gtowngrad04

I never said I knew it all. Hey, Dandy, I said I worry about the decisions made...obviously, if I am worrying about decisions, I am making decisions (and you don't know me, so don't try to pass judgments on individual decisions I have made in my lifetime--if you want to discuss the decisions I have made that I worry about, PM me). I don't think my decisions are perfect; if I did, I wouldn't be worrying, I'd be complacent.

Not so sure I agree with your disagreeing. A moderate case of obsessive compulsive disorder could help someone remain dedicated to a particular cause. Who are we to assign a negative or positive value to obsessions? The buck didn't stop at Freud and Jung. I understand the APA treats OCD as a mental disorder, but I just can't imagine the issue being so black and white.

Okay: A Muslim is not any closer to being saved than an atheist or a satanist (though, I feel that if you were to say this to a Muslim, he/she would disagree).

I never guaranteed that I would immediately accept the answers to each of those questions. I never guaranteed that those questions would not cause me to think of more questions, questions not related in any way to the original questions. I worry all the time. I worry about the weather, politics, businesses going out of business, the Pyramid, Memphis politcians (don't live in Memphis, but close enough to care), making a decision that is incorrect that causes me to make another decision that, regardless of whether it is correct or incorrect per se, cannot be truly correct because the first decision I made was not correct. I write lists out of information I want to explore and of words for which I want to know the definition. Thus, I'm not sure whether my overall quest is valid, but I am confident in my sincerity.

You have a hard time relating to the way I interpret the world and to the way I understand what goes on around me, just as I have a difficult time relating to the way you interpret the world and to the way you understand what goes on around you. Reducing the confusion to only the issue of religion, in this case, leaves both of us in a troublesome spot for a discussion on God. I should have warned you that I am incredibly skeptical of almost everything in life, including: the world of science (psych, chem, bio, physics) politicians (Clinton, Bush, etc...I'll find something negative in each one) myself (described as neurotic by nearly everyone I know; yet, I'm not so sure neurotic behavior is a negative) God and God's motive for creating this world (origins of this post) the way the world negatively changes over time (I'm allowing for positive change, also) We should have both recognized the fact that our parents reared us in separate manners, which is one of the possible reasons we have divergent views on life and religion. Interestingly, bhs, it appears that you have decided I'm an atheist; however, I am no Ayn Rand. Thus, knowing that I am not an atheist, I could go down on my knees tonight and beseech God to help you understand my perspective in this discussion. Note: I'm not assuming you are an atheist or pagan. That disclaimer actually helped me conjure up another thought (for obvious reasons, I'm not calling them questions anymore): Mosque-going Muslims aren't any better off than atheists or satanists.

bhs, NEWSFLASH: I could turn the table and say the same to you. I do pray; however, I do not think that the answers I would receive about such questions could help mankind.

Okay, so you are telling me that the ifs, ands, and buts cannot have a dramatic effect on the meaning of a translation? I beg to differ. I want to know EXACTLY what God has determined to be right and wrong. When it comes to religion, I'm not in the mood for a college chemistry lab with somewhat vague instructions. Also, I never said I didn't believe that historical figures, such as Christ and Caesar, lived. However, I do wonder about the depiction of the historical figures and the way we receive the information. I recognize that, most likely, Christ, Caesar and Plato all lived, yet I do not necessarily trust the humans who recorded the information, initially. The humans who documented were sinners, correct? How, then, can we ascertain they were free from the sin of false documentation ( I know that sounds strange, but, if you think about it, lying in a document is false documentation). From the beginning of scholarly translation of the Bible, is it possible that the scholars twisted meanings, exaggerated passages or added social mores (of a particular time)? God allows modern individuals to desecrate the Bible by burning Holy Books or modifying the Book--I don't see Him stepping in and confronting the evil-doer on Earth, do you? texas, I don't know why you are laughing.

No, I have never taken a course in any languages other than Latin and English. However, I can still see the possibility of human misunderstanding/error in translations of the Bible throughout history. God did not translate the Bible for man each time, did he?

OK, I have decided to agree to disagree with you, bhs. Yay for that! Hopefully, you can do the same. Warning: Do not throw Bible verses at me that you did not translate first hand; then, if you should chose to translate them first hand, explain to me the reasoning for your exact translation, okay? Kind of like deciphering Shakespeare's works, except in this situation your soul, not a grade, is on the line. Take, for instance, "Get thee to a nunnery!" from Hamlet. Many believe "nunnery" to have an exclusively literal translation; however, in Shakespeare's time, "nunnery" meant a bordello (whore house). Look into it. I don't think, Stan, that you and I are ever going to be on the same page on religious topics. Tired.

No, Texas, it wasn't...I've internalized many of the answers I've received on this website and have expanded my understanding of the Bible. I don't like another human feeling that he has the right to force a perspective on me, however. I know a thought that will lighten up this post: Football season on the horizon!!!!

Sorry for getting off on this tangent. Controversial issues make me extremely irritated with the world and, occasionally, I'll flip out on a message board. Let me first answer Stan by saying, "Yes! I do believe Jesus is an outstanding moral teacher (I used "is" here because of the "Living God" concept; I know Jesus incarnate died many a moon ago). However, I refuse to allow other people to determine my interpretation of the Bible. Genentic, non-genetic...I don't think the verdict is out. Who gave humans their genetic makeup? God. Why would God throw a wrench into the system? That's like a company that manufactures jigsaw puzzles putting 5 or 6 mismatched pieces in two or three boxes. Anyway, I'm off the homo soapbox.

Alice Sebold---an easily-researched internet topic. Sorry for the cattiness, but I feel that I completely did not deliver a point in my last post. I had a general idea about most of the answers before asking, this is true. However, I was trying to point out that in today's time people follow sects that were not necessarily the original version of the religion. I don't want to go off on a tangent about this subject because it's not germane to our discussion, in truth. Point given. I do not believe that my views on various subjects are moral truths. However, Nazism= eradication of a population (what was the motive for killing--maybe, finding a scapegoat for Germany's problems following their defeat in WW1) Terrorism= terrorizing a group of people to instill fear (what is the motive---subject I refuse to touch) Unless the killing is carried out in self-defense, how can you justify murder? What right does one person have to kill another person? OK, beyond the mor. relat. issue, what about practical issues for the time period. Maybe heterosexual relationships were a necessity, considering the need for propagation of the human species--like one of the purposes of the original Mormon stance on polygamy. From that standpoint, I can see why homosexuality was frowned upon. Why are long-term homo relationships a negative to Christians---seems like you'd want to encourage monogamous relationships. Instead, you shove gays further into secrecy and, in doing so, alienate them. I also find it amusing that some Christians believe reparative therapy is the panacea for homosexuality. All of us have heard the horror stories accompanied by several cases of RT. I'd bet that certain individuals have come out of the experience a different person; yet, perhaps, deep down in the subconscious, the "changed" indiv. had always been there. Just a thought. What do you say to the one who tries and fails, tries and fails.....doesn't sound like a logical process to me. A chemical reaction should occur each time you perform the same experiment, right? Therefore, RT (although fallible, unlike most CR) should have a better success rate than it does (I can find these numbers if needed). Need I remind you, the APA and APA both refute the claim that homosexuality is a disease of the mind. Both organizations also proclaim that reparative therapy can have damaging effects on someone's life. I'm sure 80% of y'all will just dismiss those statement as liberal BS. Whatever, I guess that's the easy way out of discussing the controversy that exists. I'm too tired to type any more tonight. I probably sounded partially incoherent in this post. Sorry.

I have enjoyed reading the many responses to this topic. I appreciate mature conversation and logical reasoning, and I feel that most of you are only trying to communicate with me, not judge me. However, I do not agree with the majority of you. But that's OK. I do have a thought on position changing: What was the Protestant Reformation? I hope you can provide an answer for that question. How did Martin Luther's views of Xianity differ from the Catholic Church's? For how long had Christians followed the Catholic Church up until the Reformation? Jesus died in AD 4, correct? I'd imagine that he had a sizeable following by 325, the year Constantine declared xianity the religion of the Roman empire. For 1200-1300 years, one version of Christianity was OK; however, Luther (and others) decided that the Catholic Church had fallacies and thus broke apart. I'm assuming that some of you on this website are Protestants. Why is breaking apart from the Catholic Church and eventually forming the Anglican Church a decent act, but the UCC's decisions are evil. I don't recall Jesus bringing a second New Covenant, do you? I'm not Catholic, but I do recognize a double standard when I see one. Southern Baptist v. Baptist...what is that about? Bald, not sure where you are going with the moral relativism issue. Killing people and having a relationship with another person are not on the same level. Nazis couldn't have been right because they killed people, same with terrorists.

any kind of sexuality What are the other types of human-human sexuality?

Stan: I do believe in God. I do not feel comfortable discussing my beliefs on homosexuality. I do feel comfortable in telling you that I can't understand why God doesn't mind if two men have a relationship without sex but does mind when sex is involved--as if sex is the determining factor. Why isn't lust the determining factor? Sex before marriage is comparable...difference between being a slut and being a person who truly believes he/she has found true love. A person doesn't always know a person well enough at marriage to actually predict how the relationship will evolve. What if the man starts abusing the wife 10 years after marriage...how was she supposed to know that? Why is divorce not okay in that situation? I think Protestantism has a different view on divorce than Catholicism, right? Why was it okay for Martin Luther to lead The Reformatio if the synod of the United Church of Christ does not have the right to change a position on an issue. At one time, I'm sure pastors and other religious figures in the South believed interracial marriage an act against God, yet they claimed to be Christians. I doubt you'd find many Christians today who believe that ID is against God's way. It's interesting that 150 years ago you could have easily found such a person.

mc, I don't know where you come off judging me. You have no idea about my background...you sit in front of computer screen and indirectly judge me by acting like you are God's sidekick...can't imagine what it's like for people that meet you in person. You really shouldn't assume so much about me. You expect people not to ask questions, not to care about indiscrepancies. Whatever. You think the perfect way to counteract me is to label me an unforgiven sinner. Do you not have questions about life and God? I guess when you're Einstein everything in the world is easily figured out. Write a book and I'll read it. Much judgment, the one you don't know.

Ridgeway, like the optimism...seems like you would want Germantown to beat SP in order to increase the strength of the area's football and to better the reputation for TN football as a whole.

Let me make myself clear: I am not blaming God for the transgression of Adam and Eve, but I am calling AE out for being such dipsticks. However, I do not believe it fair that we are all born with sin when we did not personally commit a crime. That is BS. I think God should have made us robotic; if he had, none of us would be capable of telling the difference (it'd be the norm). Still cannot see eye to eye with you on the parent concern. Ok, choosing to leave your father on Earth in order to pursue a different path in life is completely different than going to heck. I'm sure you could find many people who took paths in life that their parents did not approve and have become successful as a result. Ok, another question: So, if an active gay person (sex 3x a week, lies 2x a week, gossips 14x a week) and housewife (lies 3x a week, gossips 14x a week, lusts 5x a week) both claim to be Christians, then why do a significant number of Christians believe the housewife to be the true Xian. Doesn't make sense...neither is perfect and will forever make mistakes. Why should it matter what mistakes are made, recognizing that you are not perfect. Maybe there's a formula Peter uses at the Gates.

I appreciate all the responses and respect each person's belief. Here are several of my thoughts: Baldcoach, I've always heard we are God's children, created in his image. All of those analogies you mentioned (eg clay/potter) are examples of the broader category of creator/creation...I still don't understand why a creator would destroy the creation if the creation didn't understand the essence of the creator...seems sadistic. I feel that my view of parenting is solid--no abuse, no neglect, but definitely tough love. I don't believe tough love is killing a child. I was referring to people as masses of chemical compounds. Concerning Orig. Sin: Eve transgressed against God's command and screwed all of humanity. Next, Adam could either eat the apple with her or report her. And what does he do? Falls under pressure! First of all, Eve was the idiot for messing up her freeloading situation. Second of all, Adam must have been p-whipped--he did not have the courage to say, "NO!" And now, some thousands of years later (major typo...I know Adam and Eve did not enter the Garden of Eden in AD 1000), we are stuck with the lot given to us by 2 morons. nice. Sometimes I feel like a rat in a cage, meticulously being watched by a scientist to see how I behave under certain conditions. I feel angry toward God for creating humans, knowing the entire time that the race was going to turn out inherently evil (cf Adam and Eve). Why did he waste the time? I guess we all owe Adam and Eve a round! Good job, guys! Does he not have the power to create perfection? Had he created perfection, I wouldn't be typing this. 2. Stan, when a child becomes an "adult" he becomes his parents' equivalent, atleast on a legal level, right? Do we ever have standing that is on the same level as God's? No. Therefore, we are always his children. All in all, I suppose Dandy is correct: given that there is a God, I will understand the answers after meeting Him.

Hebrews 11:1 (KJV) Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. Is that a defense mechanism or what!?! What is not seen? If you were to give me a cheesy "A Walk to Remember" line concerning air, you would be wrong. The air is made of gas molecules, as you know, and one can condense the gases in air to liquid by drastically cooling the temperature--we can see most liquids! Anyway, it's a moving sentiment, but I'm asking questions about God, not questioning the existence of God. To those who question my motives: Am I not allowed to question God? Are you telling me to have blind faith, a faith without depth and meaning? I WILL NOT! To the one who told me to pray to God so that he might answer my questions: I cannot pray to him about such matters. I believe my questions are of a different magnitude than questions about personal confusion. The answers I would receive probably would not suit the majority of people, considering that most of the people I would tell would each have an individual understanding from their "communication" with God.

You're right, Baldcoach, that was off topic. I deleted the post and started another thread on the topic. I do not feel qualified to give an answer on this topic. I feel that many of my comments/opinions could easily be shot down. Moreover, I truly do not care about the UCC's stand on any issue.

Questions: 1. So, if God is analogous to a parent, then why would he allow any of his children to perish for all eternity. No sane, non-criminal parent kills a child, regardless of the offense. Typically, a parent choses to punish a child through time out or a spanking, not through lynching. 2. Why should God fault me or anyone else for the choice that Eve made? I do not feel that such a position would hold up in a court of law. Perhaps we should correct the US legal system to allow defendants to claim "Ancestral Influence" or some other fitting term. By the way, I would NOT have plucked the apple from the tree--what a frickin' MORON--end of the story. 3. Why does God place so much responsibility on the backs of masses of chemical compounds? Doesn't make much sense, but, okay! YAY! Let me go figure out all the intricacies of the world when scientists have not discovered the cure for the common cold. Def. sounds doable. HUAH! 4. Why do mentally incapacitated individuals not have to answer to God but the rest of us do? If you have Downs Syndrome, a defect of the 21st chromosome that is the most common type of mental retardation, are you allowed to waltz around and not have to answer up to anyone--sounds fishy to me! So that I don't sound like a heartless person, let me explain the reasoning. So, if a mentally retarded person has a defect on a chromosome, could one not go further and say that everyone has defects in their genes (unless of course they are perfect). Where's the line of demarcation? What defect must be present to grant impunity to one person and not to the other. Maybe some of y'all feel that people with severe mental retardation go to heck, which solves the entire problem Not a question! I LOVE HOW EACH PERSON KNOWS THAT HE OR SHE IS CORRECT CONCERNING THE AFTERLIFE!!! We are all so gosh darn intelligent that I have started having involuntary spasms. I have a devout Muslim tell me one version, a fervent Baptist another and an Orthodox Jew another. ANOTHER, ANOTHER, ANOTHER, ANOTHER, ANOTHER, ANOTHER, ANTOHER, ANOTHER, ANOTHER... maybe there is no sense in my posting ANOTHER 45,000 ANOTHERS. maybe, but then again, who knows, right?

***Disclaimer: not insulting any private school in any way (e.g. no insinuation of recruiting)---so don't go there*** Public schools in TN have consistently made names for themselves despite poor funding...5A gets my vote (namely Riverdale, DB, Gallatin, Germantown, Brentwood, although at different times). P.S. I will not discuss funding for public schools---I refuse to start an argument. If you disagree with me, and you are a plus member, try this: click "message boards" at the top of this page and scroll down to the discussion forums...have fun!!!

Germantown v. JCM at Gtown should be a quality season opener.

1. Riverdale (FSU similarity) 2. Germantown (semi-UGA look) 3. Franklin 4. CBHS 5. MUS