If anyone said anything to me about my shorts and flip flops I would simply say very politely and without malice...

"Oops! It seems I've stumbled into the wrong room, I didn't mean to intrude on your fashion show. Do you know which room worship is being held in?"

Therefore, from this day forward, this place shall no more and no longer be called Mingle2, but it will be called the valley of confusion.

So saith the Lord. Amen.

I have to ride my bicycle a longggggggggg way to church today in the heat....my ride cancelled AGAIN.

Is it proper, to wear shorts,(not real short), and flip flops,(nice flip flops), to church?

1. I don't think just because God is the creator that means that
all that was created was divinely inspired because inspiration has
to do with how God makes a human feel emotionally.

2. So, I don't think that the heavens and earth were divinely inspired - because they are not made by others besides God.
I do think it is fair to say that they are part of the universe
which came about because of or as a part of God.

Can God inspire himself?




Can God inspire himself?

I have lots of questions.

Does this mean that you believe inspiration (of God) is all good, beautiful and awesome? Would you say that the natural resources found in/on the Earth are God inspired equally? The oceans, lakes and rivers and all the beauty and utility they offer all life on Earth: inspirational? The thought processes and human labor that have harnessed the water’s utility (damns, fishing, canals, sprinkler systems): all inspirational?

Coal, natural gas, and oil: inspirational? Human development of those amazing items: inspirational. The destruction of echo-systems & bio-systems so that the human population could harness all of this Earths natural resources which has enables the growth and development of our species: inspirational?

Knowledge of both Earthly and universal properties: inspirational? Using our knowledge, to make brick and mortar structures to protect us as we search for safe harbor all around the world: inspirational? Expanding our knowledge of agriculture for hybrids to grow more food in various climates: inspirational?

Do you think Monsanto Corporation is inspired of God?

Do you think the methods we use towards human continuation, growth and development have been and continue to be inspired of God?

Nuclear power – developed by good people for the benefit of human kind: inspirational? Has the benefit outweighed its destructiveness? Was only the benefit inspired of God and what of the waste it produces? Inspirational?

Without knowing what your reply might be, I think it’s obvious that the question you seek responses to has not been clearly stated because you have avoided defining in clear terms what inspiration is in God’s mind versus what humans feel inspiration is.

Can you know what God is inspired by and what that God would consider inspirational? If God is inspired it must be by all it has created. Why would God not be inspired by what humans have created and further why would humans not be inspired by what humans have created?

I do not think an individual's death is inspired by God.
The one God which I worship does not decide on a person
by person or insect by insect or reptile by reptile basis
which one dies and which one lives.

God never kills.

Deaths result from a natural process. A process created
by God but not with direct intervention on a case-by-case
basis.

Deaths are not inspired by God.

But LIVING well is inspired by God. Beautiful living.

How did you come by the information which helped you to form your opinion?

A combination of a lot of things including personal experience and imagination.

So Your reason for your opinion is this?

"There has never been any empiracle evidence that our bodies are inhabited by some 'other' life form or so-called soul."

(did you mean empirical evidence?)

If so, then I don't believe your statement is true.

"Empirical research is a way of gaining knowledge by means of direct and indirect observation or experience. Empirical evidence (the record of one's direct observations or experiences) can be analyzed quantitatively or qualitatively."

Also another question for you:

What do you mean by "other" life form? Is that what you feel "a soul" is? Another life form?

[but to get technical, our bodies are chock full of other lifeforms.]

I.E. viruses, bacteria, cancer cells, fetuses, parasites etc

In the dark days after the crucifixion, the disciples huddled within their room, afraid for their very lives. After Yeshua’s appearance, their faith was restored. 40 days later, the spirit of God poured down upon them, giving them the powers of prophecy and healing.

So far, so good.

Their mission was to proclaim the message to the Hebrews, one in which they were faithful. At this time, Peter and James were in charge so to speak.

The disciples, like Yeshua, had no intention of creating a church. To them, men of Jewish faith, such an idea was abhorrent. It was heresy.

“Upon this rock I shall build my church,” was added generations later. Yeshua never said it!

That statement is absolute blasphemy!
Yeshua came to fulfil the law, not to change it.

Then came Paul.

Born Saul, a citizen of Tarsus, he was a Roman citizen. Though he bought this. He was also Jewish, and a Pharisee to boot. This truly evil man had spent some time killing the followers of Yeshua with glee. His hands were stained with the blood of the innocent.
He was blinded by the wrath of God, he did stagger to the home of a Hebrew believer, and he was healed. From this point on however, he made a grab for power.

As Acts claims, he went to the Damascus synagogue and began to preach that Yeshua was the Son of God. Of course, those there recognised him as the bloodthirsty beast who had enjoyed murdering the faithful. How he escaped with his life, I have no idea.
After his escape, he headed for Jerusalem to join the disciples of Yeshua. They did not believe his claims of course until Barnabas spoke up in Saul’s defence. Now, from my viewpoint, Saul and Barnabas had come to a deal. After having so much power as killer of the faithful, he was determined to set up his own religion with himself as absolute leader.

Of course, this would split the faithful and ensure its disappearance among the Hebrew believers. History records this final event.

I suspect gold changed hands and an agreement that Barnabas would be his number 2. This would explain Barnabas extraordinary intervention.
During his stay, he argued with the Greek faithful and again had to flee to Tarsus.

He reappears at Antioch, Syria, with Barnabas in tow, and sailed to Cyprus. While there, they came across a chap called Bar-Yeshua, a Hebrew. This man claimed to be a prophet and was a friend of the governor.

Now Saul and Barnabas regarded this individual as so dangerous to their plan that they cursed him until he was blind. I suspect violence was used to achieve this result. Soon after they headed for Perga, Turkey, where he spoke about God and Yeshua. It was here that he done what was not authorised. He claimed that God had sent him to preach to the Gentiles. He did all this without the sanction of the disciples, therefore without authority from God.

The first schism was well underway, as he had planned all along.
Of course, he and his companion had to flee again.

They arrived in Lystra, as recorded in Acts, where an event took place that confirms my belief.

While there, the locals gave Barnabas the name Zeus, Chief of the Greek God’s and Saul the name Hermes.

As Hebrews, this was rejection of their heritage, and outright blasphemy. If they had truly been speaking the word of God, they would never have accepted such pagan titles. What is further proof of their ungodly behaviour is this. The priest of the Greek Pantheon arranged animal sacrifice in their honour, another incredible act of blasphemy.

This shows clearly that Saul and Barnabas cared nothing about their Hebrew religion and nothing for the emerging Hebrew Christian faith. At that time centred in Jerusalem.

Of course, the local Hebrews were enraged by their behaviour and had them stoned, a punishment decreed by God through Moses.
Unfortunately, they survived.

When he and Barnabas returned to Antioch, they reported the Gentile conversion but hid their act of blasphemy. Had they been honest men, the Pauline heresy would have ended there.

Soon after their arrival, a delegation came from Jerusalem. Obviously, the alarming news of Saul’s activity had reached the disciples. The two-man delegation was despatched to sort them out. Lance the boil shall I say.

The delegation demanded that new converts must obey the Law of Moses and be circumcised. Saul and Barnabes show their contempt for the Hebrew faith and Christology by arguing against such an edict.
After the row, they were taken to Jerusalem under some duress. They were again warned by the disciples, that converts must follow the Law of Moses. A compromise was worked out by Peter and James in order to prevent the split getting any worse.

Under this plan, new converts were expected to follow the Law of Moses, eating sacred food and keeping away from sexual immorality. Saul and Barnabas returned to Antioch with the letter. They had won the first round.

A little later Saul wanted to tour the area and Barnabas wanted to take John Mark with him. Saul had other ideas and after a major row, they separated.

Sometime later Saul and Silas were arrested and thrown in prison while visiting Thyatira. Only Saul’s Roman citizenship saved their lives.

Again, while Roman troops were killing the faithful elsewhere, Saul relied on them to save his neck.

While in Athens, Saul again entered pagan shrines, a violation of Moses Law.

After many travels, he returned to Jerusalem and met James once more. At this meeting, he was reminded of his recent activity. Particularly that activity which encouraged new converts to abandon the Law of Moses. Again, proof of Saul’s contempt.

Soon after this, Saul and four Gentiles went to the Temple to report how many days sanctification would last. Gentiles were not allowed to enter, and is proof once more of his contempt. Before the seven days were up however, a group of Hebrews arrived denouncing them for their blasphemous behaviour. This charge included defiling the Temple by bringing in the Gentiles.

Once more, he was rescued by Roman troops. It was during this time that we find out that he bought his Roman citizenship. Not only was he a blasphemer, he was also a traitor to his own people.
The Romans however were suspicious and took him before the Sanhedrin. At this location, he showed further contempt by insulting the High Priest, Ananias. As things got sticky, he reminded them that he too was a Pharisee. This created a row and once more Roman troops had to rescue him.

While he was safely within their fort, the Hebrews plotted to kill him. In order to save his life, the fort commander sent him to Governor Felix. However, the High Priest and his group tracked him down.

Incensed no doubt by his blasphemy, they laid charges. Paul defended himself as recorded, claiming to adhere to the Law of Moses. This was blatantly untrue. Saul was revealed here, to be a liar and schemer to boot.

After a protracted hearing, he appealed to the Emperor himself. He had this right as a citizen of Rome. Obviously, he feared for his life.

A little later, the master escapologist headed for Rome under guard. However, a storm wrecked the ship and he ended up in Malta. Around three months later, he arrived in Rome, still under guard. While there, he was placed under house arrest.

At this time he wrote a number of letters, the contents of which breaks the Law of Moses. These letters also reveal his anti-Semitism. Romans 2:17 is the offending passage. This theme continues from then on.

As time passed the schism within the Christ movement grew larger. Those who followed Saul outnumbered those who followed the disciples. Saul also accused other believers of immoral behaviour.
These letters also introduce the blood right as practiced today.
He convinced his hearers that consuming the blood and body of Christ would remove their sin. Not only is this outright blasphemy, it also introduces paganism into the Christ movement. As a paid up Roman citizen he would have had pagan beliefs.

Paul has effectively turned modern practitioners into pagans. Eating flesh, drinking blood is the act of cannibalism. Okay, I know it’s only symbolic, but my argument stands.

The last supper was not meant to be commemorated. Yeshua himself said, “Do this in memory of me.” He did not say, “This is my body. This is my blood.” As a Hebrew, this would have been abhorrent and blasphemous. He also knew his time was up.

The bread/wine was to be enjoyed by his disciples after his death, as a means of remembrance only. Saul was responsible for creating and perpetuating this heresy.

Later on in these letters, he even suggests that if the Holy Spirit guides you, you could say “A curse on Yeshua.”

I suggest this reveals Saul’s true nature.

In Galatians, he confesses in another letter that Peter the disciple was wrong. He clearly intends to widen the schism and make it permanent. His bid for power was obviously gaining pace.
A little later, he attacks the Law of Moses openly. He said that those obeying the law lived under a curse. His anti-Semitism was on full display here.

In another letter, Ephesians, Saul places Yeshua above God. Outright blasphemy does not cover this crime. The Son is beneath his Father. He also suggests the growing church is the body of Christ. Blasphemy again.

How he kept getting away with this, I have no idea. Why his readers believed it, is even more astonishing. He continues like this throughout the letter.

Under the Law of Moses, he deserved death by stoning. No wonder he was determined to destroy it.

What happened to Saul in the end?

The final Saul letter went to Philemon. After this, he is mentioned no more.

Christian tradition strongly suggests that he died in Rome as a martyr. This happened around AD 64 under Nero.

I accept it.

However, his crimes are something else. Today’s church, which Yeshua did not intend to create, is built on lies, blasphemy and heresy.
Saul is responsible for this.

The rock on which it is built, shall crumble into dust.

This series shall continue...

As war approached in the year AD 2003, I issued warnings of the significance of that event. Those who heard listened. Events proved me right.

Jeremiah 49:34 describes Judgement on Elam, a part of modern Iraq nr the Persian Gulf. Used to be part of the Babylonian Empire. Jeremiah 50, 51 describes the fate of Babylon, 2003 to the present day. The reference to demons, evil spirits, refers bluntly to those causing carnage through shootings, bombings etc. When Saddam was found, the prophecy, “Is this the man who made the nations tremble?” went through my mind. I even spoke them to my partner. She understood.
 
Final Result.

Hebrew's believe that history must be read backwards. I follow that viewpoint. Jeremiah is explicit. Like my own warnings.

Damascus will face destruction at the hands of Apollyon. The avenging angel. He will turn on Edom, today part of Israel. Jordan will be hammered too. This is Moab and Ammon. He will sweep south to north. Lebanon, Syria. In the ensuing holocaust, Jerusalem shall be destroyed completely. Global destruction quickly follows. Have mentioned this elsewhere in discussions.

Jeremiah 47 is very important. It really is the roadmap to the end. 47:2 refers to the 2004 tsunami and the global mourning. 47:4-5 refers to the war of 2006 and the coming conflict. The final destruction follows after this.

May God in his mercy spare us all, Amen.

There is no empirical evidence for a lot of things.

To claim that 'those who believe in such things accept the dogma that defines them is a personal opinion.'

There is a spiritual side to humanity and the human consciousness. To deny that for lack of "objective evidence" is a big mistake in my opinion.

Your remark sounds arrogant. It smacks the same as telling people they are ignorant or stupid for believing in a soul or in spirit, or in God.

You shouldn't do that unless you have objective evidence that such a thing does not exist.

Otherwise its just the same old trying to prove or disprove God argument that is a ridiculous waste of time.

To claim that 'those who believe in such things accept the dogma that defines them is a personal opinion.

NOUN:
pl. dog·mas or dog·ma·ta (-m-t) KEY

A doctrine or a corpus of doctrines relating to matters such as morality and faith, set forth in an authoritative manner by a church.

An authoritative principle, belief, or statement of ideas or opinion, especially one considered to be absolutely true. See Synonyms at doctrine.

A principle or belief or a group of them: "The dogmas of the quiet past are inadequate to the stormy present" (Abraham Lincoln).

That would be because the 'soul' exists in a different realm.

and our mind links us to it...

via the holy spirit.

We will not 'see' the soul until that day mankind invents a tool that can see into a different realm.

Divine inspiration is not the same concept as "God's will".

Below is a simple description of God's will from the Wiki but
it really has little to do with Inspiration. It has to do with
the belief that God controls everything - which is clearly pretty
ludicrous.

I see no evidence that God is directly controlling each individual's
daily life through direct intervention. But this does not mean that
God didn't start the ball rolling or that God does not inspire
beautiful works!

=-=-=-=-=

The will of God or divine will refers to the concept of God as having a plan for humanity, and as such desires to see such a plan fulfilled. Thus the concept of God's will may relate to various religious concepts:

Concepts

Divine law - the concept that man's law follow God's will
Salvation - the concept that claims it is God's will that human beings be saved from death.
Providentialism is a belief that God's will is evident in all occurrences. It can further be described as a belief that the power of God (or Providence) is so complete that humans cannot equal his abilities, or fully understand his plan.
Predestination - a Christian concept of God's will for the destiny of man. Those who believe in predestination, such as John Calvin, believe that before the creation God determined the fate of the universe throughout all of time and space. Predestination is a decree by God that there are certain souls that were previously appointed to salvation.

=-=-=-=-=

None of these things is necessary for Divinely Inspired Works.

di·vine/diˈvīn/
Adjective:
Of, from, or like God or a god.

=-=-=-=

My thinking was using the above definition of divine.

So...No one has answered yet.

What things are divinely inspired?
Great art? Great music? Great literature? Science?

Lousy forms of any of those things?
Charity?
Mass Murder?

What do you think divine inspiration really is - and what are some
examples of things that are or are not divinely inspired?

Don't blame Wall Street, don't blame the big banks, if you don't have a job and you're not rich, blame yourself! ... It is not a person's fault if they succeeded, it is a person's fault if they failed."

My cup is on the table.

That statement is true(or not) to everyone. It may not be believed by everyone. But whether or not it is true is in no way contingent upon everyone's agreement. It is true if and only if my cup is on the table.

Regardless of the fact this is the American Autumn modeled after the Arab spring started by politicaly motivated man Van Jones.

Now the protesters are calling for the re election of a obamamoa,and The official Occupy Wall Street website vehemently supports Obama’s tax agenda
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bFVR9Nv43J4&feature=player_embedded

Also thought it was about the little man but now we begin to learn that along with Van jones George Soros, The Ruckus Society, the Tides Foundation and the Ford Foundation.Are all involved.

the protesters are being completely misdirected by their socialist/communist leaders. The real center of financial control is the Federal Reserve and the city of London

To get at the root of the problem, one should be protesting, say, in London’s City where central banking originated. Or protesting in front of the Federal Reserve in Washington DC. These are real seats of power. But the shadowy and excessively powerful and wealthy individuals who have created the modern economic system are quite satisfied no doubt to have Wall Street take the blame. It suits their purposes.

It is too bad that the Occupy Wall Street movement seems to be obscuring the larger issues by apparently blaming the private (transactional) sector in entirety for what has occurred in the past few years

Occupy Wall Street is leaderless resistance movement with people of many colors, genders and political persuasions. The one thing we all have in common is that We Are The 99% that will no longer tolerate the greed and corruption of the 1%. We are using the revolutionary Arab Spring tactic to achieve our ends and encourage the use of nonviolence to maximize the safety of all participants.