[FairfieldLife] Could it be...Satan?

[TurquoiseBee [e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

Here's my theory about Satan, Old Nick, Lucifer, Beelzebub, Mephistopheles, or whatever you choose to call Him/It. Be warned.  :-)

Basically, as I see it, no such entity as Satan exists, just as no such entity as God exists. Satan is just something that believers in God thought up to cover their own philosophical short-sightedness.

See, once these believers had invented a God who creates everything and runs everything according to His cosmic plan, they suddenly realized that they'd boxed themselves in and created a kind of nightmare for themselves. If, as they had already taught all their believer-followers, God runs *everything*, then *He* is the one responsible for child cancer, busloads of the faithful going over a cliff while on pilgrimage, floods, earthquakes and plagues that kill millions of innocent people, and well...just evil in general. If you actually believe that God *controls* all of these things, or worse *plans* all of this, then you pretty much have to admit that He's a psychotic thug.

So to *avoid* having to admit that they had invented PsychoThug God, believers came up with the Other Guy -- Satan -- someone they could blame for all of the shitty things they don't want to attribute to God.

This is the kind of convoluted logic people get into once they try to invent a God and claim that He controls everything. Someone points out that you just stated that God controls what you consider evil just as much as He controls what you consider good, and your philosophy is fucked. So you invent a new imaginary character and "amend" your philosophy so it reads, "OK, God controls everything...uh...*except* for that stuff we don't like...Satan controls that."

Now you know.

[ The preceding sermon was brought to you by Pastor Barry of the Blinding Light Church of the Presumptuous Assumption ]

:-)

[[e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

For the non-dualist, God or Satan are not physical objects of knowledge but consciousness itself - and parts of our own psyche. Everyone has a little God and a little Satan in them. Apparently you haven't fully realized the non-dual reality, since you're still dividing data and ideas up into sections and categories, folders and files.

The idea you had years ago of following a spiritual path indicates that you are a True Believer in the Spirit. Your history on FFL shows a Devil in practice every time you attempt to deceive, impress, or show pride or jealousy. Every time you post a fib shows a little devil inside you; one could even say that at times you are devilish and a force for darkness.

In fact, your free will is the force of power that propels you on to survival via The Lie below. If you were to be totally honest and tell us The Truth, it would be too brutal for you to bear and then there would be no need for further dialog. If you told the truth, everything you say after that would be a non sequitur.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Here's my theory about Satan, Old Nick, Lucifer, Beelzebub, Mephistopheles, or whatever you choose to call Him/It. Be warned. :-)

Basically, as I see it, no such entity as Satan exists, just as no such entity as God exists. Satan is just something that believers in God thought up to cover their own philosophical short-sightedness.

See, once these believers had invented a God who creates everything and runs everything according to His cosmic plan, they suddenly realized that they'd boxed themselves in and created a kind of nightmare for themselves. If, as they had already taught all their believer-followers, God runs *everything*, then *He* is the one responsible for child cancer, busloads of the faithful going over a cliff while on pilgrimage, floods, earthquakes and plagues that kill millions of innocent people, and well...just evil in general. If you actually believe that God *controls* all of these things, or worse *plans* all of this, then you pretty much have to admit that He's a psychotic thug.

So to *avoid* having to admit that they had invented PsychoThug God, believers came up with the Other Guy -- Satan -- someone they could blame for all of the shitty things they don't want to attribute to God.

This is the kind of convoluted logic people get into once they try to invent a God and claim that He controls everything. Someone points out that you just stated that God controls what you consider evil just as much as He controls what you consider good, and your philosophy is fucked. So you invent a new imaginary character and "amend" your philosophy so it reads, "OK, God controls everything...uh...*except* for that stuff we don't like...Satan controls that."

Now you know.

[ The preceding sermon was brought to you by Pastor Barry of the Blinding Light Church of the Presumptuous Assumption ]

:-)

[[e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

Pastor Barry,

Do you believe that human beings have a free will to choose between good and evil?


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Here's my theory about Satan, Old Nick, Lucifer, Beelzebub, Mephistopheles, or whatever you choose to call Him/It. Be warned. :-)

Basically, as I see it, no such entity as Satan exists, just as no such entity as God exists. Satan is just something that believers in God thought up to cover their own philosophical short-sightedness.

See, once these believers had invented a God who creates everything and runs everything according to His cosmic plan, they suddenly realized that they'd boxed themselves in and created a kind of nightmare for themselves. If, as they had already taught all their believer-followers, God runs *everything*, then *He* is the one responsible for child cancer, busloads of the faithful going over a cliff while on pilgrimage, floods, earthquakes and plagues that kill millions of innocent people, and well...just evil in general. If you actually believe that God *controls* all of these things, or worse *plans* all of this, then you pretty much have to admit that He's a psychotic thug.

So to *avoid* having to admit that they had invented PsychoThug God, believers came up with the Other Guy -- Satan -- someone they could blame for all of the shitty things they don't want to attribute to God.

This is the kind of convoluted logic people get into once they try to invent a God and claim that He controls everything. Someone points out that you just stated that God controls what you consider evil just as much as He controls what you consider good, and your philosophy is fucked. So you invent a new imaginary character and "amend" your philosophy so it reads, "OK, God controls everything...uh...*except* for that stuff we don't like...Satan controls that."

Now you know.

[ The preceding sermon was brought to you by Pastor Barry of the Blinding Light Church of the Presumptuous Assumption ]

:-)

[[e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

jr_esq, Barry's job is not 'pastor', it's more like 'pester'. It is a highly dignified profession, the exact opposite of what a 'pastor' does (enlightenment, in other words, is a great undoing, undoing what pastors try to do). Barry writes quickly, but sometimes he makes minor spelling errors, due to haste, hence he meant to say 'Pester Barry of the Grinding Might Lurch of the Voluptuous Resumption (more details of the church can be found online at http://tinyurl.com/ygvf8zb http://tinyurl.com/ygvf8zb as part of of the complete training required to become a true teacher of TM in all things. Of course Barry has eschewed this learning as he has moved on, leaving with the current crop of followers of M to carry on this tradition).

Whether or not free will exists, it is not necessary to choose between good and evil because those concepts are simply in the imagination of human beings. In the world, there is only what happens, it is neither good nor bad. The mind maps such concepts like good and evil onto the world, but they are not real, but they may seem real to a mind that is unclear about the relationship of thought to what happens in the world.

Here is a great explanation of how that happens (David Hume 1689):


OF THE ORIGIN OF IDEAS. 11.Every one will readily allow, that there is a considerable difference between the perceptions of the mind, when a man feels the pain of excessive heat, or the pleasure of moderate warmth, and when he afterwards recalls to his memory this sensation, or anticipates it by his imagination. These faculties may mimic or copy the perceptions of the senses; but they never can entirely reach the force and vivacity of the original sentiment. The utmost we say of them, even when they operate with greatest vigour, is, that they represent their object in so lively a manner, that we could almost say we feel or see it: But, except the mind be disordered by disease or madness, they never can arrive at such a pitch of vivacity, as to render these perceptions altogether undistinguishable. All the colours of poetry, however splendid, can never paint natural objects in such a manner as to make the description be taken for a real landskip [landscape]. The most lively thought is still inferior to the dullest sensation.


We may observe a like distinction to run through all the other perceptions of the mind. A man in a fit of anger, is actuated in a very different manner from one who only thinks of that emotion. If you tell me, that any person is in love, I easily understand your meaning, and form a just conception of his situation; but never can mistake that conception for the real disorders and agitations of the passion. When we reflect on our past sentiments and affections, our thought is a faithful mirror, and copies its objects truly; but the colours which it employs are faint and dull, in comparison of those in which our original perceptions were clothed. It requires no nice discernment or metaphysical head to mark the distinction between them.


12.Here therefore we may divide all the perceptions of the mind into two classes or species, which are distinguished by their different degrees of force and vivacity. The less forcible and lively are commonly denominated Thoughts or Ideas. The other species want a name in our language, and in most others; I suppose, because it was not requisite for any, but philosophical purposes, to rank them under a general term or appellation. Let us, therefore, use a little freedom, and call them Impressions; employing that word in a sense somewhat different from the usual. By the term impression, then, I mean all our more lively perceptions, when we hear, or see, or feel, or love, or hate, or desire, or will. And impressions are distinguished from ideas, which are the less lively perceptions, of which we are conscious, when we reflect on any of those sensations or movements above mentioned.


13.Nothing, at first view, may seem more unbounded than the thought of man, which not only escapes all human power and authority, but is not even restrained within the limits of nature and reality. To form monsters, and join incongruous shapes and appearances, costs the imagination no more trouble than to conceive the most natural and familiar objects. And while the body is confined to one planet, along which it creeps with pain and difficulty; the thought can in an instant transport us into the most distant regions of the universe; or even beyond the universe, into the unbounded chaos, where nature is supposed to lie in total confusion. What never was seen, or heard of, may yet be conceived; nor is any thing beyond the power of thought, except what implies an absolute contradiction.


But though our thought seems to possess this unbounded liberty, we shall find, upon a nearer examination, that it is really confined within very narrow limits, and that all this creative power of the mind amounts to no more than the faculty of compounding, transposing, augmenting, or diminishing the materials afforded us by the senses and experience. When we think of a golden mountain, we only join two consistent ideas, gold, and mountain, with which we were formerly acquainted. A virtuous horse we can conceive; because, from our own feeling, we can conceive virtue; and this we may unite to the figure and shape of a horse, which is an animal familiar to us. In short, all the materials of thinking are derived either from our outward or inward sentiment: the mixture and composition of these belongs alone to the mind and will. Or, to express myself in philosophical language, all our ideas or more feeble perceptions are copies of our impressions or more lively ones.


14.To prove this, the two following arguments will, I hope, be sufficient. First, when we analyze our thoughts or ideas, however compounded or sublime, we always find that they resolve themselves into such simple ideas as were copied from a precedent feeling or sentiment. Even those ideas, which, at first view, seem the most wide of this origin, are found, upon a nearer scrutiny, to be derived from it. The idea of God, as meaning an infinitely intelligent, wise, and good Being, arises from reflecting on the operations of our own mind, and augmenting, without limit, those qualities of goodness and wisdom. We may prosecute this enquiry to what length we please; where we shall always find, that every idea which we examine is copied from a similar impression. Those who would assert that this position is not universally true nor without exception, have only one, and that an easy method of refuting it; by producing that idea, which, in their opinion, is not derived from this source. It will then be incumbent on us, if we would maintain our doctrine, to produce the impression, or lively perception, which corresponds to it.


15.Secondly. If it happen, from a defect of the organ, that a man is not susceptible of any species of sensation, we always find that he is as little susceptible of the correspondent ideas. A blind man can form no notion of colours; a deaf man of sounds. Restore either of them that sense in which he is deficient; by opening this new inlet for his sensations, you also open an inlet for the ideas; and he finds no difficulty in conceiving these objects. The case is the same, if the object, proper for exciting any sensation, has never been applied to the organ. A Laplander or Negro has no notion of the relish of wine. And though there are few or no instances of a like deficiency in the mind, where a person has never felt or is wholly incapable of a sentiment or passion that belongs to his species; yet we find the same observation to take place in a less degree. A man of mild manners can form no idea of inveterate revenge or cruelty; nor can a selfish heart easily conceive the heights of friendship and generosity. It is readily allowed, that other beings may possess many senses of which we can have no conception; because the ideas of them have never been introduced to us in the only manner by which an idea can have access to the mind, to wit, by the actual feeling and sensation.


16.There is, however, one contradictory phenomenon, which may prove that it is not absolutely impossible for ideas to arise, independent of their correspondent impressions. I believe it will readily be allowed, that the several distinct ideas of colour, which enter by the eye, or those of sound, which are conveyed by the ear, are really different from each other; though, at the same time, resembling. Now if this be true of different colours, it must be no less so of the different shades of the same colour; and each shade produces a distinct idea, independent of the rest. For if this should be denied, it is possible, by the continual gradation of shades, to run a colour insensibly into what is most remote from it; and if you will not allow any of the means to be different, you cannot, without absurdity, deny the extremes to be the same. Suppose, therefore, a person to have enjoyed his sight for thirty years, and to have become perfectly acquainted with colours of all kinds except one particular shade of blue, for instance, which it never has been his fortune to meet with. Let all the different shades of that colour, except that single one, be placed before him, descending gradually from the deepest to the lightest; it is plain that he will perceive a blank, where that shade is wanting, and will be sensible that there is a greater distance in that place between the contiguous colours than in any other. Now I ask, whether it be possible for him, from his own imagination, to supply this deficiency, and raise up to himself the idea of that particular shade, though it had never been conveyed to him by his senses? I believe there are few but will be of opinion that he can: and this may serve as a proof that the simple ideas are not always, in every instance, derived from the correspondent impressions; though this instance is so singular, that it is scarcely worth our observing, and does not merit that for it alone we should alter our general maxim.


17.Here, therefore, is a proposition, which not only seems, in itself, simple and intelligible; but, if a proper use were made of it, might render every dispute equally intelligible, and banish all that jargon, which has so long taken possession of metaphysical reasonings, and drawn disgrace upon them. All ideas, especially abstract ones, are naturally faint and obscure: the mind has but a slender hold of them: they are apt to be confounded with other resembling ideas; and when we have often employed any term, though without a distinct meaning, we are apt to imagine it has a determinate idea annexed to it. On the contrary, all impressions, that is, all sensations, either outward or inward, are strong and vivid: the limits between them are more exactly determined: nor is it easy to fall into any error or mistake with regard to them. When we entertain, therefore, any suspicion that a philosophical term is employed without any meaning or idea (as is but too frequent), we need but enquire, from what impression is that supposed idea derived? And if it be impossible to assign any, this will serve to confirm our suspicion. By bringing ideas into so clear a light we may reasonably hope to remove all dispute, which may arise, concerning their nature and reality.



---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,

Do you believe that human beings have a free will to choose between good and evil?


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Here's my theory about Satan, Old Nick, Lucifer, Beelzebub, Mephistopheles, or whatever you choose to call Him/It. Be warned. :-)

Basically, as I see it, no such entity as Satan exists, just as no such entity as God exists. Satan is just something that believers in God thought up to cover their own philosophical short-sightedness.

See, once these believers had invented a God who creates everything and runs everything according to His cosmic plan, they suddenly realized that they'd boxed themselves in and created a kind of nightmare for themselves. If, as they had already taught all their believer-followers, God runs *everything*, then *He* is the one responsible for child cancer, busloads of the faithful going over a cliff while on pilgrimage, floods, earthquakes and plagues that kill millions of innocent people, and well...just evil in general. If you actually believe that God *controls* all of these things, or worse *plans* all of this, then you pretty much have to admit that He's a psychotic thug.

So to *avoid* having to admit that they had invented PsychoThug God, believers came up with the Other Guy -- Satan -- someone they could blame for all of the shitty things they don't want to attribute to God.

This is the kind of convoluted logic people get into once they try to invent a God and claim that He controls everything. Someone points out that you just stated that God controls what you consider evil just as much as He controls what you consider good, and your philosophy is fucked. So you invent a new imaginary character and "amend" your philosophy so it reads, "OK, God controls everything...uh...*except* for that stuff we don't like...Satan controls that."

Now you know.

[ The preceding sermon was brought to you by Pastor Barry of the Blinding Light Church of the Presumptuous Assumption ]

:-)

[[e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

Xeno,

I'm using the title, "Pastor", since he used it to describe himself. Also, you seem to think that good and evil do not exist. So, how do you explain what Adolph Hitler did during the Holocaust? And, more recently, how do you explain the behavior of the Islamic State rebels who killed innocent people in Iraq and Syria?


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

jr_esq, Barry's job is not 'pastor', it's more like 'pester'. It is a highly dignified profession, the exact opposite of what a 'pastor' does (enlightenment, in other words, is a great undoing, undoing what pastors try to do). Barry writes quickly, but sometimes he makes minor spelling errors, due to haste, hence he meant to say 'Pester Barry of the Grinding Might Lurch of the Voluptuous Resumption (more details of the church can be found online at http://tinyurl.com/ygvf8zb http://tinyurl.com/ygvf8zb as part of of the complete training required to become a true teacher of TM in all things. Of course Barry has eschewed this learning as he has moved on, leaving with the current crop of followers of M to carry on this tradition).

Whether or not free will exists, it is not necessary to choose between good and evil because those concepts are simply in the imagination of human beings. In the world, there is only what happens, it is neither good nor bad. The mind maps such concepts like good and evil onto the world, but they are not real, but they may seem real to a mind that is unclear about the relationship of thought to what happens in the world.

Here is a great explanation of how that happens (David Hume 1689):


OF THE ORIGIN OF IDEAS. 11.Every one will readily allow, that there is a considerable difference between the perceptions of the mind, when a man feels the pain of excessive heat, or the pleasure of moderate warmth, and when he afterwards recalls to his memory this sensation, or anticipates it by his imagination. These faculties may mimic or copy the perceptions of the senses; but they never can entirely reach the force and vivacity of the original sentiment. The utmost we say of them, even when they operate with greatest vigour, is, that they represent their object in so lively a manner, that we could almost say we feel or see it: But, except the mind be disordered by disease or madness, they never can arrive at such a pitch of vivacity, as to render these perceptions altogether undistinguishable. All the colours of poetry, however splendid, can never paint natural objects in such a manner as to make the description be taken for a real landskip [landscape]. The most lively thought is still inferior to the dullest sensation.


We may observe a like distinction to run through all the other perceptions of the mind. A man in a fit of anger, is actuated in a very different manner from one who only thinks of that emotion. If you tell me, that any person is in love, I easily understand your meaning, and form a just conception of his situation; but never can mistake that conception for the real disorders and agitations of the passion. When we reflect on our past sentiments and affections, our thought is a faithful mirror, and copies its objects truly; but the colours which it employs are faint and dull, in comparison of those in which our original perceptions were clothed. It requires no nice discernment or metaphysical head to mark the distinction between them.


12.Here therefore we may divide all the perceptions of the mind into two classes or species, which are distinguished by their different degrees of force and vivacity. The less forcible and lively are commonly denominated Thoughts or Ideas. The other species want a name in our language, and in most others; I suppose, because it was not requisite for any, but philosophical purposes, to rank them under a general term or appellation. Let us, therefore, use a little freedom, and call them Impressions; employing that word in a sense somewhat different from the usual. By the term impression, then, I mean all our more lively perceptions, when we hear, or see, or feel, or love, or hate, or desire, or will. And impressions are distinguished from ideas, which are the less lively perceptions, of which we are conscious, when we reflect on any of those sensations or movements above mentioned.


13.Nothing, at first view, may seem more unbounded than the thought of man, which not only escapes all human power and authority, but is not even restrained within the limits of nature and reality. To form monsters, and join incongruous shapes and appearances, costs the imagination no more trouble than to conceive the most natural and familiar objects. And while the body is confined to one planet, along which it creeps with pain and difficulty; the thought can in an instant transport us into the most distant regions of the universe; or even beyond the universe, into the unbounded chaos, where nature is supposed to lie in total confusion. What never was seen, or heard of, may yet be conceived; nor is any thing beyond the power of thought, except what implies an absolute contradiction.


But though our thought seems to possess this unbounded liberty, we shall find, upon a nearer examination, that it is really confined within very narrow limits, and that all this creative power of the mind amounts to no more than the faculty of compounding, transposing, augmenting, or diminishing the materials afforded us by the senses and experience. When we think of a golden mountain, we only join two consistent ideas, gold, and mountain, with which we were formerly acquainted. A virtuous horse we can conceive; because, from our own feeling, we can conceive virtue; and this we may unite to the figure and shape of a horse, which is an animal familiar to us. In short, all the materials of thinking are derived either from our outward or inward sentiment: the mixture and composition of these belongs alone to the mind and will. Or, to express myself in philosophical language, all our ideas or more feeble perceptions are copies of our impressions or more lively ones.


14.To prove this, the two following arguments will, I hope, be sufficient. First, when we analyze our thoughts or ideas, however compounded or sublime, we always find that they resolve themselves into such simple ideas as were copied from a precedent feeling or sentiment. Even those ideas, which, at first view, seem the most wide of this origin, are found, upon a nearer scrutiny, to be derived from it. The idea of God, as meaning an infinitely intelligent, wise, and good Being, arises from reflecting on the operations of our own mind, and augmenting, without limit, those qualities of goodness and wisdom. We may prosecute this enquiry to what length we please; where we shall always find, that every idea which we examine is copied from a similar impression. Those who would assert that this position is not universally true nor without exception, have only one, and that an easy method of refuting it; by producing that idea, which, in their opinion, is not derived from this source. It will then be incumbent on us, if we would maintain our doctrine, to produce the impression, or lively perception, which corresponds to it.


15.Secondly. If it happen, from a defect of the organ, that a man is not susceptible of any species of sensation, we always find that he is as little susceptible of the correspondent ideas. A blind man can form no notion of colours; a deaf man of sounds. Restore either of them that sense in which he is deficient; by opening this new inlet for his sensations, you also open an inlet for the ideas; and he finds no difficulty in conceiving these objects. The case is the same, if the object, proper for exciting any sensation, has never been applied to the organ. A Laplander or Negro has no notion of the relish of wine. And though there are few or no instances of a like deficiency in the mind, where a person has never felt or is wholly incapable of a sentiment or passion that belongs to his species; yet we find the same observation to take place in a less degree. A man of mild manners can form no idea of inveterate revenge or cruelty; nor can a selfish heart easily conceive the heights of friendship and generosity. It is readily allowed, that other beings may possess many senses of which we can have no conception; because the ideas of them have never been introduced to us in the only manner by which an idea can have access to the mind, to wit, by the actual feeling and sensation.


16.There is, however, one contradictory phenomenon, which may prove that it is not absolutely impossible for ideas to arise, independent of their correspondent impressions. I believe it will readily be allowed, that the several distinct ideas of colour, which enter by the eye, or those of sound, which are conveyed by the ear, are really different from each other; though, at the same time, resembling. Now if this be true of different colours, it must be no less so of the different shades of the same colour; and each shade produces a distinct idea, independent of the rest. For if this should be denied, it is possible, by the continual gradation of shades, to run a colour insensibly into what is most remote from it; and if you will not allow any of the means to be different, you cannot, without absurdity, deny the extremes to be the same. Suppose, therefore, a person to have enjoyed his sight for thirty years, and to have become perfectly acquainted with colours of all kinds except one particular shade of blue, for instance, which it never has been his fortune to meet with. Let all the different shades of that colour, except that single one, be placed before him, descending gradually from the deepest to the lightest; it is plain that he will perceive a blank, where that shade is wanting, and will be sensible that there is a greater distance in that place between the contiguous colours than in any other. Now I ask, whether it be possible for him, from his own imagination, to supply this deficiency, and raise up to himself the idea of that particular shade, though it had never been conveyed to him by his senses? I believe there are few but will be of opinion that he can: and this may serve as a proof that the simple ideas are not always, in every instance, derived from the correspondent impressions; though this instance is so singular, that it is scarcely worth our observing, and does not merit that for it alone we should alter our general maxim.


17.Here, therefore, is a proposition, which not only seems, in itself, simple and intelligible; but, if a proper use were made of it, might render every dispute equally intelligible, and banish all that jargon, which has so long taken possession of metaphysical reasonings, and drawn disgrace upon them. All ideas, especially abstract ones, are naturally faint and obscure: the mind has but a slender hold of them: they are apt to be confounded with other resembling ideas; and when we have often employed any term, though without a distinct meaning, we are apt to imagine it has a determinate idea annexed to it. On the contrary, all impressions, that is, all sensations, either outward or inward, are strong and vivid: the limits between them are more exactly determined: nor is it easy to fall into any error or mistake with regard to them. When we entertain, therefore, any suspicion that a philosophical term is employed without any meaning or idea (as is but too frequent), we need but enquire, from what impression is that supposed idea derived? And if it be impossible to assign any, this will serve to confirm our suspicion. By bringing ideas into so clear a light we may reasonably hope to remove all dispute, which may arise, concerning their nature and reality.



---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,

Do you believe that human beings have a free will to choose between good and evil?


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Here's my theory about Satan, Old Nick, Lucifer, Beelzebub, Mephistopheles, or whatever you choose to call Him/It. Be warned. :-)

Basically, as I see it, no such entity as Satan exists, just as no such entity as God exists. Satan is just something that believers in God thought up to cover their own philosophical short-sightedness.

See, once these believers had invented a God who creates everything and runs everything according to His cosmic plan, they suddenly realized that they'd boxed themselves in and created a kind of nightmare for themselves. If, as they had already taught all their believer-followers, God runs *everything*, then *He* is the one responsible for child cancer, busloads of the faithful going over a cliff while on pilgrimage, floods, earthquakes and plagues that kill millions of innocent people, and well...just evil in general. If you actually believe that God *controls* all of these things, or worse *plans* all of this, then you pretty much have to admit that He's a psychotic thug.

So to *avoid* having to admit that they had invented PsychoThug God, believers came up with the Other Guy -- Satan -- someone they could blame for all of the shitty things they don't want to attribute to God.

This is the kind of convoluted logic people get into once they try to invent a God and claim that He controls everything. Someone points out that you just stated that God controls what you consider evil just as much as He controls what you consider good, and your philosophy is fucked. So you invent a new imaginary character and "amend" your philosophy so it reads, "OK, God controls everything...uh...*except* for that stuff we don't like...Satan controls that."

Now you know.

[ The preceding sermon was brought to you by Pastor Barry of the Blinding Light Church of the Presumptuous Assumption ]

:-)

[TurquoiseBee [e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

While I thank Anartaxius for his creative submission, I think he has the Blinding Light Church of the Presumptuous Assumption (a product of that holy alliance known as the Firesign Theater) with another congregation of somewhat lesser worth and notoriety. Also, although Xeno means well, the honorary title of Pastor ("He who leadeth the sheep to the fleecing") is neither to be confused with the lesser title of Pester ("He who merely annoyeth the sheep by poking them") or even Fester ("He who poketh the sheep so often that their wounds become infected and smelly"). Here is an example of the latter:

As for that other Hume-boy he's talking about, how can you trust anyone who spells words like 'vigor' and 'color' as 'vigour' and 'colour'? He's obviously some kinda furriner, probably from Scorpionland, and thus possibly evil. Even though evil doesn't exist.  



From: "***@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, March 23, 2015 4:22 AMSubject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

  jr_esq, Barry's job is not 'pastor', it's more like 'pester'. It is a highly dignified profession, the exact opposite of what a 'pastor' does (enlightenment, in other words, is a great undoing, undoing what pastors try to do). Barry writes quickly, but sometimes he makes minor spelling errors, due to haste, hence he meant to say 'Pester Barry of the Grinding Might Lurch of the Voluptuous Resumption (more details of the church can be found online at http://tinyurl.com/ygvf8zb as part of of the complete training required to become a true teacher of TM in all things. Of course Barry has eschewed this learning as he has moved on, leaving with the current crop of followers of M to carry on this tradition). 
Whether or not free will exists, it is not necessary to choose between good and evil because those concepts are simply in the imagination of human beings. In the world, there is only what happens, it is neither good nor bad. The mind maps such concepts like good and evil onto the world, but they are not real, but they may seem real to a mind that is unclear about the relationship of thought to what happens in the world.
Here is a great explanation of how that happens (David Hume 1689):

OF THE ORIGIN OF IDEAS.
11.Every one will readily allow, that there is a considerable difference between the perceptions of the mind, when a man feels the pain of excessive heat, or the pleasure of moderate warmth, and when he afterwards recalls to his memory this sensation, or anticipates it by his imagination. These faculties may mimic or copy the perceptions of the senses; but they never can entirely reach the force and vivacity of the original sentiment. The utmost we say of them, even when they operate with greatest vigour, is, that they represent their object in so lively a manner, that we could almost say we feel or see it: But, except the mind be disordered by disease or madness, they never can arrive at such a pitch of vivacity, as to render these perceptions altogether undistinguishable. All the colours of poetry, however splendid, can never paint natural objects in such a manner as to make the description be taken for a real landskip [landscape]. The most lively thought is still inferior to the dullest sensation.
We may observe a like distinction to run through all the other perceptions of the mind. A man in a fit of anger, is actuated in a very different manner from one who only thinks of that emotion. If you tell me, that any person is in love, I easily understand your meaning, and form a just conception of his situation; but never can mistake that conception for the real disorders and agitations of the passion. When we reflect on our past sentiments and affections, our thought is a faithful mirror, and copies its objects truly; but the colours which it employs are faint and dull, in comparison of those in which our original perceptions were clothed. It requires no nice discernment or metaphysical head to mark the distinction between them.
12.Here therefore we may divide all the perceptions of the mind into two classes or species, which are distinguished by their different degrees of force and vivacity. The less forcible and lively are commonly denominated Thoughts or Ideas. The other species want a name in our language, and in most others; I suppose, because it was not requisite for any, but philosophical purposes, to rank them under a general term or appellation. Let us, therefore, use a little freedom, and call them Impressions; employing that word in a sense somewhat different from the usual. By the term impression, then, I mean all our more lively perceptions, when we hear, or see, or feel, or love, or hate, or desire, or will. And impressions are distinguished from ideas, which are the less lively perceptions, of which we are conscious, when we reflect on any of those sensations or movements above mentioned.
13.Nothing, at first view, may seem more unbounded than the thought of man, which not only escapes all human power and authority, but is not even restrained within the limits of nature and reality. To form monsters, and join incongruous shapes and appearances, costs the imagination no more trouble than to conceive the most natural and familiar objects. And while the body is confined to one planet, along which it creeps with pain and difficulty; the thought can in an instant transport us into the most distant regions of the universe; or even beyond the universe, into the unbounded chaos, where nature is supposed to lie in total confusion. What never was seen, or heard of, may yet be conceived; nor is any thing beyond the power of thought, except what implies an absolute contradiction.
But though our thought seems to possess this unbounded liberty, we shall find, upon a nearer examination, that it is really confined within very narrow limits, and that all this creative power of the mind amounts to no more than the faculty of compounding, transposing, augmenting, or diminishing the materials afforded us by the senses and experience. When we think of a golden mountain, we only join two consistent ideas, gold, and mountain, with which we were formerly acquainted. A virtuous horse we can conceive; because, from our own feeling, we can conceive virtue; and this we may unite to the figure and shape of a horse, which is an animal familiar to us. In short, all the materials of thinking are derived either from our outward or inward sentiment: the mixture and composition of these belongs alone to the mind and will. Or, to express myself in philosophical language, all our ideas or more feeble perceptions are copies of our impressions or more lively ones.
14.To prove this, the two following arguments will, I hope, be sufficient. First, when we analyze our thoughts or ideas, however compounded or sublime, we always find that they resolve themselves into such simple ideas as were copied from a precedent feeling or sentiment. Even those ideas, which, at first view, seem the most wide of this origin, are found, upon a nearer scrutiny, to be derived from it. The idea of God, as meaning an infinitely intelligent, wise, and good Being, arises from reflecting on the operations of our own mind, and augmenting, without limit, those qualities of goodness and wisdom. We may prosecute this enquiry to what length we please; where we shall always find, that every idea which we examine is copied from a similar impression. Those who would assert that this position is not universally true nor without exception, have only one, and that an easy method of refuting it; by producing that idea, which, in their opinion, is not derived from this source. It will then be incumbent on us, if we would maintain our doctrine, to produce the impression, or lively perception, which corresponds to it.
15.Secondly. If it happen, from a defect of the organ, that a man is not susceptible of any species of sensation, we always find that he is as little susceptible of the correspondent ideas. A blind man can form no notion of colours; a deaf man of sounds. Restore either of them that sense in which he is deficient; by opening this new inlet for his sensations, you also open an inlet for the ideas; and he finds no difficulty in conceiving these objects. The case is the same, if the object, proper for exciting any sensation, has never been applied to the organ. A Laplander or Negro has no notion of the relish of wine. And though there are few or no instances of a like deficiency in the mind, where a person has never felt or is wholly incapable of a sentiment or passion that belongs to his species; yet we find the same observation to take place in a less degree. A man of mild manners can form no idea of inveterate revenge or cruelty; nor can a selfish heart easily conceive the heights of friendship and generosity. It is readily allowed, that other beings may possess many senses of which we can have no conception; because the ideas of them have never been introduced to us in the only manner by which an idea can have access to the mind, to wit, by the actual feeling and sensation.
16.There is, however, one contradictory phenomenon, which may prove that it is not absolutely impossible for ideas to arise, independent of their correspondent impressions. I believe it will readily be allowed, that the several distinct ideas of colour, which enter by the eye, or those of sound, which are conveyed by the ear, are really different from each other; though, at the same time, resembling. Now if this be true of different colours, it must be no less so of the different shades of the same colour; and each shade produces a distinct idea, independent of the rest. For if this should be denied, it is possible, by the continual gradation of shades, to run a colour insensibly into what is most remote from it; and if you will not allow any of the means to be different, you cannot, without absurdity, deny the extremes to be the same. Suppose, therefore, a person to have enjoyed his sight for thirty years, and to have become perfectly acquainted with colours of all kinds except one particular shade of blue, for instance, which it never has been his fortune to meet with. Let all the different shades of that colour, except that single one, be placed before him, descending gradually from the deepest to the lightest; it is plain that he will perceive a blank, where that shade is wanting, and will be sensible that there is a greater distance in that place between the contiguous colours than in any other. Now I ask, whether it be possible for him, from his own imagination, to supply this deficiency, and raise up to himself the idea of that particular shade, though it had never been conveyed to him by his senses? I believe there are few but will be of opinion that he can: and this may serve as a proof that the simple ideas are not always, in every instance, derived from the correspondent impressions; though this instance is so singular, that it is scarcely worth our observing, and does not merit that for it alone we should alter our general maxim.
17.Here, therefore, is a proposition, which not only seems, in itself, simple and intelligible; but, if a proper use were made of it, might render every dispute equally intelligible, and banish all that jargon, which has so long taken possession of metaphysical reasonings, and drawn disgrace upon them. All ideas, especially abstract ones, are naturally faint and obscure: the mind has but a slender hold of them: they are apt to be confounded with other resembling ideas; and when we have often employed any term, though without a distinct meaning, we are apt to imagine it has a determinate idea annexed to it. On the contrary, all impressions, that is, all sensations, either outward or inward, are strong and vivid: the limits between them are more exactly determined: nor is it easy to fall into any error or mistake with regard to them. When we entertain, therefore, any suspicion that a philosophical term is employed without any meaning or idea (as is but too frequent), we need but enquire, from what impression is that supposed idea derived? And if it be impossible to assign any, this will serve to confirm our suspicion. By bringing ideas into so clear a light we may reasonably hope to remove all dispute, which may arise, concerning their nature and reality.  



---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,
Do you believe that human beings have a free will to choose between good and evil?


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Here's my theory about Satan, Old Nick, Lucifer, Beelzebub, Mephistopheles, or whatever you choose to call Him/It. Be warned.  :-)

Basically, as I see it, no such entity as Satan exists, just as no such entity as God exists. Satan is just something that believers in God thought up to cover their own philosophical short-sightedness.

See, once these believers had invented a God who creates everything and runs everything according to His cosmic plan, they suddenly realized that they'd boxed themselves in and created a kind of nightmare for themselves. If, as they had already taught all their believer-followers, God runs *everything*, then *He* is the one responsible for child cancer, busloads of the faithful going over a cliff while on pilgrimage, floods, earthquakes and plagues that kill millions of innocent people, and well...just evil in general. If you actually believe that God *controls* all of these things, or worse *plans* all of this, then you pretty much have to admit that He's a psychotic thug.

So to *avoid* having to admit that they had invented PsychoThug God, believers came up with the Other Guy -- Satan -- someone they could blame for all of the shitty things they don't want to attribute to God.

This is the kind of convoluted logic people get into once they try to invent a God and claim that He controls everything. Someone points out that you just stated that God controls what you consider evil just as much as He controls what you consider good, and your philosophy is fucked. So you invent a new imaginary character and "amend" your philosophy so it reads, "OK, God controls everything...uh...*except* for that stuff we don't like...Satan controls that."

Now you know.

[ The preceding sermon was brought to you by Pastor Barry of the Blinding Light Church of the Presumptuous Assumption ]

:-)




  #yiv3882698130 -- #yiv3882698130ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv3882698130 #yiv3882698130ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv3882698130 #yiv3882698130ygrp-mkp #yiv3882698130hd {color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px 0;}#yiv3882698130 #yiv3882698130ygrp-mkp #yiv3882698130ads {margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv3882698130 #yiv3882698130ygrp-mkp .yiv3882698130ad {padding:0 0;}#yiv3882698130 #yiv3882698130ygrp-mkp .yiv3882698130ad p {margin:0;}#yiv3882698130 #yiv3882698130ygrp-mkp .yiv3882698130ad a {color:#0000ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv3882698130 #yiv3882698130ygrp-sponsor #yiv3882698130ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv3882698130 #yiv3882698130ygrp-sponsor #yiv3882698130ygrp-lc #yiv3882698130hd {margin:10px 0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv3882698130 #yiv3882698130ygrp-sponsor #yiv3882698130ygrp-lc .yiv3882698130ad {margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv3882698130 #yiv3882698130actions {font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv3882698130 #yiv3882698130activity {background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv3882698130 #yiv3882698130activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv3882698130 #yiv3882698130activity span:first-child {text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv3882698130 #yiv3882698130activity span a {color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}#yiv3882698130 #yiv3882698130activity span span {color:#ff7900;}#yiv3882698130 #yiv3882698130activity span .yiv3882698130underline {text-decoration:underline;}#yiv3882698130 .yiv3882698130attach {clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px 0;width:400px;}#yiv3882698130 .yiv3882698130attach div a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv3882698130 .yiv3882698130attach img {border:none;padding-right:5px;}#yiv3882698130 .yiv3882698130attach label {display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}#yiv3882698130 .yiv3882698130attach label a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv3882698130 blockquote {margin:0 0 0 4px;}#yiv3882698130 .yiv3882698130bold {font-family:Arial;font-size:13px;font-weight:700;}#yiv3882698130 .yiv3882698130bold a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv3882698130 dd.yiv3882698130last p a {font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv3882698130 dd.yiv3882698130last p span {margin-right:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv3882698130 dd.yiv3882698130last p span.yiv3882698130yshortcuts {margin-right:0;}#yiv3882698130 div.yiv3882698130attach-table div div a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv3882698130 div.yiv3882698130attach-table {width:400px;}#yiv3882698130 div.yiv3882698130file-title a, #yiv3882698130 div.yiv3882698130file-title a:active, #yiv3882698130 div.yiv3882698130file-title a:hover, #yiv3882698130 div.yiv3882698130file-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv3882698130 div.yiv3882698130photo-title a, #yiv3882698130 div.yiv3882698130photo-title a:active, #yiv3882698130 div.yiv3882698130photo-title a:hover, #yiv3882698130 div.yiv3882698130photo-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv3882698130 div#yiv3882698130ygrp-mlmsg #yiv3882698130ygrp-msg p a span.yiv3882698130yshortcuts {font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;font-weight:normal;}#yiv3882698130 .yiv3882698130green {color:#628c2a;}#yiv3882698130 .yiv3882698130MsoNormal {margin:0 0 0 0;}#yiv3882698130 o {font-size:0;}#yiv3882698130 #yiv3882698130photos div {float:left;width:72px;}#yiv3882698130 #yiv3882698130photos div div {border:1px solid #666666;height:62px;overflow:hidden;width:62px;}#yiv3882698130 #yiv3882698130photos div label {color:#666666;font-size:10px;overflow:hidden;text-align:center;white-space:nowrap;width:64px;}#yiv3882698130 #yiv3882698130reco-category {font-size:77%;}#yiv3882698130 #yiv3882698130reco-desc {font-size:77%;}#yiv3882698130 .yiv3882698130replbq {margin:4px;}#yiv3882698130 #yiv3882698130ygrp-actbar div a:first-child {margin-right:2px;padding-right:5px;}#yiv3882698130 #yiv3882698130ygrp-mlmsg {font-size:13px;font-family:Arial, helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv3882698130 #yiv3882698130ygrp-mlmsg table {font-size:inherit;font:100%;}#yiv3882698130 #yiv3882698130ygrp-mlmsg select, #yiv3882698130 input, #yiv3882698130 textarea {font:99% Arial, Helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv3882698130 #yiv3882698130ygrp-mlmsg pre, #yiv3882698130 code {font:115% monospace;}#yiv3882698130 #yiv3882698130ygrp-mlmsg * {line-height:1.22em;}#yiv3882698130 #yiv3882698130ygrp-mlmsg #yiv3882698130logo {padding-bottom:10px;}#yiv3882698130 #yiv3882698130ygrp-msg p a {font-family:Verdana;}#yiv3882698130 #yiv3882698130ygrp-msg p#yiv3882698130attach-count span {color:#1E66AE;font-weight:700;}#yiv3882698130 #yiv3882698130ygrp-reco #yiv3882698130reco-head {color:#ff7900;font-weight:700;}#yiv3882698130 #yiv3882698130ygrp-reco {margin-bottom:20px;padding:0px;}#yiv3882698130 #yiv3882698130ygrp-sponsor #yiv3882698130ov li a {font-size:130%;text-decoration:none;}#yiv3882698130 #yiv3882698130ygrp-sponsor #yiv3882698130ov li {font-size:77%;list-style-type:square;padding:6px 0;}#yiv3882698130 #yiv3882698130ygrp-sponsor #yiv3882698130ov ul {margin:0;padding:0 0 0 8px;}#yiv3882698130 #yiv3882698130ygrp-text {font-family:Georgia;}#yiv3882698130 #yiv3882698130ygrp-text p {margin:0 0 1em 0;}#yiv3882698130 #yiv3882698130ygrp-text tt {font-size:120%;}#yiv3882698130 #yiv3882698130ygrp-vital ul li:last-child {border-right:none !important;}#yiv3882698130

[[e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

David Hume was a Scottish historian, philosopher, economist, diplomat and essayist known today especially for his radical philosophical empiricism and scepticism. His first important work, and some others, 'fell dead-born from the press', according to his own recollection.

'Attention to Hume's philosophical works grew after the German philosopher Immanuel Kant, in his Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics (1783), credited Hume with awakening him from "dogmatic slumbers".'


'According to Schopenhauer, "there is more to be learned from each page of David Hume than from the collected philosophical works of Hegel, Herbart and Schleiermacher taken together."'


'A. J. Ayer, while introducing his classic exposition of logical positivism in 1936, claimed: "The views which are put forward in this treatise derive from ... doctrines ... which are themselves the logical outcome of the empiricism of Berkeley and David Hume." '


'Albert Einstein, in 1915, wrote that he was inspired by Hume's positivism when formulating his theory of special relativity.'


'Hume originated bundle theory: the ontological theory about objecthood in which an object consists only of a collection (bundle) of properties, relations or tropes.' Though it is now thought that the first bundle theorist was Buddha, who posited the idea of no-self, that the self was simply a bundle of perceptions strung together under a uniting concept, and was thus was illusory.



'Hume influenced the Founding Fathers of the United States with his combination of scientific methodology gleaned from Isaac Newton and his work building on the political philosophy of John Locke. He was friends with Jean Jacques Rousseau, John Adams, and Benjamin Franklin.'



In other words, Hume was likely a true believer's worst nightmare. He died in 1776.


Hey, I mostly spell the same way as Hume, you never took me to account for that.


I do like that chart you posted showing that Yahweh killed 203,834 times more people by direct instigation than his alter-ego lackey, Satan. Not someone you would want to live in your neighbourhood. Charles Manson would be envious, if he was capable of envy.



'The mind is endless. You put me in a dark solitary cell, and to you that's the end, to me it's the beginning, it's the universe in there, there's a world in there, and I'm free.' —Charles Manson




---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

While I thank Anartaxius for his creative submission, I think he has the Blinding Light Church of the Presumptuous Assumption (a product of that holy alliance known as the Firesign Theater) with another congregation of somewhat lesser worth and notoriety. Also, although Xeno means well, the honorary title of Pastor ("He who leadeth the sheep to the fleecing") is neither to be confused with the lesser title of Pester ("He who merely annoyeth the sheep by poking them") or even Fester ("He who poketh the sheep so often that their wounds become infected and smelly"). Here is an example of the latter:





As for that other Hume-boy he's talking about, how can you trust anyone who spells words like 'vigor' and 'color' as 'vigour' and 'colour'? He's obviously some kinda furriner, probably from Scorpionland, and thus possibly evil. Even though evil doesn't exist.





From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, March 23, 2015 4:22 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?



jr_esq, Barry's job is not 'pastor', it's more like 'pester'. It is a highly dignified profession, the exact opposite of what a 'pastor' does (enlightenment, in other words, is a great undoing, undoing what pastors try to do). Barry writes quickly, but sometimes he makes minor spelling errors, due to haste, hence he meant to say 'Pester Barry of the Grinding Might Lurch of the Voluptuous Resumption (more details of the church can be found online at http://tinyurl.com/ygvf8zb http://tinyurl.com/ygvf8zb as part of of the complete training required to become a true teacher of TM in all things. Of course Barry has eschewed this learning as he has moved on, leaving with the current crop of followers of M to carry on this tradition).


Whether or not free will exists, it is not necessary to choose between good and evil because those concepts are simply in the imagination of human beings. In the world, there is only what happens, it is neither good nor bad. The mind maps such concepts like good and evil onto the world, but they are not real, but they may seem real to a mind that is unclear about the relationship of thought to what happens in the world.

Here is a great explanation of how that happens (David Hume 1689):


OF THE ORIGIN OF IDEAS. 11.Every one will readily allow, that there is a considerable difference between the perceptions of the mind, when a man feels the pain of excessive heat, or the pleasure of moderate warmth, and when he afterwards recalls to his memory this sensation, or anticipates it by his imagination. These faculties may mimic or copy the perceptions of the senses; but they never can entirely reach the force and vivacity of the original sentiment. The utmost we say of them, even when they operate with greatest vigour, is, that they represent their object in so lively a manner, that we could almost say we feel or see it: But, except the mind be disordered by disease or madness, they never can arrive at such a pitch of vivacity, as to render these perceptions altogether undistinguishable. All the colours of poetry, however splendid, can never paint natural objects in such a manner as to make the description be taken for a real landskip [landscape]. The most lively thought is still inferior to the dullest sensation.


We may observe a like distinction to run through all the other perceptions of the mind. A man in a fit of anger, is actuated in a very different manner from one who only thinks of that emotion. If you tell me, that any person is in love, I easily understand your meaning, and form a just conception of his situation; but never can mistake that conception for the real disorders and agitations of the passion. When we reflect on our past sentiments and affections, our thought is a faithful mirror, and copies its objects truly; but the colours which it employs are faint and dull, in comparison of those in which our original perceptions were clothed. It requires no nice discernment or metaphysical head to mark the distinction between them.


12.Here therefore we may divide all the perceptions of the mind into two classes or species, which are distinguished by their different degrees of force and vivacity. The less forcible and lively are commonly denominated Thoughts or Ideas. The other species want a name in our language, and in most others; I suppose, because it was not requisite for any, but philosophical purposes, to rank them under a general term or appellation. Let us, therefore, use a little freedom, and call them Impressions; employing that word in a sense somewhat different from the usual. By the term impression, then, I mean all our more lively perceptions, when we hear, or see, or feel, or love, or hate, or desire, or will. And impressions are distinguished from ideas, which are the less lively perceptions, of which we are conscious, when we reflect on any of those sensations or movements above mentioned.


13.Nothing, at first view, may seem more unbounded than the thought of man, which not only escapes all human power and authority, but is not even restrained within the limits of nature and reality. To form monsters, and join incongruous shapes and appearances, costs the imagination no more trouble than to conceive the most natural and familiar objects. And while the body is confined to one planet, along which it creeps with pain and difficulty; the thought can in an instant transport us into the most distant regions of the universe; or even beyond the universe, into the unbounded chaos, where nature is supposed to lie in total confusion. What never was seen, or heard of, may yet be conceived; nor is any thing beyond the power of thought, except what implies an absolute contradiction.


But though our thought seems to possess this unbounded liberty, we shall find, upon a nearer examination, that it is really confined within very narrow limits, and that all this creative power of the mind amounts to no more than the faculty of compounding, transposing, augmenting, or diminishing the materials afforded us by the senses and experience. When we think of a golden mountain, we only join two consistent ideas, gold, and mountain, with which we were formerly acquainted. A virtuous horse we can conceive; because, from our own feeling, we can conceive virtue; and this we may unite to the figure and shape of a horse, which is an animal familiar to us. In short, all the materials of thinking are derived either from our outward or inward sentiment: the mixture and composition of these belongs alone to the mind and will. Or, to express myself in philosophical language, all our ideas or more feeble perceptions are copies of our impressions or more lively ones.


14.To prove this, the two following arguments will, I hope, be sufficient. First, when we analyze our thoughts or ideas, however compounded or sublime, we always find that they resolve themselves into such simple ideas as were copied from a precedent feeling or sentiment. Even those ideas, which, at first view, seem the most wide of this origin, are found, upon a nearer scrutiny, to be derived from it. The idea of God, as meaning an infinitely intelligent, wise, and good Being, arises from reflecting on the operations of our own mind, and augmenting, without limit, those qualities of goodness and wisdom. We may prosecute this enquiry to what length we please; where we shall always find, that every idea which we examine is copied from a similar impression. Those who would assert that this position is not universally true nor without exception, have only one, and that an easy method of refuting it; by producing that idea, which, in their opinion, is not derived from this source. It will then be incumbent on us, if we would maintain our doctrine, to produce the impression, or lively perception, which corresponds to it.


15.Secondly. If it happen, from a defect of the organ, that a man is not susceptible of any species of sensation, we always find that he is as little susceptible of the correspondent ideas. A blind man can form no notion of colours; a deaf man of sounds. Restore either of them that sense in which he is deficient; by opening this new inlet for his sensations, you also open an inlet for the ideas; and he finds no difficulty in conceiving these objects. The case is the same, if the object, proper for exciting any sensation, has never been applied to the organ. A Laplander or Negro has no notion of the relish of wine. And though there are few or no instances of a like deficiency in the mind, where a person has never felt or is wholly incapable of a sentiment or passion that belongs to his species; yet we find the same observation to take place in a less degree. A man of mild manners can form no idea of inveterate revenge or cruelty; nor can a selfish heart easily conceive the heights of friendship and generosity. It is readily allowed, that other beings may possess many senses of which we can have no conception; because the ideas of them have never been introduced to us in the only manner by which an idea can have access to the mind, to wit, by the actual feeling and sensation.


16.There is, however, one contradictory phenomenon, which may prove that it is not absolutely impossible for ideas to arise, independent of their correspondent impressions. I believe it will readily be allowed, that the several distinct ideas of colour, which enter by the eye, or those of sound, which are conveyed by the ear, are really different from each other; though, at the same time, resembling. Now if this be true of different colours, it must be no less so of the different shades of the same colour; and each shade produces a distinct idea, independent of the rest. For if this should be denied, it is possible, by the continual gradation of shades, to run a colour insensibly into what is most remote from it; and if you will not allow any of the means to be different, you cannot, without absurdity, deny the extremes to be the same. Suppose, therefore, a person to have enjoyed his sight for thirty years, and to have become perfectly acquainted with colours of all kinds except one particular shade of blue, for instance, which it never has been his fortune to meet with. Let all the different shades of that colour, except that single one, be placed before him, descending gradually from the deepest to the lightest; it is plain that he will perceive a blank, where that shade is wanting, and will be sensible that there is a greater distance in that place between the contiguous colours than in any other. Now I ask, whether it be possible for him, from his own imagination, to supply this deficiency, and raise up to himself the idea of that particular shade, though it had never been conveyed to him by his senses? I believe there are few but will be of opinion that he can: and this may serve as a proof that the simple ideas are not always, in every instance, derived from the correspondent impressions; though this instance is so singular, that it is scarcely worth our observing, and does not merit that for it alone we should alter our general maxim.


17.Here, therefore, is a proposition, which not only seems, in itself, simple and intelligible; but, if a proper use were made of it, might render every dispute equally intelligible, and banish all that jargon, which has so long taken possession of metaphysical reasonings, and drawn disgrace upon them. All ideas, especially abstract ones, are naturally faint and obscure: the mind has but a slender hold of them: they are apt to be confounded with other resembling ideas; and when we have often employed any term, though without a distinct meaning, we are apt to imagine it has a determinate idea annexed to it. On the contrary, all impressions, that is, all sensations, either outward or inward, are strong and vivid: the limits between them are more exactly determined: nor is it easy to fall into any error or mistake with regard to them. When we entertain, therefore, any suspicion that a philosophical term is employed without any meaning or idea (as is but too frequent), we need but enquire, from what impression is that supposed idea derived? And if it be impossible to assign any, this will serve to confirm our suspicion. By bringing ideas into so clear a light we may reasonably hope to remove all dispute, which may arise, concerning their nature and reality.






---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,

Do you believe that human beings have a free will to choose between good and evil?


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Here's my theory about Satan, Old Nick, Lucifer, Beelzebub, Mephistopheles, or whatever you choose to call Him/It. Be warned. :-)

Basically, as I see it, no such entity as Satan exists, just as no such entity as God exists. Satan is just something that believers in God thought up to cover their own philosophical short-sightedness.

See, once these believers had invented a God who creates everything and runs everything according to His cosmic plan, they suddenly realized that they'd boxed themselves in and created a kind of nightmare for themselves. If, as they had already taught all their believer-followers, God runs *everything*, then *He* is the one responsible for child cancer, busloads of the faithful going over a cliff while on pilgrimage, floods, earthquakes and plagues that kill millions of innocent people, and well...just evil in general. If you actually believe that God *controls* all of these things, or worse *plans* all of this, then you pretty much have to admit that He's a psychotic thug.

So to *avoid* having to admit that they had invented PsychoThug God, believers came up with the Other Guy -- Satan -- someone they could blame for all of the shitty things they don't want to attribute to God.

This is the kind of convoluted logic people get into once they try to invent a God and claim that He controls everything. Someone points out that you just stated that God controls what you consider evil just as much as He controls what you consider good, and your philosophy is fucked. So you invent a new imaginary character and "amend" your philosophy so it reads, "OK, God controls everything...uh...*except* for that stuff we don't like...Satan controls that."

Now you know.

[ The preceding sermon was brought to you by Pastor Barry of the Blinding Light Church of the Presumptuous Assumption ]

:-)

[[e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

"Passive-aggressive behavior is the indirect expression of hostility, such as through procrastination, stubbornness, sullenness, or deliberate or repeated failure to accomplish requested tasks for which one is (often explicitly) responsible."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive-aggressive_behavior http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive-aggressive_behavior

---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

jr_esq, Barry's job is not 'pastor', it's more like 'pester'. It is a highly dignified profession, the exact opposite of what a 'pastor' does (enlightenment, in other words, is a great undoing, undoing what pastors try to do). Barry writes quickly, but sometimes he makes minor spelling errors, due to haste, hence he meant to say 'Pester Barry of the Grinding Might Lurch of the Voluptuous Resumption (more details of the church can be found online at http://tinyurl.com/ygvf8zb http://tinyurl.com/ygvf8zb as part of of the complete training required to become a true teacher of TM in all things. Of course Barry has eschewed this learning as he has moved on, leaving with the current crop of followers of M to carry on this tradition).

Non sequitur.


Whether or not free will exists, it is not necessary to choose between good and evil because those concepts are simply in the imagination of human beings. In the world, there is only what happens, it is neither good nor bad. The mind maps such concepts like good and evil onto the world, but they are not real, but they may seem real to a mind that is unclear about the relationship of thought to what happens in the world.

Non sequitur.

<SNIP>

Pastor Barry,

Do you believe that human beings have a free will to choose between good and evil?g God, believers came up with the Other Guy -- Satan -- someone they could blame for all of the shitty things they don't want to attribute to God.

[TurquoiseBee [e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

Human beings have free will. However, there is no such thing as "good" or "evil," so your question is irrelevant. Thanks for playing, and leave your donation in the plate.  :-)

From: "***@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com h
Sent: Monday, March 23, 2015 2:16 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

  Pastor Barry,
Do you believe that human beings have a free will to choose between good and evil?




---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Here's my theory about Satan, Old Nick, Lucifer, Beelzebub, Mephistopheles, or whatever you choose to call Him/It. Be warned.  :-)

Basically, as I see it, no such entity as Satan exists, just as no such entity as God exists. Satan is just something that believers in God thought up to cover their own philosophical short-sightedness.

See, once these believers had invented a God who creates everything and runs everything according to His cosmic plan, they suddenly realized that they'd boxed themselves in and created a kind of nightmare for themselves. If, as they had already taught all their believer-followers, God runs *everything*, then *He* is the one responsible for child cancer, busloads of the faithful going over a cliff while on pilgrimage, floods, earthquakes and plagues that kill millions of innocent people, and well...just evil in general. If you actually believe that God *controls* all of these things, or worse *plans* all of this, then you pretty much have to admit that He's a psychotic thug.

So to *avoid* having to admit that they had invented PsychoThug God, believers came up with the Other Guy -- Satan -- someone they could blame for all of the shitty things they don't want to attribute to God.

This is the kind of convoluted logic people get into once they try to invent a God and claim that He controls everything. Someone points out that you just stated that God controls what you consider evil just as much as He controls what you consider good, and your philosophy is fucked. So you invent a new imaginary character and "amend" your philosophy so it reads, "OK, God controls everything...uh...*except* for that stuff we don't like...Satan controls that."

Now you know.

[ The preceding sermon was brought to you by Pastor Barry of the Blinding Light Church of the Presumptuous Assumption ]

:-)



#yiv8700821047 #yiv8700821047 -- #yiv8700821047ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv8700821047 #yiv8700821047ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv8700821047 #yiv8700821047ygrp-mkp #yiv8700821047hd {color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px 0;}#yiv8700821047 #yiv8700821047ygrp-mkp #yiv8700821047ads {margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv8700821047 #yiv8700821047ygrp-mkp .yiv8700821047ad {padding:0 0;}#yiv8700821047 #yiv8700821047ygrp-mkp .yiv8700821047ad p {margin:0;}#yiv8700821047 #yiv8700821047ygrp-mkp .yiv8700821047ad a {color:#0000ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv8700821047 #yiv8700821047ygrp-sponsor #yiv8700821047ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv8700821047 #yiv8700821047ygrp-sponsor #yiv8700821047ygrp-lc #yiv8700821047hd {margin:10px 0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv8700821047 #yiv8700821047ygrp-sponsor #yiv8700821047ygrp-lc .yiv8700821047ad {margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv8700821047 #yiv8700821047actions {font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv8700821047 #yiv8700821047activity {background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv8700821047 #yiv8700821047activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv8700821047 #yiv8700821047activity span:first-child {text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv8700821047 #yiv8700821047activity span a {color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}#yiv8700821047 #yiv8700821047activity span span {color:#ff7900;}#yiv8700821047 #yiv8700821047activity span .yiv8700821047underline {text-decoration:underline;}#yiv8700821047 .yiv8700821047attach {clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px 0;width:400px;}#yiv8700821047 .yiv8700821047attach div a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv8700821047 .yiv8700821047attach img {border:none;padding-right:5px;}#yiv8700821047 .yiv8700821047attach label {display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}#yiv8700821047 .yiv8700821047attach label a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv8700821047 blockquote {margin:0 0 0 4px;}#yiv8700821047 .yiv8700821047bold {font-family:Arial;font-size:13px;font-weight:700;}#yiv8700821047 .yiv8700821047bold a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv8700821047 dd.yiv8700821047last p a {font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv8700821047 dd.yiv8700821047last p span {margin-right:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv8700821047 dd.yiv8700821047last p span.yiv8700821047yshortcuts {margin-right:0;}#yiv8700821047 div.yiv8700821047attach-table div div a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv8700821047 div.yiv8700821047attach-table {width:400px;}#yiv8700821047 div.yiv8700821047file-title a, #yiv8700821047 div.yiv8700821047file-title a:active, #yiv8700821047 div.yiv8700821047file-title a:hover, #yiv8700821047 div.yiv8700821047file-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv8700821047 div.yiv8700821047photo-title a, #yiv8700821047 div.yiv8700821047photo-title a:active, #yiv8700821047 div.yiv8700821047photo-title a:hover, #yiv8700821047 div.yiv8700821047photo-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv8700821047 div#yiv8700821047ygrp-mlmsg #yiv8700821047ygrp-msg p a span.yiv8700821047yshortcuts {font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;font-weight:normal;}#yiv8700821047 .yiv8700821047green {color:#628c2a;}#yiv8700821047 .yiv8700821047MsoNormal {margin:0 0 0 0;}#yiv8700821047 o {font-size:0;}#yiv8700821047 #yiv8700821047photos div {float:left;width:72px;}#yiv8700821047 #yiv8700821047photos div div {border:1px solid #666666;height:62px;overflow:hidden;width:62px;}#yiv8700821047 #yiv8700821047photos div label {color:#666666;font-size:10px;overflow:hidden;text-align:center;white-space:nowrap;width:64px;}#yiv8700821047 #yiv8700821047reco-category {font-size:77%;}#yiv8700821047 #yiv8700821047reco-desc {font-size:77%;}#yiv8700821047 .yiv8700821047replbq {margin:4px;}#yiv8700821047 #yiv8700821047ygrp-actbar div a:first-child {margin-right:2px;padding-right:5px;}#yiv8700821047 #yiv8700821047ygrp-mlmsg {font-size:13px;font-family:Arial, helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv8700821047 #yiv8700821047ygrp-mlmsg table {font-size:inherit;font:100%;}#yiv8700821047 #yiv8700821047ygrp-mlmsg select, #yiv8700821047 input, #yiv8700821047 textarea {font:99% Arial, Helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv8700821047 #yiv8700821047ygrp-mlmsg pre, #yiv8700821047 code {font:115% monospace;}#yiv8700821047 #yiv8700821047ygrp-mlmsg * {line-height:1.22em;}#yiv8700821047 #yiv8700821047ygrp-mlmsg #yiv8700821047logo {padding-bottom:10px;}#yiv8700821047 #yiv8700821047ygrp-msg p a {font-family:Verdana;}#yiv8700821047 #yiv8700821047ygrp-msg p#yiv8700821047attach-count span {color:#1E66AE;font-weight:700;}#yiv8700821047 #yiv8700821047ygrp-reco #yiv8700821047reco-head {color:#ff7900;font-weight:700;}#yiv8700821047 #yiv8700821047ygrp-reco {margin-bottom:20px;padding:0px;}#yiv8700821047 #yiv8700821047ygrp-sponsor #yiv8700821047ov li a {font-size:130%;text-decoration:none;}#yiv8700821047 #yiv8700821047ygrp-sponsor #yiv8700821047ov li {font-size:77%;list-style-type:square;padding:6px 0;}#yiv8700821047 #yiv8700821047ygrp-sponsor #yiv8700821047ov ul {margin:0;padding:0 0 0 8px;}#yiv8700821047 #yiv8700821047ygrp-text {font-family:Georgia;}#yiv8700821047 #yiv8700821047ygrp-text p {margin:0 0 1em 0;}#yiv8700821047 #yiv8700821047ygrp-text tt {font-size:120%;}#yiv8700821047 #yiv8700821047ygrp-vital ul li:last-child {border-right:none !important;}#yiv8700821047

[[e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

Pastor Barry,

If you say there is no "good" or "evil", how do explain the fact that groups, like the Islamic State, kill innocent people in Iraq and Syria?

[[e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

About 12,000 or so people die every day. About 10% of those are killed by other people one way or another. The Islamic State is one of those ways. This is what happens. One method of reducing those killings is to bomb or send troops to kill the members of the Islamic State, by substituting other killings in place of the ones the Islamic State perpetrates. Then there is the question of who or what is killing the other 11,000 people who die every day, which is a far greater number. From their point of view, the killers in the Islamic State are doing their god-given duty to remove infidels and betrayers of their faith from the world, a good thing. We don't know what the people killed think of it, but those in the West do not seem in favour of the idea, thinking it a bad thing. In almost every year, anyone born more that 120 years ago is dead. As pointed out recently God killed something like 2,000,000 people as reported in the Bible, while Satan, bless his reticent soul, only 10. So it would appear the best killers are in the service of what is called 'good', for a good cause, by their own estimation. They truly believe something is good and worthy, and carry out killings in the service of that. That probably means we should be rather suspicious of the good people who want to purify their environment in the service of that good. For our own good, maybe we should kill them, just to be on the safe side.

---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,

If you say there is no "good" or "evil", how do explain the fact that groups, like the Islamic State, kill innocent people in Iraq and Syria?

[[e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

Xeno,

You appear to be confused in determining what is "good" and "evil". A person, who who treats you well, is a person who has done a good thing for you and is considered to be a good person. However, if someone kills you for reasons unknown to you, you would call that an evil deed. The person doing the deed would be an evil doer for you. The evil deed and the evil perpetrator cannot be good for you. That is the basic difference between good and evil. Please, tell us if you agree with these statements. If not, explain why not.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

About 12,000 or so people die every day. About 10% of those are killed by other people one way or another. The Islamic State is one of those ways. This is what happens. One method of reducing those killings is to bomb or send troops to kill the members of the Islamic State, by substituting other killings in place of the ones the Islamic State perpetrates. Then there is the question of who or what is killing the other 11,000 people who die every day, which is a far greater number. From their point of view, the killers in the Islamic State are doing their god-given duty to remove infidels and betrayers of their faith from the world, a good thing. We don't know what the people killed think of it, but those in the West do not seem in favour of the idea, thinking it a bad thing. In almost every year, anyone born more that 120 years ago is dead. As pointed out recently God killed something like 2,000,000 people as reported in the Bible, while Satan, bless his reticent soul, only 10. So it would appear the best killers are in the service of what is called 'good', for a good cause, by their own estimation. They truly believe something is good and worthy, and carry out killings in the service of that. That probably means we should be rather suspicious of the good people who want to purify their environment in the service of that good. For our own good, maybe we should kill them, just to be on the safe side.

---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,

If you say there is no "good" or "evil", how do explain the fact that groups, like the Islamic State, kill innocent people in Iraq and Syria?

[[e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

I am not confused at all. Of course I do not agree with your statements. If someone killed me for reasons unknown to me, not only would I be unable to call the deed anything, because I would be dead, there would be no known information available to me, even supposing that such data could pass the life-death barrier, that would enable me to determine whether the act of my demise was 'good' or 'evil', for you specified I would not be given that information.

Suppose, for example, my death was orchestrated (say by ISIS under the clandestine influence of Zeus) so that a series of events were prevented that would have led to the destruction of the universe, including your death by horrible, ÃŒber, agonising pain and the death of everyone on Earth and elsewhere in the universe (were those others to exist). I would not have been given any information why I was killed. My death would then be the result of evil even though the purpose was to prevent everyone else from being killed?


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Xeno,

You appear to be confused in determining what is "good" and "evil". A person, who who treats you well, is a person who has done a good thing for you and is considered to be a good person. However, if someone kills you for reasons unknown to you, you would call that an evil deed. The person doing the deed would be an evil doer for you. The evil deed and the evil perpetrator cannot be good for you. That is the basic difference between good and evil. Please, tell us if you agree with these statements. If not, explain why not.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

About 12,000 or so people die every day. About 10% of those are killed by other people one way or another. The Islamic State is one of those ways. This is what happens. One method of reducing those killings is to bomb or send troops to kill the members of the Islamic State, by substituting other killings in place of the ones the Islamic State perpetrates. Then there is the question of who or what is killing the other 11,000 people who die every day, which is a far greater number. From their point of view, the killers in the Islamic State are doing their god-given duty to remove infidels and betrayers of their faith from the world, a good thing. We don't know what the people killed think of it, but those in the West do not seem in favour of the idea, thinking it a bad thing. In almost every year, anyone born more that 120 years ago is dead. As pointed out recently God killed something like 2,000,000 people as reported in the Bible, while Satan, bless his reticent soul, only 10. So it would appear the best killers are in the service of what is called 'good', for a good cause, by their own estimation. They truly believe something is good and worthy, and carry out killings in the service of that. That probably means we should be rather suspicious of the good people who want to purify their environment in the service of that good. For our own good, maybe we should kill them, just to be on the safe side.

---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,

If you say there is no "good" or "evil", how do explain the fact that groups, like the Islamic State, kill innocent people in Iraq and Syria?

[[e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

This does seem confusing. Go figure.

"The will itself, strictly speaking, has no determining ground; insofar as it can determine choice, it is instead practical reason itself." - I. Kant

---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

I am not confused at all. Of course I do not agree with your statements. If someone killed me for reasons unknown to me, not only would I be unable to call the deed anything, because I would be dead, there would be no known information available to me, even supposing that such data could pass the life-death barrier, that would enable me to determine whether the act of my demise was 'good' or 'evil', for you specified I would not be given that information.

Suppose, for example, my death was orchestrated (say by ISIS under the clandestine influence of Zeus) so that a series of events were prevented that would have led to the destruction of the universe, including your death by horrible, ÃŒber, agonising pain and the death of everyone on Earth and elsewhere in the universe (were those others to exist). I would not have been given any information why I was killed. My death would then be the result of evil even though the purpose was to prevent everyone else from being killed?


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Xeno,

You appear to be confused in determining what is "good" and "evil". A person, who who treats you well, is a person who has done a good thing for you and is considered to be a good person. However, if someone kills you for reasons unknown to you, you would call that an evil deed. The person doing the deed would be an evil doer for you. The evil deed and the evil perpetrator cannot be good for you. That is the basic difference between good and evil. Please, tell us if you agree with these statements. If not, explain why not.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

About 12,000 or so people die every day. About 10% of those are killed by other people one way or another. The Islamic State is one of those ways. This is what happens. One method of reducing those killings is to bomb or send troops to kill the members of the Islamic State, by substituting other killings in place of the ones the Islamic State perpetrates. Then there is the question of who or what is killing the other 11,000 people who die every day, which is a far greater number. From their point of view, the killers in the Islamic State are doing their god-given duty to remove infidels and betrayers of their faith from the world, a good thing. We don't know what the people killed think of it, but those in the West do not seem in favour of the idea, thinking it a bad thing. In almost every year, anyone born more that 120 years ago is dead. As pointed out recently God killed something like 2,000,000 people as reported in the Bible, while Satan, bless his reticent soul, only 10. So it would appear the best killers are in the service of what is called 'good', for a good cause, by their own estimation. They truly believe something is good and worthy, and carry out killings in the service of that. That probably means we should be rather suspicious of the good people who want to purify their environment in the service of that good. For our own good, maybe we should kill them, just to be on the safe side.

---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,

If you say there is no "good" or "evil", how do explain the fact that groups, like the Islamic State, kill innocent people in Iraq and Syria?

[[e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

Xeno,

Hypothetically, those people who witnessed your death would know that you were killed indiscriminately by an evil doer. If there is an afterlife, you would know why an evil doer killed you.


Your assumption that your death was orchestrated by Zeus is misleading and is inconsistent with your position as an atheist. As an atheist, you can only say that you were killed for no apparent reason. You can't blame an angry god or bad karma for that matter. If anyone here on the forum witnessed it, we would know who killed you and would report the matter to the police who would eventually apprehend the perpetrator and find the reason why he killed you.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

I am not confused at all. Of course I do not agree with your statements. If someone killed me for reasons unknown to me, not only would I be unable to call the deed anything, because I would be dead, there would be no known information available to me, even supposing that such data could pass the life-death barrier, that would enable me to determine whether the act of my demise was 'good' or 'evil', for you specified I would not be given that information.

Suppose, for example, my death was orchestrated (say by ISIS under the clandestine influence of Zeus) so that a series of events were prevented that would have led to the destruction of the universe, including your death by horrible, ÃŒber, agonising pain and the death of everyone on Earth and elsewhere in the universe (were those others to exist). I would not have been given any information why I was killed. My death would then be the result of evil even though the purpose was to prevent everyone else from being killed?


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Xeno,

You appear to be confused in determining what is "good" and "evil". A person, who who treats you well, is a person who has done a good thing for you and is considered to be a good person. However, if someone kills you for reasons unknown to you, you would call that an evil deed. The person doing the deed would be an evil doer for you. The evil deed and the evil perpetrator cannot be good for you. That is the basic difference between good and evil. Please, tell us if you agree with these statements. If not, explain why not.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

About 12,000 or so people die every day. About 10% of those are killed by other people one way or another. The Islamic State is one of those ways. This is what happens. One method of reducing those killings is to bomb or send troops to kill the members of the Islamic State, by substituting other killings in place of the ones the Islamic State perpetrates. Then there is the question of who or what is killing the other 11,000 people who die every day, which is a far greater number. From their point of view, the killers in the Islamic State are doing their god-given duty to remove infidels and betrayers of their faith from the world, a good thing. We don't know what the people killed think of it, but those in the West do not seem in favour of the idea, thinking it a bad thing. In almost every year, anyone born more that 120 years ago is dead. As pointed out recently God killed something like 2,000,000 people as reported in the Bible, while Satan, bless his reticent soul, only 10. So it would appear the best killers are in the service of what is called 'good', for a good cause, by their own estimation. They truly believe something is good and worthy, and carry out killings in the service of that. That probably means we should be rather suspicious of the good people who want to purify their environment in the service of that good. For our own good, maybe we should kill them, just to be on the safe side.

---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,

If you say there is no "good" or "evil", how do explain the fact that groups, like the Islamic State, kill innocent people in Iraq and Syria?

[[e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Xeno,

Hypothetically, those people who witnessed your death would know that you were killed indiscriminately by an evil doer. If there is an afterlife, you would know why an evil doer killed you.


Others knowing how I died, does not mean that I would ever know, and were I neutral regarding the existence of good and evil, or did not believe that good and evil exist, it would not matter.


As for knowing something in an hypothetical afterlife, why would the knowledge of how I died be part of it. Suppose death came without perception or warning. Why would I know what happened. Are you privy to how information like this would pass the life-death barrier? If so, tell me the mechanics of it, how it would happen.


Your assumption that your death was orchestrated by Zeus is misleading and is inconsistent with your position as an atheist.


I did not specify who or what Zeus was. You assumed it was a god apparently. Suppose it was my wayward brother-in-law?


As an atheist, you can only say that you were killed for no apparent reason. You can't blame an angry god or bad karma for that matter.


1. First of all the primary killing in the example was ISIS, the doers of the deed, so likely I would have been killed for a 'good' reason, that I was an infidel.


2. If I were killed by a bullet to the head, that would be a reason I died. If one believes in cause and effect, then one could trace, theoretically, causes back to the beginning of the universe, in which case the beginning of the universe would be the cause of my death.


3.You can blame gods for anything you want. You can blame karma. Who says you cannot do this? For some reason, gods do not seem to mind being damned. Only people who believe in gods seem to mind this. If you blame karma, nothing seems to happen either, other than what normally happens. Saying Zeus did something does not mean I believe Zeus, as a god, exists. However I will state that Zeus as a god, has the same status as all other gods, that is, is defined as a god. If Zeus actually existed, all other gods would be subservient by definition.


If anyone here on the forum witnessed it, we would know who killed you and would report the matter to the police who would eventually apprehend the perpetrator and find the reason why he killed you.


You are assuming my death in this instance would be a crime. Not all crimes are solved. And if I were killed by ISIS, they probably would have worn black face masks, and so probably not be identified. And as I said, my death at the hands of ISIS would be a good thing in their estimation, not an evil thing. As you are a light-weight thinker, if they took you out as well, perhaps life on Earth would be improved as well, raising the bar of collective intelligence a tiny notch.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

I am not confused at all. Of course I do not agree with your statements. If someone killed me for reasons unknown to me, not only would I be unable to call the deed anything, because I would be dead, there would be no known information available to me, even supposing that such data could pass the life-death barrier, that would enable me to determine whether the act of my demise was 'good' or 'evil', for you specified I would not be given that information.

Suppose, for example, my death was orchestrated (say by ISIS under the clandestine influence of Zeus) so that a series of events were prevented that would have led to the destruction of the universe, including your death by horrible, ÃŒber, agonising pain and the death of everyone on Earth and elsewhere in the universe (were those others to exist). I would not have been given any information why I was killed. My death would then be the result of evil even though the purpose was to prevent everyone else from being killed?


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Xeno,

You appear to be confused in determining what is "good" and "evil". A person, who who treats you well, is a person who has done a good thing for you and is considered to be a good person. However, if someone kills you for reasons unknown to you, you would call that an evil deed. The person doing the deed would be an evil doer for you. The evil deed and the evil perpetrator cannot be good for you. That is the basic difference between good and evil. Please, tell us if you agree with these statements. If not, explain why not.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

About 12,000 or so people die every day. About 10% of those are killed by other people one way or another. The Islamic State is one of those ways. This is what happens. One method of reducing those killings is to bomb or send troops to kill the members of the Islamic State, by substituting other killings in place of the ones the Islamic State perpetrates. Then there is the question of who or what is killing the other 11,000 people who die every day, which is a far greater number. From their point of view, the killers in the Islamic State are doing their god-given duty to remove infidels and betrayers of their faith from the world, a good thing. We don't know what the people killed think of it, but those in the West do not seem in favour of the idea, thinking it a bad thing. In almost every year, anyone born more that 120 years ago is dead. As pointed out recently God killed something like 2,000,000 people as reported in the Bible, while Satan, bless his reticent soul, only 10. So it would appear the best killers are in the service of what is called 'good', for a good cause, by their own estimation. They truly believe something is good and worthy, and carry out killings in the service of that. That probably means we should be rather suspicious of the good people who want to purify their environment in the service of that good. For our own good, maybe we should kill them, just to be on the safe side.

---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,

If you say there is no "good" or "evil", how do explain the fact that groups, like the Islamic State, kill innocent people in Iraq and Syria?

[TurquoiseBee [e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

Surveys of deaths in the two Iraq wars show that (depending on the survey), between 151,000 to 1,000,000 Iraqis died in the two US-led wars between 2003 and 2013. One study, conducted by the Iraq Body Count project, found that 174,000 Iraqis were reported killed between 2003 and 2013, with between 112,000-123,000 of those killed being civilian noncombatants. Meanwhile, the total number of US troops killed during this period was 4,491. 

Now, JR, please tell me. Was that "good" or "evil?"

From: "***@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 3:14 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

  About 12,000 or so people die every day. About 10% of those are killed by other people one way or another. The Islamic State is one of those ways. This is what happens. One method of reducing those killings is to bomb or send troops to kill the members of the Islamic State, by substituting other killings in place of the ones the Islamic State perpetrates. Then there is the question of who or what is killing the other 11,000 people who die every day, which is a far greater number. From their point of view, the killers in the Islamic State are doing their god-given duty to remove infidels and betrayers of their faith from the world, a good thing. We don't know what the people killed think of it, but those in the West do not seem in favour of the idea, thinking it a bad thing. In almost every year, anyone born more that 120 years ago is dead. As pointed out recently God killed something like 2,000,000 people as reported in the Bible, while Satan, bless his reticent soul, only 10. So it would appear the best killers are in the service of what is called 'good', for a good cause, by their own estimation. They truly believe something is good and worthy, and carry out killings in the service of that. That probably means we should be rather suspicious of the good people who want to purify their environment in the service of that good. For our own good, maybe we should kill them, just to be on the safe side.



---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,
If you say there is no "good" or "evil", how do explain the fact that groups, like the Islamic State, kill innocent people in Iraq and Syria? #yiv1274563910 #yiv1274563910 -- #yiv1274563910ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv1274563910 #yiv1274563910ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv1274563910 #yiv1274563910ygrp-mkp #yiv1274563910hd {color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px 0;}#yiv1274563910 #yiv1274563910ygrp-mkp #yiv1274563910ads {margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv1274563910 #yiv1274563910ygrp-mkp .yiv1274563910ad {padding:0 0;}#yiv1274563910 #yiv1274563910ygrp-mkp .yiv1274563910ad p {margin:0;}#yiv1274563910 #yiv1274563910ygrp-mkp .yiv1274563910ad a {color:#0000ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv1274563910 #yiv1274563910ygrp-sponsor #yiv1274563910ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv1274563910 #yiv1274563910ygrp-sponsor #yiv1274563910ygrp-lc #yiv1274563910hd {margin:10px 0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv1274563910 #yiv1274563910ygrp-sponsor #yiv1274563910ygrp-lc .yiv1274563910ad {margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv1274563910 #yiv1274563910actions {font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv1274563910 #yiv1274563910activity {background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv1274563910 #yiv1274563910activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv1274563910 #yiv1274563910activity span:first-child {text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv1274563910 #yiv1274563910activity span a {color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}#yiv1274563910 #yiv1274563910activity span span {color:#ff7900;}#yiv1274563910 #yiv1274563910activity span .yiv1274563910underline {text-decoration:underline;}#yiv1274563910 .yiv1274563910attach {clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px 0;width:400px;}#yiv1274563910 .yiv1274563910attach div a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv1274563910 .yiv1274563910attach img {border:none;padding-right:5px;}#yiv1274563910 .yiv1274563910attach label {display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}#yiv1274563910 .yiv1274563910attach label a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv1274563910 blockquote {margin:0 0 0 4px;}#yiv1274563910 .yiv1274563910bold {font-family:Arial;font-size:13px;font-weight:700;}#yiv1274563910 .yiv1274563910bold a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv1274563910 dd.yiv1274563910last p a {font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv1274563910 dd.yiv1274563910last p span {margin-right:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv1274563910 dd.yiv1274563910last p span.yiv1274563910yshortcuts {margin-right:0;}#yiv1274563910 div.yiv1274563910attach-table div div a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv1274563910 div.yiv1274563910attach-table {width:400px;}#yiv1274563910 div.yiv1274563910file-title a, #yiv1274563910 div.yiv1274563910file-title a:active, #yiv1274563910 div.yiv1274563910file-title a:hover, #yiv1274563910 div.yiv1274563910file-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv1274563910 div.yiv1274563910photo-title a, #yiv1274563910 div.yiv1274563910photo-title a:active, #yiv1274563910 div.yiv1274563910photo-title a:hover, #yiv1274563910 div.yiv1274563910photo-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv1274563910 div#yiv1274563910ygrp-mlmsg #yiv1274563910ygrp-msg p a span.yiv1274563910yshortcuts {font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;font-weight:normal;}#yiv1274563910 .yiv1274563910green {color:#628c2a;}#yiv1274563910 .yiv1274563910MsoNormal {margin:0 0 0 0;}#yiv1274563910 o {font-size:0;}#yiv1274563910 #yiv1274563910photos div {float:left;width:72px;}#yiv1274563910 #yiv1274563910photos div div {border:1px solid #666666;height:62px;overflow:hidden;width:62px;}#yiv1274563910 #yiv1274563910photos div label {color:#666666;font-size:10px;overflow:hidden;text-align:center;white-space:nowrap;width:64px;}#yiv1274563910 #yiv1274563910reco-category {font-size:77%;}#yiv1274563910 #yiv1274563910reco-desc {font-size:77%;}#yiv1274563910 .yiv1274563910replbq {margin:4px;}#yiv1274563910 #yiv1274563910ygrp-actbar div a:first-child {margin-right:2px;padding-right:5px;}#yiv1274563910 #yiv1274563910ygrp-mlmsg {font-size:13px;font-family:Arial, helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv1274563910 #yiv1274563910ygrp-mlmsg table {font-size:inherit;font:100%;}#yiv1274563910 #yiv1274563910ygrp-mlmsg select, #yiv1274563910 input, #yiv1274563910 textarea {font:99% Arial, Helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv1274563910 #yiv1274563910ygrp-mlmsg pre, #yiv1274563910 code {font:115% monospace;}#yiv1274563910 #yiv1274563910ygrp-mlmsg * {line-height:1.22em;}#yiv1274563910 #yiv1274563910ygrp-mlmsg #yiv1274563910logo {padding-bottom:10px;}#yiv1274563910 #yiv1274563910ygrp-msg p a {font-family:Verdana;}#yiv1274563910 #yiv1274563910ygrp-msg p#yiv1274563910attach-count span {color:#1E66AE;font-weight:700;}#yiv1274563910 #yiv1274563910ygrp-reco #yiv1274563910reco-head {color:#ff7900;font-weight:700;}#yiv1274563910 #yiv1274563910ygrp-reco {margin-bottom:20px;padding:0px;}#yiv1274563910 #yiv1274563910ygrp-sponsor #yiv1274563910ov li a {font-size:130%;text-decoration:none;}#yiv1274563910 #yiv1274563910ygrp-sponsor #yiv1274563910ov li {font-size:77%;list-style-type:square;padding:6px 0;}#yiv1274563910 #yiv1274563910ygrp-sponsor #yiv1274563910ov ul {margin:0;padding:0 0 0 8px;}#yiv1274563910 #yiv1274563910ygrp-text {font-family:Georgia;}#yiv1274563910 #yiv1274563910ygrp-text p {margin:0 0 1em 0;}#yiv1274563910 #yiv1274563910ygrp-text tt {font-size:120%;}#yiv1274563910 #yiv1274563910ygrp-vital ul li:last-child {border-right:none !important;}#yiv1274563910

[[e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

So, you ARE confused as to which side you are on. Go figure. The question is simple, Barry: "What makes acts right?" If man has free will, then he can know right from wrong. It's an categorical imperative. It's not complicated.

"Act only according to that maxim whereby you can, at the same time, will that it should become a universal law." I. Hume


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Surveys of deaths in the two Iraq wars show that (depending on the survey), between 151,000 to 1,000,000 Iraqis died in the two US-led wars between 2003 and 2013. One study, conducted by the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Body_Count_project http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Body_Count_project, found that 174,000 Iraqis were reported killed between 2003 and 2013, with between 112,000-123,000 of those killed being civilian noncombatants. Meanwhile, the total number of US troops killed during this period was 4,491.

Non sequitur.

http://www.numberofabortions.com/ http://www.numberofabortions.com/


Now, JR, please tell me. Was that "good" or "evil?"

Non sequitur.


From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 3:14 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


About 12,000 or so people die every day. About 10% of those are killed by other people one way or another. The Islamic State is one of those ways. This is what happens. One method of reducing those killings is to bomb or send troops to kill the members of the Islamic State, by substituting other killings in place of the ones the Islamic State perpetrates. Then there is the question of who or what is killing the other 11,000 people who die every day, which is a far greater number. From their point of view, the killers in the Islamic State are doing their god-given duty to remove infidels and betrayers of their faith from the world, a good thing. We don't know what the people killed think of it, but those in the West do not seem in favour of the idea, thinking it a bad thing. In almost every year, anyone born more that 120 years ago is dead. As pointed out recently God killed something like 2,000,000 people as reported in the Bible, while Satan, bless his reticent soul, only 10. So it would appear the best killers are in the service of what is called 'good', for a good cause, by their own estimation. They truly believe something is good and worthy, and carry out killings in the service of that. That probably means we should be rather suspicious of the good people who want to purify their environment in the service of that good. For our own good, maybe we should kill them, just to be on the safe side.





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,

If you say there is no "good" or "evil", how do explain the fact that groups, like the Islamic State, kill innocent people in Iraq and Syria?

[[e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

Pastor Barry,

IMO, it's unfortunate that human beings have to die. But circumstances happen where a person or a leader of a nation has to act to prevent evil or to eradicate evil from existing. Under these circumstances, it would be justified to take arms and fight. Any deaths that come from a justified war would be dignified and would be considered necessary to deter evil.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Surveys of deaths in the two Iraq wars show that (depending on the survey), between 151,000 to 1,000,000 Iraqis died in the two US-led wars between 2003 and 2013. One study, conducted by the Iraq Body Count project http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Body_Count_project, found that 174,000 Iraqis were reported killed between 2003 and 2013, with between 112,000-123,000 of those killed being civilian noncombatants. Meanwhile, the total number of US troops killed during this period was 4,491.


Now, JR, please tell me. Was that "good" or "evil?"



From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 3:14 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


About 12,000 or so people die every day. About 10% of those are killed by other people one way or another. The Islamic State is one of those ways. This is what happens. One method of reducing those killings is to bomb or send troops to kill the members of the Islamic State, by substituting other killings in place of the ones the Islamic State perpetrates. Then there is the question of who or what is killing the other 11,000 people who die every day, which is a far greater number. From their point of view, the killers in the Islamic State are doing their god-given duty to remove infidels and betrayers of their faith from the world, a good thing. We don't know what the people killed think of it, but those in the West do not seem in favour of the idea, thinking it a bad thing. In almost every year, anyone born more that 120 years ago is dead. As pointed out recently God killed something like 2,000,000 people as reported in the Bible, while Satan, bless his reticent soul, only 10. So it would appear the best killers are in the service of what is called 'good', for a good cause, by their own estimation. They truly believe something is good and worthy, and carry out killings in the service of that. That probably means we should be rather suspicious of the good people who want to purify their environment in the service of that good. For our own good, maybe we should kill them, just to be on the safe side.





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,

If you say there is no "good" or "evil", how do explain the fact that groups, like the Islamic State, kill innocent people in Iraq and Syria?

[[e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

You know jr_esq, you are assuming that your idea of good and evil is real. I hold they are simply conceptual mappings onto reality, but they have no real existence except as a convenient and arbitrary way to categorise certain forms of activity. There was an episode of Star Trek in which an alien species, the Excalbians, investigated good and evil. They concluded that good and evil use the same methods and achieve the similar results. The writers of the episode used science fiction as a template to discuss the nature of good and evil.

How are you defining good and evil, and why do you feel those definitions are somehow true or real?


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,

IMO, it's unfortunate that human beings have to die. But circumstances happen where a person or a leader of a nation has to act to prevent evil or to eradicate evil from existing. Under these circumstances, it would be justified to take arms and fight. Any deaths that come from a justified war would be dignified and would be considered necessary to deter evil.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Surveys of deaths in the two Iraq wars show that (depending on the survey), between 151,000 to 1,000,000 Iraqis died in the two US-led wars between 2003 and 2013. One study, conducted by the Iraq Body Count project http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Body_Count_project, found that 174,000 Iraqis were reported killed between 2003 and 2013, with between 112,000-123,000 of those killed being civilian noncombatants. Meanwhile, the total number of US troops killed during this period was 4,491.


Now, JR, please tell me. Was that "good" or "evil?"



From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 3:14 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


About 12,000 or so people die every day. About 10% of those are killed by other people one way or another. The Islamic State is one of those ways. This is what happens. One method of reducing those killings is to bomb or send troops to kill the members of the Islamic State, by substituting other killings in place of the ones the Islamic State perpetrates. Then there is the question of who or what is killing the other 11,000 people who die every day, which is a far greater number. From their point of view, the killers in the Islamic State are doing their god-given duty to remove infidels and betrayers of their faith from the world, a good thing. We don't know what the people killed think of it, but those in the West do not seem in favour of the idea, thinking it a bad thing. In almost every year, anyone born more that 120 years ago is dead. As pointed out recently God killed something like 2,000,000 people as reported in the Bible, while Satan, bless his reticent soul, only 10. So it would appear the best killers are in the service of what is called 'good', for a good cause, by their own estimation. They truly believe something is good and worthy, and carry out killings in the service of that. That probably means we should be rather suspicious of the good people who want to purify their environment in the service of that good. For our own good, maybe we should kill them, just to be on the safe side.





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,

If you say there is no "good" or "evil", how do explain the fact that groups, like the Islamic State, kill innocent people in Iraq and Syria?

[[e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

Xeno,

I would assume that you would fight to save your life if the Islamic State rebels got a hold of you to cut your head off as propaganda for their cause. Are you going to assume that you're imagining things? As you've seen in the news, these rebels have cut the heads of Brits and Americans in the recent past. It's real and true.


If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die. If you fight and win, you save your life and become a hero to the world.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

You know jr_esq, you are assuming that your idea of good and evil is real. I hold they are simply conceptual mappings onto reality, but they have no real existence except as a convenient and arbitrary way to categorise certain forms of activity. There was an episode of Star Trek in which an alien species, the Excalbians, investigated good and evil. They concluded that good and evil use the same methods and achieve the similar results. The writers of the episode used science fiction as a template to discuss the nature of good and evil.

How are you defining good and evil, and why do you feel those definitions are somehow true or real?


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,

IMO, it's unfortunate that human beings have to die. But circumstances happen where a person or a leader of a nation has to act to prevent evil or to eradicate evil from existing. Under these circumstances, it would be justified to take arms and fight. Any deaths that come from a justified war would be dignified and would be considered necessary to deter evil.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Surveys of deaths in the two Iraq wars show that (depending on the survey), between 151,000 to 1,000,000 Iraqis died in the two US-led wars between 2003 and 2013. One study, conducted by the Iraq Body Count project http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Body_Count_project, found that 174,000 Iraqis were reported killed between 2003 and 2013, with between 112,000-123,000 of those killed being civilian noncombatants. Meanwhile, the total number of US troops killed during this period was 4,491.


Now, JR, please tell me. Was that "good" or "evil?"



From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 3:14 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


About 12,000 or so people die every day. About 10% of those are killed by other people one way or another. The Islamic State is one of those ways. This is what happens. One method of reducing those killings is to bomb or send troops to kill the members of the Islamic State, by substituting other killings in place of the ones the Islamic State perpetrates. Then there is the question of who or what is killing the other 11,000 people who die every day, which is a far greater number. From their point of view, the killers in the Islamic State are doing their god-given duty to remove infidels and betrayers of their faith from the world, a good thing. We don't know what the people killed think of it, but those in the West do not seem in favour of the idea, thinking it a bad thing. In almost every year, anyone born more that 120 years ago is dead. As pointed out recently God killed something like 2,000,000 people as reported in the Bible, while Satan, bless his reticent soul, only 10. So it would appear the best killers are in the service of what is called 'good', for a good cause, by their own estimation. They truly believe something is good and worthy, and carry out killings in the service of that. That probably means we should be rather suspicious of the good people who want to purify their environment in the service of that good. For our own good, maybe we should kill them, just to be on the safe side.





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,

If you say there is no "good" or "evil", how do explain the fact that groups, like the Islamic State, kill innocent people in Iraq and Syria?

[Michael Jackson [e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

"If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die."
Seems a rather narrow minded point of view.

What if the person being killed is a committed practitioner of ahimsa? A Jainite or a fanatic pacifist? One who would rather be killed than raise their hand in violence to another even in self defense?

Or suppose the about to be killed already had a terminal illness with a bleak prognosis and a short time to live, thus the killing would actually be a favor to the kill-ee and the killer, while perhaps having evil intent, would actually be giving a blessing and liberation to the kill-ee.

Could there be some planet in your chart that is debilitated that gives you such a judgmental and combative feeling about all this?

From: "***@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

  Xeno,
I would assume that you would fight to save your life if the Islamic State rebels got a hold of you to cut your head off as propaganda for their cause. Are you going to assume that you're imagining things?  As you've seen in the news, these rebels have cut the heads of Brits and Americans in the recent past.  It's real and true.
If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die.  If you fight and win, you save your life and become a hero to the world.




---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

You know jr_esq, you are assuming that your idea of good and evil is real. I hold they are simply conceptual mappings onto reality, but they have no real existence except as a convenient and arbitrary way to categorise certain forms of activity. There was an episode of Star Trek in which an alien species, the Excalbians, investigated good and evil. They concluded that good and evil use the same methods and achieve the similar results. The writers of the episode used science fiction as a template to discuss the nature of good and evil.
How are you defining good and evil, and why do you feel those definitions are somehow true or real?


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,
IMO, it's unfortunate that human beings have to die.  But circumstances happen where a person or a leader of a nation has to act to prevent evil or to eradicate evil from existing.  Under these circumstances, it would be justified to take arms and fight.  Any deaths that come from a justified war would be dignified and would be considered necessary to deter evil.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Surveys of deaths in the two Iraq wars show that (depending on the survey), between 151,000 to 1,000,000 Iraqis died in the two US-led wars between 2003 and 2013. One study, conducted by the Iraq Body Count project, found that 174,000 Iraqis were reported killed between 2003 and 2013, withbetween 112,000-123,000 of those killed being civilian noncombatants. Meanwhile, the total number of US troops killed during this period was 4,491. 

Now, JR, please tell me. Was that "good" or "evil?"

From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 3:14 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

 About 12,000 or so people die every day. About 10% of those are killed by other people one way or another. The Islamic State is one of those ways. This is what happens. One method of reducing those killings is to bomb or send troops to kill the members of the Islamic State, by substituting other killings in place of the ones the Islamic State perpetrates. Then there is the question of who or what is killing the other 11,000 people who die every day, which is a far greater number. From their point of view, the killers in the Islamic State are doing their god-given duty to remove infidels and betrayers of their faith from the world, a good thing. We don't know what the people killed think of it, but those in the West do not seem in favour of the idea, thinking it a bad thing. In almost every year, anyone born more that 120 years ago is dead. As pointed out recently God killed something like 2,000,000 people as reported in the Bible, while Satan, bless his reticent soul, only 10. So it would appear the best killers are in the service of what is called 'good', for a good cause, by their own estimation. They truly believe something is good and worthy, and carry out killings in the service of that. That probably means we should be rather suspicious of the good people who want to purify their environment in the service of that good. For our own good, maybe we should kill them, just to be on the safe side.



---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,
If you say there is no "good" or "evil", how do explain the fact that groups, like the Islamic State, kill innocent people in Iraq and Syria?

#yiv2954156013 #yiv2954156013 -- #yiv2954156013ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv2954156013 #yiv2954156013ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv2954156013 #yiv2954156013ygrp-mkp #yiv2954156013hd {color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px 0;}#yiv2954156013 #yiv2954156013ygrp-mkp #yiv2954156013ads {margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv2954156013 #yiv2954156013ygrp-mkp .yiv2954156013ad {padding:0 0;}#yiv2954156013 #yiv2954156013ygrp-mkp .yiv2954156013ad p {margin:0;}#yiv2954156013 #yiv2954156013ygrp-mkp .yiv2954156013ad a {color:#0000ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv2954156013 #yiv2954156013ygrp-sponsor #yiv2954156013ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv2954156013 #yiv2954156013ygrp-sponsor #yiv2954156013ygrp-lc #yiv2954156013hd {margin:10px 0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv2954156013 #yiv2954156013ygrp-sponsor #yiv2954156013ygrp-lc .yiv2954156013ad {margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv2954156013 #yiv2954156013actions {font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv2954156013 #yiv2954156013activity {background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv2954156013 #yiv2954156013activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv2954156013 #yiv2954156013activity span:first-child {text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv2954156013 #yiv2954156013activity span a {color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}#yiv2954156013 #yiv2954156013activity span span {color:#ff7900;}#yiv2954156013 #yiv2954156013activity span .yiv2954156013underline {text-decoration:underline;}#yiv2954156013 .yiv2954156013attach {clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px 0;width:400px;}#yiv2954156013 .yiv2954156013attach div a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv2954156013 .yiv2954156013attach img {border:none;padding-right:5px;}#yiv2954156013 .yiv2954156013attach label {display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}#yiv2954156013 .yiv2954156013attach label a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv2954156013 blockquote {margin:0 0 0 4px;}#yiv2954156013 .yiv2954156013bold {font-family:Arial;font-size:13px;font-weight:700;}#yiv2954156013 .yiv2954156013bold a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv2954156013 dd.yiv2954156013last p a {font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv2954156013 dd.yiv2954156013last p span {margin-right:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv2954156013 dd.yiv2954156013last p span.yiv2954156013yshortcuts {margin-right:0;}#yiv2954156013 div.yiv2954156013attach-table div div a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv2954156013 div.yiv2954156013attach-table {width:400px;}#yiv2954156013 div.yiv2954156013file-title a, #yiv2954156013 div.yiv2954156013file-title a:active, #yiv2954156013 div.yiv2954156013file-title a:hover, #yiv2954156013 div.yiv2954156013file-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv2954156013 div.yiv2954156013photo-title a, #yiv2954156013 div.yiv2954156013photo-title a:active, #yiv2954156013 div.yiv2954156013photo-title a:hover, #yiv2954156013 div.yiv2954156013photo-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv2954156013 div#yiv2954156013ygrp-mlmsg #yiv2954156013ygrp-msg p a span.yiv2954156013yshortcuts {font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;font-weight:normal;}#yiv2954156013 .yiv2954156013green {color:#628c2a;}#yiv2954156013 .yiv2954156013MsoNormal {margin:0 0 0 0;}#yiv2954156013 o {font-size:0;}#yiv2954156013 #yiv2954156013photos div {float:left;width:72px;}#yiv2954156013 #yiv2954156013photos div div {border:1px solid #666666;height:62px;overflow:hidden;width:62px;}#yiv2954156013 #yiv2954156013photos div label {color:#666666;font-size:10px;overflow:hidden;text-align:center;white-space:nowrap;width:64px;}#yiv2954156013 #yiv2954156013reco-category {font-size:77%;}#yiv2954156013 #yiv2954156013reco-desc {font-size:77%;}#yiv2954156013 .yiv2954156013replbq {margin:4px;}#yiv2954156013 #yiv2954156013ygrp-actbar div a:first-child {margin-right:2px;padding-right:5px;}#yiv2954156013 #yiv2954156013ygrp-mlmsg {font-size:13px;font-family:Arial, helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv2954156013 #yiv2954156013ygrp-mlmsg table {font-size:inherit;font:100%;}#yiv2954156013 #yiv2954156013ygrp-mlmsg select, #yiv2954156013 input, #yiv2954156013 textarea {font:99% Arial, Helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv2954156013 #yiv2954156013ygrp-mlmsg pre, #yiv2954156013 code {font:115% monospace;}#yiv2954156013 #yiv2954156013ygrp-mlmsg * {line-height:1.22em;}#yiv2954156013 #yiv2954156013ygrp-mlmsg #yiv2954156013logo {padding-bottom:10px;}#yiv2954156013 #yiv2954156013ygrp-msg p a {font-family:Verdana;}#yiv2954156013 #yiv2954156013ygrp-msg p#yiv2954156013attach-count span {color:#1E66AE;font-weight:700;}#yiv2954156013 #yiv2954156013ygrp-reco #yiv2954156013reco-head {color:#ff7900;font-weight:700;}#yiv2954156013 #yiv2954156013ygrp-reco {margin-bottom:20px;padding:0px;}#yiv2954156013 #yiv2954156013ygrp-sponsor #yiv2954156013ov li a {font-size:130%;text-decoration:none;}#yiv2954156013 #yiv2954156013ygrp-sponsor #yiv2954156013ov li {font-size:77%;list-style-type:square;padding:6px 0;}#yiv2954156013 #yiv2954156013ygrp-sponsor #yiv2954156013ov ul {margin:0;padding:0 0 0 8px;}#yiv2954156013 #yiv2954156013ygrp-text {font-family:Georgia;}#yiv2954156013 #yiv2954156013ygrp-text p {margin:0 0 1em 0;}#yiv2954156013 #yiv2954156013ygrp-text tt {font-size:120%;}#yiv2954156013 #yiv2954156013ygrp-vital ul li:last-child {border-right:none !important;}#yiv2954156013

[[e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

"If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die."


Seems a rather narrow minded point of view.

In the USA you have the right to fight in order to defend yourself or your family or your property. It's not complicated. "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."



What if the person being killed is a committed practitioner of ahimsa? A Jainite or a fanatic pacifist? One who would rather be killed than raise their hand in violence to another even in self defense?

Non sequitur.



Or suppose the about to be killed already had a terminal illness with a bleak prognosis and a short time to live, thus the killing would actually be a favor to the kill-ee and the killer, while perhaps having evil intent, would actually be giving a blessing and liberation to the kill-ee.

Non sequitur.



Could there be some planet in your chart that is debilitated that gives you such a judgmental and combative feeling about all this?

Non sequitur.



From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


Xeno,


I would assume that you would fight to save your life if the Islamic State rebels got a hold of you to cut your head off as propaganda for their cause. Are you going to assume that you're imagining things? As you've seen in the news, these rebels have cut the heads of Brits and Americans in the recent past. It's real and true.


If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die. If you fight and win, you save your life and become a hero to the world.





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

You know jr_esq, you are assuming that your idea of good and evil is real. I hold they are simply conceptual mappings onto reality, but they have no real existence except as a convenient and arbitrary way to categorise certain forms of activity. There was an episode of Star Trek in which an alien species, the Excalbians, investigated good and evil. They concluded that good and evil use the same methods and achieve the similar results. The writers of the episode used science fiction as a template to discuss the nature of good and evil.

How are you defining good and evil, and why do you feel those definitions are somehow true or real?


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,

IMO, it's unfortunate that human beings have to die. But circumstances happen where a person or a leader of a nation has to act to prevent evil or to eradicate evil from existing. Under these circumstances, it would be justified to take arms and fight. Any deaths that come from a justified war would be dignified and would be considered necessary to deter evil.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Surveys of deaths in the two Iraq wars show that (depending on the survey), between 151,000 to 1,000,000 Iraqis died in the two US-led wars between 2003 and 2013. One study, conducted by the Iraq Body Count project http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Body_Count_project, found that 174,000 Iraqis were reported killed between 2003 and 2013, with between 112,000-123,000 of those killed being civilian noncombatants. Meanwhile, the total number of US troops killed during this period was 4,491.


Now, JR, please tell me. Was that "good" or "evil?"



From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 3:14 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


About 12,000 or so people die every day. About 10% of those are killed by other people one way or another. The Islamic State is one of those ways. This is what happens. One method of reducing those killings is to bomb or send troops to kill the members of the Islamic State, by substituting other killings in place of the ones the Islamic State perpetrates. Then there is the question of who or what is killing the other 11,000 people who die every day, which is a far greater number. From their point of view, the killers in the Islamic State are doing their god-given duty to remove infidels and betrayers of their faith from the world, a good thing. We don't know what the people killed think of it, but those in the West do not seem in favour of the idea, thinking it a bad thing. In almost every year, anyone born more that 120 years ago is dead. As pointed out recently God killed something like 2,000,000 people as reported in the Bible, while Satan, bless his reticent soul, only 10. So it would appear the best killers are in the service of what is called 'good', for a good cause, by their own estimation. They truly believe something is good and worthy, and carry out killings in the service of that. That probably means we should be rather suspicious of the good people who want to purify their environment in the service of that good. For our own good, maybe we should kill them, just to be on the safe side.





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,

If you say there is no "good" or "evil", how do explain the fact that groups, like the Islamic State, kill innocent people in Iraq and Syria?

[[e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

MJ,

I'm paraphrasing what Krishna said to Arjuna, who was reluctant in fighting his relatives in the battle of Kurukshetra.





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

"If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die."


Seems a rather narrow minded point of view.



What if the person being killed is a committed practitioner of ahimsa? A Jainite or a fanatic pacifist? One who would rather be killed than raise their hand in violence to another even in self defense?



Or suppose the about to be killed already had a terminal illness with a bleak prognosis and a short time to live, thus the killing would actually be a favor to the kill-ee and the killer, while perhaps having evil intent, would actually be giving a blessing and liberation to the kill-ee.



Could there be some planet in your chart that is debilitated that gives you such a judgmental and combative feeling about all this?



From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


Xeno,


I would assume that you would fight to save your life if the Islamic State rebels got a hold of you to cut your head off as propaganda for their cause. Are you going to assume that you're imagining things? As you've seen in the news, these rebels have cut the heads of Brits and Americans in the recent past. It's real and true.


If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die. If you fight and win, you save your life and become a hero to the world.





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

You know jr_esq, you are assuming that your idea of good and evil is real. I hold they are simply conceptual mappings onto reality, but they have no real existence except as a convenient and arbitrary way to categorise certain forms of activity. There was an episode of Star Trek in which an alien species, the Excalbians, investigated good and evil. They concluded that good and evil use the same methods and achieve the similar results. The writers of the episode used science fiction as a template to discuss the nature of good and evil.

How are you defining good and evil, and why do you feel those definitions are somehow true or real?


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,

IMO, it's unfortunate that human beings have to die. But circumstances happen where a person or a leader of a nation has to act to prevent evil or to eradicate evil from existing. Under these circumstances, it would be justified to take arms and fight. Any deaths that come from a justified war would be dignified and would be considered necessary to deter evil.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Surveys of deaths in the two Iraq wars show that (depending on the survey), between 151,000 to 1,000,000 Iraqis died in the two US-led wars between 2003 and 2013. One study, conducted by the Iraq Body Count project http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Body_Count_project, found that 174,000 Iraqis were reported killed between 2003 and 2013, with between 112,000-123,000 of those killed being civilian noncombatants. Meanwhile, the total number of US troops killed during this period was 4,491.


Now, JR, please tell me. Was that "good" or "evil?"



From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 3:14 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


About 12,000 or so people die every day. About 10% of those are killed by other people one way or another. The Islamic State is one of those ways. This is what happens. One method of reducing those killings is to bomb or send troops to kill the members of the Islamic State, by substituting other killings in place of the ones the Islamic State perpetrates. Then there is the question of who or what is killing the other 11,000 people who die every day, which is a far greater number. From their point of view, the killers in the Islamic State are doing their god-given duty to remove infidels and betrayers of their faith from the world, a good thing. We don't know what the people killed think of it, but those in the West do not seem in favour of the idea, thinking it a bad thing. In almost every year, anyone born more that 120 years ago is dead. As pointed out recently God killed something like 2,000,000 people as reported in the Bible, while Satan, bless his reticent soul, only 10. So it would appear the best killers are in the service of what is called 'good', for a good cause, by their own estimation. They truly believe something is good and worthy, and carry out killings in the service of that. That probably means we should be rather suspicious of the good people who want to purify their environment in the service of that good. For our own good, maybe we should kill them, just to be on the safe side.





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,

If you say there is no "good" or "evil", how do explain the fact that groups, like the Islamic State, kill innocent people in Iraq and Syria?

[TurquoiseBee [e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

From: "***@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2015 2:07 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

  MJ,
I'm paraphrasing what Krishna said to Arjuna, who was reluctant in fighting his relatives in the battle of Kurukshetra.

Just for JR, a supercut of what he believes is "good" and "moral" and "spiritual" about America.

Everyone Sly Stallone Has Ever Killed On Film In One Video

|   |
|   | |   |   |   |   |   |
| Everyone Sly Stallone Has Ever Killed On Film In One Vid...The total count is well over 500, making Sly deadlier than several actual wars. |
| |
| View on digg.com | Preview by Yahoo |
| |
|   |


Suffice it to say it takes 35 minutes to get through them all. Wouldn't Krishna be proud?

[Michael Jackson [e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

Do you believe Krshna was an actual personage on the earth or a religious myth?
If real, was he just a man or an avatar of Vishnu?

From: "***@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 9:07 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

  MJ,
I'm paraphrasing what Krishna said to Arjuna, who was reluctant in fighting his relatives in the battle of Kurukshetra.



---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

"If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die."
Seems a rather narrow minded point of view.

What if the person being killed is a committed practitioner of ahimsa? A Jainite or a fanatic pacifist? One who would rather be killed than raise their hand in violence to another even in self defense?

Or suppose the about to be killed already had a terminal illness with a bleak prognosis and a short time to live, thus the killing would actually be a favor to the kill-ee and the killer, while perhaps having evil intent, would actually be giving a blessing and liberation to the kill-ee.

Could there be some planet in your chart that is debilitated that gives you such a judgmental and combative feeling about all this?

From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

 Xeno,
I would assume that you would fight to save your life if the Islamic State rebels got a hold of you to cut your head off as propaganda for their cause. Are you going to assume that you're imagining things?  As you've seen in the news, these rebels have cut the heads of Brits and Americans in the recent past.  It's real and true.
If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die.  If you fight and win, you save your life and become a hero to the world.




---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

You know jr_esq, you are assuming that your idea of good and evil is real. I hold they are simply conceptual mappings onto reality, but they have no real existence except as a convenient and arbitrary way to categorise certain forms of activity. There was an episode of Star Trek in which an alien species, the Excalbians, investigated good and evil. They concluded that good and evil use the same methods and achieve the similar results. The writers of the episode used science fiction as a template to discuss the nature of good and evil.
How are you defining good and evil, and why do you feel those definitions are somehow true or real?


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,
IMO, it's unfortunate that human beings have to die.  But circumstances happen where a person or a leader of a nation has to act to prevent evil or to eradicate evil from existing.  Under these circumstances, it would be justified to take arms and fight.  Any deaths that come from a justified war would be dignified and would be considered necessary to deter evil.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Surveys of deaths in the two Iraq wars show that (depending on the survey), between 151,000 to 1,000,000 Iraqis died in the two US-led wars between 2003 and 2013. One study, conducted by the Iraq Body Count project, found that 174,000 Iraqis were reported killed between 2003 and 2013, withbetween 112,000-123,000 of those killed being civilian noncombatants. Meanwhile, the total number of US troops killed during this period was 4,491. 

Now, JR, please tell me. Was that "good" or "evil?"

From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 3:14 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

 About 12,000 or so people die every day. About 10% of those are killed by other people one way or another. The Islamic State is one of those ways. This is what happens. One method of reducing those killings is to bomb or send troops to kill the members of the Islamic State, by substituting other killings in place of the ones the Islamic State perpetrates. Then there is the question of who or what is killing the other 11,000 people who die every day, which is a far greater number. From their point of view, the killers in the Islamic State are doing their god-given duty to remove infidels and betrayers of their faith from the world, a good thing. We don't know what the people killed think of it, but those in the West do not seem in favour of the idea, thinking it a bad thing. In almost every year, anyone born more that 120 years ago is dead. As pointed out recently God killed something like 2,000,000 people as reported in the Bible, while Satan, bless his reticent soul, only 10. So it would appear the best killers are in the service of what is called 'good', for a good cause, by their own estimation. They truly believe something is good and worthy, and carry out killings in the service of that. That probably means we should be rather suspicious of the good people who want to purify their environment in the service of that good. For our own good, maybe we should kill them, just to be on the safe side.



---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,
If you say there is no "good" or "evil", how do explain the fact that groups, like the Islamic State, kill innocent people in Iraq and Syria?



#yiv0200281459 #yiv0200281459 -- #yiv0200281459ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv0200281459 #yiv0200281459ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv0200281459 #yiv0200281459ygrp-mkp #yiv0200281459hd {color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px 0;}#yiv0200281459 #yiv0200281459ygrp-mkp #yiv0200281459ads {margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv0200281459 #yiv0200281459ygrp-mkp .yiv0200281459ad {padding:0 0;}#yiv0200281459 #yiv0200281459ygrp-mkp .yiv0200281459ad p {margin:0;}#yiv0200281459 #yiv0200281459ygrp-mkp .yiv0200281459ad a {color:#0000ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv0200281459 #yiv0200281459ygrp-sponsor #yiv0200281459ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv0200281459 #yiv0200281459ygrp-sponsor #yiv0200281459ygrp-lc #yiv0200281459hd {margin:10px 0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv0200281459 #yiv0200281459ygrp-sponsor #yiv0200281459ygrp-lc .yiv0200281459ad {margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv0200281459 #yiv0200281459actions {font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv0200281459 #yiv0200281459activity {background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv0200281459 #yiv0200281459activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv0200281459 #yiv0200281459activity span:first-child {text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv0200281459 #yiv0200281459activity span a {color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}#yiv0200281459 #yiv0200281459activity span span {color:#ff7900;}#yiv0200281459 #yiv0200281459activity span .yiv0200281459underline {text-decoration:underline;}#yiv0200281459 .yiv0200281459attach {clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px 0;width:400px;}#yiv0200281459 .yiv0200281459attach div a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv0200281459 .yiv0200281459attach img {border:none;padding-right:5px;}#yiv0200281459 .yiv0200281459attach label {display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}#yiv0200281459 .yiv0200281459attach label a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv0200281459 blockquote {margin:0 0 0 4px;}#yiv0200281459 .yiv0200281459bold {font-family:Arial;font-size:13px;font-weight:700;}#yiv0200281459 .yiv0200281459bold a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv0200281459 dd.yiv0200281459last p a {font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv0200281459 dd.yiv0200281459last p span {margin-right:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv0200281459 dd.yiv0200281459last p span.yiv0200281459yshortcuts {margin-right:0;}#yiv0200281459 div.yiv0200281459attach-table div div a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv0200281459 div.yiv0200281459attach-table {width:400px;}#yiv0200281459 div.yiv0200281459file-title a, #yiv0200281459 div.yiv0200281459file-title a:active, #yiv0200281459 div.yiv0200281459file-title a:hover, #yiv0200281459 div.yiv0200281459file-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv0200281459 div.yiv0200281459photo-title a, #yiv0200281459 div.yiv0200281459photo-title a:active, #yiv0200281459 div.yiv0200281459photo-title a:hover, #yiv0200281459 div.yiv0200281459photo-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv0200281459 div#yiv0200281459ygrp-mlmsg #yiv0200281459ygrp-msg p a span.yiv0200281459yshortcuts {font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;font-weight:normal;}#yiv0200281459 .yiv0200281459green {color:#628c2a;}#yiv0200281459 .yiv0200281459MsoNormal {margin:0 0 0 0;}#yiv0200281459 o {font-size:0;}#yiv0200281459 #yiv0200281459photos div {float:left;width:72px;}#yiv0200281459 #yiv0200281459photos div div {border:1px solid #666666;height:62px;overflow:hidden;width:62px;}#yiv0200281459 #yiv0200281459photos div label {color:#666666;font-size:10px;overflow:hidden;text-align:center;white-space:nowrap;width:64px;}#yiv0200281459 #yiv0200281459reco-category {font-size:77%;}#yiv0200281459 #yiv0200281459reco-desc {font-size:77%;}#yiv0200281459 .yiv0200281459replbq {margin:4px;}#yiv0200281459 #yiv0200281459ygrp-actbar div a:first-child {margin-right:2px;padding-right:5px;}#yiv0200281459 #yiv0200281459ygrp-mlmsg {font-size:13px;font-family:Arial, helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv0200281459 #yiv0200281459ygrp-mlmsg table {font-size:inherit;font:100%;}#yiv0200281459 #yiv0200281459ygrp-mlmsg select, #yiv0200281459 input, #yiv0200281459 textarea {font:99% Arial, Helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv0200281459 #yiv0200281459ygrp-mlmsg pre, #yiv0200281459 code {font:115% monospace;}#yiv0200281459 #yiv0200281459ygrp-mlmsg * {line-height:1.22em;}#yiv0200281459 #yiv0200281459ygrp-mlmsg #yiv0200281459logo {padding-bottom:10px;}#yiv0200281459 #yiv0200281459ygrp-msg p a {font-family:Verdana;}#yiv0200281459 #yiv0200281459ygrp-msg p#yiv0200281459attach-count span {color:#1E66AE;font-weight:700;}#yiv0200281459 #yiv0200281459ygrp-reco #yiv0200281459reco-head {color:#ff7900;font-weight:700;}#yiv0200281459 #yiv0200281459ygrp-reco {margin-bottom:20px;padding:0px;}#yiv0200281459 #yiv0200281459ygrp-sponsor #yiv0200281459ov li a {font-size:130%;text-decoration:none;}#yiv0200281459 #yiv0200281459ygrp-sponsor #yiv0200281459ov li {font-size:77%;list-style-type:square;padding:6px 0;}#yiv0200281459 #yiv0200281459ygrp-sponsor #yiv0200281459ov ul {margin:0;padding:0 0 0 8px;}#yiv0200281459 #yiv0200281459ygrp-text {font-family:Georgia;}#yiv0200281459 #yiv0200281459ygrp-text p {margin:0 0 1em 0;}#yiv0200281459 #yiv0200281459ygrp-text tt {font-size:120%;}#yiv0200281459 #yiv0200281459ygrp-vital ul li:last-child {border-right:none !important;}#yiv0200281459

[[e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

MMY believes Krishna is an incarnation of Vishnu here on Earth. I personally have not researched the subject.

---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Do you believe Krshna was an actual personage on the earth or a religious myth?


If real, was he just a man or an avatar of Vishnu?



From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 9:07 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


MJ,


I'm paraphrasing what Krishna said to Arjuna, who was reluctant in fighting his relatives in the battle of Kurukshetra.





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

"If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die."


Seems a rather narrow minded point of view.



What if the person being killed is a committed practitioner of ahimsa? A Jainite or a fanatic pacifist? One who would rather be killed than raise their hand in violence to another even in self defense?



Or suppose the about to be killed already had a terminal illness with a bleak prognosis and a short time to live, thus the killing would actually be a favor to the kill-ee and the killer, while perhaps having evil intent, would actually be giving a blessing and liberation to the kill-ee.



Could there be some planet in your chart that is debilitated that gives you such a judgmental and combative feeling about all this?



From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


Xeno,


I would assume that you would fight to save your life if the Islamic State rebels got a hold of you to cut your head off as propaganda for their cause. Are you going to assume that you're imagining things? As you've seen in the news, these rebels have cut the heads of Brits and Americans in the recent past. It's real and true.


If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die. If you fight and win, you save your life and become a hero to the world.





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

You know jr_esq, you are assuming that your idea of good and evil is real. I hold they are simply conceptual mappings onto reality, but they have no real existence except as a convenient and arbitrary way to categorise certain forms of activity. There was an episode of Star Trek in which an alien species, the Excalbians, investigated good and evil. They concluded that good and evil use the same methods and achieve the similar results. The writers of the episode used science fiction as a template to discuss the nature of good and evil.

How are you defining good and evil, and why do you feel those definitions are somehow true or real?


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,

IMO, it's unfortunate that human beings have to die. But circumstances happen where a person or a leader of a nation has to act to prevent evil or to eradicate evil from existing. Under these circumstances, it would be justified to take arms and fight. Any deaths that come from a justified war would be dignified and would be considered necessary to deter evil.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Surveys of deaths in the two Iraq wars show that (depending on the survey), between 151,000 to 1,000,000 Iraqis died in the two US-led wars between 2003 and 2013. One study, conducted by the Iraq Body Count project http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Body_Count_project, found that 174,000 Iraqis were reported killed between 2003 and 2013, with between 112,000-123,000 of those killed being civilian noncombatants. Meanwhile, the total number of US troops killed during this period was 4,491.


Now, JR, please tell me. Was that "good" or "evil?"



From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 3:14 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


About 12,000 or so people die every day. About 10% of those are killed by other people one way or another. The Islamic State is one of those ways. This is what happens. One method of reducing those killings is to bomb or send troops to kill the members of the Islamic State, by substituting other killings in place of the ones the Islamic State perpetrates. Then there is the question of who or what is killing the other 11,000 people who die every day, which is a far greater number. From their point of view, the killers in the Islamic State are doing their god-given duty to remove infidels and betrayers of their faith from the world, a good thing. We don't know what the people killed think of it, but those in the West do not seem in favour of the idea, thinking it a bad thing. In almost every year, anyone born more that 120 years ago is dead. As pointed out recently God killed something like 2,000,000 people as reported in the Bible, while Satan, bless his reticent soul, only 10. So it would appear the best killers are in the service of what is called 'good', for a good cause, by their own estimation. They truly believe something is good and worthy, and carry out killings in the service of that. That probably means we should be rather suspicious of the good people who want to purify their environment in the service of that good. For our own good, maybe we should kill them, just to be on the safe side.





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,

If you say there is no "good" or "evil", how do explain the fact that groups, like the Islamic State, kill innocent people in Iraq and Syria?

[Michael Jackson [e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

All right then since you continue to quote Marshy (why I don't know, especially when you quote him to me since you know I think he was one big fraud) but since you do, do you accept Marshy as such an authority that you take his word for Krsna's status? Meaning that you believe what Marshy said about Krishna cuz it was Marshy doin' the talkin'?

From: "***@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2015 4:13 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

 
MMY believes Krishna is an incarnation of Vishnu here on Earth.  I personally have not researched the subject.

---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Do you believe Krshna was an actual personage on the earth or a religious myth?
If real, was he just a man or an avatar of Vishnu?

From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 9:07 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

 MJ,
I'm paraphrasing what Krishna said to Arjuna, who was reluctant in fighting his relatives in the battle of Kurukshetra.



---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

"If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die."
Seems a rather narrow minded point of view.

What if the person being killed is a committed practitioner of ahimsa? A Jainite or a fanatic pacifist? One who would rather be killed than raise their hand in violence to another even in self defense?

Or suppose the about to be killed already had a terminal illness with a bleak prognosis and a short time to live, thus the killing would actually be a favor to the kill-ee and the killer, while perhaps having evil intent, would actually be giving a blessing and liberation to the kill-ee.

Could there be some planet in your chart that is debilitated that gives you such a judgmental and combative feeling about all this?

From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

 Xeno,
I would assume that you would fight to save your life if the Islamic State rebels got a hold of you to cut your head off as propaganda for their cause. Are you going to assume that you're imagining things?  As you've seen in the news, these rebels have cut the heads of Brits and Americans in the recent past.  It's real and true.
If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die.  If you fight and win, you save your life and become a hero to the world.




---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

You know jr_esq, you are assuming that your idea of good and evil is real. I hold they are simply conceptual mappings onto reality, but they have no real existence except as a convenient and arbitrary way to categorise certain forms of activity. There was an episode of Star Trek in which an alien species, the Excalbians, investigated good and evil. They concluded that good and evil use the same methods and achieve the similar results. The writers of the episode used science fiction as a template to discuss the nature of good and evil.
How are you defining good and evil, and why do you feel those definitions are somehow true or real?


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,
IMO, it's unfortunate that human beings have to die.  But circumstances happen where a person or a leader of a nation has to act to prevent evil or to eradicate evil from existing.  Under these circumstances, it would be justified to take arms and fight.  Any deaths that come from a justified war would be dignified and would be considered necessary to deter evil.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Surveys of deaths in the two Iraq wars show that (depending on the survey), between 151,000 to 1,000,000 Iraqis died in the two US-led wars between 2003 and 2013. One study, conducted by the Iraq Body Count project, found that 174,000 Iraqis were reported killed between 2003 and 2013, withbetween 112,000-123,000 of those killed being civilian noncombatants. Meanwhile, the total number of US troops killed during this period was 4,491. 

Now, JR, please tell me. Was that "good" or "evil?"

From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 3:14 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

 About 12,000 or so people die every day. About 10% of those are killed by other people one way or another. The Islamic State is one of those ways. This is what happens. One method of reducing those killings is to bomb or send troops to kill the members of the Islamic State, by substituting other killings in place of the ones the Islamic State perpetrates. Then there is the question of who or what is killing the other 11,000 people who die every day, which is a far greater number. From their point of view, the killers in the Islamic State are doing their god-given duty to remove infidels and betrayers of their faith from the world, a good thing. We don't know what the people killed think of it, but those in the West do not seem in favour of the idea, thinking it a bad thing. In almost every year, anyone born more that 120 years ago is dead. As pointed out recently God killed something like 2,000,000 people as reported in the Bible, while Satan, bless his reticent soul, only 10. So it would appear the best killers are in the service of what is called 'good', for a good cause, by their own estimation. They truly believe something is good and worthy, and carry out killings in the service of that. That probably means we should be rather suspicious of the good people who want to purify their environment in the service of that good. For our own good, maybe we should kill them, just to be on the safe side.



---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,
If you say there is no "good" or "evil", how do explain the fact that groups, like the Islamic State, kill innocent people in Iraq and Syria?





#yiv2984503145 #yiv2984503145 -- #yiv2984503145ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv2984503145 #yiv2984503145ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv2984503145 #yiv2984503145ygrp-mkp #yiv2984503145hd {color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px 0;}#yiv2984503145 #yiv2984503145ygrp-mkp #yiv2984503145ads {margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv2984503145 #yiv2984503145ygrp-mkp .yiv2984503145ad {padding:0 0;}#yiv2984503145 #yiv2984503145ygrp-mkp .yiv2984503145ad p {margin:0;}#yiv2984503145 #yiv2984503145ygrp-mkp .yiv2984503145ad a {color:#0000ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv2984503145 #yiv2984503145ygrp-sponsor #yiv2984503145ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv2984503145 #yiv2984503145ygrp-sponsor #yiv2984503145ygrp-lc #yiv2984503145hd {margin:10px 0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv2984503145 #yiv2984503145ygrp-sponsor #yiv2984503145ygrp-lc .yiv2984503145ad {margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv2984503145 #yiv2984503145actions {font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv2984503145 #yiv2984503145activity {background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv2984503145 #yiv2984503145activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv2984503145 #yiv2984503145activity span:first-child {text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv2984503145 #yiv2984503145activity span a {color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}#yiv2984503145 #yiv2984503145activity span span {color:#ff7900;}#yiv2984503145 #yiv2984503145activity span .yiv2984503145underline {text-decoration:underline;}#yiv2984503145 .yiv2984503145attach {clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px 0;width:400px;}#yiv2984503145 .yiv2984503145attach div a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv2984503145 .yiv2984503145attach img {border:none;padding-right:5px;}#yiv2984503145 .yiv2984503145attach label {display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}#yiv2984503145 .yiv2984503145attach label a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv2984503145 blockquote {margin:0 0 0 4px;}#yiv2984503145 .yiv2984503145bold {font-family:Arial;font-size:13px;font-weight:700;}#yiv2984503145 .yiv2984503145bold a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv2984503145 dd.yiv2984503145last p a {font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv2984503145 dd.yiv2984503145last p span {margin-right:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv2984503145 dd.yiv2984503145last p span.yiv2984503145yshortcuts {margin-right:0;}#yiv2984503145 div.yiv2984503145attach-table div div a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv2984503145 div.yiv2984503145attach-table {width:400px;}#yiv2984503145 div.yiv2984503145file-title a, #yiv2984503145 div.yiv2984503145file-title a:active, #yiv2984503145 div.yiv2984503145file-title a:hover, #yiv2984503145 div.yiv2984503145file-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv2984503145 div.yiv2984503145photo-title a, #yiv2984503145 div.yiv2984503145photo-title a:active, #yiv2984503145 div.yiv2984503145photo-title a:hover, #yiv2984503145 div.yiv2984503145photo-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv2984503145 div#yiv2984503145ygrp-mlmsg #yiv2984503145ygrp-msg p a span.yiv2984503145yshortcuts {font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;font-weight:normal;}#yiv2984503145 .yiv2984503145green {color:#628c2a;}#yiv2984503145 .yiv2984503145MsoNormal {margin:0 0 0 0;}#yiv2984503145 o {font-size:0;}#yiv2984503145 #yiv2984503145photos div {float:left;width:72px;}#yiv2984503145 #yiv2984503145photos div div {border:1px solid #666666;height:62px;overflow:hidden;width:62px;}#yiv2984503145 #yiv2984503145photos div label {color:#666666;font-size:10px;overflow:hidden;text-align:center;white-space:nowrap;width:64px;}#yiv2984503145 #yiv2984503145reco-category {font-size:77%;}#yiv2984503145 #yiv2984503145reco-desc {font-size:77%;}#yiv2984503145 .yiv2984503145replbq {margin:4px;}#yiv2984503145 #yiv2984503145ygrp-actbar div a:first-child {margin-right:2px;padding-right:5px;}#yiv2984503145 #yiv2984503145ygrp-mlmsg {font-size:13px;font-family:Arial, helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv2984503145 #yiv2984503145ygrp-mlmsg table {font-size:inherit;font:100%;}#yiv2984503145 #yiv2984503145ygrp-mlmsg select, #yiv2984503145 input, #yiv2984503145 textarea {font:99% Arial, Helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv2984503145 #yiv2984503145ygrp-mlmsg pre, #yiv2984503145 code {font:115% monospace;}#yiv2984503145 #yiv2984503145ygrp-mlmsg * {line-height:1.22em;}#yiv2984503145 #yiv2984503145ygrp-mlmsg #yiv2984503145logo {padding-bottom:10px;}#yiv2984503145 #yiv2984503145ygrp-msg p a {font-family:Verdana;}#yiv2984503145 #yiv2984503145ygrp-msg p#yiv2984503145attach-count span {color:#1E66AE;font-weight:700;}#yiv2984503145 #yiv2984503145ygrp-reco #yiv2984503145reco-head {color:#ff7900;font-weight:700;}#yiv2984503145 #yiv2984503145ygrp-reco {margin-bottom:20px;padding:0px;}#yiv2984503145 #yiv2984503145ygrp-sponsor #yiv2984503145ov li a {font-size:130%;text-decoration:none;}#yiv2984503145 #yiv2984503145ygrp-sponsor #yiv2984503145ov li {font-size:77%;list-style-type:square;padding:6px 0;}#yiv2984503145 #yiv2984503145ygrp-sponsor #yiv2984503145ov ul {margin:0;padding:0 0 0 8px;}#yiv2984503145 #yiv2984503145ygrp-text {font-family:Georgia;}#yiv2984503145 #yiv2984503145ygrp-text p {margin:0 0 1em 0;}#yiv2984503145 #yiv2984503145ygrp-text tt {font-size:120%;}#yiv2984503145 #yiv2984503145ygrp-vital ul li:last-child {border-right:none !important;}#yiv2984503145

[[e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

It's about the tradition of which MMY is a part of. Krishna is mentioned in the Gita and in the Srimad Bhagavatam. I believe there's wisdom contained in these books.




---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

All right then since you continue to quote Marshy (why I don't know, especially when you quote him to me since you know I think he was one big fraud) but since you do, do you accept Marshy as such an authority that you take his word for Krsna's status? Meaning that you believe what Marshy said about Krishna cuz it was Marshy doin' the talkin'?


From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2015 4:13 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?




MMY believes Krishna is an incarnation of Vishnu here on Earth. I personally have not researched the subject.

---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Do you believe Krshna was an actual personage on the earth or a religious myth?


If real, was he just a man or an avatar of Vishnu?



From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 9:07 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


MJ,


I'm paraphrasing what Krishna said to Arjuna, who was reluctant in fighting his relatives in the battle of Kurukshetra.





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

"If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die."


Seems a rather narrow minded point of view.



What if the person being killed is a committed practitioner of ahimsa? A Jainite or a fanatic pacifist? One who would rather be killed than raise their hand in violence to another even in self defense?



Or suppose the about to be killed already had a terminal illness with a bleak prognosis and a short time to live, thus the killing would actually be a favor to the kill-ee and the killer, while perhaps having evil intent, would actually be giving a blessing and liberation to the kill-ee.



Could there be some planet in your chart that is debilitated that gives you such a judgmental and combative feeling about all this?



From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


Xeno,


I would assume that you would fight to save your life if the Islamic State rebels got a hold of you to cut your head off as propaganda for their cause. Are you going to assume that you're imagining things? As you've seen in the news, these rebels have cut the heads of Brits and Americans in the recent past. It's real and true.


If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die. If you fight and win, you save your life and become a hero to the world.





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

You know jr_esq, you are assuming that your idea of good and evil is real. I hold they are simply conceptual mappings onto reality, but they have no real existence except as a convenient and arbitrary way to categorise certain forms of activity. There was an episode of Star Trek in which an alien species, the Excalbians, investigated good and evil. They concluded that good and evil use the same methods and achieve the similar results. The writers of the episode used science fiction as a template to discuss the nature of good and evil.

How are you defining good and evil, and why do you feel those definitions are somehow true or real?


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,

IMO, it's unfortunate that human beings have to die. But circumstances happen where a person or a leader of a nation has to act to prevent evil or to eradicate evil from existing. Under these circumstances, it would be justified to take arms and fight. Any deaths that come from a justified war would be dignified and would be considered necessary to deter evil.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Surveys of deaths in the two Iraq wars show that (depending on the survey), between 151,000 to 1,000,000 Iraqis died in the two US-led wars between 2003 and 2013. One study, conducted by the Iraq Body Count project http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Body_Count_project, found that 174,000 Iraqis were reported killed between 2003 and 2013, with between 112,000-123,000 of those killed being civilian noncombatants. Meanwhile, the total number of US troops killed during this period was 4,491.


Now, JR, please tell me. Was that "good" or "evil?"



From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 3:14 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


About 12,000 or so people die every day. About 10% of those are killed by other people one way or another. The Islamic State is one of those ways. This is what happens. One method of reducing those killings is to bomb or send troops to kill the members of the Islamic State, by substituting other killings in place of the ones the Islamic State perpetrates. Then there is the question of who or what is killing the other 11,000 people who die every day, which is a far greater number. From their point of view, the killers in the Islamic State are doing their god-given duty to remove infidels and betrayers of their faith from the world, a good thing. We don't know what the people killed think of it, but those in the West do not seem in favour of the idea, thinking it a bad thing. In almost every year, anyone born more that 120 years ago is dead. As pointed out recently God killed something like 2,000,000 people as reported in the Bible, while Satan, bless his reticent soul, only 10. So it would appear the best killers are in the service of what is called 'good', for a good cause, by their own estimation. They truly believe something is good and worthy, and carry out killings in the service of that. That probably means we should be rather suspicious of the good people who want to purify their environment in the service of that good. For our own good, maybe we should kill them, just to be on the safe side.





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,

If you say there is no "good" or "evil", how do explain the fact that groups, like the Islamic State, kill innocent people in Iraq and Syria?

[Michael Jackson [e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

Dodging the question. Being evasive. Which tradition - the Holy Tradition that Marshy claimed to be part of - i.e. the line of gurus that had run jyotir math? or the larger tradition of just being a Hindu?

From: "***@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2015 12:08 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

  It's about the tradition of which MMY is a part of.  Krishna is mentioned in the Gita and in the Srimad Bhagavatam.  I believe there's wisdom contained in these books.



---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

All right then since you continue to quote Marshy (why I don't know, especially when you quote him to me since you know I think he was one big fraud) but since you do, do you accept Marshy as such an authority that you take his word for Krsna's status? Meaning that you believe what Marshy said about Krishna cuz it was Marshy doin' the talkin'?

From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2015 4:13 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

 
MMY believes Krishna is an incarnation of Vishnu here on Earth.  I personally have not researched the subject.

---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Do you believe Krshna was an actual personage on the earth or a religious myth?
If real, was he just a man or an avatar of Vishnu?

From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 9:07 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

 MJ,
I'm paraphrasing what Krishna said to Arjuna, who was reluctant in fighting his relatives in the battle of Kurukshetra.



---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

"If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die."
Seems a rather narrow minded point of view.

What if the person being killed is a committed practitioner of ahimsa? A Jainite or a fanatic pacifist? One who would rather be killed than raise their hand in violence to another even in self defense?

Or suppose the about to be killed already had a terminal illness with a bleak prognosis and a short time to live, thus the killing would actually be a favor to the kill-ee and the killer, while perhaps having evil intent, would actually be giving a blessing and liberation to the kill-ee.

Could there be some planet in your chart that is debilitated that gives you such a judgmental and combative feeling about all this?

From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

 Xeno,
I would assume that you would fight to save your life if the Islamic State rebels got a hold of you to cut your head off as propaganda for their cause. Are you going to assume that you're imagining things?  As you've seen in the news, these rebels have cut the heads of Brits and Americans in the recent past.  It's real and true.
If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die.  If you fight and win, you save your life and become a hero to the world.




---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

You know jr_esq, you are assuming that your idea of good and evil is real. I hold they are simply conceptual mappings onto reality, but they have no real existence except as a convenient and arbitrary way to categorise certain forms of activity. There was an episode of Star Trek in which an alien species, the Excalbians, investigated good and evil. They concluded that good and evil use the same methods and achieve the similar results. The writers of the episode used science fiction as a template to discuss the nature of good and evil.
How are you defining good and evil, and why do you feel those definitions are somehow true or real?


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,
IMO, it's unfortunate that human beings have to die.  But circumstances happen where a person or a leader of a nation has to act to prevent evil or to eradicate evil from existing.  Under these circumstances, it would be justified to take arms and fight.  Any deaths that come from a justified war would be dignified and would be considered necessary to deter evil.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Surveys of deaths in the two Iraq wars show that (depending on the survey), between 151,000 to 1,000,000 Iraqis died in the two US-led wars between 2003 and 2013. One study, conducted by the Iraq Body Count project, found that 174,000 Iraqis were reported killed between 2003 and 2013, withbetween 112,000-123,000 of those killed being civilian noncombatants. Meanwhile, the total number of US troops killed during this period was 4,491. 

Now, JR, please tell me. Was that "good" or "evil?"

From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 3:14 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

 About 12,000 or so people die every day. About 10% of those are killed by other people one way or another. The Islamic State is one of those ways. This is what happens. One method of reducing those killings is to bomb or send troops to kill the members of the Islamic State, by substituting other killings in place of the ones the Islamic State perpetrates. Then there is the question of who or what is killing the other 11,000 people who die every day, which is a far greater number. From their point of view, the killers in the Islamic State are doing their god-given duty to remove infidels and betrayers of their faith from the world, a good thing. We don't know what the people killed think of it, but those in the West do not seem in favour of the idea, thinking it a bad thing. In almost every year, anyone born more that 120 years ago is dead. As pointed out recently God killed something like 2,000,000 people as reported in the Bible, while Satan, bless his reticent soul, only 10. So it would appear the best killers are in the service of what is called 'good', for a good cause, by their own estimation. They truly believe something is good and worthy, and carry out killings in the service of that. That probably means we should be rather suspicious of the good people who want to purify their environment in the service of that good. For our own good, maybe we should kill them, just to be on the safe side.



---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,
If you say there is no "good" or "evil", how do explain the fact that groups, like the Islamic State, kill innocent people in Iraq and Syria?







#yiv6514601912 #yiv6514601912 -- #yiv6514601912ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv6514601912 #yiv6514601912ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv6514601912 #yiv6514601912ygrp-mkp #yiv6514601912hd {color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px 0;}#yiv6514601912 #yiv6514601912ygrp-mkp #yiv6514601912ads {margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv6514601912 #yiv6514601912ygrp-mkp .yiv6514601912ad {padding:0 0;}#yiv6514601912 #yiv6514601912ygrp-mkp .yiv6514601912ad p {margin:0;}#yiv6514601912 #yiv6514601912ygrp-mkp .yiv6514601912ad a {color:#0000ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv6514601912 #yiv6514601912ygrp-sponsor #yiv6514601912ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv6514601912 #yiv6514601912ygrp-sponsor #yiv6514601912ygrp-lc #yiv6514601912hd {margin:10px 0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv6514601912 #yiv6514601912ygrp-sponsor #yiv6514601912ygrp-lc .yiv6514601912ad {margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv6514601912 #yiv6514601912actions {font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv6514601912 #yiv6514601912activity {background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv6514601912 #yiv6514601912activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv6514601912 #yiv6514601912activity span:first-child {text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv6514601912 #yiv6514601912activity span a {color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}#yiv6514601912 #yiv6514601912activity span span {color:#ff7900;}#yiv6514601912 #yiv6514601912activity span .yiv6514601912underline {text-decoration:underline;}#yiv6514601912 .yiv6514601912attach {clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px 0;width:400px;}#yiv6514601912 .yiv6514601912attach div a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv6514601912 .yiv6514601912attach img {border:none;padding-right:5px;}#yiv6514601912 .yiv6514601912attach label {display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}#yiv6514601912 .yiv6514601912attach label a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv6514601912 blockquote {margin:0 0 0 4px;}#yiv6514601912 .yiv6514601912bold {font-family:Arial;font-size:13px;font-weight:700;}#yiv6514601912 .yiv6514601912bold a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv6514601912 dd.yiv6514601912last p a {font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv6514601912 dd.yiv6514601912last p span {margin-right:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv6514601912 dd.yiv6514601912last p span.yiv6514601912yshortcuts {margin-right:0;}#yiv6514601912 div.yiv6514601912attach-table div div a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv6514601912 div.yiv6514601912attach-table {width:400px;}#yiv6514601912 div.yiv6514601912file-title a, #yiv6514601912 div.yiv6514601912file-title a:active, #yiv6514601912 div.yiv6514601912file-title a:hover, #yiv6514601912 div.yiv6514601912file-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv6514601912 div.yiv6514601912photo-title a, #yiv6514601912 div.yiv6514601912photo-title a:active, #yiv6514601912 div.yiv6514601912photo-title a:hover, #yiv6514601912 div.yiv6514601912photo-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv6514601912 div#yiv6514601912ygrp-mlmsg #yiv6514601912ygrp-msg p a span.yiv6514601912yshortcuts {font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;font-weight:normal;}#yiv6514601912 .yiv6514601912green {color:#628c2a;}#yiv6514601912 .yiv6514601912MsoNormal {margin:0 0 0 0;}#yiv6514601912 o {font-size:0;}#yiv6514601912 #yiv6514601912photos div {float:left;width:72px;}#yiv6514601912 #yiv6514601912photos div div {border:1px solid #666666;height:62px;overflow:hidden;width:62px;}#yiv6514601912 #yiv6514601912photos div label {color:#666666;font-size:10px;overflow:hidden;text-align:center;white-space:nowrap;width:64px;}#yiv6514601912 #yiv6514601912reco-category {font-size:77%;}#yiv6514601912 #yiv6514601912reco-desc {font-size:77%;}#yiv6514601912 .yiv6514601912replbq {margin:4px;}#yiv6514601912 #yiv6514601912ygrp-actbar div a:first-child {margin-right:2px;padding-right:5px;}#yiv6514601912 #yiv6514601912ygrp-mlmsg {font-size:13px;font-family:Arial, helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv6514601912 #yiv6514601912ygrp-mlmsg table {font-size:inherit;font:100%;}#yiv6514601912 #yiv6514601912ygrp-mlmsg select, #yiv6514601912 input, #yiv6514601912 textarea {font:99% Arial, Helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv6514601912 #yiv6514601912ygrp-mlmsg pre, #yiv6514601912 code {font:115% monospace;}#yiv6514601912 #yiv6514601912ygrp-mlmsg * {line-height:1.22em;}#yiv6514601912 #yiv6514601912ygrp-mlmsg #yiv6514601912logo {padding-bottom:10px;}#yiv6514601912 #yiv6514601912ygrp-msg p a {font-family:Verdana;}#yiv6514601912 #yiv6514601912ygrp-msg p#yiv6514601912attach-count span {color:#1E66AE;font-weight:700;}#yiv6514601912 #yiv6514601912ygrp-reco #yiv6514601912reco-head {color:#ff7900;font-weight:700;}#yiv6514601912 #yiv6514601912ygrp-reco {margin-bottom:20px;padding:0px;}#yiv6514601912 #yiv6514601912ygrp-sponsor #yiv6514601912ov li a {font-size:130%;text-decoration:none;}#yiv6514601912 #yiv6514601912ygrp-sponsor #yiv6514601912ov li {font-size:77%;list-style-type:square;padding:6px 0;}#yiv6514601912 #yiv6514601912ygrp-sponsor #yiv6514601912ov ul {margin:0;padding:0 0 0 8px;}#yiv6514601912 #yiv6514601912ygrp-text {font-family:Georgia;}#yiv6514601912 #yiv6514601912ygrp-text p {margin:0 0 1em 0;}#yiv6514601912 #yiv6514601912ygrp-text tt {font-size:120%;}#yiv6514601912 #yiv6514601912ygrp-vital ul li:last-child {border-right:none !important;}#yiv6514601912

[[e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

I would say the line of gurus that MMY came from, specifically the Shankaracharya. In effect, it's the tradition that spawned the BGita and the Shrimad Bhagavatam.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Dodging the question. Being evasive. Which tradition - the Holy Tradition that Marshy claimed to be part of - i.e. the line of gurus that had run jyotir math? or the larger tradition of just being a Hindu?


From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2015 12:08 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


It's about the tradition of which MMY is a part of. Krishna is mentioned in the Gita and in the Srimad Bhagavatam. I believe there's wisdom contained in these books.





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

All right then since you continue to quote Marshy (why I don't know, especially when you quote him to me since you know I think he was one big fraud) but since you do, do you accept Marshy as such an authority that you take his word for Krsna's status? Meaning that you believe what Marshy said about Krishna cuz it was Marshy doin' the talkin'?


From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2015 4:13 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?




MMY believes Krishna is an incarnation of Vishnu here on Earth. I personally have not researched the subject.

---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Do you believe Krshna was an actual personage on the earth or a religious myth?


If real, was he just a man or an avatar of Vishnu?



From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 9:07 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


MJ,


I'm paraphrasing what Krishna said to Arjuna, who was reluctant in fighting his relatives in the battle of Kurukshetra.





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

"If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die."


Seems a rather narrow minded point of view.



What if the person being killed is a committed practitioner of ahimsa? A Jainite or a fanatic pacifist? One who would rather be killed than raise their hand in violence to another even in self defense?



Or suppose the about to be killed already had a terminal illness with a bleak prognosis and a short time to live, thus the killing would actually be a favor to the kill-ee and the killer, while perhaps having evil intent, would actually be giving a blessing and liberation to the kill-ee.



Could there be some planet in your chart that is debilitated that gives you such a judgmental and combative feeling about all this?



From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


Xeno,


I would assume that you would fight to save your life if the Islamic State rebels got a hold of you to cut your head off as propaganda for their cause. Are you going to assume that you're imagining things? As you've seen in the news, these rebels have cut the heads of Brits and Americans in the recent past. It's real and true.


If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die. If you fight and win, you save your life and become a hero to the world.





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

You know jr_esq, you are assuming that your idea of good and evil is real. I hold they are simply conceptual mappings onto reality, but they have no real existence except as a convenient and arbitrary way to categorise certain forms of activity. There was an episode of Star Trek in which an alien species, the Excalbians, investigated good and evil. They concluded that good and evil use the same methods and achieve the similar results. The writers of the episode used science fiction as a template to discuss the nature of good and evil.

How are you defining good and evil, and why do you feel those definitions are somehow true or real?


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,

IMO, it's unfortunate that human beings have to die. But circumstances happen where a person or a leader of a nation has to act to prevent evil or to eradicate evil from existing. Under these circumstances, it would be justified to take arms and fight. Any deaths that come from a justified war would be dignified and would be considered necessary to deter evil.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Surveys of deaths in the two Iraq wars show that (depending on the survey), between 151,000 to 1,000,000 Iraqis died in the two US-led wars between 2003 and 2013. One study, conducted by the Iraq Body Count project http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Body_Count_project, found that 174,000 Iraqis were reported killed between 2003 and 2013, with between 112,000-123,000 of those killed being civilian noncombatants. Meanwhile, the total number of US troops killed during this period was 4,491.


Now, JR, please tell me. Was that "good" or "evil?"



From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 3:14 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


About 12,000 or so people die every day. About 10% of those are killed by other people one way or another. The Islamic State is one of those ways. This is what happens. One method of reducing those killings is to bomb or send troops to kill the members of the Islamic State, by substituting other killings in place of the ones the Islamic State perpetrates. Then there is the question of who or what is killing the other 11,000 people who die every day, which is a far greater number. From their point of view, the killers in the Islamic State are doing their god-given duty to remove infidels and betrayers of their faith from the world, a good thing. We don't know what the people killed think of it, but those in the West do not seem in favour of the idea, thinking it a bad thing. In almost every year, anyone born more that 120 years ago is dead. As pointed out recently God killed something like 2,000,000 people as reported in the Bible, while Satan, bless his reticent soul, only 10. So it would appear the best killers are in the service of what is called 'good', for a good cause, by their own estimation. They truly believe something is good and worthy, and carry out killings in the service of that. That probably means we should be rather suspicious of the good people who want to purify their environment in the service of that good. For our own good, maybe we should kill them, just to be on the safe side.





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,

If you say there is no "good" or "evil", how do explain the fact that groups, like the Islamic State, kill innocent people in Iraq and Syria?

[Michael Jackson [e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

Thanks. But I must point out you must be suffering from Guru-itis, specifically Marshy-itis as it would be impossible for even Shankara himself to have authored the Gita, much less his line of follow up gurus.
The Gita is thought to have been composed sometimes between 400 BCE and 200 CE. Shankara wasn't born until 788 CE, at least 500 years AFTER the Gita came into existence. Some authorities have placed Shankara's birth nearly a thousand years earlier but most scholars discount the earlier dates.

From: "***@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2015 11:43 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

  I would say the line of gurus that MMY came from, specifically the Shankaracharya.  In effect, it's the tradition that spawned the BGita and the Shrimad Bhagavatam.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Dodging the question. Being evasive. Which tradition - the Holy Tradition that Marshy claimed to be part of - i.e. the line of gurus that had run jyotir math? or the larger tradition of just being a Hindu?

From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2015 12:08 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

 It's about the tradition of which MMY is a part of.  Krishna is mentioned in the Gita and in the Srimad Bhagavatam.  I believe there's wisdom contained in these books.



---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

All right then since you continue to quote Marshy (why I don't know, especially when you quote him to me since you know I think he was one big fraud) but since you do, do you accept Marshy as such an authority that you take his word for Krsna's status? Meaning that you believe what Marshy said about Krishna cuz it was Marshy doin' the talkin'?

From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2015 4:13 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

 
MMY believes Krishna is an incarnation of Vishnu here on Earth.  I personally have not researched the subject.

---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Do you believe Krshna was an actual personage on the earth or a religious myth?
If real, was he just a man or an avatar of Vishnu?

From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 9:07 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

 MJ,
I'm paraphrasing what Krishna said to Arjuna, who was reluctant in fighting his relatives in the battle of Kurukshetra.



---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

"If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die."
Seems a rather narrow minded point of view.

What if the person being killed is a committed practitioner of ahimsa? A Jainite or a fanatic pacifist? One who would rather be killed than raise their hand in violence to another even in self defense?

Or suppose the about to be killed already had a terminal illness with a bleak prognosis and a short time to live, thus the killing would actually be a favor to the kill-ee and the killer, while perhaps having evil intent, would actually be giving a blessing and liberation to the kill-ee.

Could there be some planet in your chart that is debilitated that gives you such a judgmental and combative feeling about all this?

From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

 Xeno,
I would assume that you would fight to save your life if the Islamic State rebels got a hold of you to cut your head off as propaganda for their cause. Are you going to assume that you're imagining things?  As you've seen in the news, these rebels have cut the heads of Brits and Americans in the recent past.  It's real and true.
If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die.  If you fight and win, you save your life and become a hero to the world.




---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

You know jr_esq, you are assuming that your idea of good and evil is real. I hold they are simply conceptual mappings onto reality, but they have no real existence except as a convenient and arbitrary way to categorise certain forms of activity. There was an episode of Star Trek in which an alien species, the Excalbians, investigated good and evil. They concluded that good and evil use the same methods and achieve the similar results. The writers of the episode used science fiction as a template to discuss the nature of good and evil.
How are you defining good and evil, and why do you feel those definitions are somehow true or real?


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,
IMO, it's unfortunate that human beings have to die.  But circumstances happen where a person or a leader of a nation has to act to prevent evil or to eradicate evil from existing.  Under these circumstances, it would be justified to take arms and fight.  Any deaths that come from a justified war would be dignified and would be considered necessary to deter evil.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Surveys of deaths in the two Iraq wars show that (depending on the survey), between 151,000 to 1,000,000 Iraqis died in the two US-led wars between 2003 and 2013. One study, conducted by the Iraq Body Count project, found that 174,000 Iraqis were reported killed between 2003 and 2013, withbetween 112,000-123,000 of those killed being civilian noncombatants. Meanwhile, the total number of US troops killed during this period was 4,491. 

Now, JR, please tell me. Was that "good" or "evil?"

From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 3:14 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

 About 12,000 or so people die every day. About 10% of those are killed by other people one way or another. The Islamic State is one of those ways. This is what happens. One method of reducing those killings is to bomb or send troops to kill the members of the Islamic State, by substituting other killings in place of the ones the Islamic State perpetrates. Then there is the question of who or what is killing the other 11,000 people who die every day, which is a far greater number. From their point of view, the killers in the Islamic State are doing their god-given duty to remove infidels and betrayers of their faith from the world, a good thing. We don't know what the people killed think of it, but those in the West do not seem in favour of the idea, thinking it a bad thing. In almost every year, anyone born more that 120 years ago is dead. As pointed out recently God killed something like 2,000,000 people as reported in the Bible, while Satan, bless his reticent soul, only 10. So it would appear the best killers are in the service of what is called 'good', for a good cause, by their own estimation. They truly believe something is good and worthy, and carry out killings in the service of that. That probably means we should be rather suspicious of the good people who want to purify their environment in the service of that good. For our own good, maybe we should kill them, just to be on the safe side.



---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,
If you say there is no "good" or "evil", how do explain the fact that groups, like the Islamic State, kill innocent people in Iraq and Syria?









#yiv5034609663 #yiv5034609663 -- #yiv5034609663ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv5034609663 #yiv5034609663ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv5034609663 #yiv5034609663ygrp-mkp #yiv5034609663hd {color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px 0;}#yiv5034609663 #yiv5034609663ygrp-mkp #yiv5034609663ads {margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv5034609663 #yiv5034609663ygrp-mkp .yiv5034609663ad {padding:0 0;}#yiv5034609663 #yiv5034609663ygrp-mkp .yiv5034609663ad p {margin:0;}#yiv5034609663 #yiv5034609663ygrp-mkp .yiv5034609663ad a {color:#0000ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv5034609663 #yiv5034609663ygrp-sponsor #yiv5034609663ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv5034609663 #yiv5034609663ygrp-sponsor #yiv5034609663ygrp-lc #yiv5034609663hd {margin:10px 0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv5034609663 #yiv5034609663ygrp-sponsor #yiv5034609663ygrp-lc .yiv5034609663ad {margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv5034609663 #yiv5034609663actions {font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv5034609663 #yiv5034609663activity {background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv5034609663 #yiv5034609663activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv5034609663 #yiv5034609663activity span:first-child {text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv5034609663 #yiv5034609663activity span a {color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}#yiv5034609663 #yiv5034609663activity span span {color:#ff7900;}#yiv5034609663 #yiv5034609663activity span .yiv5034609663underline {text-decoration:underline;}#yiv5034609663 .yiv5034609663attach {clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px 0;width:400px;}#yiv5034609663 .yiv5034609663attach div a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv5034609663 .yiv5034609663attach img {border:none;padding-right:5px;}#yiv5034609663 .yiv5034609663attach label {display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}#yiv5034609663 .yiv5034609663attach label a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv5034609663 blockquote {margin:0 0 0 4px;}#yiv5034609663 .yiv5034609663bold {font-family:Arial;font-size:13px;font-weight:700;}#yiv5034609663 .yiv5034609663bold a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv5034609663 dd.yiv5034609663last p a {font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv5034609663 dd.yiv5034609663last p span {margin-right:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv5034609663 dd.yiv5034609663last p span.yiv5034609663yshortcuts {margin-right:0;}#yiv5034609663 div.yiv5034609663attach-table div div a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv5034609663 div.yiv5034609663attach-table {width:400px;}#yiv5034609663 div.yiv5034609663file-title a, #yiv5034609663 div.yiv5034609663file-title a:active, #yiv5034609663 div.yiv5034609663file-title a:hover, #yiv5034609663 div.yiv5034609663file-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv5034609663 div.yiv5034609663photo-title a, #yiv5034609663 div.yiv5034609663photo-title a:active, #yiv5034609663 div.yiv5034609663photo-title a:hover, #yiv5034609663 div.yiv5034609663photo-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv5034609663 div#yiv5034609663ygrp-mlmsg #yiv5034609663ygrp-msg p a span.yiv5034609663yshortcuts {font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;font-weight:normal;}#yiv5034609663 .yiv5034609663green {color:#628c2a;}#yiv5034609663 .yiv5034609663MsoNormal {margin:0 0 0 0;}#yiv5034609663 o {font-size:0;}#yiv5034609663 #yiv5034609663photos div {float:left;width:72px;}#yiv5034609663 #yiv5034609663photos div div {border:1px solid #666666;height:62px;overflow:hidden;width:62px;}#yiv5034609663 #yiv5034609663photos div label {color:#666666;font-size:10px;overflow:hidden;text-align:center;white-space:nowrap;width:64px;}#yiv5034609663 #yiv5034609663reco-category {font-size:77%;}#yiv5034609663 #yiv5034609663reco-desc {font-size:77%;}#yiv5034609663 .yiv5034609663replbq {margin:4px;}#yiv5034609663 #yiv5034609663ygrp-actbar div a:first-child {margin-right:2px;padding-right:5px;}#yiv5034609663 #yiv5034609663ygrp-mlmsg {font-size:13px;font-family:Arial, helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv5034609663 #yiv5034609663ygrp-mlmsg table {font-size:inherit;font:100%;}#yiv5034609663 #yiv5034609663ygrp-mlmsg select, #yiv5034609663 input, #yiv5034609663 textarea {font:99% Arial, Helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv5034609663 #yiv5034609663ygrp-mlmsg pre, #yiv5034609663 code {font:115% monospace;}#yiv5034609663 #yiv5034609663ygrp-mlmsg * {line-height:1.22em;}#yiv5034609663 #yiv5034609663ygrp-mlmsg #yiv5034609663logo {padding-bottom:10px;}#yiv5034609663 #yiv5034609663ygrp-msg p a {font-family:Verdana;}#yiv5034609663 #yiv5034609663ygrp-msg p#yiv5034609663attach-count span {color:#1E66AE;font-weight:700;}#yiv5034609663 #yiv5034609663ygrp-reco #yiv5034609663reco-head {color:#ff7900;font-weight:700;}#yiv5034609663 #yiv5034609663ygrp-reco {margin-bottom:20px;padding:0px;}#yiv5034609663 #yiv5034609663ygrp-sponsor #yiv5034609663ov li a {font-size:130%;text-decoration:none;}#yiv5034609663 #yiv5034609663ygrp-sponsor #yiv5034609663ov li {font-size:77%;list-style-type:square;padding:6px 0;}#yiv5034609663 #yiv5034609663ygrp-sponsor #yiv5034609663ov ul {margin:0;padding:0 0 0 8px;}#yiv5034609663 #yiv5034609663ygrp-text {font-family:Georgia;}#yiv5034609663 #yiv5034609663ygrp-text p {margin:0 0 1em 0;}#yiv5034609663 #yiv5034609663ygrp-text tt {font-size:120%;}#yiv5034609663 #yiv5034609663ygrp-vital ul li:last-child {border-right:none !important;}#yiv5034609663

[TurquoiseBee [e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

John, we've all seen you post things on this forum that leave no doubt that you believe that such mythical personalities as Krishna actually existed. You've actually said as much in the past, so there is no need to try to hide the fact now.

What is more interesting, since you *are* trying to hide it, is HOW you claim you could "research the subject" and come up with a definitive answer stating that "Krishna is an incarnation of Vishnu here on Earth." Please explain to us HOW you or any other person could determine the validity of this statement. NOT that "some people believe it," but that's it's actual fact. Please share with us how a person convinces himself that he or she "knows" such a thing.
From: "***@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>

  MMY believes Krishna is an incarnation of Vishnu here on Earth.  I personally have not researched the subject.

---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Do you believe Krshna was an actual personage on the earth or a religious myth?
If real, was he just a man or an avatar of Vishnu?

From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 9:07 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

 MJ,
I'm paraphrasing what Krishna said to Arjuna, who was reluctant in fighting his relatives in the battle of Kurukshetra.



---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

"If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die."
Seems a rather narrow minded point of view.

What if the person being killed is a committed practitioner of ahimsa? A Jainite or a fanatic pacifist? One who would rather be killed than raise their hand in violence to another even in self defense?

Or suppose the about to be killed already had a terminal illness with a bleak prognosis and a short time to live, thus the killing would actually be a favor to the kill-ee and the killer, while perhaps having evil intent, would actually be giving a blessing and liberation to the kill-ee.

Could there be some planet in your chart that is debilitated that gives you such a judgmental and combative feeling about all this?

From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

 Xeno,
I would assume that you would fight to save your life if the Islamic State rebels got a hold of you to cut your head off as propaganda for their cause. Are you going to assume that you're imagining things?  As you've seen in the news, these rebels have cut the heads of Brits and Americans in the recent past.  It's real and true.
If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die.  If you fight and win, you save your life and become a hero to the world.




---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

You know jr_esq, you are assuming that your idea of good and evil is real. I hold they are simply conceptual mappings onto reality, but they have no real existence except as a convenient and arbitrary way to categorise certain forms of activity. There was an episode of Star Trek in which an alien species, the Excalbians, investigated good and evil. They concluded that good and evil use the same methods and achieve the similar results. The writers of the episode used science fiction as a template to discuss the nature of good and evil.
How are you defining good and evil, and why do you feel those definitions are somehow true or real?


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,
IMO, it's unfortunate that human beings have to die.  But circumstances happen where a person or a leader of a nation has to act to prevent evil or to eradicate evil from existing.  Under these circumstances, it would be justified to take arms and fight.  Any deaths that come from a justified war would be dignified and would be considered necessary to deter evil.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Surveys of deaths in the two Iraq wars show that (depending on the survey), between 151,000 to 1,000,000 Iraqis died in the two US-led wars between 2003 and 2013. One study, conducted by the Iraq Body Count project, found that 174,000 Iraqis were reported killed between 2003 and 2013, withbetween 112,000-123,000 of those killed being civilian noncombatants. Meanwhile, the total number of US troops killed during this period was 4,491. 

Now, JR, please tell me. Was that "good" or "evil?"

From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 3:14 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

 About 12,000 or so people die every day. About 10% of those are killed by other people one way or another. The Islamic State is one of those ways. This is what happens. One method of reducing those killings is to bomb or send troops to kill the members of the Islamic State, by substituting other killings in place of the ones the Islamic State perpetrates. Then there is the question of who or what is killing the other 11,000 people who die every day, which is a far greater number. From their point of view, the killers in the Islamic State are doing their god-given duty to remove infidels and betrayers of their faith from the world, a good thing. We don't know what the people killed think of it, but those in the West do not seem in favour of the idea, thinking it a bad thing. In almost every year, anyone born more that 120 years ago is dead. As pointed out recently God killed something like 2,000,000 people as reported in the Bible, while Satan, bless his reticent soul, only 10. So it would appear the best killers are in the service of what is called 'good', for a good cause, by their own estimation. They truly believe something is good and worthy, and carry out killings in the service of that. That probably means we should be rather suspicious of the good people who want to purify their environment in the service of that good. For our own good, maybe we should kill them, just to be on the safe side.



---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,
If you say there is no "good" or "evil", how do explain the fact that groups, like the Islamic State, kill innocent people in Iraq and Syria?





#yiv2036101197 #yiv2036101197 -- #yiv2036101197ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv2036101197 #yiv2036101197ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv2036101197 #yiv2036101197ygrp-mkp #yiv2036101197hd {color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px 0;}#yiv2036101197 #yiv2036101197ygrp-mkp #yiv2036101197ads {margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv2036101197 #yiv2036101197ygrp-mkp .yiv2036101197ad {padding:0 0;}#yiv2036101197 #yiv2036101197ygrp-mkp .yiv2036101197ad p {margin:0;}#yiv2036101197 #yiv2036101197ygrp-mkp .yiv2036101197ad a {color:#0000ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv2036101197 #yiv2036101197ygrp-sponsor #yiv2036101197ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv2036101197 #yiv2036101197ygrp-sponsor #yiv2036101197ygrp-lc #yiv2036101197hd {margin:10px 0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv2036101197 #yiv2036101197ygrp-sponsor #yiv2036101197ygrp-lc .yiv2036101197ad {margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv2036101197 #yiv2036101197actions {font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv2036101197 #yiv2036101197activity {background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv2036101197 #yiv2036101197activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv2036101197 #yiv2036101197activity span:first-child {text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv2036101197 #yiv2036101197activity span a {color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}#yiv2036101197 #yiv2036101197activity span span {color:#ff7900;}#yiv2036101197 #yiv2036101197activity span .yiv2036101197underline {text-decoration:underline;}#yiv2036101197 .yiv2036101197attach {clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px 0;width:400px;}#yiv2036101197 .yiv2036101197attach div a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv2036101197 .yiv2036101197attach img {border:none;padding-right:5px;}#yiv2036101197 .yiv2036101197attach label {display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}#yiv2036101197 .yiv2036101197attach label a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv2036101197 blockquote {margin:0 0 0 4px;}#yiv2036101197 .yiv2036101197bold {font-family:Arial;font-size:13px;font-weight:700;}#yiv2036101197 .yiv2036101197bold a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv2036101197 dd.yiv2036101197last p a {font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv2036101197 dd.yiv2036101197last p span {margin-right:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv2036101197 dd.yiv2036101197last p span.yiv2036101197yshortcuts {margin-right:0;}#yiv2036101197 div.yiv2036101197attach-table div div a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv2036101197 div.yiv2036101197attach-table {width:400px;}#yiv2036101197 div.yiv2036101197file-title a, #yiv2036101197 div.yiv2036101197file-title a:active, #yiv2036101197 div.yiv2036101197file-title a:hover, #yiv2036101197 div.yiv2036101197file-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv2036101197 div.yiv2036101197photo-title a, #yiv2036101197 div.yiv2036101197photo-title a:active, #yiv2036101197 div.yiv2036101197photo-title a:hover, #yiv2036101197 div.yiv2036101197photo-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv2036101197 div#yiv2036101197ygrp-mlmsg #yiv2036101197ygrp-msg p a span.yiv2036101197yshortcuts {font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;font-weight:normal;}#yiv2036101197 .yiv2036101197green {color:#628c2a;}#yiv2036101197 .yiv2036101197MsoNormal {margin:0 0 0 0;}#yiv2036101197 o {font-size:0;}#yiv2036101197 #yiv2036101197photos div {float:left;width:72px;}#yiv2036101197 #yiv2036101197photos div div {border:1px solid #666666;height:62px;overflow:hidden;width:62px;}#yiv2036101197 #yiv2036101197photos div label {color:#666666;font-size:10px;overflow:hidden;text-align:center;white-space:nowrap;width:64px;}#yiv2036101197 #yiv2036101197reco-category {font-size:77%;}#yiv2036101197 #yiv2036101197reco-desc {font-size:77%;}#yiv2036101197 .yiv2036101197replbq {margin:4px;}#yiv2036101197 #yiv2036101197ygrp-actbar div a:first-child {margin-right:2px;padding-right:5px;}#yiv2036101197 #yiv2036101197ygrp-mlmsg {font-size:13px;font-family:Arial, helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv2036101197 #yiv2036101197ygrp-mlmsg table {font-size:inherit;font:100%;}#yiv2036101197 #yiv2036101197ygrp-mlmsg select, #yiv2036101197 input, #yiv2036101197 textarea {font:99% Arial, Helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv2036101197 #yiv2036101197ygrp-mlmsg pre, #yiv2036101197 code {font:115% monospace;}#yiv2036101197 #yiv2036101197ygrp-mlmsg * {line-height:1.22em;}#yiv2036101197 #yiv2036101197ygrp-mlmsg #yiv2036101197logo {padding-bottom:10px;}#yiv2036101197 #yiv2036101197ygrp-msg p a {font-family:Verdana;}#yiv2036101197 #yiv2036101197ygrp-msg p#yiv2036101197attach-count span {color:#1E66AE;font-weight:700;}#yiv2036101197 #yiv2036101197ygrp-reco #yiv2036101197reco-head {color:#ff7900;font-weight:700;}#yiv2036101197 #yiv2036101197ygrp-reco {margin-bottom:20px;padding:0px;}#yiv2036101197 #yiv2036101197ygrp-sponsor #yiv2036101197ov li a {font-size:130%;text-decoration:none;}#yiv2036101197 #yiv2036101197ygrp-sponsor #yiv2036101197ov li {font-size:77%;list-style-type:square;padding:6px 0;}#yiv2036101197 #yiv2036101197ygrp-sponsor #yiv2036101197ov ul {margin:0;padding:0 0 0 8px;}#yiv2036101197 #yiv2036101197ygrp-text {font-family:Georgia;}#yiv2036101197 #yiv2036101197ygrp-text p {margin:0 0 1em 0;}#yiv2036101197 #yiv2036101197ygrp-text tt {font-size:120%;}#yiv2036101197 #yiv2036101197ygrp-vital ul li:last-child {border-right:none !important;}#yiv2036101197

[[e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

Pastor Barry,

I said below that I did NOT research the matter personally.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

John, we've all seen you post things on this forum that leave no doubt that you believe that such mythical personalities as Krishna actually existed. You've actually said as much in the past, so there is no need to try to hide the fact now.



What is more interesting, since you *are* trying to hide it, is HOW you claim you could "research the subject" and come up with a definitive answer stating that "Krishna is an incarnation of Vishnu here on Earth." Please explain to us HOW you or any other person could determine the validity of this statement. NOT that "some people believe it," but that's it's actual fact. Please share with us how a person convinces himself that he or she "knows" such a thing.

From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>

MMY believes Krishna is an incarnation of Vishnu here on Earth. I personally have not researched the subject.

---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Do you believe Krshna was an actual personage on the earth or a religious myth?


If real, was he just a man or an avatar of Vishnu?



From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 9:07 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


MJ,


I'm paraphrasing what Krishna said to Arjuna, who was reluctant in fighting his relatives in the battle of Kurukshetra.





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

"If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die."


Seems a rather narrow minded point of view.



What if the person being killed is a committed practitioner of ahimsa? A Jainite or a fanatic pacifist? One who would rather be killed than raise their hand in violence to another even in self defense?



Or suppose the about to be killed already had a terminal illness with a bleak prognosis and a short time to live, thus the killing would actually be a favor to the kill-ee and the killer, while perhaps having evil intent, would actually be giving a blessing and liberation to the kill-ee.



Could there be some planet in your chart that is debilitated that gives you such a judgmental and combative feeling about all this?



From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


Xeno,


I would assume that you would fight to save your life if the Islamic State rebels got a hold of you to cut your head off as propaganda for their cause. Are you going to assume that you're imagining things? As you've seen in the news, these rebels have cut the heads of Brits and Americans in the recent past. It's real and true.


If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die. If you fight and win, you save your life and become a hero to the world.





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

You know jr_esq, you are assuming that your idea of good and evil is real. I hold they are simply conceptual mappings onto reality, but they have no real existence except as a convenient and arbitrary way to categorise certain forms of activity. There was an episode of Star Trek in which an alien species, the Excalbians, investigated good and evil. They concluded that good and evil use the same methods and achieve the similar results. The writers of the episode used science fiction as a template to discuss the nature of good and evil.

How are you defining good and evil, and why do you feel those definitions are somehow true or real?


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,

IMO, it's unfortunate that human beings have to die. But circumstances happen where a person or a leader of a nation has to act to prevent evil or to eradicate evil from existing. Under these circumstances, it would be justified to take arms and fight. Any deaths that come from a justified war would be dignified and would be considered necessary to deter evil.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Surveys of deaths in the two Iraq wars show that (depending on the survey), between 151,000 to 1,000,000 Iraqis died in the two US-led wars between 2003 and 2013. One study, conducted by the Iraq Body Count project http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Body_Count_project, found that 174,000 Iraqis were reported killed between 2003 and 2013, with between 112,000-123,000 of those killed being civilian noncombatants. Meanwhile, the total number of US troops killed during this period was 4,491.


Now, JR, please tell me. Was that "good" or "evil?"



From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 3:14 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


About 12,000 or so people die every day. About 10% of those are killed by other people one way or another. The Islamic State is one of those ways. This is what happens. One method of reducing those killings is to bomb or send troops to kill the members of the Islamic State, by substituting other killings in place of the ones the Islamic State perpetrates. Then there is the question of who or what is killing the other 11,000 people who die every day, which is a far greater number. From their point of view, the killers in the Islamic State are doing their god-given duty to remove infidels and betrayers of their faith from the world, a good thing. We don't know what the people killed think of it, but those in the West do not seem in favour of the idea, thinking it a bad thing. In almost every year, anyone born more that 120 years ago is dead. As pointed out recently God killed something like 2,000,000 people as reported in the Bible, while Satan, bless his reticent soul, only 10. So it would appear the best killers are in the service of what is called 'good', for a good cause, by their own estimation. They truly believe something is good and worthy, and carry out killings in the service of that. That probably means we should be rather suspicious of the good people who want to purify their environment in the service of that good. For our own good, maybe we should kill them, just to be on the safe side.





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,

If you say there is no "good" or "evil", how do explain the fact that groups, like the Islamic State, kill innocent people in Iraq and Syria?

[TurquoiseBee [e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

I am asking you to explain to us how ANYONE could possibly "research" such a question as the historical existence of Krishna and come up with an accurate answer. You seem to base a lot of your beliefs on "Maharishisez," meaning that *he* said something that you consider fact. What I am asking you to do is explain to us HOW he (or anyone else) could *possibly* determine that "Krishna" actually existed sufficiently that you would believe it to be fact.

Don't be coy. You obviously believe this stuff. Now explain to us how you think it works.

From: "***@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2015 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

  Pastor Barry,
I said below that I did NOT research the matter personally.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

John, we've all seen you post things on this forum that leave no doubt that you believe that such mythical personalities as Krishna actually existed. You've actually said as much in the past, so there is no need to try to hide the fact now.

What is more interesting, since you *are* trying to hide it, is HOW you claim you could "research the subject" and come up with a definitive answer stating that "Krishna is an incarnation of Vishnu here on Earth." Please explain to us HOW you or any other person could determine the validity of this statement. NOT that "some people believe it," but that's it's actual fact. Please share with us how a person convinces himself that he or she "knows" such a thing.
From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>

 MMY believes Krishna is an incarnation of Vishnu here on Earth.  I personally have not researched the subject.

---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Do you believe Krshna was an actual personage on the earth or a religious myth?
If real, was he just a man or an avatar of Vishnu?

From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 9:07 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

 MJ,
I'm paraphrasing what Krishna said to Arjuna, who was reluctant in fighting his relatives in the battle of Kurukshetra.



---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

"If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die."
Seems a rather narrow minded point of view.

What if the person being killed is a committed practitioner of ahimsa? A Jainite or a fanatic pacifist? One who would rather be killed than raise their hand in violence to another even in self defense?

Or suppose the about to be killed already had a terminal illness with a bleak prognosis and a short time to live, thus the killing would actually be a favor to the kill-ee and the killer, while perhaps having evil intent, would actually be giving a blessing and liberation to the kill-ee.

Could there be some planet in your chart that is debilitated that gives you such a judgmental and combative feeling about all this?

From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

 Xeno,
I would assume that you would fight to save your life if the Islamic State rebels got a hold of you to cut your head off as propaganda for their cause. Are you going to assume that you're imagining things?  As you've seen in the news, these rebels have cut the heads of Brits and Americans in the recent past.  It's real and true.
If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die.  If you fight and win, you save your life and become a hero to the world.




---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

You know jr_esq, you are assuming that your idea of good and evil is real. I hold they are simply conceptual mappings onto reality, but they have no real existence except as a convenient and arbitrary way to categorise certain forms of activity. There was an episode of Star Trek in which an alien species, the Excalbians, investigated good and evil. They concluded that good and evil use the same methods and achieve the similar results. The writers of the episode used science fiction as a template to discuss the nature of good and evil.
How are you defining good and evil, and why do you feel those definitions are somehow true or real?


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,
IMO, it's unfortunate that human beings have to die.  But circumstances happen where a person or a leader of a nation has to act to prevent evil or to eradicate evil from existing.  Under these circumstances, it would be justified to take arms and fight.  Any deaths that come from a justified war would be dignified and would be considered necessary to deter evil.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Surveys of deaths in the two Iraq wars show that (depending on the survey), between 151,000 to 1,000,000 Iraqis died in the two US-led wars between 2003 and 2013. One study, conducted by the Iraq Body Count project, found that 174,000 Iraqis were reported killed between 2003 and 2013, withbetween 112,000-123,000 of those killed being civilian noncombatants. Meanwhile, the total number of US troops killed during this period was 4,491. 

Now, JR, please tell me. Was that "good" or "evil?"

From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 3:14 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

 About 12,000 or so people die every day. About 10% of those are killed by other people one way or another. The Islamic State is one of those ways. This is what happens. One method of reducing those killings is to bomb or send troops to kill the members of the Islamic State, by substituting other killings in place of the ones the Islamic State perpetrates. Then there is the question of who or what is killing the other 11,000 people who die every day, which is a far greater number. From their point of view, the killers in the Islamic State are doing their god-given duty to remove infidels and betrayers of their faith from the world, a good thing. We don't know what the people killed think of it, but those in the West do not seem in favour of the idea, thinking it a bad thing. In almost every year, anyone born more that 120 years ago is dead. As pointed out recently God killed something like 2,000,000 people as reported in the Bible, while Satan, bless his reticent soul, only 10. So it would appear the best killers are in the service of what is called 'good', for a good cause, by their own estimation. They truly believe something is good and worthy, and carry out killings in the service of that. That probably means we should be rather suspicious of the good people who want to purify their environment in the service of that good. For our own good, maybe we should kill them, just to be on the safe side.



---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,
If you say there is no "good" or "evil", how do explain the fact that groups, like the Islamic State, kill innocent people in Iraq and Syria?







#yiv7878196999 #yiv7878196999 -- #yiv7878196999ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv7878196999 #yiv7878196999ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv7878196999 #yiv7878196999ygrp-mkp #yiv7878196999hd {color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px 0;}#yiv7878196999 #yiv7878196999ygrp-mkp #yiv7878196999ads {margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv7878196999 #yiv7878196999ygrp-mkp .yiv7878196999ad {padding:0 0;}#yiv7878196999 #yiv7878196999ygrp-mkp .yiv7878196999ad p {margin:0;}#yiv7878196999 #yiv7878196999ygrp-mkp .yiv7878196999ad a {color:#0000ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv7878196999 #yiv7878196999ygrp-sponsor #yiv7878196999ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv7878196999 #yiv7878196999ygrp-sponsor #yiv7878196999ygrp-lc #yiv7878196999hd {margin:10px 0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv7878196999 #yiv7878196999ygrp-sponsor #yiv7878196999ygrp-lc .yiv7878196999ad {margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv7878196999 #yiv7878196999actions {font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv7878196999 #yiv7878196999activity {background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv7878196999 #yiv7878196999activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv7878196999 #yiv7878196999activity span:first-child {text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv7878196999 #yiv7878196999activity span a {color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}#yiv7878196999 #yiv7878196999activity span span {color:#ff7900;}#yiv7878196999 #yiv7878196999activity span .yiv7878196999underline {text-decoration:underline;}#yiv7878196999 .yiv7878196999attach {clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px 0;width:400px;}#yiv7878196999 .yiv7878196999attach div a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv7878196999 .yiv7878196999attach img {border:none;padding-right:5px;}#yiv7878196999 .yiv7878196999attach label {display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}#yiv7878196999 .yiv7878196999attach label a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv7878196999 blockquote {margin:0 0 0 4px;}#yiv7878196999 .yiv7878196999bold {font-family:Arial;font-size:13px;font-weight:700;}#yiv7878196999 .yiv7878196999bold a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv7878196999 dd.yiv7878196999last p a {font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv7878196999 dd.yiv7878196999last p span {margin-right:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv7878196999 dd.yiv7878196999last p span.yiv7878196999yshortcuts {margin-right:0;}#yiv7878196999 div.yiv7878196999attach-table div div a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv7878196999 div.yiv7878196999attach-table {width:400px;}#yiv7878196999 div.yiv7878196999file-title a, #yiv7878196999 div.yiv7878196999file-title a:active, #yiv7878196999 div.yiv7878196999file-title a:hover, #yiv7878196999 div.yiv7878196999file-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv7878196999 div.yiv7878196999photo-title a, #yiv7878196999 div.yiv7878196999photo-title a:active, #yiv7878196999 div.yiv7878196999photo-title a:hover, #yiv7878196999 div.yiv7878196999photo-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv7878196999 div#yiv7878196999ygrp-mlmsg #yiv7878196999ygrp-msg p a span.yiv7878196999yshortcuts {font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;font-weight:normal;}#yiv7878196999 .yiv7878196999green {color:#628c2a;}#yiv7878196999 .yiv7878196999MsoNormal {margin:0 0 0 0;}#yiv7878196999 o {font-size:0;}#yiv7878196999 #yiv7878196999photos div {float:left;width:72px;}#yiv7878196999 #yiv7878196999photos div div {border:1px solid #666666;height:62px;overflow:hidden;width:62px;}#yiv7878196999 #yiv7878196999photos div label {color:#666666;font-size:10px;overflow:hidden;text-align:center;white-space:nowrap;width:64px;}#yiv7878196999 #yiv7878196999reco-category {font-size:77%;}#yiv7878196999 #yiv7878196999reco-desc {font-size:77%;}#yiv7878196999 .yiv7878196999replbq {margin:4px;}#yiv7878196999 #yiv7878196999ygrp-actbar div a:first-child {margin-right:2px;padding-right:5px;}#yiv7878196999 #yiv7878196999ygrp-mlmsg {font-size:13px;font-family:Arial, helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv7878196999 #yiv7878196999ygrp-mlmsg table {font-size:inherit;font:100%;}#yiv7878196999 #yiv7878196999ygrp-mlmsg select, #yiv7878196999 input, #yiv7878196999 textarea {font:99% Arial, Helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv7878196999 #yiv7878196999ygrp-mlmsg pre, #yiv7878196999 code {font:115% monospace;}#yiv7878196999 #yiv7878196999ygrp-mlmsg * {line-height:1.22em;}#yiv7878196999 #yiv7878196999ygrp-mlmsg #yiv7878196999logo {padding-bottom:10px;}#yiv7878196999 #yiv7878196999ygrp-msg p a {font-family:Verdana;}#yiv7878196999 #yiv7878196999ygrp-msg p#yiv7878196999attach-count span {color:#1E66AE;font-weight:700;}#yiv7878196999 #yiv7878196999ygrp-reco #yiv7878196999reco-head {color:#ff7900;font-weight:700;}#yiv7878196999 #yiv7878196999ygrp-reco {margin-bottom:20px;padding:0px;}#yiv7878196999 #yiv7878196999ygrp-sponsor #yiv7878196999ov li a {font-size:130%;text-decoration:none;}#yiv7878196999 #yiv7878196999ygrp-sponsor #yiv7878196999ov li {font-size:77%;list-style-type:square;padding:6px 0;}#yiv7878196999 #yiv7878196999ygrp-sponsor #yiv7878196999ov ul {margin:0;padding:0 0 0 8px;}#yiv7878196999 #yiv7878196999ygrp-text {font-family:Georgia;}#yiv7878196999 #yiv7878196999ygrp-text p {margin:0 0 1em 0;}#yiv7878196999 #yiv7878196999ygrp-text tt {font-size:120%;}#yiv7878196999 #yiv7878196999ygrp-vital ul li:last-child {border-right:none !important;}#yiv7878196999

[[e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

Establishing the historicity of various religious characters today is pretty much impossible. Of the following, Krishna, Buddha, Moses, Jesus, Mohammed, Shankara, only the latter two have much evidence that would just suggest they existed, primarily because they are a bit more recent. It seems more logical with the lack of definite evidence that these names can be used as 'bookmarks' that delineate a certain point in the development of a tradition, a personification of what had transpired up to that point. If we were to take the TMO holy tradition, only Shankara, Brahmanda Saraswati, Maharishi, and King Tony have a believable amount of evidence, and only the last three have really good historical evidence as to their existence. If we assume enlightenment exists, we could say that the 'tradition' of enlightenment is something generated in one's own mind as a means to remove the delusion that there is something called enlightenment that one can gain.

Barry, I read your post with the cartoon about the cat. It was heartbreaking for a friend of mine to look in the box, because it was her cat. She probably should not have opened it. In a way enlightenment is kind of parallel to this. You are looking for something you already have, and as long as you keep looking, you never find it. When you stop looking, truly stop looking, then you discover your search was in vain. What a relief!


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

I am asking you to explain to us how ANYONE could possibly "research" such a question as the historical existence of Krishna and come up with an accurate answer. You seem to base a lot of your beliefs on "Maharishisez," meaning that *he* said something that you consider fact. What I am asking you to do is explain to us HOW he (or anyone else) could *possibly* determine that "Krishna" actually existed sufficiently that you would believe it to be fact.



Don't be coy. You obviously believe this stuff. Now explain to us how you think it works.


From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2015 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


Pastor Barry,


I said below that I did NOT research the matter personally.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

John, we've all seen you post things on this forum that leave no doubt that you believe that such mythical personalities as Krishna actually existed. You've actually said as much in the past, so there is no need to try to hide the fact now.



What is more interesting, since you *are* trying to hide it, is HOW you claim you could "research the subject" and come up with a definitive answer stating that "Krishna is an incarnation of Vishnu here on Earth." Please explain to us HOW you or any other person could determine the validity of this statement. NOT that "some people believe it," but that's it's actual fact. Please share with us how a person convinces himself that he or she "knows" such a thing.

From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>

MMY believes Krishna is an incarnation of Vishnu here on Earth. I personally have not researched the subject.

---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Do you believe Krshna was an actual personage on the earth or a religious myth?


If real, was he just a man or an avatar of Vishnu?



From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 9:07 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


MJ,


I'm paraphrasing what Krishna said to Arjuna, who was reluctant in fighting his relatives in the battle of Kurukshetra.





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

"If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die."


Seems a rather narrow minded point of view.



What if the person being killed is a committed practitioner of ahimsa? A Jainite or a fanatic pacifist? One who would rather be killed than raise their hand in violence to another even in self defense?



Or suppose the about to be killed already had a terminal illness with a bleak prognosis and a short time to live, thus the killing would actually be a favor to the kill-ee and the killer, while perhaps having evil intent, would actually be giving a blessing and liberation to the kill-ee.



Could there be some planet in your chart that is debilitated that gives you such a judgmental and combative feeling about all this?



From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


Xeno,


I would assume that you would fight to save your life if the Islamic State rebels got a hold of you to cut your head off as propaganda for their cause. Are you going to assume that you're imagining things? As you've seen in the news, these rebels have cut the heads of Brits and Americans in the recent past. It's real and true.


If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die. If you fight and win, you save your life and become a hero to the world.





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

You know jr_esq, you are assuming that your idea of good and evil is real. I hold they are simply conceptual mappings onto reality, but they have no real existence except as a convenient and arbitrary way to categorise certain forms of activity. There was an episode of Star Trek in which an alien species, the Excalbians, investigated good and evil. They concluded that good and evil use the same methods and achieve the similar results. The writers of the episode used science fiction as a template to discuss the nature of good and evil.

How are you defining good and evil, and why do you feel those definitions are somehow true or real?


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,

IMO, it's unfortunate that human beings have to die. But circumstances happen where a person or a leader of a nation has to act to prevent evil or to eradicate evil from existing. Under these circumstances, it would be justified to take arms and fight. Any deaths that come from a justified war would be dignified and would be considered necessary to deter evil.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Surveys of deaths in the two Iraq wars show that (depending on the survey), between 151,000 to 1,000,000 Iraqis died in the two US-led wars between 2003 and 2013. One study, conducted by the Iraq Body Count project http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Body_Count_project, found that 174,000 Iraqis were reported killed between 2003 and 2013, with between 112,000-123,000 of those killed being civilian noncombatants. Meanwhile, the total number of US troops killed during this period was 4,491.


Now, JR, please tell me. Was that "good" or "evil?"



From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 3:14 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


About 12,000 or so people die every day. About 10% of those are killed by other people one way or another. The Islamic State is one of those ways. This is what happens. One method of reducing those killings is to bomb or send troops to kill the members of the Islamic State, by substituting other killings in place of the ones the Islamic State perpetrates. Then there is the question of who or what is killing the other 11,000 people who die every day, which is a far greater number. From their point of view, the killers in the Islamic State are doing their god-given duty to remove infidels and betrayers of their faith from the world, a good thing. We don't know what the people killed think of it, but those in the West do not seem in favour of the idea, thinking it a bad thing. In almost every year, anyone born more that 120 years ago is dead. As pointed out recently God killed something like 2,000,000 people as reported in the Bible, while Satan, bless his reticent soul, only 10. So it would appear the best killers are in the service of what is called 'good', for a good cause, by their own estimation. They truly believe something is good and worthy, and carry out killings in the service of that. That probably means we should be rather suspicious of the good people who want to purify their environment in the service of that good. For our own good, maybe we should kill them, just to be on the safe side.





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,

If you say there is no "good" or "evil", how do explain the fact that groups, like the Islamic State, kill innocent people in Iraq and Syria?

[[e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

Right, but Hayley Kiyoko exists. She plays a forensic specialist on CSI-Cyber: ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hayley_Kiyoko
...
As to the other illustrious persons, FFL is supposed to be a "Spiritual" - oriented forum, not one devoted to historical facts; in which case the objective is to make contact with the morphogenetic fields of the Persons (say Krishna); and then gain some type of Spiritual upliftment. Naturally, there has to be some type of payoff, otherwise one is retreating into non-experiential speculation regarding their existence.
...
For example, go into a powerful ISKCON Temple, such as the one in the Culver City area of L.A. Listen to them chant a while and get really high in the Krishna vibes. Thus, Krishna can be an "experience", not just a not possibly existing entity we know nothing about.
...
Similarly, there's a "feel good" experience possible with one's personal relationship to Jesus than transcends and is more uplifting than with ordinary relationships.
...
Shankara is different - He sucks you into the Shiva/pure Consciousness vibes.
Mohammed was historical but I don't know of anyone personally devoted to him.

[[e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

I like your logic, Turq, and agree with it: That's a prevalent problem with all fundamentalist religions and cults....as soon as one spells out "the truth" in a limited set of dogmatic statements; there are most often errors that crop up once the reader is boxed into such belief systems. ...
Once boxed in, the flaws become more apparent and problematic over time; and this could take centuries.
For example, let's take Fundamentalist (Evangelical) Christianity. and mention a few of the major premises:
.
1. You can only be "saved" as long as you accept Jesus as your Savior. OK, this one sounds rather simplistic and easy to follow but it boxes the believer into concluding that if one does NOT accept Jesus as a Savior, there are dreaded consequences: namely you are doomed to Hell forever This goes for humanitarians and philanthropists who have helped countless people. Such good behavior means nothing insofar as evading Hell. (so they say).
.
On the other hand, the worst criminal supposedly can get into Heaven if in the last few minutes of his life, accepts Jesus as Savior.
.
There's no way I can disprove such claims, but on the surface, such beliefs appear to be illogical and counterintuitive, at least to me
.
Another dogmatic assertion by both Evangelicals and Catholics is that of Atonement: that acceptance of Jesus as Savior immediately - then and there - wipes out all of one's "sins". Again, this can't be falsified, but I'd say it defies logic and doesn't match reality. Even if it did wipe out "sins" (whatever that implies); it certainly doesn't wipe out the conquences of bad karma. That will probably follow you wherever you go, until it's somehow eradicated or worked off. .
s.

[[e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

It's a clear case of of cognitive dissonance - the discomfort experienced when someone simultaneously holds two or more conflicting beliefs or two or more opposing ideas both at the same time.

Sometimes, it can be jarring to read the raw truth on a computer screen. There a hundreds of demons in Tibetan Buddhism, for example. Go figure.

---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

I like your logic, Turq, and agree with it: That's a prevalent problem with all fundamentalist religions and cults....as soon as one spells out "the truth" in a limited set of dogmatic statements; there are most often errors that crop up once the reader is boxed into such belief systems.

This is a logical fallacy: the veracity of a statement does not automatically indicate support of an opinion expressed in that statement.
...
Once boxed in, the flaws become more apparent and problematic over time; and this could take centuries.
For example, let's take Fundamentalist (Evangelical) Christianity. and mention a few of the major premises:

Non sequitur.

.
1. You can only be "saved" as long as you accept Jesus as your Savior. OK, this one sounds rather simplistic and easy to follow but it boxes the believer into concluding that if one does NOT accept Jesus as a Savior, there are dreaded consequences: namely you are doomed to Hell forever This goes for humanitarians and philanthropists who have helped countless people. Such good behavior means nothing insofar as evading Hell. (so they say).

Non sequitur.

.
On the other hand, the worst criminal supposedly can get into Heaven if in the last few minutes of his life, accepts Jesus as Savior.

Non sequitur.

.
There's no way I can disprove such claims, but on the surface, such beliefs appear to be illogical and counterintuitive, at least to me

It's complicated.

.
Another dogmatic assertion by both Evangelicals and Catholics is that of Atonement: that acceptance of Jesus as Savior immediately - then and there - wipes out all of one's "sins". Again, this can't be falsified, but I'd say it defies logic and doesn't match reality. Even if it did wipe out "sins" (whatever that implies); it certainly doesn't wipe out the conquences of bad karma. That will probably follow you wherever you go, until it's somehow eradicated or worked off. .

Non sequitur.

[[e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

Re "acceptance of Jesus as Savior immediately - then and there - wipes out all of one's "sins".":

Have you ever glanced into the literature on Pure Land Buddhism? It differentiates between an *other-power* in the spiritual life, in which we respond to a source outside ourselves, and a *self-power*. Most Buddhist teachings rely on self-power - we have to work out our own salvation through meditation and right practice.


In Pure Land teachings (an other-directed form of Buddhism) Amida Buddha is seen as a saviour figure - the source of compassion. In some versions it is only necessary to repeat the Nembutsu once (yep - just the once) to be guaranteed a rebirth in the Pure Lands. Nirvana is then a short hop away.


The Nembutsu - saying "Namu-amida-butsu" - means "Adoration for Amida Buddha."


This whole other-power attitude is uncannily close to the Christian approach we are used to. In fact, when I first heard of it I assumed the Japanese Buddhists must have been influenced by Christian missionaries to Japan. Not so - it arose independently. Doesn't that suggest it taps in to a common religious stream that makes a powerful appeal to some people?


Which people? It's tempting at first (at least it was to me) to see those drawn to such a path as lazy sods not prepared to do the hard work of sitting for ten years in a cave gazing at a blank wall. But there's real insight also. Any self-power way inevitably activates our ego - our willfulness. The very thing we're trying to transcend. The other-power way (you'll notice the parallels to bhakti yoga teaching) gets you out of yourself from the get-go. Setting aside its caressingly reassuring theology, Pure Land maybe has a psychological truth to it that doubtless has proved effective to many people. And surely some Christians who have "confessed" Jesus have trod the same route. (Precious few no doubt!)


Alan Watts wrote a lucid essay on the topic - "The Problem of Faith and Works in Buddhism".








---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

I like your logic, Turq, and agree with it: That's a prevalent problem with all fundamentalist religions and cults....as soon as one spells out "the truth" in a limited set of dogmatic statements; there are most often errors that crop up once the reader is boxed into such belief systems. ...
Once boxed in, the flaws become more apparent and problematic over time; and this could take centuries.
For example, let's take Fundamentalist (Evangelical) Christianity. and mention a few of the major premises:
.
1. You can only be "saved" as long as you accept Jesus as your Savior. OK, this one sounds rather simplistic and easy to follow but it boxes the believer into concluding that if one does NOT accept Jesus as a Savior, there are dreaded consequences: namely you are doomed to Hell forever This goes for humanitarians and philanthropists who have helped countless people. Such good behavior means nothing insofar as evading Hell. (so they say).
.
On the other hand, the worst criminal supposedly can get into Heaven if in the last few minutes of his life, accepts Jesus as Savior.
.
There's no way I can disprove such claims, but on the surface, such beliefs appear to be illogical and counterintuitive, at least to me
.
Another dogmatic assertion by both Evangelicals and Catholics is that of Atonement: that acceptance of Jesus as Savior immediately - then and there - wipes out all of one's "sins". Again, this can't be falsified, but I'd say it defies logic and doesn't match reality. Even if it did wipe out "sins" (whatever that implies); it certainly doesn't wipe out the conquences of bad karma. That will probably follow you wherever you go, until it's somehow eradicated or worked off. .
s.

[TurquoiseBee [e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

Interesting rap, s3raphita. I think it's a valid description of two spiritual paths we find on planet Earth -- self-powered vs. outer-powered. Me, I consider myself fortunate that I have never even been tempted to follow the other-power path. It just never did anything for me, in any form in which I ever encountered it. And even when I found myself sharing spiritual paths with those of the bhakti/devotional/other-power bent (for example, those who got all bhakti-d out over Maharishi or Rama), I was never tempted to focus on those teachers as savior-figures of any kind.

The closest I ever got was along the lines of a metaphor that Rama used. Yes, he considered himself enlightened. Occasionally he got downright narcissistically crazy behind it. :-) But other times he seemed to have genuine insights, such as the time he described the task of the student as NOT being the ability to focus ON a teacher (via devotion or bhakti). That, in his view, just kept the student in a constant state of duality -- there is the teacher and then there is me, and never the twain shall meet.

In his good moments, he preferred to describe the teacher-student relationship he hoped to embody as him being a kind of doorway or viewer, through which it is easier to catch glimpses of the infinite. You don't focus ON the teacher but THROUGH them, to infinity. That's your real teacher, not the human person in front of you. (I won't include the whole Rama rap from the desert here, but if you're interested I taped it and used it as the basis of a story.)

Anyway, that resonated with me, because that's how I always approached the teachers I worked with. They really weren't the point. Infinity was the point. 

From: "***@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, March 27, 2015 2:01 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

  Re "acceptance of Jesus as Savior immediately - then and there - wipes out all of one's "sins".":
Have you ever glanced into the literature on Pure Land Buddhism? It differentiates between an *other-power* in the spiritual life, in which we respond to a source outside ourselves, and a *self-power*. Most Buddhist teachings rely on self-power - we have to work out our own salvation through meditation and right practice. 
In Pure Land teachings (an other-directed form of Buddhism) Amida Buddha is seen as a saviour figure - the source of compassion. In some versions it is only necessary to repeat the Nembutsu once (yep - just the once) to be guaranteed a rebirth in the Pure Lands. Nirvana is then a short hop away.
The Nembutsu - saying "Namu-amida-butsu" - means "Adoration for Amida Buddha." 
This whole other-power attitude is uncannily close to the Christian approach we are used to. In fact, when I first heard of it I assumed the Japanese Buddhists must have been influenced by Christian missionaries to Japan. Not so - it arose independently. Doesn't that suggest it taps in to a common religious stream that makes a powerful appeal to some people?
Which people? It's tempting at first (at least it was to me) to see those drawn to such a path as lazy sods not prepared to do the hard work of sitting for ten years in a cave gazing at a blank wall. But there's real insight also. Any self-power way inevitably activates our ego - our willfulness. The very thing we're trying to transcend. The other-power way (you'll notice the parallels to bhakti yoga teaching) gets you out of yourself from the get-go. Setting aside its caressingly reassuring theology, Pure Land maybe has a psychological truth to it that doubtless has proved effective to many people. And surely some Christians who have "confessed" Jesus have trod the same route. (Precious few no doubt!)
Alan Watts wrote a lucid essay on the topic - "The Problem of Faith and Works in Buddhism".






---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

I like your logic, Turq, and agree with it:  That's a prevalent problem with all fundamentalist religions and cults....as soon as one spells out "the truth" in a limited set of dogmatic statements; there are most often errors that crop up once the reader is boxed into such belief systems....Once boxed in, the flaws become more apparent and problematic over time; and this could take centuries.For example, let's take Fundamentalist (Evangelical) Christianity. and mention a few of the major premises:.1. You can only be "saved" as long as you accept Jesus as your Savior.  OK, this one sounds rather simplistic and easy to follow but it boxes the believer into concluding that if one does NOT accept Jesus as a Savior, there are dreaded consequences:  namely you are doomed to Hell forever  This goes for humanitarians and philanthropists who have helped countless people.  Such good behavior means nothing insofar as evading Hell. (so they say)..On the other hand, the worst criminal supposedly can get into Heaven if in the last few minutes of his life, accepts Jesus as Savior..There's no way I can disprove such claims, but on the surface, such beliefs appear to be illogical and counterintuitive, at least to me.Another dogmatic assertion by both Evangelicals and Catholics is that of Atonement: that acceptance of Jesus as Savior immediately - then and there - wipes out all of one's "sins".  Again, this can't be falsified, but I'd say it defies logic and doesn't match reality.  Even if it did wipe out "sins" (whatever that implies); it certainly doesn't wipe out the conquences of bad karma.  That will probably follow you wherever you go, until it's somehow eradicated or worked off. .s.  #yiv8389249230 #yiv8389249230 -- #yiv8389249230ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv8389249230 #yiv8389249230ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv8389249230 #yiv8389249230ygrp-mkp #yiv8389249230hd {color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px 0;}#yiv8389249230 #yiv8389249230ygrp-mkp #yiv8389249230ads {margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv8389249230 #yiv8389249230ygrp-mkp .yiv8389249230ad {padding:0 0;}#yiv8389249230 #yiv8389249230ygrp-mkp .yiv8389249230ad p {margin:0;}#yiv8389249230 #yiv8389249230ygrp-mkp .yiv8389249230ad a {color:#0000ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv8389249230 #yiv8389249230ygrp-sponsor #yiv8389249230ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv8389249230 #yiv8389249230ygrp-sponsor #yiv8389249230ygrp-lc #yiv8389249230hd {margin:10px 0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv8389249230 #yiv8389249230ygrp-sponsor #yiv8389249230ygrp-lc .yiv8389249230ad {margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv8389249230 #yiv8389249230actions {font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv8389249230 #yiv8389249230activity {background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv8389249230 #yiv8389249230activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv8389249230 #yiv8389249230activity span:first-child {text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv8389249230 #yiv8389249230activity span a {color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}#yiv8389249230 #yiv8389249230activity span span {color:#ff7900;}#yiv8389249230 #yiv8389249230activity span .yiv8389249230underline {text-decoration:underline;}#yiv8389249230 .yiv8389249230attach {clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px 0;width:400px;}#yiv8389249230 .yiv8389249230attach div a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv8389249230 .yiv8389249230attach img {border:none;padding-right:5px;}#yiv8389249230 .yiv8389249230attach label {display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}#yiv8389249230 .yiv8389249230attach label a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv8389249230 blockquote {margin:0 0 0 4px;}#yiv8389249230 .yiv8389249230bold {font-family:Arial;font-size:13px;font-weight:700;}#yiv8389249230 .yiv8389249230bold a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv8389249230 dd.yiv8389249230last p a {font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv8389249230 dd.yiv8389249230last p span {margin-right:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv8389249230 dd.yiv8389249230last p span.yiv8389249230yshortcuts {margin-right:0;}#yiv8389249230 div.yiv8389249230attach-table div div a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv8389249230 div.yiv8389249230attach-table {width:400px;}#yiv8389249230 div.yiv8389249230file-title a, #yiv8389249230 div.yiv8389249230file-title a:active, #yiv8389249230 div.yiv8389249230file-title a:hover, #yiv8389249230 div.yiv8389249230file-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv8389249230 div.yiv8389249230photo-title a, #yiv8389249230 div.yiv8389249230photo-title a:active, #yiv8389249230 div.yiv8389249230photo-title a:hover, #yiv8389249230 div.yiv8389249230photo-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv8389249230 div#yiv8389249230ygrp-mlmsg #yiv8389249230ygrp-msg p a span.yiv8389249230yshortcuts {font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;font-weight:normal;}#yiv8389249230 .yiv8389249230green {color:#628c2a;}#yiv8389249230 .yiv8389249230MsoNormal {margin:0 0 0 0;}#yiv8389249230 o {font-size:0;}#yiv8389249230 #yiv8389249230photos div {float:left;width:72px;}#yiv8389249230 #yiv8389249230photos div div {border:1px solid #666666;height:62px;overflow:hidden;width:62px;}#yiv8389249230 #yiv8389249230photos div label {color:#666666;font-size:10px;overflow:hidden;text-align:center;white-space:nowrap;width:64px;}#yiv8389249230 #yiv8389249230reco-category {font-size:77%;}#yiv8389249230 #yiv8389249230reco-desc {font-size:77%;}#yiv8389249230 .yiv8389249230replbq {margin:4px;}#yiv8389249230 #yiv8389249230ygrp-actbar div a:first-child {margin-right:2px;padding-right:5px;}#yiv8389249230 #yiv8389249230ygrp-mlmsg {font-size:13px;font-family:Arial, helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv8389249230 #yiv8389249230ygrp-mlmsg table {font-size:inherit;font:100%;}#yiv8389249230 #yiv8389249230ygrp-mlmsg select, #yiv8389249230 input, #yiv8389249230 textarea {font:99% Arial, Helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv8389249230 #yiv8389249230ygrp-mlmsg pre, #yiv8389249230 code {font:115% monospace;}#yiv8389249230 #yiv8389249230ygrp-mlmsg * {line-height:1.22em;}#yiv8389249230 #yiv8389249230ygrp-mlmsg #yiv8389249230logo {padding-bottom:10px;}#yiv8389249230 #yiv8389249230ygrp-msg p a {font-family:Verdana;}#yiv8389249230 #yiv8389249230ygrp-msg p#yiv8389249230attach-count span {color:#1E66AE;font-weight:700;}#yiv8389249230 #yiv8389249230ygrp-reco #yiv8389249230reco-head {color:#ff7900;font-weight:700;}#yiv8389249230 #yiv8389249230ygrp-reco {margin-bottom:20px;padding:0px;}#yiv8389249230 #yiv8389249230ygrp-sponsor #yiv8389249230ov li a {font-size:130%;text-decoration:none;}#yiv8389249230 #yiv8389249230ygrp-sponsor #yiv8389249230ov li {font-size:77%;list-style-type:square;padding:6px 0;}#yiv8389249230 #yiv8389249230ygrp-sponsor #yiv8389249230ov ul {margin:0;padding:0 0 0 8px;}#yiv8389249230 #yiv8389249230ygrp-text {font-family:Georgia;}#yiv8389249230 #yiv8389249230ygrp-text p {margin:0 0 1em 0;}#yiv8389249230 #yiv8389249230ygrp-text tt {font-size:120%;}#yiv8389249230 #yiv8389249230ygrp-vital ul li:last-child {border-right:none !important;}#yiv8389249230

[[e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

"As you sit in this light from week to week, you will transform and grow and develop. It washes away the samskaras, the past-life tendencies. It washes away the karmic tendencies from this life. If you can meditate on that light and allow it to pass through you - meditate meaning not so much necessarily to focus on, meditate meaning to let go to; you may start with a concentration, a focus on, but then you want to let go, to be absorbed, to let go, to let the light flow through you - this light will cause spiritual transformation. This is the highest octave spiritual light. Not the best, but the highest octave." - Rama, October 6, 1982

http://www.ramalila.net/RoadTripMind/rtm03.html http://www.ramalila.net/RoadTripMind/rtm03.html


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Me, I consider myself fortunate that I have never even been tempted to follow the other-power path.

From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, March 27, 2015 2:01 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


Re "acceptance of Jesus as Savior immediately - then and there - wipes out all of one's "sins".":


Have you ever glanced into the literature on Pure Land Buddhism? It differentiates between an *other-power* in the spiritual life, in which we respond to a source outside ourselves, and a *self-power*. Most Buddhist teachings rely on self-power - we have to work out our own salvation through meditation and right practice.


In Pure Land teachings (an other-directed form of Buddhism) Amida Buddha is seen as a saviour figure - the source of compassion. In some versions it is only necessary to repeat the Nembutsu once (yep - just the once) to be guaranteed a rebirth in the Pure Lands. Nirvana is then a short hop away.


The Nembutsu - saying "Namu-amida-butsu" - means "Adoration for Amida Buddha."


This whole other-power attitude is uncannily close to the Christian approach we are used to. In fact, when I first heard of it I assumed the Japanese Buddhists must have been influenced by Christian missionaries to Japan. Not so - it arose independently. Doesn't that suggest it taps in to a common religious stream that makes a powerful appeal to some people?


Which people? It's tempting at first (at least it was to me) to see those drawn to such a path as lazy sods not prepared to do the hard work of sitting for ten years in a cave gazing at a blank wall. But there's real insight also. Any self-power way inevitably activates our ego - our willfulness. The very thing we're trying to transcend. The other-power way (you'll notice the parallels to bhakti yoga teaching) gets you out of yourself from the get-go. Setting aside its caressingly reassuring theology, Pure Land maybe has a psychological truth to it that doubtless has proved effective to many people. And surely some Christians who have "confessed" Jesus have trod the same route. (Precious few no doubt!)


Alan Watts wrote a lucid essay on the topic - "The Problem of Faith and Works in Buddhism".











---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

I like your logic, Turq, and agree with it: That's a prevalent problem with all fundamentalist religions and cults....as soon as one spells out "the truth" in a limited set of dogmatic statements; there are most often errors that crop up once the reader is boxed into such belief systems. ...
Once boxed in, the flaws become more apparent and problematic over time; and this could take centuries.
For example, let's take Fundamentalist (Evangelical) Christianity. and mention a few of the major premises:
.
1. You can only be "saved" as long as you accept Jesus as your Savior. OK, this one sounds rather simplistic and easy to follow but it boxes the believer into concluding that if one does NOT accept Jesus as a Savior, there are dreaded consequences: namely you are doomed to Hell forever This goes for humanitarians and philanthropists who have helped countless people. Such good behavior means nothing insofar as evading Hell. (so they say).
.
On the other hand, the worst criminal supposedly can get into Heaven if in the last few minutes of his life, accepts Jesus as Savior.
.
There's no way I can disprove such claims, but on the surface, such beliefs appear to be illogical and counterintuitive, at least to me
.
Another dogmatic assertion by both Evangelicals and Catholics is that of Atonement: that acceptance of Jesus as Savior immediately - then and there - wipes out all of one's "sins". Again, this can't be falsified, but I'd say it defies logic and doesn't match reality. Even if it did wipe out "sins" (whatever that implies); it certainly doesn't wipe out the conquences of bad karma. That will probably follow you wherever you go, until it's somehow eradicated or worked off. .
s.

[TurquoiseBee [e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

You know, of course, that all of the "morphogenic feel-good" vibes you speak of below can be attributed to mood-making and the placebo effect, right?

For example, at a cathedral in the south of France which is supposed to have the skull of Mary Magdalene as a relic, a somewhat skeptical priest in the 1920s did a remarkably scientific experiment. He showed that skull and similarly-blackened-with-age skulls to a number of people, telling them all that the skull was Mary Magdalene's. Then he showed the same relic and the same similarly-blackened skulls to a second group of people, telling them that all the skulls were found in a nearby field.

You can imagine the results -- the people told they were ordinary skulls "felt" nothing. The people told that the skulls they were viewing belonged to Mary Magdalene "felt" her holy presence. And they "felt" it whether it was really her skull or not.

The priest, as you might expect, lost his position and was sent to a tiny church in the hinterlands of France with no relics for him to mess up the myth of.  :-)
From: "***@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
...As to the other illustrious persons, FFL is supposed to be a "Spiritual" - oriented forum, not one devoted to historical facts; in which case the objective is to make contact with the morphogenetic fields of the Persons (say Krishna); and then gain some type of Spiritual upliftment.  Naturally, there has to be some type of payoff, otherwise one is retreating into non-experiential speculation regarding their existence....For example, go into a powerful ISKCON Temple, such as the one in the Culver City area of L.A. Listen to them chant a while and get really high in the Krishna vibes. Thus, Krishna can be an "experience", not just a not possibly existing entity we know nothing about....Similarly, there's a "feel good" experience possible with one's personal relationship to Jesus than transcends and is more uplifting than with ordinary relationships....Shankara is different - He sucks you into the Shiva/pure Consciousness vibes.Mohammed was historical but I don't know of anyone personally devoted to him.

[TurquoiseBee [e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

I am aware of the problems with establishing the historical existence of many religious figures, Xeno, but that isn't what I was getting at with JR. I have noticed in him a tendency that I doubt he is aware of -- or, if he is, he probably sees nothing wrong with.

When claiming to believe in the existence of Krishna or similar figures from religious myth here in the past, he has cited as proof "scriptures" such as the Gita. Bzzzzzzt. Thanks for playing, but no win. Religious scriptures are NOT factual, no matter how many people believe they are. Scholars often don't even know the *century* many of them were written in, much less who wrote them. Best to consider them creative fiction written with the intent to inspire IMO.
The only *other* mechanism by which JR can claim to have "done research" on the question of whether someone like Krishna existed in real life or not is "seeing" -- meaning some kind of subjective realization or vision or intuition. While I admit that such things exist -- subjectively -- I do NOT admit that any of these "seeings" have anything to do with fact. If they did, more people who claim to be able to see the future would be millionaires.  :-)
I was just hoping to see JR try to actually posit and then defend some mechanism by which he thinks "proof" could be offered of Krishna's existence. If he actually tried, it might wake him up to the fact that the only reason he *does* believe in such silliness is that someone he holds as an "authority" said so. In other words, his only "proof" is the word "Maharishisez."
Now, as for Schroedinger's cat, I for one have no problem with someone being both alive and dead at the same time. Just look at Keith Richards -- the guy has looked like death on a stick since the 1960s, yet he still manages to tour and play some pretty good guitar. If that's not an example of Schroedinger's paradox, I don't know what is.  :-)

As for the answer to "What's in the big pink box, man?" that is as much of a koan as it was when posed in the movie "Buckaroo Banzai." Me, I kinda doubt it's enlightenment.  :-)
From: "***@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2015 8:08 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

  Establishing the historicity of various religious characters today is pretty much impossible. Of the following, Krishna, Buddha, Moses, Jesus, Mohammed, Shankara, only the latter two have much evidence that would just suggest they existed, primarily because they are a bit more recent. It seems more logical with the lack of definite evidence that these names can be used as 'bookmarks' that delineate a certain point in the development of a tradition, a personification of what had  transpired up to that point. If we were to take the TMO holy tradition, only Shankara, Brahmanda Saraswati, Maharishi, and King Tony have a believable amount of evidence, and only the last three have really good historical evidence as to their existence. If we assume enlightenment exists, we could say that the 'tradition' of enlightenment is something generated in one's own mind as a means to remove the delusion that there is something called enlightenment that one can gain.
Barry, I read your post with the cartoon about the cat. It was heartbreaking for a friend of mine to look in the box, because it was her cat. She probably should not have opened it. In a way enlightenment is kind of parallel to this. You are looking for something you already have, and as long as you keep looking, you never find it. When you stop looking, truly stop looking, then you discover your search was in vain. What a relief!


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

I am asking you to explain to us how ANYONE could possibly "research" such a question as the historical existence of Krishna and come up with an accurate answer. You seem to base a lot of your beliefs on "Maharishisez," meaning that *he* said something that you consider fact. What I am asking you to do is explain to us HOW he (or anyone else) could *possibly* determine that "Krishna" actually existed sufficiently that you would believe it to be fact.

Don't be coy. You obviously believe this stuff. Now explain to us how you think it works.

From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2015 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

 Pastor Barry,
I said below that I did NOT research the matter personally.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

John, we've all seen you post things on this forum that leave no doubt that you believe that such mythical personalities as Krishna actually existed. You've actually said as much in the past, so there is no need to try to hide the fact now.

What is more interesting, since you *are* trying to hide it, is HOW you claim you could "research the subject" and come up with a definitive answer stating that "Krishna is an incarnation of Vishnu here on Earth." Please explain to us HOW you or any other person could determine the validity of this statement. NOT that "some people believe it," but that's it's actual fact. Please share with us how a person convinces himself that he or she "knows" such a thing.
From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>

 MMY believes Krishna is an incarnation of Vishnu here on Earth.  I personally have not researched the subject.

---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Do you believe Krshna was an actual personage on the earth or a religious myth?
If real, was he just a man or an avatar of Vishnu?

From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 9:07 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

 MJ,
I'm paraphrasing what Krishna said to Arjuna, who was reluctant in fighting his relatives in the battle of Kurukshetra.



---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

"If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die."
Seems a rather narrow minded point of view.

What if the person being killed is a committed practitioner of ahimsa? A Jainite or a fanatic pacifist? One who would rather be killed than raise their hand in violence to another even in self defense?

Or suppose the about to be killed already had a terminal illness with a bleak prognosis and a short time to live, thus the killing would actually be a favor to the kill-ee and the killer, while perhaps having evil intent, would actually be giving a blessing and liberation to the kill-ee.

Could there be some planet in your chart that is debilitated that gives you such a judgmental and combative feeling about all this?

From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

 Xeno,
I would assume that you would fight to save your life if the Islamic State rebels got a hold of you to cut your head off as propaganda for their cause. Are you going to assume that you're imagining things?  As you've seen in the news, these rebels have cut the heads of Brits and Americans in the recent past.  It's real and true.
If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die.  If you fight and win, you save your life and become a hero to the world.




---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

You know jr_esq, you are assuming that your idea of good and evil is real. I hold they are simply conceptual mappings onto reality, but they have no real existence except as a convenient and arbitrary way to categorise certain forms of activity. There was an episode of Star Trek in which an alien species, the Excalbians, investigated good and evil. They concluded that good and evil use the same methods and achieve the similar results. The writers of the episode used science fiction as a template to discuss the nature of good and evil.
How are you defining good and evil, and why do you feel those definitions are somehow true or real?


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,
IMO, it's unfortunate that human beings have to die.  But circumstances happen where a person or a leader of a nation has to act to prevent evil or to eradicate evil from existing.  Under these circumstances, it would be justified to take arms and fight.  Any deaths that come from a justified war would be dignified and would be considered necessary to deter evil.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Surveys of deaths in the two Iraq wars show that (depending on the survey), between 151,000 to 1,000,000 Iraqis died in the two US-led wars between 2003 and 2013. One study, conducted by the Iraq Body Count project, found that 174,000 Iraqis were reported killed between 2003 and 2013, withbetween 112,000-123,000 of those killed being civilian noncombatants. Meanwhile, the total number of US troops killed during this period was 4,491. 

Now, JR, please tell me. Was that "good" or "evil?"

From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 3:14 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

 About 12,000 or so people die every day. About 10% of those are killed by other people one way or another. The Islamic State is one of those ways. This is what happens. One method of reducing those killings is to bomb or send troops to kill the members of the Islamic State, by substituting other killings in place of the ones the Islamic State perpetrates. Then there is the question of who or what is killing the other 11,000 people who die every day, which is a far greater number. From their point of view, the killers in the Islamic State are doing their god-given duty to remove infidels and betrayers of their faith from the world, a good thing. We don't know what the people killed think of it, but those in the West do not seem in favour of the idea, thinking it a bad thing. In almost every year, anyone born more that 120 years ago is dead. As pointed out recently God killed something like 2,000,000 people as reported in the Bible, while Satan, bless his reticent soul, only 10. So it would appear the best killers are in the service of what is called 'good', for a good cause, by their own estimation. They truly believe something is good and worthy, and carry out killings in the service of that. That probably means we should be rather suspicious of the good people who want to purify their environment in the service of that good. For our own good, maybe we should kill them, just to be on the safe side.



---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,
If you say there is no "good" or "evil", how do explain the fact that groups, like the Islamic State, kill innocent people in Iraq and Syria?









#yiv2280240078 #yiv2280240078 -- #yiv2280240078ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv2280240078 #yiv2280240078ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv2280240078 #yiv2280240078ygrp-mkp #yiv2280240078hd {color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px 0;}#yiv2280240078 #yiv2280240078ygrp-mkp #yiv2280240078ads {margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv2280240078 #yiv2280240078ygrp-mkp .yiv2280240078ad {padding:0 0;}#yiv2280240078 #yiv2280240078ygrp-mkp .yiv2280240078ad p {margin:0;}#yiv2280240078 #yiv2280240078ygrp-mkp .yiv2280240078ad a {color:#0000ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv2280240078 #yiv2280240078ygrp-sponsor #yiv2280240078ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv2280240078 #yiv2280240078ygrp-sponsor #yiv2280240078ygrp-lc #yiv2280240078hd {margin:10px 0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv2280240078 #yiv2280240078ygrp-sponsor #yiv2280240078ygrp-lc .yiv2280240078ad {margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv2280240078 #yiv2280240078actions {font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv2280240078 #yiv2280240078activity {background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv2280240078 #yiv2280240078activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv2280240078 #yiv2280240078activity span:first-child {text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv2280240078 #yiv2280240078activity span a {color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}#yiv2280240078 #yiv2280240078activity span span {color:#ff7900;}#yiv2280240078 #yiv2280240078activity span .yiv2280240078underline {text-decoration:underline;}#yiv2280240078 .yiv2280240078attach {clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px 0;width:400px;}#yiv2280240078 .yiv2280240078attach div a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv2280240078 .yiv2280240078attach img {border:none;padding-right:5px;}#yiv2280240078 .yiv2280240078attach label {display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}#yiv2280240078 .yiv2280240078attach label a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv2280240078 blockquote {margin:0 0 0 4px;}#yiv2280240078 .yiv2280240078bold {font-family:Arial;font-size:13px;font-weight:700;}#yiv2280240078 .yiv2280240078bold a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv2280240078 dd.yiv2280240078last p a {font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv2280240078 dd.yiv2280240078last p span {margin-right:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv2280240078 dd.yiv2280240078last p span.yiv2280240078yshortcuts {margin-right:0;}#yiv2280240078 div.yiv2280240078attach-table div div a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv2280240078 div.yiv2280240078attach-table {width:400px;}#yiv2280240078 div.yiv2280240078file-title a, #yiv2280240078 div.yiv2280240078file-title a:active, #yiv2280240078 div.yiv2280240078file-title a:hover, #yiv2280240078 div.yiv2280240078file-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv2280240078 div.yiv2280240078photo-title a, #yiv2280240078 div.yiv2280240078photo-title a:active, #yiv2280240078 div.yiv2280240078photo-title a:hover, #yiv2280240078 div.yiv2280240078photo-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv2280240078 div#yiv2280240078ygrp-mlmsg #yiv2280240078ygrp-msg p a span.yiv2280240078yshortcuts {font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;font-weight:normal;}#yiv2280240078 .yiv2280240078green {color:#628c2a;}#yiv2280240078 .yiv2280240078MsoNormal {margin:0 0 0 0;}#yiv2280240078 o {font-size:0;}#yiv2280240078 #yiv2280240078photos div {float:left;width:72px;}#yiv2280240078 #yiv2280240078photos div div {border:1px solid #666666;height:62px;overflow:hidden;width:62px;}#yiv2280240078 #yiv2280240078photos div label {color:#666666;font-size:10px;overflow:hidden;text-align:center;white-space:nowrap;width:64px;}#yiv2280240078 #yiv2280240078reco-category {font-size:77%;}#yiv2280240078 #yiv2280240078reco-desc {font-size:77%;}#yiv2280240078 .yiv2280240078replbq {margin:4px;}#yiv2280240078 #yiv2280240078ygrp-actbar div a:first-child {margin-right:2px;padding-right:5px;}#yiv2280240078 #yiv2280240078ygrp-mlmsg {font-size:13px;font-family:Arial, helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv2280240078 #yiv2280240078ygrp-mlmsg table {font-size:inherit;font:100%;}#yiv2280240078 #yiv2280240078ygrp-mlmsg select, #yiv2280240078 input, #yiv2280240078 textarea {font:99% Arial, Helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv2280240078 #yiv2280240078ygrp-mlmsg pre, #yiv2280240078 code {font:115% monospace;}#yiv2280240078 #yiv2280240078ygrp-mlmsg * {line-height:1.22em;}#yiv2280240078 #yiv2280240078ygrp-mlmsg #yiv2280240078logo {padding-bottom:10px;}#yiv2280240078 #yiv2280240078ygrp-msg p a {font-family:Verdana;}#yiv2280240078 #yiv2280240078ygrp-msg p#yiv2280240078attach-count span {color:#1E66AE;font-weight:700;}#yiv2280240078 #yiv2280240078ygrp-reco #yiv2280240078reco-head {color:#ff7900;font-weight:700;}#yiv2280240078 #yiv2280240078ygrp-reco {margin-bottom:20px;padding:0px;}#yiv2280240078 #yiv2280240078ygrp-sponsor #yiv2280240078ov li a {font-size:130%;text-decoration:none;}#yiv2280240078 #yiv2280240078ygrp-sponsor #yiv2280240078ov li {font-size:77%;list-style-type:square;padding:6px 0;}#yiv2280240078 #yiv2280240078ygrp-sponsor #yiv2280240078ov ul {margin:0;padding:0 0 0 8px;}#yiv2280240078 #yiv2280240078ygrp-text {font-family:Georgia;}#yiv2280240078 #yiv2280240078ygrp-text p {margin:0 0 1em 0;}#yiv2280240078 #yiv2280240078ygrp-text tt {font-size:120%;}#yiv2280240078 #yiv2280240078ygrp-vital ul li:last-child {border-right:none !important;}#yiv2280240078

[Michael Jackson [e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

One of the things I find interesting and amusing is the tales of the gods and goddesses in India, not to mention the tale of the enlightened sages all ascribe very human emotions like anger, jealousy, fear, suspicion, desire for revenge etc. to beings that in the case of the gods are supposed to be divine, and in the case of the rishis are supposed to be one with the divine.

If these tales are true it means that the divine is screwed up and we in our current state with all its human foibles are the best divinity can manifest or it means the humans in our hubris just create the gods to be like us.
From: "TurquoiseBee ***@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: "***@yahoogroups.com" <***@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, March 27, 2015 4:17 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

  I am aware of the problems with establishing the historical existence of many religious figures, Xeno, but that isn't what I was getting at with JR. I have noticed in him a tendency that I doubt he is aware of -- or, if he is, he probably sees nothing wrong with.

When claiming to believe in the existence of Krishna or similar figures from religious myth here in the past, he has cited as proof "scriptures" such as the Gita. Bzzzzzzt. Thanks for playing, but no win. Religious scriptures are NOT factual, no matter how many people believe they are. Scholars often don't even know the *century* many of them were written in, much less who wrote them. Best to consider them creative fiction written with the intent to inspire IMO.
The only *other* mechanism by which JR can claim to have "done research" on the question of whether someone like Krishna existed in real life or not is "seeing" -- meaning some kind of subjective realization or vision or intuition. While I admit that such things exist -- subjectively -- I do NOT admit that any of these "seeings" have anything to do with fact. If they did, more people who claim to be able to see the future would be millionaires.  :-)
I was just hoping to see JR try to actually posit and then defend some mechanism by which he thinks "proof" could be offered of Krishna's existence. If he actually tried, it might wake him up to the fact that the only reason he *does* believe in such silliness is that someone he holds as an "authority" said so. In other words, his only "proof" is the word "Maharishisez."
Now, as for Schroedinger's cat, I for one have no problem with someone being both alive and dead at the same time. Just look at Keith Richards -- the guy has looked like death on a stick since the 1960s, yet he still manages to tour and play some pretty good guitar. If that's not an example of Schroedinger's paradox, I don't know what is.  :-)

As for the answer to "What's in the big pink box, man?" that is as much of a koan as it was when posed in the movie "Buckaroo Banzai." Me, I kinda doubt it's enlightenment.  :-)


From: "***@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2015 8:08 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

  Establishing the historicity of various religious characters today is pretty much impossible. Of the following, Krishna, Buddha, Moses, Jesus, Mohammed, Shankara, only the latter two have much evidence that would just suggest they existed, primarily because they are a bit more recent. It seems more logical with the lack of definite evidence that these names can be used as 'bookmarks' that delineate a certain point in the development of a tradition, a personification of what had  transpired up to that point. If we were to take the TMO holy tradition, only Shankara, Brahmanda Saraswati, Maharishi, and King Tony have a believable amount of evidence, and only the last three have really good historical evidence as to their existence. If we assume enlightenment exists, we could say that the 'tradition' of enlightenment is something generated in one's own mind as a means to remove the delusion that there is something called enlightenment that one can gain.
Barry, I read your post with the cartoon about the cat. It was heartbreaking for a friend of mine to look in the box, because it was her cat. She probably should not have opened it. In a way enlightenment is kind of parallel to this. You are looking for something you already have, and as long as you keep looking, you never find it. When you stop looking, truly stop looking, then you discover your search was in vain. What a relief!


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

I am asking you to explain to us how ANYONE could possibly "research" such a question as the historical existence of Krishna and come up with an accurate answer. You seem to base a lot of your beliefs on "Maharishisez," meaning that *he* said something that you consider fact. What I am asking you to do is explain to us HOW he (or anyone else) could *possibly* determine that "Krishna" actually existed sufficiently that you would believe it to be fact.

Don't be coy. You obviously believe this stuff. Now explain to us how you think it works.

From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2015 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

 Pastor Barry,
I said below that I did NOT research the matter personally.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

John, we've all seen you post things on this forum that leave no doubt that you believe that such mythical personalities as Krishna actually existed. You've actually said as much in the past, so there is no need to try to hide the fact now.

What is more interesting, since you *are* trying to hide it, is HOW you claim you could "research the subject" and come up with a definitive answer stating that "Krishna is an incarnation of Vishnu here on Earth." Please explain to us HOW you or any other person could determine the validity of this statement. NOT that "some people believe it," but that's it's actual fact. Please share with us how a person convinces himself that he or she "knows" such a thing.
From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>

 MMY believes Krishna is an incarnation of Vishnu here on Earth.  I personally have not researched the subject.

---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Do you believe Krshna was an actual personage on the earth or a religious myth?
If real, was he just a man or an avatar of Vishnu?

From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 9:07 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

 MJ,
I'm paraphrasing what Krishna said to Arjuna, who was reluctant in fighting his relatives in the battle of Kurukshetra.



---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

"If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die."
Seems a rather narrow minded point of view.

What if the person being killed is a committed practitioner of ahimsa? A Jainite or a fanatic pacifist? One who would rather be killed than raise their hand in violence to another even in self defense?

Or suppose the about to be killed already had a terminal illness with a bleak prognosis and a short time to live, thus the killing would actually be a favor to the kill-ee and the killer, while perhaps having evil intent, would actually be giving a blessing and liberation to the kill-ee.

Could there be some planet in your chart that is debilitated that gives you such a judgmental and combative feeling about all this?

From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

 Xeno,
I would assume that you would fight to save your life if the Islamic State rebels got a hold of you to cut your head off as propaganda for their cause. Are you going to assume that you're imagining things?  As you've seen in the news, these rebels have cut the heads of Brits and Americans in the recent past.  It's real and true.
If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die.  If you fight and win, you save your life and become a hero to the world.




---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

You know jr_esq, you are assuming that your idea of good and evil is real. I hold they are simply conceptual mappings onto reality, but they have no real existence except as a convenient and arbitrary way to categorise certain forms of activity. There was an episode of Star Trek in which an alien species, the Excalbians, investigated good and evil. They concluded that good and evil use the same methods and achieve the similar results. The writers of the episode used science fiction as a template to discuss the nature of good and evil.
How are you defining good and evil, and why do you feel those definitions are somehow true or real?


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,
IMO, it's unfortunate that human beings have to die.  But circumstances happen where a person or a leader of a nation has to act to prevent evil or to eradicate evil from existing.  Under these circumstances, it would be justified to take arms and fight.  Any deaths that come from a justified war would be dignified and would be considered necessary to deter evil.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Surveys of deaths in the two Iraq wars show that (depending on the survey), between 151,000 to 1,000,000 Iraqis died in the two US-led wars between 2003 and 2013. One study, conducted by the Iraq Body Count project, found that 174,000 Iraqis were reported killed between 2003 and 2013, withbetween 112,000-123,000 of those killed being civilian noncombatants. Meanwhile, the total number of US troops killed during this period was 4,491. 

Now, JR, please tell me. Was that "good" or "evil?"

From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 3:14 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

 About 12,000 or so people die every day. About 10% of those are killed by other people one way or another. The Islamic State is one of those ways. This is what happens. One method of reducing those killings is to bomb or send troops to kill the members of the Islamic State, by substituting other killings in place of the ones the Islamic State perpetrates. Then there is the question of who or what is killing the other 11,000 people who die every day, which is a far greater number. From their point of view, the killers in the Islamic State are doing their god-given duty to remove infidels and betrayers of their faith from the world, a good thing. We don't know what the people killed think of it, but those in the West do not seem in favour of the idea, thinking it a bad thing. In almost every year, anyone born more that 120 years ago is dead. As pointed out recently God killed something like 2,000,000 people as reported in the Bible, while Satan, bless his reticent soul, only 10. So it would appear the best killers are in the service of what is called 'good', for a good cause, by their own estimation. They truly believe something is good and worthy, and carry out killings in the service of that. That probably means we should be rather suspicious of the good people who want to purify their environment in the service of that good. For our own good, maybe we should kill them, just to be on the safe side.



---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,
If you say there is no "good" or "evil", how do explain the fact that groups, like the Islamic State, kill innocent people in Iraq and Syria?











#yiv8905735630 #yiv8905735630 -- #yiv8905735630ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv8905735630 #yiv8905735630ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv8905735630 #yiv8905735630ygrp-mkp #yiv8905735630hd {color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px 0;}#yiv8905735630 #yiv8905735630ygrp-mkp #yiv8905735630ads {margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv8905735630 #yiv8905735630ygrp-mkp .yiv8905735630ad {padding:0 0;}#yiv8905735630 #yiv8905735630ygrp-mkp .yiv8905735630ad p {margin:0;}#yiv8905735630 #yiv8905735630ygrp-mkp .yiv8905735630ad a {color:#0000ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv8905735630 #yiv8905735630ygrp-sponsor #yiv8905735630ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv8905735630 #yiv8905735630ygrp-sponsor #yiv8905735630ygrp-lc #yiv8905735630hd {margin:10px 0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv8905735630 #yiv8905735630ygrp-sponsor #yiv8905735630ygrp-lc .yiv8905735630ad {margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv8905735630 #yiv8905735630actions {font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv8905735630 #yiv8905735630activity {background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv8905735630 #yiv8905735630activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv8905735630 #yiv8905735630activity span:first-child {text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv8905735630 #yiv8905735630activity span a {color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}#yiv8905735630 #yiv8905735630activity span span {color:#ff7900;}#yiv8905735630 #yiv8905735630activity span .yiv8905735630underline {text-decoration:underline;}#yiv8905735630 .yiv8905735630attach {clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px 0;width:400px;}#yiv8905735630 .yiv8905735630attach div a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv8905735630 .yiv8905735630attach img {border:none;padding-right:5px;}#yiv8905735630 .yiv8905735630attach label {display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}#yiv8905735630 .yiv8905735630attach label a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv8905735630 blockquote {margin:0 0 0 4px;}#yiv8905735630 .yiv8905735630bold {font-family:Arial;font-size:13px;font-weight:700;}#yiv8905735630 .yiv8905735630bold a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv8905735630 dd.yiv8905735630last p a {font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv8905735630 dd.yiv8905735630last p span {margin-right:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv8905735630 dd.yiv8905735630last p span.yiv8905735630yshortcuts {margin-right:0;}#yiv8905735630 div.yiv8905735630attach-table div div a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv8905735630 div.yiv8905735630attach-table {width:400px;}#yiv8905735630 div.yiv8905735630file-title a, #yiv8905735630 div.yiv8905735630file-title a:active, #yiv8905735630 div.yiv8905735630file-title a:hover, #yiv8905735630 div.yiv8905735630file-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv8905735630 div.yiv8905735630photo-title a, #yiv8905735630 div.yiv8905735630photo-title a:active, #yiv8905735630 div.yiv8905735630photo-title a:hover, #yiv8905735630 div.yiv8905735630photo-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv8905735630 div#yiv8905735630ygrp-mlmsg #yiv8905735630ygrp-msg p a span.yiv8905735630yshortcuts {font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;font-weight:normal;}#yiv8905735630 .yiv8905735630green {color:#628c2a;}#yiv8905735630 .yiv8905735630MsoNormal {margin:0 0 0 0;}#yiv8905735630 o {font-size:0;}#yiv8905735630 #yiv8905735630photos div {float:left;width:72px;}#yiv8905735630 #yiv8905735630photos div div {border:1px solid #666666;height:62px;overflow:hidden;width:62px;}#yiv8905735630 #yiv8905735630photos div label {color:#666666;font-size:10px;overflow:hidden;text-align:center;white-space:nowrap;width:64px;}#yiv8905735630 #yiv8905735630reco-category {font-size:77%;}#yiv8905735630 #yiv8905735630reco-desc {font-size:77%;}#yiv8905735630 .yiv8905735630replbq {margin:4px;}#yiv8905735630 #yiv8905735630ygrp-actbar div a:first-child {margin-right:2px;padding-right:5px;}#yiv8905735630 #yiv8905735630ygrp-mlmsg {font-size:13px;font-family:Arial, helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv8905735630 #yiv8905735630ygrp-mlmsg table {font-size:inherit;font:100%;}#yiv8905735630 #yiv8905735630ygrp-mlmsg select, #yiv8905735630 input, #yiv8905735630 textarea {font:99% Arial, Helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv8905735630 #yiv8905735630ygrp-mlmsg pre, #yiv8905735630 code {font:115% monospace;}#yiv8905735630 #yiv8905735630ygrp-mlmsg * {line-height:1.22em;}#yiv8905735630 #yiv8905735630ygrp-mlmsg #yiv8905735630logo {padding-bottom:10px;}#yiv8905735630 #yiv8905735630ygrp-msg p a {font-family:Verdana;}#yiv8905735630 #yiv8905735630ygrp-msg p#yiv8905735630attach-count span {color:#1E66AE;font-weight:700;}#yiv8905735630 #yiv8905735630ygrp-reco #yiv8905735630reco-head {color:#ff7900;font-weight:700;}#yiv8905735630 #yiv8905735630ygrp-reco {margin-bottom:20px;padding:0px;}#yiv8905735630 #yiv8905735630ygrp-sponsor #yiv8905735630ov li a {font-size:130%;text-decoration:none;}#yiv8905735630 #yiv8905735630ygrp-sponsor #yiv8905735630ov li {font-size:77%;list-style-type:square;padding:6px 0;}#yiv8905735630 #yiv8905735630ygrp-sponsor #yiv8905735630ov ul {margin:0;padding:0 0 0 8px;}#yiv8905735630 #yiv8905735630ygrp-text {font-family:Georgia;}#yiv8905735630 #yiv8905735630ygrp-text p {margin:0 0 1em 0;}#yiv8905735630 #yiv8905735630ygrp-text tt {font-size:120%;}#yiv8905735630 #yiv8905735630ygrp-vital ul li:last-child {border-right:none !important;}#yiv8905735630

[TurquoiseBee [e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

I've always found that interesting, too, Michael. Compared to many of the great mythologies of the world, the mythic tales from India are remarkably soap opera-y and low-vibe.

I mean, we're supposed to believe that gods are so petty that they kill each other over shit like their snuggle-bunny sleeping with another god? That's the kind of behavior I'd expect from my neighbors in New Mexico, not in Brahmaloka.  :-)
From: "Michael Jackson ***@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: "***@yahoogroups.com" <***@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, March 27, 2015 2:15 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

  One of the things I find interesting and amusing is the tales of the gods and goddesses in India, not to mention the tale of the enlightened sages all ascribe very human emotions like anger, jealousy, fear, suspicion, desire for revenge etc. to beings that in the case of the gods are supposed to be divine, and in the case of the rishis are supposed to be one with the divine.

If these tales are true it means that the divine is screwed up and we in our current state with all its human foibles are the best divinity can manifest or it means the humans in our hubris just create the gods to be like us.


From: "TurquoiseBee ***@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: "***@yahoogroups.com" <***@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, March 27, 2015 4:17 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

  I am aware of the problems with establishing the historical existence of many religious figures, Xeno, but that isn't what I was getting at with JR. I have noticed in him a tendency that I doubt he is aware of -- or, if he is, he probably sees nothing wrong with.

When claiming to believe in the existence of Krishna or similar figures from religious myth here in the past, he has cited as proof "scriptures" such as the Gita. Bzzzzzzt. Thanks for playing, but no win. Religious scriptures are NOT factual, no matter how many people believe they are. Scholars often don't even know the *century* many of them were written in, much less who wrote them. Best to consider them creative fiction written with the intent to inspire IMO.
The only *other* mechanism by which JR can claim to have "done research" on the question of whether someone like Krishna existed in real life or not is "seeing" -- meaning some kind of subjective realization or vision or intuition. While I admit that such things exist -- subjectively -- I do NOT admit that any of these "seeings" have anything to do with fact. If they did, more people who claim to be able to see the future would be millionaires.  :-)
I was just hoping to see JR try to actually posit and then defend some mechanism by which he thinks "proof" could be offered of Krishna's existence. If he actually tried, it might wake him up to the fact that the only reason he *does* believe in such silliness is that someone he holds as an "authority" said so. In other words, his only "proof" is the word "Maharishisez."
Now, as for Schroedinger's cat, I for one have no problem with someone being both alive and dead at the same time. Just look at Keith Richards -- the guy has looked like death on a stick since the 1960s, yet he still manages to tour and play some pretty good guitar. If that's not an example of Schroedinger's paradox, I don't know what is.  :-)

As for the answer to "What's in the big pink box, man?" that is as much of a koan as it was when posed in the movie "Buckaroo Banzai." Me, I kinda doubt it's enlightenment.  :-)


From: "***@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2015 8:08 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

  Establishing the historicity of various religious characters today is pretty much impossible. Of the following, Krishna, Buddha, Moses, Jesus, Mohammed, Shankara, only the latter two have much evidence that would just suggest they existed, primarily because they are a bit more recent. It seems more logical with the lack of definite evidence that these names can be used as 'bookmarks' that delineate a certain point in the development of a tradition, a personification of what had  transpired up to that point. If we were to take the TMO holy tradition, only Shankara, Brahmanda Saraswati, Maharishi, and King Tony have a believable amount of evidence, and only the last three have really good historical evidence as to their existence. If we assume enlightenment exists, we could say that the 'tradition' of enlightenment is something generated in one's own mind as a means to remove the delusion that there is something called enlightenment that one can gain.
Barry, I read your post with the cartoon about the cat. It was heartbreaking for a friend of mine to look in the box, because it was her cat. She probably should not have opened it. In a way enlightenment is kind of parallel to this. You are looking for something you already have, and as long as you keep looking, you never find it. When you stop looking, truly stop looking, then you discover your search was in vain. What a relief!


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

I am asking you to explain to us how ANYONE could possibly "research" such a question as the historical existence of Krishna and come up with an accurate answer. You seem to base a lot of your beliefs on "Maharishisez," meaning that *he* said something that you consider fact. What I am asking you to do is explain to us HOW he (or anyone else) could *possibly* determine that "Krishna" actually existed sufficiently that you would believe it to be fact.

Don't be coy. You obviously believe this stuff. Now explain to us how you think it works.

From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2015 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

 Pastor Barry,
I said below that I did NOT research the matter personally.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

John, we've all seen you post things on this forum that leave no doubt that you believe that such mythical personalities as Krishna actually existed. You've actually said as much in the past, so there is no need to try to hide the fact now.

What is more interesting, since you *are* trying to hide it, is HOW you claim you could "research the subject" and come up with a definitive answer stating that "Krishna is an incarnation of Vishnu here on Earth." Please explain to us HOW you or any other person could determine the validity of this statement. NOT that "some people believe it," but that's it's actual fact. Please share with us how a person convinces himself that he or she "knows" such a thing.
From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>

 MMY believes Krishna is an incarnation of Vishnu here on Earth.  I personally have not researched the subject.

---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Do you believe Krshna was an actual personage on the earth or a religious myth?
If real, was he just a man or an avatar of Vishnu?

From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 9:07 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

 MJ,
I'm paraphrasing what Krishna said to Arjuna, who was reluctant in fighting his relatives in the battle of Kurukshetra.



---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

"If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die."
Seems a rather narrow minded point of view.

What if the person being killed is a committed practitioner of ahimsa? A Jainite or a fanatic pacifist? One who would rather be killed than raise their hand in violence to another even in self defense?

Or suppose the about to be killed already had a terminal illness with a bleak prognosis and a short time to live, thus the killing would actually be a favor to the kill-ee and the killer, while perhaps having evil intent, would actually be giving a blessing and liberation to the kill-ee.

Could there be some planet in your chart that is debilitated that gives you such a judgmental and combative feeling about all this?

From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

 Xeno,
I would assume that you would fight to save your life if the Islamic State rebels got a hold of you to cut your head off as propaganda for their cause. Are you going to assume that you're imagining things?  As you've seen in the news, these rebels have cut the heads of Brits and Americans in the recent past.  It's real and true.
If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die.  If you fight and win, you save your life and become a hero to the world.




---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

You know jr_esq, you are assuming that your idea of good and evil is real. I hold they are simply conceptual mappings onto reality, but they have no real existence except as a convenient and arbitrary way to categorise certain forms of activity. There was an episode of Star Trek in which an alien species, the Excalbians, investigated good and evil. They concluded that good and evil use the same methods and achieve the similar results. The writers of the episode used science fiction as a template to discuss the nature of good and evil.
How are you defining good and evil, and why do you feel those definitions are somehow true or real?


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,
IMO, it's unfortunate that human beings have to die.  But circumstances happen where a person or a leader of a nation has to act to prevent evil or to eradicate evil from existing.  Under these circumstances, it would be justified to take arms and fight.  Any deaths that come from a justified war would be dignified and would be considered necessary to deter evil.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Surveys of deaths in the two Iraq wars show that (depending on the survey), between 151,000 to 1,000,000 Iraqis died in the two US-led wars between 2003 and 2013. One study, conducted by the Iraq Body Count project, found that 174,000 Iraqis were reported killed between 2003 and 2013, withbetween 112,000-123,000 of those killed being civilian noncombatants. Meanwhile, the total number of US troops killed during this period was 4,491. 

Now, JR, please tell me. Was that "good" or "evil?"

From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 3:14 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

 About 12,000 or so people die every day. About 10% of those are killed by other people one way or another. The Islamic State is one of those ways. This is what happens. One method of reducing those killings is to bomb or send troops to kill the members of the Islamic State, by substituting other killings in place of the ones the Islamic State perpetrates. Then there is the question of who or what is killing the other 11,000 people who die every day, which is a far greater number. From their point of view, the killers in the Islamic State are doing their god-given duty to remove infidels and betrayers of their faith from the world, a good thing. We don't know what the people killed think of it, but those in the West do not seem in favour of the idea, thinking it a bad thing. In almost every year, anyone born more that 120 years ago is dead. As pointed out recently God killed something like 2,000,000 people as reported in the Bible, while Satan, bless his reticent soul, only 10. So it would appear the best killers are in the service of what is called 'good', for a good cause, by their own estimation. They truly believe something is good and worthy, and carry out killings in the service of that. That probably means we should be rather suspicious of the good people who want to purify their environment in the service of that good. For our own good, maybe we should kill them, just to be on the safe side.



---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,
If you say there is no "good" or "evil", how do explain the fact that groups, like the Islamic State, kill innocent people in Iraq and Syria?













#yiv8409377281 #yiv8409377281 -- #yiv8409377281ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv8409377281 #yiv8409377281ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv8409377281 #yiv8409377281ygrp-mkp #yiv8409377281hd {color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px 0;}#yiv8409377281 #yiv8409377281ygrp-mkp #yiv8409377281ads {margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv8409377281 #yiv8409377281ygrp-mkp .yiv8409377281ad {padding:0 0;}#yiv8409377281 #yiv8409377281ygrp-mkp .yiv8409377281ad p {margin:0;}#yiv8409377281 #yiv8409377281ygrp-mkp .yiv8409377281ad a {color:#0000ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv8409377281 #yiv8409377281ygrp-sponsor #yiv8409377281ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv8409377281 #yiv8409377281ygrp-sponsor #yiv8409377281ygrp-lc #yiv8409377281hd {margin:10px 0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv8409377281 #yiv8409377281ygrp-sponsor #yiv8409377281ygrp-lc .yiv8409377281ad {margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv8409377281 #yiv8409377281actions {font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv8409377281 #yiv8409377281activity {background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv8409377281 #yiv8409377281activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv8409377281 #yiv8409377281activity span:first-child {text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv8409377281 #yiv8409377281activity span a {color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}#yiv8409377281 #yiv8409377281activity span span {color:#ff7900;}#yiv8409377281 #yiv8409377281activity span .yiv8409377281underline {text-decoration:underline;}#yiv8409377281 .yiv8409377281attach {clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px 0;width:400px;}#yiv8409377281 .yiv8409377281attach div a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv8409377281 .yiv8409377281attach img {border:none;padding-right:5px;}#yiv8409377281 .yiv8409377281attach label {display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}#yiv8409377281 .yiv8409377281attach label a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv8409377281 blockquote {margin:0 0 0 4px;}#yiv8409377281 .yiv8409377281bold {font-family:Arial;font-size:13px;font-weight:700;}#yiv8409377281 .yiv8409377281bold a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv8409377281 dd.yiv8409377281last p a {font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv8409377281 dd.yiv8409377281last p span {margin-right:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv8409377281 dd.yiv8409377281last p span.yiv8409377281yshortcuts {margin-right:0;}#yiv8409377281 div.yiv8409377281attach-table div div a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv8409377281 div.yiv8409377281attach-table {width:400px;}#yiv8409377281 div.yiv8409377281file-title a, #yiv8409377281 div.yiv8409377281file-title a:active, #yiv8409377281 div.yiv8409377281file-title a:hover, #yiv8409377281 div.yiv8409377281file-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv8409377281 div.yiv8409377281photo-title a, #yiv8409377281 div.yiv8409377281photo-title a:active, #yiv8409377281 div.yiv8409377281photo-title a:hover, #yiv8409377281 div.yiv8409377281photo-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv8409377281 div#yiv8409377281ygrp-mlmsg #yiv8409377281ygrp-msg p a span.yiv8409377281yshortcuts {font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;font-weight:normal;}#yiv8409377281 .yiv8409377281green {color:#628c2a;}#yiv8409377281 .yiv8409377281MsoNormal {margin:0 0 0 0;}#yiv8409377281 o {font-size:0;}#yiv8409377281 #yiv8409377281photos div {float:left;width:72px;}#yiv8409377281 #yiv8409377281photos div div {border:1px solid #666666;height:62px;overflow:hidden;width:62px;}#yiv8409377281 #yiv8409377281photos div label {color:#666666;font-size:10px;overflow:hidden;text-align:center;white-space:nowrap;width:64px;}#yiv8409377281 #yiv8409377281reco-category {font-size:77%;}#yiv8409377281 #yiv8409377281reco-desc {font-size:77%;}#yiv8409377281 .yiv8409377281replbq {margin:4px;}#yiv8409377281 #yiv8409377281ygrp-actbar div a:first-child {margin-right:2px;padding-right:5px;}#yiv8409377281 #yiv8409377281ygrp-mlmsg {font-size:13px;font-family:Arial, helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv8409377281 #yiv8409377281ygrp-mlmsg table {font-size:inherit;font:100%;}#yiv8409377281 #yiv8409377281ygrp-mlmsg select, #yiv8409377281 input, #yiv8409377281 textarea {font:99% Arial, Helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv8409377281 #yiv8409377281ygrp-mlmsg pre, #yiv8409377281 code {font:115% monospace;}#yiv8409377281 #yiv8409377281ygrp-mlmsg * {line-height:1.22em;}#yiv8409377281 #yiv8409377281ygrp-mlmsg #yiv8409377281logo {padding-bottom:10px;}#yiv8409377281 #yiv8409377281ygrp-msg p a {font-family:Verdana;}#yiv8409377281 #yiv8409377281ygrp-msg p#yiv8409377281attach-count span {color:#1E66AE;font-weight:700;}#yiv8409377281 #yiv8409377281ygrp-reco #yiv8409377281reco-head {color:#ff7900;font-weight:700;}#yiv8409377281 #yiv8409377281ygrp-reco {margin-bottom:20px;padding:0px;}#yiv8409377281 #yiv8409377281ygrp-sponsor #yiv8409377281ov li a {font-size:130%;text-decoration:none;}#yiv8409377281 #yiv8409377281ygrp-sponsor #yiv8409377281ov li {font-size:77%;list-style-type:square;padding:6px 0;}#yiv8409377281 #yiv8409377281ygrp-sponsor #yiv8409377281ov ul {margin:0;padding:0 0 0 8px;}#yiv8409377281 #yiv8409377281ygrp-text {font-family:Georgia;}#yiv8409377281 #yiv8409377281ygrp-text p {margin:0 0 1em 0;}#yiv8409377281 #yiv8409377281ygrp-text tt {font-size:120%;}#yiv8409377281 #yiv8409377281ygrp-vital ul li:last-child {border-right:none !important;}#yiv8409377281

[[e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

Now this is really funny, from a guy that once told me that in order to be reincarnated in another human body after I die, I'd have to spend 9 days in a "bardo" state, because he once read it in an English translation of "The Tibetan Book of the Dead." from the guy who wrote almost the entire Rama cult scriptures. LoL!

http://www.ramalila.net/RoadTripMind/rtm03.html http://www.ramalila.net/RoadTripMind/rtm03.html

You can't make this stuff up. Can anyone spell cognitive dissonance?

---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

I've always found that interesting, too, Michael. Compared to many of the great mythologies of the world, the mythic tales from India are remarkably soap opera-y and low-vibe.



I mean, we're supposed to believe that gods are so petty that they kill each other over shit like their snuggle-bunny sleeping with another god? That's the kind of behavior I'd expect from my neighbors in New Mexico, not in Brahmaloka. :-)

From: "Michael Jackson ***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: "***@yahoogroups.com" <***@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, March 27, 2015 2:15 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?



One of the things I find interesting and amusing is the tales of the gods and goddesses in India, not to mention the tale of the enlightened sages all ascribe very human emotions like anger, jealousy, fear, suspicion, desire for revenge etc. to beings that in the case of the gods are supposed to be divine, and in the case of the rishis are supposed to be one with the divine.



If these tales are true it means that the divine is screwed up and we in our current state with all its human foibles are the best divinity can manifest or it means the humans in our hubris just create the gods to be like us.





From: "TurquoiseBee ***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: "***@yahoogroups.com" <***@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, March 27, 2015 4:17 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?



I am aware of the problems with establishing the historical existence of many religious figures, Xeno, but that isn't what I was getting at with JR. I have noticed in him a tendency that I doubt he is aware of -- or, if he is, he probably sees nothing wrong with.



When claiming to believe in the existence of Krishna or similar figures from religious myth here in the past, he has cited as proof "scriptures" such as the Gita. Bzzzzzzt. Thanks for playing, but no win. Religious scriptures are NOT factual, no matter how many people believe they are. Scholars often don't even know the *century* many of them were written in, much less who wrote them. Best to consider them creative fiction written with the intent to inspire IMO.


The only *other* mechanism by which JR can claim to have "done research" on the question of whether someone like Krishna existed in real life or not is "seeing" -- meaning some kind of subjective realization or vision or intuition. While I admit that such things exist -- subjectively -- I do NOT admit that any of these "seeings" have anything to do with fact. If they did, more people who claim to be able to see the future would be millionaires. :-)


I was just hoping to see JR try to actually posit and then defend some mechanism by which he thinks "proof" could be offered of Krishna's existence. If he actually tried, it might wake him up to the fact that the only reason he *does* believe in such silliness is that someone he holds as an "authority" said so. In other words, his only "proof" is the word "Maharishisez."


Now, as for Schroedinger's cat, I for one have no problem with someone being both alive and dead at the same time. Just look at Keith Richards -- the guy has looked like death on a stick since the 1960s, yet he still manages to tour and play some pretty good guitar. If that's not an example of Schroedinger's paradox, I don't know what is. :-)



As for the answer to "What's in the big pink box, man?" that is as much of a koan as it was when posed in the movie "Buckaroo Banzai." Me, I kinda doubt it's enlightenment. :-)




From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2015 8:08 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


Establishing the historicity of various religious characters today is pretty much impossible. Of the following, Krishna, Buddha, Moses, Jesus, Mohammed, Shankara, only the latter two have much evidence that would just suggest they existed, primarily because they are a bit more recent. It seems more logical with the lack of definite evidence that these names can be used as 'bookmarks' that delineate a certain point in the development of a tradition, a personification of what had transpired up to that point. If we were to take the TMO holy tradition, only Shankara, Brahmanda Saraswati, Maharishi, and King Tony have a believable amount of evidence, and only the last three have really good historical evidence as to their existence. If we assume enlightenment exists, we could say that the 'tradition' of enlightenment is something generated in one's own mind as a means to remove the delusion that there is something called enlightenment that one can gain.


Barry, I read your post with the cartoon about the cat. It was heartbreaking for a friend of mine to look in the box, because it was her cat. She probably should not have opened it. In a way enlightenment is kind of parallel to this. You are looking for something you already have, and as long as you keep looking, you never find it. When you stop looking, truly stop looking, then you discover your search was in vain. What a relief!


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

I am asking you to explain to us how ANYONE could possibly "research" such a question as the historical existence of Krishna and come up with an accurate answer. You seem to base a lot of your beliefs on "Maharishisez," meaning that *he* said something that you consider fact. What I am asking you to do is explain to us HOW he (or anyone else) could *possibly* determine that "Krishna" actually existed sufficiently that you would believe it to be fact.



Don't be coy. You obviously believe this stuff. Now explain to us how you think it works.


From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2015 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


Pastor Barry,


I said below that I did NOT research the matter personally.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

John, we've all seen you post things on this forum that leave no doubt that you believe that such mythical personalities as Krishna actually existed. You've actually said as much in the past, so there is no need to try to hide the fact now.



What is more interesting, since you *are* trying to hide it, is HOW you claim you could "research the subject" and come up with a definitive answer stating that "Krishna is an incarnation of Vishnu here on Earth." Please explain to us HOW you or any other person could determine the validity of this statement. NOT that "some people believe it," but that's it's actual fact. Please share with us how a person convinces himself that he or she "knows" such a thing.

From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>

MMY believes Krishna is an incarnation of Vishnu here on Earth. I personally have not researched the subject.

---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Do you believe Krshna was an actual personage on the earth or a religious myth?


If real, was he just a man or an avatar of Vishnu?



From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 9:07 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


MJ,


I'm paraphrasing what Krishna said to Arjuna, who was reluctant in fighting his relatives in the battle of Kurukshetra.





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

"If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die."


Seems a rather narrow minded point of view.



What if the person being killed is a committed practitioner of ahimsa? A Jainite or a fanatic pacifist? One who would rather be killed than raise their hand in violence to another even in self defense?



Or suppose the about to be killed already had a terminal illness with a bleak prognosis and a short time to live, thus the killing would actually be a favor to the kill-ee and the killer, while perhaps having evil intent, would actually be giving a blessing and liberation to the kill-ee.



Could there be some planet in your chart that is debilitated that gives you such a judgmental and combative feeling about all this?



From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


Xeno,


I would assume that you would fight to save your life if the Islamic State rebels got a hold of you to cut your head off as propaganda for their cause. Are you going to assume that you're imagining things? As you've seen in the news, these rebels have cut the heads of Brits and Americans in the recent past. It's real and true.


If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die. If you fight and win, you save your life and become a hero to the world.





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

You know jr_esq, you are assuming that your idea of good and evil is real. I hold they are simply conceptual mappings onto reality, but they have no real existence except as a convenient and arbitrary way to categorise certain forms of activity. There was an episode of Star Trek in which an alien species, the Excalbians, investigated good and evil. They concluded that good and evil use the same methods and achieve the similar results. The writers of the episode used science fiction as a template to discuss the nature of good and evil.

How are you defining good and evil, and why do you feel those definitions are somehow true or real?


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,

IMO, it's unfortunate that human beings have to die. But circumstances happen where a person or a leader of a nation has to act to prevent evil or to eradicate evil from existing. Under these circumstances, it would be justified to take arms and fight. Any deaths that come from a justified war would be dignified and would be considered necessary to deter evil.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Surveys of deaths in the two Iraq wars show that (depending on the survey), between 151,000 to 1,000,000 Iraqis died in the two US-led wars between 2003 and 2013. One study, conducted by the Iraq Body Count project http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Body_Count_project, found that 174,000 Iraqis were reported killed between 2003 and 2013, with between 112,000-123,000 of those killed being civilian noncombatants. Meanwhile, the total number of US troops killed during this period was 4,491.


Now, JR, please tell me. Was that "good" or "evil?"



From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 3:14 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


About 12,000 or so people die every day. About 10% of those are killed by other people one way or another. The Islamic State is one of those ways. This is what happens. One method of reducing those killings is to bomb or send troops to kill the members of the Islamic State, by substituting other killings in place of the ones the Islamic State perpetrates. Then there is the question of who or what is killing the other 11,000 people who die every day, which is a far greater number. From their point of view, the killers in the Islamic State are doing their god-given duty to remove infidels and betrayers of their faith from the world, a good thing. We don't know what the people killed think of it, but those in the West do not seem in favour of the idea, thinking it a bad thing. In almost every year, anyone born more that 120 years ago is dead. As pointed out recently God killed something like 2,000,000 people as reported in the Bible, while Satan, bless his reticent soul, only 10. So it would appear the best killers are in the service of what is called 'good', for a good cause, by their own estimation. They truly believe something is good and worthy, and carry out killings in the service of that. That probably means we should be rather suspicious of the good people who want to purify their environment in the service of that good. For our own good, maybe we should kill them, just to be on the safe side.





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,

If you say there is no "good" or "evil", how do explain the fact that groups, like the Islamic State, kill innocent people in Iraq and Syria?






































































































































---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

I've always found that interesting, too, Michael. Compared to many of the great mythologies of the world, the mythic tales from India are remarkably soap opera-y and low-vibe.



I mean, we're supposed to believe that gods are so petty that they kill each other over shit like their snuggle-bunny sleeping with another god? That's the kind of behavior I'd expect from my neighbors in New Mexico, not in Brahmaloka. :-)

From: "Michael Jackson ***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: "***@yahoogroups.com" <***@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, March 27, 2015 2:15 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?



One of the things I find interesting and amusing is the tales of the gods and goddesses in India, not to mention the tale of the enlightened sages all ascribe very human emotions like anger, jealousy, fear, suspicion, desire for revenge etc. to beings that in the case of the gods are supposed to be divine, and in the case of the rishis are supposed to be one with the divine.



If these tales are true it means that the divine is screwed up and we in our current state with all its human foibles are the best divinity can manifest or it means the humans in our hubris just create the gods to be like us.





From: "TurquoiseBee ***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: "***@yahoogroups.com" <***@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, March 27, 2015 4:17 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?



I am aware of the problems with establishing the historical existence of many religious figures, Xeno, but that isn't what I was getting at with JR. I have noticed in him a tendency that I doubt he is aware of -- or, if he is, he probably sees nothing wrong with.



When claiming to believe in the existence of Krishna or similar figures from religious myth here in the past, he has cited as proof "scriptures" such as the Gita. Bzzzzzzt. Thanks for playing, but no win. Religious scriptures are NOT factual, no matter how many people believe they are. Scholars often don't even know the *century* many of them were written in, much less who wrote them. Best to consider them creative fiction written with the intent to inspire IMO.


The only *other* mechanism by which JR can claim to have "done research" on the question of whether someone like Krishna existed in real life or not is "seeing" -- meaning some kind of subjective realization or vision or intuition. While I admit that such things exist -- subjectively -- I do NOT admit that any of these "seeings" have anything to do with fact. If they did, more people who claim to be able to see the future would be millionaires. :-)


I was just hoping to see JR try to actually posit and then defend some mechanism by which he thinks "proof" could be offered of Krishna's existence. If he actually tried, it might wake him up to the fact that the only reason he *does* believe in such silliness is that someone he holds as an "authority" said so. In other words, his only "proof" is the word "Maharishisez."


Now, as for Schroedinger's cat, I for one have no problem with someone being both alive and dead at the same time. Just look at Keith Richards -- the guy has looked like death on a stick since the 1960s, yet he still manages to tour and play some pretty good guitar. If that's not an example of Schroedinger's paradox, I don't know what is. :-)



As for the answer to "What's in the big pink box, man?" that is as much of a koan as it was when posed in the movie "Buckaroo Banzai." Me, I kinda doubt it's enlightenment. :-)




From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2015 8:08 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


Establishing the historicity of various religious characters today is pretty much impossible. Of the following, Krishna, Buddha, Moses, Jesus, Mohammed, Shankara, only the latter two have much evidence that would just suggest they existed, primarily because they are a bit more recent. It seems more logical with the lack of definite evidence that these names can be used as 'bookmarks' that delineate a certain point in the development of a tradition, a personification of what had transpired up to that point. If we were to take the TMO holy tradition, only Shankara, Brahmanda Saraswati, Maharishi, and King Tony have a believable amount of evidence, and only the last three have really good historical evidence as to their existence. If we assume enlightenment exists, we could say that the 'tradition' of enlightenment is something generated in one's own mind as a means to remove the delusion that there is something called enlightenment that one can gain.


Barry, I read your post with the cartoon about the cat. It was heartbreaking for a friend of mine to look in the box, because it was her cat. She probably should not have opened it. In a way enlightenment is kind of parallel to this. You are looking for something you already have, and as long as you keep looking, you never find it. When you stop looking, truly stop looking, then you discover your search was in vain. What a relief!


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

I am asking you to explain to us how ANYONE could possibly "research" such a question as the historical existence of Krishna and come up with an accurate answer. You seem to base a lot of your beliefs on "Maharishisez," meaning that *he* said something that you consider fact. What I am asking you to do is explain to us HOW he (or anyone else) could *possibly* determine that "Krishna" actually existed sufficiently that you would believe it to be fact.



Don't be coy. You obviously believe this stuff. Now explain to us how you think it works.


From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2015 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


Pastor Barry,


I said below that I did NOT research the matter personally.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

John, we've all seen you post things on this forum that leave no doubt that you believe that such mythical personalities as Krishna actually existed. You've actually said as much in the past, so there is no need to try to hide the fact now.



What is more interesting, since you *are* trying to hide it, is HOW you claim you could "research the subject" and come up with a definitive answer stating that "Krishna is an incarnation of Vishnu here on Earth." Please explain to us HOW you or any other person could determine the validity of this statement. NOT that "some people believe it," but that's it's actual fact. Please share with us how a person convinces himself that he or she "knows" such a thing.

From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>

MMY believes Krishna is an incarnation of Vishnu here on Earth. I personally have not researched the subject.

---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Do you believe Krshna was an actual personage on the earth or a religious myth?


If real, was he just a man or an avatar of Vishnu?



From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 9:07 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


MJ,


I'm paraphrasing what Krishna said to Arjuna, who was reluctant in fighting his relatives in the battle of Kurukshetra.





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

"If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die."


Seems a rather narrow minded point of view.



What if the person being killed is a committed practitioner of ahimsa? A Jainite or a fanatic pacifist? One who would rather be killed than raise their hand in violence to another even in self defense?



Or suppose the about to be killed already had a terminal illness with a bleak prognosis and a short time to live, thus the killing would actually be a favor to the kill-ee and the killer, while perhaps having evil intent, would actually be giving a blessing and liberation to the kill-ee.



Could there be some planet in your chart that is debilitated that gives you such a judgmental and combative feeling about all this?



From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


Xeno,


I would assume that you would fight to save your life if the Islamic State rebels got a hold of you to cut your head off as propaganda for their cause. Are you going to assume that you're imagining things? As you've seen in the news, these rebels have cut the heads of Brits and Americans in the recent past. It's real and true.


If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die. If you fight and win, you save your life and become a hero to the world.





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

You know jr_esq, you are assuming that your idea of good and evil is real. I hold they are simply conceptual mappings onto reality, but they have no real existence except as a convenient and arbitrary way to categorise certain forms of activity. There was an episode of Star Trek in which an alien species, the Excalbians, investigated good and evil. They concluded that good and evil use the same methods and achieve the similar results. The writers of the episode used science fiction as a template to discuss the nature of good and evil.

How are you defining good and evil, and why do you feel those definitions are somehow true or real?


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,

IMO, it's unfortunate that human beings have to die. But circumstances happen where a person or a leader of a nation has to act to prevent evil or to eradicate evil from existing. Under these circumstances, it would be justified to take arms and fight. Any deaths that come from a justified war would be dignified and would be considered necessary to deter evil.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Surveys of deaths in the two Iraq wars show that (depending on the survey), between 151,000 to 1,000,000 Iraqis died in the two US-led wars between 2003 and 2013. One study, conducted by the Iraq Body Count project http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Body_Count_project, found that 174,000 Iraqis were reported killed between 2003 and 2013, with between 112,000-123,000 of those killed being civilian noncombatants. Meanwhile, the total number of US troops killed during this period was 4,491.


Now, JR, please tell me. Was that "good" or "evil?"



From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 3:14 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


About 12,000 or so people die every day. About 10% of those are killed by other people one way or another. The Islamic State is one of those ways. This is what happens. One method of reducing those killings is to bomb or send troops to kill the members of the Islamic State, by substituting other killings in place of the ones the Islamic State perpetrates. Then there is the question of who or what is killing the other 11,000 people who die every day, which is a far greater number. From their point of view, the killers in the Islamic State are doing their god-given duty to remove infidels and betrayers of their faith from the world, a good thing. We don't know what the people killed think of it, but those in the West do not seem in favour of the idea, thinking it a bad thing. In almost every year, anyone born more that 120 years ago is dead. As pointed out recently God killed something like 2,000,000 people as reported in the Bible, while Satan, bless his reticent soul, only 10. So it would appear the best killers are in the service of what is called 'good', for a good cause, by their own estimation. They truly believe something is good and worthy, and carry out killings in the service of that. That probably means we should be rather suspicious of the good people who want to purify their environment in the service of that good. For our own good, maybe we should kill them, just to be on the safe side.





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,

If you say there is no "good" or "evil", how do explain the fact that groups, like the Islamic State, kill innocent people in Iraq and Syria?

[[e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

Religious scriptures can contain some mention of facts, but usually they seem to be on the order of say the mention of the Kennedy assassination in the Illuminatus! triology of Shea & Wilson, where there is quite a lot of mention of historical people in an otherwise unbelievable story. There is more historical information available for Pontius Pilate than for Jesus. JR's view of the world does not seem to rest much on factual data, and seems to lack an underpinning of basic logic. Religious scriptures and apologetics basically just want to convince you of something, and there is nothing I see wrong in that, but buyer beware. Our societies tend not to give us the tools to think critically. The Netherlands has been a place where free thinking has had a better hold than in most, but I am ignorant of how well that is holding up currently.

I don't remember the pink box in Buckaroo Banzai, but it has been years and years since I saw that film. One year, probably in the min-1980s, I was talking to my sister on the phone. She was travelling and in a motel or hotel somewhere, and she said 'I am watching the strangest movie I have ever seen'; after a few questions I was able determine she was watching Buckaroo Banzai. You had to have lived in the late 40s and early 50s to get some of the things in that film, such as the relationship of comic books to characters actors played in films and on TV, especially because some of the actors played themselves in the films, like Roy Rogers, Gene Autry etc.


I had been watching a laid back modern-day western on Netflix that was cancelled by AMC: Longmire. Peter Weller had been in it occasionally and directing some episodes. Netflix has picked it up to produce an additional season, so perhaps Weller will get to direct some more episodes.


Still snow on the ground here. Went to a Connecticut mall this morning to walk around as the trails here are muck for a while as the snow and ice melt away. Usually I make my own coffee, but I had some at Starbucks, which is about the only thing around here. There is one good small non-Starbucks coffee shop I am aware of, but it is normally too far to drive (57km round trip).


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

I am aware of the problems with establishing the historical existence of many religious figures, Xeno, but that isn't what I was getting at with JR. I have noticed in him a tendency that I doubt he is aware of -- or, if he is, he probably sees nothing wrong with.



When claiming to believe in the existence of Krishna or similar figures from religious myth here in the past, he has cited as proof "scriptures" such as the Gita. Bzzzzzzt. Thanks for playing, but no win. Religious scriptures are NOT factual, no matter how many people believe they are. Scholars often don't even know the *century* many of them were written in, much less who wrote them. Best to consider them creative fiction written with the intent to inspire IMO.


The only *other* mechanism by which JR can claim to have "done research" on the question of whether someone like Krishna existed in real life or not is "seeing" -- meaning some kind of subjective realization or vision or intuition. While I admit that such things exist -- subjectively -- I do NOT admit that any of these "seeings" have anything to do with fact. If they did, more people who claim to be able to see the future would be millionaires. :-)


I was just hoping to see JR try to actually posit and then defend some mechanism by which he thinks "proof" could be offered of Krishna's existence. If he actually tried, it might wake him up to the fact that the only reason he *does* believe in such silliness is that someone he holds as an "authority" said so. In other words, his only "proof" is the word "Maharishisez."


Now, as for Schroedinger's cat, I for one have no problem with someone being both alive and dead at the same time. Just look at Keith Richards -- the guy has looked like death on a stick since the 1960s, yet he still manages to tour and play some pretty good guitar. If that's not an example of Schroedinger's paradox, I don't know what is. :-)



As for the answer to "What's in the big pink box, man?" that is as much of a koan as it was when posed in the movie "Buckaroo Banzai." Me, I kinda doubt it's enlightenment. :-)

[TurquoiseBee [e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

Obviously, I agree that JR's world is based on fictions that he has been told so many times that he now cannot differentiate them for fact. The very *concept* of "fact" is something he has lost touch with. I was trying to help him realize this by asking him to *explain* the process by which he thinks he "knows" the many things he claims to "know." He pulled the cowardly Judy/Jim routine and skedaddled, so I doubt I'll hear from him again. Maybe you'll have better luck.

As for Buckaroo Banzai, it is pretty much the quintessential cult film. (In the sense of having developed a cult following, that is, not in the sense of being about a cult, but at the same time it was one of our favorite films in the Rama cult, and we went to see it en masse many times.)

It has been voted in several surveys "The Film We Most Wanted To See A Sequel To But Didn't Get To," and with good reason. Excellent, over-the-top performances by John Lithgow and Christopher Lloyd, and more quotable one-liners than in any other movie we can imagine. My mention of "What's in the big pink box?" was a bit of a koan, in that we never really know for sure. We can guess that it's the device we see later projecting a message from the friendly Lectroids, but I don't think it was ever explicitly explained. The one true koan that we know was never explained was "What's the watermelon for?"  :-)  Here's a tremendous clip with Kevin Smith and John Lithgow and Peter Weller rapping about BB, followed by a few of my fave quotes from the film:

Buckaroo Banzai:Hey, hey, hey, hey-now. Don't be mean; we don't have to be mean, cuz, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

Lord John Whorfin:History is-a made at night. Character is what you are in the dark.

Perfect Tommy:Pictures don't lie. Reno:The hell they don't. I met my first wife that way.
Lord John Whorfin:Sealed with a curse as sharp as a knife. Doomed is your soul and damned is your life.
New Jersey:Why is there a watermelon there? Reno:I'll tell you later. Mission Control:Buckaroo, The White House wants to know is everything ok with the alien space craft from Planet 10 or should we just go ahead and destroy Russia? Buckaroo Banzai:Tell him yes on one and no on two. Mission Control:Which one was yes, go ahead and destroy Russia... or number 2?
John O'Connor:They're only monkey-boys. We can crush them here on earth, Lord Whorfin.

Lord John Whorfin:May I pass along my congratulations for your great interdimensional breakthrough. I am sure, in the miserable annals of the Earth, you will be duly enshrined.

Perfect Tommy:Emilio Lizardo. Wasn't he on TV once? Buckaroo Banzai:You're thinking of Mr. Wizard. Reno:Emilio Lizardo is a top scientist, dummkopf. Perfect Tommy:So was Mr. Wizard.
Lord John Whorfin:Where are we going? The Red Lectroids:Planet Ten! Lord John Whorfin:When? The Red Lectroids:Real soon!
John Bigboote:It's not my goddamn planet. Understand, monkey boy?

Lord John Whorfin:Laugh-a while you can, monkey-boy.

Overhead announcement at psychiatric hospital:Lithium is no longer available on credit.

Lord John Whorfin:Home... home is where you wear your hat... I feel so breakup, I wanna go home.

Yoyodyne intercom announcement:The only joy is the joy of duty. Work... work... work.

and finally, a line clearly written for Judy:

Lectroid:We are not in the Eighth dimension, we are over New Jersey. Hope is not lost.



From: "***@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, March 27, 2015 7:27 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

  Religious scriptures can contain some mention of facts, but usually they seem to be on the order of say the mention of the Kennedy assassination in the Illuminatus! triology of Shea & Wilson, where there is quite a lot of mention of historical people in an otherwise unbelievable story. There is more historical information available for Pontius Pilate than for Jesus. JR's view of the world does not seem to rest much on factual data, and seems to lack an underpinning of basic logic. Religious scriptures and apologetics basically just want to convince you of something, and there is nothing I see wrong in that, but buyer beware. Our societies tend not to give us the tools to think critically. The Netherlands has been a place where free thinking has had a better hold than in most, but I am ignorant of how well that is holding up currently.
I don't remember the pink box in Buckaroo Banzai, but it has been years and years since I saw that film. One year, probably in the min-1980s, I was talking to my sister on the phone. She was travelling and in a motel or hotel somewhere, and she said 'I am watching the strangest movie I have ever seen'; after a few questions I was able determine she was watching Buckaroo Banzai. You had to have lived in the late 40s and early 50s to get some of the things in that film, such as the relationship of comic books to characters actors played in films and on TV, especially because some of the actors played themselves in the films, like Roy Rogers, Gene Autry etc.
I had been watching a laid back modern-day western on Netflix that was cancelled by AMC: Longmire. Peter Weller had been in it occasionally and directing some episodes. Netflix has picked it up to produce an additional season, so perhaps Weller will get to direct some more episodes.
Still snow on the ground here. Went to a Connecticut mall this morning to walk around as the trails here are muck for a while as the snow and ice melt away. Usually I make my own coffee, but I had some at Starbucks, which is about the only thing around here. There is one good small non-Starbucks coffee shop I am aware of, but it is normally too far to drive (57km round trip).


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

I am aware of the problems with establishing the historical existence of many religious figures, Xeno, but that isn't what I was getting at with JR. I have noticed in him a tendency that I doubt he is aware of -- or, if he is, he probably sees nothing wrong with.

When claiming to believe in the existence of Krishna or similar figures from religious myth here in the past, he has cited as proof "scriptures" such as the Gita. Bzzzzzzt. Thanks for playing, but no win. Religious scriptures are NOT factual, no matter how many people believe they are. Scholars often don't even know the *century* many of them were written in, much less who wrote them. Best to consider them creative fiction written with the intent to inspire IMO.
The only *other* mechanism by which JR can claim to have "done research" on the question of whether someone like Krishna existed in real life or not is "seeing" -- meaning some kind of subjective realization or vision or intuition. While I admit that such things exist -- subjectively -- I do NOT admit that any of these "seeings" have anything to do with fact. If they did, more people who claim to be able to see the future would be millionaires.  :-)
I was just hoping to see JR try to actually posit and then defend some mechanism by which he thinks "proof" could be offered of Krishna's existence. If he actually tried, it might wake him up to the fact that the only reason he *does* believe in such silliness is that someone he holds as an "authority" said so. In other words, his only "proof" is the word "Maharishisez."
Now, as for Schroedinger's cat, I for one have no problem with someone being both alive and dead at the same time. Just look at Keith Richards -- the guy has looked like death on a stick since the 1960s, yet he still manages to tour and play some pretty good guitar. If that's not an example of Schroedinger's paradox, I don't know what is.  :-)

As for the answer to "What's in the big pink box, man?" that is as much of a koan as it was when posed in the movie "Buckaroo Banzai." Me, I kinda doubt it's enlightenment.  :-)
#yiv6722719927 #yiv6722719927 -- #yiv6722719927ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv6722719927 #yiv6722719927ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv6722719927 #yiv6722719927ygrp-mkp #yiv6722719927hd {color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px 0;}#yiv6722719927 #yiv6722719927ygrp-mkp #yiv6722719927ads {margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv6722719927 #yiv6722719927ygrp-mkp .yiv6722719927ad {padding:0 0;}#yiv6722719927 #yiv6722719927ygrp-mkp .yiv6722719927ad p {margin:0;}#yiv6722719927 #yiv6722719927ygrp-mkp .yiv6722719927ad a {color:#0000ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv6722719927 #yiv6722719927ygrp-sponsor #yiv6722719927ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv6722719927 #yiv6722719927ygrp-sponsor #yiv6722719927ygrp-lc #yiv6722719927hd {margin:10px 0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv6722719927 #yiv6722719927ygrp-sponsor #yiv6722719927ygrp-lc .yiv6722719927ad {margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv6722719927 #yiv6722719927actions {font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv6722719927 #yiv6722719927activity {background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv6722719927 #yiv6722719927activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv6722719927 #yiv6722719927activity span:first-child {text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv6722719927 #yiv6722719927activity span a {color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}#yiv6722719927 #yiv6722719927activity span span {color:#ff7900;}#yiv6722719927 #yiv6722719927activity span .yiv6722719927underline {text-decoration:underline;}#yiv6722719927 .yiv6722719927attach {clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px 0;width:400px;}#yiv6722719927 .yiv6722719927attach div a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv6722719927 .yiv6722719927attach img {border:none;padding-right:5px;}#yiv6722719927 .yiv6722719927attach label {display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}#yiv6722719927 .yiv6722719927attach label a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv6722719927 blockquote {margin:0 0 0 4px;}#yiv6722719927 .yiv6722719927bold {font-family:Arial;font-size:13px;font-weight:700;}#yiv6722719927 .yiv6722719927bold a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv6722719927 dd.yiv6722719927last p a {font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv6722719927 dd.yiv6722719927last p span {margin-right:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv6722719927 dd.yiv6722719927last p span.yiv6722719927yshortcuts {margin-right:0;}#yiv6722719927 div.yiv6722719927attach-table div div a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv6722719927 div.yiv6722719927attach-table {width:400px;}#yiv6722719927 div.yiv6722719927file-title a, #yiv6722719927 div.yiv6722719927file-title a:active, #yiv6722719927 div.yiv6722719927file-title a:hover, #yiv6722719927 div.yiv6722719927file-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv6722719927 div.yiv6722719927photo-title a, #yiv6722719927 div.yiv6722719927photo-title a:active, #yiv6722719927 div.yiv6722719927photo-title a:hover, #yiv6722719927 div.yiv6722719927photo-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv6722719927 div#yiv6722719927ygrp-mlmsg #yiv6722719927ygrp-msg p a span.yiv6722719927yshortcuts {font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;font-weight:normal;}#yiv6722719927 .yiv6722719927green {color:#628c2a;}#yiv6722719927 .yiv6722719927MsoNormal {margin:0 0 0 0;}#yiv6722719927 o {font-size:0;}#yiv6722719927 #yiv6722719927photos div {float:left;width:72px;}#yiv6722719927 #yiv6722719927photos div div {border:1px solid #666666;height:62px;overflow:hidden;width:62px;}#yiv6722719927 #yiv6722719927photos div label {color:#666666;font-size:10px;overflow:hidden;text-align:center;white-space:nowrap;width:64px;}#yiv6722719927 #yiv6722719927reco-category {font-size:77%;}#yiv6722719927 #yiv6722719927reco-desc {font-size:77%;}#yiv6722719927 .yiv6722719927replbq {margin:4px;}#yiv6722719927 #yiv6722719927ygrp-actbar div a:first-child {margin-right:2px;padding-right:5px;}#yiv6722719927 #yiv6722719927ygrp-mlmsg {font-size:13px;font-family:Arial, helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv6722719927 #yiv6722719927ygrp-mlmsg table {font-size:inherit;font:100%;}#yiv6722719927 #yiv6722719927ygrp-mlmsg select, #yiv6722719927 input, #yiv6722719927 textarea {font:99% Arial, Helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv6722719927 #yiv6722719927ygrp-mlmsg pre, #yiv6722719927 code {font:115% monospace;}#yiv6722719927 #yiv6722719927ygrp-mlmsg * {line-height:1.22em;}#yiv6722719927 #yiv6722719927ygrp-mlmsg #yiv6722719927logo {padding-bottom:10px;}#yiv6722719927 #yiv6722719927ygrp-msg p a {font-family:Verdana;}#yiv6722719927 #yiv6722719927ygrp-msg p#yiv6722719927attach-count span {color:#1E66AE;font-weight:700;}#yiv6722719927 #yiv6722719927ygrp-reco #yiv6722719927reco-head {color:#ff7900;font-weight:700;}#yiv6722719927 #yiv6722719927ygrp-reco {margin-bottom:20px;padding:0px;}#yiv6722719927 #yiv6722719927ygrp-sponsor #yiv6722719927ov li a {font-size:130%;text-decoration:none;}#yiv6722719927 #yiv6722719927ygrp-sponsor #yiv6722719927ov li {font-size:77%;list-style-type:square;padding:6px 0;}#yiv6722719927 #yiv6722719927ygrp-sponsor #yiv6722719927ov ul {margin:0;padding:0 0 0 8px;}#yiv6722719927 #yiv6722719927ygrp-text {font-family:Georgia;}#yiv6722719927 #yiv6722719927ygrp-text p {margin:0 0 1em 0;}#yiv6722719927 #yiv6722719927ygrp-text tt {font-size:120%;}#yiv6722719927 #yiv6722719927ygrp-vital ul li:last-child {border-right:none !important;}#yiv6722719927

[[e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

So, you're claiming that Fred Lenz was the Last Incarnation of Vishnu, but JR's world is based on fictions? Go figure. We know that Lenz was a real person, but some may have doubts about the Vishnu guy, Barry. Maybe you could explain the process by which you know that Fred Lenz was Rama, the last incarnation of Lord Vishnu. Can you spell cognitive dissonance? Thanks.

"HIS BODY TURNED GOLD . . . . . . he began to shrink, then grow to tremendous heights. He raised his arms and a shower of energy rushed down onto us while lines of power pushed up through my spine. His body turned gold, then it turned into a doorway. It became an absence. I felt myself drawn into it and through it into other realities. I felt myself spinning, floating, turning in various directions, then expanding and contracting."

http://www.ramalila.net/LetDrLenzsStudentsBooksTeach/Interview_The%20Last%20Incarnation.htm http://www.ramalila.net/LetDrLenzsStudentsBooksTeach/Interview_The%20Last%20Incarnation.htm

---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Obviously, I agree that JR's world is based on fictions that he has been told so many times that he now cannot differentiate them for fact. The very *concept* of "fact" is something he has lost touch with. I was trying to help him realize this by asking him to *explain* the process by which he thinks he "knows" the many things he claims to "know." He pulled the cowardly Judy/Jim routine and skedaddled, so I doubt I'll hear from him again. Maybe you'll have better luck.



As for Buckaroo Banzai, it is pretty much the quintessential cult film. (In the sense of having developed a cult following, that is, not in the sense of being about a cult, but at the same time it was one of our favorite films in the Rama cult, and we went to see it en masse many times.)



It has been voted in several surveys "The Film We Most Wanted To See A Sequel To But Didn't Get To," and with good reason. Excellent, over-the-top performances by John Lithgow and Christopher Lloyd, and more quotable one-liners than in any other movie we can imagine. My mention of "What's in the big pink box?" was a bit of a koan, in that we never really know for sure. We can guess that it's the device we see later projecting a message from the friendly Lectroids, but I don't think it was ever explicitly explained. The one true koan that we know was never explained was "What's the watermelon for?" :-) Here's a tremendous clip with Kevin Smith and John Lithgow and Peter Weller rapping about BB, followed by a few of my fave quotes from the film:



http://youtu.be/N8R8wmlggwc http://youtu.be/N8R8wmlggwc


Buckaroo Banzai http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000693/?ref_=tt_trv_qu: Hey, hey, hey, hey-now. Don't be mean; we don't have to be mean, cuz, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.



Lord John Whorfin http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001475/?ref_=tt_trv_qu: History is-a made at night. Character is what you are in the dark.



Perfect Tommy http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0809095/?ref_=tt_trv_qu: Pictures don't lie.
Reno http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0785277/?ref_=tt_trv_qu: The hell they don't. I met my first wife that way.


http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0086856/quotes?item=qt0259035


Lord John Whorfin http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001475/?ref_=tt_trv_qu: Sealed with a curse as sharp as a knife. Doomed is your soul and damned is your life.


http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0086856/quotes?item=qt0259039


New Jersey http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000156/?ref_=tt_trv_qu: Why is there a watermelon there?
Reno http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0785277/?ref_=tt_trv_qu: I'll tell you later.


Mission Control http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0673989/?ref_=tt_trv_qu: Buckaroo, The White House wants to know is everything ok with the alien space craft from Planet 10 or should we just go ahead and destroy Russia?
Buckaroo Banzai http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000693/?ref_=tt_trv_qu: Tell him yes on one and no on two.
Mission Control http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0673989/?ref_=tt_trv_qu: Which one was yes, go ahead and destroy Russia... or number 2?


http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0086856/quotes?item=qt0259066


John O'Connor http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001704/?ref_=tt_trv_qu: They're only monkey-boys. We can crush them here on earth, Lord Whorfin.



Lord John Whorfin http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001475/?ref_=tt_trv_qu: May I pass along my congratulations for your great interdimensional breakthrough. I am sure, in the miserable annals of the Earth, you will be duly enshrined.



Perfect Tommy http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0809095/?ref_=tt_trv_qu: Emilio Lizardo. Wasn't he on TV once?
Buckaroo Banzai http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000693/?ref_=tt_trv_qu: You're thinking of Mr. Wizard.
Reno http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0785277/?ref_=tt_trv_qu: Emilio Lizardo is a top scientist, dummkopf.
Perfect Tommy http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0809095/?ref_=tt_trv_qu: So was Mr. Wizard.


http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0086856/quotes?item=qt0259036


Lord John Whorfin http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001475/?ref_=tt_trv_qu: Where are we going?
The Red Lectroids: Planet Ten!
Lord John Whorfin http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001475/?ref_=tt_trv_qu: When?
The Red Lectroids: Real soon!



John Bigboote http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000502/?ref_=tt_trv_qu: It's not my goddamn planet. Understand, monkey boy?



Lord John Whorfin http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001475/?ref_=tt_trv_qu: Laugh-a while you can, monkey-boy.



Overhead announcement at psychiatric hospital: Lithium is no longer available on credit.



Lord John Whorfin http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001475/?ref_=tt_trv_qu: Home... home is where you wear your hat... I feel so breakup, I wanna go home.



Yoyodyne intercom announcement: The only joy is the joy of duty. Work... work... work.



and finally, a line clearly written for Judy:



Lectroid: We are not in the Eighth dimension, we are over New Jersey. Hope is not lost.








From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, March 27, 2015 7:27 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


Religious scriptures can contain some mention of facts, but usually they seem to be on the order of say the mention of the Kennedy assassination in the Illuminatus! triology of Shea & Wilson, where there is quite a lot of mention of historical people in an otherwise unbelievable story. There is more historical information available for Pontius Pilate than for Jesus. JR's view of the world does not seem to rest much on factual data, and seems to lack an underpinning of basic logic. Religious scriptures and apologetics basically just want to convince you of something, and there is nothing I see wrong in that, but buyer beware. Our societies tend not to give us the tools to think critically. The Netherlands has been a place where free thinking has had a better hold than in most, but I am ignorant of how well that is holding up currently.


I don't remember the pink box in Buckaroo Banzai, but it has been years and years since I saw that film. One year, probably in the min-1980s, I was talking to my sister on the phone. She was travelling and in a motel or hotel somewhere, and she said 'I am watching the strangest movie I have ever seen'; after a few questions I was able determine she was watching Buckaroo Banzai. You had to have lived in the late 40s and early 50s to get some of the things in that film, such as the relationship of comic books to characters actors played in films and on TV, especially because some of the actors played themselves in the films, like Roy Rogers, Gene Autry etc.


I had been watching a laid back modern-day western on Netflix that was cancelled by AMC: Longmire. Peter Weller had been in it occasionally and directing some episodes. Netflix has picked it up to produce an additional season, so perhaps Weller will get to direct some more episodes.


Still snow on the ground here. Went to a Connecticut mall this morning to walk around as the trails here are muck for a while as the snow and ice melt away. Usually I make my own coffee, but I had some at Starbucks, which is about the only thing around here. There is one good small non-Starbucks coffee shop I am aware of, but it is normally too far to drive (57km round trip).


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

I am aware of the problems with establishing the historical existence of many religious figures, Xeno, but that isn't what I was getting at with JR. I have noticed in him a tendency that I doubt he is aware of -- or, if he is, he probably sees nothing wrong with.



When claiming to believe in the existence of Krishna or similar figures from religious myth here in the past, he has cited as proof "scriptures" such as the Gita. Bzzzzzzt. Thanks for playing, but no win. Religious scriptures are NOT factual, no matter how many people believe they are. Scholars often don't even know the *century* many of them were written in, much less who wrote them. Best to consider them creative fiction written with the intent to inspire IMO.


The only *other* mechanism by which JR can claim to have "done research" on the question of whether someone like Krishna existed in real life or not is "seeing" -- meaning some kind of subjective realization or vision or intuition. While I admit that such things exist -- subjectively -- I do NOT admit that any of these "seeings" have anything to do with fact. If they did, more people who claim to be able to see the future would be millionaires. :-)


I was just hoping to see JR try to actually posit and then defend some mechanism by which he thinks "proof" could be offered of Krishna's existence. If he actually tried, it might wake him up to the fact that the only reason he *does* believe in such silliness is that someone he holds as an "authority" said so. In other words, his only "proof" is the word "Maharishisez."


Now, as for Schroedinger's cat, I for one have no problem with someone being both alive and dead at the same time. Just look at Keith Richards -- the guy has looked like death on a stick since the 1960s, yet he still manages to tour and play some pretty good guitar. If that's not an example of Schroedinger's paradox, I don't know what is. :-)



As for the answer to "What's in the big pink box, man?" that is as much of a koan as it was when posed in the movie "Buckaroo Banzai." Me, I kinda doubt it's enlightenment. :-)

[[e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

Semitic religions, that is Judeo-christian-muslim worldview
is basicaly literalist. Most of what is written there are
interperted literaly.

Eastern religions, that is Hindu-Buddhist philosophy is more
metaphorical, allegorical, symbolic and figurative.

This leads to confusion and misunderstanding, when both
groups read each other's literature.

Could it be JohnR is a literalist?


--- <***@...> wrote :

Religious scriptures can contain some mention of facts, but usually they seem to be on the order of say the mention of the Kennedy assassination in the Illuminatus! triology of Shea & Wilson, where there is quite a lot of mention of historical people in an otherwise unbelievable story. There is more historical information available for Pontius Pilate than for Jesus. JR's view of the world does not seem to rest much on factual data, and seems to lack an underpinning of basic logic. Religious scriptures and apologetics basically just want to convince you of something, and there is nothing I see wrong in that, but buyer beware. Our societies tend not to give us the tools to think critically. The Netherlands has been a place where free thinking has had a better hold than in most, but I am ignorant of how well that is holding up currently.


--- <***@...> wrote :

I am aware of the problems with establishing the historical existence of many religious figures, Xeno, but that isn't what I was getting at with JR. I have noticed in him a tendency that I doubt he is aware of -- or, if he is, he probably sees nothing wrong with.



When claiming to believe in the existence of Krishna or similar figures from religious myth here in the past, he has cited as proof "scriptures" such as the Gita. Bzzzzzzt. Thanks for playing, but no win. Religious scriptures are NOT factual, no matter how many people believe they are. Scholars often don't even know the *century* many of them were written in, much less who wrote them. Best to consider them creative fiction written with the intent to inspire IMO.


The only *other* mechanism by which JR can claim to have "done research" on the question of whether someone like Krishna existed in real life or not is "seeing" -- meaning some kind of subjective realization or vision or intuition. While I admit that such things exist -- subjectively -- I do NOT admit that any of these "seeings" have anything to do with fact. If they did, more people who claim to be able to see the future would be millionaires. :-)


I was just hoping to see JR try to actually posit and then defend some mechanism by which he thinks "proof" could be offered of Krishna's existence. If he actually tried, it might wake him up to the fact that the only reason he *does* believe in such silliness is that someone he holds as an "authority" said so. In other words, his only "proof" is the word "Maharishisez."


Now, as for Schroedinger's cat, I for one have no problem with someone being both alive and dead at the same time. Just look at Keith Richards -- the guy has looked like death on a stick since the 1960s, yet he still manages to tour and play some pretty good guitar. If that's not an example of Schroedinger's paradox, I don't know what is. :-)



As for the answer to "What's in the big pink box, man?" that is as much of a koan as it was when posed in the movie "Buckaroo Banzai." Me, I kinda doubt it's enlightenment. :-)

[Bhairitu [e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

Oh gee. Now we agree on something. Try to convince MJ though that
thinking Indians see the Hindu pantheon as metaphors. He thinks
everyone in India takes them literally. But MJ has never been to India
and I'm sure the place would come as a shock to him.

Post by ***@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]
Semitic religions, that is Judeo-christian-muslim worldview
is basicaly literalist. Most of what is written there are
interperted literaly.
Eastern religions, that is Hindu-Buddhist philosophy is more
metaphorical, allegorical, symbolic and figurative.
This leads to confusion and misunderstanding, when both
groups read each other's literature.
Could it be JohnR is a literalist?
Religious scriptures can contain some mention of facts, but usually
they seem to be on the order of say the mention of the Kennedy
assassination in the Illuminatus! triology of Shea & Wilson, where
there is quite a lot of mention of historical people in an otherwise
unbelievable story. There is more historical information available for
Pontius Pilate than for Jesus. JR's view of the world does not seem to
rest much on factual data, and seems to lack an underpinning of basic
logic. Religious scriptures and apologetics basically just want to
convince you of something, and there is nothing I see wrong in that,
but buyer beware. Our societies tend not to give us the tools to think
critically. The Netherlands has been a place where free thinking has
had a better hold than in most, but I am ignorant of how well that is
holding up currently.
I am aware of the problems with establishing the historical existence
of many religious figures, Xeno, but that isn't what I was getting at
with JR. I have noticed in him a tendency that I doubt he is aware of
-- or, if he is, he probably sees nothing wrong with.
When claiming to believe in the existence of Krishna or similar
figures from religious myth here in the past, he has cited as proof
"scriptures" such as the Gita. Bzzzzzzt. Thanks for playing, but no
win. Religious scriptures are NOT factual, no matter how many people
believe they are. Scholars often don't even know the *century* many of
them were written in, much less who wrote them. Best to consider them
creative fiction written with the intent to inspire IMO.
The only *other* mechanism by which JR can claim to have "done
research" on the question of whether someone like Krishna existed in
real life or not is "seeing" -- meaning some kind of subjective
realization or vision or intuition. While I admit that such things
exist -- subjectively -- I do NOT admit that any of these "seeings"
have anything to do with fact. If they did, more people who claim to
be able to see the future would be millionaires. :-)
I was just hoping to see JR try to actually posit and then defend some
mechanism by which he thinks "proof" could be offered of Krishna's
existence. If he actually tried, it might wake him up to the fact that
the only reason he *does* believe in such silliness is that someone he
holds as an "authority" said so. In other words, his only "proof" is
the word "Maharishisez."
Now, as for Schroedinger's cat, I for one have no problem with someone
being both alive and dead at the same time. Just look at Keith
Richards -- the guy has looked like death on a stick since the 1960s,
yet he still manages to tour and play some pretty good guitar. If
that's not an example of Schroedinger's paradox, I don't know what
is. :-)
As for the answer to "What's in the big pink box, man?" that is as
much of a koan as it was when posed in the movie "Buckaroo Banzai."
Me, I kinda doubt it's enlightenment. :-)

[Michael Jackson [e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

you are living in a fantasy world of your own making if u believe the majority of Hinduus see the gods as a metaphor. the number of incidents where Hindus riot, rampage and kill their Muslim and Sikh neighbors for some insult to one of the Hindoo deities belies your fantasy

From: "Bhairitu ***@sbcglobal.net [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, March 28, 2015 4:14 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

  Oh gee.  Now we agree on something.  Try to convince MJ though that thinking Indians see the Hindu pantheon as metaphors.  He thinks everyone in India takes them literally.  But MJ has never been to India and I'm sure the place would come as a shock to him.

On 03/28/2015 11:27 AM, ***@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] wrote:



 

Semitic religions, that is Judeo-christian-muslim worldview
is basicaly literalist.  Most of what is written there are
interperted literaly.

Eastern religions, that is Hindu-Buddhist philosophy is more
metaphorical, allegorical, symbolic and figurative.

This leads to confusion and misunderstanding, when both
groups read each other's literature.

Could it be JohnR is a literalist?


--- <***@...> wrote :

Religious scriptures can contain some mention of facts, but usually they seem to be on the order of say the mention of the Kennedy assassination in the Illuminatus! triology of Shea & Wilson, where there is quite a lot of mention of historical people in an otherwise unbelievable story. There is more historical information available for Pontius Pilate than for Jesus. JR's view of the world does not seem to rest much on factual data, and seems to lack an underpinning of basic logic. Religious scriptures and apologetics basically just want to convince you of something, and there is nothing I see wrong in that, but buyer beware. Our societies tend not to give us the tools to think critically. The Netherlands has been a place where free thinking has had a better hold than in most, but I am ignorant of how well that is holding up currently.


--- <***@...> wrote :

I am aware of the problems with establishing the historical existence of many religious figures, Xeno, but that isn't what I was getting at with JR. I have noticed in him a tendency that I doubt he is aware of -- or, if he is, he probably sees nothing wrong with.

When claiming to believe in the existence of Krishna or similar figures from religious myth here in the past, he has cited as proof "scriptures" such as the Gita. Bzzzzzzt. Thanks for playing, but no win. Religious scriptures are NOT factual, no matter how many people believe they are. Scholars often don't even know the *century* many of them were written in, much less who wrote them. Best to consider them creative fiction written with the intent to inspire IMO.
The only *other* mechanism by which JR can claim to have "done research" on the question of whether someone like Krishna existed in real life or not is "seeing" -- meaning some kind of subjective realization or vision or intuition. While I admit that such things exist -- subjectively -- I do NOT admit that any of these "seeings" have anything to do with fact. If they did, more people who claim to be able to see the future would be millionaires.  :-)
I was just hoping to see JR try to actually posit and then defend some mechanism by which he thinks "proof" could be offered of Krishna's existence. If he actually tried, it might wake him up to the fact that the only reason he *does* believe in such silliness is that someone he holds as an "authority" said so. In other words, his only "proof" is the word "Maharishisez."
Now, as for Schroedinger's cat, I for one have no problem with someone being both alive and dead at the same time. Just look at Keith Richards -- the guy has looked like death on a stick since the 1960s, yet he still manages to tour and play some pretty good guitar. If that's not an example of Schroedinger's paradox, I don't know what is.  :-)

As for the answer to "What's in the big pink box, man?" that is as much of a koan as it was when posed in the movie "Buckaroo Banzai." Me, I kinda doubt it's enlightenment.  :-)

 

#yiv2416438322 #yiv2416438322 -- #yiv2416438322ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv2416438322 #yiv2416438322ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv2416438322 #yiv2416438322ygrp-mkp #yiv2416438322hd {color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px 0;}#yiv2416438322 #yiv2416438322ygrp-mkp #yiv2416438322ads {margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv2416438322 #yiv2416438322ygrp-mkp .yiv2416438322ad {padding:0 0;}#yiv2416438322 #yiv2416438322ygrp-mkp .yiv2416438322ad p {margin:0;}#yiv2416438322 #yiv2416438322ygrp-mkp .yiv2416438322ad a {color:#0000ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv2416438322 #yiv2416438322ygrp-sponsor #yiv2416438322ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv2416438322 #yiv2416438322ygrp-sponsor #yiv2416438322ygrp-lc #yiv2416438322hd {margin:10px 0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv2416438322 #yiv2416438322ygrp-sponsor #yiv2416438322ygrp-lc .yiv2416438322ad {margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv2416438322 #yiv2416438322actions {font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv2416438322 #yiv2416438322activity {background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv2416438322 #yiv2416438322activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv2416438322 #yiv2416438322activity span:first-child {text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv2416438322 #yiv2416438322activity span a {color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}#yiv2416438322 #yiv2416438322activity span span {color:#ff7900;}#yiv2416438322 #yiv2416438322activity span .yiv2416438322underline {text-decoration:underline;}#yiv2416438322 .yiv2416438322attach {clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px 0;width:400px;}#yiv2416438322 .yiv2416438322attach div a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv2416438322 .yiv2416438322attach img {border:none;padding-right:5px;}#yiv2416438322 .yiv2416438322attach label {display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}#yiv2416438322 .yiv2416438322attach label a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv2416438322 blockquote {margin:0 0 0 4px;}#yiv2416438322 .yiv2416438322bold {font-family:Arial;font-size:13px;font-weight:700;}#yiv2416438322 .yiv2416438322bold a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv2416438322 dd.yiv2416438322last p a {font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv2416438322 dd.yiv2416438322last p span {margin-right:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv2416438322 dd.yiv2416438322last p span.yiv2416438322yshortcuts {margin-right:0;}#yiv2416438322 div.yiv2416438322attach-table div div a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv2416438322 div.yiv2416438322attach-table {width:400px;}#yiv2416438322 div.yiv2416438322file-title a, #yiv2416438322 div.yiv2416438322file-title a:active, #yiv2416438322 div.yiv2416438322file-title a:hover, #yiv2416438322 div.yiv2416438322file-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv2416438322 div.yiv2416438322photo-title a, #yiv2416438322 div.yiv2416438322photo-title a:active, #yiv2416438322 div.yiv2416438322photo-title a:hover, #yiv2416438322 div.yiv2416438322photo-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv2416438322 div#yiv2416438322ygrp-mlmsg #yiv2416438322ygrp-msg p a span.yiv2416438322yshortcuts {font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;font-weight:normal;}#yiv2416438322 .yiv2416438322green {color:#628c2a;}#yiv2416438322 .yiv2416438322MsoNormal {margin:0 0 0 0;}#yiv2416438322 o {font-size:0;}#yiv2416438322 #yiv2416438322photos div {float:left;width:72px;}#yiv2416438322 #yiv2416438322photos div div {border:1px solid #666666;height:62px;overflow:hidden;width:62px;}#yiv2416438322 #yiv2416438322photos div label {color:#666666;font-size:10px;overflow:hidden;text-align:center;white-space:nowrap;width:64px;}#yiv2416438322 #yiv2416438322reco-category {font-size:77%;}#yiv2416438322 #yiv2416438322reco-desc {font-size:77%;}#yiv2416438322 .yiv2416438322replbq {margin:4px;}#yiv2416438322 #yiv2416438322ygrp-actbar div a:first-child {margin-right:2px;padding-right:5px;}#yiv2416438322 #yiv2416438322ygrp-mlmsg {font-size:13px;font-family:Arial, helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv2416438322 #yiv2416438322ygrp-mlmsg table {font-size:inherit;font:100%;}#yiv2416438322 #yiv2416438322ygrp-mlmsg select, #yiv2416438322 input, #yiv2416438322 textarea {font:99% Arial, Helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv2416438322 #yiv2416438322ygrp-mlmsg pre, #yiv2416438322 code {font:115% monospace;}#yiv2416438322 #yiv2416438322ygrp-mlmsg * {line-height:1.22em;}#yiv2416438322 #yiv2416438322ygrp-mlmsg #yiv2416438322logo {padding-bottom:10px;}#yiv2416438322 #yiv2416438322ygrp-msg p a {font-family:Verdana;}#yiv2416438322 #yiv2416438322ygrp-msg p#yiv2416438322attach-count span {color:#1E66AE;font-weight:700;}#yiv2416438322 #yiv2416438322ygrp-reco #yiv2416438322reco-head {color:#ff7900;font-weight:700;}#yiv2416438322 #yiv2416438322ygrp-reco {margin-bottom:20px;padding:0px;}#yiv2416438322 #yiv2416438322ygrp-sponsor #yiv2416438322ov li a {font-size:130%;text-decoration:none;}#yiv2416438322 #yiv2416438322ygrp-sponsor #yiv2416438322ov li {font-size:77%;list-style-type:square;padding:6px 0;}#yiv2416438322 #yiv2416438322ygrp-sponsor #yiv2416438322ov ul {margin:0;padding:0 0 0 8px;}#yiv2416438322 #yiv2416438322ygrp-text {font-family:Georgia;}#yiv2416438322 #yiv2416438322ygrp-text p {margin:0 0 1em 0;}#yiv2416438322 #yiv2416438322ygrp-text tt {font-size:120%;}#yiv2416438322 #yiv2416438322ygrp-vital ul li:last-child {border-right:none !important;}#yiv2416438322

[[e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

So, it has been established that MJ has never been to India and obviously knows nothing about Hindus.

---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

you are living in a fantasy world of your own making if u believe the majority of Hinduus see the gods as a metaphor.

Non sequitur.

the number of incidents where Hindus riot, rampage and kill their Muslim and Sikh neighbors for some insult to one of the Hindoo deities belies your fantasy

Non sequitur.



From: "Bhairitu ***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, March 28, 2015 4:14 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?



Oh gee. Now we agree on something. Try to convince MJ though that thinking Indians see the Hindu pantheon as metaphors. He thinks everyone in India takes them literally. But MJ has never been to India and I'm sure the place would come as a shock to him.

On 03/28/2015 11:27 AM, ***@... mailto:***@... [FairfieldLife] wrote:







Semitic religions, that is Judeo-christian-muslim worldview
is basicaly literalist. Most of what is written there are
interperted literaly.

Eastern religions, that is Hindu-Buddhist philosophy is more
metaphorical, allegorical, symbolic and figurative.

This leads to confusion and misunderstanding, when both
groups read each other's literature.

Could it be JohnR is a literalist?


--- <***@...> mailto:***@... wrote :

Religious scriptures can contain some mention of facts, but usually they seem to be on the order of say the mention of the Kennedy assassination in the Illuminatus! triology of Shea & Wilson, where there is quite a lot of mention of historical people in an otherwise unbelievable story. There is more historical information available for Pontius Pilate than for Jesus. JR's view of the world does not seem to rest much on factual data, and seems to lack an underpinning of basic logic. Religious scriptures and apologetics basically just want to convince you of something, and there is nothing I see wrong in that, but buyer beware. Our societies tend not to give us the tools to think critically. The Netherlands has been a place where free thinking has had a better hold than in most, but I am ignorant of how well that is holding up currently.


--- <***@...> mailto:***@... wrote :

I am aware of the problems with establishing the historical existence of many religious figures, Xeno, but that isn't what I was getting at with JR. I have noticed in him a tendency that I doubt he is aware of -- or, if he is, he probably sees nothing wrong with.



When claiming to believe in the existence of Krishna or similar figures from religious myth here in the past, he has cited as proof "scriptures" such as the Gita. Bzzzzzzt. Thanks for playing, but no win. Religious scriptures are NOT factual, no matter how many people believe they are. Scholars often don't even know the *century* many of them were written in, much less who wrote them. Best to consider them creative fiction written with the intent to inspire IMO.


The only *other* mechanism by which JR can claim to have "done research" on the question of whether someone like Krishna existed in real life or not is "seeing" -- meaning some kind of subjective realization or vision or intuition. While I admit that such things exist -- subjectively -- I do NOT admit that any of these "seeings" have anything to do with fact. If they did, more people who claim to be able to see the future would be millionaires. :-)


I was just hoping to see JR try to actually posit and then defend some mechanism by which he thinks "proof" could be offered of Krishna's existence. If he actually tried, it might wake him up to the fact that the only reason he *does* believe in such silliness is that someone he holds as an "authority" said so. In other words, his only "proof" is the word "Maharishisez."


Now, as for Schroedinger's cat, I for one have no problem with someone being both alive and dead at the same time. Just look at Keith Richards -- the guy has looked like death on a stick since the 1960s, yet he still manages to tour and play some pretty good guitar. If that's not an example of Schroedinger's paradox, I don't know what is. :-)



As for the answer to "What's in the big pink box, man?" that is as much of a koan as it was when posed in the movie "Buckaroo Banzai." Me, I kinda doubt it's enlightenment. :-)
































---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

you are living in a fantasy world of your own making if u believe the majority of Hinduus see the gods as a metaphor.

Non sequitur.

the number of incidents where Hindus riot, rampage and kill their Muslim and Sikh neighbors for some insult to one of the Hindoo deities belies your fantasy

Non sequitur.



From: "Bhairitu ***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, March 28, 2015 4:14 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?



Oh gee. Now we agree on something. Try to convince MJ though that thinking Indians see the Hindu pantheon as metaphors. He thinks everyone in India takes them literally. But MJ has never been to India and I'm sure the place would come as a shock to him.

On 03/28/2015 11:27 AM, ***@... mailto:***@... [FairfieldLife] wrote:







Semitic religions, that is Judeo-christian-muslim worldview
is basicaly literalist. Most of what is written there are
interperted literaly.

Eastern religions, that is Hindu-Buddhist philosophy is more
metaphorical, allegorical, symbolic and figurative.

This leads to confusion and misunderstanding, when both
groups read each other's literature.

Could it be JohnR is a literalist?


--- <***@...> mailto:***@... wrote :

Religious scriptures can contain some mention of facts, but usually they seem to be on the order of say the mention of the Kennedy assassination in the Illuminatus! triology of Shea & Wilson, where there is quite a lot of mention of historical people in an otherwise unbelievable story. There is more historical information available for Pontius Pilate than for Jesus. JR's view of the world does not seem to rest much on factual data, and seems to lack an underpinning of basic logic. Religious scriptures and apologetics basically just want to convince you of something, and there is nothing I see wrong in that, but buyer beware. Our societies tend not to give us the tools to think critically. The Netherlands has been a place where free thinking has had a better hold than in most, but I am ignorant of how well that is holding up currently.


--- <***@...> mailto:***@... wrote :

I am aware of the problems with establishing the historical existence of many religious figures, Xeno, but that isn't what I was getting at with JR. I have noticed in him a tendency that I doubt he is aware of -- or, if he is, he probably sees nothing wrong with.



When claiming to believe in the existence of Krishna or similar figures from religious myth here in the past, he has cited as proof "scriptures" such as the Gita. Bzzzzzzt. Thanks for playing, but no win. Religious scriptures are NOT factual, no matter how many people believe they are. Scholars often don't even know the *century* many of them were written in, much less who wrote them. Best to consider them creative fiction written with the intent to inspire IMO.


The only *other* mechanism by which JR can claim to have "done research" on the question of whether someone like Krishna existed in real life or not is "seeing" -- meaning some kind of subjective realization or vision or intuition. While I admit that such things exist -- subjectively -- I do NOT admit that any of these "seeings" have anything to do with fact. If they did, more people who claim to be able to see the future would be millionaires. :-)


I was just hoping to see JR try to actually posit and then defend some mechanism by which he thinks "proof" could be offered of Krishna's existence. If he actually tried, it might wake him up to the fact that the only reason he *does* believe in such silliness is that someone he holds as an "authority" said so. In other words, his only "proof" is the word "Maharishisez."


Now, as for Schroedinger's cat, I for one have no problem with someone being both alive and dead at the same time. Just look at Keith Richards -- the guy has looked like death on a stick since the 1960s, yet he still manages to tour and play some pretty good guitar. If that's not an example of Schroedinger's paradox, I don't know what is. :-)



As for the answer to "What's in the big pink box, man?" that is as much of a koan as it was when posed in the movie "Buckaroo Banzai." Me, I kinda doubt it's enlightenment. :-)

[[e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

JR might be a literalist. I certainly am not. I have encountered Christian groups that interpret scripture metaphorically and speak of consciousness rather than entities such as Moses or Jesus who are going to save your ass if you believe in them. Some people just seem to be unable to interpret things metaphorically. Perhaps they could try writing poetry. To me a spiritual system is a collection of carefully crafted lies that will, if practised properly, eventually allow you to see they are lies. And then you are free of them, and the tendency to fall back into belief.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :



Semitic religions, that is Judeo-christian-muslim worldview
is basicaly literalist. Most of what is written there are
interperted literaly.

Eastern religions, that is Hindu-Buddhist philosophy is more
metaphorical, allegorical, symbolic and figurative.

This leads to confusion and misunderstanding, when both
groups read each other's literature.

Could it be JohnR is a literalist?


--- <***@...> wrote :

Religious scriptures can contain some mention of facts, but usually they seem to be on the order of say the mention of the Kennedy assassination in the Illuminatus! triology of Shea & Wilson, where there is quite a lot of mention of historical people in an otherwise unbelievable story. There is more historical information available for Pontius Pilate than for Jesus. JR's view of the world does not seem to rest much on factual data, and seems to lack an underpinning of basic logic. Religious scriptures and apologetics basically just want to convince you of something, and there is nothing I see wrong in that, but buyer beware. Our societies tend not to give us the tools to think critically. The Netherlands has been a place where free thinking has had a better hold than in most, but I am ignorant of how well that is holding up currently.


--- <***@...> wrote :

I am aware of the problems with establishing the historical existence of many religious figures, Xeno, but that isn't what I was getting at with JR. I have noticed in him a tendency that I doubt he is aware of -- or, if he is, he probably sees nothing wrong with.



When claiming to believe in the existence of Krishna or similar figures from religious myth here in the past, he has cited as proof "scriptures" such as the Gita. Bzzzzzzt. Thanks for playing, but no win. Religious scriptures are NOT factual, no matter how many people believe they are. Scholars often don't even know the *century* many of them were written in, much less who wrote them. Best to consider them creative fiction written with the intent to inspire IMO.


The only *other* mechanism by which JR can claim to have "done research" on the question of whether someone like Krishna existed in real life or not is "seeing" -- meaning some kind of subjective realization or vision or intuition. While I admit that such things exist -- subjectively -- I do NOT admit that any of these "seeings" have anything to do with fact. If they did, more people who claim to be able to see the future would be millionaires. :-)


I was just hoping to see JR try to actually posit and then defend some mechanism by which he thinks "proof" could be offered of Krishna's existence. If he actually tried, it might wake him up to the fact that the only reason he *does* believe in such silliness is that someone he holds as an "authority" said so. In other words, his only "proof" is the word "Maharishisez."


Now, as for Schroedinger's cat, I for one have no problem with someone being both alive and dead at the same time. Just look at Keith Richards -- the guy has looked like death on a stick since the 1960s, yet he still manages to tour and play some pretty good guitar. If that's not an example of Schroedinger's paradox, I don't know what is. :-)



As for the answer to "What's in the big pink box, man?" that is as much of a koan as it was when posed in the movie "Buckaroo Banzai." Me, I kinda doubt it's enlightenment. :-)

[[e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

Xeno,

I'm a truth seeker. There was a valid reason why the rishis and prophets of the past have written books like the Bible, BGita and Srimad Bhagavatam. IMO, they were conveying their realization of truth through their meditation and contemplation. Some stories in the Bible, like the Garden of Eden story, can be understood as a metaphor. But there is a message in that story in many levels that the reader and the seeker need to unravel and understand to appreciate its wisdom. The basic essence of the message is the importance of human consciousness and its capacity to cognize the truth. This can be done with human reason and the element of faith. Without them, one cannot perceive the truth that the rishis and prophets were trying to convey.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

JR might be a literalist. I certainly am not. I have encountered Christian groups that interpret scripture metaphorically and speak of consciousness rather than entities such as Moses or Jesus who are going to save your ass if you believe in them. Some people just seem to be unable to interpret things metaphorically. Perhaps they could try writing poetry. To me a spiritual system is a collection of carefully crafted lies that will, if practised properly, eventually allow you to see they are lies. And then you are free of them, and the tendency to fall back into belief.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :



Semitic religions, that is Judeo-christian-muslim worldview
is basicaly literalist. Most of what is written there are
interperted literaly.

Eastern religions, that is Hindu-Buddhist philosophy is more
metaphorical, allegorical, symbolic and figurative.

This leads to confusion and misunderstanding, when both
groups read each other's literature.

Could it be JohnR is a literalist?


--- <***@...> wrote :

Religious scriptures can contain some mention of facts, but usually they seem to be on the order of say the mention of the Kennedy assassination in the Illuminatus! triology of Shea & Wilson, where there is quite a lot of mention of historical people in an otherwise unbelievable story. There is more historical information available for Pontius Pilate than for Jesus. JR's view of the world does not seem to rest much on factual data, and seems to lack an underpinning of basic logic. Religious scriptures and apologetics basically just want to convince you of something, and there is nothing I see wrong in that, but buyer beware. Our societies tend not to give us the tools to think critically. The Netherlands has been a place where free thinking has had a better hold than in most, but I am ignorant of how well that is holding up currently.


--- <***@...> wrote :

I am aware of the problems with establishing the historical existence of many religious figures, Xeno, but that isn't what I was getting at with JR. I have noticed in him a tendency that I doubt he is aware of -- or, if he is, he probably sees nothing wrong with.



When claiming to believe in the existence of Krishna or similar figures from religious myth here in the past, he has cited as proof "scriptures" such as the Gita. Bzzzzzzt. Thanks for playing, but no win. Religious scriptures are NOT factual, no matter how many people believe they are. Scholars often don't even know the *century* many of them were written in, much less who wrote them. Best to consider them creative fiction written with the intent to inspire IMO.


The only *other* mechanism by which JR can claim to have "done research" on the question of whether someone like Krishna existed in real life or not is "seeing" -- meaning some kind of subjective realization or vision or intuition. While I admit that such things exist -- subjectively -- I do NOT admit that any of these "seeings" have anything to do with fact. If they did, more people who claim to be able to see the future would be millionaires. :-)


I was just hoping to see JR try to actually posit and then defend some mechanism by which he thinks "proof" could be offered of Krishna's existence. If he actually tried, it might wake him up to the fact that the only reason he *does* believe in such silliness is that someone he holds as an "authority" said so. In other words, his only "proof" is the word "Maharishisez."


Now, as for Schroedinger's cat, I for one have no problem with someone being both alive and dead at the same time. Just look at Keith Richards -- the guy has looked like death on a stick since the 1960s, yet he still manages to tour and play some pretty good guitar. If that's not an example of Schroedinger's paradox, I don't know what is. :-)



As for the answer to "What's in the big pink box, man?" that is as much of a koan as it was when posed in the movie "Buckaroo Banzai." Me, I kinda doubt it's enlightenment. :-)

[[e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

There is a lot of research that indicates most, if not all these books are compilations of earlier material, whether written or orally transmitted. This does not imply they are corrupt or without value.

Also the human mind's ability to see a story in a metaphorical way can override a story's original intent, and variations in human understanding may in fact override any story's original intent. That means the 'the essence of the message is the importance of human consciousness and its capacity to cognize the truth' can be something our own minds add to the original story, though it seems reasonably certain some stories were written or spoken with this in mind, but others may not have.


Faith is only the hope that something is true without any knowledge of truth. If you know, you do not need faith because it is there in front of you. If you have a plate of scrambled eggs in front of you for breakfast, you do not need faith that breakfast is at hand (unless you have been brainwashed that is something you are not supposed to eat).


Reason is certainly required to check on whether one is deceiving oneself. If there is something one could call truth, you do not need faith to perceive it, you just have to perceive it, otherwise you will never know. Because you say you are a seeker, you could not have found it yet, and therefore could not yet know what the rishis and prophets were trying to say, or whether they, in fact, said something about this truth you speak of.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Xeno,

I'm a truth seeker. There was a valid reason why the rishis and prophets of the past have written books like the Bible, BGita and Srimad Bhagavatam. IMO, they were conveying their realization of truth through their meditation and contemplation. Some stories in the Bible, like the Garden of Eden story, can be understood as a metaphor. But there is a message in that story in many levels that the reader and the seeker need to unravel and understand to appreciate its wisdom. The basic essence of the message is the importance of human consciousness and its capacity to cognize the truth. This can be done with human reason and the element of faith. Without them, one cannot perceive the truth that the rishis and prophets were trying to convey.

[TurquoiseBee [e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

Aha. FINALLY, JR is able to admit what he believes, and why. I'll riff on it below.

From: "***@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, March 28, 2015 11:20 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

  Xeno,
I'm a truth seeker. 

Based on what you say here, John, I would suggest that you are NOT a "truth seeker." What you seek is someone TELLING YOU what is "truth." That is why you rely on books from the past and what you were told by teachers like Maharishi. 
There was a valid reason why the rishis and prophets of the past have written books like the Bible, BGita and Srimad Bhagavatam.  IMO, they were conveying their realization of truth through their meditation and contemplation. 

THIS is what I have been trying to get you to admit, and to realize about yourself, John. You believe that certain books are "true" or "truth" for no other reason than that you were TOLD they are.

Similarly, you admit to a belief that "truth" can be based on the "realization of truth through meditation and contemplation." Bzzzzzzt. Science tells us that NO SUCH THING EXISTS. Humans have a near-infinite ability to deceive themselves. We can't even be sure that people are reporting the "truth" when they give first-person testimony in court about things that they see in real life. Based on studies that have shown how easy it is to "implant" false memories or "lead" witnesses into changing their testimony, there have been serious discussions in the legal system about abandoning the entire concept of first-person testimony, because it cannot be relied upon.

Now look at what you believe. Given the fact that science tells us we cannot rely on the truth or accuracy of things we perceive in the real world with our senses, you're trying to tell us that we should believe in things we "see" only in our heads?  Bzzzzzzt...does not compute. Yes, *of course* people can have "visions." But they are NOT "truth." They're just something you see -- or, more likely imagine -- in your head. So any of these "seeings" that form the basis of "scriptures" are -- according to science -- not to be believed.

The other assumption you seem to make is that when a person *claims* to have had a subjective experience that they interpret as enlightenment or holy revelation, we should believe them. Bzzzzzt. If spending a few years on Fairfield Life and having encountered bozos like Ravi, Jim, Robin and others should have taught you anything, it would be that people have a near-infinite ability to fool themselves (and others) about their supposed states of consciousness. What makes any of the so-called enlightened "seers" or authors of these "scriptures" you rely on any different? Why couldn't *they* have been fooling themselves just as much as the pretenders to enlightenment on FFL were able to?
Some stories in the Bible, like the Garden of Eden story, can be understood as a metaphor.  But there is a message in that story in many levels that the reader and the seeker need to unravel and understand to appreciate its wisdom. 

"Need to?" Bzzzzzt. People who enjoy that sort of thing "can" read these made-up stories as metaphor if they'd like, and they "can" try to convince themselves and others that they have learned something from them. But "need to?" That's just religious fanaticism. No one "needs" to read any of these fairy tales to become "wise." They can do that just by living, interacting with other human beings, and paying attention. 
The basic essence of the message is the importance of human consciousness and its capacity to cognize the truth. 

Here is the point we differ on, John. Human consciousness does NOT have the ability to "cognize truth." That is something that religious fanatics choose to believe because it makes them feel more important. But science tells us that no such ability exists. The "message" you cling to is a LIE.

This can be done with human reason and the element of faith.  Without them, one cannot perceive the truth that the rishis and prophets were trying to convey.
Do you even *know* that reason and faith are different things, and the polar opposite of one another? Faith has nothing whatsoever to do with "truth."

As it says on the home page of the forum you are writing to:  "What is wanted is not the will to believe, but the wish to find out, which is the exact opposite." ~ Bertrand Russell



---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

JR might be a literalist. I certainly am not. I have encountered Christian groups that interpret scripture metaphorically and speak of consciousness rather than entities such as Moses or Jesus who are going to save your ass if you believe in them. Some people just seem to be unable to interpret things metaphorically. Perhaps they could try writing poetry. To me a spiritual system is a collection of carefully crafted lies that will, if practised properly, eventually allow you to see they are lies. And then you are free of them, and the tendency to fall back into belief.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :



Semitic religions, that is Judeo-christian-muslim worldview
is basicaly literalist.  Most of what is written there are
interperted literaly.

Eastern religions, that is Hindu-Buddhist philosophy is more
metaphorical, allegorical, symbolic and figurative.

This leads to confusion and misunderstanding, when both
groups read each other's literature.

Could it be JohnR is a literalist?


--- <***@...> wrote :

Religious scriptures can contain some mention of facts, but usually they seem to be on the order of say the mention of the Kennedy assassination in the Illuminatus! triology of Shea & Wilson, where there is quite a lot of mention of historical people in an otherwise unbelievable story. There is more historical information available for Pontius Pilate than for Jesus. JR's view of the world does not seem to rest much on factual data, and seems to lack an underpinning of basic logic. Religious scriptures and apologetics basically just want to convince you of something, and there is nothing I see wrong in that, but buyer beware. Our societies tend not to give us the tools to think critically. The Netherlands has been a place where free thinking has had a better hold than in most, but I am ignorant of how well that is holding up currently.


--- <***@...> wrote :

I am aware of the problems with establishing the historical existence of many religious figures, Xeno, but that isn't what I was getting at with JR. I have noticed in him a tendency that I doubt he is aware of -- or, if he is, he probably sees nothing wrong with.

When claiming to believe in the existence of Krishna or similar figures from religious myth here in the past, he has cited as proof "scriptures" such as the Gita. Bzzzzzzt. Thanks for playing, but no win. Religious scriptures are NOT factual, no matter how many people believe they are. Scholars often don't even know the *century* many of them were written in, much less who wrote them. Best to consider them creative fiction written with the intent to inspire IMO.
The only *other* mechanism by which JR can claim to have "done research" on the question of whether someone like Krishna existed in real life or not is "seeing" -- meaning some kind of subjective realization or vision or intuition. While I admit that such things exist -- subjectively -- I do NOT admit that any of these "seeings" have anything to do with fact. If they did, more people who claim to be able to see the future would be millionaires.  :-)
I was just hoping to see JR try to actually posit and then defend some mechanism by which he thinks "proof" could be offered of Krishna's existence. If he actually tried, it might wake him up to the fact that the only reason he *does* believe in such silliness is that someone he holds as an "authority" said so. In other words, his only "proof" is the word "Maharishisez."
Now, as for Schroedinger's cat, I for one have no problem with someone being both alive and dead at the same time. Just look at Keith Richards -- the guy has looked like death on a stick since the 1960s, yet he still manages to tour and play some pretty good guitar. If that's not an example of Schroedinger's paradox, I don't know what is.  :-)

As for the answer to "What's in the big pink box, man?" that is as much of a koan as it was when posed in the movie "Buckaroo Banzai." Me, I kinda doubt it's enlightenment.  :-)

  #yiv3743083150 #yiv3743083150 -- #yiv3743083150ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv3743083150 #yiv3743083150ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv3743083150 #yiv3743083150ygrp-mkp #yiv3743083150hd {color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px 0;}#yiv3743083150 #yiv3743083150ygrp-mkp #yiv3743083150ads {margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv3743083150 #yiv3743083150ygrp-mkp .yiv3743083150ad {padding:0 0;}#yiv3743083150 #yiv3743083150ygrp-mkp .yiv3743083150ad p {margin:0;}#yiv3743083150 #yiv3743083150ygrp-mkp .yiv3743083150ad a {color:#0000ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv3743083150 #yiv3743083150ygrp-sponsor #yiv3743083150ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv3743083150 #yiv3743083150ygrp-sponsor #yiv3743083150ygrp-lc #yiv3743083150hd {margin:10px 0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv3743083150 #yiv3743083150ygrp-sponsor #yiv3743083150ygrp-lc .yiv3743083150ad {margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv3743083150 #yiv3743083150actions {font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv3743083150 #yiv3743083150activity {background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv3743083150 #yiv3743083150activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv3743083150 #yiv3743083150activity span:first-child {text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv3743083150 #yiv3743083150activity span a {color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}#yiv3743083150 #yiv3743083150activity span span {color:#ff7900;}#yiv3743083150 #yiv3743083150activity span .yiv3743083150underline {text-decoration:underline;}#yiv3743083150 .yiv3743083150attach {clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px 0;width:400px;}#yiv3743083150 .yiv3743083150attach div a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv3743083150 .yiv3743083150attach img {border:none;padding-right:5px;}#yiv3743083150 .yiv3743083150attach label {display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}#yiv3743083150 .yiv3743083150attach label a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv3743083150 blockquote {margin:0 0 0 4px;}#yiv3743083150 .yiv3743083150bold {font-family:Arial;font-size:13px;font-weight:700;}#yiv3743083150 .yiv3743083150bold a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv3743083150 dd.yiv3743083150last p a {font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv3743083150 dd.yiv3743083150last p span {margin-right:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv3743083150 dd.yiv3743083150last p span.yiv3743083150yshortcuts {margin-right:0;}#yiv3743083150 div.yiv3743083150attach-table div div a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv3743083150 div.yiv3743083150attach-table {width:400px;}#yiv3743083150 div.yiv3743083150file-title a, #yiv3743083150 div.yiv3743083150file-title a:active, #yiv3743083150 div.yiv3743083150file-title a:hover, #yiv3743083150 div.yiv3743083150file-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv3743083150 div.yiv3743083150photo-title a, #yiv3743083150 div.yiv3743083150photo-title a:active, #yiv3743083150 div.yiv3743083150photo-title a:hover, #yiv3743083150 div.yiv3743083150photo-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv3743083150 div#yiv3743083150ygrp-mlmsg #yiv3743083150ygrp-msg p a span.yiv3743083150yshortcuts {font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;font-weight:normal;}#yiv3743083150 .yiv3743083150green {color:#628c2a;}#yiv3743083150 .yiv3743083150MsoNormal {margin:0 0 0 0;}#yiv3743083150 o {font-size:0;}#yiv3743083150 #yiv3743083150photos div {float:left;width:72px;}#yiv3743083150 #yiv3743083150photos div div {border:1px solid #666666;height:62px;overflow:hidden;width:62px;}#yiv3743083150 #yiv3743083150photos div label {color:#666666;font-size:10px;overflow:hidden;text-align:center;white-space:nowrap;width:64px;}#yiv3743083150 #yiv3743083150reco-category {font-size:77%;}#yiv3743083150 #yiv3743083150reco-desc {font-size:77%;}#yiv3743083150 .yiv3743083150replbq {margin:4px;}#yiv3743083150 #yiv3743083150ygrp-actbar div a:first-child {margin-right:2px;padding-right:5px;}#yiv3743083150 #yiv3743083150ygrp-mlmsg {font-size:13px;font-family:Arial, helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv3743083150 #yiv3743083150ygrp-mlmsg table {font-size:inherit;font:100%;}#yiv3743083150 #yiv3743083150ygrp-mlmsg select, #yiv3743083150 input, #yiv3743083150 textarea {font:99% Arial, Helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv3743083150 #yiv3743083150ygrp-mlmsg pre, #yiv3743083150 code {font:115% monospace;}#yiv3743083150 #yiv3743083150ygrp-mlmsg * {line-height:1.22em;}#yiv3743083150 #yiv3743083150ygrp-mlmsg #yiv3743083150logo {padding-bottom:10px;}#yiv3743083150 #yiv3743083150ygrp-msg p a {font-family:Verdana;}#yiv3743083150 #yiv3743083150ygrp-msg p#yiv3743083150attach-count span {color:#1E66AE;font-weight:700;}#yiv3743083150 #yiv3743083150ygrp-reco #yiv3743083150reco-head {color:#ff7900;font-weight:700;}#yiv3743083150 #yiv3743083150ygrp-reco {margin-bottom:20px;padding:0px;}#yiv3743083150 #yiv3743083150ygrp-sponsor #yiv3743083150ov li a {font-size:130%;text-decoration:none;}#yiv3743083150 #yiv3743083150ygrp-sponsor #yiv3743083150ov li {font-size:77%;list-style-type:square;padding:6px 0;}#yiv3743083150 #yiv3743083150ygrp-sponsor #yiv3743083150ov ul {margin:0;padding:0 0 0 8px;}#yiv3743083150 #yiv3743083150ygrp-text {font-family:Georgia;}#yiv3743083150 #yiv3743083150ygrp-text p {margin:0 0 1em 0;}#yiv3743083150 #yiv3743083150ygrp-text tt {font-size:120%;}#yiv3743083150 #yiv3743083150ygrp-vital ul li:last-child {border-right:none !important;}#yiv3743083150

[[e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

It's like a circus over here - send in the clowns.

How can you believe that Fred Lenz was "the last incarnation of Vishnu" unless someone told you that or you read it in a book? Is it because Rama told you that he was Lord Vishnu? Apparently you read a Buddhist scripture and now you believe in Buddhas and that they are enlightened? Go figure.

You're not even making any sense today! Is there any "truth" to your belief in Fred Lenz, Vishnu and Buddha?

---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Aha. FINALLY, JR is able to admit what he believes, and why. I'll riff on it below.


From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, March 28, 2015 11:20 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


Xeno,


I'm a truth seeker.



Based on what you say here, John, I would suggest that you are NOT a "truth seeker." What you seek is someone TELLING YOU what is "truth." That is why you rely on books from the past and what you were told by teachers like Maharishi.

Non sequitur.



There was a valid reason why the rishis and prophets of the past have written books like the Bible, BGita and Srimad Bhagavatam. IMO, they were conveying their realization of truth through their meditation and contemplation.



THIS is what I have been trying to get you to admit, and to realize about yourself, John. You believe that certain books are "true" or "truth" for no other reason than that you were TOLD they are.

Non sequitur.


Similarly, you admit to a belief that "truth" can be based on the "realization of truth through meditation and contemplation." Bzzzzzzt. Science tells us that NO SUCH THING EXISTS. Humans have a near-infinite ability to deceive themselves. We can't even be sure that people are reporting the "truth" when they give first-person testimony in court about things that they see in real life. Based on studies that have shown how easy it is to "implant" false memories or "lead" witnesses into changing their testimony, there have been serious discussions in the legal system about abandoning the entire concept of first-person testimony, because it cannot be relied upon.

Non sequitur.


Now look at what you believe. Given the fact that science tells us we cannot rely on the truth or accuracy of things we perceive in the real world with our senses, you're trying to tell us that we should believe in things we "see" only in our heads? Bzzzzzzt...does not compute. Yes, *of course* people can have "visions." But they are NOT "truth." They're just something you see -- or, more likely imagine -- in your head. So any of these "seeings" that form the basis of "scriptures" are -- according to science -- not to be believed.

Non sequitur.


The other assumption you seem to make is that when a person *claims* to have had a subjective experience that they interpret as enlightenment or holy revelation, we should believe them. Bzzzzzt. If spending a few years on Fairfield Life and having encountered bozos like Ravi, Jim, Robin and others should have taught you anything, it would be that people have a near-infinite ability to fool themselves (and others) about their supposed states of consciousness. What makes any of the so-called enlightened "seers" or authors of these "scriptures" you rely on any different? Why couldn't *they* have been fooling themselves just as much as the pretenders to enlightenment on FFL were able to?

Non sequitur.



Some stories in the Bible, like the Garden of Eden story, can be understood as a metaphor. But there is a message in that story in many levels that the reader and the seeker need to unravel and understand to appreciate its wisdom.



"Need to?" Bzzzzzt. People who enjoy that sort of thing "can" read these made-up stories as metaphor if they'd like, and they "can" try to convince themselves and others that they have learned something from them. But "need to?" That's just religious fanaticism. No one "needs" to read any of these fairy tales to become "wise." They can do that just by living, interacting with other human beings, and paying attention.

Non sequitur.



The basic essence of the message is the importance of human consciousness and its capacity to cognize the truth.



Here is the point we differ on, John. Human consciousness does NOT have the ability to "cognize truth." That is something that religious fanatics choose to believe because it makes them feel more important. But science tells us that no such ability exists. The "message" you cling to is a LIE.

Non sequitur.



This can be done with human reason and the element of faith. Without them, one cannot perceive the truth that the rishis and prophets were trying to convey.


Do you even *know* that reason and faith are different things, and the polar opposite of one another? Faith has nothing whatsoever to do with "truth."


Non sequitur.


As it says on the home page of the forum you are writing to: "What is wanted is not the will to believe, but the wish to find out, which is the exact opposite." ~ Bertrand Russell





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

JR might be a literalist. I certainly am not. I have encountered Christian groups that interpret scripture metaphorically and speak of consciousness rather than entities such as Moses or Jesus who are going to save your ass if you believe in them. Some people just seem to be unable to interpret things metaphorically. Perhaps they could try writing poetry. To me a spiritual system is a collection of carefully crafted lies that will, if practised properly, eventually allow you to see they are lies. And then you are free of them, and the tendency to fall back into belief.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :



Semitic religions, that is Judeo-christian-muslim worldview
is basicaly literalist. Most of what is written there are
interperted literaly.

Eastern religions, that is Hindu-Buddhist philosophy is more
metaphorical, allegorical, symbolic and figurative.

This leads to confusion and misunderstanding, when both
groups read each other's literature.

Could it be JohnR is a literalist?


--- <***@...> wrote :

Religious scriptures can contain some mention of facts, but usually they seem to be on the order of say the mention of the Kennedy assassination in the Illuminatus! triology of Shea & Wilson, where there is quite a lot of mention of historical people in an otherwise unbelievable story. There is more historical information available for Pontius Pilate than for Jesus. JR's view of the world does not seem to rest much on factual data, and seems to lack an underpinning of basic logic. Religious scriptures and apologetics basically just want to convince you of something, and there is nothing I see wrong in that, but buyer beware. Our societies tend not to give us the tools to think critically. The Netherlands has been a place where free thinking has had a better hold than in most, but I am ignorant of how well that is holding up currently.


--- <***@...> wrote :

I am aware of the problems with establishing the historical existence of many religious figures, Xeno, but that isn't what I was getting at with JR. I have noticed in him a tendency that I doubt he is aware of -- or, if he is, he probably sees nothing wrong with.



When claiming to believe in the existence of Krishna or similar figures from religious myth here in the past, he has cited as proof "scriptures" such as the Gita. Bzzzzzzt. Thanks for playing, but no win. Religious scriptures are NOT factual, no matter how many people believe they are. Scholars often don't even know the *century* many of them were written in, much less who wrote them. Best to consider them creative fiction written with the intent to inspire IMO.


The only *other* mechanism by which JR can claim to have "done research" on the question of whether someone like Krishna existed in real life or not is "seeing" -- meaning some kind of subjective realization or vision or intuition. While I admit that such things exist -- subjectively -- I do NOT admit that any of these "seeings" have anything to do with fact. If they did, more people who claim to be able to see the future would be millionaires. :-)


I was just hoping to see JR try to actually posit and then defend some mechanism by which he thinks "proof" could be offered of Krishna's existence. If he actually tried, it might wake him up to the fact that the only reason he *does* believe in such silliness is that someone he holds as an "authority" said so. In other words, his only "proof" is the word "Maharishisez."


Now, as for Schroedinger's cat, I for one have no problem with someone being both alive and dead at the same time. Just look at Keith Richards -- the guy has looked like death on a stick since the 1960s, yet he still manages to tour and play some pretty good guitar. If that's not an example of Schroedinger's paradox, I don't know what is. :-)



As for the answer to "What's in the big pink box, man?" that is as much of a koan as it was when posed in the movie "Buckaroo Banzai." Me, I kinda doubt it's enlightenment. :-)

[[e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

Pastor Barry,

You've been asking the same questions for many years now. You've been told the answer, but you don't listen. You should do your own research and find out for yourself the true answer.





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

I am aware of the problems with establishing the historical existence of many religious figures, Xeno, but that isn't what I was getting at with JR. I have noticed in him a tendency that I doubt he is aware of -- or, if he is, he probably sees nothing wrong with.



When claiming to believe in the existence of Krishna or similar figures from religious myth here in the past, he has cited as proof "scriptures" such as the Gita. Bzzzzzzt. Thanks for playing, but no win. Religious scriptures are NOT factual, no matter how many people believe they are. Scholars often don't even know the *century* many of them were written in, much less who wrote them. Best to consider them creative fiction written with the intent to inspire IMO.


The only *other* mechanism by which JR can claim to have "done research" on the question of whether someone like Krishna existed in real life or not is "seeing" -- meaning some kind of subjective realization or vision or intuition. While I admit that such things exist -- subjectively -- I do NOT admit that any of these "seeings" have anything to do with fact. If they did, more people who claim to be able to see the future would be millionaires. :-)


I was just hoping to see JR try to actually posit and then defend some mechanism by which he thinks "proof" could be offered of Krishna's existence. If he actually tried, it might wake him up to the fact that the only reason he *does* believe in such silliness is that someone he holds as an "authority" said so. In other words, his only "proof" is the word "Maharishisez."


Now, as for Schroedinger's cat, I for one have no problem with someone being both alive and dead at the same time. Just look at Keith Richards -- the guy has looked like death on a stick since the 1960s, yet he still manages to tour and play some pretty good guitar. If that's not an example of Schroedinger's paradox, I don't know what is. :-)



As for the answer to "What's in the big pink box, man?" that is as much of a koan as it was when posed in the movie "Buckaroo Banzai." Me, I kinda doubt it's enlightenment. :-)

From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2015 8:08 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


Establishing the historicity of various religious characters today is pretty much impossible. Of the following, Krishna, Buddha, Moses, Jesus, Mohammed, Shankara, only the latter two have much evidence that would just suggest they existed, primarily because they are a bit more recent. It seems more logical with the lack of definite evidence that these names can be used as 'bookmarks' that delineate a certain point in the development of a tradition, a personification of what had transpired up to that point. If we were to take the TMO holy tradition, only Shankara, Brahmanda Saraswati, Maharishi, and King Tony have a believable amount of evidence, and only the last three have really good historical evidence as to their existence. If we assume enlightenment exists, we could say that the 'tradition' of enlightenment is something generated in one's own mind as a means to remove the delusion that there is something called enlightenment that one can gain.


Barry, I read your post with the cartoon about the cat. It was heartbreaking for a friend of mine to look in the box, because it was her cat. She probably should not have opened it. In a way enlightenment is kind of parallel to this. You are looking for something you already have, and as long as you keep looking, you never find it. When you stop looking, truly stop looking, then you discover your search was in vain. What a relief!


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

I am asking you to explain to us how ANYONE could possibly "research" such a question as the historical existence of Krishna and come up with an accurate answer. You seem to base a lot of your beliefs on "Maharishisez," meaning that *he* said something that you consider fact. What I am asking you to do is explain to us HOW he (or anyone else) could *possibly* determine that "Krishna" actually existed sufficiently that you would believe it to be fact.



Don't be coy. You obviously believe this stuff. Now explain to us how you think it works.


From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2015 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


Pastor Barry,


I said below that I did NOT research the matter personally.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

John, we've all seen you post things on this forum that leave no doubt that you believe that such mythical personalities as Krishna actually existed. You've actually said as much in the past, so there is no need to try to hide the fact now.



What is more interesting, since you *are* trying to hide it, is HOW you claim you could "research the subject" and come up with a definitive answer stating that "Krishna is an incarnation of Vishnu here on Earth." Please explain to us HOW you or any other person could determine the validity of this statement. NOT that "some people believe it," but that's it's actual fact. Please share with us how a person convinces himself that he or she "knows" such a thing.

From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>

MMY believes Krishna is an incarnation of Vishnu here on Earth. I personally have not researched the subject.

---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Do you believe Krshna was an actual personage on the earth or a religious myth?


If real, was he just a man or an avatar of Vishnu?



From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 9:07 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


MJ,


I'm paraphrasing what Krishna said to Arjuna, who was reluctant in fighting his relatives in the battle of Kurukshetra.





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

"If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die."


Seems a rather narrow minded point of view.



What if the person being killed is a committed practitioner of ahimsa? A Jainite or a fanatic pacifist? One who would rather be killed than raise their hand in violence to another even in self defense?



Or suppose the about to be killed already had a terminal illness with a bleak prognosis and a short time to live, thus the killing would actually be a favor to the kill-ee and the killer, while perhaps having evil intent, would actually be giving a blessing and liberation to the kill-ee.



Could there be some planet in your chart that is debilitated that gives you such a judgmental and combative feeling about all this?



From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


Xeno,


I would assume that you would fight to save your life if the Islamic State rebels got a hold of you to cut your head off as propaganda for their cause. Are you going to assume that you're imagining things? As you've seen in the news, these rebels have cut the heads of Brits and Americans in the recent past. It's real and true.


If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die. If you fight and win, you save your life and become a hero to the world.





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

You know jr_esq, you are assuming that your idea of good and evil is real. I hold they are simply conceptual mappings onto reality, but they have no real existence except as a convenient and arbitrary way to categorise certain forms of activity. There was an episode of Star Trek in which an alien species, the Excalbians, investigated good and evil. They concluded that good and evil use the same methods and achieve the similar results. The writers of the episode used science fiction as a template to discuss the nature of good and evil.

How are you defining good and evil, and why do you feel those definitions are somehow true or real?


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,

IMO, it's unfortunate that human beings have to die. But circumstances happen where a person or a leader of a nation has to act to prevent evil or to eradicate evil from existing. Under these circumstances, it would be justified to take arms and fight. Any deaths that come from a justified war would be dignified and would be considered necessary to deter evil.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Surveys of deaths in the two Iraq wars show that (depending on the survey), between 151,000 to 1,000,000 Iraqis died in the two US-led wars between 2003 and 2013. One study, conducted by the Iraq Body Count project http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Body_Count_project, found that 174,000 Iraqis were reported killed between 2003 and 2013, with between 112,000-123,000 of those killed being civilian noncombatants. Meanwhile, the total number of US troops killed during this period was 4,491.


Now, JR, please tell me. Was that "good" or "evil?"



From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 3:14 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


About 12,000 or so people die every day. About 10% of those are killed by other people one way or another. The Islamic State is one of those ways. This is what happens. One method of reducing those killings is to bomb or send troops to kill the members of the Islamic State, by substituting other killings in place of the ones the Islamic State perpetrates. Then there is the question of who or what is killing the other 11,000 people who die every day, which is a far greater number. From their point of view, the killers in the Islamic State are doing their god-given duty to remove infidels and betrayers of their faith from the world, a good thing. We don't know what the people killed think of it, but those in the West do not seem in favour of the idea, thinking it a bad thing. In almost every year, anyone born more that 120 years ago is dead. As pointed out recently God killed something like 2,000,000 people as reported in the Bible, while Satan, bless his reticent soul, only 10. So it would appear the best killers are in the service of what is called 'good', for a good cause, by their own estimation. They truly believe something is good and worthy, and carry out killings in the service of that. That probably means we should be rather suspicious of the good people who want to purify their environment in the service of that good. For our own good, maybe we should kill them, just to be on the safe side.





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,

If you say there is no "good" or "evil", how do explain the fact that groups, like the Islamic State, kill innocent people in Iraq and Syria?

[[e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

You want proof of the last incarnation of Vishnu?

"Over the years, I saw him levitate, as in sitting in lotus and just lifting up off the chair and hovering there in midair for minutes at a time, sometimes telling a joke the whole time. Or in the desert, he'd just step up off the sand and onto a "staircase" that wasn't there, and just climb up and down it for a while, several feet above the ground." - TurquoiseB

http://www.mail-archive.com/fairfieldlife%40yahoogroups.com/msg12287.html http://www.mail-archive.com/fairfieldlife%40yahoogroups.com/msg12287.html


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,

You've been asking the same questions for many years now. You've been told the answer, but you don't listen. You should do your own research and find out for yourself the true answer.





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

I am aware of the problems with establishing the historical existence of many religious figures, Xeno, but that isn't what I was getting at with JR. I have noticed in him a tendency that I doubt he is aware of -- or, if he is, he probably sees nothing wrong with.



When claiming to believe in the existence of Krishna or similar figures from religious myth here in the past, he has cited as proof "scriptures" such as the Gita. Bzzzzzzt. Thanks for playing, but no win. Religious scriptures are NOT factual, no matter how many people believe they are. Scholars often don't even know the *century* many of them were written in, much less who wrote them. Best to consider them creative fiction written with the intent to inspire IMO.


The only *other* mechanism by which JR can claim to have "done research" on the question of whether someone like Krishna existed in real life or not is "seeing" -- meaning some kind of subjective realization or vision or intuition. While I admit that such things exist -- subjectively -- I do NOT admit that any of these "seeings" have anything to do with fact. If they did, more people who claim to be able to see the future would be millionaires. :-)


I was just hoping to see JR try to actually posit and then defend some mechanism by which he thinks "proof" could be offered of Krishna's existence. If he actually tried, it might wake him up to the fact that the only reason he *does* believe in such silliness is that someone he holds as an "authority" said so. In other words, his only "proof" is the word "Maharishisez."


Now, as for Schroedinger's cat, I for one have no problem with someone being both alive and dead at the same time. Just look at Keith Richards -- the guy has looked like death on a stick since the 1960s, yet he still manages to tour and play some pretty good guitar. If that's not an example of Schroedinger's paradox, I don't know what is. :-)



As for the answer to "What's in the big pink box, man?" that is as much of a koan as it was when posed in the movie "Buckaroo Banzai." Me, I kinda doubt it's enlightenment. :-)

From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2015 8:08 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


Establishing the historicity of various religious characters today is pretty much impossible. Of the following, Krishna, Buddha, Moses, Jesus, Mohammed, Shankara, only the latter two have much evidence that would just suggest they existed, primarily because they are a bit more recent. It seems more logical with the lack of definite evidence that these names can be used as 'bookmarks' that delineate a certain point in the development of a tradition, a personification of what had transpired up to that point. If we were to take the TMO holy tradition, only Shankara, Brahmanda Saraswati, Maharishi, and King Tony have a believable amount of evidence, and only the last three have really good historical evidence as to their existence. If we assume enlightenment exists, we could say that the 'tradition' of enlightenment is something generated in one's own mind as a means to remove the delusion that there is something called enlightenment that one can gain.


Barry, I read your post with the cartoon about the cat. It was heartbreaking for a friend of mine to look in the box, because it was her cat. She probably should not have opened it. In a way enlightenment is kind of parallel to this. You are looking for something you already have, and as long as you keep looking, you never find it. When you stop looking, truly stop looking, then you discover your search was in vain. What a relief!


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

I am asking you to explain to us how ANYONE could possibly "research" such a question as the historical existence of Krishna and come up with an accurate answer. You seem to base a lot of your beliefs on "Maharishisez," meaning that *he* said something that you consider fact. What I am asking you to do is explain to us HOW he (or anyone else) could *possibly* determine that "Krishna" actually existed sufficiently that you would believe it to be fact.



Don't be coy. You obviously believe this stuff. Now explain to us how you think it works.


From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2015 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


Pastor Barry,


I said below that I did NOT research the matter personally.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

John, we've all seen you post things on this forum that leave no doubt that you believe that such mythical personalities as Krishna actually existed. You've actually said as much in the past, so there is no need to try to hide the fact now.



What is more interesting, since you *are* trying to hide it, is HOW you claim you could "research the subject" and come up with a definitive answer stating that "Krishna is an incarnation of Vishnu here on Earth." Please explain to us HOW you or any other person could determine the validity of this statement. NOT that "some people believe it," but that's it's actual fact. Please share with us how a person convinces himself that he or she "knows" such a thing.

From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>

MMY believes Krishna is an incarnation of Vishnu here on Earth. I personally have not researched the subject.

---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Do you believe Krshna was an actual personage on the earth or a religious myth?


If real, was he just a man or an avatar of Vishnu?



From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 9:07 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


MJ,


I'm paraphrasing what Krishna said to Arjuna, who was reluctant in fighting his relatives in the battle of Kurukshetra.





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

"If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die."


Seems a rather narrow minded point of view.



What if the person being killed is a committed practitioner of ahimsa? A Jainite or a fanatic pacifist? One who would rather be killed than raise their hand in violence to another even in self defense?



Or suppose the about to be killed already had a terminal illness with a bleak prognosis and a short time to live, thus the killing would actually be a favor to the kill-ee and the killer, while perhaps having evil intent, would actually be giving a blessing and liberation to the kill-ee.



Could there be some planet in your chart that is debilitated that gives you such a judgmental and combative feeling about all this?



From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


Xeno,


I would assume that you would fight to save your life if the Islamic State rebels got a hold of you to cut your head off as propaganda for their cause. Are you going to assume that you're imagining things? As you've seen in the news, these rebels have cut the heads of Brits and Americans in the recent past. It's real and true.


If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die. If you fight and win, you save your life and become a hero to the world.





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

You know jr_esq, you are assuming that your idea of good and evil is real. I hold they are simply conceptual mappings onto reality, but they have no real existence except as a convenient and arbitrary way to categorise certain forms of activity. There was an episode of Star Trek in which an alien species, the Excalbians, investigated good and evil. They concluded that good and evil use the same methods and achieve the similar results. The writers of the episode used science fiction as a template to discuss the nature of good and evil.

How are you defining good and evil, and why do you feel those definitions are somehow true or real?


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,

IMO, it's unfortunate that human beings have to die. But circumstances happen where a person or a leader of a nation has to act to prevent evil or to eradicate evil from existing. Under these circumstances, it would be justified to take arms and fight. Any deaths that come from a justified war would be dignified and would be considered necessary to deter evil.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Surveys of deaths in the two Iraq wars show that (depending on the survey), between 151,000 to 1,000,000 Iraqis died in the two US-led wars between 2003 and 2013. One study, conducted by the Iraq Body Count project http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Body_Count_project, found that 174,000 Iraqis were reported killed between 2003 and 2013, with between 112,000-123,000 of those killed being civilian noncombatants. Meanwhile, the total number of US troops killed during this period was 4,491.


Now, JR, please tell me. Was that "good" or "evil?"



From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 3:14 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


About 12,000 or so people die every day. About 10% of those are killed by other people one way or another. The Islamic State is one of those ways. This is what happens. One method of reducing those killings is to bomb or send troops to kill the members of the Islamic State, by substituting other killings in place of the ones the Islamic State perpetrates. Then there is the question of who or what is killing the other 11,000 people who die every day, which is a far greater number. From their point of view, the killers in the Islamic State are doing their god-given duty to remove infidels and betrayers of their faith from the world, a good thing. We don't know what the people killed think of it, but those in the West do not seem in favour of the idea, thinking it a bad thing. In almost every year, anyone born more that 120 years ago is dead. As pointed out recently God killed something like 2,000,000 people as reported in the Bible, while Satan, bless his reticent soul, only 10. So it would appear the best killers are in the service of what is called 'good', for a good cause, by their own estimation. They truly believe something is good and worthy, and carry out killings in the service of that. That probably means we should be rather suspicious of the good people who want to purify their environment in the service of that good. For our own good, maybe we should kill them, just to be on the safe side.





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,

If you say there is no "good" or "evil", how do explain the fact that groups, like the Islamic State, kill innocent people in Iraq and Syria?

[[e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

JR,

I don't think you get it. If you do your own research, you find out things, if you just accept what people tell you, you don't find the answers. Exactly what are the same questions Barry has been asking for years? He seems to have come to his own conclusions about many things. If you say to someone 'You've been told the answer', then accuse them of not accepting it, the reason for not accepting it is 1) they intend to research it further before coming to a conclusion or 2) they have researched it and found that what they were told was mistaken, or unprovable, or just nonsense. I think your brain is scrambled because to do your own research means you cannot first believe what someone tells you. You just use it as a spring board for an investigation, a starting point. What you are told is not the finish line. You are making the fatal assumption that when someone investigates what they are told they will come to the same conclusion as what they were told, and this is the Achilles heel of bad reasoning, that someone will always find what you think they should find.


If I think something is correct, that does not mean that I am not mistaken. If you want to counter Barry's comments and arguments, you have to respond to them in a reasoned way that demonstrates you know what you are talking about. It is not clear that you do.


When dealing with facts, the situation is a bit easier than dealing with abstractions like 'enlightenment' for which most information is not factual, for one is discussing something that literally cannot be described with any real precision. That might lead one to conclude it does not really exist. Suppose that were true? Suppose that 'good' and 'evil' do not really exist, but that those ideas were just something you were told and you bought into the ideas? How would you begin to research this, to find out if they did nor did not exist? How would you go about finding out if enlightenment exists? What are the requirements that would have to be satisfied for finding out if enlightenment exists? Have you found the answer yet? For if not, you would not know that it exists.


In this thread Barry asked the following questions, and they do not seem to be questions he has asked for many years:


'What's in the big pink box, man?' (a quotation from a movie)
Now, JR, please tell me. Was that "good" or "evil?" (a question he asked you about the body count in the Iraq wars)


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,

You've been asking the same questions for many years now. You've been told the answer, but you don't listen. You should do your own research and find out for yourself the true answer.

[[e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

Apparently Barry believes in Buddhas, reincarnation, karma and apparently he also believes in the Tibetan 'bardo" state. So, what is the difference between believing in Buddhas, Bodhisattvas and Tibetan demons, and believing in God and Christian angels and Satan? Can you explain cognitive dissonance? Thanks.

---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

JR,

I don't think you get it. If you do your own research, you find out things, if you just accept what people tell you, you don't find the answers. Exactly what are the same questions Barry has been asking for years? He seems to have come to his own conclusions about many things. If you say to someone 'You've been told the answer', then accuse them of not accepting it, the reason for not accepting it is 1) they intend to research it further before coming to a conclusion or 2) they have researched it and found that what they were told was mistaken, or unprovable, or just nonsense.

Non sequitur.

I think your brain is scrambled because to do your own research means you cannot first believe what someone tells you. You just use it as a spring board for an investigation, a starting point. What you are told is not the finish line. You are making the fatal assumption that when someone investigates what they are told they will come to the same conclusion as what they were told, and this is the Achilles heel of bad reasoning, that someone will always find what you think they should find.

Non sequitur.



If I think something is correct, that does not mean that I am not mistaken. If you want to counter Barry's comments and arguments, you have to respond to them in a reasoned way that demonstrates you know what you are talking about. It is not clear that you do.

Non sequitur.



When dealing with facts, the situation is a bit easier than dealing with abstractions like 'enlightenment' for which most information is not factual, for one is discussing something that literally cannot be described with any real precision. That might lead one to conclude it does not really exist. Suppose that were true? Suppose that 'good' and 'evil' do not really exist, but that those ideas were just something you were told and you bought into the ideas? How would you begin to research this, to find out if they did nor did not exist? How would you go about finding out if enlightenment exists? What are the requirements that would have to be satisfied for finding out if enlightenment exists? Have you found the answer yet? For if not, you would not know that it exists.

Non sequitur.



In this thread Barry asked the following questions, and they do not seem to be questions he has asked for many years:


'What's in the big pink box, man?' (a quotation from a movie)
Now, JR, please tell me. Was that "good" or "evil?" (a question he asked you about the body count in the Iraq wars)

Non sequitur.



---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,

You've been asking the same questions for many years now. You've been told the answer, but you don't listen. You should do your own research and find out for yourself the true answer.

[TurquoiseBee [e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

JR, Xeno called you out more specifically on this, pointing out that you haven't even *tried* to deal with the questions I posed to you. I'll stick with calling you an abject coward for falling back on a combination of the Judy Stein Routine and the Jim Flanegin Routine.

In the first routine, like its namesake, the intellectual coward (that's YOU, JR) tries to weasel out of an argument he realizes he isn't smart enough to participate in (much less win) by declaring that he's "already answered it." He hasn't, of course, no more than Judy ever had when she pulled this ploy. But since the coward is used to speaking to people as lost in folly as himself, he thinks no one will notice. This is just to let you know that we notice.

In the second routine, having taken the coward's route and refused to come up with any explanation of HOW he could possibly "know" the things he claims to "know," the coward "pulls a Jim Flanegin" and implies that he's superior to the other person because he "knows" the "true answer."
Too bad you're too cowardly to engage in actual discussion and debate, JR. If you did, you might have actually learned something from Xeno, who was being compassionately patient with you and your evasions. As it is, you'll probably die still being as ignorant as you are now. Your call.

 From: "***@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, March 27, 2015 9:44 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

  Pastor Barry,
You've been asking the same questions for many years now.  You've been told the answer, but you don't listen.  You should do your own research and find out for yourself the true answer.



---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

I am aware of the problems with establishing the historical existence of many religious figures, Xeno, but that isn't what I was getting at with JR. I have noticed in him a tendency that I doubt he is aware of -- or, if he is, he probably sees nothing wrong with.

When claiming to believe in the existence of Krishna or similar figures from religious myth here in the past, he has cited as proof "scriptures" such as the Gita. Bzzzzzzt. Thanks for playing, but no win. Religious scriptures are NOT factual, no matter how many people believe they are. Scholars often don't even know the *century* many of them were written in, much less who wrote them. Best to consider them creative fiction written with the intent to inspire IMO.
The only *other* mechanism by which JR can claim to have "done research" on the question of whether someone like Krishna existed in real life or not is "seeing" -- meaning some kind of subjective realization or vision or intuition. While I admit that such things exist -- subjectively -- I do NOT admit that any of these "seeings" have anything to do with fact. If they did, more people who claim to be able to see the future would be millionaires.  :-)
I was just hoping to see JR try to actually posit and then defend some mechanism by which he thinks "proof" could be offered of Krishna's existence. If he actually tried, it might wake him up to the fact that the only reason he *does* believe in such silliness is that someone he holds as an "authority" said so. In other words, his only "proof" is the word "Maharishisez."
Now, as for Schroedinger's cat, I for one have no problem with someone being both alive and dead at the same time. Just look at Keith Richards -- the guy has looked like death on a stick since the 1960s, yet he still manages to tour and play some pretty good guitar. If that's not an example of Schroedinger's paradox, I don't know what is.  :-)

As for the answer to "What's in the big pink box, man?" that is as much of a koan as it was when posed in the movie "Buckaroo Banzai." Me, I kinda doubt it's enlightenment.  :-)
From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2015 8:08 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

 Establishing the historicity of various religious characters today is pretty much impossible. Of the following, Krishna, Buddha, Moses, Jesus, Mohammed, Shankara, only the latter two have much evidence that would just suggest they existed, primarily because they are a bit more recent. It seems more logical with the lack of definite evidence that these names can be used as 'bookmarks' that delineate a certain point in the development of a tradition, a personification of what had  transpired up to that point. If we were to take the TMO holy tradition, only Shankara, Brahmanda Saraswati, Maharishi, and King Tony have a believable amount of evidence, and only the last three have really good historical evidence as to their existence. If we assume enlightenment exists, we could say that the 'tradition' of enlightenment is something generated in one's own mind as a means to remove the delusion that there is something called enlightenment that one can gain.
Barry, I read your post with the cartoon about the cat. It was heartbreaking for a friend of mine to look in the box, because it was her cat. She probably should not have opened it. In a way enlightenment is kind of parallel to this. You are looking for something you already have, and as long as you keep looking, you never find it. When you stop looking, truly stop looking, then you discover your search was in vain. What a relief!


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

I am asking you to explain to us how ANYONE could possibly "research" such a question as the historical existence of Krishna and come up with an accurate answer. You seem to base a lot of your beliefs on "Maharishisez," meaning that *he* said something that you consider fact. What I am asking you to do is explain to us HOW he (or anyone else) could *possibly* determine that "Krishna" actually existed sufficiently that you would believe it to be fact.

Don't be coy. You obviously believe this stuff. Now explain to us how you think it works.

From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2015 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

 Pastor Barry,
I said below that I did NOT research the matter personally.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

John, we've all seen you post things on this forum that leave no doubt that you believe that such mythical personalities as Krishna actually existed. You've actually said as much in the past, so there is no need to try to hide the fact now.

What is more interesting, since you *are* trying to hide it, is HOW you claim you could "research the subject" and come up with a definitive answer stating that "Krishna is an incarnation of Vishnu here on Earth." Please explain to us HOW you or any other person could determine the validity of this statement. NOT that "some people believe it," but that's it's actual fact. Please share with us how a person convinces himself that he or she "knows" such a thing.
From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>

 MMY believes Krishna is an incarnation of Vishnu here on Earth.  I personally have not researched the subject.

---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Do you believe Krshna was an actual personage on the earth or a religious myth?
If real, was he just a man or an avatar of Vishnu?

From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 9:07 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

 MJ,
I'm paraphrasing what Krishna said to Arjuna, who was reluctant in fighting his relatives in the battle of Kurukshetra.



---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

"If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die."
Seems a rather narrow minded point of view.

What if the person being killed is a committed practitioner of ahimsa? A Jainite or a fanatic pacifist? One who would rather be killed than raise their hand in violence to another even in self defense?

Or suppose the about to be killed already had a terminal illness with a bleak prognosis and a short time to live, thus the killing would actually be a favor to the kill-ee and the killer, while perhaps having evil intent, would actually be giving a blessing and liberation to the kill-ee.

Could there be some planet in your chart that is debilitated that gives you such a judgmental and combative feeling about all this?

From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

 Xeno,
I would assume that you would fight to save your life if the Islamic State rebels got a hold of you to cut your head off as propaganda for their cause. Are you going to assume that you're imagining things?  As you've seen in the news, these rebels have cut the heads of Brits and Americans in the recent past.  It's real and true.
If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die.  If you fight and win, you save your life and become a hero to the world.




---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

You know jr_esq, you are assuming that your idea of good and evil is real. I hold they are simply conceptual mappings onto reality, but they have no real existence except as a convenient and arbitrary way to categorise certain forms of activity. There was an episode of Star Trek in which an alien species, the Excalbians, investigated good and evil. They concluded that good and evil use the same methods and achieve the similar results. The writers of the episode used science fiction as a template to discuss the nature of good and evil.
How are you defining good and evil, and why do you feel those definitions are somehow true or real?


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,
IMO, it's unfortunate that human beings have to die.  But circumstances happen where a person or a leader of a nation has to act to prevent evil or to eradicate evil from existing.  Under these circumstances, it would be justified to take arms and fight.  Any deaths that come from a justified war would be dignified and would be considered necessary to deter evil.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Surveys of deaths in the two Iraq wars show that (depending on the survey), between 151,000 to 1,000,000 Iraqis died in the two US-led wars between 2003 and 2013. One study, conducted by the Iraq Body Count project, found that 174,000 Iraqis were reported killed between 2003 and 2013, withbetween 112,000-123,000 of those killed being civilian noncombatants. Meanwhile, the total number of US troops killed during this period was 4,491. 

Now, JR, please tell me. Was that "good" or "evil?"

From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 3:14 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

 About 12,000 or so people die every day. About 10% of those are killed by other people one way or another. The Islamic State is one of those ways. This is what happens. One method of reducing those killings is to bomb or send troops to kill the members of the Islamic State, by substituting other killings in place of the ones the Islamic State perpetrates. Then there is the question of who or what is killing the other 11,000 people who die every day, which is a far greater number. From their point of view, the killers in the Islamic State are doing their god-given duty to remove infidels and betrayers of their faith from the world, a good thing. We don't know what the people killed think of it, but those in the West do not seem in favour of the idea, thinking it a bad thing. In almost every year, anyone born more that 120 years ago is dead. As pointed out recently God killed something like 2,000,000 people as reported in the Bible, while Satan, bless his reticent soul, only 10. So it would appear the best killers are in the service of what is called 'good', for a good cause, by their own estimation. They truly believe something is good and worthy, and carry out killings in the service of that. That probably means we should be rather suspicious of the good people who want to purify their environment in the service of that good. For our own good, maybe we should kill them, just to be on the safe side.



---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,
If you say there is no "good" or "evil", how do explain the fact that groups, like the Islamic State, kill innocent people in Iraq and Syria?











#yiv8218096751 #yiv8218096751 -- #yiv8218096751ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv8218096751 #yiv8218096751ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv8218096751 #yiv8218096751ygrp-mkp #yiv8218096751hd {color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px 0;}#yiv8218096751 #yiv8218096751ygrp-mkp #yiv8218096751ads {margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv8218096751 #yiv8218096751ygrp-mkp .yiv8218096751ad {padding:0 0;}#yiv8218096751 #yiv8218096751ygrp-mkp .yiv8218096751ad p {margin:0;}#yiv8218096751 #yiv8218096751ygrp-mkp .yiv8218096751ad a {color:#0000ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv8218096751 #yiv8218096751ygrp-sponsor #yiv8218096751ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv8218096751 #yiv8218096751ygrp-sponsor #yiv8218096751ygrp-lc #yiv8218096751hd {margin:10px 0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv8218096751 #yiv8218096751ygrp-sponsor #yiv8218096751ygrp-lc .yiv8218096751ad {margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv8218096751 #yiv8218096751actions {font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv8218096751 #yiv8218096751activity {background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv8218096751 #yiv8218096751activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv8218096751 #yiv8218096751activity span:first-child {text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv8218096751 #yiv8218096751activity span a {color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}#yiv8218096751 #yiv8218096751activity span span {color:#ff7900;}#yiv8218096751 #yiv8218096751activity span .yiv8218096751underline {text-decoration:underline;}#yiv8218096751 .yiv8218096751attach {clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px 0;width:400px;}#yiv8218096751 .yiv8218096751attach div a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv8218096751 .yiv8218096751attach img {border:none;padding-right:5px;}#yiv8218096751 .yiv8218096751attach label {display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}#yiv8218096751 .yiv8218096751attach label a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv8218096751 blockquote {margin:0 0 0 4px;}#yiv8218096751 .yiv8218096751bold {font-family:Arial;font-size:13px;font-weight:700;}#yiv8218096751 .yiv8218096751bold a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv8218096751 dd.yiv8218096751last p a {font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv8218096751 dd.yiv8218096751last p span {margin-right:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv8218096751 dd.yiv8218096751last p span.yiv8218096751yshortcuts {margin-right:0;}#yiv8218096751 div.yiv8218096751attach-table div div a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv8218096751 div.yiv8218096751attach-table {width:400px;}#yiv8218096751 div.yiv8218096751file-title a, #yiv8218096751 div.yiv8218096751file-title a:active, #yiv8218096751 div.yiv8218096751file-title a:hover, #yiv8218096751 div.yiv8218096751file-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv8218096751 div.yiv8218096751photo-title a, #yiv8218096751 div.yiv8218096751photo-title a:active, #yiv8218096751 div.yiv8218096751photo-title a:hover, #yiv8218096751 div.yiv8218096751photo-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv8218096751 div#yiv8218096751ygrp-mlmsg #yiv8218096751ygrp-msg p a span.yiv8218096751yshortcuts {font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;font-weight:normal;}#yiv8218096751 .yiv8218096751green {color:#628c2a;}#yiv8218096751 .yiv8218096751MsoNormal {margin:0 0 0 0;}#yiv8218096751 o {font-size:0;}#yiv8218096751 #yiv8218096751photos div {float:left;width:72px;}#yiv8218096751 #yiv8218096751photos div div {border:1px solid #666666;height:62px;overflow:hidden;width:62px;}#yiv8218096751 #yiv8218096751photos div label {color:#666666;font-size:10px;overflow:hidden;text-align:center;white-space:nowrap;width:64px;}#yiv8218096751 #yiv8218096751reco-category {font-size:77%;}#yiv8218096751 #yiv8218096751reco-desc {font-size:77%;}#yiv8218096751 .yiv8218096751replbq {margin:4px;}#yiv8218096751 #yiv8218096751ygrp-actbar div a:first-child {margin-right:2px;padding-right:5px;}#yiv8218096751 #yiv8218096751ygrp-mlmsg {font-size:13px;font-family:Arial, helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv8218096751 #yiv8218096751ygrp-mlmsg table {font-size:inherit;font:100%;}#yiv8218096751 #yiv8218096751ygrp-mlmsg select, #yiv8218096751 input, #yiv8218096751 textarea {font:99% Arial, Helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv8218096751 #yiv8218096751ygrp-mlmsg pre, #yiv8218096751 code {font:115% monospace;}#yiv8218096751 #yiv8218096751ygrp-mlmsg * {line-height:1.22em;}#yiv8218096751 #yiv8218096751ygrp-mlmsg #yiv8218096751logo {padding-bottom:10px;}#yiv8218096751 #yiv8218096751ygrp-msg p a {font-family:Verdana;}#yiv8218096751 #yiv8218096751ygrp-msg p#yiv8218096751attach-count span {color:#1E66AE;font-weight:700;}#yiv8218096751 #yiv8218096751ygrp-reco #yiv8218096751reco-head {color:#ff7900;font-weight:700;}#yiv8218096751 #yiv8218096751ygrp-reco {margin-bottom:20px;padding:0px;}#yiv8218096751 #yiv8218096751ygrp-sponsor #yiv8218096751ov li a {font-size:130%;text-decoration:none;}#yiv8218096751 #yiv8218096751ygrp-sponsor #yiv8218096751ov li {font-size:77%;list-style-type:square;padding:6px 0;}#yiv8218096751 #yiv8218096751ygrp-sponsor #yiv8218096751ov ul {margin:0;padding:0 0 0 8px;}#yiv8218096751 #yiv8218096751ygrp-text {font-family:Georgia;}#yiv8218096751 #yiv8218096751ygrp-text p {margin:0 0 1em 0;}#yiv8218096751 #yiv8218096751ygrp-text tt {font-size:120%;}#yiv8218096751 #yiv8218096751ygrp-vital ul li:last-child {border-right:none !important;}#yiv8218096751

[[e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

It's almost like a circus over here - send in the clowns!

History in India begins with the Buddha, around 563 BC. Writing in India wasn't invented until several centuries later. Everything before that is considered to be pre-history.

---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Establishing the historicity of various religious characters today is pretty much impossible. Of the following, Krishna, Buddha, Moses, Jesus, Mohammed, Shankara, only the latter two have much evidence that would just suggest they existed, primarily because they are a bit more recent. It seems more logical with the lack of definite evidence that these names can be used as 'bookmarks' that delineate a certain point in the development of a tradition, a personification of what had transpired up to that point. If we were to take the TMO holy tradition, only Shankara, Brahmanda Saraswati, Maharishi, and King Tony have a believable amount of evidence, and only the last three have really good historical evidence as to their existence.

Non sequitur.

If we assume enlightenment exists, we could say that the 'tradition' of enlightenment is something generated in one's own mind as a means to remove the delusion that there is something called enlightenment that one can gain.

Non sequitur.


Barry, I read your post with the cartoon about the cat. It was heartbreaking for a friend of mine to look in the box, because it was her cat. She probably should not have opened it. In a way enlightenment is kind of parallel to this. You are looking for something you already have, and as long as you keep looking, you never find it. When you stop looking, truly stop looking, then you discover your search was in vain. What a relief!

Non sequitur.

The very moment you begin the process of transcending, you have already reached the goal.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

I am asking you to explain to us how ANYONE could possibly "research" such a question as the historical existence of Krishna and come up with an accurate answer. You seem to base a lot of your beliefs on "Maharishisez," meaning that *he* said something that you consider fact. What I am asking you to do is explain to us HOW he (or anyone else) could *possibly* determine that "Krishna" actually existed sufficiently that you would believe it to be fact.



Don't be coy. You obviously believe this stuff. Now explain to us how you think it works.


From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2015 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


Pastor Barry,


I said below that I did NOT research the matter personally.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

John, we've all seen you post things on this forum that leave no doubt that you believe that such mythical personalities as Krishna actually existed. You've actually said as much in the past, so there is no need to try to hide the fact now.



What is more interesting, since you *are* trying to hide it, is HOW you claim you could "research the subject" and come up with a definitive answer stating that "Krishna is an incarnation of Vishnu here on Earth." Please explain to us HOW you or any other person could determine the validity of this statement. NOT that "some people believe it," but that's it's actual fact. Please share with us how a person convinces himself that he or she "knows" such a thing.

From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>

MMY believes Krishna is an incarnation of Vishnu here on Earth. I personally have not researched the subject.

---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Do you believe Krshna was an actual personage on the earth or a religious myth?


If real, was he just a man or an avatar of Vishnu?



From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 9:07 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


MJ,


I'm paraphrasing what Krishna said to Arjuna, who was reluctant in fighting his relatives in the battle of Kurukshetra.





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

"If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die."


Seems a rather narrow minded point of view.



What if the person being killed is a committed practitioner of ahimsa? A Jainite or a fanatic pacifist? One who would rather be killed than raise their hand in violence to another even in self defense?



Or suppose the about to be killed already had a terminal illness with a bleak prognosis and a short time to live, thus the killing would actually be a favor to the kill-ee and the killer, while perhaps having evil intent, would actually be giving a blessing and liberation to the kill-ee.



Could there be some planet in your chart that is debilitated that gives you such a judgmental and combative feeling about all this?



From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


Xeno,


I would assume that you would fight to save your life if the Islamic State rebels got a hold of you to cut your head off as propaganda for their cause. Are you going to assume that you're imagining things? As you've seen in the news, these rebels have cut the heads of Brits and Americans in the recent past. It's real and true.


If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die. If you fight and win, you save your life and become a hero to the world.





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

You know jr_esq, you are assuming that your idea of good and evil is real. I hold they are simply conceptual mappings onto reality, but they have no real existence except as a convenient and arbitrary way to categorise certain forms of activity. There was an episode of Star Trek in which an alien species, the Excalbians, investigated good and evil. They concluded that good and evil use the same methods and achieve the similar results. The writers of the episode used science fiction as a template to discuss the nature of good and evil.

How are you defining good and evil, and why do you feel those definitions are somehow true or real?


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,

IMO, it's unfortunate that human beings have to die. But circumstances happen where a person or a leader of a nation has to act to prevent evil or to eradicate evil from existing. Under these circumstances, it would be justified to take arms and fight. Any deaths that come from a justified war would be dignified and would be considered necessary to deter evil.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Surveys of deaths in the two Iraq wars show that (depending on the survey), between 151,000 to 1,000,000 Iraqis died in the two US-led wars between 2003 and 2013. One study, conducted by the Iraq Body Count project http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Body_Count_project, found that 174,000 Iraqis were reported killed between 2003 and 2013, with between 112,000-123,000 of those killed being civilian noncombatants. Meanwhile, the total number of US troops killed during this period was 4,491.


Now, JR, please tell me. Was that "good" or "evil?"



From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 3:14 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


About 12,000 or so people die every day. About 10% of those are killed by other people one way or another. The Islamic State is one of those ways. This is what happens. One method of reducing those killings is to bomb or send troops to kill the members of the Islamic State, by substituting other killings in place of the ones the Islamic State perpetrates. Then there is the question of who or what is killing the other 11,000 people who die every day, which is a far greater number. From their point of view, the killers in the Islamic State are doing their god-given duty to remove infidels and betrayers of their faith from the world, a good thing. We don't know what the people killed think of it, but those in the West do not seem in favour of the idea, thinking it a bad thing. In almost every year, anyone born more that 120 years ago is dead. As pointed out recently God killed something like 2,000,000 people as reported in the Bible, while Satan, bless his reticent soul, only 10. So it would appear the best killers are in the service of what is called 'good', for a good cause, by their own estimation. They truly believe something is good and worthy, and carry out killings in the service of that. That probably means we should be rather suspicious of the good people who want to purify their environment in the service of that good. For our own good, maybe we should kill them, just to be on the safe side.





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,

If you say there is no "good" or "evil", how do explain the fact that groups, like the Islamic State, kill innocent people in Iraq and Syria?





























































































---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

I am asking you to explain to us how ANYONE could possibly "research" such a question as the historical existence of Krishna and come up with an accurate answer. You seem to base a lot of your beliefs on "Maharishisez," meaning that *he* said something that you consider fact. What I am asking you to do is explain to us HOW he (or anyone else) could *possibly* determine that "Krishna" actually existed sufficiently that you would believe it to be fact.



Don't be coy. You obviously believe this stuff. Now explain to us how you think it works.


From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2015 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


Pastor Barry,


I said below that I did NOT research the matter personally.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

John, we've all seen you post things on this forum that leave no doubt that you believe that such mythical personalities as Krishna actually existed. You've actually said as much in the past, so there is no need to try to hide the fact now.



What is more interesting, since you *are* trying to hide it, is HOW you claim you could "research the subject" and come up with a definitive answer stating that "Krishna is an incarnation of Vishnu here on Earth." Please explain to us HOW you or any other person could determine the validity of this statement. NOT that "some people believe it," but that's it's actual fact. Please share with us how a person convinces himself that he or she "knows" such a thing.

From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>

MMY believes Krishna is an incarnation of Vishnu here on Earth. I personally have not researched the subject.

---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Do you believe Krshna was an actual personage on the earth or a religious myth?


If real, was he just a man or an avatar of Vishnu?



From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 9:07 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


MJ,


I'm paraphrasing what Krishna said to Arjuna, who was reluctant in fighting his relatives in the battle of Kurukshetra.





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

"If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die."


Seems a rather narrow minded point of view.



What if the person being killed is a committed practitioner of ahimsa? A Jainite or a fanatic pacifist? One who would rather be killed than raise their hand in violence to another even in self defense?



Or suppose the about to be killed already had a terminal illness with a bleak prognosis and a short time to live, thus the killing would actually be a favor to the kill-ee and the killer, while perhaps having evil intent, would actually be giving a blessing and liberation to the kill-ee.



Could there be some planet in your chart that is debilitated that gives you such a judgmental and combative feeling about all this?



From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


Xeno,


I would assume that you would fight to save your life if the Islamic State rebels got a hold of you to cut your head off as propaganda for their cause. Are you going to assume that you're imagining things? As you've seen in the news, these rebels have cut the heads of Brits and Americans in the recent past. It's real and true.


If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die. If you fight and win, you save your life and become a hero to the world.





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

You know jr_esq, you are assuming that your idea of good and evil is real. I hold they are simply conceptual mappings onto reality, but they have no real existence except as a convenient and arbitrary way to categorise certain forms of activity. There was an episode of Star Trek in which an alien species, the Excalbians, investigated good and evil. They concluded that good and evil use the same methods and achieve the similar results. The writers of the episode used science fiction as a template to discuss the nature of good and evil.

How are you defining good and evil, and why do you feel those definitions are somehow true or real?


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,

IMO, it's unfortunate that human beings have to die. But circumstances happen where a person or a leader of a nation has to act to prevent evil or to eradicate evil from existing. Under these circumstances, it would be justified to take arms and fight. Any deaths that come from a justified war would be dignified and would be considered necessary to deter evil.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Surveys of deaths in the two Iraq wars show that (depending on the survey), between 151,000 to 1,000,000 Iraqis died in the two US-led wars between 2003 and 2013. One study, conducted by the Iraq Body Count project http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Body_Count_project, found that 174,000 Iraqis were reported killed between 2003 and 2013, with between 112,000-123,000 of those killed being civilian noncombatants. Meanwhile, the total number of US troops killed during this period was 4,491.


Now, JR, please tell me. Was that "good" or "evil?"



From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 3:14 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


About 12,000 or so people die every day. About 10% of those are killed by other people one way or another. The Islamic State is one of those ways. This is what happens. One method of reducing those killings is to bomb or send troops to kill the members of the Islamic State, by substituting other killings in place of the ones the Islamic State perpetrates. Then there is the question of who or what is killing the other 11,000 people who die every day, which is a far greater number. From their point of view, the killers in the Islamic State are doing their god-given duty to remove infidels and betrayers of their faith from the world, a good thing. We don't know what the people killed think of it, but those in the West do not seem in favour of the idea, thinking it a bad thing. In almost every year, anyone born more that 120 years ago is dead. As pointed out recently God killed something like 2,000,000 people as reported in the Bible, while Satan, bless his reticent soul, only 10. So it would appear the best killers are in the service of what is called 'good', for a good cause, by their own estimation. They truly believe something is good and worthy, and carry out killings in the service of that. That probably means we should be rather suspicious of the good people who want to purify their environment in the service of that good. For our own good, maybe we should kill them, just to be on the safe side.





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,

If you say there is no "good" or "evil", how do explain the fact that groups, like the Islamic State, kill innocent people in Iraq and Syria?



























































































Barry, I read your post with the cartoon about the cat. It was heartbreaking for a friend of mine to look in the box, because it was her cat. She probably should not have opened it. In a way enlightenment is kind of parallel to this. You are looking for something you already have, and as long as you keep looking, you never find it. When you stop looking, truly stop looking, then you discover your search was in vain. What a relief!

Non sequitur.

The very moment you begin the process of transcending, you have already reached the goal.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

I am asking you to explain to us how ANYONE could possibly "research" such a question as the historical existence of Krishna and come up with an accurate answer. You seem to base a lot of your beliefs on "Maharishisez," meaning that *he* said something that you consider fact. What I am asking you to do is explain to us HOW he (or anyone else) could *possibly* determine that "Krishna" actually existed sufficiently that you would believe it to be fact.



Don't be coy. You obviously believe this stuff. Now explain to us how you think it works.


From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2015 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


Pastor Barry,


I said below that I did NOT research the matter personally.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

John, we've all seen you post things on this forum that leave no doubt that you believe that such mythical personalities as Krishna actually existed. You've actually said as much in the past, so there is no need to try to hide the fact now.



What is more interesting, since you *are* trying to hide it, is HOW you claim you could "research the subject" and come up with a definitive answer stating that "Krishna is an incarnation of Vishnu here on Earth." Please explain to us HOW you or any other person could determine the validity of this statement. NOT that "some people believe it," but that's it's actual fact. Please share with us how a person convinces himself that he or she "knows" such a thing.

From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>

MMY believes Krishna is an incarnation of Vishnu here on Earth. I personally have not researched the subject.

---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Do you believe Krshna was an actual personage on the earth or a religious myth?


If real, was he just a man or an avatar of Vishnu?



From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 9:07 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


MJ,


I'm paraphrasing what Krishna said to Arjuna, who was reluctant in fighting his relatives in the battle of Kurukshetra.





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

"If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die."


Seems a rather narrow minded point of view.



What if the person being killed is a committed practitioner of ahimsa? A Jainite or a fanatic pacifist? One who would rather be killed than raise their hand in violence to another even in self defense?



Or suppose the about to be killed already had a terminal illness with a bleak prognosis and a short time to live, thus the killing would actually be a favor to the kill-ee and the killer, while perhaps having evil intent, would actually be giving a blessing and liberation to the kill-ee.



Could there be some planet in your chart that is debilitated that gives you such a judgmental and combative feeling about all this?



From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


Xeno,


I would assume that you would fight to save your life if the Islamic State rebels got a hold of you to cut your head off as propaganda for their cause. Are you going to assume that you're imagining things? As you've seen in the news, these rebels have cut the heads of Brits and Americans in the recent past. It's real and true.


If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die. If you fight and win, you save your life and become a hero to the world.





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

You know jr_esq, you are assuming that your idea of good and evil is real. I hold they are simply conceptual mappings onto reality, but they have no real existence except as a convenient and arbitrary way to categorise certain forms of activity. There was an episode of Star Trek in which an alien species, the Excalbians, investigated good and evil. They concluded that good and evil use the same methods and achieve the similar results. The writers of the episode used science fiction as a template to discuss the nature of good and evil.

How are you defining good and evil, and why do you feel those definitions are somehow true or real?


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,

IMO, it's unfortunate that human beings have to die. But circumstances happen where a person or a leader of a nation has to act to prevent evil or to eradicate evil from existing. Under these circumstances, it would be justified to take arms and fight. Any deaths that come from a justified war would be dignified and would be considered necessary to deter evil.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Surveys of deaths in the two Iraq wars show that (depending on the survey), between 151,000 to 1,000,000 Iraqis died in the two US-led wars between 2003 and 2013. One study, conducted by the Iraq Body Count project http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Body_Count_project, found that 174,000 Iraqis were reported killed between 2003 and 2013, with between 112,000-123,000 of those killed being civilian noncombatants. Meanwhile, the total number of US troops killed during this period was 4,491.


Now, JR, please tell me. Was that "good" or "evil?"



From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 3:14 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


About 12,000 or so people die every day. About 10% of those are killed by other people one way or another. The Islamic State is one of those ways. This is what happens. One method of reducing those killings is to bomb or send troops to kill the members of the Islamic State, by substituting other killings in place of the ones the Islamic State perpetrates. Then there is the question of who or what is killing the other 11,000 people who die every day, which is a far greater number. From their point of view, the killers in the Islamic State are doing their god-given duty to remove infidels and betrayers of their faith from the world, a good thing. We don't know what the people killed think of it, but those in the West do not seem in favour of the idea, thinking it a bad thing. In almost every year, anyone born more that 120 years ago is dead. As pointed out recently God killed something like 2,000,000 people as reported in the Bible, while Satan, bless his reticent soul, only 10. So it would appear the best killers are in the service of what is called 'good', for a good cause, by their own estimation. They truly believe something is good and worthy, and carry out killings in the service of that. That probably means we should be rather suspicious of the good people who want to purify their environment in the service of that good. For our own good, maybe we should kill them, just to be on the safe side.





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,

If you say there is no "good" or "evil", how do explain the fact that groups, like the Islamic State, kill innocent people in Iraq and Syria?





























































































---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

I am asking you to explain to us how ANYONE could possibly "research" such a question as the historical existence of Krishna and come up with an accurate answer. You seem to base a lot of your beliefs on "Maharishisez," meaning that *he* said something that you consider fact. What I am asking you to do is explain to us HOW he (or anyone else) could *possibly* determine that "Krishna" actually existed sufficiently that you would believe it to be fact.



Don't be coy. You obviously believe this stuff. Now explain to us how you think it works.


From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2015 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


Pastor Barry,


I said below that I did NOT research the matter personally.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

John, we've all seen you post things on this forum that leave no doubt that you believe that such mythical personalities as Krishna actually existed. You've actually said as much in the past, so there is no need to try to hide the fact now.



What is more interesting, since you *are* trying to hide it, is HOW you claim you could "research the subject" and come up with a definitive answer stating that "Krishna is an incarnation of Vishnu here on Earth." Please explain to us HOW you or any other person could determine the validity of this statement. NOT that "some people believe it," but that's it's actual fact. Please share with us how a person convinces himself that he or she "knows" such a thing.

From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>

MMY believes Krishna is an incarnation of Vishnu here on Earth. I personally have not researched the subject.

---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Do you believe Krshna was an actual personage on the earth or a religious myth?


If real, was he just a man or an avatar of Vishnu?



From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 9:07 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


MJ,


I'm paraphrasing what Krishna said to Arjuna, who was reluctant in fighting his relatives in the battle of Kurukshetra.





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

"If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die."


Seems a rather narrow minded point of view.



What if the person being killed is a committed practitioner of ahimsa? A Jainite or a fanatic pacifist? One who would rather be killed than raise their hand in violence to another even in self defense?



Or suppose the about to be killed already had a terminal illness with a bleak prognosis and a short time to live, thus the killing would actually be a favor to the kill-ee and the killer, while perhaps having evil intent, would actually be giving a blessing and liberation to the kill-ee.



Could there be some planet in your chart that is debilitated that gives you such a judgmental and combative feeling about all this?



From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


Xeno,


I would assume that you would fight to save your life if the Islamic State rebels got a hold of you to cut your head off as propaganda for their cause. Are you going to assume that you're imagining things? As you've seen in the news, these rebels have cut the heads of Brits and Americans in the recent past. It's real and true.


If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die. If you fight and win, you save your life and become a hero to the world.





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

You know jr_esq, you are assuming that your idea of good and evil is real. I hold they are simply conceptual mappings onto reality, but they have no real existence except as a convenient and arbitrary way to categorise certain forms of activity. There was an episode of Star Trek in which an alien species, the Excalbians, investigated good and evil. They concluded that good and evil use the same methods and achieve the similar results. The writers of the episode used science fiction as a template to discuss the nature of good and evil.

How are you defining good and evil, and why do you feel those definitions are somehow true or real?


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,

IMO, it's unfortunate that human beings have to die. But circumstances happen where a person or a leader of a nation has to act to prevent evil or to eradicate evil from existing. Under these circumstances, it would be justified to take arms and fight. Any deaths that come from a justified war would be dignified and would be considered necessary to deter evil.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Surveys of deaths in the two Iraq wars show that (depending on the survey), between 151,000 to 1,000,000 Iraqis died in the two US-led wars between 2003 and 2013. One study, conducted by the Iraq Body Count project http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Body_Count_project, found that 174,000 Iraqis were reported killed between 2003 and 2013, with between 112,000-123,000 of those killed being civilian noncombatants. Meanwhile, the total number of US troops killed during this period was 4,491.


Now, JR, please tell me. Was that "good" or "evil?"



From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 3:14 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


About 12,000 or so people die every day. About 10% of those are killed by other people one way or another. The Islamic State is one of those ways. This is what happens. One method of reducing those killings is to bomb or send troops to kill the members of the Islamic State, by substituting other killings in place of the ones the Islamic State perpetrates. Then there is the question of who or what is killing the other 11,000 people who die every day, which is a far greater number. From their point of view, the killers in the Islamic State are doing their god-given duty to remove infidels and betrayers of their faith from the world, a good thing. We don't know what the people killed think of it, but those in the West do not seem in favour of the idea, thinking it a bad thing. In almost every year, anyone born more that 120 years ago is dead. As pointed out recently God killed something like 2,000,000 people as reported in the Bible, while Satan, bless his reticent soul, only 10. So it would appear the best killers are in the service of what is called 'good', for a good cause, by their own estimation. They truly believe something is good and worthy, and carry out killings in the service of that. That probably means we should be rather suspicious of the good people who want to purify their environment in the service of that good. For our own good, maybe we should kill them, just to be on the safe side.





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,

If you say there is no "good" or "evil", how do explain the fact that groups, like the Islamic State, kill innocent people in Iraq and Syria?

[[e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

How many people captured and executed by the Islamic State successfully fought off the result? Zero. You seem to have a disconnect between your thoughts and what happens in the world. But what does this have to do with the discussion about good and evil? There are situations where fighting back really has no effect whatever. Here is how it would work. You fight before you have been gotten hold of, not after. Once in a situation where fighting back is restrained sufficiently, nothing you can do. In some situations, fighting back can get you killed more quickly. Are you saying the Brits and Americans executed recently by ISIS were cowards, or deluded? They certainly did not become heros to the world.

The jet that crashed in the French Alps today, all on board that plane had no opportunity to save themselves.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Xeno,

I would assume that you would fight to save your life if the Islamic State rebels got a hold of you to cut your head off as propaganda for their cause. Are you going to assume that you're imagining things? As you've seen in the news, these rebels have cut the heads of Brits and Americans in the recent past. It's real and true.


If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die. If you fight and win, you save your life and become a hero to the world.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

You know jr_esq, you are assuming that your idea of good and evil is real. I hold they are simply conceptual mappings onto reality, but they have no real existence except as a convenient and arbitrary way to categorise certain forms of activity. There was an episode of Star Trek in which an alien species, the Excalbians, investigated good and evil. They concluded that good and evil use the same methods and achieve the similar results. The writers of the episode used science fiction as a template to discuss the nature of good and evil.

How are you defining good and evil, and why do you feel those definitions are somehow true or real?


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,

IMO, it's unfortunate that human beings have to die. But circumstances happen where a person or a leader of a nation has to act to prevent evil or to eradicate evil from existing. Under these circumstances, it would be justified to take arms and fight. Any deaths that come from a justified war would be dignified and would be considered necessary to deter evil.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Surveys of deaths in the two Iraq wars show that (depending on the survey), between 151,000 to 1,000,000 Iraqis died in the two US-led wars between 2003 and 2013. One study, conducted by the Iraq Body Count project http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Body_Count_project, found that 174,000 Iraqis were reported killed between 2003 and 2013, with between 112,000-123,000 of those killed being civilian noncombatants. Meanwhile, the total number of US troops killed during this period was 4,491.


Now, JR, please tell me. Was that "good" or "evil?"



From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 3:14 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


About 12,000 or so people die every day. About 10% of those are killed by other people one way or another. The Islamic State is one of those ways. This is what happens. One method of reducing those killings is to bomb or send troops to kill the members of the Islamic State, by substituting other killings in place of the ones the Islamic State perpetrates. Then there is the question of who or what is killing the other 11,000 people who die every day, which is a far greater number. From their point of view, the killers in the Islamic State are doing their god-given duty to remove infidels and betrayers of their faith from the world, a good thing. We don't know what the people killed think of it, but those in the West do not seem in favour of the idea, thinking it a bad thing. In almost every year, anyone born more that 120 years ago is dead. As pointed out recently God killed something like 2,000,000 people as reported in the Bible, while Satan, bless his reticent soul, only 10. So it would appear the best killers are in the service of what is called 'good', for a good cause, by their own estimation. They truly believe something is good and worthy, and carry out killings in the service of that. That probably means we should be rather suspicious of the good people who want to purify their environment in the service of that good. For our own good, maybe we should kill them, just to be on the safe side.





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,

If you say there is no "good" or "evil", how do explain the fact that groups, like the Islamic State, kill innocent people in Iraq and Syria?

[[e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

Xeno,

This discussion is about good and evil and the role that you should play in it. If the IS rebels captured you, do you think they'll be doing a good deed for you and the world?


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

How many people captured and executed by the Islamic State successfully fought off the result? Zero. You seem to have a disconnect between your thoughts and what happens in the world. But what does this have to do with the discussion about good and evil? There are situations where fighting back really has no effect whatever. Here is how it would work. You fight before you have been gotten hold of, not after. Once in a situation where fighting back is restrained sufficiently, nothing you can do. In some situations, fighting back can get you killed more quickly. Are you saying the Brits and Americans executed recently by ISIS were cowards, or deluded? They certainly did not become heros to the world.

The jet that crashed in the French Alps today, all on board that plane had no opportunity to save themselves.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Xeno,

I would assume that you would fight to save your life if the Islamic State rebels got a hold of you to cut your head off as propaganda for their cause. Are you going to assume that you're imagining things? As you've seen in the news, these rebels have cut the heads of Brits and Americans in the recent past. It's real and true.


If you don't fight, then you're deluded or a coward and deserve to die. If you fight and win, you save your life and become a hero to the world.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

You know jr_esq, you are assuming that your idea of good and evil is real. I hold they are simply conceptual mappings onto reality, but they have no real existence except as a convenient and arbitrary way to categorise certain forms of activity. There was an episode of Star Trek in which an alien species, the Excalbians, investigated good and evil. They concluded that good and evil use the same methods and achieve the similar results. The writers of the episode used science fiction as a template to discuss the nature of good and evil.

How are you defining good and evil, and why do you feel those definitions are somehow true or real?


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,

IMO, it's unfortunate that human beings have to die. But circumstances happen where a person or a leader of a nation has to act to prevent evil or to eradicate evil from existing. Under these circumstances, it would be justified to take arms and fight. Any deaths that come from a justified war would be dignified and would be considered necessary to deter evil.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Surveys of deaths in the two Iraq wars show that (depending on the survey), between 151,000 to 1,000,000 Iraqis died in the two US-led wars between 2003 and 2013. One study, conducted by the Iraq Body Count project http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Body_Count_project, found that 174,000 Iraqis were reported killed between 2003 and 2013, with between 112,000-123,000 of those killed being civilian noncombatants. Meanwhile, the total number of US troops killed during this period was 4,491.


Now, JR, please tell me. Was that "good" or "evil?"



From: "***@... [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 3:14 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?


About 12,000 or so people die every day. About 10% of those are killed by other people one way or another. The Islamic State is one of those ways. This is what happens. One method of reducing those killings is to bomb or send troops to kill the members of the Islamic State, by substituting other killings in place of the ones the Islamic State perpetrates. Then there is the question of who or what is killing the other 11,000 people who die every day, which is a far greater number. From their point of view, the killers in the Islamic State are doing their god-given duty to remove infidels and betrayers of their faith from the world, a good thing. We don't know what the people killed think of it, but those in the West do not seem in favour of the idea, thinking it a bad thing. In almost every year, anyone born more that 120 years ago is dead. As pointed out recently God killed something like 2,000,000 people as reported in the Bible, while Satan, bless his reticent soul, only 10. So it would appear the best killers are in the service of what is called 'good', for a good cause, by their own estimation. They truly believe something is good and worthy, and carry out killings in the service of that. That probably means we should be rather suspicious of the good people who want to purify their environment in the service of that good. For our own good, maybe we should kill them, just to be on the safe side.





---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,

If you say there is no "good" or "evil", how do explain the fact that groups, like the Islamic State, kill innocent people in Iraq and Syria?

[Xenophaneros Anartaxius [e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

This discussion seems more about what you consider your moral compass to be, and that I should adopt your ideas about good and evil. While I have some sense of ethics, I have no moral compass. Good and Evil are in the eye of the beholder who thinks these ideas are real. I hold they do not exist except as concepts planted in the mind by others, or perhaps by oneself in an attempt to control the world in a way favourable to one's own continued existence (after all someone had to invent those ideas). I would, if possible avoid being taken by ISIS/ISIL, the best way being never to get near where they are. If they killed me, I am reasonably confident they would consider it a good deed, for them and the world, because that is how they see the world. After such a fact, I would have no opinion or say in the matter because my form, mind, etc., would be non-existent. Their way of thinking I consider a danger to others, and that a permanent way of eliminating that kind of thinking — The True Believer — would be advantageous for those outside a circle of such beliefs. There can be no such thing as a true belief, because a belief is the assumption, that such-and-such is true, without supporting evidence. Believing this way is a pretence of knowledge. You are pretending something is true. Direct knowledge of a fact is rather rare in human discourse. We have to rely on hypothetical thinking quite a lot, and inductive inference quite a lot, and if pressed to demonstrate the truth of what we say, most of us would be in a pretty sorry state.
From: "***@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2015 1:24 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

  Xeno,
This discussion is about good and evil and the role that you should play in it.  If the IS rebels captured you, do you think they'll be doing a good deed for you and the world?




#yiv6301175374 #yiv6301175374 -- #yiv6301175374ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv6301175374 #yiv6301175374ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv6301175374 #yiv6301175374ygrp-mkp #yiv6301175374hd {color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px 0;}#yiv6301175374 #yiv6301175374ygrp-mkp #yiv6301175374ads {margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv6301175374 #yiv6301175374ygrp-mkp .yiv6301175374ad {padding:0 0;}#yiv6301175374 #yiv6301175374ygrp-mkp .yiv6301175374ad p {margin:0;}#yiv6301175374 #yiv6301175374ygrp-mkp .yiv6301175374ad a {color:#0000ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv6301175374 #yiv6301175374ygrp-sponsor #yiv6301175374ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv6301175374 #yiv6301175374ygrp-sponsor #yiv6301175374ygrp-lc #yiv6301175374hd {margin:10px 0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv6301175374 #yiv6301175374ygrp-sponsor #yiv6301175374ygrp-lc .yiv6301175374ad {margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv6301175374 #yiv6301175374actions {font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv6301175374 #yiv6301175374activity {background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv6301175374 #yiv6301175374activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv6301175374 #yiv6301175374activity span:first-child {text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv6301175374 #yiv6301175374activity span a {color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}#yiv6301175374 #yiv6301175374activity span span {color:#ff7900;}#yiv6301175374 #yiv6301175374activity span .yiv6301175374underline {text-decoration:underline;}#yiv6301175374 .yiv6301175374attach {clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px 0;width:400px;}#yiv6301175374 .yiv6301175374attach div a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv6301175374 .yiv6301175374attach img {border:none;padding-right:5px;}#yiv6301175374 .yiv6301175374attach label {display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}#yiv6301175374 .yiv6301175374attach label a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv6301175374 blockquote {margin:0 0 0 4px;}#yiv6301175374 .yiv6301175374bold {font-family:Arial;font-size:13px;font-weight:700;}#yiv6301175374 .yiv6301175374bold a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv6301175374 dd.yiv6301175374last p a {font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv6301175374 dd.yiv6301175374last p span {margin-right:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv6301175374 dd.yiv6301175374last p span.yiv6301175374yshortcuts {margin-right:0;}#yiv6301175374 div.yiv6301175374attach-table div div a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv6301175374 div.yiv6301175374attach-table {width:400px;}#yiv6301175374 div.yiv6301175374file-title a, #yiv6301175374 div.yiv6301175374file-title a:active, #yiv6301175374 div.yiv6301175374file-title a:hover, #yiv6301175374 div.yiv6301175374file-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv6301175374 div.yiv6301175374photo-title a, #yiv6301175374 div.yiv6301175374photo-title a:active, #yiv6301175374 div.yiv6301175374photo-title a:hover, #yiv6301175374 div.yiv6301175374photo-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv6301175374 div#yiv6301175374ygrp-mlmsg #yiv6301175374ygrp-msg p a span.yiv6301175374yshortcuts {font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;font-weight:normal;}#yiv6301175374 .yiv6301175374green {color:#628c2a;}#yiv6301175374 .yiv6301175374MsoNormal {margin:0 0 0 0;}#yiv6301175374 o {font-size:0;}#yiv6301175374 #yiv6301175374photos div {float:left;width:72px;}#yiv6301175374 #yiv6301175374photos div div {border:1px solid #666666;height:62px;overflow:hidden;width:62px;}#yiv6301175374 #yiv6301175374photos div label {color:#666666;font-size:10px;overflow:hidden;text-align:center;white-space:nowrap;width:64px;}#yiv6301175374 #yiv6301175374reco-category {font-size:77%;}#yiv6301175374 #yiv6301175374reco-desc {font-size:77%;}#yiv6301175374 .yiv6301175374replbq {margin:4px;}#yiv6301175374 #yiv6301175374ygrp-actbar div a:first-child {margin-right:2px;padding-right:5px;}#yiv6301175374 #yiv6301175374ygrp-mlmsg {font-size:13px;font-family:Arial, helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv6301175374 #yiv6301175374ygrp-mlmsg table {font-size:inherit;font:100%;}#yiv6301175374 #yiv6301175374ygrp-mlmsg select, #yiv6301175374 input, #yiv6301175374 textarea {font:99% Arial, Helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv6301175374 #yiv6301175374ygrp-mlmsg pre, #yiv6301175374 code {font:115% monospace;}#yiv6301175374 #yiv6301175374ygrp-mlmsg * {line-height:1.22em;}#yiv6301175374 #yiv6301175374ygrp-mlmsg #yiv6301175374logo {padding-bottom:10px;}#yiv6301175374 #yiv6301175374ygrp-msg p a {font-family:Verdana;}#yiv6301175374 #yiv6301175374ygrp-msg p#yiv6301175374attach-count span {color:#1E66AE;font-weight:700;}#yiv6301175374 #yiv6301175374ygrp-reco #yiv6301175374reco-head {color:#ff7900;font-weight:700;}#yiv6301175374 #yiv6301175374ygrp-reco {margin-bottom:20px;padding:0px;}#yiv6301175374 #yiv6301175374ygrp-sponsor #yiv6301175374ov li a {font-size:130%;text-decoration:none;}#yiv6301175374 #yiv6301175374ygrp-sponsor #yiv6301175374ov li {font-size:77%;list-style-type:square;padding:6px 0;}#yiv6301175374 #yiv6301175374ygrp-sponsor #yiv6301175374ov ul {margin:0;padding:0 0 0 8px;}#yiv6301175374 #yiv6301175374ygrp-text {font-family:Georgia;}#yiv6301175374 #yiv6301175374ygrp-text p {margin:0 0 1em 0;}#yiv6301175374 #yiv6301175374ygrp-text tt {font-size:120%;}#yiv6301175374 #yiv6301175374ygrp-vital ul li:last-child {border-right:none !important;}#yiv6301175374

[TurquoiseBee [e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

From: "***@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>

  How many people captured and executed by the Islamic State successfully fought off the result? Zero. You seem to have a disconnect between your thoughts and what happens in the world.

Duh. You're wasting your time trying to reason with him, Xeno. It's like trying to reason with this guy. They think like this, and yet consider themselves "good."

“Decapitate her head off”: Phil Robertson’s vile message to atheists

|   |
|   | |   |   |   |   |   |
| “Decapitate her head off”: Phil Robertson’s vile message..."You're the one who says there is no God, there's no right, there's no wrong, so we're just having fun" VIDEO |
| |
| View on www.salon.com | Preview by Yahoo |
| |
|   |

[Xenophaneros Anartaxius [e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

Yeah, I know, but I have some time to kill. There was one hour segment on CNN last night on atheists, not very in depth, but evenly presented.

Examining the stigma of atheism - CNN Video

|   |
|   | |   |   |   |   |   |
| Examining the stigma of atheism - CNN VideoCNN's Kyra Phillips examines atheism and the stigma that some associate with the term. |
| |
| View on www.cnn.com | Preview by Yahoo |
| |
|   |


Famous atheists and their beliefs - CNN.com 
|   |
|   | |   |   |   |   |   |
| Famous atheists and their beliefs - CNN.com |
| |
| View on www.cnn.com | Preview by Yahoo |
| |
|   |

 
From: "TurquoiseBee ***@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>
To: "***@yahoogroups.com" <***@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2015 6:30 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Could it be...Satan?

  From: "***@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" <***@yahoogroups.com>

  How many people captured and executed by the Islamic State successfully fought off the result? Zero. You seem to have a disconnect between your thoughts and what happens in the world.

Duh. You're wasting your time trying to reason with him, Xeno. It's like trying to reason with this guy. They think like this, and yet consider themselves "good."

“Decapitate her head off”: Phil Robertson’s vile message to atheists

|   |
|   | |   |   |   |   |   |
| “Decapitate her head off”: Phil Robertson’s vile message..."You're the one who says there is no God, there's no right, there's no wrong, so we're just having fun" VIDEO |
| |
| View on www.salon.com | Preview by Yahoo |
| |
|   |



#yiv1562855776 #yiv1562855776 -- #yiv1562855776ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv1562855776 #yiv1562855776ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv1562855776 #yiv1562855776ygrp-mkp #yiv1562855776hd {color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px 0;}#yiv1562855776 #yiv1562855776ygrp-mkp #yiv1562855776ads {margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv1562855776 #yiv1562855776ygrp-mkp .yiv1562855776ad {padding:0 0;}#yiv1562855776 #yiv1562855776ygrp-mkp .yiv1562855776ad p {margin:0;}#yiv1562855776 #yiv1562855776ygrp-mkp .yiv1562855776ad a {color:#0000ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv1562855776 #yiv1562855776ygrp-sponsor #yiv1562855776ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv1562855776 #yiv1562855776ygrp-sponsor #yiv1562855776ygrp-lc #yiv1562855776hd {margin:10px 0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv1562855776 #yiv1562855776ygrp-sponsor #yiv1562855776ygrp-lc .yiv1562855776ad {margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv1562855776 #yiv1562855776actions {font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv1562855776 #yiv1562855776activity {background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv1562855776 #yiv1562855776activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv1562855776 #yiv1562855776activity span:first-child {text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv1562855776 #yiv1562855776activity span a {color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}#yiv1562855776 #yiv1562855776activity span span {color:#ff7900;}#yiv1562855776 #yiv1562855776activity span .yiv1562855776underline {text-decoration:underline;}#yiv1562855776 .yiv1562855776attach {clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px 0;width:400px;}#yiv1562855776 .yiv1562855776attach div a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv1562855776 .yiv1562855776attach img {border:none;padding-right:5px;}#yiv1562855776 .yiv1562855776attach label {display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}#yiv1562855776 .yiv1562855776attach label a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv1562855776 blockquote {margin:0 0 0 4px;}#yiv1562855776 .yiv1562855776bold {font-family:Arial;font-size:13px;font-weight:700;}#yiv1562855776 .yiv1562855776bold a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv1562855776 dd.yiv1562855776last p a {font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv1562855776 dd.yiv1562855776last p span {margin-right:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv1562855776 dd.yiv1562855776last p span.yiv1562855776yshortcuts {margin-right:0;}#yiv1562855776 div.yiv1562855776attach-table div div a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv1562855776 div.yiv1562855776attach-table {width:400px;}#yiv1562855776 div.yiv1562855776file-title a, #yiv1562855776 div.yiv1562855776file-title a:active, #yiv1562855776 div.yiv1562855776file-title a:hover, #yiv1562855776 div.yiv1562855776file-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv1562855776 div.yiv1562855776photo-title a, #yiv1562855776 div.yiv1562855776photo-title a:active, #yiv1562855776 div.yiv1562855776photo-title a:hover, #yiv1562855776 div.yiv1562855776photo-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv1562855776 div#yiv1562855776ygrp-mlmsg #yiv1562855776ygrp-msg p a span.yiv1562855776yshortcuts {font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;font-weight:normal;}#yiv1562855776 .yiv1562855776green {color:#628c2a;}#yiv1562855776 .yiv1562855776MsoNormal {margin:0 0 0 0;}#yiv1562855776 o {font-size:0;}#yiv1562855776 #yiv1562855776photos div {float:left;width:72px;}#yiv1562855776 #yiv1562855776photos div div {border:1px solid #666666;height:62px;overflow:hidden;width:62px;}#yiv1562855776 #yiv1562855776photos div label {color:#666666;font-size:10px;overflow:hidden;text-align:center;white-space:nowrap;width:64px;}#yiv1562855776 #yiv1562855776reco-category {font-size:77%;}#yiv1562855776 #yiv1562855776reco-desc {font-size:77%;}#yiv1562855776 .yiv1562855776replbq {margin:4px;}#yiv1562855776 #yiv1562855776ygrp-actbar div a:first-child {margin-right:2px;padding-right:5px;}#yiv1562855776 #yiv1562855776ygrp-mlmsg {font-size:13px;font-family:Arial, helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv1562855776 #yiv1562855776ygrp-mlmsg table {font-size:inherit;font:100%;}#yiv1562855776 #yiv1562855776ygrp-mlmsg select, #yiv1562855776 input, #yiv1562855776 textarea {font:99% Arial, Helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv1562855776 #yiv1562855776ygrp-mlmsg pre, #yiv1562855776 code {font:115% monospace;}#yiv1562855776 #yiv1562855776ygrp-mlmsg * {line-height:1.22em;}#yiv1562855776 #yiv1562855776ygrp-mlmsg #yiv1562855776logo {padding-bottom:10px;}#yiv1562855776 #yiv1562855776ygrp-msg p a {font-family:Verdana;}#yiv1562855776 #yiv1562855776ygrp-msg p#yiv1562855776attach-count span {color:#1E66AE;font-weight:700;}#yiv1562855776 #yiv1562855776ygrp-reco #yiv1562855776reco-head {color:#ff7900;font-weight:700;}#yiv1562855776 #yiv1562855776ygrp-reco {margin-bottom:20px;padding:0px;}#yiv1562855776 #yiv1562855776ygrp-sponsor #yiv1562855776ov li a {font-size:130%;text-decoration:none;}#yiv1562855776 #yiv1562855776ygrp-sponsor #yiv1562855776ov li {font-size:77%;list-style-type:square;padding:6px 0;}#yiv1562855776 #yiv1562855776ygrp-sponsor #yiv1562855776ov ul {margin:0;padding:0 0 0 8px;}#yiv1562855776 #yiv1562855776ygrp-text {font-family:Georgia;}#yiv1562855776 #yiv1562855776ygrp-text p {margin:0 0 1em 0;}#yiv1562855776 #yiv1562855776ygrp-text tt {font-size:120%;}#yiv1562855776 #yiv1562855776ygrp-vital ul li:last-child {border-right:none !important;}#yiv1562855776

[[e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

Everyone knows that Pastor Barry is confused about the nature of human free will and what makes acts right, or not. The only reason anyone would believe in free will would be because they believe they know right from wrong. Otherwise, everything would be determined. It's not complicated.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

About 12,000 or so people die every day.

Non sequitur.

About 10% of those are killed by other people one way or another. The Islamic State is one of those ways. This is what happens. One method of reducing those killings is to bomb or send troops to kill the members of the Islamic State, by substituting other killings in place of the ones the Islamic State perpetrates.

Non sequitur.

Then there is the question of who or what is killing the other 11,000 people who die every day, which is a far greater number. From their point of view, the killers in the Islamic State are doing their god-given duty to remove infidels and betrayers of their faith from the world, a good thing.

Non sequitur.

We don't know what the people killed think of it, but those in the West do not seem in favour of the idea, thinking it a bad thing. In almost every year, anyone born more that 120 years ago is dead. As pointed out recently God killed something like 2,000,000 people as reported in the Bible, while Satan, bless his reticent soul, only 10.

Non sequitur.

So it would appear the best killers are in the service of what is called 'good', for a good cause, by their own estimation. They truly believe something is good and worthy, and carry out killings in the service of that. That probably means we should be rather suspicious of the good people who want to purify their environment in the service of that good. For our own good, maybe we should kill them, just to be on the safe side.

Non sequitur.


---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Pastor Barry,

If you say there is no "good" or "evil", how do explain the fact that groups, like the Islamic State, kill innocent people in Iraq and Syria?

[[e-mail] [FairfieldLife]]

Someone needs to tell Barry that Sam Harris says the idea of free will is incoherent. Humans are not free and no sense can be given to the concept that they might be. If humans had free will they would be as gods, able to cause change at will. Go figure.

---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> wrote :

Human beings have free will.

This has not been determined.

He suggests that, just as a person declaring a belief that Elvis is still alive would immediately make his every statement suspect in the eyes of those he was conversing with, asserting a similarly non-evidentiary point on a religious doctrine ought to be met with similar disrespect.

We will need at least some logical proof, Barry. According to Harris, "...just as a person declaring a belief that Elvis is still alive would immediately make his every statement suspect in the eyes of those he was conversing with, asserting a similarly non-evidentiary point on a religious doctrine ought to be met with similar disrespect."

However, there is no such thing as "good" or "evil," so your question is irrelevant.

Non sequitur. Everyone knows you have more demons and devil images in your Tibetan religion than Carter had little liver pills. LoL!

Thanks for playing, and leave your donation in the plate. :-)

A winner has been declared by the Rector!


Do you believe that human beings have a free will to choose between good and evil?


Non sequitur.

Thanks for playing, and leave your donation in the plate. :-)

Do you believe that human beings have a free will to choose between good and evil?