10:36 AM - Blocked from 3 different Christian Blogs in 6 mths!
Current mood: rejuvenated
Category: Religion and Philosophy

Christians, who are they? Today, we have so many definitions of Christian it's very hard to keep up. My mother is a Christian but she has no problem with different beliefs. Love is key to her "religion" and she seems to be sane and happy. I've never seen her "witness" to anyone or suggest that anyone is not a true Christian. Many Christians that I meet are very loving and open-minded Christians, but whoa! There is a new breed of Christianin the world: They are very scary to me. Silly, but scary! They do not believe there is a new covenant, and they will proudly tell you that all who do not believe as they do are under the spell of Satan. Satan's pawns, we are. They can't wait for Armageddon so that the unrighteous will get their due. I would say they are a step under Westboro, but with a little push...Anyway, I have been on some of the blogs and let me tell you: Love is not the priority for these new Christians. The priority is "scare them into the flock" with eternal damnation, and if you can't -dust off your feet and leave them to Satan! Okay, everyone has a right to their beliefs, but are these people capable of having their own beliefs, or are they confusing belief with dogmatic brainwashing and superstition? So, I have pulled out an old poem and added a new end to it. This is how I see the battle of God and Satan vs Rationality and Science (which is btw Satan's tools, in their opinion.) Atheists, Agnostic, New Age, Catholics, Buddhists, Pagans, and all of the other religions are now the roads to hell. Methodists and Baptists are not preaching the word of God, but are preaching man's word--so this littlecommunity believes. And for the record--(LOL) they are not a religion, they are in a personal relationship with the Lord--and have the gift of spirit checkingother Christians along with knowing the truth of the "Word" through the Holy Spirit--(unlike the fake Christians, who have to use the intellect to make sense of scripture.) So again, I center myself through poetry--and though this is a bit tongue in cheek-ish --I do find that this sums up my feelings pretty well.


Electrical Rhyme Storm

I offer you an invitation-
to the investigation of speculation
Of a dimension that escapes the imagination
So, let's begin the contemplation.

Let's break this cycle of creation-
at a circular energy of mutation
Casting off waste matter in purgation
Changing nature through purification
Let's call this "God" for simplification.

This process of "life" through manifestation
Could appear at a glance to resemble damnation
With screaming pleads of approbation
Met with the silence of negation
Or disregard and disassociation
Waves cut short in abbreviation
Death of man is the interpretation.

Myopic obsessions with this realization
Would bring a mind to a new revelation
Enticing the ego's abnegation-
of it's pending termination
An electrical short out—obliviation!

Which brings us to "determination"
Hardwired into nature's regeneration
Which pings each current with exhilaration
Brainwaves rushing forth in emancipation
Calming the surge into subjugation
Feeding the need for contemplation
About the final destination
Of this rhyming aggravation
To meet the "I AM" in actualization
The Creator Creating and endless Creation.

Holy grails of articulation
About the tenents of obligation
For human rules of initiation
Into a mindless intoxication
Calms the anxious situation

Enter: the ego inclination
To destroy all the rumination
Projected onto creations'authorization
Making Satan the abomination
To tidy up God's reputation
Quite the over simplification!

Mystery has no expectation
It leaves us in anticipation
The mind is primed for inoculation
The Ego's weak in confrontation
So the  Ego kills the imagination!

Survival is calling for an alteration
According humanity with a new dispensation
We've outgrown our toleration
We proclaim our indignation!
To the continuance of God's defamation.
This God is now in hibernation
Until further investigation.

If you've participated in this exploration
You have just passed my initiation
To belong to my newest congregation
Against The Great " I Am's" assassination.

Teresa '06 some revisions*

244 Comments - 62 Kudos - Add Comment

6:43 PM - (Show me your faith!)
Current mood: amused
Category: Religion and Philosophy

78 Comments - 40 Kudos - Add Comment

6:31 PM - What the New Testament May Not Say About Homosexuality
Current mood: contemplative
Category: Religion and Philosophy

What the New Testament Says about Homosexualityfrom The Fourth R 21,3 (May-June 2008)William O. Walker, Jr.Mainline Christian denominations in this country are bitterly divided over the question of homosexuality. For this reason it is important to ask what light, if any, the New Testament sheds on this controversial issue. Most people apparently assume that the New Testament expresses strong opposition to homosexuality, but this simply is not the case. The six propositions that follow, considered cumulatively, lead to the conclusion that the New Testament does not provide any direct guidance for understanding and making judgments about homosexuality in the modern world.Proposition 1: Strictly speaking, the New Testament says nothing at all about homosexuality. There is not a single Greek word or phrase in the entire New Testament that should be translated into English as "homosexual" or "homosexuality." In fact, the very notion of "homosexuality"—like that of "heterosexuality," "bisexuality," and even "sexual orientation"—is essentially a modern concept that would simply have been unintelligible to the New Testament writers. The word "homosexuality" came into use only in the latter part of the nineteenth century, and, as New Testament scholar Victor Paul Furnish notes, it and related terms "presume an understanding of human sexuality that was possible only with the advent of modern psychological and sociological analysis." In other words, "The ancient writers . . . were operating without the vaguest conception of what we have learned to call 'sexual orientation'."1 (In the rest of this article I shall use the terms "homosexual" and "homosexuality" strictly for the sake of convenience.) Proposition 2: At most, there are only three passages in the entire New Testament that refer to what we today would call homosexual activity. None of the four gospels mentions the subject. This means that, so far as we know, Jesus never spoke about homosexuality, and we simply have no way of determining what his attitude toward it might have been. Moreover, there is nothing about homosexuality in the Book of Acts, in Hebrews, in Revelation, or in the letters attributed to James, Peter, John, and Jude. Further, homosexuality is not mentioned in ten of the thirteen letters attributed to Paul. It is only in Romans 1:26–27, 1 Corinthians 6:9–10, and 1 Timothy 1:8–11 that there may be references to homosexuality.2 The paucity of references to homosexuality in the New Testament suggests that it was not a matter of major concern either for Jesus or for the early Christian movement. Proposition 3: Two of the three passages that possibly refer to homosexuality are simply more-or-less miscellaneous catalogues of behaviors that are regarded as unacceptable, with no particular emphasis placed on any individual item in the list. 1 Corinthians 6:9–10 says that certain types of people "will not inherit the kingdom of God." The list of such people begins with fornicators, idolaters, and adulterers, and it ends with thieves, the greedy, drunkards, revilers, and robbers. Near the middle—between adulterers and thieves—are the two Greek words translated in the New Revised Standard Version as "male prostitutes" (that is, homosexual male prostitutes) and "sodomites." But no special emphasis is placed on these people; they are simply listed along with the others. Similarly, 1 Timothy 1:8–11 says that the law was given not for good people but for bad people, and it then provides a list, giving representative examples of who these "bad people" might be. Included in the list—this time near the end but again without any special emphasis—is the Greek word translated in the New Revised Standard Version as "sodomites." In both texts, such people are mentioned simply in passing, in more-or-less miscellaneous catalogues of unacceptable behaviors, but with no special emphasis or attention called to them. Such miscellaneous lists of "vices" are fairly common not only in the New Testament and other early Christian literature but also in Mesopotamian, Egyptian, Greco-Roman, and Jewish writings.3 They appear to have been somewhat stereotypical in nature, representing a kind of laundry list or grab bag of negative labels that could be trotted out and used for rhetorical purposes with little attention to individual items in the lists. As something of an analogy, I cite a passage from Arlo Guthrie's famous ballad, "Alice's Restaurant." In speaking of his own arrest for littering and his assignment to "Group B" in the jail, Guthrie characterizes this group as follows: Group B is where they putcha if you may not be moral enough to join the army after committin' your special crime. There was all kinds of mean, nasty, ugly-lookin' people on the bench there. There was mother rapers . . . father stabbers . . . father rapers . . . Father rapers! sittin' right there on the bench next to me!In somewhat similar fashion, the catalogues in 1 Corinthians 6:9–10 and 1 Timothy 1:8–11 list "all kinds of mean, nasty, ugly-lookin' people." It should also be noted that different catalogues tend to be remarkably similar in content. They typically list the same kinds of "vices." Furthermore, it appears that authors often took over and adapted such lists from earlier documents. This means that the New Testament writers may not actually have composed the lists in 1 Corinthians 6:9–10 and 1 Timothy 1:8–11. These may simply be conventional lists, taken and adapted from earlier documents and used here for rhetorical purposes. If so, then inclusion of the words translated as "male prostitutes" and "sodomites" may be little more than coincidental. In any case, neither of the catalogues—1 Corinthians 6:9–10 or 1 Timothy 1:8–11—singles out homosexual activity for any special attention. They just list, in miscellaneous fashion, various types of behaviors that are regarded as unacceptable.Proposition 4: It may well be that the two lists of unacceptable behaviors—1 Corinthians 6:9–10 and 1 Timothy 1:8–11—do not refer to homosexuality at all. The New Revised Standard Version translates 1 Corinthians 6:9–10 as follows:Do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived! Fornicators, idolaters, adulterers, male prostitutes, sodomites, thieves, the greedy, drunkards, revilers, robbers—none of these will inherit the kingdom of God.For our purposes, of course, the two key terms here are "male prostitutes" and "sodomites." It may well be the case, however, that these are not the most appropriate translations of the underlying Greek in the text.4 The Greek word translated as "male prostitutes" is the adjective malakoi (plural of malakos). This adjective means "soft," as in a "soft" bed or a "soft" pillow. When applied to people, it can mean "lazy," "self-indulgent," "cowardly," "lacking in self-control," and the like. When applied to males, it generally refers to what are commonly regarded as feminine-like "weaknesses:" such men might be regarded as "soft," "flabby," "weak," "cowardly," "unmanly," or "effeminate." But to call a male "effeminate" might or might not carry implications of homosexuality. Sometimes it did, but certainly not always. When it did, it may have referred to the so-called "passive" or "effeminate" partner in the homosexual relationship. But we cannot be at all certain that malakoi refers to homosexuality in First Corinthians 6:9. It may refer to "softness" or even "effeminacy" in some other sense. In any case, the use of the adjective malakoi to describe males should probably be seen not as "homophobic" but rather as essentially "gynophobic." It reflects a fear of women or at least of woman-like—that is, "soft" or "weak"—behavior on the part of men.5 People have assumed that malakoi does refer to homosexuality in 1 Corinthians primarily because the next term in the list is arsenokoitai (defined below)—the assumption being, of course, that the two words are somehow linked in meaning because they appear side by side in the list. This, however, is by no means necessarily the case. "The greedy" and "drunkards" are also juxtaposed in the list, and it would be difficult to see any link between them. But even if malakoi and arsenokoitai are somehow linked in meaning, it is not at all clear just how arsenokoitai should be translated. It comes from two Greek words: arsen, which means "male" (as opposed to "female"), and koite which literally means "bed" but by extension can be a euphemism for sexual intercourse (like "going to bed" with someone). This would appear to suggest that arsenokoitai refers to males who "go to bed" with other males. But Dale B. Martin has pointed out that the meaning of a compound word cannot necessarily be determined by breaking it apart, looking at the meaning of each of its parts, and then simply combining these meanings to determine the meaning of the compound word. As an example, Martin cites the English word, "understand," which has nothing to do with either "standing" or "being under."6 Numerous other examples could be cited, but I want to mention one that is closer to the topic under consideration. The word I have in mind is the vulgar term, "mother-fucker." We know what this word means literally. But when people use it, they typically are not referring to someone who has sexual intercourse with his mother (or even with someone else's mother). In fact, the word normally does not refer to sexual activity at all. Though generally viewed as highly pejorative, it is sometimes used in a more-or-less neutral sense or even, in some circles, as a term of admiration or perhaps affection. The point is, however, that its original sexual meaning is often not apparent in its actual usage. And the same thing may very well be true of the Greek word arsenokoitai. Martin has made a study of how the word is actually used in ancient Greek literature. It is a rare word. First Corinthians 6:9 is probably the earliest occurrence that we have, and most other occurrences are merely quotations from or allusions to 1 Corinthians 6:9 and/or 1 Timothy 1:10 (the only places the word occurs in the New Testament). According to Martin, though, when the word does appear independently, it is typically found in conjunction not with sins of sexual immorality but rather with sins related to economic injustice or exploitation. Thus, Martin concludes that arsenokoitai most likely refers not to homosexuality as such but rather to the "exploiting of others by means of sex, perhaps but not necessarily by homosexual sex."7 I would suggest, however, that it might even refer to exploitation that has nothing at all to do with sex. We often use sexual language to talk about things that have nothing to do with sex. For example, someone might say, "I really fucked up!" without having sex in mind at all. Or think about how we sometimes use the word "screw." If I say, "I really got screwed on that business deal," I'm not talking about sex, but I am talking about exploitation. And this is consistent with Martin's conclusion that arsenokoitai appears to refer more precisely to exploitation than to sexual activity. The bottom line is that we simply do not know what the word meant or how it was used in the first century.8  So, malakoi means simply "soft," perhaps "effeminate," and it might or might not refer to homosexuality. And arsenokoitai might or might not refer explicitly to homosexuality. Therefore, we cannot be certain that First Corinthians 6:9–10 refers to homosexuality at all. The same is true of First Timothy 1:8–11, which has the word arsenokoitai but not the word malakoi. It might not refer to homosexuality either.Proposition 5: Even if 1 Corinthians 6:9–10 and 1 Timothy 1:8–11 do refer to homosexuality, what they likely have in mind is not homosexuality per se but rather one particular form of homosexuality that was regarded as especially exploitive and degrading.9 Some scholars have suggested that malakoi designates attractive young men, or boys, whose sexual services were either purchased or coerced by older men, and that arsenokoitai designates these older men who thus "used" or exploited the younger men. According to this interpretation, malakoi and arsenokoitai do refer to male homosexuality, but the objection is not necessarily to male homosexual activity per se, but rather to the prostitution, coercion, and/or exploitation that typically accompanied one particular type of male homosexuality. And this, too, is consistent with Martin's conclusion that arsenokoitai refers more specifically to exploitation than it does to sex. Furthermore, if this is the case, then we simply have no way of knowing what the New Testament writers might have said about a non-exploitive, non-coercive, loving, committed, monogamous homosexual relationship. We cannot know because New Testament writers are not talking about that kind of homosexual relationship. In the final analysis, we cannot be certain that these passages refer to homosexuality at all. And if they do, they do so only in passing in more-or-less miscellaneous catalogues of various types of behaviors that are regarded as unacceptable.Proposition 6: The one passage in the New Testament that almost certainly does refer to homosexuality is based on some highly debatable presuppositions about its nature and causes. The passage in question is Romans 1:26–27. Earlier in this chapter, the author is talking about idolatry, the worship of false gods. Then, beginning in verse 24, he talks about the results of idolatry. Verses 24 and 25 identify the results of idolatry as lust, impurity, and the degrading of one's body. Then, verses 26 and 27 spell out in more detail the nature of this lust, impurity, and bodily degradation as follows (New Revised Standard Version):For this reason God gave them up to degrading passions. Their women exchanged natural intercourse for unnatural, and in the same way also the men, giving up natural intercourse with women, were consumed with passion for one another. Men committed shameless acts with men and received in their own persons the due penalty for their error. Following verses 26 and 27, the remainder of the chapter lists some of the other results of idolatry, and the list is rather similar to the catalogues in 1 Corinthians 6:9–10 and 1 Timothy 1:8–11. In other words, homosexuality is but one among other types of unacceptable behaviors. What must be emphasized, then, is that the passage, taken as a whole, is not about homosexuality. It is about idolatry. The only reason it mentions homosexuality at all is because the author assumes that it is a result of willful idolatry. Knowing full well that there is one true God, people nevertheless freely choose to worship false gods. As punishment for this idolatry, God "gives them up" to homosexual activity. Thus, in a sense, homosexuality is not so much a sin as it is a punishment for sin. This should mean, however, that no monotheist would ever take part in homosexual activity—no practicing Jew or Christian or Muslim. Only worshippers of false gods would engage in such activity. This was a fairly common assumption within first-century Judaism, and it is one of the dubious presuppositions that underlie Romans 1:26–27. Clearly, however, it is not consistent with what we can observe in the world around us. The passage also makes at least two other assumptions that point to its essential irrelevance so far as modern discussions of homosexuality are concerned. First, it assumes that homosexuality is somehow "unnatural"—contrary to nature—or a better translation would be "beyond what is natural." In other words, it isn't just unusual for people to engage in homosexual activity. It is abnormal; it "goes beyond" that which is natural. According to the American Psychological Association, however, "most scientists today agree that sexual orientation is most likely the result of a complex interaction of environmental, cognitive, and biological factors."10 Moreover, psychologists tend to be extremely cautious about using such categories as "natural" and "unnatural," "normal" and "abnormal" when talking about human behavior. Second, the passage assumes that homosexuality is an expression of insatiable lust. People turn to homosexual activity because heterosexual activity simply fails to satisfy them. They want more! As Dale B. Martin points out, it is somewhat like gluttony: gluttony is too much eating, and homosexuality is too much sex.11 People engage in homosexual activity because they "can't get enough" of sex otherwise. And this, of course, is related to the notion that homosexuality "goes beyond" that which is natural. Homosexuality is essentially excessive sexuality. Together with the author's emphasis on the verb "exchange," this suggests that, in modern terms, the reference in the passage may be more to bisexuality than to homosexuality. If such is the case, then the passage would appear to have little relevance for people whose sole orientation is homosexual. In light of the assumptions that underlie Romans 1:26–27, perhaps the question to be raised when reading these verses is the following: "Exactly what is it that is being opposed here, and why is it being opposed?" Is it simply homosexuality per se, or is it the idolatry, the "abnormality," and the insatiable lust that, in the first-century Jewish mind, were associated with homosexual activity? And a second question is this: What would the author of Romans 1:26–27 say about a loving, committed, monogamous homosexual relationship—one that was not rooted in idolatry, one that did not represent a rejection of one's own true nature, and one that was not characterized by excessive lust? I think the answer has to be that we simply do not know, because, once again, the author is talking about something quite different.Conclusion: The New Testament really does not provide any direct guidance for understanding and making judgments about homosexuality in the modern world. To the extent that it does talk about homosexuality, the New Testament appears to be talking about only certain types of homosexuality, and it speaks on the basis of assumptions about homosexuality that are now regarded as highly dubious. Perhaps, then, we could paraphrase what the New Testament says about homosexuality as follows: If homosexuality is exploitive, then it is wrong; if homosexuality is rooted in idolatry, then it is wrong; if homosexuality represents a denial of one's own true nature, then it is wrong; if homosexuality is an expression of insatiable lust, then it is wrong. But we could say exactly the same thing about heterosexuality, couldn't we? If homosexuality is not necessarily any of these things, however, then it would appear that the New Testament has nothing to say about it in any direct sense. Speaking specifically of the Pauline letters but in words that are applicable to the New Testament as a whole, the Pauline scholar Victor Paul Furnish puts it as follows:[Paul's] letters . . . cannot yield any specific answers to the questions being faced in the modern church. Shall practicing homosexuals be admitted to church membership? Shall they be accorded responsibilities within a congregation? Shall they be commissioned to the church's ministry? The Apostle never asks or answers these questions. . . . On these points there are no proof texts available one way or the other. It is mistaken to invoke Paul's name in support of any specific position on these matters.12In short, there is nothing in the New Testament that tells us directly whether homosexuality per se is a good thing or a bad thing or simply a fact of life. To be sure, when we consider its overall message, the New Testament may provide some indirect guidance regarding homosexuality. Indeed, it may well be the case that a twenty-first century "Paul" would revise Galatians 3:27–28 to read as follows:For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is not male and female, there is neither homosexual nor heterosexual; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. Works Consulted American Psychological Association. "Answers to Your Questions About Sexual Orientation and Homosexuality." Washington: The American Psychological Association, 1998. Furnish, Victor Paul. The Moral Teaching of Paul: Selected Issues. 2nd ed. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1985. Martin, Dale B. Sex and the Single Savior: Gender and Sexuality in Biblical Interpretation. Louisville and London: Westminster John Knox Press, 2006.

158 Comments - 99 Kudos - Add Comment

8:22 AM - Is it time to give up our power?
Current mood: contemplative
Category: News and Politics

I snagged this from "Sleepless In Seattle" and think this is a very controversial matter,
but needs to be discussed now--before the elections! I am undecided at this point about
Iran and our need to get a strong hold on this "virus" of Extremists agenda about the
West. It seems that these kind of people are not the type to respond positively to
kindness and "live and let live" attitudes. Believe me, I have tried to just open dialogue
with Muslims and it is almost like a slap in the face to them. So, please read this letter
and give me your opinion! In a perfect world, I would say: "No, more war and no more
trying to police the world, but....is it time in our human evolution to do this?



>>>>> This is one of the most profound articles that I have ever read about this Presidency, this era, and this war. No matter your politics, you owe it to yourself to read this.





An assessment of where the US stands in relation to the Middle East problems, this one is from the guy who had his finger on the nuclear trigger for three years as head of our defense and response complex buried under Cheyenne Mountain at Colorado Springs.



Jack )





Farrington, Major General, USAF (Retired)

* * *

Middle East Imperative

by: James Cash, Brig. Gen.



, USAF, (Retired)

I wrote recently about the war in Iraq and the larger war against radical Islam, eliciting a number of responses. Let me try and put this conflict in proper perspective.





Understand; the current battle we are engaged in is much bigger than just Iraq. What happens in the next year will affect this country and how our kids and grand kids live throughout their lifetime, and beyond. Radical Islam has been attacking the West since the seventh century. They have been defeated in the past and decimated to the point of taking hundreds of years to recover. But they can never be totally defeated. Their birth rates are so far beyond civilized world rates, that in time they recover and attempt to dominate again.



Should the U.S.

End Aid to Israel?
Funding Our Decline
By Alison Weir



John Mearsheimer - Iraq, the Neocons and the Israel Lobby


04/04/08 "Counterpunch" -- -- April 1st I participated in a debate in San Francisco that raised the question of US aid to Israel.



It was highly appropriate that this debate was held two weeks before tax day, since in Israel’s sixty years of existence, it has received more US tax money than any other nation on earth.



During periods of recession, when Americans are thrown out of work, homes are repossessed, school budgets cut and businesses fail, Congress continues to give Israel massive amounts of our tax money; currently, about 7 million dollars per day.



On top of this, Egypt and Jordan receive large sums of money (per capita about 1/20th of what Israel receives) to buy their cooperation with Israel; and Palestinians also receive our tax money (about 1/23rd of that to Israel), to repair infrastructure that Israeli forces have destroyed, to fund humanitarian projects required due to the destruction wrought by Israel’s military, and to convince Palestinian officials to take actions beneficial to Israel. These sums should also be included in expenditures on behalf of Israel.



When all are added together, it turns out that for many years over half of all US tax money abroad has been expended to benefit a country the size of New Jersey.



It is certainly time to begin debating this disbursement of our hard-earned money. It is quite possible that we have better uses for it.



To decide whether the US should continue military aid to any nation, it is essential to examine the nature and history of the recipient nation, how it has used our military aid in the past, whether these uses are in accord with our values, and whether they benefit the American taxpayers who are putting up the money.



1.

What is the history and nature of Israel?

Describing Israel is always difficult. One can either stay within the mainstream paradigm, or tell the truth. I will opt for the truth.



Drawing on scores of books by diverse authors, the facts are quite clear: Israel was created through one of the most massive, ruthless, and persistent ethnic cleansing operations of modern history. In 1947-49 about three-quarters of a million Muslims and Christians, who had originally made up 95 percent of the population living in the area that Zionists wanted for a Jewish state, were brutally forced off their ancestral land. There were 33 massacres, over 500 villages were completely destroyed, and an effort was made to erase all vestiges of Palestinian history and culture.



The fact is that Israel’s core identity is based on ethnic and religious discrimination by a colonial, immigrant group; and maintaining this exclusionist identity has required continued violence against those it has dispossessed, and others who have given them refuge.



2.

How has Israel used our military aid in the past?

In all of its wars except one, Israel has attacked first.



In violation of the Arms Export Control Act, which requires that US weapons only be used in "legitimate self defense," Israel used American equipment during its two invasions of Lebanon, killing 17,000 the first time and 1,000 more recently, the vast majority civilians. It used American-made cluster bombs in both invasions, again in defiance of US laws, causing the "most hideous injuries" one American physician said she had ever seen, and which, in one day in 1982 alone, resulted in the amputation of over 1,000 mangled limbs.



It has used US military aid to continue and expand its illegal confiscation of land in the West Bank and Golan Heights, and has used American F-16s and Apache Helicopters against largely unarmed civilian populations.



According to Defence for Children International, Israel has "engaged in gross violations of international human rights and humanitarian law." Between 1967 and 2003, Israel destroyed more than 10,000 homes, and such destruction continues today. A coalition of UK human rights groups recently issued a report stating that Israel’s blockade of Gaza is collective punishment of 1.5 million people, warning: "Unless the blockade ends now, it will be impossible to pull Gaza back from the brink of this disaster and any hopes for peace in the region will be dashed.

"

In addition, Israel uses US military aid to fund an Israeli arms industry that competes with US companies. According to a report commissioned by the US Army War College, "Israel uses roughly 40 percent of its military aid, ostensibly earmarked for purchase of US weapons, to buy Israeli-made hardware. It also has won the right to require the Defense Department or US defense contractors to buy Israeli-made equipment or subsystems, paying 50 to 60 cents on every defense dollar the US gives to Israel.

"

Israel has used US aid to kill and injure nonviolent Palestinian, American and international activists, as well as American servicemen. Israeli soldiers in an American-made Caterpillar bulldozer crushed to death 23-year-old Rachel Corrie; an Israeli sniper shot 21-year-old Tom Hurndall in the head; Israeli soldiers shot 26-year-old Brian Avery in the face. In 1967 Israel used US-financed French aircraft to attack a US Navy ship, killing 34 American servicemen and injuring 174.



Israel has used US aid to imprison without trial thousands of Palestinians and others, and according to reports by the London Times and Amnesty International, Israel consistently tortures prisoners; including, according to Foreign Service Journal, American citizens.



3.

Are these uses in accord with our national and personal values?

Not in my view.



4.

Do these uses of US aid benefit American taxpayers?

While some Israeli actions have served US interests, the balance sheet is clear: Israel’s use of American aid consistently damages the United States, harms our economy, and endangers Americans.



In fact, this extremely negative outcome was so predictable that even before Israel’s creation virtually all State Department and Pentagon experts advocated forcefully against supporting the creation of a Zionist state in the Middle East. President Harry Truman’s reply: "I am sorry gentlemen, but I have to answer to hundreds of thousands who are anxious for the success of Zionism. I do not have hundreds of thousands of Arabs among my constituents.

"

Through the years, as noted above, our aid to Israel has not resulted in a reliable ally.



In 1954 Israel tried to bomb US government offices in Egypt, intending to pin this on Muslims.



In 1963 Senator William Fulbright discovered that Israel was using a series of covert operations to funnel our money to pro-Israel groups in the US, which then used these funds in media campaigns and lobbying to procure even more money from American taxpayers.



In 1967 Israeli forces unleashed a two-hour air and sea attack against the USS Liberty, causing 200 casualties. While Israel partisans claim that this was done in error, this claim is belied by extensive eyewitness evidence and by an independent commission reporting on Capitol Hill in 2003 chaired by former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Thomas Moorer.



In 1973 Israel used the largest airlift of US materiel in history to defeat Arab forces attempting to regain their own land, triggering the Arab oil embargo that sent the US into a recession that cost thousands of Americans their jobs.



During its 1980s Lebanon invasion, Israeli troops engaged in a systematic pattern of harassment of US forces brought in as peacekeepers that created, according to Commandant of Marines Gen. R. H Barrow, "life-threatening situations, replete with verbal degradation of the officers, their uniform and country.

"

Through the years, Israel has regularly spied on the US. According to the Government Accounting Office, Israel "conducts the most aggressive espionage operations against the United States of any ally." Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger said of Israeli spy Jonathan Pollard: "It is difficult for me to conceive of greater harm done to national security," And the Pollard case was just the tip of a very large iceberg; the most recent operation coming to light involves two senior officials of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), Israel’s powerful American lobbying organization.



Bad as the above may appear, it pales next to the indirect damage to Americans caused by our aid to Israel. American funding of Israel’s egregious violations of Palestinian human rights is consistently listed as the number one cause of hostility to Americans.



While American media regularly cover up Israeli actions, those of us who have visited the region first-hand witness a level of US-funded Israeli cruelty that makes us weep for our victims and fear for our country. While most Americans are uninformed on how Israel uses our money, people throughout the world are deeply aware that it is Americans who are funding Israeli crimes.



The 9/11 Commission notes that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed’s "animus towards the United States stemmedfrom his violent disagreement with U.S. foreign policy favoring Israel." The Economist reports that " the notion of payback for injustices suffered by the Palestinians is perhaps the most powerfully recurrent theme in bin Laden’s speeches.

"

The Bottom Line

In sum, US aid to Israel has destabilized the Middle East; propped up a national system based on ethnic and religious discrimination; enabled unchecked aggression that has, on occasion, been turned against Americans themselves; funded arms industries that compete with American companies; supported a pattern of brutal dispossession that has created hatred of the US; and resulted in continuing conflict that last year took the lives of 384 Palestinians and 13 Israelis, and that in the past seven and a half years has cost the lives of more than 982 Palestinian children and 119 Israeli children.



By providing massive funding to Israel, no matter what it does, American aid is empowering Israeli supremacists who believe in a never-ending campaign of ethnic cleansing; while disempowering Israelis who recognize that policies of morality, justice, and rationality are the only road to peace.



It is time to end our aid.



Alison Weir is Executive Director of If Americans Knew. For more information on the US-Israel relationship she especially recommends the books by Donald Neff, Paul Findley, Kathleen Christison, Stephen Walt, John Mearsheimer, Grant Smith, Stephen Green, George Ball, and John Mulhall.



If Americans Knew


If Americans Knew Investigations; Part 1










There are eight terror-sponsoring countries that make up the grand threat to the West. Two, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan just need firm pressure from the West to make major reforms. They need to decide who they are really going to support and commit to that support.





That answer is simple. They both will support who they think will hang in there until the end, and win.





We are not sending very good signals in that direction right now, thanks to the Democrats.





The other six, Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Syria, North Korea and Libya will require regime change or a major policy shift. Now, let’s look more closely.





Afghanistan and Iraq have both had regime changes, but are being fueled by outsiders from Syria and Iran . We have scared Gaddafi’s pants off, and he has given up his quest for nuclear weapons, so I don’t think Libya is now a threat.





North Korea (the non-Islamic threat) can be handled diplomatically by buying them off. They are starving. That leaves Syria and Iran. Syria is like a frightened puppy. Without the support of Iran they will join the stronger side. So where does that leave us? Sooner, or later, we are going to be forced to confront Iran, and it better be before they gain nuclear capability.





In 1989 I served as a Command Director inside the Cheyenne Mountain complex located in Colorado Springs, Colorado for almost three years. My job there was to observe (through classified means) every missile shot anywhere in the world and assess if it was a threat to the US or Canada. If any shot was threatening to either nation I had only minutes to advise the President, as he had only minutes to respond.





I watched Iran and Iraq shoot missiles at each other every day, and all day long, for months. They killed hundreds of thousands of their people. Know why? They were fighting for control of the Middle East and that enormous oil supply.





At that time, they were preoccupied with their internal problems and could care less about toppling the west. Oil prices were fairly stable and we could not see an immediate threat.





Well, the worst part of what we have done as a nation in Iraq is to do away with the military capability of one of those nations. Now, Iran has a clear field to dominate the Middle East, since Iraq is no longer a threat to them.





They have turned their attention to the only other threat to their dominance, they are convinced they will win, because the US is so divided, and the Democrats (who now control Congress and may control the Presidency in 2008) have openly said we are pulling out.





Do you have any idea what will happen if the entire Middle East turns their support to Iran, which they will obviously do if we pull out? It is not the price of oil we will have to worry about. Oil WILL NOT BE AVAILABLE to this country at any price. I personally would vote for any presidential candidate who did what JFK did with the space program—declare a goal to bring this country to total energy independence in a decade.





Yes, it is about oil. The economy in this country will totally die if that Middle East supply is cut off right now. It will not be a recession. It will be a depression that will make 1929 look like the "good-old-days". The bottom line here is simple. If Iran is forced to fall in line, the fighting in Iraq will end over night, and the nightmare will be over.





One way or another, Iran must be forced to join modern times and the global community. It may mean a real war—if so, now is the time, before we face a nuclear Iran with the capacity to destroy Israel and begin a new ice age.





I urge you to read the book "END GAME" by two of our best Middle East experts, true American patriots and retired military generals, Paul Vallely and Tom McInerney . They are our finest, and totally honest in their assessment of why victory in the Middle East is so important, and how it can be won. Proceeds for the book go directly to memorial fund for our fallen soldiers who served the country during the war on terror.


You can find that book by going to the Internet through Stand-up America at http://www. ospreyradio. us/, http://www. ospreyradio. us/ or http://www. rightalk. com/, http://www. rightalk. com/.





On the other hand, we have several very angry retired generals today, who evidently have not achieved their lofty goals, and insist on ranting and raving about the war. They are wrong, and doing the country great harm by giving a certain political party reason to use them as experts to back their anti-war claims.





You may be one of those who believe nothing could ever be terrible enough to support our going to war. If that is the case I should stop here, as that level of thinking approaches mental disability in this day and age. It is right up there with alien abductions and high altitude seeding through government aircraft contrails. I helped produce those contrails for almost 30 years, and I can assure you we were not seeding the atmosphere. The human race is a war-like population, and if a country is not willing to protect itself, it deserves the consequences.





’Enough - said!’

Now, my last comments will get to the nerve. They will be on politics.





I am not a Republican. And, George Bush has made enough mistakes as President to insure my feelings about that for the rest of my life. However, the Democratic Party has moved so far left, they have made me support those farther to the right.





I am a conservative who totally supports the Constitution of this country. The only difference between the United States and the South American, third world, dictator infested and ever-changing South American governments, is our US Constitution.





This Republic (note I did not say Democracy) is the longest standing the world has ever known, but it is vulnerable. It would take so little to change it through economic upheaval. There was a time when politicians could disagree, but still work together. We are past that time, and that is the initial step toward the downfall of our form of government.





I think that many view Bush-hating as payback time. The Republicans hated the Clinton’s and now the Democrats hate Bush.





So, both parties are putting their hate toward willingness to do anything for political dominance to include lying and always taking the opposite stand just for the sake of being opposed.



JUST HOW GOOD IS THAT FOR OUR COUNTRY?

In my lifetime, after serving in uniform for President’s Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan , and Bush I have a pretty good feel for which party supported our military, and what military life was like under each of their terms. And, let me assure you that times were best under the Republicans.





Service under Jimmy Carter was devastating for all branches of the military. And, Ronald Regan was truly a salvation.





You can choose to listen to enriched newscasters, and foolish people like John Murtha (he is no war hero), Nancy Pelosi, John Kerry, Michael Moore, Jane Fonda, Harry Reid, Russ Feingold, Hillary Clinton, Ted Kennedy, and on-and-on to include the true fools in Hollywood if you like. If you do, your conclusions will be totally wrong.





The reason that I write, appear on radio talk shows, and do everything I can to denounce those people is simple. THEY ARE PUTTING THEIR THIRST FOR POLITICAL POWER AND QUEST FOR VICTORY IN 2008 ABOVE WHAT IS BEST FOR THIS COUNTRY. I cannot abide that.





Pelosi clearly defied the Logan Act by going to Syria , which should have lead to imprisonment of three years and a heavy fine.





Jane Fonda did more to prolong the Vietnam War longer than any other human being (as acknowledged by Ho Chi Minh in his writing before he died). She truly should have been indicted for treason, along with her radical husband, Tom Hayden, and forced to pay the consequences.





This country has started to soften by not enforcing its laws, which is another indication of a Republic about to fall.





All Democrats, along with the Hollywood elite, are sending us headlong into a total defeat in the Middle East, which will finally give Iran total dominance in the region. A lack of oil in the near future will be the final straw that dooms this Republic.





However, if we refuse to let this happen and really get serious about an energy self-sufficiency program, this can be avoided. I am afraid, however, that we are going in the opposite direction.





If we elect Hillary Clinton and a Democrat controlled congress, and they carry through with allowing Iran to take control of the Middle East, continue to refuse development of nuclear energy, refuse to allow drilling for new oil, and continue to do nothing but oppose everything Bush, it will be over in terms of what we view as the good life in the USA.





Now, do I think that all who do not support the war are un-American— of course not. They just do not understand the importance of total victory in that region.





Another failure of George Bush is his inability to explain to the American people why we are there, and why we MUST win.





By the way, it is not a war. The war was won four years ago. It is martial law that is under attack by Iranian and Syrian outside influences, and there is a difference.





So, what do I believe? What is the bottom line? I will simply say that the Democratic Party has fielded the foulest, power hungry, anti-country, self absorbed group of individuals that I have observed in my lifetime. Our educational system is partially to blame for allowing the mass of America to be taken in by this group. George Bush has done the best he can with the disabilities that he possesses.





A President must communicate with the people. And, I would tell you that Desert Storm spoiled the people. Bush Senior’s 100-hour war convinced the people that technology has progressed to the point that wars could be fought with no casualties and won in very short periods of time.





I remember feeling at the time, that this was a tragedy for the US military. To win wars, you must put boots on the ground. When you put boots on the ground, soldiers are going to die. A President must make the war decision wisely, and insure that the cause is right before using his last political option.





HOWEVER, CONTROLLING IRAN AND DEMOCRATIZING THE MIDDLE EAST IS THE ONLY CHOICE IF WE ARE HELL-BENT ON DEPENDING ON THEM FOR OUR FUTURE ENERGY NEEDS.





Jimmy L. Cash, Brig. Gen., USAF, Ret.




Lakeside, Montana 5992

48 Comments - 22 Kudos - Add Comment

9:05 PM - Prisoner of Your Mind
Current mood: annoyed
Category: Writing and Poetry

I wrote this about a blogger here on myspace who is on my last
nerve, but I will not tell you who that is--because for many reading
this:  You're so vain, you probably think this poem is about you! ha!

Unctuous opining is quite a trip
into analysis paralysis hell!
As you arouse your Ego's selfishness
of each unique brain cell.

Alas you have no options-
Myopic visions lead your path
You've closed your eyes to diversity
All new concepts fuel your wrath

Beware, your Ego thinks itself
To be unquestionably on the spot
There is no room for gray tones
Dogmatic concept consumes all thought.

And spontaneity, the spice of life
Is increasingly hard to find
Once you have committed
To being a prisoner of your mind!

Freedom becomes the enemy-
Rigidity becomes the norm

44 Comments - 44 Kudos - Add Comment

10:56 AM - repost/ Drawing my Line in the Sand (with comments)
Current mood: contemplative
Category: Religion and Philosophy

January 21, 2007 - Sunday


My line in the sand.....
Current mood: annoyed
Category: Religion and Philosophy

So, it's come down to stating my truth! I had a "nasty message" from a woman who did not think I should be calling myself a Christian. I had been doing some blogging on a religious argument and this lady didn't think I follow the laws of her definition of a true Christian. You see, I do not feel that homosexuality is a sin. I also don't care if anyone doesn't think I am a Christian. Maybe it has become a definition I'd rather not be associated with if it is going to be a line in the sand.

I have been blogging against religious fanaticism and atheist extremism for a long while now. The religiously superior interpreters of the "Word of God" call me "luke warm" which I find to be most comfortable (literally and figuratively) and I suppose comfort is a tell-tell sign in spotting false christians these days. The atheists tell me that I am clinging to my fear-based brainwashing, while insisting that I must take a stand. Here's a concept: "This is my stand!!!"

Sam Harris believes that religious moderates are being naïve and apathetic. As long as we refuse to pick a side and stand up to the foolishness of faith, we are allowing the religious insanity to flourish. Of course he is addressing both Christian and Muslim faith here—it's not as if he has a favorite. It's both sides against the middle, and I am beginning to feel a tad bit "squashed." So, here is my truth, for the record, so that I can send anyone right here to read my very personal opinions about my faith and my beliefs.

I love the story of Jesus. I agree with his teachings and wish everyone could live by them, but I also believe that some of the things written about Jesus are not fact based. I have many theories on how and why this would happen, but that is another blog altogether. I also do not believe in the God of the Old Testament, nor do I believe in the God of Islam (they are twin brothers as far as I can tell.) I pray that no God of this kind exists, and if it did, I would not wish to spend eternity with It. I should add here that many
christians believe in a loving God. I dont know where they got that picture
of God from the Old Testament--maybe they know it intuitively, as I do.

Science has disproved much about the integrity of the Christian Bible. This is not a problem for me, as it is for many believers, because my belief in God is not based in doctrine in the first place. One thing science can not prove is that there is no "God." Science also must admit that theseholy books are a history of man's evolution into a relationship with God. Something inspired man to work at being good, something inspired man to speak of and seek out God. I have a hard time believing that people were more afraid of death then they were of the God that they believed in during the Biblical times. I know I'd choose to believe in eternal sleep over the very big possibility of an "eternal lake of fire." In any case, I see room for fear on both sides of this fence. But what if we could say finally that this picture of God—the one that our ancestors believed in, never existed at all? What if we have driven ourselves into a fear based relationship with an entity that demands us to worship him? What if man did not allow Jesus (who I believe was the most God like man to teach about life in our history) to tell the story he came to tell about stopping the hate, and finding the kingdom within?

What if unconditional love actually does mean no strings attached? What if our good behavior and good will is inner driven? Well, this is where I have been for the past 20 years for the most part. I can't deny my intuitive feelings of God and I can't mold a loving god out of bible scripture. The fact is there is a vast amount of growing to be done within our own collective reality. Everyday science discovers a new truth. Why should I close my mind to any possibility? So, the truth is that my mind will remain open to the mystery of God. I behave according to how I like to be treated. God or no God, I have never wished to be evil and have felt happier when I am good. This is my stand incase you may be interested. I will go to "hell" believing that God is kinder than he is ?? If so, I'll pack light.
Teresa McKee 1-'07


Kate... Touching Spirits--


Well done Teresa..
Selfless love is what it's all about...
Not the self centered lies which pass for Christainity in many circles.

Lukewarm, cherry picking, fence sitting Teresa

Well, I may not "have" selfless love down, but I know it's the direction to go in....
Thanks Kate, hugs to you


Doug

Trouble is with religion is that everyone thinks their religion is the best.

Teresa

I remember going to the Church of Christ once with a neighbor--talk about an anxiety
attack! Hell, I was the only one there who was headed for hell (I remember thinking,
how could my parents let me go to the Baptist Church???? They must be stupid! LOL)


I Am Like You

Hahahaaaa! That must've been an experience. I think the biggest factor in the argument over whether there is a supreme being or not is our need as individuals and collectively to feel that we are right, no matter what. Naturally, this has to mean that someone else with a different view(not necessarily opposing ours) would be wrong. The day people put more stock in being correct than in being right, people will be willing to admit what they do or don't know.


Lukewarm, cherry picking, fence sitting Teresa

Well, I have learned that to be correct, you must admit that you do not know and may
(gasp!) be wrong. I am called a fence sitter because I do not know. Therefore I am
correctly sitting my ass right here until someone proves one side or the other!
In fact, I'm having a saddle made lined in fur because I want to be comfortable
dodging the insults.

~Sonya~

Its amazing all the Pharisees' I've come across on myspace, especially concerning religion! Just keep doing what you're doing, because you may challenge them to open their minds a little more, something we all need to do!


Lukewarm, cherry picking, fence sitting Teresa

I don't know Sonya--these folks have never opened their minds--I did come up with
a good slogan though --" Don't just recite, Ignite!" Well, I'll work on it....



Apostle of the Unknown

I am on Gods side 100%, once god is within, the rituals are not nearly as important, and proving myself is not nearly as important either, really god or the universe is going to do what ever it wants regardless of what any man does,LOL. mankind has a long history of being ignorent, and the more things change the more they stay the same, I read all the holy books, and they all speak the same knowledge once they are understood correctly, til then the double mindedness continues, as far as those labels go, christian, muslim, jew, ect. I haven't found a purpose for them yet, I think the job of the buildings are pretty much just to remind people of the higher power, kinda like the AA buildings,LOL to think one is better than another is exactly what jesus taught against, so I do not think jesus would have been a part of that cult either,LOL in the old testament they used gods name like we use the police's name today, because it helped keep the people in line, now we have a govn't for that, some of the old testament writings are basically law books, some are very wise, in the new testament the red words are the exact truth the rest is interpretations from men who thought they were helping people, but like they say the road to hell is paved with good intentions,LOL. happiness to you my friend, hope you do not let the haters get to you. they are quite amusing to me, with their crowns so high,LOL


Lukewarm, cherry picking, fence sitting Teresa

I don't think they see themselves as haters. I really think they are all trying to save me
--even the atheists think they are deprogramming me. The thing is I came from non-belief
to where I am. The atheist religion didn't work for me either. LOL


Apostle of the Unknown

most people have no idea of what their actions cause, this is why I say the road to hell is paved with good intentions, this is also why jesus said it is better to worry about the log in ones own eye, instead of the speck in anothers. that log is usually the arrogance in thinking they have the ability to help you,LOL a classic case of ego mania,LOL happiness to you my friend.

P.S. I have never heard a hater admit they were a hater, yet I can spot them from 10 miles away,LOL. really it is a symptom of a bruised ego,LOL.


Lukewarm, cherry picking, fence sitting Teresa
point taken! I know one King who is a hater because of his own fear! LOL

~*Gabriel*~

Oh Love!
I keep coming back to you
You heal the broken hearted,
Give hope to the hopeless
See beauty in all that is
Make the Blind to see
Tame the savage beast
You feed the Hungry
Give water to the thirsty
Fill every want
Every sadness
Every need
With your touch
But where are you?
Where have you gone?
Why can't I see you
I am alone
How is it we cannot be together
You and I

It is you who Draw the fragrance from the rose
" The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light" Matt 6:22


Lukewarm, cherry picking, fence sitting Teresa
Thanks Gabriel, this is beautiful! Did you write this?

LORD OF THE DRAGON RIDERS

MY FRIEND, I AGREE WITH YOU 100% . I WROTE A COULE OF BLOGS AGAINST EXTREMISM, IN POLITIC,AND IN RELIGION IT ALSO A VERY DANGEROUS PROBLEM .THAT THEY WOULD FORCE THEIR NARROW VIEW ON EVERYBODYY ELSE. AS IF "GOD "PICK THEM TO SPEAK WITH HIS VOICE AND TO JUDGE OTHER.
DIDN'T CHRIST SAY IN THE BIBLE

LET HE WITHOUT SIN CAST THE FIRST STONE


Lukewarm, cherry picking, fence sitting Teresa

yep. That's what he said. I think they only caught the part about casting the stone.
Thanks Bob, Teresa

Claire Noire

Wow I am so impressed. This is an amazing insight! The truth in within you. I love people who think for themselves!!! Im going to come back and read it again too :)

Lukewarm, cherry picking, fence sitting Teresa

It's funny, Claire. When I was about 19 or 20, I went through a horrible time with panic
attacks and I thought "If only I could get a labotomy...) It would be so easy to believe
what I wanted to believe--so easy to have a book to guide me through every decision.
Thanks, and hugs to you.


Christiane

Oh Theresa! I don't think we need to draw a line in the sand! God wants us to ask questions, and just because we don't agree on every little point shouldn't keep us from talking about those differences. That's one thing I love about you. You open the door for discussion so freely. And you stand there like a little kid who just heard someone say something bad about her father. Uh-uh, you say. My Daddy isn't like that! My Daddy wouldn't do that! I don't care what you say, I'm not going to change my mind. And you don't say anything else with any absolute certainty, but this one thing you will not let go of.

I stand on this as well, for the Bible says that it is the "kindness of God that leads us to repentance." (Incidentally it does not say the fear of God.) Jesus said, "if I be lifted up from the earth, I will draw all men unto me."

That doesn't mean that there isn't justice, for we all know that evil lives in the world. 9/11 has shown us all too clearly. And in every era there is some horrendous evil to remind us of this. In each of us is the striving between good and evil. We've all sensed it deep inside. Anyone who says otherwise is in denial. Yet somehow everyone has a deep heart question about a loving God who would torture a sinner for eternity. I don't believe that is a Biblical truth at all and soon I will write a blog about that topic. Again, I'm not saying that means there is no justice. Can you see a Jew wanting to spend eternity living next door to an unchanged Hitler? It doesn't make sense.

I just want to remind Christians reading your blog about the kindness of God being the driving force behind drawing others to Christ, and not the fear of hell fire. The fear of hell fire might bring some under the physical roof of a church, but that isn't the end goal. The end goal is that each individual will have a living connection with God so that they are transformed into the image of Christ and love the daylights out of those around them. And in so doing, draw more into that living relationship.

Sorry to get a little preachy there. 1 million kudos to you! Keep sticking up for God. Love you.


Lukewarm, cherry picking, fence sitting Teresa

This is very interesting. No amount of fear could lead me to God. I got to God through
Love and relaxing my EGO. I have never seen a happy Christian who got there through
fear and yet many want to use fear to win souls! I think we sometimes just want to win
period. hugs, T


Nek in The South OC
woooohoo - u are going to stir the fires with this one,..lol--but from what I read others say- they seem to have choosen to take stance as judge and jury. Now if these people were mature "Grown" Christains I am pretty sure that they would not be sendign any letters that hinted of hate or rash thining. There is a general rule of thumb that seems to be pretty accurate throuout history and life and peoples lives all the way to a personal level. The ones that cry loudest against something are the very ones who struggle with that very thing they are loudest against. You see it works this way-- that if something is not a temptation for you- it doesnt matter- its a non issue- its a mute point. Lets say,..the earth is a flat item and we all fall off the edge,..this statement is soo silly in our eyes we wouldnt even argue with a dipshit who loudly argues the point.

Also you can tell your nay sayers and those who spout as if they are teachers of the law,..you can warn them that God specifically holds those people up who are teachers and use what ever means they have to speak that they are full of knowledge and tuth,..that God holds them to a high standard and that by the very weights they measure others , God will judge them accordingly. And since sin is sin is sin,..they ,..in the crass vinacular (spelling?>) lol are screwed.

As for a lake of fire,..thats is a phrase that has been added because of our mis interpitation of greek and hebrew text. The Catholics have added huge amounts to hell and stuff,..when in actuallity hell is moslty perceived as a complete lack of God in any way- complete lack of anything good.

For the most part Hell and condemnation is way to deep of a discussion for any lay person to even begin to understand without doign years of histoprical research and years of language study on their own. If they for one instant think Jesus and his uneduacted,..low status stinky grubby fishermen dudes were educated and spoke in the King James version--lol ( flat earth people) they are seriously misinformed. Jesus did not choose any highly religious leaders to be part of his 12. I wonder if he was sending a message?

I say this because I know I am not qualified to argue these points - as a Christain with others,..I may know some,..but in no way can I even begin to even teach this stuff,..its like taking a small 1 month old baby and telling them how an engine works in a car and expecting them to beable to tell it to others and know how to drive it,..lol - which is silly- cuz they are pretty occupied with just being fed,..pooping a diaper and sleeping,..they are just at the point were otheres are meeting their needs,..they are in no way even close to being able to take care of themselves- let alone tell others how to do it.

Soo keep that in mind,..these people are seriously immature in their faith and just about everything that that includes.

The only time they get the chance to argue with you on theology or apologetics is if they have actually learned enought through years of actually searching and studying.

Okay I wander,..I gotta run. Just rember that what ever you beleive on God,..just make sure its accurate,..if you dont know for sure,..then you dont know,..if you are confused--you are confused,..its no big deal,..cuz there is no way on earth anyone of us will ever be able to put God in a box and beable to complelty understand and know everything about who and what he is. Its okay to not have to be the most knowledgeable person - lol I sure know I aint. Besides huge amounts of knowledge about the bible was never the issue,..infact,..that was the problem,..that was the whole problem with the "teachers" of the day -- the teachers were doing exactly what is happenign now,..

The masses to complety understand God and to have arguments of theology has never been the issue wity Christanity-neeever,..never never. Infact we really keep missing the point- the point was Christ free'd you from the lives that you had prior-- and the rest of life was learning to be a new person ( THE REST OF YOUR LIFE--THE WHOLE THING,..) AND TO HELP OTHERS ALONG THE WAY. And beleive you me- constantly fighting over scripture like what we do is soo stupid when we dont even understand it,..we are not at that point yet,..and our focus should be meeting the needs of others,..either food,..shelter or help,..or a hug,..or compassion- ( we are commanded to be like Christ- and his mercy and compassion were amazing,..those two items at the least we should be working on)

oh man I ramble--lol I better shut up,..

Keep up the work,..Luv ya--Ken


Lukewarm, cherry picking, fence sitting Teresa

Ken, I love your take on the whole issue of religion and God. You must have worked very hard and gotten very honest with yourself. I give you kudos! Teresa



Christiane

Well...Judas was educated


Peggy

I'm first! And I say - yay Teresa! Your personal beliefs & feelings are just that - yours! Nobody should attack & try to force another person to their "side." Rational debate or sharing of ideas is one thing, bullying is quite another ( & not very Christian by my personal definition of the word )!


Lukewarm, cherry picking, fence sitting Teresa

It wouldn't be so bad, except the atheist won't have me either! LOL



Contessa de Landsfeld Heald
By virtue of my sanity because I'm LMBO (laughing my butt off) right now...

If SEX is a SIN then maybe HOMOSEX isn't?
beeeeeeeeeeeep!
hahahahahahahahahaha! I don't agree there...

I agree here...on who ever wrote you has got to be on the wrong side of christian because if SHE were a true christian - she would not be judging you.

<3
Mary


Lukewarm, cherry picking, fence sitting Teresa

Come on Mary! You can not tell me you haven't seen a kid under 8 who you knew was
going to be gay! I've known farmers who had to get rid of animals 'cause the animal "liked the same sex" and couldn't "procreate." What about children born with both sex organs,who's to say what sex they were "meant" to be? Gotta give me some reasons here! hugs, Teresa (I wish we really could laugh our butts off--save me lots of money in lipo, which is gonna happen if I can't shrink somehow in my sleep!)


finding freedom
I like how you said unconditional love might actually mean no strings attached. God doesn't force us to believe in him. He is always there calling to us, it is by choice when we turn around and listen to the love calling us home. I can't imagine being separated from that light of love, hell to me is not being anywhere near my father. Not feeling the warmth of His presence. God doesn't force us to do anything thankfully. I'd like to be a robot for God but he did make us in his image, which means love.

A friend and I were talking today about the Bible. How Catholics have different books added to their Bible. Some bibles will omit verses and words, how do choose to do this? Isn't it all revelant and part of the love story written for us.

I find that how we view God is thru the lenses of childhood. How parents treated their children, and the effect of significant others in life. Even thru the lenses of adults that we just can't deal with a God who loves everyone unconditionally with sin intact, cause they just can't love themselves that way. I have to perform to meet God's standards, we are a performance based society. No we can't deliberately do wrong. Though God knows that screwups(aka the religous word is SIN) aren't going to stop on earth. No one is perfect no matter how hard you might not try to do what you don't want to do, we screw up in thought, word and deed. I started to list all these really simple sins we overlook, but decided not to.

You are a special person Teresa. You have the strength and courage to stand.
Good write and thoughts.


Lukewarm, cherry picking, fence sitting Teresa

Thanks for the compliment : )
Yes, I absolutely agree with that! I don't know if you've read my old stuff (now in the archives) but my dad is an atheist and he is about the most unconditional person I know.
There is nothing we could do to lose his love--that doesn't mean he hasn't always expected the best from us--but even on this small level, we all probably did well because we loved my parents and not because we were afraid of being disowned or unloved. I just always
knew God had to be atleast that loving. I don't see God as being anything at all like us--But I do think that our spirit is made in It's image. Thanks for commenting, hugs Teresa


Shebasgrl

I enjoyed reading your "stand". Thank you for sharing--you are so open and honest. That's why I find myself coming back here all the time!

You mention that your father is an atheist ad of his unconditional love--My best friend in the world since we were 15 is an atheist and I always joke that she is "a better Christian than me". She never judges, is slow to anger, is compassionate, and loving, a great person! I share my feelings, thoughts and beliefs w/ her and she is open to listening and questioning, but as far as she is concerned ther is still "no God". HOWEVER, and I am not patting myself on the back here, she is curious and has said that I am the only reason she "wonders", b/c I am the first and (sadly) only Christian she knows that hasn't condemmed her to "the lake of fire" or even tried to persuade her to believe.


Lukewarm, cherry picking, fence sitting Teresa

yes, I completely understand! I have one sister who preaches to my dad constantly.
She just doesn't seem to get it--He CAN not believe. I do wish he'd open up to the possibility of some higher force--something that might be a mystery to us, but I've noticed that he doesn't have near the problems with anxiety and depression as most people, so why change something that seems to be working fine?

Thanks for stopping by! hugs, Teresa


*MARS*

I can't say any religion is the right one, the only real thing is god and people seem to forget about him and just think they need to judge people and make rules about how we all need to act and if we don't measure up to their standards then we are not christians.

Keep believeing and asking questions, it is wonderful.


slick1fishing

hi Teresa, I love you - let me share my take as I feel I understand were you come from and were they come from .First off it is said God is love and if you cant share love then perhaps you only know about God and you lack knowing Him.This is very defining it shows the depth we have gone to see Him if we havent seen Him as love then we havent gone into the throne room were He lives.Many times the motives of the judgemental type folks or law type relationship is very good and based on love for you as they just dont have the full revelation of God as God does have two hands one is mercy and one is judgement if my kids only saw me as correcting and never loving and forgiveing they would have a very narrow veiw of me and it would effect all ares in their life.Just look at your example real close you being very grounded in love and mercy them being grounded in judgement how they can nearly quench you(momentarily) and cause you to reject who they claim to represent this shows the great need of lovers.I do believe that there is a balance of the two and because it is misbalanced we get extremes to compensate.The law is a teacher to show us our need to have the mercy and love of God because when we are in this love is when we can be like Him as in loving we can fulfill the law and that is the only way to do so.Another reason the judgemental are very difficult is because they have knowledge (usually to base their claim with) but they dont have Gods fullness.See when we try to point out anothers faults we become judge when we become judge God must then judge us and we are then in sin(most likely then He has to turn His eye from us.I cant say I have ever found any wrongs in the bible other than wrong interpretations(and they run wild) and it is very misleading especially to the narrow minded see they can see the wrath and anger and judgement of God yet they dont see the love it takes to trump that as mercy trumps judgement and love covers all sin.Let me show another aspect if I want to judge- then God must look upon you with that sin as well as me- if I come to you and give you love your sin is momentarily covered so God can look on you and me and not have to judge=do the math in this- two in Gods grace two in Gods judgement. I truly dont know how they can stand on so many scripture yet ignore the love based ones especially how the whole law has changed to a deeper more complete and more difficult standard to Love God and to love others as yourself.Teresa you will never even see the depth of kindness and love God has and yet you will see more clearly than most.If you must make a line in the sand then I make mine around you as that would also be Gods way. Blessings and remember you hold what they lack if you are to let go make sure its in their hands.


Lukewarm, cherry picking, fence sitting Teresa

Jason, I waited to answer you because I was in such a horrible mood yesterday. You are
such a sweetheart. I honestly don't know How I see God anymore. I'm confused about how
christians such as you (who obviously know about nonjudgemental love) can see the scriptures
as being literal and yet come out with a Love for it's leading character. I have cherry picked
the Bible clean for a God of Love, and was feeling okay about leaving the rest behind, but
I will be honest with you, if I have to digest the entire Bible and not spit most of it back out,
I am going to be vomitting up some bile inbetween my kind and loving words. The muslims
say the same thing--they try and say that the Q'ran gives them a Loving God. I guess I just
have a higher expectation of Love then most. I'm going to have to go back to my fence for
a while, or perhaps for good and do some serious thinking about what I really do FEEL.
hugs, Teresa


slick1fishing

Teresa do not change your veiw of the loving God one bit the revelation you have is real and is true in fact He has more love than even you or I could comprehend.He has revealed this love to you for a purpose and much of it is becuz of you have to have it to help see Him as He is.dont get me wrong I dont believe all the bible to be literal and i struggle with some of it but when placed in proper context wich one must have the eyes of love to help interpret it as well as His guidance to reveal if its literal or spiritual or allegorical or mystical or whatever some of it I think god purposely blinds me of as I am one who has to have understanding in so much so He blinds me to what I am not ready to accecpt or He is not ready to reveal.You know in your heart you have the right perception of love and its even deeper- we cant even fathom it- only in part.He is proud of you and i am proud to call you a friend. I do think our relationship with Him should be progressive or else it may go stale perhaps some of this you battle now is in preparation for God to cause you to seek out revelation in a new area. dont be discouraged and remember how it felt to be hurt by words as I feel this may have also been revealed to you again as someone has to clean behind the judgemental ones .I was also judged by the church at a young age and it hits hard to this day at that time crack addicts loved me more than church goers this to i find Gods hand in.I love you Teresa and you will find something new just for you if you seek and i do believe it will be something very powerful in your ability to re-present Him. oh I see becuase I am willing to look and God showed me Himself it came from relationship not reading but it so gave light to everything.I too was judgemental to an extent -my life kept me as more understanding as God has let me see things that many dont and he has caused me to look from multiple perspectives.


Lukewarm, cherry picking, fence sitting Teresa

Jason, I answered you down below along with Christiane because you both pretty much
are feeling the same vibes from me and know me wayyyyyyyyyyyy too well. I know
that you didn't get to where you are the easy way. That's a good thing, because you
have much more understanding of what you have to "do" to stay in the light. I am
just constantly questioning and sometimes I guess I just need to shut up and be quiet
for a while. Maybe I won't hear the answers but maybe I'll hear better questions, or
maybe I'll just decide the answers do not matter. (that labotomy I used to wish for is
sounding good about now--hahahahaha) But, I am seriously going to try and get my
mind off of this stuff and just pay attention to life --the here and the now!
hugs sweetie, Teresa


Christiane

You know Theresa, I have lots of memories of myself as a small child. One of the things I learned the hard way is about being "right." I'm glad I remember those early lessons because it makes life more manageable. I'll just never forget a handful of times that I was absolutely right. I mean I knew I had said or did what I remembered doing. Then in the middle of my carrying on adamantly about this or that, I suddenly had a clear memory and realized I was totally and absolutely wrong! I wasn't intending to lie. It's just that this brain is human and imperfect.

Then, I learned that it is possible to discern what is true or not over time. Give things time, strive to understand, question even yourself. And I learned through many many experiences that God is there for me. He really is. I too went through a judgemental period but it passed. It wasn't really about being a Christian. I was a Christian, but it was more about emotional growth that I did not have. It was a woundedness. What is needed is healing. God provided that for me. There are times that I absolutely know that God responded to my silent prayer, sometimes instantaneously. And going through some of the most painful and difficult things--things that you might think you would die from--God got me through in amazing ways. These experiences can't be forgotten. It's like someone might say to you, "I'm not sure your husband really exists. I mean, how do you know?" What would you say? Well, I just talked to him this morning and he helped me with a problem I had. And then there's the time ..." You could carry on for hours, couldn't you? Well, it's the same way for me.

I've had fun pondering some of the things in the Bible that bother me. Years ago I was part of a women's bible study group. We had a really hard time with that place in the Old Testament where women are considered unclean when they have their periods and they are required to go out of the camp during that time of the month. We made jokes about it being Eve's fault for eating the apple, and well, I just don't remember all of the jokes. Finally, it dawned on me. There were these women wandering in the desert, sweaty, stinky, working like crazy, and at the mercy of their husbands who probably were bored to death and wanted sex all the time. And then God saw that they needed his help and he said to the men, "if you touch your wife when she has her period, you will get cooties. Not just any kind of cootie but the worst kind. Now you must send her out of the camp during that time so no one gets cooties. She'll come back when the cooties are gone." And he said to the women, "When you get your period, you must go out of the camp to the nearest spa. You must go where there is a stream so you can wash yourself. Your man must NOT follow you. This is your time. Have a break once a month." It became our private joke. "Hey, Martha! Do you have your period yet! C'mon, let's go to the spa!" Of course it also had a lot to do with bacteria and cleanliness because of the lack of running water. But I think what we came up with is probably also truly part of the reasoning! Sometime I'll share some of my other eye-opening revelations about simple things like that.

My suggestion is to take a little break from the reading and trying to figure things out. Get to know the loving God you know is there. Take a break in nature. At home, light a candle and put meditative music on and ask him questions. Ask him the big ones, the ones that are really getting to you. Be still. Be silent. And wait. I guarantee you that you will not be disappointed. You will have some surprises! Love you!


Lukewarm, cherry picking, fence sitting Teresa

I know this is true. I know I need to just be silent and to stop trying so hard to
understand, but I feel a sense of urgency because so many people are so far off
from worshipping a loving God. I think we as humans have a tendency to be about as charitable as we believe God is. That's a scarey thought when you start seeing all these religious people (both Christian and Muslim) who have a God with a politcal preference. I am a truth seeker--if I try and be anything else I am being dishonest tomyself. I see points that are legitimate on all sides, and I see things that I believe are just plain foolish, wishful, childlike thinking. I hate it when someone says well I've divorced my third husband, but I know it's God's will and I just have to accept it. "noooooooooo,
it's time to get therapy and do something about yourself!" ya know?
But, I will take your advice and chill out. One thing I do know though, I may never be 100% anything. I just can't ever totally believe something that not only can't be proven,but something that people can be so completely conflicted over. I will try and and shut up and do some listening for a while. Love ya, Teresa


Christiane

Nothing wrong with continuing to strive toward understanding. But I was sensing a stress level with fire-alarm bells ringing! So I reached for the fire extinguisher. But please let the good "seeker" flame keep burning. You say, "I think we as humans have a tendency to be about as charitable as we believe God is." That is so true and history does keep repeating itself, which is also scary. The important part for each of us is to learn where we fit into the whole picture. Where is it that we can have the greatest impact on our sphere of influence. The internet has widened our little spheres so we actually can have an even greater impact that previously. Stay on the path, but hear the birds singing!


Easy Rog ;)

No HTML. I had a pic of an Angel oh well. Just kidding.

Let's see. You can join my camp if the extremists won't have you. Guess not; we do have a difference on the kindness of God. I have a little problem with a personal God. I do believe that the universe is an intelligent creation and has a lot of wonderful things in it. People keep destroying those things though. I keep hoping some tribe somewhere with about 30 members has the "TRUTH" just so I can get a laugh watching all those that are convinced.

I do so respect your open mind and the basis of love that drives your thinking. The nonjudgmental attitude too. Wish you would join my camp.

This non judging thing will get you hell fire though :) :) :) Ask any hater he'll tell you. Here's another concept I'd like to see from these people that like to point at the supposed sins of others. Christ like behavior.

Nobody's perfect but I think these folks could do a little better than picking on anybody who doesn't see it their way. The religious teachings as I see them are mostly about love, forgiveness and the like. Great ideals. The reality from the Christian and Muslim communities is different. So what is the religion, the reality or the ideal? I see the treatment of women and men for that matter in both these communities and it doesn't seem based on love. I don't know enough about some of the other major religions to have an opinion.

Excellent post.
Easy Rog :)


Lukewarm, cherry picking, fence sitting Teresa

The Buddhist are about the only ones I see who don't feel that their soul's survival is dependantupon being able to spot the true believer from the false one. I'm thinking that maybe I should have studied this religion a little further!

Thanks Roger, there are good Christians that do what they teach.(I've met a few here on myspace in fact) Just not enough of them as far as I have seen. hugs, Teresa


superb shan dee

I was thinking today about Jesus calling his disciples. He never told them or questioned them about the things they did wrong in the beginning. He just asked them to follow him, no performance on their part, just to walk with him. Come be fishers of men, nothing else said. No you are going to betray me, or you are going to desert me when I die on the cross. He knew all things and judged them not, he loved them despite their screw-ups. Unconditional love is the key. So much judgement on the part of christians. You write great blogs and are a great person!!! I just wanted to add my dual personality on this blog to give you more kudos.


Lukewarm, cherry picking, fence sitting Teresa

Thanks Shannon, that means a lot to me! ~hugs!


Rhonda Loves NOLA

Thank you for posting this, as I was wondering. Just kidding...you've never made a secret of what you believe, and you shouldn't have to keep defending it. Faith is intuitive, and not something LEARNED. We may each travel different paths to get closer to the God we are intuitively drawn to, but if the paths lead to the same destination, who the hell am I to say my path is better, somehow, than yours is? Well, having said that, I'll leave the floor to others who, I am sure, will have a lot to say. Love ya ~ Rhonda


Lukewarm, cherry picking, fence sitting Teresa

Thanks Rhonda, It's a long story, but I think you have an idea of what has been going on. Just wanted to be on record! Hugs, Teresa


Mary Gilbert

No, I really do believe all SEX is a SIN, because it's of the flesh and well animals are as the bible says dumb beasts. And yes many have been born unequal to perfect I've seen 2 headed babies and children born with many diseases. But you do know this planet has some horrible chemicals for pregnant women to breathe. Shit happens, you either live with it or die. What about the children who lose their parents, would a loving God be so cruel to allow the suffering in places like Darfur? I also believe GOD is and will always be beyond any human comprehension because of the scope of the universe he formed; even the most highly skilled scientist cannot fathom this eternity and God's forever. There is no last number.

I do wonder though, because if sex were NOT a sin, likely it would be less fun...:-)and likely there would be just a few people on the world... we are all sinners. Be fruitful and multiply would contradict that or would it! It sure took a lot of sex to get these billions of people right? But by all means fornication is sin, whether it's with a man or a woman it's still fornication. We are all God's children and maybe he uses reverse psychology on us from time to time. I do know that in my own life that my suffering as a child only made me strong enough to deal with my losses as an adult. It's a fine line to walk and to come to understanding - a very long road. God, although an infinite incomprehensible is also as real as every miracle and is somewhere I am sure in every heart. I think it's just important to look inside. Religion should be everyones personal quest for God, not everyone telling you that you should believe the way they do. I know that my God is kind, loving and forgiving and most of all that he loves me and all of his children.


Christiane

Are you really saying all sex is sin? Or is this just tongue in cheek? Because the Bible doesn't say sex is sin anywhere. After all, the Bible says that Rebecca "went in the tent." No ceremony. She was Isaac's wife because they said so. I always thought that was interesting. And lots of things are fun that are not considered sinful! Enjoy life. It's a sin not to... : )


Lukewarm, cherry picking, fence sitting Teresa

" I also believe GOD is and will always be beyond any human comprehension because of the scope of the universe he formed; even the most highly skilled scientist cannot fathom this eternity and God's forever. There is no last number.."


Well said! I totally agree! We can't even begin to fathom God's mind, maybe we should
all just settle on figuring out our own minds! hugs to you



[remove]>..>..>..> ..>

Listing 51-56 of 56

1  2  of 2

< Previous

..>..> ..> ..>

	Running Amuck is Queen Snowflake	..>..> ..> ..> If you are going to hell because of your thoughts you will be amongst friends. I'm glad that you asked me to become one of yours. Extremism on either side of the spectrum makes me crazy. I believed in God before I read the bible for myself. I think that the burden of disproving God exists is greater than proving God doesn't. I too would rather err on the side of the possiblity that there is eternal life in the spirit when I die rather than the alternative. Posted by Running Amuck is Queen Snowflake on January 29, 2007 - Monday at 11:15 AM [Remove] [Reply to this]

..>..> ..> ..>

	Lukewarm, cherry picking, fence sitting Teresa	..>..> ..> ..> I personally felt my way to God--and believe me I wasn't trying! I can't argue the intuitive feeling of God, but the scipture that man is basing God's nature on, is so different from the God I know--I can't help but defend this religious assassination! Thanks for commenting and glad to have you aboard. ~Teresa Posted by Lukewarm, cherry picking, fence sitting Teresa on January 29, 2007 - Monday at 12:49 PM [Remove] [Reply to this]

..>..> ..> ..>

	Mick, or Michael, Please Not Mike	..>..> ..> ..> This is my simple religion. There is no need for temples; no need for complicated philosophy. Our own brain, our own heart is our temple; the philosophy is kindness. -- Dalai Lama Posted by Mick, or Michael, Please Not Mike on January 29, 2007 - Monday at 12:35 PM [Remove] [Reply to this]