gooD POINTS FROM NUMBER 1
just thought you would like some history on slavery
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31E1gHowYcA

MODERN DAY ESTIMATES VARY.BETWEEN..12 TO 20 MILLION/Enslaved
http://www.google.com.au/search?q=moderN+SLAVERY+NUMBERS

that's way under/THE TRUE NUMBERS SO MY guide's TELL ME
it ignores marrying..breeding abduction to enslave.[IT IGNORES THOSE ENSLAVED TO drug's booze gambling *debt]..HOW MANY ARE ENSLAVED TO Their bank..or via a car..enslaved to obsessions that hurt demean..or make others less..THOSE BROKEN..DISCOURAGED..BATTERD BRUISED AND FORGOTTEN.

there are slaves WITH LUXURY..surrounding them[we forget the servant who prep[ares the food..often partakes OF IT..the definition..as it stands IGNORES THAT ALL SLAVERY ISN'T EQUAL/NOR EQUALLY Hurtful of spiteful..IN FACT MANY TODAY GET TREATED Worse than slave/YET TECHNICALLY ARE NOT Enslaved..[i wanted TO WRITE Are nor free]..but if you think paying blackmail /protection MONEY TO GOVT IS 'FREE'..YOUR Enslaved but too dumb to notice

[IF your working ONLY TO PAY TAX.RENT AND LIVE OFF NOODLES..YOUR ENSLAVED]..WHO-ever wields the reigns

In 4014, that man made book of mysteries, the Bible will still be debated, come 6014 the same, and so on, when will people realise that it is only a book, the human race will still be looking for that everlasting life after death, not knowing the answer, but never mind those who departed this life in 2014 according to the book will be in the house of many rooms, exceedingly full though, folks it is all rubbish, enjoy life now, it is the only chance you will get , in four thousand years and so on who will care that I ever existed. Perhaps somebody somewhere may be retrieving me from Ancestory.Com and wondering where on earth I went, and the gullible will still be saying "he went to the house of many rooms" you know the one that my God concocted. What a joke.

`NAB,O.J/QUOTE..<<..when will people realize..that it is only a book,>>

actually/[lets get it right]\.biBLE MEANS TWO BOOKS
THUS VIA logic..we have refuted a concept put forward wrong

SO NOW YOU KNOW ITS TWO BOOKS
when wILL PEOPLE REAlise that..IT ISNT Even two books but 70 BOOKS
[to retain honesty/thats an approx guesstimate given by my guides/I COULd easy google it to be right/but the cathoholic version has an extra booK[ALL ABOUT JESUS RETURN/NOT MENTIONED IN The james version

<<>.[THEN/when?..6914?..<<the human race will still be looking for that everlasting life after death,..>>

not really..well before THAT TIME JESUS WILL HAVE CAME AND GONE AGAIN
WELL BEFORE Then..mankind will haVE SUICIDE.DEAD ITSELF/READ MASS MURDERD INTO EXTINCTION\..well before then/science will finally have PENETRATED THE VEIL..but by comparing not machine

<<..not knowing the answer,>>

is again easay refuted..by asskinG TO TO PROVE IT
NO PROOF MEANS the words ARE NON-SENSE.

<<.. but never mind those who departed this life in 2014 according to the book will be in the house of many rooms>>

WELL FINALLY A TRUE WORD/EXCEPT THEIR NOT 'ROOMS' BUT REALMS..often called spheres of affect..OR PLANES of experiences..BUT YES ROOMS I HAVE RECEIVED PROOF OF..by means i trust..[many texts..[that should be joined WITH THE TWO BOOKS..]..[trust over your assurance>..the rooms..will..or could BE<<<,exceedingly full though>>

SEE THAT IN THE After realm/jesus took 3 earth DAYS TO RESolve his earthy life..[there are nO NIGHTS/JUST ONE ETERNal day,[or raTHER IN HELL one eternal/infernal..night/but LUCKEY MANY NO SOONER GET PULLED INTO THE REALM..BEFORE THEY GET OVER IT,..HELP OTHER WAKE UP..and moved on to the next on YOUR BUCK IT/HIT LIST

ANYWAY...PLEASE PRESENT YOUR PROOF..<<..folks it is all rubbish, enjoy life now, it is the only chance you will get>

I KNOW YOU cant prove that/.so thaTS YOUR OPINION
BUT LETS TRY TACT..your body..moves its muscles via electric charge
your brain PROJECTS MINUTE electrical charges able to be recieved by electroencephalogram..[or whatever]..THEN YOU DIE

WHERE DID ALL THAt energy go>
[recall THE SCIENCE SAYs..energy cant bE CREATED NOR DESTROYED]
SO WHERE DID all that will power go?

<<What a joke.>>

OH DEAR..YOU PRE REPLIED YOUR OWN JOKE

.
 
Dear George,
 
.
 
You wrote to david f. :

« In the Middle Ages doctors amputated legs without anaesthetics, and Inquisitors had their victims tortured on torture racks. Both things are horrible, however one can have understanding for the first case (historical context that Butterfield stresses, i.e. no anaesthetics) but much less for the second. »

It is not just the first case (amputated legs) which is in the “historical context that Butterfield stresses, i.e. no anaesthetics”. The second case, (victims tortured on torture racks), also happens to be in exactly the same “historical context that Butterfield stresses, i.e. no anaesthetics”.

According to Butterfield’s theory, history should be understood within the context of the particular period of time considered, in this case, the Middle Ages, when there were no anaesthetics. The first recorded use of an anaesthetic was in 1842 by a Boston dentist named William T.G. Morton at the Massachusetts General Hospital in the USA. Dr. Morton gave an ether anesthetic for the removal of a neck tumor by surgeon John Collins Warren (the first editor of the New England Journal of Medicine and dean of Harvard Medical School).

So if we wish to apply Butterfield's theory, we have to place ourselves in the context of the Middle Ages when there were no anaesthetics in order to understand why :

- Doctors amputated legs without anaesthetics
- Inquiitors had their victims tortured on torture racks without anaesthetics

As you rightly indicate : « … one can have understanding for the first case (historical context that Butterfield stresses, i.e. no anaesthetics) but much less for the second. »

This illustrates the point I was making in a previous post (page 18) : «I consider (Butterfield's theory) to be false as a general principle, but possibly valid in certain specific instances which would need to be defined in detail.»

.

SO MANY BUTTERED UP THEORIES
Butterfield's theory http://www.google.com.au/search?q=+Butterfield's+theory&

A FRAMeWORK FOR PARTIAL TRUTH
http://www.trin.cam.ac.uk/butterfield/Papers/ToposTheoryPartialTruth.pdf

POLITE ANARCHY
http://books.google.com.au/books?id=sSPHAAAAQBAJ&pg=PA200&lpg=PA200&dq=Butterfield%27s+theory&source=bl&ots=28o_mGwFTY&sig=uWdj3GR-GrL-yVLCN_SO1-m1u-8&hl=en&sa=X&ei=I0JMU9aWFISJlAWOkoDADQ&ved=0CD0Q6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=Butterfield%27s%20theory&f=false

http://www.counterbalance.org/ctns-vo/butte-body.html Butterfield stresses the highly problematic character of quantum indeterminism: it only appears in some interpretations of quantum theory and it involves a highly nonclassical ontology. He acknowledges the enormous empirical success of quantum theory but notes that considerable problems arise in reconciling it with special and general relativity, and he argues strongly against reductionism. He then provides a brief summary of the formalism of quantum theory, including a discussion of pure states, mixed states, and the meaning of probability in quantum theory.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremy_Butterfield In the philosophy of spacetime physics, Butterfield has argued for a resolution of Einstein's 1913 hole argument that preserves spacetime substantivalism by utilizing David Lewis's theory of modal counterparts.

http://www.winds.org/~frost/words/writings/butterfield.html Butterfield writes that, “…Willie remembered the the rules of the street and what his mother had taught him. ‘Don’t be bullied,’ she had said. ‘Hit back. To get respect, you’ve got to be the toughest.’” Willie’s righteous anger in response to the other boy’s attempt to violate and psychologically emasculate him combined with his mother’s lessons, and he went out and beat the other boy to the point of needing medical treatment

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whig_history Butterfield's book on the 'Whig interpretation' marked the emergence of a negative concept in historiography under a convenient phrase, but was not isolated

WHAT WAS THE ORIGINAL QUESTION?
i hatE LEARNING NEW STUFF.

Dear david f,

Thanks for the three posts supporting your opinion about Paul. I appreciate that, in response to my “I WOULD be more careful with the word horrible”, you conclude with “I THINK” (otherwise). Both emphases added. We indeed have two different, not necessarily opposite, perspectives on Paul’s heritage. In my perspective the “Ode on Love” (1 Cor 13) prevails, in yours something else does. Paul is not the only controversial historical personality whose overall contribution to mankind some evaluate rather positively, others rather negatively.

His epistles are certainly not revolutionary, calling for the abolition of slavery, liberation of whomever, including women, etc. As you rightfully point out, his views and advise contain things that are highly objectionable from the point of view of human rights as we understand them today, the same as e.g. Genesis contains things that are absurd in the light of what is known about the material world today.

Complementarity can be misconstrued either as the superiority of one over the other or as interchangeability of the two poles. In the psychological and social complementarity of the two sexes, Paul and many of his followers erred in the first sense, some contemporaries in the second.

Paul contributed towards the spread of Christianity in the first centuries - and among followers of his teachings were many women and slaves - and probably also to the rise of Christendom after Constantine. It is hard to tell, at least for me, whether things would have been better or worse without him, no mental experimentation possible to tell. Sorry, I think I am repeating myself.

You are right that both from the Christian and non-Christian points of view Jesus, or what is attributed to him, is preferable to Paul. You also seem to endorse the choice of Peter rather than Paul as the first head of the Church, which again agrees with Christian tradition.