![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 13 to 37 of 83. Go back in thread:
Posted by SLS on December 20, 2009, at 20:27:28
In reply to Lou's reply- » SLS, posted by Lou Pilder on December 20, 2009, at 18:56:41
> In that verse, we have a directive as to who to look to for healing and if one belives that is true, we could build on that aspect of the scripture.
All that is must be a manifestation of God, or it would not be at all. God is omnipresent. He is everywhere you look. So, in what direction would you like to begin looking for His healing?
> In relation to your question, I am unsure as to all of what you want it to mean or not mean.
>
> If you could post more about what you mean, then I could respond accordingly.It might be interesting for you to offer a series of possible interpretations of my words, as they might have no meaning at all except for that which you find in them for yourself.
Much of what occurs in my mind is non-verbal and multidirectional, as I imagine is the case with most people. To try to put my thoughts regarding these matters into words is sometimes difficult. When it comes to trying to understand the nature of existence and produce a conceptualization of Truth, I usually don't have sufficient words to say what I mean. All I can do is to try to mean what I say. That is challenging enough for me.
- Scott
Posted by Lou Pilder on December 21, 2009, at 7:57:07
In reply to Re: Lou's request-, posted by SLS on December 20, 2009, at 17:07:09
Scott,
You wrote,[...there is xxxx One...]
Could you post an authoruty here for that claim that as you see it?
Lou
Posted by SLS on December 21, 2009, at 8:37:39
In reply to Lou's request-ohnleigh » SLS, posted by Lou Pilder on December 21, 2009, at 7:57:07
> Scott,
> You wrote,[...there is xxxx One...]
> Could you post an authoruty here for that claim that as you see it?
> LouSorry, Lou, I cannot. It is a matter of intellect and faith. The Truth is unknowable but for in the mind of God. There is no other authority.
- Scott
Posted by Lou Pilder on December 21, 2009, at 8:55:24
In reply to Re: Lou's request-ohnleigh » Lou Pilder, posted by SLS on December 21, 2009, at 8:37:39
Scott,
You wrote,[...the truth is xxxxxxxxx...]
I am unsure as to what you are wanting to mean by that claim. If you could post answers to the following, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly.
A. Could you post here an example of a truth that is xxxxxxxx?
B. If another states that they know a truth because they believe that the scriptures that the Jews use are truth, how would you catagorize that person in relation to your claim in relation to that they think that they know a truth, and you write that the truth is xxxxxxxxx?
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on December 21, 2009, at 9:17:08
In reply to Lou's reply-wdovgd » SLS, posted by Lou Pilder on December 21, 2009, at 8:55:24
> Scott,
> You wrote,[...the truth is xxxxxxxxx...]
> I am unsure as to what you are wanting to mean by that claim. If you could post answers to the following, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly.
> A. Could you post here an example of a truth that is xxxxxxxx?
> B. If another states that they know a truth because they believe that the scriptures that the Jews use are truth, how would you catagorize that person in relation to your claim in relation to that they think that they know a truth, and you write that the truth is xxxxxxxxx?
> LouScott and friends,
I am withdrawing the above post here. My apology for any unintended meaning.
Lou
Posted by SLS on December 21, 2009, at 9:19:22
In reply to Lou's reply-wdovgd » SLS, posted by Lou Pilder on December 21, 2009, at 8:55:24
> B. If another states that they know a truth because they believe that the scriptures that the Jews use are truth, how would you catagorize that person in relation to your claim in relation to that they think that they know a truth, and you write that the truth is xxxxxxxxx?
> LouI have succinctly expressed my views. Let us now come to know yours. Then, perhaps, we can determine for ourselves whether or not further discourse on this matter is desirable.
Who or what do you deem to be the ultimate authority on what is Truth?
- Scott
Posted by Lou Pilder on December 21, 2009, at 10:04:12
In reply to Re: Lou's reply-wdovgd » Lou Pilder, posted by SLS on December 21, 2009, at 9:19:22
> > B. If another states that they know a truth because they believe that the scriptures that the Jews use are truth, how would you catagorize that person in relation to your claim in relation to that they think that they know a truth, and you write that the truth is xxxxxxxxx?
> > Lou
>
> I have succinctly expressed my views. Let us now come to know yours. Then, perhaps, we can determine for ourselves whether or not further discourse on this matter is desirable.
>
> Who or what do you deem to be the ultimate authority on what is Truth?
>
>
> - ScottScott,
You wrote,[...my views...yours....authority on what is truth?...further discorse desirable?...].
The thread is about a member that has a concern as to if taking medications for mental issues is being unfaithful to God. That brought up as to which God the member was refewring to and what was considered to be a medication.
This generated your responses as to that in your view there is xxxx One and that the truth is yyyyyyyyy. You now ask for my view concerning the authority for truth and also ask if further discorse is desirable.
I am unsure as to if I can continue here in this thread. There have been rules made to me by Mr. Hsiung and his deputies that threaten me with expulsion from this commuinity if I was to post what my views are here concerning your request to me.
Mr. Hsiung also allows statements that could lead a Jew to feel put down/accused to stand without a notation that those statements are uncivil. This leads to the potential IMO for others to think that there are two standards here which could lead to me being a victim of anti-Semitic violence. Mr. Hsiung has allowed ancient stereotypes defaming Jews to remain unsanctioned as being uncivil and just a few members here have emailed me with their concern that they do not want to be considerd to be condoning the administration's actions. There are numerous requests to the administartion that are outstanding from me that have the potential IMO to show indifference to the Jew's concerns of those statements of that nature being allowed to stand.
Lou
Posted by SLS on December 21, 2009, at 10:45:52
In reply to Lou's reply-tustn? » SLS, posted by Lou Pilder on December 21, 2009, at 10:04:12
Lou, I don't think that the differences in our thought styles and spiritual constructs will allow for a meaningful discourse between us regarding the questions you posed to several of us regarding which god any of us refer to.
- Scott
Posted by SLS on December 21, 2009, at 10:54:01
In reply to Is taking medication being unfaithful to God?, posted by meAgain on November 21, 2009, at 22:22:09
> I have take meds for mental issues and have been feeling ashamed because I feel like I should not rely on anything but God. Am I being unfaithful by taking medication?
Sorry for the digression.
Have you consulted clergy regarding your spiritual questions?
I wish I could guide you in the direction of the answers that will serve you best. I am glad you posted your question here, though. I am sure that you are not the only person to have arrived at the point of asking it.
- Scott
Posted by Lou Pilder on December 22, 2009, at 7:31:30
In reply to Re: Lou's reply-tustn? » Lou Pilder, posted by SLS on December 21, 2009, at 10:45:52
> Lou, I don't think that the differences in our thought styles and spiritual constructs will allow for a meaningful discourse between us regarding the questions you posed to several of us regarding which god any of us refer to.
>
>
> - Scott
> Scott,
You wrote,[...between us...regarding which god any of us refer to.
I think that the god in question in a discussion, if identified, could allow the members in that type of discussion to better focus on, as in this case, the way that that God wants people to use or not use mind-altering drugs and to define what a medication is or is not according to that god.
In this thread, I have replied to the poster innitiating the thread with that if I was to know which god the member was referring to, then I could offer my views or not.
I have seen many positions on the aspect of taking medicine and what is or is not a medicine in relation to someone's views concerning what they think their god wants them to do in relation to taking mind-altering drugs and as to what a medicine is or is not.
So I do agree with you in that you wrote,[...I don't think...will allow...]in relation to a discussion between {us} because I could give my view concerning the God that I give service and worship to but not, let's say, the God that Hitler gave service and worship to, or let's say, the God that is represented in the Alhambra Decree that those people that embraced that give service and worship to. Hitler said that he was doing the will of the Almighty God. I ask, which god there and I ask which god here in any discussion concerning what someone wants to know about God's position, as in this case, taking mind-altering drugs and what is a medicine according to that god in question if I was to know.
I will await a reply to me here from a member that will identify the God that they give service and worship to if they would want to have discussion.
Lou
>
>
Posted by SLS on December 22, 2009, at 9:24:19
In reply to Lou's reply-whichgd2? » SLS, posted by Lou Pilder on December 22, 2009, at 7:31:30
As I said in a previous post, I think our ways of thinking are far too different for us to continue having a dialogue regarding the conceptualization of deity.
With respect to the original poster's question, it falls within my belief system that using psychotropic drugs to treat illness does not render one as being unfaithful to God. It is often said that God works in many ways. I believe that the practice of medicine is one of them.
- Scott
Posted by Lou Pilder on December 22, 2009, at 12:14:34
In reply to Re: Lou's reply-whichgd2? » Lou Pilder, posted by SLS on December 22, 2009, at 9:24:19
> As I said in a previous post, I think our ways of thinking are far too different for us to continue having a dialogue regarding the conceptualization of deity.
>
> With respect to the original poster's question, it falls within my belief system that using psychotropic drugs to treat illness does not render one as being unfaithful to God. It is often said that God works in many ways. I believe that the practice of medicine is one of them.
>
>
> - ScottScott,
You wrote,[...far too different..the conceptualization of deity...it falls into my belief...using psychotropic drugs to treat illness does not render one unfaithful to God...God works in many ways...the practice of medicine is one of them...]
We may have too different gods as you state here to continue to have dialog concerning that, but maybe not if more was disclosed.
The conceptualization of a god is not what I am intending to have discusssion here about, but for one interested as to what their god wants for them in relation to if taking psychotropic drugs as a medicine is or is not being unfaithful to their ggod or not. I could not post my views unless I was to know which God the member was referring to.
You write that in your belief system [...using psychotropic drugs to treat illness does not render one being unfaithful to {god}....].
That is your belief, but I am unsure as to if you are wanting to mean or not the folllowing. If you could post here as to if you do or do not want to mean the following, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly.
A. The {god} that you are referring to is not identified by you but is a what is known as pantheism.
B. The god that I am referring to is (omit)
C. The member that innitiated this thread could have a different god than you
D. The God that the Jews give service and worship to could be a different god than the god that you are referring to
E. The scriptures that the Jews use that they consider to be the Word of God is accepted by you as truth.
F. The member that innitiated this thread could find the answer to their question by going outside of the scriptures that the member uses, if the member uses scripture in their belief of their God, in their service and worship of God.
G. If God works in many ways, it would be prudent for one that accepts the scriptures that the Jews use as truth to them, in relation as to the way that God wants people to do in realtion to taking mind-altering drugs or not, and see if that God prescribes or not that those using mind-altering drugs will or will not be cast into the Lake of Fire according to those scriptures.
Lou
Posted by SLS on December 25, 2009, at 10:38:17
In reply to Is taking medication being unfaithful to God?, posted by meAgain on November 21, 2009, at 22:22:09
> I have take meds for mental issues and have been feeling ashamed because I feel like I should not rely on anything but God. Am I being unfaithful by taking medication?
I had no trouble finding this joke on the Internet. It is told quite often.
- Scott-------------------------------------------------
The Lord Will Save MeIt rained for days and days and there was a terrific flood. The water rose so high that one man was forced to climb on top of his roof and sat in the rain. As the waters came up higher a man in a rowboat came up to the house and told him to get in. "No thank you, the Lord will save me!" he said, and the man in the rowboat rowed away.
The waters rose to the edge of the roof and still the man sat on the roof until another rowboat came by and another man told him to get in. "No thank you, the Lord will save me!" he said again, and the man rowed away.
The waters covered the house and the man was forced to sit on his chimney as the rain poured down and a helicopter came by and another man urged him to get in or he'll drown. "No thank you," the man said again, "The Lord will save me!"
After much begging and pleading the man in the helicopter gave up and flew away. The waters rose above the chimney and the man drowned and went to heaven where he met God.
"Lord, I don't understand," he told Him, frustrated, "The waters rose higher and higher and I waited hours for you to save me but you didn't! Why?"
The Lord just shook his head and said, "What are you talking about? I sent two boats and a helicopter?!"
-------------------------------------------------
Posted by Lou Pilder on December 26, 2009, at 8:06:02
In reply to Re: Is taking medication being unfaithful to God?, posted by SLS on December 25, 2009, at 10:38:17
> > I have take meds for mental issues and have been feeling ashamed because I feel like I should not rely on anything but God. Am I being unfaithful by taking medication?
>
> I had no trouble finding this joke on the Internet. It is told quite often.
>
>
> - Scott
>
> -------------------------------------------------
>
>
> The Lord Will Save Me
>
> It rained for days and days and there was a terrific flood. The water rose so high that one man was forced to climb on top of his roof and sat in the rain. As the waters came up higher a man in a rowboat came up to the house and told him to get in. "No thank you, the Lord will save me!" he said, and the man in the rowboat rowed away.
>
> The waters rose to the edge of the roof and still the man sat on the roof until another rowboat came by and another man told him to get in. "No thank you, the Lord will save me!" he said again, and the man rowed away.
>
> The waters covered the house and the man was forced to sit on his chimney as the rain poured down and a helicopter came by and another man urged him to get in or he'll drown. "No thank you," the man said again, "The Lord will save me!"
>
> After much begging and pleading the man in the helicopter gave up and flew away. The waters rose above the chimney and the man drowned and went to heaven where he met God.
>
> "Lord, I don't understand," he told Him, frustrated, "The waters rose higher and higher and I waited hours for you to save me but you didn't! Why?"
>
> The Lord just shook his head and said, "What are you talking about? I sent two boats and a helicopter?!"
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------
> Scott,
In response to a member asking from other members if they are being unfaithful to God by taking medicine, you wrote,[...this joke...]
I am unsure as to what you are wanting to mean in your response to the member's question as to what you posted and if you could post answers here to the following, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly.
A. What are the criteria that you used to designate the story that you posted about the man in the flood to be a joke?
B. Do you know which God the man was saying would save him?
C. Could that God be the God that the Jews give service and worship to?
D. What is your overiding intent here to posting what you say is a joke?
E. other questions not stated
Lou
Posted by SLS on December 26, 2009, at 9:36:07
In reply to Lou's request-pskpsie » SLS, posted by Lou Pilder on December 26, 2009, at 8:06:02
> D. What is your overiding intent here to posting what you say is a joke?
It is actually more of a humorous parable meant to be a teaching tool, the lesson of which is open to interpretation. I find it to be very relevant to the important question that was asked by meAgain. My intent was to present an allegory that provokes the type of thought that can produce insight. This particular parable is used quite often in religious contexts. One can accept or reject the portrayal. I don't think it is meant to be so much dogmatic as it is suggestive.
- Scott
Posted by SLS on December 26, 2009, at 9:48:53
In reply to Lou's request-pskpsie » SLS, posted by Lou Pilder on December 26, 2009, at 8:06:02
Lou, I really do think that you should begin a new thread to ask your questions. Although they are not totally irrelevant to the theme of the thread started by meAgain, they are very general and, in my opinion, not directed to address the original question.
> B. Do you know which God the man was saying would save him?
> C. Could that God be the God that the Jews give service and worship to?
I will not attend to your requests of me to answer these questions along this thread at this time.
- Scott
Posted by SLS on December 26, 2009, at 10:03:51
In reply to Is taking medication being unfaithful to God?, posted by meAgain on November 21, 2009, at 22:22:09
> I have take meds for mental issues and have been feeling ashamed because I feel like I should not rely on anything but God. Am I being unfaithful by taking medication?
I hope the replies to your post have been helpful.
Please don't think that you have incited an altercation of some sort. You haven't.
My sentiment is that this is not an appropriate thread to pursue a debate regarding the validity and ownership of God. I won't participate in one here.
- Scott
Posted by Lou Pilder on December 26, 2009, at 15:48:53
In reply to Re: Lou's request-pskpsie » Lou Pilder, posted by SLS on December 26, 2009, at 9:36:07
> > D. What is your overiding intent here to posting what you say is a joke?
>
> It is actually more of a humorous parable meant to be a teaching tool, the lesson of which is open to interpretation. I find it to be very relevant to the important question that was asked by meAgain. My intent was to present an allegory that provokes the type of thought that can produce insight. This particular parable is used quite often in religious contexts. One can accept or reject the portrayal. I don't think it is meant to be so much dogmatic as it is suggestive.
>
>
> - ScottFriends,
It is written here,[...a humorous parable meant to be a teaching tool..open to interpretation...relevant to the important question...provkes the type of thought that can produce insight...used..in religious contexts...as it is suggeative...].
I am unsure as to what those statements are wanting to mean. If interested members could email me answers to the following, then I could respond accordingly.
A. In [...a humoroust parable...],what does it mean in the story about the man drowning that it teaches as being humorous to you, if at all?
B. In,[...produce insight....] what is the insight that it produces, as you see it?
C. In [...it is suggestive...] suggestive of what, as you see it?
Lou
lpilder_1188@fuse.net
there is an underscore between the name and the 1188
Posted by Lou Pilder on December 26, 2009, at 16:00:13
In reply to Lou's request to members-uthelmiegh, posted by Lou Pilder on December 26, 2009, at 15:48:53
> > > D. What is your overiding intent here to posting what you say is a joke?
> >
> > It is actually more of a humorous parable meant to be a teaching tool, the lesson of which is open to interpretation. I find it to be very relevant to the important question that was asked by meAgain. My intent was to present an allegory that provokes the type of thought that can produce insight. This particular parable is used quite often in religious contexts. One can accept or reject the portrayal. I don't think it is meant to be so much dogmatic as it is suggestive.
> >
> >
> > - Scott
>
> Friends,
> It is written here,[...a humorous parable meant to be a teaching tool..open to interpretation...relevant to the important question...provkes the type of thought that can produce insight...used..in religious contexts...as it is suggeative...].
> I am unsure as to what those statements are wanting to mean. If interested members could email me answers to the following, then I could respond accordingly.
> A. In [...a humoroust parable...],what does it mean in the story about the man drowning that it teaches as being humorous to you, if at all?
> B. In,[...produce insight....] what is the insight that it produces, as you see it?
> C. In [...it is suggestive...] suggestive of what, as you see it?
> Lou
> lpilder_1188@fuse.net
> there is an underscore between the name and the 1188> Friends,
I am withdrawing my request for you to point out to me what you could see in the statements in question. Another has pointed out what I needed to know.
Thanks anyway if you were going to send me what you see,
Lou
>
Posted by Sigismund on December 28, 2009, at 0:26:23
In reply to Lou's reply-whichgd2? » SLS, posted by Lou Pilder on December 22, 2009, at 7:31:30
>I will await a reply to me here from a member that will identify the God that they give service and worship to if they would want to have discussion.
I'm fond of this from Steve Earle......>Then the sea gave birth and it crawled up on the dirt
And stood up and took a look around
Said "I'm the next big thing and the gift that I bring
Comes directly from God, so there ain't no holdin' me down"
So he crowned himself king
Now no one remembers his name
But the seed that he sowed took the show on the road
There was blood on their hands and a plague on the land
They drew a line in the sand and made their last stand
They said "God made us in his image
And it's in God that we trust"
When asked about the men that had died by their hands
They said "ashes to ashes and dust to dust"
Posted by Sigismund on December 28, 2009, at 0:30:48
In reply to Re: Lou's reply-whichgd2?, posted by Sigismund on December 28, 2009, at 0:26:23
Which seems a little like what Natalie Merchant was talking about in 'Thick as Thieves'......
>The worst of it is come & gone in the chaos of millennium
in the falling out of the doomsday crowd
their last retreat is moving slow
they burn their bridges as they go
the heretic is beatified
teach the harlot's child to smile>Wracked again by indecision
should we make that small incision
testify to the bleeding heart inside
we cut, we scratched, we ran, we slashed
and when we opened up at last
found a cul-de-sac deep and black
smoke and ash
deep and black
smoke and ash
Posted by Lou Pilder on December 28, 2009, at 7:26:38
In reply to Re: Lou's reply-whichgd2?, posted by Sigismund on December 28, 2009, at 0:26:23
> >I will await a reply to me here from a member that will identify the God that they give service and worship to if they would want to have discussion.
>
>
> I'm fond of this from Steve Earle......
>
> >Then the sea gave birth and it crawled up on the dirt
> And stood up and took a look around
> Said "I'm the next big thing and the gift that I bring
> Comes directly from God, so there ain't no holdin' me down"
> So he crowned himself king
> Now no one remembers his name
> But the seed that he sowed took the show on the road
> There was blood on their hands and a plague on the land
> They drew a line in the sand and made their last stand
> They said "God made us in his image
> And it's in God that we trust"
> When asked about the men that had died by their hands
> They said "ashes to ashes and dust to dust"Sigismund,
In what you wrote above, as to if it is a reply to my invitation to identify which God, is there a particular God that you could identify from what you posted there? If so, then the aspect as to if one that gives service and worship to that god could or could not be deemed to be unfaithful to that God if they take mind-altering drugs and to define what a medicine is or is not according to that God could give rise to a discussion from my view.
Lou
Posted by SLS on December 28, 2009, at 8:12:40
In reply to Lou's reply-wychgdSteveEarle? » Sigismund, posted by Lou Pilder on December 28, 2009, at 7:26:38
> could or could not be deemed to be unfaithful to that God if they take mind-altering drugs
...or are they brain-correcting and mind-correcting drugs?
That is the goal, I believe. To the extent to which there has been some success in the use of psychotropic drugs to treat mental illness and improve quality of life, I believe the goal is justified.
Would one be unfaithful to God to drink the water that the works of man has been brought to our spigots?
- Scott
Posted by Lou Pilder on December 28, 2009, at 8:36:20
In reply to Drink the water. » Lou Pilder, posted by SLS on December 28, 2009, at 8:12:40
> > could or could not be deemed to be unfaithful to that God if they take mind-altering drugs
>
> ...or are they brain-correcting and mind-correcting drugs?
>
> That is the goal, I believe. To the extent to which there has been some success in the use of psychotropic drugs to treat mental illness and improve quality of life, I believe the goal is justified.
>
> Would one be unfaithful to God to drink the water that the works of man has been brought to our spigots?
>
Scott,
You wrote,[...would it be unfaithful to God to drink the water (from a tap)...?]
Since the discussion is about as to if taking mind-altering chemicals into one's system causes one to be unfaithful to God or not,I would need to know which God is in question as to being unfaithful or not, for drinking that water, and from which tap, as if you are or are not wanting to mean that that water has mind-altering chemicals in it, before I could answer your question. Granted, water from different taps could have chemicals in it, but are those chemicals mind-altering chemicals or not?
Lou
>
> - Scott
Posted by SLS on December 28, 2009, at 12:29:04
In reply to Lou's reply-aichtuoh » SLS, posted by Lou Pilder on December 28, 2009, at 8:36:20
> Since the discussion is about as to if taking mind-altering chemicals into one's system causes one to be unfaithful to God or not,I would need to know which God is in question as to being unfaithful or not
I speak of your god.
Would employing lithium to control one's bipolar illness be an unfaithful act toward your god? If so, would you explain why or produce writings that describe the proscriptions of this behavior?
Thanks.
- Scott
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Faith | 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.