|
Post by snow on Dec 4, 2013 22:11:52 GMT -5
Does it cost you anything to sell on Amazon? Yes, there is a fee but it is very little & I haven't paid any attention to just how much it is.Maybe that's what I'll do with some of my older books.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Dec 4, 2013 22:51:34 GMT -5
Yes, there is a fee but it is very little & I haven't paid any attention to just how much it is. Maybe that's what I'll do with some of my older books.
BY ALL MEANS GIVE IT A TRY- I REALLY ENJOY IT!
|
|
|
Post by rational on Dec 5, 2013 8:31:58 GMT -5
Does it cost you anything to sell on Amazon? Yes, there is a fee but it is very little & I haven't paid any attention to just how much it is.There are various levels of selling but for most individuals the charges are 15% of the selling price, a fixed $0.99 per item, and an additional fee of $1.35 per item. Amazon also adds on a shipping fee which is passed to the seller. The cost of packaging and shipping is the responsibility of the seller. The USPS will provide boxes for free and I find it is a good way to get rid of unwanted newspapers! For a $10 book you get about $10 in your account. Remember that there is always the possibility of returns?
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Dec 5, 2013 8:58:43 GMT -5
Its clear enough for me. God sent his canary into the mine and it didn't come out. Either the world sucks or its peachy or nothing matters anyway. "Nothing Matters and What if it Did?" John Cougar Mellencamp - victim or exhibit of postmodernism and all things vain (the album title anyway) Well if the Buddhists are right, the world is just an illusion anyway. So maybe nothing really matters. However, I see it as things do matter because we live this life and are either happy or sad, and if we can do things that make people happy, then that matters to me. Maybe it's as simple as life is what matters to us. In a real sense that seems to be what's going on anyway. Each of us has a perception of life and what makes it good or bad. Then we proceed to try to avoid the things that make it bad. The existentialist road is a tough one, particularly because we have so much trouble believing it.
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Dec 5, 2013 9:05:18 GMT -5
I didn't see it. Where did you explain how the RCC's compilation of books which check the divine right of human organization and kings could somehow simultaneously constitute an unfortunate or intentional conspiracy against mankind? You obviously didn't see it -- if you think I said something about what you wrote here. Because I certainly didn't write anything about any of that. But I am interested -- you've been asking me to explain something that you say you've never read. ?? Well to recap you've argued the Gospels lead us to a false understanding of Jesus in order to serve the political ambitions of the RCC. But in reality the Gospels and their context of scripture argue against top-heavy people and institutions.
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Dec 5, 2013 9:24:10 GMT -5
Yeah well is the glass half-full or half-empty. Maybe that is the essential difference between believer and sleeper. Have a good day. ["glass half-full or half-empty?" "difference between believer and sleeper."?] Maybe you could explain just what you mean by this?Ella Fitzgerald sings it well:
|
|
|
Post by snow on Dec 5, 2013 11:28:52 GMT -5
Well if the Buddhists are right, the world is just an illusion anyway. So maybe nothing really matters. However, I see it as things do matter because we live this life and are either happy or sad, and if we can do things that make people happy, then that matters to me. Maybe it's as simple as life is what matters to us. In a real sense that seems to be what's going on anyway. Each of us has a perception of life and what makes it good or bad. Then we proceed to try to avoid the things that make it bad. The existentialist road is a tough one, particularly because we have so much trouble believing it. I have more trouble believing in an unseen God personally. I find it easier to believe that we are observers and in the quantum world anyway, being an observer changes things. We have no proof that it works that way in the macro world. However, we do know that how we see things colors our perception of life and sometimes makes things 'seem' real to us. There is a saying, 'seeing is believing', but also 'believing is seeing'. So maybe it's something as simple as a belief in God is what makes people think they are seeing proof of God. That would also work for other things we can't prove but seem to believe in. If we believe it we will adjust our understandings to make it real. For us anyway. However, it does seem that once we lose belief in something, it's not usually reversible.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Dec 5, 2013 11:39:55 GMT -5
You obviously didn't see it -- if you think I said something about what you wrote here. Because I certainly didn't write anything about any of that. But I am interested -- you've been asking me to explain something that you say you've never read. ?? Well to recap you've argued the Gospels lead us to a false understanding of Jesus in order to serve the political ambitions of the RCC. But in reality the Gospels and their context of scripture argue against top-heavy people and institutions. I don't see the gospels as serving the political ambitions of the RCC. Maybe a little because of the ones that were chosen for the bible, but the gospels were written before the RCC was in existence as the institution we see today. I think the gospels were more the product of followers of Christ who were writing to attract more followers, but also to appease the governing power which was Rome. There was a huge fear of Rome because of what they did in Jerusalem and for a new religion it would have been suicidal to blame the Romans for their leaders death. Both politically and probably even physically. That's what I see from what I've read anyway.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Dec 5, 2013 16:05:38 GMT -5
Yes, there is a fee but it is very little & I haven't paid any attention to just how much it is. There are various levels of selling but for most individuals the charges are 15% of the selling price, a fixed $0.99 per item, and an additional fee of $1.35 per item. Amazon also adds on a shipping fee which is passed to the seller. The cost of packaging and shipping is the responsibility of the seller. The USPS will provide boxes for free and I find it is a good way to get rid of unwanted newspapers! For a $10 book you get about $10 in your account. Remember that there is always the possibility of returns? Yes, there is a fee but it is very little & I haven't paid any attention to just how much it is. There are various levels of selling but for most individuals the charges are 15% of the selling price, a fixed $0.99 per item, and an additional fee of $1.35 per item. Amazon also adds on a shipping fee which is passed to the seller. The cost of packaging and shipping is the responsibility of the seller. The USPS will provide boxes for free and I find it is a good way to get rid of unwanted newspapers! For a $10 book you get about $10 in your account. Remember that there is always the possibility of returns? Yes, I pack most of my books in old newspapers! Why buy bubble wrap for a $5 book?
If it is an expensive book like a $100 one I recently sold to someone in Sweden, I try to wrap it more carefully to make that longer journey without being damaged.
The only problem I have found was that the reason I started sell was to get rid of our books, then found myself actually buying books from rummage sales & Goodwill to resell!
Snow, go to Abe.Books.com to find the book like your particular book to see what yours is worth to help you know how much to list your own.
When I first started, I tracked the books, however, the two that were lost were never found! Since it was costing .80 cents extra, I just quit doing that.
BTW, it isn't only books I have sold. As I was cleaning out the basement I wondered, why am I keeping these two old tennis rackets? The were considered vintage because they were at least 50 years old & I sold them for $50 apiece.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Dec 5, 2013 16:08:26 GMT -5
Looks as if this thread got off track! But, if it helps any, I have sold several books on Christianity!
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Dec 5, 2013 17:00:16 GMT -5
You obviously didn't see it -- if you think I said something about what you wrote here. Because I certainly didn't write anything about any of that. But I am interested -- you've been asking me to explain something that you say you've never read. ?? Well to recap you've argued the Gospels lead us to a false understanding of Jesus in order to serve the political ambitions of the RCC. But in reality the Gospels and their context of scripture argue against top-heavy people and institutions. What you should have asked me was: "What were the political ambitions of the RCC -- at that time in history?" At the time, you know, it was not the "Roman" catholic church, and in fact it wasn't yet considered the "catholic" church, The political objectives of the church in Rome wanted their "theology" to be the theology of the whole Christian world. So to accomplish this, they gained the positive recognition of the Roman government (a political strategy) who had a great wish/need to have a large, solid religious constituency (a political ambition), so the government accommodated (by arranging and overseeing) the meeting (political move) so that they would create a Christian creed that they could enforce to unite all Christians (a political objective). The Roman government was not terribly concerned what the creed was in the end, but of course the Roman church wanted it to be their theology (an exclusivist political objective). The circumstances of the meeting pressured the decision in favor of Roman theology. But of course they did establish a Catholic/Universal Christian church. As it turned out, the Roman Empire collapsed anyway, and the eastern Christian church never completely agreed with the Roman church even on the meaning of the creed. The feuding continued, and without the Roman Empire to enforce the creed universally, the church split, the western church being called the Roman Catholic/Orthodox Church, and the eastern being called the Eastern Orthodox/Catholic Church.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Dec 5, 2013 18:52:22 GMT -5
["glass half-full or half-empty?" "difference between believer and sleeper."?] Maybe you could explain just what you mean by this? Ella Fitzgerald sings it well: Still don't know what you are talking about as to "difference between believer and sleeper."Are you sure that you know?
If so, could you explain it in "precise" & "concise" words?
|
|
|
Post by snow on Dec 5, 2013 19:08:15 GMT -5
There are various levels of selling but for most individuals the charges are 15% of the selling price, a fixed $0.99 per item, and an additional fee of $1.35 per item. Amazon also adds on a shipping fee which is passed to the seller. The cost of packaging and shipping is the responsibility of the seller. The USPS will provide boxes for free and I find it is a good way to get rid of unwanted newspapers! For a $10 book you get about $10 in your account. Remember that there is always the possibility of returns? There are various levels of selling but for most individuals the charges are 15% of the selling price, a fixed $0.99 per item, and an additional fee of $1.35 per item. Amazon also adds on a shipping fee which is passed to the seller. The cost of packaging and shipping is the responsibility of the seller. The USPS will provide boxes for free and I find it is a good way to get rid of unwanted newspapers! For a $10 book you get about $10 in your account. Remember that there is always the possibility of returns? Yes, I pack most of my books in old newspapers! Why buy bubble wrap for a $5 book?
If it is an expensive book like a $100 one I recently sold to someone in Sweden, I try to wrap it more carefully to make that longer journey without being damaged.
The only problem I have found was that the reason I started sell was to get rid of our books, then found myself actually buying books from rummage sales & Goodwill to resell!
Snow, go to Abe.Books.com to find the book like your particular book to see what yours is worth to help you know how much to list your own.
When I first started, I tracked the books, however, the two that were lost were never found! Since it was costing .80 cents extra, I just quit doing that.
BTW, it isn't only books I have sold. As I was cleaning out the basement I wondered, why am I keeping these two old tennis rackets? The were considered vintage because they were at least 50 years old & I sold them for $50 apiece.
Thanks, I think I'll try it. Keeps me out of trouble...
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Dec 5, 2013 19:16:54 GMT -5
As it turned out, the Roman Empire collapsed anyway, and the eastern Christian church never completely agreed with the Roman church even on the meaning of the creed. The feuding continued, and without the Roman Empire to enforce the creed universally, the church split, the western church being called the Roman Catholic/Orthodox Church, and the eastern being called the Eastern Orthodox/Catholic Church. They can't even agree on who the early popes were. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Coptic_Orthodox_Popes_of_Alexandriaen.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_popes
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Dec 5, 2013 19:39:31 GMT -5
As it turned out, the Roman Empire collapsed anyway, and the eastern Christian church never completely agreed with the Roman church even on the meaning of the creed. The feuding continued, and without the Roman Empire to enforce the creed universally, the church split, the western church being called the Roman Catholic/Orthodox Church, and the eastern being called the Eastern Orthodox/Catholic Church. They can't even agree on who the early popes were. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Coptic_Orthodox_Popes_of_Alexandriaen.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_popesThe main reason they can't be sure of the early "popes" is because they were clandestine underground groups much of the time, and not all in unison with each other most of the time. The questionable period of who was pope was constructed retroactively when the Roman government finally chose a Christianity to sanction officially. The Coptic Church still has its own pope -- a new one came to office quite recently.
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Dec 5, 2013 22:22:49 GMT -5
Well to recap you've argued the Gospels lead us to a false understanding of Jesus in order to serve the political ambitions of the RCC. But in reality the Gospels and their context of scripture argue against top-heavy people and institutions. What you should have asked me was: "What were the political ambitions of the RCC -- at that time in history?" At the time, you know, it was not the "Roman" catholic church, and in fact it wasn't yet considered the "catholic" church, The political objectives of the church in Rome wanted their "theology" to be the theology of the whole Christian world. So to accomplish this, they gained the positive recognition of the Roman government (a political strategy) who had a great wish/need to have a large, solid religious constituency (a political ambition), so the government accommodated (by arranging and overseeing) the meeting (political move) so that they would create a Christian creed that they could enforce to unite all Christians (a political objective). The Roman government was not terribly concerned what the creed was in the end, but of course the Roman church wanted it to be their theology (an exclusivist political objective). The circumstances of the meeting pressured the decision in favor of Roman theology. But of course they did establish a Catholic/Universal Christian church. As it turned out, the Roman Empire collapsed anyway, and the eastern Christian church never completely agreed with the Roman church even on the meaning of the creed. The feuding continued, and without the Roman Empire to enforce the creed universally, the church split, the western church being called the Roman Catholic/Orthodox Church, and the eastern being called the Eastern Orthodox/Catholic Church. All that to tell me that Jesus was rightly rather than wrongly executed for sedition? Do you ever get to the point, let alone tell the truth with respect to this man Jesus?
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Dec 5, 2013 22:34:23 GMT -5
Ella Fitzgerald sings it well: Still don't know what you are talking about as to "difference between believer and sleeper."Are you sure that you know?
If so, could you explain it in "precise" & "concise" words?Well some say the world is ordered and some say it is not. Can we say then that the world is ordered, and it is also disordered? So which is it becoming more of, ordered or disordered? Atheists and terminal-earth theists tend to see additional disorder because that is what they expect to see. Terrestrial theists on the other hand continue to see and expect order.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Dec 5, 2013 22:43:49 GMT -5
What you should have asked me was: "What were the political ambitions of the RCC -- at that time in history?" At the time, you know, it was not the "Roman" catholic church, and in fact it wasn't yet considered the "catholic" church, The political objectives of the church in Rome wanted their "theology" to be the theology of the whole Christian world. So to accomplish this, they gained the positive recognition of the Roman government (a political strategy) who had a great wish/need to have a large, solid religious constituency (a political ambition), so the government accommodated (by arranging and overseeing) the meeting (political move) so that they would create a Christian creed that they could enforce to unite all Christians (a political objective). The Roman government was not terribly concerned what the creed was in the end, but of course the Roman church wanted it to be their theology (an exclusivist political objective). The circumstances of the meeting pressured the decision in favor of Roman theology. But of course they did establish a Catholic/Universal Christian church. As it turned out, the Roman Empire collapsed anyway, and the eastern Christian church never completely agreed with the Roman church even on the meaning of the creed. The feuding continued, and without the Roman Empire to enforce the creed universally, the church split, the western church being called the Roman Catholic/Orthodox Church, and the eastern being called the Eastern Orthodox/Catholic Church. All that to tell me that Jesus was rightly rather than wrongly executed for sedition? Do you ever get to the point, let alone tell the truth with respect to this man Jesus? What makes you think I lied?
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Dec 5, 2013 22:44:09 GMT -5
Still don't know what you are talking about as to "difference between believer and sleeper."Are you sure that you know?
If so, could you explain it in "precise" & "concise" words? Well some say the world is ordered and some say it is not. Can we say then that the world is ordered, and it is also disordered? So which is it becoming more of, ordered or disordered? Atheists and terminal-earth theists tend to see additional disorder because that is what they expect to see. Terrestrial theists on the other hand continue to see and expect order. What has that got to do with the words, "believer and sleeper?
or with "Ella Fitzgerald sings it well:"
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Dec 5, 2013 22:57:27 GMT -5
All that to tell me that Jesus was rightly rather than wrongly executed for sedition? Do you ever get to the point, let alone tell the truth with respect to this man Jesus? What makes you think I lied? Because a righteous man was put to death, and you act like the political implication of his crucifixion isn't of any consequence.
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Dec 5, 2013 23:01:54 GMT -5
Well some say the world is ordered and some say it is not. Can we say then that the world is ordered, and it is also disordered? So which is it becoming more of, ordered or disordered? Atheists and terminal-earth theists tend to see additional disorder because that is what they expect to see. Terrestrial-tethered theists on the other hand continue to see and expect order. What has that got to do with the words, "believer and sleeper?
or with "Ella Fitzgerald sings it well:"
Gather 'round me, everybody Gather 'round me while I'm preachin' Feel a sermon comin' on me The topic will be sin and that's what I'm ag'in' If you wanna hear my story The settle back and just sit tight While I start reviewin' The attitude of doin' right You've got to accentuate the positive Eliminate the negative And latch on to the affirmative Don't mess with Mister In-Between You've got to spread joy up to the maximum Bring gloom down to the minimum Have faith or pandemonium's Liable to walk upon the scene To illustrate my last remark Jonah in the whale, Noah in the ark What did they do just when everything looked so dark? (Man, they said "We'd better accentuate the positive") ("Eliminate the negative") ("And latch on to the affirmative") Don't mess with Mister In-Between (No!) Don't mess with Mister In-Between (Ya got to spread joy up to the maximum) (Bring gloom down to the minimum) (Have faith or pandemonium's) (Liable to walk upon the scene) You got to ac (yes, yes) -cent-tchu-ate the positive Eliminate (yes, yes) the negative And latch (yes, yes) on to the affirmative Don't mess with Mister In-Between No, don't mess with Mister In-Between Seeing no order in the world around you can only be the product of a depressed, muted, or unnaturally sleeping mind.
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Dec 5, 2013 23:05:29 GMT -5
Terrestrial-tethered theists .... I like the ring of that.
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Dec 5, 2013 23:13:26 GMT -5
The existentialist road is a tough one, particularly because we have so much trouble believing it. I have more trouble believing in an unseen God personally. I find it easier to believe that we are observers and in the quantum world anyway, being an observer changes things. We have no proof that it works that way in the macro world. However, we do know that how we see things colors our perception of life and sometimes makes things 'seem' real to us. There is a saying, 'seeing is believing', but also 'believing is seeing'. So maybe it's something as simple as a belief in God is what makes people think they are seeing proof of God. That would also work for other things we can't prove but seem to believe in. If we believe it we will adjust our understandings to make it real. For us anyway. However, it does seem that once we lose belief in something, it's not usually reversible. Be still and know ... my God you talk a lot.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Dec 6, 2013 0:16:57 GMT -5
What makes you think I lied? Because a righteous man was put to death, and you act like the political implication of his crucifixion isn't of any consequence. I wonder why I even waste my time.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Dec 6, 2013 0:44:19 GMT -5
What has that got to do with the words, "believer and sleeper?
or with "Ella Fitzgerald sings it well:"
Seeing no order in the world around you can only be the product of a depressed, muted, or unnaturally sleeping mind. And you see "order" in the world where a tornado (as happened near me last week in Washington) just skipped, hopped & jumped from one area to another?
And if I can't see order in that then you think that it can only be because my mind is "depressed, muted, or unnaturally sleeping?"
Strange, -I see it as a mind that is wide awake, alert and facing reality!
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Dec 6, 2013 0:46:39 GMT -5
I have more trouble believing in an unseen God personally. I find it easier to believe that we are observers and in the quantum world anyway, being an observer changes things. We have no proof that it works that way in the macro world. However, we do know that how we see things colors our perception of life and sometimes makes things 'seem' real to us. There is a saying, 'seeing is believing', but also 'believing is seeing'. So maybe it's something as simple as a belief in God is what makes people think they are seeing proof of God. That would also work for other things we can't prove but seem to believe in. If we believe it we will adjust our understandings to make it real. For us anyway. However, it does seem that once we lose belief in something, it's not usually reversible. Be still and know ... my God you talk a lot. And you, lee, talk a lot & say nothing!
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Dec 6, 2013 1:08:15 GMT -5
You know something, lee?
You are so full of yourself, I wouldn't be surprised if suddenly you got so full that you would just burst!
OMG- then we would bits & pieces of lee all over that place!
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Dec 6, 2013 2:06:08 GMT -5
You know something, lee?
You are so full of yourself, I wouldn't be surprised if suddenly you got so full that you would just burst!
OMG- then we would bits & pieces of lee all over that place! But wouldn't it amaze you if the pieces all landed in order?
|
|