Merry Christmas

[Cynicor]

He has said "God speaks to me", but that is quite different.

That's scary enough, because he uses it as justification for killing
600,000 civilians in a war without having any plan to win it. I doubt
that's what God would have told him to do, and frankly his insistence
that it's what God told him to do is delusional.

 

[Mark²]

So you were there in Smoketown, PA when he said or didn't say "God
speaks through me?" I'll take the word of the reporter over the word
of the White House press secretary on this one.

I say it with confidence only because I know that that statement is not
consistent with his beliefs.
The White House specifically addressed such a question after it came up due
to a triple translation gaff where an arabic man took notes in arabic
regarding words Bush spoke in english...after the arabic notes of an english
speech were again translated back into english...reandering the word
"through" instead of "to."

This was widely covered some time ago.

 

[Mark²]

That's scary enough, because he uses it as justification for killing
600,000 civilians in a war without having any plan to win it. I doubt
that's what God would have told him to do, and frankly his insistence
that it's what God told him to do is delusional.

Most Christians would use a phrase like that to describe the influence of
God in their lives. If it's scary to you, it's likely because you're simply
unfamiliar with the use of this phrase. It doesn't mean anyone is hearing
little voices, etc. Don't make a mountain out of a teaspoon.

 

[Mark²]

Your sensitivity is showing. I prefaced that with "hearsay" as the
quotation I presented was reported second-hand.

In a country that has a fundamental separation of Church and state, it
is a bit irksome (at least) when Bush is on the record as saying:

"I appreciate that question because I, in the state of Texas,
had heard a lot of discussion about a faith-based initiative
eroding the important bridge between church and state." GWB

Bush makes a lot of references to God in his speeches.

The US Supreme Court has historically been very conservative in its
interpretation of the establishment clause. In great part to avoid
the influence of any religion on government which was a plaguing
problem in Europe for the last 1000 years.

BTW: I have no "anti-religious" bias. OTOH, I don't have a moment of
patience for those who assert creationism as being truth.

What does George believe? Evolution or creationism?

The question isn't that simple. There are many forms of "creationism."
Do I think God had something to do with the universe? Yes.
Do I think he did it in 7 days? Nope.
Do I think it matters HOW he did it? Nope.
Is it in conflict with the accepted laws of science? Not in my view, no.
Some creationists assert a stance that excludes the concept of billions of
years, etc. I think they're full of it, and do a disservice to Christians
by pretending they speak for Bible believing folk. There is room for
science under the umbrella of a creator.

 

[Alan Browne]

I say it with confidence only because I know that that statement is not
consistent with his beliefs.
The White House specifically addressed such a question after it came up due

The spin house addressed that? Oh! Sorry. My mistake!

( <g> )

Seriously, it's bad enough when a reporter misquotes or when a reader
misinterprets, but when the "White House" then "tells us what he said"
then there is no possible way to know what:
-he believes he said
-he meant to say
-what was said
-what was interpreted to be said
-what others (cleaning up the mess) are telling us he said
-what Mrs. Shapiro told Mr. Greene what she thinks he meant to say and
isn't it a shame that Mrs. Cooper is a you-know-what?
-why the price of copper is so high
-etc.

But I've done some research and I will now tell you what Bush said
(since eveyone seems to need somebnody else to say what he said.

Remember, you heard it here first.

This is what Dub-ya said: "Look, have a photo taken with me and I'll,
you know, fund some new faith based initiative scissors for your beards.
You gotta, you know, cut them off. You know, you look like terrorists
to me. You can't get fooled again."

And that phrase was misquoted as "God speaks through me." You can see
it was an honest misquote. Misquotations and Bush seem, you know, to go
together.

Cheers,
Alan

 

[Q.G. de Bakker]

Are you aware . . . No, I don't think that you are.

That's indeed the trouble with people like you.

 

[Ron Hunter]

Your sensitivity is showing. I prefaced that with "hearsay" as the
quotation I presented was reported second-hand.

In a country that has a fundamental separation of Church and state, it
is a bit irksome (at least) when Bush is on the record as saying:

"I appreciate that question because I, in the state of Texas,
had heard a lot of discussion about a faith-based initiative
eroding the important bridge between church and state." GWB

Bush makes a lot of references to God in his speeches.

The US Supreme Court has historically been very conservative in its
interpretation of the establishment clause. In great part to avoid the
influence of any religion on government which was a plaguing problem in
Europe for the last 1000 years.

BTW: I have no "anti-religious" bias. OTOH, I don't have a moment of
patience for those who assert creationism as being truth.

What does George believe? Evolution or creationism?

Cheers,
Alan.

Yes, but then so did JFK, and George Washington, and Abe Lincoln.

As for the last question, why does that matter to you?
Some of us believe in both.

 

[Ron Hunter]

The question isn't that simple. There are many forms of "creationism."
Do I think God had something to do with the universe? Yes.
Do I think he did it in 7 days? Nope.
Do I think it matters HOW he did it? Nope.
Is it in conflict with the accepted laws of science? Not in my view, no.
Some creationists assert a stance that excludes the concept of billions of
years, etc. I think they're full of it, and do a disservice to Christians
by pretending they speak for Bible believing folk. There is room for
science under the umbrella of a creator.

When you read the creation account in Genesis, and compare it with the
current 'big bang' theory, they are quite similar. If fact, I consider
the account to be about as good a non-technical explanation of the Big
Bang theory as any I have read.
The difference is in the time element, which we are quite sure couldn't
have been measured in that actual situation.

 

[Ron Hunter]

Me too, but it'll have to wait, maybe until Valentine's day. I've
had the book for decades but I might go for the audiobook version
instead. I just bought Toole's A Confederacy of Dunces a couple of
days ago but haven't gotten very far as the first CD was completely
blank. Audio that is, the artwork was fine.

Reading Stranger on Valentine's day would be highly appropriate, given
the name of the main character...

 

[Ron Hunter]

And you may find out along with me, you stupid ass........

Am am NOT the one who is nighr-blind driving on an unlit road at night,
YOU are. Now who is a stupid ass?

 

[Ron Hunter]

So you were there in Smoketown, PA when he said or didn't say "God
speaks through me?" I'll take the word of the reporter over the word of
the White House press secretary on this one.

I think you are confusing him with Oral Roberts, or maybe Pat Robertson.

 

[Mark²]

Yes, but then so did JFK, and George Washington, and Abe Lincoln.

As for the last question, why does that matter to you?
Some of us believe in both.

I believe in what I'd call theistic evolution.
I think God is in charge, but see no reason why his means of creation would
have to be incompatible with scientific principles. The Bible's reference
to time is very loose and uses language devices of the day, and should not
be taken like clockwork. I don't have a problem at all with the concept of
evolution somehow being incompatible with God.

 

[Mark²]

When you read the creation account in Genesis, and compare it with the
current 'big bang' theory, they are quite similar. If fact, I
consider the account to be about as good a non-technical explanation
of the Big Bang theory as any I have read.
The difference is in the time element, which we are quite sure
couldn't have been measured in that actual situation.

Right.
If the "story of creation" came to Moses or other early writers, they would
have to write it using terms they understood. Suppose an eon passed before
your eyes in a matter of moments. How would you describe what you saw? How
would you describe it in the language of thousands of years ago? You most
definitely would NOT have the terminology of describe it in terms that are
scientifically used today. You'd tell a story of it. You'd describe it in
human terms. I believe the Genesis account is just that. -A description of
the birth of the universe, earth, etc. And I agree...that the description
follows a clear path from simplicity to complexity. Chaos...to order.
Sound familiar, scientists?

 

[Mark²]

I believe in what I'd call theistic evolution.
I think God is in charge, but see no reason why his means of creation
would have to be incompatible with scientific principles. The
Bible's reference to time is very loose and uses language devices of
the day, and should not be taken like clockwork. I don't have a
problem at all with the concept of evolution somehow being
incompatible with God.

Oops. Misspoke. -Should have read, "I don't think the concept of evolution
is somehow incompatible with God."

 

[Mark²]

I think you are confusing him with Oral Roberts, or maybe Pat
Robertson.

There are indeed some misguided folks out there, and I think you've named
two.
Oral Roberts more so, but both are indeed misguided, IMO.

 

[John McWilliams]

William Graham wrote:

<< Snipped bits out >>

Gentlemen, Princes of the OT:

Now you've both gone over the limit of decency, so let's call it off,
O.K.?? Please, both of you take some time off, or at least kf one
another. Please.

Note the ironic Subject Line, too, for a wee hoot.

 

[William Graham]

Againl... He is being misquoted. He said, "God speaks TO me."

I thought God speaks to all Christians....Surely they wouldn't believe in
such a ridiculous entity unless He spoke to them from time to time? He
certainly never actually DOES anything for them......

 

[Mark²]

I thought God speaks to all Christians....Surely they wouldn't
believe in such a ridiculous entity unless He spoke to them from time
to time? He certainly never actually DOES anything for them......

If I thought you would take it seriously, I'd explain why I believe
otherwise.
But even I'm not a glutton for that much punishment...
NGs are perhaps the crappiest of places to discuss religion...
That's not to say I haven't had my doubts, though, William. There have been
plenty of times that I've questioned whether it's all imaginary, etc. I
don't claim to have it all figured out.

 

[William Graham]

Am am NOT the one who is nighr-blind driving on an unlit road at night,
YOU are. Now who is a stupid ass?

Did it ever occur to you that you might be the one I run into? -And so the
problem is yours as well as mine? Why do you think I bothered to introduce
this whole topic on this forum, anyway? Certainly not to get a ration of
shit from people like you who don't seem to want to bother with it. The
problem will come home to you when someone like me crosses over the double
yellow line and kills you or someone you know. Then it will be too
late.....For you, anyway......In the meantime, I will continue to write my
letters to government trying to get them to fix the problem.......I have
made two very good suggestions. But you haven't heard either of them. All
you can continue to do is berate me for trying to transport myself where I
have to go whenever I have to go there. Do you really think I am the only
geezer who has to drive at night with inadequate vision? I'm here to tell
you that the roads are full of them. And we aren't all old, either....There
are a number of 20 year olds who can't see adequately at night, either. But
you could care less about that, couldn't you? All you can do is continue to
tell me that I should hang it up and become a vegetable.....And that is why
YOU are the one who is the stupid ass.....At least, I know that there is a
problem, and that it is bigger than I am, and that something should be done
about it.

 

[Mark²]

Did it ever occur to you that you might be the one I run into? -And
so the problem is yours as well as mine? Why do you think I bothered
to introduce this whole topic on this forum, anyway? Certainly not to
get a ration of shit from people like you who don't seem to want to
bother with it. The problem will come home to you when someone like
me crosses over the double yellow line and kills you or someone you
know. Then it will be too late.....For you, anyway......In the
meantime, I will continue to write my letters to government trying to
get them to fix the problem.......I have made two very good
suggestions. But you haven't heard either of them. All you can
continue to do is berate me for trying to transport myself where I
have to go whenever I have to go there. Do you really think I am the
only geezer who has to drive at night with inadequate vision? I'm
here to tell you that the roads are full of them. And we aren't all
old, either....There are a number of 20 year olds who can't see
adequately at night, either. But you could care less about that,
couldn't you? All you can do is continue to tell me that I should
hang it up and become a vegetable.....And that is why YOU are the one
who is the stupid ass.....At least, I know that there is a problem,
and that it is bigger than I am, and that something should be done
about it.

I think both of you should just type a hearty, "Nanny nanny boo-boo" and be
done with it.