Pope Benedict And The Soul of Power

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
SUSAN JACOBY
"POPE BENEDICT AND THE SOUL OF POWER “

IRT:
"The Catholic Church, historically and in the present, wants power not only over the souls of its faithful but also over others who do not share that faith."

ANS:
First, all men are endowed with certain inalienable rights as the Founding Fathers (F/F) noted. The Catholic Church is the guardian of these moral values. They are not imposed on the individual by the Church but by God.

Your statement is an absurdity. The Church wants no power except the power of administration of Her Church, and the right to defend her principles and teachings.

Her power is manifested in Her exposition of a consistent systematic interpretation or explanation of Truth.

Her perceived power is invested in Her positing of the eminent truths that all men seek from the longing of the natural innate propensity of the human soul in all men.

Her clergy are forbidden to participate in political office. Fr. Drinan, a US Congressman, was forced to leave Congress. She has condemned and shut down “Liberation Theology,” because politics is not part of Her mission. Her mission is the salvation of all souls.

Her mission is the well-being and salvation of mankind teaching the Truth that is inherent in the Scriptures and protected by God.

Namely, She succors to man's body and soul. She envision and implicates the Corporal Works of Mercy, and informs, ministers to man’s spiritual necessities to lead man to God, and to make known the incomprehensible rewards that await man in his final destiny.

IRT:
“That is why the American Catholic bishops have formed a strategic alliance with right-wing Protestant fundamentalists on so-called 'values issues'--by which they mean mainly matters of sexual behavior.

"This is a tricky business for the church hierarchy, because on many social issues--from immigration to poverty--the church's positions are much closer to those of liberal secularists than they are to the policies of the far religious right."

ANS:
Or, might one say, the positions of the secularist are closer to the Church's than what they think. There is no trick about stating the truth in defense of human life. That would be both intensely ridiculous and profound preposterousness.

Those "so-called values" are the defense of mankind especially the unborn against being legally murdered by abortion. Even Roe, in infamous Roe v. Wade, now denounces this scurrilous decision and says it was a farce.

Only 48 million have been exterminated since the Court’s opprobrious asinine decision was concluded. Those over 48 million are about the size of the population seven times the population of New York City. We have seen the cacophony, distress, fear, and anger that 9/11 stimulated; can you imagine what the protest would be if seven cities the size of NY City were destroyed? However, that's the number of unborn dead by abortion and it is being defended by the impervious ignominious.

The Court violated the Amendment process and wrote a law of immorality into the Constitution, violating the Separation of Powers. There is no inviolable right to immorality. Now, there is, according to the nefarious Court majority.

The Court trespassed on the NML, violating the Constitution that citizens are secured in their own person. The Court transgressed on man’s inviolable right, the "Right to Life."

To circumscribe the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution that “each citizen is secured in his own person,” the Court redefined “person,” and defiled the Natural Law by redefining the nature of humanity.

Blackmund incomprehensibly redefine the conceived as a “Thing-Becoming-Human” and defined the conceived as one third human and two thirds "thing" in the First Trimester of his Trimester Theory, astounding the whole of the Medical society by creating a new being that had never existed in medical history.

In the Second Trimester, the conceived became 2/3rds human and 1/3rd thing. At the end of Blackmund's Trimester Theory, a woman was never pregnant with a human being. There was no child until it completely escaped the birth canal of the mother. Hence, the Theory justified "partial birth abortion," the sucking out of the unborn's brains while it was being born.

That is the swill the Abortionists were willing to swallow, in order legally to have their unborn murder when their sexual propensities happened to get in the way and leave them pregnant.

Is it any wonder that the Pope would remonstrate to the Bishops to not put their faith under a bushel basket? No, they must let its truth shine out like a beacon from the top of the highest mountain, like a fire that can be seen from all distances, and that its truth may shower down on both the evil and the virtuous.

For, if the light of the faith of the people of God is not seen and heard, then how great will the silence and the darkness in the world be? Can we allow a public official not to know the difference of serving the people and killing the people.

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
SUSAN JACOBY
"POPE BENEDICT AND THE SOUL OF POWER “

IRT:
“Europeans are more secular today than Americans are. Secularism, ironically, is a positive word in Europe and is a dirty word only in the United States and Vatican City.

“…Benedict said…the church and its members must live out their faith by engagement in social issues...I have no problem with that--as long as the church…does not prevent me from living by my standards.

ANS:
First, the Church doesn’t prevent; it exhorts and remonstrates against transgressions against the Natural Moral Laws and the word of God.

The $64,000 question is what are your standards? Are they tenants of the Sexual Revolution and the Culture of Death? Are they the demeaning and detrimental rights for human depravation, as are the claimed rights to gay sex, the degradation of the family and marriage, live-ins, gay unions, abortion embryo stem cell experimentation, the principles of agnosticism and atheism, situation ethics, pragmatism, and moral relativism?

IRT:
“But Benedict also meant something else--that the Catholic Church in the United States will continue to try to impose its values on non-Catholics by attempting, for example, to outlaw abortion and embryonic stem cell research, as it once attempted (quite successfully) to outlaw birth control in many states.”

ANS:
The Natural Moral Law is not subjective, it is not relative, or subjugated by situation ethics. It is not governed by pragmatism, and is not subject to impulsive choices. To the contrary, it is universal, objective, and absolute because it comes from God, who is Omniscient, Omnipotent, and Prescience. Therefore, it is unchangeable.

Moreover, the NML is imbued in human nature, manifested in the conscience of man, and governs the proper behavior of all mankind.

The Pope is not forcing his values on you or anyone else. He’s defending the Natural Moral Law (NML), that are the values of our Creator. They are not the Pope’s whims, but God's values. They are the values that are ubiquitous, objective, universal and absolute because they come from God. Man has no choice to refuse them and not suffer the obvious consequences that ensue. One being over 48 million Americans alone dead by abortion.

The NML is embedded in the “Ten Commandment, given to man by God. It is the foundation of all Civil Laws. It is a necessity for all social order. To violate them is to violate human nature thereby disrupting the social order and corrupting it.

The NML encompasses the dictates of our inalienable rights that the Founding Fathers (FF) wrote in the Declaration of Independence (D/I), and the Bill of Rights (B/R). These rights are dictated by God and not man.

It is stated by the F/F that these rights are endowed by our Creator. Therefore, God and His Church has an important part in American politics and America's destiny. To deny a Creator is to deny the Constitution and your inalienable rights turning them over to the whims of man. They are defended by the Catholic Church and its Pontiff.

IRT:
“The most revealing aspect of Benedict's statement was his assertion that to " the extent that religion becomes a purely private matter, it loses its very soul." It would have been more honest for him to say, "To the extent that religion becomes a purely private matter, it loses its political power."

ANS:
As Aristotle noted as has the Church, that man is a social being, and is by his nature, inadvertently involved in the affairs of governing and being governed. Man depends on society to assist him in his eternal destiny.

As the D/I notes that man has certain inalienable rights that government has no jurisdiction over, namely man's right to "freedom of speech," "religion" and the "pursuit of happiness", a happiness Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics says is the final end and purpose of all human life.

The Catholic Church is the guardian of the NML. No other organization in the world defends the dignity of human life greater than the Catholic Church.

Moreover, the D/I states that when government consistently violates these rights, it is the duty of its citizens to overthrow that government and restore the rights that had been violated.

No nation that has consistently violated these rights can govern without being dictatorial, totalitarian, and tyrannical and eventually overthrown.

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
SUSAN JACOBY
"POPE BENEDICT AND THE SOUL OF POWER “

IRT:
“Americans' prejudice against "papists" in the first half of the 19th century was much stronger than anti-Semitism (a first in western history), and Catholicism could never have flourished if that prejudice had been bolstered by a state-established Protestant church.”

ANS:
Kind of funny, irrespective of the Constitution, how Baltimore, Florida, Louisiana, Texas, California, and all the South Western states were doing fine. St. Augustine, Corpus Christie, San Diego, Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Diego, and San Bernardino aren’t names of agnostics. They’re Catholic because Catholics settled in these areas irrespective of the Constitution.

The purpose of the religious exodus from Europe was for freedom of religion and from State controlled religions.

The Constitution and the Founding Fathers (F/F) were never for the fictitious "wall of separation" that was created by witless Court. Every one of the 13 Original Colonies had reference to God in their constitutions and were based on our Judeo-Christian Heritage and its moral bases that recognized the dignity of man.

IRT:
"Indeed, the pope…undoubtedly understands that the repressive history of Catholicism at a time when it held sway over western Europe is one of the reasons why Europeans are more secular today than Americans. Secularism, ironically, is a positive word in Europe and is a dirty word only in the United States and Vatican."

ANS:
The Catholic Church has had its bad days but not because of it doctrines and teachings, but because of its heretical members. The Inquisitions were nearly all governed by the monarchies and many were formed in self-defense from religious fanatics, and dissenting Jews.

Because of the fall of man from Eden, man in his weakness, is subject to evil, and without the graces of the Church, man succumbs to the urges of his concupiscence.

Catholicity does not give you a free ticket to Heaven; it only promises you one if you adhered to her counsel by obeying and living Her teachings that are in accordance with God's laws.

The Crusades were in defense of Catholic settlements invaded by the Turks and Saracen barbarians. The Crusades had a legitimate purpose. Yes, a few Crusades got out hand, it was not due to the Pope or the Church's teachings.

The role of the Church in Europe during WWII, besides America, was the only blessing there was for the Jews. The Pope saved some 800,000 Jews during the tragic reign of Hitler.

Moreover, because of the Holy Pontiff, Poland, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia broke free of the Communist regime in the USSR.

Mother Theresa and her mission were power seeking; they were a mission of love for the dignity of the individual person, as is the Church.

In Calcutta, the dead and dying laid in the streets. A truck would come in the mornings to pick the bodies up and throw them in a garbage heap to be disposed of later.

Mother Theresa picked them up and preformed the Corporal Works of Mercy by feeding the hungry and giving the sick and dying comfort and dignity.

She never killed the unborn, she asked for a mother contemplating abortion to give her child to her that her mission may love and care for it. She was a hero in a Muslim world that despised Catholicism because, like you, they knew her or her Church not until they touched them with their love and mercy.

The Dream program in Africa is not an organization seeking power; it is a volunteer program that succors to the medical needs of HIV and the some 20,000 African AIDS victims wrought by the Culture of Death and the Sexual Revolution that are now infecting America.

Europe and the Middle East in the Third and Fourth Century were inhabited by pagan clans and barbarians that ruled by force. In many cases, clashes between the European populations were in self-defense against the hordes from the East.

Constantine the Great saved the Church against its pagan persecutors, and because of his sense of Catholicism, the dignity of women and children, once treated as cattle, was restored.

Unfortunately, Europe, has forgotten its legacy that Catholicity had given it, and now their loss of integrity is encapsulating America, whose culture is being morphed into the culture of Europe, a culture that is metastasizing America's moral underpinnings given to it by God, and written in the Constitution by the Founding Fathers.

Celebrity sex Movie Celebrity sex Movie
Celebrity Movie Celebrity Movie
nude Celebrity Movie database nude Celebrity Movie

Celebrity sex Movie Celebrity sex Movie
Celebrity Movie Celebrity Movie
nude Celebrity Movie database nude Celebrity Movie

Celebrity sex Movie Celebrity sex Movie
Celebrity Movie Celebrity Movie
nude Celebrity Movie database nude Celebrity Movie

Celebrity sex Movie Celebrity sex Movie
Celebrity Movie Celebrity Movie
nude Celebrity Movie database nude Celebrity Movie

Celebrity sex Movie Celebrity sex Movie
Celebrity Movie Celebrity Movie
nude Celebrity Movie database nude Celebrity Movie

Arminius:

"References? I am unconvinced, and agree with Ryan Habar that the stuff CCNL pastes repeatedly is the stuff of historical theory. Anyway,history is not math or science, there is always a different opinion available. E.g. it is a fact that such-and-such a battle happened on a certain date, but what really went on there can be a matter of debate. As well as any significance of it. Or even who was there."

Ooh... that's not exactly what I said, but I think you agree with my gist. I said CCNL's stuff, from Crossan, is philosophical presupposition - not historical facts. A great deal of history can be known with reasonable verifiability and probity. Same with philosophy. They each have different methods. What I was getting at is that when Crossan, and CCNL, say something like, "Their was no resurrection, and I've proved it from the Scriptures," they are not making a historical claim. The Scriptures might not prove a resurrection, but they certainly claim it, and intended to claim it, and one cannot deduce from the claim that the claim is false. Crossan and CCNL make their case not from historical data (all available data, whether accurately or not, points toward a real resurrection) but from the philosophical presupposition, dogmatically held, that "Resurrection of the dead is impossible."

Do you see what I mean?

"There was no resurrection in AD 33 or ever," is an historical statement; "Resurrection is impossible," is a philosophical statement with a meaning that transcends any time or place in history, but applies to them all. Each requires evidence and rational argument. To base the first on the second, the second must be proved.

Neither CCNL nor Crossan has proved either statement - they've only quoted a bunch of likeminded scholars who've also only quoted each other. Their bibliographies are like circular houses of cards. It's an amazing scam, really.

Farnaz -

Googling Christian Kabbala will bring up a few interesting sites - the Wiki site discusses in paricular the Italian Rennaissance figure Pico della Mirandela as among the first to employ the Jewish Kaballah in a non-Jewish/Christian context. Other 15th century figures are also mentioned here, including the mad monk Savonarola, who was later burned at the stake. Pico was forced to retract his metaphysical musings and resultant theorums more than once by the Church.

He and Gallileo survived, where more stubbornly defiant figures such as Savonarola and Giordano Bruno did not....up in flames with Joan of Arc, poor girl.

While some have recently found Benedict to be more sympathetic to the contemplative (dare we say mystical) tradition within Christianity, I suspect his support is not without serious reservations - as a Cardinal he was reported to declare Buddhism as so much mental masturbation.
At least the Church has stopped burning mystics and contrary thinkers for being guilty of heretical practices.......

However, the more modern use of the Kaballah in The Order of the Golden Dawn and the Rosacrucion movement is somewhat different. You will also see the Yeats website, which discusses his involvement with Cabala and the Golden Dawn at some length.

Yeats was alleged to be enamored with Ezra Pound, and this no doubt led to his brief flirtation with fascism. Rather than a man of action, Yeats seemed to live a life of the mind almost exclusively - an elitist with sympathies for the common man.

On the other hand, members of the various occult-based groups of the day were all elitist in the extreme, so he was in good company.

More later .....

Whoops!

Meant

conservative side of his politics

Interesting. In the elegy I posted by Auden, a certain verse was deleted. Auden, himself, deleted three, but although he was much taken to task for what follows, to the best of my knowledge, he did not delete it. Auden greatly admired Yeats, supported Irish nationalism, but not the conservative side of Yeats's poetry, and most certainly not Yeats brief spell as a fascist. Even Frank O'Connor saw it asreprehensible. How could he not? Even as a Yeats idolator? After all, O'Connor spent time in prison.

Here is the missing verse.

Time that with this strange excuse
Pardoned Kipling and his views,
And will pardon Paul Claudel,
Pardons him for writing well.

Spiderman:

In the George Herbert poem, he is at heaven's gate and doesn't think himself worthy of entering.

Farnaz

Spiderman:

I listened to it. It is very beautiful! Thank you!

Goodnight,
Farnaz

Farnaz, check this site :

www.imeem.com/people/jlTdHkz/music/2ZDYI6eZ/king_david_a_song_of_ascents/

Hi Spiderman,

This one is for you. It's by George Herbert (Protestant). To answer your question about the 121st psalm, no, I didn't know it had been made into a song. Where might I find it?

Love(3)

"Love bade me welcome: yet my soul drew back,
Guilty of dust and sin.
But quick - eyed Love, observing me grow slack
From my first entrance in,
Drew nearer to me, sweetly questioning
If I lacked anything.

'A guest,' I answered, 'worthy to be here':
Love said, 'You shall be he.'
'I, the unkind, ungrateful? Ah, my dear,
I cannot look on thee.'
Love took my hand, and smiling did reply,
'Who made the eyes but I?'

'Truth, Lord, but I have marred them; let my shame
Go where it doth deserve.'
'And know you not,' says Love, 'who bore the blame?'
'My dear, then I will serve.'
'You must sit down,' says Love, 'and taste my meat.'
So I did sit and eat,"

In Memory of W. B. Yeats (1939)

I

He disappeared in the dead of winter:
The brooks were frozen, the airports almost deserted,
And snow disfigured the public statues;
The mercury sank in the mouth of the dying day.
5 What instruments we have agree
The day of his death was a dark cold day.
Far from his illness
The wolves ran on through the evergreen forests,
The peasant river was untempted by the fashionable quays;
10 By mourning tongues
The death of the poet was kept from his poems.

But for him it was his last afternoon as himself,
An afternoon of nurses and rumors;
The provinces of his body revolted,
15 The squares of his mind were empty,
Silence invaded the suburbs,
The current of his feeling failed; he became his admirers.

Now he is scattered among a hundred cities
And wholly given over to unfamiliar affections,
20 To find his happiness in another kind of wood
And be punished under a foreign code of conscience.

The words of a dead man
Are modified in the guts of the living.

But in the importance and noise of to-morrow
25 When the brokers are roaring like beasts on the floor of the Bourse,
And the poor have the sufferings to which they are fairly accustomed,
And each in the cell of himself is almost convinced of his freedom,
A few thousand will think of this day
As one thinks of a day when one did something slightly unusual.

30 What instruments we have agree
The day of his death was a dark cold day.

II

You were silly like us; your gift survived it all:
The parish of rich women, physical decay,
Yourself. Mad Ireland hurt you into poetry.
35 Now Ireland has her madness and her weather still,
For poetry makes nothing happen: it survives
In the valley of its making where executives
Would never want to tamper, flows on south
From ranches of isolation and the busy griefs,
40 Raw towns that we believe and die in; it survives,
A way of happening, a mouth.

III

Earth, receive an honored guest:
William Yeats is laid to rest.
Let the Irish vessel lie
45 Emptied of its poetry.

In the nightmare of the dark
All the dogs of Europe bark,
And the living nations wait,
Each sequestered in its hate;

50 Intellectual disgrace
Stares from every human face,
And the seas of pity lie
Locked and frozen in each eye.

Follow, poet, follow right
55 To the bottom of the night,
With your unconstraining voice
Still persuade us to rejoice;

With the farming of a verse
Make a vineyard of the curse,
60 Sing of human unsuccess
In a rapture of distress;

In the deserts of the heart
Let the healing fountain start,
In the prison of his days
65 Teach the free man how to praise.

Incidentally, have you seen Moshe Idel Kabbalah New Perspectives?

You know so much has been written about the automatic writing business. It drove a lot of his contemporaries quite to distraction--Auden had much to do to restrain himself, and didn't always succeed. (Have you read Auden'ts Elegy on Yeats, btw.? Took a jab at "Yeats' 'flirtation with fascism'" which Frank O'Connor, Yeats idolator that he was, did not find romantic.)

Such a gigantic and complex mind. How did his mythic imagination and spiritual desires work together? When did they split apart? How does the great artistic skill and need interweave with myth and esoterica?

Hi Perspective,

Thanks. Yes, I have the Scholem books, and a couple of others. I read the Vision. But this other book, I'm not sure, was it called the Christian Cabbala, or the Catholic Cabbala? Yeats, himself, makes reference to it in his prose writings (I'm using his spelling), but I'd have to go did through the shelves to find where.

Is it extant?

Also, can you explain to me what mosts interests you about Yeats' work and/or vision?

Of course, the two were always evolving, I know.

Farnaz

Farnaz -

I did see that your poem Byzantium was taken from The Tower, but I have not read it in it's entirety.

I have the Yeats Reader which is a compendium, and A Vision, which Yeats believed to be his most profound work in that he developed an elaborate system of metaphysics that emerged over 7 years from his wife's efforts at automatic writing - it might be worth a read.

He seems to have immersed himself in mystics and mysticism of all stripes, and even mentions terminology taken from the writings of Jacob Boehme, the Shoemaker - a German Protestant mystic of the 18th century (and a noted pantheist).

You are right in your observation that the mystical Qabalah of western hermeticism is a variation of the Jewish Kaballah, and was co-opted (discovered?) by both Christians and neo-pagans as a profound system of metaphysical truth that could be used as a practical guide to spiritual development.

Paracelsus may have been among the first to use the Kaballah as the basis for modern magical systems in the 16th century - although Pagan Hermeticism and Christian Gnosticism share common roots going back to the very early centuries of Christianity.

Gershom Scholem has written the definitive historical study of Kaballah and Jewish mysticism (as you most probably know) and in his book shows to some degree the cross- fertilization with Christianity that occurs in Europe in the 17th and 18th century.

Several of the early members of the (British based) Golden Dawn have written extensively on the use of the Qabalah and it's structure of the ten Sephiroth which the Tree of Life - and how each level is used in the system of Magick. Dion Fortune, Gareth Knight, Aleister Crowley and MacGregor Mathers were all members that wrote extensively about the structure, functions and application of the Qabalah in what they called the Work (of self-transformation).

Another tangent is the use of the Tarot in this system, and Christian Hermeticism employs the Tarot quite creatively. A rare book entitled 'Meditations on the Tarot' lays this out in great detail.

The books I have on Kaballah by Jewish authors seems to indicate that this mystical system has much in common with the meditative systems found in the Vedanta and yoga of Patanjali, and Buddhism - control of breathing is very important, for example.

The use of sacred mantras or words are equally important, as is meditating on the sacred symbols found in Kaballah. These techniques and applications are very similar to the use of mandala structures found in certain Tibetan forms of Buddhism in particular.

On the other hand, a book that I have titled 'The Kaballah of the Soul' by Leonora Leet deals exclusively with the path to perfection, the Jewish mystical structure of the soul and it's evolving complexity - including Nefesh consciousness, Ruach consciousness, and Neshamah consciousness.

Here it is assumed that humans have something called a soul - which as you know the Buddhists deny (and if compatibility within mystical systems is an issue!).

On the other hand, consciousness and it's transformation is the essense of every religion,
so how consciousness travels and in what vehicle may be of secondary importance. In fact, Tibetan Buddhism maintains that the 'very subtle essence' which is the eternal and perpetual drop of Spirit contained in each heart must use a body - in whatever realm in may find itself. The manifest realms require a form.

By now I've probably lost the thread of the original idea with my rambling, but mysticism in all it's many forms is the part of religion that interests me the most.

To me, the Kaballah is a magnificent diagram of how materiality emerges from the eternal and unmanifest essence. And of course, there are many other ways to describe this process........

donne and undone. that could be chris everet undoing again

Perspective:

If you are around, I posted to you again twice on Deepak Chopra's thread.

Farnaz

Ryan haber, I believe all this catholic stand against abortion and contraception is not about "holiness" but more of their true father's (the devil) catholic cycle scheme.

THE CATHOLIC CYCLE

In one third world country where population explosion has become a major problem, Catholic chapels or centers offer free operation to untie the fallopian tubes of mothers after indoctrinating them that it's a SIN.

This devilish Church invent their own doctrines so parents would produce more children despite their abject poverty. With more extra children, they are forced to raise them with no proper education and decent meals and most of all, no future.

They then teach these poor people that their government is the cause of their poverty due to corruption but lo and behold those same government personnel are usually "devout catholics".

Some revolt (with the church's help of course) which cause more poverty and this has become a "CATHOLIC CYCLE" which I presume is routinely duplicated around the world.

To escape poverty, many go abroad adding more economic pressure to their countries of destination.

Catholic countries not only over populate, they produce extortionist rebels too. Had you wondered why there are no marxist rebels in Islamic countries but there are so many in catholic countries? It's because many of their priests support that ideology. They breed fast and then kill each other fast too. WHAT A CYCLE.

There are many things this church does which is outside our scope of detection. The devil could be using a much bigger cycle that is harder to detect. Consciously or unconsciously, all catholics is part of that grand cycle.

Arminius - you may not be convinced, but that doesn't mean it's not factual.

When CCNL (or anyone) cites respected academic sources he is dealing with facts.

Instead of writing off his repetitious information, check it out. And go beyond his links and see if any reputable academic source fails to back up what he lists.

Just because religions have been presenting myth as fact for centuries, doesn't make it fact.

E Favorite, you said:

"When CCNL, or anyone, states facts that can be referenced, they are facts -- like 2+2=4 or Springfield is the Capitol of Illinois or there was a mass migration from Europe to America in the early 20th century, or Mount Etna is a volcano."

References? I am unconvinced, and agree with Ryan Habar that the stuff CCNL pastes repeatedly is the stuff of historical theory. Anyway,history is not math or science, there is always a different opinion available. E.g. it is a fact that such-and-such a battle happened on a certain date, but what really went on there can be a matter of debate. As well as any significance of it. Or even who was there.

A few things in CCNL's list could be called factual. Some others are theories, and the rest is opinion, and sometimes not very pleasant opinion.

Arminius

When CCNL, or anyone, states facts that can be referenced, they are facts -- like 2+2=4 or Springfield is the Capitol of Illinois or there was a mass migration from Europe to America in the early 20th century, or Mount Etna is a volcano.

When he, or anyone, states opinions, they are personal and perhaps shared by some others, but are not universally known or accepted. Like - beer is better than wine, so-and-so is stupid, classical music sucks, the mountains are more relaxing than the beach.

For everyone:

More Yeats. See the influence, Perspective?

LAPIS LAZULI
(For Harry Clifton)

I have heard that hysterical women say
They are sick of the palette and fiddle-bow,
Of poets that are always gay,
For everybody knows or else should know
That if nothing drastic is done
Aeroplane and Zeppelin will come out,
Pitch like King Billy bomb-balls in
Until the town lie beaten flat.

All perform their tragic play,
There struts Hamlet, there is Lear,
That’s Ophelia, that Cordelia;
Yet they, should the last scene be there,
The great stage curtain about to drop,
If worthy their prominent part in the play,
Do not break up their lines to weep.
They know that Hamlet and Lear are gay;
Gaiety transfiguring all that dread.
All men have aimed at, found and lost;
Black out; Heaven blazing into the head:
Tragedy wrought to its uttermost.
Though Hamlet rambles and Lear rages,
And all the drop-scenes drop at once
Upon a hundred thousand stages,
It cannot grow by an inch or an ounce.

On their own feet they came, or on shipboard,
Camel-back, horse-back, ass-back, mule-back,
Old civilisations put to the sword.
Then they and their wisdom went to rack:
No handiwork of Callimachus,
Who handled marble as if it were bronze,
Made draperies that seemed to rise
When sea-wind swept the corner, strands;
His long lamp-chimney shaped like a stem
Of a slender palm, stood but a day;
All things fall and are built again,
And those that build them again are gay.

Two Chinamen, behind them a third,
Are carved in lapis lazuli,
Over them flies a long-legged bird,
A symbol of longevity;
The third, doubtless a serving-man,
Carries a musical instrument.

Every discoloration of the stone,
Every accidental crack or dent,
Seems a water-course or an avalanche,
Or lofty slope where it still snows
Though doubtless plum or cherry-branch
Sweetens the little half-way house
Those Chinamen climb towards, and I
Delight to imagine them seated there;
There, on the mountain and the sky,
On all the tragic scene they stare.
One asks for mournful melodies;
Accomplished fingers begin to play.
Their eyes mid many wrinkles, their eyes,
Their ancient, glittering eyes, are gay.

Jihadist,

I am not sure how I fit into your post, except that you complimented the courtesy of my posts. Thank you. It really hasn't been a mission of mine to convert others because I don't believe it is within my responsibilities or capabilities to do so. Naturally, when others' views and mine contradict each other, I will believe that theirs are incorrect, but I always try to listen because I find myself rightly corrected more often than my ego enjoys. I suppose my purpose here is something like that: to expose myself to others' views in a (somewhat) uncensored way. When I see a misconception about the Catholic Faith or Church, I try my best to correct it. When I see the Catholic Church criticized, I try to (1) put the criticism, if true, in context where appropriate; if false (2) expose it as such.

Unfortunately, we in the Catholic Church are still not perfect, which is where the whole part about needing a savior comes in. One of our greatest faults, and I deliberately include myself in the "our", is forgetting that when dealing with others' faults. I am consoled somewhat by noting that we Catholics are not the only people prone to self-righteous arrogance. It seems embedded in human nature to some extent.

Your posts, if I may say so, are always very balanced in tone and fair in approach.

Farnaz,

You do have excellent taste in poetry. Do you enjoy John Donne? He's my favorite Elizabethan poet. Here's a little ditty by him, not an essential, but it shows a bit of his wit. He'd taken a bride named Anne, considerably younger than himself (she was 13 or 15?) and her father, a man of some influence, promptly had him jailed. From jail, he sent her this note.

"John Donne,
Anne Donne,
Undone."

Concerned the Christian Now Liberated's (CCNL) facts aren't proven at all. They aren't even, for the most part, facts. They are philosophical presuppositions, which is fine. We all have philosophical presuppositions, but those aren't the same things are scientifically demonstrated/disproven theories, nor are they the same as historical facts, and they shouldn't be discussed in the same terms, but as philosophical theories.

Spiderman2,

Suffice it to say that, if you will take my word for it, however many millions and billions my Church may have murdered, I haven't murdered anybody. I would hope that, as a Christian, you can muster the courtesy to deal with me as an individual.

My point about the Eucharist and John 6 wasn't whether the Church did whatever. It was only that, if you interpret it literally, you do what the Catholic Church does. If you don't interpret it literally, then you bring your own natural reason to bear on the text to understand it. That opposes "Scripture Alone" and is, also, exactly what the Catholic Church does. Just thought I'd point that out.

Have a great day!

For the not-so-religious.......

The past is already past
Don't try to regain it
The present does not stay
Don't try to touch it

From moment to moment
The future has not come;
Don't think about it
Beforehand

Whatever comes to the eye,
Leave it be.
There are no commandments
To be kept;
There's no filth to be cleansed.

With empty mind really
Penetrated, the dharmas
Have no life.

When you can be like this,
You've completed
The ultimate attainment.

Layman P'ang (740-808)

_____

However deep your
Knowledge of the scriptures,
It is no more than a strand of hair
In the vastness of space;
However important appears
Your worldly experience,
It is but a drop of water in a deep ravine.

Tokusan

_______

When mortals are alive, they worry about death.
When they're full, they worry about hunger.
Theirs is a Great Uncertainty.

But sages don't consider the past.
And they don't worry about the future.
Nor do they cling to the present.
And from moment to moment they follow the Way.

Bodhidharma

______________________

All sentient beings are essentially Buddhas.
As with water and ice, there is no ice
Without water;
Apart from sentient beings, there are no Buddhas.
Not knowing how close the truth is,
we seek it far away - - what a pity!

Hakuin Ekaku Zenji

"CCNL's facts are proven"

Are we in wonderland? Or is that a joke? Add to that Chris Everet remarks and we have 3 stooges.

CCNL's facts are proven and accepted both historically and archeologically; his opinions, attitude and style are his own.

Im sure by now a thinking person would know the last post who claims to be spiderman2 was not me. The whole post says nothing but stupid and Hell without any corresponding REASON why he is using the word stupid. This guy is sick. Chris Everet, clearly.

Farnaz, I like the last one you posted, "the Song of Ascents" which is found in Psalms. It's made into a Christian song and it's one of my favorite song. I feel you're a very good person but think that you are "unfairly" burdened by your job. Can you give me a hint what is your job? That is if it's ok with you.

I also like the other two posts. thanks

The only "poetry" needed:

Until the koran is deflawed,
No one is safe!!!

Until the koran is declawed,
No one is safe!!!

Much Islamic muck and stench there be,
Ditto that from them all.

Oops, forgot to sign in properly.

Again:

Jihhdist, Jihadist, Jihadist,

Not chips on your shoulders but 1400 years of Islamic "fems"!!!!

This Spiderman again. That other guy is impersonating me, so I can't user my name for awhile. But you all can know this is really me, because any idiot stupid enough not to understand God's love is going to be cast into the Lake of Fire.

But then again, maybe it is not me, after all. Maybe this is just some stupid idiot who thinks he can fool me by pretending to be that anonymous person who is impersonating my name Spiderman.

But in any even, we all know from our previous lessons, that God hates stupid people, and that idiots are not allowed into Heaven.

"Inventing"
Ireland..sorry for the typo.

Farnaz,

Yeats the Master

In heroic verse
William Yeats, the Irishman,
Created Ireland.

You have great taste in poetry! If you can find it get :"WB Yeats, poems selected by Seamus Heaney" Also Declan Kiberd "Investing Ireland, the literature of the modern nation", all the chapters on Yeats.

Jihadist

Thank you for your praise. Your posts seemed so ecumenical that I was not surprised to learn of the many facets of your religious background. I guess there are multiple strands of identity in all of us.

You might like this lecture by Mark Thompson, head of the BBC, given recently at Westminster Cathedral here in London. "Faith and the Media" (just add www as, to protect us from JJ we now are unable to link)rcdow.org.uk/lectures/

And to lovers of poetry and those who wonder about man and creation:

The Four Ages of Man

He with body waged a fight,
But body won; it walks upright.

Then he struggled with he heart;
Innocence and peace depart.

Then he struggled with the mind;
His proud heart he left behind.

Now his wars on God begin;
At stroke of midnight God shall win.

WB Yeats
from "A Full Moon in March" (1935)

This one is for you, Susan Jacoby. It's Keats. Prefer Blake's anti-clerical work from Songs of Experience, but I think it might be a bit too much for some people. This is surely not Keats at his best. But at his worst, he was better than most.

Written in Disgust of Vulgar Superstition

The church bells toll a melancholy round,
Calling the people to some other prayers,
Some other gloominess, more dreadful cares,
More heark'ning to the sermon's horrid sound.
Surely the mind of man is closely bound
In some black spell; seeing that each one tears
Himself from fireside joys, and Lydian airs,
And converse high of those with glory crown'd.
Still, still they toll, and I should feel a damp,
A chill as from a tomb, did I not know
That they are dying like an outburnt lamp;
That 'tis their sighing, wailing ere they go
Into oblivion;—that fresh flowers will grow,
And many glories of immortal stamp.

I don't think you will object to this one, Spiderman. My last before returning to the horror, the horror. Again, I can promise nothing with respect to lineation.

A Song of Ascents

I will lift up mine eyes unto the mountains: from whence shall my help come?

ב עֶזְרִי, מֵעִם יְהוָה-- עֹשֵׂה, שָׁמַיִם וָאָרֶץ. 2 My help cometh from the LORD, who made heaven and earth.

ג אַל-יִתֵּן לַמּוֹט רַגְלֶךָ; אַל-יָנוּם, שֹׁמְרֶךָ. 3 He will not suffer thy foot to be moved; He that keepeth thee will not slumber.

ד הִנֵּה לֹא-יָנוּם, וְלֹא יִישָׁן-- שׁוֹמֵר, יִשְׂרָאֵל. 4 Behold, He that keepeth Israel doth neither slumber nor sleep.

ה יְהוָה שֹׁמְרֶךָ; יְהוָה צִלְּךָ, עַל-יַד יְמִינֶךָ. 5 The LORD is thy keeper; the LORD is thy shade upon thy right hand.

ו יוֹמָם, הַשֶּׁמֶשׁ לֹא-יַכֶּכָּה; וְיָרֵחַ בַּלָּיְלָה. 6 The sun shall not smite thee by day, nor the moon by night.

ז יְהוָה, יִשְׁמָרְךָ מִכָּל-רָע: יִשְׁמֹר, אֶת-נַפְשֶׁךָ. 7 The LORD shall keep thee from all evil; He shall keep thy soul.

ח יְהוָה, יִשְׁמָר-צֵאתְךָ וּבוֹאֶךָ-- מֵעַתָּה, וְעַד-עוֹלָם. 8 The LORD shall guard thy going out and thy coming in, from this time forth and for ever. {P}

Do you know this one? It is magnificent to me. Although so many great artists have sung it, for me, only my dear friend Donald does justice to it. In this dire moment of reading papers that no one except, perhaps, the likes of Sadaam Hussein should have ever have to read, I hear Donald's singing. The lineation will probably not come out all right. Sorry, but if you like it, you can google it.

Precious Lord

Precious Lord, take my hand
Lead me on, let me stand
I'm tired, I’m weak, I’m lone
Through the storm, through the night
Lead me on to the light
Take my hand precious Lord, lead me home

When my way grows drear precious Lord linger near
When my life is almost gone
Hear my cry, hear my call
Hold my hand lest I fall
Take my hand precious Lord, lead me home

When the darkness appears and the night draws near
And the day is past and gone
At the river I stand
Guide my feet, hold my hand
Take my hand precious Lord, lead me home

Precious Lord, take my hand
Lead me on, let me stand
I'm tired, I’m weak, Lord I’m worn
Through the storm, through the night
Lead me on to the light
Take my hand precious Lord, lead me home

Spiderman, if you are still awake, here is another poem. I don't think you'll like it much, but if you knew what I am working on now, you will understand why I posted it. So, please don't be annoyed. I'll see what I can find of Rev. Taylor tomorrow.

Gerard Manley Hopkins (1844–1889)

God's Grandeur

The world is charged with the grandeur of God.
It will flame out, like shining from shook foil;
It gathers to a greatness, like the ooze of oil
Crushed. Why do men then now not reck his rod?
Generations have trod, have trod, have trod;
And all is seared with trade; bleared, smeared with toil;
And wears man's smudge and shares man's smell: the soil
Is bare now, nor can foot feel, being shod.

And for all this, nature is never spent;
There lives the dearest freshness deep down things;
And though the last lights off the black West went
Oh, morning, at the brown brink eastward, springs—
Because the Holy Ghost over the bent
World broods with warm breast and with ah! bright wings.

Jihhdist, Jihadist, Jihadist,

Not chips on your shoulders but 1400 years of Islamic "fems"!!!!

Daniel in the Lion's Den,

Hello. Good to see you back here again. We are a bunch here aren't we? :)

You : "And finally, for many of the religious people who post here, I think going through life with a chip on your shoulder would be a tiresome burden, and that you might feel lighter, and your way would be easier, if that chip were gone."

I don't know about the rest of the religious people here, but a psychologist and psychiatrist, who were monitoring this thread, came for me.

They discovered that I have chips on both shoulders, chips on my fish (in fish and chips) and chips with my burgers (Wendy's).

They are putting me in a straightjacket and sending me to a nuthouse to study and decide whether chips on both shoulders weighted me down and tires me out, or balance me out.

I am pleading a permanent state of temporary insanity.

Cheers

"J"

paulgraham.com/disagree.html
blog.createdebate.com/2008/04/07/how-to-write-strong-arguments/

*cough* :)

thanks farnaz, same to you.

Hi Spiderman,

Thank you so much for letting me know, but I did not think for a moment that you could have been that person.

Now, I'm afraid I must get back to my dreaded work.

Have a very, very good night, my friend.

Farnaz

Farnaz, thanks. That was a great poem. Thanks for posting it.

Farnaz, I think this fake spiderman2 is really Chris Everet.

The guy is an idiot. You can't expect something good from idiots.

Im sorry he's in his destructive mode again. Thanks for distinguishing that Im not that stupid one.

He once accused me of being Ilan. Now he's accusing Ilan, you and Liora as only one person too.

This person think he is good but it's very far from reality.

If something good happened today, at least I know who that fake spiderman2 is now.

Now, this new Anonymous cannot be Spiderman. I must tell you, however, that I do not think Ilan is a brown Persian Sfardic woman. Of course, this is the internet, so anything is possible. However, he sounds Askenazic to me, and has used language I do not use. (Ilan, if you are reading this, I do not mean to criticze.)

Liora, my dear friend, is as Askenazic as they come, and Liora, I say this with the utmost respect. (Do come back to this blog just to post a quick hello.)

Anonymous, you cannot be Spiderman. He would not speak to me so unkindly. Perhaps, you will post under your own name.

I will reply to you, but I cannott at the moment. I am disgracefully avoiding the worst drudgery, but I must get to it.

Be well, my anonymous friend.

Worth another post:

Josefus tossed. No 30%. All gone byebye.

Face it, Ilan - you are Liora, and Farnaz and Barbara B too.

No, Spiderman, he didn't believe in a literal second coming either. Absolutely not. His vision in that poem is not very far from yours, not at all.

Here it is, but I think Rev. Taylor might be worth a look for you. (Also, I didn't mean Yeats saved my life literally. It hadn't gotten quite that bad, but world, not my own life was making me despair. I was very young, very unhappy. Another time and place.)

(Not to be taken literally, Spiderman, but you can see the vision.) There are distortions in the lineation, but I can't correct them due to this little box I must post in.

Here is "The Second Coming."

Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.

Surely some revelation is at hand;
Surely the Second Coming is at hand.
The Second Coming! Hardly are those words out
When a vast image out of Spiritus Mundi
Troubles my sight: somewhere in sands of the desert
A shape with lion body and the head of a man,
A gaze blank and pitiless as the sun,
Is moving its slow thighs, while all about it
Reel shadows of the indignant desert birds.
The darkness drops again; but now I know
That twenty centuries of stony sleep
Were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle,
And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,

Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?

Josefus tossed. No 30%. All gone byebye.

Hello, again, Spiderman:

You can easily google "The Second Coming." (Yeats was Protestant, by the way.)

From time to time, I also read the Psalms, mainly, but not only, of David (the 121st Psalm, especially.

Do you know the poetry of Edward Taylor (1642-1729)? As Protestant as God ever made them. Came to the Colonies at the request of Westfield Mass. flock to minister to those folks, the descendants of Puritans. He wrote his poetry only for himself, usually after he had given a sermon, to deepen his religious experience.

Fortunately, we have his verses.

Farnaz

"You might prefer "The Second Coming." I mean that. Have you read it?"

Nope, I haven't read that. I have a different view of the second coming of Christ. I don't believe ideas about Christ second coming is accurate as they interpret it.

If Yeats had saved your life, then that's good. Keep on tracking my posts. It might save you for the second time. And hopefully, you would see Christ as the true Messiah (though not in physical form) and would lead you to true salvation.

Hmmm, disturbed by the reality of it all?

Well, that is part of the education process. Once again for a public review of the flaws and errors in it all to refute 2000 years or more of religious brainwashing:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

5. Hinduism (from an online Hindu site) - "Hinduism cannot be described as an organized religion. It is not founded by any individual. Hinduism is God centered and therefore one can call Hinduism as founded by God, because the answer to the question ‘Who is behind the eternal principles and who makes them work?’ will have to be ‘Cosmic power, Divine power, God’."

The caste/laborer system and cow worship are problems when saying a fair and rational God founded Hinduism."

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

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

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

Spiderman,

I gotcha. Posted Yeats on Sally Quinn's thread.
Poem's not to be taken as literally pagan though.

You might prefer "The Second Coming." I mean that. Have you read it?

Farnaz

PS. He dwelt in a lot of realms, Yeats, that is, some of them not so nice and pretty. But what can you say? He saved my life once.

You never know from which direction help can come.

Farnaz wrote " I wonder, could you consider maybe talking about some other aspect of your religious beliefs?"

Unlike false religions, we believe man camnot change himself by his own intellect. One needs the indwelling of the Holy Spirit of Christ to guide him in his thoughts and deeds. The same with reading the scriptures. One needs that indwelling to truly understand it. It is called being born-again. It's a realization that Jesus Christ is real just like water is real. If somebody will tell us that water is not real, it would come to us as an idiotic comment, isn't it? The same way we born-again Christians feel when somebody says Jesus is not real or God does not exist. We pity the person and I call him stupid in the hope that it will shake his head and come to himself.

Even God use the word FOOLS to describe such people maybe in the hope that they would look at it that way. Jose Rizal, the Philippine National hero, was looked up upon as a very intelligent man and was even harsher in his description to followers of false religions. He was executed for his writings of "hate". Of course it was not hate. He was just telling the truth and wished his people would realize their blindness.

If the Philippines had only listened to Rizal, the Philippines today would not be as poor and corrupt as it is now. Similarly, if the world would only understand what I'm saying, there would be no Doomsday coming. But look at how these people receive my posts. The pearl I'm giving them is seen as stone thrown at them. The Bible stated that pigs can't distinguish what is a pearl. Unless they will have that indwelling of the Holy Spirit, they would remain as blind as that 3 mice.

In short, Doomsday is still coming and nobody can stop it. Not even a thousand spiderman2, I guess.

Jihadist, I would revert back to spiderman2 soon but not on this page yet. My frequent use of the word stupidity this week may be due to the fact that Stupidity was magnified upon the arrival of the pope and the frenzy it caused to its followers. Not followers of Christ but followers of a person called the pope. It was when I shifted to high gear on attacking the stupidity when a CLONE of me (fake spiderman2) appeared coz he's frustated he can't defend their doctrine.

As to Daniel in the Lion's Den, you don't eat pearls. It's not digestible. You wear it. (sorry for the insult, i assume you needed it)

Farnaz wrote " I wonder, could you consider maybe talking about some other aspect of your religious beliefs?"

Unlike false religions, we believe man cannot change himself by his own intellect. One needs the indwelling of the Holy Spirit of Christ to guide him in his thoughts and deeds. The same with reading the scriptures. One needs that indwelling to truly understand it. It is called being born-again. It's a realization that Jesus Christ is real just like water is real. If somebody will tell us that water is not real, it would come to us as an idiotic comment, isn't it? The same way we born-again Christians feel when somebody says Jesus is not real or God does not exist. We pity the person and I call him stupid in the hope that it will shake his head and come to himself.

Even God use the word FOOLS to describe such people maybe in the hope that they would look at it that way. Jose Rizal, the Philippine National hero, was looked up upon as a very intelligent man and was even harsher in his description to followers of false religions. He was executed for his writings of "hate". Of course it was not hate. He was just telling the truth and wished his people would realize their blindness.

If the Philippines had only listened to Rizal, the Philippines today would not be as poor and corrupt as it is now. Similarly, if the world would only understand what I'm saying, there would be no Doomsday coming. But look at how these people receive my posts. The pearl I'm giving them is seen as stone thrown at them. The Bible stated that pigs can't distinguish what is a pearl. Unless they will have that indwelling of the Holy Spirit, it would remain as blind as that 3 mice. In short, doomsday is coming and nobody can't stop it. Not even a thousand Spiderman2 I guess.

Hi Spiderman,

A break from the most tedious work known to human, regardless of gender, religion, race, creed, national origin, etc.

There are more than enough people on this thread to accuse of abusive language. "The Accuser" for us is the equivalent of the evil one, although we don't quite have an evil one in your sense.

That's okay with me since there are plenty of them at my place of employment.

Also, the Protestants and the Catholics signed an official peace treaty a few years ago, if that helps.

I wonder, could you consider maybe talking about some other aspect of your religious beliefs? Then, maybe, you could come back to what is soon to be upon us.

You see I think it may be upon us, in one way or another. I'm still amazed that we are half way through the current administration and that the world is still standing. (Just my opinion)

But if we could just shift the focus for a little while, it would be so helpful, at least for me, since I do want to hear from you.

Best regards,
Farnaz

This thread is a little slice of humanity, all mixed up, and arguing, and joking, and insulting, and apologizing, and then stopping to take a few deep breaths, and then, jumping back in the brawl, for some more!

Of the people who pop up here often, I think, that truely, Chris Everett posts the most thoughtful essays, which have really caused me to think very hard, about things which I had not thought of before. When I first noticed him, I browsed over his very long posts, and then skipped them, thinking he was some sort of "know it all." But, then one day I read one through and now I always pay attention to everything he posts.

At first CCNL bothered me very much. I tried to engage him in discussion, and I tried to defend Jihadist from him. He seemed to have some potential, but mostly, he is not very practical, and kind of repetitive, and if his negative attitude towards Jihadist doesn't bother her, why should it bother me? ((After all, she calls him Pussy Cat). Now, he has ossified into the landscape, and I mostly don't ever read him at all.

E-Favorite is very thoughtful and very polite. To him I want to say, that I actually had an email exchange with David Waters of this blog, and he told me that many fine posts get held or deleted for reasons that are unknown to him, and that they are trying to fix it; what are we going to do? Just wait and hope for the best, I suppose.

Ariminis is kind and tolerant, the most tolerant Christian to post here frequently. Alot of Christians who post here are intolerant of atheists, other religions, and of each other. (Sometimes, I can see them hi-fiving each other behind our backs, but I know that their own minor differences will always be a source of contention among them, as well). Sigh!

Arminius, I have had those bad days. I have had some VERY bad days. I have posted things in momentary anger that I WISH the WaPo had "held back for review." When I am tied or frustrated, I become irritable, and say things that I would like to take back.

And Jihadist! What an interesting personage; her existence in the world casts a faint shadow upon us through this blog so that we may all have the mere-est impression of her, and what we each perceive of her is very different, as likewise are our impressions of many things in the world.

And for last, but also least, Spiderman2: I wonder at your profound disturbance, but cannot think of much, to say to you or about you or in reply to you, that would have much meaning, in a setting such as this.

And finally, for many of the religious people who post here, I think going through life with a chip on your shoulder would be a tiresome burden, and that you might feel lighter, and your way would be easier, if that chip were gone.

Anynomous
(the one formerly known as Spiderman2)

You : "Im not sure why Jihadist have this impression on me. The reason why Im anonymous now is because somebody uses my spiderman2 tag and make foolish and very offensive comments. I do make "offensive" comments but it is based on truth and reason."

Thanks for your clarification on why your resorted to using "Anonymous" as a handle. But, as you know, there are quite of number of "Anonymouses". Some by design, some by accident in pushing the post button without putting their handles and it automatically comes out as "Anonymous".

You can always complain to the blog managers that someone is using your handle. They have rules on that. Or, you can use a new handle.

I see that you do admit to making offensive comments. As to whether it is based on "truth" and "reason", that is what is debated. And that unncessary use of the word "stupid" in small letters or caps too many times.

I believe someone is irate enough by your posts to steal your handle and post as Spiderman2 to, for lack of better word, parody your more, excessive claim on "truth" and "reason", and the overuse of "stupid" as a sledgehammer word to over-stress your points, and as an attention getter to your posts and points.

As for what you said about the Catholic Church's beliefs, it is quite inimitably offensive to Catholics in some of your posts. Do learn to seperate Church and their adherents. Think Soja from Australia, Viejita Del Oeste, Mary Cunningham and Speed123. Faith is personal and personalised in degrees of the formal creed or dogma.

On a lighter note, you can alway try, other ways to make your points of disagreement, including using what Malaysians call, "politely rude" phrases in a heated discussion:

- "You are in error".
(used by the ulema as the ultimate put-down on points they really disagree with)

- "I have another theory/ thesis/hypothesis"
(used by academics on premises they disagree with)

- "I beg to differ", or, "However...", or "On the other hand..." and such
(used by civil civilians when they disagree)

Of course, those are not as punchy as "stupid", but too much use of the word "stupid" is like garbage cluttering a post and people do avoid reading further.

You really don't have to use "stupid" or "idiots" to emphasise if what you said is not "stupid" or "idiotic" do you?

Calling others "stupid" or "idiots" does not necessarily makes one smarter, or what one said is not "stupid" or "idiotic" or both.

As for your Apocalyptic and Doomsday scenario, well....I have no comment.

Cheers
"J"

Farnaz, thank you for wishing me well and for being good hearted. I still hope you'd follow my advice once things begin going so wrong as prophesied in the scripture.

Arminius wrote "Let's keep up the good work here. An amazing alliance, is it not?"

Good if that is possible coz the last time when the two of you were left alone, both of you were cursing each other. I had a good laugh observing the two of you hitting each other.

It was a funny sight. You guys don't need to make jokes. You're funnier when you are serious.

Hello Spiderman,

Just a quick note, and then I'm off to get some work done. I've hours with my neice, Baby Hagar, just a few days old. Indulgent of me, but babies, small children are so spiritualizing, even for doomed, benighted Jewish nonbelievers such as I. (I'm not poking fun at you, just being self-descriptive.)

Hope you are well, and God bless you.

Farnaz

Hi, Chris, my friend,

Yes, Ilan is to be ignored, or, at best, riposted with glee. Same as Spidey. We are agreed on that.

I have a great and abiding respect for Thomas Baum, because, despite our differences, he can so clearly expound Jesus' message of love. I do understand, if not agree with, your differences with him.

So far as CCNL is concerned, I think he has gone over the edge of late. I have no use for him, and will continue to call him out - to no avail, of course. He is as unyielding as Spidey.

Let's keep up the good work here. An amazing alliance, is it not?

Arminius

Ilan wrote "but then you see, we are daily battered by followerers of Jesus."

Wrong observation. Catholicism and Episcopalians are not followers of Jesus. Believing they are followers of Jesus does not mean they truly are.

Since your parents are atheists, they don't use their brain correctly as "observers". If you insist they are intelligent coz they are scientists, then you have to admit that they are lying when they claimed to be atheists. Stupidity and atheism are constant partners. You can't separate the two Atheists are always stupid. If you don't believe it, then let them answer my earlier post on why can plants separate hydrogen from water using just a pot of soil, air and the sun while humans can't. How can they know how plants existed when they cannot know how plants behave?

Also, true Christians protect the Jews. Believe me, there would be no Jewish state if there are no true Christians. You're tribe will be close to extinction if not for true Christians. Would you think Hitler had stopped killing your tribe if Christian America had not intervened? Or do you really believe the Jewish state could exist without America. Better tell your parents how to use observation properly before it can rub off on you.

Arminius, If China and the U.S would battle each other after this coming "small" war, would that constitute to be a prophecy? If afterwhich, more than 12 nations would rise against America, would that also connstiturte a prophecy. How far can you behave like an idiot. Calling somebody as idiot is not bigotry if that somebody behaves unmistakenly like one.

Arminus,

Ilan is a lost cause. He's Spiderman3 as far as I'm concerned.

Please understand, I'm utterly iconoclastic, I love sarcasm, and when someone is deserving of offense, I like to give it. On this thread, it was the outrage and the calls for some kind of apology from you for your mild-mannered Moses joke that set me off, and then it was off to the races.

The scales on CCNL do seem to be tipping in your favor, although the idea of "deflawing" is great and the various generic epithets (bowers, pew-sitters, etc.) are fantastic imagery.

On the more clear and present bigotry, the bigotry that was not being called by name, I think my judgement has been born out. Ilan can't even conceive a mental image of us outside of his preexisting bigoted religious and ethnic categorizations. Same for his posse. I called it out, I poked it in its sore spot, again and again, and each time the situation just got clearer and clearer. Productive? Maybe, maybe not. But fun. And selective. I certainly wouldn't treat, say, T. M. Baum that way, even though he's clearly off his rocker in some respects (by my estimation), because at heart he has heart, for all.

And I'm still trying to understand all the penis imagery that Ilan was so into. Who's Nicky, and why would he be nearby?

Ilan wrote "but then you see, we are daily battered by followerers of Jesus."

Wrong observation. Catholicism and Episcopalians are not followers of Jesus. Believing they are followers of Jesus does not mean they truly are.

Since your parents are atheists, they don't use their brain correctly as "observers". If you insist they are intelligent coz they are scientists, then you have to admit that they are lying when they claimed to be atheists. Stupidity and atheism are constant partners. You can't separate the two Atheists are always stupid. If you don't believe it, then let them answer why earlier post on why can plants separate hydrogen from water using just a pot of soil, air and the sun while humans can't. How can they know how plants existed when they cannot know how plants behave?

Also, true Christians protect the Jews. Believe me, there would be no Jewish state or if there are no true Christians. You're tribe will be close to extinction if not for true Christians. Would you think Hitler had stopped killing your tribe if Christian America had not intervened? Or do you really believe the Jewish state could exist without America. Better tell your parents how to use observation properly before it can rub off on you.

Arminius, If China and the U.S would battle each other after this coming "small" war, would that constitute to be a prophecy? If afterwhich, more than 12 nations would rise against America, would that also connstiturte a prophecy. How far can you behave like an idiot. Calling somebody as idiot is not bigotry if that somebody behaves unmistakenly like one.

Arminius:

I honestly don't want an apology from you. I had deferred to Farnaz when it came to her assessment of you.

But then you had to jump right in there between Chris E. and me.

I greatly detest this sort of thing. I don't know if you have read Serena's posts, but she is African American and Jewish. She's said she's faced more discrimination as a result of being Jewish than African American. I believe it.

Frankly, I don't want to continue this. I see no point. Empathy, my friend, is a great gift, we can give to ourselves.

Also, peace in one's household. My wife is glaring at me because I'm at the computer instead of the dinner table.

Ilan

Ilan,

I have apologized to those I have offended.

But I will never apologize to you. Congratulations, you are right down there with CCNL and Spidey with your foul bigotry. I have never, never, employed such scatological words as you do.

Arminius:

Chris E. does not come from non-believer ancestry.

You have a lot to learn. More importantly, you need to develop more empathy.

Ilan

Arminius:

Espicopalian makes complete sense. Very close to Catholicism. I guess you just don't want to understand me.

That leaves me back speaking your foul language, at which I am at a disadvantage. I will do my best.

You offended Liora, Farnaz, and me. That should be enough for you to reflect on what you wrote.

I await your NT jokes and ethnic jokes. English descent? How are your teeth? Any left? Slaughter any Irish Catholics lately?

There are none so blind, etc. Anyway, no point in going on.

Ilan,

Chris E is not a Christian, he is a non-believer, an atheist. Cannot you read his posts?

Although I am Christian, I have no particular problem with Chris in his non-belief. I do have problems with how he sometimes states it.

You have a lot to learn.

Arminius

Hi, Chris E,

Well, I'm glad to find an ally here. I still have problems with many of your statements, but I will put that to rest. Let us work together now.

Arminius

Arminius:

Let me explain something else. Both my parents are scientists, nonbelievers, but knowledgeable in Judaism and other religions. Unlike Chris E, the lapsed Protestant, they rely heavily on observation. They never speak out of ignorance.

They don't impose their paradigmatic thinking on other disciplines, as Chris E. does his Christianity on Judaism. (How could one be Jewish and an atheist, etc.; Liora a fundamentalist--a joke if you've read Liora, but, fundos is Christian language) These are the people who raised me.

I would like Liora to return to this blog. I enjoyed reading the posts among her, Farnaz, and Jihadist. They're all much more knowledgeable than I am, and I daresay much smarter.

I've seen Liora, on this blog, go at it with the worst bigots, but on this thread, from what I've seen she lost heart. That saddens me. I understand what she's probably thinking. Why come here to find racist morons?

It would be like going from New York City to Hawaii to find an apple. You find that sort of person everywhere. CCNL's post about Mohammed as a suicide bomber seemed to be the last straw for her.

I get it, but until Farnaz comes up with another venue, here we are. It would be a loss if she didn't come back, for me anyway, since I don't get to see the kind of thinking she does very often.

Ilan

Arminus,

Your Moses joke was clear and fine. Ilan's interpretation is a reflection of his own psyche. Funny how he just ASSUMED that Moses had to BUY the 10 commandments from God. I guess God IS Jewish!

Ilan,

I am protestant - Episcopal, that is, American Anglican. Liberal and progressive. Go figure, you have a lot to learn.

As far as jokes go, you apparently would not understand one if it slapped you in the face. Almost all Americans understand my joke about Moses, and where it was directed.

Arminius

WARNING! This is a religious joke:

Q: What's so great about Buddhism?

A: Nothing!

Ilan,

Are you a cartoon character? You're world view seems to be the ESSENCE of bigotry - filled with hateful Christians obsessed with defaming Jews at every turn. Well, you're living in a delusion of your own creation, my friend. The shrieking bigotometer I spoke of earlier was pointed at YOU.

Now, if only you could rise to the level of coherence, we would have our own Jewish Spiderman3 on the blog.

Note that I wrote "Jewish". That makes me a hateful antisemetic bigot, right? Just like Susan Jacoby herself, who wrote the word "Jew" in her essay, which makes her a hateful antisemite in your eyes, as I recall.

Nothing a timely counterpunch about the waterskiing messiah won't handle, don't you think? I'm so sad you didn't take to the undead zombie messiah. Isn't his undeadness much more significant than his ultrabouyancy? Especially when you consider that if he could float up to heaven, then he could easily just HOVER over the water, making it LOOK like he was walking on it when he really isn't. Don't you see? He fooled us all! He CAN'T walk on water! All he can do is hover, undead, above the water.

Arminius:

Are you Orthodox Christian, then? You don't appear to be Protestant. I don't know....It all sounds so Catholic to me, but then you see, we are daily battered by followerers of Jesus.

My long post to Chris E applies to you as well. Work on jokes dealing with your own religion and your own ethnic group, if joke in such ways you must.

Skip the part about dealing with Moses bargaining down the deity about the tablets. Read what I wrote to Chris Everett. Try to understand.

Frankly, I don't know how much more explicit I can be.

Ilan

Ilan, you wrote:
"Arminius blames the victim (he's probably Catholic) and isn't too bright, but he may be redeemable."

First, how is it that I blame the victim? Please explain.

Next, I am not Roman Catholic. The bishop of Rome is not my leader.

Third, I am not too bright, but I pursue my road.

Last, what do you mean by 'redeemable'?

Arminius

Dear Liora,

If you are reading this, and I surely hope you are not, then look at it this way. Chris E. is an ignorant, bigoted fool.

Arminius blames the victim (he's probably Catholic) and isn't too bright, but he may be redeemable.

Also, who cares? Post to me, to Farnaz, to Serena et al, to Jihadist, who seems very knowledgeable and smart. Farnaz has spotted two good Catholics somewhere on this blog. (Scroll down. She wrote this to you,) Also, she wrote you she'd try to set up a venue for us, those who wish genuine dialogue.

Did you read what Farnaz wrote?

Ilan

Ilan,

You have no understanding of us Christians, in our bewildering variety.

My Moses joke was NOT anti-jewish. Not at all. It was directed to the fundamentalist types, who keep trying to nail up the 10 Commandments in every public place, in direct violation of our first amendment.

Arminius

Arminius:

Another thing; You have made plenty of personal attacks for the "noble soul" people claim you are.

You are among those who don't even know you are being hateful when you are, as with your MOses, the cheap Jew, joke. The last line of my last post to Chris E., Atheist/Christian (generically speaking) refers to that.

Read my long post to Chris E. It applies to you, as well.

You are better intended, I suspect than he. Farnaz gave you the benefit of the doubt after your cheap Jew joke.

I did, too. I hope I was right.

Don't worry so mucy about defending and protecting against nothing. Start with your own specch first.

It's better for the brain. MOre brainful.

Ilan

Ilan,

You don't converse, you accuse. You do not back up your accusations with anything. All I can see from you is a spewing of hatred. This forum is here for us to learn about each other. This takes tolerance and compassion, neither of which you have yet to show with your bitter words.

Arminius

Arminius,

Believe me it wasn't brainless. It's very difficult for me to think this way. I learned what little I know of the language from the Christians (generically speaking) atheist or otherwise. They have a gift for it, and it comes easily to them.

Somethimes, Arminius, they don't even know they are doing it.

Ilan

To the Moderator:

Ilan's post of pril 27, 2008 4:46 PM is a direct ad hominem attack on Chris E. Ilan should be banned forthwith from this forum.

Arminius

Chris E:

Before you reveal yet more ignorance and illiteracy. Read the Qu'ran. Mohammed and MOses were not the same. For one thing, they differed philosophically. For another, unlike Jesus, the water skier, Mohammed existed.

When you're done with Nicky, use your cheeks to pick up a highlighter. Unless you're cheeks are occupied with another, that is.

Christian/Atheistically

Ilan

Ilan,
See my post to CCNL, it applies to you too.

Chris,
I take Ilan's brainless attack on you as an attack on me too.

CCNL,

You are one sick puppy. There might be doctors who can still help you, but I suspect you are beyond that. You are a boil on the arse of humanity.

Arminius

Chris E:

No. II: Typical Christian/Catholic blame the victim. Where's your other cheek? You've got four.

Turn whichever one you're not busy using with little Nicky.

No, too typically Christian (generically) speaking--blaming the victim, that is. Your training escapes you. Not free of your theology yet, not be a long shot.

Nope. No atheist.

Turn a free cheek and try again.

PS. You're right there with your co-religionist Spiderman, who blamed Barbara E. You're fitting right into the stereotype, Chris. Carry on.

Chris, Chris, Chris,

Again the idea of nuking the capital of the WARMONGERING, MURDERING Arab's religion was not my idea. It was suggested by a member of the US Congress. Many of us thought his suggestion wise as a means to get OBL's attention.

Murdering your opposition and establishing the fear factor in the rest of the population is exactly how Islam was spread. And since Moses was mythical, he cannot be blamed for similar activities.

Chris E:

Look down next time you make a peepee. Next time you get bored and your wife or girlfriend isn't around, but you're randy.

Hopefully, little NIcky, Pete, et al, aren't nearby.

Ilan

PS. Jewish atheists, not a problem. Fundies, your neck of the Atheist/Christian/Catholic divide.

Spidey, you pontificated:
"Iraq and afganistan are fulfilled prophecies and the coming wars I mentioned previously are about to happen soon."

Anybody out there believe that? If so, boy, do I have a deal for you on a certain bridge in New York...

Arminius

" And you might find inspiration in the essays of Robert Ingersoll, the "Great Agnostic" of the late 1800's "

Blind leading the blind. A usual scenario.

Jeff P.,

Beautiful letter. Well said. If you don't mind my suggesting, you might find a home at Ethical Culture, a non-theistic "religion" dedicated to the cultivation of personal and social ethics as the supreme end of life. And you might find inspiration in the essays of Robert Ingersoll, the "Great Agnostic" of the late 1800's who was America's #1 orator of the day, now nearly lost to a history taught from a Texas Christian school board point of view.

Arminus,

No need for apologies. I began by attempting to dispel an assumption that was made about me, but I'm sure I catalyzed thousands of new ones!

Jihadist,

Your voice is among those I most look forward to hearing on this blog. 'Nuf said.

Ilan,

In true "eye for an eye" fashion you ask for a Jesus epithet. A couple of weeks ago Jihadist came up with an image of Jesus as the undead zombie messiah. Rowwr!!! I was delighted at the time, said so, and still am. As for Barbara L's joke about John the B., it wasn't funny because it wasn't clear enough and I'm not sure I even understood it. Please spruce it up a little and repost it.

CCNL,

What the @#$&'s with your call for nuking?!?! Practice what you preach and deflaw you violent desires first. Do you think anyone would have followed Moses or Mohammad if they encouraged violence towards others or, God forbid, committed violence themselves? I certainly can't imagine it, can you? I mean, what kind of people would follow a murderer?

ccnl,

You were raised a catholic. What made you think you are an expert in Biblical interpretations?

Angels have no wings. If that is how some bible readers see it, it is because they don't know the meaning of those wings as described in the bible.

You have a long way to go. It's true that there's alot of false religions but you are deceived yourself if you think that there is not one true Christianity.

Iraq and afganistan are fulfilled prophecies and the coming wars I mentioned previously are about to happen soon.

Anon/Spiderman2 aka Canyon Shearer, Bible Thumper, Fortune Teller and Severely Brainwashed in that Old Time Religion,

Once again, thumping the reality of the obvious:

Fools are those who have read only the bible. God cannot be proud of such lazy creations!!!!

And what "voodooer of the hoodoo" blessed you with such stupidity in the field of fortune telling and interpretations of said stupidity???

The reality of it all is that the "pew sitters" and "bowers" are coming to grips with the flaws in their religions and in ten years the religions of today will be unrecognizable or extinct as prophets/"profiteers", the "pretty and ugly wingie flying thingies" are finally buried in the piles of utter stupidity.

Great letter but would you be proud of that letter if you'd find out that Jesus is really the Great Judge?

The truth is, I've proven that He is that Judge, 100%. Everything that's happening today are all in the Bible prophecies 100%. That is how accurate the Bible is. It is usually the reader who misunderstands it.

Anybody who loves that letter, and surely there are many, is truly in distress coz the truth is not in them.

Ye shall know the Truth and the Truth shall make you free.

Wow.

Jeff P, that was really amazing. I hope that whoever you sent it to will take it in the spirit it's intended. Having never been a part of Christianity, but having also left the religion of so many I love and admire, gives a great respect and some small understanding for what you must be going through. And I can't help but agree with you that it is precisely that type of black-and-white thinking you speak of so beautifully that has brought us to the edge of destroying what we love so much about our country.

May you find what you seek and may it bring all the happiness you deserve.

Blessed be.

Jeff P,

Wonderful letter, well and properly done. You have my respect.

Arminius

Jeff P - Beautiful. I wish I'd thought to write something like that when I left church.

Please come back and tell us how people responded to your letter.

Chris,

Please accept my apologies for my harsh posts. I was having a very bad night.

Arminius

I have too many books on the bookshelf that need to be read, so this is my last post for awhile.

I just wanted to thank my friends here on On Faith, and for the dialogue over the last year or so.

I wanted to leave you with a letter I've mailed to my church friends, that I think applies to my friends here as well.

An Open Letter to my Christian friends:

In all honesty, you and I have shared some of the questions of faith that I’ve encountered over the last several years, and I have appreciated having an “ear” for that limited dialogue. I think it would be fair to you to let you know that my “faith journey” has changed fairly significantly and dramatically since my return to Texas, and perhaps had the seeds of change much earlier, prior to our move from Utah.

I find at present that it is very difficult for me to be honest with myself (and therefore others) during our worship, and I somehow feel that I’m not being genuine as I pray the prayers and recite the creeds, because in fact I no longer own those beliefs. I’m afraid that I’m not able to see this earth in the often-described black-and-white dichotomy of true and correct spiritual belief versus the harmfulness of “the world.” I’ve resolved that I am, in fact, a natural product of this world and am not separate from it. I don’t claim natural or “spiritual” advantage. I can’t subscribe any more to the necessities to somehow separate myself from those who might “believe” differently, or who have lived in another culture different and non-congruent to the gospel that I’m advocated to spread. I’m unwilling to consider that I might have just serendipitously stumbled upon revealed “truth” by way of being lucky enough to live where I live, or to be in a culture where it’s promoted and culturally normalized. I’m afraid that I can’t ignore those questions that arise outside of the fold.

Perhaps the hardest thing for me at this point comes at the heels of the last seven political years, and seeing the results of campaigns that have attempted to clarify which are the “chosen” or “moral” among our population at large. These “black and white” issues have the real potential to destroy our existence. It’s been disheartening to me to see our country polarized and divided over issues of “belief.” For all the good that’s been done in religion’s name, I’m saddened by the harm as well. I can only hope for Ben, as he grows into an adult, an ability to contemplate how wonderful and beautiful and mysterious is our natural world, and about the possibility that he can grow up thinking and considering, loving deeply and joyously, without needing to hear (week after week) about our spoiled and sinful nature, and about how God would otherwise be extremely disappointed with creation had it not been for the ultimate sacrificial offering, and about how grateful we ought to be for it. I’ve lived long enough to observe that human nature doesn’t appear to be changed all that much by professed belief and that humans are capable of amazing things both wonderful and evil, the world over.

I do miss the Christ Lutheran community of friendly and wonderful people, who are on a similar quest for truth. Departing from this community of belief has been the somewhat saddest and most difficult part of any prior journey for me, but also the most satisfying, and the journey most worthy of travel. I’ll always have a guarded respect for the “people of God,” and have all due respect, admiration and awe for the lessons Jesus taught about compassion, the call for justice, and the leveling of unjust power systems that oppress and hurt people. It’s a truly worthy calling and I believe a lot of people within and without the church have the desire and ability to change the world for the better.

I will remain a “friend” of the church, although I’m in the process of seeking my community, which I may never entirely find. Kathryn and Benjamin are not in the same “spiritual” place with me. Benjamin will continue to be involved with confirmation classes, and I don’t yet know what Kathryn will ultimately decided, or if she will continue along the same journey. I encourage them both to walk along their own spiritual paths and seek goodness and truth, and I can never bring myself to antagonize people of faith for the sake of pride or “winning the argument.” Many of my life-heroes are “people of faith.”


Sincerely,

Jeff Pickens

Chris Everett wrote "I mean, who but a civil engineer would install a waste pipe smack-dab in the middle of a recreational area?"

Who would have thought your brain would be used like a waste pipe? It's full of trash.

And what is superstition but evolution. Does evolution have an answer why can plant leaves separate hydrogen from water? They don't have brains and why on earth can they separate hydrogen from water using just a pot of soil, air and the sun but humans can't?

"The FOOL hath said in his heart, There is no God. " (Psalms 53:1)

"The FOOL hath said in his heart, There is no God. " (Psalms 53:1)

Stupid is not a harsh word if it's backed with reason. I don't use the word stupid if there is no corresponding reason for it. If ever "I" use it successively to the point that i look stupid myself, it's because it's NOT ME but some other people using MY NAME.

Yup, there is a fake spiderman2 here. Just as there are fake Christianity like Catholicism. The devil is a cunning creature. He would use anything at his disposal just to deceive. If you are not careful, you too would be deceived. In fact, you already are. The Bible states that MANY will go to hell but FEW to heaven simply because MANY will be deceived.

Jihadist wrote "There are times when I think Spiderman2 is an athiest pretending to be an over the top believer to have fun here. "

Im not sure why Jihadist have this impression on me. The reason why Im anonymous now is because somebody uses my spiderman2 tag and make foolish and very offensive comments. I do make "offensive" comments but it is based on truth and reason.

I've posted this on another blog but I think it deserves to be posted here as well.

Here is it :

****

Exchange of ideas is not in the interest of Catholicism or any false religions. Catholicism has not changed since its conception upto now despite the clear contradiction it has with the Bible.

My intention is for Catholics to see the contradiction and not to change the doctrine of Catholicism. It would never change.

If you're living in a house made up of garbage, you would be hurt if somebody tells you , "why are you living in a house of garbage?"

Im not full of hatred, Im just telling the truth. It's harder if you would realize that at the time of Judgment Day than before when you can still make amends."

***

Jesus Christ was crucified simply because he was preaching about that "garbage". You won't notice the garbage you are in if you live in it. It's important if you "detach" yourself from it even for a while and see it from another perspective.

I've done that to my own church and by doing that, I saw the flaws that my church taught me. You can't see thru the microscope if you are inside the microscope.

There she is again, doing her "obfusing" ritual as The Jihadist offers no rebuttal to our actual comments about why Mecca might be converted to an Arab Disney World. Ditto about walls, terror, nuking and the "fems" of Islam. What are the "fems" of Islam you ask?? The flaws, errors, muck and stench of Islam as noted below:

1. Belief in "pretty/ugly wingie thingies".

2. Belief that an hallucinating, illiterate Arab did actually talk to the "pretty Gabriel" in the hot "Gabe" cave and therein received the warmongering and anti-female words and resultant laws now listed in the koran.

3. That Sunnis are superior to Shiites in all aspects of life. And Shiites think the same way about Sunnis.

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

Hello Farnaz,

One can never tell in these threads whom one offended anymore. But I am only too happy to offend some who made a habit, a practice, a career, a mission in On Faith threads to offend others.

The thing I find interesting is Chris Everett's post to Arminius refering also to "sacred religious sensibilities". Whatever that means. I am now on to "sacred atheist sensibilities" and the demi-gods of atheists, Harris and Hitchens, and see what happens.

I am not sure if Everett is referring to ethnic and religious sensitivities. Some posters don't and can't tell one can be Jewish, and an agnostic or atheist too. Jacques Berlinerblau's essay, "In Praise of Jewish Atheists" puzzled me, but I known understand what he means in being Jewish as also an ethnic and cultural heritage.

Yes, I notice Jews were at the receiving end of quite excreble posts in On Faith threads. Yes, I notice it in other places too. And yes, some Muslims have taken to reading all the conspiracies theories as Ilan stated, and made excreble comments too about Jews.

What Ilan was saying was right. It is like big boys bullying a smaller boy in the schoolyard - taunting and beating up a smaller boy. When the smaller boy fights back, the big boy whines. Christianity with over two billion adherents at least, and Islam with a billion adherents are not exactly minority faith groups, unlike Judaism.

In On Faith threads, it would seem that some Christians do "attack" the creed of others as "false" and such. It also seem to be the habit of some Christians to "convert" others to their creed here. These usually preach "peacefully" like Canyon Shearer, Thomas Baum, Peter Huff etc until and unless someone "attack" their posts.

For the life of me, I can never understand how some actually do think people can be "converted" in blogs.

You are right about racist morons and their language, and using it back on them. Bigots would happily dish it out, but seem not able to take it. They complain saying they are only stating the "obvious" or the "truth", that "truth may hurt", and this is my favourite, the sorry for our reactions to their statements, but not sorry for what they said crowd.

When people attack Catholics or Jews, it really irritates me even if I have no compunction complaining about some of Israel's policies towards the Palestinians and illegal land settlments, or on the Pope and Vatican. Just as I do on some aspects of US foreign policies and on my own goverment and ulema.

The fact is, my maternal grandfather is Catholic, my maternal grandmother is Jewish. They may not be devout in their faiths, but they would always say they are Catholic and Jewish respectively.

Long story, but suffice to say I am a half-breed and do want to know the religious faiths of my mother's side better as a measure of my love and respect for them, and to honour their memory and heritage.

What can one say about CCNL, a born again as a Crossanized Christian and evangelising it here and there? Better to read JD Crossan's essays in On Faith and not waste time reading his posts on what is Crossanizism.

As for Spiderman2, Christian "preachers" in On Faith are usually polite and civil as shown by Ryan Haber, Thomas Baum, Pablo or Peter Huff. Even Canyon Shearer on his good days if atheists are not mocking him. There are times when I think Spiderman2 is an athiest pretending to be an over the top believer to have fun here.

Mary Cunningham, my favourite Catholic in On Faith, seem to take a lot of flak too in On Faith threads for being Catholic, like Speed123.

I have never seen her posts anything unseemly about those of other faiths. Only to state her points and belief on Catholicism. She can and does put back zingers in reaction to bigotry against Catholics and Catholicism.

Go ahead. Fight back against racist and religious bigots. They invoke freedom of speech to say anything they want. You have the freedom to fight back. Give as good as they give. Nay, give a better whack back.

Thanks and regards

"J"

Needed clarification by repeating previous commentary with some added emphasis to clarify the recent commentary by one "Reality Challenged" and Obfuscating Jihadist:

"Just as Christianity is self-destructing from the weight of its flaws, errors, muck and stench to include physical resurrections, holy ghosts, "voodooing the hoodoo" aka "miracles", and pedophilic priests and nuns, Islam will analogously self-destruct as noted below:

Islam's reliance on "pretty wingie thingies" and "demons of the demented" for authenication is coming to a fast close. As it does, Mecca will no longer be a shrine to these fictional characters and will simply become a historical tourist attraction. Maybe Disney will construct another Disney World there featuring roller coaster-chariot rides to the fictional heavens, a water park at the Grand Mosque along with a Hall of Religious Embellished Characters featuring talking figures of Abraham, Jesus and Mohammed and his eleven wives.

Hmmm, Mohammed's figure would be saying something like:

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

Nuking Mecca btw was suggested by a member of the US Congress as a means to deter future attacks by Islamic terrorists . Many US citizens to include myself agreed with this suggestion and noted it as such on this blog.

With respect to building walls:

"Considering the hate generated by passages in the koran, erecting dividing walls between Muslims and Jews is highly recommended. UN forces should control these walls."

"The Jews and Palestinians are being separated by walls. Hopefully the walls will follow the 1948 UN accords and the Annapolis Peace Conference is at least somewhat successful."

"Fanatical Islam has basically been contained to the Middle East but a wall between India and Pakistan would be a plus for world peace. Ditto for a wall between Afghahistan and Pakistan."

"Without doubt, the Catholic Church is WALLowing in the muck of sinful priests but Islam shares an equal wallowing in their own muck. As a reminder, the flaws/muck of Islam:

1. Belief in "pretty/ugly wingie thingies".

2. Belief that an hallucinating, illiterate Arab did actually talk to the "pretty Gabriel" in the hot "Gabe" cave and therein received the warmongering and anti-female words and resultant laws now listed in the koran.

3. That Sunnis are superior to Shiites in all aspects of life. And Shiites think the same way about Sunnis.

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

"Abraham, the Jewish patriarch, probably never existed. Nor did Moses. The entire Exodus story as recounted in the Bible probably never occurred. The same is true of the tumbling of the walls of Jericho."

"Looks we should build a wall around the entire Middle East until these backward, immature, and irrational clerics/imams can have at it with each other.

And it is very, very disturbing that the Saudi government by their silence continues to support the vitriol for expanding the butchery between
Sunnis and Shiites. Considering the trillions of dollars in cash and investments, the Saudi political leadership could end poverty in all of the Mideast but they apparently fear the Wahhabi clerics. I say jail the terrorist clerics and send them to the Hague for crimes against humanity. Or maybe a UN/US/NATO take over of Saudi Arabia would be a faster resolution?"

The Jihadist, terror and terrorists:

"Which brings us to The Jihadist and other like "liberal" Muslims. They refuse to accept the reality of history i.e. Big Mo was a "holey hallucinator" as he supposedly saw visions of a "pwtfft" aka Gabriel. From these hallucinations, came one of the most violent/terror religions humankind has ever seen as evidenced by the Third Axis of Evil aka Iran and the "Wannabees" of Saudi Arabia and the following contemporary acts of terror in general supported by Iran and the "Wannabees" financially and "theologically" with the blood money of oil profits:

the arson/terror acts of seven Muslim doctors in the UK, the UK train bombings, the train bombings in Spain, the 9/11 terrorists, the 24/7 Sunni suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers , the 24/7 Shiite suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers , the Bali crazies, the Kenya crazies, the Pakistani koranics, the Palestine suicide bombers/rocketeers, the Lebanese nutcases and the Filipino koranics.

Instead of accepting the reality of history and demanding a deletion of Big Mo and his scribes' koranic militaristic agenda , The Jihadist and her ilk continue an almost 24/7 "wishy wash" with verbage about other religions, other life styles and other economic and government institutions while Islam continues to bring us closer to a world war. "

"The Jihadist will be back. She like other "liberal" Muslims has to feed on other peoples' flaws. That way they don't have to consider their own flawed religion and states of militaristic Islam like the Third Axis of Evil aka Iran based on the "holey not holy hallucinator", "pwtfft"s and plagiarized messages. "

"Hmmm, The Jihadist forgot a few phrases like "Its the all about the koran, stupid" also "The koran is bad both on paper and in practice" and also the most famous one,

"Until the koran is "deflawed", no one is safe!!!!"

BTW, CCNL:

Why not "Jesus, the water skier of NT fame," as Ilan suggests?

Speaking of Real Politick.

Hi Jihadist,

It was not you who offended Ilan, or Liora, and most certainly not me.

None of this really has a direct bearing on you. It's hard to explain. I can't really speak for Liora, but I can speak for myself. What he said to you, was to me, so dispicable to me , that I had to respond. I would have responded had he said it to anyone.

I think Liora just has had it for a bit. I'm hoping she'll come back.

Jews have a hard time here, as Ilan was trying to say. For reasons I'm not clear on, people seem to think that they can say whatever they want to us, and they are often surprised (Really!) when we respond in kind.

My Askenazic friends tell me that Jews used to be more reticent, since most really aren't bigots, but, for them now, and, certainly, for me, that's not the issue. Real Politik. I notice that when I let racist morons know I speak their language, they never speak it again.

At any rate, again, none of this had anything to do with you, including my remarks to the anal retentive not-so-lapsed Catholic school boy, CCNL, who must be in his late fifties, early sixties. Can't read, can't write. (Superfluous hyphens. Pace Edward Said Pere, Ph.D.s qualify people to be technicians. In his case the certification is misleading.

Certainly, you can take care of yourself. Again, I cannot speak for Liora. But some of us dislike vile behavior. Period.

As for Spiderman, if I can take Spiderman trying to convert me, then others should be able to listen to him as well. But misrepresentation, hate speech, ignorance, etc. No Sir. No Ma'am.

That's my position, Jihadist. I speak only for myself.

Regards,
Farnaz

Oh my. Arminius and Chris Everett have a small fall-out over CCNL? And they are good blog friends.

I had ignored CCNL's posts to me so others can have their conversations with others in peace.

I suppose I will have to say something to CCNL then. And time enough to go a wee bit growly.....

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

Concerned the Christian Now Liberated,

Stuff it. Crossanized Christianity has no takers here.

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

E Favorite and Chris Everett,

"Stuff it" is nothing. Arminius is one of the most civil and most liked posters in On Faith.

Many posters puts out more rude stuff regarding others.

It is apparent that you both may need CCNL more than he need you both to "defend" him or to speak for him.

Non-believers, especially the smart and savvy ones, not to mention classy, don't really need the likes of CCNL. They are liabilities to one of the secularists' larger cause - seperation of church and state.

I can take care of myself. For what CCNL posted to others, and for what others think of his posts, and to respond to it or otherwise, let CCNL take care of himself. He is personally responsible for what he said and wrote in his posts. So, let him deal with them.

CCNL is not worth drawing battlelines for. So, stuff it. Unless he is your indispensible frontline in battle against "evil" believers here.

And tell me then, which believers in On Faith threads are committing mayhem and murder? Not Spiderman2, not Speed123, not Angela, not Moody, not Thomas Baum, not Canyon Shearer, not Pablo.

Perhaps you see Osamas or Pat Robertons or Carnidal Law disguised as On Faith posters. Unless all atheists wants to be third rate clones of second rate Harris and Hitchens.

Perhaps it never occured to you that in On Faith, while some are committed to trashing and thrashing beliefs, others want to talk on their faith and to have a real inter-faith conversation.

Daniel in the Daniel's Dan, Jeff P and Liora are right to be put off. Even good-natured and patient Arminius is dismayed.

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

Ilan, Liora and Farnaz,

I'm sorry if I offended you with unseemly jokes on religion.

As for CCNL, it is up to you to take on him or otherwise on what he wrote in his posts on religion whether addressed to you or not.

I would not waste time with CCNL if I were you. He does not apologise for anything he said to anyone. He did call me a terrorist before in some of his posts. And of course, to nuke Mecca and some other interesting proposals before you came to On Faith. Including putting fences and walls around Muslims, and Mecca to be turned into Disneyland and such.

CCNL is the sort of chap wet, wimpy and whiny atheists would admire as telling to believers what they need to be told on "reality". I just think he does get unhinged sometimes in his posts.

Thanks and regards

"J"

HL,

I will look again. Good night to you as well.

Salaam.

Farnaz

Hello Farnaz,

Yes I read the story in the TaNaKh. It is moving indeed.

About the song, just google: Song of Isaac and Ishmael by Rabbi Leila Gal Berner. And it should be the first one listed; then scroll down to where the mp3 file is located.
You have a good night.

Shalom

Reality 102- pop quiz- get out your blue books and answer us this: Religions require founders. What sayest about the founders of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam??

Next day: And the acceptable answers are:

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

Jesus was an illiterate Jewish peasant/carpenter/simple preacher man who suffered from hallucinations and who has been characterized anywhere from the Messiah from Nazareth to a mythical character from mythical Nazareth to a mamzer from Nazareth (Professor Bruce Chilton, in his book Rabbi Jesus).

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

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

Hello, HL,

I don't know why, but I cannot find the song. But, yes, you have seen the Tanakh, no? When Ishmael returns and they are all together at Abraham's (Ibrahim's) passing?

It is so stark and moving, whether in Hebrew or in English.

And what followed in history is so insane. Did you know that Jews are also named Ishmael, sometimes Yismael (same thing)?

"And he shall be the leader of a great nation."

I will try again to find the song.

Regards,
Farnaz

Reality 102 continued:

B16 like many of us suffers in private and publically from the Three B Syndrome i.e. he was Bred, Born and Brainwashed in his religion. For this reason, he is unable to think past the shackles put upon him by the likes of Paul, Mark, Matthew, Luke and John.

The wishful thinking done by these five scribes approximately 2000 years ago continued the embellishment and fiction tradition of the Jewish scribes. The locals paid for a good story of myth and imminent second coming. There was no money in the truth but now we know the truth and it boils down to two simple statements, Do No Harm and Love Thy Neighbor as yourself.

Farnaz, check this son by Rabbi Leila (btw, I did not know Leila is a Hebrew name):

Song of Isaac and Ishmael by Rabbi Leila Gal Berner:

Shalom aleichem, aleichem shalom, shalom
Shalom aleichem, aleichem shalom.

I. Sh'mi Yitzchak, ayeh achi, ayeh achi?
Sh'mi Yitzchack, ayeh achi Yishmael?
My name is Isaac, where's my brother?
Where's my brother?
My name is Isaac, where's my brother Ishmael?
Salaam aleikum, aleikum salaam, salaam
Salaam aleikum, aleikum salaam

II. Ismi Ismael, wayn achi, wayn achi?
Ismi Ismael, wayn achi, Is-hak?
My name is Ishmael, where's my brother?
Where's my brother?
My name is Ishmael, where's my brother Isaac?

Shalom aleichem, aleichem shalom, shalom
Shalom aleichem, aleichem shalom

III. Born on the same Land
guided by the same God hand
We were torn apart,
And it broke our father's heart.
I was bound on the altar.
you were left to wander.
Both of us sacrificed,
And it broke our father's heart.

Salaam aleikum, aleikum salaam, salaam
Salaam aleikum, aleikum salaam

IV. When our father Abraham died,
We laid him down, you and I.
Then our brother bonds were broken,
and it broke our father's heart.
Our children's children don't know why
they must fight and kill and die.
We are slaughtering each other It breaks our father's heart.

Shalom aleichem, aleichem shalom, shalom
Shalom aleichem, aleichem shalom

IV. O Isaac I dream of you in the desert sands!
O Ishmael I dream of you in the hills!
O Ishmael can we share our father's land?
O Isaac can our mothers, too, be friends again?

Salaam aleikum, aleichem shalom, salaam
Shalom aleichem, aleikum salaam.
O Isaac, can we live free at last?
O Ishmael, with Justice in the land?
We are brothers, can we live in peace again?
O Abraham, father, can we heal your broken heart?

Salaam aleikum, aleichem shalom, salaam
Shalom aleichem, aleikum salaam.

You can listen to the song at: shalomctrd dot org slash node slash 472

Dear Liora,

Ilan seems to be under the impression that you have quit this blog. (Scroll down a bit, and then more.) Say it isn't so. But first, read on, it isn't all so bad.

A cheering report: I spent most of the day with my family and Baby Hagar. You should see her, Liora! They are so amazing when they are at that newborn all falling apart stage, and then it's so doubly awe-inspiring when they come all together!
My little nephew asked, "How come she just lies there all the time?"!

I thought following CCNL's awful post to Jihadist, we had decided to see if we could bring together respectful people to talk about the moral applications and implications of religion/agnosticism/atheism to secular statehood. Others from this blog who might be interested: Serena, Barbara, Ilan, Josh, Jihadist, Arminius, more.

And I think I mentioned that there are people I know who could make enlightening contributions. I'm sure we all know such others. I even emailed a Pakistani friend (she lives in Islamabad), and she replied that she'd love to participate.

I will try to figure something out. Promise. But if you disappear, then I can't do anything.

Also, didn't you want to set the record straight about Etz Haym?

Come on, L! Take heart! Just give us a quick post, and say hi.

Warmest regards,

Farnaz

PS. Until we get ourselves set up, we could just let ccnl and others benighted shadow box. Do you see?

The start of Reality 102 private and public:

So where are the bodies? Originally in typical burial places of those who died in the first century CE. Now the molecules/atoms from these now long-decomposed bodies circulate in the natural, recycling processes. Just think some Muslim or Israeli have molecules/atoms in their bodies that once were in the bodies of Jesus, Mary and/or Joseph i.e. the ultimate in Ecumenism!!

Chris Everett you wrote to me:

"But as for "obfusing", pew-sitters, bowers, pretty-wingie thingies, the hallucinating war-mongering Arab, and now Tablet Man, I say, "Most Excellent!" And as repetitive as CCNL is, the notion of "deflawing" the religions is one heck of a compromise between cultural parochialism and reason, and a lot more conservative than what I would recommend, which is to scrap them al"

What do you think of my own "rejoinder," as it were, with respect to Jesus, with whom, at least in my opinion, CCNL is rather mild:

Liora recommended that CCNL take it up, and here it is:

"Would that be Jesus, the water skier of New Testament fame?"

What do you think? Please give us your opinion. Would you suggest CCNL use it? You know, to balance out Moses the Tablet-Man (sic). Sorry about the hyhen, Liora. Odd, CCNL hasn't used it.

Please recommend it to CCNL, if you like it, or come up with an appealing equivalent. I'm not so good with words, so I await your reply.

Second, you wrote: "Especially all the posters accusing CCNL of being b.i.g.o.t.e.d for accurately calling Jewish dogma superstition. It's funny, I guess if you call evangelical Christianity nonsense you are called an idiot, if you call Catholicism nonsense you are called immoral, and if you call fundamentalist Judaism nonsense you are called a racist bigot."

I believe it was Pat who said what you quote. But--"Jewish fundamentalism"? Huh?! Liora???? And what exactly is that? Jews are not Christians. Don't use your terminology to describe us. Yeah, I know you're an atheist but fundamentalist isn't our jargon, so don't impose it on us.

Third: CCNL is quick to discredit the Tanakh, yet maintains an assertion about the 30% of the NT, which is "authentic Jesus." However, his actual existence is still hotly debated, as others have pointed out. The percentage, then, as the rather knowledgeable Liora pointed out may well turn out to be zero.

Fourth: Even I, who am not as knowledgeable about religion as Liora, and nowhere near as knowledgeable as Farnaz, have read about the Paul/Saul debate, and the growing evidence that there was no Saul, no conversion from Judaism, that Paul from Tarsus had always been Paul from Tarsus. CCNL ignores this.

Fifth: Liora has continually suggested to CCNL that he go on to textual scholarship. That is, the J, E, D, etc. authors of the Tanakh (Use the search bar to define Tanakh). She suggests the Q author for the NT. Farnaz may have done the same. This is secular Religious Studies. Liora wrote on another thread that she's had archaeological and historical scholarship of the Tanakh "up the wazoo." Therefore, she'd rather look into the textual.

A qualifier: She said she'd be okay with archaeological and historical discussion of the NT, about which, she says she knows little. This is on another thread. I can't sit, cut, and paste all night. I simply would like Liora to return to this site.

But that great scholar, CCNL, has yet to take her up on this. Liora, a "fundamentalist."

These writers of the Tanakh, moreover, were not scribes, as everyone has pointed out. I know nnothing of the Q and who other writers of the NT were; would have to ask that great scholar CCNL, who gets and distorts his evidence from a 2002 article. But the writers of the Tanakh were evidently educators. There is strong evidence that some, as individuals, made changes based on there varying interpretations and understandings, much the way educators do today.

I believe it was you who wrote something about how one can be an atheist and Jewish at the same time. Ask Mordecai Kaplan. Emmanuel Levinas. Leopold Zunz. Hermann Cohen. Etc., etc., etc.

And here is something really interesting: Ask the priest I heard speak this weak at an interfaith meeting, who said, laughing, that he didn't think most Catholics believe in the literal existence of hell, that the trinity is a metaphor. NOw, that did surprise me.

Sixth: I understand that Arminius meant no harm with his Moses joke, but cheap Jews, etc., something we hear every day, along with how we control the congress, own big business, are responsible for communism, World War I, etc. Of course, on some level, it's hilarious to many of us, looking at how completely stupid it is, but it is also directed at our children. And then, too, it always comes at us from out of the blue. You think you're having one discussion, and then suddenly you see you're been having another, and, surprise, it's with a racist moron. Now this idea of ubiquitousness Jewish power is Speed's.

What I'm always curious about is who died and gave all these people permission to say whatever they want about Jews? Because nobody told us about it.

Look at the verse Farnaz posted to Arminius from Sundiata:

I could wake up in the morning
without any warning
and my world could change:
blink your eyes,
All depends, all depends on the skin,
all depends on the skin you're living in.

Walk awhile in Liora's shoes my friend, or in mine.

How about this from "Harpo"?
"However, we all know the game: invoke "atheism" to attack other religions with impunity.
A la Marx, Freud, Hitchens, Harris, Jacoby etc."

And for some reason no one seemed to find Barbara L's joke amusing, and one person reacted quite negatively.

"Did you hear the one about what John the B. was really doing in the water? And how little Nickie unfortunately heard the voice crying out and that is why he is the way he is today?"

To parody you, E Favorite, others: I see no offense in this. DO you, my atheist friend? What say you?

Here, from what I can gather, is what did it for Liora:
.
Jihadist, it would have been funny if Mohamad had not come because he blew himself apart while asembling suicide bombs for his followers.
(CCNL)

Farnaz wrote a scathing post to CCNL. See, some of us just don't like bigotry and we don't like assertions based on bigotry and ignorance. Both my parents were and are scientists. Maybe that's where I get it from. Maybe from Hillel. Maybe from both.

I think Liora may be tired of bigotry, etc., disrespect, ignorance, just too plain tired right now.

But, Liora, if you are out there, it would be good if you could give it another shot here. There are people you like posting to. Maybe, you will find others.

Arminus,

I'm done talking this issue, so we'll have to agree to disagree, and maybe time will tip the scales. Maybe everyone's personal bigotometer is calibrated to its own frequency. Mine went off scale a few times reading through this thread, and not when it was pointed at CCNL. (Or you, of course)

Arminus,

You are extrapolating. I have never heard CCNL wish every Muslim dead, and it's absurd to declare me "the same as him" because I only condemned his "crucify" statement as strongly as I did. You also misread my own posts if you think I want PEOPLE deleted. I want SUPERSTITION deleted.

Perhaps we tend to see what we want to see in other posters, especially when, like CCNL, they are not particularly self-revealing. I suggest you save the salts for yourself.

As for Spittleman2, don't even get me started. I only read your battle after the fact, and besides, I don't consider him worth engaging, except as an exercise in ridicule, as I did with my post about the meaning of the engineer joke.

You want guts? Here's Mohammad: (||:-o>

Ah, we are 'graced' by the intrusion of Spidey. Easily identified by his pointless predictions and his poor command of the English language.

The quarrel between Arminius and Chris is a clear example of what would happen to this world because of shear stupidity.

Im preaching in the hope that it won't come to that scenario but stupidity is hard to cure and world destruction is still coming.

Chris

So you mildly criticized CCNL's comment to Jihadist about crucifixion. Oh, my, call Aunt Nellie, get the smelling salts....

Exactly HOW can you excuse such a bigoted comment by CCNL? Please explain in detail. He wishes every Muslim dead, it is apparent in his every word. He is a BIGOT, in all capital letters. And if you identify with him, and excuse this behavior, then you are the same as him. This truly nauseates me.

I have read your comments before, about how you want religion/believers/theists to be, well, deleted.

Mistakenly, I thought you an ally against the fundies. Where were you when I went head to head with Spiderman2? I, a believer? Where are your guts?

Deal with it, and think about it.

Arminius

Arminus,

As I said already, I found that comment offensive and agreed with your response to CCNL. His other Sunni/Shiite posts today are also a little over the top. Nevertheless, they're not the norm from him, at least not in my experience, and I would be loathe to paint him with such a damning epithet as bigot.

Jeff P,

Glad you are here, and thank you for a voice of calm and sanity. Much needed. I am at my wit's end, and almost overcome with my ancestral Furor Celticus.

Arminius

Just a commercial break here:

Here's an observation from a very wise lady, from another blog on a different topic, who I think wouldn't mind my quoting her here:

"....What matters in a democracy is not what people believe, it's what they legislate, and there lies the battle ground. The most fearless and effective soldiers on the public frontlines are in fact religious people, and they're the ones that have so far successfully kept creationism our of your schools and your reproductive rights tattered but as yet intact.

"So shake their hands and get to know them, or better yet, send 'em some money for the long fight! Rev. Gaddy's Interfaith Alliance, or Rev. Lynn's Americans United for Separation of Church and State, Reverend Carlton W. Veazey's Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice, or perhaps Rabbi Haim Dov Beliak's JewsOnFirst.org.... Hell, send me some money - I'm on my way to Washington DC to spend a week working with religious groups that are tirelessly defending YOUR right to NOT believe."

Amen to that. I'm just thankful there are religious folks who will talk to me!

Chris

Interfaith dialog? Give me a damn break.

Please explain to me just what the bloody hell you do not find bigoted by CCNL's question to Jihadist about how many Shi'ites she has crucified today?

Just what forlorn planet do you live on, anyway?

Arminus,

Maybe this is an opportunity for interfaith dialogue. Can you please clarify for me specifically what you find bigoted about CCNL?

Chris,

I cannot believe you accept CCNL's bigotry. I am bitterly, bitterly, disappointed.

Goodby, Chris.

Ilan,

Don't misunderstand me, I'm a big fan of CCNL. I just didn't like his personal crucifiction jab at Jihadist. I'm sure Arminus' chivalry was vicariously expressed for many. And I personally don't see much bigotry in what he writes. The most extreme thing I've heard, though I never saw it myself, is that he called for the nuking of Mecca, which I think would be highly UNCALLED for.

But as for "obfusing", pew-sitters, bowers, pretty-wingie thingies, the hallucinating war-mongering Arab, and now Tablet Man, I say, "Most Excellent!" And as repetitive as CCNL is, the notion of "deflawing" the religions is one heck of a compromise between cultural parochialism and reason, and a lot more conservative than what I would recommend, which is to scrap them all.

I really wish CCNL had a day job or something else to keep him busy. Not as annoying as JJ, but a one note screed. Everyone in this part of the galaxy KNOWS that you have a burn on for Jihadist. Is there something wrong with you?

Spidywhatever - I hope that the authorities find you soon and return you to the hospital you obviously escaped from.

Chris,

Gonna slip into my spiritual/religious mode here. Bear with me please.

You said, and said properly:
"Sailboats don't speak about heaven or hell. Sailboats don't demand worship. Sailboats speak to nature, and nature speaks to them. A good captain just listens."

Indeed!

My take - yes, yes, the sailing ship is in union, in communion, with nature. They are one. And the sailing ship, as it so gracefully moves, sings a hymn of praise to the Creator. And the good captain knows this, and pilots his ship to the melody.

Sailboats don't demand worship. They worship simply with their existence.

With respect,
Arminius

Chris,

I did notice your assessment of CCNL. Thanks!

Bicyles? Say WHAT?

Arminius

Liora,

Could you please come back? CCNL nothwistanding?
His true colors have come out, even for people as thick as Chris E. I know the post to Jihadist upset you. It upset Farnaz, too. And me.

Chris E.: Walk in Liora's shoes for a day or in mine before you talk about hair-trigger responses.

Ilan

Arminus,

If you scroll through the posts you'll see I agreed with your assessment of CCNL's "crucify" statement. Besides, it's the Romans who crucified - Muslims behead.

And don't forget bicycles.

Hello Jihadist,

Far be it for me to squelch the spirituality of any poetry-quoting Ruminants. But the Secularist's Corner sounds degrading and second rate, like a closet that's been turned into an office, or the "Colored" section of a 50's era Southern diner.

Maimonides certainly counts as a scholastic, in spirit if not literally - "The Guide for the Perplexed" is firmly in the scholastic tradition. What nonsense! Stick to Arminus' sailboats and you'll nurture your spirit far more profoundly. Sailboats don't speak about heaven or hell. Sailboats don't demand worship. Sailboats speak to nature, and nature speaks to them. A good captain just listens.

Susan Jacoby: Why is it that you have Jews on the brain, being the forever lapsed Catholic that you claim to be? One time it's Orthodox Jewish women, another it's your father who was delusional--there is no antisemitism--now it's competitive victimology, to which I could respond, but won't. If you want to be an atheist with no religious affiliation, kindly leave us alone. Don't quote lengthy passages from the NT.
And finally, the Pope has demonstrated enormous social responsibility. Presidents require his input on stem cell research and abortion.

Ooops, forgot to add my name. Sorry about that.

To repeat and on topic:

To all "die hard" Sunnis,

Crucify any Shiites privately or otherwise today???

To all "die hard" Shiites,

Crucify any Sunnis privately or otherwise today???

Your 800 year blood feud must make Allah so very proud of both groups!!!

But is it simply the "fems" of Islam????

Hi, Jihadist,

No, this is not about 'Herbie'. Good grief.

Please inform your husband that cars and computers do have their peculiar defects, but are not 'alive'.

A sailing ship - the best example is a 'Tall Ship' - the three mast clippers. But any will do. They are as one with the world.

The steam locomotive, on the other hand, defies the world. It must overcome mass and gravity - going uphill for any railroad locomotive involves a geometric increase of difficulty as the grade increases....

enough is enough.

Arminius

Hello Arminius:)

Our friend Chris Everett wants some fun with believers. So....

Scholasticism? No one's writing theses here. We're just talking.

I have no idea what he meant by 'sacred religious "sensibilities."'. I know only of "religious sensitivities".

Interesting that he should say, "On an atheist thread, no less!". An atheist thread in On Faith, nonetheless, and Susan Jacoby do discuss on religion. So, here are believers too.

By the way, my husband thinks his car, his computer have minds of their own, but he never call them him or her, only "it".

Surely we are not talking about "Herbie" the car?.

But I can agree that a sailboat, yatch, is a beautiful creature - at one with the sea, the wind, the sun and us and we going we it and it with us as one. I think it is because we don't feel the machine or hear it even if we have to resort to it when there's no wind.

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

Chris Everett,

......and psssst, there is also Susan Jacoby's Secularist's Corner for those who can't stand it here for some respite, some solace, some sanity.

The only "stuffing it" I know of is in fishes and fowls and other dead and stuffable animals to be baked or roasted or broiled before we eat them.

Stuff the Stiffs!

Anonymous, AKA CCNL,

I did not, to the best of my knowledge, thump Henry VIII. But I would be most happy to do that, he was a true bloodthirsty sorry work. I will never forgive him for what he did to my Scot ancestors on the Borders. He actually ordered his army to invade and hang all, including women and children. Yes, I know, he was highly educated, and actually composed music - I have some. Yet he was hardly a good example of humanity. But, knowing your bigotry, you probably consider him as such.

Arminius

Jihadist, well met!

You said, "A machine is a machine is a machine is a machine."

Well, not always.

Gonna get really far out metaphysical here.

Mankind has created two 'machines' that are alive. They have spirits, they have personalities, they have souls.

The first is the sailing ship. Absolute beauty in motion. Pure poetry, moving on the sea. Grace encapsulated. To sail one, you must understand, not only the art of sailing, but also the quirks and personality of that work of beauty that you have the honor of guiding.

The next is the steam locomotive. Yes, that's correct. The lowly steam locomotive! Replaced, due to the original low price of oil and some shady maneuvering by big corporations, by the diesel. The diesel, more properly, the diesel-electric, is known among that select fraternity of steam lovers as the 'diseasel'. Now then - a steam locomotive breathes, it has a hearbeat, and it does, despite standard parts, has its own personality. And it is a work of art to drive it, and it is a work of art to fire it. I could go on for hours. Stand next to one that is fired up, sometime. You will see, you will hear, you will feel.

Sorry for the digression, but you touched on a sensitive subject here. Mankind has created beauty other than art, poetry, music, and architecture.

Arminius

As Arminius thumps Henry VIII, the bible and abrasion, we will thump reality again:

To wit:

To all "die hard" Sunnis,

Crucify any Shiites privately or otherwise today???

To all "die hard" Shiites,

Crucify any Sunnis privately or otherwise today???

Your 800 year blood feud must make Allah so very proud of both groups!!!

But is it simply the "fems" of Islam????

Hello Chris Everett:)

We were just driving hard-headed, hard-core non-believers up the wall talking about religion. And while we are at it, sharing poetry too!

Nope. We can't have any methaphorical, elliptical, allusive, emotive, avocative subjective stuff here. Not a single measurable, quantifiable, proveable fact in them poetry or religion.

Stuff them!

Any engineer can construct and deconstruct poetry. And there's always Popular Mechanics.

With apologies to Gertrude Stein:

A machine is a machine is a machine is a machine.

We want to be soulful every now and then. We don't want to lose our soul to a machine or in the public square. Nor do machines have a soul. Never mind that book, "The Soul of a New Machine". A machine does not scream when kicked. Only thunked or clunked.

Ban religion!
Ban poetry!
Ban spiritualism!

No more spiritual atheists!
No more spiritual airheads!
No more spiritual dilettantes!

Cheers

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

Hello Farnaz,

How about some alternate mystical/spiritual poetry from Abraham ibn Ibza -

The sphere and the fixed constellations
Strayed in their paths when I was born,
If candles were my business
The sun would not turn dark until I died,
If I were to trade in shrouds
No one would die as long as I lived.

Regards

"J"

Hi, Chris!

Yes, I agree, some well-placed abrasiveness is often needed here.

But note my recent reply to CCNL - you might find it harsh. But can 'stuff it' be equated to 'crucify'?

Arminius

Arminus,

Abrasion is needed for scouring off the most resistant caked-on baked-in crud. It's also more fun. And all in good fun.

CCNL,

Congratulations! You have now lowered yourself, with your infantile bigotry and misogynist rant, right down there with Spiderman2. I'm sure you will be right at home with the 'Who would Jesus bomb?' crowd.

In other words, stuff it, dude.

Arminius

Chris,

If I labeled you as intolerant, I was wrong in doing so. Your posts can be a bit abrasive, but I should be more tolerant myself. I'll do better.

Arminius

Sputterman2,

The joke in my last post is a parable. Only a stupid idiot would fail to see that, and fail to understand the absolute incontrovertible truth it tells. I'd explain it to you, but that would be like teaching complex analysis to an ignoramus that doesn't even know long division.

The joke also predicts, with 100% accuracy, all future events. And when I say all, I mean ALL, which proves I'm right. Only a moron would be blind enough to deny it. See, you're reading this RIGHT NOW! And NOW! And even... NOW! I could go on, but it would be like handing out million dollar bills to some stupid moronic fool that would only wipe his arse with them, if that.

Well, that's about as far as I'm willing to carry you. If you're so stupid that you just don't even get it then I'm wasting my time. I know I'm right, and everyone else who's right knows I'm right too. You had your chance. Just don't be too stupid. Or an idiot.

To all "die hard" Sunnis,

Crucify any Shiites privately or otherwise today???

To all "die hard" Shiites,

Crucify any Sunnis privately or otherwise today???

Your 800 year blood feud must make Allah so very proud of both groups!!!

But is it simply the "fems" of Islam????

Arminus,

It's peculiar that in the midst of all this amateur pantheistic scholasticism, with threats of hell, hair-trigger accusations of bigotry, and analyses that amount to angels and pins, you would consider my posts to be the intolerant ones. It reflects the double standard by which we're all supposed to mollycoddle religious beliefs (it's a meme complex - the beliefs don't withstand rational inquiry), while atheistic statements are taken as inexcusable attacks on sacred religious "sensibilities." On an atheist thread, no less!

Here's my favorite God joke. It's also an engineer joke, so I guess I'll have to withstand the righteous anger of some hypersensitive, intolerant geek. I've told it once before on On Faith but I think it was on an obscure thread, so I hope it's new to you, anyway.

Three engineers were arguing over the nature of God.

The first engineer, a mechanical engineer, said, "God is obviously a mechanical engineer. Just consider the musculoskeletal system. The limbs, the joints, the articulation - it's brilliant. God is a mechanical engineer."

The second engineer, a chemical engineer, replied. "Come on, can't you see that God is a chemical engineer? Look at the enzymatic digestion, the Krebs cycle, hemoglobin. The list goes on and on. God is undeniably a chemical engineer."

Then third engineer, a civil engineer, steps in. "You guys are both wrong. God is without question a civil engineer. I mean, who but a civil engineer would install a waste pipe smack-dab in the middle of a recreational area?"

Hi again, E Fav,

Nice reply. I'm still laughing! Note that it is very difficult to offend me directly, but when those I like are insulted, I get mad. I would have replied the same to CCNL if he had insulted you.

Arminius

Arminius - I didn't say you were TOO harsh - I said you were harsh. "Stuff it" is harsh, and if you don't like my opinion, just stuff it.

(see what I mean?)

Hi, E Fav,

Well, in all honesty, I don't think I was too harsh on CCNL. What I said to him was oatmeal compared to the vitriol he spewed at Jihadist. I was mad as hell, and will not apologize. As a matter of fact, I had to hold back what I wanted to say.

Arminius

Farnaz,

Thanks for being a compassionate voice on this very combative blog.

Here's another by Rumi:

Out beyond ideas of wrongdoing and rightdoing,
there is a field. I'll meet you there.
When the soul lies down in that grass,
the world is too full to talk about.
Ideas, language, even the phrase ‘each other’
doesn't make any sense.

Jihadist,

You gave us this:

Oh God!
If I worship thee in fear of hell
burn me in hell
If I worship thee in hope of paradise
exclude me from paradise
But if I worship thee for Thine own sake
withold not Thine everlasting beauty.

Amazing, beautiful, moving! I am committing it to memory. It perfectly describes my spiritual journey. Thank you!

Arminius

Oh there "Reality Challenged" and Obfuscating Jihadist,

Your latest "obfusing" again proves the point that you still cannot come to grips with the flaws, errors, stench and muck aka the "fems" of Islam. For new readers of this blog:

The "fems" of Islam:

1. Belief in "pretty/ugly wingie thingies".

2. Belief that an hallucinating, illiterate Arab did actually talk to the "pretty Gabriel" in the hot "Gabe" cave and therein received the warmongering and anti-female words and resultant laws now listed in the koran.

3. That Sunnis are superior to Shiites in all aspects of life. And Shiites think the same way about Sunnis.

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

Hello Farnaz,

Ah yes. It was, in your post addressed to Liora on Spinoza. I like to read Levinas in tandem with Buber who said, "All life is encounter".

Liora seem interested in Sufism/mysticism. There are a few interesting Jewish ones, from Abraham Abulafia (as you noted) to Baal Shem Tov under this broad umbrella.

Oh, I forgot to give the name 'al Hallaj" for the Sufi who declared, "I am the Truth" and paid with his life for saying that. The most entertaining series on Sufism Lite is by Idries Shah, especially the adventures and misadventures of Mullah Nasruddin.

Of course, the poetry of Rumi. What a Sufi. You were from Iran. You know all his poetry then. Shiites are more into mystical Sufism that Sunnis are, even in their theology. Sunnis spent too much time hair-splitting on the Shariah.

Some Sufis were so enthusiastic they were called drunken Sufis - dancing around poles and all that and as whirling dervishes in Turkey too, of the Mevlevi Order.

Right, Rambam is shorter to call Moses Maimonides. Where does one begin on Rambam and from what perspective you ask?

Did he not wrote, "Guide for the Perplexed" after all? And quite mystical in parts. Rambam reminds me of Al Ghazali, who was into Sufism, and then wrote the defining creed so to speak, for Islam in his "The Revitalisation of the Religious Sciences". Just as as Ramban did for Judaism with his Mishneh Torah and in parts of the Guide.

It seems both Rambam and Al Ghazali remain spiritual/mystical or Sufistic in their private connection with and to God and this was manifested in their works to the perplexity of us readers.

Both Ramban and Al Ghazali were both men of their times, and realistic men too, who also seek to find and codify a common creed gleaned from their respective Holy Books for their co-religionists in those times of internal and external strifes and conflicts to keep them together and cohesive as a group.

The most interesting thing about this two men is that, they wrote a practical othopraxy creed that blended in spirituality in their works.

To understand Rambam and his work, I cheated and went straight to his "The Thirteen Principles of the Faith" as in his Misheh Torah/Commentary on the Mishna before going on to read his Guide.

He was a man of the 12th century after all, and to consider him by his times, his contemporaries and the knowledge then.

And then we have Thomas Aquinas. Mary Cunningham may want to share her thoughts on Aquinas. If she she still comes around here and wants to.

Thanks and best regards

"J"

Dear Anonymous,

Are you Spiderman?

I will certainly read your list, I promise, but right now, I must go to bed, because I am so tired. My sister had a baby just a few days ago, and I've been helping her, working, and trying to take care of everyone. I am so tired.

Take good care.

Farnaz

Farnaz, I think the other anonymous who posted that poem is Jihadist.

you wrote "As for me, I see doom, but I don't think religion will save me or anyone else."

You can be saved if you only listen to my advice in the future. It will save a lot of people (including your many friends and relatives) if they would also listen to my advice.

I can name in succession which wars are coming and what nation or cities are doomed.

Reality 101 Continued-

To my knowledge, the 1.5 million Conservative Jews have not changed their thinking about the "Tablet Man" et al.

From simpletoremember.com/vitals/ConservativeTorah.htm

"New Torah For Modern Minds

Abraham, the Jewish patriarch, probably never existed. Nor did Moses. The entire Exodus story as recounted in the Bible probably never occurred. The same is true of the tumbling of the walls of Jericho. And David, far from being the fearless king who built Jerusalem into a mighty capital, was more likely a provincial leader whose reputation was later magnified to provide a rallying point for a fledgling nation.

Such startling propositions -- the product of findings by archaeologists digging in Israel and its environs over the last 25 years -- have gained wide acceptance among non-Orthodox rabbis. But there has been no attempt to disseminate these ideas or to discuss them with the laity -- until now.

The United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism, which represents the 1.5 million Conservative Jews in the United States, has just issued a new Torah and commentary, the first for Conservatives in more than 60 years. Called ''Etz Hayim'' (''Tree of Life'' in Hebrew), it offers an interpretation that incorporates the latest findings from archaeology, philology, anthropology and the study of ancient cultures. To the editors who worked on the book, it represents one of the boldest efforts ever to introduce into the religious mainstream a view of the Bible as a human rather than divine document. "

Hi Spiderman,

Are you also Anonymous? I only ask because I don't know to whom I am writing. You are not offending me. You can post under your own name. It would be easier for me to know to whom I'm writing, but I am pretty sure you are not the one who posted the beautiful Sufi verses.

I promise I will read your posts. But can you not content yourself with Christ's love? I know other Protestants. They are happy and do not hear ancestral voices prophesying doom.

As for me, I see doom, but I don't think religion will save me or anyone else. See, from my benighted Jewish perspective, communication heals, willingness to accept the otherness of others, more than willingness, an obligation. Food feeds the hungry. Medicine heals the sick.

God bless you, Spiderman.

Farnaz

" In Judaism, folks think that when the world has been healed, perfected, all the loveliness will be revealed. "

But sad to say, for that perfection to happen, it would mean a lot of fiery scrubbing and most to suffer are those considered as unbelievers in the sight of God. Then all the loveliness will be revealed.

Oh there "Reality Challenged" and Obfuscating Jihadist,

Your latest "obfusing" again proves the point that you still cannot come to grips with the flaws, errors, stench and muck of Islam. For readers new this blog:

The "fems" of Islam:

1. Belief in "pretty/ugly wingie thingies".

2. Belief that an hallucinating, illiterate Arab did actually talk to the "pretty Gabriel" in the hot "Gabe" cave and therein received the warmongering and anti-female words and resultant laws now listed in the koran.

3. That Sunnis are superior to Shiites in all aspects of life. And Shiites think the same way about Sunnis.

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

Anonymous Sufi Verse poster,

Also, the loveliness of humans will be revealed. These are beautiful verses, all of them. The last, I know.

You would not believe this, but a contemporary Israeli Jewish author of Middle Eastern descent, the most important Israeli author living has written a novel that resonates with every one of the verses you have posted, particularly the last one.

I have read a little of Rab'ia. Not enough, I see, now, not enough.

Thank you.

Do the Jews know that because of that unbelief, you are endangering your lives? Don't you know that Israel would be occupied by foreign troops in the near future?

Im just saying this so next time when things begin to happen, you would believe me for my next advice.

Rumi!

Can you post more Rumi, Anonymous?

In Judaism, folks think that when the world has been healed, perfected, all the loveliness will be revealed.

Hi Spiderman,

I am sorry, but this one has been tried for two thousand years. You see we have our own infinite number of ideas. We can't agree with one another on a whole lot, but there are some things we all seem to like.

Think of it this way, your view of things doesn't bother us until you start harassing us and/or discriminating against us. Also, we are willing to hear you, listen to you, but we rarely hear Protestants interested in our version of things. And there really are different versions.

We never try to convert you, but we always gladly open the door for you when you knock.

Why must you have us, Jews, in particular, legitimate your beliefs?

If they bring you comfort and joy, then I am happy for you, my friend, I truly am.

Farnaz

That's the reason I post anonymous. Stupid people would mimic my name (spiderman2) to confuse the readers who wants to learn.

im not that person who posted that stupid poem

Lord, if I worship You from the fear of Hell, then let me burn in Hell.
If I worship You for the hope of Paradise, then deny me admittance to it.
But if I worship You out of reverence for You alone, then do not deny me the joy of Your Eternal Beauty.
-Rabi'a, "Rabi'a the Mystic"

I realized what was hidden within me
and conversed with You in secret.
Though we were united, we still were apart.
Though awe hid You from my searching eyes,
ecstasy brought You close
to my innermost being.
-Al-Hujwiri, "The Kashf al-Mahjub"

Little by little God takes beauty away. Little by little life's luster decays. Listen to the passage, "To whom We grant a long life, those We cause to decline." Seek the essence and not the structure. The beauty of heart shall forever abide, for it is enriched with the water of life.
-Rumi, "Mathnawi"

Behold the words of the Qur'an:
"We are closer to you than you are yourself."
Comprehend your relationship with God!
He is closer to us than our own selves.
Yet through ignorance we search for Him
Wandering from door to door.
-Sufi poem

Im spiderman2. My point is this. Doesn't the Jews know the relation between the Messiah Prince Michael to true Christianity?

"And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people.." (Daniel 12:1)

Do you know that the name Michael is the most common American name today which did not happened during it's earlier years? And America would not defend Israel if it's not a true Christian nation?

The point is, it is useless for Jews to study Jewish scholars, if they are ignorant of the link between Christ and the Messiah.

Well, Anonymous, I can't speak for all the Jews, but if I knew who you were, I might take notice.

Instead of consuming so much time on these Jewish scholars, the Jews here would benefit much if they take notice of my posts.

CCNL:

At first, I simply thought of you as an over-educated, rebellious, anal retentive not-so-lapsed Catholic school boy. The parochialism, in every sense of the word, was always everywhere present, notwithstanding your moniker.

Your ongoing misrepresentations confirm my views of advanced degrees as certification of technician status, at best. In this, I am in complete agreement with Edward Said pere.

Technician status, at best. In your case, the certification is misleading. You make absurd claims about 1.5 million Conservative Jews and when questioned, refer to an article six years old that never made the claims you did.

And then you write to Jihadist in a way that is not only offensive, but morally reprehensible.

I have only one request. Delete the hyphen in Tablet-Man. One likes to think that doctorates confer, at least, superficial literacy skills.

I cannot speak for Liora, but I don't think she will be bated by you again. Maybe, someone else will, which is what you, no doubt, hold out hope for.

As for Liora, my hope is that she returns, if only briefly, to this blog.

Hi Jihadist:

It is I, not Liora, who is interested in talking about Maimonides and Spinoza, both of whom she is well versed in, I suspect. But I think she may be right about Rambam. Where does one begin? From what perspective?

We are both well versed in Levinas. It would be wonderful if we could all have discussions around them. Almost all of his writing is secular. He was an ethicist. Alterity.

I have a Pakistani Muslim friend whose friend wrote a very well received book on female Sufi mystics. I have it, but for the life of me, I cannot find it. At any rate, if you haven't read it would you like to?

If so, I will write her and ask her for the title.

Also, to the best of my knowledge the Sufis had more influence on the later Jewish mystics than vice versa. (I'm thinking of Abulafia.)

Regards,
Farnaz

Hello Liora,

Thanks for your thoughts on the Jewish writers. I am an admirer of Moses Maimonides as a classical Jewish thinker, and Moses Mendelssohn as Jewish Enlightenment thinker.

As for Spinoza, great thinker all round. Among other things, he argued that old laws (religion-based) are no longer applicable in modern society with new ethical, moral and spiritual values "revealed". I have some reservations on that. Those are old but reshaped and redefined to suit us. Also, it is our attitudes on ethics and values that changed, specifically what are transgressions, sins or crimes, their forms and extent as well as appropriate punishment.

I like the works of Martin Buber and Emanuel Levinas. In gist, to get relationships with God and people right.

And you ask about Sufism and Kabbalah too.....

Ah, the immanence and/or the transcendence of God in the mystical and spiritual traditions of Judaism and Islam.

I would not be presuming to speak here on Kaballah, but there are those who said the mystics of Islam and Judaism were influeced by each other, and Muslim mystics by Gnostics too. Some mytics are, for lack of better word, far gone and far out of realities of life.

The spiritual path for Muslims is, once one "surrender" (which is what the word Islam means) to belief in God, how and what do one do to connect and see the connection of God at the personal level, the wider world and the universe.

Sufism basically focus on a vision of union and oneness. Some strains of Sufism are a wee enthusiastic. Most Sufis don't care for nor fear punishment here in life or the after-life in their devotion and commitment to find and expeprience God as a personal quest.

The spiritual soul of Islam is best stated in Sura 24:35: An Nur,(Light), and this part captures the pursuit of spirituality -

Light upon light
God doth guide
Whom It will to Its Light

And Rabia Al Adawiya, a Sufi, best captured the Sufism (and spiritualism) I love most in its pure unconditional love for God -

Oh God!
If I worship thee in fear of hell
burn me in hell
If I worship thee in hope of paradise
exclude me from paradise
But if I worship thee for Thine own sake
withold not Thine everlasting beauty.

There was another Sufi in the Middle Ages who exclaimed either in enthusiasm, or in an epiphany, or in a personal moment of truth, "I am the Truth!". He could have had too much coffee or hashish or was really very hungry. Sufis are mostly poor and depended on the charities of others.

He is Husain ibn Mansur. Muslims of his time were shocked and dismayed and horrified. I imagine we would in this time too, and send him to a funny farm. He was accused of blasphemy and punished so. I can't remember offhand how. Probably death by beheading. By a spectacularly convulated philosophically-theologically rationalisation, we can say he is correct - he exist, his existence is proof of creation, and he is a "truth" of God, the Ultimate Creator.

Spiritualism is not a problem. Excessive or enthusiastic mysticism is for Muslims to accept. Shariah is as dry as dust, and harsh too in many interpretations and applications, specifically the legal aspects. Think cutting off hands for stealing and stoning for adultery as extreme examples. Makes one think about the Right Path, which is also take to mean as the Straight Path in life in some interpretations of the Qur'an.

As for Salman Rushdie....

Obviously, all Muslims are supposed to be offended and insulted and hurt by "Satanic Verses".

I was just starting out in university when the flap happened over the book. I had read Salman Rushdie's "Midnight's Children" and like the tempo of that book which is like a Bollywood movie in form and content.

So, all the fuss in the streets in UK, due also to festering social-economic-political angst and anger of the lower income and recent Muslim migrants from the Indian sub-continent waiting to explode. It was also a time when the Iranian "Revolution" was still in full fervour and swing under Khomeini.

Khomeini pronounced his book review, and made the most extreme literary criticism and damnation of an author in the last century - death. It was only then I read "The Satanic Verses". I recalled Sura 22:52 - "We sent not every Messenger or Prophet before thee, but that Satan cast into its fancy, when it was fancying, but God annuls what Satan casts, then God confirm Its verses".

It is already obvious and accepted by Muslims that the Prophet is also human. As human as Moses who breaks the Two Tablets (the Tablets again!) and Jesus who rampaged in the Temple, and with, well, very human characteristics.

Salman Rushdie took the seeds of stories from Muslim history and biographies of the Prophet, and recasted them. I had thought then, and still now, that Ayatollah Khomeini was a bit too harsh in his judgement of an ambitious author in the British literary scene and plagiarist.

I still like his "Midnight Children" better too. Personally, I like Arundhati Roy's writing style and what she wrote on better if we are to consider Indian or Indian-origin writers. Perhaps Ms. Roy writes of the here and now which I immediately recognise and relate to, be it her fiction or her essays. The immediacy of her words, what she says, jumps from the pages and grabs me. There is no accounting for taste, no.

Last year, I saw Salman Rushdie ambling in the Dorchester Hotel in London with a fellow alongside who left him once he was in. I can't say if that was a bodyguard. He look well. The concierge told me he was in for an interview.

The Iranians still maintain the death fatwa by the Ayatollah and reminded Mr. Rushdie on it every Valentine's Day. The prize money is still there for anyone who claimed he kill Salman Rushdie.

Some of our leaders and members gives us hell everyday with their governance and pronouncements. Focussing on or killing Salman Rushdie is not going to make any difference at all to our lives.

I don't know how to say it otherwise, but what Salman Rushdie wrote did not appall me as much the reactions of my fellow Muslims, including Khomeini's fatwa, as well as what some in the west said and wrote on Islam and Muslims in their reactions to the Muslim reactions. Bigotry by some on both sides in full swing and sting.

A British TV interview with Fay Weldon which I saw and what she said was and still is indescriable. I do believe one of those who shaped their views on Islam, Muslims and religions in general due to the "Satanic Verses" issue is Christopher Hitchens, a friend of Salman Rushdie.

For me, the publication of Salman Rushdie's "Satanic Verses" seems to be the moment when chasms and differences comes to the surface in full blooded vents and rants against the Other and characterised as the clash of civilisations, Islam vs west and so forth. Everything, including the kitchen sink, was and is brought out to show who's better or worse in history and now, in beliefs, in values and so on.

Thanks and best regards

"J"

Oops, make that Islam..... the stench of an oozing muck.

Reality 101 continued:

A synopsis of the flaws in the major religions for those who have not seen. (Said flaws are slowly eating away the foundations of these religions.)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Arminius - You said "Stuff it." I think that's harsh. I didn't say it was uncalled for. But it certainly didn't have to be said, either. You chose to say something harsh, that's all.

Another opinion: I enjoyed your joke and don't think it was meant to offend.

Things are a little touchier than usual here - not sure why, but hope it settles down soon.

Liora -- are you going to address my questions? You don't have to if you don't want to, of course, but I would like to know whether or not you intend to.

Hi Liora,

Yes, I see what you mean. You and I both live in New York City, so there would be a way, as far as we, too, are concerned. I'm not sure about the others you mention. Also, I've followed some different threads, not all of which I've posted on, and there are two Catholics who might like to participate in this sort of dialogue. But I have no idea where they are posting from. Ditto Serena, Barbara, Ilan. There is also Josh, who had been posting for awhile, but I think he might live in New York, as well.

Jihadist is posting from Malaysia, if I'm not mistaken, and it would be good if she coud and would join. I have a very close Pakistani Muslim friend who summers at Yale, and I'm pretty sure she'd be interested. There are others I know of different faiths and no faiths, probably, all of us do, whose participation could be illuminating.

The question is how to do it, and that, I must ponder awhile.

Warmest regards,
Farnaz

MMA Arminius!

For what it's worth, coming as it is from a Pagan of Jewish descent, I did enjoy your Moses joke- even though it's not the first time i've heard it. In my estimation, the only crime you've committed is not being entirely original. ;)

There is a group called the Reduced Shakespeare Company who did an entire CD on their 'reduced' version of the Bible, with that joke immediately followed by a hilarious top 10 Letterman-style list of 'rejected commandments.'

Liora,

Arminius is one of those folks who genuinely cares about how other people feel and see the world, even when they differ from him. On this particular website, especially, it's a rare gem. Go easy on him.

It's always encouraging to see someone with your knowledge of Judaism come into a forum such as this.. and given some of the slings and arrows that are usually tossed around here, things are going pretty smoothly. Trust me, you'll get used to it. You learn after awhile who is receptive and interested in exchanging ideas and who is not.

Blessed be.

Farnaz:

Please look at what "Anonymous" wrote following Jihadist's post.

Do you see what I mean? One cannot easily escape the hatred and ignorance that permeates the air we breathe. Would it not be better to hold fast when one finds people who can and deeply wish to escape from the pollution on occasion?

Another blog. Something. I don't know.

Best,
Liora

CCNL,

I call you out on this. Once again you attack Jihadist, with the usual bigoted references to crucifixion. You have no basis for this except for your bigotry.

And I stand ready to receive the incoming artillery from the 'politically correct' crowd. Screw 'em.

Arminius

Spidey,

It is so painfully obvious to anyone with a few neurons to string together that you do not have the answers to your claims. You are afraid to answer because you have no answer. You are truly a false prophet.

Arminius

Arminius, it's not good to spoonfeed a person so often. Exercise your brain for a while. Ponder on what I said.

Here's another clue. The place that's going to be "guarded by an angel" is a pretty place today just like eden, but stupid people resides.

Reality 101

The Obfuscating Jihadist is a "die hard" Sunni. She to my knowledge has never said the Sunni-Shiite 800 year blood feud which has now spilled over the world in the form of warmongering and terror is wrong and is one of the major flaws in Islam with the stench of a oozing muck.

So when someone says to a Sunni, "Have you crucified any Shiites today" it summarizes the reality of the situation.

Arminius:

Thank you.

Hi Farnaz:

Yes, I know Sundiata. "Blink Your Eyes."

Congratulations on the birth of your neice! I don't know where people get this idiocy viz Jewish thinking on Hagar, but not from Jews, as my Aunt Hagar would tell you.

Maimonides. Okay. Gee. From which perspective? Spinoza--I'm not laughing, not at all. I'd like to talk about Spinoza. But above, all Levinas and Islamic/Judaic connections, about which you and Jihadist know so much more than I.

I've been thinking that after I post what I've learned about Etz Haym, I might not return to this blog. I get so sad and tired, sometimes. I'm not writing of Arminius, but you know what I mean.

"Blink Your Eyes," yes. And then, I just want to read Larkin and go to sleep.

Man thinks and God laughs. And then I want to wake up.

Anyway, if I do decide to say farewell, I'll let say so. Maybe, you and I, Ilan, Serena, Barbara, Jihadist and anyone else who's interested in the moral applications and implications of religion/atheism/agnosticism can find some other way to communicate.

Liora

Jihadist:

Well, as you probably know, Moses would have said the same thing as Mohammed. (Idolatry)

Are you offended by some of the works of Salmon Rushdie? I ask because I taught "The Hair of the Prophet," along with "Rosa" (Cynthia Ozick), and my students, after screaming that it was all too difficult for them, underwent a moral conversion of sorts. I wish you could have seen it. What they wrote, how they applied what they saw in these two very different anti-idolatrous texts to contemporary values. I had really been afraid to read their essays, terrified. What a wonderful surprise.

Jihadist, it would have been funny if Mohamad had not come because he blew himself apart while asembling suicide bombs for his followers.

Ah, Spidey Whatever,

You retreat, quivering in fear. You cannot explain it, so you make excuses. You are a coward.

Arminius

Arminius, if I'll explain to you the methaphor that I see in the story of Adam and Eve, you won't understand it just as what happened with the Prince Michael metaphor.

It's like teaching calculus to a person who doesn't understand algebra. Both will end up as fools.

But I'll give you a clue just to make yourself busy in the hope it could make you more sane.

The scripture said that the forbidden fruit is guarded by an angel so anybody who goes near to it dies.

The truth is that, that "guarding angel" is still to happen and it would happen very soon.

Liora and Arminius,

I'm sorry I posted and repeated what Rodney Dangerfield said about Moses. the two tablets and aspirins causing some misunderstanding here. I thought he was Jewish. I may be wrong.

Lesson learnt - if one is not Jewish, Muslim or Christian, do relate a Jewish, Christian, Muslim joke at one's own risk.

About Muslims and the Prophet Muhammad PBUH cartoons by the witty and hilarious Danes, some Muslims with absolutely no sense of humour and saw nothing funny in those cartoons ranted and vented and rampaged in the streets and kill other Muslims in reactions to it. "Stupid" indeed.

At the same time, variations of this was going around in Muslim blogs around the world. I will put it here as dialogue form.

Moses : My, my, my! Jesus and Muhammad! Muslims and Christians are fighing one another again!

Jesus : What was it about this time?

Muhammad : It was some drawings of me. Some call it cartoons. Some call it caricatures. I have not seen them. I don't know how they did it when they don't know what I look like.

Moses : Well, we have to do something about it before they all kill each other and destroy the world over it.

Jesus : Yes. Let us call a joint press conference for tolerance, understanding, love and peace.

Moses : Yes, but Friday is not good for Muhammad, Saturday not for me, and Sunday not for you.

Muhammad : Monday next then, at 10.00 a.m.

And next Monday at 10.00 a.m......

Moses : Where is Muhammad? He's an hour late already. Everyone here is getting restless.

Jesus : I just got a call. He is not coming.

Moses : Well, we'll have to cancel this then.

Jesus : No, to postpone it.

Moses : Right. And to set a new date and time after speaking with Muhammad.

And back again in heaven..........

Moses : Where were you, Muhammad?

Jesus : Yes, why did you not come?

Muhammad : I'm sorry. I can't go. There will be photographers, and pictures of me will be taken. I don't want Muslims to put up my photos and idolise me instead of submitting to God. I have already sent them messages from God on life, the Right Path and living together. They will have to sort this quarrel out themselves.

Make of it what you will, but we had a good laught on it and did put things in perspective for some of us on the Prophet Muhammad cartoon controversy.

Cheers

"J"

Spidey Whatever,

It is incumbent on you to explain your position. You only waffled, in the grand tradition of Nixon, Clinton, and Bush.

Please explain.

Arminius

Arminius, I had said it before in other blogs and I'll say it again. When it comes to Adam and Eve, I try not to talk about it coz Im not well adept to the topic.

There are indications that God uses methaphor in the story. With metaphors, it uses a bit of "impossible scenarios" coz it has another meaning.

Example of this is the book of revelations which uses lots of metaphors which means lots of "impossible scenarios".

That is how intelligent the Bible is. It needs an intelligent brain to understand it and those who accuse it as obsolete are just showing their ignorance.

Farnaz:

Well, I remember that reply. I thought it was a request for Christian jokes, which I would not, most probably, be offended at.

If I have upset anyone, anyone at all, with my Moses joke, I apologize. I did not mean that.

Arminius

Liora, I am writing, first to you, and, Arminius, then to you.

Dear Liora:
Do you know the poetry of Sekou Sundiata?

I could wake up in the morning
without any warning
and my world could change:
blink your eyes,
All depends, all depends on the skin,
all depends on the skin you're living in.

Yes, this is life every day for American Jews. When we escaped from Iran, I stupidly thought it was over.

Another thing: My sister had a baby. Her name is Hagar. Did you see what Eboo Patel wrote about what Jews think about Hagar, in the post before his present one? Where do people get these stupid ideas from? Filtering Judaism through the lense of another belief system, I guess.

This might be a partial departure from or interruption of your dialogue with Jihadist, but you know whom I'd really like to talk about, Maimonides and, don't laugh, Spinoza. (Also, what you suggested viz Islam and Judaism)

What do you think?

..................................................
Arminius:

I cannot speak for Liora, but I doubt she would have a problem with your laughing at yourself. That is not what you did.

You do not recall Barbara Ls' comeback? You do not like to scroll down? Well, I had to scroll down to catch up on this thread, so I thought I would do the work for you.

Well, here it is. Laugh away at yourself.
..................................................
From Barbara L.:

Like Jewish Jokes. Moses jokes?

Love Christian jokes of all denominations.

Did you hear the one about what John the B. was really doing in the water? And how little Nickie unfortunately heard the voice crying out and that is why he is the way he is today?
................................................

Laugh away, Arminius.

There is an old Jewish proverb;

Man thinks and God laughs.

Could you think, please. You do not appear to be a bad person.

Farnaz

Spideywhichever,

Genesis, Ch 1, 24-27
24
Then God said, "Let the earth bring forth all kinds of living creatures: cattle, creeping things, and wild animals of all kinds." And so it happened:
25
God made all kinds of wild animals, all kinds of cattle, and all kinds of creeping things of the earth. God saw how good it was.
26
4 Then God said: "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. Let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, the birds of the air, and the cattle, and over all the wild animals and all the creatures that crawl on the ground."
27
God created man in his image; in the divine image he created him; male and female he created them.

AND THEN: Genesis Ch 2, 5-15
5
while as yet there was no field shrub on earth and no grass of the field had sprouted, for the LORD God had sent no rain upon the earth and there was no man to till the soil,
6
but a stream was welling up out of the earth and was watering all the surface of the ground--
7
2 the LORD God formed man out of the clay of the ground and blew into his nostrils the breath of life, and so man became a living being.
8
3 Then the LORD God planted a garden in Eden, in the east, and he placed there the man whom he had formed.
9
Out of the ground the LORD God made various trees grow that were delightful to look at and good for food, with the tree of life in the middle of the garden and the tree of the knowledge of good and bad.
10
4 A river rises in Eden to water the garden; beyond there it divides and becomes four branches.
11
The name of the first is the Pishon; it is the one that winds through the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold.
12
The gold of that land is excellent; bdellium and lapis lazuli are also there.
13
The name of the second river is the Gihon; it is the one that winds all through the land of Cush.
14
The name of the third river is the Tigris; it is the one that flows east of Asshur. The fourth river is the Euphrates.
15
The LORD God then took the man and settled him in the garden of Eden, to cultivate and care for it.

So, get to work, whichever Spidey you are. I am salivating in anticipation of your twisted logic.

Arminius

"But in the second, Man comes before the plants and animals and - females! "

Im not familiar of that one. What verse is that in the Bible?

MaryCunningham:

I appreciate your concerns, but I generally reserve my more extreme RCC rants for my poor, beleaguered Catholic priest brother and any ad homs for the most deserving targets.

You wrote: "My references have been to the NT section of the Bible. However, because the NT was assembled primarily as a document proving/teaching that Jesus was the Christ and, as such, was the fulfillment of the Scriptures, and since the Scriptures during the time of Christ and the apostles were theHebrew Bible (or OT), from AD200 (?) onwards the Church also met in several councils regarding the authenticity of various Hebrew Scriptures as well. This was not necessary for the earliest Christians as they were all Jews and knew their own scriptures."

When one condsiders the fact that many Jews in Jesus's time, up until even today, reject(ed) the Christian's interpretation of OT Messianic prophesies, one wonders just which OT prophesies Jesus was fullfilling. For instance, there is apparently no notion of a suffering, deified, non-temporally-ruling Messiah in the OT or other pre-NT Jewish literature. According to my sources, the first explicit mention of a suffering Messiah in the canonical gospels, or the entire Bible, is found in Lk 24:25-27, which was probably written no earlier than AD 80. The notion of Jesus being "the Christ" would seem to be a purely Hellenistic-Gnostic-Pauline invention with little or no traction in the OT. Indeed, Paul's epistles almost never refer to "Jesus", but to "Christ".

Also, I've never considered it kosher that early Christian theologians and canonists tinkered with the Jewish Bible or other early Jewish writings in their re-interpretations of them. I also see no reason not to think that all the NT writings might have undergone revisions all the way up to the 4th century Codex Vanticanus.

Mahalo

Chris,

Thanks for the support and the compliment.

But... I of course disagree with your view of religion. Remember that I come to it from a different direction. Let's have a bit of tolerance here, please. I certainly respect your viewpoint.

Arminius

Arminus,

Amidst all those straining to take offense, I applaud you your hearty sense of humor! The 10 commandments joke was just great, and you were well within rights to call CCNL to task on his personal jab at Jihadist, whom we all love and admire.

If there's one place where people ought to check their sensitivities at the door it's an On Faith blog. Judaism is fake. Islam is fake. Christianity is fake. Hinduism is fake. It's all just a bunch of ancient superstition that has been clung to and dragged into the present by the worst among us.

Oh, good grief, Spidey,

The wonderful poetic first creation story ends with the whole of earth/creation done, and mankind, equipped with women, encouraged - nay, commanded - to go forth and multiply.

Then, oddly enough, it all starts over. And, even odder, God made man before much else. In the first myth, God made everything else before man. But in the second, Man comes before the plants and animals and - females!

I await your reply.

Arminius

what are the 2 creation myths? please explain

Did the TrueSpidey or the FalseSpidey address me? I cannot tell

Anyway, whichever you are, if you are so 'adept' at the bible, answer this: how do you reconcile two different creation myths in Genesis?

Arminius wrote "Oddly enough, none of us can tell the difference between your posts and the false ones."

You won't coz you're not adept with the Bible. You don't know what is false and true. Jihadist can't distinguish it either. She doesn't believe there is a false spiderman2 here.

No wonder both of you are best of friends.

sorry guys, im not able to post the list. they are being blocked

Liora,

Perhaps, just maybe, we creep towards an understanding. But it is difficult.

Look, I learned a long time ago that laughing at oneself enhances sanity, because it feeds inquiry. This is the same with religion. If I cannot doubt my faith, and shoot a few satirical arrow at those who are hidebound, then I am in chains.

Laughter heals, if it intended to make one think.

I do not recall Barbara Ls rejoinder. I think you are making a mountain out of a comic molehill.

You keep coming back at me, what is the problem? I don't understand. I am totally tolerant of all good religions, and that includes Judaism and Islam. What the hell must I do, sackcloth and ashes, groveling before you? I don't understand. I have done nothing wrong.

Arminius

Arminius:

I understand, and thank you. But Moses was not the only problem. You see, some of also read this:

"The good news is that I argued Him down to just 10."

And the adultery, Jihadist pointed out. You don't have to recall. You can just scroll down.

Language can be a violent weapon. It often is.

And, then, we have Barbara Ls rejoinder. Why did it bother you?

Suppose from time to time, meaning no offense of course, just out of the blue, Barbara L or I or anyone else posted more of her kind of joke?

Now dealing with Catholics/Christians one can move along so many dimensions. Religion, ethnicity. So one could go to Italian and Catholic, Irish and Catholic, Irish and Protestant, etc., etc., etc.

Suppose, meaning no offense, we just did this from time to time, out of the blue?

Bargaining down equals drinking equals primitive stupidity equals pasta preoccupations and grease obsessions equals bad teeth, etc.

Just as joking you see. Throw in John the Baptist, Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, and absolutely Paul/Saul.

Imagine this, please, Arminius. Then you will be able to understand what life is like in the United States of America on a daily basis for American Jews.

Liora

Anonymous, AKA Spidey,

Oddly enough, none of us can tell the difference between your posts and the false ones.

Some idiot is using my spiderman2 tag. So far he's done 5 posts using my name. He's a brainwashed catholic who is not capable of defending his religion so he resorts to stealing my name. Just enjoy his act and see for yourself how false religion can truly destroy a person.

It's funny how he mimics my name similar to how catholicism uses Jesus name to waylaid the people.

Below are all his posts under the name of spiderman2. I won't be using the spiderman tag for now. From now on, I'll use anonymous.

E Fav,

How was I harsh? CCNL asked Jihadist, "Cutting to the important question, have you crucified any Shiites today???"

Am I supposed to APPLAUD that bigoted statement? Should not hatred always be opposed?

Please grant me an explanation.

Arminius

e favorite wrote "When the Vatican first translated the bible into Latin, it was not a dead language "

But when some priests tried to translate it to their language so it's easier to understand , the church murdered them and one even resulted to millions of death jsut to extinguish the doctrine propagated by apostle paul which is justification by faith.

Liora,

An addendum here, if you can allow it.

First, the Moses joke was aimed at all religions, trying to expose their hypocrisy. Christianity especially. I am Christian, by the way. I have no problem with poking fun at my faith's faults.

Next, do not accuse me of being anti-Jewish. In 1967, on the first day of the Six Day War, I was actively looking for a place to enlist in the Israeli Army to defend that country. Of course, after a day or two, it became apparent that they needed no help....

Relax, please. I am sorry I have been misunderstood. I have no axe to grind - I am a seeker.

Arminius

E Favorite:

I understand. I am not quite that much a newcomer. If you like this sort of joke, then you like it.

Surely, then, you must have liked Barbar Ls, no?

Liora

To Arminius and Liora -

I agree with Liora that Arminius was harsh and agree with Arminius that Jihadist can take care of herself. Liora, I think you misread Arminius this time.

Some of us have been interacting here quite a while and feel we've come to know each other. Some people have even suggested that Jihadist and CCNL "get a room!"

Alas, I think our familiarity doesn't always transmit very well to newcomers.

Liora,

If my Moses joke offended you, please accept my apologies. I will not do it again.

As I recall, Jihadist rather liked it.

Arminius

Arminius:

Here is what you posted and what my post to you referred to.

Moses came down from the Mountain for the second time, bearing two stone tablets.
He said to the Israelites:
"I got good news and bad news."
"The good news is that I argued Him down to just 10."
"The bad news is, adultery is still in."
------------------------

Oy vey.....!!!
................................................
I took exception to this in a subsequent post to you, as did Jihadist, as did Barbara L., as did Ilan.

With respect, I believe that Catholics are not averse to self-reflection, recognizing errors, repenting, and making ammends.

I could be mistaken, but I think Jihadist has genuine moral strength. Posting hateful comments on Jews and then defending her from CCNL will probably not restore you to her good graces.

With respect, I believe that Catholics are not averse to self-reflection, recognizing errors, repenting, and making ammends.

You have the ability to do the right thing, one consistent with the religious values you profess and confess.

Why not do it?

Mary Cunningham,

Just go ahead. Skip the posts of the ad homs attacks.

Talking about the dodgy state and posts from Spiderman2, the mission of Spiderman2 to preach, and one Spiderman2 claiming he is the "True One" one and the other is "False One"....

....hello Spiderman2/Anonymous (you deliberate provocauteur, you)

Instead of resorting to Anonymous, why not these possible options:

* Spider-Man2

* Spiderman2

* Faux Spiderman

* True Spiderman

....and with Mary Cunningham giving me some more ideas (love her her casually tossed literate English):

* Dodgy Spiderman2

* Spiderman2 the Ad Hom Attacker of Catholicism

And Spiderman2 preach :"Beware. Apparently there are some false Spiderman2's posting now on these boards. They will attempt to lead you astray. Don't be stupid and listen to them."

Muslims don't "preach", we "remind". So as an equal opportunity for adherents of a "false" religion here vs the "true" one to preach/remind:

Guide us to the Right Path
the path of those You have blessed
Those who incur no anger
and who have not gone astray

- Sura Al Fatihah

Don't get twisted in your own web my friend. Faux personas are hard to undo.

Hell is a Doomsday Away!

Preaching time over for me today.

Lighten up.

Cheers

"J" - the ad hoc interim Holy Roller

Hi, Liora, for some reason the blog owner doesn't want to send my questions again -- maybe it's the formatting.

anyhow - they are in previous posts and relate to your view of Moses as mythical/factual being and use of the tree of Life book.

Liora,

With all due respect, I believe you misunderstand me. My reply to CCNL was due to his post to Jihadist, and he said to her: "Cutting to the important question, have you crucified any Shiites today???" So who is the bigot here? I did not say that, CCNL did.

I have conversed with Jihadist here over many months, and I have a great respect for her. And I am well aware that she is very capable of defending herself - her replies to CCNL's bigotry are priceless and a source of great laughter.

My reply to CCNL was made because I was very angry when he slandered someone I respect. And he did it with bigotry and hatred. I do NOT think I have done wrong. I defend those whom I admire.

Arminius

Arminius:

Defending your "friend," Jihadist, will probably not work, I fear, as she appears to be principled and is clearly no fool.

When one errs, one apologizes. You are fitting right into the anti-semitic racist stereotype.

I'm not yet posting my many Jesus jokes to give you time to rethink, "repent," and make ammends.
I believe Catholicism and Christianity are not in opposition to those ways of thinking and behaving.

Barbara L. is a fairly frequent poster here. She evidently has a larger repertoire of comebacks than I do.

You have the ability to do the right thing, one consistent with the religious values you profess and confess.

Why not do it?

Ilan:

Thank G-d you are back. Yes, I will post on what I learned from CSCJ and from JSP, but I've also gathered some other information, and would like to put it all together. Hence, I am waiting. Also, I've been posting to E Favorite and Jihadist, who have given me a welcome break from bigotry and hate on this blog.

Hi Jihadist:

Yes, I was referring to Mordecai Kaplan. You write of others:

David Blumenthal, Martin Buber, Hermann Cohen, Samson Rapheal Hirsh.

They are so different and they're thinking is so complex. Where does one begin, and when one does, with whom does one start? If, for example, one starts with Martin Buber, how can one not go back to Franz Rosenzeig, who in turn, would have to lead us to Levinas, et al. Then, Buber, and his continual thinking and rethinking.

Hermann Cohen: Here, you get into the territory, of Leopold Zunz, et al. And serious political questions, identity issues, crises in the Diaspora. What some would view as their attempts to cope with European moral deficits. There are those who would view, who do view Cohen, Zunz, et al, as compensatory figures for EuroChristian hatred. There was and is much more to them than that.

My best guess is that those who know what, in part, influenced them, would be most resistant to CSCJs Etz Haym, etc. Those who don't know the actual history carry the same problems, the same set of socio-political alternatives with them, and do not wish to go the way of Zunz.

I respect him and his thinking, his ethics and those of Cohen, but his way is not my way. I prefer the split I tried to describe to E Favorite.

Could you could talk about the influences among Sufism and Kabbalah, Torah and Shariah?

Hi E Favorite:

I think I'm getting lost on the thread. Did you have more questions?

Best,
Liora

Stuff it, CCNL. You contribute nothing with your sick comments about my friend Jihadist.

Arminius

Oh there "Reality Challenged" and Obfuscating Jihadist,

Cutting to the important question, have you crucified any Shiites today???

Interesting posts. Especially all the posters accusing CCNL of being b.i.g.o.t.e.d for accurately calling Jewish dogma superstition. It's funny, I guess if you call evangelical Christianity nonsense you are called an idiot, if you call Catholicism nonsense you are called immoral, and if you call fundamentalist Judaism nonsense you are called a racist bigot. I see a pattern.

Spiderman2, you're blind if you can't see the numerous flaws in the Bible. Until the Bible is "de-flawed", no one is safe!!!

When the Vatican first translated the bible into Latin, it was not a dead language - it was the root language of most Christian Europeans - very easy for speakers of Spanish, Italian, Portuguese, French, Romanian, to understand, even today. Of course most of them couldn't read then.

Meanwhile, the Bible had been translated into Latin FROM languages like Aramaic and Hebrew - which were not spoken by Christian Europeans.

The Bible is the word of God and it is thru reading the Bible that one gets saved.

The reason why the Vatican prohibited the spread of the Bible for many years and even translated it using a dead language is for it's flock not to hear God's word and be saved.

Satan is at work without them knowing it. The Vatican is the seat of Satan but he is so cunning that Catholics and the Vatican itself don't know it.

MaryCunningham,

"So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God." (Romans 10:17)

The Bible is the word of God and it is thru reading the Bible that one gets saved.

My references have been to the NT section of the Bible. However, because the NT was assembled primarily as a document proving/teaching that Jesus was the Christ and, as such, was the fulfillment of the Scriptures, and since the Scriptures during the time of Christ and the apostles were the Hebrew Bible (or OT), from AD200 (?) onwards the Church also met in several councils regarding the authenticity of various Hebrew Scriptures as well. This was not necessary for the earliest Christians as they were all Jews and knew their own scriptures.

I hope the above is correct. Please feel free to correct if wrong. I would be grateful if there were no ad homs and no rants against Catholicism. Well, maybe the latter is too much to ask.

MaryCunningham:

Thanks for the clarification and I would agree that Spiderman2 is nothing if not dodgy.

really from E Favorite having problems posting - in the second half of my message I repeated the questions I asked Liora - re value Moses as myth/reality, and use of etz hayim. I won't repeat them exactly here in case that is the problem - but you know what they are.

Neal:

My phrase was imprecise and I apologize. The earliest fragment we have is the Magdalen papyrus, a few isolated lines written in Greek, in a bold hand, from a narrative of Christ's Passion as it appears in St Matthew's Gospel: words about the woman who anointed Christ along with others others from the account of the Last Supper. These were carbon dated by Carsten Peter Theide to within 40 years of Christ's death.

The epistles of St Paul certainly date before Matthew but I have no knowledge if there are any copies of them carbon dated previous to the Magdalen papyrus.

What I was in all sincerity asking Spider2 is that given that *nowhere* in the Bible is it written that salvation can be obtained *only* by reading/knowing the Bible, how can 'sola scriptura' be true? His answer was extremely unsatisfactory--something like Catholics don't believe the Bible. Which, you must admit, both insults and dodges the question simultaneously.

test

Some idiot is using my spiderman2 tag. He's a brainwashed catholic and he's here to sow havoc.

I won't be using that name for now. From now on, I'm anonymous.

That is the reason why I'm preaching against false religions. They could make a person very foolish like this fake spiderman2 is doing now.

Just enjoy his acts and see for yourself how false religion can destroy a person.

MaryCunningham:

Earlier in this thread you wrote:

"Also, the Bible was not dictated directly from God through the intermediary of an angel like the Koran but was painstakingly assembled immediately after Christ's death and resurrection."

While I'm sure you were referring to the NT part of the Bible, I was wondering if you could point me to some source that shows that any of the canonical gospels were written before 70 AD. It is my understanding that even the authentic epistles of Paul, which are generally regarded as the earliest extant Christian writings, do not date to before 50 AD, or so. Thanks in advance if you're still around to read this.

Yes, remember your jokes. Also, remember that God does not have a sense of humor when it comes to him being mocked. That's why he created hell- to punish stupidity and stupid people like you. Stupidity and scripture don't mix. The only time God laughs is when stupid little men like you mock his power and greatness, because he knows what's in store for you; eternal punishment.

Do the right thing, dump your false religions of Catholicism, Islam, Wicca, Evolutionism, Communism, etc. and have faith in the power of Jesus. Only by doing so can you be saved from the fires of hell, a just punishment for the stupid sinner. The church today has gone soft and indulges in ear-tickling. Not enough is said about the stupidity of mankind.

Beware. Apparently there are some false Spiderman2's posting now on these boards. They will attempt to lead you astray. Don't be stupid and listen to them.

Here’s section one of my post sent earlier this AM:

Hi, Liora – I’m looking forward to your additional reply. Keep trying – I doubt if it’s anything you’re saying. I’ve had it happen too, for no apparent reason.

Of course, I know Jews don’t believe in the kind of everlasting suffering that Christianity teaches. I used that as an example of myth (in this one case, from the New Testament), that is treated as fact. All the other examples were from the Old Testament, which apply to both the Christian and Jewish traditions.

Hello Liora,

Are you referring to Reconstructionists as influenced by Mordecai M. Kaplan? And the non-supernatural God evolving with civilisation?

There are other Jewish writers with other notions of Gods. Such as by David Blumenthal, Martin Buber, Hermann Cohen, Samson Rapheal Hirsh. What do you think of them?

On a side note, I noticed that halakha is quite similar to Shariah in some ways. The poskim are like the muftis/ayatollahs on this.

Just as the Torah (a way or instruction or teaching) is regarded as eternal law by some Jews, the Quran is eternal text for Muslims and Shariah derived from it apart from Hadiths.

The halakha-like process to derive at a fatwa or a Shariah code or law also relies on historical context and precedences in comtemporary applications and relevance.

I find it interesting as the debate on halakha in Judaism is quite similar to that on Shariah in Islam. The most sought for answers and opinions are on specific questions.

Muslims even resort to various Internet fatwa blogs to ask questions on everything from Botox to Islamic venture capital as to whether they are in line with ethics, morals and values stated in the Qur'an. And to strive for hesed and yetser tov in everything too.

Thanks and best regards
and a good weekend to you.

"J"

Erica:

Please.......
Don't believe everything you hear or read, concerning the upcoming planned persecutions of Christians, or any public flogging of the religious, for the time being.

I really don't think Phillip Pullman or JK Rowling were planning on twisting the minds of our innocent babies, either.

Or any other host of persecutions. This is after all a democracy (most of the time,) and if there are public issues that need to be addressed in your community, you are as free as a Jewish person or Muslim or Protestant or non-theist to make your appeal in the public square.

You know it's really hard to read your post and go outdoors and immediately see three very tall, very large church structures, homes in the 300-400 thousand price range abounding, and mostly SUVs sporting "Jesus fish," (one has 5 Jesus fish on the back--I suppose representing every Christian in the family, maybe even the pets...) and to hear about persecuted Christians.

Cable television is here to stay--if someone wants to watch an infomercial on "better bottoms," I suspect any other amount of programming will go uncensored.

Erica Rivard -

That petition is a hoax. I found it in less than 10 seconds by googling "petition 2493 hoax." It's listed as a hoax in many places on the web.

Here's an excerpt from the urban legends site:

"Dr. James Dobson vs. Petition No. 2493
Netlore Archive: New email variants of decades-old petition expressing outrage over alleged attempt by atheists to force a government ban on religious broadcasting in the United States

Description: Email petition
Circulating since: March 2003 (Dobson version)
Status: False"

In the future, please check these sorts of things out before you post them. Consider - if you're not hearing it in the mainstream media, it probably isn't factual.

PS to Liora - my recent post to you was held! I'll try again.

It seems that everybody in this pluralistic society gets to have an opinion and work to bring that opinion into the public arena, except christians - especially Catholic christians. The response to a Catholic opinion regarding politics or social behavior borders on the rabid at times and I've never quite figured out why.

There is now a petition before the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) seeking to ban ALL gospel readings, ie, all Sunday worship services, whether on radio or TV. The group behind this Petition #2493 also wishes to ban all Christmas songs and programs from public schools. Surely the separation of Church and State goes too far when one whole segment of the population is silenced.

If such a petition attempted to silence any OTHER segment of our society there would be loud screams of "discrimination!"

If this petition passes we may well reach a time when Ramadan, Passover, and Kwanza are celebrated but Christmas is not.

Unfortunately, it is not that far a jump from "be Christian, or Catholic only in your own home" to "you can't be a christian at all in this society." Think long and hard before you let your actions - or your silence- push us down that slippery slope.

Because your belief system might be the next one to get the axe.

It seems that everybody in this pluralistic society gets to have an opinion and work to bring that opinion into the public arena, except christians - especially Catholic christians. The response to a Catholic opinion regarding politics or social behavior borders on the rabid at times and I've never quite figured out why.

There is now a petition before the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) seeking to ban ALL gospel readings, ie, all Sunday worship services, whether on radio or TV. The group behind this Petition #2493 also wishes to ban all Christmas songs and programs from public schools. Surely the separation of Church and State goes too far when one whole segment of the population is silenced.

If such a petition attempted to silence any OTHER segment of our society there would be loud screams of "discrimination!"

If this petition passes we may well reach a time when Ramadan, Passover, and Kwanza are celebrated but Christmas is not.

Unfortunately, it is not that far a jump from "be Christian, or Catholic only in your own home" to "you can't be a christian at all in this society." Think long and hard before you let your actions - or your silence- push us down that slippery slope.

Because your belief system might be the next one to get the axe.

Anonymous (Speed, CAL, thehereandnow, peer review)
writes to Barbara L:

"You are playing right into the stereotypes, Barbara."

Why such shrill defensiveness? After all, you believe in turning the other cheek.

You write of Liora:

Loria sounds very Jewish for an atheist.
However, we all know the game: invoke "atheism" to attack other religions with impunity.
A la Marx, Freud, Hitchens, Harris, Jacoby etc.

..................................................
Liora,

I've been at a conference. I've read the whole Serena, CCNL, Pat, Liora, Jihadist, E Favorite post series. And I read your call for help. Wish I could have been there, but I am here now. Are you going to post what you learned from CSCJ and JSP?

Ilan

Jihadist

Must admit that Yeats was characterized as a 'spiritual dilettante' by Seamus Heaney some years back.

Sally Quinn as a 'spiritual airhead' is original---as far as I know.

"Know what? You don't even have to say the word. I'm on. That is unless, I see an apology from you."

You are playing right into the stereotypes, Barbara.

Jihadist, Jihadist, Jihadist,

Crucified any Shiites today???

Spiderman2,

God Who????

Arminius:

Like Jewish Jokes. Moses jokes?

Love Christian jokes of all denominations.

Did you hear the one about what John the B. was really doing in the water? And how little Nickie unfortunately heard the voice crying out and that is why he is the way he is today?

It's nice to know there are folks out there with similar tastes.

Just say the word, Guy, and I'm on.

Know what? You don't even have to say the word. I'm on. That is unless, I see an apology from you.

Remember your jokes guys. It will serve you well if you're burning in flames with no way out.

God is reserving a hotter oven for you for every single joke you make on Him.

"No idle word would be left unpunished"

"But the unbelieving,... shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death."

Would you believe a person like Apostle John would invent that?

Maybe God knows that only fire can make a person sane. Constant fire to prevent the brain from misbehaving. No more sins forever.

Jihadist, you mentioned me. It is nice to be noticed by someone who is not "tripping." And that goes for Jeff, too.

Hello Arminius,

Love that other take you shared here.

Moses : "The bad news is, adultery is still in."

If that is to happen today, people will ask Moses to go up the mountain for the third time and bring down two additional tablets - a sexual performance enhancement pill, and a birth control pill. And we will have to come up with a whole new theology on that.

Frankly, I don't really like blog brawls thought I do sometimes get into them. Mostly with people who are distracting with their deliberately abusive posts when interesting and informative exchanges are going on between some posters - as like the conversation between Liora and E Favorite here.

I like the posts by, reminders and perspective of Mary Cunningham on Catholicism and history too. And she's feisty. I should look up the reading materials she suggested when I am free.

As for me going into a full-tilt blog brawl today and other days onwards, no. I have not crossed the line yet to become an extremist or fanatic who don't know when to stop :)

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

Hello Liora,

Do share one, many jokes here.

Best regards

"J"

Oh there "Reality Challenged" and Obfuscating Jihadist,

And the "obfusing" continues but now with a bit of attempted levity at the expense of The Tablet Man. Still surprised that the Jewish scribes did not throw in a few "pretty thingies" to help carry the Tablets.

And how goes the very serious issue of your Islamic deprogramming? That is something you can do in private in keeping with the this week's topic.

perplexed wrote "you are surely a churchgoer! So who is the lucky congregation??? "

Yes , Im a churchgoer but I don't believe everything that it preaches. I only listen to what I believe is right and be filled with it and reject the things which I think is wrong.

Jose Rizal is the Philippine National hero and he was raised a Catholic. He despised the church because of the injustices the church does to its people. You can learn much from this guy. Here is a part of his words :

" I do not expect to be believed simply because it is I who am saying this. What I ask of all is to reflect on what I tell him, think it over and sift it carefully thru the sieve of reason. May you in the garden of learning gather not bitter, but choice fruit, looking well before you eat because on the surface of the globe all is deceit, and the enemy sows weeds in your seeding plot. "

"Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me." (John 5 : 39)

Search it and know Jesus Christ personally and not because some church said it. It took me a long time searching and I'm glad I found it finally.

Hi Arminius,

Loved your Moses joke! Want to hear my Jesus joke?

Jesus, Mary, and Joseph, Want to here it?

A simple yes or no will do and I've got more than One joke.

Liora

Hi E Favorite, Hi Jihadist,

I've been trying to post a response to E favorite, which included, at the end, mention of Suffism and Jewish mysticism; Torah and Shariah.

But the point there concerned conceptions of the godhead and Kabbalah. I don't really see, how someone, who had reached the level of learning to actually approach Kabbalah, could not accept a godhead, since how else could he engage mysticism?

About eternal damnation, this isn't an issue in Judaism. But if I go on, I'm afraid I'll be blocked.

Also, I don't mean to imply that my views are normative. Far from it. Still Reconstructionists, including the founder of Reconstructionism did not accept the literal existience of God. Actually, I should qualify this. Some contemporary reconstructionists do.

At any rate, I'm afraid to say too much more since I think the WaPo blocker doesn't like serious religious discussion (chuckle).

BTW, I've read that by the time Sophocles was writing, the ancient Greeks were becoming embarassed by the gods. Do you know anything about this?

Liora

Arminius wrote "Be prepared for a good laugh!"

Same old stupidity the people in Noah's time did. Be prepared for a fiery flood.

Oil is about to be obsolete because of a recent "accidental" (accidental by man's satnadard but not wioth God) discoveries. Be prepared for the resulting instability to the oil producing countries.

Stupidity and Bible don't mix. Aminius, it's best that you don't read my posts. It makes you more stupid.

Hi, Jihadist,

You said: "....sometimes it is fun to go into a blog brawl to the amusement of Arminius and the consternation of Daniel in the Lion's Den."

All too true, and hoo boy, did that get a big laugh here! I always enjoy your posts.

Then you said: "There is an old joke - If Moses were to come down from the mountain today, the two tablets he carries would be aspirins."

Here's another take on that:

--------------------------
Moses came down from the Mountain for the second time, bearing two stone tablets.
He said to the Israelites:
"I got good news and bad news."
"The good news is that I argued Him down to just 10."
"The bad news is, adultery is still in."
------------------------

Oy vey.....!!!

Arminius

Jeff P : Bring "some maturity and grace into these conversations."

Nahhh.....sometimes it is fun to go into a blog brawl to the amusement of Arminius and the consternation of Daniel in the Lion's Den.

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

And Tablet-Man? With a hypen as noted by Liora? Like Spider-Man as hypenated by Stan Lee so people won't confuse him with Superman?

There is an old joke - If Moses were to come down from the mountain today, the two tablets he carries would be aspirins.

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

Liora - Carry on. Your posts are interesting. Never mind the Judeophobes.

Mary Cunningham - "spiritual dilletante" and "spiritual airhead"?

You go, girl! The best the Catholophobes can come up with is "stupid":)

Jeff P,

Thanks for the compliment! I feel the same about you, and appreciates your words here.

I must confess, though, that I sometimes am less than kind to Spidey....

Arminius

Arminius and Daniel In Lion's Den:

..this is just a commercial break to let you guys know how much I appreciate your comments. Thanks for bringing some maturity and grace into these conversations.

Ryan Haber:

..If you're still reading, I had a response to your post at Rev. Thistlewait's blog, although I'm being "held for approval." I must have made her blog censors angry at some point, but I'll try later. Check back there because, although I may have come off a little harsh, I wanted you not to go unchallenged. I appreciate your writing skills (even if I don't agree with all of your argument!)

What is your church of choice, Spiderman2?? At least pay your captive audience the courtesy of declaring your denominational affiliation - your loathing of Catholicism needs to be put in some perspective - go ahead now, and give it up.

If you're a Baptist, I think we'll understand. Or possibly a Lutheran - Missouri synod??

Try not to fall back on your special and direct relationship with God and Jesus as a response - you are surely a churchgoer! So who is the lucky congregation???

Mary Cunningham,

Pay no serious attention to what Spidey says. He does not discuss, he preaches - no, he pontificates - his weird stuff. Now it looks like he may trot out his totally bizarre 'prophesies', that only he has found, and will only hint at. Be prepared for a good laugh!

Arminius

MaryCunningham wrote "Where in the Bible does it say this? "

You don't believe the bible as the "sola scriptura " so what's the use?

Liora, I'm amazed CCNL has engaged you. He doesn't listen to me (lol). I hope you can take time reading all my posts. Im only the person here who knows the future because I interpret the Bible correctly.

In the near future, it would not be a good for the Jews coz false religions would soon dominate this world and like all false religions (Hitler is a catholic and Hamas are muslims) it will persecute the Jews.

S C Cromett wrote "Spidy,Its people like you who make sure reasonable people want stay away from religion."

It depends on how you define reasonable. God spare Noah and his family. Im sure the rest of the crowd that perish are "reasonable " by your definition.

Some idiot is using my name, I hope you are smart enough to distinguish the fake from the real one. Obviously he's a brainwashed catholic. He cannot think anymore and so he resorted to using my name.

Liora, Catholicism is not Christianity. You can't go on stating the word christian if your definition of it is erroneous. And where did you get that Christians don't believe in a historical Moses?

Loria sounds very Jewish for an atheist.

However, we all know the game: invoke "atheism" to attack other religions with impunity.

A la Marx, Freud, Hitchens, Harris, Jacoby etc.

Liora – are you saying that Moses doesn’t have to be a factual person and the stories about him don’t have to be proven history in order for them to teach extremely valuable lessons?

If so, I agree completely. This is also the case with the Greek myths – extremely important and fascinating lessons about human nature. It doesn’t matter at all that the characters and their stories are not factual. The important difference between the Greek myths and biblical myths is that Greek myths are taught as myth and biblical myths are taught as fact. This is misleading and false. People are led to believe, encouraged to believe and sometimes forced to believe, under threat of eternal damnation, that the biblical stories are factual. The stories aren’t appreciated for their mythical value; instead, they are misrepresented as facts – facts that are very hard to believe, considering that they involve events like the parting of seas, the tumbling of walls with a trumpet call, rising from the dead, etc.

Even when archeological findings and textual criticism uncovers the realities (or lack thereof) of biblical stories, that knowledge isn’t openly shared with the general public. Yet, academics and seminary-trained clergy know about it. The conservative Jews decide to add a section about the lack of historicity of Moses and the Exodus in their new edition of Etz Hayim and don’t actively announce it to the people. Of course, It’s not a secret -- this information has been publicized to some extent, or I would not have been able to learn about it, but churches and synagogues are certainly not actively trying to set the record straight.

Anon, Anon, Anon, wherever you are,

An analyses of the Catholic "rock" by many contemporary NT exegetes concluded that the rock is actually sand with no historical foundation.

To wit:

John 14: 26 not historic ( 62-. Spirit under Trial: (1) 1Q: Luke 12:11-12 = Matt
10:19-20; (2) Mark 13:11 = Matt 10: 19-20 = Luke 21:14-15; (3) John 14:26.) see wiki.faithfutures.org/index.php/062_Spirit_under_Trial

Matt 16: 18-19 not historic (73- Who Is Jesus?: (1) Gos. Thom. 13; (2a) Mark
8:27-30 = Matt 16:13-20 = Luke 9:18-21; (2b) Gos. Naz. 14; (2c) John 6:67-69.) see wiki.faithfutures.org/index.php/073_Who_is_Jesus%3F

1 Timothy- not written by St. Paul (See Crossan’s “In Search of Paul”, Harper, San
Francisco, 2004, p.105)

2 Peter 1:20

Since Father Edward Schillebeeckx basically ruled out prophecies by concluding God does not know
the future, one can rule out the infallible nature of this verse.

Also from Raymond Brown’s, An Introduction to the New Testament, 2 Peter was
the last canonical work written i.e. ~ 130 AD, author unknown. Tis a bit dated for use in claiming infallibility plus the verse is not from Jesus or Peter but some possible remembrance of a scribe.

From another source:

Also think about the logic (or lack thereof) in the following:

“I believe the Bible is inspired.” “Why?” “Because it says so.” Would your
anyone let that logic pass if it came from the followers of any other book or person? “I believe x is inspired because x says so.” Fill in the blanks:

x=Pat Robertson
x=the ayatolloah Sistani
x=David Koresh
x=the Koran”

more “logic”?
“I believe there is One God Jehovah because He is revealed in the infallible
Bible. I believe the Bible is infallible because it is the Word of the One God Jehovah.”

Hi E Favorite,

Another thought: Okay, so X doesn't think there was a historical Moses. So, she looks to the imagining and the significance of the teaching and tries to see how they interweave.

Then X thinks, "Gee, this is amazing." Those who developed these ways of thinking, who recognized the danger to them of animal gods or of man-gods, how such thinking enables false worship of things, of ideas, etc., enables naivete, etc., bestowed, Jews think, a great gift.

This does not mean that it is acceptable to condemn those who think otherwise. Quite the contrary. Polytheism, etc., is not to be questioned by Jews, since HaShem (Name) has a covenant with all peoples. But this view came later from men, and probably some women, like Akiva's Rachel, men who were like the teachers who wrote the Tanakh.

Anyway, so X is amazed by all this stuff and could start speaking alphabetically, the E author, etc. These learned men (except maybe J, whom Bloom thinks was a woman), how they wrote, how they may have added, modified, who and when added, but that is not her focus at the moment.

So there is a kind of split in X's thinking amd feeling and spirituality, wherein Moses (for X,a construct, a metaphor), works imaginatively, spiritually. Wonder is an aspect of the construct, wonder, historical continuity. It goes to the immense value Jews have always placed on teaching and learning.

Masculinity in Judaism, once formalized, has always been associated with learnedness, not physical strength. Now, of course, things have changed so that even Orthodox women read Talmud (various interpretations cutting across centuries of passages in the Bible) This is where the serious study of Judaism begins.

Learning, teaching, enlightenment create wonder. Now learning too can be a false idol. That again is where the wonder of Moses or the Moses construct figures. One doesn't want hypocrites. Although Jews like everyone else have there fair share.

Wonder that you are being told how to live snd the gift and complexity of the lessons. I think, too, that somehow saying Moshe Rabbeinu when the focus is on the learning, may have to do with trying to find some sort of link between wonder and secular scholarship. One doesn't want to forget, when one thinks of Judaism as a way of life "the way," "the principles," "the walking," is not in archaeolgy, or secular text studies.

Liora - Great - look forward to hearing back from you.

Just to let you know where I'm coming from - I respect any worthwhile teaching, no matter what the source - mythical, philosophical, psychological, scientific, historical, whatever.

My problem is when mythological stories are misrepresented as factual events.

Hi E Favorite,

Please understant--I didn't mean to say that you had made the statement about the 1.5 million.

I haven't answered your other question yet because it's not an easy one to answer. I'm trying to figure out the best way to explain it.

You see, I've done the same thing, spoken in the same way. It concerns the significance of Moses (or the Mosaic construct) for justice, for the responsibility of one person for another, for civilization's responsibility to make sure that there is justice so that crimes against humanity will not be repeated from one generation to the next. (What can one say?)

It is to the people that this is given, above all. (There is no personal saviour in Judaism, although every individual has obligations to every other and to the deity.) Hence, if it is deemed that such and such a person did not kill so and so, deemed by a court, then it is a matter over and done with. This is a small part, but you can see how important it would have been at the time, its significance.

But there is much, much more. For example, one thinks about the destruction of the tablets and Moses writing the commandments instead.

Now, Christians and some Jews might say, do say that this concerns the inability of humanity to be that close to the godhead, but another view, my own and that of many, many others, is that it was part of aiding humanity in the assumption of responsibility for justice.

It also figures an anti-idolatry. The tablets were risky business. Clearly, they didn't work. That is another difference between Judaic and Christian thinking. The deity makes mistakes! Is open to negotiation. Here, some secular history is helpful, but what fascinates Jews like me is this remarkably complex HaShem (more on this later).

Anti-Idolatry: Why choose a man who has no way with words to tell them "exist," "be." The Hebrew has no subject. (Also, anti-idolatry)
I'm probably getting ahead of myself.

There is a lot to say in answer to your question, and if it's okay, I have to give it more thought.

But I guess the bottom line is that the thinking, the teaching is so significant, that regardless of how it was developed, it warrants respect.

But I'd like to post more to you later, or tomorrow, if that's okay. You've asked a wonderful question, and I would like to give it more thought.

Liora

Spidy

Its people like you who make sure reasonable people want stay away from religion.

Liora – thanks for getting back to me.

I actually googled “Jewish hymnal” (and found numerous references) before using the term “hymnal” because I didn’t know if Jews used that term. Guess I got it wrong after all. Sorry. How about this - “medium-sized book with songs and prayers in it.” I hope it doesn’t bother you too much that I misnamed something.

Regarding the Tree of Life/Etz Hayim book, I don’t know exactly how they are used. Do you? I did assume that people used them during services, since numerous copies are available in every pew. Is this right or not?

Also, it seems that you’re responding more to others here than to me, as I did not make a statement about “1.5 million accept” nor did I mention anything about a “tablet-man.”

I did ask you about something you said in an earlier post, “…an academic, who is also a rabbi, might easily say (many do), that Moses was probably mythic, while in the next breath, Moshe Rabbeinu (Moses, our teacher.)”

I’d still like to know - What do you suppose they mean by that? Any idea how people absorb the information or if anyone asks the rabbis about it.”

I’d really appreciate it if you responded to that.

Thanks.

CCNL:

The Anonymous preceding the post to EFavorite was from me.

I'm getting blocked, so here I am going to try to add what I had to leave out to post.

I have no troubles with serious secular discussions of the Tanakh and NT.

We can review the findings of archaeologists and linguists if you'd like for both. That of Josefus that has now been thoroughly descredited, and what is on the way to being tossed.

Frankly, I think it best, and most intellectually honest to focus on the J, J subcategories, D, P, M. Like a lot of lefties, I would like to review Bloom on J.

The Q writer is what most of us know regarding the NT.

I have spoken with CSCJ and am waiting to hear back from JPS. When I have all the information together, I'll get back to you.

Hi Farnaz:

I've ordered the book. I've always been open to Rabbi Kushner. Are they using Etz Haym in your Synagogue?

Best,
Liora

Hi EFavorite:

I don't know what you mean by "hymnals." Can you explain? Also, can you tell me how it is being used?

I just spoke with someone at CSCJ, and at JPS, so I should have more information soon.

I took a number of Jewish Studies classes in college, and I just took a graduate class last spring. I'm familiar with the findings and debates among archaeologists, linguists, etc.

I'm not a literalist regarding the Tanakh. Truthfully, I'm an agnostic cum atheist. What I am unhappy with is misrepresentation of facts, distortion of facts. 1.5 million accept, etc.

Also, insanities like the 30% of the NT that is authentic Jesus.

Finally, referring to Moses (Moshe Rabbeinu) as the "Tablet-Man." Note superfluous hyphen. Whether he existed or is a construct, that kind of language is unacceptable.

Spiderman:
That goes for you as well. If you don't want to see Ilan or me referring to "Jesus, the water skier of New Testament fame," then tell CCNL to show some repect for the intellectuality, if not beliefs of others.

It cuts two ways you know. Jesus Christ does not figure in Judaism. Moses does. Regardless of what is meant when the name/word is used.

CCNL:

Sorry, but you cannot add me to your list of inaccuracies.

I know your reading is highly selective, but as I keep telling you, I am not an observant person, an agnostic at best. I am aware of the theories, findings of archaelogists, linguists, etc.

As for "The Tree of Life", I have gone to the actual source, from whom I am supposed to hear back today or tomorrow regarding use of the said text.

What I have learned definitively is that it is not affecting weekly Parshat, etc., this from USCJ, definitive. As I told you. It is they who directed me to my primary source regarding uasage.

Spiderman2

You believe that man can only achieve salvation through knowing the Bible (not by reading, remember early Christianity was spread by word, by preaching the Word), only through *sola scriptura*.

Where in the Bible does it say this?

Also, the Bible was not dictated directly from God through the intermediary of an angel like the Koran but was painstakingly assembled immediately after Christ's death and resurrection. If you agree this, tell me who decided which parts of the Bible were inspired and which were not? Why do you allow the work of the Church from, say, AD33 to 432 (the Council of Carthage when the NT finally assumed the form we know today) but not afterwards?

(OK, I know you shouldn't feed the trolls but maybe a crumb or two..)

The Church Jesus Christ Built

In Matthew 16:18 Jesus said, "And I say unto thee (referring to Peter), that thou art Peter (petro or stone or rock), and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

In Acts 15:7 Peter said, " ...Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice (or selected) among us, that the Gentiles (or we the people who are not Jews) by my mouth (or thru his preaching) should hear the word of the gospel, and believe."

In verse 9 & 11, he continues, " And put no difference between us (Jews) and them (Gentiles), purifying their hearts by faith ... But we believe that thru the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they."

If we read the whole of Acts 15, those words of Peter were made to clear up matters in which some of the members of the church (newly converted Pharisees) want to include the law of Moses in order to be saved.

Prior to this event or dispute, Apostle Paul and Barnabas had been preaching to the Gentiles the salvation of souls thru faith in Jesus Christ . In Acts 14:27 it says, "... and how He (God) had opened the door of faith unto the Gentiles." Also in Acts 13:39 it says " And by Him (Jesus Christ) all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses."

In the midst of the debate, Apostle Peter, whom Jesus Christ had first chosen to preach the gospel to the Gentiles, stood up and confirmed the teaching of Apostle Paul that indeed salvation is by grace thru faith in Jesus Christ which is made possible thru the enlightening of the Holy Spirit. In the eyes of God, nobody can satisfactorily follow the "unveiled" law of Moses unless dwelt upon by the Holy Spirit of Jesus Christ. One of the "veiled" law of Moses is circumcision of the foreskin but its true or unveiled meaning is that of the "circumcision of the heart" or being "born-again" in other words (Romans 2:29).

It was taught upon the Catholic people that their church was started by Peter. Many believe it and for this reason many choose to stand by this church and defend "what Peter had started".

But in reality, the Catholic Church has been a fierce enemy to the doctrine propagated by Peter, Paul, the other Apostles and of Jesus Christ. When Martin Luther (a former priest) floated the idea of "justification by faith", which the apostles especially Peter and Paul had long ago preached to the Gentiles, all hell broke loose and it caused many terrible wars and massacres done by the church just to suppress that doctrine. If Peter and Paul were present during those time when Catholicism was at its peak of power and had they changed their names to avoid recognition, they too could have been burned at the stake also for preaching "justification by faith".

Despite the tremendous power of the Roman Catholic Church during that time, it didn't succeed to extinguish that holy doctrine coz as what Jesus Christ had said, " the gates of hell shall not prevail against it ". As what Martin Luther had said, "the body they may kill : but God's truth abideth still". And true enough it still abides today and even gave birth to a great nation (In God We Trust) and it will continue to abide even to the end of time. [ But this nation will suffer or be punished because of the foolishness (rising atheism, sexual promiscuity, gay marriage, garbage music, TV programs & movies centered on sex) which some or many of its people, who are ignorant of that holy doctrine, are promoting. With Catholicism, liberal Protestantism, atheism and other false religions slowly "invading" it, God won't spare parts of that nation to feel the brunt of

For a very long time upto now, the salvation doctrine of Catholicism has been the sacraments like infant baptism, confession to the priests and penance, holy communion, confirmation, etc. Some even consider the role of Mary in their salvation plan. It just couldn't stop of thinking what really could save a person coz in reality, they really don't know and that explains why they have so many ways.

Justification by faith was never a part of their salvation doctrine and anybody who espoused that idea during those dark centuries were properly dealt with.

It must be noted that no Apostle ever performed infant baptism; no Apostle had a confession booth and gave penance; no Apostle performed the holy communion for the salvation of souls and neither was "confirmation" used by them. Also, no Apostle prayed to Mary for intercession to God. Whatever Catholicism has been teaching their flock like lighting candles, praying the rosary, praying to the saints, reciting prayer books, getting their properties blessed with "holy water", no Apostle ever did those things coz they are just purely Catholicism's own inventions. And as always, man's inventions especially if it pertains to godliness always fall short with God's standards. No person can ever make his own way to Heaven. It's either God's way or no way.

Catholicism was not the church Jesus Christ built in which Peter and the rest of the Apostles was tasked to propagate. On the contrary it is the church which persecuted and tried to destroy God's true church.

Jesus Christ had said, "upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." This said church is already present with us and its not Catholicism, nor liberal Protestantism, nor Judaism, nor Islam, nor Hinduism, nor Taoism, nor Buddhism nor any other big or small religion that may name Christ but has other ways of salvation other than the simple faith in Jesus Christ which He personally gives to whoever He sees fit to receive it.

For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. For we are his workmanship, CREATED in Christ Jesus UNTO GOOD WORKS, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them. (Ephesians 2: 8-10)

Faith saves a person and good works follows. With Catholicism, it's the sacraments like infant baptism, confession to the priests and penance, holy communion, confirmation, etc. (Not of works like these can a man be saved)

The blindness continues. The hillman's doctrine, in the eyes of Rizal.

Jesus loves ME.Jesus loves ME.Jesus loves ME.Jesus loves me.Jesus loves me. Jesus loves ME.
There is a God.There is a God.There is a God. There is a God.He loves me. He loves Me. He loves me.
Jesus loves ME. He loves ME.God loves me. God loves ME.
Because I do His work. I do God's work I do God's work.Everyday I do God's work. I make Christians out of atheists. Come listen to me non-believers and I will SAVE YOU. I will save you from the Fires Of HELL. I will show you God's way. It is through the pope and catholicism. It is the only way. If you are NOT a catholic then you are an atheist. Only catholics have the truth. All else blaspheme.
Hail Mary. Hail Mary. Hail Mary.Hail Mary. Hail Mary.
I want to lead you stupid morons to the LIGHT.
Follow ME> whom God does loveth.
Coz I am the LIGHT.

You can easily detect the false me because he displays all of the stupidity that the other posters typically do. Merely the stupidity of not believing in Jesus and in their false religions of Catholicism, Episcopalism, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, "Wicca", Pagan religion, Evolutionism, etc. Be warned! Many will try to deceive you from the true path, which is faith. Beware the false Spiderman2 (he is stupid). Beware stupidity!

For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. For we are his workmanship, CREATED in Christ Jesus UNTO GOOD WORKS, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them. (Ephesians 2: 8-10)

Faith saves a person and good works follows. With Catholicism, it's the sacraments like infant baptism, confession to the priests and penance, holy communion, confirmation, etc. (Not of works like these can a man be saved)

The blindness continues. The hillman's doctrine, in the eyes of Rizal.

Now I have a clone. But it's easy to detect him coz the stupidity is glaring.

I HATE idiots I HATE idiots. I HATE idiots.

You are all idoits. All of you idiots are idiots.

Idiots.Idiots ,Idiots,Idiots,Idiots,Idiots.Idiots.

Everybody here is stupid except us catholics because we KNOW truth and non catholics dont.

The most stupid is Susan the atheist who can't see that God exists everywhere, because she is willfully blind to Him and all the goodness He does.

God IS. If you are catholic you already know this.
If yiou are not then you should become one. The pope is a loving bearer of Gods truth. Open your eyes all you stupid dummies.

There is a God. There really IS a God. and He is catholic. I was rased to see and believe in Him. Not like all you stupid bozos who just dont get it.
Why everbody cant see the obvious is beyond my understanding. Can so many be so very very blind?

Yes I guess they can.

anonymous wrote "As a brain-washed believer ..."

It's God and me, nobody in between.

In your case, it's "god", then the pope, then the cardinals, the bishops, the priests, etc and then you. So many in between, so many brainwashers. So many idiots in between. The end result? An idiot product.

As a brain-washed believer Spiderman2 excels.
As a preacher, not so much - better keep your day job spidey.

Ryan Haber wrote " Does YOUR church still teach that we must eat Jesus' Body and Blood in order to be saved? "

Catholicism does not understand the Bible because they are as what Apostle Paul said "the natural man". It's only now that Catholics are allowed to read the Bible but thru-out it's very long history, only a few are given that oppurtunity and it's even written in a dead language, the Latin.

"But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God... neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned." (1 Corinthians 2:14)

The body and blood of Christ is not the literal body nor the bread but the Word of God. If Catholicism hindered their flock to read the Bible for a very long time, it is because it's a devil's church and naturally, devils hinders the "body and blood" of Christ to the people.

You should not lecture me about love coz the Catholic church is one institution who has murdered millions of people forcing their beliefs by force to anyone.

Just like Jesus and the apostles, I preach the word and if preaching means exposing stupidity, so be it.

My apologies to Liora. I thought she was the one who said "Jesus the Water Skier of New Testament Fame." That was my basis for calling her idiot. Im sorry.

Anybody who degrades the Creator is a stupid person and that's the truth.

Spiderman2,

According to the Scriptures, the infallible barometer of a person's adherence to Christ is his charity toward his fellowmen.

Jn 13:35, "By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another."

1 Cor 13:2, "And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing."

1 Cor 13:4-6, "Love is patient and kind; love is not jealous or boastful; it is not arrogant or rude. Love does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; it does not rejoice at wrong, but rejoices in the right."

As for your supposed prophecies being fulfilled now:

Mt 24:36, "But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father only."

As for thinking that the Catholic Church teaches falsely:

Jn 15:4-9, "ABIDE in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit by itself, unless it ABIDES in the vine, neither can you, unless you ABIDE in me. I am the vine, you are the branches. He who ABIDES in me, and I in him, he it is that bears much fruit, for apart from me you can do nothing. If a man does not ABIDE in me, he is cast forth as a branch and withers; and the branches are gathered, thrown into the fire and burned. If you ABIDE in me, and my words abide in you, ask whatever you will, and it shall be done for you. By this my Father is glorified, that you bear much fruit, and so prove to be my disciples. As the Father has loved me, so have I loved you; ABIDE in my love."

Jn 6:50-60, "This is the bread which comes down from heaven, that a man may eat of it and not die. I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any one eats of this bread, he will live for ever; and the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh."
The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, "How can this man give us his flesh to eat?" So Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you; he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood ABIDES in me, and I in him. As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats me will live because of me. This is the bread which came down from heaven, not such as the fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread will live for ever." This he said in the synagogue, as he taught at Caper'na-um.
Many of his disciples, when they heard it, said, "This is a hard saying; who can listen to it?""

Does YOUR church still teach that we must eat Jesus' Body and Blood in order to be saved? Or is that saying too hard for your church's members?

Your church is a bible-believing, faith-alone, scripture-alone church, I imagine. What about this quotation?

Jas 2:24, "You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone."

(Don't tell me that a 'faith-alone' Christian is also a 'scripture-alone' or even a 'Bible-believing' Christian. It'll take a lot of extra-scriptural interpretation to make James 2:24 go away, Spiderman2!)

Does your church reject a human being's spiritual authority over other men and women? Our Lord Jesus Christ doesn't:

Mt 16:17-19, "And Jesus answered him, "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

Peter's got the keys to the Kingdom, and Benedict is his successor!

Jesus Christ is Lord, same yesterday, today, and forever.

Spidey,
Please refrain from making personal attacks such as calling other posters stupid. You can call the Catholic cChurch stupid, you can call other poster's ideas stupid. Don't call them stupid.

I find your ideas and arguments loathsome but I do not personally insult you for holding them

MaryCunningham wrote "One booklet your study group really should read from CTS is "Protestantism (from a Catholic Perspective)"

Try the Bible instead. It's all wriiten there why catholicism is stupidity. Rizal was raised a Catholic but he's not weak and ignorant. He quickly saw the defects.

Liora and CCNL, both of you don't believe in Jesus so your discussions are a waste of time. You are both idiots. The prophecies that I mentioned are from Jesus and they are all happening.

If you guys don't know the future, it is because your beliefs have no future. Only the Creator knows the future and only His children are given the gift to know them.

Liora –in the synagogue down the street from me, the “Tree of Life” books (aka Etz Hayim) are lined up next to the hymnals up and down all the pews. To me, they looked like the Episcopalian Book of Common Prayer or the Catholic Sunday Missal – immediately accessible to all in the congregation. It was at this synagogue that I first saw for myself the entry about exodus archeology, on page 1343. Please check it out. Now it may be that many of the 1.5 million conservative Jews do not personally endorse or even know about this recently added section. But it is part of their teachings.

I first read about the archeology showing complete lack of evidence for exodus in “The Bible Unearthed” by respected Jewish Scholars Finkelstein and Silberman. Also, check out this review of the book --
http: // prophetess.Istc.edu/~rklein/Documents/grounds.htm (fill in the spaces to link to it.)

In it, Finkelstein, one of the authors, says: “During our Pesach Seder, my two girls, who are 11 and 7, didn't hear a word about the fact that there was no exodus from Egypt. When they are 25, we will tell them a different story.” (Personally, I don’t know why he’s waiting until his children are adults, but I’m glad he at least plans to tell them the facts at some point).

Liora, in your previous post, you say: “…an academic, who is also a rabbi, might easily say (many do), that Moses was probably mythic, while in the next breath, Moshe Rabbeinu (Moses, our teacher.)”

What do you suppose they mean by that? Any idea how people absorb the information or if anyone asks the rabbis about it.” I’m very curious to know.

Thanks

Susan,

If the Catholic Church's primary purpose has been to weild power, she has been spectacularly ineffective at it for the great bulk of her history, and even more disappointingly slow to acquire it. How, being the largest transnational organization now or ever, having a membership greater than China's, and all of this (supposed) wealth, is she so incompetent at even getting her own members to sing properly on Sunday?

Anyone who thinks priests or bishops, or the pope, is powerful has never actually interacted with one. Whatever moral authority they might actually have, their political or military "power" is pretty darn lame. Even at its height of political and military "power," the high Middle Ages, her "power" was pretty swiftly dismantled by the princes of Europe.

Stalin once asked, "How many divisions has the Pope?" Well, Gorbachev and Wojciech Jaruzelski found the answer to that one 40 years or so later. The Pope needn't have any armored divisions when he has moral authority.

I suspect that the Catholic Church and its earthly head wouldn't be the subject of such constant moral accusations and attacks if its moral authority weren't feared and (very perversely) hated. After all, with much, much more serious sexual misconduct endemic in the public school system of our nation (as documented most recently by the AP and carried in Oct 2007 by the WaPo), who ever hears or criticizes them for it?

Susan, really, the regime you fear is slipping away and hope to restore in our nation has already met its match. Its days are numbered as surely as those of the Polish United Workers' Party were when Holy Father John Paul II visited that nation. I think no Catholic really be cowed into voting against their conscience in this country again. Instead of telling us to shut up and keep our faith (really our morals, you mean) out of politics, why don't you and your lot get busy voting too? Isn't that what this is really about? Democracy? You can scream that I am brainwashed and tell others not to vote like me, but I still intend to vote. You can scream that I am just a religious zealot without reasons for my vote, only the influence of faith, but still I intend to tell people why I vote as I do. You can say that we are trying to institute a theocracy because we believe abortion (or what have you) is immoral and intend to vote that way... but really, this is about each person having a vote to exercise as she or he sees fit with no obligation to account to anyone for it.

Is God a Man?? Spiderman2 will know - I want my Mother!

Liora,

As with most of us, you have been Bred, Born and Brainwashed (The Three B Syndrome) in your religion, Judaism in your case. Deprogramming is therefore difficult but possible. Start with a review of the angel aka "pretty, wingie, flying, talking, fictional, thingie connections. A status review shows the influence of these "thingies" on the various "beliefs".

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

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

Mohammed had his Gabriel (this "tinker bell" got around).

Joe Smith had his Moroni.

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

Most contemporary biblical and religious scholars have relegated these "pretty wingie thingies" to the myth pile. We should do the same to include deleting all references to them in our religious operating manuals.

Some added references to "tinker bells".

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

Apparently hallucinations did not stop with Joe Smith.

newadvent.org/cathen/07049c.htm

"This belief in guardian angels can be traced throughout all antiquity; pagans, like Menander and Plutarch (cf. Euseb., "Praep. Evang.", xii), and Neo-Platonists, like Plotinus, held it. It was also the belief of the Babylonians and Assyrians, as their monuments testify, for a figure of a guardian angel now in the British Museum once decorated an Assyrian palace, and might well serve for a modern representation; while Nabopolassar, father of Nebuchadnezzar the Great, says: "He (Marduk) sent a tutelary deity (cherub) of grace to go at my side; in everything that I did, he made my work to succeed."

Catholic monks and Dark Age theologians also did their share of hallucinating:

"TUBUAS-A member of the group of angels who were removed from the ranks of officially recognized celestial hierarchy in 745 by a council in Rome under Pope Zachary. He was joined by Uriel, Adimus, Sabaoth, Simiel, and Raguel."

And tinker bells go way, way back:

"In Zoroastrianism there are different angel like creatures. For example each person has a guardian angel caled Fravashi. They patronize human being and other creatures and also manifest god’s energy. Also, the Amesha Spentas have often been regarded as angels, but they don't convey messages, but are rather emanations of Ahura Mazda ("Wise Lord", God); they appear in an abstract fashion in the religious thought of Zarathustra and then later (during the Achaemenid period of Zoroastrianism) became personalized, associated with an aspect of the divine creation (fire, plants, water...)."

"The beginnings of the biblical belief in angels must be sought in very early folklore. The gods of the Hittites and Canaanites had their supernatural messengers, and parallels to the Old Testament stories of angels are found in Near Eastern literature. "

"The 'Magic Papyri' contain many spells to secure just such help and protection of angels. From magic traditions arose the concept of the guardian angel. "

For added information see the review at:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angel

After coming to grips with the mythical angel connections in Judaism et al, review the mythical creation and biblical time lines and the Tree of Life will become more meaningful.

PS: Susan Jacoby states:

--"Americans' prejudice against "papists" in the first half of the 19th century was much stronger than anti-Semitism (a first in western history)--

I would ask SJ to read any history of Ireland during its unhappy 400 year 'membership' in the British Empire and any history of Northern Ireland post 1921, a state contructed solely on the basis of religious aparthed, for refutation of this.

There are a lot of other examples, but it's as good a start as any.

Speed123

One booklet your study group really should read from CTS is "Protestantism (from a Catholic Perspective)". It's part of the 'Explanations' series and explains the sources of animosity towards Catholicism shown by folks like Spiderman2. Surprisingly, it helped me appreciate the distinctiveness of Catholicism as well.

cts-online.org.uk/explanations.htm Dr Blamire is an Oxford professor, a convert from Anglicanism, and I cannot recommend the little booklet too highly.

Perspective

WB Yeats was a spiritual dilettante (unlike Sally Quinn who is a spiritual airhead). Brought up unhappily in an arid Protestant household, father an unsuccessful everything even a rector, Yeats turned away from Christianity towards, well, just about everything...sometimes things that were pretty silly. His miraculous lyric gifts almost always bail him out. "To be carved on the Tower..." and--even better--"The Cold Heaven" are throbbing with energy and life, spiritual and otherwise. Such a grand contrast to the dead centre of Larkin.

SC Cromett

Re: differentiate betw Orthodox and Catholic Europe

My posts concerned Catholic Europe solely. After the great Arab conquests of the 7th century and the spread of Islam,Orthodoxy was on the defensive and Byzantine countries do not figure greatly in the history of Central and Western Europe. (One might even say that the Reformation succeeded because the Pope was attempting to galvanize resistance to the Ottoman Turks. Constantinople fell in 1452 and for 200 years the Turks conquered all before them; Jan Sobieski finally defeated them in Vienna in 1682, the high point of the Turkish incursion into Europe.)

You are indeed correct in that the structure of power differed greatly betw. the two but IMO it is irrelevant to this discussion on the Pope's contention about religion in the public and private sphere.

Jihadist, Jihadist, Jihadist,

The "fems" rule Reality Mountain. Islam is crumbling from it all. Rational thinking and history make the koran a work of "pretty wingie" fiction and myth which it has been for the last 1400 years.

Concerned the Christian Now Liberated: "You do make us wonder!!"

Moi : Only wonder? Not infuriate, exasperate, frustrate, enrage and more?

My dear fellow, you already know all there is to know about Islam and Muslims and how to change our belief and all. So do it and see Islam crumble in ten years.

No one is stopping you here on that at all. Say whatever you want on Islam and Muslims.

--------------------------------------------------
Liora,

Thanks for all your posts. Not many Jewish posters speak on their faith as you do in On Faith. It is very refreshing and informative for me.

Thank you again and best regards

"J"

Dear Liora,

Read your post, Serena's, Pat's, CCNL's. Went to CCNL's site, etc.

I am Sfardim, of course. But you know, we have the same expression as the Askenazim. Put two Jews in a room and you get 100 opinions!

Good luck to Rabbi Wolpe! But, in time, it could come to pass. One never knows. I have the "Tree of Life" (what a name), and I rather like some of it. I think you would, too, certainly as "an agnostic at best." Ditto, this writer.

Goodnight!

Farnaz

CCNL:

Final comment because I am exhausted. I went to the site. We have no Pope. Rabbi Wolpe used it with his congregants in 2002 (the date of the Times article) and got a flood of reaction, much of it negative, and not only from his congregants, as the 2002 article to which you referred me states. The soon-it-will-be-in-use has yet to come.

Personally, I'm interested in seeing it, but this being 2008, it doesn't seem to have caught on services-wise. Not in Manhattan or Brooklyn, and not too much in L.A., at least according to Dave, my rabbi pal, except perhaps by Rabbi Wolpe. I am quite open, being an agnostic at best, to re-envisioning, but not to inventing facts. ("The Tree of Life" has not replaced the traditional Chumash of the Conservatives.) Religion should change, in my view, should keep up with the times. Even some Orthodox denominations are modernizing.

However, the 1.5 million are evidently sticking with the old Chumash. Two blocks from my home is one of the best-known Reformed Synagogues in the U.S. Reformed are generally less strict than Conservative. (I occasionally go to a Conservative synagogue because the rabbi is an academic, and she is brilliant. Her drshes should be collected and published.) Said Reformed synagogue, and all the rest are still using the traditional Chumash.

Complaints? Well, you could go to Rabbi Wolpe and insist that he issue a decree that all Conservative rabbis use "The Tree of Life" with their congregants, and I'm sure when he stopped laughing, he'd reply. (We have no Pope.)

No division of Judaism has a papal equivalent.

There, full engagement. So....my other comments? Serena's?

CCNL:

I owe you a partial apology. The commentaries have been added to, but emphatically not replaced. I emailed a Rabbi/Academic with a congregation in California.

There is a text published by Torch Light, for Orthodox Jews, which I bought for a friend who doesn't read Hebrew. Since, it too, is in English, it occasionally summarizes, or interprets more complex Talmudic thought.

Here is the thing. My California pal says that he is unsurprised that my far-left Conservative Egalitarian female Rabbi is not using "The Tree of Life" in services as neither is his leftist self or anyone he knows, non-egalitarian Conservatives, obviously included.

In two classes sponsored by his synagogue (Jewish Studies, not Judaism), two people are using it, but the students are familiar with the Chumash (ancient Hebrew).

He thinks it would be useful from a Jewish Studies perspective to use it with the Oxford (standard in JWS classes--I used it), but says he and other profs are sticking with the Oxford.

He thinks some of the "Tree" is interesting, so I'll probably get it, but he can't understand the title, and neither can I. "The Tree of Life" (Kabbalah).

As for the 1.5 million, well, evidently not.

Now, CCNL, I have engaged what you have said. Is there any possibilty that you will do the same with what I posted? Or with what Serena posted?

Just asking.

Liora,

See:
simpletoremember.com/vitals/ConservativeTorah.htm and then send your questions and complaints to Rabbi David Wolpe, one of the speakers for said 1.5 million Conservative Jews in the USA.

CCNL:

Also, "scribes"? Best we can gather they were scholars, educators.

You want to talk biblical scholarship? Then do as Serena suggested, except I'd start with the reconstructed authors of the NT, rather than the Tanakh.

The Q writer, as Serena suggested.

If anybody is out there, I could really use a hand.

CCNL:

No, it does not incorporate a new commentary. What is it that you don't understand? Did you read my post? Why are you telling me things I've just told you?

And do you not get it? The Talmud is closed, finis, as of centuries and centuries ago. How can they add to it, replace it with a new one? Will we resurrect Rashi to get the normative? HELP!!!

And the acceptance of 1.5 million Conservative Jews? Acceptance of what? Have you interviewed them? Do you know any? 'Cause, what with being one, and living in New York City, I kinda do.

There will be a text with essays appended.

What about this weaving of man and animal gods into "their god," by which, I assume, you mean, HaShem? From whcnce did this come?

All religions have mythologic components in my view, and, obviously, in Serena's. That is not the problem.

T.O. R.E.P.E.A.T. for the hundredth time, an academic, who is also a rabbi, might easily say (many do), that Moses was probably mythic, while in the next breath, Moshe Rabbeinu (Moses, our teacher.)

You don't know anything about this religion, or its many varieties.

And the Tablet-Man? Neither a believer in the literal existence of Moses nor a non-believer would speak in this way. There are C.O.N.C.E.P.T.S., related to Moses (or the construct of Moses, that would prohibit that sort of language.

I notice that you do not speak of "Jesus, the water skier, of New Testament fame" (Ilan), nor have I heard anyone, including those who more than doubt his historical existence speak in this way.

I will forgo further discussion of the 30% of the NT that is "authentic Jesus."

Help, somebody, please.

Jihadist, Jihadist, Jihadist,

You do make us wonder!! All that commentary and still you cannot address the the flaws and errors (some would say muck and stench) of crumbling, "why bother" Islam.

Once again the "fems" of your hallucinogenic-based religion:

1. Belief in "pretty/ugly wingie, flying, talking, fictional thingies".

2. Belief that an hallucinating, illiterate Arab did actually talk to the "pretty Gabriel" in the hot "Gabe" cave and therein received the warmongering and anti-female words and resultant laws now listed in the koran.

3. That Sunnis are superior to Shiites in all aspects of life. And Shiites think the same way about Sunnis.

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

Liora,

There is no archeological evidence that the Moses of the OT ever existed. The scribes who wrote the OT, embellished many old Jewish tales/legends/myths to fit their concept of Monad and to keep the general tribal communities in line with oral tradition/guilt.

The trails/trials of Noah, Abraham, Job and Moses were concepts for tribal nomads/peasants/
shepherds/ordinary folk living in the age of illiteracy, short life spans, hardships, diseases, and "dirt poor" living conditions. Mankind has advanced and these concepts although wise for the ages, are not historical.

The evolutionary process continues with contributions from the historical "standouts" e.g. Egyptians, Greeks, Babylonians, Buddha, John the Baptist, Jesus' biographers, Paul, the NT scribes, Constantine, Gandhi, the Dalai Lama, Schillebeeckx, the Jesus Seminar, Crossan et al, Mother Theresa, and the Hubble Telescope et al.

From simpletoremember.com/vitals/ConservativeTorah.htm

"New Torah For Modern Minds

Abraham, the Jewish patriarch, probably never existed. Nor did Moses. The entire Exodus story as recounted in the Bible probably never occurred. The same is true of the tumbling of the walls of Jericho. And David, far from being the fearless king who built Jerusalem into a mighty capital, was more likely a provincial leader whose reputation was later magnified to provide a rallying point for a fledgling nation.

Such startling propositions -- the product of findings by archaeologists digging in Israel and its environs over the last 25 years -- have gained wide acceptance among non-Orthodox rabbis. But there has been no attempt to disseminate these ideas or to discuss them with the laity -- until now.

The United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism, which represents the 1.5 million Conservative Jews in the United States, has just issued a new Torah and commentary, the first for Conservatives in more than 60 years. Called ''Etz Hayim'' (''Tree of Life'' in Hebrew), it offers an interpretation that incorporates the latest findings from archaeology, philology, anthropology and the study of ancient cultures. To the editors who worked on the book, it represents one of the boldest efforts ever to introduce into the religious mainstream a view of the Bible as a human rather than divine document. "

Just pushing buttons, Dan - everyone is so serious on here.

As for relativism, I would say that this would work as a definition:

Equal Validity: "there are many radically different, yet "equally valid" ways of knowing the world.

The plain fact is that when you make too much of your religious beliefs in public to people who do not share them, then it can become obnoxious. I personally hold this kind of show as rude and pretentious.

Everybody cannot shove their religion down everyone else's throats; it just would not work; it just would not. And "yes but..." is a ludicrous reply and defense...yes, but mine is right and theirs is wrong...for everyone is entitled to say that.

The point is, that there is such a thing as respect, RESPECT, which should trump all else, and if you put your speculative religious beliefs above respect for other human beings, then don't expect any in return. That is the plain long and short of it.

Speed123, you don't get the repect for your religious beliefs that you think you are entitled to. But the fact is, that you are entitled to as much respect as you extend to others, and that is not much. Above and beyond that, your sense of entitlement is misplaced, and a little arrogant.

Here's another stupidity from Catholicism. Jose Rizal was right when he said that this church is weak and ignorant.

The Holy Child

There was only one account in the Bible which told of Jesus as a child or as a little boy. That was when his earthly parents, Mary and Joseph, lost Him in Jerusalem but later found Him in the temple 3 days later. That was the only time when Jesus' story as a young boy at twelve was told. He didn't remain a young boy and yet you would see many images of Him as a young boy displayed in many Roman Catholic establishments and churches. At first, one would wonder why does this church try to immortalize the little boy image of Jesus when in fact He grew up to be an adult and really started His ministry as a grown up man. The answer is not to fully glorify the Lord but to include His "mother" in the whole picture. The real message of the image is not just Jesus but "don't forget the Mother" or "the Mother is greater than the child" or " go to the Mother to reach the child". The message is very subtle and yet very powerful. Truly, a work of a genius. Not surprising because after all, it's the work of the devil.

In John 14:6, Jesus said "I am the Way, the Truth and the Life. No man cometh unto the Father but by Me." It's a simple verse and yet many religions fail in this commandment. Thru this verse, Jesus wants to make it clear that He wants every believer to have a direct relationship with Him --- a one-on-one relationship.

False religion counter this message by putting priests or some other "holy" person between Him and us or by putting Mary between Him and us or by teaching its flock to pray to the Apostles to reach Him. Remember, the Spirit of Jesus Christ resides to every believer. He can read our thoughts and prayers even before we say them. This idea of praying to Mary so the Lord will hear us is pure fiction and is just one of the devil's inventions.The act of praying to somebody other than Jesus Christ is a self declaration of how far a person is from the Lord.

In Heaven, there is no "Holy Child". What everyone will see is the Almighty Holy God. And just as from the beginning of time there is no "mother" in the background.

Here's more of their stupidity. Jose Rizal was right. They really don't use their brains.

Mary, The Queen Of Heaven

Many Roman Catholics , if not all, believe that Mary is the "Queen of Heaven". The idea may have originated from the fact that since Jesus came from her womb, therefore she is the "Mother of God" and henceforth the "Queen of Heaven".

Many Roman Catholic beliefs are false because many of them are based on wrong presumptions. Here are the reasons why Mary is not the Mother of God.

First, God is eternal. He has no source and has no ending. God created Mary and it should remain that way. The devil wants to turn it around and voila ! God now has a mother. The Eternal God is now under the "dictates" of a "mother".

The Almighty God will judge us purely by our own merits and not by how the "mother" will intercede for us. The real question is " what is our relationship with God and God alone?" Forget about Mary. Like us she will have her own appointment with God.

In II Corinthians 5:10, Apostle Paul said, "For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ..." .

The phrase "we must all" pertains to him (Paul), us and certainly Mary also. As what the Parable of the Ten Virgins suggests, she too can't share her oil. It means that she cannot intercede.

Second, the Spirit of Jesus Christ existed even before Mary was born. In John 8:57-58, it says " Then said the Jews unto Him, thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham? Jesus said unto them, verily, verily, I say unto you, before Abraham was, I am. "

In Colossians 1:17 Paul said " And He is before all things, and by Him all things consist."

Not only He was before Abraham, He was also before the existence of the universe and the creator of it as well.

To give us a glimpse of His power, Apostle John described his encounter with Jesus in Heaven in Revelation 1:16-17 " ... His countenance was as the sun shineth in His strength. And when I saw Him, I fell at His feet as dead."

Mary is really only one of the children of God and to distort this order by making her the Mother of God is just pure blasphemy.

This "Queen of Heaven" Doctrine is really not new. In the time of the prophet Jeremiah, the people of Israel worshipped her. In Jeremiah 7:18, God said " The children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead their dough, to make cakes to the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto other gods, that they may provoke me to anger."

In verse 20, He continues "... behold, mine anger and my fury shall be poured out upon this place..."

Thirdly, Jesus never called Mary as mother. He called her "woman". (John 2:4 , John 19:26)
.
Surely, there must be a reason why He didn't call her mother and that is simply because she is not His mother. In one instance, when somebody told Jesus that His mother was looking for Him, He insultingly replied, " Who is my mother? " (Matthew 12:48)

I wonder how many times the Lord will have to ask this question for people to wake up from their trance. It's a pity that everytime a person prays the rosary, He's not only doing a vain act of repetitious prayer but in so doing, he also invites the anger and fury of God. If they'll finally meet God face to face, I doubt if they will hear that question again if they will mention her name in His presence or would it be the painful parting words "depart from me, ye cursed into everlasting fire". I hope not, and I hope they will listen.

Speed123

I think that the fact that you are 25 is shown somewhat in the thoughtlessness of your comments, as though you have discovered everything, and already know more than anyone else, or the rest of us. But I know, someday, you will realize what a silly young guy you are, and probably be a little embarrassed at all the silly things that you have said.

When you talk about "relativism" it is obvious that is something that you have learned from that Catholic Church, that it is some kind of bad influence in the world to be battled and obstructed. When, in reality, there is no such "ism" as relativism, but merely a different way of looking at things, through eyes that are not Catholic eyes; I would hardly call such a thing as point of view, or perspective an "ideology." To you, this is a very real threat, a real force, but to others, it is just common sense, as common and ordinary as the air we breathe. Never having worried about the threat of "relativism," I can scarcely think to know what it really is, that you think is terrible, and so bad.

I asked you before to tell me what relativism is, but you just shushed, me, saying that you knew I already knew.

CCNL Writes to Pat:

How is ""Religious myths and superstitions started with the ancients e.g. Hittites, Babylonians, Egyptians. Judaism simply embraced these myths and superstition and wove them into their "monogod" view around 900 BC" a bigoted statement. It is history. Are the 1.5 million Conservative Jews who would give the same answer also bigoted???

CCNL:

Serena answered you, so there is no point in my doing it. I am one of those who "tried to teach you gently" (Serena), discussing "The Tree of Life," the text to which you refer when you mention the 1.5 million.

As I explained then, while also discussing the various authors of the Tanakh and NT, there are essays appended to the Chumash. That is all. (As well, these secular scholarly essays do not include all that I would have, but I guess that is beside the point.)

Main point which has been repeated ad nauseum: the traditional Talmudic commentary remains in the Chumash. There appears to be no way to integrate the secular essays into services, at least according to the Conservative Egalitarian Rabbi (politically to the left of yours truly, the unobservant,who is pretty far left) to whose synagogue I occasionally go.

Second Main Point: Is the offensive quote from some book you have read? I am one of the 1.5 million who has never uttered such words, only because as S pointed out, they are simplistic, reductive, silly, erroneous, and, yes, bigoted, and as I have told you, I am no literalist. How do you "weave man-gods into an abstraction?" I have never heard these words uttered by anyone other than you. I haven't seen them verbatim in print.

Now, let's move on to the "Tablet-Man" (sic), about whom Serena writes. (Where is ILan when one needs him?)

I, too, would suggest you come up with another offensive comment. (Also, the hyphen is erroneous in that construction.) Otherwise, if Ilan doesn't, I will begin inquiring about "Jesus the Water Skier of New Testament Fame."

That is, unless you want to.

Pat quite right, and as a Jew, I thank her. You owe Serena an apology.

Ps. Are you certain that 30% of the NT is authentic Jesus?

Some say it is 26.8%, others 31.5%. Contemporary secular scholars continue to debate his existence, possibly putting the figure at zero.

Speed123 :

"Catholics battle against such widespread injustice - whether it is in regards to economic issues or immigration, OR abortion. Nothing if not consistent."

I agree they do in Latin America and Asia. Including the Philippines where Catholic priests and nuns also led the people against the corrupt Marcos regime. And the Vatican are against the legitimate social activism for social justice as espoused by the Latin American liberation theologists.

It was the Vatican's ban on contraceptions the led to over-population in the Philippines and Latin American countries causing migration to the developed west too. One find Filipinos everywhere in the world. And lots of Hispanics in the US.

China (mostly secular), India (mostly Hindu) and Indonesia (mostly Muslim) are the first, second and fourth highest populated countries in the world. But all practice family planning (including using contraceptions) to manage population growth, the most extreme being China with its one child policy where some parents do resort to abortions if the baby scanned are females.

One do find Indians and Chinese everywhere in the world, but stats shows that their percentage of population increase is less than some Catholic majority coutries in the developing world.

Yes, it is quite consistently responsible and humane to discourage contraceptions for family planning, and to encourage states to allow immigrations in their countries from societies that are not allowed contraceptions.

Are states and societies which practiced family planning and allow contraceptions to be used to be responsible for accepting people from societies that don't?

And is overpopulation a detriment to the enviroment and consumption of resources?

Honestly, some of what Pope Benedict 16 said seems inconsistent to me. I find Pope John Paul II more consistent and easier to grasp on his pronouncements.

Perhaps when the Muslim-Catholic dialogue happens later this year, we should encourage the Vatican to take a slightly more omnibus approach on life -what Muslims meant when they say Islam is a whole way of life. Meaning, to see everything as inter-related and intertwined, one aspect affecting and interconnected with others in this world - politics, economics, social values. All affect us, our rights, our environment.

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

Spiderman2:

"Jose Rizal, the Philippine National hero said these words referring to Catholicism : " The wild man from the hills, if clad in a priest's robe, remains a hillman and can only deceive the weak and ignorant."

Ohhhh.....

I am dying to know where the Pope got his shoes from, who are his tailors, his haberdashers, where he sourced the materials for his attires. He is, one of the ten best dressed fellows in the world. Very replesdant looking chap.

And whoever said Armani or Prada clad businessmen and politicians are not barbaric and decieve us more? Read the political and business sections of the newspapers too. You will see how many and how often they deceived the weak and ignorant.

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

Just a Comment:

Why do I think that you are really Norrie Hoyt? I do recognise his sense of humour, and "firm and level tones" to borrow from Hitchens:)

Got to go. Been a pleasure.

Cheers
"J"

Pat,

How is ""Religious myths and superstitions started with the ancients e.g. Hittites, Babylonians, Egyptians. Judaism simply embraced these myths and superstition and wove them into their "monogod" view around 900 BC" a bigoted statement. It is history. Are the 1.5 million Conservative Jews who would give the same answer also bigoted???

Lest all of the aging baby-boomers on here forget - myself being a young buck of 25 ;) - there is a difference between "authority" and "authoritarian."

The 60's are over people.....

PS - relativism in regards to morality/theology also leads to relativism in natural sciences - constructivism etc:

Equal Validity: "there are many radically different, yet "equally valid" ways of knowing the world, with science being just one of them"

Ironic that Jacoby and many posters on this board support an ideology that, in the end, comes back undermine the foundation of their own arguments...

ha!

CCNL:

Thank you for your reply. Do you intentionally miss the point of what people write to you?

What you wrote on Mr. Patel's site, what Serena specifically referred to in her quotes was B.I.G.O.T.E.D., in a big way.

Did you even bother to process the content of what she said on her posts here and on Mr. Patel's site?

What is it that you are cognitively, emotionally, and spiritually missing? You owe her, and a lot of other people an apology.

To me, religion can be only personal, personal, alone, and can operate in my mind and heart in no other way than in a personal way. All else is political, and rooted in political motivations, and becomes more and more about how to maniputlate the power levers of the world to make things come out according to some previously conceived idea or plan, the farthest thing in the world from what I think of, myself, personally, when I think of my own relgious belief.

But of course, the Pope, must defy what it is to hold a personal faith, because nothing about Catholicism is personal, but it is instead, a top-down imposed theology, that you must, or at least, ought to belief, and there must therefore be many political tools for accomplishing this goal of imposing the the theology upon the people who must, or who ought to believe it.

This way of thinking is incomplatible with a diverse and pluralistic society where there are bound to be many, many relgions, all operating and interacting together, and only brings conflict and dissension if pushed to its logical conclusiion, which would be extreme.

But he is, of course the Pope, and the duties of his office obligate him to say these things, and to think this way.

To Karen Matthews, you wrote:

"If the Catholic Church was founded by Christ for this sole purpose, then it's the duty of the Church to warn all people, not just Catholic, that their practice of abortion (killing innocent human beings), embryonic stem cell research(ditto), and birth control (the pill may cause an abortion by preventing the fertilized egg from attaching to the womb) puts their eternal salvation in dire jeopardy."

I don't know if this is true or not. But why instead of promoting the prohibition of birth control the RCC requests that condoms and pills be sold with a warning, something like:

The spiritual surgeon general warns that this product may be harmful for your supernatural health in the afterlife. Consume it at your own risk.

Similar warning could be implemented for other dangerous practices.

Peace and the best for all,

JAC

Arminius wrote "I live in Georgia."

Don't you think that is the greatest insult to Georgia?

Anonymous,

I live in Georgia. Please do not insult our rednecks by including Spidey in their number! (LOL)

The countries you mentioned have false religions too but I think Catholicism is the worst coz they not only over populate, they produce extortionist rebels too. They breed fast and then kill each other fast too. WHAT A CYCLE.

Hello Mary Cunningham :)

Always a pleasure to see you in any thread.

Yes "potted" take on history indeed by me. I prefer the word irreverent as I don't smoke, I don't drink, I don't do drugs. How much more boring can one get?

Thanks for the reminder that the other sons of the aristocrats also join the military as an option. They made much more mess there as you pointed out. The Charge of the Light Brigade immediately comes to mind.

As for William the Conqueror, a.k.a. William the Bastard, were earls also not said to be the result of the union of a king and a flower girl?

Don't forget some of the Borgias, including the one said to be the model for Machiavelli's "The Prince". Bastards resulting of kings and flower girls unions, as well as of Popes with aristocratic ladies who turn use military means injected with doses of religion to expand their power make interesting chaos to their advantage.

When it comes to combinations of bastards, religion and military means to expand power, no one can beat the Ottomans of Turkey. They are all bastards, biologically, militarily and in religion. Except for Suleiman, the Great, so said the west, and the Lawgiver, so said the Turks. And yet, he still ordered one of his sons to be killed.

The Ottomans actually do kill other sons of a former Sultan to avoid challenges to the throne, even those under five years old. The stories, almost footnotes in history, of how some members of a Sultan's harem and even his own mother tried to save some sons from being killed is of great interest to me. A favourite horror story is of paranoid, misogynistic Sultan ordering the drowning of his whole harem in the Bosphorus, some almost 200 of them.

Our aristocrats are very naughty people - regarded as either demi-gods or semi-devils, or both in Asia as defenders of faith, people and country. A law unto themselves and above the law. So they think by the way they act in history until so-called Constitutional monarchy comes into being.

No one would wonder why Kemal Ataturk do way with the monarchy and secularised Turkey after the reign of the Ottomans.

Thanks and best regards

"J"

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

Hello Jeff P,

Thanks for your post.

I'm absorbing and thinking about what you posted.

There is a lot more reprehensible things happening in Asia due to traditions, religion and state policies/ideologies than reported and as one example quoted by you here. Only thing in common - asserting or forcing power.

The combination of religion with civil power as enforcements or persecutions is a very lethal combination still. But living in Asia, with North Korea, China, Myanmar quite near and hard to ignore, ideologies such as communism/socialism which happens to be non-religious can sometimes be more reprehensible. The brutal repression of Tibetan monks by China is the latest such combinations of power and intolerant and repressive non-religious ideology.

Thanks for the tip on the book, "Philosophers Without Gods". I'll look up who wrote it and where I can get a copy.

Cheers

"J"

PS - Mr. Redneck webslinger,

Where are the largest population "explosions" in the world?

Answer: India, China and Indonesia....although you probably don't know where they are located on a map.

Do you think these are Catholic countries...?

Was spiderman2 one of the rednecks on the street in NYC with "catholics burn in hell" banners?

I hope so!

Here's more of that stupidity.

Jose Rizal, the Philippine National hero said these words referring to Catholicism : " The wild man from the hills, if clad in a priest's robe, remains a hillman and can only deceive the weak and ignorant."

He claims that Catholics are weak and ignorant. What can you say Anthony? One has to listen to shed away ignorance, you know.

His message? USE YOUR BRAIN . Plain and simple.

Immaculate Conception

This is a Roman Catholic teaching which, according to the definition (1854) of Pope Pius IX, maintains that " the most blessed Virgin Mary, in the first instant of her conception, was, by the singular grace and privilege of Almighty God, through the foreseen merits of Christ Jesus the Saviour of mankind, preserved immune from all stain of original sin." The doctrine concerns Mary's conception in her mother's womb, and is not to be confused with the virginal conception and birth of Christ.

Rebuttal :

Simply put, Immaculate Conception is a Roman Catholic belief thru the declaration of Pope Pius IX that Mary was conceived sinless from her mother's womb and immune from sin throughout her earthly life.

This declaration of course has no scriptural backing. Not only does it contradicts the teachings of the apostles and the prophets, it also contradicts the words of Mary herself. In Luke 1:46-47, it says " And Mary said, my soul doth magnify the Lord and my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour".

All sinners need a Savior and Mary is no exception, otherwise, she would not call God as her Savior.

Concerning this kind of doctrines which has no biblical support, let us hear what God had said : "Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men " (Mark 7:7 ).

Today, billions of people around the world are worshipping God in vain because they follow false doctrines which are purely commandments of some "holy" people.

A century ago, Jose Rizal (the Philippine national hero), warned his people from one of these false churches and its false teachings particularly the nation's practiced religion (Catholicism). Once again let's be reminded of what he said : " The wild man from the hills, if clad in a priest's robe, remains a hillman and can only deceive the weak and ignorant."

I believe all this catholic stand against abortion and contraception is not about "holiness" but more of their true father's (the devil) catholic cycle scheme.

THE CATHOLIC CYCLE

In one third world country where population explosion has become a major problem, Catholic chapels or centers offer free operation to untie the fallopian tubes of mothers after indoctrinating them that it's a SIN.

This devilish Church invent their own doctrines so parents would produce more children despite their abject poverty. With more extra children, they are forced to raise them with no proper education and decent meals and most of all, no future.

They then teach these poor people that their government is the cause of their poverty due to corruption but lo and behold those same government personnel are usually "devout catholics".

Some revolt (with the church's help of course) which cause more poverty and this has become a "CATHOLIC CYCLE" which I presume is routinely duplicated around the world.

To escape poverty, many go abroad adding more economic pressure to their countries of destination.

I think Jacoby is finally coming around!

Surprisingly good-natured article....perhaps Susan has been reading some Benedict XVI ;)

That being said, the competition of ideas in the public square is not for "power" over people/souls - it is to fight for justice and many people see the violence of abortion as an injustice on a vast scale. Surely you can concede this point?

Also, you say that "Power, by contrast, is exercised collectively." What about injustice? Is this not also exercised on the collectively?

How does one combat injustice at this level - through collective action?

Catholics battle against such widespread injustice - whether it is in regards to economic issues or immigration, OR abortion. Nothing if not consistent.

We also battle against the prison of the "hermitage of the self" that Susan advocates in the last paragraphs.

"some people tend to think that any politician who mentions his faith is automatically a theocrat dedicated to destroying the wall of separation between Church and state. I think that what Pope Benedict was concerned about."

While Benedict's objection is valid, only a tiny minority of extremists subscribe to such thinking. The vast majority of church-state separation advocates take the more reasonable position, which is that faith should not be a justification for making or changing secular laws. And that is exactly what the religious right has done for a generation - its positions on issues are based on its claim that it know the will of a god and must impose that will through the force of law. There is no problem with a politician simply mentioning his faith, as long as the politician makes secular arguments for his positions on issues.

Mr. Mark wrote: "Let's make a deal: every time a politician mentions his faith, he must also mention something based in reality, preferably a scientifically informed opinion."

Thank you, Mr. Mark, for making my point more clearly than I ever could have...

I'm not quite sure what private and public mean in this context. Religion has to be private in the sense of 'personally believed'. No one ought to be afraid to make their views on religion public. Atheists are showing very little reluctance to publicise their views these days, thank God. On the other hand no one ought to be compelled to make a public statement of personal belief. Yet again, people have the right to give their religion as a reason for something they want done - though this involves the risk that others will say 'that is not a reason that means anything to us'. The right to reject someone else's relgion as a reason for action is part of the right to make one's own different views on religion public.

Robert B writes:

"Yes, but some people tend to think that any politician who mentions his faith is automatically a theocrat dedicated to destroying the wall of separation between Church and state."

Let's make a deal: every time a politician mentions his faith, he must also mention something based in reality, preferably a scientifically informed opinion.

Any takers?

Tonio wrote: "No one is saying that faith shouldn't permeate every aspect of an American Christian's life. What "private matter" means is that no one religion should be the default religion, either in American government or American society. Only when both are secular can individual Americans truly have freedom to worship or to not."

Yes, but some people tend to think that any politician who mentions his faith is automatically a theocrat dedicated to destroying the wall of separation between Church and state. I think that what Pope Benedict was concerned about.

G.K. Chesterton once wrote "Religious liberty might be supposed to mean that everybody is free to discuss religion. In practice it means that hardly anybody is allowed to mention it." I think that's certainly true in the U.S. today among certain otherwise rational people...

Susan:

Your comment that it would have been more honest for Pope Benedict to say: "To the extent that religion becomes a purely private matter, it loses its political power," is way off the mark. It may seem that way to outsiders who see the Catholic Church as a force to be reckoned with, but the whole purpose of the Catholic Church is to save as many souls as possibly - to get them to heaven and keep them out of hell. If the Catholic Church was founded by Christ for this sole purpose, then it's the duty of the Church to warn all people, not just Catholic, that their practice of abortion (killing innocent human beings), embryonic stem cell research(ditto), and birth control (the pill may cause an abortion by preventing the fertilized egg from attaching to the womb) puts their eternal salvation in dire jeopardy. So the Church is being charitable towards people who are outside it by warning them of this danger. The Church Hierarchy will be held accountable if they don't warn people about this by Christ - so they have to do it. It is also a justice issue. It is unjust that innocent human beings loose their lives through abortion.

Jacoby wrote "Benedict also meant something else--that the Catholic Church in the United States will continue to try to impose its values on non-Catholics..." Does she know this for a fact, or is she drawing a conclusion based on the history of the Church and Benedict's previous statements? If it's the latter, the conclusion is a reasonable one.

No one is saying that faith shouldn't permeate every aspect of an American Christian's life. What "private matter" means is that no one religion should be the default religion, either in American government or American society. Only when both are secular can individual Americans truly have freedom to worship or to not.

The problem is not the Church's specific stances on abortion and stem-cell research, or whether there are any legitimate secular arguments for those stances. The problem is whether the Church seeks to have its stances enacted into American secular law, based on nothing more than the institution's claim that it possesses absolute truth. The Church could take the opposite stances on those issues and the problem would be the same.

Pat,

Hmmm, a catholic since childhood? Ditto that one.

Finally retired and got some time to review/study/read about many questions that bothered me since my Breeding, Birth and Brainwashing in Catholicism. What questions? Transubstantiation, original sin, limbo, and the real story of the OT and NT as starters.

A summary posted many times:

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

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

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

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

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

3.Luther, Calvin, Smith, Henry VIII, Wesley et al, founders of Christian-based religions, also suffered from the belief in/hallucinations of "pretty wingie thingie" visits and "prophecies" for profits analogous to the myths of Catholicism (original sin, limbo, resurrections, apparitions, ascensions and immaculate conceptions).

And much of this synopsis has been substantiated by a good friend who is Catholic and teaches graduate Catholic theology at a large Catholic university.

Serena wrote:

"Even persons who deem themselves "liberated," exploders of myths, remain corrupted."

I read your comment on Eboo Patel's post, and the full text of CCNL's "words of enlightenment." They do not follow sequentially. To get to your first post, evidently the one that provoked his, one must scroll down a bit. Also, I read your reply to CCNL.

In fairness, one cannot entirely blame the Catholic church for his thinking. His so-called liberation may also play a part, as may his own character, which is clearly narrow minded and self-righteous. Anyone who has read this blog, even from time to time, knows this.

As a practicing Catholic since childhood, I have never even thought in ways suggested by his post.

'The Second Coming'

Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all convictions, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.

Surely some revelation is at hand;
Surely the Second Coming is at hand.
The Second Coming! Hardly are those words out
When a vast image ouf of Spiritus Mundi
Troubles my sight;somewhere in sands of the desert
A shape with lion body and the head of a man,
A gaze blank and pitiless as the sun
Is moving its slow thighs, whie all about it
Reel shadows of the indignant desert birds,
The darkness drops again; but now I know
That twenty centuries of stony sleep
Were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle,
And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?

William Butler Yeats

After having read these two posts, if interested, you can scroll up a bit to ready my reply to his words of enlightenment.

MARYCUNNINGHAM:

“Church and state in feudal times was completely separate and the Church often acted as a check against the more vicious tendency of the nobility cf Thomas a Becket at Canterbury. The three estates--nobility, monarchy and Church--jostled for power amongst themselves. As the monarchy dominated, centralization of power led to tyranny--whether Tudor or Bourbon it matters not--and finally to civil war and revolution.”

First of all, we must differentiate between Catholic Europe and Orthodox Europe. In the Eest, I would disagree that they were totally separate. Note that after Becket’s murder, Henry II had to make a humiliating pilgrimage to ask the pope’s forgiveness. The Church did wield considerable temporal power, directly, as well. Three of the seven Grand Electors of the Holy Roman Empire, for example, were Prince-Archbishops, and many territories were directly governed by abbots, bishops, and the like, and as head of state for the Papal States, the pope was also a significant player in international affairs.

In the East, the Orthodox Churches were strongly under the direction of the ruler on the model of the late Roman/Byzantine Empire, who appointed and could remove the patriarchs.

There were constant struggles between the various estates, yes, though the Church was just as likely to be the source of tyranny as a check, just as the ruling class and monarchs could be.

In the end, in a hierarchical organization like the Church, the pope’s main concern is as much the preservation of the Church’s power over his believers, and his clergy, and over everyone else, as it is teaching the religious doctrines of his faith. This is required of him if he truly believes he is God’s representative on earth as his Church teaches. This is why every non-Catholic should be vigorously protesting his claims that religion should play a greater part in public affairs. This is why every rational person should object to the interjection of religious authority in public life.

Who chooses which version of faith to impose on the public? I don’t want George Bush or the pope to choose for me.

It would take generations upon generations for the world to rid itself of the damage done by powerful organized religions, the damage done to nations, and to the souls of those who participate in their bureaucracies.

Even persons who deem themselves "liberated," exploders of myths, remain corrupted.

Here is an excerpt from a short comment by CCNL in reply to one of mine, read only by him as threatening. Go to Eboo Patel's post, scroll down
a bit to read the CCNL's full comment, which immediately follows my own.

"Religious myths and superstitions started with the ancients e.g. Hittites, Babylonians, Egyptians. Judaism simply embraced these myths and superstition and wove them into their "monogod" view around 900 BC."

J--
thanks for your response. I'll have to digest it slowly, as there's a lot of history there.

I've just completed a biography of Martin Luther, and the complexity of the relationships among the clergy and the government leadership of the 1500s seems mind-boggling to me at times. There were all the complexities of who-you-know and all the pressures to be politically correct with the powers-that-be, it seemed to be not much different than today's very human interactions.

I've also just completed Carl Sagan's "Demon-Haunted World" that, toward the end, gives an account of witch-hunting by a Catholic (renegade) who, himself later being ostracized, wrote out against the practice itself with a measure of reason that was probably very dangerous for the times. In it, he described the very complex situation that came about as a result of group hysteria, and the political powers and church leadership positions that propogated it en mass.

And then I read this headline in today's news from MSNBC:

"PATNA, India - Indian police want a museum to display the head of a woman decapitated after she was accused of practicing witchcraft, hoping it will be a lesson for those who persecute innocent women.
A villager in the country's eastern Jharkhand state attacked the woman and chopped off her head at the weekend, apparently because he suspected her of being to blame for deaths in the family, police said. He then walked into the nearest police station holding the severed head."

Susan's new book is Age of American Unreason, and I wonder if there will ever be a point in our American, if not world politics, that we as a species can agree upon fundamental, baseline human life-value.

Honestly, it's not the history of church/politics that seem to me to be most pressing (although it certainly is a catalyst for many reactions), but I sometimes wonder if we will all go the way of all civilizations of history--to oblivion--if humans don't come to have some shared vision of the equal and shared value of human life.

I'm reading a work called "Philosophers Without Gods" that is very un-HitchinsHarrisDawkinsDennett, that I think you'd enjoy, that I'd love your take on if you get the chance.

Jeff

Indeed, Yeats is hard to beat - a great poet and a true mystic with a wife that was psychic on the order of an Eileen Garrett. Superb at automatic writing and conversations with the dead - hardly the stuff that the Catholic Church would be raving about, I think. The Irish are a mixed lot.

You'd have to dig up William Blake to get close to Yeats for mystical visions of the divine.

Larkin--that miserable git! Not to diss PL's fans but try Yeats "The Cold Heaven. Or this:

To be Carved On A Stone At Thoor Ballylee
by William Butler Yeats

I, THE poet William Yeats,
With old mill boards and sea-green slates,
And smithy work from the Gort forge,
Restored this tower for my wife George;
And may these characters remain
When all is ruin once again.

Great stuff, eh? The old, the new, the ruin, the marriage; the great cycle of birth death ruin and rebirth. Great antidote to gloomy Larkin.

Oh there "Reality Challenged" and Obfuscating Jihadist,

Wow, two commentaries already and again nothing about Islam and its power struggles through the use of oil profits woven with Islamic ideals via the spread of said religion with fear and terror. Talk about a religion that needs to go private!!!

Aubade

I work all day, and get half drunk at night.
Waking at four to soundless dark, I stare.
In time the curtain edges will grow light.
Till then I see what's really always there;
Unresting death, a whole day nearer now,
Making all thought impossible but how
And where and when I shall myself die.
And interrogation: yet the dread
Of dying and being dead,
Flashes afresh to hold and horrify.

The mind blanks at the glare. Not in remorse
- The good not used, the love not given, time
Torn off unused - nor wretchedly because
An only life can take so long to climb
Clear of its wrong beginnings, and may never:
But at the total emptiness forever,
The sure extinction that we travel to
And shall be lost in always. Not to be here,
Not to be anywhere,
And soon, nothing more terrible, nothing more true.

There is a special way of being afraid
No trick dispels. Religion used to try,
That vast moth-eaten musical brocade
Created to pretend we never die
And specious stuff that says no rational being
Can fear a thing it cannot feel, not seeing
that this is what we fear - no sight. nor sound,
No touch or taste or smell, nothing to think with,
Nothing to love or link with,
The anaesthetic from which none come round.

And so it stays just on the edge of vision,
A small unfocused blur, a standing chill
That slows each impulse down to indecision
Most things may never happen: this one will.
And realisation of it rages out
In furnace fear when we are caught without
People or drink. Courage is no good:
It means not scaring others. Being brave
Lets no-one off the grave.
Death is no different whined at than withstood.

Slowly light strengthens, and the room takes shape
It stands plain as a wardrobe, what we know,
Have always known, know that we can't escape
Yet can't accept. One side will have to go.
Meanwhile telephones crouch, getting ready to ring
In locked-up offices, and all the uncaring
Intricate rented world begins to rouse.
The sky is white as clay, with no sun.
Work has to be done.
Postmen like doctors go from house to house.

Philip Larkin 1922 - 1985.

Just not as we know it. The growing dominance of the monarchy (divine right of kings and all that) put paid to the system. Also a series of plagues, the first Black Death ironically a 'symptom' of growing prosperity, the direct result of increased trade with Asia.

On another matter, wonder how long this will last before JJ spams it and shuts it down?

Well, J., I'm sure your Asian history is excellent but your last is a terrible potted rendition of European. Would excess sons of the nobility only entered the Church! They would have done a lot less harm.

They generally looked towards more militaristic 'enterprises' and tended to invade neighbouring fiefdoms. The Norman Conquests (of various places including the Holy Land) involved second, third & fourth sons. Before the Battle of Hastings, William the Conqueror was called William the Bastard--well, wouldn't you have invaded if that was your epithet?

Re: Ms Jacoby's article:

Church and state in feudal times was completely separate and the Church often acted as a check against the more vicious tendency of the nobility cf Thomas a Becket at Canterbury. The three estates--nobility, monarchy and Church--jostled for power amongst themselves. As the monarchy dominated, centralization of power led to tyranny--whether Tudor or Bourbon it matters not--and finally to civil war and revolution.

Hello Jeff P,

You : "Susan I've often wondered how the RCC has become the perpetual machine that it is, and have understood the interpretation by the laity that it has existed and grown precisely because of it's status as the "true church" with an even-handed support from the Creator of the Universe".

Good to see you in this quiet thread thus far and an opportunity for a really subjective look at history and now on centralised organisation etc.

Of course it is about power over the masses in one way or another. How to get it and how to retain it. As for our times, just as is was during pre-gun days, Mao is right, power comes from the barrel of a gun (or any sort of weapons). Weapons/guns do greatly "help" impose ideology and control over people and countries.

Weapons' role in imposing power is obvious, but dependent on people who wield them and why they want to take up arms to advance their power. This is the fun part. What sort of person want to impose his will, his beliefs, his objectives over people and realms and why?

In reading European history, one is struck by the fact that many sons and daughters of aristocrats joined the Church as members of the clergy (priests and nuns). The first born sons are the ones who inherited their father's titles and estates, and other sons finds joining the Church an option.

As for daughters of aristocrats, one do read of some joining it to avoid getting married at all, or a way out of getting married to sorts picked by their parents that they don't personally take to. Some were sent to cool off their feisty behavior. Oh, those uncontroabble wenches and uppity viragos!

Dukes were and addressed as His Grace, some higher ranking clergy's are likewise. What are the chances such preceding titles of ennoblements like His Majesty, His Holiness, His Grace, His Excellency etc could only be thought of by those from aristocratic families?

So, we can mischieviously surmise then that frustrated sons of the aristoctats also use the church to get even in coming up with a supra religious-political state with authority over their siblings given titles and lands by their fathers.

What better place for the second, third, fourth and so on sons of aristocrats to be in an organisation to articulate their ambitions and flex their power and impose their vision and mission over the masses and realms? They may not have an army, but they certainly can rouse people to fight their wars against their perceived and identified enemies of their authority, including witches. And they don't even have to directly fight too. Just to rile up and send off the masses to wage real battles, wars and actual persecutions of "enemies".

But, the power has now morphed from Holy Roman Empire to a Catholic "commonwealth", in some ways like the British Commonwealth - one that shifted from British Empire of colonised states in the Caribbean, Africa and Asia to the British-led Commonwealth of independent former British colonies. Not voluntarily mind you. The people fought against the central authority of British overlordship imposed in their countries and their self-determination.

The Commonwealth, as an organisation, recognise the British sovereign as head of it. Of course, in some former British colonies, the British sovereign is recognised as head of state, including Australia, Canada, New Zealand some other assorted Carribean and Pacific island states. She also appoints based in country governor-generals to represent her authority.

One can only remembers Her Majesty as head of the Commonwealth when there is a Commonwealth Heads of Governments Meetings and the Commonwealth Games which she attends, makes a speech or two on the Commonwealth vision and mission, meets Commonwealh heads of governments and heads of states. Of course, the former British colonies, thought members of the Commonwealth, are independent and increasingly so of their former political master on matters pertaining to their domestic and international policies.

Whatever joint policies and actions in the name of the Commonwealth organisation is by mutual agreement of member states. In theory thought as richer members of the Commonwealth have more say and sway due to their more substantial financial contributions to the Commonwealth organisation.

Perhaps we can take the experience of what happens to the British-created Empire to British-created Commonwealth to what is happening too to the Holy Roman Empire that is now a Catholic "commonwealth". And to remember that in both cases, power is by increasingly by voluntary acknowledgement of authority and recognition of it, to agree with and to comply with it vision and mission or otherwise.

As in the British-created Commonwealth, the Catholic "commonwealth" may not be able to effectively address the expectations and concerns of people or to deal with its errant members taking independent actions not in line with its principles as members of the Commonwealth. Fiji and Pakistan with its several coups comes to mind. Zimbabwe under Mugabe is a whole different story.

What is interesting about the British-created Commonwealth is that, in response to member countries, or rather governments of member countries that do not comply with its vision and mission, the erratic and deviationist ones, is to "expel" them from the Commonwealth. Only when they "reform" accordingly will they be admitted back.

A bit of a stretch to compare British Commonwealth "expulsion" of countries with the Catholic Church Commonwealth practice of "excommunication" of members considered heretics of its vision and mission, but no other secular intergovernmental or religious organisation practice that form of formal and deliberated upon exclusions by its formal clauses or tenets of membership in the organisation.

The British Commonwealth, like the Catholic Commowealth is now seen only to have "moral" power by many of their respective members and non-members. We are hard pressed to name off-hand the President of Argentina, the Prime Minister of Japan in spite of real power they have in their respective countries, regions or the world. But of course, everyone knows who Her Majesty is as the Head of the British Commonwealth, and who His Holiness is as the Head of the Catholic Church.
Both have increasingly become symbolic rather than real powers for states and peoples - in politics for the former and in religion for the latter.

And of course, in the decades since World War II and now, regional organisations are increasing held with more importance than global ones in their ability to better meet the specific needs of members states - EU, ASEAN, SADC, Mercusor etc.

Decentralisation and specialisation is the the increasing norm as shown by the increase in and effectiveness of specialised or niched issues. Be they inter-state or global secular NGOs and intergovermental organisations, they do address issues from the environment to human rights. One look forward to see the Church form a strategic alliance with Greenpeace and World Wildlife Fund on the environment (whichever it finds more palatable) as well as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch on humans rights.

The Catholic Church has become a machine in need of retooling - in organisation, in its message, in its connection with the Catholic laity and non-Catholics. The machine, the network is there, but the message is another matter.

There is a Master of the Universe (for believers), but believers and non-believers would agree it is not any single man or organisation here on earth. Any centralised organisation and centralised authority that think otherwise is in danger of being ineffective and redundant even for its members it seek to guide, serve and protect.

We are all "protestants" of all centralised organisation and centralised authority that suffocates us in mind, body and soul.

Thanks and best regards

"J"

Susan I've often wondered how the RCC has become the perpetual machine that it is, and have understood the interpretation by the laity that it has existed and grown precisely because of it's status as the "true church" with an even-handed support from the Creator of the Universe.

However I'm more inclined to believe that the perpetual machine has been about power, with the church leadership supporting the secular puppets, and the secular puppets supporting the church hierarchy, to the ring of centuries of existence. I wonder if the perpetual truth of the RCC has historically been about weeding out skepticism, and many times converting the heathen at the point of a sword (or, at the foot of a pyre.) Is there any wonder the religion survived?

It was probably not a coincidence that protest-ism (Protestant) came about in great part by the escape of heretics from the hierarchy, most notably Martin Luther's hiding in Wartburg Castle. I wonder what would have happened if he were "caught" in the 1520s. Would he have met his end on a pyre, or been given a lifelong sentence in house-guard like Galileo?

Does anyone really think the alliance formed by American Catholic bishops with right-wing Protestant fundamentalists on value issues is sincere, sustainable and long-term?

Are they both not also competing for adherents to their respective denominations and this alliance is, perhaps, an expedient short-term one due to shared core beliefs?

Some 70 to 80 million Catholics and some 80 million Evangelicals/Protestant fundamentalists in America makes for just over half of the US population. If Evangelicals and Protestant fundamentalists are the same.

And this would be further cause for religious minorities and atheists in the US to palpitate and agitate as it is quite a strategic alliance forged for the exercise of collective power on values-related issues in the public square.

But, of course, there is also shifting alliances once one or the other found their relationship no longer expedient to their own respective objectives and agendas.

Perhaps tigers would see this collaboration as another manifestation to hasten Doomsday, or a sign of impeding Armageddon, or is an example of "stupidity".

Perhaps pussycats would see this as an example of collaborating to perpetuate "flaws" on beliefs and stance on values-related issues in the public square.

Come, pussycat, come. Go, tiger, go.
What is this thread without you both:)

Cheers

"J"