News you won't see in controlled mainstream media.

I think that www.drdino.com is the place to learn all about creation and evolution! Especially Seminar tape #3.

And Dinosaur Adventure Land is incredible.

Thanks. Great idea. Very logical and informed. Also www.icr.org is a good source for information for novices to researchers.

Thanks for the link.

I believe evolution is positively the most ridiculous thing I've ever come across. It truly amazes me that anyone could believe something so unscientific and illogical.

Intelligent Design Demands Intelligence

Why couldn't evolution co-exist with the idea/belief of creationism?

Evolution does exist. What's open for debate is how much evolution plays a role in our (indeed all life's) existance.

It's proven that giraffes once had shorter necks. Their bodies adapted to the environment just as humans have adapted to their environments. Different races amongst our own species is proof of evolving to adapt to the environment. African natives tend to have larger nostrils to facilitate sand filtration in desert-like climates. Their skin is also, clearly, darker due to millenia of walking in the sun. Just as Innuit have a propensity for chubby cheeks; they live in polar regions where excess of fat helps maintain warmth. There are environmental reasons why Skandinavians tend to have fair hair, eyes, and skin, as well. The list goes on. Mankind didn't just become like this, they evolved to match their environment.

Small scale evolution is irrifutible. It's proven that bacteria evolves to match environmental changes. There is type of month in Hawaii which subsits solely off pineapple trees yet, miraculously, the insect was introduced to the islands only 50 some years ago, before such time they had never encountered pineapple trees! Their diet and digestive system evolved in a very short time.

Large scale evolution, I agree, is open to debate (though certainly one possibility among many -- nothing is for certain). Whether mankind simply evolved from single-celled organisms, into monkeys and, thus, into homo sapiens is certainly unproven. Though there is proof of subspecies of pre-homo sapien humans (neanderthal, et al).

I don't see why evolution and creationism necessarily need oppose one another. Belief in (a) God doesn't require denying evolution.

Just my two cents.

...I hope I'm not challenging anyone's personal beliefs by the way. I'm really just having a discussion <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Is that the missing "link"? Anyway, Russ & Egan, I love both your essays. It is not an either/or issue, is it. At any rate, I think all the flap is over Darwin's Theory, not evolution in general. People who defend evolution don't seem to realize that Darwin's is only one theory. There are other, more sensible, ones. As for me, I don't give KNOW what is the Truth. I just know that the justifications for defence of evolution in general are indeed a desire to carry out noxious, big-time social engineering, as Russ has pointed out. I have never heard it expressed better. I am going to go read it again! Same for Egan's rebuttal. This is good stuff.

I am almost done writing a long post on this issue but haven't had time to finish it yet. I will as soon as I can.

It's important to really study the political and economic influences of the belief in evolution and how evolution has been used to secure certain socialistic agendas. Then, it's important to look at the "information brokers" in the msm (mainstream media) and see what motivates them and with whom they're connected.

With all this behind you, the motiviation behind the promotion of the belief of evolution becomes clear. In fact, certain documentation can be acquired (FIA) that blatantly states that evolution is promoted for these purposes.

There is more to it but after spending years putting the pieces together, my world view?including the drive behind for the agressive promotion of the belief of evolution?has itself "evolved" to the point of predictability.

The bottom line in the ongoing battle for power and money in this world is this:

It's a battle for the mind.

Canada, where I reside, is the worst. Our government is essentially run by the scariest bunch of social engineers of the politically-correct variety that you could possibly have a nightmare about. Name any self-promoting identity group of "victims" with their hand plugged in to the Great Provider, and they are supporters of the Liberal Party of Canada, the group of wierdos who run this godforsaken country. The 2 latest gifts from this bunch are multi-billion dollar, state-run Daycare, and, of course, same-sex marriage.

The thing that amazes me to no end is this:

If only a small percentage of the people who have common sense would organize and get involved in making common sense changes against these ridiculous activists you speak of, it would be easy to accomplish.

I have tried with much effort to motivate people and organize groups and found that most Americans will not lift a finger much less devote 1 or 2 hours per month to work to maintain our freedoms and moral sanity.

There is nothing more astounding to me about human nature than this resistance to invest in freedom and common sense in the country you live it. It never ceases to amaze me.

People, unfortunately, would rather wait until there is a crisis before doing something. It's very sad. The founders expressed it well...


"...mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed"

The Unanimous Declaration of the Thirteen United States of America


"The germ of destruction of our nation is in the power of the judiciary, an irresponsible body ? for impeachment is scarcely a scarecrow ? working like gravity by night and by day, gaining a little today and a little tomorrow, and advancing its noiseless step like a thief over the field of jurisdiction, until all shall be usurped from the States, and the government of all be consolidated into one. ...when all government...in little as in great things, shall be drawn to Washington as the centre of all power, it will render powerless the checks provided of one government on another and will become as venal and opressive as the government from which we separated."

Thomas Jefferson, 1821
emphasis mine

I agree Russ. I think we take too much for granted in this Country- and think its always going to be available to us. This is far from the truth.

I still write letters to Congressmen. Don Sherwood is getting sick of seeing my name..heh heh.!


Ohh, funny thing happened to me the other day. I got a Lawsuit Claim settlement letter sent to me by the Federal Trade Commission.

about 6 years ago, I purchased some "Ultimate HGH" supplement (all natural- no side effects) which helped me get through the cold dark Winter months- and even lose about 5 lbs in the process.

Kevin Trudeau did the Infomercial on this supplement. I think it is from a company that he owns. Well after Kevin's book came out on the market--stirring up hornest's nests in the FDA and FTC-- they decided to pick on him and made one of many class action suits against his products (probably because they hate that he is blowing the whistle on all thier corruption )

They won the lawsuit (which is no surprise to me- with all their $$ they are swimming naked in ) and sent all the past customers claims forms so we can get re-imbursed from the company that sold the Ultimate HGH.

I was soooooo angry!!!!! I crossed my mailing address off the form, and wrote in capital letters, "I am MORE THAN satisifed with Ultimate HGH and had no ill effects whatsoever from using this product- but actually had many health benefits from it--- Unlike pharmecuetical and over-the-counter drug products I have used before or afterwards.

I question the sincerity of your lawsuit. A reimbursement is not desired. Please get some Ethics., Thankyou."

My friends and family warned me that i'm probably on some FBI "questionable character" list now for writing that. I wouldnt be surprised either-- the way our Country is going!

Anyway- why sell your soul to the Devil-- especially for a few $$$ reimbursement for a product that actually did no harm and helped people.

The letter they sent me stated that the law suit was because the company made "unsubstantiated claims that the product could assist in symptoms of variuos diseases" or words to that effect.

I was so boiling mad I called the FTC toll free number -- but naturally, all I got were tons of recordings with no place to leave a message.

Hi Egan, you make a good point.

I agree to a point. Though I don't believe humans came from fish swimming in the Ocean and I do believe God created us from scratch. - I do feel that He is constantly perfecting His Artwork, and also has implanted genes in all living creatures to adapt to it's surroundings and change accordingly.

In that respect, I feel God uses Evolution as a means of constant growth and improvement. Not to grow is to backslide in the spiritual as well as in the physical.

I dont see the Evolution in the same way the Scientists see it though.

Also, I feel that in the book of Genesis, We read how God walked the Earth and was saddened at all the destruction on the earth. He decided to RESTORE it and He separated the Elements and created life. This leads us to realize that Earth had life on it (the dinasours, etc) until something was permitted to destroy it.--such as a meteor. Then God restored the ruins.

My pastor once mentioned He feels that this destruction from a meteor could have been a reprecussion that happened in the physical dimension after Satan withdrew from God and fell from Heaven. He said that when some decision is made on the spiritual Plane, there are reprecussions in the physical. Like a pebble thrown in the water making ripple effects.

About HGH...

I used it to strengthen my immune system the year before I discovered that my amalgams were causing my immune system to fail. It worked really well.

I agree about Trudeau; I think he's a hero. It's very satisfying to see his infomercials on every night on 2 to 5 channels exposing what we've known for 15 years.

The corruption in this country is so huge, it will succeed in it's short-terms goals simply because:

(1) Americans are apathetic and/or poisoned by mercury which makes you tired and amotionally submissive (in fact it's used in certain religions to subdue your enemies), and

(2) The conspiracy is so huge and well coordinated that most people won't get involved in working against it because they can't believe it could be so huge and they would not know about it.

Very sad; history just keeps repeating itself.

About evolution...

This is nothing more than another leg of the conspiracy.

It's so blatantly obvious to most scientists that evolution is impossible and did not occur that creation—and therefore the existence of God—is mandatory. Because the conspirators hate God so much, they are determined to use lies and the brute strength of mass media to convince "the masses" that most scientists agree that evolution exists.

It's important to follow the money... from the msm (mainstream media) to the textbook manufacturers, they've got it all wrapped up and the massess are left struggling in their ignorance instead of judging truth by logic (and history). Divide and conquer is the order of the century and you can only conquer when the masses believe they have nothing after this life. Only then, by holding all they have—this life—over their heads can you really control the masses.

I am finishing a longer in-depth explaination about the subject of evolution which I will publish here when it's finished.

The main thing to remember is that it's mathmatically impossible that symmetry can exist and "disconnected order" (i.e. the complex structure of the eye, reproductive system and even single-cell systems) can exist via evolution.

Just like a the intellectually-blind player at the roulette wheel who falsely believes that red is more likely to come up next because black has come up several times previously (in truth, the chance remains exactly the same each time), by adding astronomical amounts of "time" to the equasion, evolution absolutely does not increase in likelihood. It remains at the exact same level of likelihood—impossible. These astronomical numbers are only added to obfuscate the data—to confuse the observer.

You have to really think it through thoroughly to realize this but the numbers don't lie.

If anyone gets caught up in the idea that the masses could not mostly believe something untrue, research "the tomato effect". It's only one in a long list of examples. The majority of examples are now exposed and have been purportrated by msm. Yet, the sheep-like masses still follow those who continually have been shown to lie to them. Amazing; yet this is exactly what the Bible said would happen at this time in history.

The trouble I have with "Creationism" is that it is predominantly a Christian belief.

I am ever thankful to have been raised by an agnostic, as this has granted me the ability to see the world, life, etc., through a bird's eye view. I think it's important for all people to be educated with as many religions as possible and not just any one specific belief system. I don't wish to berate Christians (or any other religion) but I find most die-hard bible-thumpers were born and raised CHRISTIAN. Of course they're going to defend their steadfast belief relentlessly!

Let me ask you something. If you were raised Hindu, for example, do you honestly think you would have such strong Christian views? Would you just magically convert one day and -- voila -- have "found god" just like that? I ask that to any strong Christian advocates, not to anyone in particular. You might find that instead of defending the bible and conjuring up all sorts of analyses about omens and divine interventions, you would be debating the "irrifutible" evidence behind reincarnation and the role Shiva plays in all our lives.

Personally, I've always tried to look at life as a realist. I don't know anything, nor do I claim to know. Only one thing is certain to me: whatever after life (or lack thereof) may exist, we're not supposed to know. How could any human go on living if they actually, truly knew the answer to that question? To the faithful -- and I mean this with no disrespect -- I say, go ahead and believe until you are blue in the face. You still don't KNOW.

And yet, as the realist I am I find both traditional Christian ideals AND scientific atheism unconvincing. It's entirely possible there exists a god(s) and yet no afterlife. Or that said god(s) have absolutely no concern for the individual. I try not to deny the possibility of anything. I've taken a lot from a multitude of religions over the years, and am thankful to have maintained an open mindedness enough to learn from each. I've found aspects of Buddhism and Suffism, in particular, both fascinating and convincing, for example.

I cannot accept the flat belief of raw atheism simply because of the ability of the human mind. What purpose does it serve in nature? Take lucid dreaming for example. Why are we, as humans, capable of such feats? That shouldn't automatically point us towards religion, but it definately says that a greater unknown exists, one unexplained by both religion AND science.

I don't know necessarily that governments and media are trying to promote evolution for malicious purposes. Maybe they are, though that doesn't necessarily make it incorrect. I haven't pursued the topic greatly but I would guess the opposite, that Christianity is promoted and shoved down our throats. The right-winged conservatives tout "traditional Christian" values every step of the way. That doesn't sound like evolution promotion if you ask me.

Again, I hope this does not offend those of you strong in the Christin faith. I ask that you respect my opinions and beliefs as I respect yours. This is merely discussion.

Hi Egan. Thanks for the discussion.

The bottom line here is that people need to do their homework, and very few do. I have, however.

The fact is, all information that supposedly "supports" evolution is untrue. I know it's difficult to believe but if you put some time into researching this out, you will realize that evolution is nothing more than a "PR" campaign. Ironically, the promoters of evolution have even admitted it, but you have to know where to look.

You really have to study to get to the bottom of these things. Don't make the mistake of blindly accepting "facts" that are presented by textbooks or MSM. You have to get direct information about exactly how experiments were done and in every single case you will find that your source of information is completely untrue and/or that key facts have been altered and the evidence actually supports intelligent design.

Time and time again you will find the same kind of situation as we did when we looking at Nutrasweet...

A cancer-causing component of Nutrasweet was being tested in a Searle-funded "scientific" study. The rats testing the substance were fed the substance, but it was formed into large, hard crystals; too large for the rats to ingest so they just ate around it. The scientist falsely reported that the rats ingested the substance in exchange for about $30,000. The "study" concluded that the substance did not increase the incidence of brain tumors.

Another similar fraud is that surrounding refrigerants...

These substances do not deplete the ozone layer of the atmosphere. This propaganda was spread because a patent held by DuPont was expiring. By outlawing/restricting the use of the "old" refrigerants, DuPont now continue to benefit from it's monopoly on the multibillion dollar refrigerant market by holding a new patent on the new substance. This fraud is well-known by higher-level financial managers but not by the public in general.

This is a small sample of the kinds of fraud that are sold to the public and blindly believed. Evolution is simply another one. Keep studying.

All the best, and as always...

Don't be a propaganda repeater: Do your research.

I believe in evolution and a creator. If, for example, we look at society 1000 years ago, it was a lot more primitive. Society has evolved in that time to have what we do now - computers etc.

I don't find evolution as taught by atheists to be quite convincing. In fact I find it very hard to believe. I think that humans were created by a God with many capacities, including the capacity for evil (if we don't know what evil is we would just be robots of goodness without any choice or free will in the matter. To know what is good we must know what is bad. Goodness can't exist independently of badness) and the capacity to adapt to the world around us and to adapt our word.

I completely believe evolution is complete fiction. The data speaks for itself. I have no interest in subverting truth at all. If evolution were true, I honestly would want to know and I would accept it just as happily as I now accept Christianity (based on evidence).

Even if I was not a Christian and had no belief in a "God" at all, pure logic dictates, after taking a careful look at the evidence and the current state of science, that evolution is simply a creation of the current "elitist" to accomplish a certain agenda of social reform by which certain "elitist" become extremely rich.

This subject is a deep study which I have conducted over a period of years which bears great value in forming a world view.

Ideas to ponder...

"Big lies are not uncommon today. It is only the mass rejection of the existence of true evil that keeps them alive."

"Archaeologists find order in the form or writings, drawings or carvings in stone and openly pronounce that it was created by a former intelligence. Evolutionists find extreme high order in DNA and they call it chance."

Not all Evolutionists are propogandists, just as not all Christians, Muslims, or Hindus, etc. are propogandists. It's a mere belief system, nothing more. Indeed, the very man who conjured the idea of evolution was most definately not theorising his ideas with any ulterior motives in mind. He lost his job as a professor and was virtually blacklisted evermore for daring to think outside the Victorian mould.

While evolution may be used by some as a means of propoganda, Christianity has also been one of the most successful propoganda tools for the past two millenia. Centuries upon centuries of bloodshed have been excused in the name of the Christian God. Even unpresident George W. Bush, who touts Christianity profusely, uses his religion as a form of propoganda, namely: excusing the terrorism of thousands of innocent Iraqi men, women, and children.

While I'm not denying the possibility that evolution is used as some form of conspiracy, it's all too obvious that Christianity has accomplished the very same. Not all Christians are propagandists, surely, but there's a whole heck of a lot who are!

Having been raised by an agnostic, I was made to feel very out of place in the public school system of America growing up, where Christmas was not only celebrated in school, but seemingly mandatory. And when it was discovered by my peers that I hadn't been baptised, I found myself on the receiving end of shrewd skepticism and questioning glances evermore.

Evolution, itself, was not conceived for the purpose of conspiracy, just as Hinduism, Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, et al were not conveived for conspiracy either. They're mere belief systems. While some may take advantage of any number of these beliefs (evolution among them), that does not make the very concept, itself, a conspiracy.

There are Christians who practise their belief for good just as there are evolutionists who study their beliefs for good.

I couldn't disagree with you more, my friend.

Of course not all evolutionists are propogandists, however, every belief system carries with it deep implications. Those implications affect every area of life and culture. Ironically, you "eloquently" state this in your very next paragraph:



Certainly a "mere belief system, nothing more" could not invoke such horrible things, could it?

You're absolutely correct to say "Not all Evolutionists are propogandists". In fact, you could have expanded this idea to say that a belief system is often not well represented by it's constituents, and you would have done well. However, by your own reasoning, you cannot blame the belief system for the actions of those who use it outside of it's realm of implication. Therefore, you cannot say "oh, evolution is just a mere belief system so what difference does it make", yet continue to say, "people acting in the name of Christianity have shed a lot of blood" and then conclude that Christianity itself is harmful or evil. That's simply a hypocritical argument.

The fact is, each belief system has it's own logically flowing hierarchal set of deep implications, and those implications are important. Those who draw illogical conclusions are often just acting in thier own interest and are using some belief system to ease their conscience and/or maintain their social mores.

With this in mind, let's look at the purely logical implications of evolution.

• Genetic Engineering and Manipulation
  If DNA is just a result of error and/or natural processes, surely we can do better with intellect. Unfortunately, we're already seeing this backfire on us. This philosophy is leading us to horrible issues with the food supply and has already led to new diseases and previously unknown health issues. This issue alone deserves your study.
• Natural Selection
  So much for compassion and sympathy; Forget helping the poor and needy; This direct evolutionary-value promotes choas in society: Anything goes; It's just "natural selection" at work. Some refer to this idea as "Social Darwinism". Corrupt politicians are just using thier position to gain an advantage for their survival and enjoyment. It's OK. It's natural!
• Pharmacology
  Hey, if nature is just chance and error, surely we can do better. Let's attempt to manipulate systems for... oh...whatever reason we want, perhaps even natural selection. The Journal of the American Medical Association says that up to 140,000 deaths are caused by "Adverse Drug Reactions" (ADEs) from Doctor-prescribed drugs every year in the U.S. alone. Even though some believe this number is low, it is now being revealed that only 3%-5% of ADEs are reported as such (my father being a perfect example). If you do the math, this means that over 2.5 million people may die each from ADEs in the U.S. This makes pharmaceuticals the #1 cause of death by far. Because the actions of pharmacology are perfectly justified, even encouraged implicitly by the idea of evolution, I wonder how those numbers compare to those who have justified their actions using the Bible for "bloodshed"; Do the math. No wonder the Bible not only foretold of a great deception concerning pharmaceuticals during this period of time, it also imposed stiff penalties for anyone producing them. How many people have died needlessly because of the side-effects of prescription drugs, and how many lives have been ruined from the same cause. There are natural alternatives that are far superior and immeasurably safer that are being withheld and/or restricted because of the actions of the pharmaceutical companies, but perhaps they can justify their actions inside themselves through the concept of natural selection.
• No God
  Of course, I would write a book (I may very well do that some time) about my studies related to finding out if there is a God or not, nevertheless, because there is an inescapable God-shaped vacuum in each of us, and because mankind tends not to want to submit to a higher authority, mankind elevates himself into the position of God and the results are always harmful. You can see this pattern throughout history with Egyptian pharaohs or leaders of the Roman empire. You can see this to a smaller extent in the Catholic church by those who love to be called "father", which is specifically spoken about in Bible prophecy (search the "city on seven hills"). Again, you simply have humans seeking to justify their own desires and using evolution to justify their actions.

Just these profound, logical evolutionary implications should make the intellect ponder how humankind could survive for long while embracing this belief system, much less examining the logic—or lack thereof—behind it.

True Christianity is defined in the Bible, not by the actions of those who call themselves Christians. It's tenants are quite the opposite of evolution and promote:

• Freedom
  The Constitution of the united States is taken directly from Biblical law. The concept of Biblical freedom could be summarized by this: "You are free to do what you will so long as you don't harm anyone else or their property and your don't impede their inalienable rights". In short, "No victim, no crime." The most powerful and prosperous country in history grew from the fertle roots of this law and personal purity (righteousness). Of couse, there has been a great battle for many years which has left the U.S. in a state which scarcely resembles it's original form. Now, it more-closely resembles a socialistic police state which is the natural outgrowth of Democracy (the U.S. was not originally a democracy). This exact scenario was solemnly warned against by the founders. Evolutionary belief enables socialism (this is documented as one of the founding beliefs of socialism), democracy and all the evils that come from it. This is why countries that were taken over by communists in the past 100 years were not first taught the deep tenants of communism or socialism, they were taught in-depth evolutionary theory first—before anything else—while emmense information distributions systems (mainstream media) were implemented. (Now it begins to make sense to the uneducated reader.)
• Equality Under Law (Justice)
  Man did not have to live in fear of the law or government because the law never changed and the government didn't have the authority to make laws. Why? Because the law was the Bible and biblical law is eternal. The legislative branch was not authorized to make new laws, they only applied the existing law to changing situations and were supposed to provide continuing protection for people against governmental abuse. Jury members sat in judgement of these "applications of law" directly. If a person on trial was found to have violated a legislated application of the law but the jury found that the application was invalid, they had the freedom to vote "not guilty" thereby nullifying the effect of an abusive application on one person. Because Biblical law is quite simple and never changes, ignorance of the law "is no excuse"; You could hold the entire law in your hand. Today, it's impossible for one person to know the whole of mankind's "law".

The rest of your post simply deals with actions of people, which is irrelevant in a conversation dealing with the profound implications of belief systems.



Many of us feel bad at times in our lives, often at the hands or other people. I've been there many times and often in great distress, however, I have found that these times are some the most valuable lessons we have in knowing ourselves and becoming better people and more effective servants to mankind. I embrace them and am thankful for them.

I know this sounds idealistic, but it is an idealistic world we live in—if we understand it. It works, so long as you're not confounded by the fundamental underlying truths. Unfortunately, this is the exact reason evolution is so heavily promoted: To confound people to create a political environment that allows the insertion of man into the place of God. Nothing new; Just the same old stuff throughout history; and the Bible speaks in great detail about this period of time.

I would recommend reading the Bible (read the New King James translation; Many of the more recent translations have been altered to confound.), and reading any of the resources in the following post. They will help anyone understand the state of the world today:

Understanding Your World

People would also benefit from reading "The Protocols". They describe how Darwinism, Nietzschism, and Marxism were "invented". Although this document has been discredited, you must consider the sources that discredit it and carefully consider that nearly all of the plans laid forth in it have been skillfully accomplished by the "powers that be".

It's also important to point out that Bush is not a Christian. Anyone who believes he is simply does not understand the very fundamentals of the Bible. What Bush is doing in Iraq is horrible, immoral and based on lies.

I know that this statement would insult a lot of people—Especially those who like Bush and are "Christians"—but it is simply a fact.

Amazingly, most people who call themselves Christians don't read the Bible, much less know it. This was first told to me by a preacher. I had a hard time believing it, but now know it's absolutely true. The Bible even foretold about this time—a time when the Chruch would become lazy and self-serving and would rather listen to preachers who "tickle their ears" rather than to hard truth. Well, here we are.

Egan, I bet you and I would agree on most issues. The barrier is that the corrupt forces in the world redefine words and lie about belief systems, and, on the surface, that gets in the way of an easy agreement. It's called, "Divide and Conquer".

The key is not to forget what history teaches us—true history; Not the ridiculous stories that are handed to us by foundation-funded textbooks. There are heros and there are tyrants but, the most ingenious thing the devil ever did was to convince the world he doesn't exist.

I don't invent the truth. I don't even lobby for it. I simply observe and report. That's my job. That's my testimony.

NOTES

* "DRUG-RELATED morbidity and mortality have been estimated to cost more than $136 billion a year in the United States. These estimates are higher than the total cost of cardiovascular care or diabetes care in the United States. A major component of these costs is adverse drug reactions (ADEs). In addition, ADEs may account for up to 140,000 deaths annually in the United States."

JAMA 1997, 277(4): 301

Let me define what I mean by "Mere Belief Systems".

If I think bananas taste excellent and you think bananas taste horrible, and we then proceed to lay siege to one another's homes in the argument, thereby slaughtering innocent victims in our wake and subjecting the remaining few to bow down to our beliefs, what is this situation beyond mere quibbling? From that vantage point, what is it beyond a mere belief system? So much bloodshed over what? BANANAS!?! Do you think it's any different where religion is concerned? I don't. Allow me to expound on the reasons why.

If I understand your wording correctly, Russ, you seem to imply that fighting over religion is not "merely a belief system". While I'm only too happy to respect the beliefs of others (Creationists AND Evolutionists among them, though you seem to only respect the former and not the latter) I also recognise that when you categorise religion beyond "mere belief systems", what you're invariably doing, whether conscious or not, is excusing the bloodshed and mass slaughter which has existed for millenia at the hands of, yes, something that is little more than a belief, plain and simple. Maybe to you it's more than "mere", but I assure you those who've lost their lives and the lives of their loved ones because they refused to cower before the "Almighty" think otherwise. Whatever conspiracies exist (or you think exist) regarding evolution, I can point you towards an infiniate amount more evidence that Christianity (and indeed Monotheism as a whole) has done far more damage and commited far more acts of brutality and terror. Maybe these people aren't "Christian" by your or the bible's definition, but it's still done in the Christian/Muslim/<Insert Similar Monotheistic Belief Here> name. Evolution simply hasn't been around as long to have done as much damage, besides which, Evolution isn't a monotheistic belief and, therefore, lacks the propensity for violence which monotheism has been awared.

One of the reasons I've always held Christianity with such contempt is that 99.9% of all the Christians I've met routinely violate the very rules they've allegedly dedicated themselves to live by. Conversely, nearly every Evolutionist I've met has been kind hearted, doesn't commit adultery, respects others, and, amusingly enough, seems to practise all the "Love Thy Neighbor" precepts of the Christian religion -- far moreso than the Christians I've encountered. Something just doesn't add up there. I'm not saying there aren't good Christians, but based on everything mentioned above, it's still left a bitter taste in my mouth for said religion.

Everything which is fought over, just about, is for minor incidentals (mere nothings). The blood of innocents has been shed over territory, dirty looks, political and religious beliefs, you name it. And at the end of the day, killing anyone for these reasons is paltry when compared to the heinous acts committed in their name. In my opinion, if you kill me because I like bananas and you don't, that's no different than killing me because I refuse to accept someone else's belief that when I die I'll sit on a cloud with feathered wings. I'm sorry, I don't believe that, and if you step into my homeland, annihalate my people and enslave the survivors, all because we refuse to accept what we view as absurdity, then you've just committed terror over nothing more than a mere belief system.

The world would be a sad place indeed if we were all Christian; just as it would be sad if we were all Jewish, or all Shinto, Bon Buddhist, etc. But it would also be an equally sad place if there wasn't room for Christians, or, for that matter, Evolutionists.

Regardless of whatever conspiracies lie behind certain beliefs, none of these beliefs are conspiracies in and of themselves. Like Christianity -- a perfectly wonderful ideology -- this "mere belief system" can and has routinely been used as a propoganda tool. You say Evolution creates a desensitised atmosphere? Christianity has accomplished the same tenfold, with a far lengthier history. Here, look, I can commit geonice and say it's "Divine Intervention", it's "God's" will! Now we have the perfect excuse to do whatever we want. When Christopher Columbus the Butcher erected policies making it legal to dismember innocent native American men, women, and children to be used as dog feed, he was using Christianity to desensitise his people. It's "God's Will" that these "barbarians" be slaughtered, they're barely human anyway, so go ahead, feed them to your dog! The same goes for the terrorist anti-hero Andrew Jackson, who tanned a native American's skin and turned it into a horse's bridle! Meanwhile the former is given a public holiday and the latter revered on the face of a 20 dollar bill. How patriotic. (Though that's an entirely different subject, I suppose, I felt it deserved some merit here).

It's all about perception. I respect your opinion immensely, Russ, and your feedback on this discussion forum is one of the reasons which brings me coming back here again and again. You've raised some very good points in your rebuttal, some of which I cannot argue against: you're right. And I also think that we agree more than we disagree, it's more a matter of what angle we're looking at it from. So when I say these are "mere belief systems", that's not to belittle them, rather, it's to point out that elevating them to a higher degree forgives millenia of terror. I just can't do that, after all, it's merely one man's belief versus another. And what a wonderful world we live in where we're all allowed to have and to share a multitude of beliefs, no?

As always, I'm not trying to offend anyone in my comments. This is just a fun discussion. I've actually learned a great deal from some of the previous posts here, even if we stand in opposition with our views. I enjoy experiencing opinions with those I may disagree with. Sometimes it even changes my perception.

As a final note on Evolution vs. Creationism, I'd like to point out that Atheism has long been the scorn, ridicule, and target of imperial, monotheistic cultures for a long time. Even during the Renaissance era when Aethism became something of a fad, it was still, ultimately, a heresy. I had a devout born-again-Christian friend years ago who once said to me, "It's too bad that Christianity has been given such a bad rap over the years and has always been put down by others." My immediate thought was, dude, what are you talking about! Evolution and Atheism combined have undergone about as much mistreatment as a pin cushion -- BY the Christians, no less!

Anyway, that's my two cents.

Don't you think that having "contempt" towards Christians gives you a tendency of bias and prejudice? I have faced a lot of contempt from people for being a Christian and airing my opinions on what "I" believe.

I try not to have contempt for belief systems that are different to my own and try to respect all ways of life, but a big stumbling block for me in that is the oppression of women in some other cultures. There's no choice involved when there is no knowledge of an alternative. I believe, and actively support, eduating women in third world countries to help them break the cycle of male domination and exploitation. Ironically, for non-Christians, the help to do this comes from Christianity, which some see as suppressive itself. A lot of charities in the world have Christian foundations.

I am a Christian, but Christians have hurt me, as much as non-Christians at times. I try not to fall into the trap of judging God by the nastiness in the world. I do see a lot of nastiness and exploitation in this world, and I am very saddened, and sometimes maddened, by Christians who break the rules of faith.

I wouldn't like to presume to judge who is a "true" Christian or not, that's not my place, but I can tell you there are an awful lot of Christians out there who are in the faith mainly out of a desire for salvation (i.e. not to go to hell). They use Christ like a ticket into heaven. This disgusts me, but if I tackle them about it, I am accused of judging etc.

One of the biggest indicators of whether someone is this kind of Christian is whether they will have sex out of marriage or not. This is the "biggie", especially in today's society where it is the norm to be sexually active. This is the topic that brings me into clash with those who claim to be Christians but don't live by Biblical morality.

For what it's worth, I do <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" /> I have always waited for marriage, and I understand the reasons God tells us too and I fully see the wisdom of that. Some Christians will try to justify their activities and don't care at all for what the Bible says on this. They live by the idea that so long as they believe they can basically do what they like. I don't go to church, but I try to live by the rules of my faith as best as I can. And, I don't do it out of a sense of going to hell, because I'm a "liberal" Christian and believe that hell is eternal damnation (i.e. not exist anymore) rather than eternal torture.

I really am quite an odd person to the world, lol - Christian, vegetarian, pro-life but feminist. It's not easy to fit in, believing what I do, but there are those who accept me, and I try to offer the same acceptance.

I won't say that I am the strongest Christian in the world. There are times I doubt. But I only have to look around and see how bad this world is to see the need for moral standards. Atheists have nothing but subjective ideas on what is moral - and that is very dangerous. Who is to set the standards? Who is to say what is right and wrong?

I also believe that Christian teachings have better foundation in science and practise than atheism - for example:

Atheism - have sex with whoever you want, when you want it. No right or wrong. Live together before marriage if you want. Have multiples partners. Practise safe sex.

Christianity - God advises us to save sex for marriage.

Results of Atheism - sexually transmitted diseases, unwanted pregnancies, abortion, single parenthood, emotional hurt, prostitution trade, pornography. Scientifically, no such thing as "safe sex" only "safer sex". People dying of AIDS because of this false message i.e. HIV can pass through condoms (if they have not been kept in certain conditions etc). Living together actually decreases chance of marital happiness, according to recent surveys.

Results of Christianity - solid building up of relationship before marriage, children born into marriage. And if the couple love each other as the Bible says they should (and not all do this, hence why divorce even in Christian circles) should be very happy marriage, both loving each other.

Humanity:

Atheists - moral to abort any imperfect baby or unwanted baby. Therefore, human life has no intrinsic value, only applied value. How much we are worth as people depends only on what we have to offer and how much we are valued by others.

Christianity - abortion is wrong as all human life is precious. Therefore human life has intrinsic, not applied value, regardless of state of development and what person can offer to the world.

Scientific basis to Christianity:

1. Universe had a beginning - nothing contrary to scripture there, which says universe had a beginning.

2. God says he is the beginning and the end - alpha and omega, that he is, was, and always will be. Nothing contrary to science here as we know, according to theories of physics, that beyond the universe different temporal laws might apply. If, beyond the universe, there is no "time" as we know it, the eternal existence of God is scientifically possible.

3. Jesus born to a virgin - nothing scientifically impossible here. It's possible to impregnate virgins with IVF.

4. Life after death. According to science, energy never dies, it merely changes form. Supernatural events been reported for centuries.

5. Evolution - not contrary to scripture i.e. first man (Adam, if you take Genesis literally, I'm a Christian who doesn't) was both male and female. The idea of Eve coming from a rib has somehow been added into scripture, but in the original texts she came from a "side", not a bone.

Some people say that so much bad things happening in the world has to mean there is no God, but God gave humans free will. With that comes responsibility, both to other people and the world. If people choose to do wrong things, other people with suffer the consequences. There are almost always consequences to abandoning the path God sets out for us. When you have a million people doing wrong things, that is millions more who will suffer.

So many people in this world as sick, but is it God's fault or us, as peoples fault? No point a person complaining to God that they got cancer if they smoke. The environment is in bad way but still people excessively use cars - no surprise asthma etc are problems.

People wonder why their lives are in such a mess, why they are divorced etc - because either they or the people in their lives have abandoned God's ways.

How can evil exist in a world created by a good God? Without knowledge of what is wrong, we could not choose to do good. But once there is knowledge of right and wrong, some people will inevitably choose what is wrong. And as doing what is wrong can bring more temporary pleasure than doing what is right, more people do what is wrong than do what is right. This has consequences for all of us.

What you've stated is something of a misnomer.


So is this.

There are different "schools" and thought of Atheism just as there are different schools or thoughts of Christianity.

In the (Christian) Orthodox faith, for example, priests can (thankfully) marry, and their monostaries are renown for brewing brandy (spirits) and wine. As a result, pedophilia amongst men of the cloth is virtually unheard of.

Furthermore, sex before marriage in this branch of Christianity (one of the largest) is barely even mentioned. Sex is a natural human act comprable to breathing; longterm abstinence, it has been proven, results in a multitude of emotional disorders, among them phobias and sexual deviancies (such as the aforementioned pedophiliacs).

I do not know of any modern school of Atheism which touts wanton abandon for sexual intercourse, to the point which you describe as utter, indiscriminate acts. On the contrary, a vast majority of Atheists view humans as animals which mate for life (like ducks or some eagles). True, the Atheist explosion during the Rennaissance era included a, perhaps questionable, sexual openess, but that does not imply sinful degeneracy, rather a natural acceptance for human nature. Whereas the Western, Roman Catholic side of Christianity, paritculary during the Victorian era, has been responsible for horrendous acts of brutality, including genital mutilation to prevent adolescents from natural, normal sexual maturity. It is this fear of the natural, human sexual behavior from a large portion of Christianity which has successfully stunted the development of human education and learning. In the Middle Ages, literally everything was considered a "sin", from using herbs as medicinal cures to even bathing one's self! More than half a millenia later, Colonial Christians were still paranoid of sex, to the point of psychotic obsessive compulsive behavior. Adolescent boys had their penises strapped with electric devises devised to shock the recipient upon erection (a perfectly natural male function). Similar equipment included spikes which stabbed into the male genitals upon erection. These were beliefs and practises used within the last one hundred years!

...and I'm supposed to find Atheism shameful and promoting of terror?

I've yet to see any largescale open propoganda for Evolution being used for inhumane purposes. I could write an entire novel, however, for Christianity's terrorist accomplishments. Again, that's not to say Christianity, in itself, is "evil", but it is irrifutable that this religion has very openly used by the powers-that-be as a tool for terror and desensitisation.

Having said all that, I respect Christians and encourage them to their beliefs, but I ask for the Atheists and Evolutionists in the world to receive the same respect. Question one's beliefs, if you do not believe in them, yourself, but do not degrade them. Talking about the histories of various beliefs is one thing, making statements such as "I think <Evolution/Christianity/Etc.> is the most absurd thing I've ever heard of" is insulting the belief of some.

[quote]What you've stated is something of a misnomer{/quote}

No, it is the truth. All atheists have to define morality is subjective opinion. This can be anything from sex being okay for engaged couples to orgies being acceptable. There is no authority to refer to. Morality depends only on majority consensus in the form of the law. What the law defines as acceptable, is considered acceptable. Not all atheists believ the same things, but there is ultimately no right and wrong because it is all subjective.

Pre-marital sex is condemned as a sin something like 20 times or more in the Bible. Those Christians who argue it is not a sin have no scriptural basis for their belief.

{quote}Sex is a natural human act comprable to breathing; longterm abstinence, it has been proven, results in a multitude of emotional disorders, among them phobias and sexual deviancies (such as the aforementioned pedophiliacs). {/quote}

So, you're saying that for a person who is not married, the answer is to have casual sex? This leads to all kinds of problems from HIV to abortion. This kind of lifestyle cannot exist without abortion because modern contraception is not reliable. Not only does this attitude result in HIV and hundreds of abortions every day, it changes sex for an act of love to something done solely for gratification.

Christianssee sex as the ultimate act of unity, of love, and of pleasure. Those who say Christians think it is dirty have not understood our position. There is nothing wong with eating chocolate fudge cake unless you eat it in a libray. Christians take sex as a serious responsibility, both to ourselves and to any children we could make as a result. That is a very admirable position, and if everyone lived by that standard, there would be a great reduction, if not elimination, of abortions and sexually transmitted diseases.

I am single and I know what it's like to be celibate, and it's not easy. But it would be highly irresponsible of me to go out and pick up men to sleep with, not caring whether I pick up a disease or make a baby that I cannot at present give a home too. Those of your camp would say abort the baby and wear a condom. There is no such thing as safe sex. It is my responsibility to myself, any child I could make and to society, to abstain from sex until I find a man who is as committed to me as I would be to him. Only then would it be right to have sex.

Being alone can have psychological impact, there are times when I am very lonely, but going out and having sex with any man who would have me would not solve anything for me, would probably make my situation far worse. I also have no desire or intention to risk my life having sex with a man to whom I would just be a slot in the hole. If a man is not willing to marry me, then he is not committed to me, and it would be wrong to risk making a baby with him.

I don't know any atheist who has as much sense of sexual responsibility as most Christians I know, and what you've said above confirms in my mind what I was thinking - without God there are no moral standards, especially sexual ones. Without God, spread of diseases and abortion will continue because the lifestyle you promote - having sex to gratify a physical urge - cannot exist without those two consequences.

Says who? Not believing in a God or group of gods in no way implies you have no morals. Many atheists recognise that harming others is emotionally traumatising, as such they do not condone immoral behaviour for the simple fact that it's "not nice". You don't need a god to have morals (and vice versa, I might add).


I don't see anything wrong with either situation. To each his (or her) own.


Atheism is not the same thing as Anarchy.


The only people I've ever heard say "Atheists have no concept of right or wrong" are specifically non-Atheists. Atheism, itself, does not reject order. The only true definition behind atheism is not believing in a god(s).


Christianity is divided into two major halves, the "Western" Roman Catholic church and the "Eastern" Orthodox church. Neither is right or wrong, they are merely separate branches of a single belief, just as Mahayana Buddhism and Tibetan Buddhism are two schools of one religion (though technically Buddhism is a philosophy). Having said that, one half of the Christian faith, the Orthodox church, has far less focus on "scriptures" than its counterpart. Orthodox priests place very little focus on the bible, for example. Maybe that's why their priests can marry (thereby preventing psychological abnormalities which the Roman Catholic church has accomplished in spades, namely: paedophilia). Having said that, scriptures are only obsessively regarded by ONE HALF of the Christian faith. The other half practise a more productive approach by placing emphasis on spirituality rather than over-analysing words written millennia ago.


I wouldn't say I think that's an "answer" to anything, no. But I see nothing wrong with it. I don't see anything wrong with your decision to abstain until marriage, either. To me, neither is a particularly big deal.


Not if you are practicing protected sex.


I beg to differ.


To some people it is "an act of love", to some people it's an act of passion, to others still it's an erotic sharing of the senses and I suppose maybe to some, even, it's something of an art form. How delightful we live in a world where we can choose to view different acts how we wish. I perceive mountain climbing as nothing special, but ask an avid mountain climber and they will tell you it's something really special, it's spiritual, its enlightenment, it?s being close to god, etc. The same can be said of sex.


OK, you've raised two separate issues here. Having responsible sex with whomsoever you choose and having irresponsible sex with whomsoever you choose without concern for STDs or pregnancy are different subjects. I find your point of view surprising since you claim to defend women's rights. I see nothing wrong with a woman who has sex responsibly (i.e., protected) with more than one partner. But that's because I am a strong defender of liberating women and allowing them to choose their own path in life, rather than chaining them down to an ancient set of rules.


See my response above. You will find your statements regarding safe sex disproved by observing statistics. Besides which, one can always engage in non-copulating sexual acts which 100% prevent pregnancy and STDs (which, aside from naming mutual masturbation, I don?t think I need go into further detail here).


If that's what you believe FOR YOURSELF, fantastic. I'm delighted that you've found a foundation with which to live by, one that satisfies you. Likewise, I encourage others to have their own beliefs (even if that stands in opposition with yours).


Look, I don't mean to be offensive -- we are allowed to disagree of course -- but, much like the entire Western half of the Christian faith, I think you're a little too hung up on this notion of sex. I've often wondered where Christianity?s phobic obsession with sex stems from. For example, I don't have a particularly strong point of view on gays. Frankly, I could care less what they do with their lives (it's their life, after all, not mine). Yet it amazes me to no end that so many ALLEGEDLY NON-GAY Christians oppose the homosexual community with fanatic devotion. It makes me wonder if maybe they're not really angry at gays for .. being gay .. but instead fearful that they, themselves, might be gay. Otherwise, why would they care so much!? It's something I've just never understood. And, again, I'm saying that as someone who has virtually no opinion whatsoever on the issue of gay rights and such (a bit of a derailment, I realise).


Really? How many Atheists do you know? Are you friends with any, or do you instead shun them or, at best, merely argue with them? I'm saying that as an honest, matter-of-fact question, not to provoke you or inspire anger.


Again, I must point you to my above remarks regarding Atheism and morals. One needn't worship a deity to have morals. One of the greatest misconceptions of the non-Atheist world (and I'm saying this as something of a non-Atheist myself) is that if you don't believe in God (conveniently the Christian god only for some unexplained reason) then murder, rape, theft, and so on are perfectly OK.

Come on, that's absurd. If you want to argue against a subject you must fully understand the subject first. Think about it. Hurting others isn't nice. I don't want to be hurt because it's unenjoyable, therefore I have no desire to hurt others because I know how it feels. I don't see why religion necessarily has to enter into that picture. Rabbits don't hurt each other, and they're not even sentient! A lot of animals co-exist peacefully and it's not because of any religious observance.

And I must again point you towards the history of the single most violent concept known to man: monotheism. Monotheism (with Christianity at its forefront and Islam following as a close second) have been responsible for an infinite amount more violence and bloodshed than Atheism or Evolutionism. This makes me wonder how you can think Atheism condones an absence of morals. You name me one violent Atheist who has left his or her mark on history. In return, I'll name for you one thousand violent Christians (or other Monotheists). I'm being completely serious.

You missed the point. Without some kind of authority to refer to, there is no right and wrong i.e. there is nothing but opinion to determine what is right and wrong, and opinions vary from person to person. I didn't say atheists have no morals. Everyone has morals, but when there is no authority to refer too, those morals are totally subjective.


That is exactly what I meant - it's "each there own" - there are no ultimate guidelines. That to me is the weakness of atheism which makes me hedge my bets on the existence of a God (faith is faith. I don't know there is a God, I just believe).

There are lots of reasons why orgies etc can be harmful to those involved in it. But, unfortunately, people mostly learn by their own mistakes.



I agree.


I didn't say atheists have no sense of right and wrong. What I said was that atheists have differing ideas about what is right and wrong, and ultimately there is no one to say who is right.


I'm not interested in an argument. Asking for respect for your views begins in trying to respect the views of others. The Bible has a lot to teach us about how to treat others, even though it was written so long ago. The works of Shakespeare are no less valuable by the passing of the years.

I'm not a Catholic and don't believe priestly celibacy is either necessary or desirable, but I have Catholic friends and I respect their position on this.


There is no such thing. Condoms have a failure rate of approx 15%, which means that 1 in 10 condoms is at risk of breaking. Almost every woman I know who had an abortion (I am involved in pro-life) had one because of failed contraception.



Freedom of choice is God given.




Again, there is no such thing as safe sex. Like amalgam, vested interest groups have told people it's safe. Firstly, reasearch had suggested HIV can pass through a condom if it's not been kept in proper conditions, and it has a failure rate. Warnings will most likely appear on condoms in the near future telling people the risks. The chances of a failed condom increase the more times people have sex with a condom. It's called accumulative probability.


It would only be sexist if one was saying it's okay for men to have sex out of marriage but not women. The BIble says it's wrong for both.



That is what the sex industry would like you to believe. But anal sex, oral sex and mutual masturbation all carry the risk of both pregnancy and std. I've been involved in pro-life for a while. Even though I am not sexually active myself, I've had to learn all this stuff. It's a lie what people are told about safe-sex, as many people have found out to their detriment.


I have never said you have to be a Christian. I was merely explaining why I am a Christian and what I believe. You are under no obligation to believe the same. It would be against the free will God gave us to force you to be a Christian or to live by Christian standards.


Sex is an important issue in society today, especially so with increase of std's. The number of abortions are also disturbing.4000 a day in America, 95% as method of birth control. It's not just Christians who are involved in trying to educate people about the myths of safe sex. I know atheists and pagans who are involved in this movement.

Two of my best friends are gay, for what it's worth. That is their choice and I have never condemned them for it. They are free to live how they want.


One doesn't have to be a Christian to be a humanitarian.

I do feel that the world has lost it's way, though. There is so much pain and heartache. But all I can do is live my life my way and be there to help those who need help if things go wrong for them.


As I said, one doesn't need to be a Christian to be a humanitarian. But for me, personally, without God there is no one to set the standards. More than that, though, I find the principles of the Bible to be the best to live by, which reinforces my belief in God. I find it the most practical, the most accurate, and the most loving (although I appreciate it doesn't come across that way always by some zealous ones who have forgotten Christ's humility), aswell as the most wonderful imagery of marriage I've ever read. If I looked to the world to see what marriage is like, I'd become a nun, lol, but in the pages of Scripture we see God's vision, and there's some hope in that.

It's not my desire to force my religion on anyone, though. I merely posted my opinions.


True, a lot of terrible things have been done in the name of Christianity. Those things are against the principles of Christianity, though. A lot of Christians are poor representatives of the faith.

If I depended on Christians for my faith, I'm afraid I would have lost it by now. I can't explain my faith, I wasn't raised into it any more than anyone else in my family, and my life certainly hasn't been easier than anyone elses (possibly harder than some of my friends given the numerous health problems and difficult situations I've been through) but God has always, for some reason, been a presence in my life. I can't describe it more than that. I'm not the world's best theologian and I don't regularly go to church at the moment, but for reasons even unknown to me I have since my teens felt God's presence in my life - even physically felt God a couple of times. I've also been in a room with a poltergeist. Yet there are times when I doubt the supernatural. Human minds are weird.


Well, one is Hitler <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" /> But I don't think it's right to compare the nazis to atheists, however, as a lot of atheists are humanitarians.

And with that I'm bowing out of the discussion. I feel this is going in the way of an argument and I have neither the strength or the desire for one.

I wish you all the best in the path you choose to follow.

Adolph Hitler practiced mysticism and occultism and, therefore, was not an Atheist by definition, not to mention he was severely superstitious. Interestingly enough, he was also a strict vegetarian who disapproved of cosmetics since they contained animal by-products. Though that's not a defence in his name, merely an indication of his non-Atheism. Hitler's speeches were also known to contain a strong theological framework.

All branches of Christianity today have stemmed from either the Western or Eastern Roman Empire. The Western half, from which you hail, places a stricter observance over scriptures. The exact translations of the wording have been hotly debated. You'll find "Christians" in some southern states of the U.S. who expose themselves to poisonous snakes via pagan-like rituals all because "the Bible says so"; some Christians from the scripture-obsessed Western half wage fierce campaigns against the gay community because "the Bible says so"; the only meat some Christians consume is fish because "the Bible says so" while others eat all kinds of meat because "the Bible says so"; there are Christians who mutilate their own bodies by whipping themselves because "the Bible says so".

Atheists have been the target of Christians, not the other way around. For many years in the U.S. Atheists were not allowed to testify in court because it was believed that an Atheist would have no reason to tell the truth, without the fear of god motivating them to be honest. It's important to realise that no religious basis is necessary to live an ethical life. Abiding by a list of prohibitions (i.e., the "Ten Commandments") is not sufficient for genuinely ethical behaviour; morality should be positive, not negative (as in "What should I do?" rather than "What shouldn't I do?") Indeed it is religion, more often than not, that has been a source of immorality. As Francis Bacon once wrote:

Just to add, if one is pious and moral because they are told to be or because "God wills it" then they aren't pious or moral at all, they're simply following commands. Conversely, from an Atheist point of view, if one is pious and moral because they want to be, then it is only they who truly define piety and morality.

Outwardly, it may seem that a lack of religious beliefs means a lack of morals or even respect for life, in reality this couldn't be further from the truth: it's quite the opposite in fact. If I respect life because an ancient set of scriptures demands it, then who's the one respecting life, me or the sciptures? If I respect life because I've rationalised it in my head, then it is I who respects life and not the mythology which demands it.

Of course we'll disagree on this, but it's just some food for thought.

Cheers.

Those Christians who do only what they think God wants out of a fear of going to hell etc are comparable to those citizens who only abide by the law because they fear going to prison.

There are many Christians, including me, who adhere to the moral code of the Bible because we agree with it, just like there are many citizens who are law-abiding out of hearfelt desire.

Who is which in both cases? Only God knows... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Fair enough, I see your point.

I think a good conclusion to our own individual treaties, here, is that there are "good" and "bad" people from any faith (or lack thereof). There are good Christians, there are bad Christians. There are good Evolutionists, there are bad Evolutionists. And on and on..

Cheers!

So my religious views are up to date, I recently converted to the Roman Catholic faith. I think it's only fair to say this, because of some things I had said before. I am amazed at how much lies had been told to me about the Catholic church, appalled that the Protestants dropped books out of Scripture, and very happy that I finally have a deeper understanding of my God.

Well, my happiness did not last long, lol. I left the RCC. I didn't agree with their views on human sexuality. Nuff said! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Demi,

Good for you. The Catholic church is refered to as "the church on seven hills" in the Bible and there are powerful predictions as to the fate of it, and they are coming true.

Just do a Google search for the term "the church on seven hills" and you'll find what I'm talking about.

All the best <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

I just wish that other churches had the morality of the RCC. But when they start telling people that the impotent can't marry and all sex without intercourse is a sin (even in marriage), then I don't think they are speaking for God. I can image a lot of people have very bad views on sex because of this teaching.

I agree. Anything that is inaccurate is usually harmful to someone, and unfortunately, the Bible is the most misquoted and misrepresented book in history. The Catholic church lays additional, unnecessary and therefore harmful rules on people.

I always tell people to read the Bible for themselves, and not only to read, but to study it as well. It is an amazing book on multiple levels and will dispel the myths put forth by mainstream media and by modern "tickle-my-ears" churches.

All the best!

What denomination are you, Russ? I've tried a few and can't find one that I feel is "right" yet.

Actually, I don't currently go to church. I've tried a couple times in the past year or two and the teaching is so watered down and often completely inaccurate that I cannot bear continuing to go.

I tend to like the organizations or groups that understand constitutional rights and deeper truths about the Bible. These are people who believe in taking personal responsibility for their own lives and believe in freedom because they are the kind of people who can handle that kind of responsibility.

I often listen to the Republic Broadcasting Network and I wish more people would.

I used to go faithfully, but my church has changed a lot in the past 10 years - or maybe I have changed, I don't know. I have been baptised (was a Baptist). I never really felt I was learning anything, though, which was part of the appeal of Roman Catholicism - they have a lot of answers that at least make sense to their way of looking at Scripture.

I feel kind of torn between Catholicism (generally, not Roman exclusively) and Protestantism. I don't feel either has it quite right, I don't know. Prots. talk of salvation through faith alone when the Bible says quite clearly that is not the case (James 2:24) but Catholics go to the other extreme of putting too much emphasis on works.

I personally think it's somewhere in between - that it's salvation through faith, but a living faith that requires faithfulness to the teaching of the Bible, and mainly to Christ in that we are to love. If someone disobeys the teachings of the bible then it really begs the question of whether they are a true Christian etc.

I don't know, this is a journey I am beginning and am exploring all different denominations to find the right one for me. Maybe God lets there be different denominations because different people have different needs. The rigidity of RC suits some people, but it was too much for me.

I agree. I think it is useful for some denominations because they help people at certain points. I started out at the Church of Christ. I have to say, however, I never learned more about the Bible and life then when I became involved with the U.S. Taxpayers Party in Florida (it's now called the Constitution Party). They are christian and very well trained in scripture—better than anyone I've ever met or known, including all the preachers I've ever known. They are brilliant.

This venture got me started studing the Bible in much more depth and much to my surprise, the Bible is amazing on multiple levels. It's like a treasure chest full of useful information who's bottom has not yet been found.

I learned about personal responsibility, about law and it's relationship to Biblical law, which is profound, and how to view the world in light of the excessive evil that exists in it, which I actually never saw before while going to any other church. Now it's plain to me and my world view is broad and accurate and with every new piece of information I learn, is confirmed. It's really amazing. You can learn things about the Bible you never even considered or will never learn in a church by reading some of the writings of the forefathers of America. This also allows you to see exactly how the systems of the world are being manipulated along with the perceptions of people to meet a very specific agenda, which is far from christian and far from truth.

You may want to try listening to one of a couple Internet radio stations that talk about these similar issues and even have some excellent in-depth Bible studies each day:

Republic Broadcasting Network

First Amendment Radio

I always tell people it's best to study the Bible for yourself and take other people's input to help guide you, but not to make you decisions for you.

Take care and all the best on your journey!

So is the Bhagavad Gita, the teachings of Siddhartha Gautama as well as studying the potentials of lucid dreaming.

When pursuing spiritalism I think it is imperative that we not limit ourselves to one faith or philosophy alone.

In regards to Hinduism, for example, there are some who would instantly start by saying "Oh, but they have this horrid caste system which degrades the lowest of the totem and glorifies the highest." The fact that this does not imply to the whole of the Hindu religion notwithstanding, the beauty of any belief system is that we are all more than welcome to take what we want from it and discard the rest.

For example, in the same breath Gandhi has both appraised and degraded Hinduism.

He has said:

"Hinduism as I know it entirely satisfies my soul, fills my whole being ... When doubts haunt me, when disappointments stare me in the face, and when I see not one ray of light on the horizon, I turn to the Bhagavad Gita, and find a verse to comfort me; and I immediately begin to smile in the midst of overwhelming sorrow. My life has been full of tragedies and if they have not left any visible and indelible effect on me, I owe it to the teachings of the Bhagavad Gita".

Later he goes on to criticise the castes and the religion's mysoginistic views (though I can't dig up a suitable quote for that one at the moment).

For me, the best response anyone can say on the subject of religion is when Gandhi was asked whether he was a Hindu and he replies:

"Yes I am. I am also a Christian, a Muslim, a Buddhist and a Jew".

Yes, I'm obsessed with quotes <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />.

And incidentally I'm not trashing Christianity by any means. I just see it, as with all beliefs, limited. Single belief in anything erects walls, it erects boundaries. Religion has more often than not served as a retreat from reality rather than a quest for truth. But I don't find it strange at all that all we want to believe is only that which comforts us. How else do humans invent the traps which betray us into mediocrity?

The tragedy, Egan, is that a lot of people use religion to serve an agenda. And different churches, different leaders, have different agendas.

As you might see from Russ and I's posts, there is no "easy" solution, even for those of us who believe that Jesus was God Incarnate. Churches are not always very good at teaching people about Jesus. They are so often steeped in ceremony, pomp, rituals, or at the other side of the scale are so dour, that they somehow distort the message of Christianity.

"But", our God is, to some extent, a personal God. Just like in every relationship of our lives, how we see a person may not be how others see them. It's inkeeping with God to think of God as responding to the different needs of individuals and revealing himself in different ways - kind of how we may approach two people with the same problem differently depending on their character.

I don't know what non-Christian thinks of Jesus. Maybe to them he is just a made-up figure or just a name in a swear, but maybe they think that he was some kind of tyrant or someone who went around trying to make people feel bad about themselves etc. But Jesus was very humble, of very humble origins. That's how God came to earth in Christianity. Not as some kind of rich king in a palace, but as a poor man, in a primitive time.

And he spoke out against preachers who made people feel bad:

"1Jesus spoke to the crowds and to his disciples. 2"The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat," he said. 3"So you must obey them. Do everything they tell you. But don't do what they do. They don't practice what they preach. 4They tie up heavy loads and put them on other people's shoulders. But they themselves aren't willing to lift a finger to move them.

5"Everything they do is done for others to see. On their foreheads and arms they wear little boxes that hold Scripture verses. They make the boxes very wide. And they make the tassels on their coats very long.

6"They love to sit down in the place of honor at dinners. They also love to have the most important seats in the synagogues. 7They love to be greeted in the market places. They love it when people call them 'Rabbi.'

8"But you shouldn't be called 'Rabbi.' You have only one Master, and you are all brothers. 9Do not call anyone on earth 'father.' You have one Father, and he is in heaven. 10You shouldn't be called 'teacher.' You have one Teacher, and he is the Christ" (Matthew 23:1-12)

Remind you of any churches you might know?

This is what Jesus said to the disciples he chose (and indirectly to us)

"Just as the Father has loved me, I have loved you. Now remain in my love. 10If you obey my commands, you will remain in my love. In the same way, I have obeyed my Father's commands and remain in his love. 11I have told you this so that my joy will be in you. I also want your joy to be complete.

12"Here is my command. Love each other, just as I have loved you. 13No one has greater love than the one who gives his life for his friends. 14You are my friends if you do what I command.

15"I do not call you servants anymore. Servants do not know their master's business. Instead, I have called you friends. I have told you everything I learned from my Father.

16"You did not choose me. Instead, I chose you. I appointed you to go and bear fruit. It is fruit that will last. Then the Father will give you anything you ask for in my name.

17"Here is my command. Love each other." (John 15 :9-17)

And this is what the Bible says love is:

1Suppose I speak in the languages of human beings and of angels. If I don't have love, I am only a loud gong or a noisy cymbal. 2Suppose I have the gift of prophecy. Suppose I can understand all the secret things of God and know everything about him. And suppose I have enough faith to move mountains. If I don't have love, I am nothing at all. 3Suppose I give everything I have to poor people. And suppose I give my body to be burned. If I don't have love, I get nothing at all.

4Love is patient. Love is kind. It does not want what belongs to others. It does not brag. It is not proud. 5It is not rude. It does not look out for its own interests. It does not easily become angry. It does not keep track of other people's wrongs.

6Love is not happy with evil. But it is full of joy when the truth is spoken. 7It always protects. It always trusts. It always hopes. It never gives up.

8Love never fails. But prophecy will pass away. Speaking in languages that had not been known before will end. And knowledge will pass away.

9What we know now is not complete. What we prophesy now is not perfect. 10But when what is perfect comes, the things that are not perfect will pass away.

11When I was a child, I talked like a child. I thought like a child. I had the understanding of a child. When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me.

12Now we see only a dim likeness of things. It is as if we were seeing them in a mirror. But someday we will see clearly. We will see face to face. What I know now is not complete. But someday I will know completely, just as God knows me completely.

13The three most important things to have are faith, hope and love. But the greatest of them is love.
(1 Corinthians 13)

God wants us to be happy, and gives us guidelines to best help us, but it's not often you will hear that at church.

This is why some of us are having problems with churches. There is too much "putting heavy loads" on peoples shoulders.

Demi, It seems to me that most religions are race-specific, or at least were intended to be. It's not an accident that Jesus Christ appeared to the Jews 2,000 years ago - they needed his message! He didn't appear to northern Europeans or the aboriginals of any land, nor the Chinese. The Prophet Mohammed (peace be upon him) appeared to certain semitic peoples of the desert, also; and Buddha to the people of Asia (Nepal's mountains, caves & hills). OK, you see what I mean.

If there is a reason why I (or you) should glom onto an ancient religion of desert peoples, an ideology intended for people of a specific race at a certain time, I would like to know what that reason might be. It is easy to find the universal in all religions' teachings, but much of their teachings are not.

I agree that we can look at aspects of our own society or our own little lives or the world at large and see situations that match those of Biblical times, and marvel at the wise advice in the Bible that might give us perspective. However, there are also situations now, here, that are not helped by trying to graft Biblical teachings onto them. It is like forcing a square peg into a round hole, which some of us do because we have convinced ourselves that that one book MUST say something that is going to help us figure out issues and situations in our own locale and time. I don't think so. There is stuff in the bible that is so wise; but there is other ideology and advice that makes me cringe, and it can make you crazy for trying to match it to your own life.

I think it was wrong for white, gentile, western people to permit their leaders to force Christianity down their throats, or to at least allow themselves to be talked into it. Just as it was morally wrong for Moslem conquerors to give non-Arabic people the choice of "The Koran or the Sword!" And it was wrong for Christian missionaries to convert aboriginals, largely stone-age tribes, to a totally foreign religion.

Yes, religion is indeed being used to serve an agenda.

Hi Carla,

I don't believe that religion was meant to be race specific, it's just the way that cultures have responded to " the God gene",this belief that the mortal life isn't all there is.

Jesus was a Jew, but his message wasn't just for the Jews. It was for the whole world. The Bible tells us to tell the whole world the good news that Christ died for their sins. It wasn't meant to be a western religion, an eastern religion or anything of the kind. It was meant to be a global religion. Before Christianity, my people were pagans, but they converted. I'm glad they did, but others might not feel the same way.

The Bible is a huge book so to randomly open it up and read a passage expecting help to a particular situation is unlikely to happen. The help comes from the principles that the Bible teaches us as a whole - love, forgiveness, kindness,self-sacrifice, mercy. If we know the principles, we can apply them to a situation, and if we can't find peace, we can pray.

I don't think anyone can "sell" Christianity to another person. People can, as you point out, try to bully and brainwash people into believing it, but to have people believe and accept it in their heart, I don't think that is possible unless theywant to.

I don't consider myself to be believing in an "ancient religion", but to believe in the living God, "who was, who is, and is to come". People might say "If there is a God, why doesn't he talk to us? Why doesn't he show himself?" Well, the answer (to the Christian) is he did. 2000 years ago.

For me, the Bible gives us the best guidelines how to live, guidelines that are just as valuable today as they were 2000 years ago. But, what Jesus was teaching was often "alien" to the people of his day. He had his followers, but in general he was despised. Being a Christian isn't always easy. Other religions are tolerated far more than Christians are. These words of Jesus have proved very true for me in the hostlility I've receieved as a Christian, and have also brought me much comfort:

"If the people of this world hate you, just remember that they hated me first. If you belonged to the world, its people would love you. But you don't belong to the world. I have chosen you to leave the world behind, and that is why its people hate you. Remember how I told you that servants are not greater than their master. So if people mistreat me, they will mistreat you. If they do what I say, they will do what you say. People will do to you exactly what they did to me. They will do it because you belong to me, and they don't know the one who sent me. If I had not come and spoken to them, they would not be guilty of sin. But now they have no excuse for their sin.

Everyone who hates me also hates my Father. I have done things that no one else has ever done. If they had not seen me do these things, they would not be guilty. But they did see me do these things, and they still hate me and my Father too. That is why the Scriptures are true when they say, "People hated me for no reason."

I will send you the Spirit who comes from the Father and shows what is true. The Spirit will help you and will tell you about me. Then you will also tell others about me, because you have been with me from the beginning.

I am telling you this so you will not give up your faith. You will be chased out of the Jewish meeting places. And the time will come when people will kill you and think they are doing it for God. They will do these things because they don't know either the Father or me. I am saying this to you now, so that when the time comes, you will remember what I have said."
(John 15-16)

Hello Demi and Carla,

I wanted to make some responses to your comments above in hope that they will be beneficial.

There is much confusion in this world today about Christianity, and it is being created by the powers-that-be who hate it, and there is a very specific reason that they hate it.


Please be open-minded about the things I say because I'm being sincere in sharing the things I've found while researching. I don't have an agenda except to find the truth, which is my greatest goal in life.

Christ did indeed appear to the Jews (Judeans) and when you put the pieces together, it was for a very specific reason.

Paul explains that these things happened as an example to those who would come later: That would be us.

Christ appeared to Judeans because He's married to them. This is what the references to the Bridegroom and the Bride of Christ refer to in the Bible. Read carefully and you'll see the depth in what is being said.

God "divorced" Israel for being unfaithful. Christ gave the Judeans the opportunity to "establish" the kingdom of God (through Christ) on Earth at that time. Unfortunately, the Judeans rejected Him because they did not recoginize "the time of His coming".

"Jer 3:8 And I saw, when for all the causes whereby backsliding Israel committed adultery I had put her away, and given her a bill of divorce; yet her treacherous sister Judah feared not, but went and played the harlot also."

Paul explains that because of the rejection of Christ by the Judeans, the invitation to eternal life (salvation) has now been extended to all the peoples of the world. This is very significant.

"Rom 11:7 What then? What Israel seeks, this it did not obtain, but the election obtained it, and the rest were hardened;
Rom 11:8 even as it has been written, "God gave to them a spirit of slumber, eyes not seeing and ears not hearing" until this day. Isa. 29:10; Deut. 29:4
Rom 11:9 And David said, "Let their table become for a snare and a trap, and for a stumbling block," and a repayment to them;
Rom 11:10 "let their eyes be darkened, not to see, and their back always bowing." LXX-68:23, 24; MT-Psa. 69:22, 23
Rom 11:11 I say, then, Did not they stumble that they fall? Let it not be! But by their slipping away came salvation to the nations, to provoke them to jealousy.
Rom 11:12 But if their slipping away is the riches of the world, and their default the riches of the nations, how much more their fullness?"

There is much deception and evil and in the world, a subject people don't often like to think about, however, we have been warned about these things by Yahweh. Where there is evil, there is deception, and this world has no shortage of it—as evidenced by the mercury issue—among other things.

The greatest deception that will take place in the entire history of the world involves that popular character that Hollywood calls, the antichrist. This person will deceive the entire world into thinking that he was sent by God as savior of the world. Of course, this theme isn't new as many leaders of historic civilations attempted to deceive the masses that they were Gods.

A deception of this magnitude, even using today's technology, will take some time and a great deal of preparation, which we can witness even now. For example, the centralization of power of all the nations of the world into a single entity—the U.N.—is an artifact of this coming event. The Yellow-Fringe flag that exists in all of the industrialized nations of the world is another artifact of the preparations for this event. Just watch any international parade or meeting on T.V. and you'll see the various flags, all (or most) with yellow fringes on them.

This great deception is characterized by a time when Israel has lost it's identity. In other words, he does not know who he is. This time is also characterized by a group of people who will falsely claim to be Israel.

Rev 2:9 "I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan."

Rev 3:9 "Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee."

The land that was distributed to various peoples at the end of world war II—much to the surprise dismay of many onlookers in the world—was actually in preparation for this deception. This is another artifact of this upcoming deception.

The core of the story is that salvation is given to all people, if they choose to accept it on an individual level. The dealings with a particular race was—as Paul said—an example to those who could come later; us.

1Co 10:11 "Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come."

If you continue to study the prophecies—my favorite Biblical subject—you will discover much evidence that those who have lost their identity are those who are of the true tribe of Israel—12 of them—who settled in and became powerful nations in what is now the western european nations. In fact, it's suprising to discover that, in all likelyhood, England—the most influential country in the history of the world—is the modern day remnant of the tribe of Judah.

One of the several methods to decoding prophecy is by using animal symbols. For example, Christ is the Lion from the tribe (nation) of Judah. Judah, the tribe of David. England's banner animal symbol is the lion. David's actual throne is also currently located in England and has been preserved there.

The prophecies say that the antichrist will arise from this bloodline. Keep your eyes open and see who emerges onto the world scene in the not-too-distant future and claims to be a descendant of David. He may even claim to be a descendant of Christ. We'll see.

Continued study will reveal the current priest line—the Levites—the nation that carries on it the banner animal symbol of Israel is—in all likelyhood—Germany. The symbol being the eagle, which is why the U.S. adopted this symbol as well.

The other countries of the lost identity of Israel are the other european countries that settled nearby, such as Scottland, Ireland, Denmark (the mark or "banner" of Dan), Italy, Spain, Poland, Norway, Sweden, France, etc.

There are another group of people who are most likely the offspring of Abraham's servant who God prophecied would become a great, numberous people as well. These are the modern middle-eastern peoples, like Iran, Iraq, Turkey, etc.

Gen 16:1 "Now Sarai Abram's wife bare him no children: and she had an handmaid, an Egyptian, whose name was Hagar.
Gen 16:2 And Sarai said unto Abram, Behold now, the LORD hath restrained me from bearing: I pray thee, go in unto my maid; it may be that I may obtain children by her. And Abram hearkened to the voice of Sarai.
Gen 16:3 And Sarai Abram's wife took Hagar her maid the Egyptian, after Abram had dwelt ten years in the land of Canaan, and gave her to her husband Abram to be his wife.
Gen 16:4 And he went in unto Hagar, and she conceived: and when she saw that she had conceived, her mistress was despised in her eyes.
Gen 16:5 And Sarai said unto Abram, My wrong be upon thee: I have given my maid into thy bosom; and when she saw that she had conceived, I was despised in her eyes: the LORD judge between me and thee.
Gen 16:6 But Abram said unto Sarai, Behold, thy maid is in thy hand; do to her as it pleaseth thee. And when Sarai dealt hardly with her, she fled from her face.
Gen 16:7 And the angel of the LORD found her by a fountain of water in the wilderness, by the fountain in the way to Shur.
Gen 16:8 And he said, Hagar, Sarai's maid, whence camest thou? and whither wilt thou go? And she said, I flee from the face of my mistress Sarai.
Gen 16:9 And the angel of the LORD said unto her, Return to thy mistress, and submit thyself under her hands.
Gen 16:10 And the angel of the LORD said unto her, I will multiply thy seed exceedingly, that it shall not be numbered for multitude.
Gen 16:11 And the angel of the LORD said unto her, Behold, thou art with child, and shalt bear a son, and shalt call his name Ishmael; because the LORD hath heard thy affliction.
Gen 16:12 And he will be a wild man; his hand will be against every man, and every man's hand against him; and he shall dwell in the presence of all his brethren.
Gen 16:13 And she called the name of the LORD that spake unto her, Thou God seest me: for she said, Have I also here looked after him that seeth me?
Gen 16:14 Wherefore the well was called Beerlahairoi; behold, it is between Kadesh and Bered.
Gen 16:15 And Hagar bare Abram a son: and Abram called his son's name, which Hagar bare, Ishmael.
Gen 16:16 And Abram was fourscore and six years old, when Hagar bare Ishmael to Abram."

There are a growing number of scholars who have come to realize the truth of this amazing information. By putting the pieces of history together, you get a picture that helps explain the current state of the world and allows you to see the eye-opening fulfillment of Bible prophecy in this time.

I think it's important to understand that those who control modern-day media are extremely opposed to the Bible because it interferes with their ability to become rich and powerful, and for other reasons. This is why the Bible and Christianity are so harshly slandered today.

For example, Christianity has not been forced down the throats of people. This is not the Christian way at all. It has been offered as a great gift—a wellspring of knowledge and blessing—to those who freely choose to accept it.

The few times in history where supposedly Christianity has been "forced down people's throats" was not forced by true Christians. This is not possible because this is not a Christian practice. Those forcing it were those who strove for power and money and teached something that resembled Christianity, but allowed them to retain their power and their position. This is not Christian.

The way you overcome someone who outnumbers you is by dividing them among themselves; turning them against each other, and this is exactly what has happened among the so-called Christian denominations today. It also happens among people of different races and the media subtly promotes violence and hatred while attempting to look like they are helping. This keeps the focus off of the real opressors.

Through a careful program of manipulation of the truth and distortions of history, Christ has been slandered like no one in history. After coming to this place with love, wisdom and an excellent message and a perfect work in His life, he is slandered and then rejected by the masses, only to be accepted by a remnant who have the caring and passion to research ("search and ye shall find"—"search" is the condition to finding), learn the truth and finally become a real believer and live the life by true faith and understanding what it actually means. When you truly understand the goodness of the message, you'd never want to depart from it, but it takes some searching.

America was blessed by God because we originally accepted and practiced his perfect law of liberty. Under this law, America grew in wealth and power, just as God promised when His law is followed.

An example of this is the 7-year credit pardon—bad marks are supposed to be removed from your credit report after 7 years. This is taken directly from the Biblical concept of the Jubilee where all debts were forgiven every 7th year.

Nevertheless, those who hate Christ have slowly risen to power and slandered Him and falsely turned the masses against Him through incessant lies and slander. They brilliantly make it so uncomfortable and unfashionable to call yourself a Christian in these days that some are too ashamed to even admit that they read the book for themselves, much less study it to understand what it really says.

This is why I often refer to the mainstream media and point out that they lie. I've seen them do it all the time; perhaps even nightly. Channels like the Discovery Channel spread inaccurate and completely untrue information about Christ, the Bible and the people associated with it in an effort to keep the masses from actually reading it themselves and discovering the amazing law that protects everyone from opressive people and corrupt governments. Yet, these rights and blessings continue to go un-enjoyed because the slander overcomes people and keeps them away from the book completely.

In just the same way that someone who doesn't like you may tell subtle and misdirecting lies about you and what you've done, perhaps even saying that you're slandering them, they keep you from ever even speaking to each other (divide and conquor) and discovering that the real purportrator is the one who is claiming to be the friend and protector of both parties. It's really very simple because deception and slander work exactly the same way whether it's directly at 1 person or 1 billion.

Christianity is defined, not by the actions of people, but by the Bible itself. It's important not to judge it by what people say or do, even if they call themselves Christians. Judge (discern) it by studying the book first hand.

When you do, you will discover that nearly evey preconceived idea you have about the Bible is wrong because it's been shaped by a powerful, influential yet subtle media owned nearly entirely by people who hate the book because it gives true liberty and power to the people. From Warner Brothers cartoons to History Channel explorations of the past, they have shaped your world view from before you knew how to speak.

It's just as bad to go into a modern church and listen to a preacher to get an understanding of the Bible. Most modern seminaries that train teachers and preachers are owned or controlled by organizations that hate the very book they supposedly teach about. It's the old principle of, "Keep your friends close, your enemys even closer".

Thanks for listening. I truly hope this will help some on their way to discovering the true amazing nature of the Bible, the freedom it provides and help them navigate the modern-day waters that contain so much evil and deception.

"Read it for yourself."

Uhm, which religions? Go ahead, name me a couple. Because I'm dying to know which religions besides the imperical prejudicies of the violent Christian faith outnumber and are more tolerated (more tolerated by who, for that matter?) I just love how Christians try to make themselves sound like the victims when, in actuality, they win the prize for being Grand Victimiser of Other Religions. Your talk of being thankful for the end of paganism only reinforces the bloody belief of Christian conquest, oppression, and assimilation.

Just once I would like to hear Christianity defended with sources beyond (let alone without) the bible. And just once I'd like to see a die-hard Christian actually research evolution with an open mind, for the two (Evolution and Religion) needn't oppose one another.

I don't know where you live, Egan, but here in the UK Christians are a minority group. Your response above is the perfect example of what I mean. You openly condemn Christians, but wouldn't other religions.

Not all Christians dispute evolution. The Roman Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church accept the possibility of evolution by Intelligent Design. It tends to be some groups of fundamentalist Protestants who believe the world was literally made in 6 days. But there is nothing in the Bible to suggest that the world was made literally in 6 days. For example, in Genesis, God didn't made the sun until the 3rd or 4th day, therefore the "day" referred to isn't what we think of as day (24 hours). Genesis isn't meant to be literal history.

Eagan,

The Bible and Christianity are terribly slandered.

I have been a Christian for about 17 years (+-) and I became one, not because I was in need or had some emotional longing. I became one because the evidence for it's truth and authenticity is overwhelming.

The violence that you refer to is actually slander that originates from the Jesuits and is distributed through the mass media which is, in fact (as far as the United States is concerned), controlled by the Council on Foreign Relation which is an organization formed by the Jesuits. These are the ones you really should be blaming for the violence in the world, even that which has been blamed on Christianity. If you study it out, you will eventually come to the same conclusion, please just finish your research without any preconceived ideas. Let the data lead you.

The Jesuits are the power behind the vatican. The vatican and the Catholic church are not christian. In fact, the Catholic church is spoken about in the Bible as an evil power and a false religion from the city of seven hills (Rome), where it is centered along with the Jesuits. The Saying "All roads lead to Rome" is significant in this respect and it would be helpful to research this. These Jesuits are the ones who have been violent for centuries and purportrated their lies in the name of Christianity.

There are so many people these days that have strong opinions who are simply believing what they are being told by someone else, i.e., the mass media. They blindly trust these huge organizations or information without checking our or validating what it being said.

As a simple example, If the mass media had been honest about mercury, the amalgam issue would have been solved decades ago. Yet, they lie and cover up and slander and yet, people continue to listen, accept and believe. Truly amazing.

All of the information needed to do this research has never been easier to acquire and validate, so please take the time to validate all you have learned, follow the money and see who has been financing your opinions.

Evolution is excatly the same, no difference. Most people don't believe evolution because there are massive amounts of evidence to back it up. There isn't. Most people believe evolution because it has the appearance of being universally accepted so most follow.

The so-called evidence that is presented in text books and universities is based on lies and outdated theories that they keep rehashing. Check it out for yourself. Take any piece of so-called evidence dealing with the binding or formation of proteins or sequencing of DNA and research the so-called experiments that were done. In every single case you will eventually learn that there is some misrepresented data about the experiment or simply a conclusion was written that contradicts the result of the experiment. This is amazingly common even in modern medical journals when articles are written by shadow authors and conclusive summaries completely contradict the outcome of the research. I've seen this myself. The purpose of this is to deceive you.

The bottom line is that theory after theory (for example "Chemical Evolution") is shoved down the throats of students in an effort to make evolution seem more feasible while they are never told that this "theory" has since been completely debunked and is not accepted by mainstream science. Nevertheless, mainstream media still teach it through outlets like the discovery channel (as do textbooks) as if it were valid. This is called a lie and there is a specific and profitable (to the Jesuits) reason it is being promoted as truth.

This information is readily available to those who have any desire to find the truth. Those who don't find it simply don't want to find it. They delude themselves because they have their own personal agendas that they are unable to see through. For this reason, the first step in researching is to rid yourself of all ulterior motives—whether conscious or subconscious, i.e., "know thyself", then begin methodically and let the data lead you. Regardless of how you feel about it, regardless of what your emotions may do, simply follow the data. It's an amazing discovey that will lead the intellect to uncover what the Bible predicted thousands of years ago: The greatest deception in the history of the world being fulfilled in our time.

The human intellect is a function of the human spirit and so to study is a spiritual function. I encourage anyone who wants to know the truth about the Bible or about evolution to study. Rid yourself of all preconceived ideas and personal bias and simply study, and as always:

Let the data lead you.

I don't agree that the Roman Catholic Church is not Christian. I know many Roman Catholics and they are amongst the most devoted Christians that I know. While all the other Protestant Churches were allowing the use of birth control pills, killing millions of human beings in the earliest stages, the RCC was the only one who stood it's ground and said it is wrong. So much for the others speaking for God! I am appalled that most Protestants I know still endorse birth control pills. And they do do because it is convenient for them, regardless if it takes a life.

I "am" Roman Catholic in what I believe. I just have trouble with some of the Church's teachings on sex and women (I don't see anything wrong with barrier methods) but, all things considered, they are small problems. But if you look at the Bible in detail, you will see references to Purgatory and that is without having to go to the Apocrypha. Almost all other denominations deny the existence of purgatory. They also have pretty unconvincing and polar theories on who and what Mary was. I believe in the Immaculate Conception.

I do believe the RCC was founded by Christ and of all the churches has remained the closest to the teachings of the apostles, but, without a doubt, there are serious problems within the church aswell.

http://www.catholic.com/library/Hunting_the_Whore_of_Babylon.asp

You're so right that the protestant churches are far gone in their understanding of things. I also agree with you that there are many devout Roman Catholics who are believers. The same stands true in the protestant churches as well.

I think the most important thing to understand for all true believers is that we're all on a road, growing in love and discipline, and gaining knowledge as we move along. As we become more knowledgeable about Christ and the Bible, we understand what the current condition of the world is and see how the pieces fit together, and they do perfectly.

Most believers beliefs will change drastically throughout their lives as they gain a greater understanding and this will eventually unify us. Nevertheless, there are many well defined issues in the Bible that the Bible does not allow us to negotiate. It's simply not our choice to make.

I appreciate the link, I really do. Unfortunately, I find the article is missing the point of the prophecies and it is—unfortunately—glazing over the depth of what is being said by not defining or understanding the true and very specific meanings of the symbols. There are very specific things being said here and it's important to find out what they are.

That said, I encourage all people to enjoy their freedom to make their own decisions, and hopefully, they will not be hasty in making them. I believe we can work together to make each other better by challenging each other to stronger discipline and deeper study. So, thank you for your help in this by providing this dialog and link.

Through all the turmoil I've suffered in life; through all the strife and all the studying, through the personal experiences I've had with Him, this has become clear to me:

God is just and mercyful and all things will be as they should be. It's just a matter of time.

This is an excellent, in-depth, eye-opening Bible study you may enjoy:
http://www.giveshare.org/israel/judah/#toc

I stongely urge you to listen to these two audio programs so as to fully grasp the significance of Vatican City and the heart of the 7-Hills/Rome discussion.

http://mp3.rbnlive.com/Greg/0602/20060207_Tue_Greg1.mp3

http://mp3.rbnlive.com/Greg/0602/20060207_Tue_Greg2.mp3


All the best! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

I think we will have to agree to disagree on this one. I don't believe the RCC is the whore of Babylon, but the old pagan powers. The bitterness of the renaissance schism has lasted too long. It's about time Christians put it behind them and appreciated differences, as the Bible tells us to do.

Why any person living in 21-st century North America would want to take advice on how to live from an ancient, desert-dwelling semitic people escapes me. If I had an urge to base my behaviour on ancient peoples' ideology, I'd at least start with my own ancestors, ie, heathens of Europe, or maybe the outlook of indigenous (relatively speaking) people of North America, where I live. But where is there any biological connection to the Middle East for ME? There is no blood connection for me.

Biology (blood) is the basis of culture, and culture is the basis of religion/spirituality.

Mind you, I don't discount all of the teachings of the Bible, not at all. I particularly like, "To everything there is a season," etc. etc. It expresses the ebb & flo of all life just perfectly, and how we must go with that ebb & flo. However, there are other cultures in other places who also understand the push & pull contained in all, tho not expressing it so poetically.

I share your view to some degree, Carla. There are some Christians who believe we must live exactly as people lived in Biblical times - same food preparation methods, same rituals, same gender roles etc.

To me, that is to miss the moral messages of the Bible which transcend time and culture but should provide basic decent morality to any age. Wisdom can be 10,000 years old and just as valid now as then. The same people who advocate these Biblical hierarchy/structures etc wouldn't advocate we live in robes and sandals all year round and shun all modern technology as making us lazy etc.

I'm not a conventional Christian. I believe the Bible properly interpreted teaches the equality of all human beings, races and genders. I find the prevailing sexism in conservative Christian circles extremely annoying, but fortunately advances have been made.

Religion is definitely influenced by geographical location. The interesting thing about Christianity is that while Jesus was a Jew, the Jews reject him as the Christ. He was rejected by his own people but other nationalities have come to be Christians through people spreading the word (and the Scriptures).

Whether Christianity is the truth, I don't know. I believe Jesus was God in human form, but belief isn't fact or certainty. I would certainly prefer it to be true compared to some other religions that have very restrictive roles for women or involve many hours a day in rituals etc. Christianity teaches there is no need for circumcision or to spead hours washing and preparing foods certain ways and women aren't obliged to cover their heads

I hate to get in comparisons with other religions because I respect all cultural differences and have an interest in the pagan past of my ancestors, but counties that have been Christian have done particularly well over the past 2000 years. They are now the wealthiest and most powerful countries in the world with general good standard of living. Not that society is going away from Christianity, it's starting to go to the dogs, in my opinion. We have abortion on demand and so much crime and violence. Compare that to a country like Malta which is Roman Catholic majority of about 95% and there is no legal abortion and very low crimes. If there was more genuine Christianity in my country, then it would be a safer place.

I believe a society needs morals to function. That doesn't have to be Christian morals, but it needs "something", it needs someone/something to set the standards.

But I can certainly understand people having a negative view of Christianity because of the behaviours of a minority. All I can associate with Islam is women having to go out with veils or slits for eyes, preaching of hatred on the streets, bombs, and terrorist attacks. Is that representative of the whole Islamic community? I doubt it. But it's all I've seen of Islam, so it's all I know of that religion. I don't think it's fair to judge a religion by the bad behaviour of those who don't even represent it fairly.

What makes the Bible so compelling is that everything in it that God said would happen, has come true, with the exception of some of the notable end-time prophecies, which are abundant, and some of which have indeed been clearly fulfilled in my lifetime, and others which clearly will be shortly.

This makes the Bible very pertainant in todays world. Not only that, but Paul makes some extremely interesting statements about those Europeans.

Rom 11:1 I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.
Rom 11:2 God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew. Wot ye not what the scripture saith of Elias? how he maketh intercession to God against Israel, saying,
Rom 11:3 Lord, they have killed thy prophets, and digged down thine altars; and I am left alone, and they seek my life.
Rom 11:4 But what saith the answer of God unto him? I have reserved to myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal.
Rom 11:5 Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace.
Rom 11:6 And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.
Rom 11:7 What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded
Rom 11:8 (According as it is written, God hath given them the spirit of slumber, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear;) unto this day.
Rom 11:9 And David saith, Let their table be made a snare, and a trap, and a stumblingblock, and a recompence unto them:
Rom 11:10 Let their eyes be darkened, that they may not see, and bow down their back alway.
Rom 11:11 I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy.
Rom 11:12 Now if the fall of them be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles; how much more their fulness?
Rom 11:13 For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office:
Rom 11:14 If by any means I may provoke to emulation them which are my flesh, and might save some of them.
Rom 11:15 For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead?
Rom 11:16 For if the firstfruit be holy, the lump is also holy: and if the root be holy, so are the branches.
Rom 11:17 And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert graffed in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree;
Rom 11:18 Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee.
Rom 11:19 Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be graffed in.
Rom 11:20 Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear:
Rom 11:21 For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee.
Rom 11:22 Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off.
Rom 11:23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in: for God is able to graff them in again.
Rom 11:24 For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert graffed contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be graffed into their own olive tree?
Rom 11:25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.
Rom 11:26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:
Rom 11:27 For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.
Rom 11:28 As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers' sakes.
Rom 11:29 For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.
Rom 11:30 For as ye in times past have not believed God, yet have now obtained mercy through their unbelief:
Rom 11:31 Even so have these also now not believed, that through your mercy they also may obtain mercy.
Rom 11:32 For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all.
Rom 11:33 O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!
Rom 11:34 For who hath known the mind of the Lord? or who hath been his counsellor?
Rom 11:35 Or who hath first given to him, and it shall be recompensed unto him again?
Rom 11:36 For of him, and through him, and to him, are all things: to whom be glory for ever. Amen.

The above chapter basically says this:

Those who are of the race of Israel will all be saved—that is—have eternal life with God in heaven and on Earth (in the not-too-distant future). Those who are not of this race, may accept or reject the gift of salvation by their own will.

The only remaining question is, "Where or who is Israel today?" I'll cut to the chase.

I've studied this subject for years and have come to this conclusion. Israel consists mosly of the western european countries, and others:

Scottland, Ireland, Germany, Denmark, Russia, Spain, Wales, Norway, Sweden, etc.

And in all likelyhood, England is actually the ancient tribe of the Judeans.

The people of these countries are mostly in a Biblically-prophecied state of blindness to the truth of the Bible. The reason for this is so the other races of the world can be offered salvation.

Read the parable of the wedding and it will make more sense now:

Mat 22:1 And Jesus answered and spake unto them again by parables, and said,
Mat 22:2 The kingdom of heaven is like unto a certain king, which made a marriage for his son,
Mat 22:3 And sent forth his servants to call them that were bidden to the wedding: and they would not come.
Mat 22:4 Again, he sent forth other servants, saying, Tell them which are bidden, Behold, I have prepared my dinner: my oxen and my fatlings are killed, and all things are ready: come unto the marriage.
Mat 22:5 But they made light of it, and went their ways, one to his farm, another to his merchandise:
Mat 22:6 And the remnant took his servants, and entreated them spitefully, and slew them.
Mat 22:7 But when the king heard thereof, he was wroth: and he sent forth his armies, and destroyed those murderers, and burned up their city.
Mat 22:8 Then saith he to his servants, The wedding is ready, but they which were bidden were not worthy.
Mat 22:9 Go ye therefore into the highways, and as many as ye shall find, bid to the marriage.
Mat 22:10 So those servants went out into the highways, and gathered together all as many as they found, both bad and good: and the wedding was furnished with guests.
Mat 22:11 And when the king came in to see the guests, he saw there a man which had not on a wedding garment:
Mat 22:12 And he saith unto him, Friend, how camest thou in hither not having a wedding garment? And he was speechless.
Mat 22:13 Then said the king to the servants, Bind him hand and foot, and take him away, and cast him into outer darkness; there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
Mat 22:14 For many are called, but few are chosen.

The salvation which is now available to the non-Israel people will provoke Israel to jealousy so they will return to God pretty soon, but not without suffering.

Those who are currently in the land of Israel are not Judeans, nevertheless, they will reside there for a short while—being used by the banking cartel—in order to deceive the whole world, as stated in Rev 2:9 and 3:9.

This is not a light study and not some idea off the top of my head. This is the result of many hours of research and study over a period of almost 2 decades.

This study was done by "letting the data lead" rather than mixing my own opinions into the logical conclusions I drew. Even though looking at current world situations and watching the current mainstream media makes belief in this kind of information difficult for some, this difficulty makes complete sense when you understand the Biblical prediction model for world government and deception which stands in our very midst today. The deception itself was predicted and is based on a false model that those currently in Israel are of the tribe of Judah:

Rev 20:1 And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand.
Rev 20:2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,
Rev 20:3 And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.
Rev 20:4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
Rev 20:5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.
Rev 20:6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.
Rev 20:7 And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison,
Rev 20:8 And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea.
Rev 20:9 And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them.
Rev 20:10 And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.

For the benefit of those who may wonder; know that this is not an anti-semite position. In my current opinion, all races of the world have access to the gift of salvation:

Rev 3:9 Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee.

There is no information—no book anywhere—that I can find that is more pertinent today than the Bible.

Russ, there are other religions that also teach the Golden Rule, for starters. I don't know the exact wording, but I read that in the scriptures of Islam, Buddhism, & 4 others (not Judaism) it says something like, "No man is a believer until he wants for his brother what he wants for himself."

As to the common sense wisdom expressed in your long list, this is not exclusive to the Bible.

Also, I would like to know how YOU interpret Revelation 3:9? Never mind how your religious teachers have instructed you to interpret it.

I like the Book of Revelation, too, and since my brain is no worse than anyone else's, I interpret it according to my own sensibilities.

How incorrect it is for anyone to say that "Israel" in the Bible means Europe! There are no two broad races of humanity more dissimilar than Semites and Whites. My cat is closer to being a duck than your average white person (European) is to the Tribe of Judea.

By the way, if the people occupying Israel today are fakes, where are the "true" Judeans located?

It doesn't matter whether the occupants of Israel today are supposedly the Khazars of old, or the "true" Jews: they have over the centuries been made all the same in outlook by the centuries-old practice of infant male genital cutting. Maimonides himself described at least partially the way in which infant "circumcision" changes the mentality of a race of people over the years;and a few modern scientists have suggested the same thing. You could take any race, anywhere, and over centuries of infant circumcision - it has to be done to infants, not to adults or adolescents as in rites of passage - it changes the actual function and structure of the brain, producing an attitude totally at odds with the rest of the world's people - and is that not what we have in the "jews" of today, a people who have designated themselves as "Chosen" and everyone else as scum, sarcastically referred to as "the UNcircumcised"? (Read an unexpurgated version of the Talmud to see what I mean.)


Infant genital cutting is NOT just a symbolic marker of some kind of covenant; it is a form of eugenics. And it has been spectacularly successful. Abraham was no fool. The act of cutting away a portion of the infant's sex organ does its nefarious work through (A) the immediate, severe pain affecting the nervous system permanently; and (B) constant exposure of the glans penis throughout life also having a deleterious effect on brain function, through rubbing & chafing against clothing. (But I can assure you that the money needed for such research will never become available, and even if it is, the results will be immediately blasted as "racist".)

I don't think that all races of the world have access to the gift of salvation in the way the bible describes it.

You never asked me or anyone else here on this forum how we might interpret anything in the bible, esp. The Book of Revelation. I would like to hear the opinions of various religionists and non-religionists.

Carla, you won't find anyone with more disdain for modern education—whether public or religious—than me. I could not care less how my teachers have interpreted the Bible. They did little more for me than fill my head with grossly oversimplified ideas amounting to nothing more than propaganda (which they learned from their teachers) which did nothing more than to give me a place to start my own study.

The vast majority of people's logic is highly influenced by emotion, but I learned at a young age that truth does not change for my feelings, rather, I must humble myself and change to conform to truth. The truth is not in error, I am.

As for your question...

Remember after the war that we supposedly won where the soviets got control of many countries and then Israel was formed. Look carefully at this event, put the pieces together, and decide for yourself if this isn't part of the deception that is spoken of in the Bible concerning the coming "man of perdition".

It's a big subject so I'll leave it to the reader to do their own homework (which is as it should be), but as for me, it's obvious that the results of these very interesting distributions of power and land make complete sense in the light and context of Bible prophecy.

As for those people...

There are a few possibilities as to their origin, but it really doesn't matter too much. The more important possibility is the likelyhood that England is the tribe of Judah. I'm not positive on this point, but in my research, I would say there's at least an 80% that they are.


Careful. Check carefully and you'll see some implied assumptions in your statement above.

Nevertheless, in the course of my study, the possibility of many of the western European countries being the offspring of the 12 tribes of Israel is very high. I didn't say whites are Judah.

It's helpful to look at language migrations. Also, use older books that have not rewritten history for their own purposes. Keep studying and perhaps our conclusions will meet somewhere in the future.


I would say there is at least an 80% chance that the blood-English people are the offspring of Judah.

I would suggest studying the throne of David, the ancestory of Prince Charles, and other historical elements of England, and you will find:

"England has suprises."


I look at this study very logically keeping in mind that the Bible has made numerous, specific predictions about past events and current ones. Once this is established, we see that it does matter who Israel is today. It matters a lot.

I'll have to part with you in your opinion that circumcision changes your brain as you posted previously. Descendancy is followed from parents to children, not by practice. This is the difference between choice and predestination, as Paul speaks about in the verses I posted previously.

I would suggest this excellent study on the subject. It deals with your positions squarely:

Judah's Sceptre and Joseph's Birthright

I would also see the outstanding breakdown of the genealogy of Christ (66-the Son of Man, and 77-the Son of God) in the book "Number in Scripture" by Bullinger.


So, who do you think has access to salvation? Who do you think does not have access to salvation?


Sorry. I assume everyone understands that an open forum means that anyone can respond. That colorful "Reply" link above every post is an invitation to all people world wide. This is as it should be. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Thanks for your dialog on this subject. It is good because it challenges us to continue studying. Let's.

Take care and all the best.

I personally find all this prophecy thing really pointless to the message of the Bible, which is that God loves us and Jesus died for us.

So many branches of religions are so caught up with trivial things that surely can't be of any significance to an infinite being like God who they paint to be an egomaniac. I mean, why in the world would a super-intelligent being want people to prepare foods certain ways, to have things on their heads, to do rituals, to circumcise children (which I agree with Carla is a horrible thing to do to any baby). It's illogical to my mind, and I believe that was part of Jesus's message, to "correct" misrepresentations of God that required all these things. To me, Jesus seemed to be saying we serve God best by serving our fellow human beings.

I really don't have much time for "organized" religion, the rituals, the arguments over theology, the looking for meanings in things that we could give any meaning too that can breed prejudice and hatred and oppression.

I believe a wise person will, as Jesus said, build his home on a rock - i.e. will listen to the moral guidelines of the Bible and live by them. They will love God, their fellow human beings, the animals and the natural world.

That to me is what being a Christian is about. All this other stuff it totally unimportant to me.

Just my opinion.

Re the "war that we supposedly won", Russ, after which the Bolsheviks took over much of Europe and Israel was formed - that may or may not be what the Bible was talking about; it is hard to draw a straight line. It may be what the Bible refers to, but maybe not. I personally can live with this ambiguity and uncertainty.

What kind of eats me up is the fact that those crummy little countries, mainly Israel, of the socalled "middle east", they are nothing more than gravel pits & rock - no soil, no natural fertility left, no natural forests, only manmade landscrapes and pathetic ones at that - and these little nations are constantly at the heart of world politics! It looks like with the apparently soon-to-come war in Iraq, WW 3 will commence - and for what? One of the most unwelcoming, desolate areas on earth! Shouldn't big conflicts be over some beautiful, fertile, live-giving areas? Feh.

Yes, I am waiting for the day when "knowledge of the lord will cover the earth" (Isaiah?).

The English are descended from Judeans? The English are largely blonde and rosy-cheeked and physical. The Judeans are dark, with different kinds of features, and I don't know what you mean by warning me that I'm making assumptions. I am making a bold statement that middle-eastern-based peoples are as different from Europeans as cats from ducks, and I am not casting aspersions on either the cats or the ducks. Anyway, couldn't the matter of lineage by solved simply by DNA tests?

Demi...


One of the vital reasons God give us prophecies that fortell the future is to prove to us that He is who He says He is. Another reason is so we can prepare for these things.

God does not expect us to have faith without evidence. Most people really misunderstand faith, but it's vital to understanding the world, life and the issues thereof. God doesn't think it's pointless, otherwise, prophecy would not be in each of the 66 books.

Just food for thought.


The food laws—as all of Gods law—are there to test us and protect us. The laws teach us how to live with vitality and how to stay healthy. He cares about these things. It also tests us—shows us who we are, and we really need to know.

Concerning things on our heads; that's not from the Bible. God does not require us to put things on our heads. That's just one of the many things people add to the Bible to serve their own purposes.

There is only a couple "rituals" God asks of us including the breaking of bread and baptism. Both are simple and are symbols of very important things He wants us to remember. It's for our own benefit and those who practice it understand how well it works. The feast days He asked us to honor are the same, They are reminders of extremely important events.

Circumcision has many benefits and is also a very important symbol. Many extrememly beneficial things in life are painful, yet most don't honor the 8th day circumcision and therefore they cause unnecessary pain, but that's just like us, we can't follow simple directions and we suffer as a result. Some searches on the Internet will deepen the understanding on this issue and show the import thereof.

Finally, about Jesus correcting misrepresentations of God... Christ said that not one jot or tittle of the law would fail. He fulfilled it and this was vital to his mission here. Christ corrected nothing because there was nothing to correct. He, rather, fulfilled it; completed it—or more simply—"did it".

This may be related to the reason some people misunderstand things like why He said, "My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?"

Amazingly, this is the beginning of the 22 psalm which was written by Christ's own forfather many years earlier which predicted the crucifixion event that Christ was experiencing. It's as if Christ was on the cross saying, "Wake up! This is the event you've been waiting for and that has been prophecied about by my father David. This is it!" Of couse, as today, people were not ready because they didn't study:

[color:"red"]"And shall lay thee even with the ground, and thy children within thee; and they shall not leave in thee one stone upon another; because thou knewest not the time of thy visitation."[/color]

Luke 19:44


Well said! I too have no time for organized religion. It's a waste of it.

What's so amazing is that those who read and study the Bible realize that these things don't cause confusion and don't have different meanings. It's people that cause confusion.

It starts with people who have ulterior motives who slander the book, then these people are blindly listened to by others who know too little about the Bible and for this reason the slander is accepted as truth. Just like mercury-amalgam issue; you can talk until you're blue in the face but some people just won't listen. Some Doctor's just keeps believing that the ADA or AMA has told them the truth. Others only listen to mainstream media, which is horrible, slanderous, and terribly inaccurate.

There's one way to know, and that is to read it for yourself.


Here's the verse you're speaking about:

[color:"red"]"Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock: And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock. And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand: And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it."[/color]

Matthew, 7:24-27

Christ is speaking about those who do what He says; these are the ones who build on the rock.

Of course, how can we do them unless we know them. How can we know them unless we read and study them.

Carla...


This is an excellent subject to study because it get right to the heart of the deception that is to come, and you need to know about this deception because:

[color:"red"]"And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name. Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six."[/color]

Revelation 13:16-18

[color:"red"]"The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb: And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name."[/color]

Revelation 14:10-11

Not only are there tough times ahead, but those who are not prepared or don't know about the eternal doom prnounced to those receiving the mark will pay dearly.

I work in the field of publishing and I know about the coming technology called biometrics which is already being used to protect digital media and Internet content. This is a very pertinent prophecy for our time for you are about to live through it.


Very good, point well taken, yet, why is this happening? Just as I say in alternative health I say likewise here: "Everything has a cause."

The fulfillment of this coming deception is the reason.

It's very important to powers-that-be to put themselves in a place of great power—in the place of God—and they are orchestrating these events to do just that. Nothing will stand in their way and many will suffer and many will die.

Of couse, this isn't the first time this has happened. Throughout history, men have declared themselves to be God and have ruled over huge areas. You just happen to be living in the final incarnation of this event. Some deeper prophecy teachers call it "The Revived Roman Empire". That's a good name for it.


I would search out old pictures of Christ and see what He looks like. I would also read the preface to the 1611 Bible.

You have to remember, this is a war between God and Satan. Of course, God will win without more than a bruised heel. Nevertheless, you and I are caught in the middle of it, and for good reason.

In the big picture, we are here caught in a great filter—the Apocrypha calls this "the narrow space"—a filter that separates those who care from those who don't:

[color:"red"]"So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth. Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked: I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see. As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent."[/color]

Revelation 3:16-19

If you see the facts behind the idea that the blood-English are the modern Judeans, I believe you too would consider the possibility. I don't have time to present it here, but there is much readily-available information that can help you.

Take care and thank you both for the excellent dialog!

So circumcision of the infant is relatively painless if it's done on the 8th day, huh.

I read a letter written by a jewish man whose grandmother told him (when he was an adult) that she had attended his ritual jewish genital cutting when he was 8 days old - and he screamed for 12 hours, non-stop. He could not be consoled; he would not feed.

It was your normal, average, religious circumcision; there was no medical complications that required this baby to be hospitalized, no excessive bleeding or anything. He got the slug of sweet wine as anesthetic like they always do.

Twelve (12) hours.

Do you know what that man does today? He is a homosexual who runs an artificial insemination clinic for lesbians.

Now, tell me anything in this whole wide world that you want to tell me, but don't tell me that infant genital cutting does not seriously impair both the neurological system, and consequently the psychology, of the individual.

And thanks, Demi. I largely agree with your take on religion.

Babies have died from circumcision. And it is not true that the removed skin has no functions. It has many. The Bible tells us that circumcision is not necessary, so why do it? It's not done in my country, except by the Jews. Roman Catholics in general don't do it either and there are Christian movements trying to raise awareness of the dangers of circumcision. Any voluntary surgery carries risk and to put a healthy baby through it for nothing is wrong, in my opinion.

Russ, I do read the Bible. I have 3 Bibles, all different, and once including the Apocrypha. Jesus fulfilled the law and have us one most important command - "love one another".

He said it's not the food we eat or how we eat it that makes us unclean, but the nasty words that come out of our mouths, and the NT makes it clear circumcision is meaningless.

I don't think there is much point speculating when the end of the world will come. People have been doing that for centuries and they always think it will be in their lifetime or soon after. Most likely this planet will last for many more centuries. What matters, in my opinion, is taking care of the world so we can hand it on in better shape to the next generation.

Prophecy is so much like horoscopes or Nostradamus. You can read virtually anything into something that is cryptic i.e. whore of Babylon is Roman Catholic Church. Not only is there risk of error, but great risk of prejudice i.e. those who do interpret it this way will thus bear negative feelings towards the church and encourage others to do so, when in fact they may be wrong, and I believe are. Its a dangerous game to start applying cryptic things to races and organizations.

Hot post, Demi.

Circumcision has "benefits", right? Well, if you twist it around enough, so does the placement of silver/mercury amalgam fillings. We can all see that some - actually many - people have no side effects from mercury in their mouths. None. No neurological, psychological, or physical problems. I have family members (older) who are just tough as nails, and old as stones, and just keep on goin'! And they have mercury in their mouths day after day, decade after decade. If they should suddenly be diagnosed with cancer or something equally bad, can it be proved it was caused by the mercury fillings?

Circumcision? Well, millions of little jews have had it done on Day 8, and they went on to live long, healthy, productive lives. And because of these many successful lives, let's just ignore the ones (their number is carefully kept hidden, of course) who have to resort to the most degrading, foul forms of porno to be able to complete the sex act, because of circumcision damage. Also, because of the many happy and successful jews in our midst, let's ignore the ones who can't have sex at all, because a chunk of the glans came off with that filthy foreskin. I actually know of a couple of jewish babies who died from the trauma of that holy symbolic and health-giving act - but since this is such a teensy minority, let's ignore that, too. The greater good was served by the circumcision of all.

And a greater good was also served by all those millions of teeth stuffed with mercury amalgam - because prior to the development of composite filling, countless children and adults, too, would have had to have all or most of their teeth extracted. Is that a great fate, or what? Gumming your oatmeal because you can't afford false teeth, and mercury is "dangerous". Dentistry should have permitted all those teeth to rot right down to the gums because a FEW might develop severe neurological, physical, and personality difficulties from the mercury amalgam? Gotta look at BOTH sides of the issue!

I am right, aren't I, Russ?

Well, aren't I?
.

I agree completely, Carla.

Circumcision is promoted as "benefits outweight the risks" and those babies who have died from it, been brain damaged, or impotent, are just forgotten. Millions of people have amalgam but very few are as sick as most of us on here. For the majority, the "benefits outweigh the risks". Therefore, going on the argument that the majority interest prevails, why should they stop using amalgam because a few "unlucky" people get sick from it? Just put us all down to a casualty in the general public interest and forget about our suffering.

But I'd say they have an even stronger argument for using amalgam than circumcision because there are few strong dnetal restorative materials and the damage to the tooth is already done. Circumcision removes a healthy body part that has nerves, glands, blood supply, and aids in sexual pleasure, amongst other things. Even if there were no risks whatsoever in removing the foreskin, it is a violation of a baby's rights to remove permanently a part of his body without his consent.

I personally would be in favour of making voluntary circumcision illegal, but Judaism makes that difficult. Instead, I believe there needs to be mass education in the countries that still perform this about the dangers, the function of the foreskin, and the risk of death.

Rights of the child is important to me, and that goes also to the rights of a child to an upbringing free of physical punishment. Any physical chastisement of a child carries the risk of injury. But, it seems that many people follow their parents in how they raise their children and how they discipline them. If their parents circumcised them, they will circumcise their children and will discipline them physically and so on. I believe education is the only way to enlighten people to alternatives in the interest of the child.

Demi - I have a booklet put out by an anti-physical-punishment organization (it is neutral on other issues), and they list the many harms that are, or have the potential to be, done by "spanking". Here is just one: there are nerves in the backside & legs that lead to the sex organs and a sensitive child who is spanked is mildly "aroused" even though there is pain, too.

In these children, a kind of neurological pathway is formed that causes the pain and pleasure to be confounded in the brain, so these children, when they grow up, are the ones who put ads in magazines saying, "Spanking wanted." Years ago, I had heard about men & women who actually wanted spankings but could never figure out what the hell was going on. Then, years later, after I had children and sent away for that booklet, I came to understand.

Isn't this absolutely pathetic? And I am glad that you are so highly educated on the matter of genital cutting of children; you are rare indeed.

Guys! Demi and Carla...

I don't mean this in a harmful sense at all but I have to be honest with you both and tell you the truth; and this applies to both of you:

You are responding to things that I didn't even say. This makes me believe that you may do the same thing when you read the Bible and this is why get get different information from it then others do.

For example, Carla said:


That's not what I said at all. Where did you get that from? Please point it out to me. Did you get it from this that I wrote?:


Carla, please read this again. I'm talking about studies that have led many researchers to believe that circumcision done on the 8th day is less painful. I said exactly what I meant but you took it to a completely different place. You turned it into an absolute when it was not. This must be why you get something so different from scripture than others do.


I think you'd have to admit (at some time in the future, perhaps) that what you wrote above is quite a sweeping conclusion. Again, many don't take the Bible very seriously, but it's only those who don't know it. Many more claim to know it than actually do; many! Just like the vast majority of Doctors, preachers simply repeat what they hear in school, and what they hear in school is largely controlled by those with "special interests".

Demi Said:

Not necessary for what?

Answer: For salvation.

Be careful because the scripture related to what you posted (Paul wrote it) means exactly what it says when taken in context, and nothing more.

You're forgetting about Biblical law and Godly ordinances. You're forgetting about blessings.

Ask yourself why the U.S. became the most prosperous and powerful country in the world. The answer is easy: Law; Biblical law.

To not realize this important fact is to deprive yourself of great blessings. Law is about the quality of life; prosperity, and power, in the hands of good, knowledgable people.

Of couse this no longer applies to those who have ruled this country for the past 50+ years which is why the U.S. is failing dramatically. The party's over because of: Lawlessness.

Law = Prosperity
Obedience = Blessing

You're doing what many do, and I call it "glumping". This is the practice of taking a small piece of information and attaching implications to it that don't belong there. When you glump, you find "contradictions" in the Bible that aren't there because you're adding your own ideas, not letting it interpret itself.

I hope you understand that I'm not trying to make you feel bad by saying this. I'm trying to be a friend by helping you look at yourself in a more honest way, which is something we all should do.

[color:"red"]"Faithful are the wounds of a friend; but the kisses of an enemy are deceitful."[/color]

Proverbs 27:6

Demi Wrote...

Here is the scripture you're referring to:

[color:"red"]"Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man."[/color]

Matthew 15:11

With all due respect, I could not disagree with you more. You have to take this in context or you will draw conclusions that are contrary to Christ's very purpose: To fulfill the law.

Here is an excellent commentary from Clarke that should straighten it out for you.

"Mat 15:11 - Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth - This is an answer to the carping question of the Pharisees, mentioned Mat 15:2, Why do thy disciples eat with unwashed hands? To which our Lord here replies, That what goes into the mouth defiles not the man; i.e. that if, in eating with unwashed hands, any particles of dust, etc., cleaving to the hands, might happen to be taken into the mouth with the food, this did not defile, did not constitute a man a sinner; for it is on this alone the question hinges: thy disciples eat with unwashed hands; therefore they are sinners; for they transgress the tradition of the elders, i.e. the oral law, which they considered equal in authority to the written law; and, indeed, often preferred the former to the latter, so as to make it of none effect, totally to destroy its nature and design, as we have often seen in the preceding notes. That which cometh out of the mouth - That is, what springs from a corrupt unregenerate heart - a perverse will and impure passions - these defile, i.e. make him a sinner."

Christ is most certainly not talking about eating unclean foods. He is certainly not saying that the food laws are suddenly null and void, especially in the context of His life in which He came to fulfill the law.

[color:"red"]"For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled."[/color]

Matthew 5:18

[color:"red"]"But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully..."[/color]

1Timothy 1:8

The law was established and well understood by Christ's audience and they certainly would understand that to take this in context would be in reference to what had been said just previous; namely Matthew 15:2 where He is speaking about unwashed hands causing something to enter the mouth and defile you. This is very important and should clear up any misunderstanding of this verse if you read this in context.

Demi Said...

Firstly, we're not talking about the end of the world. Some people think of it this way but it's simply due to bad translations. Additionally, we're not speculating. We're know the signs of the times.

Why is it important to know the signs of the times?

Well first off, because God thinks so and that is the reason He provides them for us. Just like during the first coming when Judea didn't recoginize the time, in this coming event, most—even the vast majority—won't recoginize the time, except this time, the consequences are losing your soul. It's very serious to know the times because if you take the mark of the beast, well...

[color:"red"]"The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb: And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name."[/color]

Revelation 14:10-11

Your call.

I could not agree more with taking care of the world—and let me add—each other. Christ said to occupy till He comes, and so we shall do, and hopefully with wisdom.

Demi Said...

Not if you actually study it. It's very different and very important.

A very large percentage of scripture is prophecy. Let's not pick and choose but let us rather humble ourselves and see if it's us—check ourselves—and see if we're missing something important.

Demi Said...

It's only dangerous because mankind makes it so, and they are not cryptic if you study them yourself. Don't just take what someone else says for granted.

The scripture has assigned different genealogical groups to different tasks and positions, yet, has offered the gift of salvation to all. That's a good thing—a very good thing, for all.

[color:"red"]"Why do the heathen (nations) rage, and the people imagine a vain thing? "[/color]

Psalms 2:1

Very pertainant question in today's world.

Carla Wrote...

Not so.

It's well known in science that mercury kills cells, causes mutations, interferes with a host of other body processes and it affects us all. Your conclusion that is does not affect everyone is extremely subjective...


Can we prove negatives? Better to stick with real science.

Those people are being affected. It's just that you can't see the effects of their lowered I.Q.s (because you have nothing to compare the alternative scenario—being mercury free—with), they don't tell you about their constipation or blood in their stool, they don't broadcast news about their swollen prostate, nor to they publish their erectile dysfunction. They write off their low energy to "age" and hide their depression.

Your statements are broad, sweeping conclusions based on your observation and knowledge of mercury. Science differs.

I once had an elderly woman over that swore that fluoride helped rid the world of cavities. She said, "Just look at how few children have cavities today." Hopefully, you know better.

Carla Said...

Let's not ignore anyone. Let's rather find out why this is happening. Let's look at the equipment being used and who is using it. You'll be surprised to find—as in most situations of this type—it's all about human error and negligence, not the procedure itself.

Again, you're making broad, sweeping, glumped conclusions that if applied to other areas of life, would lead to the elimination of all cars, houses and telephone poles as well.

Let's look at the details of failures and be shocked to find out how many pattererns there are and how easy it would be to make a change. It's our fault, not circumcision's.

Carla Said...

Not so.

There are much safer alternatives and have been since the beginning of dentistry. Yes, I said since the beginning of dentistry. You certainly don't know that there have been 2 previous amalgam "wars" in the United States alone. These problems have been known about for a long time; and well established. The media has neglected to report this information, however, because placing amalgams serves the interests of the owners of the media.

Carla Said...

No, you need to look at all sides of the issue, and considering you're assuming that there were no alternatives to amalgams for some time in your previous post related to "gumming oatmeal", you may only be looking at 2. There have always been alternatives so the scenario you described above has never been necessary.

Demi Said...

I believe true education (knowledge) is the key to many things, but who's going to do the educating?

The unfortunately fact is that education fails for the same reason the following statement is true:

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."

—Edmund Burke

Too many people claim to have answers (knowledge) and want to be educators only to find out later that they didn't. People often hold on to an idea because it feels good to them, not because it's been proven good or beneficial. And then, throw in the evil people of the world—those without conscience—who would rather subvert the whole world than have an ounce of respect for another's rights.

It's a complicated situation, but without the proper information, nothing will be accomplished, which is where the world is today, and again, all for the beneit of the banking cartel, the [color:"red"]"merchants of the world"[/color], as the Bible calls them.

I appreciate both of your comments but please read posts carefully and examine what it really being said. Otherwise, we waste a lot of time making errata corrections which benefits no one.

I have a deep sense of responsibility when saying things and making posts because I'm responsible for what I say, and I'm aware that what I say affects other people. What you say does as well. Because of this respect for my fellow humans (and animals), I answer questions with research and solid information and I'm not afraid to say those beautiful forgotten words, "I don't know". I wish more people had this sense of responsibility.

And please, don't just read the Bible, study it. Doing so will clear up numerous misunderstandings in every area of life.

Good day!

With all due respect to those who are advocates of male infant circumcision I have to post my expereince and my truth: I had my first son circumcised as an infant in 1969. Little information was "out" yet to the public about this issue -- except (we were told) that circumcision was supposed to be "cleaner" and help avoid infections. That's all the info I had to "go on" and itseemed plausible at the time to me. However, in the interim between the birth of my 1st son and the birth of my second and 3rd sons (1982 and 1985) I learned a whole lot more about this subject. For one thing, I learned that a non circumcised child is easily kept "clean" and the "how to" of it. I also learned how the natural progression of the foreskin changes (loosens from the glans) naturally as the boy grows. Mothering Magazine and La Leche League have given me and many other parents the greatly needed infomration a parent needs to arm themselves with the truth in order to hold to their beliefs when others who do not believe in allowing a boy to have their natural penis speak against their decision. Anyone needing more information on this topic can get infomration from Mothering.org or doing a google search. As far as I'm concerned, circumcision is a "blood ritual" that we can leave behind as all will eventually do with mercury amalgam fillings. Yes, this is a very emotional subject for me!!! I've been "to the moutain tops" on it. So glad my last two sons are "natural" -- the way God made them.
Harriet

Carla, I agree. It is unfortunate that circuncision is still widely done in America by those who financially profit from the mutilation, but in my country it is very rare indeed for a baby to be circumcised.

I too have read about the psychological damage of spanking children and how it can cause primitive arousal which afterwards associates sexual pleasure with spanking and can lead someone into that kind of sexual activity.

Russ, I believe you are very knowledgeable on the mercury issue, but we will have to part opinions on this issue, and I'm sorry that someone who is so enlightened on the amalgam issue can advance an ancient mutilation ritual that has no significance whatsoever in the life of a Christian.

Sorry about your experience, Harriet. Its unfortunate that things happen when people are uninformed. My mother says she wouldn't have given me amalgams if she had known there was a poison in them.

Hopefully as more people are educated on the subject, circumcision will end in America as it has here.

Male circumcision provides a degree of protection against acquiring HIV infection, equivalent to what a vaccine of high efficacy would have achieved.

"Randomized, controlled intervention trial of male circumcision for reduction of HIV infection risk: the ANRS 1265 Trial."
PLoS Medicine. 2005 Nov;2(11):e298.


Over forty observational studies have reported a protective effect of male circumcision against HIV-I acquisition.

"Feasibility of medical male circumcision in Nyanza Province, Kenya."
East African Medical Journal. 2004 May;81(5):230-5.


We conclude that nontherapeutic circumcision of infant boys is a suitable matter for parental discretion.

"Between prophylaxis and child abuse: the ethics of neonatal male circumcision."
American Journal of Bioethics. (Harvard University) 2003 Spring;3(2):35-48.


Multiple lifetime medical benefits of neonatal circumcision can be achieved.... Cost benefits of circumcision resulted from prevention of infant urinary tract infection, balanoposthitis, phimosis, HIV infection and penile cancer.

"Cost analysis of neonatal circumcision in a large health maintenance organization."
Journal of Urology. 2006 Mar;175(3):1111-5.


The merits of neonatal circumcision continue to be debated hotly. The medical benefits of circumcision are multiple, but most are small. The clearest medical benefit of circumcision is the relative reduction in the risk for a UTI (urinary tract infection), especially in early infancy. In the case of a patient with known urologic abnormalities that predispose to UTI, neonatal circumcision has a clearer role in terms of medical benefit to the patient. Most of the other medical benefits of circumcision probably can be realized without circumcision as long as access to clean water and proper penile hygiene are achieved. Regarding the relationship between STDs and circumcision, patient education and the practice of low-risk sexual behavior make a far greater impact than does routine circumcision in hopes of reducing the spread of HIV and other STDs. Nevertheless, in areas where safe sexual practices are poorly adhered to, circumcision can have a relative protective effect against the transmission of HIV and other STDs. The medical harms of circumcision lie mainly in the 1% acute complication rate and the additional patients who require revision of their initial circumcision for cosmetic or medical reasons. Special interest groups have argued that perhaps the greatest harm of circumcision is in performing an operation without a clear indication. Many of these groups have claimed that performing a routine neonatal circumcision is akin to performing a surgical procedure without a clear medical benefit, and in an infant, that is akin to surgery without informed consent. Although this is an extreme posture, the clinician can understand the emphasis on trying to provide invasive medical services only when a clear medical benefit is expected, especially when treating an infant or child. Clearly, the procedure provides potential medical benefits and potential risks. It is difficult to say whether the benefits outweigh the risks for all male infants.

"Neonatal circumcision." Pediatric Clinics of North America.
2001 Dec;48(6):1539-57.

I find that a very poor argument by a biased organisation. Ask a dentist who uses amalgams if they are safe, and he/she will say "oh yes, absolutely".

To remove a healthy part of a baby's body risking death, brain damage and impotence because it "might" lower the risk of getting HIV is just ridiculous in my mind. Responsible sexual behaviour will be the best protection against HIV.

As to urinary tract infection from not being cicumcised, I have never heard of any child having this problem and none of the boys I grew up with were cicumcised. Most probably didn't even bathe more than 2-3 times a week, if that. Kids are very open about stuff and I never heard anything as a child or a teenage about any boy having a sore penis or infection because he wasn't circumcised.

I really don't see mutilation as justifyiable because of some remote possibility of a problem arising that is caused by something else i.e. irresponsible sexual behaviour.

If grown men want to have their foreskin removed, that is up to them, but I believe it iswrong to make that decision on the behalf of an baby. Many men have suffered because of their circumcision, just like a lot of us have suffered because someone decided on our behalf that amalgam was safe. Let's not put anyone else through unnecessary suffering by making irreversible decisions on their behalf that they have to live with for the rest of their life.

Besides, UTI is treatable with anti-biotics. Women are especially prone to it and it can have many causes - sexual intercourse, condoms, pregnancy, diabetes, menopause and even waiting too long to go to the bathroom.

Actually, it does have significance in the life of a Christian, a lot of significance (more on this later).

I'm honestly not trying to advance it. Rather, I simply believe parents should retain the right to make the decision. My previous post points out some medical benefits as well as cautions that parents should know about so they can make an informed decision.


There is a difference between what dentists learn in school and what real studies show—a BIG difference.

When you're viewing medical studies, they are usually unbiased and peer reviewed, although you will find some bias in certain circumstances particularly involving pharmaceuticals up for approval. Normally, reading the body of the study you can tell the difference, but I don't expect that you have this kind of experience with studies because you don't regularly read them, so I don't fault you for your opinion. You're obviously doing the best you can with what you have to work with.

Pertaining to the Christian aspect...

This subject from a Christian point of view is very misunderstood as evidenced by recent posts on this thread so I want to promote accurate information from a Christian perspective as well.

Christians have the right to know the truth about circumcision without a media bias that so often colors people's opinions throughout the world today, being that media bias is nearly always anti-Christian. This is the reason I post information correcting your assumptions and misunderstandings regarding scripture. It is important to provide people with accurate information so they have the true freedom to make informed decisions.

Check this out: http://www.infocirc.org/uti2.htm

and:

http://www.cirp.org/library/sex_function/

FYI...

In reference to your post #5459...

We are talking about male circumcision, right? The Bible has nothing to say about females in this respect.

Russ, I am finding your approach somewhat arrogant and closed-minded. You sound as though you think you are the only one that is right about everything appertaining to the Bible and medicine. There is no room in your attitude for any growth.

We have all learnt stuff from this forum, and I'm sorry that the only one who seems really closed minded to learn anything that doesn't agree with his predetermined opinions is the owner.

And I was well aware that we were discussing male cicumcision. If you had read my posts thoroughly you would have realised that is what I was talking about. Women don't have a penis.

Demi,

I'm sorry you feel this way.

I am very open minded (if you knew me personally, you would know this) but having studied the Bible, I realized that several of the things you posted previously were misinterpreting the verses so I corrected them in order to help you understand these things. I thought I was being nice.

• Have you found fault with my corrections?
• Was my help in these important matters not appreciated?
• Have I been wasting my gestures of kindness?
• Have I been wasting my time?

Please point out my errors to me and I will humbly rethink my position. I'm not proud or self-focused. Those things are a waste of time and energy. Truth is larger, older and more important than all of us. I will conform my life to it and not try to make it conform to my desires.

But now you have changed this conversation into one that condemns my character. Do I deserve this?

[color:"red"]"They also that render evil for good...because I follow the thing that good is."[/color]

Psalms 38:20

If a scuba diver was on this forum and they spoke about diving, I would humbly listen because I know little about it. I would ask questions if I was interested and would carefully consider the answers of those who know more than I do.

Yet, in your posts, you completely misinterpret scripture, and in my attempt to help, being kind to you all along, even making a reference to friends that correct each other, you now make this judgement of my character, not knowing me and having had nothing said against you.

[color:"red"]"Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?"[/color]

Galatians 4:16

If a computer programmer said to me, "Did you know you can use allocate global memory in Windows, release it and still use the memory pointer", I would kindly correct him even though the statement is completely ridiculous.

If a sound engineer came to me and said, "You can bypass the crossovers in your studio monitors and they will sound better and last longer", I would kindly point out how absurd that statement is, hoping that he will not try the very thing he is proposing and blow his own speakers.

Nevertheless, the things you've said about scripture are no less false. Not only that, but they are types of things that can be easilly researched and corrected, and so I thought I was doing you a kindness by taking the time to help you understand.

Now I am forced to ask myself if you really want to understand these things or if you just want to interpret them according to your own emotions or desires.

Do you believe the scriptures were written to be interpreted any such way we please?

[color:"red"]"Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation."[/color]

2 Peter 1:20

It is perhaps soul-searching time so we can question ourselves and see if we are:

• seeking an understanding of what scripture really says, or
• seeking our own interpretation of scripture for the fulfillment of our own wants.

As a Bible student, let me tell you, one God loves, the other He hates.

[color:"red"]"But this thou hast, that thou hatest the deeds of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate."[/color]

Revelation 2:6

Over and over again, when a prophet was sent from God to teach the truth to people, if the recipient(s)

• did not like the message, and
• was of evil character,

they attacked the messenger.

A proper understanding of scripture is valuable and is a very important matter in this life, so I implore you to listen and consider the things I have told you before sitting in judgement of the messenger.

[color:"red"]"Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man."[/color]

Matthew 15:11

Every couple of years there is an international symposium on genital cutting of unconsenting minors. The presenters include psychologists and psychiatrists. They come from various backgrounds and approaches, but are unanimous in their statement that people support infant circumcision because they have unconscious, deeply-embedded, disturbed feelings about the genitals and sexuality in general.

I know of a non-jewish woman whose baby boy died 2 years ago after a normal circumcision. Guess what? She said if she has another son, she'd have him cut, too.

You can give these folks thousands of pages of pro-intact material, and show them the grisliest photos & videos of babies with grossly damaged sex organs caused by genital cutting, and they will just stare at this information with glazed eyes. It's not getting through.

You can show them medical reports on babies whose stomach actually burst from screaming during the procedure, and it is like they are reading a comic or something; nothing registers.

You can have the world's physiologists tell them of the purposes and functions of the male foreskin, and it's like you never said a thing.

You can describe tragedy after tragedy, and all you are told in return is that "it was caused by human error and negligence". Well, Russ, WHEN will that great day occur that it IS done "properly", and what do we do in the meantime? I'd appreciate an answer.

Suppose it was YOUR son whose penis was so butchered that he had to hide himself forever because of his abnormal appearance? I have seen photos of such babies and men. I knew a man years ago whose circumcision was so tight he just couldn't "do it" properly and when he tried, he couldn't feel a thing. What, precisely, would you say to this man if he gave you hell for defending circumcision? Just a plain, simple answer will do. And don't quote the bible, because he is not religious and doesn't care what the bible says.

By the way, your biblically-based defence of genital cutting of unconsenting minors is not consistent with other religiously-ordained practices, in my view. The ancient Hebrews used to stone adulteresses and execute delinquent sons, for just 2 small examples. Are you prepared to defend those practices, also? And slavery - the ancient jews (and some not so ancient) kept slaves. And God approved of all of these things! Why don't you approve of them too? You can't just pick & choose.

I keep answering your questions but you keep posting things that indicate you haven't read them or don't understand them. This conversation has gone the way of Tom.

Here is a simple truth that you may realize the import of one day:

You don't solve problems by taking God-given rights away.

Demi already lives in a country that has forced vaccinations and look where it gets them, not to mention socialized medicine. People don't learn from history which is why it keeps repeating.

Those who don't learn are like those who Christ spews out of his mouth (rejects them from His body) because they don't care enough to study and learn first principles. In fact, they really don't want to know, and so, in rejecting this truth, they have, in fact, rejected Him. Instead, they choose to obey their own emotions over logical truth. Remember, even the evil one will come looking beautiful and spreading His own brand of "love".

No doubt it's a difficult world, full of injustice and trajedy, but of the two classes of people, only one understands why this is. The other may never know, and if they are 30 or more years old and they haven't at least begun to understand these things by now, they surely won't learn them from an Internet forum. For this reason, I'll have to leave the answer-finding up to you at this point.

Christ made it clear, that He will be a stumbling block to some and a source of life to others. There are two ways to understand the following scripture, and of the two classes of people, one will rightly interpret it and the other will stumble over it. Let the reader discern.

Hint: Intellect is of the spirit. Emotionalism is of the flesh.

[color:"red"]"Gal 5:1 Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.
Gal 5:2 Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing.
Gal 5:3 For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law.
Gal 5:4 Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.
Gal 5:5 For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith.
Gal 5:6 For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love.
Gal 5:7 Ye did run well; who did hinder you that ye should not obey the truth?
Gal 5:8 This persuasion cometh not of him that calleth you.
Gal 5:9 A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.
Gal 5:10 I have confidence in you through the Lord, that ye will be none otherwise minded: but he that troubleth you shall bear his judgment, whosoever he be.
Gal 5:11 And I, brethren, if I yet preach circumcision, why do I yet suffer persecution? then is the offence of the cross ceased.
Gal 5:12 I would they were even cut off which trouble you.
Gal 5:13 For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty; only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one another.
Gal 5:14 For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
Gal 5:15 But if ye bite and devour one another, take heed that ye be not consumed one of another.
Gal 5:16 This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh.
Gal 5:17 For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would.
Gal 5:18 But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.
Gal 5:19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
Gal 5:20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
Gal 5:21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.
Gal 5:22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,
Gal 5:23 Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.
Gal 5:24 And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts.
Gal 5:25 If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit.
Gal 5:26 Let us not be desirous of vain glory, provoking one another, envying one another."[/color]

"Gal 5:4 - Christ is become of no effect unto you - You will derive no advantage from Christ. His work in regard to you is needless and vain. If you can be justified in any other way than by him, then of course you do not need him, and your adoption of the other mode is in fact a renunciation of him. Tyndale renders this: “Ye are gone quite from Christ.” The word here used (katargeo), means properly, to render inactive, idle, useless; to do away, to put an end to; and here it means that they had withdrawn from Christ, if they attempted to be justified by the Law. They would not need him if they could be thus justified; and they could derive no benefit from him. A man who can be justified by his own obedience, does not need the aid or the merit of another; and if it was true, as they seemed to suppose, that they could be justified by the Law, it followed that the work of Christ was in vain so far as they were concerned. Whosoever of you are justified by the law - On the supposition that any of you are justified by the Law; or if, as you seem to suppose, any are justified by the Law. The apostle does not say that this had in fact ever occurred; but he merely makes a supposition. If such a thing should or could occur, it would follow that you had fallen from grace. Ye are fallen from grace - That is, this would amount to apostasy from the religion of the Redeemer, and would be in fact a rejection of the grace of the gospel. That this had ever in fact occurred among true Christians the apostle does not affirm unless he affirmed that people can in fact be justified by the Law, since he makes the falling from grace a consequence of that. But did Paul mean to teach that? Did he mean to affirm that any man in fact had been, or could be justified by his own obedience to the Law? Let his own writings answer; see, especially, Rom_3:20. But unless he held that, then this passage does not prove that anyone who has ever been a true Christian has fallen away. The fair interpretation of the passage does not demand that. Its simple and obvious meaning is, that if a man who has been a professed Christian should be justified by his own conformity to the Law, and adopt that mode of justification, then that would amount to a rejection of the mode of salvation by Christ, and would be a renouncing of the plan of justification by grace. The two systems cannot be united. The adoption of the one is, in fact, a rejection of the other. Christ will be “a whole Saviour,” or none. This passage, therefore. cannot be adduced to prove that any true Christian has in fact fallen away from grace, unless it proves also that man may be justified by the deeds of the Law, contrary to the repeated declarations of Paul himself. The word “grace” here, does not mean grace in the sense of personal religion, it means the “system” of salvation by grace, in contradistinction from that by merit or by works - the system of the gospel."

—Barnes Commentary

[color:"red"]"Rom 3:1 What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision?
Rom 3:2 Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.
Rom 3:3 For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect?
Rom 3:4 God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.
Rom 3:5 But if our unrighteousness commend the righteousness of God, what shall we say? Is God unrighteous who taketh vengeance? (I speak as a man)
Rom 3:6 God forbid: for then how shall God judge the world?
Rom 3:7 For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner?
Rom 3:8 And not rather, (as we be slanderously reported, and as some affirm that we say,) Let us do evil, that good may come? whose damnation is just.
Rom 3:9 What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin;
Rom 3:10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:
Rom 3:11 There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.
Rom 3:12 They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.
Rom 3:13 Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips:
Rom 3:14 Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness:
Rom 3:15 Their feet are swift to shed blood:
Rom 3:16 Destruction and misery are in their ways:
Rom 3:17 And the way of peace have they not known:
Rom 3:18 There is no fear of God before their eyes.
Rom 3:19 Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.
Rom 3:20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.
Rom 3:21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;
Rom 3:22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:
Rom 3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;
Rom 3:24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:
Rom 3:25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;
Rom 3:26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.
Rom 3:27 Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith.
Rom 3:28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.
Rom 3:29 Is he the God of the Jews only? is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also:
Rom 3:30 Seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith.
Rom 3:31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law. "[/color]

Those who reject Biblical truth reject the knowledge of Christ. Those who reject the knowledge of Christ may find that Christ does the same to them:

[color:"red"]"And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.[/color]

Matthew 7:23