God With Us, Not Working Against Us

Dear E Fav:

"determining that there a supernatural creator doesn't seem so simple to me, especially when you consider that such a powerful entity would need to be created as well."

Not clear the God had to be created.

"believing in such a being is easy enough, I suppose, because once you have faith in something, you don't have to think about it anymore, you just know it's true. Further scientific enquiry or other forms of rational thought not needed."

Dude, you will find no blind faith here. Even my Atheism was not blind. Open to new data it was.

The difference between me and the blind faith Atheists is that I accept the Universe as evidence and work from there on the data it offers.

So who is it really who has steadfast faith not concerned with science and observations?

determining that there a supernatural creator doesn't seem so simple to me, especially when you consider that such a powerful entity would need to be created as well.

believing in such a being is easy enough, I suppose, because once you have faith in something, you don't have to think about it anymore, you just know it's true. Further scientific enquiry or other forms of rational thought not needed.

Dear Gerry,

"I completely agree to your statement that a "scriptural" (my definition) god (the main topics of the pious crowd, heaven and hell etc. etc.) has really nothing whatsoever to do with the question of the beginning. It is funny that so many people connect the two dimensions and try in vain to prove the one through the other, arriving at nothing but constant circular reasoning."

Roger Penrose who did some of the probability calculations to which I refer carefully observes that any creator has "nothing to do with denominations." I agree.

I take my deductive religion project axioms as:

1. In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

2. She did this to make an abode for life.

I use "She" to distance Her from the ancient world's various patriarchal religions. Lepi and PaganPlace seem to enjoy this usage. But one thing seems sure to me. Whoever, or whatever this creator was She was not the God of Sunday School.

After almost thirty years of Atheism, I was very reluctant to conclude that there is a creator. It turns out to be the simplest interpretation.

While I admit you can say "Well, it just happened. Why do you need a creator?" But then you have to explain how it happened so perfectly for us to exist. I broke my Atheist jaw trying to chew that rock up.

Thomas Baum,

P.S.: I forgot to mention the swastika.

I gather Wikipedia isn't always that reliable, but it frequently is. Here's what it says:

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

Regards.

Thomas Baum,

Thank you for your post. I had read, and just now reread, your earlier post.

I agree with you that labels are not reality and don't even point toward reality.

As a Buddhist sympathizer, I believe that reality inheres in the present moment and that, from the point of view of human perception, it is infinite, multifaceted, and mysterious.

Best wishes to you.

Norrie: "If I seem sometimes to be a bit rough in my comments, it's because, in trying to make a point, I try to be entertaining...."

I know, I know - and I'm very entertained - and I bet Bishop Chane is too - please keep it up.

To Norrie Hoyt: Hi, hope you are doing fine, I don't know if you have read my posting of Sept 8, 2007 at 10:43 AM but if you haven't, I wish you would, thank you. Concerning what you wrote, "GOTT MITT UNS was engraved on the inside of the military belts worn by Nazi soldiers in World War II, where it appeared next to images of the swastila and the imperial German eagle", when I was in Vietnam, a friend of mine from the same beach that I grew up in was also there even though we never saw each other over there but we did talk on the phone. Well after we both got home in some of the conversations that we had, he related how he had seen the swastika on some graves over there. The swastika, I believe is originally a Buddhist symbol, it might be the wheel of life, I really don't know, maybe you do. I used to think that the Germans came up with it but they didn't. It does seem obvious that just because some people use symbols and words, that doesn't necessarily mean they take them to heart, sometimes it can just be a smokescreen that they hide behind. It does seem interesting about the "imperial German eagle" though, since that seems to be a very nationalistic symbol, I think that should speak for itself. Take care. Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

E Favorite,

I don't want to leave the impression that I don't like the American Episcopal Church or its clergy.

I love their clergy. A wonderful Episcopal priest played the violin at our civil wedding in the Governor's office in the Vermont State House.

Kathy and I wrote our own wedding service in which we vowed to stay together for as long as we felt like it. (It's been 33 years so far.)

As he left the service, an old Vermont politician commented, "They don't do it that way in Barre."

[Barre, home of the famous Vermont granite quarries, is a conservative, largely Catholic, working-class town.]

Another Episcopal priest, seeking to be admitted to the Vermont Bar, asked if he could serve his mandatory legal clerkship with me in my law office. He did, and I thoroughly enjoyed his company.

If I decided to become a Christian [God forbid!],
I'd be either an Episcopalian or a Congregationalist.

If I seem sometimes to be a bit rough in my comments, it's because, in trying to make a point, I try to be entertaining, just as the clergy do in their sermons. That way the readers are less likely to fall asleep or skip over the post, and my point may actually stick in their minds for a few minutes.

I really do wish you and Bishop Chane the very best.

"Since neither you nor I know what was before this beginning, the hypothesis of god (as a joker) amounts to a comparable amount of ignorance, with the only difference that I, or we atheists, admit it."

What you miss is that we know what is here now after the beginning. It has properties we can study. It is VERY precisely tuned to support life. I can't ignore that.

As to the self generating mathematical algorithms, the "Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics" is, to me a very interesting piece of the puzzle, too.

Hi, Norrie - Anglican bishops in England might be pretty comfortable - state church and all, but their Episcopal counterparts in the US are an endangered species, with some conservative americans switching allegiance to the Nigerian church to avoid accepting gays.

Though Bishop Chane's views on God might seem vague and wobbly, his accepting views on gays are crystal clear and firm, I'm sure. Ain't no goin' back.

Bravo, Bishop Chane and all your reasonable, compassionate colleagues.

The Moderate,

your deductions lack a strange amount of logic: The question between science and religion is not the fact (present ever moving theoretical assumption anyway, in light of string or brane theories!), that the universe had a beginning, but that SOMEONE with an intention started it. The poetic analogies are nice (though pretty old), but prove nothing as to the WILL or the individuality of a "god" (how would we have to picture him?) for the "creation" of the universe.

Since neither you nor I know what was before this beginning, the hypothesis of god (as a joker) amounts to a comparable amount of ignorance, with the only difference that I, or we atheists, admit it.

The mere fact that it started certainly is no proof for a willful beginning, which even you as a scientist with religious assumptions should see. The probability question omits the self-generating force of mathematical algorithms, which have the power to create forms by the sheer consequence of the rules (the "laws" of nature, the interplay of the four physical forces; fractals are an example). The "absurd" probability smallness appears in a different light.

I completely agree to your statement that a "scriptural" (my definition) god (the main topics of the pious crowd, heaven and hell etc. etc.) has really nothing whatsoever to do with the question of the beginning. It is funny that so many people connect the two dimensions and try in vain to prove the one through the other, arriving at nothing but constant circular reasoning.

E Favorite,

You're right - You never know with these Episcopalians.

In New England it's been dry martinis after (if not before and/or during) Mass. In the South, always bourbon and coke, who knows when.

In Virginia, theft of diocesan property and its conveyance to a mad Nigerian bishop. In New Hampshire, doing right by their present Bishop.

Where will it all end? At least I hope they keep their High Church music.

But if, as you suggest, the Bishop may not believe in the creation of the world by an Abrahamic diety, where does that leave him?

Is he a Buddhist, a Transcendentalist. a New Age fantasist? A partisan of the Grand High Turtle creation theory?

Normally I cut Episcopalians and their Bishops a lot of slack.

But I had a sudden thought: aren't Episcopal Bishops among the most comfortably settled people in the world?

And didn't Jesus say to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable?

Maybe in poking at the Bishop I was unconsciously acting as an adherent of the Jesus Religion (which is not Christianity).

I wish the Bishop well and will meditate for his rapid enlightenment (and his quick discarding of his present deluded samsaric opinions).

All I know for sure is that it's late here. I'm going to turn in, hopefully to sleep, perchance to dream (of a better plane of existence?).

If the morrow shows up, the battles will undoubtedly continue.

Good night, and best wishes to you (and the poor benighted Bishop).

Amen & Amen.

Hey, Norrie -- Give the poor Bishop a break!

Just because, as you say, "...all other adherents to an Abrahamic religion believe that 'God' created the universe and this world" doesn't mean he does too.

He's already gotten in a lot of trouble with supposed fellow adherents for saying ""God lives within each of us...not outside of us."

You never know with these Episcopalians.

Bishop Chane's essay is entitled GOD WITH US.

The German for this is GOTT MIT UNS.

GOTT MITT UNS was engraved on the inside of the military belts worn by Nazi soldiers in World War II, where it appeared next to images of the swastila and the imperial German eagle.

In an earlier post on this thread, I wrote:

"Bishop Chane and all other adherents to an Abrahamic religion believe that 'God' created the universe and this world.

"By creating this universe and this world with the characteristics they in fact have, 'God' must be held to have intended the natural and probable consequences of those characteristics, viz., suffering and death.

"'God' must therefore be considered to be a torturer and a murderer, as the Cathars so readily perceived."

Ah, yes:

GOD WITH US - GOTT MIT UNS

In the hellish world God/Gott created.

Hitler and Bishop Chane evidently agree on that.

Dear E Fav:

"Suffice it to say that I do not think that supernatural events (e.g., creation of the universe by a supernatural being, virgin birth, resurrection, bodily ascension into heaven) are possible."

Creation of the Universe is in a different category than virgin birth, resurrection, bodily ascension into heaven. The Universe presents evidence. For example the microwave background radiation is the remnant of an image of the universe shortly after The Big Bang (poetically: The Moment of Creation). The COBE satellite has gotten enough data to construct a picture of the surface universe just as it became transparent (poetically: Let There Be light). Roger Penrose uses black hole theory to compute the probability of the Universe with thermodynamics like the one we live in is 1/(10^(10^128)). This number is absurdly small. Thus the Universe we live in is not a chance occurrence.

In science, we reject hypotheses that have a low probability given the observations.

Modern science sees nearly back to the moment of creation. It provides theories that give physical interpretation back to 10^(-45) seconds after The Big Bang.

So:

1.There was a moment of creation.
2.The resulting Universe was not one expected by chance (to an absurd degree of confidence)

So what do you make of that?

If you reject what cannot be observed, and you reject what has been observed, what does that leave you?

Thomas Baum and Moderate, I must admit I have difficulty following your thought processes and understanding your questions. Suffice it to say that I do not think that supernatural events (e.g., creation of the universe by a supernatural being, virgin birth, resurrection, bodily ascension into heaven) are possible.

I also don’t understand why Richard Schneider thought I needed to mind my own business, and will stop by here to see if he has something to say about that.

Dear E Favorite:

“Moderate - are you equating faith with hypotheses?”

Axioms and hypotheses are not really the same thing. An hypothesis is loosely held and part of the method of scientific investigation the Catholics developed in the Middle Ages, and which was subsequently secularized. Hypotheses are always under revision by a deliberate method. Axioms and premises are necessary to make arguments about hypotheses and to advance the state of the hypotheses with regard to their generality and universality.

You must always strive to take as little on faith as possible. In math that means having as few axioms as possible and still be able to derive the rich field theorems that you need for your science of hypotheses. If you want to do arithmetic, you need the Peano axioms to prove you have done it right. If you don't like one of the Peano axioms you can reject it, but you will find that you cannot add, or count, (though some rudimentary ability to do this is “built in” to us. Among the primitives, they count one, two, three, and many, or use the remarkable computers called the hands put things in correspondence with fingers. How it got “built in” is another discussion.) and then prove you got it right.

Euclid gave the axioms of plane geometry. Well, one of these is that parallel lines never meet, and people took Euclid's postulates (axioms) as “true” for two thousand years. They built impressive technologies on that. Later Riemann said that if you can't prove the parallel postulate what happens if you replace it with its negation. Parallel lines always meet. What he got was spherical geometry, rather than plane, and founded the field of Non-Euclidean Geometry, which is still under investigation.

If you take the parallel postulate (and the other ones) on faith you get plane geometry. If you take its negation on faith you get spherical geometry. Different theorems become available to in each system. You can choose your kind of geometry, but it takes and act of faith to get any one of them.

My deductive religion project presently has two axioms:

1.In the beginning, God created heavens and the earth (poetic for Universe).
2.She did this to create and abode for life.

Many ethical concepts follow.

My point to you is that you have axioms too, whether you like it or not. What are they? Without knowing and identifying your foundations you will be adrift and never really know why you do things or what is right, except by intuition.

Clearly you do have some intuition on this subject if keep some form of the Golden Rule. But it is better to make principled decisions that are accessible to you.

As Socrates said: “The unexamined life is not worth living”

“Hypotheses change with new evidence - faith does not.”

My faith is informed by evidence, and changes with new evidence. Axioms 1 and 2 both come from the nature of the observed Universe, and am confident in them because they are consistent with scientific epistemology and the observations.

Doctrine, which is the equivalent religious equivalent of theorems derived from axioms or scientific laws and observations. Doctrine changes with new understanding of the “facts on the ground”.

“Where did "love thy neighbor" come from? it's very ingrained in humanity. Buddha said it 5 centuries before Jesus did. See Marcus Borg's "Jesus and Buddha - Parallel sayings, parallel lives."

and surely someone said it before that. If neither Jesus or Buddha had been recorded saying it, someone else would have since - it's such common sense.”

And yes, many great religions, and thinkers have arrived at it over the ages. It was certainly part of the Jewish tradition in pre-Christian times, too. It is ingrained in most, but not all people. I believe it is ingrained in good people. There are notable and numerous exceptions. They have been the bringers of destruction.

So what else do you use for your fundamental premises? Another way to phrase that is: What else do you take on faith? And why?

To E FAVORITE and the rest of the world: "Love thy neighbor", what you wrote, "If neither Jesus or Buddha had been recorded saying it, someone else would have since - it's such common sense", since all of humanity are our neighbors, why does common sense seem not very common with humanity and while we are at it why does common courtesy also seem not very common. If you read some of these posts, they are filled with hatred, do you think there might be a reason for that? I have met God the Trinity, does that mean since you don't believe it, that it isn't true? I have also met satan, just because you don't believe me, does not mean that it isn't true. Does somebody calling themself a christian mean that they know anything else about God except for His Name? It doesn't matter if anyone believes me, actually it isn't even important, I am just a messenger, what is important is that I do the job that God gave me and that is to tell the whole world that He is Love, Pure Love and that His Plan is for all of His children. One day a lot of people that call themselves christians, denominational or otherwise, will find out what christianity is all about. It does matter what you do and why you do it and also what you know. Just because the bible has been so distorted and sliced and diced by people does not mean that it isn't true. Some people use the bible to justify all of their own shortcomings and to judge and condemn others. "Look at the beam in your own eye before you try to take the speck out of your brother's", "judge not lest ye be judged", "give mercy and mercy shall be yours", "the measure you judge with will be the measure that you are judged with", people that call themselves christians should ponder these statements and others that Jesus spoke of, God is a searcher of hearts and minds, not of religious affiliations or lack thereof. Christianity is not a religion, it is not the dogma, it is not the rules and regulations, but you would be hard pressed to think that, from some of the hatred being spewed out of some of the mouths of some that call themselves christians. There is also a lot of hatred being spewed out of some of the mouths of some of the people that put another label upon themselves, God is not really into labels. Another thing, there is also such an air of superiority coming from both so-called christians and from others no matter what they call themselves. I was taught something very interesting in 2nd grade and that is we are all equal in God's eyes, think about it whether you believe in God or not, it is not saying we are the same, or we have all of the same abilities or nothing like that, but if you think about it rather than just react to it, it may speak to your heart. Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

Monk,

Repetition is one of the great ways to educate.

Some observations.

You are a monk brainwashed in some form of Tibetan non-religion who went on a non-religious mission financed by your non-religious apparently rich family but you still believe in the literal bible and literal koran. And you still live in Tibet where the Chinese make your life miserable by restricting your access to excess.

You don't have a dime to your name giving all your money the the African poor but you saved enough to pay for Internet access, a computer and a cozy place to write to all of us people of excess.

Richard R Schneider, I concur with your statement, "Everyone is entitled to their own faith."

I also wonder what I said here to inspire your directive to me that “You need to mind your own business.” I can’t promise that I’ll take your advice, but I am curious -- what, in your opinion, should I avoid saying in the future?

Dear E Favorite: My faith changes with the evidence. You keep your faith, I'll keep mine. Everyone is entitled to their own faith. You need to mind your own business.

Moderate - are you equating faith with hypotheses?

Hypotheses change with new evidence - faith does not.

Where did "love thy neighbor" come from? it's very ingrained in humanity. Buddha said it 5 centuries before Jesus did. See Marcus Borg's "Jesus and Buddha - Parallel sayings, parallel lives."

http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/1569751692/ref=sib_fs_bod/002-4083225-2322467?ie=UTF8&p=S00S&checkSum=P%2BlU2SKuUlY2GrUAOsiOO5MaNbsQggT5iPJu1kDuIu8%3D#reader-link

and surely someone said it before that. If neither Jesus or Buddha had been recorded saying it, someone else would have since - it's such common sense.

Dear Lepi:

"Weather happens. I don't believe that individual weather events are planned or controlled by any deity. Warm air mass meets cool air mass over large body of water, hurricane forms. I don't think that Mama Gaia woke up one late August morning a couple of years ago with a bad case of PMS and decided to give mankind a well-deserved b1tch-slap."

You are sweet to answer my silly tease. I do agree with you in the main. Also about God (The Gods) not putting a tiger in our tanks that belch out vast clouds of carbon dioxide that change the climate. We have only our selves to blame for that. (the) God(s) do not protect us from our own stupidity.

Who was it who said: "Against stupidity, the Gods themselves contend in vain."?

All the best.

Dear E Fav:

The ethic you seem to be discussing is:

"Love thy neighbor as thy self."

Where did that one come from?

Dear E Fav.

“Regarding: "Science was mostly created by religion" I'd say "Science was mostly DEVELOPED by religIOUS PEOPLE" because in the old days, they were likely to be the ones with advanced education. It's no accident that Mendel, the guy who developed genetics,was a monk.”

It is not that simple. The connection is much more profound than happenstance of who was educated first. Kitty Furguson in “The Fire in the equations” put her finger on it in a way that made Stephen Hawking take notice and endorse the book.

She said:

"There is a further element of risk for anyone on a search for truth. You cannot start in a vacuum. You must begin by trusting some ideas about the universe that have never been proved and might turn out to be wrong. To be simplistic about it, you have to assume that you exist and that you are sane. Those may not be such difficult assumptions. Common sense supports them. Of course you have to believe they are true in order to trust your common sense. You see what sort of mental maze we get ourselves into!

The search for truth in science is based on agreement concerning just such basic assumptions. It is a gamble, if you will; a gamble that certain articles of faith which cannot be proved by science are nevertheless well-founded enough to provide a springboard for all scientific investigation. It is intriguing to find that religion shares much of science's basic view of reality. How is it that two approaches, science and religion, both claim to be avenues to truth but in many ways reputed to clash with one another, should be in a agreement on so basic a level?

The explanation could be quite simple - that we are all looking at the same universe, and what is obvious to one reasonable person is equally obvious to the next. If that is so, it should not surprise us to find all reasonable people more or less in agreement about certain fundamental aspects of the universe. However, the agreement is not unanimous. We are speaking of a world-view shared by science (since the seventeenth century) and Western religion, with exceptions even here, but not shared by all of humanity who presumably experience and have experienced the same universe...”

... Depending on whether we believe in God, you or I might leave God out of the following articles of faith, but otherwise we would find little in this seventeenth-century world-view with which to disagree. In the seventeenth century a scientist could have had it both ways without risking charges of contradiction. What he learned form his religion and his direct experience of the universe led him to believe the following:

- The universe is rational, reflecting both the intellect and faithfulness of its Creator. It has pattern, symmetry, and predictability to it. Effect follows cause in a dependable manner. for these reasons it is not futile to try to study the universe.

- The universe is accessible to us, not a closed book but one open to our investigation. Minds created in the image of the mind of God can understand the universe God created.

- The universe has contingency to it, meaning that things could have been different from the way we find them, and chance and/or choice have played a role in making them what they are. Whether this is contingency in the sense that chance and choice play an ongoing role within the universe, or merely in the sense that there was an initial chance occurrence which brought about this universe instead of a different one or none at all, one cannot learn about the universe by pure thought or logic alone. Knowledge comes by observing and testing it.

- There is such a thing as objective reality. Because God exists and sees and knows everything, there is truth behind everything. Reality has a hard edge to it and does not cave in or shift like sands in the desert in response to our opinions, perceptions, preferences, beliefs, or anything else. Reality is not a democracy. There is something definite, some raw material, out there for us to study.

- There is unity to the universe. There is an explanation – one God, one equation, or one system of logic – which is fundamental to everything. The universe operated by underlying laws which do not change in an arbitrary fashion from place to place, from minute to minute, or even from millennium to millennium. There are no loose ends, no real contradictions. At some deep level, everything fits.”

This is one glimpse into the common source of monotheistic religion and science. There are many others, from Pythagorus on. So, many of the Atheist fundamentalists who pretend to stand upon science actually stand against it. They haven't even come to grips with the basic issues about the foundations of science, or the foundations of logic, or the foundations of mathematics.

You see, all arguments have premises. All mathematical systems have axioms. These we must take on faith. Why? Because the systems don't exist if you refuse the premises and axioms. No theorems can be proved, and nothing can be known.

So why bother? Because of the useful results that we get from the systems engendered by the what we take on faith. Medicine, electricity, computers, communication, chemistry, physics, mathematics, modern agriculture, aviation, ... Well, I don't have time to list them all.

There is no escape from faith, if you wish to reason. The fundamentalist Atheists on the site are generally not well thought out, because they fear to do what it takes to actually reason.

where did everyone go...was it something I said?

I feel sorry that you are offended by my posts, but i assure you that I have spoken nothing that is not truthful about America, you my friend are a little to unreasonable. My heart goes out for tose who know you, they are in danger of your hatred. It spreads like the fires of California..

Being Confused at such an attack-MONK

hey monk you notice how no one is responding, how dare you come onto and American site and bash us..all of your people need to be taught a lesson in fact, we should just wipe out all of you arabs and be out of there...America is the greatest nation in the world, we don't pick the fight we just get criticized for finishing the fight with your sorry countries.

I mean come on you are the problem, America does so much good and bails so many countries out of problems and the thanx we get is More More More...let me tell you I hope you blow yourself up with an IED as you are trying to hurt our Troops....

And I would have been in your Countries Peace Core why? I am not an American, but I took the mission trips, and I didn't go with a "church" my family financed my trips, and we went their to aid in relief, I know it is hard to believe, but some of us in the world see what is going on, "They took the Power from the have-nots and then came the shots"

I understand you think that by following what the Bible or the Quaran instructs and teaches we are brainwashed, but just go put somemore money on the 'ol Visa CC...I mean you as a consumer are brainwashed to believe that these worthless Plasma and LCD Tv's, and HD this and that, are good for the people. Give the Peasents more things for them to occupy their time with and we (the governments) can do whatever we want....

I mean you vote, my country doesn't get to vote because we are being occupied, and yet this wonderful American Dreams are going to liberate us from the tyranny of our Oppressors...It's ironic that I could walk down the street and go to the local Market without being attacked and questioned by either Road security or Military Checkpoint....

But hey nothing like totaly destroying my country's infustructure FOR WHAT....oh yeah:

Providing/making jobs is the best way to fight poverty and Americans are very good at that with their interest in productivity and all things new and novel.

How are those alternate sources of fuel panning out?

_MONK of XYMER_

Monk,

Had you been brainwashed in some form of religion, you would have had added direction and assistance in your missionary work. And what missions were you working in? USA Peace Corps?? (although I don't believe they call their projects missionary work.)

Hmmm, and buying electronics and other goods is actually a great thing. Look at China and India in the last 25 years. Providing/making jobs is the best way to fight poverty and Americans are very good at that with their interest in productivity and all things new and novel.

Thomas Paul Moses Baum...

That was very amazing, The world only knows God through the Holy Spirit, and the acts in which we are seen doing are how the "world" sees The Holy Spirit. It is are jobs to show the "world" that living by the word of God is better than giving into all the temptation and the "I want it now" Microwaved mentality that has gripped The Entire World, not just America...When is the last time you didn't see people complaining about standing in line or having to wait more than 30 sec for a meal...

The world has givin into Microwave mentality, but not me, I don't even own one, and let me say I am not a cave man, I just don't like the thought of purposely trying to infuse my food with radioactive microwaves. I know, in the age of cell phone this and that...when the biggest thing to happen in the last year was an iPhone? Who the flip cares...a little less "gimmme gimme gimme" a little more "for $.88 a day you can feed and educate kids in equador"

All those missionary trips I took to Africa and Central America watching kids die, while, my friends in the States wondered if their $950 Mortgage was going to be paid on time..??

Ranting and Raving- MONK

TO XYMERIAN MONK: Hi, I was wondering if you had the chance if you would read the posting I did on Sept 6, 2007 at 5:31 PM. Thank You, by the way I live in America and a lot of people sure do seem to be spoiled and ungrateful over here, kind of like a bunch of unruly children. One of the things Jesus spoke of was to be child-like as opposed to childish which are worlds apart. Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

Seems there is quite a liitle while between posts, anyone catch the game?

Just making Small Talk-MONK

It seems mu tongue has spoken sharply once again, I am sorry Concerned that I lashed out, but it seems that the average American spends his time b*tching about the way things are....and yet you have a system of Balances, if a problem is in need of fixing vote to fix it..but there in lies the problem...your Great Democracy (actually Republic) has fallen to the corruption that you people love to call out in other countries...No Government is Perfect, except Iran (a joke for all to snear at).

It seems that the common man, and your Elected Officials have not seen eye to eye, and yet only 30% vote..."Some of those who want Forces are the same that Burn Crosses...Killing in the Name of"

-Rage against the Machine sums up America in one Lyric-

_MONK of XYMER_

Concerned:

And what religion were you Bred, Born and Brainwashed in?

I would never be so. Religion or anything of such a cultish nature is quite a turnoff to me as a reasonable person, and I am offended that a Catholic such as yourself would ever through the Bred. Born, and Brainwashed comment into the mix. I have no anger towards you, but you seem to have such a negative attitude at anything that is not a New/Age whatever...Why should I care what is taught in theology, or Universities??? How does the "knowledge" of your Universities helping to end such torment in Sudan, the knowledge that is spewed from the dying jays of the American "education" system seems to be flawed...I see that your President went to Yale, so he is quite an Enlightened Person...correct?

Theology, has no bearing on my life...Although I would love to go waste 100,000 on the "Great American Dream" such as the excellent way the "Teachers" live in your great society..I am not bashing the country, only the wasted energies spent on learning "Better" things has led your great Nation down its path... So how is the Debt going...how much money does it take to buy LOVE and PEACE...I know not these answers, but you being the Concerned Cultist now Liberated should...

_MONK of XYMER_

Moderate - I can only speak for myself regarding katrina relief, but I do think my actions/motivations may be similar to many other people, irrespective of religion. I didn't respond as an atheist. I responded as a fellow human being.

I felt sorry for them. It seemed the least I could do. If I had lived closer I would have considered taking people in - not sure I would have done it, though. That would have been a bigger commitment. I respect the people who did. I suspect some of them were non-believers.

Regarding: "Science was mostly created by religion" I'd say "Science was mostly DEVELOPED by religIOUS PEOPLE" because in the old days, they were likely to be the ones with advanced education. It's no accident that Mendel, the guy who developed genetics,was a monk.

Dear E Fav:

Glad to hear you pitched in on Katrina.

But in terms of ethics, why did you do so?

On my side of the fence, it is because we are all Children of God and when one suffers, all suffer. So we should be willing to devote at least a small fraction of our time, treasure, and talent to helping each other through rough times. Because I believe that God created the universe as an abode for life, I see preserving and furthering life as a sacred duty as well as a privilege. This has many implications.

On your side of the fence, what is the motivation? This is not a criticism. It is an honest question.

It is all to clear after seeing the spectacle of Sam Harris, who publicly advocates torture because he lives in fear, criticizing Mother Teresa, that Atheists can go very, very, wrong. Religionists can also go very wrong. Clearly the religious Bush didn't care enough to cancel his month long vacation, and made religion look bad because of it.

I would like to get a better understanding of how an Atheist would go right on something, which you did if you contributed to relief of the Katrina disaster.

Moderate:
**As to God and storms, I think Zeus runs that, so ask PaganPlace, and lepidopteryx.

Whadaya think Lepi?**

Weather happens. I don't believe that individual weather events are planned or controlled by any deity. Warm air mass meets cool air mass over large body of water, hurricane forms. I don't think that Mama Gaia woke up one late August morning a couple of years ago with a bad case of PMS and decided to give mankind a well-deserved b1tch-slap.
My Divine isn't like that. It's not an exeternal entity sitting at a control panel throwing switches and pushing buttons. It's part of me and I'm part of it. It and I are part of an inter-connected web along with the rest of the Universe. It's why I don't practice petitionary prayer. If there's something I need or want, I do two things - I focus my mental and spiritual energy toward that goal (which I guess some people would call prayer), and then I focus my physical energy toward it.
I have dear friends who had just bought a house in New Orleans. They evac'd to Houston when it became apparent that Katrina was going to hit. Did I worry that their house would be destroyed? Sure. Did I ask the gods to magically shield their house? No. Did I think of them often with hope for their safety and that of their hiome? Sure. As it turned out, a tree limb fell through the roof onver their back porch, but the rest of the house was undamaged. Was I grateful? Sure. Did I think it was because they had somehow earned special divine favor that others had not merited? No. That's just how the wind blew. The gods didn't steer the wind around their house and into someone else's house that they didn't like as much.
I do think that we bring generally heightened storm strength on ourselves via our production of greenhouse gases, and it would have been nice if the Corps of Engineers had listened to the scientists who were telling them several years ago that the levees would not be able to withstand a storm surge of this magnitude, but that's a whole other conversation.
Even in places with little to no human population, storms happen. It has nothing to do with punishment for so-called sins or inadequate levels of worship.

Dear YoYo:

"It just doesn't fit anymore into this ever changing,ever evolving,ever developing brave new world,mostly created by science."

It is not that simple. Folks like you either don't know, or don't want to know any of the history of science.

Science was mostly created by religion. From the Pythagorean Society, to the High Middle Ages, through the Renaissance, science and mathematics were developed by the religious to study God's, (or the Gods') plan in laying the foundations of the world, and the Universe.

You must be some scientific genius to be so much smarter than Newton and Einstein put together. They voted against your view of a universe without cause, and for good reason.

The fulminating Atheists on this site are on intellectual par with the cartoon characters like Beavis and Butthead when they pointed a TV remote at the world, said "This sucks. Change it.", and pressed the button.

Guess what? It didn't work. God's creation is not subjective, and neither is God.

COncerned: "...New Reality that is being taught in many Catholic college graduate theology classes."

But this new reality isn't being taught to the parishioners, is it? Why do you suppose that is and what can be done about it?

Moderate - I don't question God because I don't have belief in a God. How could someone know that God didn't cause Katrina, but did cause his people to help in the aftermath? I think that people like me who provided financial support during Katrina were acting on their own innate moral sense.

Monk,

Screaming??? Hmm, how so? Because we want The Jihadist et al to come to grips with the flaws in the foundations of Islam? That is not screaming, that is concern for world peace akin to saying/singing the Prayer of St. Francis every day.

And what religion were you Bred, Born and Brainwashed in? It took me about five years to rid myself of old time, orthodox Catholicism. Now I am a Catholic/Christian of the New Reality that is being taught in many Catholic college graduate theology classes.

With all these new atheist books topping the best seller list in most countries its as if western civilization is finally growing up and beginning to move away from the fairyland scenario of gods and devils and all the rest of the superstitious mumbo jumbo they've been drumming into our heads for two thousand years or more.It just doesn't fit anymore into this ever changing,ever evolving,ever developing brave new world,mostly created by science.
Enough already with the superstitious nonsense.

I'm so glad that the good bishop says God lives inside ourselves and not outside.In other words he lives in our imagination and not anywhere real.
That also explains why different people believe in differnt gods and some believe in nogod.
This used to really confuse me so much I gave up thinking about it.But yes,of course,a muslim would have a different god in their minds because they were forced to imagine Allah when they were kids,and we we forced to believe in in an old man god with a white beard,and Indians beleive in Indian gods like Vishnu and all the other imaginary gods.
But if gods are imaginery why do we fight about them? If they are imaginary,isnt thatthe same as saying they are not real? That gods dont exist?
I feel so much better about things now.
And I don't need to pray anymore,which always seemed a waste of time.
Thanks bishop.I never thought I'd see the day when a bishop converted me to atheism.

Richard Schneider

I tend to agree with much of what you say,but you
generalize when you say god is in all of us,even if your God is only a metaphor.
The skygod we argue back and fore over on these threads is an imaginary bigdaddy in the sky that folk talk to and expect to be with when they leave this world for the imaginary world of the dead,known as Heaven.
God is not in all of us.Only in the deluded.

Dear Bishop Chaine,

"God lives within each of us...not outside of us!"

Sorry, but that is Bad Theology.

God lives within each of us... and outside of us.

Do you seriously think that the God who created the Universe lives ONLY in us? We create religion, but God created the Universe, and us within it. We did not create God.

You should give your well intended humanist side a closer look, its a bit too hard over. Think about Genesis 1. There is a whole lot to it.

Dear E favorite:

"Bishop Chane - how is it that you know that God had no hand in the disasters but was there afterwards to help us clean up the mess?"

The churches and sent a lot of people and money down to help rebuild. The still do. Could God be acting through His people in this way? I worked on organizing the disaster relief. Did you? If not, why question God about your own failings?

Dear Venkat:

"Apologists and moderates like this author give cover to the fundamentalists."

You don't get out much, do you.

The problem with the Episcopal Church is NOT giving cover to fundamentalists. It is pretty much a far-left institution, and tolerant of all things the far-left of is tolerant of. However, they are intolerant of conservatives, and especially fundamentalists.

The search committee for Bishop John Bryson Chaine had a full page list of considerations for the ideal candidate that they circulated. A requirement for gay friendliness was there near the top, but beliefs in God, and the Resurrection were nowhere on the list. Even some gay friendly folks like The Moderate here were discomfited by this.

Bishop Chaine: What do you think of that priority?

As to God and storms, I think Zeus runs that, so ask PaganPlace, and lepidopteryx.

Whadaya think Lepi?

Concerned:

I have to ask what that person feels the need to scream from a mountain top his beliefs, You should not care so much (or obviously so Little) about what we as a collective audience thinks...what is the point of throwing a boulder to crush the mosquitoe on my shoulder..that is a saying my father would say to me as a child when I would try and insert my views.

The point you get, for you are obviously inteligent, albeit persistent in pushing your views; however, what has happened to you to make such a hatred of things that we as people hold "sacred" does it affect you as an American citizen to be forced o bow to God? NO

In the United States of America, you may freely join in in the religious debates; but in my country you can not, that is why I love America...everyone is free to have an opinion or a beleif that no one can break or take...you should be rejoicing that you have such a gift..

_MONK of XYMER_

Richard Schneider, you say "It is an absolute pleasure to see this kind of rationality exetending itself into mainstream religion. We are seeing the early stages of the transformation of belief from the ancient religions, to modern understanding and the rationality of belief based on reason and science."

I sure hope you're right. and I sure hope this inspires Bishop Chane to move sprightly in the inevitable direction of Christian Humanism.

There's no going back, Bishop -- can't you see it?

Richard Schneider:

you say that we are what God is, well that is interesting. I myself would never boast that we are God, conserdering the mess the world is in and the millions that die needlessly by starvation, when America wastes 42% of the food that is consumed whithin its monsterous bowles every year.

If we were all God we would not let the innocent lose their innocence and the destruction of civilizations accure while scoffing at the one thing that could save...LOVE

By investing a personal interest in the situations that rack the human mind with extreme emotional responses we learn that we are small. I held a child in Angolia that was dying of Rhubella, a simple disease that we recieve shots for...another with HIV/AIDS and lastly an infant whose throat had closed due to lack of use (starvation)..nothing in my experence could have prepared me for those things...

God is in everyone and is attainable, but do not confuse accessability with your theory, as nice as it sounds, it is not reality...

I mean these things not as an attack, far from it, I don't even want to try and "convert" anyone, I see all of us as great and marvelous, but we are not a god, or the God.

_MONK of XYMER_

Richard Schneider, you say "It is an absolute pleasure to see this kind of rationality extending itself into mainstream religion. We are seeing the early stages of the transformation of belief from the ancient religions, to modern understanding and the rationality of belief based on reason and science."

I sure hope you're right. and I sure hope this inspires Bishop Chane to move sprightly in the inevitable direction of Christian Humanism.

There's no going back, Bishop -- can't you see it?

There is only one place where there is no agrument for where God actually exists: as an idea in the human brain. But my beleif is that the concept of a God existing outside of the human brain is simply what is known in psychology or psychiatry as a "projection". When one contemplates the attributes we ascribe to "God", eg performing miracles, we can see that over the eons it is we humans who actually have performed the miracles we ascribe to a God. I'm talking in very concrete terms here. For example, God never did a heart transplant. Or, only a God could make a sound like the voice of Karen Carpenter, then record it using electrons and broadcast it to the rest of the universe electormagnetically, and listen to it over and over again on an ipod or CD for all of eternity. WE are the actual God. Each of us is a God, and collectively, as a species, represent the actual entity we call "God". That is what I mean when I say God is inside of me and inside of all of us.

The topic of one's faith is a touchy subject for anyone...those who have "no" faith are slow to listen to those who "have" faith. And those whose faith is "absolute" are quick to condemn those who have "no" faith..and yet I see no answers coming from either side, NO ONE WINS an argument..the utter lack of beleif in a personal God affects me little in the way that some of you seem to have taken offense to someones dibelief.

We are victims of our own egos, man is a prideful being, we pride ourselves in our inventions and we pride ourselves in our intellect; however, we pride ourselves in our accomplishments; and yet, few pride themselves in terms of failure. We see situations that oppose what we hold to be "sacred" as evil or wrong, and yet I see the same thing in the times of Jesus....

The pharisees said to Jesus he was wrong and evil and that he was a false prophet, yet Jesus carried on without even giving a thought to their actions against him why?

We as the HUMAN race have failed, be you Jew, Muslim, Mormon, (one of the hundred protestant religions), or Bhuddist, Hindu or Monk the simpelist of all things is TO LOVE ONE ANOTHER... and we say that is too hard??

_MONK of XYMER_

Thomas Baum

The bishop made it clear
"God lives within each of us...not outside of us."

In other words Thomas,God is in your head;
not anywhere outside your head. Just in your head.
In your imagination.That's reality Thomas.
God is make believe,just like Santa.

lepidopteryx - And I never met a pasta I didn't love. I'll follow a man who can make linguini with clam sauce to the ends of the earth.

I like you too. And you wouldn't have to follow me to the ends of the earth to get linquini alla vongole. When women chase me they usually catch me.

wiccan - May the FSM touch you with His Noodly Appendage!

Now you've got me touching my noodly appendage. Stop talking like that. See you in Long Island.

TO JOHN BRYSON CHANE: It says that you are an Episcopal Bishop, I would like to ask you a question: Who do you say that Jesus is: a mere prophet, second rate at that, or God Incarnate? Jesus is either God Incarnate like He said or He is a liar, He is not a liar, you can take this recommendation or not but it is better to throw away the whole bible than to water it down. Just because the bible and it's message has been so distorted does not mean that it isn't true. God's Plan is for all of His children. I look past Heaven to the Kingdom, Jesus Himself said that Heaven and earth were going to pass away. I think what I have written is pretty simple and straight forward. God is a Trinity, He is Pure Love and He is the God of ALL, also God is not male, female or an it, but is God, of course God Incarnate was a Man. Also I do not hold it against Mohammed that he was deceived. Actually the acts of violence were not a contradiction of the teachings of the god of islam, islam is a religion of world domination and satan is the god of islam. Have you ever heard of sharia law? That is why I say that God is a searcher of hearts and minds, not of religious affiliations or lack thereof and also that it is important what you do and why you do it and what you know. God made the whole universe, including the earth subject to the natural laws that He set in motion when He did it. Where was God? He was in all of the people that helped out in whatever way, big or small, we are made in His Image and Likeness and we do have free will, what we do with it is our choice, that is why it is called free will. I am thankful that God has a Plan and one day everyone will be. Take care, be ready. Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

There's a little Italian diner in Mastic Beach, Long Island that serves a Penne with Vodka Sauce that would make a Pastafarian out of the most diehard fundamentalist of any stripe. May the FSM touch you with His Noodly Appendage! :-)

Maurie,

LOL. Exactly - if a cow makes beef by eating grass, grass gets its nutrients from dirt, which is partly made of the decomposed bodies of dead animals, then it's really all the same thing.

And I never met a pasta I didn't love. I'll follow a man who can make linguini with clam sauce to the ends of the earth.

lepidopteryx - I guess it's a good thing that I gave up Christianity, because I have no intention of giving up bacon cheeseburgers, smothered pork chops, boudin (red or white), shrimp, crawfish, oysters, crabs, or rabbit.

Like myself, you are actually a super vegetarian. We eat CONCENTRATED vegetation in the form of a cow. Mm, Mm, good.

I'm very fond of Spaghetti ala Carbonara.

Rahmen

Truthsayer, you're cracking me up!

I guess it's a good thing that I gave up Christianity, because I have no intention of giving up bacon cheeseburgers, smothered pork chops, boudin (red or white), shrimp, crawfish, oysters, crabs, or rabbit.

Last I heard, those other planets didn't have breathable atmospheres. Is God going to reconfigure the universe at the subatomic level just because we keep making babies? And let's face it, he hasn't exactly fixed the areas that are unlivable on this planet, so why wourld he go to all the trouble of redesigning another one for us?

You're starting to sound like one of the "pastors" at Landover...

lepidopteryx:

We can't preted to know what would have happened if sin did not come into this world for the Bible does not say. As to how many people would have been born or anything else. We only have the Bible to refer to, and those answers are not given.

As to heaven filling up, that's not going to happen, and even if it could, there's all those other planets out in the UNIVERSE which we could occupy. I mean think about it, do you actually think that earth is the ONLY planet that God could use to house humans??? No, we are told that the ANGELS have wings, and they are able to fly back and forth between heaven and earth. Don't you think that God could then transport us to another planet if things got crowded around here.

Look at the question and answer given by God and Lucifer; Job 1:6,7 "6 Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan/Lucifer also came among them. 7 And the LORD said to Satan, “From WHERE do you COME?” So Satan answered the LORD and said, “From going to and fro on the EARTH, and from walking back and forth on it.”"

Now if God asks lucifer where he comes from, and Lucifers answer is EARTH. Does that not tell us that there are MORE PLACES in this UNIVERSE that BEINGS can be, or at least that these ANGELS can be? See if there was ONLY EARTH and HEAVEN, then God would not ask "where do you come" from, and Lucifer would not answer "EARTH". No, there are MORE PLACES in this UNIVERSE that God could take us if it gets crowded on earth or in heaven. But since we sinned, we were never able to find out, until Christ comes again.

And even if all those planets got full, don't you think that the CREATOR of HEAVEN and EARTH could maybe UPGRADE the planet earth or heaven if need be??? If you can add an additional bathroom onto your house, don't you think the God who created all the earth, could maybe expand it if He needed to??? (But like I said earlier, we sinned so we never found out what would have happened. But since God is God, He could have chosen several paths for the CREATIONs He CREATED in the first place. Because when it all boils down, God is the one and only creator, who created everything in the UNIVERSE out of NOTHING, so these little issues, we discuss would be no big thing for Him.)

lepidopteryx and silence:

As to the subject of food and what one eats: God intended for us to eat fruits and vegetables (Gen 1,2), not meat. But only because of sin were we given permission to eat certain meats. Meat was not allowed until after Noah.

Ask youself this, what was the ONE THING that coincided with man only living 120 years, after man had lived over 900 years during Noahs time??? It was the introduction of MEAT in the diet!!! Noah lived over 900 years, but after that people started living less and less. Here's God saying that man can only live a certain amount of years; Genesis 6:3 "3 And the LORD said, “...yet his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.”" AND then the introduction of meat in our diet; Gen 9:3 "3 Every moving thing that lives shall be food for you..." The only change in MAN's lifestyle was the eating of MEAT. Nothing else in the Bible says that there was a change in LIFESTYLE to explain the reduction in years lived, from over 900 to a mere 120.

And just in case someone thinks that Noah and his kids ate the UNCLEAN ANIMALS, please recognize that such an act was impossible. WHY? Because whatever UNCLEAN animal they ate back then did not exist anymore. Why? Because only 2 unclean animals went into the ark, and if only 2 went in, and then they ate one, that animal would no longer exist today, because it could not procreate. No they ONLY ate the CLEAN animals, which had 7 of each animal. Gen 7: "2 You shall take with you SEVEN each of every CLEAN animal, a male and his female; two each of animals that are UNCLEAN, a male and his female."

And as to eating pork or any other unclean animal, the bible NEVER says that Christians can eat such. For Silence, when you let the Bible speak for itself, please let it continue the conversation and don't shut it up before it's done. For when reading Acts we see that the Vision, was not telling us that we could eat unclean meat, it was saying that the GENTILES were welcomed as Christians. Here's Peter saying he does not eat unclean meat; Acts 10:14 "But Peter said, “Not so, Lord! For I have never eaten anything common or unclean.” And here's the INTERPRETATION of the vision, given to us by PETER throuh God; Acts 10:28 "...But God has shown me that I should not call any MAN common or UNCLEAN."

See if we let the Bible speak for itself, without telling it to shut up before it's through speaking, we see that PETER TELLS US THE INTERPRETATION of the vision. We don't have to interpret it to mean something else. Peter specifically says that the vision was telling him that the Gentile MAN was not UNCLEAN "God has shown me that I should not call any MAN common or UNCLEAN". We see nothing about eating meat that is unclean. The truth of the matter is that Peter says he has NEVER EATEN UNCLEAN meat "For I have NEVER EATEN anything common or unclean." (extra note: when this vision is given it's several years after Christ's death, and Peter is not eating UNCLEAN meat, so to try and say that Christ said it was OK to eat UNCLEAN meat says that PETER did not know correct theology directly taught by Jesus, which is not the case, Peter knew that UNCLEAN meat was still unclean.)

And here's a little brain teaser, what was one of the only things Christ ever killed or let die while on earth??? PIGS, those unclean meats. Matthew 8:31,32 "31 So the demons begged Him, saying, “If You cast us out, permit us to go away into the herd of swine.” 32 And He said to them, “Go.” So when they had come out, they went into the herd of swine. And suddenly the whole herd of swine ran violently down the steep place into the sea, and perished in the water. " Did you see what was CAST into those PIGS? DEMONS were. Now is there anyone here who would say that Demons are not UNCLEAN? No, Jesus cast the demons into the pigs, because they were unclean, and let them die because it was not food to be eaten. Contrast that with Jesus saving leftovers from feeding the 5 thousand in (Matt 14:20). If Jesus was into conserving food he would not have waisted all those pigs.

SD,

My apologies for the mis-attribution.

Let me see if I understand your response to the Malthusian reproduction issue correctly.

Originally, God intended for human beings and animals to live forever, but had already decided that after a certain number were born, he would shut down the baby-making equipment worldwide and across all species, and the living things who were alive at the time would simply stay alive forever.
At what point would aging stop? If childbirth was a curse resulting from the fall, how were Adam and Eve going to multiply? Were all people going to be rib clones "born" full-grown without the need for gestation and maturation? And since other mammals reproduce in pretty much the same fashion as we do, was the birthing process a curse on them too?

And there's a finite number of folks talked about in heaven - and this number was known at the time of the writing of the OT. So heaven has a limited capacity. What happens if the number of people who "get saved" exceeds the fire marshall's occupancy limitation for heaven? Or does God simply withdraw the salvation option once heaven is full? What happens to people born after heaven stops accepting new tenants?

Mark, you say, “God doesn't "live inside of us", our humanity does.” I think that’s what Bishop Chane meant, in his own bishopy sort of way.

I also find it very interesting to read here about different people’s version of God, as in [paraphrasing] “my god does this but doesn’t do that….” Some people have obviously crafted their own personal gods, perhaps based in some respects on the biblical god they learned about as children, who act in a way that’s reasonable, humane and most of all comforting to the individual. Maybe they think this is the same god they hear about in church and who that looks after them for eternity in heaven(another comforting thought), I don’t know, but it’s so obviously a personal construct, that I don’t see why it would have to be associated with any religion or any theological outlook.

Lepidopteryx

I failed to address the Malthusian question you posed regarding an uncontrolled population curve in light of finite resources (organic living plants and organic animals).

This biology-based question crosses into mathematics and geometry and, for faith-based people, presents no problem. I will make a stab at things in an effort to answer this question.

A geometry professor described a "point" as a dot on a line of dots that are infinite in number and never ending - a very long line. If the line is a visual metaphor for eternity, then a human mortal life is but a dot. Arguably, the pre-fall-of-man Adam, Eve and progeny were launched on a path where both spirit and flesh were intended to be eternal. This path to someday be restored for all redeemed by that lamb's blood - believers. Until then, mortal life is a vapor in many ways, including the quantity of years. Life and its duration has been considered by Solomon, the Philosophers and even Wordsworth in his Intimations on Immortality.

Yet the Christian faith squares off with biology immediately by requiring a virgin birth and a resurrection - which are not consistent with biology, yet demanded by faith. Even when you read the Book of Numbers and Revelation, you read of a finite count on the quantity of souls/persons.

So, for a person of faith who steps away from earthly aspirations and laws, reaching for spiritual laws and things, these people do not concern themselves with the coulda/shoudas predating the fall of man because they have faith that a greater plan is unfolding and that:

1 Corinthians 13:12
For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.

This is a flawed essay. Apologists and moderates like this author give cover to the fundamentalists.

God is only in my mind? Now you tell me!
So that's why he never answered my prayers.
I've been wasting my time haven't I.
Maybe I should get a new God,a real one.
Maybe Allah is real,dont you think?
There must be a real one somewhere.
Woe is me.

Lepidopteryx:

You have attributed comments made by Truthsayer, to me

I have tried to get out of the way and permit Jesus and Scripture to speak for themselves.

SD

Once there was a huge rain storm, and the rivers all filled up and flooded over their banks. A man who lived nearby had to climb onto the roof of his house to stay out of the water. As he sat there with his dog, he prayed to God: "Lord, I know you're powerful, so please rescue me from this terrible flood. Thy will be done."

As he finished his prayer, his dog (a lab, naturally) jumped off the roof and into the flood, then swam off out of sight. A few minutes later, a neighbor came by in his little put-put boat, with the dog inside. "Climb down, and I'll take you up hill with my family!" The neighbor cried, but the man refused, saying, "No, the Lord will take care of me." So the neighbor sailed away.

The water kept rising, and after some time, the man began to pray again. "Lord, I know you're all powerful, but I'm not real comfortable up here on this roof. I'm sure there are many people who need your help today, but do you think you could spare me a few minutes? Thy will be done." When he opened his eyes he saw the Red Cross boat come by. "Jump down and we'll take you to the shelter!" The Red Cross people shouted, but the man refused. "The Lord will provide," He said. So the Red Cross continued on their way.

But the water kept rising. It was so high now, that the man was having to sit on his chimney, and his feet were getting wet. "Ok, Lord," He prayed. "I get the message. I know you're in charge. Just get me out of here and I'll never miss another day of church. Thy will be done."

Then he heard a loud noise and saw a police helicopter come from behind a row of trees. The police lowered a rope latter and yelled for him to hold on. "Nope, the Lord has it all under control. I trust in God." And when the police realized that the man wouldn't grab on, they flew away.

The man sat in silence as the water rose still higher and finally swept him down the stream.

When he woke he was in heaven, looking up at the Pearly Gates, with all of his dead relatives gathered around. The man stood up, and walked over to God. "Why did you abandon me like that? I trusted you! You were supposed to help me!"

And God looked over and said, "What do you mean, abandon you? I sent two boats and a helicopter!"

He who has ears, let him hear.

I'm so glad that the good bishop says God lives inside ourselves and not outside.In other words he lives in our imagination and not anywhere real.
That also explains why different people believe in differnt gods and some believe in nogod.
This used to really confuse me so much I gave up thinking about it.But yes,of course,a muslim would have a different god in their minds because they were forced to imagine Allah when they were kids,and we we forced to believe in in an old man god with a white beard,and Indians beleive in Indian gods like Vishnu and all the other imaginary gods.
But if gods are imaginery why do we fight about them? If they are imaginary,isnt thatthe same as saying they are not real? That gods dont exist?
I feel so much better about things now.
And I don't need to pray anymore,which always seemed a waste of time.
Thanks bishop.I never thought I'd see the day when a bishop converted me to atheism.

I'm so glad that the good bishop says God lives inside ourselves and not outside.In other words he lives in our imagination and not anywhere real.
That also explains why different people believe in differnt gods and some believe in nogod.
This used to really confuse me so much I gave up thinking about it.But yes,of course,a muslim would have a different god in their minds because they were forced to imagine Allah when they were kids,and we we forced to believe in in an old man god with a white beard,and Indians beleive in Indian gods like Vishnu and all the other imaginary gods.
But if gods are imaginery why do we fight about them? If they are imaginary,isnt thatthe same as saying they are not real? That gods dont exist?
I feel so much better about things now.
And I don't need to pray anymore,which always seemed a waste of time then.
Thanks bishop.I never thought I'd see the day when a bishop converted me to atheism.

The Bishop leaves some profound questioned unanswered. Does God have no control over nature and no influence in it? It appears that God works only through human agents. This is an unsatisfactory view both on biblical and philosophical grounds. A sharp dualism between nature and history, body and spirit is inadequate. I agree that God does not directly and immediately cause natural disasters and have tried to show in my writings how God can be an influence in natural events and in humanity without being the sole cause. To shut God out from nature denies God any role in the evolutionary process, e. g. And it is certainly contrary to the Bible and Christian tradition. Neither the Bishop nor I can present a complete theology in a few words, but I am suggesting that he could have made his major point in a way that did not leave him open to such obvious and serious criticism -- assuming that he has a more adequate theology in his mind than he expressed here.

Silence,

I appreciate your efforts to answer my question, but it still remains unresolved.

You say "Everything on earth is basicly alive in one way or another, and if it was not you'd be eating dead things, which would make your body dead in turn. As they say what you eat is what you are."

Plucking a carrot from the ground kills it. What little life-generating ability might be left in a potato when you dig it up and detach it from the vine is destroyed in the cooking process. I like my steaks rare, but the cow is still dead. With the exception of oysters on the half shell, everything you consume IS dead when you eat it.

It's that contracdiction between everything-is-alive-and-God-never-intended-death-to-enter-the-world and God-originally-intended-some-living-things-for-food-but-not-others that I was getting at. You can't have it both ways. I'm an omnivore. I eat what I please, and I know that when I die, my carcass will become food for other creatures - that's the way the Circle works. I simply make a point of offering gratitude for the lives of the plants, fungi, bacteria, and animals whose lives are forfeit for my meals, and enjoy them in the full knowledge that I will one day return the favor.

And what about reproduction? If there was to be no dying, but plenty of fruitful multiplying, then where were all these people and animals supposed to live? How was the earth going to provide enough vegetation to feed them all? Land mass is limited, you know.

The Bishop's theology leaves some fundamental questions unanswered and raises even more difficult ones. What is the relation of God to nature? Does God have no control over nature and no influence in it? It appears that in his view God works only through human agents. But since we are part of nature, one wonders how this can be. A sharp dualism between nature and humanity or body and spirit has profound difficulties. I agree that God did not directly and immediately cause Katrina and my writings try to say how God works both in nature and humanity but without being the sole cause or influence. To assert that God works only through human agents is not what the Bible or Christian traditions plainly asserts. An adequate theology needs to show that God is active in all events, since without being present in nature, God cannot influence human choices.

The Bishop's theology leaves some fundamental questions unanswered and raises even more difficult ones. What is the relation of God to nature? Does God have no control over nature and no influence in it? It appears that in his view God works only through human agents. But since we are part of nature, one wonders how this can be. A sharp dualism between nature and humanity or body and spirit has profound difficulties. I agree that God did not directly and immediately cause Katrina and my writings try to say how God works both in nature and humanity but without being the sole cause or influence. To assert that God works only through human agents is not what the Bible or Christian traditions plainly asserts. An adequate theology needs to show that God is active in all events, since without being present in nature, God cannot influence human choices.

Excellant article. Yes people have to lay blame,do
they not. Well do the research. and folks we could well be living in the time of the end of the SYSTEM OF THINGS that the scriptures do, in a
most exacting descriptions of the TIME OF THE END
of what we consider our Not too many believe we are infulenced by the greatest adversary, whom was thrown to THE VICINITY OF THE EARTH many years ago. His influemce is being felt by all the nations and people on the earth. Just look at the attrocities that are being committed. YES the Creator will clean this up, but there will be much more tragety befor the end of the system comes on us. Too bad but us humans have a lot to learn, and acceptance of the Creators will is, and
difficult for most of the nations, and peoples to accept. Yes this old world will be much better off without many of the war mongers, criminals &
corrupt governments, amongst others that would in fact destroy this planet.

Excellant article. Yes people have to lay blame,do
they not. Well do the research. and folks we could well be living in the time of the end of the SYSTEM OF THINGS that the scriptures do, in a
most exacting descriptions of the TIME OF THE END
of what we consider our Not too many believe we are infulenced by the greatest adversary, whom was thrown to THE VICINITY OF THE EARTH many years ago. His influemce is being felt by all the nations and people on the earth. Just look at the attrocities that are being committed. YES the Creator will clean this up, but there will be much more tragety befor the end of the system comes on us. Too bad but us humans have a lot to learn, and acceptance of the Creators will is, and
difficult for most of the nations, and peoples to accept. Yes this old world will be much better off without many of the war mongers, criminals &
corrupt governments, amongst others that would in fact destroy this planet.

god is present only in U-R
mind. Also, jesus sukt dix
and "virgin" mary phuktum.

god is present only in U-R
mind. Also, jesus sukt dix
and "virgin" mary phuktum.

Lepidopteryx

I omitted the two passages, sorry

Genesis 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

Acts 10:9On the morrow, as they went on their journey, and drew nigh unto the city, Peter went up upon the housetop to pray about the sixth hour: 10And he became very hungry, and would have eaten: but while they made ready, he fell into a trance, 11And saw heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending upon him, as it had been a great sheet knit at the four corners, and let down to the earth: 12Wherein were all manner of fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air. 13And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat. 14But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean. 15And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common. 16This was done thrice: and the vessel was received up again into heaven.

Lepidopteryx:

These two passages may answer some of your questions as I would like to get out of the way of Scripture and let it speak for itself.

As to the "meat" of your other question. After reading Exodus and God's precise descriptions for "all your generations" - to the Hebrews - we see that the consumption of lambs and calves were during the Major Feasts and were highly ceremonial...pointing to the Lord's Supper/Eucharist/Communion. The Passover was supposed to be an annual ritual for the tribe that was supposed to be continuing until this day...if you read Exodus and Deuteronomy...and Hebrews.

My son, a vegan for non-Christian reasons, is not persuaded to consume animals by the "dominion" passage from Genesis or from Peter's vision from Acts.

Jesus said that it is not what we put into our mouths that makes us unclean...but what comes out of our mouths and hearts.

An Old Testament case could be made that the year was generally vegetarian and only feasts and sacrifices/atonement brought out the flesh/innocent blood.

The New Testament, with Christ's mouth/unclean passage and Peter's vision makes pork palatable...but both Testaments are anchored by the perverse pattern of redemption coming only by God's action and the shed blood of an innocent.

Hebrews 9:22
And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.

As to positional stacking from God's perspective, the Genesis passage gives man dominion over plants and Hebrews says:

Hebrews 2:9
But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.

In response to -- lepidopteryx:

"Something I've never understood. If God never intended for there to be death, then where did he plan to put all the results of constant fruitful multiplying? And what were the carnivores supposed to eat? And even if all animal life was originally intended to be vegan, surely God was aware that plants are also alive, and that even making a salad involves killing other living things."

When God created the world, He created fruits and vegetables to be used for food for humans and animals. Genesis 1:29,30 "29 And God said, “See, I have given you every herb that yields seed which is on the face of all the earth, and every tree whose fruit yields seed; to you it shall be for food. 30 Also, to EVERY BEAST of the earth, to every bird of the air, and to everything that creeps on the earth, in which there is life, I have given every green herb for food”; and it was so." This shows us that everyone/everything was vegan, not eating flesh.

Everything on earth is basicly alive in one way or another, and if it was not you'd be eating dead things, which would make your body dead in turn. As they say what you eat is what you are.

In addition you must understand that since sin entered the world, animals have changed because of sins curse. So even if an animal is a carnivore now, it was not before. Take the SNAKE/SERPENT for example. Genesis 3:14 "14 So the LORD God said to the serpent: “ Because you have done this, You are CURSED MORE than all cattle, And MORE than every beast of the field; On your belly you shall go, And you shall eat dust All the days of your life."

We see that the snake was CURSED MORE, than all other animals and had to crawl on it's belly; meaning that the other animals were also cursed to some extent. Thus allowing us to see why there are carnivores now, but not before.

God, smod.
Nobody will ever prove the existence of god (or gods) because there is no being, at least one like any of the worlds religion describe.
And, as a matter of fact, most of the damage to New Orleans was man-made, from insufficiently reinforced levees to stupidly placed housing and inefficient evacuation plans. 9-11 was caused by terrorists in the war for oil.
I don't blame a non-existing being for our problems.
"The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars,
But in ourselves, that we are underlings."
God doesn't "live inside of us", our humanity does.

I think an issue that a lot of Christians seem to miss is the Bible actually refers to GLOBAL WARMING as being real and that God will do something about it. It does not use those exact terms "global warming" but when reading the Bible and understanding the context of the last days, as described in Revelation, it's clear. Revelation 11:18 "...And should destroy those who destroy the EARTH.”" And what is "global warming doing to the earth? It's destroying it.

See, Rev 11:18, shows us that God will punish those who destroy His earth. Why? Because God gave this earth to man to take care of it. Genesis 1:26-28 "26 Then God said, Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the EARTH and over every creeping thing that creeps on the EARTH. 28 ...have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over every living thing that moves on the earth."

It's our responsibility not only to love our neighbor but to take care of our home, that being earth. God said we were to have dominion over the earth, thus when we fail to take care of it properly, the Bible shows us that God will punish those who destroy the earth when He comes back.

Silence:
***Bible readers learn that death was not present until Satan took over which was after God placed the Tree of life off limits - temporarily. Under this view of Scripture, cancer, heart disease, snakebite, hurricane, etc. visited themselves upon mankind sourced from the Evil One - Satan.***

Something I've never understood. If God never intended for there to be death, then where did he plan to put all the results of constant fruitful multiplying? And what were the carnivores supposed to eat? And even if all animal life was originally intended to be vegan, surely God was aware that plants are also alive, and that even making a salad involves killing other living things.

Terra Gazelle:
Where is Starhawk?

I've wondered the same thing recently.

This is the most difficult question believers struggle with. How can an omnipotent, loving God permit such suffering? Either he isn't loving or he isn't omnipotent.

There are, of course, two answers, both unable to provide complete comfort. The first is that God limits his power, by allowing humans to have free will, and therefore to do evil. If we didn't have the ability to choose evil then we would be little more than automotons, unable to make the most fundamental choices. If we didn't have free will we wouldn't be human. Surely, the greater part of suffering comes from evil or weak choices we make.

For example, the North Carolina prosecutor decides he needs to be re-elected to keep his pension, so he chooses a path designed to stir up passions in order to get some votes. This greedy choice leads to suffering for a number of the Duke lacrosse players. God does not protect us from this. He helps us face the pain and suffering.

But second, not all pain is an unmitigated evil. We learn and become strong through the things we suffer. No pain, no gain. Pain is a part of life that protects us from greater evils; if our hand was numb, we would leave it in the flame. Could God have created a universe in which his creatures learned without suffering and never chose the evil path. Perhaps. But it's difficult to conceive of such a universe.

Such explanations seem facile, and they don't always cover all situations easily. For the Christian, our suffering was modelled by Christ who suffered so we might be saved. God couldn't create a world in which he, God, did not suffer. So such a world is inconceivable, like a stone that God could create that would be too heavy for him to lift. Suffering is a part of life, just as death is.

In the end it is a mystery which does not mean that God is evil or impotent, but the result of a creation that could not have been designed any other way.

People have free will and can decide to be evil and for that be punished.
God's Universe is expanding and with it changes that cause events to occur, it's up to man to survive these changes.

[Please note that I have not used the name "Bible Answer Man" because persons who have read the Bible and believe it, know that it is a mystery and that many answers will come later.]

After the fall of man, recorded in Genesis 3, God removed man's open access to the Tree of Life and cast man out, East of Eden.

Satan/evil acquired temporary dominion and control of the earth.

Romans 5:12
Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:

In this, and other passages, Bible readers learn that death was not present until Satan took over which was after God placed the Tree of life off limits - temporarily. Under this view of Scripture, cancer, heart disease, snakebite, hurricane, etc. visited themselves upon mankind sourced from the Evil One - Satan. And God only returned to man in the Tabernacle and Temple while the Law was given, until the tribe's disobedience was so great that they and the Ark were carried away.

So Christians should agree with the Atheists in concluding that Atheism trumps Theism, because Theism projects a remote God that cannot maintain a Theist's claims while being consistent with the elements attributed to the Theism's God, omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent. The main flaw being the remoteness of Theism's God and his non-interventionism.

However, the Trinitarian God trumps Atheism because He became man (as one of us) and dwelt among us, personally experiencing every human sorrow and pain - including the loss of His only child. This "child" overcame Death for once, for all, with resurrection.

While we wait for His return, Satan still has dominion and control over earthly things -SIN - that all lead to death.

For some reason, the non-believers want to shake-their-fists at God...when they should be shaking their fists at the Evil One who enjoys their suffering and deaths.

Thank you. In 1989, when I went through a severe depression, I came to realize that it was my inner strength that saw me through. I came to understand that God was inside me, not outside me. As a cardiologist, I have been able to save hundreds of lives, not because of some devine external being, but because of my genes. As a trained physicist, I know we can never fully understand all the laws of the Universe. But we can contiunually increase our understanding of those laws without bounds. What I do know for a fact is that the laws of nature and the Universe led to the formation of the DNA molecule that led to my existence, and to the existence of all the other people without whom I would not have my ability. It is that creation that led to my ability to heal the sick. Nothing more, nothing less. It is an absolute pleasure to see this kind of rationality exetending itself into mainstream religion. We are seeing the early stages of the transformation of belief from the ancient religions, to modern understanding and the rationality of belief based on reason and science. This procees began 500 years ago with the Enlightenment and manifested itself most dramatically in the Jeffersonian ideal that "government must follow science", a direct quote embodied on the lower level of the Jefferson Memorial.

If there was a god there would be no republicans!

Hey Gene,

What a nice post.

Although I'm no believer, I'm glad it worked out for you! Keep up the hard work my friend, one day at a time.

You are totally right on that point, life is beautiful.

:-)

I am 53 yrs old. I have always wanted "God" to give me enough faith to make something happen. I really only wanted to have power, control, and wealth. About ten years ago my life came crashing down from drug and alcohol addiction. My worthless life was hopeless. I prayed a simple prayer for help. This sounds like it is off subject, but wait... What happened was that something is out there. God, or The Great Spirit, or something. Whatever it is, and Whoever it is are the subject here. Because it really comes down to this; either there is a God, or there is not.( I believe there is), So, either He is everything, or He is nothing....... I will never have power or strength beyond my physical boundries. But, life is beautiful today because I asked Him for help, again. yours, Gene C.

Watching this discussion has been great fun.

For all of you non-believers that have posted...well either the bishop is right and god is going to give you all a free-pass into paradise, or the bishop is wrong and god will decide that he's really PO'd at your posts and stab you..or perhaps in a fit of kindness just mess with your credit rating.

God can apparently choose to do either. What a guy.

The cool thing about this supposed god is that you just never know when he's going to pop up. Sometimes he'll turn you into salt and sometimes he'll let the romans kick your a**. Occasionally he'll just watch you starve to death or get eaten up by cancer. Sometimes he'll let you win the lottery. This however doesn't happen very often, but keep buyin' them tickets and praying kids..he'll come through sooner or later and in the meantime you'll be lowering my my property taxes, which are way to high! He makes the flowers grow though, everyone knows that right.

Seriously, reading all of these posts makes me hopeful. Maybe our country isn't as full of delusional, uneducated, and easily led dopes as I'd always feared. Who knows, maybe someday we'll have a non-religious Senator? Oops..sorry I just spilled coffee on myself laughing...thanks god!!

I was so glad to see your column today, and glad to read your thoughts on the matter of "How can God do such things" when it comes to the things that are still happening in New Orleans or the hurricanes that are now pummeling Mexico.
I've been sure for years that while God doesn't "cause" such things to happen, He isn't going to keep disasters from happening either -- He's there for us whenever we need and ask for strength -- or love -- or whatever we need in order to deal with whatever happens.
Bishop Chane, I attended Christ Church, Georgetown during the late 1950s and the early 1960s, and I was briefly a good friend of Dr. John Anschutz, the Rector there at the time. He taught me that "God is the Personal in Us" -- and I live by that dictum more and more these days. I think Americans have forgotten how to talk to one another at all. But would you please let me know anything you can tell me about Dr. Anschutz? (I'm at dianastrelow@aol.com) Best Regards, Best Wishes, and thank you, Diana

I was so glad to see your column today, and glad to read your thoughts on the matter of "How can God do such things" when it comes to the things that are still happening in New Orleans or the hurricanes that are now pummeling Mexico.
I've been sure for years that while God doesn't "cause" such things to happen, He isn't going to keep disasters from happening either -- He's there for us whenever we need and ask for strength -- or love -- or whatever we need in order to deal with whatever happens. And the things, bad or good, that happen to us in this life, in our life on earth, are by no means the last word to be spoken about anything.
Bishop Chane, I attended Christ Church, Georgetown during the late 1950s and the early 1960s, and I was briefly a good friend of Dr. John Anschutz, the Rector there at the time. He taught me that "God is the Personal in Us" -- and I live by that dictum more and more these days. I think Americans have forgotten how to talk to one another at all. But would you please let me know anything you can tell me about Dr. Anschutz? (I'm at dianastrelow@aol.com) Best Regards, Best Wishes, and thank you, Diana

Tim
regarding the bishops essay,you say;

"His attempt to absent God from complicity in the horrors of the world
and to insert him in the rescue and recovery efforts falls flat"

Yeah,wasn't that a beautiful sleight of hand,
it went right by me the first time I read it.
I was focused on his admission that God is imaginary.
Thanks for pointing it out.

Hi Rev.
You say "God lives within each of us...not outside of us!"

Hey that's MY line! I'm an atheist and I've been saying that for years.
God is within,not without,
God is in the mind of the believer,and has no actual existence in the real world.
It's nice we agree on something. There is no god.

Perplexed - Maybe someone's life was cut tragically short because he was going to end up a sinner unworthy of salvation.

So maybe all the aborted fetuses would be terrible sinners that can now go to heaven? If that is the case, then you should favor abortion ... NOT!

The question of whether or not a benevolent God would stand by while something bad in this world happens is confusing from the human perspective. You have to at least start by saying whether or not you beleive in God, then go to all the possible outcomes. One could be the following principle: that God compensates in the next world what could not be enjoyed in this world (or what was enjoyed too much for that matter).

Assming God exists, and that He is inherently good and on our side, a lot can be explained by simply broadening the scope of life's stage to include life after death, called "eternal" by Jesus. If life is a test to see how we respond to the life that God permitted us to have, whether joyous or tragic, He the Judge will probably take everything into account as only He the All-Knowing could do.

Maybe someone's life was cut tragically short because he was going to end up a sinner unworthy of salvation, maybe someone redeemed himslef at some earlier point in their life unbeknownst to his friends and family before he did some crime later. Maybe it took a natual disaster to make a whole group of doomed people atone for sins in their last minutes, thus saving them from a greater disaster on the Day of Judgement. Maybe some people, like many war-thirsty Americans, don't deserve severe region-wide punishment from God because punishment in this world can very well be a ticket to freedom in the next. Maybe the defleshed Iraqi children are the truly lucky ones, after a tragic short life. Maybe the true value of the preservation of our souls for eternity has been underestimated compared to the value of our rich earthly life, which would be truly rich if we lived it according to our wishes on the Day of Judgement.

Ever notice how poor people tend to be more religuous and less cold-hearted. Ever wonder if Midwestern American values, in so far as adherence to Christian family values goes, could be the result of constant pounding of God's hammer (tornadoes, floods, blizzrds, etc.)? Just a theory.

Discussions of theology are always tricky logical maneuvers, in part because they try to explain observable reality in terms of an super-reality that cannot be demonstrated to exist- whether that is God, Allah, Yahweh, Zeus, Odin, Ganesh or whatever. The result is self-contradiction and illogic whose acceptance depends on a willingness to overlook the implausibility of the argument. Bishop Chane, like many before him, cannot escape the trap. The fundamental document of his own faith contradicts his absolution of God as a causal agent in horrific tragedies- the tale of the Flood and the teachings of Jesus tell us that God either causes or acquiesces to the suffering humans endure at the hands of each other or events of nature. His attempt to absent God from complicity in the horrors of the world and to insert him in the rescue and recovery efforts falls flat, having its foundation in a fantasy about the world as it might be wished about the world than the world as it observably is. As Mark Twain wrote, "faith is believing what you know isn't so."

Bishop Chane - Your discussion has been taken over by atheists and fundies.

Where are all those liberal Christians you preside over? Time to call out the troops.

Can he contradict himself anymore blatantly than in this short piece?? God is not present in the actions of 9/11 terrorists but only in the actions of 9/11 rescuers? Either he is present in both hands or he is not either. Author himself says God is not a director and hence 9/11 atrocities are their own then turns around and says compassion that comes after is all God's. Have some consistency for God's sake! (pun intended)

So God is not all-powerful after all?

Jihadist,

Funny you should mention Spaghetti alla Carbonara and nubile (though not virgin) Pastafarian priestesses. This past Sunday morning at Strawberry Music Festival I made a very large pot of Spaghetti alla Carbonara for a pack of Pastafarian Priestesses. The spaghetti and the priestesses were delicious.

Sometimes I kinda think the Fundies try to apologize for 'acts of God' cause they're still hoping someone they admit to hate (apart from say, the New Orleanders) get hit, and they don't wanna give up on the vindication.

Funny thing is, they seem to keep praying for innocent people to get hurt, and don't get the point, when say, they pray for the destruction of Disneyworld when there's a 'Gay day' ...and the same storm hits their own compound instead.

Maybe it a) ain't your God, b)Your God ain't down with that, or, c) The storm-spirits are tired of that lot trying to shove em around. :)

Personally, I think existential questions of 'what your God wills' ought to wait till you figure out how to deal with what *you* will.

But hey.

Maurie Beck :)

Welcome back. Good to see you. Enjoyed your post very much.

Thanks for the theological meteorological history lesson. Never knew about Franklin capturing or stealing lighting in a rod and the disaster that followed in Boston.

You said : "Although I'm a lousy shot, even I could dispatch a blasphemer with relative ease. Especially since I'd only have to shoot myself."

Before shooting yourself, make Pasta Carbonara. Then go to the Temple of the Flying Spaghetti Monster to offer some of the Pasta Carbonara to the nubile, virgin Pastarafarian priestesses before shooting yourself on a dais as human sacrifice.

Oh, way not? While you're shooting yourself, you might as well take down a few Pasta Fundamentalists, Literalists and Inerrantists who insisted you must only have Pasta Putanesca, with angel hair pasta before offing yourself. Or it will be blasphemous and guarantee you a place in sauceless pasta hell as the Pastarafarian dogma dictates it so.

Best regards

J

None of the four commenters had much depth to their remarks, but Rev. Chane's remark that "God lives within each of us...not outside of us!" gave my mind a place to go with the question. ie, whatever lovingness, understanding, acceptance or peace that exists is going to come from within us. Thus the Eastern religions' superiority to the Western, in Buddhism, or simply atheistic psychology...its an inside job.

Ah, theological meteorology (or is it meteorological theology?). A long lost art.

Although theological, or Biblical, meteorology has largely been abandoned by mainstream Christian denominations, it was a thriving area of religious study and practice (just below the burning of witches) in which natural disasters were often thought to provide the means for God (or gods) to punish sinners and other apostates.

Perhaps the demise of theological meteorology was Ben Franklin's fault. After he invented the lightning rod in 1752, the Massachusetts earthquake of 1755 (November 18) knocked down buildings in Boston. The Reverend Thomas Prince, pastor of Old South Church, suggested that by stealing god's thunder, Franklin's invention forced god to resort to cruder, less precise means, such as the earthquake, to send sinners below below below, gone to where the goblins go.

As an aside, the great Lisbon Quake of 1755 (November 1) struck on a Catholic holiday (All Saints Day) and destroyed almost every important church. For eighteenth-century theology and philosophy, this manifestation of the anger of God was difficult to explain. In Voltaire’s Candide, the hero barely survives the quake and the priests’ subsequent auto de fe’s to purify poor Lisbon, making a mockery of the idea that everything happens for the best in the best of all possible worlds.

Nowadays, religiously inspired terrorism also provides the means for true believers to punish unbelievers, apostates, and blasphemers in the name of god, whereas the true believers who have been terrorized often blame it not only on the infidel fanatics, but on a wrathful god punishing their society for its sinful ways.

Days after Sept. 11, 2001, Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson initially blamed feminists, gays, lesbians and liberal groups for bringing on the terrorist attacks. On May 8, 2006, Pat Robertson said, "If I heard the Lord right about 2006, the coasts of America will be lashed by storms." On May 17, 2006 he elaborated, "There well may be something as bad as a tsunami in the Pacific Northwest." Presumably the target would be liberal coffee drinkers in Seattle. I'm sure the bridge collapse in Minneapolis was God’s way of expressing his disappointment and reminding Minnesotans not to vote Democratic in the 2008 presidential elections.

One would think that God, being the omnipotent sort, would be a lot more competent in offing abominations, blasphemers, and heretics. However, whenever He acts, there seems to be a lot of collateral damage. Although I'm a lousy shot, even I could dispatch a blasphemer with relative ease. Especially since I'd only have to shoot myself.

Unlike Mr. Chane, I believe that God takes responsibility for natural disasters - because He is The Almighty, and could stop the disasters from occurring, but does not, because the lives of the people tragically killed in the disasters had run their course. God chooses the times of our lives, and the boundaries of our habitation, as it says in the Book of Acts.

As for God living inside each of us: This is the Holy Spirit, who is spoken of in both the Old and New Testaments. The Holy Spirit is the power of God, who created the heavens and the earth. The Holy Spirit was the voice of God who spoke to Elijah and Elisha. The Holy Spirit was the spirit who came to dwell within the apostles after the ascension of Jesus Christ, and gave the apostles the power to perform miracles as Jesus did.

For many modern Christians, they experience the Holy Spirit by faith only, not by supernatural experience. But the farther you go in your Christian journey, the Holy Spirit reveals Himself as a supernatural force, as the power of God, the same power that created the heavens and the earth. There is no greater power, no greater justice, because God is holy. If you give your life to Christ, by simply believing what God says -- that God sent Christ to die for your sins and to be resurrected, so that you might be reconciled to God and to gain eternal life, then you are born again.

Some Christians believe that at the moment of being born again, God sends the Holy Spirit to dwell inside of you. I'm not certain that is when it happens - but when you receive the Holy Spirit, you'll know, because it is a supernatural experience. When God wants to make his presence known, He can do it, supernaturally, so that there's no mistake.

I wonder whether the unbelief and skepticism in the other comments is fueled by the "fall" of many evangelical and Catholic leaders. Well if you read the Bible, you'll realize that God never intended for church leaders to be substitutes for God Himself. The Holy Spirit is God himself. When you receive the Holy Spirit, you don't need to go to church, really, except for fellowship and maybe learning about the foundations of the Bible. Once you get the foundations, quit relying on what your pastor says - rely on the Holy Spirit to guide your spiritual education, and trust in the Lord Jesus Christ. He is the author and the finisher of our faith.

If you'd like to learn more about the Holy Spirit, read the Bible (I like the Amplified translation).

Theologians have struggled with the Problem of Evil since they invented an omnipotent and omniscient God, and the Bishop's answer to that conundrum is no more convincing than that of the Fathers of the Church or the medieval scholastic philosophers, who were - with all due respect to His Eminence - far cleverer than he.

There is no solution; God is either omnipotent, and could, therefore, prevent war, disease, and all the other evils that afflict us or he's not. The only other possibility is that God himself is evil and takes pleasure in tormenting his children, but that solution, while unthinkable for all good theologians, is quite thinkable for those who suffer.

So you can't have it both ways, Bishop; God's either omnipotent or he isn't, and he's good and loves us or he doesn't. Take your choice, but he can't be both good and omnipotent. Unless, of course, he can abolish the laws of logic. And no one, not even God, can do that, though the Bishop seems to think that he, the Bishop, not God, can!

Norrie Hoyt

Holy Toledo! You don't know already? God is doing a science experiment in creating the universe from that "singularity". We are the lab rats going round and round in the one of the mazes identified as earth in God's lab.

Then God will start all over again. After all, when God created Adam, God probably think, "I can do better", and created Eve.

Man, for the most part, cannot accept life, death and suffering as inevitable, can't accept that everything has a beginning and an end with grace.

Very frustrating for man to know that he has no control over his own birth, life and death try as he might, much less planet earth. How puny and limited we are eh?

Best regards
J

I find the good Bishop quite confused as he attempts to espouse theology. He tries to make a distinction between "good" theology and "bad" theology without stepping into the shoes of the other. George Bush must have employed good theology when he consulted god and then decided to wreck havoc upon the lives of Iraqis. The Saudi citizens who flew planes into the World Trade Center were, to their viewpoint, also using good theology. So it was bad news for Iraqis, bad news for Americans, and no theology, either good or bad, was actually involved, just human nature.

"God lives within each of us" is such a lovely thought. Just when did the Homo species become capable of having god within? 5000 years ago, 50,000 years ago, 500,000 years ago? What was god doing prior to messing around with humans? When did humans become capable of creating god(s)?

Unfortunately Bishop Chane so hung-up on the supernatural that any example he tries to provide for god being our friend is just plain silly.

The Jihadist is back and like other "liberal" Muslims, she refuses to accept the reality of history i.e. Big Mo was a "holey, not holy, hallucinator" as he supposedly saw visions of a "pwtfft" aka Gabriel. From these hallucinations, came one of the most violent/terror/"Allah wrath" 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, natural disasters, other life styles and other economic and government institutions while Islam continues to bring us closer to a world war making natural disasters like Katrina pale in comparison.

It is important that we continue to remind The Jihadist and her ilk of the seriousness of the situation. This will continue until we see an acceptance of reality and a condemnation of the actions of Iran and the "Wannabees".

"The belief that God is the causal agent in natural disasters such as Hurricane Katrina and the religious fanaticism of 9/11 and acts as a grand puppeteer is just plain bad theology."

No, it's not bad theology - it's an accurate onservation.

In Anglo-American law, a person (actor) is presumed to have intended the natural and probable consequences of his act.

Bishop Chane and all other adherents to an Abrahamic religion believe that "God" created the universe and this world.

By creating this universe and this world with the characteristics they in fact have, "God" must be held to have intended the natural and probable consequences of those characteristics, viz., suffering and death.

"God" must therefore be considered to be a torturer and a murderer, as the Cathars so readily perceived.

While I would agree that God lives within each one us as us, this would have absolutely nothing to do with any Christian religious sect! By definition, all Christians profess to believe in an external, separate God that acts independent and superior to mankind, the Earth, and indeed the Universe. There is no union with this God, only a subservient groveling attainment to bask in the Glory and light of this God forever! This God is either responsible for every drop of rain, every fly that bites, every sparrow that dies; or is a judge of all actions based on unknown criteria with no responsibility for any human actions. This God no matter what form it exists is essentially worthless!

" Terra Gazelle:

"Where is Starhawk?"

Probably off *doing* something. :)

Reverend

This is a most confusing essay, even for a believer. So, let me clear my own mind.

Terms such as "man-made disasters" and "natural disasters" are internationally accepted and widely use by intergovernmental and non-governmental organisations.

"Natural disasters" are for earthquakes, volcanoes, droughts, tsunamis, floods, hurricanes, typhoons etc. Forces of nature beyond man's control but can be predicted on it occurrences (early warning systems), to devise methods to "contain" them, or to put in place humanitarian assistance network.

"Man-made disasters" are for Chernobyl, desertification, war etc. War is the worst "man-made" disaster in terms of human life lost and destruction to physical structures and the environment (landmines, nukes etc).

Man, knowing where the earthquake zones are, the hurricane paths are, when the floods will come during the regular monsoon or hurricane seasons, in living in areas where these natural forces would show up, putting themselves at risks. man may have no choice or a choice.

So called originators and bringers of "natural disasters" like volcanoes brings rich lava soil for agriculture. Monsoon seasons brings rain and floods for rice cultivation etc. Lots of benefits from the forces of nature, but become a "natural disaster" when they overwhelmed us once a while with their excess force.

Man-made disasters can now be applied to man, who live in areas where the forces of nature could wreak extra havoc and destruction when it came with more force than usual, but tried to "tame", to manage the impact of the forces of natural disasters, and failed miserably.

Katrina is a hurricane. She is a force of nature. She becomes, naturally, a disaster for those in her path and showed up human failures in preventing, nay, minimising, her impact and in reacting to her aftermath.

Ah yes, global warming is a man induced and hastened "natural" disaster. Can be minimised still. There's the Kyoto Protocols to accede to as a step.

So, what has God really got to do with man's own choices on where he want to live and how he deals with man-made and natural disasters?

I can only pray for all those who lost their lives due to our presumptions, assumptions, arrogance, indifference, carelessness, incompetence and unpreparedness - be they in natural or man-made disasters. God be with them.

Thank you and best regards
J

Where is Starhawk?

Joe, you write "lack of evidence proves nothing."

I couldn't agree more, which is exactly and succinctly why I am not a believer. If I turned that around and cited it as a reason to believe, I'd then have to believe everything that meets the same standard of evidence, which is pretty much anything that could be imagined.

This discussion at least seems more polite than other discussions on religion...

While I do not subscribe to Bishop Chane's idea that God lives within us (except that God, far as I know, is omnipresent), I do agree that knowing God comes from within each of us. Our hearts, minds, and souls.

I do not know why bad things happen, either to good people or to bad people, or even to no people. They just happen. A reader commented that Katrina was a natural event, and that the disaster was man-made. I cannot agree with that more.

I wish I could prove the existence of God, but I cannot. Nor can I prove He does not exist. To those who proclaim no God, and use as proof all the bad things that happen in the world, I can only wonder how perfect *this* world would need to be in order for such folks to believe. In all fairness, I find myself angry that God is not seemingly more involved in worldly affairs. Maybe He is, maybe He is not. But anger and misunderstanding is not enough to extinguish what I know in my heart and soul to be true.

(I guess I am one of the primitive, non-thinking, uneducated, brainwashed people I see mentioned so often in these forums.)

I happen to work in a technical/mathematical field. In my professional life, I am blessed to be able to reduce (many) worldly problems to ones and zeros and come up with solutions based on that analysis. Testing, while time consuming, is basically easy: either a solution works or it does not (in which case, well, it is not a solution). But I have, as yet, been unable to to apply the same level of analysis to all areas of my life or the world around me.

Extrapolate this to the various fields of scientific study from which people like to draw information (usually in a very selective manner) to prove their points. Far as I know, no one been successful in proving, nor disproving, the existence of God. Lack of evidence proves nothing.

People bring up inconsistencies in the Bible as proof. Of what? That books written two thousand years ago, and intended for people with far less knowledge of the world around them (than we have), do not stand up to our modern scrutiny--at least on a literal level. I understood, long before I became a believer, that the Bible contained some history, a little advice, and lots of instruction -- in the form of stories. I do not know why it was given to us this way, but I do know that by giving it to us that way, God is requiring not only that we know the rules, so to speak, but that we also strive to understand why.

The best evidence that god was created in the human mind is the many variations of gods that have arisen in different cultures.

If the concept of god was universal in all cultures of the world, it would more likely that god came from above, not created by the human mind. That said, the desire to have a god IS inherent in humans, thus many are believers in their local god.

How could Katrina *not* be an "act of God"? Aren't all natural disasters, by definition, "acts of God"?

It is not possible to have a god (or gods, or God) who takes an interest in, and sometimes chooses to miraculously intervene in, the events of our universe, without accepting that the same god/gods/God chooses similarly to NOT intervene at any other time. Thus, everything that happens - every senseless death of an innocent, every 'miraculous' save - is, on some level, the result of some god/gods/God choosing whether or not to intervene.

Further, if Free Will is essential to a religious philosophy - that is, the idea that we can freely choose from various options and are not predestined to choose a particular way - then we must surely bear responsibility for our choices. The very idea of divine intervention or miracles negates any such responsibility or free will. (Modern research in psychology, in fact, strongly suggests that we do NOT have free will - that no matter what reasoning we believe we follow, our choices are essentially predetermined.)

It is incredibly insulting (and further undermines the concept of Free Will) to any good people who help others (such as rescue workers), to suggest that they do what they do only because some supernatural divinity inspires them.

I don't wonder why people believe there is a god. What I wonder is, how they reconcile the obvious inconsistencies - the belief that God is all-knowing and all-powerful, the belief that God takes an interest in human affairs, the belief that God intervenes in our world, the belief that God punishes or rewards us for eternity in response to our choices, the belief that we can somehow choose such punishment or reward for ourselves through Free Will despite this God's interventions.

Albert Einstein, a man so brilliant that he figured out the fundamental nature of reality simply by thinking about it, thought the underlying order of natural laws implied a divine creator. But Einstein didn't believe that this entity ever intervened, or even cared about human affairs. And Einstein had his doubts about Free Will as well, famously declaring that God does not Play Dice with the universe.

There is no god. There are no miracles. By definition, nothing impossible ever happens. And I have serious doubts about Free Will. My life has what meaning I choose it to have. I pity those who are trapped in a web of superstition.

How could Katrina *not* be an "act of God"? Aren't all natural disasters, by definition, "acts of God"?

It is not possible to have a god (or gods, or God) who takes an interest in, and sometimes chooses to miraculously intervene in, the events of our universe, without accepting that the same god/gods/God chooses similarly to NOT intervene at any other time. Thus, everything that happens - every senseless death of an innocent, every 'miraculous' save - is, on some level, the result of some god/gods/God choosing whether or not to intervene.

Further, if Free Will is essential to a religious philosophy - that is, the idea that we can freely choose from various options and are not predestined to choose a particular way - then we must surely bear responsibility for our choices. The very idea of divine intervention or miracles negates any such responsibility or free will. (Modern research in psychology, in fact, strongly suggests that we do NOT have free will - that no matter what reasoning we believe we follow, our choices are essentially predetermined.)

It is incredibly insulting (and further undermines the concept of Free Will) to any good people who help others (such as rescue workers), to suggest that they do what they do only because some supernatural divinity inspires them.

I don't wonder why people believe there is a god. What I wonder is, how they reconcile the obvious inconsistencies - the belief that God is all-knowing and all-powerful, the belief that God takes an interest in human affairs, the belief that God intervenes in our world, the belief that God punishes or rewards us for eternity in response to our choices, the belief that we can somehow choose such punishment or reward for ourselves through Free Will despite this God's interventions.

Albert Einstein, a man so brilliant that he figured out the fundamental nature of reality simply by thinking about it, thought the underlying order of natural laws implied a divine creator. But Einstein didn't believe that this entity ever intervened, or even cared about human affairs. And Einstein had his doubts about Free Will as well, famously declaring that God does not Play Dice with the universe.

There is no god. There are no miracles. By definition, nothing impossible ever happens. And I have serious doubts about Free Will. My life has what meaning I choose it to have. I pity those who are trapped in a web of superstition.

"God lives within each of us...not outside of us!" Good grief, what type of theological nonsense is this? Oh, wait, this is an Episcopal Bishop . . .

This essay expresses a nice sentiment, but it's ultimately nonsensical. It's interesting to me how believers can switch so easily from claiming that we can't know the will of God and thus can't question why bad things happen to good people, and then in the next breath turn around and claim to know that god is good, and merciful, and loving, or even there at all. If god created everything then he is culpable in everything, including hurricanes. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

If you believe in God or some form of Singularity:

Father Edward Schillebeeckx notes the following in his book, Church: The Human Story of God, Crossroad, 1993, p.91 (softcover):

"Therefore the historical future is not known even to God; otherwise we and our history would be merely a puppet show in which God holds the strings. For God, too, history is an adventure, an open history for and of men and women."

Bottom line: One of God's greatest gifts to us is that of the Future.

Schillebeeckx was responding to the Dutch citizens who were blaming God for the North Sea storms that destroyed a significant number of levees resulting in a significant loss of life and severe storm damage. Sound familiar??

And also in one profound, short paragraph, Schillebeeck vitiates all prophecies ever made and relegates all prophets to the fortune teller waste pile.

In the Bible, God did all kinds of things to affect the outcome of events. But now we're to believe he couldn't have done anything to prevent 9/11, even something subtle (give the hijackers a flat tire on the way to the airport so that they miss their flights, and the whole plan dissolves.)

The Bishop is just employing the same selectivity that theists always do. God affected something here to make this event good, but there when it was bad, God didn't cause it... didn't prevent it, no, but didn't cause it.

It's tired rationalizing and it just doesn't work.

Dear Bishop Chane:

I happen to be an atheist, but I read your words with great interest. If only all the world lived by the principles you voiced. Thank you for warming an atheist's heart.

Beverly Scofield

Beverly.Scofield@gmail.com

Pablo-

"Falwell said, "What we saw on Tuesday, as terrible as it is, could be miniscule if, in fact, God continues to lift the curtain and allow the enemies of America to give us probably what we deserve."
Robertson replied, "Well, Jerry, that's my feeling. I think we've just seen the antechamber to terror, we haven't begun to see what they can do to the major population."
Falwell said, "The ACLU has got to take a lot of blame for this. And I know I'll hear from them for this, but throwing God...successfully with the help of the federal court system...throwing God out of the public square, out of the schools, the abortionists have got to bear some burden for this because God will not be mocked and when we destroy 40 million little innocent babies, we make God mad...I really believe that the pagans and the abortionists and the feminists and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People for the American Way, all of them who try to secularize America...I point the thing in their face and say you helped this happen."
Robertson said, "I totally concur, and the problem is we've adopted that agenda at the highest levels of our government, and so we're responsible as a free society for what the top people do, and the top people, of course, is the court system."
Falwell added, "Pat, did you notice yesterday that the ACLU and all the Christ-haters, the People for the American Way, NOW, etc., were totally disregarded by the Democrats and the Republicans in both houses of Congress, as they went out on the steps and and called out to God in prayer and sang 'God bless America' and said, let the ACLU be hanged. In other words, when the nation is on its knees, the only normal and natural and spiritual thing to do is what we ought to be doing all the time, calling on God."

Did Misters Falwell and Robertson have it right?

We need more Christian leaders like Rev. Chane.

Nice as in nice size congregation

And how do you know where God is? Why do you get to decide the 'flawed' theology and the correct one?

If you think God was in the rescuers but ignore the opposing possibility, you fall into the same trap we see again and again. Oh yes, God works for what you consider good, but never the opposite. You want to believe God is on your side, but apparently cannot fathom that those who carried out 9/11 believed the very same thing, and were praying that God would help guide them to the towers. They must be wrong... right?

If you want to argue that religious fanaticism is bad theology, that's fine- but then please don't pretend to know some absolute truth or place God in your own box as to what he can and does not do. Once you've died, drop us a line. Until then I take all claims by men as to what "God says" with as much credibility as such completely unfounded claims deserve.

LDS Mark - I'd settle for a God who just intervened to stop the bad weather, earthquakes, traffic accidents, plane crashes, bridge collapses, pain and illness, murder, torture and war.

Then we humans could handle the rest on our own - lying, cheating, stealing, lack of compassion, bad judgment, unwanted sexual advances, bad hair days, unreasonable bosses, loud neighbors, disappointing sports teams, etc.

But no, we've got a God who doesn't intervene period (or not since the Bible, anyway), as if there were no God at all.

Dear Chane,

You said:
"Katrina was a natural disaster and not a punishing act of God."

I am not saying that Katrina was a "punishing act of God" but would there be natural disasters had mankind not sinned? Remember death entered the world as God's judgment on sin. In other words all people who have ever been born since Adam and Eve are under the wrath and punishment of God. This is evidenced in the fact that all people die.

You said"
"9/11 was the act of a few people who chose to interpret their flawed theology by acts of violence which were clearly a contradiction of the teachings of the Great Prophet."

Your words contradict the Qur'an, the Haddiths, and the actions of the prophet. This statement tells me that you know nothing about Islam or Islam's god.

You said:
"God lives within each of us...not outside of us!"

I cannot believe this statement. Do you measure what you say based on the Word of God you profess to represent? I do not think so. God is not present in the children of the devil.

Jesus when speaking to the Pharisees said:

"You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and has nothing to do with the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies. 45But because I tell the truth, you do not believe me. 46Which one of you convicts me of sin? If I tell the truth, why do you not believe me? 47 Whoever is of God hears the words of God. The reason why you do not hear them is that you are not of God."

You contradict the word of God and thus you are a false teacher and a blind guide. I am sure you have a nice congregation because people love to be told what they want to hear.

Why is it so hard for theists to imagine that gods are simply inventions of the human mind - projections of our own psyche onto the natural world around us?

It's easy enough to see this with other people's gods, just not with your own.

All gods are fictions. Arguing about what gods do, or don't do, is a sad waste of time.

Faith can lead rationally inclined minds in many strange directions. Good god, bad god, illusive god, personal god. The meaning of life resides within a very quiet, unspoken, unlearned kind of faith which we all share (few know), along with the utility of a willful, rational mind. I know what the Bishop is trying to say but he is lost using a counterfeit faith and applying rationality to the wind. For those similarly lost his ideas might offer comfort or the stage for disagreement. But, it is all nothing.
Religion and pornography serve similar masters: Vanity all, all is vanity; Indulgence of our appetites.
Its really just sad.

If God had a hand in natural disasters or human-caused events, then they would not be natural or human-caused anymore, would they?

God's non-intervention establishes some semblance of order in society and the universe. Religion and God are supposed to help you deal with what society and nature throw at you, not give you ways to avoid them (and then throw a temper tantrum about how stupid they are when you don't get your way.)

With or without God, the world is a tough place. Religion, at least, teaches you how not to be a whinging sissy about it. No wonder it's not popular with folks these days.

I do not know many things with certainty. I was not there when Katrina hit, I was not there on 9-11. I am a capital defense attorney, therefore all of my clients (every single one of them) are facing the death penalty. I have asked myself on occasion, "where was G-d when my client was a little boy being raped repeatedly"? I have wondered where was G-d when unspeakable horrors were visited upon them when they were the most vulnerable. I do not know. I cannot tell them G-d was with them because they have felt his absence most keenly.

And it hurts more than anything to know how they suffered at the hands of humans and it seems no one heard their cries or saw their pain, or stood by and did nothing. Yet nothing has changed...we still have people walk over the homeless, we have people who close their apartment doors as a woman is sexually assaulted in the hallway of thier building, we have crowds who watch as a man is beaten. Is this the work of G-d? The absence of G-d?

There is pure evil in the world. I do believe darkness cannot extinguish light, but the tiniest bit of light can pierce the darkness. I can only hope and pray to be that tiny bit of light. Maybe I shouldn't look so hard outside for the presence of G-d and rely on the presence G-d within.

He lives in us, all right, and not outside, because he is just an idea. So, use your idea to feel better about the dreadful results of a hurricane, but don't think that it causes (or could in anyway mitigate or stop) the natural disater in the first place.

I just love these sycophantic "yes God" sermons by the primitives. They bespeak a chronologically adult human being cowering still in his child state murmuring fearfully, "Oh y-yes, God is Great, He is responsible for all the GOOD things, and none of the BAD". Uh, loincloth-man, how do you actually *know* this? The answer is that you DON'T. But you are so terrified that your (Loving and kind, of course) God will smite you down if you don't kiss up to him ("him", because he does have male genetalia, just like the father figures you model him on, right?) sufficiently. And He will do this, of course, because He is a terribly insecure, puffed-up egomaniac who cannot handle the slightest disagreement about his Goodness or Power. Again, modelled after the worst of human examples, in the timeless monotheistic fashion.

There are so many things wrong with the Christian/Muslim/Judaic conception of The Omnipotent One that it spins my head in circles trying to discern where to start.

And 95% of our society is still afflicted with this mental disorder, and the media pander to this God delusion as if it were a given. Is it any wonder the world stutters along so poorly still here in the 21st century?

I just love these sycophantic "yes God" sermons by the primitives. They bespeak a chronologically adult human being cowering still in his child state murmuring fearfully, "Oh y-yes, God is Great, He is responsible for all the GOOD things, and none of the BAD". Uh, loincloth-man, how do you actually *know* this? The answer is that you DON'T. But you are so terrified that your (Loving and kind, of course) God will smite you down if you don't kiss up to him ("him", because he does have male genetalia, just like the father figures you model him on, right?) sufficiently. And He will do this, of course, because He is a terribly insecure, puffed-up egomaniac who cannot handle the slightest disagreement about his Goodness or Power. Again, modelled after the worst of human examples, in the timeless monotheistic fashion.

There are so many things wrong with the Christian/Muslim/Judaic conception of The Omnipotent One that it spins my head in circles trying to discern where to start.

And 95% of our society is still afflicted with this mental disorder, and the media pander to this God delusion as if it were a given. Is it any wonder the world stutters along so poorly still here in the 21st century?

Can we report God to DHS?

I think we are all owed some back child support.

Sure, god could intervene in natural disasters, but then he would be taking our choices away from us.

I can imagine how people would whine when he got involved in one thing and not another. If he avoided that and got involved in all things, people would whine about not having the right to choose their own path.

God is not the kind of parent that child services is intended for. Nor is he like the “dreaded Mother-in-law” who won’t stay out of her children’s lives after they move out and start their own families.

God allowed us to come here to prove ourselves and will judge us by our choices.

Thank god that he stays our of our business!

Mark

Weather happens. Hurricanes are the result of collisions of warm and cool air masses, not divine wrath.

And any god who has to use something as huge as a hurricane or a tsunami as a smackdown on evildoers must have really bad aim. If you're omnipotent, surely you could hit the individuals you're p-o'd at and leave the innocent unscathed, no?

We lost 2/3 of our household income when Dillard University flooded - my husband was an untenured instructor there, and when they cancelled the semester, all untenured faculty and staff were let go. We lost our home in Baton Rouge because my income alone was not sufficient to cover the rent, keep utilities on, and buy food. We spent the next six months living in a friend's house until we could find a vacant apartment that we could afford. But do I feel as though the gods were punishing us for something? Of course not. It was bad weather that happened at a bad time for us, and was much worse for a lot of other people. We did what we had to do to get by, and did as much as we could to help others where we could. That's how life is.

Mr. Mark..
Thank you.
As a resident of South Louisiana and knowing a bit about Katrina, and Rita...and the man made disastor and negligence that killed 1500+ and ruined the lives or thousands more, I too am sick of blaming the hurricane. We know hurricanes...we do not know when man's inhumanity to man is going to kick in.

I will not go into the failure of government..not just the failure...but the criminal negligence of people on roof tops, of the dieing and dead, of fly overs and photo ops. Of my complete disgust of FEMA, Bush, Browny, Michael Chertoff, the soldiers that kept loaded rifles at the ready at thirsty, hungry people lined up to get help after a week of nothing.

No god did that. It was man...men that climed to have god on their side. Men that claim to talk to god. They ignored babies in their mothers arms that were dieing of dehydration and heat. Of the elderly dead and dieing in attics and in the medians of the streets, and on over passes.

I saw Browny in a hearing claim that the ice was no big deal as the people did not have hamburger to keep fresh anyway. May he rot in his hell. May he suffer in heat with no way to quench his thirst. May he watch his baby dieing because of a lack of ice and water.

No god had a part in this...not my Gods not the Christian one. This hurricane was a force of nature, made stronger by global warming and the loss of wet lands and barriers that are dissappearing. It did not do the biggest harm..it was those levees, it was Bush taking funds out of the levee maintainence to give to war, it was pumps that did not work...it was Cronies and those with the same ideology that Government does not work being given the job of running it...

I hear those idiots make a claim that god punished New Orleans for it being sinful...ha! it was the French Quarter that was not harmed. It was the residentual districts, it was the churches that were destroyed. Not the bars, not the Witch shops, not the theaters, and the art galleries...not the strip shows or the voodoo shops...that was much even slowed down. So if it was a god that was to blame..it was Pan who loves sex, music, dance and joy....because all that is going great guns.

But it seems to be the ignorant and far right values voter that says why build New Orleans...
terra

Sorry, I misplaced the apostrophe in Nor'easter in my above post, an inexcusable mistake for one who weathered many such storms during my years at the Jersey shore.

If I read one more columnist stating that Katrina was a "natural disaster," I think I'll scream.

Katrina was a natural event, a hurricane. Hurricane always have and always will rage.

The disaster of Katrina was a very human creation. We have now learned that the levees built by the Army Corp of Engineers were substandard in every respect. The levees didn't stand a chance because human beings erred in their construction.

Imagine a housing construction company in the NE USA that fails to put roofs on their homes. In such a case, even the slightest rain shower could turn into a "natural disaster" in water damage costs alone. A major N'oreaster would be a disaster of, well, Biblical proportions.

But, no problem! The Army Corp is building new levees to facilitate the next "natural" disaster in New Orleans. How do we know that? Well, Katrina was a once-in-500-year event, yet the AC is building levees to handle a once-in-100-year event. Compare that to the dike and levee system in Holland that is being built to withstand a once-in-10,000-year event.

Natural disaster my a**!

Using descriptors of God such as "merciful" is a violation of the first commandment. God is without limit. Merciful limits God. Katrina, 9-11 are demonstrations of God's lack of limits. The wise worry about what God has in store next, operate organizations like the weather service for example.

You're thinking about the Gods mentioned in the Bible. They're all devils. Saying Katrina, 9-11 is their work is acceptable. Devils are not known for mercy. We can thank God they have limits.

http://www.hoax-buster.org/sellyoursoul is the correct interpretation of the Bible. That's another real good reason to thank God, the Bible is a proved hoax otherwise all of great faith are going to hell and paying their own way,, except for Devil's representatives of course, the ones raking in the big money leading the multitudes to hell.

Thank you, Bishop Chane. I become weary of so many who continue to try, in various ways, to humanize or compartmentalize God. May we all, at some time, come to realize that HE is far greater than any of us to imagine--and that our attempts to capture HIM in our minds is vanity.

Wm A. Brown

Bishop Chane - how is it that you know that God had no hand in the disasters but was there afterwards to help us clean up the mess?

What's the point of omnipotence if it can't stop the bad stuff from happening in the first place? Truly, I think most people would trade in God's presence at the clean up for a proactive stance preventing the disaster.

When you say "natural" disaster is that a way of distinguishing it from a "supernatural" disaster, i.e., a disaster actually caused by God? I remember some of those from the Bible. I know not everyone takes the Bible literally, but I still don't understand how you could know when God’s involved and when he isn’t.