T-Bone

Welcome to GSC, Blarney – really cool rendition – thanks for the Ukulele Gently Weeps. I am always fascinated how a familiar tune sounds from different instrumentation/interpretation. Socks and Satori – I have a number of McLaughlin CDs – with Socks mentioning his Mahavishnu Orchestra, I would have to say the Inner Mounting Flame album has got to be one of my top ten favorites of JM. This one band I was in was a lot of fun – we’d all come up with renditions of tunes from our favorite groups – it made for a very eclectic repertoire that always managed to astound and confuse the audience :blink: …Anyway – I came up with a trilogy of JM’s tunes: Marbles, Dance of the Maya, Birds of Fire – I arranged them where we would play it straight for a few passages [just like the record] and then jazz it up by changing the time and do variations of a theme…Now I gotta be honest with you all – on my being musically inept and having a wooden ear – I always made up for in resourcefulness and creativity. I’d always ask the two guitarists in our band to take home my albums of choice and by next band practice show me the chords and modulations of specified tunes. These guys could figure out anything! Then I’d take it from there with what I could “hear” in my head - - hey – I’m a great bass player...in my head, anyway . Oh yeah – on that Reverse echo thing on the Korg Processor – I messed around with that a bunch last night! And this thing is so easy to set up and convenient – I didn’t even use my amp last night – just plugged my headphones into the Korg Processor…A real mind blower!!! I was playing the bass line to Strawberry Fields Forever and what I heard in my headphones was “I buried Paul’s Hofner.” <_<

Invisible Dan, Concerning historical evidence Bruce refers to early Jewish writings – especially the Jewish Historian Josephus http://www.worldinvisible.com/library/ffbruce/ntdocrli/ntdocc09.htm The Works of Josephus is a good read for anyone that enjoys ancient history and touches on noteworthy people and events in the Bible. I'm not here to defend Bruce – just responding to you asking what evidence he provides. He does list some books for further reading of which I've read a couple http://www.worldinvisible.com/library/ffbruce/ntdocrli/ntdocbib.htm I'm not hung up in trying to defend the "integrity" of the Bible – or that I could prove it's infallible by doctrinal or philosophical argument. My opinion on any Bible stuff is going to be biased for sure – I'm a Bible-believing Christian. My point in these posts has been – from the things I've read, I believe the New Testament documents are reliable in terms of historical and geographical references, who wrote them, when they wrote them and because of my Christian bias [philosophical presupposition] view them as doctrinally and philosophically harmonious with the Old Testament. Like I said before - I guess it comes down to which scholars you refer to. I have The Commentary on the New Testament: Acts by R.C.H. Lenski, Speaking about the noted scholar Sir W.M. Ramsay, Lenski says on page 8, 9: "Ramsay…started with the view that the Acts were of little value historically because, like John's Gospel, they had been written with an ulterior purpose. But in his Bearing of Recent Discovery, p.89, he confesses: "The more I have studied the narrative of Acts, and the more I have learned year after year about the Greco-Roman society and thoughts and fashions and organizations in those provinces, the more I admire and the better I understand. I set out to look for truth on the borderland where Greece and Asia meet and found it here." End of excerpt I am no longer a follower of the Bible-worshipping crowd like TWI. I think that produces a cold, lifeless, legalistic religion that prohibits God from intruding. I view the Bible as a means to connect with God. Nor do I think the Bible or my faith will fall apart if I'm wrong on how many were crucified with Jesus. Because I focus on the central figure of the crucifixion – Jesus! I agree with your sentiment that Christians should be more concerned about following the teachings of Jesus and not getting hung up on doctrinal differences.

Invisible Dan, I guess it depends on which scholars you refer to. The following excerpt is from The New Testament Documents – Are They Reliable by F.F. Bruce – and I think your position is based more on a philosophical presupposition [see the bold red section below] than on historical evidence. The link to this article is http://www.worldinvisible.com/library/ffbruce/ntdocrli/ntdocc02.htm "…The New Testament was complete, or substantially complete, about AD 100, the majority of the writings being in existence twenty to forty years before this. In this country a majority of modern scholars fix the dates of the four Gospels as follows: Matthew, c. 85-90; Mark, c. 65; Luke, c. 80-85; John, c. 90-100.4 I should be inclined to date the first three Gospels rather earlier: Mark shortly after AD 60, Luke between 60 and 70, and Matthew shortly after 70. One criterion which has special weight with me is the relation which these writings appear to bear to the destruction of the city and temple of Jerusalem by the Romans in AD 70. My view of the matter is that Mark and Luke were written before this event, and Matthew not long afterwards. But even with the later dates, the situation' encouraging from the historian's point of view, for the first three Gospels were written at a time when man, were alive who could remember the things that Jesus said and did, and some at least would still be alive when the fourth Gospel was written. If it could be determined that the writers of the Gospels used sources of information belonging to an earlier date, then the situation would be still more encouraging. But a more detailed examination of the Gospels will come in a later chapter. The date of the writing of Acts will depend on the date we affix to the third Gospel, for both are parts of one historical work, and the second part appears to have been written soon after the first. There are strong arguments for dating the twofold work not long after Paul's two years' detention in Rome (AD 60-62)Some scholars, however, consider that the 'former treatise' to which Acts originally formed the sequel was not our present Gospel of Luke but an earlier draft, sometimes called 'ProtoLuke'; this enables them to date Acts in the sixties, while holding that the Gospel of Luke in its final form was rather later. The dates of the thirteen Pauline Epistles can be fixed partly by internal and partly by external evidence. The day has gone by when the authenticity of these letters could be denied wholesale. There are some writers today who would reject Ephesians; fewer would reject 2 Thessalonians; more would deny that the Pastoral Epistles (I and ~ Timothy and Titus) came in their present form from the hand of Paul.' I accept them all as Pauline, but the remaining eight letters would by themselves be sufficient for our purpose, and it is from these that the main arguments are drawn in our later chapter on 'The Importance of Paul's Evidence'. Ten of the letters which bear Paul's name belong to the period before the end of his Roman imprisonment. These ten, in order of writing, may be dated as follows: Galatians, 48; I and 2 Thessalonians, 50; Philippians, 54; I and 2 Corinthians, 54-56; Romans, 57; Colossians, Philemon, and Ephesians, c. 60. The Pastoral Epistles, in their diction and historical atmosphere, contain signs of later date than the other Pauline Epistles, but this presents less difficulty to those who believe in a second imprisonment of Paul at Rome about the year 64, which was ended by his execution.' The Pastoral Epistle can then be dated c. 63-64, and the changed state of affairs in the Pauline churches to which they bear witness will have been due in part to the opportunity which Paul's earlier Roman imprisonment afforded to his opponents m these churches. At any rate, the time elapsing between the evangelic events and the writing of most of the New Testament books was, from the standpoint of historical research, satisfactorily short. For in assessing the trustworthiness of ancient historical writings, one of the most important questions is: How soon after the events took place were they recorded ? 3. What is the evidence for their early existence? | About the middle of the last century it was confidently asserted by a very influential school of thought that some of the most important books of the New Testament,including the Gospels and the Acts, did not exist before the thirties of the second century AD. This conclusion was the result not so much of historical evidence as of philosophical presuppositions. Even then there was sufficient historical evidence to show how unfounded these theories were, as Lightfoot, Tischendorf, Tregelles and others demonstrated m their writings; but the amount of such evidence available in our own day is so much greater and more conclusive that a firstcentury date for most of the New Testament writings cannot reasonably be denied, no matter what our philosophical presuppositions may be. The evidence for our New Testament writings is ever so much greater than the evidence for many writings of classical authors, the authenticity of which noone dreams of questioning. And if the New Testament were a collection of secular writings, their authenticity would generally be regarded as beyond all doubt. It is a curious fact that historians have often been much readier to trust the New Testament records than have many theologians. Somehow or other, there are people who regard a 'sacred book' as ipso facto under suspicion, and demand much more corroborative evidence for such a work than they would for an ordinary secular or pagan writing From the viewpoint of the historian, the same standards must be applied to both. But we do not quarrel with those who want more evidence for the New Testament than for other writings; firstly, because the universal claims which the New Testament makes upon mankind are so absolute, and the character and works of its chief Figure so unparalleled, that we want to be as sure of its truth as we possibly can; and secondly, because in point of fact there is much more evidence for the New Testament than for other ancient writings of comparable date…" End of excerpt

I think there's enough noteworthy details to distinguish two different experiences mentioned in Galatians and II Corinthians. There appears to be a three year time period [Galatians 1:17, 18] sandwiched in between Paul's conversion [Galatians 1: 15, 16] and his second trip to Jerusalem [Galatians 2:1]. In other words, when Paul is referencing his second trip to Jerusalem [Galatians 2:1] – it was fourteen years after his first trip there [Galatians 1:18] which was three years after his conversion on the way to Damascus. So, I don't think this fourteen year time-period is in reference to his conversion. When these epistles were written is another matter to consider. Some scholars say Galatians was written around the Spring of 53 A.D. and II Corinthians around late Summer of 57 A.D. – and Acts about 63 A.D. Some place Paul's conversion at around 34 A.D…Roughly around 46 to 48 is Paul's first missionary journey. Subtracting 14 years from Paul's reference in II Corinthians 12 [written around 57 A.D.] of his third heaven experience would bring us back to 43 A.D. – 9 years after his conversion. Also judging by how he refers to himself in each passage seems to show a distinction between the conversion and third heaven experience. In Galatians Paul says God "called me by his grace…to reveal his Son in me." In Corinthians Paul says "I knew a man in Christ" – already a convert, and to keep him from getting conceited was tormented by a messenger of Satan in the midst of insults, persecutions, hardships, etc. that befell this committed convert. Galatians 1:13-2:2 13 For you have heard of my previous way of life in Judaism, how intensely I persecuted the church of God and tried to destroy it. 14 I was advancing in Judaism beyond many Jews of my own age and was extremely zealous for the traditions of my fathers. 15 But when God, who set me apart from birth and called me by his grace, was pleased 16 to reveal his Son in me so that I might preach him among the Gentiles, I did not consult any man, 17 nor did I go up to Jerusalem to see those who were apostles before I was, but I went immediately into Arabia and later returned to Damascus. 18 Then after three years, I went up to Jerusalem to get acquainted with Peter and stayed with him fifteen days. 19 I saw none of the other apostles—only James, the Lord's brother. 20 I assure you before God that what I am writing you is no lie. 21 Later I went to Syria and Cilicia. 22 I was personally unknown to the churches of Judea that are in Christ. 23 They only heard the report: "The man who formerly persecuted us is now preaching the faith he once tried to destroy." 24 And they praised God because of me. 1 Fourteen years later I went up again to Jerusalem, this time with Barnabas. I took Titus along also. 2 I went in response to a revelation and set before them the gospel that I preach among the Gentiles. But I did this privately to those who seemed to be leaders, for fear that I was running or had run my race in vain. II Corinthians 12:1-10 1 I must go on boasting. Although there is nothing to be gained, I will go on to visions and revelations from the Lord. 2 I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago was caught up to the third heaven. Whether it was in the body or out of the body I do not know—God knows. 3 And I know that this man—whether in the body or apart from the body I do not know, but God knows— 4 was caught up to paradise. He heard inexpressible things, things that man is not permitted to tell. 5 I will boast about a man like that, but I will not boast about myself, except about my weaknesses. 6 Even if I should choose to boast, I would not be a fool, because I would be speaking the truth. But I refrain, so no one will think more of me than is warranted by what I do or say. 7 To keep me from becoming conceited because of these surpassingly great revelations, there was given me a thorn in my flesh, a messenger of Satan, to torment me. 8 Three times I pleaded with the Lord to take it away from me. 9 But he said to me, "My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness." Therefore I will boast all the more gladly about my weaknesses, so that Christ's power may rest on me. 10 That is why, for Christ's sake, I delight in weaknesses, in insults, in hardships, in persecutions, in difficulties. For when I am weak, then I am strong.

Yes – great points Hamm, WordWolf and Socks! And Socks, thinking about your post on the # 1 qualification of a Christian "leader" being that the person is truly a FOLLOWER of the Teacher, Jesus Christ – that reminded me of what Jesus said in Luke. There's lots of stuff in this passage about the influence Christians can have on each other, about leadership, about self-examination, about looking at what type of fruit comes out of our labor, about change and growth – and most importantly He brings it back to the critical qualifying question – if I am calling Jesus Lord, am I doing what He says? Luke 6:39-49 NASB 39 And He also spoke a parable to them: "A blind man cannot guide a blind man, can he? Will they not both fall into a pit? 40 "A pupil is not above his teacher; but everyone, after he has been fully trained, will be like his teacher. 41 "Why do you look at the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? 42 "Or how can you say to your brother, 'Brother, let me take out the speck that is in your eye,' when you yourself do not see the log that is in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take out the speck that is in your brother's eye. 43 "For there is no good tree which produces bad fruit, nor, on the other hand, a bad tree which produces good fruit. 44 "For each tree is known by its own fruit. For men do not gather figs from thorns, nor do they pick grapes from a briar bush. 45 "The good man out of the good treasure of his heart brings forth what is good; and the evil man out of the evil treasure brings forth what is evil; for his mouth speaks from that which fills his heart. 46 "Why do you call Me, 'Lord, Lord,' and do not do what I say? 47 "Everyone who comes to Me and hears My words and acts on them, I will show you whom he is like: 48 he is like a man building a house, who dug deep and laid a foundation on the rock; and when a flood occurred, the torrent burst against that house and could not shake it, because it had been well built. 49 "But the one who has heard and has not acted accordingly, is like a man who built a house on the ground without any foundation; and the torrent burst against it and immediately it collapsed, and the ruin of that house was great."

It looks like Paul IS referencing his road to Damascus experience in Galatians 1 – where he does not emphasize the “special effects” of the incident – but the point of the experience – “to reveal His Son in me so that I might preach Him among the Gentiles” [Galatians 1:16].

Thanks for the John McLaughlin clip, Satori – I love his music, especially the acoustic stuff. Socks, I've got Level 32's Level Best and had to play Something About You this morning after you mentioned it – yeah great bass work by King on that. I got the Korg processor yesterday afternoon – I was impressed even before I opened it. The shipping box was HUGE! I thought they mistakenly sent me a bass guitar case. Anyway…It's very easy to operate – and I like the built-in tuner [i've got a wooden ear yah know]. I messed around with the Flanger, Wah, Fuzz, etc. a little – but had the most fun playing with the variety of reverb, echo and delays! And like you were saying Waysider about the creative juices flowing – I kept playing a couple of my favorite riffs with the different reverb and delays – wow! This thing has a ton of features but like I said – very easy to use…This new toy ought to keep me busy for awhile. [now with the echo set to only 1%] I I just just want want to to say say – - this this stomp stomp box box is is great great!!

Okay – here's my 2 cents thrown in…Paul refers to his experience of seeing the resurrected Christ in Corinthians: I Corinthians 15: 1-11 NASB 1 Now I make known to you, brethren, the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received, in which also you stand, 2 by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain. 3 For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, 5 and that He appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. 6 After that He appeared to more than five hundred brethren at one time, most of whom remain until now, but some have fallen asleep; 7 then He appeared to James, then to all the apostles; 8 and last of all, as to one untimely born, He appeared to me also. 9 For I am the least of the apostles, and not fit to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. 10 But by the grace of God I am what I am, and His grace toward me did not prove vain; but I labored even more than all of them, yet not I, but the grace of God with me. 11 Whether then it was I or they, so we preach and so you believed. The above passage hits me that Christ's appearing to Paul wasn't unprecedented because of the other instances he mentions before his. And from my Trinitarian viewpoint – I consider the appearance of the resurrected Christ on par with the appearances of the Lord in the Old testament…Paul also indicated the experience was due to God's amazing grace – which puts the spotlight back on God rather than Paul's personality…I don't really see any contradictions between what Jesus said in the gospels and what Paul wrote in the epistles. I'm not saying there aren't any – I'm just not aware of any offhand – it may help if you could be more specific and cite certain passages. Ephesians 2:19,20 mentions the foundation built BY the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus Himself being the corner stone. It may be some who adhere to a strict dispensationalist's viewpoint see a big difference in the gospels and the epistles. In Galatians Paul does speak of a common authentic gospel – a message that he and the other apostles and prophets spread. And to me - the basic message in the epistles appears to be the same as what began in the gospels and continued in Acts: that Jesus is Lord and God raised Him from the dead. Galatians 1 NASB 1 Paul, an apostle (not sent from men nor through the agency of man, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised Him from the dead), 2 and all the brethren who are with me, To the churches of Galatia: 3 Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ, 4 who gave Himself for our sins so that He might rescue us from this present evil age, according to the will of our God and Father, 5 to whom be the glory forevermore. Amen. 6 I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel; 7 which is really not another; only there are some who are disturbing you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed! 9 As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed! 10 For am I now seeking the favor of men, or of God? Or am I striving to please men? If I were still trying to please men, I would not be a bond-servant of Christ. 11 For I would have you know, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man. 12 For I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ. 13 For you have heard of my former manner of life in Judaism, how I used to persecute the church of God beyond measure and tried to destroy it; 14 and I was advancing in Judaism beyond many of my contemporaries among my countrymen, being more extremely zealous for my ancestral traditions. 15 But when God, who had set me apart even from my mother's womb and called me through His grace, was pleased 16 to reveal His Son in me so that I might preach Him among the Gentiles, I did not immediately consult with flesh and blood, 17 nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before me; but I went away to Arabia, and returned once more to Damascus. 18 Then three years later I went up to Jerusalem to become acquainted with Cephas, and stayed with him fifteen days. 19 But I did not see any other of the apostles except James, the Lord's brother. 20 (Now in what I am writing to you, I assure you before God that I am not lying.) 21 Then I went into the regions of Syria and Cilicia. 22 I was still unknown by sight to the churches of Judea which were in Christ; 23 but only, they kept hearing, "He who once persecuted us is now preaching the faith which he once tried to destroy." 24 And they were glorifying God because of me.

Yo, Socks – speaking of amps in your post # 2376– I ordered one of these bad boys [see below] from Musician's Friend. I've never owned an effects box – this one sure looked interesting – especially their claim of imitating some vintage and hi-end amps and cabinets. And Tonto will really appreciate this - it has a headphone output. I may be in for a let down – but I figure I'm about due for a new toy. http://www.musiciansfriend.com/product/Ton...Bass?sku=152170 ToneWorks AX3000B Modeling Signal Processor for Bass Using Korg's exclusive Resonant Electronic Modeling System (REMS), the AX3000B Modeling Signal Processor provides a familiar knob-based interface with easy access to all functions, a backlit LCD, an expression pedal, and breakthrough Expression Step Sequencer (ESS). 72 different bass effects give you unprecedented tonal breadth. 16 types of drive/amp effects model tons of sought-after vintage and hi-end amps and effects including a wide range of pre-effects, cabinets, modulation, delay, and reverb (11 types of each). Effects can be activated 7 at a time and include compressor, limiter, wah, flanger, chorus, and 2-octave pitch shifter, as well as fretless and bass synth effects, plus a lot more. Create and store 96 programs with your favorite combination of REMS effects. 32 preset programs are also provided. Use the expression pedal to control wah, volume, or many other effect parameters, or assign a wide range of functions to the Control Switch for even greater flexibility. - - - Picking up on their 7 effects all at once feature - I'm thinking about pitching a T-Shirt with I operate all seven all the time on front and back – to Korg. May get some flak from staunch PFAL grads – "man, that's so Old Testament." …working on a design for the ultimate bass effect: The Electronic Gear Operation Booster – or EGO Booster for short. It will have three settings: 1. OKCT Mode – which stands for Off Key Corrective Technology. In this setting it doesn't matter what note you play the EGO Booster's on-board microphone picks up all ambient musical sounds and re-tunes any incoming bass notes that are off key. Uses a Micrognome Timing System [a teeny tiny musical conductor inside] to ensure the bass passage is in time with the rest of the band. This mode works best when playing with other musicians who really know how to play their instruments. 2. Jack Bruce Mode – very useful setting when playing with a small band, it fills in the gaps, and dazzles the audience – they'll think you're playing lead guitar, and can be used to call in whales, or serve as an emergency back-up if your ship's fog horn craps out. 3. Chuck Norris Mode – the setting of choice any time there's a battle of the bands. You're guaranteed to win! Warning: may result in physical injury to your own band members as well as the audience.

Happy anniversary Mr. & Mrs. Socks - what’s more interesting than a perfect match is a pair that work well together!

Mmm…fabulous…that’s what shoppers are saying when they browse through our Pre-Owned Delicates Department – fabulous selection – fabulous prices! Unless your underwear is going to be posted on a billboard - it really doesn't matter what it looks like.

Yeah – I bought into all the PFAL stuff. There was never any doubt while I was in TWI. Matter of fact the only doubt I wrestled with while in TWI was the self-doubt over my spiritual abilities – like operating all nine all the time or if I was really believing for something to happen. I've done a 180 on this doubt thing. I now view doubt as being a good thing. All sorts of doubts arose after I left TWI. But rather than focusing on what was the problem within me – I turned my questioning around to analyze TWI's doctrine, the mindset they fostered and yes...even questioning the Bible. These doubts forced me to think about my faith, to unravel it, to figure out why I believed this or that, to ferret out any "invisible" assumptions I held - to get as much of my thinking process out in front. I think doubt is an important element of our critical thinking process. It provides impetus to seek understanding…to double and triple check our thinking…And being a Christian it has been a surprising stimulus to strengthen my relationship with God and deepen my understanding of doctrine and personal application. I read an interesting book that might help some Christians who are afraid of doubt: The Sunnier Side of Doubt by Alister McGrath.

Happy birthday, SirGuessaLot - the knight in shining prose.

Happy birthday, Groucho – and in honor of your namesake the following adaptation: I once caught a cult leader in my pajamas…how he got in my pajamas I’ll never know.

I bet Chuck makes Him wear it.

I chose the one: I'm a Christian, and I say, remove him from office, and possibly press charges. Spare the flock and the community. And I’ll tell you my reasons. There are passages in the Bible that indicate ministers are held to a higher standard. No where in Scripture does it indicate a minister is above the moral code of the Bible nor the laws of the land. Jesus Christ is referred to as the Chief Shepherd – and since it is His flock and ministers are under His employ I think church government should follow His dictates whenever He addressed applicable church matters in the gospels or written by His apostles in the epistles. I also recall Ephesians mention of how husbands are to love their wives as Christ loved the church and gave Himself for her. I don’t think it’s that unrealistic to expect ministers who work under Christ have a long suit in self-sacrifice for the sake of love. The congregation is not there to serve him – he is there to serve them! God doesn’t view anyone as expendable – not even His ministers. The apostle Paul exemplified a true minister’s heart – happy serving the Lord and His people, putting other people’s needs ahead of his own and tried to honor God to the best of his ability both in public and private.

Have a good one!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

My concern on this topic has been an attempt to define Christianity’s concept of guidance from God. Which I think falls into two categories – and for want of better terms will just say for right now are: literal/specific directives and figurative/intellectual moral influence. And in my opinion the latter is typical for the Christian. Oak’s post has helped me clarify a thought. When I speak of a literal guidance from God with specific directives – I am not including how the Bible was written. That is a book addressing many spiritual matters - these cannot be independently verified, measured, etc. – and as such are subjective in nature. In regards to the historical aspects of the Bible – that is something concrete – references to people, places, events and things that can be cross-referenced by other artifacts, books, independent sources, etc. – these are items of physical substance and can be analyzed… What I am saying is that any literal guidance noted in the Bible could be verified – in terms of accuracy, measured, effects, etc. – and so would be objective. Ananias followed the specific directives of the Lord – he went to the specific street/house he was told about and found Paul.

I agree with you there, Oak. I've said it before that our belief system interprets the world around us. When it comes right down to it people usually lean on personal experiences to back up why they believe the way that they do…And being a Christian I am also very passionate about the points of Bliss' posts – that Christianity is a PERSONAL experience. I cannot prove that Jesus Christ got up from the dead – but my faith came by hearing the word of Christ [Romans 10] and somehow a connection was established with my heavenly Father – and I have no doubt that Christ is alive! There are passages that speak of believers knowing whether Jesus' teaching is of God, of the Spirit guiding Christians into the truth, of God opening the believer's understanding. But all this is internal – subjective – and holds no weight in a debate [a little polemic poetry ]. Sorry – I know I'm no help to either side of this debate – I just enjoy exploring belief systems. I'm sure glad we all don't think alike…or believe alike…It's a fun thing to do to try and take a look at our own belief system through the eyes of another. …with much love and confusion blowing your way, the Guesstimating Theologian.

Have a great birthday, Chatty!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Thanks, Nandon!!!!! I love this Chuck Norris stuff! And it explains so many of the mysterious things in life.

…continuing to think out loud from my post # 26…I'm not satisfied with the terminology I used to differentiate between the two types of guidance – but that's the best I can do right now. I've thought about adding objective and subjective for the purpose of specifying their source. Objective would apply to literal guidance – specific directives. It is God directly communicating to someone. Referring to the gospel that he preached, Paul said he didn't get it from man but received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ [Galatians 1:11, 12]. In his days as a persecutor, Paul certainly knew about Jesus – but then he personally met Him one day on the road to Damascus [Acts 9:1-16]. The source of this revelation was something external from Paul's mind. Paul's experience on the Damascus road was real, physical and even publicly verifiable – though the experience of Paul's traveling companions was not exactly the same as his [Acts 9:7 "The men who traveled with him stood speechless, hearing the voice but seeing no one."]. In The Penguin Dictionary of Psychology by Arthur Reber & Emily Reber objective is characterizing a thing the nature of which is determinable through the use of physical measurement; uncontaminated by the emotional aspects of personal assessment; external to the body or mind; sensed or experienced as externally localized. Subjective would apply to figurative guidance – intellectual/moral influence. God is communicating indirectly to a person. Jesus said if anyone is willing to do God's will, he will know whether or not Jesus' teaching is from God [John 7:17]. Akin to this is a reference by John of the Holy Spirit guiding believers into the truth . The Penguin Dictionary of Psychology says of subjective: loosely, characteristic of or dependent on an individual…that which is subjective is internal, personal, not available for public scrutiny…the fundamental nature of the event can only be experienced internally, privately…unreliable, biased, contaminated by personal, emotional evaluations. As a Christian, thinking about the two types of guidance - objective/literal or subjective/figurative -I can only speak from experience about the latter and think Psychology's definition of subjective accurately describes my experience of being "led" by the Spirit. Things are not always cut and dry…there's times of wondering if a certain idea was mine or the Spirit's…a lot of times actually…and boy – thinking about my TWI years – how much I let their mindset and screwy interpretations of verses set a bias in my head. So I'm saying it's not a very reliable form of guidance - not only because it lacks substantial impact but also because my sinful/imperfect head can get in the way and really cloud the issues. So, I believe that God's Spirit is in me – and that He works in me – mysteriously somehow – subtly – within my mind – within the way I personally process data coming in – perhaps at a subconscious level. I think our Creator does more to honor His creation by encouraging us to USE our minds to the max – which includes ferreting out all the whys and wherefores, options, relevant details, ramifications of decisions. His Spirit is present as a guide on our spiritual journey – inspiring us to imitate Christ, reminding us of our fallen nature, making a passage come alive and zing us in the heart or simply help us abstract a principle out of Scripture and see where it's applicable in our situation. Again – just thinking aloud here – speculating about something not clearly articulated in Scripture – the Spirit's intellectual/moral guidance. In thinking about the radical shift in many of my beliefs since I left TWI – I wonder about what God has in mind with this internal, intellectual/moral guidance, this "being led by the Spirit" thing. I don't think it's meant to be an overt guidance system…some overpowering sensation that intrudes…He is not one to violate our person-hood. I even went through a spell of disappointment with God after leaving TWI – wishing He would have been a little more obvious in helping me out of that mess…Oh I don't know – perhaps the disembodied voice of Charlton Heston screaming at me through a megaphone "Get out of there you big dummy!!!!" – and maybe throw in a burning PFAL book – and the book is totally consumed by the fire but all my furniture is unscathed – not even the smell of smoke upon it! ...I often recognize His influence in circumstances that call upon my faith, my nobler side – where in one instance it may be summoning the courage and strength to do the right thing or another time it's feeling compelled to hang out with a friend and just listen, love and let them unload.

Ok – if you’re gonna put us on the spot like that, Excathedra – I’ll have to resort to my ol’ standby – quote from a book. Under Ministry in Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, editor Walter Elwell, page 721: “The biblical concept of ministry is service rendered to God or to people. Ministry in the church has as its goal the edification of individuals with a view toward corporate maturity in Christ [Ephesians 4:7-16]. The concept of ministry as service is seen in words diakoneo [“serve”] and douleuo [“serve as a slave”] and their corresponding nouns. The word hyperetes indicates one who gives willing service to another – e.g., servants of the “word” [Luke 1:2], of Christ [John 18:36; Acts 26:16; I Corinthians 4:1], of Christ [John 18:36; Acts 26:16; I Corinthians 4:1], and of Paul and Barnabus [Acts 13:5]. The word leitourgia, and its corresponding verb, leitourgeo, often refer to the priestly service in the OT. They are used figuratively in the NT to indicate financial “ministry” [Romans 15:27; II Corinthians 9:12] and the pouring out of Paul’s life sacrificially in his ministry [Philippians 2;17]. This terminology describes Christian service in general, but in the postapostolic period it is increasingly applied to the distinctive service of clergy as the Christian counterpart to the OT Levitical ministers.”

Belated happy birthday to yah, RainbowsGirl – and thanks for putting me on your friends list.

Welcome to GSC, RainbowsGirl – I love checking out this Guitar thread myself – lots of great stuff here – and I agree with what you said about music speaking to our hearts in its own language…Also a big hearty welcome to Walking! I envy anyone that studies classical style guitar and can sight read. I’m a self-taught bass player [although it’s more of just a hobby now – haven’t played with anyone since I left TWI in 86]. Dmiller, I thought you might appreciate this. Tonto is a Beatle and Bluegrass fan – and being the experienced Indian scout that she is - read about a Beatlegras concert nearby…so last night we went - wow wee!!! These guys are fantastic! After their second tune I ran over to a concession stand selling their CDs and bought one for fear they’d be sold out later…Anyway – I love to hear different arrangements of favorite tunes and experiencing the meld of musical influences. The stand up bass player, George Anderson – just blew me away – especially on one solo where he did that – I don’t know what you call it, scat singing or something – like when a guitarist whistles or sings non-words along with their guitar notes - - simply amazing…You can check out a video of them in concert on You Tube at