God and Martial Arts
Thunder
Can God and the Martial Arts coexist with each other?
John
"Thunder" <edfe...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:e3136f92.02081...@posting.google.com...
JoeyPasta
think that Martial Arts brings one closer to understand God. I'm making the
assumption that you don't believe that God and Martial Arts can not coexist,
by the fact that you ponder this question. Why do you think that God and
Martial Arts can not coexist? I am confused on some peoples' idea, that
Martial Arts is somehow religious. At least in my Doan, religion is never
discussed except during personal conversations before or after class. Even
so, the topic is rarely brought up.
"Thunder" <edfe...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:e3136f92.02081...@posting.google.com...
Walt
"John" <ai...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Wd289.237$%K6.17597@newsfep2-gui...
R.A.Collins
No, so there can be no such thing as G*d as there appears to be something
called Martial Arts...
David H
> Can God and the Martial Arts coexist with each other?
<SOAPBOX>
Is this that whole pile of crap about how Christians should not study
martial arts because of eastern philosophies, spirituality, etc? I'll tell
you right now that I'm Catholic and an orange belt, and I see no way in
which the philosophical or spiritual aspects of my training interfere with
my religious beliefs, unless they start trying to make me believe that
meditation will put me in touch with God (although some could argue prayer
is a form of meditation) or that Tae Kwon Do will eventually make me reach
Enlightenment. My Tae Kwon Do training does not require I worship God,
Buddha, the big turtle in the sky, Barney and Baby Bop, or anything else
for that matter. Personally I think this whole debate was brought on by
cooks like Jerry "The fags are responsible for 9/11" Falwell who feel that
anything not rooted in Christianity should be burned, killed, or cast into
the ocean and not necessarialy by real grievances over religious beliefs.
</SOAPBOX>
Chuck Sears
than a scam, and scams by their nature are flexible to fit
any situation, the answer would appear to be yes.
Thunder wrote:
> I have a question folks...
> Can God and the Martial Arts coexist with each other?
--
=============================
Cuius testiculos habes, habeas cardia et cerebellum.
Reply address is spamguarded. Remove NO SPAM to reply.
Thanks!
pressureguy
> I have a question folks...
> Can God and the Martial Arts coexist with each other?
Very good question.
Yes, easily.
I will assume you are refering to the Christian God (for arguements'
sake). Jesus himself had to carry a staff for self-defense and more
than likely had to brawl a few times. God Himself sent many of his
disiples into bad situations in which He knew that they would have to
defend themselves.
Then there were the Crusades.....
The biggest thing you have to look at is if the martial art itself is
treated as a sport or a religion. If it is treated as a fun
hobby/exercise, then God is okay with it. If it contains meditiation,
oaths (of non-religious types), or any type of obsession (where the
pracitioner puts it over his religion), then it is bad.
I want you to ask this same question here:
http://www.karateforchrist.com/board/display_forum_topics.asp?ForumID=1
It is the Karate For Christ website bulletin board. You will get
great answers there covering both sides of the arguement.
By the way, you asked a loaded question, so be prepared to tune out
all of the trolls and people who hate religion.
pressureguy
Grant D. Watson
>Can God and the Martial Arts coexist with each other?
If it's the Christian God you're talking about, check out
http://www.glondon.com/tkd.html .
Grant D. Watson
grwa...@georgefox.edu
VBas...@aol.com
ChibiElf
> Can God and the Martial Arts coexist with each other?
not all do. Honestly, while some practice martial arts for the perceived
spiritual aspect, it's very possible to practice it solely for it's
physical/mental aspects.
The only thing that would make it wrong is if you became fanatical about it
to the point of harming your relationship with God and/or people in general.
If you do get involved in martial arts, be ready to face some pride problems
as practicing the arts can produce a bit of an elitist feeling if you aren't
careful.
Joe Ottoson
news:N6j89.212625$uj.3...@rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net:
>> I have a question folks...
>> Can God and the Martial Arts coexist with each other?
> Yes, they can. Although some martial arts contain elements of Zen
> Buddhism, not all do. Honestly, while some practice martial arts for
> the perceived spiritual aspect, it's very possible to practice it
> solely for it's physical/mental aspects.
> The only thing that would make it wrong is if you became fanatical
> about it to the point of harming your relationship with God and/or
> people in general.
God's followers on that particular path are just as bad. ;)
Thomas
> Jesus himself had to carry a staff for self-defense and more
> than likely had to brawl a few times. God Himself sent many of his
> disiples into bad situations in which He knew that they would have to
> defend themselves.
Are you sure about that? Give me one example of Jesus and or his
deciples in a brawl and don't try to force Matt. 26:51-52 to prove you
point, it will not work.
> Then there were the Crusades.....
What about the Crusades? Do you know what they were, where they took
place, who sponsored them (I believe there were six crusades in
total), and why they happened? Nothing personal, but you probabaly
don't know a single fact about them. If you did, you would not have
mentioned them in this context.
Thomas
Frank Ruiz
> I have a question folks...
> Can God and the Martial Arts coexist with each other?
This is my opinion, but, isn't God the judge of our hearts? Personally, I
think he looks at your motives, do you take martial arts to bully people or
for self defense? I have read the Bible a few times and really haven't found
anything against learning about how to defend yourself. Didnt Jesus tell his
disciples to sell their cloaks and buy a sword?
Now, on the other hand I don't know about some other types of martial arts
like tai chi which (i guess follows more taoist philosophies. I think alot
of the principles are similar but i dont know enough about it to know if
other parts of it conflict with Christianity. (if that is the God you are
talking about)
JoeyPasta
are coming across as one who attempts to be "holier than thou." Do you
train in TKD or any Martial Arts? As a friendly suggestion, when disputing
a point or making an argument; qualifying your views or statements
increases the understanding of your point. Otherwise, to some you may look
as if you are on the attack.
"Thomas" <tc...@magnetika.com> wrote in message
news:8cc482b3.02082...@posting.google.com...
Storys
>
> > Jesus himself had to carry a staff for self-defense and more
> > than likely had to brawl a few times. God Himself sent many of his
> > disiples into bad situations in which He knew that they would have to
> > defend themselves.
>
> Are you sure about that? Give me one example of Jesus and or his
> deciples in a brawl and don't try to force Matt. 26:51-52 to prove you
> point, it will not work.
>
Peter had a sword. It was mentioned when they were in the Garden of
gethsemane (SP?) the night before the crusifixion (SP?) I suppose you intend
to argue that he used it to clean his fingernails?
>
> > Then there were the Crusades.....
>
>
> What about the Crusades? Do you know what they were, where they took
> place, who sponsored them
Yep. They were invasions conducted by Christians. I.E. martially trained
Christians. You have another point?
...................Tom.......................
Thomas
> Perhaps you would like to enlighten us on your views. No offense, but; you
> are coming across as one who attempts to be "holier than thou."
No offense to you or any one else, but I'm not going to do your
homework for you. Someone says that Jesus did "this" and he did "that"
with no historical evidence to back it up and when I ask for the
proof, you call me "holier than thou."
>Do you
> train in TKD or any Martial Arts?
TKD
>As a friendly suggestion, when disputing
> a point or making an argument; qualifying your views or statements
> increases the understanding of your point. Otherwise, to some you may look
> as if you are on the attack.
Call it however you see it, but someone says they know something that
I know to be wrong, I ask for proof. If someone can prove me wrong I
will change my views. I know of no place in the New Testament where
the anyone is being told to defend themselve from personal harm.
As for the Crusades, I will wait for someone to enlighten me on what
they were. Most people talk about them as if they know all about them
but couldn't answer a simple question such as when they took place,
where they took place and who was a (any) general in charge.
Thomas
JoeyPasta
Behold, I send you as sheep amongst the wolves.
"Thomas" <tc...@magnetika.com> wrote in message
news:8cc482b3.02082...@posting.google.com...
John
like ( if 'Historical' references be truth ) he was a paper tiger?
According to John 18:36, Jesus said to Pilate: "If my kingdom were of this
world, my servants would fight, that I might not be handed over to the
Jews." He implies that his followers knew his kingdom was not of this world
and would not use violence. The truth is that they expected Jesus to restore
the kingdom of Israel in a terrestrial sense. Even after his death Jesus'
followers looked forward to a speedy return which would usher in the
overthrow of the Roman Empire: "Lord will you at this time restore the
kingdom of Israel" {Acts 1:6).
Moreover, just a few hours before his meeting Pilate, Jesus had ordered the
disciples to buy swords if they had none (Luke 22:36), and the disciples
responded by saying that two swords were available (Luke 22:36). Soon after
this, Peter cut off the ear of Malchus, the servant of the high priest, who
came to seize Jesus (Matthew 26:51, Mark 14:47, Luke 22:50, John 18:10).
Obviously, contrary to Jesus' statement that "these know what I said" (John
18:21 ), Peter did not know that since the kingdom was not of this world he
should not fight (John 18:36). Jesus knew, at his trial, that Peter had used
violence. Nevertheless, he lied and said that his followers would not feel
the necessity of acting violently since his kingdom was not of this world.
http://jewsforjudaism.org/j4j-2000/html/reflib/knowbase.html
Thomas
> Thomas, onward Christian soldier.
> Behold, I send you as sheep amongst the wolves.
Joey,
Sent to do what???
Thomas
Thomas
> Peter had a sword. It was mentioned when they were in the Garden of
> gethsemane (SP?) the night before the crusifixion (SP?) I suppose you intend
> to argue that he used it to clean his fingernails?
Tom, As I mentioned in my 1st response, Matt. 26:51-52 (peters sword
incident) will not work as an arguement winner for the issue at hand.
Study the whole passage and then come back and tell me that Jesus was
teaching self defense, he doesn't. Why peter had the sword is a good
question, however it is clear that after he used it, he wished he
hadn't.
> > > Then there were the Crusades.....
> > What about the Crusades? Do you know what they were, where they took
> > place, who sponsored them
>
> Yep. They were invasions conducted by Christians. I.E. martially trained
> Christians. You have another point?
>
> ...................Tom.......................
Tom, I give you some credit because you seem to know the difference
between the crusades and the inquisition. However your response is
weak in that it contains only a small amount of truth where a lot is
needed. It is impossible for me or anyone else to condense 100 plus
years of history into a post on the internet.
Historically speaking, the crusades (I believe there were 6 of them
total spanning 3 centuries) were first intended to recapture the Holy
land back from the Muslims who were on a roll to conquer most of
europe and force their religion/political life on the west. While the
pope(s) were behind this, the soldiers themselves were mostly
youngsters looking for adventure. Don't forget that 11-13th century
european governments were weak and the roman church with it's high
degree of organization and power was able to fill in the power void.
It is quite possible that a european government would have started a
war with the muslims if the roman church hadn't been willing to do it
for them. It could be said that the crusades were a factor in
bringing about the protestant reformation which paved the way for the
democratic republics that we know today. If that statement makes you
uncomfortable, consider that it is quite possible that if the crusades
had not taken place, islam would be the dominant religion in the west
today.
To imply that God ordered the crusades would be a little tough to
prove one way or the other. And to say that the actual soldiers (of
the western forces) in the crusades used martial arts is almost like
saying that the soldiers of the roman empire used martial arts to
conquer all of their lands. I think the idea behind this thread is to
nit pick over the spiritual aspects of eastern culture and religion
vs. Christianity as it pertains to martial arts training, not to
define all combat that doesn't use firearms as martial arts. After
all, isn't it true that most martial arts trace their roots to a some
sort of monestary and their monks, and yet I have not heard anyone
say that that they have found the precursor to Tae Kwon Do in an
ancient Christian church.
By the way, I'm not trying to say that the God (of the Bible) doesn't
expect people to defend themselves from the bad guys, I'm questioning
the earlier made proposal that Jesus told his followers to prepare for
a physical battle with their detractors by using a step side kick
followed by a 360 round house.
Thomas
Thomas
> Thomas got me interested, did Jesus train his disciples to fight? It sounds
> like ( if 'Historical' references be truth ) he was a paper tiger?
Ok John, so what you are saying is that the New Testament is actually
fighting manual, Jesus was the desciples SBN (I guess they properly
refered to him as master), and Christians who do not go out and fight
are not really doing it right? Either that, or what you mean is that
the Bible is full of contradictions and Jesus was a liar. Or maybe you
mean all of the above?
Teach me Sir,
Thomas
Dan Thurs
I thought I would comment on this part of your post seeing that I know a lot
about the crusades, I do reenactments of that time period. The crusades
were started by the pope to stop the knights of that day to stop fighting
between themselves. Giving them a common enemy would bring order. The
crusades have been going on nonstop at some level starting around the 10th
century, and is still going on today at some level. Martial arts were not
used in any large form. Knights were required to go to the holy land, no
self respecting knight, or king would turn down that honor. The pope said
that simply going to fight in the holy land would forgive ALL your sins,
basically giving you a get in to heaven free card. God did not have
anything to do with the crusades, the pope of that day was trying to bring
order, in my opinion it was the wrong choice. I will have to go back and
check my history, but I believe the west started the crusades. Hope that
clears up this small point.
--
Dan Thurs
www.thurs.net/dan
Dans Astrophotography web page
Astronomy is looking up
www.thurs.net
Thurs Leather & Renaissance goods
A Black belt is MORE then something you wear. It's MORE then something you
earn. A Black belt is something you BECOME!
Storys
>
> Tom, As I mentioned in my 1st response, Matt. 26:51-52 (peters sword
> incident) will not work as an arguement winner for the issue at hand.
> Study the whole passage and then come back and tell me that Jesus was
> teaching self defense, he doesn't.
Ghahh you are so full of yourself. NO ONE said Christ taught self defense.
The presence of a sword in the garden is proof enough that the diciples were
prepared to defend themselves & possibly Christ himself. Who taught them to
wield a sword is just NOT RELEVANT. Remember oh wise ass that Peter was a
grown man when he became a disciple!!!! He was NOT an unwashed diaper
wearing infant
> Why peter had the sword is a good
> question, however it is clear that after he used it, he wished he
> hadn't.
>
No I cannot give you this. Christ healed the man who had his ear cut off but
I in my own reading do not see any real censure in this.
>
> Tom, I give you some credit because you seem to know the difference
> between the crusades and the inquisition. However your response is
> weak in that it contains only a small amount of truth where a lot is
> needed. It is impossible for me or anyone else to condense 100 plus
> years of history into a post on the internet.
>
I doubt you could given months of time and a book to boot. The crusades were
invasions by martially trained christians who fought for what was economic
reasons .( read an unbiased account of the sack of Constantinople ) Many
individuals within the Christian forces may have believed that they foruhgt
for religious reasons but this was a fallacy. & what the hell did any thing
I said have do do with the inquisition. This is a totally different topic &
one where my views might shock you and lead to your questioning my
christianity.
>
> To imply that God ordered the crusades would be a little tough to
> prove one way or the other.
NOT at all. He didn't. Economic forces and a corrupt Pope decided this.
>And to say that the actual soldiers (of
> the western forces) in the crusades used martial arts is almost like
> saying that the soldiers of the roman empire used martial arts to
> conquer all of their lands.
They did. Read the dictionary definition of martial & you will see what I
mean.
>I think the idea behind this thread is to
> nit pick over the spiritual aspects of eastern culture and religion
> vs. Christianity as it pertains to martial arts training, not to
> define all combat that doesn't use firearms as martial arts.
But the use of firearms is a martial art. Whatever made you think it
wasn't??? You need a new dictionary.
> After
> all, isn't it true that most martial arts trace their roots to a some
> sort of monestary and their monks,
Only certain kinds of martial arts have this but the first martial art was
undoubtedly born when the first squabble erupted over a joint of meat. I
think you are thinking of Shaolin Kung-fu. Sorry this is not the root of all
martial arts. Try looking up an art called Silat. No religion involved in
many of the styles. Note though that there are literally hundreds perhaps
thousands of different Silat styles. Some have a very strong Islamic
flacvour. Others have NONE. There are no monasteries in Indonesia that are
home to the seminal style of Silat & I doubt that there is any such style.
> and yet I have not heard anyone
> say that that they have found the precursor to Tae Kwon Do in an
> ancient Christian church.
>
Sheesh. the art was originated in the twentieth century by a man who died
just recently. Monks & churches had zip to do with it. To get to a monastery
of any kind you have to go back through at least three different martial
arts & even then I wouldn't care to hazard a guess just how much further
back you'd need to go to find any religious connection whatsoever no matter
how tenuous. IF there is one.
>
> By the way, I'm not trying to say that the God (of the Bible) doesn't
> expect people to defend themselves from the bad guys, I'm questioning
> the earlier made proposal that Jesus told his followers to prepare for
> a physical battle with their detractors by using a step side kick
> followed by a 360 round house.
>
Who knows if this was the case. I seem to have heard that a kaka uke
followed by a mae geri from a neko ashi dachi was the favoured route.
Seriously I doubt God is concerned with HOW you defend yourself. You defend
yourself in the way you know how. I would use one way & you might use
another. Both are self defense.
................Tom.................
Joe Ottoson
news:um7sv07...@corp.supernews.com:
> The crusades have been going on nonstop at some level
> starting around the 10th century, and is still going on today at some
> level. Martial arts were not used in any large form.
No armies were used in the crusades? No swords, arrows etc? I find that
kinda hard to beleive.
grasshopper
> Can God and the Martial Arts coexist with each other?
I thought I *was* god.
Hehehe...
--
- k i t z -
"Boromir definitely not prettier than me. Cannot understand it.
Am feeling a pout coming on." -very secret diary of Legolas
http://spinning_plates.tripod.com
grasshopper
David H <dahi...@nospam.monarchelectric.com> wrote in message
news:um20cm2...@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "Thunder" <edfe...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:e3136f92.02081...@posting.google.com...
> > I have a question folks...
> > Can God and the Martial Arts coexist with each other?
>
> <SOAPBOX>
>
> Is this that whole pile of crap about how Christians should not study
> martial arts because of eastern philosophies, spirituality, etc?
I was raised to believe that I would be brainwashed if I started taking a
martial art and that they would teach me this cult philosophy.
That was before I found out that I was *in* a cult.
Live and learn.
I'll tell
> you right now that I'm Catholic and an orange belt, and I see no way in
> which the philosophical or spiritual aspects of my training interfere with
> my religious beliefs, unless they start trying to make me believe that
> meditation will put me in touch with God (although some could argue prayer
> is a form of meditation) or that Tae Kwon Do will eventually make me reach
> Enlightenment. My Tae Kwon Do training does not require I worship God,
> Buddha, the big turtle in the sky,
But I *like* turtles!
--
- k i t z -
"Frodo off to Mordor with Sam. Tiny little men caring about
each other, rather cute really." -very secret diary of Legolas
http://spinning_plates.tripod.com
grasshopper
>
> > Jesus himself had to carry a staff for self-defense and more
> > than likely had to brawl a few times. God Himself sent many of his
> > disiples into bad situations in which He knew that they would have to
> > defend themselves.
Uh... Jesus was a *pacifist*, dude. The nature of pacifism is that you
DON'T brawl. And, uh... prove to me where it says he ever carried a staff?
> > Then there were the Crusades.....
That's cute... hehehe... like Jesus was the motivation behind all that
whacked out nonsense... eh?
--
- k i t z -
"Am definitely prettiest member of the Fellowship.
Go me!" -very secret diary of Legolas
http://spinning_plates.tripod.com
grasshopper
news:<KLr89.90030$983.106638@rwcrnsc53>...
> > Perhaps you would like to enlighten us on your views. No offense, but;
you
> > are coming across as one who attempts to be "holier than thou."
>
> No offense to you or any one else, but I'm not going to do your
> homework for you.
He who makes the claim and stands on it bears the burden of proof. You're
simply wussing out because you don't have your own facts collected.
> As for the Crusades, I will wait for someone to enlighten me on what
> they were.
"No offense to you or anyone else, but I'm not going to do your homework for
you." -Thomas
grasshopper
>
> "Thomas" <tc...@magnetika.com> wrote in message
> news:8cc482b3.02082...@posting.google.com...
> > press...@tough.com (pressureguy) wrote in message:
> >
> > > Jesus himself had to carry a staff for self-defense and more
> > > than likely had to brawl a few times. God Himself sent many of his
> > > disiples into bad situations in which He knew that they would have to
> > > defend themselves.
> >
> > Are you sure about that? Give me one example of Jesus and or his
> > deciples in a brawl and don't try to force Matt. 26:51-52 to prove you
> > point, it will not work.
> >
>
> Peter had a sword. It was mentioned when they were in the Garden of
> gethsemane (SP?) the night before the crusifixion (SP?) I suppose you
intend
> to argue that he used it to clean his fingernails?
And as we all know... Peter was the BEST example to follow at that point in
his life.
Here... I have a gun in my hip pocket, and I've just converted to a belief
system that's no more than 3 years old, a religion, in fact, in which the
main philosophical figure has compared me to Satan on many occassions... be
like me and use me as an excuse for everything you do that is violent!
grasshopper
I think y'all are reading way too much in it and that he was just a nice man
who was in tune with his environment, did a good job of explaining some
ideas that he had and who wanted to be a good person and to do good things
for other people. Why does it have to be more than that? He certainly was
no bigger than what he made himself up to be.
Marc Levin
> Can God and the Martial Arts coexist with each other?
Depends on which god, care to specify?
I'm sure Mars (god of war) would happily endorse them,
however some island cultures twenty legged spider deity
might take issue with the white PJs.
Dan Thurs
kicking punching etc. Weapons fighting, swords, pikes, spears, long bow,
siege weapons etc. Are in my book on a different page of the same book.
Even horses were used to trample, this is again, something different. I
understand that all forms of fighting is a type of martial arts, but each is
in a sense a different page in the book of martial arts, or even a different
chapter. You would be amazed at what was done at this time in history, I
know I am. I have some pictures on my site showing a few battles. The
Pensic war just ended and that was well over 15,000 people lasting about 2
weeks. VERY cool.
--
Dan Thurs
www.thurs.net/dan
Dans Astrophotography web page
Astronomy is looking up
www.thurs.net
Thurs Leather & Renaissance goods
A Black belt is MORE then something you wear. It's MORE then something you
earn. A Black belt is something you BECOME!
"Joe Ottoson" <jaot...@fortlewis.edu> wrote in message
news:Xns927196686E28Aja...@130.133.1.4...
David H
"
> Ghahh you are so full of yourself. NO ONE said Christ taught self defense.
Actually, in a way he did teach self defense. He taught people how to defend
themselves against Satan. LOL
Dan Thurs
--
Dan Thurs
www.thurs.net/dan
Dans Astrophotography web page
Astronomy is looking up
www.thurs.net
Thurs Leather & Renaissance goods
A Black belt is MORE then something you wear. It's MORE then something you
earn. A Black belt is something you BECOME!
"David H" <dahi...@nospam.monarchelectric.com> wrote in message
news:um9t90o...@corp.supernews.com...
Storys
"grasshopper" <grass...@grassyspot.com> wrote in message
news:UHY89.24992$Ke2.1...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>
> Thunder <edfe...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:e3136f92.02081...@posting.google.com...
> > I have a question folks...
> > Can God and the Martial Arts coexist with each other?
>
> I thought I *was* god.
>
> Hehehe...
>
Why not? You're female that means you are always right whenever there is
anyone else present. that's gotta account for something.
.........................Tom........................ B-)
Thomas
Tom,
You totally missed my point and I think you are offended by my
comments when I did not intend to offend.
I have been reading this board for over 2 years and very seldom
respond to anything. While I'm a 2 gup and soon to be 1st, I do dont
feel qualified to offer much in the way of authoritative advice on
TKD.
However, I'm a lifelong lover of history and theology. If someone can
prove me wrong on a historical fact or something in the Bible, I will
happly change my views.
In New Jersey, where I live, almost everyone confuses the crusades
with the inquisition, so my comment on that was intended to be a
complement.
While I'm impressed by the fact that you are involved in historical
reenactments, that doesn't mean you are an expert on the subject. I
have been reading about the American Civil War for 30 years and
personally own 135 books on the subject. I have been to battle
reanactments many times and can count the number of times on one hand
the number of reanactors that knew much about the civil war. I'm not
saying you don't, but throwing out facts is a better indication of
your knowledge.
As I said, the the crusades were complicated and lasted many years and
several popes. I would not go to the wall on your comment about popes
wanting to rein in knights as the deciding factor in starting them and
sorry, fighting a war with guns is not martial arts.
I really wish you hadn't insulted me by telling me I'm full of myself.
Your too nice of a guy for that.
Thomas
Storys
> prove me wrong on a historical fact or something in the Bible, I will
> happly change my views.
>
> In New Jersey, where I live, almost everyone confuses the crusades
> with the inquisition, so my comment on that was intended to be a
> complement.
>
> While I'm impressed by the fact that you are involved in historical
> reenactments,
To do the above you will have to start reading and keeping your
correspondance in order. I Tom R. Story am NOT involved in any re-enactments
or any recognised historical groups. There are only 24 hours in a day & I
cannot do everything I would like. It was another poster that said he was
involved in such. Also you will have to use a little more reason. The fact
that Peter had a sword with him implies BOTH that he knew how to use it and
was prepared to do so. The fact that he cut off a Roman's ear proves BOTH
the aforementioned, unless you'd care to argue that a Roman soldier wasn't
able to defend himself? To be honest here I cannot recall whether it was a
Roman who got his ear bobbed or one of the priests but I submit that it
doesn't matter as soldiers would have been there if only to provide
protection for those arresting a dangerous rabble rousing criminal ( Christ,
as this is basically what the charges stemmed from. )I chose this particular
passage simply because you stated that it was invalid. IT IS NOT, your
preconceived notions to the contrary. There is another rather well known
incident in the bible that proves Christ himself was a noted martial artist.
I refrain from mentioning this as it involves reasoning and a familiarity
with the life of Christ ( major portions only )
>that doesn't mean you are an expert on the subject.
He is probably more so an expert than you!
>
> As I said, the the crusades were complicated and lasted many years and
> several popes. I would not go to the wall on your comment about popes
> wanting to rein in knights as the deciding factor in starting them and
> sorry, fighting a war with guns is not martial arts.
>
Sorry it is. Like "I" ( NB the use of the word I ) said you need another
dictionary. Guns, and their use is very definitely a martial art as is the
use of swords, billhooks etc.
> I really wish you hadn't insulted me by telling me I'm full of myself.
> Your too nice of a guy for that.
>
I call'm as I see'm & I see no reason to change my mind in this post.
...................Tom................
Thomas
> Also you will have to use a little more reason. The fact
> that Peter had a sword with him implies BOTH that he knew how to use it and
> was prepared to do so.
As you know (since you know almost everything), Peter was a Jewish
fisherman and not a Roman soldier. That fact in itself has
significance to this discussion. And while it is implied that he knew
how to use the sword, and implied that it even belonged to him, there
is now way to know for certain if either one of these varables are
fact. There is no way to even imply that he was prepared to use it,
unless you can somehow crawl into his head and ask him. The use of
martial arts or weapons is not mentioned very much in the New
Testament. A simple fact of life, it has only been in the last 50 or
so years in the US that regular citizens in this country have had the
right to carry arms for self defense purposes restricted. It has never
been manditory that a person packing heat be able to prove they could
shoot stright simply because they are packing. There was a time, not
too long ago, when you could buy a gun from sears thru the mail. It is
very possible that weapons were very common in those times, not like
today. Do you get my point?
> The fact that he cut off a Roman's ear proves BOTH
> the aforementioned, unless you'd care to argue that a Roman soldier wasn't
> able to defend himself?
No Tom, I do not care to argue this point. The fact is that the victim
was not a roman soldier or priest, he was a slave of the high priest.
Furthermore, the group of arresting people are described as a "mob,
armed with swords and clubs". It is very possible that the sword was
either dropped by a member of the "mob", or Peter grabbed it from one
of them. It is even possible that a member of the mob, seeing that he
didn't have one of his own, gave him the sword. A mob is not a trained
group of Roman soldiers sent in to protect the innocent as you would
like us to believe. It is very likely that there were no Roman
Military present at all.
> To be honest here I cannot recall whether it was a
> Roman who got his ear bobbed or one of the priests but I submit that it
> doesn't matter as soldiers would have been there if only to provide
> protection for those arresting a dangerous rabble rousing criminal ( Christ,
> as this is basically what the charges stemmed from. )
So Tom, if I'm correct about the identity of the mob (which I am), and
there was little or no Roman help available for the arrest, then your
statement above is of no value to your arguement. I also challenge
your implication that the subject was "a dangerous rabble rousing
criminal". Where do you come up with this?
> I chose this particular
> passage simply because you stated that it was invalid. IT IS NOT, your
> preconceived notions to the contrary. There is another rather well known
> incident in the bible that proves Christ himself was a noted martial artist.
> I refrain from mentioning this as it involves reasoning and a familiarity
> with the life of Christ ( major portions only )
Tom,
FYI. While I'm not a member of the clergy, nor am I a religious
scholar, I do happen to have 9 undergraduate credits from an approved
college specific on the life of Christ. I have a working knowledge of
and fimiliarity with the life of Christ. Based on what you have
written, sadly you do not. Sorry if that offends you. I would be very
interested in knowing where in the Bible it teaches that Christ was a
noted martial artist. We know he was a carpenter and a teacher (of
religious matters), but a noted martial artist?
As God in the flesh, Christ is able to do anything including turning
water into wine and creating brand new fish and loaves of bread that
had the look, feel, smell and taste of mature fish and fresh baked
bread. So it is possible that he could have been a noted anything he
chose to be, but as far as I know, he chose to be the lamb of God. No
need for him to defend himself from the bad guys, he created them and
gives them life.
> >that doesn't mean you are an expert on the subject.
>
> He is probably more so an expert than you!
WOW
WOW
and... WOW!
I'm sorry I confused you with another poster.
Thomas
PS,
Could you do me a big favor and lend me your copy of Zen and the Art
of Tank Maintenance?
Steve Tew
>
>
>
> > Also you will have to use a little more reason. The fact
> > that Peter had a sword with him implies BOTH that he knew how to use it and
> > was prepared to do so.
>
> As you know (since you know almost everything), Peter was a Jewish
> fisherman and not a Roman soldier. That fact in itself has
> significance to this discussion. And while it is implied that he knew
> how to use the sword, and implied that it even belonged to him, there
> is now way to know for certain if either one of these varables are
> fact.
John 18:11 Then <3767> said <2036> (5627) Jesus <2424> unto Peter <4074>, Put up <906> (5628) thy <4675> sword <3162> into <1519> the sheath <2336>: the cup <4221> which <3739> my Father <3962> hath given <1325> (5758) me <3427>, shall I <4095> <0> not <3378> drink <4095> (5632) it <846>?
2192
ecw echo ekh’-o including an alternate form scew scheo skheh’-o, used in certain tenses only),a primary verb; TDNT-2:816,286; v
AV-have 613, be 22, need + 5532 12, misc 63, vr have 2; 712
1) to have, i.e. to hold
1a) to have (hold) in the hand, in the sense of wearing, to have (hold) possession of the mind (refers to alarm, agitating emotions, etc.), to hold fast keep, to have or comprise or involve, to regard or consider or hold as
2) to have i.e. own, possess
2a) external things such as pertain to property or riches or furniture or utensils or goods or food etc.
2b) used of those joined to any one by the bonds of natural blood or marriage or friendship or duty or law etc, of attendance or companionship
3) to hold one’s self or find one’s self so and so, to be in such or such a condition
4) to hold one’s self to a thing, to lay hold of a thing, to adhere or cling to
4a) to be closely joined to a person or a thing
5723
Tense-Present
See 5774
Voice-Active
See 5784
Mood
-Participle
See 5796
Count-2549
1670
elkuw helkuo hel-koo’-o or elkw helko hel’-koprobably akin to 138; TDNT-2:503,227; v
AV-draw 8; 8
1) to draw, drag off
2) metaph., to draw by inward power, lead, impel
4675
sou sou soogenitive case of 4771; ; pron
AV-thy 358, thee 76, thine 50, thine own 7, thou 6, not tr 1; 498
1) thy, thee
Thomas,
If you take the time to do some research before spouting off, you won't sound so foolish. Use a concordance at least.
Steve
Dan Thurs
making it sound like the same person. I never insulted you(I hope), and
never claimed to be an expert on the crusades. But I do know for a fact
that the pope needed a way to control the knights from fighting among
themselves, and came up with freeing the holy land. It's unknown if control
was the only reason, but it played a big part.
As for guns being or not being a martial art, it's a mater of perspective.
To defend yourself with a rock, or a gun, is still defense.
--
Dan Thurs
www.thurs.net/dan
Dans Astrophotography web page
Astronomy is looking up
www.thurs.net
Thurs Leather & Renaissance goods
A Black belt is MORE then something you wear. It's MORE then something you
earn. A Black belt is something you BECOME!
"Thomas" <tc...@magnetika.com> wrote in message
news:8cc482b3.02082...@posting.google.com...
Dan Thurs
leaving for a reenactment.
--
Dan Thurs
www.thurs.net/dan
Dans Astrophotography web page
Astronomy is looking up
www.thurs.net
Thurs Leather & Renaissance goods
A Black belt is MORE then something you wear. It's MORE then something you
earn. A Black belt is something you BECOME!
> To do the above you will have to start reading and keeping your
Storys
news:<umc3sf6...@corp.supernews.com>...
>
>
>
> > Also you will have to use a little more reason. The fact
> > that Peter had a sword with him implies BOTH that he knew how to use it
and
> > was prepared to do so.
>
> As you know (since you know almost everything),
Ooooh sarcasm, I'm mortally wounded!
>Peter was a Jewish
> fisherman and not a Roman soldier.
Never said he was. Man you really can't read can you?
> That fact in itself has
> significance to this discussion. And while it is implied that he knew
> how to use the sword, and implied that it even belonged to him, there
> is now way to know for certain if either one of these varables are
> fact. There is no way to even imply that he was prepared to use it,
Go back & re-read what I said about the fact of the sword being there.
> too long ago, when you could buy a gun from sears thru the mail. It is
> very possible that weapons were very common in those times, not like
> today. Do you get my point?
>
You haven't made one yet.
> like us to believe. It is very likely that there were no Roman
> Military present at all.
>
Naive too!!!
> statement above is of no value to your arguement. I also challenge
> your implication that the subject was "a dangerous rabble rousing
> criminal". Where do you come up with this?
>
Try an experiment. Decribe to a lawyer the activities of Christ & what the
reactions of people were. Now ask him what such a person would or could be
charged with.
>
> FYI. While I'm not a member of the clergy, nor am I a religious
> scholar, I do happen to have 9 undergraduate credits from an approved
> college specific on the life of Christ. I have a working knowledge of
> and fimiliarity with the life of Christ. Based on what you have
> written, sadly you do not. Sorry if that offends you. I would be very
> interested in knowing where in the Bible it teaches that Christ was a
> noted martial artist. We know he was a carpenter and a teacher (of
> religious matters), but a noted martial artist?
>
Very simple read the flippin bible! It is all there & just for your
information I have a rather extensive knowledge of the bible & reigion based
on three years continuous study of same. The fact that we disagree is not
surprising given the narrowness of your thinking and bigotry. I gave you a
wopping clue about two posts ago & all you can do is misunderstand & ask to
be lead by the hand. NO the bible does NOT call Christ a martial Artist. You
have to look for evidence al little more direct than that.
> chose to be, but as far as I know, he chose to be the lamb of God. No
> need for him to defend himself from the bad guys, he created them and
> gives them life.
>
The one time he didn't do this he attacked ( physically!) I hope that hint
is broad enough.
.......Tom..................
grasshopper
>
> "Thomas" <tc...@magnetika.com> wrote in message
> news:8cc482b3.02082...@posting.google.com...
> > "Storys" <sto...@delete.execulink.com> wrote in message
> news:<umc3sf6...@corp.supernews.com>...
> >
> >
> >
> > > Also you will have to use a little more reason. The fact
> > > that Peter had a sword with him implies BOTH that he knew how to use
it
> and
> > > was prepared to do so.
> >
> > As you know (since you know almost everything),
>
> Ooooh sarcasm, I'm mortally wounded!
>
> >Peter was a Jewish
> > fisherman and not a Roman soldier.
>
> Never said he was. Man you really can't read can you?
As you're trying to seem as if you are above that, maybe you should refrain
from sinking to his level.
At the very least, remember what we're arguing about here... the presence of
a sword and people that lived 2,000 years ago. Is it really worth making an
enemy over?
--
- k i t z -
"Have heard some very bad stories about palantir relationships.
Should probably cool it for a while." -very secret diary of Sauman
http://spinning_plates.tripod.com
Don Moore
good website relating to this. You can find a link to it at our website.
www.christfirsttkd.com
Storys
>
>
> As you're trying to seem as if you are above that, maybe you should
refrain
> from sinking to his level.
>
> At the very least, remember what we're arguing about here... the presence
of
> a sword and people that lived 2,000 years ago. Is it really worth making
an
> enemy over?
>
>
You may have a point here Kitz. I'm afraid this guy pushes several of my
buttons. I hate loath & despise idiots who try to interpret the bible to
suit their own preconceived notions of what they want to believe. They tell
you to think about things but refuse to do it themselves. they refuse all
logic & reason. What it boils down to is " Believe what I say because I say
it!" This reminds me of things like cults & Jonestown & a whole raft of
things even less pleasant. Thus it is very easy for me to get, shall we say
a tad hot under the collar? The very best thing for me to do is to ignore
this sort of idiot but then I am far from being a perfect person & so the
inevitable ensues. My own religious education is more extensive than most
will believe. I won't give the name of the person responsible as I don't put
other peoples names on the internet without permission. His title though was
Reverend Doctor... Yep a bonefide PhD. He was also the pastor at the church
I attended. Comparative religion was taught by having a person of that faith
come in and teach us about their faith. Thus I learned about Judaism (SP?)
from a Rabbi, Catholicism (SP?)from a Priest, Wicca from a Wiccan and so on.
As a result I cannot believe a lot of the crap that is put out about various
groups and logic forms a real basis of things for me. It may interest you to
know the stated reason given to the parents of people like myself for this
rather overblown education in things religious. He told them that there were
so many cults out there that were avid to take advantage of any weakness or
lack of knowledge on the part of young people that he felt the only sure way
to prevent us falling prey was to give us so much information that we would
be nest to impossible to bamboozle. It was presented in a very even handed
fashion and if he found out that we had attended another church/synagogue of
a weekend we were NEVER censured or interrogated. If we wanted to talk that
was fine too. As a result I have been in most houses of worship in my area &
not all of them were Christian. I am host father to a Muslim. In Highschool
one of my good friends was Wiccan ( he moved away ) and close family friends
to this day happen to be Jewish. I could go on and on but I won't bore you.
BTW the incident in the bible that proves Christ himself was a martial
artist of note was the time he cleared the money changers from the temple.
Think about it. Do you think these men took kindly to this guy tossing them
out? Do you think they were really without resources to defend themselves?
If you were sitting in a place doing business as you had ( legally ) for
quite some time with large sums of money about would you not object to
having yourself & your money tossed to the wind? This would be a multiple
assailant scenario with a vengeance. The fact that he didn't get his ass
whipped proves he was no effete. Also his travels in what was a bandit
ridden countryside also proves the same thing. I mention this as Thomas
seems not to get the point & as you know it is no big secret this story.
Anyway I take your rebuke. I'll try to moderate my sarcasm.
...............Tom................
Steve Tew
>
---snip---
> BTW the incident in the bible that proves Christ himself was a martial
> artist of note was the time he cleared the money changers from the temple.
This doesn't prove that he was a martial artist, but it does show a great
deal of capability on His part. I look at it from God's point of view, and
as God's son, Jesus was a perfect human. Certainly no one was stronger,
faster, smarter, or more capable of putting up a scrap if it were to come to
it.
> Think about it. Do you think these men took kindly to this guy tossing
them
> out? Do you think they were really without resources to defend themselves?
> If you were sitting in a place doing business as you had ( legally ) for
> quite some time with large sums of money about would you not object to
> having yourself & your money tossed to the wind? This would be a multiple
> assailant scenario with a vengeance. The fact that he didn't get his ass
> whipped proves he was no effete. Also his travels in what was a bandit
> ridden countryside also proves the same thing.
You are not be far off the mark as long we are discussing capabilities that
were superior to all other men. There is an intriguing incident in Luke
chapter 4 where Jesus passes through a crowd that is determined to kill Him.
No indicaiton of a fight, but what the heck did He do? In John 8:59 He hid,
and then passed through an angry crowd. Maybe He could just run so fast, or
be so stealthy that they couldn't catch Him or even notice Him unless He
allowed it. In any case, He wasn't a martial artist as we regard the term,
but He was far superior to anyone else in every way. :o)
Steve
www.vanooyen.org
--
Thanks
Steven
www.vanooyen.org
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TournamentTKD/
Storys
"www.vanooyen.org" <TournamentT...@yahoogroups.com> wrote in
message news:Mlia9.7854$ob2.6...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> yes many gods have coexisted with MA
>
> --
> Thanks
>
> Steven
Excellent point!!
.............Tom...............
LIBERATOR
> "JoeyPasta" <Joey...@attbi.com> wrote in message news:<EMC89.188725$sA3.2...@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net>...
> > Thomas, onward Christian soldier.
> > Behold, I send you as sheep amongst the wolves.
>
> Joey,
> Sent to do what???
>
> Thomas