October's Autumn

Does it feel that way to you too? That you are more voting against someone than for someone?

That is why I'm an independent "small i." Sometimes I think it is cynicism but then "they" go and do something stupid (like giving Bush power) and I realize that I'm just realistic! I guess I *usually* see the Democrats as the lesser of the two evils is *most* elections.

TV Schedule: Sunday: Desperate Housewives and Crossing Jordan Monday: Medium Tuesday: Scrubs; sometimes SVU Weds: Alias! Thurs: Smallville; My Name is Earl; The Office Frid: NUMB3RS an d a new show I can't remember the name of! Sat: Rent a movie Sometimes I watch CSI. I got tired of the Law & Order shows and CSI was a nice switch. I like the one with Jorga Fox on it best.

I think it is a good indication of how humans have often seen themselves in relationship to animals: as above them. I don't think it is a truth per se, but rather human interpretation.

Actually, the images are created by fundamentalists/conservatives themselves. Consider what Pat Robetson says and does, what George Bush says and does, what Jerry Falwell says and does... the list goes on and on. When I was a teenager it was Jimmy Swaggart and Jim Bakker! The "seculars" who have problems with fundamentalists/conservatives were usually exposed to highly negative "Christians" who did two things, one condemned people to hell, and two did not let those who belonged to their group know that there were other versions of Christianity out there. I think of my internet friend who's mom is a "born again" and he is gay. Of course he is going to hell (according to her and her church). What kind of impression does one *expect* him to have of Christianity? A positive one? I don't think so. Especialy not when you add that to what he sees in the real world. I think he has met two people who aren't areligious (me and one other person) who wholly embraced and don't believe he is evil and going to hell. From his stand point we are the rare exception! I agreed with all your other comments, Beach! You echoed many of my own feelings (and said it better than I could have!) As far as those who think they are persecuted? I say they go to a country where Christians are *really* persecuted and *then* they will know what persecution is!

That is the point. We can't. Nor are we meant to. Not following your logic.

Once again, it is hard to blame them considering *I* couldn't find progressives/liberals for years. "They" aren't looking. How could they possibly know that Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, and George Bush are not the only kind of CHristian? Most (Fundamentalists/Conservative) Christians don't know it either!

It was Rachel something, a frequent guest of his. I don't mind people being pragmatic, but I wonder when there isn't something from a different sort of morality that asserts itself, too. I'm not quite understanding...

What about all religions are false and true, including atheism. That is to say there is truth in all religions and there are lies in all religions. No single one corners the market on who God is or isn't.

I can identify with that!

Depends on if he is a "Colmes liberal" or a true liberal (I just finished reading the new Al Franken book) Do you remember who the person from air america was? I'm sure they don't fear divine judgement because they think they are right. As far as History goes, I doubt they fear it. Afterall people often excuse this kind of behavior as being the product of their culture/situation. Although I do believe history will judge Bush and the American people of today very harshly (rightly so) for what they've done in the worldand in the United States. Probably not. But then again it does appear to be the model. I agree. I think that power and money are the priority. Well, I guess that tells us about how "true" that "Christian" is. Of course people who say he is a Christian because he supposedly prays and reads his bible every day. I don't think that is the mark of a Christian. And I suspect he is lying anyhow.

So far I've observed two ways people move from right to left. One is a growing, more intellectual way. The other is reactionary. (I'm not saying their aren't any other ways just that I've observed these two). The one that is reactionary seems to more likely produce the absolute thinking. I'm specifically thinking of someone I worked with who's brother and his wife were atheists (I can't remember what the catalyst was, I may not have known). They both started out as more fundamentalist (he was raised Southern Baptist). When they had kids (twins) they flipped back and became fundamentalists. Going in both directions there didn't seem to be any thoughtfulness that went into it. Just a sudden change. People seem to be less b&w when they can look back over a period of time and see how 5 years ago they believed such and such and 1 year ago they believed such and such. Anyone else observe this?

I can say, one thing about growing up reading it was I had no problem understanding Shakespeare in High School! Actually, I think the psalms sometimes sound better!

Radical. I'm inclined to agree.

Yup. I was also surprised someone like Yancy would not realize this. Of course we've cleared that up. I've found that generally speaking people who are more socially active are also more educated. That also tends to lead one out of using the KJV as the absolute only true bible, etc.

The general gist I've gotten, although I'm sure there are many many views, is that HaSatan is a spiritual being, created by God, to serve as the "accuser" or "prosecuting attorney" against humanity. These spiritual beings do NOT have free will, however, so in essence, they can be called aspects of God, as they are doing exactly what God created them to do. I'm not saying I agree with this. It's just something I've read. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I have as well. It come strongly from the book of Job.

Gotcha. ALthough I disagree with the view on Judaism and Satan. From my experience in the liberal Conservative congregation the members and the Rabbi did not believe in Satan as an independant being OR as an aspect of God. Although I know it is a concept from the Hebrew Bible.

That reminds me of a book I discovered when I was in Seminary (I also worked in the library). The Dangers of growing up in a Christian home by David Sloat. I don't know how I'd feel about it now but at the time it was very healing. http://www.alibris.com/search/search.cfm?S...MrD_RLQGSIrpX1w

Exactly! Although the question remains (in response to the original post) where is his emphasis? I am surprised at the fallen angel/Lucifer thing. I just assumed that people had been educated out of that one. It was a King who fell. I wonder if Yancy reads the KJV version of the bible!

I loved Franken's book when I first read it. I look at it now with a teeny grain of salt. He is such a riot though. I never stopped laughing throught the whole book. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Yeah, I take it with a grain of salt. I don't agree with all of his conclusions. Although, as I once told a child who had the habit of lying: when someone is caught repeatedly lying it is natural for others to tend to assume they are lying even when they may not be. Someone needs to tell that to Bill O'Reily and Anne Coulter, to name a few! I enjoy Franken's intelligence as well as his wit.

I'm not concerned about what others see. Well, I guess I am. I guess I don't see it as my responsibility. People will see it when they want to. I'm less concerned about the "Atheists/Humansists Left" simply because I find they are more socially active and more like to follow Jesus' teaching even if they don't believe in God. My concern with the Right is that they aren't doing what is right for those in the world who are most vulnerable and for the world itself. I've seen some who are atheists who are right wing politically (which really blows my mind!)

I think it is a matter of emphasis. Is someone more concerned about what Jesus did or rather or not Mary was a Virgin? If Mary being a virgin is not particularly important (and they may still hold that to be true) but what Jesus did (and our need to follow that example) is Primary than I'd say that person was a Progressive. If someone is overly concerned that you believe in Virgin Mary, baptism, Resurrection and resurrection, and all of Jesus miracles actually happened (you can add ot the list or subtract) then I'd say they are conservative. Again, it is not about their personal belief but where the put the emphasis on their personal belief.

I'm going with #2. isn't there a parable about two brothers? The father asks them to do something one says no, but ends up doing it. The other says yes and ends up not doing it. It is the one who does it who is recognized as right.

That is very cool. I like that analogy!