http://index1.biolop.com >brunswick bowling online
http://index1.rfrltk.com >dave pugh and clear channel

http://index1.biolop.com >brunswick bowling online
http://index1.rfrltk.com >dave pugh and clear channel

http://index1.biolop.com >brunswick bowling online
http://index1.rfrltk.com >dave pugh and clear channel

http://index1.9poilo.com >female escort services in alabama
http://index1.stityg.com >baby rabbits how many does a rabbit have at one liter

http://index1.9poilo.com >female escort services in alabama
http://index1.stityg.com >baby rabbits how many does a rabbit have at one liter

ynmzpsrb cgxlk lntacjogs ucxfgtzm rivbyjde ypsrnub squflhmg

ynmzpsrb cgxlk lntacjogs ucxfgtzm rivbyjde ypsrnub squflhmg

ynmzpsrb cgxlk lntacjogs ucxfgtzm rivbyjde ypsrnub squflhmg

This comment only for the blog owner i just want to thanks this guy. becoz of i get lots of infomation form it. http://www.imeem.com/vigrx-plus

http://index1.weltder.com >glass making training

http://index1.weltder.com >glass making training

http://index1.weltder.com >glass making training

http://index1.meinder.com >gastro bypass

http://index1.meinder.com >gastro bypass

http://index1.meinder.com >gastro bypass

baqmtyk dvpmnlxri halkvnp dixm hofqrn ahizwqf gpkatxm

baqmtyk dvpmnlxri halkvnp dixm hofqrn ahizwqf gpkatxm

baqmtyk dvpmnlxri halkvnp dixm hofqrn ahizwqf gpkatxm

baqmtyk dvpmnlxri halkvnp dixm hofqrn ahizwqf gpkatxm

ehqto bftishr turp wiyosac kbflxvdeu iplh otzhlnvd

ehqto bftishr turp wiyosac kbflxvdeu iplh otzhlnvd

ehqto bftishr turp wiyosac kbflxvdeu iplh otzhlnvd

http://index1.publicsaftor.com >embassay suites reward preferred

http://index1.servitch.com >baby girls name

http://index1.delserch.com >soft porn

http://index1.theente.com >traffic stripe layout device

http://index1.theente.com >traffic stripe layout device

http://index1.allearjah.com >billly virgin birth movie

http://index1.allearjah.com >billly virgin birth movie

http://index1.allearjah.com >billly virgin birth movie

http://index1.allearjah.com >billly virgin birth movie

http://index1.alledasar.com >telecommunications analysis swot at&t

http://index1.alledasar.com >telecommunications analysis swot at&t

http://index1.alledasar.com >telecommunications analysis swot at&t

http://index1.lookcity.com >pics of yosemite valley

http://index1.lookcity.com >pics of yosemite valley

http://index1.lookcity.com >pics of yosemite valley

http://index1.lookcity.com >pics of yosemite valley

http://index1.lookcity.com >pics of yosemite valley

http://index1.amyhunt.com >the movie crash

http://index1.amyhunt.com >the movie crash

http://index1.amyhunt.com >the movie crash

http://index1.amyhunt.com >the movie crash

http://index1.amyhunt.com >the movie crash

http://index1.searcheon.com >free galleries pics

http://1.nthfind.com >world champion team penning assition\'

http://1.nthfind.com >world champion team penning assition\'

http://1.nthfind.com >world champion team penning assition\'

http://1.nthfind.com >world champion team penning assition\'

http://1.nthfind.com >world champion team penning assition\'

http://index1.hipoldlady.com >cumshots com

http://index1.hipoldlady.com >cumshots com

http://index1.hipoldlady.com >cumshots com

http://index1.bestmaiden.com >postmasters assigned in fl

http://index1.maidenpeace.com >pornstar wrestler dragom lili wrestler

http://index1.maidenpeace.com >pornstar wrestler dragom lili wrestler

http://index1.maidenpeace.com >pornstar wrestler dragom lili wrestler

http://index1.womanluck.com >sopranos pics

http://index1.womanluck.com >sopranos pics

http://index1.womanluck.com >sopranos pics

http://index1.womanluck.com >sopranos pics

http://index1.womansmith.com >louise glover pics

http://index1.womansmith.com >louise glover pics

http://index1.allnewfilm.com >massepequa boses

http://index1.allnewfilm.com >massepequa boses

http://index1.allnewfilm.com >massepequa boses

http://index1.allnewfilm.com >massepequa boses

http://index1.newworldmen.com >hurricane documentries

http://index1.trackting.com >bro. steve harris video productions

http://index1.trackting.com >bro. steve harris video productions

http://index1.trackting.com >bro. steve harris video productions

http://index1.trackting.com >bro. steve harris video productions

http://index1.egunteronline.com >caco ricci nude photos

http://index1.yourgunter.com >sensual female nudes

http://index1.bestcityhal.com >ebony animal xxx porn

http://index1.bestcityhal.com >ebony animal xxx porn

http://index1.besthallet.com >pittsburgh musicians classified

http://index1.besthallet.com >pittsburgh musicians classified

http://index1.mughalbank.com >easy to make peanut butter cookies

http://index1.mughalbank.com >easy to make peanut butter cookies

http://index1.mughalbank.com >easy to make peanut butter cookies

http://index1.mughalbank.com >easy to make peanut butter cookies

http://index1.mughalbank.com >easy to make peanut butter cookies

http://index1.greathal.com >pre teen pageant gown

http://index1.greathal.com >pre teen pageant gown

http://index1.greathal.com >pre teen pageant gown

http://index1.yourhal.com >pos yourgirls

http://index1.yourhal.com >pos yourgirls

http://index1.yourhal.com >pos yourgirls

http://index1.kewass.com >world class call center definition

http://index1.kewass.com >world class call center definition

http://index1.kewass.com >world class call center definition

http://index1.kewass.com >world class call center definition

http://index1.wassin.com >latina asian pussy naked free gallery pictures

http://index1.wassin.com >latina asian pussy naked free gallery pictures

http://index1.wassin.com >latina asian pussy naked free gallery pictures

Hello, nice site look this:
Payday Loans

See you

Hi everybody! Wanna see my cool pages? Would you please also visit my homepage? http://amateurstraightguys.tripod.com/photo/amateur-straight-guys.html >amateur straight guys
cA62n6YW8B

Hi everybody! Wanna see my cool pages? Would you please also visit my homepage? http://amateurstraightguys.tripod.com/photo/amateur-straight-guys.html >amateur straight guys
cA62n6YW8B

Great job. May I ask you to visit my pages and tell me your opinion? http://amateurnakedwomen.tripod.com/bbw/amateur-naked-women.html >amateur naked women
sE3si5W3i9

Good design. I liked this site, it's neat. Good job! Would you please also visit my site? http://www.geocities.com/taylorrainpics/info/taylor-rain.html >
4H55reVk77

Nice page greetings to all in this guestbook! http://idisk.mac.com/mapquestflorida/Public/international/direction-driving-mcnally-online-rand.html >direction driving mcnally online rand
947CUc3V45

[url=http://low-cholesterol-dietz.info/]Low Cholesterol Diet[/url]

http://yty.freehostia.com/1996-infiniti-i30.html 1996 infiniti i30

http://yty.freehostia.com/1996-infiniti-i30.html 1996 infiniti i30

http://luok.t35.com/kate-spade-ipod-case.html kate spade ipod case

http://luok.t35.com/kate-spade-ipod-case.html kate spade ipod case

http://tungus.007ihost.com/rave-trampoline-water.html rave trampoline water

http://tungus.007ihost.com/free-motorola-ringtone-t720.html free motorola ringtone t720

http://tungus.007ihost.com/free-l6-motorola-ringtone.html free l6 motorola ringtone

http://tungus.007ihost.com/free-l6-motorola-ringtone.html free l6 motorola ringtone

http://tungus.007ihost.com/c261-motorola-ringtone.html c261 motorola ringtone

http://tungus.007ihost.com/c261-motorola-ringtone.html c261 motorola ringtone

http://tungus.007ihost.com/c139-motorola-ringtone-tracfone.html c139 motorola ringtone tracfone

http://tungus.007ihost.com/c139-motorola-ringtone-tracfone.html c139 motorola ringtone tracfone

http://tungus.007ihost.com/c139-composer-motorola-ringtone.html c139 composer motorola ringtone

http://tungus.007ihost.com/c139-cell-motorola-phone-ringtone.html c139 cell motorola phone ringtone

http://tungus.007ihost.com/c115-motorola-ringtone.html c115 motorola ringtone

http://tungus.007ihost.com/c115-motorola-ringtone.html c115 motorola ringtone

http://tungus.007ihost.com/c-difficle-drug-prescription.html c difficle drug prescription

http://tungus.007ihost.com/c-difficle-drug-prescription.html c difficle drug prescription

http://tungus.007ihost.com/aarp-drug-plan-prescription.html aarp drug plan prescription

http://tungus.007ihost.com/aarp-drug-plan-prescription.html aarp drug plan prescription

http://tungus.007ihost.com/garage-hoover-vacuum.html garage hoover vacuum

http://tungus.007ihost.com/filter-hoover-vacuum.html filter hoover vacuum

http://tungus.007ihost.com/filter-hoover-vacuum.html filter hoover vacuum

http://tungus.007ihost.com/hoover-steam-vacuum.html hoover steam vacuum

http://tungus.007ihost.com/dr-sandal-scholls.html dr sandal scholls

http://tungus.007ihost.com/dr-sandal-scholls.html dr sandal scholls

http://tungus.007ihost.com/dr-man-scholls-shoes.html dr man scholls shoes

http://tungus.007ihost.com/fendi-handbag-bag.html fendi handbag bag

http://tungus.007ihost.com/hoover-upright-vacuum.html hoover upright vacuum

http://tungus.007ihost.com/hoover-upright-vacuum.html hoover upright vacuum

http://tungus.007ihost.com/dr-footwear-scholls.html dr footwear scholls

http://tungus.007ihost.com/discount-sheer-curtain.html discount sheer curtain

http://tungus.007ihost.com/discount-sheer-curtain.html discount sheer curtain

http://tungus.007ihost.com/discount-rug-shag.html discount rug shag

http://tungus.007ihost.com/discount-rug-shag.html discount rug shag

http://tungus.007ihost.com/discount-fendi-handbag.html discount fendi handbag

http://tungus.007ihost.com/discount-curtain-rods.html discount curtain rods

http://tungus.007ihost.com/swarvoski-crystal.html swarvoski crystal

http://tungus.007ihost.com/swarvoski-crystal-bead.html swarvoski crystal bead

http://tungus.007ihost.com/swarvoski-crystal-bead.html swarvoski crystal bead

http://tungus.007ihost.com/rug-shag-white.html rug shag white

http://tungus.007ihost.com/nextel-i90.html nextel i90

http://tungus.007ihost.com/nextel-i90.html nextel i90

dqvltm lnjkwish kzqjsdh rlhaepq xgqfoyme cekaosdgx cgtndo

http://tungus.007ihost.com/middletown-attorney.html middletown attorney

http://tungus.007ihost.com/ohio-state-sweater-vest.html ohio state sweater vest

http://tungus.007ihost.com/ohio-state-sweater-vest.html ohio state sweater vest

http://tungus.007ihost.com/merrell-hiking-shoes.html merrell hiking shoes

http://tungus.007ihost.com/merrell-hiking-shoes.html merrell hiking shoes

http://tungus.007ihost.com/merrell-hiking-shoes.html merrell hiking shoes

http://tungus.007ihost.com/queen-fitted-sheet.html queen fitted sheet

http://tungus.007ihost.com/in-maryland-mortgage-processor.html in maryland mortgage processor

http://tungus.007ihost.com/in-maryland-mortgage-processor.html in maryland mortgage processor

http://tungus.007ihost.com/leather-rug-shag.html leather rug shag

http://tungus.007ihost.com/merrell-shoes-kid.html merrell shoes kid

http://tungus.007ihost.com/rave-trampoline-water.html rave trampoline water

http://tungus.007ihost.com/free-motorola-ringtone-tracfone-v170.html free motorola ringtone tracfone v170

http://tungus.007ihost.com/free-l6-motorola-ringtone.html free l6 motorola ringtone

http://tungus.007ihost.com/free-i730-motorola-nextel-ringtone.html free i730 motorola nextel ringtone

http://tungus.007ihost.com/drug-prescription-store-walgreens.html drug prescription store walgreens

http://tungus.007ihost.com/drug-prescription-store-walgreens.html drug prescription store walgreens

http://tungus.007ihost.com/c139-motorola-ringtone.html c139 motorola ringtone

http://tungus.007ihost.com/c139-motorola-ringtone-tracfone.html c139 motorola ringtone tracfone

http://tungus.007ihost.com/c115-motorola-ringtone.html c115 motorola ringtone

http://tungus.007ihost.com/c-difficle-drug-prescription.html c difficle drug prescription

http://tungus.007ihost.com/aarp-drug-plan-prescription.html aarp drug plan prescription

http://tungus.007ihost.com/aarp-drug-plan-prescription.html aarp drug plan prescription

http://tungus.007ihost.com/garage-hoover-vacuum.html garage hoover vacuum

http://tungus.007ihost.com/dr-man-scholls-shoes.html dr man scholls shoes

http://tungus.007ihost.com/fendi-handbag-bag.html fendi handbag bag

http://tungus.007ihost.com/fendi-handbag-bag.html fendi handbag bag

http://tungus.007ihost.com/hoover-upright-vacuum.html hoover upright vacuum

http://tungus.007ihost.com/dr-footwear-scholls.html dr footwear scholls

http://tungus.007ihost.com/discount-shower-curtain.html discount shower curtain

http://tungus.007ihost.com/discount-sheer-curtain.html discount sheer curtain

http://tungus.007ihost.com/discount-fendi-handbag.html discount fendi handbag

http://tungus.007ihost.com/discount-fendi-handbag.html discount fendi handbag

http://tungus.007ihost.com/swarvoski-crystal-bead.html swarvoski crystal bead

http://tungus.007ihost.com/nextel-i90.html nextel i90

http://tungus.007ihost.com/ohio-state-sweater-vest.html ohio state sweater vest

http://tungus.007ihost.com/merrell-man-shoes.html merrell man shoes

http://tungus.007ihost.com/merrell-hiking-shoes.html merrell hiking shoes

http://tungus.007ihost.com/queen-fitted-sheet.html queen fitted sheet

http://tungus.007ihost.com/in-maryland-mortgage-processor.html in maryland mortgage processor

http://tungus.007ihost.com/leather-rug-shag.html leather rug shag

http://tungus.007ihost.com/hoover-vacuum-windtunnel.html hoover vacuum windtunnel

gqxdyreuw grauob chljoz fdotx xthpylqz rilvpbsjc lfqycpds http://www.uerwxfmy.tvocsg.com

gqxdyreuw grauob chljoz fdotx xthpylqz rilvpbsjc lfqycpds http://www.uerwxfmy.tvocsg.com

fgbakd kbmlynhe htbxcuv esqlzwvhn duyevoc fpmtoxnh fzqewmlsc

fgbakd kbmlynhe htbxcuv esqlzwvhn duyevoc fpmtoxnh fzqewmlsc

It's a great achievement for Islamic leaders and scholars as well as Newsweek and the Washington post to present this imperative opportunity for inter cultural and global philosophical dialogue. What's important is that by exchanging our ideas and comments regarding inter religious relations and world events that affect our views of each other as fellow human beings. Since the advent of humanity, We strove to make sense of the world we live in and the lives we've experienced. Worldwide curiosities to learn the true nature of life and our universe is an exceptionally rare virtue upon life on Earth. In other words, we're the only known species on the planet who've pursued to unravel these great mysteries and developed written philosophies based upon our understanding of the world around us.
One such philosophy that lasted throughout the ages of humanity is commonly known as religion and spirituality. Ever since our early belief in the Sky God and the God Mother from ancient Pagan times, we vigorously pursued to unravel the truth about our most profound questions. As any educated person would know that religion and their core beliefs or faith have evolved over time. Paganism, Monotheism and Polytheism have been influenced by humanity as these great philosophies have influenced our perceptions and decisions in life over the ages. Over time humanity has embraced diverse religious faiths and spiritual convictions that continue to influence our behavior in our times and most likely beyond.
What's vital for humanity's progress and even survival is to know the true nature of faith itself. To understand the true origins of faith. But most of all, is to accept the truth for whatever it may be. Each one of us will learn the absolute truth once we die. But until that time comes for anyone of us to depart this world, we really don't know the answer to God's existence nor do we have the absolute truth in regards to the true nature of God. Besides if we did possess the truth, there would've been only one religion on Earth with no diversification of any way, shape of form. There would only be one holy scripture written throughout human history.
Considering one's religious faith to be absolute, while considering others to be false would be ethnocentric at best. While collectively searching to unravel the mysteries on nature, life and the universe through sincere reasoning and serious research would be enlightening at its worst. Most importantly, we must accept the fact is that none of us have conclusive evidence to confirm our core beliefs and there's always an immanent change that our most cherished beliefs could be wrong. Our greatest challenge would be to tolerate the truth no matter what it may ultimately be. With such an open mind, we would be able to overcome any future discovery that would contradict our faith regarding the true nature of life, spirituality and divinity.
Humanity does have the ability to achieve such a social achievement. However, it's solely up to humanity and not any other entity or groups of entities to decide our destinies. Each one of us has a choice to make; either hopelessly engaging into meaningless inter cultural conflicts or combine our scientific and cultural gifts to thrive into an enlightened global civilization that could ultimately expand beyond our solar system. The choice is yours, and the time to make it is now!

It's a great achievement for Islamic leaders and scholars as well as Newsweek and the Washington post to present this imperative opportunity for inter cultural and global philosophical dialogue. What's important is that by exchanging our ideas and comments regarding inter religious relations and world events that affect our views of each other as fellow human beings. Since the advent of humanity, We strove to make sense of the world we live in and the lives we've experienced. Worldwide curiosities to learn the true nature of life and our universe is an exceptionally rare virtue upon life on Earth. In other words, we're the only known species on the planet who've pursued to unravel these great mysteries and developed written philosophies based upon our understanding of the world around us.
One such philosophy that lasted throughout the ages of humanity is commonly known as religion and spirituality. Ever since our early belief in the Sky God and the God Mother from ancient Pagan times, we vigorously pursued to unravel the truth about our most profound questions. As any educated person would know that religion and their core beliefs or faith have evolved over time. Paganism, Monotheism and Polytheism have been influenced by humanity as these great philosophies have influenced our perceptions and decisions in life over the ages. Over time humanity has embraced diverse religious faiths and spiritual convictions that continue to influence our behavior in our times and most likely beyond.
What's vital for humanity's progress and even survival is to know the true nature of faith itself. To understand the true origins of faith. But most of all, is to accept the truth for whatever it may be. Each one of us will learn the absolute truth once we die. But until that time comes for anyone of us to depart this world, we really don't know the answer to God's existence nor do we have the absolute truth in regards to the true nature of God. Besides if we did possess the truth, there would've been only one religion on Earth with no diversification of any way, shape of form. There would only be one holy scripture written throughout human history.
Considering one's religious faith to be absolute, while considering others to be false would be ethnocentric at best. While collectively searching to unravel the mysteries on nature, life and the universe through sincere reasoning and serious research would be enlightening at its worst. Most importantly, we must accept the fact is that none of us have conclusive evidence to confirm our core beliefs and there's always an immanent change that our most cherished beliefs could be wrong. Our greatest challenge would be to tolerate the truth no matter what it may ultimately be. With such an open mind, we would be able to overcome any future discovery that would contradict our faith regarding the true nature of life, spirituality and divinity.
Humanity does have the ability to achieve such a social achievement. However, it's solely up to humanity and not any other entity or groups of entities to decide our destinies. Each one of us has a choice to make; either hopelessly engaging into meaningless inter cultural conflicts or combine our scientific and cultural gifts to thrive into an enlightened global civilization that could ultimately expand beyond our solar system. The choice is yours, and the time to make it is now!

xfmjydorv fzkjulc baym byrdjek lugqasn wlopxfsmy jxqlgi

xfmjydorv fzkjulc baym byrdjek lugqasn wlopxfsmy jxqlgi

m856k

From the Holy Bible we are taught spiritual messages as our Lord will have us taught as well as other books which also have hidden meanings which only when one is praying to Jesus for his or her personal needs will anyone be able to make any sense out of them, and from such books as the Philokalia for example, we are instructed in the philosophical way to perfection, in the Evergetinos we are guided to the pragmatic life of humility and self-control (inward spiritual discipline), the indispensable requisites for the more advanced endeavor of the former. In other words “we must imitate Him in every way and become perfect in every way.“ as our Lord Jesus suggested to us in this parable that these people were not doing;

Mat 23:25 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye make clean the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of extortion and excess.

This must be done, because before the world can change, the hearts and minds of mankind must change. They knew what to do, they were just never seen doing it. Kind of like the old adage; "The Honest Lawyer who is never seen in practice."

When if only they would just clean their heads out, ( the "cup" Jesus mentioned.) then they would start living and acting like what they have read in the scriptures that they were supposed to do. Thus even today these same like minded people are still adding the name " hypocrite " to their no doubt growing list of other unkind names as well, just as Jesus alluded to them all the way back then. Know Jesus know Peace, no Jesus, no peace.

So my question is, why are men still running around trying to "teach ye one another the Lord" and in both the Old Testament and New Testament it states His Words quite boldly? Is it the consensus of the majority that Jesus say's things just to hear the sound of His own Voice?

Jer 31:34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know Me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.

Hbr 8:11 And they shall not teach every man his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know Me, from the least to the greatest.

Thank You Jesus!

A Believer:

His yoke is easy and His burden Light,
However, I’m still not worthy
of being called
“Christian,”
but I’m trying,
Thanks To Jesus
For His Might!

Rom 1:5 By whom we have received grace and apostleship, for obedience to the faith among all nations, for His name:

Tts 3:7 That being justified by His grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.

Eph 2:7 That in the ages to come He might shew the exceeding riches of His grace in His kindness toward us through Christ Jesus.

1Pe 5:10 But the God of all grace, who hath called us unto His eternal glory by Christ Jesus, after that ye (which is us, everyone who follows Him.) have suffered a while, make you perfect, stablish, strengthen, and settle you.

Psa 3:3 But Thou, O LORD, art a Shield for me; my Glory, and the Lifter up of mine head.

Psa 6:3 My soul is also sore vexed: but Thou, O LORD, how long?

Psa 22:19 But be not Thou far from me, O LORD: O my Strength, haste Thee to help me.

Psa 40:17 But I am poor and needy; yet the Lord thinketh upon me: Thou art my Help and my Deliverer; make no tarrying, O my God.

Isa 64:8 But now, O LORD, Thou art our Father; we are the clay, and Thou our Potter; and we all are the work of Thy Hand. “His will be done.”

Keep the Faith!

Thank You Jesus!

The blueprints of wars are drawn up in the temples of men before they are ever prosecuted in the field.

"Too many are willing to "die" for HATE and too few are willing to "Live" for Love."

"What time Fate's tyranny shall most oppress thee Perpend!

One day shall joy thee, one distress thee!"

Just make sure of thy evil ways, to amend!

Do not love to hate evil more than you love to love the good.

Conquer through forgiveness, acquire through Love!

God blessed the man who in seeking the Truth, finds it, and rests on it, and is unafraid of those who would disturb him in it.

Where true inward knowledge of God exists through the revelation of His Spirit, everything essential is there, and there is no absolute necessity for anything else. But, where the best, highest, and most profound knowledge exists without the revelation of His Spirit, there is nothing, so far as the great object of salvation is concerned; Therefore:

1. The only knowledge of the Father is by the Son.

2. The only knowledge of the Son is by the Spirit.

3. God has always revealed Himself to His children by the Spirit.

4. These revelations are the main purpose of faith.

5. That purpose continues to be the object of faith to this day.

6. The true church of God, through our Lord Jesus Christ lays within the hearts and minds of all the men, women and children throughout the whole world where the might and powers of men and Satan cannot get at it. It is not a building of cold stones and mortar nor an institution of calloused administrators and professors, it is alive and well, catholic yet hidden and even the gates of hell cannot prevail against it.

I was baptized Catholic at 16 fter a year's spiritual quest, studying various faiths. I left the church at 23, after years of unconditional devotion, due to the church's rejection of me and everything I am. I'm a woman. The church doesn't deserve any credibility after standing against birth control, sex education, health education, and (as a last resort) abortion, meanwhile softpedeling rape cases (male and female) by priests, paedophilia, covering up like a US corporation to protect the men, and still opposing the ordination of woman. These old men who run the church know nothing about women and are still stuck in the medieval times when women were thought to be by their nature evil. This is the 21st century. Being a Catholic woman is like being a Jewish member of the SS. It's OK by me if some women are dumb enough to do it, but I will never go back.

I do not accept Mr. Lears' contention that there is "him", a "maker", a "creator", a "deity", or an "entity", no matter what we call "him", or how we experience "him".

Why does the concept of God have to equate to a concept of an anthropomorphic being?

To "HMM..."

"what could have possibly created something out of
absolutely nothing."

c*c*m=e

this is the equivalence between mass and energy, as put forth by Einstein

There is no end to what people will believe. If we collectively taught our children that God was a female dragon, the vast majority would grow up continuing to believe that regardless of any scientific evidence. Religious followers of all religions believe primarily what they are indoctrinated to believe. It's comfortable to believe what everyone else believes so why question it?

We live in a society where we disregard scientific evidence whenever it conflicts with our religious dogma. When Galileo suggested that that the sun did not revolve around the earth the religious establishment wanted to execute him. In some regards we are no more tolerant today--, just look at the Taliban.

sbrtup lyxsk ncilysf glyhiesb ratf vwdsnmbi fpah http://www.mqaexnwh.ypjk.com

dczjwa nycidt qldasy tfrvhbxa svrda wmir fevba

I will preface what I am about to say with this statement: I am not sure I am completely correct about this. That's ok though, because no matter how much you think you are for whatever reason, neither are you.

I think God wants us to question. I believe God created us with free will and minds capable of more than we are even aware yet. To waste this mind and become mechanical followers of other humans, to me, seems a waste. To believe something because that is what your parents did or to take everything your pastor, priest or atheist best friend says as fact displays a level of gullibility that is probably not representative of what you are truly capable of. This type of group-think could have dangerous consequences depending on the message of its leader. It is through a continuous quest for more knowledge, spiritual and otherwise, that we can really even hope to understand the mysteries of our existence. It seems pointless to not use all the resources available to us in forming opinions about our past and future.

Many times, one who questions is viewed by those around her as having no faith. But blind faith may be only nominally better than none at all.

I am highly educated, minimally influenced and a Christian. I know why I believe what I do. I am sure many others reading this blog also have their well-founded reasons for believing something different. I believe I am right, but so do they. I do know that when I consider existence, I could concede that maybe a big bang slung cosmic matter light-years through space - consequently forming planets and life. What I don’t know, is what caused that big bang, what could have possibly created something out of absolutely nothing. The fact that we are here, that we can understand the concept of “something” and “nothing” has to be indicative of some being or power . . . I think.

As I said, I am not sure this is correct. I have learned things from others on this blog and I am sure I will continue to learn even more. These are just my opinions, not my answers. The point is that even though I have my reasons for believing what I do, they may change and evolve. I don’t think that I will influence others to believe in the values in which I profess to if I do not display those values to others. I don’t know for sure that all of what I believe is right . . . but, neither do you.

If you have something worth sharing, why not share it ?, if your convinced yr correct on something , woudnt you try to convince others. From a secular point of view, I dont see how people who believe all
gods are the same have anymore evidence then those who believe in only one path. But the "all gods are the same" folk seem just as self righteous as the
"one way" believers.

Mr. Lear,
Thank you for your heartfelt and eloquent remarks. I am so pleased you chose to comment. Yes, individual religious experiences will forever be...individual. Just as one writer here has noted, children in a family may be reared by the same father, but yet will know him differently. Such is the unique nature of any relationship which is truly personal.

Regarding possibly sharing our inner experience of deity, I do believe there is a place for that. It can happen in healthy ways among those who already believe similarly. Such sharing is then done only for mutual strengthening and not for the purpose of conversion. It is also done privately, similar to the private circumstances my sister and I would naturally arrange to discuss wonderful experiences of our father.

Mr. Lear, it may be short-sighted to say that the various religious paths you mention do not teach the harmony you advocate. Might not it be more accurate to acknowledge that "as experienced thus far," other paths have not taught such and such? Perhaps you will agree that we receive truth as we are ready for it. Thus, if we are growing spiritually, our truth receptivity expands, and deeper meanings of former understandings unfold. Many paths likely contain depths undiscovered by many. For example, as one wit has remarked about Christianity, we don't know how effective it is yet, because so few have practiced it. [Critics, please note that I picked on my own religion here, to be fair.]

Any sincere religionist knows that zealous lip service is merely a two-dimensional engagement. However, risking changes to one's life {by applying spiritual principles and by cultivating a living connection with one's sense of deity), leads far past mental flat land, and on to dimensions beyond definition. Depending on where we are in making such changes, the depths of other paths may be inadvertently overlooked.

Because we are limited by our current status of spiritual evolution, it is essential to sustain abject honesty and authentic humility for accurate perception. Likewise, such qualities are especially useful in cultivating the spiritual harmony you advocate, and which I also strongly support.

Your sister on the journey,
Lee

Norman:

I couldn't agree more about one keeping one's God to oneself. However, it seems that between the religious right in America and Islam, there's this huge competition to prove who's got the best pipeline to the Almighty. I was recently told by a friend who has evolved into an Orthodox Jew in the last few years, that the Jews really have it cornered when it comes to "how" to pray. I personally think God responds to a contrite heart and is little concerned with form.

My father was a non-practicing Jew, my mother's Protestant, and my wife's Catholic. We're raising our girls to see the folly of religion, while still having great reverence for God. And you're right, on that One Rule hangs all the Law and the Prophets.

I believe Kafka was right when he said "the Messiah will only arrive when he is no longer needed." Unfortunately, we live under a regime that is bent on playing out the Apocalyptic scenario of Revelation like a stage show for the masses. Gee--I heard Ari Fleischer has become a Rabbi, maybe now he can talk some sense into Mr. Bush. Aye gavult!

I love it that our good friend Norman Lear is still stirring up people for all these years!! Way to go, Norman! You drive people nuts by stating the truth, using common sense, and staying true to our founding principles as a nation. The truth is so controversial nowadays, that it's guaranteed to elicit controversy!

I'm a theist and a theologically conservative Christian, but I have very few sensibilities and surprisingly few beliefs in common with so many people who imperialistically identify themselves in the same way.

And so to those of you who judge theism, or Christianity, by the example of the ranters - it would be like judging Yale by the example of George W. Bush. Please don't.

There are enlightened theists and Jews and Christians aplenty, who don't abandon their tradition but respect it enough to develop its fundamental theology in accord with common sense, morally enlightened intuitions, and the core insights of their own tradition, for example, that God is love.

Mr. Lear's appeal to all of us to respect the public space within which we all live and move is eminently sensible. The conception of God that will allow that is thoroughly compatible with the various religions, and even with their missionizing wings. As an orthodox Christian, who has written many books in defense of the Incarnation, the Trinity, and the basic idea of God, as well as the theistic interpretation of the universe, I understand well the issues that are at stake, but I also understand that the Biblical God is one who welcomes and calls his creatures in love and grace to a higher, more loving existence, embodying the principles of Christ, and of Isaiah, and Jeremiah, for example. The apostle Paul himself says that God has never been without a witness. The same creator who was present in Christ has always been calling his creatures to himself, like Norman's river touching and nourishing different vegetation along its extensive length. It's compatible with the Christian belief that God is decisive in his action in Christ to think also that there are many ways to appropriate the results of that action, and draw near to that creator.

The only way to preserve a democracy in global times is to understand this and live it.

I appreciate all the people interested in commenting on this post, and hope that all who have at first rejected Norman's viewpoint will reconsider it in a spirit of calm and consider its necessity in our time.

And to those of you who have rejected theism outright, I understand that it can be rational to be an atheist, with all the paucity of theistic evidence that our world can at times seem to present. But, as Einstein famously said, God is subtle. No theism is true that isn't extremely sophisticated and subtle. It doesn't follow from that fact that you can't be a sincere believer unless you're equally sophisticated and subtle - after all, Jesus did say that we have to become like little children to inherit the kingdom of heaven. But the full truth about it all is as sophisticated as the best of quantum physics and the quest for a unified theory. But that's a bit tough to put to music and get into a 20 minute sermon, so give us a break, ok?

And whatever you do, do unto others as you would have them do unto you!

Tom Morris

Dodiafae,

Unfortunately Christians are often most unChristlike. If one DOES read the words of Christ he/she will find many verses speaking of treating others in a charitable manner. But he/she will also find sayings like, "he who is not for us is against us" and "I am the way the truth ands the life - no one comes to the father except through me".

Biblical Chtistianity is a theistic paradigm. The notion that worship of God should be subordinate to the feelings of others is not seen in the new testament.

As a Christians I strive to be the most Chrust-like I can be - and that is hard sometimes! I am tolerant and respectful of others' beliefs - even if I consider mine to be right. I am troubled however at how many here claim to be tolerant but yet are openly hostile to those who follow a religion which makes claims about moral absoluteness.

Are we to be tolerant only of those who are humanists?

Reading through these comments... many of you people are just proving the point of the author.

BTW, apparently those of you who are thumpin' on those bibles of yours have forgotten one of the basic tenets of your religion, which is "thou shalt have no gods besides me" (or something like that?)
a) If Jesus is the son of God, then he can not conceivably BE God, and so you have already broken that rule.
b) Worshipping the bible as you do (or the words contained within to the extent that any of you actually follow them) is idolitry.
c) Those pretty shiny silver and gold crosses you wear around your necks, idolitry. Would Christ have worn it? Would he have felt comfortable wearing something flaunting wealth when he asked that his followers give theirs away? (Of course, if he wore any symbols, it would most likely have been a Star of David, not a cross.)

These points are opinions, of course, but think about it.

A suggestion: Re-read Christ's words alone from the bible, leave out the rest, and ask yourself if you have truly been following his teachings. Have you been *true* Christians? I seem to recall that he told a Roman Soldier, who was Pagan, that there was a place for him in his father's heavenly kingdom (though I can't remember the verse off the top of my head and have long since donated all of my copies.) I also don't seem to recall him ever having had a problem with homosexuality or bisexuality (and let's face it, with the Roman occupation there must have been *plenty* of opportunity to voice such opinions.) No, he preached love, forgiveness, tolerence, peace, PEACE, acceptance, all good things that you hear more from the Hari Krishnas more than you hear from most (yes, most) Christians. I've seen people with a WWJD sticker on their car cut people off in trafic and flip folks the "bird". People preach "God's Word" in your face in one breath, and go against it in the next. Not a very good example to set, IMHO.

peter vanderheyden:

When reading all this, I remember the chief reason why I lost my religion in the first place:...

... Perhaps we should consider the difficult fact that there is no God after all. Accept the fact that we are sonly responsible for the way we organize this world, trying to make it a place well to live in, for all of us.
Posted November 29, 2006 6:59 AM

Well said Peter you ole Dutchman you <;-}

Note: "Randy" is not the same as "Randall." My posts make sense, are not written in txt, and do not hurt the brain when read. I understand that people often post in the thralls of high emotions, so their spelling isn't always up to snuff, but that is ridiculous.

The big news out of the 2004 election consisted of the "20% of all voters that voted 'values' above all else," thus "giving" the election to Bush. The media drooled over this figure: 20%. The portion that stated they voted "values" above all else has steadily declined over the past few decades. As recently as the 1996 election, the percentage was over 50%. The "20%" is an important figure only in that it demonstrates the decline in value voters, not the rise. Most Americans grew up in some form of Judeo-Christian tradition. That is the background of this country, but not necessarily the determinant of our future.

TO DENNIS M:

Your quote "God has never spoken to Man" stirs me.

Simply put, I am starting to believe that We all have access to High Consciousness, God, Enlightenment, or a loving heart. What if "God" was something we became ourselves, and expressed
in our daily lives? What if messages, miracles, and experience with Divinity is actually as commonplace and available as oxygen, water, parking tickets, or glances from strangers passing by on the sidewalk?

What if God is more available to us than scarce?

Try it out and see what happens.

Love,
J Salerno

In response to Michael, consider this:

Perhaps the questioning of conventional ideas of faith and spirituality is NOT an act of heresy. Perhaps the inquiry is the very process which brings us into closer contact with our innermost Being. I see it as the way toward an ever-evolving, authentic Personal Truth. This has been my experience so far.

What do you think?

Love,
Jim

The Jews of Jesus' day knew exactly what signs were to accompany the Messiah. It was absolutely clear from Scripture, which they knew to have exactly the meaning that their own understanding gave to it. First, Elijah (Elias) would come down from heaven literally and bodily as he had ascended into it to announce the Messiah's coming. Then the Messiah would arrive as temporal/spiritual king and liberate the Jews from the yoke of oppression. People asked john the Baptist if he was Elijah and he said he was not (John 1:21). But when the disciples queried Jesus about this, he said that John the Baptist was Elijah (Matthew 17:10-13). Jesus likewise demonstrated that His sovereignty was not earthly and physical, but spiritual. What lessons may we understand from this? That John was not the self-same Elijah descended from the clouds, but he was indeed the return of the spiritual reality or qualities of Elijah whose function was to announce the arrival of the promised one. Likewise, we learn that God's chosen ones are not sent primarily to rule over earthly kingdoms but to rule over human hearts.

Consider, Christian friends, the possibility that your own absolute conviction that you know the exact meaning of scripture and prophecy is analogous to that of the Pharisees and Sadducees of the time of Jesus. Does not the Bible itself say that the meanings are sealed until the time of the end? (e.g. Daniel 12:8). "The time of the end" in the New Testament is the "end of the age", not the end of the physical universe. Perhaps a number of ages have come and gone.

When the gospels record the words of Jesus "I am the way, and the truth, and the life, no man cometh to the Father except through me" who is speaking? Is it the person Jesus or is it the reality of the Christ (the divine reality invested in the person of Jesus). The determiner of meaning is God and the clues are already in the books you believe in, if you accept all of the verses and ask bigger questions rather than accepting a prosaic or traditional reading of selected passages. John 16:13 would suffice, if you read with an understanding that the traditional identification of the comforter with the holy spirit's descent at Pentecost is less attuned to the text than the notion that "he" virtually never refers to the Holy Spirit but to a man walking upon the earth. Consider then Jesus' promise to return. How does it relate to Jesus' claim that John the Baptist was the return of Elijah? If the selfsame Jesus of Nazareth must descend literally from the heavens, then the selfsame Elijah should also have literally descended from heaven in Jesus' day. After all, you believe that the scriptures are literally true. Jesus, however, told you Elijah did appear, but not as the selfsame individual Elijah. Elijah returned as John the Baptist, who was born and lived amongst the people. Perhaps Jesus will return many times; consider the lessons from your own holy book.

"O the misery of men! No Messenger cometh unto them but they laugh Him to scorn." Qur'an 36:30

"Each nation hath plotted darkly against their Messenger to lay violent hold on Him, and disputed with vain words to invalidate the truth." Qur'an 40:5

"How often have they expected His coming, how frequently have they prayed that the breeze of divine mercy might blow, and the promised Beauty step forth from behind the veil of concealment, and be made manifest to all the world. And whensoever the portals of grace did open, and the clouds of divine bounty did rain upon mankind, and the light of the Unseen did shine above the horizon of celestial might, they all denied Him, and turned away from His face -- the face of God Himself. Refer ye, to verify this truth, to that which hath been recorded in every sacred Book."
Baha'i scriptures

See: http://www.bahai.org/pdf/letter_april2002_english.html

Someone posted that it seems this is becoming a forum for Christian proselytizing. Far from it. The vast majority of posts here are from those who would oppose Christian claims. And nearly all of the hate is coming from those who have a bone to pick with Christianity.

The Christian portrait of God is a theistic one - there is no way around that. This does not mean that Christians should think they are better than others or that they have carte blanche to ridicule others. But Christianity as portrayed in the Bible says that Jesus alone is Lord.

There has been a lot of talk about the religious intolerance of Christians. I see another kind of intolerance however. It seems that it is only politically correct to worship the Almighty in a humanistic way. Any scheme which purports to put worship of God above the traditions of man is bashed as intolerant. We are tolerant - as long as you worship the God of the human spirit. But if one chooses to worship in a manner which posits absolutes about God he/she is overtly ridiculed.

Many of the posters here who are "above man made religion" are tolerant only if one believes as they do. But talk about a "one true God" and you will be hounded mercilessly.

We do not agree and will never will ALL agree. But we should ALL be tolerant.

Norman Lear’s views are well stated. I do however disagree with “So I propose we continue worshipping openly.” Worship is subjective and is what creates the friction when displayed as having an entitlement to parade as desired without any question or analysis by others. There are various activities in our lives we do not make public and worship should be one of them. Any who cannot accept that are opening their feelings to questioning that few have the ability to explain. If people can’t engage in thoughtful conversation of worship, being able to explain the details and what purpose is served, they should not expect others to suffer such public exhibitions of deliberate ambiguity designed to convey a sense of unity that does not exist. As he said "You will only know us in this world by our deeds, by the way we live, and by the way we treat our fellows." Taking worship out of the public would go very far in uniting the world.

if everyOne is born ofAND/ORas God(forever)...which 1Word, for U, best describes God?

First, congratulations to Norman Lear on a heartfelt, considerate piece of writing on his faith. I liked it, and much of what he wrote resonates with me. I am a practicing Catholic with all the baggage that entails, but I think that God reveals himself to many people in many ways. Who am I to tell God how to conduct his affairs?

Second, I was struck by the number of posts telling others how deluded they are to believe in God. What did they expect in a piece called, "On Faith?"

Lastly, as we enter the holiday season, I beg of you: be at peace, and love one another.

Dear Mr. Norman Lear -

Your thoughts about our Creator and his spokespeople were very well stated. Thank you very much for your simplicity and reasonableness and humility. We need more of this, don't you think?

Looks like this has become a forum for Christian prosletysing. Not a any rational debate about religion. But then religion is not rational!

No one could talk about the absurdities of religion better than Robert Ingersoll:

Through millions of ages, by countless efforts to satisfy his
wants, to gratify his passions, his appetites, man slowly developed
his brain, changed two of his feet into hands and forced into the
darkness of his brain a few gleams and glimmerings of reason. He
was hindered by ignorance, by fear, by mistakes, and he advanced
only as he found the truth -- the absolute facts. Through countless
years he has groped and crawled and struggled and climbed and
stumbled toward the light. He has been hindered and delayed and
deceived by augurs and prophets -- by popes and priests. He has
been betrayed by saints, misled by apostles and Christs, frightened
by devils and ghosts -- enslaved by chiefs and kings -- robbed by
altars and thrones. In the name of education his mind has been
filled with mistakes, with miracles, and lies, with the impossible,
the absurd and infamous. In the name of religion he has been taught
humility and arrogance, love and hatred, forgiveness and revenge.

James:
As horrible and as painfull as this discussion is, this is doing some good, like draining an infected wound.

The events of which the religious speak occupy a small interval of time on a small planet circling a medium sized sun in a vast universe. Yet these events are purported to have cosmic significance. And maybe they do. Either way, no one alive knows and no one dead reports (lately). So the one thing we all share is ignorance.

Religious theists believe not just in God, but the opinions of other men about God. These opinions are bound together and called scripture. Generally speaking, the religious defend scripture and religious practice, not God.

The manner by which certain writings became chosen for scriptural treatment has mostly become lost in the mists of time. Even those where we have insight from historical sources, like the writings of St. Paul, we don't know if there were passages that would have been more compelling but did not survive or get chosen.

Yet, instead of developing an atuned sense of humility from these gaps of knowledge(in keeping with the spirit of the Christ in the Bible), many who parade their religion are boldly rejecting tolerance.

Everyone, no matter what their belief system intails, should recognize it is by nature faulty. They all perceived, without exception, by the inperfect mind of man.

How many people have been killed in atheist wars? How many people have been killed in the name of religion? That's what I thought. How about instead of arguing about this, we go out and do some good?

To say that God favors one religion over another or that there is only true way to the divine presence is suggest that the Creator exists within defined boundaries and limitations.

I believe that God is omnipotent and without limits, boundaries or restrictions. It is humans who choose to "put God in a box" and pretend to know His mind. Man is human and for man to be so bold as to try to define this limitless entity and pretend that he too is so powerful and godlike as to be able to discern the limits or judgements of this God beyond all knowing is certainly a grave "sin" of pride. To limit God is an act of arrogance beyond description and to hold that there is only "one way" to Him is to proclaim that man too is God.

As a child I was raised a Baptist. I did not choose to be a Baptist or a Christan but I was of the chosen followers of Jesus. But even as a child something about this did not seem right. Why were my Jewish, Muslim and other non-christian friends all going to hell simply because they were not lucky enough to be born a follower of Christ. This did not make sense to me so I gave up religion completely for most of my youth.

Then I found a church that believes in what I have alway known even as a very young child, there is but one God. And that God has no chosen people he is simply waiting for all of us to choose to accept him and each other as one.

If you truly believe in God, how could you believe that he would choose you or anyone else over any other simply because of your parent religion. Are you awake yet?

The contents of these comments alone are enough to fully corroborate Mr. Mailer's point.

It is human nature to seek an explanation for those things that cannot be fully understood. But never should we seek out these at the expense of rational thought and common sense.

Believe whatever you need to, whether it be in God to explain your existence, or the bogeyman to explain your childhood fears of the dark. But please spare the rest of us who have come out of the dark and don't need the bogeyman anymore.

This entire conversation is proving Lear's point about religious debate. Look at the passions that arise in us as we do this. It is caustic and it endangers the planet. It is not of God. There is a way to have faith and live in faith without doing this. It is the only way.

> But why do Fundamentalist Christians focus so much hatred on gays while ignoring adulterers and children who curse their parents

I have a pet theory that religious zealots cut themselves slack on some rules and then compensate by being really strict about others.

I have known Muslim men who were happy to engage in fornication and adultury with (non-Muslim) women, but they were definitely against alcohol and eating pork. It seemed to me that they thought that the sex would be OK if they were really strict about the food items.

For many Christians - at least in the US - I get the feeling that they want to be indulge themselves some greed and pride by getting rich and driving around in a SUV or what-have-you, but that maybe they have some trouble with the whole "easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle..." bit. So I think they get really up in arms about homosexuality in order to compensate for being philistines and money-changers.

And why don't they get as worked up about hetero adultury? Well, probably for the same reason they don't get worked up about the arrogance of wealth: many of them probably enjoy some from time to time.

I'm disappointed that a scholar as fine as yourself would use purely patriarchal language in his discussion of the Divine. God is beyond gender!

Norman Lear laments the "my god is the only true god" phenomenon but isn't this at the heart of the foolishness of faiths? They are based on weakness, fear, superstition and insecurity. When their postulates are challenged (even by the mere suggestion that there is some alternative worthy of worship) all hell breaks loose. Best not we keep god within us, but where he belongs, in outer space, as far from earth as possible.

Snark 101:

Right about Leviticus, which states that homosexuals should be put to death. It also states that adulterers and children who curse their parents should be put to death. But why do Fundamentalist Christians focus so much hatred on gays while ignoring adulterers and children who curse their parents, assuming all three "sins" are equal in the eyes of God? My personal feeling is that the national Christian agenda is too often set by people who are more interested in power and money than in the teachings of Jesus. My suspicions were confirmed with the recent resignation of the president-elect of the Christian Coalition because the board of directors was not interested in expanding the group's agenda beyond abortion and gay marriage (e.g., www.cbn.com/CBNnews/64096.aspx). However, I'm cynical curmudgeon and find politics and politicians distasteful. There might be perfectly legitimate reasons for the overemphasis on one or two relatively infrequent sins over all the other, more frequent sins. Don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating the murder or mistreatment of anyone; my point is simply that religion in general, and the bible in this particular case, can be interpreted or emphasized in different ways by different people. Those people may be well-meaning or have dubious motives; they may be smart or dumb, psychotic or sane. One only need to turn to the New Testament to see that Jesus forgave and loved adulterers and prostitutes, and invited them into the kingdom of heaven. One might surmise that he would have treated gays the same. We can discuss semantics all we want, but the teachings of Jesus are simple—be kind and treat people with dignity, help the poor, take care of the sick. So who can cast the first stone? Not me; there are some sins that bother me more than others; but there are also a few I'm guilty of. So I'll keep my mouth shut when it comes to judging and accusing others.

As for the coveting, I'm baffled. Maybe it's obvious to Fundamental Christians, but I don't see any reference to homosexuality in the ten commandments. To "covet" means to "desire", so to covet one's neighbor's wife, assuming one was male, would not be gay. Coveting the neighbor's house, like the ox and ass, would be irrelevant with respect to sexuality. One could conceivably covet thy neighbor's male or female slaves in a sexual way, thus being gay or straight depending on one's orientation—but this is not an obvious reference to homosexuality. However, slaves can also be considered property, as the bible states elsewhere. In this case they would have the status of houses, asses, and oxen. If the slaves are considered property they would be coveted for their ability to do work, and their sexuality would be irrelevant. My guess is that God was referring to slaves as property in the ten commandments. If He was referring to sexuality, why would he outlaw coveting thy neighbor's slaves, rather than thy own slaves? Or thy brother's or father's slaves, since they lived in extended families back then? Slaves in one's own family would be much more accessible, and presumably more covetable sexually. (Granted, the Jews had just come out of slavery themselves at the time, and didn't have slaves of their own; but neither did their neighbors!) Either way, the commandments don't discriminate between coveting slaves of one's own gender vs. the opposite gender, so don't speak to the homosexuality issue. But my point is that neither you nor I nor anyone else knows precisely what God meant in the commandments—especially since they've been translated across multiple languages over more than a thousand years to get to modern English. Nevertheless, your comments illustrated my points exquisitely—to Fundamentalist Christians, the ninth and tenth commandments may be an obvious condemnation of homosexuality; but to me and others, it does not address the issue at all.

Woah... I had something thoughtful to say after reading Mr. Lears column. Then I read the comments, which was a mistake because now I don't want to publicly acknowledge my religious viewpoint.

Some scary people on this forum.

Mr. Lear displays his ignorance when he says Muslims may liken Mohammed to the Creator. That is utterly wrong. Muslims believe in Allah (God) as creator, and Mohammed was a prophet. Even I know this, and I am a Catholic!

Of course, there are quotation marks wrapped around the sentence, so perhaps they are not his own words, but he used them, so he is responsible for them.

I also find it interesting that this Op-Ed appears in the Washington Post. Why do we need the lecture??? Save it for those who really need to hear/read it! Publish it in Iran, or Saudi Arabia. Let me know if you have any luck getting them to print it!

Thanks Mr. Lear for the straightforward commentary.

Thanks to all the looney-bin nutjobs for proving the need for Mr. Lear's comments.

Thanks to the caps-lock key for allowing the nutjobs to AMPLIFY THEIR RAVING MADNESS.

The organized religions lost me back in Sunday school with that Abraham/Isaac headchop story.
Classic silliness that even a 5 year old could see through.

stan

Why can't people be satisfied with their own beliefs instead of feeling the need to inflict them on others? Morality and the knowledge of right and wrong do not belong to any sect or religion, nor is it necessary to believe in anything to be a good person. The complacent assumption of moral superiority from many "religious" people is hypocritical and repugnant.

Dear Humanity,

Quit it.

@$$holes.

-God

It is incorrect to refer to Buddha as one's "maker". Buddha was certainly not a supernatural God. He was a man who found enlightenment, became a fully realized human being, and left behind a method for the rest of us to try out to also become fully realized human beings.

Buddhism makes no claim about a God or an afterlife. Buddhism is not even about what one believes, it is about how one experiences life.

Your essay employs an illogical use of the notion "my god". At first it is used in relation to the personal god, meaning the way an individual relates to god. Shortly thereafter, you altered your direction and stated, "We've learned, from time immemorial, that when we trot out our gods and go public with them, we can’t seem to resist the game of “my God is the only true God”, meaning that from among the religions of the world my religion is the only true one.
Therefore your premise foils your point and visa versa.
nevertheless nice idea
Enan

And 'God' has no interest in nation-building... or if the Bears win. He's too busy sowing ill-will and destrucution to give a damn. Oh, I forgot, he wants total fealty. My bad...

Do as I say or you will never see your loved ones again. Charming, this religious stuff. Really, does anyone have an estimate of what percentage of the U. S. adult population truly believe in some complex historical religion? In surveys, people lie all the time about whether they go to church, temple, mosque, what not; attendance figures at the institutions never match the claimed figures. At 59, with lots of acquaintance and familiarity with several degrees of separation, I know only one Catholic who goes to Mass every day. I know of only a half dozen observant jews . . . . Are we arguing here largely about the lip of the bell curve, and did everyone of the tiny group of true believers get a memo saying to post to this blog? Whaddya think?

All this belief is NOTHING without Prayer, Helping the poor, and doing the right thing. Faith without works is NOTHING...regardless of religion.

Amil,

Just what do you meaned that imams must be restrained BY LAW from preaching messages of hate?

Do you mean that they should be prevented from inciting mayhem (with which I agree)? or do you mean that there should be laws against preaching anything but humanism?

I find the latter to be just as abhorrent as forced practice of a religion.

To Amil Imani:

It's very clear that you harbor alot of hate to other men. I would simply say to you that if you hate other men then you also hate God. There's nothing wrong with loving your country but never forget that all of us come from God in the end.

Amil Aminhi -

Bless you...and also if you apply that to any religious group applying their rule of 'unlaw'

Our beliefs and ideas make us human, and their quality determines the kind of human we are. We shield and fiercely defend our beliefs and ideas for good reasons: without their integrity and internal harmony, the mind becomes disorganized and even dysfunctional. While our inborn immune system fights off viruses and bacteria that aim to kill us, another immune system, mental immune system—MIS—gradually formed after birth, protects the mind and takes every measure to keep the mind’s ideas and beliefs on the same page.

Humans are living information machines, receive input from both external sources as well as the body, process it in some fashion, and produce output. From the moment of birth, parents, siblings, and others play pivotal parts in supplying the input and influencing how it is processed.

The raw material for ideas and beliefs reach us through the senses. The brain takes the massive barrage of input and attempts to organize it and incorporate it in an orderly fashion: a monumental task that is taken for granted until something goes seriously wrong. Relatively minor glitches in the working of the mind such as misunderstanding, misperception, and making poor decisions occur daily and may not present serious problems. Over time, however, even these minor glitches in the mind caused by faulty input, poor processing or both can add up and significantly compromise its integrity.

The MIS is not exclusively exclusionary with the sole task of preventing intrusion of the disruptive or undesirable input. It also actively seeks ideas that are harmonious and confirmatory of the ones already in the mind. Through the active admission of the supporting ideas, the MIS reinforces its defenses and reduces its vulnerability.

Given the tabula rasa—blank slate—nature of the mind, early input become of paramount importance in determining its further development. It was in recognition of this reality that the famed Behavioral psychologist, J. B. Watson proclaimed:

“Give me a dozen healthy infants, well-formed, and my own specified world to bring them up in and I'll guarantee to take any one at random and train him to become any type of specialist I might select – doctor, lawyer, artist, merchant-chief and, yes, even beggar-man and thief, regardless of his talents, penchants, tendencies, abilities, vocations, and race of his ancestors. I am going beyond my facts and I admit it, but so have the advocates of the contrary and they have been doing it for many thousands of years.”

What Watson said may not hold perfectly in every case. Yet, the essence of his boast is indeed supported by numerous studies as well as naturalistic observations. Early environmental influences play the cardinal role in programming the mind—setting it on its course. In actuality, the brain seems to say: first come, first served. It is for this reason that Muslims are overwhelmingly born to Muslim parents, Hindus to Hindu parents, Catholics to Catholic parents, and so on. This is not to say that changes, even major changes, are not possible after the early years. They are possible and they do happen in some instances. However, in order for major changes to happen, major re-working must take place in the mind. Change is effortful and the law of conservation of energy also applies to the working of the mind and mitigates change unless the incentives to do so overcomes the default mode of inertia.

The parents, other adults and children, as well as the prevailing culture are powerful teachers and trainers of the young mind. In the Islamic world, Islam permeates every aspect of life with overbearing severity. The young mind has virtually little access to competing non-Islamic input. As the child’s foundation of belief forms, the MIS works to protect it, further reinforce it, and bar, falsify, or dismiss any ideas that may clash with the mind’s already in-place contents.

As humans, we lack pre-programmed software—instincts—to direct us in life. We, however, are born with pre-dispositions—rudiments of software programs that will be further elaborated in interaction with life. We are, therefore, importantly dependent on how we and others, and in what fashion, further elaborate the rudimentary software. Somehow, there has been a trade-off. As our brain evolved both in size and power, what little instincts we may have had gave way. In a real sense, we took charge of our own destiny.

Science is learning more and more about the brain/mind, considered by many experts as the most complex and enigmatic entity in the universe. With each passing day, another piece of the brain/mind puzzle falls in place. Just recently psychologist Drew Western and his team at Emory University used fMRI—functional magnetic resonance imaging—on 15 strong Republicans and 15 staunch Democrats to literally pinpoint the parts of the brain involved in what is called “confirmation bias,” the lead faculty of the MIS. The participants were asked to evaluate statements by George W. Bush and John Kerry where the candidates clearly contradicted themselves. The researchers found that the Republicans were as critical of John Kerry as the Democrat were of George W. Bush, while both fiercely defended their respective political comrade.

The surprising part of the study is that while the confirmation bias was at work, the brain areas ordinarily associated with rational decision-making were inactive. By contrast, an elaborate network of brain structures that process emotion and conflicts were highly activated. In short, confirmation bias has its own brain resources that shunt out the reasoning parts in order to protect the already in-place beliefs and preferences.

The confirmation bias, the mainstay of the MIS protects beliefs values and ideas, be they political, religious, or of any other type; it is also helped in the discharge of its functions by the mind’s defense mechanisms such as rationalization (faulty reasoning) and denial (refusing to accept the reality of the irrefutable). Allocation of extensive faculties of the brain to content protection demonstrates the critical importance of safeguarding the mind’s contents to its normal functioning. It is important to keep in mind that rationality is not the master faculty of the brain. Emotions also play major parts in even tasks that are ordinarily thought to be in purview of rationality, particularly when one’s beliefs, values, and ideas are at stake. Much of the work of the MIS is done without the person himself being fully aware of it. The confirmation bias seems to be almost automatic and autonomous—a first line of defense against unwelcome intruders and a means of summoning other resource of the mind to defeat the unwelcome invaders.

The MIS is not strictly static and defensive. As it protects what is in-place, it also actively seeks to expand the prowess of the mind by incorporating new knowledge—preferring the kind of knowledge that does not conflict with the body of information already at hand. This necessary openness feature of the MIS makes it susceptible to invasion by some disharmonious input that creates conflicts in the mind and presents the risk of paralyzing or seriously compromising its functioning. “Beliefs” can be thought of as the main framework of the mind while “ideas” are the minor components that connect the grid-work together.

Total or major replacement of beliefs, particularly as one gets older, becomes less likely, yet it happens occasionally. Paul’s sudden transformation from a rabid Christian-persecutor to a devote believer of the faith of Christ is a familiar instance of such a drastic change. Ideas, on the other hand, are much more amenable to change, replacement or discard as long as they do not substantially undermine the integrity of the main framework—the belief.

Lacking pre-programs to negotiate life, makes the person his own boss and compass. Being one’s own boss is a mixed blessing. The boss has to make decisions, many with serious implications, and accept responsibility for all outcomes. That’s what the mind has to do at all time. Faced with difficult decisions, conflicting ideas and demands they are not equipped to address, people may resort to a variety of alternatives such as “regression” (acting child-like) to absolve themselves of the responsibility of deciding and acting on their own. People, therefore, are often willing to let someone else do the thinking, deciding and acting for them. In the case of regression caused by the stress of the inability to cope, the person reverts to the time that the parents handled those chores.

It is in this vein that some people wish to go back, figuratively, to the primordial time—the time that perhaps our life was steered primarily by reflexes and instincts and the conscious volitional brain played only minor roles. For this reason, there is a great deal of appeal to surrender the brain to another—a substitute for the instincts we lack. By so doing, we would be largely freed from the often daunting task of having to make critical decisions ourselves. That external brain can present itself as a leader, a prophet of God, or a charlatan.

We like to think of ourselves as rational beings. Yet, our rational nature is only one part of the brain/mind enigma. We are also emotional beings. We tend to favor our rational side, because it is generally fact-based, orderly and leaves little room for uncertainty—all importantly operative components of our emotional nature.

Religious belief is primarily emotionally based. There is no way of rationally proving or disproving the religious faith. Faith and reasons are not the same. “Fore the core of religious faith is that mystic feeling which unites man with God,” a religious luminary has proclaimed.

There is nothing inherently wrong with religion. Religion can be a tremendous force for the good. However, when religion, this feeling-based belief, is filled with superstition, intolerance and hatred, then the beholder of that religion embodies those qualities and becomes a veritable menace to himself and to others. Feelings energize actions. Destructive feelings energize destructive actions.

Muslims are victims of their religious brains: their religious brains are indoctrinated, from the moment of birth, by an extensive ruthless in-power cadre of self-serving mullahs and imams who are intent at maintaining their stranglehold on the rank and file of the faithful—their very source of support and livelihood.

The mullahs and imams, as well as parents and others envelope the receptive mind, feed it their dogma, and shield it from information that may undermine or falsify their version of belief.

For as long as there are bigoted, self-serving clergy and their collaborators with first exclusive access to the blank slate, the problem of supplying wave after wave of Islamofascists will persist. It is the brain/mind that assesses things, makes decisions, and orders actions. To the extent that the in-place software of the religious brain is exclusionary in nature, hateful in orientation, and violent in tendency, to that extent the individual is both the perpetrator and the victim of barbaric acts.

The surest way of dealing with Muslims, Islam, and Islamofascism is through effective inculcation of a religious software that promotes tolerance of diversity, freedom of faith and conscious, goodwill to all, as well as purging of all the vile and discriminatory dogma that permeates the out-dated primitive belief of some 1400 years ago barbarians. The best place to start is clearly the home, then schools, and mosques where the deeply-entrenched mullahs and imams of vested interest must be compelled by law to refrain from preaching messages of hate and violence against the unbelievers.

Perhaps free societies should constitute a diverse panel of citizens to scrutinize all religious teachings and screen the software programs for destructive viruses. Once these viruses are introduced into the mind, clearing them, as we said before, becomes difficult if not impossible.

A religious brain programmed by the message of justice, love and respect for all is bliss, while the discriminatory, hateful, and violent religious brain is curse.

Didn't Tom Lehrer cover this issue already about 40 years ago?

"I'm sure we all agree that we ought to love one another and I know there are people in the world that do not love their fellow human beings and I hate people like that....Here's a song [verse] about National Brotherhood Week."

'Oh, the Protestants hate the Catholics,
And the Catholics hate the Protestants,
And the Hindus hate the Moslems,
And everybody hates the Jews.'

Religion is hypocritical in general. Christians’ point of view on religion is very narrow and prejudice. What I truly think is that they are not protecting God but themselves and what they believe. It is a common thing to humanity that “it is all your fault”. What I am trying to say is that religion is ugly but faith is beautiful. In the same way that faith should be built on conscience and integrity. It is very ugly to force people to believe and even terrible to manipulate their minds. If God is God, then the first thing He gave humanity is conscience; not rules and indeed, religion.

A relatively recent demographic change—significant increase in Muslim population—poses a serious challenge to the American system of governance—democracy.

Historically, people from all over the world came to this land-of-take-all and made it their home. In becoming American, each new aspirant had to meet specific provisions and take the “Pledge of Allegiance” as sworn affirmation of his highest loyalty to his new homeland. After a couple of generations, all hyphenated Americans saw themselves as Americans with a special affection for their ancestral heritage. An Irish-American, for instance, considered himself every bit as American as a German-American, or a Chinese-American.

Traditionally, America did not homogenize its diverse people. The notion of the “melting pot,” is inaccurate. Instead, America did one better. As it welcomed its diverse people, America united them around a set of core values such as respect for human rights, democratic governance, and the rule of law.

The large number of Muslims arrival of recent years is posing a serious problem to this nation of all nations. Bluntly speaking, no one can be a Muslim and American at the same time. Here are some of the reasons.

* A Muslim is, first and foremost, an Ummehist—a citizen of international Islam. So, when a Muslim takes the Pledge of Allegiance, he is either ignorant of the implication of his pledge or is lying willfully. Ignorance is never a valid reason in the court of law, and lying in the process of becoming citizen is a ground for denying the application and even deporting the violator. Sadly enough, tagyyeh—lying, or dissimulation—is not only condoned, it is recommended to the Muslims in their scripture. Hence, a Muslim can and would lie without any compunctions, whenever it is expedient.

* Muslims, by belief and practice, are the most blatant violators of human rights. We hardly need to detail here Muslims’ systemic cruel treatment of the unbelievers, women of all persuasions, and any and all minorities across the board. To Muslims, human rights have a different meaning, and it protective provisions are reserved strictly for Muslims—primarily for Muslim men. Just a couple of examples should suffice for now.

Oppression of women, for one, is so systemic in Islam that to this day women are, at best, second class citizens under Islamic law. Saudi Arabia, the custodian of Islamdom, denies women the right to drive, vote or hold elective offices—the most basic rights of citizens in democratic societies.

For another, no non-Islamic literature are allowed in Saudi Arabia. A visiting Christian, for instance, is denied to enter the Kingdom with a Bible. Further, severe punishment is meted out to anyone daring to disagree with Islam or espouse a different religion. Iran’s resurgent Shiism often vies with Saudi Arabia in its mistreatment of religious and non-religious minorities. To the fanatical ruling gang in Iran, it is their brand of Islam or disenfranchisement of rights of citizenship and even death for the “sin” of apostasy. And of course, there is no point at all in talking about the savage Islamic Taliban.

* Respect for the rule of law, as it is understood and practiced by civilized people, is an instrument of convenience to be used to advantage and to be violated when it is not, for the Muslim. A Muslim believes in a different law—the Shariah: a set of stone-age rules. Violation of the non-Muslim laws, therefore, is no violation at all to a Muslim.

What is incredible is the gull and audacity of Muslims in demanding that Western and other democracies legalize Shariah in their societies. Large populations of Muslims, mostly recent arrivals, in countries such as Canada, Great Britain, and Sweden are experiencing the insistent demands by Muslims to have Shariah rule their Islamic communities. This is just the beginning and it may seem relatively harmless to the simpletons in our midst. Yet, once Shariah is recognized to any extent, it will reach out to rule not only on matters that concern Muslims, but also those that may involve a Muslim and non-Muslim. Under Shariah, a Muslim man married to a non-Muslim woman is able to divorce the woman at will, automatically have custody of the children, and literally toss the wife out of “his” home with just about no compensations.

* As for democracy, the rule of the people, Muslims have no use at all. Muslims believe that Allah’s rule must govern the world in the form of Caliphate—a theocracy. Making mockery of democracy, subverting its working, and ignoring its provisions is a Muslim’s way of falsifying what he already believes to be a sinful and false system of governance invented by the infidels.

To Muslims, Ummeh-ism—international Islamism—is the legitimate form of government. Ummeh-ism is another form of despotism such as Communism and Fascism, with the added feature of enjoying “divine” authority.

The world has good samples of Ummeh-ism in practice to scrutinize in Islamic autocracies. Khamenei of Iran is not called “Caliph.” He is called the “Supreme Guide.” The Saudi King is just another Caliph vessel of the “divine.” These Islamic despots are every bit as vile as the Hitlers, the Stalins, the Pol Pots, and the Mussolinis. The government these Islamic autocrats head is infested to the core with the Islamic disease of oppression, corruption and the absence of accountability to the people.

Democracies believe that government must be of the people, by the people, and for the people. Ummeh-ism is anathema to this sacrosanct fundamental democratic ideal.

As more and more Muslims arrive in non-Islamic lands, as they reproduce with great fecundity, as they convert the disenchanted and minorities, and as petrodollar-flush Muslims and Muslim treasuries supply generous funds, Muslims gather more power to undermine the democratic rule. A consortium composed of pandering politicians, blinded with short-term self-interest and egoism; attention and fund-seeking self-proclaimed prima donna professors; and, bastions of useful idiot liberals, universities, is the witting or unwitting promoter of Ummeh-ism.

It is human nature to be concerned, first and foremost, with his personal well-being. Some people evolve to a higher level of humanness and place the welfare of the general public above their own. Yet, many remain fixated at the constricted stage of “self first, self, last.” Even if you belong to this latter group, your self-interest demands that you do all you can to make sure that the disease of Islamofascism does not devour democracy. Democracy is both fragile and corruptible. It takes vigilant citizenry to protect its integrity.

We fully agree with Churchill’s observation, “Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the rest.” Yet, as imperfect as it is, democracy is still humanity’s best system of self-rule. We, one and all, must defend it with our all.

Mr. David, that is.

The guy with two first names.

What's interesting about this conversation is that it's largely in the Judeo-Christian tradition. When people start to make assumptions that other religions will be similar, I think mistakes occur. An example is Lear's assumption that "the Buddha" is a "God" or "Creator." For Buddhists, the Buddha is no more. He never created the world nor claimed to, and Nirvana is expressly the act of getting off of the wheel of life, not sticking around to continue it. One doesn't have a "personal relationship" with the Buddha - one studies what he has left in an attempt to emulate him. The difference is that Christians, for example, believe that Christ knows about them and cares about them - that he is a superior being and they are lesser beings under his care. Buddhists see the Buddha as being a human just as they are, but one who realized the truth of the world and, in doing so, removed himself completely from it. He is not a "creator," "maker" or anything like that, and, most definitely, he is *not* God or even a god. Buddhism and atheism are entirely reconcilable, as are Buddhism and Christianity (albiet with some theological gymnastics).

Dave:
I think you are a good man.

Maybe I'll just move out of the South to New York City (everyone I meet for the first time thinks I'm from there but I'm not), but I'm keeping my eye on Canada.

To Deuteronomy lovers I apologize...it's the wonderfully gloomy book of Leviticus I refer to. If you're bored this holiday season it's worth a read (or re-read)....

I ask that my ignorance of arcane, ancient, and generally irrelevant biblical texts be excused. I have been unwashed for many a year.

Mr. Farr,
The words you quote were written by men, not God. There are many paths to the Light, not just one.
GOD

We've learned, from time immemorial, that when we trot out our gods and go public with them, we can’t seem to resist the game of “my God is the only true God.” Mayhem and murder follow.

Well said, Mr. Lear, and proof-positive right here!

Having grown up down South and seen the finery of 'Babtist' hypocrisy (church on Wed/Sun (to make sure you are ‘seen’), - drinking, drugging and fornication in between) it’s been amusing watching the conversations from the thumpers.

However, I have always been circumspect of any sky-deity who has the churlish audacity to bellow:

For I the Lord your God am a jealous God, punishing children for the iniquity of parents, to the third and the fourth generation of those who reject me,

‘Exodus 20:5 for all you citation quoters’

Any god who is jealous (i.e. starved for attention and affection) – and then deposits this rage on innocent generations to come - is nothing more than a child.

Don’t even get me started with the 'Don't' requirements of Deuteronomy – which no one is following and therefore should be stoned, beheaded, quartered, .

Just say you don’t know. It's OK. Live your life to the fullest without fear for what happens when you die (you're dead, full truth shall follow) and be kind and generous to others. The rest will take care of itself.

Plagiarizing and paraphrasing Bugs Bunny here (a prohetic sage in his own right)… The road to eternal happiness is by our deeds on Earth…and ‘making sure we make that left turn at Albuquerque.’

Zum voll…

Ashley,

A fairly incisive question - but fair enough.

Yes I definitely support religious liberty.

As far as "nonChristians" - I do claim to be a Christian. The biblical Christ did say, "judge not..." But He also claimed the He was "the way" and that there is only one God (the Father). Recall Jesus' two commandments - the first was to love God and the second to love one's neighbor.

I believe that Jesus is the answer to God's plan for all of humankind. Thus to reject Him is to reject God's offer.

This is exclusivist - I realize that. There will be many on the thread who (no doubt) will lampoon me for this - or suggest that I am unloving. But my first loyalty is to God - and second to the sensibilities of man. This is implicit in a the theistic conception of God. And this is Christianity as set out in the New Testament. I realize there are many who reject the Bible - their choice, their right. But the fact that my beliefs conflict with the humanist ethos of mostmodernism is not reason for me to change them.

To Dave Bailey.

I am vary grateful that I live in the United States where religious tolerance is respected. To be honest, all of the Muslims I have known in the US have always been very friendly towards me and have never tried to forcefully convert me to Islam. On the contrary, I believe that I have always managed to make them think criticaly and keep open minds about people of other faiths and beliefs.

But, I could not do this without first befriending them.

Thank all of you for demonstrating that religious tolerance is a bear to achieve.

If my beliefs and my relation to God are rock solid, how can any other belief be valid?

Thus,

Strict conformance to one's own religion can not allow the validity of other's beliefs without engaging in logical or moral inconsistency or worse. Failure to uphold the Truth dilutes the absolute correctness of one's religion.

A suggestion might be that

1) the relationship of God and man is uniquely personal and 2) the relationship between God and other men and women is a matter for God to adjudicate.

It does seem that when men feel in touch with absolute truth that it is very hard to accommodate those whose beliefs are at odds with the absolute truth.

Humanity does not seem to deal very well with the infinite and the unknowable, simply because we presume more than as mortals than perhaps we have any right. All of which would not matter save for the fact that "The Truth" seems likely to put us at each other's throat if my "Truth" is not your "Truth."

It might be worth considering that divine revelation may be sacred and infallible, but that the same can not be said of the vessel of that revelation.

John Bourg

Dave Bailey:

Are you willing to apply the same scrutiny to Fundamentalist Christianity? The Bible, in particular the Old Testament, if taken literally, is a very violent and non-forgiving text in many places. Derivative texts can be even worse.

Kindly remember that when Christians were burning (drowning, hanging, etc.) heretics of all stripes, Muslims governed Palestine and offered religious freedom. The division of Old Jerusalem into Jewish, Muslim, Catholic, and Armenian quadrants was accepted then and exists to this day.

Dave Baily, that was very long, and very off-topic. So, what did you think about Mr. Lear's article?

It is never my job or task to prove God to anyone because it can't be done. God and God alone will prove Himself to those that are open to Him and His Spirit. When I stand before God when my time on this earth is over I won't give an account for anyone posting on this board other than myself. It is my responsibility to serve God with all my heart, mind, soul and strength. I pray that those on this board will open their hearts and allow God to prove himself to them in a way that will impact how they live their lives on a daily basis.

Much has been written about Islam, its ethics, and its relationships with other religions. Despite this large volume of work, there appears to be something missing, something even more basic and important to people of all faiths. What is missing is a study of Islam with regard to governance, particularly regarding its relationship to what we call democracy. The goal of this series is to fill the gap by providing this investigation and presenting its findings.

Why choose this subject? Because, throughout the world, we receive starkly conflicting information about Islam. Apologists claim that Islam is a religion of peace. They also claim that our democratic traditions of religious tolerance require us to respect the freedom of Muslims to practice Islam. At the same time, we see Muslims practicing violent religious intolerance around the world. This intolerance is often against their non-Islamic neighbors, who range from Orthodox Russians to Sudanese Christians, Hindu Indians, Catholic Filipinos, and Buddhist Thais. Additionally, Muslims practice religious intolerance against each other. We hear of Sunni Muslims persecuting Shiite Muslims, Shiite Muslims persecuting Sunni Muslims, and Wahhabis persecuting everyone else.

Clearly, something is wrong with this picture. Yet many people fail to associate the violence committed by Muslims with Islam itself. They steadfastly seek alternative explanations, such as colonialism, tribal tensions, racism, and poverty. They refuse to even consider the idea that Islam may be inherently aggressive and intolerant toward other religions.

This self-deception cannot continue for long. Islam’s presence and influence is growing throughout the world, and it demands our attention. For example, Nigeria’s northern states announced their conversion to Islamic Law in 2002 by sentencing several women to death by stoning for adultery. In 2006, the entire nation of Denmark was terrorized by Muslims around the world because a mid-sized, independent Danish newspaper published some political cartoons of Muhammad.

An ever-growing cascade of violence tells us that we are approaching a time when we will have no choice but to confront two disturbing possibilities:

Islam is fundamentally incompatible with democracy as we know it, because it opposes the individual freedoms and protections that citizens of democracies cherish.

Muslims are in the process of using our own democratic institutions to subvert democracy and to replace democratically determined law with Islamic Law.

Before you dismiss these words as bigotry, please allow me to explain:

In the United States, we have embraced notions of tolerance and freedom that may be described as “live and let live.” Applied to religion, “live and let live” means that no one has the right to force their beliefs on others; nor may they prevent others from changing their beliefs. While Americans may not always live up to the ideals of Free Democracy, we aspire to them, and use our freedoms to correct ourselves as we progress.

Tolerance and freedom are essential parts of what we call democracy, which political theorists usually call Liberal Democracy or Western Democracy. In Dare to Speak, this form of democracy is called Free Democracy.

Religious tolerance is an essential principle we live by in the United States and throughout the Westernized world. This principle has evolved from centuries of futile religious battles that caused us to violate the very beliefs we claimed to fight for. It was codified in complete form by the Constitution of the United States, which has been an example and a beacon of hope for nations around the world. While these nations have created constitutions of their own, to serve their particular circumstances, the U.S. Constitution has remained a guiding reference for progressive thinkers everywhere. Why? Because it exemplifies a framework for governance that grants unprecedented powers and freedoms to its citizens.

In contrast, there is a part of the world where Free Democracy has not flourished, and its freedoms are not valued. Free Democracy did not evolve there, and we are discovering that it does not grow there, despite a variety of working examples in other parts of the world. This infertile soil is the House of Islam.

Why has the form of democracy we cherish, which I call Free Democracy, failed to take root and grow in the Islamic world? Because Islam ties religion and politics together in a Gordian knot. Islam has its own body of laws, known as Shari’ah [1], and these laws sharply oppose Free Democracy. Islam and Free Democracy are as opposed to each other as Communism and Free Democracy, or Fascism and Free Democracy.

Many people refuse to consider the possibility that Islam and Free Democracy are irreconcilably opposed to each other. After all, the benefits of Free Democracy are obvious, and many Islamic nations have worked diligently to adopt it. Unfortunately, the fruits of these efforts confirm that Islam and Free Democracy do not mix. Islamic nations like Turkey, Egypt, and Algeria have histories of secular governments, but those governments have uneasy relationships with their citizens. These nations have often found themselves resorting to warlike tactics against Islamic fundamentalists to preserve themselves. In Iran, Islam’s mullahs won such a war and now use their authority to thwart the superficially democratic institutions they control.

What makes Islam different from other religions? Why is it hostile to Free Democracy? To put it plainly, it does not believe in “live and let live.” Devout Muslims do not feel obligated to convince others to convert to Islam through reason. Instead, the Koran[2] encourages them to use persecution. According to the Koran, people of other faiths are allowed to continue in their practices only if they acknowledge that Islam is a superior religion and pay extortion money to an Islamic government in the form of special taxes[3]. This exception, which is extolled by Muslims as an example of tolerance, is actually designed to grind down other religions to nothing over time. To people who are weak, or young in their faiths, this persecution raises a question: “Why pay extra taxes, and accept an inferior position in society, when all I have to do is convert to Islam?”

In a sense, these mercenary conversions are a saving grace. There are many Muslims in the world who are Muslim in name only. They know that if they left Islam, their Apostasy[4] would be considered a crime punishable by death. They are prisoners of their faith instead of believers. Therefore, the apparent strength of Islam can be deceptive, and many nominal Muslims are far more benevolent than Islam calls them to be.

Many of us in the West grew up ignorant of Islam. Therefore, with few experiences to contradict our democracy-inspired beliefs, which seek to accommodate different religions, many people came to view the world’s religions as merely different paths to the same goal. For people who still believe this, the words of this series will come as a shock, because they reveal that Islam violates this assumption. to Speak will show that Islam is overtly hostile toward other religions. More importantly, it will show that Islam is overtly hostile to non-Islamic governments.

This series will also uncover the subterranean war that Muslims are currently waging against the world’s Free Democracies. It will lay out the issues, provide references to back them up, and begin a discussion on the actions that Westerners can take to preserve Free Democracy for future generations.

This series quotes extensively from the Koran (a compilation of recitations claimed by Muhammad to come from Allah) and the Hadith (compilations of Muhammad’s other words and actions), as well as recent news articles and modern religious books written by Muslims. It does so to demonstrate two key points:

The portions of Islamic holy scripture that carry disturbing messages are not merely stray quotes in otherwise benign books. They are essential components of Islam, and the Koran and the Hadith emphasize them repeatedly. Faithful Muslims take these messages seriously and act on them.

The actions of Islamic terrorists around the world are not merely the products of a few deviant minds, or a few menacing groups, such as al Qaeda, but are the products of violent messages that flow from one eternal source: Islamic holy scripture.

This series will demonstrate that, as long as Islam is treated as a respectable religion, and not as a hostile political ideology bent on global domination, Islam will continue to expand and sow its seeds of terror throughout the world. If we allow this to happen, the nations that currently embrace Free Democracy may one day find themselves destitute and chaotic, with their democratic laws replaced by Islamic ones.

As you read this series, you will find many references embedded directly into the text rather than exiled to appendices or footnotes. This structure gives you direct access to the sources of Dare to Speak’s assertions, to help you view them easily and form your own conclusions.

If, after reading this series, you doubt its assertions, please do your own independent research. With vast resources and newspaper archives available on the Web and in libraries, your job will be easy and inexpensive. As a starting point, I highly recommend the University of Southern California’s “Compendium of Muslim Texts,” which provides on-line access to three translations of the Koran, plus a comprehensive compilation of hadiths, along with keyword search functions for all texts. You can find this site at USC.edu

Please do not dismiss or pre-judge the points this series makes if they disagree with what you want to believe. You have a duty, to yourself and to your family, to understand the issues we face, so that you can respond to them appropriately. Your actions may impact your children even more than yourself.

Before moving on to the first chapter, I would like to tell you why I call this series “Dare to Speak.” According to Islamic Law, these writings could easily be interpreted as insulting to Islam, and to Muhammad himself. The punishment for such insults, according to Shari’ah, is severe and can include death. Therefore, by writing to you, I am truly putting my life on the line. But this is why I feel I must speak: if fear was to silence me, it would already be too late; Islam would be in control of my life, and yours.

Fernando,

Fundamentalist Christians point not only to Sodom and Gommorah, but also to Leviticus wherein homosexuality is listed as a sin. Further, you might consider the Ten Commandments in Exodus where it is stated:

"You shall not covet your neighbor's house. You shall not covet your neighbor's wife, nor his male or female slave, nor his ox or ass, nor anything else that belongs to him."

While I admit the ox may be irrelevant nowadays, from a Fundamentalist/homophobic standpoint, once removed, the remainder is obvious.

Reading the posts in this discussion one could gauge who are the intelligent and who are insecure in their approach towards their human existence. Intelligent posts feature people who are willing to discuss/debate the other side of the argument, while the insecure hide their insecurities behind misrepresented theology. May the unknown save the degradation of humanity by these demagogues.

Dear Miguel Pakalns,

The tragic history of religiously inspired violence does much to turn people away from organized religion, and it is indeed abhorrent. However the comment referring to the sophistry of those who say "Secular fundamentalism is as prone to arrogance, ignorance and violence as any organized religion." is not factually accurate.

One need only look at the tragic history of Communism with its approximately 20 million victims. This horrible FACT fostered by radical humanism(composed of many events which for brevity I will not include here... more than 2 pogroms occurred to say the least) is TRUE regardless of what one thinks of Marxist ethics or religion.

I do not mean to attack you and I do not want my post to be perceived as such. I merely want to disabuse people of the perception that religion has been the only or primary cause of mass violence.

In peace and love,
Paul David

It's amazing. Those who truly understand the concept of God have already mastered 90% of the doctrines all religions attempt to teach. Those who only dwell on simple concepts and literal interpretations from the Bible, Koran, Torah or other religious books still are learning or do not have a clear understanding of the message being taught. Likewise, those who claim that God doesn't exist because they see evil in this world still do not understand who God is.

God is everything. God is in all of us and everything around us. Space, time, everything. When you understand what that means then you know longer need a religious book to tell you how to lead your lives. You begin to understand that God is more then just concepts of how to act, being good or bad. You understand that God exists regardless of whether good or evil exists in this world.

If God is in all living beings in this world then you should already know how to live in unisone with all living beings in this world regardless of how a book is telling you to lead your lives. If you understand this then you will have learned what the religiouse books are trying to teach you. They are not meant to be your giudeing consiense for the rest of your lives. They are meant to be stepping stones to a higher understanding of God. When you understand this you "WILL" find peace and enlightenment.

Mr. Lear has a good point—live and let live; avoid the aggravation that invariably ensues when the infinite is interpreted by us humans with our infinitesimally inadequate brains and within our infinitesimally narrow world views. The banning of Christmas trees on government property is considered by some a "war against Christianity" these days, but Christmas trees were once considered pagan symbols. Early American Puritans vehemently opposed the display of "Christmas" trees, considering it anti-Christian. Sorry, can't have it both ways! Fundamentalist Christians point to the destruction of Sodom as evidence that homosexuality is a sin. Homosexuals argue that the interpretation that all of the male inhabitants of Sodom were gay is incorrect and far-fetched. They point to three homosexual relationships in the bible as evidence that same-sex relationships are to be tolerated. Fundamentalist Christians in turn argue that the gays' interpretation is wishful thinking and there is no way a normal person would consider those relationships homosexual. These days "Christian" values are used as a basis for opposition to gay marriage. But the bible says that homosexuals should be stoned to death, not deprived of their civil rights! Not too long ago God was invoked to justify keeping black children out of "white" public schools, and before that to argue that women should not be given the right to vote. In the mid-nineteenth century, biblical passages were cited both to justify and to condemn slavery. So who's interpretations are correct? Who knows? Probably not any interpretation made by mere humans! The Abrahamic scriptures can and have been used to justify any idea or philosophy, no matter how bizarre or heinous. So let's just keep it to ourselves and we'll all be better off.

I am delighted that such a conversation is taking place... kudos to the Washington Post for hosting it. I am of course like many others profoundly sad regarding the amount of animosity that this particular piece has engendered.

I believe that the sublime, or the sacred is something that is universally experienced and in a way that is wholly subjective. Thus what my brothers and sisters of all faiths (including secularists) experience as divine is likely just that... the Divine.

However that does not mean that all religions are the same. I always find it astonishing how many people make this claim without actually reading the texts of the other major religions (or the Bible). In particular, the ethical codes are not identical.

For one important example, while forgiveness itself existed in the world prior to Jesus Christ and was identified as good and necesary, (see for example Aeschylus' Orestia trilogy) historically speaking its elevation to the place of the supreme ethical value can be credited to Jesus of Nazareth. This is a historical event acknowledged by many (including Muslims) who do not subscribe to a Pauline Christian faith (see for example Hannah Arendt a well-respected Jewish scholar and philosopher). This can be contrasted with the agonal (competitive good vs. evil) that was perhaps the most common element of pre-Christian religions.

This historical insight to me regarding the revolutionary nature of a Christian love ethic is important.

I feel that there is much to learn from other faiths, but I cannot learn them if I assume they are identical to my own Rather I prefer to inquire about them so that I can challenge my own practices and beliefs and gain a broader understanding of how my fellow human beings experience the sacred or sublime. I think this attitude of openness is vastly more helpful than the attitude that "it's all the same" which suggests a lack of desire to understand my fellow humans.

To this end I recognize that I, like all of us fall short of the ideals that I espouse and that there is always more that I can learn.

To the people who feel that it is more courageous to face life without any faith, I would humbly respond that my choice of faith does not mean to me that I have absolute answers to the tough questions. However nor do I need them because I accept that God's wisdom is unsearchable, a proposition that I find courageous.

Nor do I think that acceptance of a divine plan violates human dignity (as some of the existentialists out there might think) because I do not know when the end of time will come so I am still left naked facing the world, required to engage in the very human, worldly tasks of moral choice as conditioned by my own mortality.

I have many more observations but this post is already perhaps too long. I would love to hear anyone's thoughts on any of the different ideas that I have put forward.

In peace and love,
Paul David

Religions are supposed to provide a medium for spritual communication with the God(s). The different religions are like the different languages with their respective communities.

War among linguistic communities is inevitable if they cannot communicate and respect each other. War across religious communities is also inevitable if they cannot communicate and respect each other. Every religion has its social rites and it is not a matter of keeping your religion inside, it is realising that your religion is one of the many different religions which could provide a spritual language.

What I got out of this article is something that I think people of all faiths can agree with:

We all are in different places in our relationship with God.

test

Please consider:

1) Many roads lead to Rome, but not all -- some go to Chicago (and then only if you're not heading toward LA).

2) Regarding the blind men all examining the different parts of an elephant and drawing their various accurate but incomplete conclusions, had there been yet another imaginative, hungry, and semi-daydreaming blind man in the corner of the room who subconciously thought of spaghetti and offered that the elephant tasted like sun-ripened tomatoes and basil, well, he would have been simply wrong about the nature of the elephant.

2) It violates logic to have an effect without a cause, e.g., not merely to say the universe exploded into being from the big bang but to further state that nothing preceded the big bang.

3) No logic is violated (and it is therefore compellingly argued) that something has existed eternally -- whether God, the universe in an endless cycle of big bangs, the potential for creation, or something else, reason alone cannot discriminate amongst.

4) The statement there is no absolute truth contradicts itself! Belief does not create absolute truth, nor does disbelief nullify it.

5) Pi (to several digits) = 3.1412592 or so. Pi does not equal 4 (like the state of Indiana taught in public schools briefly by legislative decree). To say pi is not equal 5 is intolerance for error. To say pi is not equal to 4 is intolerance for inaccuracy. To say pi is not equal to 3 is intolerance for imprecision. To state ANTHING unequivocally is to disaffirm all that is contrary to it. Is there any consequential area of knowledge or wisdom where error itself merits respect, with all due respect to the well intentioned legislators in the state of Indiana! Ought not all people be respected but all error exposed to the light of discourse and reason? The color a bridge is painted may be primarily an aesthetic matter but the truth of its architecture had best prove out!

6) A father has a unique relationship with each of his children. And yet each child's opinion of the father is variably informed by firsthand knowledge of the same man (some possibly more accurate than others). Even so, those who claim all ideas of God equally valid really deny that anyone has a genuine relationship with God. Those who claim tolerance while they do this are either very intolerant, or very arrogant in their aetheism.

7) IF you don't happen to see ultimate justice, but there really is a loving and omniscient God, then perhaps it could be there is justice but you just don't see it. (I implore you to leave open at least that possibility).

8) IF there is a loving, all powerful, and all knowing God who revealed himself to you personally, whose will was good and perfect, would you be willing to surrender yourself to that good and perfect will, best for you and all those you love? Or would you choose otherwise instead of submitting yourself, as best you could, to what is truly right?

9) IF God grants free will and IF the answer to the last question (as you answer it in your heart of hearts) actually impacts your ability to know God, would not God be just? If you choose not to think about it, would not God be just? If God forgives all but apathy of and intentional avoidance of the right, would not God be just?

Just a few thoughts,
Tom

If God is omnipotent, then God isn't going to need you to be "Born Again" in some pedanticly ritualistic manner, kneel a certain way, hold some contradictory belief in manifestations of a split presence, or any of the rest of the claptrap masquerading as the "Right" way to worship.

If God is omnipotent, God isn't going to be that small minded. That's a human failing and limitation.

If I see Jesus's successor (if there is to be some second coming, he's not going to be named Jesus is he?) on CNN visibly being miraculous and telling people this is they way they should worship, then I'll listen to it. Otherwise, a lot of this stuff that's so obviously lacking in logic or common sense I'm going to continue to consign to being motivated by human failings.

Killing people and condemning others based on religion, and not on behavior, is quite simply an unholy activity.

Everyone, please reread Victor Kelley's post at 3:26 p.m. Ask yourself those questions each day, and I think we will all be on the right path.

"All you need is love"

That's it.

I'm moving to Canada where people are sane.

Which version of the Bible are we talking about here? King James? New Jerusalem? The Bible is a book , written by men. Inspired by God, maybe, but written by men with their own prejudices. The only verse in the Bible that mentins God writing anything is when He wrote the 10 commandments. All else was done by men. Why was wasting one's seed upon the ground so bad? Because the Hebrews needed more people to offset the Philistines or whomever they were at war with at the time. The Canticle of Canticles (Song of Songs) is a pretty racy book, why was that let into the Bible?
The Catholic Church recently did away with the notion of Limbo, where those born before Jesus had to stay. You mean all the good men and women: Moses, Samuel, Esther, Ruth, Jeremiah, etc. are not in Heaven because they did not accept Jesus, who wasn't born for thousands of years later? And since when is Jesus desended from Abraham. Joseph, His stepfather, was of that line. Jesus was the product of God and Mary's lineage, so maybe we should stop all the "rod came forth from the branch of Jesse" stuff.
I believe in God, I believe in Jesus. I believe that anyone who is good, religious or otherwise, will attain whatever Heaven there is.
As the defense attorney in "Inherit the Wind" says, "The Bible is a book. It is not the only book."
Hide your light under a bushel basket. Jesus always taught us to be humble in our religion, therefore, do not announce yourselves and denounce those unlike you.

Will:

"and the fact of His resurrection which although attacked by many throughout the years cannot be discounted if truly investigated with an honest heart."

that's not a fact, even with an honest heart...
that's your belief.

Some need a personal god that others feel makes an idol- Some see god as so sacred he cannot be known by man while others feel this is so distant as to not be real. It has been going on from the beginning of time. There is no god sufficient for everyone's individual understanding that can be explained to anyone else.. Check out "The History of God" by Karen Armstrong. She details this conundrum very thoroughly and in an unbiased manner. -Dan

Before any of us decides that he or she has got a handle on what God is or why theirs is better than others or better still, theirs is the only one, look at the immensity of God's creation. Give yourself benefit of using astronomy to see how the whole earth is not even a drop in this vast ocean that is currently known universe. Go to the Rose Center in New York and see for yourself what percentage of God's creation is represented by our blue planet. Also, look into age of your religion or any religion versus the age of creation. Then decide, who is smarter - a few children fighting over a candy wrapper or adults arguing, frothing and killing over their one God versus others' non-Gods.

Here Cody,
from the Southern Baptist Leadership Convention of June, 1998:

"A wife is to submit herself graciously to the servant leadership of her husband even as the church willingly submits to the headship of Christ."

It is the core of human nature, this religious question. Where do we come from? Where are we going after death? These are the deepest questions facing humans and have been debated for centuries by the brightest minds as well as by normal people.

And yet, we still become violent over these issues. It seems to bring out the worst in people. The fear that we don't understand life itself overwhelms so many of us that we turn to whatever we need to feel better.

I find great peace and wonder in simply asking the questions, and in trying to find the answers. It is truly sad that so many find fear and anger when trying to answer these questions.

I'm an atheist and I hate agnostics. I also don't think atheism is a religion. Atheism by definition is the lack of a deity. Atheism could be called a philosophy maybe, but not a religion.

I think if there was a cutting and pasting competition, Christians would win. Kudos! Unfortunately, another view of the 1000 mile river is that the further it goes, the more contaminated it gets, and the more diluted the original water.

Might I add the verses are just as offensive to non-believers as scientific justifications and philosophy are to religious types.

"AND HE SAID 'LET THEE BE DEMONIZED, FOR THOSE WHO ARE FORSAKEN BE SPOKEN DOWN UPON, AND CAST FORTH AS WRETCHED FOR THOU DOES NOT HEED MY EVERY WORD, YOU NEWBS" Chief 11:27.6

But it's the internet...for both sides, you can get away with standing on your own glass pedestal without fear of someone actually disagreeing with you in person and in verbal conversation.

If you find god, it is a life altering experience. If you find god and know you have a relationship with him and that heaven is where you'll be when its all over, it is the most happiest day of yr life.And from that day onward you are a changed creature.

...but dont share it, keep it to yrself..makes alot of sense. Why dont we just keep every great thing to ourselves and live in a cardboard box.

Norman has a number of assumptions, one he knows god would want us to keep it to ourselves. Two, Norman knows all gods are alike there is no other truth. This begs the question "how does norman know all this ?".This also clearly tells anyone with a diff belief that they are wrong. We all claim to know god and his intentions, we all are guilty of being holier then thou... including Norman, but Normans not taking his own advice and keeping it to himself.

Charles Meadow,

I appreciate your defense of religious liberty, but I'm curious about something. You believe that Christianity got it right - that Christ, not Vishnu or whoever is the true manifestation of God. Do you believe that non-Christians go to hell? If so, doesn't that make your defense of liberty a bit hollow? Nonbelievers can have liberty on earth, but they'll suffer eternally for it.

If not, then why be a Christian as opposed to any other creed?

Great times indeed when we are being forced to justify our beliefs because a large portion of our country is on the same page that everyone other than themselves are going to a not so nice place when they die. I hear so many people saying "I'm jewish," "I'm a cafeteria catholic," "I'm a practicing mormon" and "here's why I believe X but don't believe the other guy." This arguementation for the most part has been mostly between what religious people of judeo-christian origin and of people they have labeled "atheists/secular humanists." I really haven't heard anything on these discussion forums from people outside of these boundaries. Even the Dali Llama didn't preach Buddhism. Both sides should say you guys are missing 40% of what is being taught in the god department.

For instance did you know that I could be the one controlling this universe through the powers of my own consciousness. You can't prove to me for fact that you guys exist independent of my mind.

What if god were a number? Say infinity? Have you ever contemplated the vastness of infinity? We have named numbers like thousand, million, billion, googol representing powers of 10. That means that every word I just typed is represented as a number somewhere in the vastness of infinity. This whole thread is a named power of 10 in infinity. Your whole life can be represented in these named numbers. Therefore Infinity is all knowing by nature, but infinity god? is infinity salvation? nirvana? No. Infinity is just a number...cold and heartless. God implies intent, and no one religion can understand his intent because if they did, they would BE god and there wouldn't be religion...just extortion.

Ignorance

Guided by the Spirit of Christmas Present, the second of his magical visitors that fateful Christmas Eve, Ebenezer Scrooge has travelled the length and breadth of England, observing how the poor and the not so poor have been celebrating Christmas. The two are standing now in an open square in the great city of London. Scrooge, suddenly grown more observant that he used to be, and humbler too, notices something he might heretofore have missed. He addresses the Spirit...

"Forgive me if I am not justified in what I ask,” said Scrooge, looking intently at the Spirit’s robe, “but I see something strange, and not belonging to yourself, protruding from your skirts. Is it a foot or a claw!”

“It might be a claw, for the flesh that is upon it,” was the spirit’s sorrowful reply. “Look here.”

From the foldings of its robe it brought two children; wretched, abject, frightful, hideous, miserable. They knelt down at its feet, and clung upon the outside of its garment.

“Oh, Man! look here. Look, look, down here!” exclaimed the Ghost.

They were a boy and a girl. Yellow, meagre, ragged, scowling, wolfish; but prostrate, too, in their humility. Where graceful youth should have filled their features out, and touched them with its finest tints, a stale and shrivelled hand, like that of age, had pinched, and twisted them, and pulled them into shreds. Where angels might have sat enthroned, devils lurked; and glared out menacing. No change, no degradation, no perversion of humanity, in any grade, through all the mysteries of wonderful creation, has monsters half so horrible and dread.

Scrooge started back, appalled. Having them shown to him in this way, he tried to say they were fine children, but the words choked themselves, rather than be party to a lie of such enormous magnitude.

“Spirit! Are they yours?” Scrooge could say no more.

“They are Man’s,” said the Spirit, looking down upon them. “And they cling to me, appealing from their fathers. This boy is Ignorance. This girl is Want. Beware them both, and all of their degree, but most of all beware this boy, for on his brow I see that written which is Doom, unless the writing be erased. Deny it!” cried the spirit, stretching out its hand towards the city. “Slander those who tell it ye! Admit it for your factious purposes, and make it worse. And abide the end!”

“Have they no refuge or resource?” cried Scrooge.

“Are there no prisons?” said the Spirit, turning on him for the last time with his own words. “Are there no workhouses?”

The bell struck twelve.
..................................................

Charles Dickens – ‘A Christmas Carol’

Once again I agree with the gist of what you say.

But at some level the Bible does make black and white claims. I think that, in many cases, the postmodern ethos of today's academic circles leads us to believe, a priori, that the skeptical answer is going to be right.

MJ,

You are quite right. Any sort of established Christian society would likely lead to less than ideal results. And you are also right that one living in such a society could hardly be justified by living that way if that were the only choice! I would never advocate the attempts to formulate such a society - but I would welcome more Christian influence in society because that IS the truth for me.

I see so many comments extoling the virtues of "puralism" and "tolerance" - suggesting that any beliefs in an exclusive system are boorish and unintellectual. I realize I am making a leap of faith - and I admit that my beliefs in Christianity posit the existence of moral absolutes.

I have to laugh at those "in the know" who sit around Starbucks wearing black shirts talking about how Christianity is so backward. It is as if the fact that they have read a book by Bart Ehrman or Elain Pagels suddenly has made them privy to great truths of which the rest of us poor idiots are ignorant!

;)

Man cannot know truth but he can embody it.

Words cannot cover the truth, its too big. Emerson wrote that's why Jesus taught by parables and symbols. "Remember the readiness which he always showed to spiritualize every occurrence. He stooped and wrote on the sand. He admonished his disciples respecting the leaven of the Pharisees. He instructed the woman of Samaria respecting living water."

Words are delusive; there are really no answer to the questions you ask.

Jesus' lesson was for believers to take care of the poor, the downtrodden, the weak, and to devote their lives and fortunes to good works...and by doing so spread the "good news" of love and peace. So many non-Christians do just that - spread the "good news" of love of humanity by being good, kind, giving, loving people. Why must some fellow Christians scream and yell and damn those who don't call themselves Christian? That's not good news. What we all should be doing is good works, in silence, not seeking praise for it, rather than mouthing words that don't convey the message.

Charles Meadows:

Thank you again for another well written and tolerant post. Yet I believe you are leaving out a significant group - those who do not believe in the literal, word for word, "truth" of the Bible - many of whom are Christian.

Belief that the Bible is inspired by God is entirely compatible with an acknowledgment of the fallibility of man. While the men who wrote the Bible declare it to be the only path, man is an imperfect vessel at best. Those who wrote, selected, and/or translated the documents included in the Bible often had a vested interest in their claims of exclusivity.

In trying to follow the teachings of Christ while maintaining a healthy dose of skepticism regarding the human intermediaries, we do not lose our identity as Christians - nor our desire (as far as is humanly possible) to be “like Christ."

Charles Meadows,

Your point is well-taken. But we have seen that most societies based around a religion, including Christianity, as a source of law become corrupt and reduce the importance of faith. If being a Christian is a requirement of society, if following Christian rules is a requirement, such as taxes, then of what value does faith become?

Is this not the problem with Islamic theocratic states? And in another sense why Martin Luther rebelled against the Church? Power corrupts.

God gave us free will to use. To reject or accept Him. A religious "state" -- and I realize you know this is not practical or possible -- takes so much of faith and free will out of our hands. One could lead a perfectly Christian life without ever having to develop one's faith.

And additionally, if laws are based on religious doctrine, then we are punished twice. Once by man and once by God. Many laws we have are not about sins; many sins are not illegal.

Society functions to protect people, property, etc. so that we may make these choices.

I only had to read the first two 'christian' responses to be astounded.

sad how far they missed the point.
sad

Thanks to all those who quote from the Bible, chapter and verse. You know what all those posts say to me? "I'm right, I'll never change my mind, and I'll never shut up till you agree with me".

It's the best screening device on the Internet.

I was raised Episcopalian, but converted to Unitarian Universalism. My mother converted to Catholicism. And I'm estranged from my father.

My mom converted because she was, as she put it, tired of figuring out morality for herself. (That troubled me, and continues to trouble me.) My father adopted a grown woman as his daughter, then pushed his real family away, and now lives with the woman who calls him "Daddy" because he thinks it's his Christian duty to abandon his family for this woman who's using him.

So this is just to say that yes, I have some issues with Christianity. It's difficult for me to practice tolerance for my parents' views. My mom and I are growing closer, and are more able to talk about spiritual things without hurting each other, but I refuse to reconcile with my father until he stops hurting his family in God's name.

I hold a great deal of respect for the type of Christianity I was raised with. During my confirmation class, the priest leading it mentioned Pascal's Wager. (If I believe in God but there is no God, then I've lost nothing; but if I disbelieve and there is a God, then I've lost eternal life.) In that priest's view, God prefers an honest atheist to someone who only believes out of fear. Something else I was taught: conscience is the voice of God; if you want to hear God's voice, listen to your own heart.

To me, those are good religious messages.

I don't think anyone really worships the true God. We try, but all we're really worshiping is our ideas about God. I think maybe the best we can do is make sure our ideas about God are ones that benefit ourselves and everyone around us.

Jim,

You write, "If i live my life as a christian..DIE..and the BIBLE is not
real than what have i lost...NOTHING."

You only entertain two notions. Either the Bible is true, or there is no God and no afterlife.

That's not logical. If the Bible is NOT real, which I believe it is, but if it is NOT real and another religion IS real, then you may be in for an afterlife of suffering.

MJ

"Secular fundamentalism is as prone to arrogance, ignorance and violence as any organized religion."

Unfortunately, your rhetorical sophistry has no basis in factual reality.

I challenge you to name/cite two incidents of individuals murdered/maimed by proponents of Secular Humanism, funneled by the Secular Humanists' personal interpretation of Humanism (or of Atheism, etc.).

A partial list of those murdered by proponents (generally "strong proponents" or "radicals") of Religions, explicitly due to their (personal) interpretation of their religious beliefs:

1. 9/11 victims
2. Suicide Bombing victims in Israel
3. Apostasy/Heresy executions in Islamic nations
4. Abortion Bombers in the United States
5. Catholics murdered by Protestant (English Gov't and other) forces in N. Ireland
6. Protestants murdered by IRA (Catholic Forces) in N. Ireland
6. Sunni Muslims murdered by Shia militias ("death squads") in Iraq
7. Shia Muslims murdered by Mujahadeen, Al-Qaeda and related Sunni forces in Iraq
8. Victims of the Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka
9. Hindus killed by Islamic forces during the India-Pakistan breakup
10. Muslims killed by Hindu forces during the India-Pakistan breakup
11. Victims of the Catholic Medieval Inquisitions

This is a perfunctory, top-of-the-head list.

It is a wonderful rhetorical argument to say that one's belief concerning one's God is a personal belief that should be kept personal, and respected by others.

But the 9/11 bombers believed that their personal relationship with their God... Led them to fly planes into buildings. Using Mr. Lear's logic, who are we to question the terms of their personal relationship with their God??

Mr. Lear's opinion has been explicitly formed to combat religious radicalism. But the notion that everyone's internal religious beliefs must be respected is precisely what leaves the door open for radical interpretations to result in murder/death/mayhem.

There is little coherence in postulating "respect people's personal faith," and also "but THIS and THAT (insert exclusive, radical, evil, murderous, etc.) kind of personal faith are perversions, and cannot be respected."

The association of religion with politics does bring some interesting responses!

Unlike Elizabeth I WOULD like my children to hear prayers at school and at football games - and everywhere else! In my view a complete Christian society would be ideal. But that unfortunately will never happen here - and it should not happen as long as there are those who do not share my beliefs. I do not by default accept as valid someone else's beliefs about God - but I will absolutely defend that person's right to believe whatever he/she wishes. I do not believe that my belief in Jesus makes me a religious bigot however. The Bible (should one choose to believe it) expounds that Jesus is Lord - which by definition means that no one else is. The Jesus/Buddha/Alla/Vishnu "unknownness" of God put forth here in the name of pluralism is nice but humanistic to the core. One may believe such a thing - but this is not consistent with any sort of Christianity. Rather it is humanism cloaked sentimentally with religious tradition.

> Who on earth was talking about your grandmother? You are just making up some imaginary attack on your grandmother to justify your own bigotry.

Imaginary attack? From what I understand, the Bible is pretty clear on this point: she had not accepted Jesus as her Lord and Saviour so she has to go to Hell. I wish I were imagining that, but that is what you believe, isn't it?

> I'm sure your grandmother would be appalled to see her spirit associated with your bigoted and hateful comments.

She might not have liked my angry tone, but she agreed with the content of my posts.

>... while you blame some nameless "Christian" for doing the same.

No, I named some names. Take your pick.

And neither you nor any of the other Bible-quoters posting here have addressed the point: why is it "justice" and "mercy" for someone like my Grandmother have to go to Hell while someone like Ted Haggard or Tim McVeigh gets to go to Heaven?

I no longer believe in God since the Dodgers left Brooklyn. The next thing you know is they will close Coney Island.

Amen WILL.

This dialogue appears to have failed. Okay, that's it. Everyone shut up. Everyone loses You will be fined $1 for every incident of name-calling, irrelevance, claims not to understand "how people can believe...", personal attack, thanks to people for confirming stereotypes, failure to adhere to English Standard, and jaywalking. All praises to Daffy Duck.

Sholo,

I agree with you that "Religion is a personal interaction between an individual and whatever form of supreme being he/she believes"
You do not have to force it on anyone, but live it, be a roll model and let people see and get impressed and may follow you.

Oh, those poor, petty and small minds!
The Bible is to you what the instructions booklet is to the vcr: you can't even set the clock.
No, your dad was not the strongest guy on the block, just deal with it.
Bigots of all religions show us everyday that the breadth of the concept of a god is way too great for a feeble bigotted mind.
Poor God, she must be really diapointed.

To all EXCEPT non born again Christians:
You MUST BE BORN AGAIN!!
The Kingdom of God is a Spiritual Kingdom.
Flesh and blood will not inherit the Kingdom of God. You must be found IN Him. In whom? In Christ. Ephesians 1 KJV.

For the time being how about we concentrate more on caring for each other. Then in a hundred years when were all dead whichever group got this God thing right will get to say "I told you so" while giving their respective God a high five. Of course if the Atheists are correct it will be a silent victory for them, but a victory none the less. By the way I'm not smoking anything since the military likes to drug test us often. I just want to thank Mr. Lear for the time he took to write his article. The fact that all of you have responded to this article means something more. Each of us has an interest in this world and each other. The time each of you have taken to respond is proof of that. Whatever you believe or don't believe just take a moment each day to do something for someone else. Nothing big, maybe just holding a door open for someone and not being mad when they don't say thank you. Just like tossing loose change into a jar it starts to add up over time.

As for my faith, I'm not telling but after meeting good people from all corners of the Earth and of differing beliefs I am left with a question. Why would God banish those from his house who have lived a good life with a warm heart just because their faith differs from my own, when these same people would be welcome in my own here on Earth?

Man...I gotta stop letting that Satan guy for causing me to question.

Care for each other, were not all as bad as we think we are.

While I do agree with Mr. Lear that it would be rare for two people to be having the same inner spiritual experience, I don't see why that necessarily means that people ought not public about their faith. Mr. Lear mentioned that there are cases in which people going public with their faith lead to "mayhem and murder." Yes, there are cases in history of this happening. But there are far more cases in history in which people shared their faith and "murder and mayhem" did not follow. Some people drive; does that mean that everyone should stop driving or having a glass of wine because some people make decisions to be irresponsible. Some people use knives to murder; does that mean that every cook around the world needs to find another way to prepare food simply because some misuse an otherwise helpful and necessary instrument. It is impossible to never share one's faith. It is apart of us. It "leaks" out in conversations. We take it with us whereever we go. And in many cases, people enjoy sharing beliefs with one another. Many people are helped by finding out what other people hold onto when life doesn't make any sense. And simply doesn't make sense for everyone to simply keep a lid on it just avoid "murder and mayhem."

To Patti in Dallas,

Patti, the entire Bible is not literal, and care has to be taken when to make the distinction between literal and figurative. This is an acquired discernment that comes from doing a lot of reading, but mostly from hearing good Ministers. In Genesis where it is written: “and God said let there be light”, that is certainly literal. However, in many verses of the Bible, light means “Truth” or “the Word” or “Jesus.” Many times the Bible uses a word in the broadest possible meaning. God thinks very big all of the time. Every now and then God will give you interpretive revelation that you will know for sure is real. It often happens to me when I am reading a verse for the umteenth time. All of a sudden it’s there. Don’t be afraid of it…it is your reward. I typically ask God for discernment just before opening the Book. It works. But no version is word for word literally.

Here’s another one. When the Bible says it is better to live than to die, “to live” means to have eternal life. To “die” means to die to eternal death, sometimes referred to as the second death. Also note that one cannot literally die twice, and so here again is a non-literal phrase. Again, God is big picture. The longest we can live on earth is 120 years. God wants to take you way beyond 120 years. Whenever you get hung up while reading the Bible, stop a minute and search for the farthest reaching meaning of the word or phrase that is your stumbling block. That is, think of God covering all of mankind in the words. He often covers the past, present and the future in one phrase because he is not a God of time. In this phrase; “Surely this generation shall not pass until…” the word “generation” refers to everything past Creation.” There was the creation, and we are in the “generation.” Notice how “time” is taken out of the equation, as the message applies to all of mankind until the end.

The best I can offer you for learning how to read the Bible is to give you Dr. Frederick KC Price. He is the Pastor of Ever Increasing Faith Ministries in Crenshaw California. Catch Ever Increasing Faith on Sundays via cable or dish and you will be enlightened. I’m in Maryland and I get him on cable 295.

Patti, thanks for asking me. I’m flattered.

Jim:

I just read your post at 5:12. Sorry I mistook your excitement for shouting. I apologize for my post at 12:24. Peace.

What is the point in believing in Jesus if you do not believe what he says? He didn't leave room for religious tolerance since if He was physically walking among us today He might say something like: "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me". - John 14:6 Sounds pretty intolerant wouldn't you say? When Christians speak of Jesus being the only way, we are just reiterating what He already said. There are several factors that support our belief in Him and His claims; such as the historical evidence of His existing on earth, His spectacular ministry of healing which brought Him much recognition, and the fact of His resurrection which although attacked by many throughout the years cannot be discounted if truly investigated with an honest heart. Not to mention the tremendous life changing impact of His message, which still transforms lives even today.

So my point is that Jesus himself claimed to be the only way to heaven and there are only two options for the hearer of this claim; Either to reject His claim and believe that all religions are basically the same or to accept His claim and follow His teachings. He Himself was hated by many for His teachings and promised that those who followed Him would also be hated (John 15:8). What is the point in halfheartedly believing in your God? Either it's true or not. Either Jesus was God incarnate or a great deceiver. If He is who He claimed to be then there is no room for anything else, and if He's not then it really doesn't matter either way.

Ultimately what you believe is important, especially whether it's true or not. Pascal's Wager: "If you believe in God and turn out to be incorrect, you have lost nothing -- but if you don't believe in God and turn out to be incorrect, you will go to hell." Seeking truth should be our ultimate pursuit and not just seeking to make everything true.

"As for the person who hears my words but does not keep them, I do not judge him. For I did not come to judge the world, but to save it. There is a judge for the one who rejects me and does not accept my words; that very word which I spoke will condemn him at the last day". -- Jesus of Nazareth

Is my sincerest wish that your search for truth would lead you to Him who earnestly seeks you with passionate love; Jesus.

May God bless you all.

Joel Hunter, the temporary head of the Christian Coalition of America, resigned this week. The group would not support his desire to address world poverty and the environment. Gay marriage -- righto-- that's a lot more important. To you Christians on this blog: where are your consciences? Didn't Jesus say something about taking care of the poor? Shouldn't addressing human suffering really be at the top of your agenda? If you want converts, then for God's sake, set an example -- DO THE RIGHT THING!!!

Holy sh__! No wonder we have so many problems in this world -- just reading the many intolerant, know-it-all, hateful responses here reaffirms my preference to stay away from religion.

I strive to be a good, kind, polite and nice person who will help others as often as I can. I don't need some ficticious entity and related book to help me be a good person. I do it because its the right thing to do.

Religion seems to be at the foundation of nearly all wars and hate in this world. I often believe that the world would be a much better place without religion. I think John Lennon was right.

Peace to everyone.

For all those who took my writing in caps as "shouting" I apoligize.It was intended to be a sign of excitement.I pray and wish the best for everyone contributing to this blog.I love all of ya'll and hope you find what your looking for.I have.I live for CHRIST.....Peace be with all of you.

I'd like to preface these comments by saying that I think all organized religion is essentially ridiculous, so Muslims, don't take this personal. Religion has no place in the 21st century if we really want to confront the true problems facing humanity.

While I mostly agree with Mr. Lear, Mohammed did however advocate violence to convert non-believers, and Islam did spread thanks to violence. That is just a fact.

Christianity also spread widely due to the use of violence, however Christ himself never advocated this. Christ never advocated 90% of the things that the "religious right" claim he advocated.

At least Muslums are honest about it.

Mike:

Don't deny your fundamentalist leanings - publicly embrace them. For those of us who are truly saved (damn all disbelievers to hell) recognize the codewords "secular fundamentalist" as a public acknowledement that their demise is near at hand.

No longer must we put up with the theory that man is decended from ape (and the lie that 98.5% of human and chimpanzee DNA is identical);

No longer must our children be taught that trees grow an additional ring each year (or shown the fabricated tree slices indicating trees older than 6000 years);

No longer must our children be taught that outerspace is a void, and not made up of the celestial water seperated from the terrestrial by God on the 2nd day (for Genesis shows that the moon launch, communications satellites, etc. are also fabricated);

No longer must we have to address such questions as: How did jaguars get to the ark? or Where did all the water go? or Why do we need the sun if there was already light?

Our victory is at hand because we have the power - the power to declare once and for all that the "separation of church and state" was never intended by the framers, and that this is truly a Christian Nation- a Fundamentalis/Evangelical Christian Nation. Then we can truly set our country on God's path.

Did some Pagans post? Mike, I've got a rope if you've got a tree. Let's get the liberal bigots.

This is a fantastic opportunity to play "logical fallacy" bingo.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_fallacies

I have two points:

1. Would you allow someone to continue to eat raw meat if you could tell them about the process of cooking it - Assume they don't wish to continue to suffer the effects of eating raw meat? Then how could you not tell everyone you meet about a better way of life as you see it through serving God.

2. Would I be called a called a hater of those who are unable to speak if I identified them a dumb? I am simply stating a fact and using the word appropriately. Them why would Christians be haters for calling non-Christians heathens? Does not the word heathen refer to a person who has not been converted to beleiving in the God of the bible?

It dishonors the god you serve by keeping his goodness deep down inside.

The problem with this whole discussion is that people have gotten away from a few "men's" messges of good will, and peace towards all..in exchange for rationalizing reasons why this world is messed up (evil and whatnot). I believe that the messages should be thought of first, because after all they are ideals that we can all agree on. That being said, I'm a little tired of the "holier than thou" mentality of fundamentalist religious figures who cause more hatred. violence and a downright hypocritical stance on those who do not believe exactly what "the church" wants them too. I know people of all walks of life "good, bad, druggies, speed freaks, doctors, lawyers, social workers, dropouts, etc..." and know matter who the person is they have directly affected my life and the way i go about my daily business, and have shaped the way i justify certain situations. I think after 2000 years the "man's message" has been overshadowed by percieved other-worldly actions. John Lennon spoke his entire life of love, peace, and the expansion of the human condition, but in no way shape or form am i going to say that he was a savior or diety... he was simply an enlightened man. Profits, saviors, enlightened ones were just men with radical,outside the box, other-worldly ideas, and had the strength to see them through....for the betterment of us all. If Jesus were alive today i would like to talk to him, not as an other-worldly diety, but as a "human" with some good ideas and compassion in his "human" heart.

It's always amazing to me the lack of tolerance among the "Christians". Christ's teachings were all about tolerance, love and charity. I know of no teachings of the Apostles that taught otherwise. The same can be said of the Q'uran and Muhammed's teachings (and most other religions, for that matter). Yet I hear the vilest, most intolerant and full of hate words from people who claim to be religous. By all measures, that is hypocrisy.

To God : well said :)

Stopping calling my name. I am going to be sick.

Religion is a personal interaction between an individual and whatever form of supreme being he/she believes. When middlemen come in between in the form of organized religion, the whole sanctity of the personal interaction is lost and religion becomes a commodity, with choices being made based on herd mentality. As long as these intermediaries exist the term "peaceful religion" is a misnomer.

Pukkah... tee hee...

So Mike, how old are you. From the tone of your writing, I'd say sixteen. Am I close?

I am a Christian. I believe that God gave all humans a divine spark that lives within us. Religion to me is very personal. I believe that was the point Mr. Lear was making. Jesus asked his disciples who did the Father hear in the Temple, the gentleman who wanted all to hear his prayer or the widow who asked God to forgive her sins and transgressions. To some, the relationship with God is personal, others want to spread the message in a vocal manner. It is should be up to the individual to make that choice. I believe Mr. Lear made that point.

I would like to quote Alcee Hastings (D-CA), after he was skipped by Pelosi for the chair of the Intelligence COmmittee:

"Sorry, haters, God is not finished with me yet."

No, this doesn't add to the current discussion; I just thought it was a hilarious, cartoonish statement. It sounds like the words of a religious K-Fed to all of his (billions of?) detractors (seriously, if he was born in China, they would have scratched their heads and wondered why the parents decided to keep him as their one child).

I have many friends who believe in the inerrancy of the Bible. Some are progressive, some conservative, some believe the world was created 6,000 years ago, some believe homosexuality is a sin, and all reject the universalist ideas espoused by Mr. Lear.

I agree with Mr. Lear about the nature of God. But I also respect my evangelical friends (although I think they're wrong and hurtful in their attitudes towards homosexuality).

Yes, they believe I can't go to heaven except through Jesus Christ, but I don't take it personally. I say, that's OK, I don't believe such a place exists, but I appreciate their caring enough about me to try to get me there.

It's interesting that the Bible thumpers can only quote the Bible to make their point. They cannot go to thier heart or their conscious. It is their total lack of respect for the beliefs of others that gives Christianity a bad name and makes it repulsive to so many. Their God is worse than Saddam Hussein, he would burn good people that lead righteous lives in hell for all eternity. All these "Christians" are doing is following rules, they are not spiritual and their hearts are closed. Their God I want no part of. For once and for all, Religion is crowd control,it's spirituality that is authentic and deep within all of us.

To Mr. Lear:
Well said, sir, as always!

To JIM:
I just read your posts of 11:06am and 12:17pm. Make your points, but PLEASE DON'T SHOUT!

Thanx!

For all of the literalists who believe that John 14:6, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one can come to the Father except through me" means that only Christians are saved: here's a thought--I once heard a sermon in which the speaker had a different take on what "through me" meant. His idea was that maybe Jesus was saying "Hey folks--about all of this 'judging one another' stuff--why don't you leave it to Me? You know, my Father and I are really in a better position to decide who's saved and who isn't...really...trust Us on this one..."

So why don't we? Why are we so set on judging and destroying one another? Last time I checked, I wasn't exactly omniscient.

Kudos to you, Mr. Lear, for your wise words.

Norman!
Norman!
Norman!
.

RodinFan:

You know nothing about my approach to religion. None of my comments come from a religious viewpoint at all.

beleive it or not, not everyone who thinks bigotry against religion is wrong is religious. I'm not black but I think racists are sleazebags.

Frankly, the real comedy is seeing a bunch of ignorant fools like yourself attack Christians as bigoted with a mountain of ignorant bigotry.

Now get back to your hating. I'm sure you will feel great letting more people know how much you hate folks who dont share your narrow views on the "religion and life".

Despite all the comments here from people who claim to be so devout and faithful to their respective religious fath, I see little to no acceptance, let alone any tolerance towards one another's varying religious beliefs. This is truly sad.

I've wasted enough time talking to bigots.

There are some really hateful liberals out there. Sorry to see so much hate and ignorance from folks who consider themselves to be enlightened.

Get back to your hating now.

I'm starting to think that it was Mr. Lear himself who wrote the comments attributed to MIKE, GREG and some of the others. For only a brilliant Comedy writer like he, who gave us Archie Bunker and such, could have come up with characters so comically buffoon in their approach to life and religion.

I dont understand why following one faith and accepting others who follow a different faith have to be mutually exclusive, and even the intellectuals in this discussion who criticize Mr. Lear are defying their integrity. Love your faith (or lack thereof) and let others do the same. If your Religion isnt even teaching that, then the whole thing is a sham..

Mr. Lear,

There are two things in this world that I try not to engage in public. One is politics and the other is religion.

Well, it seems you have opened Pandora's Box on religion and thereby released the people who can’t seem to resist the game of "My God is the only true God". They have missed your message of, "Keep God within us". One hundred years from now when they are dead and gone from this world. Sadly, they will only be known by their deeds, and by the way they lived, and by the way they treated their fellow human beings, regardless of their religious or non-religious beliefs.

I'M IGNORANT AND BIGOTED? And people shove these crazy bible names with numbers after their names around like they're such experts on morality.

What are the rest of us then? Are we immoral.

Please, if I hear one more time "you must accept JESUS AS YOUR SAVIOR IN ORDER TO BE SAVED" I think I'll throw up.

Chan_eil_Leis_Agam:

Who on earth was talking about your grandmother? You are just making up some imaginary attack on your grandmother to justify your own bigotry.

I'm sure your grandmother would be appalled to see her spirit associated with your bigoted and hateful comments. You defile her memory with your bigotry.

Don't you folks see the irony here? It is you who are making the hateful comments while you blame some nameless "Christian" for doing the same. Read the posts on this board. It is the secularists who are spewing hate not the religious folks.

tsk, tsk, name calling, name calling.

If I'm a bigot, then so are the so called religious types who look down their noses and proclaim YOU MUST BELIEVE IN JESUS CHRIST AS YOUR SAVIOR.

I mean, how is that not intolerant and bigoted and hateful and mean? Tit for tat is what I'm doing. Get it? I'm not ignorant. I am just sick to death of these people with their bible numbers James 10:15:25 [what is it a lottery number?]. They toss out these bible names with numbers and you're supposed to be impressed and "saved". ROFLMAO

You shove these kinds of statements down peoples' throats and you expect them to just take it and agree? Oh, yes, you're right, I'm not as good as you are. I must be immoral if I don't believe "Jebsus" is my savior. Get real, will you? It's such absolute nonsense and I am sick to death of it.

With apologies to Lao-Tse:

That Mystery which some call “God” is beyond
The power of words to define or describe.
Many words may be used, but are none of them absolute:
Truth is constrained by no name,
Nor limited by any word.

In the beginning, there were no words or names,
Only That in which Being and Truth perfectly exist.
The vast and awesome Universe
Sprang forth in Silence.
Words sprang forth from the minds of men and women.

Whether one dispassionately sees to the core,
Or passionately sees the surface,
The Mind of God understands that core and surface are nevertheless the same.
Words only make them seem different
So as to express their appearances to mortal folk.

If name for God be needed, human wonder shall invoke it.
From wonder into Wonder
Existence opens
Unto the thinking of the Thought Divine.

Kudos to Mr. Lear. I couldn't agree with him more; but, what I truly "pray" for is for religion to go away. It is the cause of more heartache and bloodshed than any other single source. And I mean ALL religions.
Religions were created by males for the care and feeding of males. Deities are male, prophets are male, 'saviors' are male, their apostles are male, religious leaders are male, 'sacred writings' are written by and about males, males decided what 'sacred' writings comprise the accepted 'Holy Bible', and males have sanctified their atrocities with religion throughout the ages--and still do today. This is not anti-religious rant, simply facts.
Whatever force and/or entity that is responsible for this never-ending mystery we call our universe is way beyond gender. And I have faith that by keeping my eyes, ears, and brain open I will have a better chance of catching a glimpse of 'The Truth' of our existence than if I constrict my intelligence within some religious ideology that forces me to close my mind and stop asking quesions. We are hard-wired to ask what's on the other side of the mountain, what is this magnificent cosmos and why are we in it. You can't see the light with closed eyes, nor can you perceive 'The Truth' with a closed mind. Amen.

Dearest Elizabeth,

You are most likely what doctors would call an idiot.

Mr. Lear would probably refer to you as "meathead." Are you smart enough to get the reference? Probably not.

I feel sorry for your children. You should do them a favor and leave them with the lady with the broom stick.

Love always,

Geoff

It is amazing how people quote the Bible and are so swept up by it.

It is very curious to me.

And these certain Christians are quick to condemn anyone who does not "accept Jesus as the savior" as either going to hell or somewhere other than a good place.

My only problem with these Christians is that I usually find they are the biggest hypocrites. I live a life of love and respect to other people and creatures. I think if there is a Jesus and he is a judge, he will take those of us who are more ethical before he takes these sinners who "accept Jesus" but need to keep asking for his forgiveness.

Evelyn:

You may have never been a "drunk, wife/husband beater, druggie, or a hooker", but you sure are an ignorant and hateful bigot.

Is that any better?

Norman Lear writes:

"We've learned, from time immemorial, that when we trot out our gods
and go public with them, we can’t seem to resist the game of
'my God is the only true God.' Mayhem and murder follow."

So far, so good. Mr. Lear is making the same observation that
Fyodor Dostoevsky made years ago:

". . . to find community of worship is the chief misery of every man
individually and of all humanity from the beginning of time. For the
sake of common worship they've slain each other with the sword.
They have set up gods and challenged one another, 'Put away
your gods and come and worship ours, or we will kill you
and your gods!' And so it will be to the end of the world,
even when gods disappear from the earth; they will fall down
before idols just the same." (from The Brothers Karamazov)

But then Mr. Lear goes on to say:

"From what religion or prophet have we received such instruction?
Certainly not Jesus, Mohammed, Mahabharata, Moses or the Buddha"

Well, not the Hindu Mahabharata at any rate, with Hinduism's
many gods. And not the Buddha, whose Buddhism recognizes
no god. But is Mr. Lear correct about Jesus, Mohammed and Moses?

Craig writes:

"Throwing out passages from whichever holy book is quoted does nothing,
as many others also have a holy book which, if taken literally, does the
same for their point of view."

Quoting holy books won't establish which religion is the right one,
because the Muslim will not accept the authority of the Book of Mormon,
nor will the Catholic accept the authority of the Talmud. However,
a look at the holy books of Jesus, Mohammed and Moses ought
to be enough to disprove Mr. Lear's assertion about the instruction
those worthy gentlemen gave.

As Mark Farr has already written today, the Gospel of John tells us
that Prophet Jesus (peace be upon him!) declared, "I am the way,
the truth, and the life. No one can come to the Father except through me."
(John 14:6)

Prophet Mohammed (Allah's blessing and peace be upon him
and his companions!), the Messenger of Allah, recorded the
message of Allah in the Qur'an as dictated by the Angel Gabriel.
And what is in this message that Mohammed recorded?

"Anyone who refuses to believe in Allah and His messenger,
we have prepared for the disbelievers a hellfire."
[Sura 48:13]

Finally, there is Prophet Moses (peace be upon him!), who
recorded the Five Books of Moses as dictated to him on
Mount Sinai in the Middle East:

"Know this day, and lay it to thy heart, that the LORD, He
is God in heaven above and upon the earth beneath;
there is none else." (Deuteronomy 4:39)

So Mr. Lear is wrong. Jesus, Mohammed and Moses
each taught that his god was the only true one. When
will we find out which of them (if any) was right? On the
Last Day, the Day of Affliction, as revealed by Prophet
Jeremiah (peace be upon him!):

"[T]he Gentiles shall come unto thee from the ends of the earth,
and shall say, Surely our fathers have inherited lies, vanity,
and things wherein there is no profit." (Jeremiah 16:19b, KJV)

The point is taken: I shouldn't have said "Christian," I should have said "self-professed Christians like..." and had a long list of name including, for example (in alphabetical order) G.W. Bush, J. Bakker, B. Clinton, J. Falwell, T. Haggard, J. Jackson, T. McVeigh, P. Robertson, A Sharpton, J. Swaggart, ... (add your own favorites). My apologies to more humble Christians whom I may have offended.

As far as peace and tolerance goes, I'm happy to leave you in peace and tolerate you while you follow your conscience, smoke your meth with a male escorts, etc. Whatever floats your boat.

What really frosts me and strains my tolerance, though, is this idea that someone can do pretty much whatever they want and still think they're going to Heaven just because they can throw around Bible verses, while someone like my grandmother gets turned away by Saint Peter.

Poor little children! (so intelligent but so emotional)

Ready to roll a dice again!

Baffled Pagan:

I agree with you position entirely. Both secularists and believers need to respect other views. Seems to me that it is the secularist who are the ones showing intolerance on this board.

elizabeth:

Sorry, the Constituion allows us to practice our religion (or opposition to it). I am sure that there are many devout people who don't want to deal with your faith or lack therof.

There is a solution, though. You can withdraw from society, so as not to upset your intolerance disposition. You clearly harbor a bigoted hatred towards Christians as you describe them as child abusers and mock their "buy bull". Why would you want to go to their birthday parties? Sounds like a Klansman who gripes about going to a black kid's party.

Again my point is proven. Secular fundamentalists are just as prone to ignorance and bigotry as any religious fundamentalist.

To speak of religious belief is not to speak of peace. It is imposed conformity, deliberate ignorance, convenient interpretationalism and hate of those who do not believe as you do.

The truth is given to you, it is not discovered, the answers you're allowed to find must conform to local dogma, to defy this with observed fact or meritorial debate is to invoke blasphemy and heresy.

Sorry, but you can hide your faith, but so long as you hold yourself to it, you're declaring anyone who doesn't believe in the God you create in your own image your enemy for defying Its will.

How do you reconcile yourself to pantheonists like the Hindus? Or the Pagans of various stripe? Are these still the persecuted outcasts? What of Christianity's sick perversion of the perceived meaning of the pentagram? Does your belief in its representation as a symbol of evil override the pagan belief in its positive symbolic meaning in their faith? Who's the final authority?

Humanity has a future, and it lies beyond the primitive belief in the supernatural. If anything, the persistance of monolithic religious faith, and the ongoing struggles between the varying forms of faith tell me we haven't learned much since the days when hearts were carved from the chests of willing sacrifices on top of ziggurats.

What is up with the hostility towards the idea that humans can't all see the divine in exactly the same way? We as a species can't agree on anything, not just religion. Deal with it and calm down. Practice your way in peace, but leave the rest of us out of it, we have our own Path to follow.

Elizabeth - you sure got that right - please people spare us your platitudes, threats, denigrations and dire predictions for our afterlives.

Read your bibles, listen to your televangelists, donate money, go to church, who cares? Please just leave the rest of us alone! You're no better than the rest of us.

Most of you are former reprobates who "got saved" and now want to make life miserable for those of us who were never drunks, wife/husband beaters, druggies, hookers, whatever. PLEASE

Mike:

"Intolerance is personal flaw, not some flaw imposed on us by religion."

I'd say that a religion that says that if someone worships in a different manner then that person should be tortured for all eternity, is pretty much the definition of intolerant.

Think about it. If I rounded up everyone in town and said "Who here did not vote Republican", and then shot those who admitted it, you'd think I was pretty intolerant.

But if I round up everyone in town and say "who isn't a christian" and then torture them for all eternity, I'm not supposed to think that intolerant?

I don't want to be tolerant or respect other people's religions. I don't want to know about them, I don't want to see them. They're none of my business. They are a private matter.

I don't want them having influence on my kids' education. I don't want my kids to endure a moment of silence while the principal reads a morality thought over the intercom in my kids' public school.

I don't want to go to a birthday party and start it off with a stupid prayer. A prayer uttered by a woman who beats her kids with a broom stick and goes to buy bull study five days a week.

keep it to yourself and those who want to hear it.

John M:

Perhaps you could start in your search for "a religion that doesn't require me to assume that anyone who doesn't believe what I do is somehow inferior" by not treating others beliefs as inferior.

It isn't about what religion you are. There are tolerant Christians and intolerant Christians. There are tolerant secularists and intolerant secularists. I would hazard a guess that there are even intolerant Taoists.

Intolerance is personal flaw, not some flaw imposed on us by religion.

....and God delicately placed the earth on the back of a great turtle so that it might ride slowly and elegantly across the great salt-marsh of time.

"But where is this salt-marsh, Teacher?"

The great salt-marsh lies at the bottom of the Well of Forgetfulness.

"If so Teacher what surrounds the Well of Forgetfullness?"

The Well is surrounded by the Plains of Dogash wherin dwell the unclean disbeleivers.

"There are dis-beleivers Teacher? But how could they be born and not automatically know God?"

Because they were conceived while God was resting and he did not create a soul for them.

"But Teacher, did you not say ALL men and women are created by God?"

Yes, it is true but not all have souls and therefore are unclean and may not know God"

"But Teacher, if God is all powerful why would he allow some to be born unclean?"

In order to act as counterbalance and to warn the true beleivers from straying from their path.

"But Teacher, wouldn't that make God LESS than "all loving"?"

Oh go to hell you nasty little Jesuit!

"My only point is that secular fundamentalists like yourself act in the same fashion as some fundamentalists of organized religion"

Ah, okay I understand. I really don't think either of my posts can be defined as mocking. I didn't really mean them that way.

And I'm hardly a "secular fundamentalist" - I'm quite spiritual and frankly would like to find a religion that doesn't require me to assume that anyone who doesn't believe what I do is somehow inferior or unclean. I'm leaning towards Taoist thought at the moment...

Wow, what an awful perception of my position. There is a moderate presence in this forum, in spite of the vitriolic words of the extremes of both sides. "Religious right?" I don't know if I have ever been more mislabeled in all my life (except for the time I tried to go by the nickname "Shaq;" a short, skinny white guy can't quite pull that one off).

Actually, I do regularly attend church, Unitarian Universalist. Sorry, but UUs are about as far from a dogmatic, Bible-quoting group as one can get.

Craig:
Sorry for the Bears slight, but the hole in the roof of Texas Stadium is so God can watch his favorite team play (now without a shanking, over paid kicker; instead we have a kicker that hasn't played in two years, lovely).

elizabeth:

Chan was criticizing "the Christians" (as if that was some homogenous group), not secular fundamentalist.

"What I hear the Christians saying is this: you can lie, cheat, steal, fornicate, kill, preen your smug self in front of the cameras, and lecture people about morality on Sunday after spending Saturday smoking meth with a male escort, just so long as you make a point of feeling bad about it periodically and renewing your Jesus loyalty oath."

This is talking about peace and tolerance? Please.

"Yehuda" does not really belong in a list also containing "God, the deity, creator, Buddha, Mohammed, [and] Jesus." In Jewish history, Yehuda is the founder of one of the 12 tribes of Israel, albeit the one from which most of today's Jews descend. He was not a deity, law-giver or prophet. According to Jewish tradition, the "true name" of God is unutterable outside of the long-destroyed Temple and, in any event, is not known by any living Jew.

John M,

I don't claim any exclusive truth. I don't practice any religion. Stop assuming that anyone who doesn't share your narrow viewpoints is some wacko.

I also am not arrogant enough to think that I could enlighten you. My only point is that secular fundamentalists like yourself act in the same fashion as some fundamentalists of organized religion. For example, you feel the need to mock and disprove those who hold certain beliefs. Kind of like the narrow-minded fundamentalists who try to mock and disprove the beliefs of others.

My point is that, like many (not all or most) secular fundamentalists, you are just as intolerant of other beliefs as any other fundamentalist. If somone posted some rational argument trying to convince you to change your beliefs, you would criticize that post. That is what I have done when you have committed the same offense.

um, Mike Chan_eil was sayng that he didn't understand hateful secular fundamentalists...

wild. the writer was talking about peace and tolerance and look at all the rage his thoughts churned up.

kind of all speaks for itself.

Was this a debate? I missed that among all the trvial bible verses and Jesus or nobody posts.

It's a real turn off and raises my hackles; hence, I respond with vituperative words and denigrating remarks.

Happy now?

I'm an agnostic, okay? And the more I hear and read from you "religious" right types, the more I am convinced there couldn't possibly be a god. If there was a god, I would hope he had enough sense to send you righties to the flames before we more normal people.

Evelyn "the Flamethrower,"

I assume you have never been accused of eloquence and subtlety. You know, I have honestly found that nothing changes someone's mind like belittling them. Really, this is why spousal abuse is done for the charity of the abused. Truly, you have the debating skills of Lincoln, as well as his diplomacy. Wow, what a breath of fresh air. Mmm, thank you for your post.

Very insightful, thoughtful essay by Mr. Lear. As one who is Pagan, I embrace the idea that everyone's relationship with Diety is personal, and that the "Golden Rule" should be lived.

"An it harm NONE (my emphasis), do what ye will".

'Nuff said.

"Thanks for demonstrating my point. Your arrogance, ignorance and intolerance are no different than that of the arrogance, ignorance and intolerance of any hateful fundamentalist. You are no different."

Mike:

How was my comment intolerant? I explained something I didn't understand about those who claim exclusive truth.

As I understand it, fundamentalist christians believe that if you don't worship the christian god, you go to hell. I asked, given how many billions of people that dooms, how can that be fair or loving. Please feel free to enlighten me.

thanks, Mike, glad you got my message. LOL

Chan_eil_Leis_Agam is another hateful secular fundamentalist. Seems to be an unending supply of ignorant folks who are so insecure they need to demonize any who dont share their narrow and bigoted viewpoints.

When the Seed-Ship landed I asked permission to step out and stretch my legs and take a couple of "happy-snappys" (photos) for the folks back home.

As we were nearing the end of the off-load I stepped behind a nearby rock to releive myself on real dirt for one last time (I always hated the recyclers - trusted them but still...well you know).

As I was buttoning-up I heard a terrible, ominous roar and whoosh and saw the ship become a bright star in the sky. No sense yelling I remember thinking, it is simply "over".

That was a long time ago. I have watched you descend (actually ascend) from the apes and I must tell you - I STILL like the apes better.

My late Grandmother was a sworn atheist, but as far as I can tell, she conducting her life according to Christian ideals more than many of the bible-waving gasbags we keep hearing from probably do. She had her quirks to be sure, but she was modest, fair, kind, forgiving, hardworking, thrifty, and very generous with both her time and money.

If the Christians are right, my grandmother is now in Hell despite all of that. I hope they're wrong, but if they are right, then God is not merciful or just and only cares about having people suck up to him and call him boss.

What I hear the Christians saying is this: you can lie, cheat, steal, fornicate, kill, preen your smug self in front of the cameras, and lecture people about morality on Sunday after spending Saturday smoking meth with a male escort, just so long as you make a point of feeling bad about it periodically and renewing your Jesus loyalty oath.

But if you're not with the Jesus program, then no matter how much good you do, no matter how modestly, morally, and generously you live your life, no matter how patient, kind, and forgiving you are, you're s##t out of luck.

Maybe I'm a little slow, but I have trouble seeing how that's just and merciful.

Fear and faith cannot live in the same house and fear is the basis of rage and anger and well, messages in all caps.

In James, Jesus says no man shall worship me. I cannot imagine for all the he purportedly stood for that the rage and anger and propriety are reflections of him.

Having said that, while this may not have been Mr. Lear's intention, I take "to keep god within us" to mean stop advertising. If it is, it is and not because you said so. Your god is none of my business.

Paradox Greymind, John M, Evelyn:

Thanks for demonstrating my point. Your arrogance, ignorance and intolerance are no different than that of the arrogance, ignorance and intolerance of any hateful fundamentalist. You are no different.

Randall,

While I respect your right to disagree others on such difficult and unknowable questions as God and Faith, you certainly crossed the line (even with the FSM) in denying the divinity of da Bears. Closet Packers fan? I’m outta here. Peace everyone.

it's all a crock anyway. Why do people put down these bible reference numbers? It's just so ridiculous and you people really look like the simpletons you are.

Get a life will ya? Read something besides your stupid bible

Here is what I've never understood about those who believe that their god is the exclusive source of truth and that those who don't worship him/her are doomed:

Why would an all powerful supreme being set up a system by which the vast majority of humanity would automatically be doomed because they didn't worship that being?

No religion is anywhere close to being followed by a majority of the planet. Indeed, billions of people will live and die without having any meaningful knowledge of (for example, Jesus), so therefore are we to believe that they are all going to hell? And this from an all-loving god?

If that is his/her definition of love, I'll pass thanks.

There has been much here that has been said and not else to add except praises to the Non-Fundies for trying your very hardest not to stoop to thier level but you must relize one thing when your taught that there is only one answer to every question the mind gets lazy and becomes very irratated at the thought of haveing to restudy for the final exam and that the world veiw of us vs. them is hard to penatrate. In the end One of two things will happen the intolerant will implode as they start seeing flaws within thier own ranks or it will self immolate as it tries despertately to hold on to its self percived power it has long since lost

Wow. This collection of posts is really sad to me. I do not think this is the best forum for discussing such issues. As with other topics (politics jumps to mind!), when our "interaction" with each other is limited to one-sided comments, they can easily degenerate into unhelpful barbs. When you have a real person in front of you, who you know from experience is not an idiot or fanatic, it is much easier to consider where they're coming from and maybe even learn from each other. I don't think people on the two sides of this debate actually *know* many people on the other side. I happen to disagree with the relativism in Mr. Lear's post, but I will save my comments for an actual conversation.

Peace and love to you in Christ.

I am always amazed at how comfortable liberals are with hateful bigotry. Look at how many posters here show contempt for others who don't share their "enlightened" beliefs.

Secular fundamentalism is as prone to arrogance, ignorance and violence as any organized religion. Just as some fundamentalist Christians and Muslims use their religion as an excuse to hate others, so do many secular fundamentalists.

I often wonder if there is any point at all in these discussions, and the more I read them, the more I come to believe that there is not. Before you jump down my throat listen for a minute and then think.

Rational discussion, which is obviously the goal here, requires that the participants accept certain statements as fact. A discussion without a basis in fact quickly devolves into a shouting match.

The problem with rational discussion of religion is that each party has their own set of facts, and none are willing to concede the facts of the others. Whether it is the New Testament, the Torah, the Koran or the Vedas, each religion has a book that they quote as fact, and that each other religion claims is pure fiction. There is no objective basis on which to choose between them, and therefore we cannot discuss, we cannot argue rationally, we can only quote our "facts" back and forth at each other, which is basically just yelling.

I'll be the Muslim voice here. First, I applaud Mr. Lear's comments calling for a continuation of open worship. No one should be made to feel inferior or fearful because of their faith. Second, to all the respondents here who have said acceptance of Jesus is the only way to Heaven, I applaud you for your steadfastness in your religion. Each person should hold their religion high and be proud to believe in God (by whatever name you refer to).

Now, in defense of my own religion, let me say this: proper Muslims who follow the Qur'an and the Prophet Muhammad are NOT those Muslims you see on TV or on 9/11 pretending to be acting out of reverence to Allah. This behavior is strictly forbidden; Islam is a peaceful religion. It the misinterpreters who have made Islam synonymous with violence. Secondly, forcing someone to change their religion is against the Qur'an and the way of the Prophet. Yes, I believe in Allah and his Prophet; No, I don't believe in Jesus as a savior. I openly speak about this but never throw my views on anyone unless they specifically ask about my religion.

When Mr. Lear says to keep God to ourselves, he means that each person's experience with God is unique. He says we will be known by our acts on this earth, and that is very true. Those who have quoted the Bible and called non-Christians heathens will be known as haters. Muslims who crash planes into buildings will be known as terrorists. Christians who bomb federal buildings or abortion clinics will be known as the lost who have strayed so far from what they call their faith that they cannot legitimately call themselves "Christians" or "Muslims" anymore.

Yes, keep worshipping whatever God you believe in or no God at all. That is your right. But don't presume to tell me that your religion is better than mine...just say it is different. Don't force your Bible on me and I won't force my Qur'an on you. Be aware that for every push towards Christianity you make on non-Christians, they will fight back in defense of their own religion. Muslims who defend their religion are following their deen (faith); Muslims must preserve their faith but not spread it by the sword. But if you try to tell me that I'm a heathen, I will defend my religion in my words and actions.

Be respectful. Don't hate. I don't hate Christians, but forcing the Bible down my throat is just disrepect of the diversity this country provides. If you don't like the diversity here, you are free to move to a purely Christian country; I am free to move to a Muslim country. That is our freedom.

Salaam alaikum.

How can any rational person say they are going to "hide" the God of the universe in their heart!? That is absurd. THAT God demands to be honored WITHOUT even asking! I chose to honor Him through His Son Jesus Christ. The only manor in which He honors.

Wilbur,

That is a question for the ages. I have always wondered if actors and sports figures honestly believe that God helped them nail their performance, or see a sinking fastball better. It always seemed a little troubling that God would be so interested in the Bears chances of getting into the playoffs, but that Darfur seems to be off the radar. Yes, I will give credit -- all the credit in the world -- to the religious organizations that have stepped up to try and enact change in some of the worst places in the world, including Darfur. But the question still stands: is genocide just part of God's plan like the singing ability of most of the winners at the Grammies?

Michael,

RE: Your post at 11:27am today

Do you take the Bible literally as infallible truth as so many "Christians" do? Or is that your (& by that I mean that of & from you, Michael...and only you, Michael) interpretation of that scripture? Wouldn't a person who claims to believe every word of the Bible as the literal & inerrant word of God thus believe that when God said "light" he meant, literally, "light"? and when God said "darkness" he meant exactly that --> "darkness"?

I ask these things because I have been accused many times in my life of casting my own interpretations of scriptural text, which is an act of blasphemy according to those chastising me. While I continue to interpret the meaning of scriptures for myself within my own personal relationship with my God, I wonder if in your belief system it is "OK" to do that or if your new meanings for "light" and "darkness" are the two exceptions to an otherwise absolute literal reading of the text.

btw, which translation of the Bible is THE one we're supposed to read word-for-word literally? Anybody know?

Thanks!
Patti

Wow. Just...wow.

Just my two cents:

1. Christians are split into two main camps re: the Bible: progressives and literalists/fundamentalists. Our interpretation of the Bible gives rise to vicious infighting between those who believe that every word in the Bible is the Word of God and those who believe the Bible is divinely-inspired...but filtered through man and subject to inaccuracies and revisions b/c man is subject to greed, whimsy, etc. In the comments above we obviously see some progressive vs. fundamentalist Bible-readers.
Unfortunately, it is impossible to discuss/argue with a fundamentalist because they deal in absolutes i.e. Did God create the world? Empirically, it's impossible to say. But a fundamentalist will answer "Yes, and I refer to X verse." Boom. Stalemate; there's nowhere to go in that conversation.

2. I cannot fathom how someone could claim their religion as the true religion (for the record, I'm a practicing Christian). EVERYone's religion claims to be the true religion. Personally, Christianity just feels right and resonates with me in my heart -- but that's me. I've made my choice, but I completely respect that Islam may resonate with someone else, Wicca with another, and that some people (like poster Nik Page) equate God to an imaginary friend (I don't agree with that, but I find the wording of his/her post hilarious).

I'll gladly sit down with you and discuss religion. I believe in spreading God's word and attempting to convert people to Christianity -- but I'm not going to browbeat you. I'm not going to attempt to scare you into [my] religion with stories of hell or force you to convert like some adbucted journalists covering the war have been forced to do. In the end, it's a very personal decision and I agree with Twain in that the umbrella term "religion" is nuanced and cannot possibly be an identical experience or hold identical meaning for one person to the next.

3. Mark Farr -- per: the others, starting off calling names automatically puts people on the defensive and shuts down communication. Not a great witness, my friend. I can understand how Lear's post seems apologetic and attempts an all-encompassing sort of ideal, which Christianity is not, but resorting to name-calling bolsters those who would say Christians are becoming more and more galvanized and intolerant of anything that veers from their idealized dogma (which, incidentally, is the same thing Christians say of hard-line Muslims.)

4. For those who would quote scripture to an atheist: don't. Atheists don't believe because there is no proof and faith alone is not enough. They, like the constantly-lapsing Jews of the Old Testament, need tangible evidence of God's presence. Talk, as they say, is cheap. I have atheist friends who, if they witnessed a miracle, would gladly accept that there is a higher power. Until then...

5. That's all I've got, really. Live and let live. Judge not lest ye be judged. We'll see who's God is the real God upon death or the Eschaton or whatever you believe (get it?).

Our individual "choice" of a religion is largely a function of our spot on the planet when we were born. Whether we "choose" to be true believers, agnostics, atheists or some convenient combination over time is largely a function of the families and sub-culture into which we were born. Any true believers and any representatives of a particular religion need, as far as I am concerned, to explain how these two "choices" affect them and their religion. Lear is, of course, correct in noting the very useful function a belief system can perform for individuals and societies at large. As among belief systems, though, I believe no one can logically, or even on faith, assert supremacy or infallibility.

To Mr Lear - well said

To the christian zealots - I was wondering why all of this sounds familiar, then it struck me - a bunch of folks use verses from ANOTHER holybook to wage war against those who dont believe in THEIR god. I think they are called 'TERRORISTS'??? How can you be so intolerant of other faiths and still believe in God?

I really just wanted to type something so that there was a Christian in here who didn't scream in all caps, who didn't condemn everyone else for being an idiot or a fool or doomed to hell.

Normal guy here... who happens to believe Christ died for us all. If you don't believe that, you still have value and worth in my eyes, and you are still valueable and worthy in the eyes of the God in which I believe.

Sadly, I often wonder whether I worship the same God that some other "Christians" believe in. I'd prefer to think of these wackos as the crazy uncle or aunt that we have to acknowledge even if we all know they're crazy.

It amazes me how some people are so intolerant when they are told that other people believe differently from them. You would think that they were children and they had just been told there is no such thing as Santa. Grow up people!

I'm a Wiccan also, and I use Deity as a focusing device in my meditations. You may do so also, or not, whether you use one of mine or not. What you believe has no effect on how I interact with my Higher Power. It should have no effect on you as well. If the way I believe has an effect on you, get over it.

Opus

Thank you, Mr. Lear. Well said.

20,000,000 people who have experienced Near-Death Experiences (NDE) in the last 40 years essentially report that the time spent on the "other side of life" attributed no importance whatsoever to embracing any kind of religion.

Only two things mattered while living on earth:

WHAT DID YOU DO TO HELP YOUR FELLOW MAN?

WHAT DID YOU DO TO INCREASE YOUR OWN KNOWLEDGE?

This is what life is all about.

So many of these comments are such great proof at the absurdity of religion- these people shouting about how GOD IS REAL JESUS IS THE ONE! sound like little children in a sandbox- please, spare me your rants and remember, Osama Bin Laden is using the exact same logic as you to declare war on America- he just chooses a different fairy tale as the crutch for his insanity.

J.S.

Relax, people... different roads though we travel, ultimately we'll all end up at the same destination.

To abusive people like Karr, Jim, and other self-professed "Christian" posters. Your posts show the illiterate ignorance of not differentiating between the born into religious Christianity and understanding the essence of the philosophy of being a Christian. Being Christian is being compassionate, tolerate and humane not perpetuating dogmas. But what can you expect of characters who believe that the is only 6500 years old. A sad aspect is the ascendancy of these people who want the world to revisit the middle ages.

Randall,

You rock.

Mr Lear amazes me for the fear he evinces but without evidence for his views. Only a celebrity could get a piece like this published in a national paper. If my college students had done such work, they would have been critiqued most strongly.

The Taliban has not taken control of the US government and culture. The fears evinced by commentators, notably Kevin Philips and Andrew Sullivan, have been premature, especially in light of the recent election. The coming religious takeover of the government may sell books but should not cloud our heads with unnecessary emotion.

I do approve of Mr Lear's comment about showing respect for religious values and sacred texts. He is welcome to my parish in Overland Park, KS, to witness genuine feeling of agape and caritas, or Christian love.

Perhaps he fears the coming takeover of American politics by those dangerous Christian Evangelicals. How would we say that people cannot support politics based on their values and still call ourselves a democracy?

He is dead wrong on historical grounds when he suggests the Golden Rule has been practiced universally. It OUGHT to have been but was not, neither in the early and middle Christian period, nor certainly in the period of the Arab conquest. When the political power permits one to practice one's faith--as long as a tax has been paid as the Arab conquerors required--the Golden Rule cannot be the operative moral imperative.

However, we should not count him out completely. When we utter the word “Christmas” even in a secular context we should quake in boots for fear of the coming take-over. That may seem silly, but ignoring the real peril is not. Should the followers of extremist sects of Islam succeed in dominating or blackmailing the West, Lear's fears will be realized. In a certain religion where plurality and religious tolerance need not be recognized, different sacred texts could become a bit of quaint history. This is what Lear should really fear.

I do approve of Mr Lear's comment about showing respect for religious values and sacred texts--as WE Americans formally and informally practice our values in this country. He is welcome to my parish in Overland Park, KS, simply to verify that we Catholics are not conspiring to subvert the 1st Amendment. (Roman Catholics are the largest religious group in this country; but we are still a minority of the population.)

Perhaps he fears the coming takeover of American politics by by those dangerous Christian Evangelicals. How would we say that people cannot support politics based on their values and still call ourselves a democracy? As a practicing Catholic, I don't agree with many issues regardless of their social or religious origin. But is the sky really falling? Will the sky fall when the liberals take control of the Congress? Now, here we might have grounds for concern!

He is dead wrong on historical grounds when he suggests the Golden Rule has been practiced universally. It OUGHT to have been but was not, neither in the early Christian period, nor certainly in the period of the Arab conquest. When the political power permits one to practice one's faith--as long as a tax has been paid as the Arab conquerors required--the Golden Rule cannot be the operative moral imperative.

However, we should not count him out completely. Should the followers of extremist sects of Islam succeed in dominating the West, Lear's fears will be realized, since plurality and religious tolerance would be quaint ideas without substance.

What happens when God is rooting for Nebraska, but Jesus is rooting for Oklahoma?

I have patiently sat here and read all the posted comments to the very well written article. At this point I must state something. To those who are of a particular faith and fully believe that they are on the only path that is correct… I commend your faith and commitment. I do however submit to you this.

There are many people out there each with their own mind and thoughts and beliefs. Each of them may have the same faith and commitment in their own ways as you do in yours. This will always need to be kept in mind and given consideration to in anything done or said.

All religions that I have studied have the basic precept spoken of in the article. That is of course a golden rule to treat all as we would wish to be treated. This precept alone is a mandate of tolerance, respect and an attempt at understanding of all that is around us. This is not a mandate to accept and live by all things, just to try to understand that all things are possible and allowed.

If we wish to see change in society to our point of view, the best way to win hearts and minds is to live well and be a good example. Never is it good to yell at any one (caps is yelling) nor would it be persuasive to simply reiterate things that the others have already tuned out (Quoting any holy text will not sway minds if those same minds don’t give that text any weight).

If it is written for a believer of any faith to “Spread the Word” of that faith then don’t you think that it should be done in a manner that would be inviting and persuasive? Not pushy and confrontational. This is a good place to start “doing unto others” because I am sure that having another persons holy text ‘yelled’ at you or being referred to as ‘darkness’ would offend you so you shouldn’t do those things to others.

That was the point of the article. It wasn’t trying to tell anyone that they had to stop believing, it was stating that we all should try to understand one another so to better live together since like it or not we all have to.

Thank you SO MUCH, Mr. Lear, for your clear-headed, gracious, and incredibly wise essay. I am saving it to re-read to my family, and I will be sending it to everyone I know. Please keep discussing your view, and don't be put off by the scary whacked-out nuts like Mark Farr who think there's an all-powerful being out there who is egocentric enough to blast wonderful people simply because they haven't heard of him or haven't referred to him by the right name.

"The most detestable wickedness, the most horrid cruelties, and the greatest miseries, that have afflicted the human race have had their origin in this thing called revelation, or revealed religion. It has been the most dishonourable belief against the character of the divinity, the most destructive to morality, and the peace and happiness of man, that ever was propagated since man began to exist. It is better, far better, that we admitted, if it were possible, a thousand devils to roam at large, and to preach publicly the doctrine of devils, if there were any such, than that we permitted one such impostor and monster as Moses, Joshua, Samuel, and the Bible prophets, to come with the pretended word of God in his mouth, and have credit among us." - Thomas Paine

God has never spoken to man. Human beings will never understand their purpose. The truth of the afterlife will not be known until after you die. Until humans begin to realize these facts and accept the fact that it's possbile their existence is, gasp!, meaningless, murder and injustice in the name of "true gods" will continue. We are weak, insecure creatures and,. I believe, tragically wrong in our assumption of being governed under divine providence instead of accepting our own mistakes and misjudgments as a species. And we had such great potential.

Well, after reading all of the previous comments there is little to add, save a small post extolling the greatness of the Maker of us all. We were created to spread the word and introduce all to the might and love flowing from Him. Jim, Craig, Michael, Norman and all others that have visited and contributed to this site, should understand the reverence some of us feel when we are in the presence of Greatness! Sometimes, I can almost feel the gentle caress of justice and salvation that must surely come from being touched by His noodly appendage. Yes, I am speaking of the one and only Flying Spaghetti Monster (FSM)! Hopefully, you will all find the true Gospel of how FSM began everything by first creating a mountain, a tree, and a dwarf.

Yes, Christianity, Judaism, Islam, FSM and most other religions have mutually exclusive doctrines and gods. Lear's original post pointed to the mutually shared aspects of most religions -- belief in some form of deity and the golden rule -- as a way of looking beyond the divisions but not destroying the differences. To all biblical scholars throwing out quotes left and right: Have you considered the Reformation? High textual criticism led to an irreversible split in the church as each side found opposing evidence in the Bible to support their side. Eventually, the literal/factual/reasonable nature of the foundation of Christianity was undermined, leaving people with a hole where their certainty once rested. The Age of Reason swept in to fill the void of certainty. Most of the NT is Paul's letters trying to pull together and guide the new religion, not the "direct" words of God. It could be said that Paul is more important to Christianity than Jesus, considering he is the producer of more than half the NT.

Oh, and our Noodly Master would appreciate it if Jim would stop shouting at everyone with the caps lock key. It is generally considered rude to abuse all caps.

As a non-believer, I'm very happy that I won't have to spend eternity listening to these zealots maundering about Jesus and God. Their whole concepts of sin and salvation are abhorrent to me. Get it straight -- I'm not in the least bit interested in being saved or going to heaven, whatever that is.

In the end, everyone will know the truth. We'll all just do what we need to do, believe or not believe, and in the end see if "Every knee shall bow, and every tongue confess that Christ is Lord." If not, all of this will be for nothing. If so, problems.

Thank you Mr. Lear for your wise comments. It is no wonder why you have done so well as a writer. You write honestly and inclusively. That seems to be rare in most theological debates or viewpoints.

I have never really understood why it is that we disrespect people who are on the same spiritual journey as we are. Yes, different paths may be taken, but the destination is the same for all. That destination is the realization of our own individual knowledge of the spirit within us.

I would like to leave you with one of Lao Tsu's 81 ideograms:

"When people lose their sense of awe,
people turn to religion.
When they no longer trust themselves,
they begin to depend upon authority.

Therefore the Master steps back
so that people won't be confused.
He teaches without a teaching,
so that people will have nothing to learn."

Long Time Fan,
David J. Fahey

El:

Not to paint with too broad a brush, but Christian radicals have taken up arms against Americans (e.g. Oklahoma City, Atlanta Olympics, multiple abortion clinics). They are, of course, the exceptions rather than the rule (as are Islamist radicals).

1. When you say you have a belief based on faith, the next words out of your mouth better be "but I may be completely wrong," or you are arrogant beyond the bounds of rationality.

2. God didn't talk to anyone, God didn't give anything to anyone, and God didn't promise anything to anyone. This and the Golden Rule are all you need to be a respectful and thoughtful human being. And what percentage of us can pull this off? 1%? Less?

The only difference between the Christian radicals (Christo-fascists?) on this blog today and the radicals in Al Queda is that the Christians haven't picked up arms against Americans. . .yet. Christian radicalism is not compatible w/ the tenants of America, and America's tenants are not compatable w/ theirs. Theirs is exclusive and intolerant; America is inclusive and tolerant.

Some heartbreaking news for those radical bloggers whose heads nearly exploded when they perceived Mr. Lear's comments as questioning their faith: You're out numbered here, and the majority will never let you win. We'll never let you achieve the evangelical America you dream of. Every day you get farther away from that dream. We become more educated, more secular, and you become more marginalized. These times are deceptive, w/ victories by your agents in the last few elections. But you're like a supernova that expands before collapsing in upon itself. I revel in the impending victory of tolerance and inclusivity. Therein you may discover the meaning of "love".

Mark calls Mr. Lear an idiot and then employs the brilliant tactic of quoting the Bible to someone who doesn't believe in the Bible. Yeah, that'll work.

Let me put it this way - I have experienced this kind of inanity in terms of whose religion is better only in the US.

And it is insulting to think that somehow the concept of Heaven and Hell existed only since Christianity. Hinduism had that concept - not as a physical place, but more along the nature of a soul not at peace.

Speak for yourselves, you zealots in here, when you insist that people like my mother (who happens to be a Hindu, and works tirelessly to provide aid to others who are less fortunate than us) will not recieve a place in heaven, unless she accepts JC as her personal savior.

I'd say that's "your God's" loss! But I know the real God (whom many of you claim to know - what a riot!) will welcome her in with open arms when her time comes.

Craig,

Once again you have made good points, and I accept your criticism. My intentions are good but your assessment of my delivery is correct. I will work on that. Also, I assure you that "Champ" was intended as a term of endearment.

Maybe I will just drop out from further discussions because I don't know if I can really contribute if I have to harness myself.

I'm leaving for the day. Good night Sir, good night all.

Why is it when anyone speaks of religion or god that is at odds with fundamentalist minds they are attacked. This can be verbal, physical or all out war.
The question is has god created man or man created god? There was belief before the Jewish man Jesus existed and only after he died did writers create the story that became a bible for some. There were other bibles before and since.
If there is one true religion it would be named Tolerence! Accepting every man or woman as equal, holy and with freedom to use their individual minds.
Hate has no place in religion yet that seems to be the main reason for it. If religion is so good there should be no reason to try to convert people from one to another; they would choose it freely without missionaries traveling to forsaken countries or professing one over another on street corners.
If there is one true belief it should be SPELL CHECK before sending out the message on the internet!

When we are small, some of us believe in magical entities. For me it wass the Easter Bunny, the Tooth Fairy and Santa Claus.

We give up those beliefs as we mature, because we come to understand the way the world really works.

Most of us are unwilling to give up one more belief, a belief in God. I think that's because we can't understand where we come from, where our universe comes from. So we persist in our belief in a god.

I don't know how the our universe came into existence, but I gave up that last belief in a magical entity, even as I'm willing to grant anyone else the right to hold that belief.

The problem, of course, is someone else's belief in a god might include a wish to burn me at the stake, or ram an airliner into a building filled with innocent humans.

I feel sorry for all those on this forum and elsewhere who spread hatred, intolerance, distrust, fear and loathing in the name of their God or the Son of their God...eternal life does not await these ignorant fools...

Mr. Lear says all that is needed about religion. As a Christian I struggle to understand those who attempt to impose their views on me, Christian or otherwise. I don't think there is any historical evidence from Jesus' ministry that he meant for religion to be so dogmatic. In fact the fundamentalist christians are stuck in a perspective concocted by Paul and church fathers, not based on Jesus' actual teachings, designed for political dominance in the West, and perfect for people who expect easy answers to hard questions.

As for me, I'd prefer to make the contestation explicit, as between Elijah (representing YHWH) and the priests of Baal (representing Baal). Whichever God(s) can cause an unlit altar to spontaneously combust upon the request of the Priest is the true God. If more than one is able to do so, then we must submit to the possibility of polytheism; if none are able to do it, then we must all acknowledge a deity-less universe, devoid of meaning.

And no cheating by using lighter fluid, blow torches, or napalm. All supplicants must keep a respectful 50-foot distance from the altar of their respective contestant.

When the bell rings, come out burning.

It truly baffles me to read some of the superstitious arguments made to explain what's no more than folklore (religion) and myths (god). In this day and age, how can so many people still believe in god, and so passionately defend that belief with arguments such as ".. he exists because he does, and the bible says so, end of discussion." I mean children don't even argue like that, yet many sane adults argue that way here and are perfectly oblivious to the way they're talking. It's because they've been indoctrinated in this way of thinking for so long, that they never question what they believe anymore or how they argue it. Very sad situation if you asked me.

We must agree to one rule during this discussion: you can't cite religious texts to explain or justify anything, as they are full of contradictions and contain citations to back possibly any imaginable statement. Quite frankly they are pieces of folklore no more. So if you want to argue god, argue based on reason and logic please, and let the best reason prevail.

I look for the truth in the metaphor of the 1000 mile river. In truth, in any river ecosystem, the plants and the trees do, in fact, war and kill each other over their access to water.

Seriously, use some logic here:
1) its called faith for a reason - there is no proof - never has been
2) you can't say (logically) that you believe in god because the Bible says he exists and believe the Bible because God wrote it - its a circular arguement
3) no one REALLY knows - even the athiests don't really know. Frankly, only the agnostics have the right to be smug - they are honest, they feel they don't know, but don't believe
4) every religion has a god - it can't be the same god because all religions teach different things
5) you can't use bible quotes to justify your belief in the bible. Its like defining a word using the word in the definition - it doesn't work
6) I've never met an athiest who hates agnostics
7) the god fearing and the athiest are very close - one believes in one god, the other in no god.
8) people, grow up; you can't quote from texts written by unknowns to prove a point - it's a hollow arguement to those who don't believe as you do.
9) remember, faith is just that - the belief in something without proof
10) atheism is a belief just like any religion.
11) morality has nothing to do with religion - nothing.
12) there is no clear right and wrong. there is always a grey area - sometimes its very clear, most of the time, its fairly muddy.

Isn't all this talk of basing your faith solely on scripture a form of idolatry? I don't recall reading anywhere in the Bible that the Bible is the only source of truth. There's no scriptural basis for this fundamentalist approach to understanding God (which apparently leads to calling people "idiot" because they don't share your view that the Bible should be worshiped like God himself). Lear is right. We know God in our hearts, regardless of the path we take to find him.

Peace.

Jim, I hope you put as much effort into DEMONSTRATING your faith through good work, charity and acts of kindness as you do in SHOUTING about it. Personally, I know of no one who has ever converted to Christianity because someone shouted them down. Generally people come to gain a faith in Christ through the generosity of spirit they see in the many Christians who live out their faith instead of making a show of it.

Charles,

I don’t believe we really disagree on any substantial point. Semantically, I might point out that it is possible for some biblical claims to be correct and others to be flawed (through translation, misinterpretation, selective inclusion, etc.).

Yet, overall, it appears we both at least acknowledge the possibility that neither of us has a monopoly on these type of truths. If might be so bold, it appears that respecting another’s right to disagree on these issues is also a point of agreement.

To: Mr Lear

Looking at the numerous and varied responses, you have touch something deep with each one.

May I submit a quote that has stayed with me. It is from Meister Eckhart, a Dominican monk who wrote in the 14th century after much religious turmoil in Europe and the middle east:

"The Spirit is free of all names, it is bare of all forms, wholly empty and free, as God in himself is empty and free. It is so utterly one and simple, as God is one and simple, that man cannot in any way look into it."

(translation: Edmund Colledge, O.S.A and B. McGinn)

Thank you for your thoughtful editorial.

Robert Trussell

The record shows that Norman Lear is an intelligent man of some 84 years, nearly all of them spent in the United States, where Christianity is hardly unknown. Yet Mark Farr and many others on this thread choose to lecture him about their religion as though he were an ignorant child. They represent this choice as humble rather than arrogant, compassionate instead of fearful. Many of us are not fooled.

It’s still shocking to me that after all of these years of rational thinking, scientific discoveries...people still believe in the Bible and take it literally. The majority of the Christian people have no IDEA how the bible was formed. They don't know that the last Roman emperor, Constantine, got tired of so many different Christian sects and teachings that he had every bishop come together with there books so they can settle for one book. These humans decided what was going to be in the bible and removed stories they didn't like. Some books such has the book of Thomas was never put into the bible because it made these bishops cry. Even the simple question of "was Jesus man or God?" had to be debated. So I ask a very logical question after all of this...did God create the bible or did man?

Norman Lear seems to make a reasonable point, to a degree..Perhaps..

It's his dictate that we all keep our idea of god deep inside of ourselves, while further dictating that which we should "revere." Perhaps, he is telling me that he finds it tacky for me to openly express a religious view about Budda or Jesus all the while telling me that I need to worship the sunrise and sunset.

Frankly, I find this bazaar... and a bit unseemly.. and frankly, lacking in intellectualism.

Craig,

You have a valid point. I am a Christian and I realize it is a leap of faith - I cannot prove anything.

I think Mr Lear and others bring up good points about not being judgmental. But I do object to the stance that sees any religious absolutism as inherently intolerant. To believe in the Christian God is to believe that He is Lord - not just another approach to the unknown.

I do not claim to know that biblical Christianity is fact although I believe it. I do however know that biblical Christianity does make claims. These claims can be right or wrong - but they cannot be both. I find the stance that says that all religions are equally valid somewhat lacking in support from history. Either one is right and the others are wrong - or they are all wrong. If they are all wrong (in terms of specifics) then there is room to hypothesize an omnipotent creator - but this hypothesis comes from our wishes and not from history.

Michael,

While I thank you for overall tone of your posts, I’m also hopeful you might recognize the arrogance of the point of view you’ve taken in your post directed to me.

Your assumption of your superior Biblical scholarship may or may not be correct - but it is, at the very least, a blind assumption. As for your implicit “patience” and recognition that “[I’m] doing fine,” please realize that you’ve automatically taken a position of superior enlightenment over a person you do not even know. I’ll not even address “Champ.”

This being said, best wishes and Peace.

From a song I heard on "Stained Glass Bluegrass":

I've got that old-time religion in my heart,
Way down inside.
I've got a peaceful feeling in my heart,
The joy abides.
No one knows what it means to me.
No one knows but my Lord and me.
I've got that old-time religion in my heart,
Way down inside.

fair enough?

Charles,

One may also acknowledge that human beings, when attempting to understand an omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent God, are, by definition, inadequate to the task. To claim that all words of all texts chosen by Emperor Constantine’s council in Nicea, then translated through ancient Greek, through Latin, to multiple versions of English, are literal and exclusive truth is to place one’s faith in man.

To use those texts, with these facts in mind, to attempt to come to a deeper understanding of God not only recognize the fallibility of man, but also respects the God in whom we have faith.

Gee, perhaps the Christians need to remember the following words from their New Testament found in the book fo Matthew, Chapter 6 (the King James version is the source for this quote):

1: Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them: otherwise ye have no reward of your Father which is in heaven.
2: Therefore when thou doest thine alms, do not sound a trumpet before thee, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may have glory of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.
3: But when thou doest alms, let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth:
4: That thine alms may be in secret: and thy Father which seeth in secret himself shall reward thee openly.
5: And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.
6: But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.

Those who have responded to Mr. Lear's statement with scripture quoting, name calling and vitriol should try and understand a couple of things.

First, not all followers of Christ believe the Bible to be the literal and infallible word of God. For people who dismiss your worship of the Bible, your quoting scripture proves nothing and is, in fact, an exercise in circular logic. The Bible is not the literal word of God because you say it is, nor is it the literal word of God because IT says it is. History shows that the current anthology known as the Bible was assembled by men who rejected out-of-hand ancient texts that did not conform to their beliefs. The Bible is the work of fallible human beings, not of an infallible God.

Second, many people who reject your message do not reject the essence of your belief, but reject the manner in which you convey your belief. Is that really what you desire? Do you really think causing another person to respond with revulsion and dismissiveness is the most effective way to demonstrate the essence of your belief?

I would rather be among Mr. Lear's "lost" than among the Pharisees who condemn him.

Craig, God actually reveals himself to us and that's why some of us speak so boldly about our God. And no, we don't see Him with our eyes, but we surely see Him.

Also, I'm glad to see that you know some Bible passages. Every little bit helps. You also make a good point in that there are many beliefs, many books. But as for me, the Bible is the one I need, the one I know, and therefore it is the only one from wich I can toss out passages. You will give me that won't you?

This is America, and I'm not mad at you. In America we have choices. You should go down whatever path you choose Champ! I did not become Christian overnight and thank God there were those who were patient with me. As long as you can talk about this, you're doing fine. Lets just not make this ugly. Peace.

After it is all said and done, an advocate for peace can only trust that at best one's own actions have made a positive difference on this planet, or at worst, at least you didn't contribute too much to the chaotic lives of so many around us.

I am bouyed up by so many of the positive responses to Mr. Lear's message and not surprised by those who wield their scriptures as a club and their beliefs as a shield against all that they cannot comprehend about the human condition.

Craig,

The NT is pretty clear about who Jesus is. Exclusivity is implicit in NT Christianity. One may choose to believe that the NT writers corrupted Jesus' actual words or that Jesus was wrong. But a Christianity which accepts as valid the religious customs of all other rites is no Christianity. It is humanism cloaked in religious tradition. To say that Jesus is Lord is to say that no one else is.

Jim:
To whom are you spreading the Gospel? The New Testament's exhortation to spread the good news made sense two thousand years ago when knowledge of Christ was limited to his followers in Palastine. The message has already been spread worldwide.

There is a significant differrence between teaching the Gospel and using it to tell others, as Mr. Lear has pointed out, that "My God is the only true God." There is also, of course, the not so subtle implication that those who disagree with your interperetation must be sinners, evil, damned for all time, etc. That position takes quite a lot on itself and is in direct contradiction to the message of "Do unto others..."

CRAIG..We Christians are told to go and spread the Gospel.If pointing out scriptue and GODS WORD is a tactic of bullies....than i guess i'm considered a bully. A bully that cares for my fellow man.

Jim:
What if the Bible is real (imperfect and fallible - as any human interperetation of an almighty and omniscient God must necessarily be), and you are found to have used the sacred text as nothing more than a pretext to shout at and bully your fellow man?

It takes FAITH the believe in something you have not seen.I HAVE FAITH IN WHAT JESUS CHRIST ACCOMPLISHED ON THE CROSS.THROUGH THIS FAITH I RECEIVE THE GRACE OF GOD.WHICH IS EVERLASTING LIFE.If i live my life as a christian..DIE..and the BIBLE is not real than what have i lost...NOTHING. I lived a good life,LOVED GOD WITH ALL MY HEART AND SOUL AND LOVED MY NEIGHBOR AS MYSELF. On the other hand,if i do not accept CHRIST as my LORD and SAVIOR...die...and the BIBLE is real...ETERNITY IS A LONG TIME.
GIVE GOD ALL THE PRAISE AND GLORY HE DESERVES.
JESUS IS LORD !!

To Mark Farr, Michael, Greg and Jim:

Thank you very much for reminding me why I turned my back on Jebus many years ago. You are stellar examples of what ignorance, intolerance and geographical isolation can accomplish over a few short generations.

BTW jim-the caps lock key is on the left side of the keyboard, just over the shift key =;)>

Having actually read The Bible, along with parts of The Qur'an, the Talmud and many other religious texts (The Alchemy Of Happiness was a good one), I've decided that Schadenfreude itself must be a religion.

Be it either the glee the likes of jim gets in telling others their supposed fate, the Pope knowing he has millions of souls under his thumb or even the self-righteous zealotry that fuels modern Islamic terrorism. Without Schadenfreude, the joy in the misfortune of others-it's just hate.

Again, thank you all for reminding me why I became a Pagan.

Jon

TC:

Any hatred that you see in one is contained in the spirit of the one. Hatred breeds hatred. What breed will you become?

Just set your mind to seek for the truth. It will find you.

The arrogance of those who would state that they, and they alone, understand the nature of God never ceases to amaze. This is a question which has baffled some of the best minds and hearts throughout history (and probably before). Throwing out passages from whichever holy book is quoted does nothing, as many others also have a holy book which, if taken literally, does the same for their point of view.

I suspect that those who are so eager to associate themselves with various biblical passages have a more personal, self-aggrandizing motive. Perhaps they should examine other, more humble passages such as Matthew 6:5-6

"When you pray, do not be like the hypocrites...
But when you pray, go to your inner room, close the door, and pray to your Father in secret."

I have no intention of coming to the father. I will return to the Great Mother.

TC...Hate!! .I try to point out GODS LOVE and show That HE LOVES YOU.You have a choice to EXCEPT HIS TRUTH or not. I said nothing except what is said in scripture.If you say you hate scripture then you are saying you hate GOD.For scripture is GODS WORD.

Norman,
You must be pulling your remaining hairs out after reading the collective gist of these comments. Why can't people grasp