http://everyotherdaydietguide.com/top-5-calf-exercises-for-more-definition/

"Mother whale proudly lifts her calf out of the water to introduce it to delighted onlookers."

Sure, that's one way to read it. Another is:
Mother whale, sick to death of her annoying offspring, hoists it out of the water hoping the savage humans kill it

What's the opposite of aquarium? So the mother whale takes her calf to the aerium to see humans?

That's one tough babushka right there. Took it right on the chops and still had the sense to cover herself on the ground. I would have been out cold with my glass jaw, but why the hell would I be at a calf birth in the first place?

You can't call God immutable, then show that he can obviously change (have fulfilling relationships, have changing feelings, make decisions to do things), and say we can't understand how he's immutable. You claimed immutability. I didn't. I'm just showing you the logical consequences of the words you're using. After you say words, you can't go back and say you don't know what the words mean, or that they don't mean the same thing when we're talking about God. Again, words have meaning.

There are massive internal inconsistencies in your bible story. "God is immutable" is not a compatible statement with "God has emotional reactions to things people do", or "God has ongoing interactive relationships with people". Yes, taken to it's logical conclusion, God is a frozen thing, which is clearly incompatible with omnipotence, as you pointed out yourself. Either God is not immutable, or significant portions of the bible story are false, including every part where God does anything, feels anything, and especially claims of omni-anything.

I am applying immutability to His essential nature, I am not saying God never changes. To say God cannot change is to say that God cannot do anything or be anything. The thought that total changelessness is a prerequisite of perfection is a platonian ideal, not a Christian one. How can perfection be actualized if it is not manifest? Who God is is what always stays the same. He is perfectly good. What God does can change. He manifests that good in many different ways.

About God's supposed immutability. Why would he have two covenants with us if his basic nature never changes? Why would he have one set of rules before Christ, and another set after? Why was he such a warring murderous genocidal badass in the OT, but relatively passive in the NT, and totally absent in daily affairs since then? It seems to me he has changed plenty over the years.

His first covenant was exclusively with the Israelities to create the conditions for the coming of the Messiah. The second covenant was established for the entire world. It takes a student of the bible to understand that the entire OT is about Jesus Christ. Everything that is going on there is preparing the way for the Messiah, and is a picture of His coming. For instance, the story of Abraham and Issac is a picture of the sacrifice the Father made. Consider this video:



Not only a picture, but containing numerous prophecies. When Jesus said "My God My God why have you forsaken Me?".. He wasn't crying out to the Father because He felt abandoned, He was quoting Psalm 22, to let everyone there know He was fulfilling it. If you read it take note that when it was written (600 years before Christ) that crucifixion hadn't been invented yet.

Regarding the Old Testament, you should consider the other side of the coin. You may consider the actions of God the Father harsh, but then you should also consider the actions of the people He was dealing with. Consider the fact that after He brought the jews out of egypt, delivering them from hundreds of years of slavery, and doing non stop miracles in front of them, even personally leading them through the desert, that as soon as Moses disappeared for a few days, they all descended into barbarism and paganism and made golden calfs to worship saying "this is the God that brought us out of Egypt". Even after all that God had done for them, they were ready to betray Him at the drop of a hat. This is why God dealt harshly with them, because it was the only thing they understood, and that even just barely. The people whom you claim genocide (which wasn't genocide, btw..they drove them out, they didn't exterminate them) were given 400 years to repent, and the reason they were being judged because they were so corrupt that they ritually sacrificed their children to demons. We know from history that people who did this kind of thing also engaged in things like cannibalism. They weren't nice people, and even then God gave them 400 years to change.

How can God get angry when something happens if he always knew it would happen? Jesus seems to be a completely different dude from God of the OT. I like Jesus. God the father I don't

Foreknowledge doesn't rule out an emotional response when it happens. It's not easy to watch your children betraying you I am sure.

I'm glad to hear you like Jesus. And He loves you. The thing to understand is that Jesus is the Fathers heart; they are one. You have a negative impression of the Father because you disagree with how He dealt with the israelities, but you should see the other side of it and understand what He did for us through His Son. Christs very words came from Him:

John 12:50

I know that his command leads to eternal life. So whatever I say is just what the Father has told me to say."

John 8:28

So Jesus said, "When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am [the one I claim to be] and that I do nothing on my own but speak just what the Father has taught me.

John 5:19

So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of his own accord, but only what he sees the Father doing. For whatever the Father does, that the Son does likewise.

Christ did not come of His own accord, He came because the Father sent Him. He died on the cross to give us forgiveness for sins and eternal life, which was the Fathers plan all along. God doesn't want to destroy us, He wants to save us, and He was even willing to give His only Son to do it. So if you can understand the OT in that light, maybe you can understand God the Father a little better.

As far as not being active today, God is always working all the time. I see it clearly, but it takes spiritual discernment to notice it. You need the Holy Spirit for that. God is really hiding in plain sight.

>> ^messenger:
@shinyblurry
Words have meaning.
You can't call God immutable, then show that he can obviously change (have fulfilling relationships, have changing feelings, make decisions to do things), and say we can't understand how he's immutable. You claimed immutability. I didn't. I'm just showing you the logical consequences of the words you're using. After you say words, you can't go back and say you don't know what the words mean, or that they don't mean the same thing when we're talking about God. Again, words have meaning.
There are massive internal inconsistencies in your bible story. "God is immutable" is not a compatible statement with "God has emotional reactions to things people do", or "God has ongoing interactive relationships with people". Yes, taken to it's logical conclusion, God is a frozen thing, which is clearly incompatible with omnipotence, as you pointed out yourself. Either God is not immutable, or significant portions of the bible story are false, including every part where God does anything, feels anything, and especially claims of omni-anything.
About God's supposed immutability. Why would he have two covenants with us if his basic nature never changes? Why would he have one set of rules before Christ, and another set after? Why was he such a warring murderous genocidal badass in the OT, but relatively passive in the NT, and totally absent in daily affairs since then? It seems to me he has changed plenty over the years.
How can God get angry when something happens if he always knew it would happen? Jesus seems to be a completely different dude from God of the OT. I like Jesus. God the father I don't.

thanks for the response my friend.
you need to realize something,for it will save you a huge amount of time.
i am already aware of your theosophy so you dont have to reiterate every time we converse.
more practical that way.

Sure, always a pleasure my friend. I didn't get notification of your reply, otherwise I would have replied to this sooner. If I am reiterating anything it is to respond to bold claims and assertions about Jesus or the word of God that you're making.

I understand that in your eyes you have dissected the scripture for its "true" meaning, and that in comparison, you think I am rubbing two sticks together. Before I became a Christian and had gnostic beliefs, that is the way I approached scripture as well. I am not ignorant to your point of view, or your methodology. What I am trying to tell you is that by searching for the "true" meaning you have lost the true meaning.

i knew you would have a strong disagreement with not only my take on sin but how i dealt with those in a crisis of faith.
was to be expected. please remember that condensing 40 years down in to a few paragraphs much will be lost. so the answer would be:
no hell (not the version given by the church)
nor satan (again,not the version given by the church)
but i do not teach that salvation is a solo job.christ was the way and the light.
the path has been lit we need but to follow.
love and forgiveness are the first step towards that goal.

John 10:1

Truly, truly, I say to you, he who does not enter the sheepfold by the door but climbs in by another way, that man is a thief and a robber.

The first step is to submit to the Lordship of Jesus Christ. What we need foremost is Gods love and forgiveness; that is how we are validated as human beings. This is the reason I am disagreeing with you, because you are distorting what Jesus said. You're teaching people to make up their own gospel, and thus, their own Jesus. This is what is called idolatry. You're teaching people to make Jesus into a false idol. Don't like the idea of eternal punishment? No problem! Jesus didn't really mean that..He loves you and accepts you just the way you are. Don't like the idea of Satan? No problem! Evil is just a state of mind..you don't really have an enemy trying to destroy you. God would never allow that, He loves you!

What you're doing is divesting Jesus and His word of its authority and teaching people to be a judge over scripture. Instead of conforming to Gods standards, you're teaching people to make God conform to their standards, and showing them how they can justify it. It's wrong, and you're doing them more harm than good, because what you're teaching them is in fact in opposition to everything Jesus taught us to do.

i dont really understand your disagreement with my internalization/externalization example

because then you turn around and kind of make my point and even back up MY perspective.
that was interesting.

I disagree because it is all the work of the Holy Spirit. No, it is not what I happen to call the Holy Spirit and you call something else. I am talking about the literal Spirit of God, who has a mind and is God Himself. I am talking about the Spirit who searches the deep things of God, and leads into all truth. It isn't a metaphor I am using. This is where we're disagreeing. The Holy Spirit is the one who transforms us into the image of Christ, and apart from the Spirit we are chasing our own tails.

You say the Holy Trinity = body mind spirit. This is the problem with gnosticism, that it makes all sorts of connections that aren't really there. By making these kinds of associations you are actually divesting it of its true meaning. The Holy Trinity is God, there is nothing to compare God to, or associate God with. God is God and no one and nothing is like God. The equation isn't body mind and spirit in any case, it is body soul and spirit.

http://bible.org/seriespage/man-trinity-spirit-soul-body

nor do i understand your reticence to being called a baptist.it is what most closely aligns to your theosophy.sometimes we need labels to help us relate.thats why i use gnostic.
ah well.not a big point really..was just curious.

They are closer to what I believe than other denominations but what they believe doesn't represent what I believe. That's why I reject the label. I am simply a follower of the Way, a disciple of Jesus Christ.

i was thinking of a long line of questions but feel they not express the revelation i desire.
so.let me ask you this ONE question:
did god create us so he could be worshiped?

God created us to be in relationship with Him, which includes love, worship, fellowship, and service. He didn't create us because He needed anything, He created us out of the abundance of His goodness.

Let me ask you a question. Do you feel God isn't worthy of worshipped, or that He doesn't want to be worshipped?

This is something people bring up, that they don't feel they should have to worship God. My position is, if you don't feel like worshipping God then you clearly don't know Him. He is worthy of all honor, all praise, and all glory.

i have to admit being a bit tickled by some of your responses.they actually fit quite well from a gnostic perspective.i know you didnt mean them that way..hence me getting the giggles.
so i agree in spirit.we ARE all ONE.
this is why i end many of my letters with:namaste
what a great word.

2 Corinthians 6:14

Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness?

We are one when we are joined together in Christ. The body of Christ is the unity that God has set apart for Himself, separate from the world. We are all made in the image of God, true, but the spirit apart from Christ is dead in its sins and is incapable of pleasing God. The family of God is made up of adopted sons and daughters, and outside of that, there is no fellowship or unity.

OH.almost forgot (because "someone" keeps using bullet form responses)
when it comes to the bible the only thing i really give any authority to is the ministry of jesus.
the old testament is the old covenant and lets be honest.god is kind of a huge dick in that book.jesus made it irrelevant.and i have read all the gospels i could get my hands on,researched the meanings,the mistranslation,other theologians hypothesis and came to two conclusions:
1.jesus was most certainly here.
2.the bible is an incomplete text,fascinating as it may be.(boring to most though,but im a dork).

It might have skipped your attention but Jesus verified the Old Testament as the truth. He verified Genesis, Noah, Jonah, and many other things. It most certainly is not irrelevent for that reason, and for the reason that it is the prophecies in the Old Testament that predict the coming of Christ, prophecies which Jesus literally fulfilled. You can read the entire OT as being a type of the Messiah to come:

http://videosift.com/video/True-and-Better

However you might see the actions of God, He was dealing with a stubborn and evil people, who defied Him at every turn. Remember when He brought Moses up on the mountain? What is the first thing the israelites did? They made a golden calf and worshipped it saying "here is the god who brought us out of egypt." This was after God had done all of these mighty miracles before them. If anything, God was way too lenient.

I'm glad we can at least agree that Jesus was here. So let me ask you two 1/2 questions:

1: why don't you think Jesus is literally God (not someone who attained it, but is the literal creator of this reality)?
1a: was He raised from the dead, and if yes, by whom and for what purpose?
2: why is the bible "incomplete"? What do you think is missing?

ps:great book for ya right here.
http://frimmin.com/books/cosmicchrist.php

I've actually seen and read similiar books to these. They attempt to turn Christianity into a universalist enlightenment religion. The 12 steps to being as God is. It is to believe everything in general without believing anything in particular. It is the same thing the serpent said to Eve:

"ye shall be as gods"

Saying, we have to become as Christ to fix the Earth. That isn't what Jesus taught. He taught us that we are servants serving in His house, and that He has been given all authority under Heaven and Earth. He said in very plain language that He is the judge of the living and the dead, and that He is going to return to this fallen world and establish His Kingdom.

There is only one Jesus Christ, and we're not it. Why do you ignore the scripture that talks about His Lordship over Heaven and Earth but then embrace everything else?

and look up christ conciousness.
thats where my general theosophy lays.

It is indeed true that we need to have the mind of Christ, but again we can't do that without the Spirit of Christ. I think it is a noble pursuit to want to be like Jesus, but you can't do that by just emulating Him. You need His Spirit, the one that raised Him from the dead. We don't get the Spirit of Christ unless we are born again and confess Jesus as Lord. It is all a work of God, and apart from Him we can do nothing.

Galatians 5:22-23

But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law.

I hope you don't see my reply as being too harsh, because I am stating the truth of what I believe, just as you are. If you have taken any offense, please accept my apology. I don't compromise on truth, and I am only meeting you with it at the places where you have drawn the lines. Take care my friend.

>> ^enoch

Hehehe... yeah... I went there too... *noshame*>> ^rottenseed:

heh...POV

He's probably thinking, "Great, now I'm going to be made into a veal-burger. I was almost home free!"

You know it's not America when the rescuer doesn't say one word to the calf (such as "Hey, buddy. Come here, boy. You're okay...").

Yeah, what the heck was that? The pity laughs were also painful.
>> ^conan:

wtf? he messed up his whole act. has he even rehearsed it? should be ashamed to go live with that.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'flex, gym, calf exercise, everything, is terrible' to 'flex, gym, calf exercise, weightlifting, bodybuilding' - edited by xxovercastxx

Disturbing yes. Snuff no! Because there is a valueable lesson attached.


The guy being gored by the elephant?

The guy being attacked and gored by the bull?

I don't think those people survived. Video sift has strict rules on what is and isn't snuff. This doesn't fit with those rules. You lot are obviously a lot more blood thirsty than I am, and see that as awesome, so be it. Good luck with that.

>> ^luxury_pie:

>> ^robbersdog49:
Nature can be awesome. Truly inspiring and incredible. The last sequence with the Buffalo calf being attacked by lions and then a crocodile and then being saved, that's awesome nature. Why the images of people being very badly injured/killed by animals? That's not nature. I don't believe that none of the victims died, this isn't a news story and I'm pretty sure that makes this snuff.
Nature can be horrendous as well as beautiful. I've watched lions in Kenya catch and kill a Zebra and it really was a horrible thing to see and hear. It took a long time to die. What you normally see on TV is the edited down version. Death is a part of nature, a part of life. The lioness had cubs and they would survive thanks to her killing ability. It wasn't just mindless violence.
I don't like to see snuff on the sift, but particularly when it's presented as being a demonstration of how awesome nature is. This is an unpleasant video and about as far from being awesome as it's possible to be. If a bullied animal gets it's own back on the person bullying it, nothing good has happened. The animals 'getting revenge' in this video will have been killed for what they did. Awesome would have been seeing these animals being rescued from their positions and looked after properly before things got that bad. This is just sad.

I have to disagree on "nothing good has happened".
IMHO if the abusers died for what they did to the animals, the world is a little bit better.
And to take the edge out of the snuff-judgement:
a) the bungee jumper was fake
b) the dude arm wrestling the crocodile, alive and had it coming
c) the fucktard participating in the toro-chase in spain? Educational I hope.
d) the poacher for torturing the cat? Educational too.
Disturbing yes. Snuff no! Because there is a valueable lesson attached.

While I agree this definitely is not snuff, and so do 13 others, including myself again, should we not take all valid-ish concerns and discuss them? That's just because I am very rules-centered. (I hate guidelines, but not rules, funny huh?) And hurricanes are not "newsworthy" because they happen everyday somewhere @robbersdog49 but it is educational and this particular video is both morality based and educational.

Respect nature, or else.

>> ^robbersdog49:

Nature can be awesome. Truly inspiring and incredible. The last sequence with the Buffalo calf being attacked by lions and then a crocodile and then being saved, that's awesome nature. Why the images of people being very badly injured/killed by animals? That's not nature. I don't believe that none of the victims died, this isn't a news story and I'm pretty sure that makes this snuff.
Nature can be horrendous as well as beautiful. I've watched lions in Kenya catch and kill a Zebra and it really was a horrible thing to see and hear. It took a long time to die. What you normally see on TV is the edited down version. Death is a part of nature, a part of life. The lioness had cubs and they would survive thanks to her killing ability. It wasn't just mindless violence.
I don't like to see snuff on the sift, but particularly when it's presented as being a demonstration of how awesome nature is. This is an unpleasant video and about as far from being awesome as it's possible to be. If a bullied animal gets it's own back on the person bullying it, nothing good has happened. The animals 'getting revenge' in this video will have been killed for what they did. Awesome would have been seeing these animals being rescued from their positions and looked after properly before things got that bad. This is just sad.


>> ^luxury_pie:

>> ^robbersdog49:
Nature can be awesome. Truly inspiring and incredible. The last sequence with the Buffalo calf being attacked by lions and then a crocodile and then being saved, that's awesome nature. Why the images of people being very badly injured/killed by animals? That's not nature. I don't believe that none of the victims died, this isn't a news story and I'm pretty sure that makes this snuff.
Nature can be horrendous as well as beautiful. I've watched lions in Kenya catch and kill a Zebra and it really was a horrible thing to see and hear. It took a long time to die. What you normally see on TV is the edited down version. Death is a part of nature, a part of life. The lioness had cubs and they would survive thanks to her killing ability. It wasn't just mindless violence.
I don't like to see snuff on the sift, but particularly when it's presented as being a demonstration of how awesome nature is. This is an unpleasant video and about as far from being awesome as it's possible to be. If a bullied animal gets it's own back on the person bullying it, nothing good has happened. The animals 'getting revenge' in this video will have been killed for what they did. Awesome would have been seeing these animals being rescued from their positions and looked after properly before things got that bad. This is just sad.

I have to disagree on "nothing good has happened".
IMHO if the abusers died for what they did to the animals, the world is a little bit better.
And to take the edge out of the snuff-judgement:
a) the bungee jumper was fake
b) the dude arm wrestling the crocodile, alive and had it coming
c) the fucktard participating in the toro-chase in spain? Educational I hope.
d) the poacher for torturing the cat? Educational too.
Disturbing yes. Snuff no! Because there is a valueable lesson attached.

>> ^robbersdog49:

Nature can be awesome. Truly inspiring and incredible. The last sequence with the Buffalo calf being attacked by lions and then a crocodile and then being saved, that's awesome nature. Why the images of people being very badly injured/killed by animals? That's not nature. I don't believe that none of the victims died, this isn't a news story and I'm pretty sure that makes this snuff.
Nature can be horrendous as well as beautiful. I've watched lions in Kenya catch and kill a Zebra and it really was a horrible thing to see and hear. It took a long time to die. What you normally see on TV is the edited down version. Death is a part of nature, a part of life. The lioness had cubs and they would survive thanks to her killing ability. It wasn't just mindless violence.
I don't like to see snuff on the sift, but particularly when it's presented as being a demonstration of how awesome nature is. This is an unpleasant video and about as far from being awesome as it's possible to be. If a bullied animal gets it's own back on the person bullying it, nothing good has happened. The animals 'getting revenge' in this video will have been killed for what they did. Awesome would have been seeing these animals being rescued from their positions and looked after properly before things got that bad. This is just sad.

I have to disagree on "nothing good has happened".
IMHO if the abusers died for what they did to the animals, the world is a little bit better.
And to take the edge out of the snuff-judgement:
a) the bungee jumper was fake
b) the dude arm wrestling the crocodile, alive and had it coming
c) the fucktard participating in the toro-chase in spain? Educational I hope.
d) the poacher for torturing the cat? Educational too.

Disturbing yes. Snuff no! Because there is a valueable lesson attached.

Nature can be awesome. Truly inspiring and incredible. The last sequence with the Buffalo calf being attacked by lions and then a crocodile and then being saved, that's awesome nature. Why the images of people being very badly injured/killed by animals? That's not nature. I don't believe that none of the victims died, this isn't a news story and I'm pretty sure that makes this snuff.

Nature can be horrendous as well as beautiful. I've watched lions in Kenya catch and kill a Zebra and it really was a horrible thing to see and hear. It took a long time to die. What you normally see on TV is the edited down version. Death is a part of nature, a part of life. The lioness had cubs and they would survive thanks to her killing ability. It wasn't just mindless violence.

I don't like to see snuff on the sift, but particularly when it's presented as being a demonstration of how awesome nature is. This is an unpleasant video and about as far from being awesome as it's possible to be. If a bullied animal gets it's own back on the person bullying it, nothing good has happened. The animals 'getting revenge' in this video will have been killed for what they did. Awesome would have been seeing these animals being rescued from their positions and looked after properly before things got that bad. This is just sad.

It's been calculated that using his prosthetic legs he's measurably less efficient than the able-bodied athletes (doesn't feel right suggesting his body isn't able, but you know what I mean), since he doesn't have any of the calf, shin, or foot muscles contributing any force. Conclusively demonstrating this is how his team he won the court battle. I'm glad he had to go through a legal process, in a way, because all this suspicion has come up in court already, and people can point this out and say that it's clearly not cheating. He's just that good, and happens to have prosthetic legs. Rock on.