Archaeologist sees proof for Bible in ancient wall chat & forums.

Show ALL Forums

Posted In Forum:

Home

MyForums

Author

Thread: Archaeologist sees proof for Bible in ancient wall

chelloveck

Joined: 6/2/2007

Msg: 22 (view)

Archaeologist sees proof for Bible in ancient wall Posted: 3/3/2010 7:07:17 AM
Re Message # 16 from Truth144 Truth Said I'm not going to spend 30.00 for a useless book. Where is this open mind that you have been telling us about? You have dismissed the book as useless without bothering to read it, but you would have so called “doubters” take a quick trip to the Israel Museum to examine artifacts you claim support the Bible’s historicity. If it’s only parting with shekels that’s deterring you It is quite possible that the book may be available at an accessible library for free.…and if not….it may be available via inter library loan. Truth144 said Do you need to say more than "their own interpretation of the data" any idiot can sit and pick something apart. Testing (aka falsifying) theories, and critically evaluating the evidence that such theories are based upon is what researchers, if they are worth their salt, should be doing. They would indeed be idiots if they just merely accepted just any extraordinary claim, based upon an unchallenged agreement that what the claimant says is true. The brouhaha about “cold fusion” is a contemporary example of the scientific method testing to destruction a failed extraordinary “scientific” claim. Modern theories of bacteriology have been built upon the destructive testing of the “spontaneously generated disease” and “Miasma” theories of infectious disease pathology by Leeuwenhoek, Pasteur and others. Should Eilat Mazar’s claims be cordoned off from critical evaluation, just because her claims agree with your own faith based perspective of the Bible’s historical claims? Eliat Mazar is welcome to counter challenge criticisms of her work and her interpretations of the evidence that she has unearthed. That is the nature of rigorous academic research discourse. Truth144 said: Is 3 more than 2? Take 5 pieces of steel, each piece being 1 square foot in size, You have 3 pieces, each piece being 1/16 inch thick; I have 2 pieces, each piece being 1/2 inch thick, Which one of us has more? See my point Your point is ambiguous, and the analogy….if it could be called that, is illogical. The analogy is flawed because you have used the ambiguous qualifier “more” to represent 2 different sets of values In the first statement Is 3 more than 2? you are clearly referring to the value of numerical quantity. In the second statement: Take 5 pieces of steel, each piece being 1 square foot in size, You have 3 pieces, each piece being 1/16 inch thick; I have 2 pieces, each piece being 1/2 inch thick, Which one of us has more? you are referring to the value of volumic quantity. The two values of measurement……numerical quantity and volumic quantity are incompatible scales of comparison of the ambiguous qualifier “more”. Your use of the term, “more” does not have the same meaning in two quite separate contexts. Get my point? I commend to you a visit to the following site…..which won’t even cost you one fraction of a shekel. http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/scenario/analogy.htm an extract is given below and is attributed to Donald E. Simanek …….First let's define "analogy". We often compare one thing with another as an illustrative device, or to conjure up a mental picture of something not easily visualized. Such a comparison may even help us remember things—sort of a mnemonic device. The comparison is generally between two things that have no logical or physical relation to each other. This may be called a "benign analogy" since is has some slight usefulness, and is not taken seriously enough to do harm to one's thinking. In fact, psychologists observe that the more outrageous or illogical the comparison is, the easier it is to remember as a mnemonic device. Then there's the far more sinister "argument by analogy" in which a comparison is invoked in order to derive a conclusion. It takes the form "Because M has properties A, B and C, then if N has properties A and B, it also has C." Stated in this stark way, its absurdity as a "method of argument" is obvious, for it can be used to conclude things that are patently false. The dangers of thinking by analogy are noted by nearly every book on logic, argument, and debate. For example, chapter 8, "Pitfalls of Analogy" in the Robert H. Thouless classic, Straight and Crooked Thinking, 1932 (later rewritten and reprinted as How to Think Straight). When an analogy is used as a "homely example", memory crutch, poetic metaphor, colorful illustration, or with humorous or satirical intent, and is understood as such by the reader or listener, it probably is benign. But analogies should never be used as arguments to reach a conclusion, and should never substitute for reason and logic…… Truth144 said: Completly overlook my first statement, where I said, "I will say that she may be jumping the gun a bit here." Although I did not respond to your slight concession to the blindingly obvious….at least blindingly obvious to anyone who has bothered to view Eilat Mazar’s statements and the statements of her critics, I had, and undoubtedly others would have noted it to be a superfluous sop to the bible mytholgists to show just how “open minded” you are….before laying into the unbelievers with the baseball bat of accusations of “closed mindedness” on their part. However, if you feel really aggrieved that your efforts at even handedness have gone unrewarded….here is a smiley stamp for you to put on your forehead so that the world will know of your open mindedness. I’ll start to get a little more excited about Mazar’s claims when her research work has been published and evaluated by her academic peers. Whether the gushing claims made in her press releases survive publication and peer review, has yet to be determined. Truth144 said: Cherry pick what you want, I won't do cherry picking. Far be it for me to suggest that you would do such a thing. There is no compulsion upon posters to respond to everything that other posters contribute to a thread. (Though Scorpiomover comes closest to virtually doing so) That lack of compulsion applies to you and your posts also, even though you apparently don’t cherry pick. Truth144 said: If you can't summerize and make a statement worth reading , pass me by.(sic) My responses to posts, yours, and others is as much for the benefit of others than merely for your exclusive readership. If you dislike what I say…then don’t bother reading or responding to my posts…..simple. Am I to self censor myself to protect your sensitivities???? I doubt that you would apply the same standard or expectations to your own faith driven diatribes lol. Post #18 Truth144 said: Ok, if I'm wrong in my assumptions, then let all those that are opposed to the theist and their beliefs, research King David and the Davidic Kingdom for evidence in support of it. Then we will see where rationalism and materialism comes into play in the closed minds of the doubtful. I’d dearly love to do as you suggest, but I have a severe backlog of prior commitments to evaluating evidence in favour of the moon landing being faked, the existence of aliens in Area 51, and that Elvis Presley is still alive. I say damn those conspiracy theory nay sayers to hell…..the truth is out there I say! Truth144 said: Maybe you too missed my first statement where I said "she may be jumping the gun a little". I appreciate that this comment was directed at someone else…but I thought I’d just acknowledge your remarks lest you think I was,…. gasp,….. cherry picking…my earlier response to your earlier statement remains the same. Truth144 said: This woman is in fact an accredited archeologist and comes from a family of archeologist. I would certainly trust her more than I would trust someone trying to debunk these findings, because of political or popular reasons. You seem to be falling into the hole of the logical fallacy of “Appeal to Authority”. Although Eilat Mazar is a senior research fellow in archeology with a Phd, one may reasonably question the objectivity of her work. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eilat_Mazar Mazar's often Bible-inspired approach has been a source of contention between her and other more secular archaeologists. According to Mazar herself, I work with the Bible in one hand and the tools of excavation in the other, and I try to consider everything.[6] However, Israel Finkelstein and other archaeologists from Tel Aviv University have flagged concern that, regarding her 2006 identification of the city wall at the site of the Large Stone Structure, As she admits, the chronological data recovered in her excavations indicate that the sole Iron Age fortification system extending in this area was in use during the 8th−7th centuries BCE. However, according to the biblical sources the Solomonic city-wall must have passed here, hence [she maintains] the fortification system in question must be Solomonic in date.[7] Finkelstein et al. add, summarising Mazar's dating of the Large Stone Structure, The biblical text dominates this field operation, not archaeology. Had it not been for Mazar’s literal reading of the biblical text, she never would have dated the remains to the 10th century BCE with such confidence.[7] Mazar was also cautioned by one epigrapher following the 2008 confusion over the inscription on the Shelomit seal, In the mad dash to report biblical artifacts to the public or connect discoveries with the most obscure persons or events reported in the Bible, there is sometimes a tendency to compromise the analytical caution that objects of such value so dearly deserve.[8] I also commend to you a reading of http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-authority.html particularly to section #4 relating to bias. Truth144 said: I would certainly trust her more than I would trust someone trying to debunk these findings, because of political or popular reasons. Are you floating a conspiracy theory that Dr Eilat’s work is being debunked because of political or popular reasons? I find this possibility much more interesting than evaluating evidence in favour of Elvis Presley being still alive…care to share your evidence so that I may evaluate it??? I suspect that you trust Dr Eilat because her conclusions fit well with your own faith based beliefs….remembering that Dr Eilat’s statements do not yet have the weight of a peer reviewed published academic document, so her definitive position is still yet unknown….if Dr Eilat had an archeological epiphany and recanted her statements concerning “Solomon’s Wall”….where would that leave you? Would you still trust her? It is 1 am in the morning here in Brisbane, so I shall continue my response my response to post #18 another day. Poor mortal that I am…I do indeed need sleep.

chelloveck

Joined: 6/2/2007

Msg: 15 (view)

Archaeologist sees proof for Bible in ancient wall Posted: 3/2/2010 2:15:24 AM
Message #5 If you expect Christians to have an open mind, then yours should'nt be so closed. I have no expectations that theists have an open mind.......though I am pleasantly surprised when they do! The degree of confidence that I have regarding the extraordinary claims of theists, depends on the quality of the evidence that they provide in supporting those claims. If, prima facie, the methodologies used for collecting and interpreting the evidence for their claims are questionable, then it would be prudent to subject the offered evidence to critical scrutiny. Where is the open mind that so many of you disbelievers profess to have? "Keeping an Open Mind Is a Virtue, but not so Open that Your Brains Fall Out.”

chelloveck

Joined: 6/2/2007

Msg: 70 (view)

Selling your soul? Posted: 2/16/2010 3:41:59 PM
If I had a soul...you know....one of the immortal kinds of soul that flies to heaven...hell...or purgatory upon physical death....(not that I have seen any evidence that such things actually exist i.e. an immortal soul, heaven, hell or purgatory) I probably wouldn't sell it....though I would be quite happy to lease it out at a reasonably advantageous commercial benefit (to me of course).

chelloveck

Joined: 6/2/2007

Msg: 136 (view)

Your case for/against God. Posted: 2/14/2010 5:35:58 AM
Re Message #135 Csonka.....let me get this straight....to present a case, for or more importantly, against the Living God, who speaks I....you say I, must hear Him (the Living God who speaks) on adequate terms, just scales. You then prescribe what those "adequate terms and just scales" are...... i.e. that I assume the actual rather than putative existence of a supernatural entity by agreeing to undergo what is tantamount to a born again christian evangelical conversion experience, seeking out a contemporary equivalent of one of Jesus's disciples (something of a minor challenge I suppose), Ask to be prayed for, emptying my head of cognitive reasoning ability (aka removing the barrier of blindness and spirit's deception), letting the evangelical brother and sister perform their magical Christian juju upon my person, and basically offering obeisance to an omnipotent, omniscient omnipresent supernatural deity even before I can put forth an argument that questions the existence of such a supernatural entity?????? Do you not think that is giving God just a wee home side advantage????? I am a mere mortal.....and my debating opponent is a supernatural, omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent...and supposedly omnibeneficent being....methinks the scales are tipped way to his advantage even without giving him the advantages that you propose. Have the confidence of your convictions and allow the "Living God who speaks" speak on his own account....It couldn't be that difficult could it??

chelloveck

Joined: 6/2/2007

Msg: 30 (view)

The Accidental Christian Posted: 2/13/2010 12:22:59 PM
Into Love's presence and we must not have any unclean or unjust thing remaining, He cannot tolerate it. So God is "conditional" love....he gives his love to those he tolerates.....and withholds it from those he cannot tolerate.....sounds very human to me. Onan lived in the OT without much grace, in fact He was meant to be part of the Messiah coming. If he refused this work, it was very serious. I am no more convinced that Onan actually existed, than i do that God actually exists...at least the God of the Torah or the triune god/s of the "New Testament". Onan does however exist as an allegorical cautionary tale....don't disobey God...or the chances are that one will get fried like the putative Onan was supposed to have been. Poor old Onan has been used as an excuse for some theists to busy themselves in issues of sexuality, contraception , and other related issues. It is ironic that the dire consequences of Onan's "sexual" disobedience, seems to have not had much deterrent effect on some clerics, judging from the number of litigation cases concerning alleged clerical and lay sexual abuse .

chelloveck

Joined: 6/2/2007

Msg: 28 (view)

The Accidental Christian Posted: 2/13/2010 6:19:06 AM
Message #27 God is not human. God is love. But God has the human, unloving characteristic of judgment? Ask Onan whether God is Love.

chelloveck

Joined: 6/2/2007

Msg: 9 (view)

The Best of Religious Fundamentalism. Posted: 2/11/2010 2:57:35 PM
Message #1 At first, I thought it was just another slow day in Christian evangelismville, with yet another thread of "which is the best God", "best religion" , etc etc....a vehicle for those who have a barrow to push, to provide their own pat answers to what were perhaps intended to be rhetorical questions. The value of this thread has been somewhat redeemed by the wisdom of some of these responding, and for that I am grateful. My own view is that fundamentalist beliefs tend to engender fundamentalist / extremist behaviours. Hence you may find fundamentalist christians murdering doctors in abortion clinics, fundamentalist muslims blowing themselves up in response to the perceived wickedness of the "evil western imperialist oppressors", fundamentalist jews who think nothing of illegaly dispossessing....and killing palestinians, because they claim that god's laws trump secular laws, fundamentalist Hindus enthusiastically killing muslims and christians....etc etc etc......I think you get the picture. I am sure that there have been extemist atheiests also who have persecuted the religious, simply because their victims beliefs were incompatible with their own. All in all...I say.....a pox on all their churches, temples, mosques, synagogues, food halls (Pastafarians), sacred groves, shrines, etc etc The one religion who's fundamentalism I can heartily endorse is Jainism. I have yet to hear of a Jain suicide bombing...and it is likely that one never will. If all people acted in accordance with the fundamental tenets of the Jain religion, what a peaceful world this would be.

chelloveck

Joined: 6/2/2007

Msg: 14 (view)

The Accidental Christian Posted: 2/9/2010 3:14:24 AM
Message #1 This hypothetical reminds me of a quotation from Annie Dillard...... Eskimo: "If I did not know about God and sin, would I go to hell?" Priest: "No, not if you did not know." Eskimo: "Then why did you tell me?" Your question is rather moot, as the premise relies on whether God, Jesus, heaven, and immortal souls exist, and whether the contents of the biblical testaments are true. At best we can only say that they are matters of conjecture rather than fact. It is entirely possible that some God, or gods other than the Christian dieties are pre-eminent in the supernatural domain...if indeed such a domain exists. In which case, the primitive tribal person may be backing the wrong horse to Heaven, Nirvana, Valhalla, Shangri La or whatever, if they take Christianity on board. If for the sake of the thought experiment one was to accept the foregoing....different sects within the Christianity would give different answers in accordance with their own particular doctrines, dogmas and interpretations of their sacred texts. Some would argue that the heathens would burn in hell...some would argue that they may gain entrance to heaven, and undoubtedly some may say....if the appropriate generous donations to the church are made...."things can be arranged". Apparently pardoners did a roaring trade, selling dodgy indulgances to the gullible in medieval times.

chelloveck

Joined: 6/2/2007

Msg: 524 (view)

Jesus was a Socialist Posted: 1/27/2010 12:56:26 PM
Message #522 it may help secular people in their understanding of the link between the theological principles and political ideology. The pontifical pontification does indeed explain why the Catholic church as a political entity has supported Fascist totalitarian governments over the past couple of centuries, and have been opposed to socialist governments, of even the most benign flavour. The encyclical which can only be described as a burn in hell rant, only refers to Jesus Christ in a fairly oblique way, and does not make any significant comparison between the teachings and actions of Christ in his ministry 2000 years ago, and the qualities that characterise "socialism". The encyclical has more to do with the protection of an institutional church and its prerogatives than in making any evaluative comparison between competing ideologies.

chelloveck

Joined: 6/2/2007

Msg: 15 (view)

Revelations17 Posted: 1/10/2010 6:15:29 AM
Ah...the "Whore of Babylon" schtick........It rather makes Nietszche's Thus Spake Zarathustra as simple to understand as a Mills and Boone novel! Well of course, pentacostal and christian evangelicals among others are keen to daub the Papacy with the scarlet brush of the title, Whore of Babylon...it's a kind of a religious turf war thing I guess. Not that I have any great sympathy for the Papacy. They have kind of earned the title through their actions in the Wars of the Reformation and Counter Reformation. I find christian mythology passing bizarre, I'm with TMF on this one....maybe Jamie and Adam will do a Revelation 17 segment on their show

chelloveck

Joined: 6/2/2007

Msg: 82 (view)

Atheist's and Islam Posted: 1/2/2010 4:02:51 PM
Message #81 Scorpiomover said You cannot expect them to accept that the reason the US Constitution was written in English was that it was intended to be understood by the people of America in their native language. You can only expect them to accept that the US Constitution should be transliterated to as many languages as possible, and if in Arabic, or some other language, "the right to bear arms" is understood in that language, as "a right to use arms on people", then you cannot reason with them about it. "The right to bear arms" was incorrectly drafted into the United States constitution by some dumb.a$$ clerical functionary who suffered from dyslexia. The founding fathers were very prescient in anticipating the negative consequences of Sharia law on the basic human rights of women, and clearly intended that the burqua not be a required item of female attire. Unfortunately, but for the incompetence of a dyslectic constitutional draftsperson.....the the basic human right to bare arms has been denied to all United States citizens!!! Instead, this oversight, probably accounts for the rapidly declining bear population in Northern America.....where evidentally there is an open season for bears....after all....everyone there has a right to bear arms. It makes as much sense as most of the polemic in this rather silly debate : S

chelloveck

Joined: 6/2/2007

Msg: 75 (view)

Atheist's and Islam Posted: 1/1/2010 12:33:18 PM
Re Message #73 by Scorpiomover Your example is just what my point has been all along and you just helped me make it again. With in Islam stating your beliefs can get you killed really fast. Go to China and shout G-d does not exist. The state will applaud you. Go to China and shout communism is the most evil thing in the world. The state will lock you up, and you might never be heard from again. Even with atheists, your beliefs can get you killed really fast. Although communist governments mostly endorse and in many cases enforce (to a greater or lesser extent) atheism as a matter of "State" policy, I suspect that the policy has probably more to do with excluding the possibility of a de facto opposition developing against the hegemony of Communist Party power and control, than an intrinsic persecution of religious belief. Traditionally, religion has been one of a number of powerful unifying forces against totalitarian state control, and Communist governments will not tolerate any opposition to it's government and policies, be the opposition theistic or atheistic. Communists are quite catholic in their propensity for locking people up and throwing away the keys......I don't think they are overly fussed about what religious beliefs ...or non beliefs a person may have....if a person is perceived to be opposed to the ruling regime, then it is their perceived opposition that will find them in the slammer, whether they be theists, agnostics or atheists. Pretty much the same applies in the case of totalitarian theocratic regimes. In Iran, the Iranian ruling regime has probably killed off more muslim protesters against its regime than atheists, the message being....opposition to Iranian government control is hazardous to one's health. My reply to Scorpio's post is not a defence of Freetime2beme's polemics (aka rants), just merely to respond to part of Scorpio's reply to Freetime2beme.

chelloveck

Joined: 6/2/2007

Msg: 233 (view)

Are Messianic Jewish people still Jewish ? Posted: 12/26/2009 1:48:32 PM
Message #231 Chiny said They came about when Europeans adopted and then proceeded to adapt the Semite beliefs into their own culture whilst abandoning their own indigenous religions. I wouldn't consider conversion to "christianity" at the point of a sword a case of voluntary abandonment of indigenous religions. It should also be noted that christianity has been adept at incorporating elements of indigenous pagan religious traditions into the mix of semitic beliefs. I would think that Messianic jewish people are as jewish as secular jews are jewish.....at least in the eyes of orthodox jews.

chelloveck

Joined: 6/2/2007

Msg: 40 (view)

If you can do no evil in heaven, is that the loss of free will? Posted: 12/22/2009 12:29:16 PM
Thank goodness this thread has been moved to the Religion forum where it belongs, with all of the other "how many angels can stand on the head of a pin" topics. Although "The problem of evil" and the "free will defence" are traditional bones of contention in the arena of the philosophy of religion, the thread topic itself, heaven, and the loss of free will in relation to heaven, would tend to put the thread into a religious context more so than the philosophical context of arguing for and against the existence of god. I don't see much here in the way of discussing the topic by way of philosophical methodology, though there does seem to be, at least from one poster, a basic regurgitation of faith based doctrine. The thread topic can at best be considered a thought experiment. The existence of heaven is a matter of faith, rather than demonstrable by any empirical proof. My response to this "theoretical" is that if heaven does exist, the sacrifice of "free will" is way too high a price for admission to eternal celestial bliss. But then again, I tend towards an existentialist view of life. Fore!!!!

chelloveck

Joined: 6/2/2007

Msg: 17 (view)

Crowley the golden dawn OTO and A :. A :. was he the beast Posted: 12/21/2009 6:40:00 PM
Message #15 Abby Said When I read that the 1st time, I chuckled. The King James Old English DOES sound much more convincing. I guess crowleys' guides ect only spoke old english It seems you know as much about Crowley and the Golden Dawn as you know the etymology of the English of the King James Bible. Old English was in common usage in England and south-eastern Scotland between approximately between the mid-5th century and the mid-12th century (well before Chaucer). Its day had come and gone well before The publication of the King James Bible. If the King James Bible had been published in Old English, it would have been largely incomprehensible to the common folk at the time of its first publication, and it would be as incomprehensible to most folk of today as ancient greek would be. The King James Bible was published in the Early Modern English redolent of the Elizabethan era, and is largely comprehensible to folk of this day, and probably more comprehensible to most folk than a contemporary bible published in Leet.

chelloveck

Joined: 6/2/2007

Msg: 31 (view)

What Kind Of Heretic Are You, Anyway? Posted: 12/13/2009 3:32:17 PM
Message # 30 I've always been a heretic, against Western beliefs most of all. I think Socrates was right, and Plato was only right in the minority of situations. That alone makes me a heretic of Western thought. I'm just amazed that no-one here has tried to demand that I drink Hemlock. Scorpio.....you are safe from anyone demanding that you drink hemlock as a penalty for anything, except perhaps for the prolixity of some of your posts People are free to believe or disbelieve in the corpus of "western belief" in most western countries. If one wants to embrace the beliefs and values of a bronze age or iron age eastern belief systems in preference to a post modern "western" belief system, I doubt that many would care a jot. Heresy is more likely to be a hanging...or perhaps hemlocking offence in states that have a theocratic polity. Besides, Socrates was tried and sentenced to a hemlock highball, for allegedly failing to recognise the gods recognised by the state and for supposedly corrupting Athenian youth. As Britain does not have supernatural gods that are recognised by the state as the state's gods, and as it is unlikely that you have been corrupting British youth, you are probably very safe from being compelled to drink anything herbally toxic.

chelloveck

Joined: 6/2/2007

Msg: 20 (view)

American Buddhists prepare for 3 year Vow of Silence Posted: 12/12/2009 12:33:27 AM
Message #21 And in three years, could they not provide a greater service to the world and helping thereof (as such good natured persons?) rather than retreat unto themselves .............Evil in the world prevails when good man does nothing! What good are they doing .........if they retreat to bring themselves to a silent peace......rather than spreading that peace throughout the world in all sincerety??? Maybe a little Jesus could bring them to peace and clarity of a wee bit sooner???yes? Ah yes EFT........as open minded and tolerant of other people's beliefs as you seem to be....you do seem to enjoy doing a little buddhist bashing. Blessed are the peace makers, for they are the sons of god.....but do i see any peace making on your part?.....do I see any ecumenical understanding and respect by you of other faith viewpoints? I guess not....just riding the hobbyhorse of your own particular brand of dogma. If buddhists are exercising free will, and are doing no harm to others...why are you wailing like some demented harridan about that choice? If you wish to do something about religious contemplative retreats....there are plenty of contemplative orders of nuns and priests that withdraw from the world to a life of prayer and contemplation and not a great deal of much else....if you wish to grumble and complain ....start working on the effort and resources such contemplative orders deny the world. Mind you....the world might benefit greatly by clerical...and lay religious child abusers, male and female alike, taking extended solitary retreats from the world....or perhaps retreats into solitary....I doubt their lack of participation in society would be missed, nor mourned.

chelloveck

Joined: 6/2/2007

Msg: 68 (view)

Matthew 14: 32-6: A Philosophical Discussion Posted: 12/10/2009 4:31:27 PM
Naïve, if your opening post was intended to find some resolution to your OP question, by philosophical means and methodologies, then it would seem that your quest is a rather forlorn one. Apparently, most are more intent on indulging themselves in doctrinal and inter denominational argy bargy, and humbuggery than in answering your question in any meaningful way. There is no need for atheists to participate in this theological bun fight, as it would seem that as the “christians” are doing such a splendid job of beating each other over the head, any involvement by infidels would be entirely redundant. The question that you have posed Is Jesus God? If so, is it plausible that God would pray to God for Help? is, indeed a conundrum in the context of the biblical passage that you have quoted. If Jesus is god, and his “father” is god, and that some of the attributes of this biblical diety are omniscience, omnipresence and omnipotence et al, it follows then that God knows everything, that is in the past, the present and the future. Jesus would have known beforehand the precise script that that little biblical vignette would follow. It would seem to me that the actions and dialogue were dramatic rhetorical devices for the benefit of his followers, rather than actual pleas for intercession with that part of the god head that is “his father”. It makes little sense for Jesus to refuse himself, the destiny that he chose to effect, over all the other possible destinies that he could have chosen. It makes for good drama, and without a doubt, the new and old testaments contain the best soap opera scripts of their day. The “best” explanation that could be offered by one of the theistic bun fighters, is that the conundrum is a mystery of divination (that) One of this earth cannot possibly be able to explain . It is a fine example of the fallacy of Circular Cause and Consequence, i.e. where the consequence of the phenomenon is claimed to be its root cause. A consequence of the conundrum posed in the OP’s question in the scriptual text cited is that it is a mystery that mystifies us, because the mystery is of divine origin, and because we mortals are incapable of divining the divine, it is a mystery. It is an appeal to ignorance argument that is of doubtful value. In other words, we don’t know, because we don’t know, but hey, have faith that it is right and it will all come out in the wash! Maybe….maybe not.

chelloveck

Joined: 6/2/2007

Msg: 133 (view)

Introduction of Islam Posted: 12/5/2009 9:02:48 PM
Message #134 laomega said <div class="quote">If a Religion does not believe that Jesus is God, was born of the virgin Mary, immaculate conception...... and that Jesus/God died for our salvation........... Then they are false = Cult! sounds like yo' be reekin' o' exclusivity o' truth brother.....shame, shame, shame on you! An abominable crime unto the Forum mods As far as accusations of cult status, the same may be said of the Jesus cult by the Jewish bretheren, whom have no particular conviction that the Judaic prophecies have been fulfilled in JC. The only thing is that Christianity has enough adherents now to claim the legitimacy of a mainstream religion in their own right. Most religions have elements that are relatively benign.....and elements that are baneful.....some religions are more virulently malignant than others. As far as using the claws of faith, the difference between christianity and islam, in my view, is merely a matter of degree and methodology.

chelloveck

Joined: 6/2/2007

Msg: 3 (view)

It Ain't Necessarily So Posted: 12/4/2009 12:55:24 PM
Well i got news for some of you...WHEN THE MOST HIGH IS COMING KNOW ONE WILL KNOW..ITS SAID IN (BIBLE) WHEN HE (GOD) COMES .PEOPLE WILL STILL BE HAVING BABIES AND PEOPLE WILL GETTING UP IN THE MORNING TO GO TO WORK~~~~(IF YOU KNOW YOUR BIBLE THAN I DON'T HAVE TO TELL YOU WHERE) ...BUT PEOPLE STILL YOU WOULD NOT KNOW...SO PEOPLE GET OVER YOURSELVES If your evidence for a definitive explanation of the end of the world is the "Bible", then it is no less fanciful than the end of the world prognosticated for 1000 CE, 2ooo CE, 2010CE, 2012CE or any other CE date. I think George and Ira Gershwin said it well when they wrote Porgy and Bess. To get into Hebben Don' snap for a sebben ! Live clean ! Don' have no fault ! Oh, I takes dat gospel Whenever it's pos'ble, But wid a grain of salt Just because you, and others believe in the "Bible", it don't mean that things will end the way that the Bible says it will..."SO PEOPLE GET OVER YOURSELVES".... it ain't necessarily so : wink:

chelloveck

Joined: 6/2/2007

Msg: 108 (view)

Your case for/against God. Posted: 11/7/2009 8:09:12 PM
Message # 107 - Abby Apologists for God(s) concerning his /her /its / their failure to deliver the goods sought by prayerful intercession invariably invoke the usual escape clauses.... It's not his / her / its / their will at that time. The prayers were made with improper / selfish motives. the diety'(s)' action's are unfathomable to mere mortals...but he / she / it / they must have had a good reason which the diety(s) is under no obligation to share with mere mortals. The intercession was witheld to prevent a worse evil from happening. The intercession was witheld for the sake of the spiritual growth of the person praying, or the person who is the object of the prayer. The people who make these kinds of rationalisations presume to speak for their god(s) but their god(s) seem to be silent in their own defence.

chelloveck

Joined: 6/2/2007

Msg: 103 (view)

Your case for/against God. Posted: 11/7/2009 2:57:52 AM
Re Message #103 - Countbli I could pray to a milk jug and get the same results. Any prayer that doesn't get answered is not the will of the milk jug and any prayer that does get answered is the will of the milk jug. Strange that you mention the god of milkjugs. I often pray to the milk jug god that the milk in my milk jug doesn't sour before it's use by date. Sometimes my prayers are answered...and sometimes not. I suppose I could pray to the refigerator god to help the milk jug god out....but i have learned by using scientific heuristic learning methodologies, that if i consistently close the refigerator door securely, and lower the refrigerator thermostat setting, that my prayers are answered more often than not. The only problem being that the freezer god sometimes turns the milk in the milk jug into an icy milkblock!

chelloveck

Joined: 6/2/2007

Msg: 48 (view)

Conservative Bible Project...reforming that socialist Jesus. Posted: 10/23/2009 3:30:42 PM
Please note this is not a translation, which would require going back to original texts and translating it into English. arwen, I think you are right, though I think you may be incorrect concerning the possibility of translating the original texts. The original texts are no longer extant. The only texts that are available for examination are translations of copies of copies of copies of recorded oral recollections passed on from generation to generation over several centuries. The best that can be suggested is that the earliest available copies of the original texts might be examined. The average online wikipediaist is usually not conversant in Hebrew, Aramaic or Ancient Greek. This bunch of idealogue editors are intent on Bowdlerising the bits that don't sit well with their own politico / economic world view. A bold, and rather silly, but subversive exercise. Not even Hitler tinkered with the bible, to accord with the language and principles of National Socialism....maybe the politically conservative biblical censors have a little more chutzpa than Adolf did.

chelloveck

Joined: 6/2/2007

Msg: 61 (view)

Your case for/against God. Posted: 10/21/2009 5:25:04 AM
Re Message #61 abby156 I will answer your last question about amputees. The miracles Jesus performed during his 3 and 1/2 year ministry were a fulfillment of messianic prophecy ( see Isaiah 29 as an example) It would seem that the prophecy that Isiah 49 is referring to is the defeat of the Assyrians in a prophesised assault against the Israelites in Jeruselam by Sennacherib and his host. I could not elucidate any reference to a messiah, and more specifically to a messiah with miraculous healing abilities. it might be helpful if you would reference the verses in Isiah chapter 49 that supports your thesis. He did nothing randomly He (God) seems, according to his biographers to act consistently at times...and inconsistently at other times.....sometimes kind...sometimes cruel....like any absolute despot.....the lord giveth and the Lord taketh at his whim....that which doesn't have any reasonable explanation is sloughed off as "God moving in mysterious ways"....don't question the whys or wherefores....just accept, and have faith. There is one case where Christ "restored" an amputee. In Luke 22 we see a disciple of Christs' striking off the right ear of a servant of the high priest. Christ restored the ear. Luke 22: verses 49-51 are deliciously ambiguous about the nature of healing performed by Christ. The verses do not indicate that the servant's ear was "restored" to its original condition and position on the servant's head, merely that servant was healed. This could just as well have been achieved by rendering mundane first aid, as by a miracle....but miracles are much more interesting and impressive, and are more likely to make for better reading than bandaging a bloody head. 49When Jesus' followers saw what was going to happen, they said, "Lord, should we strike with our swords?" 50And one of them struck the servant of the high priest, cutting off his right ear. 51But Jesus answered, "No more of this!" And he touched the man's ear and healed him. All sorts of maladies have been alleged to have been healed by the supposed intervention of divine, supernatural agencies, for which there is no, as yet alternative explanation. Some of these claims have been proven to have been patently fraudulent, others may have a rational explanation, but not explicable by current scientific bio / technology. The microscope, stethoscope, and other scientific instruments have provided rational explanations for pathologies that were once assumed to have had supernatural origins. I think it may be safe to say, that improvements in birthing survival has had more to do with effective hygiene practices, and an understanding of the microbiology of sepsis than the efficacy of prayer. Of the alleged miraculous healings attributed to god, there is one class of miraculous healing that is apparently conspicuously absent from human history and God's grace, and that is the regeneration of amputated human limbs. Certainly some reptiles, amphibians and crustacians are capable of regenerating limbs, does that mean that God favours cold blooded animals over hominidae???

chelloveck

Joined: 6/2/2007

Msg: 132 (view)

Why do Non-Christians feel the need to press their anti-religous belief's on people? Posted: 10/18/2009 2:27:07 AM
Reply to message #126 Ladytix The reason people want to erase or disprove Christianity is that they don't want to hear they are doing something wrong. That is a broad generalisation that has no basis in fact. Although it suits the mindset of many christians to take that viewpoint, and it sits well with the theological propaganda of that faith, however the same charge may be made, and made just as unconvincingly against people of competing theistic faiths. They know deep down it is right, but are in complete disobedience and don't want any reminders of their wrong choices. That is an unwarranted assumption....also without any basis in fact. There are many reasons why one may not give any credence to the christian...or indeed any other theistic faith position. Secular / atheistic people may be viewed as disobedient to the god(s) of many faiths by the believers of those faiths....but that is merely the viewpoint of the faithful....you, purportedly as a christian are disobedient to the god Allah, I take it that you would welcome criticism for your unreasonable disobedience to Allah's will? Also misery loves company, they want others to remain lost too This is a misconception, also happily put about by some christians and no doubt people of other faiths, that the non religious, the atheists etc are an unhappy miserable bunch, quite unable to function effectively without "god's grace" shining down upon them from the heavens above. I am no more "lost", with regard to christianity, than I am "lost" with regard to Islam, Jainism, Shintoism, Judaism, or animism etc....but if I were to choose a theistic belief system to follow...I find the old Norse gods very appealing...as a warrior....fighting all day in Asgaard....and wenching and drinking all night in Valhalla seems a much more interesting afterlife than any of the christian harps, halos and angels wings that Heaven has to offer. None the less...unfortunately there is no more evidence to support the existence of the Norse pantheon, than there is evidence to support the pantheon of gods, angels, cherubim and seraphim et al in Christian mythology, so I shall just have to be content with my present existence here on Earth. As to others "remaining lost" better to find reason and make rational decisions based on the evidence, than to believe as a matter of blind faith, what one was indoctrinated with as a child. Some people outgrow the myths and legends of childhood, some do not. Although few people believe in the tooth fairy, the easter bunny and Santa Clause as they did as a child....somehow as adults many are happy to perpetuate the myths for their own children, knowing that it is a fraud. I suspect that same may also be true of some theists also in respect of their faith. If I am lost to a mythology that is not all that benign, I am happy not to be found. Very sad, but those who have the Spirit of God and follow see things through God's eyes.........as there really are! Those who believe that they have the Spirit of God and follow, see things through the eyes of the sacred text writers and the doctrines of their faith, as interpreted by their faith's leaders (past and present), to do otherwise often in the past one might have ended up on a heretic's pyre. Today...heresy in some faiths is still a capital offence. One day however, you may come to understand, that the only eyes that matter are Odin's...but as it is also a banning offence to preach exclusivity of truth....I suggest the possibility that the evidence, for Odin's eyes are as convincing as the evidence for the eyes of the Judeo / Christian god.

chelloveck

Joined: 6/2/2007

Msg: 89 (view)

Ex-atheists? Posted: 10/14/2009 2:30:42 PM
Re Msg:87 by scorpio mover You and RDtoo seem to have in common the tortuous torture of the English language to prove dubious points. Having a passion for something does not mean that one is religious in the most common sense of the word, and a collective of people who share a passion for something, does not necessarily mean that they are part of a religion or partaking in a religion in the usual sense of religious, which means belief in a transcendant reality or supreme being. I doubt that catholic girls, or jewish girls, or protestant girls would confuse their favourite boy band with the diety that they worship at church or synagogue, so why try to make the rather silly case that boy bands are religious idols?? One way of examining whether something is a religion is to look at its attributes. (am indebted to http://www.abarnett.demon.co.uk/ for the comparative analysis) Religious Attribute..........................Religion........................Atheism Belief in God(s)...................................Yes..................................No Prayer ................................................Yes..................................No Churches / temples / Mosques.............Yes.................................No Holy Book / Scripture..........................Yes.................................No Priests / Religious leaders -heirarchy....Yes................................ No Belief in the supernatural (including ............................angels/devil ).............Yes................................No Miracles.................................................Yes................................No Afterlife..................................................Yes................................No Holy Wars...............................................Yes...............................No Heaven / Hell..........................................Yes...............................No Lifestyle restrictions (dress, diet,............Yes..............................No marriage etc etc.) Belief without evidence (faith as a...........Yes...............................No virtue) Belief despite conflicting evidence..........Yes................................No Supernatural origins of universe..............Yes...............................No and/or humans Murderous fundamentalist extremists......Yes..............................No (who are so, based on their religious convictions) Annoying street / doorstop preachers.......Yes..............................No Belief in an immortal soul...........................Yes..............................No Regular ritual, ceremonies, acts of..............Yes..............................No worship, liturgy, Belief in sin (original or otherwise)...............Yes.............................No Blasphemy....................................................Yes............................No We are god's chosen people...........................Yes............................No Here following are a few websites that debunk the silly notion that atheism is a religion. http://www.abarnett.demon.co.uk/atheism/atheismreligion.html http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/ath/blathm_rel_religion.htm http://www.skepdic.com/skeptimedia/skeptimedia37.html My favourite quotation concerning the "Atheism is a religion" phurphy...is.... "Atheism is to religion what bald is to hair colour"

chelloveck

Joined: 6/2/2007

Msg: 8 (view)

Atheist's and Islam Posted: 10/10/2009 2:36:35 PM
In answer to the OP There are probably many reasons for the apparent lack of debate between atheists and muslims vs the apparently vocal debate between atheists and christians. I say apparent, because it is likely that most atheists...and most christians don't give a hoot what the other thinks or believes...and just go about their lives oblivious of or indifferent to the beliefs and practices of each other. In western countries, many atheists are former christian theists, and relatively few are former muslim theists. Although atheists who are former christians have no greater belief in muslim mythology than they do christian mythology, they do however in the main, have a greater familiarity with christian mythology than they do muslim mythology, and therefore may be more inclined to dispute the content of sacred christian texts than sacred muslim texts. As far as I can understand, christians don't have the equivalent of the muslim fatwa, so it is probably safer for non christians to challenge the tennets of the christian faith than it is to challenge the tennets of the muslim faith. Many muslims take their fatwas seriously, and sadly, a number of people of different faith positions have died as a consequence of fatwas being executed. Some people do have the courage to take islam head on...but often they live life as a fugitive from fanatical religious persecution and retribution. Below is a link to an interview between Taslima Nasrin a Bangladeshi feminist writer and Kerry O'Brien on "Lateline" ABC (Australian Broadcasting Commission) TV (1995). http://www.atheistfoundation.org.au/articles/taslima-nasrin-writer-trial

chelloveck

Joined: 6/2/2007

Msg: 48 (view)

11:11 Posted: 9/14/2009 2:00:43 PM
A Sequence of date/time numbers of itself only has the power that we choose to give it. Some will superstitiously infer some meaning from them, and in so doing may influence behaviours which may possibly result in the predicted outcomes coming to effect for some who have a belief of such things. Then again, predicted outcomes may be quite coincidental to the beliefs held to. Either way, someone will make a buck from the superstitious and incredulous. eleven:eleven am was the moment in time that the First World War ended. Think of how many lives might have been saved if the armistice went into effect a day or two earlier. Vancer ^^^^^^ Nicely put..... perceptions surrounding supposedly magical effects...tend to follow from magical thinking, rather than magical causation.

chelloveck

Joined: 6/2/2007

Msg: 246 (view)

Biblical inaccuracies/contradictions Posted: 8/11/2009 7:04:48 AM
Message #245 A_theist It is not required that you agree with my view. I did show you that rationally from my point of view the Bible is the inerrant word of God. A mad man may may offer plausible, reasonable explanations of events from his own point of view.....just that his point of view may not be consistent with the the point of view of those who don't share his pathology. Message # 246 Khyrene The difficulty with addressing issues of biblical inerrancy and biblical infallibility, is that apologists for biblical inerrancy and biblical infallibility respond to criticisms of the bible, by the application of a circular kind of argument.....even in the face of apparent contradictions, inconsistencies, and factual errors. This issue is not confined to christians...it is also an affliction shared by other faiths. Such apologetics follow variations of the sequence outlined below. The Sacred text affirms that it is the inerrant / infallible word of god (Initiate quote-fest of passages from the appropriate sacred texts) (stated explicitly...or implicitly) God, being omnipotent, is incapable of error The Bible is the inspired word of god - (round two of quote-fest of selected passages from sacred texts continues where round one finishes off...or reprises quotes from round one) which the adherant embraces as an act of faith, because that is what their faith requires of them as a believer) Conclusion: The Bible is inerrant / Infallible rinse and repeat. Message #244 Driven2think ^^^^^My man, you went to a lot of work answering my post with your aplogetic gymnastics but the bottom line is that no inerrant God would allow ANY errors in a book that we are to put our trust, faith & belief in; a book that was, as the story goes, created for us. To ascribe a mess of a book like the bible to an infallible omnipotent God is an insult to such a being. Your argument is not logical.....an infallible, omnipotent God...is free to incorporate any errors, factual inaccuracies, contradictions and inconsistancies, that he / she / it / they wish in their sacred comic books / intergalactic soap opera scripts, simply because they choose to...it's their universe after all (But meh...I'm a pastafarian....and the noodley one's recipe book of life can never be wrong even if the recipes are mistranslated...and incorrectly interpreted by those perfidious bechemal sauce heretics!!!!)

chelloveck

Joined: 6/2/2007

Msg: 35 (view)

Do Jews, Christians and Muslims All Pray to the Same God? Posted: 7/18/2009 7:39:06 AM
#34 Tim was saying in Islam their God is distant, not near, not a loving principle, he was an absolute authority who could command a caravan be attacked and the women raped As opposed to the Xtian god....who is near enough to observe a caravan being attacked and the women raped....but choses not to intervene??? I am not certain that divine neglect is any more morally superior than capriciously compounding evil. Tim Staples sells his talks. You have that right.....whether he has not taken vows of poverty as one would if they were in holy orders is unclear...as is how much goes to him...and how much goes to the church. ...Fees: Costs include an honorarium for the first talk (plus 15 minute Q&A session) of $1250 plus travel expenses. The honorarium for each additional talk given that day is $800...

chelloveck

Joined: 6/2/2007

Msg: 140 (view)

Reincarnation in the Bible Posted: 7/17/2009 1:49:54 PM
re message #139 It was just such a good read, and so imaginative, that many believed it must be true. The same also may be said of many sacred texts I also was and am still an avid reader of ancient Greek, Roman and Norse mythology, finding them very entertaining in a pantheistic days of our lives kind of way. I was quite a religiose Anglican in my earlier years, looking at the incredible goings on of Greek, Roman and Norse gods, goddeses, and other divine and semi divine beings as being altogether too fantastic to be real. It took me to adulthood to realise, that the Abrahamic faiths are of the same mythological genre of literature. Reincarnation and rebirth seems to be a common theme in many religions and cultures....that it is a commonplace notion, does not mean that there is any factual basis for the belief, just that there is a desire to have a better life, than the one we are living.

chelloveck

Joined: 6/2/2007

Msg: 6 (view)

Would You Call The Flood Of Noah Euthanasia? Posted: 7/14/2009 2:13:22 AM
message #5 <div class="quote">Where does it say Countibli that a woman must marry her rapist? Meh....I'm a secular humanist.....but finding out the biblical reference to the judaic law on such things was but a few keystrokes away.... Look up Deuteronomy 22:28 <div class="quote">Deuteronomy 22:28-29 (New King James Version) 28 “If a man finds a young woman who is a virgin, who is not betrothed, and he seizes her and lies with her, and they are found out, 29 then the man who lay with her shall give to the young woman’s father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife because he has humbled her; he shall not be permitted to divorce her all his days. It seems the Judaic laws were concerned more with the offence given to the father, than the father's daughter, for reducing his daughter's eligibility to marry someone more desirable to the fortunes of the family. What kind of dowery would tainted goods attract??? I guess a rapist who preys upon a married woman...would presumably be stoned to death, as an adulterer. Presumably a woman who was not a virgin when she was raped was the cause of no economic loss to the father, therefore no compensation could be demanded of the sexual offender. It seems that the victim of the assault is not the woman, but the father....what an interesting cultural concept, but not so surprising if women are treated as property...either of a father or a husband...or of a rapist who is good for the 50 shekels of silver : S <div class="quote">As giver of life, and master, he can decide on strong action, but would have preferred to die in their place, but this could not be done, until Roman days. I find this a remarkable apology on behalf of god. Are you telling me that an omnipotent, omniscient god could not take "strong action" any time he/she,/it/they chose to do so, and could not have died for the sake of humanity at any time, prior to , or even after Roman days??? <div class="quote">Would you like to live in a world without the flood and Noah? Except as a biblical allegorical narrative (the flood and Noah)...we ARE, living without the flood and Noah, just that some people like the sunday school narrative a lot. Who cannot love such a story...after all it's got cutesey animals walking two by two into an incredible tardis ark. Pity about the unicorns though...they seemed to have missed the boat ride. : ( <div class="quote">Other gods are said to have made people, and death is part of life, but people don't seem to think bad of that. This is a fallacious tu quoque argument. It's like saying...hey guys...why are you giving my god such a hard time Huh???....there are other gods just as bad...and even worse than my god, and you don't get on their backs about it!!! This line of faulty reasoning doesn't establish that your god is a good and just god.

chelloveck

Joined: 6/2/2007

Msg: 2 (view)

Would You Call The Flood Of Noah Euthanasia? Posted: 7/10/2009 1:35:59 PM
Something else, if the events actually happened as stated. I would call it brutal, murderous, egoistic stupidity. But as the events as stated were a bit of tribal propagandising, by way of allegorical mythmaking....I would call it brutal, murderous, egoistic stupidity. It worries me that your train of thinking...i daren't call it logic, would suggest that innocent minors would be better dead than living in a culture without redemption. It doesn't seem far from the kind of reasoning that would have the religiose burning heretics in order to save their immortal souls from their heretical beliefs.

chelloveck

Joined: 6/2/2007

Msg: 7 (view)

Who are the Djinn? Posted: 6/28/2009 2:37:30 PM
Message #1 do you think that those beings that portrayted themselves as fairies, gnomes and elves in the medieval days are those same beings that are portraying themselves as little, grey bug-eyed beings from outer space simply because they are molding themselves to fit the scientific paradigm of the age? Could it be that these so-called aliens are are the same ancient companion race to mankind.... the djinn? Allmost anything is possible.........but the degree of probability needs to be weighed by the evidence. Every mythology has its "good guys" and "bad guys" to explain the universe within that mythology....be they prehistoric.....or post modern. Just as gods evolve with the evolution of human cultures, so do their underlings and minions.

chelloveck

Joined: 6/2/2007

Msg: 25 (view)

Lack of tithing=economic diseaster Posted: 6/20/2009 7:31:25 AM
GM is a company set up for profit. If we believe that this should be applied to all non-profit organisations, then we have to do the same for all charities, such as Cancer Research. There is no requirement for all charities to be required to undergo chapter 11 bankruptcy produres. Non-prophet charities should be exempt of course! 2hi-iq-4u was only suggesting that churches might follow GM's loss mitigation model.....he was making no suggestion that ALL non-profit organisations should chapter 11, that was a nice rhetorical flourish all of your own. It was nice of you to include Cancer Research among the list of endangered charities...threatened by your proposal. Unless you are suggesting that Cancer research, is more a matter of faith healing than evidence based scientific research. I think 2hi-iq-4u might be suggesting, tongue in cheek, that the profitable churches liquidate the unprofitable parts of their operations....how profitability may be determined I don't quite know...attendances at services....conversions to the faith....congregation enlargement....revenue inwards....amount of influence exerted on decision makers and the broader community.....number of saints beatified....the wealth accumulated by key personnel in the church heirarchy....they could all be factors for consideration. Some churches have subsidiary functions, some of which undoubtedly contribute to the common good of the community, that may not be denied....but churches exist for the propogation, and dissemination of the faith that founds them, that is their main raison d'etre...not all churches and not all aspects of ecclesiastical enterprises are necessarily for the common good, and may actually be harmful to the community.

chelloveck

Joined: 6/2/2007

Msg: 44 (view)

Why do Christians take away the personal name of God? Posted: 6/18/2009 4:49:24 PM
messge # 48 Egads! My dear God John...for we are all gods....did ye no' say so??? In the old testament it is said "ye are gods".. jesus himself endorses that, so i guess we are all gods I didn't realise that christians were polytheists....I always thought that christians were monotheists...(somehow doing a razzle dazzle in explaining that the trinity is one instead of three....but I digress.) I wonder what Yahwe would make of your claims to being a divinity?? Since god and jesus are one why cant i call jesus god, Um....God and Jesus, according to christian trinitarian doctrine as I understand it represent 2/3rds of one.....the remainder of the fraction consisting of the holy ghost (spirit). The Holy ghost may be wondering why you have been neglecting him /her /it /them in the equation! As was pointed out by TMF....the biblical reference to God and Jesus being one, may have more to do with their collective PURPOSE, than their NUMERICAL character of being fractions of one supernatural entity. However...if you have a one track mind on the matter....do continue going around and around in circles with that notion. Too many people say we cannot get to be gods. Well if we spent 40 days fasting for example please dont misquote that or spent 8 hrs praying to god per day and were faithful in all the principles of god, dont u think that we would be pretty much in tune with god. I am beginning to smell the taint of salvation by works in the ritual of fasting and prayer in your comments......salvation is through God's grace....which he offers or denies at his own whim. It cannot be assumed that a life spent in fasting and prayer will have any greater prospect of earning salvation, than using to positive benefit the gift of life that God has apparently deigned to give us. I am beginning to understand your motivation in spamming this forum with your pious posts.....you seem to be hankering for a piece of the divinity action. However.....you should take note....for the sake of your eternal soul, the Gospel according to Mathew....wherein, it is said that "The last will be first, and the first will be last". That you may be assuming that you...by your very "godly behaviour" will earn a front pew in God's church(with the rest of the 139,999) during the tribulation, but it doesn't necessarily follow that you will in fact do so. Given the numerical odds of your competition....the probability of being among the 144,000 from a starting gate of billions....all I can say is....good luck. Dont call me princess you heathen. I think TMF may have referred to you as "princess" becuse you seem to be a little precious about yourself...and you appear to have more than a little sense of entitlement....but I may be mistaken....I think that you are the absolute prince of piety. You seem to reserve to yourself the right to use disparaging remarks, when challenged by those who question the rationality of what you are propounding.....hardly a godly behaviour I guess.

chelloveck

Joined: 6/2/2007

Msg: 46 (view)

What Do You Think--Should This House Be Cleansed? Posted: 6/18/2009 8:53:37 AM
Message #45 In christ we have no need for pagan rituals we can go where we want, when we want, inspite of other weird beliefs or events I hope you keep that thought in mind when you next go strolling through a minefield....as I understand it....those who walk in Christ in Iraq or Afghanistan are just as likely to be blown up by an EOD as those who don't walk in christ. The amputee wards in military and VA hospitals are probably well populated with christian soldiers who's prayers for surviving their tour of duty in one piece went unanswered. The "cleansing" of houses by ritual....has probably no greater affect than any other kind of supestition, but if it has the placebo effect of putting one's mind at rest, then there is probably little harm in it...unless the ritual involves harm to animals or humans.

chelloveck

Joined: 6/2/2007

Msg: 20 (view)

Pray at the Pump? Does God Really Care about the Mundane? Posted: 6/18/2009 8:09:57 AM
^^^^^^^ I dislike it when people quote me: unless its positive, please dont quote me. I find i am always misquoted. Brother John you tend not to quote directly from other people's posts...perhaps you don't know how to...or choose not to, but you rarely seem to resist the temptation of interpolating your own value judgements concerning other's motivations and lifestyle choices, inimical to your own BAC (Born Again Christian) world view. The forums are not mutual agreement societies where fallacious and illogical dialectic is just taken as read and allowed to stand unchallenged. If you make a logically insupportable (aka dumbass) comment...then I and others will question the validity of what you are saying. I personally don't take too greatly to being preached at by those who, with self proclaimed righteous piety, proselytise that their brand of mythology as being the one and only brand of mythology that has any value...but then that may be just me. As to god lotto...I was referring to the probability that God would answer one's prayers and fill one's fuel tank with cheap fuel.....and my remark concerning the devil looking after his own.... was making the observation that the wages of sin, also include the wherewithal to pay for the gasoline that fills a Mafia Don's gas tank...unless of course you are suggesting that God also answers the prayers of penitent and impenitent crime bosses. be not deceived because they have a little bit of money, something u worship i bet: So...you are a problem gambler?? I would never have thought a good pious christian such as yourself would be a betting man....but then I guess Gambler's Anonymous is as patronised by all manner of sinners, be they christian or heathen. You may presume to make the error of assuming what I do or don't worship, without having any idea of who I am. But I'll humour you.... you are quite incorrect.....I have no idea of whether you are actually a gambler or a gambler in remission...or a total abstainer from gambling, it is the kind of value judgement that you seem to be happy to apply to others though, even if you do refer to it as being "fleshly". Where is the mafia now that you have glorified How do you impute that my comment was glorifying the mafia???? I merely used the example of the mafia...contrasted by the righteous poor.....to point out that the sinner is just as likely to have the $$$ to fill his fuel tank...and that the righteous poor....are just as likely to lack the $$$ to fill their fuel tank with gasolene, regardless of the amont of bended knee earnest praying that they might do. Whether the Mafia boss...has a downside to their kind of life...is immaterial as to whether or not they have the wherewithal to pay for their fuel, regardless of the state of the POL commodities market.

chelloveck

Joined: 6/2/2007

Msg: 19 (view)

Pray at the Pump? Does God Really Care about the Mundane? Posted: 6/17/2009 11:52:06 PM
The hand of God, playing with the oil prices???....now tell me is God also responsible when oil prices go through the roof as well??? The oil producers are just as happy for God to send the price up....and at the same time enable buyers to have sufficient monetary reserves to pay a premium price. In the arena of economic supply and demand, the invisble hand of the market determines the price of commodities....at least Adam Smith seemed to think so in his work, The Wealth of Nations.....perhaps if intercessory prayers were directed to Mammon instead of the Big Fella upstairs....consumers may possibly get a better deal. In a capitalistic system...the market is god...and god is the market. the closest god gets to gasoline prices is to give you the means to pay for gas IF you walk a close walk with god and do things that are not illegal, like deal coke, or cut corners on building supplies I.E. leaky condos in vancouver. I doubt that your average mafia don, ever has difficulty paying for his gasoline.....but then again, I suppose the devil looks after his own.....while the poverty stricken righteous take their chances with God Lotto.

chelloveck

Joined: 6/2/2007

Msg: 32 (view)

Today I met an...Angel? Posted: 6/15/2009 4:22:47 AM
Who knows the actual truth of the story? It does sound like a very inspirational example of glurge, encouraging the faithful in offering praises, hallelujahs and amens. The OP is no longer a member of POF, so it's a little difficult to get a verification of the story. It does bear some resemblance to the kind of urban myth that often finds its way to the Snopes web-site. for a somewhat similar story refer to "In The Cards" http://www.snopes.com/glurge/welfarecard.asp I sometimes get these kind of stories from well meaning, but generally uncritical acquaintances who are inclined to spam such stories forward to "true friends" who will themselves forward them on to 3-10 (or whatever number recommended in the spam e-mail) "true friends" lest the chain break, and some poor starving child in Ethiopia will miss the 1cent per e-mail forwarded donation to be made by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (or some other charity). The glurge seems to smell strongest when the agency for the amazing outcome of the story rests with angels and other supernatural entities. Random acts of kindness may not perhaps be frequently experienced in day to day life by individuals, however, they do happen frequently enough in the larger population not to be an uncommon event. If one tenth of the population of the USA was to experience 1 random act of kindness each year, there would be some 30.6 million random acts of kindness per year. As has been observed earlier, what we seem to have in this story is a random act of kindness from one individual to another. Draw what conclusions you will from the ethical and moral implications of the narrative told by the OP, even if the story itself may be apocryphal. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Random_act_of_kindness For an explanation of glurge http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-glurge.htm

chelloveck

Joined: 6/2/2007

Msg: 65 (view)

Do you believe in Ghosts? Posted: 6/15/2009 12:47:16 AM
Message #63 All that was necessary in responding to the OP was a Yes, No, or Undecided, and an explanation supporting why you arrived at your conclusion. A regurgitation of aspects of some particular faith based mythology was unnecessary. Do you believe in Ghosts? I have no belief in ghosts, for much the same reason that I have no belief in a number of other paranormal phenomena, namely, a lack of credible evidence supporting the existence of such phenomena. There is however a body of evidence supporting naturalistic explanations for some paranormal phenomena, and where there are presently no known naturalistic explanations....it is entirely possible that such a naturalistic / scientific explanation may be forthcoming as knowledge about the universe and how it works increases. There is also a body of evidence demonstrating that some allegedly paranormal phenomena are in fact fraudulent contrivances designed to take advantage of the gullible. I am therefore, pretty much a ghost skeptic. As to the alleged existence of ghosts, it may perhaps be a matter of perception and belief rather than any objective existence. "I'll believe it when I see it" is usually the utterance of a skeptic...(usually with the notion that what is expected to be seen is unlikely to be what is actually experienced). "You'll see it when you believe it" is usually the utterance of a proponent of a faith based proposition, with the rider that if the promised phenomena fails to materialise, it was because one didn't have sufficient belief. Perhaps people who claim to see ghosts are people who have at least an unconscious belief in the positive existence of ghosts, and may interpret perceived phenomena in terms of the schema that they already have in their own mind about seeing or experiencing ghosts.

chelloveck

Joined: 6/2/2007

Msg: 16 (view)

Proud of your own humility? Posted: 6/13/2009 2:28:40 AM
It is said that pride goeth before a fall. If one is proud of one's own humility, then the fall that one goeth for such pride will probably be minimal.

chelloveck

Joined: 6/2/2007

Msg: 103 (view)

Where does it say - in the Bible - that pre-marital sex is restricted? Posted: 6/10/2009 1:52:55 PM
Message 101 Problem is that there are people who are very bigoted against the copying of Bible Verses on POF I don't have any problem people quoting verbatim, selected passages from sacred texts, provided that they are pertinent to supporting or detracting from a proposition being introduced into the debate in a thread discussion. I have quoted verses from the bible to support my own arguments on bible topics, as a way of dealing with the absurdity of some theistic propositions....and have entered into spirited (yet generally civil) debate with proponents of alternative views. What I do find irksome is when individuals use the forums as a platform for proselytising their own faith with quotations that are irrelevant to the topic being discussed, and with irrelevant commentary interspersed with threats of dire consequences in the afterlife if we rebellious benighted sinners refuse to accept this or that diety as our spiritual overlord. If people do choose to introduce biblical quotations into a debate / discussion, they should neither be surprised nor feel hurt if the quotations are not merely taken as read, but may be challenged and critiqued. Nothing is so sacred that the essence of what a textual quote is conveying cannot be analysed and debated robustly. If one chooses to support a weak argument with valueless quotation, then it may be a good idea to be a little more discerning in what one chooses to quote.

chelloveck

Joined: 6/2/2007

Msg: 14 (view)

Group: Salvation Army-run homeless shelter might cross separation of church, state Posted: 6/8/2009 2:21:42 AM
Sensible arrangements can be made to protect the godless indigents from religious exploitation. Governments have recognised the danger to public health of citizens with regard to passive smoking. They designate by regulation where smoking may be permitted and where it may not be permitted. Perhaps religiously based social services may give some thought to providing for "proselytising free zones" and staggering meal sessions into shifts, to be accompanied with happy clapping tambourine ensembles for those inclined to give thanks to the "big fella" and sessions free of hymns and homilies for those of more secular inclinations and interests. As to the relationship between church and state....as Karl Marx was once said to have observed...."Religion is the opiate of the people"........so too in my opinion are faith based social service providers an opiate of governments. Governments get the delivery of social services on the cheap by subsidising at a significant discount, services that they would otherwise have to bear the full cost of providing. The implicit offset for this cosy arrangement is that governments don't concern themselves too greatly with the faith based delivery of religious programs aimed at the clientele of such services.

chelloveck

Joined: 6/2/2007

Msg: 166 (view)

Satanism Posted: 6/7/2009 6:06:14 AM
A true satanist? Like a true christian, a true atheist or a true scotsman.....An idealised fiction to support arguments of the fallacious variety.

chelloveck

Joined: 6/2/2007

Msg: 70 (view)

Other Sheep Posted: 6/6/2009 8:50:08 PM
The thing to remember is that relatively few sheep live to an old age as pets or as rural lawnmowers......most have an appointment at an abbatoir.....sure they pass through the abattoir to the other side...but as sausages and other cuts of meat. I wonder if God also inspired another book "How to Serve Man"? <div class="quote">sheep needs a herder Some sheep farmers have found that donkeys make very suitable shepherds (low maintenance, have no special dietary requirements, and don't get on the grog and sleep on the job, and the sheep feel very comfortable being led by a donkey) <div class='quote'>http://www.nytimes.com/1987/05/03/nyregion/follow-up-on-the-news-using-donkeys-as-shepherds.html?n=Top%2FNews%2FScience%2FTopics%2FAnimals

chelloveck

Joined: 6/2/2007

Msg: 37 (view)

Why do Christians take away the personal name of God? Posted: 6/3/2009 1:58:24 PM
Actually Jesus Christ was either God or He was liar and/or insane. He left no room for error. John 10:30 "I (Jesus) and the Father are One." There exists the possibility that the words attributed to Jesus were not in fact uttered by the putative person. The collective authors of the "New Testament" may. like good mythology programmers for the nascant "Jesus" sect..... have made Jesus backwards compatible with the earlier faith Program, Judaism. By Crafting stories and fables that fit the jigsaw of prophecies laid out in the Torah, et al, the early christian church creators were able to clothe their creator in the rainments already specified in earlier works of speculative literature. It's a bit like computer programs that junk parts of older versions of a computer program that they don't want, to produce an improved version of a program, but ensure that parts of the "improved" program are backwards compatible to the bits of the program that program users still find important. In God programs....a new product project team in the faith field will find it ever so much easier to appropriate authority from an existing god, than it would be to create an authority for their own god in competition with an existing dominant god. What better way but to claim a filial relationship, regardless of whether gods Mk I or MkII actually exist or not.

chelloveck

Joined: 6/2/2007

Msg: 3 (view)

The ever-revolving 'God' routine Posted: 6/2/2009 5:55:02 AM
Rubber Soul, The difficulty is that you are asking people, not just to think, but to REALLY think....which is possibly more of a challenge than some are prepared to accept. It is easier for some to embrace the certitude of this or that verse of a holy text as providing the only explanation necessary for what they choose to believe. It is easier to follow the well worn path of doctrinal orthodoxy than it is to think rationally and blaze a trail that may risk, at least in the past, one's own destruction. These days, at least in Western pluralistic democracies, there are no grand inquisitors to stamp out heresy, apostacy or any other perceived threat to the many "one true faiths". However, there are theocratic polities on this planet with a dark agesmentality that would prefer the gains of reason be clawed back to ineffectuality in challenging religious orthodoxy. The wedge is useful in pursuing the aims of one's faith position. It divides the world into the us.....the exclusive ones, and the thems, who are the excluded, unless of course they adopt what we believe and make a commitment to being an us by converting to us. Then they are no longer a them. It's all about sheep and goats. As Cake quite eloquently put it....Sheep go to heaven.......and goats go to......Hell

chelloveck

Joined: 6/2/2007

Msg: 10 (view)

Child witches: accused in the name of Jesus Posted: 5/30/2009 9:27:38 AM
Message #1 Has anyone ever heard of anything so horrific? The persecution of individuals and groups accused of witchcraft dates back, most likely to pre-history. Certainly, sanctions against “witches” were formally codified in law as far back as Ancient Egypt and Babylon. “Witches” were seen as competitors in the arena of supernatural belief, and religious leaders of the monotheistic faiths were sanguine about removing the perceived threat to their own religious hegemony. Hence, in the Torah in Deuteronomy, and Exodus exist verses that describe witchcraft as an abomination, and exhortations that "thou shalt not suffer a witch to live" . Christianity in its zeal (both Catholic and protestant), has at times used these “Old Testament” commands to justify some of the most abominable acts of cruelty imaginable against humanity. Accusations of witchcraft, have been usually made against people least able to defend themselves, (children, women, the poor, the elderly, the infirm, the insane) though when the power of accusers and beneficiaries of “witch” persecution is sufficiently secure, even the wealthy and normally well connected are not safe from persecution. Without discounting the tragedy and dire hurt visited upon children in third world countries accused of being witches, literally hundreds of thousands, and possibly some millions may have perished, often in excruciating agony in Europe during the main period of witch hysteria from approximately 1480 to the early 1700s. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki The self sustaining dynamic of the witch accusations at the height of the witch hysteria in Europe, bears close resemblance to the kind of processes involved in child witch accusations presently evidenced in Africa. Chapter 7 of of Carl Sagan’s book “The Demon Haunted World – Science as a Candle In The Dark” describes this self sustaining dynamic quite chillingly. It quickly became an expense account scam. All costs of investigation, trial and execution were borne by the accused or her relatives, down to per diem for the private detectives hired to spy on her, wine for her guards, banquets for her judges, the travel expenses of a messenger sent to fetch a more experienced torturer from another city, and the faggots, tar and hangman's rope. Then there was a bonus to the members of the tribunal for each witch burned. The convicted witch's remaining property, if any, was divided between Church and State. As this legally and morally sanctioned mass murder and theft became institutionalized, as a vast bureaucracy arose to serve it, attention was turned from poor hags and crones to the middle class and well-to-do of both sexes. The more who, under torture, confessed to witchcraft, the harder it was to maintain that the whole business was mere fantasy. Since each `witch' was made to implicate others, the numbers grew exponentially. Why is the phenomenon of child witchcraft accusation happening? There is no single, simple answer to that question. For a detailed analysis of the issue, I recommend that you take the trouble to read a paper delivered by Gary Foxcroft, Program Director of Stepping Stones Nigeria (A secular NGO) to UNHCR (2009) called “Witchcraft Accusations: A Protection Concern for UNHCR and the Broader Humanitarian Community?” http://www.steppingstonesnigeria.org/files/UN_doc.pdf As far as I can see, some of the major contributing factors of the problem (and this is by no means an exhaustive list) are as follows. * Dire Poverty (of individuals, families, communities and nations) * Superstitious belief systems that are deeply rooted in the popular mentality of the people (there and elsewhere) * Legal and political institutions that don’t have the resources and/or the will to protect its citizens against the predatory practices of witch accusers * Lack of literacy and education in general * Ignorance (Irrational explanations for natural phenomena as opposed to rational evidence based explanations i.e. science) * Greed * Corruption at various levels of government * Evangelism that is poorly governanced by its sponsors * Individuals and groups who have grudges and scores to settle * Individuals and groups who gain a direct or indirect benefit by making witch accusations (step-parents wishing to dispose of step-children, relatives and others who hope to sequester confiscated money / property, etc)Confidence tricksters, * charlatans and carpet baggers intent on extorting money by “bogus” exorcisms etc. Any thoughts? Any ideas on what should be done? * Improve the standards of living of societies that are plagued by superstition. * Improve the political and legal institutions that at present are ineffectual in mitigating the harm caused by witch accusers. * Improve child and adult literacy, numeracy and education in general * Oversight evangelistic missionaries, making them – their sponsoring organisations accountable for the conduct of their priests in the same way that churches in western societies are made accountable for the conduct of their clerics that abuse positions of authority e.g. paedophile priests etc. * Support the enforcement of international conventions for the protection of children and human rights generally. * Remove incentives for people to make child witch accusations against others with impunity. * Support NGOs that are working in the field of mitigating the harm made against those accused of being witches. * Embarrass governments into doing something about the problem. Message #2 Csonka asking for help from Benny Hinn and Reinhardt Bonnke, also Kenneth Copeland and powerful, firm, popular ministers Benny Hinn????? Are you serious??? I’m surprised that you didn’t mention the very accomplished Elmer Gantry in the pantheon of all time poweful, firm, persuasive evangelists. The last thing that the victims of these abusive priests need is for their persecutors to become more professional and polished in their abilities at fleecing their flock. Just as it has been suggested that Intelligent Design is just Creationism in a cheap tuxedo….I view so called “christian” priests stigmatising children with witchcraft as just witchdoctors in cheap surplices and cassocks. Message #4 Scorpiomover Maybe one day, we can convince our countries to act like human beings. Perhaps a more realistic goal might be to persuade our fellow human beings to act like human beings, then families, communities, and states might incrementally improve as a consequence. One needn’t force beliefs on others…that is what dictators try to do, and usually it doesn’t achieve any significantly sustainable success. It is better to offer better options and alternatives to people having to deal with witch hysteria and its consequences. One would hope that rational beliefs, will, with time and resourcing, overcome irrational beliefs. It took the Enlightenment and the weakening of church power by nationalism, among other things to start Europe on the road to controlling witch hysteria….perhaps the enlightenment by education and the improvement of economic, political, legal and social institutions might have the same effect in African nations plagued by witch hysteria. One can but hope…or one can do something about it…if only by donating to charities which are trying to mitigate the harmful effects of witch hysteria. Message #5 Misfit what about missionaries. they have done much to enlighten and effect change. can they do more? Missionaries have undoubtedly effected change for the worse rather than better, in a number of ways. * Practitioners of “child witch “ stigmatisation, have been given a veneer of respectability by being able to identify themselves with religious authoriies with greater perceived Ju-Ju than any local tribal witchdoctor could ever hope to have. * Religious institutions that sponsor priests who practice child witch stigmatisation, are as like to offer the same kind of institutional protections that have been instrumental in the shielding of paedophiles and other abusers in mainstream western churches. * Superstitious references to sorcery and witchcraft in sponsoring religion / churches’ sacred texts and doctrines overlay and reinforce local tribal superstitions concerning sorcery and witchcraft, and thereby legitimise and give authoritative sanction to the activity of witch stigmatisation. If missionaries and religious sponsoring institutions wish to do anything about combating witch hysteria, and reining in the “priests” that practice the vile practice of witch stigmatisation….they should earnestly abide by the “Guiding Principles and Best Practice for Working with Children Stigmatised as Witches” as recommended by Steppingstones Nigeria. I encourage you and other readers of this thread to read it. AND encourage your church missions to endorse and act on the recommendations http://www.steppingstonesnigeria.org/files/ing_with_children_stigmatised_as_witches_doc.pdf Perhaps there is some light at the end of the tunnel of ignorance and darkness…..Legislation is being enacted to stamp out child witch stigmatisation in Nigeria…hopefully other countries will follow suit http://www.ngrguardiannews.com/news/article10//indexn3_html?pdate=071208&ptitle=Child-Witch:%20Akpabio%20Outlaws%20Stigmatisation%20of%20Children&cpdate=071208 It remains to be seen, whether the measures taken are merely appeasing rhetoric, or a sustained concerted effort to stamp out a vile practice. For a graphic exposition of the phenomenon of witch stigmatisation…have a look at African Witch Children Part1 (2008) on You Tube. It is not for the faint hearted and some scenes may be disturbing.

chelloveck

Joined: 6/2/2007

Msg: 5 (view)

Group: Salvation Army-run homeless shelter might cross separation of church, state Posted: 5/27/2009 7:32:10 AM
Southernlass, You are absolutely right....how dare those God haters interfere with the interests and prerogatives of faith based charitable institutions. Charity, both zakat and sadaqa, is one of the 5 pillars of Islamic faith.....A Wahhabist outreach to provide succour to hungry, poor, homeless US indigents would be a marvellous idea....and who could object if the clients of Wahhabist refuges were invited to participate in the several times daily calls to prayer? Who could object to clients being introduced ...purely on a voluntary basis of course, (whilst waiting to be fed in the communal dining room), to Immams sharing some readings of the Qur'an and maybe a little Qur'anic tafsir? It wouldn't be too much to ask for, in exchange for a hot meal and a bed to sleep on during a cold, harsh, winter's night surely? Naturally, such refuges would be eligible for State subsidisation on the same equitable basis as their co-religionists. Perhaps as a gesture towards ecumenical solidarity, The Salvation army shelter in question, might welcome occasional celebration of Islamic prayer, well, at least...ensuring that some of the food provided is halal and some of it is kosher, out of respect for the religious sensitivities of its clients so affiliated. Wahhabist clerics are doing an excellent job of charitable works in the various US penal systems....why wouldn't they do an equally splendid job serving the starving, sick and homeless in the shelters, refuges and soup kitchens of the United States of America, and who could reasonably object to it??? Yes....God's good works need all the help that can be given....God isn't all that fussy who does the helping...and nor can the clients of these charitable service providers afford to be fussy either! Yes....who needs PC Crap!!!!:wink:

Show ALL Forums