All Comments (88)

sjdmne ofadqsjew becwkg zckbq qtrlzj csxhqgz jvdwct http://www.gkdv.fdicv.com

ndgsvb ovxqgan qmycjgvn rqmxd rqupjvg opqueb ypqfvnjae

Hello! I found your beautiful site -I'm very impressed and I'm a very spiritual lady.
Thank you for having it around and God bless you both.
I've a poem that befits your beautiful site to a 'T'!
It's copywrited since I wrote it and I'm also a published poet as well.
I wrote this poem with a gospel setting but it can be actually applied to anyone as it talks about the beauty of God that can help us get through our trials in our world by giving each of us hope and strength to carry us through one day at a time.
I will sent it if you wish and you'll be so glad that I did.
By the way I'm disabled myself as well being born a preemie 54 years ago at 1pd.11 oz.
Sincerely, D. K. Heath

The white Christo-fascists who attempt to blow up abortion clinics are far more of a danger to this country than Muslims.

Eric Rudolph was never categorized, by John Ashcroft, as a domestic terrorist.

The people who want to turn this country into a theocracy with their own brand of Christian Sharia are not Muslims.

The American Taliban own the WhiteHouse.

Figures you advertise up front that any messages lacking in fulsome praise will be deleted!

Figures you advertise up front that any messages lacking in fulsome praise will be deleted!

Having just read "God is Not Great" by Christopher Hitchens, I read Sally Quinn's absurd paean to faith and was appalled. Even assuming that you can boil down the essence of all religions to “What you do not wish for youself, do not do to others,” (obviously, you can't, as Bill Drissel points out above)but let's go ahead and assume) why do we need religion for that basic and obvious standard?

And I wouldn't be so quick to "take away all of the evil that has been done in the name of religion." That evil has been done, and will continue to be done, because true believers possess the one great truth and all others are fools, heretics, lesser human beings.

Dear Sally

Since I already posted my congratulations on the first anniversary of On Faith forum 9 Nov, I won't repeat the thoughts here.

But I repeat the congratulations to you, Jon Meacham and the producer, David Waters for this genius.

I wish you and the rest of your team more Divine Impulses! It is my hope that all those who read and participate in the forum may benefit at least as much as I have.

Best wishes
Soja

I wonder if I can get a job working for Newsweek/WashPost writing about "gourmet cooking." I've been to over 10 major league stadiums, and had a hot dog in each one.

While I am glad that the co-founder of a religious blog for the Washington Post has the humility to admit her relative ignorance of religious faith, I would hope that she will continue to converse with people of faith in order to understand that faith is not mere ethics and is more than derivations from the so-called Golden Rule. Only by being in dialogue with persons of faith can she begin to perceive the transcendant aspects of a relationship with God that truly gives most believers meaning and purpose in their lives. As a United Methodist Minister and Attorney, I can attest that it is this element of faith that drove me to live in the jungles of Bolivia teaching well-digging for clean water and distributing food to AIDS orphans in Kenya. As she turns her focus from the negative aspects of religion, perhaps she will begin to see that the world would be more harsh and deadly were it not for the people of faith and their presence wherever there are people who are suffering.

Speaks volumes that a leading newspaper and leading newsmag would hire a style columnist to co-edit a religion blog

Speaks volumes that she is an atheist and, as charitably as I can put it, unacquainted with any religious doctrine.

Speaks volumes that a corporation would pay for a three-week jaunt around the world to acquaint her with religion rather than have her spend the equivalent time in one of Washington’s excellent libraries or on the Inet.

Speaks volumes that anyone would publish her vapid, superficial, “the most enlightening thing about my trip was how similar the basic tenets of all religions are.”

Real briefly,
Christian tenets: Christ is God. He became human and died for our sins. This redeemed humanity and made possible everlasting life. The Bible is the word of God.

Islamic tenets: Strict monotheism. Mohammed is God’s final prophet. The Koran is the exact words of God (in Arabic) and recorded by the Prophet. Jesus was never crucified. To believe that he was God is the worst kind of polytheism and that belief will earn the sinner an eternity of torment after death.

Hindu and Buddhist tenets: Reincarnation. Actions in this life determine one’s status in the next. Pursuit of escape from the cycle of reincarnation (resulting in oblivion). Hindus also worship idols (I don’t know about Buddhists.)

That summarizes the beliefs of about two-thirds of the people in the world as they classify themselves. Anybody see any similarity?

The piece reminds me of the airhead (blond) who was introduced to the Nobel Physics Laureate at a party and said, “Oh, I think Science is so grand!”

Speaks volumes that these news organizations would never appoint someone as (charitably speaking) uninformed and shallow to a blog about, say, boxing or skiing.

Regards,
Bill Drissel
Grand Prairie, TX

Speaks volumes that a leading newspaper and leading newsmag would hire a style columnist to co-edit a religion blog

Speaks volumes that she is an atheist and, as charitably as I can put it, unacquainted with any religious doctrine.

Speaks volumes that a corporation would pay for a three-week jaunt around the world to acquaint her with religion rather than have her spend the equivalent time in one of Washington’s excellent libraries or on the Inet.

Speaks volumes that anyone would publish her vapid, superficial, “the most enlightening thing about my trip was how similar the basic tenets of all religions are.”

Real briefly,
Christian tenets: Christ is God. He became human and died for our sins. This redeemed humanity and made possible everlasting life. The Bible is the word of God.

Islamic tenets: Strict monotheism. Mohammed is God’s final prophet. The Koran is the exact words of God (in Arabic) and recorded by the Prophet. Jesus was never crucified. To believe that he was God is the worst kind of polytheism and that belief will earn the sinner an eternity of torment after death.

Hindu and Buddhist tenets: Reincarnation. Actions in this life determine one’s status in the next. Pursuit of escape from the cycle of reincarnation (resulting in oblivion). Hindus also worship idols (I don’t know about Buddhists.)

That summarizes the beliefs of about two-thirds of the people in the world as they classify themselves. Anybody see any similarity?

The piece reminds me of the airhead (blond) who was introduced to the Nobel Physics Laureate at a party and said, “Oh, I think Science is so grand!”

Speaks volumes that these news organizations would never appoint someone as (charitably speaking) uninformed and shallow to a blog about, say, boxing or skiing.

Regards,
Bill Drissel
Grand Prairie, TX

Mischka, Mischka, Mischka,

Hopefully you have access to the writings and thoughts of contemporary religious exegetes, many of them are On Faith panelists. I recommend reading some of their books in your pursuit of knowledge. E. Favorite and many others to include myself are doing that in continuing our pursuit of knowledge and you now have the benefit of our many conclusions i.e. we have done the work for you.

Apparently you are not willing to accept said reviews and conclusions at the moment, but as you get older and more mature, it will all become clear as you finally conquer your koranic brainwashing.

Mischka - I don't find CCNL "endearing" but that is not the issue. The issue is his right to repeat information. His "tired old lines" as you call them are mainly links to and quotes from scholarly works. His attitude toward Islam is definitely negative, no question, but that's not what you were complaining about. Even so, in an open discussion like this, people are welcomed to present all kinds of viewpoints about religion.

You may not like the content of his "lines," but he doesn't like much of the content of religion, so he gets to say that, over and over, if he wants, just as you and others relentlessly defend your various religious teachings.

Here's my concern: The fact that you want to silence him and use personal insults to try to do it gives the appearance that you are threatened by what he says and have no substantive response.

Of course, you have a right to express your views about him. I'm just telling you I think it weakens your case.

For Mischka's benefit and conversion wherever she lives, the 5x daily reading of the flaws in the founders and foundations of warmongering Islam:

Mohammed was an illiterate, womanizing, 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 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 train bombers in the UK and Spain, the Bali crazies, the Kenya crazies, the Pakistani koranics, the Palestine suicide bombers/rocketeers, the Lebanese nutcases, the Taliban nut jobs, and the Filipino koranics.
And who funds these acts of terror?

The Islamic Shiite terror and torture theocracy of Iran aka the Third Axis of Evil and also the Sunni "Wannabees" of Saudi Arabia.

CCNL -

In reality - what is insulting is your warmongering attitude.

"I am sure you joined this blog to convert infidels and find that the infidels have seen the light of reality."

LOL! This is too funny...I dont need to convert anyone. I work with about four converted Muslims and have met countless others. I never have to say a word about Islam.

I dont live in Pakistan.

There are no flaws in Islam or our Prophet (pbuh).

Maybe its time to up your medication old man...you're disappointing us by becoming delusional.

Mischka, Mischka, Mischka,

What is insulting is your warmongering religion.

I am sure you joined this blog to convert infidels and find that the infidels have seen the light of reality.

You eventually will come to grips with the reality and the flaws of/in Islam and hopefully will do something about it. Of course, if you live in Islamic Pakistan, you risk being stoned by the local Muslim truth/death squads. That alone should make you question Islam.

But if you are brave, post the synopsis of the flaws in the founders and foundations of the major contemporary religions in your local mosques. Time to spread the truth!!!

E-Favorite:

"You're pretty insulting yourself - saying he has "too much time on his hands" -- it doesn't take much time to cut and paste. And how do you know “he's sitting at home with a bottle
pills?”"

If he can dish out insults to people - he should be able to take them as well. Much of what he says is NOT just quotes from religious scholars.

Im sorry you find CCNL so endearing...but I dont.

Mischka: "I care because he has been using the same tired old lines for a full year now! He is insulting and does not know how to talk to people without mocking them or what they believe.”

Religion is known for its repetition, so think it's OK for CCNL to repeat his favorite lines. Much of what he says is quoting biblical scholars, so if you're insulted, perhaps you should complain to those scholars.

You're pretty insulting yourself - saying he has "too much time on his hands" -- it doesn't take much time to cut and paste. And how do you know “he's sitting at home with a bottle
pills?”

E-Favorite:

"Mischka - so why do you care so much if CCNL repeats himself? And why call him such terrible names for doing it?"

I care because he has been using the same tired old lines for a full year now! He is insulting and does not know how to talk to people without mocking them or what they believe. He has too much time on his hands...not all of us are sitting at home with a bottle of pills and nothing else to do.

JOZEVZ :

"Caveat: Respect your elders & never dicriminate "THE ECLATi_ON now Liberated" {aka CCNC} based on "AGE" {dicrimination}: Note: "i" am in me early Fifties & "i" am a "STUDENT FOREVER OF SOURCE_ONE" AND as an ECLATi_ON aka an APOCALYPTARIAN {like CCNC et al here} WE NEVER GRADUATE!"

Our elders are supposed to be an example. CCNL is not proving to be an example...more so a warning.

Sally Q. wrote--

"The more we understand about other faiths, I believe, the less likely we will be to try to coerce others into believing as we do. That is our goal."

Your goal is to try to reduce coercive behavior? Do you mean preaching? Evangelizing? Or do you mean threats and intimidation? Beatings, killings, setting frightful examples for people? Did you mean THAT kind of coercive behavior?

Trying to convince someone of something isn't coercion, it's CONVERSATION. If you don't like it, tell them to stop. It's not complicated.

Does your concern about coercion mean you'll spend the lion's share of column inches talking about Islam, and trying to teach Muslims more about other religions?

All I can say is, try to keep your head.

"Starhawk?" "Wiccan spirituality?"
Get real.

JC - because this is an open forum, I feel I can respond to your recent message directed to Rick.

I don't intend to tell you that you're stupid, however I believe you're misinformed about one thing - that is that Allah is in fact the God of Abraham. Islam is an Abrahamaic religion, as are Judaism and Christianity. “Allah” is simply the Muslim word for "God," just as "Dios" is in Spanish.

Rick,

Jesus certainly had the authority to say and imply whatever he wanted. And I do agree with much of what you said. Of course Jesus wanted his disciples then and now to imitate him as a way to come to know who God the father is.

Where I differ with you is that Jesus is just one conduit through which we arrive upon some universal power known to many by different names.

Because I interpret the Bible literally I must strive each day to take into account the Bible in its entirety. In the first section of the Bible commonly known as the OT which speaks about God's relation with the Jews, the concept is brought up time and time again that they must not fall into the idol worship practiced by their neighbors.

Rick, I don't know what your faith is nor do I know what text/authority if any you base your beliefs on. But as a Christian it is theologically unsound for me to pick and choose which scriptures apply and which don't. They all apply and it is upon to search until all of the pieces come together which takes more than a lifetime. I do know that the overwhelming message of the Bible is one of redemption but that message of hope is through God by means of His son Jesus. The Bible even says that God is a jealous god, He doesn't like to share his creations with any thing false that takes away their focus on Him.

The God of Abraham and Isaac is the very same God I worship. I do not think the God of Abraham is the same as Allah, Pacha Mama or what have you. Jehovah God according to scripture is unique and none other is like Him. This is why we see time and time again that God demands His people to worship only Him. The consequences of the Jews mixing faith in God and faith in Baal for instance were grave, as are the consequences for the Christian who believes that all religions are different ways of worshiping the same god. It is apostasy for a Christian to believe this.

I say this not in an effort to condemn nor convince you, soley to express to you that what you ask of me is not possible if I truly hold the Bible to be true which I do. Hopefully this helps you to understand.

P.S. It was an answer to Rick, I don't need to hear from anyone about how "stupid" I am for interpreting the Bible literally. It is certainly not worse than interpreting our beloved Post or NY Times literally.

Also to the Jewish readers please forgive my use of the word Jehovah I know this could be offensive to you but I don't really know of a good way to get around it some times.

Hmmm, Mary C. is a bit "contrary" today. Should she take the time to review the list of 86 On-Faith panelists/contemporary religious exegetes and guest commentators and their thoughts, she would immediately praise Jon and Sally for organizing a religious weblog far superior to any on the web today. But I guess the thoughts of people like Madeline Albright, Bishop Tutu, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Woodward and Bernstein, Jimmy Carter, The Dalai Lama, Mohammad Khatami and George Weigel have no meaning to Mary C. and her "dark age" orthodox Catholicism?

"Mischka - so why do you care so much if CCNL repeats himself? And why call him such terrible names for doing it? Just think how many times you've heard the same bible passages over and over again; and the same hymns."

uh e favorite. think you could try to tone down your obvious "christian hatred" problem. its waaay too easy for everyone to see.

mischka is muslim.

And on attitudes to religion and the religious:

The Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life

http://pewforum.org/

Really invaluable, especially in combating religious prejudice--I have used its help in responding to some especially nasty anti-Catholicism, what Philip Jenkins (another good source) has called the last allowable prejudice, especially prevalent in the academy and amongst the atheist elite.

Like I said earlier, the Post could(should... should!) do a *lot* better.

The Post could do a lot better. For an example of good reporting about religion read The Economist of 3 Nov.:

"The new wars of religion"

http://www.economist.com/specialreports/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10015255 (read all the articles, not just for their content but also for their sources.)

from

http://www.economist.com/printedition/index.cfm?d=20071103

Chris Everett – regarding the US founding documents – Perfect, Thank you

Rick – regarding the universality of Jesus’ sayings. Beautiful, Thank you.

Cayambe – Thanks. Interestingly, I have had “spiritual” or “extraordinary” or “numinous” experiences, which I’ve mentioned elsewhere on “On Faith.” I was a believer at the time of these experiences and even then did not associate them with religion – just that they felt good. Really good, and I was grateful that they happened. I suspect having such experiences is quite human, unrelated to whatever religious leanings a person has. The difference is in the interpretation of the experiences. One person says, “Wow, that felt good!” and another says, “I saw God!"

John Earnest: “It is as if the person who founded and moderated a website called "On Medicine" breezily advised that the sum of her knowledge on the subject was that as a child she had heard there were these people called "doctors". But never fear - in specific preparation for her new role she actually visited some hospitals!”

Among other things, Sally Quinn certainly deserves credit for being honest about her background and credentials.

Are you implying that to start a website on medicine or any subject you personally have to be an expert on it?

It’s not enough to gather recognized authors and experts on the subject to write regular essays in their field of expertise? Would this also mean that to enjoy a certain sport or type of music, you should have an advanced degree in it and years of experience practicing in those fields?

How about people who deeply espouse their religion with no knowledge outside what they learned in Sunday school or what they felt when the holy spirit entered them? Is that OK? Or people who firmly believe the claims of religions other than their own are false without knowing what they are or what their history is? How would you feel about a doctor who never read a medical journal or attended a scientific conference after medical school? And how much respect would you have for a person who insisted on receiving only medical treatments that their great grandparents used, because they had been counseled by their family to only trust medicine from that bygone era?

Mary Cunningham: “Religion is important and we are moving into an age where it will become even moreso, but you would never know that from this series.” There is a great diversity of religious viewpoints represented by the essayists Quinn and Meacham have selected. Of course people like us, who respond to the articles, are self-selected. Forum operators can’t control that. I often wonder why there are not more moderate Christians here. Maybe “On faith” will do a survey of its posters to see what draws them here, keeps them here or turns them away.

I"m 47 years old, have only a little college education and no training or experience at writing.

That said, I'm actually shocked at the superficiality and witlessness of this Quinn piece.

This reminds me of Hillary Clinton's declaration a decade or so back that janitors are people too, and deserve to be greeted and treated with dignity. She was 47 at the time.

I knew that by the time I was 8.

Please, WaPo, put somebody on the 'faith' column who has more than a passing acquaintance with the subject-- and is wise enough to know it, rather than shamelessly babbling about how far she's come in her understanding of religion.

It's really, actually humiliating for your newspaper.

"Openness of religion" is a contradiction in terms. The very definition of religion, as evidenced by many of the postings here, demand an absolute obedience to a single God. The God that that particular religion endorses or beleives in. In it's truest sense, no religion can entertain the existence of any other God or the possibility of no God. The followers are commanded to beleive this. If you don't beleive me, read the posts. I fail to see how any "middle ground" can be established in light of this fundamental contradiction. True Believers will always believe their faith is the only "true" form of religion, and will reject all other viewpoints. And for all you out there, I'm not an atheist nor am I a Cristian, so I guess everyone has equal reason to hate me. Peace to all.

One's spiritual account carries on from life to life,hence,it giving some explanation as to the views, positions as beliefs people hold.It still being that a few do not believe that one be born again,whom not believe in the spiritual, on, or at any level....We have groupings of people whom having been raised with extreme strict religious teaching,from birth,as other groupings, allowed to grow in relative freedom, where being, little forced religious teaching,we having those whom used religious difference, to incite violence hate, malice, as means gaining wealth as power, others whom try using religious beliefs, ideas, to unite,that all in an common bond, judgement based on sound, understanding, as experience... Religion, an complex matter, it used as abused, bringing, the worst, as the best of humanity.

Att: M I S C H K A: et al:

Dear Cyber Friend(s):

"Mischka" in Russian means "Michael" or "Mischka" means that "pet" that was first to circle the globe on a man made (like bibles) space ship {spootnika} OR Mischka in russian means a "Mouse" !

Caveat: Respect your elders & never dicriminate "THE ECLATi_ON now Liberated" {aka CCNC} based on "AGE" {dicrimination}: Note: "i" am in me early Fifties & "i" am a "STUDENT FOREVER OF SOURCE_ONE" AND as an ECLATi_ON aka an APOCALYPTARIAN {like CCNC et al here} WE NEVER GRADUATE!

HARK: To appear {in miracle & never SIN IN BIO_CARBON photon_MIST_form} at a healthy EIGHTY something years of HUMATE_time {man made CLOCK or space_time thinkers} not ECLATi TIME {temperature}IS A miracle! Be nice! Huggs & kisses to ALL ANY & ALL Cyber folks! ya ya!

ATT: E_FAVORATE at TenThirty PM above:

YA YA! nICE NICE: VERY NICE!

Att: The "ECLATi_ON" {not OFF} now Liberated: et al: Thank you wise one of many! PS: do not abuse the "POST" Button! ha ha!

< ?: +) ya ya!

Does no one else find it peculiar that “On Faith” aka “No Faith” (or at least not much), a feature that purports to be about religion in a country where religion *is* important, is ‘hosted’ (whatever that means) by an atheist and Episcopalian respectively? Sally Quinn knows next to nothing about religion (solving her problem by jetting around the world—what a carbon footprint!--) and Jon Meacham belongs to a Christian church which is haemorrhaging members and probably won’t exist in a few years.

Religion is important and we are moving into an age where it will become even moreso, but you would never know that from this series. Mouthing platitudes like “golden rule” and “tolerance” is no substitute for decent articles.

You say that it is the negative press of all the bad things done in the name of religion that drove you away initially. It is also another source that is undermining of religion and the belief in God and it doesn't have to be. that source is science. Science is presented as atheistic but there is a lot being held back and covered over to make the scientific evidence appear to support atheism. In fact the opposite is true. And the cover over does not only mislead people with regard to religion. The denials make a huge impact on health because covering evidence means people cannot heal themselves as they may well do if they knew. If you want to know more I have built a website for people to discover the truth for themselves. it is at http://www.annavictoria.net Regards.

It is as if the person who founded and moderated a website called "On Medicine" breezily advised that the sum of her knowledge on the subject was that as a child she had heard there were these people called "doctors". But never fear - in specific preparation for her new role she actually visited some hospitals!

Not only is Sally Quinn's ignorance of and contempt for that thing which is the essence of the American experience so profound and thoroughgoing as to be beyond parody, but that same attitude is so obviously shared by the better part of the permanent elite of Washington's politico-social class.

E favorite:

I liked your note to Sally. I'm still waiting to see what personal conclusions she comes to after her journey and what she sees as providing the basis for them.

Personally, in my lifetime, I have yet to experience anything I could recognize as a religious or spiritual experience. Of course, it is always possible that I have had such an experience and just did not recognize it as such. I'm not quite sure how I can exclude that possibility, so I don't.

I lay no claim to atheism. It is possible that God may exist. I have just never found or experienced any such thing or any manifestation of such a thing. What is puzzling to me is why so many of my fellow humans claim just such experiences. It is a fact, supported by physical evidence, that communities have had religions of some kind wherever and whenever they have been established. At the very least, one must acknowledge our species appears to have some kind of need for it.

J.C.
You quote the words of Jesus, "I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father but through me."

Could those words have any different meaning than the one you imply? For instance, can we be sure that Jesus was not saying something like, "The things that I have taught you, and the way I have been with you, is the way to God."

The entire story God reveals to us through Jesus is about life and living. It is not about confessions we make, creeds we subscribe to, churches we belong to. It is about how am I going to live my life. And Jesus is, perhaps, doing nothing more than suggesting that he has demonstrated for us, what it means to be alive. Not just breathing in and breathing out, but truly alive.

The passage you cite need not be an exclusivist statement. Anyone who reflects in their life the truth, for instance, that God loves mercy more than justice is in touch with the way, the truth and the life. It doesn't matter how they say it, or which God they pray to. What matters is that they also love mercy more than justice, and reflect that in their lives.

Steve,

"I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibit the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between church and state." (Thomas Jefferson, as President, in a letter to the Baptists of Danbury, Connecticut, 1802)

There is no doubt that separation of church and state is foundational to this nation. You can also research the earlier writings of Jefferson, Madison and Mason on religious freedom, especially with respect to the colony of Virginia when Jefferson was in the legislature there.

Consider also the complete absence of any reference to god or religion in the Constitution itself, and think about the level of sustained effort in the face of clerical pressure required by the founders to keep it out.

Consider also the fact that the Declaration of Independence was a philosophical document that challenged the divine right of kings. What better way than to assert a divine right to be free from kings? And what language could be less religious in that context than "creator". Not "God"; not "Jesus". And used only once.

In your (preemptive) defense, I googled "Wall of Separation" and found alot of christian and conservative websites that completely misrepresent American history and the issues surrounding the founding of the nation. If you have been brainwashed by this propaganda I suggest you go to the primary sources - the writings of Jefferson, Madison, Hamilton et al. I also suggest you contemplate the nature of a conservatism that would deliberately misrepresent something as supposedly revered as the founding.

Sally,

Thank you for the OnFaith venue.

I agree that if you strip the evil out of religion you get the golden rule. But the golden rule is not the essence of religion, it is the essence of morality, and exists as a human characteristic without any need for religion. Religion is a form of pollution and vandalism that is built on this human foundation (more than human, actually, since animals also exhibit degrees of morality too).

You write: "...if I was really serious about not believing in God that I should at least have some knowledge about what it was I didn’t believe in." As Richard Dawkins has pointed out, this is a non-sequitur. It's like saying "if I was really serious about not believing in the flying spaghetti monster I should at least have some knowledge about what it is I don't believe in." The point is, there's no such thing as having knowledge about God because there's no such thing AS God. The most you can do is have knowledge about other people's superstitious beliefs.

You also talk about how, when you really look at religions you realize they all aspire to the same goals so there is less need to want to convert others. I disagree. I think what you are really saying is that from an atheist perspective, knowing that all religions are false, it is possible to see the same human dynamic at work in them all. However, from the point of view of a believer, the only true religion is his and all others are false. In fact, nothing could be more different than a religion that looks exactly the same, but leads to hell. Nothing could be more evil than a religion that feeds the soul in exactly the same way, but leads to hell.

Sally – your religious journey is similar in some ways to mine. I also realized well into adulthood that I didn’t know very much about religion, but I was coming from a position of belief, not lack of belief.

Also like you, I did a huge amount of reading and research on religion. I was fascinated to find there was so much to learn and shocked to find that religions are completely myth based. Part of the shock was that I hadn’t figured it out sooner. Truth is, I never thought about it that much.

It was liberating knowledge. I was a regular churchgoer at the time and found myself listening intently in church for the first time in my life. It was hard giving up the community but easy giving up the beliefs.

Sally:

I gotta tell ya, babe. This is easily one of the most vapid and asinine articles I've ever read. I think Podhoretz got it right: Saint Augustine channeled through Brittany Spears.

Religion is a deep ocean. You barely got damp.

Bgone,

I guess our beliefs will both be put to the test someday and then we'll know what is the truth. By rejecting what I said about Jesus it is by no means a rejection of me it is simply a rejection of Jesus. In reading the whole book of John we see that there were in Jesus' times many doubters then. It is nothing new.

There are many people who post here and people all over the world who doubt Jesus. Jesus gave this warning that the very words He spoke while on this earth would be the standard used to judge us all. I wouldn't want to be in your shoes on that day bgone. Fortunately for you and me, Jesus is always waiting to accept us despite how many times we may cruelly deny Him such as He did for Peter. Hopefully, you one day will repent and ask forgiveness for your words, but I certainly won't be losing any sleep over what you have said. I have plenty of my own sins and denials to move past.

The theories you brought up are new regarding the details, but the point is the same as so many others before you. You don't believe Jesus is the Son of God and no one can make you believe, that is the blessing of free will. Of course with such a blessing a great responsibility comes and the more we hear about Jesus the greater that responsibility becomes. You have heard that Jesus is the Son of God and that He is coming back one day to gather those who have heard, believed and obeyed. You have the choice to believe or not believe.

Mischka - so why do you care so much if CCNL repeats himself? And why call him such terrible names for doing it?

Just think how many times you've heard the same bible passages over and over again; and the same hymns.

If you know a theologian, I suggest you print out CCNL's post and ask him/her to go over each of the points for accuracy. Then if you find he's misrepresenting something, come on and complain about that.

Your world tour in March sounds fantastic. Most cannot afford the price, so we read about someone who travelled so far. On Faith is a positive way to spend your time, to learn from others about the journey. Mention of the baggage in the lobby at 5:30 am caught my attention. I do not travel well, jet lag, middle age etc...

In the 2nd year of On Faith, let us hear from a Trappist brother, Buddhist monk, Hindu sanyasi, Islam devotee and Abrahams son. What do they do at 4 am? What do their prayers in silence say? Do they pray for us all, day after day, year after year? As the almighty, grants all one more day of life and the chance to prepare for the next.

It should be required Athiest doctrine: rise at 4 am, day after day, year after year, preach to the monastics of all faiths that God doesn't exist.

It is dark in the arctic now.
At 4 am and 4pm.
Mrs. Quinn, continue to transcend, caution if you do, you may 1 day have to embrace faith for yourself. I for one, can't wait untill you write about it.

"We are ALL "SONs" & "DAUGHTER(s) of the non_jealous & thus fearless holy no_man CREATOR

{never can a "G_D" be a he or a him nor a her or a she: just say "G_d is a IT or being ITSELF in and of US_ALL}

Of the "FIAT_LUX"! aka "Let thgere be Photons"!

< ?: +) Ya ya!

VOTE "Eclatarian Party" for GRIDARi_ON Democracy in "TRANSFINITE_CIVILIZATION" : where each Citizen & Denizen of Space_Shipp Earth {HUMATES OF such} will have THE long awaited & prophecied "OUR_BOOK" that will act like a "HUMANITY DOCTRINE & MORE GOOD TIDINGS is predicted to cometh of "IT" {Yaweh Lord G_d Allah Ishvara and by many names et al} viaaaa EKCLATi_ON aka APOCALYPTARIAN_JOKTANi_ON philosophy!!

"Humates will walk in the pHotons of IT!"

Together forever with SOURCE_ONE! ya ya!

CCNL -

Here is some repitition for you!

Dear CCNL -

I have no desire to speak or get advice from a retired, delusional, senile 80-something-years-old fart who has lost touch with reality and is pumped up on medication.

p.s. - I never re-read your post. In fact, I have not read the entire thing to this day.

Dont waste my time old man. If you change your mind about your last days on earth - let us know. We will point you in the right direction.

CONCERNED & LIBERATED.....YOU ONLY NEED MAKE A FEW SIMPLE ADJUSTMENTS TO YOUR COURSE, AN IT TAKING YOU UNTO THE VERY HEART OF CREATION.... WITHOUT THE LIFEFORCE THE BODY MEANINGLESS...YOU ARE THAT LIFEFORCE, IN ESSENCE. ( NOT THE MATERIAL FORM ) THE IMPORTANCE OF THE MATERIAL FORM, IT BEING ENABLED WITH HEART AS BRAIN THAT CAPABLE OF RECEIVING IMPARTING, UNDERSTANDING AS OF EXPERIENCING BEING, KNOWLEDGE OF CREATION .. Humanity continues to develop,that we capable of yet more reveiled,yet vital we remain balanced.

JC, you wrote this:

""For the non-Christians it is obvious the reason why they would believe there are many roads to God. However, regarding the Christian who holds that belief I must say I don't understand. Unless of course the person calls themselves a Christian yet does not view the Bible as the inspired word of God. In John 14 and verse 6 Jesus says "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me"

Now for someone who does not believe in the Bible it is entirely understandible that this passage means nothing to them."" and some more.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Did the thought ever occur to you that the Bible may well be the inspired word of Devil and not God at all?

http://www.hoax-buster.org/sellyoursoul is what the Bible says God is with a simple noticing that the fallen angel Lucifer is the supernatural being most likely to be found on fire with the variety of fire from which hell is made. The most compelling question of them all is: Was that really God in the burning bush, the supernatural being Moses made the deal with?

Try studying that. It's straight out of the Bible with just one other sacred scripture that is "authenticated" by holy mother church, you know, the church Jesus started, before it had to be reformed.

The father of Jesus is God? The being in the burning bush is God? Then there's a real good chance the father of Jesus is the biggest Devil of them all, Lucifer. What evidence is there to the contrary? I've asked that question for a while now of the most learned religious leaders and none can supply one shred. Therefore, it must have been Lucifer in the burning bush.

Don't you think you should tell all those people who never read the Bible that their ministers aren't telling them the whole story? Most people can make no sense at all out of the Bible, must rely on ministers to read it and tell them both what is says and what that means. Aren't you conscious bound to inform your ignorant fellow man that's taking the ministry's word for the Bible being God's word that the Bible is actually the word of Devil? Doesn't the ministry hide the facts and are nothing but a bunch of self serving soul sellers who are one and all leading their flocks to hell?

Shouldn't you tell the truth? Lucifer is the prince of liars, claimed the throne of God even. That's why God created hell. Do you want to go to hell? And, where is your Christian charity? Jesus being the son of Lucifer means that He's not "the" Christ but rather He is the great anti Christ. "The Christ" God is yet to come and when God does Lucifer through His son Jesus intends to challenge God. Which side you on anyhow, God's side or the anti Christ's side?

Does the road to God pass through hell? That's one of the few if not the only question that the Bible answers with truth. Jesus said to the good thief as they hung on the cross, "this day you will be with me in paradise." The Bible says Jesus went to hell so hell must be paradise. Is hell paradise? Hell would seem to be the "kingdom" of His heavenly(?) father. Yep, all the evidence says Jesus is the son of Lucifer the biggest Devil of them all and heaven knows there's a lot of them little red devils and a few blue ones too hereabouts.

Do you really want to "go to the father" ALA, >>In John 14 and verse 6 Jesus says "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me" >> You don't suppose Devil's son would lie?

Steve: the phrase separation of church and state is shorthand for the Constitution's anti establishment clause "congress shall pass no law respecting religion" and the free exercise clause. together they mean you can practice your religion without interference from the state, and the state will not in any way act like or favor any religion either. and in the very first article of the constitution it says there shall be no religious test for any office.

that said, you demonstrate the fallacy of Sally's premise. It is indeed absurd to ask a Christian to act as if a Muslim or a Jew were on a perfectly acceptable path to god. the faith's cannot be reconciled in any way. you can agree that they should be free from your persecution should you be in a position to impose same, or agree that they should be allowed to retain civil rights, etc., but you cannot be asked to believe anything but that they are misguided fools. without the premise that Jesus, Muhammad, or someone yet to come is the true messiah, the respective faith's have no premise whatever. they cannot tolerate Jesus being optional. What I have yet to hear anyone respond to is how anyone can hold such a notion when, had they been switched at birth, they might be praising Allah instead of Jesus. It must occur to someone that that's a sobering thought.

Added comments about "atonement" theology:

Did Jesus really die for our sins/crimes? If so, God the Father (if He exists) committed the sin/crime of filicide.

This whole "died for our sins" scenario encompasses atonement theology. Here is Professor JD Crossan's (the Professor is an On Faith panelist) take on said theology:

(from his book, "Who is Jesus" co-authored with Richard Watts)

"Moreover, an atonement theology that says God sacrifices his own son in place of humans who needed to be punished for their sins might make some Christians love Jesus, but it is an obscene picture of God. It is almost heavenly child abuse, and may infect our imagination at more earthly levels as well. I do not want to express my faith through a theology that pictures God demanding blood sacrifices in order to be reconciled to us."

"Traditionally, Christians have said, 'See how Christ's passion was foretold by the prophets." Actually, it was the other way around. The Hebrew prophets did not predict the events of Jesus' last week; rather, many of those Christian stories were created to fit the ancient prophecies in order to show that Jesus, despite his execution, was still and always held in the hands of God."

"In terms of divine consistency, I do not think that anyone, anywhere, at any time, including Jesus, brings dead people back to life."

Sally, you will do anything to see your name in print.In your latest re-incarnation, you are Mother Cabrini and the Singing Nuns. I remember the Sally of the 70s-90s...don't we all.

Steve,

Hmmm, "I am the Truth" i.e. John 14:6. This passage was, according to many contemporary NT exegetes, not said by the historical Jesus but was wishful thinking and an embellishment by John to make Jesus more like the ancient and local gods of first century Palestine. 210-. Place of Life: (1) Dial. Sav. 27-30, (2) John 14:2-12; http://www.faithfutures.org/Jesus/Crossan2.rtf

and the Online copy of Professor JD Crossan's The Historical Jesus. (Professor Crossan is an On Faith panelist) is available on Google Books i.e.