All Comments (34)

Hi! I'm Dr. Santana! I love your site! Looking for Viagra?
order viagra order viagra
http://www.blinklist.com/_-ORDER-VIAGRA-ONLINE-CHEAP!-_/]order viagra[/url]
Thank you!

Hi! I'm John Strass and i like your site!
cheap viagra
Thank you!

test

MARY CUNNINGHAM AND ANNE CORESS,

For some reason I haven't returned to this thread for two days, so unfortunately I've missed your posts diected to me until now.

ANNE,

You asked: "Norrie, who are you and what do you believe?"

Another poster, Karen, asked me the same question. I'm reposting the answer I posted yesterday. It's long but it's an answer:

********
Karen,

Thank you for your very thoughtful response. I'll try to speak to what you asked in the last sentence.

First, as far as I know, all my ancestors until the 1900's have been Protestants, or at least non-Catholic Christians, for as long as there have been any such people in England, Scotland and Ireland.

My father progressed from Presbyterian through Congregational to Unitarian. I don't think my mother ever felt any real attachment to any religion, though she went to church with my father.

I was about six years old when I told my Congregational Sunday School teacher that I couldn't believe any of the c--p they were teaching. My father ultimately came around to my point of view.

I'm really agnostic as to all of the religious issues discussed in these essays and posts, except that I detest government involvement in religion.

I don't call myself a Buddhist but I have great sympathy for Buddhism. It seems the most compassionate of all belief systems that I know of, and it extends its compassion to non-human species.

I have no use for the Oriental cultural baggage that has encrusted Buddhism over the centuries, and makes it so hard for Westerners to make their way to the heart of Buddhism. I embrace the ethical principles of Buddhism and many of its ideas about how the mind works, and how to use the mind to progress spiritually.

I'm agnostic as to Buddhism's cosmology or view of the universe. I'm agnostic as to reincarnation, the Bardo (the state between death and rebirth), the idea of karma, the idea that there are an infinite number of steady-state eternal universes, the six levels or planes of existence, that all beings have an inner Buddha nature, and that there are an infinitude of enlightened beings (Buddhas) in all the universes.

I only began reading about Buddhism about four years ago. I've never joined a sanga (Buddhist congregation) or had teachings from a Buddhist teacher. So my conception of Buddhism is my own personal construction, but I don't think it's inaccurate.

Buddhism helped me greatly when I was very sick with Lyme disease. I have tried to become compassionate toward all beings and I know I've changed for the better in that regard. Basic meditation, which I do very little of, has helped me any many ways.

As for the question of an afterlife: Traditional Buddism believes in reincarnation. But my understanding is that the individual consciousness does not survive. What survives is the action of the karmic tendencies and energies of the individual. But I'm not very sure of the exact traditional teachings.

As I said, I'm agnostic as to the question of an afterlife. But this question doesn't seem to affect my daily life. What will be will be, and I'm content with that. What really has affected my daily life are knowing Buddhist ethics and some understanding of how I can use my mind to not be bothered by things that used to disturb or upset me.

I hope this is responsive to what you wrote.

Thanks for listening (reading, actually.) Best wishes.

P.S. I'm intellectually agnostic as to reincarnation and afterlives, but I have an emotional hunch that something like that does take place in some form or other.

But, again, that doesn't mean that individual consciousness will survive.

On the other hand, Professor Ian Stevenson's work at the University of Virginia, "Twenty Cases Suggestive of Reincarnation", and his subsequent publications, have produced evidence that personal consciousness may survive for a few years into the childhood of the next life.

Posted February 3, 2007 1:32 AM

HERE'S A FURTHER, LATER POST:

Karen, I'm back again because I left a couple of things unsaid in my last post.

I got so carried away talking about Buddhism that I didn't mention other possible forms of survival or afterlife. I'm also agnostic as to all of them, except for the Christian/Islamic Heaven and Hell versions of the afterlife. I simply do not believe them, but of course, as with everything else, I could be wrong.

I believe that some people do have psychic and "paranormal" powers. Many of them have had plausible visions of an afterlife, people surviving to exist on other planes of existence, with their personal consciousnesses intact.
I'm open to all of that.

One of the more appealing arguments for me is that "Nature doesn't let anything go to waste." That is, Nature is not going to go to all the trouble of creating lives, merely to toss them all away at death. Nature likes transformations -caterpiller into butterfly - so perhaps we'll all be transformed into a better kind of being. Some people think quantum physics may provide a plausible basis for this.

I'll close with a quote from the Dalai Lama. Good advice that, unhappily I rarely follow. I hope it reveals to you how compassionate and benevolent Buddhism can be. I'm sorry when my negativity about religion gets the better of me and charges ahead. Apologies.

**********
Dalai Lama Quote of the Week

Suppose... you try to convert someone from another religion to the Buddhist religion, and you argue with them trying to convince them of the inferiority of their position. And suppose you do not succeed, suppose they do not become Buddhist. On the one hand, you have failed in your task, and on the other hand, you may have weakened the trust they have in their own religion, so that they may come to doubt their own faith. What have you accomplished by all this? It is of no use. When we come into contact with the followers of different religions, we should not argue. Instead, we should advise them to follow their own beliefs as sincerely and as truthfully as possible. For if they do so, they will no doubt reap certain benefits. Of this there is no doubt. Even in the immediate future, they will be able to achieve more happiness and more satisfaction.

...When I meet the followers of different religions, I always praise them, for it is enough, it is sufficient, that they are following the moral teachings that are emphasized in every religion. It is enough, as I mentioned earlier, that they are trying to become better human beings. This in itself is very good and worthy of praise.

--from Answers: Discussions with Western Buddhists by the Dalai Lama, edited by Jose Ignacio Cabezon, published by Snow Lion Publications

A FURTHER NOTE TO KAREN:

I think that somewhere along the way you picked up a mistaken idea about Buddhism: that it involves detachment from the world. In all my reading I've never come across a Buddhist idea that involved what I would call detachment.

I think the person who wrote that probably had a misunderstanding of "emptiness," the idea that nothing in the universe has an inherent identity.

That is, for example, a "tree" does not have an inherent, concrete, enduring, separate identity as a tree. A tree is a process, arising from causes and conditions, and is never the same from one moment to the next. It is an example of impermanence in action. The same is true of people, animals and everything else, even subatomic particles.

Or perhaps the writer misunderstood that aquiring the ability to not be adversely affected by negative happenings in the world somehow constitutes detachment. It doesn't. Such a Buddhist is completely aware of what is going on in the world. He is not detached. He has simply learned how not to be harmed while maintaining his full awareness.

Most Buddhists, except maybe a few who live in monasteries, are actively involved in the world and with helping people. Many Buddhist teachers are known for their amazing senses of humor.

I wish you well on your path.

Posted February 3, 2007 2:06 PM

MARY,

I can't locate my post to you about my sons' Irish ancestry, which I posted to you when I learned that you're Irish. I had mistakenly thought you had said you were American.

Our boys have Southern (Republic of) Ireland ancestry through their mother, whose family name had been Conner (Connor - O'Connor). Almost certainly Catholic but switched to Protestant sometime in the remote past.

They have Protestant Northern Ireland ancestry from both their parents, and Protestant Scots ancestry from both of us. They have Puritan - Congregational English ancestry from the Hoyts who first arrived in Salem, Massachusetts from England in 1628.

One woman, whose mother's maiden name was Hoyt, was hanged as a witch. Perhaps that's why I'm so sympathetic to Wiccans.

***********

SORRY, EVERYONE, FOR TAKING SO MUCH SPACE, BUT IT TOOK A WHILE TO ANSWER ANNE'S QUESTION, AND TO LET MARY KNOW OF OUR COMMON IRISH CONNECTION.

I APPRECIATE YOUR PATIENCE.

Yes, I am interested in not the debunking of but the source of documents. I know Mark Twain used his own life experiences, what he read and his imagination to write his books. Why would someone 50,000 years ago much less 5,000 or 2,000 years ago be any different to Mark on that point?

I'm interested in finding out if the hoax buster has really found the source "readings" done by those inspired to write the Bible. Those writers get 2 out of Mark Twains 3, life experiences and imagination. What about the third, what did those authors read?

The easiest sell ever done on me was that they had other documents they did not reference at all. What are those mysterious documents? They debunk the Bible if they are found. Has Bill Hunt actually found them? If so then religion as we know it is in for a substantial upgrade.

http://www.hoax-buster.org page 2 has a story that if confirmed means the Bible is a proved hoax. The proof is the standard for proving literary hoaxes and hoaxes in general, the original material. I see on page 2 the Bible's main thrust with life experience and imagination added.

Norrie H.

The thread was closed before I say your reply. And, yes, you do spend a lot of time here, but to me it is because you are still searching...

But you are searching for the numinous in what is really a philosophy, Buddhism. So I think it must ultimately be frustrating for you.

More later.

Best,
MC.

Therefore, I have to bow my head and trust. God is not altogether unknowable, just not fully knowable, and never fully known this side of heaven.

Knowable in what sense Reverend? No, I am not talking Biblical here. Brain, mind, soul? Certainly God is beyond the reach of man's brain. Certainly God is within the reach of man's soul...so where does the mind fall? I suppose that our entire body is our mind. Furthermore I think that God can reach us and we know God in our mind...which though limited is not as limited as our brains.
God Bless you and yours Reverend Byron, always.

I posted a comment on here just a few minutes ago, but it hasn't shown up on the site. I'll repeat it.

TO BGONE,

Carbon dating of the Book of Enoch, Ethiopian version, would be inapplicable here. If an extant original copy exists, it would be over 5000 yrs old.

J Rhinehart

TO BGONE,

Carbon dating doesn't apply. At least, not until an original manuscript could be found. And I doubt such a manuscript would be intact or readable, since it would be over 5000 yrs old.

The basic timeline says Enoch lived before the flood, a few generations before Noah but still alive when Noah was born.

If you are truly interested in debunking myth, you need to read The Book of Enoch, Ethiopian version, for yourself. Not the redacted Biblical version.

Hi Norrie:

"But you're still wrong to call me an atheist"

Please excuse me for jumping in -but you don't sound like an atheist. You are more like a contrary seeker (unsure of what you believe but certain and vocal about what you don't believe.)
For this reason: I thought you were Episcopalian. But I see you are Protestant not Anglican.

Norrie, what are you and what do you believe?

Norrie - you should be ashamed of yourself. Now I'm going to laugh myself to death and it's your fault.

National Prayer Breakfast. A strange concept. Let us pray. Please pass me a croissant. Would you like some orange juice? I am amazed that devout people countenance this sort of nonsense.

Also, Mary Cunningham in her comment above about John Crossan nicely channels the Catholic fear of apostasy and heresy.

Bgone,

It wasn't jusr "A CROSS" that the Templars gathered round at the Horns of Hattin. It was THE TRUE CROSS, perhaps the ultimate relic of Christendom. Because it was the True Cross, the Templars were absolutely convinced they would be saved. After the Templars were annhilated the Saracens took the Cross with them. It ended up in Constantinople, and, after a fairly long time, it disappeared.

The History Channel periodically runs programs on what may have happened to it.

And, as you know, in later Christendom, enough fragments of The True Cross were sold to rebuild the World Trade Center. Hope never dies.

Oh my, oh my! Father, your first sentence was all I had to read to know you are a typical non-thinking religious type twit.
You pray to let God know what is in your mind. If that is what you actually believe, then you can't at the same time claim your God is omniscient. I see you pray to a lesser God who isn't able to know what is on your mind without you telling HIm.

Point taken BGONE.

Sorry YOYO.The On Faith article by Imam Zaid Shakir on Muslims and prayers is a good place to start. As to why I pray is as stated in my posting on the question posed by Meacham and Quinn on "Why Do You Pray"

Peace be with you both and have a nice weekend.

And BGone - see you some weeks from now if you are still contributing your thoughts in On Faith threads. Am bringing home the kosher/halal bacon :)

Jihadist, I think YOYO is only using that as an example of how praying is a waste of time in his estimation and did not intend to insult anyone. If one is selling a product and advertising it to perform in a certain way then product failures will be noticed by some like YOYO.

I take it that praying is not presumed to ward off disasters for Muslims the way it is for Christians. YOYO is probably confusing the two faiths. Why do Muslims pray? Maybe that will help YOYO understand.

Knoghts Templar, part of the crusades were surronded by Sallidin and about to be wiped out when they gathered around a cross and prayed hoping God would save them. YOYO could have used that example but only a few know about that failure of God to hear prayers or at least act on them.

When people are in big trouble God is the most common word used and the most useless at the same time with some rare exceptions none of which comes to me at the moment.

Ah! JR I think I know what you are talking about. Important question is how old is it? Carbon dated to when? There are documents that crop up now and again, "Gosper accoring to Judas" types but they tend to be "modern" compared to the time of Moses, after year 1.

Thanks

Yoyo,
Nah, the tsunami was an act of God, divine retribution for us not being good Muslims, not actually praying five times a day, that the wrath of God was set upon us :)

After insulting the sufferings and memories of over 100,000 thousand Indonesians killed by the tsunami, apart from another hundred thousand, at least of Thai and Sri Lankan Buddhists and Indian Hindus, do you now wish to insult the memories of the Japanese dead killed by the atom bomb in Hiroshima and Nagasaki? It was not an act of God, but an act of man, a retribution of man against fellow men.

Let us both grow up here.

Here's quick demonstration of how truly silly this stuff is -- substitute the word "Zeus" for the word "God" (equally irrational concepts) and let's see what happens. . . So William said:

"I pray to a Zeus of mystery, a personal Zeus, an approachable Zeus, but a mysterious Zeus nonetheless."

Hum. Makes sense to me.

Thank you.

TO BGONE,

If you get a copy of the Book of Enoch, you'll find it is the predecessor to an early part of the Old Testament. It is like an unedited version of what later was polished, condensed and severely edited.

You said that Constantine tried to destroy all the old records. I haven't read anything about that, but if so, this is one that survived in Ethiopia (probably when the Coptic Christians fled the Romans). It's actually a compilation of several sources under one name. There's a fragment of the Book of Noah in it, a detailed description of the Watchers, Enoch's accounts of what he was taught by different ? (the later peoples called them Gods). You will have to read it before I can discuss it with you, and this is probably not the forum for that.

As for prayer and the sun, there's no praying to the sun in Enoch. There is no direct mention of an Egyptian nation. This is pre-Egypt. Or is it? I'm not an expert on ancient Middle Eastern history. I wish I was. I'd love to study that in earnest. Recent archaeological evidence in Egypt points to a pre-Pharaonic civilization. And the age of the pyramids has been called into question. And pyramids exist in many places on the Earth, not just in Egypt. Enoch does talk about pyramids in 3 different places, 3 different colors. The pyramids in central America are a different color from the Egyptian pyramids (or were before someone took their surface layers off).

Enoch is fascinating. There's too much to talk about here. Just the literal descriptions Enoch wrote down, not including what the actual meaning of some of it is, would take an almost endless discussion.

This is way off the subject of prayer. But you can't debunk something if you don't know much about it. And that's what you keep trying to do on all these blogs.

I'm hoping someday the source materials for the early period of modern history will turn up, tell us what really happened. Maybe they already have, and somebody doesn't want us to know about it. Maybe they were in the pyramids. Maybe that's what their purpose was, as a repository of knowledge to get mankind thru a war, or disaster.

There's a lot more to the Jewish religion than just what was put in the "Bible". And a lot more going on in the world.

No J I haven't read whatever that is. I have looked at the pictures at hoax buster and read a few books on ancient Egypt. Does that help any? I can find way too much of Genisis through Joshua and the Gospels in Egypt to get excited about much else.

Tell us about it please. What new light does it shed on praying to the sun and the woman who claimed she was fathered by the sun? The subject is praying to what most, me included expect to be Bible based God(s).

I far from know everything but I'm still learning something new every day. If there's something I should know then tell me about it. My mind is as open as I can get it I think.

TO BGONE,

Have you ever read a copy of the Ethiopian version of the Book of Enoch?

J RHINEHART - A hoax is saying something is one thing that it is not. The Biblical hoax that dominates faith is that Moses spoke to God. Strangely enough that would not be a hoax if it was reported accurately, as it happened. Moses spoke to the sun and the sun is God to some people.

The actualy hoax is in the definition of God, council of Nice 320ish and saying that is the THING Moses spoke to and got all that help from was that God.

The Bible began as a set of independant documents. Hoax buster answers the question, where did those documents come from? What is the basis in fact contained in those documents, all 850++. The proof is there. Literary hoaxes are proved by finding the original material used to construct them.

The "books" from which a set was selected have a solid historical basis in fact. The difficulty comes from at least two places. Very few people actually read hieroglyphics and Constantine tried to destroy the original with some success.

I have little hope many if any folks at this blog actually read hieroglyphics. However, there are pictures that as luck would have it are what the original story writers seemed to have used as a base themselves. I can look at the page from the "book of the dead" and see things like the "devil" and Satan, Trinity God, Jesus, the virgin Mary seated behind, (to the right of Jesus) and the 12 apostles or disciples of Jesus without reading the hieroglyphic writing.

The hoaxer is actually Constantine who ordered the formal definition of God, Bible constructed, all remaining documents destroyed and dispatched a Legion to Egypt to destroy the original source. That's how literary hoaxes that are successful come into being.

We have only been into ancient Egypt since the time of Napaleon, 200 years or so since the Muslims captured it long ago. That is probably why this information has been so long coming to light.

Hoaxes are alright for religion that has nothing to do with reality to begin with. I know astrological charts are nonsense for example of an acceptable hoax used to swindle suckers. Replacing the constitution with one is against my rules and I'm far from alone there.

http://www.hoax-buster.org is the web site with pictures for us illiterates. It has a little more than the Bible is a hoax I've noticed but only for eggheads. No one else cares about Atlantis or how Neanderthal got wiped out, to mention a couple.

The hundreds of thousands of people who were washed away in the recent Asian sunami were mostly people who prayed 5 times a day facing Mecca.
And a fat lot of good it did them!

TO BGONE,

You keep saying over & over that the Bible is a "hoax". I am reading the Old Testament Bible right now in a class, & the Bible is simply a record of events. Most of it is either factually historical or symbolically historical. It is open to many different interpretations, but I see nothing in the way of a "hoax".

I think you're confusing the actual writing in the book with the religions that have sprung up afterward that say they are based on different interpretations of it.

Have you by any chance read a book called "Worlds In Collision" by Immanuel Velikovsky? If you're interested in a different interpretation of the events described in the Old Testament other than the ones put forward by the religions, you might try that. It's completely non-religious. And it's fascinating. It's a historical survey of ancient records from all over the world - including the Biblical accounts. I don't propose to say that it's theory is the be-all and end-all of theories, but it's a well-researched & very well-educated attempt to explain ancient history. If you really like to explore different options, you might try that one. It's given me a lot to think about.

BGONE.........I'm praying you'll find the Love of Christ.He Loves you very much.He died for you.

Mary Cunningham,

I imagine you're sick of my sparring with you and with Roman Church beliefs, and I can't say I blame you.

But you're still wrong to call me an atheist - if you parse what I wrote you'll see that I left open the possibility of a non-Roman-Church, non-Abrahamic god.

Did you catch up with my post at the end of another, almost-exhausted, thread about your and my sons' common Irish heritage?

You should know that "O. Wellington Archibald", who purported to comment above, is actually my elder son, who loves to twit me about spending so much time on these threads.

O. Wellington was/is my grandfather. He was born in Nova Scotia, a descendent of Ulster Plantation Irish. He practiced medicine in Minnesota in the late 19th Century, owned racehorses, and once took a bear cub as payment of a medical bill. The cub lived in his house until it got too big, at which point he donated it to the St. Paul zoo.

Now you know with certainty, what you have undoubtedly suspected all along, that Irish Protestants and their descendants are all crazy as loons.

Best wishes.

Dear Fr Byron,

This was nice to read after Prof. Crossan... Lord, please spare me from the a lapsed Catholic's musings about prayer!

I was remembering my childhood in Ireland and we prayed so much! As my grandfather lay dying--after the priest administered the last rites--I sat with my mother, aunts & grandmother & said a few decades of the rosary. When the old man died, my mother said two prayers: one for God to receive his soul & the other to console her mother. A new baby was born & we said a prayer of thanksgiving, a couple married & we prayed for them to lead a happy & holy life. We prayed at Mass, we prayed after Confession, we prayed on our own, and we prayed communally.

When JPII lay dying two years ago, the most comforting part of his death vigil was the bishop of Rome's recital of the rosary. I loved that recitation, I loved the Italian. It comforted me as the best man the world was slipping away from us.

I feel bad you only draw atheists & not Christian believers so I thought I'd write. I read all your pieces.

God bless you.
MC

Norrie--
Everyone prays to the same entity whatever name it's given:
Wuji--the Supreme Unknown.
Cheers!

NORRIE - you sure ask hard retorical questions.

Moses spoke to a ball of fire and it answered back. Now what do you suppose Pat Robertson talks to that answer's him back always saying the same thing. Maybe he should change his brand of laxitive? Father and Pat talk to the same thing? The answer is the same, replace the constitution with the Bible a proved hoax so they can run the country.

It's the choice of "kingdom of God" or "democracy of God" and they choose kingdom. It was the kingdom of God until the constitution.

Conservative - keep things as is. When things change then change them back. They're up to changing things back to kingdom. We must not let that happen.

Sorry, Father, there is no God, at least of the kind that the Roman Church teaches.

So who, or what, are you talking to, and who, or what, is responding to you?

IMHO, God started the Big Bang. He/She also granted the gifts of Free Will and Future to all the thinking beings in the Universe. This being the case, God is not able to alter life and requests/prayers will not be answered. Statistically, your request might come true but it is simply the result of the variabiliy/randomness of Nature.

So put down your rosaries and prayer beads and stop worshiping cows and bowing to Mecca six times a day. Instead work hard at your job, take care of aging parents, volunteer at a soup kitchen, donate to charities and the poor and continue to follow the Commandments of your religion or any good rules of living as gracious and good human beings. And lets all hope there indeed is a place called Heaven!!!

I think I understand faith now. The only way one could actually make sense of this is if they had faith that he wasn't just barking mad. I think I'll just put enough contradictory adjectives and sugary images together and maybe someone will find it "inspiring."

Unbelievable.

"I pray to a God of mystery, a personal God, an approachable God, but a mysterious God nonetheless"

If this doesn't show the absolute silliness of religious thinking then I don't know what could.

God is personal and mysterious, approachable but unknowable? What does any of that mean? Why not just start making things up as we go along. You are WJB. This is so sensless it is laughable. Here's what my God is he is bright but dark at the same time. I know his will but at the same time he is unknowably great. He is beyond human comprehension but I can talk to him. His justice is greater and not within our understanding, but the US constitution is based on it.

Come on. Get real.