There is good evidence that the bible has been mistranslated, and misinterpreted to promote the doctrine of eternal punishment, no hope, no forgiveness, no restoration. We also have a clear motive for this crime, i.e., unbridled Church authority, which is always the result of fear through endless torments. I believe in a God that doesn't take any crap, but is ultimately, totally about restoration, redemption.



WHY DOES A HIGHER, MORE NOBEL, MORE BEAUTIFUL, MORE MAGNIFICENT VIEW OF GOD (WHICH HAS MUCH JUSTIFICATION IN SCRIPTURE), AND WHICH ALSO AGREES WITH HOW EVERY GOOD PARENT WOULD WISH TO RELATE TO A WAYWARD CHILD, WHY, WHY, WHY, DOES THIS PISS EVERYBODY OFF? Does this raise a question about the moral character of Christians?

Scott,



I shouldn't be posting here because I really don't have the time to get in to this deeply, but am going to give you my belief in a nutshell. It doesn't irritate me that you don't believe in a never ending hell, but I do think it to be very sad. There is, however, nothing I can do about it. It is your free choice.



I simply understand the Bible to say that there is a never ending eternity, and that all men will spend that eternity in one place or the other. I understand hell to be a terrible place. Jesus said that it would be better for a man to go through life without a complete body then end up there.



I believe that judgment is final. When the Bible says that hell is eternal and unending (read the last part of Mark 9, "Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.") I also believe that Heaven is eternal and unending, and that Jesus died so that whosoever will deny himself, take up his cross, and follow the Lord, that such a person will be in Heaven.



I also believe that when a person chooses the ways of sin, and his physical body dies, he awaits the final judgment. When this judgment is made, it means that person denied the Father, and now the Father denies that person, and such a person is not a child of God, and the Lord will proclaim "I never knew you".



I believe a person can reason all day long about how he would do things if he were God, however, none of us are, God has set those rules. If you choose not to serve God because you don't like the way He does things, that is your choice. I believe your reasonings are the very thing the faithful Christian is warned of in Ephesians 4:14b, "by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;". You are using an appeal to the emotions in about everyone of your attempts. What you do not realize is that the only reason any of your theories work is because the grace of God still exists even with the unbeliever in all matters pertaining to life on earth. When death comes upon a person, and final judgment is made, this grace is gone, and as such, separates a person from God so far that God no longer even knows that soul exists. That, I believe, is why the Bible says "depart from me, I never knew you". It is because the last strand of connection between that soul and God is broken, and it will never exist again. I believe that is firmly based in the Word of God. I am open to hearing why you believe I error, but you won't get anywhere using intimidation and emotional appeals.



It seems to me your reasonings are quite a long ways from being based on the Word of God. If you are not basing your reasonings on the Word of God, then I, for one, will never "get it". Intimidation won't work here, I've been down that road before. It's not new to me. Statements such as "We also have a clear motive for this crime" are a part of this attempt at intimidation, and aren't even true anyway, since we don't "have a clear motive for this crime". If it was so clear, then I would "get it". But you have not yet made it clear. Instead, you have resorted to your own reasonings. If you want me to be convinced of your view, you first need to give me something better than sand to build on. Fair enough?





Hope this helps you understand why I "refuse to 'get it' ". I tried to keep it clear, simple, and easily understood.

I'm taking quite a bit of flak. I realize these ideas challenge everything that was ever dribbled into our religious baby bottles. There is a precedent for this type thing though.



Brent, this answer is for you also regarding hope. Here is my position: Religion is about serving, worshipping, and loving God. If we are to do that, the numero uno frigging first step is to answer the question of Who is the God we purport to serve. Is He a punitive torturer who flunks most of the creation which He purports to love, or is He massively redemptive (quite unlike us as conversations on this forum have aptly revealed)? Why wouldn't we ask the nature of who we serve before we quibble about hanging beards and head coverings? I cannot imagine a more relevant questions than these because they establish His justice and His integrity. Or perhaps you think you love and serve who you do not know, or worse, love and serve He who has a sense of justice and forgiveness exactly the opposite of what humans consider good and noble.

I simply understand the Bible to say that....
I understand hell to be a terrible place...
I believe that judgment is final. ...
I also believe that Heaven is eternal and unending,...
I also believe that when a person chooses the ways of sin...
I believe a person can reason all day long about how he would do things if he were God...
I believe your reasonings are the very thing the faithful Christian is warned of in Ephesians
That, I believe, is why the Bible says "depart from me,...
It seems to me your reasonings are quite a long ways from being based on the Word of God.
You have resorted to your own reasonings.


LOL, you accuse me of my own reasonings, so to help you remember your own, I cut and pasted them. Wow. Not one single actual argument, but simply a repetition of what you believe again and again and again. Guess what TR. We already know what your believe. The question is WHY do you believe?

TR, a very very good post. cowabunga TR, if you'd just change your stupid avoidance rules,,,,,,,, !

Scott, you asked:

"The question is WHY do you believe? "



I thought I was clear on that, but maybe not. The answer is simple. Because I believe the Bible.


I know you don't like that answer, but I have nothing else to offer.

Is it really so important to be right or wrong about the hell debate?
I seem to be missing the point somehow, I honestly don't care much if or when or how hell exists, the way I see it is if I lead successful spirit filled life, it really doesn't matter.
I don't think any successful Christian lives his life based on fear of hell, but rather a sincere desire to please God...I serve the loving God who loves me more then I love my kids (if the Bible is to be believed) so I trust His motivation for me to based on success, I was not created to fail according to His Word, nor was anyone else. I choose to accept success or to fail, the consequences will be separation from Him forever...that is enough for me.
We can be right about the hell debate but still not successful in eternity, we can be wrong about the debate and still be with God for all eternity, can't we?
So am I not thinking deep enough here or what?
It seems fairly simple to me...what am I missing???
(Scott, do I need to go back into the kitchen and let the "intellectuals deal with this matter?" ;P )
Isn't this just another example of how Religion is just another way of men trying to save themselves (pride) instead of trusting Jesus' work on the cross?

Grace, a philosopher wrote centuries ago, that a problem with women relating to men, is that as a typical pattern, their effeminate emotional minds will typically seek comfort and security, and in so doing, usually hinder a man in his quest for objective principle and truth. I see that things have not changed.

Scott I could say a lot to you right now, but I am going to be real nice. But if you want feminine respect, you had just better change your attitude toward women. a constant Us vs Them will not solve anything here on earth, whether it is X vs H, Man vs Woman or whatever.


Satan uses that constant one upmanship constantly to create a constant state of conflict to keep us from God.

Love and prayers, Locklady

Scott, I actually find your reply pretty predictable.

LOL

Interesting observation, did everyone else think that my original post was based on emotion and a feel good point of view?

I am not naive enough to think that how we view the afterlife doesn't effect how we feel about the character of God.

It is these passionate altercations between the opinions of various men who get all emotional about their ideas (either opinion has a high margin for error since we don't have facts for the afterlife) and then accuse us women of lacking logic that make me chuckle!

"Interesting observation, did everyone else think that my original post was based on emotion and a feel good point of view?"

Knowing I stand largely alone here, you conveniently appeal to the opinion of others (with a quite predictable response). Are there times when it doesn't suit you to appeal to majority opinion?


You write:

"Is it really so important to be right or wrong about the hell debate? I seem to be missing the point somehow, I honestly don't care much if or when or how hell exists..."


And then you refute yourself:

"I am not naive enough to think that how we view the afterlife doesn't effect how we feel about the character of God."


And then you accuse us of doubting your logic:

"...and then accuse us women of lacking logic"

Well, who should be laughing now grace?


"The way I see it is if I lead successful spirit filled life, it really doesn't matter."


Maybe its not about you. Maybe its about the unbeliever like Stan. Go back and read his post to understand what I mean. The world is larger than just YOUR salvation gracy. Don't you give a **** about all the angry intelligent people whose intellect is offended by this precise discussion. Abraham Lincoln said, "Christianity makes the most sense if not examined too closely".


"I don't think any successful Christian lives his life based on fear of hell, but rather a sincere desire to please God..."


That is is very dishonest. You know good and well most Christians live their life fear-based.


"Isn't this just another example of how Religion is just another way of men trying to save themselves (pride) instead of trusting Jesus' work on the cross?"


So, in your economy, to argue for the character God, that He is not a torturing tyrant, is tantamount to being proud in your books, is to try to save ourselves. I've seen some wild-ass thinking in my days, your you are getting there!


"It is these passionate altercations between the opinions of various men who get all emotional about their ideas (either opinion has a high margin for error since we don't have facts for the afterlife)"


If you don't have all the facts, then why so strong on your position? Furthermore, apparently you don't understand the difference between feeling strong emotion when arguing a point arrived at logically, and arguing a point arrived at emotionally.

Grace, your point is to discourage me (us) from searching for and establishing the principle of God's character. You write as follows:

Is it really so important to be right or wrong about the hell debate?
I seem to be missing the point somehow, I honestly don't care much if or when or how hell exists, the way I see it is if I lead successful spirit filled life, it really doesn't matter.
Isn't this just another example of how Religion is just another way of men trying to save themselves (pride) instead of trusting Jesus' work on the cross?
It is these passionate altercations between the opinions of various men who get all emotional about their ideas (either opinion has a high margin for error since we don't have facts for the afterlife) and then accuse us women of lacking logic that make me chuckle!



And I wrote:
Grace, a philosopher wrote centuries ago, that a problem with women relating to men, is that as a typical pattern, their effeminate emotional minds will typically seek comfort and security, and in so doing, usually hinder a man in his quest for objective principle and truth. I see that things have not changed.



And you write:
Scott, I actually find your reply pretty predictable.

Did you not see how you fullfilled exactly the wisdom and prediction of that ancient philosopher, of hindering a man in a quest to know an objective principle, by using derision to invalidate the relevancy of the question. Grace, if you are not interested in the character of God, then the standard solution applies...go bake some cookies.

>their effeminate emotional minds will typically seek comfort and security, and in so doing, usually hinder a man in his quest for objective principle and truth. I see that things have not changed.< <br>
Scott, wasn't you the man promoting giving women "comfort and security"? What are you using that against them for?

Brent

Resistance can reach a level on this forum which can cause me to doubt myself. Grace's response was arrogant from the perspective that it courts that idea that a woman in this modern age enjoys a form of gender-based "diplomatic immunity". In other words, there is an energy that is extremely intimidating to men which asserts, we women can do everything better than men, both logically, and relationally.



Manhood is being denigrated into the sewer in our society, and men have become its most avid supporters. Many many women have a very deep ingrained belief that men are baboons, and they reveal this patronizing attitude in a thousand ways.



Grace's post scorned my passion for the question of "who is God", and also, apparently couldn't conceive of the idea that maybe a man can (at least some men) think more logically and less emotionally than a woman. The prove of a monkey in the woodpile is that this thought angers most woman. The very idea that men by design can (if not emasculated or emotionally damaged) think more logically than a woman angers them, so they grab for the place of men, while yet retaining their own place, i.e., the established fact that woman are more relationally and emotionally astute then men. This is the bad energy in the feminine movement, and they are very few men and woman unaffected by it. Hillary Clinton put it in a nutshell. She said, "woman can do everything better than men". I heard her say that on TV. I couldn't believe it.



This thought is strong on this forum. If I told grace that I was more logical than she (which I am), I know this would piss her off, but if I conceded that point and asserted that I was more emotionally astute, that would piss her off also. This equates to total superiority. Men are becoming useless. In a nutshell, men are reduced to breeding stock and emasculated house pets and woman feel superior on every front. They are quick to instruct men as if they are children, and they do this without pause, both in the areas that men have typically excelled in, and also along lines of traditional woman strength. The energy of this femininist thing intimidates me more than anything else. I'm not even sure why. The men will defend their own emasculation even more than militant women. Strange but true! Men want to seem enlightened, and they crave acceptance from women. Perhaps this is it, I don't know. There is all the band-wagon syndrome. All I know, is that the evil of the movement is revealed by how difficult it is to even broach a subject like this. Again, a certain form of immunity has become entrenched, and women can now get away with murder. All you see on television now is men depicted as stupid, bumbling buffoons. I will stand against this bullsh*t if I'm the only one on the planet. Canadian lesbians can come out of the woodwork and weigh in here, accusing me of having a fetish for macho. I don't care. I see what is going on and so do countless thousands of other men, and we are getting pissed about it. American men refusing to marry is becoming an epidemic. Why? They are sick and tired of the stacked deck, and the immunity which women now enjoy.



So I discerned from graces post, that she considered herself very logical about the entire affair, but from my perspective, the emotionally driven premises and outright contradiction of her post astonished me. So who is thinking clearly here. There is now way to prove it, I will say that. But I wondered, am I as foolish as grace and Locklady think I am. Well, I have a strong, independent, educated, female friend, certainly a woman who would defend woman's rights to the last straw, and I sent grace's, LL, and my post to her with absolutely no explanation of any kind except this, I stated this exchange was in response to a heated debate on hell between me and some others. I didn't even ask for a response. No information of any kind about me or the ladies, no setup whatsoever except our several posts cascaded together an emailed. She writes back:









The responses I saw were reactionary and self contradictory. They are ignoring the points you were striving to discuss. This is a typical diversionary tactic when persons feel threatened. Uncourageous people feel threatened when it occurs to them that they may need to rethink beliefs. Religion is for many a security blanket and is not plumbed to the depths for it's meanings that allow us to grow rather than stagnate. We all like to think we are right, but the greater spirituality is to be open to enlightenment and not be entrenched in something just because we've been mentally lazy. It is a childish response to attack the messenger or bring up side issues, rather than addressing the question of 'what shall I determine is logical to believe and thereupon base all my opinions and actions?'.



It was unthinking and later contradictory of the one person to ask 'is it really that important to be right about the hell debate?' Yes, as it propels whether or not you love and trust and yearn for God, or if you just fear Him. Standard psychology says the level of emotional development can be read by the characterization of God. A person believing, and refusing to consider otherwise, that God is punitive is (by text book definition) lacking confidence in their own worth. They are seeking either the threat of punishment for themselves (to either 'earn' their redemption or to provide motivation for complying with the rules they would not otherwise want to follow) or seeking punishment for others (providing a 'special' designation and feeling of superiority for themselves). It's done unawares of course, but is still very ignorant and revealing to anyone who studies human nature and motivations.



In contrast, a more inclusive belief of God being forgiving without limit indicates that the human himself is ready to also extend that grace to self and others. A Christian virtue, I would think. It's a well known fact that we can only forgive others when we have first forgiven ourselves, and that to withhold it or suppose punishment is the same as to wish it. The brain sees what it wishes to see and is forever revealing it in ways the person does not intend. Much is evidenced here as repressed anger towards maybe feeling forced into choices that were not truly embraced but fear driven instead. The accusation is between the lines that you want to make it too easy to be redeemed. That is exactly the God that seems to have made our natural world with all it's beauty and intricateness and self correcting mechanisms in the animal and plant kingdoms. And I understand that these are given to us for instruction as to how God also deals with humans.



The question of hell leads to the questions of 'where did we come from?', 'why are we here?', 'where are we going?' If a loving God did not create hell, but only man has assumed that possibility, then there's hope and assured redemption for everyone. It gives (or should) all enthusiastic and proper motivation for becoming the most aware and developed person one can. If that makes a human parent happy in relation to their children growing, then it is reasonable to feel God must be happy about our growth as well, given that we were created in His image. That is a more Christian or moral attitude than instead blaming Him for being unfair (even if only in our most secret thoughts), or being angry within themselves, and feeling piety while holding other's feet to the stove. To condemn others results in showing them as special, they think. True spirituality is not about rising about others, it is about understanding ourselves and others and realizing how much we have in common and forgiving that in them and us. And helping them if we can to come to their own understanding. Knowledge brings freedom and peace, and you can't grow in knowledge if you stubbornly defend what's been handed down from others or if you doggedly rely on some textual interpretation that may or may not have been true to the original. This tendency to human error is why God gave us the ability to reason and to have the courage to seek that still point of true knowing internally.



If there is a hell, then according to the ideas and the modern version of Christian scriptures, then there is no way any of us can hope to survive ridiculously inappropriate punishment, seeing that we are here under duress and with the odds seemingly stacked against us. Not even the most conscientious Christian would qualify. And if redemption is rather due to God's grace, then why some and not others, when it is said specifically that He came to redeem all? That is insulting to the Deity in it's capriciousness and foisting human shortcomings upon Him. It is sad to see illogical thinking such as shown in the responses that has it's base in emotions without seemingly even once stopping to see if it really makes sense. It's this kind of thinking at national levels that have caused most of our wars. The very refusal to sanely and cordially debate these or any other issues points to a world of unresolved emotions driving the reactions. I hope that the better nature of all persons involved in this debate encourages them to seek and not just defend.

Now, after having said all those cruel things, I will add this. I have a very high regard for both grace and LL, because their various posts in the past have proven their insights and intelligence, but I do believe they need to recognize what most psychologist know, is that they are gloriously created by God to be more sensitive, tender, relational, etc, then men, but they are not more logical and adept at working out abstract principles. We need to revel in the where and how God made us, and not be edging over onto other's territory. These are general truths with many exceptions, and the current crop of immasculated men are nearly proving me wrong.

Scott, you missed my point completely...

Let's try this again. Its not your argument, in fact I agree with much (actually most) of what you have to say it about it. Its the approach you take in debating it that I have issue with. I don't see you getting positive results.

Your approach doesn't make me want to look at the issue for some reason...(it has bushmaster feel)

The mentality or attitude you expose while debating an issue makes me want to argue with you, not debate. In fact it often appears like a complete waste of time as no one seems to get results in these debates. It's not the message its the delivery...You're bringing out the rebel in me man!

I may not be as intelligent as you, but I'm far from an emotional wreck living my life and making decisions based on pure emotion. If you want your message to appeal to women like myself you will have treat us with dignity.

I respect you immensely and I don't think you actually disrespect women you just have a way getting our blood pressure up when you start in on your preaching. Your music also gets our blood pressure up as well, just in a different way...a good way!

Your gonna have to compose a song and with your message and sing it softly while strumming the Boss and you'll have no arguments with us girls. ;P

Ok grace, I understand!

<<< your approach doesn't make me want to look at the issue for some reason...(it has bushmaster feel)>>>

dang, that's rough. How would you approach it? How does one present a contrary idea to entrenched religious people, and how does one deal with the fall out. I remember, when I first presented the idea a couple of year ago, once they caught on what I was actually saying, they were NOT polite, sesnitive, caring about my feelings, oh no! And, my heart and soul are not made out of wood. If you poke me, I bleed.

I know that was kind of harsh wasn't it...most likely a comment based on emotion!
Your no bushmaster, and it kinda had that feel this thread that's why I called you on it!

You know, I'm not being quite honest here. It isn't so much the reaming you get when you propose a new idea. That can hurt a little, but one should expect that. I would say this. Most of my anger and frustration comes from the way that people argue, i.e., refuting you without hearing you, attacking your character, never REALLY looking at the issue, that is what pisses me off so bad. I'm serious, I know what a logical approach is, I was successful in engineering, and that is pretty much the last word on a logical approach to problem solving. Much of the thinking on this forum is very effeminate, i.e., emotionally rather than logically based. But an effeminate (includes most men) thinker is absolutely incapable of recognizing this trait within their own thinking. You can only see it when you move away from it and look back. To an effeminate thinker, their thought process is the very pinnacle of pure logic.

I will give an example of effeminate-type thinking. Take the head covering issue in 1Cor11 (which I could care less btw). I don't care if you do or don't believe in head coverings, but I have never (not one frigging time) heard a advocate of this practice actually address the Greek word "anti" which means "instead of a covering". Why? They come back and answer your question, with their own question such as "do you feel God has more than one way to get to heaven", etc. etc. That is the stuff that is hard to take, and I'm sure we all do it in degree, some much much more than others, but when we do, we need to called on it hard.

oh, and this:

<< I may not be as intelligent as you, but I'm far from an emotional wreck living my life and making decisions based on pure emotion. >>>

Grace, you don't have to be an emotional wreck to be making decisions on PURE emotion (no one does that), but you only have to be a prefect, healthy, wonderful woman to tend towards emotional, sentimental considerations.


<< If you want your message to appeal to women like myself you will have treat us with dignity.>>>

You have every right to demand that consideration, and I am ashamed at of the many times where did not do that.

To me, the OT is all about the character of God, the four goespels in the NT are about Jesus and the rest of the NT is about the Holy Spirit and how he works. And they are three in one. calledoutPTL

[but I have never (not one frigging time) heard a advocate of this practice actually address the Greek word "anti" which means "instead of a covering".]

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -



Scott, the word "anti" (instead of/in place of) poses no problem at all for the literal head covering for women advocates.

I believe that 1 Corinthians 11:1-13 is talking about a literal head covering which the woman is to place on her head while praying or prophesying (whereas the man is NOT to place a literal head covering on his head while praying or prophesying).

And THEN in 1 Corinthians 11:14,15 the apostle Paul CONTRASTS what he was just talking about with the fact that NATURE itself teaches the same thing.....but in nature, "instead of" the literal head covering (which he was just giving instruction in reference to), the long hair is given to the woman for a covering.

It's really no big deal.

): ): ): ):

LL that is why God gave us the ability to manipulate men, so we can get them to do things and they think its their idea.
Again it is not so much who is right or wrong, but that the roof won't leak.
Had you let them think the sheeting was their idea it would have been done...you could even tell them your husband thinks you should put it on but you think its a silly idea, bet you'd have a dry bathroom and men telling you how they knew you were wrong...that's when you smile and say "Your soooo smart, no wonder I hired you!"
You don't really think God would plant us here without the skills to handle those boys do you?

Grace, God musta missed me on that gift, never have been one of those women that man fall over each other trying to help. They will more than likely step aside and let me do it myself unless they think I'll mess up something of theirs. I got a man that thinks I am invincible and capable of doing anything I set my mind to. I never had that gift of male persuasion you are talking about. I got 5 boys and it is more like "YOU are going to do this or ELSE." I sometimes think I got jipped. No housecleaning skills, no male persuasion skills, Built like a trucker, Not much help in femininity. Can cook real good, and sew like a dream. But now I am even losing my singing voice due to acid reflux destroying my vocal cords and my hearing loss severe enough to require hearing aids that will not be in the budget for who knows how long. every once in a while I have to remind myself that God had a purpose for me anyhow, and my grandbabies love me anyway.

Love and prayers, Locklady

Are you aware of how much of a subtle scorn for men is in your comments. How much the idea comes through that you are not different then men, but better than men on their own turf. I'm surprised that you think I am interested in that type thing. LL, I am not interested in a personal worldview which has been entirely formed on the basis of your experience with emasculated, emotionally damaged, dissfunctional men, and the corresponding coping methods of your evolutionary response. Haven't we had this conversation before. Why are you bringing it up again? Do you want your disfunction spread out on this forum. There is something about men in general that pisses you off, and therefore, I piss you off. Or maybe, you are subtly aware of the energy in the feminine movement, and you know that if you can drag me into this conversation, I will surely take the scorn of public opinion. Is that what it is all about.

Granted, I give you a reason to be angry some time, but it goes deeper than that. You don't like the idea of a man having an indispensable purpose which you could not perform. You have an energy to accuse my very God-given gifts and purpose. So PLEASE, keep me out of your musing. They are driven by hurt and not by health.

Also, oddly enough, I have some very close women friends in my life, and it is strange indeed that they are all very strong and independent. Does it strike you odd that these types are my friends? It doesn't me. You don't understand me. You never will.

LL you gotta know I love you too!

.........

no matter what I say or do, I am still looked at by men as a WOMAN. So therefore not a whole lot of stock is put into what I say even if it is totally logical. Which is why it is raining in my bathtub right now because when some MEN redid our roof a few years ago and I questioned and tried to make them put new sheeting on the whole thing, they told me,"It will be perfectly fine. it is not necessary and we don't need to do it."
At the time, I am standing there with the money and the sheeting.

I never had that gift of male persuasion you are talking about.

Locklady, I don't know if you are aware of this, but a huge part of everyday life involves a certain amount of psychology. When those men were fixing your roof and you were standing on the ground with the cash and materials available to do the job correctly it was your right to demand they repair it to your specifications. You say that you don't posses the gift of male persuasion. Who's problem did that become, Locklady? Yours. In the long run you suffered because you allowed a half assed job to be done on your property when probably a little male persuasion would have done the trick.

Stop being a victim, Locklady. Roll with it, deal with it, life is not perfect.

I have to agree with Sirius on this one. Ownership and who's paying the bill equates to authority on this one. I don't see how men/women remotely figures into this.

LL,
Has it ever occured to you that you may be calling some of these situations forth with your own attitudes and words? Once you understand the creative power that words have, you will use them carefully. The Bible says to choose carefully, since death and life are in the power of the tongue. He give a strong hint...choose life that you may live.

In the above post there was scorn dripping from it, to the point that you capitalized MEN every time you used it. There was nothing of life from the post, only death.

I challenge you for the next year to take all negatives out of your vocabulary and begin to bless instead of curse your past, people or current situations and see if your circumstances don't take a dramatic turn.

I know what will happen, I was in your shoes at one time and I speak from experience. You will even notice a difference in your health...it will be health to your bones.

Sirius can you e me. I got a couple questions I want to ask you.
As for your post I have a question here. Okay I grew up in a house where when the man of the house said jump, you did not ask how high until you were on your way up. I learned at a young age to do what was said to the letter, I remember as a teenager being a bit conflictive to that and actually ducking ahead of time as I spoke. Add the abuse that I dealt with beside that. Then I became part of a group of people with a very Male dominated environment and got married in that environment. Okay you say stop being a victim. I am trying very hard, but I have nearly 50 yrs of intense programing that I am learning to throw off and I am having a bit of a time with it all. SO am I allowed to deal with some of it in the open or am I supposed to Kow- tow to a couple more of you. In a similar manner to what I have had to live with for the past 49 yrs?
I am known as a roll with the punches kind of person in reality, that is why I am still alive actually. But another reason that I sometimes am a bit more open about some of this is because I know beyond a shadow of a doubt that I am not the only woman that reads this that is dealing with stuff that they cannot talk about because they are instantly shot down and there are people reading this that will never ever post because of their fear of the unknown that need to hear once in a while that someone else is actually human.

Just before Christmas I got a letter in the mail that had no name from a place where I know no one, that has inspired me ever since. It simply said, " Locklady you have been an inspiration to me for a long time, thank you." It came with a small gift to me that was a real inspiration. I have the letter on my bulletin board to keep me grounded.

I know that some of you have got your life together and know what direction you are heading and what you want out of life. That has never been something I have had, for me life has simply happened. But I know that lots of others have had similar lives. And I also know that we will gain nothing by chopping up each other on here. And I honestly was not trying to do that to Scott, just give a different side of things. In a short time I will be 50 yrs old, I would like to think that I could live a different kind of life for the next 50 than I have had for the last 50 but who knows what life will bring, although I know that It will definitely be different, cause the last yr sure has been.

Love and prayers, Locklady

Mark, why do you and Scott only see the scorn you charge her with?

Brent