Readers’ Responses to Our Question (48)

slvwf hfuz moauw hntaey ylxkfhbdn kiwy cnvjiwuhx

slvwf hfuz moauw hntaey ylxkfhbdn kiwy cnvjiwuhx

slvwf hfuz moauw hntaey ylxkfhbdn kiwy cnvjiwuhx

slvwf hfuz moauw hntaey ylxkfhbdn kiwy cnvjiwuhx

FAITH and KNOWLEDGE are not opposite ends of a spectrum of human experience, but are two arcs in an upward spiral.

Religion is far more scientific than what people refer to as science today (2008). The chemist, the biologist, most -ists have never performed many of the experiments they rely upon. Worse yet, we know nothing of the character of those who reported those experiments. Are they honest? Do they pay their bills? Do they cheat on their wives or husbands? But we build with FAITH on uncertain data from unknown people. Even so, look at the miracles around us now.

By contrast, in true religion the focus is almost entirely on personal experimentation (FAITH) and KNOWLEDGE based on experience.

In the Bible, God challenges us to return just 10% of our income to Him and see if He will not “open you the windows of heaven and pour you out a blessing that there shall not be room enough to receive it,” more than a person can receive. My father or neighbour, whom I know well as people of integrity, tell me that they have put that God to the test that way in FAITH and found the promise to be conclusively true by their own experience. With faith in them, I try the experiment and report my new-found KNOWLEDGE to others, who then have faith to try that experiment, while I have FAITH to experiment with the Word in other areas.

Joseph Smith read a promise in the Bible that God would respond to honest enquiries by giving liberally and upbraiding not. He tried it in FAITH, and found KNOWLEDGE that the world had lost for centuries. He left us with clear instructions about how to perform the experiment. I have followed his instructions and KNOW 1) that God lives and loves us, 2) that Jesus Christ is the Saviour of the world, and 3) that through Joseph Smith, the Prophet, God restored the keys of His kingdom to His children on this earth.

How important are religious leaders to members of the faith and to public perceptions of those faiths?

"IN THE past decade, more than 300 titles on workplace spirituality—from Jesus CEO to The Tao of Leadership—have flooded bookstores," says U.S.News & World Report. This trend is merely a reflection of the fact that in many materially prosperous lands, there is a growing hunger for spiritual direction in life.

In the past, people looked to established religion to help them find "deeper meaning" and "purpose" in life. Today, many have turned their backs on organized religion.

Many young people in the more secular societies believe in God or some kind of supernatural force but do not see the church as important or helpful in expressing their spirituality. This skeptical view of religion is understandable. Many religious organizations are mired in political intrigue and moral hypocrisy and are drenched in innocent blood from countless religious wars.

The Bible condemns hypocrisy and lawlessness. Jesus said to the religious leaders of his day: "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because you resemble whitewashed graves, which outwardly indeed appear beautiful but inside are full of dead men's bones and of every sort of uncleanness. In that way you also, outwardly indeed, appear righteous to men, but inside you are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness."
Matthew 23:27, 28

The Bible also shows that those entrusted with positions of authority must have exemplary morals.

“If any man is reaching out for an office of overseer, he is desirous of a fine work. The overseer should therefore be irreprehensible, a husband of one wife, moderate in habits, sound in mind, orderly, hospitable, qualified to teach, not a drunken brawler, not a smiter, but reasonable, not belligerent, not a lover of money, a man presiding over his own household in a fine manner, having children in subjection with all seriousness; (if indeed any man does not know how to preside over his own household, how will he take care of God’s congregation?) not a newly converted man, for fear that he might get puffed up [with pride] and fall into the judgment passed upon the Devil. Moreover, he should also have a fine testimony from people on the outside, in order that he might not fall into reproach and a snare of the Devil.
Ministerial servants should likewise be serious, not double-tongued, not giving themselves to a lot of wine, not greedy of dishonest gain, holding the sacred secret of the faith with a clean conscience.
Also, let these be tested as to fitness first, then let them serve as ministers, as they are free from accusation.”
1 Timothy 3:1-10

“Do your utmost to present yourself approved to God, a workman with nothing to be ashamed of, handling the word of the truth aright.But shun empty speeches that violate what is holy;”
2 Timothy 2:15-16

“Further, turn down foolish and ignorant questionings, knowing they produce fights. But a slave of the Lord does not need to fight, but needs to be gentle toward all, qualified to teach, keeping himself restrained under evil, instructing with mildness those not favorably disposed; as perhaps God may give them repentance leading to an accurate knowledge of truth,”
2 Timothy 2:23-26

The Bible shows that those who mistreat God’s flock or mislead his people will answer to God.

“Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the killer of the prophets and stoner of those sent forth to her,—how often I wanted to gather your children together, the way a hen gathers her chicks together under her wings! But YOU people did not want it. Look! YOUR house is abandoned to YOU. For I say to YOU, YOU will by no means see me from henceforth until YOU say, ‘Blessed is he that comes in Jehovah’s name!’”
Matthew 23:37-39

“Then he said to his disciples: “It is unavoidable that causes for stumbling should come. Nevertheless, woe to the one through whom they come! It would be of more advantage to him if a millstone were suspended from his neck and he were thrown into the sea than for him to stumble one of these little ones.”
Luke 17:1-3

“After these things I saw another angel descending from heaven, with great authority; and the earth was lighted up from his glory. And he cried out with a strong voice, saying: “She has fallen! Babylon the Great has fallen, and she has become a dwelling place of demons and a lurking place of every unclean exhalation and a lurking place of every unclean and hated bird! For because of the wine of the anger of her fornication all the nations have fallen [victim], and the kings of the earth committed fornication with her, and the traveling merchants of the earth became rich due to the power of her shameless luxury.”
And I heard another voice out of heaven say: “Get out of her, my people, if YOU do not want to share with her in her sins, and if YOU do not want to receive part of her plagues.”
Revelation 18:1-4

““Be glad over her, O heaven, also YOU holy ones and YOU apostles and YOU prophets, because God has judicially exacted punishment for YOU from her!”
And a strong angel lifted up a stone like a great millstone and hurled it into the sea, saying: “Thus with a swift pitch will Babylon the great city be hurled down, and she will never be found again.” …” Yes, in her was found the blood of prophets and of holy ones and of all those who have been slaughtered on the earth.”
Revelation 18:20-21,34

I think this question is very poor, and cannot see that there is much to say on it.

However, I noticed a spark of controversy eariler in the thread regarding the difference between knowing something and belieiving something.

Mr Mark is right, and it is not just a point of grammer, but it is basic to understanding what it is to be a human being in an ordered world. Order is the essence of existince and impressions are the essence of consiousness.

What we do consider knowledge acqires the status of knowledge, because of the impressions of order of the world by our senses.

A belief is something you wish or hope to be true, not something you know to be true. Faith is your belief in something that you cannot prove. By its very defintion, faith in God does not require any kind of proof, scientific, intelligent design, nor any other kind.

This is called the Faith Forum, not the Knowledge Forum. I think alot or religious people are a little mixed-up on this seemingly fine point, which is actually, devestatingly important.

Where Are the Women Leaders???????

The "Good News" is that a number of enlightened groups are now headed by women, and an increasing number of seminaries.

But churches like the Mormons and Greeks consider women Unworthy to be leaders. Of course, they are too polite to say it Exactly that way,

but in the Mormon Church, a woman, by virtue of the fact that she is female, can never take Gordon Hinckley's place as leader of the whole church.

Even if her name is Hilary Clinton.

Jihadist writes:

"Can't get allusive and metaphorical and poetic language eh? Oh, some of these dogmatic, didactic, literalist atheists."

Yawn.

All religious texts are in the main metaphorical as they aren't discussing real events. Within the fantasy talk there are always a few pathetic attempts to explain the world scientifically, and they're always laughable.

Poetry in religious texts? I don't see it.

Sorry if we atheists are dogmatic by expecting religious texts to be consistent and sensible. We apply the same standards to Dr Seuss books, and they have no problem meeting the same, most notably in the metaphorical department.

Too bad religious texts can't measure up to children's books in this respect.

;)

"Headscarves bother you so much? Yes, well what to do? We live in the equatorial zone. Keeps the hair from being dry and to prevent all those split ends. Saves us on shampoo too. No one can see our bad hair days. Nor do we give excuses such as, "I'm having a bad hair day!.""

Jihadist - LOL! I never thought of it that way. Excellent point!

Daniel,
I enjoyed your thoughts very much. I've thought about your statement: "In short the great religions do not really offer something anymore which would put all our current artistic, scientific, etc. schooling in a subordinate position. They do not give us proof they can make us greater than our current schooling. They do not in the final analysis provide us with spirituality." I think you are right in many respects.

Why would artistic, scientific, and other schooling ever take a "subordinate position" to "great religion"? I don't think that would have been the intent, though some probably differ with me on that perspective. I think "great religion" has to stand alongside or perhaps take a back seat compared with the importance to humankind of great science, great art, great literature of many genres, great technological and medical advances, etc. Those all play vital and important roles.

I think you are right in alluding to the need for meditation as an important aspect of developing spirituality. Religions may teach that in a general way and try to foster it, but they can't "provide" the spirituality. That has to come from within the individual, in the context of their life experiences. Thus each person becomes ultimately their own spiritual leader. No need to look farther than within yourself to find and cultivate that which is saintly. C.S. Lewis wrote about that.

As to wanting to meet Mohammed or Buddha or any pope, I would say "no thanks"--since I don't think they have offered leadership models that sustained and cultivated their followers into becoming better people or preparing for future generations, and they seem to have had an over-abundant sense of their own self-importance. I have met a few religious leaders with true humility, and it is a marvelous and rare thing indeed.

Jihadist did you know-

"Strange Fruit" began as a poem written by Abel Meeropol, a Jewish schoolteacher from the Bronx, about the lynching of two black men. He published under the pen name Lewis Allan (the names of his two children who died in infancy).

Meeropol wrote "Strange Fruit" to express his horror at lynchings after seeing Lawrence Beitler's photograph of the lynching of Thomas Shipp and Abram Smith in Marion, Indiana. He published the poem in 1937 in The New York Teacher, a union magazine. Though Meeropol/Allan had often asked others (notably Earl Robinson) to set his poems to music, he set Strange Fruit to music himself. The song gained a certain success as a protest song in and around New York. Meeropol, his wife, and black vocalist Laura Duncan performed it at Madison Square Garden."

I have faith that Jesus Christ makes it possible for all of us to overcome all of our shortcomings, with His help. Listening to President Hinckley speak has increased my faith in Jesus Christ. I know that he had the authority and power to lead the church and organization of God, and that God will choose another prophet to continue this leadership. I also appreciate the example of every kind person whether in a prominent ecclesiastical position, of any faith, or not. I feel that leaders of religion have a great opportunity to supply motivation and power to the entire world.

Concerned The Christian Now Liberated :
Again The Obfuscating Jihadist proves the following in her latest commentary in her normal "obfusing" ways making small talk and avoiding the crushing issues of warmongering Islam.

The Obfuscating Jihadist (formerly Jist) has come full circle. She recently indicated a liberal leaning and deletion of the more offensive ways and passages in the koran. However, whereas she continues to get excellent feedback from commentators on their basic beliefs, never does she provide the specific basics of her own. We therefore have to assume that she actually follows and adheres to the hallucinogenic-based, plagiarized, militaristic and anti-feminine rules of Islam and its leaders and the sins inherent in such.

e.g.
1. Believes in "pretty/ugly wingie" thingies and teaches her children that such things really exist.

2. Believes that the long-dead Arab did actually talk to the "pretty Gabriel" in the "Gabe" cave and therein received the good words now listed in the koran.

3. That Sunnis are superior to Shiites in all aspects of life.

4. That Islam is perfect and the koran inherently condones no sin even though the 24/7, 800 year-old blood feud between Sunnis and Shiites gives significant credence that suicides, assassinations, maiming, and murder are condoned by the koran. Having multiple wives also gives significant credence to the sins of lust and polygamy. The condoned treatment of these wives gives credence that the koran allows the sins of anger and greed.

Mr. Mark : Compare that to Jesus (god), who didn't know a damn thing about the wind: "The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goes." - John 3:8

Neither does Bob Dylan - "And the answer my friend, is blowin' in the wind".

"You are the wind beneath my wings" - Bette Midler.

And we won't know what Billie Holiday is singing about in "Strange Fruit" if we take it literally.

Can't get allusive and metaphorical and poetic language eh? Oh, some of these dogmatic, didactic, literalist atheists :)

Again The Obfuscating Jihadist proves the following in her latest commentary:

The Obfuscating Jihadist (formerly Jist) has come full circle. She recently indicated a liberal leaning and deletion of the more offensive ways and passages in the koran. However, whereas she continues to get excellent feedback from commentators on their basic beliefs, never does she provide the specific basics of her own. We therefore have to assume that she actually follows and adheres to the hallucinogenic-based, plagiarized, militaristic and anti-feminine rules of Islam and its leaders and the sins inherent in such.

e.g.
1. Believes in "pretty/ugly wingie" thingies and teaches her children that such things really exist.

2. Believes that the long-dead Arab did actually talk to the "pretty Gabriel" in the "Gabe" cave and therein received the good words now listed in the koran.

3. That Sunnis are superior to Shiites in all aspects of life.

4. That Islam is perfect and the koran inherently condones no sin even though the 24/7, 800 year-old blood feud between Sunnis and Shiites gives significant credence that suicides, assassinations, maiming, and murder are condoned by the koran. Having multiple wives also gives significant credence to the sins of lust and polygamy. The condoned treatment of these wives gives credence that the koran allows the sins of anger and greed.

Jihadist, I can't speak for all atheists of course, but from my point of view, the values of love, the nature of our existence (human nature), and human frailty are implicit in the atheist stance. There is no second chance, no life after to look forward to if/when this one goes awry. There is no supreme deity to lift us when we fall. We have to rely on ourselves and the other humans around us. In other words, we have to be adults.

Do you need to be told to love in order to do so? Does your existence need validated by the love of a deity?

Going on about love and compassion is trumpeting the obvious. The peddlers of religion sound that trumpet with the same intent that a fisherman baits his hook: "Don't worry about the sharp hook, look at the tasty worm". Everyone already has the worm, yet still they take the hook.

How important are religious leaders to members of the faith and to public perceptions of those faiths?

A fascinating question--one which really tells whether a religion is destined to continue.

The main problem I find with the major religions is that they always seem founded on a series of prophets or enlightened figures often culminating in the "most enlightened" such as Mohammed or an outright savior such as Christ--or as in the Eastern religions, culminating in a figure such as the Buddha--but then there is a decided falling off of inspiring figures--and this has only increased with the progress of history--especially the last few hundred years.

Increasingly it seems religions are on the defense and not producing inspiring figures let alone keeping a progression going which would culminate in figures rivaling the great religious figures of the past. We all are familiar today with longings such as wanting to have met Jesus or Mohammed or the Buddha and these longings exist because we only hear about them and have no evidence from the men in our sight of such enlightened being.

I have always wanted to meet a clearly superior human being, one which is enlightened. I hear about saints and that methods of enlightenment are successful such as those touted in the East, but I have never met or even seen on television or anything a truly inspiring religious figure. I fear that without the production of truly fascinating inspired figures that the major religions are doomed to having their entire pasts relegated to the realm of myth.

I appeal to common sense to make my point. We all are familiar with a plant growing or the trajectory of an artist or business, but somehow we give religions the benefit of the doubt even though the historical record clearly shows a decided falling off of great religious figures, a slowing of trajectory, a failure of growth. We are left with something of historical remembrance, messianic longing, and even these tend to fade under the overwhelming progress of modern times, the modern world which in so many respects seems so much more prophetic and even messianic than any religious figures of the past could ever be.

My belief is that the great religions are going to continue to decline unless they produce saints, buddhas, great figures as proof of the possible inward dwelling of God or practices such as meditation. Apparently the great religions now are not producing the evidence we need and which apparently was required in ancient times as well what with the desires for miracles, people that can heal, powers of levitation, etc. In short, under the increasing passage of history culminating in modern times and its emphasis on method, we are questioning the methodology of religion as never before and asking exactly how does a person become a saint and what is a saint, and exactly what can we expect of practices such as meditation.

All that remains to be asked is really how seriously can we take people such as the Mormon Hinckley or the archbishop Christodoulos or the Pope or the Dalai lama? Are these really people different from the rest of us? Are they saintly and/or enlightened? What is the the difference between saintliness and enlightenment? What are the definitions of the two in the first place? What really is it that the great religions are expected to make of us? They must be expected to make something or how can they continue to exist?

This has puzzled me since I was a boy, and a great deal of my skepticism of religion has arisen because of not having had any inspiring figures to convince me of the particular import of this religion or that. I was forced to go to regular school and find inspiring figures. And I found no one there as well. Finally I was forced to go with artists and scientists--people for which there is clear evidence of success. Also sports figures. Various political and military leaders. In short I have been forced into a certain realism of what is humanly possible.

Now I do not discount the possibility of realms of human development which are greater and more than hinted at by the great religions, I just observe that the religious figures I have seen or heard about in my lifetime (and for which there is rigorous evidence going back a few hundred years) seem decidedly short...Certainly not up to the foundations of their respective religions...

This is as honest as I can be about it. I would dearly like to believe in increased realms of human possibility beyond what we are taught in our public schools--true spirituality which would be the culmination of our schooling--but all I hear about is simply introducing prayer into school or something...

In short the great religions do not really offer something anymore which would put all our current artistic, scientific, etc. schooling in a subordinate position. They do not give us proof they can make us greater than our current schooling. They do not in the final analysis provide us with spirituality.

What this means for man I leave to better qualified persons.

....and Concerned the Christian Now Liberated, Halozcel and TJ care not a whit about the death of President Gordon B. Hinckley of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and Archbishop Christodoulos of the Greek Orthodox Church?

--------------------------------------------------

Hello TJ,

Has anyone said atheists are not capable of love and appreciating human nature without a supreme deity?

Perhaps not, but the advocates of atheism as well as reason, logic and rationalism certainly don't write nor talk much or at all about love, trust, being comfortable with others, nor of compassion, hope, empathy etc. It is simple broadly categorised as the human condition or human impulses which, of course, also includes greed, envy, jealousy, fear, hatred, anger etc.

Quite a number of atheists resort to quoting John Lennon's "All You Need Is Love" and "Imagine" to cogently (?) express their human side, their yearnings and ideals.

Come on TJ, surely atheists are not, in identifying, differentiating and measuring themselves against believers, are to the point where even language associated with faith and belief, including compassion, humility, love has to be redefined by atheists or co-copted by them as theirs in a purer version and not tainted by belief in God and religion that they find reprehensible?

--------------------------------------------------

Hello Halozcel,

It was from the 15th century onwards that Malays became Muslims.

Headscarves bother you so much? Yes, well what to do? We live in the equatorial zone. Keeps the hair from being dry and to prevent all those split ends. Saves us on shampoo too. No one can see our bad hair days. Nor do we give excuses such as, "I'm having a bad hair day!."

As for Easter Island/Rapa Nui in the south east Pasific and Makemake, the creator of humanity etc. anthropologists and historians are still arguing about who build them.

As a self-identified Malay, and jingoistically so here, I am saying the Easter Islanders are Malays from the Malay Archipelago of Southeast Asia. Our ancestors doth cross seas and oceans in days of yore on little canoes to as Malagasy (Madagascar) near East Africa, to the Pacific isles. Many Malay words are found in the languages of the Pacific Islanders, including Fiji. Including mata for eyes, ika/ikan for fish and numerals.

As for those colossal stones in Easter Island/Rapa Nui, having seen them facing the sea and their huge size, I have my own unproven and unsubstantiated theory without any scholarly merit:

- they build them to let seafarers and voyagers know they are there and rescue them as the island become overpopulated.

- they build them to try to scare people off from landing on Easter Island/Rapa Nui as they are fearful isolationists but careless environmentalists.

Building all those huge stone figures destroy the environment with all trees chopped off. I wonder why they don't use the trees to make boats. If they can get there by boats, they can get out by boats too.

Moral: Don't overdo anything, maintain moderation to the excess to ensure mental and environmental balance.

--------------------------------------------------

Yo! Concerned the Christian Now Liberated:)

How is your mission project to Crossanize Muslims in On Faith coming along?

There is a God
God is Great
Islam is perfect
Convert to Islam

(Blog warning: The above invocation is hazardous for the mental health of Crossanized Christians and Catholics of Reality)

The Obfuscating Jihadist (formerly Jist)
has come full circle. She recently indicated a liberal leaning and deletion of the more offensive ways and passages in the koran. However, whereas she continues to get excellent feedback from commentators on their basic beliefs, never does she provide the specific basics of your own. We therefore have to assume that she actually follows and adheres to the hallucinogenic-based, plagiarized, militaristic and anti-feminine rules of Islam and its leaders and the sins inherent in such.

e.g.

1. Believes in "pretty/ugly wingie" thingies and teaches her children that such things really exist.

2. Believes that the long-dead Arab did actually talk to the "pretty Gabriel" in the "Gabe" cave and therein received the good words now listed in the koran.

3. That Sunnis are superior to Shiites in all aspects of life.

4. That Islam is perfect and the koran inherently condones no sin even though the 24/7, 800 year-old blood feud between Sunnis and Shiites gives significant credence that suicides, assassinations, maiming, and murder are condoned by the koran. Having multiple wives also gives significant credence to the sins of lust and polygamy. The condoned treatment of these wives gives credence that the koran allows the sins of anger and greed.

Orange Juice,

If you worship five times in arabic(although you are not bedouin) in a day under oppression and if you attend *brainwashing courses* over and over again,yes,you are right.

Yes,after the seventeenth century,Malay people had learnt what Allah is and they learnt to wear headscarf within thirty years.

Do you know Easter Island/Rapa Nui in the south east Pasific and Makemake,the creator of humanity.
Do you know who brought those colossal stones and how thousands years ago ?

ANGELA writes:
Mr. Mark: do you know the wind blows? How? Only by the effects of its blowing: trees sway, dirt swirls, things might even get knocked over if the wind is strong enough."

I don't think responding to you will make a scintilla of difference, but here goes:

One need not depend on mere observation to know that the wind blows. One can measure the speed and direction of the wind, the composition of the air that is blowing. Indeed, we now know what produces wind in the first place (the effects of the sun heating the earth as well as temperature-altering events born in the earth itself), and it ain't a burst from god's nostrils. We can classify different winds as jet streams, synoptic-scale, mesoscale and micro-burst. We know that winds are driven by different pressure gradient forces, the Coriolis force, buoyancy forces, and friction forces.

What we DON'T believe is that a gust of wind blowing in one's face means that a fairy just flew by, or that a micro-burst allows us to "know" that an angel just earned its wings

Yes, we humans know a lot about the wind, where it comes from, where its going and what its going to do on its way from here to there. Compare that to Jesus (god), who didn't know a damn thing about the wind: "The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goes." - John 3:8

;)

ANGELA writes:
Mr. Mark: do you know the wind blows? How? Only by the effects of its blowing: trees sway, dirt swirls, things might even get knocked over if the wind is strong enough."

I don't think responding to you will make a scintilla of difference, but here goes:

One need not depend on mere observation to know that the wind blows. One can measure the speed and direction of the wind, the composition of the air that is blowing. Indeed, we now know what produces wind in the first place (the effects of the sun heating the earth as well as temperature-altering events born in the earth itself), and it ain't a burst from god's nostrils. We can classify different winds as jet streams, synoptic-scale, mesoscale and micro-burst. We know that winds are driven by different pressure gradient forces, the Coriolis force, buoyancy forces, and friction forces.

What we DON'T believe is that a gust of wind blowing in one's face means that a fairy just flew by, or that a micro-burst allows us to "know" that an angel just earned its wings

Yes, we humans know a lot about the wind, where it comes from, where its going and what its going to do on its way from here to there. Compare that to Jesus (god), who didn't know a damn thing about the wind: "The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goes." - John 3:8

;)

I think that the point of this question was that good leaders are hard to find - no matter what faith you follow. People like Pope John Paul II or the Dalai Lama, who have personal charisma, are few and far between. Some people are born great, and others have greatness thrust upon them.

I'm not familiar with Brother Hinkley (I believe that's how the Mormons refer to their leaders) or the Patriarch. However, I know that the followers of the religions that they represented are mourning their loss, and looking towards the next generation to follow in their footsteps. May these gentlemen find their rewards in their version of the Afterlife.

The fact that it isn't obvious to you that leaders of faith are important is proof that what you are asking is ignorant nonsense. Say it this way 'the King is dead,long live the King'. Your column is truly stupid, but perhaps your ulterior motive is the hatefulness of attacking religions.

The fact that it isn't obvious to you that leaders of faith are important is proof that what you are asking is ignorant nonsense. Say it this way 'the King is dead,long live the King'. Your column is truly stupid, but perhaps your ulterior motive is the hatefulness of attacking religions.

Jihadist writes: "Always in a world one lives in which does not recognise one's supreme dieties or beliefs. Being of a minority ethnic or religious group or opinion can be difficult in any society.

... "

You missed the point. Your characterization of atheists in the post I was responding to demonstrates that you are incapable of fathoming how love, and an appreciation of human nature, can take place in a universe without a supreme deity. If it weren't for flashes of creative thought that humans are known for, science wouldn't get very far.

Jihadist writes: "There is a God
God is Great

(Warning : The above invocation is dangerous for the rationality, logic and reason of non-believers)"

Who, exactly, are you trying to convince with this? I know the answer. Do you?

Yo! Concerned the Christian Now Liberated:)

What!? Still no success at all Crossanizing regular Christians or Muslims in On Faith after all this time?

I hope you succeed in Crossanizing the "newbies".

Of course, you are free to go ahead and issue a "blog advisory" as some issue "travel advisories" to newbies and regulars.

There is a God
God is Great

(Warning : The above invocation is dangerous for the rationality, logic and reason of non-believers)

Oh, Obfuscating Jihadist (formerly Jist),

Well you have come full circle. You recently indicated a liberal leaning and deletion of the more offensive ways and passages in the koran. However, whereas you continue to get excellent feedback from commentators on their basic beliefs, never do you provide the specific basics of your own. We therefore have to assume that you actually follow and adhere to the hallucinogenic-based, plagiarized, militaristic and anti-feminine rules of Islam and its leaders and the sins inherent in such.

e.g.

1. Believe in "pretty/ugly wingie" thingies and teach your children that such things really exist.

2. Believe that the long-dead Arab did actually talk to the "pretty Gabriel" in the "Gabe" cave and therein received the good words now listed in the koran.

3. That Sunnis are superior to Shiites in all aspects of life.

4. That Islam is perfect and the koran inherently condones no sin even though the 24/7 800 year-old blood feud between Sunnis and Shiites give significant credence that suicides, assassinations, maiming, and murder are condoned by the koran. Having multiple wives also gives significant credence to the sins of lust and polygamy. The condoned treatment of these wives gives credence that the koran allows the sins of anger and greed.

We will issue this advisory after each of your future commentaries so newbies” understand your obfuscating ways.

Since my religious leader, Gordon B Hinckley, has been mentioned within the context of this question, I feel to respond though I know many will take issue with what I have to say. That's fine with me; in fact I relish the juxtaposition of the misperceptions and misunderstandings of those who present their views with their own version of "circular reasoning" which in its way is just as "circular" as anyone else's, since all of our reasoning starts and ends within only ourselves.

I don't care much about "public perceptions" since there really is no such thing--each person has their own private perception, though reporters may think they are offering a "public perception" or may take a poll and say they have found the "public perception". Perception is reality for each person.

But I do care about leadership, and if a religious leader is going to "talk the talk" then they ought to "walk the walk", and anything other than that is lack of leadership, in my opinion. Gordon B Hinckley unquestionably "walked the walk" and lived to be a visible example to millions of people of living in a Christ-like way, as well as being positive not punitive and kindly not coarse or crass. This is being attested to by thousands of blogs in many forums this week.

As to the need for religious as well as secular leadership, I think there is an urgent need for it in our world today. I wish every religion and every secular institution or organization on the planet could find a leader among them who would inspire goodness, kindness, compassion, uplifting language, graciousness, thinking of others rather than self--the list would go on and on. But they will have to "walk the walk" and not just "talk the talk."

We need more Shakespeares, more Hugos, more Thoreaus, more Emersons, more multidimensional whole-hearted people who can inspire because they know how to use the language and know how to elevate others by a resonance that people can feel deep inside.

Answering the original question....

I don't thing leaders much beyond the level of local pastor are all that terribly important to the practitioners of the faith. There are of course exceptions the pope would tend to be more important to your average Catholic than say the president of the Missouri Synod Lutheran Church would be to the average Missouri synod Lutheran.. And of course the Dalai Lama is the be all and end all if you follow that particular form of Buddhism.

On the other hand, I think those on the outside looking in tend to look at the leaders of a given religious organization rightly or wrongly as a sign of what they should expect of the followers of that particular religion.

By the one additional note. Mormonism is a theology of works, as such you have to be a pretty good ole boy if you are going to try to earn a spot in any sort of a heaven that I'd care to enter.

Yo! Concerned The Christian Now Liberated!:)

Getting frenetic again? No takers from Christians?

So, how goes the Crossanization of American Christians/Catholics? No so good?

I am not going to get into a religious debate. I ran into to many people on my mission who seemed to feel it was necessary. I have laid before all of you the facts. That I KNOW. I did not misuse the language in anyway. Just like I KNOW that the sun will rise tomorrow, just like I KNOW the wind blows. I know what I know and no amount of hot air or "kindly" advice will change that. Thank you all for your comments. I hope you think and ponder on what I have said though. It has brought me joy and it can bring it to you as well. And thank you so much
Angela. You brought a smile to my face.
So to all
God Bless

Jist, Jist, Jist, (formerly The Jihadist),

Well again, let us see how your road to Reality is proceeding via gleaning your commentaries about atheists, anti-theists, music, ethics and now love. Hmmm, we still have the outstanding questions as noted below:

"The echoes of your mind still need a bit of sound adjustment as to what you hold true:

1. the existence of "pretty and ugly flying thingies" (a required tenet of Islam)???

-still no response- tough one -what do you teach your children about these "thingies"??

2. the koran being based on the hallucinations of one long dead Arab????

-still no response- another tough one since the if you agree there would be no foundation for Islam

3. the correct side of the Sunni-Shiite 800 year old blood feud???

It appears you take no sides although you are a Sunni and have the upper Islamic economic hammer in most Islamic countries.

4. theocracies, good or bad???

-You apparently dislike theocracies but you live in Malaysia which is fast becoming a theocracy. Have you sent letters of complaint to your government officials and clerics??

5. the sins of being Islamic??? (false prophets/ profits, greed, anger, lust, polygamy, warmongering, suicide)??

- I guess if you cannot see the problems of Islam, there is no sin but the koran's passages ooze of said sins

6. Islamic scribes plagiarizing the codes, passages and ways of the ancients even the anti-female passages of "Prude Paul"?????

- Again, you still adhere to the "Islam is perfect" mantra so this is a problem for you to grasp. Some courses in ancient history should help you come to grips with Reality.

P.S. And no commentary on Jay Smith's conclusions about the koran???

Amy,

Unfortunately just like Jist (formerly the Jihadist), you were Bred, Born and Brainwashed in your religion. If you care to step outside this very restricted box, read more about Joseph Smith, "The Mormon-con" below:

Joe Smith had his Moroni.

Jehovah Witnesses have their Jesus /Michael the archangel, the first angelic being created by God;

Mohammed had his Gabriel (this "tinkerer" got around).

Jesus and his family had Michael, Gabriel, and Satan, the latter being a modern day demon of the demented.

The Abraham-Moses myths had their Angel of Death and other "no-namers" to do their dirty work or other assorted duties.

Contemporary biblical and religious scholars have relegated these "pretty wingie thingies" to the myth pile. We should do the same to include deleting all references to them in our religious operating manuals. Doing this will eliminate the prophet/profit/prophecy status of these founders and put them where they belong as simple humans just like the rest of us.

Latter-day Saints also believe that Michael the Archangel was Adam (the first man) when he was mortal, and Gabriel lived on the earth as Noah.

With the "ptfft" i.e Moroni and Joe Smith as the "spiritual" guides/founders, what does one conclude about Mormonism???

A cult based on hallucinations which has bought respectability with a $30 billion business empire, the BYU "mission matured" football team and a great choir.

Hello TJ

You : It's common to have some difficulty with the concept of love in our own lives when we consider a world that doesn't include our respective supreme deities. I certainly felt that way.

Always in a world one lives in which does not recognise one's supreme dieties or beliefs. Being of a minority ethnic or religious group or opinion can be difficult in any society.

One can love and not like certain aspects of what one love. Or one may like something but not to love it.

is not love also about trust? If we can trust and love those in our lives, would it not be a problem to get along with others?

Certainly, it is always childhood memories and experiences that shaped us. Either we harbour our grudges, anger, mistrust hatred, or to let them go. Depends on one's personality, temperament, willpower and determination.

I am not saying a traumatic event in adulthood cannot change one's life and infuse one with mistrust and cynicism. Again, subject to whether one decides to live with it, to get over it, get pass it and move on.

And yes, as apparent in On Faith threads, tauntings or mockings of one's creed, race, gender or belief, and in real life even what and how one eats and dresses, or one's music or book taste by others does not seem to foster much love and trust or even like.

Thanks and regards
"J"

Jihadist, It's common to have some difficulty with the concept of love in our own lives when we consider a world that doesn't include our respective supreme deities. I certainly felt that way.

Hello Amy,

Never mind Mr. Mark and Concerned the Christian Now Liberated.

Some atheists have taken to being the vanguards of English grammar and usage led by Ms. Susan Jaboby. She seem quite irate by "bad" English used by some posters/bloggers in her threads. And some of our logical and precision-minded atheists friends too.

Language, it seems, has to be as precise as mathematics and physics. Then we will have to do away with poetry and other forms of allusive and metaphorical languages. Not all of us are Bret Easton Ellis or Ernest Hemingway or Don De Lillo or Ian McEwan or Philip Roth or MFK Fisher etc.

Atheist also know and believe that science, logic and reason will sort out everything. That is also blind belief or blind faith, in not factoring in human nature and human impulses.

They also have such beliefs that are as fallacious as what they deem believers to believe in - believing science and logic will solve all, cure all, contrary to all evidence.

But of course, atheists insisted it is because religions and believers are impeding that. That is the atheists' stock in trade.

Thanks and regards
"J"

Mr. Mark: do you know the wind blows? How? Only by the effects of its blowing: trees sway, dirt swirls, things might even get knocked over if the wind is strong enough. Even though you don't see the wind itself, it is real. Though I don't know Amy personally, I imagine her knowledge comes by the same token: she has seen the effects of things she says she knows. I believe it is narrow minded to say she can't express a knowledge, only a faith. And while I have no problem with a person disagreeing with another over beliefs, I find it annoying when anyone uses a public forum to denegrate another's sacred views. Where is the courtesy and common decency in that?

PS You don't actually know the sun will rise tomorrow; you only know it's risen every day before now. If some major cataclysm were to happen to the earth before tomorrow morning, the sun might not rise. So if you're going to critique another's word choices, don't do it with faulty logic.

Mr. Mark: do you know the wind blows? How? Only by the effects of its blowing: trees sway, dirt swirls, things might even get knocked over if the wind is strong enough. Even though you don't see the wind itself, it is real. Though I don't know Amy personally, I imagine her knowledge comes by the same token: she has seen the effects of things she says she knows. I believe it is narrow minded to say she can't express a knowledge, only a faith. And while I have no problem with a person disagreeing with another over beliefs, I find it annoying when anyone uses a public forum to denegrate another's sacred views. Where is the courtesy and common decency in that?

PS You don't actually know the sun will rise tomorrow; you only know it's risen every day before now. If some major cataclysm were to happen to the earth before tomorrow morning, the sun might not rise. So if you're going to critique another's word choices, don't do it with faulty logic.

Dear Amy -

You say you "know," but you don't know. You believe.

There's a huge difference. Knowing something is a fact-based exercise. For instance, you know that the sun will rise tomorrow, and you may believe that you are going to win the lottery. In the case of Jesus, it hasn't been established as a fact that he even existed, so it's absolute hubris to say you "know" the things about him that you say you do.

Believing is quite a different affair. One can believe anything they wish without a shred of factual evidence. Judging from the religious, it's their stock in trade. Your comments above are a bit infantile, like children asserting that they know Santa is real.

There's nothing wrong with you believing something through faith. Faith is believing something in the absence of evidence. Why demean your faith and debase the language by asserting that you know what by definition is unknowable?

I am happy to leave your belief in peace, Amy, but somebody needs to correct you on your abuse of the language.

I don't know whether or not you'll take my words to heart, but I believe that if you do, you'll thanks me down the road for chatting with you.

TJ : After the thorough drubbing the believers have been taking on multiple fronts for the last week or so, they probably do deserve a break.

Moi : Is that so? I'm still standing. Still a believer of God. As hundreds of millions others are. Nay, billions.

Scary for atheists, is it not, religious leaders die, and new ones arises or new ones come in to take their places.

My condolences to the family and adherents of President Gordon B. Hinckley of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and Archbishop Christodoulos of the Greek Orthodox Church.

Their respective importance to members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and the Greek Orthodox Church as well as to other faith groups in inter-faith dialogue and cooperation cannot be under-estimated.

to God we return
to God alone we answer to
for all our own deeds

Thank you.

"J"

I wanted to address this remark to Concerned the Christian Now Liberated,

I can respect the fact that you do not believe in religion. That to you all of the teachings of leaders and guides that we have had through out the years are just the made up fancies of religious fanatics. I give you that right. It is one of the unalienable rights that men have.
But, I do not think that you have the right, or the background to judge or criticize any other persons religious belief.

I am a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saint's (Mormon) and can tell you a few simple facts.

1. Even though I have never seen him, I know that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and Savior of the World. I know he lived, and died, for us. That He did NOT have hallucinations. Your so said scholars will do anything that they can to prove their own point.

2. I Know as well that JOSEPH SMITH was a prophet of God. He didn't just hallucinate to see God the Father and Jesus Christ. That at the young age of fourteen he went out to the woods near his home and prayed and they appeared to him. I know that he was called to serve the Lord by restoring the fullness of His gospel.

3. I know that he was able to translate the BOOK OF MORMON by the power of God and that it is a true book of ancient scripture, not just a made up story. And I also know that anyone who takes the time to read it, and has an open heart to what it teaches, will also be able to know. For Christ lets us know by the power of the Holy Ghost.

And last of all 4. We do have living Prophets today who lead and guide us. Even though President Gordon B. Hinkley is dead there is still the Quorum of the Twelve and the two councelors. They also receive revelation from the Lord. If anyone doubts the choice they have the right to go to the Lord in prayer themselves. It's not blind faith. It's intelligent obediance.

And that is where I stand. I thank you for your opinion, but ask you to please do some research before putting down anyone else's religion. I believe we all have the right to believe or not believe as the case may be. Just leave my belief in peace OK?

OH MY GOSH, what a horrible, negative, sad man . But whoever he is I feel sorry for you that your life is so empty that you need to degrade spiritually relevant and important people and things to the general public. You must be such a fun person at a party! NOT! You certainly have a right to your own opinions, but I am highly offended that you would diminish the importance of important, beloved figures and historically proven individuals have, in some instances changed our world and our society and our life for the better. IN FACT just because you fail to SEE TRUTH makes the TRUTH no less valid of true and actually just makes you look terribly pathetic and ignorant. These key religious leaders who died this past week are important and significant to many and I for one am embarrassed for you that you must lessen their lives and the importance of their lives and their mission in life, their impact on others lives, their example for right and good and decency because your void little empty ignorant perspective is how you choose to view the world. Sadly, I being very imperfect am a lot less tolerant of such ignorance and hatred than the Lord & Savior of this World who loves you regardless of what you say and do and who I testify died for all our sins, all our pains, all our sorrows, all our silent and not so silent agony - of which you obviously suffer a great deal from. He will even forgive me for being so intolerant of your ignorance thankfully. One day every knee shall bow and every tongue confess my friend - I hope you are blessed enough to see a little light & love & faith and hope in your life before that day comes.

Assalamu'alaikum

Adam (pbuh) walked alone with God as did all of the prophets to come since. When Judgement comes, we will all stand alone before God. With that in mind, I see little value in religious leaders. We are responsible for ourselves to God, no one else. The age of teachers has come and gone. The Word has been delivered. It's now up to each of us alone.

Wa'salaam

After the thorough drubbing the believers have been taking on multiple fronts for the last week or so, they probably do deserve a break.

Looks like I'll be taking this week off from On Faith.

What an inconsequential question! Does anyone care about such things?

The Prophet and the Archbishop were good and gracious men but were they leaders? Leaders educate and both failed in that regard. We "pew sitters" should not need to search for contemporary historic reviews of our religions. This information should appear in our Sunday bulletins, posted on our bulletin boards and discussed from the pulpits.

This is what should have presented but was and is not being promugated as required by our religious leadership:

A synopsis of the flaws in the founders and foundations of the major religions (for those that have not seen them before or did not take the time to look):

1. Abraham founder/father of three major religions was probably a mythical character as was Moses, the "Tablet-Man" who talked to burning bushes and made much magic in Egypt.

1.5 million Conservative Jews and their rabbis have relegated Abraham to the myth pile along with most if not all the OT.
http://www.simpletoremember.com/vitals/ConservativeTorah.htm

2. Jesus, the illiterate Jewish peasant/carpenter possibly suffering from hallucinations, has been characterized anywhere from the Messiah from Nazareth to a mythical character from mythical Nazareth to a mamzer from Nazareth (Professor Bruce Chilton, in his book Rabbi Jesus). Analyses of Jesus’ life by many contemporary NT scholars (e.g. Professors Crossan, Borg and Fredriksen, On Faith panelists) via the NT and related documents have concluded that only about 30% of Jesus' sayings and ways noted in the NT were authentic. The rest being embellishments (e.g. miracles)/hallucinations made/had by the NT authors to impress various Christian, Jewish and Pagan sects.

The 30% of the NT that is "authentic Jesus" like everything in life was borrowed/plagiarized and/or improved from those who came before. In Jesus' case, it was the ways and sayings of the Babylonians, Greeks, Persians, Egyptians, Hittites, Canaanites, OT, John the Baptizer and possibly the ways and sayings of traveling Greek Cynics. http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/theories.html

For added "pizzazz", Catholic/Christian theologians divided god the singularity into three persons and invented atonement as an added guilt trip for the "pew people" to go along with this trinity of overseers. By doing so, they made god the padre into god the "filicider".

3. Mohammed was an illiterate, womanizing, lust and greed-driven,warmongering, hallucinating Arab, who also had embellishing/hallucinating/plagiarizing scribal biographers who not only added "angels"/"pretty thingies" and flying chariots to the koran but also a militaristic agenda to support the plundering and looting of the lands of non-believers.

This agenda continues as shown by the assassination of Bhutto, the conduct of the seven Muslim doctors in the UK, the 9/11 terrorists, the 24/7 Sunni suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers, the 24/7 Shiite suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers, the Islamic bombers of the trains in the UK and Spain, the Bali crazies, the Kenya crazies, the Pakistani “koranics”, the Palestine suicide bombers/rocketeers, the Lebanese nutcases, the Taliban nut jobs, and the Filipino “koranics”.

And who funds these acts of terror? The warmongering, Islamic, Shiite terror and torture theocracy of Iran aka the Third Axis of Evil and also the Sunni "Wannabees" of Saudi Arabia.

4. Luther, Calvin, Joe Smith, Henry VIII, Wesley et al, founders of Christian-based religions, also suffered from the belief in/hallucinations of "pretty wingy talking flying fictional thingie" visits and "prophecies" for profits analogous to the myths of Catholicism (resurrections, apparitions, ascensions and immaculate conceptions).

5. Hinduism (from an online Hindu site) - "Hinduism cannot be described as an organized religion. It is not founded by any individual. Hinduism is God centered and therefore one can call Hinduism as founded by God, because the answer to the question ‘Who is behind the eternal principles and who makes them work?’ will have to be ‘Cosmic power, Divine power, God’."
The caste/laborer system and cow worship are problems when saying a fair and rational God founded Hinduism."

6. Buddhism- "Buddhism began in India about 500 years before the birth of Christ. The people living at that time had become disillusioned with certain beliefs of Hinduism including the caste system, which had grown extremely complex. The number of outcasts (those who did not belong to any particular caste) was continuing to grow."
"However, in Buddhism, like so many other religions, fanciful stories arose concerning events in the life of the founder, Siddhartha Gautama (fifth century B.C.):"

Archaeological discoveries have proved, beyond a doubt, his historical character, but apart from the legends we know very little about the circumstances of his life. e.g. Buddha by one legend was supposedly talking when he came out of his mother's womb.

Bottom line: There are many good ways of living but be aware of the hallucinations, embellishments, lies and myths surrounding the founders and foundations of said rules of life.