steveorino

I had to think on this one a bit. While I believe theology is a study that is unique in many ways it is similar to pyschology I thought we'd already decided that theology was different from psychology because psychology is held to scientific standards (such as they are) whereas theology isn't? The basis of pshycology isn't revealed in the pages of one 2000 year old book, it's based on what we can deduce from empirical observations. Any theory that a psychologist comes up with is subject to the scrutiny of their peers and can be shot down if it fails the test. For theology to be similar to psychology you would need to say Freud is the untouchable, unquestionable father of psychology and his original works are inerrant in all respects, they my be reinterpreted but never rewritten and all phycological knowledge flows from them. The bottom line is that theology isn't held to any rational standards at all. There is no theological equivalent to peer review, double blind, six sigma, golf handicap, michelin star ratings or any other measure of performance. All other subjects, all of them, have some method for self improvement or performance measurement except theology. There is no way to tell if your theology is correct in any way shape or form. You can't even tell if your theology is improving. Quite obviously, theology gets a special pass and I cannot for the life of me fathom out why it deserves one. Can you? I thought I answered it already as well in the thread you quoted. It is unigue. However, it is similar in that it has competing theories that are only valid to those who follow the theory. steveOrino

Just curious. Do you get as upset when the NAACP speaks about their favorite candidates as you do when Focus on the Family does? That being said. I don't agree with Dobson or his methods for choosing one candidate over another. steveOrino

I had to think on this one a bit. While I believe theology is a study that is unique in many ways it is similar to pyschology (maybe this is why I enjoy both) Both pyschology & theology work with different theories that are at times complimentary and at times conflicting. In the field of psyschology we have psychotheories like Alderian, Jungian, Existential, Person-Centered, Gestalt, behavior, cognitive, reality, feminist, family and other theories. In Christian theology you have, Calvinst, Armenian, then Orthodox, Roman Catholic, Protestant, and then they offshoot even farther. steveOrino

Fig trees in the Spring produce leaves first, then a small fig called a tagsh, later that tagsh becomes what we know as a fig. The tagsh were often eaten by hungry travellers. The season was time for the fig tree to be with leaves, but not yet time for figs. However, what should have appeared was the tagsh ((young fig). A fig tree w/o tagsh will grow to be a fig tree w/o fruit. People often ate the tagsh. This tree with leaves and in the spring before passover should have been with tagsh (but not figs) JC often used agricultural illustration as this was an agricultural/pastoral society. At least most of his initial followers were of that economic status. This would parallel a story about remaining with him (in the vine) and producing fruit. Those outside the vine (who do not remain with him) would not bear fruit and be cut off. steveOrino

From the MIT library ... Tacitus (A.D. c.55-A.D. c.117, Roman historian) mentions "christus" who is Jesus - Annals "Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular." steveOrino

No work survived, but you believe the testimony of a man who lived 800 years later regarding to what he wrote? If you are going to accept Photius commentary on Justus of Tiberia, that is 800 years old, you will be hard pressed to rationalize why you will not accept the writings of Christian patriarchs from the 1st & 2nd century. steveOrino

To illustrate a point maybe? You shouldn't advertise what you don't have. Why is there smoke coming out of my irony-o-meter? steveOrino

To illustrate a point maybe? You shouldn't advertise what you don't have. EDITED TO ADD A LESS FLIPPANT ANSWER. Fig trees in the Spring produce leaves first, then a small fig called a tagsh, later that tagsh becomes what we know as a fig. The tagsh were often eaten by hungry travellers. The season was time for the fig tree to be with leaves, but not yet time for figs. However, what should have appeared was the tagsh ((young fig). A fig tree w/o tagsh will grow to be a fig tree w/o fruit. JC often used agricultural illustration as this was an agricultural/pastoral society. At least most of his initial followers were of that economic status. This would parallel a story about remaining with him (in the vine) and producing fruit. Those outside the vine (who do not remain with him) would not bear fruit and be cut off. steveOrino

For me, booties give a litle more surface area for lift but also allow me to make my turns crisper and "track up" to the tandems after exit a little faster. steveOrino

I like booties too.

Not relaxed per say, just different. The standards for practicng medicine are not relaxed when compared to building a bridge, just different. steveOrino

I was being sarcastic, I am sick of Tom Petty. Unfortunately Tom gets requested alot. Hey, its their video. I thought so, but I'm like you -- it is there video. Here in Okiehoma we get request for Tim McGraw's "Live like you were dying" a lot. shudder. steveOrino

I don't follow this, Steve. Are you saying that theology is not a science and therefore is not subject to the requirements of science? I mean, isn't this a given? Since theology has to do with the reality of the supernatural (God), not the natural? Well, it is a given to me, but not everyone here. steveOrino

Jack, I see your point. I guess my belief is simply, theology, while it can fall under the guise of academic study, it is not a science, and therefore should not fall under the same requirements. steveOrino

Erm, no. In science they have this thing called a double blind study. They use this method in both medicine and, you guessed it, psychcology. Try a double blind study in theology and you'll get nowhere fast. In fact, theology can be held to no scientific standards at all which makes it quite different from psychology or medicine or business or criminology or sport, all of which can. If you're trying to find fact from fiction, evidence found using the double blind process does elevate science and diminish theology. That's why we no longer perform trapanning rituals to cure mental illness. If you really are planning to be a psycologist, I would urge you in the strongest terms to look into what constitutes good evidence. It could mean the difference between good practice and quackery. I'm very well of double blind studies. I'm almost finished with my Master's in Counseling. The normal practice of evaluating a patient requires listening and looking for evidence, some obvious and some not so obvious. A pyschologist or therapist does not perform a double blind studyto make a diagnosis. The results of double blind studies have aided in the understanding of pyschology, but to imply it is used on a regular basis with clients is not true. steveOrino

The purpose of JC's miracles were two fold; to cause men to believe in Him (Jn. 14:11 Believe me when I say that I am in the Father and the Father is in me; or at least believe on the evidence of the miracles themselves. ), and to confirm His word (Jn. 20:30-31 Jesus did many other miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name). Jesus promised His disciples the ability to perform miracles in order to confirm the word they would preach We learn from the NT that these miracles were performed and did indeed confirm the gospel message (Heb. 2:2-4 For if the message spoken by angels was binding, and every violation and disobedience received its just punishment, how shall we escape if we ignore such a great salvation? This salvation, which was first announced by the Lord, was confirmed to us by those who heard him. God also testified to it by signs, wonders and various miracles, and gifts of the Holy Spirit distributed according to his will). steveOrino

I'm not sure I'm following your point. Pyschology along with Theology do have different standards of proof than some natural sciences such as physics. It doesn't diminish one or elevate the other. Talk to most any medical doctor and he will remind you the science of medicine is really an art. steveOrino

As I have said in a previous thread, the most amazing thing about JC's miracles is not the magnitude of their expression; after all how hard would it be for the creator of the world to change water into wine or walk on water? To me the amazing thing is how few miracles JC actually performed. While John records JC did more than what was recorded we are left with but a few examples of miracles during JC's 2-3 year ministry on earth where every minute a miracle in need lay waiting. JC answered critics that wanted a demonstration of his powers that he would NOT give signs to those who do not believe. In other words, he reserved his infrequent miracles for a few that he chose to reveal his power to. One purpose was to give creedance for what he said he could do. For instance he forgave a lame man his sins, but the Pharisees asked who he thought he was claiming to do what only God could do ... forgive sins. JC's reply was "so that you know the Son of Man has the ability to forgive sins, I say to you, 'Take up your mat and walk'" The main purpose of his miracles was to demonstrate his power as God and encourage his followers. He obviously chose to not intervene in the natural laws and free will of mankind most of the time. That is one reason I give little creedance to the TV faith healers who will heal you for a donation. For the few who may be healed in that situation I believe the innocent faith in God of the person healed had more to do with it than the huckster for God (think of the movie "Leap of Faith") So, I have no reason to believe I'm special or Drew was so special that God intervened in our natural world, anymore than I believe that the others lacked faith or something else needed for divine intervention. The pain of this world, such as my parent's early deaths, along with the many other sensless tragedies, illustrate to me a world desparately in need of redemption. steveOrino

Well I thought I had an interesting theological question at the end of the last page, but oh well. Jack, which one was that. you have many good questions. steveOrino

I weigh over 220 lbs so I prefer swoop cords for that exra lift. Those wings would be too small for me on many tandems that are under 120 pounds steveOrino

Anything but Tom Petty. Personally, I like ... Gnarles Barkley "Crazy" Red Hot Chili Peppers stuff U2 steveOrino

For grins sake let's say Drew's experience was a miracle. By what reasoning would there be for God to repeat that miracle with my father-in-laws old buick and someone elses 1 year old baby? And how would I repeat this for Randi? Does any rational Christian believe they can force Almighty God to perform miracles at their whim? Yeah, we've beat this horse enough. steveOrino

Personally, I think anytime I am forced to tip or overly "influenced" to tip, you'll get the absolute minumal I'm forced to pay. While scuba diving in Cancun & Cozumel, many dive boats brow beat you to tip over and over again. For them, I usually give a buck or nothing, or single out my instructor and give him the tip on the sly. For those who say little apart from having a tip jar visible, I leave $20-40 depending on the service. At our DZ we have one sign that says tips are appreciated, but certainly not mandated. I usually get $10-20 on about 10% of my jumps. It is always unexpected and deeply appreciated. I think nothing about a tandem that doesn't give me a tip. Hey, they paid a good chunk to jump, and I'm already compensated for doing a job, I'd for for free most of the time. So tell your buds if they give $5 the TM will be estatic. If they are tapped out ... no biggee. Skydivers are a great group of people. Rather than give a tip to the TM, most would love for you to bring a six pack or two of beer/pop, hang out after the last load and listen to their stories. It will make your day even more fun. steveOrino

No, of course not. But believe me, my wife and I both inspected this event with a great deal of scrutiny. Just because we are Christians we don't drop reasoning from our life. In fact we studied everything after the fact. We grilled the doctor as we were afraid of injuries that may not have shown up in his initial assessment. We inspected the tires, the sleeper, Drew's entire body (over and over and over again) There was no rational explanation. No one, the Drs, the EMTs, the nurses, engineers and scientist at my church had no reasonable explanation. We accept our miracle with a sincere heart of gratitude. steveOrino