Dear Phillip,I don’t believe the heart is merely glands dictating to our minds, and I think it extremely unhealthy to suppress the heart. The mind cannot reason everything, we should be open to God’s direction too. Your statement about the heart leading to killing things or people who get in the way is not necessarily true. It is compassion, and hence, the heart, which can lead to, the correct decisions in many circumstances. What about the bombers who carried out instructions and burned Dresden to the ground, where was their heart? They were running on intellect alone, albeit a corrupted one, but they did not reason with the gift of feeling.
Strange, I have a correspondent who told me an opposite view to your correspondent, that I should be less emotional and run more on intellect, but I am happy with who I am, I can’t change the emotions, they are useful and open up many things. I’m happy with a spiritual side.
This is an extremely deep topic I think, if you want to continue to discuss it feel free, I’m ready for the challenge.
Best wishes, Steven.On Sun, 23 Sep 2007 22:40:58 +0100, philip madsen <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Nice letter Steven.. Mind you I had tongue in cheek on the floating dinosaurs.. Maybe I should have used a crocodile rather than a Lizard.. So in practical terms all the dinos if there were any, died with the flood. Then there is the evidence of the frozen mastodons in Siberia... allegedly extinct 10,000years ago.Steven I have another correspondent who is always on about " the heart" which I interpret as emotionally inclined. Their heart rules their head..... glands rule the Brain. I consider this to be a racial trait. Huns (I must descend from them) can control this weakness. Latins , cannot, and always react in an uncontrollable way, sometimes killing things or people who get in the way. Maybe Arabs jews and blacks likewise.I was trained from birth to kill the heart, and resist even the slightest tendency to display such a weakness as emotion.. Its always been easy. The true meaning of heart in spiritual terms is the soul as "centre" of the human psyche, and this can be controlled or affected by the glands of emotion, or the will of the mind. It is only through this latter action that charitas, (love of God) can be truely attained, and must come first, before any charism, if allowed , can be deserved.But not entirely... I have no argument with the emotional heights one can reach when listening to Verdi, my favourite of the classics.. Not to mention of course those stirring German beer drinking songs.. which make me friendly with all my enemies, after the beer of course..Philip. ----- Original Message ----- From: Steven Jones To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Sent: Monday, September 24, 2007 5:45 AM Subject: [geocentrism] Re: DinosaursFlood like conditions that you say a dinosaur could ride out for a year:http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=F3_u5KrcsPQ Here a cruise liner (without engines) has entered beam sea, the most dangerous sitation for any boat. Bare in mind, this is not a “North Atlantic Storm”. Steven. On Sun, 23 Sep 2007 20:14:51 +0100, Steven Jones <midclyth@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Sorry Phillip, but to suggest that dinosaurs didn’t need to board the > ark because they could survive the ocean is simply untenable. Whilst> it’s true modern secular knowledge believes that many species bathed in> water and even almost totally submersed themselves, it is in much the> same way that Elephants and Hippopotamus’s do in modern day Africa. Put> simply, that is to say that they either need a supporting riverbed> underneath their feet (security) or they can “paddle” but not for long.> Take Brachiosaurus for example, coming in at about 35 tonnes > (Christiansen 1997), built for land, and a very slow mover, there is> simply no way this creatures morphology could cope with being out in an> ocean for long, ask yourself how long a modern day African elephant > would last if air-lifted and placed in the sea? A terrible cruelty of> course, and instead you expect me to believe that an 82-feet beast can> ride out the floodwaters for almost a year? What about it’s food?> Brachiosaurus ate no fish; his long slender neck was used for pine and> other type trees, crunching needles and all that with powerful molars > “built” for such. >> Regarding developing from a little lizard, sorry too, but there are no > connection links. We are expected to believe that fish that could barely> walk would somehow develop into all the vast and complex animal types> that are dinosaurs? I would be very dubious of a dinosaur missing link.> There is much forgery in the world of dinosaurs as it is, let alone> this. “New” species have already come into being in the past by simply > mixing and matching bones. Remember too, many of these fossils have to > be constructed and different constructors will of course have different> ideas. The bones are not always found in order. Even how they should> stand has changed, Iguanodon for example, is a classic illustration. I> believe the modern view to be correct, but it highlights different > interpretations. In short, all of this bone pick-and-mixing is> deceiving, and there is no real evidence for any evolution amongst the > dinosaurs anywhere. I’ve even forgotten to mention the financial drive > too of putting more “exotic” creatures on displays in the museums of the > 19th century. The famous “bone wars” of ED Cope and OC Marsh, is a great > example. Two businessmen shaping American science, with perhaps forgery > at the best of times, but did it make money? It’s sad when people spend> their lives studying the fossils of forgery’s, Piltdown man has been> shown to be a hoax now say, but for those that studied him? Well, they> just can’t let go. >> Open your eyes to divine design Phillip, it’s simple and clear to see.> And what about the spirit? How do evolutionists explain this? We are > according to them only physical, some kind of chemical conglomerate> thinking machine, but that is rubbish. We have a heart, a spirit, and a> soul. My own experiences prove there is a God, but your probably> unlikely to receive anything without the right heart. God desires each > and everyone of us to seek him out and we must be looking in the first> place. Music to me too is deeply spiritual. And composers have always > been striving for new sounds and ideas, at the cutting edge of > innovation, that innovation did not spring about by chance. Even > wind-chimes (which I find annoying anyway) are thought out to be less> intrusive. It could be a pentatonic scale so the notes are less likely > to clash, what if it were pure chaos I ask you? Do you think it will be> worthy of notation? > > Steven. > >> On Sat, 22 Sep 2007 22:00:29 +0100, philip madsen <joyphil@xxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote: >>> Dinosaurs would not need to have gotten onto the ark now Steven would >> they? Wern't they natural water beasts? They could have floated around >> on the sea eating fish, which likewise suffered little from the flood.>> >> Just wondering. But then maybe they developed from a little lizard,>> which Noah could easily have accomodated. You see we can accept Darwins >> theory, in that Tigers developed after the flood from Mrs. Noah's pussy>> cat. >>>> Lets all keep in mind as well that fossil dating is pure guess work...>> >> Philip. >> Mastodons>> The American mastodon (scientific name Mammut americanum) roamed North>> America from at least 3.75 million to 11,000 years ago. Mastodons, >> along with mammoths and modern elephants, are members of the order>> Proboscidea. As adults they stood between 2.5 and 3 meters (8-10 feet) >> at the shoulder and weighed betweeen 3500 and 5400 kilograms (4-6 tons).>> >> Mastodons became extinct approximately 11,000 years ago. Today, >> paleontologists are trying to understand why. >> >> But, but but.... >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: Steven Jones >> To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx >> Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2007 2:39 AM >> Subject: [geocentrism] Dinosaurs >> >> >> Hi All, >>>> Just while we’re touching upon the topic of dinosaurs, I would like>> to say >> I was once a very big hobbyist concerning them, collecting vast >> quantities>> of secular data and both reading and learning it avidly. But, times>> haves >> changed rathRe: [geocentrism] Re: Evolutioner substantially, I was>> significantly younger then and I’ve grown in spirit concerning God.>> The >> following statement I hope is not too radical, but I have come to >> question>> many of the species labeled as "dinosaurs" entirely. After all, how>> many >> of you have actually seen a real fossilized dinosaur skeleton? The >> answer>> is probably none, since almost every museum has only plaster casts on >> display. This all suggests a rather large mass conspiracy, but how do>> the>> skeletons look so realistic you ask? It’s often mooted in the secular >> world that birds descended the evolutionary path from dinosaurs, why>> do >> they believe such? It’s simple, because many dinosaur fossils have >> similar>> structures to birds. Could this not be because the plastercasts are>> really>> based upon birds in the first place. Meet the real Tyrannosaurus rex, >> probably an enlarged chicken skeleton, with a massive skull and tail>> added>> plus two pointless little arms. This, iconic and typical “ultimate” >> monster is so similar to those "classic" beasts and dragons dreamed>> up by >> man’s imagination that perhaps it is only an element of the >> imagination. >> And don’t be fooled into thinking this 5-7 tonne beast is an agile >> hunter, >> because it does have some serious flaws with it’s morphology. The>> balancing act required for that huge skull, the pointless little arms>> which can’t even pick teeth and even the art of getting up after >> sleeping>> are all a bit suspicious. Computer models have demonstrated I believe>> that>> this is not an easy balancing act. Any beast seeing the site of those >> teeth coming along would be away as fast as lightning, making hunting >> nearly impossible, don't believe 35 mph, sorry, even modern results>> are >> showing 17.9 mph at best. You'll need RealPlayer for the computer >> simulation video link below: >>>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediaselector/check/player/nol/newsid_6950000/newsid_6958000?redirect=6958025.stm&news=1&nbwm=1&nbram=1&bbwm=1&bbram=1&asb=1>> >> Anyway, there are only thoughts for the time being, but it is >> interesting >> to further add that it wasn’t always the case that dinosaurs were >> thought >> to have lived and “ruled the Earth” in their own right 65,000,000 >> years >> ago. Many museums of the 19th century put abundant evidence of the>> co-existence of dinosaurs and man on display. If someone is going to>> challenge me on this, they are most welcome. >> >> Former dinosaur expert, >> >> Steven. >> >> >> >> -- >> No virus found in this incoming message. >> Checked by AVG Free Edition. >> Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.13.28/1021 - Release Date: >> 21/09/2007 2:02 PM >> > > > -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/ -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition.Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.13.28/1023 - Release Date: 22/09/2007 1:27 PM
-- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/