All Comments (82)

To JAY S and the rest of the world: You wrote, "You both seem to have a strange way of looking at logical conclusions. If the universe just seems too wonderful to you to be by natural processes, then it must be god. Yet you don't seem to bother to explore beyond that conclusion. What kind of god? Is it by necessity the Abrahamic god? Is it necessarily sentient, or omnipotent, omniscient, and benevolent? Is it something that you can actually pray to? Could it be Einstein's metaphorical god, which is actually the organizing principles that govern how the universe operates?" I do not speak for The Moderate, but I will tell you and everyone else, I have met God, the Trinity, and I have met satan. God is a Being of Pure Love, I can see how that would be hard to believe considering some of the absolute hate-filled garbage being spewed out in His Name. satan is not nice but he can try to come across as mister nice guy and guess what not only is he intelligent but probably more intelligent then the entire human race. Before I met God, I believed in God but I did not know that He was real. Actually it is so simple, we have free will, we will all be judged by what we do and why we do it and by what we know. Repenting is being sorry for the things that we have done wrong, we all have a conscience whether we use it or not. Some people say that you do not have to believe in God to know right from wrong, of course that is true, actually God said "I will write it on their hearts". Believing in God is just that, believing in God, but do you try to live your life in a loving way or to be holier than thou? Some people like to look down on others by saying that they are christians, some by saying they are more intelligent, others by saying whatever, I was taught in second grade that we are all equal in the sight of God, that does not mean we are the same, quite the contrary we are all different but we are all made in the Image and Likeness of God, ALL. I remember a sign in a bar I used to go to a lot and it said, "It is nice to be important, but it is more important to be nice", it might sound cute, it might sound quaint but think about it. Christianity, in reality but not necessarily in practice, is part of God's Plan for All of His Children to be with Him in His Kingdom, the new heavens and the new earth. God is a searcher of hearts and minds, not of religious affiliations or lack thereof in other words calling yourself a christian doesn't mean that you are one where it counts. To TIM and the rest of the world: You wrote, "Let's not forget how hopeless things looked during the cold war and yet how quickly the wall did fall as Regan blew the trumpet and we all prayed. We enjoyed a small period of peace and now we face another, what seems to be hopeless situation." I am an American and I was born in America and I find it really sad when so many people seem to think that America is the whole world. In a lot of ways, America is probably the most arrogant country that has ever existed. America was founded on the highest of ideals, it has never lived up to those ideals but it has tried. Something to think about. God wins, satan loses, a tie is unacceptable. Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

Dear Concerned the Christian Now Liberated:

This literal and physical interpretation of the resurrection seems to be very important to you. It is not major issue to me, one way or the other. Could the God who created the Universe recreate a person? The Universe is physical, and it was created, so creation of physical entities in not without precedent. So who am I to say no? Paraphrasing the Job Creation story: where where we when God created the Universe?

However, We know what the people who were there at the time thought. The backbone of the Canon was probably set by the mid sixties.

I think he did die on the cross. So that option is bogus.

Moderate,

Aaccording to Reimarus as referenced in R.B. Stewart in his introduction to the recent book, The Resurrection of Jesus, Crossan and Wright in Dialogue, http://www.amazon.com/.

"Reimarus (1774-1778) posits that Jesus became sidetracked by embracing a political position, sought to force God's hand and that he died alone deserted by his disciples. What began as a call for repentance ended up as a misguided attempt to usher in the earthly political kingdom of God. After Jesus' failure and death, his disciples stole his body and declared his resurrection in order to maintain their financial security and ensure themselves some standing."

And as noted by JPII and Aquinas, Heaven is a spirit state i.e. there can be no bones there or bodies to include the theological glorified body. So where are Jesus' bones? As per Professor Crossan's analyses in his many books, the body of Jesus very possibly would have ended up in the mass graves of the crucified, eaten by wild dogs, with lime in a shallow grave, or under a pile of stones.

Dear Concerned the Christian Now Liberated:

"Yes indeed the Romans were good at torture and executions to include crucifixions. And no one ever physically resurrected from said crucifixions i.e. Jesus was executed/crucified and his body then decomposed by some natural method just like any body of nature."

Finally a rational argument instead of an appeal to some really bad scholarship that presumes its conclusions and rationalizes until it “shows” the desired result. Eventually Funk and the Jesus Seminar have to reject about 95% of the texts by one subjective means or another to arrive at their goal. At that point, as Pope Benedict says, the Gospels are “unintelligible”. Well, close to non-existent, if you only keep Funk's travesty “Red Text”. You must admit that rejecting the introduction to Luke because it does not appear elsewhere is pretty goofy. And yes, I think that it is representative of the whole flawed methodology of the Jesus Seminar, not a very laughable exception.

Okay. You have never seen anyone resurrected from the dead. Moreover, we have no physical science that would explain a resurrection. So it seems very, very, likely that there was no such event. The options seem to be:

1.Jesus did not die on the cross. He was battered and in shock, but still alive, when taken down. So the “resurrection” was a resuscitation.

2.The community thought they saw the resurrected Jesus, now Christ, but they had hallucinations.

3.The Apostles and company simply made it up.

More on these later, case by case. Can you think of other cases?

Moderate,

Yes indeed the Romans were good at torture and executions to include crucifixions. And no one ever physically resurrected from said crucifixions i.e. Jesus was executed/crucified and his body then decomposed by some natural method just like any body of nature.

Dear jay s:

“I am fond of Occam's Razor, not because the most parsimonious explanation is always right, but because it cuts through the more elaborate explanations that many favor, without evidence.”
Yep. Concerning creation, we are faced with two hypotheses:
An infinity of universes, only one of which we can see, each in need of a creator (uncaused cause, if you will).
The one universe we see, in need of a creator (uncaused cause, if you will). Which takes more on faith?

“You both seem to have a strange way of looking at logical conclusions.”

No, I don’t. I have studied logic, both human and machine. I have built thinking machines, so called “inference engines”, and I know the rules of logic; several logics actually. Human reason can go places where no machine can follow. That in itself, is an interesting point.

“If the universe just seems too wonderful to” you to be by natural processes, then it must be god. Yet you don't seem to bother to explore beyond that conclusion. What kind of god? Is it by necessity the Abrahamic god?“
No. It is not of logical necessity the Abrahamic God. At no point have I suggested that this.
“Is it necessarily sentient,”
More than we are.
“or omnipotent,”
Compared to us, yes. Get an astronomy book on the size of the observed universe.
“omniscient,”
Not clear how closely the Creator watches each bit of creation.
“and benevolent?”
On a grand scale, yes. On a Sunday School scale, apparently not. The Universe was precisely tuned to support life. Benevolent enough for you?
“Is it something that you can actually pray to?”
I can. Up to you if you do.
“Could it be Einstein's metaphorical god, which is actually the organizing principles that govern how the universe operates?”
Just reread Chapter 8 “Science and Religion” in Einstein’s “Out of My Later Years”. You have him only partially. He did not believe in an anthropomorphic God, but he was profoundly religious. He believed that human affairs would never be complete with science only. Religion would be needed to make Mankind whole.

“Your neat conclusion just raises bigger questions than it supposedly answers,”
Yes, it would have to, wouldn’t it?
“and theists don't seem to want to do the thought work to explore it further.”
Which ones? I do.
“They just take the pre-packaged god concept handed to them by organized religion, with no evidence at all that this model has any more validity than any other.”
I don’t.
“Those of us with a naturalist view just don't see the need to fabricate a theistic explanation that does not help answer the big questions.“
1.The Universe was created. We can see almost all the way to the Big Bang now.
2.Science, as we know it, has no explanation for why the Universe is so perfectly tuned to support life, but it is.
3.The probability of 2 is absurdly small by accident.
If your null hypothesis is that the universe is an accident results in an absurdly small probability, 1/(10^10^128) by Penrose’ reckoning, You must come to terms with “the opposite of accident”. Face it like a man: that would be “intent”.

“Science works in the natural world, and it has worked very well, without falling back on supernaturalism. Any bets that it will continue to work successfully that way?”

Einstein agreed, but also said:

“It is true that convictions can best be supported with experience and clear thinking. On this point one must agree with the extreme rationalist. The weak point of his conception is, however, this, that those convictions which are necessary and determinant for our conduct and judgments, cannot be found solely along this solid scientific way.”

Another time he said: “Science without religion is blind. Religion without science is lame.”

We need Science. But it will never be enough.

Dear Concerned the Christian Now Liberated:

"There are a number of problems with the "miracles of Jesus" besides the lack of attestations. A major problem was the lack of medical knowledge/help in first century Palestine i.e. any skin ailment being considered leprosy wherein said skin ailment was caused by poor diet, too much exposure to the sun, allergic reactions, reactions to herbal medicines, poor hygiene, and/or too much alcohol. "Go son and take a bath" is hardly performing a miracle."

If you want to have a scientific discussion of the healing miracles, you are entitled to. However, your actual approach is to say that the ancients were primitives who did not know leprosy from athlete's foot. They saw a lot of it, so I suspect they knew it when they saw it. Could the "miracle" been spontaneous remission? Who knows? But these people were not stupid.

Also, Roman executioners were very good at getting people dead. They knew their job. They did it all the time. You may not believe in the resurrection, but please don't do the faculty lounge lizard thing pretending that the Romans were incompetent at torture and homicide because it lets you justify your assumed conclusion. That is called rationalization, not reasoning.

"We ought to pray for the conversion of the hearts and minds of our jihadist enemies. I've heard very few such prayers these past six years."

George, yes you are right. Prayer is important but also that we speak the truth, as you have. Our Muslim brothers need to know the truth. We should pray not just for the jihadist but for every Muslim seeker. God will answer our prayers in this regard. Let's not forget how hopeless things looked during the cold war and yet how quickly the wall did fall as Regan blew the trumpet and we all prayed. We enjoyed a small period of peace and now we face another, what seems to be hopeless situation. It is not. As all things are possible through prayer in His name. Speak the truth and pray in the name of Christ, this is what we do and what we have faith in.

Religion becomes hypnosis;which is why its so hard to cure.

Thomas wrote: "Is there a reason that we have reason? Is the utter simplicity of the complexity of not only everything on earth but everything in the universe kind of mind-boggling? Could maybe the DNA structures of living things have so much in common because they were created by One Who Just Is rather than by whatever?"

Moderate wrote: "The Universe presents with evidence of Creation, and evidence that Creation was carefully done. It is just too good to be accidental.
The only other option than God as the Uncaused Cause is to multiply uncaused creation by infinity. The Atheists are fond of Occam's Razor. Except when it comes to denying God. But when denying God, its okay to multiply uncaused causes by infinity in the absence of any evidence because of their faith tells them to. Very logical, that. ;-)"

I am fond of Occam's Razor, not because the most parsimonious explanation is always right, but because it cuts through the more elaborate explanations that many favor, without evidence.

You both seem to have a strange way of looking at logical conclusions. If the universe just seems too wonderful to you to be by natural processes, then it must be god. Yet you don't seem to bother to explore beyond that conclusion. What kind of god? Is it by necessity the Abrahamic god? Is it necessarily sentient, or omnipotent, omniscient, and benevolent? Is it something that you can actually pray to? Could it be Einstein's metaphorical god, which is actually the organizing principles that govern how the universe operates?

Your neat conclusion just raises bigger questions than it supposedly answers, and theists don't seem to want to do the thought work to explore it further. They just take the pre-packaged god concept handed to them by organized religion, with no evidence at all that this model has any more validity than any other.

Those of us with a naturalist view just don't see the need to fabricate a theistic explanation that does not help answer the big questions. Science works in the natural world, and it has worked very well, without falling back on supernaturalism. Any bets that it will continue to work successfully that way?

Don't miss the articles on the front page her at the WPost;
under the heading "More non believers speaking out".

Very encouraging reading.Keep it up non believers.

Just keep on making sense.

Moderate,

There are a number of problems with the "miracles of Jesus" besides the lack of attestations. A major problem was the lack of medical knowledge/help in first century Palestine i.e. any skin ailment being considered leprosy wherein said skin ailment was caused by poor diet, too much exposure to the sun, allergic reactions, reactions to herbal medicines, poor hygiene, and/or too much alcohol. "Go son and take a bath" is hardly performing a miracle.

Dear Duckphup:

Welcome to the Dawkins Delusion...

If we could just get rid of those nasty religions we would have paradise right here on earth. Yeah, thats it, those nasty people who go around saying "Love thy neighbor as thy self." who are really the root of all the world's problem...

This conundrum CAN be resolved... quickly... easily... economically... once and for all.

My simple solution requres only that for one whole month, every newspaper in the free world devote its front page to cartoons ridiculing Allah (peace on him) and Mohammed (peace on him, too). By the end of that time, all of Islam will have self-destructed in a paroxysm of snits, hissy-fits and terminal apoplexy. WARNING: This will not be pretty... but the world will be a much better place for it.

My only regret in this is that I cannot think of a similarly uncomplicated, cost-effective and efficient stratagem to dismantle Christianity... but, oh well... one thing at a time. One only does what one can.

Dear Thomas:

The thing that undermined my youthful Atheist faith is exactly what you have said.

"Is there a reason that we have reason? Is the utter simplicity of the complexity of not only everything on earth but everything in the universe kind of mind-boggling? Could maybe the DNA structures of living things have so much in common because they were created by One Who Just Is rather than by whatever?"

The Universe presents with evidence of Creation, and evidence that Creation was carefully done. It is just too good to be accidental.

The only other option than God as the Uncaused Cause is to multiply uncaused creation by infinity. The Atheists are fond of Occam's Razor. Except when it comes to denying God. But when denying God, its okay to multiply uncaused causes by infinity in the absence of any evidence because of their faith tells them to. Very logical, that. ;-)

TO CONCERNED THE CHRISTIAN NOW LIBERATED and the rest of the world: You wrote, " Keep in mind that most of the Jesus Seminarians have PhD's in theology and/or religious history and are typically professors at major universities. And have published over 100 books on the subject". If you think about it, this statement that you wrote really does go hand in hand with what the bible speaks of, namely that the learned of Jesus's day also had trouble with opening their hearts and minds. Of course, there were some that were willing to listen. I have also noticed that on some of these postings people calling themselves atheist and people calling themselves christians, both read what I post and somehow change the words in them to what they think it says rather than what it actually says, it doesn't matter if they believe what I write or not, but at least see what words I write. A case in point: I said that I met God, two different postings asked what did He look like, I didn't say I saw God, I said that I met Him. Actually after meeting God, I wrote on a previous posting; that was when I understood why the commandment to not make graven images was given to us because God knew it would be impossible to make an image of Pure Love. Of course the crucifix is not a graven image because it is a representation of God-Incarnate and what God did for ALL OF HUMANITY. You also wrote, " And you believe in the physical resurrection of Jesus even though his heavenly destination is a spirit state?", the bible is more than one statement and I would like to make a comment about this question of yours. It also speaks of new heavens and a new earth, could this have something to do with it. Exactly what the new heavens and new earth will be I don't know, since I am just a messenger, but it will be permeated with LOVE, since God is Love. TO THOSE THAT BELIEVE IN GOD: Do you really think that God asked us to be better than Him, to be more forgiving than Him, to be more merciful than Him? Something to think about. TO THOSE THAT DO NOT BELIEVE IN GOD: The "how of things" is interesting but have you ever really thought; is there a "why"? Is there a reason that we have reason? Is the utter simplicity of the complexity of not only everything on earth but everything in the universe kind of mind-boggling? Could maybe the DNA structures of living things have so much in common because they were created by One Who Just Is rather than by whatever? See you all in the Kingdom. Take care. Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

Dear Concerned the Christian Now Liberated:

You are getting incoherent now.

Like many modern fundamentalists (I define that as immunity to reason that operates upon facts.) you are certain of you conclusions and your manufacture notions (distinct from valid arguments) to support them.

Like Funk, you have your conclusions and you manufacture assertions to shore up your feelings.

Funk: Jesus only cured psychosomatic ailments.

Student: What about the leprosy part?

Funk: Oh yea. That. That couldn't be.

Student: Why?

Funk: Because Jesus only cured psychosomatic ailments.

Student: What about the dead guy? It said that he had the stench of death about him.

Funk: Oh yea. That. That couldn't be.

Student: Why?

Funk: Because Jesus only cured psychosomatic ailments.

Student: Why?

Funk: Because I said so.

Student: We just don't believe it, right?

Funk: Right.

Student: So Dr. Funk, Dr. Goebbels was right?

Funk: Eh?

Student: Repeating something enough times makes it true.

Funk: Uh... No.

Student: Because it's you?

Funk: Uh... Yea, I'm right.

This is your style of "argument".

I recommend Plato's Republic to you. Peter Kreeft has a marvelous book called Socratic Logic about how to think.

Moderate,

As I noted originally, you apparently suffer from the three B's, i.e. you were Born, Bred and Brainwashed like a lot of us in orthodox Catholicism/Christianity. Actually you suffer from another B also, that B16 somehow communicates with three gods.

Nothing wrong with the four B's as these typically give one a good moral/ethical foundation.

Unfortunately, you needlessly believe then in

"pretty/ugly wingy talking flying, fictional thingies",

a Roman governor with no free will specifically created to kill your Caesar-competing god,

physical resurrections to a spirit heaven that by definition cannot have physical bodies,

Paul's second comings,(fortunately for us his first prophecy did not occur),

miracles,

atonement theology,

Adam and Eve,

their/our original sin/guilt trip,

a global flood,

fortune telling,

hallucinating fishermen/shepherds/"wise" men,

a heaven just for Catholics/Christians and their "glorified bodies",

a daily wine/blood-letting/bread conversion to edible body ritual,

filicide,

and four gospels historically inaccurate and full of discrepancies supporting all of the above.

I would suggest evaluating some other religions but they also are severely flawed as previously noted.

Again, added reading of some of the previously referenced or analogous books will hopefully start the healing process from apparently too many years of orthodox brainwashing.

And again as noted previously, said brainwashing has moral and ethical attributes and it is significantly better than the brainwashing our radical Muslim brothers and sisters are receiving.

Dear Mary,

I am listening to Jesus of Nazareth by Pope Benedict on CD in my car on he way back and forth to work. It is a real eye opener. Thoughtful work. He says a couple of particularly telling things:

The all those who try and uncover the Historical Jesus seem to come forth with portraits that look like themselves. I had to laugh once again about Funk, Wilson, and Crossin at that one.

The Gospels become unintelligible when the premise is that the divine in them is divorced from the "historical truth" in them.

Great listen. I have the book too and will read the text in the due course.

Thanks for the note on A.N. Wilson there might even be hope for Bishop Spong at that rate.

Dear Bunkey:

The book that I read through with the color coded rejections of the "hisoricity" of most of the Gospels. Is "The Acts of Jesus" by Funk. I found it at the bottom of a pile.

An example in the chapter on Luke: Do you know why Luke's introduction to the Gospel according to Luke is rejected? (p267)

Because it is not duplicated in the other Gospels!

I just can't believe how fraking stupid that is! These guys are fraking morons!

Why in God's name would the introduction to LUKE be duplicated in Matthew, Mark, or John??? Or anywhere else??? It belongs nowhere else. It is where it belongs. It gives Luke's fundamental methodology of conducting interviews to set down an orderly account. "No parallels Source: Luke"

Would the Jesus Seminar Morons think that future scholars should reject the preface of "The Acts of Jesus" by Funk because it did not appear in other books? How fraking stupid could you get?

That is why I couldn't stop laughing. I still haven't laughing yet. I'm glad got me looking at this again. What a hoot!

So if this is where you hang your hat for theology I see why you have such problems.

Dude, start over again! Try C.S. Lewis, Aquinas, John Paul II, Benedict XVI, Peter Kreeft, Eusebius, Iamblicus, even, if you want to understand the reform of Paganism...

Pagan Place:

Iamblicus might just be for you. :-)

And may I add to that, that among the many things we can't NOT KNOW is how our willingness to believe and accept everyone naively, in our desire to be open-minded, can be dangerous. An astute jihad of avid lies covering destructive intent is also part of the mentality we are now dealing with.

Please read this current article

http://washingtontimes.com/article/20070914/NATION04/109140086/1008

Moderate:

AN Wilson has definitely moved on. Here is his (this last May) review of Pope Benedict's "Jesus of Nazareth"
where he says:

"From the supposed “Rottweiler Pope” comes this gentle exposition of a simple idea: namely, that the Jesus of History and the Christ of Faith are one and the same, and that faith in Jesus Christ is reasonable.."

And I actually believe the Wilson now "believes" that it *is* reasonable...which btw is all the Church has every maintained, not that reason can 'prove' Christ, which, without faith, IMO it can;t.

http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/books/non-fiction/article1798127.ece

He finished:

"Yet there is a dogged impressiveness about the Pope’s exposition of scene after scene from the Gospel, a reading that finds it more logical to worship the Christ of Faith in the Gospels than to invent the vestiges of some Jewish prophet who had his words distorted by some later theological genius. Jesus was the genius. That is Ratzinger’s message, and the luminous intelligence of the exegesis will prompt many to respond with an Alleluia. Wordy as the old German can be, this reader at least felt that he had repeatedly identified what was haunting, indeed frightening about the Gospels. No amount of reasonable liberal “explanation” can evade the voice that comes through them – calling the reader not to a set of propositions, nor to a theory, but to a Person, who is at one with God."

We won't get a big hoohah about a conversion--Wilson is, after all, English--but I do think the old dis-believer is dancing closer, closer, ever closer....(like you, maybe?)

Moderate,

I presented the attestations to the crucifixion of Jesus as noted by Professor JD Crossan in his book and by his permission on the internet. How does that make me a "google" bomber???

There is nothing wrong with "googling" a subject as long as you reference said pages. In the case of Professor Crossan's conclusions, I noted that many NT exegetes have determined these (as in Professor Crossan's books). Did you find anything about your referenced wars in any of your books/course notes or was it all found via a google search? i.e. you are a history major???

And please do give us your thinking about the "Jesus project". Keep in mind that most of the Jesus Seminarians have PhD's in theology and/or religious history and are typically professors at major universities. And have published over 100 books on the subject.

And since you have not even finished any book written by any Jesus Seminarian, you are bit premature in making any conclusions about their reasoning and methods.

Books currently in my library and read cover to cover:

Professor Crossan's The Historical Jesus, Who is Jesus, The Excavation of Jesus, and In Search of Paul.

The Resurrection of Jesus: John Dominic Crossan And N.T. Wright in Dialogue (Paperback)
by Robert B. Stewart (Author), John Dominic Crossan (Author), N. T. Wright (Author

Father Raymond Brown's, An Introduction to the New Testament.

Professor Borg's, Reading the Bible For the First Time, and Jesus and Buddha

James Carrols's Constantine's Sword: The Church and the Jews -- A History

Professor Luke Johnson's
The Real Jesus : The Misguided Quest for the Historical Jesus and the Truth of the Traditional Gospels

And public library books written by Professor Fredriksen and also Professor Pagels. And one book written by Karen Armstrong:

From Jesus to Christ by Paula Fredriksen


A History of God: The 4,000-Year Quest of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam by Karen Armstrong

THE GNOSTIC GOSPELS by Elaine Pagels

Bunkey, what just happened?

1. You made a baseless accusation. To whit The Moderate is a "google bomber" with the implication that google bombers don't really know anything.

2. YOU were proven to be a "google bomber" by the stuff you scraped off of google to use in the argument.

3. You were given every opportunity to check my text to see if I really am a "google bomber" but you either: a. did not check, or b. checked but did not find anything.

4. You continue your accusation after your argument has been eviscerated.

5. Caught red handed.

6. Now that we have established that it is YOU who are the "google bomber" you now say that YOUR google bombing is ok.

I conclude:

1. You make baseless accusations.

2. You stick to them after they have been refuted.

That means:

1. You do not reason.
2. You are immune to facts and their effects on your "arguments"; accusations really.

We conclude that you are a fundamentalist.

Got to get back to work.

Later, if you are interested, I will explain the systematic error in the "logic" of Jesus Project.

It comes from the fundamentally flawed inferential paradigm that they use throughout. That is what makes it so hard to stop laughing when I read their stuff.

Moderate,

Crossan's inventory is on-line and exactly as noted in his book, The Historical Jesus, which you have just started to read. It was put on-line with Professor Crossan's permission (as noted if you read the introduction to the inventory and associated web sites). I could have just as easily scanned it from the book. When you finish, I recommend any of his other 24 books of excellent scholarship as shown by the number of books and their wide publication.

You failed to mention anything about the physical resurrection. Why is that?

And more than likely you summarized your googlization of the various wars you cited. Web pages used????

And what undergraduate/graduate school invited you to teach for ten years?

And apparently you do not have a copy of Father Raymond Brown's, An Introduction to the New Testament. Having and reading this book are minimum requirements for teaching/knowing anything relevant about first to third century Palestine's Christian movements.

Conclusion: Your born-again underwear is showing.

Dear Concerned the Christian Now Liberated:

Let me answer you in the spirit you offered your little diatribe.

"Moderate,

"Hmmm, let me guess, you were bred, born and brainwashed into orthodox Christianity??"

I went to a Catholic Cathedral elementary school, and and constantly did things like bringing up the theodicy question during Catechism. It went like
this:

Sister Mary Elephant: "OK kids. God created everything. Lets each in turn say something God created."
Barbara: "Flowers."
Billy: "Blue Sky."
Timmy: "Trees."
The Moderate: "Poison Gas."

I also challenged the Bishop Ussher time line with science magazine articles and books on paleontology. The nuns were not amused.

Well, after being thrown out after of elementary school, I read John Gault's radio speech on Original Sin I became a committed Atheist for twenty five years or so.

Then, I began to loose my faith in... well nothing. I began to read history and history of religion. I read Robert Graves, the Greek Myths from cover to cover among others, and then had an explore through Hellenic religions, an their contemporaries. I think I was a Pagan for a time during that study. There is a lot to Paganism.

Then I took a four-year seminar on Christianity from Genesis 1 up to, through, and past Liberation theology as part of my meditations on God and the Universe. Very interesting to read the Christian Canon after learning about the Pagan religions with which they were in dialog. It is like finally having both sides of the phone conversation. I was invited to teach after graduating the course and have done that for ten more years.

But it was really the advancing science that spoiled Atheism for me though. The COBE actually imaged the surface of the Big Bang shortly after the moment of creation when the Universe just went transparent. The Universe was no accident, my friend. Read Penrose. So we have:

1. There was a moment of creation.
2. The universe is no accident, if you believe in the modern scientific epistemology.
3. The Universe is very precisely tuned to support life.

Sounds like the People of the Book got it closer than The Dawkins Delusion, et al. It drives you all crazy, though, when it turns out to be YOU who are ignoring the Science. So you live in angry denial. Just like the other fundamentalists.

"You have not read any books written by any members of the Jesus Seminar?"

I have read them to analyze their methods. I am looking at Jesus by A.N. Wilson, and Crossan's The historical Jesus as I write. I must admit that they are so poor in method that I laughed as much as read.

There is another one where a bunch of stooges highlighted the words they voted for as the true words of Jesus. In some sections there were only phrases like "He said..." and what he said was not considered valid by the faculty lounge lizards. I have loaned that one out so others can laugh too, so I don't have it to hand. Probably Bob Funk, but I don't remember this early in the morning.

"You "googlized" your last commentary?? And you believe in the physical resurrection of Jesus even though his heavenly destination is a spirit state?"

Hmm... Let me guess, you "googlized" your citations, and that is why you think I did.

Google works both ways, Bunkey. Lets see...

"(1) 1 Cor 15:3b; (2a) Gos. Pet. 4:10-5:16,18-20; 6:22; (2b) Mark 15:22-38 = Matt 27:33-51a = Luke 23:32-46; (2c) John 19:17b-25a,28-36; (3) Barn. 7:3-5; (4a) 1 Clem. 16:3-4 (=Isaiah 53:1-12); (4b) 1 Clem. 16.15-16 (=Psalm 22:6-8); (5a) Ign. Mag. 11; (5b) Ign. Trall. 9:1b; (5c) Ign. Smyrn. 1.2."

???

Oh yes...

Google records that it is from Crossan's inventory.

Reference:

(wiki.faithfutures.org/index.php/Crossan_Inventory)

So you Just blew your credibility, Bunkey. You are just another poseur, like the rest of the single-digit IQ crowd on the Atheist blogs here. I suspect your heads would burst if any real logic, reason, science, or history, seeped in. But give it a try anyway, after the pain subsides you may find yourself in a larger world.

BTW, give it a try, you won't find what I wrote to you in Google because I wrote it. It is based on wide and long reading and study on the topics in question. Right or wrong, at least it is original.

Moderate,

Hmmm, let me guess, you were bred, born and brainwashed into orthodox Christianity?? You have not read any books written by any members of the Jesus Seminar? You "googlized" your last commentary?? And you believe in the physical resurrection of Jesus even though his heavenly destination is a spirit state?

And I recommend reading Father Raymond Brown's, An Introduction to the New Testament, to get a great review of what is known and not known about the authors of the Gospels.

Attacks are made on the ancient carving of Buddha in north-west Pakistan.

The statue, thought to date from the second century BC, sustained only minimal damage in the attack near Manglore in remote Swat district.

The area has seen a rise in attacks on "un-Islamic" targets in recent months.

This is the first such attack in Pakistan and is reminiscent of the Taleban's 2001 destruction of the giant Buddhas at Bamiyan in Afghanistan.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/6991058.stm

Dear Concerned The Christian Now Liberated:

Many contemporary NT exegetes are simply speculating. The deeper I get into the “reasoning” of, say the Jesus Project, the more I am convinced that these guys don't know whereof they speak.

My point about the Trojan war was that prior to Heinrich Schliemann, it was a commonplace, among scholars using your method that Troy, and thus the Trojan war, were mythical. Only one attestation that was held as an oral tradition (implication: we know every bard changes the story at will all the time) for centuries supported it. Schliemann found Troy using that one attestation as a map, and showed us differently. In fact there was a detailed map of the Mycenaean culture and sites that were recovered. The Great King of the Achaeans was later confirmed in the diplomatic correspondence of the Great King of the Hittites.

Details of Boar's tusk helmets, knives, golden chalices with doves at the handle tops, shield geometries, tactical descriptions of battles and individual combat that martial artists verify as well described. Social orders and military organizations that would survive in the Mediterranean for at least another millennium. All there, in that one "shaky" Oral Tradition.

The truth turned out to be that the carefully kept stories of the Ancient World contain a wealth of correct detail about all manner of things that have been verified. The letters of Paul for example contain details about the sailing conditions and the techniques necessary to the ships of his day that are spot on. Why would a description of tacking and wave conditions in the Eastern Med supported only by a single attestation be verified later?

The quantitative evidence from the oldest codices of the New Testament indicate that there was a first edition from which the others came. Luke traveled with Paul and (according to Clement) even ghost wrote Paul's Letter to the Hebrews (which Paul wrote in Hebrew) into Greek much better than Paul's. During this time, Luke interviewed the eye witnesses to “set down an orderly account”. Luke worked with Paul in Rome before Paul's death, and probably with the Matthew and Mark to edit the first edition of the New Testament. That would give you at least Paul's letters, the three Synoptic Gospels, and Acts all done by one group in Rome in the sixties. Why would they feel a need to repeat one another?

BTW, do you know of any disputes about what was in the Canon at the Great Councils? They certainly disputed the meaning of each and every word. Why not the Canon itself? Because it was compiled by a group that had authority, and early on. So it was simply accepted later.

My point is that faculty lounge lizards make conclusions based upon “gut feel” and teach them. The ones who used to teach that there was no Trojan War, for example, used your methods. Basically, a closed minded “Didn't happen 'cause I feel sure it didn't.” doesn't really mean anything. Twenty-first century scholarship, more quantitatively based, is telling a different story.

Hunter Finch,

Do you get paid by the word to post things here?

You couldn't pay me enough, even by the letter, to read all that stuff.

Might you consider trying to develop a sense of proportion?

Regards.

Quoting: "Six year after 9/11, we certainly should have learned that the threat that made itself lethally clear that day was not generic -- "religious extremism" -- but very specific: global jihadism."

Responding: Oh yes, I'm sure the many thousands of Bosnian Muslims massacred by Serbian Christians at Srebrenica in 1995 would agree. Not to mention the genocide of 3000 Muslims in India by Gujarat Hindu extremists just months after 9/11. Mr. Weigel demonstrates that the greatest, most insidious threat is historical and religious ignorance from psuedo-intellectuals posing as policy wonks in Washington think tanks--the very class of persons who gave us thousands of dead bodies in Iraq in just the past few years.

Moderate,

If indeed you are correct about a single attestation, the cited wars may not have happened or if they did they got significantly embellished over the years. Archeology also plays an important role in establishing historic accuracy. Is there archeological evidence of these wars?

And also as noted by many contemporary NT exegetes, the problem is that there are four gospels and associated documents about the life and sayings of Jesus. When only one of these fifty or so documents lists a very important event, one must question the authenticity of said event.

An event with multiple attestations for example is the crucifixion of Jesus +. Crucifixion of Jesus:(1) 1 Cor 15:3b; (2a) Gos. Pet. 4:10-5:16,18-20; 6:22; (2b) Mark 15:22-38 = Matt 27:33-51a = Luke 23:32-46; (2c) John 19:17b-25a,28-36; (3) Barn. 7:3-5; (4a) 1 Clem. 16:3-4 (=Isaiah 53:1-12); (4b) 1 Clem. 16.15-16 (=Psalm 22:6-8); (5a) Ign. Mag. 11; (5b) Ign. Trall. 9:1b; (5c) Ign. Smyrn. 1.2.

Dear Concerned The Christian Now Liberated:

"The "flight" to Egypt. It did not happen. Single attestation in Matthew (2:13-18)."

The Peloponnesian War did not happen. Single attestation in Thucydides.

The Trojan War did not used to happen either. Single attestation in Homer, and one other mythological story Quintus of Smyrna clearly inspired by Homer, or perhaps by the Q3 source?

Hunter,

No matter how you want to look at Islam, it like all religions, has some significant flaws, flaws if not corrected will lead to even more serious conflicts.

Christianity is slowly correcting its flaws as noted in the studies and books published by many contemporary NT exegetes like Professors Crossan, Borg and Fredriksen, three of the On Faith panelists.

In case you missed it and would care to comment, here is a short synopsis of said flaws:

1. Abraham founder/father of three major religions was probably a mythical character. If he was real, he was at best a combination of at least three men. 1.5 million Conservative Jews and their rabbis have relegated Abraham to the myth pile along with most if not all the OT.

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. Analyses of his 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.

3. Mohammed, an illiterate, hallucinating Arab, also had embellishing/hallucinating/plagiarizing scribal biographers who not only added "angels" 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 conduct of the seven Muslim doctors in the UK, the 9/11 terrorists, Saudi Arabia AQ "suiciders", the 24/7 Sunni suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers , the 24/7 Shiite suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers , the Bali crazies, the Kenya crazies, the Pakistani koranics, the Palestine suicide bombers/rocketeers, the Lebanese nutcases, the nut cases that blew up the trains in England and Spain and the Filipino koranics.

And who funds these acts of terror with their blood money and theology? Islamic Iran, the Third Axis of Evil and also the "Wannabees" of Saudi Arabia.

4. Luther, Calvin, 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 centred 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.

http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/BUDDHISM/SIDD.HTM

Bottom line: There are many good ways of living but be aware of the hallucinations/embellishments and myths surrounding the founders of said rules of life. Then, apply the Five F rule: "First Find the Flaws, then Fix the Foundations". And finally there will be religious peace in the world!!!!!

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_Jesus for an analysis of Jesus' life to include his illiteracy.

"The Problem" isn't that we can't now see, but that we refuse to admit, all absolute religious and secular belief systems have blind spots with inherent potentials for "non-generic" extreme interpretations. Nobody takes issue with global jihadism being the direct cause of the attacks on September 11, 2007; nor that when manipulated, that the Qur'an can be interpreted to specifically call for jihad against "infidels," nor with what should be obvious, that the overwhelming majority of Muslims don't entertain that perverted line of reasoning even though their theocratic institutions in recent generations of stifling open questioning and dissent have predisposed them to it. Yet if, as George seems to suggest, this problem is not with "generic religious extremism" but with Islam pure and simple, he is blind to this inherent problem in all religions and cults. This is no time to point fingers at others or to proselytize other leaps of faith. Each of us is born into social environments with legacy beliefs and belief systems. We inadvertently come to accept many beliefs we really haven't thought much about. As a responsibility to ourselves and to each other, we all have a moral responsibility to independently reconcile and integrate our beliefs with real world working abstracts of "the truth" as we individually see it, as opposed to accepting the edicts, mandates, mantras and pretense in behalf of "the truth" that others would impose on us if they could. In other words, everybody has a right to say and believe what they want, but nobody has a right not to think about what they believe. Yes, the Enlightenment which gave rise to values of democratic and open critical dissent among and between belief systems was and continues to be a rich deterrent to most religious extremism. It needs to be revisited not just by Muslims, but by all people, societies, governments and their religious as well as secular institutions, so that blind faith never gets the upper hand over critical reason as it did on 9/11/07.

Majan College Student Wins Grant to Study in USA

Times of Oman -- September 11, 2007

Muscat — "A student of Majan College (University College) has won a grant to study in the United States of America for a year awarded by the American Embassy, Muscat. Ibrahim Al Bandari of the BA English Language degree programme attributes his success to the foundation laid by his parents, who relentlessly strove to provide the best for him educationally and otherwise. At an early age Ibrahim was exposed to the English language, which enhanced his interest in developing his skills further ... Upon completion of his Thannawiya, Ibrahim enrolled for the BA (Hons) English Language degree programme offered at Majan College. Ibrahim acknowledges his skills and abilities to the excellent tuition, personal development, encouragement and support gained during his three years as a student in Majan College. He recalls his experiences as a student representative, the knowledge and confidence gained on the programme and the focus given to developing analytical and critical thinking skills ... Although at ease with the language, Ibrahim’s ability to critically analyse and argue different topics related to linguistics was an added advantage to his performance at the scholarship. “I thank Majan College for all their support and encouragement. I would also like to thank all my tutors particularly Dr Maha, Dr Wendy, Dr Rajat and Abdul Said and all my colleagues,” says Ibrahim. He takes with him their best wishes for the ensuing year." -- Read the Full Article

Students Get Slow Introduction to Laptops

Colorado Springs Gazette -- September 11, 2007
by Shari Chaney Griffin

"More than an hour after they sat down with a PC tablet in front of them, about 80 seventh- and eighth-graders in the 21st Century Curriculum Pilot Program got permission to open them up Monday ... Slowly ... Lifting the LCD screen too quickly is the easiest way to break the computer, teacher Will Colebank reminded the students ... They were excited to see inside, after spending time noting all plugs, ports and jacks on the outside ... Eventually, the tablets, which are laptop computers with a screen that can be laid flat and written on with a stylus like a Palm Pilot, will be one of several tools used to teach critical thinking and reasoning, information literacy and other topics covered in the Harrison School District 2 program ... A grant from The Daniels Fund paid for the laptops. " -- Read the Full Article

Teaching About Global Climate Change

NSTA Reports (National Science Teachers Association) -- September 10, 2997
by P John Whittsett, NSTA President

"Nearly everyone discusses the weather, and recently the concept of 'global warming' has entered the conversation. When it’s hot, some say global warming is the cause. When it’s cold, some may conclude that global warming is a myth. These statements are obviously based on short-term observations and have little to do with a long-term event like climate. Most students have difficulty distinguishing between weather and climate because they view their world from a very limited perspective ... To assess the extent to which our climate is changing, we must examine temperature and other weather-related information over a long period of time. Reliable data has shown a temperature increase of approximately 1 degree Celsius in the last century. Additionally, 10 of the warmest years on record have occurred in the last 15 years. It is clear that the Earth’s temperature is rising ... The American Association for the Advancement of Science’s (AAAS) Project 2061 promoted a massive overhaul of the education system. Like Science Matters, Project 2061’s Science For All Americans identified the big ideas, but also demonstrated the connections among them. Energy and how it moves within and between systems is one of those big ideas. Within this topic, fossil fuels are shown to be part of a dynamic cycle of formation and conversion back to gas through combustion, but the time scales are certainly not aligned with our current use of fossil fuels ... The single most significant document used by curriculum developers is the National Science Education Standards. The Standards ask that students recognize that human activity can produce negative outcomes. Standard F asks students to use critical-thinking skills to examine global issues and develop a global awareness ... The AAAS Benchmarks state that in grades 6–8, students should understand that our climate has changed due to relatively small variations in the atmosphere. The Benchmarks recommend that high school students understand that life as we know it must adapt to our climate, that our climate results from the transfer of energy in and out of the atmosphere, and that technology can have unintended outcomes ... NSTA strongly supports environmental education as a way to instill environmental literacy in students. NSTA’s position statement on environmental education states that instruction should be based on the national standards, be interdisciplinary, and include all viewpoints." -- Read the Full Article

Public Perception Of Biotechnology

Medical News Today (MediLexicon International Ltd) -- September 10, 2007
by Barbara Janssens

"The term 'biotechnology' elicits a range of emotions, from wonder and awe to fear and hostility. Alan McHughen from the University of California in Riverside (CA, USA) now reviews public knowledge of biotech, popular misperceptions, scientific illiteracy and the role of the media. How is coexistence dealt with in the US and Europe? Who benefits from agricultural biotech -- only big companies or also the society at large? In the public interest, who is best suited to provide advice to weary consumers? ... Find these answers in the latest issue of Biotechnology Journal, devoted to 'Talking Biotech with the Public' which will be entirely FREE for download during the month of September 2007, at http://www.biotechnology-journal.com/. In this way the publisher Wiley-Blackwell wants to show its commitment to an open public dialogue. The BTJ issue features Forum and Scientific Articles on science communication, biosafety and public perception of biotechnology and GMOs. Moreover, a free Podcast will be broadcast on September 14, 2007, and features interviews with science communication experts and a humoristic Audio Play of a Journalist-Scientist interview provided by EMBO Science and Society. Download the free podcast: http://www.podcast.biotechnology-journal.com/ ... Alan McHughen claims that academics have to get more engaged in public education and social empowerment. The public might in part not be interested in being taught details of molecular biology, but may be willing to learn critical thinking skills to face all controversial issues in our increasingly complex modern world. 'Biotechnology is not new in this regard' said McHughen, 'everything from automobiles to barbeques warrants appropriate experts working in the public interest to assure safety'."-- Read the Full Article

STS-5 and the Impact of Apollo-era Decision-Making

The Space Review -- September 10, 2007
by Paul Torrance

"Some time between June 27 and November 11, 1982, the Apollo-era managers at NASA made a key decision: they ordered the removal the crew escape provisions from the Space Shuttle. Not that the shuttle crew escape provisions were any good—in fact, the crew escape system was never “crash dummy” tested as was done with the Apollo launch escape system (LES) and the modern automobile. Unlike the Apollo LES, two SR-71-style Blackbird ejection seats were basically just put into the Space Shuttle without “crash dummy” testing ... I think this early decision demonstrated a lack of both leadership and vision of the Apollo-era management (notice I did not call them “leaders”). This decision meant the Apollo-era management did not learn from Apollo 13 how to succeed or how to fail in the business of human space flight. This STS-5 decision would set the stage for the Challenger and Columbia disasters to come. There are also ethical implications of their decision that have caused a generation of NASA managers, astronauts, and engineers to follow the lower ethical standard path they chose ... Early decision-making, including critical thinking, is not easy. In the Battle of Dunkirk, the old commanders on top on both sides no doubt relied on the experiences of the First World War. When wars begin, often it becomes quickly evident when weapons are no longer effective. The Monitor-versus-Merrimac US Civil War battle instantly made the wooden ship extinct worldwide so far as battleships go ... Above my desk is a fairly recent “NASA Values” chart. The chart begins by stating, “We are dedicated to the values of safety.” In a day and age when we have infant car seats and laws regarding how to put infants into car seats and how to install infant car seats into cars; with seat belt laws, air bags, front impact, side impact, and rollover crash dummy tests of automobiles, I must confess I feel like an oxymoron when I drive to work in my car strapped in by my seat belt knowing there is an air bag in the steering wheel, when the space shuttle launches human beings on a rocket with no launch escape system by an agency that does not seem to know the reason for its own success and failures ... Thus, in the spirit of oxymoronism, I think it is pretty ugly that the same difference, or should I say indifference, has left my agency in the fine mess it is in today. But in the spirit of “pessimistic optimism”, I end this article with my own perhaps 'obscured vision' for American human space flight, and leave that vision open to debate." -- Read the Full Article

USAO's On a Mission to Draw New Students

The Oklahoman -- September 10, 2007
by Susan Simpson

Chickasha. OK — "On a recent day, a chorus of cicadas broadcast loudly from the trees lining sidewalks at the University of Science and Arts of Oklahoma ... Inside the buildings of this century-old campus, administrators are singing their own chorus of sorts, loudly voicing an aggressive plan that some say will either raise the campus to new crescendos or silence it forever ... USAO leaders are raising academic admission standards to rival that of the University of Oklahoma and Oklahoma State University, seeking substantially more money from lawmakers and boosters and wooing top students from across the state and nation in an effort to shed its image as a regional university ... The state's only public liberal arts university 'seems destined either to alter dramatically the terrain of Oklahoma higher education or to destroy itself,' said Sanders Huguenin, USAO's vice president for academic affairs.University leaders say the campus has long been overlooked for its unique quest, which is to provide a liberal arts education rivaling that of private colleges but with a public school price tag ... Many Oklahomans don't understand the university's curriculum, finding the liberal arts concept foreign, even though it dates back to the beginnings of American higher education ... Instead of training students for one of hundreds of specific professions, the liberal arts approach aims to provide a broad and comprehensive education that stresses general knowledge, interdisciplinary learning and critical thinking. Only bachelor's degrees are offered, and some courses are taught by teams of professors from different disciplines." -- Read the Full Article

Hero Worship is Incompatible with Critical Thought

Cyprus Mail -- September 9, 2007

"At the end of last month, the Education Ministry sent out a circular to the heads of all state schools setting out the three main targets of the new school year which starts this week. The main target was the development of inter-cultural dialogue in schools, as a way of cultivating greater tolerance and acceptance of other cultures ... The European Parliament and European Council declared 2008 the European Year of Inter-Cultural Dialogue, pointed out the circular, adding that cultivating a multi-cultural conscience among children was an imperative, given the growing number of foreign students at state schools and the changing cultural composition of our society. A list of sensible suggestions as to how this could be achieved were included in the circular ,,, Another target for the new year was to make schools more inclusive by making each class cater for the individual needs, skills and interests of each child so that all students could feel a sense of achievement and nobody would feel excluded or marginalised. These are commendable objectives, in line with European values and current educational thinking, but whether schools are in a position to achieve them at such short notice, without any time to prepare, is another matter ... What is important, for now, is that the ministry has recognised the need for schools to adapt to the changes our society is undergoing. But the third and final aim makes a mockery of this superficial modernising drive, as it exposes the government’s real thinking on education. It will focus on “acquainting children with the life and work of Archbishop Makarios III”, as 30 years from his death were marked this year! ...The suggestions made by the ministry for acquainting children with Makarios defy belief. Here are some of them: “Every school to organise an exhibition of works inspired by the life and work of Makarios; research to be carried out about artistic works that were inspired by Makarios; projects to be written about the life and work of Makarios; artistic events to be staged, devoted to Makarios; magazines and newspapers published by schools to be devoted to the memory of Makarios' ...The Makarios-worshipping aim of the ministry is anti-educational and exposes the true intentions of the government regarding state schools, which is, quite blatantly, to discourage free and critical thinking. And we wonder how the ministry mandarins hope to achieve the other two aims of the school year – multi-cultural conscience and inclusiveness – which require open-mindedness, when dogmatic thinking remains an educational ideal." -- Read the Full Article

Commentary
It's human to socially gravitate towards authoritative leadership on ideas and issues seeking our own acceptance in the notoriety of others especially when what we have least in common is "critical thinking." Acculturation within and across societies, cultures and religions constantly pulls us into intellectual assumptions and positions of acceptance in our associations with others, which need continual reconciliation. In fact, when we build our own convictions around the thinking of our heroes, when our thinking becomes their thinking by proxie, we work at cross-purposes with the fundamental concepts and cadre of best practices of critical thinking. This article illustrates a classic example of where, as institutions, we precondition our intent to "think critically" like the leaders we admire thereby undercutting our very ability to begin the critical thinking process. When the collective thinking of our institutions on one hand embrace "critical thinking" but on the other impose whose critical thinking we must embrase, it becomes obvious they either don't understand the fundamental cadres and best practices of independent thought or that they intentionally are out to indoctrinate and brainwash us in their "thinking," ableit, beliefs. Voluntary acceptance of such beliefs, without the intellectual work of independent critical process, is not "thinking." All social institutions, religious as well as secular, are inclined towards telling us what to think; not how to think. Our individual ability to see and think independently and critically is our only defense against this tendency.

America's Double Trouble

Science & Spirit -- September 8, 2007
by Trey Popp

"The nation's science and religion literacy was put to the test in America's heartland this spring, not by a battery of school tests, but by the opening of the Creation Museum in Petersburg, Kentucky, a small town within driving distance of half the U.S. population ... Visitors to the Creation Museum encounter a state-of-the-art exhibition whose visual displays are the curatorial equivalent of a Hollywood blockbuster. The museum is inventive in other ways, too. In an effort to reconcile a literal interpretation of the Bible with natural history, it portrays children frolicking under the placid gaze of a pair of Tyrannosaurus Rexes, explains how coal can be formed in a few weeks rather than millions of years, and posits that all animals were created as vegetarians ... Whatever one may say about the quality of 'science' and 'religion' the Creation Museum presents, visitors flock through its doors. Most of them lack enough knowledge in either sphere to participate in a critical debate ... only seven percent of American adults are scientifically literate and only one in five college graduates makes that mark, according to a 1998 report on "civic scientific literacy" by Jon D. Miller of Northwestern University Medical School. American fifteen-year-olds rank behind their peers in twenty-two other countries—including the Netherlands, Poland, and South Korea—in scientific knowledge, according to the National Center for Education Statistics. And last year's report from the National Science Foundation indicates that the public's scientific knowledge hasn't improved since the 1990s—though it did in almost every European country surveyed ... The nation's religious IQ isn't much better: About one-third of American adults believe that the Bible is the literal word of God, according to a recent Gallup poll, but that doesn't mean they've read or remembered it. Only half of American adults can name one of the four Gospels, and still fewer know that Genesis is the first book of the Old Testament. A scant one-third know that the Sermon on the Mount was delivered by Jesus, not Billy Graham. One 1997 survey found that eighty percent of born-again Christians erroneously thought that "God helps them that help themselves" is in the Bible. Misinformation multiplies when the subject shifts to Islam or Hinduism, the second- and third-largest religions in the world with a combined following of 2.5 billion; few Americans know even basic tenets of either faith ... Improving both scientific and religious literacy may be the only hope of averting a future in which the American public is divided between adherents of science and adherents of faith, each group trying to out-shout the other in an effort to win over the undecided middle. That is why Collins, an evangelical Christian, regards the Creation Museum as an "utterly heartbreaking" sign of the times." -- Read the Full Article

Time to Ask Why the Education System is Failing Us

The Vancouver Sun -- September 8, 2007
by Michael Campbell

"'Whenever you think about the future, no matter where you start, if you think about it long enough, you'll always wind up thinking about education. . . . Brain power is the answer no matter what the question, and for brains to function well they have to be well stocked with information and ideas, and trained in coming up with fresh, new approaches' ... Richard Worzel, Canada's leading futurist ... Worzel is trying to say more than just 'look at my great enlightened goodness.' Worzel is issuing a warning that if we don't adapt our education system to meet the challenges of a world that changes with breathtaking speed, then we will be left behind individually and collectively ... Think about it. How much of our discussion on education ever gets beyond the latest contract issues? If a child's education is really the key to our future, then parents, teachers, school boards and the ministry of education better wake up to the fact that class size and salaries are not the key determinants of effective schooling ... Where is the focus on innovation in terms of delivery, critical thinking, and preparation for meeting the challenge brought on as our competition with countries like China and India intensifies? How are we going to deal with the increasing gap between the literacy rates between girls and boys? Unfortunately, as Worzel points out, 'The problem is that education and the means by which we deliver it is the single social structure most resistant to change at a time when change is happening faster than at any other time in human history.' "-- Read the Full Article

Don’t Let the Conformity Get to You

The Journal (Queens University) -- September 7, 2007
by Sayyida Jaffer

Kingston, ON —"University should teach students to think outside the box ... This week, thousands of new students flock to Queen’s to begin their university careers. Traditionally, campus environments have been hotbeds of social change—for examples, one need only look to the twentieth century’s civil rights or anti-apartheid movements ... But one of the first lessons Queen’s students learn is the importance of conformity ... Frosh Week is one of the first tangible experiences first-year students have at Queen’s and they deserve for it to be an enjoyable and purposeful one. However, when thousands of students are required to do the same thing at the same time, it sends a strong message that there is only one way to be accepted and successful at Queen’s and that is through conforming to the norms of the student culture here ... In Principal Hitchcock’s fall 2006 convocation address, she made severa