RE: Collab with @clayboyn: Photography and Philosophy by dreemit

View this thread on steempeak.com

Viewing a response to: @therealpaul/re-dreemit-collab-with-clayboyn-photography-and-philosophy-20170809t030237380z

· @dreemit ·
lol, well in the lessons from church God is portrayed as a 'perfect' being, and their definition of perfect excludes sex of any kind. Same went for Jesus, a completely celibate man says they. In particular since they consider it a sin for a man and woman to have sex outside of the construct of marriage, (and for men to be with men and women to be with women etc. etc.)and since Jesus was never married and he was without sin, well you get the picture.  No, what I was taught was God loved David because he was constantly apologizing to or praising God, depending on the circumstance. But even when I had the language all wrong I still didn't get that out of it, seemed to me God liked him simply because he was likable. Despite having his neighbor killed to be with the wife lol. (Bathsheba)

Actually there were quite a few questions in that post that were worded in a way that was too vague,  we discussed it last morning and he altered them for the sake of me directing people over there. Generally he writes his posts for himself and if others like it great, in which case it wouldn't have mattered, but if others were going to take a stab at answering them, well, it made it easier for them to be answerable lol.  Truthfully I like the way he reconstructed quite a few of them and might have chosen them to answer instead, but I'd already finished this and I figured it was long enough.

It makes me really warm and fuzzy that you feel you would have answered similarly :)

Did you happen to take a look down this comment section? My question elicited some vastly differing answers, one end of the spectrum to the other :)
properties (22)
post_id9,647,083
authordreemit
permlinkre-therealpaul-re-dreemit-collab-with-clayboyn-photography-and-philosophy-20170809t080601715z
categoryblog
json_metadata"{"app": "steemit/0.1", "tags": ["blog"]}"
created2017-08-09 08:05:48
last_update2017-08-09 08:05:48
depth2
children1
net_rshares0
last_payout2017-08-16 08:05:48
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 SBD
curator_payout_value0.000 SBD
pending_payout_value0.000 SBD
promoted0.000 SBD
body_length1,629
author_reputation165,111,672,942,758
root_title"Collab with @clayboyn: Photography and Philosophy"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 SBD
percent_steem_dollars10,000
@therealpaul ·
I enjoy the type of question that asks 'what if', then presents an unorthodox description of the true situation in the world- any rhetorical question that inspires a look inside of ourselves is a productive venture I think, even if the only 'answer' to the question is to agree that there is truth in it's meaning.

I did see the variety of comments, by the time I came along your wise readers had already solved a world of mysteries. I especially noted the language topic even touching on the sound and intent of words being potent in creation, aside from the various spell-ings of the English words. It's been suggested, even in modern physics, that the universe is held together cymatically by an enormous sound, so the ideas about how words and their sounds can change reality are always on the tip of my tongue, it was nice to see it covered here.
properties (22)
post_id9,725,026
authortherealpaul
permlinkre-dreemit-re-therealpaul-re-dreemit-collab-with-clayboyn-photography-and-philosophy-20170810t025601015z
categoryblog
json_metadata"{"app": "steemit/0.1", "tags": ["blog"]}"
created2017-08-10 02:56:00
last_update2017-08-10 02:56:00
depth3
children0
net_rshares0
last_payout2017-08-17 02:56:00
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 SBD
curator_payout_value0.000 SBD
pending_payout_value0.000 SBD
promoted0.000 SBD
body_length852
author_reputation82,751,862,601,752
root_title"Collab with @clayboyn: Photography and Philosophy"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 SBD
percent_steem_dollars10,000