![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 6 of 6. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by rayww on December 27, 2002, at 22:18:23
For me, I believe and I don't expect any of you to believe:
Lou, we are all in the same boat, rowing toward the same shore. What does it matter if there is one God to greet us or many? There will be atleast two, Father and Mother -- don't forget the women. Are we not all sons and daughters of God? Then what is to say we can't all grow up to be like our father (and mother)? Have you heard of the Patriarchal order? Why is there so much genealogy recorded in the OT? Who knows, maybe we're all gods in embrio.Anyway Lou, we know you believe in one God. You have made that extremely clear. And we know the Jews as a nation believe in only one God. I also believe in that same God, the Father of us all. It's OK to disagree on the Jesus issue. Whether or not Jesus existed is not debatable, all agree he lived. The debate lies inside the question, "Who is Jesus?"
Jesus was the firstborn spirit son of God. You and I came somewhere farther down the line. Every person who has ever lived on earth is a spirit son or daughter of that same one God that you and I believe in. OH, that makes us all brothers and sisters. Yes. Lou, you my brother! Lets just agree to disagree on our interpretation of scripture.
Bob can work it out. He can ban me for a week for writing this if he chooses, and I'll probably come back afterward. It's no biggy. Let's just work it out and agree to disagree. Everyone is right for once.
Posted by Lou Pilder on December 28, 2002, at 8:18:07
In reply to A request for Lou Pilder, posted by rayww on December 27, 2002, at 22:18:23
rayww,
Thank you for your interest in this discussion. You wrote, [Bob can work it out.]
The purpose of the admin. board is stated as;[...possible topics might be: problems with the site, ideas for improvement,...]
You wrote,[ ...let's just work it out...]. That is what I am trying to do here. For I can not accept the admin. policy of threatening to punish me by expelling me from this community for 16 weeks or 8 weeks or for any lengh of time for I can not allow my concience to entertain that I am to be punished in this manner here, at all, for posting xxx
I feel that this is something that I have to object to and to do what I can to not allow the policy of expelling me by [giving ideas for improvememnt] to the site. I do want it to [be worked out]. I feel that I can not allow myself to be portrayed here as someone that , if they post the post in question, that they are to be expelled, in any way, from this community. The avenues open to me to enable me to not allow the admin. to portray me in this light is to object here , which is [to work it out]. Your input is valuable in this discussion and I hope that you will continue to contribute to it.
Best regards,
Lou
Posted by Dr. Bob on December 28, 2002, at 12:11:02
In reply to Re: A request for Lou Pilder » rayww, posted by Lou Pilder on December 28, 2002, at 8:18:07
> I can not allow my concience to entertain that I am to be punished in this manner here, at all, for posting xxx
I understand, but please don't post that here, either.
> I feel that this is something that I have to object to and to do what I can to not allow the policy of expelling me by [giving ideas for improvememnt] to the site... The avenues open to me to enable me to not allow the admin. to portray me in this light is to object here...
You have to do what you have to do. I used to think I could get everyone to see things my way, but (1) I couldn't and (2) I received some helpful feedback, some posted, for example:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20020725/msgs/7421.html
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20020725/msgs/7423.htmland some by email. So now I try not to ask anyone to "give up their ideals and accept your rules". If you think you have to challenge, challenge. (But if I think I have to exercise some authority, I'm going to exercise some authority.)
Bob
Posted by Lou Pilder on December 28, 2002, at 13:53:47
In reply to Re: something that I have to do, posted by Dr. Bob on December 28, 2002, at 12:11:02
Dr. Bob,
Thank you for responding to this discussion. You wrote,[I understand...].
I appreciate that you understand that some issues to some posters, like the examples from Beardedlady and others that you included, compell some of the community mmbers here to seek redress of greivances that they feel need to be redressed. And I also understand your position of authority that you state here. I believe in administrative authority. It is my intention to have a discussion here about my proposed post so that changes could possibly be made that could help the community as a whole by me giving my ideas for improvement, and it is my understanding that the admin. board is the place that we are invited to come to for you state that [...you are open to feedback...].
Now here are some ideas that I have that I feel would fall under your guideline of [giving ideas for improvment.]
First, I am asking that you lift the prohibition for me, on a tempoary basis, to post the proposed post in question so that I can complete the folowing:
1) The 7 Gates on the Road to the Crown of Life, for the 7th Gate involves the proposed post.
2) The explanation of what has been revealed to me about the symbolism of [do not hurt the oil or the wine] that I had posted about the 4 horseman. I did not include the explanation because it has been revealed to me that the oil involves [annointing] and that involves my proposed post and the wine is a symbol of blood which also would involve the proposed post, and so I had to leave the explanation that has been revealed to me out of that post.
3)My response to the post about dietary restrictions , for my response would contain the proposed post.
4)My response to rayww's post that wrote that [...the Pharasees sought to kill Jesus..]
I could not respond to that post without writing the proposed post in question.
Now if you could do that, then (1) I would agree to not object to any and all critisism by anyone here about those posts, to be posted,regardless of its content. (2) I would agree that you could delete any and all of those posts without explanation, (3)I would agree to leave this community without any protest from me, if you wanted me to do so for the 8 week or 16 week blocking that your authority would administer. (4) that I will not involve myself in any other threads durring the time that I am completing the posts in question. (5) That after all the posts are completed, the community as a whole examines the posts and has an opportunity to give their input before the posts are deleted, if they are going to be. (6) other good an just suggestions by anyone in this community.
I feel that this proposal of mine is a good proposal for the community as a whole because,
A) IF allowed, it would end all of the other poster's concerns about the faith board that they have posted.
B) It would end my feelings of being treated unfairly, which has caused me to object to your proposed restraint of my proposed post.
C) Me and you could [bury this dispute among ourselves] and you could have the time spent on this dispute to be put elseware.
D) It would, in a sense, be a compromise by us.
E) It would give me what I am seeking, partially, which is to post the post in question on just those spacific posts and give you ,partially, what you would like, for I would only post the post in question on those posts, only.
F) The controversy would be ended, for there would be no need for me to want to post the post in question again.
F) Any support or educaton that arrises out of my posts could be retained by the community, while what is deemed to be not could be deleted.
G) other good and just causs that other members of this community could suggest to end this controversy.
I am asking for you to review this proposal of mine, and allow other members to give their input , and respond with any additions,deletions, modifications or concerns that need further discussion.
Sincerely,
Lou Pilder
Posted by Lou Pilder on December 30, 2002, at 21:54:41
In reply to Re: something that I have to do, posted by Dr. Bob on December 28, 2002, at 12:11:02
Dr. Bob,
You wrote,[...if you think you have to challenge...]
I now have thought this over and I a conceding, and will not make a challenge to the issues at hand here. It is better for all not to entertain things that cause one to be compelled to do something. At least not on this board. And I must be also aware that our minds need to be unencombered from compelling forces. Our minds, however want to persue in a compelling way, all manner of injustices that we percieve in our minds. This is something that I feel that I must Overcome, so I am conceding the issue here and will not expect you to reply to my requests for clarification of your guidlines.
Best regards,
Lou
Posted by Dr. Bob on December 30, 2002, at 22:26:42
In reply to Lou concedes » Dr. Bob, posted by Lou Pilder on December 30, 2002, at 21:54:41
> our minds need to be unencombered from compelling forces.
Thanks, and I like that, we should be in charge, not the forces! :-)
Bob
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Administration | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.