No Theocracy Here: Saddleback Does What American Christians Have Always Done

Reasonable not Hateful

If your views are circumscribed, cloistered, narrow, and naive, then you cannot be aware of the confinement of your thinking and cannot be aware of all things that you do not know. That is the definition of "not knowing;" that is a poverty of knowledge; that is ignornace. The ignorant cannnot help their ignorance, nor be blamed for it.

Likewise, once one has acquired knowledge, how does one get rid of it and go back to a state of not knowing? Tell me how to do that, and then I will try it.

I did not say that you should shut up nor that you should not express your opinion. Just stop being intolerant. Drop from the core of your beliefs that mean and wicked intolerance that people like you carry around inside. It is not against the law to be intolerant; you are entitled to it, just as you are entitled to lie. But it is a very, VERY ugly trait to have for Conservative Christians. And I DON"T CARE IF IT HURTS ANY ONES FEELINGS to hear this. Intolerance hurts a lot more than people's feelings. It ruins people's lives and destroys families.

So murch for Christian Love. So much for being Reasonable but not Hateful

Christian Churches needs to present anti-abortion literature to Christians with scientific material on fetal development and abortion procedures to support the view of the Church.

Knowledge alone will not stop a woman from aborting her child if she chooses to, but at least she will do it with full knowledge, without being misled by pro-abortion propaganda.

For three and a half decades abortion has been marketed as "reproductive choice," as late term contraception. By referring to the growing baby in the womb as a clump of cells/parasite etc, the real nature of abortion has been denied, namely the killing of an unborn child.

When such a propaganda has been around for so long, it is no wonder that it has become part of the normal thinking process and women are able to abort their children without qualm. It is a wonder, considering how aggressively a pro-abortionist propaganda has been propagated for so long that pro-life groups have not given up.

Proper education about what abortion is really about needs to be stepped up. At least consciences that have not yet been hardened by the pro-abortionist propaganda should be made aware and sensitive to the real science concerning abortion.

The hardened responses of pro-abortionists on various threads of this forum, whether believer or atheist, shows that those who have bought into the propaganda over several years are beyond reach.

The hope for change lies with the young who are still uncorrupted by pro-abortion lies.

It doesn't take rocket science to understand how men benefit from a pro-abortion attitude in women.

It is blood chilling to see how women have chosen to iron out their biological differences with men in their sexuality by becoming baby-killers.

I should say that I am (for good or ill) not a pastor. My training was in analytic philosophy (Plato in particular) and not theology at the graduate level.

Said ELLIE: "Do you really think that people like me give a damn about a zygote or a two-month fetus? I do, but only if the mother wants the child those cells will become when the pregnancy comes to term."

You should read a textbook of embryology, ask a Fetologist and or watch a few YouTube videos on fetal development, watch ultrasound pictures of babies in the womb, before making claims about a child growing in the womb. You'd notice then that the pro-abortion propaganda that has been marketed for at least three and a half decades is not based on medical science.

For a start you might watch this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cjNo_0cW-ek

An interesting article on the topic:

"Beyond the legal right; why liberals and feminists don't like to talk about the morality of abortion" by Jason DeParle
Washington Monthly, April, 1989

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1316/is_n3_v21/ai_7537791?tag=artBody;col1

Thanks Harold - you proved you were a bible thumping, self-centered idiot.....and your next act?

DITLD

I don't know what a "sophisticated" view of Christianity is really. To do what many liberal theologians do , you must ignore the words Paul penned and throw out the resurrection, throw out the atonement, deny men and women have sin in their lives and basically just boil it all down to love your neighbor, without any power to do so, which the power of wherein comes from having that within yourself.

As for your other response to me, I doubt your sincerity there.

Atheists I have met here equate Christian (evangelical) involvement in society and politics in general with us attempting to create some theocracy, which is just a straw man argument. You and others want us to just shut up.

Just as you do, I have the right to influence society and politics and if our representative agree, laws can be enacted that you may not like. The same goes for you.
------------------------------

As for other comments you made

There is no good argument for atheism. Agnostic maybe, but to not believe in any deity you would have to have been to every portion of the universe and every dimension there is to be in to find no being that is god or God.. It is not logical. To doubt there is one is a much better .... To know or believe absolutely makes no sense to me.

Rev R,,

"John McCain won the Saddleback event by combining his real world experience with his agreement with Evangelicals and other traditional Christians on the paramount moral issue of the day."
--------------

No. The paramount moral issue of the day is access to health care.

Living people suffer, put off care, even die because they cannot afford the care they need. I heard all the self-serving rubbish I ever care to hear about "personal responsibility" when I had a toddler who was screaming in pain every night from Perthes, and pain management was deemed non-urgent care. With six kids to feed I could barely afford the orthopod and her leg braces.

And no; before some conservative tells me that I shouldn't have bought the big screen TV, we had no big screen TV, we never took vacations, or ate out. I bought meat that was at its expiration dates, we had meatless days, and wore used clothes. I earned good money, but I couldn't get health insurance at a reasonable price because I had a "pre-existing condition", the result of an injury when I was a child. And I was still paying off my late husband's co-pays and those expenses that hadn't been covered by his insurance, insurance we lost when he died. COBRA? Don't make me laugh. Who could afford that! Dying of cancer is expensive.

Had I known that Maggie would be born with this painful condition, I would have had an abortion.

Extended needless suffering doesn't build character. It wears one down. It causes depression. It warps one's character.

Only when I brought her to Europe did she get the treatment she needed. She is still crippled. (I like that word. It doesn't pull any punches.) No one can help that. But she is mostly pain free. Most important, she knows that her society is doing its best for her.

Do you really think that people like me give a damn about a zygote or a two-month fetus? I do, but only if the mother wants the child those cells will become when the pregnancy comes to term.

I care more about the old ladies and men, the young families, the middle aged couples, the forty-something woman in Quimper who runs the tiny shop where I bought a new sewing machine this week, and all those polite, handsome teenagers who were hanging out in the parking lot (with not one discarded bottle or food wrapper in sight) I care about those already born, those with birth defects and the families who care for them, kids and adults with Perthes and Downs, CP and all the others.

You all are focusing on cells while living people suffer, and lose everything they worked a lifetime for, and often still can't get the treatment they require. There is something wrong with this.

Mags has another peculiarity. She is a prodigy. Music and math, in her case. At six she is studying with teachers from the conservatory, and self-taught, she is doing college-level math. She will grow up to be a credit to her new country. She was born in the US, but the US showed that it didn't have much use for her.

McCain sounded like a pandering fool, and I say that as someone who doesn't much care for Obama. McCain had an OPINION as to when life begins. I respect that opinion, but, I am a scientist and, like Obama, I have no idea when those cells become human life. My oldest son, just finishing his studies in pediatric neurosurgery put it this way, "God knows, and God's not telling."

Rev R,

A whole lot has changed since Lincoln's time. The US has had... well... ya know... them pesky immigrants comin’ over. Weird folks like Eyetalians, Jee-yews, Irishers of the Cafflik type, Hispanics, Poles, and folks from Africa and Asia. Even my family, who came from Scotland to escape the midges, I suppose. (We still speak Gaelic at home, and a form of Glaswegian Scots comprehensible only to God and other Glaswegians.) Now before I took my kids and moved to France, we lived in Manhattan. A mixed bag.

You write: "The good news is that all of us can relax. Both Obama and McCain are mainstream American politicians. Our constitution is not in peril and neither is the historic relationship between church and state. Lincoln's Union was not theocratic from any sane perspective despite the involvement of religious leaders like Beecher."

Mainstream, by whose reckoning? Tell that to a New Yorker, someone from Philadelphia, most residents of large Northern urban areas, or the near suburbs, or to a Jew, a Jain, or an Italian-American from almost anywhere in the US. Ask Kinky Friedman.

I'm Scottish, and Protestant, and let me tell you: I listened to the Saddleback discussion over the Web, and found it as off-putting and as alienating as anything as I have ever heard. My late husband, a clergyman from rural Vermont, would have cringed as much as I did.

I am interested in hearing about the war, the economy, education, the housing crisis, affordable health care; you know... the issues. The candidates' religious beliefs and their relationship to Jesus is both irrelevant and none of my business. I am still of the strong opinion that one's religious beliefs are a personal matter.

You tell us to relax. Many Americans can't relax. Such narrow white-bread religiosity is too Orange County, too Ozark, too rural South, too EXCLUSIVE of all the people I knew and loved when I lived in the US, people who are representative of millions of Americans all over the country. Then again, in the eyes of the NASCAR fans and those who live in the Bible-belt, we Americans of the Northeast never were REAL Americans. Barry Goldwater summed it up years ago when he said "sometimes I think this country would be better off if we could just saw off the Eastern Seaboard and let it float out to sea".

There are millions of Americans who don't need or want any Rev'runds like Henry Ward Beecher mixing into the workings of government. Let these people influence and inspire society as popular preachers and philosophers, like Martin Luther King, and the Dalai Lama.

All my friends back in the US want is an honest, transparent political process, and honorable elected officials. Mixing religion directly into the political process gives favored religions undue influence.

As for political speeches, let me recommend Franklin Roosevelt, Dwight Eisenhower, and Harry Truman, no great orators any of them. but good, solid speakers who were able to address the nation without pandering to the self-righteous. In doing so, they spoke to all Americans, even me, and I hadn't been born yet. By all accounts, they were decent presidents too, and they had no need to add religiosity and sanctimonious overlays to their speeches.

I see nothing particularly Christian about the US, except for a lot of bloviating and spurious claims to the effect that the US is a “Christian nation”. I’ll believe that when I see some evidence of it.

Hopefully Senator Obama and Senator Biden, if elected in November will support Physician Conscience on abortion.

Contraception up to the point of implantation is not abortion. After implantation the embryo should be protected.

Availability of contraceptives is one way to reduce abortions, so it should never be restricted in anyway.

A physician should be able to able to follow his conscience and say NO to performing abortions.

Blog of Secretary Mike Leavitt on Physician Conscience:

http://secretarysblog.hhs.gov/my_weblog/2008/08/physician-con-2.html#comments

At the talk at Planned Parenthood, Senator Obama said nothing about abortion being a deeply moral issue. He expressed a typical pro-abortion stand, abortion as a right for the woman and Roe vs Wade as a hard won battle for women.

His later comment would seem to be to soften criticism from pro-life groups.

Senator Obama's talk at Planned Parenthood reveals a strong pro-abortion position.

He strongly supports Roe vs Wade, to the extent of voting against the Born Alive Infant Protection Act three times while in Illinois Senate.

He is for reducing late term abortions, which is not the same as being against abortion and for the right of life of an unborn child. He is a strong supporter of the rights of women to abort their children if they so chose.

Some Christians are able to accept his stand about abortion as a woman's right, while others who look at the issue from the vantage point of the child in the womb are not.

Daniel,

Your points about atheism are generally the same reasons that I classify myself as an "atheist sympathizer" or a skeptic. I'm not a strict atheist because I acknowledge the possibility of a metaphysical. But I'm also not a strict agnostic because I recognize the lack of evidence for a metaphysical, emphasizing that the burden is on any assertion that a metaphysical exists.

How and why did humans first conceive of the idea of a metaphysical? Why do many religions assert its existence? Maybe they want to fill gaps in human knowledge about the physical universe. Maybe they seek meaning for human existence. (There may be other reasons as well.) Regardless, the religions in question are asserting the existence of things without evidence, effectively setting themselves up as alternative sciences. If a metaphysical exists, we can't assume that it has anything to do with human knowledge or meaning.

The filling of gaps in knowledge is relatively an easy question - the answer is that the existence of any object or phenomenon is a matter for science, not for philosophy or religion. It's unscientific to postulate the existence of a metaphysical to bridge those gaps. That's like filling the missing pieces of a jigsaw puzzle with putty. It's possible that a metaphysical may exist that has nothing to do with a specific gap in knowledge.

The question of the seeking of meaning for human existence is much more difficult. I've been saying for a while that religions should address the issue of meaning without intruding on the realm of science. This would involve religions recognizing the distinction between the physical universe and the human experience. However we perceive the physical universe, it would still have certain properties if humans didn't exist. By "human experience," I mean such things as love and beauty, and although they have a biological basis, I'm talking about the human experience of such things. The concept of meaning belongs to the "human experience" realm and not the physical universe realm. Meaning is a human creation. It's possible that meaning has existence independent of the human mind. But if one is going to assert that, then one must present evidence for such existence.

Physical laws have nothing to do with speculation. They are simply human-created classifications for the order that humans observe in the universe. These laws have changed over time to explain new observations, and it's reasonable to suspect that this process will continue. (I avoid the term "natural law" because it has a different meaning in legal discussions.)

When you use the term "God," are you referring to the metaphysical in general? Or are you asserting that the only two possibilities are a single god or no god?

By the contingency of my birth, I had a lot to work with. And by the contingencies of my upbringing, education, and experiences, I think that I have developed an increasingly sophisticated characterization of God and Christianity.

I think that there are different kinds of atheists. Some people see the pantheon of religions laid out before them to choose from, and they don't like any of them; they reject them all; then they are atheists, meaning without belief in God; I don't blame them or condemn them; it would seem a plausible and sensible thing to do. Others decide that there is no God, and embrace a positive belief that there is no God. There is a distinction between these two. Rejection of all religion is more passive, and does not require any kind of supporting philosophy. However, belief in no God would seem to require some kind of philosophical explanation.

Alot of atheists believe in a world that operates under natural law. They believe in the laws of nature, the laws of physics, the laws of science; they base all of this on science. They see these laws of nature operating without a need for, or the presence of, any God.

However science is not a philosophy and is not based on any philosophy. Science does not comment on God, whether there is a God, or there is not a God. Even more, to the surprise of many, I would suppose, science does not comment on natural law either. What many might characterize as natural law, or even the laws of physics, is not part of science, but is instead speculation, based on inferences from science. Aside from a few sensory perceptions, and all scientific knowledge derived from these perceptions, all else is speculation. When we think of natural laws, we are really assigning physical reality to relationships that exist only in our own minds, the true nature of which is speculative, and ultimately, unknown. (Uh-oh! I think that shoots down Intelligent Design, too!)

There are alot of good arguments in support of atheism. However, all of these arguments are speculative in nature. Speculative arguments for atheism do not make atheism more believable for me; it just reinforces my belief that atheism is a speculative belief, just as speculative as any belief.

I wonder sometimes, that maybe we are all confined to a little prison and that our pitiable and feeble senses define its boundaries, and that all of us, each and every one of us, Christian and atheist alike, are confined to dwell there. We can speculate about the true nature of existence; it can be like a puzzle to work through, like a game of scrabble or working a cross-word puzzle. It is a good mental excercise. But it can also be the source of anxiety and fear, even terror. Worrying about this stuff too much can lead to depression, alcoholism, drug addiction, even suicide, and even worse. Maybe that had something to do with flying the planes into the building on 9/11.

I was born, not into a fundamentalist Christian family, but into a family that sought to pass on to me a more sophistocated view of Christianity, which I have always kept, and am still working on.

If you believe in God, and if you are a Christian, you cannot believe that any person "set" on this earth, within the "setting" of their birth can be any more or less favored by God, merely by the "accident" of their birth. And therefore, to assert and assume the superiority of one religious truth over another is absurd and that there must be something more than such a silly way of looking at things.

This point of view is severly myopic. Maybe "spiritual glasses" would help such people to see better.

The issue isn't religious talk in political discourse, as this blog by a liberal Christian illustrates:

http://slacktivist.typepad.com/slacktivist/2008/01/king-and-huck.html

"(Martin Luther) King's argument was ultimately a secular one: a call for justice in accord with the biblical prophets but also, even more so, in accord with the rights guaranteed in the Constitution. (Mike) Huckabee's argument is ultimately a religious one: a call for the Constitution to be re-written in accord with the (alleged) fiats of his faith...Those are very different. It is in no way inconsistent to endorse the former while opposing the latter. In fact, it would be inconsistent not to."

More...

http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/12/24/5976/

"The majority of people who bring their faith into politics, on the right as well as the left and center, translate that faith into statements of value couched in more or less secular terms. The critical question is whether they allow open-ended challenge and debate, or whether they claim 'Hey, you can't challenge this because we didn't make it up. It comes from a transcendent authority than can never change and never be challenged.' If you hear that, it's fair to say 'Religion out of politics!' Because at that point the only response adherents of another faith or none at all can make is, 'I don't believe you.' Then there's nothing more to say. The conversation comes to a dead end. And that means the democratic process comes to an end."

Reasonable Not Hateful

"What you would like is for Christians to just shut up and not exercise their freedom of speech and right to affect the political process."

That is not what I said and not what I implied. So you might be reasonable, but you are a liar.

If you think that being tolerant of other people infringes on YOUR freedom of speech, then maybe you are the one who should go to China or Iran.

I do not apologigze for hurting the feelings of "sensitive" Conservative Christians, because they are not for the most part sensstive; they are crude and course. All of the intolerant and rude comments that come from Conservative Christians everyday on this blog demonstrate my point.

It is good for Conservative Christians to get some "push back" and to learn to respect ther beliefs of others, just as they, and you, would DEMAND respect for yourselvles.

John Mark Reynolds has been drinking his own bathwater -- again.

Senator Obama agrees that abortion is a deeply moral issue ---

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlY9HFRNUHs&feature=related

Senator Obama on Abortion ---

He trusts women to make the right decision in consultation with their doctors and clergy

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCifpbfQlOM&NR=1

At Planned Parenthood ---

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uUl99id2SvM&feature=related

Daniel in the Lion's Den-

What you would like is for Christians to just shut up and not exercise their freedom of speech and right to affect the political process.

If you can't handle people with different beliefs than you getting involved in the political process, then go to China.

If telling people what you don't want to hear, or legislation that follows principles that you don't like bother you, do the same for your POV in the political process. The fact that you seem to be threatened by those awful religious folk telling you their POV (religious or otherwise) or taking their POV to government reps tells me alot about you, and it ain't good.

The way to stop us awful Christians is to involve your self in the political process.

There is a big difference between spirituality and religion. Spirituality doesn’t have any dogma, fiction, or perversion. Spirituality is simply based on everything being connected and part of one body, with One Being behind it all. This is what Jesus A Christ was trying to communicate. It is that simple.

Politics being how various needs and wants are expressed and met or obtained how combined efforts are implemented and what joint ventures are formed and funded. Politics should include the view that we are all one; part of the same body. Religion should not be involved in Politics because it has become perverse in the eyes of the Lord it has become the house of hypocrisy not the House of God.

Oh, and on this:

"Insensitive heathen!"

Having just spent a year as a guest of a lovely little Heathen kindred... I'm somehow not finding those good folks 'insensitive' by any kind of modern standards. Go figure.

Well, yeah, Love.

"To quote the infamous GaryD, "the truth hurts.""

I assure you, many things hurt. By some oversight, I'm sure, not all of these things are 'The Truth.'

Though some may tell you different.

Daniel in the Lion's Den:
Anonymous

So?

To quote the infamous GaryD, "the truth hurts."

That is your response to someone expressing distress over you criticizing them, calling them names, and belittling them for their personal beliefs?

Why I am not surprised, if someone thinks like a child they will act like a child. Grow up, maturity begins with the realization that "you" are not the only one in the world and that there will always be others who believe differently.....get used to up, you have to grow up sometime!

Insensitive heathen!

Cause, you know, I mean, the terrors of the French Revolution sprung right out of the heas of some unknown prophet of 'atheism' and couldn't *possibly* have had anything to do with centuries of oppression and arbitrary torture and in fact decapitation by 'God-ordained' religious-monarchical authorities such as sixteen kings named Louis or pogroms of the Protestant Reformation or...

Nah. Ir was 'atheism' did it.

"John R.:

"Bigotry and hatred are long traditions of atheism going back to the French Revolution."

I'm not sure if you noticed this in your extensive studies of psychohistory, but, it so happens that before the Terror, there were a lot of people quite-justifiably *pissed off* at the Church/monarchy/aristocracy complex of the time?

I got this wild notion they weren't all deluded by too much Hitchens and Darwin, seeing as how they didn't exist yet.

John R

If you wnat to go to church, who is stopping you? If you want to pray, then pray! Who is stopping you? If you want to read the Bible, the read it; who is stopping you?

You want to shove it all down everbody else's throat? Then maybe someone would try and stop you.

What part of that don't you get?

Bigotry and hatred are long traditions of atheism going back to the French Revolution.

Do we have to suffer fools who pander to radical Christian theology rather than telling the American people that in order to represent all the people, the Constitution requires political representatives to set aside their particular religious views influence when making decisions and policy?

>>What "radical theology"? What is radical is the intolerant effort of fanatical atheists to abolish Christianity's role in civil society.

Those on the political left would have been right at home in Stalin's Russia or Mao's China where religion was illegal.

"Seeking a Pastor's Political Support is a Time Honored American Tradition"

So is the oppressing and lynching of blacks.

Dear Happy to Read

If you like to read the bible, then do so. Who is stopping you? Nobody is stopping but your lazy self.

Bible quoting in public is pretentious and rude. I guess Conservative Christians do not care about such social niceties, because it is a matter of saving everyone's immortal souls.

But, still, it's a little obnoxious.

Happy to read :

anon, "Harold, that was not kind at all.

We tend to scroll down the page as fast as we can to skip your post. If the intention of your post is to get people to read it, if you keep up your style, you can be sure nobody is reading.

Why don't you post a real comment if you want someone to read it and respond to you?"
***********************

WHAT AN UNTRUTH YOU TOLD IN YOUR POST, IF YOU DIDN'T READ HAROLD'S POST YOU WOULD HAVE NEVER BEEN ABLE TO COMMENT ON IT AS BEING "that was not kind at all," AND "Why don't you post a real comment."

THIS IS AN ON FAITH BLOG AND YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO DICTATE TO ANYONE THAT THEY CANNOT WRITE SCRIPTURE IN THEIR COMMENTS.YOU SOUND LIKE A CHILD NOT WANTING TO SHARE AND TO HAVE IT ALL YOU WAY.........LIVE WITH IT AND GET OVER YOURSELF!

HAROLD, I LOVE READING YOUR POST, THEY GIVE ME ENCOURAGEMENT AND THEY ARE UPLIFTING, AS SCRIPTURE IS TO THOSE THAT BELEIVE.

August 20, 2008 6:31 PM

______________________________________________

I didn't have to read Harold's post to notice he had posted AGAIN in the same old style. Since I scroll past his post I'm not even aware if there is any comment tucked between his long Scripture passages. I do not notice anyone posting any response to his posts except to complain about them.

Scripture is available online. So a reference with the link would do the job.

As to this comment in full caps, it is equal to shouting in nettiquette. I suspect Harold has posted it himself.

You are being childish Harold. Keep up your style by all means and be the LOSER because everyone in their right mind are likely to scroll past it like I do.

Again, do post a real comment and everyone would be happy to read it and respond.

Anonymous

Your reply to me is proof of my criticisms. You are a snob; you think you are better and smarter than everyone else.

But, guess what? you're not.

That is a shock to you? that others would not bow down to your superiority?

Are you the same Anonymous who seeks to poison this blog with your steady stream of anti-abortion hate mongering?

Why are you so shocked that someone such as myself would push back? You have such a sense of entitlement that it is sickening. You can go around and spit in everyone else's faces; yet, you are shocked, when someone actually does not like it?

Maybe I am a little harsh here on this thread and on others of these threads. But it is a harshness in repsonse to people like you, who will NEVER LEARN good manners, unless you get a push back. You are not entitled to wipe your muddy feet all over everybody else's faces. And that is exatly what you and people like you do.

Anonymous

So?

To quote the infamous GaryD, "the truth hurts."

DITLD, "What can you do with people like this?"

Striving to change someone's beliefs by criticizing them and putting them down for the way that they believe is certainly discriminatory in every sense of the word. Since when did you obtain the right to “judge” someone’s beliefs as being “wrong,” are you God?

Can you see the heart of a person to know their sorrows, pain, hurts, and sincerity? Can you tell if what I believe is without a doubt “false” and will cause harm to you? Can you predict that my beliefs will bring me to a certain end in life? Can you answer the past, present, and future from your distant place of being and call me to be in “error?”

By what means do you measure my faith? Against yours, that is just selfish pride that says I am the man/woman and no one should believe other then the way I do.
Who are you to criticize my beliefs in God, my faith that gives me hope, peace, and joy?

Take the veil from your own eyes and the outer layers from your presented outward appearance and let others see you as you really are and then let them judge you, “the true you” not the one you present for others to see, the one underneath. Tell the secretes you do behind closed doors and what you hide from others fearing what they will see. You will stand to be judged then because once the veil (covering) is gone and all see and know you in the true light, your hypocrisy will be evident.

How dare you judge my faith in God and how dare you judge others for their faith in God.

I suggest that you be a grown up and learn to live with not having your way in every situation and accept others for who they really are. That is what you confess but your actions speak louder then your words, hypocrite!

anon, "Harold, that was not kind at all.

We tend to scroll down the page as fast as we can to skip your post. If the intention of your post is to get people to read it, if you keep up your style, you can be sure nobody is reading.

Why don't you post a real comment if you want someone to read it and respond to you?"
***********************

WHAT AN UNTRUTH YOU TOLD IN YOUR POST, IF YOU DIDN'T READ HAROLD'S POST YOU WOULD HAVE NEVER BEEN ABLE TO COMMENT ON IT AS BEING "that was not kind at all," AND "Why don't you post a real comment."

THIS IS AN ON FAITH BLOG AND YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO DICTATE TO ANYONE THAT THEY CANNOT WRITE SCRIPTURE IN THEIR COMMENTS.YOU SOUND LIKE A CHILD NOT WANTING TO SHARE AND TO HAVE IT ALL YOU WAY.........LIVE WITH IT AND GET OVER YOURSELF!

HAROLD, I LOVE READING YOUR POST, THEY GIVE ME ENCOURAGEMENT AND THEY ARE UPLIFTING, AS SCRIPTURE IS TO THOSE THAT BELEIVE.

" local:

"The term Theocracy is an oxymoron- there is nothing democratic about religion."

Well, that doesn't make it an oxymoron. Theocracy isn't some ad agency's fusion of 'Democracy' and 'Theology,' ...' -cracy' is a root word meaning basically, 'rule by.' Democracy means 'rule by the demos' ie, the common people. 'Autocracy' means, essentially, 'rule by one ruler,' ...Theocracy essentially means 'rule under the auspices of a God.'

" Jesus didn't take votes or read opinion polls. He did His will. Thus, there is nothing democratic about His teachings. Any government based on a religion would necessarily be a dictatorship- or else it would run the risk of being based upon nothing."

One of the reasons the price of freedom is eternal vigilance, and why we have all these protections to our civil liberties and individual rights, is that it's possible to manipulate a populace into *voting* for tyrrany, if that's allowed. Let's not forget that Hitler was *elected.*

Not with great honesty or democratic spirit, of course, but elected. There's few easier ways to do that than having a religion tell the voters that they want whatever the religious establishments *say* to want.

If a religion is allowed to dominate the process, and even what passes for 'facts' to the electorate, you have theocracy in all but name.

What Jesus himself actually taught about *religion in public life* was unfailingly to watch out for hypocrisy, mob mentalities, ...to resist passively as necessary, and to do whatever else as individuals, ...not to try and coerce through government or take over.

He even cautioned against displays of public piety, never mind demanded they be compulsory.

A government based on 'a religion' needn't be a dictatorship, and a government based on Christianity not only wouldn't be democracy, ...it wouldn't be Jesus' Christianity, either.

You can have governments based on other religions, without them being dictatorships... if the religion isn't based on the universe and people being arranged according to some 'Divine dictatorship.' Not all religions are.

For instance, the Masonic influences on American government are often the source of much paranoia and/or... conveniently ignored by people who want to claim it was always about modern American fundamentalism, but the Masonic view *of* government, (and even what the Masons do, which isn't a religion of itself so much as an interfaith adjunct to it: only at the highest levels does one have to profess a particular monotheist sort of faith) ...isn't just *compatible* with democracy, it's got much to do with the form and shape and inspiration for it.

(Frankly, a great deal of American evangelical theocratic impulse actually has its origins in the 'Anti-Masonic' movement and *political party.* These guys weren't doing all that just cause they didn't like some guys like the local Shriners, they wanted to remove a lot of the egalitarian and secularist ways of democracy.)

But the very principles of freemasonry are a democratizing influence that helped shape our pluralistic society, ...and as a largely-Christian group, they have a *great* perspective on what roles are good and bad for particular religions and religious in a secular democracy.

Just cause some religions may *want* easy power and control and influence doesn't mean that's good for them, or anyone.

And there's no faith or goodness in coercion and blind obedience. Not when power's involved.

Probably Christians ought to 'give to Caesar what is Caesar's,' and Republics ought to be damn careful what they put in a dictator-for-life-and Pontifex Maximi's pocket.

Dear Local -

How right you are. There are no instances that I can recall in any of the holy books where a god gives believers a chance to vote on anything. Certainly, Jesus held no votes among his followers, at least, none were recorded (one assumes Jesus allowed his disciples to decide who they would mooch off of for their daily meals. None of these guys had jobs once they met Jesus, so they were forced to mooch off mostly poor people...poor people whose fathers didn't up and abandon their families as did the disciples).

And, there are no votes in heaven - it's a kingdom, after all.

Freestinker wrote:

"I've always wondered why public officials don't swear their oath on the Constitution instead of some religious book?"

Swearing on the Bible is a meaningless public display, isn't it? Who's going to render judgment if the oath taker breaks his oath? God? Jesus? Allah? Nope. It will be the institutions set up by the Constitution who will bring the oath-breaker to account.

Swearing to an imaginary being seems the height of fantasy. Sort of like swearing to break your mother's back if you step on a crack, especially when the imaginary being has no hand in enforcing the terms of the oath.

"... Warren asked questions about the religious views of the candidates. Next thing you know candidates will be taking the presidential oath of office on the Bible!"

A candidate's fitness to govern has never been acurately predicted by their religious opinions. Therefore their religious opinions are completely irrelevant. I've always wondered why public officials don't swear their oath on the Constitution instead of some religious book? After all, they are swearing to protect and defend the U.S. Constitution, not some archaic collection of religious opinions!

The term Theocracy is an oxymoron- there is nothing democratic about religion. Jesus didn't take votes or read opinion polls. He did His will. Thus, there is nothing democratic about His teachings. Any government based on a religion would necessarily be a dictatorship- or else it would run the risk of being based upon nothing.

I agree with Pagan Place; Conservative Christians complain and whine if they do not get special preferential treatment; they are snobs; they do not respect the beliefs of others, and they are proud of this disrespect; they are intolerant; and in all of this, they are insincere and disingenuous in their political motivations and lust for power.

What can you do with people like this?

Reasonable -

Did you read AS-A's take on the forum?

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/catholicamerica/2008/08/riding_herd_on_saddleback_ca.html

There's a differnce, 'Reasonable,' between being 'forced to leave your religion at the door,' and simply not being allowed to *impose* your religion on the public or public institutions.

Conservative Christians tend to whine they're being 'oppressed' when reminded their civil rights end where their 'fist' hits someone else's 'face,' or when they want to claim special privileges with government, or to use said government to promote or enforce their views and censor all others.... Or say that all that praying the Founders are said to have done must have meant they somehow *forgot* to be sure to claim 'This is a (solely) Christian Nation.'

That's what I see here.

I don't think there is much to fear from such shallow, minimalist people, who don't know anymore about Christianity than they know about the Constitution.

Reasonable not Hateful

Wow, you sure are mixed up about Obama. "Off the cuff" is where he is strongest and where he outshines all the others, including, espeically, McCain. Hesitation does not mean that he is having trouble remembering a script; hesitation means that it takes a second or two to compose extemporaneous and creative thoughts that make sense.

Mccain should try it sometimes.

No one seeks to "force the majority to strip the public square of any affirmation of our religious character as a nation." The goal is to protect America's true religious character, which means religion is an individual matter and there is no such thing as a national religion, even an unofficial or civic one. Whatever religion is in the majority is irrelevant. The true problem is that a tiny but hugely influential minority of fundamentalists equate their religion with Americanism. Not theocracy in fact, necessarily, but certainly theocratic in spirit. Once you equate any religion with patriotism, you might as well toss the Establishment cause in the trash.

Listening to unsubstantiated claims, Mr Mark?

Care to provide PROOF of your claim about McCain listening in to Messiah Obama's answers?

Why don't you just admit it, Obama got his butt handed to him during that forum.

Perhaps this another Obama campaign (and daily kook Kos) ploy to try and dilute the butt whipping he got.

Get ready for more. Obama needs his teleprompter to get his points out. Off the cuff ain't his M.O.

Jay-

The constitution DOES NOT require elected representatives to leave their religion at the doorstep of the capital.

Where you people get this crapola I don't know, but telling a lie over and over will still not make it seem like the truth to those that know their government underpinnings, which you clearly don't.

Did you know that during the constitutional convention they took breaks to pray?

Washington said the following: "Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked: Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice ? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle."

The founders were a mix of deists and Christians, and believed in the fact that no one denomination of Christianity should dominate -like the church of England.

No one wants a theocracy . This is just a convenient straw man that atheists like yourself like to drag out when they see that religious people actually get involved in the political process. It is our right to do so, and it is the right of any elected official to "pander" or be influenced by his/her constituents, that is what representative government is all about.

Better read up more on US history. You are obviously ignorant of the roots of this country, and have bought in to the sep of church and state leftists that want to turn all religion out of the country. It's crap. (Un)Pure crap.

Dear JMR -

Why am I not surprised that you failed to bring up Rev Warren LYING about the cone of silence that he didn't have John McCain sequestered in? Perhaps providing such an opportunity for McCain to cheat at the debate - which he obviously did - is not germane to your evaluation of how and why Xians do the things they do.

"We believe in separation of church and state, but not faith and politics." – this statement is evasive and dishonest. It is meant to give solace to Americans that imagine that they would be happier living in a theocracy.

What happened to separation of church and state?

Do we have to suffer fools who pander to radical Christian theology rather than telling the American people that in order to represent all the people, the Constitution requires political representatives to set aside their particular religious views influence when making decisions and policy?

Have Americans have become so naive that they are willing to give up a fundamental principle upon which their rights are secured?

Are Americans happy to be ignorant of the differences between religious myth, morality and human rights?

Are Americans no longer capable of the intellectual vigilance required to reject a self-serving theocracy and maintain a constitutional democracy with the goal of equal freedom for all?

The difference between now and Lincoln's day is that campaigns are run by soundbytes, and setting up a theological 'debate' in which all the Republican has to do is parrot the party line, (Even after previously having been considered just awful by the Evangelicals not so very long ago, until he changed all his 'maverick' positions to 'master evangelical language:' which would seem in this case to involve picking up a book of phrases and receiving due applause and a retroactive approval)

.... and the Democrat has to be on the spot in front of people who want to believe he's a secret Muslim or something.

Too many Evangelicals want to *feel* like they're taking a strong 'morally-absolute' stand on abortion, but really what they want is to claim authority and punitive control over sex and reproduction and women ...even information *about* these things, ... in ways that *don't actually reduce the number of abortions going on,* and which are often actively-counterproductive.

And which measures also create social ills and civil rights violations all their own. But it's 'Christian Conservative' power, so all you have to do is promise it.

In a mass-media age, it's harder to carry across the fact that these situations are complex and don't stand in a vacuum, with only a 'commandment from on high' needed to actually do something about it.

These folks invariably want the 'choice' whether or not to shoot people with guns, but don't want women to be able to make decisions about our own lives and bodies... and dismiss concerns of practicality, freedom, other beliefs, and responsibility just as casually as if I were to say, 'Guns mean people get shot, they must be taken away.'

It often gets down to the level as if I were to say, 'People who are for any gun rights at all are murderers.'

And *that's* why this kind of pandering is dangerous to our nation, our freedom, and our democracy.

Why does it not surprise me whenever a god-believer says that atheists have nothing to worry about when a pastor like Rick Warren asks questions of the major party candidates, and later reveals that he (Warren) would never vote for an atheist? Hey, what's a little bigotry against atheists to worry about, eh?

Harold, that was not kind at all.

We tend to scroll down the page as fast as we can to skip your post. If the intention of your post is to get people to read it, if you keep up your style, you can be sure nobody is reading.

Why don't you post a real comment if you want someone to read it and respond to you?

“Unto you, O men, I call; and my voice is to the sons of man.”

He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee.
In famine he shall redeem thee from death: and in war from the power of the sword.
Thou shalt be hid from the scourge of the tongue: neither shalt thou be afraid of destruction when it cometh.
At destruction and famine thou shalt laugh: neither shalt thou be afraid of the beasts of the earth.
For thou shalt be in league with the stones of the field: and the beasts of the field shall be at peace with thee.
And thou shalt know that thy tabernacle shall be in peace; and thou shalt visit thy habitation, and shalt not sin.
Thou shalt know also that thy seed shall be great, and thine offspring as the grass of the earth.
Thou shalt come to thy grave in a full age, like as a shock of corn cometh in in his season.
Lo this, we have searched it, so it is; hear it, and know thou it for thy good.

“in seven there shall no evil touch thee”
“the beasts of the field shall be at peace with thee”
“thou shalt know that thy tabernacle shall be in peace”
“as a shock of corn cometh in in his season”
“we have searched it, so it is; hear it, and know thou it for thy good.”

To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven:
A time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to pluck up that which is planted;
A time to kill, and a time to heal; a time to break down, and a time to build up;
A time to weep, and a time to laugh; a time to mourn, and a time to dance;
A time to cast away stones, and a time to gather stones together; a time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing;
A time to get, and a time to lose; a time to keep, and a time to cast away;
A time to rend, and a time to sew; a time to keep silence, and a time to speak;
A time to love, and a time to hate; a time of war, and a time of peace.

“A time to love, and a time to hate; a time of war, and a time of peace.”

And seeing the multitudes, he went up into a mountain: and when he was set, his disciples came unto him:
And he opened his mouth, and taught them, saying,
Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
Blessed are they that mourn: for they shall be comforted.
Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth.
Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled.
Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy.
Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God.
Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God.

“Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God.”

But the men of Sodom were wicked and sinners before the Lord exceedingly.

And the king of Sodom said unto Abram, Give me the persons, and take the goods to thyself.
And Abram said to the king of Sodom, I have lift up mine hand unto the Lord, the most high God, the possessor of heaven and earth,
That I will not take from a thread even to a shoelatchet, and that I will not take any thing that is thine, lest thou shouldest say, I have made Abram rich:
Save only that which the young men have eaten, and the portion of the men which went with me, Aner, Eshcol, and Mamre; let them take their portion.

“I have lift up mine hand unto the Lord, the most high God, the possessor of heaven and earth,”

And the Lord said, Shall I hide from Abraham that thing which I do;

Then the Lord rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the Lord out of heaven;

Then came Amalek, and fought with Israel in Rephidim.
And Moses said unto Joshua, Choose us out men, and go out, fight with Amalek: to morrow I will stand on the top of the hill with the rod of God in mine hand.
So Joshua did as Moses had said to him, and fought with Amalek: and Moses, Aaron, and Hur went up to the top of the hill.
And it came to pass, when Moses held up his hand, that Israel prevailed: and when he let down his hand, Amalek prevailed.
But Moses' hands were heavy; and they took a stone, and put it under him, and he sat thereon; and Aaron and Hur stayed up his hands, the one on the one side, and the other on the other side; and his hands were steady until the going down of the sun.
And Joshua discomfited Amalek and his people with the edge of the sword.
And the Lord said unto Moses, Write this for a memorial in a book, and rehearse it in the ears of Joshua: for I will utterly put out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven.

“when Moses held up his hand, that Israel prevailed: and when he let down his hand, Amalek prevailed.”
“Write this for a memorial in a book, and rehearse it in the ears of Joshua”
“I will utterly put out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven”

And Samuel said, When thou wast little in thine own sight, wast thou not made the head of the tribes of Israel, and the Lord anointed thee king over Israel?
And the Lord sent thee on a journey, and said, Go and utterly destroy the sinners the Amalekites, and fight against them until they be consumed.

“the Lord sent thee on a journey, and said, Go and utterly destroy the sinners”

Unto you, O men, I call; and my voice is to the sons of man.
O ye simple, understand wisdom: and, ye fools, be ye of an understanding heart.
Hear; for I will speak of excellent things; and the opening of my lips shall be right things.
For my mouth shall speak truth; and wickedness is an abomination to my lips.
All the words of my mouth are in righteousness; there is nothing froward or perverse in them.
They are all plain to him that understandeth, and right to them that find knowledge.
Receive my instruction, and not silver; and knowledge rather than choice gold.
For wisdom is better than rubies; and all the things that may be desired are not to be compared to it.
I wisdom dwell with prudence, and find out knowledge of witty inventions.
The fear of the Lord is to hate evil: pride, and arrogancy, and the evil way, and the froward mouth, do I hate.
Counsel is mine, and sound wisdom: I am understanding; I have strength.

“Unto you, O men, I call; and my voice is to the sons of man.”

How long, ye simple ones, will ye love simplicity? and the scorners delight in their scorning, and fools hate knowledge?
Turn you at my reproof: behold, I will pour out my spirit unto you, I will make known my words unto you.
Because I have called, and ye refused; I have stretched out my hand, and no man regarded;
But ye have set at nought all my counsel, and would none of my reproof:
I also will laugh at your calamity; I will mock when your fear cometh;
When your fear cometh as desolation, and your destruction cometh as a whirlwind; when distress and anguish cometh upon you.
Then shall they call upon me, but I will not answer; they shall seek me early, but they shall not find me:
For that they hated knowledge, and did not choose the fear of the Lord:
They would none of my counsel: they despised all my reproof.
Therefore shall they eat of the fruit of their own way, and be filled with their own devices.
For the turning away of the simple shall slay them, and the prosperity of fools shall destroy them.
But whoso hearkeneth unto me shall dwell safely, and shall be quiet from fear of evil.

“Turn you at my reproof: behold, I will pour out my spirit unto you”
“I will make known my words unto you.”
“I have called, and ye refused”
“I have stretched out my hand, and no man regarded”

Wisdom is better than weapons of war: but one sinner destroyeth much good.

Harold PLEASE!

Please stop posting as you do, endless lines of something.........

Do post a comment.

Quoting “A different theology of ministry produces a different philosophy of architecture that allows the same location to be used for many different events.”

The Words of Solomon, “Hearken unto thy father that begat thee, and despise not thy mother when she is old”

And Samuel told him every whit, and hid nothing from him. And he said, It is the Lord: let him do what seemeth him good.
And Samuel grew, and the Lord was with him, and did let none of his words fall to the ground.
And all Israel from Dan even to Beersheba knew that Samuel was established to be a prophet of the Lord.

And again the anger of the Lord was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, Go, number Israel and Judah.
For the king said to Joab the captain of the host, which was with him, Go now through all the tribes of Israel, from Dan even to Beersheba, and number ye the people, that I may know the number of the people.

“from Dan even to Beersheba, and number ye the people, that I may know the number of the people.”

Judah and Israel were many, as the sand which is by the sea in multitude, eating and drinking, and making merry.
And Solomon reigned over all kingdoms from the river unto the land of the Philistines, and unto the border of Egypt: they brought presents, and served Solomon all the days of his life.
And Solomon's provision for one day was thirty measures of fine flour, and threescore measures of meal,
Ten fat oxen, and twenty oxen out of the pastures, and an hundred sheep, beside harts, and roebucks, and fallowdeer, and fatted fowl.
For he had dominion over all the region on this side the river, from Tiphsah even to Azzah, over all the kings on this side the river: and he had peace on all sides round about him.
And Judah and Israel dwelt safely, every man under his vine and under his fig tree, from Dan even to Beersheba, all the days of Solomon.

“from Dan even to Beersheba, all the days of Solomon.”

And Hezekiah sent to all Israel and Judah, and wrote letters also to Ephraim and Manasseh, that they should come to the house of the Lord at Jerusalem, to keep the passover unto the Lord God of Israel.
For the king had taken counsel, and his princes, and all the congregation in Jerusalem, to keep the passover in the second month.
For they could not keep it at that time, because the priests had not sanctified themselves sufficiently, neither had the people gathered themselves together to Jerusalem.
And the thing pleased the king and all the congregation.
So they established a decree to make proclamation throughout all Israel, from Beersheba even to Dan, that they should come to keep the passover unto the Lord God of Israel at Jerusalem: for they had not done it of a long time in such sort as it was written.

“from Beersheba even to Dan, that they should come to keep the passover”

And Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel.
And David said to Joab and to the rulers of the people, Go, number Israel from Beersheba even to Dan; and bring the number of them to me, that I may know it.

“Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel”
“number Israel from Beersheba even to Dan; and bring the number of them to me, that I may know it.”

My son, if thine heart be wise, my heart shall rejoice, even mine.
Yea, my reins shall rejoice, when thy lips speak right things.
Let not thine heart envy sinners: but be thou in the fear of the Lord all the day long.
For surely there is an end; and thine expectation shall not be cut off.
Hear thou, my son, and be wise, and guide thine heart in the way.
Be not among winebibbers; among riotous eaters of flesh:
For the drunkard and the glutton shall come to poverty: and drowsiness shall clothe a man with rags.
Hearken unto thy father that begat thee, and despise not thy mother when she is old.

These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens,
And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the Lord God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.
But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.
And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
And the Lord God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed.
And out of the ground made the Lord God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

“heavens and of the earth” “earth and the heavens”
“there went up a mist from the earth”
“watered the whole face of the ground”
“Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground”
“breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.”
“out of the ground made the Lord God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight”
“the tree of life also in the midst of the garden”
“good for food”
“the tree of knowledge of good and evil”

And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.

“My spirit shall not always strive with man”
“his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.”

And Moses went and spake these words unto all Israel.
And he said unto them, I am an hundred and twenty years old this day; I can no more go out and come in: also the Lord hath said unto me, Thou shalt not go over this Jordan.
The Lord thy God, he will go over before thee, and he will destroy these nations from before thee, and thou shalt possess them: and Joshua, he shall go over before thee, as the Lord hath said.

“I am an hundred and twenty years old this day”
“I can no more go out and come in”

Give ear, O ye heavens, and I will speak; and hear, O earth, the words of my mouth.
My doctrine shall drop as the rain, my speech shall distil as the dew, as the small rain upon the tender herb, and as the showers upon the grass:
Because I will publish the name of the Lord: ascribe ye greatness unto our God.
He is the Rock, his work is perfect: for all his ways are judgment: a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is he.

“Give ear, O ye heavens”
“I will speak; and hear”
“O earth, the words of my mouth”
“My doctrine shall drop as the rain”
“I will publish the name of the Lord”

Then said the Lord unto Moses, Behold, I will rain bread from heaven for you; and the people shall go out and gather a certain rate every day, that I may prove them, whether they will walk in my law, or no.

“I will rain bread from heaven for you”
“the people shall go out and gather a certain rate every day”
“I may prove them, whether they will walk in my law, or no”

Then I will give you rain in due season, and the land shall yield her increase, and the trees of the field shall yield their fruit.
And your threshing shall reach unto the vintage, and the vintage shall reach unto the sowing time: and ye shall eat your bread to the full, and dwell in your land safely.
And I will give peace in the land, and ye shall lie down, and none shall make you afraid: and I will rid evil beasts out of the land, neither shall the sword go through your land.

“I will give you rain in due season”
“the trees of the field shall yield their fruit”
“sowing time: and ye shall eat your bread to the full, and dwell in your land safely”
“I will give peace in the land”
“I will rid evil beasts out of the land, neither shall the sword go through your land”

And it shall come to pass, if ye shall hearken diligently unto my commandments which I command you this day, to love the Lord your God, and to serve him with all your heart and with all your soul,
That I will give you the rain of your land in his due season, the first rain and the latter rain, that thou mayest gather in thy corn, and thy wine, and thine oil.

“the first rain and the latter rain”

But the land, whither ye go to possess it, is a land of hills and valleys, and drinketh water of the rain of heaven:
A land which the Lord thy God careth for: the eyes of the Lord thy God are always upon it, from the beginning of the year even unto the end of the year.
And it shall come to pass, if ye shall hearken diligently unto my commandments which I command you this day, to love the Lord your God, and to serve him with all your heart and with all your soul,
That I will give you the rain of your land in his due season, the first rain and the latter rain, that thou mayest gather in thy corn, and thy wine, and thine oil.

“drinketh water of the rain of heaven”
“A land which the Lord thy God careth for”
“I will give you the rain of your land in his due season, the first rain and the latter rain”

The Lord shall open unto thee his good treasure, the heaven to give the rain unto thy land in his season, and to bless all the work of thine hand: and thou shalt lend unto many nations, and thou shalt not borrow.
And the Lord shall make thee the head, and not the tail; and thou shalt be above only, and thou shalt not be beneath; if that thou hearken unto the commandments of the Lord thy God, which I command thee this day, to observe and to do them:

“the heaven to give the rain unto thy land in his season”
“to bless all the work of thine hand”
“the Lord shall make thee the head”

Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.

“Unto the woman he said”
“I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception”
“in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children”
“thy desire shall be to thy husband”
“he shall rule over thee”

Then Moses heard the people weep throughout their families, every man in the door of his tent: and the anger of the Lord was kindled greatly; Moses also was displeased.
And Moses said unto the Lord, Wherefore hast thou afflicted thy servant? and wherefore have I not found favour in thy sight, that thou layest the burden of all this people upon me?
Have I conceived all this people? have I begotten them, that thou shouldest say unto me, Carry them in thy bosom, as a nursing father beareth the sucking child, unto the land which thou swarest unto their fathers?

“Moses said unto the Lord”
“Wherefore hast thou afflicted thy servant”
“wherefore have I not found favour in thy sight”
“that thou layest the burden of all this people upon me”
“Have I conceived all this people”
“have I begotten them, that thou shouldest say unto me”
“Carry them in thy bosom, as a nursing father beareth the sucking child”