarily "Gentile" audience. It should be noted that of all the Gospels, only Luke contains Jesus' commissioning of "the seventy" (which, we all know, was a number signifying the nations). Add to this the healing of the Roman centurian's slave, and the apparent more literal emphasis of Jesus' sermon contained in Luke 6 in comparison to the more figurative emphasis of Matthew. 6,) If I had to amend the system of dispensationalism, I would not draw a sharp line of demarcation between the entire body of Gospels and the Pauline epistles, as Bullinger and Wierwille had insensitively done - such an erroneous methodology ignores the actual literary and historical content and contexts of these writings - for the Jewish Christians of their communities apparently had their version(s) of the Gospel(s) (akin to Matthew), while the Gentile-Christians had in circulation among them their own version(s) primarily intended for them (akin to our canonical "Luke"). In fact, it is interesting to note that Paul's reproduction of Jesus' communion in 1 Cor. 11 follows more the wording of the Lukan account than any other. 7.) I would highly suggest that if you really want to grasp the import of what Jesus' "political" leanings might have been, get caught up to speed on actual biblical research done this past century, and a fine area for expanding your investigations would be in the area of studies done on Jesus' parables, beginning with C.H. Dodd's "Parables of the Kingdom" and J. Jeremias' "Parables of Jesus" to the more recent groundbreaking "Parables as Subversive Speech" by Herzog. Jesus' parables had explosive implications in the era and the social setting they were first aired, and there's little doubt that the content of His parables alone would have resulted in Him being crucified by the state perhaps more than anything else He had uttered at the time. 8.) in discussing the era and environment of Jesus in Palestine, we are most certainly NOT dealing with a modern American (nor Aussie) economic, political and social system. A good many of Jesus' parables underscored the oppression and exploitation of the ruling classes of His society. But we oft fail to grasp this 20 centuries later within the comforts of our own world. Danny

"Blessed are the poor...blessed are those who hunger now...blessed are those who weep now..." Oh, I forgot. According to old Way dispensational leanings, a number of you don't actually believe the words of Jesus recorded in the gospels pertain to us at all, not being addressed to us. It's quite difficult to follow a savior whose words don't even apply to you, isn't it....

"Known" this way only to your own self perhaps.

Socks - The "live" effect is perhaps more from the "TC Native Reverb" plug-in that I used for post mixing this little snippet. But the tremelo-like "pulse" beneath the sound which you very aptly described comes from my shaking fingers. It's a very sensitive instrument. Thank you Chas. The instrument really can sound like a human voice, or a violin, or an organ, or even certain wind instruments. Which is perhaps why it's oft regarded the earliest version of a synthesizer. Hope I can pick up an amp half as nice as your beautiful new Fender, with which to sculpt other voices through the tone controls. Speaking of tubes, the early tube versions of the Theremin made by the Victor RCA company are the most sought after, and expensive! I'd love to acquire one of those. :) Danny

I liked your post, but I do not agree with the notion that the "Jew' religion is a "worldly counterfeit", when we recall that the same thing has been expressed of Christian movements as well (by other Christians no less). Danny

If our ROA experience was ever filmed in the style of a weird 50s sci-fi movie, the soundtrack might sound something like this. As promised, a small snippet of the sound of my Theremin, with some reverb added. I tried uploading a slightly larger file of a better piece, but it wouldn't go. Danny Beat_Sci.mp3

Sunesis - This thought also occurred to me a few years ago. When a person "sleeps", they generally don't cease to exist altogether. As you suggest, "consciousness" (or sub-conscience?) is still seemingly "somewhere else" or active in some way. There's still so much about the human mind that is not known or understood, despite centuries of attempts in both science and theology to map it all out. Johniam, very good points as well. Danny

Concerning the Parable of the rich man and Lazarus, Herzog writes ( Parables as Subversive Speech , pp.129-130): "Having been surrounded by signs of God's abundant blessing, his own evident prosperity, and even his honorable death, the rich man should have been in Abraham's bosom. By contrast, Lazarus should have been in flames. This portrayal would have confirmed the social system that honored one and discarded the other as shameful. The reversal of their expected fates undermined not simply the hearers' view of the afterlife but, more important, their assumption that present circumstances could be used as a reliable guide for discerning God's judgment or, to put the matter more pointedly, that social class was an indicator of divine blessing or honorable status. Once this connection had been broken, the assorted rural folk of Galilee or Judea could inquire into reasons for their misery that were much closer to home. In first century Palestine, any such presumed aligning of human fate with divine will involved the sanction of sacred texts, in the case of the parable, the Torah (=Moses) and the Prophets. But Jesus was not making an abstract or generalized appeal to Scripture; he was making an appeal in the context of what had been revealed in the parable about the rich and the destitute. How could the holy and the clean end up in the flames while the unclean poor were taken into the caree of Abraham's bosom when the Torah, as interpreted by Jerusalem scribes, concluded that the opposite should occur? If wealth and poverty were not signs of God's blessing and curse, then how should they be understood? If wealth and poverty were not the result of God's mandate, then what were their causes? If the scribes were wrong about this matter, could they be trusted to interpret the Torah in other matters? The parable discloses a loose thread capable of unraveling a much larger pattern." Little wonder that someone like a Wierwille, hording the cash and flying about in his private jet and preaching his brand of "prosperity" and "abundant life" - as if these were genuine badges of "righteousness" and true "believing" - couldn't propose an understanding of Jesus' parable there extending beyond the depth of a cardboard cutout. He was totally oblivious to it, and unfortunately, I don't expect his most zealous brown-nosers would venture any farther outside the coziness of that dogmatic hedge he constructed for them. Of course charities weren't high on the list of the Way's goals - the "poor', after all, apparently comprised mostly of "natural folk" of which the true spiritual elite need not concern themselves. Their "believing" just wasn't up to par (they supposed) - they were where they were because they were in some way deficient in "operating" God's "natural laws". Oh yeah. Wierwille "reproduced" a certain attitude from the first century alright - unfortunately it wasn't that of Jesus, but of the oppressors of the religious elite He spoke out against. There is great meaning behind this parable. But it will not be perceived by freeze-framing one's mind within the opinions of a deceased charlatan, who is most likely anywhere but "Abraham's bosom" at this moment. Danny