Sandra Bullock's 'blind' faith

I think Christians should stop acting as if they invented kindness.

Religion has no more to do with being a good person than whether one is left-handed, right-handed, or ambidextrous. Christianity is an ideology (a system of ideas). Thinking and doing are two different things, and what ideology one has is irrelevant.....

Perhaps part of the problem, as someone once said, is that the media loves bad news. That old saying "if it bleeds it leads" covers a lot. The liberal media loves to report on the preacher caught in adultery but do they cover the congregation supporting poor families, food banks, tutoring poor children? Do they do a survey of all the Churches and Synagogues running Job Clubs to support all the unemployed or the Ministers and Rabbis quietly giving money to congregants in need? Why do you pick on Christians who "don't walk the walk" while so many actors, politicians and media darlings who lecture others on "going green" fly to Climate Change conferences in private jets then use limos to get to their SUV's. I'd love to see more on the front pages of the Washington Post on the Environmental Movement's biggest hypocrites...like when Leonaro di Caprio flew into DC on a private jet to do a film. Because, you know, its just so hard to get a commercial flight here... Religious people are still people, with all the flaws and weaknesses that comes with being a human being. There are a lot of them quietly going about the work of helping where its needed most. The miracle is that as hard as life is there are still so many people trying to do a good thing...trying to help others.

Last but not least, I find your comment that "Leigh Anne Tuohy, with her expensive car, dolled-up appearance and don't-mess-with-me attitude may seem more southern belle than follower of Christ" bizarre and insulting. I didn't realize that caring about your appearance and having a can do attitude made you ineligible for being a Christian. I guess you have learned the old lesson about not judging a book by its cover.

He (Jesus) also said in Matthew to not be showy about your charity.

That may be true, but "evangelizing" is a different matter. I wish Christian's weren't so showy about converting everyone they meet.

I think the real difficulty is that so many religious leaders have sold their souls to politicians. I speak specifically of the so called religious right whose only true consistency is support for the republican party, not to any Christian ideal. The attempts to support the power of the government to directly interfere in peoples lives and individual choices has done more damage to the reputation of the Christian faith than any PR work of individual acts of kindness and generosity which really do follow the Christian ideal.

Religious leaders that focus on what people shouldn't do, instead of helping people as Jesus instructed them to do, is incredibly destructive. It also labels them as hypocrites, liars, and political shills.

The Tuohys have acted commendably, that is without a doubt. What is erroneous is to attribute this behavior as being derived from christianity instead of from humanity's generosity in general, and at that, not just humanity's. Numerous other animal species have adopted non kindreds to be raised as their own, even other species! This is well documented.
As for christianity being the source of this compassion - correlation is not causation.
If compassion were divinely inspired, what would be the need of an eternal punishment in hell? Why the threat of endless torture to persuade people towards goodness if christianity itself is the cause of goodness?

"I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. They are so unlike your Christ." Mohandas Gandhi...

Similar to Ms. Bullock, I've not always felt that Christians did anything more than carry the banner.

That said, I'm very curious as to why all this kindness and generosity is linked specifically with Mrs. Tuohy's religious belief.

I have known of deeply moving acts of compassion and generosity shown by people who would rather eat ground glass than enter a church or claim they did it as an act of faith in an unseen god. They did it, obviously, because they have compassion as one human being to another human being.

Judaism teaches us to give anonymously. This ensures sensitivity and protects those in need.

Lostein, excellent post.

There seems to be a general ignorance of Christianity in the "On Faith" blog. The reason that people trumpet their faith in Christ is because they are commanded to do so. The last words Jesus spoke while on the earth are the following: Matthew 28:19. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: 20. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

This passage is known as the Great Commission and most Evangelical Protestants try to follow it. That is why churches send missionaries to foreign lands and this is why people share their faith in the United States, no matter how much they are ridiculed and mocked. Jesus Christ was ridiculed and mocked and ultimately he was crucified -- the Christians should expect no less. (Yes; we realize we are ridiculed and mocked by the world; it is a simply a cross we are called to bear.)

Christianity does not have a PR problem per se. Again, there is a general ignorance of Christianity in this blog. Christianity teaches that all people are sinners and fall short. Romans 3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; The fact that the pastor has fallen short or that someone in the congregation has fallen short is not a great surprise; it is disappointing because Christians have a standard (unlike the secular world) but it is not surprising.

So in some respects everyone at the church is a hypocrite because everyone falls short. The only difference between the Christian and the non-believer is that the Christian is attempting to do the will of God and the Christian is resting in the shed blood of Christ to pay for their sins; the non-believer believes they can stand before God based on their own goodness and in this they will be sadly disappointed.

Finally, the author of the blog seems to believe that Christians are commanded to take vows of poverty and to somehow withdraw from society. This is not a biblical doctrine; though it is a dream of the secular Left. Christians want to be successful just as much as non-believers. Tim Tebow wants to win football games just as much as anyone else; Mike Huckabee wanted to be President just as much as anyone else; Sam Walton wanted to be a successful businessman just as much as anyone else. Remember, America was once a Christian nation (let's say 100 years ago) and those people who were building our national foundation had no desire to take vows of poverty; they were active participants in all aspects of the society.

i call myself a Christian.. iwas baptized as an adult at st pauls, united methodist church in tallhassee florida by the reverend Catherine Fluck_Price ( a very spiritual person on my opinion i have seldom felt the power i felt when praying with her) in a service in the small chapel instead of the "big" room , of the bigg big church i felt more comfortable inth esmall room. the church was the church of who became the first woman methodist bishop in the southern region and when these two ladys were ther it was a very very special Godly spiritual church and me a person who seldom feels comfortable anywhere anytime in my life ..felt very comfortable.. i don't go to the big church by the little pond in tallahassee . the little pond is lake ella to the locals fred drake park to who knows .... but i guess it matters to them since they have the sign at lake ella. I am not allowed to go to lake any more i have been in my opinion illegally given a trespass warrant because of my freedom of speech performance art. i feel i should be able to say when is tome delays trial going to begin in tallhassee in public. even the Aclu has sent me an e-mail saying they.. are doing much more important things in fl and tallhassee than astand up for the constitution... yes i think most christians are pople who get to gether to help like minded people once a week in big empty buildings they call churches while people go homeless,.. in my way of thinking th ebaptist wouldn't even let Jesus Christ himself be a member of thier PHine church since he like to drink wine and turned water into very good win so the people could celebrate at a wedding. baptist are two good two drink maybe... instead of asking what Jesus wood due maybe they should ask what flipper the porpoise (with a purpose) that was mistakenly called a dolfin on tv what he wood due or dew or do they seem to have thier words in the bible mixed up 2 me maybe

Christianity has a PR problem because its values - respect for life, love for one another - are anatema to many of us today. Relatedly, many Christians call themselves such, and believe themselves to be such, without embracing their faith fully; we get too obsessed with wealth, power, popularity, and other misplaced things.

Many Christians do wonderful acts as part of their faith. Perhaps the most notable aspect of the Touhys' act is the sacrificial nature - they concsiously, deliberately, and unashamedly opened up their family home to an outsider. They could have been content with placing Michael in a home, or supporting him financially - both worthy in their own right - but, no, they sacrificed their family. And, in the nature of Christian sacrifice, came out the other end stronger.

Mrs Touhy attributes her actions to her Christian faith. How nice it would be if the athiests would accept this at face value and stop trying to twist her actions into some all-purpose humanitarian framework.

Regarding this: "Leigh Anne Tuohy is a Christian woman who wears designer clothes"

What?

Since when is it un-Christian to be fashionable? It that just a failed joke or are you really stupid?

Hmmm, Mr. and Mrs. Touhy are Old Miss alumni so was it a Christian act or simply alums wanting to see their school excel in football? I doubt if Mr. Oher were five feet tall, weighed 140 lbs and not gifted athletically that he would have been adopted.

THEWIZARD1, Gandhi did not know many evangelical Christians. You could hardly call Lord Mountbatten or Winston Churchill evangelical Christians in the same way the Tuohys are.

Foreigners often conflate Christianity with being an United States citizen. Anyone who lives in this country knows that most of the people are not Christians. Yes, there is a large minority of Christians in the country but most people do not believe in the Biblical Jesus Christ like the Tuohys do.

"Or is Bullock right that too many religious people talk the talk but don't walk the walk?"

Yup, you're stupid. This false image of Christians is leftist media propaganda. You should know better than to believe crap like this. Sandra I forgive because she's immersed in a corrupt Hollywood culture. But you should know better.

On thhe other hand, you're immersed in thee corrupt media culture, so I forgive you too for being detached from reality. It's not really your fault, but I expect better from you.

Hmmm, Mr. and Mrs. Tuohy are Old Miss alumni so was it a Christian act or simply alums wanting to see their school excel in football? I doubt if Mr. Oher were five feet tall, weighed 140 lbs and not gifted athletically that he would have been adopted.

to CCNL1: Your doubts about the Tuohy's motivations are addressed in the film The Blind Side. When that scene came up, I was shocked, because such a crass thought hadn't even occurred to me as I had watched the story unfold to that point.
Crass thinking is common and typically encouraged in much of our culture, so you're certainly not alone in making your assumptions about why other people choose as they do. You know, of course, that it doesn't make your doubts right.
The Tuohys first encountered him (if the scene is presented accurately in the film) as a lone figure out in the cold of a dark night, nowhere to go. They stopped their car, invited him in, and brought him home. They did not stop to have a conversation: "Hey, there goes a big black guy! He MUST be good at football! If we adopt him now, in two years we can make sure Ole Miss gets him on the roster to win football games!"
No, they just saw a needy person and attended to his needs. That happens sometimes.
CCNL1, you might even have helped someone yourself, likely without even thinking crassly about it: "Someone else learning about my act of kindness will work to ensure I look greedy and manipulative!"

My next comment is for author Elizabeth Tenety, from whom I would love a response.

You write: "Leigh Anne Tuohy is a Christian woman who wears designer clothes. (It does seem God loves contradictions …"

Please, explain the contradiction in that first sentence. It is not readily apparent.

Christ exhorted us all to love our neighbor as ourselves, or as I have learned, love our neighbor first, because he knew what giving love will do for all of us. I have come to the conclusion that giving love, giving service, is actually a selfish act because the giver usually gains far more than the receiver. But that is what Christ knew long before I did. And so in those moments, which are far too infrequent, when I give of myself and come away with that warm feeling, I am willing to be selfish and know that God is smiling too.

Of course it his human nature to be generous. It is also human nature to be selfish and destructive. All I can say is that my life long faith in Jesus and God have freed me to be much more generous because I love more people in a deeper way. While that same faith has made me less selfish and destructive as a person. This, I believe, is what religion and spirituality are all about.

Monty Keeling

In my experience, there are few Christians speaking in public who can adhere to the commands judge not let ye be judged, don't cast stones unless you are without sins, and don't bear false witness against your neighbors. Hence, it is common to read Christians misrepresenting and condemning other people's motives, while at the same time excusing their own desires for great worldly success, and for seeing others punished. Not wanting to be poor and wanting to be rich are two different things. Falling short of a goal is not hypocrisy -- rationalizing the fact that you're not really trying for the goal you have announced is.

This post sets up the Pharisee approach as the acceptable benchmark for being a Christian (if you're not perfect then you are false). We are all sinners, day in and day out before and after accepting Christ. That's exactly why we need Him. Christianity is not about nice or poor clothes - I suspect if Ms. Touhy wore rags she would be blasted as putting on a show of humbleness - or about the car one does or doesn't drive, house one lives in, etc. It's about a relationship with Him that slowly and surely reveals His goodness while covering with His grace our fallen nature found in every aspect of our internal and external life. I am certain Mrs. Touhy isn't a perfect woman (good, Lucifer tried that) but Jesus has her blind side. In the life of this young man, she and her husband threw a TD for Christ's team.

The view if a Christian sins, they are a hypocrite misses the point of the religion.

We are all imperfect and subjected to temptation regularly and fail at times.

Christ's sacrifice brings forgiveness for those inevitable failures when forgiveness is sought with humility.

Merry Christmas to All!

After citing the Bible to support other points, Ignorant Hillbilly says, "the author of the blog seems to believe that Christians are commanded to take vows of poverty and to somehow withdraw from society. This is not a biblical doctrine; though it is a dream of the secular Left."

In Mathew, Chapter 19, Jesus counsels a rich man to sell off all his possessions if he wants to have eternal life. Verses 23 and 24 state: Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter in the kingdom of heaven. And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God."

This supports the view that striving for material success is not sanctioned by Christian doctrine; it is clearly not an idea invented by the "secular Left".

As an ex-Christian, I am dismayed by the number of people I know personally who loudly proclaim their faith to all and sundry but whose primary passion seems to be money. There is little to no resemblance between them--despite loud protestations to the contrary--and the man Jesus.

allknowingly writes:
I think Christians should stop acting as if they invented kindness.
different things, and what ideology one has is irrelevant.....
--------------------------------------
No, Christians did not invent kindness. It was instilled in us as the imago dei, the image of God, at creation. But Jesus did exhort us to go beyond the norm, to give sacrificially, even unto death. Jesus didn't invent compassion, but He did raise the bar considerably; And it was through those acts of compassion that the early church attracted others despite the persecutions leading to martyrdom.

Here's another question for the author of this column, Elizabeth Tenety. I, too, would like a response.

You write: "Leigh Anne Tuohy is a Christian woman who wears designer clothes. (It does seem God loves contradictions -virgin birth, anyone?)

Is it really necessary to mock seriously held beliefs by Christians? Do you think it's cute to make fun of the concept of "virgin birth"? I find that off-hand remark to be extremely offensive and one that shows you are just trying to show case your self-imagined wit.

Yeah, what's with the comment about virgin birth? Are you as ready to mock Muslim beliefs? Or only Christian, since your neck is safe?

tbrucia writes:
Religion has no more to do with being a good person than whether one is left-handed, right-handed, or ambidextrous. Christianity is an ideology (a system of ideas). Thinking and doing are two different things and what ideology one has is irrelevant....
-------------------------------------
You cannot possibly be serious when you say that one's ideology does not affect behavior. I will grant you that thinking and doing are not the same thing. But the closer that we adhere to a given ideology, then the greater relevance it has in our decisions, our behaviors, and our lives. For example: your ideology prompted you to make the above statements, did it not? Look at history. Is it not the ideological philosophies of any given era that changes the courses of history? For better or worse, of course it does.
Whether it was Martin Luther's Wurtenburg Theses, Marx and Engel's Communist Manifesto, or Martin Luther Kings Civil Rights, these ideologies changed thoughts, behaviors, societies and cultures. Don't ever think that what you believe is irrelevant.
Because ideology does affect beliefs and behaviors, then your other statement about it having as little affect as being right or left handed concerning acts of compassion, morality or goodness also does not make sense. When I see a secularist ideology inspire them to do the same things with the same numbers and the same resources and making the same sacrifices as the hundreds of thousands of Christian missionaries around the world, then we can start comparing ideologies.

Sandra Bullock is reputedly one of the wealthiest and savviest of the Hollywood celebrity mavens and wouldn't have backed a loser - period.

She knows her audience, and predicted correctly that this timely theme was solid gold.

Exactly how often do wealthy white protestant Christians from Tennessee adopt impoverished black children that go on to become successful football players? Maybe such a paradox occurs once in anyone's lifetime.

The prescient Ms. Bullock knew that a one time event, sufficiently well portrayed, was good for at least a Golden Globe, if not an Academy Award.

The movie says a whole lot more about the canniness of the celebrity and virtually nothing about Christians and Christianity.

Why, I'll bet Ms. Bullock could make a darn good movie about Christian rodeo riders from Texas, if she had a mind to!

As a former pastor of urban and cross-cultural ministry at a large evangelical church, I was always amazed at how many people in our congregation 'just did things', as acts of compassion and sacrifice. Tutoring kids in an urban school, welcoming internatinoal students into their homes for meals and friendship, staffing homeless shelters, teaching English to immigrants, opening homes to foreign refugees (yes, to live in their home while they looked for housing), helping single parents, adopting orphan kids and being foster parents, spending Saturdays repairing old donated cars to give to people without one, and the list goes on almost endlessly. Christians do not have a corner on compassion, and God touches the hearts of people of many faiths (or no faith) to help those in need. But, I know very few of my evangelical friends who would not give of their hands and hearts, when maybe there are other things that would be more 'fun'. The reality: The spirit of God moves closer to us, and we see it more clearly, when we joyfully live others-centric lives. Read the story of a once-little-known nun named Teresa. There are millions who live in America with her spirit. God bless everyone this Christmas, and when you see those guys by the door of a store ringing their bells, look them in the eye and put something in there -- every time you pass. A homeless person will eat because of your small act.

This is a time of great joy for Christians! Why wouldn't we want to share that with other people? Try living your life up to the teachings of Jesus and you're going to be a hypocrite at some point. It's the trying, though, that's transformative. And no amount of mocking is going to spoil the joy of God's unconditional love. Merry Christmas!! Really!!

The good words of Sanbra B. are a must written in her film contract.
Love one another goes back few millenia BCE: it's called The Golden Rule and The Ethic of Reciprocity. The believers in Jesus and in The Way did not invented that.

Few things stink in the nostrils of most people more than hypocrisy. Even children can smell it. As long as hypocrites carry the banner, Christianity will have a major PR problem. In my own experience, most Christians I know are fine people and don't feel the need to talk about it; those who talk the loudest are usually the ones to watch out for. Coincidence?

The Golden Rule is evident in every faith, and it is why it is now my true faith. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Period.

Religion and the Church are for sinners --so, quess what, everyone qualifies. All people of faith are on a journey to live better lives and to help others, but no one ever reaches the end of that journey. So I too am uncomfortable with anyone who claims that he or she "has arrived" at the end. We won't -- we can't. Our lives are the witness -- not preaching and not shouting and not condemning others' motives or intentions.

ZZIM: Do you really believe that hypocrisy among Christians is an invention of the media and the political Left? Do you really think that kind of hypocrisy hasn't been around for centuries? Does the name Larry Craig mean anything to you? David Vitter? Ted Haggard?

I find it interesting that rather than simply say that you disagree with Ms. Tenety, you feel compelled to call her "stupid". Is that what Jesus would do?

Strange that the Tuohy's with all their money, only adopted a bruising 300 pounder who obviously was born to play football at Old Miss. The Tuohy's made sure of that!!!

From RC13:

"The Tuohys first encountered him (if the scene is presented accurately in the film) as a lone figure out in the cold of a dark night, nowhere to go. They stopped their car, invited him in, and brought him home.

The real story: from Wikipedia:

"After playing football his freshman year at a public school in Memphis, Oher applied for admission to a private school, Briarcrest Christian School, at the instigation of acquaintance Tony Henderson, with whom he was staying temporarily. Henderson was sending his son to the school in order to fulfill the dying wish of the boy's grandmother, and thought Oher might as well come along. The school's football coach submitted Oher's school application to the headmaster, who agreed if Oher could complete a home study program first. Despite not finishing the program, he was admitted when the headmaster realized that his actions had the consequence of having removed him from the public education system.[1]

Oher was living with several families and a football teammate at Briarcrest for a year and a half or so until Leigh Anne and Sean Tuohy, a couple with a daughter and son at Briarcrest, allowed Oher to move in with them and began taking care of his needs after becoming familiar with his difficult personal circumstances. "

They also connected him with a tutor, who worked with him for twenty hours a week.[1] At Briarcrest, he was named Division II (2A) Lineman of the Year in 2003 and First Team Tennessee All-State.[2] Scout.com rated Oher a five-star recruit and the #5 offensive lineman prospect in the country.[3] Oher eventually brought his 0.6 grade point average up to a 2.52 GPA by the end of his senior year by getting all A's and B's and staying on the Honor Roll, which brought his GPA up to 2.05, which he then was able to raise above a 2.65 so he could attend a NCAA Division 1 school by enrolling in some 10-day-long internet-based character courses from Brigham Young University which finally raised his graduating GPA over the required limit.[4][1][5]"

continued below:

"College career

After receiving scholarship offers from the University of Tennessee, Louisiana State University, the University of Alabama, and the University of South Carolina, among others, Oher ultimately decided to attend the University of Mississippi, the alma mater of Leigh Anne Tuohy and Sean Tuohy, with whom he was living at the time.[6] His decision was not without controversy. The National Collegiate Athletic Association suspected that the Tuohys had taken Oher in and added him to their will in order to secure his services as a player for their favorite college, but an investigation did not affect his eligibility.[1] Oher's high school coach Hugh Freeze also created the appearance of possible impropriety by taking a job as UM's assistant athletic director for external affairs twenty days after Oher signed a letter of intent with the school. Freeze claimed that the offer was not an example of quid pro quo for encouraging Oher to attend Mississippi, but rather the result of a pre-existing relationship with Mississippi offensive coordinator Noel Mazzone.[7] The NCAA later ruled that Freeze had committed secondary violations by contacting Memphis-area prospects on behalf of the school before he had officially become an employee.[8]

Oher started in 10 games as a guard during his first season with Mississippi, becoming a first-team freshman All American. He shifted to the position of left tackle for the 2006 season, and was named to a variety of preseason All-Conference and All-American teams.[9][10] He was named a second-team SEC offensive lineman after his sophomore season and a first-team SEC offensive lineman after his junior season. Oher was also successful in an academic sense at Ole Miss, and his IQ increased 20 to 30 points between when he was measured in the public school systems growing up and when he was measured in college.[1]"

I was a Christian by birth (mindless operation on my part) became an agnostic as a teen by judging what I saw daily in real life and then a spiritual believer of some sort when I was granted sobriety at the age of 41. Labels are almost always misleading if not totally wrong. I keep mine very simple. A Salvation Army person ringing a bell in the cold at this time of year-"good". I don't see these people as Christian but just as good people. My life has brought me into close contact with many Jews and their families. Kindness, caring, loving-"good". Lying thieving pastors and pillars of the Jewish and Christian communities according to their public badges-"bad". Muslims bombed out of their homes by strangers from 35,000 feet-"bad". Pictures of WWII with people like my dad being blown to bits-"bad". None of these judgments of mine need a complicated label or ideology to explain. Real life is very complicated. Sobriety taught me to keep it simple and not to pre judge. It's not easy.

Oher did eventually make it to college and the NFL thus the "true story". The trappings of the entire story line were so phony the movie became a Disney cartoon. Since when do high-heeled Southern belles wiggle on to the football field to instruct a coach on the choice of plays? Worse than that Mrs. Touhey drives her BMW into the hood to challenge a bunch of crack dealers. Sudden death anyone? Oher got his grades up in high-school by utilizing online courses from Brigham Young which could be completed in 10 days and almost always resulted in an A grade.
Get the facts right and don't use Christianity to explain this Hollywood fabrication.

CCNL1 - the Wiki reference was far from the full story. I've yet to see the movie but Michael Lewis, a talented and reputable writer, authored the book upon which it's based. While not a football fan - and even less fond of family values-espousing Christians who talk one way and walk another - I read the book and found Oher and the Tuohy's story amazing. The notion that the Tuohys adopted Oher because of his football prowess is BS. There are plenty of easier ways to score tickets to an Old Miss football game than taking a kid with Oher's issues into your family. And the comment that they "only adopted" Oher (and not others?) was ridiculous. With all due respect, how many foster kids have you adopted or extended yourself to help? One - two - none? This is tough work that I, for one, am unwilling to undertake. Good for the Tuohys, good for Oher and good for society, which has benefitted from having one fewer young person who's "aged-out" of foster care and is now desperate and out on the streets.

Being among the wealthiest nations in the world, it should not come as a shock that there is a scarcity of genuine witnesses and real followers of Jesus in America. The Bible is filled with examples of this, to have faith in God you have to have to get humbled, Blessed are the poor, the meek shall inherit the earth.

We still have freedom of speech and religion in America, and Christians should be free to express their faith, everyone here has the right to choose whether they want to believe or not, and no one has the right to force religion on anyone, neither should we try to change the Constitution and attempt to force people to not practice a particular religion.

I helped a man dig his car out of the snow last week here in Wisconsin. I'm an atheist - does that mean I'm charitable without being a christian? Christians could do this every day if they liked but prefer to wait for a 2000 year old book to tell them when to be good.

PR problem? No. Yes the Oher story is wonderful and the Touhys should be commended. BUT, one reason this became such news is that such acts by Christians are - on the whole rare.

Also, witness the current health care debate. Complex issue? Not really. To have universal health care, you would need to rein in exhorbitant pay to insurance executives and doctors. The U.S. DOES NOT, on average, spend three times the amount per person on health care as other developed nations because we have three times better health care. We know why. How can a CHRISTIAN NATION allow tens of millions to go without quality health care? But essentially that is what ALL Republicans (and some Democrats) are willing to do: sacrifice the poor to protect the wealthy. And you have to figure 99% of these "decent" legislators are Christians, right? Go figure.

Wow, Cogosome, are you claiming America is a Christian nation?

Anyway, such acts as the Tuohys' are on the whole rare for EVERYONE. Don't read much about atheists, agnostics, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, etc., etc., etc., etc., doing what they did.

So why single out Christians for not being able to live up to their aspirations every second of every day? Who else does? Why should they be targeted for their humanness more than people from any other group?

I just don't get the criticism of Christians in particular. If you're not a Christian yourself, why on earth would you feel justified in criticizing those who are? Mystifying.

hercster44: You cannot be born a Christian. I don't know who taught you this but it is incorrect. (This is one of the big differences between the Catholicism and Protestant Biblical Christianity -- Catholics believe they are baptized into the Church as infants; Reformation Protestantism, the faith of the people who founded the nation (see Pilgrims, Puritans, Presbyterians, Baptists, etc., has always rejected this doctrine).

In order to become a Christian you must believe in the Biblical Jesus Christ and this typically includes a public declaration of faith. Romans 10:9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. 10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

Of course, Jesus taught the same thing when he said a person must be born again to enter His Kingdom. John 3:3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

It is not possible for an infant or a toddler to make this decision.

No one is born a Christian; this is a conscious choice person makes because they are convicted of their sin and drawn to Christ -- God's remedy for sin.

acrossthegulf: Jesus said is was hard to get into heaven if you were wealthy -- not impossible. Yes, most affluent people have rejected Jesus Christ because they love this world more than they love the next. And yes, they will not make it to heaven.

However, the Bible is clear that people have a right to private property and have a right to enjoy the fruits of their labor. 1 Corinthians 9:7 Who goeth a warfare any time at his own charges? who planteth a vineyard, and eateth not of the fruit thereof? or who feedeth a flock, and eateth not of the milk of the flock? 8 Say I these things as a man? or saith not the law the same also? 9 For it is written in the law of Moses, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth God take care for oxen? 10 Or saith he it altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, this is written: that he that ploweth should plow in hope; and that he that thresheth in hope should be partaker of his hope.

I rarely read the column "On Faith" since it's secular view condones such practices as wicca and scientology. Today's post and comments are representative of why I shan't read this column again anytime soon. Your anti-Christian bigot readership writes with such "expertise" about my faith in manners they would never consider using concerning Islam, for fear of being killed, or Judaism for fear of being called anti-Semite. Pathetic. But then the tone of the column sort of begs such publicly taudry bigotry. I guess when you conclude Christian charity and love are a scam you are free to avoid either in your own lives.

It's probably more to do with the press.

Pastor misappropriating funds: front page news.

Christian in the same church adopting a cold homeless boy, no notice. Until he starts playing in the NFL.

Teacher caught compromised with student: front page news. Guidance councilor works after school with disadvantaged students on her own. No one hears about it, no news story. Until one of the students publishes her 3rd best seller.

If it bleeds, it leads. If there is no conflict, it's not a story

Chadwick1776, I agree wholeheartedly with you. I normally don't read this page either because of the Post's blatant bias, but maybe the cabin fever with the blizzard caused me to take a look. I didn't like what I saw, and the author doesn't have the courtesy to respond to questions posed to her. I wish there was a "report offensive comment" under her entire column!

CCNL1:
While I hesitate to question the infallibility of Wikipedia, the claims that the Touhy's only took in Oher in order to supply Ole Miss with a good O-Lineman or as a meal ticket are patently false. Oher was living with them prior to showing any real promise on the football field. What you are essentially saying is that the Touhy's somehow recognized (a year or two in advance of any coach or scout) they had an All-American on their hands. Quite the talent evaluators, those Tuohy's. As for the idea of using him for material gain, they were already worth in the neighborhood of $50 million. The book (researched and written by an objective observer, Michael Lewis) is quite clear on the timeline. The only folks ascribing nefarious intent have been SEC fans from schools other than Ole Miss (By the way, I'm a Pac-10 guy, so I have no dog in this hunt). Is it really that impossible to believe that the Tuohy's were motivated not by self-interest, but by something more altruistic? Sheesh.

Persiflage: Sandra Bullock is savvy and prescient? Allow me to introduce you to Hope Floats, All About Steve, Two Weeks Notice, Premonition and of course Speed 2. She's bombed more than she's hit.

It was a kind act motivated by Christians who take their faith seriously. Why does that incite so much bitterness from people who don't share the faith? Just let it be.
If someone who was Muslim or Bahai did something motivated by faith, I'd just think to myself, "That's really great" and I'd log into my brain another example of how Muslims and others who believe differently aren't all terrorists and there are good people of all faiths around the world.
The fact that Christians evoke so much fierce backlash, cynicism and criticism shows how the critics are often narrow minded and hypocrites themselves. Those who think we should accept all people just as they are should practice just that, even when it comes to Christians.
Merry Christmas to all and may God bless you and yours, especially those who are hard hearted cynical haters.

Religion of any kind and doing good to others are two completely seperate things. Many non-religious persons do good to others. In fact, it's probably more genuine coming from the non-religious because they were not "commanded" to do it. They do it because they want to, or because they feel it is the right thing to do. But, if some need to use religion or God to guide them to do right, who am I to argue?

I was brought up Catholic, but I have come to a point in my life where I have stopped believing in God and religion of any sort, but I value the teachings of Jesus, who was probably one of the wisest persons who ever lived.

Christianity or religions in general have no monopoly on basic human decency. That is something one can choose at any time for onesself regardless what one believes or not.

SOCIAL DISTORTION SEZ:

'Persiflage: Sandra Bullock is savvy and prescient? Allow me to introduce you to Hope Floats, All About Steve, Two Weeks Notice, Premonition and of course Speed 2. She's bombed more than she's hit.'

Here you go Social D -- your favorite reference source has got the lowdown on Sandy B. PS. She really does know about rodeo riders in Texas, being married to one. I think she's kind of cute, and apparently alot smarter than she is cute!

Rich Christians have a long established link with football and football players - considering the team owners throughout the NFL, not to mention team ownership in other professional arenas - now the ever irreverent Casey Stengal may be the rare exception ......although in general, there is way too much pre-game praying all around for my taste.

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

Christianity is a god virus. Certainly, those infected may do some good in the world, but most of their energy is devoted to propagating the virus. Those who are not infected generally do as much (or more) good in the world, for their primary concern is not propagating the virus.

Like The Salvation Army, which is a Christian organization...

Leigh Anne Touhy did what she did because she is a true Christian. She believes in walking the (Christian) walk. In interviews, she has stated that is what she believes... and so that is what she does.

Isn't the story of The Good Samaritan in the New Testament? Isn't that what Jesus taught?

Deal with it.

A secular liberal would have driven past Michael Oher on that cold night and pretended he didn't exist. You know it.

A secular liberal would have driven past Michael Oher on that cold night and pretended he didn't exist.

You know it.

Leigh Anne Touhy did what she did because she is a true Christian. She believes in walking the (Christian) walk. In interviews, she has stated that is what she believes... and so that is what she does...

Isn't the story of The Good Samaritan in the New Testament? Isn't that what Jesus taught?

Deal with it.

A secular liberal would have driven past Michael Oher on that cold night and pretended he didn't exist. You know it.

Yes, of course Christianity has a PR problem. I know many progressive Christians who like to say they "are followers of Jesus" instead of Christians because of the bad rep brought on by fundamentalist Christians. Any one can call themselves a Christian leader and advocate a distorted version of Christianity.

For the reasons discussed in this forum we Christians are often defined by our most extreme factions. The church is not a haven for saints, but a hospital for sinners. Most people today don't realize how European Christianity enabled us to make the progress that Western Civilization did over the last 500 years.

In my own small city I could easily find 100 compassion projects that Christians do quietly and selflessly (I mean this literally). The Muslim, Jewish, Morman, and Buddist communities do great things as well, but on a smaller scale since there are fewer people of these faiths in my city. Ditto for athiests, but they generally are not organized into groups around here.

The Tuohy's seem like great people. However their story is not really unique. I have been involved in the foster care and adoption community for a long time. There are thousands of stories in every state similar to the Tuohys: people sacrifice to care for troubled kids, long term or short term, and adopt them when appropriate. Many who do this are Christian, many are of other faiths, and some are not religious.

Picking a child up off the street informally, and having the child grow up into the NFL make this story more dramatic. However, there are thousands of kids like Michael Oher waiting for forever families in the foster care system. Okay, they are not all destined for the NFL, but each has wonderful qualities and is "worth" the challenges that come with parenthood.

Good foster families (and most are quite good), are doing God's work whether they realize it or not.

I'm a bit offended by the statement that there are "too many Christian hypocrites to mention." Certainly, in a way all Christians will act at some point in a way contrary to their belief system. But so does anyone who adheres to a halfway decent belief system! Tiger Woods recently stated that he has been untrue to his values. We all believe and say we shouldn't lie. We all call out and judge liars when we see them. But we all lie at one time or another: it's only human. Christians just have an explanation for this failure, and hopefully a way to get on track once more!

So think carefully when you call someone a "Christian hypocrite," because sometimes just "failed human like you or me" will do just as well!

Obviously, there are some who have been "gulliblized" by the likes of the Tuohys and Micheal Lewis. Google Oher's bio to see how Old Miss really got him on their football team if you don't believe Wikipedia and the references therein.

But then again, we have been "gulliblized" before by one Tiger Woods and the authors of those religious documents entitled the bible and the koran!!!!

The West in general and Christianity in particular do have a public relations problem. One of the virtues of our civilization is a search for truth and the truth is that human beings and their behavior is a very mixed bag. Christians have acted both nobly and venally as all groups of human beings have done.

However, the towering achievement of our civilization is that in its search for Truth, a divine impulse, we have established a huge volume of little truths about nature and humanity that did not exist before. Many try to separate that body of knowledge from its roots today and worship the knowledge itself but without Christians and their impulse to investigate the celestial spheres, it would not exist today.

CCNL1 seems intent to have the last, negative, made-up word. So be it.

But The Word is far more interesting.

Go give it a read for yourself and make your own decision. Talk with a believer in Jesus whom you respect and make your own decision. There is good reason why so many have chosen to believe in Jesus for so long and have done so much good in the world, unpublicized, unnoticed, but not unrewarded.

Go, and be blessed.

CCNL was a former Catholic. In other words he was never a Christian and yet he considers himself knowledgeable in Christianity. Strange.

You can't critique something you have no knowledge of unless you consider yourself an idiot.

Catholicism is the devil's religion. It never was a Christian religion. You can read the Bible if you have doubts. And by the way, for centuries the bible was never encouraged to be read by their flock.

There are lot of other fake Christians. Bill Clinton is one of them.

Spidermean2 aka Canyon Shearer, Bible Thumper, Fortune Teller and Severely Brainwashed in that Old Time Religion,

What "voodooer of the hoodoo" cursed you with such stupidity in the field of fortune telling and interpretations of said stupidity???

The reality of it all is that the "pew sitters" and "bowers" are coming to grips with the flaws in their religions and in ten years the religions of today will be unrecognizable or extinct as the simple, preacher man and the mad Arab's embellished lives and "pretty/ugly wingie flying,talking thingies" are finally buried in the piles of myth.

CCNL-

Christianity will survive and thrive a long time after you are long gone and dead. People chose to put their faith in alot of things, and others have chosen to listen the words written down by Paul, James, and the disciples and not the naysayers like the Jesus Seminar and the guru Crossan than knows nothing really. I will make a bet with you- in 10 years, people will still be discussing religion and Christianity will be around and as recognizable as it is now.

You are in deep error my friend - if the only way you can discuss religion is to put down the founders and followers of it as "brainwashed" and "having hallucinations" then you are really deeply lost.

To doubt Touhy in the manner you have illustrates your hatred and disdain for Christians, and Christianty . You are a very pathetic sad person sir.

Some more reality for Counterww:

Christian et al Economics/Greed 101:

The Baptizer drew crowds and charged for the "dunking".

The historical Jesus saw a good thing and continued dunking and preaching the good word but added "healing" as an added charge to include free room and board. Sure was better than being a poor peasant but he got a bit too zealous and they nailed him to a tree. But still no greed there.

Paul picked up the money scent on the road to Damascus. He added some letters and a prophecy of the imminent second coming for a fee for salvation and "Gentilized" the good word to the "big buck" world. i.e. Paul was the first media evangelist!!! And he and the other Apostles forgot to pay their Roman taxes and the legendary actions by the Romans made them martyrs for future greed. Paul was guilty of minor greed?

Along comes Constantine. He saw the growing rich Christian community and recognized a new tax base so he set them "free". Major greed on his part!!

The Holy Roman "Empirers"/ Popes/Kings/ Queens et al continued the money grab selling access to JC and heaven resulting in some of today's richest organizations on the globe i.e. the Christian churches (including the Mormon Church) and related aristocracies. Obvious greed!!!

An added note: As per R.B. Stewart in his introduction to the recent book, The Resurrection of Jesus, Crossan and Wright in Dialogue, ( Professors Crossan and Wright are On Faith panelists).

"Reimarus (1774-1778) posits that Jesus became sidetracked by embracing a political position, sought to force God's hand and that he died alone deserted by his disciples. What began as a call for repentance ended up as a misguided attempt to usher in the earthly political kingdom of God. After Jesus' failure and death, his disciples stole his body and declared his resurrection in order to maintain their financial security and ensure themselves some standing."

Judaism - Because the foundations are so mythical, it is impossible to be historical about greed in said religion.

The historical King Herod and his off-springs were with the assistance of Rome, however, were a very greedy bunch.

Hinduism and Buddhism- A Google search will take you to many instances of greed in the leadership of said religions even though like other religions greed is a major sin and disorder.

Paul was greedy?

He was sick, and had very little in any kind of money outside of what the churches gave him to go around and spread the news of the gospel. He was jailed, and lived on just enough. John the Baptist lived off the land and had very little also. Greed? Paul was executed, are you just dopey?

Get some education from Non liberal scholars and maybe you will get not only some balance in your life but the truth of Jesus your Savior. Crossan is an intellectual elitist like many in the Jesus Seminar. He chooses to pick and choose what Christ said.

If you bothered to read the gospels NOT through the eyes of others, you would see that Jesus did not care about politics. It was and is all about spiritual renewal and using the power of God in our lives to love, have joy and all the other fruits of the spirit. Try that CCNL, and get out from under the sewage you are immersed in. Paul was no evangelist like the some of the ones today that cared about material things more. He cared about the people and if you bothered to read through the Epistles you would know that.

You really are no expert at all if you have not read through both sides.

The disciples never stole his body- he was resurrected. You don't believe in miracles so you must come to this conclusion.

Too bad you are so darn "smart" but can't find truth. Sometimes it takes digging beyond people that can't or won't dig to find it. It is all there if you bothered and asked God to reveal it to you.

Obviously, Counterww has also been "gulliblized" by the likes of the Paul and the pseudo Pauls. We suggest that he brings this up in his next discussion with god.

Some added facts about Paul:

"He (Paul) feared the turn-on of women's voices as much as the sight of their hair and skin..... At one point he even suggests that the sight of female hair might distract any "pretty wingie talking fictional thingies" in church attendance (1 Cor. 11:10). from Professor Bruce Chilton in his book Rabbi Paul

The Epistle to Timothy was not written by Paul but by a pseudo Paul and therefore does not belong in the NT. Ditto for Colossians.

ref. In Search of Paul by Professors JD Crossan (On Faith panelist) and Jonathan Reed, pp. 105-118.

An Introduction to the New Testament by Father Raymond Brown

Galatians 3:28 ("There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus") is, according to some historic Jesus exegetes, not credible as a historical utterance by either Jesus or Paul. It is the only time Paul considers women as being equivalent to men.

http://wiki.faithfutures.org/index.php/013_Two_As_One

And Paul's apparent real utterances about women give credence to this conclusion.

e.g.

And the following:

"In 1 Corinthians 11:3-16 Paul writes: “But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a woman is her husband, and the head of Christ is God.” He goes on to say that “any woman who prays or prophesies” should keep her head covered, whereas a man should never cover his head, “since he is the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man. (For man was not made from woman, but woman from man. Neither was man created for woman, but woman for man.)”

continued below:

In 1 Corinthians 14:33-35, Paul gives us the famous injunction, “… women should keep silence in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be subordinate, as even the law says. If there is anything they desire to know, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church.” This theme is taken up again in 1 Timothy 2:11-15, where women are instructed to dress modestly and to keep silent in church: “For Adam was formed first, then Eve; and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor. Yet woman will be saved through bearing children, if she continues in faith and love and holiness, with modesty.”

Ephesians 5:21-32 is the passage that is read at every Orthodox marriage ceremony, so it’s already quite well known to us. This is the passage in which women are told to be subject to their husbands, as to the Lord, which Paul repeats briefly in his letter to the Colossians (3:18). The husband, Paul explains, “is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church.” While women are to be subject to their husbands, so men are to love their wives “as their own bodies.” “This is a great mystery,” Paul says, “and I take it to mean Christ and the church.”

Simply add Paul's (and the pseudo Pauls) thinking about women to the list of flaws in the foundations of Christianity and a major reason why women have been discriminated against for these so many, many years.

Note: Many contemporary NT exegetes to include Father Ray Brown put the author of Ephesians in the category of another pseudo Paul.

Hmmm, do you think maybe that Mohammed/Mahound's scribes simply enhanced Paul's thinking about women when they wrote the koran??? Absolutely!!!!

Yes CCNL, but you only quote part of it. The Christian model is for the husband and wife to be subjected to one another, and that Christ is the head of both of them in matrimony. Mohammed has nothing to do with this. MORE foolish conjecture on your part.

How can you read through the holy Scriptures and not find that truth inside?

Paul wrote the the Ephesians while in prison in Rome, what a awful money hungry person he was! (Sarcasm) He actually care about the church while in a Roman prison, not a good place to be. That is the truth, not what some liberal naysayer says.

Paul also exhorts husbands to love their wives as they do their own bodies, and says that the relationship in essence brings both of them in subjection to God through Christ.

I guess you don't understand nor want to, as you have immersed yourself in this liberal stuff for so long,

How convenient for you that the scriptures that DO point out the equality of men and women you don't think were written by Paul- how exciting for you! more sarcasm.

You are hoot , CCNL, and a hater of religions all of them.

YOU are the one that is gullible, listening to the words of liberal elitist theologians that don't know squat,- and you do not know squat either as you don't even try to glean the truth out of the scriptures.

You are to pitied.

To be pitied is what you are CCNL.

Instead of quoting over and over liberal idiots, making yourself an idiot, try picking up a couple of conservative theologians books to get some balance. I have read both sides, and reject doubters like Crossan who apparently thinks nothing of picking and choosing what is and what is not spoken by the real people in the NT.

spidermean2

You wrote, "Catholicism is the devil's religion. It never was a Christian religion."

So are you saying that for about 1000 years, more or less after Jesus, that there were no "Christians"?

Actually, if you think of "Christianity" as a religion than you do not have a clue about "Christianity".

You also wrote, "There are lot of other fake Christians. Bill Clinton is one of them."

Our Brother Jesus is reported to have said, "Judge not lest ye be judged", "Forgive and you will be forgiven", have you ever heard about these reported sayings?

As I have said before, "Christians" do not have a lock on having a "holier than thou" attitude, many people of all faiths and no faith display a "holier than thou" attitude and this includes those that consider themself "Christian".

God is a searcher of hearts and minds, not of religious affiliations or lack thereof.

"This is GOOD NEWS for all" and "Peace to whom God's favor rests", two statements both true, have you ever heard of them?

See you and the rest of humanity in the Kingdom, the new heavens and the new earth.

God's Plan will come to Fruition.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

Even quoting Paul is insufficient to heal Counterww's significant brainwashing in the Christian mumbo jumbo. Such a pity but we will persist in the healing process with once again the following synopsis of Christianity:

Jesus was an illiterate Jewish peasant/carpenter/simple preacher man who suffered from hallucinations and who has been characterized anywhere from the Messiah from Nazareth to a mythical character from mythical Nazareth to a mamzer from Nazareth (Professor Bruce Chilton, in his book Rabbi Jesus).

Analyses of Jesus’ life by many contemporary NT scholars (e.g. Professors Crossan, Borg and Fredriksen, On Faith panelists) via the NT and related documents have concluded that only about 30% of Jesus' sayings and ways noted in the NT were authentic. The rest being embellishments (e.g. miracles)/hallucinations made/had by the NT authors to impress various Christian, Jewish and Pagan sects.

The 30% of the NT that is "authentic Jesus" like everything in life was borrowed/plagiarized and/or improved from those who came before. In Jesus' case, it was the ways and sayings of the Babylonians, Greeks, Persians, Egyptians, Hittites, Canaanites, OT, John the Baptizer and possibly the ways and sayings of traveling Greek Cynics.
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/theories.html

For added "pizzazz", Catholic/Christian theologians divided god the singularity into three persons and invented atonement as an added guilt trip for the "pew people" to go along with this trinity of overseers. By doing so, they made god the padre into god the "filicider".

Current crises:

Pedophiliac priests, atonement theology and original sin!!!!

Luther, Calvin, Joe Smith, Henry VIII, Wesley, Roger Williams, the Great “Babs”, Russell et al, founders of Christian-based religions or combination religions also suffered from the belief in/hallucinations of "pretty wingie thingie" visits and "prophecies" for profits analogous to the myths of Catholicism (resurrections, apparitions, ascensions and immaculate conceptions).

Current crises:

Adulterous preachers, "propheteering/ profiteering" evangelicals and atonement theology, all male hierarchies and strange banking and funding.

Excellent article, Elizabeth. I can't blame Sandra Bullock for having difficulty in distinguishing the Joel Olsteens of the world from true evangelical Christians, who read the Bible and do their best to live the words of humility that Jesus taught. But once you get it, it's a great thing.

The Bible cannot be understood by a person unless the Holy Spirit gives him the wisdom to see it from His perspective.

Poor CCNL and Baum, they try hard to see the yoke in the egg but can't seem able to break open the shell.

Some people try hard to turn screws with their bare hands. They end up hurting their fingers and gets infected in the process. Idiots should be told that they need a screwdriver. In the same manner, the Bible cannot be understood without the proper tool. The Holy Spirit is the keeper of those tools.

People who truly understands the Bible are actually scratching their heads as they see CCNL turn those screws with his bare hands or try to interpret the Bible by himself or withthe fellow idiots around him.

Spidermena sayeth:

'People who truly understands the Bible are actually scratching their heads as they see CCNL turn those screws with his bare hands or try to interpret the Bible by himself or withthe fellow idiots around him.'

Well, this is cause for great consternation - who shall we believe? That great apostate of the faith, CCNL, or Spidermean, the apparent sui generis modern-day apostle of Christ that single-handedly understands the mysteries of the bible inside out.

A tough decision - I think I'll take a nap, and wait for the end of time. I predict that after 20 years or so, I'm going to wake up. I will probably start a bowling league - my first act in paradise.

Without recreational activities, eternity could get a wee bit boring......

Persiflage wrote "I predict that after 20 years or so, I'm going to wake up. I will probably start a bowling league - my first act in paradise."

Idiots don't understand it. Actually, Christians are most fun loving people in the world. Stupidity always lead to subjugation and those ruled by idiots end up virtually imprisoned. Is there a bowling alley in godless communist countries?

The only reason non Christian countries are free to play bowling nowadays is because the greatest Christian nation on earth (not all it's occupants of course) which is America is acting as the good big brother.

Without America, the world would look like a big North Korea. And you persiflage might end up thinking what in the world is a bowling ball?

Since a big chunk of America has forgotten what Christianity means, Doomsday is coming and a lot of bowling alleys in mostly liberal gay marrying states will vanish. They will all turn to dust and very sadly, yes, the people too who continue to unscrew screws with their bare hands. Stupidity is self-destructive.

First off , I would not call them idiots spider- just mistaken, and fooled by the god of this world. THat is god with a little g. Baum is a brother, and you should not be so apt to judge Catholics the way you do.

The only crisis there is for CCNL is that he believes what fools say.

Poor lost soul. that he is.

Im not so sure who is the more dangerous among the two : Baum or CCNL?

I don't hate Catholics coz I have many wonderful catholic friends. Catholicism is the enemy. The doctrine itself. It's like a sucking force which is luring many people including many of my friends and relatives to eternal damnation if they are not too careful.

It's the devil's religion and it's giving true Christianity a very bad name.

CCNL is right in saying that catholicism has so much blood in its hand. CCNL was duped by catholicism himself that is why he too is a very blind man.

I love the people but I hate the doctrine duping the people.

So many Christians in the past centuries have tasted the brutality of this evil doctrine. What you see today is a TAMED catholicism coz in a way, they were defanged thru lots of wars which in the first place wouldn't had happened were it not for catholicism's stupidity.

Spidermean's comments above simply reinforce the previous question:

What "voodooer of the hoodoo" cursed you with such stupidity in the field of fortune telling and interpretations of said stupidity???

Jesus said "Destroy this temple and in 3 days, I will raise it again".

How in the world can idiots at that time would have known what Christ was referring to?

In like manner, how in the world can idiotic CCNL ever have the capacity to know that the Bible is full of metaphors.

How can you let idiots appreciate the yolk when they haven't seen or tasted one? For them, the egg is is just a solid egg shell, inside and out.

Poor guy.

"Mrs Touhy attributes her actions to her Christian faith. How nice it would be if the athiests would accept this at face value and stop trying to twist her actions into some all-purpose humanitarian framework."

Amen. Amen. Amen. Amen.

Sorry, did I say Amen yet? Amen.

spidermean2

You wrote, "The only reason non Christian countries are free to play bowling nowadays is because the greatest Christian nation on earth (not all it's occupants of course) which is America is acting as the good big brother."

Countries are not "Christian" or "non-Christian", people are.

God looks at people's hearts and minds not the "label" one applies to oneself.

It is important WHAT one does and WHY one does it and WHAT one knows.

We are not to be other people's "big brother", we are to be what we already are "children of God", everybody's brother and sister.

Jesus died for us so that we can die for others, not to pick up a "get out of hell" card.

Didn't Jesus say something to the effect that "If one calls his brother a 'fool'...", remember?

I cannot see how anyone with a drop of decency running thru their veins would want to have anything at all to do with "your god".

God, most definitely, is not the vain, egotistical, vile, putrid, revengeful being that you present him to be, sad to say, you seem to know God's Name but that appears to be the extent of your knowledge of God.

See you and the rest of humanity in the Kingdom, the new heavens and the new earth, as I have said previously, I look past heaven to the Kingdom.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

spidermean2

You wrote, "Since a big chunk of America has forgotten what Christianity means,"

Since you don't seem to know what "Christianity" is, here is a clue.

"Christianity" is part of God's unfolding Plan for the Salvation not only of ALL of humanity but ALL of creation.

It is referred to as "the mysterious Plan of God", God is not the loser, you think of God as.

You also wrote, "Doomsday is coming".

As it says, "The seventh day is coming, the new heavens and the new earth, but the night of the sixth day shall precede it".

Don't worry spiderman2, you will meet God one day.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

Cable Show Alert!!!!

"Letting Go of God"

A "must see" for all is Julie Sweeney's take on the Christianity that is being shown on Showtime (12/29/2009, Comcast, Philly area). With great humor, honesty and preparation, she lampoons the bible, Catholicism, Mormonism, religion in general, the Pope, Karen Armstrong and Deepak Chopra.

Baum wrote "I cannot see how anyone with a drop of decency running thru their veins would want to have anything at all to do with "your god".

Good that you found out that my Christian God is not the same as your catholicism's god.

my comment to Julie Sweeney's show is :

How can you let idiots appreciate the yolk when they haven't seen or tasted one? For them, the egg is is just a solid egg shell, inside and out.

She will talk about the Bible? It's like a turtle telling people how to fly. The idiocy is so rampant that you can feel in the air that doomsday is just around the corner.

Baum wrote ""Christianity" is part of God's unfolding Plan for the Salvation not only of ALL of humanity but ALL of creation. "

You worship the god of lies, which is the devil, for Jesus himself said that very, very few will go to heaven but broad is the way to hell and many will be going there.

Stop the stupidity Baum. I think you are the more dangerous person that CCNL coz you act like a wolf in sheep's clothing while CCNL is not hiding his skin.

Many may turn a blind eye on this news clip but the main culprit why these kind of things happen is mainly because of an evil religion called Catholicism. It is part of the big Catholic Cycle where people are taught that artificial contraceptive is wrong but not the raising of children without care and future. It is being duplicated around the world.

Here's the news clip :

"PORT-AU-PRINCE, Haiti – Poverty has forced at least 225,000 children in Haiti's cities into slavery as unpaid household servants, far more than previously thought, a report said Tuesday.

The Pan American Development Foundation's report also said some of those children — mostly young girls — suffer sexual, psychological and physical abuse while toiling in extreme hardship."

Tale of Two Countries Occupying the Same Island

"Roman Catholicism is the official religion of Haiti, but voodoo may be considered the country's national religion. The majority of Haitians believe in and practice at least some aspects of voodoo. Most voodooists believe that their religion can coexist with Catholicism. Most Protestants, however, strongly oppose voodoo. "

"The Dominican Republic is 95.2% Christian, including 88.6% Roman Catholic and 4.2% Protestant. Recent but small scale immigration, as well as proselytizing, has brought other religions, with the following shares of the population: Spiritist: 2.2%,[90] The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints: 1.0%,[91] Buddhist: 0.10%, Bahá'í: 0.1%,[90] Islam: 0.02%, Judaism: 0.01%, Chinese Folk Religion: 0.1%,[90] and Dominican Vudu (no census)."

Haiti's population

9,780,064 - 2008

Source: World Bank, World Development Indicators

Dominican Republic- population

10,090,000- 2009

- Haiti, Per capita income $790

- Dominican Republic, Per capita income- $8,672

(Wikipedia's reference lists)"

It would appear that Voodoo is the reason "Catholic" Haiti remains in the dark ages while its neighbor the "Catholic" Dominican Republic prospers.

spidermean2

You wrote, "You worship the god of lies, which is the devil, for Jesus himself said that very, very few will go to heaven but broad is the way to hell and many will be going there."

Jesus, Himself, went to hell when He took ALL of the sins of humanity upon Himself, remember when Jesus said, "My God, My God why have thou forsaken Me".

Do you think that Jesus thought this was a good time to say this psalm or could it be that the reality of this psalm came true before the very eyes and ears of those present?

How do you think Jesus won the "keys" to the netherworld?

God cares for all of His children, that is why God came up with His Plan.

You then wrote, "Stop the stupidity Baum. I think you are the more dangerous person "

Didn't the "religious" people of Jesus's day think that He was dangerous?

Didn't they say something to the effect: "It is better that One should die than for all of us to die"?

Isn't it something that God sometimes speaks thru people when they haven't a clue that God is speaking thru them?

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

But did Jesus really say: "My god, my god why have you forsaken me"? Matt 27:46

This passage only appears in Matthew's gospel and therefore is a single attestation failing modern historical analyses and testing as being authentic.

Matthew was also not at the crucifixion. There were no friends, apostles, family, CNN, no stenographers, and no tape recorders in attendance. This simple preacher man caused a disturbance and was taken out and crucified just like any common rabble rouser.

Do you think maybe Matthew borrowed this passage from the OT/Torah i.e. Psalm 22:1

"My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? why art thou so far from helping me, and from the words of my roaring?"

Hmmmm????????

ccnl1

You wrote, "Hmmmm????????"

Don't worry, you'll find out when you meet God.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

Hmmm, you can ask god about the history of the crucifixion next time you talk. Or you can simply use the common sense he or she or it or Mother Nature gave to you.

Common sense? Coming from you , CCNL?

You believe fools like Crossan and others in the Jesus Seminar, who use "divining rods to ascertain what was said by Jesus the CHRIST, the SON OF GOD, and what was not said. If anyone challenges you have no discourse, no reasoning back and forth, just cut and paste, cut and paste. By the way, it God, with a BIG G not little G.

Like Baum says, take care, be ready.

Oh, and yes, Jesus did say that.

The reason you can't accept Jesus's words or Paul's is that if you did they confront you . It is just an easy out for you not to believe.

CCNL, when are you going to get it?

CCNL wrote "It would appear that Voodoo is the reason "Catholic" Haiti remains in the dark ages while its neighbor the "Catholic" Dominican Republic prospers."

Haiti was greatly influenced by liberation theology of Catholicism. Voodoo plus leftist Catholicism plus the Catholic Cycle of overpolulation are the culprit.

The Dominican Republic on the other hand, was more blessed because of U.S intervention during their upheavals caused by Catholicism's doctrines of course.

A large Dominican diaspora exists, most of it in the United States, where it comprises 1.2 million. They aid national development as they send billions of dollars to their families, accounting for one-tenth of the Dominican GDP.

America made the difference. Without America, the two countries would fare equally poor because of the evils of Catholicism.

Baum, when Christ said that many will go to hell, it means exactly that. Waht kind of brain do you have? Don't twist the scriptures like what Catholicism usually does.

You are a false prophet and as I've said earlier, more dangerous that CCNL coz you wear sheep's skin.

What kind of people come to an "On Faith" forum to bash Catholicism and Christianity on Christmas eve? You must be very lonely, miserable people. May you find peace and happiness in the new year.

Spidermena-

only God can see what is in a person's heart. You need to stop the hate and preach the gospel without hate.

My two cents

Spidermean stays on script with his usual egocentric nastiness:

'Baum, when Christ said that many will go to hell, it means exactly that. Waht kind of brain do you have? Don't twist the scriptures like what Catholicism usually does.'

If Spidermean would master the use of the English language, I'm sure his listening audience would increase.

So here's the deal - Christianity, like all religions, is the product of man's innate ability to create mythologies that allegorically explain the inexplicable through the use of a wide variety of symbols....all of which are common throughout human history and the wide world of religion.

Religion is a universal phenomenon. Christians need to stop acting as though they invented religion - much less religious 'truth'. This applies to both Catholics and Prostestants (including the fundamentalist bible thumpers that were genetically programmed to hate Catholics).

If you hate Catholicism and love being a Protestant, it's purely a result of upbringing and unconscous programming. There was absolutely no choice or logic involved. There is no basis for choosing one over the other in a logical world.

Spidermean should stop sounding like a self-absorbed moron that's never read a book ..... that would be my advice and my best wishes to Spidermean for the New Year.

Vast numbers of intelligent people don't take the mythos of religion literally.... so there's clearly a lesson to be learned by that fact if one chooses to do so.

Best Wishes and a sincere hope for human progess in the coming New Year, Persiflage

Counterww wrote "You need to stop the hate and preach the gospel without hate"

What blindness is this? Hating the evil doctrine is like hating the cancer cells and not the victims of the cancer. You have to burn the cancer cells to save the patient. idiots

Persiflage,

Doomsday is coming soon. Let's wait and see if it's a myth.

If one understands the Bible, he would know who are the exact enemies of America in WW3. And I've been sayingthis for a while now, that it's more than 15 countries all at once. And the way things are going, the bible is right on target.

Even in some real mythology like the Phoenix, there is some truth to it if you know how to read between the lines. America will burn but it will not die. Liberal America will burn but ...

If you guys really wish for a true Merry Christmas, stop supporting your false religions and just read the Holy Bible with humbleness and that it won't be understood unless guided by the Holy Spirit of Jesus Christ.

After WW3, when stupidity has self-destructed, it would be a merry Christmas for a thousand years.

That's the prophecy. So advance Merry Christmas people.

Persiflage, I hope you give this some thought coz I actually care for you guys. I don't like anybody to burn forever.

Baum's doctrine is more dangerous than CCNL's coz he coats the poison with chocolate.

Many innocent kids could bite his trap.

'Baum's doctrine is more dangerous than CCNL's coz he coats the poison with chocolate.'

T. Baum's metaphysics are consistent - he believes that an omnipotent creator God wouldn't bother to create beings that for the most part would be destined to suffer eternal damnation - that, after all, is a purely human approach to right and wrong. What intelligent person would buy into this juvenile fiction? This is the stuff of childhood Sunday school classes.

A God that would do this is no better than a capricious child with supernatural powers. This of course is the God of the bible that fundamentalists revere so highly. The stern father that suffers no doubters, no 'sinners', no wafflers that stray from his omnipotent and almighty directives(as found only in the bible, of course). The appointed and appropriately schooled clergy will make sure that the throngs of sinners get it right.

Thomas Baum sees a far more beneficient God, a far greater God, than bible thumping fundamentalists that are moved only by the absolute authority that they perceive to be in the collected, edited, revised, and annotated works authored by a legion of unknown authors, and that is falsely perceived as a unified work - known euphemistically as the New Testament.

People have been seeing the end times off in the distance for centuries. One should ask why this self-destructive, punitive and self-negating psychology persists? One good reason - vast crowds of people have been taught this garbage since childhood.

The end-times for this particularly destructive and perpetually delusional point of view can't arrive too soon, if you ask me........

Persiflage,

Yes there is logic in your arguments but you don't understand what went wrong with creation. I too don't understand what went wrong but God said that he was sorry for creating man during the time of Noah.

Jesus Christ stated about a parable of how evil began. That God was not responsible for planting the evil seeds.

In Judgment Day, God will put an end to all these evil but man being eternal, he would not die.

Some would end up in heaven but many in hell. Not a really nice story but that's the reason why God let himself be crucified on the cross just to warn the people of the coming great burning. If He had not done it, I think I would had remained lost coz it is His words which converted me.

Doomsday is not the will of God but a consequence of man's stupidity and unbelief. The first volley of nukes would come from the godless and worshippers of false religions.

If all men had followed Christ, living on earth will be heaven-like.

When Christ said that many will burn in hell, it is not his choice but the choice of every man that will go there. They chose not to believe. Christ gave his life just to save as much people but sadly, people have a hard heart. Christ gave the best that he could to save man.

False religion did not help and continue sending people to hell. In fact false religion crucified Christ.

Bending the truth like saying that fire is cold would not help anybody. That is what Baum is doing.

For counterww: reference: Common Sense 101

a. Communion is a fantastic spirit symbol of our thanksgiving but body and blood do not exist there.

b. Jesus lived and was crucified but did not bodily rise from the dead.

c. The simple preacher man's teachings to include the 70% added by P, M, M, L and J's embellishments serve as the basis for living a good life but there are other teachings of comparable strengths save Islam which is nothing more than a warmongering, plagiarized version of the OT, NT and other ancient rules.

d. Heaven(if it exists) is a Spirit State as per Aquinas and JPII i.e. no bodies to include glorified bodies allowed.

e. The Physical Resurrection, Ascension and Assumption therefore did not take place. (This is also taught in graduate theology classes at many major Catholic universities).

f. The simple preacher man's spirit/soul resides in Heaven (if it exists) with all the souls of deceased good people of any religion or of no religion therefore there will be no second coming.

g. Adam and Eve are myths making original sin mythological and Baptism symbolic.(Also taught in graduate theology classes at many major Catholic universities).

h. There was therefore no Immaculate Conception.

i. Happiness in Heaven (if it exists) is not a gradient but is dependent on the number of souls present.

Jesus said that "The foolish man builds his house upon the sand."

Man left to himself is an easy prey for the very wise devil. Man is no match unless he has an anchor to hold on to, which is the words of Jesus.

CCNL is resting his foundation on the sand and just like anybody else, he is not smarter than the devil. His doctrines cannot stand and therefore his house will collapse as it is standing on sand.

"Ye shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free".

The biggest truth is this:

John 14:6 : Iam the Way, the Truth and the Life...

Matt. 10:39 : He that findeth (saveth) his life shall lose it...

Hmmm, John 14:6. This passage was, according to many NT exegetes, not said by the historical Jesus but was wishful thinking and an embellishment by some guy named John (he was not the apostle) to make Jesus more like the ancient and local gods of first century Palestine. 210-. Place of Life: John 14:2-12; http://www.faithfutures.org/Jesus/Crossan2.rtf

Note: Said passage is only found in John's gospel, a single attestation and therefore failing the testing of modern historic review.

Matt 10:39 - Professors Crossan and Meier give this passage a thumbs-up as being authentic Jesus.

Other experts did not.

e.g.

Samuel T. Lachs
"
Lachs [Rabbinic Commentary on the New Testament, 187f] cites the following ancient parallels to this saying now attributed to Jesus:

Alexander of Macedon asked the wise men of the South: 'What shall a man do that he may live?' They answered: 'Let him kill himself.' 'And what should a man do that he may die?' They answered: 'Let him keep himself alive.' [B.Tam. 32a]

R. Judah the Prince said: 'If you have performed His will as your will, you have not performed His will as His will; and if you have performed His will against your will, then you have performed His will; if it be your will that you should not die, die that you may not die; if it be your will that you should live, live not, so that you may live; it is better for you to die in this world against your will than to die in the world-to-come.' [ARN II(2), p. 36a]"

"Gerd Luedemann
Luedemann [Jesus, 58] describes this saying as "a profane proverb" whose authenticity is "extremely uncertain."

CCNL wrote "Hmmm, John 14:6. This passage was, according to many NT exegetes, not said by the historical Jesus but was wishful thinking "

That is because your exegetes has not cracked the egg. Nobody can crack it, not even Einstein, unless the word choses to reveal itself.

Sounds like Excalibur? Sort of.

Christ choses to reveal himself to those he sees worthy.

"Judas (not Iscariot) asked him, "Lord, how is it that you are going to reveal yourself to us and not to the world?" (John 14:22)

Those who know Christ today know what that verse mean coz He has reveal himself to us but not to the unbelieving world.

Change your teacher CCNL, coz you'll be in deep trouble once you die.

Spidermean may be alot of things I do not agree with, but you better change who you listen to .

There were eye witnesses to Jesus rising and seeing him actually eat a piece of fish.

When will CCNL realize that quoting liars and fools like the Jesus Seminar and others that this does lead to legit conversation?

THINK FOR YOURSELF! Read other theologians and then make up your mind?

Jesus is waiting for you- the risen Christ is calling you.

John 14:22

This particular passage appears only in John's gospel i.e. a single attestation and therefore historically unreliable as is most if not all of John's gospel.

"Since the advent of critical scholarship, John's historical importance has generally been considered less significant than the synoptic gospels. The scholars of the 19th century concluded that the Gospel of John had little historical value.

Today, prominent historians, such as E. P. Sanders, look mainly to Mark, Matthew, and Luke for historical information about Jesus.[46] Some scholars today believe that parts of John represent an independent historical tradition from the synoptics, while other parts represent later traditions.[67] The Gospel was probably shaped in part by increasing tensions between synagogue and church, or between those who believed Jesus was the Messiah and those who did not.[68] The scholars of the Jesus Seminar assert that there is little historical value in John and consider nearly every Johannine saying of Jesus to be nonhistorical.[69] J. D. G. Dunn comments: "few scholars would regard John as a source for information regarding Jesus' life and ministry in any degree comparable to the Synoptics". [70]

ANd why does the Jesus Seminar hold water over conservative theologians?

Your problem is that you have never experience Christ from a personal relationship perspective. It is all intellect with you. It is about a personal one on one relationship with God through Christ.

You have not even bothered to look into that due to your dependence on these liberal theologians that were not there. People who were there wrote down their experiences.

I like what the ankerberg site had to say-

"That the early church had no real biographical interest is highly improbable. The New Testament writers, impressed as they were with the belief that Jesus was the long-prom- ised Messiah, the Son of the living God (Matt. 16:16-18), had great motivation to accurately record what he actually said and did.
To say otherwise is contrary to their own clear statements. John claimed that “Jesus did” the things recorded in his Gospel (John 21:25). Elsewhere John said “What... we have heard, we have seen with our eyes, we beheld and our hands handled... we proclaim to you also” (1 John 1:1-2)."

You just don't want to hear the truth, old friend. Read up and you will find Christ. He did say the way to destruction was wide, but the way to the Kingdom was narrow. The way can be found however, but you can't just accept what elitist "intellectuals" have to say on face value.

When Christ said that he will manifest himself to believers, the believers got a taste of that promise.

The word of God is like a telegram sent to two persons which says "you will receive money tomorrow". The two received the telegram but only one got the money.

CCNL, no wonder you find the words of John as fake. You guys have not received the package.

No one knows who M, M, L and J really were to include their educational backgrounds so how can anyone trust anything they wrote? We know a lot about Paul but his epistles are so full of anti-female passages and fortune telling, how can anyone put credence in anything he said???

Some references for perusal:

Professor Crossan and Reed's “In Search of Paul”, Harper, San Francisco, 2004

Professor Chilton's "Rabbi Paul", Doubleday, New York, 2004

Professor/Father Ray Brown's "An Introduction to the New Testament", Doubleday, New York, 1997, 878 pages

Chilton, Reed and Brown are/were not members of the Jesus Seminar.

From Brown's An Introduction to the New Testament, Doubleday, New York, 1997, p. 172, (with Nihil Obstat and Imprimatur (with regard to Matthew's Gospel)

Date: 80-90 AD,give or take a decade

"Author by traditional (2nd century) attribution. Matthew a tax collector among the Twelve, wrote either the Gospel or a collection of the Lord's sayings in Aramaic. Some who reject this picture allow that something written by Matthew may have made its way into the present Gospel.

Author detectable from contents: A Greek-speaker, who knew Aramaic or Hebrew or both and was not an eyewitness of Jesus' ministry, drew on Mark and a collection of sayings of the Lord (Q) as well as on other available traditions oral or written. Probably a Jewish Christian.

Locale Involved: Probably the Antioch region

Unity and Integrity: No major reason to think of more than one author or sizable additions to what he wrote."

More and more quotes from liberal theologians.

You don't bother taking any advice from anyone else, or are willing to have real discourse on the topic.

You are deceived by "intellectual" snobs.

For those that like to engage in metaphysical speculation about the after-life and related topics, here's an excerpt from a large website devoted to near-death experiences. Are such life-altering psychic phenomena actual pre-cursors to physical death itself?

Curiously, near-death experiences are often in line with a person's pre-conceptions and allied religious beliefs, but oftentimes not.

It is exceedingly doubtful that any one religion or set of metaphysical beliefs actually prepares one for the moment of physical death when it arrives.

This is one reason why ironclad beliefs of any kind regarding the deep mystery of death are unrealistic.

That said, there are and always have been esoteric traditions that are much more schooled in the nature of non-physical realms, as compared to mainstream Christianity.

While modern-day materialists have no time or patience with this kind of metaphysical speculation, this says nothing about the actual inner experiences of practitioners that form the foundations and/or truths of these age-old wisdom traditions.

http://www.near-death.com/experiences/research10.html

For those that like to engage in metaphysical speculation about the after-life and related topics, here's an excerpt from a large website devoted to near-death experiences. Are such life-altering psychic phenomena actual pre-cursors to physical death itself?

Curiously, near-death experiences are often in line with a person's pre-conceptions and allied religious beliefs, but oftentimes not.

It is exceedingly doubtful that any one religion or set of metaphysical beliefs actually prepares one for the moment of physical death when it arrives.

This is one reason why ironclad beliefs of any kind regarding the deep mystery of death are unrealistic.

That said, there are and always have been esoteric traditions that are much more schooled in the nature of non-physical realms, as compared to mainstream Christianity.

While modern-day materialists have no time or patience with this kind of metaphysical speculation, this says nothing about the actual inner experiences of practitioners that form the foundations and/or truths of these age-old wisdom traditions.

http://www.near-death.com/experiences/research10.html

Speaking of near-death-experience, Discovery Channel featured somebody who was blind since birth. The blind lady said that the only time she was able to see in her life was when she saw herself in the operating room after she had an accident.

At first she was shocked coz she never saw a human being before. She only recognized herself by the 3 rings she wore and the length of her hair.

Yes, there is life after death and all of man's 5 senses will be restored perfectly.

CCNL, while you and your exegetes are busy working on the authenticity of the telegram, believers are already relishing the package which the telegram said they'll receive.

Jesus said "And now I have told you before it cometh to pass, that when it hath come to pass, ye may believe "

Yes, this is the main reason why most believers believe. What the Lord said had come to pass.

It has not passed to any of CCNL's exegetes. Thta is what is missing in their research.

The flipside of all this is that in fact, the media and many Christians *do* in fact trumpet 'Christian charity' ...as something only Christians have, as part of advertising... While in fact insisting that 'no one else is charitable,' or if you're, say, Pagan, with no need to proselytize at all, they'll claim what you may do without fuss must 'really' be all about Jesus.

In fact, sometimes when our small groups do gather and have a food drive or something, we have trouble *giving it to charities which may have an agenda of saying 'Only Christians are charitable.'

So the whole posture often does come off as simply crass, not always without reason. It's often used to justify a lot of the nastier things done to others in the name of Christianity, too, as though having big-name charities excuses oppression of others.

Good things to do are good things to do. Particular religions neither guarantee nor hold copyright to them.

Professor/Father Ray Brown as a liberal NT exegete?? Hardly as his books have all received the RCC's Nihil Obstat and Imprimatur. But then again Counterww and Spidermean know that or do they??

Hmmm, it appears Spidermean2 aka Canyon Shearer is now "thumping" NT passages in the style of the founder of "Baumianity".

John 14:29, btw, is another of those "johnisms" only found in John (who was not the apostle) gospel. Quoting these "johnisms" is akin to quoting from something Santa Clause said.

It's amazing that this person, CCNL, calling himself a scholar, has reading comprehension problems.

Maybe that is part of the reason why God said that "the FOOL had said in his HEART, there is no God".

Pitiful.

Note the word "heart" coz these guys don't THINK. They think with their heart and not their brains. Fools indeed.

Sad to think that the "package" is not on its way yet to CCNL.

CCNL. you're lost coz you're holding the wrong map. Give yourself even just a short time to let go of it.

It is obvious that Counterww and Spidermean2 aka Canyon Shearer's "redneckedness" runs deep as all attempts to educate them so far have failed.

Psalm 14.2- “The Lord looks down from heaven on all mankind to see if there are any who are wise.” - unfortunately said lord continues to see the likes of Counterww and Spidermean2 and therefore is sad to see his/her creation in such a sorry state of ineptitude which will continue as long as Counterww and Spidermean2 are both trapped by the walls of the NT.

YOU are the one that needs education. Listening to fools like the Jesus Seminar has blinded you.

Failure is yours CCNL, as you continue to quote liberal theologians as if they hold truth when Jesus and Paul are quoted to you in the NT.

What is obvious is that your so called "intellectual" superiority has failed you. You can't even debate the points as you act like what Crossan and others have to say are facts when they are conjectures that assume that the things in the and historical accounts in the gospels can't be true. Therefore you must attack the character of Jesus, Paul, Abraham, etc ad nauseam to somehow legitimize your positions.

The Gospels, as I have asserted before, are freeing- and free you from sin and the trap you held in. There is no reasoning with people that can't discourse.

Only some tramatic event can open your eyes I fear.

CCNL-

You quote Father brown who is quite a controversial figure in the Catholic church.
He definitely is on the liberal side of the ledger, with beliefs that are anti thetical to the apostle's creed.

NOT mainstream Christianity and very close to heretical if not there already.

You sure find the wackos, don't you?

http://socrates58.blogspot.com/2009/04/was-fr-raymond-brown-liberal-modernist.html

Once again

Psalm 14.2- “The Lord looks down from heaven on all mankind to see if there are any who are wise.” - unfortunately said lord continues to see the likes of Counterww and Spidermean2 and therefore is sad to see his/her creation in such a sorry state of ineptitude which will continue as long as Counterww and Spidermean2 are both trapped by the walls of the NT.

Using David Armstrong to criticize Professor/Father Ray Brown and his Imprimatur and nil obstat writings simply shows Counterww's continued ineptitude. To my knowledge, none of Armstrong's books have received the RCC's Imprimatur and Nil Obstat.

First off, you are really quoting the Roman Catholic church? Is this not the church you also critique?

The scripture you quote also says- AFTER the part of "to see if there are any that are wise- "WHO SEEK AFTER GOD"

How exactly do YOU seek after God? You doubt the inerrancy of the scriptures, so how in the world do you decide what is in the Scriptures that represents God and who he is and what is not? Do you in verse 4 of the 14th chapter of Psalm call upon the Lord?

Get EDUCATED from others that are not liberal, and you will know the Lord in real terms.

This particular part of Psalms is talking about the refuge of the Lord- is David, who wrote this Psalm, one of those that you think is not mentally ill or was on some kind of drug?

'Get EDUCATED from others that are not liberal, and you will know the Lord in real terms.'

CCNL is anything but liberal so directing invectives toward 'theological' liberals is probably beside the point....secondly, who needs a Supreme Creator that isn't liberal?

Be advised that CCNL agrees with absolutely nothing that Dominic Crossan espouses with regard to social policies, and agrees only with the alleged Jesus history - Crossan is a true liberal through and through in every fiber of his being, as the saying goes. This does not apply to CCNL in any way, shape, or form.

There are so many ways to fail in life, so one would presume that the Almighty Creator would have built in some leeway to an imperfect creation - because perfection means exactly what it says - perfection.

Did God screw up?? As far as the 'free will' issue goes, there are any number of reasons to believe that true free will is achieved by only a minute number of liberated individuals from generation to generation. Free will is an attribute that is very likely achieved in ways that remain unknown to ordinary mortals.

The ongoing argument between Christian fundamentalists and CCNL does provide some levity during the holiday respite......

You are funny persi.

I do not know what a fundamentalist is in your mind, but the one commentary I found on the net-

"In the broad sense, fundamentalism may be used to describe Christians who are uncompromising, conservative and who take their beliefs to the maximum — exactly how every believer should live. But because of recent, increased activism by those identified as fundamentalists, who have promoted unethical actions such as bringing violence against abortion clinics, doctors etc., some academic circles believe that fundamentalism has been redefined by our society. They believe that the philosophy of fundamentalism (at least in the world's eyes) has evolved into a legitimate form of extremism, with views too radical for the balanced, evangelical Christian. For this reason, fundamentalism may no longer be a term which accurately conveys what orthodox Christians really believe.

What has happened is that many have been successful in demonizing those that believe that Jesus is who he claimed to be, and what Paul wrote down in the Epistles.

Persiflage, this was not a discussion on social policy, it was one about theological terms and about those that try to glean what was said in the NT and what was not.

We all fall short in life and have the free will you talk about. But there are those that doubt there is anything like Jesus dying for our sins, and doubt the resurrection and the power of God through the resurrection of Christ which gives us the power to be resurrected. God does not "screw up" and the liberation he provided was through Christ.

You sound like others on this board that tend to over intellectualize everything. Levity? I find your comments first very funny, as you don't have context in the on-going posts back and forth(many different sub topics) and sad that you don't even look at free will and ascertain if any of this Christianity stuff just might, might be true . Demonizing people like me may seem funny to you, but given the context of these posts, I can't seem to understand why you are so amused.

The leeway the Creator provided was through his Son. We can screw up , as long as we are connected to him. Christ is the way out of our screwups.

Counterweight - every major religion has a concept of salvation. Yours happens to be based on the Christian concept of redemption/salvation through the resurrection of Jesus.

You should understand that for people not born and raised up in this particular theological schema, such a concept is downright alien.

It defies all logic - but that is not by any means the only route to salvation. Believers elsewhere outside the bounds of Christianity think their version is perfectly sensible. Why is one better than any other?

The fact that true believers of particular religious persuasions absolutely ignore the relativity of their beliefs as merely one version of many, gives objectivists that are taken with comparative studies good reason to doubt the concrete validity of a whole host of religious beliefs.

For the religious, free will and salvation seem to be two ideas that are not only taken at face value, but are assumed to be necessary conjoined components of man's ultimate spiritual purpose on earth.

What we then find is the need for vast and complex theoligies in order to make sense of how these two ideas work together harmoniously in order to make 'salvation' happen.

The elaborate contortions of religious metaphysics is where the levity part comes in.......because nothing whatsoever is established as true or factual, beyond what the faithful already believe to be true. This is called (self-confirming) dogma. What reasonable person wouldn't doubt it?

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

Interesting - I do think that God allows for the fact that some people will not hear about the cross, and salvation through Christ.

God is just, and He will allow many to enter into the kingdom of God dependent on how much someone has heard of the gospel. The tribesman in the deep jungle who has never heard of Jesus will be judged by what is in his heart, and by his actions on this earth. Jesus said it himself.

One way is better than another, as Jesus did say he is the way, the truth and that no one comes to the Father but through Him. I believe that. When someone overtly rejects Him, that is a real problem. However, I am not the final judge and in the end, God will sort it all out.

I have always contended that all fact is true, but not all truth is proven as fact. It is true that Jesus died for ALL men and women's sins, and how that mechanism works for those how have not had the opportunity to hear about it, I can't really comment. I have had this argument with other evangelicals and given the scriptures, I know that God is just and will make a way for everyone to come to him.

As noted previously, "I am the Truth" i.e. John 14:6.

This passage, according to many NT exegetes to include Professor Crossan, was not said by the historical Jesus but was more wishful thinking and embellishment by John to make Jesus more like the ancient and local gods of first century Palestine. 210-. Place of Life: (1) Dial. Sav. 27-30, (2) John 14:2-12;

http://www.faithfutures.org/Jesus/Crossan2.

From one of the many commentaries on social issues made by Professor Crossan via On Faith:

"In the last decade, the most serious charge I would make and have heard from others against Roman Catholicism is that it is deeply involved in a profound abuse of power both hierarchically and sacramentally.

This involves, for example, a refusal to accept the divinely-given vocation of priesthood for those women or those married men who have received it and would accept it if allowed. Also, since pederasty is an abuse of power (sexually), that is the criminal tip of this immoral iceberg.

It may well be that some criticize Roman Catholicism for discriminatory reasons. But it must also be acknowledged that there are valid reasons for the most serious criticism of its failure to conduct a serious structural review of its hierarchical procedures or, if you prefer, for the hierarchy to conduct a public examination of corporate conscience.
"

Most everyone to include myself agree with the professor's positions on social issues.

"Google" - Crossan social issues- to find other On Faith commentaries by the professor.

CCNL sez:

'Most everyone to include myself agree with the professor's positions on social issues.
"Google" - Crossan social issues- to find other On Faith commentaries by the professor.
_____________________

We are pleased to see that CCNL has finally come around to Crossan's very sensible views on homosexuality i.e. that sexuality is not a choice but is an attribute bestowed by nature. Dominic Crossan lays out his position in a couple of past On Faith columns just below.

Crossan also doesn't bother to highlight proposed restrictions or limits on how, when, or in what manner one's sexuality may be expressed - he seems to be free of arbritrary moral judgements in this area, which is certainly to his credit as well.

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/panelists/john_dominic_crossan/2007/08/dont_ask_dont_tell_dont_care.html

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/panelists/john_dominic_crossan/2007/03/against_nature.html

CCNL sez:

'Most everyone to include myself agree with the professor's positions on social issues.
"Google" - Crossan social issues- to find other On Faith commentaries by the professor.
_____________________

We are pleased to see that CCNL has finally come around to Crossan's very sensible views on homosexuality i.e. that sexuality is not a choice but is an attribute bestowed by nature. Dominic Crossan lays out his position in a couple of past On Faith columns just below.

Crossan also doesn't bother to highlight proposed restrictions or limits on how, when, or in what manner one's sexuality may be expressed - he seems to be free of arbritrary moral judgements in this area, which is certainly to his credit as well.

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/panelists/john_dominic_crossan/2007/08/dont_ask_dont_tell_dont_care.html

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/panelists/john_dominic_crossan/2007/03/against_nature.html

Positions on gay (yucky?) sex aka mutual masturbation and heterosexual sex aka the marriage act.

(note: Professor Crossan has not gotten into the specifics of gay unions and marriage but based on his excellent use of the English language, I as sure he would agree to the definitions.)

As previously noted:

Hmmm, the NT says nothing about gay sex? Au Contraire!!! Thou shalt Not Commit Adultery and Thou Shall Not Covet Thy Neighbors Wife/Husband/Partner with the corollary of Thou Shalt Not Fornicate pertain not only to heterosexual couples but also homosexual couples. This probably is no concern to non-Christians or non-Jews but it should be a major concern to those religious types who believe in the teachings of the OT, NT, the Commandments and all of its corollaries.

So we have a Christian God who supposedly created all of us to include homosexuals. Said God is therefore responsible for the defective gene/mind-set that causes homosexuality? One might conclude from this that the Christian God would therefore approve same-sex unions since that is the only sin-free state where any type of couple-sex can be performed.

Positions on gay (yucky?) sex aka mutual masturbation and heterosexual sex aka the marriage act.

(note: Professor Crossan has not gotten into the specifics of gay unions and marriage but based on his excellent use of the English language, I am sure he would agree to the definitions.)

As previously noted:

Hmmm, the NT says nothing about gay sex? Au Contraire!!! Thou shalt Not Commit Adultery and Thou Shall Not Covet Thy Neighbors Wife/Husband/Partner with the corollary of Thou Shalt Not Fornicate pertain not only to heterosexual couples but also homosexual couples. This probably is no concern to non-Christians or non-Jews but it should be a major concern to those religious types who believe in the teachings of the OT, NT, the Commandments and all of its corollaries.
So we have a Christian God who supposedly created all of us to include homosexuals. Said God is therefore responsible for the defective gene/mind-set that causes homosexuality? One might conclude from this that the Christian God would therefore approve same-sex unions since that is the only sin-free state where any type of couple-sex can be performed.

spidermean2

You wrote, "Baum, when Christ said that many will go to hell, it means exactly that. Waht kind of brain do you have? Don't twist the scriptures like what Catholicism usually does."

Do you realize that hell is not the "monolithic" place that some seem to think it to be and that God did not create hell to sling people into?

God did not create hell at all, if one were to find themself in hell, they would come to the realization that they built it themself and that they have no one to blame but themself.

I have the "kind of brain" that God gave me.

Jesus said, "Simon, thou art Peter and upon this Rock, I will build MY CHURCH and the GATES OF THE NETHERWORLD shall NOT prevail against it", don't you believe Jesus?

Jesus won the "keys" to the netherworld, hell and spiritual death, and He will use them in due time, God's Time, God is not the loser you think God to be, a tie is unacceptable, a tie would be a loss and that is totally and utterly unacceptable.

As I have said, I look past heaven to the Kingdom, do you?

Remember, Jesus said, "My Father has been busy even until now", did He not?

It is written, "On the seventh day, God Blest, Rested and Made Holy", is it not?

The seventh day is coming but the night of the sixth day shall precede it, as the two above statements show we are still in the sixth day.

It is written, "It is GOD'S WILL that ALL BE SAVED", is it not?

It is written, "He is expiation for our sins, and not for our sins only but for those of the whole world", is it not?

God's Plan is ultimately for all to be with God in God's Kingdom and God's Plan Will come to Fruition.

See you and the rest of humanity in the Kingdom.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

ALLKNOWINGGUY |
POSTED DECEMBER 18, 2009 11:53 PM
IRT:
“I think Christians should stop acting as if they invented kindness.”

ANS:
I wonder what makes you think Christians think they invented kindness. Is it because you see so many who are kind? Some of the heroes of the Pagans are Moloch, Baal, human sacrifice, and temple prostitutes. In Buddhism, there is no forgiveness or mercy from a loving God.

What is the feast of Christmas? I believe it is a feast of giving and love for one another, is it not? Didn’t Santa Clause spring from St. Nicholas. And, there’s the Greeks Santa, St. Basil of Caesarea.

If I am not mistaken, it was the founder of Christianity, who said “Do unto others as they would do unto you,“ and “Love your neighbor as you love yourself, and as God so loves you.“ I think love is the basis of kindness, and who but Jesus said, “No one has greater love than one who gives up his life for the good of another.” Jesus was God, in a great act of kindness, came down from heaven and died so that man may not suffer eternal damnation.

Who is it that exceeds the defense of human life and its dignity more than the Catholic Church? Who can say they had more love for another than Mother Teresa did? I believe it is the non-Christians who legalized and defends abortion, the murder of little unborn children is the epitome of unkindness.

Moreover, being kind to others is represented by the largest NGO charity in the world, Catholic Charities. The Catholic “Dream Program” is one of the best treatment programs in Africa that treats AIDS patients. It is a Catholic organization that is free for AIDS victims, and is an extreme kindness done unto others. Catholic Charities are all over the world.

When the Great Tsunamis that hit the Indian Ocean in 2004 killing some 300,000 people, the UN sent its people over to assist the victims. Pagan UN workers raped the defenseless little girls who were victims of this tragedy. Long after the UN left the areas struck by the Tsunamis, Catholic Charities remained long after aiding the poor.

Maybe Christians didn’t invent kindness, but they have a long sterling history and laudable record for exacting it.

T. Baum:

'God did not create hell at all, if one were to find themself in hell, they would come to the realization that they built it themself and that they have no one to blame but themself.'

Here we are in complete agreement. Hell is always of one's own making, unless we as humans inflict it on one another, of course. Imagine the countless people that have suffered unimaginable pain, suffering and torment at the hands of others. Death is welcomed with open arms in many such cases.

Hell and the respite from hell obviously have more than one meaning.....what folks may find after their demise simply cannot be pre-determined by anyone.

In my view, it's completely foolhardy to try and predict post-mortem futures.....although the proponents of religion do it with wild abandon.

spidermean2

You wrote, "Yes, there is life after death and all of man's 5 senses will be restored perfectly."

Doesn't it say, "Eye has not seen, Ear has not heard..."?

Don't you think that God "just might" have something in mind that is beyond anyone's "wildest imaginings"?

I do not know "exactly", by any stretch, what the Kingdom will be like but the very human and American way of looking at it as "new and improved" sure does make God into nothing more than a "super" man rather than the God Who made absolutely everything out of absolutely nothing.

As I have said before, God does not fit into any of the "boxes" that we humans try to cram God into.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
TBRUCIA
Posted December 19, 2009 12:05 AM

IRT:
"Religion has no more to do with being a good person than whether one is left-handed, right-handed, or ambidextrous. Christianity is an ideology (a system of ideas). Thinking and doing are two different things, and what ideology one has is irrelevant"

ANS:
Really, Buddhist don’t believe in mercy or forgiveness, two fundamental principles of kindness. Have you ever seen a kind Communist? Abortionists are’nt kind; they murder little unborn children.

Have you ever seen someone without any ideas do anything?

Ms Bullock, who is a Jew,should play christian women or not, as she chooses.

Perhaps no one has informed her of the growing anti semitism in America and abroadas polls show most blamer "American Jews" for the tank of the world economy.

Has she heard of Madoff, that paragon of virtue and philanthophy, of Gaza, of the centuries of detestation for those same values of her own.

She's not very smart to talk about her supposed superiority.

"...a Christian woman who wears designer clothes..." Yeah, I'm hung up on this being a contradiction, too. I'm a Christian man, and I too enjoy wearing designer (= expensive in most instances, I suppose) clothes. We have a Saks Fifth Avenue store in north Raleigh, and a Saks Off Fifth outlet store out near the airport in Morrisville, and I can't afford anything even on the markdown racks, to tell you the truth, so guess what, I own very few designer/expensive clothes - the few that I do own I have gotten for free off of Freecycle mostly.

But someday, the Lord willing, I hope I can afford a couple of them expensive/designer clothes. I think I'd look good in them, and I kinda think they'll last longer than many cheaper and less expensively made garments. But if the Lord is NOT willing, then I'm not going to be wearing them. Saint Paul wrote someplace that he had learned wherewith he was endowed therewith to be content, or some such lingo - look it up. The point is, be thankful to God for His blessings - whether they be many and pricey or few and cheap. He alone is God; every day of life we have from Him is a blessing that we do not merit. I hope that Sandra came to know that through her conversations with Mrs. Tuohy.

I saw the previews to this film this past weekend when my wife and daughter and I went to see "2012." It touched my heart and I blinked back tears. I had no idea that Mrs. Tuohy is a Christian. I'm gratified to learn of it, and I praise God for the excellent testimony in this blog to His grace and mercy, the kind that He extended once at Calvary that we His children are now called on to extend to everyone we encounter on His behalf.

Will some or most of us fail as we try to do so? Assuredly. Look at the example of Peter who denied Christ three times before He was executed. Should individual Christians' failures be any excuse not to strive for giving God praise and glory in living the lives we are called to live? Nonsense. I heard some wag once say, "I wouldn't belong to any church that would have me." Even so, when you drop your cross, pick it right back up and keep marching to your own Calvary. Die daily to your self, and live every moment for Him. Praise God that Mrs. Tuohy tries to do this. She fails miserably sometimes as she will be the first to tell you. That doesn't prevent her from getting right back to it as soon as she scrapes herself off.

Hmmm, "whistling" returns yet again. Remember, this is an anonymous blog and imposters abound.

For blog accuracy:

From answers.com-

"Is Sandra Bullock Jewish?

No she isn't. She was born in Arlington, Virginia US but her mother was from Nuernberg Germany."

Once again:

Obviously, there are some who have been "gulliblized" by the likes of the Tuohys and Micheal Lewis. Google Oher's bio to see how Old Miss really got him on their football team if you don't believe Wikipedia and the references therein.

But then again, we have been "gulliblized" before by one Tiger Woods and the authors of those religious documents entitled the bible and the koran!!!!

persiflage

You wrote, "Here we are in complete agreement. Hell is always of one's own making, unless we as humans inflict it on one another, of course."

We are not in complete agreement, if you read what I wrote and it is not the first time that I have wrote it, I am speaking of the "hell" of the bible, I am speaking about after our biological death.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

Baum wrote "It is written, "It is GOD'S WILL that ALL BE SAVED", is it not?"

Yes it is very clear in the epistle of Peter. You should read the whole of the book of Peter.

You are a crazy man. You have the same problem with CCNL. Im not sure if what you're doing is a WILFUL ignorance.

Even in John 3 :16, it says taht whosoever believeth in him should not perish. But as things are going, a lot do not believe. You can see what God has stored for them who don't believe.

Wilful ignorance.

T.Baum:

'We are not in complete agreement, if you read what I wrote and it is not the first time that I have wrote it, I am speaking of the "hell" of the bible, I am speaking about after our biological death.'

Ok then, we're sort of in agreement - given that it is commonly understood among a number of religious traditions that hell is a state of mind (even after death), and that hell is of our own making - based mainly on harmful, selfish behavior perpetrated on others. Buddhism, for example, speaks of six cold hells, and six hot hells.

As far as the 'hell' of the bible goes, this is one understanding and one version only. I often wonder how folks can speak authoritatively on heaven, hell, and the afterlife in general when they're not dead yet.......a mystery I have yet to unravel.

Persiflage wrote "I often wonder how folks can speak authoritatively on heaven, hell, and the afterlife in general when they're not dead yet.......a mystery I have yet to unravel."

It is in everyone's interest to wish that hell does not exist. I, myself, wish it does not exist. I think if we listen carefully to God's words, He too does not wish hell existed coz it is his will that nobody perish.

It is absolutely not God's will that angels or men rebel against Him. Hell is therefore a consequence of a rebelious act and probably not an intentional creation.

Jesus Christ does not lie. He said that hell exist. He is just stating the truth. True Christians have seen the power of Christ in their lives, in his fulfilled prophecies, etc.

There is actually no reason to not believe Him.

God called the the people in the old testament who makes false assurances as false prophets. It reminds me of Baum.

The fact that God had come down to earth and be crucified is a sign that the message is very serious. I don't think it is rational for a God to have such a concern for humanity if man just die like an animal. Death for them is an endgame. For humans, it is not.

A crucified God means the message is very serious. It means hell is real.

CCNL- again, you quote Crossan like what he thinks is fact. It is conjecture and opinion . He does not deal in faith but in skepticism .

Spidermean does say one thing very true- to send Jesus to be crucified to die for man's sin illustrates not only how serious things are, but how much God loves us.

CCNL and Persiflage should think about this long and hard before rationalizing it out their heads.

John 3:11-21 (not found in any other gospel or epistle)

3:11 "Very truly, I tell you, we speak of what we know and testify to what we have seen; yet you do not receive our testimony. 3:12 If I have told you about earthly things and you do not believe, how can you believe if I tell you about heavenly things? 3:13 No one has ascended into heaven except the one who descended from heaven, the Son of Man. 3:14 And just as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up, 3:15 that whoever believes in him may have eternal life.

3:16 "For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him may not perish but may have eternal life. 3:17 "Indeed, God did not send the Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. 3:18 Those who believe in him are not condemned; but those who do not believe are condemned already, because they have not believed in the name of the only Son of God. 3:19 And this is the judgment, that the light has come into the world, and people loved darkness rather than light because their deeds were evil. 3:20 For all who do evil hate the light and do not come to the light, so that their deeds may not be exposed. 3:21 But those who do what is true come to the light, so that it may be clearly seen that their deeds have been done in God."

Continued below:

"Professor/Father Raymond Brown [The Gospel according to John. Anchor Bible 20. pp. 135-37] provides a typically cautious introduction to these issues in general and this case in particular:

The Nicodemus scene is our first introduction to the Johannine discourse. It is the first oral exposition in John of the revelation brought by Jesus, and in capsule form it gives the principal themes of that revelation.

Historicity
When we try to think of this scene occurring in the ministry of Jesus, there are many problems that must be faced, not the least of which is setting. The opening statement of Nicodemus in vs. 2 implies that Jesus has worked many miracles in Jerusalem, and this is also the burden of ii 23 and iv 45. Yet, the fact that no miracle done in Jerusalem has been narrated by John has led many to suggest that the Nicodemus story should come later in the Gospel after miracles in Jerusalem have been described. Mendner, art. cit., suggests that the authentic setting for the Nicodemus story is in vii 51. Mendner supposes that, after Nicodemus had spoken on Jesus' behalf, he went to investigate him. In his Diatessaron (Codex Fuldensis), a 2nd century harmony of the Gospels, Tatian placed the Nicodemus scene in Holy Week, an arrangement Lagrange finds tempting. A prediction of death, such as found in vs. 14, would be more in harmony in Holy Week. Gourbillon, art. cit., would relocate iii 14 21 between xii 31 and 32, thus giving part of the Nicodemus scene a setting toward the end of Jesus' life. Such exercises of ingenuity are always interesting, but in the end one is discouraged by the LACK OF PROOF."

Other contemporary NT exegetes after careful review of all the scriptural documents have concluded that John 3:11-21 was not historic but was yet again another embellishment by the author John who no one really knows anything about.

CCNL wrote "Other contemporary NT exegetes after careful review of all the scriptural documents have concluded that John 3:11-21 was not historic but was yet again another embellishment by the author John who no one really knows anything about."

CCNL,

It appears that you're using a different kind of science similar to a science evolutionist use.

Evolutionists conclude that there is no God and no intelligent design when in fact in the field of engineering, the highest form of design is to make a device which aside from its designed function,it has the capacity to duplicate itself.

All living things has such attributes. The intelligence is so high that no person can actually mimic it in any way or form.

In your case, you make conclusions that are not scientifically acceptable except in the field of evolution where stupidity abounds.

The verses you claim as embelishments are very real to us who understood it. In other words, your conclusion is false.

Lack of proof does not mean false. It just means lack of proof.

Stupidity is your god.

has Cassandra Bullock send a letter from the billowing windy side?

So according to Spidermean2 aka Canyon Shearer, all PhD's with degrees in History and/or Religious studies are stupid??

One can only hope that someday Spidermean2 gets a college degree so he learns how to think on a rational basis.

To boil it down, CCNL, Crossan and others are not stupid, just full of themselves. All you ever do is quote these guys- they don't know truth and would not know it if it slapped them in the face.

I have TWO college degrees and probably more education than you do (if I don't than I credit you the fact that you worked hard to get yours)- but I don't take what idiots like Crossan and Brown say on face value. I have met many professors that think like Crossan. Elitists, thinking themselves wise, but not seeing the truth right in front of them.

It is quite revealing that you won't discourse about what you say. You don't really have any debate or respond to anything anyone else has to say without a quote from your heroes. My hero is Jesus Christ, and I know in my heart who he is (IS) - the risen Messiah that saved the world through his death and resurrection.

Spidermean's methods may be blunt but he is right- stupidity is your God. You quote scripture but can't see what it really means- all you ever do is pull it out and then "intellectualize" it with quotes from the morons that can't see the truth of it.

Not only are you spiritually you are dead, but intellectually on the spiritual side you are bankrupt. Ask God to open your eyes!

spidermean2

You wrote, "Baum wrote "It is written, "It is GOD'S WILL that ALL BE SAVED", is it not?"
Yes it is very clear in the epistle of Peter. You should read the whole of the book of Peter."

Check out 1 Tim also and many other places.

Have you ever met Dad?

You also wrote, "You are a crazy man."

This puts me in pretty good company then doesn't it?

Remember, there were many in Jesus's day that said the same thing about Him, didn't they?

See you and the rest of humanity in the Kingdom, God is NOT a loser.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

spidermean2

You wrote, "Wilful ignorance."

No, I have met Dad and the Holy Spirit and the Holy Spirit revealed to me that the Catholic Eucharist is Jesus just like Jesus told us and I have been chosen to speak, therefore I speak.

I have also met satan and I have experienced "hell" and "spiritual death".

Jesus extended the invitation to "Come follow Me", He did not tell us to come pick up your 'get out of hell' card.

Jesus died for us, so what do you think Jesus meant when He extended the invitation to "Come follow Me"?

God's Plan, the "Mysterious Plan of God, will come to Fruition on the dawning of the seventh day.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

persiflage

You wrote, "Ok then, we're sort of in agreement"

What I am saying is that we are responsible for what we do whether or not we accept that responsibility while we are still breathing is our choice.

I have not attempted to explain any "scenario" of "hell" as others have attempted, one example you give is of Buddhists and there are others, only to say that whatever "hell" one wakes up in, so to speak, will be "built" by the individual and they will realize that they have no one to blame but themself.

You also wrote, " I often wonder how folks can speak authoritatively on heaven, hell, and the afterlife in general when they're not dead yet.......a mystery I have yet to unravel."

I can not say anything personally about heaven for the simple reason I have not "experienced" heaven, when I met God, it was here on earth.

I have "experienced" hell, it is not a "mystery" to unravel, it is something that God knew that I needed to know among other things that I needed to know to even attempt to do the "job" that God chose for me.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

spidermean2

You wrote, "Evolutionists conclude that there is no God"

This is simply not true, there are many "evolutionists" that believe in God.

Then " in the field of engineering, the highest form of design is to make a device which aside from its designed function,it has the capacity to duplicate itself."

God Is a Creator, THE CREATOR, not an engineer.

An engineer takes something and does something with it, a Creator creates something out of nothing, therefore we do not create, we can be "creative" but we do not create.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

Actually, I have three degrees, BS, MS and PhD in the science and engineering fields.

When Counterww and Spidermean2 finish their studies on the historical Jesus, the historical Paul and the history of Christianity and then publish 50+ books on the results of their studies as have Professors JD Crossan and Raymond Brown, they should contact us again.

Some examples:

John Dominic Crossan

Excavating Jesus: Beneath the Stones,
Behind the Texts (Harper San Francisco 2001)

The Birth of Christianity (Harper San Francisco 1999)

The Jesus Controversy : Perspectives in Conflict (Trinity Pr Intl 1999)

Who Is Jesus? (Westminster John Knox 1999)

The Essential Jesus (Book Sales 1998)

Who Killed Jesus? (Harper San Francisco 1996)

Jesus: A Revolutionary Biography (Harper San Francisco 1995)

In Parables : The Challenge of the Historical Jesus (Polebridge Press 1994)

The Historical Jesus (Harper San Francisco 1993)

An Inventory of the Jesus Tradition by Chronological Stratification (online)

An Inventory of the Jesus Tradition by Independent Attestation (online)

Common Sayings Tradition in Gospel of Thomas and Q Gospel (online)

Seminar: HJ Materials & Methodology (online)

A Closer Look at the Mustard Seed (online)

Was Jesus Buried? (online)

Alchemy and Accuracy (online)

Professor/Father Brown books

The Sensus Plenior of Sacred Scripture, Baltimore: St. Mary's University, 1955:

His dissertation in Partial fulfillment of his Doctor of Sacred Theology
New Testament Essays, 1965.

"The Gospel According to John", in Anchor Bible, 1966 and 1970

Peter in the New Testament (coauthor), 1973.

Mary and the New Testament (coeditor), 1978.

The Community of the Beloved Disciple, New York: Paulist Press, 1979

The Critical Meaning of the Bible, New York: Paulist Press, 1981

New Jerome Biblical Commentary (coeditor), 1990

Responses to 101 Questions on the Bible, New York: Paulist Press, 1991, ISBN 0-8091-4251-1

Death of the Messiah, 1994.

An Introduction to New Testament

Christology, 1994. Preview

An Introduction to the New Testament, 1997
Birth of the Messiah 1998, with a reappraisal of the infancy gospels, 878 pages

Again, you quote liberal theologians out the ass.

(Pardon my swearing)

I don't care what those guys think. I could , but will not, quote dozens of theologians that think differently than the people you admire and worship as all knowing.

Just listened to the debate between William Craig and Crossan, and Craig makes a very good point. Crossan wants us to hold on to our faith but not believe that the resurrection in a physical sense is true. He also presumes that miracles and that the resurrection can't be before he starts writing.

When I first heard of the Jesus Seminar and how the loony guys decided on what Jesus said and did not say, I thought- "how in the hell would they know? they were not there? what kind of "science" do they think they have?

The science they have is one thing CCNL- they assume from the beginning that Jesus can't be the Son of God, did not do miracles, and was not resurrected from the dead physically. Then the kook Crossan wants me to somehow keep my faith intact while the scriptures tell me that without the resurrection there is no point. He wants it both ways- we have the scriptures, and it is when it comes to the belief in Christ and the main theological points of both evangelical and Catholic mainline theological thinking that some things are either buy in all the way or reject it completely. I am bought in.

You have been fooled by a snake oil salesman, dude.

Counterww's comments are typical of one trapped in the box of the NT whose gospels were written basically by ghost writers since we know basically nothing about M, M, L and J.

Professor Brown gathers all that is known about said authors (four pages) but Counterww already knows that. He also knows that Father Brown criticizes the Jesus Seminar and the historical Jesus movement in general in his "epic" 878 page book, An Introduction to the New Testament. (The title should have been "The Complete Compilation of the Christian Take on Christianity Especially in Regards to the Writings of M, M, L, J and P.)

All Christians should have this book in their libraries. It opens at least a small door to the reality of the simple preacher man and how he was turned into a god by M, M, L, J and P.

CCNL,

There is no Christianity without the risen Christ. PHYSICALLY risen.

There is plenty of evidence that the gospels were written by men that were either first hand witnesses.
And Father Brown's opinion is not the official position of the church-

there is a section on Scripture and inerrancy in the Catechism of the Catholic Church which reads as follows --

107. The inspired books TEACH THE TRUTH. "Since therefore ALL that the inspired authors or sacred writers AFFIRM should be regarded as affirmed by the Holy Spirit, we must acknowledge that the books of Scripture firmly, faithfully, and WITHOUT ERROR teach that truth which God, for the sake of our salvation, wished to see confided to the Sacred Scriptures." [Vatican II DV 11]

136. God is the author of Sacred Scripture because he inspired its human authors; he acts in them and by means of them. He thus gives assurance that their writings teach WITHOUT ERROR his saving truth [cf. DV 11].

You can speak about liberal theologians or even those that deny the inerrancy of scripture all you want. I would never have the books of these wackos in my library. I will look at them to understand the errors of their ways, and even read them online, or go to the library to read them. But they are in error just as you are.

These are wolves in sheep's clothing CCNL.

Find the real Christ. Listen to Paul, James, and the gospel writers and find out how your sin can be atoned for(it already has)

You are being fooled with the same lies over and over and over again.

Baum wrote "No, I have met Dad and the Holy Spirit and the Holy Spirit revealed to me that the Catholic Eucharist is Jesus just like Jesus told us and I have been chosen to speak, therefore I speak."

You are a crazy man. You don't have to meet God in person to know that Catholicsim is the devil's doctrine and the Vatican is the seat of satan.

What you actually saw was satan himself disguised as god. I've seen him also but he vanished like a burst bubble when I asked him if he is Christ.

CCNL,

Im an engineer and engineers don't rely on fake science. Yes those PhD people you rely on and who make stupid conclusions are stupid people.

In the world of stupidity, they earned their degree.

I'll say it again. Lack of evidence does not mean it is false. It only means lack of evidence.

You don't hold any evidence to show that Im an engineer but it doesn't mean Iam not.

You guys should go back to the drawing board and renew your definition of science before you call yourselves PhD holders. Until then, it reamains that you are a bunch of idiots.

Counterww wrote "there is a section on Scripture and inerrancy in the Catechism of the Catholic Church which reads as follows -"

CAtholicsim is the devil's religion and the Vatican is the seat of Satan.

In the world of Catholicism, all their saints are dead but if you read the Bible, saints mean Christians who were born again.

Romans 12:13 "distributing to the necessity of saints" . Paul did not mean burial services for the dead.

Colosians 1:2 "To the saints who are in Colosse". Paul was not addressing the dead people in Colosse.

Counterweight declares correctly:

'There is no Christianity without the risen Christ. PHYSICALLY risen.'*

*Of course, one must believe that this tale in it's entirety actually happened.

Spidermean declares in his typical forthright manner:

'I'll say it again. Lack of evidence does not mean it is false. It only means lack of evidence.'*

Now this statement applies to a belief in the above fundamental assertion upon which Christianity is based i.e. the resurrection.

Oddly, when it comes to the question of evolution, he sings quite another tune - never happened, no evidence, etc. etc. etc.

What science in general and realists in particular know, is that factual evidence pertains in a thousand different ways to the truth of evolution as the fundamental process of biological change.

By way of comparison, what is lacking in theology is the same hard, empirical evidence that supports evolutionary theory.

So what we have here is faith in a historically remote event without substantial contemporary evidence on the one hand, and the replication of results in countless different experiments that shore up evolutionary theory - which is still subject to change.

The tenets of Christianity remain inflexible, unchangeable, and absolute in it's various hypotheses and declarations...... none of which have ever been replicated for all to see - because it's all allegedly based on a singular event that occurred some 2000 years ago.

The fact is, such singularities are virtually unknown in the annals of human history - because history and human behavior both are known to repeat/recapitulate in countless ways.

This is the heart of the problem for believers vs non-believers, but then it's all been said before.

The topic is "blind" faith and Baum, Spidermean2 and Counterww are perfect examples of said blindness even though the answers are right in front of their eyes.

ersiflage wrote "Oddly, when it comes to the question of evolution, he sings quite another tune - never happened, no evidence, etc. etc. etc."

There are two types of evolution. The evolution of the universe and the evolution of biological beings. I don't debunk the first coz they are based on science but the latter is based on stupidity.

They conclude that there is no God and intelligent design when in fact the existence of plants and animals proves otherwise.

There was a time when I want to believe that there is no God but science tells me that it is a crazy proposition because of the intelligence I see everywhere in creation.

Im an engineer; a believer of true science and you guys are a bunch of idiots coz you don't follow the rules of true science.

I did not assert that without resurrection, there is no Christianity. For me, Im a Christian partly because of evidence I see in which the prophecies are unfolding right before my eyes.

However you look at things, either thru science or thru prophecies, God is there and I cannot disprove His non-existence.

"The FOOL had said in his heart that there is no God". This is absolutely true coz idiots don't use their brains.

That statement is also scientific.

Guys, it seems that you lack faith coz something is lacking in your brains. You lack the knowledge of true science.

CCNL,

Yes it's blind faith and it's your faith that is blind. Start using true science coz it might help.

Start with algebra. In a way you would realize that science can't be bent. You either follow it or fool yourself. It seems that fooling yourself is your choice.

Lack of evidence does not mean false. It only means lack of evidence. You don't make conclusions based on lack of evidence. You can only speculate. You can speculate that John could be lying but scientifically you can't conclude that he is lying.

You are an idiot coz you already concluded when in fact I can see in his writings that the prophecies are unfloding right before my eyes.

In other words, you made the wrong the wrong conclusion coz in the first place, you use a wrong and idiotic science.

Spidermean sez:

'I did not assert that without resurrection, there is no Christianity. For me, Im a Christian partly because of evidence I see in which the prophecies are unfolding right before my eyes.'

Then you're a heretic, by any Christian standard that you care to apply - there is no modern-day Christianity without the resurrection, period (unless you're a Gnostic - and yes, they still exist).

Ask any theologian about the resurrection......but then again, better not. If they're at all educated and not of the fundamentalist/literalist persuasion, they'll also support evolutionary theory!

You just make up stuff that suits your limited understanding. After reaching a certain level of committment, believing without questioning is the position of all dogmatists and true believers that suffer from a closed mind - that and disparaging a mountain of well-founded evidence that disagrees with an assortment of ironclad and unshakable religious beliefs.

Disagreeing with Spidermean does not an idiot make. And many of us can read between the lines where the subtleties of religion and religious symbolism are concerned. We just don't reach the same conclusions as biblical literalists - not by any means.

Spidermean sez:

'I did not assert that without resurrection, there is no Christianity. For me, Im a Christian partly because of evidence I see in which the prophecies are unfolding right before my eyes.'

Then you're a heretic, by any Christian standard that you care to apply - there is no modern-day Christianity without the resurrection, period (unless you're a Gnostic - and yes, they still exist).

Ask any theologian about the resurrection......but then again, better not. If they're at all educated and not of the fundamentalist/literalist persuasion, they'll also support evolutionary theory!

You just make up stuff that suits your limited understanding. After reaching a certain level of committment, believing without questioning is the position of all dogmatists and true believers that suffer from a closed mind - that and disparaging a mountain of well-founded evidence that disagrees with an assortment of ironclad and unshakable religious beliefs.

Disagreeing with Spidermean does not an idiot make. And many of us can read between the lines where the subtleties of religion and religious symbolism are concerned. We just don't reach the same conclusions as biblical literalists - not by any means.

Persiflage,

Just like many unbelievers and many fools, reading comprehension seems to be their problem.

I didn't say that I don't believe in the resurrection. What I said is that even without resurrection, I would still be a Christian coz my faith is based on a personal experience with Christ and the fact that all His words were fulfilled right before my eyes. That is enough proof for me.

I'll say it again less you dont comprehend it again. I believe in a risen Christ. What stupidity is going in your brain to think that I didn't believe?

In the field of science, only evolution is the branch where there is no practical application.

Persiflage, I don't need to ask a theologian about evolution. Im an engineer and I know how to discern what is science and what is stupidity.

Darwin's writing are full of "lack of evidence types of conclusions". The type of conclusions that are not acceptable in the true field of science like engineering.

The type of conclusions CCNL makes.

You guys should go back to the drawing board and learn the true definition of science.

Evolution is ALL SPECULATION and can't be considered as science unless stupidity is your God. The theologians you were talking about have stupidity as their god.

It is sad that the lives Spidermean2, Counterww and Baum revolve around the writings of a women-hating fortune teller and four ghost writers. Indeed, how very sad!!!

CCNL- you are a loon if you think that Paul hated women.

Spidermean- don't be mean. I have met plenty of Christians that are also Roman Catholic. YOU are not the judge of the RC church. Let God do his job and you do yours- telling others about Christ and his atonement for all of mankind's sins.

Persiflage- you say-"What science in general and realists in particular know, is that factual evidence pertains in a thousand different ways to the truth of evolution as the fundamental process of biological change."

Yes in MICRO evolution. There are plenty of holes in the MACRO evolution theory, and I for one don't preclude it, but it is far from fact. It is a hypothesis with not enough evidence to call fact, and has speculative factors in people's heads leading them to conclude that it is the only way we could have come to be. There is not enough empirical evidence to call it fact. It is educated conjecture , a theory with some fact thrown in. It is not observable obviously so you can't call it fact.

Science and Christianity do intersect but again, not all truth can be proven(the truth of Jesus risen physically) and the theory of evolution does not preclude a created man which came from the macro evolution process. It is just highly unlikely in my opinion.

CCNL needs to just read up on other theologians not just the idiots he has depended on for so long. No debate, nothing to say, so why is he here? Really, why are you here?

“In those days there was no king in Israel: every man did that which was right in his own eyes.” (KJV, Judges 21)

“Trust in the LORD with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding; in all your ways acknowledge him, and he will make your paths straight (NIV, Prov 3)

So maybe this “debate” is vanity and vexation. :)

Biblical references promoting female inferiority:

1 Corinthians 11:3: "...Christ is the head of every man, and a husband the head of his wife, and the head of Christ is God. (NIV)". .

1 Corinthians 11:7-9:"For a man...is the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man. For man did not come from woman, but woman from man; neither was man created for woman but woman for man. For this reason, and because of the angels, the woman ought to have a sign of authority on her head." (NIV) This refers to the practice of women wearing hair covering as a sign of inferiority.

1 Corinthians 14:34-35: "...women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says, If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church." (NIV) .

And once again:

From Professor Bruce Chilton's book, Rabbi Paul.

Professor Chilton pulls no punches in criticizing one of the founders of Christianity. Basically Paul was a "prude". An excerpt for Chilton's book,

"He (Paul) feared the turn-on of women's voices as much as the sight of their hair and skin..... At one point he even suggests that the sight of female hair might distract any "pretty wingie talking fictional thingies" aka angels in church attendance (1 Cor. 11:10).

Simply add Paul's thinking about women to the list of flaws in the foundations of Christianity.

Professor Chilton btw is a Professor of Religion at Bard College and a priest at the Free Church of St. John in Barrytown, NY.

Hmmm, do you think maybe that Mo's scribes simply enhanced Paul's thinking about women when they wrote the koran???

Absolutely!!!!

Counterww wrote "Spidermean- don't be mean. I have met plenty of Christians that are also Roman Catholic. YOU are not the judge of the RC church. Let God do his job and you do yours- telling others about Christ and his atonement for all of mankind's sins."

I have many catholic friends and relatives and i love them all. You should separate the person from the religion.

Catholicism is the devil's religion and Im helping catholics by revealing what kind of trap they are in. You just don't realize how a devil's religion works.

False religions and atheism contribute a lot to why doomsday will happen.

The killings and communist extortions in many poor catholic countries thru-out many years are due to catholicism's liberation theology and supported by liberal protestantism.

Officially, Catholicism and liberal protestantism support evolution. God is fed up with these false religions and I think the world will see His wrath soon.

Or should I say the world will see how their stupidity will destroy themselves.

Spidermean, your concept of engineering is as limited as your understanding of the mythology of the bible.

As you've been asked many times, please share your credentials for both engineering and biblical interpretation, if you will - and see below the many ways that the idea of 'engineering' can be used, even with regard to evolution!!

You really must love playing the fool, because in that arena you are the undisputed On Faith master - not so much regarding other areas of human knowledge. As for prophecy, you're no Nostradamus.

Go with God.

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=engineering+and+evolution&hl=en&rlz=1T4HPIA_enUS310US310&um=1&ie=UTF-8&oi=scholart

CCNL,

There's a reason why women are prohibited to preach in a church. You are not a Christian, so as a result, you won't be able to understand it.

I think even the devil knows the reason and that is why there's no female catholic priest.

Persiflage wrote "if you will - and see below the many ways that the idea of 'engineering' can be used, even with regard to evolution!!"

The article you site speaks of protein evolution but there's no theory of evolution applied in it. They just placed the name evolution in it. Nothing more. It speaks of built-in intelligence in proteins but not a single evolutionary theory was applied in their work.

Engineering is true science and the reason why evolution can't mix with it is because it's fake.

Nice try.

Counterweight muses:

'Really, why are you here?'

I'm here because of the whole idea of the 'risen Christ' and because of the historical if peculiar fact that countless millions of people through the ages have taken this idea as a literal event.

As has been said, never before or since have we known of an actual, empirically established case of the dead rising - we will also have to take the story of Lazarus being raised from the dead by he who would be the 'risen Christ' with a grain of salt.

To me, it's just plain baffling, given that the resurrection is the core 'event' of Christianity - at least in most schools of Christianity. So many people and so much history, because of what seems very likely to be nothing but pure fiction based on earlier mythologies.

That this is less likely to be true by a factor of a million to one as compared to say, the established truth of the evolutionary process - whether macro or micro, also keeps me scratching my head.
I'm not without spiritual interests myself, but what exactly is the appeal of this idea? It seems like a monumental distraction, so say the least.

Particularly when the most vocally ardent, perpetually combative, and least informed bible thumpers aka Spidermean, make such a fuss over such matters.

That kind of behavior also holds a certain fascination.....

Here we offer a host of articles pertaining to genetic engineering and evolution.

We know now that genetic mutations are the foundation of the evolutionary process and biological/adaptive change. And we are ever hopeful that Spidermean will begin exercising his brain before it completely turns to fried mush.

Jesus would probably have a PhD in genetic engineering, were he with us today. It may be the only way to achieve a higher level of logic and reason in the general population within a reasonable time frame -possibly by adding something to the water.

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=genetic+engineering+and+evolution&hl=en&rlz=1T4HPIA_enUS310US310&um=1&ie=UTF-8&oi=scholart

Persiflage wrote "We know now that genetic mutations are the foundation of the evolutionary process "

Wow, what a statement. If we convert this statement using all the applied sciences like math, chemistry, physics, etc, it would end up UNSOLVABLE.

x+y=5

With that single equation, you won't be able to solve y nor x. One would need another equation of y or x to solve it.

If you have two unknown variables, you would need two or more equations to solve it.

Persiflage, the statement you just gave have thousands of unknowns (genetic behaviors) and yet you have a CONFIRMED CONCLUSION?

Evolutionists are not scientists but a bunch of idiots. Engineers don't think that way. We are a very precise branch of science and we don't deal with FICTION.

spidermean2

You wrote, "You are a crazy man."

Thank you, that is what some said about my Brother Jesus when He walked this earth.

You also wrote, "What you actually saw was satan himself disguised as god."

I never said that I saw Dad or saw the Holy Spirit or saw that the Catholic Eucharist is Jesus, I said that I met God and met the Holy Spirit and that the Holy Spirit revealed to me that the Catholic Eucharist is Jesus.

I never said that I saw satan either but that I met satan.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

Thomas Baum,

It's pitiful that you stand on a foundation built on sand. No wonder your ideas are so far-fetched.

spidermean2

You wrote, "Colosians 1:2 "To the saints who are in Colosse". Paul was not addressing the dead people in Colosse."

You are right that Paul was talking about "breathers" but are you calling Jesus a liar?

Do you think that Jesus was speaking only of "this life"?

Remember what Jesus said to one of those that was crucified with Him, "Today, I will see you in Paradise".

Paul spoke of those that "died" and that we are not to think of them as "snuffed out", did He not?

Didn't Paul say something to the effect that if we think "only of this life" that we are "the most pitied of people"?

God's Plan will come to Fruition.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

Something below for Spidermean's continuing education in 'how DNA works' and also how we're able to observe these changes.

DNA is the foundation of biological life on this planet, and humans share substantial DNA with every other living creatures - chimps have about 98% of human DNA. When we observe bacterial and viral mutations (something that science can even cause to happen) we understand much more completely how genetic mutations occur in humans over much longer time periods.

This is all bedrock science - those that disagree only highlight their own ignorance and inability to grasp the obvious - apparently established facts are a serious threat to their fiction-based, confabulated belief systems. What other explanation can there be??

Persisting in one's own religiously based stupidity and/or ignorance can't be good for the future of an individual's mental health. They could even be a threat to the well-being of others, and we have certainly seen more than one example of this!

http://www.biochem.wisc.edu/faculty/inman/empics/

Evolution is the BIGGEST stupidity ever invented. And this stupidity will soon destroy almost half of mankind or even more.

Stupidity and ignorance is self destructive. Hitler, Lenin, Mao and all the leading killers in this world were all true believers of evolution. More wars are coming until all believers of evolution will self destruct. Evolution is one of the major reason why Doomsday is coming.

What separates man from animals is the ability to CREATE. If only these evolutionist IDIOTS can teach any chimp to create something, then they would be worthy to be called scientists and not scientific MORONS and IDIOTS.

The only reason why evolutionists think that chimps are their relatives is because they almost have similar brains. They both have dumb brains. At least those chimps don't proclaim they have human relatives. That make them a lot smarter.

Bone formation is nothing compared to brain complexity. Why would these evolutionist IDIOTS study bones and link it to evolution when it's the brain that defines the difference between humans and chimps?

It's like IDIOTS comparing the difference between two computers by examining the casings when in fact they should be examining the Operation Systems (brain) of the computers. These idiots are clueless what brains are for. Maybe they don't have any.

Science means truth. When it's FALSE, it's called STUPIDITY. There is NO science in evolution coz it's 100 percent false.

After thousands of years from the time chimps appeared on earth they still look like chimps today.

It's the evolutionist idiots who evolved. They evolved into thinking they were chimps before.

Chimps may share 97 percent of human DNA but it means nothing when they can't even utter a single word or create a single thing. On that area , the similary is ZERO PERCENT.

persiflage

You wrote, "Counterweight declares correctly:

'There is no Christianity without the risen Christ. PHYSICALLY risen.'*"

I agree.

I hope that you had a nice Christmas and I would like to wish you a Happy New Year.

I would like to add something that I have previously said, "I am thankful that God is our Judge and not our fellow human beings.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

ccnl1

You wrote, "The topic is "blind" faith and Baum, Spidermean2 and Counterww are perfect examples of said blindness even though the answers are right in front of their eyes."

Sometimes one needs to take a "leap of faith" with their eyes wide open.

Sad to say but you, even with all of your "higher education", do not seem to know the meaning of the word "faith".

It is written, "Faith is a gift that no man should boast", but the meaning of the word "faith" is right in the dictionary, one does not need "faith" to know the meaning of the word.

It is pretty simple and sometimes God will answer that "leap of faith" in a very "personal way" to the "leapee".

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

They say that chimps and humans share 97% of their DNA. The evolutionist IDIOTS don't realize that despite this similarity, chimps don't share even a 0.00001 percent of the human vocabulary. They can utter NOT A SINGLE WORD. How's that for 97% similarity?

My chair and table share 100% of their DNA and yet they don't look the same. Why? It's because that's not the way to make scientific comparisons.

DNAs has no many unknown properties. Again, we'll end up with thousands of unknowns and yet making a CONFIRMED CONCLUSION.

When will the stupidity stop?

spidermean2

You wrote, "They conclude that there is no God and intelligent design when in fact the existence of plants and animals proves otherwise."

I take it by "They" you mean evolution, it doesn't "conclude" one way or the other.

By the way, God is a Creator, not a designer.

You also wrote, "I did not assert that without resurrection, there is no Christianity."

If you did not, than you may as well throw away the bible, because the bible asserts this.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

spidermean2

You wrote, "I didn't say that I don't believe in the resurrection. What I said is that even without resurrection, I would still be a Christian"

Without the "Resurrection" there would be no Christianity so how could you still be a "Christian"?

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

Baum,

Im sorry to say this but you're a crazy man.

I hope the people understand that I have no hatred for anybody.

Catholcism is the devil's religion and Mr. Baum defending it make him a false prophet.

There are many nice catholic people and Baum could be one of them but it doesn't make catholicism legitimate.

Im saying this because I think I owe Mr. Baum an apology for being too harsh on him.

I'll still remain harsh on Catholcism but should not be that harsh to the person.

I hope you forgive me, friend.

It's been a tiring debate but I wish that as the prophecies start unfolding, the people here would reflect to everything that I've said.

Persiflage- you said-

"SSo many people and so much history, because of what seems very likely to be nothing but pure fiction based on earlier mythologies."

this is YOUR choice to think of the risen Christ as myth. You are mixing fact , again , with truth, and fact is only a subset of truth. Everyone or at least, many want everything to be proven except when it comes to their dogma(Macro evolution comes to mind, natural selection without intelligent guidence0

There are many things that will always be mysteries on this planet, and I think that God wants it that way. We are all born with IQ's that have different dynamics and kinds- spiritual, physical, mental, emotional, etc etc. Faith is a real thing, and many , especially people like CCNL and the atheist crowd around here, want to dismiss it. I just look at the fruits of the people that are doing the works(Christians) and see if they are really helping society. CCNL put down the lady that took the poor black kid in and put false notions in his own head about her motives. Sometimes people are just plain kind. And Christians are supposed to be that way to show how Christ like they are. Unfortunately the debate gets boiled down to evolution versus intelligent design at times .... I don't think the evidence will ever confirm nor deny how mankind came to be... but i always find it interesting that the notion of God to people like Dawkins and others .. sagan.... is so easily rejected....

Bottom line though is that mankind needs to realize his sinful nature and how asking God to come inside us and cleanse us can change all of that. Jesus Christ is real, He is alive, and the life changing event of his resurrection after death is the key to all of that.

I doubt people like CCNL will ever get it as they just assume the Jesus Seminar knows something everyone else is not smart enough to figure out. But that is foolhardy.

Spidermean's heart is in the right place , he just needs to not be so judgementel all the time. We will find many Roman Catholics in heaven someday.

.

Counterww,

The NCAA also had significant issues with the Tuohys adopting a 300 lb lineman who ended up at their alma mater along with said lineman's high school coach.

Thomas "Moses of the NT" Baum, Spiderman/Spidermean2/Canyon Shearer and Counterww, Nova has a new TV documentary on evolution and Darwin's importance to it.

Obviously the NT box walls are too thick for you three to escape but the Nova presentation should help you escape The dark ages of the creation theory but then again, your fear of something "new" might simply keep you entrenched in your significant Three B Syndrome. Unfortunately, this is a strong indication that you and your offsprings are not evolving.

Check your local PBS stations for a list of broadcast times:

"What Darwin Never Knew"- Nova

"On the 150th anniversary of the publication of Darwin’s famous On the Origin of Species, NOVA reveals answers to the riddles that Darwin couldn’t explain. Stunning breakthroughs in a new science — nicknamed “evo devo” — are linking the enigma of origins to another of nature’s great mysteries: the development of an embryo.

To explore this exciting new idea, NOVA takes viewers on a journey from the Galapagos Islands to the Arctic, from the Cambrian explosion of animal forms half a billion years ago to the research labs of today. Here, scientists are finally beginning to crack nature’s biggest secrets at the genetic level. And, as NOVA shows in this absorbing detective story, the results are confirming the brilliance of Darwin’s insights, while exposing clues to life’s breathtaking diversity in ways he could scarcely have imagined."

'They say that chimps and humans share 97% of their DNA. The evolutionist IDIOTS don't realize that despite this similarity, chimps don't share even a 0.00001 percent of the human vocabulary. They can utter NOT A SINGLE WORD. How's that for 97% similarity?'
_____________________

How can anyone possibly be this stupid and be proud of it?? DNA research indicates that other higher primates lack the DNA necessary for language. It's not possible to penetrate such abysmal ignorance....

As far as the resurrection goes, Counterweight declares that he buys into it, and also grants that many Catholics will join him in heaven.....sounds boring for all of you Catholics and Protestants that believed correctly.

There are adventures to be had beyond Christian heaven - or we certainly hope so.

Persiflage-

There are no adventures after death except Heaven or hell. The first adventure will be fantastic. The 2nd will not be much of adventure at all. It will be the lack of the presence of God, and will not be very fun at all.

You can talk out your ass (excuse my french) all you want but jeez, you would think that if a designer and creator created biological units, he might have used similar designs.

As for CCNL and his bull crap about the Tuohy's- nothing came out of the investigation

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

he recruiting of Oher sparked controversy after Oher decided to go to Ole Miss. The NCAA suggested the Tuohys were, in effect, boosters and had deliberately taken him in because of his football prowess and steered him to their alma mater.

Since he'd never played football when the Tuohys took him in, the NCAA finally dropped the subject.

The Tuohys also make the point that the real story is not about what they did for Oher, but what Oher did for them.

"He had an amazing impact on our lives,'' Leigh Anne said. "We're closer than most families because of Michael. We spent an amazing amount of time together and it was a huge bonding process. He changed our lives and the way we view people. We now feel bad about putting labels on people and pigeonholing them. Here's a kid who seemed valueless and now he's in the NFL. Michael coming in our home had a much greater impact on us than what we did for him.''

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

Sounds like they were truly altruistic. These are good people that did something that many people would not. They illustrated true Christian values, and this is what got your goat. You are a true loser to even try to critique them.

As for both Persiflage and CCNL- I never preclude macro evolution. None of us can exclude it or say it is 100% true, but if it is true, there was intelligent designer behind it. The DNA strand , for just one example, is too complex and too detailed to have come from a random process over even billions of years. It is obvious that there was something behind it with intelligence. Same with the eye for example.

I see CCNL that you have accused others of your "three b syndrome " - which is a prime example of when you are losing the argument. You are consistent, I will grant you that. When trapped, you revert back to calling the prophets, Christ, etc mentally ill or having taken drugs, and call out believers with some phantom disease.

Counterweight sez:

'You can talk out your ass (excuse my french) all you want but jeez, you would think that if a designer and creator created biological units, he might have used similar designs.'

Now you sound like every bit the moron that Spidermean has proven to be. There is no designer, no creator, no resurrection in any sense that applies to your religiously literalist fabrications and fantasies.

Your imagination has taken you up to the 7th heaven and that is all. CCNL is quite correct - none of this really happened.

In the end, you fundamentalists are all the same - challenged as to the veracity of your beliefs, you resort to nastiness.

People that attempt to defend the indefensible really are all the same - same designer, same product.

There's really nothing more to be said, beyond reading the link below:

http://www.oeaw.ac.at/klivv/evolution/7_Misconceptions.htm#Va_6

spidermean2

You wrote, "Catholcism is the devil's religion and Mr. Baum defending it make him a false prophet."

I never defended the Catholic "religion" one way or the other, what I said was that the Catholic Eucharist is Jesus, just like Jesus said at the "Last Supper".

You then wrote, "I hope you forgive me, friend."

No problem whatsoever, actually I am glad that you chat with me on here and to be honest with you, there are many "Catholics" that think along your lines as far as who gets to the "good place".

It is not about "dogma", it is not about "religion", it is not about "rules and regulations", it is about our relationship with God and our fellow human beings and about God's relationship with us, God did become One of us, did He not?

Didn't Jesus say, "The First is Love the Lord God... and the Second is like unto it, Love your neighbor" and "our neighbor" happens to be every other human being that ever was, is or will be since we are all made in the Image and Likeness of God, page one stuff?

Notice Jesus said "Love", He did not say like.

There are things in the Catholic "religion" that I disagree with and one of the things that I have brought up at different times at bible studies at which most or all are "Catholic" is that one should get off the "venial and mortal" sin kick.

When Jesus said, "He who is without sin cast the first stone", He did not say He who's sin is "not as bad", did He?

This is not the only thing about the Catholic "religion" that I think people should think about but as I have said, I cherish my Catholic Faith, I did not say "religion", there is a difference to me.

There are probably many "Catholics" that do not consider me Catholic at all and that is fine, another thing that I say is: Maybe more Catholics should be catholic, catholic does mean "universal" and if God's Plan is not universal then it is not much of a Plan.

After meeting God and coming to the realization that Love is God's Very Being rather than just an attribute of God has made me look at things from a completely different perspective.

Also, it was God, thru a dream, that told me that "only I could say it" and that is why I speak.

God did not tell me what "only I could say" but I take Jesus to heart when He said, "I will send the Holy Spirit to guide you...".

God has not and does not act in my life like some kind of big "dictation machine" in the sky, it has been rather "surprising" at times to me just how the Holy Spirit "guides".

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

spidermean2

You wrote, "It's been a tiring debate but I wish that as the prophecies start unfolding, the people here would reflect to everything that I've said."

They are already unfolding.

Something to think about:

Jesus said, "My Father has been busy even until now", did He not?

It says in Genesis, "On the seventh day, God Blest, Rested and Made Holy".

We are still in the sixth day, night is coming but the dawning of the seventh day shall surely follow.

The seventh day, the new heavens and the new earth.

Sometimes we can get so wrapped up in the details that we can miss the big picture or not even realize that there is a big picture.

I do NOT know the "specifics" but the "wrath of God", spoken of in Revelation, could be of our own making, I am not saying it is but it is something to think about, considering the arrogance of mankind.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

Counterww

You wrote, "There are no adventures after death except Heaven or hell. The first adventure will be fantastic. The 2nd will not be much of adventure at all. It will be the lack of the presence of God, and will not be very fun at all."

You forgot about "spiritual death", it is different from hell and you are confusing hell and spiritual death.

hell is not the absence of God, it is the presence of God and seeing yourself in the Light of Pure Love.

I hear people say that God hates sin, do you know why?

It is because if one full of "sin" then when God comes near, the Love is not caressing but otherwise that is why Jesus took ALL OF MANKIND'S sins upon Himself and that is also why on the cross Jesus cried out, "My God, My God why have thou forsaken Me", Jesus endured the "hell" of absolutely everyone and that is how He "won the keys" and not just the "keys" to hell but also of "spiritual death", the "netherworld".

That is also why Jesus said, "No one comes to the Father except thru Me", He did NOT say to God but to The Father.

Didn't the Angels at Jesus's birth say, "This is GOOD NEWS for ALL PEOPLE" and "Peace to whom God's favor rests", two different statements both True.

This is the "GOOD NEWS" that we are to proclaim.

God's Victory is Total.

See you and the rest of humanity in the Kingdom.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

Mr. Baum,

Catholicism is the devil's religion and the Vatican is the seat of satan. The fruits of Catholicism thru-out history has been very devastating for mankind.

It's hard to imagine that what you say like the Catholic Eucharist is being sanctioned by God.

There is no bigger lie than this.

You are misguided.

There is no power in the bread and wine. The real bread is the word of God which atheists like CCNL and Persiflage reject.

Even if they eat tons of bread and wine, it will not change them unless they will receive the Word in their hearts.

CCNL and Persiflage,

Science cannot be twisted and I'll repeat this statement again so please share this to those idiotic scientists:

You can't solve two unknown variables unless you have two known equations. Everything that you say about evolution has no applied scientific equations. None whatsoever. While Newton's gravity, and Eintiens relativity have equations to prove their case, evolution has none but just statements that defy engineering basics. So many unknowns but yet making "confirmed conclusions".

The reason why evolutionists continue to COPY protein behaviors and can't make their own version is SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY DON'T UNDERSTAND THE TRUE SCIENCE BEHIND IT.

The last time I heard, they try to make a synthetic bacteria by COPYING the structures of a real bacteria.

Do you guys get my point? If not, it is because you are not engineers. Engineers don't copy like you guys do.

If engineers get to do that business of making a synthetic bacteria, they will do it without copying an existing bacteria like a fool. They will look at the science behind it and not how it looks.

You guys are like real monkeys copying a book. They may be able to copy a book but won't be able to understand what the books say. You can train monkeys to write letters from a to z and they're off to copying books. Like monkeys, evolutionists do the same.

I hate to say this but when will you guys stop being STUPID?

When, when, when? In hell?

Spidermean provides a sample of his lucid thinking in the quote below:

'Do you guys get my point? If not, it is because you are not engineers. Engineers don't copy like you guys do.'

In other words, by this interpretation engineers reinvent the wheel every time they approach a novel problem to be solved, rather than using an established system of knowledge - like evolutionary biology would do, for example.

Nope, I don't think so. Whatever kind of engineer you might be, you're using systems thinking and pre-conceived formulas to design solutions.

Here's a general working definition:

'The application of scientific and mathematical principles to practical ends such as the design, manufacture, and operation of efficient and economical structures, machines, processes, and systems.'

Thus, the concept of engineering can be applied across an almost infinitely broad spectrum in the world manufactured and modified by man, from nanotechnology to human genomes and everything in between.

However, 'engineering' is a human concept and is applied to purposeful human behavior....in the broadest sense some form of modern-day tool-making - an attribute inherited from our ancient ancestors. Even chimps make tools.....

Astro-physicists, cosmologists, and biologists for example, typically don't speak of the cosmos, the galaxies, and physical life in all it's many forms, as having been 'engineered' or designed. That's a Spidermean idea.....

As a final tribute to engineers, I offer this enlightening web link below.

One of mother nature's engineers hard at work.....

http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/uw285

Well we have done it the Christian way i.e. we have shown Baum, Spidermean2 and Counterww the way by recommending the studies of contemporary NT and evolution experts via books and documentaries. It is now up to them to read, watch and hopefully learn. If after all of this, they still are suffering from their significant Three B Syndrome (caused by a faulty DNA switch?) then we will have to abandon them to the hopeless case files of non-evolving members of the human race akin to the global Islamics. How very sad!!!!

You be the Judge:

"After playing football his freshman year at a public school in Memphis, Oher applied for admission to a private school, Briarcrest Christian School, at the instigation of acquaintance Tony Henderson, with whom he was staying temporarily. Henderson was sending his son to the school in order to fulfill the dying wish of the boy's grandmother, and thought Oher might as well come along. The school's football coach submitted Oher's school application to the headmaster, who agreed if Oher could complete a home study program first. Despite not finishing the program, he was admitted when the headmaster realized that his actions had the consequence of having removed him from the public education system.[1]

Oher was living with several families and a football teammate at Briarcrest for a year and a half or so until Leigh Anne and Sean Tuohy, a couple with a daughter and son at Briarcrest, allowed Oher to move in with them and began taking care of his needs after becoming familiar with his difficult personal circumstances. They also connected him with a tutor, who worked with him for twenty hours a week.[1] At Briarcrest, he was named Division II (2A) Lineman of the Year in 2003 and First Team Tennessee All-State.[2] Scout.com rated Oher a five-star recruit and the #5 offensive lineman prospect in the country.[3] Oher eventually brought his 0.6 grade point average up to a 2.52 GPA by the end of his senior year by getting all A's and B's and staying on the Honor Roll, which brought his GPA up to 2.05, which he then was able to raise above a 2.65 so he could attend a NCAA Division 1 school by enrolling in some 10-day-long internet-based character courses from Brigham Young University which finally raised his graduating GPA over the required limit.[4][1][5]

continued below:

College career
After receiving scholarship offers from the University of Tennessee, Louisiana State University, the University of Alabama, and the University of South Carolina, among others, Oher ultimately decided to play for Coach Ed Orgeron and the University of Mississippi, alma mater of Leigh Anne Tuohy and Sean Tuohy, with whom he was living at the time.[6] His decision was not without controversy.

The National Collegiate Athletic Association suspected that the Tuohys had taken Oher in and added him to their will in order to secure his services as a player for their favorite college, but an investigation did not affect his eligibility.[1]

Oher's high school coach Hugh Freeze also created the appearance of possible impropriety by taking a job as UM's assistant athletic director for external affairs twenty days after Oher signed a letter of intent with the school. Freeze claimed that the offer was not an example of quid pro quo for encouraging Oher to attend Mississippi, but rather the result of a pre-existing relationship with Mississippi offensive coordinator Noel Mazzone.[7] The NCAA later ruled that Freeze had committed secondary violations by contacting Memphis-area prospects on behalf of the school before he had officially become an employee."

Persiflage,

You missed the point as usual. The issue here is science and the reason why engineers can't believe evolution is because there is no science in it. We are trained using PURE science. We can easily detect what is fake science.

There is no science in copying a bacteria.

Understanding how or why a bacteria was formed, that is science. Once that is attained, there is no need to copy a bacteria. We can make one ourselves. But we can't because the level of intelligence functioning in a bacteria is very very very high. It's god-like.

I can't imagine why idiots can't see a creator in such very intelligent creations like a bacteria. That is because there is no intelligence in their brains.

"The FOOL had said in his heart that there is no God"

I can't imagine how CCNL calls himself as having an engineering degree when he can't even understand simple math logic rules.

For him, a thousand unknown variables can result to a factual conclusion.

What school did this person came from?

I've read Darwin's book and even in the very first page, I can formulate a number of questions already.

The funny thing is they called it SCIENCE.

WOW, the stupidity is also god-like in magnitude.

Persiflage-

This quote-"Now you sound like every bit the moron that Spidermean has proven to be. There is no designer, no creator, no resurrection in any sense that applies to your religiously literalist fabrications and fantasies."

Only illustrates where you have put your faith. I never preclude macro evolution but you apparently have precluded faith , Christ, the resurrection, miracles, and etc. Fine, you called me a moron.
You revealed your elitist opinion, just like CCNL. Elitists like you and CCNL all have the same spiritual DNA- thinking themselves smart, they make themselves fools. THere is no where else to go if you can't find faith. The way to find it is laid out in the New testament, but your supposed superior mind can't fathom it. This does NOT mean that macro evolution or any of the other theories that are short of fact can't be true. But it does preclude that we did not come to be by chance. We are too complex to be anything else. I do however apologize for stooping to crudeness. Can't shake calling a spade a spade, but I was out of line.

Baum- you have to ignore scripture after scripture to think that people don't go to hell, or that hell is somehow has the presence of God in it. Far from it. You sir are a universalist and that is extreme error and outside of mainstream Catholic, and biblical theological precepts. People do go to hell.

CCNL- basically you are just a cretin- someone that mocks all that are religious, ignores other contemporary opinions about the authenticity of the scriptures, and cannot discourse worth a damn. You don't even allow for the fact that your heroes Crossan, Brown, and the other liberal theologians could be wrong, when they conjecture about the scriptures and cannot fathom they may just be wrong. To mock a woman that took someone in that needed help, illustrated Christian charity, with no proof of anything but wanting to help that person, shows how very low you can go. Even Crossan would just shake his head at your cynic attitude.

CCNL there is no "3 b syndrome". And I have read your foolish Jesus seminar people's stuff, and read enough about evolution and studied it enough to know that it could not possibly happen without a creative force behind it. Note that you don't, neither does persiflage- or even talk about the complexity of the DNA strand or the human eye, or the how the our incredibly fantastic blood system works with antibodies and white blood cells. Complexity does not occur without design.

CCNL- I have recommended that you search out other theologians but you fail to respond to that. Sounds like you are bought into the conjecture of the Jesus Seminar so there is probably no talking to you.

Many times I have shaken my head at spidermean but he does make some legit comments.

At this point it is probably fruitless to type anymore but to pray for each of you to find Jesus Christ - the risen Christ so you can find real joy, peace and ultimate oneness with God.

Hmmm, conservative, contemporary theologions/religion historians books consulted/read to date:

Professor Luke Timothy Johnson and his book The Real Jesus,

Bishop NT Wright, On Faith Panelist

"As regards the Historical Jesus, Wright stands broadly in the tradition of Albert Schweitzer (thoroughgoing eschatology), against what he sees as the thoroughgoing skepticism of William Wrede (famous for his thesis on the Messianic Secret in the Gospel of Mark as an apologetic and ahistorical device) and the Jesus Seminar, Wrede's modern-day counterparts.[12] He tends to agree with and laud such scholars as E.P. Sanders and the lesser-known Ben F. Meyer (whom Wright calls "the unsung hero" of New Testament studies[13]), although he thinks Sanders and others go too far in their use of form criticism. He also thinks it is a mistake to say that Jesus expected the imminence of the end of history, as Schweitzer thought,[14] but rather thinks that Jesus spoke of the Kingdom of God as something both present and future. He has also defended a literal belief in the Second Coming and the resurrection of the dead as central to Christianity. [15]"

http://www.answers.com/topic/n-t-wright-1?method=26&initiator=CANS#Historical_Jesus

Some of his books: (most of which are a rehash of the NT, the works of a women-hating fortune teller and four ghost writers

The Climax of the Covenant: Christ and the Law in Pauline Theology. Fortress Press, 1991.
Following Jesus: Biblical Reflections on Discipleship. Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1997 / SPCK, 1994
What Saint Paul Really Said: Was Paul of Tarsus the Real Founder of Christianity? Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1997.
The Challenge of Jesus: Rediscovering Who Jesus Was and Is. Hardcover ed. InterVarsity Pr., 1999 / SPCK, 2000
The Resurrection of Jesus: John Dominic Crossan and N.T. Wright in Dialogue. Ed. Robert B. Stewart. Paperback ed. Augsburg Fortress, Pub., 2005 / SPCK 2006 (co-authored with John D. Crossan)

Continued below:

Paul: Fresh Perspective. Fortress Press, 2005 co-edition SPCK, 2005
The Last Word: Beyond the Bible Wars to a New Understanding of the Authority of Scripture. Harper SanFrancisco, 2005.
Simply Christian: Why Christianity Makes Sense. Hardcover ed. SPCK, 2006 co-edition HarperCollins Pub., 2006.
Judas and the Gospel of Jesus: Have We Missed the Truth about Christianity? SPCK 2006 / Baker Books, 2006.
Evil and the Justice of God. SPCK, 2006 / Intervarsity Press, 2006.
"The Reasons for Christ's Crucifixion," Stricken by God? Nonviolent Identification and the Victory of Christ (ed. by Brad Jersak and Michael Hardin), 2007.
Surprised by Hope: Rethinking Heaven, the Resurrection, and the Mission of the Church. HarperOne, 2008.
Justification: God's Plan and Paul's Vision. SPCK, 2009

And once again:

Well we have done it the Christian way i.e. we have shown Baum, Spidermean2 and Counterww the way by recommending the studies of contemporary NT and evolution experts via books and documentaries. It is now up to them to read, watch and hopefully learn. If after all of this, they still are suffering from their significant Three B Syndrome (caused by a faulty DNA switch?) then we will have to abandon them to the hopeless case files of non-evolving members of the human race akin to the global Islamics. How very sad!!!!

Happy New Year especially to the Tuohy's and their success at "gullibilizing" us about their "adoption" of a All-American football hulk!!!!!

Now we should know why doomsday is coming. These guys can't be stopped from running 200 mph over a cliff. Nothing would change their minds.

tsk, tsk, tsk

Im actually interested at how these people live their lives just to know if it's possible for these people to live a real honest life. I just want to check if these people have a possibility of scaping the fire on Judgment Day.

How dirty are these people's minds and brains that they can't believe the Son of God? That I want to know.

I mean hearts and minds. Not minds and brains. :)

Spidermean proudly declares:

'I've read Darwin's book and even in the very first page, I can formulate a number of questions already.'

Apparently you cobbled up some answers that were in conformity with your theological preferences.

Suggest re-reading Darwin, and here are a few to add to your reading list for the New Year - for the man that already has all the answers. The last link was added because you apparently avoided it the first time around.

And once again - engineering has nothing to do with evolution and biological change. It's a man-made systems construct and a body of knowledge, that allows man to manipulate his environment, as I posted above.

It cannot be applied to the 'creation' of the natural material world. 'Emergence' is much preferred to 'creation' as depicting how the cosmos and the natural world and life actually came to be. Science does not apply the term 'creation' to any of these processes, mysterious though many still remain.

Faith in God and a mythical resurrection is not a substitute for not having all the answers to all the questions - and yet that seems to be exactly the purpose it serves for the religiously devout. The deeply self-righteous but unlettered Spidermean-style fundamentalist Protestant is of course at the extreme end of the spectrum - yet not all that uncommon.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudolf_Bultmann
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnostic_gospels
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudolph_Steiner

Persiflagw wrote "(Engineering) It's a man-made systems construct and a body of knowledge, that allows man to manipulate his environment, as I posted above."

This is false. But it fits the definition of evolution. Evolution is man-made and not scientific.

Engineers don't make their own concept. We simply obey science. Evolutionists make their own fake science. They are good at making fictional stories like monkeys turning into humans. What happened to werewolves?

Dinasaurs turning into birds? What a fantastic story. With evolution and dreams, nothing is impossible coz they manufacture their own science.

Spidermean:

'Engineers don't make their own concept. We simply obey science.'

Which should debunk the idea of 'Spidermean as engineer' once and for all, if anyone cares. Are you paid to sound like a dummie? If so, I hope it pays the bills. Better luck in the New Year!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Engineering_concepts

In the first page of Darwin's descent of man he wrote :

"Again, are the variations the result, as far as our ignorance
permits us to judge, of the same general causes, and are they governed
by the same general laws, as in the case of other organisms; for
instance, by correlation, the inherited effects of use and disuse,
&c.? "

He then answered it as affirmative.

VERY FUNNY. There has been many experiments in which animals' body part were cut to test this case but the result was NEGATIVE.

The idiot Darwin made a conclusion without first making some thorough experiments. Very typical of what evolutionists do. A thousand unknowns and yet they can make confirmed conclusions based on these unknowns.

Don't you guys tire of how moronic you are?

spidermean2

You wrote, "It's hard to imagine that what you say like the Catholic Eucharist is being sanctioned by God."

Maybe you should read the bible and what Jesus said. I believed Him and the Holy Spirit revealed it to me, don't you believe Jesus?

You then wrote, "There is no power in the bread and wine. The real bread is the word of God which atheists like CCNL and Persiflage reject."

According to the bible, the "Word of God" became flesh, it says so very clearly, does it not?

The bible did not become flesh, Jesus did, didn't He?

You then wrote, "Even if they eat tons of bread and wine, it will not change them unless they will receive the Word in their hearts."

How do you know? Are you God?

Doesn't it say that God works in "mysterious ways", who are you to tell God just what He can and cannot do and just how He can attempt to get thru to people?

God does not fit into the "box" that you seem to have tried to cram God into and there is more to being a "Christian" than knowing God's Name.

As a matter of fact, some people have found "The Way" and are following it and don't even realize that it is Jesus and some that are following "The Way" and yet do not believe that Jesus is Who He Is and there are others that believe that Jesus is "The Way" and yet do not follow "The Way" even tho they may give "lip service" to it.

Remember, God is our, humanity's, Judge, we aren't. If we "judge" anyone, it should be ourself, I, personally, have found myself, guilty.

Jesus came for "sinners", did He not?

God's Plan will come to Fruition, see you and the rest of humanity in the Kingdom, the new heavens and the new earth.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

ccnl1

You wrote, "Well we have done it the Christian way i.e. we have shown Baum, Spidermean2 and Counterww the way"

This is very nice and also humble of you, I might add, and by the way since you said "we" are you implying that "others" think they "know it all" like you seem to think?

Do you really think that people should "follow you and your way"?

I find it rather interesting that I have met God and I know that I do not "know it all", I also know that I do not need to "know it all".

I think of "worship", as in worshipping God, as being thankful, this may not be how others look at "worship" but it is how I look at it.

As I have said, God "looks" at the person, not the "label".

See you in the Kingdom and Happy New Year.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

spidermean2

You wrote, "Persiflage,

You missed the point as usual. The issue here is science and the reason why engineers can't believe evolution is because there is no science in it."

I am not an engineer but I find it rather hard to believe that there is not at least one engineer on the planet that believes in evolution.

You can call yourself an engineer and you can speak for yourself but you cannot speak for others that is their "God-given" right.

See you in the Kingdom and Happy New Year.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

Counterww

You wrote, "Baum- you have to ignore scripture after scripture to think that people don't go to hell,"

I have never said that people don't go to hell, as a matter of fact, I have said that they do and that they will come to the realization that they "built" it themself and that they have no one to blame but themself.

Then, "or that hell is somehow has the presence of God in it."

What do you think the "fire" of hell is?

By the way, doesn't it say that Jesus took the "sins of humanity" upon Himself?

What do you think, "My God, My God why have Thou forsaken Me?" means?

You wrote, "You sir are a universalist"

Yes, I am Catholic and catholic.

Then, "and that is extreme error and outside of mainstream Catholic, and biblical theological precepts."

If you check some things out, you might find that some of the people of Jesus's day just might have thought Jesus to be in "extreme error and outside of mainstream Jewish and biblical theological precepts".

I am not a "theologian", I am a messenger.

Then, "People do go to hell."

Never said they didn't, remember when Jesus said, "Simon, thou art Peter and upon this rock I will build MY CHURCH and the 'gates of the netherworld' shall not prevail against it", just what do you think the "mission" of JESUS'S CHURCH is?

See you in the Kingdom and Happy New Year.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

spidermean2

You wrote, "Baum,

Im sorry to say this but you're a crazy man."

Some of those of Jesus's day said the same thing about our Brother Jesus, so I suppose this puts me in some pretty good company, don't you think?

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

I personally don't feel we can give up on Spidermean. One day he may leave his parent's basement and his comic book world, and face the real world.

He will need to be equipped with the arsenal of secular knowledge that any well-respected and highly educated engineer might possess in contemporary times. I think he has quite a lot of work ahead in the new year.

In case he missed the slide show on Darwin and evolution, he can make up for lost time just below:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29040024/

persiflage,

Again I repeat, engineers don't invent their own original non-science concept. Any concept they make is derived from observing science at work. The result of their concept are equations that explain the science behind a phenomenon.

Evolutionists on the other hand has so many concepts without the coresponding math or chemical equations.

They are all fairy tales. Even with Darwin's first page in the Descent of Man, he made a fairy tale conclusion that if one don't use a body part, the next nth generation will do away with that body part.

VERY FUNNY. Stories you can see only in cartoon movies.

I'll give you a secret why he made such a lousy conclusion. It is because he never heard that a human body has a blueprint design called DNA. If you want to do away with a body part, change the design and not thru use or disuse.

What an idiot. And the rest who admire Darwin are a lot more stupid.

Here's the site persiflage want me to read :

***
Darwin's finches evolve

The seed-crushing bills of little songbirds called finches, which were adapted to various niches throughout the Galapagos Islands, proved integral to the formulation of Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection. And the birds haven't stopped evolving. For example, the medium ground finch (Geospiza fortis), shown here, recently downsized its beak to exploit small seeds more efficiently after a larger finch arrived on its island and began competing for food. The smaller beaks on the smaller birds allowed them to thrive, while the big birds ate all the big seeds and nearly went extinct, scientists say. "

***

Nothing in the said article proved a biological evolution. It is more of the evolution of existence. In a certain environment, it speculates who gets to live and who gets extinct.

In the world of true science , this is called PROBABILITY. It is not PURE SCIENCE but more of a GAME THEORY.

idiots to the highest degree think that this kind of things are science.

They should keep that finch in a big lab and make photographs of it for centuries and see if it is really capable of refiguring its beak.

DUMB, DUMB ,DUMB . And yet you would wonder why doomsday is coming. We are ruled by idiots folks. This world will self-destruct very soon.

Spidermean yammers on and on about probability, apparently knowing absolutely nothing about it - this is of course no surprise.

Here below is the most exacting science known to man, all founded on it's ability to make predictions based, of all things, on mathematics and probabilities.

Spidermean's lack of understanding of science and the scientific method is appalling. It's really no wonder that he has such a hard time grasping evolutionary theory.

Doomsday has indeed arrived, and a very black cloud has settled over Spidermean's extremely dense noggin - it should start raining pitchforks any minute.

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qt-quantlog/

Probability means that something is probable at a certain percentage. In layman's term, it's called hit or miss.

In other words, evolution is actually a hit or miss kind of science and based on the conclusion of Darwin in page 1 of his book, he MISSED in his conclusion TERRIBLY.

I can read the whole book and I can list so many misses on that stupid book.

Only idiots who don't understand true science can appreciate such a book. It's a good read though if you are into science fiction.

As to fiction, the bible is pure allegory and metaphor. This applies to all religious mythologies that have been chronicled in written form.

The link below highlights many areas in the bible that are pure fiction - either gross elaborations of the imagination, or complete misrepresentation of actual historical events. What's quite amazing is that so many adults buy into this fairy tale lore as real human history.

Humans are without doubt the strangest of all mammals. The only animal that stubbornly refuses to learn from experience, while failing to benefit from the increased general knowledge base of the species at large.

This, rather than any kind of supernatural doomsday, will spell the end of mankind if humans continue on down this religion-based irrational road to oblivian.

http://dmiessler.com/writing/bible_fiction/

The Bible is fiction to people who can't understand an intelligent book. When it prophecied that cities will be burned an become desolate in 1 hour, it was not possible for almost 2000 years until just a few years back.

Darwins Descent of Man book was even wrong in the first page and for those who understand real science, it's all wrong thru-out all its pages.

In ten years time when intelligence will abound, this book will be worth less than a toilet paper (a used one).

Is Spidermean a prophet??

'The Bible is fiction to people who can't understand an intelligent book. In ten years time when intelligence will abound, this book will be worth less than a toilet paper (a used one).'
________________

Agreed. In a single decade, were human intelligence to cumulatively rise by 20 decimal points, the bible would be seen as a work built on other much older mythical works......and all are allegorical fiction, from start to finish. An intelligent person would see this right away.

Bringing science into any conversation pertaining to religious mythology is mixing apples and oranges and is completely mis-directed - unless the social sciences are somehow involved. In that case, there is considerable literature on the subject......

When fire (missiles) come down from heaven (space) which are capable of burning and desolating cities in less than 1 hour, Im not so sure if it is still useful for skeptics to understand the scripture by then.

One should realize that even the myth of the Phoenix has some metaphorical meaning in it. The bird will burn but it wont die.

It means that America will burn but ...

spidermean2

You wrote, "Evolutionists on the other hand has so many concepts without the coresponding math or chemical equations."

Do you have any "math or chemical equations" for God?

It says that one of the first if not the first "thing" that God created was Wisdom.

Exactly "how", as in the sequence of creation, God created everything, I do not know.

Considering the FACT that time is also a Creation of God, do you think that God was in a rush? One could say that God had all the time in the world to "work" on His Creation.

Also since it says that "On the seventh day, God Rested, Blest and Made Holy" and Jesus said, "My Father has been busy even until now", we are still in the sixth day, so God is still at "work" on His Creation.

God also has a "reason" for His Creation and that "reason" is referred to as "the mysterious Plan of God".

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

persiflage

Hi, I would like to make a comment and ask a question about the "finch" thing.

I look at the "finch" thing with the beak as an "adaptability" as in adapting to the environment.

You seem to look at it as an "evolutionary" phenomenon.

Do you consider "adaptability" and "evolution" as one and the same?

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

T. Baum:

'Do you consider "adaptability" and "evolution" as one and the same?
______________

Adaptive change is part of the panoramic evolutionary process. Natural selection means adaptive evolution, conceptually speaking.

http://www.biology-online.org/dictionary/Evolution

T. Baum:

'Do you consider "adaptability" and "evolution" as one and the same?
______________

Adaptive change is part of the panoramic evolutionary process. Natural selection means adaptive evolution, conceptually speaking.

http://www.biology-online.org/dictionary/Evolution

This is great comic stuff. That beaks will reshape itself to fit with the environment?

If you believe this stuff, people who don't cook their food and want their meats eaten raw will soon grow fangs.

Comic stuff for sure.

The fact that Spidermean is unable to comprehend natural selecton or how it works, apparently has not dissuaded high school biology classes from including the exploration of evolutionary theory as part of the core classroom curriculum.

This has not stopped creationists from attempting to legally force the inclusion of biblical mythology as an alternate science - but fortunately their efforts have largely failed, thus far.

It's possible that coursework on evolution is available in Spidermean's home town in the form of adult education. Pursuing additional education would be highly recommended, in his case.

On the other hand, bible studies may have ruined him for further cognitive development, beyond reading comic books.

I wonder how they came to a conclusion that chimps had evolved into humans thru natural selection.

What were the selections involved?

Comic stuff again.

Do they know what were the selection involved in those finches' beaks?

Amazing comic stuff.

I just can't imagine why their work is considered science when it's more appropriate that their books should be placed side by side with comic superheroes.

Spidermean muses, wrongly as usual:

'I wonder how they came to a conclusion that chimps had evolved into humans thru natural selection.'
__________________

Here's a crash course in human evolution - no charge.

http://humanorigins.si.edu/ha/primate.html

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

Evolutionists want to point out that chimps and humans have a common ancestor, but in their drawings, it's clear that there is no common ancestor coz if there was one, they would have a bigger problem.

From whom would that common ancestor had evolved from? They would end up pointing to an offspring a human and a chimp.

Again, it's comic stuff. These people don't run out of fiction stuff.

Waht were the selections involved which led to the existence of that common ancestor?

Comic stuff for idiots again. No end to their idiocy.

And suddenly, a common ancestor appeared out of the blue. Where in the world did it came from? From a common common common ancestor?

As cloudy as the concept is, the idiots call it science.

wow.

This link on a recent discovery of fossil evidence of the earlist human ancestor has been posted before in the never-ending effort to educate Spidermean - who in fact seems less educable than most 5th graders.

However, as Jesus said, 'that which you do to the least of my brethren, you do to me'.

In that equitable spirit of universal congeniality, world brotherhood, and optimism for the new year, we offer the link once again.

PS. We have also noticed that the great biblical archeologist/prophet Spidermean, has offered no evidence whatsoever of an alternative to the idea of human evolution - or how we actually got where we are today....body and soul, as it were.

From whence did we come?? This should be good.......

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/10/091001-oldest-human-skeleton-ardi-missing-link-chimps-ardipithecus-ramidus.html

It is so amazing that evolutionists could know a person's lineage just thru observing bone formations.

They've seen this bone and seen this other bone. They observed that the bones have similarities and THEREFORE THEY CONCLUDE THAT HUMANS ARE RELATED TO CHIMPS.

For them that is science.

What a bunch of idiots.

I have an interesting question. Was it because of the invention of clothes that we humans have no body hairs compared to chimps? The hair protect the chimps from the cold.

What were the selections involved for the common ancestor to become humans?

Spiderman's right brain muses:

'I have an interesting question. Was it because of the invention of clothes that we humans have no body hairs compared to chimps? The hair protect the chimps from the cold.'
___________________

Pure genetics, my man. I recall an interesting episode of CNI where both the brother (who was murdered) and the sister suffered from the genetic syndrome of extreme hirsutism - the sister, a total social isolate, killed the brother, as it turned out. They could both have passed for chimps, hairwise. They did have the language gene, unlike chimps.

This 'hairy' trait has not died out completely in humans by any means. It's related to both male hormones and DNA - in super abundance. The same goes for baldness, and many other human attributes.

Notice that many bald men can be extremely hairy elsewhere, as an example of DNA distribution. In fact, body hair sometimes increases with age....while it vanishes on the crown of the head - for both men and women.

It's all applied science - as we've been saying from the get go......

http://www.hirsutism.com/hirsutism-causes/genetic-hirsutism.shtml

Once again, some possible enlightenment for Spidermean2/Canyon Shearer, Counterww and Thomas, "The Hallucinator" Baum,

"What Darwin Never Knew"- Nova

"On the 150th anniversary of the publication of Darwin’s famous On the Origin of Species, NOVA reveals answers to the riddles that Darwin couldn’t explain. Stunning breakthroughs in a new science — nicknamed “evo devo” — are linking the enigma of origins to another of nature’s great mysteries: the development of an embryo.

To explore this exciting new idea, NOVA takes viewers on a journey from the Galapagos Islands to the Arctic, from the Cambrian explosion of animal forms half a billion years ago to the research labs of today. Here, scientists are finally beginning to crack nature’s biggest secrets at the genetic level. And, as NOVA shows in this absorbing detective story, the results are confirming the brilliance of Darwin’s insights, while exposing clues to life’s breathtaking diversity in ways he could scarcely have imagined."

Persiflage wrote "Pure genetics, my man. "

These people are strange. I thought we're talking about natural selection. What selection transpired for the common ancestor to shed its body hairs? We're not talking about genetic malfunction here. All humans have no body hair like that of chimps except for genetic anomaly.

Did that common ancestor have fangs? Did it shrank with humans coz we stopped eating raw meats? What specific selection is needed so we can grow fangs again?

CCNL wrote "Here, scientists are finally beginning to crack nature’s biggest secrets at the genetic level. "

You idiots don't realize that the secrets kept at the genetic level CANNOT be solved. Man's level of intelligence is way too primitive to understand the science behind it yet.

This is the reason why humanoid robots are so dumb compared to any living thing you can find in nature.

Spidermean declares without further ado:

'You idiots don't realize that the secrets kept at the genetic level CANNOT be solved. Man's level of intelligence is way too primitive to understand the science behind it yet.'

Here Spidermean makes another firmly declarative (prophetic?) statement without anything to back it up - does he mean that humans will never solve any of these heretofore unsolved riddles of nature? Or does he mean that such knowledge is reserved for divinites only, or just what does he mean? He never says......

While we may be well past genesis, we're not yet past genetics - as the science that observes the mechanisms of evolution. Intelligence and knowledge are two different things. Knowledge is cumulative and is generally acquired through a vast expenditure of resources and human effort. It helps when people of sufficient intelligence are spending the money and doing the research, of course.

The bottom line - the enigmas of nature will keep thinking humans busy for the next few millenia. Even now, the 'truths' of quantum physics challenge the processes of ordinary human logic.

Humans will transcend old ways of thinking. It is likely that we will eventually see a revolution in fundamental cognitive/logical processes in order to view reality with a much larger yet more focused and refined lens.

Clarity is always the goal. See ideas about the evolution of knowledge below.

http://www.kcl.ac.uk/ip/davidpapineau/Staff/Papineau/OnlinePapers/evoknow.html