Bob

Galen, Let's not speak of what you or someone else is doing in your head.

I thought I was translating Luke, not mathew?

Makes more sense to me the other, straight-forward way. Doesn't requires other books of the Bible to circle round and bring in a theology, and with less assumptions. How's this for a transaltion of Luke 7:28 (the common man's, street translation)? "I'm telling you, John is the biggest son of a bitch there ever was. God's toilet cleaners are better than him." Well, that's one way to read it, maybe. ;)--> Maybe it's just my warped brain? More likely though the lack of nicotine in my blood this morning (damn cancer sticks -- get thee hence!!!).

Huh? -->

One thing that Picknett pointed out is that Salome appears in the section of Mark that was removed by Clement (found in the 1950s, quoted in a letter to Clement -- he had it removed b/c a Gnostic group was using it to justify one of their doctrines). The section is another version of the Lazarus incident. I've seen several references to Lazarus and Mary Magdalene being related. Also wealthy and probably financing Jesus. In the quote, Salome is right there with them. Picknett also points out that the Mandaeans' texts state that Lazarus was originally a disciple of John. And Bethany was a place frequented by John, and the home of Lazarus. So putting two and two together, Lazarus and his house switch over to Jesus and Salome uses her influence to have John removed. Jesus then starts taking over John's followers. It's an interesting mental exercise. I'm doing worse in discussing it than Picknett did though.

Ham, There's a needle in your arm, and it's not yours. :D-->

By seriously, I mean them being what they claim to be -- a true account of the life of Jesus and/or, as some take them, God-breathed. As an example of how a religion develops, they're fascinating. Plus, since you can't exist in this culture without them impacting you in some way, it's prefered to have a good handle on them.

No. But dismissing ideas because they disagree with held beliefs is dangerous. It's one of TWI's most powerful methods that keeps people under their thumb. They are not allowed to consider any alternative other than what they sanction. Just because an idea sounds far fetched, doesn't mean it's wrong. It's wrong when an examination of the facts prove it such.

To be honest, I don't take the Gospels seriously. I've studied enough about their history and development to realize they are basically propaganda texts promoting a mystic Jesus and contain very little factual data. If the topic is an affront to your beliefs, fine. No big deal. Not looking for a battle. I just enjoy exploring topics as this (my favorite so far was comparing the Dead Sea Scrolls to the New Testament -- very interesting). Dan, I would be interested Burt Mack's book if you can find the title. Picknett's book perked my interest but lacks substance.

Maybe there's someone in your head, and it's not you.

Actually, the right answer is there (well, a combination of a couple of them). Sane? A matter of opinion. Looking for answers? Not really. Got all I need for the moment. I'm sure tomorrow will have some more questions requiring investigation though.

Been reading Lynn Pichnett's book, "The Secret History of Lucifer." I don't really recommend this book. The first 25% of the book was interesting but her points were not well developed. The last 75% was just how the church has persecuted women over the last 1700 years, over and over again (required skimming). But, she made some interesting observations on the relation ship between John the Baptist and Jesus. She notes that John was based in Alexandria and his following was huge (international). She shows from various sources, Gnostic texts, Gospels, Josephus, the rivalry between John and Jesus. Supposedly, Jesus was a follower of John but latter broke off and competed with him. Example of the feud between them is the quote in the gospels, "Among those born of women there has not risen anyone greater that John the Baptist..." She points out that "among those born of women" does not mean everyone, as Westerners might think, but is an "ancient Near-Eastern insult meaning 'fatherless', bastard' (in both the literal and derogatory sense), perhaps 'son of a bitch'. Even the "old wine skins" could be a reference to what John was famous for wearing, suggesting he was too old to teach anything new. But, as to John's murder, it was carried out at the behest of Herod's step-daughter after she does her little dance. The Bible does not mention her name but she is named in Josephus' Antiquities of the Jews. Now, if Josephus knew her name, the authors of the gospels surely would have known her name but suspiciously left it out. Her name was Salome. Salome is mentioned as a disciple of Jesus once in the gospels. She is mentioned more frankly in the Gospel of Thomas, having religious discussions with Jesus. She is also mentioned in a fragment of Mark that was redacted on the order of Clement (because Gnostics were using it to justify one of their beliefs). This fragment was found in a letter to Clement in the 1950's. It is another account of Lazarus' raising from the dead. So, is this Salome, step daughter of Herod, the same Salome that was a disciple (apparently a close one) of Jesus? If so, it would explain why she is hardly mentioned at all in the Gospels. She would be a bit too controversial for people to swallow. I know there is a Gnostic on this forum somewhere. Have you heard of this?

You have a limited time to vote. This poll with self-destruct when GreaseSpot moves (so I hear). :)-->

I am:

Terri and Bronte were BCs in Boston in the late 90s. They went on staff in 98. Saw them there in 2000 during the aniversary. They were still corpse when they left boston. If they were demoted, it was after they left Boston (might have something to do with that disaster marriage he promoted, which lasted a month...Hayward Chappell even suffered for it with a demotion).

Can't really say I'd call them a friend, but was wondering where they disapeared to. They were RCs of New England up until a year ago. The latest list of RCsLCs didn't have their name. Did they take off, or do they have a non-glory job now?

Did anyone get pictures of Craig there? Would love to see them. I'd even pay to see them. Don't know about Mrs. W representing good of TWI. Can't think of one damn good thing in or about TWI, ever -- let alone someone representing it.

I'm really not following you, but a simple answer to your original question about God et. al. being an object is: The question cannot be answered. For something to be an object, it must first have existance. Since existance is not established, determining what type of existance it is is a fruitless exercise. The only concrete existence God, heaven, hell have is in the mind of believers. Until some other form of existance is established, the mental exercise is pointless.

Your examples of hell are not what the standard religions define hell as, unless you are trying to say that the real hell would be worse than all the examples. Either way, your examples only point out that life sucks occasionally and that nirvana is a theory, not a reality. Death is proven daily. People die daily. You can observe their bodies rot away (apparently on the streets nowadays, if you're in New Orleans).

Everything mentioned is a theory, unproven, except for death. That is a reality.

Check out Picassa, http://picasa.google.com/index.html (owned by google - free). It will scan you pc for images and organize them. To resize an image, select it and choose "export" on the bottom button row. Allows you to specify the size.

I coulnd't resist.

Hmm, we've only had rain for the last 6,000 years huh? How then do you explain these rivers coming down mountains, where the river bed can be dated so far back, it makes 6,000 years look like 6 minutes. How did that water get up that mountain? Hmm. So the laws of physics were different 6,000 years ago. And they were changed by one couple enjoying a snack they didn't have permission for? Was water able to freeze before that fateful apple?

What is unnatural weather? -->

No. The only thing predictable (prophetic if you will) is people associating the hurricane with God's wrath for [put ungodly action of your choice here]. Why ignore the obvious? Hurricanes are a naturally occurring event. It was known long ago that a major hit to the city would damage the dykes and flood the city. It wasn't a matter of if, but when. Just because the laws of probability caught up with them doesn’t mean god/alah/yahweh/rah/seth/zeus was dealing out wrath for the people committing xxx. Has there ever been a natural disaster where the prophets of doom didn’t come crawling out of the woodwork?