Conference lgp30::christian-perspective

Much to the chagrin and dismay of some, we are a community.

Genuine and lasting bonds have been created.  Many of each other's deepest
joys and burdens have been lifted up and shared.  Some of us have prayed
and provided caring support for others in the community.  Some have gone
out of their way to connect with other participants.

Much to my own chagrin and dismay, we are not as much of a community
as I would like us to be.

There is still much distrust, suspicion, and withholding of affection.
Perhaps it goes with the territory of non-homogeneity.  I don't know.

Shalom,
Richard

      Hi Richard,
    
        "much to the dismay and chagrin of some..."
    
        Whatcha got to look for alienation for?  Why is that your
        first thought that is expressed?   Why not just note the
        positives of why we are a community and leave out any negative
        thoughts you think others might have?
    
        I don't get it.
    
        I think sometimes its better not to look for any bad things that
        may lurk around the corner _even_ if they really might be there!
    
                                                  Tony

re .2

 Tony,

 Your note to Richard reminded me of two illustrations I heard
 yesterday....

 An old man was on a mountain side overlooking his village 
 below. A Young man from a neighbouring village asked the
 old man "what are the people like in your village?". The old
 man answered by asking the young man the same question. In
 reply, the young man said that people were nasty, selfish,
 and un-neighbourly. Then the old man answered thats how
 people are in the village below. A second young man passed
 by asking the old man "what are the people like in your 
 village?" again the old man turned the question back. In
 reply the second young man said "they are kind, considerate
 and neighbourly" and the old man replied that's how people
 are in the village below.
  
 Two prisoners in a cell and the first one was asked what do
 you see through the window? he answered "prison bars". The
 second was asked the same question, and he answered "beautiful
 stars in the sky".

 If one looks for alienation then one will find it.

 Phil.

reply .3 reflects the spirit one expects to find in this notes file (community)

nice one, phil!


andreas.

    Another interesting annecdote I read somewhere.
    
    Two shoe salesmen were sent to upper Montana, two weeks apart.
    
    When the first one enters the region, he notices nobody wearing shoes. 
    He calls his office and says, "Forget about selling here...nobody wears
    shoes."  Two weeks later, the second rep. arrives and seeing the same
    conditions, he calls his office and says, "Please send more sales
    reps...nobody wears any shoes up here!!!!!!"
    
    But I digress.  As far as being a community, I believe we are to be in
    the world but not of the world.  Some people do communal activities for
    different motives.  Some do good deeds to get to heaven.  Some do good
    deeds because they are going to heaven.  Some people do good deeds out
    of fear.  Some people do good deeds for selfish motives.  
    
    Yet God has put us all together and for whatever the reason, we are to
    be the salt of the earth!!!
    
    -Jack

	there were once two brothers, they never agreed on a single issue. 
once grown, one built his house next to his father's house and worked his 
father's land, the other one moved to a neighbouring town and became a 
merchant. 
	they rarely saw eachother and rarely spoke, until their father's 
house burned down, when they both rushed to help. together, they rebuilt their 
father's house.
	whilst they didn't have much to say to eachother, they could count
on one another.



andreas.

if you think the story in 1034.6 is silly (well i _did_ make it up :-) 
it does somehow capture the situation you have in a confrontation between 
two sides over an issue which both sides hold dear. 

as i wrote the story i thought of my younger brother. i'd call him 
an unbending dogmatic, he'd call me a limitless liberal. one day when
our youngest sister became very ill and got into alot of trouble, it was
him and i who rushed to help. we had a lot of arguments on what was 
best, of course, but help we did and will do so again if someone else in 
our family gets into trouble. 

whilst we still don't agree on many things, we have learned to accept 
our differing points of view, and we agree, that in the end, it is what 
you _do_, that really matters! 

i am sure all in this community agree! :-)


andreas.

    I thought .1 a valid and balanced assessment, acknowledging the
    negativity that does exist toward this conference.
    
    However, I'm not saying that all here should share my assessment.
    
    Shalom,
    Richard
    

    Actually, I've seen the negativity dwindle down quite a bit...in
    retrospect, would you say the same!!?
    
    -Jack

    Now which commandment is
    
    "Thou shall not Lie"
    
                                   Patricia

isn't perception of negativity and such highly subjective??

btw, is there a topic in here something along the lines of
"what drives me really nuts about christianity"?

i am thinking of starting one, preferably as a humor topic.


andreas.

    .11
    
    Do it.
    
    Shalom,
    Richard
    

    Actually, the commandment is, "Thou shalt not bear false witness
    against thy neighbor."  But now that I think of it, the commandment,
    "Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain" centers
    around breaking a vow.
    
    Patricia, you really think it has been that negative in here?  Sure
    there are disagreements but that doesn't mean it has to be perceived as
    negative...right?
    
    -Jack

    Each of us are as we are.  Some Positive.  Some Negative.  Some
    Realistic.  some Fantastic.(Well actually all Fantastic)
    
    A community accepts, supports, and encourages each person, as they are.
    
    I sense this is a community.  We have been at it for a long time.  We
    have learned.  We have grown.  We have argued.  We have been
    frustrated.  We have  been enlightened.  We have been angry.  We have
    been Forgiving. 
    
    
    We are a community.

    Jack,
    
    I should have drawn one of those funny faces to my reply.  I had just
    noticed the fat dinasour comment.
    
    I think fear of disagreements is worse than disagreements.  We are all
    intense in here and we all believe intensely and differently.  In this
    kind of community, of course there will be disagreements.  I personally
    feel that I have gained a great deal in pushing through those
    disagreements.  I have certainly learned to be more tolerant and
    accepting.
    
    Patricia

.14>  Each of us are as we are.  Some Positive.  Some Negative.  Some
.14>  Realistic.  some Fantastic.
		       ^^^^^^^^^

oh patricia, i must confess, is misread this as fanatics!!
    
deeply ashamed, 
yours,

andreas.

:-)

>But now that I think of it, the commandment, "Thou shalt not take the
>name of the Lord thy God in vain" centers around breaking a vow.

"Breaking a vow" is only part of that commandment.

In English, the word "vain" means, among other things, "irreverent" or
"blasphemous".

This commandment is a commandment not to use the Holy Name of God irreverently
or blasphemously.  Using the Lord's name to confirm a vow you then break is
an irreverent use of the Holy Name of God, but so are expressions where you
use the Holy Name of God in any other irreverent or blasphemous manner.

Some infractions are obviously more serious than others, but even use of
terms such as "Golly, Jeeze, Gee Whiz", etc., are to be avoided in order
to more perfectly obey this commandment.

/john

    Good point!
    

    > Some infractions are obviously more serious than others, but even use
    > of terms such as "Golly, Jeeze, Gee Whiz", etc., are to be avoided in
    > order to more perfectly obey this commandment.
    
    I don't get it. Where's the beef?

re Note 1034.19 by APACHE::MYERS:

>     > Some infractions are obviously more serious than others, but even use
>     > of terms such as "Golly, Jeeze, Gee Whiz", etc., are to be avoided in
>     > order to more perfectly obey this commandment.
>     
>     I don't get it. Where's the beef?
  
        I think the point was that terms such as "Golly, Jeeze, Gee
        Whiz" are more or less obviously used as substitute
        expletives for the actual use of words and names referring to
        the divine.

        I see a dilemma in this:  a substitute seems to me to be a
        way of avoiding that which should be avoided, although it is
        clearly not as total an avoidance as using no expletive at
        all!

        Bob

        re .20

    Ahh, I see now. I don't agree with it, though.  Unless, of course, the
    *intent* of the interjection (NOT an expletive, as you seem to
    indicate) is to blaspheme.

    I will continue to say "Yikes," "dog gone it," and "Jimminy Cricket"
    with confidence. :^)
    	
    	Eric

re .21

Should God's name be used as an expression of anger?

Is it any different to use a deliberate corruption of the Holy Name?

/john

    > Should God's name be used as an expression of anger?

    No.

    > Is it any different to use a deliberate corruption of the Holy Name?

    No, and I said as much in my .21. The key here is deliberateness and
    intent. For example, never in my wildest dreams did I think Gomer Pyle
    was taking the Lord's name in vain when he sang out his trademark...
    "G-o-o-o-lly." 

    	Eric

| <<< Note 1034.22 by COVERT::COVERT "John R. Covert" >>>


| Should God's name be used as an expression of anger?

	Never. But be real. You yourself, as a master of words, knows that the
meaning of words has changed over the years. Once gay was happy, now it defines
an orientation along with it. You made a big sting about what certain words
meant back in the days of the Bible, compared to what they mean now. The word
golly, geeze and all the other ones you wrote about do not mean what they may
have at one time. If you can realize it for other words, which your notes show
you do, why can't you see it with these words? It was said best when the word
intent was used.

| Is it any different to use a deliberate corruption of the Holy Name?

	If it is a deliberate corruption word to YOU, then don't use it. You
can't really expect everyone to agree with your view of these words, can you?
Geeze.....


Glen

    	Remember that John used the phrase "to more perfectly obey this
    	commandment" in .17.
    
    	I think we're seeing some overreaction to his entry.

| <<< Note 1034.25 by CSC32::J_OPPELT "Whatever happened to ADDATA?" >>>


| Remember that John used the phrase "to more perfectly obey this
| commandment" in .17.

	Joe, it still comes down to intent. There are some Christians who will
drink zero alcohol, because they don't want to tempt others to drink. It isn't
called for, but people do it. There are some Christians who think Geez, etc are
taking the Lords name in vain. They choose to not use these words. Is it
necessary? Again, it isn't called for. To take the Lords name in vain has to
have intent of anger, hate, not love. If that weren't the case, then we could
not even say I love you Jesus! Because the word Jesus would be taken in vain.
INTENT is the key. 

Glen

    	Well John's entry (in my opinion) was intended to raise
    	consciousness about the issue.  
    
    	Based on your participation here and elsewhere, I think it
    	did its job for you.
    
    	I know it did for me.

    Well, I am one of those odd balls who does consider so called innocent
    phrases a swear.  My childrens friends probably get the worst of it,
    because my rule is so different.  My most frequent correction is that I
    will not allow the use of the phrase "Oh my God" to be used
    frivilously.  It's a soft line, and I'm not always sure where to draw
    it.  When getting carried away with the action in a video, they may
    exclaim "Oh my God."  I will point out that I consider that a swear. 
    But if they are commenting on a dramatic and touching scene, then I am
    silent.  Why?  In that situation, the phrase could have been a prayer.
    
    Subtle difference?  Yes.  Do I expect 8 year olds to understand?  No. 
    Someday my children will catch on.  My oldest, now 20 years old, did. 
    Does she agree?  No.  But she knows what I am trying to accomplish,
    what point I am trying to make.  
    
    So, am I swearing by using the word "God" in this note?  I don't think
    so.  Was it a prayer?  No.  But it was used in a thoughtful way.  I
    think that is the difference.

    
    I agree that these words are swears of a sort.  They are minced
    oaths or slang swears.
    
    A very old scribe taught certain things to me regarding words.  He 
    revealled how the scriptures are actually mathematically foundational
    and are written in the form of a mathematical song, perfect in their
    continuity.  It is easy to hear when a song is not quite right to the
    ear, he showed me how the scriptures are a perfect song as well as
    mathematically unified.
    
    In addition he taught about these minced oaths. Words like Geeze, Gosh
    Darn, Gee Wiz.  They are slang for Jesus, God Damn, Jesus the Wizard.  There
    are many of them in varying degrees.  I have found that they are
    habitual.  People do not even realize they are saying the words.  If
    you interupt them after they say "Jesus" or a slang swear and say "what
    did you say", in most cases they will be baffled and not even remember
    saying it.
    
    	Life and death are in the power of the tongue.  
    
    	A wise man will learn to control his tongue and be aware of every
    word that proceeds from his mouth. 

| <<< Note 1034.27 by CSC32::J_OPPELT "Whatever happened to ADDATA?" >>>

| Well John's entry (in my opinion) was intended to raise consciousness about 
| the issue.

	I also think it was to bring in words that he feels are taking the
Lords name in vain. But he'll have to inform us if that is true or not. I
personally do not feel those words do what he claims.



Glen

one characteristic of community must surely be its language and use of language.

to me it makes sense that within a community of christians, the use of 
expressions such as "good god!", "jesus!", "damned!" etc., can come into 
conflict with faith.

what would you say to the following:

in society, where believing christians are in the minority, these expressions 
as used colloquially (sp?) are devoid of the original meaning but serve none-
theless to keep the original meaning very much alive (in a sense, the 
expressions are something like a pointer to the faith. a pointer, which any 
interested person can follow up on). if the use of these expressions were 
banned (or went out of fashion) in society, would this not relegate "god", 
"jesus" etc. to the back-ground, make the words more inaccessible and so widen 
the gap between believing christians and society? how then, would you explain 
to someone who has never heard the word "god" or "jesus", how omnipresent these
are?


the above is just my hypothesis, from a point of view of the larger community
as represented by society. i think it may be worth while thinking about the use 
of the contested expressions in non-christian environments.


andreas.


ps. i don't see the same applying to terms like "geee", "geee whiz" etc.
    imo, these are mutants beyond recognition - mostly not even covered by
    pocket dictionaries [how do you expect english learning christians 
    to know that they are not supposed to use these terms?!
    for goodness sake! :-) ]

    
.29>	Life and death are in the power of the tongue.  
    
precisely.


if you don't talk about it, it doesn't exist.

    
    I have often wondered why people who do not believe
    in Iesous Christos use His name quite frequently and
    without even an awareness.  What significance can it
    have if they do not even acknowledge His existence.
    
    I realize that some of it is merely neuro-retentional 
    thus resulting in habitual behaviour.  In some cases I 
    found it to be spiritually induced due to intwining 
    entities on the extra-spheric matrixes.
    
    Nonetheless it is fascinating that even among natural
    and carnal mankind the proliferation of the name of Jesus
    continues to manifest.  
    
    >>.29>    Life and death are in the power of the tongue.
    
    >precisely.
    
    
    >if you don't talk about it, it doesn't exist.
    
    
    	Within the constructs of human existance lies the principles
    that, though hidden by nature and revealled partially by the same, 
    bring forth the revelatory truths through a most unique recognizable
    foundation.  The Word is the foundational key upon which all things
    exist.  Within this Word the cornerstone is Light.
    
    	Within the Word the mechanics of this universe, all things moving
    within the boundary of the velocity of light wavicles and the
    mechanics of all realities that are found beyond that velocity, can
    easily be determined through an insurgence of that Word.  
    
    	The understanding of the Word can not be grasped for it fullest
    utilization without releasing the preconceptional rationalizations of
    ones attained conscious posture.
    
    	Through the release comes the disabilty to actualize the precieved
    reality and recognize the revelation of Light thus the illumination or
    enlightenment of the Word.  The Word is hidden and the Light is
    manifest.  The revelation is given, the Word must be revealled,
    uncovered, sought.  
    
    	To seek is not an act of will but rather an act of heart.  To seek
    one must surrender all.  For the principle is as such; to the degree
    one retains and yet seeks, shall determine aforehand what they shall
    find.  The one who surrenders all, shall receive all.  What shall they
    receive?  What they seek.  
    
    	One must surrender all, even what they seek, to truly find what
    they seek.  Then one may truly know that the Word exists despite what
    is said or done.
    
    	 

.33>	To seek one must surrender all.  For the principle is as such; 
.33>	to the degree one retains and yet seeks, shall determine aforehand 
.33>	what they shall find.  The one who surrenders all, shall receive all.  
.33>	What shall they receive?  What they seek.  
.33>    
.33>	One must surrender all, even what they seek, to truly find what
.33>    they seek.  


to hear YOUR word is truly a pleasure! 

even i, restricted in my "natural and carnal" existance, 
always say: "let go to gain!"

heaven knows why... its a paradox, but it works! :-)


andreas.

re .33


    >>.29>    Life and death are in the power of the tongue.
    
    >precisely.
    
    >if you don't talk about it, it doesn't exist.

or

    if it's not on "tv", it doesn't exist.



of course, don't believe EVERY word. 

not everyone is "spiritually induced due to intwining entities on the 
extra-spheric matrixes".



andreas.

| <<< Note 1034.31 by DECALP::GUTZWILLER "happiness- U want what U have" >>>


| ps. i don't see the same applying to terms like "geee", "geee whiz" etc.
| imo, these are mutants beyond recognition - mostly not even covered by
| pocket dictionaries [how do you expect english learning christians
| to know that they are not supposed to use these terms?!
| for goodness sake! :-) ]


	Andreas, with a Christian to English dictionary of course! :-)

.33>	The one who surrenders all, shall receive all.  

Those who lose their life for my sake, and for the sake of the gospel,
will save it.

					-- Mark 8:35b