ex-Korn guitarist finds God!

[paulnj]

Ray,

you crack me up!

Why do you think that you know my thoughts, my faith(or lack of ?), my TRUE nature and most importantly.... MY ABNORMAL SENSE OF HUMOR? I assure you MY HEART is PURE and I do not FEAR the truth ONCE you discover it.

YOUR BIBLE may have these verses....

James 4:4 and James 4:11 wait those to me read DO NOT judge and churches are adultresses

Matthew 7:1 and Matthew 7:17-20..... WHICH ONE DO WE FOLLOW?

John 7:24 OK, do we judge our fellow man or not?

and Romans 2:1 OH I LIKE THIS ONE

1 Corinthians 4:5 ... PONDER THIS why don't you

Romans 14:10 .....AMEN

1 Corinthians 5:3.... OH NO.... GOD is everywhere, so he does truely know me and my HEART

You truely need to rethink what you have just written next time, because those seemed to be JUDGEMENTAL words you wrote. BUT WAIT.... the Bible is unclear as to it's stand on that matter anyway

NOW I'VE DONE IT.


Almo....

I truely am sorry that my comments were not taken as nothing more than a poke in the ribs (PHOTOGRAPHYREVIEW/ IMAGE of GOD....get it)

I do think it's GREAT that he has chosen a religious path over a drug addiction

[schrackman]

NOW I'VE DONE IT.

Yep, just look what you started! Shame on you, Paul. LOL Nevertheless, not being one to back down, here are some thoughts for you to ponder:

Ray,

you crack me up! Why do you think that you know my thoughts, my faith(or lack of ?), my TRUE nature and most importantly.... MY ABNORMAL SENSE OF HUMOR?

If this is your way of showing humor then yes I have to agree with you, Paul. It is abnormal. Most people would communicate themselves in a manner where all can clearly understand their point or humor, but you chose to communicate yourself to where only one person could understand you. But perhaps you were really intending to spark a bit o' debate????

I assure you MY HEART is PURE

According to whom?

and I do not FEAR the truth ONCE you discover it.

Ahh. Well, I suppose that explains why you have never told me the name of the "god" you spoke about several months ago, or how he has revealed himself to you, or how he has communicated his commandments or spiritual principles to you, if indeed he actually has any. So I would like to restate the challenge to you. Enlighten me.

YOUR BIBLE may have these verses....

James 4:4 and James 4:11 wait those to me read DO NOT judge and churches are adultresses

Matthew 7:1 and Matthew 7:17-20..... WHICH ONE DO WE FOLLOW?

John 7:24 OK, do we judge our fellow man or not?

and Romans 2:1 OH I LIKE THIS ONE

1 Corinthians 4:5 ... PONDER THIS why don't you

Romans 14:10 .....AMEN

1 Corinthians 5:3.... OH NO.... GOD is everywhere, so he does truely know me and my HEART

You truely need to rethink what you have just written next time, because those seemed to be JUDGEMENTAL words you wrote. BUT WAIT.... the Bible is unclear as to it's stand on that matter anyway .

Paul, Paul, Paul. Better start reading things in context instead of just copying and pasting and hoping to fabricate a biblical contradiction. Gonna have to try a bit harder than that, buddy.

[Axle]

And when God flooded the world to killl everyone we were again repopulated by just 2 people? Without inbreeding?

Actually if you read the story, there was more than just Noah and his wife onboard. There was his sons, and their wives and children, and their wives and children. Yes there was proably inbreading which could explain how frail our bodies are today.

[schrackman]

Actually if you read the story, there was more than just Noah and his wife onboard. There was his sons, and their wives and children, and their wives and children. Yes there was proably inbreading which could explain how frail our bodies are today.

Yes, 8 people boarded the ark. Also one thing to consider...relations between close relatives was not forbidden by God until the law of Moses was given. Personally, I think God knew the cut off point for when such a thing would benefit humanity (by populating the earth) and when it would do more harm to it (by creating reproductive problems). Of course this is purely my speculation, since the Scriptures do not really address the reasons why God prohibited it.

[Dzerzhinski46]

Paul, I can understand the quirky humor part, but please do not disguise it in such an, how shall I put this, inflammatory way. After all, humor keeps us alive most of the time.

Separate forum for religion and politics? Well, you might start a fire that would not go out. In escence you would create an environment that would breed argument and anger, and there would be no let up. With these topics here, we know to maintain a civil disscusion, even if we don't feel like it. Creating a separate forum would licence people to vent, in a very unhealthy fashion.

Rick, how considerate you are! LOL I will try to keep my beliefs to a dull roar okay?

Blessings on you all,

Dzerzhinski

[Michael Fanelli]

Yes, 8 people boarded the ark. Also one thing to consider...relations between close relatives was not forbidden by God until the law of Moses was given. Personally, I think God knew the cut off point for when such a thing would benefit humanity (by populating the earth) and when it would do more harm to it (by creating reproductive problems). Of course this is purely my speculation, since the Scriptures do not really address the reasons why God prohibited it.

I have been reading this thread and have just two simple comments to make and then I'll leave.

To those who are thankful that religion and faith exist, take a look at history. More violence and terror has been committed "in the name of God" than by any other force on Earth. It continues unabated today. With faith, logic is almost always excluded.With God on your side, any atrocity can be rationalized.

As for repopulation of the Earth... studies of DNA show that humans have a very low level of diversity compared to other primates. The theory these days is that humans came very close to extinction at some point in history. Repopulate with a handful of people? Of course not. But maybe the numbers were adjusted downward for effect. As someone wrote, the Bible is based on history no matter how distorted.

Time for me to go dancing naked and wickedly around the bonfire...

[schrackman]

I have been reading this thread and have just two simple comments to make and then I'll leave.

Aw, don't do that, Michael. It's just starting to get fun.

To those who are thankful that religion and faith exist, take a look at history. More violence and terror has been committed "in the name of God" than by any other force on Earth. It continues unabated today. With faith, logic is almost always excluded.With God on your side, any atrocity can be rationalized.

Religion, like politics, is a double-edged sword. If wicked men are in charge of either one, people unjustly suffer; but when righteous men reign, people's lives are blessed by their goodness and wisdom. The one's you are speaking of all fall into the former category, yet there are still plenty who fall among the latter.

The Christian religion, as it is genuinely practiced, has proven more than true and beneficial not just for my life but for countless others who have come to receive Jesus Christ as their Savior. Through it's teachings, I and many others have become a "new man" in Christ. However, those who don't follow the teachings of Christ and yet profess him with their lips, do not deserve to be called Christians but imposters.

By the way, Almo gave a pretty good description of what baptism means to the Christian. Bet you can't guess who this is being baptized way back in 1988.

[stew]

I have been reading the religious diatribe with a mixed sense of humor and pain. As for whether it belongs here I don't have a strong feeling, as long as it doesn't end up interfering with the fact that these are Photo Forums and I hope we all stay focused on that!

However.... Michael has a solid point about history which is well documented. Additionally, some very prominent philosophers have argued that religion has done more harm to humanity than good throughout history (e.g, Bertrand Russell).

From the viewpoint of scholarship, there have been many different belief systems throughout known human history (4000+ years roughly if memory serves). They clearly have evolved from one another, each taking influence from others and changing - sometimes forcibly - due to political (read: human), natural, and other causes. I'm sure if we could travel back in time, a very faithful person from a more "primitive" religion would feel equally convinced that their belief is correct and that the dominant belief systems of today are incorrect or even ridiculous. A first example: before Zarathustra's time, the concept of a heaven for believers and a hell for non-believers that forms the basis of most modern religions did not exist. A second example: eating from the tree of knowledge, seen within Christianity as a fall from purity, was seen in most pre-Christian systems as a good and desirable act. Of course, the emphasis in those systems was on the fundamental purity and goodness of our human-ness and harmony with the world within which we exist; whereas in Christianity (as only one example; my intent here is not to be anti-Christian) the belief system revolves around the inherent flaws in our human-ness and our separateness from the world we inhabit, and, therefore, the goal is redemption. This philosophical viewpoint has arguably helped lead to a host of issues in modern society today including our pollution of the very environment which sustains us (Earth viewed as Mother (woman), a concept which dualistic belief systems tend to demonize). But I digress...

Our society has evolved in so many ways, yet as humans we still largely take an exclusive viewpoint of life, particularly on religious or nationalistic issues. By exclusive, I mean the idea that if another is not a part of one's own group, then the other is undesirable in some way. In point of fact, as individuals we are largely products of the situations we are born into; your race, nationality, religion are determined arbitrarily by accident of birth. This is a fact. Of course, as beings capable of free and rational thought, we ultimately make our own choices, but in my personal experience (granted this is limited), the correlation between a person's birth situation and their "adult" belief systems is so strong as to suggest that most people never truly step back, look around, and seriously consider alternative viewpoints.

Whichever course of action any individual chooses, I would only hope that enough rational thought is applied to realize that religion (and nationality for that matter, among other issues) is a personal choice. Judgement of others, in my opinion, should be avoided, as one very possible and easily arrived at course of action is violence against those who are "different" than yourself. History is dominated by such examples; we (collectively, as humans in a global sense) are still repeating these same mistakes today. I hope that we can all keep our individual faiths (or lack of a particular faith which is not inherently a bad thing. Not being religious does not equal a lack of spirituality, any more than having a religion equals spirituality), and live in peace and acceptance of each other.

Cheers, Stew

I have been reading this thread and have just two simple comments to make and then I'll leave.

To those who are thankful that religion and faith exist, take a look at history. More violence and terror has been committed "in the name of God" than by any other force on Earth. It continues unabated today. With faith, logic is almost always excluded.With God on your side, any atrocity can be rationalized.

[walterick]

Okay, Ricky the nonChristian is going to try to get this straight:

God says it's okay to inbreed as long as it's done before Moses and as long as the entire human race depends on it. See: Adam & Eve; Noah and his family.

AFTER the gene pool has expanded to large numbers and/or Moses comes down from the mountain are we not allowed to sleep with our immediate family anymore

Is this right?

What about eating meat on Fridays? Is that still a sin?

Oh, and dancing?

Sorry, I have lots of questions.

Rick

[schrackman]

Okay, Ricky the non-Christian is going to try to get this straight:

God says it's okay to inbreed as long as it's done before Moses and as long as the entire human race depends on it. See: Adam & Eve; Noah and his family.

AFTER the gene pool has expanded to large numbers and/or Moses comes down from the mountain are we not allowed to sleep with our immediate family anymore

Is this right?

Partially correct. I refreshed my memory of Scripture and found in Leviticus 18 the reason for prohibiting close relations between kin. Apparently, it was to distinguish Israel from the rest of the nations, such as Egypt and Canaan, who did practice not only close relations but also immoral relations (such as being intimate with one's mother, or daughter-in-law, or granddaughter). Indeed, the whole law was given to the Hebrews, in part, to sanctify them (i.e. set them apart) as worshipers of Yahweh in contradistinction to the worshipers of the false and pagan gods of the other nations. The teachings of Christ are designed to do the exact same thing–to distinguish us as a people holy (seperate and different from the world) unto our God, and to his Son, Jesus Christ.

What about eating meat on Fridays? Is that still a sin?

No. Sin is the transgression of God's law (1 Jn. 3:4); eating meat on Friday, however, for a Catholic, is simply to break with Catholic tradition.

Oh, and dancing?

No prohibition in Scripture found for dancing. In fact, king David danced before the Lord. I think, though, that anyone who has gained any wisdom from the Bible knows the difference between dancing for joy, or dancing for enjoyment, and participating in the sensual, carnal type of dancing that the world is accustomed to doing.

Sorry, I have lots of questions.

That's great. I love questions!

[Dzerzhinski46]

Ray, I also find that a lot of the old Mosaic law has quite practical considerations behind it. For instance, the prohibition of touching a dead man, or eating pork, or the special washing prescribed for the priests. Just those laws show that God wanted his people to not get any nasty infections from dead animals, or from undercooking pork (after all, bacon is best when its crispy ). And actually I found out that the washing prescribed for the priests is just as effective at cleaning as the washing routine doctors go through before surgery. Now that is foresight. As for intermarriage, limiting the gene pool can eventually lead to insanity, and predispositions for genetic diseases (Down's syndrome, hemophelia, etc). It wasn't just to sanctify God's people that he made those laws, it was also to keep them healthy. Not just what God said to do, but very practical. Absolutes if you will . Just an aside in the discussion.

Drew

[schrackman]

Drew,

Yes, those are good observations! And precisely why I said the law was given "in part" to distinguish Israel from the other nations. Another reason why the law was given, and this was taught by the apostle Paul when he wrote to the Galatians, is that the law was also meant act as a "schoolmaster" to point out sin, i.e. our "missing the mark" fo God's righteous standard. By the law God pointed out sin, the condemnation that belongs to sin, and the remedy for sin (which is sacrifice for atonement), God is able to direct the sinner to repent of his sin and turn in faith to Christ for mercy and forgiveness and amendment of life, which is in essence the Gospel (good news) message of salvation.

[Axle]

Yes, yes! And that's why God sent his son to act as the ultimate atonment sacrifice to resolve us of our sin once and forever!

[adina]

We are getting a puppy.

[almo]

"We are getting a puppy."

;)

[paulnj]

MAKE SURE you take it swimming ;)

[Michael Fanelli]

What about eating meat on Fridays? Is that still a sin?

That rule was for Catholics. It was introduced by the Pope to help the fishermen in France by eliminating meat one day a week. It had nothing to do with scripture, purely political.

[schrackman]

That rule was for Catholics. It was introduced by the Pope to help the fishermen in France by eliminating meat one day a week. It had nothing to do with scripture, purely political.

I have to take back my previous statement that to eat meat on Fridays is to break Catholic tradition. In actuality, it is to violate the Catholic code of Canon Law, to which Catholics are bound to observe and of which states thus:

Canon 1250* All Fridays through the year and the time of Lent are penitential days and times throughout the entire Church.

Canon 1251* Abstinence from eating meat or another food according to the prescriptions of the conference of bishops is to be observed on Fridays throughout the year unless (nisi) they are solemnities; abstinence and fast are to be observed on Ash Wednesday and on the Friday of the Passion and Death of Our Lord Jesus Christ.

Canon 1252* All persons who have completed their fourteenth year are bound by the law of abstinence; all adults are bound by the law of fast up to the beginning of their sixtieth year. Nevertheless, pastors and parents are to see to it that minors who are not bound by the law of fast and abstinence are educated in an authentic sense of penance.

Contrast this to the the apostle Paul's teaching:

Now the Spirit speaketh expressly that, in the latter times, some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of demons, speaking lies in hypocrisy, having their conscience seared with a hot iron, forbidding to marry, and to abstain from foods, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving by them who believe and know the truth. (1 Timothy 4:1-3)

So you are correct in saying that abstaining from meat on Friday had nothing to do with Scripture.

[Axle]

Ah, human religion. It has some good sides, and bad sides. Just like us.

[walterick]

So, if I'm heaing you correcty,

Christianity says:

We're all inbred

Jesus wanted his followers to be "separate and different" from the rest of the world

It's still okay to eat a burger on Fridays

Well, you're all wrong! Ha!

Pretty sure all of humanity didn't come from 2 people.

Jesus taught us to see ourselves as one with each other, one with him, one with God, one in life. If he was who it's said he was he would never preach separatism. To do so would contradict his goals (and life)

Okay, I guess eating meat on Fridays isn't wrong. It's those crazy Mondays you gotta watch out for.

I suppose next you're going to tell me it's a sin to have sex before marriage? Sheesh! What's this world coming to?!



Rick

btw I happen to be very fond of carnal dancing ;)

[schrackman]

So, if I'm heaing you correcty,

Christianity says: We're all inbred.

No. To be "inbred" means that your immediate parents are of a close relation. We are far removed from Adam and Eve, and the ancient civilizations that practiced inbreeding, and so it is not really accurate to say we are inbred.

Jesus wanted his followers to be "separate and different" from the rest of the world

Yes, in their deeds and behavior.

It's still okay to eat a burger on Fridays[/COLOR]

Yep.

Pretty sure all of humanity didn't come from 2 people.

Tell that to Mitochondrial Eve, or rather, her supporters. The Bible similarly states, by the way, that Eve was the "mother of all living". Interestingly enough, scientists in favor of the "Out of Africa" theory propose to trace the origin of modern humans via the maternal line.

Jesus taught us to see ourselves as one with each other, one with him, one with God, one in life. If he was who it's said he was he would never preach separatism. To do so would contradict his goals (and life)

Correction. Jesus taught his followers, not "us" (as in all humanity), that they were one in him and one in God. The thing that unites them together is their faith in Christ, and the goal of Christ is to redeem men from sin. Therefore, Jesus was quite comfortable in teaching his disciples to be separate (again, in deed and behavior) from sin and the world in order to manifest his saving power.

I suppose next you're going to tell me it's a sin to have sex before marriage?

Yep. But let's call it what it is--fornication. Euphemisms are for wimps.

Sheesh! What's this world coming to?!

According to the Bible? Judgment.

[opus]

MY OPINION, which matters for nothing, I suppose, but formulated from other boards I've visited:

1) There is no requirement that all posts in Viewfinder contain photo content. Please don't make it so or this will just become another Critique, which can get boring after awhile. I've learned things about my fellow posters that I think are wonderful, deep things, making me view them as much richer human beings.

2) A "living room" where we share "philosophies" is, in my vision, just like a real living room at a family reunion. We're a big family, getting to know each other. Some people enjoy discussing religion and politics. The "etiquette" rule about avoiding such subjects is only in "polite" company, which is much more formal than our gathering here. There's no law against discussing it among friends in a casual setting.

3) Some people are, understandably, uncomfortable with such a topic. Well, if that's you, and the thread title is clearly marked as containing religious or political content, then simply DON'T OPEN THE THREAD!

4) I mean, really, I could open a thread about someone's kids and state that I hate discussions about people's kids, and the only one out of place in that situation would be me. If I don't like it, I leave.

5) If the discussion gets nasty, with personal attacks flying (NOT simply personal opinions!), then someone can report their offense, and the proper authority can step in and put a stop to it.

6) If every other thread in Viewfinder becomes a religious or political (or otherwise controversial) thread, then I can understand the moderators' concern about the general impression that visitors will get from the site. At that point, a decision can be made about whether to set up another forum strictly for controversial threads, or if an appeal can be made to please cut back on them or restrain them to one or two threads.

7) But I think visitors know what to expect from a "general" forum, and I think they actually WANT such an outlet. I actually visit a different site much more often than this one for the very reason that I can post off-topic threads on their general forum, and I've made some very close friends in the process. I can't say that about here, because sometimes I come here and look for something interesting and can't find anything, because it's all about other people's individual and personal life that I have to comment on, and nobody's asking me about mine. Does that make sense? There's only so much "Great exposure, but I'd like to see it cropped a bit differently" I can say before I get bored. I want to KNOW the people here! And I want to BE known!


Oh, and may I add that I'm a total peace lover, diplomat, and avoider of conflict. But I see allowing these types of discussions as a way to understand each other. Because there is nobody forcing anybody else to listen. It's just a free exchange of ideas.

Thank you. We now return you to the original programming.

*stepping off soapbox*

[opus]

"ex-Korn guitarist finds God!"


Why, was God lost?


;)

[walterick]

"so it is not really accurate to say we are inbred."

Then all of humanity was derived through several generations of inbreeding.

Twice.

And I still don't think Jesus wanted us to see ourselves as separate from each other. Every major spiritual/philosophical/religious system in the world preaches unity, harmony, togetherness, oneness. Jesus was no different. To raise yourself above others is to appear "holier than thou" and that is one thing that not a single human being can stand. It is natural - ie, built into our nature by god - to destroy that which is holier, higher, bigger than us. Why? Because being "holier" is a lie. Each and every one of us is holy, sacred, and sanctified in the eyes of god. There is no "better" way of living. God loves each of us no matter what choices we make in life (no matter how destructive those choices have become) and part of that love is not to judge us or interfere with our free will! If you sit your children down to play a game, do you tell them they can play it whichever way they please (free will) and then give them 10 Commandments to tell them to behave a certain way? No, of course not. That would be lunacy.

The end is guarateed. We all return home, to the Source, God, Oneness, whatever. The universe will fold in upon itself in a few millenia and life will go to sleep. It is inevitable. What matters is how you play the game while you're here. Were you playing the Life game well? Poorly? In the end it doesn't matter. We're all going home. It's a matter of are you happy with your choices?!

There's my religious diatribe for the day.

Rick

btw Fornicating is for lovers ;)

[schrackman]

Then all of humanity was derived through several generations of inbreeding. Twice.

No, not everyone inbred in ancient times, mind you.

And I still don't think Jesus wanted us to see ourselves as separate from each other. Every major spiritual/philosophical/religious system in the world preaches unity, harmony, togetherness, oneness. Jesus was no different

Well, Rick, the truth is your opinion here finds no basis in the teachings of either Jesus or his apostles. Jesus taught the unity of believers (John 17), not a unity of mankind like some philosophers and religious sages have taught. There is no hiding the fact that the God of the Bible clearly distinguishes mankind into two classes: the righteous/just and the unrighteous/wicked, believers in/followers of Jesus Christ and those who disbelieve him and refuse to follow him, those who inherit eternal life and those who are sentenced to eternal perdition. So I don't understand how you arrived at the conclusion you did about what Jesus would or would not teach.

To raise yourself above others is to appear "holier than thou" and that is one thing that not a single human being can stand.

Who said anything about raising ourselves above others? It is God who determines who is holy and who is not, and he has determined that whosoever should believe in Christ may be sanctified, made holy, or set apart unto God by the sacrifice of Christ himself (Heb. 10:10; 1 Pet. 1:2). We live holily because we have been made holy through faith in the Son of God.

It is natural - ie, built into our nature by god - to destroy that which is holier, higher, bigger than us. Why? Because being "holier" is a lie. Each and every one of us is holy, sacred, and sanctified in the eyes of god. There is no "better" way of living. God loves each of us no matter what choices we make in life (no matter how destructive those choices have become) and part of that love is not to judge us or interfere with our free will! If you sit your children down to play a game, do you tell them they can play it whichever way they please (free will) and then give them 10 Commandments to tell them to behave a certain way? No, of course not. That would be lunacy.

Rick, I have to stop here and ask you what I asked Paul. Who is this "god" you speak of? I speak of the biblical God, but the god you speak of contradicts my God. So who is this god of yours? What is his name, if he has one, and how did he reveal the above "truth" to you, if indeed he reveals anything to man? What are his other "truths" or principles, and how did you come to learn them? You know how I get my information, so how do you get yours?

The end is guarateed. We all return home, to the Source, God, Oneness, whatever. The universe will fold in upon itself in a few millenia and life will go to sleep. It is inevitable. What matters is how you play the game while you're here. Were you playing the Life game well? Poorly? In the end it doesn't matter. We're all going home. It's a matter of are you happy with your choices?!

**warning: the following response may contain intense sarcasm intented to maximize the effect of the bad/good rationale contrast. read at your own risk of being enlightened**

Why would it matter how you play the game if in the end it doesn't really matter and we all return to the same state of being or whatever it is you believe? With that kind of logic, one may as well pursue whatever evil it is he/she desires in life, even if it means aspiring to be a Hitler or Son of Sam or some other degenerate. I guess I could brutally murder the one closest to you so long as it makes me happy, and hey, it's okay, because in the end it won't matter anyway. We're ALL going home together. Yippee ay-yay! We've discovered the truth at last.

Uh-oh. Now I'VE gone and done it.