The Right and Left conflict:
The conflict began between the teachings of Christ motivated by devotional love to God and neighbour and the Religious Zealots enforcing religious Law. When the Roman Empire syncretised Christianity into its laws; the precedent they knew from the background of Christianity was the commandments of Moses. So ultimately the educated Pharisees the right wing of the Church finally emerged to administer Moses law as State law.

However the primary teaching of Christ is founded in attitude and behaviour motivated by love and devotion to God and not in enforced behaviour imposed with legal penalties. The role of law is to define the standard and impose penalty for violation. So there is a dichotomy within Christianity, one that believes man is autonomous and personally accountable to God: and the other that the State must enforce an acceptable level of behaviour for the good management of society.

These positions have ebbed with moral and social trends, the religious right unhappy with the behaviour of society will move to stem the drift toward debauchery by strict law. The tolerant left, though not happy with the moral decline, persevere with a message of forgiveness, and they tolerate evil because they work among the poor and oppressed. The left carry a message of forgiveness but tolerate their evil, while the right expect repentance and change as the result.

These dichotomies apply within every society not only Christian. Take the principle of training children, when a parent enforces behaviour there is conflict but children are more secure within the boundaries of behaviour, when bad behaviour is tolerated children continue to test the limits and usually cause the parent great anxiety and the child feel insecure and unloved. This conflict also applies within Muslim States, the messengers carry the message of monotheism to those they feel are infidels. However the Hardliners (extremists) are not happy with the tolerant attitudes to evil within the State and act to enforce the ancient Islamic shari’ah law. The hardliners enforce behaviour against the will of the person in every Totalitarian State.

How does poetry from the poetry of Jashar quoted by Joshua’s scribe become relevant to establish Biblical authority of a Christian world-view? Ignorance from the fathers of the Roman Catholic Church caused such misrepresentation. A poetic quote taken out of context does not prove fact. This failing by the RC Church does not establish divine authority, rather establishes the fallible human factor.

Understand Joshua’s battle strategy: They were to advance upon the enemy in darkness (Joshua 10: 9). Soldiers prefer to be unseen not exposed in bright sunlight. Joshua prayed the sun would not shine till it set over Gibeon to the west of Gilgal (examine-map). He prayed for darkness, though the sun was in the sky that it wouldn’t shine. At dawn a hailstorm of giant proportions falls upon the enemy at Azekah as far as Makkedah and kills many of the enemy. If claimed by some that the sun appeared still in the sky at midday means it still had to traverse to Gibeon, thus extending the period of sunlight. Unlikely! The morning started with a darkened sky. The context of Joshua’s request cannot support such an event, because what Joshua desired he received. If you have been in a hailstorm you will notice that the clouds darken the sun. Hardly an answer for more sunlight, or a longer day? The standard movement of the sun across the sky measured the period of that very day (note verse 13b). If the day had been lengthened as proposed there would have been no standard to measure the period of light, they had no clocks! Another poetic impression was that day seemed long because they were tired after they had marched all the night before.
Dawn ><hail -------- midday heavy cloud ----------- short period of sunlight ><sunset.

This issue has no relevance whatsoever to a Christian world-view on politics, unless we are discussing a war strategy that involves God, eg. The invasion of France by the English under the cover of a descending dense fog. Was this an answer to the English prayers in their war strategy?

Oliver,

Why you are directing comments re Habiru and Hebrew of Joshua 10:12 to me... I never mentioned Habiru and I can read the text myself in original Hebrew. Let's get back to the point shall we?

Re jury deliberations over evidence: I was not talking about a case where evidence and facts are disputed, but about a case where jury believes, based on their own opinions and morals, that no actual wrong was committed. eg. offender was not wrong to ignore girl's "no" statements.

Again, if its a matter of opinion then why should anyone be tried and convicted of any crime - serious or not? Answer the question, Oliver.

Re Chinese astronomy: Yes, some obervations were made several thousand years back but serious and systematic recording did not occur until around 1000 BC. As I said, when Shi Huang Di took over all China most of those records were destroyed. Ergo, it is not at all surprising that Chinese accounts of Joshua's long day do not exist. However, an account does exist in Book of Jasher.

You said: “Black is white. White is black.” Those last two sentences do not demonstrate paradox. Just ask Mr Black from Norway and Mr White from Nigeria.

But sentences do not say: "Mr Black is White. Mr White is black." These qualifiers not only remove ambiguity, they remove the circular reference as well. Try again.

Re Luther: His "Table Talk" comments may have been an after dinner talk but they were not a formal lecture. Why do you think they were called "Tischreden" (Table Talk)?!? The comments came from recollections of students after Luthers death. They are off-the-cuff because they were made once only to his students in an informal setting rather than in a sermon or commentary, and 4 years BEFORE the full details of Copernicus' view were available. As I said, this is clearly not a concerted attack on or response to Copernicus' view.

You said: "I’m with Kenny [re Luther].

Too bad (for you) that truth is not decided by a majority vote...

Aslan,

ON MEN CREATING GODS

Regarding the Habiru and Moses, I was extending on the “possibility” Moses & Co spoke an Egyptian tongue and well as Hebrew. With respect to the shift from Henotheism to Monotheism, I did not mention it, but, I was leading towards how religion can be used to disparate peoples, as would seem to be the case with Islam (c.620), who pulled a prophet out of the hat, under pressure from the encroachment of Christianity. In a sense, see some similarities between Moses and Mohammed. We can drop this, is you like.

JURY DELIBERATIONS

Yes, again, I would assume juries are deliberate based on their opinions based on the evidence. (There would be personal dynamics, as in any group). In this case the jury has decided to ignore the “no” statement weighed against other evidence. In the court, next door, where the “I said ‘no’ ” statement case was more strongly put a different verdict might have emerged. People can be tried on the basis of considered, deliberated opinion, with the help evidence – preferably broad and triangulating evidence. People in our system are tried as previously discussed, based on considered opinion, because it is the least faulty system we have.

BLACK AND WHITE

The kernel of my example was, my sentences –unlike yours- were true self-references and have meaning. I was just attempting a bit of fun with our Norwegian and Nigerian friends. Ms, Mr Messrs and Mesdames are qualifiers: Ms Brown and Lord Green. "Captain" Brown will only have Brown on her shirt.

I will pause a few hours, before the next post.

Aslan, the Second,

LUTHER

I did some quick research about “table talk” more generally. It seems that the idea is that students meet with academics in casual surroundings and discuss a topic, which would suggest a degree of focus to the course of discussion. So, it would appear to be neither a lecture nor a quip, but, rather, discussion on a predefined topic in an informal atmosphere.

Regarding, Luther and Copernicus, Kenny and I are jointed by Silver (1998, pp. 53-54), The Assent of Science, Oxford University Press:

“It was the Lutherans who perhaps put up the first serious opposition to Copernican suggestion of the heliocentric universe, which they saw as a direct attack on the literal truth of the Scriptures. Luther said of Copernicus, ‘the fool wants to turn the whole art of astronomy upside down’.”

We shall continue to see Luther had plenty of Protestant company.

… “In 1549, his friend Melanchthon said of the heliocentric hypothesis: ‘Now it is want of honesty and decency to assert such notions in publicly, and the example is pernicious’. The straightlaced Protestant John Calvin also blasted Copernicus, but reason was not exactly the strong suit of Calvin, whose God arbitrarily and irrevocably sorted out souls for Heaven or hell, before birth.” Presumably, the 144,000 (?) thing. Six billion people now live and 80 billion people have lived. Them… ain’t good odds.

ANCIENT CHINESE ASTRONOMY

My source for the oracle bones was Lucian Pye: A big name in Sinology. Pye is supported by NASA :
“By 2300 BC, ancient Chinese astrologers, already had sophisticated observatory buildings, and as early as 2650 BC, Li Shu was writing about astronomy. Observing total solar eclipses was a major element of forecasting the future health and successes of the Emperor, and astrologers were left with the onerous task of trying to anticipate when these events might occur. Failure to get the prediction right, in at least one recorded case in 2300 BC resulted in the beheading of two astrologers.”

(http://education.gsfc.nasa.gov/eclipse/pages/traditions_Calendars.html#China)

Oliver,

RE jury deliberations - you still didn't answer the question. You just repeated what you said before. I am not talking about a case where the jury members have differing opinions about the facts of the case, but a case where the jury members refuse to conclude, based on their own opinions, that the facts amount to a crime. eg. a girl goes out wearing a very skimpy outfit. A guy approaches her but she tells him to get lost. He grabs her. She again protests. He rapes her while she protests. Jury accepts all facts, but thinks she deserved it because she dressed like a whore => No guilty.

Put another way: why is rape wrong? Don't say "because the law says so" - why does such a law exist? If it is merely the opinion of the law makers and by extension, society at large, do you admit that rape may be legal one day? Is it a simple case of "might makes right" - the majority rule?

You said: "my sentences –unlike yours- were true self-references and have meaning"

No they don't have meaning. In what sense is the next sentence true and the last sentence false? What meaning do they convey? I asked this before and you didn't respond. BTW, its a cyclic reference not a self-reference.

You said: "Regarding, Luther and Copernicus, Kenny and I are jointed by Silver"

Silver cites the same Table Talk account, ergo he too is incorrect. Something that is objectively wrong, remains wrong regardless of how many people refuse to accept it.

Melanchthon expressed early disapproval of heliocentrism as a description of reality but later softened his position. See Bruce T. Moran, "The Universe of Philip Melanchthon: Criticism and Use of the Copernican Theory," Comitatus 4 (1973) 14.