Thanks for the advice B.D. ... Watch out though, the itch turns into a rash if you do it to obsessively.

How does your regurgitation of bible verses without any deeper exploration coming from that reference differ from the naive fanaticism of undergrad politicians who may proclaim "you should read Green Left weekly" instead of "you should read ephesians"?.

B.D. you never answered my earlier question. Why is Exodus 21 in a different moral league entirely to Exodus 20? You should read Exodus!. If you explain the diference I promise I will read ephesians (again).

Stop defending your own prejudices about the bible and explore it and the rest of gods creation with an open heart and mind.

surely you can go the next step in the conversation with out more unexplained, out of context bible quotes as you have been recently.

Lets adjourn to the secular rationalism thread. You and I might be able to gang up together against western materialism and it's concommitant consciousnesses there.

I have more respect for you than "secular rationalism". You are a freak and I like freaks. God made us freaks. Secular rationalists are just people pretending not to be freaks.

Dear Reason,
the reality to which I point, is supported by the documents themselves, and by the experience of believers.
You probably don't have much 'faith' in the experiential nature of we believers.
The documents are indeed evidence, but I am fully aware that on some issues there is on going debate.

Higher criticism ( the scholastic kind, emanating often from Germany) usually starts of with the presupposition "Miracles cannot occur because science tells us so" then, they proceed to impose such a view on the Gospels declaring any mention of 'unscientific' miracle as 'myth'. I hope it is obvious why I have small regard for such an approach.

King...
I'll try

Big Context= Covenant Relationship between Israel and God. (Abraham.. Gen 12:1-3)
It was always intended to be universal not particular.
Israel was the vehicle, not the object of Salvation alone.
The covenant relationship was expressed via the 10 commandments, do you recall that the Ark of the Covenant contained.....(fill in the blank)..yes.. thats right the 'tablets of the 10 commandments'.
Not the host of other social/religious rules added after the 10.

I don't believe it is difficult to show that the "Law" is primarily limited to the 10. More important, was not the letter of the law, but the heart condition in relation to it. "Abraham believed God, and this was counted as righteousness". The social expression of this law, was explained to the Israelites in community. (Exodus 21 etc)

Personally, I think God was relating the 'Law' (the 10) to the specific cultural identity of that day. It all boils down to 'do for others...etc'

There are many layers of depth one can plumb in all this, its difficult to know the point where the eyes of the reader will glaze over though :)

P.S. I'm glad you challenge shallowness. Last Sunday I heard a pastor say "Remember the prayers God answered" to get them in the mood for worship. My mutterings was "He answered them ALL, just not with a 'yes' :)

Part One

Commonsense for a troubled world, as we might call it. Part taken from Dr Geoffrey Chia, cardialogist who believes that more wisdom and understanding is needed in modern global discussion, especially regarding international relations.

1. Like a trained medico curing an ill patient possibly close to a mental breakdown, we must work together using the best known means available.

2. The topmost principle to bind such persons together surely must contain wisdom, meaning the persons we need must not only be learned and trustworthy but also compassionate

4. According to Dr Chia, owing to today’s overload of information, especially concerning international relations, we now have to be so careful about ascertaining the real truth of situations, especially political ones such as regards Iraq and Iran. Dr Chia would surely add a rider stating - “ with no interference from not only presidents, prime ministers, and other heads of state, but also from persons with strong conflicting interests, especially in oil, which locks out Dick Cheney and Condoleeza Rice.

Bushbred Part Two

5. Certainly there will be more weeding out, with special personages of proven capability chosen to gather all vital historical information, then encouraged to move out alone into a desert - so to speak - taking the overhead view, not taking any sides.

6. However, this taking of the Socratic view, as some might call it, even as regards the whole Middle East since WW1, might create much more debate, because such a view could leave the Arabs and Iranians justifiably ahead of the West

7. Still taking the overhead view, we might say that besides Western penetration into the Middle East, coupled with the thirst for fossil fuels, there is not only the problem of letting Israel settle in what had become Arab or Islamic territory for over a thousand years, but also allowing Israel to break UN rules and go militarily nuclear - in so doing very seriously altering the balance of power in the Middle-East. Hence the anger in Iran

8. To many people it would seem that agreeing with Dr Chia’s philosophical reasoning. locks out Christianity, even liberal Christianity. But maybe using a nonbiased or spatial view, could be close to a true humasist view or even a dinkum Aussie view, or even a true Christian view, making us reflect on what rotten selfish bastards we’ve become, like back in the colonial days, believing that the term liberalism denotes the freedom to gain over the weak, rather than what it does mean, looking after your neighbour, and even your enemy as it says in the Sermon on the Mount

We can only indulge in "Humanism",so long as we have done our homework and make sure that our economy runs efficiently enough to buy the time for such introspection.

Life without a survival component is equally meaningless.We also need disciple to mould our intellect and character.There must always be a balance.Too much humanism produces a wishy washy self indulgent society that expects the State to provide everything.

Other than Humanism, we have a number of alternatives.

1/ Islam.

Saudi Arabia has its Wahabis and Salafis.

Iran has a goose stepping army, a Leader who believes in his own divine destiny, and sees visions, and believes in the 'great catastrophe' and return of the 'Madhi'. He is also adamant about acheiving Nuclear Weapons.. (in spite of the "Taqiya" deception)

Syria has its genocidal son of a genocidal dictator

Sudan is in process of genocide even on fellow Muslims (sorry, wrong skin color)

2/ Christian Values Society
Or.. we can have a Christian based society, pretty much what we have now, although we have strayed about as far as a society can from God without self annihalation or divine retribution. (watch this space, specially Sydney)

3/ Various other religious/philosophy based.

Or..we can have Judge Alistair Nicholsons version.. "Man/Woman marraige legislation is 'Christian' and its not needed".. sure..ok Judge.. there is also (following your logic) no reason for not allowing CROSS SPECIES marraiges.. hmmmm There is also nothing to stop HUGE gaps in age.. male/male.. Male/Female, Female/female....

I can see Nambla gloating with joy over that little effort of his.
Just a small step....but in the RIGHT direction they are saying.
(Australian family court Judge says same sex marraige is 'ok'.. Tomorrow, if we keep up the pressure, same sex with HUGE AGE gaps will be ok.)

THAT.....is humanism.. unrestrained by a moral anchor, firmly grounded in revealed truth.