Press "Enter" to skip to content

ACLU Writes Letter, Miller School Board Boots Gideon Bibles

I told the Miller School District in May that their decision to allow the Gideons to distribute Bibles to fifth graders was unconstitutional. And the Miller School District listened!

Actually, they listened to the American Civil Liberties Union, which sent the Miller School District a complaint outlining the obvious church-state-separation problem of a public school letting religious groups proselytize on campus. Last month, the school board reversed its Bible-distribution policy and told the Gideons and other converters to hand out their tracts elsewhere.

This reversal is a small but instructive victory for us liberals trying to bring secular sanity to South Dakota. The Miller board president's comments on the reversal explain why:

"It's been through the court system and everything. We've got to follow the letter of the law," said board president Tim Zacher.

The reversal came after the ACLU sent a letter to the Miller School District in May saying the school was on "shaky constitutional ground" by allowing religious literature to be distributed in a public school.

...Zacher said he was disappointed the board was forced to change its policy and disallow the Bible distribution.

"Our founding fathers felt God very strong in this country," he said.

The Bibles had been distributed in previous years at Miller, though Zacher didn't know for how long.

"We had never had a bit of problem with it before," he said. "I guess that's the way it is" [David Montgomery, "Miller School Board Reverses Policy Allowing Handout of Bibles," that Sioux Falls paper, 2014.07.30].

Never had problem before... there's a key phrase. We may think that conservative Republican fundagelicanism is just entrenched in South Dakota culture and institutions. But Miller shows that bad policy may be less entrenched and simply unchallenged. As long as there's not a problem, nothing happens. But create a problem, or even warn there could be a problem, and local leaders may surrender. The ACLU didn't have to lawyer up; they just wrote a letter, showed the Miller school board that the Constitution was not on their side, and got the proper result.

That's why, instead of retreating to Minnesota and other saner political spheres, I keep encouraging my fellow South Dakota liberals, atheists, and other lovers of freedom to stand up and fight. Not every school board or city council will surrender before superior logic and law. But many will, preferring to avoid conflict and headlines. If we challenge every instance of local theocracy and other oppression, and if only 25% of the boards we challenge give in without a fight, those few easy victories give us that much more precedent for fighting hard against the remaining 75% to get liberty and justice for all... including liberty for our fifth-graders from Gideons, jihadis, Satanists, and atheists who may try to co-opt school grounds to advance or denigrate specific religions.

* * *

Under the Constitution schools cannot intentionally, or unintentionally, advance religion or become too entangled with religious groups. The courts have repeatedly said that schools must also avoid favoring or appearing to favor a religious view, and they may not create any situation in which students feel coerced to participate in religion. These constitutional protections ensure that students can find and follow their own faith with the guidance of their family and religious leaders, free from government intrusion [ACLU, press release, 2014.05.12].

249 Comments

  1. bearcreekbat 2014.08.01

    It is good to see the ACLU able to take an interest in South Dakota issues! Years ago the ACLU was pretty much overwhelmed, with a single lawyer, Steven Pevar, situated in Denver, and in charge of most litigation throughout the Midwest. During those bleak days, Pevar was not able to offer much, if any, help on complaints he heard from SD.

  2. Rocky Racoon 2014.08.01

    I remember them doing this when I was in 5th grade. School was over for the day. We came down from our upstairs classrooms and in the common hallway stood two old men in suits holding small copies of said book in outstretched, hopeful hands. But this was the 70's. They got away with that crap back then.

  3. Angelo Cruz 2014.08.01

    ACLU = ENEMIES of GOD/AMERICA

  4. larry kurtz 2014.08.01

    Mr. Cruz: you don't want me to be your enemy.

  5. Angelo Cruz 2014.08.01

    The Bible Contains:

    The Mind Of God - The State Of Man
    The Way Of Salvation
    The Doom Of Sinners - The Happiness Of Believers

    Its Doctrines Are Holy - Its Precepts Are Binding
    Its Histories Are True
    Its Decisions Are Immutable - Its Ways Are Perfect

    Read It To Be Wise - Believe It To Be Safe
    Practice It To Be Holy

    It Contains Light To Direct You - Food To Support You
    Comfort To Cheer You

    It Is The Traveler's Bag - The Pilgrim's Staff
    The Pilot's Compass
    The Soldier's Sword - The Christian's Charter

    Here Paradise Is Restored - Heaven Opened
    The Gates Of Hell Disclosed

    Christ Is Its Grand Subject - Our Good The Design
    The Glory Of God Its End

    It Should Fill The Memory - Rule The Heart
    Guide The Feet

    Read It Slowly - Frequently
    Prayerfully

    It Is A Mine Of Wealth - A Paradise Of Glory
    A River Of Pleasure

    It Is Given You In Life - Will Be Opened At The Judgment
    Be Remembered Forever

    It Involves The Highest Responsibility - Will Reward The Greatest Labor
    And Will Condemn All Who Trifle With Its Sacred Contents

    The Gideons

  6. Steve Sibson 2014.08.01

    "The courts have repeatedly said that schools must also avoid favoring or appearing to favor a religious view, and they may not create any situation in which students feel coerced to participate in religion."

    Previously Cory argued to except the Buddhist's yoga from the ban of religion in the government schools:

    https://madvilletimes.com/2013/01/yoga-is-the-devil-claims-christian-group-fighting-yoga-in-calif-elementary-school/

    Since the blog master does not want my analysis, can somebody else provide an analysis and/or reconciliation here?

  7. Angelo Cruz 2014.08.01

    A Society Without God

    "I am as sure as I am of the fact of Christ's reign that a comprehensive and centralized system of national education separated from religion, as is now commonly proposed, will prove the most appalling engine for the propagation of anti-Christian and atheistic unbelief, social and political, which this sin-rent world has ever seen."

    Professor A.A. Hodge
    Princeton Seminar - 1887

    "For over one hundred years, Americans have been running a gigantic experiment in government schools, trying to find out what a society looks like without God. Now we know."

    Douglas Wilson
    Author - 1991

  8. caheidelberger Post author | 2014.08.01

    The ACLU and I are not enemies of America or God (though God doesn't have a great track record of backing me up in my various battles). We actually serve the better interests of church and state by defending their separation.

  9. Jenny 2014.08.01

    I don't know how you put up with Sibby controlling your blog, Cory. He doesn't even call you by your name. He's twisting it into 'poor pitiful Sibby' now.

  10. Angelo Cruz 2014.08.01

    You will NEVER be my enemy larry. You SHOULD fear being the enemy of the Ruler of the Universe - Elo'him.

  11. larry kurtz 2014.08.01

    go f[-] yerself, angelo.

  12. larry kurtz 2014.08.01

    God @TheTweetOfGod · Jul 29
    Nothing is real and you are cosmically insignificant, so relax.

  13. caheidelberger Post author | 2014.08.01

    This discussion is fine, but the point is that you can't walk into a public school and force a captive audience of children to listen to it. Angelo's response seems to suggest that he reads the ACLU as putting a wall between children and the Christian God. But read the ACLU's statement at the bottom of the post again: they are all about children learning religion from their parents and churches; they want to prevent the state from intruding on that religious instruction.

    Remember, the state can't promote one specific faith. Angelo, suppose we re-reverse Miller's decision and quash the ACLU. Are you o.k. with my coming to your local school and handing out my atheist tracts to the fifth graders?

  14. Angelo Cruz 2014.08.01

    That is very eloquent and deep larry.

    Did you learn that vocabulary from Princeton, Yale or Columbia?

  15. bearcreekbat 2014.08.01

    Cory, your proselytizing might be a very good thing! It borders on emotional child abuse to tell these precious young ones that they are going to burn in hell and be tortured unless they shape up.

    Just be careful that you don't reveal too much, such as information about Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny and the Tooth Fairy, or you might take away some childish hopes.

  16. bearcreekbat 2014.08.01

    Angelo, in our spirit of good humor, here are a couple more:

    Q: How many atheists does it take to change a light bulb?

    A: Two. One to actually change the bulb, and the other to videotape the job so fundamentalists won’t claim that god did it.

    Q: How many creationists does it take to change a light bulb?

    A: None! They've invented torches!

  17. Angelo Cruz 2014.08.01

    caheidelberger

    *Are you o.k. with my coming to your local school and handing out my atheist tracts to the fifth graders?*

    Is this not the beauty of America Cory?

  18. larry kurtz 2014.08.01

    Angelo, fan worship is just another mental disorder: your book of literature is allowed South Dakota classrooms as just another English translation of someone else's art.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24653942

  19. Angelo Cruz 2014.08.01

    caheidelberger

    *The ACLU and I are not enemies of America or God.*

    I mean this in the spiritual sense.

  20. Jenny 2014.08.01

    You'll have to excuse Larry. He has a low threshold for religious freakshows coming on to a progressive blog.

  21. Angelo Cruz 2014.08.01

    larry

    *your book of literature*

    Correction: Holy Bible.

  22. jerry 2014.08.01

    Cruz, Sibson and that bird fella, are like scud missles. They fire often and are always off target by a bunch.

  23. larry kurtz 2014.08.01

    Thanks, Jenny; but not convinced Madville is a progressive blog: liberal leanings for sure yet Cory has not quite been able to embrace all the tenets of Progressivism applied in the 21st Century.

  24. Lynn 2014.08.01

    Angelo do you reside in South Dakota?

    Not far from Miller SD is the Sunshine Bible Acadamy. Parents that would like their kids immersed in a religious education there if it is in line with their faith. Granted that school's tuition may be too expensive for some parents but there are other options outside of the public school system.

    Private religious schools offer various levels of financial aid or Parents could send their children to after public school religious classes, Sunday school, bible study or at their home.

    That is the real beauty of living in America! Parents and children especially when they get older can decide what how to proceed with their very intimate spiritual journey.

  25. bearcreekbat 2014.08.01

    I, as an atheist, would love the opportunity to teach a school class about the Bible. Indeed, the study of the Bible was a key to my conversion to atheism.

    A man sees a boy with a box of kittens The man goes over and says "Oh what cute kittens!"

    The boy replies "Yes they are Christian kittens".

    About a week later the man sees the boy again with the same batch of kittens. Once again he walks over and says "my, those are just adorable!"

    The boy replies "Yes, they are atheist kittens."

    The man asks "wait, weren't they Christian before?"

    The boy looks at the man and says "Yeah but they have their eyes open now."

  26. jerry 2014.08.01

    Cruz and Sibson loves them some Sharia Law along with the Gideon Bible thumpers. These two crazy kids could take the oxygen out of a civic center by just opening their pie holes.

  27. Angelo Cruz 2014.08.01

    Jenny, you are sweet to defend what is sour.

    As a former atheist I always maintained respect for anyone with religious beliefs. Too bad today's crowd has neither
    beliefs nor respect. Sad & tragic.

  28. Chris S. 2014.08.01

    Wow, if I wasn't already a Christian, I'd be totally converted by the wild-eyed ranting of someone like Angelo Cruz.

    Why don't we just call off school classes altogether, and instead have the whole day be a series of proselytizers lecturing at the kids? Even if we limited the proselytizing only to Christian groups, it would still take weeks and weeks. We'd have to make time for Methodists (Southern and Other), Catholics, Greek Orthodox, Lutherans (ELCA, Wisconsin Synod, Missouri Synod, and all other flavors), Presbyterians, Baptists (Southern and Other), Russian Orthodox, Seventh Day Adventists, Christian Scientists, and every other church listed in the phone book. Otherwise, if we want to cut back the list, we'll have to declare an official state religion and limit discussion to that — only I have some nagging memory of something prohibiting such a thing. In the Constitution maybe? Nah, that can't be right...

  29. Lynn 2014.08.01

    Chris S. I'd hate to be the faith that is scheduled just before or after lunchbreak with those school kids. I'd be at a severe disadvantage.

  30. Angelo Cruz 2014.08.01

    Jenny, you are sweet to defend what is sour.

    As a former atheist I always maintained respect for people and their beliefs.

    Today's crowd has neither beliefs nor respect.

    Sad & tragic.

  31. Chris S. 2014.08.01

    @Lynn—too true. Also, I didn't even think about time for rebuttal. After all the denominations have had a chance to proselytize, then everybody should get at least one more lecture to tell the students why the other ones are wrong or misguided. The Missouri Synod Lutherans would need to explain where they think the ELCA is wrong, and the Catholics would need to describe why both of them are wrong, and the various fundamentalist denominations would definitely need to give fiery lectures about how everybody else is wrong. Otherwise, how will the students learn?

    Alternately, we could leave the teaching of religion to, you know, parents and families, and leave the school out of it. I know, that's crazy talk.

  32. jerry 2014.08.01

    "Sad & tragic" Otherwise known as Cruz & Sibson

  33. Steve Sibson 2014.08.01

    Angelo, do you feel any love yet?

  34. jerry 2014.08.01

    Sibson, you and Cruz should get a room with that kind of talk.

  35. larry kurtz 2014.08.01

    We believe in separation of church and state here: Angelo is in Florida where climate change is real and creationism threatens his state's ability to plan.

  36. larry kurtz 2014.08.01

    dwc wants you, steve and angelo: go preach to the choir.

  37. Loren 2014.08.01

    By the time Angelo makes his pitch for Jesus and Cory rebuts with atheism, Abdul with his Islamic slant and the Dali Lama chimes in with Buddhism, etc, etc, are we still gonna have time to teach the three "R's" or are we just going to discuss philosophy?

  38. Lynn 2014.08.01

    Steve what if you re-activated Sibby Online and you and Angelo could post on there and we have the option to read and reply. It could be a great opportunity to rebuild your blog with quite a bit of in depth and stimulating discussion. How about it? :)

  39. jerry 2014.08.01

    Sibson has the rubber suit and Cruz has the rubber boat, what a match made in, dare I say it, heaven.

  40. Steve Sibson 2014.08.01

    By allowing yoga in government schools, you are establishing Hickey's religion (Evangelical Covenant Church and Spiritual Formation/Contemplative prayer):

    Zondervan Publishing hopped on the band wagon too. A couple years ago they formed a formal partnership with Youth Specialties, host of the National Pastor's Convention which brings in an array of New Age practices from labyrinths, contemplative prayer and yoga. Last year Rick Warren spoke immediately after the yoga workshop. This year Warren is incorporating into his Purpose-Driven Life youth ministry speakers from Youth Specialties and the pro-contemplative Group Publishing.

    Ruth Haley Barton, formerly of Willow Creek and trained at the very contemplative Shalem Institute for Spiritual Formation in Washington D.C., wrote Invitation to Solitude and Silence, and teaches contemplative prayer through her Transforming Center. Barton co-authored with John Ortberg Ordinary Day With Jesus, which clearly instructs readers in mystical prayer practices.

    And as if that were not enough to show Ortberg's sympathies to this New Age spirituality, he will be speaking this year at the National Pastor's Convention where labyrinths, contemplative prayer exercises, and yoga workshops will take place.

    http://www.lighthousetrailsresearch.com/PressReleasemarhc252005.htm

  41. jerry 2014.08.01

    Well Lynn, Sibson is just another freeloading republican that gets his kicks doing his selfish stuff at hard working Americans expense. As he is a 1 percenter, in his mind, he feels privileged.

  42. MJL 2014.08.01

    There is plenty of other religious things that happen in school all the time. Many schools have meetings of the Fellowship of Christian Athletes before or after school in class rooms. As a teacher I refuse to tell a student that they can't do a speech on a subject that has a religious underpinning as long as it meets the requirements of the assignment.

    With that said, the handing out of religious material in the school building to all students if they want it or not crosses the line. In the cases above, students are not required to go to a meeting and a student chooses the topic and is not assigned it to the class.

    The Gideon's can still hand out the Bibles to students on public sidewalks outside of the school to students that choose to take them.

  43. larry kurtz 2014.08.01

    Sib: even you could do Shavasana.

  44. Bill Fleming 2014.08.01

    "As a former atheist I always maintained respect for people and their beliefs."

    Yes, so what happened, Angelo? Did you lose it when you found Jesus? These people are telling you that they don't believe religious instruction belongs in the schools. And as per the US Constitution, they are correct. Even the school admits it. Why then are you being so disrespectful of the people here?

  45. Steve Sibson 2014.08.01

    Angelo, now we see the impact that government schools have on our kids by reading the hate mongering that such schools produce. By banning Bibles and allowing yoga, we see the results of a totalitarian theocracy that wants to push us Christians out of the public arena, and then have hypocrisy to argue they are part of a marketplace of ideas. They want me to leave so that their deceptions and mockery of me can go unchallenged.

  46. larry kurtz 2014.08.01

    The clowns at DWC treat you worse, Sib.

  47. bearcreekbat 2014.08.01

    Sibby & Angelo, which translation or version of the Bible do you accept and believe in? There are apparently over 100 full versions to choose from, along with over 40 partial versions. What is your preference and how did you decide on that particular version rather than one of the others?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_English_Bible_translations

  48. mike from iowa 2014.08.01

    Angelo,your holey bible has so many holes it won't hold hay. Like the saying goes,don't pray in my schools and I won't think in your churches.

  49. Angelo Cruz 2014.08.01

    Bill

    *Why then are you being so disrespectful of the people here?*

    1 - Why do you ask this question? Is it because I offer a counter-point?

    2 - Why didn't you ask larry this question?

    3 - Catholics stand with me on this issue, why don't you?

  50. larry kurtz 2014.08.01

    Mr. Cruz: under what conditions would you agree to allow the KKK to hand out copies of Mein Kampf outside schools?

  51. Steve Sibson 2014.08.01

    BCB, I believe the Gideons distribute the New King James New Testament. I am currently reading that version, both OT and NT. I have read the NIV and parts of King James and English Standard. I have studied the Hort/ Westcott controversy. Found this research interesting:

    http://www.bible-researcher.com/kutilek1.html

    Important excerpt:

    We may indeed believe that He would not allow His Word to be seriously corrupted, or any part of it essential to man's salvation to be lost or obscured; but the differences between the rival types of text is not one of doctrine.

  52. Steve Sibson 2014.08.01

    "Mr. Cruz: under what conditions would you agree to allow the KKK to hand out copies of Mein Kampf outside schools?"

    That's covered in Social Studies class Larry. Atheist indoctrination is found in the science textbooks. They call it evolution.

  53. Lynn 2014.08.01

    Well I see another 300 post thread coming with the Sibby and Angelo Cruz tag team troll session. I'll be back in a few weeks. Have a great August! :)

  54. Angelo Cruz 2014.08.01

    Steve

    *Angelo, do you feel any love yet?*

    Actually I do Steve . . .

    For God so loved Madville Times posters that He gave His Son . . . John 3:16.

  55. charlie5150 2014.08.01

    I think Chris is onto something with the various sects getting face time with the kids. We CHARGE for the time! Wealthier more popular churches get their time, and if they can afford those "fringe" groups have the opportunity as well. The money goes to fund teachers if there are any left, and there you go, problem solved!

  56. Angelo Cruz 2014.08.01

    larry

    *under what conditions would you agree to allow the KKK to hand out copies of Mein Kampf outside schools?*

    So you equate the love of the Gospels with the hate of Mein Kampf . . . interesting!

  57. larry kurtz 2014.08.01

    Cory should have had the byline: Sibby Bait! It was the first thing that came to mind opening Madville this morning.

    One person's hate is another's hope, Mr. Cruz.

  58. bearcreekbat 2014.08.01

    Sibby, I too find it very interesting to consider the various translations. I note that there are many contradictions among these 100's of translations.

    http://www.1001biblecontradictions.com/Introduction.html

    That is why I asked you and Angelo which of the many translations do you accept as accurate. It seems a bit off the mark to defend or worship "the Bible" when there is no single Bible translation available to us. Perhaps if you could read Aramaic< Greek and Hebrew and study the original untranslated text, you might be able to assert that there is "a Bible" that you accept. But my guess is (correct me if I am wrong) both you and Angelo cannot read these languages and have rather arbitrarily decided to accept the very first translation that you were give or purchased. I think you are wise to read other versions as this might make you question the inerrancy of whatever version you started with.

    All this leads to the problem of the Gideons. What if their Bible is an incorrect translation? Surely you would be committing a sin if you did not object to them spreading it among children?

  59. Angelo Cruz 2014.08.01

    *One person's hate is another's hope, Mr. Cruz.*

    Please do not confuse the two, Mr. Kurtz.

  60. Angelo Cruz 2014.08.01

    "Hate, like acid, does more damage to the vessel in which it is stored than to the object on which it is poured."

  61. Steve Sibson 2014.08.01

    BCB, you may have missed the point from the excerpt. The argument is that the differences among the translation does not impact the foundational doctrine of the Gospel message. Some argue that there is and only the King James is reliable. That is core controversy regarding Hort & Westcott. I am still researching that.

    You are correct, I do not read Hebrew or Greek, so I don't go down to the base writing. I do study analysis by those who do. I wished that I had learned Hebrew and Greek. Sadly, there are not part of Common Core standards. :)

  62. JeniW 2014.08.01

    The big question for me is how did the ACLU find out that the Bibles were distributed to the students?

    Someone, either a parent, or member of the community must have notified the ACLU.

    So who gets the credit or blame?

    I think it is amazing that people are willing to use children who are in a captive situation as pawns to promote their agenda.

    I have no objection to the Bible, but if I had children, I would object to them being given one without my permission in a school setting, just as I would object to handing them cigarettes, vitamins, and etc. without my knowledge or consent.

  63. caheidelberger Post author | 2014.08.01

    JeniW, they may also have read the Madville Times!

    I'm with JeniW on her tolerance of the Bible. My child is subjected to Biblical teachings daily... by her mother. If some Gideon, Jehovite, Mormon, Buddhist, Shi'ite, agnostic, or believer or non-believer of any stripe comes up to my child in school and tries offering religious instruction, we will have words.

  64. Steve Sibson 2014.08.01

    "I think it is amazing that people are willing to use children who are in a captive situation as pawns to promote their agenda.

    I have no objection to the Bible, but if I had children, I would object to them being given one without my permission in a school setting, just as I would object to handing them cigarettes, vitamins, and etc. without my knowledge or consent."

    That is my complaint, indoctrination. We have it today. What do you say about handing out condoms? Yoga mats? Advice on abortions?

  65. larry kurtz 2014.08.01

    ACLU recently contacted ip to point out an error this blogger had posted: the correction was made. Lawyers read the paper, too.

  66. Steve Sibson 2014.08.01

    "If some Gideon, Jehovite, Mormon, Buddhist, Shi'ite, agnostic, or believer or non-believer of any stripe comes up to my child in school and tries offering religious instruction, we will have words."

    But what about us who have a problem with secular humanist propaganda such as the false doctrine of evolution that my convert our children and grandchildren into atheists?

  67. larry kurtz 2014.08.01

    But what about us who have a problem with Zionist propaganda such as the false doctrine of the bible that my convert our children and grandchildren into Gazans?

  68. bearcreekbat 2014.08.01

    Sibby, are you saying there is something wrong with being an atheist?

  69. jerry 2014.08.01

    Sibson believes that the earth is a couple thousand years old and that man and dinosaur roomed together. Sibson is an idiot and so is his new brother Cruz.

  70. Steve Sibson 2014.08.01

    BCB, I am saying there is something wrong with government schools converting Christian kids into atheists. If you want to be an atheist, that is your business, but leave the kids alone.

  71. Douglas Wiken 2014.08.01

    Angelo fails to understand that rejecting his ideological bull shit is not the same as hating him. We can walk around cow manure on the ground without hating the cow. We can do the same with those who want to forcefeed us religious mythology. For some reason, conservatives always assume liberals must positively hate them because they disagree with their dogma. Apparently they are so wedded to their nonsense that they cannot separate themselves enough to comprehend simple English.

  72. larry kurtz 2014.08.01

    BCB, Sibby is saying there is something wrong with government schools converting Christian kids into atheists because he's never had kids and resents paying property taxes.

  73. bearcreekbat 2014.08.01

    Sibby, kids are neither Christian nor atheist until adults began to indoctrinate them. Do you think it is okay for a school to indoctrinate children into becoming Christians, but it is not okay for the school to indoctrinate them into becoming atheists? Or would you agree that perhaps it is best for the schools not to indoctrinate children either way, but let the parents provide the instruction?

    And your teaching evolution argument only works as indoctrination if kids are taught that as unchangable dogma, like religion, rather than the current state of scientific knowledge that is subject to revision as we discover more and more evidence.

    Anyway, I appreciate your willingness to allow me to be an atheist. Do you think I should be punished here on earth or in an afterlife for my beliefs?

  74. Roger Cornelius 2014.08.01

    There were a couple of references to the Gideon bible being handed out to 5th graders at Miller, why were just the 5th graders being subjected or targeted by deranged bible bangers?

  75. Roger Cornelius 2014.08.01

    Sibson and Cruz and their type, likely drive more people to atheism than the devil himself.

  76. caheidelberger Post author | 2014.08.01

    No, Angelo, the beauty of America is that the state takes no role in imposing religion on anyone, nor in allowing any one sect to co-opt public resources to gain an advantage. No one should come to public school to intrude on parents' and churches' right and duty to raise their children in the faith of their choosing.

    But man, I mention Bible, and everybody goes ape. Maybe when the election gets done, I should try a month of nothing but religious posts.

    Remember, though, Angelo: 43 years of Christian messaging, including 12 years of marriage to a Christian, haven't converted me. Nothing in this comment section will make a saint of me, either.

  77. Angelo Cruz 2014.08.01

    jerry

    *Sibson is an idiot and so is his new brother Cruz.*

    I'd rather be an idiot than to be lost and deceived.

  78. Angelo Cruz 2014.08.01

    bearcreekbat

    *Do you think I should be punished here on earth or in an afterlife for my beliefs?*

    Unless you repent you will not inherit the Kingdom of Heaven.

    This is your choice to make which you have until your last breath.

  79. Angelo Cruz 2014.08.01

    Cory

    *Remember, though, Angelo: 43 years of Christian messaging, including 12 years of marriage to a Christian, haven't converted me.*

    Just wait. God is raising a son or a daughter who will bring you to Jesus.

  80. bearcreekbat 2014.08.01

    Angelo, is not inheriting the Kingdom of Heaven a punishment for my good faith in recognizing that I am an atheist? Or am I being denied a reward because I am unwilling to pretend to believe? Do you think it is appropriate or moral to punish (or deny a reward) to someone who reveals his or her actual beliefs?

  81. JeniW 2014.08.01

    Steve, I would object to my children, while they were in school, or any place else to be given items without my knowledge and/or permission.

    I would object to you handing out materials that you approve of because I do not like what you seem to be advocating as an angry, hostile and vengeful being.

    When I was a child, I was told by some Christians that God was is an angry, bitter, and vengeful being. You cannot imagine how what a negative impact that had on me.

    Be at peace with what you believe, but please do not use God, Jesus, or the Bible as weapons to attack others (and please do not try to rationalize your doing so to "warn" others.) You are, IMO, doing God a disservice.

  82. mike from iowa 2014.08.01

    Must be time for WWF rasslin' since the god skwad,tag team showed up. Must be minor league rasslin' as this team appears pretty lightweight.

  83. JeniW 2014.08.01

    No one has yet to inform us as to who notified the ACLU that the Bibles were being handed out to public school students.

    The police do not know of a vehicle crash unless someone notifies them, so someone must have notified ACLU about this sitution.

  84. JeniW 2014.08.01

    Mr. Cruz wrote "You will NEVER be my enemy larry. You SHOULD fear being the enemy of the Ruler of the Universe - Elo'him."

    If I may ask, why anyone would want to have anything to do with a being, whether human, animal, plant, spiritual, or otherwise that they are afraid of?

  85. larry kurtz 2014.08.01

    Did you read Cory's original post, Jeni? Looks like they've been at it for a while.

  86. Angelo Cruz 2014.08.01

    JeniW

    *When I was a child, I was told by some Christians that God was is an angry, bitter, and vengeful being. You cannot imagine how what a negative impact that had on me.*

    A - They were not Christian or . . .

    B - They were not knowledgeable Christians or . . .

    C - They were atheists pretending to be Christians.

    God is too wise to make a mistake and too loving to be unkind.

    The love of God is agape love - pure and unconditional love.

  87. Angelo Cruz 2014.08.01

    JeniW

    *No one has yet to inform us as to who notified the ACLU that the Bibles were being handed out to public school students.*

    God haters notified the ACLU.

  88. Angelo Cruz 2014.08.01

    JeniW

    *If I may ask, why anyone would want to have anything to do with a being, whether human, animal, plant, spiritual, or otherwise that they are afraid of?*

    Fear God. Why?

    Because in Him lies the Key to your eternal destination.

    The Key = Jesus Christ.

  89. Steve Sibson 2014.08.01

    "And your teaching evolution argument only works as indoctrination if kids are taught that as unchangable dogma, like religion, rather than the current state of scientific knowledge that is subject to revision as we discover more and more evidence.

    Anyway, I appreciate your willingness to allow me to be an atheist. Do you think I should be punished here on earth or in an afterlife for my beliefs?"

    The indoctrination is based on the premise that the current scientific evidence has already reached a conclusion, which it has not. Your outcome is not based on what I believe, it is based on your own free will.

  90. Steve Sibson 2014.08.01

    " including 12 years of marriage to a Christian, haven't converted me."

    Like I said to BCB, you have your own free will. And second, there are two types of Christians...real and fake.

  91. JeniW 2014.08.01

    Mr. Cruz I respect your perspective, and you have the right to believe in what you want to.

    I spent many, many years not believing in God because it was much easier to not believe in God than it was believing the God is an angry, hostile, and vengeful being that hated me.

    It took a long time, and a lot of struggle to reach the point of thinking that God/Jesus is a peaceful and loving being that I can love instead of being in fear of.

    If someone was holding a gun to my head, I would be afraid and want to get away as quickly and far away as I could get. I would not love that person, nor would I want to embrace him/her.

    I prefer to be able to be close to God and to embrace God rather than being afraid and want to be as far away as possible.

    No, your response of a "God hater" informing the ACLU is not sufficient. That is too vague and a blanket statement.

    As I have told Steve, be at peace with what you believe, but please do not use God as a weapon to attack others. It does just the opposite of what you want to accomplish.

  92. JeniW 2014.08.01

    Yes, Larry, I did read Cory's report that it has been going on for quite a while, but still someone had to have brought it to the attention of the ACLU.

  93. larry kurtz 2014.08.01

    How did Miller miss the tornado with which Gaia flattened Wessington Springs?

  94. mike from iowa 2014.08.01

    "Our Founding Fathers felf god very strong in this country",Zacher said. Does that mean gawd and the Founding Fathers were gay or was it locker room humor? Maybe that is why gawd shone his grace on thee.

  95. jaa dee 2014.08.01

    Sibson--" there are two types of Christians...real and fake."---There are Christians and (c)ristians for convenience....The convenience of trying to use their claimed beliefs and cherry picked bible to promote their own personal hang- ups they would have without their supposed "deep religious beliefs"---Which are you?

  96. Barry Smith 2014.08.01

    Mr Cruz I have yet to meet an atheist who hates God. It is sorta like saying that lettuce farmers hate jackilopes. It is nonsense. You have to believe that something exists in order to hate it.

  97. Deb Geelsdottir 2014.08.01

    I enjoy teaching my Confirmation classes very much. The students are 7th and 8th graders who are there, generally because their parents insist. Sometimes there are students whose parents are not members of my church. Rarely, but it has happened, students are there entirely of their own volition.

    In the ELCA, when we baptize babies and people of any age, one of the promises the congregation makes is to provide Christian education. That is one of the biggest responsibilities a church has. It's not the town's responsibility, nor the county's, the school district's or any other entity. It is for the church and the family to fulfill.

    Martin Luther, instigator of the Protestant Reformation, which led eventually to every non-Roman Catholic Christian church in the USA, except for Orthodox and Eastern churches, wrote the first catechism. (Geez what a run on sentence! Sorry.)

    Luther was very clear that the catechism, which is a very short textbook of sorts, was for families to use as they taught their own children. He never NEVER wanted Christianity to be a part of the state. That was one of the bigger problems with religion in Europe in the 15th century.

    I invite those of you who are interested enough to read a little Reformation history. I just did a quick skim via Google, but I didn't find anything brief but informative enough. Frustrating. This quickie comes via Theopedia. Note the second sentence in the article references government's efforts to co-opt the faith for the purposes of political power. Perhaps you might check some of the references at the end of the listing.

    http://www.theopedia.com/Protestant_Reformation

  98. Donald Pay 2014.08.01

    As a school board member 14 years ago, I remember lots of controversy over what school sent home to students. The schools called it "backpack mail." It included graded homework, notices from teachers/principals, and quite a lot of advertising from businesses and churches.

    As a parent, I didn't mind getting all that church and business stuff, but some of it did cross the line from being just a notice about some event at a church to outright proselytizing. Teachers, though, would have to take time from their instruction to stuff backpacks, and it seemed at that point that your tax dollars were being used to subsidize church activities and business advertising budgets. To boot, the flyer might be from a church that Sibby, for example, would think was UnChristian, though it was the First Church of Christ. Teachers couldn't discriminate, so if the First Church of Satan wanted something stuffed in your kids' backpack, well, it would have to be done.

    I recall the Board adopting policy that put a stop to that, and the free advertising for business that wasn't school-related.

  99. Roger Cornelius 2014.08.01

    I recall reading most of these same comments on numerous Madville threads wherever God, the Bible, or religion is mentioned.
    Same comments, different thread.

  100. mike from iowa 2014.08.02

    since Angelo likes jokes,here is one about acid. Little Johhny walked around town sprinkling acid on anything he could find. The local minister saw him and said he would trade Johhny a bottle of holy water for the acid because holy water had special powers. Naturally little Johhny said like what powers. The minister said last week a well known city official's wife had trouble delivering her baby so I sprinkled holy water on her tummy and she passed a fine son. Johhny say hell preach,that ain't nothing. I sprinkled acid on a cat's ass and he passed a motorcycle.

    Yer gawd surely works in mysterious ways.

  101. mike from iowa 2014.08.02

    Sibby @ 16:33-leave the kids alone.
    Sounds like a character out Pink Floyd's "The Wall".

    What don't you like about the schools,Sibby? The thought control? The dark sarcasm in the classroom? The fact you can't have any pudding if you don't eat yer meat?

  102. Bill Fleming 2014.08.02

    Leave the kids alone indeed. Here's the current lesson on religion that any child can learn just by listening to the evening news.

    On one side, if you are a child, the soldiers and their government will hide their weapons close to you, and you and your family will be killed because your religion and your government demand it.

    On the other side, if you are a child, you will probably be safe because your government and religion is rich and strong. And to keep it that way, they have to kill the little children on the other side.

    It all depends on where you were born. It's not your fault. But you might get killed anyway.

    Thus endeth the lesson...

    Oh, wait, there's one more thing. Both sides believe in the same God.

  103. Bill Fleming 2014.08.02

    Right now, the above scenario is being played out in Israel and Gaza. But it has happened all across the Middle East and Asia, and not so long ago in Ireland, South Africa, France, England, and yes, even in the US. If you're unlucky enough to be born into the wrong religion, you're a goner. Where's the "free will" in that?

  104. JeniW 2014.08.02

    Bill, your comment reminded me of the Vietnam era protest song "Universal Soldier."

    "He's five foot-two, and he's six feet-four,
    He fights with missiles and with spears.
    He's all of thirty-one, and he's only seventeen,
    He's been a soldier for a thousand years.

    He's a Catholic, a Hindu, an Atheist, a Jain,
    A Buddhist and a Baptist and a Jew.
    And he knows he shouldn't kill,
    And he knows he always will,
    Kill you for me my friend and me for you.

    And he's fighting for Canada,
    He's fighting for France,
    He's fighting for the USA,
    And he's fighting for the Russians,
    And he's fighting for Japan,
    And he thinks we'll put an end to war this way.

    And he's fighting for Democracy,
    He's fighting for the Reds,
    He says it's for the peace of all.
    He's the one who must decide,
    Who's to live and who's to die,
    And he never sees the writing on the wall.

    But without him,
    How would Hitler have condemned him at Labau?
    Without him Caesar would have stood alone,
    He's the one who gives his body
    As a weapon of the war,
    And without him all this killing can't go on.

    He's the Universal Soldier and he really is to blame,
    His orders come from far away no more,
    They come from here and there and you and me,
    And brothers can't you see,
    This is not the way we put an end to war."

  105. Bill Fleming 2014.08.02

    I remember it well JeniW. Great song.

  106. Bill Fleming 2014.08.02

    "...and when the broken hearted people living in the world agree, there will be an answer."

  107. bearcreekbat 2014.08.02

    Sibby & Angelo, it seems you are both hesitant to acknowledge your belief in my eventual damnation as an atheist, instead deferring to Sibby's thoughts about "free will." Now think about this, how "free" is "free will" if there are only two options - either believe in God or be eternally damned? That is sort of like your "free will" to either hand over your wallet to an armed robber or be killed - the idea that the choice is "free" is an illusion.

  108. Bill Fleming 2014.08.02

    You are correct, BCB, and it gets worse. We have absolutely no way of knowing what the next thought that pops into Angelo's or Sibby's head will be (or yours or mine either, for that matter) because we are not the author of our thoughts, we can only follow and develop them or decide not to. And even then, there's no way of knowing why we decided one way or the other. "Free will" in the truest sense is pretty hard to come by.

  109. mike from iowa 2014.08.02

    OMG,Bill-are you saying that Dan Ackroyd was absolutely correct in Ghostbusters that the image of the Sta-Puft marmallow monster rilly did just pop into his mind?

  110. bearcreekbat 2014.08.02

    Deb, thanks for the links. I enjoyed the Reformation article as it put some of the current disputes with Catholics in an interesting historical perspective. Sibby seems a lot like a Calvinist.

    I also enjoyed the link to the sermon. I was fascinated by the description of life events that could not shake faith in God. That was quite a list and I was pleased that it left out my basis for not having faith - human reason.

    I had to take issue with the sermon's assertion that "the source of the love among us is God. And ultimately, that is what allows us to love at all." If that were true, then how can I love my spouse, my own children and grandchildren, other family members, and even people I have never met such as the children crossing our border from Central America that Republicans have been demonizing as diseased gang members, when I clearly do not believe in God and have no faith in God? Indeed, without belief in and faith in God, how is it that I can believe in the goodness of fellow human beings, which I steadfastly do?

    My answer is that as a rational human being I have the capacity to choose to love others. I believe the same holds true for all human beings. To assert that someone cannot love another without belief in or faith in God seems to diminish humanity.

  111. bearcreekbat 2014.08.02

    Bill, your free will comment is right on the money and reminds me of our extensive discussion of the topic a few years ago. My take was that human freedom is a "freedom from" compulsion or control of our thoughts, coupled with a "freedom to" choose how to react to those thoughts.

    But I think this is a different philosophical concept than Sibby's and Angelo's free will. That free will argument seems to be more of a "blame the victim" argument, sort of like that old blues tune "Nobody's Fault But Mine." If God decides to torture me for eternity or deny me the Kingdom of Heaven, God is blameless, rather, it is my fault for not buying the company line. Here Blind Willie Johnson's version:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_o4omd8T5c

    And here is the great 1979 redo by Led Zepplin in a video live performance with some pretty hot Jimmy Page guitar work:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8ahBqVuT68

  112. Bill Fleming 2014.08.02

    Mike, yup, just sayin'. ;-)

  113. Bill Fleming 2014.08.02

    Great stuff BCB. Thanks!

  114. Douglas Wiken 2014.08.02

    PubTV "Closer to truth" had a discussion on free will. Mostly I was confused after hearing it. All kinds of "free" and all kinds of "will". After listening to the discussion on the existence or absence of free will, it seemed to me that the non-philosopher economic view might make most sense.

    We are free to decide between options. We may or may not be free to chose the values of the options or the odds of the options, but that is another part of the discussion.

    I think we are free to make decisions based on the relative values of the options. We are free to decide which options have which value and which odds.

    A philosophy prof at SDSM&T (sorry I can't remember his name) said that God allowed evil to keep us from being bored and to demonstrate our free will on tough cases.

    Of course you are free the decide YMMV.

  115. Deb Geelsdottir 2014.08.02

    BCB said, "My answer is that as a rational human being I have the capacity to choose to love others." I agree. I think God/Jesus has a supernatural inclination to love that supersedes human capabilities. But I am lucky enough to know really wonderful, kind, loving people who do not believe in God.

    So are they Accidental Christians? Is God loving through them without their permission? I think that question is part of the free will discussion. I believe that we are free to choose what we believe. Our history, culture, experiences, education, brain-function, and a few zillion other things affect our choice making. Our religion, or lack thereof, is part of that.

    For myself, my belief that there is a benign power of some kind, a power that finds me completely delightful, enables me to feel freer about offering less judgment and more toleration of others. I like that a lot. It makes my life better.

  116. Bill Fleming 2014.08.03

    BCB an accidental Christian. :-) Funny Deb.

    BCB a minor tweak. The sermon didn't say that faith in God was the source of love. It just said God was the source, whether you choose to believe it or not. Personally I like that definition of God better than any others I've heard. If everyone would accept that as being the Only definition, it might be something even you believe. We've already establishe we don't know where our thoughts come from.

    My niggle with Deb is that it has to be supernatural. I'm not so sure. We don't even know for sure what nature is, so I'm not inclined to sell it short.

  117. Bill Fleming 2014.08.03

    Btw, Deb, of course you know that the ethic of reciprocity isn't proprietary to christians

  118. bearcreekbat 2014.08.03

    Deb, your suggestion that you "believe that we are free to choose what we believe," gives me pause. How can I "choose to believe" I am 15 feet tall and weigh 6 ounces when our scales measuring height and weight tell me something completely different?

    An online definition of believe states:

    be·lieve
    verb (used without object), be·lieved, be·liev·ing.

    1. to have confidence in the truth, the existence, or the reliability of something, although without absolute proof that one is right in doing so: Only if one believes in something can one act purposefully.

    verb (used with object), be·lieved, be·liev·ing.

    2. to have confidence or faith in the truth of (a positive assertion, story, etc.); give credence to.

    3. to have confidence in the assertions of (a person).

    4. to have a conviction that (a person or thing) is, has been, or will be engaged in a given action or involved in a given situation: The fugitive is believed to be headed for the Mexican border.

    5. to suppose or assume; understand (usually followed by a noun clause): I believe that he has left town.

    Can I have the confidence necessary to believe by merely choosing to do so, or is my confidence or lack thereof a result of analyzing the circumstances and evidence before me? I think it the latter, and it seems to me that belief is more an involuntary result of what evidence I might choose to examine and accept, sort of like sneezing when confronting allergies or crying when peeling an onion.

    To simply claim belief because one chooses to seems at odds with a rational analysis of whatever reality we experience. On another thread Kurt Evans argues he knows God exists by having a direct revelation from God. Such an experience, if true rather than a hallucination or trick, certainly might provide some support his belief, but his revelation certainly was not a choice, rather it was an experience purportedly coming to him from an outside source. And for those of us that have not had such a revelation or similar experience, how can we come to the same conclusion as Kurt?

  119. bearcreekbat 2014.08.03

    Bill, love does not strike me as something that comes to us from outside, hence I have a problem the assertion that God is the source of love. Indeed, love is not a thing at all but it is an attitude we have towards others and they toward us. To suggest that one cannot love without an outside source, such as a God, seems to be total "bad faith" under Sartre's analysis, which I tend to accept. It seems a denial of personal responsibility and provides a pathway to all sorts of mischief.

    For example, a man quits his wife and kids because God provided him a source of love to give his mistress. Or a mother drowns her babies because God gave her a source for the love necessary to protect them from worldly hurt and to help them into the heavenly kingdom instead.

    That is the main problem I see with the God is the source of love theory - classic existential bad faith. It is each of our own personal responsibility to give and receive love, we need not, and cannot even if we wanted to, depend on - nor blame - any source outside ourselves. The good news is that by recognizing and accepting our personal responsibility we are freed from an outside dependency.

  120. JeniW 2014.08.03

    Bear, beliefs are subjective.

    Your height and weight are objective, if using the traditional mode of measurement created by humans. You can still believe that you are 15 feet tall, and weigh six ounces, if you want to, because your believing so is subjective and it is yours to own.

    From the time we were little children we were taught that 2 + 2 = 4. We tend to choose to believe that so we have a mixture of subjective and objective.

    If we had been taught that 2 + 2 = 15, we would say "fifteen" when ask "two plus two equals what?"

    For some people, the Bible is to an extent measurable, such as time and locations, while the belief in the message is subjective, so there is a mixture of objective and subjective.

  121. Bill Fleming 2014.08.03

    BCB, to be clear, I'm not suggesting it comes from outside of nature, only outside of consciousness. It appears to be pre- conscious.

  122. Tim 2014.08.03

    The bible, reminds me of an experiment we did in school years ago, have a line of 30 people, whisper one sentence into the ear of the person on the end and have each person do that from one end of the line to the other, the sentence you will get at the other end of the line will be totally different from what you started with. That book is total fiction and anybody willing to base their life on it is a fool. We have a lot of fools running the show these days, it's no wonder the world is what it is.

  123. bearcreekbat 2014.08.03

    JeniW, I am not quite sure that I understand how the messages of the Bible are at all subjective. The Bible speaks of a knowable, speaking, living, existing deity - in other words an objective God with all sorts of goals, abilities and powers.

    I suppose all belief "is subjective and it is yours to own." But is it a choice, or is it an involuntary reaction to the circumstances we face? If I believe that I am 15 feet tall and weigh 6 ounces, even though the scale says otherwise, doesn't that necessarily mean that I have chosen to rely on some other form of evidence than the scale. And once I have decided or chosen what evidence to rely on, isn't the resulting "belief" an involuntary subjective reaction, rather than a choice?

  124. bearcreekbat 2014.08.03

    Bill, the distinction escapes me. The theme that "love" is pre- conscious seems to objectify "love," but in line with JeniW's comment, isn't love a purely subjective human experience, fully dependent on consciousness?

    On a lighter note, here is a poem about "love" by Fish Karma:

    Love: a poem

    Love is like a large piece of cheesecloth attached to a revolving bowling ball covered in fructose and postage stamps.

    Love is like a black velvet painting of Elvis; except one of the sideburns is missing, the jumpsuit is on inside out, and Elvis is a black midget.

    Love is like a made-for-TV movie starring Pia Zadora and David Soul as wacky, suburban neo-Nazis whose refrigerator is on the verge of breaking down while the dog begs for neutering. (Dog!)

    Love is like George Bush’s left, not his right, but his left testicle swinging gently in the airspace over Panama, glowing gently like a neon ball or something, while the barefoot children beneath fill their buckets with chicken entrails and dream of Oldsmobiles and Saran Wrap.

    Love is like Isadora Duncan, her svelte, taut, well-muscled body enwrapped in translucent, silk scarves suddenly swallowed whole by frogs with lisps.

    Love is like bell-bottom trousers filled with lint, wax lips, empty Pez dispensers…but the lint doesn’t exist.

    by Fish Karma (from the album: “Teddy in the Sky with Magnets” – 1991 Triple X Record

  125. Bill Fleming 2014.08.03

    As per Sartre, BCB, we can't know your answer. We can objectify consciousness and refection on consciousness, reflection on reflection is unavailable to us. Add to that recent neurological studies that show we decide to act sometimes up to 7 seconds before we become conscious of our decision, and what we know about what we think and feel becomes even more foreign to us. Love and altruism appear to be functions of the lymbic system. It's a mamillian thing, not exclusively a human thing. But not subjective. It is, or can become an object of consciousness.

  126. bearcreekbat 2014.08.03

    Bill, the neurological studies that have found "we decide to act sometimes up to 7 seconds before we become conscious of our decision," are interesting, yet they seem to have studied physical actions, like moving a finger, or pushing a button, rather than emotions. And it seems common experience that humans engage in many, many physical activities without any conscious reflection each day. I instinctively scratch an itch without thinking about it or even choosing to scratch, and the act of scratching never enters into my consciousness at all, absent some triggering event to bring it to consciousness, like pain or blood.

    In contrast, it appears that "love" can only exist through a conscious experience of loving. "Love" seems a part of what we think and feel, which, in contrast to our physical activities, appears totally dependent on conscious awareness of the thought or feeling.

  127. JeniW 2014.08.03

    Bear, I do believe that we choose what we believe.

    Some people have the belief that God is shaped like a human (or humans are shaped like God,) and that God has a gender.

    I was taught that from early on, and for a while believed it. I no longer believe that God is shaped like humans, or has a gender. It is my choice to believe that God is not shaped like a human, or has any shape at all.

    Since no one now living has a objective picture of what form, if any, God consist of, our perception (beliefs) of what God looks like is subjective.

    All religions, IMO, are abstract concepts. We cannot see, taste, touch, smell, or feel religions, nor is religion measurable using the tools that humans use to measure weight, height, and etc.

  128. Bill Fleming 2014.08.03

    Perhaps the naming of it, BCB. Like I noted, love appears to be a function of non humans as well as humans. Is the dog who loves his master mAking a conscious choice? Or are you suggesting that love is an ego state, and as such is a creation of consciousness as opposed to an object of it?

  129. bearcreekbat 2014.08.03

    JeniW, I like your opening sentence - "I do believe that we choose what we believe." It means that you choose to believe that you choose to believe whatever you choose to believe. A compelling circle of choices for sure.

    It appears from your comments that when you refer to God, you do not seem to be referring to the God as literally described in any particular version or translation of the Bible. The objective God I referenced is based on a literal Bible description. A non-Bible God or deity seems to have been accepted by many people and they find something valuable in this viewpoint. Indeed, the more I learn about theology the more I am discovering that modern theologians agree with this viewpoint, even those in standard religions, such as Paul Tillich, a Catholic scholar (Thanks Bill). These modern deities do tend to be more subjective, absent some doctrinal description.

    To the extent religions can be considered abstract concepts, it would seem that most religions adopt particular discrete viewpoints and practices that distinguish them from other religions. That would seem to move religions toward the more concrete.

  130. bearcreekbat 2014.08.03

    Bill, I doubt very much whether a dog actually "loves" his master, in the sense we are describing love. I suspect that such love is merely our own human projection, perhaps based on our own love of our pets. My discussion of love is based solely on what I perceive as human love.

    I don't think I am contending that love is an ego state, and as such is a creation of consciousness as opposed to an object of it. Rather love seems to be an experience of consciousness (which may well also be an object of it), based on the choice or decision to love. And I would suggest that wanting or needing to be loved is more of an ego state, while loving another is an experiential state, if that makes any sense.

  131. Bill Fleming 2014.08.03

    Both noun and a verb, subjective and objective, animal yet not animal (yes we are animals), natural and supernatural. Love's a pretty complicated deal, huh Bat? :-)

  132. Bill Dithmer 2014.08.03

    " Is the dog who loves his master making a conscious choice? Or are you suggesting that love is an ego state, and as such is a creation of consciousness as opposed to an object of it?"

    I'll take a stab at this. It is a little of both. And I doubt that it would be possible without either.

    There was a study done in the early 80s where they did EEGs of dogs and humans to try to learn similarities in the way the two processed external stimulation. One of the things they looked at was love.

    The EEGs showed that when someone spoke to a person with a blindfold on and they were in love with each other, there was a certain patern. In fact the same patern could be found when the person could recognize the scent of the other person.

    The funny thing was when they did the same test with a dog hooked to the EEG and using a human that they loved, to stimulate them with either voice or smell, the exact same paterns were observed.

    At the time they called this a learned response to conscious thought. In my opinion it was what we would call today conciseness programming.

    So yes dogs do love in the same way as humans.

    The Blindman

  133. larry kurtz 2014.08.03

    bcb: mysteries suck.

  134. bearcreekbat 2014.08.03

    larry, interesting links but they are not related to me. My nickname in high school was "bat" because my friends thought I looked like a drowned bat after swimming. My lovely mother built a cabin on Bear Creek and I helped her improve and maintain it, which led to the moniker bearcreek bat. I was a rock/blues star in the Hills in the 1980's, but was appropriately forgotten well before the 1990's, despite a solo gig as bearcreekbat for several months after our blues band broke up.

  135. bearcreekbat 2014.08.03

    Blindman, that is some interesting stuff. I would like to learn more about these studies and their conclusions. I can look on line but do you have any links that you think are more credible than others?

  136. Bill Dithmer 2014.08.03

    BCB, the only way I knew anything about the test is from a man in Idaho by tht name of Obe Cory. He wasn't directly involved but knew a women that was. She got the papers on the study and let him read them.

    Obe Cory was the best country geneticists there was in the dog world back then. He also was on the ground floor of behavioral science in scented hounds. I still have at least two of his books, " The Locating Treedog" and I believe "The Trailhounds." I had some serious phone bills to his number. Breeding good coon and cat dogs was a passion, what can I say.

    The Blindman

  137. Deb Geelsdottir 2014.08.03

    Y'all were sure busy here since I last was online. Lots of thoughts and philosophizing. Let me say first that I'm not very good at abstracts. I do much better when I consider actual human beings. I've read a fair bit, but most of my learning is based on observations and conversations. I believe everyone is a teacher, whether aware of it or not. It doesn't matter. My job is to pay close attention so I don't miss the lesson.

    All that being said, back to the topic at hand.

    A close reading of the Bible reveals many, many things that have been suppressed or deliberately ignored and distorted. So, BCB, one need not create a generous, loving, feminine God. It's all there. Isaiah is a great resource for feminine God imagery. God as a pregnant woman, God as a nursing mother, God possessing a womb, on and on and on.

    Proverbs 31 is all about the Wisdom or Holy Spirit of God as a woman. If God and the Holy Spirit are one, she's a woman. There are also a ton of parables Jesus told that feature a woman as the bearer godly qualities or even as a stand in for God.

    So there is plenty of Biblical support for a feminine image of God and for women at the top echelons of Christianity. My overall take is that the image one holds of God is actually irrelevant. God is only seen in one's imagination anyway, so what's the Big Deal with insisting God is a boy's name?! Hahahahaha!

  138. Deb Geelsdottir 2014.08.03

    "Do we choose what we believe?" Great question!

    I think we do have the ability to make conscious choices about what we believe and, conversely, what we disbelieve. A good example is climate change deniers.

    I think we can limit our knowledge as a way to manage our beliefs. I actually know a man who didn't want to learn anything new or more. He was in his mid 50s, racist, sexist, farther right than Sarah Palin (and just as dumb), and of course, ignorant as hell. He was also disliked by everyone who knew him, except for a couple other neanderthals.

    Opps, sorry. I digress especially thinking about that . . . . person.

  139. Steve Sibson 2014.08.04

    "He never NEVER wanted Christianity to be a part of the state."

    And it is fascist, socialists, and communists who believe education is to be a part of the state.

  140. Jenny 2014.08.04

    Sibby, I've read from from other commenters here that you don't even have children so why the obsession with children and their education? Again, a child's education is really none of your business.

  141. Steve Sibson 2014.08.04

    "But I think this is a different philosophical concept than Sibby's and Angelo's free will."

    BCB & Bill, your philosophical concept ignores personal accountability.

  142. Steve Sibson 2014.08.04

    "My answer is that as a rational human being I have the capacity to choose to love others."

    Yes BCB, free will.

    "For myself, my belief that there is a benign power of some kind, a power that finds me completely delightful, enables me to feel freer about offering less judgment and more toleration of others."

    Deb, that benign power is Lucifer. And I don't see much toleration from you in regard to my positions.

  143. Steve Sibson 2014.08.04

    "He was in his mid 50s, racist, sexist, farther right than Sarah Palin (and just as dumb), and of course, ignorant as hell."

    That is Deb being tolerant. What a hypocrite.

  144. bearcreekbat 2014.08.04

    larry, I enjoyed your persecution complex link. Christians who think they are being persecuted because they are Christians are pretty full of themselves. For example, Islam extremists do not persecute anyone for being Christian, rather they persecute everyone who does not buy into their extremist Islamic views. Christians just happen to belong to that group, along with Muslims that reject the extremist views, atheists, Buddists and everyone else not in the extremist club. And Christians who see themselves being persecuted because they cannot post one of the two versions of the 10 Commandments or hand out Bibles in schools are not being persecuted because they are Christians. Instead, they are again part of a much larger group, including all other religions.

    It seems as if these Christians who see themselves as victims do so only because they are unable to impose their views on everyone. A strange definition of victim indeed.

  145. bearcreekbat 2014.08.04

    Sibby, your comment that my "philosophical concept ignores personal accountability" raises this question - Do you mean the accountability that you believe your God will impose upon me for my good faith non-belief, namely, eternal damnation and torture? Is that the "personal accountability that you cherish and honor and defend?

  146. Steve Sibson 2014.08.04

    "So there is plenty of Biblical support for a feminine image of God and for women at the top echelons of Christianity. My overall take is that the image one holds of God is actually irrelevant. God is only seen in one's imagination anyway, so what's the Big Deal with insisting God is a boy's name?! Hahahahaha!"

    If you take those out of context Deb. Returning to goddess worship is a return to ancient paganism. Your worldview is called postmodernism. It rejects rational thought and is instead based on "experiences". Its theology is based on pantheism or in Fleming's words "monism". Yes, we all are teachers, some are false teachers.

  147. bearcreekbat 2014.08.04

    Sibby, you consistently call people names, such as hypocrite, and label people intolerant. Do you consider tolerance a virtue? Do you think your behavior in calling people names to be tolerant?

  148. Steve Sibson 2014.08.04

    "Do you mean the accountability that you believe your God will impose upon me for my good faith non-belief, namely, eternal damnation and torture?"

    No BCB. It would be illogical to argue that God made you not believe in Him just so he can torture you. You have your own free will. You make your choices. Those who lack personal accountability blame someone else for those choices. It is not logical to blame God for your non-belief. Blame yourself.

  149. bearcreekbat 2014.08.04

    Sibby, I am not talking about blame, I am talking about punishment. I accept full responsibility for my non-belief as my own exercise of reason has helped me come to this conclusion. When you reference "accountability" that sounds a lot like being punished by your God for my non-belief, if your God exists as you believe. Did you have something else in mind when you referenced "accountability?"

  150. Steve Sibson 2014.08.04

    BCB, when I am talking personal accountability, I am not talking about punishment. That is accountability from a higher authority.

    "Sibby, you consistently call people names, such as hypocrite, and label people intolerant."

    Tolerance is irrelevant to me. I don't promote it as tolerating sin doesn't fit my Biblical worldview, nor does tolerating false teachers and false prophets. And hypocrite was how Jesus Christ referred to such actors. Today they make a law that says we all have to be tolerant and not talk about sin, repentance, and salvation as a gift from God versus good works so they can boast. Then they don't follow there own laws. Deb shows little tolerance toward white men, conservatives, nor those who place the Bible above experiences.

  151. larry kurtz 2014.08.04

    yer a scary little dude, sib.

  152. Bill Fleming 2014.08.04

    Monism isn't my term. Most people credit the term to Spinoza as did Albert Einstein, who remarked that his belief inGod was similar to that of Spinoza's. It's one of the few religious constructs that can be resolved rationally and without paradox.

  153. Angelo Cruz 2014.08.04

    Bill

    *Oh, wait, there's one more thing. Both sides believe in the same God.*

    Blasphemy!

    Allah, the god of the Muslims, is NOT the same as the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

    The God of creation is Elo'him, the Triune God, the One who formed the universe and all that is in it out of Nothing!

    Allah is a false god and Islam is a major Cult.

    ISLAM = ENEMY of GOD/AMERICA

    Jehovah God and Allah are NOT one and the same.

  154. mike from iowa 2014.08.04

    Religious wingnuts are the enemy of America. How do I know? Because I said so!

  155. larry kurtz 2014.08.04

    The God of Abraham has been used a weapon of mass destruction against indigenous cultures, including the one manifest destiny extirpated from Miller, Dakotah Territory.

  156. larry kurtz 2014.08.04

    "...merciless Indian savages..." Thomas Jefferson, denier of Jesus' divinity.

  157. Angelo Cruz 2014.08.04

    Deb

    *My overall take is that the image one holds of God is actually irrelevant. God is only seen in one's imagination anyway, so what's the Big Deal with insisting God is a boy's name?!*

    And you say that you TEACH what exactly?

    THE ALMIGHTY NAMES OF GOD

    Elo'him
    My Creator
    The LORD Our Creator
    Genesis 1:1

    Jeho'vah
    My Father
    The LORD Our Father
    Genesis 2:7

    Jeho'vah-God
    My Almighty God
    The LORD Our God
    Genesis 6:3

    El-Shad'dai
    My Supplier
    The LORD Our Supplier
    Genesis 17:4

    Ado'nai
    My Master
    The LORD Our Master
    Genesis 18:3

    Jeho'vah-Ji'reh
    My Provider
    The LORD Our Provider
    Genesis 22:14

    Yah'weh
    My Keeper
    The LORD Our Promise-Keeper
    Exodus 6:3

    Jeho'vah-Ro'phe
    My Healer
    The LORD Our Healer
    Exodus 15:26

    Jeho'vah-Nis'si
    My Banner
    The LORD Our Banner
    Exodus 17:15

    Jeho'vah-M'kad'desh
    My Sanctifier
    The LORD Our Holiness
    Leviticus 20:7-8

    Jeho'vah-Sha'lom
    My Peace
    The LORD Our Peace
    Judges 6:24

    Jeho'vah-Ro'hi
    My Shepherd
    The LORD Our Shepherd
    Psalm 23

    Jeho'vah-Tsidke'nu
    My Righteousness
    The LORD Our Righteousness
    Jeremiah 23:5-6

    Jeho'vah-Je'sus
    My King
    The LORD Our King
    Isaiah 61:1

    Jeho'vah-Sham'mah
    His OmniPresence
    The LORD Is There
    Ezekiel 48:35

  158. JeniW 2014.08.04

    Angelo, we were talking about what God looks like to each of us, not about what God is to each of us.

    Some think that God looks like the Charleston Heston image in the movie he acted in. Some might think that God looks more like George Burns who acted in the movie "Oh, God!"

    Some people think God looks like other forms. I do not think God looks like anything.

    There is, IMO, no requirement for each of us to have the same opinion of what God looks like.

  159. Steve Sibson 2014.08.04

    Angelo, Deb is a Scripture twister so that it supports her cultural Neo-Marxist worldview. That is why the unbelievers support her positions.

  160. larry kurtz 2014.08.04

    Rai and Jiri at Lungha. Rai of Lowani. Lowani under two moons. Jiri of Ubaya. Ubaya of crossroads, at Lungha. Lungha, her sky gray.

  161. Steve Sibson 2014.08.04

    Bill:

    Pantheism is closely related to monism, as pantheists too believe all of reality is one substance, called Universe, God or Nature. Panentheism, a slightly different concept (explained below), however is dualistic.[34] Some of the most famous pantheists are the Stoics, Giordano Bruno and Spinoza.

    Moreover, the New Thought and New Age movements embraced many monistic concepts during the twentieth century and continue up to the present day.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monism

  162. Bill Fleming 2014.08.04

    Christianity, Judaism and Islam are all three Abrahamic religions referencing the same diety. Knowing this is not blasphemy. Not knowing it is sheer ignorance.

  163. JeniW 2014.08.04

    Well Steve, you obviously do not like or share Deb's opinions and perceptions, which is perfectly within your rights to do so.

    It is just as easy for Deb to say that you twist words to fit your agenda, as it is for you to say that she twists words to fit her agenda.

    It all gets down to a pissing contest between people who have different perspective of God.

  164. Steve Sibson 2014.08.04

    Bill, in case you have not noticed, Islam hates Jews and Christians. The same god is responsible? Illogical. Your monism has confused you.

  165. Craig 2014.08.04

    The best part is if Steve or Angelo were born and raised in Iran or Syria they would be Muslims telling you that Allah - the Islamic god - is the one true god.

    When you find people who aren't willing to accept that we don't know everything and never will, and when you realize they are the same ones who reject the scientific method... you typically find religion. It is much easier to just say "this book says it happened, so it must have happened".

    Those who profess their faith the loudest generally are the least confident. They claim their book is the one true gospel or their god as the one true god... it is much easier than trying to explain concepts like carbon dating, evolution, or the fossil record.

    When I read some of their comments I can help but wonder if they are trying to convince others of their beliefs - or if they are trying to convince themselves. Pity we will never know for sure.

  166. Steve Sibson 2014.08.04

    "Those who profess their faith the loudest generally are the least confident. They claim their book is the one true gospel or their god as the one true god... it is much easier than trying to explain concepts like carbon dating, evolution, or the fossil record."

    It takes more faith to believe evolution than it does the Bible, because there is more scientific proof that the Bible is true than there is that the books of Darwin are true.

  167. Roger Cornelius 2014.08.04

    Is there any definitive proof that God has a sex. Can the argument be made that God is asexual?

  168. JeniW 2014.08.04

    Roger, here are my questions: Why would God need a gender? and Why would God need to look like anything?

    I think the gender and appearance was based on helping people who are concrete thinkers grasp the concept of God. Defining God as a male, human figure is easier for people to relate to, and talk about.

  169. Steve Sibson 2014.08.04

    Larry, my argument is off base. The truth: science has proved Darwinian evolution to be false.

  170. larry kurtz 2014.08.04

    Sibby, you are certifiably, clinically, medically, out to lunch.

  171. Roger Cornelius 2014.08.04

    Has anyone checked out Landslide's Dakota Reporter? Naturally he avoids the questions Cory asked about Chad's scandals, but has proven his lack of talent to be and investigative journalist.
    After reading Madville for sometime now, it is hard to see just where Cory has an obsession for Chad and Annette. Obviously Landslide confuses obsession with looking for the truth and reporting what he finds.
    This is off topic, I know. How does it relate to the Gideon Bibles in Miller, well it doesn't.
    Also today, Susan Wismer had an op-ed piece in the Rapid City Journal calling out Rounds, Daugaard, Jackley, and GOAC for not upholding their constitutional responsibilities on GOED/EB-5 and an investigation into Northern Beef Packers.

  172. Craig 2014.08.04

    "It takes more faith to believe evolution than it does the Bible, because there is more scientific proof that the Bible is true than there is that the books of Darwin are true."

    I just... There is no science in the bible... I really can't.... Are you seri....

    Really Steve. Really. There is no way you typed that without having to stop and wipe whatever liquid you spewed all over your monitor when you realized how utterly ridiculous it was.

    Seriously man – do you even understand the scientific method at ALL? [Obviously not – it was a rhetorical question.]

    Second, ‘faith’ is not required when believing in supportable, substantiated facts – 'faith' is only required to believe in things which lack evidence. This is why so many of those who profess to be strong in their faith and so proud of their faith are the very same individuals who fail to understand that is the exact problem.

    Science doesn’t rely upon faith. Science doesn’t require one to forego evidence or ignore advancement in order to continue to believe the writings of man from centuries ago which to date are only supported by themselves. Science doesn’t rely upon clichés, and advanced evolutionary science is far, far beyond the basic tenets of what Darwin discussed.

    I don’t blame people for ignorance Steve, but when one practices such willful ignorance it is an entirely different matter.

  173. Angelo Cruz 2014.08.04

    JeniW - God looks the same to you , me and all 7 billion sinners.

    *Angelo, we were talking about what God looks like to each of us, not about what God is to each of us.*

    Exodus 33: 17-23
    So the Lord said to Moses, “I will also do this thing that you have spoken; for you have found grace in My sight, and I know you by name.”

    And he said, “Please, show me Your glory.”

    Then He said, “I will make all My goodness pass before you, and I will proclaim the name of the Lord before you. I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.”

    But He said, “You cannot see My face; for no man shall see Me, and live.” <=== God has a face.

    And the Lord said, “Here is a place by Me, and you shall stand on the rock.

    So it shall be, while My glory passes by, that I will put you in the cleft of the rock, and will cover you with My hand while I pass by. <=== God has a hand.

    Then I will take away My hand, and you shall see My back; but My face shall not be seen.” <=== God has a back side, therefore He also has a front side.

    John 4:24
    God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth.

  174. Bill Dithmer 2014.08.04

    I have given up arguing with those of the fundamental religions. Whenever you ask them to prove the bible is true, they try to use the bible as proof.

    I'm getting a little smarter as I get older. For instance, now I understand why Howlen Gordon Howie, and Big Wheel Bobby Ellis find it necessary to link back to one of their own blogs in an attempt to legitimize something they wrote.

    Would that be an acquired habit or a learned response to religious bull shit?

    Angelo Cruz2014.08.04 AT 17:22
    Aren't you trying to use the bible to prove the existence of god?

    Bat I coon hunted close to your moms house years ago on Bearcreek. I was with Bud May Tommy Vaughn, and Jerry Amiotte. Is it still there?

    The Blindman

  175. bearcreekbat 2014.08.04

    So Sibby, then just what is your definition of "personal accountability" if not punishment?

  176. bearcreekbat 2014.08.04

    Deb, Sibby provides an example of someone you might describe as choosing to deny science and evolution. I don't think he chooses to adopt this unsound belief, rather, I think he feels that science contradicts a literal reading of the scriptures, which to him ends the matter. Since he sees the scriptures as absolute fact, he has no choice in the matter - he has to reject science.

    The same probably holds true with climate change deniers. They don't choose to deny the reality of climate change, rather they adopt world views that would be contradicted by a belief in climate change. Thus they don't choose to deny climate change, their world views require them to dismiss the fact of climate change and dismiss any evidence to the contrary.

  177. bearcreekbat 2014.08.04

    Angelo, you might want to check out the movie "Dogma." God shows herself and appears to be a woman.

  178. JeniW 2014.08.04

    Angelo, do you know with absolute certainty that God's face is that of a human face, or the face of some other wonderful type of God's creation?

    Be at peace with what you believe. I respect the perception that you have.

    But let's say for the sake of argument that God looks like a human, what color is God's skin? What color hair and eyes? Does God have a full head of hair, or is God partially, or totally bald? If the color of God's skin is irrelevant, then why would what God looks like matter?

    I am at peace with what I believe that God does not need to look like anything, human or otherwise, and that God does not need to have a gender.

  179. mike from iowa 2014.08.04

    Cory,let's go fishin'.

  180. Angelo Cruz 2014.08.04

    bearcreekbat

    *Angelo, you might want to check out the movie "Dogma." God shows herself and appears to be a woman.*

    Deep!

    That's very deep bearcreekbat!

  181. Angelo Cruz 2014.08.04

    JeniW

    *Angelo, do you know with absolute certainty that God's face is that of a human face, or the face of some other wonderful type of God's creation?*

    I hope I do not shock you JeniW but . . . Jesus IS God in the flesh! And yes He was/is . . . Wonderful!

    Isaiah 9:6
    For unto us a Child is born, Unto us a Son is given; And the government will be upon His shoulder. And His name will be called >>> Wonderful, <<< Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

    Jesus IS God:

    1 Timothy 3:16
    And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness:

    God was manifested in the flesh, Jesus Christ
    Justified in the Spirit,
    Seen by angels,
    Preached among the Gentiles,
    Believed on in the world,
    Received up in glory.

    Now you need wonder no more JeniW!

  182. Angelo Cruz 2014.08.04

    Bill Fleming

    *Christianity, Judaism and Islam are all three Abrahamic religions referencing the same diety. Knowing this is not blasphemy. Not knowing it is sheer ignorance.*

    Bill, didn't you say somewhere that you are Catholic?

    Now, as a Catholic, you would/should KNOW that Judaism and Islam REJECT the deity of Jesus Christ . . . you SHOULD know this Bill, you REALLY should know.

    This is Religion 101 Bill.

    Not knowing this is sheer ignorance.

    Sheesh!!!

  183. JeniW 2014.08.04

    Yes, Angelo I do believe that while Jesus was on earth he was in the human form, otherwise he would not have been able to communicate in the style at the time, and in order to not be totally dismissed, he had to look like a human.

    That does not necessarily mean that God is in human form.

    BTW, you did not answer my question about what color skin and hair God has, if full head of hair, or partially or totally bald.

    I do not need for God to look like anything or have a gender, so no, I do not wonder about it. To me, it is just not that important.

    As I wrote previously, I respect you perception, and I hope that you are at peace with what you believe, but you will never be able to convince me to change my perception.

  184. Jenny 2014.08.04

    Islam's deity is Allah but they just don't believe Allah (god) had a son called Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ IS mentioned in the Koran though. Am I right here?

  185. Angelo Cruz 2014.08.04

    JeniW

    *That does not necessarily mean that God is in human form.*

    ===> Jesus *IS* God Jesus ChristJesus ChristJesus ChristJesus ChristJesus ChristJesus Christ<===
    =======

    Now, exactly what part confuses you?

  186. Angelo Cruz 2014.08.04

    JeniW

    The Bible does not give a physical description of Jesus.

    The central theme of the Bible is Salvation and how to obtain it.

  187. Angelo Cruz 2014.08.04

    Yes Jenny, you are right.

    Muslims don't believe Allah (god) had a son called Jesus Christ.

    They refer to Jesus as a prophet.

  188. Angelo Cruz 2014.08.04

    I wonder . . . did my message to JeniW get hijacked @ 20:05?

  189. JeniW 2014.08.04

    Angelo, please do not adding meaning to my words that I did not express. I am able to express myself without any coaching from anyone.

    I do believe that Jesus and God are one in the same, but they do not NEED to be in human or any other form for me to believe that. Your implied insult that I am "confused," has lowered my regards of you.

    If you need and want to believe that God/Jesus is in human form, that is fine, if it works for you, that is great. Be at peace with what you believe, but please do not attack me, it will not do any good.

  190. Deb Geelsdottir 2014.08.04

    Angelo, 2 things:

    1. I don't read Sibson's comments. I've tried, but I find that he is not a helpful discussion partner.
    2. I am not a fundamentalist or Selective Literalist. I believe that "My bible verse can beat your bible verse" is a misuse of the Bible. I know without question that you can find verses to support any point you want to make. I can do the same. So? There is nothing gained in that process.

    Angelo, I believe that the Bible is a rich resource, full of interest and information. I also believe that reading that marvelous book thoroughly and with a high level of understanding requires knowledge of its historical setting, ancient languages it was written in, the art of translation, ancient Middle Eastern culture and history, etc. The Bible never existed in a vacuum and it still doesn't. I doubt God is surprised by that. In fact, I'd venture to say that God planned for it.

    I find a literal reading of the Bible to be inaccurate and superficial. I don't believe it does right by the text.

    To conclude, I don't believe that you, or anyone else, must read and understand the Bible exactly as I do, to be a Christian. I don't believe that God is small, petulant and demanding.

    In short Angelo, I have no problem with your beliefs. I will not be silenced or shamed by you or anyone else. I am quite certain that God, in all her glorious permutations, finds me absolutely wonderful and delightful. I don't fully comprehend that, but I really like it!

  191. Douglas Wiken 2014.08.04

    News Flash!!!
    God is dead.
    All gods are dead.
    All gods are the same.

    Father, son, and holy ghost.

    "If I may ask, why anyone would want to have anything to do with a being, whether human, animal, plant, spiritual, or otherwise that they are afraid of?"

    The Lutheran catechism has "We should FEAR and love God, so that we do not curse, swear, conjure,r lie or deceive by his name." Or something much like that. The idea is that believers should love God in the same way a child loves a stern parent.

    Religion is untestable in the same way that mathematics may be. Tautology upon tautology wrapped in tautology. Every thing unprovable and which must be accepted on faith.

    I know there will be comments that there is the same faith required to accept scientific conclusions. We know that the testing and revision of science works. We can tell if an idea be tested and if tested whether or not it fails. We have all kinds of daily experiences similar.

    We do not have all kinds of similar provable, testable results from religion.

    Of course when we get into string theory and all that, we may be getting into ideas so abstruse that they may seem to explain all kinds of things ..or everything and thus nothing. Nothing man puts together is altogether perfect or can even necessarily exist, and that is certainly true of God.

  192. Deb Geelsdottir 2014.08.04

    Doug, you are right about the Lutheran catechism. Using the word "fear" is a problem for many, many people, and understandably so. It refers to a sense similar to "awe." Due to the historic misidentification of God as a big, mean, hairy old man who revels in punishing people, "fear" as the equivalent to "being afraid of" is most common.

    It frustrates me a great deal.

    Something else that frustrates me that you mentioned is trying to Prove God. Of course God is not provable. That's precisely the point.

    Religion Must Be Accepted by Faith.

    That's a tenet referred to repeatedly in Scripture. I think an insistence in proving God/the Bible has much more to do with struggles with faith more than anything else. Such times of struggle are referred to as Crises of Faith, the Dark Night of the Soul, and other names.

    For the believer, these times are terribly difficult, and the struggler often comes out stronger in many ways. Mother Teresa lived her life in a Dark Night of the Soul. That did not make her a nonbeliever.

    Faith is so hard! So hard! People go to great lengths to avoid the fear of aloneness, of frying for eternity, or something else. I won't go on about the psychology of faith. Although I've done a great deal of research on the topic with some of the best scholars, I'm not an expert.

  193. Deb Geelsdottir 2014.08.04

    One more thing about faith: Mother Teresa wrote in her diaries about feeling abandoned by God. She was able to go on with her ministry anyway, because she accepted her feeling as just that - a feeling that did not define how God felt about her. I really don't know how anyone could live a life of faith without learning to accept fears, doubts, misunderstandings, crises of faith. That's part of the deal.

    Creating rigid rules to follow and measure oneself by are an attempt to eliminate the unknown. Follow the rules and make it simple, doubt free.

  194. Steve Sibson 2014.08.05

    " I don't think he chooses to adopt this unsound belief, rather, I think he feels that science contradicts a literal reading of the scriptures, which to him ends the matter."

    BCB, not correct. We have already established on another thread that Darwin's belief that we evolved from monkeys has been scientifically disproven. Second, science has not proven how we came to exist.

  195. larry kurtz 2014.08.05

    yet your evolution remains a mystery, steve.

  196. Steve Sibson 2014.08.05

    "Science doesn’t rely upon faith."

    I agree, evolution does rely on faith.

  197. Steve Sibson 2014.08.05

    "I know without question that you can find verses to support any point you want to make. I can do the same."

    Yes Deb, you take the Bible out of context and at times completely ignore the words, the same as you do to what I write. That is how false teachers work. Take BCB's advice, your worldview cannot exist unless you deny the truth.

  198. caheidelberger Post author | 2014.08.05

    Someone needs to call closing time.

  199. Steve Sibson 2014.08.05

    Deb, Mother Teresa was a universalist, which means the denial of the exclusivity of Jesus Christ. Is that "Christian"?

  200. Jenny 2014.08.05

    Knock it off, Sibby. Have some respect for Cory.
    Okay, I'll call it. MOVE ON PEOPLE.

  201. larry kurtz 2014.08.05

    The new GOP enemies list:

    1. Black voters.
    2. Brown babies.
    3. Women who like sex.
    4. Men who like each other.
    5. Scientists.
    6.The Pope.

  202. jerry 2014.08.05

    Larry, remember when China was at the top of the list? The GOP said that first it would be the Long Beach Port and then...gasp...America herself. China just laughed its ass off and opened Hobby Lobby to sell its crap to dumbass republican fundamentalists like Sibson and The Cruz with a promise to close on Sundays. Game set match.

  203. Steve Sibson 2014.08.05

    The new Neo-Marxist enemies list:

    1. White voters.
    2. Unborn babies.
    3. Women who like family.
    4. Men who like the Constitution.
    5. Biblical Christians.
    6. Jesus Christ.

  204. mike from iowa 2014.08.05

    Larry K-http://www.juanitajean.com/2014/08/05/hummmm-can-i-think-of-a-racist-excuse-to-show-my-ta-tas/

    getting uglier out there.

  205. jerry 2014.08.05

    Ted Nugent will be in Sturgis Sibson, he seems kind of like you, crapping his pants to avoid military service along with that, he is also a neo-confederate just like you. You should go see your racist hero.

  206. Angelo Cruz 2014.08.05

    JeniW

    *That does not necessarily mean that God is in human form.*

    ===> Jesus *IS* God Jesus ChristJesus ChristJesus ChristJesus ChristJesus ChristJesus Christ Jesus Christ

    Justified in the Spirit, ===> Jesus Christ

    Seen by angels, ===> Jesus Christ

    Preached among the Gentiles, ===> Jesus Christ

    Believed on in the world, ===> Jesus Christ

    Received up in glory. ===> Jesus Christ

    *I do believe that Jesus and God are one in the same, ===> but they do not NEED to be in human or any other form for me to believe that.* <===

    JeniW, God was in human form in . . . Jesus Christ.

    *If you need and want to believe that God/Jesus is in human form, that is fine.*

    I believe it because the Word says it and that settles it.

    This is what I was pointing to concerning confusion - the Word says it but you're not accepting that God came down in flesh.

  207. Angelo Cruz 2014.08.05

    I guess that what I type will NOT appear the way I want . . . strange!

  208. Angelo Cruz 2014.08.05

    I did not post that nonsense. That was what I referred to as hijacking.

    This is what I intended, if it is NOT hijacked again by mystery characters:

    Jesus IS God:

    1 Timothy 3:16
    And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness:

    God was manifested in the flesh, ===> Jesus Christ
    ===

    This should've appeared above *Justified in the Spirit* in the thread above.

    Oh well . . .

  209. JeniW 2014.08.05

    Angelo, please do not assume what you know about my beliefs.

    I will write this one more time, and will ask that you stop insulting me.

    I did not say that Jesus/God did not come to earth as a human. Jesus/God had to come to earth as a human in order to be able to communicate to humans in a style and method that they would understand.

    It is my belief that God/Jesus does not NEED to look like anything, or to have a gender in order for me to believe that God/Jesus exist.

    If you need and want God/Jesus to look like something, that is perfectly fine, and if that works for you terrific.

    If you are not able to accept my belief that God does not NEED to look like anything in order for me to believe that God exist, that is yours to own.

    You will never convince me that God NEEDS to look like something in order for me to believe that God exists.

    Be at peace with what you believe, and please stop insulting me.

  210. Steve Sibson 2014.08.05

    "And now? I'm outta here!"

    Deb, don't let the truth hit you on the way out.

  211. larry kurtz 2014.08.05

    sib, you wouldn't know the truth if it came up to you and kicked you in the nards.

  212. Steve Sibson 2014.08.06

    Right Larry, Osteen is a fake Christian. From your link:

    "That’s because Jesus can be whatever you want him to be, and the Christian message can be whatever you want it to be.”

    And that is the very same problem created by Deb's universalism.

  213. mike from iowa 2014.08.06

    Osteen's message is aimed at the late Tammy Faye that Joel Osteen is the queen of too much make-up.

    Sibby,some nut that apparently goes by the name "son of god" is reportedly blackmailing Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones with racy pictures of Jones and young women. Know anything about this?

  214. Steve Sibson 2014.08.06

    No Mike, not heard of it until now.

Comments are closed.