Pro-life cross display on university campus vandalized, desecrated
Last week, on Holy Thursday, students on the campus of Clarion University, a secular college located in Clarion, PA, awakened to a vile scene. Click all photos to enlarge…
While Clarion Students for Life have grown accustomed over the years to having their annual Cemetery of the Innocents cross display vandalized, this time the crime was taken to a “whole new level,” as Students for Life of America described in a statement.
Vandals inverted crosses that had been placed in remembrance of babies killed by abortion, thereby creating a well-known satanic symbol. In addition, the vandals splattered fake blood on other crosses, also using the blood to write, “Pro-Choice!” and to make baby’s feet…
CSFL filed a campus police report as well as a complaint with the head of student organizations.
The Clarion Call student newspaper has yet to report the crime, although to be fair it appears not to have posted anything since April 21. Its Facebook page, however, has been updated and does not list the crime. Nor does its Twitter feed, although it does link to an April 20 letter to the editor protesting CSFL’s sponsorship of abortion survivor Rebecca Kiessling to speak on April 18.
[HT: Jim S., Students for Life of America; photos via Rebecca Kiessling on Facebook]
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
Well, in a strange way, this vandalism shows that the pro-choice side is finally validating what we’ve been saying all along: abortion is murder. From a spiritual view, they are also validating what a lot of religious people already acknowledge: abortion is demonic.
The baby-sized foot marks are irrefutable: even pro-choicers know that abortion kills a human child. See, BO, we are finding common ground after all.
Well, let us make the best of the crosses. Perhaps they were just really big fans of St. Peter! As for the other stuff, well, its just typical.
The pro-aborts would like nothing more than for us to hate them. I will pray for them.
Our Father, who art in heaven,
hallowed be thy name.
Thy Kingdom come,
thy will be done,
on earth as it is in heaven
Give us this day our daily bread.
And forgive us our trespasses,
as we forgive those who trespass against us.
And lead us not into temptation,
but deliver us from evil.
For thine is the kingdom,
the power and the glory,
for ever and ever.
Amen.
“Pro-choice” written in blood. Seems the other side gave up lying for Lent.
Yes I am sure that through your anti-choice view of the world you see the foot prints as a total admission that a fetus is a baby… Looking at the same pictures through my Pro-choice view I see it as a commentary that this vandalism was done by a baby to show you that even babies do not agree with your point of view.
I find this whole display very bias and offensively Christian. I notice that those are all Christian grave markers… no six sided stars or crescents atop those grave markers like you would see in ALL of our military memorial grave sites. So my question is this, are you just memorializing fetuses of Christian parents only or are you saying no matter what anyone else believes we will all be judged by your Christian god in the end?
This ridiculous display was put up for one reason only, to provoke a response from the local community… well you got it.
At least they finally admit abortion kills children. Granted, celebrating it is two hundred steps backward to the one step forwards, but honesty is a refreshing change.
The academy- a place of tolerance and respect for other views.
“are you saying no matter what anyone else believes we will all be judged by your Christian god in the end?”
Christians have been saying this for 2000 years, Biggz. Everyone will be judged by Jesus Christ. Why is it so controversial to believe that someone who believes that Jesus is the God of the universe would also believe that there are no other gods and that he is the god of all people regardless if they believe in him or not? This is a premise that even the most hardened atheist would find no fault with. I’m not sure what your question is supposed to prove…
”Everyone will be judged by Jesus Christ”
With all due respect, Bobby, Jews and other non-Christians do not believe that.
Biggz, I for one am elated that you are offended.
I presume, largely because your every comment is laughable, you are trying to be clever by suggesting that even the babies do not agree with the display.
Babies, or if you prefer Latin, fetus, can only agree or disagree with something is they are sentient, a position your friends continue to fail to refute. And of course only living babies can agree with anything, those that prefer death have no horse in the race. But taking this argument to its logical conclusion, you might express your infantile agreement with this act by taking a long walk off a short pier.
Your equating a symbolic graveyard with a US military one makes no sense, babies have no religion, nor do they serve; military graveyards are not the sine qua non. And, despite multiculturalism’s advances, the overwhelming number of Americans are at least nominally Christian. I am sure that next year’s display can include other religious imagery, but will it really support the abortion side to make it clear that ALL religions proclaim that killing the innocent is immoral?
Finally, vandalism is no response, it is a reaction; emotional, violent, and devoid of reason, the perfect expression of those who support abortion. Implying that it is representative of the community is an ignorant slander as well.
I understand, CC. But I’m not trying to argue that. Biggz seemed incredulous that Christians believe taht everyone will be judged by Jesus Christ. I am not the least bit offended that an atheist believes that no one will be judged by Jesus, or when the Muslim says that we will be judged by Allah or when Jews say we will be judged by YHWH and not Jesus or whatever. That is what they believe, which is fine. I don’t understand why it is problematic to think that people who believe something actually believe that what they believe is true.
My point is that this is a christian movement and has been for 40 years. The “Secular Pro-Life” group of your movement has only been around for 2 years.
That you people only see the world through your Christian view point and do not care even a bit about what anyone else thinks or believe. Only you know what is right and the rest of us are all just drowning in a sea of wrong… It is one thing to hold these beliefs dear to your own heart but to force them on everyone else in the world is over stepping just a bit don’t you think? I swear I would have no problem with Christianity AT ALL if you would keep it to yourself and practice/worship the god you choose.
Can none of you see the unmitigated arrogance of your point of view?
God isn’t Christian, only humans are called Christian. God is God. Whether you self-identify as Buddhist, pagan, Jewish, Muslim, or atheist: there is only one God. The universe was not created by accident, atheists, or committee. Lol!
I see it as a commentary that this vandalism was done by a baby to show you that even babies do not agree with your point of view.
Uh, Biggz, even you must realize that babies don’t wander out in the dark of night with saucers of paint so they can vandalize displays. An older human did it, though we don’t know the age. Since ultrasound has shown (on at least two occaisions that I know of) babies try to get away from the abortionists’ tools, they choose life, not death.
Biggz says: says: April 26, 2011 at 4:58 pm
“This ridiculous display was put up for one reason only, to provoke a response from the local community… well you got it.”
=======================================================================
Biggotzz,
You probably blame the Jews for anti-semitism.
I bet you blame women who have been raped for ‘askin for it’ by provoking the rapist with their inappropriate fashion choices.
Bigots are predictable, but just because they are offended by the truth is no reason to be censored.
I find this whole display very bias and offensively Christian. I notice that those are all Christian grave markers… no six sided stars or crescents atop those grave markers like you would see in ALL of our military memorial grave sites.
Does a star or crescent signify death? A cross does.
Kevin – your statement “babies have no religion” just shows how much you don’t know about any other religion other than yours. Any baby born to a Jewish mother is a Jew in the eyes of Judaism regardless of what the father believes.
One of the things that bothers me about American Christianity is its woeful lack of knowledge of other faiths before it proclaims to be the correct one.
I don’t understand why it is problematic to think that people who believe something actually believe that what they believe is true.
Bobby, Personally, I see no problem here. Well said.
Biggz says: April 26, 2011 at 5:50 pm
“Can none of you see the unmitigated arrogance of your point of view? ”
==================================================================
Biggotz,
I suppose in your Alice in Wonderland fantasy world, only people who believe in GOD can be ‘arrogant’.
A person can be ‘right’ and still be arrogant, but that does not make them any less right.
The one to be pitied is the one who is both arrogant and wrong.
I have to confess I do find it difficult to pity you, but I am doing the best that I can.
Janet – Um yes. A Jewish grave site would be marked by a Star of David and a Muslim grave site would be marked by a crescent moon… You are aware that there are other religions in this world who do not worship or pay homage to your god right?
Ken – “A person can be ‘right’ and still be arrogant, but that does not make them any less right.”
Thank you for making my point… Mr. Right lol
One of the things that bothers me about American Christianity is its woeful lack of knowledge of other faiths before it proclaims to be the correct one.
Biggz,
You must be referring to American Christians, not Christianity. I am personally lacking in knowledge in many areas of my life but that doesn’t disallow me from having opinions on what I know and don’t know to be true.
Janet – Um yes. A Jewish grave site would be marked by a Star of David and a Muslim grave site would be marked by a crescent moon… You are aware that there are other religions in this world who do not worship or pay homage to your god right?
Maybe I should rephrase my question. Does a crescent moon or a star alone signify death in the way a cross does? We often see crosses along side the road where a traffic accident or tragedy has struck. I don’t think anyone has ever objected because “a cross is specifically Christian”.
If one cross = 10 of the 3,315 pre-natal humans who are killed each day in America, then someone(s) took the time to pull 331 crosses out of the ground and stick them back in upside down.
These agents of tolerance must have told Deputy Barney Fife there was a blue light special at the local doughnut shop.
Biggz says: April 26, 2011 at 6:06 pm
“Thank you for making my point… Mr. Right lol”
====================================================================
Bigotzz,
Thank you for making my point about how difficult it is to pity one as arrongant and as willfully ignorant as you.
sigh. please. please, please. when you are waving your genius flag, check to see that it doesn’t have holes.
some muslim graves have crescents. classically, they have pomegranates. peel one open and see why.
and, likewise, some classic greek graves have pomegranates. same reasoning.
the pomegranate graves are mostly in what is now turkey.
LittleZ,
You’re right. The babies were making a statement. These are the unlucky ones who were not torn apart in utero and were so pissed off that they just had to make a statement.
You are completely unhinged.
Janet – As I have been saying, in Israel if your teen age child were killed in a car accident you would find posts with the Star of David surrounded by flowers on the side of the highway. Why would a Jewish family memorialize the death of their child with the symbol of a man who they believe was just another flash in the pan profit who had nothing to do with god?
Gerald – No I am saying that this was done by someone who is a parent of a baby who does not agree with you. The foot prints are there to let you know that this statement was made by someone who loves children not fetuses.
Ari – Thank you, the pomegranate was a symbol of death long before Christ was even born. It comes from Greek Mythology.
Wow, Biggz, you aren’t aware that the Muslims, Jews, and Christians all worship exactly the same entity, the God of Abraham? Maybe YOU need to learn a bit more about religion.
A silent man may be suspected of ignorance. A fool opens his mouth and removes all doubt.
Shhh, don’t tell Biggz that Jesus, Mary, and John the Baptist all have places of honor in the Quran. It’ll make his littlez brain hurt, ;>) !
The palm tree was a Jewish symbol long before the star of David was designed.
Ninek – I know all about it. Are you not aware that there have been hundreds of gods worshipped by humans on this planet over our history. Gods that were worshipped and loved as much as you love yours. Gods that have been disproven with science and are no longer thought of as gods but mythology. Time marches on!
LittleZ,
In response to Jesus being disproved over time:
http://gerardnadal.com/2011/04/24/is-it-true/
Biggz,
You are a sinner, like the rest of us.
In need of a Savior.
If you ever get tired of your sin, this world or your life without God,
Jesus is just a prayer away.
He came that you might have Life, and have it more abundantly.
Trust me, you don’t want to die in your sin.
Eternity is a long, long time. Actually, it’s the end of time.
Biggz, as far as the pro-life movement being Christian or religious is concerned, there have been secular people and atheists in it almost from the beginning, not just the last two years. Dr. Bernard Nathanson, who was an abortionist, and then became pro-life, was an atheist who worked in the pro-life movement for many years before he became a Christian. There have been others as well – atheist columnist Nat Hentoff, for example. (I have no idea what he would want put on babies’ graves).
As for the crosses, you may have a point that it would be worthwhile to acknowledge that not all these babies would have come from Christian families. Placing some crescents or stars of David would not hurt. But since the babies were “unwanted,” and basically just cut up and thrown away, there is no way of knowing this. You might also say that since the fetus is no longer “part of the woman’s body” and she no longer “owns” it, then the mother has lost any say-so over what becomes of her child’s remains.
It might be possible, but I would hate to do so, and won’t do so, because I know that so many mothers regret their abortions and many must grieve over what happened to their children’s bodies.
But since I already know what you think unborn babies are, I also think you don’t care and are just saying this to attack Christians, because you have no valid arguments to use.
And as for the rest, you are just raving — as usual.
There is no God but Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. There is no salvation except through Jesus Christ. That is, quite frankly, fact.
Lori, well said!!
I find it sad that a human being would type onto his computer outrage that a cross represented dead babies and that dismembering them and throwing them in the trash is not outrageous at all. I am happy to be Christian, but I’d be happy to see all the babies brought up in any kind of religion rather than chopped up and thrown away.
Biggz just wants to poke at people because he’s not happy. There isn’t enough death to suit him. Not enough death! He shakes his little fist at the sky. Don’t worry, little guy, we die eventually. No matter how much moisturizer I use or antioxidants I consume, I won’t be able to live forever. I’m just so sorry for you that we all aren’t dying quickly enough to satisfy your little bloodlust.
The culture of death’s lust for death cannot be sated.
Biggz says “I would have no problem with Christianity AT ALL if you would keep it to yourself and practice/worship the god you choose.”
Biggz, this statement proves you know nothing about Christianity. As Christians, we are obligated to share the gospel. Indeed, it is our primary obligation in this world. One can’t “practice” Christianity without evangelism.
We are specifically instructed NOT to “keep it to ourselves.”
The reason we say anything at all is not because we get off on telling people that they’re wrong. We spread the gospel because we truly care about the eternal soul of our fellow humans. If instead we “kept it to ourselves” we would be quietly complicit in the damnation of others. What you ask us to do is beyond simply wrongheaded, it is actually evil. What kind of people would we be if we knew the truth about salvation, but chose to remain silent?
You are hilarious Gerard, thanks for the laughs! “So, yes, I have all the evidence I need.” – let me tell you about this other character. If you lose a tooth and place it under your pillow…..
“That is, quite frankly, fact.” – no, it’s quite frankly just your belief.
“The culture of death’s lust for death cannot be sated.” – ad hominem propaganda claptrap. As is “I’m just so sorry for you that we all aren’t dying quickly enough to satisfy your little bloodlust’ – mind you, it could be said that your reason, logic, intellect and grip on reality have suffered somewhat :-)
Your version of christianity sounds like one of the old pyramid schemes lauren. As long as you can keep getting enough people to buy into it, it’s self-perpetuating.
Great post lauren.
Reality, how exactly is it a pyramid scheme? The people who enter last get the same benefit as the people who’ve been working at it for 70 years. A pyramid scheme makes the people at the top rich on the backs of the people at the bottom. If anything, Christianity is the inverse of such a system.
Also, it’s not “my version”. Have you ever actually read the book of Acts? Have you ever actually read the Gospels?
Thanks, Praxedes.
I’m always amazed by people who come in here to berate us for not understanding X religion and then completely misrepresent Christianity in the next breath.
“Biggz, this statement proves you know nothing about Christianity. As Christians, we are obligated to share the gospel. Indeed, it is our primary obligation in this world. One can’t “practice” Christianity without evangelism.”
Evangelism is not a universally required or even accepted practice in Christianity. Some denominations explicitly reject proselytization and view faith as something that must be arrived at as a result of a search born of personal initiative, rather than something that can be “shared” from believers to non-believers.
“view faith as something that must be arrived at as a result of a search born of personal initiative, rather than something that can be “shared” from believers to non-believers.”
“Go, therefore, and make disciples of all the nations. Baptize them in the
name of the Father and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Teach them to carry out
everything I have commanded you. And know that I am with you always, until the
end of the world” (Matthew 28:19-20).”
-Jesus
Pray tell, Joan, how this personal initiative will arrive at a fruitful understanding of Christ without the help of Christians?
Joan – just because a particular branch of Christianity practices poorly does not mean that the Teaching should not be taught. Christianity was to be brought to the ends of the earth, as told explicitly by Jesus. We are to be salt of the earth, leaven in bread and a light to the world. We are not to hide our light under a bushel basket, but put it high in the house for all to see. All of His disciples were blessed and sent out – to what – have pancakes? Nope – to share the Good News. He came to proclaim that the Kingdom was at hand and that all need to repent and turn back to God.
His teaching was not for just some – but for all. And with free-will, everyone has the right to accept the graces and teaching given or not. Did He give marching orders? You bet. And for very good reason.
Peace to all, everyone!
Go ask the people who belong to such denominations or churches. I’m just pointing out that the entirety of Christianity can’t fit neatly into the little box you’re trying to put it in.
” the entirety of Christianity can’t fit neatly into the little box you’re trying to put it in.”
I’d like to see a single example of ANY Christian church that doesn’t have missionaries. I’ve been a member of several liberal denominations, yet even they did mission work. The only “church” I know of that doesn’t specifically evangelize is the Unitarian Church. Of course, they DO evangelize their own warped perspective, they just don’t spread the Gospel of Christ.
Nope – Joan you just want to put everything neatly into the box of abortion. Sorry – sin and evil are not easily contained in a box. It will always try to get out, to devour more souls.Again – just because a denomination teaches, preaches and practices poorly does not mean that they are to be held up for a fine example to emulate. Poorly taught Christians are still poorly taught Christians. And those who are Christians in name only are still in name only.
Should that mean that we should dumb-down the standards to fit their poor example? Not a chance. Still pray for them, still help them, still want the best for them (and all).
There is much required of a true Christian, and thankfully, the God-given grace to match that high standard.
Lauren – exactly. Thanks.
joan, what was the homily about during Mass on Easter Sunday?
I never knew that a priest’s homily is not “even an accepted practice in Christianity.”
WE are Christ’s hands here on earth. That is why we all spend so much time trying every thing we can to reach your heart.
I’ve read a couple of versions of the bible, both old testament and new, from front to back lauren. It’s…interesting. But how many more versions do I need to read to gain ‘god’s true word’? Which interpretation? Or should I read the koran as the ‘true word’? Someone else’s holy book?
Many years ago I allowed a well dressed young couple into my home. The questions they asked and the statements they made really seemed to fit the religious context. Then they pulled out their propaganda for what was basically a pyramid scheme. Their version of ‘enlightenment’ was money and the life freedoms it could deliver. I smiled, said ‘no thanks’ and ushered them politely out of my home. Just like I would anyone trying to ‘sell’ me non-factual schemes predicated on gullible self-seeking. I prefer to take responsibility for myself.
“sin and evil are not easily contained in a box” – ‘sin’ is a social more of the times. ‘evil’ does not exist.
“I’d like to see a single example of ANY Christian church that doesn’t have missionaries. I’ve been a member of several liberal denominations, yet even they did mission work. The only “church” I know of that doesn’t specifically evangelize is the Unitarian Church. Of course, they DO evangelize their own warped perspective, they just don’t spread the Gospel of Christ.”
It is my understanding that the mainline Episcopal Church also rejects evangelism and does not engage in mission work either.
“Should that mean that we should dumb-down the standards to fit their poor example? Not a chance. Still pray for them, still help them, still want the best for them (and all).”
No one is asking you to “dumb down” your standards for anything, but I think a bare minimum degree of respect for churches (and by extension the members of such churches) that don’t share your particular doctrinal interpretations of the Bible is certainly in order. There wouldn’t be much point in having different branches of Christianity to begin with if there was no disagreement on matters of doctrine.
I personally think the renovated display is a more accurate portrayal of abortion and those who support it.
Well, it seems that upside down crosses bring out the satanic troll circus.
Reality,
No need on the tooth fairy. I realize that you don’t believe in anything bigger than what you see in the mirror. From your little baby-killing rants, I’d say that visage is not only terribly small, but terribly impoverished. Rant on.
Joan, I’m surprised at your assertion that evangelization is not central to Christianity. Even your diabolical father quotes scripture, so you need to check in with Wormwood about Jesus’ charge to His Apostles to go and baptize all nations in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Or maybe you can just slum with Reality, who only believes in her ugly little visage as that which is true.
The cross is probably the most easily recognizable symbol for a grave or of death that there is, at least in the United States. A field of hundreds of crosses makes a point and makes it clearly, far greater than a field of any other symbol would.
Turning the crosses upside down and pouring fake blood on them is really nothing but a vicious act of pure hatred. In a sane world, it would be included along with all of the other crimes that are considered ”hate crimes”. Normally our pro-life cross displays get vandalized by having some of the crosses knocked over, broken, or stolen. But this had a lot of thought put to it. This was calculated in such a way to be as offensive as possible. It is the equivalent of putting a noose around the neck of a statue of Martin Luther King Jr, which, if it happened, would be national news. Why isn’t this national news?
Your usual string of snide little phrases substituting for any sort of rational response I see Gerard. I’m sure your jesus thinks highly of your attitude towards those who don’t genuflect at your ‘font of all knowledge’ feet.
“the satanic troll circus” – no god, no satan. Troll, if you wish. Circus, well at least they’re entertaining.
“I realize that you don’t believe in anything bigger than what you see in the mirror.” – because there isn’t anything bigger than the evolution of nature of which I am a part. No goblins, no fairies.
“From your little baby-killing rants,” – my my, aren’t we toey today!
“I’d say that visage is not only terribly small, but terribly impoverished.” – why, because I don’t feed at the trough of god’s self-appointed dispenser of all knowledge, truth and wisdom? Rant on.
“Or maybe you can just slum with Reality, who only believes in her ugly little visage as that which is true.” – just because I haven’t fallen prey to the delusion that you have doesn’t mean I haven’t a greater truth behind me. Oh, and you are in the habit of making assumptions, aren’t you.
Reality,
God totally respects your desire not to become a part of His family.
He will allow you to live according to your own understanding and reasonings.
You don’t have to appreciate the sacrifice Jesus made on your behalf to reconcile you to the Father.
You can dismiss the message of the cross, of self-sacrifice, and go on and continue to live for yourself.
Sadly, you will be heart-broken and filled with grief, sorrow and regret when you find out who you will be spending eternity with.
Unless you repent, you will be lost for all eternity.
I hate to say it Reality but you’ve bought a pack of lies.
You’re extremely deluded.
The god of this world has deceived you.
Biggz: “Yes I am sure that through your anti-choice view of the world you see the foot prints as a total admission that a fetus is a baby… Looking at the same pictures through my Pro-choice view I see it as a commentary that this vandalism was done by a baby to show you that even babies do not agree with your point of view.”
May I refer you to Occam’s Razor…
You started out ok Ed, even though you made a string of false assumptions, but then you really fell down with the ‘you’ll regret it’ bit.
The point is Ed, that I haven’t ‘bought’ anything. Apparently you have.
You bet I have, I’m sold out.
In fact, I’ve been bought, by the Blood of the Lamb.
Not only did Jesus shed His Blood for me, but every time I screw up, He keeps forgiving me, blessing me with His Mercy and Grace and Love…
But you don’t know Him, and you can’t see Him, and it’s too bad.
You’ve read this before in 2 Cor.: “But even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing, 4 whose minds the god of this age has blinded, who do not believe, lest the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine on them.”
Wow, this is all about a non-issue as far as I’m concerned. Everyone is talking about religion. Yes Christianity says any murder is wrong. Yes a fetus is viewed as a baby in christianity. Its the way they are taught. But I too see it as murder. I’m not christian. I believe in only this life. So, for a life to be taken away before it can start is murder in my eyes. And before someone posts that a fetus is not alive, it has been proven by science a fetus’s heart beats jsut a few weeks after inception. If it’s heart is beating, is it’s brain not functioning? What then is the defenition of life? For that matter, you can be declared brain dead and still be alive! So, the biggest question is, what is the defenition of life? Yeah, there is some serious bigotry, on both sides here. But its about time y’all stop the fighting and wake up to the FACTS; It is not illegal to post the crosses, or it would have been stopped. It IS illegal to vandalize property. if they wanted to say something against this group, it should have been done a differnet way.
one more thing:
Reality said “‘evil’ does not exist.” So then, does good not exist? If someone were in the middle of a shooting, and you stopped it, would you not have performed a good act? You cannot have good without evil.
Just my point of view. Diss me if you want, say its immature, but its still MY view.
and this over in Ep 4: “17 This I say, therefore, and testify in the Lord, that you should no longer walk as the rest of the Gentiles walk, in the futility of their mind, 18 having their understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God, because of the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart;”
“t is my understanding that the mainline Episcopal Church also rejects evangelism and does not engage in mission work either.”
And you would be wrong. http://www.episcopalchurch.org/109460_ENG_HTM.htm
I’ve got to go to bed Reality, but you should always remember, that even though right now you are alienated from the Life of God, He is always only a prayer away.
His promise is that if you will draw near to Him, He will draw near to you.
If you seek Him you will find Him when you have searched for Him with all your heart.
You can know Him if you want to.
But He will respect your decision to live and die without Him.
This is what you’ll have to look forward to.
Hello Lost One, are you still lost or is your moniker out of date?
“for a life to be taken away before it can start is”….um, um, a contradiction of terms?
“What then is the defenition (sic) of life?” – depends who you ask.
Good and bad exist Lost One. What’s good and what’s bad vary according to the times and culture. The point at which ‘bad’ can be classified as ‘evil’ is even more variable. No definitive ‘evil’ exists. Yes, stopping a shooting is generally known as a ‘good’ thing because it prevented something ‘bad’ happening. But as to whether the intended shooting could be construed as ‘evil’ would depend on a number of factors and also be influenced by opinion as regards it’s intention.
Of course you can have good without evil!
I shan’t ‘diss’ your view unless you insist that everyone else should live by it.
I think you’ve been watching too much South Park Ed.
Reality: Certainly evil exists. It’s privation of good. Where a due good is absent, that’s evil.
Sounds simple, but it’s not a naive simplicity. The notion dates to Aristotle and hasn’t really lost currency.
What, so now we need to argue what constitutes a full and definitive privation of good? How long is a piece of string?
The sad fact is Reality, that you are on your way to Hell and you don’t even know it.
Not because you are a bad person by the world’s standards. You’re probably a better person than me.
But because you’ve rejected God’s sacrifice for your sins.
My prayer is that the Lord Jesus Christ will apprehend you, save you and deliver you from destruction.
The spiritual realm, God, angels, demons, Heaven, Hell, is all very real.
its always the same. Atheists and Christians going head to head in these things. seriously, if we identify with Christ then let us do like Jesus did when He faced accusation, say nothing. Don’t pull the Hell card…I’m pretty sure you’re not the first Christian they have come across that has pulled it. We have to embody love and acceptance of the person…not looking through the eyes of biggotry, racism, or stereotyping. This is for all of us that identify with Christ and for those that do not to show that not all of us are a bunch of judgemental people. We do have convictions yes and those convictions are embodied in the life of the God-man Jesus, but those convictions and standards are not to be shoved in the face of people around us. We are to live them out in such a way that people would want what we have.
Okay, people complain about the bloody fetus pictures displayed by pro lifers as being to graphic, upsetting, etc.
How about the bloody crosses an little red baby feet here with pro choice written by them? Wouldn’t that bother the same people for the same reason? I mean, um, I don’t get how that is going to make folks more pro choice.
Lost One,
According to my Taber’s Cyclopedic Medical Dictionary:
Life: State of being alive; quality manifested by metabolism, growth, reproduction, and adaptation to invironment; state in which the organs… are capable of performing all or any of their functions… Biologically, the life of a system begins at the moment of conception and ends at death…
April 27, 2011 at 6:29 am
Ed says:
“The spiritual realm, God, angels, demons, Heaven, Hell, is all very real.”
Yes, Ed, and everyone who has a testimony of that realm (Don Piper, Bishop Earthquake Kelley, Dean Braxton, and countless others) says it is MORE real than the natural one we experience. Mickey Robinson was lost when the plane he was in crashed. What happened next changed him forever. His TESTIMONY (begins at 4:00).
its always the same. Atheists and Christians going head to head in these things. seriously, if we identify with Christ then let us do like Jesus did when He faced accusation, say nothing.
I agree. You either believe or you don’t.
And personally, I don’t think there would be any harm done if a Star of David or symbol of Islam were placed in the Cemetery of the Innocents.
Sorry Dustin, I’ve got to disagree with you.
Jesus “pulled the Hell card” plenty.
There were times when He answered His accusers, and called them snakes and vipers and blind leaders of the blind, and there were times He didn’t.
Jesus said He came not to bring peace but a sword, and yet He was the Prince of Peace. Read the Gospels yourself. Don’t just listen to what a nice suit tells you what they mean on Sunday morning.
There’s this Casper Milktoast version of Christianity which is very popular right now, but it’s not biblical. Let me clarify, sure you can pull Bible verses out of context and pitch the Gospel any way you please.
But atheists like Reality are not going to get saved unless they are confronted with the truth about the condition of their heart. And even then, many will not be saved but the Word preached to them will judge them on the Final Day.
Jesus was a perfect soul-winner, and He didn’t save everybody.
Have you ever read Eze 3? “When I say to the wicked, ‘You shall surely die,’ and you give him no warning, nor speak to warn the wicked from his wicked way, to save his life, that same wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood I will require at your hand. 19 Yet, if you warn the wicked, and he does not turn from his wickedness, nor from his wicked way, he shall die in his iniquity; but you have delivered your soul.”
See Jonathon Edwards classic sermon, “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God”, which helped spark The Great Awakening revival.
I don’t plan on going to Heaven with bloody hands.
That’s so disturbing, but an accurate portrayal of the true nature of the so-called “Pro-Choice” side. Abortion is evil.
Amen Klynn.
I like what the Lord showed Bill Weise when he was returning from Hell.
He said the Lord showed him a puff of smoke, or vapor, and he asked Him, “What was that?” And Jesus said, “That’s your life.”
We’re here but for a moment, when compared with eternity. We need to make every second count.
Lost, certainly you’re not so lost if you understand the injustice in murdering an innocent developing human. I like your comments; thanks for chiming in.
When I was away from the Church, I explored most of the world’s religions. I discovered you can’t pick a religion from a book alone. You have to mingle with the people, see them in practice. But even then, why wouldn’t I convert to Mormonism? I like them because their social structure is so nurturing and their children do so much better in school than the rest. Well, choosing religion also means using the heart and mind that God gave you. I returned to the Church by my heart: I stayed for my mind. I’ve studied Scripture for many years, as well as the scriptures of other religions. Catholic and/or Orthodox Christianity makes the most sense. Books have been written on the subject that are more eloquent than any comment I could make but in summary: I would be crazy to arbitrarily pick a religion based on characteristics alone. The only religion worth following is the one that embraces the truth. I believe that Jesus died on the cross. I believe he rose on the third day. I believe in his promise of eternal life. Why do I want others to embrace the same? Because I believe it will bring you also into the eternal fold.
If a train was coming down the tracks, wouldn’t I try to get you off the tracks and out of harm’s way? I would. Choose life, that your joy might be complete.
Totally Agree, Hippie and Ed! Keep it Up!
The vandalism says “We are Pro-Choice and we love death and we are happy to sacrifice these children. We like bloody baby feet and satanism” WOW!
Pretty self-incriminating. But hardly suprising.
I think they really sent much more of a message than intended. Truth shows thru.
Because I believe it will bring you also into the eternal fold.
Ninek, I can see your point but we have to realize that we live in a country where not everyone is Christian. One of our local CPC’s says that it “serves the Christian community.” I have a problem with this, because what if there’s a woman facing a crisis pregnancy who is Jewish, or Buddhist, or atheist? Would they be turned away? I think what Biggaz was trying to say is that isn’t the life of a non-Christian baby as valuable as one whose parents are (at least nominally) Christian? I certainly think so, even though I don’t find the crosses “offensively Christian.”
Please remember the secular prolifers who would never do such a thing.
Phillymiss, Oh, I totally agree that during a crisis pregnancy, it ought not to matter. However, instead of NOT having Christian CPC’s, maybe we just need more CPC’s in general so people have, oh, what’s that word, choices! In my community we have both religious and secular CPC’s and the secular one is very well located, near the bus line, etc.
I would never proselytize a woman in crisis; she needs immediate help. However, on an ordinary day with one of my friends, yer darn tootin’ I tell them that I love going to church.
I have a training session coming up for Project Gabriel, and my first question will be: what about women who are in crisis and have another or no faith? I will post on a thread later next week and let you know how we are trained. I’m really anxious to be part of the Project. Commenting on blogs is fun and educational (I hope) but it’ll be nice to be involved with my hands, not just writing checks to CPC’s.
I would never proselytize a woman in crisis; she needs immediate help.
Well, I sure would! If she rejects the message of the Gospel, fine. But it should be presented, and regardless, someone should offer to pray for her and her baby.
Meeting her most immediate physical needs is crucial, of course, but never once in my years working at a CPC did I have anyone stop me in the middle of my Gospel presentation or refuse my prayers. They didn’t all receive the message, but it was definitely delivered out of love and concern.
Not all CPCs are Christian, and not all need to be. But the ones who claim to be, in my opinion, should be reaching out to their clients with the message of Christ along with meeting their physical needs. I’ve seen the cycle of destructive lifestyles long enough to know these women need freedom from the sin that keeps them in their same situation and makes them repeat clients with new crisis pregnancies from year to year by different fathers. If there is no heart change, there can be no true life change.
Just my two cents.
And God bless all the secular Pro-Lifers who endure my/our Christian rants!
I must confess, my passion to save babies may only be exceeded by my passion to win lost souls. I’ve heard many testimonies of people going to Heaven and meeting aborted or miscarried children or siblings and being comforted in the knowledge that they are safe and waiting to be united with their families.
I have also heard many testimonies of people who after growing past the age of accountability end up in Hell where there is no recourse, no way out, no hope.
Make your eternal destiny sure!
“… Clarion Students for Life have grown accustomed over the years to having their annual Cemetery of the Innocents cross display vandalized…”.
This statement pissed me off more than any other part of this story.
As a pro-life movement, we ARE insane. You know that tired old catchphrase that even I hate hearing about the definition of insanity? WELL IT’S TRUE!!!
When are we going to learn from our past and stop WASTING our time and efforts on utterly USELESS “feel good” “demonstrations” like this that accomplish absolutely NOTHING!? …except to tee ourselves up perfectly for acts of pro-abort vandelism and mockery.
How many peoples minds were converted to being pro life by this? How many babies lives were saved? None. Did they even ATTEMPT to catch the vandels on video?? That would have at least been something worth talking about.
It is years past due that we start thinking about this fight in terms of NUMBERS not FEELINGS.
If what you’re doing as a pro-life “demonstrator” does not have a MEASURABLE effect of changing minds or saving lives, then you might as well stay at home.
These kinds of “demonstrations” merely give the people involved the illusion that they are doing something positive. It allows them to pretend to be “activists” while failing to effect any meaningful outcome whatsoever.
In my not-so-humble-at-the-moment opinion, CS4L’s great time and effort for this were wasted. Stories like this continue demonstrate the futility of such passive, kumbaya, “let’s be nice”, “let’s not upset anyone”, “let’s try to make people LIKE us”, so-called “events”.
As my last act atop my enormous soap-box, I must offer a suggestion. Because, as angry as I am right now at hearing about this events of this article, I DO give a damn about the fight for the unborn, and I have a seen and participated in REAL ACTIVISM for our cause that produces REAL AND MEASURABLE CHANGE and RESULTS. Imagine that!
It is graphic images. See them here: http://www.abortionno.org
If every person who claims to be a pro-life activist took to the streets and public spaces with graphic images, we would see the end of legal abortion in this country before the end of the next president’s 1st term in office.
You don’t like that idea? You don’t like to see them? You think they’re too offensive?
Well, too bad.
If you ACTUALLY care about saving the unborn from the knife, if you ACTUALLY care about saving women from the scars, if you ACTUALLY care about ENDING this, then you will suck it up, grow some intestinal fortitude, and put your time, effort, and money behind the PUBLIC USE of graphic images.
Do you think I’m an arrogant jerk for this post? Good. Then you’re listening.
Now, go listen to the FACTS about what’s really working to STOP abortion and what’s really just a big waste.
Abortion has been legal in the U.S. for 38 years… NOT because of Planned Parenthood… because of 38 years of “insanity” by pro-life “activists” who refuse to do what is PROVEN to be effective.
Marc,
First, let me say that I am not disagreeing with you. So do not take this comment as anything but an honest inquiry as it is meant to be. I have been struggling with the use of graphic images for some time. To briefly illustrate the two sides, let me throw out two examples. When I am in front of a clinic, and I want the women coming and going to stop and talk, I think graphic images push them away rather than draw them in. So in that case, I think they are unproductive. When Planned Parenthood is holding a rally and talking about all the good they do, I think graphic images are definitely appropriate as they show the truth of what PP does. In short, I think graphic images can be good or bad depending on the context of their use.
The reason for my comment is honest. You say the graphic images are working. And you say we need to go listen to the facts about what is really working to stop abortion. I will accept you at your word. My request to you is that you provide the facts that you speak of. If indeed it has been shown that graphic images are effective, then I want that information so that I can indeed find the most effective methods.
Thanks.
You keep claiming things as ‘fact’ Ed, when they are not.
“The spiritual realm, God, angels, demons, Heaven, Hell, is all very real” – to you they may be but that doesn’t make it so.
I could say and claim all sorts of things about spiritual or extraordinary experiences too klynn73, I could espouse my personal testimony on a string of turtles supporting our planet, but without any evidence…..
‘I like what Bill Weise claimed the Lord showed him when he was returning from Hell’ – now that’s closer to the truth.
You have my encouragement for your plans Marc, please do so. We’re all listening, and observing.
joan says: April 26, 2011 at 8:57 pm
“I’m just pointing out that the entirety of Christianity can’t fit neatly into the little box you’re trying to put it in.”
=====================================================================
Joan of anathema,
The ‘box’ is not nearly as large as you imagine or as easy to enter as you wrongly believe.
You must subscribe to the heresies of that inclusive religious institution known as the ‘Broadway Church of the Half Saved’, the most irreverant Luke Warm presiding.
They will tolerate anyone except those who attempt to enter in singing ‘Nothing but the blood of Jesus’.
Matt 7:13-23 13 Enter through the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and spacious and broad is the way that leads away to destruction, and many are those who are entering through it. 14 But the gate is narrow (contracted by pressure) and the way is straitened and compressed that leads away to life, and few are those who find it. [Deut 30:19; Jer 21:8.] AMP
Luke 13:23-24 23 And someone asked Him, Lord, will only a few be saved (rescued, delivered from the penalties of the last judgment, and made partakers of the salvation by Christ)? And He said to them, 24 Strive to enter by the narrow door [force yourselves through it], for many, I tell you, will try to enter and will not be able. AMP
1 Cor 6:9-11 9 Do you not know that the unrighteous and the wrongdoers will not inherit or have any share in the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived (misled): neither the impure and immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor those who participate in homosexuality, 10 Nor cheats (swindlers and thieves), nor greedy graspers, nor drunkards, nor foulmouthed revilers and slanderers, nor extortioners and robbers will inherit or have any share in the kingdom of God.
11 And such some of you were [once]. But you were washed clean (purified by a complete atonement for sin and made free from the guilt of sin), and you were consecrated (set apart, hallowed), and you were justified [pronounced righteous, by trusting] in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the [Holy] Spirit of our God. AMP
Gal 5:21 21 Envy, drunkenness, carousing, and the like. I warn you beforehand, just as I did previously, that those who do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God. AMP
LOL… See this is what I am talking about. You “Christians” can’t even agree among yourselves what god’s rules are. How can you possibly try to hold the whole world up to a set of standards that you yourselves cannot agree on? Furthermore, if they are god’s rules and god is infallible how can mortal men change the rules put down by the almighty? I can’t even count the number of Catholics I see at Burger King on Friday’s now but 60 years ago that would land you strait into hell. How do you explain “Special Dispensations” for raising the most money in the churches canned food drive?
You guys work it out… get your rules strait and then let the rest of us know what you have decided should be they way the rest of us live our lives… lol
Your god will be disproven by science just like all the other gods humans believed in before him. They will go the way of Apollo and Ra now that we know how stars and suns are created and why they behave as they do. Someday there will be a constellation named Jehovah’s Belt right next to Allah’s little dipper…
I think I will live MY life in accordance with the laws of the Force put forth by the Jedi… It makes me feel better about how insignificant every human’s life is to the rest of the universe.
May the Force be with you all.
Hey Reality,
Yes, I claim many things to be fact because I have proven them to myself. God has given us a mechanism by which we may determine whether His Word is true or not:
Jesus said “My teaching is not Mine, but His who sent Me. 17 “If anyone is willing to do His will, he will know of the teaching, whether it is of God or whether I speak from Myself.” Jn 7.16-17
When you read God’s Word, which reveals His will, and then do it, you discover the power of His Word in your life. It’s so much more than just good advice. It is His literal presence, in the form of the Holy Spirit. Jesus was teaching about these Kingdom Dynamics when He shared the Parable of the Vine: “If you abide in Me and My Words abide in you…you will bear much fruit, and so prove to be my disciples”
What fruit was He talking about? The fruit of the Spirit, Love, Joy, Peace…
But you know Reality, I might as well be speaking another language. You don’t have the capacity to understand what I’m saying.
The closest analogy I could make might be to use the movie The Matrix as an example. In the movie, there was a secret sub-culture, invisible and not apparent to those going about their day to day activities in their normal lives. That is what the Kingdom of God and spirit realm are like. Until you recognize you are a sinner in need of a Savior, and practice the universal message of the cross, and commit to no longer live for yourself, but for Him who died for you and rose again, you won’t be able to “see what is unseen”.
The Canadian band Rush made reference to it in one of their songs, “We sometimes catch a window, A glimpse of what’s beyond…”
When you study God’s Word, and apply it to your life, you develop spiritual discernment, and get first hand revelation “of what’s beyond”.
Your god will be disproven by science just like all the other gods humans believed in before him. They will go the way of Apollo and Ra now that we know how stars and suns are created
I am far from being a rocket scientist like you Biggz. Can you explain to me exactly how the stars and suns were created. After that please explain to me how the stuff that created the stars and sun was created.
So to summarise Ed, ‘god is real because the bible says so and the bible is god’s word and I choose to believe the bible so god is real.’
“Yes, I claim many things to be fact because I have proven them to myself.” – a claim which can’t be substantiated.
“The closest analogy I could make might be to use the movie The Matrix as an example…..That is what the Kingdom of God and spirit realm are like.” – yes, a story – then why not believe in that? It’s just as factual.
Because the big difference, that which makes all the difference in the world…
is the power of the Gospel
to heal the sick, raise the dead and cast out demons.
That’s the difference
That’s the proof that it’s God
More miracles
If anybody needs physical or emotional healing, let your request be made known…
Prayer works! Jesus is a Healer!
Ed – Do you know the history of the Bible? How many different people wrote it or how many wrote gospels that were taken out of it by the Catholic Church? How can you censor the word of god? Do you know how many times it has been rewritten over the years? When you read it can you not see the unfair bias it places on women because it was written by men?
I see a lot of American Christians who hold up the Bible and say “this is the word of god and every single word in this book is 100% true.” Without ever taking the time to read the history of the bible and learning about the revision, editing, and omissions that have taken place just in the new testament, let alone the old testament which has been edited even more. Why is it that the same type of people who read and believed in the same old testament and pray to the same god as you do saw Jesus as he was alive and still to this day deny he was the son of their god?
You would be a fool to buy a Ford Pickup just because it says Ford on it and you believe Ford is the best motor company. You think “This used Ford will run just fine because it’s a Ford.” Wouldn’t you want to know about all the different people at the factory who helped build it, wouldn’t you want to know about the lazy interior guy who was fired and they had to rip out his work to be replaced by another person’s work, wouldn’t you want to know about the first owner who tried to make it into a roadside service truck and put 120000 highway miles on it, wouldn’t you want to know about the second owner who bought it for his son who tried to make it into a off-road monster truck and tore up the transmission and suspension. If you knew about all these things would you still think this Ford truck will run fine just because it says Ford on it?
How can you hold up the Bible as truth without considering its very history and the people who created it and revised it?
“is the power of the Gospel
to heal the sick, raise the dead and cast out demons.” – non-evidential, faith-based claims.
“That’s the proof that it’s god” – like I said, I think you’ve been watching too much South Park.
Ok Biggz and Reality, you don’t have to believe the Gospel.
I can’t prove it to you. God didn’t set it up that way. You’d have to prove it to yourself by believing it.
But what are you going to do when you die???
Anyway, you guys have a good night, I’ve got some things I’ve got to do to get ready for work tomorrow.
Catch ya on another thread.
Which Gospel Ed? The ones that are in the bible or the ones that were removed from it by the Catholic Church or the new ones they keep finding in the desert? Which word of god is the true word of god and who made that decision?
Biggz,
If you just stick with Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, there’s more than enough truth right there to get you saved. In fact, the Book of John is probably the best Gospel account for a good comprehensive study.
If you read and believed the Book of John, it would absolutely change your life forever. God would come inside your heart and you would pass from death unto life.
You would then have the promise of His Spirit to lead you and guide you into all truth (Jn 16,13) and you would have discernment to deal with the rest of the books of the Bible.
“You’d have to prove it to yourself by believing it.” – for what reason?
“But what are you going to do when you die???” – absolutely nothing, the same as everyone else.
Take responsibility for yourself!
One last verse guys,
“He who has My commandments and keeps them, it is he who loves Me. And he who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and manifest Myself to him.” Jn 14.21
Here again, if you read God’s Word and keep His commandments, Jesus will manifest Himself to you. He will just show up.
That’s how you prove the Gospel is real.
I love the afterlife discussion…
When I die I will rot in the ground just like every other animal or living thing on this planet. I know it comforts you to think that there is a place waiting for you afterward so that you don’t have to face the reality of death and your own mortality. I know you can’t handle the idea that all the people who have died in your life are truly gone forever as will you be. I understand that mortality is a raw deal but please it is time to leave fairy tales to the kids and face our mortality like adults.
I have found that you cannot change the mind of a true believer with facts because they didn’t need any facts to become believers in the first place…
I have found that you cannot change the mind of a true believer with facts because they didn’t need any facts to become believers in the first place…
Fortunately, your unbelief has no direct effect on the faithful, except as a cause for prayers for you. Faith demands love and trust in God and exists on many different levels. If you choose not to believe, you live with the consequences…
Ed – Do you know the history of the Bible? How many different people wrote it or how many wrote gospels that were taken out of it by the Catholic Church? How can you censor the word of god? Do you know how many times it has been rewritten over the years? . . .
I see a lot of American Christians who hold up the Bible and say “this is the word of god and every single word in this book is 100% true.” Without ever taking the time to read the history of the bible and learning about the revision, editing, and omissions that have taken place just in the new testament, let alone the old testament which has been edited even more.
Well Biggz, since you are such a terrific New Testament scholar, please tell us exactly which Gospels were taken out by the Catholic Church and the number of times and where and when the New Testament was rewritten. I’ll be glad to address any of these points for you – I happen to know a great deal about how the Bible was put together. I studied ancient history and also have a very good knowledge of Latin and some Greek. I studied paleography (ancient handwriting). I know quite a bit about these thngs.
I’ll bet you never got any further than reading Dan Brown, right?
Let me save you a bit of trouble by letting you know that the answers are number of times Gospels were removed = 0 Number of times rewritten = 0.
“Here again, if you read God’s Word and keep His commandments, Jesus will manifest Himself to you. He will just show up.
That’s how you prove the Gospel is real.” – ludicrous, just plain ludicrous.
“Faith demands love and trust in God and exists on many different levels.” – so, close your eyes, wish real hard and….
“If you choose not to believe, you live with the consequences… ” – yep, zip, nada, zero.
Then maybe you need to do some revision Lori.
It’s ludicrous to you Reality because you’ve never enjoyed the presence of God. You’ve never had His Spirit bless you and bless you and bless you until you can’t hardly stand it.
You’re alienated from the love of God through your unbelief.
There are two hard incontrovertible facts here:
When you and Biggz stand before God to give an account of your lives, you will not be able to say that you never heard the Gospel.
And my hands will not be covered with your blood.
Any time you guys are ready, Jesus is only a prayer away. All you have to do is repent from your sin, ask Jesus to forgive you and tell Him that you want to live for Him.
He will receive you into His family and you will pass from death unto life.
It is ludicrous Ed, because you have not come up with any evidence or proof. All you do is make claims of faith and personal belief.
“There are two hard incontrovertible facts here:” – no, they’re not. They’re your opinion.
“you will pass from death unto life” – nonsense.
Then maybe you need to do some revision Lori.
Huh???
By the way, here is a nice beginning to answering some biblical questions posed by Bart Ehrman’s many misleading statements about the composition of the NT – another place Biggz may have learned his errors
http://www.youtube.com/user/ehrmanproject
Biggz, Don’t forget about me. I wanted some answers about the suns and the stars. Please don’t make me beg and cry. Waaaaa.
A few straight-forward questions for you Lori:
What language/s were the new testaments originally written in? Did Matthew pen Matthew himself, Mark Mark etc.?
Were they all originally written in exactly the same language as each other or were some originally written in different languages? Differing dialects?
What other languages were they translated into before they were translated into ‘modern’ languages like english or french or italian? How many?
Who did the translations? Were they all done by the same person or even the same group?
Thank you.
There’s a good reason why astronomers don’t debate astrologers Praxedes. One is a science, the other…
Reality and Biggz,
Like I said last night:
But you don’t know Him, and you can’t see Him, and it’s too bad.
You’ve read this before in 2 Cor.: “But even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing, 4 whose minds the god of this age has blinded, who do not believe, lest the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine on them.”
and this over in Ep 4: “17 This I say, therefore, and testify in the Lord, that you should no longer walk as the rest of the Gentiles walk, in the futility of their mind, 18 having their understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God, because of the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart;”
You guys are perishing, you’re blind, you’re ignorant and you’re lost.
God won’t save you through facts and evidence, at least the type you’re looking for.
He’s a faith God.
His rules.
And sadly for you, if you don’t repent, you will be damned forever.
And that would suck.
None of us want that for you.
But it’s your choice, not ours.
Good night.
I imagine the atheists posting here do not believe in free will, since our brains are simply meat that shoot off chemicals, and are therefore no different than any other natural process. So it seems odd that you are so angered over a purely mechanical process AKA people’s brain chemicals telling them there is meaning in the universe. It is as absurd as getting frustrated that a plant is undergoing photosynthesis or water is turning into ice at cold tempatures. So good luck convincing us, as purely mechanical clumps of elements arranged in a certain way (humans), of your views on the universe. Or perhaps start trying to talk reason to my body’s chemicals that aid in digestion, which seems to me just as much a colossal waste of time as you trying to make the chemicals in my brain accept your arguments.
An interview with Richard Dawkins…
…and quickly changed the subject.
You obviously should have signed off for the night when you said you were earlier Ed. I think you need some sleep.
I think that’s what is referred to as a strawman Adair. Your assertions are not factual at base.
I think that’s what is referred to as a strawman Adair. Your assertions are not factual at base.
Please explain why. It is non-factual that we are made up of elements, no different than anything else found in nature? You do not believe this?
“since our brains are simply meat that shoot off chemicals” – in an infinite number of ways, enabling an infinite number of thoughts and feelings
“and are therefore no different than any other natural process.” – yep, the whole infinitesimally rich and diverse spectrum
“So it seems odd that you are so angered over a purely mechanical process AKA people’s brain chemicals telling them there is meaning in the universe” – not angered, disappointed. Choosing to spurn knowledge and credit fables simply shows that some chemical processes are less productive than others.
“It is as absurd as getting frustrated that a plant is undergoing photosynthesis or water is turning into ice at cold tempatures.” – invalid comparison. I don’t get frustrated that eating food gives me heat and energy. But plants and water don’t have self-awareness, you and I do. So what’s your excuse?
“So good luck convincing us, as purely mechanical clumps of elements arranged in a certain way (humans), of your views on the universe.” – education trumps ideology.
“Or perhaps start trying to talk reason to my body’s chemicals that aid in digestion” – not another South Park aficionado – Mr Hanky anyone!
“which seems to me just as much a colossal waste of time as you trying to make the chemicals in my brain accept your arguments” – well I like to hope that eventually they’ll function with enough efficacy for realisation to dawn on you.
Reality,
If you’d really like to try and understand the concept of “faith”, here is a start.
(Taken from the Catholic Encyclopedia on-line.)
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05752c.htm
~ ~ ~
Ed,
Your tenacity is quite admirable! Your arguments – compelling.
Fundamentally facts and reason will take us so far and then we all make a leap in a direction that seems to make the most sense to us given the facts. Atheists don’t know that there is no God, but they reject either the historical evidence of the Christian narrative or the conclusions drawn from it, or both. I personally think CS Lewis said it best: “Christianity, if false, is of no importance, and if true, of infinite importance. The only thing it cannot be is moderately important.”
There is a truth, regardless of what we believe – there is an objective reality and eventually someone is going to be proven right or wrong. All we can do in this life, is make sure that we don’t shut ourselves off. These are important questions. I could never explain how I came to believe – it was a thousand moments over many years. It was nothing sudden or miraculous, just a slow slog of “that does make sense” or “huh, I’m surprised by that”. The more I learned and questioned, the more the facts aligned. I don’t know everything and I certainly can’t prove anything. But there are logical reasons to make that leap of faith in the direction of God and at minimum I think people owe it to themselves to make efforts toward really understanding why you leap in one direction or another.
Also: I don’t think Adair’s assertions are a strawman. The nature of our free will and the question of whether our concept of will is compatible with various beliefs is a valid philosophical question. If you care about logical consistency of belief, it should at least interest you.
Reality, you are really going to have to learn that simple contradiction is not equivalent to argument, evidence or proof. I don’t know why I am even going to answer your questions, because all I’m likely to get is a big fat “No, that’s not true! Cased closed!” Ha!
Well, in spite of all that . . .
A few straight-forward questions for you Lori:
What language/s were the new testaments originally written in? Did Matthew pen Matthew himself, Mark Mark etc.? Were they all originally written in exactly the same language as each other or were some originally written in different languages? Differing dialects?
First of all, there is only one New Testament, not dozens as you apparently fantasize. This is not optional and all real scholars are agreed on it.
The New Testament as it has come down to us in its present form is written entirely in Greek, the lingua franca of the whole ancient Mediterranean. Some parts of it, including the Gospel of Matthew, may have been originally written in Hebrew or in Aramaic, the language Jesus spoke, and the Greek is a translation of that. Much of the language of the Gospels in particular, shows that there was an original foundation of oral tradition in Aramaic underlying them. They will quote things like Talitha koumi, the very words Jesus used in raising the daughter of Jairus, or Cephas, the Greek transliteration of the actual Aramaic word Jesus used in giving Peter his new name – the Rock.
In other words, the Greek texts are very close to their oral sources.
Did the authors “pen” the works themselves? Depends on what you mean. We know, for instance, that Paul dictated his letters, and that he wrote the personal greetings at the end and his signature in his own hand, because this is reflected in the text itself. Many people, inlcuding the literate, dictated works to scribes back then.
It’s also true that oral or collective memory of the first Christian community preserved much of the content that the authors of the NT books eventually wrote down. While Mathew, John and probably Mark, were eyewitnesses to Jesus’ life, and had their personal memories as well as the collective one, Luke was not an eyewitness to Jesus’ life, though he had direct access to the personal and collective memories of the first Christian community. Who held the pen is not the important thing. Oral memories and testimoney in the ancient world are very reliable and faithful, as many scholars have shown.
From the beginning of the Church it has been held (I’m talking here about Catholic belief) that the Gospels have authority because they have the authority of the apostles behind them. They were written (mostly) by eyewitnesses, but more important, they were written by those to whom Jesus himself gave the authority to speak about him and about his teaching. We know that the teaching of the Apostle lies behind Scripture, because we have a multitude of historical witnesses, people who lived at that time, some of whom knew the Apostles themselves, who can testify to this.
What other languages were they translated into before they were translated into ‘modern’ languages like english or french or italian? How many? Who did the translations? Were they all done by the same person or even the same group?
The books of the New Testament were translated into just about every known ancient language, including Aramaic, Syriac, Coptic, even Armenian. If I remember right, we don’t really know who did most of these translations. I believe the same is true of the earliest Latin translation (the Vetus Latinus), but we do know the name of the person who translated the Vulgate Latin Bible that was used throughout the Middle Ages, St. Jerome (late 4th, to early 5th century). Jerome not only knew Greek, he was a Hebrew scholar, and had the help of other Hebrew scholars in translating the OT psalms. The Bible was translated from the very beginning more than any book before or since.
Now, what are you hoping to make of all this? I suppose you and Biggz imagine that since there are so many versions or translations, they must all differ in many ways and that thee are many texts of the NT, all different, that we have to choose from. This idea is nonsense, and is held only by people who have no idea what a manuscript tradition is and how an accurate critical text of an ancient work is put together.
I do know because for my doctoral disseration, I edited two medeival Latin texts from microfilms of the original manuscripts; medieval texts differ slightly from the ancient ones, but scholars who treat medieval and ancient texts all base their work on the same principles.
There are variants in the readings of the various Greek manuscripts (there are literally hundreds of whole or partial manusripts of the original Greek NT from as far back as they early 2nd century). Scholars have kept track of every one of the variants of the text in these manuscripts and can use them to work their way back to the earliest texts. They can follow the scribal mistakes and occasional alterations. Even though we don’t have very early complete texts in Greek, the other early versions in different languages are very early and can help us determine whether something has later been changed or not. So the various versions are a scholar’s best friend; not a barrier to or an enemy of accuracy in a text. The more manuscripts and texts that exist, the more an accurate version is possible. I read once that there were some 4,000 variants in the various Biblical manuscripts (once again, this is a good thing; more variants means more accuracy, because you can sort out manuscripts into their “families” and lines of descent). But only a tiny minority of the variants affect the meaning of the scriptural text at all. They involve things like word order, spelling, alternative tenses of a verb, and the like. Less than 1 percent of variants affect the meaning at all. So there are not many NTs, but only one.
We have a more complete and accurate Greek text of the NT than we do of any other ancient text, bar none.
(And ten to one Reality will just shrug and say “No, you’re wrong” and walk away).
This is written for you too, Biggz.
Wow. You have completely missed the point. There are some educated, intelligent atheists out there, I would suggest you read some. The main problem is that you are conflating self-awareness with free will, and they are extremely different concepts. Furthermore, I was writing from the point of a naturalist in the OP to illustrate how naturalism makes no sense. So you corrected these non-sensical arguements, and in the process, make my point for me.
“in an infinite number of ways, enabling an infinite number of thoughts and feelings” Indeed. That is the point. It makes no sense that atoms and molecules function according to strict physical laws, yet they are able create immaterial realities. Hence why I am not a naturalist.
You said you are “disappointed” with chemical reactions? Strange.
“invalid comparison. I don’t get frustrated that eating food gives me heat and energy.”
Exactly right! Why should you get frustrated at any natural process?
“But plants and water don’t have self-awareness, you and I do. So what’s your excuse?”
Again, self-awareness is not free will.
“education trumps ideology”
This is not an argument, and would not be allowed in any debate. It is circular reasoning.
“well I like to hope that eventually they’ll function with enough efficacy for realisation to dawn on you.”
How in the world would you define “efficiency”? From a purely natural perspective, we are here to reproduce, and religous people reproduce more. Therefore, the chemicals in religious people brain’s are more efficient. And again, circular reasoning.
Isn’t it interesting that so many of the pro-aborts are atheists? You would think that atheists would be the most pro-life people in existence. After all, they believe that death is final and that a person’s soul fades into nothingness at the moment of death. How can they not be pro-life? They should support the lives of all people, since they do not believe in an afterlife.
Most Christians would likely say that they believe that aborted babies end up in Heaven. But every atheist will tell you that aborted babies cease to exist entirely. Where’s the compassion, pro-abort atheists?
“Your tenacity is quite admirable!” – I agree. “Your arguments – compelling.” – no, repetitive, subjective and completely lacking in evidence is closer to the truth.
“they reject either the historical evidence of the Christian narrative” – because science is unrelentingly squeezing it into extinguishment.
“the more the facts aligned” – not facts, an amalgam of everything but.
“there are logical reasons to make that leap of faith in the direction of God” – which one? Whose? At what point in history? The ones that used to be believed in or the ones that are believed in now?
“simple contradiction is not equivalent to argument, evidence or proof.” – neither is an unsubstantiated claim. That sounds like a pre-emptive defence Lori.
“First of all, there is only one New Testament, not dozens as you apparently fantasize” – OK, the books of the new testament or whatever you wish to call them. You know, matthew, mark, luke, john et al. I didn’t think it was that difficult to decipher. But if you feel the need to make ad hominem attacks like ‘dozens’ and ‘fantasize’ go ahead.
“The New Testament as it has come down to us in its present form is written entirely in Greek….. Some parts of it, including the Gospel of Matthew, may have been originally written in Hebrew or in Aramaic….. and the Greek is a translation of that” – so yes, no, maybe or probably not? So we have translations from hebrew or aramaic into greek. That would be point of possible misinterpretation, translation or personal perspective number 1.
“oral tradition in Aramaic underlying them” – number 2.
“Did the authors “pen” the works themselves? Depends on what you mean” – number 3.
“It’s also true that oral or collective memory ….. eventually wrote down” – number 4.
“Luke was not an eyewitness to Jesus’ life, though he had direct access to the personal and collective memories of the first Christian community” – number 5.
“Who held the pen is not the important thing” – I beg to differ.
“Oral memories and testimoney in the ancient world are very reliable and faithful, as many scholars have shown” – you think? Got any evidence clearly demonstrating the level of accuracy? Never heard of ‘chinese whispers’?
“They were written (mostly) by eyewitnesses, but more important, they were written by those to whom Jesus himself gave the authority to speak about him and about his teaching” – so they would claim. I could claim this as number 6 but I’ll leave it for now.
“we have a multitude of historical witnesses, people who lived at that time, some of whom knew the Apostles themselves, who can testify to this” – you have a time machine?!?
“just about every known ancient language, including Aramaic, Syriac, Coptic, even Armenian…we don’t really know who did most of these translations” – number 6.
“The Bible was translated from the very beginning more than any book before or since.” – number 7.
“since there are so many versions or translations, they must all differ in many ways and that thee are many texts of the NT, all different, that we have to choose from” – and so it is.
“This idea is nonsense, and is held only by people who have no idea what a manuscript tradition is and how an accurate critical text of an ancient work is put together” – that may be so but the bible doesn’t fall into that category.
“I edited two medeival Latin texts from microfilms of the original manuscripts” – I too can change a flat tire, but I can’t build a car. The content of the bible is vastly more voluminous and of diverse sources and periods of time than two medieval latin texts.
“There are variants in the readings of the various Greek manuscripts (there are literally hundreds of whole or partial manusripts of the original Greek NT from as far back as they early 2nd century). Scholars have kept track of every one of the variants of the text in these manuscripts and can use them to work their way back to the earliest texts” – well they may think they have. Number 8.
“But only a tiny minority of the variants affect the meaning of the scriptural text at all. They involve things like word order, spelling, alternative tenses of a verb, and the like.” – not to mention personal perspective….number 9.
You will note that I have only used the material you supplied to demonstrate just how many opportunities there have been for interpretations, misinterpretations both accidental and deliberate, translations, errors in translation, cultural and linguistic anomolies and variances etc. etc. etc. Do you have any references for your thesis?
“I imagine the atheists posting here do not believe in free will, since our brains are simply meat that shoot off chemicals, and are therefore no different than any other natural process.”
Well, I imagine some don’t. Atheism doesn’t necessarily imply materialism, which doesn’t necessarily imply determinism.
“educated, intelligent atheists” – we do seem to be. Have you seen the graphs which show that as inte
“It makes no sense that atoms and molecules function according to strict physical laws, yet they are able create immaterial realities.” – you are kidding, right?
“You said you are “disappointed” with chemical reactions? Strange.” – no I didn’t, read the words of yours that I quoted plus the whole of my response to those particular ones. You’ll note the word ‘choosing’ in there.
“How in the world would you define “efficiency” – I didn’t say ‘efficiency’. No wonder you keep going around in circles and not actually comprehending what I’ve said.
“we are here to reproduce, and religous people reproduce more. Therefore, the chemicals in religious people brain’s are more efficient” – what the…?
Your attempt to debate has slipped into irrationality.
Reality –
“they reject either the historical evidence of the Christian narrative” – because science is unrelentingly squeezing it into extinguishment.
I assume you’re referring to problems that arise from purely literal biblical reading. I don’t disagree. Not every word in the bible is meant to be taken literally and I don’t agree with those who think the bible can be properly understood apart from proper historical context and understanding of the text.
“the more the facts aligned” – not facts, an amalgam of everything but.
That’s fine. You can reject the scholarship and the historical record. The facts don’t make the leap – there is no proof that gets you to the final step. Absent that, you seem to be uninterested.
“there are logical reasons to make that leap of faith in the direction of God” – which one? Whose? At what point in history? The ones that used to be believed in or the ones that are believed in now?
Obviously I’m referring to God as understood from a Christian perspective. I understand that you think there is no better evidence for the Judeo-Christian narrative, than there is for me pointing to my teacup and saying, “hey, I say that’s God”, but objectively there is. The factors upon which you reject the bible as useless, should cause you to reject a great deal of what we know about early history and how we know it. Biblical scholarship and the historical record is recognized even in secular or non-christian academic communities.
I did a lot of digging and reading which I can’t sum sum up in a comment. Suffice it to say, I was just like you – “Don’t wave your book of fairy tales at me” That betrayed my ignorance, not theirs. I didn’t have some miraculous “Halleluia, I see the light” conversion either. I think my brain is too analytical. If you’re actually interested, which I’m not sure you are yet, I started by reading point counterpoint. Christian apologist then atheist/agnostic response. I started with specific books and then specific critiques of that book. Then I moved on to just reading the broader arguments from both sides. It brought up new questions and moved on like that.
Thank you Janet, but I’m afraid Reality was right, I probably should have quit a couple of hours earlier.
When Jesus attempted to minister in Nazareth, He could not do many mighty works there because of their unbelief. In this dispensation, God has limited Himself and ordained that to be the one thing more powerful than the Word of God, our unbelief.
He has given us all a free will. We have a tremendous responsibility with eternal consequences. Some of us choose to be personally redeemed and reconciled to our God through His Precious Shed Blood, and then partner in His great work to rescue lost souls. And some choose to harden their hearts in unbelief. They despise the sacrifice Jesus paid at the Cross for their behalf. In their arrogance, they do not recognize their sinful condition. It breaks God’s Heart, yet He honors their choice.
This will not always be the case. One day every knee shall bow, and every tongue confess that Jesus is Lord to the Glory of God the Father. He is the Potter and we are the clay. It is He Who has chosen us, to be objects of His Mercy, or objects of His Wrath. It is a mystery, in His foreknowledge, He knows what we will choose.
I need to be careful not to waste my time with those who adamantly cling to their unbelief. There are so many who need and are open to the Love of Christ.
But here’s a third hard incontrovertible fact: one day, both Reality and Biggz will bow their knees and confess Jesus is Lord. I only hope and pray that they do so before their souls are eternally lost.
And Reality will probably reply, “that’s your opinion, subjective and completely lacking in evidence”.
Time will tell.
It’s your choice. Life or death, Heaven or Hell, God’s Mercy or His Wrath.
It’s your choice.
Unfortunately, there are those who will enter Hell, screaming loudly that it doesn’t exist, while denying the existence of Jesus Christ,the only substitution by which they can hope to escape Gods Holy Judgement. In their deepest hearts, these people already know the truth we speak, but anger and defiance have so hardened those hearts, they will not ever yield to the still small voice of God.
They are in need of our sincerest prayers.
What would David Wilkerson have said to these…
Please Lord, tell David we are thankful for his ministry.
And Pro-lifers are supposed to be the terrorists/vandals.
Yes, there does seem to be a connection between education and atheism. This was true even in the time of Christ. The people who tried to trick Jesus and hang him with his own words were usually members of the elite class who didn’t like that Jesus was preaching that the last would be first and the first would be last. They were the rich and educated people who wanted to maintain their economic and political power, and couldn’t stand the thought of being on the same level with fishermen and housewives.
A lot of our popular entertainers are strongly anti-religion, after all, they don’t like the message of the last shall be first and the first last either. I recall one “popular” album being named “Give a monkey a brain and he’ll swear he’s the center of the universe”. The implication being that arrogant humanity invented God just to make ourselves seem more important in the universe. Of course, it goes both ways – the monkey with a brain might also worship himself as in the case of the atheist.
Lori Pieper @ 11:19 am,
Thank you for sharing your historical knowledge of the Bible with us.
The cross is a powerful image and there is a history of memorial crosses driving pro-aborts to anger
Thanks, Janet. I’m glad at least someone is able to understand what I wrote.
Reality, it’s hard to type this, because I’m still laughing . . . you couldn’t have displayed your ignorance more or more completely misunderstood my answer if you tried. I’m also glad you know so much and are so authoritative on the subject of critical editions and textual scholarship without having ever studied it. That makes it quite easy for you to remain in your ignorance, doesn’t it?
You keep talking about “possibilities” and “opportunties” or misinterpretation or “personal perspective” or whatever, in different versions and variants in Biblical texts. What I showed was that scholars have already been through these texts and shown that there are none that can’t easily be corrected. So don’t get your hopes up.
Of course a translation or different version gives a possibility of passing on error. This would be a valid point perhaps if we possessed only the translation of a lost work that we know was originally in another language. But not when we still have the original text, as we do with the Greek NT. We can compare the two and see whether it has been misinterpreted and discount that translation if it does. I’m amazed how often atheists are tripped up by this. I had the same discussion here with cranium last year, who made practically all the same ridiculous statements you did (Could you possibly be cranium under a different handle? I don’t think the mods would let that get by).
The passing on of oral tradition is precisely the opposite of the game of “Chinese whispers” or “telephone” that you mentioned. In one case, you have someone told something in a way that may not be clear who has no possibility of checking what he has heard for errors before passing it on. In the other, the receivers of an oral tradition are very carefully trained word by word in the poetry or epic or other material they are going to pass on, until they know it perfectly. That is why it is reliable. Any anthropologist who has studied the matter can tell you this.
I hardly think I need any “references” for my thesis since what I wrote is simply the basc principles of a scholarly discipline applied to this particular case. If you want a better understanding of these principles and the errors people make in regard to them, look at the videos by real Biblical experts that I mentioned above.
http://www.youtube.com/user/ehrmanproject
Perhaps I can help you more if you have some specific case in which you think the Gospel texts are unreliable. If so, give me the specifics.
Reality, short of pulling out my own wisdom tooth by the roots, I don’t know of anything more tortuous than trying to talk to you. I hope you get wised up so you can someday have a real discussion with someone.
Reality wrote:
“I think I will live MY life in accordance with the laws of the Force put forth by the Jedi… It makes me feel better about how insignificant every human’s life is to the rest of the universe.
May the Force be with you all.”
Haha, Reality. But seriously, do you even know the Jedi Code? The Jedi Code was rewritten by Grand Master Luke Skywalker upon reestablishing the Jedi Order in the Galaxy:
Jedi are the guardians of peace in the galaxy.
Jedi use their powers to defend and to protect.
Jedi respect all life, in any form.
Jedi serve others rather than ruling over them, for the good of the galaxy.
Jedi seek to improve themselves through knowledge and training.
You’re flawed in your thinking because the Jedi respect all lifeforms/all are seen as significant in the Force (universe). Also, the Jedi do not to seek to be prideful, but rather humble. You remind me of a certain bright, young Jedi, prideful and arrogent, who fell to the Darkside. May the Lightside of the Force be with you as well ;-)
“Not every word in the bible is meant to be taken literally” – I agree, although there are many who wouldn’t agree. It’s interesting that what has been preached as the ‘truth’ from the bible over the last couple of centuries has reduced, been adjusted, explained in new terms or contexts or generally backed away from.
“You can reject the scholarship and the historical record” – well since they don’t add up to much more than ‘there may have been someone like that’ I will.
“but objectively there is” – I think you mean subjectively.
“The factors upon which you reject the bible as useless, should cause you to reject a great deal of what we know about early history and how we know it.” – not true. The archeological evidence for other aspects of early history are only claimed to show what people ‘believe’ may have occurred, they aren’t claimed as infallible records until vast evidence has emerged. This is not the case with the bible.
“Biblical scholarship and the historical record is recognized even in secular or non-christian academic communities’ – only to the extent that there may have been someone of the ilk of a jesus character and certainly nothing for a claim of god.
My experience was the opposite of yours. I went from belief, through investigation to disbelief.
Ed, you really need to realise that quoting scripture is not evidence of anything. You keep claiming ‘incontrovertible facts’ when you have none.
“It’s your choice.” – not really. I can only choose between things that actually exist.
“In their deepest hearts, these people already know the truth we speak” – you wish!
There was an unfinished sentence in my previous comment John (I was distracted by an emergent situation). ‘Have you seen the graphs which show that as IQ rises, belief in god reduces?’
Ah, the old atheists worship themselves line. Why can’t you get it that we don’t need to worship anyone or anything. You’re the one with ‘need’.
I didn’t write that stuff Rachael C. Pay attention.
I find your need to attempt derision and/or ad hominem language in place of academic rigour quite amusing Lori.
You know as well as I do that there is a veritable treasure trove of debates about the translations and interpretations of biblical content and meaning. Many if not most are by biblical scholars, theologians and people of faith. Atheists just point out the inconsistencies and disagreements. Suffice to say that it is self-evident that there is no singular and agreed transcript of the old or new testaments. So what one chooses to believe to be accurate is just that, choice.
What this means of course is that any claim of a valid, accurate, true record is spurious at best.
“What I showed was that scholars have already been through these texts and shown that there are none that can’t easily be corrected” – no you didn’t. You expressed an opinion. You cited no references other than yourself.
“But not when we still have the original text, as we do with the Greek NT” – which you yourself said was derived from both oral and written stories from previous languages.
“The passing on of oral tradition is precisely the opposite of the game of “Chinese whispers” or “telephone” that you mentioned. In one case, you have someone told something in a way that may not be clear who has no possibility of checking what he has heard for errors before passing it on. In the other, the receivers of an oral tradition are very carefully trained word by word in the poetry or epic or other material they are going to pass on, until they know it perfectly. That is why it is reliable. Any anthropologist who has studied the matter can tell you this” – evidence?
“real Biblical experts” – these are the ones who argue the most about what is accurate!
“pulling out my own wisdom tooth by the roots” – oo, don’t do that, you won’t find any more evidence there than you’ve supplied so far – none.
accidental repeat posting, sorry
Reality, I gave you a reference up above. It’s a video series with some very prominent Biblical scholars explaining the errors that the modern mindset falls into when approaching the Bible. It seems perfect for you.
Most of the elemental errors they point out are the ones made by Bart Ehrman, an evangelical type Biblical scholar turned atheist. Yes, Biblical scholars disagree, but in many cases as in this one, it’s because some people just abandon the scholarly point of view because they prefer atheism, agnosticism or relativism, and desperately need an argument for it.
In other words, someone a lot like you.
Given that you either don’t understand or don’t accept some of the obvious basic principles of scholarship, it seems useless to me to cite any more references. What I would have to give is the materials for a whole beginning course on textual scholarship. But you are just going to reject everything offhand without argument anyway, so what’s the point?
Exactly the same argument I had with cranium, btw. Are you sure you’re not him?
You stated “number of times Gospels were removed = 0 Number of times rewritten = 0” knowing that there are great debates amongst biblical scholars on the inclusion and removal of books, chapters, gospels, whatever you wish to call them.
And you have explained how the various components, both oral and written originated from different languages and have then undergone various translations. Humans being humans, it is inevitable that ‘changes’ occurred and that discrepancies have arisen.
We haven’t even raised the issue of versions created in the last 500 years.
You keep claiming your own scholarship as all that is necessary to prove your case. It isn’t. All I have done is ask you some questions, most of which you haven’t answered. I then showed you how your own words demonstrated that rewrites have taken place.
Hey Reality,
I quote Scripture because it is the truth. But as we discussed, you don’t have ‘ears to hear’ so we might as well agree to disagree and move on. We both have better uses for our time.
Your unbelief however is a choice, and a very poor one.
Well sorry Reality, there were only 130-something comments at the time, as well as interruptions in real life when I posted, so give me a break!
Well, anyways the Star Wars reply was intended for Biggz., if you’re still reading this thread, and was as follows:
Biggz wrote on Apr 27, 2011 at 6:35 pm
I think I will live MY life in accordance with the laws of the Force put forth by the Jedi… It makes me feel better about how insignificant every human’s life is to the rest of the universe.
May the Force be with you all.
I replied:
Haha, Biggz! But seriously, do you even know the Jedi Code? The Jedi Code was rewritten by Grand Master Luke Skywalker upon reestablishing the Jedi Order in the Galaxy:
Jedi are the guardians of peace in the galaxy.
Jedi use their powers to defend and to protect.
Jedi respect all life, in any form.
Jedi serve others rather than ruling over them, for the good of the galaxy.
Jedi seek to improve themselves through knowledge and training.
You’re flawed in your thinking because the Jedi respect all lifeforms/all are seen as significant in the Force (universe). Also, the Jedi do not to seek to be prideful, but rather humble. You remind me of a certain bright, young Jedi, prideful and arrogent, who fell to the Darkside. May the Lightside of the Force be with you as well!
Fact: almost all the books of the Jewish Bible and the Christian Bible (New Testament) have been represented at the Dead Sea.
Fact: The Dead Sea scrolls are by far not the only ancient archeological biblical texts.
Fact: The early Church fathers and historians in the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd centuries wrote about and quoted the Bible frequently. Most of these writers’ works are still in print, including Eusebius, Polycarp, and Josephus Flavius
Fact: If we could not find a Bible younger than 1,000 years old, we would still be able to recreate the bible from the extensive quotes of it in the writings mentioned above which are still in print.
Fact: There are over 5,000 partial and complete Bible texts that are more than 1,000 years old.
Fact: The Scroll of Isaiah that was found at Qmran was compared to a modern published book of Isaiah and the accuracy was over 90%. The discrepancies were all attributed to mispellings and smudges, none of which affected the meaning of the text.
There are a lot of great books and even DVD’s that back this up. I recommend Dinesh DeSouza’s “What’s So Great About Christianity?” and Lee Strobel’s “The Case for Christ” as two excellent starter books to get you on the path to biblical scholarship.
Reality, once and for all, I never claimed my own scholarship as an authority. I’m not a biblical scholar, just a historian who has read widely in biblical scholarship and who has also edited critical editions of texts. What I have presented is the widely accepted result of biblical scholarship.
“there are great debates amongst biblical scholars on the inclusion and removal of books, chapters, gospels, whatever you wish to call them.”
From the vague way you write this, it seems that you either don’t know what a Gospel is, or how it differs from other books of the Bible, or you don’t know which books of the Bible are actually in question, or both. Why don’t you supply me with a specific example of some book that you claim has been removed or rewritten? Since you never deal in specifics, I have to conclude you are just ignorant.
Here are the facts: Biggz’s orginally meanderings incuded the claim that the Catholic Church had removed books – not just books, but Gospels — from the Bible. This is false. There have been NO books removed or inserted by the Catholic Church since the canon (official list of scriptural books) was established at the end of the fourth century. Up until then there was no definitive list of what was Scripture, and some books of the New Testament were slow to be accepted by everyone. But at no time were any Gospels other than the four we have now even seriously considered for inclusion in the canon. Nor were they ever removed since. There are the various Gnostic Gospels, but they were written long after the canonical ones and never taken seriously by anyone but the small collection of kooks who wrote them (Dan Brown to the contrary). The Protestants later removed several books of the OT from the canon, but that is another matter. That is why I said the number of Gospels removed was 0.
There are questions about parts of the books of the NT, sure. The story of the woman taken in adultery has wandered from Gospel to Gospel in the different manuscripts and other short passages were apparently inserted by scribes. Some critical editions of the NT contain these and others not. But these does not affect the meaning of the Christian faith at all. None that I know of are the subjects of any great arguments between Protestant and catholics, or for that matter, Christians and atheists. In fact, we argue most over the meaning of those parts where what words are in the text are perfectly clear. (Passages of Romans and Galatians come to mind).
None of these insertions, even if they could be considered a “rewriting” of the text (and that is a stretch), it leaves us without knowledge of what the early text was. We know which parts are most likely early and which bits are questionable. It’s not as if there was a rewritten text where we remain ignorant of the fact and without knowledge of the original. So it does not really affect our knowlege of the faith. Hence rewritings” = 0.
What you apparently don’t understand is that every single work that dates from ancient times contains the same types of textual problems: variants, scribal glosses in the margins entered into the text, problems of authorship, translations whose author we don’t know (as if this even effects whether it’s a good translation or not). There are missing manuscripts and badly written manucripts. Our first manuscript of Virgil’s Aneid dates from around a thousand years after Virgil wrote. There have even been whole books that have been reconstructed from quotation of them in other books. Few if any of them present as good a text as does the NT.
And yet no one ever screams about these other ancient texts being unreliable. People don’t wring their hand over having an “unreliable” text of Virgil and therefore refuse to study Virgil or take his poem seriously. They make the best of the text they’ve got, once textual scholarship has done the best it can. Why atheists are so naive about these things I don’t know — except that, like you, they are desperate the dismiss the Bible, and will use any means they can to do so, whether intellectually honest or not.
If you’re not satisifed, look at the videos on the link I gave you. Or, if you still claim I haven’t answered your questions, at least give me a specific example of which books were rewritten or removed and when.
Reality, once and for all, I never claimed my own scholarship as an authority. I’m not a biblical scholar, just a historian who has read widely in biblical scholarship and who has also edited critical editions of texts. What I have presented is the widely accepted result of biblical scholarship.
“there are great debates amongst biblical scholars on the inclusion and removal of books, chapters, gospels, whatever you wish to call them.”
From the vague way you write this, it seems that you either don’t know what a Gospel is, or how it differs from other books of the Bible, or you don’t know which books of the Bible are actually in question, or both. Why don’t you supply me with a specific example of some book that you claim has been removed or rewritten? Since you never deal in specifics, I have to conclude you are just ignorant.
Here are the facts: Biggz’s orginally meanderings incuded the claim that the Catholic Church had removed books – not just books, but Gospels — from the Bible. This is false. There have been NO books removed or inserted by the Catholic Church since the canon (official list of scriptural books) was established at the end of the fourth century. Up until then there was no definitive list of what was Scripture, and some books of the New Testament were slow to be accepted by everyone. But at no time were any Gospels other than the four we have now even seriously considered for inclusion in the canon. Nor were they ever removed since. There are the various Gnostic Gospels, but they were written long after the canonical ones and never taken seriously by anyone but the small collection of kooks who wrote them (Dan Brown to the contrary). The Protestants later removed several books of the OT from the canon, but that is another matter. That is why I said the number of Gospels removed was 0.
There are questions about parts of the books of the NT, sure. The story of the woman taken in adultery has wandered from Gospel to Gospel in the different manuscripts and other short passages were apparently inserted by scribes. Some critical editions of the NT contain these and others not. But these does not affect the meaning of the Christian faith at all. None that I know of are the subjects of any great arguments between Protestant and Catholics, or for that matter, Christians and atheists. In fact, Christians argue most over the meaning of those parts where what words are in the text are perfectly clear. (Passages of Romans and Galatians come to mind).
None of these insertions, even if they could be considered a “rewriting” of the text (and that is a stretch) leave us without knowledge of what the early text was. We know which parts are most likely early and which bits are questionable. It’s not as if there was a rewritten text where we remain ignorant of the fact and without knowledge of the original. So it does not really affect our knowlege of the faith. Hence rewritings” = 0.
What you apparently don’t understand is that every single work that dates from ancient times contains the same types of textual problems: variants, scribal glosses in the margins entered into the text, problems of authorship, translations whose author we don’t know (as if this even effects whether it’s a good translation or not). There are missing manuscripts and badly written manucripts. Our first manuscript of many of Plato’s Dialogues was written around 895 A.D, around 1300 years after Plato originally wrote them. We have no idea what ocurred in the interim. There have even been whole ancient books that have been reconstructed from quotation of them in other books. Few if any of them present as good a text as does the NT.
And yet no one ever screams about these other ancient texts being unreliable. People don’t wring their hand over having an “unreliable” text of Plato and therefore refuse to study him or his works seriously. They make the best of the text they’ve got, once textual scholarship has done the best it can. Why atheists are so naive about these things I don’t know — except that, like you, they are desperate to dismiss the Bible, and will use any means they can to do so, whether intellectually honest or not.
If you’re not satisifed, look at the videos on the link I gave you. Or, if you still claim I haven’t answered your questions, at least give me a specific example of which books were rewritten or removed and when. Otherwise you just keep insisting on the “possibility” of errors and discrepancies occurring without ever bothering to demonstrate the reality of them (Reality! Now there’s a concept).
***
(Please disregard the above post where I mistakenly wrote Virgil instead of Plato. I thought I had cancelled it before it posted. I’ve also edited it some more).
YOU ARE RIGHT LORI!!!! – look I even put it in capitals, and bold!
I cannot categorically state that the catholic church is responsible for the removal of gospels.
Others have been though, And it is still a fact that there have been so many translations and interpretations both ancient and modern that it cannot be stated that there is a definitive text. And that’s a Fact: ninek.
If you were able to copy and paste a section of the tract Rachael C., it would not have been hard to see the name on it.
Reality, pleae tell me which Gospels you think have been removed and when. if you can’t do it, then don’t keep repeating the claim.
And no, neither translations or interpretations affect anything in the original Greek text of scripture. That’s why they’re called translations and interpretations, not text. Why can’t you get this simple concept straight?
I can, and I shall supply some info in a few days – I’m off to indulge in hedonism right now.
“And no, neither translations or interpretations affect anything in the original Greek text of scripture” – which came from??? That’s right, aramaic and hebrew I think you said. So there were translations and interpretations.
And you have yet to prove that the transltion from the Aramaic involved any error. I don’t mean that the Aramaic oral tradition and the Greek were worded exactly alike, but that there was no fundamental change in meaning. That’s because we have a strong probability, supported by much evidence that the people who were responsible for the Armaic tradition were the same people (or at least part of the very same tightly knit group) that wrote the Greek. So the errors you suppose are very unlikely.
Hedonism — now that’s another great concept, but it has little to do with reality. I suppose you know that?
I seriously doubt you’ll be back.
Well Lori, it would appear that you are seriously wrong, yet again. I cannot fathom why you would doubt I’d be back, wishful thinking perhaps.
On what basis do you claim hedonism to have little to do with reality? Are you not aware of the concept of christian hedonism?
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07187a.htm
Anyway, as I said I would, here’s some stuff for you to look at:
http://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=13&article=66
http://carm.org/apologetics/lost-books/are-these-lost-books-bible
http://www.scribd.com/doc/5486124/The-Lost-Books-of-the-Bible
http://teampyro.blogspot.com/search/label/sola%20Scriptura
http://bible.org/question/why-are-some-books-missing-kjv
Perhaps you could try submitting some of your scholarly works to Bilogos.
Reality, the thoroughly unscholarly stuff you are submitting is just laughable. Don’t believe everything you read on the internet.
First thing: That the Bible cites extra-biblical books that no longer exist may be true, but how on earth does that make the biblical text incomplete? That is ludicrous.
Second: I have already explained about the “apocrypha” above. In fact, the “apocryphal” books were considered scripture by the Catholic Church all throughout the ancient and medieval periods, and were in all the early manuscripts and in the canons of scripture. It was the Protestants who removed these books. All this is shown by the manuscript evidence and cannot possibly be in doubt. In fact, the first editions of the Protestant King James Bible all contained the Apochrypha! These books were no longer in later editions. Once again disagreement about canon in no way affects the actual text, which we know and have always known.
There were never 600 books in the Bible or anything like it. All that junk about Constantine is false. The particular source you got this from is lying or ignorant. Dan Brown conspiracy stuff. It’s not even worth going into the rest of this.
Any real scholar is going to laugh at what you have cited here.