Wednesday, December 09, 2009

Opposing Forces


For decades I figured people would wake up and raise hell before things got this bad, but I’ve been wrong. Last summer, however, I noticed stirrings and wrote “Something Big is Brewing Out There.” Democrat congressmen were shocked by constituent anger when they returned to their home districts during the August recess. Citizens back home knew more than their congressmen in Washington did about the various versions of the Obamacare bill under consideration and they were ripped. Our congressional representatives became so afraid, they wouldn’t meet with people except in the most controlled environments. Now something else is brewing that could be just as troubling for big-government liberals who are running our country into the ground.

When Speaker Pelosi cracked the whip on Democrats during the late-Saturday night vote on the multi-trillion-dollar Obamacare bill, an unforeseen element presented itself: Pelosi got her arm twisted by representatives of the American Conference of Catholic Bishops. She was told that unless she took taxpayer funding for abortion out of the House bill, the Catholic Church would actively oppose it. She buckled and pushed through the Stupak Amendment. Since then, Catholics have teamed up with Orthodox Christians and evangelical Protestants to file the “Manhattan Declaration” just two weeks ago, which declares in part:
We are Orthodox, Catholic, and evangelical Christians who have united at this hour to reaffirm fundamental truths about justice and the common good, and to call upon our fellow citizens, believers and non-believers alike, to join us in defending them. These truths are:
1. the sanctity of human life
2. the dignity of marriage as the conjugal union of husband and wife
3. the rights of conscience and religious liberty.
Inasmuch as these truths are foundational to human dignity and the well-being of society, they are inviolable and non-negotiable. Because they are increasingly under assault from powerful forces in our culture, we are compelled today to speak out forcefully in their defense, and to commit ourselves to honoring them fully no matter what pressures are brought upon us and our institutions to abandon or compromise them.
Catholics are teaming up with conservative Protestant Calvinists? Who would have predicted this twenty years ago? It’s happening because they’re both “under assault from powerful forces in our culture” and in our government - like Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi - two of the most pro-abortion and pro-homosexual politicians ever to hold office. When they and their ilk pushed the disingenuously-named “Freedom Of Choice Act” or FOCA that would force conservative Christian doctors, nurses and hospitals to perform abortions, that was bad. When Pelosi, a Catholic, said the Catholic Church isn’t sure when human life begins, she was not only stating a falsehood, she was throwing down the gauntlet to the bishops. They could either slink away as they have been for decades in the face of leftist “Catholic” politicians, or they could accept the challenge. I’m very pleased to see that they’ve summoned some courage at long last. Now, leftist Democrat Senators promise they won’t sign an Obamacare bill with the Stupak Amendment in it. Moderate Democrat Senators say they won’t sign a bill without it. President Obama went up to Capitol Hill last weekend to try to work out what would seem to be an impossible impasse. I hope he fails.

The downside of the Catholic bishops’ position is that they would support Obamacare absent the abortion funding, even if it’s going to cost $2 trillion we don’t have. In that, they’re not on the same page with the Tea Party protesters. Both groups are against Obamacare, but for different reasons.

As a young Boston-Irish-Catholic-Democrat I was foolish in many ways, but my opinions about what are now called “social issues” of abortion and homosexuality were the same then as they are now: Abortion killed babies and homosexuality was a perversion. Neither deserved sanction by government. Though I was liberal on other issues, I’ve never been convinced that either abortion or homosexuality warrants government protection. The Democrat Party had a strong conservative wing in the fifties and even in most of the notorious sixties. There were lots of members with views like mine, but then Democrats moved hopelessly leftward on every issue. Now it barely tolerates any members who oppose abortion or homosexual “marriage.”

Unduly influenced by homosexual priests and bishops for the past thirty or forty years, Catholic leaders in New England and elsewhere shrank away from political battles against “gay rights” legislation - even after being ripped apart by the altar boy rape scandals of 2002. I was disgusted, and like many Catholics, cut back drastically on my donations and even considered leaving the church. Recently, however, the Portland Diocese led a successful fight against homosexual “marriage” here in Maine this year, and that defeat of the “powerful forces in our culture” caused a domino effect in New York and New Jersey immediately after.

Neither Tea Party activists nor signers of the Manhattan Declaration were foreseen by the liberal Democrat machine when they swept to power late last year, but both will be formidable enemies in 2010 against Democrats and the “powerful forces in our culture” with whom they’re so closely allied. They’ve seen their enemies lately, however, and that’s why they’re trying so hard to jam through Obamacare and Climate change fixes before too many more people wise up.

The 2010 election will be very interesting.

Addendum: The Senate rejected an amendment last night that would have blocked abortion funding from its version of the Obamacare bill on a vote of 54-45. Let's see what the Catholic Church does now. Time is very short.

81 comments:

Mike Hein said...

Agreed. The 2010 elections will be very interesting, indeed.

Irregardless NH said...

Inquiring minds want to know:

Why does Educator McLaughlin continue to be so 'troubled' by the homosexual tolerance agenda?

And why the continued anti-choice diatribe?

And, if he's such an advocate for participation by the Catholic and Evangelical Protestant churches, would he similarly require them to abjure their tax exempt status?

I'm just askin'.

Irrespective said...

Answers for the anonymous Imaginary Word:

Homos currently have every single right that all other Americans have. Tom, and many others are against changing the definition of marriage. Words have meanings. Although, with a name like "irregardless" i cant understand why that may confuse you.

If Tom is "Anti-Choice" than you are certainly Pro-Dead Baby. Tom, and many others believe that the unborn have a right to life.

ACORN which both endorsed and played a large roll in helping Obama get elected is not only a tax except organization, but also receives tax payer grants to fund their criminal activities. Would you require them to abjure their tax exempt status?

I'm just askin'.

Irregardless NH said...

"ACORN which both endorsed and played a large roll in"

Uh, Irrespective? That's role, just for your records.

DAWN said...

"Tom, and many others are against changing the definition of marriage."

I'm one of those "many others."

That pic of Pelosi is scary. It's going to give me nightmares. Oh wait...the Dems already give me nightmares! :-0

Tom, not all Protestant Evangelicals are considered Calvinistic. To be considered one you must have a stong belief in election/predestination. The other side subscribes more to freewill.

Anonymous said...

Funny picture of Pelosi....it is one of many good ones that come up on a "Pelosi Photoshopped" google search. I just can't figure out if Tom wants to be taken seriously as a writer or if he considers himself a humorous entertainer...hard to tell with strange use of pictures. Is he pretending the picture is real? And what is up with that poster with the kid that advocates insurance not covering ER visits and open-heart surgery?!? Anyway, another strange little narrow-minded right wing view of things. Whether it is intent or not, good for a chuckle.

Sam Bradley said...

Tom is certainly not a writer by any stretch of the imagination. Nor is he humorous. He is a tea-bagging moron.

Tom McLaughlin said...

I don't like Nancy Pelosi personally or politically, so I chose the most unflattering picture I could find to depict her. Was it photoshopped in an attempt to make her look attractive? Or was she captured in this shot while she was waiting for one of her plastic surgery sessions to heal up? This is what people with a point of view do. I'm a columnist, remember? I'm not a reporter.

I do what the New York Times/Boston Globe/Washington Post and that ilk did with people like George Bush. They chose images to make him appear as dumb as possible. The difference between them and me is that I don't pretend to be unbiased.

And Steve: If you don't like my writing, what are you doing here?

Anthony Tiani said...

Tom, although I am pro-choice, I completely understand your point of view and can easily see why you and others would be vehemently against abortion; it's a nasty business no matter which way you look at it.

The paranoia and disdain for homosexual rights, however, leaves me completely puzzled. For someone who is so afraid of big government, it is absolutely ludicrous that you would not want to afford the same rights to all individuals. The notion that strangers going about their own personal lives the way they see fit is somehow "tyrannical" is equally absurd.

If your silly, draconian religion commands you to show contempt for anyone who doesn't follow your "pure" way of life you have every right to do so and I have no right or desire to forcibly change your mindset. It would be nice if you afforded everyone else that same decency.

Anonymous said...

A few thoughts...

When did the Times or the Globe or the post use photoshopped pictures of Bush?

About the "big government" liberals - surely you noticed the large expansion of government under Bush.


If my daughter were raped and impregnated then I would surely hope that insurance would cover the abortion.

I fully expect there to be a big swing back in the conservative direction next election...that is how it always works after a big swing the other way.

Tom McLaughlin said...

Irregardless:
If you think the Catholic Church's tax exempt status should be revoked for its political activity, you must also think the Episcopalians, the Unitarians, the ACLU and ACORN should lose theirs too, no?

Just askin'.

Anthony:
Homosexuals have always had the same rights everyone else has. I'm content to let them be, but that's not what they want. It's their constant demands for special rights I react to. The latest is their effort to re-define marriage laws and institute extra penalties if they're victims of crimes. They're in the public's face constantly and you think I should keep silent. Well I'm not going to, so get used to it or go somewhere else.

The latest Anonymous: If your daughter got pregnant by a rapist or any other way, it would still be a human life she was carrying and that's the point. If you want to persuade your daughter to kill your grandchild and then get your insurance company to pay for it, I won't approve, but I won't say anything because she has the "right" since Roe V Wade.

But if you want to use my tax dollars to pay for it through some kind of government-subsidized medical coverage, I'll object. You should pay for your own killing.

Tom McLaughlin said...

Oh and yes, I did notice the expansion of government under Bush and I objected. The Republican Party under Bush abandoned conservatism and that's why they lost the last two elections. I'm not a Republican and won't become one as long as they act like that. I'm a Conservative.

Bush expanded government more than Clinton did, but then Clinton lost Congress to converative Republicans under Gingrich in 1994 and they put the brakes on him. Now, however, Obama, Pelosi and Reid are making them both look like Libertarians.

Tom McLaughlin said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
DAWN said...

"would he similarly require them to abjure their tax exempt status?"

Irregardless:

Why should the churches lose their status because they speak out for protecting traditional marriage and unborn life?

Way before politicians entered the picture the sanctity of life and the covenant of marriage was established by God. We have record of this thru the scriptures. The church's job is to preach and protect what God revealed to mankind. We make up the church.

So now that these issues have become politically charged, you think the churches should shut up? Not do their job? And if not, lose their status?

Sooooo what are you basing this on?

Anthony Tiani said...

"Homosexuals have always had the same rights everyone else has."

Come now Tom, surely you know your history better than that.

The fact is that marriage is not just a religious ceremony. It is a LEGAL STATUS--a legal status that affords over 150 new rights to couples. When I do my taxes or fill out any legal document, they don't ask me what my religion is, but they sure do ask what my marital status is. It is a secular institution just like our government is and should be.

Face it, the only argument you or anyone has against gay marriage is a religious one. Pure and simple. But you know that the movement can't get away with calling it what it is because of that pesky separation of church and state business. So you call it "tradition" and try to scare people into thinking the sky will fall if all of the sudden gay couples are allowed tax breaks and to visit their partners in the hospital.

Who are you to decide what is and isn't perverted anyhow? What is it about consenting adults having sex that drives you batty?

Oh right, religion has been trying to control who fucks whom for centuries. GOOD LUCK controlling one of our most natural instincts.

Why, Catholicism won't even allow their priests to MARRY let alone have sex. How'd that work out? Now we have first hand proof what happens when religion tries to control sex. And if you think there is no correlation between the two, I truly feel bad that your piety blinds you so.

Garnet said...

“Unduly influenced by homosexual priests and bishops for the past thirty or forty years, Catholic leaders in New England and elsewhere shrank away from political battles against “gay rights” legislation.”

No. It was not a bad thing. It is, I think, what Jesus would have done.

“...but the Pharisees and scribes began to complain, saying, “This man welcomes sinners and eats with them.” Luke 15, 2

DAWN said...

“...but the Pharisees and scribes began to complain, saying, “This man welcomes sinners and eats with them.” Luke 15, 2"

hey, we're not talking about eating here. Jesus never let anyone get by with their sin. He ALWAYS addressed it. He also said "go and sin no more."

I have no problem eating with a homosexual or any engaged in sin, but that doesn't mean I am to condone their behavior or not tell them the truth when they seek it.

Jesus did and we are to follow his example.

Anonymous said...

If my daughter were raped by her uncle and if Tom had his way then my daughter would be forced to suffer even more than the horrible ordeal she had already gone through. She would have to carry the baby while she went to school, suffering the shame, humiliation, and character judgements that come with it....she would then have to keep and try to support a kid (who may end up looking like the rapist) and be reminded of her horror every single day....or she could give it up for adoption and go through the emotional ordeal that will carry with it for the rest of her life. How kind of you though to just think that she is a sinner and not SAY anything. Although I find it highly unlikely that you could ever refrain from saying anything, no matter how hurtful or thoughtless.

Anonymous said...

No comment on the newspapers you mentioned not resorting to photoshopping pictures to embarrass people?

Anonymous said...

"For decades I figured people would wake up and raise hell before things got this bad, but I’ve been wrong"

No you weren't, Tom. Just look at the 2008 elections!


Anthony - brilliant post. It must drive Tom crazy to be constantly put in his place through the use of reasoning and facts!

DAWN said...

to the anon with the daughter....

do you have any idea the negative emotional and physical turmoil that goes with aborting a baby?

In any crowd of pro-lifers there are many women who went thru abortion(s) and are voicing their support for pro-life knowing exactly the heavy baggage that comes with it.

Here's a clue... It's not over the day they walk out of the clinic. They have to walk around for the rest of their lives knowing they decided to kill their own child.

I know because I've met some of them. One lady I know had two abortions as a teen and can never have children again as a result. Guess which side of the fence this childless woman is on?

Besides all that... do you realize how miniscule the chances are that one gets pregnant as a result of a rape? Doesn't stop the abortion supporters running to push the rape card tho time and again. This is very old and very tiring.

Anonymous said...

Dawn, do you have any idea the negative emotional and physical turmoil that goes with carrying, raising, and supporting the child of your rapist? Whether or not having an abortion would be even worse is not your decision to make. I'm sorry that you are "tired" by the fact that some people, including children, get pregnant due to rape. I too feel that in almost every case having the baby is preferable to having an abortion. My point is that there ARE exceptions, and in certain cases people should be not only able to have their abortion but also have insurance pay for it as it would any emergancy medical condition.

Anonymous said...

"I'm a Conservative."

I know Otm, that is obvious by definition: "a person who is reluctant to change or consider new ideas; conformist"


Definition of Liberal:

"Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry.
b. Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded."

"Tending to give freely; generous"

"associated with ideals of individual especially economic freedom, greater individual participation in government, and constitutional, political, and administrative reforms designed to secure these objectives"


Hmmm....

lol

Ragnar said...

Goodness, Tom, the boundless venom and stupidity of your liberal coward commenters never ceases to amaze me!

This one though:

"associated with ideals of individual especially economic freedom, greater individual participation in government, and constitutional, political, and administrative reforms designed to secure these objectives"

was a real gem!

This clueless commie takes the EUROPEAN definition for "liberal" and pretends it to be the AMERICAN one.

That invites the question whether he is too STUPID to know the difference or if he is just LYING and trying to MANIPULATE.

Either one would be typical for a liberal (of the American variety!)!

What human garbage, all these anonymous cowards ...

No wonder they want to abort their progeny!

Anonymous said...

Hey Rag, can you point out specifically what you thought was vull of "venom"?

I didn't see any. I think what might be called venom filled is :

"stupidity of your liberal coward"

and

"clueless coward"

or

"human garbage"

Don't deny it. When you resort to using uppercase letters to scream "STUPID" and make truly tasteless and classless comments about aborted babies you go beyond simply commenting - it's called venom.

So where is the similar venom coming from those liberals you rant about?

You wouldn't have said that for nothing, would you?

Ragnar said...

So, poor stupid little coward Anonymous, you want to have a discussion with a grown-up?

You are being called a coward because you post anonymously. I call you stupid and clueless because with your copy/pasted definition of "liberal" you fell over you own feet.

I call your posts venomous because they are and because the comment section is full of personal attacks against Tom. Look at the past few comment sections and you might see what I mean.

I call you a liberal because you are all of the above!

Typical for a commie, btw, the fact that you do not pick up at all on the core of my comment, namely your fucked up definition of "liberal".

And the only thing that is tasteless and classless here is the FACT of abortions and not my comments about it.

Try to wrap your poor little imitation of a mind around that and go abort your babies, moron.

Alex said...

Well, well, well...

On the issue of abortion, I am wise enough to say that I can not offer an opinion. I am too young to have gone through any of the experiences associated with it, and I do not know anyone personally who could explain. What I do know is that if my mother had chosen an abortion (she was a young, single girl at the time of my birth) I would never have received my acceptance letter to Stanford University. (I apologize for my brief moment of bragging; I hope that I can make a former teacher and a former coach proud... =D ) So I will not voice an opinion.

However, I will comment on the types of responses that I am seeing. Mr. McLaughlin is always good about framing his arguments to involve religion *and* logic [sometimes]. In any discussion of politics, it is useless to try to force religion into it. People have their beliefs, and they may be very strong, faith-driven beliefs. BUT, One cannot use Faith in an argument of American politics! Our Fore Fathers, the very ones who Conservatives reference in nearly any argument, made it clear that one "God-given Right" is the freedom of religion. Not freedom from religion, but freedom "of". Still, this implies that what one group of people believes is right CANNOT be forced upon another group. What CAN be used is logic and reasoning. Any argument using religion is, to me, baseless and over-lookable. Now, if you provide a well-thought, well-reasoned argument, I will listen.

I do consider myself an atheist, but I believe in a strict set of morals. These morals can be derived from simple logic and reasoning. The knowledge of what is "right" and "wrong" is unachievable for humans (read "Ishmael", by Daniel Quinn). Nevertheless, it is necessary to have a set of rules that the majority of people agree with and follow. The only argument for an augmentation to these rules is one of logic.

Hey, this post isn't anonymous?

Stephen Casper said...

I read the posts of Anthony and Alex and Dawn and I see thoughtful words and genuine attempts at conversation. Now compare these to the venom filled rantings and name callings of Ragnar....who is being the child? When you mature and are able to have an intelligent conversation with the adults people will be much more likely to listen to you - continue your babyish tantrums and you will continue to be not taken seriously. I challenge you to try and have an adult conversations Ragnar...are you man enough?

Anthony Tiani said...

So Houston, Texas of all places just elected their first openly gay mayor.

This is clear evidence that the social conservative crowd will certainly lose the war against equal rights. Even when their pointless bans on same sex marriages pass, they have been only passing by slight margins (e.g. California, Maine).

As the older, "traditional" voters die out, they make way for the more tolerant and sensible generations. My generation (Gen Y) is the newest to come to adulthood and have better things to worry about than what personal decisions people choose to make.

Anonymous said...

Well said, Anthony...definitely a matter of time. It also took time for black rights, women's rights, etc.

There is no stopping it....good will prevail.

Anthony Tiani said...

Thank you, but I should also point out that I am in no way part of the "multicultural agenda". I have no desire to be in a parade, scream for special laws against hatred, or call for arbitrary quotas in the workplace and schools.

I just want our laws and justice system to not infringe on our privacy more than it already has.

pinko said...

As always, this little rantlet would be vastly improved by the addition of some pictures from Tom's collection of burly leather clad gay men.

DAWN said...

"As the older, "traditional" voters die out, they make way for the more tolerant and sensible generations."

I've been saying this for years Anthony and I'm a baby boomer. I agree but not in a good way.

Scripture has predicted this way before you and I were even born. Paul writing to the church in Thessalonica, after they were concerned about missing the rapture, gave them something to look for before the second coming could become reality. He said two things to be watching for:

"Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come except there come a falling away first and that man of sin be revealed (AC) the son of perdition."

So you are right. That's what we've been seeing. A falling away from the truth. It's going to progress. When God gives a people up homosexuality runs amok. The truth is being exchanged for a lie.

Think about it...before Moses the deliverer came, what happened? Boy babies were murdered. Before Christ, the deliver, came the first time what happened? Boy babies were murdered. Now, what's happening once again? Babies are once again being murdered only now before they are born.

I don't think we have that much time left before we see exactly what Paul was speaking of. Time is growing short.

When men persistently abandon God, He will abandon them. Like an untended garden when man is left to himself the bad always chokes out the good.

DAWN said...

Congrats Alex on your acceptance to Stanford. You are a prime example of exactly why you should be AGAINST abortion. Think of all the other children out there never given the chance you have been given. I am very proud of you!

Go and get em!

"I do consider myself an atheist, but I believe in a strict set of morals. These morals can be derived from simple logic and reasoning."

Alex, you're too young to call yourself an atheist. Most atheists do not make a real effort to know if there is a God. The very fact that an atheist cannot be sure makes it logical that he should consider the claims of Christianity. Therefore atheism should not be grounds for rejecting Christianity, rather, it is grounds for examining Christianity.

You have to admit that you cannot hold this position dogmatically. To do so you would have to know the universe in its entirety and to possess all knowledge. AND YOU HAVN'T EVEN ATTENDED STANFORD YET!

All you can say is that you are uncertain whether or not there is a God..so you'd be better off calling yourself an agnostic. The atheist's claim that God doesn't exist crumbles under examination.

My faith in Christ is very logical and very rational. It makes much more sense than any of the alternatives.

Where do you think morals come from?

Anonymous said...

Count me int the agnostic category...it makes WAY more sense than any of the alternatives.

"Like an untended garden when man is left to himself the bad always chokes out the good."

Wow, that is a real pessimistic view of the human race. There are millions of examples of people that do not put any creed in being "tended to" by god that do not have their good choked out.

It is wonderful to see the world becoming more tolerant all the time.

Cooper said...

"I challenge you to try and have an adult conversations Ragnar...are you man enough?"

Appearently he is not!

Anonymous said...

Here is an interesting quote for Dawn:

"When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."

DAWN said...

Here is an interesting quote for Dawn:

"When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."

Anon:

I do understand. That's why I do dismiss them.

and when you can show me where one of these other possible gods did for us what Christ did for us..I might consider it.

DAWN said...

"Like an untended garden when man is left to himself the bad always chokes out the good."

Wow, that is a real pessimistic view of the human race.

Man has no capacity in himself to restrain the weeds of his sinfulness. Man's natural development is not upward but downward. He is not ascending to God but descending from God which is very evident, by the way. Look around at our culture over time. Are we getting better or worse? Are we locking ourselves in our homes today? Were we 25 years ago?

C.S. Lewis said speaking about this said: "The lost enjoy forever the horrible freedom (from God) they have demanded and are therefore self enslaved."

When God abandons men to their own devices as they demand, His divine protection is partially withdrawn making us more vulnerable to destructive actions by others.

Anonymous said...

Is our culture getting better? Heck yes....we as a country have come from enslaving people to giving them equal rights. Civil rights are making tremendous gains. People are living longer. Not everything is better of course, and it is a matter of perspective as to whether things are better overall. I believe that those who focus on love and goodness, not for external reasons, but for the internal joy that it brings, will feel happier and more optimistic, and those that are controlled by fear and pessissism will never be satisfied with the way things are going.

It's a real shame the way that the Bible tries to control people through fear. Believe or go to HELL!!!!

DAWN said...

"I believe that those who focus on love and goodness, not for external reasons, but for the internal joy that it brings, will feel happier and more optimistic, and those that are controlled by fear and pessissism will never be satisfied with the way things are going."

I absolutely agree with this. You don't realize it but that is the Christian way you're speaking of.

The fruit of the spirit is "love, joy, peace, patience, goodness, gentleness, faith, meekness and temperence." Galatians 5:22-23 Christ exhibited all of this fruit and so should we.

I'm not controlled by fear and pessimism at all. But do I think the world is going down? Yes. Is that pessimistic? To some it is. To those who are hanging onto the world sytstem instead of God who calls us out of it.

The only fear I have is in God, and it's not the fear you're thinking. It's fear as in "awe" not in fear as if God's out to get me. It's fear in recognition that God is God and that He is Holy and I am not. He made provision for me and I took ahold of it. For those that have not, they will stand naked before Him and they will be the ones who should be fearful.

Anonymous said...

I truly admire those that do great deeds and seek no recognition for them. Anonymous donors, lending a helping hand with no expectations for something in return. That is why I believe that if there is a god, they would not be so vain and ego-driven as to insist on being worshipped, and threatening non-believers with hell. That sounds so unlikely and rediculous. I think god is also content with us being good for no other reason than it is the right thing to do.

DAWN said...

" That is why I believe that if there is a god, they would not be so vain and ego-driven as to insist on being worshipped,"

What kind of a god do you want anyway? You want a god you can wrap your mind around?

I don't. I'm hoping my God is so big that I can't wrap my mind around him. I want a God who is Holy, Righteous, Loving and Fair. These are things that we, in our flesh, try as we might can't be. He's way beyond human flesh.
That's the kind of God I want and that's the God that is revealed in scripture. He's not some small god who caters to our every whim and need because we say so.

No disrespect but you say "I think" or "I believe" but it doesn't matter what you think or what you believe. God is God whether you "think" he is or not...whether you "believe" he is or not.

Also God is more interested in our character than our comfort.

Anonymous said...

Dawn, I agree with everything in your last post...but you did not address my previous comments about the extreme vanity of your god.

And no disrespect to you etither when I say that it doesn't matter if you believe in god....it doesn't make him any more likely to exist. Again, I have no problem with what people believe as long as their beliefs do not spawn intolerant words and actions.

Anonymous said...

I have a question for Dawn...what can one get from religion that they can't get otherwise?

DAWN said...

"I have a question for Dawn...what can one get from religion that they can't get otherwise?"

Just to be clear...I'm not a religionist per se. I'm a Christian. You can be religious about anything but that doesn't mean you have a relationship with God.

To answer your question simply...salvation.

Man cannot offer us what God offers us. Jesus came to give us abundant life which the world cannot. Money and power cannot offer us the peace that surpasses all understanding that only God can offer. Just look around at the world to see how miserable they are. The more they have, the more miserable they are. The more they have the more they want. Look at Tiger. Prime example. Think he's happy and satisfied? Nope!

There's nothing this world can offer us that surpasses what God offers us.

Jesus taught us that the shortcut to happiness is to make others happy. The problem with the world is they are stepping on each other to make themselves happy and in doing so they are quite miserable.

DAWN said...

"Dawn, I agree with everything in your last post...but you did not address my previous comments about the extreme vanity of your god."

Where are you getting that God is vain? Because he desires us to worship him and not man or idols?

God says he's a jealous God. Why does he say that? Isn't jealousy bad? Yes. It is. But when God says he's jealous it's not the same as how we mean it. God is jealous FOR US not OF US. He wants the best for us and he knows the best for us is HIM. Because his love, mercy, forgiveness and justice is perfect. He loves us with an everlasting love and his mercy endures forever. When he forgives us it's as though we never sinned against Him. He says our sins are cast into the sea or thrown over his back never to be seen again.

You have to remember it's not about us. It's always been about Him. God created us, a people for His name, to love and protect as a hen gathers her chicks he said. It's never been about us but about his great attributes exercised on our behalf.

That's why Satan went after man's pride right from the get go promising them (Adam & Eve) they could be "as gods." That was a lie from the pit of hell right from the beginning. And we've been falling for it ever since.

Pride is the ultimate rebellion against God. Why do you think the homosexuals use "gay pride" as their slogan? Homosexuality is the last straw that will take our nation down. It's ultimate rebellion against a Holy God. And it all started in the Garden of Eden.

Pride ALWAYS goes before the fall. We all know that...but do we really?

Anonymous said...

So you say that what Christianity can give us is salvation. Since there is no proof that god will give us this salvation then what you are saying is that Christianity can give people comfort in their faith that god can give them salvation. But I was looking for something that christianity can give that you can't get elsewhere. I already have comfort and happiness. I am not looking for salvation. Telling me something will happen with absolutely no evidence means nothing to me.


I agree that money and material objects do not bring happiness. I admire Jesus and think he was a great man and a wonderful example to people. I agree that making others happy brings happiness to yourself. Yes, way too many people in their world are simply out for their own happiness without concern for others. I don't have to believe in god to understand this.

"Where are you getting that God is vain? Because he desires us to worship him..."

Yes. Demanding worship is very vain.

"He loves us with an everlasting love and his mercy endures forever."

So when a baby is born it receives this everlasting love and mercy forever. How exactly does this fit in with the idea of eventually sending this baby to burn eternally in hell if it doesn't grow up to have the "right" beliefs?

"Homosexuality is the last straw that will take our nation down."

That is one of the most naive, bigoted statements I have ever heard. It is almost so ridiculous that it makes me think that conversing with you is futile. Homosexuals have been around forever and I don't think god will stop making them. What IS tearing our country apart is ignorant, intolerent beliefs and the condemnation of other groups of people who are not doing anybody any harm. It is a real shame that so many people are brainwashed into these beliefs and have lost all capability to think rationally for themselves. That is a downside of christianity. I am still looking for an upside that can't be got by other means.

DAWN said...

"That is a downside of christianity. I am still looking for an upside that can't be got by other means."

What you're saying is truth is hard to swallow. That's what it is. You're looking to have your ears tickled. I'm not about to do that. I am all about giving out the truth.

Paul warned Timothy: "the time is coming when people will not endure sound teachng but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths." 2 Tim 4:3-4

That's exactly what you're doing.

The downside: "the wages of sin is death." We know we all die right? Why? Because of sin.

The upside: Christ paid the price for our sin by dying in our place. Because of that we can live forever with him in eternity. According to you the downside would be we have to worship him right?

What you don't understand is you worship what you love.

It's not hard to worship a God when you know he what he sacrificed for you. When you understand his great love for you it comes naturally.

There is no greater love than one who would give up his life for another. Makes worship very easy.

DAWN said...

"Homosexuals have been around forever and I don't think god will stop making them."

First off God doesn't "make" homosexuals.

and Yes they've been around, well not forever but a long time...since Sodom. Hmmm which brings me to ask you this question...what exactly happened to Sodom? While homosexuals have been around a long time, the acceptance of it as an alternative lifestyle with the culture lasting has not.

Anonymous said...

God doesn't make homosexuals? I thought he was the creator of everything on earth.

Dawn, you have never given the slightest little bit of evidence that your god exists...the only evidence you even TRY and use is the bible...the very thing that has been called into question.

I find it very sad that you have been brainwashed and can no longer think on your own. I am SO glad that I have found happiness and contentment without the intolerant crutch of christianity.

Peter said...

Dawn, I am genuinely curious as to just how you expect homosexuality to take our nation down. Can you give me any examples as to how this will happen. It really does sound quite silly. Thanks.

DAWN said...

"It really does sound quite silly. Thanks."

Why is it silly? God condemned homosexuality using very harsh language in both Old and New Testaments. We have the example of Sodom and Gomorroah being destroyed as a result of rampant homosexuality. At one time Rome and Greece were dominant world powers driven by sexual immorality. Nobody took over Rome. Rome fell from within. Both nations were stripped of their superiority. We are going in the same direction. This is the history of the nations. It happened to Israel as well. They wandered for 2,000 years with no country to call their own until 1948. Many generations have gone thru this cycle of rejecting God and suppressing the truth. We are following the same cycle of having the truth, rejecting the truth and being abandoned by God.

There comes a time when God lets a people go and leaves them to their own devices. They will eat the fruit of their own choices. It's a fearful thing to know we've been abandoned by God. The day of grace is over.

At one point even Jesus said of the corrupt Pharisees "leave them alone." He gave them up and left them to their own corrupt mind.

When the abandonment of God goes into action three consequential steps are taken and there are at least 4 reasons that cause the wrath of God to happen. Too much to go into here but it can all be found looking at Romans 1:18-32 and has been proven truth by looking at past world powers.

Three times it says in that one chapter that God gave them up. In the Greek this has a judicial sense like a judge handing them over for sentencing. We have been weighed and found wanting.

We will pay the price. It's already beginning to happen as we are seen struggling with ethics and morals. We are going down at a warped speed descending at a fast rate because we have turned our backs on God and his truth.

Peter said...

Dawn, I guess you did not really get my question. I am wondering just HOW homosexuality will take down our country. You quoted a lot of versus and talked about the bible but that doesn't answer the question. Try and leave the bible out of it and let me know how it is possible that gays will destroy the country....are they going to have an armed revolt?...try as I might I can't fathom what will happen to have them destroy us.

Anonymous said...

Dawn seems to say that the Roman Empire collapsed because of gays!!! It is amazing how people with such strong opinions are often the most ignorant people.

Getting wacked out on christianity does scary things to people...kind of like scientology does.

Please, everybody.....stop drinking the KoolAid and start learning to think for yourselves.

DAWN said...

Peter,

I don't expect that you're going to understand. We are coming from two diff world views. I did answer your question and I didn't quote alot of bible verses just showing you the consequential steps are there if you even cared to read the ONE section I gave you. The breakdown of the family is the breakdown of society. Like I said already...too much to put here but history has proven this to be true.

Just ask yourself are we becoming a pornographic, sexually immoral and homosexaul society or not? Compare our TV programming, magazines, music media etc to the same 25 years ago just to see how far we have descended.

We can't attack one of the pillars holding this country up and expect it to stand.

Reminds me of the story of the man digging furiously all around the basement of his home. When asked by a passerby what he was doing he answerd "I don't need this part of the house anymore."

We're destroying the foundation of this nation and many of us see it crumbling right in front of our eyes. Maybe you're just too young to appreciate what us "older" folk have been witnessing over a period of years.

I'm afraid about the time you do, it's going to be too late. Just like our parents before us warned us of corrupt immoral behaviors we are also doing the same to those coming up behind us. Only it's getting progressively worse. If only WE had listened.

Peter said...

Dawn, I don't know how much older you are than me, but I'm 45. Yes, I've noticed changes in our society, many of which I don't like...there IS too much graphic raunchiness in songs and on TV and magazines, for example. The divorce rate in this country is also disturbingly high. There is way too much violence. And although it is getting better, there is still too much ignorance and intolerance towards people that are "different". But my question to you is this - what do homosexuals have to do with these problems? Can you show me the slightest shred of evidence that gays are not good for society?

Anonymous said...

Here is another unanswered question:


Dawn said:
"He loves us with an everlasting love and his mercy endures forever."

So when a baby is born it receives this everlasting love and mercy forever. How exactly does this fit in with the idea of eventually sending this baby to burn eternally in hell if it doesn't grow up to have the "right" beliefs?

Anonymous said...

Here is a link that shows a lengthy study as to the effects of religion on society. If one is looking for a reason why our country might fall there appears to be much more evidence that religion is more at fault than homosexuality.

http://www.epjournal.net/filestore/EP07398441_c.pdf

Anonymous said...

Here are some comments by Bertand Russell:


"You find as you look around the world that every single bit of progress of humane feeling, every improvement in the criminal law, every step toward the diminution of war, every step toward better treatment of the colored races, or ever mitigation of slavery, every moral progress that there has been in the world, has been consistently opposed by the organized churches of the world. I say quite deliberately that the Christian religion, as organized in its churches, has been and still is the principal enemy of moral progress in the world."

He goes on to say:

"We want to stand upon our own feet and look fair and square at the world -- its good facts, its bad facts, its beauties, and its ugliness; see the world as it is and be not afraid of it. Conquer the world by intelligence and not merely by being slavishly subdued by the terror that comes from it. The whole conception of a God is a conception derived from the ancient oriental despotisms. It is a conception quite unworthy of free men. When you hear people in church debasing themselves and saying that they are miserable sinners, and all the rest of it, it seems contemptible and not worthy of self-respecting human beings. We ought to stand up and look the world frankly in the face. We ought to make the best we can of the world, and if it is not so good as we wish, after all it will still be better than what these others have made of it in all these ages. A good world needs knowledge, kindliness, and courage; it does not need a regretful hankering after the past or a fettering of the free intelligence by the words uttered long ago by ignorant men. It needs a fearless outlook and a free intelligence. It needs hope for the future, not looking back all the time toward a past that is dead, which we trust will be far surpassed by the future that our intelligence can create."

Anonymous said...

A christian griping and blaming societies woes on gays would be like Tiger Woods griping that it's people like Sara Palin's daughter who are giving Family Values a bad name.

DAWN said...

"Can you show me the slightest shred of evidence that gays are not good for society?"

Peter, first off I thought you were much younger so forgive my assumption there. I am older, but not a whole lot older than you.

I'm not saying "gays are not good for society." They are people just like we are. I'm saying the legalization and acceptance of this as normal behavior or legalizing marriage between two men and two women is not good for society.

First like I said previously.. although homosexuality flourished in ancient Greece, Rome and Sodom, none of these civilizations survived. In modern times we only need to look at the Netherlands and Belgium both of which legalized gay marriage and gave it equal status with tradition male/female marriage.

We can look at Norway, Denmark and Sweden who are much more advanced with the legalization of homosexual marriage than we are. The consequences for traditional families have been devastating there. Traditional marriage is rapidly dying with most young couples living together outside of the covenant of marriage. The percentage of children born out of wedlock reaches as high as 80% in some areas of Norway.

Many of our pressing social problems can be traced to the breakdown of the family which represents the very foundation of human social order. It's just common sense. Institutions, governments, religion and the welfare of children are all dependant on its stability. When it is weakened or undermined the entire structure begins to wobble.

More than 10,000 studies have concluded that kids do best when they are raised by loving and committed mothers and fathers.

Homosexual marriage will destroy the fundamental principles of marriage and parenthood. I also believe the divorce rate will be even higher and we are starting now to see some breakups all across the country between two same sex partners and the severe implications when it comes to child custody.

Just recently on the news: two gay women divorcing went before a judge over the custody of "their" daughter. He awarded primary custody to the NON biological mother OVER the biological mother.

This is just one reason this whole thing is absurd that we're even discussing these things.

DAWN said...

"So when a baby is born it receives this everlasting love and mercy forever. How exactly does this fit in with the idea of eventually sending this baby to burn eternally in hell if it doesn't grow up to have the "right" beliefs?"

Are we talking about babies or people growing up who reject God? Remember God sees and judges our spirit. You are looking at our outer physical tent that covers the spirit.

A baby can't reject God now can he? You know what's interesting?Helen Keller who was blind, deaf and dumb when asked by her teacher if she wanted to know about God answered that she already knew he existed she just didn't know his name.

We will have no excuse when we stand before him. His fingerprints are all over the place. Not only that he put within us a conscience to know him. We talk alot about our 5 physical senses don't we? What about the two spiritual senses he left us with? Reason and morality. It is so strong within us it should lead us to God

The problem is we have allowed the world and the Prince of it to distract and block that out. The world is blind, deaf and dumb to God because that's where it wishes to be.

Peter said...

DAWN said...
”First like I said previously.. although homosexuality flourished in ancient Greece, Rome and Sodom, none of these civilizations survived.”

Huh? How incredibly naïve. That is like saying that because Chariot racing flourished in these places that perhaps they were to blame on the fall of these empires? Same sex marriages were outlawed in the Roman Empire in 342 AD and the empire still fell a little over 100 years later. You have still give NO evidence that gays were at all responsible for the fall. Overexpansion? Unsound economic policies and inflation? Barbarian mercenaries and invaders? Plauges and diseases? Nope, nope, nope and nope….it must have been the gays! Laughable.

DAWN said...
”We can look at Norway, Denmark and Sweden who are much more advanced with the legalization of homosexual marriage than we are. “

Interesting that you bring that up…perhaps that fact has something to do with Norway being voted as having the best living conditions in the world. Sensible, compasionate laws create great societies to live in.
http://digg.com/travel_places/World_s_Best_Countries_to_Live_In

DAWN said...
”More than 10,000 studies have concluded that kids do best when they are raised by loving and committed mothers and fathers.”

Go look closely at these type of studies. You will find that the key is “loving and committed”, not gay/straight.
Here is an excerpt about these studies:
"The vast consensus of all the studies shows that children of same-sex parents do as well as children whose parents are heterosexual in every way...In some ways children of same-sex parents actually may have advantages over other family structures."
http://www.webmd.com/mental-health/news/20051012/study-same-sex-parents-raise-well-adjusted-kids


DAWN said...
”Homosexual marriage will destroy the fundamental principles of marriage and parenthood”

That is a strong OPINION that is based on no evidence. The 50% divorce rate amongst heterosexuals, and the horrible parenting that is so sidespread can NOT be blamed on the ever popular scapegoat, the gays.

I don’t quite get the relevance of your custody story, which you didn’t give the full story to. For five years, the biological mother violated court rulings in Vermont and Virginia that agreed upon Vermont’s jurisdiction in the case and therefore affirmed Jenkins’ visitation rights as a co-parent. Had she not made her daughter a pawn in fundamentalist cultural warfare conducted by Jerry Falwell’s Liberty Counsel, and had she simply permitted visitation as required under law, she would have retained custody. But I still don’t understand why you even brought the case up, although it is encouraging that judges are basing their decisions on who is the best parent regardless of sexual preferences.


"So when a baby is born it receives this everlasting love and mercy forever. How exactly does this fit in with the idea of eventually sending this baby to burn eternally in hell if it doesn't grow up to have the "right" beliefs?"

You still haven’t answered this question, which is pretty straightforward. You say god gives everlasting love and mercy. How is this love “everlasting” and “merciful” when it involves sending the “loved” one to hell if, when it grows up, it is not a “believer”. Are you telling me that god’s love is like that of an abusive parent, one that beats the snot out of their child because they “love” them?

I believe, as you do, that our two most important senses are our spiritual ones - Reason and morality. They are VERY strong within me and they have led me to conclude that the christian god does not exist and that what is best for society is being godd for goddness sake.

Merry Christmas!

Anonymous said...

DAWN said...
”We can look at Norway, Denmark and Sweden who are much more advanced with the legalization of homosexual marriage than we are. “


You say these countries laws about homosexual marriage are more "advanced". I like your word choice. I'm surprised you admit that these countries are farther along in development when it comes to these matters. A Freudian slip?

DAWN said...

"A Freudian slip?"

No, not at all. This is NOT a good thing.

But again... to you and Peter, we are coming from two diff world views so I can't expect that we can agree on this subject. My world view is shaped on the Word of God. Yours is on secular humanism. God gave us natural revelation (creation) and special revelation (his written word). One day we will be judged according to how we responded to it whether you believe in it or not. That's what truth is all about.

God has clearly revealed himself to man but there are at least five dominant lies that people would RATHER believe.

1. Life is random.
2. Truth is relative; no standard
3. All people are "basically" good.
4. Everyone is in charge; be whatever you want.
5. Self-satisfaction is the goal in life.

I thank God there is hope. That's what the Christmas story is all about.

God takes life's broken pieces and gives us unbroken peace!.

Merry Christmas!

DAWN said...

"Are you telling me that god’s love is like that of an abusive parent, one that beats the snot out of their child because they “love” them?"

my guess is this is really what you choose to believe so you can hate God all the more. I can see you have no concept of the love of God to ask such a thing. Read Matthew 23 to see God in the flesh (Jesus) weeping over the sin of his people as they rebelled against God. God takes no pleasure in the judgment of the ungodly.

Here's a thought for you to ponder. All people walking around...past, present and future are God's creation...but NOT ALL can be called "children of God."

Peter said...

Dawn, God has not "clearly revealed himself to man". If he had, all men would believe. Don't say it's for lack of looking, or trying to look, because I know personally that is not the case.

As to your 5 lies that people would rather beieve:

1. Life is random.
2. Truth is relative; no standard
3. All people are "basically" good.
4. Everyone is in charge; be whatever you want.
5. Self-satisfaction is the goal in life.

I do not believe these "lies". As I said, I also believe strongly in the senses of reason and morality, so our world views have lots of important similarities. Our only disagreement is on the proof of existance of god. You have given none and believe on pure blind faith. That is not for me. You anssered none of the areas I brought up in my last message. I don't believe you rationally can. Your blind faith and words of the bible simply do not hold up against reasoning and truth. I don't want this to turn ugly because I think you are a good person who has been unfortunately brainwashed by christianity. I truly do wish you a Merry Christmas though, and best wishes.

Anonymous said...

No, I absolutely DON'T want to believe that god is like an abusive parent. No, I DON'T want to hate him. I would love to be shown evidence of his existance. I just have not been given an answer as to why god would choose to burn non-believers in hell when he supposedly has everlasting love and mercy for us all.

DAWN said...

"I just have not been given an answer as to why god would choose to burn non-believers in hell when he supposedly has everlasting love and mercy for us all."

so if I answer your question then you'll believe? Really? Ok.

God does not take pleasure in the condemnation of the wicked. I've already said that...but there's more.

God has many attributes...love, mercy, grace, holiness etc. When God loves it's at 100%. There is no greater love than the love of God. His grace and holiness also are perfect and he exercises them in a most perfect way. On the opposite spectrum is his attribute of judgment. He's a perfect judge as well. He has no choice but to make perfect judgments. There is no half way with God.

His holiness demands perfection. Because of sin, we fall short. We are far from perfect. The wages of sin is death. But with the problem of sin comes the provision and solution he provided in His sinless son who came to pay the price for our sin.

So to answer your question, God doesn't choose to burn unbelievers. They choose their path themselves when they do not accept God's promise of satisfaction and provision of Salvation.

God is in the business of good news. Joy is foremost on his mind for us, not judgment. Christ said he came to give life and to give it abundantly.

So if we find ourselves in the heat zone we can't blame God. We will have nobody to blame but ourselves. Right now you have a choice to make. Don't blame God for your choice.

DAWN said...

"I think you are a good person who has been unfortunately brainwashed by christianity. I truly do wish you a Merry Christmas though, and best wishes."

I wasn't always a Christian Peter. I was where you are now. I know exactly where you're coming from. Have you ever read C.S. Lewis one of the foremost writers and thinkers of the 20th century? He dealt alot with reason and logic in his book Mere Christianity. Using reason and logic he had no choice but to believe in God. Anthony Hopkins played him in the movie Shadowlands.

He died on the same exact day as John Kennedy and it would have made big news if not for the fact that the president dying on the same day.

If you really are interested in truth, logic and reasoning, I suggest getting ahold of some of his writings especially the book I mentioned. He had a unique ability to combine reasoning and imagination capturing your mind and taking you into a richer world of thought and experience that points to God.

Best wishes as well.

Anonymous said...

What it still boils down to Dawn, is my conviction that any merciful being would not allow a loved one to eternally burn in flames. Especially not for something like what they believe in! It sounds absolutely satanic to allow a kind, decent, honest, hard-working person to suffer in hell because, "well, damnit, they chose not to believe in me!...oh, you over there, Charles Manson, you can come on in...I see you have decided to believe in me." Preposterous.

DAWN said...

"What it still boils down to Dawn, is my conviction that any merciful being would not allow a loved one to eternally burn in flames."

Well, no disrespect..but it doesn't matter what your conviction is. You're not the judge. You didn't make up the rules.

When you create a people, you can do what you wish with it. But you have no say in this matter. There is only room in the universe for one God. Neither do you understand what the whole thing really boils down to.

There isn't one, decent, honest, hardworking person that can compare to a Holy God and his standards although that doesn't seem to stop us from dreaming!

Anonymous said...

With no disrespect, it doesn't matter what your convictions are either. Your truth is no more real than mine. Your god is no more real than mine. And no, I don't really know what it all boils down to, but neither do you. We are all here together, but unfortunatly some feel compelled to keep claiming that they will go to heaven while others burn in hell. Whatever makes you feel good I suppose. Talk to you later on another thread.

DAWN said...

"With no disrespect, it doesn't matter what your convictions are either. Your truth is no more real than mine."

You are criticizing without understanding.

I'm NOT talking about MY truth compared to YOUR truth. We are coming from two complete different world views. I believe the Bible is the revealed Word of God. It has NOTHING to do with religion or religious views.

It's NOT MY truth. It's HIS. So I'm comparing YOUR truth to HIS. I'm Not comparing YOUR truth to MY truth. It's doesn't really matter what I think.

What it boils down to is this. You have a choice. You can either believe what the world tells you and take the humanistic secular world view or you can believe that God didn't leave us here sans instructions and take the biblical world view.

Anonymous said...

If there were even the teensiest bit of evidence concerning HIS truth...

DAWN said...

there is...

Anonymous said...

...if there is you have yet to mention it.

Stephen Casper said...

The Bible is supposedly God's perfect Word. It contains instructions to humankind for avoiding the eternal fires of hell. How wonderful and kind of this God to provide us with this means for overcoming the problems for which he is ultimately responsible! The all-powerful God could have, by a mere act of will, eliminated all of the problems we humans must endure, but instead, in his infinite wisdom, he has opted to offer this indecipherable amalgam of books called the Bible as a means for avoiding the hell which he has prepared for us. The perfect God has decided to reveal his wishes in this imperfect work, written in the imperfect language of imperfect man, translated, copied, interpreted, voted on, and related by imperfect man. No two men will ever agree what this perfect word of God is supposed to mean, since much of it is either self- contradictory, or obscured by enigma. And yet the perfect God expects the imperfect humans to understand this paradoxical riddle using the imperfect minds with which he has equipped us. Surely the all-wise and all-powerful God would have known that it would have been better to reveal his perfect will directly to each of us, rather than to allow it to be debased and perverted by the imperfect language and botched interpretations of man.

The Bible contradicts itself on matters of history. A person who reads and compares the contents of the Bible will be confused about exactly who Esau's wives were, whether Timnah was a concubine or a son, and whether Jesus' earthly lineage is through Solomon or his brother Nathan. These are but a few of hundreds of documented historical contradictions. If the Bible cannot confirm itself in mundane earthly matters, how are we to trust it on moral and spiritual matters?

The Bible is imperfect. It only takes one imperfection to destroy the supposed perfection of this alleged Word of God. Many have been found. A perfect God who reveals his perfect will in an imperfect book is impossible.
While believers may find comfort in being faithful to impossibilities, there is no greater satisfaction than a clear mind. You may choose to serve an impossible God. I will choose reality.

DAWN said...

"The Bible contradicts itself on matters of history. A person who reads and compares the contents of the Bible will be confused about exactly who Esau's wives were, whether Timnah was a concubine or a son, and whether Jesus' earthly lineage is through Solomon or his brother Nathan. These are but a few of hundreds of documented historical contradictions."

It really doesn't matter but just for the record there ARE NO contradictions. I've been reading this book for 40 years and every time I thought I saw one I found out later the problem was my understanding not the word itself. How about you? Are you saying this because you've read it yourself..or is it perhaps you've got yourself a nice little website that lists the "supposed" contradictions. I've heard them all. They're bogus.

For instance...the lineage of Christ. In the book of Matthew we see Joseph's line mentioned thru Solomon (kingly line) and in the book of Luke it was Mary's line thru Nathan (Solomon's brother).

So God in his wisdom covered it all. He looked down the corridor of time and chose Mary and Joseph who were both relations of David thru his two sons. Thru one line Jesus obtained the Kingly connection (Solomon) and thru Nathanial he received the right to be the son of David by his mother's bloodline. His birthright was NEVER questioned.

"You may choose to serve an impossible God. I will choose reality."

You choose Hell. And yet you would blame God for your choice?

DAWN said...

Actually this is a good title for what's going on here. "Opposing Forces"...although I'm thinking more towards a spiritual POV than a physical one.

I have to make a correction I meant to say Nathan instead of Nathaniel in my last posting.

Also food for thought:

In his book Maximum Achievement, corporate trainer Brian Tracy writes, "Virtually everything you do is the result of habit. The way you talk, the way you work, drive, think, interact with others, spend money and deal with the important people in your life are all largely habitual." But then he says, "The good news is that all habits are learned, and they can therefore be unlearned."*

It's easy to see the habits in our lives. We brush our teeth, dress ourselves, and drive to work the same way. Those habits may or may not need changing. But here's one habit we should definitely unlearn: our tendency to consider the temporal implications of life's choices and events before we consider the eternal.

"Every action of our lives touches on some chord that will vibrate in eternity."
E. H. Chapin