The Devil In Ms. And Mr. Jones

"Take Bernie Madoff. Two weeks ago, New York magazine portrayed Madoff on its cover as the infernal creature, and the caricature of the devilish investment guru proved to be one of the most popular covers that has ever been published by the magazine. But really, Madoff is just another example. albeit a high-profile one, of the evil that lurks in the hearts of men. In his case, the prime motivator must have been, could only have been, greed. And it's a safe bet that some (though by no means all) of his investors were not purely innocent victims but were motivated by greed themselves--or at least by determination not to look a gift horse in the mouth."

Ah, yes. And when will we see Poulson's picture on the cover of New York magazine, Poulson, who delayed pulling the plug until he could accrue more millions via bad paper? And the presidents, Congressmen, and Senators who made it all possible, indeed made it happen? And the golden parachute retirement package recipients? And Foreclosure Phil Gramm? And all the other purely innocent, never-to-be-thought-of-as-corrupt-and-greedy to whom our money has gone? When will we see their pictures on the cover of New York magazine? (Never mind the possibly greedy investors, who didn't look the Trojan gift horses in the mouth and suffered the consequences, those of the ilk you mention regarding Madoff.)

Bernie Madoff is a bad dude who belongs in jail, but he didn't plunge this nation into economic chaos and continue to benefit in the process. Those I mention did. And they never went to trial. And they never went to prison. And they never will.

And speaking of magazine covers, "devils incarnate," should we consider the more-than-1,000,000 dead in Iraq and Afghanistan? Would Bush and Cheney merit magazine covers? Haliburton, which secured contracts for Iraqi oil before there was an Iraqi government to sign one? I never could quite figure that out.

Questions for the ages....

Hi Persiflage,

Thanks for the reply and the links--I didn't know there were two Suzukis.

As for the third, the automotive, I gather it isn't familiar with Zen!

Regards,
Farnaz

For those that missed this link from a thoughtful poster via the preceeding Jacoby thread - very valuable resource as regards the founding ideas related to Humanistic Psychology.

An entire online book - see Chapter VII for a review of Maslow, et al.... ideas on Self-Actualization, what it is, and how to achieve it.

http://www.csun.edu/edpsy/Gowan/titlez.html

Hi Farnaz! The two Suzukis are important figures in the historical growth of Zen in the USA.

Shunryu Suzuki founded the San Francisco Zen Center, which is still extant as a locus of Soto Zen in America. Somewhat earlier, D.T. Suzuki had become renowned here as a scholar and promulgator of Zen, by way of his affiliation with the Rinzai sect.

Here you have the two main schools of Zen practice represented by masters of each tradition. Pretty cool! Unfortunately their personal qualities don't extend to vehicles with the same surname......

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

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D.T._Suzuki

Persiflage,

Hell is not punishment,
it's training.

-Shunryu Suzuki

'nuf said, I think. Time to move on to a new topic. But--do you know much about the author? Have done a wee bit of research, but haven't discovered much. Influenced some glitterati, it seems, back in the day.

Oh, what the heck! Just one, then:

Antiphon for the Angels

Spirited light! on the edge
of the Presence your yearning
burns in the secret darkness,
O angels, insatiably
into God’s gaze.

Perversity
could not touch your beauty;
you are essential joy.
But your lost companion,
angel of the crooked
wings – he sought the summit,
shot down the depths of God
and plummeted past Adam –
that a mud – bound spirit might soar.

- Hildegard of Bingen

Thomas Baum, Frederic,

Thomas Baum, you are correct viz the source of the Marxian paraphrase. However, see Wikipedia. There appears to have been a surprising earlier source.

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Groucho_Marx

FREDERIC2

You wrote, "If Cheney, Bush, Coulter, Rush, Robertson, Swaggard et alii are images of god, god “in his infinite love” would simply have to be regarded as too stupid to create even those monsters. I furiously refuse to be their co-creation"

How can you refuse what you are? You can deny it, but they and everyone else is part of creation or "whatever" you want to call it.

You also wrote, "Was it Chico Marx who said “I am not going to join a club which is willing to accept a guy like me”?"

I am not positive, but I believe that it was Groucho Marx that said words to that effect.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

„God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them“. (Genesis, supposed to be the word of God).

If Cheney, Bush, Coulter, Rush, Robertson, Swaggard et alii are images of god, god “in his infinite love” would simply have to be regarded as too stupid to create even those monsters. I furiously refuse to be their co-creation.

Was it Chico Marx who said “I am not going to join a club which is willing to accept a guy like me”?

The angels terrified the ancients, Rilke only repeats the fear of the mystic when he confronts the absolute. Yet the rebellious hosts, the demons, the lords of this world--like Satan, who was only one of many--initially appear very seductive.

It is odd.

A Cradle Song

The angels are stooping
Above your bed;
They weary of trooping
With the whimpering dead.
God's laughing in Heaven
To see you so good;
The Sailing Seven
Are gay with His mood.
I sigh then kiss you,
For I must own
That I shall miss you
When you have grown.

William Butler Yeats

________________________

The Angel

I dreamt a dream! What can it mean?
And that I was a maiden Queen
Guarded by an Angel mild:
Witless woe was ne'er beguiled!

And I wept both night and day,
And he wiped my tears away;
And I wept both day and night,
And hid from him my heart's delight.

So he took his wings, and fled;
Then the morn blushed rosy red.
I dried my tears, and armed my fears
With ten-thousand shields and spears.

Soon my Angel came again;
I was armed, he came in vain;
For the time of youth was fled,
And grey hairs were on my head.

William Blake

Persiflage asked: “What do men really know of angels?’’

Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel
Ordnungen?...

Who, if I cried out, would hear me among the angels'
hierarchies? and even if one of them pressed me
suddenly against his heart: I would be consumed
in that overwhelming existence. For beauty is nothing
but the beginning of terror, which we still are just able to endure,
and we are so awed because it serenely disdains
to annihilate us. Every angel is terrifying.

And so I hold myself back and swallow the call-note
of my dark sobbing. Ah! Whom can we ever turn to
in our need? Not angels, not humans;

Rainer Maria Rilke

NT beliefs about Satan and his spirit minions presuppose a tiered universe with Ouranos "heaven" at the top/outside, beyond the fixed stars, and our material world at the bottom/core. Between these realms are the air - closest to earth - and then the planetary circuits, both of which are infested with hostile spiritual beings, composed of astral fire (the lightest element in the physics of the time). The NT typically names them "archons", a term that pervades Gnostic speculations. The cultural influences at play here are Persian through an Hellenic seive.

In the NT, the Tanakhic figure of *the satan* may have been identified with the archon closest to the earth, i.e. in the atmosphere between it and the moon:

"the ruler (archon) of the power of the air" - Eph.2:2
τον αρχοντα της εξουσιας του αερος

He may or may not be identical with the being described in the Fourth Gospel as "the ruler of the cosmos" - John 12:31, 14:30, 16:11
ο αρχων του κοσμου

As such he fills a role analogous to that explored in the Gnostic literature - a tyrant over the world of matter in which "spiritual" human beings are trapped.

St Paul himself subscribed to this hierarchical cosmology, and its attendant demonology:

"For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the powers, against the world forces of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places." - Eph.6:12

Comes across as rather abstract in English, but the original Greek referred to actual beings, at the head of whom are those old Gnostic favourites, the archons ("rulers").

This rich mythos is integral to the whole Christ story, as he is the ideal spiritual human - the Ouranic "son of man" - who actually descends incognito through the hostile territory governed by the astral and planetary archons, and materialises on earth. On earth, he's a sort of undercover agent for Ouranos, sowing "spiritual" seeds in the hearts of those destined to be saved from the "wrath to come", in which Ouranos would literally unite with earth, displacing all those pesky archons in between.

Unfortunately for contemporary Christianity, the Christ story (and its Satan) is rooted in this antique cosmology, which is now obsolete in FACTUAL terms. If Christianity at large had a higher view of myth, this would not be a problem. But as many contemporary Christians insist on the facticity of their mythos, they make it a target for ridicule.

Please don't overlook Samael, a fallen angel of supreme accomplishments - variously said to be The Grim Reaper, the serpent in the garden, and even Satan by some accounts - although as Farnaz says, Satan is more of a job description than a specific angelic being.

In Gnostic lore, Samael is the first Archon of creation known as Ialdaboath e.g. the Demiuge - cast down below the Abyss by Zoe (daughter of Sophia/wisdom) for falsely claiming the title of Supreme Creator.

But what do men really know about angels?

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

On Satan

One of the many translations of heb. "the Satan" is "obstructionist." In the Hebrew Bible and in Judaism, Satan like everything else, is a creation of God. He represents the obstruction, the problems in all their myriad forms on the path to Tikkun Olam (healing, perfecting the world, which is the task of Jews). The principle of obstruction exists so that Human may have free will.

There is no hell in Judaism. "Sheol," mentioned in the Tanakh (Hebrew Bible, Bible, "OT") is not to be equated with hell.

The serpent in Genesis is neither "the Satan" (common noun) nor the later "Satan" (obstructionist, prosecuting attorney, accuser, challenger, etc.).

For a good introduction to the myth of the serpent, the serpent in Judaism (Genesis), the serpent in Christianity, see:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serpent_(symbolism)

Susan,

The russian poet never thought of "Evel Knievel" the stunt driver then did he? And I'am sure this gentleman had at least walked into the room once or twice to meet people and stated "Hi, I'm Evil" Although the first name has a different spelling if your "evel" does it matter?

Great pointless article, you need to challenge yourself to do better

Moderate,

You:
"I must be off. I will check in after another month or so to see if Farnofrio "et al." have given up the ghost."

Don't bother dropping in to check; I'll still be here in a month, Nongod willing.

You:
"The search for the historical Ulysses... Now that's rich, isn't it? So just in case you thought that Crossan, Funk, and Borg were original, their kind of silliness was clearly abroad two thousand years ago among the Greeks and Romans."

Sifting the absolute claims made about Jesus is hardly comparable to Graeco-Roman pedantry about Homeric heroes. Far more at stake, certes.

As you well know, no Hellene ever claimed Odysseus was the Alpha and Omega who would come to judge the living and the dead, nor that he was the only way to Father Zeus, nor that those who have not his pneuma have not eternal life, nor that he was the predestined basileos of all the Hellenes, nor that he was the Logos incarnate. In other words, if you're going to take a swipe at historical Jesus scholarship, try comparing apples with apples.

Hate to go all Timmy2 on you, but your *historical Ulysses* jab is a strawman (and silly trite chastened me should know ;) )

You:
"I must be off."

As cheese in a greenhouse...

Hi Ivri 5748,

I've been reading your posts. I didn't reply to the one about Bangladesh because I wasn't sure of where you were coming from. I can't defend Pakistan's role in that horror, but I think you understate India's. India instigated it; without India, it wouldn't have occurred.

You're correct that the US supported Pakistan, but that was because India, at the time, was aligned with the Russia and China.

Together, the Indian soldiers, "freedom fighters," and Pakistani soldiers raped Bangladesh. It is, as you seem to know, a no man's land, at present.

I'm replying to you on this thread because I couldn't locate your original post.

Have you had much experience in Asia?

Farnaz

Moderate, Old Boy,

"I must be off. I will check in after another month or so to see if Farnofrio "et al." have given up the ghost."

You've been reading too much Seneca. Be advised that I intend to keep my ghost right where it belongs and wish the same for you and yours, Onofrio's and his, "et al['s]" and theirs.

May I suggest you drop the much divided Lucius and pick up Plautus, "The Twin Menachmi? More fitting to the occasion, methinks.
_________

Desultory reading is delightful, but to be beneficial, our reading must be carefully directed.

-Seneca

"Lucius Annaeus Seneca the Younger (ca. 4 B.C.-65 A.D.) was a Roman philosopher important in his own day as tutor and "prime minister" of the emperor Nero."

Hmmmm?????

Seneca lived in an ancient time, in another mind-set, without the benefit of the freedom of the press, the printing press, the internet, search engines, and the rigid, historical, contemporary requirements for making conclusions about past events.

Those interested in the historical, simple, preacher man aka Jesus based on said rigid, review criteria are directed to

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/theories.html

mtio.com/articles/bissar24.htm

wiki.faithfutures.org/index.php?title=Jesus_Database

faithfutures.org/HJstudies.html

earlychristianwritings.com/

All I was doing Arminius was responding to your "I'm here to learn" statements.

So, what is it you wanna learn?

Is some knowledge off limits then, if you have faith? Are there some things you would rather not know? I don't get it.

I'm older than you Arminius, and I'm not trying to screw you around. You're a Celt for godsake, so get a grip.

I was just recommending a great little book, that might delight you as much a it delighted me. That's all.

You don't think I was trying to get you to come on back to our side do you Arminius?
Perish the thought. That would be devious of me, and sly and sneaky - and Celts, as you know, are not like that.

Take care, Be ready.

.

CCNL old fellow,

I ran across a passage in Lucius Annaeus Seneca's On the Shortness of Life that you should find interesting:

"It was once a foible confined to the Greeks to inquire into what number of rowers Ulysses had, whether the Iliad or the Odyssey was written first, whether moreover they belong to the same author, and various other matters of this stamp, which, if you keep them to yourself, in no way pleasure your secret soul, and, if you publish them, make you seem more of a bore than a scholar."

The search for the historical Ulysses... Now that's rich, isn't it? So just in case you thought that Crossan, Funk, and Borg were original, their kind of silliness was clearly abroad two thousand years ago among the Greeks and Romans.

Especially, did you get the part about: "...if you keep them to yourself, in no way pleasure your secret soul, and, if you publish them, make you seem more of a bore than a scholar."? There is a lesson for you to consider in that.

Well, as the sage wrote, Life is Short, and must needs be filled with the good food for thought rather than a two-thousand year warmed over "search for the historical" Ulysses, Jesus, Mohamed, Buddha, ...

I must be off. I will check in after another month or so to see if Farnofrio "et al." have given up the ghost.

I commend Seneca generally to you, and to Pagan Place. A lot of wisdom there from a good Pagan to contemplate.

Hi, Colinnicholas,

Perhaps a short bit of my background might be appropriate.

I am 65. I was a non-believer for over three decades, before a spiritual experience changed my life. I won't go into that, but it eventually led me back into Christianity. It took four readings of the Gospels, over two years or more, before I bought into the teachings of Jesus. The heart of my belief is the Gospels - all else in the bible is either commentary, history, wisdom, poetry, mythology, or madness.

I know where non-believers come from. Been there, done that. That is why I accept them and do not criticize. But my path is set - and believe me, faith is not a destination, it is a journey, and it is not easy. And it is MY path.

Arminius.

You ever read Dawkins? All his books aren't necessarily about his atheism.

I'm just reading his River Out of Eden, a skinny little book of a mere 160 pages about how evolution works.

I've heard you say, more than once, "I'm here to learn." I am too I guess. But I also read all the time, just to understand stuff.
You know - I think reality beats fantasy every time. Everything is just so awesome, fantasy just gets in the way. Like why waste time on the supernatural - when maybe there is no supernatural; when right before our eyes is the amazing real world.

Dawkins doesn't go into all that - he's writing just about the real, but in such a way that makes one feel in total awe at what IS.

Check it out. I think you'd enjoy it.

Hi Pam.

Yeah. That's how I lost my yoyo id.

One day I commented, hit submit and saw my real name come up. I felt like I was caught in the headlights with my pants down.
But I thought - what the hell. Susan had made a good case for just being who we are anyway, with the masks off. So let it be.

I dropped into Cal Thomas's blog yesterday as you suggested, and enjoyed watching Gladerunner go a few rounds with TBaum.
It was fun. TB was outclassed but didn't have what it takes to appreciate that fact.
I made a few comments there, and another today, that might give you a giggle.

Currently reading "River Out Of Eden" which Dawkins wrote twenty years ago, and is terrific for the clarity of his writing and his ability to make the reader visualize this river of genes, and the way the river sometimes splits off into another stream that eventually can lead to another species. I hadn't realized he was such a good writer. But clarity is his thing, like he's determind to have the reader understand what really happens.

Wish religious folks would read Dawkins and give their Bibles a rest. Reality is so beautiful.

Hi Colin,
Yes, I'm the one who used to be just "Pam."

When they decided to make us register (mainly to get rid of JJ, I think, although he makes an occasional comeback as someone else), my name was apparently not acceptable, so I added the first two letters of my last name. Thanks for the kind words.

I can't remember about Chris Everett - I was thinking that he was a doctor - pediatrician, maybe - but I may be thinking of someone else.

I loved Duckphup - saved some of his comments. I still see him pop up on the general commentary now and then, but it's sporadic.

Yes, I remember you well as Yoyo - always one of the good guys. I did realize that you were one and the same.

As for Celts, most of my ancestors are Scottish and Welsh, but a few Sassenach slipped in there, too. :)

Arminius and Cymru Colin,

Instead of pining for auld lang syne, perhaps you Celtic arbiters of threadworthiness could BE THE CHANGE.

I thought *Celts* were supposed to have a special way with words. So if this Celticity's all it's cracked up to be, let's see some bardly bravura.

Onofrio,

Vah! Denuone Latine loquebar? Me ineptum. Interdum modo elabitur.

Ivri :}

Ivri,

"Sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"

Pallida mors.

Revera linguam latinam vix cognovi.

Colinnicholas,

I see no reason why we should not get along, fellow Celt. Welsh - pretty cool, although your ancestors, the bowmen, gave the Scots a lot of trouble, especially at Falkirk! Ah, well, when the Scots were not fighting the English, we were cheerfully fighting each other anyway.

Chris E was pretty cool. Norrie has reappeared here recently. I miss the Pagans also.

Onofrio:

Sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

Pamsm.

Thanks for your comment earlier. I do appreciate it.

Arminius;

You too Arminius.

Pam, then you are the Pam who previously posted as just 'Pam'? I wasn't sure.
I was a fan of yours. I was impressed at many of the exchanges between you and Chris E. who I thought was awesome. Wasn't he a physicist or something?
There were others whose names I forget. but Duckphup was very clever too.
Norrie Hoyte posted here for the longest time. Brilliant man. Also a lady named Meg had a lot of fresh things to say. And - what was his name - Morley something. A real class act,and funny. I was Yoyo back then, and used to go after T.Moses Baum a lot of the time. But I quit that.

Arminius;

Nice to see you take some responsibility
for your part in feeding into the Agatha Christy-like mystery - "Who is F?"
As if it means anything. Anyway, I'm a Celt too, born and raised in Wales.
So I guess we should try to get along

Cymru am Byth.

Regards

Ivri,

Kind of you to construe me in such league as Persiflage Abu el-Silsila (pardon my Arabic) and Pam, the Muse of the Fact - betwixt their poles I reel, sans net. Such flattery may waft me to a fatal plummet. Zesta.

"Satan's p--s, pug, your sauce is dangerous!" (from somewhere in Gormenghast) :)

Arminius,

You:
"Onofrio, I do not understand you. With your undisputed intelligence, your profound knowledge, how the living Hell can you follow such as Farnaz? Are you indeed the same? Writing styles denies this, but the emotional intent supports it."

Rest ye, claymorist. I'm not "following" anyone. All I did was share a little of my Satanic *testimony*; relevant, methinks, given that this thread is about Hisher Majesty.

I've just now checked in, and can see the hurly burly's not done, nor battle lost and won. I have no taste for this wing of the melee de merde, would rather sit it out and sip single brimstone malt.

Ivri has a score to settle with CCNL, a genuine casus belli (excuse my Latin, sir scholar), and has spun an amusing pasta conceit to do so. Best leave them to it, else it's bellum omnium contra omnes again. And only deus could vult that, being a thigh-high blood-wader and all.

(The serpent rounds hisher self into an O and kisses hisher tailtip.)

In the meantime, Satanael anyone? Ialdabaoth? Ahriman?

DITLD:

"This blog is interesting, but it is not so life and death as you seem to make it."

It was interesting, not so much anymore. Mr. Mark, Gerry, Wiglaf, et al, left a long time ago. Now, Farnaz pops in for a few seconds and disappears. Lots of bi*ching and trolling. Not so interesting anymore.

Persiflage and Onofrio, that's about it. Maybe Pamsm.

DITLD:

You write, "It's Spring. So why don't you just relax, and enjoy life?"

Okay.

Ivri5768

Susan Jacoby did not mention you specifically. She just gave some wise advice, in general.

This blog is interesting, but it is not so life and death as you seem to make it.

It's Spring.

So why don't you just relax, and enjoy life?

BREAKING NEWS FROM CCNL (Church of Clancy, Nusbaum, and Luigi):

CCNL (Church of Clancy Nusbaum and Luigi) is fast approaching the promised line. He and his co-religionists are headed toward New Brunswick, New Jersey to begin the intuning which is to occur every month for six months prior to the great event.

These most solemn services will begin with "Al dente, Dio" (probably inaudible to human ears), the inspirational hymn penned by Mother Millie Macaroni, sister of the Sainted Archbishop Luigi (of the Lasagna.) As per usual, the services will end with the choral Luigian "Hmmm."

A visit from the Holy Sauce will take place within the sixth-month-preparatory period. He has been in seclusion meditating on Regeneration and is expected to speak Ex Cucina. In the meantime, StemCellians are urged to read the Four Garlics in the New Tetrazzini.

We wish CCNL peace in the name of the Pasta, the Meatballs, and the Lasagna.

In solidarity,

Hmmm

CCNL should ask itself two questions:

1. WWLD (What would Luigi do?)

2. WWIPCD (What would the Illiterate Preacher Cell Do?)

It should get back to us in six months with its answers.

The delusions are with Farnaz as exhibited by her many aliases.

Once again but for the last time on this thread:

(as requested by Susan Jacoby who is kind of enough to take time to respond the commentaries about her thoughts on a wide range of topics. On future threads where the delusional Farnaz participates, we will remind the other bloggers about the "devilish" Farnaz and her subterfuging methods once a day for the duration of said thread.)

Again: Farnaz aka Farnaz2 aka Observer12 aka Observer31 aka Yael1 aka ivri5678 aka Billy8 was caught "red handed" using all these aliases some threads ago. After this, she said she would no longer participate in said discussions. As seen, this has not happened but we continue to remind everyone about this "devilish" woman as a service to our fellow bloggers.

Addendum:

There's nothing unusual in the sort of writing I mentioned. I could have chosen specimens from several bloggers on this page.

Farnaz does differ in that she plays with certain tropes and topoi that are beyond most of us, though not Onofrio or Persiflage, I daresay.

KJohnson3 writes:

However, while I have detected Farnaz-style writing in the posts of both ivri5768 and "Yael" (a poster from other threads), I can't agree that this style is present in the writings of any of the other posters currently on this thread.
(By way of explanation, as a former college writing instructor and current academic book editor, I'm accustomed to examining and analyzing people's prose for clarity, style, and consistency of personal voice. It's not much of a leap to apply these skills to the messages posted here and to find similarities if they exist.)
Posted by: kjohnson3 | March 27, 2009 11:47 AM
_______

No, it isn't much of a leap. If we compare Kjohnson3's writing style to that of Farnaz and me, we note striking simiarities, among them the frequent use of complex sentence beginning with dependent clauses, polysyndenton, etc.

As a current senior editor for a prestigious publisher, I'm accustomed to....

Susan Jacoby:

You write: "By directing so much attention to the question of who is posting under what screen name, you are giving this person, or these people, what they want."

Odd that you assume the correctness of Arminius, who with the troll, CCNL, are alone in their assumptions of my multiple identities, Onorion's, Sparrows, and Farnaz's.

Because Onofrio understands multiculturalism, because Sparrow is an assertive Jew, they are all me, Farnaz, etc.

And KJohnson3 is a CCNL style Troll, who bashes hither and yon, most recently Mormons. Bigots do shimmer forth on this blog.

Here is my post to Colinicholas. I suggest you read it. Carefully.

Btw., for those who miss Mr. Mark, he left because of the Christian bigotry. That's what he said.

Susan Jacoby:

Colinicholas writes:
If you clowns ignored the 'Who is Farnaz/" game, which means nothing, we might get some good discussion on here.

Well said, except there is no "Who is Farnaz game" for the clowns to ignore. The "clowns" are CCNL and Arminius who started the game and are continuing it. To end it, they'd have to ignore their delusions. Can they do that? I posted as I always have and these two keep dogging me with this crap.

The pathetic part about Arminius is that Farnaz never took a swipe at him. She replied to bigots. So do I. She had a Jewish identity. So do I. She's interested in Asia and the Middle East. So am I. Ergo, I'm Farnaz.

These two are parochial to a point I can't imagine. Sparrow is also Farnaz because she's Jewish and has a strong Jewish identity. Onofrio is Farnaz because he understands multiculturalism.
These two are stuck back in Christian America of the 1950s.

If CCNL and Arminius quit dogging me and posting from their delusional perspectives, then these clowns would end this nonsense, and we could get on with it. Most important for me, maybe Farnaz would blog here again.

Otherwise, except maybe for Onofrio and Persiflage, we're in small town bigoted "Christian" America of the McCarthy era.

EFavorite shows up here occasionally, but never stays - I wish she would. And I miss Mr Mark too. He and I had many a good conversation, despite him being an atheist and me a believer. That guy is really smart.

Hear, hear, Colin.

I, too, miss the people you mention - especially Mr. Mark.

But there are still some intelligent voices about. Some good stuff from Gladerunner on Cal Thomas's thread right now.

Don't you stop contributing, please!

You make alot of sense, Ms. Jacoby.

I believe that there are possibly several people, using several names interchangeably, for the purpose of disupting tnis blog. I am not sure why anyone would do such a thing, but they are being pretty successful. I think this kind of behavior is probalby directed more at the Washington Post, than at any one individual who posts here. You cannot really blame victims, for becomeing unknowingly engtangled in these passive-aggressive traps set up over the past few months.

FROM SUSAN JACOBY:

I would suggest that the best way to deal with people who post under multiple usernames is to stop obsessing about them. Why not just direct your comments to people on the thread with whom you have good conversation, instead of replying to the kind of bloggers who, obviously having too much time on their hands, try to hog the thread with their generally foolish comments?

By directing so much attention to the question of who is posting under what screen name, you are giving this person, or these people, what they want. What they want is attention, whether of a negative or positive kind. When you think about that, it's quite pathetic. Imagine having so little going on in your real life that you concentrate on how to attract attention in the virtual world? Why not just ignore these pests and get on with talking about what interests you?

While I agree that the Farnaz thing detracts from the focus of the discussions here, I do have to say that I think the person who used to post as Farnaz has continued to post under other names.

My basis for this conclusion is writing style, patterns of word choice, and a repetitive tendency to self-victimization using a tone that is consistent from one post to the next and one thread to the next.

There is quite a lot about the messages posted by ivri5768 that is reminiscent of Farnaz in exactly these ways.

However, while I have detected Farnaz-style writing in the posts of both ivri5768 and "Yael" (a poster from other threads), I can't agree that this style is present in the writings of any of the other posters currently on this thread.

(By way of explanation, as a former college writing instructor and current academic book editor, I'm accustomed to examining and analyzing people's prose for clarity, style, and consistency of personal voice. It's not much of a leap to apply these skills to the messages posted here and to find similarities if they exist.)

colinnicholas,

Your post on the ongoing 'Mystery Poster' mess that I have been involved in, really got my attention. I apologize to you, to all on this blog, and to Susan Jacoby, for all my off-topic posts. No more stupid games.

Colinicholas writes:

If you clowns ignored the 'Who is Farnaz/" game, which means nothing, we might get some good discussion on here.

Well said, except there is no "Who is Farnaz game" for the clowns to ignore. The "clowns" are CCNL and Arminius who started the game and are continuing it. To end it, they'd have to ignore their delusions. Can they do that? I posted as I always have and these two keep dogging me with this crap.

The pathetic part about Arminius is that Farnaz never took a swipe at him. She replied to bigots. So do I. She had a Jewish identity. So do I. She's interested in Asia and the Middle East. So am I. Ergo, I'm Farnaz.

These two are parochial to a point I can't imagine. Sparrow is also Farnaz because she's Jewish and has a strong Jewish identity. Onofrio is Farnaz because he understands multiculturalism.

These two are stuck back in Christian America of the 1950s.

If CCNL and Arminius quit dogging me and posting from their delusional perspectives, then these clowns would end this nonsense, and we could get on with it. Most important for me, maybe Farnaz would blog here again.

Otherwise, except maybe for Onofrio and Persiflage, we're in small town bigoted "Christian" America of the McCarthy era.

CCNL should ask itself two questions:

1. WWLD (What would Luigi do?)

2. WWIPCD (What would the Illiterate Preacher Cell Do?)

It should get back to us in six months with its answers.

BREAKING NEWS FROM CCNL (Church of Clancy, Nusbaum, and Luigi):

CCNL (Church of Clancy Nusbaum and Luigi) is fast approaching the promised line. He and his co-religionists are headed toward New Brunswick, New Jersey to begin the intuning which is to occur every month for six months prior to the great event.

These most solemn services will begin with "Al dente, Dio" (probably inaudible to human ears), the inspirational hymn penned by Mother Millie Macaroni, sister of the Sainted Archbishop Luigi (of the Lasagna.) As per usual, the services will end with the choral Luigian "Hmmm."

A visit from the Holy Sauce will take place within the sixth-month-preparatory period. He has been in seclusion meditating on Regeneration and is expected to speak Ex Cucina. In the meantime, StemCellians are urged to read the Four Garlics in the New Tetrazzini.
We wish CCNL peace in the name of the Pasta, the Meatballs, and the Lasagna.

In solidarity,

Hmmm

Why do you morons play this silly game?

This used to be the most interesting thread at WPO. At least discussions used to take place, arguments happened, and ideas were swapped. But the loonies have taken over.

If you clowns ignored the 'Who is Farnaz/" game, which means nothing, we might get some good discussion on here.

We can only pine for the days of Chris Everett, Mr Mark, EFavourite, and eveh Jihadist. And Timmy too. No chats anymore

Just games.

Just "Who is the mystery phantom?".Like who cares?

Oh please.

Arminius

Remember a few weeks back, during the previous posting and commentary meltdown, do you remember what you said about people posing here?

I hestitate to remind you or bring it up again, for fear of myself getting dragged into this.

Don't even reply to me. Just sit tight, and see what happens next.

Satan must definitely be at work here. Everybody going at one another...Give it a break please. All this nastiness just plays into religious people's hands. It would not surprise me if a bunch of religious people log on here and say "God help you all"....

Again: Farnaz aka Farnaz2 aka Observer12 aka Observer31 aka Yael1 aka ivri5678 aka Billy8 was caught "red handed" using all these aliases some threads ago. After this, she said she would no longer participate in said discussions. As seen, this has not happened but we continue to remind everyone about this "devilish" woman as a service to our fellow bloggers.

This will continue until she apologizes for her transgressions and promises to stop using the alias subterfuges.

Arminius-"Because I support gay rights, I am accustomed to being called gay, even though I am straight."

Well, well. The closet door's unlocked. Just push it open. Maybe your dark, fake world will change.

"Enough of this, Farnaz. I have better things to do than constantly counter your lies with reason, which you cannot understand nor counter. You have given me nothing, nothing at all, but despite, self pity, and hatred. No facts, no reasons, no analysis, just a monkey in the zoo throwing feces. Honest to God, you make CCNL look good.
As I think I said before, I'll see you in Hell. I look forward to it."

I doubt it. You're already there, and there you'll remain until you face who you are.

You're pathetic.

CCNL should ask itself two questions:

1. WWLD (What would Luigi do?)

2. WWIPCD (What would the Illiterate Preacher Cell Do?)

It should get back to us in six months with its answers.

CCNL, AKA TOM

Seeing as you and the rest of the Embryonics are on coming to the end of the line, I will follow the model of the Numinous Nusbaum, and wish you bon voyage.

May you find peace in the name of the Pasta, the Meatballs, and the Lasagna.

In Solidarity,

Hmmm

Enough of this, Farnaz. I have better things to do than constantly counter your lies with reason, which you cannot understand nor counter. You have given me nothing, nothing at all, but despite, self pity, and hatred. No facts, no reasons, no analysis, just a monkey in the zoo throwing feces. Honest to God, you make CCNL look good.

As I think I said before, I'll see you in Hell. I look forward to it.

BREAKING NEWS FROM CCNL (Church of Clancy, Nusbaum, and Luigi):

CCNL (Church of Clancy Nusbaum and Luigi) is fast approaching the promised line. He and his co-religionists are headed toward New Brunswick, New Jersey to begin the intuning which is to occur every month for six months prior to the great event.
These most solemn services will begin with "Al dente, Dio" (probably inaudible to human ears), the inspirational hymn penned by Mother Millie Macaroni, sister of the Sainted Archbishop Luigi (of the Lasagna.) As per usual, the services will end with the choral Luigian "Hmmm."

A visit from the Holy Sauce will take place within the sixth-month-preparatory period. He has been in seclusion meditating on Regeneration and is expected to speak Ex Cucina. In the meantime, StemCellians are urged to read the Four Garlics in the New Tetrazzini.

We wish CCNL peace in the name of the Pasta, the Meatballs, and the Lasagna.

In solidarity,
Hmmm

Arminius:"Onofrio, I do not understand you. With your undisputed intelligence, your profound knowledge, how the living Hell can you follow such as Farnaz? Are you indeed the same? Writing styles denies this, but the emotional intent supports it.

Ah, of course! Onofrio is here. Farnaz has called forth her lap-dog poodle, to drool and pant at her every phrase, and lift his hind leg at all that his goddess hates."
_______

You're a sick hater, Arminius. I ain't Onofrio. Don't have his gentlemanly ways. You're deep in it. What would you know about a "writing style"? He can write. She can write. You can't even read yourself.

Get help,Arminius. Try the Gay Men's Health Center.

Actually Farnaz aka Farnaz2 aka Observer12 aka Observer31 aka Yael1 aka ivri5678 aka Billy8 was caught "red handed" using all these aliases some threads ago. After which she said she would no longer participate in said discussions. As seen, this has not happened but we continue to remind everyone about this "devilish" woman as a service to our fellow bloggers. This will continue until she apologizes for her transgressions and promises to stop using the alias subterfuges.

Arminius: The matter of your bigotry is evident. Every Jew is Farnaz. I'm Farnaz. Sparrow is Farnaz. Anyone who agrees with her is also Farnaz. Your constant OTing, disparaging the Hebrew Bible, while whining endlessly when anyone questioned the NT speaks for itself.

You don't remember things, confuse people, places, events typical of a heavy drinker. Your gayness is readable by anyone who packs. JJ was far from alone. As you said, "people" think you're gay. What's despicable is that you masquerade as a heterosexual gay rights advocate.

You're a coward too. You join in with others to pick on bloggers.

I'm not Farnaz, Arminius. She's probably a stronger person than I am, but I don't go away. Have some guts. You're pathetic. A pathetic loser, who probably squandered his life. Sorry about that, but it's not my fault.

You said you weren't gonna post here anymore, so don't. Or do, but get off my case. I never bothered you. You came after me, and I'm coming backatcha. What did you think would happen? Jeez, what do you think this is? An f'ing sewing circle?

Oh, yes, Farnaz, while you're in the neighborhood, please submit evidence as to why I am gay and why I am an alcoholic.

Can you? CAN YOU? I doubt it.

Interesting, Farnaz, interesting. You enlist the help of JJ, that prison-spawned white supremacist, who undoubtedly hates Jews as well. He is a self-proclaimed homophobe, and you have allied yourself with him. Interesting.

Give me some proof of your accusations. Can you? Exactly what have I said that shows that I hate? Quote me, go for it. You give me nothing except reason to pity you. All lies, a five-year old whining in a corner.

You have given me no evidence that you are not a bigot. You are no challenge at all.

Onofrio, I do not understand you. With your undisputed intelligence, your profound knowledge, how the living Hell can you follow such as Farnaz? Are you indeed the same? Writing styles denies this, but the emotional intent supports it.

Ah, of course! Onofrio is here. Farnaz has called forth her lap-dog poodle, to drool and pant at her every phrase, and lift his hind leg at all that his goddess hates.

Satan saved me from Christmongery.

An unjustly maligned entity, certes.

I recommend all the Christ-besotted try a consultation.

Toss those study Bibles; Satan really is the most brilliant exegete. And despite what you may have heard, his-her services do not cost your soul. They're free...free indeed.

Farnaz,

To be brutally honest, you are not worthy of my hatred. Being part Celtic, I am quite capable of hate, but reserve it for the worst. You are... well, you are merely pathetic.

Pamsm,

You nailed CCNL perfectly - he wants angry response. The internet's most boring troll.

But, on the other hand, ivri5768 IS Farnaz, in my opinion. The styles of writing are identical, the subject matter is the same, and the ad hominem attacks, replete with unsupported lies, are all like Farnez. Believe me, I have endured her acidic hatred too much to miss this.

Arminius:"Thus with you - you use 'gay' as an insult, thus exposing yourself to the world as a common, garden-variety, gutter-dwelling, homophobic bigot.
Is that really the best you can do? Sad"

Your a hater, Arminius. Your no Thomas Baum, not in your wildest dreams. Your a bigot and a self-hating gay. JJ isn't the only one who pointed both things out. He's also not the only one who pointed out your inner nastyness.

A lot of people on this blog support gay rights. You're the only one anybody thinks is gay. Man, it's obvious. A lot of gays come out and say who they are instead of accusing and hating. Or patronizing other gays.

You're a miserable piece of work.

Pamsm:

"For the record, I don't think you're Farnaz - you're not as smart as she is."

I'm wounded, but acknowledge her superior brain. But I don't just cut and paste my own stuff. I have new material from time to time. I post the news on CCNL's StemCellian congregation as I get it.

He's a bigot, sexist, homophobe, anti-Semitic, anti-Muslim OCD jerk, etc. He's been dogging me like he dogged Farnaz every time she posted. But I'm not Farnaz.
I'm gonna get him. Not vice versa. I'm gonna get him. As long as it takes. He's a hater.

Re: Your posts
There's a certain rigidity in your thinking. That's the biggest problem. You're smart, but your rigidity keeps you locked in. You refuse to listen.

Arminius-" You can group me with Thomas Baum"

Not possible. Thomas Baum doesn't hate.

Ivri5768,
"CCNL has made it his StemCellian mission to hound me whenever I post. Though not OCD, I shall respond in kind. Always, until he's off this blog once and for all."

So, because he behaves like a two-year-old, you respond in kind? I hate to tell you, but you won't drive him away - he loves this.

I addressed you, rather than him, because I *know* that he's hopeless. I thought you might benefit from having it pointed out that lowering yourself to his level was just diminishing you. I see that I was wrong.

If you would take your own advice about scrolling and just ignore him, he might not stop, but at least you wouldn't be so hot and bothered about it.

I've seen blogs in this forum where the *entire* Comments section is nothing but your back-and-forth cut-and-paste bs with CCNL.

Whether or not you like my posts is immaterial. I fully expect that most in this forum don't like them. At least they're original, and not just endlessly repeated pastes. Hyper-rational? Oh, don't throw me in the briar patch, Br'er Fox!

For the record, I don't think you're Farnaz - you're not as smart as she is.

Farnaz, you really are a piece of work.

Because I support gay rights, I am accustomed to being called gay, even though I am straight. This does not bother me. But many homophobes assume I am gay because of my stand on gay rights. Thus with you - you use 'gay' as an insult, thus exposing yourself to the world as a common, garden-variety, gutter-dwelling, homophobic bigot.

Is that really the best you can do? Sad.

Arminius: Arminius: "Right you are, this endless spamfest of Bun-Bun(CCNL) and ivri5768 is getting very tiresome. BTW, it is pretty certain that ivri5768 is Farnaz."

Your nastyness to me won't solve your sexuality problem. You can gang up on other bloggers, bi*ch and moan, call every Jew Farnaz, everyone who agrees with her Farnaz, and you'll still be gay.

Deal with it.

Colin,

Counterww posted, "There is NOTHING you can do to convince me that God's love is not real." in reply to your post.

I seldom am in sync with Counterww, but I agree with him here. Don't ask for proof, it is not there. But it is true to me, and I know it is true to all. Classical reasoning does not apply here. You can group me with Thomas Baum, if you wish - we are similar, but not nearly parallel.

Colin, dude

There is NOTHING you can do to convince me that God's love is not real.

I can't help those that let their intellect rule their lives to the point that they think in their elitist heads that nothing can exist out there.

What really gets me is the dismissal of what the ancients had to say. It's like the end of Battlestar Gallactica(don't know if you watched that series, just ended)- our science and our intellect outstrips our ability to step back and realize that all this material world does not matter in the long run- that it is our souls, our hearts, our very being that MUST have something , a plan that was developed for us. Either you are right, and Yehweh is not real, or, just maybe, there is a reason why this God has been believed in for centuries despite all the naysayers, the killing of believers, the call for the last 4 decades with all this "god is dead " bs and the radical atheism that has reared its ugly head these days.

You are minority my friend, and I will say this - people that don't know intrinsically that God is out there, that there is something at least out there, are the ones that are deficient. Not us believers. You can kick and scream all you want, but someday, your knee will bow to Christ. Either willingly, or you will with great sighs and reluctance do it and realize that your so called great intellect can't save your from your sin.

The cross is there, waiting for you... all you have to do is grab it.....

counterww;

Excuse me butting in, but I couldn't help it.
You Write;

"God's love for us in infinite, and so is the capacity to love HIM and love others if we love him first."

I say, that is simply your assumption. You believe it. Millions believe other things, or nothing at all about gods.

Surely you have to agree that what you say is at the very least - shall we say - controversial? It may or may not be the truth.

And why all this love for some god who very well may not actually exist anywhere except in the imagination? After all, you have never seen this God, and never known anyone who has.

And yet you even try to persuade others that this highly dubious never-seen, never-heard from God, is real and should be loved. How on earth can you believe you're making sense?

Can someone just decide like- duh, I think I'll love Rama. He's a lot better than Vishnu?

Belief in supernatural deities is bad enough; but loving them too? And then trying to persuade others to do likewise for no reason at all? It's a no-brainer.

Considering that all the thousands of gods who people worshiped in ancient times, and fought over, and died for, and loved, and sacrificed for - were all myths - don't you have a teeny-weeny suspicion that maybe - just maybe - there's a remote possibility that your god might just be just like them? The people at the time didn't know the gods were make believe. They thought the gods were absolutely real. But now WE know they weren't. Think of all the outrageous sacrifices folks back then suffered to pacify what we now know were make-believe gods. How terrible!

I wonder if people in the future will look back and wonder why 21st century people were still believing in an invisible God - for which there was no more evidence than there was for any of the old mythological ones.

So forgive some of us cynics if we are very reluctant to believe in yet another God, we see no "reason" to think he's any different from all the other ones, who were also invisible, and also never showed up anywhere, ever. How could they? They were make believe.

Will close with a statement from the Great seeker who said;

"The idea of a personal God is quite alien to me and seems even naive."

Albert Einstein in a letter to Beatrice Frohlich Dec 17,1952.
Einstein Archive 59-797,from "The Expanded Quotable Einstein" p.217

Who you gonna believe? Your pastor or Albert Einstein?

Well, Farnaz, I see you are back in form, with your lies and ad hominem attacks. I make a simple comment, not terribly crital at all, and you go ballistic. Typical of you.

Te futue atque equem in quo huc vectus es.

Arminius: "Right you are, this endless spamfest of Bun-Bun(CCNL) and ivri5768 is getting very tiresome. BTW, it is pretty certain that ivri5768 is Farnaz."

Arminius, at least I have more creativity than to continue posting on the Flying Spaghetti Monster, Sheesh. Old news, old.

I'm not Farnaz, but am delighted you think so. I've been around far longer than she and I'm surprised you still haven't caught on. But, no offense, you ain't no genius.

Too much trouble dealing with the closet, as JJ used to say, I guess. Give up the drugs and alcohol, and face your condition like a proud gay man.

Well, Pam - here is what you don't get , as usual or par for the course.

God's love for us in infinite, and so is the capacity to love HIM and love others if we love him first.

Unreal, You don't get it. The capacity to love others is multiplied by our willingness to give up self, love God first, and love our neighbors at the same time, with ever increasing capacity to do so.

Of course, since you are incapable (more like unwilling really) to believe, and are interested in reality self first, you would not know that. It is easy to love our families, or some of our friends- but to love others we don't know takes the connection where God lives in each of us to help us with the a infinite pool of love to love others.

Pamsm,

Right you are, this endless spamfest of Bun-Bun(CCNL) and ivri5768 is getting very tiresome. BTW, it is pretty certain that ivri5768 is Farnaz.

MORE BREAKING NEWS ON THE CHURCH OF CLANCY, ET AL.

The texts of Domenick Crossan will once again be appearing 24/7 on this blog, at the request of the Blessed Cardinal Clancy of the Corned Beef and Cabbage.

The Illiterate Preacher Cell will be posting.

BREAKING NEWS FROM CCNL (Church of Clancy, Nusbaum, and Luigi):

CCNL (Church of Clancy Nusbaum and Luigi) is fast approaching the promised line. He and his co-religionists are headed toward New Brunswick, New Jersey to begin the intuning which is to occur every month for six months prior to the great event.

These most solemn services will begin with "Al dente, Dio" (probably inaudible to human ears), the inspirational hymn penned by Mother Millie Macaroni, sister of the Sainted Archbishop Luigi (of the Lasagna.) As per usual, the services will end with the choral Luigian "Hmmm."

A visit from the Holy Sauce will take place within the sixth-month-preparatory period. He has been in seclusion meditating on Regeneration and is expected to speak Ex Cucina. In the meantime, StemCellians are urged to read the Four Garlics in the New Tetrazzini.

We wish CCNL peace in the name of the Pasta, the Meatballs, and the Lasagna.

In solidarity,

Hmmm

Pamsm: "Do you realize that your posts are every bit as annoying as CCNL's?"

CCNL has made it his StemCellian mission to hound me whenever I post. Though not OCD, I shall respond in kind. Always, until he's off this blog once and for all.

I don't mean you the kind of offense as you meantme, but your posts bore the hell out of me. Hyper-rational-biologistic, narcissistic-atheistic-believer-"correcting"- believer trolls like you are a drag. Would never have had the rudeness to mention it though.

I've learned the trick of scrolling past. Try scrolling, Troll.

I posted this on the general reply site, thought it might be appropriate here:

Satan has been found! He's working at a gas station in Ohio. He took the place of Elvis, who has moved on.

If you want to know the true cause of global warming, go to the web site of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

"We're all just dancers on the devil's dance floor."
- Flogging Molly

As noted yesterday:

Well, well, well, today we turn to the Satans of the world aka those “ugly, wingie, flying, talking, fictional thingies” aka those modern day “demons of the demented”.

For some history of these creatures of superstition, see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devil
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satan
excerpt:

"Satan (Standard Hebrew Satan'el, English accuser) is a term that originates from the Abrahamic religions, being traditionally applied to an angel in Judeo-Christian belief, and to a jinn in Islamic belief.

Originally, this figure was the one who challenged the religious faith of humans in the Hebrew Bible. Since then, the Abrahamic religions have variously regarded Satan as a rebellious fallen angel or demon that tempts humans to sin or commit evil deeds. Others regard the Biblical Satan as an allegory that represents a crisis of faith, individualism, free will, wisdom and enlightenment."

continued below:

ivri5768,
Do you realize that your posts are every bit as annoying as CCNL's?

You two trolls are filling up all the On Faith blogs with your endless, repetitive nonsense. I'd like to see both of you banned.

If you have something original and interesting to post, please do so - otherwise GO AWAY.

http://www.philipharland.com/Courses/RELI398Satanoverheads.htm

excerpt:

"Satan’s Predecessors in the Ancient Near East (from 3000 BCE)
1.Chaos monsters and the combat myth in the Ancient Near East (see Beal chapters 24)

· Background: The Ancient Near East and common mythology; Order vs. chaos in the society of the gods

· Ninurta vs. Anzu (Sumerian, Akkadian, Babylonian): Rebellious chaosmonster

· Marduk vs. Tiamat (Sea) (Babylonian; see Beal, pp. 1619)

· Baal vs. Yamm (Sea) and Mot (Death) (Ugaritic/Canaanite; see Beal, pp. 1921)

· Yahweh vs. Leviathan, Rahab, and Behemoth (Israelite; see Psalms 74:1217; 89:518; compare Isaiah 51:911; Job 4041)

· Avenue into Jewish apocalypticism "

From:
http://www.sacred-texts.com/evil/hod/hod07.htm

“THE TRANSITION from Devil-worship to God-worship marks the origin of civilisation; and among the nations of antiquity the Persians seem to have been the first who took this step with conscious deliberation, for they most earnestly insisted upon the contrast that obtains between good and evil, so much so that their religion is even to-day regarded as the most consistent form of dualism.”

And here we go again and again and again with Farnaz posing as ivri5768 as the subterfuge continues with the multiple aliases. One strange, "devilish" woman!!!

And note how she even "talks" to herself in some commentaries. Very strange!!!

I do not believe that Satan exists. Once again, it is the easiest explanation for some people, that requires the least amount of brain-power; just sit back and believe the tale told to you, passed on in a succsssion generations, stretching back into the fog of antiquity, and who knows where it started, or why.

Yet that is not my explanation for "bad" things in the world. I believe that we feel joy and sadness, each together, in contrast, and cannot know either without the other. We are aware of pain and pleasure, repose and struggle, light and darkness only because of their contrasting natures.

Peace is not really a happy kingdom with a wise ruler; peace is really an equilibrium of tensions and a synchronization of rythms, which includes and accounts for all that is good and bad in the world and in the human heart.

See here a brief history of Satan as a concept, and note in particular the word 'allegory'.

When you consider life on a small planet with few visitors from elsewhere, things can get blown out of proportion. Before you know it, myth is turned into an actual historical event before your very eyes!

On the other hand, 'evil personified' is no myth......and is the main theme of all of our most successful TV crime dramas.

Religions prof. Elaine Pagels has written a good book entitled, 'Adam, Eve, and the Serpent' that places the tale in a historical setting in a most engaging fashion.....

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

Thomas Baum: "some believe that science will cure all of the world's "problems" including those that have been brought on by science."

False argument. Who is saying this?

In rebuttal, Which has done more to reduce the occurrence of diseases in humans; Religion or science?
Which has done more to reduce pestilence and increase food production; Religion or science?

If my house gets too cold for my kids, which should I employ to rectify the situation, prayer (religion) or my thermostat (science)?

How did mankind find out about germs and disease carrying vermin? Religion or science?
(I don't buy the Leviticus food rules, since the reason for these laws was never made clear to the people as being for health reasons, but rather as some form of spiritual cleanliness so as not to pi55 off God)

Religion offers no actual tangible solutions for the prroblems of life on earth. If religion/prayer protected us from natural disasters then Christians wouldn't need levees, storm shelters, lightining rods or umbrellas... If religion worked against disease then the black plague or Spanish Flu should have never killed or inflicted suffering on so many Christian babies.

I don't know if science will cure ALL the world's problems, but I certainly don't believe God will either, he's had plenty of time, claims to be all powerful, and yet has not really come through. In the meantime if I want to keep my family safe, warm, healthy and strong.... I'll go with the system that has produced many, many more tangible results, not one based on a 'promise' of an eternal reward that no one on earth has ever seen or experienced.

Believing in something that produces actual results, science, does not require 'faith'.
Science is not and does not even pretend to be religion. It is not a replacement for a god. It is simply a method for understanding the way the earth works then using that understanding to improve life on earth. It does not require blind belief in the unknowable, it seeks to understand the unknown. It does not require constant praise and pure thoughts of it's 'followers' it has no moral mandate. Nothing about science is anything like religion.

DANIELINTHELIONSDEN

You wrote, "who thinks that "good" and "evil" are actual physical forces that operate in the universe, like gravity or electicity;"

God is not a physical force and satan is not a physical force either but is a creature. We are also creatures.

There is more to the world than just the physical.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

SUSAN JACOBY

You wrote, "The idea that "faith issues" are something apart from the rest of life--not to be discussed along with politics, science, love, sex, health, you name it--is ridiculous."

How true.

What one believes even if that belief is a non-belief, speaking of the reality of whether or not there is a "Supreme Being" or at least something higher than humans, is very much part of the person and how that person looks at life.

Some people seem to think that there is a "secular" and a "sacred" division of life whereas life is life.

Everyone's beliefs colors the way that they look at life, I don't see how anyone could look at it any differently.

One example of a belief apart from a belief in a "Supreme Being", some believe that science will cure all of the world's "problems" including those that have been brought on by science.

This is an example of "belief" and one could also say "faith" and to seperate this from the rest of life is, as you say, "ridiculous".

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

Truly there is evil in this world. There always has been.

The problem is that neither the Enlightenment nor Progress has any answer for it. None. This is why all the evolutionary optimism of the last two hundred years remains helpless before world wars, drugs, crime, apartheid, and others. Progress can't explain any of these and neither can it eradicate them.

Only in the Christian story itself do we find any sense that the problems of the world are solved not by a straightforward upward movement into the "light", but by God going down into the dark to rescue humankind from it's plight.

DANIELINTHELIONSDEN:

"One thing that puzzles me about Conservativem, Born-Again Christian Evangelicals . . .

. . . they seem emotionally flat and "Stepford-like." When it comes to respect and tolerance, these type of Christian-like people cannot show or real love, but only what they call "tough-love" which is not love at all . . .

Please explain this to me. Merely expressing mean sarcasm to me is not a good answer, and only undermines your credibility even more. . ."

Allow me to give it a shot.

Being religious is different from being a fundamentalist.

Fundamentalism is always political. One can be Christian, Jew, Wiccan—whatever and be compassionate, essentially trusting that "The Big Cheese", whether Wotan or the Virgin Mary, knows what's best. Fundamentalists attach themselves to religious groups for political ends. Being a fundamentalist is essential paranoia, fear of invasion by "The Other". The fundamentalist fear of sexual activity is identical to General Jack D. Ripper's fear of America losing its precious bodily fluids. Strip away all the religious citations from fundamentalist ideology and one is left with tribalism. Interesting to note that the Al Queda field manual [as discussed last night on Rachel Maddow's show] says do not seek the religious, don't look to the Koran. Al Queda's handbook says it's better to seek the spiritually indifferent. Politics is the real point here, not spirituality.

There's plenty of religious people who do believe charity, humility, giving other people a break and all the rest of those good things. But fundamentalism is first and foremost primitive political territorial marking. Fundamentalism is essentially regressive, a step backwards.

Satan is just another god in the christian pantheon.

Counterww

One thing that puzzles me about Conservativem, Born-Again Christian Evangelicals:

They center they whole belief system around the word "lover" (they are real big on loving the sinner, for example). But in many ways, they seem emotionally flat and "Stepford-like." When it comes to respect and tolerance, these type of Christian-like people cannot show or real love, but only what they call "tough-love" which is not love at all.

These people do not "normal" love relationships, nor "normal" family relationships.

Please explain this to me. Merely expressing mean sarcasm to me is not a good answer, and only undermines your credibility even more.

And here we go again and again with Farnaz posing as ivri5768 as the subterfuge continues with the multiple aliases. One strange, "devilish" woman!!!

And note how she even "talks" to herself in some commentaries. Very strange!!!

Tellya one thing, Ms Jacoby: You had eight Mother-lovin years to get Jungian about who's living down to the Fundie myth... ....six weeks into an Obama presidency, *now* they wonder, 'How can we make it like we're *newly* retroactively-deceived?'

Phhhbbt.

Remember when I said for a couple of years that supposed conservatives had other things that maybe were more important than making me defend my own life and marriage for their theological conveniece?

SOBs, right? Hardly missed a beat, either, did they.

*Now* their* Satan comes up. Usually, we only hear of that Christian figure's praeternatural powers of influence and deceit when some abused kids decide to go Blair Witch on their church and someone needs to blame a Pagan. :)

MORE BREAKING NEWS ON THE CHURCH OF CLANCY, ET AL.

The texts of Domenick Crossan will once again be appearing 24/7 on this blog, at the request of the Blessed Cardinal Clancy of the Corned Beef and Cabbage.

The Illiterate Preacher Cell will be posting.

BREAKING NEWS FROM CCNL (Church of Clancy, Nusbaum, and Luigi):

CCNL (Church of Clancy Nusbaum and Luigi) is fast approaching the promised line. He and his co-religionists are headed toward New Brunswick, New Jersey to begin the intuning which is to occur every month for six months prior to the great event.

These most solemn services will begin with "Al dente, Dio" (probably inaudible to human ears), the inspirational hymn penned by Mother Millie Macaroni, sister of the Sainted Archbishop Luigi (of the Lasagna.) As per usual, the services will end with the choral Luigian "Hmmm."

A visit from the Holy Sauce will take place within the sixth-month-preparatory period. He has been in seclusion meditating on Regeneration and is expected to speak Ex Cucina. In the meantime, StemCellians are urged to read the Four Garlics in the New Tetrazzini

We wish CCNL peace in the name of the Pasta, the Meatballs, and the Lasagna.

In solidarity,

Hmmm

And while we're on the subject of love, how do you love someone that you've never met or seen?

During the Viet Nam war, I had some friends who would watch the news, and when they heard the daily casualty figures (which were high), they would cry.

I never understood this. I was horrified and angry about the huge numbers of wasted lives, but these were numbers - for me they had no faces or personalities. I understood intellectually what the numbers represented, but I couldn't feel the kind of emotion that causes tears without actually knowing the people.

When people talk about "loving" Jesus, or God, I am completely baffled by this. Especially when you're "commanded" to love them with every fiber of your being.

How do you do that?

Further, I think if I did know the God of the bible, love is not the emotion that he would evoke in me. I find the O.T. God thoroughly reprehensible.

Karen2565 talks about mistreatment of children deserving the worst fate. What about 2 Kings 2:23-24 when 42 little children mock the prophet Elisha's baldness and he curses them in the name of the lord, who sends two she-bears to rip them to shreds. Nice, eh?

There are no Satans or devils but if there were, they definitely had a hand in writing the OT, NT, koran and golden plates considering the lies in all of these books!!!

And here we go again with Farnaz posing as ivri5768 as the subterfuge continues with the multiple aliases. One strange, "devilish" woman!!!

"Jeez Pam you just don't get it , do you?"

No, Counterww, as usual, it is *you* who doesn't "get it."

If every part of your mind, etc. is given to loving God, then what part is left for loving anyone else?

Let me help you out here: Imagine a pie chart representing your love (whether you think it comes from mind, heart, soul, or all of the above is immaterial). Let's color the pie green for love of God, pink for love of self, and blue for love of neighbors. Now, follow that First Great Commandment. Oops! Chart is entirely green!
Where, oh where, are we going to put pink and blue?

DUH!

CCNL,

I am not going to fuel your fire by giving you my testimony.

But I will tell you this: for anyone who believes the bible is the word of God, as I do, then the devil does exist for there are reams of references to him in the bible.

Mark,
Always seek the truth.

Ps: sit down!

Farnaz,

They never said Jeffrey Dahmer was Christian either. They never mentioned the Christianity of Enron.

The list, Farnaz, goes on.

FARNAZ:

Just before the Holocaust, I mean the second one on this blog, there was all the antisemitism on Madoff, remember??

Got this via email:

WHEN IS A JEW A JEW

When Paul Newman died, they said how great he was but they failed to mention he considered himself Jewish (born half-Jewish).

When the woman (Helen Suzman) who helped Nelson Mandela died last week, they said how great she was but they failed to mention she was Jewish.

When Ken Lay, Jeff Skilling, Martha Stewart, Randy Cunningham, Gov. Edwards, Conrad Black, Senator Keating, Gov Ryan, and Gov Begoivich messed up, no one told me what religion or denomination they were -- because they were not Jewish.

When Ivan Boesky or Andrew Fastow or Bernie Madoff committed fraud, almost every article mentioned they were Jewish.

This reminds me of a famous Einstein quote -
In 1921, Albert Einstein presented a paper on his then-infant Theory of Relativity at the Sorbonne, the prestigious French university.

"If I am proved correct," he said, "the Germans will call me a German, the Swiss will call me a Swiss citizen, and the French will call me a great scientist. If relativity is proved wrong, the French will call me a Swiss, the Swiss will call me a German, and the Germans will call me a Jew."
-------------
But the Americans won't call Einstein a Jew...

And they won't call Keating, a Catholic; Bushie and Cheney Christians; Poulson Christian, BOA Christian, Lloyds of London Christian, etc, etc.

And the Christians don't call themselves Christians as you have so astutely pointed out, not when it comes to Iraq, Afghanistan, the Oil Companies, the Banks, the media, etc.

FARNAZ, the devil is on this blog, and he is multitudes. He is not you, and he is not me.

Ok people.
I guess I have to define what “Faith of convenience” means.

For those of you in the cheep-seats, it’s simple: following what is convenient and ignoring what is not.

Sit Down! CCNL

If you still don’t get it, here are some examples:
1. I have an associate that says that Jesus doesn’t require you to be baptized and backs it up by quoting John: 3.16.
a. He says he believes Jesus is the son of God, and believes everything he says is true. If so, then John: 3.5 and Mark: 16.16 are being ignored by this guy.
2. I have a friend who is the spiritual leader of a Hutterite colony who tells me that Jesus said nothing about any law of fasting.
a. In Matthew chapter 4 Jesus demonstrates the value of fasting.
3. The Westborough Baptists said that God hates gays.
a. All of us are children of God. Would you hate your child because of an affliction or an orientation different than yours? I think not.
b. God does not hate gays, but he has been very consistent throughout the bible that the act is an abomination in his eyes.
c. As I like to say, heavenly father (God) is not the kind of father that Child Services was invented for.

Do you get it now?

If you don’t follow everything that Jesus has told us to do, then you have a faith of convenience.

Mark
Always seek the truth.

FARNAZ,

Thanks for your post on the last thread. You're right about my boundless generosity toward CCNL and all the Embryonics.

ON THE TOPIC OF SATAN
I think Satan showed his face here when the issue of holocaust denial came up.

And he had it in for us Jews once again, us Jews, Farnaz, living, dead, and surviving.

What do you think?

Karen2565,

Right you are, I know many non-Christians who are hugely decent people, and have known many so-called 'Christians' that I would not trust for the time of day. NO religion has a hammerlock on morality.

Counterww: there are plenty of atheists/agnostics that are selfless and giving, quite a few self proclaimed christians that seem incapable of charity.
I was just explaining the 2 great commandments as I understand them and try to apply them in my life.

Jeez Pam you just don't get it , do you?

It is impossible to fully love your neighbor unless you love God first- it puts things in the proper order and priority . jesus was saying that we must love God first, give up self, and then we will have the capacity to love our selves and our neighbors properly.

As soon as you take God out of the equation, the rest of it all falls apart.

Duh.

Arminius,
I totally agree with your last post. Yes it is possible, though not alwasy easy to obey the two great commandments. And it is a journey, isn't it?

Volkmare:
Why would believers be naturally conservative? It is only a relatively recent phenomenon that religion is being associated with one party, namely the republican party, and IMO, that has been a disastrous association for people of faith.

For your information, there are those of us who read the Bible everyday and spend quite a bit of time studying it and reflecting on its meaning, yet are not conservative. If this leads you to question the depth of my faith, I will remind you that what makes a Christian is belief in Jesus Christ as savior, not our stand on this or that issue. Much of the rest is open to discussion.

PAMSM:
This is how I understand the 2 greatest commandments:
If I love God with all my heart and all my mind, then I will not love money with all my heart, or material possesions, or power, etc. and thus I can turn my attention and my heart to the things of God, namely loving my neighbor i.e. sharing what I have with those in need, not being greedy, giving of my time and talents to my community, etc.

I honestly don't understand how such a negative view as yours can be taken of the second commandment, unless you are absolutely bent on never finding anything positive if it comes out of the Bible. Jesus tells us that those who mistreat children will meet the worst fate and deserve the worst punishment. So how can you possibly conclude that He would direct us to condone the actions of our neighbor if he is a pedophile?
Love your neighbor is universally understood to mean: take care of each other. I've never seen interpreted as condone crime and embrace child molesters.

Sorry for the double posts. On Faith gets spastic sometimes, and so do my fingers.....

Pam,

It is possible to try to follow the Great Commandments, but it is NOT easy. The Way of the Gospels, the Path of Jesus, is NOT easy. I think this is why so many so-called 'Christians' knee-jerk to the OT rules, because it is easier than following a general rule. It is easier to 'not do' than to 'do'. And anyway, faith is not a destination, it is a journey. Lifelong.

Thanks for the info on the OT commandments. I am here to learn.

Pam,

It is certainly possible to try to live by the Great Commandments. It is NOT easy, to be sure. The Way of the Gospels, the Way of the Teachings of Jesus, is NOT easy. I think this is why so many so-called 'Christians' cling to the OT, because it is easier to knee-jerk to hard laws than to follow a tough general rule. But faith is not a destination, it is a journey. Lifelong.

I am not familiar with much of the Jewish beliefs on the assorted 10 Commandents, thank for the info. I used 'traditional' because it seems that way at least in my lifetime.

Hmmm, what do the historical Jesus and NT exegetes have to say about the Two Great Commandments??

First, they do not appear in all four gospels i.e.John's Gospel has no reference to them: The Chief Commandment: (1) Mark 12:28-34 = Matt 22:34-40,46b = Luke 10:25-28, (2) Did. 1:2a;

Comments by some exegetes:

From David Flusser

"Jesus' saying about the double commandment of love was clearly coined before his time. ... both verses from the Bible (Deut. 6:5 and Lev, 19:18) begin with the same word.

It was typical of rabbinic scholarship to see similarly phrased passages from the Bible as connected in content also. The first great commandment of Jesus—love of God—was thus in harmony with the spirit of contemporary Pharisaism. ... the double commandment of love existed in ancient Judaism before, and alongside, Jesus.

The fact that it does not appear in the rabbinical documents that have come down to us is probably accidental. Mark (12:28-34) and Luke (10:25-28) show that on the question of "the great commandment" Jesus and the scribes were in agreement. [Jesus, 89f]"

From Samuel Tobias Lachs

"Lachs [Rabbinic Commentary on the New Testament, 280f] notes that the form cited in Mark begins with the traditional opening phrase of the Shema ("Hear, O Israel ..."). This may reflect the influence of Jewish devotional practices, since none of the other versions have that form. He comments further as follows:

The combination of Deut. 6.4 and Lev. 19.18 is already found in the Test. of Iss. 5.2 and in the Test. of Dan. 5.3. It is reasonable to assume that this combination was commonplace in rabbinic teachings, since it combines the love of God with the love of man."

From Gerd Lüdemann

"Lüdemann [Jesus, 85f] suggests that Mark was handing on the tradition he had received without any significant change, but he sees the two fold summary of the law as a reductionist and anti-cultic development from the early Christian community, rather than as a saying of Jesus:

The historical yield of the tradition is nil, since it is firmly rooted in the community and is to be derived from its needs. This community has detached itself from the temple cult and justifies this with reference to 'Jesus.' Moreover at another point Jesus gives a completely new definition of the term neighbour (see on Luke 10.30-37).

From Kurrt Niederwimmer

"Niederwimmer [Hermeneia, 64] notes the parallels to the Gospels where this double summary of the Torah is variously attributed to Jesus (Mark, Matthew) or to a Torah scholar (Luke). Niederwimmer offers several considerations for concluding that the Didache version is not dependent on the Gospels, but was added to the traditional "Two Ways" tractate (which seems to have spoken only of the commandment to love God) when the Didache was compiled."

Arminius:
"You shall love the Lord, your God, with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind."
and
"You shall love your neighbor as yourself."
The whole law and the prophets depend on these two commandments."

Do you honestly think that either of these things are possible? For that matter, are they even desirable?

If you keep the first, with *all* your heart, soul and mind (never mind that only the mind is capable), where is there room for love of self or neighbor?

What if your neighbor is a vile sumbi+ch? A pedophile and a wife-beater?

ARMINIUS: As far as I know, it is the traditional 10 that are generally held as the Decalogue by Judaism, but I stand to be corrected if necessary.

In Judaism, one is called the "Ethical Decalogue", the other the "Ritual Decalogue." But only the latter bears the name T.C. in the bible.

I have to question your use of the word "traditional" here - it's much more a recent phenomenon than a traditional one. "Tradition" favors the biblical one.

Pamsm,

The Two Great Commandments, here from Matthew 22 (they are in all 4 Gospels):

"You shall love the Lord, your God, with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.
This is the greatest and the first commandment.
The second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself.
The whole law and the prophets depend on these two commandments."

Note that the first sums up the first 4 of the standard 10 Commandments, and the second sums up the last 6. Both put a positive spin on them. And the Second Great Commandment should appeal to everyone. The Great Commandments are the heart of the teachings of Jesus.

As far as I know, it is the traditional 10 that are generally held as the Decalogue by Judaism, but I stand to be corrected if necessary.

"Susan started out her article...comparing common conservatives with the devil."

Sorry, Volkmare, but Ann Coulter is not -- by any definition -- a common conservative. She's a shrieking, foaming, rabidly deceptive celebrity with no credentials whatsoever who has made a fortune off of Republicans and doesn't want to give up the golden goose.

She'll continue to ride that goose as long as she can hold on, so Republicans: beware. This woman does not have your party's interests at heart. (Of course, being a liberal Democrat, I am not unduly concerned.)

Daniel ITLD,

Impossible.

"A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject"--Winston Churchill

Arminius says:
"The 10 Commandments also are listed in Exodus 20:2-17 and Deuteronomy 5:6-21. These two lists are the ones the traditional list comes from. Why there are three lists is beyond me. Anyway, as a liberal Christian, it is the Two Great Commandments that are important to me."

But those are spoken, and never written in stone, nor ever called the "Ten Commandments" - that is reserved for the ones I posted, which were supposedly engraved on the tablets that Moses brought down the mountain.

Deuteronomy is just another version of the same story - much as are the first 2 chapters of Genesis. One imagines that those writing the old oral traditions for the first time didn't know which version was correct, so included both. Hardly conducive to thinking of it as the direct inerrant word of God, eh?

And what might "The Two Great Commandments" be? This is not a term I've heard before.

...isn't it?

How do you argue with people who think that Satan is a real "personage;"

who thinks that "good" and "evil" are actual physical forces that operate in the universe, like gravity or electicity;

who quote disconnected verses from the Bible to prove that the Bible is true;

who snarl at you that you have not read the "scriptures enough, or properly, or correctly;"

who regard science as some kind of "liberal" menace, to be controlled, or stamped out?

I mean, it is impossible, isn't?

Pamsm,

The 10 Commandments also are listed in Exodus 20:2-17 and Deuteronomy 5:6-21. These two lists are the ones the traditional list comes from. Why there are three lists is beyond me. Anyway, as a liberal Christian, it is the Two Great Commandments that are important to me.

What's so great about Ann Coulter?

She is a very hostile, bitter person.

I do not think I would take any kind of advice from any such person.

Yes, I worship Stan—oops!

Some street-corner clown in Madera hoists signs that warn us all of diabolical forces awaiting to ensnare us, all the usual suspects—sex, disrespect of parents, not worshiping God on the Sabbath [whenever the hell that's supposed to happen] pants that ride too low, skank stamps, usw. But best of all were the hours this bozo spent holding up a sign warning us about the snares, the rampant Evil of "Stan"—call it a typo if you like, but I'm betting on a cryptic reference to South Park.

Hey, truthseeker dude—the devil is always that other guy's God, get it? "Satan" is the "Other", it's a knee jerk cultural response to someone who's not a member of YOUR tribe, Satan's a pantload plain and simple, generally a sign that your tribe ain't ready for primetime. It's a reflex that displays the inability to accept that someone else's view just might be right, it is a fascistic "NO" in the face of creation's big "YES", a leading indicator of diminished mental capacity, living proof that people can become stupider over time, entropy's last laugh. It is the most mean-spirited aspect of religion, God's shadow, a subject that too many Americans obsess over way too much.

Probably Al Pacino's best [or at least most fun] acting role as well.

"And Satan is my motor, hear my motor purr. . . "

The only list referred to in the bible as the "Ten Commandments":

1. Make no covenant with the inhabitants of other lands to which you go, do not intermarry with them, destroy their places of worship.
2. Do not cast idols.
3. Observe the Feast of Unleavened Bread for seven days in the month of Abib in remembrance of the Exodus.
4. Sacrifice firstborn male animals to Yahweh. The firstborn of a donkey may be redeemed; redeem firstborn sons.
5. Do no work on the seventh day.
6. Observe the Feast of First Fruits and the Feast of Ingathering: All males are therefore to appear before Yahweh three times each year.
7. Do not offer the blood of a sacrifice with leavened bread.
8. Do not let the Passover sacrifice remain until the following morning.
9. Bring the first fruits of the harvest to the Temple of Yahweh.
10. Do not cook a kid in its mother's milk.
(Exodus 34:10-26)

How many of these do you keep? Do they seem to you to be the most important things you would wish to mention as rules for living? Can you think of one or two others? When is the month of Abib, exactly?

"It is the documented practice of liberals to demonize conservatives any way they can."

Horse poop. Nothing any liberal has ever said comes close to the vitriol that Coulter and Rushbo spew.

Rubytues63 says:
"This is the sin that the devil deals in – things that separate man from God. It is no wonder that people who do not believe in God cannot attribute any evil to Satan. How can it be wrong to separate man from someone who does not exist?"

Hate to tell you, Ruby, but we don't believe in Satan or sin, either.

As to your "top ten" list, I'll bet you think that the Ten Commandments are the ones that are engraved on stone tablets in courthouses and public parks (you know, the list that says "you shall make no graven images"...?

Read your Bible. Nowhere is that list called the Ten Commandments. Those are the verbal instructions that Moses said he got from God. Later, he went up the mountain and got stone tablets, engraved with commandments writ by the finger of God. He broke these tablets when he found the people worshipping a golden calf (how stupid were these people - they saw the plagues of Egypt and the parting of the Red Sea, and still thought they'd be better off with a homemade god? Is this believable?), and had to go back up to get another set exactly like the first. These were the instructions actually called the Ten Commandments. See them in my following post.

Volkmare said:

"It is the documented practice of liberals to demonize conservatives any way they can."

That's sure funny; I thought it was just the other way around; it is conservatives who use every dirty nasty trick in the book to demonize liberals. Do you deny that is true?

When you call people's heart-felt beliefs the "faith of convenience," that merely shows your extremely hostile passive-aggressive slant on things. That is a sign of Conservative Christians.

Your beliefs are a lazy man's beliefs, that you just absorb and hold onto with no thought or curiosity about what is behind the workings of the world. To accuse me or anyone of not "reading my scriptures," is ignorant and hostile.

The main thing I get from your post is superiority over inferior people. But Christians are not superior or better than other people; that is your delusion, and corruption of Jesus's true teachings.

Mark, Mark, Mark,

You can testify that Satan exists? We await the specifics of your testimony!!! Hmmm, maybe an anti-Moroni type of guy/gal???

I’m sorry if you all missed the point.

It is the documented practice of liberals to demonize conservatives any way they can.
Susan started out her article doing just that: comparing common conservatives with the devil. The ploy is getting old.
There are times I wish Ann Coulter would just sit down and shut up, but making comparisons to her with the devil is not nice.

Those of you who think that people of faith by their nature are not conservative haven’t been reading your scriptures. If you have, you’ve not understood what you read.

Yes, there are those with a “faith of convenience” who follow what sits well with them and ignore what does not, but I for one, am not one of those. Every faith has those that fall in the convenience trap, and I am sure CCNL can list them all. But, that list will not make up a majority.

Does the devil exist? I can testify that he does. (sit down, CCNL)
Does he look like Dick and Ann? I doubt it.
Does he do every thing he can to defeat God’s plan? You be he does.

Mark
Always seek the truth.

I would say that Satan does exist in the evil that humans are capable of perpetrating.

Believing in a force outside of humanity that is Satan is utter nonsense.

DanielITLD

You write;

"Belief in Satan is childish, and religions that promote this belief are on the the more childish end of the religious spectrum, and give the whole concept of maturity a bad name"

Hi Daniel. You and I have talked before when I used to post under the name YOYO.
I remember writing here that of all the believers on these threads - you understood the atheist position better than anyone. I think I might have written too - that if you get any more rational you'll end up being an agnostic, if not an atheist.

Anyway...regarding your comment above...
I would say that from this atheist's point of view God and Satan are equally preposterous. You dismiss the bad guy but embrace the good one. How can you justify picking and choosing like that?

It is interesting however, that Christians have kinda dropped Satan, where back in the fire and brimstone days he was front and center. But in religion's new Hallmark incarnation I guess he came to be an embarrassment.
But really, if Christians can now say there isn't really a Satan, despite his terrifying presence in Christendom for several hundred years, well that's nice.

Soon hopefully - we'll be told that there isn't really a God either; He's on the childish supernatural end of the religious spectrum.

I can hardly wait to say I told you so.(He said,chuckling

Regards. CN

The idea that "faith issues" are something apart from the rest of life--not to be discussed along with politics, science, love, sex, health, you name it--is ridiculous. And people of faith are not by nature conservative. Presumably, Mark means that people of his kind of faith are by nature conservative. Faith deserves no immunity from anyone's political and social concerns.

I'm sorry, Mark, but I've got to come at you again. What the heck did you mean by "People of faith are, by their nature, conservative." huh?

So you never heard of the Dali Lama? Archbishop Hunthausen? St Francis? The clergy of many denominations and faiths who protested both racial discrimination and the Viet Nam war? The Quakers (often cited by conservatives, who fail to note how radical their position was to conservative religion at the time) who fought slavery? I could go on and on. Faith often inspires radical action, from Mother Theresa to St. Joan of Arc.

I think you are falling into a common logical trap. Since you admire faith, you are using the expression "people of faith" to mean "people like me". Many people who take their faith very seriously believe in things like gay marriage rights, equality between the sexes, war as a last option only and the need to provide for "the least among us," non-conservative positions all. Faith is not a mirror of your beliefs. I would encourage you to consider that in the future.

Well, well, well, today we turn to the Satans of the world aka those “ugly, wingie, flying, talking, fictional thingies” aka those modern day “demons of the demented”.

For some history of these creatures of superstition, see

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devil
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satan

excerpt:

Satan (Standard Hebrew Satan'el, English accuser) is a term that originates from the Abrahamic religions, being traditionally applied to an angel in Judeo-Christian belief, and to a jinn in Islamic belief.

Originally, this figure was the one who challenged the religious faith of humans in the Hebrew Bible. Since then, the Abrahamic religions have variously regarded Satan as a rebellious fallen angel or demon that tempts humans to sin or commit evil deeds. Others regard the Biblical Satan as an allegory that represents a crisis of faith, individualism, free will, wisdom and enlightenment."

http://www.philipharland.com/Courses/RELI398Satanoverheads.htm

excerpt:

"Satan’s Predecessors in the Ancient Near East (from 3000 BCE)
1.Chaos monsters and the combat myth in the Ancient Near East (see Beal chapters 24)
· Background: The Ancient Near East and common mythology; Order vs. chaos in the society of the gods
· Ninurta vs. Anzu (Sumerian, Akkadian, Babylonian): Rebellious chaosmonster
· Marduk vs. Tiamat (Sea) (Babylonian; see Beal, pp. 1619)
· Baal vs. Yamm (Sea) and Mot (Death) (Ugaritic/Canaanite; see Beal, pp. 1921)
· Yahweh vs. Leviathan, Rahab, and Behemoth (Israelite; see Psalms 74:1217; 89:518; compare Isaiah 51:911; Job 4041)
· Avenue into Jewish apocalypticism "

From:
http://www.sacred-texts.com/evil/hod/hod07.htm

“THE TRANSITION from Devil-worship to God-worship marks the origin of civilisation; and among the nations of antiquity the Persians seem to have been the first who took this step with conscious deliberation, for they most earnestly insisted upon the contrast that obtains between good and evil, so much so that their religion is even to-day regarded as the most consistent form of dualism.”

Even without a devil, there is enough evil in the hearts of men to make the world a sad place. But that does not mean there is no devil.

I once heard ‘sin’ described as anything that separates man from God. Many people, understandably, dislike this fluid, ambiguous definition. It’s unfair that addictive personalities make some things (like alcohol) sinful to some and not to others. Sin becomes difficult to recognize when it determined by excess instead of action. This is the sin that the devil deals in – things that separate man from God. It is no wonder that people who do not believe in God cannot attribute any evil to Satan. How can it be wrong to separate man from someone who does not exist?

It is easier for dim minds to define sin (or right and wrong, if you will) as a written set of acts, independent of motivation or motivator. Not only do literalists and secularists have the written Law, but we can condense it into a Top Ten list. (David Letterman, eat your heart out)

But the devil knows one thing about sin that most men fail to recognize. As spiritual beings, we hurt ourselves as much if not more than our victims when we do wrong. The devil does not want us to act against other people because he wants them hurt. The devil wants us to act against other people because he wants us to hurt ourselves.

Secular law is a shallow pool compared to the realization of sin. And the fact that so many people deny he exists makes the devil’s work all the easier.

"People of faith are by their nature conservative."

I think the word you are looking for there is "gullible", not conservative.

Mark,

I saw no politics is Susan's comments. Rather I saw what could be taken for a scriptural reference. (Mote, beam, eye - anyone?) What she is saying is don't demonize other people, rather look at yourself and understand your own capacity for sin (in this case, greed) before lashing out. This helps keep your response reasonable. How is that political? I think it's good sense, and firmly in the spirit of seeking the truth.

This is a disappointing question.

Belief in Satan is childish, and religions that promote this belief are on the the more childish end of the religious spectrum, and give the whold concept of maturity a bad name.

Volkmare's comment has to be the most hilariously un-self-aware post I have ever read.

Susan,

As soon as you start with politics then everyone knows you are inserting personal bias and your own agenda. You are not being objective.

You know the definition of politics:
Poli, meaning many.
tics, meaning blood-sucking little insects.

If you don’t like the people you mentioned, that’s fine.
Demonizing your favorite political bunching-bags is out of place in this venue. People of faith are by their nature conservative. Therefore, you just attacked faith in a faith column.
Why would you do that?

Keep your agenda to yourself when you are discussing faith issues.

Mark
Always seek the truth.