fetish vs. faith

[Gadilici]

You do realize, John, that anyone using what God said for control over others is completely perverting the Book?

The Bible is not about control over others. It's about freedom. You've got your mind set, so I know you're going to want to argue the freedom point, but honestly, it is.

Trust no one who uses it as a mechanism for control. It's not about control. The "rules" are about a better quality of life. Seriously.

In fact, the Ten Commandments are about relationships, not about control. I'm going to assume you're an atheist, so, we'll leave out the first four (No gods before Me, Sabbath, etc).

Honor your father and mother. Ok, assuming you're not in fear of your life, or something like that, by treating them with honor, you help to preserve your relationship with them. It's when the dishonoring happens that most arguments and fights pop up (and the Bible elsewhere tells parents to treat their kids right too, so it goes both ways). In fact if you expand it out to a somewhat lesser degree to everyone, and treat all people with respect, just think of how much smoother life would run.

Do not murder. That one should require no explanation.

Do not commit adultery. It preserves the relationship with your spouse. And it prevents a crap ton of problems.

You shall not steal. Ever lose a friend because you've stolen something? Know of anyone who has lost their freedom because they were found to have stolen something? Or lost a job? Bet they weren't real happy with the result.

False witness. Lying. Ever lose a friend because you lied to them? Again, ever see anyone lose a job because they lied to the boss? Following this one preserves friends, and jobs. And if it's a stranger you're lying to, how do you know he's not the type who'll pound you into dust? Or shoot you? Or maybe not even that violent, but just slash your $400 set of tires?

Do not covet. This one all alone would nearly end stealing and adultery. Ok, I know some theft is not envy based, same with adultery, but it would be a start. Coveting can poison relationships.

Now, imagine everyone followed those 6 commandments alone. Would anyone feel the need to lock their doors? Would anyone ever wonder if their wife or husband was sleeping around? You could trust everyone. You could leave your valuables out, and ADT would be out of business. The intrusive practice of background checks would be totally unnecessary.

I'm not a utopian dreamer. I know it's not gonna happen. But the point is, can you see how it is a set of rules designed to free you, not control you?

Again, anyone who is trying to control you with the Bible is perverting God's word, and he will be judged.

Christopher

 

[Libertine]

Hmmm. Ok, it seems we have a God who throughout history has allowed war, sends pestilence, famine, tsunamis and suchlike, and recently trashed some 150,000 men, women and children in Haiti. I know beyond a shadow of a doubt that each and every person throughout history who died in these various cataclysms must have done something really horrendous to provoke His Almighty Wrath. Especially the malevolent babies and depraved toddlers.

And as you know, no bad person in history has ever prospered and/or passed away peacefully of old age.

But this is as nothing compared to the fact, vile sinner, that you happen to enjoy playing with women's feet.

 

[john getty]

You do realize, John, that anyone using what God said for control over others is completely perverting the Book?

The Bible is not about control over others. It's about freedom. You've got your mind set, so I know you're going to want to argue the freedom point, but honestly, it is.

Trust no one who uses it as a mechanism for control. It's not about control. The "rules" are about a better quality of life. Seriously.

In fact, the Ten Commandments are about relationships, not about control. I'm going to assume you're an atheist, so, we'll leave out the first four (No gods before Me, Sabbath, etc).

Honor your father and mother. Ok, assuming you're not in fear of your life, or something like that, by treating them with honor, you help to preserve your relationship with them. It's when the dishonoring happens that most arguments and fights pop up (and the Bible elsewhere tells parents to treat their kids right too, so it goes both ways). In fact if you expand it out to a somewhat lesser degree to everyone, and treat all people with respect, just think of how much smoother life would run.

Do not murder. That one should require no explanation.

Do not commit adultery. It preserves the relationship with your spouse. And it prevents a crap ton of problems.

You shall not steal. Ever lose a friend because you've stolen something? Know of anyone who has lost their freedom because they were found to have stolen something? Or lost a job? Bet they weren't real happy with the result.

False witness. Lying. Ever lose a friend because you lied to them? Again, ever see anyone lose a job because they lied to the boss? Following this one preserves friends, and jobs. And if it's a stranger you're lying to, how do you know he's not the type who'll pound you into dust? Or shoot you? Or maybe not even that violent, but just slash your $400 set of tires?

Do not covet. This one all alone would nearly end stealing and adultery. Ok, I know some theft is not envy based, same with adultery, but it would be a start. Coveting can poison relationships.

Now, imagine everyone followed those 6 commandments alone. Would anyone feel the need to lock their doors? Would anyone ever wonder if their wife or husband was sleeping around? You could trust everyone. You could leave your valuables out, and ADT would be out of business. The intrusive practice of background checks would be totally unnecessary.

I'm not a utopian dreamer. I know it's not gonna happen. But the point is, can you see how it is a set of rules designed to free you, not control you?

Again, anyone who is trying to control you with the Bible is perverting God's word, and he will be judged.

Christopher

Thanks, I appreciate your point of view and for taking the time to type that for me, I want to stress in a slight contradiction to my previous post, that I do know that there are Christians out there who are wonderful people, I said earlier in this thread that I'm gonna avoid it from now on, which I intended to. But still I'm being quoted and respect for religion (which isn't gonna happen) is being demanded from me. If that's your take on the bible, then you must have had a more laid back religious upbringing than I did, (Catholic Liverpool). I must have been 7 or 8, I told the teacher I didn't believe in God. She got in my face and screamed that I was a stupid boy. I came out as an atheist and I was ridiculed by my family. About a year ago, I got in touch with my old school friends on facebook, turns out our old Father Duncan at school has been arrested for sexual assault on a minor(surprise surprise) and our devout Catholic music teacher from senior Catholic school (sfx) has been arrested for having child pornography on his computer (surprise surprise). So yes, I have a very hostile attitude towards religion, it's probably best to leave me alone on this one.

ps. Honour thy father and they mother? Let's not go there.

Thread Derail Alert.

 

[Tickaler]

Jesus had his time. It's been 2,000 years, where the ef is he? The world belongs to humans and the animals that live on it.

Tickle away.

 

[madpipertn]

Wow, it's been a few days since I've stopped in. And I have to be honest, I never thought this thread would "blow up" the way it has. I appreciate everyone's thoughts and advice. I think I am in a more "comfortabe" place with my fetish than I was before. Even though I " get my rocks off" to watching beautiful women's feet getting tickled, I know that, just as in sex, I am commited to one woman. I will probably never tickle another woman's feet "in that way", and I'm fine with that. And I'm glad I brought this up, I guess more than anything else I was just curious if anyone else felt the same way I do. Sort of like how I wondered, so many times when I was younger, if anyone felt the same way about feet & tickling as I did. I know I'm not the only one who felt udderly alone at some point. Thanks again guys & gals, you all ROCK!

 

[jackbw]

as far as what u guys said about the bible wow just wow and mostly wrong lol,,,,,,,,i know God.......as far as lust yes if u lust after anything its bad/wrong wanting something isnt wrong,sex isnt wrong neither is playing its just how and with whom,,,married do whatever u want,,i see tickling as playful ,fun, teasing, if its sexual or u mix play then u should be married but no ones perfect,,,,,,as for taking what u like out of the bible ,IT says listen to all of it or its pointless, u can take things and say your a buddist? the bible is history for the one guy. people need to read the bible and understand it ,to many ignorant people talking about something they know little about lol last comment get off of religion and get on God, religion will do NOTHING for u but give u a head ache,,,its all about God! people seem to forget that........

No offense trace, but after so many well thought out ideas in this thread, to laugh and dismiss them with an "I know God" is pretty obscene and self-righteous. And to be honest, I couldn't make sense out of most of this. At least in my posts I gave somewhat of a citation for the things I said instead of waltzing in, stringing some generalizations together... "It says listen to all of it or it's pointless?" "People need to read the Bible and understand it?" If the Bible is nothing but a flat, lifeless book, devoid of even literary content, interpretation isn't required. It would be universally accessible to any language and culture, and everyone who read it would be instantly converted. You assume quite a bit here... think before you type. I'll take my own advice.

 

[jackbw]

all due respect, the most dangerous and reckless form of scriptural misinerpretation and misrepresentation is "well jesus never said..."

that attempts to completely invalidate every piece of scripture not highlighted in red and implies some kind of adversarial relationship between a collection of documents that have been vetted by men inspired by the holy spirit for centuries.

while i appreciate in a way the attention that you pay to certain details, lest i remind you that sin originated in the idea that there was beneficial knowledge outside the framework of devine order through human understanding gen 3:6.

and to say something like the idea of pre-marital sex isn't biblical completely obliterates the concept of the greatest commandment. the highest commandment that we have in relation to other people is to love our neighbor as ourselves. as that applies as a man to a woman who would take a woman into his house to know her without marrying her who is not a coward? that is not a moral axim subject to the concept of cultural transposition that may apply to things like dress, dance, observation of holidays, diet etc. etc. etc. but the foundational purpose of the covenant surrounding righteous sexual relations is fully explained several times (example 1 corinthians 7:1-10). It's about respect for the woman that you share that kind of intimacy with, not social conservative dogma.

Thanks for your input. You'll note that my point about Jesus was not the only support for my idea there, just one of many reasons why homosexuality shouldn't be demonized as one of two moral issues Christians should care about.

You'll also note that I never denied that women should be respected. I never said that abstinence until marriage is a mistake or wrong, and I didn't mean to imply that such abstinence's only biblical support was cultural undertones. The verses you cited alone seem to reduce the marriage relationship to an outlet for sexual frustration, and I hope we both agree that marriage represents more than just a safe context for sex. I'm not saying the rest of what you said is wrong, just pointing out that it's an interpretation based on the tones of a number of verses and stories. There simply wasn't dating in the Bible, so there's not much mention of sex before marriage except cases of rape and prostitution. There's no direct correlation to contemporary Western relationships, even if some overarching principles might still apply.

 

[jackbw]

Jesus had his time. It's been 2,000 years, where the ef is he? The world belongs to humans and the animals that live on it.

Tickle away.

Lol. Brevity is the soul of wit, I hear.

 

[Deadsea7777]

Hmmm. Ok, it seems we have a God who throughout history has allowed war, sends pestilence, famine, tsunamis and suchlike, and recently trashed some 150,000 men, women and children in Haiti. I know beyond a shadow of a doubt that each and every person throughout history who died in these various cataclysms must have done something really horrendous to provoke His Almighty Wrath. Especially the malevolent babies and depraved toddlers.

And as you know, no bad person in history has ever prospered and/or passed away peacefully of old age.

But this is as nothing compared to the fact, vile sinner, that you happen to enjoy playing with women's feet.

Maybe it could be necessary to take this with a pinch of salt,...but it is good.

 

[Deadsea7777]

i saw someone mention songs of solomon earlier and talked of it as thinking it was lust, infact it isnt solomon is writing about his wife (one of them) in that book. he isnt lusting after her he is thankful for her.

The word "Lust" (i.e., self-indulgent sexual desire), does not figure in any of my post about this topic. I used the Song of Songs, to show that the Bible does not condemn physical pleasure, albeit it does condemn the excess.
Having several women (!!! called wife, concubines) for satisfying your sexual desires would be called indulge in your sexual desires, i.e lust....no matter that Solomon could be grateful to each one of them. I wish I could justify having several women because I am grateful to them. Solomon was lucky.

You can said that a car is an elephant....and still it will be a car. As I say in one of my post this is an erotic poem. In doing that I am not alone, in the XVI Century Sebastian Castellio the first of the Reformed Christian proponents of Freedom of the Conscience or Freedom of Thought pointed out to Calvin that the Song of Songs was in fact an erotic poem, which praised the physical love and not a hymn to God. Common sense.

Therefore, if an erotic poem, which is an exquisite exaltation of the sensorial world of physical pleasures, is in the Bible there is no way the Bible condemns physical pleasures. Is does condemn the excess however. This poem has always been a problem to those who support the vision that the Bible condemns the pleasures of the flesh. So, from my point of view tickling as a physical pleasure has no condemnation in the Bible.

The Song of Songs has always been one of my favorites poems, specially because never ever in history has been possible to make it fit in any scheme of sexual repression based on the word of God from the Bible. It is eroticism at its best...and is in the Bible. In fact I always thought that God included this erotic poem in the Bible as a escape valve against the repressive instincts of humanity.

 

[jj82277]

Thanks for your input. You'll note that my point about Jesus was not the only support for my idea there, just one of many reasons why homosexuality shouldn't be demonized as one of two moral issues Christians should care about.

you know the process of cannonization means something. they didn't pick the writings of moses and paul because they were good looking guys.

John 1:1 In the beginning there was the word and the word was with god and the word was god.

Christ is described by John as also a basic manifestation of the ETERNAL word of god, applicable to all points in time in our finite world.

You'll also note that I never denied that women should be respected. I never said that abstinence until marriage is a mistake or wrong, and I didn't mean to imply that such abstinence's only biblical support was cultural undertones. The verses you cited alone seem to reduce the marriage relationship to an outlet for sexual frustration, and I hope we both agree that marriage represents more than just a safe context for sex. I'm not saying the rest of what you said is wrong, just pointing out that it's an interpretation based on the tones of a number of verses and stories. There simply wasn't dating in the Bible, so there's not much mention of sex before marriage except cases of rape and prostitution. There's no direct correlation to contemporary Western relationships, even if some overarching principles might still apply.

That's based on the wayward assumption that the contemporary concept of RELATIONSHIPS carries its own inherent righteousness and the express word of God is subordinate to the rantings of men, which again is just another playing out of Gen 3:6 and a perfect illustration of Acts 20:28Keep watch over yourselves and all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers.[a] Be shepherds of the church of God, which he bought with his own blood. 29I know that after I leave, savage wolves will come in among you and will not spare the flock. 30Even from your own number men will arise and distort the truth in order to draw away disciples after them.


the only two RELATIONSHIPS recognized in scripture are marriage and betrothed. outside of that there is nothing because the concept of short term dating is inherently antithetical to the institution of marriage.

The Christian concept of COURTSHIP is far too under taught in modern Churches because it doesn't jive with the next episode of sex and the city.

The purpose of Marriage is primarily and always has been one of Sexual covering. that's what it is. ultimately that is the institution that God has put forth to satisfy the righteous urges one to another that we all experience.

when we DATE it should not be in the frivilous sense of just HANGING OUT hooking up or whatever modern vernacular you wish to give. the fundamental purpose once mutual attraction has been established should be to determine the marriagiability of both partners.

if you're not marriagiable then you are just wasting your time and risking emotional capital or worse yet sexual congress outside the covering of marriage.

why is the coverning of marriage so important? fo each individual it has been shown that the closeness and kenship of marrital relationships extends life health and happieness. and the mortar that holds the bricks together is intimacy, specifically physical intimacy. the more spread the mortar over more partners over time the weaker the marital bond and the greater likeliehood of a disoloution of the marital relationship for whatever reason.

also, sex outside of marriage, especially men, reinforces terrible habbits. chief of which is the emotional physical and mental federal headship demanded of a biblical husband. when you get the milk without having to wake up at 4 in the morning to actually milk the cow you get spoiled. if you par take in the marital sacrament without the responsibilities there unto then it reinforces immature masculinity as a false substitute for biblical manhood.

and contrary to popular belief sexual proclivity should be specialized to the person whom you will be spending the rest of your life with, not spliced together between random encounters over your entire life so that your partner is now subject to unrealistic expectations to become 20 different women just so you can achieve an erection.

and i am not even going to talk about the importance of the marital construct for the rearing of children, this is already too long and boring already.

degrading that concept and likening it to a short term relationship is hust like Rehoboam trying to replace the stolen shields of gold with shields of bronze. man's construct trying to replace a divine institution.

and at the heart of the matter, beyond more advanced doctrinal thought lies the basic question.

"If you love her enough to screw her you don't love her enough to spend your life with her?"

she's either your wife or a glorified toilet seat... it's basic logic. you pick.

and this isn't about me being perfect, i'm not. i don't even want to hear that retort, i rival paul for the greatest sinner on record. i am going to put it in my living will that when i die i want them to put me upside down in my casket because i don't deserve to go in the way of my fathers.

i fall short, as everyone falls short but it is important to remember what the scriptures actually say, actually support, and how they should be properly applied to modern society.

 

[jj82277]

In THEORY it's God's food, cars and air, and until it's been confirmed that this imaginary friend of yours -who seems to be a split-personality homophobic prone to violent mood swings- really does exist, no, I won't remember what you said to me, because you're just one of many Christians who've demanded my respect for their own delusions throughout my life. The notion of a God was invented by men who wanted their own rule book to be followed by everyone so they came up with a magical place of eternal bliss for people who comply, and an equally magical place of eternal suffering for those who don't.

again, more self righteous indignation from those who have never read the bible.

 

[CrazyLikeAFox]

Any minute now someone's opinion is going to be swayed... Wait for it... Any second now...

What? Miracles can happen. Just read the Bible.

 

[tickler118]

I'm going to give my input and I'll keep it short. This seems to be a very touchy subject so please remember this is just one lad's opinion and nothing more.

The way I see it, Christianity is ultimately about leading a good life and the pursuit of getting to heaven. I'm not religious to be honest but I'm not really an atheist either. I'm just unsure what to think.

But what I do believe is that heaven can be found here on Earth. Just think about your family and friends that you are blessed to know and have been alive to meet. So that's my heaven. And I believe that if there is a God and a real Heaven up there somewhere and if you have lived your life true to yourself and treat others with respect in all your actions (including tickling!) then how can God deny you a place in Heaven?

Anyway that's my two cents, make of it what you will! Thanks and try not to shoot me down if you don't agree because I haven't read the Bible. I always respect what others believe and would not criticise anyone's opinion or religion (even if I think it's not correct!)

 

[john getty]

again, more self righteous indignation from those who have never read the bible.

I've read enough of the bible to know that an old age pensioner could not possibly get two of every species onto a boat. As for Moses and the burning bush, that sounds like slang to me no wonder he heard voices. And if God (a sentient being) has ALWAYS been there, then what was he doing for all that time before he decided to "create" us? Were we just the result of his mid-life crisis?

 

[Tickaler]

I've read enough of the bible to know that an old age pensioner could not possibly get two of every species onto a boat. As for Moses and the burning bush, that sounds like slang to me no wonder he heard voices. And if God (a sentient being) has ALWAYS been there, then what was he doing for all that time before he decided to "create" us? Were we just the result of his mid-life crisis?

Yes.

 

[waitin2btkled]

In THEORY it's God's food, cars and air, and until it's been confirmed that this imaginary friend of yours -who seems to be a split-personality homophobic prone to violent mood swings- really does exist, no, I won't remember what you said to me, because you're just one of many Christians who've demanded my respect for their own delusions throughout my life. The notion of a God was invented by men who wanted their own rule book to be followed by everyone so they came up with a magical place of eternal bliss for people who comply, and an equally magical place of eternal suffering for those who don't.

lol... not demanding you're respect at all...just for you to see the difference.

What if I were to tell you that I have documented Historical Proof that a big even in the bible before Christ did in fact take place?

With that kind of attitude condemning and thrashing our beliefs, I doubt you will be open to it but lets see....

 

[john getty]

lol... not demanding you're respect at all...just for you to see the difference.

What if I were to tell you that I have documented Historical Proof that a big even in the bible before Christ did in fact take place?

With that kind of attitude condemning and thrashing our beliefs, I doubt you will be open to it but lets see....

I'm not cloed minded and ignorant, if that's what you think, I had Jehova's witnesses come round here every Wendnesday for a year, they only wanted me to listen, which is fine by me. But still, at the end of it, if I still don't believe what you believe does that make me ignorant?

 

[Tickaler]

lol... not demanding you're respect at all...just for you to see the difference.

What if I were to tell you that I have documented Historical Proof that a big even in the bible before Christ did in fact take place?

With that kind of attitude condemning and thrashing our beliefs, I doubt you will be open to it but lets see....

I think the main problem here is that unwitting and inherent demand of the oppressive majority (Christians) to be respected....i.e. if you don't believe in our prophet and Son, you will go to hell. It's a very life-denying philosophy in my book. That's why Hinduism and Judaism seems to be far less oppressive (don't bring in the whole middle-eastern conflict, that is over land, not God, and don't bring up "God's" land), because those faith systems do not condemn the outsiders (i.e. those that do not believe in their faiths).

A wise Jewish professor once told me that, though God can be an integral part in Judaism, it is more about the cultural and familial ties of the Jewish people and their traditions ties that bind them.

I am neither Jewish nor Hindu, fyi.

 

[john getty]

Ps: Jonah and the whale, who says Christians don't have a sense of humour. lol

 

[Gadilici]

Yeah, I hear Catholic school makes a lot of atheists. In my readings of the Book, I don't recall Jesus ever getting in someone's face and calling them stupid. I do recall He got mad at people being cheated by money changers in the house of His Father.

But who wouldn't get mad about their daddy's house being used for dishonest things? Let's just assume a good relationship between whomever the "who" in the previous sentence is and their father.

He did get a tinge frustrated a couple times. But frustration and exasperation is to be expected when you make something obvious to your closest friends and they just ain't getting it.

I don't blame you for being an atheist. You never had a good reason to think He was real or worthwhile. My wife was like that. Raised pagan by a woman who genuinely hates the very concept of a single, all powerful God (or any male with authority). She was driven away from God by Christians who are very religious, but didn't appear to have what really matters which is the relationship with Jesus. So she wandered thru a set of pagan religions she never felt were right. And then she started to learn that it's really all about faith, and having a relationship with God, not being a rules lawyer.

I don't believe in religion. I believe it's the single most destructive force man has invented.

And it nailed Jesus to a cross. He wasn't a fan of religion either. Read all the words in red in the Gospels. He was constantly at odds with the religious establishment.

So, disrespect religion if you want. Or show politeness for the sole reason of civility towards other people, should the occasion require it. Belief or unbelief is your choice. No one can make it for you, and no one can force it on you, try tho they might. If they do, and you convert, it's meaningless except that it gets the people off your back.

I did put the caveat on Honor thy Father and Mother. Use it if necessary.

Oh, and the pervert priests are still the minority. A well publicized minority, but a minority. Of course if they had stayed with the original rule of priests being allowed to marry, I don't think it would be as common.

Do you have kids, Libertine? Ever intentionally let them make a mistake?

If He wanted people that could not do bad things he'd have automatons, not children, not friends. He desired beings that would chose Him of freewill. So, regardless of our opinions, freewill we got. Which means that we can chose to follow Him or not. it also means that we can chose to be the most vile, horrendous beings in all Creation. We have the potential to be worse than Lucifer himself. But those details are a whole other post.

God doesn't cause earthquakes. The forces within the planet do. They are indiscriminate, caused by a sphere that is without thought, and they are the result of planet that is dying. It's been dying for thousands of years. But that is another rather long post unto itself. God did not cause this. However this event can still be used for good, and for things to be better in the future than they were in the past.

But probably won't. Yay for fallen human nature.

And lots of bad people die young. How many old men have shootouts over drugs? Just one example.

And lots of good people live to be very old.

Where is He? waiting till it's time. One of the requirements for the End of the Age was for Israel to become a nation again. that took till 1948. Another was that the Gospel was to be preached in all nations. That took till the late 20th/early 21st century...if it's even being done now. The technologies have to be in place to allow all the Antichrist stuff to happen. And lastly (and I haven't done the complete list), the full number of people to be saved prior to the Tribulation must be filled. So, the fact it hasn't happened yet means there are still people to find God during this current age.

Oh, as far as non-marital sex. The Bible talks about "fornication" which is any unwed sex. Not a contradiction of love your neighbor as yourself. It's really wisdom. You can't get hit with a paternity suit if you're not humping the neighbor girl. Or any of the other problems that make modern dating such a minefield.

Fox, I doubt there will be many opinions swayed. People so vehement with their opinions can only be swayed from the inside. I just believe as it's written to not let anything I deem good be called evil. The clearing up of things is my goal. Maybe someone will be swayed. But that's not the point. The point is when someone says something ill about your God, family, and friends, you stand up and and speak the truth. Maybe they'll accept it, maybe they won't. Their call.

Still glad to know you lot.

Christopher

 

[john getty]

Thanks Christopher, I don't think there's any more to be said.

 

[Gadilici]

Oh yeah, the ark. Moses was only middle aged. He lived for centuries after the cataclysm. And yeah, he could fit them. When you calculate out the size and the number of species at the time (less than now because for example, there wasn't necessarily wolves, dogs, coyotes, etc, just a single lupine...maybe a single canine breed).

And think of all the species he didn't have to take. He only had to take birds (and maybe not aquatic birds) and terrestrial critters. Quite possibly very few of the insect world.

It's possible.

And what did he do for all eternity? Probably made other stuff. First line of the Bible says He created the Heavens and the Earth. Next line says and the Earth was void and without form. Now, God, being perfect (just follow the assumption, perfection can be argued separately), stands to reason He'd create something that was done. But it was without form. So, one line of thinking is that He created it complete. Then was Lucifer's rebellion, and when he was cast down, it caused destruction throughout creation. Then, the second line in the Book is where God starts to put it all back together again.

Point being, He may have created infinite universes, maybe similar, maybe dissimilar, maybe with history arcs that look nothing like ours. Being omnipresent, omniscient, and omnipotent, it's a real possibility He's done that.

And it's a question I'm looking forward to learning the answer to, one day.

There is no middle of eternity.

Ignorance is a lack of knowledge. If you haven't read the book, then by definition, you are largely ignorant on the subject. Just as I am ignorant about cars, and medical stuff. Ignorance is easily fixed. And not really anything to be ashamed of nor hurled as an insult. Ignorance simply means "I dunno". Nothing wrong with that. Maybe one day you'll be curious and decide to read the whole thing. Or maybe not.

It's a fish. Not a whale. And there are fish that big. And there once was bigger fish.

Of course we have a sense of humor. Ever see a guy get whacked in the nads on one of those video shows? Trauma to the groin. It's funny.

Christopher

 

[Gadilici]

Well, maybe there wasn't, but I didn't see the stuff about the ark, et al, so I said more...lol

Christopher

 

[john getty]

Fish (even sharks) do not swallow men whole, keep them in their stomachs and then spit them out alive. Also, how did Moses get two lions onto his boat without a tranqualizer? Never mind, as you said, we're both fervent in what we believed happened or didn't happen.