Church-State Queries For The Goose And The Gander

Hello Peter,

Is Gene Cook’s show where you found my site? I was a guest there (for the third time) on August 17th. It’s show #935 and is still on the main page of The Narrow Mind Aftermath, available for free download. I’m a novice at these interviews, but enjoyed my time on air with Gene and Jonathan.

I have some of VanTil’s and Bahnsen’s books, and although they are wonderful, the comprehension level needed to understand them is one of the motivating factors for me in writing my book.

I really enjoyed the Bahnsen - Stein debate and get something new out of it every time I listen to it. The Bahnsen - Tabash debate is also quite good. Have you ever heard the Bahnsen - Smith radio debate? Really poor audio quality, but a fantastic conversation.

I’ve seen those Bahnsen videos that you linked (it’s almost a guarantee that if it is Bahnsen, I’ve seen or heard it :-). I even attended the 10th anniversary memorial service of Bahnsen’s passing in California a few years back, and met some of his family.

Are you Canadian as well? I’d appreciate it if you'd send me an e-mail (sye@proofthatgodexists.org), so I can have your address on file to tap your brain once in a while :-). I’m also interested in politics and have been following the Canadian and U.S. races quite closely.

Anyhow, thanks for your posts here, I’ve saved most of them.

Look forward to hearing from you.

Blessings,

Sye

Hi Sye,

For me discovering Reformed Theology brought many answers to light, especially in the case of God's sovereignty and Word. A.W. Pink is a favorite, as is James White. Along with Reformed Theology, I found reading Robert Reymond's and Wayne Gradem's Systematic Theology helped to tie the Scriptures together.

But in apologetics I used to use solely the evidential or classical approach until I discovered presuppositional apologetics (not that classical apologetics is not effective, but more so for the Christian since the atheist is extremely biased to it).

From the Presuppositional approach I have learned that God's Word is my highest standard of appeal, my Rock, in talking to anyone who is not a Christian. In doing so I have come to love His wisdom and knowledge. As Paul makes mention of in 2 Corinthians 10:3-5, there is nothing stronger in demolishing strongholds! I also love Colossians 2:3 and 1 Thessalonians 2:13. They are an anchor. But nothing surpasses knowing Christ Jesus as Lord and Savior, and of His great love for us who believe by His grace and mercy!

Like you, I got hooked on Presuppositional apologetics by listening to people like Gene Cook debate atheists and agnostics, or the classic Greg Bahnsen/Gordon Stein debate. I have saturated myself with not just Bahnsen and Van Til, but also John Frame, and Gordon Clark, but Clark seems out of it a bit and a lot harder to understand.

The Monergism site is a good place to peruse.

I enjoyed Bahnsen's "Pushing the Antithesis" but the classic was Bahnsen on "Van Til's Apologetics/Readings and Analysis."

Have you listened to his You Tube lectures?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vPn8AX6Ru3E&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FDn4aIrvp_0&feature=related

SYE: "I've started writing a book on the subject to try to explain the apologetic to the average person. I've enjoyed reading your posts here, they have been quite helpful."

I look forward to reading it!

I have found these forums very helpful for myself in understanding and attempting to answer the bankruptcy of the atheist position. God's Word stands supreme as THE standard!

I'm still waiting for an atheist to fully engage in answering some of these questions instead of just name calling when a nerve is touched.

Actually, on a few occasions a atheist has admitted that they do not have answers (to the moral question especially), but the alternative to be avoided at all cost is that God is the answer. That self destructs their whole foundation so although there is no other solution in making sense of these issues they will not go there. (Timmy, a comedian from Canada was an example on the Sam Harris forum, as was someone on this or the last post - I get confused to which)

I have also taken a bit of an interest in American politics. :-)

There seem to be two underlying opposite foundations involved between the Republicans and Democrats, just like between the Conservatives and Liberals in Canada. I don't think the Republicans have fought a good campaign (it is downright ugly) but the basis for their values on important issues such as abortion and same-sex marriage, on the surface at least, appear miles apart. To stand for godly values is certain to get you ridiculed. Unfortunately, the Republicans do not have any idea on how to address the economy. It boils down to choosing the lesser of two evils in who to vote for, if you are American.

Thanks for the chat.

Blessings in Christ Jesus!

ENDER: "So when I talk about P'huff presenting a circular argument I'm being too kind?"

Too kind?

Ender: "Don't bother Puff!"

Do you classify derogatory name calling as being kind? Again you deal with a qualitative value - kindness - so what is your standard that you measure it against? Is it yourself or someone else? In either case why are you or they the ultimate standard?

Do you have an answer? I did not think so.

If you dig deep enough all arguments boil down to circular reasoning, do they not? You use science to prove science, you use logic to prove logic. Where as the Christian falls back on God's Word as the ultimate source of knowledge and truth, the atheist falls back on a number of circular reasons, two of them being himself and his feelings, or evolutionary science.

The difference between the logic a Christian uses and the logic an atheist uses is that only a Christian can account for the facts. You have no idea where they came from. Without God as the ultimate, absolute, objective, unchanging reality what are you left with? Some mere humans subjective changing opinion? Only with God can we know what is a true fact.

"For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but He rested on the seventh day." (Exodus 20:11)

ENDER: "Would it be more like the McSame campaign? They keep throwing crap at the wall and you don't really want to talk about it so they laugh while we try to find interesting patterns in crap stains on the wall....is it sorta like that?"

I won't touch that comment.

When you, Ender, talk about real discourse you don't follow through with it. I took the time to answer most of your questions, but you dodged most of mine because when you get to the tough issues of life the atheist has no answers, just silence. As I have said all along you cannot make sense of anything when your arguments are probed deeply enough.

ENDER: "So when I talk about P'huff presenting a circular argument I'm being too kind?"

Too kind?

Ender: "Don't bother Puff!"

Do you classify derogatory name calling as being kind? Again you deal with a qualitative value - kindness - so what is your standard that you measure it against? Is it yourself or someone else? In either case why are you or they the ultimate standard?

Do you have an answer? I did not think so.

If you dig deep enough all arguments boil down to circular reasoning, do they not? You use science to prove science, you use logic to prove logic. Where as the Christian falls back on God's Word as the ultimate source of knowledge and truth, the atheist falls back on a number of circular reasons, two of them being himself and his feelings, or evolutionary science.

The difference between the logic a Christian uses and the logic an atheist uses is that only a Christian can account for the facts. You have no idea where they came from. Without God as the ultimate, absolute, objective, unchanging reality what are you left with? Some mere humans subjective changing opinion? Only with God can we know what is a true fact.

"For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but He rested on the seventh day." (Exodus 20:11)

ENDER: "Would it be more like the McSame campaign? They keep throwing crap at the wall and you don't really want to talk about it so they laugh while we try to find interesting patterns in crap stains on the wall....is it sorta like that?"

I won't touch that comment.

When you, Ender, talk about real discourse you don't follow through with it. I took the time to answer most of your questions, but you dodged most of mine because when you get to the tough issues of life the atheist has no answers, just silence. As I have said all along you cannot make sense of anything when your arguments are probed deeply enough.

Thanks Peter! Your quote will be in good company :-)

http://www.proofthatgodexists.org/favourite-quotes.php

Indeed I am Canadian. Thanks for your kind words about the site. Just about everything I've learned about presuppositional apologetics has been through audio lectures by Dr. Bahnsen.

I've started writing a book on the subject to try to explain the apologetic to the average person. I've enjoyed reading your posts here, they have been quite helpful.

Blessings,

Sye

Hi Sye Tenb,

Please feel free if you think God will be glorified, although I'm just restating what has been made clear from great presuppositional thinkers like Van Til and Greg Bahnsen among others on the impoverished worldview of anyone who suppresses the truth of God.

If that is your website it is well done! I understand you are Canadian. Is that correct?

Hi Gerry,

If you want to talk stupid, it reminds me of a tale I heard about a couple of scientists who took bets of how many jumps a frog would take to reach a pond while on each successive jump they would slightly, but progressively impede his progress. The pond was 19 feet away. After the first jump of 6' they impeded the frogs progress by cutting of one of his front legs. The jump measured 5'. After removing both front legs the next jump was measured at 4'. This time they cut off his back leg and coxed the frog into jumping again, this time to a measurement of 3'. Now being intelligent human beings they figured by removing the last leg the distance would decrease just enough to get the frog into the water. Jump frog, jump! When this did not happen the scientists came to the conclusion that you can lead a frog to water but you can't make him jump.

In other words, you are working on the wrong set of presuppositions as usual, which results in arriving at the wrong conclusion.

Hello Peter Huff,

I'd like to add a quote of yours from this blog, to the "Favourite Quotes" section of my site http://www.proofthatgodexists.org

Here's the quote: "The atheist can appeal to nothing absolute, nothing objectively true for all people, it is just mere opinion enforce(d) by might.
The Christian appeals to a standard outside himself/herself in which truth and qualitative values can be made sense of."

Could you let me know if that's okay?

sye@proofthatgodexists.org

So when I talk about P'huff presenting a circular argument I'm being too kind?

Would it be more like the McSame campaign? They keep throwing crap at the wall and you don't really want to talk about it so they laugh while we try to find interesting patterns in crap stains on the wall....is it sorta like that?

Almighty, taken seriously, of course has created everything, including human stupidity.

"Dear God, I am stupid and it feels so good. Please help me to maintain this mental state and defend me against any doubt, learning and knowledge. Amen".

PHuffs probable answer: "What is your absolute point of reference that God created stupidity along with everything else? There is no mention in the bible that god created stupidity"!

Of course, the bible authors did not mention such a thing: It would have refuted their narrative!

Almighty explains everything, even stuff that don't make no sense. If it don't make no sense, it's 'cause Almighty don't want it to and you ain't never gonna understand stuff Almighty don't want you to. That's Almighty's secret.

Almighty ain't called Almighty for nothin'.

Alrighty?

Don't bother Puff! Your circular logic explaining the bible with the bible is useless in real discourse. You have nothing else to offer here and your apologies for the actions of christians in every situation are even more inane.

PS. The last comments were mine. I forgot to preview.

I will most likely have to catch up Friday to any more responses.

Hi Gerry,

GERRY: "The next star, Alpha Centauri, is about four light years away from the solar system. So how can "God" create the earth and Alpha Centauri on the same "day", with the stars "on the firmament"?"

"By the word of the LORD the heavens were made,
And by the breath of His mouth all their host...
Let all the earth fear the Lord;
Let all the inhabitants of the world stand in awe of Him.
For He spoke, and it was done;
He commanded, and it stood fast." (Psalm 33:6, 8,9)

Just as Adam was made a fully grown man, so the universe was made in an instant with its vast difference in distance to show the awesomeness of God.

Of course, I do not expect you to believe this. How can you convince a skeptic? Your worldview will not allow it to be any other way other than how you see it.

GERRY: "If, just for understanding the proportion, the earth would be reduced to the size of a pea, A.C. would be roughly 10.000 km away. All in one "non-figurative" day? Nonsense "rears its head", to use Sarah Palin's eery words."

If it was too difficult for the Almighty He would not be God. But alas He is and you are not, therefore He decides, not you, how things will be.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/young.asp

Hymn to Pseudo and Inspired Rhymers

Fearing Pseudo had left
They all stood bereft.
O, the bloggers did try
To debate the Most High.

But with Pseudo away
Their passion gave way.
'til Heav'n or something
Brought back Pseudo triumphing.
Now, Bloggers sweet sing
Borne on Poesie's wing.

Ah! But to what each does ask.
Were we ever on task?
E'en inspiration gave way
With Pseudo away.

But now Pseudo is nigh
Our thoughts they do fly.
Let all the great rhymers who post on this thread
Fill the ether with song by the great Pseudo led.

Hi, Arminius - E Favorite here, trying again - it worked as described on another part of this blog, but I will try previewing first as you suggested.

Well - having just pressed "preview" I see I'm named as Anonymous, even though the original response box said "efavorite" would show as my name. However, I got and just took the option of changing that to "E Favorite."

The preview box is not working the same way as in the past -- not an actual preview, just the usual comment box. Now lets see what happens when I press preview again.

Ah - this time I got the regular preview box and the original comment box - just like old times.

Hope this is fixed soon.

My own poor prose contribution...

The universe began in simplicity.
One microsecond later,
Entropy began
It’s long, sweet war,
With that which created it.

Without knowledge all is simple
So knowing is messy,
And KNOWLEDGE is messier still.

So many yearn for that simplicity
Of ignorance
Of the Cross
Of the long dirt nap
Of the Singularity before
The universe plunged madly into
The Chaos of Creation.

The next star, Alpha Centauri, is about four light years away from the solar system. So how can "God" create the earth and Alpha Centauri on the same "day", with the stars "on the firmament"?

If, just for understanding the proportion, the earth would be reduced to the size of a pea, A.C. would be roughly 10.000 km away. All in one "non-figurative" day? Nonsense "rears its head", to use Sarah Palin's eery words.

From the previous Susan Jacoby thread Anonymous wrote:

ANON: "Peter - a while back on this thread you wrote: "First you have to establish whether He is talking plainly or figuratively"

ANON: "So why isn't it possible that God was speaking figuratively in Genesis and Exodus 20:11?"

If God did not speak in plain language it would be impossible to understand what He was saying in reference to anything, let alone a day, so the normal laws that govern language apply here. You look at the context of the passage to determine what kind of language is being used, plain/literal or figurative/symbolic.

"Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy. Six days you are to work, but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the LORD your God. On it you shall not do any work, neither you, nor your son or daughter, nor your manservant or maidservant, nor your animals, nor the alien within your gates. FOR IN SIX DAYS THE LORD MADE THE HEAVENS AND THE EARTH, THE SEA, AND ALL THAT IS IN THEM, BUT HE RESTED ON THE SEVENTH DAY. THEREFORE THE LORD BLESSED THE SEVENTH DAY AND MADE IT HOLY."

The problem comes in interpreting these verses in any way other than how they are revealed in Scripture. How do you determine how long a day is if God is using a different measure other than the normal day/night (24 hours) that man uses?

If He is using figurative language there is no indication from this narrative and these verses become unintelligible if the words do not convey the Author intended meaning, hence man cannot know how long a day is, thus the statements become meaningless.

If the world and everything in it was not created in six days then how long is the day God is talking about in reference to our days and how long was one to work?

And God is clear in other verses of Scripture what defines a day, such as Genesis 1:4,5,8,13, etc., as well as the word "yom" being translated as a literal 24 hour period in almost every other passages it is used in the Bible. That and the fact that Jesus, the Creator, identifies when the beginning was (Matthew 19:4-8: Mark 10:6, etc.); the genealogies trace the lineage of Jesus back to Adam, the first man (Luke 3:223-37; death and decay appeared after Adam sinned, not before. Therefore man and animals were created together, within days of each other as laid out in Genesis. They were also created each to their own kind, not one type evolving into another, and man was made different from the animals in that he was made in the image and likeness of God.

These are just a few of the many examples that consistently testify to when God created and how.

So you either take the verse in reference to the context used or you read into the context something that is not found there. Do you find any figurative language in the text, for it appears to be a narrative, not symbolic language?

Either God's Word judges you or you judge it, depending on whether you are in rebellion to Him or not. But in the final outcome His Word will be the judge of you.

A reason why so many different interpretations are found is because people read something into the text that is not there. When that happens the Author's intended meaning is lost for the words become whatever one wishes to make them depending on what he likes the meaning to be. In this way countless meanings can be applied to the same verse.

Hello Perciflage,

PERCIFLAGE: "It's impossible to defeat a wily Christian because it's always 'God's will' that makes everything happen. And God is indisputable..."

Yes, God is indisputable, but it is possible to defeat a Christian by showing him that what he says does not line up with the Word of God, if that is the case.

PERCIFLAGE: "And being the penultimate undetected projection of the shadow, 'God's will' gives His humble servants here on earth an unlimited latitude to say and do anything whatsoever."

All I'm asking is for you to make sense of this world without God as your first presupposition.

PERCIFLAGE: "Under the banner of 'God's will', the truth shall set you free, no?"

If God chooses to set you free, you will be free indeed. Free from condemnation and penalty from His judgment, free to worship God as He is, and yes, free to know the truth that is Jesus Christ.

PERCIFLAGE: "Here we have God as the eponymous Perfect Circle of unresponsibility posing as truth."

I don't follow your meaning?

PERCIFLAGE: "Christians so often unknowingly present God as the trickster - but that is one of His jobs, after all."

Explain?

PS. Thank you for the tip Arminius!

Hello again Acebojangles,

ACEBOJANGLES: "Having a reasonable, observable factual basis for the things you believe is more important than being able to explain everything with absolute certainty."

What good is a "reasonable, observable factual base" if it is not true? You presuppose that any person looking at the observable factual basis comes to the table neutral, without bias or prejudice. Although facts can be new to man they are never new to God, since He knows all things.

ACEBOJANGLES: "People have been able to use the nature of god to explain everything with absolute certainty for millenia. Disease was caused by evil spirits, the earth was center of the universe, etc. They were using god as an ultimate reference point and they were wrong about almost everything."

Man's correct interpretation of any fact depends on thinking God's thoughts after Him, of discovering His laws, of accepting His interpretation because God makes the facts what they are. Yes, men have been wrong on interpreting God's Word, of using bad science to misinterpret what God has made, but God has not left Himself without proof, both by His written Word and by what has been made.

But there are five points I would like to be made here, 1) that there is a correct interpretation of His Word, 2) the atheist or rejecter of God is constantly tell others what can and cannot be, so he is not "open minded" at all for he has already concluded that there are no absolutes, except of course for the one - there is not and cannot be the Christian God, 3) neutrality is a myth, 4) there is an seemingly endless stream of facts, most of which we have not even tapped into which either spring (originate) from Chance and are contingent, or from the ultimate, absolute Being who is God and hence the ultimate source of truth, 5) man is limited in his understanding of all things, therefore he needs outside aid in understanding the how and why of things.

Now if facts are there because of Chance then how does the unbelieving atheist string together a "reasonable, observable factual basis" for anything, for there is no rational and reason with Chance? How can and does Chance control facts and why are they related? How does an impersonal principle, Chance, create reason or information?

If Chance then why does reality perform in a uniform, consistent manner? If Chance then how can one ever predict what will or could happen in the future, much less with certainty? If Chance how can anything be but speculation? If Chance then what of truth, what of logic, what of consistency, what of intelligence?

Dear Sarah and Joe,

A rhyme for your next debate memory bank:

O Islam, Islam, violent Islam,
Mohoud, illiterate and hallucinating,
O Islam, Islam, violent Islam,
Moha greed and lustful, womanizing,
Was he too,

O Islam, O Islam, violent Islam,
Moha, warmongering and hateful,
Was he too,

O Islam, O Islam, violent Islam,
Sunnis of hate, Shiites of late,
Even Pretty Wingie Thingies cannot
Save us from O Islam's hate.

Save us from these Islamic FEMs,
Flaws, Errors, Muck and Stench,
They ooze from the rocks of earth,
Like worms of death and wrench.

Born, Bred, and Brainwashed too,
Whatever, whatever to do?
Truth, Truth, History and Truth,
Let it Ring True, Freedom, Freedom
Freedom at Last and much left to do!!!

E Favorite,

Is that you, after all this time?

When you post on this blog, hit 'Preview' and then enter your handle.

hello, just lurking, seeing if I will turn up "anonymous" or as myself, E Favorite

a poor effort.... just to keep things going

I come to this site so very much humbled
To offer verse in form that is quite bumbled
Yet my stuff will continue its groaning
Since I am now well full knowing
That Sparrow is now well and truly gruntled!

I came over here to join the poetry fest! (farnazz- I like the word consolate! I am now consolable). We should all write in poetic meter. I'm a free verse sort myself, but I like a good limerick and sonnet as well.

Pseudo, Great Penman,

Pseudo you are in name only, for you are the real thing. Your poetry must never be left on the side of the road as you travel the quotidian. Even if you rhyme an entry To-Do list every day, you will keep the Muse at your side.

I rejoice in your return. For awhile, I thought I'd have to give up, but that would not have been for many a sun and moon.

Farnaz

A brilliant metrical comment, dear Pseudo, replete with alliteration and internal rhyme. Surely, you are one of the major versifiers of the twentieth-first century.

Pseudo and Farnaz,

Well, I think we've got something going here that is positive. That is a rare thing on these blogs, and we should pursue it.

Thanks Arminius, I forgot to preview.

Pseudo, that last Anon was from yours truly, Farnaz, the currently consolate and gruntled. 'Twas a long and bitter season here without you.

If that was the answer,
then what was the Question?
A debate like a cancer
That we're all protestin'

What did they debate,
Of Religious beliefs,
Or was it just to berate
The church versus state
And from our misgivings we got no relief

O'Biden unbidden dropped a policy midden
And O that McPalin's intellectual failings
Left any clear thinking so carefully hidden
And left us to wonder on future clear sailing

Hi, Farnaz,

"I am now consolate."

In other words, you are now gruntled, instead of disgruntled?

Oh, yes, don't forget to go to preview first on this blog.

Pseudo! You have returned! I was just about to post yet another plaintive cry, when I read the words of Arminius, great lover of verse, rejoicing of your return on another thread.

It has been dusty here in the plains, chilly in the Klondike, windy in the desert. Alas and alack we have been disconsolate in your absence. Perciflage, Arminius, and I. You must not go for such long periods. Even a poet for the ages such as you are cannot be expected to post exquisite rhyme on every passing Quinn whim. A simple couplet will do. Or even prose, or a prose poem.

Welcome back. I am now consolate.

Farnaz

Pseudo!

Welcome back! As we say here in the South, YEEE-HAH!!!

Everything is going to be fine
Pseudo's back, and barely in time
All we did was lament
But he's back, heaven sent,
And he'll fix everything with his rhyme.

This is a test
Of pseudo progress
In printing a handle
that won't just get mangled

What's in a name?

To my dear friend O Farnaz
Of absence who does say alas

Pseudo need not be Anonymous
For it would not even be eponymous

Poor Pseudo is well known
For bad verse causing groans

And with No One he is not synonymous

{prose}
have not had the time for a relevant rhyme,
that fits in with the topic this time.
{/prose}

{well pseudo prose, anyway %-}

And so, Mr. Peter Huff -

It's impossible to defeat a wily Christian because it's always 'God's will' that makes everything happen. And God is indisputable...

And being the penultimate undetected projection of the shadow, 'God's will' gives His humble servants here on earth an unlimited latitude to say and do anything whatsoever.

Under the banner of 'God's will', the truth shall set you free, no?

Here we have God as the eponymous Perfect Circle of unresponsibility posing as truth.

Christians so often unknowingly present God as the trickster - but that is one of His jobs, after all.

My last post should have begun with "Having a reasonable, observable factual basis..."

Peter Huff:

Having a reasonable, oversable factual basis for the things you believe is more important than being able to explain everything with absolute certainty. People have been able to use the nature of god to explain everything with absolute certainty for millenia. Disease was caused by evil spirits, the earth was center of the universe, etc. They were using god as an ultimate reference point and they were wrong about almost everything.

Hello Ender,

ENDER: "Your reply tries to separate Christianity from the actions of the majority of its constituants. You can make lofty claims for your religion, but you are known by your actions, not your words."

That is not the point, the point is how we should live in light of the knowledge of God, that we, as Christians have. That can only be done by Christ living in and through us, not in us living apart from Him by His moral guidelines. The Bible makes it plain that we must be born again, reborn or made anew by God. The values of this world need to be replace by His Spirit and guidance. The Christian life is a surrender to God by His grace, so not all that claim to be Christians are in fact, or they are immature in their commitment to Christ, not taking Him at His Word, or the Bible as the supreme authority in matters of faith.

If I do not proclaim the truth as He has spoken it, and I misrepresent it, I make myself to be a liar; if I do not live as He has called me then my actions are hypocritical. We have all been there, but it is through His grace to me that I continue on, knowing whom I have believed in and that He is able to keep me safely within His grasp and protection, that in the end God works for the good of those who love Him and have been called according to His purpose.

I do not boast of a righteousness of my own for in even breaking one of His holy laws I am guilty before a perfectly righteous Judge. That is why I need a Savior, One who is able to obey God without sinning and who will substitute Himself in my place in order to take the punishment and judgment I deserve in His place and provide a life that is lived perfectly before God on my behalf. No man made religion can do that, for only God is able; no mere human works can justify me before the Just One.

ENDER: "If the world is more brutal now than in the past, a notion I actually contest, then look where the power has resided for the last 2000 yrs. With nations claiming to be christian."

It has always been unjust and brutal ever since Adam and Eve decided that they would distrust that God had their best intentions at heart. Satan came along and said, "Did God really say...surely you will be as God, knowing the difference between good and evil." Well when man makes himself the final authority, the ultimate autonomous one, the self law, what do you expect? Six thousand or so years of human history have proved to be extremely brutal as man tries to live without God, denying His existence at ever turn.

ENDER: "Humans should be good because their own innate sense of right and wrong tells them to. To do good, or evil because of carrot or stick is not good, or even free will."

Not when they suppress the truth of God for a lie in order to do what they want, rather than what is good. Let's face it, you in your rebellion towards God want to have the last say in what God should be like, what should be moral, what is true. The problem is everyone has a different idea and in order to make that idea a reality force or persuasion is needed. Hence the brutality of history.

ENDER: "Humans have been living together without the Cults of Abraham for most of history and prehistory, and those "people of the book" have been just as brutal as those of other religions. You can throw Hilter and Stalin in there, but the Third Reich claimed to be a Christian organization at its root, and Stalin was a failed catholic Priest."

No, actually Hitler masqueraded as such in order to advance his political aspirations, but his book and what he believed and said proved otherwise. He was deeply influenced by Darwinian thought, as was the culture in which he lived. If you want to learn something about someone learn who influenced them.

ENDER: "Please deal with the absolute morality issue I make. That is where you make claims unsupported by any logic, and I don't see you dealing with my counter perspective."

Actually it is the only logical explanation, that without an absolute, objective, unchanging, ultimate standard or reference point that is God, it is all mere personal opinion. So why should I believe yours?

ENDER: "Your view of humanity as born sinful is unique to the cults of Abraham, and where all of your claims to moral superiority through any religion are flawed. You can make these claims as elements of faith, but not of logic or reason."

Many religions borrow on the idea that man is sinful, they just don't have the answers of how man can be justified before a holy and perfectly righteous Judge once they have broken His law. They base their actions on pleasing Him, although they have already disobeyed Him.

As for myself being superior, I have never claimed as much, nor do I think so for it is only through God and His mercy that I have been forgiven, not through my merit, but by His.

ENDER: "When even the Christian subdivisions disagree and those subsets don't even agree with what their subset believed 100 yrs ago, the only thing absolute is the changing nature of humanity."

Man without the guidance of the Holy Spirit or without proper interpretation of His Word argue over lots of things. The Christians ultimate, final reference point is God, through His revelation to us. He is absolute.

You are wrong. Something that is changing is not absolute.

ENDER: "Without the Secular thought, ethics and logic of the Age of Enlightenment, Christianity would still be supporting marriage of prepubescent girls, slavery and the murder of non-Christians for land and profit(example native Americans and Indian Indians)."

There again, for much of your argument you attribute to Christianity much of what is of man, not God.

ENDER: "Once again, Christianities ACTIONS prove it unable to provide moral guidance that is any better than that of natural human when the make the attempt."

Sometimes yes, other times no. You are attributing every evil act to Christians but have overlooked all the good as well. We can get into it if you like, but that will have to be this weekend.

ENDER: "250,000 yrs of socialization of the animal have provided almost all of us with the ability to correctly differentiate right and wrong even when those differences are very often shaded gray."

You're wrong.

Hi Ender,

ENDER: "I will answer in kind. Stephen Pinker makes a well thought out case in "The Blank Slate" that humans are hardwired to believe in the afterlife, and god or gods."

Long before Stephen Pinker came along God confirmed that man was created in His image and likeness and that although they are aware of God they suppress that truth in their unrighteousness. (Romans 1:18-25)

You know that God exists,

"For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves, in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness, and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them." (Romans 2:14-15)

So you look upon the evidence and interpret it as mankind hardwired because of their environment, and in their search for some kind of meaning and purpose in an otherwise meaningless world they invent God as the crutch that will help them when the island they are living on starts to rumble and spew forth larva.

We as Christians look upon it as you knowing the difference between right and wrong because God has made you such and you're hardwired by God to know Him. So your conscience tells you as someone made in God's image and likeness that murder is wrong, harming another human being is wrong even though you may not have come in contact with the Ten Commandments.

ENDER: "250,000 yrs of shared human experience established instincts that cause many of us to pursue, experience and even invent 'religiousity' and 'spirituality'."

Again, you start with a basic foundational belief - evolutionary dogma and hundreds of thousands of years of mans existence - and build your whole worldview upon these starting presuppositions. As such, all evidence, all facts you interpret in light of your starting presupposition and fit the evidence as best you can to conform to your original starting point. The problem is that when your foundation is questioned you have no answers.

ENDER: "The most likely explanation is that social groups that shared social mores and beliefs about the natural world(parts of which were viewed as supernatural in primitive societies) had a better survivability factor...."

There again, you look on all evidence from a natural, worldly perspective with "the most likely" explanation as the only certainty you have.

ENDER: "I can go on for hours, really. The point is that all of the worlds religions contributed to their societies success or failure, at least long enough for the religion to become established."

Yes, we both could. I only believe that one religion or belief system is true due to the contrary of all the others and their inability to make sense of this world, and the fact that God in His mercy has given me ears to hear His Word and a heart to believe. All the rest are man's ideas about God, not as He really exists but as they have created their god in their mind from their imagination.

ENDER: "Does that in anyway imply that any of these religions have one more iota of truth than any of the others? Of course not."

"God is Spirit and those who worship Him MUST worship in spirit and in TRUTH." (John 4:24)

Enough said.

ENDER: "Since the majority of these religions are mutually exclusive, if one is absolutely true, the rest are absolutely false, then Occam's Razor tells us that the highest probability is that all are false."

Finally in the first part of your premise you have said something I can agree with. The rest are false on the impossibility of the contrary!

As for probability, that is all you have to work with. You can never know anything for 100% certainty without presupposing the God of Christianity.

ENDER: "The same goes for your claim of 'absolute morality'. Your test uses child molestation for fun as the test of absolute morality. Let's go back christendom in Europe, or even here in the US as recent as 100 yrs(we were behind europe), girls of 13 were considered elligable for marriage, and usually were told whom they would marry."

You are confusing what is done "in the name" of as opposed to what the Scriptures actually teach.
You also assume that thirteen is the age that constitutes a child. The test did not give the age. You pulled out of the context something that was not there.

ENDER: "We find that attrocious, and your absolute morality does not provide a place for what was considered moral in your own holy book. Slavery was legislated in the old testament, and never struck down in the new, at least according to the majority of American churches in the south before and during the civil war, but no human in right mind can now deny the absolute evil we have wrought against people when we enslaved millions from one race, destroyed their culture, forbid their education and convinced even them they were subhuman. Your absolute morality became that, absolutely moral evil."

What was done in churches during the last century, or for that matter now, does not coincide with what the Bible teaches about slavery or how to treat a human being. That came about by the church being influence by evolutionary dogmas, social Darwinism (that teach that some humans are on a lower level than others), and the ideas of man.

ENDER: "The exhortations of the tribal god of the Jews to raid the valley of Canaan and kill every man woman and child and take their land for your own is absolute morality of the most evil kind."

There again, you do not recognize that God as sovereign and almighty, has the right to do with His creation as He pleases and that these people were guilty in their own right of sinning before Him. He used the Israelites to extract justice. He also did not want them polluted by people who did not worship God as He really is but who had made for themselves gods in their own likeness. He wanted His people separated from their false religion, just as one day He will judge and separate the sheep from the goats again, if you will.

ENDER: "Your absolute reality works only if you operate on faith that your own version of it is always correct."

No, it only works if you have faith in the One true and living God who is absolute and you correctly interpret His Word.

ENDER: "Return to my earlier post for my opinion on where that has brought us, and why religion has become the thing most likely to bring about the destruction of the modern world, and the most powerful hinderence to the ethical advancement of humankind."

Your opinion is your opinion and is wrong. As for your idea of what is the most ethical is invalid also unless you can show me why I should believe that your standard is the final arbitrator in all matters of ethics.

Ok Mr. Huff.

Your reply tries to separate Christianity from the actions of the majority of its constituants. You can make lofty claims for your religion, but you are known by your actions, not your words.

If the world is more brutal now than in the past, a notion I actually contest, then look where the power has resided for the last 2000 yrs. With nations claiming to be christian.

Humans should be good because their own inate sense of right and wrong tells them to. To do good, or evil because of carrot or stick is not good, or even free will. Humans have been living together without the Cults of Abraham for most of history and prehistory, and those "people of the book" have been just as brutal as those of other religions. You can throw Hilter and Stalin in there, but the Third Reich claimed to be a Christian organization at its root, and Stalin was a failed catholic Priest.

Please deal with the absolute morality isssue I make. That is where you make claims unsupported by any logic, and I don't see you dealing with my counter perspective.

Your view of humanity as born sinful is unique to the cults of Abraham, and where all of your claims to moral superiority through any religion are flawed. You can make these claims as elements of faith, but not of logic or reason.
as
When even the Christian subdivisions disagree and those subsets don't even agree with what their subset believed 100 yrs ago, the only thing absolute is the changing nature of humanity. Without the Secular thought, ethics and logic of the Age of Enlightenment, Christianity would still be supporting marriage of prepubescent girls, slavery and the murder of non-Christians for land and profit(example native Americans and Indian Indians).

Once again, Christianities ACTIONS prove it unable to provide moral guidance that is any better than that of natural human when the make the attempt. 250,000 yrs of socialization of the animal have provided almost all of us with the ability to correctly differentiate right and wrong even when those differences are very often shaded gray.

Hello Gerry,

GERRY: "I don't run on faith. I think
if a = b, and b = c, then a = c, god willing, lol."

You run on faith that without God you, oh wise man, can make sense of this world.

GERRY: "I also believe that 2+2=4, independently of approval or disapproval of your god. They call it "a priori"."

You only do it because God is logical and not arbitrary.

The fact that you think at all you attribute to an origin that happened by random, happenstance. So how does logic and order come from such as system? How does life? Yeah, I know, science is working on it and you are closer to the answer!!!

Hi Ender,

ENDER: "Lets you forget PUFF, you promised to respond to"

I know you have an intense dislike for my way of thinking, but I have been respectful in calling you by your post name. I have no disrespect for you as a person; I just happen to find your way of looking at things untrue. That is my objection, so my name is Peter or Peter Huff or PH, not PUFF if you would care to oblige? Since you are the one talking of Christianity as the evil of the world I thought I would get more respect from your "higher" position?

ENDER: "Then christianity starts from and invalid premise. I have seen the "absolutism" of Christianity. It has been used to support slavery, suppression of women rights, war upon war, capital punishment, oppression of minorities, destruction of the environment and currently an illegal war against a nation that was no threat to us which we have now utterly destroyed and killed hundreds of thousand of noncombatants.
This has not come from random christians, but from pulpits all across our nation."

So, you tell me nothing new. Many things have been done "in the name of Christianity" just like many things have been done by those who were atheists. The point is what God has said. You have yet to make sense of the "why", the "should/ought" of things. Why ought a person to be good and who determines it from your worldview?

ENDER: "For more than 2000 yrs the Cults of Abraham have used the commands of their brutal, tribal god to commit crimes against humanity and commit war in the name of the greed of the church and the greed of the state, which by the design of our farsighted founding fathers are forever to be separate in this nation."

Again, you use the subjective opinion of people like Christopher Hitchens with references like "the cult of Abraham" to determine your point of view. Who is Christopher Hitchens that I should believe him? He's someone who has a beef against the God of the Bible.

ENDER: "Now if we could just keep Christians out of govt as well as the religion, we could become the light of freedom and refuge for the downtrodden that we are capable of reaching."

Freedom, whose idea of freedom? Where does it come from. Why is it the epitome of freedom? You banter about these terms without knowing where they come from.

ENDER: "The flawed flame of christian morality...."

Again you make a moral judgment but what is your standard, your final reference point? These are questions the atheist continues to side-step because although they want their opinions heard, that is all it is - mere opinion - with no backbone to them at all.

ENDER: "You attempt to speak in absolutes. You pretend you have a moral high ground and you have been imbued with special knowledge."

The Christian God speaks in absolutes. He is the One with the morally high ground, and yes, He has made Himself known to His people.

ENDER: "Those very beliefs are the reason the world can no longer afford to allow the morally corrupt christian riechwing to control the American Political landscape."

Oh yes, what would you propose? A system based on personal preference - yours! What makes you the ultimate judge of what is right? Why should you determine what is corrupt?

ENDER: "There is no atrocity you cannot condone and use your pulpits to change the language of the debate to keep your flocks in line with the politics of hate, fear and murder.
Your self righteousness is a joke and fraud perpetuated on humanity by men to control men."

Well the 20th century is the bloodiest to date, governed by evolutionary and atheistic thought and action.

ENDER: "The religions of Abraham are the chains and blocks around the neck of humankind holding it back from becoming ethical creatures capable of surviving and prospering in world united in the cause of the betterment of humanity, and not the wars and hate of ancient superstitions and tribal animosity."

Whose idea of betterment, whose idea of ethics and why? Is mankind capable of determining the betterment of humanity? Why so many wars, why so many differences of opinion, why so many ethical standards that originate by power that are not absolute, objective, all knowing, unchanging?

I don't run on faith. I think
if a = b, and b = c, then a = c, god willing, lol.

I also believe that 2+2=4, independently of approval or disapproval of your god. They call it "a priori".

Carp. That last post was from Peter Huff. Sorry, it used to be automatic before.

Hi Gerry,

GERRY: "Logic is not a Christian invention! I agree that it takes a mind to use logic (almost a tautology, but here you are right!) Augustine desperately tried to use logic to prove God - and failed: It must be faith! I am afraid that if Augustine failed, your little test is bound to fail big time!"

Where does logic come from Gerry? You are an atheist. What is your explanation for it?

Logic comes from God on for the same reason that everything else comes from God. Without Him try and make sense of it. BTW, you are running on faith too Gerry. It takes tremendous faith to believe what you do.

Hi Anonymous,

I'm not sure if I'm conversing with the same person or a different person each time. This forum does not allow for a clear understanding of whom to address.

ANON: "God is not absolute, he had a little change of hearts between the Old and New Testaments. At least most religious books are consistent with BS. Jesus came to save Jews and maybe a few Gentiles...."

First of all your knowledge of the God of the Bible is limited and inaccurate, as based on His revelation. The God of Christianity is absolute, all knowing and unchanging. Therefore you do not understand, just as His word says you would not.

"But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God; for they are foolishness to him and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised." (1 Corinthians 2:14)

God's plan was to make Himself known through the Jewish people and from that people to send the Messiah to save the world. His revelation to mankind is progressive, starting by revealing Himself to Adam and Eve, then the patriarchs, the Jews, the prophets and ultimately His Son and the church who would believe in the Son after Jesus' death and resurrection.

ANON: "If God is so absolute, why doesn't he care about all of his children? He is the King of the Jews, and I'm not a Jew, so why the hell should I care?"

He is absolute and He does care for His all His children, but not all are His children. Some are the children of the devil.

"Jesus said to them, "If God were your Father, you would love Me; for I proceeded forth and have come from God, for I have not even come on My own initiative, but He sent Me.'
'Why do you not understand what I am saying? Is it because you cannot hear My word?
'You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. Whenever he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own nature; for he is a liar, and the father of lies.'
'But because I speak the truth, you do not believe Me....He who is of God hears the words of God; for this reason you do not hear them, because you are not of God'" (John 8:42-45, 47)

Why should you care? Because God will one day judge the thoughts of your mind and the actions of your heart in reference to His goodness and justice. You will either be judged in Christ and His payment and substitution of Himself on your behalf for your disobedience or you will stand in your own merits before God. Your eternal existence depends on His grace, mercy and provision for those who have ears to hear.

Mark one thing; God is just.

"For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world should be saved through Him. He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. And this is the judgment, that light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the light; for their deeds were evil. For everyone who does evil hates the light and will not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed." (John 3:17-20)

Dear DZ:

Just to advance to the competence of your 7th grade textbook:

Neither did I say that Kaiser Wilhelm was a fascist (how could he, fascism was a later invention!), nor did I say that Germany started WWI. Why be so aggressive against your own fabrications? I was talking about national patriotism (ever heard of "Hurra-Patriotismus" of the beginning of WWI, a common symbol of every 101-history book I know of? My own grandfather told me the details of the mental state he shared before he lost his arm after the "Hurra"!). I happen to know the history of the first part of the 20th century pretty well. By a strange accident, in my youth I met the military guardian of the guy who assassinated Erzherzog Franz Ferdinand (Gavrilo Princip) in Sarajevo. And, my "tertium comparationis", if by your high education you happen to know what that is, is only the dumbing-down concept of patriotism (see present campaign), which I firmly believe has lost its value through the development of the globalization and shifted its meaning to regionalism.

So, before bleating and insulting somebody and making a fool of yourself, it would be wise first to read what he wrote, and second to try to understand the intent of a post, even if you disagree and maybe think that patriotism is the climax of all happiness.

And Peter Huff:

Logic is not a Christian invention! I agree that it takes a mind to use logic (almost a tautology, but here you are right!) Augustine desperately tried to use logic to prove God - and failed: It must be faith! I am afraid that if Augustine failed, your little test is bound to fail big time!

Sorry, it was this post you said you would respond to, and I would much like to see that responces. The mass C&P of the idiot online witness interferes with rational conversation.

PUFF:

I will answer in kind. Stephen Pinker makes a well thought out case in "The Blank Slate" that humans are hardwired to believe in the afterlife, and god or gods. 250,000 yrs of shared human experience established instincts that cause many of us to pursue, experience and even invent 'religiousity' and 'spirituality'.

The most likely explanation is that social groups that shared social mores and beliefs about the natural world(parts of which were viewed as supernatural in primitive societies) had a better survivability factor. ie The twelve god system of the Greeks and Romans created societies that mirrored the gods the had created. Strong respect for strength and martial prowess. Medical advancemt and the advantages of good sewage systems and clean water were the gifts of the godsPan, and even Ascheleus, a human, were worshipped even outside their Roman and Greek cultures for the good their followers provided society. Of course the Greeks considered human females souless and useful for breeding only, while the Romans considered Julius Ceasar a god along with the rest of the Pantheon.

I can go on for hours, really. The point is that all of the worlds religions contributed to their societies success or failure, at least long enough for the religion to become established.

Does that in anyway imply that any of these religions have one more iota of truth than any of the others? Of course not.

Since the majority of these religions are mutually exclusive, if one is absolutely true, the rest are absolutely false, then Occam's Razor tells us that the highest probability is that all are false.

The same goes for your claim of 'absolute morality'. Your test uses child molestation for fun as the test of absolute morality. Let's go back christendom in Europe, or even here in the US as recent as 100 yrs(we were behind europe), girls of 13 were considered elligable for marriage, and usually were told whom they would marry. The choice was often between having a child you couldn't feed starve, and marrying her off early. In fact, old enough to bleed is old enough to breed has been the human standard across all religious lines for most of human history..

We find that attrocious, and your absolute morality does not provide a place for what was considered moral in your own holy book. Slavery was legislated in the old testement, and never struck down in the new, at least according to the majority of American churches in the south before and during the civil war, but no human in right mind can now deny the absolute evil we have wrought against people when we enslaved millions from one race, destoyed their culture, forbid their education and convinced even them they were subhuman. Your absolute morality became that, absolutele moral evil.

The exortations of the tribal god of the jews to raid the valley of Canaan and kill every man woman and child and take their land for your own is abosolute morality of the most evil kind. If there were a Satan, this decree would have to come from It, yet even today chritians use this as an example of god giving the underdog that worships It victory.

Your absolute reality works only if you operate on faith that your own version of it is always correct.

Return to my earlier post for my opinion on where that has brought us, and why religion has become the thing most likely to bring about the destruction of the modern world, and the most powerful hinderence to the ethical advancement of humankind.

The last post was by ender

Lets you forget PUFF, you promised to respond to:

PH "Your starting point, your basic foundational beliefs, determines how you look at and interpret the evidence. The difference between the two worldview of atheism and Christianity is only Christianity can make sense of the how and why of things. The atheist works on relativism, the Christian on absolutism; the atheist on subjective opinion, the Christian on an objective all knowing standard; the atheist continually borrows from the Christian reference point in order to make sense of things."

ender:
Then christianity starts from and invalid premise.
I have seen the "absolutism" of Christianity. It has been used to support slavery, suppression of women rights, war upon war, capital punishment, oppression of minorities, destruction of the environment and currently an illegal war against a nation that was no threat to us which we have now utterly destroyed and killed hundreds of thousand of noncombatants.
This has not come from random christians, but from pulpits all across our nation.
For more than 2000 yrs the Cults of Abraham have used the commands of their brutal, tribal god to commit crimes against humanity and commit war in the name of the greed of the church and the greed of the state, which by the design of our farsighted founding fathers are forever to be separate in this nation.
Now if we could just keep Christians out of govt as well as the religion, we could become the light of freedom and refuge for the downtrodden that we are capable of reaching.
The flawed flame of christian morality holds up a light inadequate for contemplation of a world where a BJ in the oval office is considered a high crime, while torture, crimes against humanity, war for greed, support of corporate theft of American's life saving are excused as the right of the governing and not moral failures of leaders expressing devotion to Christianity.
You attempt to speak in absolutes. You pretend you have a moral high ground and you have been imbued with special knowledge.
Those very beliefs are the reason the world can no longer afford to allow the morally corrupt christian riechwing to control the American Political landscape.
There is no atrocity you cannot condone and use your pulpits to change the language of the debate to keep your flocks in line with the politics of hate, fear and murder.
Your self righteousness is a joke and fraud perpetuated on humanity by men to control men.
The religions of Abraham are the chains and blocks around the neck of humankind holding it back from becoming ethical creatures capable of surviving and prospering in world united in the cause of the betterment of humanity, and not the wars and hate of ancient superstitions and tribal animosity.

Your co-religionist C&Pd several thousands of words of bibliobabble. I know you weren't avoiding my reply.

PS, the last post was from Peter Huff.

Hi Anonymous,

ANON: "PH, your little test is so ridiculous and unworthy of any human being with two halfway functioning brain cells."

Alright then, thanks for your subjective, relative opinion! You are wrong.

By the way, you use a qualitative statement - unworthy - a value judgment. It is not something tangible in that it does not come from the physical world of matter. It is abstract, intrinsic. What is your standard for this judgment? In other words, how do you determine the idea of unworthiness? What is your reference point for it? If everything originated from a point of singularity in time how do we get intrinsic things?

What is your starting point for knowledge, for truth?

ANON: "Peter: Have you stopped beating your wife? Yes or No!!!"

Your illogical statement, not my reality. You can't stop doing something that you have never done. It is logically absurd.

Not the case with reality, knowledge and truth. They are fixed on absolutes in order to make sense of them. Either something can be known with absolute certainty or nothing can be known for certain. Either truth exists or everything is just mere preference. Either God or nothing makes sense. If everything is relative to the individual, which one determines truth?

Since you believe that certain things do make sense you operate, or should I say borrow, from the Christian point of view.

The facts do not speak for themselves, they need to be interpreted. The question is whose? Since no human can see every aspect of every fact and every detail in how they are related to one another, without thinking God's thoughts after Him the certainty is not there.

Evolutionary science works on probability mixed with observation. Probability is based on happenstance. No one was there when things originated - except God. So why should things continue in the future as they have in the past and present? The chance is, in a happenstance process of natural selection they will not.

"And He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together." (Colossians 1:17)

You operate on the laws of logic in order to make sense of anything. Without logic you would be doing things in a random, happenstance way, just as the atheist claims things originated.

So how does logic come into being? Either logic exists as an absolute universal truth or nothing makes sense. Please explain how anything can be made sense of without using logic if you think otherwise.

If logic is only capable for a being with a mind, then only beings with minds are capable of logical. Where do you see anything thinking and using logic that is not a being? A stone does not use logic, neither does a natural process. It just is. There is no intent involved, no purpose or meaning.

So why should I take your opinion that the little test is ridiculous?

Peter Huff, your level of faith is remarkable. It's a good thing that most of us employ more common sense (hopefully you included) in our daily lives.

Otherwise, we could all just take our hands off the wheel in the middle of rush hour traffic and expect the car to drive itself home - as long as we believe it so.

So goes the doctrine of salvation.....

God is not absolute, he had a little change of hearts between the Old and New Testaments. At least most religious books are consistent with BS. Jesus came to save Jews and maybe a few Gentiles. Death is not the ultimate sacrifice, and Jesus really didn't have much to lose other than his life, which made it much easier to be so radical. It's not like he had a wife and kids. If God is so absolute, why doesn't he care about all of his children? He is the King of the Jews, and I'm not a Jew, so why the hell should I care?

Hi Perciflage,

PERCIFLAGE: "Anon (Peter Huff?) - as far as we know for sure, homo sapiens have always 'only' been human. We have no irrefutable evidence to the contrary - the vast assemblage of gods,dieties, and avatars found throughout the history of religious mythology notwithstanding."

"As far as we know for sure" is certain when you start from the presupposition of the God of the Bible. He made each form of life to its own kind. Man was created distinct from animals.

PERCIFLAGE: "And the point I was making was simple enough - without consciousness and it's more refined and less cluttered twin, awareness, one doesn't exist - much less have knowledge of anything whatsoever (we won't debate unconsciousness, the other half of the equation at this point)."

And you have an awareness of God that you deny when you call Him a liar in your suppression of truth. (Romans 1:18 to end of chapter)

PERCIFLAGE: "With an estimated 100 billion galaxies, each with perhaps 200 billions stars, we can use Drake's equation to make our best guess about the probable presence of life in general and highly advanced life forms in particular elsewhere in the cosmos."

There again you make an assumption without any credible evidence to support your supposition other than probability. You are trying to make man the originator and God the derivative instead of the opposite. Why should your subjective opinion be valid based on your perception of probability when you only know an infinitesimal amount of the facts that support and sustain life?

PERCIFLAGE: "Why a tiny planet in a remote part of our galaxy has been singled out by the Creator of all things to make a personal appearance about 2000 years ago remains a mystery - much less the fact that evidence for this ever actually happening is sorely lacking."

It is a mystery for those who are blind to God in their willful rejection of Him.

PERCIFLAGE: "Buddhists don't worry about God - they're more concerned with compassion for all life forms & knowing first-hand what the essence of reality actually is."

Compassion comes from mind and is an attribute of God. How do you get compassion from a mindless, unthinking beginning that just is?

PERCIFLAGE: "Nagarjuna (2nd century C.E) says the co-dependence and interconnectedness of all things manifests as Emptiness (sunyata) and the mere appearance of phenomena (with no autonomous, objective reality whatsoever)."

Another human, made in God's image, trying to deny the existence of God while all the time living and breathing by His grace and mercy. The Buddhist sees phenomena as illusion, all the time betraying his worldview by looking both ways before he crosses the street to avoid being hit by the speeding bus.

PERCIFLAGE: "When consciousness at it's deepest level confronts the Void nature of all things, it has seen the face of the Absolute - and the end of all desire."

Have you been there or are you just speaking from someone else's subjective experience that you have no idea of as to being true or not?

You, as a Buddhist, have a worldview that discounts rational and logic while all the time using it in trying to rid yourself of it to become "one" with the emptiness of it all. Round and round you go in a constant state or rebirth, depending on your karma, with the ultimate aim of becoming one with the universe - Nirvana.

Like all man made religions your scope is a works driven system of merit. What you do in this life determines what happens in the one to come. Christianity stands alone as what God has done in His Son for those who believe, not what we could do on our merit.

Peter Huff

That would be Gerry not Garry

DZ

Garry:

Lumping Kaiser Wilhelm II in with Hitler and Mussolini is both historically inaccurate and intellectually incompetent. You need to go beyond your 6th grade textbook.

Germany did NOT start WWI. They were part of the problem, but the real culprits were Austria, France and Russia. Try Sidney Fay for a relatively even handed overview.

Willy (Wilhelm II) was an Emperor not a fascist. Personal freedom, social insurance, economic opportunity, just administration of the law, etc. were widespread in Germany under Wilhelm II. It would be wise to know the facts before you say stupid things.

DZ

Pseudo,

Your continued absence could mark the end of the bloggosphere as we know it.

Increasingly distraught,

Farnaz

Hi Ender,

ENDER: "There is no such evidence for ya boy jesus. Not one single piece of evidence that would stand up in a court of law or a history class exist to prove that he did."

Even the most liberal scholars agree that Jesus existed. The only people that don't are the ones who have not done their homework or carry a particularly heavy bias. You go against a vast sea of evidence including discounting the Bible as an historical account from which you have four gospels, the Book of Acts, and a number of epistles all giving historically verifiable evidence, and then a number of secular historians of the period and the early church fathers also making claims of His existence.

ENDER: "Your whole worldview is base on a myth."

More assertion.

ENDER: "And you are the one calling for moral absolutes based on your worldview."

All I'm saying is you cannot make sense of anything without an absolute, objective, unchanging, ultimate reference point - God and His revelation - as your starting presupposition.

Why would I want to believe you? What makes you the expert?

ENDER: "That one ain't selling to rational humans."

The question is are you being rational in your assertion and what is your subjective opinion based on? As an atheist (I presume) you continue to avoid the tough questions. It is easy to side step the issues because you don't have the answers.

How do you get rationality from a blind, chance, random beginning? How does order come from chaos? How does information come about from such beginnings? How about intent? How does being come about from an impersonal process? Would you care to have a stab at these questions? Let's see how you make sense of them!

No, rationality and logic comes from a living Being, not impersonal matter.

Peter Huff

Susan,

I can feel with you losing all seriousness towards the end of your post. I guess in view of today's catastrophes, all induced by the neocons' bigotry, nationalistic hubris (PNAC, HAHA!) and ignorance, the Bush doctrine at the root of it (unknown to a butterfly's brain like Palin's) all that we have left is a sarcastic desperate humor to carry us on.

America's quality as a beacon has ceased to exist. Europe and Asia are drawn into the American quagmire. Concepts like national "patriotism" don't have any meaning anymore. They stem from the 19th century and messed up the 20th, (cf. Kaiser Wilhelm, Hitler, Mussolini etc.) and threaten to even poison the 21st. The GOPers have even managed to draw the democratic ideal itself into the mud. We live in a globalized world where the only valid instruments to save this planet are insight, reason, communication, diplomacy, education, and above all, complete elimination of religious influence in any political decision.

It has always been amusing to me how religious fossils use the very technical instruments which disprove their own nonsense to spread just that very nonsense ("Science is wrong"!).

The American system is not functional anymore: How would it be possible otherwise that a caricature like Palin is drawn into serious political consideration by a large part of the American population? How would it be possible that witchcraft is "rearing its head" again from the dark ages? That televangelists, fraudulent monsters like Hagee propagate an atomic war for their weird and idiotic psychopathies ("Armageddon") - and find thousands, even millions of fellow idiots to enrich them?

Desperate.

For the court case on the existence of the simple preacher man aka Jesus

From Professors Crossan and Watts' book, Who is Jesus.

"That Jesus (lived and) was crucified under Pontius Pilate, as the Creed states, is as certain as anything historical can ever be.

“ The Jewish historian, Josephus and the pagan historian Tacitus both agree that Jesus was executed by order of the Roman governor of Judea. And is very hard to imagine that Jesus' followers would have invented such a story unless it indeed happened. "

From the First Stratum,(30-60 AD) with multiple attestations

Crucifixion of Jesus 1) 1 Cor 15:3b; (2a) Gos. Pet. 4:10-5:16,18-20; 6:22; (2b) Mark 15:22-38 = Matt 27:33-51a = Luke 23:32-46; (2c) John 19:17b-25a,28-36; (3) Barn. 7:3-5; (4a) 1 Clem. 16:3-4 (=Isaiah 53:1-12); (4b) 1 Clem. 16.15-16 (=Psalm 22:6-; (5a) Ign. Mag. 11; (5b) Ign. Trall. 9:1b; (5c) Ign. Smyrn. 1.2.

DEAR PSEUDO, GREAT CHRISTIAN POET,

I don't know if you noticed this from Perciflage:

"PS. we can only hope that Pseudo re-appears soon. We're dying here!

October 5, 2008 1:32 PM
******************
It's the truth, Pseudo. We grow weak, and we are pining away.

With hope for your quick return,
Farnaz

Hey Peter: I went to read your "test". Found this: "Universal, immaterial, unchanging laws cannot be accounted for if the universe was random or only material in nature."

A universe that functions in *any* way that is *consistent* demonstrates "unchanging laws" of its functioning. That it *is* consistent demonstrates *nothing* about how it got that way. "It just is" is quite good enough for some of us, and entails no logical conundra. You may believe what you like on that point, but your belief is not necessarily necessary.

As for the material/immaterial distinction: this is an old trick. Abstraction is the recognition of common arrangement, where it is *things* that are arranged. And *things* can exist that recognize arrangements. Arrangements are *things*, but they are not "material". Laws are immaterial because they are abstractions. This does not make them other-worldly or supernatural in any sense.

To: PSEUDO, GREAT POET
From: Farnaz
Subject: Your absence.

It's chilly here in the Klondike. Please return.

You can still post as Pseudo on Susan's thread. Just Preview your verse and then type in your moniker when the Preview appears.

If you just click on "Submit," your post will come up as "Anonymous." You could then simply indicate that you are the author.

E.g., Verses by Pseudo

PH,
your little test is so ridiculous and unworthy of any human being with two halfway functioning brain cells.

Peter: Have you stopped beating your wife? Yes or No!!!

Anon (Peter Huff?) - as far as we know for sure, homo sapiens have always 'only' been human. We have no irrefutable evidence to the contrary - the vast assemblage of gods,dieties, and avatars found throughout the history of religious mythology notwithstanding.

And the point I was making was simple enough - without consciousness and it's more refined and less cluttered twin, awareness, one doesn't exist - much less have knowledge of anything whatsoever (we won't debate unconsciousness, the other half of the equation at this point).

This can be applied to all sentient life (down to and including bacteria, but viruses are questionable we know). What 'sentient' in other parts of this vast universe might mean, we can only guess.

With an estimated 100 billion galaxies, each with perhaps 200 billions stars, we can use Drake's equation to make our best guess about the probable presence of life in general and highly advanced life forms in particular elsewhere in the cosmos.

Why a tiny planet in a remote part of our galaxy has been singled out by the Creator of all things to make a personal appearance about 2000 years ago remains a mystery - much less the fact that evidence for this ever actually happening is sorely lacking.

Buddhists don't worry about God - they're more concerned with compassion for all life forms & knowing first-hand what the essence of reality actually is.

Nagarjuna (2nd century C.E) says the co-dependence and interconnectedness of all things manifests as Emptiness (sunyata) and the mere appearance of phenomena (with no autonomous, objective reality whatsoever).

When consciousness at it's deepest level confronts the Void nature of all things, it has seen the face of the Absolute - and the end of all desire.

PS. we can only hope that Pseudo re-appears soon. We're dying here!

PUFF:"Spoken like a Buddhist. The Buddha is just a man."

At least Siddhartha was a man. THere is historically valid evidence that he existed and walked the earth.

There is no such evidence for ya boy jesus. Not one single piece of evidence that would stand up in a court of law or a historiy class exist to prove that he did.

Your whole worldview is base on a myth.

And you are the one calling for moral absolutes based on your worldview.

That one ain't selling to rational humans.

Ender, I will have to sit down later to answer your posts.

Hi Perciflage,

PERCIFLAGE: "Peter Huff - there are no absolute objective realities that exist apart from human consciousness. Quantum physicists discovered early in the 20th century that all observations were 'tainted' and conditioned by the very act of being observed."

As I said before, you have a worldview that doesn't know anything for certain. Why should I believe what you have to say? What makes you the authority, the ultimate standard that is never wrong?

Evolutionary science is always tweaking its findings as more evidence becomes available as does Quantum Physics.

You say "there are no absolute objective realities that exists apart from human consciousness." Glad you place human consciousness on such a high level. Are you absolutely sure there are no other absolute objective realities? What do you base your subjective opinion on - someone else's subjective opinion (a Quantum physicist's perhaps) or just your own all knowing mind (at least when it comes to objective realities)?

How do you know that the human consciousness is objective? God is the necessary condition for objectivity.

PERCIFLAGE: "Religion and all related concepts are therefore subject to the same inescapable law - whatever reality may be, it is shaped by consciousness from beginning to end. How could it be otherwise?"

So what do you know for sure? It can only be otherwise because God is the necessary condition for it to be so. He reveals what is real, what is true, what is right, what is good. In His light we see light.

PERCIFLAGE: "And as the Buddha says, consciousness only arises when the necessary inter-dependent elements are present. How is Christian consciousness any different?"

Spoken like a Buddhist. The Buddha is just a man.

To the Great Poet, Pseudo:
From: Farnaz
Subject: Your absence

Life here in the plains is dusty. Please return.

From Concerned the Christian now Liberated:

Harold, Harold, Harold,

As with your buddy, Spiderman2:

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

Anon,

AT one point, Saturn came to be associated with disorder. You can see it in Chaucer. By any chance, do you know how this came about?

quoting "his nonsensical biblical quotes. Damn, I am a believer, a Christian, but this sad person really offends me"

tell us what you believe in,

Remember, the roman faith has twelve stations of the cross, The roman cross and the greek cross, and the so-called jewish cross. In Roman mythology Saturn was the god of agriculture founder of civilisations and of social order and conformity. The glyph is most often seen as scythe-like but it is primarily known as the "CRESCENT BELOW THE CROSS", whereas Jupiter's glyph is the "CRESCENT ABOVE THE CROSS". THESE TWELVE JESUS SENT FORTH. Like the twelve jesus’s, like twelve signs of the zodiac. you are of this faith, even though you may deny it. you are a warmonger, THE GOD OF WAR, MARS, you believe IN THEIR GODDESS OF LOVE, VENUS. She belives in conception is life, WOLF-AND-SHEPHERD-GOD LUPERCUS WHO BROUGHT FERTILITY. you belive in the light of the world, PHOSPHOROS AS LUCIFER ("LIGHT BEARER"). you belive in THE MOON DIANA, the light who dwells in darkness. As well as the cross, Oak groves were especially sacred to her. you believe in the trinity, DIANA MADE UP A TRINITY WITH TWO OTHER ROMAN DEITIES, EGERIA THE WATER NYMPH, AND VIRBIUS THE WOODLAND GOD
you believe in WORTHY IS THE LAMB THAT WAS SLAIN TO RECEIVE POWER AND RICHES, PLUTO WAS THE ROMAN GOD OF THE UNDERWORLD
THESE METALS, JEWELS AND OTHER RICHES LIE UNDER THE EARTH. and THE FOUR AND TWENTY ELDERS FELL DOWN AND WORSHIPPED HIM, “THE BROTHER OF GOLIATH THE GITTITE”. you believe in 'GOD OF OUR FATHER', DAGAN. And you believe in eternal life, THE EGYPTIAN GOD PTAH IS GIVEN THE TITLE DŪ GITTI 'LORD OF GATH', PTAH IS OFTEN CALLED THE LORD (OR ONE) OF ETERNITY

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.
And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.
And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.
And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.
And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.
And God said, Let the waters under the Heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.
And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - NASA extended the mission of the busy Phoenix lander on Monday, saying it will operate until it dies in the cold, dark Martian winter.
The lander found evidence that the chemical makeup of the dust on the surface of Mars resembles that of sea water, adding to evidence that liquid water that once may have supported life flowed on the planet's surface.
And, said JPL's Michael Hecht, further analysis shows the Martian dust is about as alkaline as seawater, with a pH of 8.3, more evidence that life could have existed on Mars.

THE DUST ON THE SURFACE OF MARS RESEMBLES THAT OF SEA WATER
MARTIAN DUST IS ABOUT AS ALKALINE AS SEAWATER

These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not:

THESE TWELVE JESUS SENT FORTH

I am debtor both to the Greeks, and to the Barbarians; both to the wise, and to the unwise.
So, as much as in me is, I am ready to preach the gospel to you that are at Rome also.

I AM DEBTOR BOTH TO THE GREEKS, AND TO THE BARBARIANS
I AM READY TO PREACH THE GOSPEL TO YOU THAT ARE AT ROME

To ancient astrologers the planets represented the will of the gods and their direct influence upon human affairs. To modern astrologers the planets represent basic drives or impulses in the human psyche. These drives express themselves a) with different qualities through the twelve signs of the zodiac, and b) in different spheres of life through the twelve houses. How the planets manifest themselves also depends on the aspects (or angles) that they form with each other in the sky as seen from Earth.

THE TWELVE SIGNS OF THE ZODIAC
SPHERES OF LIFE THROUGH THE TWELVE HOUSES

Romulus (c. 771 BC–c. 717 BC) and Remus (c. 771 BC–c. 753 BC) are the traditional founders of Rome, appearing in Roman mythology as the twin sons of the priestess Rhea Silvia, fathered by the god of war, Mars. According to the tradition recorded as history by Plutarch and Livy, Romulus served as the first King of Rome.

the twin sons of the priestess Rhea Silvia, fathered by THE GOD OF WAR, MARS.
Luperca's husband is the WOLF-AND-SHEPHERD-GOD LUPERCUS WHO BROUGHT FERTILITY to the flocks.

The evening star they called Hesperos (Latinized Hesperus) (Ἓσπερος, the "star of the evening"), but by Hellenistic times, they realized the two were the same planet. Hesperos would be translated into Latin as Vesper and Phosphoros as Lucifer ("Light Bearer"), a poetic term later used to refer to the fallen angel cast out of heaven. The Romans would later name the planet in honor of their goddess of love, Venus, whereas the Greeks used the name of her Greek counterpart, Aphrodite

PHOSPHOROS AS LUCIFER ("LIGHT BEARER"), a poetic term later used to refer to the fallen angel cast out of heaven
The Romans would later name the planet in honor of THEIR GODDESS OF LOVE, VENUS,

Saying with a loud voice, Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength, honour, and glory, and blessing.
And every creature which is in heaven, and on the earth, and under the earth, and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, heard I saying, Blessing, and honour, and glory, and power, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb for ever and ever.
And the four beasts said, Amen. And the four and twenty elders fell down and worshipped him that liveth for ever and ever.

WORTHY IS THE LAMB THAT WAS SLAIN TO RECEIVE POWER AND RICHES
every creature which is in heaven, and on the earth, and under the earth, and such as are in the sea
Blessing, and honour, and glory, and power, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne
and unto the Lamb for ever and ever
THE FOUR AND TWENTY ELDERS FELL DOWN AND WORSHIPPED HIM

And there was again a battle in Gob with the Philistines, where Elhanan the son of Jaareoregim, a Bethlehemite, slew THE BROTHER OF GOLIATH THE GITTITE, the staff of whose spear was like a weaver's beam.
And there was yet a battle in Gath, where was a man of great stature, that had ON EVERY HAND SIX FINGERS, and ON EVERY FOOT SIX TOES, FOUR AND TWENTY in number; and HE ALSO WAS BORN TO THE GIANT.
And when he defied Israel, Jonathan the son of Shimea the brother of David slew him.
These four were born to the giant in Gath, and fell by the hand of David, and by the hand of his servants.

“AND THERE WAS YET A BATTLE IN GATH”
“THE BROTHER OF GOLIATH THE GITTITE”
“ON EVERY HAND SIX FINGERS”
“ON EVERY FOOT SIX TOES, FOUR AND TWENTY in NUMBER”
“HE ALSO WAS BORN TO THE GIANT”

The Egyptian god Ptah is given the title dū gitti 'Lord of Gath' in a prism from Lachish which has on its opposite face the name of Amenhotep II (c. 1435–1420 BCE) The title dū gitti is also found in Serābitṭ text 353. Cross (1973, p. 19) points out that Ptah is often called the lord (or one) of eternity and thinks it may be this identification of Ēl with Ptah that lead to the epithet ’olam 'eternal' being applied to Ēl so early and so consistently.

THE EGYPTIAN GOD PTAH IS GIVEN THE TITLE DŪ GITTI 'LORD OF GATH'
PTAH IS OFTEN CALLED THE LORD (OR ONE) OF ETERNITY

In Roman mythology, Diana was the goddess of the hunt, being associated with wild animals and woodland, and also of the moon.
Along with her main attributes, Diana was an emblem of chastity. Oak groves were especially sacred to her. According to mythology, Diana was born with her twin brother Apollo on the island of Delos, daughter of Jupiter and Latona. Diana made up a trinity with two other Roman deities: Egeria the water nymph, her servant and assistant midwife; and Virbius, the woodland god.

Diana was the goddess of the hunt
associated with wild animals and woodland, and ALSO OF THE MOON.
Oak groves were especially sacred to her
DIANA MADE UP A TRINITY WITH TWO OTHER ROMAN DEITIES
EGERIA THE WATER NYMPH
VIRBIUS, THE WOODLAND GOD

Pluto was the Roman god of the underworld, known in Latin as Tertius, the counterpart of the Greek Hades. He was originally the Roman god of certain metals and, because these materials are mined, he also took on the role of god of the underworld. The Greek word for wealth is Πλοῦτος (Plοutos) and it is believed that the Romans derived Pluto from the Greek because these metals, jewels and other riches lie under the Earth.

PLUTO WAS THE ROMAN GOD OF THE UNDERWORLD
THESE METALS, JEWELS AND OTHER RICHES LIE UNDER THE EARTH.

Amorite inscriptions from Zinčirli refer to numerous gods, sometimes by name, sometimes by title, especially by such titles as ilabrat 'god of the people'(?), il abīka 'god of your father', il abīni 'god of our father' and so forth. Various family gods are recorded, divine names listed as belong to a particular family or clan, sometimes by title and sometimes by name, including the name Il 'god'. In Amorite personal names the most common divine elements are Il ('God'), Hadad/Adad, and Dagan. It is likely that Il is also very often the god called in Akkadian texts Amurru or Il Amurru.

especially by such titles as ilabrat 'god of the people'(?), il abīka 'GOD OF YOUR FATHER', il abīni 'GOD OF OUR FATHER' and so forth.
In Amorite personal names the most common divine elements are Il ('God'), Hadad/Adad, and DAGAN

The word El was found at the top of a list of gods as the Ancient of Gods or the Father of all Gods, in the ruins of the Royal Library of the Ebla civilization, in the archaeological site of Tell Mardikh in Syria dated to 2300 BC. He may have been a desert god at some point, as the myths say that he had two wives and built a sanctuary with them and his new children in the desert. El had fathered many gods, but most important were Hadad, Yam and Mot, each of whom has similar attributes to the Greek gods Zeus, Poseidon or Ophion and Hades or Thanatos respectively. Ancient Greek mythographers identified El with Cronus

El had fathered many gods, but most important were Hadad, Yam and Mot, each of whom has similar attributes to the Greek gods Zeus, POSEIDON or Ophion and HADES or Thanatos respectively

A bilingual inscription from Palmyra (KAI. 11, p. 43) dated to the first century equates Ēl-Creator-of-the-Earth with the Greek god Poseidon. Going back to the eighth century BCE the bilingual inscription at Karatepe in the Taurus Mountains equates Ēl-Creator-of-the-Earth to Luwian hieroglyphs read as da-a-ś, this being the Luwian form of the name of the Babylonian water god Ea, lord of the abyss of water under the earth.

the TAURUS Mountains equates Ēl-Creator-of-the-Earth to Luwian hieroglyphs read as da-a-ś, this being the Luwian form of the name of THE BABYLONIAN WATER GOD EA, LORD OF THE ABYSS OF WATER UNDER THE EARTH.

The Egyptian god Ptah is given the title dū gitti 'Lord of Gath' in a prism from Lachish which has on its opposite face the name of Amenhotep II (c. 1435–1420 BCE) The title dū gitti is also found in Serābitṭ text 353. Cross (1973, p. 19) points out that Ptah is often called the lord (or one) of eternity and thinks it may be this identification of Ēl with Ptah that lead to the epithet ’olam 'eternal' being applied to Ēl so early and so consistently.

THE EGYPTIAN GOD PTAH IS GIVEN THE TITLE DŪ GITTI 'LORD OF GATH'
PTAH IS OFTEN CALLED THE LORD (OR ONE) OF ETERNITY

And there was again a battle in Gob with the Philistines, where Elhanan the son of Jaareoregim, a Bethlehemite, slew THE BROTHER OF GOLIATH THE GITTITE, the staff of whose spear was like a weaver's beam.
And there was yet a battle in Gath, where was a man of great stature, that had ON EVERY HAND SIX FINGERS, and ON EVERY FOOT SIX TOES, FOUR AND TWENTY in number; and HE ALSO WAS BORN TO THE GIANT.
And when he defied Israel, Jonathan the son of Shimea the brother of David slew him.
These four were born to the giant in Gath, and fell by the hand of David, and by the hand of his servants.

“THE BROTHER OF GOLIATH THE GITTITE”
“ON EVERY HAND SIX FINGERS”
“ON EVERY FOOT SIX TOES, FOUR AND TWENTY in NUMBER”
“HE ALSO WAS BORN TO THE GIANT”

In Roman mythology the sun was represented by Apollo, the god of light.
In Roman mythology the Moon was represented by Diana, the hunter goddess.
In Roman mythology Mercury was the messenger of the gods, noted for his speed and swiftness .
In Roman mythology Venus, was the goddess of love and beauty, famous for the passions she could stir among the gods.
Mars was the Roman god of war and bloodshed, whose symbol was a spear and shield
In Roman mythology Jupiter was the ruler of the gods (having overthrown Saturn) and their guardian and protector, and his symbol was the thunderbolt.
In Roman mythology Saturn was the god of agriculture founder of civilisations and of social order and conformity. The glyph is most often seen as scythe-like but it is primarily known as the "crescent below the cross", whereas Jupiter's glyph is the "crescent above the cross".
In Greek mythology Uranus was the personification of the heavens and the night sky.
In Roman mythology Neptune was the god of the sea, and the deep, ocean blue colour of the planet Neptune reflects this.
In Roman mythology Pluto was the god of the underworld and of wealth, hence the coin-and-chalice glyph.

Hi, Ender,

Yeah, this sucks. I had to restrain myself. This spammer is Harold, famous for puking his nonsensical biblical quotes. Damn, I am a believer, a Christian, but this sad person really offends me. How can he believe that anyone reads it? The stupidity of such people is really depressing.

And my next post got caught by the cyber censor because I wasn't as polite as you They ought to let the autocensor limit post to 400 words at least. That would cut out the 1500 word length garbage spams eats up the thread with.

Spammed again by the bible-thumping idiot. There ain't no justice.

Ye know not the least, the great, the greater and the greatest; that they together form ONE. A Hebrew Servant is not a slave; it is a student in Hebrew. My teachings begin with the WORD of the LORD. My doctrine is pure, as rain from Heaven. If one believes in slavery, it is he that has become the slave. This is what you could call a living hell. You can clearly see, the spirit over the seas, the dry land, and the pit are “the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep” Look “And Gideon said unto him, Oh my Lord, if the Lord be with us, why then is all this befallen us?” “Oh my Lord, wherewith shall I save Israel? behold, my family is poor in Manasseh, and I am the least in my father's house.” Look “There were they in great fear: for God is in the generation of the righteous. He asked life of thee, and thou gavest it him, even length of days for ever and ever.” “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;” Look “And they said one to another, Behold, this dreamer cometh.” “In Gibeon the Lord appeared to Solomon in a dream by night: and God said, Ask what I shall give thee.” Look “I love them that love me; and those that seek me early shall find me.” “I lead in the way of righteousness, in the midst of the paths of judgment:” “The Lord possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old. I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was.”

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
And God said, Let the waters under the Heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.
And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good.

And Gideon said unto him, Oh my Lord, if the Lord be with us, why then is all this befallen us? and where be all his miracles which our fathers told us of, saying, Did not the Lord bring us up from Egypt? but now the Lord hath forsaken us, and delivered us into the hands of the Midianites.
And the Lord looked upon him, and said, Go in this thy might, and thou shalt save Israel from the hand of the Midianites: have not I sent thee?
And he said unto him, Oh my Lord, wherewith shall I save Israel? behold, my family is poor in Manasseh, and I am the least in my father's house.

There were they in great fear: for God is in the generation of the righteous.
He asked life of thee, and thou gavest it him, even length of days for ever and ever.
His glory is great in thy salvation: honour and majesty hast thou laid upon him.
For thou hast made him most blessed for ever: thou hast made him exceeding glad with thy countenance.
My praise shall be of thee in the great congregation: I will pay my vows before them that fear him.
For thy name's sake, O Lord, pardon mine iniquity; for it is great.
What man is he that feareth the Lord? him shall he teach in the way that he shall choose.

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:

And they said one to another, Behold, this dreamer cometh.
Come now therefore, and let us slay him, and cast him into some pit, and we will say, Some evil beast hath devoured him: and we shall see what will become of his dreams.
And Reuben heard it, and he delivered him out of their hands; and said, Let us not kill him.
And Reuben said unto them, Shed no blood, but cast him into this pit that is in the wilderness, and lay no hand upon him; that he might rid him out of their hands, to deliver him to his father again.
And it came to pass, when Joseph was come unto his brethren, that they stript Joseph out of his coat, his coat of many colours that was on him;
And they took him, and cast him into a pit: and the pit was empty, there was no water in it.

I love them that love me; and those that seek me early shall find me.
Riches and honour are with me; yea, durable riches and righteousness.
My fruit is better than gold, yea, than fine gold; and my revenue than choice silver.
I lead in the way of righteousness, in the midst of the paths of judgment:
That I may cause those that love me to inherit substance; and I will fill their treasures.
The Lord possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old.
I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was.
When there were no depths, I was brought forth; when there were no fountains abounding with water.
Before the mountains were settled, before the hills was I brought forth:
While as yet he had not made the earth, nor the fields, nor the highest part of the dust of the world.
When he prepared the heavens, I was there: when he set a compass upon the face of the depth:
When he established the clouds above: when he strengthened the fountains of the deep:
When he gave to the sea his decree, that the waters should not pass his commandment: when he appointed the foundations of the earth:

Hath a nation changed their gods, which are yet no gods? but my people have changed their glory for that which doth not profit.
Be astonished, O ye heavens, at this, and be horribly afraid, be ye very desolate, saith the Lord.
For my people have committed two evils; they have forsaken me the fountain of living waters, and hewed them out cisterns, broken cisterns, that can hold no water.
Is Israel a servant? is he a homeborn slave? why is he spoiled?

“For my people have committed two evils”
“they have forsaken me the fountain of living waters”
“and hewed them out cisterns, broken cisterns, that can hold no water”

“THEY HAVE FORSAKEN ME THE FOUNTAIN OF LIVING WATERS”

“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,”
“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 a river went out of Eden to water the garden; and from thence it was parted”
“and became into four heads.”
“I was made in secret”
“his name Enos”
“then began men to call upon the name of the Lord.”
“Naked came I out of my mother's womb, and naked shall I return thither”
“blessed be the name of the Lord”

“AND HEWED THEM OUT CISTERNS, BROKEN CISTERNS, THAT CAN HOLD NO WATER”

And the third day there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee; and the mother of Jesus was there:
And both Jesus was called, and his disciples, to the marriage.
And when they wanted wine, the mother of Jesus saith unto him, They have no wine.
Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come.
His mother saith unto the servants, Whatsoever he saith unto you, do it.
And there were set there six waterpots of stone, after the manner of the purifying of the Jews, containing two or three firkins apiece.
Jesus saith unto them, Fill the waterpots with water. And they filled them up to the brim.
And he saith unto them, Draw out now, and bear unto the governor of the feast. And they bare it.
When the ruler of the feast had tasted the water that was made wine, and knew not whence it was: (but the servants which drew the water knew;) the governor of the feast called the bridegroom,
And saith unto him, Every man at the beginning doth set forth good wine; and when men have well drunk, then that which is worse: but thou hast kept the good wine until now.
This beginning of miracles did Jesus in Cana of Galilee, and manifested forth his glory; and his disciples believed on him.
After this he went down to Capernaum, he, and his mother, and his brethren, and his disciples: and they continued there not many days.
“there were set there six waterpots of stone”
”after the manner of the purifying of the Jews”
“Draw out now, and bear unto the governor of the feast”
” When the ruler of the feast had tasted the water that was made wine”
“Every man at the beginning doth set forth good wine”
“when men have well drunk, then that which is worse”
”This beginning of miracles did Jesus in Cana of Galilee”
“and his disciples believed on him”
“he went down to Capernaum, he, and his mother, and his brethren, and his disciples”

“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,”
“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 a river went out of Eden to water the garden; and from thence it was parted”
“and became into four heads.”
“I was made in secret”
“his name Enos”
“then began men to call upon the name of the Lord.”
“Naked came I out of my mother's womb, and naked shall I return thither”
“blessed be the name of the Lord”
“AND ISAAC CALLED JACOB, AND BLESSED HIM”
“AND GOD ALMIGHTY BLESS THEE”
“THE SECRET OF GOD WAS UPON MY TABERNACLE”
“WHEN THE ALMIGHTY WAS YET WITH ME”
“AND GIVE THEE THE BLESSING OF ABRAHAM”
“AND BREATHED INTO HIS NOSTRILS THE BREATH OF LIFE; AND MAN BECAME A LIVING SOUL.”
“the hand of the Lord”
“In whose hand is the soul of every living thing, and the breath of all mankind”
earth and the heavens
GOD ALMIGHTY
“NAKED CAME I OUT OF MY MOTHER'S WOMB, AND NAKED SHALL I RETURN THITHER”
“THE HAND OF THE LORD”
“IN WHOSE HAND IS THE SOUL OF EVERY LIVING THING, AND THE BREATH OF ALL MANKIND”
heavens and of the earth
ALMIGHTY GOD
“and BREATHED INTO HIS NOSTRILS THE BREATH OF LIFE;”
“THE SPIRIT OF GOD IS IN MY NOSTRILS”
“ALL THE WHILE MY BREATH IS IN ME”
“AND MAN BECAME A LIVING SOUL.”

PUFF:

I will answer in kind. Stephen Pinker makes a well thought out case in "The Blank Slate" that humans are hardwired to believe in the afterlife, and god or gods. 250,000 yrs of shared human experience established instincts that cause many of us to pursue, experience and even invent 'religiousity' and 'spirituality'.

The most likely explanation is that social groups that shared social mores and beliefs about the natural world(parts of which were viewed as supernatural in primitive societies) had a better survivability factor. ie The twelve god system of the Greeks and Romans created societies that mirrored the gods the had created. Strong respect for strength and martial prowess. Medical advancemt and the advantages of good sewage systems and clean water were the gifts of the godsPan, and even Ascheleus, a human, were worshipped even outside their Roman and Greek cultures for the good their followers provided society. Of course the Greeks considered human females souless and useful for breeding only, while the Romans considered Julius Ceasar a god along with the rest of the Pantheon.

I can go on for hours, really. The point is that all of the worlds religions contributed to their societies success or failure, at least long enough for the religion to become established.

Does that in anyway imply that any of these religions have one more iota of truth than any of the others? Of course not.

Since the majority of these religions are mutually exclusive, if one is absolutely true, the rest are absolutely false, then Occam's Razor tells us that the highest probability is that all are false.

The same goes for your claim of 'absolute morality'. Your test uses child molestation for fun as the test of absolute morality. Let's go back christendom in Europe, or even here in the US as recent as 100 yrs(we were behind europe), girls of 13 were considered elligable for marriage, and usually were told whom they would marry. The choice was often between having a child you couldn't feed starve, and marrying her off early. In fact, old enough to bleed is old enough to breed has been the human standard across all religious lines for most of human history..

We find that attrocious, and your absolute morality does not provide a place for what was considered moral in your own holy book. Slavery was legislated in the old testement, and never struck down in the new, at least according to the majority of American churches in the south before and during the civil war, but no human in right mind can now deny the absolute evil we have wrought against people when we enslaved millions from one race, destoyed their culture, forbid their education and convinced even them they were subhuman. Your absolute morality became that, absolutele moral evil.

The exortations of the tribal god of the jews to raid the valley of Canaan and kill every man woman and child and take their land for your own is abosolute morality of the most evil kind. If there were a Satan, this decree would have to come from It, yet even today chritians use this as an example of god giving the underdog that worships It victory.

Your absolute reality works only if you operate on faith that your own version of it is always correct.

Return to my earlier post for my opinion on where that has brought us, and why religion has become the thing most likely to bring about the destruction of the modern world, and the most powerful hinderence to the ethical advancement of humankind.

On this particular Jacoby thread, your comment has to be previewed, with your name re-typed, in order for the User ID to be included in the post.

I've found this not to be the case with the other threads here, which do post automatically.

PS. Peter Huff - there are no absolute objective realities that exist apart from human consciousness. Quantum physicists discovered early in the 20th century that all observations were 'tainted' and conditioned by the very act of being observed.

Religion and all related concepts are therefore subject to the same inescapable law - whatever reality may be, it is shaped by consciousness from beginning to end. How could it be otherwise?

And as the Buddha says, consciousness only arises when the necessary inter-dependent elements are present. How is Christian consciousness any different?

I can always tell when I've hit a nerve. I will try to respond Sunday or Monday.

Ender, please humor me with this little test,

http://proofthatgodexists.org/

Peter Huff

The last anonymous was from formerly Gerry.

To Peter the Absolute:

"I know you won't believe me, but the highest form of Human Excellence is to question oneself and others” (Socrates).

He was sentenced to death for telling the truth, for even searching for the truth (remember apostates, witches, heretics, Albigensians, Huguenots, scientists etc. etc.?): Refused to join “Opinion Enforced by Might” (your words!).

Roman Gods: Christians were killed as “heretics”, because they refused to join “Opinion Enforced by Might”.

Mohamed: “Kill all who do not believe! Kill all who refuse to join “Opinion Enforced by Might”.

Crusaders: Moslems were killed. Refused to join Christian “Opinion Enforced by Might”.

European principalities: “Cuius regio, eius religio”, (“All subjects are forced to believe their principal’s religion”!). Made into “International Law”! One of the most horrendous examples of “Opinion Enforced By Might”, in Peace of Augsburg 1555, later in Westphalian Peace 1648): Opinion Enforced By Might” (your words!).

Bible Belt religious pressure within communities: “Opinion Enforced by Might” (your words!)

Dominionists’ (Sarah Palin) attempt to make their religion “Opinion Enforced by Might” (your words!).

Might, of course, includes brain washing: The victim doesn’t even know that he/she is brainwashed and that he/she has fallen prey to “Opinion Enforced by Might” (your words!).

Conclusion:
ALL (monotheistic, at least) RELIGIONS are defined by your words: “Opinion Enforced by Might”.

What is worse: These opinions are based on NOTHING! (cf. Paine, Crick, Einstein, Edison, Twain, etc. etc.).

Hmmm. Odd. The website says my User ID would be posted automatically. It wasn't. That last response to Peter Huff was from me. The Anonymous one before was not.

Steven T Abell

Peter Huff:

"The atheist can appeal to nothing absolute, nothing objectively true for all people, it is just mere opinion enforce by might.

The Christian appeals to a standard outside himself/herself in which truth and qualitative values can be made sense of."

Ah, yes: the gospel according to Peter. Declare your reference point to be objective by assertion, declare your assertion to be true by assertion, and proceed from there. If anyone tries to argue with you, continue to assert without acknowledging the baldness of your assertion. This is not objectivity, which has only one standard of reference: observable properties of existence that do not depend on one's outlook or bald assertions.

No, Peter. I know what you're going to say next, and it's an assertion, not an objective fact.

"A knowledge of the true age of the earth and of the fossil record makes it impossible for any balanced intellect to believe in the literal truth of every part of the Bible in the way that fundamentalists do. And if some of the Bible is manifestly wrong, why should any of the rest of it be accepted automatically?"

Francis Crick 1916-2004. Nobel Prize-winning biophysicist and co-discoverer of the structure of DNA. in "What Mad Pursuit".

I have never seen the slightest scientific proof of the religious theories of heaven and hell, of future life for individuals, or of a personal god.

Thomas Edison in Columbian magazine.

The study of theology ,as it stands in Christian churches, is the study of nothing; it is founded on nothing; it rests on nothing; it proceeds by no authorities; it has no data; it can demonstrate nothing.
Thomas Paine 1737-1809 "The Age of Reason".

From Concered the Christian now Liberated:

Not one debate question about Witches, Holy Cows, Holy Ghosts/Spirits, Pretty Thingies, Ascending/Descending Bodies, Wine to Blood and Bread to Flesh and the rest of that ancient Voodoo with some first century Palestine Hoodoo!!

Shocking???? Or maybe we have finally grown up and put away Dark Age superstitions!!!!!!

Peter Huff:

"The atheist can appeal to nothing absolute, nothing objectively true for all people, it is just mere opinion enforce by might.

The Christian appeals to a standard outside himself/herself in which truth and qualitative values can be made sense of."

Sir, do you believe this is a quality of the Christian religion only, or do other religions have this standard?

The "absolute" Peter Huff and his fellow Christians rely on is an "absolute" alright: It is an absolute conjured up by human superstition and as such immanently untouchable by reason and evidence. It will stay an absolute up to the point where it is finally debunked by future generations ("the emperor has no clothes on"!) who are not forced anymore to split their personalities into an honest, reasonable and reasonably doubting self and a superstitious, mendacious, pseudo-absolute self.

Formerly Gerry

Maybe the best proof of evolution as a working theory is that is has repeatedly proven to be an accurate predictor of what will be discovered. When evolutionary science has shown there should be some creature that should have existed, or exist now, that fills some middle niche in the evolution of a species, it has been found frequently and had the characteristics needed to fill the niche.

Just and FYI - for those of you that don't 'believe' in evolution, National Geographic had a great article ("Was Darwin Right?", circa spring 2007), talking about evolution. Thier conclusion, was that if you believe in things like electricity, and plumbing (and therefore physics), there is MORE proof of evolution. There is proof in the world right now, (studies over time), as well as in microcosms of life (i.e. isoloated islands), as well as from archeology (i.e. old bones and such). Religious theories, on the other hand, have their support ("proof") from ancient and unverifyable texts, as well as from the 'teachers' of those religious texts (priests, imans, etc).

Don't kid yourselves, religion is not based on any sort of imperical proof - it's faith all the way, and if you have it, you believe it, and if you don't, you don't believe it. Science on the other hand, (for whatever it's faults), requires the ability to repeat a test of a theory repeatedly, with the same results, in order to consider it a supported theory. And, to add to the credibility, science acknowledges it's shortcomings - theories are supported, not proven, (hence the quotes around proof earlier in this text), because there are always some unknowns that could, at some point, effect the outcome of a given hypothesis.

Please seek that article out, it's very compelling.

PH "Your starting point, your basic foundational beliefs, determines how you look at and interpret the evidence. The difference between the two worldview of atheism and Christianity is only Christianity can make sense of the how and why of things. The atheist works on relativism, the Christian on absolutism; the atheist on subjective opinion, the Christian on an objective all knowing standard; the atheist continually borrows from the Christian reference point in order to make sense of things."

Then christianity starts from and invalid premise.

I have seen the "absolutism" of Christianity. It has been used to support slavery, suppression of women rights, war upon war, capital punishment, oppression of minorties, destruction of the environment and currently an illegal war against a nation that was no threat to us which we have now utterly destroyed and killed hundreds of thousand of noncombatants.

This has not come from random christians, but from pulpits all across our nation.

For more than 2000 yrs the Cults of Abraham have used the commands of their brutal, tribal god to commit crimes against humanity and commit war in the name of the greed of the church and the greed of the state, which by the design of our farsighted founding fathers are forever to be separate in this nation.

Now if we could just keep Christians out of govt as well as the religion, we could become the light of freedom and refuge for the downtroden that we are capable of reaching.

The flawed flame of christian morality holds up a light inadequate for contemplation of a world where a BJ in the oval office is considered a high crime, while torture, crimes against humanity, war for greed, support of corporate theft of American's life saving are excused as the right of the governing and not moral failures of leaders expressing devotion to Christianity.

You attempt to speak in absolutes. You pretend you have a moral high ground and you have been imbued with special knowledge.

Those very beliefs are the reason the world can no longer afford to allow the morally corrupt christian riechwing to control the American Political landscape.

There is no atrocity you cannot condone and use your pulpits to change the language of the debate to keep your flocks in line with the politics of hate, fear and murder.

Your self righteousness is a joke and fraud perpetutated on humanity by men to control men.

The religions of Abraham are the chains and blocks aroung the neck of humankind holding it back from becoming ethical creatures capable of surviving and prospering in world united in the cause of the betterment of humanity, and not the wars and hate of ancient superstitions and tribal animousity.

Hi again Susan,

SUSAN: "Do you think that religious theories, such as creationism and intelligent design, should be taught along with evolution in public school science classes?"

Your starting point, your basic foundational beliefs, determines how you look at and interpret the evidence. The difference between the two worldview of atheism and Christianity is only Christianity can make sense of the how and why of things. The atheist works on relativism, the Christian on absolutism; the atheist on subjective opinion, the Christian on an objective all knowing standard; the atheist continually borrows from the Christian reference point in order to make sense of things.

Evolutionary science ties itself to the popular Big Bang model of origins as an explanation of why we are here, but it cannot explain how it happened.

Both are beliefs that are trusted, both interpreted from the same facts, based on something that no one (but God) was here to witness, but atheism cannot make sense of itself.

SUSAN: "You have both said that your religions teach--and you believe--that life begins at the moment of conception. Why do you, Gov. Palin, think that your personal beliefs should set the legal standard for Americans who do not share them? Why do you, Sen. Biden, draw a distinction between what your faith tells you and the legal standards your government should set for others?"

Again, the question comes down to what your personal beliefs are based on and what is your standard for them? Why is your standard of when human life begins the one true standard? When does human life begin for you Susan?

The atheist can appeal to nothing absolute, nothing objectively true for all people, it is just mere opinion enforce by might.

The Christian appeals to a standard outside himself/herself in which truth and qualitative values can be made sense of.

http://tenminasministries.org/moralityprovesgod.html

SUSAN: "What do you consider the proper approach for judges to take on legal disputes involving the relationship between religion and government?"

Without God's standard whose is the "right" one? What gives one judge (or politician) the "right" to legislate his/her views as the morally correct one, to determine what "good" is?

SUSAN: "Do you believe that religious interference with government is as dangerous as government interference with religion?"

Politicians need to be held morally accountable, and in order to be morally accountable you need a reference point that is objective, absolute, universal and unchanging. (If not what you have is mere opinion, not good)

Do you know of any such standard Susan? If not, what gives anyone the "right" to impose their religious slant (I'm including atheism as a religious slant) on others? Why should your system of beliefs be the one that we all follow? Why are your views the ones that make sense, or do they? What makes you the all knowing expert, the one in whom we judge truth by? If it is just an opinion what makes it valid?

Although the issues are important and effect everyone living in America, the value system on which the candidate operates on is equally important and they effect everyone living in the country also.

Susan, where does your value system come from and what makes it right?

Regards,
Peter Huff

PS. When the formate changed to having to disclose my e-mail address to the Washington Post, I was not able to post my follow up comments on your last forum to answer Notsogreatscot or Acebojangles, just when it was getting interesting. If you guys are reading this, I can try on this post.

"And Moses went to Pharoah's palace, and said, 'let my people go'. Amd Pharoah had his guards take Moses away from him, and they threw him down the palace steps, and he rolled into the street. And he got up and he dusted himself off, and Moses said, "Well, I guess the ball's in his court now." And Moses went home to his wife. And Moses's wife said to him, "Did the Pahaaoh let your people go?" And Moses said, "Oh fine! now they're MY people."

From the New American Ordinary Everyday Revision of the New King James Reivsed Bible.

I am ordained a preacher
I am made a minister
I am an ambassador in bonds
I am persuaded that in thee also
I am thy fellowservant
I am in this tabernacle
I am set for the defence of the gospel
I am filled with comfort
I am tempted of God
I am rich
I am carnal
I am coming to you
I am crucified with Christ
in whatsoever state I am, therewith to be content
be as I am
I am now ready to be offered
for I am as ye are
I am become as sounding brass

Ok, here is an opinion, which, if not all gods is this nation under. it is one nation under god indivisable. which god and which satan satan. is it from sea to shining sea, the whole nation. crowned thy hood with brotherhood, who are your brothers. is it 12 golden crowns of glory. is this why this nation is so "rich" when you pray to the gods above, is it to the sun god, moon god, planet gods, star gods. where you worship, does the clergy use sorcery and bewitched the sinner creatures. do they pray for miracles from jesus. is this nation of christian soldiers under the centurians. do you consider you father to a dog and your mother swine. they produce devils don't they. does your spirit come from above by doves. are you wise as serpnts. remember you believe in the gospel for creatures

PHARAOH “the sword to slay”
OSIRIS WAS THE FIRST THE BROTHER OF SETH
NEBUCHADNEZZAR “and the dogs to tear,”
SIMON, SIMON
CAESAR “and the fowls of the heaven”
ROMULUS AND REMUS
BERA KING OF SODOM ”and the beasts of the earth”
GOLIATH AND THE BROTHER OF GOLIATH

Ender,

The anonymous idiot polluting the board by pasting the whole bible is Harold. He's been around for a while, never has anything to contribute, just posts absurdly long passages of his holey (not holy) book.

Kert,

The Alien Seed Theory holds that aliens from another planet visited earth long ago and planted humans here, either in our current form or possibly as a primitive life form from which humans later evolved. The science however, at least according to my H.S. Biology teacher, is still unclear on the latter question making it an ideal alternative theory (to Intelligent Design) for Biology students to study.

--Freestinker

Not one debate question about Witches, Holy Cows, Holy Ghosts/Spirits, Pretty Thingies, Ascending/Descending Bodies, Wine to Blood and Bread to Flesh i.e. all that ancient Voodoo with some first century Palestine Hoodoo!!

Shocking???? Or maybe we have finally grown up and put away Dark Age superstitions!!!!!!

I had posed a question yesterday about the scientific evidence for the Alien Plant theory and people seemed to get a little off the subject. I am still looking for some of the information on this.

I find it amazing that lepers, sinners, and the soldiers under the centurion have such great faith in Jesus and his miracles. Remember Jesus is in the House of Lepers; there is where the ten met him along with Simon.

“CAPERNAUM, WHICH IS UPON THE SEA COAST”
“by the way of the sea, beyond Jordan, Galilee of the Gentiles;”
“The people which sat in darkness saw great light”
”TO THEM WHICH SAT IN THE REGION AND SHADOW OF DEATH LIGHT IS SPRUNG UP.”
“JESUS WAS IN BETHANY, IN THE HOUSE OF SIMON THE LEPER”
“he passed through the midst of Samaria and Galilee.”
“he entered into a certain village”
“THERE MET HIM TEN MEN THAT WERE LEPERS”
“And when Jesus beheld him”
“he said, THOU ART SIMON THE SON OF JONA”
”THOU SHALT BE CALLED CEPHAS”
“WHICH IS BY INTERPRETATION, A STONE”
“But there was a certain man, called Simon”
”which beforetime in the same city used sorcery, and bewitched the people of Samaria”
”giving out that himself was some great one:”
“This man is the great power of God.”
“because that of long time he had bewitched them with sorceries.”
“BEHOLD, THERE CAME A LEPER AND WORSHIPPED HIM, SAYING”
“Lord, if thou wilt, thou canst make me clean.”
“And Jesus put forth his hand, and touched him, saying”
”be thou clean. And immediately his leprosy was cleansed.”
“JESUS WAS ENTERED INTO CAPERNAUM”
”THERE CAME UNTO HIM A CENTURION, BESEECHING HIM,”
“Lord, my servant lieth at home sick of the palsy, grievously tormented.”
“The centurion answered and said, Lord”
”I AM NOT WORTHY THAT THOU SHOULDEST COME UNDER MY ROOF”
”FOR I AM A MAN UNDER AUTHORITY, HAVING SOLDIERS UNDER ME”
”When Jesus heard it, he marveled”
”AND SAID TO THEM THAT FOLLOWED”
“I HAVE NOT FOUND SO GREAT FAITH, NO, NOT IN ISRAEL”
“there were set there SIX WATERPOTS OF STONE”
”after the manner of the purifying of the Jews”
“Draw out now, and bear unto the governor of the feast”
” When the ruler of the feast had tasted the water that was made wine”
“Every man at the beginning doth set forth good wine”
“WHEN MEN HAVE WELL DRUNK, THEN THAT WHICH IS WORSE”
”THIS BEGINNING OF MIRACLES DID JESUS IN CANA OF GALILEE”
“AND HIS DISCIPLES BELIEVED ON HIM”
“HE WENT DOWN TO CAPERNAUM, HE, AND HIS MOTHER, AND HIS BRETHREN, AND HIS DISCIPLES”
“AND THOU, CAPERNAUM, WHICH ART EXALTED UNTO HEAVEN”
”SHALT BE BROUGHT DOWN TO HELL”
”for if the mighty works, which have been done in thee”
”had been done in Sodom, it would have remained until this day.”

“THESE SIX THINGS DOTH THE LORD HATE”
“SEVEN ARE AN ABOMINATION UNTO HIM”

“AND THESE SHALL STAND UPON MOUNT EBAL TO CURSE”
“REUBEN, GAD, AND ASHER, AND ZEBULUN, DAN, AND NAPHTALI.”
“there were set there SIX STONES”
“he said, THOU ART SIMON THE SON OF JONA”
”THOU SHALT BE CALLED CEPHAS”
“WHICH IS BY INTERPRETATION, A STONE”

“AND HAST REVEALED THEM UNTO BABES.”
“A TEACHER OF BABES, WHICH HAST THE FORM OF KNOWLEDGE AND OF THE TRUTH IN THE LAW.”
“My son, keep thy father's commandment,”
“and forsake not the law of thy mother”
“Bind them continually upon thine heart”
“and tie them about thy neck”

Now when Jesus had heard that John was cast into prison, he departed into Galilee;
And leaving Nazareth, he came and dwelt in Capernaum, which is upon the sea coast, in the borders of Zabulon and Nephthalim:
That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet, saying,
The land of Zabulon, and the land of Nephthalim, by the way of the sea, beyond Jordan, Galilee of the Gentiles;
The people which sat in darkness saw great light; and to them which sat in the region and shadow of death light is sprung up.

“CAPERNAUM, WHICH IS UPON THE SEA COAST”
“by the way of the sea, beyond Jordan, Galilee of the Gentiles;”
“The people which sat in darkness saw great light”
”TO THEM WHICH SAT IN THE REGION AND SHADOW OF DEATH LIGHT IS SPRUNG UP.”

When he was come down from the mountain, great multitudes followed him.
And, behold, there came a leper and worshipped him, saying, Lord, if thou wilt, thou canst make me clean.
And Jesus put forth his hand, and touched him, saying, I will; be thou clean. And immediately his leprosy was cleansed.
And Jesus saith unto him, See thou tell no man; but go thy way, shew thyself to the priest, and offer the gift that Moses commanded, for a testimony unto them.
And when Jesus was entered into Capernaum, there came unto him a centurion, beseeching him,
And saying, Lord, my servant lieth at home sick of the palsy, grievously tormented.
And Jesus saith unto him, I will come and heal him.
The centurion answered and said, Lord, I am not worthy that thou shouldest come under my roof: but speak the word only, and my servant shall be healed.
For I am a man under authority, having soldiers under me: and I say to this man, Go, and he goeth; and to another, Come, and he cometh; and to my servant, Do this, and he doeth it.
When Jesus heard it, he marvelled, and said to them that followed, Verily I say unto you, I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel.

Now when Jesus was in Bethany, in the house of Simon the leper,

“JESUS WAS IN BETHANY, IN THE HOUSE OF SIMON THE LEPER”

And it came to pass, as he went to Jerusalem, that he passed through the midst of Samaria and Galilee.
And as he entered into a certain village, there met him ten men that were lepers, which stood afar off:
And they lifted up their voices, and said, Jesus, Master, have mercy on us.
And when he saw them, he said unto them, Go shew yourselves unto the priests. And it came to pass, that, as they went, they were cleansed.
And one of them, when he saw that he was healed, turned back, and with a loud voice glorified God,
And fell down on his face at his feet, giving him thanks: and he was a Samaritan.

“he passed through the midst of Samaria and Galilee.”
“he entered into a certain village”
“THERE MET HIM TEN MEN THAT WERE LEPERS”

And he brought him to Jesus. And when Jesus beheld him, he said, Thou art Simon the son of Jona: thou shalt be called Cephas, which is by interpretation, A stone.

“And when Jesus beheld him”
“he said, THOU ART SIMON THE SON OF JONA”
”THOU SHALT BE CALLED CEPHAS”
“WHICH IS BY INTERPRETATION, A STONE”

But there was a certain man, called Simon, which beforetime in the same city used sorcery, and bewitched the people of Samaria, giving out that himself was some great one:
To whom they all gave heed, from the least to the greatest, saying, This man is the great power of God.
And to him they had regard, because that of long time he had bewitched them with sorceries.

“But there was a certain man, called Simon”
”which beforetime in the same city used sorcery, and bewitched the people of Samaria”
”giving out that himself was some great one:”
“This man is the great power of God.”
“because that of long time he had bewitched them with sorceries.”

“BEHOLD, THERE CAME A LEPER AND WORSHIPPED HIM, SAYING”
“Lord, if thou wilt, thou canst make me clean.”
“And Jesus put forth his hand, and touched him, saying”
”be thou clean. And immediately his leprosy was cleansed.”
“JESUS WAS ENTERED INTO CAPERNAUM”
”THERE CAME UNTO HIM A CENTURION, BESEECHING HIM,”
“Lord, my servant lieth at home sick of the palsy, grievously tormented.”
“The centurion answered and said, Lord”
”I AM NOT WORTHY THAT THOU SHOULDEST COME UNDER MY ROOF”
”FOR I AM A MAN UNDER AUTHORITY, HAVING SOLDIERS UNDER ME”
”When Jesus heard it, he marveled”
”AND SAID TO THEM THAT FOLLOWED”
“I HAVE NOT FOUND SO GREAT FAITH, NO, NOT IN ISRAEL”

And the third day there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee; and the mother of Jesus was there:
And both Jesus was called, and his disciples, to the marriage.
And when they wanted wine, the mother of Jesus saith unto him, They have no wine.
Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come.
His mother saith unto the servants, Whatsoever he saith unto you, do it.
And there were set there six waterpots of stone, after the manner of the purifying of the Jews, containing two or three firkins apiece.
Jesus saith unto them, Fill the waterpots with water. And they filled them up to the brim.
And he saith unto them, Draw out now, and bear unto the governor of the feast. And they bare it.
When the ruler of the feast had tasted the water that was made wine, and knew not whence it was: (but the servants which drew the water knew;) the governor of the feast called the bridegroom,
And saith unto him, Every man at the beginning doth set forth good wine; and when men have well drunk, then that which is worse: but thou hast kept the good wine until now.
This beginning of miracles did Jesus in Cana of Galilee, and manifested forth his glory; and his disciples believed on him.
After this he went down to Capernaum, he, and his mother, and his brethren, and his disciples: and they continued there not many days.

“there were set there six waterpots of stone”
”after the manner of the purifying of the Jews”
“Draw out now, and bear unto the governor of the feast”
” When the ruler of the feast had tasted the water that was made wine”
“Every man at the beginning doth set forth good wine”
“when men have well drunk, then that which is worse”
”This beginning of miracles did Jesus in Cana of Galilee”
“and his disciples believed on him”
“he went down to Capernaum, he, and his mother, and his brethren, and his disciples”

But I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon at the day of judgment, than for you.
And thou, Capernaum, which art exalted unto heaven, shalt be brought down to hell: for if the mighty works, which have been done in thee, had been done in Sodom, it would have remained until this day.
But I say unto you, That it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom in the day of judgment, than for thee.
At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes.

“AND THOU, CAPERNAUM, WHICH ART EXALTED UNTO HEAVEN”
”SHALT BE BROUGHT DOWN TO HELL”
”for if the mighty works, which have been done in thee”
”had been done in Sodom, it would have remained until this day.”
“AND HAST REVEALED THEM UNTO BABES.”

Behold, thou art called a Jew, and restest in the law, and makest thy boast of God,
And knowest his will, and approvest the things that are more excellent, being instructed out of the law;
And art confident that thou thyself art a guide of the blind, a light of them which are in darkness,
An instructor of the foolish, a teacher of babes, which hast the form of knowledge and of the truth in the law.

“A TEACHER OF BABES, WHICH HAST THE FORM OF KNOWLEDGE AND OF THE TRUTH IN THE LAW.”

And Moses charged the people the same day, saying,
These shall stand upon mount Gerizim to bless the people, when ye are come over Jordan; Simeon, and Levi, and Judah, and Issachar, and Joseph, and Benjamin:
And these shall stand upon mount Ebal to curse; Reuben, Gad, and Asher, and Zebulun, Dan, and Naphtali.

“AND THESE SHALL STAND UPON MOUNT EBAL TO CURSE”
“REUBEN, GAD, AND ASHER, AND ZEBULUN, DAN, AND NAPHTALI.”

These six things doth the Lord hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him:
A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood,
An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief,
A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.
My son, keep thy father's commandment, and forsake not the law of thy mother:
Bind them continually upon thine heart, and tie them about thy neck.

“THESE SIX THINGS DOTH THE LORD HATE”
“SEVEN ARE AN ABOMINATION UNTO HIM”

“My son, keep thy father's commandment,”
“and forsake not the law of thy mother”
“Bind them continually upon thine heart”
“and tie them about thy neck”

Galileo, Newton, or Einstein "theories" can be tested in the lab and can be repeated again and again. That is science.

Evolution has NOTHING TO SHOW. It's just a dream. Dream on idiots

For the idiot trying to cut and paste the entire bibble into this thread, FYI you don't get any witness points for c&p, specially when you do it anonymously. Please use a screen name so I can make it clear who I'm calling an idiot. Or just go away and jabber away maddly on your nearest street corner.

Pope Benedict XVI will kick off a week-long reading of the Bible on Italian television starting Sunday, with readers to include three former presidents and Oscar-winning actor Roberto Benigni.
Some 2,000 people will take turns reading the Bible's 73 books, from the Old Testament's Genesis to the New Testament's Book of Revelations, at Rome's Holy Cross in Jerusalem basilica.
The pope will record the first reading at the Vatican.

And Moses said unto God, Behold, when I come unto the children of Israel, and shall say unto them, The God of your fathers hath sent me unto you; and they shall say to me, What is his name? what shall I say unto them?
And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.
And God said moreover unto Moses, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, The Lord God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath sent me unto you: this is my name for ever, and this is my memorial unto all generations.

“Then said the Lord unto me,”
“Though Moses and Samuel stood before me”
”yet MY MIND COULD NOT BE TOWARD THIS PEOPLE”
”cast them out of my sight, and let them go forth.”
“And it shall come to pass, if they say unto thee”
”Whither shall we go forth? then thou shalt tell them”
“Thus saith the Lord”
”Such as are for death, to death”
“and such as are for the sword, to the sword”
“and such as are for the famine, to the famine”
”and such as are for the captivity, to the captivity.”

“And I WILL APPOINT OVER THEM FOUR KINDS, saith the Lord”
“the sword to slay”
“and the dogs to tear,”
“and the fowls of the heaven”
”and the beasts of the earth”

“Daniel spake and said, I saw in my vision by night”
“behold, the four winds of the heaven strove upon the great sea.”
“And FOUR GREAT BEASTS CAME UP FROM THE SEA”

“came THE LIKENESS OF FOUR LIVING CREATURES.”
”And this was their appearance; they had the likeness of a man.”
”As for the likeness of their faces”
”they four had the face of a man”

“THESE TWELVE JESUS SENT FORTH”
HEADS CROWNS OF GOLD

PHARAOH “the sword to slay”
OSIRIS WAS THE FIRST THE BROTHER OF SETH
NEBUCHADNEZZAR “and the dogs to tear,”
SIMON, SIMON
CAESAR “and the fowls of the heaven”
ROMULUS AND REMUS
BERA KING OF SODOM ”and the beasts of the earth”
GOLIATH AND THE BROTHER OF GOLIATH

And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.
And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.
And they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever.
But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.

Lord, even THE DEVILS ARE SUBJECT UNTO US THROUGH THY NAME.

BEHOLD, I COME AS A THIEF. Blessed is he that watcheth, and keepeth his garments, lest he walk naked, and THEY SEE HIS SHAME.

Then were THERE TWO THIEVES CRUCIFIED WITH HIM, one on the right hand, and another on the left.

But when they had commanded them to go aside out of the council, they conferred among themselves,
Saying, What shall we do to these men? for that indeed a notable miracle hath been done by them is manifest to all them that dwell in Jerusalem; and we cannot deny it.
But that it spread no further among the people, let us straitly threaten them, THAT THEY SPEAK HENCEFORTH TO NO MAN IN THIS NAME.
And they called them, and COMMANDED THEM NOT TO SPEAK AT ALL NOR TEACH IN THE NAME OF JESUS.
But Peter and John answered and said unto them, Whether it be right in the sight of God to hearken unto you more than unto God, judge ye.
For we cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard.

But if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it; lest haply ye be found even to fight against God.
And to him they agreed: and when they had called the apostles, and beaten them, they COMMANDED THAT THEY SHOULD NOT SPEAK IN THE NAME OF JESUS, and let them go.
And they departed from the presence of the council, REJOICING THAT THEY WERE COUNTED WORTHY TO SUFFER SHAME FOR HIS NAME.

Saying, DID NOT WE STRAITLY COMMAND YOU THAT YE SHOULD NOT TEACH IN THIS NAME? and, behold, ye have filled Jerusalem with your doctrine, and intend to bring this man's blood upon us.

Being defamed, we intreat: we are made as the filth of the world, and are the offscouring of all things unto this day.
I WRITE NOT THESE THINGS TO SHAME YOU, but as my beloved sons I WARN YOU.
For though ye have ten thousand instructers in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel.
Wherefore I beseech you, be ye followers of me.

If then ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the church.
I SPEAK TO YOUR SHAME. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you? no, not one that shall be able to judge between his brethren?
BUT BROTHER GOETH TO LAW WITH BROTHER, and that BEFORE THE UNBELIEVERS.

Whose end is destruction, WHOSE GOD IS THEIR BELLY, and WHOSE GLORY IS IN THEIR SHAME, who mind earthly things

Wherefore seeing we also are compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which doth so easily beset us, and let us run with patience the race that is set before us,
Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, DESPISING THE SHAME, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.
For consider him that endured such CONTRADICTION OF SINNERS against himself, lest ye BE WEARIED AND FAINT IN YOUR MINDS.
YE HAVE NOT YET RESISTED UNTO BLOOD, striving against sin.

Lord, even THE DEVILS ARE SUBJECT UNTO US THROUGH THY NAME.

BEHOLD, I COME AS A THIEF. Blessed is he that watcheth, and keepeth his garments, lest he walk naked, and THEY SEE HIS SHAME.

Then were THERE TWO THIEVES CRUCIFIED WITH HIM, one on the right hand, and another on the left.

For the SON OF MAN IS LORD even of the sabbath day.
But that ye may know that the SON OF MAN HATH POWER ON EARTH to forgive sins
THE SON OF MAN came eating and drinking, and they say, Behold a man gluttonous, and a winebibber, A FRIEND OF PUBLICANS AND SINNERS. But wisdom is justified of her children.

But when he saw Jesus afar off, he ran and worshipped him,
And cried with a loud voice, and said, What have I to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of the most high God? I adjure thee by God, that thou torment me not.
For he said unto him, COME OUT OF THE MAN, THOU UNCLEAN SPIRIT.
And he asked him, What is thy name? And he answered, saying, MY NAME IS LEGION: FOR WE ARE MANY.

SO THE DEVILS BESOUGHT HIM, saying, If thou cast us out, SUFFER US TO GO AWAY INTO THE HERD OF SWINE.
And he said unto them, Go. And when they were come out, they went into the herd of swine: and, behold, THE WHOLE HERD OF SWINE RAN VIOLENTLY DOWN A STEEP PLACE INTO THE SEA, AND PERISHED IN THE WATERS.
And they that kept them fled, and went their ways into the city, and told every thing, and WHAT WAS BEFALLEN TO THE POSSESSED OF THE DEVILS.

And Jesus asked him, saying, What is thy name? And he said, LEGION: BECAUSE MANY DEVILS WERE ENTERED INTO HIM.
And they besought him that he would not COMMAND THEM TO GO OUT INTO THE DEEP.

And they went into Capernaum; and straightway on the sabbath day he entered into the synagogue, and taught.
And they were astonished at his doctrine: for he taught them as one that had authority, and not as the scribes.
And there was in their synagogue A MAN WITH AN UNCLEAN SPIRIT; and he cried out,
Saying, Let us alone; what have we to do with thee, thou Jesus of Nazareth? art thou come to destroy us? I KNOW THEE WHO THOU ART, THE HOLY ONE OF GOD.
And Jesus rebuked him, saying, Hold thy peace, and come out of him.
And when the unclean spirit had torn him, and cried with a loud voice, he came out of him.
And they were all amazed, insomuch that they questioned among themselves, saying, What thing is this? what new doctrine is this? for WITH AUTHORITY COMMANDETH HE EVEN THE UNCLEAN SPIRITS, AND THEY DO OBEY HIM.

Now there was there nigh unto the mountains a great herd of swine feeding.
And all the devils besought him, saying, Send us into the swine, that we may enter into them.
AND FORTHWITH JESUS GAVE THEM LEAVE. AND THE UNCLEAN SPIRITS WENT OUT, AND ENTERED INTO THE SWINE: AND THE HERD RAN VIOLENTLY DOWN A STEEP PLACE INTO THE SEA, (THEY WERE ABOUT TWO THOUSAND;) AND WERE CHOKED IN THE SEA.
And they that fed the swine fled, and told it in the city, and in the country. And they went out to see what it was that was done.
And THEY COME TO JESUS, AND SEE HIM THAT WAS POSSESSED WITH THE DEVIL, AND HAD THE LEGION, sitting, and clothed, and in his right mind: and they were afraid.
And they that saw it told them how it befell to him that was possessed with the devil, and also concerning the swine.

Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to MARY MAGDALENE, OUT OF WHOM HE HAD CAST SEVEN DEVILS.

Will God hear his cry when trouble cometh upon him?
Will he delight himself in the Almighty? will he always call upon God?
I will teach you by the hand of God: that which is with the Almighty will I not conceal.
Behold, all ye yourselves have seen it; why then are ye thus altogether vain?

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.
And a river went out of Eden to water the garden; and from thence it was parted, and became into four heads.
And the LORD GOD TOOK THE MAN, AND PUT HIM INTO THE GARDEN OF EDEN TO DRESS IT AND TO KEEP IT.
And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof;
And the rib, which THE LORD GOD HAD TAKEN FROM MAN, MADE HE A WOMAN, and brought her unto the man.
And Adam said, THIS IS NOW BONE OF MY BONES, AND FLESH OF MY FLESH: SHE SHALL BE CALLED WOMAN, BECAUSE SHE WAS TAKEN OUT OF MAN.
Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.
AND THEY WERE BOTH NAKED, THE MAN AND HIS WIFE, AND WERE NOT ASHAMED.
And to Seth, to him also there was born a son; and he called HIS NAME ENOS: THEN BEGAN MEN TO CALL UPON THE NAME OF THE LORD.

“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,”
“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 a river went out of Eden to water the garden; and from thence it was parted”
“and became into four heads.”
“I was made in secret”
“his name Enos”
“then began men to call upon the name of the Lord.”
“Naked came I out of my mother's womb, and naked shall I return thither”
“blessed be the name of the Lord”
“AND ISAAC CALLED JACOB, AND BLESSED HIM”
“AND GOD ALMIGHTY BLESS THEE”
“THE SECRET OF GOD WAS UPON MY TABERNACLE”
“WHEN THE ALMIGHTY WAS YET WITH ME”
“AND GIVE THEE THE BLESSING OF ABRAHAM”
“AND BREATHED INTO HIS NOSTRILS THE BREATH OF LIFE; AND MAN BECAME A LIVING SOUL.”
“the hand of the Lord”
“In whose hand is the soul of every living thing, and the breath of all mankind”
earth and the heavens
GOD ALMIGHTY
“NAKED CAME I OUT OF MY MOTHER'S WOMB, AND NAKED SHALL I RETURN THITHER”
“THE HAND OF THE LORD”
“IN WHOSE HAND IS THE SOUL OF EVERY LIVING THING, AND THE BREATH OF ALL MANKIND”
heavens and of the earth
ALMIGHTY GOD
“and BREATHED INTO HIS NOSTRILS THE BREATH OF LIFE;”
“THE SPIRIT OF GOD IS IN MY NOSTRILS”
“ALL THE WHILE MY BREATH IS IN ME”
“AND MAN BECAME A LIVING SOUL.”

I AM ALPHA AND OMEGA, THE BEGINNING AND THE ENDING
THE BOOK OF THE GENERATION OF JESUS CHRIST
THIS IS THE BOOK OF THE GENERATIONS OF ADAM. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him;
Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.
And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth:

I AM ALPHA AND OMEGA, THE BEGINNING AND THE END
He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, LORD JESUS.
And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:
But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
And the Lord God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.
And out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and WHATSOEVER ADAM CALLED EVERY LIVING CREATURE, THAT WAS THE NAME THEREOF.
And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.
NOW THE SERPENT WAS MORE SUBTIL THAN ANY BEAST OF THE FIELD WHICH THE LORD GOD HAD MADE. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?
And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:
But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.
And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:
FOR GOD DOTH KNOW THAT IN THE DAY YE EAT THEREOF, THEN YOUR EYES SHALL BE OPENED, AND YE SHALL BE AS GODS, KNOWING GOOD AND EVIL.
And unto Adam he said, BECAUSE THOU HAST HEARKENED UNTO THE VOICE OF THY WIFE, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life;
THORNS ALSO AND THISTLES SHALL IT BRING FORTH TO THEE; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field;
In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.
And ADAM CALLED HIS WIFE'S NAME EVE; BECAUSE SHE WAS THE MOTHER OF ALL LIVING.
Unto Adam also and to his wife did the Lord God make coats of skins, and clothed them.
And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:
Therefore the Lord God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken.
So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and A FLAMING SWORD WHICH TURNED EVERY WAY, TO KEEP THE WAY OF THE TREE OF LIFE.

I AM ALPHA AND OMEGA, THE BEGINNING AND THE END, THE FIRST AND THE LAST.
The grace of our LORD JESUS CHRIST BE WITH YOU ALL. Amen.
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.
So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.
THUS THE HEAVENS AND THE EARTH WERE FINISHED, AND ALL THE HOST OF THEM.

I am debtor both to the Greeks, and to the Barbarians
I am carnal
I am left
I am sure
I am of Paul
I am of Apollos
I am to you
I am not the hand
I am become as sounding brass
I am the least of the apostles
I am filled with comfort
I am present with that confidence
I am jealous over you with godly jealousy
I am weak
I am coming to you
I am crucified with Christ
I am afraid of you
be as I am
for I am as ye are
I am an ambassador in bonds
I am set for the defence of the gospel
I am apprehended of Christ Jesus
in whatsoever state I am, therewith to be content
I am made a minister
I am also in bonds
I am chief
I am ordained a preacher
I am persuaded that in thee also
I am now ready to be offered
I am tempted of God
I am holy
I am in this tabernacle
I am well pleased
I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending
I am he which searcheth the reins and hearts
I am rich
I am thy fellowservant
I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end
I am thy fellowservant
I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.
I am the root and the offspring of David

Not one debate question about Witches, Holy Cows, Holy Ghosts/Spirits, Pretty Thingies, Ascending/Descending Bodies, Wine to Blood and Bread to Flesh i.e. all that ancient Voodoo with some first century Palestine Hoodoo!!

sparrow

sorry arminius- the anon you replied to was me. the user id thingie doesn't seem to work all the time. Do you think that manicotti is a more evolved form than spaghetti? But if you're saying that He was drunk before he created the universe, then yes- not only have I been touched by, but I have been mashed flat by his noodley appendage.

farnaz- I am not sure how I would really define myself in terms of how much of a believer I am. Certainly I'm Jewish, but maybe also a bit agnostish. I've always been fascinated with religions and there's no way to understand who we are today without knowing who we have been. And I think religions are the richest part of that, whether or not you believe in G-d, a history of religion is to see the human mind unfold.

Arminius,

Please don't forget the Muffinists and Fluff (blessed be he), especially.

Sparrow:

"Indeed, as part of a class on the study of religions and religious ideas, but to teach ID by itself is still to teach religion, and the religion of one particular group. there's a big difference between teaching about faith and teach a faith."

Sparrow, yes, I know. Hence, my hesitant suggestion pace Dennett that we try the former. I'm afraid I'm a dedicated secularist.

But Ender, Arminius, and Anon raised the pertinent questions. Still, such programs have been implemented and frankly they're badly needed. We will become more, not less diverse. Religion isn't going anywhere any time soon, I don't think. Do you?

Farnaz

Ender,

Yes, the FSM was created primarily by one dude (PBUH) who, after a few beers, invented the religion as a reply to the Kansas State Board of Education, which had been ready to include ID in the curriculum. Note, all, that Intelligent Design [sic] is the wolf of creationism in sheep's clothing.

Anyway, his letter reached the web, and became a sensation. From there, a forum on religious studies actually invited FSM to participate, because FSM is truly a study in the organization of any particular religion. FSM is worthy of consideration for this reason alone.

To all of you out there - have YOU been touched by His noodley appendage?

College kids started FSM as a hoot, but have ended up actually affecting the court case about teaching ID in Kansas.

Anonymous -

I usually don't answer anonymous posts, but this time I will make an exception. I hope that in the future you will use a handle to make it easier to connect.

Anyway, I had run into the Flying Spaghetti Monster from time to time on the web. I was mightily puzzled, so I googled. Please google - the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster has a great site, but go to Wikipedia first. I did, and I literally laughed for days.

arminius- I have to say I am still wiping away tears of laughter, but I will never look at a plate of spaghetti the same way again. Now I don't know whether to pick up a fork or genuflect! For my own edification however,- was there meat in the sauce? (oh dear- I think I've gone over to the dark side.)

Ender:

Obviously, you have been touched by His noodley appendage! I trust you celebrated International Talk Like a Pirate Day, Sep 19? This is a FSM holiday.

Arminius,

Not so close to dinner! ;)

All Hail FSM! May the Sauce Be With You, and On You, and In You. And on that nice bowl of Heavenly Pasta Before You!

"Susan Jacoby, you forget that America was originated by extremist churches. It's the secular side of American history that has brought us to the brink of disaster we have today."

How so? The American Revolution was a political revolt against taxation issues, not a sectarian religious war. Some of the colonies originally were religious based, but most were not. You might actually want to read some history before commenting on it.

If we are going to get into alternative creation theories, I think the best one is the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. The imperfection of creation is handily explained by the fact that His Noodliness had had a few too many drinks before creating the universe! Have you been touched by His noodley appendage?

I'm partial to the "I invented evolution " theory. I have spent years planting all those resin fossil castings to fool all those scientists. (I mean, if McCain invented the blackberry and Gore the internet........)

My sister however subscribes to the Tinkerbell Theory of the Wave the Magic Wand.

Susan Jacoby, you forget that America was originated by extremist churches. It's the secular side of American history that has brought us to the brink of disaster we have today.

Can you explain the science behind the Alien plant theory? I'll assume the Stork Theory is a joke.

Kert,

The Stork Theory is one of my favorites. The Alien Seed theory is another good one.

--Freestinker

Can someone explain to me the alternative theory to evolution? I would like to know the options.

Farnaz wrote:"Creationism and intelligent design are religion, not science, I agree. This doesn't mean, however, that the two cannot be presented, just that they cannot be presented as credible theories within the scientific community."

Indeed, as part of a class on the study of religions and religious ideas, but to teach ID by itself is still to teach religion, and the religion of one particular group. there's a big difference between teaching about faith and teach a faith.

Arminius, Ender, Anon,

I hear you, and kind of thought the same thing when I was reading Dennett's article, but then these programs have worked in some of the least expected places. And, of course, they need to know the basics, but this sort of thing can and does fit in with them.

But have no fear. I know I'm dreaming for all the reasons you folks give. Ah, well. I can dream, can't I?

So Farnaz, are we going to make our public school system responsible for teaching world religions at a HS or Jr. HS level? They are having enough problems teaching math, science and language.

Parents, at least here in the bibble belt, would fly off the handle if their little repugnicians were to be exposed to any presentation of xtianity that didn't match their own. Same if other religions were taught in a benevolent way. Then, you would have teachers of all faiths using class a bully pulpit to convert all the little monsters to their own mythologicial system.

And finally, you would have children like mine, who are articulate, intelligent, confrontational and despising of religion that would cause riots with in class discussions. Sorry, but at least until college, religion should be taught at home or at your place of worship, not in a multicultural, secular school system.

Farnaz,

The problem is most people would absolutely freak out if you taught their myths to their childern for what they really are ... religious myths.

Best just to leave that stuff at home or in church or wait until college where the students are adults and there's a little more academic freedom to present the material in its proper context.

Farnaz, you said,
"Creationism and intelligent design are religion, not science, I agree. This doesn't mean, however, that the two cannot be presented, just that they cannot be presented as credible theories within the scientific community."

This believer says NO. Nothing of religion must be in any science course, ever. Belief cannot be approached by reason or the scientific method.

The last anon was moi.

Creationism and intelligent design are religion, not science, I agree. This doesn't mean, however, that the two cannot be presented, just that they cannot be presented as credible theories within the scientific community.

Daniel Dennett suggested awhile back that all high schools follow the model of presenting survey courses on the world religions. Such programs have been very effective, increasing appreciation for diversity, diminishing prejudice, with student response overwhelmingly positive. (Atheism and agnosticism are also addressed.)

This, to me, is a sensible approach, a sane addition to cultural diversity about which we all need to know more and about which some of our children are being informed. All of them need to be, IMO.

The act of teaching any form of Creationism in HS science classes is insane to contemplate. Makes no difference whether it is the Sumarian Creation Myth copied in the Hebrew bible, or the Cahokia Nation where the animal people came up from the darkness and morphed into REAL PEOPLE with TWO SOULS.

Creationism or ID(same difference) are ANTI science. Evolution is a growing body of knowlege that has proven repeatable in experimentation and observation and each itteration has increased that body of knowledge.

Creationism/ID both claim to HAVE THE ANSWER! NO MORE STUDY IS NEEDED, SOME GOD JUST PULLED THIS WHOLE BIOLOGICAL SYSTEM OUT OF IT'S DIVINE ARSE, NUFF SAID.

Both predetermine an answer so they do not contribute to adding to the body of knowledge of the science of biology nor evolution through openminded discovery.

ender

Seems as if the time has come when religion is being contradicted on all fronts for its irrationality in regards to its creation stories.
Science has caught up and passed religion as the place we turn to for deep knowledge and understanding of our origins. The bible has taught us myths for thousands of years. But times have changed. We no longer need myths. Knowledge is better.
Religion retards our development. We in the 21st century know there are no gods. How absurd to even contemplate such nonsense.
I tell my children "Of course there aren't any gods" when they ask me god questions. And I dont keep a bible in the house. Its disgusting pulp fiction if you ever get around to actually reading it. Just like the koran.

I'm a believer, a Christian, and to me my faith indeed is real. BUT IT HAS NO PLACE IN ANY SCIENCE COURSE. Sorry for the yelling, but I don't know any other way to be emphatic here. A belief in God cannot be proved, ever, by any reasoning whatsoever. It belongs, in secondary school, in a comparative religion course. In college, it belongs in a department of religion.

In highschool, there is no course on Evolution. It is simply integrated into general sicence and biology.

How would you teach Intelligent Design and Creationism? How would that work? Science teachers who really understand science would not willingly teach it. It would have to be taught by Conservative Christian teachers who are not necessarily science teachers. Would they give a separate course, or just an announcement over the PA? There is really not enoough material to fill up a whole semester.

This is really an absured thing to discuss. Science, philosophy, and religion are all different things, and though there may be some minor overlap, they cannot be regarded as the same or even similar. Although comparative religion might be a good thing for young people to learn in highschool, that is not likely to happen, since Conservative Christians would not tolerate this type of religious study, because it would not necessarily favor their own personal religion.

And I do not think that personal religous studies should be conducted in public schools at tax-payers expense. So what else is left? I guess religious people are just going to have to bite the bullet and go to church!

Darwin was a very intelligent man - and thought about philosophy and religion, as well as the superlative piece of the science that he gave us.

It is clear he became an Atheist - and nothing has surpassed his poetic and inspiring summary of his position than the last paragraph of the 'Origin of the Species':

"It is interesting to contemplate an entangled bank, clothed with many plants of many kinds, with birds singing on the bushes, with various insects flitting about, and with worms crawling through the damp earth, and to reflect that these elaborately constructed forms, so different from each other, and dependent on each other in so complex a manner, have all been produced by laws acting around us. These laws, taken in the largest sense, being Growth with Reproduction; inheritance which is almost implied by reproduction; Variability from the indirect and direct action of the external conditions of life, and from use and disuse; a Ratio of Increase so high as to lead to a Struggle for Life, and as a consequence to Natural Selection, entailing Divergence of Character and the Extinction of less-improved forms. Thus, from the war of nature, from famine and death, the most exalted object which we are capable of conceiving, namely, the production of the higher animals, directly follows. There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being, evolved."

Charles Darwin. "The Origin of Species" pp459.

Irischermenn said:
"It's not mythology to those who belong to a religion, practice their faith, or at least have spirituality (belief in a higher power/supreme being). To believers, it's not myth but, on the contrary, it's real."

Freestinker responds:
And the earth isn't spherical to those who believe it is flat either! Should we teach the flat earth theory as well? After all, let's give equal time to all theories ...

Just because you believe something doesn't make it factually true ... unless you are George Costanza! ID is clearly a religious belief, you said so yourself and religion is pure mythology until proven otherwise.

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

Irischermann said:
"Truly, believers will tell you there's evidence (biblical and non-biblical alike) to prove God exists and He's very real indeed. For as frustrating as this is, non-believers out there still can't disprove God's existence."

Freestinker responds:
Faith alone is good enough for most of the believers I know. Besides, the evidence they bring is always better explained by science. The burden of proof always lies with those making supernatural claims not with non-believers.

Can you disprove the existence of the Easter Bunny or the Tooth Fairy? If you can't, then by your logic, they both exist! Right?

As long as we teach those "theories" along with ID in a mythology class then you've got a deal but like I said, believers probably won't like the context in which their story is told.

Imagine the looks on the faces of the ancient Greeks were they to be taught (and rightly so) that Zeus, Athena and the rest of their gods are just myths. Funny thing is, there's no more evidence for your god than there is for theirs!

--Freestinker

God may not exist.
But Tinkerbell sure does. I feel Her presence everynight when i curl up in bed all snuggly warm and comforted by Her very real presence in my room, in the dark.
No, of course i can't see her...she is not visible the way people are...but I FEEL she's there. and it brings me comfort and joy.Real joy.
Nonbelievers don't know what they're missing.
When folk chuckle and think i'm a fool, I chuckle back, because I KNOW Tinker's with me, ALL the time.
There is no God. There is only Tinkerbell.

Irischermann,

"It's not mythology to those who belong to a religion, practice their faith, or at least have spirituality (belief in a higher power/supreme being). To believers, it's not myth but, on the contrary, it's real. Truly, believers will tell you there's evidence (biblical and non-biblical alike) to prove God exists and He's very real indeed. For as frustrating as this is, non-believers out there still can't disprove God's existence.

So, again, BOTH should be given equal treatment in schools."

There are two problems with this.

1) Just because someone believes something is true does not make either real or true. The fact that someone believes Creationism or ID is true flies against the verifiable evidence. In the scientific method, a hypothesis that is disproved by the evidence must be modified or discarded. The fact that radioactive decay rates in rocks show that the Earth is over 4 billion years old means that God could not have created the Earth 6,000 years ago. There is no reason to teach such blatant myth in science class.

2) It's not a "teaching both" situation. There are probably more Hindus out there than Fundamentalist Christians out there, so perhaps we better teach Hindu Creationism, too . . . and some of my Native American ancestors believed the Great Manitou created the universe, so we MUST teach that one, and so on. Not to mention the many variations of Christian sects. To teach every version of every creation myth in school would mean nothing else got done.

If you want to teach religion, teach at home or in church. Don't waste the time in school where something productive could be done.

~Shawn Cromett

"To believers, it's not myth but, on the contrary, it's real. Truly, believers will tell you there's evidence (biblical and non-biblical alike) to prove God exists and He's very real indeed. For as frustrating as this is, non-believers out there still can't disprove God's existence.

So, again, BOTH should be given equal treatment in schools."

You're making the mistake of confusing metaphysics and science. Science is based on provable, testable fact. Science is not about what people believe, it's about what can be tested and proven- ID is not within its scope. Your comment works both ways- while non-believers may not be able to disprove the existence of G-d, neither can believers scientifically show proof He exists- so we're at an impasse.

Belief varies from religion to religion and often from sect to sect. So whose "real" belief is going to be taught here? religion is something that you learn in your home- what religion you are is a matter of choice. there is no place for this in public school. It doesn't belong there, and freedom of religion suffers by incorporating it into any level of government. there's nothing wrong with a factual discussion of different religions and faiths, but what you're advocating is the promotion of one groups faith over all others. It's unconstitutional and its wrong.

For as frustrating as this is, non-believers out there still can't disprove God's existence.
-----------------

I cannot prove the Tooth Fairy does not exist.
I cannot prove Donald Duck doesn't exist.
I can't even prove behind a shadow of a doubt that Santa Claus doesn't exist.

Does that mean they exist?

There is NOTHING to suggest that a god exists.
There is a great deal that suggests that god is made up by people. and different people make up different gods. History books are full of the evidence that people made up gods, from Apollo to Zeus and Shiva and Hanuman.
Our imaginations are bigger than all outdoors.

Religion is amazing.Its power is awesome.
To think that on September 11 2001,nineteen intelligent,college educated,religious young men,some with PHD's,
could believe so strongly in a god and paradise, up there in the sky somewhere, that they died horrible deaths and killed thousands just to get in.
These were not morons.
They were just seriously religious.
For years supernatural ideas had been drilled into their brains almost hypnotically through groupthink and belief in every word of their ever studied Holy Book. Surely,once one accepts the existence of the supernatural as natural or real,then ones reason must suffer,and one is set up to believe almost anything.
Despite their PHD's, religion turned these men into deranged and murderous idiots.
Lets stop treating religious thinking as something wise and wonderful.It's not. It's ridiculous,irrational and the most dangerous force out there.

Freestinker,

I hear what you're saying but ...

It's not mythology to those who belong to a religion, practice their faith, or at least have spirituality (belief in a higher power/supreme being). To believers, it's not myth but, on the contrary, it's real. Truly, believers will tell you there's evidence (biblical and non-biblical alike) to prove God exists and He's very real indeed. For as frustrating as this is, non-believers out there still can't disprove God's existence.

So, again, BOTH should be given equal treatment in schools.

Back to the topic......

Asking questions that will let Palin fall into Pentacostal Preacher Mode will only help her with the hard Reichwing who are swooning anyway.

Citizens in the model of the gender confused German guy named Iris posting here would just love to here her make some statement committing to an unconstitutional breach of separation of church and state.

Everyone else already knows she is a very dangerously ignorant person with no business anywhere near the Oval Office.

ender

irischermann- I have no grudge. You take offense at whatever I say and that's your problem, not mine. Don't call me names, don't accuse me of things I don't say or believe and we'll have no problem. It's a blog- if you don't want anyone to respond to you, then don't post.

In any event you persist in trying to rewrite the meaning of science and religion because you can't prove your point otherwise. science is not religion-you simply refuse to deal with this point. Creationism and intelligent design are. Period. end of story. No amount of denial or torturous twisting is going to change that. ID has no place in a a public school education because it is religion. Teach it where it belongs- in a religious institution.

Glad you agree with my point about politicians.

If religion is to be taught in schools, it should be in classes on mythology. It could also be included in psychology classes which examine how and why we believe the unlikely, with studies of the power of childhood indoctrination; and why people in different cultures belief different things.
Religious studies should include the history of religions, their beginnings, and how they have used torture and burnings at the stake to further their dogma.

Irischermann,

ID might be a suitable topic for an elective H.S. or College level mythology course if it were taught along side all the other great religious myths but I'm guessing most parents who would support teaching ID won't like it being taught for what it really is ... religious mythology.

-Freestinker

Sparrow,

For the record, I actually agree with an earlier post you made here:

"I really don't think we need to insult Christ or religions. What we do need to do is insist that any candidate understand this basic premise: the privilege of serving in government comes with this caveat- it must be for the good of the country, the whole country, and not for the promotion of individual beliefs. Of course it means many politicians may have to vote against their personal conscience, but until we understand this, we will be fighting the culture wars and losing for a long time to come. At some point everyone has to put aside personal beliefs and needs and wants for the good of the country.

If a politician is unable to do this, he has not business being in government or in a democracy."

I agree with this statement 100%. Any and every elected official should be doing things in the best interests of the American people, not one group over another and, yes, that even includes religious ones. The good of the country must come first.

Again, I agree with you on this point.

-- Irischermann

Sparrow,

My name isn't Iris Schermann. My name is Irischermann, which is German for "Irish Man." Just an FYI.

Ok, so you've got a beef with me from the other blog yesterday and now you're bringing the grudge here. And you told *me* to grow up. Interesting.

Now you're misreading what I wrote. I *never* said ID should be taught in science classes. I believe BOTH should be given equal treatment in the *educational system*. This is totally different.

Sparrow, everyone is entitled to their opinions in this great nation. So why are you jumping all over me for expressing mine in a civil fashion? I'm not attacking anyone here, just discussing.

Since yesterday, you've been taking every opportunity to berate me. *You're doing this because I bruised your ego yesterday.* Somehow bashing me is making you feel better and that's sad. It's a petty and arrogant thing to do. I accused you of trolling and you're proving me right yet again with your newest post.

Please do everyone a favor and let this grudge of yours go. Please don't force innocent people to read your comments of malcontent. Please just take your own advice and grow up and get your own priorities straight.

-- Irischermann

The comment space says it will be displaying my user id but only enters "anonymous."

I think they both should be asked, "Should faith be an issue in this election." The question is open enough to allow creative answers. Like the Rorschach test, answers should reveal deep differences in personalities.

"Religion and science should never be confused, as they serve different purposes culturally and socially speaking, and the study of related subject matter also employs different methodologies."

I agree. Science attempts to explain how while religion attempts to explain why. One of the problems with religion attempting to explain why is that in doing so, it begs the question and assumes that there is a why.

The question "why" often implies agency. For a great number of occurences that religion attempts to explain, why is the wrong question as agency is not involved. The question isn't why a tsunami occurred, but how it occurred.

For such questions, science should be employed. Problems occur when religion is employed to answer questions for which science is better suited.

Mike K.

"One might even say that science and scientific theorems and methods attempt to study, explain, and predict the empirical/material world, whereas religion is founded and has it's deepest meaning in the non-material/spiritual world."

All the same, I believe science *can* be a religion too. There are numerous schools of thought in the world of science (like different denominations within a religion) on top of the various areas of science (chemistry, physics, etc). Some schools agree on where we came from, the origin of existence, while others have different ideas. This is much like the different religions and denominations of the world that have both large and small differences on such matters. All believe they are right but how can that be?

BOTH science and religion claim to have the answers for how our existence came to be but neither can *really* prove their cases. BOTH will disagree with that statement and say they do. One thing is certain for BOTH: for disbelievers there will never be enough evidence but for believers there always will be more than enough evidence.

So, again, since BOTH have the same disposition, I believe, in fairness, they should be given equal treatment in schools.

-- Irischermann

Iris schermann wrote "Doesn't make for a good education? Well, that's your opinion and you're certainly entitled to it. But your statement begs the question: what constitutes a "good education?

Science, despite all it magnificence, can't concretely prove where we (humans) came from, nor can it concretely prove how our existence began. The Theory of Evolution is still just that: a theory. That being said, this theory is nor more plausible than Intelligent Design, another theory."

You obviously have no clue what science is, what the word "theory" means, or what good educational standards are.

Science is not the study of metaphysical questions. That is the function of religion. If you cannot grasp this simple difference, you'll never understand why including creationism or intelligent design in a science curriculum is so wrong. You don't even understand what the word "theory" means.

from wiki: "In science a theory is a testable model of the manner of interaction of a set of natural phenomena, capable of predicting future occurrences or observations of the same kind, and capable of being tested through experiment or otherwise verified through empirical observation. " and "In science, the word theory refers to a comprehensive explanation of an important feature of nature that is supported by many facts gathered over time."

And I repeat, it is not good education to confuse science with religious belief. Our educational system loses credibility if we cannot keep our disciplines and our priorities straight.

(and FYI- the post you quoted was mine. my user name didn't come up)
-sparrow

This last post on religion and science was mine.

I feel compelled to enter the fray briefly as regards the creationism/ID vs science argument.

While I don't believe any form of creationism is likely to make it into public school curriculums anytime soon, I've said in the past that creationism (and intelligent design) are inseparably attached to the wider world of religion, and cannot be fairly reviewed or even discussed in isolation from that much wider spectrum.

That being the case, these concepts would need to be part of a Comparative Religions curriculum, which of course could not be limited merely to Christianity. In fact, all of the world's great religions would need to be given equal treatment regarding similarities and differences regarding symbology, cosmology, rites and rituals, beliefs in general and in particular - essentially a broad comparative and historical coverage.

This would truly be an informative educational undertaking, rather than a very limited exposure to a few highly charged and emotion-laden ideas that have relevance to a relatively limited number of Christian believers.

That would not be education, but would more appropriately be defined, at the very least, as an inappropriate reinforcement of religious ideas that parents and churches are already expounding as the truth.

If the day arrives when studies in comparative religion ever become part of the secondary education curriculum, it would naturally not be part of the science curriculum, but would more appropriately be placed as a 'liberal arts' component of history and social studies.

At the university level, there are of course religion departments that stand on their own academic merits and scholastic requirements.

Religion and science should never be confused, as they serve different purposes culturally and socially speaking, and the study of related subject matter also employs different methodologies.

One might even say that science and scientific theorems and methods attempt to study, explain, and predict the empirical/material world, whereas religion is founded and has it's deepest meaning in the non-material/spiritual world.

Religion is in any event a topic best covered by weaving history, sociology, anthropology, psychology and mythology artfully together as a many-colored fabric with a multitude of similarities and differences.

Religion and science are apples and oranges, in terms of placement in any given educational environment, and particularly where elementary studies are concerned.

Jed-

"I think you should be suspicious of any belief that brings joy. You are likely to be fooled by an illusion that seems wonderful."

Interesting.

Doesn't make for a good education? Well, that's your opinion and you're certainly entitled to it. But your statement begs the question: what constitutes a "good education?"

Science, despite all it magnificence, can't concretely prove where we (humans) came from, nor can it concretely prove how our existence began. The Theory of Evolution is still just that: a theory. That being said, this theory is nor more plausible than Intelligent Design, another theory.

Like I said before, this is a decision state and local governments should decide. There is no reason why BOTH can't be taught. After all, unless the child is going to either a religious or scientific school, students should be getting a LIBERAL EDUCATION, which fits into my definition of a "good education."

-- Irischermann

_________________________________________________

What's a good education? Well it's definitely one that teaches science in science class. You are making a common mistake about the "theory" of evolution. The fact that the life currently found on earth (including humans) is a result of evolution is not a matter of scientific debate. The theory of evolution is a theory just as the theory of gravity is a theory. None of the facts are in dispute and the theory explains them.

I'm not sure what your definition of plausibility is, but I think it's hard to find one that allows evolution, which has significant factual and scientific support, to be on par with intelligent design, which says that we don't know how something came to be, so grandpa in the sky must have made it.

Teaching science does not require the ability to answer every question about the origin of man or the universe. It does prohibit saying that if we currently can't explain something, god must have done it.

If you want students to get a liberal education that includes what major world religions believe, fine. Just don't try to put it into science class.

The last link is a debate between an agnostic and a Christian.

http://www.blubrry.com/player/?e=271811&p=660

""Do you think that religious theories, such as creationism and intelligent design, should be taught along with evolution in public school science classes?"

They're BOTH theories but the decision for whether or not they should be taught should be left up to state and local governments, not federal."

They are both articles of faith and have no place in a science curriculum. They are not within the realm of science and they do not use any methods of research and discovery that define science. And I would object to any child of mine being taught religion in school and believing he has gotten a proper scientific education.

It doesn't make for a good education or give American kids a competitive edge.
------------------------

Doesn't make for a good education? Well, that's your opinion and you're certainly entitled to it. But your statement begs the question: what constitutes a "good education?"

Science, despite all it magnificence, can't concretely prove where we (humans) came from, nor can it concretely prove how our existence began. The Theory of Evolution is still just that: a theory. That being said, this theory is nor more plausible than Intelligent Design, another theory.

Like I said before, this is a decision state and local governments should decide. There is no reason why BOTH can't be taught. After all, unless the child is going to either a religious or scientific school, students should be getting a LIBERAL EDUCATION, which fits into my definition of a "good education."

-- Irischermann

http://www.blubrry.com/player/?e=271811&p=660

Test

Someone wrote:

"I've spent half my life talking to people in various countries around the world about the impact that Christ has had on their lives. And I can say with some certainty that the impact from understanding or appreciating fine art, music, etc., doesn't even begin to compare with the life changing experience of loving Christ. To say that people undergo a 'rebirth' is an understatement indeed."

I know people who experience a similar sort of intense joy and sense of commitment from art and music, and some who get it from physics and chemistry, or from making money. Some people love war more than life itself. I cannot tell with any certainty whether they are more satisfied than you are. How do you know these passions do not "begin to compare"? How can you be so sure? You cannot read other people's minds, or live their lives.

This is not to suggest that love of physics and love of war are morally equivalent, but only that people are passionate about both, and there is no way to gauge their feelings.

The "impact" that Christ has had on people's lives may be great, but in my opinion the impact of public health, chemistry, physics, evolutionary theory, sewers and electricity is greater, albeit not as dramatic. They have brought people more genuine happiness, liberty and self-knowledge than the love of Christ has. As Franklin said, lighthouses do more good than churches.

My original point was that your standard is intuition or gut feeling -- not logic. My intuition is as good as yours. Or, I should say, it makes no sense to compare one intuitive feeling to another, or to rank them. It would be like claiming that my marriage is better than yours, or I enjoy food more than you do.

"I've given up, for the most part, trying to logically validate the Bible to people."

I suggest that you cannot logically validate it, because its value is in your heart. I do not feel the same way about the Bible; I find much of it insipid, or creepy. And my intuitive response is as valid as yours. No argument or logic can demonstrate that you are right and I am wrong, or vice versa.

"I rationalized God away and paid attention to the things I could see and touch. And then I got it. And I can only tell you that my life is now filled with joy instead of happiness."

Well, so is my life. I got both joy and happiness. But in any case, your joy is no evidence that God exists. That's a logical fallacy: appeal to the consequences of a belief, and an appeal to popularity. (To be a dour realist, I think you should be suspicious of any belief that brings joy. You are likely to be fooled by an illusion that seems wonderful.)

- Jed Rothwell

YoYo:

When Voltaire said that if there were no god the people would have to invent one....he was suggesting of course that that is precisely what happens.
The concept of religion as groupthink supports this way of seeing things. One generally believes what ones group believes.
Mormon families rear Mormon children.
Hutterites bring up little Hutterites.
Shia Muslims rear their children to become big Shia Muslims,
and Sunnis rear Sunnis. Catholics produce Catholic kids,Protestants Protestant kids,and so on.
Most of us are indoctrinated in childhood...never
to see reason again.
As far as we know there is no supernatural world
or a place called paradise where we go to play golf when we die.As far as we know we just die and rot.

Reality is not nice, but at least it's real.

""Do you think that religious theories, such as creationism and intelligent design, should be taught along with evolution in public school science classes?"

They're BOTH theories but the decision for whether or not they should be taught should be left up to state and local governments, not federal."

They are both articles of faith and have no place in a science curriculum. They are not within the realm of science and they do not use any methods of research and discovery that define science. And I would object to any child of mine being taught religion in school and believing he has gotten a proper scientific education.

It doesn't make for a good education or give American kids a competitive edge.

God is a fairy tale like the devil is a fairy tale.
And Heaven is a fairy story just like Hell is.

When will Americans get it? They are just as indoctrinated into belief in fairy tales as are Iranians and Saudis and Pakistanis.

Religion is pure bunk.(Mark Twain).

One should recognize that there are no gods.

Our fearful and clueless ancestors made it all up.

When afraid and ignorant, they had no way of making sense of existence; science had not yet been invented...that would take many thousands of years.

It's time we came to our senses. Gods are fiction.

Irischermann wrote:

"Do you interpret our Constitution as an instrument intended to separate church and state?"

It's an instrument intended to uphold the fundamental principles of our naion: Democracy, Justice, Liberty and Freedom.

"Do you believe that the founders established a Christian government and that America should be considered a Christian nation?"

No. This is a *Christian-influenced* nation, not a Christian nation. The national religion of this country is Religious Liberty.

"Do you think that religious theories, such as creationism and intelligent design, should be taught along with evolution in public school science classes?"

They're BOTH theories but the decision for whether or not they should be taught should be left up to state and local governments, not federal.

"Do you believe that parents who wish their children to attend religious schools should receive a tax break to defray the tuition?"

No. It's a school, not a church.

"What do you consider the proper approach for judges to take on legal disputes involving the relationship betwen religion and government?"

One institution is NOT allowed to control or dictate policy to the other. If either tries, then the law is being violated.

"Do you believe that religious interference with government is as dangerous as government interference with religion?"

Most definitely yes.

"Do you interpret our Constitution as an instrument intended to separate church and state?"

It's an instrument intended to uphold the fundamental principles of our naion: Democracy, Justice, Liberty and Freedom.

"Do you believe that the founders established a Christian government and that America should be considered a Christian nation?"

No. This is a *Christian-influenced* nation, not a Christian nation. The national religion of this country is Religious Liberty.

"Do you think that religious theories, such as creationism and intelligent design, should be taught along with evolution in public school science classes?"

They're BOTH theories but the decision for whether or not they should be taught should be left up to state and local governments, not federal.

"Do you believe that parents who wish their children to attend religious schools should receive a tax break to defray the tuition?"

No. It's a school, not a church.

"What do you consider the proper approach for judges to take on legal disputes involving the relationship betwen religion and government?"

One institution is NOT allowed to control or dictate policy to the other. If either tries, then the law is being violated.

"Do you believe that religious interference with government is as dangerous as government interference with religion?"

Most definitely yes.

One should realize there are two spirits of God.

For the Lord is a great God, and a great King above all gods.
In his hand are the deep places of the earth: the strength of the hills is his also.
The sea is his, and he made it: and his hands formed the dry land.
O come, let us worship and bow down: let us kneel before the Lord our maker.
For he is our God; and we are the people of his pasture, and the sheep of his hand. To day if ye will hear his voice,

IN HIS HAND ARE THE DEEP PLACES OF THE EARTH: the strength of the hills is his also.
THE SEA IS HIS, AND HE MADE IT: AND HIS HANDS FORMED THE DRY LAND.
and THE SHEEP OF HIS HAND. To day if ye will hear his voice,

To him the porter openeth; and the sheep hear his voice: and he calleth his own sheep by name, and leadeth them out.
And when he putteth forth his own sheep, he goeth before them, and the sheep follow him: for they know his voice.
And a stranger will they not follow, but will flee from him: for they know not the voice of strangers.

THE SHEEP HEAR HIS VOICE: AND HE CALLETH HIS OWN SHEEP BY NAME
THE SHEEP FOLLOW HIM: FOR THEY KNOW HIS VOICE

“darkness was upon the face of the deep”
“And the SPIRIT OF GOD MOVED UPON THE FACE OF THE WATERS”
“Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters,”
“let it divide the waters from the waters.”
“Let the waters under the Heaven be gathered together unto one place”
“and LET THE DRY LAND APPEAR”
“GOD CALLED THE DRY LAND EARTH”
“the gathering together of THE WATERS CALLED HE SEAS”
“God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life”
“fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven”
“God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth”
“every winged fowl after his kind”

TO DAY IF YE WILL HEAR HIS VOICE,
For the Lord is a great God, and a great King above all gods.
O come, let us worship and bow down: let us kneel before THE LORD OUR MAKER.
For he is our God; and we are the people of his pasture

“IN WHOSE HAND IS THE SOUL OF EVERY LIVING THING, AND THE BREATH OF ALL MANKIND”

“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,”
“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 a river went out of Eden to water the garden; and from thence it was parted”
“and became into four heads.”
“I was made in secret”
“his name Enos”
“then began men to call upon the name of the Lord.”
“Naked came I out of my mother's womb, and naked shall I return thither”
“blessed be the name of the Lord”
“AND ISAAC CALLED JACOB, AND BLESSED HIM”
“AND GOD ALMIGHTY BLESS THEE”
“THE SECRET OF GOD WAS UPON MY TABERNACLE”
“WHEN THE ALMIGHTY WAS YET WITH ME”
“AND GIVE THEE THE BLESSING OF ABRAHAM”
“AND BREATHED INTO HIS NOSTRILS THE BREATH OF LIFE; AND MAN BECAME A LIVING SOUL.”
“the hand of the Lord”
“In whose hand is the soul of every living thing, and the breath of all mankind”
earth and the heavens
GOD ALMIGHTY
“NAKED CAME I OUT OF MY MOTHER'S WOMB, AND NAKED SHALL I RETURN THITHER”
“THE HAND OF THE LORD”
“IN WHOSE HAND IS THE SOUL OF EVERY LIVING THING, AND THE BREATH OF ALL MANKIND”
heavens and of the earth
ALMIGHTY GOD
“and BREATHED INTO HIS NOSTRILS THE BREATH OF LIFE;”
“THE SPIRIT OF GOD IS IN MY NOSTRILS”
“ALL THE WHILE MY BREATH IS IN ME”
“AND MAN BECAME A LIVING SOUL.”

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

“darkness was upon the face of the deep”
“And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters”

And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.
And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.

“Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters,”
“let it divide the waters from the waters.”

And God said, Let the waters under the Heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.
And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good.

“Let the waters under the Heaven be gathered together unto one place”
“and let the dry land appear”
“God called the dry land Earth”
“the gathering together of the waters called he Seas”

And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.
And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

“God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life”
“fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven”
“God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth”
“every winged fowl after his kind”

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.
And a river went out of Eden to water the garden; and from thence it was parted, and became into four heads.

“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,”
“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 a river went out of Eden to water the garden; and from thence it was parted”
“and became into four heads.”

And to Seth, to him also there was born a son; and he called his name Enos: then began men to call upon the name of the Lord.

“his name Enos”
“then began men to call upon the name of the Lord.”

My substance was not hid from thee, when I was made in secret, and curiously wrought in the lowest parts of the earth.

“I was made in secret”

As I was in the days of my youth, when the secret of God was upon my tabernacle;
When the Almighty was yet with me, when my children were about me;

“the secret of God was upon my tabernacle”
“When the Almighty was yet with me”

And said, Naked came I out of my mother's womb, and naked shall I return thither: the Lord gave, and the Lord hath taken away; blessed be the name of the Lord.

“Naked came I out of my mother's womb, and naked shall I return thither”
“blessed be the name of the Lord”

Moreover Job continued his parable, and said,
As God liveth, who hath taken away my judgment; and the Almighty, who hath vexed my soul;
All the while my breath is in me, and the spirit of God is in my nostrils;

“All the while my breath is in me”
“the spirit of God is in my nostrils”

“And Isaac called Jacob, and blessed him”
“And God Almighty bless thee”
“And give thee the blessing of Abraham”

Who knoweth not in all these that the hand of the Lord hath wrought this?
In whose hand is the soul of every living thing, and the breath of all mankind.
Doth not the ear try words? and the mouth taste his meat?
With the ancient is wisdom; and in length of days understanding.
With him is wisdom and strength, he hath counsel and understanding.

“the hand of the Lord”
“In whose hand is the soul of every living thing, and the breath of all mankind”

earth and the heavens
God Almighty
“Naked came I out of my mother's womb, and naked shall I return thither”
“the hand of the Lord”
“In whose hand is the soul of every living thing, and the breath of all mankind”

heavens and of the earth
Almighty God
“and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life;”
“the spirit of God is in my nostrils”
“All the while my breath is in me”
“and man became a living soul.”

And Isaac called Jacob, and blessed him, and charged him, and said unto him, Thou shalt not take a wife of the daughters of Canaan.
Arise, go to Padanaram, to the house of Bethuel thy mother's father; and take thee a wife from thence of the daughters of Laban thy mother's brother.
And God Almighty bless thee, and make thee fruitful, and multiply thee, that thou mayest be a multitude of people;
And give thee the blessing of Abraham, to thee, and to thy seed with thee; that thou mayest inherit the land wherein thou art a stranger, which God gave unto Abraham.

“And Isaac called Jacob, and blessed him”
“And God Almighty bless thee”
“And give thee the blessing of Abraham”

Will God hear his cry when trouble cometh upon him?
Will he delight himself in the Almighty? will he always call upon God?
I will teach you by the hand of God: that which is with the Almighty will I not conceal.
Behold, all ye yourselves have seen it; why then are ye thus altogether vain?

The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one;
The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels.
As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world.

And Lamech said unto his wives, Adah and Zillah, Hear my voice; ye wives of Lamech, hearken unto my speech: for I have slain a man to my wounding, and a young man to my hurt.
If Cain shall be avenged sevenfold, truly Lamech seventy and sevenfold.

“Lamech said unto his wives”
“Hear my voice; ye wives of Lamech, hearken unto my speech”
TRULY LAMECH SEVENTY AND SEVENFOLD

And all the days of Lamech were seven hundred seventy and seven years: and he died.

Then came Peter to him, and said, Lord, how oft shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? till seven times?
Jesus saith unto him, I say not unto thee, Until seven times: but, Until seventy times seven.

JESUS SAITH UNTO HIM, I SAY NOT UNTO THEE
UNTIL SEVEN TIMES: BUT, UNTIL SEVENTY TIMES SEVEN.

And the Lord said unto Moses, Is the Lord's hand waxed short? thou shalt see now whether my word shall come to pass unto thee or not.
And Moses went out, and told the people the words of the Lord, and gathered the seventy men of the elders of the people, and set them round about the tabernacle.
And the Lord came down in a cloud, and spake unto him, and took of the spirit that was upon him, and gave it unto the seventy elders: and it came to pass, that, when the spirit rested upon them, they prophesied, and did not cease.
But there remained two of the men in the camp, the name of the one was Eldad, and the name of the other Medad: and the spirit rested upon them; and they were of them that were written, but went not out unto the tabernacle: and they prophesied in the camp.
And there ran a young man, and told Moses, and said, Eldad and Medad do prophesy in the camp.
And Joshua the son of Nun, the servant of Moses, one of his young men, answered and said, My lord Moses, forbid them.
And Moses said unto him, Enviest thou for my sake? would God that all the Lord's people were prophets, and that the Lord would put his spirit upon them!
And Moses gat him into the camp, he and the elders of Israel.
And there went forth a wind from the Lord, and brought quails from the sea, and let them fall by the camp, as it were a day's journey on this side, and as it were a day's journey on the other side, round about the camp, and as it were two cubits high upon the face of the earth.
And the people stood up all that day, and all that night, and all the next day, and they gathered the quails: he that gathered least gathered ten homers: and they spread them all abroad for themselves round about the camp.
And while the flesh was yet between their teeth, ere it was chewed, the wrath of the Lord was kindled against the people, and the Lord smote the people with a very great plague.
And he called the name of that place Kibrothhattaavah: because there they buried the people that lusted.
And the people journeyed from Kibrothhattaavah unto Hazeroth; and abode at Hazeroth.

“And the Lord said unto Moses, Is the Lord's hand waxed short?”
“THOU SHALT SEE now whether my word shall come to pass unto thee or not.”
“the Lord came down in a cloud, and spake unto him”
“and took of the spirit that was upon him, and gave it unto the seventy elders”
“and it came to pass, that, when the spirit rested upon them”
“they prophesied, and did not cease”
“But there remained two of the men in the camp, the name of the one was Eldad, and the name of the other Medad”
“and they prophesied in the camp.”
“My lord Moses, forbid them”
“Moses said unto him, Enviest thou for my sake?”
“would God that all the Lord's people were prophets”
“and that the Lord would put his spirit upon them!”
“there went forth a wind from the Lord, and brought QUAILS FROM THE SEA”
“and let them fall by the camp”
“while THE FLESH WAS YET BETWEEN THEIR TEETH,”
“ERE IT WAS CHEWED”
“THE WRATH OF THE LORD WAS KINDLED AGAINST THE PEOPLE”
“AND THE LORD SMOTE THE PEOPLE WITH A VERY GREAT PLAGUE”
“BECAUSE THERE THEY BURIED THE PEOPLE THAT LUSTED.”

When Abimelech had reigned three years over Israel,
Then God sent an evil spirit between Abimelech and the men of Shechem; and the men of Shechem dealt treacherously with Abimelech:
That the cruelty done to the threescore and ten sons of Jerubbaal might come, and their blood be laid upon Abimelech their brother, which slew them; and upon the men of Shechem, which aided him in the killing of his brethren.

“THEN GOD SENT AN EVIL SPIRIT BETWEEN ABIMELECH AND THE MEN OF SHECHEM”
“the men of Shechem dealt treacherously with Abimelech:”
“THAT THE CRUELTY DONE TO THE THREESCORE AND TEN SONS OF JERUBBAAL MIGHT COME”
“and their blood be laid upon Abimelech their brother, which slew them”
“and upon the men of Shechem, which aided him in the killing of his brethren.”

Then went Abimelech to Thebez, and encamped against Thebez, and took it.
But there was a strong tower within the city, and thither fled all the men and women, and all they of the city, and shut it to them, and gat them up to the top of the tower.
And Abimelech came unto the tower, and fought against it, and went hard unto the door of the tower to burn it with fire.
And a certain woman cast a piece of a millstone upon Abimelech's head, and all to brake his skull.
Then he called hastily unto the young man his armourbearer, and said unto him, Draw thy sword, and slay me, that men say not of me, A woman slew him. And his young man thrust him through, and he died.
And when the men of Israel saw that Abimelech was dead, they departed every man unto his place.
Thus God rendered the wickedness of Abimelech, which he did unto his father, in slaying his seventy brethren:
And all the evil of the men of Shechem did God render upon their heads: and upon them came the curse of Jotham the son of Jerubbaal.

“And Abimelech came unto the tower, and fought against it”
“and went hard unto the door of the tower to burn it with fire.”
“A CERTAIN WOMAN CAST A PIECE OF A MILLSTONE UPON ABIMELECH'S HEAD,”
“AND ALL TO BRAKE HIS SKULL.”
“Then he called hastily unto the young man his armourbearer, and said unto him”
“DRAW THY SWORD, AND SLAY ME, THAT MEN SAY NOT OF ME”
“A WOMAN SLEW HIM. AND HIS YOUNG MAN THRUST HIM THROUGH, AND HE DIED.”
“THUS GOD RENDERED THE WICKEDNESS OF ABIMELECH”
“WHICH HE DID UNTO HIS FATHER”
“IN SLAYING HIS SEVENTY BRETHREN:”
“And all the evil of the men of Shechem did God render upon their heads”
“and upon them came the curse of Jotham the son of Jerubbaal.”

And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God:
Praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, and watching thereunto with all perseverance and supplication for all saints;
And for me, that utterance may be given unto me, that I may open my mouth boldly, to make known the mystery of the gospel,
For which I am an ambassador in bonds: that therein I may speak boldly, as I ought to speak.
But that ye also may know my affairs, and how I do, Tychicus, a beloved brother and faithful minister in the Lord, shall make known to you all things:
Whom I have sent unto you for the same purpose, that ye might know our affairs, and that he might comfort your hearts.

“THE SWORD OF THE SPIRIT”
“WHICH IS THE WORD OF GOD”
“PRAYING ALWAYS WITH ALL PRAYER AND SUPPLICATION IN THE SPIRIT”
“AND WATCHING THEREUNTO WITH ALL PERSEVERANCE AND SUPPLICATION FOR ALL SAINTS;”
“And for me, that utterance may be given unto me”
“that I may open my mouth boldly, TO MAKE KNOWN THE MYSTERY OF THE GOSPEL,”
“Tychicus, a beloved brother and FAITHFUL MINISTER IN THE LORD”
“SHALL MAKE KNOWN TO YOU ALL THINGS”

MY SERVANT MOSES IS NOT SO, WHO IS FAITHFUL IN ALL MINE HOUSE.

Then Samuel took the horn of oil, and anointed him in the midst of his brethren: and the Spirit of the Lord came upon David from that day forward. So Samuel rose up, and went to Ramah.
But the Spirit of the Lord departed from Saul, and an evil spirit from the Lord troubled him.
And Saul's servants said unto him, Behold now, an evil spirit from God troubleth thee.
Let our lord now command thy servants, which are before thee, to seek out a man, who is a cunning player on an harp: and it shall come to pass, when the evil spirit from God is upon thee, that he shall play with his hand, and thou shalt be well.
And Saul said unto his servants, Provide me now a man that can play well, and bring him to me.
Then answered one of the servants, and said, Behold, I have seen a son of Jesse the Bethlehemite, that is cunning in playing, and a mighty valiant man, and a man of war, and prudent in matters, and a comely person, and the Lord is with him.
Wherefore Saul sent messengers unto Jesse, and said, Send me David thy son, which is with the sheep.
And Jesse took an ass laden with bread, and a bottle of wine, and a kid, and sent them by David his son unto Saul.
And David came to Saul, and stood before him: and he loved him greatly; and he became his armourbearer.
And Saul sent to Jesse, saying, Let David, I pray thee, stand before me; for he hath found favour in my sight.
And it came to pass, when the evil spirit from God was upon Saul, that David took an harp, and played with his hand: so Saul was refreshed, and was well, and the evil spirit departed from him.

“Then Samuel took the horn of oil, and anointed him in the midst of his brethren”
“and the Spirit of the Lord came upon David from that day forward”
“But the Spirit of the Lord departed from Saul”
“and an evil spirit from the Lord troubled him.”
“Behold now, an evil spirit from God troubleth thee.”
“Let our lord now command thy servants, which are before thee”
“to seek out a man, who is a cunning player on an harp:”
”and it shall come to pass”
“when the evil spirit from God is upon thee, that he shall play with his hand, and thou shalt be well.”
“And it came to pass, when the evil spirit from God was upon Saul”
“that David took an harp, and played with his hand”
“so Saul was refreshed, and was well, and the evil spirit departed from him.”

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.”
“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:”
“But whoso hearkeneth unto me shall dwell safely, and shall be quiet from fear of evil.”

The last anonymous was from Gerry.

Religion forces a person to become a schizophrenic: To divide his mind ("spirit") into a real and a fictional part, or into an honest and a mendacious part.

I am not having any of this: As long as I have a healthy mind, the ability to perceive and think (which of course includes acknowledging the limits of logical thinking!) I refuse to have others usurp this state, the only one I think can merit the attribute of "human dignity".

A mass psychosis which produces the crusade, the inquisition, the belief in fairy tales to justify murder and genocide (by even idealizing genocide in the Old Testament!), which generates monsters like Hagee and his idiotic ilk, is something I hope will go away some day like a dangerous disease. (I won't live to observe it, but I have this confidence).

From Concerned the Christian now Liberated:

Witches, Holy Cows, Holy Ghosts/Spirits, Pretty Thingies, Ascending/Descending Bodies, Wine to Blood and Bread to Flesh, it is all ancient Voodoo with some first century Palestine Hoodoo!!

Hopefully, JM, BO, SP, and JB don't buy into any of it, but they should at least be asked about it and should promise to protect those who believe in some, all or none of this nonsense.

Jed,

I'm the last Anon. Odd that only Susan's thread isn't posting our monikers. Mine btw. is misspelled.

Hi Jed,

Well said. I'm not at all troubled by what others believe, have never been. The problem is with conversionism, the hype we're seeing in this election, faith-based initiatives, etc. I think we need to separate church and state for real and for good.

In frightening times such as these, it's unsurprising that some might turn to religion who otherwise might not have. For them it represents an island of order and promise in a sea of chaos.
When they take that next step, wanting to legislated their relgious beliefs, they become dangerous to themselves and others. All they have to do is take a good hard look at theocratic states.

In some, it was unthinkable that a theocratic turn would occur.

Jed Rothwell's right. People lie about their religions. I did it for years.
In a religious community atheists or agnostics or anyone questioning the 'truth' of the Bible, bothers people. They don't like others to examine and question beliefs that they cherish. Just have faith they say; which comes across to me more like hope or a wish, which, if you believe in, will come true.
Utter nonsense. Fear is the motivation. Fear of death and the nonlife that awaits us all.
Religion is reality management, like doing drugs.
Sure it feels good, thats why people get addicted to either, and sometimes both.

YOYO

I was the anonymous writer below.

It's tough on Palin. Like most folk she believes the twaddle she was raised to believe. Hard not too, when everyone around you all say the same thing; Jesus is Lord - or Allahu Akbar. You get told it enough - you end up believing it to be absolute truth, instead of the silly old religious twaddle that all supernatural-magical religions are.
Which one you believe-in depends on where you were born and what your folks were made to believe before you.

Groupthink and childhood indoctrination are almost irresistible; a kind of cultural hypnosis that most folk never get over.
There should be a law against it. And maybe one day there will be.

Great questions all!

** !moon! cox.net **

Jed,

From a Baptist perspective, I can tell you that most people I know don't view a lack of a relationship with Jesus Christ as some sort of fault or that it makes someone a lesser person (in the literal sense).

I've spent half my life talking to people in various countries around the world about the impact that Christ has had on their lives. And I can say with some certainty that the impact from understanding or appreciating fine art, music, etc., doesn't even begin to compare with the life changing experience of loving Christ. To say that people undergo a "rebirth" is an understatement indeed.

I've given up, for the most part, trying to logically validate the Bible to people. Although I will join the fray when someone who obviously has no clue what the Bible says starts quoting scripture in an effort to validate their own opinion. But for half my life, I was the outsider looking in. I rationalized God away and paid attention to the things I could see and touch. And then I got it. And I can only tell you that my life is now filled with joy instead of happiness.

Rich blessings.

[By the way, you have to PREVIEW these messages to add an ID.]

Arminius wrote:

"'How do you know that the thing that you believe are true, really are true?' And I would insist on reasonable and valid answer.'

Well, if you asked me that, I, a believer, do not think that I could give you an answer that you would accept. There is no proof, in the classical sense. The spiritual is not amenable to logic."

With all due respect, wouldn't it be simpler to say that faith is based on intuition or gut feeling, and not logic? Saying that it is "not amenable to logic" seems tantamount to saying it is not logical.

And so what if it isn’t logical? Many things are not logical. Some are out-and-out irrational, such as art, love, or rooting for the Boston Red Sox. Nobody insists such things are logical, and we sure as heck do not try to convince other people that they are "true." There is nothing more "true" about one baseball team than another. Whether you love your wife is entirely a matter of taste and your own inner feelings, and if other people do not share that love (because they have never met your wife, let us say) that does not diminish your love or belittle your feelings.

It seems to me that only religion is held to this weird standard: that it is not amenable to logic yet other people are expected to yield to argument and believe it, as if it were logical, and not a matter of taste. If you paint a picture or write a symphony, your feelings may be hurt if others do not appreciate it, but you not hold it against them, or see this as a fault, or deficit, or a spiritual void in their personality. Why then, do religious believers have this overpowering urge to make others agree with them? Whence their pseudo-logical arguments? I suppose Dawkins is correct. He says proselytizing is built into the meme, because a religion would not survive without it. If no Christian cared whether other people are Christian or not, other people would soon drift away to other religions or atheism.

It makes sense to try to convince others that your political beliefs are correct, because we have elections, and you want your candidate to win. But I cannot see why it matters whether other people share your religion or not. Probably this is because I have no religious instinct. I resemble a tone deaf person who has no opinion about Beethoven or the Rolling Stones because they both sound like undifferentiated noise to him. (See Oliver Sacks' latest book "Musicophilia.")

- Jed Rothwell

AHA!!! I guess I'm not as dumb as I thought!

Susan,

I think you are absolute right, we the people, do have a right to know! And we need to ask specific questions, not open-ended ones that candidates can spin every which way they wish. I thought you had a very good sampling in your essay, but at the same time I fear that these type of questions will not be asked.

Well, let's see if this works!

Oh well, I guess there are still some glitches. The message in the comment section said I will be displayed as Nevermore53, but somehow that is not happening.

Gaby

Hi Arminius and Daniel ITLD,

Susan did a good thing to protect her blog by requiring that you have a valid e-mail address. I see that I have become Nevermore53 which was the original nickname I gave myself registering with the WAPO.

In any case, I think that Susan's questions are valid and I believe that one can seperate one's faith from one's official duties. I do it in my line of work all the time and I don't understand people who can't separate the two.

Good to see you!

Gaby

Indeed, those would be telling questions to ask a candidate. I can only hope that church and state issues come up more than flag pins.

Someone wrote:

"Of course we should know about a candidates faith. It can tell many things about a candidate including their honesty and consistency."

You cannot know about candidate's faith. All you can know is what the candidate says his faith is. U.S. politicians often lie about their faith, claiming to go to church more often than they do, or publicly embracing religion while privately ignoring it.

Ask the politician about faith and he will tell you whatever he thinks you want to hear. This is true of anything else you might ask, but other issues can be independently fact-checked. When a politician claims she said "no thanks" to a bridge, you can check the record and see if she really did. But you cannot read the politician's mind, so you have no way of knowing whether she is honestly religious or merely faking it. Even attending church is no proof. Many people attend church just for show, and they do not sincerely believe in God.

Religion is entirely in the mind of the believer; it is a mental state, like love, admiration, or contempt. Anyone can lie about what is in their own mind. Perhaps in the future we will learn to use an MRI machine to determine whether politicians really do believe in God, but I doubt they will submit to it, and I think it would be best to leave such private beliefs alone.

"I want to know if a person believes something is morally wrong but won't create laws against it, and why they believe that way."

That has nothing to do with religion per se. Many people believe that X or Y is morally wrong for non-religious reasons, but they do not favor creating laws against it, because such laws would be unenforceable, or they would cause more harm than good. Abortion is an example. It is impossible to prevent women from aborting unwanted fetuses because you can never tell when a woman is pregnant and is relatively easy to induce an abortion. Women in Japan did it hundreds of years ago. In order to enforce antiabortion laws you have to test every woman every month, and impose other draconian measures. Otherwise, all you accomplish is to prevent poor or helpless women from getting abortions, and you endanger their lives. Middle-class and wealthy women will always have abortions on demand.

"I would also like to know where how they create laws if they don't look to their faith in some way."

If they are atheists, they look to rationality and their consciences, not faith. It works quite well.

- Jed Rothwell

Daniel ITLD,

OK, that's all right with me, thanks. I agree that bible quotes don't cut it for the answer - which may not exist, as you say.

Arminius

Perhaps, I mis-spoke when I said I would insist on a reasonable and valid answer. I am not sure that there is a final answer to this question. I meant that merely quoting from the Bible, or reciting platitutdes to run out the clock would not be acceptable answers.

I just wanted to get people's mind's working and see what they might come up with.

The type of answer that you gave seems reasonable.

"Do you believe that religious interference with government is as dangerous as government interference with religion?"

I think this is the key question on religion that needs to be asked of all the candidates.

Daniel ITLD said:
""How do you know that the thing that you believe are true, really are true?"
And I would insist on reasonable and valid answer."

Well, if you asked me that, I, a believer, do not think that I could give you an answer that you would accept. There is no proof, in the classical sense. The spiritual is not amenable to logic.

If I were the moderator during the debate, and I were required to ask a religious question, I would ask them both:

"How do you know that the thing that you believe are true, really are true?"

And I would insist on reasonable and valid answer. If I did not get it, then I would persist, knowing that if they would start to answer honestly, then we could get to know alot about their brains work. I am sure that we could spend the entire 90 minutes just on this question, if I would be allowed to squeeze some real answers out of them.

(And by the way, I have figured out how to get my name to appear in my post, instead of "anonymous" but I think that people who post here should not have to know a technique; it should be automatic).

10 posts and only one had the courtesy to use a handle. I might be back when WaPo/Newsweek figures out how to force handles here.

And, not to put too fine a point on it, but in trying to determine whether secular laws are 'really' based in Biblical ones, have a look at what in America *aren't* considered criminal 'sins' compared to what a 'Biblical' society might consider the same sort of sacrilege as things which might happen to align with the public interest, like, stealing, first degree murder, etc...

If it were based in *Biblical* morality, where'd all the dietary restrictions go? The mandatory church attendance? Ritual ablutions? The prayers one's supposed to do on certain occasions, The patriarchal polygamy, the dowries?

These are all things which are not part of *secular* morality *because* there's no compelling secular interest or basis for them, or in fact they may run counter to the interests of the people to enforce.

Anonymous:

"Traditionally most all laws come from our beliefs. What is the basis of morality. All questions I would like to ask the author."

This is a commonly-promulgated notion by conservative churches which just isn't true of America. Our Constitution is based on very secular objectives, precisely because of the horrors of then-recent European history where religion and politics came together in centuries of horror and division and oppression.

American law is not based on religious moral authority, except perhaps in the very broadest sense that our Constitution represents a recognition of unalienable human rights, as inherent to our natures. As 'created.'

But the Constitution says pretty explicitly what the purpose of our government and law are *for,* and where the authority derives: from the consent of the governed as people with unalienable individual rights, not conferred or removable by any religious authority.

The purpose: 'We the people,' (here's the who)

'in order to form a more perfect union, establish Justice,domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of Liberty to ourselves, and our posterity,' (here's the why and to what purpose,)

'do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United states of America.' (here's what is done.)

Our laws do not derive from religious authority or a sense of 'moral commandments.'

Where religious morals align with these purposes and the consent of the governed, great. But they are not the root of these laws.

Where religious dogma runs counter to these purposes, well, too bad. If a majority rise up and declare mixed polyester leisure suits are an 'abomination' according to God and fashion, ...likewise, too bad. That's not what this government is *for.*

I really don't think we need to insult Christ or religions. What we do need to do is insist that any candidate understand this basic premise: the privilege of serving in government comes with this caveat- it must be for the good of the country, the whole country, and not for the promotion of individual beliefs. Of course it means many politicians may have to vote against their personal conscience, but until we understand this, we will be fighting the culture wars and losing for a long time to come. At some point everyone has to put aside personal beliefs and needs and wants for the good of the country.

If a politician is unable to do this, he has not business being in government or in a democracy.
-sparrow

I would really like to know how the author decided that is is undemocratic to ask someone about their faith. Then she goes on to ask a bunch of questions that are basically based on faith. You faith matter either way, whether you have it or not. Part of faith is saying what things are applied to Government laws and what can't and shouldn't be governed.

Of course we should know about a candidates faith. It can tell many things about a candidate including their honesty and consistancy. I want to know if a person believes something is morally wrong but won't create laws against it, and why they believe that way. I would also like to know where how they create laws if they don't look to their faith in some way.

Of course her questions show the author is very interested in your faith. She just wants to hear the answer that your faith means so little it will never lead to any action. It's a fair view but not widely accepted. Her article is just a round about way of explaing it.

I would really like her to respond and tell me where her convictions come from. If laws can't come from faith and religios views, where do they come from? Traditionally most all laws come from our beliefs. What is the basis of morality. All questions I would like to ask the author.

Susan Jacoby wrote: "I do not care whether Joseph Biden believes in the Roman Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation, which states that bread and wine are actually transformed into the body and blood of Christ during the Mass. I would care very much, however, if he suggested that this religious belief should be presented as a fact in a public school science class. And I do not care that Sarah Palin has worshipped at a church where she received a blessing to guard her against witchcraft during her campaign for the governorship of Alaska. I would care very much, however, if Palin wanted students to open their school day with an invocation against witchcraft."

While there can be no official religious 'test' for holding office, don't you think that it's appropriate for sane, rational individuals into account? You provide examples which show candidates that are: a) deluded, b) liar, c) non-rational, d) incapable of critical-thinking, e) some of the above, f) all of the above.

And this doesn't bother you?

There is sort of a dilemma here. Is it possible for a politician of faith to make decisions detached from their religious beliefs? If this is not possible, it would seem important to know exactly what each candidate's beliefs are. Accordingly then, perhaps the most germane question would be: "Are you prepared make decisions unbiased by your personal faith?"
Government should act in our interest not god's. Church and state separation begins within our politicians' egos. Biden/Palin the VP and Biden/Palin the Christian should be discrete organisms. Otherwise, we must judge the candidate's beliefs to know what we are getting.

Mrs. Palin... do you believe that a cosmic Jewish zombie, who is his own father, can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh (in the form of a cracker) and telepathically tell him that you accept him as your master so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was tricked by an infinitely malevolent entity (disguised as a talking snake... with legs) into eating a piece of magical fruit from an enchanted tree... (etc.)... and that there is something horribly wrong with people who ARE NOT so gullible and droolingly stupid as to believe such outrageously ridiculous codswallop?

Which of the following are features of your world-view, and your understanding of how we got to where we are today?...

[ ] a universe in which all that exists are the earth and heaven (Genesis)
[ ] solid 'firmament' structure (the sky) separating the earth from heaven (terrarium earth) (Genesis)
[ ] stars are little tiny lights, attached to the firmament (sky) for omens and portents
[ ] the world/universe poofed into existence around 4,000 BC by an invisible, magical, all-powerful, supernatural sky-fairy (god)
[ ] talking snakes (with legs)
[ ] talking donkeys (Genesis)
[ ] shepherd staff turning into an asp
[ ] demons chased out of people and into pigs
[ ] woman turning into a pillar of salt
[ ] dinosaurs co-existing with man
[ ] friendly spirits
[ ] evil spirits
[ ] walking on water
[ ] multiplying loaves and fishes
[ ] food falling from the sky
[ ] conception by a child-molesting ghost
[ ] people raising from the dead
[ ] the sun stopping in its tracks
[ ] parting the sea
[ ] people being bodily sucked up into heaven (which, by the way, lies 'right up there', on the 'other side' of the sky)
[ ] world-wide flood that drowned the earth to a depth of 40 feet above the tallest mountain (Genesis)
[ ] people fabricated from a dust bunny and a rib (Genesis)
[ ] magical tree of knowledge (Genesis)
[ ] invisible, magical sky-fairy (god) speaking from a burning bush

In the article,
Susan Jacoby
wrote:
"a candidate's religious beliefs are relevant to political campaigns only if he or she wishes to impose those beliefs on other American citizens"

All candidates
wish to impose some-one's beliefs on other citizens,
. . .
including when,
for example:

1.) These beliefs effect pre and post birth babies:
http://www.davidmacd.com/catholic/abortion_general.htm

or when

2.) These beliefs involve following or rejecting what is written in the Bible:

e.g.
Deuteronomy 30:19
... choose life,
so that you and your children may live
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy30:19;&version=31;

A candidate's religious beliefs are relevant
because:
some-one's beliefs will be imposed on other citizens.

test

Senator Biden and Governor Palin,

Do you believe the Adam and Eve story?

Noah?

Abraham?

The "Prophets",

Fortune tellers?

"Pretty/ugly, wingie thingies aka angels/satans? aka Moroni, Gabriel, Beetlejuice

Heaven?

Hell?

Physically changing bread into human flesh and via incantations?

Witches?

Reincarnation?

Holy cows?

Castes?