EP, "A Christian should feel compassion. Remember, hate the sin, love the sinner. You seem to hate the sinner."
~~~~~~~~~~~

This is a true statement, and indicative of what God's sentiment is regarding the same; according to scripture.

Spidey,
You didn't address my point. Maybe the bridge is broken up ahead. And maybe you are trying to alert people to that fact. But your posts display a joyfulness about people burning in hell. I think you'd like to watch them burn. A Christian should feel compassion. Remember, hate the sin, love the sinner. You seem to hate the sinner.

Athena, nobody wants to burn you. Im preaching so nobody gets burned. Don't you get it?

Hell is real.

Philbin, my mother was a former Catholic and I'm glad somebody told her that it's false. If not for that person, our whole clan could have been driving along a highway and going towards that broken bridge. Somebody put a sign "BROKEN BRIDGE AHEAD" and as a result, it saved many lives.

Now, I want to emulate that act to save more lives. If you want to take that sign out, it's your call.

Spidey,
Do you relish the prospect of Catholics, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists and Quakers burning in hell? Do you look forward to hearing them go snap, crackle, and pop? It seems to me that a Christian ought to feel tender sympathy and compassionate pity for those he deems lost. Yet in your posts you always seem gleeful that nonbelievers will burn in hell. It seems to give you joy. You seem to have a sadistic streak in you that is very unchristian.

Egregious Philbin wrote : "Hey Spidey, Will any Catholics or Jews go to heaven? Any Quakers? Any Hindus or Buddhists?"

Check this youtube link and judge for yourself :

http://www.you tube.com/watch?v=-ZcueajkWnY&feature=related

(omit that space between "you tube", otherwise an error message will greet you.)

http://www.you tube.com (testing)

Wapo censors my youtube link post. (censorship testing)

v=-ZcueajkWnY&feature=related

censorship testing

testing censorship

Athena:

"Sorry, Lacey, to lump you in with the likes of Spiderman.

I can't speak for PP's response to Jovez, but I do know that JJ is a spammer who frequently posts inflammatory things just to get attention. He "decorates" the boards with his BUAGs and rants, then complains when the moderators censor his postings. In one case, he threatened to sue the WaPo for not letting him post. Any smackdown that PP layed on him was probably deserved."
~~~~~~~~~~~~

Thank you for the apology, I do appreciate it and it is well received.

I also like Spiderman's post so I don't have an issue with him, in fact some of his post are very informative to me. (I quantified my statement and said "me")

I don't care for any of PP's post very much and this one post seemed particular vindictive and delighting in seeing harm come on JJ. I don't know JJ and am not as bothered by his post as some are.

But if I ever had to judge a post as "cold, indifferent, and seeing pleasure in one being hurt it was the one by PP that I referenced, it bothered me that much.

I found this quotes and thought that you and others, including my self might like to consider them,

1. A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject. Sir Winston Churchill,
British politician (1874 - 1965)

2. When I do good, I feel good; when I do bad, I feel bad, and that is my religion. Abraham Lincoln, (attributed)16th president of US (1809 - 1865)

3. Faith is taking the first step, even when you don't see the whole staircase. Martin Luther King Jr., US black civil rights leader & clergyman (1929 - 1968)

Sorry, Lacey, to lump you in with the likes of Spiderman.

I can't speak for PP's response to Jovez, but I do know that JJ is a spammer who frequently posts inflammatory things just to get attention. He "decorates" the boards with his BUAGs and rants, then complains when the moderators censor his postings. In one case, he threatened to sue the WaPo for not letting him post. Any smackdown that PP layed on him was probably deserved.

Athena:

"If this nation continues to forsake God, This Nation WILL be Punished."

Do you mean that God will damn America?

Frankly, if America becomes a nation of Christianists like you, Lacey, and Spidey, I'm heading to Australia before the mob comes to burn me at the stake for being a Witch."
~~~~~~~~~~~

You have a lot of gull determining my position of death sentence on someone's life. If I have not said it to you then you do not have a right to state that I would do as such.

I take it you are one of the Pagans that claims to have morals, if so use them and stop making false accusations against someone. Great example of Pagans having morals.....

In fact, please, please, leave my name out of any of your conversations. I have had enough dealings with Pagans to make me never to want to know one again.

Especially, Paganplace, the post PP did to JJ last night was filled with nothing but hatred, revenge, and payback. What kind of person claims to have morals but openly tells JJ that "remember when you said such and such, now look at you, your in a bad position, as a form of ha, ha, now you are getting what you deserve.

I want no part of people like that, period. If someone is hurting they have my sympathy and I hurt with them, not ha, ha, remember when you did this to me, now your getting paid back.

Post by PP under Rabbi Kula to JJ, "can religion help us heal sexism and racism?

Paganplace:
"Do you *remember,* JJ, the name you called me, when knowing full well I was non-straight, Irish, and Pagan?

"World-view," you called me.

Remember?

Nothing's forgotten, Jacob.

What does your 'world view' look like *now,* JJ?"

Look where you've come in a very short time.

The *world* hasn't changed that much. But what *you're* doing has.

Guess what. It's not the first time. Someone thinks they got the brightest blessing ever, and in short order they are saying things *just like you have.*

Some will tell you that hateful speech like that will reward you, Jacob. But where *are* you?

Any time you want to come back from that dark and frightened place you're in, now, JJ. Any time.

We'll be here."

March 30, 2008 9:08 PM

"Paganplace:
"I *told* you that all that 'seeing the one true Light' would eventually lead you to this...

Photon guy.

Tsk."

"If this nation continues to forsake God, This Nation WILL be Punished."

Do you mean that God will damn America?

Frankly, if America becomes a nation of Christianists like you, Lacey, and Spidey, I'm heading to Australia before the mob comes to burn me at the stake for being a Witch.

Spiderman2, thank you for your explainatin. I understand your point of reference now.

The only reason any candidate wants support from the church is because they are going for the vote of the masses who show up on Sunday morning all dressed up thinking that this means something to God.
The word "religion" comes from the Latin root meaning, "to connect" and you don't have to wear anything or go anywhere to do this. Yes, you can actually connect with the deeper nature of reality at anytime or place. You don't need a paid cheerleader or a collection plate or a balance sheet, these have nothing to do with God. They are simply the tools that people use to convey their take on history.
If we haven't learned from the past two decades about the real reason these people want to be on television and in the news then we never will. It's all about money and the love of it. People like Falwell, what an appropriate name, and Robertson are all about the fame and fortune of talking loud about God.

This is one more argument why everyone should vote for Hillary !!

Reasonable not hateful:

I've seen GW claimed by several teams. That aside, it doesn't change the fact that many people, for hundreds of years, justified their ownership of other people based on Biblical scripture. It also does not change the fact that Christianity was the dominant religion in our country at that time. It seems only fair, therefore, that if GW wants to credit religion and religious morality for "political prosperity" and whatnot, then one cannot ignore that particular key religion's role as, at least, an indirect enabler of governmentally sanctioned human bondage.

As regarding the validity of GW's quote, I certainly don't see any kind of refutation of the principle of church/state separation that your original post seemed to imply, i.e. "The separation clause was not meant to be as high as the secularists here want. [.] G. Washington disagreed with you." That is unless, of course, you can demonstrate that either the establishment clause or the quote say something that I'm not seeing.

I agree wholeheartedly with you and GW that religious people will probably always influence government; one can't be forced to check one's beliefs at the curtain of the voting booth and religion isn't going anywhere soon. But, I also stand by my (expanded) statement that religious leaders and organizations who/which violate pertinent IRS rules should have their tax-exempt statuses revoked. If the direct endorsements we've seen lately are permitted under the current rules, then I think the rules should be re-examined .

Aloha

Hey Spidey,
Will any Catholics or Jews go to heaven? Any Quakers? Any Hindus or Buddhists?

Lacey, I'm fine. Thanks for correcting me. I used the word "we" the same way I would use it in statements like " Why did we crucify Christ? " I didn't noticed that there's a possiblity that it could be misconstrued. Thanks.

Neal- I have addressed this issue with many before(slavery). People are sinful. Period. They are greedy and culturally some really did believe that blacks were not human. Big mistake. I don't discount what people had to say just because they were not in the right time in the world. Cultural change takes time, but it does not make GW's words any less valid. He was a deist, by the way.

Churchwallstate- what you are looking for is some place that does not exist, where people that are religious don't have the right to speak up about what they believe about society and what direction it should go. After all, it is a exchange of ideas- of course we all have to listen to what people say, even if we disagree with you. I fear, however, that people like YOU want people like myself and others to shut our pieholes, and to not vote our consciences. This is a Republic- democracy, after all, and one of our great founders had something profound to say about those that are religious - that we have something positive to contribute to our republic, which many on this forum - like YOU , think we don't. That is why it galls you so much.

Neal,
So you've seen that charlatan Mike Murdock too. Pretty unbelievable, no? You're right that he is pretty much a-political; he is also a-religious. He says little about God or the Bible except brief references when he goes about his main business, seducing that fool that is born every minute into sending him a thousand dollars. This guy is a more transparent fraud than Robert Tilton, Jimmy Swaggart, Peter Popoff, and Benny Hinn, and that's going some. At least nut jobs like Pat Robertson and James Dobson seem, to me, sincere (though hateful and misguided). But Murdock and his ilk are like the professional wrestlers of the religious world. How do people not see through the all-too-obvious scam? I guess there will always be people who buy snake oil.

Neal Obstat:

If you don't have $1,000 in cash, and even if you're praying to be delivered from crushing personal debt, "Dr." Murdock will deign to let you charge up to the limit of your credit cards. I've also heard him and his spawn encourage people who have already sown their seeds without result to, in effect, double-down and donate multiple times: "It takes a lot of seed to reap a mighty harvest." To give the devil's look-alike his due though, he seems largely a-political and keeps his attention focused, like a laser, on believers' pocketbooks.

Hagee and Parsley claim Catholicism and Islam are false. If it's true, then, what's wrong with that?. What is wrong with exposing a false doctrine?

Spiderman2, "Hagee and Parsley claim Catholicism and Islam are false. If it's true, then, why do we condemn them?"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Spiderman2,
Hi, how are you?

We as Chrisitans do not condemn anyone that is appointed only to God and Christ, I am not sure what your point is here, please explain?

Thanks

Jon: "This is a waste of everyone's time. There are no gods, and there never have been. Religion has outlasted it's usefullness if there ever was a good use to dividing people.

Many of the posts I have read don't even get the point. These folks need to move to a theocracy instyead of a democracy."
~~~~~~~~`

And by what merit would an "unbeleiver" consider that there is a God?

NO, "Think of it as an investment so that at least your personal finances will be protected by God while he decimates everybody else's."
~~~~~~~~~~~~

Truly stated and a good point.

So why aren't you trusing in God to protect your finances?

Neil wrote : "To use an admittedly inflammatory analogy: chimps and humans seem to share 98% of their genes, but no matter how much we might object, we're both still primates."

Your eyes and hair share 100 percent of your DNA and no matter how perfectly similar their DNAs are, they are not both eyes nor both hair. The analogy of blood relations cannot be applied to DNA. Humans and bananas share a big chunch of their DNAs and both cannot be considered as relatives. On the other hand, if we share 1% of our grandmother's blood, we can be relatives.

False assumptions or beliefs makes many so-called "Christians" become false Christians. In short, Neil, you give Christianity a bad name. Atheists don't see the difference coz they are idiots. There are true and false religions or true and false Christianity and it's your business to find out the difference. You got brains, use them.

To Cindy Murphy:
If our economy is a mess because we have forsaken God (apparently God actually intervenes in economic affairs and in the weather, which I was quaint enough to believe varied according to narural forces), then I have a suggestion for you. Send Mike Murdock your $1000.00 "seed money"; he assures you that God will repay you many times over. Think of it as an investment so that at least your personal finances will be protected by God while he decimates everybody else's.

While I understand why "moderate" Christians do not want to be associated with the more intemperate elements of their faith, it seems unavoidable.

In my part of the theological universe some people juggle rattlesnakes and sip cyanide as tests of their faiths. They cite Bible verses (Mrk 16:18, among others) as reasonable faith-based justification for their liturgy. From what I can tell from a (safe) distance, except for those few particular beliefs, they would be considered garden variety, heaven-bound Christians. To use an admittedly inflammatory analogy: chimps and humans seem to share 98% of their genes, but no matter how much we might object, we're both still primates.

This is a waste of everyone's time. There are no gods, and there never have been. Religion has outlasted it's usefullness if there ever was a good use to dividing people.

Many of the posts I have read don't even get the point. These folks need to move to a theocracy instyead of a democracy.

There is some support from the words of Jesus for this point of view. Not that I am an expert or even very familiar with all the words of Jesus, but his instruction that prayer should be performed in private, plus his view that it was ok to render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's seems to me to indicate that He thought of the realm of religion as being separate from the realm of government and perhaps even society to some extent. The emphasis of protestants on the concept of Jesus as a personal savior is in harmony with this.

None of this is to say that good works, by which "ye shall know" believers, are unimportant. And legitimate good works include trying to improve things for people, and that includes trying to improve government. But government is not improved by dragging religious considerations in to the extent of causing strife among various religions.

It seems to me that Christians in particular are less true to their faith if they cause or exacerbate divisions among people when trying to achieve such worldly goals as influencing the election of particular political candidates.

I love it.

Only God knows what's in the hearts of Rod Parsley and John Hagee; as for me these guys are unfortunate caricutures of Christians. I am sorry Senator McCain feels he has to bring them in his camp.

A 73 year old follower of Christ

Simplier, just tax what church a religious "leader" belongs to (i.e., do away with an tax-exempt status), the day they endorse a political candidate. Most (if not all) of those who have "political" aspirations, love money far more than religion...take John Hagee for example.

Spiderman2:

I was about to chastise thee for quoting an anonymous North Korean source when I realized, that compared to your usual sources, it's probably a net improvement.

"When you mix politics and religion, you get politics." - Gene Carlson, Wichita, Kansas preacher

"My proposal is, of course, a tad facetious."

Yes, just a "tad."

Dumping undesirables from the U.S. in France---this represents scholarly 'thinking' today?

On the other hand, rather than dumping people, there could be valuable gains from more considered exchanges between the French and American people.

The fact is, each could learn valuable lessons from the other and in the process certain silly stereotyped notions of the other could be undone by some direct experience. Both France and the U.S. suffer from what might be described as 'complementary errors of habit'. That is, each has certain strengths and weaknesses which the other tends to lack.

I admire the French people for a much greater respect for intellectual life. At the same time, France could benefit from adopting in _deed_ rather than merely in (lip-service) word some of the U.S. society's habits of placing greater priority on a person's individual merits rather than its too-common class-protectionist habits of a society based on inherited privilge and opportunity. That automatically excludes many bright and talented people from even getting a fair crack at advancement.

An important book, "The Path Through Infinity's Rainbow: Your Guide to Personal Survival and Spiritual Transformation in a World Gone Mad" clearly describes how the religious right is a tool for controlling the masses and turning the United States into a war machine. In his book, author Michael P. Byron also details what we need to do once these insane and evil people have finished off our civilization.

An unidentified KCNA (North Korea) military commentator, just recently, said, "Everything will be in ashes, not just a sea of fire, if our advanced pre-emptive strike once begins."

There goes your atheist relatives, fellas. A product of "enlightened" Karl Marx.

"[P]lease do not presume to inject your personal fantasies into public discourse regarding a government that is supposed to serve and protect us all - those who believe in your bible and those who do not."
___________________

Everyone injects their own personal fantasies into public discourse, whether those fantasies be inspired by science, philosophy, religion, or political theory. That is the essence of democratic freedom and religion is no less a legitimate source of illumination than any other.

The illiberal impulse to tell people to shut up because we disagree with them should be resisted. Remember that there is no Constitutional protection from being annoyed. Chances are, your personal opinions are just as annoying to others as their's are to you.

Kenneth wrote : "Executing Spiderman2 and Jimmy Carter is going a little too far...A little waterboarding and exile seem a little more reasonable to me."

Sounds like North Korea. See what I mean?

Most Churches are dens of inequity. Glorified fashion shows where everybody slaps each other on the back about how their saved then goes back to their greed materialistic lives making big plans on how they are going to despoil the earth and take advantage of their fellow man. Where are the vows of poverty working to lift the lowest and least among us? Instead it's the fancy clothes fancy cars and the big house. Every drop of oil wasted is food out of someones mouth, but you wouldn't know that if you looked at the average Church's parking lot. Sunday Christians have driven my doubt to heavenly levels they talk the talk but can they walk the walk. When Religion has become the tool of statecraft it has soiled itself and for the most part is the refuge of scoundrels.

Bondage and false beliefs go hand in hand. It is therefore not a surprise that countries which follow Islam (Arab countries & Africa), Catholicism (South America), Budhism (SE & E Asian), Atheism (China & Russia), "Enlightenment" (European Parliament) are mostly dictatorial or corrupt in their governance.

In the U.S. private groups can no longer give free Bibles to students because secular/atheist groups hinder them.

Jesus said that the truth shall make you free. On the other hand, adherents of falsehood make prisoners out of themselves.

If we replicate the likes of Jacques a million times and make them a state, it would have more similarities with North Korea than any free nation and similarly would very likely treat the U.S as it's staunchest enemy.

Would you believe that a few years from now, the U.S would battle a big chunk of countries which adhere to false beliefs? Yes, it's in the Bible and it would happen.

If you think you're smart because you are "enlightened" and does not believe in God, think again. And think hard.

Executing Spiderman2 and Jimmy Carter is going a little too far...

A little waterboarding and exile seem a little more reasonable to me.

As a Pastor of a small Bible believing Baptist church in Vermont, I find the recent flap over Rev. Wrights comments interesting. It is not his remarks that bother me, in fact I think he has every right from the pulpit to declare what he believes. Mr. Obama in my opinion is not responsible for those remarks. What is interesting is that no one is talking about the theology which is the basis for the remarks. Liberation theology is at it's heart a socialistic theology. When Cone coined the phrase "black liberation theology" it just narrowed the view. McCain has been endorsed by Hagee and Parsley(which I have theological disagreements with) but has not been a part of their respective churches. Mr. Obama while not having to answer for the remakrs of Wright does have to explain if he endorses liberation theology. At least in my view the issue isn't race but what does he believe. That's why it is important to know what if anything a candidate believes. It is silly to think that a candidate can seperate himself from his core beliefs.When Jimmy Carter introduced religion into public politics by declaring himself to be born again, he had somewhat of a different take on it than most Evangelicals. The Democrats opend the box using religion to get a candidate elected and I fell for it. Now I want to know more.

Any preacher who uses his pulpit and/or power in the religious community to endorse/campaign for a political candidate should automatically be investigated by the IRS for violation of their tax-exempt status. I don't care if the leader is muslim, jewish, christian, or pagan - if whatever religious organization is covered by the tax-exempt status, then they need to stay OUT of politics. Of course, that will never happen - therefore, I say to those in the church who believe it is their right to use the church's influence to steer a political campaign - then you must render unto Ceasar that which is Ceasar's (your tax exempt status) and render unto God that which is God's (your offering plates)Of course I'm still trying to figure out how these folks remain tax exempt when they are selling prayers to God via on-line and TV orders of holy land water, sand, and god-blessed prayer scraps. . .too much snake oil

re: Cindy Murpy: "There's going to be The Wrath of God On Our Nation and we're seeing signs already. Our nation was Founded on GOD and The Bible that is why God Blessed this nation. If this nation continues to forsake God, This Nation WILL be Punished. My concern it will be worse than 9-11. The Bible has many examples of nations that faced the wrath of God. Lord Deliver your people."

This kind of pseudo-theological rambling is like second-hand smoke. Keep your personal religious beliefs away from our government. You are free to believe any fairy tale you choose. But please do not presume to inject your personal fantasies into public discourse regarding a government that is supposed to serve and protect us all - those who believe in your bible and those who do not.

Amen!

Religion does not exist in a historical vaccuum any more than science does, although both would like to tell themselves otherwise. The good and bad of religion are determined by the social context in which it exists, as well as by those who practice it.

What one continually finds in religions are boundaries not only deterimined by who does and who does not belong, but by the prevailing prejudices of the day. Although I am not Catholic, I did work in a Jesuit University for awhile. There, I heard a priest speaking to an admissions officer about a paricular graduation, referring to the graduates as NOK. Translation: Not our kind.

The Jesuit was Irish. The graduates from the school of social work were black, Latino, Jewish, et al. Good enough to pay the bills with their tuition, but that was it. That the blacks and Latinos were Catholic was irrelevant to the good father, SJ. For him, they were inferior just as Jews were. Although for awhile, I was raised as an Episcopalian, Englightenment struck my very wise mother who decided that nonsense was nonsense and that she was better equipped than the church to teach me morality. As a result, I escaped the WASPY class-consciousness that so many of my former co-religionists endlessly demonstrate.

I leave you to contemplate our good Christian president.

This Hagee guy sounds to me more like someone running for the Israeli Knesset than a Christian preacher. On the other hand I have never heard an Israeli politician badmouth the Catholic church.

My concern is The way This nation is headed. Don't you see the warning signs of God? God is warning this nation by the signs in the weather, the economy,etc. If this nation Does not repent to God for the evil this nation is guilty of and repent for forsaking Him. There's going to be The Wrath of God On Our Nation and we're seeing signs already. Our nation was Founded on GOD and The Bible that is why God Blessed this nation. If this nation continues to forsake God, This Nation WILL be Punished. My concern it will be worse than 9-11. The Bible has many examples of nations that faced the wrath of God. Lord Deliver your people. I believe the reason our economy is in trouble is that this nation forsaken God. How can He Bless this nation if we don't turn to Him.

America is the laughingstock of the world because (among many other things) of the way primitive superstition plays such a prominent role in public life. The only difference between us and islamic nations is that we're largely ignorant and they're largely evil.

Jprfrog wrote : "Why do I do it?" I keep asking myself. I don't know and so far God hasn't answered. Maybe He's too busy talking to Spiderman."

Or maybe He did answer but your ears were not tuned in.

Reasonable not hateful:

It's seems relevant to point out that the scriptures of GW's particular religion were also used to justify his ownership of other men.

You're probably 100% correct, but maybe we *can* prevent religious leaders from continuing to suck on the public teat while they're doing it.

"Religion is connected to morality and morality/virtue that springs from religion initiates popular government."

Religious fundamentalism is related to morality only in that it *interferes* with the discernment and practice of moral behavior. Religious fundamentalism makes people like YOU believe that you don't have to listen to or consider the wishes of anyone else. "God says" what you say, and scruw anyone who doesn't agree with you.

In any other setting, people who think they can step on whomever they want without regard to their wishes are considered, well, criminals.

But religious fundamentalism gives people the excuse they need to do just that.

"Please note to all you secularists-"

And you call yourself "reasonable not hateful." Evidently you had to spell that out, because it sure isn't evident in wour words.

To church wall state and Franklin in Sarasota-

The separation clause was not meant to be as high as the secularists here want. Franklin, G. Washington disagreed with you.
Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked: Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice ? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.

It is substantially true that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government. The rule, indeed, extends with more or less force to every species of free government. Who that is a sincere friend to it can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric?

Religion is connected to morality and morality/virtue that springs from religion initiates popular government.

Please note to all you secularists- you will NEVER keep religious people from influencing government.

JPRFROG wrote:

"Can't anyone here recognize exaggeration for effect? Perhaps the Professor's error was that he expected at least some readers to have a sense of humor."

Amen, JPR FROG, Amen

Can't anyone here recognize exaggeration for effect? Perhaps the Professor's error was that he expected at least some readers to have a sense of humor.

Reading these comments is profoundly depressing. "Why do I do it?" I keep asking myself. I don't know and so far God hasn't answered. Maybe He's too busy talking to Spiderman.

Andrew:--"His argument seems to be that Dr. Hagee and Dr. Parsley should not be permitted to express their views because others may (and surely do) disagree. Notably he doesn't evaluate the veracity of their statements, perhaps because he would be obviously out of his depth."

My research indicates that neither John Hagee or Rodney Parsley hold anything other than honorary doctoral degrees from anywhere other than Bible colleges.

Not only do I agree with you that John Hagee, Rodney Parsley should not be censored, I think their messages should be broadcast on the mainstream media, at high volume and repeatedly, so that everyone is aware from whom John McCain draws his inspiration.

I don't see how there is enough room in the entire WaPo to judge the veracity of their statements, especially if that would include the necessary (I think) examination of the veracity of the pertinent Biblical foundations upon which they seem to totter.

big difference between haggee and parsley and rev. wright. one answer is sitting right in the pews. there are loads of black,white ,yellow and red people sitting in haggees and parsleys pews.they are preaching the word of God from the bible and essentually it says repent,accept Jesus's sacrifice on the cross to have fellowship with the Creator. thats what sticks in you libs craws is the sin part. they are't telling their people to go out and rob ,pillage and destroy anything. they are telling their people how to have a relationship with God and their fellow man. you accuse them of being dangerous? you are the danger and wright's black liberation theology is the danger and you libs ignore it to your peril. black liberation theology is very close to radical islam in it's objective. your new amendments "majestic" words are crappola. black theology makes no allowances for white libs. you go under the bus with the rest of us.

Spiderman2:

Apologies accepted.

I've read your response. Given the conditions I placed upon my question, i.e. "If people you respected found 100% verifiably genuine scrolls, which could be proven to be written by Jesus himself...", I would have thought that the question would not be so difficult. I still think it can be answered with a simple "yes" or "no", but thanks for the effort.

Another air ball from the good professor. His argument seems to be that Dr. Hagee and Dr. Parsley should not be permitted to express their views because others may (and surely do) disagree. Notably he doesn't evaluate the veracity of their statements, perhaps because he would be obviously out of his depth.

A reasonable examination of Islam suggests that what Dr. Parsley wrote in his 2005 book is a series of inconvenient (to the secularist worldview) truths.

Lacey:--"I say the latter because the more education that people get the more they become distance from relying on innate processes such as instinct, reason, and logic."

I could be mistaken, but I thought the whole point of education was to teach people how to use the correct application of reason and logic to overcome the frequent errors that arise from relying too much on our uninformed instincts.

You seem to be saying: "Too much education is a bad thing". If that's a correct assessment of your statement, where would you draw the line? High school? 3rd Grade? Up to the point where people might start to effectively disagree with you and Spiderman2's assertions on the nature of the universe, god, hellfire and brimstone?

"A *little* knowledge [may] be a dangerous thing", but a lot of knowledge would seem to be very useful.

Neal::, Im sorry for the harsh words. I thought you were Obstat. Honestly, I admired your question and you can see that thru my lengthy reply. Thinking that you were Obstat, I tried to shoot it down. Emotions overtook me. I sincerely apologize.

For the record, and though I covet the name even more than my neighbor's ox, I am not "Neal Obstat".

Props to Arminius for warning me of the resultant "drivel".