loveapple

I am so sorry that this board is being targetted in this way. I see there is a very unpleasant piece of spam on the forum at the moment . It must be hard to keep up with it all!

No political part is innocent in these murders.

 

It is the individuals who suffer for the sake of the Nationalistic Egos. There is no reason why Palestinians should not have a homeland. There is no reason why Israeli's should not have a homeland. There is no reason why they can not share the same space.

 

The Media isn't just lying to us, it is lying to those who are living in the midst of it all.

 

Anyone else get an email from Pat Robertson? He thinks this is God. What kind of god does he believe in? I deleted the email. I probably should have saved it and posted the content. God tells him a lot of things, apparently. He is like a seer or a soothsayer.

I am surprised that people in the US give Pat Roberstson the time of day, the chap comes over as a an unpleasant kook whose views on life should be disregarded!

Ditto loveapple:

 

IMHO Israel is reacting these days in paranoid and irrational ways, and the net result is mostly the death and suffering of innocent people, not terrorists.

 

flow....

You are right, Israel doesn't seem to be killing Hezbollah just the poor innocent bystanders. I think both sides can be accused of terrorism!

When Israel was created there was a fatal flaw for which the creators of that country are responsible. The Palestinians had just as much right to their own state as the Israelis. I think if I was lving next door to Israel I might feel as their neighbours do!

At one time I supported Israel but no longer. What I see on my TV screen convinces me that Israel is indeed an unholy and pariah state, and if their God really supports the country as some would have us believe then God is a pariah diety!

Good to be back after a short hiatus, needed some time for chillling with my friends, playing cards, all the good stuff.

 

loveapple:

Are you saying then that by allowing their citizens to be indiscrimantely attacked Israel would be setting a better example? How else should Israel deal with an enemy force which targets its civilians while hiding behind Lebanese civilians? How can peace be acheived given Hezbollah's very public aims (ie: the destruction of Israel and the driving of the Jews into the Sea?)

I guess that answers my last question to a certain degree. Given this opposition to Israel's existence, what should be done now?

They were offered one, but Terror-fat knew that peace with Israel would mean a coup against him by the Islamofacist thugs within Fatah, the PLO at large, Hamas, Al-Aqsa Martyr's Brigade, Islamic Jihad and the rest of their cronies. SO instead he diverted Palestinian Arab attention by launching another intifada.

Zionist terrorism? Would that be the Jews who tried to buy land legally from Arabs living in what has been variously known as Israel and Palestine but weren;t allowed to because it was ILLEGAL under Jordanian law to sell land to Jews? Or were the zionist thugs and terrorists the ones who fought back against the armed gangs organised by the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem (You know, the one who supported Hitler and organised Arab brigades to fight for him?) Even if your history weren't wrong, the moral equication you make between two armed groups facing off and blowing up children on the way to school disqualifies anything you say from serious consideration.

Untrue, if and when mistakes are made, as they can be in the "fog of war" Israel a.) apologizes and recognizes their faults, b.) investigates soldiers accused of crimes against terrorists and those unlucky enough to be forced into shielding them c.) gives rights to the Arabs who live inside Israel and Gaza as well as Judea and Samaria which surpasses the rest fo the Arab world. When Hezbollah (and Hamas for that matter) kill civilians they dance around in the streets with Korans held high giving candy to children.

 

October's Autumn:

You do understand what specious means right? Because after quoting what DCJ said about specious arguments you have simply cranked yours up to 11.

 

Are you saying that ALL WAR is caused and prosecuted by evil men? I hope not, as some wars are necessary because they prevent and vert greater evils. A classic example would be the Second World War. Fighting against Hitler militarily was necessary as diplomacy had clearly been shown to be useless. By fighting, the Allied powers prevented a much greater evil from beign perpetrated throughout the world by averting the world-wide establishment of the Third Reich.

 

You may call it blindness to defend some of GWB actions, but I think Albert Enistein might consider the methods of the anti-war left to be insanity.

Let the ghost of Chamberlain rest. There will be no peace in our time until those who desire and attempt to destroy us utterly fail or utterly succeed. Which side are you on?

 

p.s. - The show you are describing is called "Red Green", written by and starring Steve Smith amongst others, it was actually not Public Access but rather produced by our State run broadcaster (my tax dollars at work ) to have the look and feel of Public Access.

Quite frankly, although it pains me to say it, I really hope that Israel gets a bloody nose this time, and has as much damage inflicted on that unholy state as it has inflicted on Lebanon, then it might not be so gungho in future!

loveapple:

 

We used to get a public television show in the US called the Red and Green Show. It featured two Canadian guys wearing red and green plaid outfits who mostly sat around talking about hunting trips, killing animals, and about recipies for cooking what they killed and subsequently ate. Really hilarious, but I haven't seen it on for sometime. Did that make it across the pond to the UK? We have quite a few of your comedies on over here.

 

Maybe one of the middle east channels could revamp the concept and do a comedy of the same sort satirizing the warfare follies we're forced to watch on the daily news. It could be called, perhaps, Middle East Mash ?

 

flow....

I haven't seen the one you mentioned but we have similar satire shows.

loveapple:

 

Maybe that's how they both arrived here on earth 5,300 years ago.

 

flow....

loveapple:

Agreed. But I will ask again, please give reasons for your opinions, perhaps even a few suggestions for ways that Israel's policies could achieve the ends you advocate. If Israel isn't being "moderate" or "proportionate" please explain to me what actions would fall within these categories. Saying someone is wrong, without proposing anything else isn't exactly debate.

Do you have any particular sources to back up your claim that it is mostly children who are being hurt or killed in Lebanon?

 

If you want to know one of the main reasons for civilian casualties you should read this article from the Jerusalem Post. Or this article on Ynet about Hezbollah preventing civilians from leaving the areas of combat. It seems to me that if Hebollah was at all concerned about women and children and other non-combatants they would let them leave instead of using them as human shields.

Israel always makes the excuse that innocent people get hurt because Hezbollah is operating in civilian areas! Israel should not be targetting those areas, but then Israel is no better than Hezbollah imo! The Americans are getting their 51st state to do their dirty work, and Blair is going along with it. Most of the British public don't support Israel, I suspect! Israel should never have been created imo. The Palestinians should have been given a state too. Don't forget zionist terrorism forced the issue, they were fighting for what they saw as their right to a state. Sound familiar? Isn't that what the Palestinians are doing? I suspect that if the holocaust hadn't happened, a truly disgusting blot on the 20th Century, Israel would not have been created. I think the guilt engendered by the death of so many millions of Jews was the pressure that led the British to give into the zionist thugs!

Hezbollah and Israel deserve each other, they are both beyond the pale, neither side seeming to care how many of the otherside's inncocents they kill and maim. I just wish we could send the warring combatants to some distant planet where they could kill each other with impunity, then the world could forget about them and their angst!

loveapple:

 

Again and again it is the same thing with no actual plan.

Will you ever actually put forward what you think would be a proportionate response or will you just sit back and say that the Jews shouldn't fight the people trying to destroy them and their state? You didn't respond to the needs of Israel for strategic depth necessary in thier defense and you haven't answered why a politically motivated fake letter can or should be used at all in this type of conversation?

 

Do you have anything to contribute other than blandly insisting that the Jews quietly suffer kidnappings, invasions and rocket attacks?

 

Let's go a step further and change the players. If French suddenly decided to start shelling say, London, what would be an appropriate response for the British government to take? Or, more apropos to the situation in Lebanon, what if an armed group (who was coincidentally part of the government - or in Gaza where a terrorist organisation IS the government) started to shell London while the French government sat idly by? What would be an appropriate reaction?

 

flow:

 

I don't know if you are realy gone or not but I missed this the first time.

It seems you are really intent on playing my teacher, first the book reports and now a english lesson.

 

Here at dictionary.com you can find the entry for drivel. It should be noted firstly that I used drivel as a noun and not a verb, so the definitions you gave (all being verbs) are contextually incorrect. Secondly, the first definition as a noun is

I stand by my use of the word drivel, but if you insist I could probably modify to simply "trash" if that would be clearer.

James you are entitled to your opinion, just as the rest of us are enttiled to ours. If Israel was just exterminating Hezbollah then I wouldn't have too much of a problem with that, but of course it is the civilian population that are getting hurt and killed, mainly children and that I do have a problem with. I have an even bigger problem with Bush who vetoed stem cell research as he didn't approve of the use of embryos, but is quite happy for foreign children to be killed so Israel can pursue its aims! We all know that if the USA said, 'HALT', Israel, the 51st State, would do just that! I also have a big problem with Tony Blair, who is the poodle of Bush and goes along with everything the US does, however terrible! Power has gone to that man's head, but the majority of the British public are not in favour of Israel's actions! Hopefully when Blair is no longer PM Brtiain and the US will not be as close where foreign policy is concerned!

"I am concerned that Israel might over react to provocations. However, thus far, Israel has acted moderately in response to missile attacks and kidnappings."

You reckon? I would have thought that Israel and Moderate was an oxymoron. Lebanon is devasted, many innocents killed. I would hate to see what they would do if they weren't being moderate

In order to try to confront my fundamentalist theology demons I go onto fundamentalist forums from time to time and challenge their way of thinking. I find it does help in a strange sort of way, although I usually end up getting kicked off the forum as what I have to say is an anathema to most of them. At present I am on an end times forum. It beggars belief that people can actually believe the in the things they do. I confidently expect to be kicked off the forum by the end of the day as I challenged their views on homosexuality, which they seem to think is at the bottom of all the ills in this world!

.) What would be an appropriate Israeli response to incursions accross Israeli borders from two peices of land they gave up in the "peace" process?

It wasn't their land to give up, they were occuping it illegally!

Something I read today: You should raise your children up in a religion so they have

something to rebel against later. :-)

 

--des

Do children need any excuse to rebel when they are teenagers?

[i am sorry if I jumped to conclusions. Maybe you could talk a little more about your own stuggle with faith.

 

Marilyn

When I was eleven I recited the 'born again' mantra because I was scared of hell-fire and for no other reason. All the time I resented God whom I blamed for putting me in that position! When I left home to marry in 1969 I left God behind too. I had my 50th birthday in 2000, which concentrates the mind wonderfully. I realised that it was unlikely that I would still be around in 50 years time so I needed to explore if I believed in God and an afterlife. I have come to the conclusion that God exists in the form of a divine spark in each one of us, which we can access if we so wish. I am doubtful if God is an external physical presence. I think the spirit or soul moves onto a higher plain when we die, but I don't believe in a physical resurrection, I can't see the point of one. I think Jesus was a good man and an example to us all, but I am not sure if I believe in all the supernatural stuff attributed to him. It might be true, but I have my doubts. That is my thinking at present. It is not writ in stone, it could change if I was otherwise convinced.

Yes, that is the format I use. The size is smaller than the posted limit.

Gosh, what a handsome fellow you are!

Mine are 13 and 10. We didn't "do church" until about 6 years ago. We joined a service oriented church that, theologically is much more conservative than we are. The congregation is all over the map and the sermons are practical - mostly focused on how to take this God/christian stuff into the rest of your life. There is quite a bit of trust, safety, love, etc. from God. My kids are thriving religiously... it is so much easier for them to believe - after all they believe all the stuff we tell them! We (ok, periodically ) read aloud - right now it's Max Lucado's, God Came Near (great, short essays), watch stuff on TV (or recently saw the famous DaVinci Code) and then casually talk about it... not too organized, but we like it. Anyway, I think making God accessible, giving them information - (as we say it) God is big. When people try to say God only loves certain people, etc, they make God small. We usually talk about fear and people trying to have rules to feel safe.

 

Thich Nhat Hanh has some good children's books as does Max Lucado. They may be old enough for Narnia (CS Lewis) - those are great to read aloud. Then, of course, Harry Potter! If you mix up secular and religious, they don't catch on and object as often !!!

 

I think you're right in that it helps for them to have a church, some basics, and the overall identity. As any of us can attest - christianity can take you to a variety of places! Just give them the comfort level and information to know God so that they can work it out with "Him".

 

Godspeed!!

When my eldest grandson, a very bright child, was 2-years-old he asked his mother why she believed in Jesus as she couldn't see him, hear him or feel him, she couldn't come up with an answer that convinced her son of the existence of Jesus. He is now aged four, and I cannot see him being interested in religion as faith has too many unanswered questions!

Here's a little article that appeared in one of our local alternative papers, The Las Vegas Weekly. I thought that you'd all enjoy it.

 

flow....

 

> NEVADA BISHOP TAKES OVER WORLD<

 

Now that she's been voted Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church worldwide, Nevada's Bishop Katherine Jefferts Schori is everywhere-- CNN, Time, NPR, flying around the globe. We remember when her concerns were much, much smaller than becoming the first female to hold that post and subsequently divide the stodgy international Anglican community:

 

"When I was growing up, the closest that little girls could come to the altar was singing in the choir." Las Vegas Sun, October 2000 upon being named Bishop of Nevada.

 

"I hope to... develop God's dream for Nevada."--Las Vegas Sun 2001

 

Better amp up those dreams, Bishop. Here's the reaction of Orthodox Anglican, Virtue Online, to your new job: " [Liberals] voted for her to stick it in the eye of the Anglican community."

 

Give 'em hell, Right Reverend !

I hope it won't be too long before the UK has its first woman bishop! It would be great if there was a woman Archbishop of Canterbury, the highest Anglican office in the UK. I am hopeful that my daughter, an Anglican priest, might have aspirations in that direction!

Try http://forums.crosswalk.com/

When you describe your husband's faith, or lack of faith the cliche "Easy come, easy go" comes to mind.

I'm convinced that those of us who are compelled to struggle with faith are not content with the shallow and superficial. I believe that anything with depth comes as a result of struggle and suffering. The fact that you acknowledge a divine spark within you is in itself a sign of hope. Obviously faith is important to you, despite this struggle, or you would be more willing to let go.

As you have not met my husband I just don't know how you can make that sort of judgment on one comment of mine?

My husband is an extremely intelligent man with four degrees, one in theology. The more he studied the more he found that the idea of a deity became less credible to him. Just after his 50th birthday in 1997, he realised that he no longer had any belief in God at all and the intervening years have only strengthened that opinion. It was certainly NOT easy come, easy go, much thought went into it!

I use a jpg file to upload my avatar, which is of one of my artwork pictures. It is not always easy to select a picture or photo that will show up when you can use so few pixels to display it.

I was banned from crosswalk.com also.

Then I am in good company!

like what Kibran says we are a bow and they are the arrow we point them in the right direction

Ah but which is the right direction where faith is concerned?

There are at least *two* Crosswalks having to do with religion.

 

I believe you must have joined up

with http://www.crosswalk.com. This particular group declares someting that sounds like a literal

view of the Bible--- a virgin birth, inerrant scriptures, a literal trinity, etc. From your short time on

the group, I would not think you would mix too well with this! I just did a little lurking! YIKES.

http://www.crosswalkamerica.org does not have a forum. If it did, I doubt you would be

kicked off, since it was started by some UCC members (I think, at least one). UCC is the

most liberal/progressive of Christian demonimations, allows the ordination of gays and lesbians,

and is not creedal (iow, there is no statement of what you must believe). Here and there, however, there are conservative denominations, since there is no central authority. This group is attempting to walk across

the US (from Phoenix) passing by and talking with and interacting with as many people as possible

giving them a different inclusive vision of Christianity.

Here is a summary of the Phoenix Affirmations: http://www.crosswalkamerica.org/pa.htm

 

--des

Des, it was crosswalk.com which gave me my marching orders!

Just joined this forum. It looks pretty awesome. I love the topics after a brief perusal!

 

I have young children (3 of them: 6, 4, 2) and I have wondered how I am going to raise them as I am moving through a variety of stages of faith and expect to continue my growth. As much as I have left the old teachings behind, I do value the experiences and perspectives they gave me. In fact, I am certain they were instrumental in helping me move beyond some of the more basic truths which I once upon a time accepted.

 

Recognizing the importance of all these milestones along the way, I am wondering if I should rather begin to influence my children in the fundamental teachings of my early childhood experiences. Even those beliefs I heartily disagree with, I think are crucial to formation of spiritual understanding. I can help to expose the inconsistencies and help them think outside the box as opportunities arise.

 

In the story Jurassic Park, by Michael Crichton, the scientists are skeptical of Dr. Hammond's dream of reintroducing dinosaurs to humanity. Their critique is that he is standing on the shoulders of many scientists before him to extract the dino DNA (blah, blah) and basically take a massive leap forward scientifically. Their concern is that he has not acquired the maturity and understanding to efficiently and safely manage the creatures. He has not grown through the process of maturation to be able to adequately think through his decisions.

 

In some weird, round about way, I want to provide my children with a healthy, slow process of discovery and growth that in some ways emulates my own growth of faith. The temptation is to imbue in each of them an understanding of God and Christianity that in many ways only begins where I leave off - without the broader foundation of nurture, safety, and dissent. Not that I am anyone to point fingers, but maybe this is the problem with the Baby Boomer generation having grown up with Builder (Depression era) parents.

It is fine to share with kids the understanding that people have of faith, and why people think as they do, providing the children don't feel pressured into accepting it themselves.

Some days I am hanging onto my faith by my fingertips. It would be so much easier to be an atheist like my husband, who was a 'born again' in his youth. However, I feel that my divine spark and myself are still in business, even though that spark is very dim sometimes!