why I support getting god out of PF

[ahinton]

Please come in the first 2 weeks of September, coz I is going to Greenland.

If you are looking for somewhere to stay, there is a nice Bed & Breakfast in Bath.

Send an e mail to sorabji-archive@lineone.net for further details.

Bye

Thal

Please ignore this invitation, despite its obviously well-meaning(?!?) intent, as (a) I'll not be around a lot of that time and (b) the concert is not, as you know, until November.

Now that this thread has gotten so far from its original topic, I'm almost tempted to try to consult God for his view on the way it's going right now. He wouldn't listen to me, of course - and, indeed, why should he? since I'm not one of his chosen ones...

Now, dear "Thal" - do please stop teasing people here any more; I think that the relevant points have been made and accepted, don't you?

Lastly - whereabouts in Grønland are you planning to gø øn that øccasiøn? - ør shøuldn't I ask?...

Best,

Alistair

[pianistimo]

are u seriously going to greenland!  that should be fun.  yes...i can see u munroing about in greenland. 

**dreams about the bed and breakfast in bath.  buying lavender soaps.  buying an english tea hat.  milling about.

[rimv2]

You are all going to hell if you do not repent NOW!!!!!!


HEATHENS!!!!!


Less the fires of hell be where you wish to lie.

Make your beds!!!!

[thalbergmad]

Anyone seen the new version of "The Omen".

Very good film that sticks pretty close to the original.

Thal

[lagin]

Well, to be honest, as a Christian, reading about certain other things really irks me as well, but I learn to avoid reading posts by certain people and especially not opening topics by them.  So if we ban God, then we should ban other stuff, too. 

For a while, this whole forum was very unappealing to me, so I just went else where for a few months.  Personally, I don't think we can ban stuff that annoys us because we are all annoyed by different things.  We either have to ignore it, or if it really offensive - leave - like I did - until conversations change again or until the offending posters simmer down or go elsewhere.  Some people are annoyed by senseless posts and some people find them funny.  Some people hate posts like this that create arguments, some people love to argue.  Some people hate posts about God, some people find them interesting. 

For people who have God as the most important aspect of their lives, it is as impossible for them to stop talking about Him as it would be to ask one of us to not mention music outside of "music forums."  It's just part of our lives and thus natural for us to mention it (music) or Him all the time. 

Anyway, that's my 2 cents (and btw, I haven't read more than a couple posts on this thread so if I seem redundant, that's why). 

[prometheus]

So if we ban God, then we should ban other stuff, too. 

I am not for banning God but if one did; in your opinion banning what should naturally follow. This puzzles me since you seem to hint at something. What do you mean? Astrology? I haven't seen any topics on that? Discussing Hanon and Czerny maybe?

Personally, I don't think we can ban stuff that annoys us because we are all annoyed by different things.

People do not have the right not to be annoyed. Just like people do not have the right not to be offended.

For people who have God as the most important aspect of their lives, it is as impossible for them to stop talking about Him...

If it is so hard to stop talking about a topic, let alone stop thinking. How would one describe this behavior?

...as it would be to ask one of us to not mention music outside of "music forums."

Really, even in times I was really obsessed by music I did not talk about music on a forum aimed at chess, physics or languages. So I do not agree that this is a fitting analogy. If we argue about science I don't bring in musical aesthetics. So even when I would manage to sneak music into the discussion it would not have the same function.

[lagin]

In response to your questions: 

no. 1:  Yeah, I was hinting at something that I was personally annoyed with, but it is not really an issue any longer because I don't go near threads that I will find offensive or vulgar anymore.  But yes, it would be different for different people.  Hanon and Czerny discussions I actually find entertaining and somewhat informative, but I'm sure they drive some people up the wall.  Likewise, I care not if people don't use the search function and post the same topics again and again, but I know it makes some people batty.  My point in all of it was, that you can't ban the discussion of something just because it personally annoys you.

no. 2  I agree, being offended and annoyed is really part of life and growing as people - a part that can be avoided however, but that is not done be removing the offending person or thing, but by choosing not to go there - either physically by not reading the posts or internally by just not LETTING it bother you anymore. 

no. 3 How would one describe this behavior?  Have you ever been in love?  It's just like that. 

no. 4  Okay, I agree with your argument here.  It is perfectly possible not to mention God.  For example, I didn't launch into a "sermon" with point no. 2 a minute ago, but it was VERY hard indeed not too because talking about God just like talking about music comes second nature to me because those are the 2 loves of my life.  It was by far harder not to, than it would have been to say something regarding Him. 

So I hope that clears a few things up.

[penguinlover]

I agree totally with you lagin!  And I understand what you are getting at.  Those are my top two loves too, well among my top.  I guess my family has to get in there too.  It is terribly difficult to even discuss how much music means to me without referring to God and my love for Him.

[prometheus]

no. 3 How would one describe this behavior?  Have you ever been in love?  It's just like that. 

I think I would describe both as obsessive behavior or a delusion. But the problem is that the reason for loving someone of the opposite sex has both very different motivations and very different implications. Let me start with the first.

We know what drives both sex drive and falling in love. There are chemicals in the brain involved and hormones in the blood. And there is also a clear reason. If we didn't have these chemicals and hormones we would have died out because we wouldn't reproduce or we wouldn't reproduce enough.
As for the implications. If you are in love with a person of the opposite sex then you know this person. The bible says that you cannot know god. No one knows what god is. There are only a few properties we know about god. She is all powerful, all knowing, all good(holy) and god is everywhere. Now of these properties which one makes you love her? Do you love all powerful entities? Or do you love knowledgeble people? And how can you love someone you do not know? I mean, you can tell me that there is a person somewhere that is really nice, really beautiful, really ethical, really conscious, really wise, etc etc and I wouldn't fall in love with this person while these properties would be properties that can trigger me to love someone I know. But if I don't know a person I cannot fall in love with that person.
Furthermore, if you fall in love with god then you also believe in god. And believing in god has all kinds of implications concerning views of the world and philosophical questions.

So really, I think they are both insane forms of behavior but that loving a person is more innocent because it only effects one person and falling in love with a person is  unpreventable. But falling in love with god is insane behavior that influences all spheres of life and it is not forced on a person my physical mechanisms.

So yes, I also frown on falling in love with a person of the opposite sex but I also know that it is part of our reproduction cycle, that it is temporary and that it happens to everyone. Really, I would reason against it if I didn't know that it is forced on someone by chemicals. But isn't loving god a free choice? I mean, one cannot be held responsible for falling in love with a person but can one be held responsible for falling in love with god? Personally I think religion is a virus of the mind that is passed on from one generation to the next but I also think that every normal person will be able to shake it off with reason in an enviroment where one has access to knowledge about the world. But if one can really be blamed for not doing this? Is it a free choice for everyone? I do not know these answers.


A new question. What comes first. Believing in god or loving god?

...but it was VERY hard indeed not too because talking about God just like talking about music comes second nature to me because those are the 2 loves of my life.  It was by far harder not to, than it would have been to say something regarding Him.

So can you describe what God has to do with music? Same goes for Penguinlover. I mean, I don't get this at all. Even if god is responsible for all the aesthetics in music why think of him? Doesn't that nature of music stand on its own and explain its own functionality? I mean, I can't imagining thinking about Bill Gates when I use my computer.

Furthermore because there are people who believe in the same god and build on some of the same scriptures that claim that music should be limited or outlawed.

[penguinlover]

Since this is a thread that wants to get God off the Piano Forum, it seems funny that I would be bringing Him in.  I won't preach a sermon here, but if you want to contact me, I will answer whatever questions you may have concerning this subject.  I am no expert or theologian, but I will do my best.  The Bible does teach that we can know God, so your point here has little foundation.  Music comes from God, because He created everything.  God is love, so all love, true love, comes from Him.  That's about all I will say here.  Thanks for reading.   Penguinlover

[prometheus]

If music is special because it was created by god and god created everything then something does not compute. Or isn't music special? If so that would be kind of funny because I think that music is special, at least to humans, and that it was not created but that it came into being because as a by product of language, a evolutionary development, music became aesthetically pleasing to humans and thus humans got the urge to express themselves through sound as well. I mean, there are two things. The desire to express oneself and the ability to process and interpret sounds. What the reason of the first is is more unclear. I have seen evolutionary biologists claim that it is because creating humans became sexually attractive. And I agree that sexual selection must have been essential for such a fast evolutionary development in terms of intellect.


The bible does claim that humans cannot know god. I mean know him in a personal way. Humans are sinfun and god is holy. And that is also why christianity has christ. It is in the new testament, Romans. I can imagine the pope would claim that you are a heretic if you claim that you do not need christ to get closer to god.

And to understand what god is. The bible does not tell us what god is. It only says that god is something that is omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent. Plus of course god, or holy. But you say that god is love. As far as I know this is not in the bible. Actually, the old testament contradicts this because there god is hateful. But going back to the first question. Is god even a person? Or is she more like a force, like a divine law of nature. I mean, the law of gravitiy has no personality either. It doesn't need one.

If god is love then he cannot be omnipotent. This is because love is not omnipotent. Love does not create new living creatures. God does. So I don't see how one can say that god is love. I have seen a lot of people claim this. To me this is absurd. It is like saying god does not exist at all. Even in real life it is clear to see that love is a very limited concept. A lot of things can, and do, get in the way of love. Furtermore, a lot of love dissapears or at least cools down.

I understand what 'true love' is, apart from obsessive 'falling in love' behavior. (English uses the same word for both, a major flaw). I do not recognise any of the properties the bible atributes to god in love or the other way around.

You say that all love comes from god. Already, this is a bit different. I wonder why believers are so inaccurate when they describe and ascribe things to their 'best friend'. But does that also mean that someone who doesn't believe cannot 'channel love'? Since all love comes from god how can I access gods resevoir of love? How does this work?

As for talking about god in this post. Maybe it is funny in an ironic way but I don't care. The main subject of this topic is god. So eventhough someone wants god out of the pianoforum, which is a totally meaning statement to me, this is the appropriate place to talk about god.

And about preaching, you are just answering questions, or not if you don't want to, that one has brought up by making the statements you made. Statements which in my opinion are totally fair to make in a topic like this.

[bernhard]

I think that music is special, at least to humans, and that it was not created but that it came into being because as a by product of language, a evolutionary development, music became aesthetically pleasing to humans and thus humans got the urge to express themselves through sound as well. I mean, there are two things. The desire to express oneself and the ability to process and interpret sounds. What the reason of the first is is more unclear. I have seen evolutionary biologists claim that it is because creating humans became sexually attractive. And I agree that sexual selection must have been essential for such a fast evolutionary development in terms of intellect.

I would like to propose that it is actually the reverse order: Language is a by-product of music as an evolutionary development.

Or in other words, music is not a language, but language is a music.

(I am now following Ahinton´s machiavelic suggestion that the best way to get God out of threads is to mention music whenever the topic veers towards God)

Best wishes,
Bernhard.

[lagin]

For someone who wants God off the pf, you sure do like to talk about Him alot (btw, love the reference to God as "her."  I had a friend that used to do that all the time to see if he could get under my skin.  It makes me smile).

Anyhoo, please quote the verse that says we cannot know God, cause I'm interested, and too lazy to look it up .  I am not a Bible theologen either, but I have been to Bible school, and know enough that if you research the Greek and Hebrew (original languages of the Bible) origins sometimes supplied in an actual lexigon in the back on some Bibles, you will see that "know" in those languages is roughly translated to English and can have a multitude of levels of meaning.  Just like our word "love" can.  I love my dad, I love pizza.  It's very similar with their words, and the English language really doesn't do them justice.  (Note: just read more of your post, and see you've noticed this too).

Believing in God comes first.  You cannot love someone you do not believe in - trully love them that is.  You need to know them, like you said.  No, one cannot help "crushing" on someone, which is a chemical hormone thing, but "love" real love - I've been married to you for 40 years type love (for sake of example) - is a choice. 

Music and God were used in my example because they happen to be my two passions in life, not because I was hinting at some intrinsic combination of the two.  Edit: Though God is part of EVERYTHING in my life.  You'll see why later.

"The bible does claim that humans cannot know god. I mean know him in a personal way. Humans are sinfun and god is holy. And that is also why christianity has christ. It is in the new testament, Romans. I can imagine the pope would claim that you are a heretic if you claim that you do not need christ to get closer to god".  You typed this, and I agree completely that without Christ, we could not know God.  You've hit the nail on the head.  If you want me to explain how exactly that works, then that would be a long post indeed!  (Can do, if you want).  Edit: I ended up doing this anyway at the end of the post.

The God of the Old Testament and the New are One in the same.  The difference lies in that the old testament was before Christ came to earth which is why back then, they couldn't "know" God like we can now.  But God Himself has not changed, He is still loving.  Even in the old testament He was.  Why is it that when God disciplines us we see it as His being mean?  Since you like to quote the Bible, "A father disciplines the son he loves."  Edit: For further understanding of why He did the things He did, then this refers to my comment about reading the whole thing later on.

"I understand what 'true love' is, apart from obsessive 'falling in love' behavior. (English uses the same word for both, a major flaw). I do not recognise any of the properties the bible atributes to god in love or the other way around."  I agree with you on that major flaw.  The Greek actually has 3 different levels of love for our translation of the word in the Bible.  One question - not an accusation, but just a question because I come across this alot.  Have you read the ENTIRE bible at least once?  Please say yes because I hate trying to "battle" over verses and facts when one hasn't even read it all to understand how it links together (some Christians haven't even done this and that makes me crazy because then they try to "preach" about something they haven't even fully read!)   If you have and still do not see how the Bible attributes God as love, then let me know.

"You say that all love comes from god. Already, this is a bit different. I wonder why believers are so inaccurate when they describe and ascribe things to their 'best friend'. But does that also mean that someone who doesn't believe cannot 'channel love'? Since all love comes from god how can I access gods resevoir of love? How does this work?" 

Okay, this is the thing I refered to before that I said I could explain if you wanted and since you asked I will attempt, but it's very much like trying to explain what the earth looks like from space to one who hasn't been there or seen the pictures, so bear with me because it will sound as crazy to you as telling our ancestors that the world was not flat (before it was discovered that it actually is round I mean).  Or like someone trying to explain to me what galloping on a horse is like - something I've always wanted to try.  I can see them do it, but I won't really know what it's like till I try myself.

You already hit the nail on the head when you said we are sinful, God is not, thus we cannot know Him without Christ whose blood was the "ransom" or "payment" for our debt of sin should we choose to accept that gift, that is.  When one does accept that gift, it is not merely "fire insurance" as sadly alot of "Christians" believe it is.  It is not meant to stop there and if it does I would question as to whether they had really accepted that gift then.   It is so much more.  There is a verse in the Bible where Christ says that when we accept this gift we will "be once as I (Christ) and the Father are One."  This is where the exciting part is.  (I'm sorry, it's just easier if I use some Christian "lingo" to explain this, so try to follow through the jargon and let me know if some terms are unfamiliar).  When we accept that gift we exchange who we are (sinful) for Christ's gift of righteousness.  When God looks at us then, He no longer sees our "missing the mark" (literal translation of the Greek word sin), but instead sees Christ's righteousness in us instead.  Christ takes our spirit of sinfulness and replaces it with His Spirit of righteousness.  This is the part that is almost impossible to explain unless you've "been there."  You are NOT the same person.  I can testify to this.  I don't not watch some of the trash on t.v. that I used to because it's the "Christian thing to do."  I actually don't WANT to watch it anymore-that's a really wierd feeling let me tell you).  I actually think differently than I used to.  It's like seeing the world from space for the first time like they did on that shuttle so many years ago.  So how do I know what God is like?  He's given me part of His Spirit, part of His heart (the "becoming one" bit).  Do I know Him fully?  No, do I know Him more and more each day?  Yes.  It's not an overnight kaboom!  It's a growing process, a discovering process.  Not a "lifestyle" but a "lifechange."  I am NOT who I used to be.  I don't need to pretend to be "nicer" or pretend to actually love, yes, love my enemies.  I actually do!  (That's wierd too!) How can I explain that!?  It's something that needs to be experienced.  I could give you accounts of miracles (yes, the real things) in my own family even, as "proof" but the REAL miracle is what happens INSIDE when you become a Christian.  So, yes, you're right.  Loving God is different than loving people.  It's on a whole different level of playing field.  But it's real, and intense, and thus seeps out in our conversations.  I agree with you thank alot of Christians just talk the talk, and unless they walk the walk, then even I find their "talk" annoying.  But when you find a real Christian who has trully accepted Christ's gift and thus the "change" then their walk and their talk become part of who they are and speaking of God becomes a natural part of them like my Canadian accent is a part of me.  It's just who I am.

Now to sum this up, Please, PLEASE do not misinterpret me.  Look at my signature.  Christians are not "better" or some sort of "superior" person.  Were the people who believed the world was round "better" than those who thought it was flat?  Is my friend who has galloped on a horse better than me who hasn't?  No!  That's ridiculous.  And I agree some Christians need to get off their high horse - pun unintended.  We've just been forgiven because we've chosen to be, and consequently when one truly chooses that different life, they really can't help but change!
Pardon my crude horse/globe examples.  I know that we are talking about more important issues like salvation, truth, lives, ect, but they help a wee bit I think.  Anyway..


Since you asked

[nagona]

I have trouble reading long posts, so this will be a difficult one for me.  I will try to be brief.  Much of what you said, prometheus, is true.  Man is sinful.  God is holy.  Therein is the problem of knowing Him personally.  You got that right.  That is precisely why Jesus came to earth, to bridge that gap between man and God, so that we can know God personally.

Music is very special.  Most of us wouldn't know how to live without it.  Music is not only special to humans, but to animals and plants too.  It is not special just because it is a gift of God.  Life itself is a gift, and without life, there would be no music. 

The Bible makes it very clear what God is like.  You mentioned a few of His attributes, but there are many more.  If you read the entire Bible, you will find them.  The Old Testament and New Testament do not contradict each other, they compliment each other.  You really can't understand one without the other.

As far as referring to love, there is no comparison between man's love and God's love.  They are totally different.  Our love between people is conditional.  God's love for us is unconditional.  If we as people could learn to love with God's love (agape) the world would sure be different.  We probably wouldn't even be having this discussion.  Conditional love, man's love, will always fall short.  God's love for us doesn't change by what we do to Him, it is unconditional.  That's why He is God, and we aren't.

I know I didn't even scratch the surface of your questions. At least I started.  If you want, I will answer more.  Just give me time to think of my answers so I don't sound preachy, uneducated, or angry.  I really care to express myself clearly.  Thank you for your questions.  I guess this is the "anything but piano" forum, so this thread fits right in there.
                   Penguinlover

[nagona]

Sorry, I really did send that last post.  I accidentally got on under someone else's name.  I am not very smart when it comes to computers.  Penguinlover

[lagin]

Penquin lover said it better than me, cause I'm way too longwinded!

[Derek]

  actually......a little humility before THE GREAT BEYOND---whatever it is...god, the "force,"  THE GREAT MYSTERY....never hurts.  I choose to call that great mystery "God" and talk to it---many agnostics/mystics might see this as silly but I find it to be an equally effective way to connect to the profound mystery of the universe as simply contemplating that profound mystery. In fact---I don't find it mutually exclusive with pure mysticism either.  No spiritual technique causes mutual exclusion with others unless you allow it to---there's no point in doing that, I don't think, because WE DON'T KNOW IF GOD EXISTS.   I have great, deep faith in God---but I have no problem with admitting that I don't *KNOW* that he exists.  Why modern protestant christians feel the need to synonymize "know" with "believe," I will never understand.

[ahinton]

 actually......a little humility before THE GREAT BEYOND---whatever it is...god, the "force,"  THE GREAT MYSTERY....never hurts.  I choose to call that great mystery "God" and talk to it---many agnostics/mystics might see this as silly but I find it to be an equally effective way to connect to the profound mystery of the universe as simply contemplating that profound mystery. In fact---I don't find it mutually exclusive with pure mysticism either.  No spiritual technique causes mutual exclusion with others unless you allow it to---there's no point in doing that, I don't think, because WE DON'T KNOW IF GOD EXISTS.   I have great, deep faith in God---but I have no problem with admitting that I don't *KNOW* that he exists.  Why modern protestant christians feel the need to synonymize "know" with "believe," I will never understand.

OK - but your post doesn't tell us anything about the thread topic as a whole.

Best,

Alistair

[lilypiano]

I think I disagree, Alistair.   Maybe it doesn't relate directly to getting God off of the forum, but it does make the point that having faith in God can be similar to being agnostic and having reverance for the mysteries of the universe apart from believing in him.  I think telling people that they absolutely should not talk about their beliefs on a music forum is a little ridiculous.  Many people find music to be a very spiritual experience, and I think it's natural for them to want to share what they believe with other musicians.  I don't think it's appropriate to tell people they need to believe or better believe in God, but other references are fine with me.  I'm comfortable listening to people with beliefs that are different than my own.  I think it's better not to limit oneself or only be able to tolerate one's own line of thinking.

[ahinton]

I think I disagree, Alistair.   Maybe it doesn't relate directly to getting God off of the forum,

Not "maybe", but definitely - and that was precisely the point I was making - no more, no less - "the piano forum", remember?

That's all...

Best,

Alistair

[Siberian Husky]

For someone who wants God off the pf, you sure do like to talk about Him alot (btw, love the reference to God as "her."  I had a friend that used to do that all the time to see if he could get under my skin.  It makes me smile).

You mean...Have?.right?

By the way... thus far you have terminated all preconcieved notions I had about your passings of judgment before reading your entries throughout this entire thread and I, for the most part, stand by your opinions whole heartedly agreeing with most of all the points you have made so articulately. Whether you purposely used delicacy in stating your beliefs or not, you have made great strides in your understanding of human diversity. Quite Noble of You Lagin... Dont f.uck it up..lol

[back to the shadows i go]

[pianistimo]

so is God in or out? 

i can't help but want to confirm what i read by penguinlover, lagin, lily piano, derek and alistair and many others.  tolerance is where you admit that you don't know everything. even the bible says 'we see through a glass darkly.'

i will admit to transferring my knowledge of love from my husband to God, although i knew God before i met my husband.  the reason that women need affection is to confirm themselves of their worth.  i don't know why this is - but it just is - for me.  my husband has always treated me like gold (even when i don't deserve it).  he is always there, always cares, always asks how i feel or what i want to do, he basically spoils me.  but, he also requests a lot from me - at times.  sometimes i don't always want to do what he wants to do - but do it anyways because it makes him happy. 

now, before i met my husband -- i felt this same type of love from God (and even after marriage).  He is not concerned with perfection - but growth.  i think he wants us to mature and develop 'agape' love and not 'eros' love only.  'agape' - as i understand it - is unconditional love.  the Holy Spirit shows us how to express this humanly to others.  instead of looking at people for what we can get out of them - we look for ways to just love them and do for them because God first did that for us (and shows us how).

[lagin]

Hey!  Penquinlover and I were wondering where you were, haha.   

[ahinton]

the bible says 'we see through a glass darkly.'

Therein lies just one of many great truths to be found in the Bible; we Scots know just what that means (provided that the whisky in the said glass is of that kind of deep amber hue indicative of maturation in sherry casks)...

Maybe you'll encounter evidence of this for yourself when you come to Scotland...

Best,

Alistair

[mephisto]

Therein lies just one of many great truths to be found in the Bible; we Scots know just what that means (provided that the whisky in the said glass is of that kind of deep amber hue indicative of maturation in sherry casks)...

Maybe you'll encounter evidence of this for yourself when you come to Scotland...

Best,

Alistair

No one is going to Scotland, without any questionable motive..

[Derek]

This is the "anything but piano" section of the forum is it not? Clearly religious discussion should not appear on the "performance" board, or the "student" board, but here it seems to me quite appropriate. It is an interesting topic after all what all our worldviews are and why we play the piano and why we make music---and how all that relates to our beliefs!

Ahinton: A small bit of criticism. Must all conversations, in your opinion, stick tenaciously to a single topic and never digress? And, doesn't it seem to you that even "what is the topic?" is , to a degree, a subjective question, especially when discussing something that is itself subjective such as personal religious beliefs or lack thereof?

[ahinton]

No one is going to Scotland, without any questionable motive..

What? No one? Ever?

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

Ahinton: A small bit of criticism. Must all conversations, in your opinion, stick tenaciously to a single topic and never digress? And, doesn't it seem to you that even "what is the topic?" is , to a degree, a subjective question, especially when discussing something that is itself subjective such as personal religious beliefs or lack thereof?

I did not say that they necessarily should; I merely observed that your post did not. However "subjective" a question "what is the topic" may be, or appear to be, to you (or to anyone else), it actually is "why I support getting god out of PF" and, rather than addressing that as a whole, you selectively made observations on God while omitting reference to this forum, thereby avoiding any mention of why you would presumably not support such a move. That's all.

Best,

Alistair

[mike_lang]

I did not say that they necessarily should; I merely observed that your post did not. However "subjective" a question "what is the topic" may be, or appear to be, to you (or to anyone else), it actually is "why I support getting god out of PF" and, rather than addressing that as a whole, you selectively made observations on God while omitting reference to this forum, thereby avoiding any mention of why you would presumably not support such a move. That's all.

Best,

Alistair

How about a parallel thread entitled "why I support getting non sequiturs out of PF"?

ML

[ada]

*bangs head against wall*

 

[ahinton]

How about a parallel thread entitled "why I support getting non sequiturs out of PF"?

This would seem to be an eminently good idea - and indeed was intended to be implicit in my previous post where I might have expressed this more clearly had I added the suggestion to Derek that he initiate another thread rather than avoid mention of the forum aspect of and in this one. Just don't expect me to start such a thread, that's all!

Best,

Alistair

[ada]

I like ahinton's non sequiturs   

[mephisto]

What? No one? Ever?

Best,

Alistair

It seams rather silly to do so, doesn`t it?

[ahinton]

It seams rather silly to do so, doesn`t it?

Not to me it doesn't - and, since I understand you to be a Norwegian, I would not have thought it would be for you, either - but it seems that I may be wrong about that. In any case, we now seem to be getting on to the topic of getting Norwegians out of Norway, which is not what the thread is supposed to be about...

Best,

Alistair

[Derek]

I rather like non-sequiturs.    I see any topic as potentially inspiring one to take the conversation in a new direction. It is not as though this forum is some sort of formalized debate organization...we're just a bunch of pianists. If you want formal debate I'm sure there are plenty of actual debate competitions you can turn to.

[pianistimo]

as i see it - music and religion ARE united - but for some this may not be the case - and they may see additional topics as non-sequitors.  for me, the love of God was first expressed to us by creation of everything good.  God made a place for us much like a mother makes a bassinet for her baby with hanging mobils as something to look at.  There is no place of creation that is empty (that we know of - except dark holes which are millions of miles away) - or that is without sound.  Crickets, birds, weather, even our own blood pumping, or with stethescope -our heart beats.  Just from that - i would take it that God wants us to be cared for and loved.  Just heard today on the news from a soviet person speaking from a space station - of looking down on the earth and seeing how beautiful it is compared to the rest of space.  He said he couldn't find the words to express it's beauty.

But, then above that 'God first loved us... '   can't remember where this is - but, also, God 'did not send us His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved.'  So he is allowing good for the natural creation for us - and also a spiritual renewal where we can be WITH him forever.  This is like a parent who truly enjoys being with their children.  Sometimes, i have to admit - there's times i get tired - but God seems to have a neverending love and need to be with us and share with us everything.  How loving can that be.  Especially when His family is so huge (including people who have long since died for many generations).  I can't really fathom God's love - but I believe it sincerely.

Alistair, Scotland and scotch do seem to go together.  Unfortunately, I never drink and ride a bicycle.  actually, i've never developed a taste for scotch.  we used it at home with tea for getting over sore throats - so i associate a gulp or two with a sore throat.  imagine if i tasted the real thing - i might change my mind.  cheap scotch is probably not a way to decide if you like it or not.

Devious motives.  I've always had those.  I'm just trying to adjust my actions so that noone will suspect the motives.  God knows, though, so i can't pull anything over on Him.  Usually, i tell myself that pianists are just that - stupid geeks.  But, then, whever i meet one and they start going on about their favorite composer - or see their music stack - or instrument - or whatever - it's probably better i never heard it in the first place.  Take my piano teacher - it's an ongoing fantasy that he takes me on as a permanent under-study (probably until 90) so i can have the career i want.  Of course, he saw right away i'm just an average plunker - except good pianos make me sound better. 

[ahinton]

we're just a bunch of pianists.

Not all of us; I'm not, for one...

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

God made a place for us much like a mother makes a bassinet for her baby

What's one of those, then? It sounds like a bass clarinet with the middle bit missing...

Scotland and scotch do seem to go together.  Unfortunately, I never drink and ride a bicycle.

This is indeed wise of you.

imagine if i tasted the real thing - i might change my mind.  cheap scotch is probably not a way to decide if you like it or not.

Indeed it isn't!

Best,

Alistair

[pianistimo]

ok.  as i see it, a baby bassinet is a glorified garden of eden.  unfortunately, mothers times pad the sides (cradle) and bottom and the baby can neither breathe or get comfortable due to too much supposed comfort.  you look over at the baby on the hard mattress sleeping for hours (with no padding on the sides) and that is because they can actually breath the air - and don't feel hot.

anyway - i am disproving my own point with lots of non-sequitors that probably dont' make any sense to anyone.  but, what i mean is that God prepared the world before we got here.  to me the stars are like a mobile that is constantly going around and we know what to expect. we have seasons (that are like predictable bedtimes).  everthing is planned - to me - and not random in the least (although there are elements that seem to have random patterns).  i've also wondered at God's humor to put a face on the moon.

ok.  prepare the scotch.  i'll hold my nose.  do scottish women typically drink scotch straight up or do they also hide it in tea?  can u tell from the color if it is good?  what is the dif between scotch and sherry?  are they basically the same?  or is sherry typically sweeter?  i always though scotch was dry and sort of a'medicine' drink.

[ahinton]

ok.  as i see it, a baby bassinet is a glorified garden of eden.  unfortunately, mothers times pad the sides (cradle) and bottom and the baby can neither breathe or get comfortable due to too much supposed comfort.  you look over at the baby on the hard mattress sleeping for hours (with no padding on the sides) and that is because they can actually breath the air - and don't feel hot.

OK - well, that just shows how little I know about babies and caring for them.

ok.  do scottish women typically drink scotch straight up or do they also hide it in tea?

Most people who drink Scotch whisky - whether or not they are women or Scottish or both - drink it with just a little water - and it should be good, clean water otherwise it will risk ruining the taste of the scotch.

can u tell from the color if it is good?

Not necessarily.

what is the dif between scotch and sherry?  are they basically the same?  or is sherry typically sweeter?  i always though scotch was dry and sort of a'medicine' drink.

As large a difference as there is between God and this forum, I'd say. If I were you, I'd go look up some information on each of these drinks, beause there's no space here for it - especially in a thread about God and this forum - and whilst I daresay that some forum members may drink Scotch, some may drink sherry and some may drink both (though not, of course, together), I've no idea what God drinks...

Best,

Alistair

[Derek]

Not all of us; I'm not, for one...

Best,

Alistair

ah, so you're better than us?  oh...i'm not just a pianist either. probably none of us are.

[mephisto]

Not all of us; I'm not, for one...

Best,

Alistair

Can you play a c major scale?

[ahinton]

ah, so you're better than us?  oh...i'm not just a pianist either. probably none of us are.

Did I say any such thing? No. Nor did I mean any such thing; this is someting from your own imagination alone. In fact, the situation is very much the reverse. Many of you are pianists. I am not one. I do not pretend to be one. Is that OK?

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

Can you play a c major scale?

I'm not even answering that (if you don't mind)! I said that I am not a pianist. Which is true. Let's just leave it at that, shall we?

Best,

Alistair