Koenraad Elst on Christianity:

hristianity, a mistake

The essence of Christianity is a belief, a particular truth claim: that Jesus was the sole son of God and that he redeemed mankind from sin by his crucifixion and resurrection. Modern Bible scholarship has made that belief untenable. Jesus was a troubled personality whose beliefs were entirely within the Jewish tradition, at least within its extremist fringe of people who expected Judgment Day to arrive within their own lifetime. He never founded a new religion, Saint Paul being the real inventor of Christianity as a sect separate from Judaism. The Gospels are highly doctored texts, rewritten to suit the theological developments and political needs of the budding Church. Thus, the injunction to pay taxes to the Romans ("give unto Caesar...”) and the depiction of Roman governor Pilate as innocent of Jesus’ crucifixion were included to mollify the Romans after the defeat of the Jewish revolt in AD 70. Most importantly, Jesus never rose from the dead. The decisive difference between the dead and the living is that the living are someplace in this world, while Jesus, like all dead men, is nowhere to be found in this world. He was spirited away in the “Ascension to Heaven”, which amounts to dying: he left this world. Of course you could say that “his spirit lives on”, but that is equally true of other inspiring characters, both historical and fictional.

The reason why Christians are a shrinking minority in Europe is that an educated population, which applies its mind to religious questions, cannot keep on managing the contradiction between this faith and reason forever. This is not for want of trying: generations of Christian intellectuals have tried to harmonize faith and reason. The Saint Thomas institute (Leuven, Belgium) where I studied philosophy was founded in 1889 as an instrument to prove the basic unity between Aquinas’s Christian philosophy and modern science. But to no avail: most professors teaching there now are no longer practising Catholics themselves. Many moderns including myself have discovered that religion is still relevant, that the religious urge has survived the interiorization of the scientific worldview, that “the 21st century will either be religious or not be at all” (André Malraux); but the Christian belief cannot satisfy that religious need, because we cannot base our lives on fairy-tales anymore.

-- __ (__@__.__), December 05, 2004.

-- sdqa (sdqa@sdqa.com), December 24, 2004

Answers

Response to the christians are a shriking minority in europe(believe me i lived there)

"The reason why Christians are a shrinking minority in Europe is that an educated population, which applies its mind to religious questions, cannot keep on managing the contradiction between this faith and reason forever. This is not for want of trying: generations of Christian intellectuals have tried to harmonize faith and reason."

sdqa-- You make a good point about the "educated population" However a truely educated population will be open minded enough to understand that not everything will have hard core proof of existance, that theories are still speculation based upon some physical evidence but not absolute. That modern "Science" is in fact reverse engineering to try and get to the core of the development from which at that point they can come to understand how to work at changing the outcome.

The "Intellectual" is mocked by his/her peers when they look or believe in none absolutes such as Religion, which as you know requires faith to gain knowledge of something you cannot put your hands on or can be seen with the eye.

A true intellectual will say ok if the big bang did this and brought all of these incredibly chaotic actions into an intensely precise order of physics we see in our lives, what are the 2 or more elements which started this action and where did the elements originate from and so on and so on. So if we conclude what the original elements were it opens up the next even more complex set of questions where did they come from? Much to the effect of where did God come from?

We believe God created the Universe and all within so it is true that he is Alpha and Omega, but what is beyond what we understand to be our Universe?

The true answers can only come from within which even at that point we as humans will NEVER have the ultimate answer other than to have faith that something or someone which can not be measured with test equipment is real.

Thank You

-- Michael G. (NoEmail@Nowhere.no), December 24, 2004.

Response to the christians are a shriking minority in europe(believe me i lived there)

'The true answers can only come from within which even at that point we as humans will NEVER have the ultimate answer other than to have faith that something or someone which can not be measured with test equipment is real.'

this is true

but does it really matter in what someone believes or not?

-- sdqa (sdqa@sdqa.com), December 24, 2004.

Response to the christians are a shriking minority in europe(believe me i lived there)

"but does it really matter in what someone believes or not? "

Yes and no, I think once people remove all of the man made laws regarding religion and seek truthful understanding of what God has spoken through the prophets and what was lived out by Jesus I believe that each will achieve its own level of merit. How do you and I interact as friends or enemies with each other. Even if we are enemies would I be able to have the love and compassion for you as another human to pray for you and to help insure you basic needs are met or will I seek your destruction. Can I swallow my pride and say I am wrong when I am, and ask for forgiveness from you and would you give it?

When I study different Religions I see truth in almost all of them, Remember in Isaiah 53 it concludes with I will give a portion of the great devide (or Kingdom depending on version) which to me suggest that other portions are still open possible for other redemptions which may have taken a harder road towards perfection.

I see so much in fighting and cross fighting between Religions it is a shame, so many claim to have the express way to heaven but many appear to have the rush lanes to hell. Seek it from with in and don't be afraid to study abstracts to gain knowledge, look at some of the Edgar Cayce readings and such and as always study the Bible and pray for greater understanding.

-- Michael G. (NoEmail@Nowhere.no), December 24, 2004.

'Yes and no, I think once people remove all of the man made laws regarding religion and seek truthful understanding of what God has spoken through the prophets and what was lived out by Jesus I believe that each will achieve its own level of merit. How do you and I interact as friends or enemies with each other. Even if we are enemies would I be able to have the love and compassion for you as another human to pray for you and to help insure you basic needs are met or will I seek your destruction. Can I swallow my pride and say I am wrong when I am, and ask for forgiveness from you and would you give it?'

but what i was talking about and i probably didn't express myself good enough,but i was talking about beliefs,for example believing that jesus was god's son who died for our sins like christians do,what you say here above is a matter of morale that was thought by jesus,someone can agree with this(like me for example) but therefore i'm still not christian...

and what man made laws do you mean?

'I see so much in fighting and cross fighting between Religions it is a shame, so many claim to have the express way to heaven but many appear to have the rush lanes to hell.'

this is true

but many people also use religions to manipulate and gain profit in many kinds of ways

-- sdqa (sdqa@sdqa.com), December 25, 2004.

"but i was talking about beliefs,for example believing that jesus was god's son who died for our sins like christians do,what you say here above is a matter of morale that was thought by jesus,someone can agree with this(like me for example) but therefore i'm still not christian... "

Although I believe that Jesus is the Son of God and did die for our sins and will Redeem the world at the end. I can not and would not rule out that there are others paths to God, what you mention was a moral statement or thought train of Jesus I believe is the in fact one of the core requirements of returning to God. I do believe in reincarnation as a method of perfecting the soul, however I more so believe that a person should not bank on recarnation or the number of times a soul can be, hence the Bible's approach of a 1 shot deal.

Remember everything Jesus did and said was for God the Father so I would find it hard to believe that if a person Loved, Honored and Worshipped God the Father and lived a life as Jesus taught without knowing or accepting Jesus as the Son of God that he would be rejected at the end. But a person who strongly and outwardly rejects Jesus and causes dislike or hatred of him or his name could have lived his life in perfection otherwise but would fail in the end because he caused other people from coming to know God through Jesus or Rejecting God as a result of Jesus's name. The core focus is always on God the Father with the help of His Holy Spirit and Jesus Christ. (Luke 18:15-17 let the little children come to me and do not hinder them...).

"and what man made laws do you mean?" Rules should have been the actual word. Anything that slows or interferes the progress of that persons relationship with or to God.

"but many people also use religions to manipulate and gain profit in many kinds of ways"

Your statement is similar to the meaning of the Parable of the Weeds (Mt. 13:25-29) The weed (Darnel) looks very much like wheat when it is young but as they mature wheat becomes white/golden and darnel is dark. But that is the nature of man on ANY topic. Always view people and topics on a horizontal scale, on the far Left and the far Right side of the bar are the FEW nutjobs who give any and every issue a bad name, But as you move to the center from either direction you will have an increasing amount of people on the scale until you hit center where you will actually have the Majority of the people. So the amount of Churchs or people for profit and control are in fact very few but are always used to justify the postion of the people on the other end of the scale about them.

sdqa-may I inquire as to what your beliefs are in general regarding God, Jesus, Bible, Spirit world or Religion? just brief statements, to give me a better understanding of where your coming from or looking to understand.

-- Michael G. (NoEmail@Nowhere.no), December 26, 2004.

'Remember everything Jesus did and said was for God the Father so I would find it hard to believe that if a person Loved, Honored and Worshipped God the Father and lived a life as Jesus taught without knowing or accepting Jesus as the Son of God that he would be rejected at the end. '

yes i think this also

' But a person who strongly and outwardly rejects Jesus and causes dislike or hatred of him or his name could have lived his life in perfection otherwise but would fail in the end because he caused other people from coming to know God through Jesus or Rejecting God as a result of Jesus's name.'

dislike towards jesus is very often caused by ignorance,misinterpretations or prejudice;someone can hate jesus but in the same time share many common views on certain things with him while not knowing this.

'Rules should have been the actual word. Anything that slows or interferes the progress of that persons relationship with or to God.'

this is one of the things i dislike quiete a lot about the RCC,their teachings besides the bible

'Your statement is similar to the meaning of the Parable of the Weeds (Mt. 13:25-29) The weed (Darnel) looks very much like wheat when it is young but as they mature wheat becomes white/golden and darnel is dark. But that is the nature of man on ANY topic. Always view people and topics on a horizontal scale, on the far Left and the far Right side of the bar are the FEW nutjobs who give any and every issue a bad name, But as you move to the center from either direction you will have an increasing amount of people on the scale until you hit center where you will actually have the Majority of the people. So the amount of Churchs or people for profit and control are in fact very few but are always used to justify the postion of the people on the other end of the scale about them.'

nice parable,i've couldn't said it myself in a better way;i don't think if you are aware of that,but nowadays religion is still used a lot to manipulate,all those secrs who's goal is only to get the people's money or the islam in the fundamentalistic countries...etc

about my personal beliefs:

i'm chinese,i was born in europe,lived all my life there and raised catholic

first of all i don't believe in the concept of sin and therefore also not in jesus as the saviour of mankind and the son of god

everyone of us 'sins',but i don't think that that makes us evil,i don't think we were supposed to be perfect,everybody makes mistakes,sometimes intentionally,sometimes not,but i don't think that mistakes make someone bad unless you really choose that way through life and don't care about other people and just do everything what you want,no matter if it's harmfull to others or not

the christian beliefs are that we have to believe in jesus and keep his commands to be saved,so if there was no jesus,every one of us will burn in hell,no matter how good we were,we surely did at least something wrong in our life and for our inperfectness burn in hell,this makes no sense to me

further,there are many things defined as sin in the bible,but where i don't see what's wrong with it

all normal people know the basic differences between right and wrong,it's an archetype that we all have,some things in life can supress that and bring up new rules that are against the natural human distinction between right and wrong(like for example the army who are being taught that killing is the right thing to do and that you are defending your country that way while war should be the very last option for which our leaders should decide for and while most of the times wars get started when we don't need one or when we even aren't being attacked by anyone like the wars in iraq or vietnam or like for example the catholic priests who are being taught that it's wrong to get married while having the function of a priest)

so sin and morale are actually two different things

and the main reason why i don't believe is that i can't just believe some letters on a paper,i don't understand how someone could expect something like that from us in this world of lies and manipulations i also don't see a reason why i should believe that jesus was god's son etc...i just don't think that way and i don't see anything bad in it there are many things in the bible that don't make much sense to me and really don't seem to come from a loving father

i agree with many of jesus's teachings and he's been for sure one of the biggest inspirations in my life,but i have more of a gnostic vision on him instead of the traditional way christians see him

many christians just keep the commands because they're scared of hell and only see some sinful things defined by the bible as sinfull only because the bible and the church tells them so,they focus on the details and forget the real thing,the real essence of his teachings was not to put them in the center of your life but to show you the way to real life,here on earth now and after this life

so i'm not religious nor i see religion as something positive(i said religion!...not faith)but i do believe in god in a certain way,i believe that there is something more than just this life,this world and these things we have here today;i don't know why,maybe because i have some personal experiences with it,maybe just because i feel a need for an eternal shelter and can't imagine that everything ends with this life

-- sdqa (sdqa@sdqa.com), December 26, 2004.

scers=>sects**

-- sdqa (sdqa@sdqa.com), December 26, 2004.

sdqa-- Someone once wrote "Those who have the greatest positive influence on society in this life are the ones who are concerned about their next life"

"i believe that there is something more than just this life,this world and these things we have here today;i don't know why,maybe because i have some personal experiences with it,maybe just because i feel a need for an eternal shelter and can't imagine that everything ends with this life"

I ask earnest do you believe or have you experienced visions, psychic or foreknowledge, prophecies, astrology and such? since you mention the word gnostic along with the above ending statement about personal experience. Also are you from a large or small family and do you have a family of your own? You will understand the reason for the questions in order for me to better respond to some of your statements.

As far as sects and corruption go, I have sadly enjoyed the experience I have gained by attending some of these other Christian groups to study them and their interactions and what I have seen with some, as you have mentioned were driven by small minded power and money, others would allow people in as long as they were without sin and at the same time under no condition could they be holier then the holy old ladies of the church, otherwise you would see the not so holy side of those nice little ladies come out, I have sat in a regional meeting of Luthern Ministers and saw and heard the deception and professional psychological show and structure of this meeting in order to push the homosexual issue into the forefront of acceptance of the Church, I have sat in a meeting with a RCC "priest" where in vision I saw his deception and it was revealed about 10 minutes later in error when he tried to end the meeting.

But these have been extremely Few in relation to the number of extremely Good experiences I have had with Church's as a whole. While we can look at the RCC the largest and Oldest and find numerous faults in its history and people, when we look at the whole these faults are really very small in proportion to it's works. Besides I am only 43 and I can list streams of my faults over the years but on the flip side I would like to think that I can provide a much longer list of good that I have achieved and I hope that as I continue to get older (uugggg) my faults will become fewer. So I can only imagine what my list would be like after 2000 years.

Something to think about, for all of the aquired "wealth" that people bring up about the RCC You rarely if ever hear about all of the good works the money goes to support. Example:Are you aware that Catholic Charities is the Largest Health Provider in the US? sure some cost are recovered with insurance or patients who can pay something but much of it is not, And they provide these services to everyone regardless of their religion or lack of, and they do so without making people be preached to .

-- Michael G. (NoEmail@Nowhere.no), December 26, 2004.

The real porbelm is his premise...he asusmes edication leads to a lack of faith in Go and Jesus and e Bible and such, when usually the reverse is true. C.S.Lewis is constantly broguht up on hti baord...he was a highly educated man, and haldy the minority.

The torubel with europe is less there level of educaton maks it impossible for them to beelive in christendom, but WHAT they are taught.They are taght, and blidnly accept, Humanism and atheism and neo-socialism, this naturlaly elads htem away form God.

Its not so much because htey know more and have mroe knwoeldge, they often have less,a nd never critically challenge what they beleive, rather, they beelive blidny and beelive tere rejetion of chirstendom, a choice made for them by the teachers, is englihten self choice.

Its relay a remarkable thing how educaiton is used to leas society.

-- ZAROVE (ZAROFF3@JUNO.COM), December 26, 2004.

'sdqa-- Someone once wrote "Those who have the greatest positive influence on society in this life are the ones who are concerned about their next life'

i really wounld't link those 2 things,i think that having a positive influence on society and doing good things only to get yourself in heaven(instead out of love for your fellow man maybe?)are totally meaningless

'I ask earnest do you believe or have you experienced visions, psychic or foreknowledge, prophecies, astrology and such? since you mention the word gnostic along with the above ending statement about personal experience. Also are you from a large or small family and do you have a family of your own? You will understand the reason for the questions in order for me to better respond to some of your statements.'

i didn't have any visions or prophecies or astrology or i don't know what else,i already said that i don't know on which my beliefs are really based,also i'm not 100% sure about it,but i just think that way; i think life has it's meaning and people have their creator and that everything is heading towards something and that it doesn't end with the death,many things are indicating this but i can't be 100% sure about it,with personal experiences,i meant personal experiences with god in my life,...just normal things that meant a lot(not any visions or i don't know what) ...i'm still looking for the answers

i don't know if you really know what the word gnostic means and how gnostics see jesus,so just look it up on the net,you can also look for the gospel of thomas,often you find can find ir at gnostic sites and read something about gnosticism

i come from a small family,i have one sister and a brother and i don't have a family of my own,i'm just 21 lol

-- sdqa (sdqa@sdqa.com), December 26, 2004.

"i don't know if you really know what the word gnostic means and how gnostics see jesus,so just look it up on the net,you can also look for the gospel of thomas,often you find can find ir at gnostic sites and read something about gnosticism"

sdqa-- Thank you for responding and answering my questions I believe that you would be able to gain a deeper understanding to begin confirming what I believe you already know or understand deep inside yourself. Not uncommon at this point in your life. "http://institutionalized-ignorance.tk/" don't be offended by the title, You will also find out what the truer original meaning to the word gnostic was. But if you find agreement to much of what it says don't accept this as a cure all but simply a stronger foundation to which you will continue to build upon over the years. And to your surprise you may find yourself back where you started (RCC) but with a much greater level of knowledge and confidence of the whole and not just the bits and pieces.

Regarding Gospel of Thomas it contains multiple problems in relation to the other Gospels. It is not really a "Gospel" as Christians commonly understand the term, rather it is a seemingly random collection of 114 sayings which are attributed to Jesus. The author of this document is unknown. Since these sayings are not tied to historical events (via a narrative), it cannot be independently check it's external validity. Best dating put it at 100-200AD compared to the 4 which are in the 50-70AD range. Just to name a few of the problems. You might be amazed at how much research has been done in validating from numerous directions the accurate writings and translations within the Bible.

Truely an amazing book when a person understands how it has stood up in translations, hand written editions and such of nearly 2000 years, the dating of the original writings based upon paper, word structure, known history of the writer all linked and verified together. Of course there have been some attempts to translate the original which failed and continue to fail when they surface from time to time. Even more amazing is the psychology where you can read something one day and it gives you understanding for what you are trying to understand and then months later read that same phrase and its meanings are reflective to what you seek on that day as well although totally different from the previous.

"i really wounld't link those 2 things,i think that having a positive influence on society and doing good things only to get yourself in heaven(instead out of love for your fellow man maybe?)are totally meaningless"

See that is the point, just doing good things does not buy you the ticket in, Doing them out of love is what is truely required to help a person to progress into the next life.

If you don't have it I would like to suggest you picking up a NIV Study Bible by Zondervan--excellent book with Theological notes and cross references. Which will help you in gaining the knowledge you are trying to understand.

-- Michael G. (NoEmail@Nowhere.no), December 26, 2004.

"Modern scholarship" says whatever the "scholar" wants it to say. Do the research yourself, and see which scholars take account of ALL the facts.

To start with, I recommend Jesus Christ: Fundamentals of Christology by Roch A. Kereszty, O. Cist.

-- anon (ymous@god.bless), December 27, 2004.

I have a bible, I was raised catholic and I know much about it, I already explained the reasons why I don't believe in one of my previous posts

-- sdqa (sdqa@sdqa.com), December 27, 2004.

"i was raised catholic and i know much about it"

No you don't. If you knew the first thing about Catholicism, then you wouldn't have said that it was a different Peter other than the Apostle who was the first Pope. That is pretty basic knowledge that even Church detractors credit the Church.

-- Cameron (shaolin__phoenix@hotmail.com), December 27, 2004.

that is being taught so but today there is historical proof that denies that we are talking about the same person

btw

did that peter really call his community of christians 'the catholic church'?

and himself 'the first pope'?

-- jerry(sdqa's friend) (doofykorn@hotmail.com), December 27, 2004.

> "there is historical proof that denies that we are talking about the same person"

A: Then cite the proof please! I don't know why someone else of that time would be referred to as "the rock", which is what "Peter" means, and which is a title bestowed on the Apostle Simon by Christ Himself.

> "did that peter really call his community of christians 'the catholic church'?"

A: That is completely irrelevant. History plainly shows that the Church Christ founded, of which Simon Peter was a member, was calling itself "The Holy Catholic Church" by the end of the First Century. We know this from the writings of St. Ignatius of Antioch, a disciple of the Apostle John, who wrote of "The Holy Catholic Church" in the year 107 A.D.

> "and himself 'the first pope'?

A: No. I mentioned the derivation of the title "pope" in another thread. However, all the Apostles recognized that Simon Peter held supreme authority. That's why Scripture refers to the Apostles as "Peter and his companions", a rather curious description if Peter was simply one of twelve, with no special position of leadership.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), December 27, 2004.

> "did that peter really call his community of christians 'the catholic church'?"

A: That is completely irrelevant. History plainly shows that the Church Christ founded, of which Simon Peter was a member, was calling itself "The Holy Catholic Church" by the end of the First Century. We know this from the writings of St. Ignatius of Antioch, a disciple of the Apostle John, who wrote of "The Holy Catholic Church" in the year 107 A.D.

> "and himself 'the first pope'?

A: No. I mentioned the derivation of the title "pope" in another thread. However, all the Apostles recognized that Simon Peter held supreme authority. That's why Scripture refers to the Apostles as "Peter and his companions", a rather curious description if Peter was simply one of twelve, with no special position of leadership.

from these statements paul made i can come to the conclusion that peter(doesn't matter which peter,but the one who found the church)wasen't the first pope and that the people later made of him the first pope

we can't consider him as the founder of the RCC because the RCC(that wasen't even named like that back then)was in his time a simple community of christians and not a hierarchal religious institution which people later made of it on based their own human will and idea's

-- sdqa (sdqa@sdqa.com), December 27, 2004.

No, you read what Paul wrote and extracted your own conclusion. You don't listen to what anybody says. I will pray that God opens your eyes.

-- Cameron (shaolin__phoenix@hotmail.com), December 27, 2004.

sdqa--I see it's time to start moving into the meat and potatos of the subjects. Please continue to remain polite and just think about the points.

"first of all i don't believe in the concept of sin and therefore also not in jesus as the saviour of mankind and the son of god"

What is sin-1 a : an offense against religious or moral law b : an action that is or is felt to be highly reprehensible c : an often serious shortcoming : FAULT2 a : transgression of the law of God b : a vitiated state of human nature in which the self is estranged from God

Now let's put it into relation to your family-- with each offense you have committed against your parents it pushes you away slightly until you reconcile it with them during that time they still love you, now think about the absolute worst offense that you could do against them (as far as how they have raised you) say you turn your brother and sister against them as well, to the point that they could not stand the sight of you and they push you, your brother and sister out of the house to end the rebellion. Would they stop loving any of you? Would they not hope that each of you would come to your senses and apologize and ask for forgiveness? Would your brother and sister have an easier time obtaining forgiveness due to the fact that they were lead astray, and have since reconciled their hearts back to the true nature that your parents showed you from birth. Throughout this time their love would still be there for you and I believe that they would hope that you would suffer enough to understand the pain they have gone through in order for your hearts to become one again in thoughts and actions, not in rebellion and offenses. How much would they rejoice on the day that you set your mind on resolving these offenses and your heart and return home to them with a greater understanding of what love truely is. This is the truer nature of sin our seperation from our heavenly Father God the Creator, for our acts of rebellion, Jesus would be our non-rebellious brother who came to live with us in order to help make our way back to our Father by trying to help us understand what is required and that it can be done. (sorry much easier to communicate verbally)

"all normal people know the basic differences between right and wrong"

That is why it has always been easy for man to oppress the weaker man right? Remember Chinese Slaves built the railroads here, The African Slave ships also stopped in Ireland to get Irish Slaves as well, Catholics and Protestants still battle each other in Ireland, Europeans in the name of tolerance can't tolerate religions, Marx and Engles developed communism to equalize all people (just as long as they were more equal then others) Stalin improved communism by adding brutality, Hitler corrected evolution by trying to eliminate people he didn't like and if he picked up a few countries along the way oh well. But again that is the nature of man. not all but just like child abuse, where an abused child will be prone to abuse children themselves and so on. with each of these add a multiplier to them.

Even in your statements you see things in a manner that each of them saw things, Material and Political., Could Jesus have lead a Political or Material revolution during his time, Heck yes, why didn't he? because he knew that the material, political is limited to time and space and the spiritual has no time and space limitations and his sole objective was Spiritual (Also note "give to Ceasar"-- Because his goal was NOT a Political threat). Is resurrection or reincarnation physical? NO, They are both spiritual when Jesus spoke of the dead he spoke only of the spiritually dead even the ones who were physically alive.

When you read the Bible you are reading it as you would a novel, but if you continue to read it that way you will never get the true meaning to what is being said or meant. Example read Luke 8: 42-48 1st conclusion (dude relax it's only a cotton robe) #2 actual --the womens faith was so strong that by merely touching his robe the Holy Spirit left Jesus and healed the women, hence Jesus saying "someone touched me, I Know that Power has gone out of me" what was the power? it was the Holy Spirit! Daughter your FAITH has healed you go in peace. Or in other words Jesus did not have to turn and heal her the fact that her faith in him was so strong the Holy Spirit knew it when she touched his robe and acted on his own accord because of it.

Think about this IF the Bible and the Church warns against the occult (i.e) psychics, due to the negative or dark influence involved it tells you that they stand to oppose each other (Good vs Evil) But even in the spirit world Jesus is acknowledged as the Son of God, How do you prove the spirit world? Look up Edgar Cayce aka the Sleeping Prophet, he is VERY Highly Documented in his works, readings. When you look at the opposite ends of the spectrum and they both give you the same answers,Well.... But of course you have to be willing to do the research with an open mind.

Well by now I have either ticked you off or bored the &^&% out you, so the ball is in your court if you choose. Just give me a direct question.

-- Michael G. (NoEmail@Nowhere.no), December 28, 2004.

I believe I know why Christianity seems to be so "unpopular" or "shriking." Christ said "enter the narrow gate, for few find it." "Do not enter the wide gate that leads to destrution, MANY find that."

P.S. I forfet His exact words.

God give you peace!:)

-- Jason (Enchantedfire5@yahoo.com), December 28, 2004.

[but michael,i don't believe that all the things that are defined in the bible as sinfull really are(like for example:pre marital sex,abortion of zygotes,masturbation,the use of contraceptives,getting drunk on occasion,oral sex,letting the possibility open to have children in marriage...etc...etc)

sin and immorality aren't the same things although all the catholics define all sins as immoral

these things that i've mentioned above aren't really immoral or wrong,but are sinfull according to the RCC]-sdqa

'Even in your statements you see things in a manner that each of them saw things, Material and Political., Could Jesus have lead a Political or Material revolution during his time, Heck yes, why didn't he? because he knew that the material, political is limited to time and space and the spiritual has no time and space limitations and his sole objective was Spiritual (Also note "give to Ceasar"-- Because his goal was NOT a Political threat).'

[i trully doubt that his sole goal was spiritual,i think he knew that he would make the most succesfull and lasting revolution through spirituallity,because this would last and would have no time or space limitations just like you said,because this could really change the minds of the people and change this world,material revolutions are a temporary solution for a problem that has been lasting ever since the beginning of mankind,they don't last and don't change the people but just the situations;jesus wanted to open the people's eyes and let them see the truth,he saw what was wrong with the world and he wanted to change it,his mind wasen't infected with the convential way things go in society,he opposed to the jewish religious authrorities for putting useless burdens on the people's shoulders just like the RCC does today,but i don't think his words have really been understood,many people think that if they just believe in him that they will be saved,when he actually tried to show us to way how we can save ourselves in this life and find a way to happiness(this is how gnostics see jesus)]-sdqa

'That is why it has always been easy for man to oppress the weaker man right? Remember Chinese Slaves built the railroads here, The African Slave ships also stopped in Ireland to get Irish Slaves as well, Catholics and Protestants still battle each other in Ireland, Europeans in the name of tolerance can't tolerate religions, Marx and Engles developed communism to equalize all people (just as long as they were more equal then others) Stalin improved communism by adding brutality, Hitler corrected evolution by trying to eliminate people he didn't like and if he picked up a few countries along the way oh well. But again that is the nature of man. not all but just like child abuse, where an abused child will be prone to abuse children themselves and so on. with each of these add a multiplier to them.'

[no...people know the differences between right and wrong,but they just choose for the wrong thing because of their own material profits,also like i mentioned in my previous post certain things can suppress those basic distinctions and make some good things bad and some bad things good]-sdqa

[further i "don't like" the RCC for tons and tons of reasons,i'm not gonna post them here because it will be deleted anyway;off course there are good people among the catholics like in every religion]-sdqa

-- sdqa (sdqa@hotmail.com), December 28, 2004.

sdqa

This is sort of off topic, but there was another thread asking how old various people were. I was wondering out of curiosity how old you are. You write well and I can tell you're an intelligent person. I was thinking you are probably fairly young. Did you ever believe?

I was raised Catholic and lost my faith around the age of 17 or so,--- got it back, but it took a long time. I don't think I ever felt the animosity to Catholicism that you seem to, but I really didn't believe in any of it during a good many years.

By the way I don't think its because I got became stupid, or "hit bottom" or any of the other possible reasons some would think that I came back to the Church.

Just have always been interested in peoples faith or lack there of, when it was lost, when it came back---if it did? Ages, reasons etc. If you feel like answering, I'ld be interested.

-- Jim (furst@flash.net), December 28, 2004.

i'm 20 jim,and thnx for the compliment:)

-- sdqa (sdqa@sdqa.com), December 28, 2004.

sdqa

I think you said you were raised Catholic, did you ever believe? If so, when or how old were you when you stopped?

-- Jim (furst@flash.net), December 28, 2004.

actually i was raised more christian i think,my parents aren't devout catholics but the RCC was kinda the best church also represented their beliefs they don't believe in the chuch's infaillability nor the manmade rules and teachings of the RCC and i was also never been taught that,they didn't even know many of the teachings of the RCC till i informed them about it

i stopped believing when i was 16

-- sdqa (sdqa@sdqa.com), December 28, 2004.

and yes i did believe in jesus and the bible etc...

but i was never taught by my parents nor in schoo the teachings of the catholic church

-- sdqa (sdqa@sdqa.com), December 28, 2004.

school**

-- sdqa (sdqa@sdqa.com), December 28, 2004.

sdqa

Thanks for the reply. 16-17yrs. seems like the magic number, course for me, that was over 30 years ago. But most of my friends who lost faith, seemed to do it around the same age.

Seems like at the time, we all did it together. I'm not in touch with many of them anymore but wonder if any have returned to the Church over the years.

If you had asked me 20 years ago if I'd ever come back to the Church, I would have said "no." I would not have been able to foresee it.

Its interesting how things play out.

-- Jim (furst@flash.net), December 28, 2004.

"16-17yrs. seems like the magic number, course for me, that was over 30 years ago. But most of my friends who lost faith, seemed to do it around the same age."

LOL when I taught Religion to 6-7 graders I told that when they moved into their teen years that many would move away from the Church and question these things, But I followed up with telling them that I was not concerned about that because they would come to understand on their own and begin to move back into it with a greater understanding.

Same goes for my daughter (now 17) as much as she wants the independence and tries to counter some of these teachings I still see deep down she can't move away totally, and even more so she is actually a big help with my younger daughter concerning Religion and the Church.

Sometimes it simply takes more life experiences to gain the knowledge, Kind of like as I got older my parents seem to get a little smarter or maybe it was just me acknowledging I didn't have ALL of the answers. (but don't tell them)

-- Michael G. (NoEmail@Nowhere.no), December 28, 2004.

"i trully doubt that his sole goal was spiritual,i think he knew that he would make the most succesfull and lasting revolution through spirituallity,because this would last and would have no time or space limitations just like you said,because this could really change the minds of the people and change this world,material revolutions are a temporary solution for a problem that has been lasting ever since the beginning of mankind,they don't last and don't change the people but just the situations"

sdqa-- Ok I can agree with you to a degree, simply based on the fact that most people who approach life and it's problems in a spiritual manner will come to understand the desired nature of man, that I believe God expects from us. (i.e.) Brotherly love, feeding the hungry, providing shelter and clothing and such for our fellow man. But in all honesty how do you feel people and society would respond after a period of time if Religion "Any" were Banned or forbidden? As far as sin or morality goes I agree that people of good conscience will make the right decisions as a whole, each person needs to know that there is some line between good and bad, moral and immoral to decide. If you believe that there is a God wouldn't it seem reasonable that he would have some defined rules or laws the same as these laws of physics he uses to develop and maintain the Physical worlds we see? and would you think that he would also maintain laws to govern the Spiritual world as well? Otherwise what would stop some spirit he created from trying to take over his seat , his Kingdom. (wait that sounds familar)

Wouldn't it be irresponsible of any church not to warn the people they are to be assisting on Spiritual matters that such laws do exist such as the 10 commandments. Of course much like man made laws we have to decide it they are good for the whole reason and decide if we are going to walk on of periodically cross over these line without getting caught or hurting ourselves. Even the RCC says somethings are acceptable in moderation but it is up to each of us to decide and live our lives accordingly.

Something to think about during one of my classes a few years ago some students asked why man or God had laws/rules, I asked them to tell me what they would do if they knew they would not get into trouble and I gave them an open floor, each of them came out with their wants and wants and wants and the room continued to grow louder and more chaotic by the second and after a few minutes I stopped them all dead, as silence came back and the very first thing many of them said without me saying a word was I didn't like that with an actual scared tone in their voices, They saw and heard first hand what life without rules/laws or consequences could be like. Just something to think about. Afterall it is in the nature of man some much deeper then others.

How much do you honor your mother or father? and what do YOU do to maintain it? And doesn't God deserve an even greater honor as well?

-- Michael G. (NoEmail@Nowhere.no), December 28, 2004.

LOL when I taught Religion to 6-7 graders I told that when they moved into their teen years that many would move away from the Church and question these things

Michael G., I really think its a mistake to tell pre-teens that you expect them to move away from the Church. Teenagers and parents buy into that with miserable consequences. It becomes a self-fulfilling prohechy. Teenagers (or anyone) who move away from the Church put their soul in grave danger.

But I followed up with telling them that I was not concerned about that because they would come to understand on their own and begin to move back into it with a greater understanding

Did you really tell 12-13 yo's you weren't concerned about many of them moving away from the Church? Holy Cow! If you or their parents aren't concerned about them moving away from the Church, why should they be concerned? It took Jim 20+ years to come back to the Church with a fuller understanding. Thanks be to God that he didn't lose his soul during that time away. We never know the day nor the hour when we may be called to Judgement.

-- Brian Crane (brian.crane@cranemills.com), December 29, 2004.

prophecy

-- -------------- (cant@spell.ugh), December 29, 2004.

"I really think its a mistake to tell pre-teens that you expect them to move away from the Church. Teenagers and parents buy into that with miserable consequences. It becomes a self-fulfilling prohechy. Teenagers (or anyone) who move away from the Church put their soul in grave danger."

Brian Crane--Thank you for your comments (seriously) From the outside looking in I would fully agree. From the position I was in, already at this point in their lives (public school kids) they have already been indoctrinated by the Public Ed. agendas. they already were questioning a lot of it. They ALL had valid questions which they had accumulated over time that no one provided them with answers about, Especially the prev. Religious Ed. teachers (some out of ignorance and others because it was not politically correct) You can give kids answers and provide them with a rational explanation that they can understand however most of them wouldn't. That does more to totally discredit any and all teaching efforts then anything else. Besides most teens who begin pulling away do so as a matter of trying to gain some independence from their families each believing that they have reinvented the wheel to some degree, If they are given valid and rational answers upfront to their questions as far as what the Church teaches, why it believes that, how it relates to God, and what to expect society to say to counter it and when they know that they are not they first not will they be the last to questiion and try to rationalize religion it does take away some of the rebellion in these areas. In short they walk with much greater confidence in their beliefs. It may not make getting up early on a Sunday any easier But....

However it does require a teacher to not only provide answers but rational answers that they can relate to and relate t to Church teachings.

And to be honest it's an awesome feeling when at Church the kids turns and smiles because he understand what the Priest is speaking about.

Hopefully you will see that the point is not as bad as it may sound and seems to be effective. If not please send me some Ice Water.

Thank You

-- Michael G. (NoEmail@Nowhere.no), December 29, 2004.

Michael,

Thanks for the reply! I'm still a little fuzzy on the context here. Is this Catholic religious education (CCD) class that you are teaching, and the kids are all (or mostly) public schooled? I agree with what you say about reducing some of the rebelliousness. If you teach them the Truth, they will be able to sniff out b.s. and be able to defend the faith. I think its especially wise of you to tell them the kinds of counter arguments to expect among peers, the media etc. That's why I was kind of alarmed at the above comments about moving away from the faith. This notion of the rebellious teenager is what modern society sells (tv shows, magazines...) as if its a fait accompli. This is especially true in regards to chastity and you see the results of it even on this forum. It strikes some as impossible and obscenely naive to believe that teenagers, of their own will, can be chaste. But it also applies to faith and other things as well. Although many teens do rebel in certain ways and that must be acknowledged, it doesn't have to be presented as an inevitability. Sounds like you're doing a great job. I wish you continued success!

-- Brian Crane (brian.crane@cranemills.com), December 29, 2004.

'If you believe that there is a God wouldn't it seem reasonable that he would have some defined rules or laws the same as these laws of physics he uses to develop and maintain the Physical worlds we see? and would you think that he would also maintain laws to govern the Spiritual world as well? Otherwise what would stop some spirit he created from trying to take over his seat , his Kingdom. (wait that sounds familar)'

[i think god's laws are written in the people's hearts,but many things in our life can make us blind and not see these laws or simply choose for the bad things instead,i think that jesus came here to clear some things a little more up for us,so that we can see them clearly and off course accept them and understand their meaning

i think that it doesn't matter if you believe in jesus or not,but the core of his teachings(for example:"Do NOT to others what you do NOT want them to do to you") can't be rejected by any moral person who shows good will

but because of prejudice,wrong impressions and wrong interpretations of some christians(maybe even a lot of christians) people reject and despise jesus without really knowing him

things above that i mentioned(contraception,pre marital sex,'you will only be saved if you believe in jesus'...etc...)blind the people that don't know jesus and make them think that that was what jesus was all about and so they reject him without really knowing him

and we really need laws

but right laws

laws can give you freedom and can also take away your freedom...

my freedom reaches to someone elses freedom,laws are needed to prevent us taking each other's freedom,without laws there would be really chaos,but there are also laws that take away your freedom and these are wrong(for example all the useless taxes...)]-sdqa

i honor my parents now,but it wasent always that way...

i'm not actually 'doing something' to maintain it,they are just being nice to me,if they suddenly start treating me like ****,then i probably wouldn't honor them anymore,but that still doesn't mean i can't forgive them or love them...

i think the best way you can honor god is by respecting his creation; by respecting(and not destroying and preventing it will be destroyed) our planet and the environment and by loving yourself and your fellow man and doing the right things in life

after all jesus said:'whatever you have done to your fellow men,you have done to me'

i don't think that someone can't love god that he doesn't see and in the same time not love the people that he sees

-- sdqa (sdqa@sdqa.com), December 30, 2004.

'If you believe that there is a God wouldn't it seem reasonable that he would have some defined rules or laws the same as these laws of physics he uses to develop and maintain the Physical worlds we see? and would you think that he would also maintain laws to govern the Spiritual world as well? Otherwise what would stop some spirit he created from trying to take over his seat , his Kingdom. (wait that sounds familar)'

[i think god's laws are written in the people's hearts,but many things in our life can make us blind and not see these laws or simply choose for the bad things instead,i think that jesus came here to clear some things a little more up for us,so that we can see them clearly and off course accept them and understand their meaning

{oN THIS WE CAN FOR THE MOST APRT AGREE...}-Zarove

i think that it doesn't matter if you believe in jesus or not,but the core of his teachings(for example:"Do NOT to others what you do NOT want them to do to you") can't be rejected by any moral person who shows good will

{You cannot divorce the core teahcigns form the man, or the man form he core teachings... in this case most especaly, tey ar eone in the same.}-Zarove

but because of prejudice,wrong impressions and wrong interpretations of some christians(maybe even a lot of christians) people reject and despise jesus without really knowing him

{Agreed, the ibels ai many will say " Lord Lord, have we not prophecied in thy name" ad wil be rned away. However, soem Chrisais whoDO know Jeuss you reject because they disagree wih your secular, socialistic, hedonism...}-Zarove

things above that i mentioned(contraception,pre marital sex,'you will only be saved if you believe in jesus'...etc...)blind the people that don't know jesus and make them think that that was what jesus was all about and so they reject him without really knowing him

{Not relaly. Premarital sex is dangeous, a ha been repeatldy shown by several decades of researhc and life expeirnce. Cnraception is debaable but one can make a mroal case agsint it.

Good morals, doign what irhgt, means not havign sex until married, then only withhte spouse, you may not agree, but all logic, common sence, and sicnece agrees with the Bible, and even Jesus said this, to avoud fornication.}-Zarove

and we really need laws

{Harldy, tyou wat ot make it OK to have premaritcal sex becuse the society around you accepts his, and so you want ot reshae the religion to suit your own agenda, and osical norms, and hten claim trleigious folks liek me are blidned by these older morals and cant see Jesus.

You use the name of Jesus to further your own ends, and you fall victim to what you stated above. You allow the owlrd and its temptatiosn to blind you to what is right and what is wrong, and you dispise Jesus wihtout kowign him.

do you relaly think that whht eincreased divorce rate, suicide, depression, and inability to stabalise a relationship, premarital sex is such a good thing? Afte all the damage its cause,w e shodl declr it mrolaly aceptbale?

Im sorry, but your ideas abou chanign the laws have not to do with gettig then in line with Jesus, but self gratificaitona dn makign th hcurhc more liek the seular world...}-Zarove

but right laws

{we have right laws, universal constants dtn change, and moral laws are Univesal constants.}-Zarove

laws can give you freedom and can also take away your freedom...

{we have those.I am free in Christ, but not free to sin, but unto righeousness an abundance, not the trap of the world and its chauns.}- Zarove

my freedom reaches to someone elses freedom,laws are needed to prevent us taking each other's freedom,without laws there would be really chaos,but there are also laws that take away your freedom and these are wrong(for example all the useless taxes...)]-sdqa

{Not all taxes are useless, and now you are coveign secular concenrs, and not religiosu mater. I agree we ned sociological reform, but lets face reality, this has nothign to do wiht out veiwson Morlaity...}- Zarove

i honor my parents now,but it wasent always that way...

{OK, and now your rambling, shiftign form moral laws to tate laws, and now to yourself...}-Zarove

i'm not actually 'doing something' to maintain it,they are just being nice to me,if they suddenly start treating me like ****,then i probably wouldn't honor them anymore,but that still doesn't mean i can't forgive them or love them...

{do you even knwo what Honour means?}-Zarove

i think the best way you can honor god is by respecting his creation; by respecting(and not destroying and preventing it will be destroyed) our planet and the environment and by loving yourself and your fellow man and doing the right things in life

{but you advocate premarital sex, which is not doing the righ thting... how can yo advocate the polution of nes boy and the mental an dphysical consequences, and sya yo are " repsecting the creation', lus your veiw lends to the dangerous lien of hough of Honourign the cration ver he creator...}-Zarove

after all jesus said:'whatever you have done to your fellow men,you have done to me'

{ And this is why we dont beelive in he modern morlas, premarital sex is abotu gratifying my own lust, so if I shag a girl, Im doign it for myself, and I just used Jesus to gratify my desies... not to show love...an it doesnt matte ri I lie her r not, if I turely loved her, I woudl mary her.}-Zarove

i don't think that someone can't love god that he doesn't see and in the same time not love the people that he sees

{Ok, nice sentement, btu ultimatle moot snce you used this les than comltley cohenrent rant to advocate self destictive behaviour...}- Zarove

-- ZAROVE (ZAROFF3@JUNO.COM), December 30, 2004.

[pre marital sex isn't self destructive

marriage is a concept invented by people to bound 2 people together for different reasons

but what really gives marriage a meaning and a value is love

marriage is a word

marriage is a formality

marriage is a thing on paper

marriage by itself is nothing

it's the love and all the things that come along with that love that give marriage it's meaning

married people can also easily divorce

but when you really love someone so much that you want to have sex with that person,then i think you already are married

so pls stop this marriage thing and maybe realise that it's a manmade thing and love isn't

it's a thing bound to this society where we live in

imagine for example that you and your girlfriend are on uninhabited island 600 years ago and you guys have been stuck there already for some years and the chance is that someone finds you is quiete little,are you gonna spend all your life not-having sex because you're not married? but you really love each other and want to be together

without the state,without the church(any church)there would never be no marriage

without politics and religion there would never be no marriage

but the true meaning behind it has always been,the true meaning why 2 people want to be together;and it will always be

regardless of society,time or place]-sdqa

-- sdqa (sdqa@sdqa.com), December 30, 2004.

[pre marital sex isn't self destructive

{Numerous stidies shwo tyou wrong. Premarital sex leads to lower self esteem in women, and higher rates of slef centredness in men. It leads to a lak of ability ot commit in later relaitonhsips, and increased depression and feeligns of wothlessless, and contirnutes ot instabiulty in romantic relaitonships...

But if you wantot go agaisnt the entire fienld of Modern psycology that counsils agisnt this, then be my guest, not liek tou will listen to reaos anyway. all you expect form us is tacit agrement and comlete complaince whiel you desemenate wisdom...

Heaven forbid you be wrong in your short sighted and narorw veiw of things...}-Zarove

marriage is a concept invented by people to bound 2 people together for different reasons

{Marriage is harldy an invention of people, and is the oldest and most rpsecre dHuman Instetution on which we base all of society, we are programmed for it biologiclaly...

what wa sinvente dby peolel where the spacific ceremoneis we use to finalise it, not marirage itsself.}-Zarove

but what really gives marriage a meaning and a value is love

{ And this means Premarital sex is OK? did you knwo that if I had sex wiht a few girls before I marrie a diffeent girl altogahter, thn sex wiht ehr WOUDL NOT be menaignful precicely becuase I alreayd did the thigns I am now doign with her iwht others? Yeah, makes her feel real special to kwo shes girl numebr 18, right?

How is that love?}-Zarove

marriage is a word

{ Yes, its also the basic social element in civilisaiton, and indeed in all huamn society we have marirages, its mroe htna jyst a word.}- Zarove

marriage is a formality

{No, Marirgae is a long term comitment in which provides mutually for both parties...}-Zarove

marriage is a thing on paper

{ Not to those livign in a marriage, but you just wan tot be dismissive and ignro the praitcal relaity na dpretend marirgae is just peooel haivng sex togather iwht a peice of paper ont he wall...

Ignroe what acula marird peole say too, it will shwo you supeoror to tyhem...}-Zarove

marriage by itself is nothing

{Thre is no such thing as "Marirage by itsself"... by the wya, your view on marirage is that its justa frmlity and a thign on paper, this means thta livign togTHE ROWTHOUT marriage is th same as mairage epcet withouth frmality an paperwork.

why is it, then, that coiles who lvie togather sldm remain togather a slong as marired ocules? why is it that tose hwo DO marry afte rlivign togather odn find i exclty the same, and often th shift desoyrs them?

Mariage is a little more thna what you pretend it to be here.}-Zarove

it's the love and all the things that come along with that love that give marriage it's meaning

{ This means what, exalcy? That livign togahte ootu marirage is just the same as Marirage? why shodl I ignroe the real evidence agsint this, to support yor Pseud-romantic, immature babblings?}-Zarove

married people can also easily divorce

{Nit not so nealry as eaily as unmarried peopel can just ip and leave...

And it leaves a much deeper emoional wound in the individual.}-Zarove

but when you really love someone so much that you want to have sex with that person,then i think you already are married

{Then tou are a fool. Also, as discussed before, what if I only love the girl enough o have sex wih her, then afte I have sex wih her find anothe girl to "Love"? By pretending sex is only an expresson of love and neve used or anyhign else, you ignroe the reality, agaiun, that often sex is lust-based, and we don always have sex putley for love as a culture... least of all our current culture...

Yoiur eiw of marirage and sex is, obviosuly, nothgin btu an excuse to liberate you form resonsibilites you woudl otheriwse have, and you want sex not as an epresion of love, but as a mean to self gratificaiton wotout consequence.}-Zarove

so pls stop this marriage thing and maybe realise that it's a manmade thing and love isn't

{ Marriage isnt man-made, its biologiclaly programmed within us, and yor view is self destrctive because it lads to depresion an suicide increae an low self esteem and people usign each other.

Living togathe and "Having sex out of love" has, in our culture, contirnuted to STD spread, unwanted pregnancy, divirce rates skyrocketing, and torhbles hoimes na dpsiceties.

walcy what beenei do we hav of rejecing the thing thatsociety rejects o the same end?

Youw ant out view to look stuffy and artificial and oyrs to look lovign and wamr, btu all i see is the old jard facs othe world, which desoty your ramblings.}-Zarove

it's a thing bound to this society where we live in

{Marriage is only in westen culture? You dad to where cinese, im pretty sure chuina has had weddings since before they even knew what a european was...Indeed, all cultures have this concept, its Univerlaly constant. Its not as artificial and culturlaly induced as you think.}-Zarove

imagine for example that you and your girlfriend are on uninhabited island 600 years ago and you guys have been stuck there already for some years and the chance is that someone finds you is quiete little,are you gonna spend all your life not-having sex because you're not married?

{The term " Comon Law Mariage' applies in these cases. However, the marriag is sill binding, and its nto the same as " we are haing se and not beign married." If to commit to the woman, you are marired, and it snot just a fomality, it changes everyhting. if I just have sex iwht my girlfirned on thi island, then im not marired. If I marry her on the Island, then shes my wife.}-Zarove

but you really love each other and want to be together

{If we are stranded on an island, we are togather, one doesnt need sex to be intimate...}-Zarove

without the state,without the church(any church)there would never be no marriage

{Uhm, tribesmen n the middle of Africa and Osuth america have marirages. Indeed, the aborigionies had marirages before James Cook discovered australia.

You see Marirga a an artificial cultural consturct only to serve tour own slefish ends, bu the relity is that marirage is as old as Humanity, and is the bedrock of all of society and fmaily life.

You widl become th civil auhtority on the Island in tor Hypothetical situaiton, and oul marry yourself off.}-Zarove

without politics and religion there would never be no marriage

{HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA YOU HAVE TO BE KIDIDNG, RIGHT? Have you NEVER picjed up a copy of Natonal geogrpahic? do you hoenslty thinkthat marirage existed firts in western euroep and pspread? Marriage exists becuase we ae BIOLOGICLAY PROGRAMMED TO FORM SUHC FAMILIES AS THE BASIS OF OUR SOCIAL INTERACTION. Its part of every collage tandard text on human social elionary theory.

Only an idiot coiuld posisbley make such an absurd and innacurate claim.}-Zarove

but the true meaning behind it has always been,the true meaning why 2 people want to be together;and it will always be

{uhm, you do relaise the sort of romantic love you escibe didnt exis till Christain euripe, right? Most marriage where arrnaged mariages deinged to bothpropogate family lines an strenghten unity between houses, whre the man and wman had no real say in who they married. The famileis cose for them.

This was true o MOST cltures for MOST of Human hisotyr, be it chinese, where you alledge yorself form, european, where yoy lciam invened marirage it seems, or african.

Marirage for love started after the Christaisn introcdiced the ocncept f lovign oen another uflly to begin with...}-Zarove

regardless of society,time or place]-sdqa

{ If you think marigae is confind nly to ou society time an palce, yo need to pick up social stuoies coruses, not to mention hisotry...}- Zarove

-- ZAROVE (ZAROFF3@JUNO.COM), December 30, 2004.

don't use my words and make of it something i didn't say and don't make false statements without giving any arguments,i'm not going into further discussion with you zarovo because you only want to come out as a winner out of this discussion,i already said everything i had to say about this but if you want to deform my words into something i didn't say and provoke me to a discussion just go ahead,but i'm not gonna reply to it

marriage is a manmade thing,it's not part of our biological programmed mind or whatever...

just like you said it by yourself,marriage wasen't often because of love in many different cultures

that shows that marriage isn't the real thing here,the imoportant thing with a value

that show that marriage can be anything and can happen because of anything

that shows that marriage can be evil...

you can marry someone just like that,you can be forced to marry someone and you can do it regardless of your feelings towards that person

but you can't love someone if you don't love that person and you can never be forced to love anyone

marriage isn't an archetype(what you were saying i guess?),love is

when i hear the word marriage,i don't know what i have to think about

it could be anything

it could be because of money,tradition,religion,forced to do that,or love

but when i hear love,i know what someone means

marriage is nothing

love can be everything

ok...and this was the last time i will ever reply to you zaroffe,unless you stop being judgemental and arrogant,what i trully doubt...

-- sdqa (sdqa@sdqa.com), December 30, 2004.

don't use my words and make of it something i didn't say and don't make false statements without giving any arguments,

{kind of hard when I lost post your entire post with running commentary...everyoen can see what you write in my last post.}-Zarove

i'm not going into further discussion with you zarovo because you only want to come out as a winner out of this discussion,

{what I want is to fairly represent truth, which yo do not do, and to present a beter way of life, which you seek to demean.}-Zarove

i already said everything i had to say about this but if you want to deform my words into something i didn't say and provoke me to a discussion just go ahead,

{I didnt exaclty invite you hee you know. By the way, I didnt deform yor words to ma you say thigns you didnt relaly say, I presented unmolested text form your post. Indeed, I copied and pasted your entire pst and added only comemntary...}-Zarove

but i'm not gonna reply to it

{In short, you cannot defned your statements, so you will repeat them and not answer my redress whle makgn eprsonal attakc son my charecter... yeah that shows maturity and reason...}-Zarove

marriage is a manmade thing,it's not part of our biological programmed mind or whatever...

{ Acordign to whom? You? Can you explain, then, why it is that EVERY Human cultue, rather having intercourse with another culture or not, has the same basic idea? Can you explain to me why even Guia and Papa New guinea had mariga long before they made firts contact with anyone else? Can you explain to me why men andmen tend to be Monogomous, and why emotuonal and Psycological states shift to instability when not?

simpely declargn marriage a manmade htign abse don our culture politis and eligion doesnt make it a fact, and ignorign the fac thta EVERY Human culture has had marriage a sa basic tenet, and the Bioloical drives and psycological needs of any gien person does not mak those matters dissapear.

so, declare all you want the lie that Marriage is madmade, but int he elast pck up a ecent arument in faovur of tis absurd posiiton.

evolutionary Biologists who stidy the social development of Humanity will also disagree, but he way, shid I recocmend books?}- Zarove

just like you said it by yourself,marriage wasen't often because of love in many different cultures

{But marirage itsself still existed... My poitn was that marriage for lov is a relativly recent, and Christin, innovation.One wohc you seek to corrupt and undemrine by making it all abtu sex and gratificaion and calling that love...}-Zarove

that shows that marriage isn't the real thing here,the imoportant thing with a value

{No, it shows your shortsightedness and ignoranc eof Hisotry and culture. Love has always been invovled in marriage, and Humanity. en in th Bible, semmarired for love, hsoever, culturlaly speakign the families often made arrangments.}-Zarove

that show that marriage can be anything and can happen because of anything

{Marirage, rather for love, finances, or arranged is all basicallythe dame thing. A contractual ommitmment between a man an a woman to ensure mutual survival and a safe enviornmnt and mutual aid in rearin children.

Motives may be diergent, but th einstetution is the same. syaing its different and can be mad eino anythign we want base don disecting cultgural motives only revelas your apritude for pervertign what I said, to suit your own paradigm, and this is the fualt you accused me of.}-Zarove

that shows that marriage can be evil...

{No, it shows that motivaiton for marriage is not always constant. wven in todats world peopel dot always marry for love, but he instetution of mariae itsself is never eil, even if motives driving it are.

Ot likewise doesnt advicate the open sex policy you did, as even an evil marigae is beter than no amrirage and justs sex.}-Zarove

you can marry someone just like that,you can be forced to marry someone and you can do it regardless of your feelings towards that person

{ This happens often, but fdeis this make mariage itsself evil, or rather those who forced tyo to marry evil? This is like saying doin an hoenst days work is evil because soem peopel are forced to do it a slaves.

Because slave labour and enforced emp;oyemnt in Commuist countries eicsts, doesnt make the idea of workign ofr a living evil, neithr does it make the cnecpet become anyhtign we want and thus menaifnless.

Same applies tofor marriage.You jiust dotn want it to, and sek nto to undertsnad, to support your veiws.}-Zarove

but you can't love someone if you don't love that person and you can never be forced to love anyone

{Never said you could. But all i said was that marirage istteselnf is not alway fo love, neither is sex an expresion of love.

By the way, you cna be forced towork too, this dost mean work is in and of itslrf menaignless and thst we cna do away with it...}-Zarove

marriage isn't an archetype(what you were saying i guess?),love is

{Mariage is found in all cultures in Bumanity, and inevery society thohut time. Arhctype or no, Marirage is what we are programmed iologiclaly for.}-Zarove

when i hear the word marriage,i don't know what i have to think about

{Then i reccomend a good dictonary. Oxford puts out great ones, so does Cambridge. Americans tend to prefer Websters though...}-Zarove

it could be anything

{No it coidlnt. for someone hwo seemed so indignant that I warped what he said, ehre you are warping wehat marirage is to suit your own ends. This is the slippery slope fallacy.

Mariage is simple. Itx a commited relaitonshp between a man and a oman for mutual corproate and social survuval,a nd to present a stable envuronment for the rearign of children.

A Husband and wife help each other and become part of each others lives as no oen welse can or will.

Having to explain this to you though makes me relaise how petty and ultumary futile your mind is.}-Zarove

it could be because of money,tradition,religion,forced to do that,or love

{Here you confuse Motive for mariage with what marirage is. Marirage isnt defined by the motives of those getitng maried.

sayign mariage codl be anyhting becaue peopel have difeent reasons to marry is abnsurd. its as I sid above. on could work because oen needs money. One coil work becaue one wants ot feel accomplished, oen can work becaue oen loves what oen is workign on. One can work becaue a fiedn needs a task done. orone can be forced to work.

The motives are different, bu the aspect of ehats happenign is the same. rather contractors where hited to build a palace for a King, or slave labour is used, and the owrkers orced ot build the smae palace, the end reusl is the same and they are buildign a palace.

Syaing " Marirage cdl be anyhting" becaue osme marry fo love, othes money, and still others becase they are forced, is simpley moronic, as it confuses motivaion to pefom an action withhte aciton itsself.

If you learn nohign else, elarn htat motivaiton is not equel to establishment and deed.}-Zarove

but when i hear love,i know what someone means

{You know what marirage mean as wlel, and simley declaring that Maiage is a meanignless word because pepels motives vary only revelas th deapths of willful ignoance you have burrowed yourself into.}- Zarove

marriage is nothing

{Marriage is the stapl building block of society, and has ben prven to prolong lives an doffer more fulfillemn to most people.

Sayng its notgin and dismissing it becaue ytou ar a short sighted litle twat isnt bood enough lad. Marriage is bigge an mroe defined than yo give it credit for, and you only cal it nothign so as to justify your own lack of commitment.}-Zarove

love can be everything

{Treu, btu what you advicate isnt love, byt lust. Youthink if two peopel love eahcithe, they have sex. But cant hey have sex wiiyt love? doesn tthis, by your logic, make sex meanignless? Some wemn are forced to have sex. Others choose t for thepleasure. Others for attention. Others for money. Isnt sex, by your own logic, just as menaifnless as marirage? After all, marirgae is meanignelss because peopel do it for variosu reaosns, the same as I listed. so whysit sex meaningless?

As for love, if a man turly wa a man and truely lived a woman, he wodl marry her.

Greater lvoe hath no man than to lay fdown his life for a firend, and if I lvoed a woman Iwoidl give her my lif ein marirage, and not just my bed in sex.}-Zarove

ok...and this was the last time i will ever reply to you zaroffe,unless you stop being judgemental and arrogant,what i trully doubt...

{Im not the one claiming others are wring becase I said so, lad. You ar eht eone beign both arrogant and judgemnetal, not to mention Hypocritical by "deforming" mywords, and acusign me of the same for yours.

You neither know what love is, nor marriage. You just knwo sex, which to yo is menaignful dispite the fac thta the meanign of marriage is null and void because of the varisu reaosns for it, the same rwaOSNS THAT PEOPEL HAVE SEX...}-Zarove

-- ZAROVE (ZAROFF3@JUNO.COM), December 30, 2004.

'' . . ok...and this was the last time i will ever reply to you zaroffe, unless you stop being judgemental and arrogant,what i trully doubt...

-- sdqa (sdqa@sdqa.com), December 30, 2004.

SDQA: --When HAVEN'T you been judgmental and/or arrogant, since you arrived here? Are YOU going to stop? Everything you say here about marriage is stupid. But you can't allow someone to correct you. That's arrogance. If you don't believe in marriage, then go someplace where others need your questions. This is not a place where you fit; you contradict this faith. We believe marriage is Matrimony-- a sacrament instituted by God, our Creator. He allows animals to breed; human beings marry.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), December 30, 2004.

love is just a drug designed to keep us busy and in the end destroy us

'real'love sucks and commitment also

because either you stay together but the love feeling has just faded away like it always does,(unless we find a person from our dreams and this person wants to stay with us together,but this doesn't happen very often...)or you just split up

i think that the best relationships are the ones that last for a while,you both had a nice time together and then move on

sex isn't the problem here

sex doesn't destroy people

love does

love is harmfull and sex can make a love stronger so even more harmfull ,the problem isn't pre marital sex,the real problem is love

but because love is so great when it doesn't suck people don't realize this

everyone wants to be happy,everyone wants a fairy tale

but i think we should be realistic...

everything ends...

-- greg (greg_pisahov@hotmail.com), December 30, 2004.

love is just a drug designed to keep us busy and in the end destroy us

{sPOKEN LIKE A TRUE NEHILISTIC COMMUIST... sorry, love isnt a drug,and love never destorys us.}-Zarove

'real'love sucks and commitment also

{why? Because you said so?}-Zarove

because either you stay together but the love feeling has just faded away like it always does,(unless we find a person from our dreams and this person wants to stay with us together,but this doesn't happen very often...)or you just split up

{what if he feelign never fades? and besdes, real love isnt a feeling, its a choice.}-Zarove

i think that the best relationships are the ones that last for a while,you both had a nice time together and then move on

{what you think is immaterial, its evidnet that you jae no idea what love is, and assosiate it with the eictement and feleings of elation when ne fiurst falls in love. Love is, however,not defiend that wya, and real, lasitgn love is always better than fleetign relaitonships.Its betterthan theelaiton.Its commitment, duraiton, and dependability that gorws day by day.}-Zarove

sex isn't the problem here

{Sex isnt the problem unless misused.}-Zarove

sex doesn't destroy people

{Tell that t the many sufferers of STD's, AIDS, and vsariosu other ailments. Tell that tot he unwed mothers with unwanted hcidlren. Tell that to all the heartbroken, devestated lives whihc want ocmiment now but cant break the habbit of pormiscuous sx, tell that tot he low self esteem girl who has sex to fwele better nad alwyas feels worse so does it again ina viciosu cycle.

Sayign sex dosnt desoty people is irrespobncible nonsence.}-Zarove

love does

{Love never desotrys lad, it builds and makes better.}-Zarove

love is harmfull and sex can make a love stronger so even more harmfull ,the problem isn't pre marital sex,the real problem is love

{Or rather, yor poor undertsnading of hwta Love is.}-Zarove. i thinkyou mean "Lust" is dangerous, and to that i agree, but lvoe isnt all abtu list, and true lov never is.}-Zarove

but because love is so great when it doesn't suck people don't realize this

{Love never sucks, though soem situatiosn do...}-Zarove

everyone wants to be happy,everyone wants a fairy tale

{Not everyone. Most cloinically dpressed peopel aim fr depreson... this is why its so hard to overcome... and som peel liek beign depressed...}-Zarove

but i think we should be realistic...

{this form a guy who said "Sex doesnt desotry, love does"... sex obviosuly has the capability f desotyring peopel een takign awya the emotional aspect... realisticaly love builds stability, whereas whatyour escribifn is lust. not love. You dotn even knwo what love is.}-Zarove

everything ends...

{I wn't. God promised me eternal Life. what about you?}-Zarove

-- ZAROVE (ZAROFF3@JUNO.COM), December 30, 2004.

"That's why I was kind of alarmed at the above comments about moving away from the faith. This notion of the rebellious teenager is what modern society sells (tv shows, magazines...) as if its a fait accompli. This is especially true in regards to chastity and you see the results of it even on this forum. It strikes some as impossible and obscenely naive to believe that teenagers, of their own will, can be chaste. But it also applies to faith and other things as well. Although many teens do rebel in certain ways and that must be acknowledged, it doesn't have to be presented as an inevitability."

Brian Crane-- I Appreciate your comments and I do agree with you. Yes the classes I mentioned are (formerly known as CCD now just Religious Education--I guess CCD sounded to Catholic) all the kids are in public schools but these kids already knew of classmates involved in bi-sexual relations, most of the teachers would respect the student religious views while other teachers would plow right over the kids with the NEA agendas for supporting abortions, homosexuality and the rest of the crap that they push. The NEA ideas seem to be if nothing is wrong then everything is alright to do. What does bother me even more then the teachers and society is the lame position of some of the people in the Church who are suppose to be teaching these things but not taking any real stand for fear of hurting someones feelings who does not share the Churches position on some of these issues. Or in other words don't tell them about sin so in case someone is guilty of it they won't be upset with us for reminding them.

I hope that I have never presented moving away for a period time as an absolute whoever I will make certain to be careful on this one and I will check with my daughters (since they both help me in the class) if they ever viewed it that way. Normally they let me know if something doesn't get communicated correctly or clearly by me. But I do appreciate your thoughts.

-- Michael G. (NoEmail@Nowhere.no), January 03, 2005.

"i think god's laws are written in the people's hearts,but many things in our life can make us blind and not see these laws or simply choose for the bad things instead,i think that jesus came here to clear some things a little more up for us,so that we can see them clearly and off course accept them and understand their meaning,i think that it doesn't matter if you believe in jesus or not,but the core of his teachings(for example:"Do NOT to others what you do NOT want them to do to you") can't be rejected by any moral person who shows good will but because of prejudice,wrong impressions and wrong interpretations of some christians(maybe even a lot of christians) people reject and despise jesus without really knowing him"

sdqa--Hope you had a good New Years Eve. After seeing the words of love and inspiration on this forum for 12-30 I thought a few quite days might be good.

By reading of your various post I don't get the impression that you view God the creator as being impersonal, but one who is still active in our world and lives. I know most people tend to forget that the Bible as it is composed does not consist of all of the writings,prophecies, inspirations that have ever occured for obvious reasons this would be impossible. I think that prejudice (ignorance) is used to distract from the true message of what Jesus came to teach something which God tried to convey through the Prophets often to no avail. Where Jesus lived it out and was able to show love through compassions, love through acceptance of others, accepting the sinner for who they are not what they have done and to pray for them, because by accepting them the Holy Spirit and time will soften and hopefully correct their hearts and minds. As Jesus said (a doctor does not come to heal the healthy, but he comes to heal the sick).

I do agree with you that there are some Churchs that ultimately put such a yoke of oppression upon their people that they fear to even wake up in the morning because satan is waiting to attack them and bring their live to waste, or the person who sits there on welfare never trying to achieve anything because they know that God will provide for them. (As I have mentioned I have studied many types of churchs) And in all honesty the most centered Religion on a whole I have studied has been the RCC, I have seen a few of the reasons you oppose the RCC, and to be honest they are the ones Unitarians generally use. ( Next to debating liberal theologians the Unitarians are even more fun). To argue over such points as to who the first Pope was, or whether the term Pope was even used at that time is really nothing more then a mere distraction. Even to look back at 2000 years of human and Church history and critique events such as the crusades or the selling of indulgences simply distracts people from the spiritual and keeps it on the physical plane which takes the focus off of God and keeps it on man. It's always easy to find what is wrong in something or someone but shouldn't we try to find what is right with it and to try and to build it up from there?

"i honor my parents now,but it wasent always that way... i'm not actually 'doing something' to maintain it,they are just being nice to me,if they suddenly start treating me like ****,then i probably wouldn't honor them anymore,but that still doesn't mean i can't forgive them or love them..."

Not all that uncommon during in the teenage years, mother-daughters tend to be the worst, the oldest of the family always have the highest standards put on them, then it become a little easier for each of the younger ones, sometimes the teen adapts a lifestyle that is just so opposed to everything ever taught by the family it can take time (sometimes a lot) for everyone to accept or reconcile and on the teens part as part of the overall anger they look to find reasons to attack araes which are of equal importance to the family often religion or the church. But in a strange sense the anger a parent presents is actually a sign of their deep love for the teen, otherwise they would simply wash their hands and say so be it you aren't my problem. Human emotions, love and anger are tough to peg at times when they are in fact often one in the same. My wife one day even called her mother to apologize for the grief she gave her mother when she was a teenager, of course this was after she got a taste of it from our teenage daughter. Human Nature!

True Love and Marriage is knowing that (assuming that you are a male otherwise reverse it) you will wake up to a women with no make-up on and her beauty will not be physical, firm breast and body will give way to sagging and stretch marks, long blonde hair will turn to short graying hair, your wife rolls over and breaths on you in the morning you won't need an alarm clock to wake up, you will be with each other in the absolute worst of times and the best of times, during the heavier and skinner parts of each others lives. But most of all knowing that you can go out and get a newer, sleeker model but knowing that in time this one as well will begin to sag , have stretch marks and everything else but maybe this one will dump you when you are flabby, old and gray only to realize that you really already had all that you did want to start with but your own greed and lust decided to break her heart, disrupt or destroy your family. And then you are alone old, gray and flabby with 2 alimony payments just what every 20 year old girl looks for in a man.

-- Michael G. (NoEmail@Nowhere.no), January 03, 2005.

'True Love and Marriage is knowing that (assuming that you are a male otherwise reverse it) you will wake up to a women with no make-up on and her beauty will not be physical, firm breast and body will give way to sagging and stretch marks, long blonde hair will turn to short graying hair, your wife rolls over and breaths on you in the morning you won't need an alarm clock to wake up, you will be with each other in the absolute worst of times and the best of times, during the heavier and skinner parts of each others lives. But most of all knowing that you can go out and get a newer, sleeker model but knowing that in time this one as well will begin to sag , have stretch marks and everything else but maybe this one will dump you when you are flabby, old and gray only to realize that you really already had all that you did want to start with but your own greed and lust decided to break her heart, disrupt or destroy your family. And then you are alone old, gray and flabby with 2 alimony payments just what every 20 year old girl looks for in a man.'

very nice said man

but i was only trying to say that you can have all this without marriage,i don't have so much time now so if you are intrested what i think about marriage just scroll a little up and you find several posts from me about it

happy new year too!(and yeah i really had a great new year's eve:))

greetz,sdqa

-- sdqa (sdqa@sdqa.com), January 04, 2005.

True love is Christ Himself, wrought into our being to be expressed.

True marriage is God and man becoming one in the mingling of humanity with divinity, fulfilled in the Bride of Christ, the church, filled, and saturated with the life and love of God.

-- Oliver Fischer (spicenut@excite.com), January 04, 2005.