It matters not what you believe but how you treat your fellow man.
How can be have a concept of any superior being when we are incapable of controlling our own excesses and continually rape,pillage,murder and enslave our own kind?

Our concept of god is nothing but a manifestation of our own vanity.Man created god in his own image to serve his own purposes of power over others and alley his insecurities.Man wanted a father figure who was supposed to be infallible.

If there was a god based on our concepts, he would be no more bothered with us,than we the ants beneath our feet.

Measure your godliness by how you treat other people,then you have a starting point to progress.

One of the most fascinating aspects of my study of the law has been the way it has evolved from a Strict Mosaic Law, the Lex Talionis of the Jews and Moses, to what should be the Lex Misericordiae, the Law of Mercy which was introduced by Jesus Christ.

It evolved and transformed itself after the Media started calling for revenge again, and cheering heavy sentences for criminals, and out of all proportion sentences for minor offenders. Jesus Christ with his Lex Misericordiae, the law of forgiveness, on repentance, was the very foundation of the Law of England. Repentance was proved when a criminal paid a fine cheerfully to avoid jail. Those stupid media people who call for harsh sentences which you and I pay for, by maintaining expensive prisons, should do some serious homework, and go into the Crimes Act 1914 ( Cth) a Commonwealth law, that converts all sentences short of murder, to a monetary figure, and suggest that every prisoner be offered a cash payout instead of jail, and a chance to pay it off instead of serving in a jail at our expense.

The States have evolved into Quasi Gods. A Quasi God, is the God you have to have when Almighty God is no longer respected. Everyone must have a God or society does not function as a whole. The Commonwealth is a God, and Centrelink is it’s St Vincent de Paul society.

The problem we have is that two Justices of the Peace have evolved into a Magistrate. The Magistrate is paid by the same Paymaster as the Police, and the God of the State sets his discretion. This is retrograde evolution, within which a huge number of lawyers are becoming disillusioned. They call the Magistrates Court the sausage factory, where meat is processed on behalf of the State.

I cannot wait for the Australian Federal Police to start getting an education, and start enforcing S 268:10-12 of the Criminal Code Act 1995 ( Cth) against Judges and Magistrates to supply honest and fair services at reasonable cost to a hungry and frustrated public

Peter the Vexacious,
what you talk of is indeed the final hurdle! Why should we cloud legal issues with morals when a monetary solution is ready at hand? But what about the fact that O J Simpson can easily cough up and Chopper Read can't? But sorry, let's not cloud the issue with nonsense about equity, besides, you did say "short of murder". So what about the ATM hacker and the insider trader? I'm sure the latter would be happy to hand over a percentage of his million or billion dollar take to pay off the justice system, but the disillusioned ATM guy already spent his on drugs, and the take wouldn't cover it anyway?
Was God ever respected (I'm not talking lip service)?
Centrelink is the small price spoiled buffoons pay to maintain the lifestyle to which they've (blundered in to) become accustomed.
Congtatulations on your fatuous Latin, but you're a bit short on substance: "retrograde evolution" is a contradiction in terms and lawyers can't get "disillusioned", surely?

Dear Peter Vexatious,

The Lex Talionis (eye for eye, tooth for tooth) of the Jews and Moses was never literally applied since the Torah forbids maiming as punishment. It means there should be appropriate penalties for various actions - generally specified fines. Let the punishment fit the crime. A heavy sentence out of proportion to the offense is a violation of the lex talionis. After punishment the matter is considered settled. This was a great advance over the situation existing at the time. At the time there would be an act of revenge from the victim's family for the wrong and corresponding retribution from the other family. Such blood feuds could go on for generations after the original act was forgotten. The Lex Talionis replaced the blood feud.

I think it is a bad idea to lessen criminal penalties due to a show of remorse. That rewards hypocrisy and punishes sincerity. A hardened criminal can be quite effective at showing remorse. A war protester who has been convicted of destroying draft or conscription files would in general feel that he or she had done nothing wrong and would not feel or show remorse. Justice should be tempered with mercy, but extenuating circumstances should not include showing remorse after conviction.

Peter Vexatious also wrote:

Those stupid media people who call for harsh sentences which you and I pay for, by maintaining expensive prisons, should do some serious homework, and go into the Crimes Act 1914 ( Cth) a Commonwealth law, that converts all sentences short of murder, to a monetary figure, and suggest that every prisoner be offered a cash payout instead of jail, and a chance to pay it off instead of serving in a jail at our expense.

Dear Peter,

Rehabilitation usually involves confinement along with providing psychologists and other professionals to cope with the antisocial attitudes of the offender and possibly giving the offender training so that he or she is equipped to make an honest living.

Some offenders should be locked up because they are a danger to the community.

The expense for the above is justified.

It appears this thread could be hijacked by another theme.

The topic is Christianity and evolution. I am a Christian believer as taught and demonstrated in the life of Jesus and reasercher of the Biblical text.

I remain unconvinced that the Christian fundamentalists six day creationism and evolution by natural selection can give us all the answers to life and beginnings. Though there may be some insights into the original Genesis text. Life began in a localised place with springs of water to form a garden. The Biblical text only uses the word "bara" meaning to create from nothing three times and it indicates new material. On all other occasions the same material is used to form new developments.
1. Creation "bara" of universe at the beginning of time - this contained all the current chemistry of our universe.
2. Creation "bara" of moving and warm blooded creatures - this indicated a self consciousness to creatures.
3. Creation "bara" of intelligent humanity. Formed from the basic chemistry but implanted with an intelligent and moral consciousness.

On all other developments the existing materials were permitted or ordered to produce as identified by the term "amar" and the word "Let" in our English Bibles. For example "Let the land produce vegetation" which in effect means the land already had the conditions and power to produce vegetation and the diversity of species. This could imply an evolving nature.

However the Genesis 1: 1 - 2: 3, text is not consistent with monotheistic revelation as it uses Elohim (plural) as the sourse of creation and may be from ancient Chaldean, Egyptian, or Babylonian origins which the Hebrews incorporated into the Torah as an introduction. The Septuagint, written for Greek speaking Jews about 284 - 247 BC, overcomes this purality by the common Greek word Theos a single God.

Philo every thread is high jacked.
And your post did not try to return us to the subject.
I am extremely interested in the idea Christianity now believes in evolution.
My views remain As they are in my last post here, and evolution of belief is something I can see, clearly.
We do evolve, even in just one lifetime we rarely end life the same as we started it.
I however would like opinions about the idea Catholics believe in evolution, yes I understand that now some Church's embrace the idea.
But what place in time can be pin pointed as the time evolution and Christianity came together?