David wrote:
> On Apr 19, 8:29 am, Rod <icom...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> David wrote:
>>> On Apr 18, 9:30 pm, Rod <icom...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>> ...
>>>> Yes, but you need to let go of that. No good will come from
>>>> brooding over things already said and done.
>>> Haven't you noticed I am actively preaching on SRQ as a
>>> minister? I am hardly brooding.
>>>> As for the Essenes, the quickest way to turn me off of looking
>>>> further into understanding quakers and their history is to
>>>> demonstrate ties with christianity.
>>>> ...
>>> Your prejudices are your own. If you decide to get to know
>>> our founder George Fox better, please remember he came
>>> from a time of social upheaval and was consequently polemical
>>> (imperfect in his treatment of other non-Quaker Christians).
>>> If it helps, Fox would just as soon wor****p in a field as in
>>> a church.
>> Did he like art ?
>
> George Fox underestimated the value of art.
>
Art, like mathematics, is a universal language spoken by most
men.
How does a person define wor****p ? Is it a form of adoration..,
an obsession with an object or person, or personal abasement
before an object of veneration, in an attempt to raise it higher
in stature than ones self ? If it is the latter, then does this
not indicate that the person may have a placed a false value on
themselves, ego being a predominant factor ?
How would, say a community of quakers fit into this "nitch" ?
Rod
|
