Not Even Saints are Perfect

Bgone,

1) Not everything is economic. To you, everything might be economic, in which case, I feel very sorry for you. A life without love, or recreation, or beauty must be a very ugly life.

2) I cannot think of how Queen Mutemweya killing her grandson could somehow be miscopied into a text on Herod killing the innocents of Bethlehem. The mere fact that in each story there is a ruler killing a child doesn't even begin to intimate a connection between the two.

3) The text of the Torah (Old Testament without some of the Wisdom books) was completely intact as we have it now well before Alexander the Great and his forces ever came either to Egypt or to the Holy Land.

4) Hieroglyphic names are not difficult to translate.

5) "Greek scholars" (depending upon who you mean, specifically) were not superstitious. In fact, quite the opposite, they tended to very incredulous when it came both to typical Greek religion and to prevalent superstitions.

Which "Greek scholars" do you mean? What ideas did they get?

"6. Hoaxes never have authors. That's one of their earmarks."

No, hoaxes have authors. From whence do they originate if not from an author?

Josephus does not include references because he receives his historical details from (1) the Torah; (2) word of mouth; (3) knowledge held in common at the time; (4) his own observation.

"I expect you know the rest of the story, Constantine ordering the sorting of all those sacred scriptures, collecting them into what we know as the Bible and commissioning the first 50 copies."

Um, again, not at all. It is a widely held misconception that Constantine had anything to do with the canonization of the Christian Scriptures. He did not. He convened the Council of Nicaea so that the attending bishops could hash out a solution to the Arian controversy pertaining to Christ's divinity (specifically, the theological question was regarding the nature of the Father's generation of the Word). The canon of Scripture was more or less agreed upon by the early 200s (a century before Constantine), addressed in a large (though not ecumenical) Church council (Carthage) in 397, half a century after Constantine's death, and dogmatically defined at Trent in 1562-1563, about 1200 years after Constantine.

"Hope this helps with your research."

Hmmm... Perhaps you have more detailed information than is available on... hoaxbusters.com (?) was that the name of the site?

Ryan:

I see I left out WHY. All issues are economic. Constantine the great will tell you that the only thing an emperor can do beyond tax is to add tithes. He operated a really charitable organization, the Roman Empire which he took in a "just cause" war or three and added the Roman Catholic Church thus honoring the truism, "charity begins at home."

Constantine's home was his palace,, kinda like Dr Schuller and Dr Robertson and Dr Roberts and.....the late Jerry Falwell. Did I leave the pope out on purpose? The atheists will get me for that. St Peter wore silk shoes, "The Shoes of the Fisherman?" Jesuits don't even wear shoes. Are Jesuits economically guided?

Hi Ryan Haber:

Bgone, hoaxes have hoaxsters, people who perpetrate them. If the life of Jesus of Nazareth as recorded in the Gospels is a hoax, then the following questions need answering:

1) WHO perpetrated the hoax?
2) WHEN and WHERE was the hoax perpetrated?
3) WHY was the hoax perpetrated?
4) HOW was the hoax pulled off?

----

Here's what I have concluded given both the content of hoax buster and other info.

The action took place during a period of Egyptian history, 3,350 - 3,300 BCE give or take. It began with a queen, Mutemweya ois her name that wanted to be king. She gained the power when her king, Thutmosis became a full time drunk, party alone with his harem animal. It ended when she died.

During her life every important event in the Bible was acted out like children doing a Christmas play today only their acting was the original. That was written down, recorded by Egyptian scribes.

The most significant thing was her attempt to convert Egypt to a matriarchy. In that effort she had two of her grandsons, male heirs to the throne killed. The first killing appears as "the slaughter of the babes" Bethlehem. The second is repeated several times, "David kills Goliath" "Cain kills Able" more I can't remember momentarily and the most significant perhaps, "death of the firstborn son(s) of Egypt" Passover.

As you can see, it's somewhat lengthy which is why I refer you to the web site.

It got into the Bible by the following conduit.

1. Greeks of Alexander the great ear attempted to read the story piece meal.
2.The key is the names. In hieroglyphics names are the most difficult to translate, meaningless things. That's why most all Biblical figures are not named but rather "described" Moses for example.
3. The key figures, Moses and Jesus are Amenophis IV. The Egyptians attempted to remove her from their records. That probably gave the superstitious Greek scholars ideas.
4. Many different people tried to read the same writing and as many stories were written.
5. Over a period of 300+ years these writings circulated about, were rewritten, sometimes used as the basis of pure fiction and so on.
6. Hoaxes never have authors. That's one of their earmarks. However, we have Josephus the great Jewish fiction writer.

I'll end with the usual question. Where did Josephus get his information? He has no references.

I expect you know the rest of the story, Constantine ordering the sorting of all those sacred scriptures, collecting them into what we know as the Bible and commissioning the first 50 copies.

Hope this helps with your research.

Hi, BGone,

We are in agreement. Hammer and saw, do good. Offer your beliefs politely, but never insist. Any so-called Christian that insists on conversion before help is a text-book hypocrite.

But as to stained glass. It helps, but is not central. It is the experience of the service that counts. Please allow me to give you a personal example. The church - parish - of which I am a member stands in mid-town Atlanta GA. The outside, stone with slate roof, is very nice but not striking. But walk in the front door, and enter the nave (the main part of the church where the congregation is), and it is a jaw-dropping experience. Wood, stone, stained glass, all put together to produce a breathless moment. It is drop-dead beautiful Stained glass? Yup. All nearly a century old. 15 windows total, seven of which are by Tiffany Studios, one signed by the master himself. Yet, the joy of the service would be the same if held in the middle of a desert.

What's wrong with a beautiful building? There are countless buildings elsewhere just as beautiful - take a walk down the Mall in DC. And there are many opera houses, art museums, even houses and office buildings..... Architecture is, at its heart, an art form. Again, personal experience. Not an architect myself, I worked for one for 12+ years. The boss designed beautiful structures, and had his own art showings of paintings.

Oh, well, enough rambling.

Hello, Bgone!

***Example: There have been 2 people in the history of the world that "chased the money changers from the temple of God" first, Amenophis IV and then Jesus. Question? Has there been only one? If there has been but one then Amenophis IV and Jesus are one and the same person. Writing Amenophis IV's story up as the life of a Jew is literary hoaxing. This is but one example among many perfect fits between the lives of the two. Same thing is true for Amenophis IV and Moses.***

Bgone, hoaxes have hoaxsters, people who perpetrate them. If the life of Jesus of Nazareth as recorded in the Gospels is a hoax, then the following questions need answering:

1) WHO perpetrated the hoax?
2) WHEN and WHERE was the hoax perpetrated?
3) WHY was the hoax perpetrated?
4) HOW was the hoax pulled off?

There also has to be hard evidence - harder than a name (Amenophis IV) scratched on a stele somewhere in the sand.

***I think the story of Moses talking to a supernatural being in a burning bush qualifies as a hoax.***

You may discount on principle the very possibility of divine intervention in histoy if you like, but to do so, you must make a case for yourself. If (there is a) God (and he) can intervene in history, then the simple fact that his intervention is recorded does not make the intervention a hoax. This particular intervention seems to be weird, in the sense of unusual or uncommon; but then if God only intervenes in history rarely, wouldn't any of his interventions strike us as uncommon or weird?

***It's certainly questionable. Anyone today making a similar claim would/should be laughed out of town, (Joseph Smith not to be belittled).***

Clearly, but are we to take the tastes and common beliefs of today as our standard for deciding what is laughable or questionable (in the sense of dubious)? Why should we not take the standards of 1832? Why shouldn't we attempt to figure out what the standards of 2032 might be, and take those as our basis for deciding? Just because we happen to be alive right now, and to have particular standards, does not mean that our standards are better than those of our forebears.

***Faith is in what is the real question?***

My faith is not, firstly in the details of the story of the burning bush (though I happen to think the story true). My faith is in the Living and Real God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, of whom my parents have taught me, and who took flesh in the person of Jesus Christ; many of my forebears shed their blood rather than deny what they saw and heard, and I take them at their word. Moreover, in my own life I have seen His hand at work, have felt His heart, and seen His power. It is in him that I put my confidence and trust; I pray that He will strengthen me to trust in Him even when I do not feel His presence. As I have come to know Him, the world makes more and more sense - science, history, relationships, mathematics even, dovetailing into a coherent account. It is in His company that I have come to know love and experience life more fully than ever before. It is not that I believe this or that about Him; it is that I KNOW HIM. For these reasons I have entrusted my life and death to Him. Each day I renew that commitment. What He does with my afterlife - that is for Him to decide, but I am confident in Him because He has led me safely thus far.

Hi Ryan Haber:

"What part of the Bible is a hoax?"

I believe that fellow says that the Bible is a literary hoax and uses his second page (?) for the proof that he claims comes from the written historical record. I believe it's the finding of the key episodes, Moses and Jesus in particular.

Example: There have been 2 people in the history of the world that "chased the money changers from the temple of God" first, Amenophis IV and then Jesus. Question? Has there been only one? If there has been but one then Amenophis IV and Jesus are one and the same person. Writing Amenophis IV's story up as the life of a Jew is literary hoaxing. This is but one example among many perfect fits between the lives of the two. Same thing is true for Amenophis IV and Moses.

I think the story of Moses talking to a supernatural being in a burning bush qualifies as a hoax. It's certainly questionable. Anyone today making a similar claim would/should be laughed out of town, (Joseph Smith not to be belittled). Of course there is the question of which supernatural being that might have been, not wishing to call anyone an outright liar.

http://www.hoax-buster.org/sellyoursoul is my favorite page at that web site. I think it bangs the ball to the other side of the net myself. Faith is in what is the real question? May we please have some evidence that really was God in the ball of fire and especially so that it was not Devil.

Arminius:

I think we have reached an agreement. Just one last comment. Thank God hammering and nailing doesn't require a middleman with saving souls as his primary objective. Stained glass costs lots of money but it also inspires lots of faith.

Preparing for the after life can be ruinous to this life. I hope Mother Teresa didn't have too many second thoughts along that line.

Bgone et al.,

There is a lot of speculation about what caused Mother Teresa's "Dark Night." I put the words in quotation marks because:

1) I doubt most people speculating have actually read the book - I haven't, and so they cannot know what she experienced;

2) Most people do not even know what is meant by "Dark Night" in the Church's mystical tradition.

Dark Night DOES NOT REFER TO A LOSS OF FAITH; it refers to a loss of the consolations normally associated with holy Faith.

To Bgone especially,

You have noted several times that the Bible is a hoax. Your proof is an unjuried website. That's nice.

What part of the Bible is a hoax? You are aware that it has 73 books authored by at least 80 different persons (who are named - plus more unnamed)? To what parts are you refering?

What do you mean by hoax? Words make a difference.

BGone,

While blogs per se are not a real source, they indicate that there might be something there. So,
three points here:

1. If the Shrub (aka Bush, aka Darth Dubya) is actually funneling FEMA funds to churches, he should be impeached at once.

2. Agreed, that a lot of churches get money for themselves. Megachurches are most suspect. Any so-called church that has ATMs in its lobby and a preacher wearing thousand-dollar suits and driving a mercedes, is not Christian. It worships money and greed, and probably mainly preaches fear and hatred.

3. Many churches do good works. No, I don't have stats, wish I did. But my own church, for example, has sent lots of groups of its members to the Gulf area to help with reconstruction. By that I mean getting out there with hammers, nails, and saws, and working and sweating. They are there to rebuild, not to convert. Not decisive, but indicative. Picking up where the feds never really got started.

Dear Arminius

I suggested the Book of Job as you rightly pointed out only because it is appropriate to the topic being discussed. It is happy reading because it has a happily ever after ending after all.

The book by Joseph Ratzinger, as Pope Benedict, "Jesus of Nazareth" is very good. (It is hoped that the Pope would complete the second part of his book by Christmas. He is said to have devoted his summer break in August to writing it.) I recommend the book highly to any Christian. There is nothing denominational about the Pope's portrayal of Jesus. Its serious limitation is that it takes prior knowledge of Christianity as given, so it would make less sense to a non-Christian.

Arminius:

I saw that 4 billion on the net at other blogs, more than one. Americans for separation of church and state claims that Bush funded some church with 2 million, (not even the interest on 4 billion) tax dollars on the grounds it was a charitable enterprise even though it actually promoted him. Either there are a lot of malicious liars or the media chooses to ignore it. That is clearly a violation of the first amendment, the door mat of American politics.

I'll try again. I meant to say that churches use the money to promote their businesses and only a trickle if any for actual charity. Another, perhaps better example is Dr Schuller and the Crystal Cathedral. 25 grand will get your name on a door there but not a single bite of bread in a hungry child's mouth. Will giving him more money get some to the poor? How much of what he gets?

Mother Teresa was close enough to that fire, money gained by the church going to the operation of the church and not charity to feel a lot of that heat. Stained glass windows cost a fortune you know,, and they bring in a fortune too that is spent on more stained glass for the most part. I wonder if she ever notice that. California AG Jerry Brown might be able to tell us.

Fr Reese is more in MT's camp by miles than the other, vows of poverty, chastity and obedience. Actually, by the charter of the original church founded by Constantine they're heretics. The first, real reformation was when their groups were founded much later. There are a lot of good people who are throttled by the churches. People like Schuller hide behind them while he violates the first amendment, administration supported.

Jesus said, "sell all your earthly possessions and give to the poor." That's a screwball idea but better than what's happening. Mother Teresa makes headlines because she actually tried at least to give to the poor. I doubt that she had all she needed or that what people thought they were giving to the poor got to her to give.

Giving money to churches in an effort to relieve the things you mentioned is a bad idea, only promotes more churches. We got lots of churches and lots of poor people already.

Dear HEYYOU,

“Moderate, All I hear from you is religion and religion doesn't save you so quit trying.

The person who refuses to change his lifestyle because of what God in His Bible says does what is to him the next best thing. He asks God to change.”

Dude, I know you strongly believe in your position. But have you considered the medical evidence that some people are just wired to be gay. That is to say “God made them that way.”

It seems that some people are hard wired gay, some can switch hit, and more are hard wired straight. I know some right fine people who happen to be gay. They don't seem to be able to do anything about it.

One guy I work with is acutely aware that he missed out on being to raise children because he is hard wired gay. He would have liked to raise a bunch of kids, but he was not sexually attracted to women. He deeply feels the loss, but he could not change his orientation. He is a productive and honorable guy, and I enjoy working with him. BTW, he is also a Christian.

I believe that true followers of Jesus Christ to not persecute others in His name. Are you following the desires of your own heart rather than those of Jesus when you go after people the way you do? Take some time to discern the source of your zeal. Is it really Jesus Christ? Do you think you are really helping anyone or anything with your strident approach? Give it some thought.

BGone, you said:

"It's was reported that more than 4 billion dollars of Katrina FEA money went to ministries."

Of course that has no bearing on what should be done, i.e., helping the people who are still suffering. An interesting statement, nonetheless. I would not put it past the Shrub for doing that if he could have managed it. Any sources?

And although that had no real bearing on what I said, I suppose you were just adding something interesting, which is ok.

For the record, I am neither Christian right nor Evangelist.

Dear Arminius,

“But a number of evangelicals have of late been pushing for action on world hunger, disease, pollution, and global warming. Maybe something good is happening, from a somewhat unlikely source. Naturally, the religious right is outraged at this. I really wonder if any of them have ever read the Gospels.”

It's was reported that more than 4 billion dollars of Katrina FEA money went to ministries. So or not makes no real difference. The question is: which is highest priority, building/rebuilding the churches or relief for the people? Mother may well have encountered that kind of religious charity in Calcuta, a source of doubt about the priorities of God's representatives.

The poor women of Paris sold their bodies rather than starve and put some of the money in the collection at Notre Dame, acceptable if they were truly sorry for what they did to earn the money according to Cardinal. They were sorry before they did what they did but had little choice. Napaleon turned the cathedral over to them on the grounds they had paid for it.

Maybe we can suppose that charity begins at home? Government agencies administering relief are just too bureaucratic, don't you think? Maybe if the whole welfare system was turned over to the Christian church, (as though there was but one)? Jerry Falwell was in favor of that because it would give the church direct taxing authority, a brilliant idea for helping out the needy. Yep, things are looking up alright, the Bible is a proved hoax, consistent with the charity demonstrated by the church.

Moderate, All I hear from you is religion and religion doesn't save you so quit trying.

The person who refuses to change his lifestyle because of what God in His Bible says does what is to him the next best thing. He asks God to change.

Dear Father Reese:

Along with Mother Theresa, you name Peter and Thomas as doubters, but you might also have mentioned Christ himself, who, curiously, doubted in his final agony that God intended to carry through on their plan to redeem the world. I say curiously because Jesus, as the prescient agent of God's divine plan, had full knowledge of the purpose of the crucifixion and the necessity for his extraordinary suffering (as the scapegoat for the sins of all mankind); and yet he could entertain the possibility that God had abandoned him, that is, doubt God and his purpose. But Jesus, who knew the plan and the role he was destined to play in it, had less reason to doubt than later famous doubters—people like Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens—not to mention St. Peter, St. Thomas, Saint Therese, and Mother Theresa.

James Colvert
jcolvert@bellsouth.net

Dear Arminius,

“But a number of evangelicals have of late been pushing for action on world hunger, disease, pollution, and global warming. Maybe something good is happening, from a somewhat unlikely source. Naturally, the religious right is outraged at this. I really wonder if any of them have ever read the Gospels.”

I doubt that they have. I am also interested in the Evangelicals who seem to be realizing that they were played for fools by Bush/Cheney/Rove. Many of these people are very well intended and may well become a positive force over time, once they drop political affiliation and demand improvements in the areas you mention without regard to political parties.

Dear PaganPlace and Cambellite,

So many good points, I don't know where to start.

“OK.... As long as 'people of faith' isn't code for 'conservative Christians and Jews.'”

With my speckled religious past the last thing I would do is place myself above people who have taken a different path. Got a Roman Catholic elementary school education that made me into an Atheist for more than two decades. Study of the sciences and mathematical foundations reluctantly forced me to the conclusion that the Universe was created, and the whoever did it went to a lot of trouble to see that it would support life. During this time, I also study of ancient history and ancient religions.

This resulted in a period that the nuns would certainly have called Pagan. I am not sure you would, though, because I am still not really sure what the term means to modern practitioners. My acquaintance with it comes from the writings of the Ancient World. Platonism, and Neoplatonism. Back then it seems that religion and science were intertwined. One might “participate in a God” by learning the mysteries, and these included mathematical, scientific, and engineering matters. It pointed to the sacredness of creation, and the belief that the Gods were leaving us something to work with. They didn't make creation inaccessible and opaque.

The Roman Catholics of the Middle ages drew heavily upon these Pagan traditions and how they developed knowledge of the world, so there are deep interconnections in the traditions of Catholicism, the Neoplatonics, and the sciences as we have them today. Having read on Newton, Einstein, and Gödel, they seem to all agree on this point. Pretty good company to be in, I think if you are really interested in science and religion.

On experiencing a “crisis of faith”, that is what to do with any faith if I ever got it, I realized that I was not the first to think this over, so I sought out a community to study with that has preserved a long tradition. I never dissembled about my varied path with them, and that seems to be okay with everyone. So I am now a member of a progressive Christian community that gets itself in trouble for being a bit too far ahead of the pace. I have found more decent, honest, and kind people per square foot here than anywhere else I have been. Of course, no one is perfect, but I am a bit too old to ask for perfection, and have none to offer to them in turn.

Peter Kreeft, a noted Christian apologist, commented in one of his books that Christians would find much more in common with Wiccans than they do with the militant Atheist crowd. I think he is right.

So be at peace. You will find nothing from me of right wing fundamentalist cyphers. Being The Moderate, though I will offend all sides from time to time. I wouldn't have it any other way. ;-))

Cambellite:

You are on point about the doing. I am trying to talk to others about what people of faith can approach the issues facing our society. I think that a lot of the Evangelicals are realizing that they have been had big time by the Bush/Cheney/Rove crowd. It will be interesting to see how that plays out.

All the best.

All,

Regarding Moderate's 'To Do' list of things to correct in America, I am in agreement.

But there might be a glimmer of light here and there. The religious right, of course, is obsessed with abortion, stem cell research, homosexuals, and the teaching of evolution. But a number of evangelicals have of late been pushing for action on world hunger, disease, pollution, and global warming. Maybe something good is happening, from a somewhat unlikely source. Naturally, the religious right is outraged at this. I really wonder if any of them have ever read the Gospels.

"I share David's concern that the increasing loss spiritual virtue leads nowhere good."

If by spiritual value you mean faith, hope, charity, fortitude, justice, prudence, temperance, then I too worry about the loss of these spiritual virtues. If more CEOs practiced charity and temperance, we wouldn't have empty factories and store shelves emptied of Chinese-poisionous toys, and there would be shorter lines at the food banks.

If you mean people-doing-things-I-don't-approve-of-with-their-private-bits, then no, I worry more about the worrier.

Jesus didn't argue theology with his disciples, he didn't line them up according to how virtuous they were. He welcomed the outcasts to his company, and he befriended those who had nothing. Under the boot of Rome he taught people to overcome their oppressors by loving each other. And THAT is why Christianity spread across the Mediterranean, and THAT is what we need today, and I don't care what name you call it, and frankly I don't think he would either.

The morality lessons are getting us nowhere. They won't lead us out of the dark, only love will. Love, and faith that Something out there will give us the courage to keep working, even when we can't see the results in front of our eyes.

The problem as stated in the Bible is the unforgivable sin /disbelief/;so if you disbelieve in the existence of god you are not going to ask for forgiveness.Since she plainly stated that she did not believe any longer in god how is she a saint according to the Bible?

Campbellite:

"Arguing over inanities like where it says in the bible this or that is just like that. Giving in to the darkness. Forget the grievances. Love your enemies. Feed the hungry. Clothe the naked. Heal the sick. Give comfort to the comfortless.

*That's* what God wants."

Yes. "They shall know you by how you love one another." I believe we are called to ask better or our society. Any less and we will fail to maintain our ourselves as a great nation and a great people.

I share David's concern that the increasing loss spiritual virtue leads nowhere good. As Dostoevsky said through his character Ivan Karamazov: Without God, all things are permissible. Without God, life is not sacred. Then we get into this wonderful Will to Power thing. The Ancient Romans believed that it was the proper order of things that the strong should dominate the weak. The weak got what they deserved.

Incrementally, we are going back to that kind of outlook. It bodes no good.

Hi, 'Moderate.' Just saw your note on another thread. Been a bit busy.

I don't tend to agree without on much that you say, but here we have something:"

"I think that people of faith need to begin to articulate a program for the care of the Nation."

OK.... As long as 'people of faith' isn't code for 'conservative Christians and Jews.'

"We need to frame this in terms of issues rather than parties. If faith is high jacked by a party affiliation it is faith that suffers."

Also agreed... But... How about issues about which there *isn't* great controversy, debate, bigotry, and issues of civil rights?

"Contrary to the the fulminating Atheists here on "Against Faith" say, Separation of Church and State protects the Church, not the State."

I think it protects both. I think we would not be such a 'religious' country if in fact they hadn't kept the churches out of the dirty business that turned Europe off the whole thing.

Then again, we wouldn't have the problems that come of not taking a more rational and humanistic view, too.

But I don't think this forum is 'Against Faith...' apart from a few people with nothing to say but, 'You live in fairyland, you'll be sorry when you die and find there's ...umm, nothing.'

Kind of like people saying, 'Yer goin' to Hell,'

...which statements are really on about the same intellectual level.

Personally, I think an awful lot of Christians are kind of used to being told in their Churches, 'Everyone thinks this way' and kind of freaking out cause someone gave em the idea that they should take this to public policy, and they're a little bewildered to find life don't work that way, and in fact, a lot of people think they're off their gourd on a few matters, that people have been polite about till they started this big effort to export their intolerances into the public sphere they'd previously been led to believe was supposed to be theirs anyway.

This is all about 'faiths,' if not 'faith.'

What some aren't expecting is to actually come here and meet *other people.*

"Some of the people here have the wherewithal to do this. What do you all think are the most pressing issues?"

Not sure what you mean by wherewithal, in this case, but... I think social and civil justice is really the sine qua non of other important issues, like balancing our economy against the corporations that have taken the American capitalist idea and turned it to profiteering...

I think we have serious foreign policy issues that ideology has led us to make stupid moves that can't come to the good, which we need to accept as having happened and work for better...

I think we need to seriously do something about the quality of our educational system rather than be indulging people's Biblical demands for ignorance to be taught...

Most of all, I think we need to deploy resources, not to the ultra-rich we envy, but to a sustainable future for the world and ourselves, ...more than any religion, people need a sense of *hope,* not that they're slouching toward Apocalypse and being offered a few diversions in the meantime.

We need to deploy our phenomenal resources to *save the fricking world,* and moreover, *improve life,* ...not in a 'magical' moralistic religious-conversion way, but by actually putting our wondrous capabilities to *work for something real for once.*

That's the issues of concern. Basically anything that isn't solely to get the 'moralistic' voting for people leading us to ruin. :)

People ONLY do what they want to do. Mother Teresa is no exception to the rule. She set out to alter what people want to do which just happened to be what she wanted to do at the time, alter what others want to do. She must have doubted what she wanted to do, later.

Altering what people want to do is often unlawful. I can get anyone to do what I want by point a gun at them. That's within the limits of what they can do. It's unlawful to point guns at people, especially true in banks but it will work to get what the person holding the gun wants, within limits.

Altering what people want by pointing the "gun of hell" at them is a tried and true method to create faith. It's also unlawful in some places, China for example where missionaries are jailed and even the president can't get them out.

What people want most of all is to violate the commandments of God. Christianity is wonderful because people can do what they want, violate the commandments and be forgiven. Of course there are considerations, "render to Caesar that which is Caesar's and to God that which is God's." No doubt about it.

Faith is the path to what you want with the simple warning, be careful what you want for you might just get it. Did Mother Teresa get what she wanted and then doubt? Doubt what? What she wanted? We know she did what she wanted to do. Did she get what she wanted and was disappointed, in God?

How sure are you the being in the burning bush really was God? That is the God Mother doubted? Could there be another God? Is the OTHER God watching you get what you want and then seek forgiveness from the son of the God in the burning bush? Without a reasonable shadow of a doubt.

Remember in "The Lord of The Rings" when they all sat in council at Rivendell, and Frodo brought out the Ring? And they all started bickering, about who was to blame for what, and who could and couldn't be trusted, and whose place was where? And when it became obvious that none of the representatives would be able to handle the Ring? Remember how the Ring whispered and fueled the fight until it came nearly to blows? The Frodo stepped up and said he would take it to Mordor?

Arguing over inanities like where it says in the bible this or that is just like that. Giving in to the darkness. Forget the grievances. Love your enemies. Feed the hungry. Clothe the naked. Heal the sick. Give comfort to the comfortless.

*That's* what God wants.

Mother's doubts like us all could have many sources. I had a fellow worker who railed against God because God let his mother die when he was 10. She smoked cigarettes and died of lung cancer. Probably God's fault, don't you think?

I met a young lady who only made it through one year being a nun. Her story is probably more closely related to MT's doubting. Her first teaching assignment was in Yazoo, Mississippi at an all black Catholic school. She was in free fall towards becoming a believer of evolution. I'll spare you of her logic that is still common in the deep south. This much, "you is plum et up with ig-nernce."

Mother no doubt went to her appointed duty with a similar mind set only to find out that people everywhere only do what they want to do. That's the only real undeniable truth. She discovered that the hard way, matriculated at the university of hard knocks. It's very human to blame God for the fate of those who seem to be in misery but do nothing to help themselves. Who's fault is it that children go to bed hungry? In Calcuta they sleep on the sidewalk, if the black hole is full.

God serves many purposes. Being the universal blame for what people do is just one. I think we should look at "acts of God" more closely before blaming God for them. There's a lot of devils and at least on that would be God. Who knows. Maybe Lucifer will eventually make it, if He can get enough people to overcome their doubts. As the Rabbi told the young priest that boasted how priests could become pope, "why stop there. One of my group made it all the way to God."

BGone, your website is a textbook case in pseudo-intellectual flatulence.

Soja John Thaikattil, Sydney, Australia:, HeyYou, Arminius:, Soja, all:

Here's my favorite place to start reading the Bible, http://www.hoax-buster.org/sellyoursoul gives you a good feel for what Mother Teresa doubted and could put you on her team.

Soja,

With all due respect (I am on the believing side here), the book of Job is NOT happy reading! Yes, it is appropriate to the discussion, but I would suggest starting with the Gospels.

Dear HEYYOU:

The Beatitudes, maybe, for starters. The Lord's Prayer (Remember the part that goes Forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us? It is called "The Lord's Prayer" for a reason, you know.) The Book of Job. Proverbs. An honest look at Leviticus. Do you actually keep all the code given there? If not, then why are you so hard on others who don't?

Above all, try not to substitute your judgment for God's. It is a trap we all fall into from time to time.

HeyYou

The book of Job in the Old Testament might make a good beginning as far as this topic is concerned. Happy reading!

The Moderate, what part of the Bible would you like me to read?

Dear Fr Reese

You have made a very important point about the dark night of the soul that is inevitable on any serious faith journey. It does not appeal to those who are addicted to feelings, the "feeling junkies" who try out one religion after another to experience the high that comes at the beginning and give up when one has to endure the feeling desert of spiritual life.

It is equally important, as you mention, that one should not put MOther Theresa or any other saint on such a pedestal that one does not see their life as being examples for one to follow in any humble fashion where one is called to be in life - The call to be faithful where one is placed. Not long ago I listened to an interview given by the grandson of Mahatma Gandhi. He expressed his opinion that Gandhi, if he were alive, would be disappointed that most Indians who admire Gandhi merely worship his picture, without following the principles Gandhi tried to teach through his life.

The lesson Mother Theresa tried to teach was to see Christ in everyone and she did it to the best of her ability. We should merely try to see Christ in the people who cross the path of our lives as best as we can. That is so hard, so hard, even for those of us who would very much like to imitate Mother Theresa in that regard and fail so miserably. Does it really matter that Mother Theresa didn't feel at the top of the world everyday while she lived in accordance with her convictions?

Soja John Thaikattil
Sydney, Australia

There is a long tradition of apophatic worship in Christianity, from John of the Cross and "The Cloud of Unknowing" in Catholicism to Kierkegaard in Protestantism. Its a valued and cleansing phase. The Dark Night of the Soul is something we could all learn from.

Hey Moderate,

Sorry "OLD TIMER"! I'm laughing hysterically now.....I just read that you re-posted my other post. thank you for that. I appreciate the positive response. It's amazing that me being 29 have seen such a change in literally one single decade. I can't imagine what changes have been experienced by the more experienced and wiser folks than I.

I thought "more experienced and wiser" is better than "old timers"

Forgive me.... ha ha :)

Concerning my post on that I have been paying close attention to the social and culteral impact of secularism. It's scaring me.

Bgone,

Dude you lost me.

Not to back out of an argument, but you are very close to committing the one un-forgivable sin Bgone. I would rather not ask you anymore questions or even get into this conversation anymore for your sake. I do not want you to publicly announce what I may be assuming what you really believe. You actually may have intentionally done so already and I really do not hope for that. There's no coming back from that. I think it's best to let this conversation go. I wish you the best Bgone. For your sake I want to end this conversation.

Please, get away from that garbage site. That is the lamest brainwashing garbage I've seen yet. Please Bgone, be careful of what your saying, you may or may not believe in the Christian faith, but why take the chance? It's better for me in my faith to let this conversation go then to allow you to speak about something that can forever condemn you. Sorry Bgone. Take care.

David:

I see. But Satan? Who's Satan anyhow? Never head of he/she/it. Oh! Now I remember. There's a 3,000 year old picture of Satan at that garbage web site. Satan is the accuser, the one angel of God that does the judgment of soul, sees to it that sinners are properly punished. Satan is "the one" that can destroy both body and soul in fiery hell.

The story of the fallen angels says that Lucifer and not Satan tried the old coup de grassy in heaven. Satan is getting a bum rap. Don't you think?

How about Satan worshipers? They hold services where they openly sin. Oh my! You don't suppose Satan will let them slip into heaven just because they say he's really God? That's like trying to get out of a traffic ticket by complementing the officer and saying he should be police chief. I guess it could work. Who knows?

Satan - the accuser
Lucifer - leader of fallen angels
Blaspheming - a woman claiming to be the son of God

Are we speaking in tongues yet?

Bgone,

WHEW....I was a little worried for a minute about you. I'll explain why.

First off, that "hoaxbuster" garbage is just that...garbage. If you want to know how Satan works, it's by means of garbage websites like that one. Why you may ask?

Even Satan knows what the one un-forgivable sin is...blaspheming the Holy Spirit. This website gets people to believe in God and then claim that God is really Satan. Of course Jesus spoke of such claims when the Pharisees and Sadduccees claimed He was driving out demons by way of demonic possesion. This garbage site you posted is trying to get people to believe in God and then claim that these miracles were really performed by Satan. Including the burning bush. To believe this fully is to blaspheme the Holy Spirit. What greater way for Satan to work then to make sure that no matter what, someone commits the one un-forgivable sin of blaspheming the Holy Spirit. Meaning no possible way to be forgiven and then eternal damnation. Points for Satan.

I would hope for now that you really do not believe in God for the sake of this blasphemy. I do hope that you do one day. You may or may not. It's obvious that if you believe in a website like the one posted your willing to believe in any garbage that someone throws at you.....of course except the truth in Jesus. Maybe one day, you'll see. Maybe not. But I would hope that if you do believe in Jesus as God that you would never proclaim that Jesus is Satan. Otherwise, adios. Of course you said that you do not believe in Jesus, so better that for now, than the guarantee of never obtaining salvation.

Concerning MT, yeah she did doubt. Doubt is a part of faith. I can't imagine never doubting. But one thing is for certain, every time a doubt arises in my life, I can just come over to this post and read some atheists opinion and realize why I believe what I do. Jesus always finds His way back in my heart somehow, no matter how far I stray. Can't imagine life without Him.

I think there's a temptation to get lost in ideas, philosophy, dogma, doctrine; to go after the red herring of "what should we think?"

What if, instead, we considered what to DO?

When a person goes through their Dark Night, they are encouraged to continue with prayer/contemplation/whatever name you give it. Just push through, don't get distracted by the scratching of despair at the back of your mind. Eventually, if you don't give up, the dam will break and you'll emerge a new, stronger, more spiritually mature person.

So if the world's problems of war, economic and educational inequity, social disintegration, and so forth, are the result of a global Dark Night, what do we as the world do about it? Do we hide in our closets and pray? Do we give in and join the party? Do we rail against those whose practices we find offensive, who don't fit the mental model we have of how things used to be? (Even, or perhaps because, we misremember and think of The Old Days as good instead of seeing the faults as well.) Or do we get out there and fix the problems to the best of our ability: feed the hungry, clothe the naked, demand justice for the disenfranchised...

I think that in some of the U.S., the essential pointlessness of the current consumer, shallow, hollow lifestyle is becoming apparent. People are finally sick of the Paris Hilton/Brittney Spears type of people. WE are beginning to look deeper. I mean, we're all here, aren't we? Could you have imagined this board existing ten years ago?

And anyway, WHY does a person or society go through a Dark Night, anyway? Is it to mourn the Old Days or to give birth to New Days?

Bgone,

I'm a litte confused by your words. Maybe because I've never heard an argument as such as what you have proposed. I just have two questions for you.

1. How do I know what your saying isn't from Lucifer?

2. Who is Jesus to you then?

----David:

1) I'm only asking a question, not making a statement. The question is: How can I tell God from Devil? You are free to believe Lucifer would ask that question while I doubt He would. It exposes Lucifer but He was crazy enough to try to throw God out of heaven so who knows.

2) Jesus is actually a fictional person. Like most all fictional people HE and HIS story is based upon a real person, a woman that would be Pharaoh, Amenophis IV. Amen-oh-fis IV is "the Amen the faithful at true witness" of Revelation. Want chapter and verse? St John had Egyptian documents in his hands when he had his revelation. That's not my opinion. It's the written historical record. If you can't read it then look at the pictures I almost always say.

Everything goes back to a single point in time and space, Moses making a deal with an on fire supernatural being taught to children to be God, absolutely, no doubt about it. Sorry, there's a lot of doubt. That's completely independent of whether or not there really is a God.

How can I tell that being in the ball of fire was God and not the being in the other story, "Lucifer and the fallen angels" is the question? That Lucifer tale isn't a lie calculated to stimulate faith, cause people to believe something they wouldn't otherwise is it?

You're better off to say the Lucifer tale is a lie and find another source document showing there really is a hell, in my opinion. Maybe if you dropped the notion of hell? Can religion pass the honesty test? Are you real sure that was God in there? Even Mother T it seems wondered about that.

Dear All:

I am taking the liberty of reposting a piece by David. I think that it might offer an interesting discussion point (except, of course, for the part about being an "Old Timer" :-))).

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

Moderate,

Very nice post. I felt compelled to let you know that.

I'm not much of an old timer. I'm quite young (depending on how old the rest of you are). I'm 29. But even in my days in school it was just a fist fight or two once in awhile. Just a couple of months ago I went to my son's middle school (6th grade) and the police had a presentation about school violence. He showed youtube videos of kids in my son's school and other schools in the district (6th and 7th graders) with oozies, pistols, car-jacking an old man and then spinning donuts in the car in the middle of an intersection. 6TH AND 7TH GRADERS!! This wasn't even happening in my time as a 6th grader. I still didn't even know how to wipe my butt right, much less know how to shoot a gun, carjack and do donuts!! All this is less than 2 decades. And its only getting worse.

I wonder if Nietzche was right. Was killing God in the 19th century gonna cause humanity to kill itself? Obviously after looking at the 20th century, it's not that good. And looking at today with a secularist society, maybe Nietzche was on to something. That's probably why he was insane the last 13 years of his life. Killing God meant we define ourselves. Kids are defining themselves by the music, videos, and materialism while schools are ranting that God is a bad word. Nietzsche being an atheist knew that if the whole of society became atheists and completely killed God, then to define ourselves would be the worst thing humanity has seen. All this from an atheist. I'm not saying all atheists are bad people. I'm sure your very nice, but the point is proven with evidence in today's world. Especially the Western world. And now we see the Western World declining and it will continue to decline until we have killed ourselves.

I look forward to it. :(

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

The central theme to me seems to be that ideas do matter.

Dear HEYYOU:

Still at it? Did you actually ever read the Bible yet?

Homosexuals HATE God and the Bible because it convicts and in some cases unfortunately condemns them to eternal seperation from the sourse of all life. Its useless to discuss with them anything of God because they will grasp at the most pathetic straw to justify their lifestyle.

Bgone,

I'm a litte confused by your words. Maybe because I've never heard an argument as such as what you have proposed. I just have two questions for you.

1. How do I know what your saying isn't from Lucifer?

2. Who is Jesus to you then?

Dear Campbellite, Pagan Place, and Arminius:

I am reposting something that grew out of the Kreeft quote above here since it seem to fit. Campbellite's comments about American liberals not being the cause of all the problems of faith are particularly relevant.

The political parties always seek to high jack people of faith.

Far from believing that the liberals are the only problem, I lay a great deal of blame on the Reaganauts and neocons.

Bush and Cheney and their pals are pillaging the wealth of the nation for their friends an concentrating it to create a new Gilded Age.

In spite of their propaganda, I believe that these are not people acting in a way that is informed by faith. The Rove approach is that of a master manipulator who has played the faith communities for suckers. In doing so they have wrought great damage to the nation in general and the faith communities in particular.

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

Arminius:

“First, I am also using 'Disneylander'.

Next, I take issue with the surveys. Paganplace has some valid points - one, the reporting samples must have been skewed; and two, the fact that 1958 sure as hell was no 'Golden Age'. I know this, for I was there, 15 years old, in the South.“

Thank you.

I didn't mean to suggest that that 1958 was anybody's golden age. It was constricted, prejudiced, and hypocritical. Only a small elite (not including me or mine) lived well.

But ask anyone at Va. Tech if the concern about violence in everyday life is misrepresented in that survey.

While I grew up in a gritty and dangerous industrial city that was an ethnic melting pot, and got into some pretty good fights when I got jumped on the means streets. But there was less cold blooded, killing. Sometimes a good fight would clear the air, in fact.

Also, the teenage pregnancy rate was much lower, the drugs were less powerful, the few guns on the streets were not automatics. I don't think that the inner city was anywhere near as violent as it is today.

When I came up was still possible to find upward mobility through modestly priced public higher education. That was true because there was a sense that a great nation had to educate its people, so even if you grew up poor you could reach higher.

Now higher education is out of sight for most kids whose parent's don't have deep pockets because the Reaganauts pillaged the budgets for it.

The President with his tax cuts for his pals is running up vast debt that will weight heavily on the kids who have diminished educational and economic prospects.

Popular culture sells exploitation of women on a vast scale.

Fiduciary responsibility in corporate officers is a thing of the past with CEO compensation growing beyond reasonable economic bounds or reason. So income becomes more unevenly distributed by the year.

I think that a great nation can and must do better, and that this is a moral issue, and the great religions can be engines of renewal. People need to take a breath and look around to see what needs to be done to maintain a great nation, find like minded neighbors and get to work. Fascists like Sam Harris who degrade the nation further by supporting torture in the name of the United States do not have the answers.

I read recently about a program for prison inmates that taught these men who were going to be released that their children needed them, and they should return and become fathers. The out come was very positive. Many of them did. This means that they could be reached, but no one tired before.

Clearly we can do better.

Clearly we must.

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

I think that people of faith need to begin to articulate a program for the care of the Nation.

We need to frame this in terms of issues rather than parties. If faith is high jacked by a party affiliation it is faith that suffers.

Contrary to the the fulminating Atheists here on "Against Faith" say, Separation of Church and State protects the Church, not the State.

Some of the people here have the wherewithal to do this.

What do you all think are the most pressing issues?

David:

"I'm wondering why you question which is Creator and which is created?"

I did not question which is. I asked how can I know which is. Explain the difference in God and Devil so when I hear voices and have visions I will know which being it is. It's perfectly clear that Moses made his deal with the Devil and everyone is calling Devil God and a higher power too.

http://www.hoax-buster.org/sellyoursoul in case you haven't heard. The being in the ball of fire Moses made the deal with to get off the wanted for murder hook is also the father of Jesus.

I think Mother T woke up one day and noticed the money that was sent to her for charity going into other causes ordered by those above her. Wouldn't be surprised if she too ask which being is served by religion. In fact, that's what she did isn't it?

Of course there are all those promises like, "when two or more are gathered in My name..." etc never happening that could have made her doubt. Faith moves mountains of what, money? Mother T was out there where the rubber meets the road and a bit under funded too. Small wonder she doubted a little from time to time.

If you had faith like me that people are confusing God and Devil, worshiping, honoring, adoring, glorifying and making sacrifices to Devil thinking they are doing that for God wouldn't you warn them? I got faith. I believe in God and I see many people believing in Devil calling Him God, at church. That's exactly what Lucifer wants.

Bgone,

Please explain:

"How do we know the "higher power" is God and not Devil?"

Do you believe in a higher power? I'm wondering why you question which is Creator and which is created?

You know, that's just a good column, my agreements and/or disagreements notwithstanding, cause it's just ...well-done. :)

Good level to be on, at least, if I do say. :)

Andy Amy:

People, listen up this is your President speaking, Fidel Castro will be dead soon, if not in two weeks!
-----
The mafia hit man couldn't get Castro, Kennedy couldn't follow through - Bay of Pigs, (invasion planned by Caroline), Nixon couldn't negotiate with him, no other presidents tried and Bush says 2 weeks. When all else fails call on the Devil.

Wonder who'll be around to pick up the pieces in Cuba. Myer Lansky is dead isn't he? Maybe Havana will return to the glory days when the mafia ran the place. Lookout Las Vegas.

The Moderate:

It's beginning to look a lot like all those tax breaks went into mortgage backed securities, speaking of who'll be around to pick up the pieces. The world is teetering on the brink of the greatest depression ever, greater than the most vivid imaginable. There are no quick and easy fixes to the "sub-prime mortgage" mess. There are some quick and easy bucks to be made but not for the faint of heart. The Bush bunch has experience at that, S&L bailout orchestrated by Pappy Bush and cashed in on by the family, according to reliable sources.

It's an ill wind that blows nobody good. Bush advises the country, 9-11-2001 "Go to your churches, temples, synagogues and mosques and pray." He should have added, "for only the Devil can help us now." If he had added the last then he wouldn't be president,

They stand at ground zero and sway the voters. They come in the name of God. At least they use the word God. Was that really God in the ball of fire, the being Moses made the deal with to become the tax collector? Was that really God that gave Pat Robertson a preview of the future? How can we tell if it's God or Devil.

Any ideas Fr Reese? The world desperately needs to know which supernatural being is giving our leaders so much help. How do we know the "higher power" is God and not Devil?

People, listen up this is your President speaking, Fidel Castro will be dead soon, if not in two weeks!

Dear Campbellite,

"The cultural changes across the world are too varied and widespread to blame on "American Liberals"."

I think you have you finger on something important there too. It is not just "American Liberals" who are the root of this change.

Our current President is not an "American Liberal", and yet he has contributed to the problem far more than his liberal predecessor.

Tax cuts that rob the children to give toys to the rich, elective war in Iraq, outing CIA operatives, defaulting on disaster recovery in Katrina, presiding over a country that does not provide medical care for tens of millions of children. I don't see much moral decision making in all that.

Fr Reese: I agree with you, "The church is to be congratulated for its openness in publishing Mother Teresa’s letters." Now if we could get the same honesty about the "Fatima letters" and a few other things as well. What did those children say in the end? "Lies that cause people to believe are moral" are they not?

Was it the church's initiative or is this a case of "hiding in plain open view?" Were the letters already published?

http://www.hoax-buster.org for the earth shattering truth. The truth will set us free,, free to have undying faith in God. That would be the real God and not the sun, not that the sun is to not be believed.

Can we believe Mother T? I think she had faith in God and realized like millions now that the Bible is a literary, (stretching the word, you call that literature?) hoax.

Dear Campbellite:

Thank you for your thoughtful reply. I believe you have put your finger on it with:

"I see the new problems as symptoms of despair, the opposite of Faith."

The loss of faith in our gods, our culture, our neighbors, and our selves leaves us without compass in a night too dark to see.

People like Sam Harris, one of our Panelists, quickly come up with the ideal from the Twentieth Century Fascists that torturing our enemies will somehow fill the spiritual void within ourselves. It won't. It will only make the night darker.

With regard to:

"And MT, as an example of how people can continue to work for the light while immersed in darkness, will become very, very important."

I am in awe. In these fractious blogs one does not often encounter profound truths. But you have given one. I will keep an eye out for your posts in the future.

Thank you, and all the best to you in your journey.

Moderate, you've said a mouthful. I see the new problems as symptoms of despair, the opposite of Faith. And these symptoms aren't limited to U.S. high schools. The cultural changes across the world are too varied and widespread to blame on "American Liberals".

If the culture change can be viewed as a spiritual emptiness, a global dark night, then the solutions will be different than I think most people realize. And MT, as an example of how people can continue to work for the lighth while emmersed in darkness, will become very, very important.

I hope the good Father reads this. I'm very interested in his thoughts. I would be shocked if the church hasn't taken this line of thought already.

Dear Campbellite:

Good questions. Peter Kreeft in his book Making Choices pointed out that a survey of high school principals in 1958 identified the main problems among their students to be:

1. not doing homework
2. not respecting property - e.g., throwing books
3. leaving lights on and doors and windows open
4. throwing spit balls in class
5. running through the halls

The same survey thirty years later was different, with the top five being:

1. abortion
2. AIDS
3. rape
4. drugs
5. fear of violent death, murder, guns and knives in school

Can anyone think that this is progress? How did we come from the one to the next?

I just had a thought:

Is the angst, despair, and destruction in our society a kind of cultural "dark night"? And if so, what might the return of god's presence look like? what would it feel like? What guidance can the experiences of the saints give us?

Good evening, Father Reese. Kind of quiet over this way tonight. Thank you for your well written essay.

Particularly the part about putting MT on a pedestal and letting ourselves off the hook by saying that it is so simple that only a saint can do it.

Though I am not RC, I do admire the Society of Jesus and its membership. I will look forward to your next post.