Because church and state have been separate in America since the revolution, churches have had to compete for adherents. This has led many to embrace marketing techniques (such as advertising and market research) and technology to a far greater extent than churches in countries that have some degree of state support. As a result, they are far more competitive and entrepreneurial, and the consumers respond accordingly: 44 per cent of Americans embrace a brand of Christianity different to the one they were brought up in.

Michael Duffy of the SMH reviews God Is Back: How The Global Rise Of Faith Is Changing The World, by John Micklethwait and Adrian Wooldridge, is published by Allen Lane/Penguin.

Because Australasia is apologetic about its small cousin image, as a small South Asian Nation, it has to some extent mocked the global reach of a Sydney based, evangelical Church, that has and is evangelizing the United States, South Africa, The United Kingdom, Russia France and Sweden, and is having an enormous impact, boxing way above its weight in the global competition to teach the word of GOD.

Michael Duffy is a very thoughtful and insightful reporter columnist. What do you think is happening. My position that Church and State were separated in Australia but have now been merged, under the influence of secularists, may or may not be adopted by a report to be issued soon, by the Committee investigating the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Father Frank Brennan is one of the members of a Church threatened by evangelical churches

God is back to the extent
that all the male gods
have come home to roost,
Peter the Believer.

the question seems rather vague[or is it missleading]there are so many deceptions[missconceptions regarding god...god as far as i am concerned has never been born[being eternal,and as far as i am concerned most definitivly isnt jesus]

jesus..is by far/..one of the greatest revealers of god,..but is not the only..'son'..of the father..[of all living]...my problem with many churches being they worship the messenger..[abouve god]...this extends into the abrahamic sects as well..[i would say peace be upon all the messengers]

jesus revealed the personal god,..who lives in real time..[not dead holy texts,..i have reverance for all the holy texts..[except the talmud]...as well as the messengers/..who collectivly reveal the living loving light sustaining all life to live

i feel that god is like water..[that religions are like wells,..all revealing the same body of water...from seeing one hillsong service[live]..i found it interesting,..but not memorable...i recall mainly a wooden bridge..[prop]...and an overly attentive focus on song
#
[and while they all are meritorous,..they do little to elivate our honour to living/loving/god

the commands are quite clear..[we are..to put none before god...not son nor holy-ghost..not trinity,..not ritual..there is but one..[god is one]..

and while the body of christ..[all those called]..to the father..in his name]..contains many good and true...it is only by service..[like god serves/..even the least..to live]..

that the true reasons of love of neighbour..may bear its fruit...we love each other/..not for love of other..[but to better know the love of one..[the one..who loves all]

at hillsong..i did see a lot of love..[but i went there because of love,..it just seemed..the focus point/..of the love..was for the messenger,..not so much understanding his message..[

yet the play i saw..was meant to make more clear his message..that we might get a more clear knowing of the living good..[god]...but in at least two parts..diverted the messagers intent..[like the blind leading the blind]...all with a higher intent..[and much love,..

but..in the end..not drawing the all..to the one...[only joining one and other]...god is personal..[like teaching a man to fish feeds him for life...knowing all good/..is of god..could give each their knowing..of his good voice..being within us all..[not in govt]

Dear Peter,

Marianne Williamson in her book, "Illuminata,"
I think sums it up beautifully:

"There is a spiritual renaissance sweeping the world.
It is a revolution in the way we think.

Most people feel it, some deride it, many embrace it
and no one can stop it.

It's torchbearers are a motley mix. Some are religious
in a raditional sense, while some are not.

Some are successful in the world, while some are not.
Some genuinely like one another while some do not.
Some are politically liberal, while some are conservative.
Some seek Truth in fellowship and some seek Truth alone.
Some are old and some are young. They are an assorted
group, an unlabeled group but together in spirit they are
affecting the world in significant ways. They are turning
away from purely worldly orientation...However disparate
their personalities and interests, they all agree on one
very important point: Mankind has come to a major
crossroads, at which the spirit alone can lead them
toward human survival..."

I think the important point that Williamson is making
is that, "We have begun to recognize that our
individual minds create our collective realities, and
we are ready to take responsibility for the world by
taking more seriously our individual contributions
to it. Personal transformation can and does have global
effects. The revolution that will save the world is
untimately a personal one..."

Bush brought back the Cristian God and turned him against muslim's!
As the problems on the earth are growing up, all Gods, good and bad , old and new returned back to wonder their creatures!
Oooo! my god what creatures gods created!
Run, run away, before gods start fighting each other! They are more crazy from their creators!
Antonios Symeonakis
Adelaide

Recently during an insomniac night, I had occasion to read the Book of Job. The King James Version of the Bible, has references to the critical governance parts, like Genesis 49 Verse 10, and Isaiah 9 Verse 6, with little black stars next to them. The oldest Bible I have is dated from 1829.

The story in Job, is of a righteous man whose material wealth which was considerable, was taken from him, in a contest between God and Satan. Various individuals then did their best to get Job to denounce Almighty God, and curse him to his face. This Job steadfastly refused to do even in the face of great affliction. In the end Satan has to admit that Job is the ultimate righteous man, and no matter what misfortune is visited upon him, he will not denounce his God. Many of us are tested in a crucible, to see if we are worthy. Finally when it is clear Job loves God almost more than life itself, because his life is no longer worth living, God restores him to all his wealth and power.

Australia has been in the testing stage since 1952. We have invented the greatest affliction on men ever devised called the Family Court. If women were not so darn attractive, the Family Court would cause men to give them up, and many have. The abolition of God Almighty as the sole Sovereign, in Australia and the substitution of Judges and Magistrates for Him, with absolute power in practical terms over every one of their fellow men, ( and women) is Islamic or ancient Egyptian. It has been 59 years since we had a Prime Minister who was not a lawyer. In 1952, the first lawyer coup took place, and you the people of Australia were deprived of the benefit of a Federal Supreme Court.

When the Federal Court of Australia was established right after the Family Court, it further created a Temple to Man. That Temple continues to violate the civil and political rights of all Australians, and will do so until Kevin Rudd moves

Our friend in Adelaide talks of many Gods. One has only to read a sample of High Court judgments written over the past forty years, to understand the Gods are crazy. As the head honchos of Australia’s Gods, in black robes, the inconsistencies and downright contradictions in their so called judgments, are so glaring that you would have to be a true believer to accept that they are infallible.

My terrible affliction started when Queensland created its Pantheon of Gods, under Wayne Goss, a lawyer. In the same year we still had Writs in Queensland, and I was served with one. I was not a regular church attendee, and trusting in what I perceived to be a good system, I trusted that the truth would set me free. What a hoot. What I did not know was that the High Court was nobbled in 1952, and the Supreme Court in Queensland in 1991, and justice was now a commodity to be sold to the highest bidder. It still is.

It would not matter so much, if the Gods in Australia were like the God of the Bible, and when they gave their word, it was worth something. I am of Scottish heritage, and our answer to a man whose word was worth nothing was to run him through with a Claymore. The God of the Bible, entered a Covenant with the people of Israel, and gave them the first written Constitution. It was called the Ten Commandments. After 1500 years, God realized it was not working. Even though he sent Prophets to show the people of Israel, the error of their ways, and inflicted all sorts of trials and tribulations on them, they persisted in creating Gods.

The New Covenant of Jesus Christ was given to us, and the English adopted it as their Constitution. Until after WWII they had a contract with the Australian people, to freely travel between the two countries, and fight for the integrity of both. We paid for that contract with 100,000 Australian lives. It is time the Gods in Australia realized they will pay

When Judas Iscariot sold his master for forty pieces of silver, to the Jewish authorities, he was fulfilling prophesy. His remorse caused him to dangle himself on the end of a rope. Jesus Christ could have avoided crucifixion. All he had to do was accept Pontius Pilate’s offer to worship Rome. Instead he cast himself upon the people, and they pardoned Barabbas, and crucified Him. You would think making such a point would impress people with the importance of having only One God.

He of course confounded his detractors, and most accept that He was truly resurrected. The English, who are a very spiritual lot, certainly did, and proceeded in the Magna Carta to permanently abolish the concept of the State as God. In 1640, in the Habeas Corpus Act 1640 16 Charles 1 Ch X. they permanently abolished the right of a Priest to become God for a day, as a Judge in Court.

This came to Australia with English Law. The Constitution was the last English Law, to be adopted by us, because in it we were granted the exclusive right to alter or prevent its alteration, in S 128. Don’t believe the lawyers. Believe your own eyes, and read it for yourself. S 118 Constitution, prescribes that full faith and credit be given to it throughout the Commonwealth.

The Kingdom of God, was established 50 days after the crucifixion. On that day, the Holy Spirit descended on a gathering, and they started speaking in multiple tongues. How is it that Jesus Christ was so learned? He attended Church, the Synagogue every Sabbath. At 12 he was able to be accepted as a teacher. At thirty he was accepted as a Master. The English adopted the Kingdom of God, as their Rule of Law. It covered the United Kingdom and Australia, in a unique document, the Constitution.

God is restored. His will be done, the rule of law and personal security it guarantees is restored. The Parliament of the Commonwealth has legislated Him back, and the Judges and Magistrates better start to obey. Is Kevin Rudd our miracle

Why do you trumphet the belief in some authoritian being when that is not even the question nor the answer?The Concept of god is human,used to explain what we cannot understand and more often use to subjugate our fellow man.

If you want to reach true spiritually,know yourself since our concept of god is both childish and inadaquate in explaining anything in this amazing universe.

The existence of god is irrelevant.Wanting to know is like wanting more money in your bank account.That is not the point.The point is now and striving to become a better person.Heaven and hell are childish mis-conceptions.

The "SEPARATION" of God and State is present for very good reasons.

The various religions have historically caused extreme suffering, mayhem, horrific violence, and withdrawal of basic freedoms that "free" countries now enjoy.

The history of religion and "God" worship is one of horrific violence.

Unfortunately we "still" have degrees of "god worship" influence in some countries. Saudi Arabia for instance, where human rights of some groups are denied in the name of God. Also in the USA, we have a quite powerful religious right. The USA religious right has heavily influenced the USA government to invade, and bomb, other countries over the past decades. The initial bombing of Iraq by the USA, which murdered at least 20,000 innocent Iraq citizens (most studies put the figure as higher than that) was ordered by President George Bush in God's name.

Religion = violence

God worship = violence

History has shown this to be so: Time and time and time again.

I say keep God worship WELL AWAY FROM THE CORRIDORS OF POWER.

It's hard to decide which is more preposterous:

a) that a supposedly omnipotent, all-powerful being must rely on tacky Hillsong evangelising to promote Himself, instead of just poking His head down and telling us to worship, or...

b) the fact that some consider that evidence FOR His existence, rather than a solid confirmation that no such god exists.

As we grow older we are supposed to
grow into our wisdom. Where are our
wise women and men. Where are the
wise who have seen the light at the
centre of things, where are the Elders
to lead us ...? Whatever you believe -
it's a personal choice. It should not
separate and divide us ...

A Prayer For The World...

"May we no longer be at war with each other.
May we no longer be at war within ourselves.
Let us remove from our hearts the illusion
that we are separate.
May every nation and every people and every
colour and every religion and every belief -
find at last the one heartbeat we all share..."
-Marianne Williamson.

It doesn't matter what you believe - as long
as you believe in compassion, tolerance,
and inclusion.

Foxy, I wish it were not so but unfortunately "compassion, tolerance and inclusion" can mean radically different things to different people.

A Mullah or a Bishop may believe that a government should be "tolerant and inclusive" by adopting religious values within it's legislation - - - we all know, or should know, where that leads.

A convicted violent rapist, jailed for life, would probably like a government to show "compassion" and let him out of jail.

Unfortunately compassion, tolerance and inclusion (or one's version or interpretation of these traits) can be used for evil as well as good. Human nature cannot be explained simply - - - it's complexity is mind boggling.

The subject of how "ALL" people can live peacefully together requires a depth of knowledge that has so far eluded "ALL" humanity. The BEST we have managed so far is to "separate" ourselves into countries, territories, religions, races, status, cultures, sexes etc etc, the list is ENDLESS. We have sought peace via the method of associating with people who are MOST LIKE US. That method seeks to avoid immediate conflict.

It's a method that, while attempting to avoid immediate conflict, enables the participants to develop a lack of knowledge and understanding of others who are "different". This creates conflict when paths are crossed, and so the endless stream of aggression and violence continues even in these so called modern times.

So far, there simply is NO answer to how "ALL" people can live in peace together.

And there's also no shortage of people who "claim" to know the answers.

diversity Master.
compassion, tolerance, diversity and inclusion.

its bothy funny..[and sad]..that men know there is a cause for everything...[yet definitivly accord our own egsistance to chance]...

im going to state loosly..[for illistrative purposes]..that over 100,000 lifeform-types encompas the known/animal realm...only one..uses the written word..[only one has concepts greater than itself..[only one can imagine a cause beyond itself]..only one can philosphise..or even invision abstract concepts

animals are clearly beasts,living and surviving...according to its own imediate[natural]..circumstances...that while men can conform to basic animal instincts..even the least of man..is yet far more than a beast...there are of course some men that see any-other men..[not of their imediate/inbred..family alliances as infiriour..[little more than beasts...

the honest reality is..that each of the races have their shinning lights..[as well as their more baser animalistic types]...every family its bl;ack-sheep/or its family fears/hopes/dreams and delusions

i feel sorry for those needing to revile..the general/standing of the humane of our species...needing god-less theories...to establish their racists favour/fervour..claiming science godheads/high-priests that weave their god-less theorum...what is their fear of a greater power than men

it is beyond dispute that there are greater..[and lesor,than the best or worst of the human-being]...we are well aware[mostly]..that there are realms beyond the human range of sight and sound...even the science godheads dare to speculate about black holes[wormholes/string theories and big bangs...concepts an animal would quite simply noyt comprehend

why you men fear a perfect living loving god,is for you to rationalise out[youyr quite content to fil the minds of your children with delusions such as satan clause[santa]...or the toothfairy[or easter bunny..[or the delusions of genus evolutions...but definitivly ridicule the egsistance of the higher power...

fixating upon your own children..the limitations listed abouve..infuring them to be no more[or less]..than a beast...yet creating these faulse god-heads..that create a spiriour minded..spoilt child...thinking themselves god's..

dare to realise something greater than thou/self..[gungadin]...its time you got off your high-horse and on ya knees..or at least realise the self/truth of the brutish beasts..you thus claim to be

Dear Peter,

You stated "Various individuals then did their best to get Job to denounce Almighty God, and curse him to his face."

From my reading of Job there was only one individual who said he should curse God and that was his wife and one would have thought she had every right to do so.

Job is an exploration of the limits of God especially the moral ones. If you would like to read it again I think you will find some great litrature including quite startling poetry. You will also find some deep questions about the nature of God and humans.

You also stated "Finally when it is clear Job loves God almost more than life itself, because his life is no longer worth living, God restores him to all his wealth and power."

That is not how the story goes. By the end Job instead challenges God forcibly saying that a human wouldn't treat a man the way God was treating Job. The restoration of all his wealth and power is the closest thing to an apology from God that Job could hope for.

God was found to be sorely wanting in his actions toward Job and ultimately appears less righteous than Job. But one gets the sense that Job accepts God for who he is rather than whom he would like him to be.

Luckily many Australians are nonaccepting of either.

It is a very confronting book and I often have cause to wonder how it made it into the Hebrew Bible.

God and the State were one and the same in Rome, Russia and in China. They are the same in Australia while Judges and Magistrates who under Our Constitution are supposed to separate Church and State continue to exercise arbitrary power in the name of the State. Pagans, Atheists and Agnostics who do not understand the concept of collective government, have not finished their education by understanding what exactly the Holy Bible in two Testaments is trying to teach us.

Arbitrary was the word used in the Habeas Corpus Act 1640 16 Charles 1 Ch X. to describe what went on in the Star Chamber. Arbitrary is the word used in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in Article 17. It says: No one shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, not to unlawful attacks on his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such attacks. Not in Australia in 2009 we don’t.

How long must we tolerate government by the Liberal Party. We voted them out on Nov 24 2007, but they still govern through their arbitrary Judges and Magistrates who daily attack the reputation and honor, homes and families, throughout Australia.

Arbitrary is used in the Habeas Corpus Act, in the Imperial Acts Application Act 1980 ( Vic) on page 9, and for asmuch as all matters examinable or determinable before the said judges…..have by experience been found to be an intolerable burthen to the subjects and a means to introduce an arbitrary power and government:

God taught the separation of powers in John 5 Verses 22 and 23. Every Church attending Christian knows God is his maker and his judge. God got well and truly sick and tired of wannabees. The Romans had a whole paddock full of gods. As a Pagan Nation, we have every State creating its own God impersonators. The Parliament of the Commonwealth has fixed it, but the little tin gods of the State will not accept Parliamentary authority. Its Time, remember that slogan

Dear Master,

Thank You for responding to my post.
There's a lot of food for thought in what
you've said - and I for one certainly
don't have all the answers. I've been
accused by people in the past - of looking
at things through 'rose-coloured,' glasses,
and of being naive. However, I believe that
the antidote to what is fundamentally wrong
is the cultivation of what is fundamentally
right. Ultimately, the choice to 'Do unto
others...' is the only choice that I can see
for a survivable future.

Every time we open our hearts, we create a
space for a global alternative. Of course
I realize that as you point out - each of
us - has our own understanding of things -
and we view things from our own perspective -
which is influenced by our culture, education,
bliefs, and so on. However, we need to find
a common ground - because I fear that the
world can become so obsessed with the problems
of hatred and aggression, that it will allow
peace and love to be regarded as soft and
weak.

Yet our survival depends on their dominance.

Take care.

Every one is an atheist. All current monotheists do not believe in the Greek, Roman, Norse and other pantheons of gods. People who call themselves atheists simply believe in one less god than the monotheists.

Here's a rather less rosy review of "God is Back': http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2009/0905.baumann.html

Despite the focus on religion, the book is actually a defence of free-market economics which uses the example of the Hillsong-style of "salvation for sale".

It concludes, "In the end, it is hard to imagine any serious religious believer, or any curious agnostic, for that matter, not being irked by a theory that requires a neologism as cringe-making as "pastorpreneur," or by a book whose bottom line informs us that American-style Evangelical religion has finally solved the age-old problem of whether one can serve both God and Mammon."

oug wrote: i have reverance for all the holy texts..[except the talmud]

Dear oug,

The Talmud records rabbinic discussions on Jewish law, ethics, customs, and history. It is central to mainstream Judaism.

from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talmud

Criticism of the Talmud is widespread, in great part through the Internet.

The Anti-Defamation League's report on this topic states:

By selectively citing various passages from the Talmud and Midrash, polemicists have sought to demonstrate that Judaism espouses hatred for non-Jews (and specifically for Christians), and promotes obscenity, sexual perversion, and other immoral behavior. To make these passages serve their purposes, these polemicists frequently mistranslate them or cite them out of context (wholesale fabrication of passages is not unknown)...
In distorting the normative meanings of rabbinic texts, anti-Talmud writers frequently remove passages from their textual and historical contexts. Even when they present their citations accurately, they judge the passages based on contemporary moral standards, ignoring the fact that most of these passages were composed close to two thousand years ago by people living in cultures radically different from our own. They thus ignore Judaism's long history of social progress and paint it instead as a primitive and parochial religion.

Those who attack the Talmud frequently cite ancient rabbinic sources without noting subsequent developments in Jewish thought, and without making a good-faith effort to consult with contemporary Jewish authorities who can explain the role of these sources in normative Jewish thought and practice.
—Anti-Defamation League, The Talmud in Anti-Semitic Polemics

continued

continued

Rabbi Gil Student, a prolific Internet author, writes:

Anti-Talmud accusations have a long history dating back to the 13th century when the associates of the Inquisition attempted to defame Jews and their religion [see Yitzchak Baer, A History of Jews in Christian Spain, vol. I pp. 150-185]. The early material compiled by hateful preachers like Raymond Martini and Nicholas Donin remain the basis of all subsequent accusations against the Talmud. Some are true, most are false and based on quotations taken out of context, and some are total fabrications [see Baer, ch. 4 f. 54, 82 that it has been proven that Raymond Martini forged quotations]. On the Internet today we can find many of these old accusations being rehashed...
—Gil Student, The Real Truth About the Talmud

I suspect that you have accepted this defamatory information as true.

continued

Maybe my Book of Job, is different, or my English comprehension is deficient, but in Chapter 42, after the Lord spoke to Job, he spoke to Eliphaz the Temanite, my wrath is kindled against thee, and against thy two friends, for ye have not spoken of me the thing that is right, as my servant Job hath. God gave instructions for a sacrifice, and instructed them that if Job prayed for them He would accept the prayer. And the Lord turned ( ended) the captivity of Job, when he prayed for his friends; also the Lord gave Job twice as much as he had before. The other two friends are said to be Bildad the Shuhite and Zophar the Naamathite. So the Lord blessed the latter end of Job more than the beginning.

I saw a cheap shot at one large evangelical Church. It is very modern in its technology, but no more so than some Presbyterian Churches I know of. Perhaps if the mainstream Churches realized that neither of the really big ones, are State Churches anymore, they would start to demand some responsibility by our governments. They would recognize that the enemy is not each other, but the State itself, because when a State becomes a God, it is an abomination. The Christian majority in Australia should stop being apologetic, and assert their undoubted influence for good. The moral and ethical conduct demanded of Christians used to be enforceable. While Judges and Magistrates rule arbitrarily, it is not. Democracy cannot survive without an anchor. The Bible is that anchor.

The evangelical Churches all over Australia took the cable presentation from the National Press Club, about three weeks before the November 2007 election. 200,000 people gave up a Thursday evening, to listen to the two contestants for the Christian vote. One of the contestants was very impressive and remains so. Unfortunately he has some fellow travelers still stuck in a Liberal Party time warp, still employed in government, but we can hope he will carry out the necessary reforms, to restore the good government guaranteed by the Australian Constitution

As this thread is developing, it is becoming increasingly clear that Australia has left the path of its Constitution, and allowed nine separate Bishoprics to develop, each with its own justice stream. Instead of nine Popes, all running a State Church, we have six Premiers, two Chief Ministers, and one Prime Minister. All except Paul Keating and Kevin Rudd, for the last sixty years have seen nothing wrong with this but it is terribly wrong. The concept of One God, combined with One Queen, representing Him, was the foundation of all property rights, but now no one has any property except what the State will allow you to keep. Taxation has expanded to take over one third of most peoples wages, and when they lost that right in 1942, in the National Interest, the States found other ways to extract money from the people.

The High Court is simply a toothless tiger as far as the Constitution is concerned. It shabby rules restricting access to its power, are totally negating the Constitution, and a direct attack on Christianity. To extract limitless money from people the States had to dissolve the Commonwealth, and establish Communist States as Sovereign, instead of Almighty God. They have done this with all the help in the world from lawyers. Lawyers have profited enormously from their loyalty to the State. They have a monopoly, the only profession that has no competition policy to meet. They monopolise the sale and purchase of justice, and have formed great partnerships, employing thousands of want to be lawyers at sweat shop wages.

The law firms will not accept the High Court as an authority when it does not suit their clients, and the one who can afford them are mostly the big corporations whose legal budget, is written into your cost of living. The Commonwealth as a corporation spent $400 million dollars last year on legal services. They do not want to waste that money so they continue to make sure the Law Courts are stacked with their lawyers. God will come back and when He does, our lives improve

dear david i trust you will be able to guide me to a LINK,to the complete writings of this supposed ancient text...my understandiung of it comes from

http://www.biblestudysite.com/factsarefacts.htm
quotations;from the Soncino Edition of the Talmud,(Book)

that actually says things like found hereunder[presumably..AS I HAVE BEEN UNABLE TO FIND THIS BOOK I can only believe what i see written[hereunder]

YEBAMOTH,60b...Rabbi.Ramanos who conducted an inquiry..and..'found'..in it..the daughter of a..'proselyte'..who was under the age of three years and one day...,and Rabbi declared her eligible to live with a priest."

(footnotes)"..A proselyte..under the age of three years and one day may be married by a priest...And was married..to a priest.

(i.e.,permitted to continue to live with her'husband'."]

(Book)

SANHEDRIN,..55b-55a:.."What is meant by this?...Rab said:..Pederasty with a child below nine years of age..is not deemed as pederasty with a child above that.

(footnotes)"..The reference is to..the passive..'subject'/victim..of sodomy

i have mentioned this at 3 other posted topic[and no one has yet been able to present the complete book[on the web]via a link...from what i read about it so far encourages me not to spend a penny actually bying this text..

that reportedly/guides rabbies of certain abrahamic/beliefs..i understand that the so called settlers in palistein..use the book as their authority..[to do unspeakable things in hidden places]...

thus your being able to present the full text online...may allow me to either confirm or deney...

its noticable that few..that criitique my quote..have read the text[HAVE YOU?]...

you seem to be quoting others..thus are unlikely to have read..the very text your defending...but please prove me wrong

PLEASE PROVIDE AN ONLINE LINK

Dear oug,

Here it is:

http://www.come-and-hear.com/talmud/

The Babylonian Talmud;edited by Rabbi Dr. Isidore Epstein; of Jews’ College, London
More than fifteen years in the making, more than 5 1/2 million words, this monumental task of scholarship called on the best brains in Judaism and won the approval of the world's top rabbis. Yet few Christians today even know it exists, and you will probably not find it in your local public library. The Come and Hear™ hypertext version, currently on line at this web site, represents approximately 1431 folios (produced as accurately as possible). We hope this presentation will provide the necessary context for understanding ancient and modern rabbinical teachings. We hope the larger context will also enable you to evaluate how fairly various commentators interpret the text.

Passages censored in previous editions of the Talmud were restored, and the translators amplified the text with extensive footnotes that form a running commentary. The publication was completed as a 35-volume set in 1952, and republished in 18 volumes in 1961. Each tractate was accompanied by a glossary, a table of abbreviations, an index of Biblical references, and a general subject index. In 1952, Soncino published a comprehensive Index volume collating the indices from all tractates, and included an index to the statements of each of the Sages. The Jew's College/Soncino English translation of the Babylonian Talmud has remained the gold standard of English Talmuds for six decades.

Table of Contents — What's On Line
SEDER ZERA‘IM — Introduction
Tractate Berakoth
SEDER MO‘ED — Foreword — Introduction
Tractate Shabbath
SEDER NASHIM — Foreword — Introduction
Tractate Yebamoth
Tractate Kethuboth
Tractate Nedarim
Tractate Nazir
Tractate Sotah
Tractate Gittin
SEDER NEZIKIN — Foreword — Introduction
Tractate Baba Kamma
Tractate Baba Mezi‘a
Tractate Baba Bathra
Tractate Sanhedrin
Tractate ‘Abodah Zarah
Tractate Horayoth
SEDER KODASHIM — Foreword — Introduction
SEDER TOHOROTH — Introduction
Tractate Niddah
Tractate Tohoroth
Structure of Files for Come and Hear™ Hypertext
Soncino Talmud Glossary
Abbreviations Used in the Soncino Talmud
Search the Babylonian Talmud
Kudos for Soncino

Dear Peter,

You indeed appear to have read Job without comprehending it.

Perhaps if you read it in the New International Version rather than the KJV greater understanding may be afforded your good self. If you don’t have a copy then might I suggest www.biblegateway.com . However I do concede that part of the problem may be viewing text through the proverbial ‘rose coloured glasses’.

Job’s friends, along with that large evangelical church you speak of with their ‘prosperity gospel’ contended that God rewards the good and punishes the bad therefore what had befallen Job was the direct result of him sinning against God.

But Job would have none of that. He says “I will never admit you are in the right; till I die, I will not deny my integrity” He asks “Why do the wicked prosper and live long?” and when his friends reply that God blesses the good with abundance and afflicts the wicked Job replies
"So how can you console me with your nonsense? Nothing is left of your answers but falsehood!"

When Eliphaz says "Submit to God and be at peace with him; in this way prosperity will come to you.” Job says instead give me my day in court. “I would state my case before him and fill my mouth with arguments.”

Job effectively puts God on trial and this is what God respects about him. Not subservience but forceful challenging.

Your view of Job is nothing like that presented by the literal word but is one honed by Christian folklore. My own brother-in-law, an evangelist preacher, exhibit’s a similar blindness. He quotes passages from Job as some of his most favourite in the bible but with little understanding of the full book.

Because he is family I don’t seek to disavow him of those notions and I would offer you the same courtesy, therefore if you would like to walk away a more in-depth analysis of Job I would understand

Sorry Peter,

I forgot to respond to your “In the end Satan has to admit that Job is the ultimate righteous man”.

I’m afraid a closer reading of Job will show that Satan does no such thing.

You might find this excerpt from Wikipedia interesting.

“The Jewish and Christian interpretations of who "ha-satan" (literally, "the adversary") is tend to differ. Many from a Christian perspective believe 'Satan' to be the Devil. 'Satan' is generally considered in that tradition to be the adversary of God, and is typically conflated with Lucifer. Thus, 'Satan' is viewed by Christians as evil personified. The Jewish view of "the adversary" is as a sort of prosecuting attorney for God. While "the adversary" is equated with the Angel of Death, he is generally considered to be the adversary of humanity rather than God, and he is often shown obeying the will of God.”

That two belief systems can differ quite markedly over the same text is instructive. I will admit to having reservations about Christian interpretations of the Hebrew Bible countermanding Jewish ones, after all it is their book.

A continuing interaction with evangelistic Christians over Job has me largely convinced that Jewish interpretations are truer to the text (as should probably have been expected) and I am inclined to extend that to the rest of the Hebrew Bible.

thanks david...[could you please explain what the quotes are saying...from your link
http://www.come-and-hear.com/sanhedrin/sanhedrin_55.html

<<R.Joseph said:Come and hear!..A maiden aged three years and a day may be acquired in marriage by coition,>>

<<and if her deceased husband's brother cohabits with her,she becomes his.>>

<<The penalty of adultery may be incurred through her;..[if a niddah] she defiles him..who has connection with her,...so that he in turn defiles that upon..which he lies,..as a garment..which has lain upon [a person afflicted with gonorrhoea].5

If she married a priest,...she may eat of terumah;..If any unfit person has a connection with her,...he disqualifies her from the priesthood

If any of the forbidden degrees had intercourse with her,...>>

.well it sort of goes on..about A CHILD..AGED 3 years and a day...seems lying[having sex]..with a child is ok...if your the right degree..[right?]..

no doudt goys wouldnt have the right degree..[right?]...but rabbies can..have sex with babies...can marry and lie with children...i dont care how much wisdom is in the book....having sex with children is morally corrupt...

thanks for the link...but it only confirms my worst fears

i note the book has only but recently been completed...[the selling point is..this is what jesus was taught[...]thats untrue]

from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talmud

<<Some scholars hold that there has been extensive editorial reshaping of the stories and statements within the Talmud...>>>the question arises to what end..[by who?

<<...Lacking outside confirming texts,..they hold that we cannot confirm the origin..or date of most statements and laws,..and that we can say little for certain about their authorship....>

Job is not a Christian interpretation of Christian theoloigy and must be studied carefully in context. The sons of God (ben Elohim in chapter 1) were part of a pantheon of ancient Elohim worshipped at Ur and they regularly reported to El Shaddai the cellestrial and the mother of all gods in the Chaldean pantheon. El (Satan) was a terrestrial god who administered the Earth for El Shaddai.

Abraham chose of all his fathers gods one El Shaddai and worshipped only her and attributed all events to El Shaddai both good and mortal as the God of life and death (and Israel worshipped her till Moses announced God as YHWH Exodus 6: 2).

Job an Edomite and grandson of Abraham was influenced by his cousin Teman to accept only one God. In Edom known as the female god Aloah, of which language the original text was written. The Hebrew text is a corruption of Hebrew and Edomite words as it has centuries of editing. Throughout the text God is identified as both the celestrial and who Job believed would be revealed in the Earth chapter 19(the domain of El) as the ONLY creator, sustainer and controller of the Earth to vindicate his new theological position.

The text is a rebuttal of polytheism / gnosticism of which many Christians are influenced by Roman theology of a being known as the devil. It is important to note Satan in Hebrew theology means an opponent and on some occasions the satan is YHWH who opposes Israel. There is no other being opposing God other than man who was cast out of the presence of God because of his sin.

The fact that some of you people take these various "beliefs" seriously is a testament to how human nature remains at a very "primitive" level, even in this modern age.

Since we lived in caves, till we walked on the moon, there's NEVER been a shortage of people who "believe" they have all the answers. Answers that come from a "belief" in many, many different "versions" of God. All debating that "their" version is the one true God and that "they" are right.

Primitive, in the extreme. But that's how human nature manifests itself.

Isn’t it so that people who call “primitive“ symbolic language (e.g. mathematics or theology) or discussions on hermeneutics (of biblical or historical texts) they cannot understand, actually make a statement about themselves?

It is all very well to theorise about the existence of God but lets get down to practical reality. The practical reality of the Holy Bible is that it is a very successful template for good government. A country that has no respect for authority is a rabble. Currently with nine separate authorities governing one people Australia is a rabble, and in today’s Australian there is an article evidencing that there are still 100,000 homeless going into Kevin Rudd’s second winter.

The homeless in Australia are a direct result of the destruction of society by the rise and rise of independent States. The lack of will by Canberra to enforce its laws, or allow anyone else to do so, has led to a plethora of laws, and no way to weed the obnoxious ones out. When the Constitution was framed it was framed in a climate where there was a universal respect for the Holy Bible, and Churches were almost always full on a Sunday.

The reality: Australia has gone back to a second rate mongrel clone of the United States of America, when with only 21 million people it was constituted to be one Nation, under a strong Federal Government, is undeniable. With a whole cauldron of self serving Judges and Magistrates each working for a separate State, and refusing to work together as Australians we are just lucky we are not much worse off. Until KR and his team wake up to the fact that they are top dog, and do not have to even listen to the State Premiers, unless they want to, we will continue to be badly governed.

We need God back urgently. We need the authority of One God, accepted as the ultimate authority, to whom all others look for guidance. We do not need 49 or so little tin gods in the Federal Court. Little Tin Gods who have written their own Bible, and completely control the Judicial Power of the Commonwealth. There are another seven of these individuals who want to be God, on the High Court. How long must we wait

George,
We are all testament to the nature of the God / gods we believe in. Even atheists who claim to have no god give their passions and aspirations to an images of self.

The image of self defines the nature of the absolutes that define beliefs of who we are and why we are here. Identify these things in yourself and that defines the nature of the god upon which you model your being. Most peoples image of self is based around primitive passions (drives) of sex, pride and power. Examine your own most dominant passions.

True religion is the channelling of these id drives to purposeful and honourable ends, marriage, selfessness and servanhood. All these qualities taught by Christ.

i have read some more of the talmud[from its dictionary have learned that..''if a niddah''..essentially means bleeder..[though the dictionary calls it menstration]..''she defiles him''..dictionary also revealed a new word for goy..

<<..CUTHEAN
Used as euphemism for non-Jew: 'Cuthean'..(Samaritan)..was here substituted by the censor..for the original goy..(heathen)...
http://www.come-and-hear.com/sanhedrin/sanhedrin_57.html#57a_33

i picked at random through the 18 book text..in the end begining at the beginning..[seeking laws of the sabbath...[like the 49 year rule]..where the land returns..to its origonal owners
http://www.come-and-hear.com/shabbath/shabbath_2.html#chapter_i

maybe..something has gotten lost in translation<<..
Folio..2a

CHAPTER..I

MISHNAH...THE CARRYINGS OUT OF THE SABBATH..ARE TWO..WHICH ARE FOUR WITHIN,..AND TWO..WHICH ARE FOUR..WITHOUT.

3 ..HOW SO?
THE POOR MAN STANDS WITHOUT..AND THE MASTER OF THE HOUSE WITHIN:
[i]..IF THE POOR MAN STRETCHES HIS HAND WITHIN AND PLACES..[AN ARTICLE]..INTO THE HAND OF THE MASTER OF THE HOUSE,

OR[ii]..IF HE TAKES..[AN ARTICLE]..FROM IT AND CARRIES IT OUT,..THE POOR MAN IS LIABLE,4..AND THE MASTER OF THE HOUSE IS EXEMPT.5

[AGAIN]..[i]..IF THE MASTER OF THE HOUSE STRETCHES HIS HAND WITHOUT AND PLACES ..AN OBJECT] IN THE POOR MAN'S HAND,OR [ii]..TAKES [AN OBJECT]..THEREFROM AND CARRIES IT IN,..THE MASTER IS LIABLE,..WHILE THE POOR MAN IS EXEMPT.6

[iii]..IF THE POOR MAN STRETCHES HIS HAND WITHIN AND THE MASTER TAKES [AN OBJECT] FROM IT, OR PLACES..[AN OBJECT] THEREIN AND HE CARRIES IT OUT, BOTH ARE EXEMPT;

[iv] IF THE MASTER STRETCHES HIS HAND WITHOUT AND THE POOR MAN TAKES [AN OBJECT]..FROM IT,OR PLACES..[AN ARTICLE]..THEREIN AND HE CARRIES IT INSIDE,..BOTH ARE EXEMPT.7

GEMARA,We learnt elsewhere:[False]..oaths are two which are four>>

i guess it explains much..about the palistein issue failing to get resolved..[with such thinking..one needs wonder what the settlers are doing/achieving..running their raw sew-rage..into the gaza strip ghetto..[i presume[iv]..covers it..or maybe the first line...[quote]

Philo,
I do not want to disagree with you, however my post - about the level of intellectual sophistication of people who call things that humanity has been discussing for centuries “primitive” just because they cannot understand them - was simply a reaction to the post preceding mine.

George,
I may have been saying the same thing as yourself. It is not personal! Comments are made in the general discussion and may not be directed at the named percon. That is why I generally do not draw attention by name to a poster. Do you agree with the ideas? Confirm it: if not debate it.

As this thread is developing, it is becoming increasingly clear that Australia has left the path of its Constitution, and allowed nine separate Bishoprics to develop, each with its own justice stream. Instead of nine Popes, all running a State Church, we have six Premiers, two Chief Ministers, and one Prime Minister. All except Paul Keating and Kevin Rudd, for the last sixty years have seen nothing wrong with this but it is terribly wrong. The concept of One God, combined with One Queen, representing Him, was the foundation of all property rights, but now no one has any property except what the State will allow you to keep. Taxation has expanded to take over one third of most peoples wages, and when they lost that right in 1942, in the National Interest, the States found other ways to extract money from the people.

The High Court is simply a toothless tiger as far as the Constitution is concerned. It shabby rules restricting access to its power, are totally negating the Constitution, and a direct attack on Christianity. To extract limitless money from people the States had to dissolve the Commonwealth, and establish Communist States as Sovereign, instead of Almighty God. They have done this with all the help in the world from lawyers. Lawyers have profited enormously from their loyalty to the State. They have a monopoly, the only profession that has no competition policy to meet. They monopolise the sale and purchase of justice, and have formed great partnerships, employing thousands of want to be lawyers at sweat shop wages.

The law firms will not accept the High Court as an authority when it does not suit their clients, and the ones who can afford them are mostly the big corporations whose legal budget, is written into your cost of living. The Commonwealth as a corporation spent $400 million dollars last year on legal services. They do not want to waste that money so they continue to make sure the Law Courts are stacked with their lawyers. God will come back and when He does, our lives improve

Dear oug,

Jesus was taught neither the Talmud nor the entire Bible. The Jewish Bible was not completely canonised until 90 CE after Jesus' death. Work started on the Talmud about 170 years after the death of Jesus.

People of today do not accept the entire Bible. Mass murder is no longer acceptable, and women do not give their servant girls to their husband for sex.

From the Bible Jesus knew:

Genesis 16:3 And Sarai Abram's wife took Hagar her maid the Egyptian, after Abram had dwelt ten years in the land of Canaan, and gave her to her husband Abram to be his wife. 16:4 And he went in unto Hagar, and she conceived: and when she saw that she had conceived, her mistress was despised in her eyes.

Joshua 6:21 And they utterly destroyed all that was in the city, both man and woman, young and old, and ox, and sheep, and ass, with the edge of the sword. [worse than 9/11 but God supposedly told them to do it]

Polygamy, slavery and mass murder are unacceptable to most people of today. The passages above are in the Bible. It is behaviour that is unacceptable today. It is exactly the same for the Talmud. Some of what was acceptable when it was written are no longer acceptable.

If you condemn the Talmud because some of the practices it accepts are wrong in today's world then, to be consistent, you should also condemn the Bible.

However, the Bible also contains ethical observations and wisdom some of which are still useful and relevant in today's world. The same is true for the Talmud. Enjoy it.

Philo wrote: True religion is the channelling of these id drives to purposeful and honourable ends, marriage, selfessness and servanhood. All these qualities taught by Christ.

In other words your religion is the only true one. That’s the same belief that many Muslims, Jews, Hindus etc. have. That belief is an unending source of conflict.

George, "think" about what you have recently written. You have insinuated someone is "primitve" because (1) you have made an "assumption" about that person's intellectual capacity and because (2) that person called the behaviour of others "primitive". George, your logic shows typical "god worship logic" - - - - where people believe "THEY" are right, "THEIR" version of god is the only one "true" god, everyone must obey and if anyone doesn't believe exactly the same they are "beneath" true believers. True believers depth of insight STOPS at "belief": It goes no deeper than that. You seem to "believe" that my intellectual capacity does not stretch to "your" lofty standards? Why? It's probably because I'm not playing "your" game in the way "you'd" prefer.

Philo, atheism is the "NON WORSHIP" of, and non "belief" in, a deity. Atheism is defined NOT by what it believes, but by what it DOESN'T believe. Atheism, by it's very nature, does not believe in deities and does not worship deities. In fact atheism does NOT "worship" anything. The "belief" among god worshipers that atheism is the worship of things mankind shows how primitive the god worshipers are - - - - they are so brainwashed they just can't imagine anyone having an existence without "worship".

Philo wrote, "true religion is the channeling of these drives (sex, pride and power) into purposeful and honourable ends, marriage, selfessness (sic) and servanhood (sic). All these qualities taught by Christ". You're right Philo, all those qualities were taught by Christ. One thing you neglect though - - - - they existed LONG before Jesus Christ was even born. They're also taught by a plethora of prophets from just about every religion and belief imaginable. They're also taught by people of NON-belief, in all their diversity.

By the way Philo, "servanthood" is NOT a "quality". It discourages independent, free thinking as evidenced by many contributions here from the unquestioning "true believers" - - - the "servants" of the god they "believe" in.

david..i dont pray..but if i did..it would be

that we are only divided by..belief in the living loving good..[god...by anyother name or whoever its messenger]...and those not having belief..[in loving neighbour as themself]..or simply a belief in love others equally,regardless of them accepting god..[that they accept others..believing as they chose,..as long as/they do of love for self..and love of other

that we accept people..by their works..good works...[or reject people by their vile selfish works,...regardless if that good or vile be done..in any other name/authority/or god

i include in this..[anti-loving/god-lot..those advocating eugenics,abortionists,racists,murderors,rapists,thieves,bigotry,racism,ursurists,liers/perverts...and all the others..living for their own good advantage alone...

i attack the book..reluctantly..[and agree..that it no doudt contains much wisdom..[as do the quran and the torah...[that isnt egsactly the same as the old testiment]..and the new testitment,..or even collectivly the bible..[but includes the wisdoms of the tao,and the bagadivita[science and health/arcana celestia.and many other texts

i have found good in them all..but[and]..also many contradictions]...but reason that[as swedenborg reveals]..we are ALL under constant influx/from heaven..AND HELL...

that none is without sin..but..that sin is initself a judgment call[as advidsed..in the course in miracles..[dictated by one claiming to be christ..[to a jewess,..in total denial,that she was channeling him

i have meditated on the quote..[re sabbath...i quoted abouve...and can make sense of it..in a certain manner...

but i feel that is what..the volumous rewrite..should have done...im all for not censuring the texts..[and note that the text/i quoted re the 3 year and one day child..[have at times been deleted]...and fully deserve..to be deleted...but feel they must stay...with the note[warning..of how any text..can be perverted/..by those wishing to keep...all gods good..divided...

just as i feel..all the holy texts need warnings..at the seemingly contradictory bits..that give the impression that god is in anyway pleased with blood shed...

i have enjoyed your knowing..and your ability to share[the link]...in time i will try to read it...but like how..i read all the other texts..i will filter the words..by how i know/trust.. my../our god..[good]..to be

Master,
you are a servant to your own beliefs, master of your passions and drives. This is the identity of the god you worship. God is not only defined as a being outside the universe you seem to classify as all people believe exists. Your image of the highest power is in you. You are your view of god. No man can escape his image - his spirit.

God is manifest in Truth and wisdom and is eternal and not the property of one. That Jesus taught them makes him a wise man to be respected for his knowledge of truth

Philo wrote, "you are a servant to your own beliefs, master of your passions and drives. This is the identity of the god you worship".

Master replies: You don't seem able to grasp the meaning of the word "worship". Here's a link to the definition for your edification:
http://www.answers.com/topic/worship

Worship basically means "the reverent love and devotion accorded a deity, an idol or a sacred object".

Living one's life in the normal way is not "worshiping", nor is it the worshiping of an "identity of a god" as you seem to "believe". Living life is just that, "living life" - - - it's NOT worship.

Philo wrote, "God is manifest in Truth and wisdom and is eternal and not the property of one".

Master replies: Good on you, if you "believe" that then that's wonderful.

Just remember that others have EQUAL right to "their" religious beliefs, whether or not they agree with your beliefs. And others have EQUAL right to have no religious beliefs. I'm sure you're gracious enough to accept these people "AS THEY ARE", without feeling the need to change or convert them - - - or are you?

Philo,
I agree that the term “primitive“ can have many meanings (as you suggested), however “primitive in the extreme” can have only a disparaging meaning.

I appreciated and learned a lot from the various interpretations of the Book of Job presented here since my world-view is not that much based on scripture (especially OT) but rather on (philosophy of) science and metaphysics.

Thus my reaction, which was not to defend this or that opinion, belief or world-view but the level of language, style on this OLO, even when expressing disagreement with other world-views.

However, I agree, I should not have referred to “intellectual sophistication” in retaliation for the term “primitive in the extreme“ (a Christian should not retaliate, although it does not have to be always “turn the other cheek”).

Nevertheless, I still maintain that people who are arrogant, who belittle, denigrate other people‘s world-views make a statement not about those world-views but about themselves. This has been pointed out on this OLO many times when religious zealots wrote disrespectfully about atheists. I think it works also the other way around.

Master,
ditto.

George, it's all about a little thing called "freedom of speech". Under a "free" society I am allowed to say that it's my opinion that other peoples' opinions on certain things seem "primitive" or "primitive in the extreme" - - - and in the same free society they are absolutely allowed to reply in the manner that they choose.

The fact that I said the views are "primitive" does not display disrespect. It displays my opinion that the views are indeed "primitive". If I think their views are primitive and DON'T SAY THAT, then my "silence" shows a disrespect. They have a right to be aware of what others think; and they have the right of reply: And that reply can be expressed in the manner in which "THEY" choose.

Master,
I am not sure I know, or would understand, what you do or do not believe, what is your world-view, but you can be sure I would never call it “primitive to the extreme” in a sweeping statement, because that is not a language I would use on this OLO, freedom of speech or not.

As a matter of fact, neither would I THINK of it in that way if I knew that this world-view was more or less shared by a number of respectable people - philosophers, scientists, etc.

Well, this is where we apparently differ.

>> Nevertheless, I still maintain that people who are arrogant, who belittle, denigrate other people‘s world-views make a statement not about those world-views but about themselves. <<

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T69TOuqaqXI&feature=channel_page

The most primitive views on OLO are from the earth worshipers who deny the obvious (a Creator) and mumble on with pseudo science such as evolution. It is not surprising to see them acting like animals in the name of 'saving the planet'.

Runner, here's some facts you seem unable to comprehend:

1) Caring for Planet Earth is NOT "worshiping" Planet Earth

2) Not believing in a deity does NOT mean a person cares for Planet Earth

3) If a person cares for Planet Earth it does NOT equate that they therefore must be "acting like animals"

Runner, there are people who claim to care for this planet who are pedophiles, murderers, rapists and thugs JUST as there are people who claim to be Christians who are pedophiles, murderers, rapists and thugs.

Conversely runner, there are people who claim to care for this planet who are thoroughly decent individuals JUST as there are people who claim to be Christians who are thoroughly decent individuals.

Runner, you seriously need a reality check and need to understand life and people as they "really" are - - - - NOT as you "believe" they are.

Don't bother, Master. I know it's tempting, but there's no point: http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/ferouscranus.htm

If you try to demonstrate to runner the surreal absurdity of his statements, he will take that as confirmation that he's telling such palpable truths that you were stung into reaction.

Let runner's ignorance beget everyone else's ignorance of his posts.

Dear runner,

Evolution is basic to all life sciences. Christians, even conservative ones such as Pope John Paul 2, accept evolutionary science. Anglican Bishop Tom Frame, Director of St Mark's National Theological Centre and Professor of Theology at Charles Sturt University wrote "Evolution in the Antipodes."

The book deals with Darwin's attitude toward religion, the influence of Australian wildlife on Darwinian science, the influence of Darwin on Australia, Creationism and Intelligent Design in Australia, religious attitudes towards Darwinism and Victorian England's responses to Darwinism.

i began a topic one time..to allow evolutionists..to prove their theory,..asking only that they provide proof of life from nothing[chance]..abiogenesis...this was not forthcomming...in the end

and that evolutionist provide..one..verification of evolution of genus[NOT SPECIES]...as darwin wrote evolution of species...noting he DIDNT write evolution of GENUS...

because evolution of genus simply hasnt happend..[has never been recorded]...is not valid..even as a science theory..[let alone faulsifyable science fact]

yet simpltons..who never bred two things together..in their life..believe its science..[but none of you can quote any science for abiogensis..nor genus evolving...this dosnt stop evolutionists pratteling blindly on about proof...but there is none

yes seagulls have ring species that evolve ...lol..seagulls,..and yes bacteria has evolved..into bacteria...lol...and the canus[wolf] evolved into canus[dog]...but all within the genus...not ever is recoded any mutation into new genus

there are 7 so called gap fossils..[that prove nothing..[being only bits,pieces[part fossils]...and drawings..that may THEORETICLLY have evolved fingers...but no where is recorded..a cold blood mutating into a warm blood..[no where is recorded a fish/water breathing cold blood..mutating into a walking airbreathing warm blood..because its scientificlly invalid...it simply hasnt happend..hasnt been recorded and NEVER been replicated

i couldnt care less if the pope BELIEVES in it..[its simply not scientificly validated..nor faulsifyable...you were taught the theory as children..and never bothered confirmuing the facts..thus got suckked into a deception

[DONT GET YOUR INFO FROM THE MEDIA..its need's suckers to believe liars in lab coats,..to make GULLABLE FOOLS/..con-sumers..THAT BELIEVE IN EVOLIUTION..AND WHITER THAN WHITE...

[BUT ITS LIES..IF evolution is FACT..[yet..again]..PRESENT YOUR PROOF
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=2305&page=0

You confuse me! Do you mean the cristian god? the muslim god? the indian gods, or the greek gods? All regilious persons believe that their god or gods are the only one, the real god/gods. Is it any prove that their god exist, that their god is the only one, the real one?
I suggest to put all religious talibans in a desert and leave them there until to find which god is the GOD!
It is seemed to me that there are two main gods. One who created the world in 6 days and the other god who have grabed the power of the first god and he condinues the creation! Something like CRONOS and his son ZEUS.
Religious persons, religious talibans believe to the first god, atheist believe to the second god, who continues the creation of the universe. We are lucky the second god allows us to learn his secret and soon or later we will learn how to create life and big parts of the world. Us we learn more the current god weaken and weaken..
Soon or later we will learn enouph to understand that the god does not exist, never existed, that we created him to cover our weaknes and fears.
EVIVA THE DEAD GOD OF OUR FANTASY!
Antonios Symeonakis
Adelaide

antonous,..science cannot make life..[it cant even..'make'..a cell membrane..[it needs to empty out a cell..to even make a clone]...you know how scientific that sounds...here are mad-hatters..[in lab coats]..,fooling people..that in a few years../they will cure cancer..[i been hearing that one/..for twenty years or more]

when will people realise..all these faulse/god..replacements,..mearly played tricks on athiest/fools...to try to make a godless..theory..[so fools..will think god didnt make life..fools[thinking..it/life was a fluke..[an ACCIDENT..]

they/science/fools will say it was..'natural'../selection..explain[how scientific is..'natural'...or say/..it was survival of the fittest..[boy thats reaL SCIENCE/method..ISNT IT...the fit survive...wow

next they say..small mutations..make big changes..[but 99.9 percent of mutations kill..or are damaging to the mutant cell..[cancer is a mutation..[for egsample]

but here is the joke..[we got trillions of cells that make up just your/our nervous system..[science says one in 400 cell-divisions..is a mutation,..meaning you got millions of mutations..just in your brain

study of darwins finches/..proves there is thick beaks or thin beaks DEPENDING SOLELY..on wether last season was dry or wet..[they found that there is a constant flux..between its genomic norm..ie the finches NEVER become not finches

ok..?..now to what god is...god is that life/force..that makes your billions of sperms live..[once you were a sperm]=energy[that cant be created NOR destroyed.....

see god sustains all living things...you want to know../god study life[not dead words in dead books..[god lives in real time...living live-time...through all time..till science..realises../life can ONLY come from life...they will never get god..[despite god sustaining..[them too]..to live]

you ask what/..who god is ...think of the unity of gods breath..[spirit]..spirit/sustaining life...just as one computer can hook into the web..to acces the whole/web..[so each life..hooks into god..so life can live..god is light..[light sustaining life..via logic..[logus]..for life to live..

or think of religions../like wells..sucking from the same water..[but via different wells]...or think of god..as electricity../flowing into you..[via your belly button]..,..sustaining your heart to beat...[sustaining your mind to think...activating your nerve impulses...

as soon as science loses its attitude..they might describe god better...till then..know..that we do../did..to the least..we do to god...if any life knows../then god knows

OK under one god (uog), you obviously know all the answers, and you "know" people who don't share your beliefs are "simpltons" (sic), "suckers", "liars" and "gullable (sic) fools" - - - - - - - - all "your" words (though I would suggest you get some remedial help with your spelling cobber).

Now uog, seeing you're the font of all knowledge, maybe you could answer my following question regarding this "one god" you're "under":

If your god is FACT...PRESENT YOUR PROOF.

Notice the word is "PROOF", not "evidence".

master..your a wise man..[and forgive me using strong language]..its just that i was indoctrinated away from god,..till arround 1996..by which time i had proved to myself..[after twenty years researching evoltion/mendelic inheritance etc..that evolution was fraud

i ended my studies and thought to just go walkabout...it didnt take long to realise the reality of god...simply by study of nature..[not science].in time i studied the holy texts..[from many beliefs,..purly to know this living loving god,..i realised must live..live time..[in real time..all the time]...

via the texts..i concluded that god must be by nature good...that his good still voice..speaks to all of us...simply by following good thoughts flowing through our minds..[ie a personal good[god]..like jesus reveals..who in real time...gives us all..comfort/love

yeah..im a very bad speller...but god dont seem to care about us/me spelling correctly...lets face it..if..the only thing people can/..critisize me about..is..not/what i say...but usually only their complaint is..about the way i spelled it out

i know god is a reality..[for a fact]...but hey..i know for a fact evolution is fraud too...but you clearly dont../have an opinion either way...

you didnt ask for me to give proof about evolutions fraud...but its hard to dis-prove a negative..[aparently]...so i broke down the proof./..others thought...to prove evolution...

so i will make the same deal to you...offer your proof/..there is no god..and i will refute it

see i know..because of the daily..[live time]..proof's..god gives those who believe...the same proofs..you would dismiss..as chance or luck..[or lunicy]...

like..god's own...[and even the anti-god lot]..have syncronicity...this i cant prove to you...its only you../that can validate..[or invalidate]..it..for you...

if your expecting some formulated proof..you will be disapointed...

presume to know../god knows whats in our heart...god needs prove nothing to anyone...god dont beg...first comes belief then infinite proofs follow..one to one...believed to believer

im sorry..if thats not the answer you wanted..[but its the answer god[or other influx../conveyed into my mind..thus i convey it to you...as imperfectly..as i can translate the mind imagry..that inspired these images..now transcribed into words

Thanks for the answer uog.

There's only one reason I asked that question of you (I already knew exactly what the reply would be like). The reason is, in your previous post you demanded that people who believe in evolution provide proof of evolution. So I thought it only reasonable that we apply "exactly" the same standards of proof to you, that you expect from others.

Your reply, of course, shows no proof whatsoever, but of course I already knew that would be your reply.

Most people who believe in god, generally know the existence of god can't be proven (keeping in mind that there's many "versions" of god - - - - - with the adherents believing that "their" god is the one, true god). That's precisely why the many religions have "FAITH" and "BELIEF" as their cornerstone. If we KNEW a god existed, if we could PROVE a god existed, then belief and faith would be totally redundant: It would simply be unnecessary to "believe" in a god, because we'd KNOW the deity existed - - - - it would be unnecessary to have "faith" that a god existed, because we'd KNOW the deity existed.

Therefore, "faith and belief" continue to be the cornerstone of deity worship.

Why?

Because there's not one shred of proof that a god exists.

BUT - - -

Because most worshipers know this, they can easily handle the question "Can you prove your god exists". Why? Because their "faith and beliefs" require ZERO proof. So the fact that there is zero proof is pretty much meaningless to them. After all, they "believe" they know their god exists because their "faith" in god tells them so.

And they're entitled to that faith and belief, if that's their choice in life: Just as another person is fully entitled to walk a different path.

AH...M-ASS-TER YOU VERY CLEVER MAN...you too clever by far...you claim god dosnt egsist...i say even a simple bacteria is proof god egsists..[make...just one..LIVING bacteria..but you cant..because your ignorant..[in denial]...

you deney god...yet cant even concieve even simple life..from your own knowing/doing..even your most clever scientist..has been unable to make ..even..the simplest lifeform...

i care..not in the least../to make you believe..[in anything..you dont want to believe in]...freewill..[freechoice]..is very important to god..[god dont want mindless slaves]

but lets say..i proved god to be real..[right now]...would that affect your belief in god...or would you be in denial still...

if you knew god..to be real..[you would lose your free-..will to sin]..and im..not saying..your any sort of sinner...just that god lets us chose..to believe or not...

freewill is an important thing...god dosnt want blind obediance...he actually enjoys..you/us..futile/puny ants..made from mere dust..standing against him...

he enjoys freewill/driven spunk...its amusing like watching a miniature-dog..trying/futily to carry a huge bone

these wishy washy weak in faITH TYPES...make me sick...im being insulting..because..now im not self censering..not trying to channel good..i admire satan..to a cetain extent..[the least../that yet is greater than the baptiser]..for refusing gods command..to bow before adam...the clay goyam

mankind..to me..is a pathetic creature,..full of weak failings,...not even willing to give..that..of god.../back to god...god created you/me/us/all...loves you lot..enough..to give you the freewill..to even chose..to deney him

be gratefull i dont wish to prove god..to you..[or perhaps be more happy..you cant disprove god to me...you see..because god is love...i try very hard to love others#..as i know god does...but once..one of you retards..actually disproves god...i will return to type

to explain..when i bred thousands of animals..to test evolutions theory..[i would cull the offspring...by pulling off their heads...that was done..unthinkingly..because thats what us athiest/science types do...

but after discovering god..i realised it was a mindless/sensless act..to muder innocent animals..i bred..only to test a theory...

but what if..you prove god..not to be real,..frightens me..im likely to revert../to the murdering scientist i was...

good thing i know god wouldnt want that...because i know god is real...so give proof..or pull your head in..cant be bothered finding nicer words

That last post of your's uog, is full of so much sadness and skewered thinking it's mind boggling, but not unexpected.

I did NOT claim that god doesn't exist.
I claimed that there was no "proof" that god existed.

According to you, your so called "PROOF" that god exists is "simple bacteria". You then go on to imply, because "I" can't make bacteria (owing to me being ignorant and in denial you say) then that PROVES god made bacteria. You'd make a GREAT comedian cobber.

Ummm uog, the fact that bacteria exists DOES prove something - - - IT PROVES THAT BACTERIA EXISTS. The mere existence of something does NOT prove how it came to be. Better luck next time with that old, well known tactic uog.

You write "god don't want mindless slaves". Well cobber, it sounds like he's pulled the wool over your eyes - - - - but that's ok, you're allowed to continue believing that you're an independent and free thinker. Ha ha.

You wrote, "let's say I proved god to be real right now. Would that affect your belief in god?" Well uog, how do you know I don't already think god is "real" and how do you know I don't believe in god? And how do you know that either the existence of, or non existence of, "proof" has anything to do with whether I do, or do not, believe in god? Like many confused god worshipers (I wouldn't classify you as a Christian)you make lot's of "assumptions".

It's interesting that you say you "admire satan", and that you know god "enjoys" us "puny ants" "standing against him", and that you think "mankind is a pathetic creature".

You wrote, "be grateful I don't wish to prove god to you". Umm uog, you tried to do JUST THAT in your first paragraph. Ha ha. But seriously I see you as a very, very sad and lost person. It's a shame. I think you need the good company of some "real" Christian people. You probably need psychiatric care, but there's no shame in that.

I came across a thread on OLO awhile ago and read a brief argument about whether or not Stephen Hawkings believed in god. Not sure why that made a difference to anything or anyone what one mans (no matter how brilliant at anything else) beliefs were/are.

I think it is the different IQ’s – social, academic, etc. There must be a “faith IQ”, separate from the rest. From what I have seen on documentaries and read about any religion is that people have some receptors in the brain for group activities such as in church and that faith stimulates something to make us happier/ releases happy chemicals. I think one program I watched suggested either humans were wired for belief or susceptible to beliefs because we were wired a certain way.

I also read that when humans worshipped the moon and were hunters that the women were important but then we starting growing crops we began worshipping the sun and the men then became important.
Why was it always something in the sky? Why do cults now often believe UFO’s are coming? Something else in our brains make always look outside of where we exist for answers?

And now we have moved on where without the bible our laws do not protect us? But is the belief in the Christian god important or just acknowledging that Australia would function better if we returned to these laws that first came from a bible?

It is seemed to me that religious persons found the ease way to answer to many and difficult questions withouht to use their brain!
For everything there is the same answer! The god, and close to their god the DARK AGES!
I am atheist sir! Because I do not know how to make life, how to make difficult complex things does not mean that the god exist. I am learning, study the human history how many primative gods died because humans learned more from what these gods knew.
We are only at begin!
Antonios Symeonakis
Adelaid

Sancho,
The second of your links is really witty, I did not know of it, so thanks. It could be fun to try to assign various types of “flame warriors“ to several contributors on this OLO, naturally only as a mental exercise.

As to your other link, it appealed to me immediately, since it starts like the famous Apple commercial (and I am a staunch Mac OS X adherent). So I watched it twice and tried to understand its point. It revolves around concepts like evidence, proof, logic that have a more or less universally accepted meanings in everyday situations. However, when referring to basic existential questions (as what actually exists and in what sense, c.f. metaphysics), one has to be more careful with how one uses them, and not confuse them with what is better known as "common sense" (and since Einstein and QM - or even more recent theories in physics - we know that "common sense" is not always a good guide as to what exists, and how can we know it, even within reality investigated by science).

So at the level of "common sense", the video serves its purpose to reassure those who agree with its premises though I do not think it can satisfy/convert those with a wider perspective. Nevertheless I am sure I am not the only one who had fun watching it.

Foxy,

"Personal transformation can and does have global
effects. The revolution that will save the world is
untimately a personal one..."

Foxy you've been watching Ten Years Younger in Ten Days haven't you

“Philo, atheism is the "NON WORSHIP" of, and non "belief" in, a deity. Atheism is defined NOT by what it believes, but by what it DOESN'T believe. Atheism, by it's very nature, does not believe in deities and does not worship deities.” – Master

Not necessarily. Atheism can be disbelief in an alterative religion or theism. The Ancient Romans maintained the early Christians were atheists, because they believed in one god, thus lacking the cross-theistic civility of the pagani

1.As you know when I will die I will go direct to the hell. From one hell to an other hell! Already I found work in the kitchen of the hell, I will coock croock's and hypocrities' seouls. No problem with human seouls I know their earthy materials. My question is if UFO seoul's go to the hell or not. I do not know their material and may be I burn my self. I read the holy books about UFO but I did not find anything about them. I supposed the god/gods are waiting from the humans to find something about UFO and in the next god' version to write something about UFO!
2. I know that for many centuries rich criminals paid money and god forgived all their crimes. I understand and I agree that all these criminal's seoul must go to the heaven! The business is business, the contract is contract! My question is about the religious leaders seouls, where are their seouls, to the heaven or to the hell of cause their coruption? If their seouls went to the hell will they be representatives from the god in the hell or as every one's else seoul and I can coock them?
3. As you know for the same god there are various versions and each one different from the other. For many centuries thousands of people burned from the church in the name of the god. In the latest version of the god, these things are crimes and their seouls will go direct to the hell. I want to know when I will coock the seouls I will use various versions from the same god or the latest one! If I use the latest version of the god most seouls even from the most popes will go to the hell! but if I use the version of the dark ages then all seouls, exept from mine, and whitches, will go to the heaven!
4. How many versions of a god we can make, before we decide that it is time for new god/gods?

Antonios Symeonakis
Adelaide

as...its futile to say anyone is going to heaven or hell...we dont really know...how it works is the same personality types hang arround the same realm's...all who love murder are in the same place...loving to murder..only each other for eternity

in the after life are many realms,from the lowest hell..[where those who decieved others...by deliberatly lying..[decieving people away from knowing god...is good..sink down to[that lies in the dark realm]up to the realm's of light..where many who led people to love live

the safest thing if you dont know god is just to forget[if you decieve others away from god it gets dangerous[to our spiritual well being]..if you recall the inquisition..[where people thought to buy iundulgences...or permission to sin and many good people were killed...simply for following the wrong religion...these types are in hell

not in the same place asa murderors..or rapists or thieves or,lovers of gold dwell but inj hell non the less...from what i have seen of you by your previous posts you will be in the middle reaLM..[not in the light of heavens..[but not in the darknes of true hell

anyhow its not god that judges us[nor that any judge us...but that the good or bad we love to do draws us to those who love the same things...there are many..[uncountable realms]..the only thing that counts is the good we did..[or the bad we didnt do]

when you helped those strikers...your earned spiritual credit[i dont kknow whats in your heart./..but if you dont believe in god...dont be making others follow your ignorance...if your talking about something you dont believe in...stick with stuff you know

in case you want to know more i suspect it goes something like as written in these stories
http://www.angelfire.com/ne/newviews/gonewest.html
http://www.angelfire.com/ne/newviews/wsltoc.html

but like anything..do your own research...it might not seem inportant to do good for others...but there just might come a time..you will be glad you helped others as i am sure you have

if only religion's.. would explain the truth about god...there wouldnt be so many of them in hell

Oliver, the early Christians could NOT be atheists, regardless of what the Romans "thought" on the subject. Why? Because atheists don't worship or believe in a deity.

Master,

One should be careful in using the term “primitive” to describe the abstract and super-mundane, if that is your intent. The notion of other-worldliness is within the domain of higher cognitions. I quote Einstein:

“To know that what is impenetrable to us really exists, manifesting itself to us as the highest wisdom and the most radiant beauty, which our dull faculties can comprehend only in there most primitive forms – this knowledge, this feeling, is at the centre of all religiousness and in this sense, and in this sense only, I belong to the ranks the ranks of devoutly religious men.”

Is Einstein claiming to be a theist? No. Yet, he posits the existence of the super-mundane vis-à-vis common experience. If anything, Einstein calls the common place "primitive" and supra-realms of a higher-order.

Or, to cite Shakespeare,

“There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.”(Hamlet Act 1, scene 5, c. 1600)
Here, Hamlet engages a ghost … an abstract spirit being. Spirituality is an abstract concept, whether one believes or does not believe in deity. Hegel (1807), who did not believe in deities, recognised Spirit in the Phenomenology of the Mind. Today, atheist, Murray Gell-Mann critiques Henri Poincaré notion of the mechanical and predictable Laws of Nature;

“Even when classical approximation is justified and quantum mechanical indeterminancy is correspondently ignored, there remains the widespread phenomena of chaos, in which the outcome of a nonlinear dynamical process is so sensitive to initial conditions that a small change in the situation at the beginning of the process results in a large difference at the end.”

Whether an ancient animist or a modern physicist, notions of alternative realities even exist, to separate humanity from rest of extant life.

Master,

The Romans did regard the Christians as atheists. Read Robin Lane Fox or Burton Mack. Words change meanings in various contexts. Atheism would be barely understood to an early Muslims, because non-belief was enjoined to ingratitude rather than faith.

Oliver, Master, oug,
you might be interested in the following discussion of atheism:
http://moses.creighton.edu/JRS/pdf/2009-4.pdf.

The importance of God to our everyday lives has been suppressed and forgotten for nearly 140 years since lawyers were readmitted to the English Parliament after being banned for 498 years. In 1870, after admitting Roman Catholics to English Public Life, after they found they did not have enough Protestants to run the colonies, there started to be an erosion on the teaching and understanding of the English system of Government.

The English system started in ancient Egypt, right after Moses led the people out of Egypt, and got the Jewish Constitution carved in rock from Mt Sinaii. A Sydney Scholar is currently collating the history of written Constitutions, starting at Mt Sinai and finishing in Sydney in 2009, as a resource that he will make available on a DVD, to anyone who wants one. It will detail the way that a Constitution protects a community, and how when there is not one, the quality of life of everyone declines and in some cases as in Russia and Nazi Germany and probably Zimbabwe, is totally destroyed for the bulk of the population.

The English Constitution is derived entirely from the Holy Bible. Lawyers have been lying to themselves, and everyone else, that the English do not have a written Constitution, but Lord Chatham argued that they do, in 1770, the same year that the English were forced to find a new colony having just lost the American Colonies to stupidity. The New American Colonies adopted the principles of the English Constitution, and the United States is the only successful republic, with over 200 years of successful self government. The central pillar of a working Constitution, is jury trial. It is guaranteed in the United States, and a proper reading of the Australian Constitution discloses it is guaranteed here, despite lawyers telling you it is not.

God started his comeback on the 7th July 2009, when the case Pace v The Commonwealth was decided. It is just a pity that High Court is stacked with lawyers, and not freely available to interpret Our Constitution. Its time St Kevin fixed it

I just had a phone call from a man in the Murray Goulburn Valley, 100 miles north of Melbourne, and he tells me that there is only enough water in the Eildon Dam, to supply essential drinking water to the million residents of that catchment area. Victoria went bad and abolished God in 1986. Straight after the Australia Act 1986 was passed they put Judges in charge of Victoria, and since they no longer believe in the Holy Bible or Almighty God, have put control of their Supreme Court in the hands of a Registrar and a Judge. Is it possible that even today, Almighty God matters? As the Supreme Being, is it possible that he gets a little annoyed when men and women destroy His Supreme Court, and do what the Jews did to their temple in Jerusalem, and turn it into a den of thieves.

The only time Jesus Christ exhibited extreme anger, was when he plaited a whip and drove the merchants out of the Temple. The people who are selling God’s Justice, in His Supreme Court, may just be responsible for the drought in Victoria. There can be no denying the lack of water. There can be no denying the first sentence of the Book of Ruth, When judges ruled there was famine in the land. Judges rule in Victoria, since 1986, when the distinction between court and Chambers was abolished. Chambers was a place where private business was conducted but court was a place where public business was done, and in a court there had to be 12 ordinary people, mostly Christians, before any proper business could be conducted.

We had a drought in Sydney a couple of years ago, and the Big Pentecostal church here had a mega prayer night. I know some people will say that was a coincidence, but next morning there was so much rain that Sydney Airport was disrupted. It has not stopped raining since, and is continuing to rain two years afterwards. We have plenty of water in Sydney, and even our wallabies can stop carrying water bottles

A Supreme Court Writ used to start, Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God, We command you: Now since abolishing the Royal Plural, on Writs, the rain has stopped falling in Victoria. The We on a Writ, meant the Queen and Almighty God. The Supreme Court was a place of worship, not a den of thieves.

We should call on St Kevin, to at least give his Victorian worshippers a chance to call upon Almighty God again by freeing up access to the Federal Court, and letting them issue Writs, as they are authorized to do by S 23 of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976. It has power under S 23, but instead of having Writs, like a proper Superior Court of Record, it starts proceedings with an application. You do of course have to be a member of the Union of Lawyers, to get an application filed without question. Not only do they not conduct the Federal Court as a court, with a Justice and a jury, they also are very selective about who they let into it.

As a Temple of Mammon, just like they had under Baal, in Elijah’s day, they control who comes to their Court. Elijah was the original vexatious litigant. He had direct access to Almighty God, and told them they would get no more rain until they started to worship Almighty God again. When Elijah started to tell them they were doing it wrong, they persecuted him, and he went to live with a widow. After three years he came back and challenged the Priests of Baal, to a competition.

They erected two altars. One to Baal and one to Almighty God. Four hundred Baal Priests did their thingy. Dancing and praying, but nothing happened. Then Elijah took his offering, dug a ditch around it and poured four barrels of water over his burnt offering. Water was probably the most valuable commodity in a drought. Then Zappo, he called down Almighty God. The offering was burned to a crisp. He then beheaded the 400 Baal priests and it rained

Peter the Believer wrote:

“The New American Colonies adopted the principles of the English Constitution, and the United States is the only successful republic, with over 200 years of successful self government.”

Europe had been torn by religious wars. Those who wrote the Constitution sought to avoid that in the United States by erecting a wall between church and state. The Constitution does not mention God, Christ or Christianity. The only mentions of religion in the Constitution are:

Article VI

…. no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

First Amendment
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ….

The First Amendment has been interpreted by the US Supreme Court to mandate separation of church and state and prohibit government funding for religious schools or allowing any religious observances in the public schools. Religious bodies may get tax exemption but such exemption can be removed if those bodies engage in partisan politics.

The father of the current president was a Muslim and the current vice-president is a Catholic. The Democratic candidate for vice-president of the United States in 2000 was an orthodox Jew.

The Treaty of Tripoli was signed at Tripoli on November 4, 1796 and at Algiers (for a third-party witness) on January 3, 1797, finally receiving ratification from the U.S. Senate on June 7, 1797 and signed by President John Adams on June 10, 1797.

The Treaty of Tripoli officially denied that the United States was a Christian state.

Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.

President Obama in his inaugural address this year characterised the United States as a nation composed of “Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus and unbelievers.”

In so doing he included most religionists and those who believed in no religion. The government should neither encourage nor discourage religion. Neither is the business of the United States government.

Peter the Believer wrote:

“The only time Jesus Christ exhibited extreme anger, was when he plaited a whip and drove the merchants out of the Temple.”

Jesus drove the moneychangers from the Temple courtyard. In that he did the community a disservice. People came from many places with different coinages to worship at the Temple. Like others who came from foreign lands they needed to get local currency so they could get food and lodging. The moneychangers provided a needed service.

Jesus’ action made as much sense as a contemporary expulsion of the moneychangers from the Sydney International airport. He should have saved his anger to condemn social ills such as slavery. There is no record in the New Testament of Jesus or any of his followers condemning slavery.

Jesus’ anger, like that of contemporary Christians who try to set up a nanny state to censor free speech on the Internet, was misplaced.

as we are drawing a wide bow i will wade in...jesus drove the money changers from the temple...for the prime reason of the money changers having taken supreeem control over the temple tokens...these tokens were a nessesity to gain acces to the services of the temple

to put it in proportion in our hindsite is difficult...but we have the clues...that the tokens the money changers established monopoly positions over were as money itself is a token...and that jesus had to pay a temple tax...

despite...peters response that the tax was for..'others'..it can be presumed..no tax coin../.no temple acces...sort of an early form of pay for indulgences...even having temple coins..to cover animal sacrifices

thus he finds the ursurors selling cattle/sheep/dove indulgenges in the temple...talk about a divided house..for they had turned our fathers house into a market...

naturally the priests asked for a sign...[to which jesus reveals the concept of rebirth of spirit..''destroy this temple]]..ie..[his proof of authority would come with his reserection,..that should have destroyed the lie of judgment day...spirits waiting for reserection..[how absurd]

its interesting to note the feast parrable gets inserted...'for many are invited,but few chosen...followed again by the question..is it right to pay taxes...followed by give to caeser..and give that of god to god

this gets followed by the parrable of the ten servants...more shall be given...

regarding the giving of graces and then giving increase..where some took their grace and multiplied it 10 fold,..and one fool just burried his grace...

but im just muddie-ing the waters

but the temple he had spoken of was his body[john2;21]

john2;23..then at 24/25,..an other hand muddies the waters...[and what was meant to be an end..gets lost in a new beginning..[..or revision]-ism...timing it seems is everything

I don't care what your name is, nobody walks on the water when I'm fishing!

If the fisherman who is scared of footprints scaring the fish away, was familiar with his Bible he would know that on two occasions Jesus came on the scene when no fish were being caught. After giving some instructions the fish caught were so numerous they nearly broke the nets. The first time was at the beginning when He told the fisherman, to come fish for men, and the second time was after he had been crucified, the disciples were crestfallen and depressed, and had gone fishing, tried all night, and caught nothing. When Jesus turned up, he said Cast your net on the other side. The record shows they caught 135 big fish, but he already had some cooked fish on the beach. That was the first men’s breakfast where men met in Jesus name. We still do this.

The reference to the plaited whip and driving the money changers out of the temple, is really relevant. When Martin Luther got annoyed at Popey Wopey, selling indulgences to rich criminals, and giving them get out of jail free card, he started the Lutheran Church, which is still the biggest Protestant Christian Church in the world. Why, because they keep their members.

Some of you are making a big thing of S 116 Constitution. There was to be no State required Religious test for public office. That meant Roman Catholics could take public office, because before 1900, if you were out of favor with the local Anglican Bishop, or Presbyterian or Methodist Minister, you could not be a Justice or Justice of the Peace. Judges were banned in 1900, and had to get consent in writing to sit without a jury. Two justices could sit without a jury, in minor cases but as soon property was involved, they had to step aside and the matter had to be tried with a jury. This stopped the selling of indulgences, and lawyers who traditionally traded in indulgences were really annoyed at the way they could no longer coin money. Examine our present system because indulgences are being sold today throughout the Commonwealth

Peter the Believer wrote:

"...he started the Lutheran Church, which is still the biggest Protestant Christian Church in the world. Why, because they keep their members."

Since they kept their members they can use them to produce more Lutherans.

The concept proposed that we need to get back to God to establish government authority is not altogether desirable nor rational. Government authority should be vested by the people (ideally). Are you are proposing some sort of benevolent dictatorship influenced by the idea of God and the rules of Christianity.

The trouble with God and religion is that when it comes down to it, it is man that interprets, translates and dictates the word of God and with it all man's imperfections, self interest and (for some) the need for power/money.

Why are there so many versions of Christianity? Because when it comes down to it, it is man who seeks to put in his own world view regardless of whatever the 'good book' sought to convey.

Some of the comments made above lead me to believe that many don't really understand atheism.

That said, it comes down to the simple fact that humans will never agree to follow one homogenous path no matter under which umbrella - Christianity, Islam etal.

PTB's idea to transfer this same confusion and disunity to government would be fraught with disaster.

i think what govt we have now is formed arround a wrong idea of god, we have govt along the lines od a strict diciplin-arian father god who says this you WILL do [or we get armed men with guns and tasers to put you before the men in blacxk dresses and lock up your flesh and blood huh-man for as long as we like

its written that woman and men will rule us..that he who would lead you will serve you...govt should be more like a mother..[protecting the weaker kids from the bully..not giving bailouts to the greedy stealing wealth/fees from the poor..[not having favourites..and making sure we all get a fair share of the common weal...noty just ever more taxes with-out representation

govt should be like a mother who feeds all equally...govt should be prepared to sacrifice of itself..[not make sure its over generous pension sceme is safely banked away..for it and its mates...like govt currently is doing...where the servants of the people..live high on the hog and the poor cant even get the crumbs off the table..[let alone anywhere near the table]..ONE PENSION FOR ALL..damm cap loc

it seems we should all be getting equal largess..from govt not only the fathers mates getting the cash...govt seems so much like a boozer in the pub..buying free drinks for his drunken mates..while his family starves

protecting his drinking buddies while beating up on the wife and kiddies...govt is out of control...its not enough to beat up protestors he sends in police to shut down those simply trying to camplain//ever tried to write to the editor of the news paper...they are part of the boys club...dont think god isnt watching

Why do you think Richard Pratt was able to make so much money? He made it because he was able to get a big law firm to buy him a get out of jail free card, if he broke the law. He broke the law and was fined 40 million dollars. So what price his indulgence? He probably paid another thirty or forty million to his lawyers. As a Jewish Gentleman who attended synagogue, with Graham Samuel, another Jewish gentleman, he was really annoyed that his efforts for charity and other good works had not made him immune from the law. The scuttlebutt is that he and Samuel were previously friends.

These days the big businesses like Telstra, the Commonwealth and The States are all in the business of buying indulgences. They buy them from lawyers, and even have their own law firms to buy them from. Crown Law and the Australian Government Solicitor are nothing more that law firms wholly owned by the Governments. On top of that to be able to keep in good with the lawyers, the Commonwealth spent another four hundred million on legal services. The legal profession is so dishonest, it refuses to accept Commonwealth legislation that has fixed this problem, and still thinks that in 2009, they can continue to sell indulgences to their rich clients, provided the media continues to support their lies. This is Liberal Party Government, and Labor in the Commonwealth has fixed it, but the State Labor Dog, is wagging the Commonwealth tail.

When the State and Federal Governments own all the Judges and Magistrates in Australia, having bought their services from them by various bribes ranging from about $3000 a week for a Magistrate to $7000 a week for a High Court Judge, then the legal profession has something to sell.

The Commonwealth has actually made laws to allow ordinary people like you and me, to be Graham Samuels. It has made the laws to restore the system, and the High Court has ruled that it must be restored. Problem is Judges Rules of Court exclude the legislated Law

We will know God is back, when we are given free and totally unfettered access to the Royal courts of God Almighty. This will happen when the members of the Parliament of the Commonwealth stop frothing at the mouth, getting drunk on their salaries, and start to question the exercise of the Judicial Power of the Commonwealth by unelected individuals drawn from the legal profession.

For all the huffing and puffing going on in this thread, the fact is that as a collective community we are realizing that Judges are an abomination. Judges have been a menace ever since one man wanted to dominate another. We are supposed to worship a Judge instead of Almighty God. If the Lord’s Prayer is to have any meaning, thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven, then there has to be a place where we can pray for justice. That place in the United Kingdom from 1297, was a court.

We are entitled to courts. We should not have to be Muslims, Jews or Communists with a Little Red Book, or a Big Black Book, written by Judges in conclave, with absolute power to overrule every law made by the Parliament of the Commonwealth. That is what the Rules of Court made by nine separate judiciaries, do. They overrule the laws of the Parliament of the Commonwealth.

The Commonwealth has legislated to give everyone the right to full participation in this democracy. S 45 Trade Practices Act 1974 does that, because justice is a business and a very profitable one. You as members of the Commonwealth, should be in every court. You should not be excluded by Rules of Court and rulings made by Judges. The Rules should be the servant of legislation, not the master. Currently the servant is greater than his master, as Judges rule. Even pagans know you cannot have a disloyal servant.

Every Judge is a pagan. They cannot be Christian and be a Judge. We can be judges, with two or more of our fellow subjects, but only in a jury. That is law

I cannot make sweeping statements without giving examples; S 6 Supreme Court Act 1970 ( NSW) states: Any Act in force immediately before the commencement of this Act which is inconsistent with the rules shall be superseded to the extent of the inconsistency and while such inconsistency continues to exist. It commenced on the 14th October 1970, but the Governor had no constitutional power to assent to it.

S 17 Supreme Court Act 1970 does not apply the Rules made under S 6 to Criminal Proceedings. So if the State prosecutes you they must comply with the Commonwealth Constitution, but if you are unlucky enough to want civil justice, then you must worship a Judge and he makes the Rules.

What S 6 means is we no longer have any reason to respect the Commonwealth. The Judges make the Rules, and we better like it. The Judges are not our servants, they have one loyalty and one only, to the legal profession, and how they gouge us, one and all. All States including the Commonwealth have abolished courts and created Courts.

In 1363, a law was made in these terms: 36 EDW III Ch 9: Remedy in Chancery for breaches of Statute: If any man feeleth himself grieved contrary to any of the Articles above written, or others contained in divers Statutes will come into Chancery , OR ANY FOR HIM, and thereof make his Complaint, he shall presently there have remedy by Force of the said Articles and Statutes without elsewhere pursuing to have remedy.

By 1487, Judges in Chancery were selling indulgences, so in 4 Hen 7 Ch 20,[1487] the Parliament took away the power of a Judge to grant an indulgence, and only by a jury of 12 men and not otherwise, was a good discharge from a complaint obtained.

This was all incorporated into Australian Law in the Australian Courts Act 1828 and protected by the Australian Constitution in 1900, by S 118. God blessed the English with common sense, and common sense makes common law. Accept nothing less that totally Christian law; its your birthright

Peter The Believer forgot to add an important little message at the end of his rambling monologues. He forgot to add "In my 'opinion'".

He thinks that what he writes is "fact". Good on him - - - - that's free speech in action within this great country. People are allowed to think and write all sorts of nonsense, and that is as it should be.

i note peter cant post till lunch time tomorrow
thats not a fair shot master

you could at least have rebutted some of his points
fight fair oh master

dont wait till the post limit is reached and have the last say
why did you not rebutt?

...all you simply did..was put an ammendment..
we know should go under every post..by every poster

[hardly worth throwing away a valuble post..to say nothing]
but you made your clear point..

[perhaps revealing too much eh?]
i thought better of you...but guess were all only too human

George,

Thank you for the the Definition of Atheism link posted 9 July 2009. I will offline for a week.

With Church attendance at record lows I would say:
1 No
2 Who cares!

Uog, he can reply if he wishes (post counts are something that have never entered my mind), if he has to wait some extra time so what. I've had to wait extra time; probably most people here have.

Regarding your "rebuttal" comment: Rebuttal is pointless against people such as you or Peter - - - - - - you are both dogmatic "believers", each "believing" you "know" the word of god, even though you disagree with each other. You each present your "beliefs" as if they were the description of FACT. All the facts, logic, information and influence in the world will not alter, or influence, the "beliefs" of people like UOG and PTB. Therefore rebuttal is a pointless exercise in futility.

There's plenty of folks in the world who "believe" that "their" version of god is the ONE and ONLY true god for EVERYONE. You can't effectively debate with people like that because they lack the necessary flexibility and emotional/spiritual awareness to alter their ground. They believe "their" interpretation of god's laws MUST be inflexible (after all they "believe" the laws come from god), and they possess an incapacity, and/or lack of will, to understand anything else.

One can't debate effectively against ignorance.

Dear Constance,

“Are you now dismissing even your own ethnic clannish background?” – C

- No, I have Scottish ancestors. I recognize my roots.

“Why have you distorted the only point I intended to make and have taken it somewhere unrelated?” –C

- You responded to my comments on the capstone year of 1492, reverting to a period two generations earlier. Isabella and Ferdinand were awarded for their deeds, as I cited.

“And you are still ignoring my statements on Christian clergy helping their fellow man.” - C

- Many clergy would make good humanists, many clergy would not. Father Francis of Assisi was an example of a good man. There a good and kind nuns too.

“The Koran lacks one of the golden rules “Love Thy Neighbour”. – C

True. Islam is more theistic. "Not one of you is a believer until he loves for his brother what he loves for himself." Hadith of an-Nawawi 40:13
- “ Christians do not punish those who wish to convert to other religions.” –C

- Read the history of Rome post-Nicaea (325). The Christians acted towards other religions artefacts, as the contemporary Taliban did against the Buddhist statues. Under Isabella and Ferdinand, Jews whom didn’t convert to Christianity, were killed. Today, several Christian OLO posters are antagonists against other faiths.

- “Do not argue with the followers of earlier revelations otherwise then in a most kindly manner… say: we believe in that which has been bestowed upon us, as well as that which has been bestowed upon you, for our God and your God is one and the same, and it is unto him that we [all] surrender.” Koran 29:46

Cont...

Are you able to differentiate between the lives of Jesus and Mohammad...?” - C

Yes. And, I can differentiate Jesus from Christianity too. I see Mohammed to be more like Moses than Jesus.

I haven’t hitched rides across Muslim countries, yet I have lived overseas for ten years. I have travelled with Muslims thoroughout rural Indonesia and rural Malaysia - In Indonesia there were riots! On one occasion, my Muslims hosts in Indonesia said they appreciated the respect that I showed their country by travelling with them, given there where DFAT warnings, especially as I came alone, while, known to them, my Chinese colleagues were too scared.

Oliver wrote: - “Do not argue with the followers of earlier revelations otherwise then in a most kindly manner… say: we believe in that which has been bestowed upon us, as well as that which has been bestowed upon you, for our God and your God is one and the same, and it is unto him that we [all] surrender.” Koran 29:46

The statement assumes that earlier revelations are consistent with later revelations. That is not true. The Trinity is inconsistent with the basic Jewish statement of faith. "Here, Oh, Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one." It is also inconsistent with the Muslim statement of Faith. "There is no God but Allah, and Mohammed is his prophet."

Buddhists maintained there is neither a God nor a soul. Buddha came after the Jewish revelation and before the Christian and Muslim revelations and is inconsistent with all three.

Religions contradict each other. A religionist cannot believe in an earlier religion. To the best of my knowledge there is no earlier religion which is a subset of a later religion.

Mohammed could have used a course in comparative religions.

david f.

Actually it was what Oliver quoted not said.

My remark to Constance was that in theory early Islam accepted other religions and did not try to convert. Related ideas are The People of the Book and that the Muslims believe that there were/are many prophets to all peoples across the ages. I was not claiming Islam to be true or consistent.

I agree with you other comment.

Offline for a week.

Master,
i reckon animals on your farms are content.
men's religions are self-flagellating.
talk about hog the limelight.
the women's religions are much more intriguing
more mystical, precious and deliberate.

God’s a bloody drongo.

this is one of them posts you just know you shouldnt post...[but i must reply the luddite..insulting OUR GOD..and cant resist a femail godhead

i may be whistling in the wind,..but have all was regarded my..[male self]..as being a lesbian at heart...it too resent those of the same sex as i...the song sung from my heart has allways been rubbing together[but nothing that goes in]..i too cant stand the thought of a beastly male penetrating my very being

god is of course beyond sex..and i love her dearly...and resent a ludite who dont know of her goodness saying things that might in time condem their very soul...

i often envey the fEmail of gods creation..for their claim to hormonal anger outbursts...yet resent those who think god is so hormonally inclined

anyhow the theory is..when you dug a hole stop digging..i have defended my favourite sex..and the only god..[beyond sex]..i stand ready to become a full fledged lesbian,...to worseship at the sacred alter protected by the man in the boat,...seems i need a post script to prove my bonifiedes...

and hairy legs are normal..all men are beasts..especially adam..who could easilly have pardoned eve[being her father/brother[it was his rib...and eve was cloned from his rib...

and as he was her husband..COULD WELL HAVE FORGIVEN HIS WIFES FOOLISHNES..REGARDING THAT AFFAIR WITH ROTTED FRUIT..[darn cap locs]..as satan did point out..[didst god forbid]...and its clear god didnt..cause she was still only a wee rib..not yet even a pain in adams ribs

...only a womaN,..[SORRY FEMAIL]..GOD..COULD HAVE THUNK OF THAT..

anyhow were all grown-up's now..maybe its time we all saw the real joke of the matter..[god is so funny..when you get to know her]..who else could have concieved the circumsision...great one lord

Yes well OUG, dunno what you are trying to say, but....

God's a bloomin drongo.

And by Jeezus that's a fact!!

you're not fooling anybody one under god.
her god is not your god,
it belong her.

Ludwig wrote, "God's a bloody drongo" and "God's a bloomin drongo".

Boy Luddite, I mean Ludwig, I think you've just shown your intelligence level with that well thought out, insightful piece of wisdom. Which school of ignorance did you attend?

god's a piece of history
we celebrate each day
our wives and mum's and daughters
her godesses we pray.

for this is the emergence
of women's law we know
alongside men's, we make amends
for what we did we know.

a country song, Master?

gOD IS BACK! wHAT GOD? ....WHAT THE ones in your minds say its so, does it mean, this is fact! I don't think so.......can anyone feed me.
My best device is, stay in the neutral zone, and let the 19th work it out.

P/S Its not their world.

Signed sock.

Derrrr…aaahm Maahthter (thayth Ludwig, with tongue hanging out of thide of mouth and drool dripping on floor…

God’th a bloody bloomin blithththtering dthrongo.

Tho there. Thuck on that!

This is on line opinion, and the world cant be sustained with-out the world as one. Are you people of this planet...off your heads? You know the score! planet wins and the weak dies, and this time clock, we are running short of, I can only give you a hand full of...I told you so,s!

You too can make a difference?

Answer me this. How much would you all work, if you had a chance to go too the Moon or Mars, how hard would you study?

There! Can you follow the yellow brick-road?

How much of this world can man dig up, and it still leave,s you with..........well! you figger it out.

Signed sock

soc pupette quote<<You know the score!planet wins and the weak dies,>>..mate that is the way of the beast...there is no such thing as a win for the planet...its our our resource base...but its basiclly a closed loop system

sure we flush our used poop into oceans..mine third world estates AND POLUTE THEIR RIVERS...but the thing is..in time the earth repairs itself...

in the end the poisens get flushed into the ocians..accumulates into the subduction zones and the system regurgitates its[our waste in its cycle via some volcano..or pole shift..or earth quake...even if we did nothing,..the cycle goes on]

<<and this time clock,we are running short of,I can only give you a hand full of...I told you so,s!>>mate your falling for the spin...the powers that be like to talk up peak oil and such other scarcities..to get the price up...

its a game...go for a drive and se all the empty farmland...if its organic we can grow it...algie farming will make sure we got enough oil[for fretiliser/plastics..or fuels

<<You too can make a difference>>,,in time you will see nothing we do #can make any difference...learn to tell spin from fact

<<Answer me this.How much would you all work,if you had a chance to go too the Moon or Mars,how hard would you study?>>>mate your dreaming[delusional...get this no matter how bad things appear to be we got the main bits of the system still working..[on mars you need to begin from scratch..and get the junk over there to terraform..build/grow/survive mate mars freaming is nuts...how do they say begin change in your own bach garden

<<There!Can you follow the yellow brick-road?>>and your the delusional wizard..of oz..speaking from behind your curtain..thanks toto..

<<How much of this world can man dig up,and it still leave,s you with..........>>..with what..what ocians of minerals in our seas?..rivers of plastic..mountains of food..empty shops

Thank you all of you, for your many and varied opinions. The whole problem is we have shut off our pipeline to Almighty God, by failing to follow the teaching of Jesus Christ, in the New Testament. He promised to be there always to guide us, and while he still mostly guides the United States, he cannot guide us under the common law, because we no longer have any in Australia.

It Sunday and as I was sitting in Church, I realized that when we abolished the common law we also abolished the continued blessings that flow from humble worship of the Lord. The common law was the law common to everyone under the Christian Almighty God. We did not worship Parliament, we did not worship Judges and Magistrates, we did not have millions of words of contradictory Statutes, but we did have a public forum much like OLO where we could raise debatable matters of concern, and have them decided by a fair just and impartial tribunal of fact (these words are out of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights: Article 14).

Jesus Christ in John 5 verses 22 and 23, tells us if we don’t honor Him, we don’t honor Almighty God, so why should Almighty God bless us. The prayer in the Constitution, humbly relying on the blessing of Almighty God, is meaningless when we must worship a State appointed God, called a Judge or Magistrate. There is a complete prohibition in S 116 Constitution, on the State becoming a religion, but we must now worship a Judge, or Magistrate and make a prayer to an individual, instead of to an ecclesia. We pray in a Church, but the power and the glory of Almighty God is exercised in a court.

The Courts created by the States and Territories and the Commonwealth, are all illegal, because there is no such capital letter word in S 79 Constitution. That goes for every Court from High Court to Magistrates Court, and when man starts to think he is a God, trouble is brewing. Where are you Kevin

PTB wrote: "The whole problem is we have shut off our pipeline to Almighty God, by failing to follow the teaching of Jesus Christ, in the New Testament."

Dear PTB,

Jesus as a pipeline to God? Jews believe there is nothing between humans and God. Muslims believe that Mohammed is the prophet who transmitted the word of God. Catholics believe that the traditions and pronouncements of their church interpret the word of God. Your belief is different from their beliefs. There is no reason to accept any of the beliefs. Your beliefs are probably due to the fact that you chose parents with similar beliefs.

One can doubt the reliability of the New Testament. It is more probable that humans made up the story of the various miracles than that there actually were miracles. The miracles were fiction, and we don't know how much of the narrative outside of the miracles were also fiction.

The Bible is neither a scientific text, a reliable history, a reliable guide to behaviour nor a reliable predictor of the future. The Old Testament contains a lot of old Hebrew tribal legends, and the New Testament contains a lot of legends about Jesus who may never have existed at all.

I really find belief in God as incompatible with belief in miracles. I am not sure I believe in God, but I have a concept of God if he exists. My concept of God is an entity that has created a world of order which is partially expressed in the laws of physics and chemistry. Whatever purposes God may have can be achieved without violating physical and chemical constraints. To need a miracle means to me that God is imperfect and cannot achieve his purpose without violating those laws. With or without a God I believe in a world of order which follows natural laws. Therefore accounts of miracles must be invented.

There are many problems. One problem is that people confuse belief in unprovable propositions with truth.

Ludwig wrote, "god'th a bloody bloomin blithththtering dthrongo"

This marvelously intelligent quote comes from the "FAKE" self professed "greenie" from other threads, whose claims of links to greenie organizations is betrayed by his often right wing statements of belief. He's NO greenie. Yep, there we have Ludwig, sitting behind his typewriter furiously pretending to be someone he's not. What a w a n k e r!

And now we have the "fake" greenie here on this thread, offering his astute analysis via his tiny mind.

david..the miracles have teachings../attatched to them...like the miracle of wine into water..is about how far servants will go to make sure their masters dont loose face

and..the feeding of the hungry..how people are fixed in their faiths..as you have generously explained re the qaran..so i wil explain the teachings

at the cana weding..jesus clearly reveals[to his mother]..it is not yet my time....thus clearly saying../what happens next is nought to do with me...

so what happend...the host had a booze up...drunks being drunks..drank the cheap booze...next we have the messiah...who tells them its naught to do with me...saying..why..[i dont care]..if you feed them that douche water

now you may be shocked..at hearing the truth..[so i will prove it]...see that ritual cleanlyness..is a fetish..[to the abrahamic tribes...do not the muslims wash..at their temple's..,before approaching god in prayer

well it was the same..in the time of the messiah..[there were 7 ritual jars there to progressivly..make them selves clean...when the messiah says..clean the jars and give the guests the water from the dirt jars...THINK..[wouldst anyone drink from a toilet

[even the best wine?...noting the wine from the..'jars'..was better..lol..[we can summise..that the guests got the best of the masters private/stash..rather to/risk..the masters wrath..than embariss their master

at the mountain..feeding the jews..[a count was made of the fish/etc...yet after eating..[all they WISHED...there was an increase...because tradition at the time..insists a gift be brought[WITHOUT THE RITUEL OF THE HANDWASH JARS..none could wish to eat..[so fixed are men in ritual]

his deciples didnt realise it..[because they next ate..[with unwashed hands..of the shew bread...to which..the high priest specificlly pointed..their lapse out...

to which jesus replied..its not what man puts in his mouth..that makes him unclean..[but that which issues forth..from it

his deciples knew the unclean teaching...[those on the mount did not...but/yet..his deciples thus missed the teaching...[of fixed ritualised faith...in land/books/rituel/rank bloodline,thus missing the living/loving god,..alltogether

jesus even divided..those present to sit..oppisite each-other..so none would be tempted..to eat with dirty hands...

because such is their faith in ritual..[and other rites..that have become more important than..the living loving personal GOD

Dear oug,

Sure the miracles were there to teach lessons. However, some people believe they actually happened. if one reads the Bible as fables to teach lessons. Fine. You might learn from it. To believe it actually happened is superstition.

The problem with the Jewish people and the Muslims and Hindu’s is they do not really believe that the God of the Christians can perform miracles, and can wreak havoc on unbelievers if He gets really annoyed. I had a Federal Court Judge mock Almighty God one day in Court and about two months later he died of no apparent cause.

Neither do they believe that Almighty God can actually heal the sick, in many cases in situations where the Doctors have already told the patient to go home and die. Most of these people who are still alive after having a death sentence virtually pronounced upon them, just quietly attend church and get on with enjoying their life. Many people who have rejected chemotherapy are still alive, and many good people who did not are no longer with us.

We need a miracle in one of the Australian States possibly Queensland, where there are quite a number of Christians in the Labor Party Government to point out the inconsistencies between S 56 of the Supreme Court of Queensland Act 1991, and the Supreme Court Act 1995, which would lead to as of right jury trials in Queensland, in all matters. The Details are posted on an Article site on OLO.

If they do that and restore Christian Rule in Queensland, because of the nature of the Australian Constitution a court in Queensland can do the will of Almighty God, and bring even a High Court Judge to account. The lines up to heaven could be opened and the Royal Telephone reconnected. The High Court opened the way for the reestablishment of Royal Service, in 1996, when they gave us the “Kable Principle”, and ruled a New South Wales Statute illegal.

There is no reason for the Queensland Government not to create a boom situation in Queensland. At the present time there are no courts in any State in Australia. If they restored them, just as the High Court said they must, all roads would lead to Brisbane, and the situation where 95% of cases settle out of court restored

PTB wrote: The problem with the Jewish people and the Muslims and Hindu’s is they do not really believe that the God of the Christians can perform miracles, and can wreak havoc on unbelievers if He gets really annoyed.

Dear Peter,

They have no problem. They don't accept your superstition. They have their own superstitions. It's you that have the problem.

There are no miracles of any kind from any God. It is an unreasonable God who would wreak havoc on decent people because they don't accept the Christian mumbo-jumbo.

A Muslim might claim that the problem with Christians is that they don't accept Allah.

Jews don't have that kind of bigotry. They believe that the important thing is to lead a righteous life. If you do it doesn't matter what mumbo-jumbo you believe. If you don't it also doesn't matter what mumbo-jumbo you believe.

I am fascinated with the reference to Hillsong in the article by the secularists on OLO on Queensland Education. Hillsong is a Sydney Church, and only just got an affiliated Church in Queensland when one voted to become part of the worldwide Hillsong phenomenon. It must be the music. The song, You Cant Stop the Music, may be applicable but it is also true that you cannot stop the hunger of people who want to know more about Almighty God.

In Sydney last night there was a packed service in the City, with everyone seated, but not a spare seat in the house. The preacher was a Hillsong Pastor who moved to Orange County California, and has planted a growing church there. He took his wife and children and moved to a foreign country, and has been made welcome.

I know that the impact of Hillsong is Australia wide as their conferences are attended by Christians from all over Australia, who come to hear the world class preachers, prepared to come down under to attend. It particularly welcomes Pastors, of all denominations, who want to grow their flocks, and Pastor them in the best possible way.

Hillsong is apolitical, but its members form opinions just like anyone else, and they were not unhappy to see KR replace JH. It is an open Church, in which everyone is welcomed, provided they come to worship Almighty God, and not push a political agenda. It has a College where students from all over the world come to study, for up to three years, so its long term impact is likely to be huge, and for the good. It has been said of Islam that the lot of ordinary people improved when Islam was introduced, and it can certainly be said of the Hillsong Congregation that they believe their lives are better for their weekly attendance at Church. We get an enormous number of former Roman Catholic churchgoers, who were disillusioned with Christianity, but come back to the fold, when the ministry is made attractive. If God is coming back, its by invitation

Davidf wrote that Jews, "believe that the important thing is to lead the righteous life".

Umm David, try telling that to the thousands upon thousands of "innocent" Palestinian civilians murdered by Israel's attacks. Just like George Bush's massacre of thousands of innocent Iraq civilians during the initial bombings of Iraq ("conveniently" called collateral damage), done in the name of the Christian god after George prayed for so called "guidance".

Religious people are amongst the most violent, intolerant and murderous people. Religious belief and god worship has a horrible history, throughout the ages, of violence, violence and more violence.

The study of Christianity that can only be really successfully conducted when a person is planted in a church, with good Pastors and Vicars, was once mandatory for a career in the law. Nowadays, the study of law is done in universities, with no reference back to the Christian roots from which it comes.

Psalm 92 verse 13, Those that be planted in the house of the Lord, shall flourish in the courts of our God, predates the Christian era, but the courts referred to were even then the courts of Almighty God. Who are we to think man can create something better. We elect arrogant politicians, who have no intention of keeping impossible promises, and we have elevated them into a collective God Structure. The problem is we have elected nine sets of them, all competing to make Statutes, to personally enrich themselves and the legal profession, from whom an extraordinary number are drawn.

We have a Constitution, but both Chiffley and Menzies chafed under that discipline. To stop accountability, in 1952, they closed up the universal nature of the Federal Supreme Court with the High Court Rules 1952, and Order 58 Rule 4 subrule 3, so that no one could easily access the power and glory of Almighty God in the Federal Supreme Court. In 1979, these same people led by the Liberals changed its name to the High Court.

When Fraser created the Federal Court he made it a secular Court, not a Christian court, or much legislation that clearly oppresses individuality and freedom would be disallowed. What is so good about KR is that he is planted in a Christian Church, and made a promise in 2006, that he would abide the Constitution in Government. What is not so good is that he is still surrounded by atheists and hypocrites, in the career public service, who serve the other team. He would do well to heed Shakespeare; If you would a kindness do, do it quickly, for delay in doing kindness takes the kindness all away. Rudd can fix homelessness immediately, and so can Anna Bligh

to david muslims have their own miracles[1.460.000 search result
http://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=gd&q=muslim+miracles&hl=en-GB&rls=MEDA,MEDA:2008-36,MEDA:en-GB

to others
no doudt there are other so called miracles for jews[2,480,000..results]
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rls=MEDA%2CMEDA%3A2008-36%2CMEDA%3Aen-GB&q=jewish+miracles&btnG=Search&aq=f&oq=&aqi=

xtian 8.090.000
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rls=MEDA%2CMEDA%3A2008-36%2CMEDA%3Aen-GB&q=christian+miracles&btnG=Search&aq=f&oq=&aqi=g6

buddhist...6.380.000
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rls=MEDA%2CMEDA%3A2008-36%2CMEDA%3Aen-GB&q=buddhist+miracles&btnG=Search&aq=f&oq=&aqi=

hindu 9,120,00
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rls=MEDA,MEDA:2008-36,MEDA:en-GB&ei=hoxZSpylEouqNuWjoUM&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=1&q=hindu+miracles&spell=1

so its a basic human condition...to see the miracles...its not even a thing held to those with faith...atheist miracles...[rebuttals no doudt 6.240,000
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rls=MEDA,MEDA:2008-36,MEDA:en-GB&ei=6YxZSsy2N4akMa2pkUM&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=1&q=atheist+miracles&spell=1

seeing miracles is no big thing...but are we to believe that gods son..made his first miracle giving drunks booze...its just plain nuts...look at the deaths from booze..[the crime from booze....go to any hospital on firday night...see what booze does

think..amoung jesus last words he bespake..was only new wine from now on..[go figure..grape juice dont ferment in heaven]...faith is a great healer[as jesus actually said..[your faith has made you [whole?..or well]...also on the faith thing about having the faith to move mnountains

god can do anything...but just like a mature man dosnt need to force people into obeyances..neither doth god...those who judge god the origin of any vile...dont get god...

anyhow thats it..believe if you have it..[disbelieve if thats your want..[as it says near the end of revelations 22;11 let him who does right continue to do right,..and him who is holy continue to be holy..

rev 22;18..[but none try to be holier than thou deservith..for it comes with great accounting]..above all decieve not the children of love[god]..ok yeah i made the last bit up...but read the quote thyself[]

Master wrote: Religious people are amongst the most violent, intolerant and murderous people.

Dear Master,

You are absolutely right. I was telling you about the belief when I wrote, "Jews believe that the important thing is to lead the righteous life". I was not claiming the belief has been always followed. However, one flaw that Judaism does not have that both Christianity and Islam have is that is not a missionary religion. Jews do not believe they have a divine mission to get other people to adopt those beliefs. The actions of the Israeli government and any other government connected with religion that uses the religion to justify its acts is a good argument for the separation of religion and state. All religions can exhibit intolerance, but the missionary religions have it built in to a greater extent. Those who do not accept their mumbo jumbo are "depraved, alienated etc." until they come to the 'true' faith. With all its faults Judaism does not have that one.

I've met Jewish people in my time, and especially one Rabbi, who "very much" wanted others to convert.

I think Judaism has not been a "missionaty" religion, of the type shown by Christianity and Islam, because it has not historically had the same type of opportunities. The history of Judaism is MARKEDLY different to Christianity and Islam.

As far as I'm aware (please correct me if I'm wrong), there's no doctrinal prohibition against Jews seeking converts.

Ahh yeth Mathter, what an intelligent piece of work your response to me was.

You assert things that you haven’t a clue about as though they are undeniable facts. We’ve had a grand total of about three exchanges on this forum. You don’t know me and you can’t assert anything about me.

Perhaps you’d like to explain to all the good OLO readers why you choose to be as offensive as you can possibly muster. I haven’t said anything offensive to you have I? I’ve offered my viewpoint….and you can’t handle it!!

Instead of entertaining the debate and asking me to explain my statements, you just launch into an extremely subintelligent rant. How old are you? 80something. More like 8, mentally at least!

Have a nice evening won’t you.

.
Now, the simple comments I have made in my last three posts are not without solid foundation.

If god exists, then what the hell is he doing?? ?? Oow, sorry OUG, I mean she. Why is he...er she.. taking humanity directly away from a sustainable existence, thus taking us towards an enormous upheaval and taking billions of other creatures and thousands of whole species out as well?

What’s it all about? How can anyone possibly believe in god once they are mature enough to see how the world operates?

ludwig quote<<..my last three posts..are not without solid foundation...>>..interesting back-story there..im sure..let me guess over zelious/parentals...or two faced..believers...

anyhow..if it removed your belief..in the good of god..it wasnt a solid foundation...neither was mine...mine told me..not to bother with god.

<<If god exists,then what..is he doing??>>...i can only tell you..that a builder..builds your house..[then lets you get on with furnishing/living in it...trusts..you will use it..as intended...

with god..think god as..the means..to give us life...then lets[trusts]..you..to chose..how to live it

<< Why is he...er she..>>gods..beyond sex..but we are free..to think of god..as we chose

<<why god...taking humanity directly away from a sustainable existence,>>...i need to disagree...look at the birds/animals etc..they seem to have means of survival...not spending..one second of concern...loving god..should not be stressfull...

i use god to switch off my concern's...i figure if its difficult...then spiritually..there must be something to learn from the situation..

[what me worry?..lol...i trust god to sort out anything bigger than i think i can handle myself...havnt had to yet...but..its nice to be able to not concern or worry

<<,humanity away..from..thus taking us towards..an enormous upheaval and taking billions of other creatures..and thousands of whole species out..as well?>>..its/thats not in gods plan..;ie not to bring on armogeddon...if that comes..[and it wont]..its from nutters that got the wrong idea of god...[god isnt pleased with murder...he is life giver..[not life taker..he is love..[not served by hate]...

yes there are vile..that would gladly genocide/murder/abort...but god heals all wounds..[this is but the playpen...the real eternal/life..comes hereafter...

an imperfect life time here ..against an eternity of perfect...and if im wrong..i die guilt free..and lived with high hopes and joy...gave love for hate

<<What’s it all about?..>>spiritual evolution...god wants equals..[god is one..that gets lonely...he knows all...that can get to be a huge concern......am i..lol..trusting..'my'..creation..too much...not enough...god needs no reason..[nor men to explain..[we can know god one to one...personal/god...needing no intermediatries

<<How can anyone possibly believe in god once they are mature enough to see how the world operates?>>.this realm isnt perfect...[to our judmental eyes...but if we can know one thing...god gives justice in the end...[and grace]

Ludwig,
we've been using creation mythology
to accumulate knowledge
from the beginning of time.
nowadays god is our hard drives.

Luddite (Ludwig) wrote, "God'th a bloody bloomin blithththtering dthrongo"

and

Luddite (Ludwig) wrote, "God's a bloody drongo"

and

Luddite (Ludwig) wrote, "God's a bloomin drongo"

Boy Luddy, keep up the intelligent, insightful posts ol' boy!

Der gee Mahther, that’s say s it all. What a wonderful contribution this debate! Just a repeat of what you’ve said before, with absolutely nothing new!!

You really are shaping up to be the lowest quality respondent that I’ve encountered in my three and a half years on this forum.

Why did you bother with this last post, or any of your responses to me? If you are completely disinterested in debating the subject of the thread and only interested in being strongly offensive, then I will invite you F off right away from this forum forthwith. Do yourself a favour and read the forum rules old boy.

I thought about asking you a couple of questions to try and steer you back on to the debate at hand, but I think I’d be wasting my time.

Thanks OUG for your thoughtful response. Appreciated.

Yes Whistler, it seems that the belief in god and all the terrible future-destroying stuff that goes with it is hardwired in our brains, and that only a very small portion of us can override it and practice commonsense atheism.

Is God Black?

LOL!

Dear Master,

Judaism has no doctrinal objection to conversion, and some Jews want gentiles to convert. However, that is not a majority attitude.

Christianity enjoins Christians to spread the Gospel. Judaism contains no such injunction. Christianity holds that only through Jesus Christ is a person 'saved'. Judaism holds that it is only necessary to lead a righteous life.

You brought up the actions of the state of Israel. Israel is not Judaism. Jews outside of and within Israel have many differences with the state. Some orthodox Jews such as the Satmar completely oppose the state since they believe that only God should return the Jews to Israel. In Israel itself there are many groups of Jews with many different attitudes. One problem is that the Christian Zionists in the United States have backed the most reactionary political elements in Israel. Google Christian Zionists.

I prefer democratic nations that make no distinctions among its citizens on the basis of ethnicity or religion. I favour separation of religion and state and oppose government subsidies for religious schools in both Australia and Israel.

Judas Maccabeus conquered the Idumaeans around 163 BC. They were again subdued by John Hyrcanus (c. 125 BC), who forced them to observe Jewish rites and laws. The Hasmonean official Antipater the Idumaean was the progenitor of the Herodian Dynasty that ruled Judea after the Roman conquest. Herod was a horrible tyrant. He is mentioned in the New Testament as an oppressive ruler and is considered such by both Christians and Jews. Herod’s legacy affected Jewish attitudes since he descended from people forcibly converted. Not only would Jews no longer do that, but also they would require prospective converts to make the approaches. This is tradition not doctrine.

Another reason for the Jewish attitude was the death penalty in many parts of medieval Europe for Christians who converted to Judaism.

My synagogue has classes for people who want to convert, but they must approach us.

Rainer,

I didn't realise he took vacations.

I reckon he was missing for most of the last century, or possibly thought "Oh Damn" and went back to the drawing board.

Ludwig,
You stated; "only a very small portion of us can override it and practice commonsense atheism".

Could you please outline what is "common sense atheism".

What is emerging from this discussion for which I thank you all, is that almost everyone is unaware of how Christianity is woven firmly into the very fabric of our society, and how this benefits everyone, from the many and varied belief systems who post here, as well as the Christians who make up a claimed 65% of the population.

All of the criticism of Christianity leveled at it, have occurred because of the conflict between the Roman Catholic Church on the Continent of Europe, and the English catholic Church, which called itself the Church of England. I do not know how land tittles work in Europe, but in England and Australia all land is owned by Almighty God, Her Majesty Elizabeth the Second is the Trustee of that land, and She grants it on the sale by a State to an individual as Land in fee simple.

As part of that Christian Principle, to protect the individual against the State and separate Church and State from 1290 and the Statute called Qaia Emptores, in force in New South Wales to this day, as S 36 and 37 of the Imperial Acts Application Act 1969. It is so important I will repeat it, because it affects every property owner in Australia.

36 Alienation of fee simple
Land held of the Crown in fee simple may be assured in fee simple without licence and without fine and the person taking under the assurance shall hold the land of the Crown in the same manner as the land was held before the assurance took effect.
12 Charles II c 24-The Tenures Abolition Act 1660 -s 4.

37 Tenure
All tenures created by the Crown by way of the alienation of an estate in fee simple in land after the commencement of this Act shall be taken to be in free and common socage without any incident of tenure for the benefit of the Crown.

These two sections give a freehold landowner jurisdiction over his own land, because socage meant the right to plow and harvest the fruits of the soil. TBContinued.

Because Christians believe Almighty God keeps his word, and is truly in a Covenant with us, for our benefit, the Magna Carta was enacted in 1297, but not wholly transcribed in New South Wales. It is wholly transcribed in Victoria, and by s 118 Constitution, is able to be cited anywhere in a Federal Court. It says:

Clause 29: No Freeman shall be taken, or imprisoned, or be disseised of his Freehold, or Liberties, or free Customs, or be outlawed, or exiled, or any otherwise destroyed; nor will we pass upon him, nor condemn him, but by lawful Judgment of his Peers, or by the Law of the Land. We will sell to no man, we will not deny or defer to any man either Justice or Right.

The word We twice in Clause 29, denotes the Royal Plural, Almighty God and Her Majesty Elizabeth the Second, and the word Royal denotes the nexus between Almighty God and the Sovereign upon which all land titles are based. The Law of the Land referred to in Clause 29 was and remains Christianity, and is incorporated into the Australian Constitution by the inclusion of The Queen or Her Majesty, at least forty times in its text.

Freehold land has value, jury trial guaranteed that in all cases where its ownership came into dispute, and jury trial comes out of the New Testament. There were Judges in the Old Testament, but a blanket prohibition on judging in the New Testament. To get around that Biblical prohibition, the English Christians legislated to have twelve disciples of Jesus Christ form a court, with a Justice to preside, and take their verdict. Jury trial is a manifestation of the promise of Jesus Christ, to be where two or three are gathered together in His name: Matthew 18 :20 A Writ called a Christian meeting together in the Queens name.

In Luke 12 verse 10, Jesus Christ warns against blasphemy, which occurs when a Judge sits without a jury. The legislation creating Judges should be deeply offensive to all Bible believing Christians of all denominations

Rainier: << Is God Black? >>

That's what I thought too, when I first read the thread title :D

Might have been an interesting discussion...

G’Day Philo

What is commonsense atheism?

It is simply the practical management of our wellbeing and future, with the understanding that there isn’t any god figure that is going to help us out.

Ludwig. Its a little deeper than that. But not bad. Remember the baby boots. Mankind still has a long way to go, but it is working.

Sock.

Davidf, thanks for that reply regarding Judaism. I appreciate that, as I'm not familiar with it as I maybe should be.

Luddite (Ludwig) wrote, "Der gee Mahther" "God'th a bloody bloomin blithththtering dthrongo" "God's a bloody drongo" and finally "God's a bloomin drongo".

Poor ol' Ludditewig struggles sometimes.

Ahhh hahahaha. Another maththterpiethe of a potht Mathter!

.
“baby boots”? Could you elaborate Sock. Thanks.

.
OUG, there seems to be a contradiction in your last post:

“<<If god exists,then what..is he doing??>>...i can only tell you..that a builder..builds your house..[then lets you get on with furnishing/living in it...trusts..you will use it..as intended...

with god..think god as..the means..to give us life...then lets[trusts]..you..to chose..how to live it”

But then…

“[what me worry?..lol...i trust god to sort out anything bigger than i think i can handle myself...havnt had to yet...but..its nice to be able to not concern or worry”

You seem to be saying that god has built and furnished our world and then left us to get on with our own management and destiny. But then you say that you rely on god to sort out the problems that are too big for you (or for man overall?) to deal with.

We are obviously doing a very poor job at managing our future, and we haven’t done a particularly good job of managing our affairs at any time, with all the world’s conflicts and inequality.

So can I ask, which do you believe…. that it is up to man to sort out the mess that confronts him, of his own making, or should the faithful be appealing to god to sort it out?

There’s a very worrying aspect in your words, which I think is a major negative factor to religions worldwide, and that is the inclination to abdicate one’s responsibilities, concern or worry by trusting in their god figure to sort out their problems, rather than taking on the tasks themselves.

This sort of belief just leads to the continuation and escalation of big problems that people find hard to deal with. It effectively results in a blind eye being turned to them or in peoples’ energies being put into faith and prayer activities rather than into directly addressing the issues.

i love god..thus accept the contradictions...just as science has accepted a quark can symoultaioniously appear at different places..you deney gods egsistance thus need to point them out...and because i love god i will try to rationalise the way of the unseen.

the cause of causes has a policy of allowing freewill of our belief, thus..dosnt work via obvious ways..ways..that would indicate and evidence..beyond doudt..the proof of his sure egsistance..that would remove say..your freewill to disbelieve

god works by subtil co-incidences...an unseen hand..[that helps..[not hinders]..those who sustain their belief in the onipresent..[omnipotant]..as well as the unbeliever..who are more foolish for their failure to appriciate those chance events..that they dismiss as mere luck or coincidence

noting these unseen fortuinate[luck]..events are all ways positive..or if seemingly negative[at the time...later reveal themselves to have been a better option than what would/could have been

no evil comes from good/god...any that ascribe the negative..[to an act from the positive are clearly mistaken...anyhow its a thing where words fail to do justice...if your not sealising god with us[emmanuel] means god is with[in] you right this moment..well thats your free choice...god would never interfere with your choice to believe or disbelieve

it makes me sad people miss the amasings hand even in the mundane,but its your choice...maybe you have learned to apriciate shakespear[or poetry]...

but i have never been taught/nor learned..to appriciate them...so naturally..[for me]..they are pure tripe..but those who love meta or cadences or lust of murder..just love those meaningless bits of[what is to me..verbal diareria..

just as my rambling on about gods good seems...no doudt to..you..[who simply hasnt sought..to know..the ever loving...its the same thing..[how does it go..[seek and find..[dont seek..never find]...its faith then belief..[i guess]

Ludwig,
What superior wisdom do commonsense atheists have above those you supose are still have primitive mind sets. sockpuppet are you the font of intelligence found in atheists viewing theists in baby boots.

Ludwig, where are we heading if we follow your common sense? Past generations have all considered they used common sense in the development of combustion, the industrial revolution and medical technology. What do you view as common sense? Going back to primitive living and allowing nature to take the lives of the weak?

Rainier & CJM

I thought the same thing. Good to know there are others who share similar ways of looking at things.

As for the actual topic, it has no meaning for me at all given that I never considered god to be present ever.

Cheers

Dear Houellebecq,

Welcome back!

In answer to your question - No - I don't watch
"make-over," shows.

I prefer - "Australian
Story," in that genre.

Back to the subject ...

There are many ways of thinking about God.
Agnostics question the existence of God.
Atheists deny God's existence.
Theists believe that a Supreme Being exists.

Many theologians have used rational arguments to
defend the existence of God. Some have developed
cosmological arguments, which state that a first
cause must have begun the process of creation,
a cause that must be God. Others have set forth
teleological arguments based on belief in a grand
design or purpose for the world that only a supreme
God could have created.

Many others feel that, "God is dead," They argue
that the traditional image of God as a father figure
with supernatural powers does not reflect the modern
world's scientific view of reality.

Others have kept the idea of God - but have not used
names that are personalized or limited.

For many years it was widely felt that as science
progressively provided rational explanations for
the mysteries of the universe, religion would have
less and less of a role to play and would eventually
disappear, unmasked as nothing more than superstition.

But, there are still gaps in our understanding on the
ultimately important questions - of the meaning and
purpose of life and the nature of morality.

Few people would utterly deny the possibility of some
higher power in the universe, some supernatural,
transcendental realm that lies beyond the boundaries
of ordinary experience, and in this fundamental sense
religion is probably here to stay.

Ludwig wrote;

"God's a bloomin drongo"

"Der gee Mahther"

"God'th a bloody bloomin blithththtering dthrongo"

"Ahhh hahahaha another maththterpiethe of a point Mathter"

"God's a bloody drongo"

Woops, in my last post that should have read ‘abrogate one’s responsibilities’. Not abdicate! (:>|
.
OUG, you wrote;

“…no doudt to..you..[who simply hasnt sought..to know..the ever loving...”

Oh I have sought to know. For some years I was open to the possibility of embracing Christianity, Hinduism, the Baha’i faith or whatever religion might have fitted with my deep love of nature, strong environmentalism and sustainability ethic.

But in the end, for all the good aspects of these faiths, I found the very concept of believing in a god figure to be too much at odds with a world that is governed by the laws of physics and ecology and in which I can see no sign of divine intervention and a whole lot of dog-eat-dog, eat-and-be-eaten, survival-of-the-fittest, no-mercy-given-to-the-weak, very-high-infant-mortality-rate-in-just-about-every-species-of-plant-and-animal-on-the-planet sort of stuff.

Of course, I have a fundamental problem with Genesis 1:28: "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over every living thing that moves upon the earth."

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/attenborough-genesis-it-can-go-forth-and-multiply-1521668.html

David Attenborough says that the bible is to blame for the devastation of the planet.

I’m not sure I’d go quite that far, but I reckon the bible or the Christian faith (or any faith?) certainly hasn’t helped stem the rate of devastation one iota.

So it’s a godless world to me.

One thing I've found about atheism is that many of them are open to "movement" regarding their non belief in a deity. This is my personal experience over my 81 years on this planet regarding my conversations with non believers and my diverse readings on the subject.

However, I have found the fundamentalist god worshipers to be utterly inflexible regarding their beliefs; people like PtB and oug etc etc. They are absolutely convinced that only "THEY", and those who share exactly the same specific beliefs, know the "true" pathway to God. their mind boggling arrogance in this regard does a disservice to religious belief, and is historically a major factor in international conflict from thousands of years ago to the present time. If God really exists, I bet the arrogant and smug fundamentalists will "themselves" be judged harshly when they go through the Pearly Gates expecting an easy ride to Nirvana. I'm sure that horny old bloke in "that other place" will be welcoming them with open arms.

“What superior wisdom do commonsense atheists have above those you supose are still have primitive mind sets [?]”

Philo, the obvious 'superior' wisdom that I can envisage straight up is that they realise that it is man that has to fix his own mess, and that relying on god or spending any energy appealing to god, is not only a waste of time but is very strongly negative because it just allows the mess to get progressively worse through lack of remedial action or development of practical solutions.

‘What do you view as common sense? Going back to primitive living and allowing nature to take the lives of the weak?’

Not at all. The most commonsensical thing of all is to strive for a sustainable existence - to make sure that we are living within our means in an ongoing manner – to understand the relationship between the demand that humanity is exerting on its life-supporting resource base and to work towards modifying this demand in several ways – by population stabilisation, reduced profligacy and technological innovation, as well as shoring up the supply capability of resources that are potentially renewable but currently being exploited unsustainably. There are all sorts of other aspects of commonsense thinking and actions, but that is the most important stuff.

Mind you Philo, there is not a particularly strong relationship between atheism and commonsensical thinking. Few atheists are commonsense or sustainability-progressive people, while many people of various faiths are. A strong faith doesn’t necessarily have to prevent people from seeing what needs to be done and acting on it.

masters quote<<..god worshipers..utterly inflexible..;They are absolutely convinced..only.."THEY"..and those who share..exactly the same..specific beliefs,...mind boggling arrogance>>..feeling better now..master..lol

there is no doudt..many have gotten god..'wrong'..never the less..god has grace...except..if we deliberatly set out to injure others..[or deliberaty lead people from god..we cant really go far wrong..simply by loving others...no one has the exclusive franchise to love...and thats what god is...if zeal injures others..thats a different matter

i didnt reply ludwig..<<....we..haven’t done a particularly good job of managing our affairs..at any time,..with all the world’s conflicts and inequality>>.i agree..but,..we do the best with..what we have got to work with...

as jesus reveals..love goes a long way...[be we athiest or thiest..or..[im reminded agnostic..even zealot]

<<which../..you believe...that..it is up to man..to sort out the mess that confronts him,.of his own making,.or should the faithful be appealing to god..to sort it out?..>>if god fixed the mess,..to what learning..[growth]..we must learn to sort sheep from goats...tares from wheat..for ourselves

<<..There’s..the negative factor..to religions worldwide,..and that is the inclination to abdicate one’s responsibilities..concern or worry..by trusting in their god figure..to sort out their problems..rather than taking on the tasks themselves.>>i agree..if our children never learned to walk...we would be carrying them arround forever...if we didnt give them meat..they would look to suck their mothers milk for eternity

..<<..a blind eye being turned..to them..or in peoples’ energies being..put into faith and prayer..activities..rather than into directly addressing the issues..>>..many have gotten the prayer thing incorect...but who am i to judge...

used correctly...prayer is a device and reason..to forgive each others foolishnes and allow us to move on...or a way to visualise/verbalise..a way out of impossable situations..or a way of giving strength...or a way to realise the unseen..

prayer is no small thing...prayer isnt..'for god'...its for us/mankind..[and FOR..others]...god knows whats in our heart...but the comforts of prayer,..is not a thing to be valued lightly,..prayer is positive visualiastion..[amoung so many other things]...

for some..prayer is the only thing they have left...and it is a direct line to god...as long as..we treat it with the reverance and seriousness it deserves..its our greatest hope

No uog, I DIDN"T say that god worshipers were utterly inflexible etc etc etc.

I said that applied to "FUNDAMENTALIST" believers - - - - the fundamentalists are a MINORITY. The VAST, VAST majority of Christians and Muslims are not inflexible fundamentalists.

I've met MANY believers who are flexible, inquiring and open minded. My wife was one of them; my children are another example.

Ludditewig wrote, "that it is man who has to fix his own mess". Gee Luddy, I'm over 80 years old and vote Liberal and even I don't use THAT sort of antiquated language anymore - - - - women "DO" exist you know!

There are none so blind as those who will not see. There is overwhelming evidence that the Commonwealth was established as a Christian nation, and with Christian systems of government, that allowed all people of every faith to live in peace together. Since 1970, in New South Wales a small sect of atheists have taken over the Christian role, and abolished the Supreme Court and created a money making machine for themselves out of it.

The vast majority of people have common sense and the jury system acted as a distillery where this collective common sense was concentrated in the essence of the law as maxims. If enough juries decided similar cases in a similar way, a maxim was established that allowed a lawyer to predict with some certainty what would happen in a given set of circumstances. Juries are practically unbribable, and that is why Abe Saffron asked for them to be abolished and Rob Askin abolished them for him in 1970. How much money the Liberal Party was paid to do that will never be known. The SMH reported that Abe Saffron was paying Rob Askin $5000 cash a week in the 1960’s.

The spirit of the law was preserved when jury trial was the norm, and everyone knew they were entitled to a jury in all civil cases. Those of us who pray should pray that the seven Justices on the High Court, respond to the cry for justice from the people of Australia as Justices Kirby and Callinan did, and restore full jury trial to Australia following their pronouncements in the Pape decision on the 9th July 2009, on s 15A Acts Interpretation Act 1901 ( Cth).

It took the High Court three months to write, but the comments on s 15A are worth waiting for. If followed by the Federal Court this decision will give everyone a jury trial from now on. To fail to do so is to fail to apply s 79 Constitution. The problem with the High Court is that it is an exclusive club, and will not enforce Federal Statutes

women and men invented mythologies
of goddesses and gods to accumulate knowledge.
storytelling is an ancient art.
nowadays our godesses and gods
include stories told on the internet.

Mathter, your last post was about 3000% better than your previous several responses to me. Congratulations! However, you are still dwelling totally in the negative and picking out something that you can just be critical of, without furthering the debate.

Why don’t you have a go at responding to my views in a sensible manner? Or are you afraid to be seen to be basically agreeing with me? That is, to be agreeing with someone that you have made a point of hating, without foundation…simply because I initially expressed a view that you couldn’t handle.

Sensible debate with Luddie old mate. Come on, have you got it in you?

.
“i didnt reply ludwig..<<....we..haven’t done a particularly good job of managing our affairs..at any time,..with all the world’s conflicts and inequality>>.i agree..but,..we do the best with..what we have got to work with...”

OUG, I don’t think we’ve done the best with what we’ve got to work with by any stretch of the imagination, not overall nor under any particular religion.

The big problems that now confront us have been evident for decades, if not to all members of particular communities or faiths, certainly to the wise few amongst them. But rather than religions adapting to deal with these issues, they’ve terribly missed the mark.

Back in my naïve days, 30 years ago, I actually thought that religions did this sort of thing. That is, unite communities and cultures to deal with the big problems that plague them, and work directly towards protecting their future, based on the wisdom of the best old minds in those communities and cultures. But alas, how far from the truth it is!

So I reckon that we could do enormously better with what we’ve got, in terms of protecting our future and living more harmoniously with all the other creatures on this planet. And unfortunately religions are not helping us…and never have.

During this discussion as we were lounging in the Forum, the majority of our secular Gods, on the High Court brought down written reasons for their judgment to allow Kevin Rudd to proceed to fertilise the electorate with lots and lots of money. It took them about one hundred and eighty pages of writing to do so, and while two did not in any way say anything about S 15A Acts Interpretation Act 1901 ( Cth) five of them did, and what they said is significant. This was published on the 9th July 2009, and should be celebrated as Constitution Day, because it marks the day when the Highest Court in Australia admitted we have an effective and binding Constitution.

The decision is Pape v the Commisioner of Taxation, [2009] HCA 23 and if you are brave you may find it on the Austlii Website in Australian Document Collections. Justices French and Heydon had no comment on S 15A Acts Interpretation Act 1901 ( Cth), but Justices Gummow, Crennan, Bell, Hayne and Kiefel, said it applies, and said this about it.

389. The principles governing whether s 15A of the Acts Interpretation Act is to be applied to read down a statutory provision that in some operations would be beyond legislative power are not controversial. They are conveniently described in the joint reasons of five Justices in the Industrial Relations Act Case:

This means that the Gods have spoken, and God is back. They would if they are willing to take the opportunity, now be most likely on an application from an interested party, to read down which means strike down, the provisions of S 39 Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 and Order 46 Rule 7A Federal Court Rules as being unconstitutional, and also strike down or read down the provisions of their own High Court Rules 2004 in Regulation 6.6 and 6.7 that currently forbid people from raising Constitutional issues in the High Court.

It is now to be seen whether the High Court will follow its own precedent and restore the Queens name to all process issued.

Bryan Pape, also a barrister and states-rights champion, took on the might of the Commonwealth and lost.
The court has ruled that the Tax Bonus for Working Australians Act passed by Federal Parliament in February is valid under the constitution.

This decision marks the first time in a long time, that the High Court has moved quickly to make a decision, and it is a good decision, because it upholds the Constitution, which should be used all the time to discipline the States. The States have elevated themselves by their own boot straps to the position of Almighty God, and until the 9th July 2009, the High Court has never clearly said they cannot.

As self created Gods, the States have created Courts of the State God, and if you have ever been in one of their Courts, you will now be much poorer, and you will not have received much in the way of justice. The States Rights Champion, has done us all a very great favor, by making the High Court squarely face the fact that it is either a representative of Her Majesty Elizabeth the Second, the Australian Sovereign, or it is nothing.

It chose to be of significance, and even though two of them, French and Heydon said nothing about S 15A Acts Interpretation Act 1901 ( Cth), the other five strongly asserted that the Constitution is paramount.

If Bryan Pape who is also a law professor was duly diligent, he would also have raised as a significant piece of legislation, that abolishes State Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. That would have given the High Court a reason to either strike or approve its enactment. As it is now the Parliament of the Commonwealth is insignificant in the extreme. Parliament was treated with utter and complete contempt by the previous High Court, in the High Court Rules 2004 where they left the Queen’s name off all documents issued out of that Court. This is a direct contradiction of S 33 of the High Court of Australia Act 1979 . What happens now

Ludwig wrote:

"And unfortunately religions are not helping us…and never have."

In a threatening world religions gave security, explanations and a sense of community. In our society where many cultures meet and we have the explanations of science it is a divisive force, and its fables should be discarded. Some of its fables actually prevent us from solving problems such as the population explosion, the degradation of the environment and conflicts with those of other beliefs. The worst are the missionary religions such as Christianity and Islam. They both have the delusion that they have a truth denied to others and are therefore entitled to push it on others.

However, nothing has replaced the sense of community that religion gives. Humans may meet on line as on this list, at the work place or at the supermarket, but we live in our little separate nests.

My daughter lives in a place in the United States where there is a great sense of community not dependent on religion, but most people in our society do not.

With a sense of community not dependent on religion we can get together to solve problems caused by, exacerbated by or neglected by religion.

ludwig quote<<..I don’t think we’ve done the best with what we’ve got to work with by any stretch of the imagination,..not overall nor under any particular religion...>>mate how can we judge others fears[let alone see their hopes]we founded organisations with the best intent[like league of nations and the un...even the care groups,docters withoud borders/redcross

ok they have largly become vehivcles for ego based self agrandisment..but look at the bnasic intent behind forming them...its visionary...just like the current vision of the new world order...that yet again is selling a dream...but most people want to see the dream...see its good[for evil]..if we think there is no hope

yes the vile will allways make sure these things only serve their own adgenda...but thats a little group of cccrap...as the bible says on bit of leaven leavens the whole loaf...but that dont mean the whole loaf is bad...most people are good and honerable..but they trust others too much...but the fact remains its better to be abnle to trust..than be suss on everything

<<The big problems...rather than religions adapting to deal with these issues,they’ve terribly missed the mark...>>..perfection takes time..guess we been waiting for a saviour...but till all want peace the best we can get is a way to find peace within ourself..i try not to concern about stuff i can change...

<<Back in my naïve days,..I actually thought that religions..unite communities and cultures to deal with the big problems that plague them..work directly towards protecting their future,..based on the wisdom of the best old minds in those communities and cultures...But alas,how far from the truth it is!>>till people thirst for it..no one can force it to happen

<<we could do enormously better with what we’ve got,..in terms of protecting our future and living more harmoniously...unfortunately religions are not helping us…and never have.>>..on the individual level..we are only responsable for our own selves...govts wont do it..religions arnt allowed..so it become individuals doing it for themself...find the peace within...things arnt as bad as the media needs us to believe

The Queen, Her Majesty Elizabeth the Second by Her Coronation Oath, represents Almighty God, and from the highest balconies and rooftops throughout Australia the cry should go out; GOD IS BACK.

In the Pape case, the assertion that the States are paramount and the Commonwealth is insignificant, was firmly put down by the majority.
After 109 years, the High Court has confirmed that the Parliament of the Commonwealth can make laws that apply to all Australians, even if the States don’t really approve.

The Coronation Oath can be found here: http://www.community-law.info/?page_id=456

The States have got uppity because they have created a parallel black justice system, that no longer subscribes to allegiance to Her Majesty Elizabeth the Second, the Christian Queen, but owes its allegiance to the local Law Society and Bar Association, and has steadfastly refused to accept the ruling of the High Court in such cases as the “Kable Principle”.

A black Satanic government is operating between the Parliament of the Commonwealth and the ordinary Australian people, erected by the States as an alternative to Christianity. That Satanic Government got its teeth kicked in on the 9th July 2009. The Kable decision in 1996, should have resulted in a wholesale rollback, of illegitimate and unauthorized conduct by State Judges and Magistrates, but because the High Court was but is now no longer a branch of the New South Wales Law Society, it has refused to allow any except those proposed by the Law Society Members to access its hallowed halls. Bryan Pape is a barrister, so he can come, have his argument accepted and argue, but no unrepresented person ever gets to do so.

How long will it be before the High Court starts to accept everything presented to it, have a look at the document and if it was not tried with a jury as was mandated before 1970, in New South Wales, and throughout Australia in 1903, when the Judiciary Act 1903 was enacted, and use s 44 Judiciary Act 1903, to send it back to its original court with a direction for jury trial. We wait

"Be always humble, gentle and patient.
Show your love by being
tolerant with one another."

Ephesians 4:2

Or put another way:

"Never look down on anybody unless you're
helping them up."

Dear Foxy,

You quoted Ephesians 4:2 as saying:

"Be always humble, gentle and patient.
Show your love by being
tolerant with one another."

Is that a good sentiment? If one takes it seriously, it can create a burden of guilt when impossible to carry out. I certainly can't always be humble, gentle and patient. I would amend it to: "Try to be always humble, gentle and patient." That still may not be reasonable. I think that might be a bit of advice given more often to women than to men. It might be better to recommend that one be humble, gentle and patient where appropriate. Sometimes one should be assertive. Religious injunctions are rarely given with caveats.

It is probably easy to be tolerant with those we love. However, tolerance should not be restricted to those we love so I think that should be amended to: "Show tolerance to opinions which differ from your own but are humane regardless of how you feel toward the person who expresses those opinions." I don't think we should be tolerant towards expressions of bigotry.

Of course Bibles can differ in translation. The King James Version of Ephesians 4:2:

With all lowliness and meekness, with longsuffering, forbearing one another in love;

“In a threatening world religions gave security, explanations and a sense of community.”

Agreed david f. But as per my last post: ‘in terms of protecting our future and living more harmoniously with all the other creatures on this planet,’ religions haven’t had much to offer.

Even security, explanations and a sense of community, engendered by religious faith, has not always been positive.

A sense of community has all too often resulted in a sense of mistrust or outright contempt for people in other communities, or for those in the same town that follow a different faith and who are therefore considered to be in a different community.

Explanations have all too often been complete fables, and as scientific information has come forth and shown some explanations to be wrong, the faithful have been very reluctant to let go of these fables, with resultant tensions.

A sense of security was false if the sense of community helped create us-and-them situations and tensions between communities.

Dear David f,

The sentiment I quoted was intended as a guide.
Something to strive towards. That's all any of us
can do. Each and every one of us tends at times
to be less tolerant of others than we know in
our hearts that we should be. The only thing that
any of us can be responsible for is our own actions
and our personal commitment to the attributes of
fair play and integrity.

Marianne Williamson in her book, "Illuminata,"
tells us that:

"The search for God is a lifestyle decision.
Fill your mind with the meaningless stimuli
of a world preoccupied with meaningless things,
and it will not be easy to feel peace in your
heart. Fill your mind with the things of God,
and peace will flow into you like water into
the ground... I've heard it said that
prayer is when we talk to God, and meditation
is when we listen..."

"Make every effort to pray from the heart.
Even if you do not succeed, in the eyes of
the Lord the effort is precious."
(from The Gates of Prayer:
The New Union Jewish Prayer Book).

http://www.bom.gov.au/tsunami/nsw_alerts.shtml

God not happy tonight.

To the rat musical. You are gold.lol

sock

Foxy wrote:

Marianne Williamson in her book, "Illuminata,"
tells us that:

"The search for God is a lifestyle decision.
Fill your mind with the meaningless stimuli
of a world preoccupied with meaningless things,
and it will not be easy to feel peace in your
heart. Fill your mind with the things of God,
and peace will flow into you like water into
the ground... I've heard it said that
prayer is when we talk to God, and meditation
is when we listen..."

Dear Foxy,

The above is an expression of belief that things of God are sacred and things of the world are profane. That is Christian dualism and not a Jewish belief. Some Christians see celibacy and denial as a good in itself. One is rejecting the things of the world.

Jews see things differently. The world is good. God thinks it is good. Genesis 1:31 "And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day." Food, sex, music, intellectual speculation, seeking knowledge and all other good things were put on this earth for humans to enjoy. A rejection of them is regarded as a rejection of God as we are rejecting what God has put on earth. That does not mean we should enjoy them to excess.

The world is full of things with meaning. Science is one way to find the meaning. The things of God are earthly things if you believe he has created them. Maimonides (1138-1204), the greatest Jewish philosopher was asked how one shows love for God. One cannot physically embrace God. God does not need sacrifices or offerings. Maimonides recommended using the divine mind God gave us to ask questions.

Jews do not regard prayer as talking to God. God has already decided what will be and is not changed by human pleas. The purpose of prayer is to find strength in oneself to live with what God has decided.

Dear David f,

It's always interesting reading your posts.
You extend my perspective on things.
I used to think I wasn't religious, and
perhaps I'm not. I don't like what organized
religion has done to the world, and I've come to
see that true religion is internal, not external.
Secularized organized religions have become,
in many cases, as calcified as other institutions
that form the structure of the moder world.
Our religious institutions have far too often
become handmaidens of the status quo, while the
genuine religious experience is anything but that.

Spirituality is an inner fire, a mystical sustenance
that feeds our souls. I agree with you the mystical
journey drives us into ourselves, to a sacred flame
at our center.

Religion means "to bind back." Its purpose is to
turn back into ourselves, to the well inside from
which we are endlessly creative. God is a well that
does not run dry.

A friend of Abraham Lincoln once remarked about him,
"He's so religious he's beyond religion."

Anyway David, as I said in my earlier posts - to each
his own. I wouldn't dream of imposing my views on
anyone else, nor do I feel that my views are necessarily
the right views for everyone else. They're simply -
right for me. For everyone else - I say - "Whatever
gets you throught the night!"

Take care.

Foxy,
What beautiful words! Most priests I know would endorse them, and often use as part of their sermons. Certainly those who had been secretly ordained in underground Churches in what used to be Communist Eastern Europe some 20+ years ago, and today have a following among the young unparalleled in the West.

When my daughter, while still a teenager, exhibited a similar selectiveness towards religion I told her this sequel to the story about the three little pigs:

After they learned their lesson, and all built their houses from bricks, they wanted to have some beautiful flowers in their gardens. So they went to a nursery and bought some plants. The first pig liked the flower, but not the rest, so she plucked its head and placed it on the ground in her garden. The second pig kept the flower and the stem but threw away the roots with the dirt they came in, because they were not as pretty as the flower. The third pig was wiser, she realised that the beautiful flower cannot survive for long without its roots. She planted the whole lot, mixing its dirt that clung to its roots with the soil of her own garden, etc.

However, you are right as far as traditional West is concerned: too much freedom corrupts and makes lazy those “religion professionals” who should be driven by spirituality; indeed, many among the hierarchy run on "religious inertia", become "calcified" as you put it.

When looking at the empty churches in e.g. Western Europe (and I presume also Australia, though last time I checked it was not as bad as here in Germany) I do not see how "religious institutions" are still the "handmaids of the status quo". More likely, they have become part of a permanent opposition to the status quo, a role they still have not learned how to play properly.

just one point george...>>religion professionals” who should be driven by spirituality;>>..sadly i feel thats where they went wrong

just as the 3 little piggies...have gone wrong..[ok two in your story]...but for me the main failings lie at the 3..the jew fails..because land/war/death/sepperation has become more important...and in common with christianity ritual..[and who says what]..has become more important than the whole flower[god]

i will call out the third..islam as well..[together the three pigs,..have dared to put the messengers..[..may peace be upon them all..]..and the messengers..holy texts..before the living loving good[god]...the personal loving god jesus revealed to mankind

we have seen where..words rituals and messengers..all have become more important than the lifegiver and his creation..[life]..when their reason for being is to bridge this realm[..and the next realm..into union..for our joint creater...

it is written that the veil shall faLL...but that love of neighbour is the sure path to god..[love]..

those serving the lifegiver...seem more obsessed with their own spiruality and rank..rather than bringing the spirit[..the eternal/living loving logic/love[god]..to the people..or rather the people..back to THE wholy/spirit

the churches and the state..are the status quo...they think to rule mankind..when they in truth were called to serve mankind...as jesus revealed ...he who would rule you will serve you...where is the humbleness of the servant..?...reflective..in the works of the church or the state...there isnt any..

they think them-selves..the flower...and as for the common people..roots..stuck in the muck of hell...let the stems and leaves police the roots into submission...

all the while those deluding themselves the flower..thinking..and if we cant convince even ourselves..of the living loving god[grace/mercy]...lets baffle them..[the one gods children]..with man-ure

Dear George,

Thank You for your kind words - and I loved
your "three little pigs," analogy.
It's interesting what you had to say about
the West. I think that many people turned
away from organized religion - but are now
coming back. But they're coming back not
as spiritually half-interested, compliant
congregants that many of their parents were
when they were growing up. They're coming back
with an interest in actually having a religious
experience.

Dear OUG,

Religious institutions, as such, are not the
only arbiters of religious experience. They do
not own the Truth, for Truth as you point out
cannot be owned. Nor should they think they hold
some franchise on our spiritual life. They are
consultants and frameworks, but they aren't God
Himself. We shouldn't confuse the path with the
destination.

oug,
As far as I could understand you (e.g. do you agree or disagree that "religion professionals" - i.e. priests, bishops, rabbis, imams - should be "driven by spirituality"?) I do not think your sermon contradicts what I wrote, except that the "parable of the three pigs" is certainly not about comparing Jews, Christians and Muslims. I think Foxy could understand you better, and I can only endorse what she wrote.

Foxy,
Again, wise words. Confusing the path with the destination is a widespread fallacy, closely related to looking at the finger without realising that it is pointing to the "moon" that many of our atheist friends are prone to.

Religious experience, as well as "compliance" with the teaching of this or that authority or Church, can (and often does) influence one's way of seeing things, but neither of them on its own should be a substitute for an authentic Christian world-view. Maybe this is true also for other religion-friendly world-views.

driven by spritituality..dosnt go far towards explaining spirit...what is spirituality?...is it rightiousness...well jesus had a bit to say about those thinking themselves more rightious

its just the word driven[seems a poor choice...we hear of the insane driven to suicide[for egsaple]..or the drive to success..or the drive to succeed..or parents complain their children are driving them up the wall...we have as clean as driven snow..[whatever that means]..see that driving is what demons do to the lowest of lost souls in hell..

jesus asked us to have passion...[not to be driven]..he asked what is salt that has lost its flavour...its nothing..except..i regard words as sacred..but the spirit as holy...

i agreed with most of what you say...you confided a strong story..[you gfifted to your own children]...a very good story/teaching

you were inspired..to expand the teaching of the three pigs seeking to ingrane another vital lesson/teaching fot those your driven to love...[or did you have a choice to love or not...driven seems so firm...but its your word and its all good stuff...

ok..maybe the church is full of driven people..and i see that drive is not suited to serving others...but clearly you and everyone else..thinks its ok...its your word and your story..i think if that is what you think thats fine..[ok too]

its not a big issue...anyone else would maybe disagree..and say the good outweighs the one minor not good...its only one word after all..i was simply driven..to point it out...just as you were driven to use driven ...

you say tom-ate-o...i say tom-art-oh...its the same fruit...

were just using our different/understanding..of the meanings of the words..were chosing to use..[that best explain the feelings were trying to convey..differently]..[.like god intended]...my illiteracy isnt helping...but this too was gods will

Dear Foxy,

You seem to have one of the most generous spirits of any poster so I hope you will forgive me for my disagreement with you.

You and others have referred to true religion. I don't think there is any 'true religion'. I think when people use the expression they might mean that true religion is the kind of religion they approve of. Often we use the word religion to mean the religion we are familiar with and assume that other religions share some of the same outlooks. That may or may not be true.

Manichaeism was a religion that lasted from the third to the eighteenth century. It is now a curiosity for antiquarians and historians.

Manichaeism regarded sex for bonding and pleasure as good and sex for reproduction as evil. The religion saw the good as scattered in sparks contained in the bodies of human beings. To defeat evil it was necessary to gather these sparks together. Creating more human beings scattered the sparks and was therefore evil.

Possibly no other religion has or has had a similar idea.

Ludwig said,"Mind you Philo, there is not a particularly strong relationship between atheism and commonsensical thinking. Few atheists are commonsense or sustainability-progressive people, while many people of various faiths are. A strong faith doesn’t necessarily have to prevent people from seeing what needs to be done and acting on it".

Ah Ludwig, you are beginning to talk some sense and admitting lack of belief in God does not determine commonsense living. In my community I as well as other believers have been leading the fight for the cause of sustainability and retaining ecological environment. This fact is the first commission given in Genesis to man in the Bible - replentish the earth and make it fruitful. The warning is given in Revelation the God will destroy those that destroy the Earth. Neglect or abuse has its own punishments found in fruitless rewards.

Very good Philo. Religion could be utilised so effectively to galvanise people into undertaking the right sorts of actions.

I would have thought that most religions would be intimately linked to the enormous problems that confront us and embrace them and implore their followers to take up the causes in a united and effective manner.

It is good to see that you are involved with this sort of thing. But as far as I can tell, there is scant little of it happening in religious circles.

Dear David f,

My apologies - I did not express it very well.
I did not mean to infer 'true religion,' as being
only the one I believed in - because as I explained
in another post - religious institutions do not
own the Truth, for Truth cannot be owned.
As I tried to explain - religious institutions are
consultants and frameworks but they are not God Himself.
We shouldn't confuse the path with the destination.

I tried to explain that spirituality is an inner fire, a
mystical sustenance that feeds our souls. The mystical
journey drives us into ourselves, to a sacred flame at our
center. The purpose of the religious experience is to
develop the eyes by which we see this inner flame,
and our capacity to live in its mystery.

David, Thank You for your kind words - They meant a great
deal to me because it is the spirit of the human being
which can fill me with more joy than anything in the
world. And that's what I've learned on my life's journey,
that my spirit is uplifted by these encounters. Yes, I've
met some bad people along the way. But I have also met
some amazing souls - such as yourself - and their/your
light fills me.

oug,
OK, if you do not like "driven" you can replace it with stimulated, motivated, and "spirituality" with faith, since I concede that spirituality - as understood e.g. by Foxy in the above post - usually refers to the "pre-rational" or mystical feature, component of faith. At least this is how Christians see it, although for some - e.g. Buddhists - it can be a level of awareness on its own, not necessarily related to faith in the Western meaning of the word.

So I would not try to "explain spirit" here, even if I had more than 350 words at my disposal. It is not an easy concept, and your definition or explanation will depend on the cultural and world-view context you approach it from. And, of course, for some spirit, spirituality, spiritual experience, might be just meaningless concepts or a state of mind reducible to explanations from within (evolutionary) psychology.

ok george motivated seems applicable..but then many arnt motivated by spirit...though it would be a foolishness to judge others motivations,..maybe..as a form of motive-ation..as in moved...

but..the matter is as nothing..to our thoughts on spirituality...so despite the word limitations..let us..try to begin to define spirituality...lol

first..i feel we need to find the underlying motivation of..life/love logic/light...grace/mercy..

all..we can presume to be affectations of the positivity of spirit...though spirit straddles a far greater being..than just the positives..manifested in these realms

thus spirituality is the gnosis..of the realised powers of spirit,..that together with law,..moderation and generosity realise the proper/eternal..and infinite fruits of spirit

sprituality is to spirit..what music is to dance...what melody is to song..without spirit there is no life/no light...no logic/no love..no emotions/no wisdom..no knowing of the difference of good and bad

spirituality thus..is the applied..wisdom/knowledge...combined with the intent and purpose inherant in realising the unseen...inextricably interwoven..in life and living...reality and communinality...logic and widoms...understanding and comprehention

which..via that able to be seen/heard/known..and that unseen/unheard unfelt/unknown...or beyond obvious knowing..yet has become know-able..at the personal[then communal/institutional area'S]..usually via personal revelations..past wisdoms/stories/lessons and learnings

..and that thus..is yet remembered and recorded,..applied and taught[preferably by egsample]..by deeds and by words to be...used or applied to better mankinds life experiences...into its better realisations..

..at this time and..in this place...hopefully to the betterment of all...as an act of love..that unites the percieved/reality with the hoped better possability..with the truth..best applicable to the knowable knowns..within the spirit of the beliefs..as commonly/intermitantly believed...or applied

sadly this ideal..is not..an ever/present..good fruit..of spirit and spirituality...fully realised or indeed reaLISABLE..at this time or place...

but..we may be comforted..that this perfect spirt/state..is not intended for in this realm..[but is promised and fullfilled in the next]

david f,

Is it your understanding that Herod the Great was appointed by Julius Caesar and that by the time of Augustus that the Annas were gaining ascendancy? These timelines suggest to some researchers that Jesus Christ was born 6/7 BCE.

Thiering suggests that the Herodians delegated teaching to the gentiles (godfarers) to the House of David with implications for Jesus ministry (and religo-politics). Moreover, Gibbon suggests that the first fifteen (so called) Christian bishops were Jewish. Only after Hadrian did the Christian Jews become a Latin religion.

I doubt Christans would recognize the historical account of the Jewish ministries and the exile to Pella. Do Jews recognize with the histories presented here?

PetertheBeliever,

Coronation Oath or Coronation Affirmation?

To be true to Christian scripture "yes" or "no" are affirmations not oaths, I suggest, and now cite:

"But I say to you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God's throne: Nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King. Neither shall you swear by your head, because you can not make one hair white or black. But let your communication be, Yes, yes; No, no: for whatever is more than these comes of evil." Matthew 5:34-37

Regards,

Oly.

Oliver wrote: "Do Jews recognize with the histories presented here?"

Dear Oliver,

I don't know what Jews generally recognise concerning Jesus' ministry. The statements I have made I get from my own reading.

Jesus' ministry really isn't of particular interest in Jewish history any more than those of Jacob Frank, David Reubeni, David Alroy, Shabbetai Zevi or the other false messiahs. Although Jesus lived and died a Jew a new religion was founded in his name. The history of that religion is generally of no more interest to Jews than the history of Islam is to Christians. It is of interest to Jews when Christians have engaged in persecuting or massacring Jews. Then it became part of Jewish history. Judaism has much more in common with Islam than it has with Christianity.

In my reading I gather the two most significant events in splitting Judaism from Christianity were the Jewish revolt of 70 CE and the reign of Hadrian. The followers of Jesus in 70 CE were divided into the followers of Paul and the followers of James, Jesus' brother. Paul sought and accepted gentiles, and James' followers were all Jewish. With the failure of the 70 CE revolt the followers of James were wiped out. Hadrianic law banned the circumcision of those who were not born Jews. Therefore, converts could not be circumcised. That was a great departure from Jewish custom, and the Jewish Christians decided to accept converts anyhow.

Gibbon is more read currently for the beauty of his prose rather than for his historical accuracy.

Almost all my knowledge concerning Jesus and the history of Christianity is from Christian sources. http://www.johnshelbyspong.com/bishopspongon_jesus.aspx is one source on Jesus. I have read other works by Spong. I have also read material by Karen Armstrong, Owen Chadwick, Hans Kung, Steven Ruciman, Elaine Pagels and James Carroll.

Dear david f,

An informative post. Thank you.

The First Jewish-Roman war is very significant in Jewish history, especially the demise of The Temple. Until reading your post, I didn't appreciate its importance to the Jesus ministry. If memory serves, the final straw from the Roman's perspective was the Jews (zealots?)attacked a Roman garrison, after the Greeks were permitted to contact a religious cerimony close to the Jewish Temple.

Robin Lane Fox is an interesting scholar/writer on the Christians and the Pagans.

Your point on Gibbon is well taken. Although, we are separated by a further two hundred years, our knowledge of the ancients is certainly greater than Gibbon and his contemporaries. Moreover, we have the Dead Sea Scrolls and rediscovered Gospels to evaluate.

Writing objectively about God seems to be thwart with risks or perceived risks, even into recent times and not only Salman Rushie's, "Satanic Verses". Wells, normally an excellent writer, seems nearly apologetic about the facts he presents in his Outine of History. I wonder if Dawkins could have written and published, "The God Delusion" as recently as 1930?

Despite history and science, I suspect, the God of the Gaps, will endure, pehaps for centuries. Yet, I wonder whether the traditional church (as an intermediary between Man and God) will continue to exist in its present form?

UOG! Humans have dug themselves into a no go situation and this does not help our collective minds reach our evolutionary goals. Religion is the product, and our minds, is the stage, and if we run it, neanderthal,s we become the common running.

Is this your foreseeable out-come?

Sock

You be the judge of that. This is what the Statute says, and all these Judges and Magistrates in Australia are supposedly sworn to allegiance to the Sovereign who says here, that in order to take this Holy Office, as Queen, I bend my knee before Almighty God.

CORONATION OATH

The Statute is 1 Will & Mary C 6 ( Coronation Oath ) (1688) and may be found in Halsburys Statutes of England Vol 4 Constitutional law. Section 3.
Will you solemnly promise and sweare to governe the people of this kingdome of England and the dominions thereto belonging according to the Statutes in Parlyament agreed on and the laws and customs of the same?
The King or Queen shall say: I solemnly promise soe to doe.
Archbishop or bishop,
Will you to your power cause law and justice in mercy to be executed in all your judgments
King and Queene
I will
Will you to the utmost of your power maintaine the laws of God the true profession of the Gospell and the Protestant reformed religion established by law? and will you preserve to the bishops and clergy of this realme and to the churches committed to their charge all such rights and privileges as by law doe or shall appertaine unto them or any of them.
King and Queen
All this I promise to doe.
After this the King and Queen laying His and Her hand on the Holy Gospells shall say,
King and Queene
The things which I have here promised I will performe and keep,
Soe Help me God.
Then the King and Queene shall kiss the booke.

This is faithfully reproduced from Halsbury’s Stautes of England 3rd Edition, dated 1960, so there can be no doubt whatsoever that it was in force in 1828 when the Australian Courts Act 1828 was enacted and adopted. If you look at S 11 of the Australia Act 1986 you will see that the Australian Courts Act 1828 is continued except for the abolition of appeals to the Privy Council.

Judges are not Christians, honest or loyal.

While I am posting, just so as you know how solid is the perfidy of the High Court and the members of the Parliament of the Commonwealth for the past sixty odd years, in exceeding their legislative powers, and failing to abide the Constitution, which is said to bind them, as judges courts and people, none capitalized. The Magna Carta comes from the same source.

Magna Carta 1297 Statute
Clause 14: [14] A Freeman shall not be amerced for a small fault, but after the manner of the fault; and for a great fault after the greatness thereof, saving to him his contenement; and a Merchant likewise, saving to him his Merchandise; and any other's villain than ours shall be likewise amerced, saving his wainage, if he falls into our mercy. And none of the said amerciaments shall be assessed, but by the oath of honest and lawful men of the vicinage. Earls and Barons shall not be amerced but by their Peers, and after the manner of their offence. No man of the Church shall be amerced after the quantity of his spiritual Benefice, but after his Lay-tenement, and after the quantity of his offence.
Clause 29: [29] No Freeman shall be taken, or imprisoned, or be disseised of his Freehold, or Liberties, or free Customs, or be outlawed, or exiled, or any otherwise destroyed; nor will we pass upon him, nor condemn him, but by lawful Judgment of his Peers, or by the Law of the Land. We will sell to no man, we will not deny or defer to any man either Justice or Right.

This guarantees the separation of powers completely. Church and State were one throughout Europe and there was no separation of powers. The Church as State was brutal, judgmental, criminal, murderous even, and was a Roman Catholic State throughout Europe.

The English did not consider Roman Catholic believers were Christians. Because of that they could be enslaved as convicts. This wrong thinking continues to this day except that the State now treats us all as Roman Catholic slaves, with no Christian civil rights

Australia was settled in 1788, because the English, believing Roman Catholics were not Christians, had just lost a war with the American Christians, over religious freedom, and needed they believed to have a place far from Britain where Roman Catholic prisoners, and proven unbelievers could be stored when they were not big enough sinners to be executed.

Those American Christians were helped by Roman Catholic troops from France, and French assistance was instrumental in their victory. There are still many Roman Catholic believers in Scotland, and Wales, and throughout England, as well as in Ireland, and today when they are mostly now literate, the hold of the Priests over them has diminished. They can read the Holy Bible for themselves and do.

It is only a matter of time, as people realise that we are dominated by a small pagan sect, centered in the legal profession, before as Christians we demand equal rights to Muslims, Jews, and Atheists, and mount a march down Elizabeth Street Sydney, to the Supreme Court with a demand that we be given back our religious freedom. The Rights at Work people clogged George Street for hours with their marching, and Christians should demand equality.

We as Christians of all denominations are slow to anger and have turned the other cheek for almost sixty years to slap after slap in the face from Judges. One of us John Wilson is in Silverwater Jail as I write. We will be mounting a prayer campaign to see him released.

We are all aware of the incident where another Peter was imprisoned, and while the people were praying, the gates of his prison were opened, and the chains on his body dissolved. The chains on every Australian forged by State Parliaments, and in conflict with binding Federal Law must be dissolved, and the Commonwealth of Australia restored to its paramount position.

It will be a mark of Kevin Rudd’s faith, if he keeps his word, as The Lord our God keeps his, and takes steps to restore to Christians their basic freedom to worship as they like

The Commonwealth enacted the Criminal Code Act 1995 ( Cth). It came is as law on the 16th October 2001. It is not being enforced at all. It is Labor Legislation, and I can understand the Liberal Party suppressing it. It completely screws up the agreements of COAG. The Council of Australian Governments, the rort that makes the States think that a State tail can wag the Commonwealth dog.

The High Court can uphold the Constitution, but Hawke, being a consensualist, instead of a confrontationalist, gave in to a request from the Legal Profession and the High Court to make them inaccessible, in 1983. In 1986, this should have been repealed by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights which as Schedule 2 to the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission Act 1986 bans discrimination. As a Federal Supreme Court the High Court should take everything sought to be filed, and make the State courts work as intended, as what Gaudron in Kable called the autochthonous expedient.

I say the High Court is willing, but the evidence of that is the Pape decision, where they worked swiftly for once in the last sixty years. In the Pape decision they said S 15A Acts Interpretation Act 1901 ( Cth) is not in issue. If its against the Constitution its not law. They could work swiftly all the time.

All they have to do is get Matt Grey or Deborah Carlshund, or any of the other Deputy Registrars to read the papers, and see if there has been a jury trial, or if it is in Original Jurisdiction. If either is the case, they have the power to use S 44 Judiciary Act 1903 and shoot it straight back to a State court for trial, directing it be with a jury. When that is done, the authochthonous expedient which did not require the Commonwealth to erect a separate Supreme Court in every State, is fulfilled; Its not rocket science, but basic jurisprudence.

19 out of 20 cases with juries settle because the judges of Ch III Constitution cannot be bribed

sock<<<..Humans have dug themselves into a no go situation and this does not help our collective minds reach our evolutionary goals.>>there are those who will be free to see things in this way...but the truth is were spirits having an incrnate experience

if the holy texts of all religions reveal anything its that...there is a clear sepperation of powers..be it prophet and their message...that makes them the 'prophet'...and the believers...or the more mundae of cause/affect...that of unseen cause[spirit]animating the seen

i see evolution as a spiritual concept...that is evolving us collectivly into higher levels of reality...to use the visual egsample of the evolutionary charts...we see life begin and mutate...eventually evolve to leave the oceans...and live on the land

as peter would know...we are under maritime laws..[defacto law of the merchant...contract law]..a judge is having the same omnipotant powers of a captain on the high seas...enforcing their will by threat...not the constitution...

this is an abstract way of seeing the laws of the seas has crawled from the depth of the sea to walk on the land..where we have dead incorperations[with their ,limited liability assuming the rights of living people...by the fiction of the person...but copmpanies are not living flesh and blood human...

they are dead corpses...in-corpse-oration...but in truth..[in the heavens they have no real..living/spirit..[thus no real'life'..on the evolutionally level of speaking..they are simply going to die off like any other mutation..that dosnt pass the test of love

FOR THEM..Religion is the product,and our minds FOR them are like putty they can reprogram at will by simple advertising,...fame for them is the stage,..and if we think we run it,..we best need think again...

but they are only dead legal fictions..in time those living beings sustaining the beast..will wake up to know..the beast[in corpse-orations]..ltd..is eating them TOO

sorry for not being able to explain it better...as jesus said let the dead tend the dea

Thank you OUG and peter for your interesting posts. No-one's Religious rights are under any threat, but the balance of power is now even with no upper level bully-ism. The time of making man jump through hoops of fear is nor practical or necessary. We evolved one's that know religion and its key importance's to worship in peace but some do not do this. ( if you cannot play nicely to what you don't understand, best to take it away for you ) like the boy with the firecracker. An unforeseen entity can create more, but law is the new reading. Every human on this planet has religion automatically woven into one's self and you can not take it out. You can thank evolution for this great gift, but it comes with warnings on its proper use.

1 Do not die for any God.
2 Do not live without spirit.
3 Do not move forward without fact.

Peter! If I didn't know any better, I swear in one of your posts, your insighting unrest in the force, may now you be warned.

Nothing has been taken from you.

You and others need to look deeper, and the hitchhikers guide to the galaxy, we can all read. That's right! The bible.
Its value is measured by the ones that teach it.

It took 5 million years to reach this point, and with proper translations of the texts, this will help us ascend into what the books expects of us, and that's to learn the minds of ourselves.

Nothing more and nothing less

Sock

YES! Some one forgot to close the back door! Close the doors before all gods and demons enter in!
Why sir do you want to scare us with all these gosts?
Please leave us alone in our loneness.

This post has almost exhausted itself, but one word before we all put it to sleep. If you think of Australia as a Church, a big universal catholic church, then you must think of the Prime Minister as the Head Pastor. Both John Howard and Kevin Rudd are like the pastor in a good Pentecostal church, as both are married and both had deputies, of greater or lesser talents.

The system of government adopted by the English in 1215 and fully settled by 1297 was one of democracy under the guidance of Almighty God and the Trinity. Unfortunately some of the Pastors in the English Church have listened to some heretics, got themselves a Jewish Pastor in Disraeli, and have taken to thinking the servant can be greater than its master. I am talking about the philosophy adopted by lots of lawyers that the Parliament is Supreme, even over Almighty God. You have only to look at Hitler and Stalin, and lots of other dictators to understand that this is a disaster, but the seeds of disaster are planted in our midst, when we have a Head Pastor who espouses Christianity, but condones atheism.

The two previous leaders of Australia have openly professed Christianity. The last one said he was a Christian but like the fig tree Jesus cursed, never to bear fruit again, that withered and died, the last leader of the Nation, was so cursed he even lost his own seat, in the furnace of popular unrest that followed on some real competition for the Christian vote. I am their leader, I must follow them, is supposed to be a joke, but in reality, the them is the Holy Trinity. Father, Son and Holy Ghost. This is the central philosophy of the English and American Governments under written Constitutions, and is not the central philosophy of either the Jewish nation or the Islamic nations that surround it.

All three are claiming to be Gods anointed. However the government adopted by the Arab Nations, and Israel has more in common with communist Soviet Russia, than it has with America

YES! Some one forgot to close the back door! Close the doors before all gods and demons enter in!
Why sir do you want to scare us with all these ghosts?
Please leave us alone in our loneliness.Posted by AnSymeonakis, Saturday, 1 August 2009 10:40:44 AM

At the end of the day, do you know what mans knows?
That's right, NOTHING! So today is no different to yesterday, and that's a fact.
If you were talking to me? Then As you wish.

Sock

i have enjoyed this topic peter

and yes..i feel the narrow gate is about to close..i should expand but am tired...consoled alone by the teaching of jonah...except closer to 30 days...or ninvah..[or sodom and gomora...the quote i would seek to seal the topic is..that of the questions presented to the angels

of finding ten good and true..it must have been the later...those resisting the lure of the vile..are getting tired...there is one living loving god...is that too hard to get...thinking the messenger is god..[may peace be upon them all]..is blasphomy...believing a lie is believing nothing

but i have said all i care to say..and will hope whistler return to correct.. or david with his wisdom..with their version of truth..quote<<..Both John Howard and Kevin Rudd are like the pastor in a good Pentecostal church,..as both are married and both had deputies,of greater or lesser talents.>>have we gained increace of the grace[talents]..our master..left with us?

agreeing that<<some of the Pastors..have listened to heretics,..and have taken to thinking the servant/flesh..can be greater than its master/spirit...>>or judgment day or the revelations of the insane

for different reasons agree<<..You have only to look at Hitler and Stalin,>>.but agree..<<but the seeds of disaster are planted in our midst>>...agree..but for different reasons,...lol

[treason]..is the central philosophy of the Jewish nation[upon all not chosen[goys]..and the Islamic nations that surround it....as you yourself reveal..<<All three are claiming to be Gods anointed.>>.

i can only agree..<<..Israel has more in common with communist/Soviet-Russia/...bolchovicvs,...>>>and will only explain that its the same bolchovics

[and natzie's that via banking/educating/acclimatising/media/lies..etc is running..the same moneychanging/pharosees/elite..sceme to realise armogedon..to bring flesh..to the unspeakable...going down at bohemia-grove as we speak....

and America...is the tool of the antichrist...that will collapse the money market..and attack the final remnants of persia..iran and gaza...for those zionista xtian holocaust/bolchovics..that anilated the tribe of juda...then wrapped themselves in the skin of the lamb they systematicly subverted and murded for THEIR 4th reicke...

but only love can save us

ab-origonals talk of dreamtime...were soon going into it...recall this..in thirty days when a lot of other topic's...we have also discussed.. gets closed for further comment..

sockpuppet
"If you were talking to me?"
No I did not talk to you! If I talk to you, you can hear me!
I spoke to ghosts! to my fantacy's ghosts.
Do you think only you can see them? even me I can see, feel and touch them!
Does my fantacy created them or they created my fantacy to see, feel and touch them?
I do not know. Leave me alone in my lonesness, in the real world, without ghosts, gods and fantacies

OooooooooooK then! sorry I asked.

Sock

sockpuppet
Do not be ungry!
I spoke to you in a language you can not understand in a language I can not speak or write!
Do you understand me?
I spoke to you with an internal language, a mind language, a hope and dream lunguage!
Do you understand me? Of cause you do!
If I can understand your ghosts and gods and demons the sure you can understand me!
sockpuppet
Ask Pythia to translate my language, she knows to read god's thoughts, even when they are hiden in human's dreams!
Now you know that I spoke to YOU!

Arr the mind of god? mmmmmmmm lol I think the chaser team would be proud of you Antos.
There,s just not enough laughter in the world today. Good luck to all the chicken Little's out there.

All the best and take it easy.

Sock