"We are invited to become what we are."

Been there, done that... thanks.

"Rather, the Being of Jesus saves us from thinking that we know good and evil and thus saves us from ideology and theory and returns us to ourselves."

Is itself both a theory and an ideology and where do you end up... yourself!

But, that is merely my opinion of such ruminations. On the 'up' side, you have achieved salvation by your own definition:

"Our salvation is not from the pains of hell but from ideas that we think are "clear and distinct" as Descartes would have had it."

Congratulations.

Religion is the conviction that history may be changed by ideas and force. The implication that religion is separate from and superior to ideology is an illusion of the author's.

Religion is an ideology. Religion justified: slaughters by Christian Crusaders; Anti-Semitism; countless religious wars in Europe; and the Spanish Inquisition. Religion is currently causing distrust, hatred and violence in Israel, Northern Ireland and civil wars in Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan.

There is also an increasingly documented correlation in Australia between Men of the Cloth and pedophilia.

There is also an increasingly documented correlation in Australia between Men of the Cloth and pedophilia. Pete has warned us.

Our Prime Minister is connected to the Cloth and Bike-riding (pedophilia is the Latin) and your television shows clearly bike-riding is full of men's sweaty bottoms all swaying in the breeze! Yuk!

Is it possible that the growth of cycling is a result of gay-lobby groups putting the bait, mate, before the public gaze while pretending it is a sport?

Should cycling be banned?

Yes cycling ex-Jesuit boxer "rode" scholars who entertain Big Business and brave Sir Knights should certainly be watched.

No matter how many times Sellick holds forth belief in superstitious mumbojumbo is nothing more than belief in superstitious mumbojumbo.

All his articles can be summed up by the proposition that such belief is worthwhile.

Peter (Sellick),
The contributors (so far) appear to having a laugh at your expense.

You need to visit an ethics class in a NSW primary school. There you would learn how helping young people to think, for themselves, about various ethical concepts such as human rights and consequently the rights of animals, some species of whom are exceeding closely related to us (the naked apes). Or you could hear discussions of fairness or honesty and thus maybe recognize that the students are developing a solid base of ethical concepts for themselves.

The students are learning how to think and how to make sensible decisions throughout the whole of their lives. The following generation will be raised by more competent parents, something dogmatic teaching cannot achieve.

Online opinion has a report on file of a trial that verified the outcome of conducting classes which discuss open ended questions between young peers.

Socrates was right well before those who wrote the New Testament put words into the mouth of someone who supposedly lived many years before the first four books of the NT were written.
Read; http://onlineopinion.com.au/documents/articles/Clackmannan.doc

Have to agree with Foyle, who as usual, puts everything into sensible, intelligible perspective! Leaving me with nothing else to add.
Rhrosty.

FOR ONCE PETER I AGREE WITH A WORTHY THOUGHT FLOW
DAMM caps...appart from using that big buzz wurd ontogogie
or oinalothology..why cant you speAK DOWN FOR ME?

so i will need reply pAUL

..<<>.Pete has warned us.>>.?

<<..Our Prime Minister..is connected to the Cloth..>>
so what/he thus can be shAMED INTO THE MAIN RULE/TRYING TO LOVE NOT KILL/IM FINE with enDING THE KILLING [the fesh being willing]

,,,<<and Bike-riding (pedophilia is the Latin)>>

DAVID PEDOPHILE..means simply child loving/lover of children]..ITS HARDLY AN INSULT AND A POOR INKAGE/EVEN IF PARTIALY TRUE..in some cases.but perhaps not in this inkage

<<.and your television shows..clearly bike-riding is full of men's sweaty bottoms all swaying in the breeze! Yuk!>

i agree/and woman arnt much better
too much like p teasing..but thats the game titivation..into deviance

actually talked of extensively ON JONSIE TODAY
http://rss.infowars.com/20140506_Tue_Alex.mp3

<<Is it possible that the growth of cycling..is a result of gay-lobby groups putting the bait,..mate, before the public gaze while pretending it is a sport?>>

mate its not just cycling
footy caters to the MIND NUMB OVINg the biff
[try going to a live game/you wil see its ainY RETARDS[OOPS JUDGE SAID DONT USE THAT Word]..but they are barin damaged masinly via heavey metal poisening [plud light METAL/TOO..IN DEODERANTS CREAMS WATER FOOD VACINES.PRESEVATIVES MUTAGENES ETC

so much so/that 30 YEARS AGO ONE IN 3000
has become tODAY ONE IN 32..RETARDED BY GOVT carelessness[hIgh treason]..but spi*riutual karms/this is satans realm/evil can ony claoim..its oWN..AND IKE THE DAYS OF OLD THEY SeE a uniform identity to provide their individual laCK

LISTEN TO THE FIRST HALF HOUR
IT WIL MAKE YOU SICk.or help wake others up

<<Should cycling be banned?>>

OF course not/the bible says let the wheat grow with the chaff/but dont let the sheep eat the goats..TILL HARVEST/THEN LET GOD JUDGE

WE THE JUDGE HAS BEEN JUDGING 50,000.years as the koran forETOLD
TIME IS NEAR UP/WE GROW UP.or the shop shuts up

Foyle,
Certainly part of the socialising of children include teaching them how to behave. I do not deny the worth of intellectual development. However, this is no the only way children learn, they model themselves on the behaviour of parents and teachers and their peer group. Teaching and modelling impinges on Being. People instinctively know how to act out of who they have become. What I am against is the idea that we act entirely out of intellect, as if, in each situation, we have previously decided between right and wrong acts. This approach is a product of Enlightenment thought that overemphasised autonomous rationality. I am proposing an ontological basis for ethics that is grounded in the Christian tradition.

Dear Sells,

Considering the Wars of the Reformation, the persecution of non-Christians by Christians, the persecution of Christians regarded as heretics by Christians, the Holocaust fueled by years of Christian hatred, the Spanish Inquisition, the burning at the stake of Servetus in Calvin's Geneva, the burning at the stake of Giordano Bruno in Catholic Rome, the support for Hitler of most of the German churches, the current evangelical support for the execution of homosexuals in Uganda and many other Christian inspired and supported atrocities Christianity lost any claim to moral or ethical leadership a long time ago.

Although Christians may be quite decent people the commitment to superstition is appalling.

Thank you Peter for another excellent and beautiful article. Keep up the good work!

<<No one now asks why we have an economy, what is government for, what constitutes true humanity?>>

I do... but then I'm not a product of the modern age.

Dear David F.,

<<Although Christians may be quite decent people the commitment to superstition is appalling.>>

Why then the commitment to the superstition of modernism, that airy-fairy belief as if the objective world is worthy of study and reverence; that irrational assumption as if it is good to lead our life on the basis of trying to achieve objective results?

Dear David G.,

<<Should cycling be banned?>>

No, but you just gave me a great idea: if I ride wearing a burka, then the cops will not find out that I wear no pot on my head!

your correct..wearing near anything..on your head
is a matter of freedom of belief..[via fed constitution..116/freedom of religion/OBSERVANCE...

thing is if i sO CHOSE I HAVE RIDDEN WITHOUT HELMETS A FEW times
and most coPpers got better things to do..A CLOSE FITTING SCULL CAP..

but i would tesT THE LAW/RIDE AT LEAST TILL YOU GET THE FIRST OFFER..[ABOUT THE PRice of a helmet.?]

"It is not important what we have, but who we are."
- St Pope John Paul II

.

The author wrote ...

.

« Ideology is the conviction that history may be changed by ideas. Particularly, it has come to mean that ideas can lead us into an improvement of the estate of man. We begin to see this movement with Francis Bacon (1561-1626) … Indeed the whole discipline of the history of ideas is predicated on ideas being the driving force behind history. »

The Oxford English Dictionary indicates the following for «ideology» :
[ 1.
a. (a) The study of ideas; that branch of philosophy or psychology which deals with the
origin and nature of ideas. (b) spec. The system introduced by the French
philosopher Étienne Condillac (1715–80), according to which all ideas are derived
from sensations.
b. The study of the way in which ideas are expressed in language (see quot. 1826).

2. Abstract speculation; impractical or visionary theorizing. Now rare.

3. = IDEALISM n. 1. Obs. rare—1.

4. A systematic scheme of ideas, usually relating to politics, economics, or society and forming the basis of action or policy; a set of beliefs governing conduct. Also: the forming or holding of such a scheme of ideas. ]

In fourth position, ideology is defined as «a systematic scheme of ideas … forming the basis of (all) action or policy» - including that of «history» - not just «ideas which one is ‘convinced’ will change history». As the author himself rightly points out, ideas are « the driving force behind history».

This means that, as the author suggests, by upholding «that ethics has a divine origin and any attempt to do ethics on our own will be demonic », Christianity is clearly just as much an ideology as all those he decries.

Indeed, religion is one of mankind’s oldest, firmlly entrenched ideologies, finding its roots in the fear, awe and wonder inspired by natural phenomenon for which we had no rational explanation. Those primordial animist religions evolved down the ages into today’s long list of religions, including Christianity :

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

Not only is religion an ideology, it is a political ideology :

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

.

.

(Continued ...)

.

"The end of Ideology", (the title of the article under discussion), would be the end of Christianity ... but I doubt that that is what the author wants.

Perhaps he was referring to his personal world view ... but I have my doubts on that too.

Just a misunderstanding, I guess ...

.

.

banjo....MAYBE idiology//synonumbs\\HERE
http://thesaurus.com/browse/ideology

ideology/noun
Definition..of IDEOLOGY
*the basic beliefs..or guiding principles..of a person or group

<members of that sect..follow an ideology
of nonviolence..and freely given cooperation..Love..of otHER.>

Synonyms.;credo,..doctrine,....dogma,.gospel,
ideology/(also idealogy),.philosophy,/testament

Related Words...manifesto;..metaphysic,.theory;..axiom,..tenet, watchword

Variants..of IDEOLO

THE POINT BEING..we are..sick of creed/division/that
has divided..the church..[BODY OF CHRIST]..when jesUS CAME HERE..NOT TO..found 'a church'..but TO RESTORE ALL/BACK TO..OUR FATHERS HOUSE[BY LOVE/GRACE/MERCY]..damm caps..

jesus came..to say worry notTAabout the TARES..[DEMONS]..GROWING UP WITH..THE WHEAT..because..AT DEATH...THEY GET SORTED.[for the rest of you..do not judge other..inDEED LOVE Sister..love bother..love one and other]

and whosover..shall adulterate or make..less..these pRIME COMMANDS
STAND GUILTY..OF ADULTERY/adulteration..[in its proper context/NOT AS THE DECEPTION]THE NANNY STATE....SAW..MORALITY/INITIATED.

the church...cant be intimidated/SPIRITUALLY
BUT..MATEREIALY.IT HAS BECOME A.. DIVIDED HOME..IF YOU LOVE CHRIST/BEGIN BY AT LEAST forgiving..OTHERS IN YOUR OWN FREAKING HOMES...[WE HAVE SEEN..THE INJURY/division/DIRE-VERSION..THAT CREED CAN DO

DAMM CAPS[the key..board is.breaking up[MY TIME/HERE..IS NEAR UP]..I MUST STOP..MY ANGER..BUT TILL ..THE BODY OF CHIST gets unity..evil shall reign..

nothing is more urgent..than leaving...your offering at the alter

peter..please note that carefully..
YOU KNOW..HOW VITAL TYthe..[nothing iS MORE IMPORTANT][presumably]
YET READ MATTHew 5....
Anger and Reconciliation
…23"Therefore if you..are presenting your offering...at the altar, and there remember...that your brother...has something against you, 24*leave your offering there...before the altar..*and go;

*first...be reconciled to your brother,..
and.[only]..then come and..present your offering.

25"Make friends quickly...

CONTEXT\23/
http://www.biblegateway.com/resources/commentaries/?action=getChapterSections&cid=1&source=1&schap=23

mat 5 applies/TO\CHRISTS DIVIDED HOUSE*
AS SAid previously...the other creeds[messengers].2..ARE SAINTS..TRUE SAINTS

WE ARNT..to judge
we arnt.to divide
let god,,decide/

FOR NOW..SIMPLY 'DO' AS..WE SAW OUR MASTER.*DO.

he took on..THE MONEY CHANGERS

YET/MC/TOok over\the church
GOVT TURNED BELIEF..INTO AN/APPROVED\Charity/
subject to..govt/licenCE..IE..[mans laW]

..IT HAS SOLD OUT SPIRIT/eternal/for material..street/merket..glory

LEAVE YOUR GIFT...where it is/*]
thyne gift..is 4 nought..[with what...was it bought?]..the cost price....is not near the eternal..l-EARNING...of/IN SPIRIT..[ETERNITY]...worth nuthin/OUTSIDE..this materialis ream

for what..is chists HOUSE DIVIDED..?
that/fools..confound the wisE

what trumps/over..FORGIVENESS/GRACE MERCY...FOR THE REPENTANT?

THE IdIO\logie..logic..WHATEVER
idiology...MUST not/die..bUT..IT MUST NOT..BE ALLOWED..any further..to..TO DIVIDE THE fathers..[not just the CHRISTS]..DIVIDED HOME

idiologie ?
lets moVE ON...divisive Di Reversions begone

Hi Peter,

I notice that you haven't adopted my suggestion of saying 'I' rather than 'we' when you make claims about the world which depend on your own opinions and experiences, rather than those of the seven billion other people who also occupy the planet. Apart from producing incoherent and misleading articles like this one, it also reveals a phenomenal degree of intellectual arrogance and a self-imposed blindness to the realities of life.

Most of us are quite happy with the current world. Most of us are delighted to have discovered a system of behaviour which actually achieves the tangible results that it promises. There is no 'we' -- there is only 'you'.

Please correct this oversight in future.

Peter,

An interesting sermon, although I am not sure this was the right place for it. By the way, the following might resonate with you

"The thought occurs to me whether we Christians have not in the course of history constantly fallen prey to the temptation to exchange the paradoxical God of Christ’s Easter story for a “familiar god” conforming to the human notions and expectations of specific epochs. Wasn’t the identification of the Biblical God with the god of the ancient philosophers as described by Plato and Aristotle – so fateful for the history of Christian theology – precisely one of those substitutions? "

The author is Tomáš Halík, a late convert, professor of sociology, psychotherapist and priest, and the quote comes from his 2014 Templeton Prize Lecture (www.jamesgregory.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/St-A-Halik-lecture.pdf).

Dear Banjo,

My googling brought up over 34 million responses to “ideology, religion”. Checking the first few I did not find one that would regard the latter a special case of the former, though, of course, there might be those among them that agree with you.

I agree with your quoted author completely. What the others who write in this commentary miss is exactly this misidentification that has causes so much grief, including the awful acts of the church in the past. Monarchical monotheism has a lot to answer for. We will get no progress in theology until we announce that this god is well and truly dead. One of the most distressing results of this identification is that the doctrine of creation has been placed in confrontation to scientific cosmology. The damage done do the intelligence has been incalculable.

Banjo,
I will not try to justify the deeds of evil men who call themselves Christian. The death of Jesus in Jerusalem should promote pacifism not violence. But alas, you keep beating us around the head and refuse to understand that those who perpetrated violence could not in any way be understood as following in the path of the gentle Galilean.

George wrote: "The thought occurs to me whether we Christians have not in the course of history constantly fallen prey to the temptation to exchange the paradoxical God of Christ’s Easter story for a “familiar god” conforming to the human notions and expectations of specific epochs. Wasn’t the identification of the Biblical God with the god of the ancient philosophers as described by Plato and Aristotle – so fateful for the history of Christian theology – precisely one of those substitutions?"

Dear George,

Aren't you describing what always happens? The original is made to conform with the familiar. Would Christianity have spread throughout the classical world if the paradoxical God of Christ’s Easter story had not taken on the familiar aspects of the god of the philosophers of that world?

Tacitus found the Jewish god offputting:

“…the Jews have purely mental conceptions of Deity, as one in essence. They call those profane who make representations of God in human shape out of perishable materials. They believe that Being to be supreme and eternal, neither capable of representation, nor of decay. They therefore do not allow any images to stand in their cities, much less in their temples. This flattery is not paid to their kings, nor this honor to our Emperors. From the fact, however, that their priests used to chant to the music of flutes and cymbals, and to wear garlands of ivy, and that a golden vine was found in the temple, some have thought that they worshiped father Liber, the conqueror of the East, though their institutions do not by any means harmonize with the theory; for Liber established a festive and cheerful worship, while the Jewish religion is tasteless and mean.”

However, the Christians added a divinity in human form like the familiar Roman and Greek gods and identified the original deity with the god of the philosophers. The early Christians did not fall prey to the temptation to exchange the paradoxical God of Christ’s Easter story for a “familiar god”. That exchange was essential to the Christian appeal to the peoples of the ancient world.

David F,
Interesting post. The early Christians in Rome were accused of atheism because they did not worship the standard gods. But there must be some truth in what you say. There has been a long argument about how early theology was influenced by Plato and Aristotle. Certainly the New Testament that was written in Greek and whose authors, mostly were surrounded by Greek culture resisted any influence. Platonism became Christianised Neo-Platonism as early as Augustine. Aristotle was used by Aquinas. Perhaps the biggest danger was the incorporation of Christianity by Constantine into the centre of Roman religion. It is easy to see monarchical monotheism mirroring the person of the emperor.

However, it is obvious, with the revival of Trinitarian theology, where we should proceed!

Dear david f (and Peter),

>>Aren't you describing what always happens? The original is made to conform with the familiar. Would Christianity have spread throughout the classical world if the paradoxical God of Christ’s Easter story had not taken on the familiar aspects of the god of the philosophers of that world?<<

I was not describing anything, I just offered a quote to Peter since I discerned therein a Barthian influence, and Peter is known to favour the theology of Karl Barth.

Your "taking on familiar aspects" is called inculturation, different from "conforming with". So the answer to your question is NO. If you remember, I was always in favour of a balance (no replacement or identification of one with the other) between the “God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob” and the “God of philosophers” as two “faces” of the same God.

What was “essential to the Christian appeal to the peoples of the ancient world” is so also today, which does not exclude the acceptance - after having passed through both the Middle Ages and Enlightenment - of a philosophical understanding of God, that has moved far beyond of what was originally available from ancient Greeks, and is hopefully comprehensible also to Christians with non-Western cultural roots.

Since Halík is a Catholic priest, I could offer as a counter-view the words of Benedict XVI in his 2006 Regensburg lecture:

"In the light of our experience with cultural pluralism, it is often said nowadays that the synthesis with Hellenism achieved in the early Church was a preliminary inculturation which ought not to be binding on other cultures. The latter are said to have the right to return to the simple message of the New Testament prior to that inculturation, in order to inculturate it anew in their own particular milieux. This thesis is not only false; it is coarse and lacking in precision."

Dear Sells,

Religions tend to incorporate the social structure extant at the time of their invention.

Constantine did not incorporate Christianity into the centre of Roman religion. He issued the Edict of Toleration which stopped the persecution of Christians. It was Theodosius who made Christianity the official religion of the Empire. Non-Christians were severely persecuted under Theodosius.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodosius_I contains an account.

In 1633 the Catholic church condemned Galileo as a heretic. Galileo quoted Cardinal Baronius (August 30, 1538 – June 30, 1607) known for saying, in the context of the controversies about the work of Copernicus and Galileo, "The Bible teaches us how to go to heaven, not how the heavens go." This remark, which Baronius probably made in conversation with Galileo, was cited by the latter in his Letter to the Grand Duchess Christina (1615).

The incorporation of the Aristotelian view of the universe by Christianity was partly responsible for the hostility of the church to the discoveries of Copernicus and Galileo.

One influence of Greek culture upon Christianity is the mythology of the virgin birth. The KJV contains Isaiah 7:14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

In the original Hebrew the word, almah, meaning young woman, shall conceive. However, the Greek translation of Isaiah translated almah into parthenos which means virgin. This made Jesus similar to the pagan gods who were also born of a virgin.

Many pagan gods were born on or very near our Christmas Day, of a Virgin-Mother, in a Cave or Underground Chamber, led a life of toil for Mankind, were called by the names of Light-bringer, Healer, Mediator,Savior, Deliverer, were however vanquished by the Powers of Darkness, descended into Hell or the Underworld, rose again from the dead, and became the pioneers of mankind to the Heavenly world, founded Communions of Saints, and Churches into which disciples were received by Baptism and were commemorated by Eucharistic meals.

http://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/1561/pg1561.txt points to “Pagan & Christian Creeds, Their Origin and Meaning” by Edward Carpenter which gives details.

*W\*/M*..quoting/PETER<<.."We..are invited..to.,become..what..we are."

Been/there,.done that...thanks.>>

YOU COULD..AT LEAST EXPAND/....BRO..[JESUS INVITED you]?
saying that..simply by loving..other..is/the way?....TO BECOME THAT WHICH...WE..ARE?

but/did you change?...[even]if...only..more skeptical?
regardless..of the change..it..had to have bought/YOU..closer TO WHAT YOur.wanting to ..become..[WHO-r-YOU?][who=i]
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=6293&page=0

[OURS..IS EASY/.if/WE WANT TO..BE LIKE HIM/
loving/teaching/standing up/for.OTHER..[explaining.. caring sharing/...but

IMPORTANTLY..IS..that we earn it...by figuring-out
wHAT..*THAT PARABLE\/PARALLEL...IS REALLY Saying..[to me]..right now

[PETER].."Rather,..[living]..the Being..of Jesus..saves us
/from..[confused]/thinking...that we..*know..*good>>BY..my/WORKS/NOT JUST WORDS][lip/honorarium/..giving and*..[recieving

we well..[SHOULD/COULD/WOULD].know..[now]
that,/good/is\GOOD..BEcause all feel good..[IS/OF\god]
knowing..god=GOOD..

<<P>.and evil..and thus..[this LIVED SURETY]..saves us
from ideology..[creed/fear/greed]..and {IN}..theory [*]..
and re*turns us..to [higher].our sell'sF...">>

\/\/*/\/\:quote..<<>...Is itself.both a theory..>>

PLEASE WM..A TTIME TESTED/THEORY/
LEARNED AND EARNED.[and/YOU CANT FAKE IT]
BUT YES..ITS THEORY/..BUT..ONE ACTIVELY BEING..fIElD/TESTED/a working hypotheses/or a masters?

THEory*.<<\/\/*/\/\:quote>>..and an ideology..and where...do you end up.....yourself!>>

faiR ENOUGH..WM/WE...CAN/DO..END UP./OUR\.SELVES.
but..we alL have feet..of clay..

EVEN AT The end..our master doubted.[that doudt cost him...3 dayS IN HELL/BUT THE PAIR2B murded on the steps=3 DAYS AS WELL[]

WM,,..<<But,..that/is merely..my opinion..of such ruminations.>>

WONDERFUL*mate ..PLEASE SEE..ONLY TOGETHER,,can
this BE FIGURED OUT..[THE ME WE SEEK TO FIND=HE*...in all of thee

we=ME

WE
ME

ITS..A REFLECTION..THE MIRROr=HE

<<>*On the...'up' side,...you have achieved salvation..>>

i feel/..its more a waY..FOR ETERNAL CONSCIOUSNESS/OMNIPRESENT Holy.[S'..TO pass through eternity/..\[AS SOME SAY..WE ARE THE DREAM/..IN REALITY .ONLY THE SLEEPER EXIST

[know thyself/son..of the sUN...W=M]

<<>.by your/own definition:..
"Our salvation..is not..from*..the pains of hell>>

WE*ME.
PLEASE THINK..JESUS DID DIE/..aND HE DID RETURN
he didnt die..for our sins/or..he may have..bought them 'back'[BUT/I OWN\my..own sins/ti i can REPENT/THEIR MINE

my point is..deMONS SO LOVE THEIR SIN
[THEY CANT REALLY HURT THEmselves..MUCH/more once ya dead/
so goD LETS THEM..DO AS THEY WISh/..our last wish/gave us this body/to meet the need.

you just..need 'RECAL'/WHO YOU are..and
recall/why..why you came/..thAT GOD GRANTED..THYNE..thyne/WISH/

VIA THIS FLESH.

SEE SADLY/..MANY OF US,,\heard the cries/..from earth
and righteously CAME HERE..[incarnated].TO help-END IT/..BUT THIS PLACE IS LIke...a finger trap/...once ya spirit jumps iN..ITS HARD TO GET IT BACk..OUT..[and ya CANT JUMP..THE TRAIN/ONCE THE ride..has began/but\each..of us knew/ahead\OF TIME.

but..your fears/HURTS
AND SCREAMS...RISK BRINGING..YET..MORE GOOd spirits down

<<but..from ideas..that we think..are.."clear and distinct" as Descartes would have had it."

Congratulations>>

HONESTLY/YOU GUYS
ARE As bad as me

[beg/PARDON?]

david f,
All reasonable and acutely observed comments. However, there is the air of trying to fit Christianity into all of the other religious movements and hence neutralise it. While I am not sure how religions are "invented" it cannot be said that Christianity was an invention. What happened in the very early church and in the NT were many attempts to understand the meaning of the life and death of Jesus using the materials at hand i.e the Old Testament. The theology thus produced was not invented as such but was a creative effort.

I would like to stick with the Greek that Luke used to describe Mary. The virgin birth may have echoes in culture, what has not? However, Luke uses the virgin birth to tell us that this Jesus does not owe his origin entirely to his biological father. It is out of this understanding that John can identify him with the Word that was with God and was God. Sure, it is a theological device but an effective one if you give up on the literal meaning.

Dear Sells,

Perhaps the Trinity can be seen as a theological realisation of Montesquieu’s theory of government. He recommended separation of government into executive, judicial and legislative branches which together form one government. The Westminster system with the executive and legislative branches combined is dualistic rather than Trinitarian.

Frankly, the Trinity seems like mumbojumbo to me.

Certainly Christianity is just another religious movement. Like all religions it is a human invention. It doesn’t neutralise Christianity to recognise that. Why deny obvious fact? As I pointed in my previous post the narrative of the life of Jesus as described in the Gospels incorporates the pagan mythology of its time. It owes much more to that than it does to the Jewish Bible. Actually the canonical version of the Jewish Bible was finalised after the death of Jesus. The Pentateuch (Torah), as we know it today, was completed during the Babylonian exile, by the time of Ezra. The Neviim (Prophets) were finalized during the Persian era, approximately 323 B.C.E. The conclusion of the last section of the Bible, ketuvim (Writings) is debated; however, most scholars believe its final canonization occurred in the second century C.E.

No one owes one’s origin solely to one’s biological father. We also owe our origins to our biological mother. To claim any other entity is involved is simply more mumbojumbo.

Dear George,

You quoted Benedict XVI: "In the light of our experience with cultural pluralism, it is often said nowadays that the synthesis with Hellenism achieved in the early Church was a preliminary inculturation which ought not to be binding on other cultures. The latter are said to have the right to return to the simple message of the New Testament prior to that inculturation, in order to inculturate it anew in their own particular milieux. This thesis is not only false; it is coarse and lacking in precision."

The thesis seems neither coarse nor lacking in precision. Whether it is false or not is a matter of opinion.

I appreciate your making the distinction between “inculturation” and "conforming with".

DAVID/quote.<<.We also owe our origins..to our biological mother...To claim any other entity..is involved..is simply more mumbojumbo.>

THE matters..of the FLESH...NEED..femail..to make
[co-create../BUT The living sperm to animate...[MAKE LIFE]
but just as mother father child=3..ditto the trinity.of creation creator/ANIMATOR.[THE FATHER AND THE SUN AND THE WHOLLY LIVING SPIRIT.]

daviD..<<Dear George,..You quoted Benedict XVI:
"In the light..[REALISED LIVING [life-LESSONs cumination]..of our [church]...experience..with cultural pluralism,.it is often said nowadays..that the synthesis..with Hellenism..>>

<<>>..:a body of humanistic..and classical ideals/associated with ancient Greece..and including reason,..the pursuit of knowledge..and the arts, *moderation,..civic responsibility,..and bodily development

First Known Use of HELLENISM
1609..>>>

<<>.achieved in the early Church..was a preliminary in-culturE-ation which..ought not to be binding..*on other cultures...>>

sounds fair/look at the culture PROBLEMS..SOME SECTIONS Of the mnuim wrestle with..but THEN AGAIN ..it is so with most if not all .intrest-groups

THE OTHER latter..CULTURE=LATIN?..Roman/greek.english?

<<The latter*..are said to have..the right to return
to..the simple message..of the New Testament..*prior to that inculturation,>>

ITS not onLy permitted/its essential[ie miracles/4000/5000..[not eating]..WITH UNCLEAN hands/as there wern't handwash jars.[on/the\mount...i].between the canna wedding/WASH JAR/AND THE SHEW BREAD/this..reveals THE DECILES KNEW not..the handwash rite/

DO NOT EAT..[in].WITH UNCLEAN HANDS
but..what issues from it..maketh/UNCLEAN

any/FOOD\increase..is human naTURE
[IE SITTING OPPISITE EACH OTHER/EACH would to too afraid..to be seen eaTING anthing/WITH UNCLEAN HANDS./[the extra food was in case any saw the food lATER/AND ACCUSED..Or sharing[agE-OLD/custom]..even if yOU/CANT EAT.

the first..[AT CANNA]..WAS SIMPLY SERVANTS NOT WISHING....THE MASTER TO LOOSE FACE[AND SERVING THE BEST WINE..even if jesus did make toilet water/into wine/..the wash jars are the saME AS A TOILET/NO SERVANT COULD FEED,,champain/from..TOILET JAR WATER/TO GUESTS

[ONLY A SERVAnt..could notice]

I appreciate your making..the distinction
between “inculturation” and "conforming with".?

pease explain?

I don't think either religion or ideology in the sense the author explains are 'essentially bad'. But it is true that to 'pick out' communism - and even fascism - while not mentioning evils committed for the sake of capitalism, and even conservatism - is mistaken and will-fully short-sighted. Atrocities have been committed for the sake of ideologies - including communism and fascism, but also conservatism and capitalism - indeed, even liberalism. (ie: war in the guise of a 'civilising mission') But we have to strive for an ethics... Is the author suggesting that Christians not strive after an understanding of what is right? Also it is technocracy that denies ideology - and dismisses questions of right and wrong...

In a democracy we should all strive for our understandings of 'the good society'. But this needs to be taken in the context of a 'basic consensus' - a grounding in the most basic liberal, democratic and social rights... Such a consensus - and mutual respect for each others' humanity - is how we avoid the 'extreme ends and means calculations' that occurred in the French and Russian revolutions, and also in various manifestations of fascism.

But remember what was done in the name of 'anti-communism' in Guatemala, Chile, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Indonesia etc during the Cold War.. Remember undoubtedly 'extreme ends and means' calculations with fire-bombing and nuclear bombings in World War 2... And also in World War One - the casualties of which were even more than occurred in the Terror of Stalin....

But if we do not ask ourselves ethical questions it is doubtful we will ever learn; More likely history with repeat itself...

tristen/itS FUNNY,,<<..More likely history..with repeat itself...>>

AS I Was reading....that alex jones..said much the same thing[HALF-WAy]
http://rss.infowars.com/20140507_Wed_Alex.mp3

<<>.it is true that..to 'pick out'..communism ..fascism - while not mentioning evils committed for the sake of capitalism, and even conservatism - is mistaken and will-fully short-sighted>>

great point/no one is without sin.
HENCE THE NEED FOR A..PERFECTLY CLEAR Knowing..THE SEPARATION...[di-vide]..OF GOOD From vile..is essential..[TO RECOGNIZE fair measure]..educated choice.....to reject or accept..via reason..

<<>>Atrocities have been committed..>>
so lets ensure no more war
<<>>(ie: war in the guise of..a 'civilising mission')..But we have to strive for an ethics...>>.

moderated WITH GRACE/MERCY/LOVE..NOT CENSURE?

<<>.Is the author suggesting..that Christians not strive after an understanding..of what is right?.>>

im presuming/we arnt to judge
THERE BUT FOR THE GRACE OF GOD GO I

<<Also it is technocracy..that denies ideology>>

HOW SO?

DISMISSED ID*eOLOGY..<<>> -and dismisses questions of right and wrong...>>

IF WE COME ACROSS An accident/do we not act first
think later?..[we must be as cHILDREN/WITH EAGER CURIOSITY AND PASSION
able to forget easY..]

<<>.the context of a 'basic consensus' -a grounding in the most basic liberal, democratic and social rights...>>

YES/THE CHURCH...of love makes a better state
BUT GOVT SHOULD BE LIKE A MOTHERS NURTURE/NOT A FATHers firm hand[but different strokES FOR DIFFERENT FOLKS[there is no one size fits aLL FOR EVERYTHING.nor everyone[god made us each unique/own..FACE/FINGER PRINT/SMELL Dna..eyesign and soul form..ETC

<<>.Such a consensus -life waand mutual respect..for each others' humanity - is how we avoid the 'extreme ends.and means calculations'>>

snt meant to be easy
but it must be lived as we chose
IE WE MUST HAve skin in the game..want for something/specificly/with a passion[for what is salt/lost of flavour

<<>.if we do not ask ourselves ethical questions it is doubtful we will ever learn;..>>

YES...AHHH MEN
dont...miss edward Griffith..IN 2DE HOUR
http://rss.infowars.com/20140507_Wed_Alex.mp3

FASCINATING SEARCH RESULTS
http://www.google.com.au/search?q=JESUTS+CANT+BE+POPE&

Dear Tristan,

The great European empires can be considered capitalist crimes. I believe it was US Justice Jackson at the Nuremberg trials who said that the US should accept being called to account in the future for its crimes. As an American I am disappointed that the US has not ratified the treaty establishing the International Criminal Court and submitted to its jurisdiction.

Australia has been condemned by the UN for its treatment of asylum seekers. It has also been condemned a number of times by the UN for its blockade of Bougainville which cut off medical supplies and other important items when Bougainville was trying to get independence from PNG. Somehow those condemnations were generally not reported in the Australian news.

Dear david f,

>>The thesis seems neither coarse nor lacking in precision. Whether it is false or not is a matter of opinion.<<

I gave the quote (out of context) only to illustrate that there are Catholics who seem to disagree with Halík on this. To judge Benedict’s thesis you would need to read the sequel where he gives his reasons, c.f. http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2006/september/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20060912_university-regensburg_en.html. Of course, it is still a matter of opinion whether or not one agrees with them.

.

Dear George & Sells,

.

Belief is an idea. It is the idea that something is true. An irrational belief is called faith. Faith in the existence of a supreme (ideal) being is called religion.

“A systematic scheme of ideas forming the basis of action or policy - a set of beliefs governing conduct. Also: the forming or holding of such a scheme of ideas” is called an ideology (Oxford English Dictionary definition n° 4).

It therefore seems logical to me that religion is an ideology.

I should be interested to read your arguments to the contrary.

.

Dear Banjo,

<<It therefore seems logical to me that religion is an ideology.>>

The story of the blind men touching an elephant is well known: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_men_and_an_elephant

Ideology is a limb of religion, or one way by which religion operates - a means rather than an end.

So is faith (which truly isn't a belief, but an attitude).

Neither is strictly required for being religious, but just as an elephant would function poorly without its trunk or tail, a leg or an ear, so is religion harder to follow without ideology or faith.

Most elephants have a trunk.
Most religions have an ideology.

One should not confuse between the two.

<<Indeed, religion is one of mankind’s oldest, firmlly entrenched ideologies, finding its roots in the fear, awe and wonder inspired by natural phenomenon for which we had no rational explanation.>>

Sadly, that's how religion is perceived from the outside, by a blind human.

<<Not only is religion an ideology, it is a political ideology>>

When religious ideology turns into a political ideology, then it is no longer religious, then it is no longer a limb of religion - but a cancerous growth!

Dear Banjo,

>>Belief is an idea. It is the idea that something is true. An irrational belief is called faith. Faith in the existence of a supreme (ideal) being is called religion.<<

You can have your definitions as you please, but you can then compare your opinions only with those who share your definitions. For instance, people believe in God, or believe that God exists (not the same), I do not know what it means to have faith in the existence of something. Or who decides what is a rational and what an irrational belief, etc?

>>It therefore seems logical to me that religion is an ideology.<<

Which means that many, if not most, of those 34 million Google responses I referred to are illogical.

>>I should be interested to read your arguments to the contrary.<<

There are many, although probably not easily explained in a few words, since religions can degenerate into ideologies. Just read a few of those that Google pops up when you ask for “ideology, religion” (or Yuyutsu’s reply).

>>arguments../to\..*the contrary.<<=uncertainty>sureness>SURETY>SECURITY>PUREITy.

GEORGE? <<religions..can degenerate..into ideologies...[for]...those who share your definitions...For instance,..people believe..*in God,>>.[or]..those people/who..<<..>>believe that God exists>>

great point

(its/..<<..not/the same..,I do*/not..know*]

its the certainty/believability
..LIMITATION/EVEN..OF what it is..we are..*knowing


<<>..what it means to have faith..in the existence>

[VAUE/WORTH/TRUTH/VERACITY]...<<of some*thing.<<>>

WE HAVE FAITH/SHAKING-pen/of..shakAre-SPEAR\WRote,/MAC/BREATH
we have faith...dino*saw/WE HAVE FAITH..DODO'S..USED TO EXIST..we have hope..the tASSIE/TIGER..ISNT EXTINCT..damm caps..

*FAITH..rather than trust..SOMETHING EXIST..[your/FAith..HAS made you/well]..must be based..on the believability...OF/THE\Speaker.

[VIABILITY/VARIABILITY]..OF THE PROOF..presented..
how its...fruits ARE..of/...how..long the faitH fixes/a\RESPONSE..HOW MUCH..the/belief holds..influence as if true..[or..EVEN FRAUD;FAITHLESS].

eg/..without JESUS'S..BEST MATE/judia\betraying him..he
coud never..have died..FOR our siins.[tHUS IS..THE LEAST YET GREATER THAN THE baptiser]..BUT...FOR THE BETRAYAL/..NONE OF US...CAN CAST..our sins..[wr\orries/concerns/hopeS/FEARS/PROMISES..upon the scape-goat

<<>.Or..who decides..what is..*a rational...and/or..what an irrational belief,etc?>>

govt cannot..decree/man-date.faith..[NOR/ENFORCE UNFAIR-TERMS]..EVEN GOVT..[offialy]..LEAVES..THAT TO FREEWill/freechoice\.BUT..THEn makes..it../none\..CAN succeed..[SATAns clause]

THUS..THE CHoice lies..
within us/baring..the event of..no CHOICE.
.

<<Belief..is an idea>>
no an idea=a MINDFUL/creation..or
receipt/visualization..of a..mind picture/response/to\emotion..sent/from de*mONS OR AN*GELS..[DEeP.ENDING ON THE FRUITS OF THE MESS.AGE...[IdEA]

<<>..It/is..the idea..that something..is true.>>
clearly many beliefs..are wrong...thus untrue..but
we..*are loo,king..AT UNDER-STANDING..A CONCEPT..;ON faith=trust..usually..OF...others ideas/visualisations\..ONES WE HAVNT RECEIVED..DIRECT.

<<>...An irrational belief...is called faith.>>
no..its calLed..a delusion

<<>Faith..in the existence
0f a supreme..(ideal)..being is called religion.>>

NO SENsE INSPIRED;input../imPUTATION
[,,INput/is\..implanted.by a higher authority/0R\POWER
[MUCH>TO LESS<OSmosis..]

you..have faith.in/WORDS/THEORY\promise..we accept/
over the proof OF/the supreme..WE MUST IGNORE.

TO go/WITH\..THE.LOGIC OF LIGHT.[FRom the sUn]..SUStaining the life/0f\..THE SON\./..and the holy[light/life/active]spiriT SUSTAINING..*ALL LIVING..OF BOTH ..THE FATHer..[suN].and the son.

cause/means\way

so MUCH TRIune-WAS REVEALED TO ME YESTERDAY
i SHOULD HAVE TAKEN NOtes..but..the trinity[3]=[PLACE]..is a key [me=thee]..reveal/much more..than an idea..or concept..[article]..of faith.

yu/quote..<<..faith..(which truth]...isn't
a belief,.but..an attitude)

[application?]..GREAT POINT.
except..we are all cells...of THE ELEPHANT....[TOO CLEVER/BY HALF SELLS]..lol

<<>One should not confuse..between the two.>>
my guides say...be carefuL of absolutes/*\/[NEVER SAY NEVER*]

<<fear,>>...*THAT IT*..can be taken/away

<<awe>>..that even the least..is yet
SUSTAINED...ITS LIVING..BY THE MOST.

<<>.and wonder>>at the wonder'S woUNDINGS..wonderment in wanDERING..OF Our minds in wonder,,

<<AND inspired by natural phenomenon..for which..we had no rational explanation.>>..

..in its over all perfections..[by/chance?..KISMET OR PERFECT TIMMING..[regard-less/where time..shows..[REVEALS/UNVEILS]..its wonders..is in live time.

...the living gooD
cannot be bound..by words..nor spell-ing..only faith
[missPLACED-faith...in authority..can deceive THE MASSES..Beware the faiths..of the ides..of may-daZE..oh/ye..faitHESS GENERATIONS

.

Dear George,

.

I wrote:

"Belief is an idea. It is the idea that something is true. An irrational belief is called faith. Faith in the existence of a supreme (ideal) being is called religion".

I then compared religion with the OED definition n° 4 of "ideology" (the topic of the article under discussion) and noticed that it corresponded to that definition, thus arriving at the logical conclusion that religion is an ideology.

However, as your googling activity appeared to have planted some doubt in your mind, I thought I should seek your reaction along with that of Peter Sellick whose article clearly implies that he considers Christianity and ideology as two entirely different, if not antagonistic, notions.

Hence my concluding - and quite sincere - invitation :

"I should be interested to read your arguments to the contrary."

To which you replied:

"You can have your definitions as you please, but you can then compare your opinions only with those who share your definitions."

I find that a rather nifty little side-step, George, which is a bit disappointing. I was hoping you would reciprocate and let me have the benefit of your own thoughts on the matter.

If you have other definitions to suggest, I should be pleased if you would agree to share them with me. I have an open mind on the matter and am more than willing to consider whatever you may be kind enough to offer, together, of course, with your own analysis and considered opinion.

.

.

Dear Yuyutsu,

.

Thank you for your input. I can see where you are coming from but your vision is too clouded with Hindu mysticism for me to get a proper focus on it. The image is blurred and I can’t distinguish it clearly.

As you wisely observe:

“Sadly, that's how religion is perceived from the outside, by a blind human”.

.

Dear one under god,

.

I am pleased to be able to say that I subscribe wholeheartedly to just about everything you have posted on this thread.

Even your “living good” is quite acceptable to me.

By the way, am I right in presuming that your court case was not quite as stressful as first appeared and that you managed to survive it OK ?

You seem to be back to your normal self, anyway.

Dear Banjo,

>>If you have other definitions to suggest, I should be pleased if you would agree to share them with me. I have an open mind on the matter and am more than willing to consider whatever you may be kind enough to offer, together, of course, with your own analysis and considered opinion.<<

I am sorry, this is not my field of expertise, so I would not dare to compress into a few words the vast material that is available on the relation of religion and ideology. Of course, I could pick a few of those links provided by Google and copy-and-paste from it, but what would be the point?

Nevertheless, here for instance, is a concise explanation of the difference:

Ideologies, in fact, are sometimes spoken of as if they belonged to the same logical category as religions. Both are assuredly in a certain sense “total” systems, concerned at the same time with questions of truth and questions of conduct; but the differences between ideologies and religions are perhaps more important than the similarities. A religious theory of reality is constructed in terms of a divine order and is seldom, like that of the ideologist, centred on this world alone. A religion may present a vision of a just society, but it cannot easily have a practical political program. The emphasis of religion is on faith and worship; its appeal is to inwardness and its aim the redemption or purification of the human spirit. An ideology speaks to the group, the nation, or the class. Some religions acknowledge their debt to revelation, whereas ideology always believes, however mistakenly, that it lives by reason alone. Both, it may be said, demand commitment, but it may be doubted whether commitment has ever been a marked feature of those religions into which a believer is inducted in infancy. (http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/281943/ideology/12149/The-philosophical-context)

See also my older post to daviid f: http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=7816&page=0#124645.

The end of ideology equals the Spiritual Way of no ideas.
http://global.adidam.org/books/radical-transcendentalism

All ideas whether secular or so called religious (especially in this case those of reductionist exoteric Christian-ISM) are rooted in the separate and always separative ego-"I", the very dark essence of which is hell-deep fear.
Which inevitably creates the kind of blood-soaked applied Christian politics described via this reference.
http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/cruelty.html

b*jp/quote..<<..presuming that your court case was not quite as stressful as first appeared and that you managed to survive it OK?>>

every point i raised was denied/THAT IS POLITICAL..mr defendant
but held court FOR 8 HOURS...COST 3oo..[wont mention GOVT SPENT OVER 10,000 getting it..[but they have a new 'clawback'/sceme..the judge..finned 300/BUT SOMEHOW BUREAUCRATS ALSO...SEND A DEMAND..FOR 103.50..FOR SOMETHING..CALLED AN ENFORCEMENT LEVI...[state enforcement act/1999-SECTION38[2]..its my...next..tONTI/project..ON APPEAL.

http://rss.infowars.com/20140507_Wed_Alex.mp3

I NEED..TO NARROW THE APPEAL Points down/so..i wilL test.the govt right to install...a levy...without a/LAWFULL-ORDER../PLUS THE Possession point[i hold officers..[ON DUTY]..can..ONY hold custody/but not..'POSSESS'..AND...IN POSSESION

I COULD PUSH...THAT I WAS UNDER POSSESSION..OF SPIRIT...but who isnt
regardless physical possession..../IS 9/10 TH LAW.BUT GOVT TAKING IT INTO Custody.proves i DIDNT HAVE POSSESSION[AS IN A CHAin of rightful..'posses'

<You seem to be back to your normal self, anyway.>>DAMM POST LIMITS[ie i write/THEN GET 100 over word count/AND SPITTING IT INTO TWO LIMITS MY ABIIty to reply[like i had to wait two hours to post]..often i forget and the moment has passed.

[george]..<<>.a concise explanation..of the difference:

<<>.Ideologies,..[spoken of as if they belonged
to the same logical category..>>....AND CEARLY Religions can have audioogy/mythology/but ideology DONT EQUATE/Imply*...necessarily..*a religion.

ie atheist

<<g>>Both are assuredly in a certain sense “total” systems, concerned..*.at the same time with questions of truth and questions of conduct;...but the differences between ideologies and religions are perhaps more important than the similarities.>>

key*..really..

<<.G>>..A religious theory..*[of reality]..>>

Practical realistic reality[day to day]...REAL..AS OPPOSED BY FAITH/SPIRITUAL OD OTHER DISPUTABLE 'REALITIES'.....

<<<.is constructed in terms of a divine order..and is seldom, like that of the ideologist,..centred on this world alone.>>

<<>.A religion may present a vision..of a just society,
but it cannot easily.?..have a practical political program.[?]

<<..The emphasis of religion..is on faith and worship;..>>
RESULTING IN GOOD[or better ]..'works/fruits..product/service'.<<...

<<..its appeal is to [ITS]..inwardness>>
AS WARDS OF..[in]..THE FATHER/sun..[GOD]/THE FSATHER/NOT Further nor furor..

<<..and its aim....AT[IS].the redemption [or/atONEMENT[AT-ONE-MEANT]..THAT REALIZE../A\..COMBINED Perfecting]...0f love/lived by MERCYGRACE/SERVICE.

<<..THE..purification..affectation of..HIGHER/godly aspects..OF the human spirit.>..As we saw the true master do

go away daffy/i ove ya/but rULE ONE/JESUS HAS A BODy
the church..of..wholly/WORTHY/attributes..TALENTS..YET WE EACH GET EQUAL GRACE/mercy.

.

Dear George,

.

You wrote to david f. :

« I agree that religion can easily (and unfortunately often) degenerate into ideology or science (more exactly pseudo-science, like pre-Enlightment Christianity, or even today those who are pushing ID as scientific theory). So in this sense you might be right that there is only a soft difference between religion and ideology. » http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=7816#124645).

That seems close to my own understanding except that I see ideology as a generic term applying in various domains, religion being one. This is on the basis of the OED definition of ideology as : « a systematic scheme of ideas, a set of beliefs governing conduct ».

Like you I am loathe to investigate the 34 million Google entries for ideology and religion. Your link to the article in Encyclopaedia Britannica is, unfortunately, incomplete and I am not prepared to pay the subscription fees to view the full article – which would be necessary for me to be able to judge the validity of the synthesis available for free.

The synthesis reveals, however, that it is in contradiction with the Oxford English Dictionary’s definition of the term “ideology”. This leads me to suspect that the article is somewhat tendentious – hence the necessity of a careful examination of the author’s arguments before I could possibly accord any credence to his conclusions.

Needless to say, the difference of interpretation of the meaning (explicit or implied) of the word ideology, between the author of the article and the Oxford English Dictionary, must necessarily be in favour of the latter, being the indisputable authority on such matters in the English language.

It is, nevertheless, apparent that there is no consensus among scholars on the relationship between ideology and religion – possibly partly because specialists of different disciplines have their own intellectual perspectives and references. Also, the eternal controversy surrounding the validity of religion is by no means conducive to the development of common methods and concepts.

Please allow me, therefore, Dear George, to adopt your suggestion, in such circumstances, that we leave it at that.

.

BANNED JEHOVA/BY\QUOTE.<.It is, nevertheless, apparent that there is no consensus among scholars on the relationship between ideology and religion –>>

wHAT CAME FIRST THE CHICKEN..OR THE EGG?
[CHICKENS ONLY COME FROM EGGS.

IDIOLOgy usually comes up/arises
once they woRDS OF THE MESSENGERS BECOME SACRED..
AND THE ESSENGERs words become literal/dont MIX THE THINGS OF MAN/WITH MATTERS ETERNAL..[OR so my guides..ARE TELLING ME TO WRITE]

<<>.possibly partly...because specialists of different disciplines have their own intellectual perspectives and references.>>

YES/LUTHER..HAS valid points/so too wesly
THEN MARY-ANNE/EddIE\BAKER/and swedenberg/EVEN THE PROFFIT/who heard the messages left in thE STRANGE LAND..point being..AS THE koran says..each notion was sent its mess-anger[im ONE OF THE WEB ONES..or the lAND OF OZ..[hAS the downunder recieved its meSS-ANGER..[YES WE HAVE A SAINT]..DO SAINTS HAVE 'IDIOLOGY/IS MARY..or terrasa..AN IDIOLOGY?

is the double helic of the snakes arround the staff a vision
recIEVED IN THE DIM DARK AGES...predicting the dna double helix..[who knows..ITS ABOUT WHAT COMES FROM Us by way of fruits

<<>.Also, the eternal controversy surrounding the validity of religion is by no means conducive to the development of common methods and concepts.>>

TAKE THAT BACK*

A BIT harsh/on ban jehova...so lETS BREAK IT DOWN

bj/<<.<<>.Also, the eternal controversy surrounding the validity of religion>>

to THOSE WITH 'RELIGION'..THEY HAVE A COMPANIONSHIP A SUPPORT STRUCTURE OF PEERS WITH THE SAME 'SPIRITUal bias..heaven is structured in its sects[AT THE LOWER levels..in fact its hard..to tell where ends hell

SO MANY GOOD AND TRUE HAVE LEARNED THE USTS OF DEmons
they physically 'eat/the body of christ'..THEY PHYSICALLY DRINK HIS BLOOD.

THEY HANG HIs trophy flesh/meat/corpse in their dens and crypts..see him as dead/though he was long ago arisen

just because satan jiNN-self/helped paul draw thE VEIL/DONT MEAN ITS EVIL/JUST DELUSIONAL IDIO-PATHOLOgy.of the blind to spirits graces and mercies/THE PIG KNOWS Its nAture/NURTURE..but not that we judged him swine

its sublime..we catch on to it in timE
BUT WE Can live it..IN THE LIVING MOMENT..with love/grace/mercy.NOT BY THE Ideological hump/dump and RUN THROUGH THE GRIME OF TIME...observed

VIA BLINKERED- EYES/STOPPED EARS
CLOSED MINDS TO OPEN HEARTS

<<is by no means conducive to the development of common methods and concepts.>>

AHH MEN..DAMM THATS MY POSTS..oh we its saturn day
THE DARKNESS THAT PRECEEDS THE SUnday..of the sabbath..that REFLECTS HOW THE FATHER RESTS..while we catch up..

much ike the TORT TAUGHT/US/AND THE HEIR*..
the plodder ...[no dont explain]..ANYHow the taughtus won over the hare..

HERE HAIR THERE...THEir..your heir
but ye know not thyne own being.is all being.all freeing a knowiNG ALL PAIN ALL GLORY..ITs a ong story and you all are part oF IT/WE EACH PLAY OUR PART..TO REVEAL GODS FULL GLORY

great evil/allows greater good in ending...it
YOU WILL DO THIS TO REMIND YOU TO GIVE lOVE..
TO RETURN..for hate GOOD OR BETTER FOR BAD
to let god fix it for you..to not judge
good/grace aND MERCY..are gods coin.

.

Dear one under god,

.

You wrote :

« wHAT CAME FIRST THE CHICKEN..OR THE EGG?
[CHICKENS ONLY COME FROM EGGS. »

Wasn’t it the coq which came on board first, one under god ? And wasn’t the chicken then extracted from the rib of the coq ? And didn’t it then lay an egg? And isn’t it true that since that day, as you say : CHICKENS ONLY COME FROM EGGS ?

« dont MIX THE THINGS OF MAN/WITH MATTERS ETERNAL..[OR so my guides..ARE TELLING ME TO WRITE] ».

Your guides are right.

« TAKE THAT BACK* »

Got it !

Thanks.

.

banDAID/QUOTE.<<..Wasn’t it..the coq.which came on board first,>>

DAvid might know..BUT..MY GUIDES/COGNITIVE ME TO SEARCH
MY/OWN THEORY=Snake/egg/MUTATED=chicken/MUCH CROSS-BREEDING/Inbreeding/in the big-egg-GENUS.

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

>>/In computer science,..Coq is an interactive theorem prover.>>

[FUNNY..I THOUGHT IT .WAS THE FRENCH4\COC K]

coQ..<<It allows the expression..of mathematical assertions,..mechanically..coq..checks proofs..of these assertions,..then..helps to find formal proofs,..and extracts..a certified program...from the constructive proof..of its formal specification.>>

IN Short/as tHE NEED EMERGES..For SPIRIT to haVE A SUITABLE 'BODY'/AS SUITS THEIR NATURE AND NEED.. as cose as i have come/is a sAMOEN/FABLE THAT SPEAKS OF BIRD'S..PRE materialistic recognition/first emerged as sounds/then came birds
http://www.google.com.au/search?q=BIRDS+SOUNDS+HEARD+FROM+SPIRIT+REAm

http://angels.about.com/od/MiraclesPopularCulture/a/Birds-As-Divine-Messengers-Animal-Angels-Spirit-Guides-And-Totems.htm

as the only creature..God made who takes flight,..birds have inspired human beings throughout history.with their ability to rise above the Earth...Something about birds..soaring through the air.stirs our souls,..motivating us..to rise above our earthly concerns..and learn more..about a greater world..beyond our Earth:..[IE..the spiritual realm.]

Birds and angels..share a special bond,..as well,..since both symbolize..the beauty of spiritual growth -–and angels sometimes even choose..to appear with wings,...like birds...[if thus/THEIR EXPECTED/TO-BE..but/thats retro/today]

People sometimes..see birds appear..before them
to deliver..some type.of spiritual messages..They may encounter angels..manifesting..in the form of a.MESSENGER-bird,..see images of a beloved bird..who has died..and now they believe is acting as a spirit guide to them,..or catch sight..of bird images that symbolize something*..God wants to communicate to them..(known as animal totems).

Or,..they may receive..extraordinary inspiration..from God simply through their ordinary..interactions..with the birds in their lives...If you're open..to receiving spiritual messages..through birds,..here's how God..may use them to send.mes*sages to you:

Angels Appearing as Birds..Angels are..associated with birds more than any other type of animal, because angels who appear to humans in their heavenly glory sometimes feature wings. Wings symbolize both the spiritual covering of God's care for people and the freedom and empowerment people gain from spiritual growth. Sometimes, angels may even appear in the physical form of earthly birds, if

Coq works within the theory of the calculus of inductive constructions, a derivative of the calculus of constructions.

Dear oug,

Birds are not the only creatures who take flight (I would rather write ‘fly’. There’s elegance in simplicity.). Mammals, many insects and some fish also fly.

Speaking of flying mammals my mother used to recite a poem:

When there’re bats in your belfry that flut,
And your comprenez vous rope is cut.
And there’s nobody home
In the top of your dome,
Then your head’s not a head, it’s a nut.

Whether it was original with her, I can’t tell. If anyone else has heard it, please tell me.

We have just serviced our birds. We filled the feeder for the seed eaters – mainly pale-headed rosellas and lorikeets and gave bits of hamburger to the meat eaters – butcher birds, magpies and kookaburras.

Angels with wings growing out of their backs are anatomically impossible since there is no place to attach muscles to power the wings. Like griffons, unicorns, god(s) and other creatures of the imagination there is no evidence for the existence of angels, and it is reasonable to conclude they do not exist.

Hadn't heard it, david f, but found this:

"This limerick was penned by my grandfather, ANTHONY HENDERSON EUWER. He first published it in the early 1900's in "Collier's Magazine". A few years later, he wrote "The Limeratomy", published by James B Pond, New York, which includes "The Nut" and "The Face" quoted by President Wilson on a number of occasions."

at

http://forum.quoteland.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/99191541/m/5971998205

Dear Wm Trevor,

Thank you very much for that. My mother was born in 1899, but I doubt that she was publishing as early as the reference to the limerick. She once said, "If you feel perverse, you could lay the linoleum."

My family lives a long time and makes jokes about it. My great-grandfather lived to 107. In Lithuania at that time one didn't buy ready made boots or shoes. One went to the shoemaker, selected a portion of a piece of hide and told the cobbler to make the footwear from it. At 99 the old man decided he needed new boots. He went to the shop and was taking a long time deciding on the portion of hide. The bootmaker said, "You're 99. What's the fuss?" G-G came back, "Statistics show that few people die over the age of 99."

You're welcome, david f... My family wishes it were longer lived to make jokes about it.

Although there was the exception of one of my grandmothers who died aged 102.

Not the total tragedy it might have been under the circumstances as the doctors managed to save the baby.

DAVID/quote..<<>.Angels\with wings/..growing out*of..their backs/are anatomically impossible\..since there is..no place/to attach\muscles to power..the wings.>>

an egg-laying mammal..THAT Swims?,,[black*swans?]
WITH THE beak of a duck..[OR A Unicorn...or jesus..or budda]
we each...see them.as we expect*/to\see them/..*they do this..to not shock us.

i recall/a priest..who passed over/was met..by the Seignio/HIGH AUTHORITY...WEARING...THE EXACT VESTMENTS..HE WORE On earth/WHEN COMMENTED ON..HE REPLIED HE WAS PERCEIVED..as/expected../TO WEAR THE CLOTHES/THE\DEPARTED EXPECTED HIM..TO BE WEARING..

AS SOON/AS..IT WAS noticed..the normal dress/became apparent[INSTANTLY/APPEARED]..THE/point being..if a child dies expecting*to get an..angel\with wings/..thats what they get.[children/even/have..what/they alone/perceive/2\B/..fairies/etc[WE UNDERACHIEVERS OF/COURSE..WOULD SEE/ZIP.]

its hard to...explain/..the nature..of the spirit-realm
its made up..of many different/LEVELS..PERCEPTION ..REAMS OF SIMULTUDE/OF WILL/THAT OVERLAY..EACH OTHER/..MUCH IN THE PATTERN WE layed down on earth\but/.like a red filter filters out red..those only perceiving 'blue'..or completLy unaware OF RED

to try and explain it/movement in spirIT IS BY..ENVISIONING\WILLING..2/..where/you wish to/be..and YOUR DRAWN To towards that..your wishing for/..physical wings dont need 'fly'/THOUGHT\Will..DOes all the 'travel'

WINGS WERE PERCEIVED/by\sense..[AS ANGEL..'TOUCHING'..US FEELS LIKE A BREEZE/WIND//LIKE A FEATHER BRUSHING PAST US..EVER SO GENTLY[OR ON OCCASION A LOT FIRMER]

BUT mostly by..senseS..[I Feel]..the wing thing arose.

AND AN OSMOSIS/LIKE LEVITATION/THAT FLOATS US WHERE-ever..OUR MIND Wills us...to'be;..can instantly..take us/anywhere/in time..we want to go/

the perception of 'WINGS'..IS EASY EXPLAINED AWAY/
the dead reporting..their assent TO HEAVEN../AS BEING LIKE CARRIED AWAY..INTO the sky/..LIKE SAINTS RAISED 'BODILY'..[EXCEPT MAYBE ITS A Spiritual simile.]..but flesh cant go to where our soul goes/simply by our will passion/obsession lust ..

still its a powerful imagery/and imagery DECEIVES
quote rightly imagery IS WARNED AGAINST..YET AN ANGEL TOUCH Feels like a FEATHER TOUch..MUCH lIKE WINGS ENFOLDING US..[nothing is imposable....like god we need simply say be and it shall be.]..[jesus said that..ye see me do you..will DO GREATER..

anyhow..its just imagery..but simuli/to give us a guidance..so we can recognized the angels ever so gentle Presence...RELAYING GODS EVER SO SOFT VOICING...as we stumble FROM one teaching lesson TO THE NEXT/TIL WEE FIND THAT PASSION/that gets us OUT OF OURSELVES...AND ENJOINING WITH OTHER/AT WHATEVER LEVEL meets our paSSION..

or something/..LIKE THAT..<-;-}

Wm Trevor,

I'll bet it was an ugly little bugger, too :)

Joe

LADJOE/QUOte..RE THE 102 YEAR OLDS BABY/MAKES AN UNFAIR Although probale..EXPLANATION..buT UNFAIRLY

LET ME BE MORE UNFAIR..[IT]..[]AGE-grIST UGLY BABY SIN-D-ROME]....
MIGHT EVEN EXPLAIN..WHY THE BAPTIZER WANDERED IN THE DESERTS/EATING honey/robbing honey..or eating grasshoppers/thAT FIGHT ALL THE WAY DOWN[ONE IS HARMLESS/except the bEES BUT KARMICLY THE STINGS HELP EXplain the 'uglyness]..so ugly one could only bare to look upon his head/REFLECTED ON THE PLATER..once he was dead

his mum WAS 87?
his parents were both priests
HE WAS CONCIEVED AFTER THE CERImony of the holy of hOLIEST DAY[HIS BURTh 9 months is certaIN/HE WAS The messiah..as jesus said when the baptiser lived..its not yet my time*..[and who in their right mind wants that burDEN/HE SAW WHAT IT WAS DOING TO JOHN/who sat in the waters to cool off his been stings/

he once said something to jesus//about a lamb/lying with the lying
like the tares lie with the wheat/but only one is fit to eat

I SO OVER BLOGGING..but idioLogy must eND

ISRAEL IS RESISTING/kicking and screaming/
both popes should BE GOING*
http://www.blacklistednews.com/Israel_hate_crimes_%27poison_atmosphere%27_for_pope_visit/35132/0/38/38/Y/M.html
[IF THE TRUTH be for knowing]
http://www.blacklistednews.com/One_of_our_Sun%E2%80%99s_long-lost_sister_stars_has_finally_been_found%2C_and_she%E2.../35114/0/0/0/Y/M.html?morestories=obinsite

ale
http://xrepublic.tv/node/8832

the end of idio/logic
Idea-logGY...[REVEAL-ELATION]

falls upon govt/GOVERNING/LAW AND THE ARTS TOO

via previous life's miss leanings
WE ENTERED INTO/OUR LIVED..Life's yearnings[learning].
[SOME NEED TO BE SPANKED..OTHERS A LooK..is enough..sOME CAN LEARN FROM OTHERS/MISS-TAKES..yet others need liVE..IT OUT ourselves/

each..life lesson..is given/the easiest least damaging way/mainly to correct PAST KARMA..[we then did unto other]..ITS About..LEARNING-earning..empathy.

we cant conceive/ourselves..'DOING../e-vile\..UNto other
AND YET IN A PREVIOUS LIFE WE MAY HAVE...un-thINkINGly IN OUR HEARTS WE EVEN 'Helped'..them..[into error]..in some sick way..

its/NOT..Until iT HAPPENS TO..us/..thAT..we truly/know..
how it feels/but\.MADE..WORSE..BY..
knowing we did it..unto other/..firstly.

im told its about power/only if you make it so\satans school=this..just so you knOW.

WHETHER OR NOT WE WROTE OUR NAME...Upon lifes living-play

its up to us how much we let THESE THINGS AFFECT US..[if its somE FOOL ON AN EGO TRIP/THAT'S ANOTHER TOPIC]..BUT ITS BY GODS WILL WE GET BETTER THAN WE DESERVE/EARNED.

<<..would He please zap miscarriages..out of existence.>>
beware/for what YOU ASKED/THE SPIRIT/HAS RESOLVED..ITS PAST LIFE ISSUE/living out a whole life sentence/YET AGAIN/ONCE THE BIG POINT HAS BEEN OVEr/OR BE-come..

ACTUAL BEING...isnt needed..so THE GOOD DIE YOUNG

<<>.its consequences upon your mother.>>
MUST BE SEEN..IN THE WAY IT IS..now its EXPERIENCED/ONE KNOWS.

<<..Sooner would be better than later.>>
once you perfected/thyne own part/
ONE GOES WHERE LEADS THE HEART.

http://rss.infowars.com/20140513_Tue_Alex.mp3