• Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Tsukino_Rei

  1. As an adopted girl I went through a phase where I wondered if the lives of ancestors I didn't even know could have a negative spiritual effect on me. I reached the conclusion that I am an independent being with my own power and I am who I choose to be. There is certainly an element of nature and nurture. I have had negative experiences in my life. Modern science is proving that things that have happened to our genetic forerunners do have an effect on us, not just our development in the womb but ancient experiences translate into modern phobias. Fascinating, really. But I digress.

    We don't have control over how others have nurtured us. We don't have control over many biological constraints. But what we do have control over is how we choose to respond to those experiences. We can choose to build great stores of internal strength, compassion, and wisdom from the worst experiences. If we choose bitterness and anger then we spread bitterness and anger. If we choose compassion and wisdom then we spread healing.

    We all carry injuries of varying cause and degree. That doesn't have to make us into harmful people.

    You can guide your internal dialogue through prayer and meditation to refocus your intentions.

  2. The most evil book I ever read was in the Trinity College Library in Dublin. It was an instructional book of torture methods used at the height of the protestant catholic civil war. I only saw two pages of it because it was behind glass, alongside various news papers of the day open to reports of torture and violence from either side of the conflict. There is no violence on television or in movies or in video games that comes close to that reality of THAT imagery. Even Game of Thrones.

    As to Dungeons and Dragons being evil, no. Of course it isn't. RPG's are just another form of story-telling. They are a form of story telling in which the reader creates a character to take part in the story. This makes them an excellent tool for imagination as in part the reader may also become the writer - but it's no more evil then any other medium of story telling. When I was a girl I was raised in fundamentalism. There was a period of time in which a Sunday School teacher leant me a book, she knew I loved to read, about the evil satanic new age movement and how it was infiltrating today's youth (me) - through Care Bears, My Little Ponies, Smurfs, and the Muppets. I ** you not. These things were banned in my home for a time based on a fear mongeror who made a small fortune and the tele-evangelists who made an even bigger fortune by telling parents that all the evils in todays youth came from the dark guidance of Papa Smurf. No amount of reasoning could convince the grownups around me that they were being ridiculous.

    So, as you can imagine, when the same group of people came along to warn me of the Satanic driving force behind Dungeons and Dragons I rolled my eyes and walked the other way.

  3. Fairness in the philosophical sense I equate with justice. I recently attended a Bahai group meeting in which the topic was Justice, and there were readings from many religions and philosophers on the topic. The common thread in these readings was the idea that Justice, what is fair to our fellow man, is that we desire for them the best of what we desire for ourselves. Understanding, love, compassion, caring, and uplifting - these are the ultimate spiritual justice.

    This idea seems to be supported by recent studies of primate behaviour where-in the monkeys become upset when the best food isn't shared equally among them, or when one member of the group doesn't uplift the needs of the others. The instinct for fairness is a survival trait within social species which have evolved to survive through group strength and group support rather than individually.

    As an agnostic I tend to consider both the spiritual and scientific explanations for a given reality.

  4. Every time we cook peas to go with a meal I think my hamsters who have passed, especially the most recently passed, Jasparr. I always set a few aside for them. When I clean and cook any vegetable I feel a little sad, but especially when I cook peas.

    Heh, Chewbacca is outside my office door. He's made a game of tossing his toy birdy down the stairs, chasing after it, then bringing it up and doing it again!

  5. I'm sorry for your losses. :group: And I agree, Cryzme. I've always felt a strong sense of responsibility to make sure my furry companions have as happy and comfortable a life as possible, probably because I started with raising hamsters and they have such short lifespans! My living room became a hamster spa.

  6. We've left our now 6 month old kitty, Chewbacca, with good friends while we house hunt in Canada. A couple of days ago he woke our dear friends at 3am by jumping on their keyboard until itunes started playing, then somehow finding the volume key and turning it up to maximum. They sent me a picture of him looking very smug ... and just a little bit evil.

  7. In the last century the two phrases were used interchangeably, and they are still related for most anti-rich conspiracy types who see the world run by rich Jewish bankers. Even if you remove the anti-Semitic component, the rest of the viciousness still remains and is bad enough on its own. And targeting a faceless evil is even more dangerous for the innocent, as was evidenced by Joseph McCarthy and the anti-red scare. Then anyone can be attacked. What is evident in these attacks is the divide and eliminate strategy that we have seen over and over. That is embodied in the targeting small segments of society, the parts the majority do not care about, and moving on from one group to another until all are conquered and enslaved. Such is the tactic of the Statists. Whether Fascist, Communist, Nazi, Socialist, Crony Capitalist or Theocrat, all require a State where the sovereignty to rule resides in itself and not the people. This allows sovereignty to reside in the small minority who control the State.

    While I agree that government is necessary, I also hold that I and all others are sovereign. Where there is conflict between members of a society it is a conflict between sovereigns, and should be treated as such, just as it is in the world of nations, because in essence we are all nations of one. It would be inconsistent to have one position for the interactive behavior of nations or groups of nations, and another for the interactive behavior of sovereign individuals or groups of sovereign individuals. We are all the heads of state and deserve to be treated as such. Or do you favor the treatment of Tibet, after all China is the majority.

    I do agree that a dictatorship of the majority is something to be avoided and I am in favour of all members of society having a voice and the protection of certain rights and freedoms that should be shared by all people. And certainly, not all rich people take advantage of the tax evasion methods available to them, but for me the issue in discussion here is not how individuals behave, or even how a large group of individuals behave, but rather how the perceptions, rules and norms of society as a whole have been shaped to find certain behaviours either acceptable or undesirable depending upon the income level of the individuals performing the same basic behaviours. In the same way that it has been observed in the past that men sleeping around got feathers in their caps, while women sleeping around get to be called **s. There is an incongruency.

  8. Panpariel, Brother Kamen, you guys are both agreeing that the very terms 'the rich', and 'the poor' are divisive and falsely imply that all people within these categories are the same, which in turn agrees with my statement that societal philosophies regarding 'the rich' and 'the poor' are to be questioned.

    I do think that the comparison to 'the Jews' is inappropriate, and again implies that questioning inequalities in the way our society applies the law within the class divide is in any way comparative to historic acts of ethnic cleansing and 'racial purification'.

  9. ~ Philosophy... OK.

    { Thank you To'na, the figs do bring some philosophy in... Well, & some Freud too ;) }

    Hyper, how is a billionnaire adopting a girlfriend a philosophical discussion? :dntknw:

    I understand the discrepency in social strata aspect & how that is distressing, but it's a capitalist country & this shtuff happens often.

    She's guaranteed his estate as a legally recognised heir & since she's of age & not blood-related they can monkey-about as they wish.

    Seriously, do you think this is the worse the massively rich do? Hon, getting upset about such is just gonna give ya the pip & not change a thing...

    Does that really happen often? :crazyeyes:

    Envy, jealousy and class warfare......

    Isn't 'class warfare' just a catchy shorthand for people who want to end discussions about inequality and legal jiggery pokery by claiming that even suggesting that the poor are being treated comparatively unfairly is an aggressive act bordering on hate crime?

    When poor people look for ways to reduce their taxes and effectively increase their income from the government it gets called benefit fraud and leaching off the system. When rich people do it the government loses even more money, but that's just good business. I see nothing wrong with challenging the perceptions of society on matters such as this. If challenging predominant societal philosophies regarding the rich and the poor is class warfare, then so be it.

  10. When my kitten wants his breakfast he eats my nose! I have sometimes woken up with my entire nose inside his mouth. It's just a quick gentle nip. Then he sits on my chest and looks innocent. If I close my eyes again, he eats my nose again!


    Do your pets have any special ways of waking you up?

  11. Just googled Mormon Underpants for my own curiosity. The symbolism is actually quite neat, and some of the designs of the Temple Garments (as they are called by the Church of Latter Day Saints) are quite beautiful.


    If I had any personal complaint it would be that were I Mormon living in a hot climate I'd want MUCH skimpier garments if I was going to wear them under my clothes all the time! But I'm not, so to each their own. :derisive:

  12. http://www.hogueprophecy.com/2009/05/is-ray-mabus-nostradamus-mabus/

    entury 2 Quatrain 62:

    Mabus puis tost alors mourra, viendra,

    De gens & bestes vne horrible defaite:

    Puis tout  coup la vengeance on verra,

    Cent, main, soif, faim, quand courra la comete.

    Mabus very soon then will die, [then] will come,

    A horrible undoing of people and animals,

    At once one will see vengeance,

    One hundred powers, thirst, famine, when the comet will pass.

    Nostradamus (1555)

    The dude in the link above suggests that Ray Mabus could be the Mabus indicated in the prophecy. I wonder if that topic comes up at White House dinner parties! :clown(1):

  13. I disagree. It is available throughout the bible, both old ans New testaments, albeit in veiled and later in primitive form. Since I believe that Christ taught it, his disciples, imho, believed it. Just because a complete and thorough explanation and exegesis of the trinity, as we have it today, does not fall from the pages of scripture does not preclude its existence as an idea among the Christians of the new testament. I am not a bible-only Christian. The bible itself testifies that it does not hold all the lord said or did, nor could it. To pass on the fullness of his revelation, he chose apostles, not a book. The apostles passed on the fullness of faith to the church, which has kept it as its tradition. While the bible is a part if that tradition, it is not the only part. For me, the holy trinity is the Rosetta stone of Christian theology, without it, nothing that we know about christ makes sense. But if you have a poll taken during the New testament times proving that Christians disavowed the idea of the trinity, please share.

    It seems a bit cruel to 'veil' a doctrine that salvation supposedly depends upon. I guess it boils down to whether one buys into the idea that true, redemption-dependant knowledge of god was progressively revealed to politicians, torturers, and murderers throughout history. Personally, I smell rotten fruit.

    Suppression of heresies

    Main article: Christian debate on persecution and toleration

    One of the roles of bishops, and the purpose of many Christian writings, was to refute heresies. The New Testament itself speaks of the importance of maintaining orthodox doctrine and refuting incorrect teachings, showing the antiquity of the concern.[7]

    During those first three centuries, Christianity was effectively outlawed by requirements to venerate the Roman emperor and Roman gods. Consequently, when the Church labeled its enemies as heretics and cast them out of its congregations or severed ties with dissident churches, it remained without the power to persecute them.

    Before 313 AD, the "heretical" nature of some beliefs was a matter of much debate within the churches, and there was no true mechanism in place to resolve the various differences of beliefs. Heresy was to be approached by the leader of the church according to Eusebius, author of The Church History. It was only after the legalisation of Christianity, which began under Constantine I in 313 AD that the various beliefs of the Church began to be made uniform and formulated as dogma through the canons promulgated by the General Councils. Each phrase in the Nicene Creed, which was hammered out at the Council of Nicaea, addresses some aspect that had been under passionate discussion prior to Constantine I, and closes the books on the argument, with the weight of the agreement of the over 300 bishops, as well as Constantine I in attendance. [Constantine had invited all 1800 bishops of the Christian church (about 1000 in the east and 800 in the west). The number of participating bishops cannot be accurately stated; Socrates Scholasticus and Epiphanius of Salamis counted 318; Eusebius of Caesarea, only 250.] In spite of the agreement reached at the council of 325, the Arians, who had been defeated, dominated most of the church for the greater part of the 4th century, often with the aid of Roman emperors who favored them.

    Irenaeus (c. 130–202) was the first to argue that his "orthodox" position was the same faith that Jesus gave to the apostles, and that the identity of the apostles, their successors, and the teachings of the same were all well-known public knowledge. This was therefore an early argument supported by apostolic succession. Irenaeus first established the doctrine of four gospels and no more, with the synoptic gospels interpreted in the light of John. Irenaeus' opponents, however, claimed to have received secret teachings from Jesus via other apostles which were not publicly known. Gnosticism is predicated on the existence of such hidden knowledge, but brief references to private teachings of Jesus have also survived in the canonic Scripture as did warning by the Christ that there would be false prophets or false teachers. Irenaeus' opponents also claimed that the wellsprings of divine inspiration were not dried up, which is the doctrine of continuing revelation.

    The first known usage of the term 'heresy' in a civil legal context was in 380 AD by the "Edict of Thessalonica" of Theodosius I. Prior to the issuance of this edict, the Church had no state sponsored support for any particular legal mechanism to counter what it perceived as 'heresy'. By this edict, in some senses, the line between the Catholic Church's spiritual authority and the Roman State's jurisdiction was blurred. One of the outcomes of this blurring of Church and State was a sharing of State powers of legal enforcement between Church and State authorities. At its most extreme reach, this new legal backing of the Church gave its leaders the power to, in effect, pronounce the death sentence upon those whom they might perceive to be 'heretics'.

    Within 5 years of the official 'criminalization' of heresy by the emperor, the first Christian heretic, Priscillian was executed in 385 by Roman officials. For some years after theProtestant Reformation, Protestant denominations were also known to execute those whom they considered as heretics. The last known heretic executed by sentence of the Roman Catholic Church was Cayetano Ripoll in 1826. The number of people executed as heretics under the authority of the various 'church authorities' is not known, however it most certainly numbers into the several thousands.


    Early Christianity

    Most nontrinitarians take the position that the doctrine of the earliest form of Christianity (see Apostolic Age) was nontrinitarian, but (depending on which church) believe rather that early Christianity was either strictly unitarian or binitarian or modalist. Typically, nontrinitarians believe Christianity was altered by the edicts of Emperor Constantine I, which eventually resulted in the adoption of Trinitarian Christianity as the official religion of the Roman Empire during the reign of Theodosius I. Because it was during a dramatic shift in Christianity's status that the doctrine of the Trinity attained its definitive development, nontrinitarians typically consider the doctrine questionable. Nontrinitarians see the Nicene Creed as an essentially political document, resulting from the subordination of true doctrine to state interests by leaders of the Catholic Church, so that the church became, in their view, an extension of the Roman Empire.

    Although nontrinitarian beliefs continued to multiply, and among some people (such as the Lombards in the west) were dominant for hundreds of years after their inception, Trinitarians gained prominence in the Roman Empire. Nontrinitarians typically argue that the primitive beliefs of Christianity were systematically suppressed (often to the point of death), and that the historical record, perhaps also including the scriptures of the New Testament, was altered as a consequence.

    Some scholars investigating the historical Jesus assert that Jesus taught neither his own equality with God nor the Trinity (see, for example, the Jesus Seminar).

    Nontrinitarians also dispute the veracity of the Nicene Creed based on its adoption nearly 300 years after the life of Jesus as a result of conflict within pre-Nicene early Christianity. Nontrinitarians (both Modalists and Unitarians) also generally claim that Athanasius and others at Nicaea adopted Greek Platonic philosophy and concepts, and incorporated them in their views of God and Christ.[26]Nontrinitarians also cite scriptures such as Matthew 15:9 and Ephesians 4:14 that warn the reader to beware the doctrines of men.

    The author H. G. Wells, later famous for his contribution to science-fiction, wrote in The Outline of History: "We shall see presently how later on all Christendom was torn by disputes about the Trinity. There is no evidence that the apostles of Jesus ever heard of the Trinity, at any rate from him."[27]

    The question of why such a central doctrine to the Christian faith would never have been explicitly stated in scripture or taught in detail by Jesus himself was sufficiently important to 16th century historical figures such as Michael Servetus as to lead them to argue the question. The Geneva City Council, in accord with the judgment of the cantons of Zürich, Bern, Basel, and Schaffhausen, condemned Servetus to be burned at the stake for this and his opposition to infant baptism.


    I see nothing wrong with believing in a Trinity, per se. Multiple interesting religions do. But to claim that it is a requirement for salvation, a requirement to call oneself a follower of Christ, to enforce it using the state, or to torture or put to death those who disagree is, for me, full of problems and, from my own understand when I read the book, not at all supported by the Christian Bible. My interpretation instructs me that there should be some internal alarm bells going off at that point.

  14. Jesus is part of the trinity, and therefore belief in him as not only messiah and savior, but also second person of the godhead is necessary for salvific Christian faith but it is not sufficient. There must also be belief in god the father and god the holy spirit, according to most Christians. People who believe in Jesus but not the One who sent him or the one who came after could hardly be called a christiam, at least in the traditional sense

    If Trinitarianism is valid pre-requisite to Christianity then none of the disciples were Christian, nor were their followers

    An exhaustive review of Scripture and history reveals the simple fact that the Trinity teaching was unknown to the early New Testament assembly. That the doctrine of the Trinity is a "revealed doctrine" foreign to the Scriptures is supported by many authorities, including the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia. Under the article Trinity we read, "The term ‘Trinity’ is not a biblical term…In point of fact, the doctrine of the Trinity is a purely revealed doctrine…As the doctrine of the Trinity is indiscoverable by reason, so it is incapable of proof from reason" (vol. 5, p. 3012).


    Trinitarian doctrine, whether it be the belief in three Persons so perfectly united in purpose as to be One (Trinitarianism) or three manifestation of a single being, each manifestation so perfect and complete as to like three Persons (Unitarianism), they find their roots in Babylonian theology. Not in Judaism or the teachings of Christ.

  15. I've always enjoyed the tangents in conversations on this forum. Topics change as they are discussed between people and many times things have been taught or learned on here because of the tangents.

    Ditto! I'm eating this up! I'm just quiet because the things that are being discussed are things I don't know about, so I'm learning from all of your input and looking up stuff as I read along.

  16. I like the follow through and perspective you bring to the discussion. It is unfortunate that in general, people think of Europe and Christian church of the day as being the world's center. Many of the advances and discoveries were-before and since- by Arabic, African, and Asian peoples. The perspective opens us to events and cultures far removed from that most studied, and brings a crucial element to the perspective of history. After reading your posts, I explored those cultures and their gifts to mankind more in depth and found the study enlightening and refreshing...isn't sad that people abuse various implements of power- politics, religion, etc!

    Thank you Windwalker! :cloud9:

    Yes, it is very sad. I think that, depending on how they are used, these things have the power to bring as much good as they have evil. Religion, when used correctly, is a tool of philosophical growth and personal enlightenment, teaching us to better know and love ourselves so that we are empowered to better know and love our neighbours. At its best, politics is people coming together as a community and working towards the common goals of building and maintaining happy lives, working out how we can best keep each other safe and trade our resources for individual and common good.

    Windwalker--this maybe of interest to you--and others regarding monotheism and concepts of spirit almost 5000BC.




    This is completely fascinating. I can tell I'm going to spend a lot of time on this! I am particularly intrigued by the levels of soul.

  17. ...So, the Dark Ages, so to speak- is a matter of perspective: There was certainly a slowing of inventions and discoveries, but by no means was it nil. The 1st mention of a handgun was in the 1400's, glasses for nearsighted people, movable type for printing presses, golf balls, oil painting- to name a few-were all discoveries and inventions of this time. Here is my reference-it is pretty interesting - http://www.google.co...es1300ad-1500ad

    True. the 'Dark Ages' were a period of specifically European history. It's notable that Ethiopia, one of the happiest and most successful civilizations on earth if the reports are to be believed, was also a predominantly Christian civilization. This could be taken as evidence that the religion was not to be blamed, but rather how some people chose to use the religion. Given political interests, class divide, and mores of the day in Europe I think it's probable that the 'Dark Ages' and the atrocities committed by the Church would have happened with or without it.

  18. Are we forgetting about war elephants, camels, various relatives of the goat, cattle since 8000 BC, all in Africa. Desert horses have been bred in Africa since the 8th century.

    The african ostrich has been used for meat, eggs, feathers, leather, fat, oil, as a mount, and for racing.

    Methods of irrigation, a relatively recent development in western farming, was in use in ancient Egypt.

    Archaeological investigation has identified evidence of irrigation where the natural rainfall was insufficient to support crops.

    Perennial irrigation was practised in the Mesopotamian plain whereby crops were regularly watered throughout the growing season by coaxing water through a matrix of small channels formed in the field.[4]

    Ancient Egyptians practiced Basin irrigation using the flooding of the Nile to inundate land plots which had been surrounded by **s. The flood water was held until the fertile sediment had settled before the surplus was returned to the watercourse.[5] There is evidence of the ancient Egyptian pharaoh Amenemhet III in the twelfth dynasty (about 1800 BCE) using the natural lake of the Faiyum Oasis as a reservoir to store surpluses of water for use during the dry seasons, the lake swelled annually from flooding of the Nile.[6]

    The Ancient Nubians developed a form of irrigation by using a waterwheel-like device called a sakia. Irrigation began in Nubia some time between the third and second millennium BCE.[7] It largegly depended upon the flood waters that would flow through the Nile River and other rivers in what is now the Sudan.[8]

    In "sub-Saharan Africa" irrigation reached the Niger River region cultures and civilizations by the first or second millennium BCE and was based on wet season flooding and water harvesting.[9][10]


    Ancient African Civilizations were some of the most advanced in the world, with long distance trade, great architecture, plumbing, irrigation, writing, art, schools, and great wealth. That's not even counting Egypt. Ethiopia was building stone castles a thousand years before Europeans, they were the third most advanced civilization on earth, in their day they were more advanced than China. Their armies defeated the Romans, the Greeks, and the Persians.