PDA

View Full Version : An as yet not-asked question (as far as I know)



Zinjifar
26th December 2009, 07:35 AM
A new question to ask a Spokesclam:

Q: Did L. Ron Hubbard ever issue any pronouncement in regards to circumcision?

A: Huh?

Q: I mean, Ron went so far as to tell Scientologists how to give birth, make baby formula and even wash windows. Most of the 'major religions', which Scientology seeks to become, have taken a position on circumcision. Did Ron ever tell Scientologists whether they should snip or slide?

A: I don't know.

Q: Well, do you know whom I could ask? Is it in an HCOB or HCOPL or maybe in a Flag Order or confidential 'Advice'?

A: I don't think Mr. Hubbard cared about foreskins

Q: Wow. It would seem to be a natural for him! To judge by his affirmations he spent quite a bit of his 'research' time staring at his. Are you saying he didn't notice it?

A: I don't know.

Q: Now really, what's that say about 'knowing how to know'????

Zinj

HappyGirl
26th December 2009, 09:24 AM
Zinj, you have way too much time on your hands. :eyeroll:

Zinjifar
26th December 2009, 10:22 AM
Zinj, you have way too much time on your hands. :eyeroll:

12 thousand posts can't be wrong in the land of Total Status

I rest my case

And, what do you mean by that snide remark about 'on my hands'!!!:omg:

Zinj

Gottabrain
26th December 2009, 01:07 PM
foreskin...on my hand...

LOL!

:roflmao:

But as long as you brought up a completely off the wall subject out of boredom, I'll take you up on it and add to it.

Circumcision actually cuts quite a few nerves in a man's genital area. Some consider it genital mutilation. This cutting prevents proper lubrication. Circumcision is most common in America. It is not necessary for a man's health unless he only bathes once a week or so.

Now, who of you guys here are circumcised and who isn't? How do you feel about this? What would ELRON say if he were still alive?

GreyWolf
26th December 2009, 04:06 PM
foreskin...on my hand...

LOL!

:roflmao:

But as long as you brought up a completely off the wall subject out of boredom, I'll take you up on it and add to it.

Circumcision actually cuts quite a few nerves in a man's genital area. Some consider it genital mutilation. This cutting prevents proper lubrication. Circumcision is most common in America. It is not necessary for a man's health unless he only bathes once a week or so.

Now, who of you guys here are circumcised and who isn't? How do you feel about this? What would ELRON say if he were still alive?

I've been mutilated? Oh NO! I better get that audited out!

:roflmao::roflmao::roflmao:

Wisened One
26th December 2009, 04:14 PM
Wow...never thought of that...but I don't think lrh had any policies...you'd've thought he WOULD tho!

And fwiw....I elected to NOT have my son circumcised...I just couldn't do that to him...he might regret that or not, idk..

Sai Ninja 2000
26th December 2009, 05:44 PM
oh zinj...
:duh:

Happy Aberree
26th December 2009, 05:55 PM
Zinj -

....

never mind

Good twin
26th December 2009, 10:59 PM
Perhaps I should say I'll weigh in. For goodness sake Zinj. Aren't you already a walking encyclopedia of useless information about the cult of Scientology?

I have seen Scientologists struggle for the answer to this question through the years and no matter what they decide it's based on their own interpretation of "What would Ron do?"

If they opt to not circumsize it's because of the engram the child will be recieving during an already stressful period of his life. I mean with reorienting himself after the horrible loss of his last identity giving him such an engram could be really consequential.

If they opt to circumsize it's because we have the technology to handle it with just a short auditing session and as long as no words are spoken during the trauma the chances of a key in are slight.

By my own personal observation and survey most often the parents opt for the child to have the same style penis as the baby's father.

Jus' sayin'

Moonchild
27th December 2009, 02:30 AM
Since the topic has been raised:

I believe it's quite possible for the operation to be performed under a local anaesthetic even in infancy; this would presumably disqualify any 'engramic' impact. In 2009 you'd think that would be the standard procedure wouldn't you?

Expanding slightly: it seems that cutting has arisen as an accepted/required practice in many cultures around the world. Apart from the obvious examples of the Judaic and Islamic cultures, I believe (without the benefit of extensive reasearch) that it's also found amongst certain Native American tribes, the Aborigines of Australia, certain of the ancient civilisations of South America and non-Islamic South Africa, possibly more besides.

Assuming (perhaps dangerously) that the practice pre-dates contact between these various cultures the question could be asked why have these seemingly non-overlapping societies adopted this common practice?

What I'm really driving at here, and this a question for the upper level Scientologists amongst us, is whether it occurs as part of an 'implant' or similar.

Just speculating...

Voltaire's Child
27th December 2009, 02:38 AM
Actually, Hubbard didn't tell Scn'ists how to give birth. In Book 1 he merely says silent birth is a good idea.

Tiger Lily
27th December 2009, 02:11 PM
I do find it interesting though that the "circumcision engram" is never mentioned in DMSMH. I would think that would be significant enough to come up in session, though I suppose not as a chain. . . did anyone ever run their circumcision incident? Did it come up?

Good twin
27th December 2009, 02:12 PM
I do find it interesting though that the "circumcision engram" is never mentioned in DMSMH. I would think that would be significant enough to come up in session, though I suppose not as a chain. . . did anyone ever run their circumcision incident? Did it come up?

yes

thetanic
27th December 2009, 10:46 PM
I do find it interesting though that the "circumcision engram" is never mentioned in DMSMH. I would think that would be significant enough to come up in session, though I suppose not as a chain. . . did anyone ever run their circumcision incident? Did it come up?

It's an interesting point.

My guess, to answer Zinj's original question was that it's a pain-causing incident and thus to be avoided, but I never heard policy on it.

Rmack
27th December 2009, 10:52 PM
Here's something for you heathens to think about;

In the old testament, it was Commanded that Jewish babies be circumcised on the eighth day after birth. Modern science has determined that a blood coagulant is at its peak on this day, making it the optimum time for this procedure.

How do you atheists think they knew that? Trial and error?

Good twin
28th December 2009, 01:35 AM
Here's something for you heathens to think about;

In the old testament, it was Commanded that Jewish babies be circumcised on the eighth day after birth. Modern science has determined that a blood coagulant is at its peak on this day, making it the optimum time for this procedure.

How do you atheists think they knew that? Trial and error?

Of course a blood coagulant is at it's peak that day. After hundreds of years of circumcisions, evolution would naturallly dictate that. Not trial and error, Silly.

Rmack
28th December 2009, 02:13 AM
Of course a blood coagulant is at it's peak that day. After hundreds of years of circumcisions, evolution would naturallly dictate that. Not trial and error, Silly.

There wasn't hundreds of years of experiments. Why would they do that? It worked from operation one. Silly.

Moonchild
28th December 2009, 02:48 AM
Here's something for you heathens to think about;

In the old testament, it was Commanded that Jewish babies be circumcised on the eighth day after birth. Modern science has determined that a blood coagulant is at its peak on this day, making it the optimum time for this procedure.

How do you atheists think they knew that? Trial and error?


Actually, I think the answer to your question is 'yes'.

I wonder how Japanese chefs learned to prepare fugu-fish so it wouldn't poison whoever avidly shovelled it down their cabbage-hatch?

Why did fermented beverages such as beer and wine become so popular as preferred alternatives to water, given that the former tend not to cause cholera and typhoid whereas the latter often did even into the late 19th century in Europe.

'Divine Inspiration' is a possibility, I suppose, but I would think that observation of what actually happened if you did 'this' versus 'that' is more likely.

Speaking of matters 'Divine'...as you quite rightly point out, according to the Old Testament, circumcision was indeed a 'commandment from God' to Abraham as a cultural requirement for the 'Chosen People'.

Bearing in mind the likely perspective of Scientologists acquainted with the 'upper level' OT materials as regards 'God' and 'implants' I was prompted to wonder whether the practice may be referred-to in such materials as being 'implantish' in origin.

Do you get what I'm suggesting here?

Moonchild
28th December 2009, 02:51 AM
Of course a blood coagulant is at it's peak that day. After hundreds of years of circumcisions, evolution would naturallly dictate that. Not trial and error, Silly.

If the evolutionary argument as you present it held water, maybe after 'hundreds of years' or by now, thousands, Jewish male babies would be born without foreskins in the first place?

As it happens, I believe in 'evolution', but I think it takes much longer for change to take place than is suggested here, and not necessarily by virtue of surgical alteration.

Rmack
28th December 2009, 03:15 AM
Actually, I think the answer to your question is 'yes'.

Do you indeed?


I wonder how Japanese chefs learned to prepare fugu-fish so it wouldn't poison whoever avidly shovelled it down their cabbage-hatch?

I would much easily believe trial and error on this than for slicing your sons foreskin off!


Why did fermented beverages such as beer and wine become so popular as preferred alternatives to water, given that the former tend not to cause cholera and typhoid whereas the latter often did even into the late 19th century in Europe.

Sure, avoiding sewage tainted water probably helped propagate alcohol consumption. 'All things work toward the good for those who love God and are called to his purpose'! hehe


'Divine Inspiration' is a possibility, I suppose, but I would think that observation of what actually happened if you did 'this' versus 'that' is more likely.

If this one fact; -eighth day circumcision- was the only remarkable scientific validation in the TORA, then it would still be unlikely to be random. When you couple it with all the various hygienic laws, you must conclude an advanced technology as the source.

It's not just the various dietary laws that condemned pork, shellfish, and other meats as being 'unclean' that are later proved to be very unhealthy by modern science, or the quarantine laws of the TORA that demonstrate an undeniable mastery of microbiology that compels me to believe. It's got to be the fact that some of the major prophecies of this book are coming true around us that really compels me. Like the main theme of the book of the Jews returning to Zion. I case you hadn't noticed, it happened for real in 1948.

The Scriptures then say that the generation that sees this happen will not pass away before all the prophecies come true.

You ready for real fun?

These other issues are just sidebars that support the whole.




Speaking of matters 'Divine'...as you quite rightly point out, according to the Old Testament, circumcision was indeed a 'commandment from God' to Abraham as a cultural requirement for the 'Chosen People'.

Bearing in mind the likely perspective of Scientologists acquainted with the 'upper level' OT materials as regards 'God' and 'implants' I was prompted to wonder whether the practice may be referred-to in such materials as being 'implantish' in origin.

Do you get what I'm suggesting here?

Laffy 'the Lips' Hubbard had a great way of circumcising you. He just kicked you where it hurt first.

nozeno
28th December 2009, 03:22 AM
Uh... my unit is clean because it was circumcised. I can't rule out with 100% certainty that those who weren't cut aren't. I really haven't studied it that closely, if ya get my drift.

Whatever floats your boat.

But I can tell you with certainty that I don't have any engrams or schematics (somatics) from the event. :omg:

Mystic
28th December 2009, 04:18 AM
Why haven't I posted in this thread?

Moonchild
28th December 2009, 04:47 AM
If this one fact; -eighth day circumcision- was the only remarkable scientific validation in the TORA, then it would still be unlikely to be random. When you couple it with all the various hygienic laws, you must conclude an advanced technology as the source.

Erm...no, not really.




It's not just the various dietary laws that condemned pork, shellfish, and other meats as being 'unclean' that are later proved to be very unhealthy by modern science, or the quarantine laws of the TORA that demonstrate an undeniable mastery of microbiology that compels me to believe. It's got to be the fact that some of the major prophecies of this book are coming true around us that really compels me. Like the main theme of the book of the Jews returning to Zion. I case you hadn't noticed, it happened for real in 1948.


The dietary laws in the Old Testament certainly make sense as regards the era (c. 1350 B.C.) and the meteorological climate in which they were established; certain foods are indeed especially susceptible to infection (in the pre-refridgeration era) unless consumed immediately, which may not always have been possible or practical.

I don't see how this has anything to do with 'Divine Inspiration'; my supposition would be that our middle eastern ancestors weren't devoid of common sense and were perfectly capable of observation and discovering by 'trial and error' what worked and what didn't.

Turning to the fulfilled prophesy of the Jews returning to Zion (1948): thank you for informing me of that. It had, of course, completely escaped my attention....it's going really well over there, isn't it? :coolwink: :whistling:

But seriously, it's undeniable that the sense of cultural identity that exists amongst many people of Jewish origin is a formidable force in the world; a similar (if less strident) phenomenon can be observed with, say, the Irish in America.

It doesn't surprise me therefore that the people of the 'Diaspora' would eventually, having amassed the political clout to make it a reality, demand restoration of a 'homeland', which, of course, is exactly what has happened.

Palestinians may take a less philosophical view...:whistling:

Again, this seems easily explainable from a secular/sociological POV without recourse to 'scripture' or the mysterious workings of the 'Divine'.

TalleyWhacker
28th December 2009, 06:08 PM
To the contrary, the subject of circumsion was addressed.
Well, in a way...
When born, LRH was void of eyelids
Back in that day they tried their best to graft skin from other parts of his body (thighs, buttocks etc.) in an attempt to provide him a working set of eyelids.
Meanwhile they had these small cups formed to keep moisture in the eyes--drying out of the eyes can be very harmful.
Before long, someone suggested foreskin as having much the same properties as eyelids.
(Go ahead, feel it--take a pinch, rool it around on your fingertips--you'll see this is correct)
So they circumsized the young baby, grafted the skin on the eyes and sure enough, it took and the problem was completely overcome.
The surgeon who performed the procedure was one of the precursers of our modern day cosmetic surgeons and was really made quite famous as a result of the operation.
And the baby, well, he was fine--it worked!

Of course, if you looked at him straight on, he appeared a bit "cock-eyed".
:coolwink:
So that's why offical scriptures about circumsion were not widely known. They were not for BPI.

Good twin
29th December 2009, 12:13 AM
To the contrary, the subject of circumsion was addressed.
Well, in a way...
When born, LRH was void of eyelids
Back in that day they tried their best to graft skin from other parts of his body (thighs, buttocks etc.) in an attempt to provide him a working set of eyelids.
Meanwhile they had these small cups formed to keep moisture in the eyes--drying out of the eyes can be very harmful.
Before long, someone suggested foreskin as having much the same properties as eyelids.
(Go ahead, feel it--take a pinch, rool it around on your fingertips--you'll see this is correct)
So they circumsized the young baby, grafted the skin on the eyes and sure enough, it took and the problem was completely overcome.
The surgeon who performed the procedure was one of the precursers of our modern day cosmetic surgeons and was really made quite famous as a result of the operation.
And the baby, well, he was fine--it worked!

Of course, if you looked at him straight on, he appeared a bit "cock-eyed".
:coolwink:
So that's why offical scriptures about circumsion were not widely known. They were not for BPI.

Of course. :duh:

Rmack
29th December 2009, 12:38 AM
The dietary laws in the Old Testament certainly make sense as regards the era (c. 1350 B.C.) and the meteorological climate in which they were established; certain foods are indeed especially susceptible to infection (in the pre-refridgeration era) unless consumed immediately, which may not always have been possible or practical.

Nah, that doesn't cover it. Pork and Beef, for instance, are pretty similar in their longevity, but one is banned, the other ok. We now know why, but not until modern times.


I don't see how this has anything to do with 'Divine Inspiration'; my supposition would be that our middle eastern ancestors weren't devoid of common sense and were perfectly capable of observation and discovering by 'trial and error' what worked and what didn't.

It would have been pretty difficult to deduce the quarantine laws from trial and error. Read them sometime; covering food jars, burning infected clothes, moving infected people downwind, etc.

Take washing things in flowing water, not still water. For centuries people just thought that God was just being arbitrary to test the Jews faith or something, because scientists knew that there is no difference between water that is moving or still. That is, until microscopes were invented, and stagnant water was seen to have much more microbes in it.

None of this emerged from trial and error afterwards, even though the Old Testament was around. There are stories of people kissing their relatives good by before they died of the black plague in Europe, insuring it's spread for many years.


Turning to the fulfilled prophesy of the Jews returning to Zion (1948): thank you for informing me of that. It had, of course, completely escaped my attention....it's going really well over there, isn't it? :coolwink: :whistling:

The conflict is predicted in the Bible.

Ever wonder why a place like Jerusalem is such a hot political spot? It's not because of natural resources. It's not a trade center. It hasn't any real strategic value beyond what is artificially considered for it. So, why?

Possibly because it's predicted that the third temple will be built, starting a sort of prophetic chess clock going again. Hence the 'Palestinians' (who are really just Arabs that the Saudis won't let be integrated into the rest of their country just to keep the shit storm brewing) are rabid about not letting any Jews near the temple mound. Never the less, they have the plans ready for the third temple. They even have most of the equipment made, and claim they know that the arc of the covenant will be no problem when the time comes. It's predicted that a 'covenant' will be made (a treaty) allowing them to rebuild. Care to bet your eternity that that will never happen?

Check out some of the stuff they have made. Even a breastplate!

http://www.templeinstitute.org/


But seriously, it's undeniable that the sense of cultural identity that exists amongst many people of Jewish origin is a formidable force in the world; a similar (if less strident) phenomenon can be observed with, say, the Irish in America.

It doesn't surprise me therefore that the people of the 'Diaspora' would eventually, having amassed the political clout to make it a reality, demand restoration of a 'homeland', which, of course, is exactly what has happened.

Do you realize that no other nation has ever been destroyed, it's genetic people scattered, and then reformed with it's culture still mainly intact ever, back into it's historic lands, let alone after nearly two thousand years. Ever. It's unique in history, and totally predicted in the Bible.

As a matter of fact, it was seen as being so unlikely that many theories of these prophecies being symbolic in some way have sprung up. The Jehovah's Witnesses, the Mormons, Seventh day Adventists, even some Rosicrucian orders, and others. It's always some version of 'the Jews returning to Zion' as meaning their church coming up with some dogma as 'Zion' and them following it meaning 'returning to'.

It's not real surprising that when the Jews actually returned, they didn't go 'you mean it was literal? Our bad! Here's all the money back.'

Why do people think because politics was involved, that somehow negates the prophecy being correct? Jesus Christ waited until the exact day before riding into Jerusalem on an ass, which he also arranged to fulfill the predictions about it, though people where trying to get him to do it early. Because he knew what he was doing means it's not valid? No one else showed up on the exact day.



Palestinians may take a less philosophical view...:whistling:

So did Hitler. So what?


Again, this seems easily explainable from a secular/sociological POV without recourse to 'scripture' or the mysterious workings of the 'Divine'.

You should study prophecy sometime. Lot's of 'coincidences' to explain away, I'll tell you. The reformation of the Roman empire, communication satellites, smart weapons, world travel, even the Chernobyl nuclear catastrophe is all predicted, plus lots more that hasn't happened yet, like accurate descriptions of the effects of nuclear weapons. (raining fire and brimstone for nukes, people's skin and eyes 'dissolving' while they stand on their feet for neutron weapons ) and the technical aspects of the cleanup afterwards.

Moonchild
30th December 2009, 02:28 AM
deleted

Moonchild
10th January 2010, 04:38 AM
Nah, that doesn't cover it. Pork and Beef, for instance, are pretty similar in their longevity, but one is banned, the other ok. We now know why, but not until modern times.



It would have been pretty difficult to deduce the quarantine laws from trial and error. Read them sometime; covering food jars, burning infected clothes, moving infected people downwind, etc.

Take washing things in flowing water, not still water. For centuries people just thought that God was just being arbitrary to test the Jews faith or something, because scientists knew that there is no difference between water that is moving or still. That is, until microscopes were invented, and stagnant water was seen to have much more microbes in it.

None of this emerged from trial and error afterwards, even though the Old Testament was around. There are stories of people kissing their relatives good by before they died of the black plague in Europe, insuring it's spread for many years.



The conflict is predicted in the Bible.

Ever wonder why a place like Jerusalem is such a hot political spot? It's not because of natural resources. It's not a trade center. It hasn't any real strategic value beyond what is artificially considered for it. So, why?

Possibly because it's predicted that the third temple will be built, starting a sort of prophetic chess clock going again. Hence the 'Palestinians' (who are really just Arabs that the Saudis won't let be integrated into the rest of their country just to keep the shit storm brewing) are rabid about not letting any Jews near the temple mound. Never the less, they have the plans ready for the third temple. They even have most of the equipment made, and claim they know that the arc of the covenant will be no problem when the time comes. It's predicted that a 'covenant' will be made (a treaty) allowing them to rebuild. Care to bet your eternity that that will never happen?

Check out some of the stuff they have made. Even a breastplate!

http://www.templeinstitute.org/



Do you realize that no other nation has ever been destroyed, it's genetic people scattered, and then reformed with it's culture still mainly intact ever, back into it's historic lands, let alone after nearly two thousand years. Ever. It's unique in history, and totally predicted in the Bible.

As a matter of fact, it was seen as being so unlikely that many theories of these prophecies being symbolic in some way have sprung up. The Jehovah's Witnesses, the Mormons, Seventh day Adventists, even some Rosicrucian orders, and others. It's always some version of 'the Jews returning to Zion' as meaning their church coming up with some dogma as 'Zion' and them following it meaning 'returning to'.

It's not real surprising that when the Jews actually returned, they didn't go 'you mean it was literal? Our bad! Here's all the money back.'

Why do people think because politics was involved, that somehow negates the prophecy being correct? Jesus Christ waited until the exact day before riding into Jerusalem on an ass, which he also arranged to fulfill the predictions about it, though people where trying to get him to do it early. Because he knew what he was doing means it's not valid? No one else showed up on the exact day.




So did Hitler. So what?



You should study prophecy sometime. Lot's of 'coincidences' to explain away, I'll tell you. The reformation of the Roman empire, communication satellites, smart weapons, world travel, even the Chernobyl nuclear catastrophe is all predicted, plus lots more that hasn't happened yet, like accurate descriptions of the effects of nuclear weapons. (raining fire and brimstone for nukes, people's skin and eyes 'dissolving' while they stand on their feet for neutron weapons ) and the technical aspects of the cleanup afterwards.


I've spent a little time looking into Judaic law as regards diet and quarantine etc.

Yes, I must concede you have a point there. I'd previously taken the whole business too lightly...made assumptions that seem to have been unwarranted...my bad.

I accept that 'intervention' seems likely; whether 'Divine' or 'extraterrestrial' seems unclear. I don't mean to go all 'Von Daniken' on you, but do consider that as a possibility?

Erich von Daniken was shown to be a liar and a fraud; but that said, disavowing Erich's BS, do you think there is some merit in the idea of interference in ancient cultures by visitors from extraterrestrial civilisations that could be interpreted, in terms of the articulacy of those times, as visitations from 'God'?

Many authors including for example, John A. Keel who seems to be held in higher regard than many, have expressed opinions about all this...just asking! :)


www.templeinstitute.org/


Yes; these guys mean business, don't they?

The obvious problem with 'prophesy' is that absent specifics re: time, date, place etc. surely they can be interpreted to mean pretty much anything? I'm thinking Nostradamus here; remember all that nonsense about the 'King of Terror' who turned out (via a transcription error) to be 'that nice man who forgives debts'? The end of the world in 2000 and so on.

You mentioned Chernobyl...again...how do you know that? Is Chernobyl mentioned by name in the Scriptures? And 'fire and brimstone': that could be taken to mean nuclear detonation, but couldn't it also mean volcanic eruption?

What would be the point or meaning of prophesy other than to indicate future events with lucidity? If you can see the future, wouldn't it be sensible to simply describe it in terms that could be readily understood by the reader?

Why the enigma...the mystery? What purpose does this serve? I'm not talking about Madame Sosostris here; if prophesy occurs within the Holy Scriptures...God's revelation to Man...what is the point of the vagary?

If the true meaning is lost in translation or something, doesn't this call into question the validity of other tracts of these ancient writings?

If Thomas Paine is to be trusted: the original meaning of the word 'prophet' is 'a singer of songs...a story-teller'...a wandering minstrel almost.

Makes ya wonder eh? :coolwink: :)

WildKat
10th January 2010, 06:33 AM
I was once in a chat group years ago and the topic of circumcision came up. Apparently, the main reason men thought it was OK is because "everyone else did it and no one wants to be different". Men want their sons to "be the same" as them.
But if you think about it logically, does it make sense to maim a little baby and cause such great trauma? Those babies shriek in pain when they are cut. And what for? To "keep it clean"?
I knew some men who were uncircumcised, and the way you keep it clean is to shower every day and clean it! Circumcision to "keep it clean" is like trimming your nose to avoid the boogers!
OK, maybe that's not quite analagous....
I never had kids, but if I had, I would not circumcise a baby robotically without thinking why. There is plenty of good scientific reason NOT to do it (including sex benefits). A little bit of Googling on the subject would be informative, I'm sure.
Most men don't want to admit they were maimed unnecessarily.
A "covenant with God"?? What was THAT about??

WildKat
10th January 2010, 06:40 AM
Lots of good info here.

http://www.mothersagainstcirc.org/

Operating DB
10th January 2010, 07:13 AM
Males are born with foreskin. Obviously there is an evolutionary and survival related reason for it otherwise males would not be born with it. Why mess with nature?

Gadfly
10th January 2010, 02:27 PM
Males are born with foreskin. Obviously there is an evolutionary and survival related reason for it otherwise males would not be born with it. Why mess with nature?

And, why not?

I don't see that "nature" or "evolution" involves some perfect, error-free operation. But then, I also don't think "evolution" unfolded "accidentally". Somebody or something seems to possibly have been tinkering with life forms for a very long time (recall the beginning of the movie 2001: A Space Odyssey). Some literature explains Earth as a "garden", as a genetic breeding ground for life forms (for some other far more advanced race). I don't know. Could be.

But also, I have noticed that Man's tinkering, with his own body and mind (especially with the new experiments of genetics and the continuing use of man-made drugs), based on grossly limited knowledge, often causes unknown and unwanted side-effects. This is true for the body, mind and for Man's societies. Man's tinkering with himself, especially by self-appointed "controllers" or "social experimenters", often involves outcomes that were largely unanticipated. In that regard, there does seem to be some built in safeguard AGAINST "messing with Mother Nature".

Rmack
11th January 2010, 02:23 AM
I've spent a little time looking into Judaic law as regards diet and quarantine etc.

Yes, I must concede you have a point there. I'd previously taken the whole business too lightly...made assumptions that seem to have been unwarranted...my bad.

Wow.

I must compliment you on your courage and integrity. Being able to adjust your opinion with the introduction of new data is what I consider real freedom to be. People with this ability seem to be very rare, from my experience.

Were you a clam? I bet this ability helped you escape early, if you were,


I accept that 'intervention' seems likely; whether 'Divine' or 'extraterrestrial' seems unclear. I don't mean to go all 'Von Daniken' on you, but do consider that as a possibility?

First book I read on 'esoteric' subjects was 'chariots of the gods' when I was a teenager, and it changed my world view.

I was abducted by 'aliens' as a child. Several times. However, I don't think they are from another planet, I think they are extra-dimensional. In other words, they operate in more than the 4 dimensions that we enjoy. As you might have heard, Quantum physics (and certain old Rabbi's who analyzed the TORA) has determined that there are actually at least 10 dimensions.

I highly recommend that you listen to all five of these radio shows;

http://www.khouse.org/6640/BP052/




You mentioned Chernobyl...again...how do you know that? Is Chernobyl mentioned by name in the Scriptures?

The short answer is; Chernobyl is the Ukrainian word for 'mugwort' which is very synonymous with 'wormwood', and the events of The Revelation 8:10 and 11 are a technically accurate description of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster.

Rev 8:10 and 11

"And the third angel sounded, and there fell a great star from heaven, burning as it were a lamp, and it fell upon the third part of the rivers, and upon the fountains of waters;

And the name of the star is called Wormwood: and the third part of the waters became wormwood; and many men died of the waters, because they were made bitter."

People have tried to dismiss this for a couple of reasons; one is the description of the 'star' 'falling from heaven'. However, the word translated 'heaven' is actually the Greek word 'oranos' which comes from the root word 'oro' which means 'mountain'. The word might better be translated 'elevated place' because elevation is implied as well as altitude.

It seems that the Chernobyl plant was in an unusual configuration with the reactor near the top of a big building. When that thing went China Syndrome, it literally fell from an elevated place, and wound up in the European water table, causing the cases of cancers related to radiation contamination to soar in the areas downstream from the disaster. So, it did literally 'fall upon a third part of the waters, and the fountains of waters'. I mean, with the half life of these materials in the tens of thousands of years, it's not at all unreasonable to assume that they may eventually contaminate 'a third of the waters'.


And 'fire and brimstone': that could be taken to mean nuclear detonation, but couldn't it also mean volcanic eruption?


A rain of fire and brimstone might be descriptive of a volcano, but it's also very descriptive of the effects of a near-surface nuclear blast. And there is nothing in nature anywhere near the horrors of the last chapter of Zechariah, although they're an exact description of the effects of a neutron weapon (which the Israelis do have);


Zec 14:12

"And this shall be the plague wherewith the LORD will smite all the people that have fought against Jerusalem; Their flesh shall consume away while they stand upon their feet, and their eyes shall consume away in their holes, and their tongue shall consume away in their mouth."

If you read it in context, it's clear that it's talking about the 'latter days'





What would be the point or meaning of prophesy other than to indicate future events with lucidity? If you can see the future, wouldn't it be sensible to simply describe it in terms that could be readily understood by the reader?

Why the enigma...the mystery? What purpose does this serve? I'm not talking about Madame Sosostris here; if prophesy occurs within the Holy Scriptures...God's revelation to Man...what is the point of the vagary?

You know, you're not the first person to ever ask this question, :)

I think that the real point of prophecy is to validate God's word. If history is written before it occurs, perhaps you can trust other parts of the Bible that seem outlandish.

The vagary is part of the grand plan, it seems. Life is a school and a test that not all pass. Read the parables of Jesus, particularly the ones about 'The Kingdom of Heaven is like a man who planted a field' and such.

Moonchild
12th January 2010, 01:33 AM
Wow.

I must compliment you on your courage and integrity. Being able to adjust your opinion with the introduction of new data is what I consider real freedom to be. People with this ability seem to be very rare, from my experience.

And 'wow' to you too! I think your assessment may be a trifle generous, but that notwithstanding, a nice compliment. Thank you. :)






First book I read on 'esoteric' subjects was 'chariots of the gods' when I was a teenager, and it changed my world view.

I was abducted by 'aliens' as a child. Several times. However, I don't think they are from another planet, I think they are extra-dimensional. In other words, they operate in more than the 4 dimensions that we enjoy. As you might have heard, Quantum physics (and certain old Rabbi's who analyzed the TORA) has determined that there are actually at least 10 dimensions.

I highly recommend that you listen to all five of these radio shows;

http://www.khouse.org/6640/BP052/


Have listened to the first, will continue with the rest. I'm aware of the 'Nephilim' from other sources.




The short answer is; Chernobyl is the Ukrainian word for 'mugwort' which is very synonymous with 'wormwood', and the events of The Revelation 8:10 and 11 are a technically accurate description of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster.

Rev 8:10 and 11

"And the third angel sounded, and there fell a great star from heaven, burning as it were a lamp, and it fell upon the third part of the rivers, and upon the fountains of waters;

And the name of the star is called Wormwood: and the third part of the waters became wormwood; and many men died of the waters, because they were made bitter."

People have tried to dismiss this for a couple of reasons; one is the description of the 'star' 'falling from heaven'. However, the word translated 'heaven' is actually the Greek word 'oranos' which comes from the root word 'oro' which means 'mountain'. The word might better be translated 'elevated place' because elevation is implied as well as altitude.

It seems that the Chernobyl plant was in an unusual configuration with the reactor near the top of a big building. When that thing went China Syndrome, it literally fell from an elevated place, and wound up in the European water table, causing the cases of cancers related to radiation contamination to soar in the areas downstream from the disaster. So, it did literally 'fall upon a third part of the waters, and the fountains of waters'. I mean, with the half life of these materials in the tens of thousands of years, it's not at all unreasonable to assume that they may eventually contaminate 'a third of the waters'.



A rain of fire and brimstone might be descriptive of a volcano, but it's also very descriptive of the effects of a near-surface nuclear blast. And there is nothing in nature anywhere near the horrors of the last chapter of Zechariah, although they're an exact description of the effects of a neutron weapon (which the Israelis do have);


Zec 14:12

"And this shall be the plague wherewith the LORD will smite all the people that have fought against Jerusalem; Their flesh shall consume away while they stand upon their feet, and their eyes shall consume away in their holes, and their tongue shall consume away in their mouth."

If you read it in context, it's clear that it's talking about the 'latter days'




You know, you're not the first person to ever ask this question, :)

I think that the real point of prophecy is to validate God's word. If history is written before it occurs, perhaps you can trust other parts of the Bible that seem outlandish.

The vagary is part of the grand plan, it seems. Life is a school and a test that not all pass. Read the parables of Jesus, particularly the ones about 'The Kingdom of Heaven is like a man who planted a field' and such.

Interesting stuff; there's an awful lot there which makes it difficult to comment on thus far. Duly noted though! Thanks for the Biblical references.

Cheers, M :)