So, no consultation with the almighty in that one?

(February 27, 2019 at 10:43 am)Drich Wrote: Look at mr thunder cat.. If I were so inepth why have I been correcting his understanding of the church for over a week? EVERYTHING this guy thought about the 1st century church the bible how it was translated was totally wrong.. but at the end all this douche has to say is I'm stupid and he can reset all the wrong stuff he orginally believed and you would gladly return to his side in support.. 

Now is it because I am ignorant here? or is the sentiment assigned to me so that you all do not have to change what or how you think about the church?

You know?... I was going to just ignore this, but to heck with it.
You systematically failed to understand the difference between the tradition in which Peter was the first head of the Catholic Church, and the (let's grant it, likely) reality in which Paul was the main driver behind the early growth of Christianity.
I've said this, in other words, of course, many times... and what did you do? whine about Mark being Peter's scribe (with nothing to back that claim, except some 2nd century attribution).

And yet, you claim I'm the crazy and ignorant one?...

(February 27, 2019 at 10:43 am)Drich Wrote: Truthfully look at the crazy stuff he has said and what I had to do to correct him.. all the resources and all the reference material I used to support my work.. what did thundercat have? nothing more than what he thought and his 'word.' and for 3 days with supporting material I was treated as the ignorant one! why? if I can completely support my position? becuse it is a lie you all have to believe inorder to stay with what you believe about God and the church.

Well then, mister sunflower, support your god without a book.
Go ahead, I'll wait...

You know what?... Wait over! Heck, you even call the guy "god of the bible".

Your work is comparable to the millions of man-hours that have been dedicated to analyzing The Lord of the Rings. Sure, people can say much about hobbits, elves, orcs, wizards, etc... and can draw some inferences from all of their behaviors and interactions... but, ultimately, they are creatures in a book.

(February 26, 2019 at 5:24 pm)pocaracas Wrote: Ah, Drich... if only you could take your head out of the sand and look around...

that is what you are here to do isn't it? to show me a different world view?That is why I am here with you and one of the reason you have dropped this whole bible was not written in greek BS.. because I did my job going lie by line and beating you with undeniable facts till it broke the level of intellectual dishonestly you where willing to live with/pretend I was wrong despite so much fact showing me to be right. that you had to concede. That is an example of someone pulling someone elses's head out of the sand and forcing them to look at it a different way... If you haven't been able to do this with me it is because your arguement are largly unsupported and weak.

(February 26, 2019 at 10:37 am)Drich Wrote: Retard.. Peter himself could not read or write. So he used a scribe. that scrib's name was commonly refered to as saint mark. Meaning the book of mark is peter's gospel.
So peter's gospel was indeed included.

Quote:Here's a crazy idea... Whoever was Peter's scribe wrote the gospel of Peter.
Whoever Mark was, wrote a gospel as if it was told by Peter, or however you can claim him to have been his scribe...

Who would know the difference?

anyone who knew peter could not read or write like all other fishermen at the time... so to assign him this accomplishment would cast doubt on the authorship. it was commonly known only a couple of the disciples including judas could read or write. So why not give credit where credit is due? Mark penned the gospel of peter, as the church records mark being peter's number one disciple.

(February 25, 2019 at 3:41 pm)Drich Wrote: dear not smart person.. Paul's church... did not start till the reformaition nealy 1600 years after the church of peter had been in power.

Quote:Oh yeah... Paul didn't write letters to several locations explaining how his view of the church was to be.

read the vulgate those letters have been highly modified or even in some cases excluded infavor of other books. there are about 1/2 a dozen different books in the vulgate that are not apart of the holy bible.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Books_of_t...in_Vulgate

So for 1600 years you had peter's church and it had it's own bible. alot of which was changed as the popes saw fit as they went along. the reformation happened and the holy bible was compiled only from those manuscripts that where around when the church first started. meaning they cut about a 1/3 of edits newly found supposedly old books and laws set forth by people who claim the authority of the apostles.

(February 25, 2019 at 3:41 pm)Drich Wrote: God showed me my path via a dream sequence that I saw my own judgment and was cast into hell. where I was consumed by hell fire in a great pit of nothingness. I asked for a second chance. and here I am 20 some odd years later still trying to spread the truth I was not privy too. Again incase you forgot I am not here to save anyone rather in my time in hell my worst haunting thought was if I had known the truth would I have responded to God differently. My task here is to provide you with God's truth so if you ever find yourself in my position this thought will not haunt you till it breaks your sanity in grief.
Afterwards I sought God and he gave me several gifts to do this job. a few thriving sources of income where I can spend 4 to 6 hours aday in study prayer and answering these questions. godly wisdom to answer questions like the epicurean paradox, evolution verse creation, stupid little paradoxical spiritual speed bumps like can god creat a rock so big he can lift it.. and of course those long lists you 'good people' provide. answers to that stuff come off the cuff and ver little of my time has to be waisted in fussing over them. for instance I prayed for something to tell you guys about evolution/creation when asked. my whole answer came in flashes like I was watching a movie, 15 mins (as long as it took for me to write it down and put it in order and that was it.
be continued..

Quote:I rest my case.

what did you think I would say? I've shared from like week 2 and revisited this message at least a few dozen times. We are talking about the God of the bible and how the bible says God communicates. Nothing I experienced is not already been established in scripture even though at the time I experienced this stuff I had no idea, as my picture of faith was alot like yours.

There are billions of christians all over the world. did you honestly think your experience with God or lack there of was any sort of bench mark? meaning do you think God ignoring you and the people like you was the same all across the world? This religion has thrived for over 2000 years for a reason.. because God makes good on promises unique to christianity mainly direct contact with it's members. That sport is why I do not need faith. My faith has turned into experience and knowledge as we go on. We only need the smallest amount of faith to have God introduced into our lives. then we must simply be faithful to God for that relationship to grow.

(February 26, 2019 at 3:30 pm)Drich Wrote: You are saying that the god of the bible needs to be dumbed down to fit man's philosophy of a god, which is why the god of the bible is not taught intuitively?
Meaning when you said religion is invented by man, and I asked why then is the God of the bible not intuitively taught the way I/the bible teaches, you said because the teaching are not based in man's philosophy hence the need for a course in philosophy?!?!

Are you so stupid to not understand you just contradicted yourself? If God is man's creation then why does one need to study how man perceives God to change the god of the bible to fit man's idea of what God is supposed to be? Do you understand if man created the God of the bible should the God of the bible not fit man's philosophy automatically?

Because the God of the bible does not fit the philosophical profile of what man seeks in God... (by your own admission) shows that God's nature is different than what man would create.  I know you are not smart enoug to understand but you just refuted your own objection. you just falsified the idea that God is a creation of man.

Quote:Here, I'll help you find the error in your judgment. You won't see it as an error, because you're thick, but I'll show it to you nonetheless.

In these 3 paragraphs when you speak of god, you always say "god of the bible". That is your problem.
You see... if a god does exist, then god is god. period. simple.
God is that which created the cosmos, that which supports all existence.

and IF he does? then is not the oppsite true? which is why you said the reason my teaching is not commonly taught is because it is not consistent with human philosphy!?!??! which leaves what.. It is consistent with the will of God for us.

Quote:It doesn't matter which book describes this god, for it is an objective reality.
When you cling so strongly to the "god of the bible", you are telling us that your god is a [comic] book character.... and, as such, fictional. Every time you have to support god with the book, you repeat that he's fictional.

only if you BLINDLY and closed mindedly assume God can not exist. you said that yourself. How ever if you took the bible as a road map and followed it and then found God as described... then what? then you would obviously refer to him and point to the bible as the way to find the God the bible describes. as he is not the God of the reformation movement he is not the God of islam he is not the God of the catholic church... thus you can not find him if you follow those religions. I am consistently representing God and the methodology to him in a way true to what I myself has experienced.

Quote:And I don't think I contradicted myself.

because you are full of yourselfand can not fathom being wrong, but we've already cracked that nut haven't we mr aramaic? You indeed contradicted yourself because you assume God can not exist due to what ever meassly efforts you have played around with decades ago and was left in silence.

Here's the thing. If you don't assume you will find nothing and at the same time do not expect to find ABC... Then what you do find will amaze you. as you will know what you are experience is not of you. it is not being generated by you nor controlled by you. He comes and goes like the wind. but when he is there you will know it is not anything comming from you nor anyone else.

Quote:The god you call "god of the bible" is just a character in a book.

untill he shows up in life right where the bible says do and look.

Quote: At best, it is akin to a highly advanced extraterrestrial.
The god so-called "god of the philosophers" is a near-unassailable edifice, which then takes a bit of faith to make the leap into the god of Christianity, but people do it and live on.

and there are really people who live it. not just faith, but the holy Spirit as promised by the bible.

Quote:That you can't understand how vastly superior to the "god of the bible" the "god of the philosophers" is, shows just how stunted you are.
Go dream+life coincidences!

says the douche bag who thought paul fathered the church in aramaic. What is stunted is that you have been factually wrong in every aspect you have chosen to repersent the bible in and the church in and yet you stand here proudly going over your same conclusion/same summary as if I did not just obliterate everything you thought you know about the bible the church and it's history!!!

This kills me.. I just show you 2+2=4 and you are trying to wrap things up as if you ignored everything I did to prove your 2+2=5 wrong you are still extolling your orginal conclusion... talk about a lazy broken intellect! If I took all the points of your argument away and showed you where wrong in every aspect of church history you cared to explain, how then can you maintain any sort of intellectual integrity buy summing up with the same conclusion that you would have used is your theories of the church where true?!?!

(To Gae Blogona) This is why you all call me stupid or inepth or ignorant... because you/mr thunder cat can summarily dismiss or not read the paragraphs I used obliterate you. after all how stupid must you be to loose an arguement against a guy who keeps misspelling simple words? How much easier would it be to just get a consensus that I am the problem rather than re examine your entire world view like mr. thundercat would have to do if he were an intellectually honest person.

(February 26, 2019 at 3:30 pm)Drich Wrote: the catholic version of God can't even work his way past simple paradoxes of being an almighty being. not to mention the problem of evil nor can he resolve creation with evolution or even how adam and eve's children got married and had kids of their own without resorting to incest. So yeah I see a huge difference in that the catholic god is full of flaws you all like to pat yourself on the back when you point them out to eachother over and over again as if it where the first time those objection where made... then you have the God of the bible which no little paradox of litature can bind no question of orginans can't be anwered or is lost to explain how adam and eve children got married with resulting to incest.

You are so transparent in that you need the catholic God to be relevant with your objections and your insults. as your mind is not flexible enough to roll with the punches of a God based in the bible. especially when you are still arguing for aramaic/non Greek translations. (you have yet to properly concede the whole topic.

Quote:There you go again.... "god of the bible" this, "god of the bible" that... sheesh!

what's the matter sport? trying to trivialize what you can not refute? are you in 6th grade? are you so f-ing stupid that you do not know you started this line of reasoning by segregating the God of the bible with the God of catholicism? Thereby making it necessary for me to make this distinction when ever I speak so as not to confuse the difference between the two? Then you have the nerve to criticize me for making a distinction you forced in the conversation?!? Are you stupid or again intellectually dishonest?

Quote:The god of the philosophers (which has been adopted as the god of catholicism) is not a being. It is Being! It is Existence.

see there you go forcing the distinction.) why don't you go back and address the point I made concerning the God of the bible. because it explains everything you are repeating here.

Quote:It doesn't need to be almighty... It is the source of everything around you, everything in all of existence.
Can you top that with your puny "god of the bible"?

no you are wrong the catholic God demands it to be an omni max god. It says so in their creed:http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p1s2c1p3.htm

Quote:The "god of the philosophers" does not concern itself with the problem of evil at all. Evil is a human construct. God merely permeates his own existence with love. And humans can draw upon that love or not. Evil arises through humanity not partaking in the love provided.

citation on a 'god philosopher' example/name

Quote:Adam and Eve are, at best, allegory.

for small minded people who can not think outside their little box, yes.

Quote:Mankind evolved from apes, from mammals, from animals, from other life forms. When mankind became what we now call human (or perhaps this happened still before Homo Sapiens) and started thinking of their own morality, mortality and meaning... that's when they left the paradise that was an existence of animal intuition and came to be thinking, premeditating animals. That's the allegory of leaving paradise... ignorance is bliss, remember?

Awe... YOU STILL DON"T UNDERSTAND MY THEORY!!! JENHEE GETS IT!!!! Holy crap how are you still lost?

Just so you know sport my theory... the one the God of the bible made me privy to in about 15 mins.. Completely assimilates ALL of evolution into a 7 day creation with out changig a word in the bible nor one in the theory of evolution. I simply and easily explain how both can work together! and have done so maybe 20 times in this last week and you are still lost.

yet here you are trying to extoll the value of pulling my head out of the sand?
you are a joke of a troll.

If you want to know how God assimilates evolution into a 7 day literal creation... just ask.. and again all the paradoxes the catholic reading leaves including a science is correct or religion is correct gets fix by God in a three paragraph explanation.

Quote:The god of the philosophers is also consistent with whatever science finds to be reality.

not according to the catholic church.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_C..._evolution
The church recently had to go netural meaning it holds no position on either... meaning the church, the catholic church refuses to back it's god and it's bible because it can not reconcile what science has to say.
So again you are wrong.

Hey-sus you ever get tired of being wrong so much?

Quote:Your "god of the bible" is just the personification of a cosmic king. Wholly conjured up by people, drawn from people's experiences, emotions, commands, desires...

then why again is this God's two laws not taught thus dropping the need for the laws of morality?
Why aren't christian's known for only having two governing rules in their churches? why is the catholic church so over burdened with rules you can sin without knowing it?
why do most churches follow the catholic model even after the reformation if again the God of the bible was modeled off of what people were and wanted?

Can't have it both ways douche bag.. you can't say the god of the bible is the product of what people want then have that God demand nothing people naturally do. If God is the God of what people want then why is homosexuality a sin? why is masterbatition to pronography a sin? In fact God is counter/the oppsite of how we want to deal with and look at sin. We want to be 'moral' god says too late for that you must be redeemed. once redeemed people want to be moral again.. which has no meaning or point in of itself. "we" don't understand the first thing about the God of the bible yet here you are pretending to teach me God is modeled after the psycology of the people after I destroyed all of your arguements to support this statment. then I show you he is counter what people want then you claim I do not understand what people want in a god because you assume you initial statment is true...

Here's the thing sport... maybe the reason the God of the bible's want and will do not line up with the psychology of the people is because he is not of the people. If God where an independent entity would it not stand to reason his will be different from our own? Would this gap in "morality' not be evidence of two different sources of religious belief?

(February 26, 2019 at 3:30 pm)Drich Wrote: said the douche that just learned that romans primary spoke and wrote greek in the first century in the middle east.

Quote:Try again. Romans spoke and wrote Latin. Some in the middle East learned Greek and used both Latin and Greek side by side. Official Empire business, especially that to do with the military, was solely performed in Latin.

NOT SOME IDIOT READ THOSE 5 Pages of reference AGAIN!!!
Latain was the region areound the city of rome EVERYWHERE ELSE SPOKE and wrote KOINE GREEK!!!!! in the first century!!!
How can you be so stupid after being caught quoting this yourself???
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Empi...#Languages
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_...man_Empire

(Gae bologna) Again.. here is another example of one of you flat out ignoring history and prooven fact for your own person arguments, AND YOU CONSIDER ME IGNORANT! This fool used 3 wiki pages to proove a point and all three first sentence of the first paragraph supported my assertion of koine greek... But again, you look to my message as the one being unreasonable incoherent or lacking truth or sense while everything I have said is supported.. this is not a one time thing. I support everything by the rule of three!! and have from the beginning. why? because I knew from the start how eazy it would be to call me crazy because of what God has done with me. So from the very first post I made it my mission to vet everything by at least 3 sources.

Quote:Local middle Easterns spoke and wrote Greek as a second language.

then why was the septuagint the jewish bible only copy written in greek?
Aramaic was the basterdized language.. not greek Greek was the base from which everyone had incommon.

Quote:That's what I learned. Thank you for pushing me towards that info.

you did not learn that from me, that's the bullshite you came here with.. You learned this from me:
Koine Greek had become a shared language around the eastern Mediterranean and diplomatic communications in the East even beyond the borders of the Empire. The international use of Greek was one condition that enabled the spread of Christianity, as indicated for example by the choice of Greek as the language of the New Testament in the Bible[6] and its use for the ecumenical councils of the Christian Roman Empire rather than Latin. With the dissolution of the Empire in the West, Greek became the dominant language of the Roman Empire in the East, modernly referred to as the Byzantine Empire.

Because communication in ancient society was predominantly oral, it can be difficult to determine the extent to which regional or local languages continued to be spoken or used for other purposes under Roman rule. Some evidence exists in inscriptions, or in references in Greek and Roman texts to other languages and the need for interpreters. For Punic, Coptic, and Aramaic or Syriac, a significant amount of epigraphy or literature survives.[7] The Celtic languages were widespread throughout much of western Europe, and while the orality of Celtic education left scant written records,[8] Celtic epigraphy is limited in quantity but not rare.[9] The Germanic languages of the Empire have left next to no inscriptions or texts, with the exception of Gothic.[10] Multilingualism contributed to the "cultural triangulation" by means of which an individual who was neither Greek nor Roman might construct an identity through the processes of Romanization and Hellenization.[11]

After the decentralization of political power in late antiquity, Latin developed locally in the Western provinces into branches that became the Romance languages, including Spanish, Portuguese, French, and Italian. In the early 21st century, the first or second language of more than a billion people derived from Latin.[12] Latin itself remained an international medium of expression for diplomacy and for intellectual developments identified with Renaissance humanism up to the 17th century, and for law and the Roman Catholic Church to the present.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_...man_Empire

(February 26, 2019 at 3:30 pm)Drich Wrote: Aramaic was not an offical language. it was the scribblings of malcontents and barbarians. as such there were or are surviving text in aramaic but they are know translations from the greek. many speculate the aramaic was translated from the greek as a means to speak to the aramaic only as an outreach.

There he goes again...

Quote:Aramaic was the de facto spoken language in the region of Jerusalem.

citation!!!!!! douche bag citation!!!!!!
I've proven you wrong 10 ways to sunday Show me something that supports you bull shite or shut your mouth unless you are intentionally trolling.

Quote: Otherwise, this discussion wouldn't even exist.
For local writing, it is clear that some used Greek characters for conveying the sounds of Aramaic. For more widespread communication, proper Koine Greek was used.

it's like talking with a 4 year old who doesn't even understand english let alone a different langage he just learned about. Dummy.. Aramaic is an amalgamation of several different languages.. the reason greek can be found in it was because that specific dialect (galeean dialect contained both hebrew words and greek.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galilean_dialect

So who spoke aramaic in that region? primarily jews. the non jewish members of the empire which out numbered the jews in the region spoke greek sport. So no aramaic not eve t he galilean dialect was spoken more than the greek. because the jews spoke greek and the none jews spoke greek.. who only spoke aramaic? those who only spoke or work in the jewish community and was uneducated. as they could not get work from anyone else.

(February 26, 2019 at 3:30 pm)Drich Wrote: no back then they had access to the people who where there. which in that culture is far more believable than anything that could have been written

Quote:No, they didn't. That is such a fallacy.

is english your 3rd langage? you are not even using the word fallacy correctly.
with a 3% literacy rate people distrusted anything written down because they themselves could not verifyit. which is why personal intergity was so important back then because your word was your literal bond meaning if you were as dishonest as you have been in this post, you would most certain be cast outside the city and treated like a theif because you would soon be one as you could not support yourself any other way.

Despite this schooling system, many children did not learn to read and write. It has been estimated that at least 90 percent of the Jewish population of Roman Palestine in the first centuries CE could merely write their own name or not write and read at all,[2] or that the literacy rate was about 3 percent.[3] Exact literacy rates among ancient Jews in Roman Palestine cannot be determined [4]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of..._and_Judah

So look at it this way.. you got a letter written to you in my loose hand in korean meaning no google translate. you know to guys who can read it but one you hate/he hates you and the other you trust. both see it and both tell you to do two different things according to the letter. who do you trust? (don't wander off, stay with in the parameters of the story) trust the hated guy, trust you can figure out the letter you can't read/know nothing about or trust your buddy who is an upstanding person?

Every Other human on the planet trust the trust worthy guy. Why? because the other two are not options. Hence in a illertare soceity a man's word is far more trustworthy than anything written.

Quote:Most people never moved farther than 10 miles away from their homes, during their whole lifetime. And the propaganda was aimed at these people who couldn't fact check.

never heard looked up the requirements of being a roman citizen huh? may look up the term mission trip or missionary, then ask someone if any of that was required of the members of the church? Then look at history more specifically the pilgrimage required of the jews to goto the temple for various high holy days and cermonies... the jews would be compelled to travel hundreds of miles. Just look what happened when Christ was born herod commanded that all boys 2 and under be killed. To save your son you would not travel more than 10 miles? God you look stupid to anyone in the know. you just repeat anything men like crowder or erhman say without thought or research. it is like you all think quoting them is permission to turn off your brains!

Quote:And it carried a message that resonated with the poor peasants.

retard it also resonated with the rich and affluent as well because wasn't it the emperor Constantine the Great that made christianity the official religion of rome??? how much more affluent does one need to be than the emperor of rome at that time?

Gae bologna...

Again can you honestly see all the ignorance and errors left by mr thundercats? everytime I left a quotation it was because we had this discussion several times before he lost horribly and still yet he was returning to his orginal position despite the evidence!!!

So what will his response be? a personal attack. to discredit the messenger because he can not directly attack the message. and because he is liked his assessment of me will be what sticks because the alternative is to believe me and what I have to say which Demands a man of integrity to reexamine his whole world view. This guy and people like him would rather be outraged and stand in the filth of their own ignorance and proclaim someone else has their deffency than to admit their own failures. Why? again to give an inch demands a re examination of your world view. And you know it is easier to say I am stupid than to admit you are and always have been foolishly wrong, about the church about God about any of it.

So honestly look and ask yourself is drich really wrong or am I simply not wanting to face facts!

At work.

"So honestly look and ask yourself is Drich really wrong or am I simply not wanting to face facts."



Uhm..... It's not that you're wrong, persay, it's that your bat -sheet crazy Drich.

You've posted that you (Effectively) 'Hear voices' 'Have been influenced directly by the divine'.

Now I'm paraphrasing the above and if you Drich want to expand/clarify/elucidate some more on the subject that's grand.

But hearing things in your head that others don't?

(February 27, 2019 at 1:48 pm)Drich Wrote: If you haven't been able to do this with me it is because your arguement are largly unsupported and weak.

I'd say it differently, like "talking to a brick wall".

(February 27, 2019 at 1:48 pm)Drich Wrote:

(February 26, 2019 at 10:37 am)Drich Wrote: Retard.. Peter himself could not read or write. So he used a scribe. that scrib's name was commonly refered to as saint mark. Meaning the book of mark is peter's gospel.
So peter's gospel was indeed included.

Quote:Here's a crazy idea... Whoever was Peter's scribe wrote the gospel of Peter.
Whoever Mark was, wrote a gospel as if it was told by Peter, or however you can claim him to have been his scribe...

Who would know the difference?

anyone who knew peter could not read or write like all other fishermen at the time... so to assign him this accomplishment would cast doubt on the authorship. it was commonly known only a couple of the disciples including judas could read or write. So why not give credit where credit is due? Mark penned the gospel of peter, as the church records mark being peter's number one disciple.

RETARD! See?, I can do it too!
The written text was not to be provided to the locals who might have had access to Peter. It was to be spread out in other provinces.
Your "commonly known" would have been totally unknown more than 20 miles away from Jerusalem.
I think you have a bit of a problem with timescales...

(February 27, 2019 at 1:48 pm)Drich Wrote:

(February 25, 2019 at 3:41 pm)Drich Wrote: dear not smart person.. Paul's church... did not start till the reformaition nealy 1600 years after the church of peter had been in power.

Quote:Oh yeah... Paul didn't write letters to several locations explaining how his view of the church was to be.

read the vulgate those letters have been highly modified or even in some cases excluded infavor of other books. there are about 1/2 a dozen different books in the vulgate that are not apart of the holy bible.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Books_of_t...in_Vulgate

So for 1600 years you had peter's church and it had it's own bible. alot of which was changed as the popes saw fit as they went along. the reformation happened and the holy bible was compiled only from those manuscripts that where around when the church first started. meaning they cut about a 1/3 of edits newly found supposedly old books and laws set forth by people who claim the authority of the apostles.

Go back to school. Your History is a bit shoddy.
"
The first council that accepted the present canon of the New Testament may have been the Synod of Hippo Regius in North Africa (393 AD); the acts of this council, however, are lost. A brief summary of the acts was read at and accepted by the Council of Carthage (397) and the Council of Carthage (419).[125] These councils were under the authority of St. Augustine, who regarded the canon as already closed.
"

Congrats on pulling 1600 years out of your ass.

(February 27, 2019 at 1:48 pm)Drich Wrote: what did you think I would say? I've shared from like week 2 and revisited this message at least a few dozen times. We are talking about the God of the bible and how the bible says God communicates. Nothing I experienced is not already been established in scripture even though at the time I experienced this stuff I had no idea, as my picture of faith was alot like yours.

Your picture of faith was never anything like mine.
I was never indoctrinated into belief, like you probably were by your mom.
I look at your tale and I see a human brain doing its thing.
Do you suppose that those who wrote the instructions you came to find in the bible, perhaps had a brain similar to yours and first went through something similar to yourself and then wrote it down? They used their interpretation of the event. A mythical interpretation, as was to be expected from folk who were not aware that the brain produces thoughts and has several layers and error correction mechanisms that can go awry.
You.... like most people... you also don't know these things and thus also use your own interpretation of what happened in your mind.

(February 27, 2019 at 1:48 pm)Drich Wrote: There are billions of christians all over the world. did you honestly think your experience with God or lack there of was any sort of bench mark? meaning do you think God ignoring you and the people like you was the same all across the world? This religion has thrived for over 2000 years for a reason.. because God makes good on promises unique to christianity mainly direct contact with it's members. That sport is why I do not need faith. My faith has turned into experience and knowledge as we go on. We only need the smallest amount of faith to have God introduced into our lives. then we must simply be faithful to God for that relationship to grow.

No, Drich, that's not the reason it has thrived for so long.
There are too many reasons to list them here, but they're mostly a combination of politics, ignorance, indoctrination and imposition.

(February 27, 2019 at 1:48 pm)Drich Wrote:

Quote:Here, I'll help you find the error in your judgment. You won't see it as an error, because you're thick, but I'll show it to you nonetheless.

In these 3 paragraphs when you speak of god, you always say "god of the bible". That is your problem.
You see... if a god does exist, then god is god. period. simple.
God is that which created the cosmos, that which supports all existence.

and IF he does? then is not the oppsite true? which is why you said the reason my teaching is not commonly taught is because it is not consistent with human philosphy!?!??! which leaves what.. It is consistent with the will of God for us.

Let's try to reason a bit, here.
If our planet had an outer creator, but which was not the creator of the Cosmos, then maybe... maybe your god of the bible exists and is this creator of the Earth.

If there is a god creator of the Cosmos, even if there is a multiverse, then that god has to be a form of the god of the philosophers.

If there isn't any god, the human psyche could easily have conceived the god of the bible, given the parallels found in earthly kings and emperors. The human mind would have also have come up with the god of the philosophers. And here we'd be, all the same.

(February 27, 2019 at 1:48 pm)Drich Wrote:

Quote:It doesn't matter which book describes this god, for it is an objective reality.
When you cling so strongly to the "god of the bible", you are telling us that your god is a [comic] book character.... and, as such, fictional. Every time you have to support god with the book, you repeat that he's fictional.

only if you BLINDLY and closed mindedly assume God can not exist. you said that yourself. How ever if you took the bible as a road map and followed it and then found God as described... then what? then you would obviously refer to him and point to the bible as the way to find the God the bible describes. as he is not the God of the reformation movement he is not the God of islam he is not the God of the catholic church... thus you can not find him if you follow those religions. I am consistently representing God and the methodology to him in a way true to what I myself has experienced.

You are consistently, persistently, presenting something which is known to be a way to convince a mind of anything. Most people who apply that method will become convinced of whatever it concerns. You think you've arrived at some Universal door to god, but you just stumbled upon a psychological trait most of us share.
Knowing this, that method you propose fails, as I understand how it would ensnare my mind and cause it to have a faulty perception of reality.

(February 27, 2019 at 1:48 pm)Drich Wrote: Here's the thing. If you don't assume you will find nothing and at the same time do not expect to find ABC... Then what you do find will amaze you. as you will know what you are experience is not of you. it is not being generated by you nor controlled by you. He comes and goes like the wind. but when he is there you will know it is not anything comming from you nor anyone else.

Just as I said above... your perception of reality is clearly mangled and you are interpreting your own brain function as being something coming from the outside.

(February 27, 2019 at 1:48 pm)Drich Wrote:

Quote:The god you call "god of the bible" is just a character in a book.

untill he shows up in life right where the bible says do and look.

Correction, "shows up in your mind".

(February 27, 2019 at 1:48 pm)Drich Wrote:

Quote: At best, it is akin to a highly advanced extraterrestrial.
The god so-called "god of the philosophers" is a near-unassailable edifice, which then takes a bit of faith to make the leap into the god of Christianity, but people do it and live on.

and there are really people who live it. not just faith, but the holy Spirit as promised by the bible.

Or so they say and are convinced of. Just like you, they have their perception mangled.

(February 27, 2019 at 1:48 pm)Drich Wrote:

Quote:That you can't understand how vastly superior to the "god of the bible" the "god of the philosophers" is, shows just how stunted you are.
Go dream+life coincidences!

says the douche bag who thought paul fathered the church in aramaic. What is stunted is that you have been factually wrong in every aspect you have chosen to repersent the bible in and the church in and yet you stand here proudly going over your same conclusion/same summary as if I did not just obliterate everything you thought you know about the bible the church and it's history!!!

This kills me.. I just show you 2+2=4 and you are trying to wrap things up as if you ignored everything I did to prove your 2+2=5 wrong you are still extolling your orginal conclusion... talk about a lazy broken intellect! If I took all the points of your argument away and showed you where wrong in every aspect of church history you cared to explain, how then can you maintain any sort of intellectual integrity buy summing up with the same conclusion that you would have used is your theories of the church where true?!?!

(To Gae Blogona) This is why you all call me stupid or inepth or ignorant... because you/mr thunder cat can summarily dismiss or not read the paragraphs I used obliterate you. after all how stupid must you be to loose an arguement against a guy who keeps misspelling simple words? How much easier would it be to just get a consensus that I am the problem rather than re examine your entire world view like mr. thundercat would have to do if he were an intellectually honest person.

Clearly, your reading comprehension is very subpar... no wonder you needed 25 years to study a single book...
If you tried to read what people write, instead of reading what you think they write... then you might have a point... but no... go go.

(February 27, 2019 at 1:48 pm)Drich Wrote:

Quote:There you go again.... "god of the bible" this, "god of the bible" that... sheesh!

what's the matter sport? trying to trivialize what you can not refute? are you in 6th grade? are you so f-ing stupid that you do not know you started this line of reasoning by segregating the God of the bible with the God of catholicism? Thereby making it necessary for me to make this distinction when ever I speak so as not to confuse the difference between the two? Then you have the nerve to criticize me for making a distinction you forced in the conversation?!? Are you stupid or again intellectually dishonest?

I didn't force you to do anything.
You're the idiot who thinks that the god represented in the bible is, somehow, a real entity that depends on us going through a known psychological fault in order to accept it as real.
I've told you this quite a few times in the past few years... but you trundle on, as expected, because your brain has fallen for it.

(February 27, 2019 at 1:48 pm)Drich Wrote:

Quote:It doesn't need to be almighty... It is the source of everything around you, everything in all of existence.
Can you top that with your puny "god of the bible"?

no you are wrong the catholic God demands it to be an omni max god. It says so in their creed:http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p1s2c1p3.htm

Did you.... did you even read what is in that link? It only says that he's omnipotent.

(February 27, 2019 at 1:48 pm)Drich Wrote:

Quote:The "god of the philosophers" does not concern itself with the problem of evil at all. Evil is a human construct. God merely permeates his own existence with love. And humans can draw upon that love or not. Evil arises through humanity not partaking in the love provided.

citation on a 'god philosopher' example/name

Hahahaha!!! Ed Feser is your man. I think he's wrong at a basic level, but everything is then quite well structured.

(February 27, 2019 at 1:48 pm)Drich Wrote:

Quote:Adam and Eve are, at best, allegory.

for small minded people who can not think outside their little box, yes.

LOL!!

(February 27, 2019 at 1:48 pm)Drich Wrote: If you want to know how God assimilates evolution into a 7 day literal creation... just ask.. and again all the paradoxes the catholic reading leaves including a science is correct or religion is correct gets fix by God in a three paragraph explanation.

Bloody hell, man... I don't care about the way you came up to stretch or shrink the word "day" into whatever amount of time it needs to be done. It's bollocks retroactively made to fit the bible. Reality doesn't work like that.

(February 27, 2019 at 1:48 pm)Drich Wrote:

Quote:The god of the philosophers is also consistent with whatever science finds to be reality.

not according to the catholic church.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_C..._evolution
The church recently had to go netural meaning it holds no position on either... meaning the church, the catholic church refuses to back it's god and it's bible because it can not reconcile what science has to say.
So again you are wrong.

Hey-sus you ever get tired of being wrong so much?

huh?! from your link, again:
""
Catholic schools in the United States and other countries teach evolution as part of their science curriculum. They teach that evolution occurs and the modern evolutionary synthesis, which is the scientific theory that explains how evolution proceeds. This is the same evolution curriculum that secular schools teach.
""

(February 27, 2019 at 1:48 pm)Drich Wrote:

Quote:Your "god of the bible" is just the personification of a cosmic king. Wholly conjured up by people, drawn from people's experiences, emotions, commands, desires...

then why again is this God's two laws not taught thus dropping the need for the laws of morality?

Because morality is more complex than just 2 laws.

(February 27, 2019 at 1:48 pm)Drich Wrote: Why aren't christian's known for only having two governing rules in their churches?

Because people can't be ruled over with only two rules.

(February 27, 2019 at 1:48 pm)Drich Wrote: why is the catholic church so over burdened with rules you can sin without knowing it?

Because people need lots of rules and cases to behave as the leaders want.

(February 27, 2019 at 1:48 pm)Drich Wrote: why do most churches follow the catholic model even after the reformation if again the God of the bible was modeled off of what people were and wanted?

Because there are many different kinds of people and not all want the same thing... in case you've never noticed...

(February 27, 2019 at 1:48 pm)Drich Wrote: Here's the thing sport... maybe the reason the God of the bible's want and will do not line up with the psychology of the people is because he is not of the people. If God where an independent entity would it not stand to reason his will be different from our own? Would this gap in "morality' not be evidence of two different sources of religious belief?

Sadly for your view, god's morality lines up perfectly with the morality of the patriarchy.

(February 27, 2019 at 1:48 pm)Drich Wrote:

(February 26, 2019 at 3:30 pm)Drich Wrote: said the douche that just learned that romans primary spoke and wrote greek in the first century in the middle east.

Quote:Try again. Romans spoke and wrote Latin. Some in the middle East learned Greek and used both Latin and Greek side by side. Official Empire business, especially that to do with the military, was solely performed in Latin.

NOT SOME IDIOT READ THOSE 5 Pages of reference AGAIN!!!
Latain was the region areound the city of rome EVERYWHERE ELSE SPOKE and wrote KOINE GREEK!!!!! in the first century!!!

Curiously, that's not what the sources say. Of course.
I know that Latin was used in Portugal, in Spain, in France, in Italy and in Romania. It was so used that these countries now have what are called Latin, or Romance, languages. So... "everywhere else"... methinks you're exaggerating.
And those wiki links say that there was a very specific border between the Latin world and the Greek world, the Balkans.

I think you need to learn to write a bit more properly.

(February 27, 2019 at 1:48 pm)Drich Wrote:

Quote:Local middle Easterns spoke and wrote Greek as a second language.

then why was the septuagint the jewish bible only copy written in greek?
Aramaic was the basterdized language.. not greek Greek was the base from which everyone had incommon.

Because the book had the purpose of being shared among different populations.
You're not very good at spotting propaganda, are you?

(February 27, 2019 at 1:48 pm)Drich Wrote:

Quote:That's what I learned. Thank you for pushing me towards that info.

you did not learn that from me, that's the bullshite you came here with.. You learned this from me:
[...]

After the decentralization of political power in late antiquity, Latin developed locally in the Western provinces into branches that became the Romance languages, including Spanish, Portuguese, French, and Italian. In the early 21st century, the first or second language of more than a billion people derived from Latin.[12] Latin itself remained an international medium of expression for diplomacy and for intellectual developments identified with Renaissance humanism up to the 17th century, and for law and the Roman Catholic Church to the present.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_...man_Empire

Everywhere else, he said...

(February 27, 2019 at 1:48 pm)Drich Wrote:

(February 26, 2019 at 3:30 pm)Drich Wrote: Aramaic was not an offical language. it was the scribblings of malcontents and barbarians. as such there were or are surviving text in aramaic but they are know translations from the greek. many speculate the aramaic was translated from the greek as a means to speak to the aramaic only as an outreach.

There he goes again...

Quote:Aramaic was the de facto spoken language in the region of Jerusalem.

citation!!!!!! douche bag citation!!!!!!
I've proven you wrong 10 ways to sunday Show me something that supports you bull shite or shut your mouth unless you are intentionally trolling.

So be it...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_o...s_of_Jesus:
"The languages spoken in Galilee and Judea during the first century include the Semitic Aramaic and Hebrew languages as well as Greek, with Aramaic being the predominant language. Most scholars agree that during the early part of first century Aramaic was the mother tongue of virtually all natives of Galilee and Judea."


25 years of study, he said...

(February 27, 2019 at 1:48 pm)Drich Wrote:

Quote: Otherwise, this discussion wouldn't even exist.
For local writing, it is clear that some used Greek characters for conveying the sounds of Aramaic. For more widespread communication, proper Koine Greek was used.

it's like talking with a 4 year old who doesn't even understand english let alone a different langage he just learned about. Dummy.. Aramaic is an amalgamation of several different languages.. the reason greek can be found in it was because that specific dialect (galeean dialect contained both hebrew words and greek.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galilean_dialect

So who spoke aramaic in that region? primarily jews. the non jewish members of the empire which out numbered the jews in the region spoke greek sport. So no aramaic not eve t he galilean dialect was spoken more than the greek. because the jews spoke greek and the none jews spoke greek.. who only spoke aramaic? those who only spoke or work in the jewish community and was uneducated. as they could not get work from anyone else.

Here, I'll put that citation here for you again:
"Most scholars agree that during the early part of first century Aramaic was the mother tongue of virtually all natives of Galilee and Judea."

(February 27, 2019 at 1:48 pm)Drich Wrote:

(February 26, 2019 at 3:30 pm)Drich Wrote: no back then they had access to the people who where there. which in that culture is far more believable than anything that could have been written

Quote:No, they didn't. That is such a fallacy.

is english your 3rd langage? you are not even using the word fallacy correctly.

Fallacy, faulty reasoning... yep, I'm pretty sure I'm using it right...

(February 27, 2019 at 1:48 pm)Drich Wrote: with a 3% literacy rate people distrusted anything written down because they themselves could not verifyit. which is why personal intergity was so important back then because your word was your literal bond meaning if you were as dishonest as you have been in this post, you would most certain be cast outside the city and treated like a theif because you would soon be one as you could not support yourself any other way.



So look at it this way.. you got a letter written to you in my loose hand in korean meaning no google translate. you know to guys who can read it but one you hate/he hates you and the other you trust. both see it and both tell you to do two different things according to the letter. who do you trust? (don't wander off, stay with in the parameters of the story) trust the hated guy, trust you can figure out the letter you can't read/know nothing about or trust your buddy who is an upstanding person?

Every Other human on the planet trust the trust worthy guy. Why? because the other two are not options. Hence in a illertare soceity a man's word is far more trustworthy than anything written.

So?... the people were trusting the writings of someone they didn't know and had no way of knowing.

(February 27, 2019 at 1:48 pm)Drich Wrote:

Quote:Most people never moved farther than 10 miles away from their homes, during their whole lifetime. And the propaganda was aimed at these people who couldn't fact check.

never heard looked up the requirements of being a roman citizen huh? may look up the term mission trip or missionary, then ask someone if any of that was required of the members of the church? Then look at history more specifically the pilgrimage required of the jews to goto the temple for various high holy days and cermonies... the jews would be compelled to travel hundreds of miles. Just look what happened when Christ was born herod commanded that all boys 2 and under be killed. To save your son you would not travel more than 10 miles? God you look stupid to anyone in the know. you just repeat anything men like crowder or erhman say without thought or research. it is like you all think quoting them is permission to turn off your brains!

Not even going to try to address all that crazy...

(February 27, 2019 at 1:48 pm)Drich Wrote:

Quote:And it carried a message that resonated with the poor peasants.

retard it also resonated with the rich and affluent as well because wasn't it the emperor Constantine the Great that made christianity the official religion of rome??? how much more affluent does one need to be than the emperor of rome at that time?

Wow... mixing up 1st and 3rd centuries, here? A lot happened in between.
25 years of study, he says...
Can't even have a decent timeline in his head...

(February 27, 2019 at 1:48 pm)Drich Wrote: Gae bologna...

Again can you honestly see all the ignorance and errors left by mr thundercats? everytime I left a quotation it was because we had this discussion several times before he lost horribly and still yet he was returning to his orginal position despite the evidence!!!

So what will his response be? a personal attack. to discredit the messenger because he can not directly attack the message. and because he is liked his assessment of me will be what sticks because the alternative is to believe me and what I have to say which Demands a man of integrity to reexamine his whole world view. This guy and people like him would rather be outraged and stand in the filth of their own ignorance and proclaim someone else has their deffency than to admit their own failures. Why? again to give an inch demands a re examination of your world view. And you know it is easier to say I am stupid than to admit you are and always have been foolishly wrong, about the church about God about any of it.

So honestly look and ask yourself is drich really wrong or am I simply not wanting to face facts!

Drich is wrong. Definitely.

When I was 16, I had what I thought was a religious experience.

On a week end retreat, at monastery with the rest of my year 11 class. We were in the chapel. A monstrance was set up, with exposed host. One of the priests, sitting behind us, gave a homily on the Eucharist. After about 10 minutes, I felt 'suffused', 'light', with a deep peacefulness. Of course I ascribed this as the presence of the holy spirit. These days; not so much.

At 23 had another, even more intense experience; I solved a Zen koan ,which had been in my head for about 5 years. The experience was one of intense awareness of my surroundings. The feeling lasted for some minutes, then faded, never to return. The non verbal answer to the koan was also gone.

Today I'm convinced such experiences have nothing to do with so-called spirituality or mysticism. They are physical responses to stimuli. Pretty sure such experiences can be repeated with some drugs, such as mescaline , peyote, and LSD. As well as exercises without drugs; eg various Yogic and Zazen practices.

I've also seen it in a happy clappy church, which I consider as spiritual as my dog. To me, very obviously inducing mass hysteria/mass hypnosis. The techniques used include some classic practices used in hypnosis, such as repetition and external focus.
.
(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((0)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

A monstrance, also known as an ostensorium (or an ostensory),[1] is the vessel used in Roman Catholic, Old Catholic and Anglican churches for the more convenient exhibition of some object of piety, such as the consecrated Eucharistic host during Eucharistic adoration or Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament. It is also used as reliquary for the public display of relics of some saints.[2] The word monstrance comes from the Latin word monstrare,[3] while the word ostensorium came from the Latin word ostendere. Both terms, meaning "to show", are used for vessels intended for the exposition of the Blessed Sacrament, but ostensorium has only this meaning.[2]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monstrance

Zazen (literally "seated meditation"; Japanese: 座禅; simplified Chinese: 坐禅; traditional Chinese: 坐禪; pinyin: zuò chán; Wade–Giles: tso4-ch'an2, pronounced [tswô ʈʂʰǎn]) is a meditative discipline that is typically the primary practice of the Zen Buddhist tradition.[1][2] The precise meaning and method of zazen varies from school to school, but in general it can be regarded as a means of insight into the nature of existence. In the Japanese Rinzai school, zazen is usually associated with the study of koans. The Sōtō School of Japan, on the other hand, only rarely incorporates koans into zazen, preferring an approach where the mind has no object at all, known as shikantaza.[3]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zazen

(February 27, 2019 at 10:43 am)Drich Wrote:

(February 26, 2019 at 10:01 am)Jehanne Wrote: Why not just say that the Cosmos was created by some super alien intelligence last Wednesday to deceive you from believing the real Truth, unless, of course, you pass the "test" of not believing in modern science??

I know you are stuck in 1990's when it comes to creation verse evolution, but there is indeed a movement towards a master creator race of aliens or master designer who seeded this world as it explains alot. if you simply google it science is considering not 'god' wizard supreme but the description of creation and assigning it to a older more advanced race of people. To which I simply ask why can't that master creator alien be god?

---

Citation or reference?

(February 28, 2019 at 10:07 am)Jehanne Wrote:

(February 27, 2019 at 10:43 am)Drich Wrote: I know you are stuck in 1990's when it comes to creation verse evolution, but there is indeed a movement towards a master creator race of aliens or master designer who seeded this world as it explains alot. if you simply google it science is considering not 'god' wizard supreme but the description of creation and assigning it to a older more advanced race of people. To which I simply ask why can't that master creator alien be god?

---

Citation or reference?

Why bother, when you have footage?

(February 27, 2019 at 2:13 pm)Peebo-Thuhlu Wrote: At work.

"So honestly look and ask yourself is Drich really wrong or am I simply not wanting to face facts."



Uhm..... It's not that you're wrong, persay, it's that your bat -sheet crazy Drich.

You've posted that you (Effectively) 'Hear voices' 'Have been influenced directly by the divine'.

where did I ever say I hear voices? That is your imaginings on how this all works. I have said many times.. my first encounter by all measures was a dream I went to bed had my experience (which was again very consistent with a bible I knew absolutly nothing about) then I woke up in the same place.

Second experience a hitch hiker I picked up told me of my past present and future dealing with God. he told me of prayers I had silently prayed he even answer questions I had in my head and never spoke aloud to him. then again he told me of everything to come and as I live i am still checking off items on a list he told me to expect. This time I heard a voice but it came from a big dirty black guy who said he was 'fresh out of jail.'

in the past I would receive direction as I would pray and every day I would listen to several different radio ministries, and the message for the day would literally answer my prayers. I'd ask about money I'd get a message on money I'd ask about how long I was expected to forgive (my wife had a 250 aday heroin problem for like the first 7 years, and on and on and on I would ask and what ever I would ask by the evening I would have direction.

Then we started a business together was working withsomeone who promised me a partnership after two years we were with him for 3 then one day he stopped communicating for like a month. I just kept doing my job (no pay no word) but so long as the company credit card would allow me to buy fuel and parts I worked.. did this for a month then the card declined. start talking to my wife about doing our own thing/we had no money. next day ower came back gave a bs excuse ( i think he got locked up for drugs) then a guy I had only met in passing one time before who owned a company I did work for came out to his back lot where I was working and asked what the problem was with the billing as he had not gotten a bill in over 6 weeks, then got like 30 invoices all at once.. I told his I just do the work and the owner processes the billing. he asked could I do the work and also bill him on time. I said yes but we can't go out on our own no money he asked how much you need i said to do it right about 50k he said can you do it for 25k and I will help you buy a service truck through a guy he knows supposedly saving a ton.. I said sure the majority of the money would go to a new truck anyway. he said talk it over with your wife, and the next morning we met at a perkins he drew up a contract on a napkin and wrote a check for 25K.. not exactly free money from heaven but he did not charge any intrest on the money. just asked for frr labor so long as the loan was open.

Then with the business we saw opportunity come to us in waves doubling what we did every year. never once spent any real money or time advertising. this continued on till one of my better customers bought into a Italian designed piece of equipment. ask if I could work on it I said sure looked at it and realized this should be under warranty.. found the closest dealer in Miami like 380 miles away. made arrangements to file warranty under them. 2 weeks later the cooperate HQ for this international company invited me to come up to Boston where they are out of and attend a dealer meeting. I told him we could not afford a franchise, he said come up and get to know us at least we can use you as warranty for central fl. Long story short I went and came back with a 250K (what they where charging other dealers to be established) for free. They said they needed competent representation in my market. IE they wanted to be introduced to businesses like disney universal sea world ect/people I do business with, and companies who support those businesses.. FF a few year the head guy found out my dad was head of the local votech school and long story short there they moved the yearly dealer meeting to Orlando. Problem was the Italian engineers teaching the class had such heavy accents the americans could not understand them.

This is not a supernatural thing as I saw it documented with people like temple grandon. but she could see how thigs work. like wise the only material not written in itialian was the wiring diagrams and schematics. they had the standard copy then the changes they made and I could literally see the changes instntly I understood the load out requirments and could also predict what how this would effect everything and how it could later fail. So I took two weeks worth of material studied it all in one night went over everything I had planned to talk about with 4 engineers that moring they would fill in a few gaps and I taught 75 other guys and got them all legitly certified except one guy.

Did that two years. at the end of the second was approached about a hush hush project. essentially there was a company in nyc who bought 4 electric truck who wanted 4 battery powered refrigeration systems to last 4 hours. the problem was the american battery engineers could not understand the power requirements and have a basic understand of how things work. they just wanted me to look at the diagrams and explain it to the power supply people.

So when to this meeting on the left were 6 refrigeration engineers from itialy on the right the battery engineer team 4 ex-nasa guys (they do batteries for the government/military equipment like drones and power space equipment, like mars rover.

So I'm alittle out of my element to say the least. but the battery people started to expalin their understanding and their problems.. took about 20 mins.. in that time I reconfigured not only the refrigeration system electronic, power supply needs and controls, i drew out a small device that would compensate and manage the switching process from charging to running off battery. not only did I finish the needed up date I also in my mind build it with parts I knew I could get from a local air force surplus store (where they have all sorts of parts and peices) I showed them the diagram they laughed and argued and said it would never work I said not only would it work I could have a running prototype by Monday morning, it was 3:00 friday.. they said we are years away from prototyping, as all the components needed to be vetted. I said I was able to do all of that in my head and could grantee a working prototype Monday for 300 dollars.. the owner of the battery company laughed and said here is 500 I'll buy the pizza for the all nighters you have coming!

So me and the boston lead guy left there going to the surplus store him freaking the f out as this was an obama era green program that they could milk for millions and if I screw this up....

Long story short.. I got two patents out of this, and bought out when this company order 25 more units.

The point My mind was now open for technical viewing of tangible components in relation to one another. This was just another avenue God would use to provide answers to the questions I had been answering though out all of this..

You might call this crazy off the cuff but I would challenge you to look at what was said and try and find fault. In 10+ years none of you nor anyone from the church ca find fault.. only thing you all can do is try and discredit me personally.

Quote: Now I'm paraphrasing the above and if you Drich want to expand/clarify/elucidate some more on the subject that's grand.

But hearing things in your head that others don't?

I hear what I understand, which I can explain in such away that you can not show me to be wrong. So rather than try, my observation is most of you take the easy way out and call me crazy..
you guys are just lazy and dishonest

Was the hitchhiker dressed like 1950, half drunk and hollow eyed?