Page 6 of 17 [ 268 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 ... 17  Next


Are religions unfair to women?
Yes 75%  75%  [ 43 ]
No 25%  25%  [ 14 ]
Total votes : 57

appletheclown
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2013
Age: 27
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,378
Location: Soul Society

15 Feb 2014, 5:33 pm

LKL wrote:
appletheclown wrote:
ArrantPariah wrote:

1 Corinthians 11 wrote:
Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you. But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God. Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head. But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven. For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered.

For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man. For the man is not of the woman: but the woman of the man. Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man. For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels.

Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord. For as the woman is of the man, even so is the man also by the woman; but all things of God.

Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered? Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him? But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.



1 Timothy 2 wrote:
I will therefore that men pray every where, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting. In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array; But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works.

Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.



You realize that that is not Jesus speaking but a letter to Mr. Tim they added on? IOW, the early church added that, not God, or Jesus.
Also, the fact that Corinthians is a letter to the Greek city of Corinth?
There may be good things in those add-on books of the bible, but think if Jesus weren't dead or some thing like that. You would have no idea if he would agree with Paul, or any of the apostles.

When Jesus was alive he corrected the disciples constantly, so half that stuff is probably just Paul's and peters opinion.

In another thread, AR asked for evidence of morally repugnance in the Bible; in this thread he specified the NT; now you're specifying the words of Jesus. This is known as 'shifting the goal posts.'

Any response from AR on these passages? How does my citation of either of them, earlier, differ in any significant, meaningful way from the passages quoted directly? How can you defend this kind of content?


Well if he wants to subjugate women in his own little world there isn't much we can do.
You don't defend it by the way.


_________________
comedic burp


AngelRho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,260
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile

15 Feb 2014, 6:51 pm

appletheclown wrote:
Wasn't that easy AR?

:lol:

Indeed!

WRT shifting the goalposts: IIRC the other thread being mentioned had to do with the Bible as a whole. "Moral repugnance" is also being defined in relative terms, i.e. not in terms either one of us will universally agree upon, so arguing over it is pointless. I don't see a problem with OT situational ethics. Nor is it even relevant…I'm a Christian, not a Jew. My faith is informed by the OT, sure, but "my people" have never been scripturally commanded to wage holy war or any of the other things AspieOtaku brought up--or if so, I've yet to see evidence of it (hint: I've read the Bible a few times, so I'm already well aware of its contents). As such, I'm moving no goalposts. I'm simply distinguishing between one "game" (so to speak) and another. If in THIS thread I'd asked for evidence for God telling ANYONE to do thus-and-so and then dismissed it by demanding something else, I'd be guilty of raising said bar. However, I don't see how what was said in a different thread is directly relevant to this one.

Note that in this very thread I admitted that divine mandates for war, etc. do exist within the OT. However, my presuppositions do NOT include any ideas that such activities are NECESSARILY unjustified. I'm able to maintain a healthy amount of skepticism in order to see how one might consider such acts unjustified and certainly inappropriate in a present-day context; but I can also see how they MIGHT be justified in an ancient context. I don't merely assume that they are unjustified. Either way, those things are NOT for Christians. The point of inclusion is to inform our faith, emphasizing God's patience and mercy before mankind reaches a point of no return as well as the necessity for a divine redemptive act. They are NOT there to justify wanton destruction by professing Christians to effect personal/political agendas.

And I'm honestly flattered. LKL is lampooning some of my own antics, and I have to admit it makes me smile…just a little. ;)



LKL
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2007
Age: 45
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,402

15 Feb 2014, 6:55 pm

AR, AP did you the favor of choosing two complete bible passages and citing them in full.
1)How do my citations of those passages distort their meaning?
2)How do you defend those passages, in full context?

Focus, boy. Focus.



simon_says
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Jan 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,075

15 Feb 2014, 6:59 pm

In the gospel of Thomas, which is not included in the bible, you have Simon Peter telling Mary to leave because women aren't worthy of life. Jesus responds that he can tinker with her in some way and make her male so that she can get into heaven.

It just shows the prejudice of the time and that you can write anything with these characters. If what you wrote was theologically correct in a broader sense it would very likely be included. That things are unfair by our standards never seemed to concern many people associated with writing or selecting biblical texts.



ArrantPariah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2012
Age: 117
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,972

15 Feb 2014, 7:10 pm

Image



appletheclown
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2013
Age: 27
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,378
Location: Soul Society

15 Feb 2014, 7:16 pm

ArrantPariah wrote:
Image

:dj:


_________________
comedic burp


Feralucce
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2012
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,143
Location: New Orleans, LA

15 Feb 2014, 7:55 pm

simon_says wrote:
In the gospel of Thomas, which is not included in the bible, you have Simon Peter telling Mary to leave because women aren't worthy of life. Jesus responds that he can tinker with her in some way and make her male so that she can get into heaven.

It just shows the prejudice of the time and that you can write anything with these characters. If what you wrote was theologically correct in a broader sense it would very likely be included. That things are unfair by our standards never seemed to concern many people associated with writing or selecting biblical texts.


Flag on the play! - technical foul... The gospel of thomas has always been, and is currently considered by some to be fake, and is not available to most practitioners... It also is not canonical and was not discovered til 1945... Making it inadmissible as a foundational document, especially since most believers do not count it as part of the book.


_________________
Yeah. I'm done. Don't bother messaging and expecting a response - i've left WP permanently.


appletheclown
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2013
Age: 27
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,378
Location: Soul Society

15 Feb 2014, 8:01 pm

Feralucce wrote:
simon_says wrote:
In the gospel of Thomas, which is not included in the bible, you have Simon Peter telling Mary to leave because women aren't worthy of life. Jesus responds that he can tinker with her in some way and make her male so that she can get into heaven.

It just shows the prejudice of the time and that you can write anything with these characters. If what you wrote was theologically correct in a broader sense it would very likely be included. That things are unfair by our standards never seemed to concern many people associated with writing or selecting biblical texts.


Flag on the play! - technical foul... The gospel of thomas has always been, and is currently considered by some to be fake, and is not available to most practitioners... It also is not canonical and was not discovered til 1945... Making it inadmissible as a foundational document, especially since most believers do not count it as part of the book.


Thank you very much!


_________________
comedic burp


ArrantPariah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2012
Age: 117
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,972

15 Feb 2014, 8:27 pm

simon_says wrote:
In the gospel of Thomas, which is not included in the bible, you have Simon Peter telling Mary to leave because women aren't worthy of life. Jesus responds that he can tinker with her in some way and make her male so that she can get into heaven.


http://gnosis.org/naghamm/gosthom.html

Way down at the bottom.

Quote:
[Saying probably added to the original collection at a later date:]
114. Simon Peter said to them, "Make Mary leave us, for females don't deserve life."

Jesus said, "Look, I will guide her to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every female who makes herself male will enter the kingdom of Heaven."


Now that's a weird thing to add to a Gospel.

Further up it says

Quote:
22. Jesus saw some babies nursing. He said to his disciples, "These nursing babies are like those who enter the (Father's) kingdom."

They said to him, "Then shall we enter the (Father's) kingdom as babies?"

Jesus said to them, "When you make the two into one, and when you make the inner like the outer and the outer like the inner, and the upper like the lower, and when you make male and female into a single one, so that the male will not be male nor the female be female, when you make eyes in place of an eye, a hand in place of a hand, a foot in place of a foot, an image in place of an image, then you will enter [the kingdom]."


...which would seem to suggest the eradication of genders in Heaven.

Here are a couple of passages comparing Heaven to a woman:

Quote:
96. Jesus [said], "The Father's kingdom is like [a] woman. She took a little leaven, [hid] it in dough, and made it into large loaves of bread. Anyone here with two ears had better listen!"

97. Jesus said, "The [Father's] kingdom is like a woman who was carrying a [jar] full of meal. While she was walking along [a] distant road, the handle of the jar broke and the meal spilled behind her [along] the road. She didn't know it; she hadn't noticed a problem. When she reached her house, she put the jar down and discovered that it was empty."


By the way, although discovered in 1945, it dates to 340.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Thomas

It may have been important to some early Christians, even if they were heretics.



ArrantPariah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2012
Age: 117
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,972

15 Feb 2014, 9:02 pm

LKL wrote:
The kingdom of heaven like ten virgins who went to meet their bridegroom. Five had oil for their lamps and five didn't. When the bridegroom was ready for them, only the five well-oiled virgins got to have sex with him on their wedding night. The bridegroom shunned the other five, saying "Get lost. I don't even know you." The moral to the story is this: watch out, you never know when (or with whom) Jesus will come.25:1-13
(the emphasis of that story is more, 'be prepared for the rapture,' but it demonstrates that the NT writers were perfectly fine with polygamy).


This story is different from the way that I had remembered it.

Good News Translation wrote:
“At that time the Kingdom of heaven will be like this. Once there were ten young women who took their oil lamps and went out to meet the bridegroom. Five of them were foolish, and the other five were wise. The foolish ones took their lamps but did not take any extra oil with them, while the wise ones took containers full of oil for their lamps. The bridegroom was late in coming, so they began to nod and fall asleep.

“It was already midnight when the cry rang out, ‘Here is the bridegroom! Come and meet him!’ The ten young women woke up and trimmed their lamps. Then the foolish ones said to the wise ones, ‘Let us have some of your oil, because our lamps are going out.’ ‘No, indeed,’ the wise ones answered, ‘there is not enough for you and for us. Go to the store and buy some for yourselves.’ 10 So the foolish ones went off to buy some oil; and while they were gone, the bridegroom arrived. The five who were ready went in with him to the wedding feast, and the door was closed.

“Later the others arrived. ‘Sir, sir! Let us in!’ they cried out. ‘Certainly not! I don't know you,’ the bridegroom answered.”

And Jesus concluded, “Watch out, then, because you do not know the day or the hour.


King Jimmy's Version wrote:
Then shall the kingdom of heaven be likened unto ten virgins, which took their lamps, and went forth to meet the bridegroom. And five of them were wise, and five were foolish. They that were foolish took their lamps, and took no oil with them: But the wise took oil in their vessels with their lamps.

While the bridegroom tarried, they all slumbered and slept. And at midnight there was a cry made, "Behold, the bridegroom cometh; go ye out to meet him."

Then all those virgins arose, and trimmed their lamps. And the foolish said unto the wise, "Give us of your oil; for our lamps are gone out."

But the wise answered, saying, "Not so; lest there be not enough for us and you: but go ye rather to them that sell, and buy for yourselves."

And while they went to buy, the bridegroom came; and they that were ready went in with him to the marriage: and the door was shut.

Afterward came also the other virgins, saying, "Lord, Lord, open to us."

But he answered and said, "Verily I say unto you, I know you not."

Watch therefore, for ye know neither the day nor the hour wherein the Son of man cometh.


The "virgins" versus "young women" translation problem, similar to Isaiah 7:14, except that this time the original is Greek.

If you go with the Good News Translation, it seems like these are 10 women invited to a wedding. Like bridesmaids. Which is more-or-less how I remember the sermons built around this passage interpreting it.

In the King James version, it does indeed sound more like these are 10 saucy virgins hoping to marry the same man at the same time. And, only 5 of them get to join the bridegroom for the mass deflowering.

It could have made for a much more memorable sermon if the pastor had gone with the King James version.

It does seem like an unlikely interpretation, though, because I think that it would have been unusual for a man to take 5 or 10 new wives at once. And, I think that the influence of the Greeks and Romans may have made the region somewhat more monogamous by that time.

Still, it would make a great basis for a porn flic.



ArrantPariah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2012
Age: 117
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,972

15 Feb 2014, 9:17 pm

LKL wrote:
John:
Jesus magically perceived that a Samaritan woman had been married and divorced five times previously. (He could spot a divorced woman a mile away.) Since women weren't allowed to get a divorce, it was always the woman's fault and divorced women were considered outcasts. This was a great opportunity for Jesus to explain why the Mosaic marriage laws were unjust and correct them -- if he thought they were wrong, that is, which apparently he didn't. 4:7-18


John 4 wrote:
“Go and call your husband,” Jesus told her, “and come back.”

“I don't have a husband,” she answered.

Jesus replied, “You are right when you say you don't have a husband. You have been married to five men, and the man you live with now is not really your husband. You have told me the truth.”

“I see you are a prophet, sir,” the woman said. “My Samaritan ancestors worshiped God on this mountain, but you Jews say that Jerusalem is the place where we should worship God.”


It doesn't say that she had been divorced 5 times: she might have been widowed 5 times. And, it doesn't say whether the Samaritans followed Mosaic marriage laws: they might have, or they might have been more liberal about it. Also, from the rest of the story, this woman doesn't seem to have been an outcast at all, at least among the other Samaritans in her town.



ArrantPariah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2012
Age: 117
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,972

15 Feb 2014, 9:26 pm

Well, I took the challenge, and picked two things attributed to Jesus from LKL's list, and it would seem that I scored a victory on AngelRho's behalf. Maybe that Skeptic's site isn't as brilliant as we thought it was.



appletheclown
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2013
Age: 27
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,378
Location: Soul Society

15 Feb 2014, 9:30 pm

AP must be blessed by God :lol:


_________________
comedic burp


aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 60
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,540

15 Feb 2014, 9:30 pm

ArrantPariah wrote:
simon_says wrote:
In the gospel of Thomas, which is not included in the bible, you have Simon Peter telling Mary to leave because women aren't worthy of life. Jesus responds that he can tinker with her in some way and make her male so that she can get into heaven.


http://gnosis.org/naghamm/gosthom.html

Way down at the bottom.

Quote:
[Saying probably added to the original collection at a later date:]
114. Simon Peter said to them, "Make Mary leave us, for females don't deserve life."

Jesus said, "Look, I will guide her to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every female who makes herself male will enter the kingdom of Heaven."


Now that's a weird thing to add to a Gospel.

Further up it says

Quote:
22. Jesus saw some babies nursing. He said to his disciples, "These nursing babies are like those who enter the (Father's) kingdom."

They said to him, "Then shall we enter the (Father's) kingdom as babies?"

Jesus said to them, "When you make the two into one, and when you make the inner like the outer and the outer like the inner, and the upper like the lower, and when you make male and female into a single one, so that the male will not be male nor the female be female, when you make eyes in place of an eye, a hand in place of a hand, a foot in place of a foot, an image in place of an image, then you will enter [the kingdom]."


...which would seem to suggest the eradication of genders in Heaven.

Here are a couple of passages comparing Heaven to a woman:

Quote:
96. Jesus [said], "The Father's kingdom is like [a] woman. She took a little leaven, [hid] it in dough, and made it into large loaves of bread. Anyone here with two ears had better listen!"

97. Jesus said, "The [Father's] kingdom is like a woman who was carrying a [jar] full of meal. While she was walking along [a] distant road, the handle of the jar broke and the meal spilled behind her [along] the road. She didn't know it; she hadn't noticed a problem. When she reached her house, she put the jar down and discovered that it was empty."


By the way, although discovered in 1945, it dates to 340.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Thomas

It may have been important to some early Christians, even if they were heretics.


It appears that the reference to making females into males..may be another parable of egalitarianism...

A balance of male and female..IS necessary in my opinion..to enter into bliss...

We all start out as women..and gain some androgens..and voila a part gets bigger...and a couple more appear on the outside..
instead of inside...

But the brain can be a balanced organ of male and female...

HIGHLY..highly..unlikely that passage is meant to be taken literally...

Per magically growing a Penis or something ludicrous like that..for someone who might take it literally...

IN my opinion..i could care less when the Gospel of Thomas was written..or who wrote...it...

There are more Universal truths in that Gospel..that the rest of the official ones all put together...

Who ever wrote that...was at least close to enlightenment..

in my opinion....and the teachings certainly resemble that of
a buddhist monk..or any other enlightened individual in real life humanity....


_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI

Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !

http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick


appletheclown
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2013
Age: 27
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,378
Location: Soul Society

15 Feb 2014, 9:31 pm

aghogday wrote:
ArrantPariah wrote:
simon_says wrote:
In the gospel of Thomas, which is not included in the bible, you have Simon Peter telling Mary to leave because women aren't worthy of life. Jesus responds that he can tinker with her in some way and make her male so that she can get into heaven.


http://gnosis.org/naghamm/gosthom.html

Way down at the bottom.

Quote:
[Saying probably added to the original collection at a later date:]
114. Simon Peter said to them, "Make Mary leave us, for females don't deserve life."

Jesus said, "Look, I will guide her to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every female who makes herself male will enter the kingdom of Heaven."


Now that's a weird thing to add to a Gospel.

Further up it says

Quote:
22. Jesus saw some babies nursing. He said to his disciples, "These nursing babies are like those who enter the (Father's) kingdom."

They said to him, "Then shall we enter the (Father's) kingdom as babies?"

Jesus said to them, "When you make the two into one, and when you make the inner like the outer and the outer like the inner, and the upper like the lower, and when you make male and female into a single one, so that the male will not be male nor the female be female, when you make eyes in place of an eye, a hand in place of a hand, a foot in place of a foot, an image in place of an image, then you will enter [the kingdom]."


...which would seem to suggest the eradication of genders in Heaven.

Here are a couple of passages comparing Heaven to a woman:

Quote:
96. Jesus [said], "The Father's kingdom is like [a] woman. She took a little leaven, [hid] it in dough, and made it into large loaves of bread. Anyone here with two ears had better listen!"

97. Jesus said, "The [Father's] kingdom is like a woman who was carrying a [jar] full of meal. While she was walking along [a] distant road, the handle of the jar broke and the meal spilled behind her [along] the road. She didn't know it; she hadn't noticed a problem. When she reached her house, she put the jar down and discovered that it was empty."


By the way, although discovered in 1945, it dates to 340.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Thomas

It may have been important to some early Christians, even if they were heretics.


It appears that the reference to making females into males..may be another parable of egalitarianism...

A balance of male and female..IS necessary in my opinion..to enter into bliss...

We all start out as women..and gain some androgens..and voila a part gets bigger...and a couple more appear on the outside..
instead of inside...

But the brain can be a balanced organ of male and female...

HIGHLY..highly..unlikely that passage is meant to be taken literally...

Per magically growing a Penis or something ludicrous like that..for someone who might take it literally...

IN my opinion..i could care less when the Gospel of Thomas was written..or who wrote...it...

There are more Universal truths in that Gospel..that the rest of the official ones all put together...

Who ever wrote that...was at least close to enlightenment..

in my opinion....and the teachings certainly resemble that of
a buddhist monk..or any other enlightened individual in real life humanity....

1qo;bneivbai


_________________
comedic burp


aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 60
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,540

15 Feb 2014, 9:52 pm

appletheclown wrote:
aghogday wrote:
Well, here's the point. Your insistence that the actual practice of homosexuality is against the ideology of Christianity indicates that you do not practice the true Christian belief of no oppression against others who have natural differences from the norm.

As much as you may try to defend this real life practice that does harm people, and potentially lead some folks to suicide from being force fed this crap in churches like yours, it is all truly anti-christ in affect!

So all I am asking you to do is defend your insistence that the moral and ethical argument against the real life natural practice of homosexuality is consistent with the teachings of the real Jesus!

Oh, and as far as women go: Just the fact that most Christian sects refuse to allow women to be preachers, and or priests,
is evidence enough on it's own that the actual modern practice overall of Christianity is still not fair to women. In fact, there is no real substance to back this up in the new testament either! But real life is what really counts, not the book (The New Testament)!
If people twist it to harm folks in real life, it is even worse!

Harming folks in real life and taking their freedom away to express their will, is the greatest
mortal sin of all!

Oppression of any other, is just plain horrible!

The Truth...
It is hard to kill once it truly springs to life!


I spiffed up your response for you.


Well.. thanks Apple Clown..i am pleased with your input...

But i am not expecting an answer for this..question..anymore than someone who might try to prove evolution does not exist..and the earth was created 6 thousand years ago....

Homosexuality is as much a part of nature...as evolution...and a 14.8 billion year old earth...

There is an autism spectrum..a gender spectrum..and yes a friggin..sexual orientation..spectrum as well...

While some folks may lean this way or that way.. a little bit of this or that..as far as stereotyped feminine and masculine characteristics..and sexual orientation..
modern science most definitely can attribute at least 20% of homosexuality as determined by biology...

So.. in other words.. 'GOD' don't create something in human nature..and then damn it to hell..that is just ridiculous..not any less
than the assertion that the friggin earth is only 6,000 years old....

But again the main point...

And from a personal perspective..while i am straight as an ARROW..and completely comfortable in my balance of masculinity
and femininity per my brain..and with an extremely masculine looking body..overall at 53...

I was in that place growing..up with a softer appearance..and constantly being accused of being homosexual..based on my..
genial nature...and over literally friggin happy to be alive..if ya wanna describe that as literally gay ..like gay happy...and know what that feels
like to be oppressed simply for who you are as a human being...

If i ever saw a person doing that to someone in real life..
they would get to hear from me..loud and clear in person..and trust me i ain't a person that someone wants to see..angry...and yes
been there done that..and even recently in my church when a deacon tried to do this in a little rant about homosexual folks not being
able to raise kids..per biological capacity...and i 'won' that one easy...as everyone else kept their mouth shut except for me....and the priest....

There is really not much of anything in life that angers me..but when i see someone oppressed..with the full sociological..anthropological..psychological..and yes health science perspective of just how dangerous it can be to oppress a young person ..like they do not deserved to live ..just based on their human nature...
There is fire comes out of my eyes..and nah i don't have to even say something..to overpower someone with my gaze....and i sure as hell ain't got to get into any fight..as there are some human energies..that are more powerful..than even the strength of my muscles..and yes..

more powerful than an atomic bomb..and i am dead serious about that....and THAT IS part of that stuff the real Jesus dude was talking about....

SACRED LOVE.. THE MOST POWERFUL ENERGY..
IN THE LIVING UNIVERSE....
AND NO IT'S NOT ALWAYS..
POSITIVE..PER THE RECIPIENT OF IT..
WHEN THERE IS TRUE GUILT OF HARMING OTHER FOLKS...

yeah...i can turn the other cheek all day long when folks attempt to be my enemy..and call 'em friend and all of that and mean it..

But when it comes..to oppressing someone else..hell no...!

altruism..true altruism..and that Sacred Love thingy..kicks.. in...:)


_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI

Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !

http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick