Thanks heaps for this!… if anyone else has anything, it would be much appreciated. Great website HOT Pianoforte Links http://www.en.Grand-Pianos.org Enjoy!…

On November 10th, 2009 at 1:30 pm, happyscrapper said: #840330

I know it is a mistake to comment to the troll…but I can’t resist this one.

Why you would think it was a mistake is beyond me. When you take me to task, I will respond.

ZZ asks a lot of questions. A LOT. And then expects them all to be answered.

Yep, I do. And, that is because I may not know something or seek greater understanding. That is how people learn. I accept that there are fearful people who want to keep their heads in the sand, content to remain oblivious to knowledge that might broaden their horizons. And yes, internal and external horizons.

However, none of us are obligated in any way to answer any questions we don’t want to.

Absolutely. And you have no obligation to take me to task or comment on what I post. But, when you engage me in a discussion, asking me questions, as Misscheryl has, then yes, there is the expectation that you answer questions, as I have answered your questions.

Don’t call me out, then run and hide. Now that is troll behaviour. Cowboy up and don’t crawl back under the bridge from where you throw bombs from the shadows.

Especially those of a troll who hi-jacks a religious-based thread and destroys the great feeling we got from reading MM’s original comments.

No one highjacked anything. Did you happen to read these few words from her post? “. . . the transcendent power of faith over the worldy power of government . . .”

That is “faith” over “government” and in my initial post I spoke of “religion” and “politics”. I spoke to the interwoven system that we have, using both, in balance.

Some one else, need I say Misscheryl, jumped the rails and brought up “rights”. Others added comments concerning Saudi Arabia, Stalin, arguing with God, progressives, etc.

If anything was highjacked it was my initial comment by the reponses where those individuals read more into it than what was actually said.

MM spoke of “faith” and “government” I spoke of “religion” and “politics”. Nope. No higjacking by me, but certainly jumping the rails by others.

As for your feelings, they are your own. More power to you.

I got real inspiration from those comments, but ZZ has taken this entire thread off the tracks.

Where you find inspiration and that you are able to recieve it, is wonderful for you. You may have received inspiration from MM’s post, but she did not mention it. She mentioned “faith” and “government”.

And no, I won’t be answering any of its questions. And yes, it can go ahead and bash me for commenting. I’m use to it from the troll.

I understand your fear of questions, your fear of expanding your horizons and your fear of others having a greater understanding of your position, therefore I have avoided asking you any questions.

If you feel ‘bashed’ well that is on you and your feelings, of course, are your own. But, when you, or anyone else, takes me to task, please know that I will respond.

Yep, when you opine on what I say, I will opine on what you say. That is what you should get used to.

On November 10th, 2009 at 1:10 pm, zyzzyg said:
Misscheryl -

Thank you, though you did not answer any questions.

I know it is a mistake to comment to the troll…but I can’t resist this one. ZZ asks a lot of questions. A LOT. And then expects them all to be answered. However, none of us are obligated in any way to answer any questions we don’t want to. Especially those of a troll who hi-jacks a religious-based thread and destroys the great feeling we got from reading MM’s original comments. I got real inspiration from those comments, but ZZ has taken this entire thread off the tracks. And no, I won’t be answering any of its questions. And yes, it can go ahead and bash me for commenting. I’m use to it from the troll.

On November 9th, 2009 at 2:27 pm, Regulus said:I don’t care what the scriptures say; if we’re going to avoid the bad end that the donks have in mind for this country, or to reclaim this land if we can’t avert it, then falling back on “Pie in the sky when you’re by-and-by” isn’t going to cut it.

God didn’t get us into this fix. People did. And God won’t get us out of it. Hope-a-Dope and the donks are their own “Man-Caused Disaster,” and the sooner people put the Bible down and focus on Man-Caused Solutions in 2010 and 2012 the better.

I haven’t seen anyone one else here comment on this post, so I will. I agree with Regulus! However, we can spend time on our knees AND fight the good fight too! In other words…don’t count on God to get us out of this mess. God helps those who help themselves, and this is one of those times. He will give us courage and strength, and the assurance that we are on the side of right. But the fight is ours and we can’t sit back and think God will take care of this problem for us. One thing I don’t agree with…we shouldn’t “put the Bible down”. We should pick it up a bit more often!

Thank you, though you did not answer any questions. Well, good luck to you, too. I mean that sincerely.

Z

On November 10th, 2009 at 9:19 am, Misscheryl said: #840134

ZZ: Simply put, if you love unconditionally, the welfare (rights, needs, wants) of your husband, neighbor, mother, father, etc. is more important to you than your own. Today, we have people scrapping and clawing for what they feel they have a right to. Where does one person’s right begin and another’s ends?

Within the context of balance between religion and politics, and MM’s post addressing “. . . the transcendent power of faith over the worldy power of government . . .” both have boundaries concerning rights.

There are religious boundaries to rights and there are political boundaries to rights. And, each has it’s own impact on the other. It is about finding the balance for you, for me, for society, for everyone.

One person’s rights begins and ends in that balance between religion and politics.

This thinking does nothing but steal from others, hurting one another. Me first! Me most! Me! Myself and I! It’s perpetuates man feeding on man. It’s leads to distruction and death.

Yep, and that is why we have religious boundaries and political boundaries. To stop us from feeding on ourselves, or at least both attempt to do so. We need both, and in balance, so that one does not usurp the other.

One of the commandments says “Thou shalt not steal.” That doesn’t just apply to material things. It applies to someone’s happiness or peace, which also intersects with “thou shalt not bear false witness.” Dont steal someone’s happiness by lying, coveting, destroying etc. In many cases, in an effort to “get what we deserve” this is the behavior we employ.

Yep, and there are political boundaries and religious boundaries that address your example. Some of these boundaries are interwoven in a balance that we as a Nation, accept.

Christ said “I am the Way, the TRUTH and the Life.” Let that come before the discussion of “religion vs government” and everything else will fall into place. Because if we live as HIS creation, created to commune with Him, that discussion is mute.

And, when you don’t follow the teachings of The Christ, what then? Do you force it on others? You earlier asked that The Christ be approached as a philosopher. Now you are shifting your premise and are approaching The Christ as a deity.

Agreeing with The Christ as a philospher is one thing, accepting him as a deity is another. And, that further demonstrates my point. I am not prepared to compell anyone to accept The Christ as a deity and to live according to his teachings. Are you?

The only “right” we have is to worship our God and He will be our defender, He will meet any need we have so that we don’t have to beat someone else to get what we think is our right or what we think we must have and we willingly, selflessly, in joy help others because we love them.

Nope. We have rights because of the balance and interwoven nature of our system, that is both religious and political.

We are better served when the two are in balance.

We might be talking past one another, so I am suggesting a specific example. You, of course, are welcome to provide your own specific example.

During the Christmas season people dress up their yards with lights and stuff. Should people who do not celebrate Christmas be forced to put up lights? Do they have a right not to? Should they be compelled to do so? Do our politics protect that individual from putting up lights.

Again, within the context of MM’s post discussing the “. . . transcendent power of faith (religion) over the worldy power of government (politics) . . . “ I maintain that one should not be ‘over’ the other, and that they should be in balance.

On a sliding scale of 1 to 10, 1 being religion and 10 being politics, I would not want to live in a world of all 1, or all 10. I would prefer the balance to be between 4 and 6. I believe there, in that balance, rights are ensured. Your right to pursue peace the way you want, and the right of others to pursue peace the way they want.

I’m sorry but I do not follow and don’t understand your point. I would very much like to know what you mean. The thing is, we do have rights. Again, I am missing something. Please explain.

ZZ: Simply put, if you love unconditionally, the welfare (rights, needs, wants) of your husband, neighbor, mother, father, etc. is more important to you than your own. Today, we have people scrapping and clawing for what they feel they have a right to. Where does one person’s right begin and another’s ends? This thinking does nothing but steal from others, hurting one another. Me first! Me most! Me! Myself and I! It’s perpetuates man feeding on man. It’s leads to distruction and death. One of the commandments says “Thou shalt not steal.” That doesn’t just apply to material things. It applies to someone’s happiness or peace, which also intersects with “thou shalt not bear false witness.” Dont steal someone’s happiness by lying, coveting, destroying etc. In many cases, in an effort to “get what we deserve” this is the behavior we employ.

Therein is my answer to your next question:

Religion aside from The Christ? Are you suggesting approach The Christ as a philospher and not a deity? That being the case, there are a number of philosophers who suggested how we live. Which philosopher do you listen to and follow? Well, that is your right

Christ said “I am the Way, the TRUTH and the Life.” Let that come before the discussion of “religion vs government” and everything else will fall into place. Because if we live as HIS creation, created to commune with Him, that discussion is mute. The only “right” we have is to worship our God and He will be our defender, He will meet any need we have so that we don’t have to beat someone else to get what we think is our right or what we think we must have and we willingly, selflessly, in joy help others because we love them.

Is there so sad a sight as a hungry alligator?

On November 9th, 2009 at 10:15 pm, jangar said: #839985

Your questions are overly broad, but I will give it a go.

Just what is it that you DO know?

I know that we are all entitled to our opinions.

And what is it that you do believe?

I believe that when asked a question, it should be answered.

Or are you content to argue with the seasoned faithful?

I am content to give my opinion and engage anyone who engages me, no matter who they are.

Your turn to answer the questions you asked me.

zyzzyg said:
An interesting point, though I am not that doctrinaire on the subject

Just what is it that you DO know?

And what is it that you do believe?

Or are you content to argue with the seasoned faithful?

More importantly, how did you conclude anything about my knowledge of faith? And, exactly which faith are you saying I am ignorant of? Or, is it all faith that I am ignorant of?

What is truth? – Pontius

On November 9th, 2009 at 7:39 pm, Bob1234 said: #839954

A very wise man once agreed with you. See Matthew 22:21. His comment there had an enormous influence on the development of western civilization.

An interesting point, though I am not that doctrinaire on the subject. I acknowledge the influence of religion on politics and vice versa. There is room for each as a part of the other. My point, said another way, is that one should not dominate the other.

Balance between the two is a good thing.