Foxy
Americans have had huge problems last fifty years, they are in decline!
They have had a bad health system, they have had huge problems in work places, they have had millions of illigal migrants and rupidly change of population synthesis, they have had a huge number of prisoners and many killed american soldgiers arount the world!
Under these bad conditions for the Americans, especialy for the white Americans they had two choices, to learn and accept the American reality or to try to create a god according to their needs and ask him for support.
The white Americans who have used their brain voted OBAMA, the white Americans who turned to religious, created a god not less crazy from his creators! Usualy American's god is a war god, fighting against Muslims and Satan, the American god is supported from black magic and other exotic creatures imported from African. ask PALIN!
david f
"a consideration of religious identity as tied up with national identity and not just to discriminate" Is not it an other express of extrem nationalism and discrimination? Is not it an other kind of Talibanism in the Cristian world?
Unfortunatly various religious is the biggest source of hate and division on our planet.
There are not biggest hypocrities from the religious leaders. Did you see the empty churches on sundays? Did you see how many churches are for sale?
The question is what to do with Islam, a difficult question!
Israelis have to choices:
1. recognize the reality and give a fair solution to their problem with palestinians and arabs
2. Create a military theocratic state not different from the NAZIs or Talibans. As the synthesis of Israeli population will change and palestinias will become majority the Israelis will not have any other chance than to create their own Dachaou, Ausvits and Mathousen for palestinias this time!
I hope they will accept a fair solution than to drive their self in a hopeless position.
Antonios Symeonakis
Adelaide

Oliver,
Jesus teaching was to kingdom people in this context. Of assisting a asset rich brother in the faith to be compassioate. Note the comparison in your textual quote, it doesn't condemn gaining interest it merely states to show love to your brother in the faith do not expect all the repayment of principal as he may be struggling to repay. In Israel all debts were cleared in the seventh year.Jesus encoraged "Forgive our debtors as God has forgiven us".

Equally the other person has responsibility to show love by endeavouring to owe no man anything.

"And if you lend to those from whom you expect to receive, what credit is that to you? Even sinners lend to sinners, to get back the same amount. But love your enemies, and do good, and lend, expecting nothing in return, and your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High, for he is kind to the ungrateful and the evil." - Luke 34:35 KJV

However today we live in volitile economic society where every 20 - 30 years prices rise by 100% so a just interest must reflect this increase. However greed and lust have destroyed economic balance.
______________________________________

You said, A "Son" is presumably a special relationship not a term for divinity.

Divinity is the character and nature of one's spirit - i.e. born of God; not by family genetics, or by mere outward observance of religion. (John 1: 12 - 14) Though faith is outwardly demonstrated by compassionate action

Dear George,

I regard Lustiger and Edith Stein differently. Catholics gave Lustiger refuge. That was a good act. Because of circumstances his young impressionable mind was indoctrinated into a faith that alienated him from his people. I regard his life as a tragedy. Edith Stein made a decision to adopt another religion. I can’t argue with her free choice.

Bishop Spong makes more sense to me than other versions of Christianity I am aware of.

Dear Foxy,

Obama, in common with Washington, Kennedy and all other political leaders speaks to his constituency. In so doing all politicians are to some degree insincere in saying what they think their constituency wants them to say. Many politicians when elected say they are humbled. When one is humbled one is brought down in pride or arrogance or decisively defeated according to my dictionary. I pointed that out to a local politician who made that statement after she was elected. She confessed that she was unaware of the dictionary meaning of the word. The references to God are also often expected formula.

Dear Antonios,

I agree with many of your feelings toward religion. However, I do not like inflammatory rhetoric. Keeping a Jew from joining a country club is anti-Semitism. However, it is ridiculous to liken that to Hitler. I am sure that the Greek Orthodox clergy have some prejudices. However, I think bringing in the Taliban is also ridiculous.

Dear Philo,

England supported a Jewish state in the Middle East for more than one reason. In an arrogant act England decided who should own another people’s land. There was some sympathy in England for the Jewish people. There was also the desire to establish a state in the Middle East that in gratitude would be friendly to England. There was also the anti-Semitic motivation that Yids fleeing persecution would come to Israel rather than come to England. There is also that fact that England made promises to the Arabs that contradicted promises made to the Jews. England’s motives were murky, and its actions contradictory.

"However today we live in volitile economic society where every 20 - 30 years prices rise by 100% so a just interest must reflect this increase. However greed and lust have destroyed economic balance."
I wonder why prices increase by 100%, every 20-30 years?
Whether or not Jesus condemned Usury, or what his motivation was for driving the money changers from the Temple, is immaterial to my argument.
The Christian Church had strong laws against Usury for about 1500 years; during which time anyone who wanted to borrow money had to go to a Jewish money lender; from Christian Kings and landlords down.
Was Shakespeare's Shylock hated for his faith, or his insistence on his "pound of flesh"?

Dear Foxy,

More about religion and the founding of the US:

"The United States of America have exhibited, perhaps, the first example of governments erected on the simple principles of nature; and if men are now sufficiently enlightened to disabuse themselves of artifice, imposture, hypocrisy, and superstition, they will consider this event as an era in their history. Although the detail of the formation of the American governments is at present little known or regarded either in Europe or in America, it may hereafter become an object of curiosity. It will never be pretended that any persons employed in that service had interviews with the gods, or were in any degree under the influence of Heaven, more than those at work upon ships or houses, or laboring in merchandise or agriculture; it will forever be acknowledged that these governments were contrived merely by the use of reason and the senses..." (John Adams, in 1787 from his "A Defence of the Constitutions of Government of the United States of America;" as quoted by Adrienne E. Koch, ed., The American Enlightenment: The Shaping of the American Experiment and a Free Society

"Those of our "founding fathers" who participated in the drafting of the Constitution never intended their use of religious illustrations in speeches as more than rhetoric. They knew the dangers of giving constitutional or legal sanction either to civil religion or to Christianity or to any denominational expression. They knew that religious liberty requires freedom from any identification of religion with state action. They were intent on avoiding more than 100 years of religious intolerance and persecution in American colonial history and an even longer heritage of church-state problems in Europe." (John M. Swomley, Religious Liberty and the Secular State: The Constitutional Context, Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books, 1987, p. 114.)

The tardiness of this contribution might make it seem a little of topic now but here goes.

It seems some here can blithely state that God is a human invention and thus quite dismissible but come on people, what an invention!

I place it with the any of the high humanities that Foxy described, “philosophy, languages,
literature, history and the arts.” Its contribution to the advancement of humankind is immeasurable.

Even on a more basic level I know of people living very ordinary lives, (openly admitting to not having opened a book in decades) who after becoming Christians have found the time to be avid readers of the Bible and other associated literature and am now capable of holding quite deep conversations about the human condition.

I am convinced a true humanist would celebrate mankind’s ability to produce working religions that certainly serve needs within our societies. That there are obvious examples of its misuse should not preclude acknowledgement of its strengths.

Why can’t we place it side by side with romantic love? We can bounce from a discussion about serotonin levels (who wrote ‘Love has its pillars in secretions’?) to the attrition rate of people through murders of passion, but there aren’t many of us who would give up the chance for falling deeply and completely in love with someone and the surrender that entails.

A recent trip with the kids to the Pompeii exhibition was enlightening. Recovered from the ruins where plaster like busts of deceased relatives who were placed on high shelves looking down on the current generation. It is not a great stretch to see the effect an ‘all seeing’ ‘father on high’ might have on behaviour within the household and the powerful advantages to a society of promoting a concurrent set of beliefs.

I think it is obvious from history that humans adapt their religions to serve their societies at the time. In that there is an understandable lag (The Pope might condemn condoms but he is not burning heretics) gives the impression of religion as being out of date, but still an undeniable servant.