Conference lgp30::christian-perspective

    Can you define it for us -- or is that the purpose of the string?
    ;}

    re: .1  Partly.  It seems piety has fallen into ill repute in modern
    times.  I'd be curious to learn of current Christian perspectives
    concerning piety.
    
    Richard

Rhymes with "sobriety".

				-- Bob

    I guess it only has negative connotations for me.  Either reminds me of
    proud, self-conscious, religious practices or of paintings of mournful,
    heavenward-gazing medieval "saints" suffering from something or other
    (guilt, I guess)!
    
    Love and devotion and adoration I can understand.  Acts of selflessness
    I can understand.  Mysticism I'd *like* to understand.  Piety?  Can't
    figure it out.

LJOHUB::NSMITH "rises up with eagle wings"            8 lines   2-APR-1991 19:22
                           -< Well, I'll jump in... >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>    Love and devotion and adoration I can understand.  Acts of selflessness
>    I can understand.  Piety?  Can't figure it out.
    
    Sounds like you have a pretty good grasp on Piety right there. 
    Although it does conjure up pictures of � dead looking saints in
    rustic paintings.  I think it is much of what you listed above.
    Love and devotion and adoration (directed to god).  Acts of
    selflessness is also included.  
    
    	Overall I think Piety is a sober attitude in relation to
    righteousness.  It means not playing games with sin.  Or compromising
    ones moral standards to placate the world.  It is NOT an aloofness or
    condescending attitude toward others.  Jesus was pious but he was also
    reachable.  
    
    _ed-
    
    	

    
    Well, I have done a fair amount of looking into the term, and will
    share what I have found.
    
    First of all, the term is only mentioned in the King James Bible "one"
    time, in Timothy, "Let the children learn piety at home" something like
    this.  It therefore directs the parents to teach this virtue at home
    and to the child at an early age.
    
    But, more than this, I have discovered that it is a very relevent
    virtue that has been left out of the KJV for some reason.  You will
    note that in Revelations 1:5, the bible clearly states, "He that was,
    is and is to come (thus God), and the SEVEN SPIRITS BEFORE HIS THRONE." 
    Yet, in Isaiah 11:2 you find that it reads "and the spirit of the Lord
    shall be upon him, the spirit of 1)Wisdom, 2)Understanding, 3)Might,
    4)Counsel, 5)Knowledge, and 6)Fear of the Lord (not in this order).  In
    short it only names 6 of the Spirits of God, and I believe this verse
    corresponds to Rev 1:5, and should have named seven spirits.
    
    SO...in the Lost Books of the Bible, in the book of Mary 21 or 26:
    something, it reiterates Isaiah 11:1-2, "And a rod/stem shall spring
    forth out of the root of Jesse, and the spirit of the lord shall be
    upon him...." and it goes on to name these six and adds a seventh,
    namely PIETY.  And, since there are seven spirits of the Lord, I would
    have to say that in this case the Lost Books of the Bible are more
    correct than the KJV.
    
    Piety, means "religious devotion" and is a virtue, because it is one of
    the Spirits of the Lord.  It is interesting that this virtue is missing
    from the KJV, and also lacking in European Christian religious
    expression.  
    
    I wonder, personally, "why?" was it left out in Europe.  Is it because
    the State/King wanted all devotion and thus deemphasized "religious
    devotion" to God?
    
    It is truly discouraging for me to hear the first five responses
    proclaim such lack of knowledge and even disdain for the term and it's
    expression.  
    
    No other people on earth are as undevoted to their religion as whites
    are to Christianity.  This is seen in whites having no problem in
    interpreting God's Word practically any way they want, (i.e. Blacks are
    cursed through Ham (and the bible doesn't say that), using the bible as
    a tool to facilitate the sustaining of slavery, allowing homosexuality
    and other non-christian behavior to be condoned or accepted as
    righteous conduct (and this shouldn't be). 
    
    I feel that if whites had or would begin to emphasize a greater
    devotion to God's Word things would be better...
    
    I know what I'm saying sounds and probably is racist/racial, but for
    the most part that's how it is.  This is an issue whites alone need to
    address, moreso than any other people on earth...so get mad, Dave
    Meyer, or others at me for saying this, but personally, I'm trying to
    bring an important issue to your attention (since you brought it up). 
    
    I have some more information that could be instrumental for you
    learning to integrate this virtue into your conduct and to understand
    it better.
    
    To give you a little idea of the universiality of "PIETY"...
    
    There are four natural elements, Earth, Air, Fire, and Water.  Each
    natural element translates into a virtue in human character as
    follows (according to the Egyptians, but in Bible/english terms)
    
    1)	Earth = The Spirit of Fear of the Lord
    2)	Air = The Spirit of Counsel
    3)	Fire = The Spirit of Might
    4)	Water = The Spirit of Piety
    
    Just to complete the picture..
    
    The Natural Elements when they interact produce four Elemental
    Conditions:
    
    1)	Earth and Fire create the Elemental Condition of Dryness
    2)	Fire and Air create the Elemental Condition of Hotness
    3)	Air and Water create the Elemental Condition of Wetness
    4)	Water and Earth create the Elemental Condition of Coldness
    
    And each of the four Elemental Conditions also translate into virtue in
    the human character:
    
    1)	Dryness manifests as the Spirit of Wisdom
    2)	Hotness manifests as the Spirit of Understanding
    3)	Wetness manifests as the Spirit of Love
    4)	Coldness manifests as the Spirit of Knowledge
    
    You may have noticed that there are eight Spirits listed here, but that
    I/Rev 1:5/Isaiah 11:2/Mary 21:? only mention seven Spirits.  You will
    note however, that Rev. 1:5 first mentions "He that was, is and is to
    come" which is God, and in I John 4:something it clearly states "God is
    Love", and in Matthew is says "God is a spirit", so in essence there
    are actually Eight Spirits of God, Love is the greatest and is most
    talked about. 
    
    Perhaps that is a reason why Piety is left out in Isaiah, and we are
    instructed to teach Piety at an early age and at home is the
    prepondence of water in the earth...I don't know.
    
    I can give you more info...if you want.
    
    Playtoe, In the Spirit of Truth 
    Playtoe

    Playtoe,
    
    Lots of what you say has value, but when you spout those
    generalizations and insensitivities you lose potential sympathizers. 
    Why because only God can look into people's hearts (whites/blacks/
    women/men/etc) and know their devotion!!!  You are judging a whole race
    of people and it is not a human's place to judge.
    
    The way you say it is comes from your narrow human perspective...
    
    Ro
    

    Playtoe,
    
    Why is there only one mention of piety in the KJV?  My guess is that
    the Bible, amongst other things, is designed to provide inspiration,
    guidance and instruction on piety.  
    
    I understand that the Bible has been used to sanction non-Christian
    behavior, but I think you are wrong when you say...
    
    > No ther people on earth are as undevoted to their religion as whites
    are to Christianity.  This is seen in whites having no problem in
    interpreting God's Word practically any way they want... <
    
    Devotion to one's religion stands side by side with one's
    interpretation of the basic tenets of that religion.  They are both
    aspects of one's spiritual self, but imo, they are not interchangeable 
    as you have infered.  Also I know a lot of blacks who have no problem
    interpreting God's Word the way they want and I know of several
    different interpretations amoung blacks.  But I wouldn't classify any
    of them as being undevoted to their religion no matter what their
    interpretation.  The same applies to the whites I know.
    
    Oh and by the way, Dave Meyer is no longer here.  But I'm sure he
    would've appreciated your thinking of him.
    
    Karen  

    re: 7
    
    Ro,
    
>    Lots of what you say has value, but when you spout those
>    generalizations and insensitivities you lose potential sympathizers. 
>    Why because only God can look into people's hearts (whites/blacks/
>    women/men/etc) and know their devotion!!!  You are judging a whole race
>    of people and it is not a human's place to judge.
 
    You're escaping with this.  As the scripture clearly states "ye are
    gods", "the saints will judge", and also "you will know them by their
    fruits (or conduct).  What I've said is plainly seen in society.  How
    whites raise their children, allowing them a great deal more freedom
    (the opposite of piety) than black parents.  Also, even now
    predominantly whites place more emphasis on their devotion to financial
    and imperialistic interests than to religious conduct.  Whites are more
    materialistic than blacks and most people of color...all this is
    plainly seen in the world today.
    
    You may say that blacks control of their children stems from slavery,
    but I'll tell you that it began in Africa long before that.  You may
    say that civilization building is more important than spirituality
    building (and many whites don't believe in "spiritualness").  You may
    say that Materialism stems from the educational process, which trains
    people in means of production and gives little concern to spiritual
    matters, relegating that study to the church which is separate from
    state...but IMO it is all summed up in PIETY.
    
    Reacting to my ideas and not first reflecting on their presence or
    non-presence in reality is childish and immature.  What I've said is
    generally the reality of the matter...
    
    I've studied whites and blacks for many years and my insights are very
    valid and insightful.  I challenge you to name a race/society of people
    who have seen fit to misuse the Word of God as whites have.  I
    challenge you to show me in America alone a race that treats the Word
    of God as transitory as whites.  The Hispanics?  The Blacks?  The
    Indians?  The Asians?  WHO?  You can't show me in reality.  So on what
    can you base you rejection of my ideas other than sentitivity and
    reactionism?
    
       
>    The way you say it is comes from your narrow human perspective...
    
    This is typical...trying to evoke an emotional reaction in me to place
    me in the same circle as yourself.  How do you feel I'm coming from a
    "narrow human perspective"?  
    
    Playtoe, IN THE SPIRIT OF TRUTH

    Re: 8
    Karen,
    
>    Why is there only one mention of piety in the KJV?  My guess is that
>    the Bible, amongst other things, is designed to provide inspiration,
>    guidance and instruction on piety.  
 
    If this was the case, why is it mentioned only once...your guess is not
    as good as mine.  I said it was because of the desire of the King
    (James) to have the major portion of citizen devotion go to him, which
    has been a major motivator in the European tradition of social rule.
       
>    I understand that the Bible has been used to sanction non-Christian
>    behavior, but I think you are wrong when you say...
    
>    > No ther people on earth are as undevoted to their religion as whites
>    are to Christianity.  This is seen in whites having no problem in
>    interpreting God's Word practically any way they want... <
    
>    Devotion to one's religion stands side by side with one's
>    interpretation of the basic tenets of that religion.  They are both
>    aspects of one's spiritual self, but imo, they are not interchangeable 
>    as you have infered.  
    
    Devotion is not "side by side" with one's interpretation.  Belief in
    God, the level of faith, is the primary determinant of how one
    interprets the Word of God, "according to your faith so by it unto
    you", "with what measure you meet...".  Devotion follows after
    interpretation, one is devoted to one's interpretation, which again is
    based upon one's belief in the existence of God.  If you don't believe
    in God you won't be devoted to any interpretation.
    
    >	Also I know a lot of blacks who have no problem
>    interpreting God's Word the way they want and I know of several
>    different interpretations amoung blacks.  But I wouldn't classify any
>    of them as being undevoted to their religion no matter what their
>    interpretation.  The same applies to the whites I know.
 
    I know a lot of blacks too who have no problem interpreting God's Word
    the way they want, but for the most part it is in contradistinction to
    how they had been previously believing in it as taught under slave
    Christian interpretations.  I know very few blacks who use the BIBLE as
    a tool to their selfish ends, unless they are mimicking white's who do
    the same...if you see otherwise please inform me and I'll surely look
    into it.  
    
    
>    Oh and by the way, Dave Meyer is no longer here.  But I'm sure he
>    would've appreciated your thinking of him.
    
    Well the memoes he sent me off-line only make me pleased to hear it!
    I was worried for a minute that he might try to do something to me.
    
    Playtoe

Playtoe,    
    
    
>    Lots of what you say has value, but when you spout those
>    generalizations and insensitivities you lose potential sympathizers. 
>    Why because only God can look into people's hearts (whites/blacks/
>    women/men/etc) and know their devotion!!!  You are judging a whole race
>    of people and it is not a human's place to judge.
 
<<    You're escaping with this. >>

I think not, scripture also states 'judge not, less ye be judged'.
We can all pick and choose scripture to fit our words.

I still stand by what I say about you making generalizations and that 
only God can truly know what is in a person's heart.  

<<'ye are Gods'>>

You see Playtoe, I agree with some of what you say.  Yes, we are all 
children of God, we all have that God seed in our hearts.  However, I 
choose to believe that the God in us is the goodness in us, the Love 
in us.  When you separate us by races, you are denying that basic 
spiritual goodness that is inherent in each of us.  As God's children 
we are all equal in his eyes, apparently we are not in yours.

<< How whites raise their children, allowing them a great deal more freedom
    (the opposite of piety) than black parents.  >>

Hmmm, my dearest friend in the world is a black woman who is closer to 
me than my own sister.  She has raised her daughter the same way I've 
raised my two children - that is with love, with wanting them to be 
the true 'spiritual' beings that they are.  I think you make an 
unsubstantiated claim here.  You make yourself the spokesperson for 
all Blacks and that seems silly to me.  Who elected you to make these 
claims?

<<Also, even now
    predominantly whites place more emphasis on their devotion to financial
    and imperialistic interests than to religious conduct.  Whites are more
    materialistic than blacks and most people of color...all this is
    plainly seen in the world today.>>

A lot can be 'plainly seen' in the world today, but it is all where we 
look and what we look for and what we 'choose' to see!!
    
>>    You may say that blacks control of their children stems from slavery,
    but I'll tell you that it began in Africa long before that.  You may
    say that civilization building is more important than spirituality
    building (and many whites don't believe in "spiritualness").  You may
    say that Materialism stems from the educational process, which trains
    people in means of production and gives little concern to spiritual
    matters, relegating that study to the church which is separate from
    state...but IMO it is all summed up in PIETY.>>

I would never say anything of those things, please don't put words in 
my mouth.
    
>>    Reacting to my ideas and not first reflecting on their presence or
    non-presence in reality is childish and immature.  What I've said is
    generally the reality of the matter...<<

My reality and yours are obviously not the same.  Reducing this dialog 
to name calling - 'childish and immature' - serves only to separate us 
further.  My purpose in noting in this file is attempt to see and 
honor the Oneness.  What is yours?
    
>>    I've studied whites and blacks for many years and my insights are very
    valid and insightful. >>

As have I and thus my insights and experiences are also valid and 
insightful.

>> I challenge you to name a race/society of people
    who have seen fit to misuse the Word of God as whites have.  I
    challenge you to show me in America alone a race that treats the Word
    of God as transitory as whites.  The Hispanics?  The Blacks?  The
    Indians?  The Asians?  WHO?<<

Playtoe, I don't lump people into groups, I certainly try not to 
catergorize people that way.  I try to see the Light of God in each 
person I meet.  I truly believe that unless I've walked in your shoes 
I cannot judge you, yet you are choosing to judge millions of people 
you don't even know.


>>  You can't show me in reality. >>

I can't show you what you don't want to see.


>> So on what
    can you base you rejection of my ideas other than sentitivity and
    reactionism?>>

I didn't say I rejected your ideas, I was objecting to your 
unChristian slurs.
    
       
>    The way you say it is comes from your narrow human perspective...
    
<<    This is typical...trying to evoke an emotional reaction in me to place
    me in the same circle as yourself. <<

What circle is that?  I wasn't trying to evoke an emotional reaction.  
I was stating how your note affected me.  By limiting your beliefs to 
the idea that 'all' whites are all the things you've said, you are 
narrowing your view of the world.  That is a human way of perceiving, 
I do not believe it is the Creator's way.


 How do you feel I'm coming from a
    "narrow human perspective"?  

As I've said, because you are placing judgement which I believe is 
against what Jesus taught.
    
Yes, terrible attrocities have been committed by some white people but 
you don't say 'some', you point your finger at the entire race.

I don't intend to argue with you Playtoe.  What I was pointing out is that 
the value I find in some of your points becomes lost when they are weighed 
against your biases.  Therefore, you lose what could have been a sharing 
of ideas and experiences, because I will no longer read any of what you say
if you continue to write with such bigotry.

Ro

    
    Ok, so what's all this silence about?  You don't understand Piety, and
    you don't want to?  Or, you don't want to discuss it with me?  
    
    So I'm a serious person and well educated and tend to get deep into the
    heart of matters of religion and history...does that bother you?
    
    Piety/Devotion is as important to the Christian faith and the course of
    history and of life as water is to the earth and all natural life. 
    Would you allow a bigot, racist, etc. like ME keep you out of the
    kingdom of God?  Because for a surety Jesus says "Unless they
    righteousness exceed that of the scribes and pharisees ye shall in NO
    wise enter into the kingdom of God".  And this relates to your ability
    or capacity to "turn the other cheek" and stay on the righteous path.
    
    This silence also implies to me, again, just how undevoted some are to
    God's Word.  If you salute only those who are like you or that you
    like, even the publicans do this.  If I have spoken of value but from
    the perspective of my black/African past, which may include things that
    offend your sensitivities, are you righteous in alienating me for the
    offence, or should you focus on the love of God.  If you admit their
    have been atrocities why does it offend to mention them, could it be
    because you have not repented, but continue in those ways?
    
    If the poor man, homeless and hungry, asks you for change, is that
    offensive?  Do you think God is offended by the cry of the poor?  Do
    you do as God would do for them?  Does it hurt your feelings that I
    mention these things?
    
    We're talking about Piety, or Devotion to God.   Is this not an
    appropriate place to challenge or discuss or examine our feelings and
    performance of devotion?  
    
    Playtoe

    re: .14, Playtoe,
    
    >Ok, so what's all this silence about?  You don't understand Piety, and
    >you don't want to?  Or, you don't want to discuss it with me?  
    
    >Piety/Devotion is as important to the Christian faith and the course of
    >history and of life as water is to the earth and all natural life. 
    
    Your first note referred to all the previous ones having a negative
    view of piety.  However, you went on to define piety as devotion,
    which is something I stated in my opriginal note that I *do* understand 
    So I have no need to discuss it further.  If piety=devotion, fine, no
    problem.      
    
    >Would you allow a bigot, racist, etc. like ME keep you out of the
    >kingdom of God?  
    
    No, your racist remarks did not bother me.  I recognized them for what
    they were, along with recognizing that you could not see that, by *your*
    definition, some of us *do* understand what piety is.
    
    >This silence also implies to me, again, just how undevoted some are to
    >God's Word.
    
    I think the silence shows tolerance for irrelevances, which I, for one,
    have no desire to debate and which are totally unrelated to piety. 
    That fact that the silence implies something different to you says to
    me that you are looking for some kind of fight rather than a discussion of
    piety in our lives.  Apparently we are disappointing you.
    
    Nancy
    

    re: 15
    
    Nancy, you are correct and I apologize to you for including you (the
    first five notes, minus one should have been what I said).  However, I
    could debate the difference between being racist and racial, and in
    regards to someone saying I'm "judging", I could debate the difference
    between "admonishing" and judgement, as judgement is always followed by
    sentencing/condemnation and admonishment is followed by instruction as
    I have done...but I won't pursue those courses.
    
    Actually, I went home last night to study more on Piety and have found
    something more....
    
    Perhaps, this has something to do with the six spirits mentioned in
    Isaiah and why the Water/Piety is not.  In the Lost Books of the Bible,
    the First Book of Hermas called his Vivions, Vision III, verses 41-44 (
    and while I'm at it the verse in the Gospel of Mary which reiterates
    Isaiah 11:1-2  is Mary 5: 14-15, I had said 21: or 26:) it reads as
    follows:
    
    "I asked her, Lady, why is the tower built upon the water?  She
    replied, ....Hear therefore why the tower is built upon the water: 
    because your life is and shall be saved by water.  For it is founded by
    the word of the almighty and honourable name, and is supported by the
    invisible power and virtue of God.
    
    And I answering, said unto her, these things are very admirable; but,
    lady, who are those six young men that built (the tower)?
    
    They are, said she, the angels of God, which were first appointed, and
    to whom the Lord has delivered all his creatures, to frame and build
    them up, and to rule over them.  For by these the building of the tower
    shall be finished."
    
    Thus, water, as Piety or Devotion, is what the building of the tower
    (or our spiritual house) rests upon.  The other six spirits (those
    mentioned in Isaiah) are the builders of the tower/spiritual house.
    
    Playtoe
    

re: .14

>    Ok, so what's all this silence about?  You don't understand Piety, and
>    you don't want to?  Or, you don't want to discuss it with me?  
    
    Actually, my silence comes from the fact that I don't want to DEBATE it
    with you.  It seems that often when you bring up something, it gets
    heated and debated.  "Discuss" .ne. "Debate" in my mind.
    
>    So I'm a serious person and well educated and tend to get deep into the
>    heart of matters of religion and history...does that bother you?
    
    No, it doesn't bother me, but if you wish me, personally, and others
    like me to respond, you'll have to use a different tone, one that does
    not challenge with a chip on its shoulder.  One that accepts there are
    many ways of looking at things, one that is willing to softly encounter
    others' ideas as well as softly offering your own.
    
>    This silence also implies to me, again, just how undevoted some are to
>    God's Word.
    
    Thank you so much for passing judgement on me.

>    We're talking about Piety, or Devotion to God.   Is this not an
>    appropriate place to challenge or discuss or examine our feelings and
>    performance of devotion?  
    
    It is an appropriate place to discuss and examine our feelings.  I for
    one do not wish to play the game of challenge-and-conquer-or-be-conquered
    I am here to learn and share and grow, not to debate.
    
    -Jody
    
    
 

Well said, Jody.

I, for one, have not been participating much in this file because I have found
that what I am looking for is an exchange of ideas rather than a debate over 
the "rightness" of ones' belief system over another.  I am perfectly willing
to accept others' differences in beliefs but I find that there are a few in
this file who are not as accepting.  My path is not yours nor yours mine.  
That is the way it must be given our differences of origin and goals i.e. 
beliefs and value systems.  I honor all paths of spiritual growth as "right".  
I have trouble understanding why some people seem to need to think in terms of
black and white/right and wrong.  Why can't we exchange ideas and beliefs and 
accept, love and honor each other for our differences as well as our
similarities?

Nanci  

    re 17
    
    Debate is more what I get instead of discussion whenever I enter notes
    in the Black Christian perspective (which if you deny is a valid
    perspective you deny my existence).  But Jody, it really doesn't matter
    to me, but to God moreso, that WE learn of each other's reality and
    needs and concerns and try to understand and help each other according
    to those needs.  I would like to get along with every one, but not
    because I'm doing the things YOU expect, but the things that God
    expects of us all.  
    
    My notes always deal with generalities and issues of the common good,
    and not just for my personal good.  But some don't necessarily care
    about the common good of all or even perceive the "all" as opposed to
    the self and those like self.
    
    I don't believe, and I've said this before, that it's my tone, because
    there are those in this file whose "tones" are worse than mine, but
    they don't address the issues that I address.  Even in the first few
    notes of this file the tone of some regarding Piety to God (and as I
    mentioned there is one which suggests "disdain" for such conduct) but
    that doesn't seem to offend any of the Christians in this file.  So I'm
    compelled to think it is the subject matter that is the offensive part
    of my notes.  As you see Nancy (and she's proven how sweet she is on
    several occasions, she's the only person to read and comment positively
    on my Dogon Religion entry, for instance).  It matters to ME!
    
>>    This silence also implies to me, again, just how undevoted some are to
>>    God's Word.
    
>    Thank you so much for passing judgement on me.

    How you turn this into "judgement on me" is interesting.  I clearly say
    "implies" and "some", yet you turn that into "judgement" of "you"...
    
>    It is an appropriate place to discuss and examine our feelings.  I for
>    one do not wish to play the game of challenge-and-conquer-or-be-conquered
>    I am here to learn and share and grow, not to debate.
    
    We're talking about getting into the kingdom of God aren't we?  I
    believe the bible asks us to "vie with one another for righteousness",
    thus "challenge and conquering (though a harsh turn)" one another for
    God's sake.  I mean, also, I've been told by many ministers and
    teachers throughout my Christian life, that if you read the bible and
    aren't convicted from time to time you aren't reading it right.  So the
    bible itself challenges and conquers us/our natural/carnal minds.  
    
    Let us try to overcome the hurt feelings and emotions for the reward
    and good that comes from repentence and continuance in righteousness.
    
    Playtoe
    

    Re: 18
    
    I do mean to pry, because we are suppose to be brothers and sisters in
    Christ...
    
    Nanci,
    
>I, for one, have not been participating much in this file because I have found
>that what I am looking for is an exchange of ideas rather than a debate over 
>the "rightness" of ones' belief system over another. 
    
    This is a poor attitude, IMO, for a Christian, as the scripture clearly
    states "Reproof and instruction is the daily life of a Christian." 
    Furthermore, what good is it to aimlessly toss around ideas?
    
    >My path is not yours nor yours mine.  
    
    This is also in err, IMO, as there is just one path we all follow,
    which is exemplified in the life of Christ.  Any other path is no good. 
    So it IS imperative that we "be of one mind, on one accord, and in
    agreement".
    
>That is the way it must be given our differences of origin and goals i.e. 
>beliefs and value systems.  I honor all paths of spiritual growth as "right".  
    
    That's pragmatism and is not the Christian way, I believe this is
    spoken of in Deutoronomy, where it says something like "we shall not do
    then as we do now, each man following after his own [ways/mind/or
    something like that], and again "lean not unto thine own understanding
    but the understanding of God".
    
>I have trouble understanding why some people seem to need to think in terms of
    >black and white/right and wrong.  
    
    This is the reality which God created and HE himself speaks in this
    terms.  He says the scribes and pharisees, the Jews, the wicked and the
    righteous, and many other things that denote the differences among us. 
    The point is that inspite of difference we must live in harmony...do
    you understand how it's possible for the lion and the lamb to lay down
    together?  How can blacks and whites live together?  How can good and
    evil exist together in the universe?  (I love the Digital motto,
    "Diversity is our Strength" it echoes of God's created universe).
    
    >Why can't we exchange ideas and
    >beliefs and accept, love and honor each other for our differences as
    > well as our similarities?
    
    How can we love and honor each other for our differences and
    similarities if we don't know what our differences and similarities
    are?  Answer this and you answer why it is imperative for some and all
    to think in terms of black and white/right and wrong.  If God wasn't
    thinking in terms of right and wrong Satan and his followers would
    never have been cast out of heaven.  The key is "overcoming" difference
    and making it our strength, instead of overlooking difference and
    allowing it to be our weakness.
    
    Playtoe
    

re: .19
    
>    Debate is more what I get instead of discussion whenever I enter notes
>    in the Black Christian perspective (which if you deny is a valid
>    perspective you deny my existence).  But Jody, it really doesn't matter
>    to me, but to God moreso, that WE learn of each other's reality and
>    needs and concerns and try to understand and help each other according
>    to those needs.  I would like to get along with every one, but not
>    because I'm doing the things YOU expect, but the things that God
>    expects of us all.  
    
    Debate is what you get when you enter notes with no leeway for allowing
    other people THEIR opinion.  I don't care if you're green and sprout
    purple twinkies from your head, I don't deny you anything.  Your
    attitude is denying me comfort in this notesfile right now, so I tend
    to come in here less and less.  I am willing to learn your reality and
    need and concerns, but it doesn't seem like you're validating mine a
    whole lot.  I think God expects different things from everybody, each
    from their capabilities, strengths, and weaknesses, but you're not
    painting it that way.  You also paint it like you're speaking from God,
    not from YOU, and then you yell at people when they try to explain why
    you're not coming through to them.
    
    
>    My notes always deal with generalities and issues of the common good,
>    and not just for my personal good.  But some don't necessarily care
>    about the common good of all or even perceive the "all" as opposed to
>    the self and those like self.
    
    Your notes deal with YOUR OPINION.  PERIOD.  And it feels like you're
    telling us for OUR PERSONAL GOOD (i.e.  "if you know what's good for
    you you'll see it my way").  I care about the common good - everybody's
    good - not just yours (or your interpretation of God's).
    
>    I don't believe, and I've said this before, that it's my tone, because
>    there are those in this file whose "tones" are worse than mine, but
>    they don't address the issues that I address.  Even in the first few
>    notes of this file the tone of some regarding Piety to God (and as I
>    mentioned there is one which suggests "disdain" for such conduct) but
>    that doesn't seem to offend any of the Christians in this file.  So I'm
>    compelled to think it is the subject matter that is the offensive part
>    of my notes.  As you see Nancy (and she's proven how sweet she is on
>    several occasions, she's the only person to read and comment positively
>    on my Dogon Religion entry, for instance).  It matters to ME!
    
    If it matters to YOU you'll hear what we are saying about your tone,
    rather than turning a deaf ear to us.
         
>    We're talking about getting into the kingdom of God aren't we?  I
>    believe the bible asks us to "vie with one another for righteousness",
>    thus "challenge and conquering (though a harsh turn)" one another for
>    God's sake.
    
    I thought this was the Christian-PERSPECTIVE notesfile.  The one where
    the Bible isn't our only source?  Where's the freedom in your above
    statement that is put forth so clearly in this notesfile's charter?
    
    
      I mean, also, I've been told by many ministers and
>    teachers throughout my Christian life, that if you read the bible and
>    aren't convicted from time to time you aren't reading it right.  So the
>    bible itself challenges and conquers us/our natural/carnal minds.  
    
    The Bible is only one source of religion for me.  Don't tell me I'm
    wrong and don't tell me how to live my life.  Your ministers and
    teachers tell you what works for them, and maybe something else works
    for me.
    
>    Let us try to overcome the hurt feelings and emotions for the reward
>    and good that comes from repentence and continuance in righteousness.
    
    I don't learn through conflict.  I learn through nurturing.  I repent
    nothing I have said here, nor do I repent any single step of my
    spiritual growth.  Your righteousness is currently scaring me away from
    studying the bible, because I'm afraid I'll become just like you.  My
    reward is MY growth, my self-acceptance and the growth of my
    spirituality. I am righteous in my beliefs, and righteous in God's
    strength and support of my continued growth.
    
    
    -Jody
    
    
    

    re: 21
    
    Talking about wanting a fight!  Talking about debate!  Was that
    necessary?  What is my response to be?
    
    How can my notes deny you the option of entering your opinion?  Sounds
    like a personal problem.  How can my attitude deny you comfort?  This
    is again a personal problem.  NO note or person can (because I won't
    allow it to) deny me my right to speak and express my ideas, or cause
    me discomfort unless I choose to...so don't blame your problems on me,
    please.
    
    You aren't being very sensitive to my needs and concerns right now.  I
    think it's time again to get racial.  For 400 hundreds black people
    have "validated" your needs and concerns to the neglect of our own. 
    Here I am trying to get just a little consideration and you have the
    nerve to tell me I haven't given you enough yet...how long, how much?
    
    In regards to the doubt of my speaking from God Word's, if I don't and
    none of are capable of it, then why don't we just close down this false
    notes file?  If I'm not coming through to some, I'd question both
    parties.
    
    My notes deal with "my opinion", does that make them invalid or in
    error.  If I claim God's Word as the head of my life, does that then
    transform His Word into "my opinion"...is it just God's opinion too?  I
    don't say if you know what's good for you you'll see it my way, I say
    If you know what's good for you you'll see my way.  Which is to see
    "value my difference", because if you don't you'll answer for it!
    
    I'm not turning a deaf ear to you, because I'm examining and exploring
    the idea.  I've tried to say things in other ways, nicely, without
    offence, but as I said, tone is not so much important as is the thought
    itself...if you don't understand that and turn a deaf ear to it then
    what are we saying?
    
    If this is the Christian Perspective file the bible isn't the only
    source but it does become the centerpiece.  And I would think that the
    Apocrypha, Lost Books of the Bible, and other "Christian" related
    literature (like Thomas Mann's Joseph in Egypt, among others) are
    sources.  I'm quite aware of what this conference is about, that's why
    I entertain it.
    
>    The Bible is only one source of religion for me.  Don't tell me I'm
>    wrong and don't tell me how to live my life.  Your ministers and
>    teachers tell you what works for them, and maybe something else works
>    for me.
    
    This is so disrespectful, SHAME ON YOU.
    
>    I don't learn through conflict.  I learn through nurturing.  I repent
>    nothing I have said here, nor do I repent any single step of my
>    spiritual growth.  Your righteousness is currently scaring me away from
>    studying the bible, because I'm afraid I'll become just like you.  My
>    reward is MY growth, my self-acceptance and the growth of my
>    spirituality. I am righteous in my beliefs, and righteous in God's
>    strength and support of my continued growth.
 
    This is your way?  Is this the Christian way?  Is this a Christian
    Perspective?  You're angry at me, FOR WHAT?  And let me get racial
    again.  If you think my words cause you to want to "run in fear from
    the bible", then you just ought to know that there are many blacks in
    America RIGHT NOW who will not (and may never) look into the bible
    because of the way it was used to sustain slavery....so perhaps you
    might now understand the black perspective of Christianity!  
    
    I've done my best from coast to coast to try and change that attitude
    in blacks.  (As a matter of fact, there are whites who now refuse to
    believe in the bible because of how it was misused then...but).  
    
    You feel uncomfortable with me, so you want to make me feel
    uncomfortable too.  Well, Jody, it don't work that way with me, I'm
    just to close to God for you to separate me from Him....though I see
    you can't say as much for yourself...so what you gonna do now, drop
    kick the bible?  
    
    Playtoe   
    

    Playtoe .10,
    
    >>Why is there only one mention of piety in the KJV?  My guess is that
    the Bible, amongst other things, is designed to provide inspiration,
    guidance and instruction on piety.<<
    
    > If this was the case, why is it mentioned only...your guess is not as
    good as mine. <
    
    Allow me to clarify further.  Each religion has some kind of holy book. 
    Imo, a holy book *in it's totality*, is intended to provide inspiration, 
    guidance and instruction on piety, one's "devotion to God", so in effect 
    a separate section may very well be redundant.
    
    > I said it was because of the desire of the King (James) to have the
    major portion of citizen devotion go to him, which has been a major
    motivator in the European tradition of social rule. <
    
    Yes, that's a possibility.  But my guess on this one feels more right
    to me.
    
    Also Playtoe, I oftentimes find the tone of your notes to be harsh,
    condemning, and not welcoming of communication other than the
    appearance that you are trying to cram your opinion down other people's
    throats.  What you say is righteousness for God's Word, appears to be
    righteousness for yourself.  
    
    Your anger is justified at the atrocities blacks have suffered, and
    there are many in this community who are working to help heal the
    sickness in this society that condones these atrocities.  But you never
    acknowledge that and it *appears* that you take every opportunity to 
    lash out here and if we don't receive your comments the way YOU wish, 
    your automatic default is that we're racial or racists.  And frankly 
    I'm getting tired of it.  It is your tone I object to, not your 
    blackness or your black Christian perspective.  
    
    So give it a rest, man. If you truly desire to communicate not dictate, 
    then at least consider altering your methods.  Truth can still be spoken 
    and heard.  You don't need to package it in anger or condemnation to 
    get your ideas across.
    
    And also, as has been said, this is a Christian-PERSPECTIVE conference. 
    Your Christian perspective is valid, but not recognized as being
    absolute and applicable for everyone across the board here, so you
    would do best to remember this when you find yourself getting upset the
    next time people here do not receive your ideas the way *you'd* like.
    
    Karen  

    Oh,, of course, I'm the opressor.  It's all my personal problem and my
    fault that I can't accept the teachings the way you're teaching them. 
    My myopia.  My illiteracy.  
    
    I guess it's my loss then.
    
    ciao
    
    -Jody
    

    Jody,
    
    	You I would enjoy as my oppressor. *<8*)}***
    
    Richard

                              -- piety -- 






The more I gaze at that single word on my screen, the more it seems to change.
It seems to loose it's meaning, it's word-ness.  Even as I gaze it becomes 
simply an odd collection of letters.   p - i - e - t - y  

"Piety:  devotion and reverence, especially to God and family" says my office 
dictionary.

	"Devotion:  ardent attachment or affection"
	"Reverence: a feeling of profound awe and respect."
	"Ardent:  characterized by warmth of passion or desire"

so then,

a warmth of passion, 			not the heat of passion
attachment, 				not division
a feeling of profound awe and respect, 	not bitterness, fear, and hurt

towards God and family


Who is my brother?  Who is my sister?

You are, and you, and you...

Oddly, I have this overwhelming feeling of awe and respect for each of you.

May God's Peace, which is beyond all understanding, be with us.

Jim

    Re: .26
    
    Thanks, Jim.  Your note touched my heart.
    
    Peace be with you,
    Richard

    
    
    I wish people would study history before making up their own false
    hoods about history out of hate.  To begin with King James did not 
    edit the 1611 Bible.  A large group of Puritans who knew Greek, Hebrew,
    and Latin did the 1611 translation.  They were Pastors of churches and
    heads of universities.  In fact less than 50 years later these same men
    under Oliver Cromwell killed King Charles and took over the government
    of England.  So, before you give false witness (which is a sin), please
    study history.  Or have you already done that, and due to your hate you
    are telling false hoods?   This is a reply to .6
    
    
                                  In Christ, Marshall
    
    
                                 

        I kind of think that piety may be a bit like pornography.
       Not something that I could define for you, but I would know
       it when I see it.


                                                              Mike

    RE: 28
    
    Well, I have studied history quite well.  
    
    According to what I've learned of the King James bible is that King
    James, indeed did not actually do the translation, but he
    "commissioned" it to be done.   100 religious scholars of his day were
    given segments to translate, and afterwards the entire document was
    given to Sir Francis Bacon, who had it one year, to finalize it.  Sir
    Francis Bacon, was a Rosicrucian.
    
    Actually, King James was a "Satan" worshipper. 
    
    You say that 50 years later these same (100) men took over the
    government of England?  They must have been some healthy old men, at
    least over 70!
    
    Anyway, what intrigues me most about that period and the fact that the
    Bible came forth out of it, is that it doesn't seem possible.  I
    believe that it only proves the "Power of God" working in the world and
    lives of men inspite of themselves....because the Bible is divine.
    
    It caused me to study further into the issue of evil, the "devil",
    etc., and how does it really fit into the scheme of things.  It is
    interesting, however, because we notice in Job (though Satan is
    reported been put out of heaven and God is supposedly angry with him)
    Satan "presenting himself" along with the men of God.  And, what
    happens, do the call out the troops at the sight of him?....NO.  On the
    contrary, God begins to talk with Satan like they're still "cool" (in
    the black vernacular).  Then God proceeds to allow the destruction of
    Job's world, not because Job had sinned at all, but on Satan's whim, "I
    bet if you do such and such he'll curse you to your face".  God already
    had said "See Job how PERFECT AND UPRIGHT he is", Satan is a liar and
    trickster through and through and everyone knows it, but what's up on
    this, why did God even get into the conversation of Satan, why didn't
    he, like Jesus, say "Get thee OUT OF HERE"!  Anyway, God knows what
    he's doing, beyond human comprehension.
    
    Also, you have Jesus, however, who selects Judas as his disciple, in
    full knowledge that he was a "devilish" person and would betray him. 
    He uses him, however, to facilitate the things of God.
    
    So we see that both God and Jesus are not at all contrary to using
    "evil/devilish, even the devil himself" to facilitate the ultimate end
    of good....aint THAT clever!
    
    So here we have the Bible produced by a Satan worshipper...no problem!
    
    Playtoe  

    
    
    Re 29
    
    Not to argue, but it is said "You eyes can't perceive, what your mind
    don't conceive"..."it takes one to know one".
    
    I wanted to say in another topic on "perfect" people, but will say it
    now.  If a "perfect" man came in your presence, you probably wouldn't
    notice him at all, because he would be perfect and not cause you think
    anything peculiar of him.  
    
    Also, it somehow strikes me uncomfortably for you to say "Piety
    (Devotion to God) is like pornography"...that just don't mix in my
    head!
    
    Playtoe

re: .30

Playtoe,
	I am curious to know where you found out that King James was a Satan 
worshipper?  I remember reading in different places that King James had
commissioned the translation but not anything about him being a Satan 
worshipper.

ktlam...

    re: 23
    
    I imagined you meant all that, you needn't have elaborated that.  But
    since you have.
    
    Devotion to God, or Piety, is merely an aspect of the totality of
    things we must do to enter the kingdom.  I wouldn't say, however, that
    the entire bible could be summed up as a book of Piety, but it is a
    book of Love for God.  We can Love God but our Piety or Devotion can be
    weak.  In other words, Piety is a virtue, and each virtue must be
    developed in and of itself, as well as in terms of collective spiritual
    integration, or as the spiritual system...but have it as you will.
    
>    Yes, that's a possibility.  But my guess on this one feels more right
>    to me.
    
    So you say this to say "you have your right to believe what you want"? 
    In this case, because it is about historical issues what can't be
    firmly established, I'll let you get away with that.  :-)
    
>What you say is righteousness for God's Word, appears to be
>    righteousness for yourself.  
    
    A husbandman must be the first to taste his wine!
    
>    Your anger is justified at the atrocities blacks have suffered, and
>    there are many in this community who are working to help heal the
>    sickness in this society that condones these atrocities.  But you never
>    acknowledge that and it *appears* that you take every opportunity to 
>    lash out here and if we don't receive your comments the way YOU wish, 
>    your automatic default is that we're racial or racists.  And frankly 
>    I'm getting tired of it.  It is your tone I object to, not your 
>    blackness or your black Christian perspective.  
    
    Well, you must be saying that black folks ought to be happy with the
    fact that "there are many in this community who are working to help
    heal the sickness in this society"?  Well, that's really nice, I
    believe it and know it to be true as well, but that hardly addresses
    what we're dealing with here.  The question is "Have whites *repented*
    and got themselves right with God concerning their sins and atrocities
    of the past?"  How can you heal the sickness and not first repent of
    the attitudes and ways that caused them in the first place?  Perhaps
    this is why the progress that those who are trying the heal society are
    making is so slow and practically insignificant, because in studies of
    the "condition of life" for blacks in America, the black family is in a
    state of "crisis", and "racism" is rampant, and "hate crimes" are up...
    
    So you keep being tired of hearing me...only tells me you don't plan on
    doing a damn thing about it, to any serious extent.  Like the S&L
    failure wizards, they discuss and study and try (teehee) to figure out
    "Why have these white males, raised in affluent homes, supposedly of good
    morals and integrity and good background, stole from the people like
    this?"  But all they do is ask, and study and wonder...pat them on the
    hand (5 years in jail, etc.) and never try to heal THEM!  So the same
    with your so-called "some who are trying to heal" they ask, they study,
    but "positive programs/alternatives" noway...Why?  Lack of Piety,
    refusal to repent, denial of sin.....
    
    No problem...one way or the other, God's Will WILL be done, inspite of
    ourselves.  
    
    Playtoe 

    
     Re.31

      Playtoe:


              Yeah, I guess in a sense I do feel the same about piety
      and eroticism. There are a whole load of things that can be added
      to the list also. 
              Can we really define good cooking, fine painting or a beautiful
      flower ? I don't think so. Some things just are and you know them 
      when you experience them in some manner.
              I'd venture that you could have two very pious people who
      were very different. How do you come up with one definition that
      that will apply to both ? Seems to me for some things you will have to
      so inclusive a definition as to render it useless.
              You could list characteristics of pious behavior or ways
      that piety manifests itself in a person's life and come up with,
      I guess what you might call, symptoms of piety. Piety itself will
      probably remain elusive.
               Supposing that you could successfully define piety. Nail
      it right down with a perfect definition, then what ? What has
      been accomplished ?

                                                               Mike 

    
    re 32
    
    I have a book apparently written by King James on Daemonology, 1563. 
    It also has pictures of Queen Elizabeth, with her serpent sleeve gowns.
    
    Oh yea, King James was quite a fellow, you know the verse in Exodus 33,
    the last first, where it says, "I will pass by you (Moses) but you can
    only see my hinder parts", this is where he, King James, validates the
    practice/ritual of "kissing the hinder parts" of the priest in worship
    of Satan.  Gets DEEP...
    
    Anyway, I know a little more than most you think I do...and understand
    it on the whole real well too...wouldn't you say?
    
    Playtoe

    
    
    RE: .32 Playtoe
    
    ?? Hunh?
    
    Carole

    Re: 34
    
    You need to read "The Idea of a University" by Newmann, I believe. 
    There's also a condensed booklet entitled "The Uses of Knowledge",
    which contains a selection of lectures from that book on the topic of
    Knowledge, it's use, virtue and how it disciplines you...keeps you from
    going to extremes that others how have not knowledge/definitions reach
    at length because they have not the discipline of knowledge, which
    refines us and leads us to a kingdom of righteousness.
    
    Playtoe

    Re 34
    
    OH NO...he's a ZEN thinker!  I just noticed your heading!  
    
    I've got a friend Cecil Rhodes, became a ZENer way back in the 70's
    when it really became popular in America.  And it's funny, but nowadays
    whenever he makes a ZEN statement it just stands our in my mind and I
    can call it.  I know his ZEN mentality very well...you'd love him, very
    good at that sort of rationalization...but I still don't like it
    either, it's REAL weak in my book...gets you by but never OVER!
    
    Playtoe

    Re.38

         Oh yes ! I am one of them ! "Zen Thinker", what an oxymoron !!!
     I love it. I laughed so hard it nearly brought tears to my eyes.
     Thank you Playtoe, you have really brightened up my day. 

                                                          
                                                               Mike

    Playtoe .33,
    
    > So you keep being tired of hearing me...only tells me you don't plan
    on doing a damn thing about it, [racism, et.al.]  to any serious 
    extent. <
    
    There you go again... :-(  drawing erroneous conclusions to simply
    solidify your own position.  
    
    You know absolutely nothing about who I am or what I do to work for the
    causes I believe in, and I'm not about to lay it out for you to prove
    anything.  So be my guest.  Stay right where you are my righteous, 
    and deluded friend.
    
    At the moment, I actually feel sorry for you Playtoe.  Such intelligence 
    and sensitivity.... :-(
    
    All I have to say is may God keep you.  Continuing this discussion
    further along this vein serves no useful purpose.   
    
    Karen                   

    re: 39
    
    My pleasure! 
    
    Playtoe

    Re: 40
    
    Excuse me, I was really referring to the society as a whole and the
    progress that WE are making and not you personally.
    
    My reasoning is correct, however, according to the Word of God, from
    which I always speak (even as Mike and Zen).  If one doesn't repent of
    one's sins/evils/erroneous ways one hardly can heal the problem that
    results from it. 
    
    My position is solidified without focusing on you personally, this is a
    social problem, not any one persons problem.  
    
    I agree that continuing in this vain serves no purpose...peace!
    
    Playtoe

================================================================================
Note 197.12                           Piety                             12 of 26
DELREY::DOTHARD_ST "PLAYTOE"                        127 lines   3-APR-1991 18:20
                 -< Devotion to the Word of God is the key... >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    re: 11
    
    Ro.
    
    1)	Ezekiel: Whether they will hear or whether they will forebear
    hearing TELL them....If you don't tell them their blood is on your
    head...so I'm obligated to tell.
    
    2)	If I seek my own glory I am a false prophet and teacher, however if
    I seek the glory of God and judge according to his Word my testimonies
    are righteous and true.
    
    3)	Acknowledging "differences" is Wisdom and is of God.  God created
    us different.  Whites know this that's why they invented "racism". 
    Blacks have traditionally sought equality and endeavored to overlook
    the "racial differences", but whites taught us to know racial
    difference, which is good and important to science and social
    development, yet here you say that it is now wrong to classify people
    in groups, and now after all the atrocities and the condition of life
    whites have subjected blacks to around the world you want us all to
    talk as if we are equal...this will not be unless you first make
    reparations for the damage you have done to us as a people, as a race.
    
    4)	God can look into people's hearts, I am his son, I do only that
    which I have learned of my father, I do what I have seen him do.  This
    is a christlike characteristic...so either you are saying that I am not
    of God, his son, or that I am not able to be christlike, or just what
    are you saying that would prevent me from doing the will of the Father
    of us all?
    
    5)	You say "you choose to believe that God is [this or that]", is that
    according to the scripture or your own conception?  You say, "When *I*
    separate us by "races" I deny that basic spiritual goodness that is 
    inherent in each of us."  So I imagine you must really feel angry at
    God, because "race" is merely a term used to acknowledge the
    differences that were actually the work of God...you condemn me for
    seeing the difference, how much more will you condemn he who created
    the difference?  Africans and African-Americans, of all the things
    we've learned from this experience in the past four hundred years, is
    that people are NOT the same, not just of different race but within
    each race differences exist.  You see we had a problem, we were too
    friendly and open, we didn't suspect that all people weren't as kind as
    us, even as the Indians hardly expected that they would be tricked and
    deceived treaty after treaty.  But nonetheless, it wasn't blacks,
    browns or yellows who did that to the red man, it was whites.  So now
    you want us all to be equal...do you think if we do that God will
    perhaps forget the past sins?  Perhaps you're right, as a matter of
    fact I'm sure you're right...the problem I see though is I don't really
    think you have forgotten the difference as much as you are trying to
    get me to do.  Tell me this, when you see a homeless/hungry person on
    the street do feel there is a difference between him and yourself?  Do
    you feel God loves him as much as he loves you, even the same?  Do you
    think that the issue is not who and how much God loves us, but the
    difference is a result/factor of how much we love him?
    
    I'm reasoning with you, though I'm slightly upset that you can't
    receive my original ideas.  You know in the book of Revelations, it
    speaks of the "Fall of Babylon" and many blacks consider the West
    Babylon, thanks to Rastafarians, and that whites are the rulers of
    Babylon.  But whether you believe this or not, the bible says of
    Babylon that it fell because they would not "repent of their ways".  So
    here I am speaking in general about general history and difference
    based upon natural genetic (god-given) attributes, and you tell me now
    after four hundred years of telling me that there IS a difference
    according to scripture (i.e. blacks are cursed, blacks are less than
    human approximately 3/5's of a man) and now for some reason you're
    saying there's no significant difference...WHY?  This seems to me and
    blacks alike to be another example of changing the standards for YOUR
    benefit and to sustain domination.  What's up?  And although you may
    feel as you do, and honestly I agree, I don't reduce the world to my
    experience and reality, but look at the reality for what it is.  If
    this society has evolved to the point you have, then my generalizations
    are indeed wrong, but as long as the institutions and attitudes
    *prevail* in society I am correct is generalizing about whites or
    blacks or reds or browns as a distinct group, with a unique history and
    a particular future instore.  
    
    I'm giving you the knowledge with which you can approach your
    counterparts to change the course of things, your rejection implies to
    me that you have no intention of changing significantly.  You have only
    reacted, again using scripture as a weapon of itself and not using it
    justify your world view.  This is the issue of "devotion" and piety of
    which we speak.
    
<< How whites raise their children, allowing them a great deal more freedom
>    (the opposite of piety) than black parents.  >>
>Hmmm, my dearest friend in the world is a black woman who is closer to 
>me than my own sister.  She has raised her daughter the same way I've 
>raised my two children - that is with love, with wanting them to be 
>the true 'spiritual' beings that they are.  I think you make an 
    
    This is an insulting.  "My dearest friend is BLACK"...come on.
    
    I attended a seminar a few years ago on "Racism in America" at Michigan
    State University, on the panel were four Dr.s of ED, in History,
    Sociology, Education and Political Science, and it was a consensus that
    the major sustainer of racism in America was that whites know little
    about the other races and unawares/uninformed say things that are
    stereotypical and insulting.  For instance, if you ask the average
    white about Indians they'll say "The lived in teepees and went wo wo wo
    wo wo".  Or if you as them about blacks they'll say "they like
    watermelons, love to dance, and some other things I won't mention", but
    the point is that whites would actually believe that they were being
    honest and forthright, when in essence they have deeply misperceived
    and misjudged both.  And the way they talk of Asians is pathetic. 
    Basically, YOU and your counterparts MUST begin to reachout to others
    not to give them of your self, because you've already given too much
    (to put it nicely) but instead to take something/knowledge of them.  
    
    If you decide to disregard my notes where does that leave you and where
    does that leave me?  If you decide to disregard my notes what does this
    say for "narrow scope of mind"?  I speak not for all blacks, because
    they can put it in their own words themselves, but you can believe that
    I do speak for most blacks in America, because again I don't seek my
    glory but peace on earth and the glory of God...
    
    Playtoe

    After Bacon put it together the 100 reviewed it and made corrections.
    I have read the book, "The Men Behind the KJV".  You are quite correct 
    when you say some of those men where 70 years old at the time of
    Cromwell.  They backed Cromwell.  Men do live longer than 70 years.
    Sent. Strom Thurmond of SC is in his mid 80's and still working.
    I know many preachers that work into their 80's  and at lest one that
    was still preaching at 90 when I was in College.
    
    By the way no man is perfect.  Even the ones that have done all other
    translations.  However, God is perfect and He rules over all.
    
    After all is said you now come back and  prove your own statements as 
    being wrong about King James editing the KJV.  He never did that.
    
    This is a reply to .30
    
    
    
                                 In Christ, Marshall

    The issue this co-moderator had with 197.12 has been resolved.
    
    Richard Jones-Christie
    Co-Moderator

    RE: 43
    
    I never said King James did anything but "commission" the translation. 
    
    I would also add to my comments of how God/Good uses evil to facilitate
    the ultimate manifestation of Good.  In things like this, where God is
    sending a message to the people, we note that historically there are
    two phases/aspects of how he chooses who will do this for him.  He
    considers first who has the intelligence to do the task and this
    includes the event of "will" they do it, and then he considers who has
    the "means" to deliver the message to whom he wants it go.
    
    God will give a message to a King James, though he's a Satan
    worshipper, because he had the mind and means to receive and spread the
    message, inspite of who he is...this is the reverse aspect the common
    understanding of the statement "God is no respecter of persons".
    
    Also, now that we know something of King James, and his beliefs, the
    idea that he would desire the devotion of the people, rings ever more
    true in my mind.
    
    peace...
    
    Playtoe
    

        This discussion continues to be rather heated.

        Rather than write-lock this topic, could I ask for a
        cooling-off period on the part of the current participants? 
        I would also ask that new participation for the next week be
        directed towards the base topic, piety, rather than towards
        any of the responses so far.

        I will be watching this frequently, and if the heat
        continues, I will write-lock and perhaps hide the entire
        string -- all authors.

        Bob, co-mod

    RE: 44
    
    Hey, wait a minute...Mike is the Zen, but I personally find them quite
    harmless...you needn't run because of them.
    
    Furthermore, ZEN thinkers can be very interesting, but you've got to
    know their "WAY" to really appreciate them in their context.  
    
    Also, you don't have to worry about what he/they say, because "it's not
    what goes into a man/mind the defiles him/it but what comes out",
    therefore just "gird up YOUR mind" and don't let yourself begin to
    repeat their conceptions...less you become a ZENNER!  They, or their
    philosophy has an uncanny way of sneaking up on you...there is a
    measure of truth to it as well.  But when dealing with "path"works,
    which is what Christianity is about, they tend to boag down a
    conversation because they don't necessarily follow "paths".  The
    totality of reality, in their point of view, is like "random access"
    and not sequential or in stages like Christianity advocates...
    
    Their are two (really three) directions of life, lateral (ZEN) and
    graduated/progressive advancement (Christianity)...the Yin and Yang
    deals with the essence of balance, which fundamentally we can all
    appreciate.  However, with ZEN the balance is the essence of life. 
    Whereas with Christianity the balance is fundamental to progression,
    you can't move forward without balance first, so it becomes a means to
    our end, but an end in itself to ZEN...am I close MIKE?
    
    Playtoe

    RE: 47
    
    I beg your pardon, sir.  Perhaps you're reading too much into this.  I
    sense no "heat" as you call it.  Furthermore, a certain level of
    argument MUST occur in Christianity, due to the nature of the doctrine. 
    As Christ said, I come not to bring peace but a sword...to set you at
    variance."  The problem is people need to control their anger, which
    can only be done by putting it to trial and test.  If you seek to avoid
    ALL conflict by stopping ever sign of disagreement then we cannot grow
    and develop.  
    
    Personally, and I know this may offend, I think the "nicey-nicey",
    self-righteous nature of most of the discussions does injustice to the
    topics and the Word of God.  For the sake of feelings people it seems
    that we can't really explore and study or expound upon the Word. 
    People attack you for your beliefs and not try to seek the proofs or
    validations for the belief.  Though they say it can be interpreted
    anyway one wants, they seem to still attack people if their
    interpretation is too far from their own...as long as we remain alike
    we're cool, but if we differ much there's argument.  But again, I would
    say that the range of interpretation of scripture spans from the needs
    of the Lion to the needs of the Lamb.
    
    Playtoe

    RE: .19
    
    >As you see Nancy (and she's proven how sweet she is on
    >several occasions, she's the only person to read and comment positively
    >on my Dogon Religion entry, for instance).  
    
    I don't know if this is a reference to me, or not, because I don't
    recall commenting one way or another on Playtoe's Dogon Religion entry.
    My only dialog (that I remember) was intended as a confrontation
    earlier in this string but apparently was not interpreted that way. (sigh)
    
    Most of Playtoe's expounding is so far removed from my own beliefs and
    experience that I do not even read it.  Most of it *makes little sense*
    to me and *has even less relevance* to me!  (Note the wording:  *to me*.)
    
    I am reluctantly writing this note because I fear that others may
    assume I am in agreement with Playtoe when, for the most part, I
    usually hit NEXT UNSEEN.  And it saddens me greatly when people I *want*
    to share perspectives with are driven away by those whose notes don't
    even interest me.   :-(
    
    Nancy

    Re.46

    Playtoe:
             Well, partially right I suppose. You seem to have blended
        a bit of Taoism into you nutshell sketch of Zen. I prefer not
        to elaborate about on this in this particular topic to avoid
        going far very far of topic. 

                                                               Mike

    In keeping with Bob's request to bring this topic back to the subject
    of the basenote, I have replied to Playtoe's note .12, in a new topic -
    see note 204.
    
    Ro
    

    RE: 49
    
    Please look at 177.1.  You were the only one to at least respond at
    all.  It showed me your objectivity, if you want to renig on that
    that's your perogative.
    
    Playtoe

    Re: 50
    
    Yes, perhaps that subject should be left for another conference.  I'm
    surprised, however, at the response to Zen that was entered.
    
    It reminds me of those Christians who say "The Bible is the ONLY book
    to read (excluding even the Apocrypha)" or "Unless you believe in
    JESUS you won't make it to heaven (excluding even the Gentile, all
    Jews, all Muslims, all Buddhists, etc.), which I do not believe, and
    feel that that is an immature/baby state of Christianity, which if not
    corrected may exclude THEM from heaven.  Because the scripture says,
    "Do not say who will go to heaven or hell", nobody knows this but God.
    
    Anyway, your perspective on Christianity is fine as long as it's not
    condemning, which your's are not, which would still only have me seek
    to understand and address your statements, and not RUN away.
    
    Playtoe

    Playtoe,
    
    Thanks for the pointer --  Yes, I did read and enjoy 177.0, and I do
    stand by 177.1.    In 177.0 *you shared* something with us; you
    *offered* it for our consideration, and I could accept it in that vein!
    
    I have felt that many of your recent notes have been unnecessarily harsh
    toward others or have begun as "spoiling for a fight" where none was
    being provoked.   I find that kind of approach uninviting (to put it
    mildly) and so I usually hit NEXT UNSEEN without pursuing the note.  
    I had forgotten about your earlier note; thanks for the reminder!
    
    Nancy
    
    
    PS - I guess this should have been put into a different string but I
    was halfway through it and didn't remember where it should go.  Mods,
    feel free to move it.  ;}  Thanks!

    In my gut I associate Piety with wimpiness -- tho' in my head I know
    that's incorrect.  What does it say about our relationship with the
    idea of piety that it excites such heat?  How many of us would want
    Piety included in our epitaph as a description of our traits?  
    
    The Hell note is positively idyllic next to this.
    
    DR

re.53

Playtoe,

> Because the scripture says, "Do not say who will go to heaven or hell",

What scripture says this?

Ace

    RE: 56
    
    Ace (That's an interesting handle)
    
    I don't keep a bible at work, but can get it tomorrow for you. 
    However, the verse says something like "The word is nigh thee....for to
    say who will descend into hell is to bring Christ...to say who will
    ascend into heaven is to..."...we are not to say who will or will not
    make it.
    
    Somebody has access to on-line Bible, maybe they can post it..
    
    Playtoe

re.57

Playtoe,

	Oh, that verse. Yes, I've read that verse, but never understood it to
mean the way you presented it.

	But we're off the subject...

Ace

    RE: Last several - Romans 10:6-7
    
    But the righteousness which is of faith speaketh on this wise, Say not
    in thine heart, Who shall ascent into heaven? (that is, to bring Christ
    down from above);
    Or, Who shall descend into the deep? (that is, to bring up Christ again
    from the dead.)
    			-- KJV
    
    It's not clear to me what it means but it doesn't appear to me to be
    as direct as Playtoe described. But as I said I don't really understand
    it anyway.
    
    			Alfred

Note 197.55
>    How many of us would want
>    Piety included in our epitaph as a description of our traits?  

DR,

Not me.  My connotation of piety is "smug," "self-righteous," "condescending"
and "arrogant."  I realize the denotation of piety does not mean these things.
But alas, the connotation continues to haunt me.

Peace,
Richard

    RE: 59
    
>  RE: Last several - Romans 10:6-7
    
>    But the righteousness which is of faith speaketh on this wise, Say not
>    in thine heart, Who shall ascent into heaven? (that is, to bring Christ
>    down from above);
>    Or, Who shall descend into the deep? (that is, to bring up Christ again
>    from the dead.)
>    			-- KJV
 
    Yes, this is the verse.  First, what it means exactly to "bring Christ
    down from above," or to "bring Christ again from the dead", means
    basically to "play God", because only God can do these things.  It has
    a deeper meaning regarding the fact that Jesus is the "Finisher of the
    Faith" and how His acts served "once and for all" for the salvation of
    all mankind.  Yet, these statements go beyond the more simpler
    statements that we are not to say "Who shall ascend into heaven" or
    "Who shall descend into hell", not according to the "Righteousness
    which is of faith", because this righteousness teaches us of "hope in
    repentence for all".
    
    This is what I believe it means.  We can actually prove this.  Just
    talk about who's going to go to heaven or hell and see how it makes you
    feel inside.  Or, on the other hand, express a hope for all sinners and
    see how you feel....in this you'll know what the righteous path is.
    
    Playtoe

    RE: .61  Playtoe
    
                        In Romans 10:6-8, Paul quotes Deuteronomy 30:12-14
    while adding his commentary to it.  Here it is:
    
    Deut 30:12-14
    
                   12  It is not in Heaven, that thou shouldest say, who
                       shall go up for us to Heaven, and bring it unto us,
                       that we may hear it, and do it?
    
                   13  Neither is it beyond the sea, that thou shouldest
                       say, who shall go over the sea for us, and bring it
                       unto us, that we may hear it, and do it?
    
                   14  But the word is very neigh unto thee, in thy mouth,
                       and in thy heart, that thou mayest do it.
    
    
    
            I believe that these two passages mean that Duet. said that 
    righteousness came by faith while Paul said that righteousness speak's
    this way.
    
    
    Dave

>                                         We can actually prove this.  Just
>    talk about who's going to go to heaven or hell and see how it makes you
>    feel inside.  Or, on the other hand, express a hope for all sinners and
>    see how you feel....in this you'll know what the righteous path is.
    
>    Playtoe
    
    WoW!  Common ground with Playtoe!  That's often how I try to discern
    truth.
    
    DR

    Re 62
    
    Dave
    
    Good, Good.
    
    I'm quite mistaken aren't I.
    
    These verses in Romans and Deut. aren't saying exactly what I said. 
    It's actually saying the understanding of God's word, the actual itself
    as a matter of fact, is not far off that we should require one to go
    off and bring it back to us, but it is "very nigh (near)" us, in our
    mouths and hearts.  And if we confess with our mouths the Lord Jesus
    and believe in our hearts that God has raised him from the dead, we
    shall be saved (these are the following verses in Romans).
    
    Which surely isn't what I was saying.
    
    It only makes me realize again the benefit of sharing and expressing my
    opinions to other Christians.  Just think, if I had continued on in my
    own understanding I'd still be misunderstanding it, praise the
    brotherhood.
    
    I feel it necessary however to explain where I got my interpretation
    from.  First, having read and studied Romans many, many times, you read
    it once and get an understanding and you read it again you get a deeper
    understanding, this seems to be the nature of studying. 
    
    So, in Romans 9 Paul speaks of "God will have mercy on whom he will",
    suggesting that we don't know who God will have mercy upon.  So when I
    got to these verses in 10 I was still in this same mind and considered
    it to say that we shouldn't say who's going to heaven or hell.
    
    In reading Deut., we know that at this time Christ had not come, and
    men were looking for someone to bring them the Word of God, as if it
    were far off, so God, through Moses, tells them "My Word is nigh thee
    even in thy heart and on thy tongue and you need not seek one to go
    fetch it, but search within thyself (paraphrase).  
    
    In Romans, it says "For that is to bring Christ down from above: That
    is to bring Christ up from below", which seems to address man's self
    righteous will to send someone or be responsible for having someone go
    and get the Word and bring it to them.  When in fact only God
    determines when he shall send someone with the Word or raise someone
    from the dead...from which I interpreted this scripture to be saying
    *besides* what it clearly says, that we should not think in our hearts
    who shall ascend or descend for the Word of God is in us all and God
    will have mercy on whom he will, such that we cannot say who goes to
    heaven or hell.
    
    May God add a blessing to those who study His Word.
    
    Playtoe